Neo-Assyrian Prophecy and the Hebrew Bible: Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah 9781463200770, 2011027535, 1463200773

Citation preview

Neo-Assyrian Prophecy and the Hebrew Bible: Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures and its Contexts 14

The series Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures and its Contexts publishes academic works dealing with study of the Hebrew Bible, ancient Israelite society and related ancient societies, biblical Hebrew and cognate languages, the reception of biblical texts through the centuries, and the history of the discipline. Volumes in the series include monographs, collective works, and the printed version of the contents of the important on-line Journal of Hebrew Scriptures

Neo-Assyrian Prophecy and the Hebrew Bible: Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah

Russell Mack

9

34 2011

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2011 by Gorgias Press LLC

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2011

‫ܙ‬

9

ISBN 978-1-4632-0077-0

ISSN 1935-6897

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mack, Russell, 1961Neo-assyrian prophecy and the Hebrew Bible : Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah / by Russell Mack. p. cm. -- (Perspectives on Hebrew scriptures and its contexts ; 14) 1. Prophecy--Comparative studies. 2. Prophets--Comparative studies. 3. Prophecy--Judaism. 4. Bible. O.T. Nahum--Criticism, interpretation, etc. 5. Bible. O.T. Habakkuk--Criticism, interpretation, etc. 6. Bible. O.T. Zephaniah--Criticism, interpretation, etc. 7. Assyro-Babylonian literature--Relation to the Old Testament. 8. Assyria--Religion. I. Title. BL633.M27 2011 224'.9067--dc23 2011027535 Printed in the United States of America

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents.....................................................................................v  Preface.......................................................................................................xi  Acknowledgments .................................................................................xiii  Abbreviations .........................................................................................xiv  Introduction ..........................................................................................xvii  1  The Changing Landscape of Prophecy........................................1  A Review of Recent Scholarship...................................................2  The Contribution of Comparative Studies..................................5  The Problems with Comparative Studies .................................10  2  Review of Scholarship ..................................................................13  Assyrian Religion ...........................................................................14  Genre Classification ......................................................................15  Deutero-Isaiah ...............................................................................16  Holy War.........................................................................................18  Imagery............................................................................................18  Prophets and Prophecy ................................................................19  Royal Ideology ...............................................................................23  True Versus False Prophecy ........................................................26  Conclusion......................................................................................27  3  Methodology of the Study ...........................................................29  Semiotics .........................................................................................29  Structuralism...................................................................................31  Genre Theory.................................................................................32  Anthropology .................................................................................35  Marxist Literary Criticism.............................................................36  New Historicism............................................................................37  Reader Response Theory .............................................................38  Comparative Analysis ...................................................................39  Underlying Assumptions........................................................39  The Method of Comparison..................................................40  v

vi

4 

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE Conclusion......................................................................................43  Neo-Assyrian Prophecies.............................................................45  Historical Background of the Oracles........................................45  Physical Description of the Tablets............................................46  The Oracles ....................................................................................47  SAA 9 1.1 Issar-La-Tashiyat ..................................................47  SAA 9 1.2 Sinqisha-amur .......................................................50  SAA 9 1.3 Remutti-Allati........................................................52  SAA 9 1.4 Bayâ ........................................................................53  SAA 9 1.5 Ilussa-Amur...........................................................55  SAA 9 1.6-7 Issar-Beli-Da’’ini ...............................................56  SAA 9 1.8 Ahat-Abisha ..........................................................60  SAA 9 1.9-1.10 La-Dagil-Ili ...................................................61  SAA 9 2.1 Nabû-Hussanni.....................................................64  SAA 9 2.2 Bayâ ........................................................................65  SAA 9 2.3 La-Dagil-ili.............................................................66  SAA 9 2.4 Urkittu-Sharrat......................................................70  SAA 9 2.5 Sinqisha-Amur ......................................................73  SAA 9 2.6 Unknown Prophet ...............................................75  SAA 9 3.1 Introduction ..........................................................76  SAA 9 3.2 First Šulmu Oracle ................................................78  SAA 9 3.3 Second Šulmu Oracle............................................80  SAA 9 3.4 The Meal of the Covenant..................................82  SAA 9 3.5 Word of Ishtar of Arbela ....................................84  SAA 9 4 .....................................................................................89  SAA 9 5 An Oracle to the Queen Mother ..........................90  SAA 9 6 An Oracle from Tashmetu-eresh of Arbela ...............................................................................92  SAA 9 7 Prophecies for the Crown Prince Ashurbanipal ...................................................................94  SAA 9 9 Words of Encouragement to Ashurbanipal .................................................................100  SAA 9 10 Fragment of a Prophecy.....................................102  SAA 9 11 Report on a Vision and an Oracle to Ashurbanipal .................................................................103  Summary Comments ..................................................................104  The Opening Lines ...............................................................104  The Closing Lines..................................................................107  Divine Protector ....................................................................110  Divine Self-Identification Formula.....................................111 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5 

6 

vii

Encouragement Formula .....................................................122  Enemy .....................................................................................123  Imagery....................................................................................123  Kingship..................................................................................125  Piety .........................................................................................126  Trust in Divine Word ...........................................................127  Universal Dominion..............................................................127  Under Foot .............................................................................127  Victory Oracle........................................................................128  Conclusions ..................................................................................128  Neo-Assyrian Prophecies in Supplemental Materials............133  Prophecy in a Secondary Context.............................................133  Building Inscriptions.............................................................133  Prism Inscriptions .................................................................135  Letters to the King ................................................................137  Letters from the Deity ................................................................152  SAA 3 41 Letter from Ashur to Shamshi-Adad V...........152  SAA 3 44 Ashur’s Response to Ashurbanipal’s report on the Shamash-Shum-ukin War ...................154  SAA 3 45 Ashur’s response to Ashurbanipal’s Report on the Elamite Wars .......................................158  SAA 3 46 Fragment of a Divine Letter..............................160  SAA 3 47 Letter from Ninurta to an Assyrian King ................................................................................161  SAA 13 139 Bel Reconciles with Mulissu..........................163  SAA 13 43 Gods at Your Gate ...........................................165  Summary Comments ............................................................165  Dialogues between Deities and People....................................168  Conclusions ..................................................................................172  Nahum...........................................................................................175  Date of Writing............................................................................176  Historical Setting .........................................................................181  Analysis of the Book...................................................................182  Nahum 1:1 ..............................................................................182  Nahum 1:2-8 ..........................................................................185  Nahum 1:9-10 ........................................................................193  Nahum 1:11-2:1 .....................................................................194  Nahum 2:2-14 ........................................................................201  Nahum 3:1-17 ........................................................................210  Nahum 3:18-19 ......................................................................215 

viii

7 

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE Summary Comments ..................................................................217  Opening Lines........................................................................217  Closing Lines..........................................................................219  Divine Anger..........................................................................219  Divine Protection ..................................................................220  Divine Self-Identification Formula.....................................220  Enemy .....................................................................................223  Encouragement Formula .....................................................224  Imagery....................................................................................224  Kingship..................................................................................226  Piety .........................................................................................227  Universal Dominion..............................................................227  Conclusions ..................................................................................227  Habakkuk......................................................................................233  Date of Writing............................................................................233  Historical Setting .........................................................................238  Analysis of the Book...................................................................238  Habakkuk 1:1 .........................................................................239  Habakkuk 1:2-4......................................................................239  Habakkuk 1:5-11....................................................................243  Habakkuk 1:12-17 .................................................................246  Habakkuk 2:1 .........................................................................248  Habakkuk 2:2-6......................................................................248  Habakkuk 2:6-8......................................................................256  Habakkuk 2:9-11....................................................................256  Habakkuk 2:12-14 .................................................................257  Habakkuk 2:15-17 .................................................................258  Habakkuk 2:18-20 .................................................................259  Habakkuk 3:1-19....................................................................261  Habakkuk 3:16-19 .................................................................270  Summary Comments ..................................................................272  Opening Lines........................................................................272  Closing Lines..........................................................................273  Divine Anger..........................................................................273  Divine Protection ..................................................................273  Divine Self-Identification Formula.....................................274  Enemy .....................................................................................274  Encouragement Formula .....................................................274  Imagery....................................................................................275  Kingship..................................................................................275 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

8 

9 

ix

Piety .........................................................................................276  Trust in Divine Word ...........................................................277  Universal Dominion..............................................................277  Victory Oracles ......................................................................277  Conclusions ..................................................................................277  Zephaniah .....................................................................................281  Date of Writing............................................................................281  Historical Setting .........................................................................285  Analysis of the Book...................................................................286  Zephaniah 1:1.........................................................................286  Zephaniah 1:2-6.....................................................................287  Zephaniah 1:7-18...................................................................290  Zephaniah 2:1-4.....................................................................296  Zephaniah 2:5-7.....................................................................298  Zephaniah 2:8-11...................................................................299  Zephaniah 2:12 ......................................................................301  Zephaniah 2:13-15.................................................................302  Zephaniah 3:1-13...................................................................304  Zephaniah 3:14-20.................................................................309  Summary Comments ..................................................................312  Opening Lines........................................................................312  Closing Lines..........................................................................313  Divine Anger..........................................................................313  Divine Protection ..................................................................314  Divine Self-Identification Formula.....................................314  Enemy .....................................................................................314  Encouragement Formula .....................................................314  Imagery....................................................................................315  Kingship..................................................................................315  Piety .........................................................................................316  Trust in Divine Word ...........................................................317  Universal Dominion..............................................................317  Victory Oracles ......................................................................318  Conclusions ..................................................................................319  Conclusions ..................................................................................323  The Neo-Assyrian Prophetic Corpus.......................................323  The Content ...........................................................................323  The Producers of the Neo-Assyrian Prophetic Corpus ............................................................................325  The Biblical Prophetic Corpus ..................................................326 

x

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

The Content ...........................................................................326  The Producers of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah ......................................................................329  Bibliography ..........................................................................................341  Scripture Index......................................................................................377  Author Index.........................................................................................383 

PREFACE This book is a revision of my doctoral dissertation submitted to the faculty of Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, OH. Ever since George Smith discovered the Babylonian Creation tablets, scholars have been comparing Akkadian texts with the Old Testament. Many of these studies lack sophistication and are of questionable value because the authors proceeded without a clearly articulated methodology for comparing the literary relationships between texts across cultural boundaries. This book is an attempt to address these deficiencies. My goal is to articulate clearly an objective, repeatable methodology that can be used for analyzing such literary relationships. I demonstrate the methodology by comparing Neo-Assyrian prophecy of the seventh century BCE with the OT books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. However, the methodology explained in chapter 3 can be used between texts of any culture. It is my hope that scholars desiring to do literary analysis of ancient texts will find the methodology useful and students of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah will gain insight into what is truly unique in these books. R. Russell Mack June 8, 2011

xi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Throughout my graduate studies at Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion, I have had the privilege of enjoying the scholarship, example, and hospitality of many professors. I wish to thank them all, and especially Dr. Samuel Greengus, my advisor who suggested this project and whose advice has helped direct my studies at HUC-JIR and whose scholarly judgment always brought clarity and fresh insight into whatever issue I was pondering. Thanks also to Dr. David H. Aaron, whose expertise and wisdom helped guide the formation of the methodological issues that shaped this project. His insight and comments helped to sharpen my research and to see it through to completion. Whatever shortcomings remain in the present work are doubtless due to my failure to incorporate all my readers’ suggestions and corrections. I also wish to thank Katie Stott of Gorgias Press for her assistance in bringing this book to print. Katie performed above and beyond in helping resolve various technical problems. I am deeply indebted to the scholars associated with the NeoAssyrian Text Corpus Project for their gracious permission to use their translations of the Neo-Assyrian texts found in this book. My deepest gratitude belongs to my wife, Sandy, without whose tireless support I could never have begun or completed this journey.

xiii

ABBREVIATIONS AHw AKOT ANEP ANET AOAT ARI AshN Baal BDB BZAW CAD ch. COS DDD DN DtrH f.s. GKC GN HB HUCA JAOS

Von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. John Joseph Owens, Analytical Key to the Old Testament (4 vol.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989). Pritchard, The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old testament. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament Alter Orient und Altes Testament Assyrian Royal Inscriptions Vassal Treaty of Ashurnirari V with Mati’ilu of Arpad Esarhaddon’s Treaty with Baal of Tyre The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Peabody: Hendrickson,) Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttesamentliche Wissenschaft Chicago Assyrian Dictionary Chapter Hallo, Context of Scripture (Leiden: Brill, 2002) Toorn, Karl van der, Bob Becking, Pieter W. van der Horst eds. , Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Divine name Deuteronomistic Historian Feminine singular Gesenius, Wilhelm. 1910. Hebrew Grammar. Edited and Enl. by E. Kautzsch. Rev. by A. E. Cowley. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon. Geographical Name Hebrew Bible Hebrew Union College Annual Journal of the American Oriental Society

xiv

ABBREVIATIONS JNES JTS KN LXX m.p. m.s. MT NAP OAN PN PNf RelSRev RLA RN S SA SAA SKL T TB V v vv VT VTE ZA ZAW

xv

Journal of Near Eastern Studies Journal of Theological Studies King’s name Septuagint Masculine plural Masculine singular Massoretic Text Neo-Assyrian Prophetic Oracles against foreign nations Personal name Female Personal Name Religious Studies review Reallexikonder Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie (Sallaberger, 1998). Royal Name Syriac (Peshitita) Vassal Treaty of Shamshi-Adad V and Mardu-zakirshumi State Archives of Assyria Series Sumerian King List Targum Tyndale Bulletin Vulgate Verb, verse Verses Vetus Testamentum Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon Zeitscrift für Assyriologie Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

INTRODUCTION The last three decades have witnessed numerous shifts in the field of biblical prophecy. Long-standing assumptions are being questioned in the light of recent advances in the field. I outline some of these changes in chapter 1, where I also discuss the reasons and goals for undertaking this project. Interest has grown in a group of prophecies originating from Assyrian gods and goddesses that were communicated by prophets and prophetesses to the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal in the seventh century BCE. Many scholars are intrigued by these texts and their implications for the study of biblical prophecy. Some of these scholars have used the Assyrian texts to study the office of the prophet while others have focused on the relationship between these prophecies and portions of the Old Testament. I summarize these efforts in chapter 2. One of the weaknesses plaguing the fields of biblical and Assyriological studies is the lack of well-conceived methodologies. Meir Malul and Hans Barstad are two scholars who have called attention to this situation. One of my goals in this study is to address this problem by presenting a clearly articulated methodology that guides my analysis. I engage in a cross-cultural intertextual study of Assyrian and biblical prophecy. In other words, I investigate the literary relationship between Assyrian and biblical prophecy to learn how they are similar and how they differ and then attempt to account for those phenomena. In chapter 3, I explain the methodology I use in this book to conduct my investigation. I outline my methodology so that the reader may evaluate whether I have been consistent in how I conduct my analysis and whether my conclusions are warranted in light of the evidence examined. It is also my hope that future researches will find this methodology a useful tool for guiding their own endeavors. My analysis begins in chapter 4 with a treatment of approximately 30 prophecies delivered in ancient Assyria by its gods and goddesses to two of its kings by prophets and prophetesses in the seventh century BCE. I examine the dominant literary forms em-

xvii

xviii NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE ployed, the ideology of the material, and the socio-political locus of its production. I do not undertake a detailed examination of the grammar and syntax of the prophecies. My focus is on the texts, not Assyrian prophecy per see, but I do discuss, to a limited degree, what can be learned about the office of the prophet during the period in question. I do the same thing in chapter 5 where I examine the use of prophecy in secondary contexts such as royal inscriptions and letters. Assyria exerted significant political influence in the ancient Near East from the eighth century BCE on. The book of kings paints a picture of considerable Assyrian religious influence in Jerusalem during the reign of Ahaz. This raises the question whether this influence extended to the area of prophets and prophecy. I examine the books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah in the following three chapters. Here again, my primary focus is on literary forms, ideology, and the socio-political locus of text production. In these chapters I call attention to points of convergence and divergence between the Assyrian and biblical material. I study these three books because they have traditionally been dated to the seventh century BCE. Therefore, if Assyrian and biblical prophecy of the period influenced one another, this is where we might expect to find evidence of such influence. While there are correspondences between the Assyrian and biblical material, these are outweighed by the differences. I summarize my findings in chapter 9, where I also discuss the parties responsible for preserving the Assyrian and biblical prophecies in written form. My study supports the conclusion that the Assyrian and biblical material was written under considerably different conditions.

1 THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF PROPHECY The field of biblical prophetic studies is undergoing a time of flux as scholars undermine traditional assumptions. The discovery of prophetic texts from other ancient Near Eastern cultures has spurred changes in anthropological-social models. Biblical prophecy is no longer studied in isolation or considered unique to Israel. Developments in the social sciences contribute to this undermining. Socio-anthropological approaches propose that it is not ideas that shape socio-political destiny, but socio-political realities that shape ideas. The infiltration of methodologies from other disciplines such as literary criticism and trends in contemporary historiographic theory has resulted in a shift in the focus and nature of critical inquiry and a questioning of the status quo. These forms of critical research erode long-standing theories regarding the role of oral transmission, the designations “exilic” and “post-exilic,” and the evaluations of stereotypical forms and expressions. Correspondences between the classical prophets and the Deuteronomic History lead to the conclusion that reconstruction of the ipsissima verba of the prophets is impossible to achieve. These and other factors are changing the face of biblical prophetic studies as they undermine traditional assumptions and approaches to biblical prophetic literature.1 Ferdinand Deist discusses the factors that contribute to the undermining and gradual replacement of scholarly paradigms in the field of Old Testament prophecy: first, new evidence may come to light that cannot be adequately explained by the existing model. Second, scholarly as1

1

2

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

A REVIEW OF RECENT SCHOLARSHIP A review of scholarship from the last three decades demonstrates three primary areas in which scholars question long-standing assumptions. The first is the questioning of the existence of historically identifiable prophets. For instance, Otto Kaiser has advanced the thesis that the core of Isaiah 1-39 is a handful of prophetic sayings dated to the fifth century and that the eighth century prophet “disappears into legend.” Jean M. Vincent has similarly proposed that Isaiah 40-55 is a collection of cultic prophecies handed down through several generations, collected and redacted during the postexilic period.2 J. H. Eaton attempted to demonstrate that the text of Isaiah 40-55 is the work of an “Isaian circle” of “festival prophets” that stemmed from the autumnal New Year Festival. These works, among others, advance the common thesis that it is impossible to reconstruct the historical identity of Israelite prophets from within the prophetic books and raise the question whether the alleged “writers” are fictional personages.3 Robert Carroll argues that the association of texts with historical figures is the result of convention and tradition; consequently, it is impossible to prove the existence of the alleged “writers” (Carroll 1988 and 1989). The second development is related to the first; scholars push forward the date of composition of the prophetic books. A close reading of the text reveals that there is little, if anything, by way of content that reflects the traditional dates assigned to them. As sumptions change resulting in the dominant model being questioned. Third, new questions emerge that cannot be adequately treated using existing models and/or methods. Fourth, the proponents of the dominant model may exit the stage to be replaced by a new generation of scholars. Finally, new models compete for prominence until one emerges as the dominant model adopted by the scholarly community (Deist 1989, 5). Robert Wilson (2004) discusses current trends in biblical prophetic studies. Three primary questions have been raised against traditional scholarship. First, what is the relationship between the prophet’s experience and the final literary form of the text? Second, what is the role of society in shaping prophecy? Third, to what extent was biblical prophecy influenced by similar phenomenon in the ancient Near East? 2 Barstad 1993, 40-43. 3 Barstad 1993, 40-43.

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF PROPHECY

3

noted, Kaiser pushes the writing of First Isaiah from the eighth to the fifth century BCE. Deutero-Isaiah is traditionally dated to the exilic period, but Vincent places it in the post-exilic period. Previous scholarship assigned portions of Jeremiah (oracles) to the prophet, other segments (biographical portions) to Baruch, and the final section (prose discourse) to the Deuteronomistic school. This situates portions of the book in the seventh century. However, Robert P. Carroll argues that the book of Jeremiah is an anthology produced by Deuteronomistic redactors in the exilic and postexilic eras, thereby moving the writing to the sixth century BCE. and later. K. Jeppesen argues that the book of Micah is a postexilic production written to explain the fall of Jerusalem.4 These books, then, are more a reflection of what the authors believed, or wished, that a prophetic book should look like than an historical record of a prophet or prophetic activity. The third development naturally flows out of the preceding two. Some scholars question whether prophetic oracles were ever spoken. Jeppesen argues that the book of Micah should be read as a coherent postexilic production written to explain the fall of Jerusalem. Therefore, the book is not a collection of oracles, but a literary creation. A. Graeme Auld and Robert P. Carroll also argue that the prophetic books are literary creations divorced from prophetic activity. The writers of these books were in fact poets and not prophets at all. Later collectors and redactors used the designation ‫ נב'א‬when referring to these authors, and thus studying the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible reveals little about ancient Israelite prophecy.5 My research will further call into question the traditional view that biblical prophetic literature is a collection of spoken oracles. My analysis of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah will demonstrate that that the features cited as evidence of oral delivery may also be the result of a text influenced by an oral aesthetic. These controversial approaches to the literature are not universally accepted; nor are the controversies themselves close to 4 Barstad

1993, 40-43. Barstad 1993, 40-3. For the views of Auld, see Auld 1980, 1983, 1984, and 1988. For the views of Robert P. Carroll, see Carroll 1980, 1983, 1988, 1989, 1990. 5

4

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

being resolved. Hans Barstad (1993) engages the works of Auld and Carroll. Barstad disagrees with the thesis that studying the texts discloses little about the practice of Israelite prophetic activity, arguing that studying the phenomenon in light of other ancient Near Eastern prophetic material and texts can be highly illuminating. While biblical accounts, such as Jeremiah dictating to Baruch the scribe in Jeremiah 36, might not reflect actual events, they do correspond to actual practice. Even the writers of historical fiction must yield to the historically and culturally plausible. “All of these stories reflect the historical and social surroundings that created them” (Barstad 1993, 53). While Barstad focuses primarily on new discoveries in Mari, he also advocates consideration of NeoAssyrian texts to illumine the question. Thomas Overholt’s (1990) position is similar to Barstad’s. In responding to the work of Auld and Carroll, he writes: “Conclusions about prophets in ancient Israel based on an examination of the use of words like ‘prophet’ and ‘prophesy’ err in failing to take into account a social reality clearly perceivable in (or behind) the texts” (Overholt 1990, 12). He argues that prophetic mediation is a clearly defined socio-religious function practiced throughout the ancient Near East and cross-cultural comparisons can shed light on the phenomenon of biblical prophecy. In addition to the issues dealt with above, several questions remain intact. Why were oracles, which were not intended to be reused, written down and retained? This question plagues biblical scholars and Assyriologists.6 To what extent were oracles redacted by writers?7 Some present-day biblical scholars believe the recording of prophetic oracles changed the nature of the original 6 Given the present uncertainty concerning the performance venue of biblical prophesies, the question whether the classification “oracle” is suitable, remains an open one. 7 Nissinen calls attention to the fact that the biblical materials were subject to a lengthy period of editing (Nissinen 1993, 249). Antti Laato (1996) explores the issue of redaction in depth. He argues that extrabiblical parallels to biblical prophecy lend support to the view that classical prophecy is connected to the actual practice of Israelite prophecy in preexilic Israel. However, absent extant Vorlege, earlier literary strata cannot be recovered.

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF PROPHECY

5

prophecies. In light of Near Eastern prophetic material, Barstad questions whether that is the case (1993, 57). Alan R. Millard (1985) explores the question of the relationship between prophetic words and writing. Millard asserts that the biblical oracles were written down immediately without being altered. However, Simon B. Parker demonstrates that those recording oracles in Mari did not always believe it necessary to record the precise wording of an oracle (Parker 1995, 50-68). Therefore, Millard’s conclusions regarding Israelite prophecy are not fully validated. In summary, the state of biblical prophetic studies is one of flux. The utilization of new methods, critical inquiry, and the study of ancient Near Eastern material have shaken the foundation of traditional assumptions concerning biblical prophets and the ability of contemporary scholars to recover their ipsissima verba. My dissertation will attempt to shed light on some of the compositional and historical problems presently under debate.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF COMPARATIVE STUDIES My investigation of seventh century prophetic literature is necessitated by the current state of flux in biblical prophetic studies. It has long been assumed that ancient Near Eastern materials are relevant for biblical studies.8 This assumption also pertains to prophecy. I investigate ostensibly contemporaneous documents to see whether the genre constraints, literary formalisms, subject matter, etc. manifest common elements to an extent that such comparisons are warranted. I will demonstrate that certain scholarly assumptions about dating and shared genres are no longer tenable. The Neo-Assyrian material studied includes prophetic oracles, oracles incorporated into inscriptions, letters from the deity, letters from priests that reference oracles, and a dialogue between Ashurbanipal and Nabû.9 The State Archives of Assyria series differentiates these materials based on genre and devotes individual volumes 8 Hence

Pritchard’s ANET and Hallo, COS. David Weisberg has assessed the impact of Assyriology on biblical studies (2002). 9 Grayson (1983) has published fragments of letters from deities. He tentatively dates the letter from Belit-Balati to the Middle Babylonian period.

6

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

to the study of each one. Although this material is treated in separate volumes of the SAA, it all records communication from the deity/deities as human speech and qualifies as prophetic literature within the paradigm proposed by David Petersen (see below). Comparative studies have been a norm of biblical scholarship since George Smith’s publication of Babylonian creation and flood accounts in the 1870’s. Such studies have made significant contributions to our understanding of prophets and prophetic activity. In addition to clarifying the social matrix of prophets and prophetic activity in the ancient Near East, these studies have facilitated an emerging sophistication in the understanding of related terms, concepts and activities.10 Previously, scholars have held to the view that prophets were unique in ancient Israel; that they were outsiders, social, moral, and religious reformers.11 Comparative studies have called these assumptions into question. At present, there is a growing trend in prophetic studies (biblical and ancient Near Eastern) to regard prophecy as an integral part of divination.12 This emerging view has Definitions are important for “definitions set the terms of comparisons” Huffmon 1974, 101. For example, his definition of prophecy as “the proclamation of divine messages in a state of inspiration” allows Helmer Ringgren to argue that there are no extant Egyptian prophecies (Ringgren 1982, 1-2). How one defines prophetic literature will include or exclude certain texts. For more on Egyptian prophecy see Shupak 198990. 11 Grabbe 1995, 99-100. Grabbe provides a recent socio-anthropological reconstruction of Israel’s religious personnel. 12 Ellis 1989, 129-33; Grabbe 1995, 139-41; Nissinen 1998b, 6. For divination in ancient Mesopotamia see Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 1966; A. L. Oppenheim 1977; H. W. F. Saggs 1978, 125-41; Jean Bottéro 1992; Ivan Starr 1983; and Frederick Cryer 1994. For a brief introduction to divination and magic in Assyria see Leichty 1997. For a discussion of omen interpretation as an element of divination, see Reiner 1960. For a discussion of divination in ancient Israel see Overholt 1989, 117-140; Grabbe 1995, 119-51; and Cryer 1994. Overholt and Grabbe also discuss the relationship of prophecy to divination (Overholt 1989, 140-147; Grabbe 1995, 139-41). For divination in ancient Egypt see Through a Glass Darkly, edited by Kasia Szpakowska (Swansea: The Classical Press of Wales, 2006). 10

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF PROPHECY

7

been influenced by such texts as the Ashur A inscription of Esarhaddon, which lists prophecy among a series of omens that signaled the divine will. The sequence presented is celestial omen, prophetic messages, and omens in dreams and oracles (Assur A i 31-ii 26; Nissinen 1998b, 15). Divination often took place as a process of ascertaining the divine will by means of observing and interpreting ominous signs or happenings (such as animal entrails or the movement of: celestial bodies, animals, birds, smoke; atmospheric signs; etc). Divination required skill and training in interpreting omens. Specialists developed omen literature, collections of omen observations, for the purpose of study and consultation to determine the divine will. In addition to its use as a reference tool, it also served as training material for the diviner (Ellis 1989, 129-33; Nissinen 1998b, 6; Leichty 1997). Omen literature is distinct from oracles in that it provides a “yes” or “no” answer and does not present the message from the deity as human speech. Evan Zuesse (1987) proposes three main categories of divinatory activity. (1) Intuitive divination involves the personal insight of the diviner. (2) Wisdom divination is the exercise of learned skills, such as astrology, hepatoscopy (inspection of livers), and extispicy (inspection of intestines). (3) Possession divination is the communication with spirits through an intermediary. This final category includes spirit possession, shamanism, and prophecy. Oracular reports present divine communication in the form of human speech.13 The traditional view holds that the recording of an oracular report followed an original oral delivery. These reports reflect both the status quo at the time of delivery and the knowledge of future events desired by the addressee. This knowledge may be gathered through either inductive (omen observation) or non-inductive (dreams, visions, ecstatic experiences) means. These reports are “the result of the immediate activity of the diviner” (Ellis 1989, 171). Oracular reports are relevant to the current situaNissinen’s caution should guide our inquiry. Literary products that emerged from scribal interpretations of prophetic words should be construed as a secondary prolongation of the prophetic communication process (2004, 25). 13

8

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

tion and the choices to be made in light of that situation and the will of the god(s) (Ellis 1989, 144-48). The question remains whether Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah preserve prophetic oracular speech, as is the case with the NAP corpus. Literary predictive texts also present themselves as verbal communication from the god(s). However, unlike oracular reports, there is nothing to suggest prophetic or divinatory activity accompanied the composition or compilation of these works. They are literary creations that provide highly detailed predictions written vaticinia ex eventu that precede actual predictions. The concluding predictions may be an attempt at genuine prophetic prediction or an attempt to influence the king, or other party, to undertake a specific course of action. Each of these texts (the Marduk Prophecy, the Shulgi Prophecy, the Uruk Prophecy, the Dynastic Chronicle, and Text A) advances a specific political agenda. Each of these texts dates to a period outside the seventh century BCE and falls outside of the scope of this study. Noteworthy is the fact that the extant copies date centuries after the times in which the predictions were set and were all found in libraries. Some of the texts survive in more than one manuscript. Therefore, Ellis concludes that the texts had become part of a well-established literary tradition (1989, 146157). In spite of the advancements made in prophetic studies, there is no scholarly consensus concerning the definition of a prophet. Part of the problem with definitions is drafting one that encompasses the various categories of prophetic activity. Poetic composition characterizes Egyptian prophecy. Scholars generally regard Egyptian prophecies as having been written post eventum. Mesopotamian prophets are known for reading omens and oracular divination. Baru priests were experts in omen literature. The Mari tablets attest to the existence of one type of prophet known as an apilu “answerer.” This expert provided oracular responses to questions posed to the deity. The muhhu “ecstatic” engaged in trance possession and was associated with irrational acts to deliver rational oracles. The assinu may have been a special type of male prophet who took on female characteristics to speak on behalf of a female deity (Sweeney 2005, 24-6). The Hebrew Bible utilizes numerous terms: rō’eh “seer,” hōzeh “visionary,” ’îš ’ĕlōhîm “man of God,” and nāvi’ “prophet” with these various terms highlighting different aspects of prophetic activity.

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF PROPHECY

9

Scholars have advance several definitions. Weippert’s definition focuses on the experience of the prophet as an intermediary: A prophet(ess) is a person, male or female, who (1) through a cognitive experience, a vision, an audition, a dream or the like, becomes the subject of the revelation of a deity, or several deities, and (2) is conscious of being commissioned by the deity/deities in question to convey the revelation in speech, or through metalinguistic behaviour, to a third party who constitutes the actual recipient of the message (Barstad 1993, 46).

An important component of this definition is the prophet(ess)’s awareness of being commissioned. Prophets were not the only individuals to receive dreams from deities. Not everyone who received such dreams was conscious of fulfilling the social function of a prophet.14 Martti Nissinen proposes a definition similar to Weippert’s. A prophet(ess) is an individual who communicates a divine message and functions in a social role and function that distinguishes the person from other members of society. This social role or function is consciously assumed by the prophet(ess). It is a point of interest that Neo-Assyrian texts identify female prophets, but not female scholars, demonstrating a different social location. The primary element in prophecy is intermediation, not prediction. The prophet(ess) is believed to have the capacity to speak for the deity/deities. It is important to remember that not everyone who receives a dream or vision is a prophet(ess), but only those individuals accepted as operating within that social role or function (Nissinen 1998b, 7-8; 2004, 22-24). David L. Petersen proposes a six-fold typological definition of prophet. The prophet has an intense experience of the deity; speaks or writes in a distinctive way; acts in a particular social setting; pos14 Recent definitions of the term have been advanced by Huffmon, Malamat, and Nissinen, and while not identical in detail are generally consistent and have been compiled by Nissinen (Nissinen 1998b, 5). David L. Petersen faults Weippert’s definition as “overly monolithic and excessively reliant on the Gunkel and Lindblom heritage concerning biblical prophets” (Petersen 2000, 41).

10

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

sesses distinctive personal qualities, for example, charisma; is an intermediary; and has a distinctive message (Petersen 2000, 33-39). He observes that: These then are the primary options—definitions that focus on religious experience, distinctive literature, social setting, personal charisma, the prophet’s role as intermediary, and distinctive message. However, only one of these typologies, the notion of prophet as intermediary, seems comprehensive enough to help understand prophets throughout the ancient Near East, including those attested in the Hebrew Bible and in the old Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian texts (Petersen 2000, 39).

He proposes a correlation between the type of intermediation experienced by the prophet and the literary form used to record it. He argues that any text that reports the message or activity of a prophet qualifies as prophetic literature. Divinatory chronicles, vision reports, prophetic speech, legend, and prophetic historiography would all be prophetic literature under this proposed rubric (Petersen 1997, 23-40). An important contribution of Petersen’s work is that it emphasizes the existence of prophetic literature in the Deuteronomistic History. With its focus on the social role of the prophet as well as the distinctive literature associated with them, Petersen’s definition of prophet is the starting point for my own research. However, I will refine some of his descriptions in my concluding chapter.

THE PROBLEMS WITH COMPARATIVE STUDIES Although comparative studies have made important contributions to our understanding of the role and message of the prophet, problems remain. Meir Malul (Malul 1990) addresses the present state of comparative studies in biblical scholarship. The majority of scholars no longer question the existence of a connection between the Bible and ancient Near Eastern sources. The current questions revolve around issues of methodology. His work summarizes the basic goals and approaches used in comparative studies as well as a review of the criticisms leveled against them. He proposes a methodology for comparative study designed to identify genealogical connections between texts, which he then applies to the case of the “goring ox.” He makes the following observation:

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF PROPHECY

11

No major study has yet been published, however, which deals in a systematic manner with the basic question of applying the comparative method in biblical and ancient Near Eastern research. Critical studies, which have appeared, are usually attacking specific comparative studies and criticizing their methodological assumptions while discrediting their conclusions. Very few deal with the comparative method in its own right (Malul 1990, 155).

In many respects, Malul’s critique constitutes the desideratum behind my own dissertation. While Malul focuses on the use of comparative material in the study of law, I develop a cogent comparative method in the area of prophetic studies. One of my goals is to establish the potential yields and limitations of comparative study in the realm of prophetic literature. Hans Barstad notes that many comparative studies lack a sophisticated treatment of theoretical and methodological issues. He discusses some of the problems that confront scholars who attempt to illumine biblical prophecy by reading prophetic texts from the ancient Near East. The first problem he identifies is taxonomy. Barstad divides comparative studies into two broad categories classified as historical and typological. Historical studies treat materials “within the ‘same’ historic, linguistic, or literary context, within the same culture, social system, or civilization” (Barstad 2000, 6). Many such studies have attempted to focus on the question of origin, but are hampered by inadequate evolutionist views of how culture develops.15 Typological studies concentrate on materials from different contexts and from widely separated periods. Similarities between materials are the result of how the human brain functions and deals with universal phenomenon, not the result of cultural diffusion (Barstad 2000, 6-7). The taxonomical problem that faces scholars is determining whether connections are historical or typological. Barstad suggests 15 Barstad 2000, 3-6. Lester L. Grabbe discusses the benefits and methodological considerations for an anthropological comparison of ancient Near Eastern prophecy with modern prophecy (2000, 13-22).

12

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

combining the two categories. “When we do find interesting similarities in closely related cultural systems, the similarities may result from how humans, as mentioned above, behave in similar manners in similar situations” (Barstad 2000, 7). The second problem is one of method. Many works are limited to the identification of similarities and parallels, but fall short of comparative study. Other studies engage in detailed analysis of material within distinct cultures, but stop short of an actual comparative analysis between them. Subjectivity is also a problem; every scholar’s conception of the studied phenomenon affects his/her methodology. Additionally, scholars do not always proceed with a clearly identified field of comparison, whether it is linguistic, cultural, phenomenological, social, etc. (Barstad (2000, 8-11). I will offer a solution to many of these methodological concerns. I present a hybrid approach that explores recent developments in literary and cultural criticism, and present the benefits of using such an approach in biblical studies. I outline my methodology in chapter 3. My analysis of the Neo-Assyrian and biblical material reveals the value of this method.

2 REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP A review of scholarship will situate my dissertation in the field of Neo-Assyrian studies and expose some of the limitations currently plaguing this field. While some scholars have done comparative work, these works tend to be narrow in focus or fail to engage emerging trends in biblical studies. The field of Assyriology has been slow to embrace the methodologies of literary and historical criticism, a situation paralleling developments in the field of biblical studies. The work of scholars overlaps in numerous areas; therefore, I will follow the lead of John Hilber (2005) and arrange this material topically, not chronologically. Several scholars have done valuable work in the field that will lay a foundation for my research; however, they fail to engage in any meaningful comparative study. For instance, Hermann Spieckermann (1982) treats Israel’s religious response to the Assyrian hegemony under Josiah as well as the religious and religio-political policies of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Spieckermann argues that aspects of the Assyrian cult were imposed on vassal kingdoms and provinces influencing the religious practices of Assyrian vassals. Simo Parpola (2003) outlines Assyrian influence on the economic, intellectual, political, and religious life of seventh century Judah. Therefore, the seventh century BCE was a time of cultural contact between the Assyrians and Judah that influenced religion and cult. The work of Spieckermann and Parpola play an important role in demonstrating cultural permeability in the seventh century. I intend to focus on the influence of this permeability on biblical prophecy. I will demonstrate that Neo-Assyrian prophecy and biblical prophecy (i.e. Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah) are fundamentally different with regard to content, focus, and literary development. This leads to one of two possible conclusions: either biblical prophets remained singularly insular successfully resisting Assyrian influence 13

14

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

or these materials reflect a different locus of production. I intend to argue the latter.

ASSYRIAN RELIGION Simo Parpola (1997) devotes a lengthy introduction to a discussion of the origins of prophecy in Assyria and a reconstruction of Assyrian religion. He argues that the theory that explains Mesopotamian prophecy as a western import is untenable in light of the tight links between prophecy and the cult of Ishtar, Assyrian royal ideology, mythology, and iconography. The similarities between Assyrian and biblical prophecy can be attributed to conceptual and doctrinal similarities of the underlying religions without having to rely on direct loans or influences. He then reconstructs the cult of Ishtar as an esoteric mystery religion promising transcendental salvation and eternal life.16 An important contribution of his work is the assertion that biblical prophecy could not have influenced Neo-Assyrian prophecy; a premise that provides part of the impetus for my research. A weakness of this work is the citation of select parallels between Neo-Assyrian and biblical texts, without engaging in a comparative analysis. Van der Toorn (2000, 79) disagrees with Parpola’s thesis that all deities are manifestations of Assur. He holds that Bel and Nabû speak for themselves (SAA 9 1.4), but through Ishtar’s prophets, who function as the agents of other deities. Porter (1999); Cooper (2000); Kwasman (2001); and Weippert (2002) criticize Parpola’s reconstruction of Assyrian religion on methodological grounds. Barbara Porter (2000) examines the question from 16 Parpola likens his reconstruction to the piecing together of a jigsaw puzzle. The pieces he employs include: the data found in his assembled corpus, “supplemented by those found in other Mesopotamian sources, both written and iconographic, earlier, contemporary, and later” (Parpola 1997, xvii). Parpola’s reconstruction is not convincing. Some of the material he uses in his reconstruction is too far removed spatially and temporally to have influenced the Assyrians, yet no justification is provided for the use of these materials in elucidating Assyrian religious beliefs. A second weakness of the reconstruction is the reliance on iconography, which is subject to multiple and varied interpretations. For a systematic disputation of Parpola’s reconstruction, see Cooper 2000.

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

15

the perspective of Assyrian hymns and ritual texts and concludes that the Assyrians were polytheistic. Karl Van der Toorn (2000) explores the differences between second millennium prophecy at Mari and first millennium NeoAssyrian prophecies. He concludes the Neo-Assyrian prophecies reflect a growing sense of transcendence. Second millennium OldBabylonian prophecies reflect the conception of gods as immanent—gods lived and spoke in the temple, went into battle with the king, and oracles were limited to an immediate application. In NeoAssyrian times, the gods are transcendent—their realm is in heaven, they fight from heaven, prophecies were received anywhere, and words were of an enduring quality relevant to many situations and times (2000, 74-77). However, Van der Toorn overstates his case. It is by no means certain that Neo-Assyrian prophecies were recorded because the words were enduring—addressing many situations, times, peoples. The making of administrative documents, storing them, and referencing them are three distinct enterprises that do not automatically follow one another. Modern scholars overestimate the ease of accessing archives (Niditch 1996, 42). Van der Toorn also misrepresents the content of these prophecies. The Neo-Assyrian prophecies do not concern themselves with enduring dynasties, but rather the immediate concerns of a king that his son and grandson would occupy his place on the throne. Neo-Assyrian deities are no more transcendent than are the Babylonian gods of the second millennium. The Neo-Assyrian gods also spoke from the temple as evidenced by the prophetic ascriptions and references to the temple in the prophecies. In second millennium Babylonia, the gods were viewed as living in heaven, not the temple. The Babylonians built ziggurats as a staircase so the gods could descend from the heavens to the temple (cf. Walton 2001, 371-74).

GENRE CLASSIFICATION Maria deJong Ellis (1989) believes it is possible to reconstruct how the divine will was experienced or communicated in Mesopotamia, the Sitz-im-Leben within which the experience took place, and how the text was produced. To this end, Ellis discusses the limitations of modern genre classifications and advocates a consideration of the interdependence of texts that cross genre boundaries in understanding the societies and Sitz-im-Leben that produced them. An

16

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

important consideration is the find location for tablets that gives insight into ancient classification systems.17 Ellis subscribes to the view that neo-Assyrian prophecies are contemporary, or nearly contemporary, and are archival records. Babylonian theoreticians adapted prophecies and omen literature to produce “predictive literary texts” that exhibit the characteristics of historiographic literature. Therefore, Mesopotamian scholarly practitioners functioned as historiographers. Ellis does not engage in a comparative analysis of Akkadian and biblical prophetic literature, but her discussion of genre issues has implications for my research.

DEUTERO-ISAIAH Philip Harner discusses four formal elements common to Assyrian and Second Isaiah victory oracles.18 The elements he identifies are: direct address to the recipient; the encouragement formula—“Fear not”—with supporting statements; divine self-identification formula; and a message of victory. He supports Begrich’s assertion that Second Isaiah deliberately adopted the form to bring a message of encouragement to people languishing in exile. He concludes victory oracles originated in times of distress, were delivered in the Temple in response to an individual’s lament, future references to victory are an authentic part of the oracles and not an intrusion, and Second Isaiah may have adapted an oracular form with royal associations in a democratizing theological shift. Harner’s work is an important contribution to the field and will facilitate my own analysis. Many of the works that engage in comparative study are limited in focus. They either engage a limited number of texts or fail to engage potentially profitable methodologies from other fields. For Ellis calls attention to the fact that the library collections of ancient practitioners often cross over the boundaries of their specific functions (1989, 165-71). 18 Harner 1969, 430-32. Harner uses the term salvation oracle to refer these prophecies. Throughout this dissertation, I will use the term victory oracle instead so as to avoid the theological associations inherent in the word “salvation.” 17

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

17

instance, Meindert Dijkstra (1980) studies the form, background, function, and theological meaning of YHWH’s statements of identity, self-prediction, and self-praise in Second Isaiah.19 He examines the relevant passages in Second Isaiah against West Semitic and Mesopotamian texts that have similar form and function. Dijkstra proceeds under the assumption that all of these texts have a cultic function. He argues that Second Isaiah uses the language and ideas of his polytheistic environment to advocate exclusive worship of YHWH. His primary focus is developing the theological thought as expressed in statements of identity, self-prediction, and self-praise in Second Isaiah. I intend to build upon Dijkstra’s work and survey a broader range of issues across a broader spectrum of biblical and NAP texts. Manfred Weippert (1981) asserts that prophetic kingship oracles, not priestly victory oracles, are the source for Deutero-Isaiah. He classifies the Assyrian material on a typological basis. He acknowledges similarities in speech recorded in Deutero-Isaiah and the Psalms, but does not take a position concerning their respective Sitz im Leben. In a later work, (1997) he directs his attention to prophetic quotations and allusions in a study that compares their usage in the NAP corpus (SAA 9 3.3 and 7) with Deutero-Isaiah (Isa 41:21-29; 42:5-9; and 48:12-16). He notes that quotations and allusions are not always clearly marked in either corpora, but on occasion can only be identified on the basis of context, not semantic markers. He concludes the use of the promise/fulfillment motif is used to strengthen the faith of the audience in divine promises yet to be fulfilled (Weippert 1997). He also concludes the homogeneity of prophetic style in Isa 40-48 with Assyrian prophecy allows this material to be isolated from chapters 49-55 (2001, 55-57). This study is useful, but limited in scope, for instance Weippert does not consider the biblical usage of the divine self-identification formula outside Deutero-Isaiah. Additionally its treatment of the divine self-identification formula does not incorporate insights available through a semiotic approach. 19 Dijkstra’s work is written in Danish with an English summary. I am dependent upon this English summary for my knowledge of Dijkstra’s work.

18

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Antti Laato (1992b) engages in a traditio-historical analysis of the servant and Cyrus texts in Deutero-Isaiah in light of Akkadian royal inscriptions (ARI), the NAP corpus and the Cyrus Cylinder. In the context of this study, he advances the theme of Weippert (1981) and identifies five themes common to the NAP corpus and Deutero-Isaiah: (1) encouragement formula, (2) divine selfidentification formula, (3) the oracle is delivered to the king during a time of distress, (4) the king receives the promise of divine assistance against his enemies, and (5) the promise of divine presence (1992, 61-65). He argues that the phraseology, motifs, and themes of the servant and Cyrus proclamations have their traditiohistorical roots in Akkadian royal ideology.

HOLY WAR Manfred Weippert (1972) relies upon Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions and prophecies to refute Gerhard von Rad’s thesis of “Holy War.” “Holy War” was not a theologically centered, defensive undertaking unique to Israel’s tribal confederacy. Weippert concludes that all warfare in the ANE can be traced to common cultic actions and the intervention of gods on behalf of their worshippers. Furthermore, the ANE knew no distinction between profane and holy wars. Karl van der Toorn (1987) investigates the oracle of victory in Old Babylonian texts from Mari as well as Neo-Assyrian texts from Nineveh. Van der Toorn focuses on the relationship between prophetic oracles of victory and analogous messages obtained by means of divination, the constitutive elements of the oracle, and its underlying ideology and propagandistic function. He expands Weippert’s thesis showing the promise of victory, divine presence in midst of battle and divine participation that eclipses human action are part of a propagandistic function of prophetic oracles of victory in the ancient Near East. Van der Toorn also contrasts the roles of prophecy in Mesopotamia and Israel. Van der Toorn’s work is a valuable contribution to the field, but is limited in scope. I intend to address a broader range of issues.

IMAGERY Weippert (1985) analyzes two sets of imagery in Neo-Assyrian prophetic texts. The first, the deity as mother or nurse of the king, has

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

19

no biblical parallel. The second set, involving nature, has some biblical parallels, but they are only superficial. Weippert concludes that the imagery supports a temple setting, rather than palace, for the Neo-Assyrian prophets. This work focuses on Akkadian material, and treats biblical material in a cursory way only. Simo Parpola (1993, XVIII-XLIV) incorporates Assyrian symbols and imagery in his reconstruction of Assyrian religion. Martti Nissinen (1998b, 74; n. 325) calls attention to the standard phraseology for delivering his enemies into the king’s hands.

PROPHETS AND PROPHECY Herbert B. Huffmon (2000) undertakes a socio-religious study on the role of prophets in three cultures: Mari, Assyria, and Israel. He calls attention to the four common activities in which prophets engage; prophets: (1) mediate messages from the divine world; (2) draw inspiration through ecstasy, dreams, or inner illumination; (3) “offer messages, often unsolicited, that are immediately understandable by the audience addressed; and (4) offer assurance, as well as admonition or exhortation. He concludes that this activity takes place within different contexts and develops in different ways, but does not provide sufficient analysis of the implications of this conclusion. Furthermore, traditional views of biblical prophecy guide his approach, and he does not engage emerging theories regarding biblical prophetic literature. Lester L. Grabbe (2000) advocates the use of social anthropological perspectives in studying ancient Near Eastern prophecy. He focuses on methodological considerations and attempts to illustrate the value of the social sciences in understanding the role of the prophet. Grabbe focuses on Mari and discusses shamanism and mode of revelation, prophets in a monarchic context, divine assistance in military endeavors, prophetic lifestyle, testing the prophets, literary prophecies, stereotypical language, the prophetic call, and reactions to failure of prophecy. His emphasis on socioanthropological considerations lays a partial foundation for some of the issues I wish to explore. However, whereas, Grabbe focuses on the effect of these forces in shaping the role of the prophet, I intend to explore how they shape the production of prophetic literature. Robert Wilson (1980, 119) proposes two groups of prophets functioned in Assyria. The first functioned as part of the royal

20

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

court advancing the policies and agenda of the ruling monarch. As part of the state apparatus, they supported the status quo. The second group functioned on the periphery of social institutions as reformers attempting to influence religious and political practices. This latter group served the interests of their constituencies. He finds a parallel between this distribution of social locus of prophets between Assyria and Israel. Antti Laato (1996, 205-206) identifies four areas of correspondence between Israelite prophecy and prophecy in the ancient Near East: religious criticism, prophecy addressed to a community or the people, social criticism, and prophecy’s link with covenant ideology. Marti Nissinen (1993) argues the content of prophecies and preservation in royal archives testifies to the influence of prophets in the Assyrian court. Prophets were a distinct class of diviners attached to temples, and prophecy was an integral institution of the empire (2000a, 95-109). Nissinen argues that the Assyrian prophets proclaimed divine words and formed part of the community of the devotees to Ishtar. The prophets’ affiliation with and worship of Ishtar is the determinative factor in their socio-religious role. The primary role of the prophets as intermediaries between the divine and the human spheres reflects the role of Ishtar/Mullissu as the mediator between the gods and the king (Nissinen 2000, 96).

His focus on the socio-religious role of prophets is important for the work I wish to do; however, this work does not engage in comparative analysis of biblical material. I also intend to attach different significance to the phenomenon of the majority of prophecies being associated with Ishtar of Arbela. Nissinen and Simo Parpola argue prophetesses were permanent members of the Ishtar temple community (Parpola 1997 XLVII; Nissinen 1993, 227). Parpola proposes the texts paint a picture of prophets who address the masses and have the potential to influence them in support of or in opposition to the king. Laato takes a similar position (1996, 205). Nissinen (2000, 111-14) questions the validity of McNutt’s presentation of the prophetic image. Paula McNutt writes: Prophets tend not to be associated with institutions. And prophets are less concerned than priests with maintaining the status quo; that is, they are usually more involved in promoting

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

21

dynamic social change as innovators and reformers (McNutt 1999, 179).

Nissinen calls for an end to the caricature of Israelite prophets as purely reformers who were hostile to official, priestly functionaries. He proposes that Israelite prophets occupied the same social locus as the cult and royal prophets of Assyria (Nissinen 2000, 112-14). He concludes the picture of Israelite prophets as reformers is the result of centuries of interpretative literary tradition. John Hilber (2005) also investigates the social location of prophecy in ancient Israel. His investigation covers Royal Psalms (2, 89, 110, 132); select Asaphite Psalms (50, 75, 81, 82, 95); and select laments, hymns, and songs of confidence (Pss 12, 46, 60, 68, 87, 91, 108). He identifies numerous psalms that incorporate cultic prophecy (Pss 2, 89, 110, 132), contain prophetic words that legitimize royal power (Pss 2, 89, 110, 132), contain prophetic words that advance cultic orthodoxy and practice (Pss 50, 68, 81, 95, 132), and address prayers and laments similar to Assyrian cultic prophecy (Pss 12, 60, 75, 82, 91, 132) (2005, 219). He finds the closest parallels between the Psalter and the NAP corpus in royal psalms that correspond in form-critical style, thematic content, and function. He concludes a strong case can be made for the argument that prophets participated in Temple worship from the pre-exilic to post-exilic times. However, Hilber overstates his case. Another explanation may account for correspondences between the NAP corpus and these psalms. Hebrew scribes may have become familiar with Neo-Assyrian practice through cultural contact, either direct or mediated, and mimicked Neo-Assyrian practices in their compositions. The correspondences would then be the result of literary borrowing, not comparable social practice. As Chartier observes, literary works “are always inscribed within the field of possibilities that makes them thinkable, communicable, and comprehensible” (1997, 20). I intend to explore the literary relationship of the NAP corpus and these psalms in a subsequent article. Traditional assumptions concerning biblical literature guide Alan R. Millard’s research (1985). He has studied the mechanism by which Assyrian prophecies make the transition from oral to written form. Two questions are of importance: when were the prophecies written down? For what purpose were they recorded? He concludes that many were recorded on the day the prophecies were

22

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

delivered. They were written in order to communicate the words to others, preserve them for official purposes, and to prove the reliability of the prophecies when they came true. “Sans écriture, l’autorité unique des paroles d’un prophète est la mémoire—la sienne et celle des auditeurs” (Millard 1985, 126). Nissinen (1993, 224) believes prophecy was verbally stated primarily and delivered in writing and/or archived only under unusual circumstances. I argue a different view than Millard with regard to the creation of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. Manfred Weippert (1981) studies select Neo-Assyrian prophetic oracles. He calls attention to the thousand-year gap between the production of prophecies at Mari and the production of the neo-Assyrian texts; he proposes that the oracles were an independent development in Assyria in response to crises of the first millennium. For the most part, the texts reflect oracles that were recorded when they were delivered. He uses the term “prophetien” to denote Neo-Assyrian oracles and certain biblical passages, thus distinguishing them from “prophezeiungen,” literary prophecies. Weippert’s primary focus is a typological classification of the NeoAssyrian oracles. He deals with eight of the eleven texts he mentions and identifies six categories: “word of DN,” “I am DN,” “Fear not,” “Peace,” atypical, and unclear. He concludes by commenting on select Royal Oracles (2 Sam 7:4-17 and Isa 45:1-7) and a salvation oracle (Isa 41:8-13). While Weippert’s work is a significant treatment of the Neo-Assyrian material, his treatment of biblical material is limited in scope focusing on royal oracles. A few weaknesses limit the contribution of Weippert’s work. He works within traditional models as evidenced by his attempt to reconstruct the original wording of 2 Samuel 7. He treats biblical oracles in isolation, rather than as part of the broader rhetorical context in which they may have been integrated.20 Finally, his literary criticism is limited to the area of structuralism, and does not encompass Gitay 1981, argues that Isa 40:1-11; 40:12-31; 41:1-29; 42:1-13; 42:14-43:13; 43:14-44:23; 44:24-45:13; 45:14-46:13; 47:1-15; and 48:1-22 are rhetorical units that incorporate individual oracles. Weippert limits his treatment to individual oracles: 41:8-18; 43:1-4; 44:1-5; 45:1-7; and 48:1215. 20

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

23

semiotics or reader response theory. I intend to use Weippert’s analysis of the NAP as a starting point and work with a different model of prophetic literature that includes a consideration of the rhetorical use of that literature. This will enable me to conduct a far more extensive and methodologically sound comparison of the literatures.

ROYAL IDEOLOGY Tomoo Ishida (1977) engages in a comparative analysis of the NAP corpus and OT royal ideology. He identifies numerous elements of the Akkadian material that correspond to elements of 2 Sam 7. (1) The deity elects the king. (2) The deity abides with the king. (3) The deity intercedes to destroy the king’s enemies. (4) The deity promises to make the king’s name great. (5) The deity promises peace for the land as well as (6) peace for the king. (7) The deity promises to establish the king’s dynasty. (8) The idea of building a temple is absent the Assyrian material (however, Esarhaddon sought permission to repair Ashur’s temple). (9) The divine paternity of the king is asserted and is closely associated with (10) divine love for the king. Two additional themes link the Assyrian prophetic corpus with the narrative account: the unchangeability of the divine promise to the king and the divine promise of the king’s everlasting reign. Ishida also cites SAA 9 3 to argue for the existence of a 3fold relationship between YHWH, David, and the people (1977, 116). Antti Laato (1996, 271-80) engages in a reconstruction of covenant theology and Old Testament prophetic literature. In the course of this reconstruction he examines the covenant ideology of SAA 9 3 and its relevance for 2 Sam 5 and 2 Kings 11. He identifies three points of comparison: (1) a covenant that legitimizes the king’s rule is established at the temple and unites the deity, king, and people; (2) a ceremony accompanies the establishment of a covenant between the king and people; (3) the covenant includes stipulations to maintain the deity’s cult (1996, 274-76; 1998, 97-98). Laato proposes that Pss 2 and 110 are associated with similar coronation rituals, while Ps 132 reflects the king’s covenant duty to maintain YHWH’s cult (1996, 276-77). Therefore, the religioushistorical background of Deut 17:14-20 may well be found in a “royal covenant document which was made during the reigns of Solomon and Joash among others” (1996, 277). Laato also pro-

24

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

poses that Isa 8:16-23a might refer to such a covenant document (1996, 277). He concludes that the covenant traditions associated with enthronement and cult reform are deeply embedded in the early history of the Davidic monarchy and are not dependent upon later Deuteronomistic innovations. Israel’s covenant theology may have originated as early as the thirteenth century BCE (Laato 1996, 277-78). Laato makes several important contributions to biblical scholarship. One observation that is directly related to my research is his observation that the NAP corpus witnesses the shift in addressee (cf. SAA 9 1.8 and 3.4) and that the tensions such shifts create are not always the result of redactional activity (1996, 185). Another important contribution is his defense of the thesis that literary study should incorporate modern literary-theoretical concepts of intertextuality connected with semiotics (1996, 9-12). Griphus Gakuru (2000, 57-71) utilizes the NAP corpus in an inner-biblical study of the development of the Davidic Covenant. He engages in a form-critical assessment of SAA 9 1.6-1.7 and 1.91.10. Relying upon the NAP material, he identifies the likely original dynastic oracle preserved in 2 Sam 7:1-17 (which excludes the Temple building motif). He concludes Nathan’s oracle is a Dynastic Oracle of Salvation associated with cultic celebration, not enthronement. He proposes the most likely occasion for the oracle was the bringing of the ark to Jerusalem. The tradition that linked the ark narrative with prophetic pronouncement of blessing probably belongs to the Davidic period. He believes the original oracle lacked covenant associations. The Davidic covenant is not a historical event as such but a cluster of interpretations about the dynastic promise developed over the years under different social and historical circumstances (Gakuru 2000, 234).

However, the Sitz-im-Leben of SAA 1.10 as a celebration is not firmly established. Perhaps the greatest weakness of Gakuru’s work is his use of a seventh century prophetic oracle to argue for a tenth century origin of a Davidic Dynastic Salvation Oracle. Marti Nissinen has written extensively on Neo-Assyrian prophecy and its relationship to biblical materials. In an early work (Nissinen 1993) he discusses the relevance of Neo-Assyrian prophetic texts for the study of royal ideology expressed in the Deuteronomistic History, Deutero-Isaian oracles, and select psalms.

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

25

Nissinen suggests that Israelite royal ideology evolved into notions of a theocracy during the exilic/post-exilic period. Another development observed is the democratization of the prerogatives originally associated with kingship. These become transferred to the people who enter into a covenant with YHWH (Nissinen 1993, 240). I demonstrate that a similar transfer of kingly prerogatives is evident in Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. One important observation made by Nissinen is that some of the most significant correspondences with the Neo-Assyrian material exist in the Deuteronomic History and not the prophetic books as one might expect. Like Weippert, Nissinen works within a traditional model of prophecy and treats texts in isolation. I intend to build upon Nissinen’s work while proposing a different model of prophetic literature that includes a consideration of the “strategic” use of that literature.21 I will also engage forms of literary criticism not utilized by Nissinen. Scott Starbuck (1999, 205-12) also argues for a democratization of royal ideology during the exilic period. The editing of the royal psalms in preparation for their inclusion in the Psalter is evidence of this democratization. He rejects the commonly held view that succeeding Israelite kings used royal psalms as part of Israel’s cult. He calls attention to a striking contrast between ANE royal hymns and prayers and the royal psalms in the HB. The Mesopotamian material evidences the political, ideological, and theological importance of naming the pertinent monarch (1999, 72); the biblical material does not. He brings SAA 9 1.6 into his discussion noting that Assyrian prophetic oracles preserve RN’s in the same way the hymns and prayers do (1999, 72 n 19). The footnote on p. 72 is the only reference to the NAP corpus in Starbuck’s work. Helmer Ringgren (1983, 91-95) undertakes a form-critical assessment of the relationship between Ps 2 and SAA 9 7. He identi21 Literary works are strategic answers to questions posed by the situation in which they arise (Burke 1973, 1). Burke also writes: “Every question selects a field of battle, and in this selection it forms the nature of the answers” (Burke 1973, 67). Furthermore, “… we are reminded that every document bequeathed us by history must be treated as a strategy for encompassing a situation” (Burke 1973, 109).

26

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

fies five common elements: rebellion of the princes, allusions to coronation, sonship, world dominion, and promise of victory. The two texts reflect comparable divine responses—legitimate installation to divine sonship—to a threatening situation. In a similar study, Hans Steymans (2002) analyzes Ps 89 in light of the NAP corpus. He focuses on the historical transformation and development of the conception of the Davidic covenant.

TRUE VERSUS FALSE PROPHECY Alan Millard (1985) proposes that the true prophet risked nothing by committing his prophecy to writing, while the false prophet risked everything. He notes that the prophecies were not altered once recorded and proposes that this has important implications for the history of the biblical books on prophecy. Martti Nissinen (1996) also addresses the issue of true and false prophecy. Nissinen (1998a) compares the approach taken to false prophecy in Deuteronomy 13 and select Neo-Assyrian documents, i.e. the vassal treaty of Esarhaddon and a letter to that king (ABL 1217). Nissinen’s primary focus is on demonstrating the existence of false prophecy in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. The Assyrians distinguish false prophecy from true prophecy on the basis of royal ideology. Any prophecy that fails to support the reigning king is judged as false. In Deuteronomy, the guiding principle is worship of YHWH alone. Thus, both Neo-Assyrian and Israelite prophecy are judged as true or false on the basic of contentual principles. Nissinen’s work is a valuable contribution to the field of prophecy, despite its limited scope. However, an important question remains unanswered; Nissinen does not explore the implications of his research for evaluating the social locus of false prophecy in the Hebrew Bible. Karl van der Toorn (1987, 90-91) suggests prophecy was the only means available for the voice of the opposition, the “common voice,” to be heard. ANE kings may have tolerated a degree of criticism and allowed a certain amount of freedom to these “insane of the gods” so as not to harm the populace. In his view, the prophets conveyed the sentiments of the people at large.

REVIEW OF SCHOLARSHIP

27

CONCLUSION Numerous scholars have undertaken the task of analyzing portions of the HB in light of the NAP corpus. A lack of sophistication in methodology characterizes the majority of these studies. While many of them make important contributions to the field, they are limited in their treatment of biblical material. Deutero-Isaiah, royal ideology, and 2 Sam 7 have benefited from a majority of the study to date. What is striking is that no commentary on prophetic books traditionally dated to the seventh century utilizes the Akkadian material to illumine understanding of those works. I utilize the NAP corpus to study the books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah to determine how our understanding of those books will profit from such an analysis. In the following chapter, I will conclude my discussion of preliminary matters by outlining the methodology I will employ in my research. My approach will combine elements of semiotics, structuralism, genre theory, anthropology, Marxist literary criticism, new historicism, and reader response theory. These theories intersect at numerous points of convergence producing an integrated methodology capable of providing valuable insight into the nature, purpose, and creation of literature. Next, I turn to an analysis of the Neo-Assyrian material. This material dates to the seventh century BCE and will serve as the benchmark for an examination of the biblical material. The NeoAssyrian material studied includes prophecies, letters from the deity, and the secondary use of prophecy. All of this material is propagandistic in nature and serves a political purpose in the NeoAssyrian Empire. It is propaganda of the empire that supports the state apparatus and agenda of the “legitimate” king. I examine Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah in chapters 6-8. I examine each book individually paying special attention to their genre forms. I demonstrate that many of these forms are not attested in extra-biblical material of the seventh century BCE. Furthermore, the forms that are attested have undergone significant literary adaptation. I argue this adaptation is evidence of a different socio-political locus of production and may be part of the literary response to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in the sixth century. This political and religious crisis sparked literary innovations and the production of new genres as the people struggled

28

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

with questions of ethnic identity and the purposes of YHWH in the world.

3 METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY This paper will engage in a hybrid approach that incorporates elements from numerous fields of inquiry—semiotics, structuralism, anthropology, Marxist literary theory, new historicism, Reader Response theory, and comparative methods—to learn what they can contribute to an understanding of Neo-Assyrian and biblical prophetic literature.22 These fields share numerous points of convergence that facilitate their combination into a unified approach. This chapter summarizes key elements from these methods of study.

SEMIOTICS Semiotics is the study of the production and use of signs that encompasses a broad array of symbol-based systems.23 This book focuses on the contributions of semiotics to linguistics, the production of literature, and the reading of texts. The common uses of language, aesthetic communication, text theory, and the use of signs to refer to objects or states of the world will be of special interest. The material in this chapter is a condensed version of the discussion of methodology that appeared in my dissertation (Mack 2010). 23 A universal theory of semiotics encompasses: zoosemiotics, olfactory signs, tactile communication, codes of taste, para-linguistics, medical semiotics, kinesics and proxemics, musical codes, formalized languages, written languages (including unknown alphabets and secret codes), natural languages, visual communication, systems of objects, plot structure, text theory, cultural codes, aesthetic codes, mass communication, and rhetoric (Eco 1976, 3-14). For attempts to develop a comprehensive theory of semiotics, see: Eco 1976. For a history of semiotics, see: Culler 1981, Hawkes 1977, or Scholes 1974. 22

29

30

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

In terms of reading, semiotics “seeks to identify the conventions and operations by which any signifying practice (such as literature) produces its observable effects of meaning” (Culler, 1981, 48). Two assumptions form the basis for a semiotics of literature: first, literature should be treated as a mode of signification and communication; second, one can identify the effects of signification one wants to account for. Since two readers may construct different meanings when engaging the text, semiotics is interested in the range of possible meanings that exist for a text and the rules that govern the process by which meaning is constructed (Culler 1981, 48-53). Texts do not exist in isolation. “To read is always to read in relation to other texts, in relation to the codes that are the products of these texts and go to make up a culture” (Culler 1981, 12). Literary works exist as intertextual constructs whose meaning is determined in relation to other texts that they take up, cite, parody, refute, or transform. Therefore, a text can be read only in relation to other texts. The codes, which animate the discursive space of a culture, are the necessary condition for this process. In addition to this system of texts, literary works also participate in a variety of other systems: conventions of literary genres, logic of story, teleologies of emplotment, condensations and displacement of desire, and various discourses of knowledge that are found in culture.24 All of these factors influence the construction of meaning on the part of the reader. Roger Chartier (1997) explores the importance of semiotics for identifying the relations that individuals or groups cultivate within the social world. What Eco and others denote as “signification,” Cartier identifies as representation. The differing terminology is not of concern here, what matters for this discussion is the fact that both theorists speak of a text’s ability to stand for something whether it be a real object, a fictive one, or an idea, etc. Semiotics Culler 1981, 12-38. David H. Aaron summarizes memetics, the study of how ideas “sometimes called, memes—are created, promulgated, and evolve among a variety of social contexts and through a variety of media” and illustrates the field’s implications for illuminating the development of literary motifs employed in the HB (Aaron 2006, 171-89). 24

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

31

provides crucial tools in aiding the researcher organize and classify the many configurations by which reality is perceived, constructed, and reconstructed. Additionally, it is instrumental in studying the practices and signs that shape and determine social identity, including those that exhibit a unique way of existing in the world, as well as those that signify status, rank, or power. Finally, semiotics aids in identifying the institutional signs employed by the “representers” (whether single individuals or groups) to incarnate the coherence of a community, the force of an individual, or the permanence of power.25 Chartier’s work paves the way for important questions to arise. Were ancient Near Eastern prophecies an attempt to utilize symbolic domination, in the form of divine fiat, in place of physical force? Did the authors of prophecies align themselves with absolute (political) power or in competition with it? Neo-Assyrian prophets were in alliance with political power, and the material they produced support the absolute power of the empire. In the case of Israel, at various points in its history, the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians had absolute power, while the Israelite scribes possessed only the power of representation. Were the books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah the means by which scribes sought to impose an image of Jewish society, ethnic identity, or historical reality?

STRUCTURALISM Although the approaches and objects of study vary, researchers seek to identify underlying structures that serve as unifying systems. The goal of structuralism is to identify these structures on numerous levels. On the level of Saussure’s parole, structuralists analyze individual speech-acts and attempt to identify the rules of syntax

Chartier 1997, 94-95. Robert Carroll (1994) discusses the danger of reading biblical and extra-biblical materials in a naïve manner without consideration for how ideology shapes representation. Chartier’s views of the relationship between semiotics and culture overlap those of Geertz (1973) and Goldschmidt (1966). 25

32

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

that govern the formation of discourse and make it intelligible.26 In an individual literary work, structuralists analyze organizational devices, plot development, adherence to genre restrictions, etc. Researchers compare and contrast numerous texts in order to clarify genre boundaries (Scholes 1974, 3-18, 59-68). Structuralists may also analyze an individual text with an eye to discovering its relationship to a society’s culture.27 Structuralism, then, is performed on a gradient stretching from the micro to macro level. This book focuses on organizational devices, development, adherence to genre restrictions, and the relationship of the prophetic oracles to the societies that produced them.

GENRE THEORY Literary analysis is incapable of proceeding without recognizing the role of genre. The word genre enters the English language from French and is related to the word genus. With regard to literature, it is a literary category, defined by thematic as well as formal criteria, and indicating a historically existent type (Duff 2000, 210). Researchers classify works with similar characteristic features as members of a given genre. This book will adopt the communicative-semiotic approach to genre that focuses on genre’s role in facilitating the act of text production and reading. Genre restraints guide the author and reader in their respective tasks enabling comprehension in the reading process.28 This approach recognizes the fluid and overlapping na-

26 Scholes

1974, 14-19. For a brief introduction and history of structuralism, see Jobling 1995. For a more detailed treatment of the same, see Scholes 1974 and Hawkes 1977. 27 This is the focus of Claude Lévi-Strauss (1976). 28 Longman 1985, 49-51. Piotr Michalowski calls attention to the problem with linking genre categories with reception and the reading of ancient texts. Generally, when we turn our attention to ancient Near Eastern texts, we lack any surviving continuous traditions of how texts are to be read. Scholars place certain texts together and create a field of intertextuality, which may create a false sense of security in our reading (Parkinson 2002, 33). This problem is addressed by the work of Maria deJong Ellis (1989) who proposes researchers pay careful attention to find loca-

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

33

ture of genre boundaries, which are not fixed, static entities, but are constantly changing and adapting.29 Literature is constantly evolving. During this evolutionary process, new genres may become dominant in a culture while other genres fall out of favor. Adherence, or lack thereof, to genre restrictions on the part of biblical writers has significant implications for this study. Genre boundaries demarcate a literary form and serve to establish and preserve the form’s function and ideology, irrespective of the actual content (see the discussion below). Consequently, the violation of genre restrictions produces a change in both function and ideology. I will demonstrate that this is what happens when biblical writers employ the victory oracle. David Duff addresses genre transformation and the role of genres in cross-fertilization: Without reverting to the Neoclassical delusion of a comprehensive taxonomy of the literary kinds, or succumbing to the structuralist fantasy of a total science of the literary system, it is possible to conceive of a type of literary history that has an accurate perception of the genre spectrum that obtains at any given period; that is able to identify the dominant genre or genres (what Opacki calls the ‘royal genres’), and to explain how they attained that position of dominance—as well as how they cross-fertilize, or impoverish, or conflict with, neighboring genres; that is able to show how the genre spectrum may vary from one period to another, and how the cultural assumptions and aspirations of an era are reflected in its hierarchy of genres; and that is able to illustrate the process of change itself through re-orderings of the generic hierarchy, or the proliferation of new forms, or alterations in the cultural perception of genre. It would be possible, in this context, to speak with some precision about the ideological functions of genre, about the tions. Texts found in a collection together establish an automatic field of intertextuality. 29 Maria deJong Ellis (Ellis 1989) discusses the genre-crossover between Akkadian literary predictive texts and historical-literary texts noting that the presence of shared vocabulary and motifs hampers the creation of clearly delimited genre boundaries.

34

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE conditions of possibility for the existence of particular genres, and the reasons for their flourishing or decline (Duff 2000, 18).

Duff’s work is important for my own on several grounds. He draws attention to the fact that genres may cross-fertilize one another. This is important for the study of the book of Nahum where I argue that Assyrian treaties and royal annals have influenced biblical prophecy. Duff addresses the issue of genre transformation, which is evident in the books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. He also introduces the concept of the ideological functions of genre. I argue in chapters 6-8 that the biblical authors created new genres in support of new ideologies aimed at transforming cultural assumptions and aspirations when old ideologies failed. Finally, he raises the issue of what conditions give rise to the formation of new genres. Turning to the question of function, genre functions very much like a code of behavior between the author and his audience. Genre prescriptions resemble social codes in at least two ways. They vary from culture to culture and may be neglected or ignored, though seldom cavalierly. When an author prepares to communicate a message to his audience, he begins by selecting the form suitable to his content.30 Marxist literary critics have established that content determines form/genre. Terry Eagleton writes: Forms are historically determined by the kind of ‘content’ they have to embody; they are changed, transformed, broken down and revolutionized as that content itself changes (Eagleton 1976, 22).

It does not appear that ancient Near Eastern scribes were concerned with genre designations on a theoretical level; this would be a concern of later Greek scholars (Longman, 1985, 55). However, the conclusion that prophetic oracles were a recognized genre is supported by this excerpt from Esarhaddon’s Nineveh A inscription: “Oracles of prophets, messages of the gods and the Goddess, were constantly sent to me and they encouraged my heart” (ii 6-7) (Nissinen 1998b, 14 15-29). Prophetic oracles must have been a known and recognizable genre form for Esarhaddon to be able to refer to them in this inscription. 30

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

35

Once an author selects the appropriate genre, his literary choices are determined by pre-existing rules that are comparable to contracts between the author and his audience. Authors are not free to invent new rules that govern the communication process. Norman Holmes Pearson likens genres to institutional imperatives that both coerce and are in turn coerced by an author.31 However, just as contracts can be broken and ignored, rules of communication can be violated, but only to a degree. Any communication that drastically departs from norms runs the risk of being incomprehensible.32 Genre analysis is fruitful for this study on several counts. Genre identification is instrumental in determining the meaning of the texts studied. Texts only become comprehensible when the reader is able to assign them to a familiar genre category. Genre identification will assist in identifying a texts’ social setting (which may be historical, social, and/or intellectual). Specifically, I argue that many of the genres and forms preserved in Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah cannot be located in the seventh century. Third, genre identification exposes the literary relationships between texts and serves to identify instances of cross-fertilization, as in the case of the book of Nahum. Finally, the grouping of texts into genres is the first step of comparative studies (Longman 1985, 60-67).

ANTHROPOLOGY Religion and politics are two aspects of Assyrian and Judean social structure especially relevant for this study. Clifford Geertz defines religion as: a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the

Dubrow 1982, 2-3, 31, 82. For a history of genre studies see: Dubrow 1982 and Duff 2000 and R. B. Parkinson 2002, who provides a wide survey of developments in literary theory of the last three decades. 32 Iser’s Reader Response Theory explores this problem (Iser 1978). 31

36

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic (Geertz 1973, 90).

Religion is used to define the nature of reality—the world’s structure. Intrinsic to any reality is a corresponding set of behaviors, as well as an understanding of identity (both that of an individual and community). Religious symbols serve to delimit appropriate behavior by formulating moral-aesthetic norms. Those who disregard them are generally considered stupid, insensitive, unlearned, or in extreme cases mad or even evil. This suffuses morality with an aura of realism and practical wisdom. Religion therefore, promotes proper conduct by representing morality as nothing more than common sense. Therefore, the force of a religion to support social values lies in its ability to formulate a world in which those values, as well as the forces opposed to their actualization, are fundamental ingredients. By fusing ethos and worldview to create a set of social values possessing the appearance of objectivity, religion acquires the very quality necessary for it to be coercive (Geertz 1973, 12932). Prophetic oracles, in which the prophet delivers the very words of the deity, are especially useful as tools of coercion. The presumed authority of the utterance was crucial in establishing the ethical argument of the authors. These oracles, vested with divine authority, were ideally suited to the task of exerting psychological force. Geertz argues that those who want to exercise political power must make themselves the expression of a powerful force in contemporary social life (Geertz 1973, 248). Assyria held absolute political power in seventh century Israel, during the exilic period it was the Babylonians and Persia in the post-exilic era. The only available means of exercising power available to the post-exilic intelligentsia was writing. Writing is a two-fold exercise of power: (1) the power of writing belongs to the person who possesses the ability to write and exercises it and (2) power held by the authority in place, which delegates it and exercises control over what is written Chartier 1997, 88).

MARXIST LITERARY CRITICISM Marxist literary criticism not only draws attention to the fact that literature is an artifact, a product of social consciousness; it also reminds us that the production of literature is an industry. Litera-

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

37

ture itself is a commodity. The production of literature is but one form of social and economic production that exists alongside and interacts with others (Eagleton 1976, 59-60). In the ancient world, texts were not mass produced. They were produced by hand, one at a time and were passed among the elite. This is a crucial factor in determining the relationship between producers and consumers (Eagleton 1976, 61-8). The author in ancient societies worked for a patron who compensated him for the production of texts. This patron may be the temple or palace. Although individuals retained the service of scribes to draw up letters and contracts, these documents fall outside of our discussion. There is no evidence to suggest individuals commissioned literary texts. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the ideology of ancient literature is the ideology of the palace or temple that commissioned the work.33 Marx introduced concepts important for our study. The social relationships that characterize society are intrinsically bound to the way men produce their material life. In the end, Marx argues, the dominant ideas of a society are those of its ruling class. However, perhaps more profound is the idea that thoughts do not shape political reality, political reality shapes thought (Eagleton 1976, 4-5). This has implications for the understanding of the prophetic oracles analyzed in the following chapters. For example, Martti Nissinen (1996) demonstrates that the distinction between true and false prophecy in Assyria is determined by whether it supports the ruling monarch. Biblical prophetic literature supports the interests of those who produced it. What does the focus of the material reveal about the concerns of the “representers” and their historical situation? Theses books lack the characteristic features of monarchic patronage evidenced in the Neo-Assyrian material.

NEW HISTORICISM New historicism, like Marxist literary criticism, is concerned with the historical, social, political, and economic factors that contribute to the production of literature. Under the influence of Johann 33 Ryan Byrne (2007) outlines scribal activity in Iron I Palestine. The extant corpus consists of prestige items commissioned by elites and curricular instruments used to preserve the scribal profession.

38

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Gottfried von Herder and Clifford Geertz, it regards entire cultures as texts suitable for study.34 An important contribution of new historicism is its recognition of the role of the historical imagination. It recognizes that “historical knowledge is primarily, or in substantial part, the metaphoric creation of the historical imagination” and that the historical imagination is “the application of the general capacity of the human mind for comparison, connection, analogy, and difference to the study of the past and its sources” (Munslow 2000, 129, 124).

READER RESPONSE THEORY We now turn our attention to Reader Response Theory. One of the major tenets of the theory is that the reader creates meaning as he engages the text. The act of reading is guided by strategies and structures employed by the text’s author. The norms of communication theory and semiotics govern the act of reading; therefore, there is a limit to the possible meanings created by the reader (Iser 1978, 1-62). Reader Response Theory distinguishes between propagandistic texts and literary texts. The former employs different strategies resulting in a reduced level of ideation (the creation of meaning) on the part of the reader. The goal is to transmit reliably a thesis by means of smoothly linking the expectations and disposition of the reader to the contents. The reader’s participation is rigidly controlled and limited to the acceptance or rejection of the thesis (Iser 1978, 189-91). Neo-Assyrian prophetic oracles fall into this category. They support Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal as the deities’ chosen and protected king who will triumph over their enemies. Literary texts, on the other hand, play a pivotal role in reformulating reality. The theory acknowledges that literary texts are 34 D. F. McKenzie Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) expanded the idea of text to include: books, orally produced works, numerical or computer-processed data, images in all its forms, geographical maps, musical scores, and landscapes. In his conception text is a construction based on signs whose meaning is fixed by convention and that constitutes symbolic systems inviting interpretation (Chartier 1997, 81).

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

39

speech-acts—“units of linguistic communication through which sentences are situated and take on meaning in accordance with their usage” (Iser 1978, 55). They employ a greater array of strategies to guide ideation: foreground and background, theme and horizon, wandering viewpoint, and blanks and negation (Iser 1978, 92-99, 108-18, 163-96). The books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah are literary texts—speech acts that engage the reader in such a way that he will change his perception of reality. They evidence a greater concentration of literary strategies that guide ideation.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Barstad (2000) identifies certain limitations that plague the field of comparative studies (see my discussion in ch. 1). The methodology I am advancing in this chapter makes a conscious effort to avoid these pitfalls. As Barstad notes, all comparative analysis is in danger of falling victim to subjectivity. I articulate my underlying assumptions and methodology in an attempt to reduce this danger. Underlying Assumptions The disciplines outlined above guide my reading of the texts in question. I will demonstrate these approaches have a great deal to contribute towards understanding the meaning and creation of literary texts. At the outset, I wish to acknowledge that the number of open questions plaguing prophetic studies will make it impossible to establish literary connections with any degree of certainty (Nissinen 1993, 224). However, it is possible to establish probable connections. I will explore the nature of the connection between the Akkadian and biblical material, which may exist on one of two levels. The literary level is the world of the text. This world may or may not correspond to historical reality—the second level (Malul 1990, 88-9). This limitation confronts everyone examining ancient texts. It is the natural result of the inability to observe societies first hand or question their inhabitants. My analysis supports the conclusion that correspondences exist on the literary level. Assyria and Judah shared direct cultural contact throughout the eighth and seventh centuries. Subsequent to the collapse of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, cultural contact continued through Babylo-

40

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

nian mediation. Therefore, any literary connections between the Assyrian and biblical material could be the result of direct or mediated contact (Malul 1990, 89-91). While it is possible that literary connections are the result of borrowing from another source, lack of evidence of a likely candidate precludes this option from consideration. I will articulate probable lines of cultural influence whenever possible. Phenomena common to the Neo-Assyrian and biblical texts may be unique or the result of coincidence (Malul 1990, 93-97). Similar phenomena may not be evidence of influence, but simply the result of common institutions in ancient societies. However, consultation with other material (i.e. Egyptian) reveals that similarities in the corpora are limited to a narrow geographic and temporal distance increasing the probability of literary influence. The Method of Comparison Although I enumerate the steps, I will undertake below, the steps are not taken in a rigid sequence, but overlap and intersect with one another. By enumerating them as I do, I simply call the reader’s attention to what I am consciously doing as I work with the texts, not outlining a step-by-step process. As the analysis unfolds, the caution offered by William Hallo will prove most relevant: … a comparative approach that is truly objective must be broad enough to embrace the possibility of a negative comparison, i.e. a contrast. And contrast can be every bit as illuminating as (positive) comparison. It can silhouette the distinctiveness of a biblical institution or formulation against its Ancient Near Eastern matrix (Hallo 1977, 2).

First, I have a clearly defined field of comparison (cf. Barstad 2000). I have chosen material that falls within the rubric of prophetic literature. The material is ostensibly close in terms of social context and temporal distance (the seventh century BCE) (cf. Barstad 2000). Recent anthropological studies (see ch. 1) advance the theory that prophets associated with the temple produced biblical prophecy, much like Assyrian prophecy. The dating of the Assyrian material is relatively secure and it is assured that the temporal distance separating the delivery of Assyrian prophecies and the act of recording them is shorter than that of the biblical. This makes the Akkadian prophecies suitable for use as a test case for theories

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

41

concerning the production of the biblical material. The Akkadian material I study includes oracles, letters from deities, and oracles in secondary contexts. Second, I will attempt to understand each corpus as thoroughly as possible within the confines of the socio-political and religious system that produced it. This will address Barstad’s (2000) concern that comparative studies fail to consider how societies develop. The work of Geertz and Chartier will be especially helpful in this undertaking. Third, I will engage in a cross-cultural comparison of the material, addressing another of Barstad’s concerns—the lack of crosscultural comparisons (2000). I will begin by examining the NeoAssyrian prophetic material which will serve as a benchmark for my analysis of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. I pay special attention to the genre forms that predominate in both corpora. Tremper Longman (1991, 34-36) enumerates some of the benefits of engaging in cross-cultural comparison of texts. Four are of special interest in this study: (1) historical and functional causality may be determined, allowing the origin, development, or adaptation of a motif, theme, or piece of literature in one culture to be determined by comparison with another. Furthermore, it may be possible to identify the manipulation of a motif (e.g. the lion motif in Nahum). (2) The function of literary works may become apparent when considered in light of ancient Near Eastern parallels. I argue that the biblical texts are literary works designed to reformulate the community’s conception of reality. (3) The identification of differences may highlight what is unique in the subject cultures. The respective corpora share many motifs, but some undergo transformation in the biblical texts (e.g. royal ideology and universal dominion). (4) Finally, it militates against scholars isolating one culture from another. Commentaries on Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah fail to consider the influence of the NAP corpus in determining the meaning of these books. As Lévi-Strauss (1976) argues, the meaning of texts emerges in the differences they share with other texts. This proves the case in the material under consideration. The Akkadian and biblical material evidence stark differences in terms of content, focus, and genre features. These differences shape the meaning of the biblical material and provide insight to its production.

42

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Fourth, my examination will focus on both similarities and differences in the texts’ lexical elements, themes, and genre forms. However, I will not limit myself to a discussion of similarities and differences, another of Barstad’s concerns (2000). I will rely on anthropological and literary models to account for the differences encountered. The differences will help identify those institutions, phenomena, and ideas unique to the Hebrew Bible. Fifth, I will cross genre boundaries in my analysis. Longman discourages comparisons that cross genre boundaries because such comparisons introduce uncertainty and are unreliable (Longman 1991, 31). However, as Duff observes (see above), cross-genre comparisons may be fruitful in tracing ideological changes. Therefore, I will explore issues of cross-genre fertilization that illumine our understanding of the creation and meaning of the biblical material. Sixth, I will endeavor to avoid the five pitfalls that await such a comparison. (1) I avoid the distortion of my results by not submerging one culture to the other. (2) I acknowledge that establishing dependence is difficult and often impossible. (3) On a related note, adaptation is often difficult to discern or recognize. (4) I avoid adopting a monolithic view of culture that takes one text and treats it as the representative view of that culture. (5) I do not afford the biblical texts a place of dominance in this endeavor.35 Seven, I will account for unique phenomena once they have been identified. Scholars who desire to make inquiries into either the cause of an effect or effects or properties of a given cause may employ the method of elimination. The method of elimination is the process [in the theory of equations] by which one after another of the elements of a question is excluded and the solution made to depend on the relation between the remaining elements only (Mill 1970, 207).

This process may employ either the Method of Agreement or the Method of Disagreement (Mill 1970, 205-6).

35

34).

Longman discusses these dangers in detail (Longman 1991, 32-

METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

43

The Method of Agreement compares different instances in which a given phenomenon occurs. The method holds that “if two or more instances of the phenomenon under investigation have only one circumstance in common, the circumstance in which alone all the instances agree, is the cause (or effect) of the given phenomenon” (Mill 1970, 206). This method is not without its limitations; it leads only to laws of phenomena, i.e. uniformities which either are not laws of causation or in which the cause of causation remains undecided. The source of this limitation is the plurality of possible causes to any given phenomenon. The methods greatest value is in proposing applications of the Method of Difference. However, it is the principle means of investigation where experimentation is impossible such as the study of ancient texts) (Mill 1970, 205-10).

CONCLUSION Having outlined the methodological approach I employ, I now turn to a study of the Neo-Assyrian prophetic corpus. I demonstrate that this seventh century material is propagandistic in nature. It exists to support the absolute power of the state, having been produced by prophets who are complicit in this process of political domination.

4 NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES The Neo-Assyrian material analyzed in this chapter consists of twenty-nine oracles from the reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. The material has been collected in Simo Parpola’s Assyrian Prophecies (SAA 9), published by the Helsinki University, 1997. I am indebted to Simo Parpola who has compiled these texts. The translations are his, unless otherwise noted.36 I will begin this chapter with a brief discussion of the historical background and physical description of the tablets. A discussion of the individual oracles with special attention paid to the genre forms encountered follows. Even a casual reading of these prophecies reveals they share numerous common features, images, and motifs. I discuss these shared features in summary comments that follow my treatment of the individual oracles. The chapter closes with a presentation of my conclusions. I demonstrate that the material is political and propagandistic in nature.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE ORACLES The Neo-Assyrian prophecies date to the seventh century BCE and are primarily concerned with the political turmoil associated with the ascension of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal to the Assyrian throne. Civil wars, instigated by their brothers, plagued both kings. The prophecies contain numerous divine promises relating to the destruction of the kings’ enemies and their safe ensconcement on the throne and thus reflect the political crises of the time. The oraParpola (1997) provides transcriptions, translations, notes, photographs of the tablets, and a textual apparatus that discusses unusual forms (among other items of interest). The spelling of names has been modified to adhere to the guidelines published in the SBL handbook and DDD. 36

45

46

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

cles focus on the present and immediate future. Aside from the promise of an enduring dynasty (SAA 9 2.3 ii 13-14), they lack any focus on the distant future. The prophecies were delivered by a variety of prophets and prophetesses on behalf of numerous Assyrian and Babylonian deities.37 Although all of the prophecies originated in response to specific historical events, scribes produced some of the tablets for immediate use. Royal scribes produced the collections after the fact in order to preserve the prophecies for political purposes. In fact, the majority of extant Neo-Assyrian prophecies are preserved in collections, which appear to be organized chronologically and thematically.38 I will develop this idea below as each collections is treated.

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE TABLETS All of the Neo-Assyrian prophecies are preserved on clay tablets. The Ninevite archives preserve two types of tablets. Scribes used the horizontal format (u’iltu) for notes, reports, receipts, and memoranda, that is, information for immediate use, not permanent storage. Oracles SAA 9: 5-8 are examples of this type of tablet. Vertical, multi-column tablets (tiuppu) were used for treaties, census lists, balanced accounts, and inventories of treasury, as well as collections of all sorts (including royal decrees and ordinances, recipes, etc), that is, for documents specifically created for archival storage.39 Collections 1-4 and oracles SAA 9: 9, 10, and 11 are examples of tiuppu tablets.40 For a discussion of the prophets and prophetesses, see Parpola 1997, IL-LII. 38 The bearing of this for biblical studies is discussed in the final chapter. 39 “An archive is a repository of documentary records, of necessity organized so as to enable the efficient retrieval and comparison of individual records. An archive is an administrative resource, and its contents are preserved for such purposes. Such records are not read except when the information they contain is needed; they are copied, not edited” (Davies 1998, 17). Niditch cautions that records in archives and libraries are not easily retrieved and not made for utilitarian purposes; they are pledges to posterity—an assurance of cultural or familial continuity (1996, 60). 37

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

47

THE ORACLES The ten prophecies of the first collection address Esarhaddon. They concern his political struggle against his brothers after their assassination of Sennacherib and their attempt to seize the throne of Assyria. Parpola dates the first prophecy of this collection to just before the decisive battle of 681 BCE. The next five prophecies appear to have been delivered after this battle, but before Esarhaddon’s arrival in Nineveh in 681 BCE. The prophecies in this collection contain correlations to Esarhaddon’s Nineveh A inscription: his entering the Palace of Succession, betrayal by his brothers, divine protection, defeat of his enemies, etc. Based on these correlations, Parpola dates the collection to late 673 BCE.41 These prophecies assert that Esarhaddon’s actions are not those of an usurper who brings ill upon the land, but the actions of the legitimate heir who restores good to the land.42 SAA 9 1.1 Issar-La-Tashiyat 1 [......] strong (f.) 2 [......] is wide (f.) 3 [......] ... 4 [Esarh]addon, king of the lands, fear [not]! 6 What wind has risen against you, whose wing I have not broken? Your enemies will roll before your feet like ripe apples.43 Van der Toorn (2007, 55-63) paints a different picture. He maintains that temple libraries lent tablets to scribes who wanted to make their own private copies of texts. Assuming he is correct, it seems much more likely that scholars would want copies of texts that related to their own profession (cf. Ellis 1989). 40 Parpola 1997, LIII. For a physical description of the tablets, see Parpola 1997, LII-LXII. 41 Parpola provides an English translation of Esarhaddon’s Nineveh A inscription in an appendix pertaining to the corpus. The correlations between the oracles and the inscriptions are indicated in brackets (Parpola 1997, LXVIII-LXXIII). 42 Liverani (2004, 147-59) explores the structure and political ideology of such restoration tales. 43 See CAD G 153b and CAD S 269b. Literally “apples of Simānum” (name of the 3d month).

48

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

11 I am the Great Lady; I am Ishtar of Arbela, who cast your enemies before your feet. What words have I spoken to you that you could not rely upon? 18 I am Ishtar of Arbela. I will flay your enemies and give them to you. 20 I am Ishtar of Arbela. I will go before you and behind you.44 24 Fear not! You are paralyzed, but in the midst of woe, I will rise and sit down (beside you).45 28 By the mouth of Issar-la-tashiyati46 of Arbela.

This is a typical victory oracle containing direct address to the recipient, the encouragement formula, the divine self-identification formula, and a message of victory.47 The encouragement formula precedes a review of Ishtar’s deeds that serve as justification for placing trust in her. The enemies in question are the king’s brothers. Ishtar of Arbela, the Assyrian warrior goddess, is the source of the message and the prophet Issar-la-tashiyati of Arbela the messenger. The enemies are designated as a wind, whose wing Ishtar has broken—this “marker” likely points to the Adapa legend creatWhile we do find the promise that the goddess will go before the king: “I (Ishtar or Arbela) will go before Ashurbanipal, the king whom my hands created. . .” (CAD pānu and kutallu) the formula “I will go before you and behind you” is not common. 45 A different translation appears in CAD M/2 203a: “(when) you are in m., I am in woe.” Given the overall tone of the oracle in assuring Esarhaddon of Ishtar’s activity on his behalf, Parpola’s translation is perhaps to be preferred. 46 Parpola observes the name is a hapax legomenon and proposes it is the equivalent of Lā-teggi-ana-Issār “Do not neglect Ishtar” (Parpola 1997, L). After careful examination of the tablet, Parpola concludes that the scribe began to write the name of the prophet using the female determinative MÍ, before writing the masculine and divine determinatives over this sign (Parpola 1997, 5 note). 47 Philip Harner (1969) classifies this as a Salvation Oracle. I have chosen to avoid the use of the word “salvation” which is highly charged with theological associations alien to the historical setting of this material. I prefer to identify it as a victory oracle, because it is a promise of military victory over the king’s enemies. Weippert (1981) relies on typological criteria to classify it as a “Fear Not” oracle. 44

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

49

ing an intertextual link between the texts.48 The use of such an allusion would demonstrate an awareness of Akkadian scribal tradition on the part of the prophet and establish a frame of reference for understanding the lines.49 The Adapa legend provides the external framework that facilitates interpretation. The original meaning recedes to the background while the new meaning emerges in the foreground, in this case a rhetorical question situated in a prophecy. The south wind almost destroyed Adapa before he rebuked it, breaking its wing; similarly, Esarhaddon’s enemies have threatened his life, but Ishtar has broken their power rescuing Esarhaddon. The putative allusion is recast as a rhetorical question assuring Esarhaddon of the goddess’s protection. Thus, while Adapa had to fend for himself, Esarhaddon enjoys divine protection.50 Esarhaddon is also assured that his enemies will roll like apples at his feet (literally “apples of the month of Sivan”), an image evoking associations of a harvest. Apples were also associated with death in the

48 A marker, in this case the broken wing of the wind, is an identifiable element or pattern in a text that is recognized as belonging to another independent text (Ben-Porat 1976, 108). Three fragmentary accounts have been recovered from the library at Ashurbanipal along with the NeoAssyrian prophecies. Liverani (2004, 4-23) demonstrates that the Adapa myth functions to explain the priestly characteristics. Allusions are difficult to establish with certainty because they are generally subtle in nature. Gordon Johnston lists 4 criteria for identifying allusions in a text: (1) the alleged allusion must be drawn from a specific text; (2) it must be demonstrated that the text was known to the author and a portion of his audience; (3) sufficient number of familiar and meaningful elements from the source material must be present; (4) the proposed allusion must serve a rhetorical function (Johnston 2001, 289-90). 49 Ziva Ben-Porat defines literary allusion as “a device for the simultaneous activation of two texts. The activation is achieved through the manipulation of a special signal: a sign (simple or complex) in a given text characterized by an additional larger ‘referent.’ This referent is always an independent text. The simultaneous activation of the two texts thus connected results in the formation of intertextual patterns whose nature cannot be predetermined” (Ben Porat 1976, 107-108). 50 Indeed, not only did Adapa have to fend for himself, his actions earned divine disfavor that was only deflected by the counsel of Ea.

50

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

ancient world.51 This particular harvest will ensure the death of Esarhaddon’s enemies. The king’s enemies are ripe fruit waiting to be plucked from the branch. The divine self-identification formula and encouragement formula are both integral parts of the oracle accompanied by descriptions of divine intervention. The prophecy envisions the king as an infant crying violently, to the point of paralysis (Parpola 1997, 5 note). Ishtar will rise—a motif commonly denoting preparation for action, in this case to attack enemies— and sit down beside him, ostensibly to comfort and protect him.52 The reference to the deity sitting is also an indication of sovereignty; Ishtar is in control of the situation at hand.53 Rhetorical questions assure the king that Ishtar will deal with his enemies and he can trust in her promises. Parallel construction, characteristic of ancient Near East poetry, appears in lines featuring the selfidentification formula. In lines 11-12, “I am the Great Lady” is in synonymous construction with “I am Ishtar of Arbela.” The two lines are arranged in an a/b::b/a chiasmus: dGAŠAN

GAL-tú a-na-ku :: a-na-ku dXV ša URU.arba.-ìl.

SAA 9 1.2 Sinqisha-amur54 30 King of Assyria, fear not! I will de liver up the enemy of the king of Assyria for slaughter. [I will] keep you safe and [make] you [great in] your Palace of Succession. 36 I am the Gr[eat Lady. I am Ishtar o]f Arbela 38 [……] from his midst II beginning (about 6 lines) destroyed (Break) 51 Vries

1976, s.v. apple. For examples see CAD tebû. 53 Vries 1976, s.v. sitting. 54 Sinqisha-amur “I have seen her distress” is a hapax legomenon. Parpola observes that it is “clearly” an assumed prophet name that “refers a visionary revelation of Ishtar” (Parpola 1997, LII). However, it is not assured that such scholarly skepticism is warranted. During the Reagan administration, the Assistant to the President and Principal Deputy Press Secretary was Larry Speakes. It is not hard to imagine scholars 100 years from now assuming that “Speakes” was an assumed or fictitious name used to refer to someone who spoke for the president. 52

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

51

ii2 What [……] I would not have heard you? [The enemies …] in neckst[ocks], the [vassals] under [tribu[te]; I alone55 defeat[ted] your enemy. 8 I have given you faith, I do not sit (idle)! 9 By the mouth of the woman Sinqisha-amur of Arbela.

The second prophecy is also a victory oracle. It addresses the king by title, followed by the encouragement formula. The divine selfidentification formula refers to Ishtar by her title and name. The formulaic: “I am the Great lady. I am Ishtar of Arbela” is used again in this oracle by a different prophetess (Sinqisha-amur) indicating it had become a stock phrase through overcoding (cf. Eco 1976, 129-35) and was regularly utilized in prophecies. The extant material preceding and following this formula consists of the promise of victory and divine intervention: the king’s enemies will be delivered for slaughter, the deity will keep the king safe, the enemies will be [brought] in neckstocks and pay tribute. There is a problem with the temporality of this oracle. It contains both a promise to deliver up (nadānu in the present/durative tense) the king’s enemies to slaughter (1 ii 31-32) and the assurance that Ishtar alone has defeated (kašādu in the perfect) the king’s enemies (1 ii 6-7).56 Noteworthy in this oracle are the promises that Ishtar has heard the king, has given him faith, and does not sit idle. 57 The deity instills the king with confidence (ú-ta-ki-il-ka) through omens and prophecies.58

Understanding e-da-ni-’e to be a form of ēdēnu “alone.” Parpola understands e-da-ni-’e to be derived from ēdāniu “single” and renders the line: “I defea[ted] your enemy in a single [encounter]” (Parpola 1993, 5). 56 By the Neo-Assyrian period, the perfect with infixed -ta- was used to denote simple past time in positive main clauses and in interrogative main clauses lacking an interrogative particle. The preterite was used in subordinate clauses with an interrogative word, and as precative and cohortative in negative main clauses (Hämeen-Anttila 2000, 110). 57 For the use of “sitting” to denote inactivity see CAD ašābu. 58 Cf. CAD takālu; “Upon a trust(-inspiring) oracle (given) by Ashur, my lord, I fought with them and inflicted a defeat upon them” ANET, 287-8. 55

52

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

SAA 9 1.3 Remutti-Allati59 11 I rejoice with Esarhaddon, my king! Arbela rejoices! 13 By the mouth of the woman Remutti-Al-lati of Dara-ahuya, a town in the mountains.

This brief oracle may commemorate Esarhaddon’s victory over his brothers in the decisive battle of 681 BCE. The prophecy does not explicitly identify the deity who uttered this prophecy. However, given that all of the attributed oracles in this collection are associated with Ishtar of Arbela and the prominence of Arbela in the oracle, I tentatively attribute it to Ishtar of Arbela. “My king” emphasizes Esarhaddon’s status as the chosen one of the gods. This brief oracle serves as the hinge point of the collection. The next prophecy presents a unique set of problems. It relates oracular messages on behalf of three different deities, thus raising the issue of how to attribute the lines to the respective gods. The speech is not set off by the use of ma as in SAA 9 2 iii 9. There are no physical clues on the tablet (Parpola 1997, plate 1) to suggest when one deity’s speech ends and another begins. I have opted to rely upon functional criteria to assign the lines to the respective deities. Ancient cosmologies were functional in nature. Deities and their roles in the pantheon were primarily concerned with an individual god’s area of responsibility—what the god did (Walton, Spring 2008).60 With that in mind, I have assigned the lines to Bel, Ishtar, and Nabû based on the roles these deities played in Assyria’s religious life.

59 Remutti-Allati “Granted by Allatu” was a prophetess from the mountain town Dara-ahuya. Allatu was the name of a Mesopotamian netherworld goddess, Ereshkigal. Parpola proposes the name, which is a hapax legomenon, is an “assumed ‘prophet name’ referring to its bearer as a person released from the power of the netherworld” (Parpola 1997, LILII). 60 At the time of writing, John Walton was working on a book that explores this issue in greater depth. The work is being published by Eisenbrauns and is tentatively titled Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmogony. See also Liverani 1998, 15-25, 63-64.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

53

SAA 9 1.4 Bayâ 16 Fear not, Esarhaddon! 17 I am Bel. (Even as) I speak to you, I watch over the beams of your heart. 20 When your mother gave birth to you, sixty great gods stood with me and protected you. Sin was at your right side, Shamash at your left; sixty great gods were standing around you and girded your loins. 27 Do not trust in man. Lift up your eyes, look to me! I am Ishtar of Arbela; I reconciled Ashur with you. When you were small, I took you to me. Fear not!; praise me! What enemy has attacked you while I remained silent? 37 The future shall be like the past. I am Nabû, lord of the stylus. Praise me! 40 By the mouth of the woman Bayâ “son” of Arbela.

The encouragement formula opens this victory oracle; the divine self-identification formula follows. The prophecy features “I am DN” statements from three distinct deities, each of which is accompanied by a statement of divine intervention on behalf of the king. A naïve reading accepts the notion that one prophetess received what amounts to a conference call from the gods.61 However, it seems more likely that this prophecy provides an important clue as to how one should understand the self-identification formula (see below). The prophecy contains the assurance that Bel/Marduk is watching over the “beams” of the king’s heart.62

For example: “Für den ersteren Fall nimt man gerne an, dass im polytheistischen Milieu Assyriens der Adressat oder die Adressatin einer Gottesbotschaft davon unterrichtet werden muss, wer zu ihm oder zu ihr spricht, und das am besten gleich am Beginn des Orakels.“Weippert goes on to say that examples of the self-declaration raise questions whether this explanation is sufficient (Weippert 2001, 42). Neo-Assyrian temples contained numerous cult rooms occupied by a plethora of different gods (Driel 1969, 37). Therefore, it is not unusual for a prophet to “receive” a message from more than one deity at a temple. 62 This expression is not common, and is only attested here CAD G 146a. For a discussion of the status of Marduk and Nabû in Assyria during this period, see Porter 1997. Marduk played an important role in As61

54

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Since beams support roofs, ceilings, etc., this expression serves as an assurance to Esarhaddon that Bel will not let his heart fail, i.e. will not allow him to be disheartened or discouraged. The prophecy assures the king that sixty gods had attended and protected his birth. In this occurrence, sixty is a trope denoting a full complement.63 Sin and Shamash stood at the king’s side, right and left respectively, a motif that occurs elsewhere, though their positions are not fixed.64 It is not the position of the gods that is important, simply their presence. The same complement of gods girded the king’s loins, a common motif denoting preparation for action.65 Ishtar, or possibly Bel, encourages the king: “lift up your eyes, look to me!”66 He is to put his trust in her and not men. She also reminds the king that she chose him while he was small and has reconciled Ashur with him. Ashur here lacks a determinative and it is not clear whether the city or deity is intended, but the city seems more likely. While Ashur has reason to be angry with the traitors who assassinated Sennacherib and driven Esarhaddon from the land, Esarhaddon has done nothing to anger the deity. The activity of Esarhaddon’s brothers has left the king and the city estranged. A similar sentiment is expressed in SAA 9 2 where Ishtar promises to reconcile the king with Assyria (cf. SAA 9 2.3 ii 3). Ishtar’s divine intervention forms the basis for the encouragement formula. She

syrian religious rites as early as the Middle Assyrian period (Driel 1969, 52-7). 63 Sixty is the optimal number in the Mesopotamian sexagesimal system. The sexagesimal system also plays a significant role in some versions of the Sumerian King List (Bailey 1989, 123-201 and Cassuto 1961, 188290); cf.: “let loose against her (Ishtar) the sixty diseases;” “may (the evil of the dream) withdraw sixty leagues from my body” (CAD šuši). 64 Cf.: “at my left (stands) Sin, at my right Shamash (CAD I-J 121a); cf. “As a child the great gods guided me, going with me on the right and the left” (SAA 3 3, 14-15). 65 See CAD R 97b, said of Esarhaddon. 66 Although the idea of lifting up one’s eyes to behold something is common in Akkadian literature, the command from a god to do so is not common (CAD s.v. matāhu and dagālu).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

55

assures Esarhaddon that she has not “remained silent,” i.e. done nothing, while his enemies attacked.67 Nabû, the patron deity of scribes, promises a stable future that preserves the traditions of the past: “The future shall be like the past.” This line underscores the high value placed on tradition and its continuity in the ancient Near East. A portion of this oracle is chiastic in structure: Sixty great gods stood with me and protected you Sin was at your right side Shamash at your left Sixty great gods were standing around you and girded your loins.

It is noteworthy that these lines pertain to Assyrian deities. The oracle, as a whole, is not chiastic in structure, nor is it poetic. The oracle, like others, employs rhetorical questions to persuade the king to put his trust in Assyria’s deities. SAA 9 1.5 Ilussa-Amur iii beginning (about 14 lines) destroyed (Break) 2 I will [......] 3 you shall […..]. 4 I am Mu[lissu (…)]. 5 By the mouth of the woman Ilussa-am[ur] of the Inner city.

This is the first prophecy to introduce Mulissu in the prophetic corpus.68 Its presence in a collection of prophecies prominently featuring Ishtar of Arbela suggests that the two deities have begun to merge in the Neo-Assyrian pantheon. I explore this idea in detail below. Oracle SAA 9 1.6 alludes to crossing the Tigris River on the king’s journey to ascend the throne (Parpola 1997, LXIX). Gakuru The use of “remaining silent” to denote inactivity is also featured in SAA 1 98 r. 4, 200 r. 1, and SAA 5 149 r. 5 (Parpola 1997, 6 note). 68 Parpola proposes the name originally meant “Female Enlil” and was reinterpreted in the Neo-Assyrian period as “She Who Purifies/Sanctifies” (Parpola 1997, CI note 190). 67

56

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

analyzes SAA 9 1.6 and 1.7 as one prophecy. The break in the tablet precludes a definitive assertion either way. SAA 9 1.6-7 Issar-Beli-Da’’ini 7 I am Ishtar of [Arbela]. 8 Esarhaddon, king of A[ssyria]! In the Inner City, Nineveh, Calah, and Arbela I will give long days and everlasting years to Esarhaddon, my king. 15 I am your great midwife; I am your excellent wet nurse. For long days and everlasting years, I have established your throne under the great heavens 23 I watch in a golden chamber in the midst of the heavens; I let the lamp of elmēšu69 shine before Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, and I watch him like the crown of my head. 30 Fear not, my king! I have spoken to you; I have not lied to you; I have given you faith; I will not let you come to shame. I will take you safely across the River. iv 5 Esarhaddon, rightful heir, son of Mulissu! With an angry dagger in my hand, I will finish of your enemies. 11 Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, cup filled with lye, axe of two shekels! 14 Esarhaddon! I will give you long days and everlasting years in the Inner City. O Esarhaddon, I will be your good shield in Arbela. 20 Esarhaddon, ri[ghtful] heir, son of Mul [lissu]! I am mindful of you, I have loved you greatly. 26 I hold you in the great heavens by your curl. I make smoke rise up on your right side, I kindle fire on your left. 33 The kingship [is] stro[ng] on [……] (break) rest (about 14 lines) destroyed

69 Parpola translates elmēšu as amber, but this translation is by no means certain. While elmēšu sometimes is used of amber, it has other meanings as well. CAD (E 107) renders the line: “I watch from a golden chamber in the midst of the sky. I let the lamp or e. shine before me.” Cf. biblical ‫( חשמל‬Ezek 1:27) a word of unknown etymology and uncertain meaning. It is evidently some shining substance and is translated “amber” in the Authorized Version (BDB 365b).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

57

v1 [......] shall not receive [...] from him. I will cut the conspiring weasels70 and shrews to pieces before his feet. 8 You (f.) are you. The king is my king! 10 By the mouth of the woman Issar-beli-da’’ini, a votaress of my king.

This dynastic victory oracle originates with Ishtar of Arbela and is closely related to the victory oracle. Gakuru identifies seven components to this oracle: (1) introductory divine selfidentification formula (iii.7) followed by, (2) direct address to the king (iii.8), (3) an allusion to past acts of deliverance (iii.31-32), (4) promise of a long tenure of office (iii.11-14; 19-22; iv.14-17), (5) promise of divine protection (iii.23-29), (6) reference to special relationship between deity and king (iii.15-16; iv.20-25; v.8-9), (7) prophetic ascription, to which I wish to add (v.10-11) (8) the encouragement formula (iii.30).71 As in the victory oracle, the promise of divine intervention follows the divine self-identification formula. The deity promises a long tenure of office—long days and everlasting years—three times in the oracle. The promise of divine protection takes numerous forms. Ishtar watches “in a golden chamber in the midst of the heavens.” While this reference is not entirely clear, SAA 3 39:30-32 may illumine the issue. In this cosmology, Anu resides in the upper heaven of luludanitu stone, “the middle heaven of saggilmud stone is of the Igigi gods.” Bel is specifically named as sitting in the middle heaven on a high temple dais of lapis lazuli and has a lamp of elmēšu that shines there.72 Likewise, Ishtar watches in a golden chamber in the heavens and has a lamp of elmēšu, which she uses to illumine Esarhaddon’s path. Gold was associated with the heavens, hence the goddess watches from a golden chamber in the heavens.73 Ishtar will take the king safely across the river and also protect him as

70 The meaning of this word is uncertain; see CAD K 50; kakkišu: “a small animal, a rodent?” The two usages referenced in CAD carry a negative connotation. 71 Gakuru 2000, 58-61. 72 “The lower heaven of jasper is of the stars” (SAA 3 39 33). 73 Vries 1976, s.v. gold.

58

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

she does her own crown/tiara, the symbol of her authority.74 The goddess will use an “angry dagger” to finish off his enemies; this image conveys Ishtar’s severe displeasure with the traitors.75 It is ironic that Ishtar uses a dagger to kill the king’s enemies, because daggers are associated with treachery, the very crime the brothers have committed.76 Ishtar will be the king’s shield, protecting him from harm. Ishtar will cut the king’s enemies—weasels and shrews— to pieces at his feet. This ideologically charged imagery severs all ties between Esarhaddon and his traitorous brothers, indeed, none of the prophecies acknowledge the family relationship between the king and his brothers/enemies. Weasels are treacherous, known for sneaking into nests and sucking out eggs. The term “weasel” also denotes an individual who is bloodthirsty, arrogant, and quarrelsome.77 Several images depict the special relationship between the deity and king. The goddess identifies herself as the king’s midwife and wet nurse. This could be figurative. On the other hand, Parpola suggests that the mother-child imagery invoked in the oracles may be more than metaphorical. Assyrian princes were entrusted as infants to temples of Ishtar, perhaps to be suckled and nursed by hierodules enacting the motherly aspects of the goddess.78 This may be what lies behind Ishtar’s assertion that she is the king’s midwife and wet-nurse. Ashurbanipal may allude to this practice in his hymn to the Ishtars of Nineveh and Arbela (SAA 3 3, 13-15). As midwife and wet-nurse, she claims responsibility for his birth and life. Having raised the king, the deity promises to establish his throne for everlasting. Thus, the goddess’s relationship with the king begins at birth and continues throughout his life. Nothing in 74 The word agû is used for the crown of both kings and deities (CAD A 153f). 75 Usually it is the heart of the deity that is angry. The use of aggu to modify dagger is unusual (CAD aggu). 76 Vries 1976, s.v. dagger. 77 Vries 1976, s.v. weasel. 78 “The ideological background of this practice is provided by the creation myth, Enūma elish, according to which Marduk, the future king of the gods, in his infancy suckled the breasts of goddesses and was tended by a divine nurse” (Parpola 1997, XXXIX-XL).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

59

the prophecy suggests it is in any way conditional.79 The king is the “rightful heir” (distinguishing between him and his brothers, who are heirs of Sennacherib, but not entitled to the throne) and son of Mulissu, two designations expressing divine favor. Mulissu greatly loves Esarhaddon and takes special notice of him. She keeps the king in the heavens by his curl (kizirtu).80 This obscure reference to hair is one of only a few known references, all limited to the NeoAssyrian period. The encouragement formula is linked with the fact that she has spoken to him, not lied to him, given him faith, and will not let him come to shame. The divine word is the basis for confidence. The images invoked in lines 11-13 (cup filled with lye and axe of two shekels) convey the king’s power to destroy his enemies. Lye (qīltu) is not a common word in Akkadian texts. It is not readily apparent whether the usage here is intended as a poison (so Parpola 1997, 8 note) or because of its caustic properties. Either way, the general intent is a reference to the destructive power of the king. An axe of two shekels weight is not very heavy; therefore, it is more likely that the prophecy refers to an axe valued at two shekels. The axe appears in ancient iconography as a weapon of the deity.81 The prophecy may envision Esarhaddon as Ishtar’s weapon. The goddess is the king’s shield protecting him from harm. Thus, goddess and king enjoy an interdependent relationship. The reference to smoke and fire invokes the imagery employed in the annals: the king destroys his enemies by burning their cities with fire. The smoke and fire here represent the successful completion of Esarhaddon’s campaigns against his enemies. The meaning of line v 8 is obscure, but presumably, addresses Naqia, Esarhaddon’s mother. She is addressed in other oracles of the collection (see SAA 9 1.8, 13 below) and the personal pronoun is feminine in gender. The following line is clear. Esarhaddon is the true king. This is of interest when considered against 2 Sam 7:15. Cf. Ezek 8:3; also Akkadian abūsātu: “he (Nergal) seized me by my forelocks and brought me before him” CAD A/1 92a. 81 Vries 1976, s.v. axe; Keel and Uehlinger 1998; Parpola 1997, 8 note. 79 80

60

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Select portions of this oracle employ parallelism, a structuring device common in ancient Near East poetry: I am your great midwife (15'-16') I am your excellent wet nurse (17')

These lines employ the divine self-identification formula. The following example of parallelism recounts the deity’s assurances to Esarhaddon: I have spoken to you, I have not lied to you (31'). I have given you faith, I will not let you come to shame (iv 1).

This oracle was delivered by Issar-beli-da’’ini whose name means “Ishtar, strengthen my lord!” She is a prophetess of unknown domicile (possibly Arbela) and identified as a votary of the king. Parpola proposes that the king may have renamed her when he donated her to the temple (Parpola 1997, L). Oracle SAA 9 1.8 appears to address conditions after the king’s ascension to the throne. SAA 9 1.8 Ahat-Abisha 12 I am the Lady of Arbela 13 To the king’s mother: 14 Because you implored82 me, saying: “You have placed the ones at the (king’s) right and left side in your lap, but made my own offspring roam the steppe”— 21 Now fear not, my king! The kingdom is yours, yours is the power! 24 By the mouth of the woman Ahat-Abisha of Arbela.

Ishtar speaks to the king’s mother, presumably at a time when Esarhaddon was under banishment. The oracle is in response to

The verb ta-hu-ri-ni-ni is difficult. There is no known Akkadian verb with the consonants ’hr, h’r, or hr’ that would fit the general context (CAD H). Robert Pfeiffer translates tahurinini as “complained” (ANET, 450b); Luckenbill translates it “call me to account for” (Luckenbill 1927, 240). 82

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

61

the queen mother’s lament that it quotes.83 While it is probable that the queen mother interceded with Ishtar on behalf of her son, it is unlikely the prophetess could know the words of the queen mother’s prayer or recite them with certainty, therefore the quotation should be regarded as a plausible fiction. The queen mother believed that Ishtar had placed the traitors in her lap; this image is used to indicate: divine favor and acceptance, divine sanction to rule, and divine protection (cf. SAA 9 1.10 vi 27-29).84 Meanwhile, her son wanders the steppe as an exile. This dynastic victory oracle contains an introductory divine self-identification formula, “I am the Lady of Arbela.” It addresses the recipient directly, “To the king’s mother.” The oracle shifts addressee in line 21; the encouragement formula is addressed to the king and linked to the promise of divine intervention. Esarhaddon will receive the kingdom and power. Therefore, he will be the one to receive divine favor and acceptance, sanction to rule, and divine protection. The ascription attributes the prophecy to Ahat-Abisha. Oracle 1.9 begins with the declaration that all is well with Esarhaddon and is associated with the king’s triumphal entry into the capital (Parpola 1997, LXIX). Gakuru classifies SAA 9 1.9-1.10 as a dynastic oracle of salvation.85 However, in light of the connotative meaning of “salvation,” dynastic oracle of victory would be a better label. SAA 9 1.9-1.10 La-Dagil-Ili 26 Well-being to Esarhaddon, king of Assyria.86 27 Ishtar of Arbela has gone out to the steppe and sent (an oracle of) well-being to her calf in the city. 31 At [her] coming out [……] (Break) (about 8 lines destroyed) 83 For a discussion of prophetic oracles delivered in response to laments see Hilber 2005, 66-74. 84 CAD S 388a. 85 Gakuru 2000, 61. Gakuru analyzes SAA 9 1.9 1and 1.10 as one oracle. Parpola scribes a line between SAA 9 1.9 and 1.10 but there is no evidence of such a scribed line on the tablet (SAA 9, 10; Plate II). 86 Parpola renders the line: “All is well with Esarhaddon . . .”

62

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

vi 2 [I am the Lady of Arb]ela 3 [O Esarhaddon, who]se bosom [Ishtar] of Arbela has filled with favor! Could you not rely on the previous utterances which I spoke to you? Now you can rely on this latter one to. 13 Praise me! When daylight declines,87 let them hold torches! Praise me before (them)! 19 I will banish trembling from my palace. You shall eat secure food and drink secure water, and you shall be secure in your palace. Your son and grandson shall rule as kings on the lap of Ninurta.88 31 By the mouth of La-dagil-ili of Arbela. blank space of 5 lines rest (about 8 lines) destroyed

The oracle contains (1) a direct address to the Esarhaddon (vi 3). (2) The divine self-identification formula appears in vi 2, “I am the Lady of Arbela.” (3) The allusion to past acts of deliverance finds expression in the rhetorical question, “Could you not rely on the previous utterances which I spoke to you?” The assurance that the king’s son and grandson will rule on Ninurta’s lap extends the promise of a (4) long tenure of office to three generations and constitutes the promise of a (5) dynasty. 89 Ninurta is the champion warrior who defends against monsters that attempt to destroy the irrigation system, agriculture, and civilization. His standard epithets include “fierce, heroic, warrior, and hero.” He was a patron god of royal war from the Middle Assyrian period onwards.90 The image of Esarhaddon’s heirs ruling from Ninurta’s lap conveys divine AHw 1197 posits sâsiu and is followed by CAD Š/2 168, which renders the line: “as soon as the day wanes.” 88 Parpola renders taqānu “safe” and CAD follows his reading in rendering the line: “safe food . . . safe water . . . be safe in your palace” CAD T 199b, but taqanānu is also translated “orderly or secure” (CAD T 197b) and this appears to be a better rendering given the context. 89 Cf. the imagery of sitting on a lap to Gen 50:23; Isa 66: 12. No significance should be ascribed to the fact that only two generations are mentioned. The Akkadian ideal is that the throne be secure and that the father be able to pass it to his son (Gakuru 2000, 38). That two generations are mentioned would be a bonus. 90 Kang, 1989, 24-31 and DDD, 627-28 s.v. Nimrod. 87

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

63

sanction of his dynasty’s rule. (6) The promise of divine protection finds expression in the deity’s promise to ban trembling, establish him safely in the palace, and provide the king with safe food and water. (7) The king is Ishtar’s “calf,” a reference to the special relationship between the deity and king.91 (8) The prophetic ascription ascribes the prophecy to La-dagil-ili of Arbela. Ishtar has gone out to the steppe, while the king is in the city. Parpola suggests Ishtar has gone to a chapel called Palace of the Steppe, located outside Arbela, to prepare for a triumphal procession into the city with the king. The king is in the city anticipating the beginning of the ceremony (Parpola 1997, 9 note). The opening line, “All is well . . .” suggests that Esarhaddon’s enemies have been defeated and he is preparing to assume the throne. The damaged lines may have included information concerning what was to happen as part of the triumphal entry. The king is encouraged to praise Ishtar, presumably for her endeavors on his behalf in delivering him from his enemies and bringing him safely into the city and palace, as well as what she will yet do in the future. The envisioned praise may be a component of ritual activity performed at sunset. It is interesting that the deity refers to the palace as hers in line 20 and the kings in line 25. This underscores how closely intertwined the earthly and heavenly kingdoms are. The stabilization of the king’s rule is the theme of collection 2. It lacks any references to battles, but is dominated by references to Assyria’s internal disorder (SAA 9 2.1, 2.3-5), the stabilization of Esarhaddon’s kingship (SAA 9 2.2 and 2.6), and the elimination of disloyal subjects (SAA 9 2.4). Historically, these depictions are consistent with the political events following Esarhaddon’s ascension in 680 BCE that are recounted in Esarhaddon’s Assur A inscription composed in 679. Another correspondence between collection 2 and Esarhaddon’s Assur A inscription is the references to Babylon and/or its exiled gods (SAA 9 2.1, 2.3, and 2.5). Based on these factors, Parpola dates the second collection to 679 BCE (1997, LXVIII-LXIX).

91

Vries 1976, s.v. calf.

64

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

SAA 9 2.1 Nabû-Hussanni I beginning (about 5 lines) destroyed i 1 [......sp]oke 2 [… have stre]ngthened 3 [......] their 4 [......] I will give 5 [… I am] the Creatress. 6 I will put […] in order and consolidate [the throne of Esarha]ddon. 8 [……]. We are the goddesses 9 […… i]n Esaggil. 10 Esarhaddon, king of Assyria! I will seize [your enemies] and trample [them under my foot]. 13 [Fe]ar [not], mother of the king! 14 [From the mouth of Nabû]-hussanni of the Inner City.

The legible lines of this prophecy favor its identification as a victory, or perhaps kingship, oracle. The identity of the recipient is not clear from the first nine lines, but line 13 is clearly addressed to the queen mother. Line 5 contains the divine self-identification formula followed by a promise of divine intervention—the deity promises to put x in order and consolidate the throne of Esarhaddon. The illegible element is likely in parallel construction with the following line and may be Assyria (cf. SAA 9 2.5 iii 19). The deity shifts to first person plural in line 8. It is not clear whether the declaration in line 8 ends there or continues into line 9. The lines may have included divine self-identification formulae relating to Ishtar and Mulissu, the two female deities predominant in the material. The promise of divine intervention follow, i.e. the deity will seize the king’s enemies and trample them underfoot. This intervention forms the basis for the encouragement formula addressed to the queen mother. If Parpola’s reconstruction “your enemies” is correct, the oracle undergoes a shift in addressee at this point, from Esarhaddon to Naqia.92 The closing line is a prophetic ascription.

92 A similar shift in addressee occurs between lines 20 and 21 in SAA 9 1.8.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

65

SAA 9 2.2 Bayâ 15 [Fe]ar [not], Esarhaddon! 16 [Like a] skilled boatman [I will st]eer [the ship] into a good port. [The fu]ture [shall] be like the past; [I will patrol] your regions and stand your watch.93 20 [The watch over] the lands is very strong. [Sixty gods are standing at] my right side], sixty gods at my left. 22 Esarhaddon, king of Assyria! I will vanquish yo[ur enemies]. 24 [……] I am their lord 25 [... from] my hand they have received 26 [......] strengthened me 27 [……] Esarhaddon 28 [......]s of the heavens 29 [......] old age 30 [……] I will make him go 31 [……] I will consolidate 32 […… I will l]ight 33 [……] the w]ell-being of [Esarhadd]on 34 [……] I will […]. 35 [From the mouth of Bay]â of Arbela.

This victory oracle addresses Esarhaddon. It begins with (1) the encouragement formula followed by (2) direct address to the recipient. (3) The promise of victory consists of the assurance of divine protection and a stable future. The king is assured he need not worry for a full complement of gods are watching over the land, sixty on the right and sixty more on the left of the deity. The Akkadian word masisiartu (“watch, guard”)—normally used in military contexts—is the same word used throughout this oracle to speak of the gods’ activity in watching over and protecting Assyria. The deity will also vanquish the king’s enemies. The formulaic, “The future shall be like the past” emphasizes continuity and stability in the succession (a similar construction was employed in SAA 9 Parpola renders the line: “[I will go] around you and protect you” (1997, 14). His rendering is indirectly supported by the following: 60 DINGIR.MEŠ GAL.MEŠ ina bat-ti-bat-ti-ka i-za-zu “the sixty great gods stand all around you” (CAD B 169b). 93

66

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

1.4).94 The deity will restore the order and stability that existed in the land prior to the brother’s revolt and consolidate (the crown? cf. SAA 9 2.3). (4) The divine self-identification formula, “… I am their Lord” is damaged, hindering identification of the deity in question. Although the oracle originated in Arbela, a city associated with Ishtar, that does not establish Ishtar as the source of the oracle as evidenced by SAA 9 1.4 in which Bayâ of Arbela delivered one oracle in which three deities speak. Since Bayâ delivered this oracle as well, it is possible the oracle contains messages from more than one deity. In SAA 9 1.4 the trope of 60 gods standing watch over the king was attributed to Bel, suggesting he may be the speaker behind lines 20-21. This is compatible with line 24 “I am their lord.” However, the promise to consolidate (the crown?) (line 31) is generally made by Ishtar. The deity is a skilled pilot/boatman, one who is knowledgeable and experienced, who will guide the ship into a good port, one not hostile to the king. It is difficult to determine whether the “ship” in question is the king, the state, or the future.95 (5) The prophetic ascription attributes the oracle to Bayâ of Arbela. It is not possible to reconstruct the content of the damaged lines (24-34) though they may discuss the deity’s relationship to the divine assembly. Based on similarities with other prophecies, the oracle may have contained the promises that the king would live a long life, he would go in well-being/victory, the deity would consolidate the king’s crown, and the deity would light the king’s way (lines 29-32). SAA 9 2.3 La-Dagil-ili 36 [I am the La]dy of Arbela. [Esarhaddon, king of] Assyria, [fear not!] rest (about 2 lines) destroyed (Break) ii beginning (about 3-4 lines) destroyed I assigned this line to Nabû in SAA 9 1.4 based on functional criteria. Its usage here in an oracle that I tentatively attribute to Bel may be an indication it had become a standard trope. 95 Parpola draws parallels with the “Ship of State” imagery employed in Greek literature (Parpola 1997, CVII note 296). 94

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

67

ii 1 [I will annihilate] as many enemies as you [have]. As for [you, stay] in your palace;96 I will [reconcile] Assyria with you. I will protect [you] by day and by dawn97 and [consolidate] your crown. 6 Like a winged bird ov[er its young] I will twitter over you and go in circles around you. Like a beautiful (lion) cub I will run about in your palace and sniff out your enemies.98 11 I will keep you safe in your palace; I will make you overcome99 anxiety and trembling. Your son and grandson shall rule as kings before Ninurta. 15 I will abolish the frontiers of all the lands and give them to you. 17 Mankind is deceitful; I am the one who says and does.100 I will sniff out, catch and give you the ‘noisy daughter.’101 21 As for you, praise me! Gather into your innards these words of mine from Arbela:102 24 The gods of Esagila languish in the ‘steppe’ of mixed evil. Quickly let two burnt offerings be sent out to their presence, and let them go and announce your well-being!103 96 Parpola (1997, 49) proposes “to sit, live, or stay” as possible meanings of kammusu (presumably a D form of kamāsu), but the CAD does not attest a D form of this verb with this meaning (CAD K 1176). However, it should be noted kam-mu-sa-ka is a conjectural reconstruction. 97 This clause kal-UD-me kal-la-ma-r[i] “by day and by dawn” is not simple. Parpola’s translation assumes kal-la-ma-r[i] is kal plus namaru and that the initial “n” of namaru assimilates under the influence of the final “l” in kal. Namaru is often used in phrases denoting the breaking of the dawn (see CAD K 211). However, there are no attested parallels to this phrase, and one would expect the word for night in this context forming merismus. 98 Mīrānu “young dog, puppy, cub of wild animal” (CAD M/2 105b106a) is rendered lion cub here because the lion was an emblematic animal of Ishtar and the context requires the word to convey a threat to the king’s enemies (Parpola 1997, 15 note; XXIX figure 10). 99 CAD M/1 34a does not translate masiû. Parpola observes masiû is usually intransitive in NA, but the transitive usage in this context has a parallel in Syriac, where msi’ means both “to be able” and “to prevail over, overcome” (Parpola 1997, 15 note). 100 Cf. Num 23:19. 101 CAD H 220b-221a associating hu-bur-tu with hubūru “din.” 102 Cf. Deut 6:6; 11:8.

68

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE 28 From the mouth of La-dagil-ili of Arbela.

This dynastic victory oracle from Ishtar of Arbela begins with the divine self-identification formula, followed by direct address to the recipient and the encouragement formula. The break of approximately two lines may have included a reference to past acts of deliverance. The promise of divine protection includes the promise to annihilate the king’s enemies and protect him “by day and by dawn.” It appears that the king’s safety was in jeopardy during the period of consolidation and the threat of assassination was real— his brothers had assassinated their father Sennacherib. Ishtar commands the king to remain in his palace while his enemies are exposed. Ishtar will protect the king in his palace and expand the borders of the empire.104 The special relationship between deity and king is conveyed by the two images depicting Ishtar’s protection of the king: a winged bird and a lion cub.105 The first image focuses on the defensive aspect of Ishtar’s activity (or possibly the nurturing image of a mother bird bringing food to its young) while the latter focuses on the offensive.106 Ishtar’s activity will result in Esarhaddon overcoming anxiety and trembling. The promise of long tenure of office is linked with the promise that Ishtar will reconcile him with Assyria, protect him, and consolidate his crown. She promises a continuing dynasty in lines 13-14. The prophetic ascription credits La-dagil-ili of Arbela with this prophecy. Several items in the prophecy are noteworthy. Line 17 reads, “Mankind is deceitful;” humankind does not keep promises, but it CAD restores balli‹ti› and renders the line: “restore the gods of the Esagila temple (who are) in evil exile, they are humbled, have them send out quickly two burnt offerings in front of them, let them proceed and pronounce well-being for you” (r 7b). It should be noted that the phrase EDIN HUL balli “steppe of mixed evil” is not otherwise attested. 104 “Limited” in that the oracle specifically lists two succeeding generations, as opposed to 2 Sam 7:16, where David’s house will be established forever. 105 As Parpola points out, mūrānu may be a young dog or puppy, but the association with Ishtar and the use of damqu “beautiful” favor interpreting the word “lion cub” (Parpola 1997, 15 note). 106 Siabāru (twitter) is commonly used in omen texts, which frequently report the results of behavioral studies of birds (CAD siabāru). 103

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

69

is the goddess who “says and does.” This line assures Esarhaddon that Ishtar will fulfill all of her promises. The reference to the “noisy daughter” may be an allusion to the story of Atrahasis. It was the hubūru “noise” and associated chaos of humanity that led to their destruction by the gods. The underlying problem in Atrahasis was the noise accompanying overpopulation.107 If this is a deliberate allusion, the concept of hubūru “noise” undergoes a transformation and is linked with the concept of tiullumā’u “deceit.” An allusion to Atrahasis would underscore the idea that the guilty parties are worthy of divine destruction. Ishtar then calls for praise and acceptance of her message using language unique to this prophecy: “Gather into your innards these words of mine from Arbela . . .”108 Ishtar proceeds to provide ritual instructions concerning the Babylonian gods of Esagila (the main shrine of Marduk in Babylon), who had been exiled when Sennacherib destroyed Babylon and deported its gods to Assyria. These gods are languishing in exile. In a remarkably empathetic gesture, Ishtar likens deportation to Assyria to banishment in a “steppe of mixed evil”—a phrase seemingly unique to this prophecy.109 Once the king has sacrificed to these Babylonian gods, they too will announce the king’s well-being paving the way for his unencumbered rule of Babylonia. This prophecy begins to set the stage for Esarhaddon’s policy of reconciliation with Babylonia and the restoration of Babylonian temples and underscores the connection between religion and politics in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Restoration of foreign temples is a political Frymer-Kensky 1977. Parpola is correct when he observes that hubūru of Atrahasis corresponds to the corruption of the world in Gen 6:11-13 (Parpola 1997, 16 note), but not because hubūru is synonymous with corruption. These concepts only correspond to one another in that they serve as the reason for the flood. There is nothing in Atrahasis to suggest moral corruption was perceived as the problem of humanity. The noise of an increasingly populous humanity interfered with Enlil’s sleep. After the flood, the gods took steps to limit the size of the population. It is only in this oracle that hubūru is reconceptualized as moral corruption. 108 A review of CAD s.v. bītānu reveals no other known attestations of this concept (CAD B, 274b). 109 See note 79 for the alternate reading and Parpola 1997, 16 note for a brief discussion of this metaphor referring to the exile of the gods. 107

70

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

undertaking on par with consolidating the Assyrian throne. It also affords a glimpse of the use of prophecy to influence political policy. SAA 9 2.4 Urkittu-Sharrat 29 Thus shall you answer the disloyal ones!110 30 The word of Ishtar of Arbela, the word of Queen Mulissu: 31 I will look, I will listen,111 I will search out the disloyal ones, and I will put them into the hands of my king. 34 I will speak to the multi[tudes]: 35 Listen, sun[rise] and sunset! I will create [……]. 38 The word of Ishtar of [Arbela] to [……] About 2 lines broken away (Break) iii beginning (about 2 lines) destroyed iii 1 Be on [your] guard [……] 2 the augur[s ……] 3 I myself [……] 4 I will roll many [……] 5 I will choose and catc[h ……] 6 I [……] 7 How, how (to answer) those who … many [men], saying, “When will the change in the land come about? Let us not stay in Calah and Nineveh!” As for you, keep silent, Esarhaddon!112 12 I will choose the (foreign) chieftains of the Elamites and the Mannean. I will seal the writings of the Urartians.113 I will cut off the . . . of Mugallu.114

110 Alternatively: “How do you/does she answer . . .” taking a-ki as a scribal error for a-ke-e “how” and tappala as a 3d sg. f. form referring to Ishtar (Parpola 1997, 16 note). Rejecting the first assumption but accepting the second, the line could also be rendered: “Thus she answers the disloyal ones . . .” 111 Concerning as-sa-nam-me (ii 31), Parpola notes that the Gtn stem of šm’ in NA can mean “to listen” without an iterative or durative meaning, cf. line 35 (Parpola 1997, 16 note). 112 Alternatively: “As for you Esarhaddon, pay attention” cf. s.v. qalu “pay attention, be silent.” This line appears in CAD Q 73b, but is not translated.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

71

16 Who (then) is the lone man? Who is the wronged man? Fear not! Well protected115 is Esarhaddon, king of Assyria. 18 From the mouth of the woman Urkittu-sharrat of Calah.

This victory oracle opens: “Thus shall you answer the disloyal ones!” The prophecy is the divine word of Ishtar/Mulissu with the names of the two goddesses appearing together in line 30 in parallel construction. This supports the theory that the distinctions between the two deities were blurring during this period. Note it is not “we,” but “I will look . . .” (line 31). The promise of victory envisions Ishtar/Mulissu seeking out the disloyal ones as threats to Esarhaddon’s rule and delivering them into the king’s hands. Ishtar also promises that she will speak to the multitudes. It is striking that the address opens with the merismus, “Listen, sunrise and sunset . . .” In Mari, we find a similar expression is used with the sense of “entirety,” “I will give you the land from the r[isi]ng of the sun to its setting” (Nissinen 1993a, 20). However, this is only part of the meaning conveyed by the Assyrian expression. Given Assyria’s imperial designs the merismus is an expression of universal dominion. Therefore, the opening line addresses the multitudes of the empire. The quote within a quote concludes and leads to a warning that the king should be on his guard for the diviners have ascertained some threat to his safety that Ishtar will eliminate (lines iii 1-6). Diviners and astrologers routinely sought omens concerning the safety of the king as evidenced by the substitute king ritual 113 URI-a-a may be rendered either Akkadian or Urartian (Labat 1988, 359). Presumably, Parpola favors Urartian given the preceding and following lines refer to foreign powers. CAD renders the line: “I shall write the (destiny) of the Akkadians in the stars” (CAD I 39b), however, šitiiru used by itself means “text, document, inscription”; it does not speak of something written in the stars unless it is in a compound expression such as: šitiir šamê, šitiir burūmê “starry sky, stars (lit. heavenly writing) (CAD Š/III 146a). 114The meaning of igibu is unknown (CAD I 39b). Parpola raises the possibility, though he considers it unlikely, that it is related to ikkibu “sacred thing (or place)” (1997, 17 note). Mugallu was the king of Melid (Melitene); see SAA 4 p. LVIIf (Parpola 1997, 17 note). 115 GIŠ.MI/ siillu “shadow, shade of a tree, shaded place; protection, aegis, patronage” (CAD Si 189a).

72

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

discussed in chapter 5. The malcontents who are the subject of lines 7-11 may be the source of this threat. The prophecy raises the question of how the king is to respond to the criticisms of those who are unhappy with the state of affairs that exists during the uncertainty and unrest prevalent during the consolidation of the throne. The answer is he is not. Esarhaddon does not have to defend himself against his critics because Ishtar will intervene on his behalf. Why preserve the words of the king’s critics? The critics words form a sharp contrast with the deity’s. The former are insignificant and can be ignored, while the latter are to be gathered into the king’s innards (2 ii 22-3). Thus, they serve a rhetorical function. The following lines reinforce the idea that the king can ignore his critics because Ishtar/Mulissu is active on his behalf. Ishtar will choose the Elamite and Mannean (foreign) chieftains to Assyria. These lines look ahead to the coronation and tākultu ceremony of the king, which Assyria’s vassals and neighbors will attend. The following line: “I will seal the writings of the Urartian/Akkadians” is obscure. The word šitiiru used alone typically means “text, document, inscription”; when used in a compound expression such as šitiir šamê or šitiir burūmê it means, “starry sky, stars (literally heavenly writing)” (CAD Š/III 146a). It is noteworthy that Ishtar asserts she will actively participate in the activity of nations not under her dominion. The last international foray attested in this oracle is her cutting off the igib of Magallu, the King of Melid (Melitene).116 The point being Esarhaddon need not worry about internal critics because Ishtar’s power is so great, she exerts influence even over Assyria’s neighbors. Esarhaddon is certainly the recipient of the rhetorical questions in lines iii 16 and 17 and appears to be the recipient throughout. They serve to assure him he is not alone in facing his critics, nor have the gods wronged him.117 The encouragement 116 Starr 1990 (SAA 4), lviif. Melid is in south-central Anatolia. It was a Luwian speaking principality that arose after the collapse of the Hittite Empire. 117 The first expresses a concept also found in SAA 3 12 r. 15 (the “Righteous Sufferer’s Prayer to Nabû”): “May the lone one who has called to you, lord, not die!” but there is insufficient reason to suppose it is a deliberate allusion (Livingstone 1989, 30).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

73

formula and promise of divine protection appear together at the conclusion of the prophecy. The prophetic inscription attributes Urkittu-sharrat of Calah with the prophecy. SAA 9 2.5 Sinqisha-Amur 19 Esarhaddon, fear not! I will put Assyria in order and reconcile the angry gods with Assyria. 21 I will pull away the cover118of your enemies and shed the blood of my king’s enemies. I will protect my king; I will bring enemies in neckstocks and vassals with tribute before his feet. 26 I am your father and mother. I raised you between my wings; I will see your success. 29 Fear not, Esarhaddon! I will place you between my arm and my forearm.119 In woe, I will vanquish the enemies of my king. I will put Assyria in order, I will put the kin[gdom of] heaven in order. […] 35 [t]he sunri]se ……] 36 [the sunse]t [……] Rest (about 5 lines) destroyed (Break)

This dynastic victory oracle begins with direct address to Esarhaddon followed by the encouragement formula. The promise of victory envisions the deity vanquishing the king’s enemies and includes the promise to protect him. The removal of the enemies’ cover (siipputu) likely signifies the loss of protection. Ishtar will shed the enemies’ blood and bring them in neckstocks before the king.120 The Assyrians employed neckstocks from the mid-third millennium on (Parpola 1997, 18 note). Enemies coming before the 118 Parpola translates siipputu as cover on the basis of Syrian siipptô “a mat, matting” and rabbinic siippetā “deck, matte” noting that none of the meanings attested to Akkadian siippatu in CAD fit the present context (Parpola 1997, 17 note). 119 Parpola believes iziru is a West Semitic loan word and refers the reader to CAD I 319a (Parpola 1997, 18 note). CAD attests only a few occurrences of the word in NA and relates it to Hebrew ‫ אזרוע‬and Aramaic ‫דרע‬. 120 Ishtar is not specifically identified in this oracle. The identification is based on the fact that the other oracles in this collection are divine words of Ishtar.

74

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

king in neckstocks and vassals bringing tribute are two motifs common to Assyrian annals and iconography. The Akkadian word salmu (vassal, ally) is related to the word salāmu (peace). An ally is someone who has sought peace by submitting to Assyrian military power. In Assyrian thought, peace comes through the use, or fear, of military power.121 The divine self-identification formula identifies the deity as both father and mother. This is noteworthy; while mother imagery predominates in this material—the deity as divine mother gives birth, nurtures, and protects the king—the prophecies do not indicate what role the deity plays as father. Numerous elements highlight the special relationship between deity and king: the divine-self-identification formula, the deity raised the king between her wings (an image conveying nurture and protection), will place him between her arm and forearm (perhaps signifying the deity cradling the king in her arm), and the assurance that the king is the deity’s chosen. Asserting that the deity raised Esarhaddon may constitute an allusion to the “Legend of Sargon” and place him on equal footing with Sargon of Akkad, the first Assyrian emperor. In that legend, we read “Aqqi, the water drawer, adopted me, brought (râbu) me up” (COS 1, 461). This allusion would serve to endow Esarhaddon with greatness by association. The references to the king’s long tenure is implied in the assurance the deity sill see the king’s success and put the kingdom in order. The concluding lines are damaged resulting in the loss of the prophetic ascription. The promise to reconcile Esarhaddon with the angry gods includes the standard pledge to put Assyria in order. The “angry gods” may be the gods of Babylonia that had been deported by Sennacherib and will be returned to refurbished temples by Esarhaddon (cf. SAA 13 139 in ch. 5 below). It may also refer to the displeasure of the Assyrian gods generated by the treachery of Esarhaddon’s brothers. The prophecy clearly articulates Assyrian ideology. The deity will put the kingdoms of Assyria and heaven in order (lines 33-34). The parallel construction of these lines indiAssyria extended its political influence over neighboring powers through many means: blatant force, treaties, and dynastic marriages. But, it was the overriding fear of Assyrian military power that motivated many of Assyria’s neighbors to enter into these agreements (Parpola 1988). 121

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

75

cates the two events are intimately connected. One cannot be in order if the other is in disarray. The kingdom of Assyria is the image of the kingdom of heaven and reflects the god’s divine will on earth. The merismus, sunrise to sunset, is used elsewhere in the oracles (SAA 9 2.4, 3.2) to denote universal dominion and appears here in damaged lines. SAA 9 2.6 Unknown Prophet IV beginning (2-3 lines) destroyed iv 1 […… to a]vert 2 [……] Ashur 3 [……y]ou 4 [… Esagi]l, Babylon 5 [......] I am on my guard122 6 […… to my] king 7 I gave [……]. 8 [I am Urk]ittu. Praise me! 9 [Wherever you g]o, I will guard you. 10 [……] you 11 [……]. Praise me! 12 [……] very 13 [……s]trong, you 14 [……] Fear not! 15 [……] your eyes (Break) 19 [I will re]concile [……] 20 [Fear not], my calf! 21 I will cover your figure [……]. 22 [I will sh]elter you [between my uppe]r arm [and my forearm]. 24 [......] righteous 26 [……] in my presence 27 [……] I will put your kingdom in order. 28 [As for you, mother of the king], fear not! 29 [……] the support of Ashur. 30 [Esarhaddon], fear not! 122 Parpola identifies this as a form of etāku (1997, 48); cf. CAD etēku “to be watchful, alert” (CAD E 380).

76

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE (Rest destroyed) (about 6 lines) destroyed

The damaged nature of the text limits what can be said concerning this prophecy. The available clues lead to the conclusion that the prophecy was a dynastic victory oracle. It appears to include direct address to the recipients (lines 28, 30). The addressee changes between lines 27 and 28 and again between 29 and 30 as the encouragement formula is addressed first to the Queen Mother and then to Esarhaddon. The prophecy contains the divine selfidentification formula (line 8) and encouragement formula (line 20, 28, 30). The promise of divine protection appears in lines 5 and 9. Urkittu, another name for Ishtar, calls for praise in response to her divine protection (Parpola 1997, XVIII). The prophecy references the special relationship between deity and king (lines 6, 20-22). The promise of a long tenure is implied in line 27. The prophetic ascription is damaged. The prophecy refers to Babylon, and possibly Esagila in line 4; possibly with a promise that they would be reconciled with the king or Assyria (cf. SAA 9 2.5 iii 20). Line 19 contains a clear promise of reconciliation, but the tablet is damaged where the object (which may have been Assyria, cf. SAA 9 2.3 ii 3, or Esagila) is identified. Collection 3 contains oracles sealing Ashur’s covenant with Esarhaddon at his coronation. The prophecies would likely have been compiled during the last days of 681 or the early days of 680 BCE (Parpola 1997, LXX ). Oracle SAA 9 3.1 appears to recount a procession led by the king to Esharra, the temple of Ashur in the city of Ashur. This collection is different from the two preceding ones in that there is only one prophetic ascription at the end of the tablet, not one for each prophecy. The prophecies in this collection differ from those of the first two in two ways. They primarily contain historical reviews of Esarhaddon’s deliverance and the literary nature of the material stands out. SAA 9 3.1 Introduction (Beginning destroyed) i 5 favor [......] 6 give [......]! 7 He has taken care of […], 8 he has promoted th[eir …].

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

77

9 Heaven and earth are [well]; Esharra is [wel]l; Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, is [well]. 12 [May the well-b]eing which Esarhaddon [has established] gain footing! 14 Ashur has arranged [a feast in] Esharra. 15[......] of the Inner City 16 […… Es]arhaddon 17 [……] 18 [……l]ifts up 19 [……] the lands 20 [……] before Ashur 21 [……] with Esarhaddon 22 [……] they come 23 [......] they burn 24 […t]o his mother 25 […] … three pillars 26 [...] he runs his [ey]e over […].

Unfortunately, damage to the tablet prevents reading of the opening lines. Parpola suggests the tablet may have opened with a blessing similar to those used in the coronation ritual and tākultu ceremony (Parpola 1997, 22 note). If Parpola’s reconstruction is accepted, this oracle reveals an unanticipated aspect of NeoAssyrian royal ideology. The fates of heaven and earth, Ashur’s main temple, and the king, are intertwined. All are well as the crown prince ascends the throne.123 The lines are parallel in construction: Heaven and earth are [well]; (9) Esharra is [wel]l; (10) Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, is [well] (11). 123 Alternatively, the lines could be rendered Peace be on Heaven and Earth, etc. However, this juxtaposition of heaven and earth is unattested. The attested expression closest to Parpola’s reconstruction reads: “well-being is granted to the temple, the city, and the house of my lord” (CAD Š/III 250a). However, it should be noted that though the temple may be the point of convergence between heaven and earth, it is still spatially located on earth.

78

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

According to Parpola’s reconstruction (lines 12-13), Esarhaddon has established this state of well-being, presumably by defeating his enemies and ascending the throne. While the king was under banishment, heaven, earth, and Esharra all suffered with him. The statement of well-being is undoubtedly an example of hyperbole. The oracles of collection 2 make clear that a great deal of work to consolidate the king’s rule remained undone throughout the kingdom. It is unlikely that that the city of Ashur was exempt. The Ashur A inscription recounts Esarhaddon’s restoration of Esharra, suggesting the temple had suffered neglect. However, although Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal both pride themselves on their work in restoring Ashur’s temple, the temple remains are too slight to allow archaeologists to make a conclusive determination concerning the extent of the work they performed (Driel 1969, 2829). A feast in Esharra, Ashur’s main temple, was part of the coronation ceremony (line 14). The remaining portion of the prophecy seems to record additional ritual activity. Oracle SAA 9 3.2 (a šulmu oracle—oracle of well-being) appears to address a congregation of Assyrians vassals kings who have been convened in the temple courtyard for the coronation ceremony. SAA 9 3.2 First Šulmu Oracle 27 [List]en, O Assyrians! 28 [The king] has vanquished his enemy. [You]r [king] has put his enemy [under] his foot, [from] sun[se]t [to] sun[ris]e, [from] sun[ris]e [to] sun[se]t! 35 I will destroy [Meli]d, 36 [I will de]stroy […]. 37 [I will ……], ii 1 I will deliver the Cimmerians into his hands and set the land of Ellipi on fire. 3 Ashur has given the totality of the four regions to him. From sunrise to sunset there is no king equal to him; he shines as brilliantly as the sun. 8 This is the (oracle of) well-being placed before Bel-Tarbasii and the gods.

This oracle of well-being is closely related to the dynastic victory oracle. It contains direct address; in this case, Ashur addresses

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

79

the convened assembly that has gathered for the coronation ceremony. Lines i 28-34 contain the reference to past acts of deliverance. Esarhaddon has vanquished his enemies. The lines are parallel with the phrase “has put under his foot” being the equivalent of “vanquished:” [The king] has vanquished his enemy (28). [You]r [king] has put his enemy [under] his foot (29)

Lines i 35- ii 1, though partially damaged, clearly contain the promise of divine protection and victory over the king’s enemies. Ashur will now destroy the principality of Melid and another foe, deliver the Cimmerians into Esarhaddon’s hands, and set the land of Ellipi on fire.124 The deity will deal with the external threats to the kingdom, now that the internal ones have been resolved. This prophecy reports that Ashur has given the empire into Esarhaddon’s control (ii 3-7). The merismus “from sunset to sunrise, from sunrise to sunset” is the equivalent of saying from one end of the empire to the other and back. Ashur has given the king his dominion, which extends into the four regions, a phrase common to Assyrian annals that signifies universal dominion. This motif shapes our understanding of the following line. The clause “from sunrise to sunset”—used in parallel construction with the “totality of the four regions”—must also be understood as a reference to universal dominion. These lines are the functional equivalent of a long tenure of office. There is no king the equal of Esarhaddon who shines as brilliantly as the sun. The Akkadian word namāru (shine brilliantly) may be a pun with nāmaru (mirror), thus Esarhaddon mirrors the sun, i.e. Ashur. Several factors make this a possibility. The oracles of collection 3 are associated with the coronation of Esarhaddon at the temple of Ashur and make repeated references to Ashur’s divine activity on behalf of the king. The location of the ceremony The Cimmerians were equestrian nomads who inhabited the region north of the Caucasus and the Black Sea. Ellipi was a kingdom located on the western side of the Zagros Mountains in present day Iran. The kingdom was situated between Babylonia on the west, Media on the north east, Mannae on the north, and Elam on the south. 124

80

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

and references to Ashur in the oracles set the stage for associations with the deity. A winged sun disk represented Ashur during this period thus, setting the stage for an association of the deity with the sun. The repeated manipulation of the merismus “from sunrise to sunset” points to the highly literary nature of this oracle. SAA 9 3.1 lines i 9-11 establish the unique relationship between Esarhaddon and Ashur. The notion of a king’s radiance is a common motif in ancient Near Eastern materials; therefore, the cultural repertoire facilitates the operation of the word play. The prophecy compares Esarhaddon to the sun and by extension to Ashur; the king reflects/represents the national deity. The oracle was placed before the statue of Bel-Tarbasii (Lord of the Pen), located in Esharra. Parpola cites SAA 1 76 r.6 as evidence that treaties were ratified in the “pen” (courtyard) of this temple (Parpola 1997, 23 note). Oracle SAA 9 3.3 is also identified as a šulmu oracle—oracle of well-being: SAA 9 3.3 Second Šulmu Oracle 10 Now then, these traitors provoked you, had you banished, and surrounded you; but you opened your mouth (and cried): “Hear me, O Ashur!” 125 14 I heard your cry. I issued forth126 as a fiery glow from the gate of heaven; indeed, I hurled down fire and had it devour them. 18 You were standing in their midst, so I removed (them)127 from your presence. I cast them into the mountains128 and rained (hail)stones and fire of heaven129 upon them.

125 CAD A/2 122a anīna reads “now I, Ashur, have heard your complaint.” Parpola’s translation takes ‘anīni as an Aramaic loanword (Parpola 1997, 14 note). 126 Parpola identifies at-ta-qa-al-la-al-la (cf. AHw s.v. qalālu II) as a denominative from anqullu, a fiery portent Parpola 1997, 13 note). Von Soden addresses the problem with attempts to identify this verb with šuqallulu “to hover” (von Soden 1951), but CAD links this form with šuqallulu: “(I Ashur have heard your cry of distress) I floated down (?) from the gate of heaven” (CAD Š/III 331b). The verb may be an N-stem quadrilateral: naqallalu. 127 Parpola identifies at-ti-šias a form of našû, antaši > attiši (1997, 50).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

81

22 I slaughtered your enemies and filled the river with their blood. Let them see (it) and praise me, (knowing) that I am Ashur, lord of the gods. 26 This is the šulmu oracle (placed) before the image. 27 This covenant tablet of Ashur enters the king’s presence on a cushion. Fragrant oil is sprinkled, sacrifices are made, incense is burnt, and they read130 it out in the king’s presence.

This oracle of well-being also contains affinities with the dynastic victory oracle. It contains direct address to the king. Lines 10-24 report the deities past acts of deliverance in response to the king’s cry. The prophecy presumes the deity has reported the king’s prayer to the prophet. Having heard the king’s cry, Ashur issued forth as a fiery glow from the gates of heaven to rain fire down on the king’s enemies. The gates of heaven were the two points where the path of the sun intersected with the horizon (Parpola 1997, 24 note). According to Parpola, the prophecy refers to an anqullu—an ominous fiery glow at sunrise or sunset—that appeared on the day in question. Anqullu (ii 21) is a word known from omen literature where it signifies an ominous sign portending a massacre and the defeat of an army.131 Line ii 17 explains the significance of the portent. It presaged Ashur’s slaughter of Esarhaddon’s enemies by sending fire upon them to consume them. The idiom išātu karāru (to set fire) combined with akālu (to consume) also appears in the Governor’s Palace Archive 188:4-10 (Postgate1973, 187-8). Ashur drove the enemies from the king’s presence before sending hailstones and fire of heaven upon them. Although not historically viewed as a storm god, the activity in this oracle portrays Ashur as such. The images are mixed; in line 22, Ashur slaughters (hatāpu) Reading us-se-li-šú-nu as a form of šalu. Parpola renders the line: “I drove them up the mountains.” 129 CAD identifies anqullu as a “fiery glow, an atmospheric phenomenon,” but does not translate aq-qul-lu and renders the line: “I (Ashur) have rained a.-stones upon them (A/2 143b). 130 Understanding i-sa-as-si-u as šasu plus the suffix pronoun. For the fluidity between s and š in NA see Hämeen-Anttila 2000, 9-10. 131 CAD anqullu; Parpola 1997, 24 note; cf. SAA 10 79, 16-r. 1 (Parpola 1993). 128

82

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

the enemies; this Akkadian word is associated with the slaughter of animals in the hitpu ritual, evoking associations with a cultic rite.132 The king’s enemies are a sacrifice whose blood filled the river. Therefore, Ashur makes sacrifices to himself that precede the praise he is to receive from Esarhaddon’s enemies. The hyperbolic nature of the oracle is immediately evident, how can the king’s enemies praise Ashur if they have all been sacrificed to him? It is their death as sacrificial offerings that constitute their act of praise. The special relationship between deity and king is implied in Ashur’s act of hearing the king’s prayer and his separation of the king from his enemies before their destruction. It appears that this covenant tablet was used in a ritual procession before being placed before the image (presumably Bel-Tarbasii cf. ii 8-9) in Esharra. The remaining lines constitute stage directions for the ceremony: the covenant tablet enters the king’s presence on a cushion; fragrant oil is sprinkled; sacrifices are made; incense is burnt; and the tablet is read aloud in the king’s presence. Oracle SAA 9 3.4 alludes to a covenant meal administered on the temple terrace. Therefore, it seems likely that a recitation of the entire collection was part of Esarhaddon’s coronation ceremony. SAA 9 3.4 The Meal of the Covenant 33 The word of Ishtar of Arbela to Esarhaddon, king of Assyria. 35 Come, gods, my fathers and brothers, [enter] the cove[nant ……] Possibly 1 line missing (Break) iii 2 [She placed] a slice ... on the [ter]race and gave them water from a water jug to drink. She filled a flagon of one seah with water from the water jug and gave it to them with the words: 7 “In your hearts you say, ‘Ishtar is slight,’133 and you will go to your cities and districts, eat (your) bread and forget this covenant.

CAD H 149a; AHw 336a. See pâqu (CAD P 141b). The rendering of this epithet (pāqtu) for Ishtar is uncertain. Parpola proposes it is related to TUR.TUR=pa-a-qu “narrow.” The intended idea is not a disparagement of her powers, but a comment on the size and shape of her icon (Parpola 1997, 25 note). 132 133

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

83

12 “(But when) you drink from this water, you will remember me and keep this covenant which I have made on behalf of Esarhaddon.”134

In this “word of DN,” oracle, Ishtar invites the gods to enter into an adê agreement. The covenant is apparently between Esarhaddon and neighboring powers, some of which were undoubtedly vassal states.135 Ishtar hosts the meal on the temple terrace, which was located immediately outside of the Royal Gate of Esharra that led to the cella of Ashur.136 This meal sealed the covenant. It was customary for officials to swear loyalty oaths to the king and crown prince. The oracle presumes that the participants will approach the ceremony with little regard for Ishtar and the covenant (iii 7-11). However, the ceremonial drinking that accompanies the loyalty oaths (not mentioned but inherent in adê) will provide an impetus for them to remember (hasāsu) Ishtar and guard (nasiāru) the covenant they have entered. Two interesting features of this oracle are worthy of comment. First, the prophet, 134 CAD A/1 133a (adû) has the following translation: “should you go (in your cities and provinces) and eat food and forget this a.-agreement then through this water which you are (now) drinking (here) you will remember (them again) and then you will keep this a.-agreement which I have made (with you) concerning Esarhaddon.” The overall idea parallels that expressed in the following lines referring to Esarhaddon: “The citizens of Assyria who had recognized me as their king by means of an a.agreement effectuated by (drinking with appropriate curses) water and oil in an oath ceremony with invocation of the great gods” (CAD A/1 132b). CAD A/1 250a (akālu) has this translation: “you will give them water to drink and say, you will go to your cities and districts, eat food, and forget these oaths – but when you drink this water you will remember and keep these oaths.” CAD N 123a renders the line: “you will go and eat bread in your cities and districts.” 135 Cf. “The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon,” ANET 1969, 534-41. Vassal treaties were used to reorganize conquered territories as Assyrian provinces under an Assyrian governor. These treaties called for the total destruction of the vassal country in the event it violated the treaty terms (Parpola 2003, 100-101; 1987, 161; Parpola and Watanabe 1988). 136 Parpola 1997, 25 note. The temple of Ashur contained multiple cult rooms inhabited by other deities (Driel 1969, 37-45). It is beyond doubt that one such cult room was inhabited by Ishtar. It is not surprising then to find her hosting a ceremony at Ashur’s temple.

84

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

speaking on behalf of the deity, reveals the thoughts of the treaty participants. The deity has revealed the thoughts of those in attendance to the prophet, unless the relevant clause is rendered as a conditional phrase. Second, while it is the divine word to Esarhaddon, the prophecy never addresses him. Although the king is the putative recipient of the prophecy, he is not the real audience. The actual audience is the group of leaders who will gather from their cities and districts to enter into the loyalty oath. Esarhaddon’s coronation ceremony appears to be the setting for the performance of the first four oracles of the collection. However, SAA 9 3.5 contains a mild rebuke for the king’s neglect of Ishtar’s temple, and one must ask whether such a rebuke would have been delivered as part of a public coronation ceremony. SAA 9 3.5 Word of Ishtar of Arbela 16 The word of Ishtar of Arbela to Esarhaddon, king of Assyria: 18 As if I did not do or give you anything!137 20 Did I not bend the four doorjambs of Assyria, and did I not give them to you?138 Did I not vanquish your enemy? Did I not collect your haters and foes [like but]terflies?139 25 [As for yo]u, what have you given to me?

CAD M/2 18b (memēni) renders the line: “as if I would not do anything (for you), as if I would not give you (anything).” For the placement of negation in NA see Hämeen-Anttila 2000, 120. 138 Concerning iii 20-21 and iv 15f: CAD S 303b (sippu) renders the line: “Have I (Ishtar) not surrounded the four sides (?) of Assyria and given (it) to you (the king)?” CAD K 176a (kapāpu) follows the same reading, but clarifies “sides” means doorjambs. The nuance of kapāpu “to bend” is paralleld by Syriac kpp “to bend, curve, bow (knee, head, or oneself)” and H.B. kpp “to bend (back), bow (head), subdue, depress)” (Parpola 1997, 26 note). 139 CAD K 568b (kursiiptu) renders the line: “I will destroy (your enemies) like butterflies.” CAD L 101a (laqātu) follows this reading although laqātu means “to pick up, to glean, to gather” (CAD L 100a). However, CAD G 99a (gisisiisiu) “raging, furious” renders the line: “Have I not conquered your enemies, have I not snatched, like butterflies, your adversaries who rage against you?” 137

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

85

26 [There is no fo]od for my banquet,140 as if there were no temple; I [am depri]ved of my food, I am d[ep]rived of my cup! I am waiting for them; I have cast my eye upon them.141 32 Verily, establish a one-seah bowl of food142 and a one-seah flagon of sweet beer! Let me take up and put in my mouth vegetables and soup,143 let me fill the cup and drink from it; let me restore my charms!144 (Break) iv 3 let me lift [……] 4 [let m]e go [……] 5 I went up [……] 6 and arranged [a fea]st […]. 7 [When] I was [there, they said: “We know] that you are Ishtar [of A]rbela.” 10 I set out [for As]syria to see yo[ur success], to tread the mountains [with my feet], [and to spea]k about Esarhaddon. 14 [No]w rejoice Esarhaddon! [I have be]nt [the four doorjamb]s of Assyria and given them to you; I have vanquished yo[ur enemy. The mood of the people] who stand with you has been turned upside down.145 20 [From thi]s you shall see [that] I am [Ishtar of]Arbela.146 22 [As soon as the traitors] have been dragged forth,147 [the ‘ones at the right and] left side’ shall be there to bear [the punishment].148

CAD Q 241 qerītu generally refers to an offering, but may refer to a banquet, or festival (CAD Q 240a). 141 CAD K 209a renders the line: “I am looking at (her), I set (my) eyes upon (her).” This idiomatic usage is not common. The word is usually employed to refer to laying foundations stones, setting up inscriptions, casting lots, etc. 142 Asiudu “a dish of food of liquid consistency” (CAD A/2, 385a). 143 The meaning of soup for akussu is established by its juxtaposition with mê šīri “bouillon” in contemporary lists; see SAA 7 209:8f. (Parpola 1997, 26 note). 144 CAD L 51a does not translate this line. 145 This reconstruction is conjectural. Parpola directs readers to CAD N/1 17a (s.v. nabalkutu) meaning 2d for the rendering (Parpola 1997 27, note). 146 This recognition formula is common in the book of Ezekiel; cf. 5:13; 6:7, 10, 13-14; 7:4, 9, 27; 11:10, 12; 12:15-16, 20; 13:9, 14, 21, 23; 14:8; 15:7; 16:62; 17:21; 20:26, 38, 42, 44; 21:5, etc. 140

86

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

25 (As for) [those cou]rtiers and palace [personnel who] rebelled [against] you, [I have sur]rounded them and impaled them through their teeth.149 Blank space of about 2 lines 31[La-dagil-i]li, a prophet of [Arbela, prophesied (this) when ......] Ishtar [……]. (blank) (end of column)

Weippert (1981) identifies this as a “Word of DN" oracle; it contains affinities with the dynastic victory oracle. It contains direct address from Ishtar to Esarhaddon. The references to past acts of deliverance (lines iii 20-24) are linked with a divine complaint. Ishtar has not received the acknowledgement that is her due. The review of past acts of deliverance is framed as a series of rhetorical questions, clustered in a triad, aimed at reminding the king of all that Ishtar has done on his behalf. She has bent the four door jambs of Assyria and given them to the king. This enigmatic phrase emphasizes the point that Ishtar has secured the empire for Esarhaddon. Parpola suggests the four doorjambs in question are the principle urban cities of the empire: Ashur (the Inner City), Nineveh, Calah, and Arbela. Each of which was an important center for the cult of Ishtar (Parpola 1997, 26 note). The word bend (kapāpu) carries the idea of subduing in this context. Ishtar is re147 Parpola identifies [u]s-sa-di-du-ni “dragged forth” as a perfect 3m. plural ventive of šadādu D. The corresponding G- stem form (i-sa-du-ú-ni) appears in SAA 5 91. CAD Š/1 31a does not translate the line. 148 This restoration is conjectural. Parpola directs his readers to CAD N/2 pp. 104 and 108 s.v. hitiu and šērtu našû. He notes the usual NA word for “punishment” was šiptiu, which alternates with hititiu in the idiom hititiu/šiptiu emādu/šakānu našû “to punish.” The plural stative na-siu (lacking the ventive suffix) is otherwise attested in NA only in the idiom pūtuhu našû “to bear responsibility” (Parpola 1997, 27 note). 149 Parpola renders the line: [I have sur]rounded them and impaled them by their teeth. The meaning of the line is not clear; consequently, his translation is conjectural (Parpola 1997, 27 note). If Parpola’s translation is correct, it may describe a process of impaling that involves the stake being driven through the victim’s open mouth and down through the base of the skull.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

87

minding the king that she is responsible for bringing these cities under his control. Ishtar vanquished his enemies. She has collected the king’s enemies like butterflies (kursiiptu). In spite of all this, the king has done little for the goddess in return. The oracle expresses Ishtar’s displeasure with the king who has neglected her temple after all that she has done for him in securing the throne of Assyria and destroying his enemies on his behalf: a[k-ka-l]i a-ka-li ak-k[a]-┌li┐ ka-a-si

I [am depri]ved of my food, (28) I am d[ep]rived of my cup (29)!

These lines are highly stylized, employing poetic parallelism and assonance. The oracle contains specific information pertaining to the temple sacrifices that are to be offered to the deity (a one-seah bowl of food, a one-seah flagon of sweet beer, vegetables, and soup). These items are comparable to those sacrificed to Mulissu on her wedding night (SAA 7 207-10 & 215-18). This sacrifice will restore Ishtar’s charms (lalû)—a word pregnant with semantic nuances. Lalû can be rendered: charm or pleasure; wish or desire; wealth, happiness, riches, desirability; prime of life; or pleasant appearance.150 Lines iv 2-7 seem to refer to a festival of Ishtar.151 Lines iv 7-9 suggest this festival has been observed and Ishtar has received the reverence that is her due. Lines iv 10-13 recount the deity’s endeavors on behalf of the king; Ishtar does not threaten to discipline the king for neglect of her temple. She promises to set out for Assyria to do three things; to see Esarhaddon’s success, tread the mountains with her feet, and speak on behalf of the king. Why are these three concepts linked? To see the king’s success and speak on his behalf are concepts that readily fit together. How does treading upon mountains relate to these two concepts? Traitors and fugitives frequently fled to the mountains surrounding Assyria. Perhaps the clause is a metonym for a battle Ishtar fought. Alternatively, the deity’s walking about an area may by symbolic for establishing ownership. Lines iv 14-17 repeat ideas previously expressed CAD lalû. e-ta-li-a is an irregular verbal form rare in Neo-Assyrian and used almost exclusively in contexts relating to a festival of Ishtar (Parpola 1997, 26 note). 150 151

88

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

(cf. iii 30-22). This reference to the principle cities of the empire takes the place of a promise of long tenure of office. The assurance that [the mood of the people] has been turned upside down replaces the line comparing enemies to butterflies. The conjectural reconstruction required in this line precludes any definitive statements being made; however, the line seems to address Ishtar’s involvement in changing the loyalty of people so that they will stand with the king. This will serve as impetus for Esarhaddon affording her the reverence that is her due (iv 20-21). The prophecy lacks terms denoting the special relationship between deity and king (e.g. “my king,” “my calf”—unless they appeared in the damaged lines), but this relationship is implied in lines10-13. The acts of future divine protection center on the fate of traitors. The lines differentiate between the traitors who have yet to be dragged forth and punished and the courtiers and palace personnel who have already been impaled through their teeth (an obscure phrase, not readily understood; it may however denote an impaling that was characterized by the pole passing through the base of the skull and open mouth of the victims). The traitors are likely the king’s brothers who had fled the land and eluded capture. The divine selfidentification formula is recorded in line 21. The ascription assigns the prophecy to La-dagil-ili of Arbela. Like other oracles in this collection, SAA 9 3.5 is highly stylized; it is organized as a chiasm: a The word of Ishtar of Arbela (iii 16) b Retort concerning divine deliverance (iii 18-19) c Ishtar has bent the 4 doorjambs of Assyria and vanquished the king’s enemies (iii 20-22) d Concern with food (iii 26-37) e (Damaged line, possible center point) d' Concern with food (iv 6-7) c' Ishtar has bent the 4 doorjambs of Assyria and vanquished the king’s enemies (iv 14-17) b' Divine deliverance as proof of divinity (iv 20-30) a' From a prophet of Ishtar in Arbela (iv 31-35)

Marie-Claire Perroudon (1993) calls attention to a second literary feature of the oracle. The manipulation of sibilants and dentals, along with the use of dark vowels in lines 31-34, conveys an irritated and commanding tone of voice. However, the tone of the

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

89

prophecy shifts after the line: “let me fill the cup and drink from it, let me restore my charms!” From this point on, there is no evidence that Ishtar has a complaint against Esarhaddon. Numerous factors suggest that La-dagil-ili penned these prophecies specifically for the coronation ceremony and that tablet 3 is not simply a collection of individual prophecies. The oracles in collection 3 evidence a greater degree of literary stylization than those of collections 1 and 2. Parallel construction is employed numerous times in this collection (SAA 9 3.1, 3.2, and 3.5). SAA 9 3.2 employs a pun and a manipulation of a merismus. SAA 9 3.2 and 3.4 employ the notion of prophetic omniscience. SAA 9 3.5 is arranged as a chiasmus, manipulates vocal sounds to convey an emotional state, and employs assonance. The material contains ritual instructions and the descriptions of feasts (SAA 9 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5). Finally, the tablet contains only one prophetic ascription at its end.152 SAA 9 4 is a fragment of an archival copy of an oracle. It has a two-column format similar to collections number 2 and 3. The extant fragment is similar in theme to numbers 2 and 3. The deity promises to capture the weasels (the disloyal ones) and cast them at Esarhaddon’s feet (Parpola 1997, LXX). SAA 9 4 Beginning (possibly 2 lines only) destroyed 2 [Esarhaddo]n, king of Assyria! [Fear not!? . . .] 3 I will [catch … and wease]ls, (and) 4 I will [cast them before] your feet. 5 [As for yo]u, fe[ar] not! [……] 6 I will v[anquish] the latter [......]153 7 You shall … yo[ur ……]154 152 John Hilber explains these features as evidence of redactional activity in which several oracles from different deities were collected on one tablet along with liturgical instructions (2005, 2003). Antti Laato (1998, 95-97) proposes that the collection is based on earlier oracles that were collected to provide formal legitimating for Esarhaddon’s enthronement. 153 Alternately, Parpola suggests the line may have read: “I will ch[oose] (a-b[i-ar) the future [. . .]” Parpola 1997, 30 note).

90

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE 8 […] I will p[ut ……] 9 […] massive in […] (Rest destroyed)

Esarhaddon is the addressee in this fragment of a victory oracle. Parpola estimates the column width of the original tablet to be approximately 55 mm with a script density of 10 signs to 37/38 mm (Parpola 1997, LIX). Given these figures, it is possible that line 2 contained the encouragement formula “Fear not!” (cf. SAA 9 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5, and 7) or one of the attested DN/divine word formulas and prophetic ascription that open oracles. The oracle appears to have contained a promise of victory over the king’s enemies, referred to as weasels, a highly charged derogatory term. It appears in conjunction with shrews in SAA 9 1 and may have done so here as well. The weasels are the king’s enemies who have eluded capture by fleeing to the mountains. The deity assures Esarhaddon that (s)he will cast them at his feet (a motif common to the oracles cf. 1 v 3-7). The encouragement formula, “Fear not” is linked to the promise of divine intervention. If Parpola’s reconstruction is correct, Ishtar addresses the Queen Mother directly. The prophecy’s content parallels that of SAA 9 1.8, 1.9, 2.1, and 2.6. Based on the similar content, Parpola proposes that the oracle was likely delivered sometime during the period 681-680 BCE (1997, LXX ). SAA 9 5 An Oracle to the Queen Mother 1 The word of Ishtar of Arbela [to the king’s mother: …]155 2 My knees are bent fo[r ……].156 154 This line is obscure, Parpola asserts it can hardly be: [pi-i]-ka tapta-an-[at-ti] “you shall keep opening your mouth” (Parpola 1997, 30 note). 155 This reconstruction is based on two factors: (1) the feminine suffixes in line 4 and (2) Esarhaddon is nowhere addressed in the 2d person in the extant portion of the text; therefore the break could be restored: ana AMA-LUGAL cf. 1 v 13, 2 ii 38f, and 3 ii 33f and iii 16f (Parpola 1997, 34 note). 156 Possibly restore [a-na man-ni] “for whom my knees are bent” or an[a maš-šur-PAB-AŠ LUGAL-ia] “for [Esarhaddon, my king]” (Parpola 1997, 34 note). The line is not rendered in CAD K 375a.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

91

3 Mulissu [has heard] the cry [of her calf]. 4 Gird (f.) your loins! [. . . . . .] 5 of Esarhaddon, king of Assyria [. . . . . .] 6 Ninurta [shall go] at the right and left side o[f …….] 7 [shall put] his enemies under [his] foot [……] 8 I will g[o out] to the Palace of the Steppe […] e.9 I will give security157 for [Esarhaddon, king of Assyria.] 10 [His] e[enemies] r.1 within [……] 2 I will [……] 3 The enemy who [……] 4 the enemy who … […] 5 we will cast [before his feet] and g[o ...]. 6 Glorify (pl.)158 […] Mulissu! [……] 7 are those of Shamash, until my father [……].159

Bent knees are usually associated with intercession. The notion of a deity bending the knee in supplication to another deity is attested in Akkadian literature: “all (goddesses) together pray to her, kneeling before her” (CAD kimsiu). In this context, the intercession is on behalf of Esarhaddon. Mulissu prays on behalf of the king because she has heard his cry. Alternatively, given the damaged nature of the text and its proposed original dimensions, line 2 may have been a quotation of the queen mother’s prayer on behalf of her son and may have read: “Because you said/prayed, ‘My knees are bent for . . .’” Line 3 would be Ishtar’s assurance that she is aware of the king’s plight. The deity commands the queen mother to gird her loins! Such a command is generally the prelude to specific instructions, but the damage to the tablet has obliterated any. The prophecy contains numerous references to past and/or future acts of deliverance (7, 10 r. 3-5). The motif of divine accom157 tu-qu-un can be either a variant of tuqnu (cf. ú-zu-nu = uznu) or tuqunnu (cf. nu-ur = nūru) (Parpola 1997, 34 note). CAD T does not render this line. 158 Parpola takes dul-la as an imperfect plural of dalālu “to glorify” addressing Naqia and Esarhaddon (Parpola 1997, 34 note). 159 Parpola cautions the rendering of this line is only tentative (Parpola 1997, 34 note).

92

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

paniment has been seen before (SAA 9 1 ii 24; 2 i 21), though the identity of the deity varies. Ishtar/Mulissu will place the king’s enemies under his feet, a recurring motif. Ishtar will go out to the Palace of the Steppe. If this is referring to the same event as SAA 9 1.9 (cf. 1 v 27-28), this oracle would have preceded the one recorded on collection 1. Ishtar will provide security (tuqnu is the same word used in 1 iv 3, “I will take you safely across the river”). The promises that Ninurta shall go at the right and left side (of the king?) and give security to Esarhaddon refer to his tenure in office. Line 3 may have made reference to the special relationship between the deity and king. The promise “we will cast” (r. 5) and Ishtar’s closing admonition that Esarhaddon and Naqia glorify Mulissu (r. 6) points to a merging of identities between the two deities in this period (see below). Oracle SAA 9 6 contains a promise to restore order in Assyria. It may date from ca. 680 BCE when Esarhaddon was struggling to stabilize his kingship. Alternatively, it may be contemporaneous with oracle 11, a prophecy from the reign of Ashurbanipal that also contains a promise to restore order (Parpola 1997, LXX). SAA 9 6 An Oracle from Tashmetu-eresh of Arbela 1 Ishtar of Arbe[la has said: ……] 2 “I will put in order [……] 3 I will put in order […...] 4 ... […...]160 5 “the city […...] 6 th[ey …]ed [……] 7 they entered […...] 8 of the king […...] 9 they killed [……] e10 I will c[ast …...] r.1 “I do not [……] 2 help […...]161 Possible restorations include: [qar]-ru-bi “to present” and [še]-ru-bi “to bring in” (Parpola 1997, 35 note). 161 Parpola takes ú-su-tú as a nominative singular of usātu “help” (Assyrian usatu, see AHw, 1437b) (Parpola 1997, 35 note). 160

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

93

3 I heard and [……] 4 your enemies [……] 5 this [……] 6 prophes[ied ......] 7 [wit]hin [......] 8 who prophes[ied …...] 9 before […...] 10 until [your] enemi[es …...]. 11e [T]ashmetu-eresh, a [prophet of ......], pro[phesied] (this) in the city of Arbela.

This victory oracle contains numerous promises to put x in order. Based on the other oracles in the collection it is reasonable to assume that x is the kingdom or throne of Assyria (cf. SAA 9 2 i 6; 2 iii 19, 33; 2 iv 27). The general thrust of the prophecy is political in nature with a promise from Ishtar to deal with the king’s enemies. The prophecy also appears to assure the king that Ishtar has heard his prayer for help (r. 2-3) and will take action against his enemies. It is noteworthy that this prophecy contained references to other prophecies (r. 6-8), but the damaged nature of the tablet precludes determining whether those prophecies were viewed as legitimate or false.162 The ascription assigns the prophecy to Tashmetu-eresh of Arbela. Oracle SAA 9 7 is addressed to Ashurbanipal when he was still crown prince, but before his official promotion ceremony. Therefore, it must predate his introduction to the Palace of Succession in Iyyar, 672. The references to the land of Gomer and Elam in line 14 and entering Egypt in r. 5 date the prophecy to the period between 674 (peace treaty with Elam) and Tammuz/July 671 (the conquest of Egypt) (Parpola 1997, LXX). Esarhaddon died while campaigning against Egypt. It fell to Ashurbanipal to complete the invasion and deal with subsequent uprisings in that country. Few false prophecies are preserved. False prophecy is alluded to in the “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty” § 10 lines 108-122 (Parpola 1988, 33). ABL 1217 r. 2-5 below (chapter 5) quotes a false prophecy (“The kinship is for Sasî!”) in a letter to the king. For what constitutes false prophecy in Assyria, see Nissinen 1996, 172-195. 162

94

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

SAA 9 7 Prophecies for the Crown Prince Ashurbanipal 1 The prophetess Mulissu-kabtat (has said): 2 “This is the word of Queen Mulissu: Fear not! Ashurbanipal! 3 “Until I have done and given to you what I promised, until you rule as king over the sons of the bearded courtiers and the successors of the eunuchs,163 [I will look af]ter you in the Palace of Succession; [your father] shall gird the diadem […].164 8 “[The … king]s of the lands shall say to one another:165 [‘Come, let us] go to Ashurbanipal! The king has witnesses! [Whatever the go]ds decreed for our fathers and fore-fathers, [let him now] arbitrate between us.’166 12 “[Mulis]su [has] said: [You shall ru]le over [the king]s of the lands; you shall show them their frontiers and set the roads they take.167 14 “Secondly, let me tell you: I will finish the land of Gomer like (I finished) Elam. r. 1 “…I will break the thorn, I will pluck the bramble into a tuft of wool, I will turn the wasps into a squash.168 163 The word hal-pe-te is a hapax legomenon that Parpola identifies as an Aramaic loan word meaning “something given in exchange; a substitute” (Parpola 1997, 38 note). šá-SU6.MEŠ (ša-ziqnu) “bearded courtiers” and šá LÚ.SAG.MEŠ (ša-rēši) “eunuchs” are often paired and are used per merismus to denote the entire male personnel of the Assyrian court. CAD renders the lines: “(you, Ashurbanipal, will exercise kingship) over all the non-eunuchs (and) over the ... of the eunuchs” (CAD Z 126-7) and “until you exercise kingship over the sons of the bearded ones and over the successors (?) of the ša-rēši, I will embrace you” (CAD R 294b) . 164 CAD restores [abuka in rīš]āti and renders the line: “your father will tie the headband joyfully upon you” (CAD P 448a; R 97a). 165 Parpola identifies i-qab-bu-u-ni as a ventive (Parpola 1997, 38 note). 166 CAD does not attempt to restore the break and renders the line: “[just as the . . .] have decreed for our fathers and grandfathers, so shall he make a decision concerning us” (CAD Š/1 361b-362a). Ringgren (1983) translates lines 9-11: “[The king]s of the lands spoke, each to his neighbor: ‘Come, [let us rise] against Ashurbanipal, her (Assyria’s?/Bēlit’s?) mighty king. [The destinie]s of our fathers (and) our grandfathers they (the Assyrians) have fixed. Let [his might?] among us be dissolved.’” 167 Cf. “you will rule over the kings of all lands and assign territories to them” (CAD T 57a).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

95

3 “Like a centipede, like a …! You say, ‘What does it mean, like a centipede, like a …?’ Like a centipede I will enter Egypt, like a … I will come out.169 6 “You whose mother is Mulissu, fear not! You whose nurse is the Lady of Arbela, fear not! 7 “I will carry you on my hip like a nurse, I will put you between my breasts (like) a pomegranate. At night I will stay awake and guard you; in the daytime I will give you your milk; at dawn I will play ‘watch, watch your . . .’ with you.170 As for you, fear not, my calf, whom I (have) rear(ed).”171 168 The interpretation of ta-al-la remains a crux; Parpola includes talla in his glossary, but the meaning is obscure (Parpola 1997, 39 note; 52). Lines r. 1-2 contain a hapax legomenon that make rendering the lines uncertain: “I shall break into small pieces the proud thorns, I shall pluck into tufts the (thorny) amurdinnu plant” (CAD G 99a); cf. “I shall break the proud thorn into small pieces, and I shall pick the bramble into tufts” (CAD A/1 91a; CAD Š/2 248b; and N/2 249a refer the reader to this entry): “I (the goddess) will turn the a.-flies into . . .” (CAD A/1 95a); cf. “I (the goddess) will turn the wasps into šarbu” (meaning unknown; CAD Š/2 606). 169 Lines r. 3-5 contain hapax legomena that pose problems for translators. Parpola follows von Soden in identifying hallalatti as an adverb derived from hallulāja “centipede.” The rendering of the second adverb, engur-a-ti, is enigmatic. The word may be related to engurru “underground waters,” imgurru “envelope,” or the word could be read EN.GUR-a-ti and refer to some form of insect cf. adudillu “a mantis grasshopper” (Parpola 1997, 39 note). I favor reading the second adverb as EN-GUR-a-ti and identifying it as an unknown insect, thus understanding the line to employ parallel construction. CAD renders the lines: “like a furtively walking person, like a proudly walking person (?) – should you ask, ‘what does ‘like a furtively walking person, like a proudly walking person (?)’ mean?’ (I explain) like a furtively walking person he will enter Egypt, like a proudly walking person (?) he will come out (of Egypt)!” acknowledging the proposed translation is merely a guess based upon the context (CAD H, 43b); CAD E 168a offers no definition for enguratti and refers the reader to CAD H. 170 CAD renders the line: “in the early morning I will rock (?) you, I will soothe you saying, ‘Hush! Hush!’” (CAD E 232b). For kal-la-ma-ri see note on SAA 9 2 ii 4. Parpola proposes that previous attempts to connect un-na-ni-ka (a hapax legomenon) with the poetic word unnennu “prayer” are mistaken; rather, the context points to an unattested vocable of child lan-

96

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

In this dynastic victory oracle, (1) the divine speech formula, “DN has said” takes the place of the divine self-identification formula. (2) The prophecy features direct address to Ashurbanipal throughout. (3) The prophecy lacks any obvious allusions to past acts of deliverance, focusing instead on what Mulissu will do for Ashurbanipal. (4) The references to the king’s tenure of office include references to domestic and international affairs. The king will rule over the “sons of the bearded courtiers and the successors of the eunuchs.” The terms “bearded courtiers” (ša-ziqni) and “eunuchs” (ša-rēši) form a merismus denoting the entire male personnel of the Assyrian court. The girding of the diadem signifies the official investiture of the crown prince. Lines 8-11 are noteworthy; they do not simply denote wishful thinking, but reflect political reality: “The kings of the lands will say to one another, ‘Come let us go to Ashurbanipal! . . . let him now arbitrate between us.’” A letter from Sin-ahhe-riba to Sennacherib (SAA 1 29) bears on the issue: “The (ruler) of Ukku must be kept away from me; why do you keep silent while he is trying to destroy me? I have sent my bodyguard to the Ukkaean (with this message): ‘Do[n’t ar]gue with the Arabian! [Until the ki]ng comes, [I will ar]bitrate between you!’”172 The belief that the gods determine fate and then reveal it through the king is typical of Assyrian royal ideology. The king on earth is the manifestation of the gods in heaven. In this context, the king’s witnesses may be the diviners through whom the divine will was disclosed to the king. Ashurbanipal will also rule over the kings of the lands and determine their borders, establishing what roads the nations use. Determining borders and exercising control of roads are important aspects of controlling an empire.173 The king guage. Parpola follows Deller in identifying the phrase: un-na-ka usiur usiur as an interjection a nursemaid may use to calm an infant. (Parpola 1997, 39 note). 171 The verb u-rab-bu-u-ni is ambiguous and may refer to present or future action (Parpola 1997, 39 note). CAD also renders the line in the past tense (CAD R 46b). 172 Parpola 1987a (SAA 1), 29 r. 12-17. 173 Control of roadways was an important part of imperial administration. In addition to facilitating trade, control of roads also ensured the rapid dispatch of messages throughout the empire as well as the means of

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

97

will be victorious over the land of Gomer and Egypt. Gomer, traditionally identified with the Cimmerians of the Eurasian steppes, is thorns or bramble, a nuisance easily dealt with. The lowliest of bushes they fail to offer the protection of shade and are suitable only for burning.174 The reference to plucking bramble into a tuft of wool is obscure; the former is botanical and the latter derived from sheep. Gomer is a wasp, an annoying insect readily squashed. The king will enter Egypt like a centipede.175 Centipedes are fast, agile, predatory, and venomous (Campbell 1996, 614). This image underscores the rapidity and viciousness with which the king will invade Egypt. (5) The promises of divine protection include the assurance that Mulissu will look after the king in the Palace of Succession and stay awake at night guarding him. (6) The prophecy contains numerous references to the special relationship between deity and king: she is his mother and nurse; she carries him on her hip and places him between her breasts; he is her “calf.” Mulissu and Ishtar feature in two cola in synonymous parallelism in r. 6 with Mulissu identified as the king’s mother and Ishtar his nurse. Select lines from Enuma Elish illumine the idea of the goddess as nurse: “He (Marduk) suckled at the breasts of goddesses, the attendant (tāritu) who raised him endowed him well with glories” (COS 1, 392). The same idea is at work here, the goddess as divine mother and nurse endows the king with greatness. Parpola suggests moving large military formations to needed hot spots. For a discussion of the role played by roads in the neo-Assyrian Empire, see Parpola 1987a, and Kessler 1997. “Once the coercive dominance of a foreign governmental entity is established, the empire seeks to put into effect a series of interrelated mechanisms designed to integrate a particular territory and its population into a mutually beneficial series of relationships with the imperial center” (Hoglund 1991, 56). These mechanisms include: ruralization—the dispersion of population into rural areas to support a tributary mode of production, commercialization—empires promote an increasingly commercialized economic environment to facilitate the exchange of goods throughout the empire and beyond, and militarization—forts are built to maintain trade routes and roadways (Hoglund 1991). 174 Vries 1976, s.v. bramble; thorn. 175 The word enguratti is undoubtedly used adverbially, but is meaning is unknown (CAD enguratti; Parpola 1997, 39 note).

98

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

the line: “un-na-ni-ka usiur usiur” may have been an interjection used by a nurse to calm a child (Parpola 1997, 39 note). Ashurbanipal is the calf whom Mulissu has reared, another allusion to the “Sargon Legend.”176 (7) The king is repeatedly encouraged “Fear not!” in this oracle because of the special relationship he shares with the goddess (twice in r. 6 and once in r. 11). (8) The prophetic ascription in the opening line attributes the prophecy to Mulissu-kabtat. Parpola dates oracle 8 to the reign of Ashurbanipal. It anticipates open military conflict with Elam leading to that country’s subjugation. On this basis, it dates to either the war with Teumman in 658/7 BCE in which Elam was reduced to vassalage or the aftermath of the Shamash-shum-ukin war of 647-646 BCE, which reduced Elam to the status of an Assyrian province.177

SAA 9 8 Words Concerning the Elamites 1 Words [concerning the Elam]ites. 2 [Ashur] says as follows: 3 “I have go[ne and I ha]ve come.” 4 He s[ai]d (this) five, six times, and then: 5 “I have come from the [m]ace. I have pulled out the snake which was inside it, I have cut it in pieces, and I have broken the mace.”178 8 And (he said): “I will destroy Elam; its army shall be leveled to the ground.179 In this manner I will finish Elam.”

This Oracle Against a Nation targets Elam, a longtime foe of Assyria and Babylonia. The damage on the tablet obliterates the identification of the deity who pronounces the prophecy. I tenta176 Nissinen discusses the iconography that represents the deity as a cow and the king as a calf (Nissinen 1993, 243). 177 Parpola 1997, LXX. For a discussion of Ashurbanipal’s battle with Teuman at Til-Tuba see Scurlock 1997. 178 CAD renders these lines: “I have come from the mace, I have pulled off and cut off the serpent which is on it, and (as) I have broken the mace, (so) shall I destroy Elam” (CAD S. 148b); “(as) I have broken the nir’antu –staff, (so) shall I destroy Elam” (CAD H 171b). 179 Parpola translates Á.2.MEŠ-šú as “its army.” CAD renders it differently: “with his hands he will level (Elam) to the ground” (CAD Q 115b).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

99

tively assign the prophecy to Ashur based on the verb in line 4 that identifies the speaker as masculine and other prophecies in the corpus that associate Ashur with Assyrian national ambition. The narrative interruption in line 4 is not a typical feature of Assyrian oracles. The deity has spoken “five, six times,” saying, “I have go[ne and I ha]ve come,” an apparent reference to previous campaigns against the mace (Elam?) intended to reinforce how active the deity has been on the king’s behalf. A number of factors hamper the translation and interpretation of this oracle. The cultural repertoire that determines the signification of “mace” and “snake” in this oracle has been lost to us. Snakes played a prominent role in Elamite culture: “Die Schlange ist, es wurde schon angedeutet, geradezu ein Leitmotiv elamischer Kultur” (Hinz 1964, 35). Through metonymy, “snake” may stand for Elam in this oracle (Hinz 1964, 35-56; McEwan 1983, 221-2). The serpent, or snake, carries many associations in the ancient world, some positive, some negative. The context here clearly indicates snake has a negative connotation—such as a negative evaluation of character; the mostly earthly of animals, i.e. opposed to or ignorant of divine will; or destructive forces, etc. The conclusion of the oracle is also difficult because of the ambiguity inherent in the sign Á.2.MEŠ (it may signify hand or army in this context). Apparently, (Ashur?) will destroy the nation of Elam leveling its army to the ground annihilating (gamāru) Elam once for all. An interesting feature of this OAN is that the deity does not address Elam directly as is typical in the HB, nor does it provide a reason for the deity’s intervention. Although not specifically addressed to the king, one can readily imagine the prophet acting out the smashing of the mace as he delivers the prophecy prior to a military engagement. SAA 9 9 is the only oracle with an eponym date: Nisan 18, eponymy of Bel-shadû’a, governor of Tyre (i.e. April 16, 650 BCE). This situates the oracle in the middle of the Shamash-shum-ukin rebellion against Ashurbanipal. Six months earlier, in Elul (II), 651, the Babylonian army had captured Cutha. Ashurbanipal launched a counter-offensive and besieged Babylon on Tammuz 11, 650 (Parpola 1997, LXXI). John Hilber (2005, 70-74) proposes that this prophecy was delivered in response to Ashurbanipal’s lament recorded in the dialogue with Nabû (SAA 3 13, see below).

100

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

SAA 9 9 Words of Encouragement to Ashurbanipal 1 [O Protected O]ne180 of Mulissu, […] of the Lady of Arbela! 3 [They] are the strongest among the gods; they [lov]e and keep sending their love [to] Ashurbanipal, the creation of their hands. [They g]ive him heart for the sake of his life. 8 I roam the desert desiring your life. I cross over rivers and oceans; I traverse mountains and mountain chains; I will cross over all rivers. Droughts and showers consume me and affect my beautiful figure.181 I am worn out; my body is exhausted for your sake.182 16 I have ordained life for you in the assembly of all the gods. My arms are strong; they shall not forsake you before the gods. My shoulders are alert; they will keep carrying you. 20 I keep demanding life for you with my lips; [...] your life; you shall increase life. 22 [O favorite of] Nabû, may your lips rejoice! I keep spe]aking good words about you [in the assembly of] all [the gods]; I roam the desert [desiri]ng [your life]. 26 [In woe I will r]ise and slau[ghter] your enemy; [your …] will […] and retur[n] to his country. (Break) about 4 lines broken away Rev. about 8 lines obliterated or uninscribed r.1 May Mulissu and the Lady of Arbela keep Ashurbanipal, the creation of their hands, alive forever! blank line 4 By the mouth of the woman Dunnasha-amur [of Arbe]la.6 Nis[an] 18, eponymy of Bel-shadû’a, governor of Tyre (650). rest (about 8 lines) destroyed.

The opening lines (1-7) highlight the special relationship between deity and king. They feature Mulissu and Ishtar in parallel construction. The king is the goddess’s “Protected one” (kidinnu), a Parpola translates, “O protégé” (Parpola 1997, 40). CAD SiI 152a renders the line: “I pass to and fro through the hills and mountains, I am ever crossing all the rivers, the weather and the rains constantly cut me;”CAD L 79b: “. . . have disfigured my beautiful form.” 182 CAD D 48a renders the line: “I who was always sleepless . . ., am tired out.” 180 181

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

101

term denoting divine protection and divinely enforced security.183 Ishtar/Mulissu appears to be the originator of the prophecy. The prophecy refers to a group of deities (line 3), identified only as “the strongest among the gods,” who keep sending their love to Ashurbanipal. The king is the creation of their hands. Ishtar intervenes on the king’s behalf expending great energy roaming the deserts, crossing rivers and oceans, and traversing mountains seeking life for the king. Parpola identifies numerous allusions to Gilgamesh’s quest for life after the death of his companion Enkidu in these lines. For example, 8-15: Gilgamesh IX 5: “Fearing death, I roam over the desert”(mūta aplahma arappud EDIN); X 251-3: “I came circling through all the lands, I traversed (ētettiqa KUR.MEŠ) difficult mountains, I crossed all the seas (ētebbira kalīšina tâmātu);” X 122-6: “How would my cheeks not be emaciated (aklā) . . . my face not ‘burnt’ by showers (sarbi) and droughts (siēti);” X 254-5: “My face did not get enough good sleep, I have worn myself out through sleeplessness (ina dalāpi).”184 These allusions to Gilgamesh provide the backdrop for understanding the nature of Ishtar’s activity on Ashurbanipal’s behalf. Gilgamesh, the King of Uruk, undertook an epic journey and faced great dangers on his quest for life, although he experienced fleeting success, his endeavor ultimately failed. However, Ashurbanipal is a king more worthy of honor than Gilgamesh for he does not have to undertake such a journey himself; he is the protected one of Ishtar/Mulissu who takes it upon herself to embark on a similar journey on his behalf, encountering many of the same hardships. What the human king could not accomplish, the deity can. Unlike Gilgamesh who was told “Who will for thy sake call the gods to Assembly that the life which thou seekest thou mayest find?” (ANET XI 197-8), Ishtar is able to ordain life for Ashurbanipal in the divine assembly. Recasting Gilgamesh’s journey as Ishtar’s also serves to highlight the great lengths to which the deity is prepared to go on behalf of Ashurbanipal, who is “favored among the gods.” Ishtar loves Ashurbanipal in the same way Gilgamesh loved Enkidu. However, unlike CAD s.v. kidinnu. Parpola identifies the allusions (1997, 41 note) but does not discuss them. 183 184

102

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Gilgamesh who embarked on his quest after his friend’s death, Ishtar is proactive. Likewise, while Gilgamesh sought life for himself, Ishtar seeks it on behalf of her protected one. For all of her exertions, Ishtar’s arms remain strong; and she will not forsake the king. She will keep carrying Ashurbanipal and demands life for him speaking well of him before the gods. She will slaughter his enemies. The prophecy closes with the imprecatory: “May Mulissu and the Lady of Arbela keep Ashurbanipal, the creation of their hands, alive forever!” This sentiment seems best attributed to the prophetess Dunnasha-amur. Noteworthy by its absence is the encouragement formula, “Fear not!” Oracle 10 contains a prophetic inscription naming the same prophetess who authored number 9. It may be contemporaneous with that oracle (650 BCE). Alternatively, if the prophetess’s name is read Sinqisha-amur, it may date to the reign of Esarhaddon. SAA 9 10 Fragment of a Prophecy (Beginning destroyed) 3 we [......] 4 because [……] 5 before [……] 6 face [......] (Break) rest broken away Rev. Beginning broken away r.1 shall be [……] 2 shall bring me out [......] 3 shall give the kingship [......] 4 of all lands [......] 5 the day when you [……] 6 and those who are lo[yal ......] 7 I will lengt[hen ……] (Break) rest destroyed s.1 […] the woman Dunnasha-amur (said): “[……] 2 […] the prophetess who [……]

This fragment of a dynastic victory oracle preserves remnants of lines with the standard themes one has come to expect in this material: the promise to give the kingship, a reference to all the lands, a promise for those who are loyal, and the promise to lengthen (his days/his reign?).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

103

Finally, oracle 11 dates from the reign of Ashurbanipal (r.1) and contains a promise to “restore order in (all) the lands.” It may date from the time of the Shamash-shum-ukin rebellion (652-650 BCE). Alternatively, lines r. 4f are reminiscent of the theophany reported to Ashurbanipal before the war with Teumman. It is possible that this oracle is the original report; note the reference to a previous vision in r. 6 (Parpola 1997, LXXI). SAA 9 11 Report on a Vision and an Oracle to Ashurbanipal Obverse completely destroyed 1 […] wen[t ……] did you/she [not] go t[o ……] 3 “days … [……] 4 “I will vanquish the enemy of Ashurbanipal [……] 5 “Sit down!“ I will put the lands in orde[r ……] 6 “In my pr[evious] vision [……] 7 “Very [much]; a golden star ornament [……] 8 [a t]able, one ‘liter’ of strong bread upon [it ……] 9 a ... platter [......] 10 [...]s pulled taut [......] 11 [un]der the golden] star ornament [......] 12 [at] my head [……] 13 [s]tar[s ……] (Rest destroyed)

Line 4 contains the customary promise to vanquish the king’s enemies. The deity commands the king to “sit down!” “Sit down” here may convey the idea of a cessation from exertion or the assumption of a position of authority, both fit the general context. The typical promises to vanquish enemies and put the land in order find expression in this prophecy. The reference to the golden star ornament (lines 7 and 11) may be a reference to an emblem of Shamash, the sun god and god of justice. Gold is associated with the sun in ancient cosmologies.185 A prophecy relating to putting the land in order may well include a reference to justice and Shamash. Alternatively, star (kakkabu) is also an epithet of Ishtar.186 It is 185 186

Vries 1976, s.v. star. CAD kakkabu.

104

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

possible the lines refer to the goddess in some way. Ishtar has made numerous promises in other prophecies that correspond to those made here. The reference to a previous vision is obscured by the damage to the tablet. The extant fragments of lines 8-9 refer to a table and food. These lines may have referred to a covenant meal similar to the one alluded to in SAA 9 3.4 or the sacrifices expected by the deity as expressed in SAA 9 3.5.

SUMMARY COMMENTS It is now time to consider the oracles as a group. This summary will include a structural examination of the openings and closings in an attempt to identify recurring patterns, a discussion of dominant and recurring motifs and tropes, the use of imagery within the corpus, a discussion of the general thrust of the material, and highlight its political focus. The Opening Lines Five victory oracles begin with the encouragement formula: “Fear not!” (SAA 9 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 2.2, and 2.5).187 In some of the oracles, the name of the addressee precedes the command, while it follows in others. The openings are structured as follows: RN, king of the lands, Fear not! (1.1) King of Assyria, Fear not! (1.2) Fear not! REGION (1.4) Fear not! REGION (2.2) RN, Fear not! (2.5)

The standard elements in these openings are the identification of the addressee and the encouragement formula, with the order of the elements being optional. The address may be in the form of either a royal name or title (with both employed in oracle 1.1). It is interesting that this opening appears in prophecies collected for archival storage and not in individual oracular reports. The formula 187 I have classified these as victory oracles (see discussion above). However, it is possible in light of ARI that the Assyrians classified them as encouragement oracles (see discussion in chapter 5).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

105

can also appear in the body of the prophecy (see below). Given that the encouragement formula is a key component of victory oracles, the opening was probably part of the original oracle and not the result of a standardizing practice of the scribal copyist. Four of the oracles begin with the divine self-identification formula (SAA 9 1.6, 1.8, 1.10, and 2.3): I am Ishtar of Arbela (1.6) I am the Lady of Arbela (1.8) I am the Lady of Arbela (1.10) I am the Lady of Arbela (2.3)

This formulaic opening may identify the deity by their divine name or title. The elements appear in a fixed order: I am DN/title of GN. The use of the determinative (URU) before the city name is optional. Prophecies 1.10 and 2.3 are credited to the same prophet, La-dagil-ili, who uses the determinative in 1.10, but not 2.3. The use of the divine self-identification formula to begin oracles is only attested in the collections, not the individual oracular reports. Three prophecies open: “The word of DN” (SAA 9 3.4, 3.5, and 5). Each addresses a member of the royal family: The word of DN of GN to RN, king of Assyria (3.4) The word of DN of GN to RN, king of Assyria (3.5) The word of DN of GN to the king’s mother (5)

The first two of these prophecies are part of a collection ascribed to La-dagil-ili. However, other oracles by this prophet employ different openings. Although there were standard forms, prophets had a certain freedom of creativity in expression. This opening appears in both collections and individual reports, and is therefore almost certainly original to the prophecy in question. SAA 9 2.4 begins: “Thus shall you answer the disloyal ones!” The formulaic “The word of Ishtar of Arbela, the word of Queen Mulissu” follows the preamble. With the exception of the preamble, the opening is consistent with the other “Word of DN” oracles just discussed. The promise of divine intervention on behalf of the king follows the opening. Two other prophecies preserve openings that are a variation of the “Word of DN” formula. SAA 9 6 begins: “Ishtar of Arbela has said.” This introduction is followed by a series of promises to put x in order. SAA 9 7 begins with a preamble: “The prophetess

106

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Mullissu-kabtat (has said): . . .” The following line combines two typical expressions: “This is the word of Queen Mulissu: ‘Fear not! Assurbanipal.’” Ishtar’s promise to look after the crown prince and establish him in the Palace of Succession follows. Both of these prophecies are preserved on horizontal tablets and are copies of individual reports that were not copied for archival storage (Parpola 1997, LX). The remaining opening lines show greater variation of structure. Oracle SAA 9 1.3 begins with a poetic bistitch, in which the reference to Esarhaddon is gapped in the second colon: I rejoice with Esarhaddon, my king! Arbela rejoices!

The prophecy consists of only these two lines followed by a prophetic ascription. It is the shortest of the prophecies and atypical with regard to length, subject matter, and opening. Oracle SAA 9 1.9 opens: “Well-being (šulmu) to Esarhaddon, king of Assyria.” DI-mu, read šulmu, in this context can mean “completeness,” “well-being,” “health,” “peace,” or “safety.”188 Although the word šulmu appears elsewhere in the collection, this is the only example of it used in a prophetic opening. The second oracle of La-dagil-ili’s collection, SAA 9 3.2, opens: “[List]en, O Assyrians!” A recitation of the king’s triumphs follows. Of the preserved openings, this is the only one addressed to parties other than members of the royal family. While two of this prophet’s oracles shared an identical opening (SAA 9 3.4 and 3.5), this oracle and the next demonstrate great variation. Oracle SAA 9 3.3 begins: “Now then, these traitors provoked you, had you banished, and surrounded you; but you opened your mouth (and cried): ‘Hear me, O Ashur!’” The first line of this opening (3 ii 10) follows immediately upon the last line of the preceding oracle (3 ii 9) with only a scribed line separating them; the plate (Parpola 1997, PlateVI) evidences no sign of damage. Therefore, there is no evidence of damage to the opening lines. The pos188 CAD šulmu; the term is common and attested in letters; medical texts; as the apodosis in omens; reports on family, troops, the king, country, property, etc.; court greetings; and legal contracts.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

107

sibility that a scribal copyist has modified the opening is beyond our ability to investigate. Oracle SAA 9 9 opens with a vocative address to the king: “[O Protected O]ne of Mulissu, […] of the Lady of Arbela!” followed by an assurance that the strongest of the gods keep sending their love to Ashurbanipal, the creation of their hands. The last preserved opening is from SAA 9 8: “Words [concerning the Elam]ites.” The following lines read: “[God] says as follows: ‘I have go[ne and I ha]ve come.’” This prophecy is atypical from the others under discussion. It does not address any person or group and is classified as an oracle against a nation—a prophetic form well attested in the HB. The remaining prophetic oracles (SAA 9 1.5, 1.7, 2.1, 2.6, 3.1, 4, 10, 11) have all suffered damage that renders the opening lines illegible. The extent of damage makes restoration of these openings impossible. A certain amount of variation exists in the openings lines of the NAP. This is similar to the situation at Mari. The extant prophecies from Mari are preserved in letters. Some of these letters preserve divine oracular formula in the openings of the prophecy: “Am I not Adad, lord of Kallassu” (Text A 1121 + A 2731) and “Thus says Adad” (Text A 1968),” but others do not: “The small ships of Dagan . . .” (Text A 3760). In some letters the prophet is referred to but not identified (cf. Text A1121 + A 2731) while in others the prophetic ascription appears just before the oracular opening (cf. Text A 1968) (Nissinen 2003a, 18-23). The greatest degree of standardization in the NAP is in the collections, suggesting a degree of editorial activity. This activity is only evident in the standardized openings and closings (see below), not in the body of the prophecy. However, the limited number of non-archival oracular reports (SAA 9 5-8) makes any conclusions premature. The Closing Lines It is in the closing of the oracles that one finds the greatest degree of standardization of form, supporting the conclusion that the collected oracular reports have undergone limited editing as part of the collection process. The oracles of the first and second collections have standardized prophetic ascriptions located at the end of each oracle:

108

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Each oracle in the first collection was delivered by a different prophet(ess).189 The formulaic ascriptions read: “by the mouth of PN, ‘son’ of GN” “by the mouth of PNf, ‘daughter’ of GN” “by the mouth of PNf of GN” “by the mouth of PN, ‘son’ of GN” “by the mouth of PNf of GN” (Damaged) “by the mouth of PNf, votaress of the king” “by the mouth of PNf, ‘daughter’ of GN” (Damaged) “by the mouth of PN, ‘son’ of GN”190

The closing formula is identical in oracles SAA 9 1.1, 1.4, and 1.10. In a similar manner, an identical formula concludes SAA 9 1.2 and 1.8. Another feature of these ascriptions worth noting is that a scribed line separates them from the body of the oracle. This feature is unique to collection one. The same general pattern is used in SAA 9 9, which is an archival copy. Therefore, one would expect to find the same evidence of scribal editing that is evident in the collections. SAA 9 9 closes: “by the mouth of PNf, ‘daughter’ of GN Nis[an] 18, eponymy of Bel-šadû’a, governor of Tyre.” Two features distinguish the closing of oracle 9 from those of collection one: the addition of the eponymy and the use of the logogram KA for pû “mouth.” However, this second variation may simply be the result of scribal preference; therefore, it is not meaningful in terms of the prophet. The formulaic closings in collection 2 are similar to those of collection one. The four preserved endings each ascribe its respective oracle to a different prophet(ess). The logogram TA (issi/u “with; from”) replaces the initial preposition “ša.” The closings lines read as follows:

189 See Parpola 1997, IL-LII for a discussion of the identity of each prophet(ess). 190 Parpola 1997, LXIII

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

109

[TA pi-i] PN GN-a-a “from the mouth of PN of GN” (2.1) [TA pi-i] PN GN-┌ a-a ┐ “from the mouth of PN of GN” (2.2) TA pi-i šá PN GN-a-a “from the mouth of PN of GN” (2.3) TA pi-i PNf GN“from the mouth of PNf of GN” (2.4)

Parpola argues that the use of TA in the second collection requires that the ša of the first collection by taken literally and read as “by” not “according to” (Parpola 1997, LXIII ). Unlike the ascriptions in collection one, a scribed line does not separate the ascriptions in collection two from the prophecies. However, scribed lines do separate the oracles from one another. The third collection is unusual in that only one ascription appears at the end of the tablet. A blank space separates the ascription from the preceding oracles. It reads: “PN a prophet of GN, prophesied (this) when . . . DN . . .” The ascription explicitly identifies the author as a raggimu “a prophet.”191 The prophet Lā-dāgil-ili of Arbela authored the third collection as well as SAA 9 1.10 and 2.3.192 Collection 4 preserves only one prophecy. Regrettably, the closing ascription is illegible because of damage. The closings of the individual oracular reports lack standardization (cf. SAA 9 5, 9 6, 9 7, 9 8, 9 10). A prophetic ascription introduces SAA 9 7; its ending is the conclusion to the oracle: As for you, fear not, my calf, whom I (have) rear(ed)! SAA 9 8 lacks a Raggimu is related to the word ragāmu “to shout; to proclaim.” Parpola proposes that the distribution and occurrences of raggimu (its use in the prophecy corpus, letters, treaties, and administrative documents) suggest it had replaced the more archaic mahhû “to go/be in a frenzy, to become crazy” (Parpola 1997, XLV-XLVI). However, the fixed phrase šipir mahhê is utilized in ARI (Parpola 1997, XLV) calling Parpola’s proposal into question. Mahhû is the standard word for prophet attested in the Mari materials (Parpola 1997, XLV). 192 Parpola 1997, L. This prophet’s name means “One who does not see/look to/obey the gods.” Parpola comments on the surprising nature of this name and its correlation to the naming of Hosea’s children (Parpola 1997, L-LI). 191

110

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

prophetic ascription and closes with the following lines: And (he said): “I will destroy Elam; its army shall be leveled to the ground. In this manner I will finish Elam.” The observed variations have implications for SAA 9 5. Its original ascription may have been located on the upper or lower right half of the tablet. Alternatively, like SAA 9 8, it may have lacked an ascription all together. SAA 9 10 appears to contain the remains of a damaged ascription: […] the woman Dunnasha-amur (said): “[……][…] the prophetess who [……]. The closing lines of SAA 9 11 are broken away. The high degree of variation in the closing of the individual oracular reports, the differing loci of the prophetic ascriptions, and the differing formulation of the prophetic ascriptions support the conclusion that the high degree of standardization observable in the collections is the result of scribal editing. The prophetic ascriptions of all of the archival copies of oracular reports are located at the end. The ascriptions of collection one are separated from the prophecies by a scribed line; the ascriptions of collection two and SAA 9 9 are joined directly to the prophecies; the single ascription of collection three is separated from the preceding prophecies by a blank space; the damaged condition of SAA 9 10 makes it impossible to make a determination. Likewise, the ascription of SAA 9 6, which is not an archival copy, is located at the end. However, the ascription of SAA 9 7 is located at the beginning demonstrating a variety of form. Presumably, some of the archival tablets preserve oracular reports whose ascriptions were similarly located at the beginning. I previously mentioned that the Mari prophecies are preserved in individual letters. Some letters identify the prophet by name while others refer to anonymous prophets. The closing lines of these prophecies lack a consistent formulation (cf. Nissinen 2003a, 17-77). The quotation of prophecies in letters shares its greatest affinity with the Assyrian letters that quote prophecy discussed in the following chapter. I now turn to a discussion of dominant motifs employed in the NAP corpus. Divine Protector The dominant motif in this collection is the deity as the king’s protector. Ishtar/Mulissu is the principal deity who fulfills this function (SAA 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.7, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.5, 5, 6, 9, and

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

111

11). She is joined by Ashur, the national deity, who protects the king (SAA 9 3. 2, 3.33); Bel who watches over the beams of the king’s heart (SAA 9 1.4); and sixty great gods who stand around the king protecting him and girding his loins (SAA 9 1.4). Likewise, Sin is on the king’s right side and Shamash on his left watching over his birth (SAA 9 1.4), and Ninurta goes forth at the right and left side of the king (SAA 9 5.6). A related motif is the king’s life. This is the dominant theme in SAA 9 9. The gods have given the king heart for the sake of his life. Ishtar roams the deserts desiring the king’s life. She has ordained life for the king in the assembly of the gods and has demanded life for him with her own lips. The oracle of Dunnashamur closes with the precative, “May Mulissu and the Lady of Arbela keep Ashurbanipal, the creation of their hands, alive for ever.” Since the forms and appropriations of writing reveal who is exercising power over the production of texts and literary patrons exercise control over what is written (Chartier 1997, 88), it can be concluded that a monarchic patron commissioned this literature. A special relationship in which the king receives divine protection is typical of material produced under such patronage. Divine Self-Identification Formula Formulas enrich an utterance by bringing with them a “meaning beyond the immediate content . . . enriching the” utterance “with the large implications of the tradition and with essential denotators of a culture’s worldviews” (Niditch 1996, 15). The divine selfidentification formula incorporates epithets. Epithets themselves evoke the “full range of a character’s personality in the tradition, qualities beyond those emphasized in the context at hand” (Niditch 1996, 16-17). These features of formulas and epithets lead to the conclusion that the divine self-identification formula is used as a trope; through overcoding, the phrase has acquired a greater significance and meaning than just the literal meaning of the words employed (cf. Eco 1976, 129-35). Semiotics and anthropology acknowledge that humanity is a symbolizing, conceptualizing, meaning-seeking animal. Religious ideas and institutions emerge as humanity attempts to understand everything from natural phenomenon to the questions of human identity and destiny (cf. Geertz 1973). Growth in the pantheon accompanies the growth and increasing complexity of society as every sphere of human activity

112

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

comes under the purview of the gods. Liverani summarizes the process: With the urban revolution an entire pantheon was conceptualized, which was internally structured along the lines of human relations of kinship, hierarchy, and functional specialization. In short, there was one god to supervise each type of activity: one for agriculture, one for herding, one for writing, one for medicine, and so on (Liverani 1998, 63).193

Conceptualizations of the gods vary by regions according to topography and ecosystems. Accordingly, Hadad was the West Semitic storm god responsible for rain, while in Mesopotamia— which was dependent upon irrigation for agriculture—Adad is the canal inspector of heaven and earth. Each member of the pantheon is associated with a specific sphere of activity.194 Although it is possible that the divine self-identification formula is nothing other than a verbal signal identifying the deity on whose behalf the prophet speaks, this is a naïve reading and offers only a simplistic explanation for textual phenomena. An examination of the statements and the material associated with them supports the conclusion that these tropes serve a semiotic function. The god’s selfidentification conjures the images and activities associated with that deity’s responsibilities. It invokes the deity’s blessing and support in a specific sphere of human activity assuring the recipient of suc193 Liverani traces the development of urban culture in Uruk. Urbanization was linked to “long field” irrigation resulting in increased specialization of society. Centralization developed around the temple, which was ideologically suited to convince producers to surrender a substantial portion of their crops for the advantage of the community and its administrators. This urban revolution was accompanied by an emerging polytheistic religion that found its expression in the development of a pantheon. The pantheon grew and expanded as the workforce became increasingly specialized and emerging professions selected a patron deity (Liverani 1998, 15-25, 63-4). 194 The curses at the end of the Succession Treaty of Esarhaddon (§§ 37-63) provide a glimpse into this phenomenon as numerous gods are invoked to enforce the treaty (ANET 1969, 534-541; SAA 2 = Parpola 1988, 28-58).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

113

cess. More importantly, however, the realm of activity addressed by the prophecy determines the selection of the deity on whose behalf the prophet speaks.195 Existing norms of communication govern all speech-acts. The speaker and audience share a given frame of reference—cultural repertoire—in this case, the Assyrian pantheon. The prophet must invoke agreed upon conventions if his message is to be understood and accepted (cf. Chartier 1997, 20). Audience expectations determine his selection of the deity on whose behalf he speaks.196 If he intends to assure his audience of the king’s military victory, he promises victory on behalf of Ishtar of Arbela, Assyria’s warrior goddess, not Adad, the canal inspector. The divine self-identification formula may begin a prophecy or be embedded within it. When embedded, lines denoting the activity associated with the deity in question often accompany the formula. The most frequently employed divine self-identification formula in the corpus is “I am Ishtar of Arbela” or a variant thereof. Ishtar is a complex deity with numerous associations and realms of activity.197 It is significant that she is identified as Ishtar of Arbela, for Arbela was a mustering point for the neo-Assyrian army before it embarked on military campaigns.198 Arbela sat on the border of the western threshold of the Zagros Mountains and controlled the northern access to the Iranian plateau as well as Urartu. The city’s status as a military garrison guaranteed the promotion of its patron 195 Nissinen characterizes this as a “functional” of “aspectual” “concept of God which allows prophets to speak in the words of the appropriate manifestation of the divine in a given situation” (Nissinen 2000, 99). Weippert agrees that the choice of divine name must be linked to the thematic differences of the three subunits of the oracle (Weippert 2002, 14-15). 196 Long addresses this dynamic in his essay on prophetic authority: “Traditional societies tend to confirm the charismatic’s calling mainly through evaluation of acts—that is, by relying upon external demonstrations rather than subjective claims. . . . Does he transmit oracles that conform to community expectations?” (Long 1977, 10). 197 For a general summary, see “Ishtar” in DDD, 452-456. 198 Jo Ann Scurlock, private communication February 17, 2007.

114

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

deity, Ishtar. The Assyrian king would naturally seek the protection of the patron-deity of a garrison on the border with his enemies (Pongratz-Leisten 1997, 249-51). The treaty between Ashur-nerari V and Mati’ilu of Arpad, dated to the eighth century BCE, conceptualizes Ishtar of Arbela as the goddess of war: “May Ishtar . . . take away their bow . . .”199 A similar conception is preserved in the Succession Treaty of Esarhaddon: “[May] Ishtar, lady of battle and war, smash your bow in the thick of ba[ttle] . . .” (SAA 2 6 § 48). The following divine self-identification formulas appear in the corpus: I am the Great Lady; I am Ishtar or Arbela, who cast your enemies at your feet (1 i 11). I am Ishtar of Arbela. I will flay your enemies and give them to you (1 i 18). I am Ishtar of Arbela. I will go before you and behind you (1 i 21). I am the Gr[eat Lady. I am Ishtar o]f Arbela. (Following line damaged, but subsequent lines refer to actions Ishtar will take against the king’s enemies)( 1 i 36-37). I am Ishtar of Arbela; I reconciled Ashur with you. . . . What enemy has attacked you while I remained silent? (1 ii 30). I am Ishtar of [Arbela]. (Opening of oracle. The oracle contains a promise that Ishtar will finish off the king’s enemies)( 1 iii 7). I am the Lady of Arbela. (Opening of oracle. Oracle is a promise to the Queen Mother that her son will possess the kingdom)( 1 v 12). [I am the Lady of Arb]ela (Opening of oracle. The oracle is a promise the king will reside in safety in the palace)( 1 vi 2). [I am the la]dy of Arbela. [Esarhaddon, king of] Assyria, [fear not!] (Opening of oracle; following lines contain the promise that Ishtar will defeat the king’s enemies)( 2 i 36). Nissinen (1993), Parpola (1997), and Weippert (2001) offer a less convincing reason for Ishtar’s participation. They associate Assyrian oracular prophecy with the fertility cult of Ishtar. This explanation fails to take into consideration the significance of Arbela in the deity’s selfdeclaration. 199

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

115

[From thi]s you shall see [that] I am [Ishtar of]Arbela. (“This” being the capture and defeat of traitors)( 3 iv 21).

The majority of accompanying lines depict Ishtar’s military activity. Indeed, this is the dominant image associated with her in the corpus. As Assyria’s warrior goddess, she casts the king’s enemies before his feet, defeats them, vanquishes them, etc. However, religious ideas and institutions, even pantheons, evolve over time.200 Therefore, it is not surprising that by the seventh century BCE, Ishtar’s identity had begun to merge with that of Mulissu as evidenced by lines in which the names stand in parallel construction: The word of Ishtar of Arbela, the word of Queen Mulissu: (SAA 9 2 ii 30) You whose mother is Mulissu, Fear not! You whose nurse is the Lady of Arbela, Fear not! (SAA 9 7 r. 6) [O proté]gé of Mulissu, […] of the Lady of Arbela! (SAA 9 9, 1).201

200 Dramatic changes in pantheons are most often associated with new cultural contacts of shifts in the dynamics of cultural contacts as one culture begins to dominate the other. For example, Egypt’s increasing contact with the Levant during and subsequent to the Hyksos period witnessed the identification of Seth with Baal (Velde 1995, 1731-1749). Such an evolution is demonstrated by references to Mulissu. The goddess’s name was written dNIN.LIL, but presumably read Mulissu. This is evidence of an earlier evolution in the pantheon. The Assyrians identified Ashur with the Sumerian god Enlil in the second millennium. Evidence suggests the name of Enlil’s wife was written dNIN.LIL2 and pronounced Mulliltum (Stol 1995, 606). The final sibilant and dental were reciprocally assimilated to š, which in turn exchanged places with s in the phoneme field and final m was dropped: Mulliltum > Mulliššu > Mulissu (HämeenAnttila 2000, 9, 22). Ashur displaced Enlil in the pantheon. In turn, Mulissu displaced Sheru’a as Ashur’s wife (Stol 1995, 606). 201 Oracle 9 contains a line that appears to undermine this conclusion: “May Mulissu and the Lady of Arbela keep Ashurbanipal, the creation of their hands, alive forever!” (9 r. 1-3). However, the parallel constructions cited above and the ascription of the same relationship to Ishtar

116

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

This merging of identities is also evident in “Ashurbanipal’s Hymn to Ishtar of Nineveh” (SAA 3 7, 10-12). Additional evidence of this phenomenon is available from two temples of Ishtar. Mulissu was identified with Ishtar at the Emašmaš temple in Nineveh and at Egašankalamma in Arbela (RLA 9, 458). This merging results in Ishtar’s portrayal as the mother goddess who rears the king as her calf (SAA 9 7 r. 11), and wet-nurse, who suckles the king (SAA 9 1 iii 17). The divine self-identification formulae function to conjure the appropriate images and associations—either mother or warrior. The modern reader may find the images of mother and warrior intrinsically incompatible. Nissinen addresses the issue; since the goddess envisions herself as being in an exclusive love relationship with her chosen king, it is not hard to understand her willingness to protect him against his enemies, just as a mother bear protects her cubs in the wild (Nissinen 1993, 242-5). Urkittu “the Urukite” is an appellative for Ishtar (Parpola 1997, 54). Uruk was a principal city in southern Mesopotamia and a cult center for Ishtar. As would be expected, the accompanying line invokes warrior imagery: 2 iv 8' [I am Urk]ittu. Praise me! [Wherever you g]o, I will guard you. Mulissu was the wife of Ashur and Queen of Heaven. She was traditionally identified as the mother goddess as evidenced by a ninth century treaty between Shamshi-Adad V and Marduk-zakirshumi of Babylon, where she is identified as the “Great Mother.” A similar conception is preserved in the Accession Treaty of Esarhaddon: “May [Mulissu, the great mother . . .]” (SAA 2 4 r. 1819). As the Queen of Heaven, Mulissu was the mother of the gods. Motherly imagery characterizes references to Mulissu in the prophecies. Esarhaddon is referred to as the son of Mulissu (SAA 9 and Mulissu: “Ishtar of Arbela has gone out to the steppe and sent (an oracle of) well-being to her calf in the city.” (1 v 27-30) “Mulissu [has heard] the cry [of her calf] (5, 3) are strong evidence in favor of the conclusion that the two deities were in the process of being merged, if the merger had not yet fully taken place. Mulissu is often the name chosen when highlighting the personal relationship between the deity and king e.g.: “Esarhaddon, rightful heir, son of Mulissu. . .” (1 iv 5-6).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

117

1 iv 5 and 20). Mulissu has “heard the cry of her calf” (SAA 9 5:3) an image invoking the nurturing, protective concern of a mother for her young. Queen Mulissu vows to look after the king in the Palace of Succession (SAA 9 7:6f). She promised that the king will rule over the kings of the lands (SAA 9 7:12), an activity similar to that employed by earthly queen mothers seeking to ensure the succession of their children. In SAA 9 7 r. 6, Mulissu identifies herself as the mother of the king. She will carry the king on her hip like a nurse (SAA 9 7:7f). SAA 9 9 begins by addressing the Protected One of Mulissu and goes on to recount the extremes to which a mother will go on behalf of her child (SAA 9 9:8-15). Therefore, it is likely that the divine self-identification formula conjured the image of divine mother in the following line: 1 iii 4' I am Mu[lissu (…)]. (Following line damaged.) Without doubt, other references to Mulissu throughout the corpus evoke the image of her as divine mother. However, since the identities of Ishtar of Arbela and Mulissu had begun to merge by the seventh century BCE, it is not surprising to find warrior imagery associated with this goddess. Mulissu will “finish the land of Gomer like (she) finished the land of Elam” (SAA 9 7:14). The occurrence of an oracle attributed to both Ishtar and Mulissu (SAA 9 2.4) makes it impossible, in this instance, to determine who is envisioned as undertaking the specific actions depicted. One line seemingly attributes warrior activity to Mulissu: “Esarhaddon, rightful heir, son of Mulissu! With an angry dagger in my hand I will finish off your enemies” (SAA 9 1 iv 5-10), but a closer examination reveals Ishtar of Arbela is the one who is speaking. Creatress is an appellative for Mulissu and appears in the following formula (Parpola 1997, 54): 2 i 5' [… I am] the Creatress. I will put […] in order and consolidate [the throne of Esarha]ddon. As the Creatress, Mulissu/Ishtar has the right to exercise control and lordship, giving the throne to the person she chooses. Bel “Lord” is an appellative of Marduk; SAA 10 111 (see ch. 5 below) refers to the deity as both Marduk and Bel in the same letter. He became the head of the Babylonian pantheon a position he enjoyed from the second half of the second millennium on. Marduk acquired his role as head of the pantheon from his father Ea, the god of wisdom. Marduk also absorbed the power and prerogatives of Enlil of Nippur during the reign of Hammurapi and be-

118

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

came a prominent Mesopotamian deity. The reference to a Babylonian deity in an Assyrian prophecy is not difficult to explain. The Babylonians were subject to the Assyrians during the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Indeed, Esarhaddon ruled as king over Babylonia as well as Assyria. The younger Assyrians had a long history of venerating the older southern Mesopotamian culture. Neo-Assyrian sources refer to Marduk as “sage of the gods, lord of omens, commander of all” (COS 2, 278: 1-81). Ashurbanipal’s acrostic hymn to Marduk testifies to Marduk’s prominent position in seventh century Assyria (SAA 3 2). As head of the Babylonian pantheon, Bel/Marduk was able to summon and command lesser deities (SAA 3 2: 26-27, 3031). It is natural then to find him presiding over a company of gods at the king’s birth: “I am Bel. (Even as) I speak to you, I watch over the beams of your heart. When your mother gave birth to you, sixty great gods stood with me and protected you” (SAA 9 1.4). Nabû’s rise in status accompanied the rise of the NeoAssyrian Empire.202 Nabû was the son of Marduk and the scribe of the gods. As such, he had access to divine secrets that others could not read and possessed special wisdom and knowledge. He recorded the decisions of the divine assembly and kept accounts, reckoning credit and debt. The turn of the year was the time for settling past accounts and planning the next session. Near the end of the New Year’s Festival in Babylon, Marduk and Nabû settled the fate of the land for the coming year. Nabû then inscribed it on his tablet. During the festival, Nabû is carried along the street “Nabû is the judge of his people” to meet his father, before the gods left Esagila in procession for the House of the New Year’s Festival (bit akiti) outside the city (Millard 1995, 608). Nabû was the most common theophoric element in Assyrian personal names by the seventh century BCE. Nabû, the lord of the stylus, engraves the destiny of each person on the tablets of the sacred record in accordance with the decision of the gods. He has the power to increase or diminish the length of human life, and consequently the reign of the king (Millard 1995, 607-10). This concept is expressed in the following excerpt from an Assyrian loyalty oath: “May Nabû, 202 For a discussion of the status of Nabû in the ancient Near East, see Porter 1997.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

119

bearer of the tablet of fates of the gods, erase your name, and destroy your seed from the land” (SAA 2 6 § 105). It is also within Nabû’s power to determine whether the future will be like the past. To invoke Nabû’s name in a prophecy is to remind the king that the gods have decreed his fate and destiny. Although his enemies may loom large on the horizon, Esarhaddon is the one the gods have chosen to rule Assyria. His fate has been determined and is secure. “The future shall be like the past. I am Nabû, lord of the stylus. Praise me!” (SAA 9 1.4). Praising Nabû is simply one of the means available to the king to ensure the deity’s good will and continued support. Ashur is the name of one of the principle cities of Assyria, as well as its national deity.203 It appears the hill was recognized as a sacred site first, later giving name to the deity. Originally, Ashur was not a divine being and had no divine family. Eventually, views of Ashur conformed to the theology of southern Mesopotamia. During the second millennium BCE, Ashur appropriated the identity of Enlil, the god of Nippur, one of the most important deities of Babylon. Enlil’s wife, Ninlil (whose name was written dNIN.LIL2), became Mulissu, the wife of Ashur. This process of assimilation began in the thirteenth century BCE during the reign of Tukulti-Ninurta I and continued into the Sargonid period (eighth-seventh century BCE). It became a common scribal practice to write Ashur’s name dAN.ŠAR during the Sargonid period.204 This enabled scribes to introduce retroactively Ashur into Assyrian and Babylonian classical literature elevating Ashur to the head of the Babylonian pantheon. Ashur played an important role

For a discussion of the history of Ashur’s temple, cult, ceremonies, and personnel see Driel 1969. 204 dAN.ŠAR was originally used by Babylonian scribes to designate a primeval deity in Babylonian theogonies. In one text Anšar and Kišar (“whole heaven” and “whole earth”) precede the senior Babylonian gods Enlil and Ninlil, separated from them by Enurulla and Ninurulla (“Lord” and “Lady” of the “primeval city”). This effectively places Ashur at the head of the Babylonian pantheon (Lambert 1971, 469ff). 203

120

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

in Assyrian royal ideology as evidenced by prayers incorporated in coronation ceremonies:205 Ashur is king, Ashur is king! . . . May your (the king’s) foot in Ekur and your hands (stretched) toward Ashur, your god, be at ease! May your priesthood and the priesthood of your sons be at ease in the service of Ashur, your god! With your straight scepter enlarge your land! May Ashur grant you a commanding voice, obedience, agreement, justice and peace!206

Ashurbanipal’s coronation hymn conveys similar sentiments: Ashurbanipal is the [representative] of Ashur, the creation of his hands! May the great gods make his reign firmly established! May they guard the life of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria! May they give him a straight scepter to widen his land and peoples! May his reign be renewed and may they firmly establish his royal throne forever! (COS 1, 473)

Ashur’s lack of a past facilitated his assumption of the traits best suited to the Assyrian people at any given point in time (Lambert 1983, 86). During the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Ashur was the divine embodiment of Assyrian political ambition with the fate of the empire inextricably linked to him. He was the god associated with Assyrian ambitions of empire: “May Ashur, father of the gods, str[i]ke [you] down with [his] fierce weapons” (SAA 2 6 §58: 518). It became usual practice to parade through the capital, also named Ashur, prisoners vouchsafed to the deity. His iconography was a winged disc enclosing a stretched bow ready to let an arrow fly. The NAP corpus contains one divine self-identification formula attributed to Ashur (3 ii 22-25): “I slaughtered your enemies and filled the river with their blood. Let them see (it) and praise me, (knowing) that I am Ashur, lord of the gods.” It is not by chance that this oracle is in the third collection. The oracles of this collection all pertain to Esarhaddon’s succession ceremony. In this ceremony, Esarhaddon enters into a covenant relationship with Ashur, 205 Livingstone 1995, 108-9; Lambert 1983, 82-6. For a comprehensive discussion of Ashur see Holloway 2002. 206 MVAG 41 (1937): 9-13 quoted in Livingstone 1995, 108.

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

121

the national deity at the temple Esharra, in the presence of vassals gathered for the ceremony. Some of the divine self-identification formulas focus on activity or relationship, not personality. Ishtar assures the king that she is the one “who says and does,” signifying that she is in the position to make promises and ensure they are fulfilled. She also likens herself to a beautiful lion cub that will sniff out the king’s enemies: “I am the one who says and does. I will sniff out, catch and give you the ‘noisy daughter’” (SAA 9 2 ii 18-20). The deity had a special relationship with the king.207 The deity was the parent, the king the child. As divine parent, the deity raises the king, protecting and nurturing him: “I am your father and mother. I raised you between my wings, I will see your success” (SAA 9 2 iii 26-28). The material associated with the divine self-identification formula in the NAP corpus supports the conclusion that these formulae took on special significance through the process of overcoding. To invoke the name of Ishtar of Arbela is to conjure military associations and comfort the king in the face of battle. To invoke the name of Mulissu is to summon images of comfort and support. To cite Bel/Marduk is to assure the king that the head of the pantheon is his ally. The name of Ashur serves to martial Assyrian political ambition, while that of Nabû ensures the gods have decreed the king’s fate and he need not worry about the future. Bel, Ishtar of Arbela, and Nabû each speak in one preserved prophecy (SAA 9 1.4). Since each deity customarily speaks from his/her temple, how is this feature to be explained? Does each deity arise and speak in turn on the basis of its rank? It seems more likely that each deity is invoked in turn because of the associations that it holds. Bel/Marduk opens the oracle and assures Esarhaddon that he is watching over the beams of his heart; indeed sixty great gods stood with Bel/Marduk and protected the king at his birth. The nature of the relationship was dependent upon the identity of the deity. For example, Ishtar promises to protect the king throughout the corpus and is identified as his midwife and wet-nurse (SAA 9 1.6 iii 15-18), he is the rightful heir and son of Mulissu (SAA 9 1.6 iv 5-6), Ashur has given him universal dominion (SAA 9 3 ii 3-6). 207

122

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Only the head of the pantheon is able to convene the gods and ensure widespread divine support for the king. Ishtar of Arbela reconciled the king with Ashur, an allusion to Ishtar’s warrior activity on behalf of Esarhaddon enabling him to return from exile. Finally, Nabû assures the king that his destiny is secure, “the future will be like the past.” This is probably a promise that Esarhaddon’s succession will be orderly and prosperous. The three divine selfidentification formulae in this oracle are necessary because Ishtar can no more convene the divine assembly than she can decree the king’s fate. Had a prophet(ess) attempted to ascribe these prerogatives to her, the oracle would likely have been dismissed as the work of someone who was stupid, insensitive, unlearned, or in extreme cases mad or even evil (cf. Geertz 1973, 129). Prophets cannot function without the support of the community. This dynamic necessitates yielding to established religious conventions when delivering prophecies. Audience expectations determine which deity is credited with any given activity and thus exert influence on the prophet. The divine self-identification formula always appears in the context of a member of the royal family receiving divine intervention, protection, or presence. Therefore, it is another indicator of monarchic patronage. Encouragement Formula The encouragement formula appears throughout the corpus. The formula accompanies reminders of past, or assurances of future, divine intervention and protection and is frequently linked to the divine self-identification formula. The formula is used in the opening line of six oracles (SAA 9 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 2.2, 2.5, and 7). Similar usage occurs when the encouragement formula appears in the middle of an oracle (c.f. SAA 9 1.1, 1.6, 2.5, 2.6, 4, and 7). The formula may appear at the end of an oracle as in the case of SAA 9 1.8, 2.1, 2.4, and 7. The encouragement formula is never arbitrary. It is always associated with the promise of divine presence, protection, or intervention. The formula is an important element of royal ideology employed to assure the king that all will be well. Nissinen writes: In Assyrian prophecy . . . “fear not” is more than an encouraging or soothing formula; it is a signifier of the position of the

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

123

king as the point of convergence between heaven and earth. As such, this formula belongs firmly to the language of the Assyrian royal ideology as a sign of divine acceptance of the king’s rule (Nissinen 2003b, 158-9).

Enemy The material focuses on the king’s enemies. Two Akkadian words translated “enemy” appear in the corpus: aiābu and nakru (SAA 9 1 i 8; 1 i 13-14; 1 i 19; 1 i 31; 1 ii 3; 1 ii 6; 1 ii 34-36; 1 iv 7-10; 2 i 1112; 2 i 23; 2 ii 1; 2 ii 21-25; 2 ii 31-32; 3 i 28-30; 3 ii 22; 3 iii 22; 3 iv 17; 5:7, 10, r. 3, r. 4; 6 r. 4 and r. 10; 9:26; 11:4). In addition to the Akkadian words for enemy, other words used synonymously appear throughout the corpus: “weasels” and “shrews” (SAA 9 1 v 34; 4:3), the “noisy daughter” (SAA 9 2 ii 19), the “disloyal ones” (SAA 9 2 ii 29 and 32), “traitors” (SAA 9 3 ii 10; iv 22), “haters” and “foes” (SAA 9 3 iii 23). This focus on the king’s enemies is what one expects in material written under monarchic patronage. In every instance, the deity assures the king that (s)he will deliver him from his enemies. Imagery Kirsten Nielsen outlines four functions of imagery. (1) It acts in a specific context by an interaction between two different statements. (2) Imagery serves as a source of information by proposing new understandings of reality. (3) It involves the audience in such a way that they take it over as their own perception of reality; and (4) it can be reused in new contexts with possibilities of new interpretation and new evaluation of the informative function and the performative function respectively (Nielsen 2003, 24). Figurative language functions in each of these ways in the NAP corpus. Imagery shapes the hearer’s attitude towards the king, his enemies, and deities. The king is a cup filled with lye and an axe of two shekels (SAA 9 1 iv 12-13). These images underscore the king’s power to destroy his enemies. He is the calf of Ishtar/Mulissu (SAA 9 1 v 29; 2 iv 20; 5, 3; and 7 r. 11) who nurtures and protects him because of their special relationship. The king will enter Egypt like a centipede (SAA 9 7 r. 3-5). Centipedes are fast, agile, predatory, and venomous (Campbell 1996, 614). This metaphor serves to assure Ashurbanipal that his conquest of Egypt will

124

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

be quick and decisive. Finally, the king shines as brilliantly as the sun (SAA 9 3 ii 7) an image intended to impress the hearers with a sense of wonder and perhaps to establish an association between the king and Ashur who was portrayed as a winged sun disk in this period. Three of these metaphors speak to the king’s prowess in war and serve to imbue him with courage in the face of his enemies. The third assures him of the deity’s protection and care on his behalf. The final metaphor, intended for a gathered assembly present at the king’s coronation, impresses the Assyrians with a sense of awe and wonder in the king’s presence. Each of these images functions in a specific context by invoking interaction between two disparate statements. They provide information about the nature of the king’s relationship with the deity or his enemies. They also invite the hearer to adopt a specific perception of reality as it relates to the king. The king’s enemies are a wind whose wing Ishtar breaks (SAA 9 1 i 6-7); this probable allusion to the Adapa Legend transfers the interpretation and evaluations of that legend to the present situation. Wind whose wing is broken is powerless to do harm. The enemies will roll like ripe apples at the king’s feet (SAA 9 1 i 8-10). Ishtar will harvest them when the time is right. The king’s enemies are weasels and shrews (SAA 9 1 v 3-4; 4, 3), they are cunning and given to guile, characterized by violent temper and speech. The land of Gomer is a thorn, bramble, a wasp (SAA 9 7 r. 1-2); it is an irritant, a minor nuisance. Brambles and thorns are also useless as building materials, which may be the idea behind this usage. These metaphors are ideologically charged and intended to belittle the king’s enemies. The first four collections all date to the reign of Esarhaddon. Esarhaddon’s enemies were his older brothers who resented him being named crown prince. It is imperative that the oracles supporting Esarhaddon’s bid for the throne disavow any familial relationship with the usurpers. These enemies are as harmless as the wind whose wing is broken, guileful as weasels, violent as shrews, and worthless as bramble. None of them is worthy to sit on the throne of Assyria. The images serve an important function in the war of ideology. The use of images extends to anthropomorphic and zoomorphic representations of the deity. Ishtar is the king’s midwife and wet-nurse (SAA 9 1 iii 15-17). The king is dependent upon her for his very life. Ishtar is the king’s good shield (SAA 9 1 iv 19), his

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

125

defense against the attacks of his enemies. Pilots guided barges laden with goods up and down the Tigris and Euphrates rivers guiding them safely into port. Likewise, the deity will guide Esarhaddon safely to the throne (SAA 9 2 i 16). Ishtar will twitter over the king and fly in circles around him like a winged bird (SAA 9 2 ii 6-8). Birds will flutter around their young twittering when the nest is in danger and attempt to drive away any perceived threat. Not a very awe-inspiring image, but apparently one intended to assure the king that Ishtar will drive away his enemies. It is immediately followed by an image in which Ishtar likens herself to a beautiful lion cub that goes about the king’s palace sniffing out his enemies (SAA 9 2 ii 9-10). Implicit in this metaphor is the idea that none of the king’s enemies will elude detection and continue as a threat. The deity raised the king between her wings (SAA 9 2 iii 27). This metaphor capitalizes on the protection and nurturing mother birds provide for their young. Having heard the king’s cry, Ashur issued forth from the gate of heaven as a fiery glow hurling down fire upon the king’s enemies (SAA 9 3 ii 14-17). Finally, Mulissu will carry the king on her hip like a nurse (SAA 9 7 r. 7). This image underscores the deity’s role in caring for the king. The divine images employed in the NAP corpus assure the king of the deity’s care and protection. Some of the images emphasize the nurturing aspect of the relationship while others emphasize divine protection. All of the images derive from Mesopotamian society and would have been readily understood by the recipients of these oracles. These images serve the basic function of imagery by assigning features and characteristics of one entity to another. They also shape the audience’s perception of reality and serve as weapons in the war of ideas. The use of imagery in the NAP corpus produces a favorable attitude towards the king and a negative attitude towards his enemies. It also highlights the special relationship the king shares with the deity. It is typical of what expects to find in material produced under monarchic patronage. Kingship The dynastic motif surfaces in several of the oracles. Ishtar will make the king great in his Palace of Succession (SAA 9 1.2 ii 3335). She has established his throne for long days and everlasting years (SAA 9 1.6 iii 19-22) and gives the king long days and ever-

126

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

lasting years in the Inner City (SAA 9 1.6 iii 14-19). The legitimating formula “rightful heir” is used in SAA 9 1 iv 5 to refer to Esarhaddon, who happens to be the deity’s chosen king (SAA 9 1.7 v 8-9).208 Ishtar has given the kingdom and power to Esarhaddon (SAA 9 1.8 v 22-23) and promised that his descendants will rule on the lap of Ninurta (SAA 9 1.10 vi 27-30; 2.3 ii 13-14). The deity will consolidate Esarhaddon’s throne/crown (SAA 9 2.1 i 7; 2.3 ii 5), having put Assyria in order on his behalf (SAA 9 2.5 iii 33-34; 2.6 iv 27; SAA 9 11, 5). Ishtar has bent the four doorjambs of the kingdom and given them to the king (SAA 9 3.5 iii 20-21, iv 14-16). Ashurbanipal will rule over the sons of the bearded courtiers and successors of the eunuchs (SAA 9 7, 3-7) as well as the kings of the lands (SAA 9 7, 12-13) who will come to him to have their disputes settled (SAA 9 7, 8-11). This material reflects monarchic patronage. Piety The corpus is concerned with the king’s religious piety. It is important that the king have the appropriate attitudes and engage in correct behavior. Various deities admonish the king to offer praise in response to what they have done on his behalf: Ishtar (9 1.4 ii 2829, 33; 1.10 vi 13-18; 2.3 ii 21), Nabû (SAA 9 1.4 ii 38-39), Urkittu (SAA 9 2.6 iv 8), Ashur (SAA 9 3.3 ii 13, 22-25), and Mulissu (SAA 9 5 3). The king’s faith is a gift from the deity (SAA 9 1.2 ii 8; 1.6 iv 1). The king is responsible for making appropriate sacrifices at the temple (SAA 9 2.3 ii 25-27; 3.5 iii 26-37). It is not surprising then that the corpus records the appropriate sacrifices and rites were observed during Esarhaddon’s coronation ceremony (SAA 9 3.3 208 Gakuru (2000, 23-38) summarizes Mesopotamian views of kingship, including the king’s selection by the gods and the legitimating formula. The legitimating formula came into favor as a means of defending the dynastic right of a king’s rule during the Amorite period. Gakuru summarizes the Akkadian view of dynasty: “It was believed that no dynasty lasts forever. There is no evidence that the reigning king even contemplated asking his gods such a favor. What the kings were interested in was to have a strong grip on the throne during their life time and that their sons should succeed them. Therefore, Mesopotamia does not provide a precedent for the Israelite concept of an eternal dynasty” (Gakuru 2000, 38).

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

127

27-23). Having the proper piety will influence the king’s rule. He is to decide disputes among the kings of the lands according to the decisions decreed by the gods (SAA 9 7, 8-11). Trust in Divine Word The king has always been able to trust Ishtar’s word in the past and will continue to do so in the future (SAA 9 1.1, 1.10). She has continually spoken to the king and has not lied to him instilling him with confidence (SAA 9 1.6). The king is encouraged to gather Ishtar’s words into his innards (SAA 9 2.3).While humanity is deceitful, it is Ishtar who does as she promises (SAA 9 2.3). Universal Dominion The universal dominion motif appears in several oracles. The merismus “sunrise to sunset” (SAA 9 2.4 ii 35-37; 3.2 i 28-34, ii 4-5) is likely intended as an image of universal dominion given its parallel use to “the totality of the four regions” in SAA 9 3.2. Ishtar will abolish the frontiers of all the lands and give them to the king (SAA 9 2.3 ii 15-16). Ashur has given “the totality of the four regions” to Esarhaddon (SAA 9 3.3 ii 3). This is a standard trope used in the Assyrian annals to represent universal dominion. Ashurbanipal will rule over the kings of the lands, arbitrating their disputes, setting the roads they take, and establishing their frontiers (SAA 9 7 8-13). The oracles reflect the same ideology as the ARI. Under Foot The phrase can be taken literally, as in such passages as: “I will bring enemies in neckstocks and vassals with tribute before his feet” (SAA 9 2 iii 23-25). In this example, the oracle may well speak of the king’s enemies being brought before him in shackles as depicted in various Neo-Assyrian reliefs (c.f. ANEP 119-29). However, the phrase is also used a number of times when it may be taken figuratively. Whether used literally or figuratively, the phrase “under foot” in the prophetic corpus conveys the idea of dominion through overcoding (cf. Eco 1976, 129-35). It may be the king’s dominion over his enemies, the deity’s dominion over the king’s enemies, or the deity’s dominion over the world (SAA 9 1 i 8-10; 1 v 3; 2 i 1112; 3 i 28-30; 3 iv 10-12; 4:4; 5:7; and 5 r. 4).

128

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

The Neo-Assyrian prophecies were delivered in response to the political crises—rebellions and wars—that arose during the reigns of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. Therefore, it is not surprising that many of the NAP should incorporate the theme of dominion. The contested issue was who would occupy the throne and exercise dominion in the empire. Victory Oracle Philip Harner (1969) identifies four elements common to Assyrian victory oracles: (1) direct address, (2) encouragement formula with supporting statements, (3) message of victory, and (4) divine selfidentification formula. SAA 9 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, and possibly 9 4 have these elements and fall into this category. Some of the oracles (SAA 9 1.5, 1.7, 6, 10, and 11) are too damaged for a determination to be made. Each of these oracles addresses a member of the royal family, either the king or queen mother. The victory oracle is the most dominant type of oracle in the collection. There are no victory oracles contained in collection 3, which was prepared for Esarhaddon’s coronation ceremony.

CONCLUSIONS The preceding analysis leads to two broad conclusions concerning the content and composition of the NAP corpus. First, the general tone of the corpus is propagandistic in nature. The use of imagery carefully shapes attitudes towards the king and his enemies in the war of ideology. The material makes use of the textual strategies that guide ideation to restrict the reader’s response to acceptance or rejection of the thesis: the king is the gods’ chosen instrument and source of blessing. Royal scribes arranged the prophecies collected for archival storage chronologically and thematically. Collections number 1 and 2 include prophecies by more than one prophet(ess). Collection 3 may be a series of prophecies by the same prophet. Scribes collected the material for a political purpose. There is no evidence these prophecies were collected to preserve the words of the prophets for their own sake. Nor is there evidence the oracles were later studied or reinterpreted. It is possible that scribes used them when preparing Assyrian Royal Inscriptions (ARI) (see ch. 5). Scribed lines clearly demarcate the prophecies in these collections,

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

129

and they are not integrated into a coherent work. They underwent a minor degree of editing as scribes standardized openings and closings during the process of copying for archival storage. However, there is no evidence they underwent editing within the body of the prophecy or extensive editing or reshaping over a prolonged period. The prophecies constitute a relatively pure genre with the victory oracle being the dominant form. They report the speech of the deity in first person address, occasionally quoting the king or queen mother. They do not include hymns or record dialogues between the deity and king and/or prophet. The exception is collection 3 that apparently preserves ritual instructions relating to the king’s coronation ceremony. Many of the motifs employed are not unique to the prophetic genre, but also appear in ARI: for example, the king as chosen, loved, and favored by the deity; the creation and destiny of the king; and divine protection and presence (Laato 1992b, 48-61). However, they lack the type of literary creativity evidenced by the mixing of genres or creations of new genres through the transformation of old ones. Poetic construction appears sparingly in the oracles. Synonymous parallel construction appears on occasion. The majority of oracles lack complex structures such as acrostics, chiasmi, and double cycles.209 However, this observation does not support conclusions regarding the origin of these works. Susan Niditch (1996) has demonstrated the difficulty in differentiating between the oral and literary origins of a work based on style. Second, the material reflects the concerns of its monarchic patron. In terms of recipients, the prophecies generally address members of the royal family. The king, crown prince, and queen mother are all recipients of prophecies. Some prophecies come in response to laments. Only one is directed to a convened assembly during Esarhaddon’s coronation ceremony (SAA 9 3.2) and that ceremony would have been attended by state officials and vassal kings who had come to swear loyalty oaths, it is by no means certain that it 209 Acrostics were known to Assyrian scribes as evidenced by “Ashurbanipal’s Acrostic Hymn to Marduk and Zarpanitu” (see Livingstone 1989, 6-10 = SAA 3, 2).

130

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

would have been attended by the masses. Prophecies never address priests, temple personnel, or the people at large.210 There is little evidence that prophets generally addressed the masses at large, and their ability to influence public opinion towards the king must remain an open question. However, the fear of prophets spreading sedition is evident in loyalty oaths.211 The general thrust of the prophecies is political. The contents pertain to the crises that afflicted the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the seventh century BCE. Accordingly, the most frequently recurring motifs are divine protection, “enemies,” and the encouragement formula. The divine self-identification formula appears throughout the prophecies as well. Each of these statements serves the semiotic function of mustering a specific set of associations. The prophecies are always in support of the king. The gods and goddesses of Assyria and Babylonia will vanquish the king’s enemies at home and abroad and establish him on the throne. Only one time does the deity chastise the king, and that is for neglecting the temple of Ishtar (SAA 9 3.5), but even this mild rebuke is not followed by a warning of judgment, but by a promise of divine support. Prophecies never criticize or fault the king’s political policies or military endeavors. Cities and countries feature in these prophecies only to the extent that the king will conquer them or the gods will consolidate his rule over them. The prophecies lack utopian or dystopian images and motifs.212 The glorious future of Nineveh, Ashur, Calah, or any other principle city in Assyria is lacking.

It can be assumed with a fair degree of certainty that oracles promising military victory were shared with the military to bolster the confidence of troops. Although none have survived, it is possible these may have been directed to the troops at large (cf. Van der Toorn 1987, 89). 211 This obligation is clearly spelled out in the treaties; SAA 2 3:2-6; 4:4-9; 6 § 10 108-122 and § 12:130-46 and § 19:212-13; 8 r. 2-27; 9:6-16, 29-37; 13:10-17 (Parpola and Watanabe 1988). 212 For a general overview of utopian and dytopian motifs and bibliography, see Schweitzer 2006. This lack of utopian and dystopian images is not surprising given the social setting that produced these texts. Utopian and dystopian images emerge in environments of perceived cultural 210

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES

131

The prophecies do raise the issue of piety, but in each occurrence of this motif, it proves to be a political issue. Piety is a matter of loyalty to cultic practices and the temple, and is never abstractly conceived. From the third millennium BCE, a symbiotic relationship existed between the state and the temple (Diakonoff 1972, 4548; Gelb 1972; Kuhrt 1990, 149). Temples were dependent upon the palace for slave labor as well as for their construction and maintenance. The palace was dependent upon the temple for legitimating of policy through diviners of all classification. A king could not reign in the ancient Near East without the support of the temple; I refer here to temple personnel.213 Restoring neglected temples was a means of ensuring priestly support. Prophet(s/esses) never criticize the temples or temple personnel. None of the material promotes monotheism, indeed, as noted above, Assyrian prophet(s/esses) deliver prophecies in support of foreign deities and temples. Temporally, the prophecies are concerned with the present and immediate future. The closest they come to dealing with the distant future is a promise that the deity will establish the king’s dynasty for two succeeding generations. Although most of the oracles can be tentatively dated with a reasonable degree of accuracy, the oracles are very general in nature and with the exception of SAA 9 9, lack historical anchors. The recipients are addressed by name, but the enemies are not so identified. The numerous references to enemies in the Esarhaddon prophecies allow us to assign them to the civil war and accompanying aftermath; however, there is little historical information in the prophecies themselves. We are dependent on annals, letters, and other material for historical reconstruction.

lack and constitute a form of social critique. They are also a coping mechanism for cultural dissonance, see Ehud ben Zvi 2006. 213 Nabonidus (555-539 BCE), the last king of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, may serve as an example of this principle. David Weisberg theorizes that the king’s policy of restoring the temples to Sin in Harran, Ur, and Teima angered the priests of Marduk who collaborated with Cyrus in the Persian king’s capture of Babylon (private communication).

132

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Having concluded a discussion of the prophecies, the next chapter will turn to a discussion of prophecies in a secondary context, divine letters, and divine-human dialogue. This material is also progandistic in nature and was produced under monarchic patronage.

5 NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECIES IN SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS In addition to the oracles discussed in chapter 4, other written materials from the seventh century BCE preserve prophecies or references to them. These materials include Assyrian Royal Inscriptions (ARI) and letters.214 This chapter will examine these materials as well as letters from deities, and a dialogue between Ashurbanipal and Nabû. As in the previous chapter, I study the material individually first and then as a whole with attention paid to dominant motifs. I will demonstrate that this material, like the prophecies, is political and propagandistic in nature.

PROPHECY IN A SECONDARY CONTEXT Building Inscriptions Esarhaddon’s ARI recount his rise to power and the role played by prophecies. The Nineveh A inscription deals with events that preceded Esarhaddon’s rise to power in 681/680 BCE. The inscription dates to 673/2 based on the eponym year incorporated in the manuscripts.215 Tadmor proposes that the author of the inscription sought to justify Esarhaddon’s decision to appoint his younger son Ashurbanipal as crown prince. The inscription serves imminent political aims in the present or some particular design for the future, not to reflect apologetically on the past. Assyrian kings wrote For an introduction and bibliography to Assyrian Royal Inscriptions also referred to as annals in scholarly works, see Tadmor 1997. 215 Borger 1956, 64. For the complete text see Borger 1956; for an English translation of the relevant passage see Nissinen 1998b, 14. 214

133

134

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

their apologies long after their accession, not immediately after an event to appease or justify it. In this case, it was written to legitimate the appointment of a successor, who like Esarhaddon, was not the oldest son.216 The Nineveh inscription recounts that deities sent numerous prophecies to Esarhaddon to encourage his heart: “Oracles of prophets, messages of the gods and the Goddess, were constantly sent to me and they encouraged my heart” (Nin. A ii 6-7). Nissinen proposes this inscription may refer to select portions of prophetic oracles (.e. SAA 9 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 3.3, and 5).217 Nineveh A lines i 60-62 contain an excerpt from a šir takilti, an “oracle of encouragement:” “Answering me with their firm positive ‘yes’ they constantly sent me this oracle of encouragement: ‘Go ahead, do not hold back! We go by your side, we annihilate your enemies.’” While the wording of this passage is reminiscent of a prophecy, other instances of šir takilti support the conclusion that it is associated with haruspicy.218 The Ashur A inscription was composed in the month of Sivan/Tammuz (III/IV), 679, soon after Esarhaddon’s ascension to the throne.219 The focus of this inscription is the restoration of Esharra, Ashur’s temple in the city of Ashur. It is characteristic of ARI recounting the king’s military and building exploits. The Ashur A inscription records that the king received numerous prophetic messages concerning the foundation of his throne: “Messages of prophets concerning the establishment of the throne until far-off days were constantly and regularly conveyed to me” (Ass. A ii 12-17). SAA 9 1.6, 1.10, and 2.3 include references to the king’s dynasty being established. Nissinen suggests that the 216

Tadmor 1983, 37-45. cf. Parpola who believes the prophecies were intended to present Esarhaddon as a messianic leader (Parpola 1997, XXXVI-XLIV). 217 Nissinen 1998b, 14-29. Nissinen discusses the correspondences between the oracles and the building inscriptions in the context of a review of the historical situation surrounding Esarhaddon’s rise to power. 218 Nissinen 1998b, 33. Haruspicy is the art of divination by means of reading animal entrails. 219 Nissinen 1998b, 16. For the complete text see Borger 1956; for an English translation of the relevant passage see Nissinen 1998b, 15.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

135

writers of the building inscriptions may have had access to the collections of prophecies delivered to Esarhaddon. These scribes shared a similar ideology to the prophets responsible for the prophecies (Nissinen 1998b, 31). This is what one would expect since the scribes and prophets are both functioning under monarchic patronage. While extant prophecies support the claims of the building inscriptions, these inscriptions themselves only allude to prophetic messages and do not cite them. The absence of explicit oracular formulations in the building inscriptions makes it impossible to determine intertextual issues with certainty. What is especially interesting is that the inscriptions of previous Assyrian kings lack any comparable references to prophecy.220 Prism Inscriptions Three of Ashurbanipal’s prism inscriptions contain references to prophecy. Ashurbanipal’s first reference to prophecy is in Prism T that recounts his restoration of Assyrian temples. Prism T reports that Ashurbanipal received orders through dreams and prophetic messages to restore the temple of the Lady of Kidmuri—the original designation of Ishtar of Calah: The Lady of Kidmuri, who in her anger had left her cella and taken residence in a place unworthy of her, relented during my good reign which Ashur had presented and, to make perfect her majestic divinity and glorify her precious rites, constantly sent me (orders) through dreams and prophetic messages. I asked Shamash and Adad and they gave me a firm positive answer (Prism T ii 9-19) (Nissinen 1998b, 35).

220 Nissinen 1998b, 30. Van der Toorn proposes that the rise in popularity of prophecy in the royal court in the seventh century is the result of the precariousness of the throne. The kings, anxious to ensure popular support for their rule, relied upon prophecy—a divinatory technique of the masses characterized by the bright, dazzling, and spectacular—in an attempt to suitably impress the populace (Van der Toorn 1987, 91).

136

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Two temples to this deity existed during the reign of Ashurbanipal: the temple Bīt Kidmuri restored by Ashurnasirpal II in the ninth century and a temple dedicated to her in Nineveh. It is not clear to which of these temples Ashurbanipal’s inscription refers. This prism inscription demonstrates that temple restoration, as well as military endeavors, benefited from prophetic encouragement and exhortation. However, confirmation by means of extispicy preceded performance of the work (Prism T ii 18-19). It also succinctly presents the idea that the absence of a deity is a sign of divine displeasure and the deity’s return a mark of reconciliation.221 Prism A reports Ashurbanipal’s Mannean campaign. The inscription cites Ishtar of Arbela promising to deliver Ahsheri into the hands of Ashurbanipal: “I will, as I have said, take care of the execution of Ahsheri, the king of Mannea” (Prism A iii 6-7). Prisms B, C, D, F, and H also record Ashurbanipal’s war against Ahsheri, but only Prism A contains a reference to prophecy.222 The prophecy in question is attributed to Ishtar of Arbela, the warrior goddess of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Prism B reports the king’s campaign against Elam. This inscription also records a portion of an oracle from Ishtar: “Ishtar heard my desperate sighs and said to me: ‘Fear not!’ She made my heart confident (saying): ‘Because of the ‘hand-lifting’ prayer you said, your eyes being filled with tears, I have mercy upon you’” (Prism B v 46-49).223 As in the case of the previous example, this oracle was delivered on behalf of Ishtar during a battle. This inscription contains another allusion to prophetic messages the king received (v 93-5), but these latter messages are not quoted. Ashurbanipal’s inscriptions quote the prophecies in question. As in the case of Esarhaddon’s inscriptions, the ideology of the Nissinen 1998b, 35-42. For the complete text see Borger 1996; for an English translation of the relevant passage see Nissinen 1998, 35. 222 Nissinen 1998b, 43. For the complete text see Borger 1996; for an English translation of the relevant passage see Nissinen 1998b, 43-4; for a summary of the historical background see Nissinen 1998b, 46-7. 223 For the complete text see Borger 1996; for an English translation of the relevant passage see Nissinen 1998b, 44; for the historical background see Nissinen 1998b, 47-51. 221

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

137

prophecies is compatible with that of the inscriptions. The subject matter relates to military matters and the restoration of temples, both of which are political concerns (see ch. 4 above). Letters to the King Numerous letters written to the king either quote, paraphrase, or allude to prophecies. Assyrian and Babylonian scholars, but not prophets, write these letters. Each letter serves as an example of the use of prophecy to achieve political ends.

SAA 10 352 Letter from Mar-Issar Mar-Issar wrote to Esarhaddon concerning the substitute king ritual performed on the lunar eclipse that occurred in the month of Tebet (X), 671 in Akkad, the ancient Sargonic capital of Babylonia. Celestial omens portended evil for the king of Babylonia, i.e. Esarhaddon. Damqî was enthroned as king of Assyria and Babylonia on the 20th of Tebet, 671 so that he might bear the celestial and terrestrial portents in place of Esarhaddon. Mar-Issar’s letter reports the death of Damqî and his queen: 5 [Damqî], the son of the prelate of Akka[d], who had ru[led] Assyria, Babylon(ia) [and] all the countries, [di]ed with his queen on the night o[f the xth day as] a substitute for the king, my lord, [and for the sake of the li]fe of Shamash-shumuuki[n]. He went to his fate for their redemption. . . . . . . 22 [I] have heard that before these ceremonies, a prophetess had prophesied saying, to the son of the prelate, Damqî: “You will take over the kingship!” r. 1 The prophetess had also said to him in the assembly of the country: “I have revealed the thieving polecat of my lord, and placed (him) in your hands.” These apotropaic rituals which were performed succeeded well indeed; the king, my lord, can be glad.224

224 Nissinen 1998b, 68. For general information on the substitute king ritual, the historical background of this occurrence, and attempts to

138

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

In the course of reporting the success of the substitute king ritual, Mar-Issar recalls two quotes from a prophetess. The words spoken should be understood as the words of the deity, not the prophetess. The first quote serves to legitimate Damqî’s role as successor, validating the choice of the son of the prelate. The second quote, uttered in the presence of the assembly seems to pertain to the deity’s action of surrendering the king’s enemies into his hands, a theme common in the prophecies discussed above. The prophecies in SAA 9 collection 3 all pertain to rituals and ceremonies involving Esarhaddon’s coronation and indicate prophetic involvement in the process. Here too, we find prophetic involvement in the enthronement of the substitute king. This further underscores the role of the prophet in supporting and protecting the king. In the Neo-Assyrian Empire, prophecy was a tool of statecraft and political power; it served the interests of the king.

LAS 317 Letter from Adad-ahu-iddina Adad-ahu-iddina appears to be a temple functionary responsible for the care of temple property. He writes to the king concerning a prophecy of the prophetess Mulissu-abu-usiri. The prophetess has taken the king’s clothes to Akkad and is requesting permission to transport the throne as well. Nissinen proposes the king’s clothing and throne may have been required for the substitute king ritual discussed above (Nissinen 1998b, 78-80). In the letter, the writer quotes the prophetess’s prophecy and requests instructions from the king on how he should proceed: 1 To the king, my lord, (from) your servant Adad-ahu-iddina: Good health to the king, my lord! May the gods Ashur, Mulissu, Nabû and Marduk bless the king, my lord. 7 The prophetess, Mulissu-abu-usiri who took the king’s clothes to Akkad, has prophesied [in the te]mple: “[The] throne from the te[mp]le [. . .] (Break) identify the parties involved see Nissinen 1998b, 68-73. For the full text of the letter and notes see Parpola 1970.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

139

r. 6 [Le]t the throne go, I shall catch my king’s enemies with it.” I said: “Without (the permission of) the king, my lord, I shall not give up the throne.” 12 We will act according to the instructions of the king, my lord.225

The use of the verb ragāmu (prophesied) makes it clear that Muliss-abu-usiri claims to be speaking on behalf of the deity. If Nissinen is correct in associating this event with the substitute king ritual, it provides insight into the activity of a prophet(ess). Their responsibilities were not limited to simply delivering messages on behalf of the deity, but included discharging other tasks as well. Also of interest, is Adad-ahu-iddina’s response to the prophetic word, which is one of apparent suspicion. He does not simply obey the prophetic word, but asks the king for instructions. Presumably, had the king failed to give permission for the throne to be transported, Adad-ahu-iddina would have rejected the prophetess’s request. It would appear then that the king was the final authority in determining the legitimacy of a prophecy, at least one relating to issues of state. This letter also provides additional evidence that the office of prophet(ess) existed to support and serve the king. There are no grounds for doubting that the prophetess Mulissu-abu-usiri actually delivered the prophecy in question. There is no good reason for Adad-ahu-iddina to fabricate such an occurrence.

SAA 10 111 Letter from Bel-ushezib Bel-ushezib was a Babylonian astronomer who had supported Esarhaddon during his exile and war for the Assyrian throne (SAA 10 109). This letter pertains to Esarhaddon’s war against the Manneans in the mid-670’s. The letter itself dates to 675 based on historical and astronomical details. The opening of the letter cites two meteor omens concerning the defeat of the Manneans. The letter appears intended to advise the king during a time of indecision concerning continuing the campaign. Esarhaddon’s indecision is 225

Nissinen 1998b, 78.

140

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

rooted in the fact that it cannot be determined what action the Cimmerians will take if the campaign goes forward. The king had apparently consulted Bel-ushezib to learn if the astrologer could divine the intentions of the Cimmerians. Bel-ushezib cautions the king that he can interpret omens, but military matters are outside of his purview. Ultimately, the king must do as he deems best. The relevant portion of his letter reads: r. 19 The king of the gods, Marduk, is reconciled with the king, my lord; whatever the king, my lord says, he can do. Sitting on your throne, you will vanquish your enemies, conquer your foes and plunder the land of your enemy. 23 Bel has said: “May Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, be seated on his throne like Marduk-shapik-zeri, and I will deliver all the countries into his hands.” The king, my lord, may rejoice over this! 26 The king may do as he deems best.226

It is important to remember that Bel-ushezib was a Babylonian astrologer, not a prophet.227 It is not clear whether this message from Bel/Marduk was received by means of celestial omen or some other means. I discuss it here because the message is presented as the first person speech of a deity. It is the will of Bel/Marduk that Esarhaddon be established on his throne just as was Marduk-shapik-zeri, the seventh ruler of the second dynasty of Isin. Marduk-shapik-zeri had restored the fortifications of Babylon and the temple of Nabû in Borsippa (1081-1069).228 This prophecy expresses the desire that Esarhaddon engage in a similar policy of restoring the fortunes of Babylon and the temples of Babylonia. It is interesting that the promise of military victory follows the use of the cohortative, which in this case expresses a wish. Does Bel226

1993.

Nissinen 1998b, 96-98. For the full text of the letter, see Parpola

For information on Bel-ushezib and his correspondence, see Dietrich 1968, 233-42; 1970, 62-68. 228 On Marduk-shapik-zeri see Brinkman 1968, 130-35; 334-5; Longman 1991, 157-8; Frame 1995, 45-9. 227

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

141

ushezib intend the king to understand that his military victory is dependent upon his adopting a particular attitude towards Babylonia? If so, this would serve as an example of the use of prophecy to influence the king to undertake a specific policy. Also of note is the ideology expressed in the phrase, “Marduk, is reconciled with the king, my lord; whatever the king, my lord says, he can do.” Nissinen observes that Marduk and the king share a unity of purpose and desire. The throne is the earthly manifestation of the heavenly will (Nissinen 1998b, 99). Of course, in actuality, it is not the king who serves the deity as much as the deity who serves the king by legitimizing his rule. Palace and temple personnel share a symbiotic relationship. The temple is dependent upon the king for its maintenance, personnel, and offerings. The king is dependent upon the temple for his divine authority to rule.229 We do not know the prophecy Bel-ushezib quotes. The circumstances of the delivery of the oracular report go unreported. Did Bel-ushezib, a Babylonian astrologer who previously resented the influence prophets had with the king (cf. SAA 10 109), quote a prophet or fabricate the message himself? The nature of the message does not lend itself to reception by celestial omen. The lack of a reference to the prophet(ess) who is the source opens the door for the possibility that the prophecy is a literary creation intended to influence the king’s attitude favorably towards Babylonia, which would most assuredly have been a concern of a prominent Babylonian astrologer.230 On the other hand, if a prophetess delivered the prophecy as the letter asserts, this serves as an example of a member of one branch of divination utilizing another.

229

Diakonoff 1972, 45-48; Gelb 1972; Kuhrt 1990, 149. In the context of a discussion of Babylonian priests, Kuhrt (1990, 149) makes the following summary comment: “The conclusion from the Assyrian material is that the activities of religious experts were directed by and towards the monarch and that the experts themselves were dependent on him.” 230 Nissinen raises the question of whether the oracles quoted in Ashurbanipal’s inscriptions are literary creations (Nissinen 1998b, 58).

142

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

SAA 13 144 Letter from Nabû-resh-ishi The priests of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal communicated every detail of temple operations to the king. The following letter is a report of temple sacrifices made on behalf of the king. It also contains a report of a prophecy. 1 To the king, my lord: your servant, Nabû-resh-ishi. Good health to the king, my lord. May Ashur, Ishtar, Nabû, and Marduk let the king, my lord, live 100 years. 10 The sacrifices of the king [. . .] have been performed on the [14]th [day], the 1sixth, [the 1eighth], the 20th [. . . . . .] (Break) r.7 She prophesied: “Why did you give the [. . .]-wood, the grove, and the . . . to the Egyptians? Say in the king’s presence that they should be given back to me. I will (then) give total abundance [to] his [. . .].”

Unfortunately the tablet is damaged and the identity of the prophetess is unknown. The prophecy concerns the gift of groves to the Egyptians. The Assyrian kings often campaigned into Lebanon in search of lumber from its cedar groves. The Egyptians also prized that wood and have a history of sending trading expeditions north to obtain it. This prophecy may well involve those forests. Whatever forests are involved, the prophetess is clearly at odds with the king’s decision to award them as a gift and speaks on behalf of the deity that the groves should be returned to the deity. The temple would have wanted to retain control of the groves as a source of lumber for temple construction and repair, use in cultic items (not the least of which would be idols and chariots), and as a source of income through the sale of a commodity.231 This letter serves as another example of prophecy used as a political tool to influence the king’s decision.

231 The deities were often placed in chariots for processions through the city and as they traveled from one temple to another for various festivals.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

143

SAA 10 284 Letter from Nabû-nadin-shumi The next letter demonstrates an interesting use of prophecy. Nabûnadin-shumi, the chief exorcist after Marduk-shakin-shumi, served both Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. In this letter, he writes concerning an individual who is disloyal to the crown, advocating banishment for the guilty party. In the course of his letter, he quotes a prophecy: 1 To the king, my lord: your servant Nabû-[nadin]-shumi. Good health to the king, m[y lord]! May Nabû and Marduk very gr[eatly bless the king, my lord]! . . . . . . r. 1 [I]f he has become troublesome, may that gracious face [of the king], my lord, tur[n] away from him! And inasmuch as Ishtar of N[ineveh] and Ishtar of Arbela have said: “We shall root out from Assyria those who are not loyal to the king, my lord!” he should really be banished from Assyria! 10 May Ashur, Shamash, Bel, and Nabû feel concern over the health of the king, my lord!232

The damaged state of the letter makes it impossible to identify with certainty the individual involved or the time of the events. The general content of the prophecy is consistent with extant prophecies known to us. SAA 9 2.3 makes mention of Ishtar of Arbela sniffing out the king’s enemies wherever they may be in the palace. Ishtar also promises to search out the disloyal ones (SAA 9 2.4) and put them into the king’s hands. There are several interesting things in this letter. First is the fact that an exorcist is quoting a prophecy. This serves as evidence that members of a particular branch of divination were not averse to exploiting other branches when it suited them. Second is Nabû-nadin-shumi’s interpretation of the prophecy. He associates “root out” with banishment and applies the prophecy to a specific person, even though the prophecy itself is general in nature. This letter provides an example of prophecy used in service of the king as a political weapon against a perceived threat. Third, we do not know the actual prophecy Nabû-nadin232

Nissinen 1998b, 102.

144

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

shumi quotes. The letter does not contain any information concerning the delivery of the prophecy raising the question whether Nabû-nadin-shumi’s is applying a prophecy to a specific situation or whether the referenced prophecy is a literary creation purposefully crafted to persuade the king to a given course of action.

ABL 1217 + CT 53 118; Letter from Nabû-rehtu-usiur CT 53 17 + 107; CT 53 938 Three letters written by Nabû-rehtu-usiur to Esarhaddon (the seed of Sennacherib) recounting the traitorous activity of Sasî follow. The poor condition of the letters hampers scholarly reconstruction of the actual events, dates, and persons involved. Nabû-rehtu-usiur writes to fulfill his obligation under the loyalty oath sworn to Sennacherib and Esarhaddon to report any conspiracy against Esarhaddon.233 The author is unknown to us, but claims to have knowledge of applicable prophecies. Nissinen posits the events transpired between Iyyar (II), 672 and Marchesvan (VIII), 669 with the letter likely written between the months of Tebet (X) and Adar (XII) 671/670. Nabû-rehtu-usiur intends that the king’s officials seize Sasî and his co-conspirators and remove their name from the land. Nabû-rehtu-usiur admonishes the king to act quickly before it is too late. The letter refers to a pseudo-oracle of Nusku.234 It seems that a slave girl of Bel-ahu-usiur, while in an ecstatic state, has proclaimed on behalf of Nusku (a Harran deity and the son of Sin) that Sasî would be king. Mulissu and Nikkal (a Harran deity and Sin’s consort) on the other hand, have decreed the fate of the conspirators. While the letters reference several prophecies, only the pseudo-prophecy is quoted verbatim:235 233 This obligation is clearly spelled out in the treaties; SAA 2 3:2-6; 4:4-9; 6 § 10 108-122 and § 12:130-46 and § 19:212-13; 8 r. 2-27; 9:6-16, 29-37; 13:10-17 (Parpola and Watanabe 1988). 234 Nusku was viewed as the son of Sin, the moon-god, in the NeoAssyrian period. He was worshipped in Haran (Nissinen 1998a, 168). 235 It was common practice in Mari to summarize prophetic oracles when reporting to the king (cf. the prophecies recorded in Nissinen 2003a). For a more detailed historical reconstructions, see Nissinen (1998b, 116-50). Nissinen attempts to piece together the events using the extant portions of the letters supplemented by other sources. He argues

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

145

ABL 1217 + CT 53 118 1 To the king, m[y lord], your servant Nabû-rehtu-usiur. May Bel and Be[let, Nabû and Tashme]tu, Ishtar of Nineveh and Ishtar of Arbela give you long days and ever[lasting years]! 4 Nikkal [has revealed] those who sinned against [your] father’s goodness and your [father’s] and your own treaty. Destroy their name and seed from your palace! [May] she cast [. . .]! May the accomplices of Sasî [die quickly]. 8 Hear me, O king, my lord! I k[now] the words of Nikkal. Let [the people] die! [Save] your life and the life of your family! Let t[the goddesses . . .] be your father and your mother, and let them li[ft up . . .]! Do not destroy your life; do not let the kingship [slip] from your hands! 12 Hear me, O king, my lord! Do not disregard [these] words of Ni[kkal! Let . . .] and [. . .] a letter [. . .] in [. . .] (Break; continued in Ct 53 118) 4 . . . are staying in his presence [. . .] are making common cause [with . . .]. 6 [They are] constantly [. . .] to Sas[î. . .]: “Present yourselves in a good light with the king! Let [. . .] do [. . .] with Nabû-belu-[. . .] with Ubru-Nabû [. . .] with the magnates w[ho . . .] (Break; continued in ABL 1217, rev.) r. 1 Perhaps ther[e is . . .] let them ask [. . .]. 2 A slave girl of Bel-ahu-usiur [. . .] upon [. . .] on the outskirts of H[arran]; since Sivan (III) she is enraptured and speaks a good word about him: ‘This is the word of Nusku: The kinship is for Sasî! I will destroy the name and seed of Sennacherib!’” that the probable location where the pseudo oracle was delivered was the cedar temple of Sin and Nusku erected for Esarhaddon on his campaign to Egypt. Nissinen also calls attention to the fact that Sasî was never punished by the king for his role in this plot and suggests that his real role was not that of an instigator, but rather that of informer or royal spy.

146

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE 6 Let your squadron commander question the household of Belahu-usiur under the gate of the Nabû-temple. Let the ša šepi guards who brought the slave girl into the house of Sasî bring her here, and let the king [. . .] perform a(n extispicy) ritual on her (account). 8 Let them bring Bel-ahu-usiur from Harran and [. . .] Nusku. May the name and seed of Sasî, Bel-ahu-usiur and their accomplishes perish, and may Bel and Nabû establish the name and seed of the king, my lord, until the far-off days! 11 Let them speak with Ardâ as follows: “On the 2seventh day, at night, [when] the scribe Issar-nadin-apli at this particular moment went to Sasî the city overseer, [did . . .] with the eunuch Awyanu? [Did] the scribe Issar-nadin-apli [. . .] Nabû-etiir? What did Sasî [. . .] concerning it on the 2eighth? Did Sasî speak with you and the [. . .] on the following day? Why have you [not reported] what you sa[w and heard]?” [Let] the squadron commander [. . .] men [. . .] the scrib[e] Issar-[nadin-apli . . .]. 20 The people who conspire with them and with Sasî [should die! . . .]. Let your [son]s and uncles guard you. Let [me] gather your [. . . As for you], stay in safety in your palace until [. . .]. [Let the people di]e! Save your life!236

CT 53 17 + 107 1 To the ki[ng], my lord: your servant Nabû-re[htu-usiur. May Bel and] Belet, Nabû and Tashmetu, Ishtar of Ni[neveh and Ishtar of Arbela, your gods (who) [called] you by name [to kingship, keep] you a[live]! 4 Those who sinned against [your father’s goodness, yo]ur fa[ther’s and] your own treaty, and who p[lo]t [against yo]ur [life, shall be placed] in [your] hands, [and you shall delete] their name [from As]syria and from [your pa]lace.

236

Nissinen 1998b, 109-11.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

147

6 This is the word of Mulissu; [the king, my lord,] should not be ne[glectful] about it. 10 On the sixth of [Marchesvan (VIII)] I had a vi[sion]: “[. . .] in the midst {. . .].” [I am bound by the treaty of the king, my lord]; I cannot c[onceal it . . .]. Just as I saw, in [. . .] I have put discree[tly . . .]. The king, my lord, knows, that [. . .] as follows in the lette[r: “. . .] should have . . . [. . .] (Break;

continued in CT 53 107 obv.)

1 [. . .] the crown pr[ince . . .] to the crown prin[ce . . .] are in league with one another [. . .] he says: “These [. . .]” and: “The whole palace [is] with [. . .] anything; the daughter of Bambâ [. . .] and the men of Adad-shumu-usiur and Ar[dâ . . . . . .] have said to me: “They are making a rebellion [. . ..” He has rejected what Bel, Nabû, Ishtar of Ni[neveh and Ishtar of Arbela have . . .ed], and [. . .] of his own. Ishtar of Nineveh says: “[. . .] have done [. . .] from [your] pal[ace . . . (Break, continued in CT 53 107 rev.) r. 4 may . . . [. . .] It r[ead]s as follows: “In Harran [. . .] What orders has he given [to you] about me? [. . .] The word of my father has become very [. . .]. You have turned the palace into a [. . .]. My men [. . .] Sasî [. . .]. I trust in [. . .] They [. . .] with Sasî [. . .] let him e[stablish . . .] (Break; continued in CT 53 17 rev.) r. 7 t he l[ife of . . .] the lif[e of . . . in the pres]ence of the chief eunuch [. . .] Save your life! [Let the people die] qu[ickly!. . . ] Sasî to [. . .] Milki- nuri and Urad-Issar [. . .] with [him]. 13 Interrogate them! Let them tell you the [. . .] people who conspired with them, and let [these] people die! Fear not!237 Bel, Nabû, and Mulissu are stan[ding with you]. Let the people die quickly, and [save] your life! May this letter be a spell, it will

237 Parpola renders the line: “Have no fear; Bel, Nabû and Mulissu are standing with you.”

148

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE [. . .] upon you! Let the people die before they get ahe[ad] (of you). 18 Hear me, O king my lord! Save your life! [The men o]f Sasî have [set] an ambush, [saying: “The moment the king] will speak with us, we shall [kill] him [before he gets ahead] (of us).” s. 1 Hear me, O king [my lord]! Bel [. . .] Let the [. . .] bring gold and precious stones . . . [As for you, ke]ep in safety, [pray to . . .] and let him prolong your life. Take care of yourself, ditto ditto (=let the people die quickly)! 3 [Save] your life and [the life of] your family! Save your life [from the hands of the e]unuchs! Ditto ditto. Brace yourself! Let the [. . .] stand [with you]; they are loyal to you.238

CT 53 938 1 [To the king, my lord; your servant Nabû-rehtu-usiur. May Bel and Belet, Nabû and Tashmetu, Ishtar of] Nineveh and Ishtar of [Arbela, your gods who] called [you be name to the kings]hip, [keep you alive]! 4 [Those who sinned against] your father’s [goodness, your father’s and your own] treaty, and who p[lot] against your life, shall be placed in yo[ur hands], and you shall delete [their] name from [Assyria and from] your p[alace]. 8 [This is the word of [Mulis]su; the king, my lord, should not be ne[glectful] about it. 10 [On the sixth o] Marchesvan (VIII), I had a vision: “[. . .] spend the night [. . .].” [I am] bound by the treaty of the ki[ng, my lord]; I cannot c[onceal] the thi[ngs that . . .]. (Break)

238

Nissinen 1998b, 111-14.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

149

r. 2 which have been done in your palace [. . .] he has not heard, and does not know [. . .] to turn away your attention [. . .] to destroy . . . [. . .] and Bambâ [. . .] do not [. . .] their [. . .]239

Nabû-rehtu-usiur assures the king that he knows the words of the goddess (“I k[now] the words of Nikkal”) and admonishes Esarhaddon to take appropriate action. He appears to paraphrase the prophecies he has received from Nikkal (ABL 1217 8-12). Numerous ideas expressed in his letter (the death warranted by the conspirators, the notion of divine parentage, and the gods lifting up x) appear in prophecies preserved in SAA 9 (discussed above). In SAA 9 1 i 31-32 and 2 ii 1, Ishtar promises to give up the king’s enemy for slaughter. This idea recurs throughout the oracles preserved in SAA 9. SAA 9 2 iii 26 refers to the gods as the king’s father and mother; unfortunately the line is broken, but SAA 3 iv 3 recounts these words of Ishtar of Arbela: “Let me lift . . . .” While these ideas are conveyed in letter ABL 1217, that is not to say that Nabû-rehtu-usiur is referencing these particular prophecies, but simply highlights that he appears to be paraphrasing prophecies that contain content similar to those known to us. The words, “Do not disregard [these] words of Ni[kkal]!” (ABL 1217 12-13) further support the view that the writer is referring to a known prophecy. Likewise lines 4-8 of letter CT 53 17 and CT 53 938 appear to paraphrase a prophecy of Mulissu; a portion of the content of these lines is similar in tone and content to SAA 9 2 ii 33 in which Queen Mulissu declares: “I will put them into the hands of my king.” CT 53 r. 14 contains the well-attested encouragement formula: “Fear not!” The notion of the gods Bel, Nabû, and Mulissu standing with Esarhaddon is also similar to that expressed in SAA 9 1.4. Of particular interest is the fact that ABL 1217 r. 2-5 contains a verbatim report of the pseudo-oracle: “This is the word of Nusku: ‘The kingship is for Sasî! I will destroy the name and seed of Sennacherib!’” This oracle may have been intended to be used by the con-

239

Nissinen 1998b, 114-15.

150

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

spirators to legitimize the assassination of Esarhaddon (CT 53 17 r. 18-22), mislead him, and seize the throne.240 Why paraphrase the genuine prophecy and report the pseudoprophecy verbatim? A consideration of the purpose of the letters may explain this authorial decision. Esarhaddon does not need to be convinced that he is the legitimate king. He has received numerous prophecies to that affect (cf. SAA 9). Likewise, he has received numerous prophecies in which the gods have promised to eliminate the threat posed by his enemies. This letter serves to alert the king to a conspiracy afoot in the palace and identify the principle characters. The letter may serve as evidence assisting the investigation. As such, it would be important for Nabû-rehtu-usiur to recount the words of Nusku as relayed by the servant girl to clarify her involvement in the plot. Nabû-rehtu-usiur also recommends an extispicy ritual be performed (ABL 1217 r. 7-8) because of the servant girl who uttered the pseudo-oracle. It is likely that this ritual served to establish the validity of the prophecy as was common practice in Mari (Noort 1977, 84-6).

Summary Comments Neo-Assyrian prophecy was put to secondary use in ARI and letters. Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal both commissioned ARI chronicling important events and accomplishments associated with their reign. Esarhaddon’s inscriptions allude to prophetic messages that encouraged his heart during the difficulties associated with his succession to the throne. Numerous extent prophecies (cf. SAA 9) are compatible with the sentiments expressed in the building inscriptions. Monarchic patronage supports both prophets and the writers of the ARI and their work supports royal ideology. The inscriptions were made years after Esarhaddon’s own succession and appear to have been written to safeguard the succession of his Nissinen proposes a second possible reason for this oracle. Esarhaddon may have arranged for it to confuse his enemies and keep them of balance. This possibility is dependent upon identifying the chief eunuch as the leader of the conspiracy and understanding Sasî’s role to be that of informer (Nissinen 1998b, 151). 240

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

151

son Ashurbanipal to the throne of Assyria. The allusion to prophecies serves to legitimate the king’s rule and safeguard his choice of his younger son as his successor. In this case, prophecy is a political tool that safeguards succession by serving as a reminder of what has happened in the past when Esarhaddon’s brothers challenged the crown prince. Ashurbanipal’s first inscription refers to prophecies directing his restoration of a temple to Ishtar of Calah and addresses the issue of the king’s piety. The king’s piety is also addressed in SAA 13 144 where it will be evidenced by his reacquiring groves that had been gifted. The king must be pious if he is to serve as the deities’ representative. Thus, the inscriptions have a political function. Two of Ashurbanipal’s prism inscriptions and SAA 10 111 address the role prophecies played in his military campaigns. The inscriptions commemorate the king’s campaigns undertaken on behalf of the Assyrian deities and attest to his faithfulness in matters of war. The letter is a response to a request for divine guidance. As such, they serve a political purpose attesting to the appropriateness of the king’s rule and attest to the deity’s support and protection. Several letters refer to the role prophecy played in protecting the king from danger. SAA 10 352 serves to advise the king of the status of the substitute king ritual performed to protect him and the crown prince from evil portents. Letters SAA 10 284 and ABL 1217 (et al.) employ prophecy as political weapons against individuals perceived as threats to the crown. Both of these letters use prophecy to advise the king to take action, either banishment or execution, against his political enemies. These authors appear to apply general prophecies to specific individuals. Adad-ahu-iddina writes to the king to inquire whether a prophecy is to be obeyed (LAS 317). He appears to be a temple functionary responsible for the care of temple items. He is not prepared to obey the prophetess without specific instructions from the king. This raises the question concerning who is qualified to evaluate and pass judgment on prophecies. The contents of the letter suggest that the king had the final say in prophecies concerning the state. If this letter is related to the substitute king ritual, it serves as another example of the use of prophecy to protect the king and crown prince from harm.

152

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Every one of these usages is political in nature. These inscriptions and letters all employ prophecy to achieve political ends, whether it be to safeguard succession; affirm the king’s military prowess and piety, thus affirming his right to rule; influence policy; or protect the king from all forms of threat. The prophets, ostensibly servants of the deity, are in fact foremost servants of the king.

LETTERS FROM THE DEITY Several letters from deities to Assyrian kings have come down to us. These letters present messages from the deity in first person address, as such, they warrant treatment as prophetic literature (cf. Petersen 2000, 41-42). Four things are of particular interest. First, what is striking about these letters is how little they resemble prophecies. Second, whereas prophecies are attributed to specific prophets, these letters are anonymous. Each appears to be the deity’s response to a letter from the king. Since most of the letters concern military campaigns, the third point of interest is the high degree of correlation they share with ARI. The final point of interest is the correspondence of material between the king’s letter and the deity’s (cf. SAA 3 41). The deity’s letters often reiterate entire portions of the king’s original letter. This correspondence serves to highlight that the king’s activities have been divinely commissioned and sanctioned; the will of the deity and the will of the king are as one. Two letters included here (SAA 13 139, 143) appear to have been written on the deity’s behalf by priests. The first letter (SAA 3 41) is from Ashur to Shamshi-Adad V (824-810 BCE). This letter is significant because we know no other preserved prophetic material from this king’s reign. SAA 3 41 Letter from Ashur to Shamshi-Adad V Beginning broken away; traces of one line. 1 [. . . . . . To sa]ve his life, he entered the city Nemetti-sharri. You followed behind him] and defeated him. [You took away from him his chariots, [his stallions and . . . of battle.] 3 You [did] battle within his city and [wrought a blood bath at the city gate. You cut down his orchards. Two] hundred and fifty-six cities in [its] vicinity [you razed, destroyed and burned].

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 5 As to what you wrote to me: “[I went] to Der. [Der is a great metropolis] whose foundations are as firm as the mass of a mountain. [.....] I surrounded and captured that city. [The gods dwelling in Der] together with their extensive property, the property of the palace, [. . . . . .], his royal bed, the treasure of his palace, [his palace women, his sons and his daughters], 30,000 captives, their cattle [and their sheep without number I took as spoil]. Four hundred and seventy-six cities in their vicinity [I razed, destroyed and burned.]” 12 (That) happened at the command of my great divinity. [You went to Der]—Der is a great metropolis, whose foundations [are as firm as the mass of a mountain]. You surrounded and captured that [city. The gods] of Der [together with] their [extensive] property, [the property of the palace, …….], r.1 his royal couch, the trea[sure of his palace, his palace women, his sons] and daughters, 30,000 captives, [their cattle and sheep without number you took as spoils. Four hundred] and seventy-six cities [in the vicinity] you razed, destroyed and [burned]. 5 As to what you wrote to me: “The people of [……] feared the terrifying splendor of Ashur […..], aban[doned] their cities and [se]t out for Elam [to save] their lives. 8 [From the city of Parsamash] as far as the city of Bit Nunakki, on the border [of …….], 10 [my ……] inflicted a defeat on them, and led away their spoil, [……] their cattle and sheep. [... cities within the vicinity] they devastated, destroyed and bur[ned].” 13 (That) happened [at the comma]nd of my great divinity. [The people of ….] feared the terrifying splendor of Ashur, [abandoned their cities], and [set] out for [Elam to save] their lives. 16 [From Pa]rsamash to Bit-Bunakki on the border of …….] 17 [......] They inflicted [a defeat on th]em, and led away [their] s[poil, ...... their cattle and sheep ......] (Rest broken away)

153

154

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Royal inscriptions and prophecies share compatible ideology. Both either promise or recount divine assistance against the king’s enemies. However, the stock phrases employed in the two genres differ. This letter contains numerous stock phrases associated with ARI: the list of stallions, chariots, and other weapons of war seized; the number of cities razed, destroyed, and burned; the list of spoils including: gods, gods’ property, property of the palace, etc.; the number and classification of captives, cattle, sheep without number taken as spoils; the terrifying splendor of Ashur; the people abandoned their cities and fled to GN; and the number of cities devastated, destroyed, and burned. All of these phrases routinely appear in ARI (cf. Luckenbill 1924, 23-47; ANET 1969, 274-301; and COS 2, 261-71: 284-306.) Absent from this letter are stock phrases common in prophetic oracles: “I am DN,” “Fear not!.” “The word of DN of GN,” promises to defeat the king’s enemies, etc. The second letter (SAA 3 44) considered here is from Ashur to Ashurbanipal.241 It is a response to Ashurbanipal’s report on the civil war with Shamash-shum-ukin. Esarhaddon had previously appointed Ashurbanipal to the throne of Assyria and his older brother, Shamash-shum-ukin to the throne of Babylonia. Unwilling to submit to his younger brother, Shamash-shum-ukin revolted in 652 BCE resulting in a civil war that lasted four years. SAA 3 44 Ashur’s Response to Ashurbanipal’s report on the Shamash-Shum-ukin War 1 By my great support, with which I gave [you] confid[ence, you defeat the . . . . . .] who vie with you [for kingship . . . . . .]. 3 Because of these evil deeds [which Shamash-shum-ukin] committed against you, I pulled out the foundations of his royal throne, over[threw] his reign and [comma]nded the destruction of the entire land of Akkad.

241 SAA 3 42 and 43 are fragments of the same letter. The fragments are too poorly preserved to yield much useful information.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 5 To perfect the shrines of the great gods, to renew [...] the offerings, to venerate my divinity (and) a good reign of [...] I decreed as your fate. 7 As for Shamash-shum-ukin, who did not keep my treaty but sinned against the charity of Ashurbanipal, my beloved king, I confined him in harsh imprisonment and bound [......]. I placed lead ropes on his magnates and [lead] them to [your] presence. 11 To aid my kings, to overthrow enemies, to resettle [...] sanctuaries, I appo[inted you] as the just shepherd of the subjects of Illil. 13 Ruining his own life and destroying the land of Akkad, (as prophesied by) the words of gods which [...], Shamash-shumukin [overlooked] my lordly curse with which I had cursed him, and did not take seriously good [couns]el regarding his own life [.....]. Blank space of about 2 lines 16 [......] he aroused [the anger of] all the gods and [......] performed evil deeds which were to cost him his life. 18 As for Shamash-shum-ukin], who carried off the property of the gods, [...... I] decreed his fate as evil. 20 Because of these evil deeds [which] he kept on perpetrating, on my account (even) his (own) gods became angry, abandoned him, and took to foreign parts. 22 At the command of my great divinity you conquered their cities and took heavy booty as plunder from there to Assyria. 24 By my great support you brought about the defeat of his warriors. The rest you [handed over] to me alive and (later) slew with weapons in Nineveh, city of your lordship. 26 I sent before you my fierce weapons to defeat your enemies. 27 At the mention of your name, which I made great, your troops go victoriously wherever there is fighting with weapons.

155

156

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE 28 Because of your in[cessant] prayers and supplications [with which] you beseeched my great divinity, I stood at your side and [poured out the blood] of your enemies. 30 [......] of [......] the citizens of Assyria 31 [......] him 32 and [......] his kingship. r.1 [...... who had not] kept [my treaty] and has sin[ned against] your [ch]arity, you [took] in your hands like sheep, and slaughtered like lambs. Blank space of about 2 lines 3 At my lordly utterance, the [Igigi] and Anunnaki pay attention to his (the king’s) command! All the kings seated on thrones bow down [before] you and kiss your feet. 5 I smashed the [bo]ws of Elam, and strengthened your bow. I made your weapons stronger than those of all (your) enemies. 7 I decreed for him [the fate] of his predecessor Ishdu-kin, king of B[abyl]on, and in his time his people were seized by famine; they chewed leather straps. I made [.....] to seize the people of Akkad, and I made them eat each other’s flesh [......]. break of approximately 8 lines 19 [You ......ed the word of] my [great] divinity, eased [my angry heart and made the land of Akkad conclude peace] with me. 21 [...], forgiveness and [...] are in my hands. I spoke to you with my divine word and you acted. 23 I commissioned you to renew those gods and [to prov]ide for their shrines. 24 They heard (this) in their assembly, blessed your kingship, and commended your good deeds greatly in my presence. 26 [Any oth]er enemies who do not fear my great divinity, I will deliver into your hands in like manner. You sent a tablet of good tidings and peace to the presence of my [god]head! (One line blank)

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

157

30 [Co]py of the words [......]

This letter provides insight into royal and religious ideology. Ashur and his own gods abandoned Shamash-shum-ukin because of his “evil deeds” against Ashurbanipal and the gods. What were these deeds? He rebelled against Ashurbanipal the king of Assyria and carried off the property of the gods without divine authorization. When Shamshi-Adad V carried off the property of the gods, it was at the command of Ashur (SAA 3 41 above), thus it was an appropriate, legitimate action. Shamash-shum-ukin has no such authority. Additionally, he did not keep Ashur’s treaty (adê) and sinned (hatiû) against his brother’s charity.242 Shamash-shum-ukin swore a loyalty oath to Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal upon Ashurbanipal’s appointment as crown prince of Assyria. His “sin” was failing to honor this oath; it is political in nature. His deeds were significant enough to warrant the destruction of “the entire land of Akkad.” The great gods have commissioned Ashurbanipal, “the just shepherd,” to resettle the temples and put religious rites in order. The themes: plunder, defeat of warriors, troops going victoriously in battle, forsaking of treaties, crushing of weapons, kings bowing to kiss Ashurbanipal’s feet are all-common to ARI. Like the previous letter, this one has little in common with prophecies, though the motif of divine support is common to both.243 It does however; allude to prophecy without quoting it. The king has performed all of his military endeavors in obedience to the god’s command. Especially noteworthy is the idea that the Igigi and Anunnaki gods pay attention to Ashurbanipal’s commands because Ashur has directed them to do so (r. 3). The kings bow down and kiss Ashurbanipal’s feet in the line parallel to this one. This poetic construction is significant. The Igigi and Anunnaki gods do not simply pay attention to the king’s commands they are subject to them. This highlights the interconnection of the physical and heavenly realms implied in SAA 9 3 i 9-11 and the king’s role as repre-

For a discussion of adê see the excursus in Parpola 1987b, 180-3. The word tukulu (trust, reliance, support) also appears in prophetic oracles (cf. SAA 2 iv 29). 242 243

158

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

sentative of Ashur. The lesser gods obey the king as they would obey Ashur himself. The third letter considered here is a letter from Ashur to Ashurbanipal written in response to the king’s report on the Elamite wars. Elam attacked Babylonia in 664 and 658 BCE. Assyrian forces drove the Elamites out of the region both times. This letter may pertain to either of these two campaigns. SAA 3 45 Ashur’s response to Ashurbanipal’s Report on the Elamite Wars One or two lines broken away 1 [......] gods [......] 2 [......] to make you attain [your] wish [......] 3 [...... I] endowed you with mig[ht .....] 4 [......] You have no [equal] where there is battle [......]. 5 [Princes and governors kne]el before you and praise the valor of your lordship. 6 [The magnates of Elam tremble and shake b[efore you]. [By] your [... and] the good fate which I decreed for you, [you will sm]ite [her], and her governors will sway to and fro like reeds in the tempest. 9 I will remind you of [......] and show it to you. [(While) the ......] seized their [. . .s] and carried them to Elam, you [...] continually approach my great divinity. [He who] sets the offering table and strews flour offering in my presence, 13 evil names [...], this caused them to sin. 14 [...] ...[......]... my royal feet 15 [......] I went before you. 16 [......] in your hand (Rest broken away) Rev. beginning broken away r.1 [...... his name [...]

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

159

2 [......] ...[...] ...[...] 3 [......] ...[...] and you make a libation. 4 [One chariot fighter, two cavalrymen, and three] dispatch riders [were] ki[lled]. 5 [......]... their murder [...] (Rest broken away)

The fragmentary nature of this letter limits its value; however, some preliminary observations are possible. Lines 3-8 pertain to Ashurbanipal’s campaigns against Elam. The king has no equal in battle because Ashur has endowed him with strength. Princes and governors bow before him. The officials of Elam will shake and tremble before Ashurbanipal. In his second campaign against Elam (658/657), Teumman the king of Elam committed suicide rather than be captured. His head was returned to Assyria and put on display at the port of Nineveh. The king continually approaches Ashur’s “great divinity.” The god’s DINGIR-ti-ia GAL-ti “great divinity/godhead” is a motif common in these letters (cf. SAA 3 41: 12, r. 13; 44: 22, 28 r. 19, 26; 45: 11; and 46:1, 4, 7, 12). In this usage, it seems to carry the sense of the king approaching the deity’s representation to make offerings. The motif appears in numerous other expressions, such as the command of my “great divinity,” prayers to my “great divinity,” word of my “great divinity,” enemies who do not fear my “great divinity,” support of my “great divinity,” and presence of my “great godhead.” We also find references to my “godhead” in SAA 3 44: r. 29: “You sent a tablet of good tidings and peace to the presence of my godhead.” “Divinity/godhead” may well be a reference to the deity’s image in each of these occurrences.244 244 It is well documented that prophetic oracles in Mari were delivered in the temple of the respective deities (Nissinen 2003a, 16). While we lack incontrovertible evidence that oracles were delivered in temples in Assyria, it is probable that a similar practice was employed there. If this is the case, the “command of my great divinity” (SAA 3 41: 12, r. 13; 44: 22) may be a reference to an oracle originating in the presence of the deity’s representation in the temple. The “support of my great divinity” (SAA 3

160

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

A fragment of a divine letter from Ashur to an unidentified king follows.245 This letter appears to be in response to the king’s report on a military campaign. Little historical information is preserved; however, the letter does provide insight concerning royal ideology. SAA 3 46 Fragment of a Divine Letter 1 [By the support] of my great divinity, with which [I gave you confidence], 2 [...] the kings, your fathers [......] 3 [...] to conquer a land not obedient to me [......]. 4 [At the comm]and of my great divinity, which cannot be [changed ..., the rulers] of the [four] regions [......]. 6 On their own initiative [they ..... and ......] in Ehursaggalkurkurra in the presence of [my great godhead.] 8 I desired you, I picked you out for shep[hardship ......, and sent you with] mighty weapons, sharp arrows, and flaming [swords] to fell [my] enemies. 11 [...] your priesthood [......] 12 [...... of] my [god]head [......] (Rest broken away) (Rev. completely destroyed)

This letter relates in some way to military campaigns (line 9). The opening of this letter: “[By the support] of my great divinity, with which [I gave you confidence],” is very similar to the opening of SAA 3 44: “By my great support, with which I gave [you] confid[ence, ].” This similarity in openings suggests that the two letters adhere to an established convention. Since SAA 3 44 relates to 46: 1) may be a reference to the oracles delivered in support of the king (cf. SAA 9). 245 The letter refers to the presence of the deity’s great godhead in Ehursaggalkurkurra, the chapel of Ashur in Esharra (line 7).

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

161

military campaigns, it is reasonable to conclude this letter does as well. The openings of SAA 3 41 and 45, both reports on campaigns, are damaged and cannot illuminate the issue. This letter also contains references to mighty weapons, sharp arrows, and flaming swords. The king waged these campaigns to bring peoples under obedience to Ashur (line 3). The official goal of Neo-Assyrian political ambition was to extend the influence of Ashur. This letter also indicates that the deity’s commands are unalterable; they cannot be negated or ignored. Finally, the deity “desired” the king, and picked him out for shepherdship. This underscores the special relationship between the deity and the king, a theme found in the prophecies. The final letter is from Ninurta and may address the crown prince Ashurbanipal. Ninurta was a deity of Nippur worshipped as part of a triad including his father Enlil and his mother Ninlil. In Assyria, he was worshipped along with Ashur and Mulissu. The letter is poorly preserved and the transitions between sections are lost hindering our ability to understand its internal context. SAA 3 47 Letter from Ninurta to an Assyrian King 1 The great lord, the king of the gods, Ninurta, has sent [me]: 2 S[ay] to the prince, [my outstretched hand, to the one who has received scepter, throne, and regnal insignia, to the governor (appointed) by my own hand: 5 Thus speaks Ninurta, the great lord, the son of Illil: 6 I am distressed, I am wrathful, I am angry [...]. (When I am distressed, who [......]? 8 (When) I am wrathful, who [......]? 9 (when) I am angry in my temple, who [......]? 10 Truly, [who ...] to the one who created him? Where is the oath [......] ...[......] 13 And in her blood [......] 14 You, when ...[......] 15 To the son [......] 16 to ...[......]

162

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE (Break) (Rest broken away) (Rev. beginning broken away) r.1 ...[......] 2 until/as far as ...[......]. 3 The message of Ninurta [to ......]. 4 Palace of Ashurbanipal, [king of the world, king of Assyria], whom Nabû and Tashmetu [endowed with great wisdom], and who with a sharp eye [acquired the gems of literature]. 7 While [none of] the kings who preceded me [had learned that craft], with the wisdom of Nabû I wrote on tablets [all extant] cuneiform writings, checked, and collated them, [and established them] in my palace for my reference and reading.

This letter shares the greatest affinity with prophecies. The opening lines refer to an unknown messenger bringing a first person address from Ninurta: “Thus speaks Ninurta. . .” However, it lacks the standardized opening of the collections (SAA 9 1-4) and does not employ the same terminology (“DN ma” or “abat DN”) to introduce divine speech as found in the individual prophecies (SAA 9 5-11). Unfortunately, the damaged state of the letter makes it impossible to identify additional motifs common to prophecies or ARI. The message pertains to something that has angered the deity, but the details are unknown. The letter closes with a reference to Ashurbanipal’s scribal training. This closing features Ashurbanipal speaking in first person address. This may be another example of the deity quoting the king’s letter verbatim as seem in SAA 3 41: 511 and r. 5-12, in which case the damaged lines on the obverse or the opening lines of the reverse may contain a line similar to SAA 3 41: 5: “as to what you wrote to me. . .” Priests may have written the following two letters on the deity’s behalf. They warrant treatment here because they preserve first person speech of the deity and qualify as prophetic material under Petersen’s rubric (cf. 1997, 2000). Sennacherib leveled Babylon in 689 BCE carrying off the statue of Marduk. His son, Esarhaddon initiated a program of reconciliation, rebuilding the city and Es-

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

163

agila, Marduk’s temple.246 In the following letter, Bel/Marduk indicates that he has become reconciled with Mulissu. SAA 13 139 Bel Reconciles with Mulissu 1 [I] am Bel. I have entered and made peace with Mulissu. 3 Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria whom she raised, fear not! I am Bel. 6 I have forgiven you (Mulissu). Ashurbanipal is in a country that is loyal. Together with his country, I have forgiven you. 10 I departed safely and securely from your city. Mercy, compassion ... (Rev. beginning (about 4 lines) broken away) r.1 I entrea[ted] and prayed to Bel. I (then) dispatched Nabûsharru-usiur, a tracker of my contingent. (Blank space of about one line) 5 To the king, my lord: your servant, Ashur-hamatu’a. May Ashur and Ishtar bless the king.

This letter is interesting in that the “Bavian Rock Inscription” (COS 2, 305) commemorating Sennacherib’s destruction of Babylon attributes his success to Ashur, not Ishtar/Mulissu, yet she is mentioned as having been at odds with Bel. This would seem to indicate that by the time of Ashurbanipal, the distinctions between Mulissu and Ishtar had grown even more blurred. No doubt, this is in part due to Mulissu’s position as the consort of Ashur, who has come to be increasingly associated with Assyria’s military expansion during the Neo-Assyrian period. Whatever the reason, Bel had held Mulissu responsible for Assyria’s military aggression against Babylon. However, now that the city and temple have been restored, the animosity between the gods is forgotten. Bel has departed Mulissu’s city (Ashur) for his home in Esagila in Babylon. 246 Cole and Machinist 1998 contains numerous letters and reports (SAA 13 161-4, 166, 168, 164, 179) concerning the rebuilding and refurbishing of Esagila.

164

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

This letter has the encouragement formula and self-identification statements characteristic of prophecies. It also refers to Mulissu raising Ashurbanipal, a motif common to the prophecies. Bel has forgiven (riāmu) Mulissu and Ashurbanipal. The qualities of mercy (rēmu) and compassion (gimlu) are mentioned, but the context cannot be determined due to the damaged condition of the text. However, given Bel’s act of forgiveness, it seems likely that these qualities were in some way associated with him. The break in the tablet coincides with the change in speaker. It is not clear who prayed to Bel (line r. 1), though it may have been Ashur-hamatu’a who sent the message to the king. What purpose does this letter serve? It serves a very political purpose. Ashurbanipal was crowned king of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. His older brother, Shamash-shum-ukin, was appointed to the lesser position King of Babylon, which made him vassal to his younger brother. By announcing Bel/Marduk’s reconciliation with Ashur and Ashurbanipal, this letter supports the succession decision of their father Esarhaddon. It also implicitly tells the people of Babylonia that they are to submit to Ashurbanipal’s rule. The final letter requests an item be sent to Esharra and may be from a deity or priest. The contents of the letter—the fact that the sender will give the recipient the royal scepter of life—suggest that the sender is a deity. If so, which one? The sender will take possession of the desired object when it reaches Esharra. Presumably, the sender is waiting there. The most likely candidate then is Ashur, since Esharra is his temple. The letter would then be Ashur’s personal address to either Esarhaddon or Ashurbanipal. The letter refers to an earlier message of well-being sent by way of messenger.247

247

The deities sent messages of well-being (cf. SAA 9 3.2 and 3.3).

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

165

SAA 13 43 Gods at Your Gate 1 On the day that you performed the previous sacrifices in front of Esharra, I sent Hammâ (and) an outrider to you with a message for your well-being.248 5 Now they (and) Gugal-namruti stand at your gate, and Belmatati stands with them. The outrider has come with a message concerning the prayer bowl. Give it to him. Let him go to Esharra that I may take possession of it, and that I may send Gugal-namruti to the lands. r.4 Your chariot should come to Esharra straightaway so that I may give you the royal scepter of life. (This) message that I have sent you is the absolute truth!

The letter refers to previous events. The king had performed sacrifices in front of Esharra. Ashur had sent a message of wellbeing by means of Hammâ, presumably a diviner of some sort. Now Ashur sends a new message concerning a prayer bowl in the possession of the king. The bowl is to be sent to Esharra by means of the dispatched messenger so that Ashur can take possession of it. The king is to come to Esharra as quickly as possible so that he may receive the scepter of life. This letter attempts to persuade the king to send a religious object to Esharra. Presumably, the king knew which prayer bowl was in question. The king was also to go to Esharra, but he is not to bring the bowl himself; it is to go by means of messenger. This raises the question why the king simply did not bring the bowl with him when he came? Would his doing so somehow have been a breach of temple etiquette? Would it have been a breach of palace etiquette to ask the king to ferry the item himself? Summary Comments Most of these letters concern military campaigns, share their greatest affinity with ARI, and have a political focus. The letters employ 248 A kallābu šipirtu was a member of the Assyrian light troops who served as a messenger (CAD kallābu). An outrider is a mounted attendant, scout, or vanguard.

166

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

numerous themes and motifs common to the prophecies (see below), while others are not employed (the fire motif, imagery, and victory oracles).

Openings & Closings The opening of SAA 3 47 bears a casual resemblance to prophecies. Due to the damaged nature of the tablets, it is impossible to determined whether SAA 3 41, 44, 45, and 46 contain a reference to the human agent who bore the message as does SAA 13 139. The closings of SAA 3 47 and 13 43 are intact, but they lack any reference to a human intermediary. Although the letters necessitate the presence of such an intermediary, they pass over this fact (Keller 1991, 302). The damaged nature of the letters makes it impossible to ascertain the existence of standard openings and/or closings, but the opening of two letters bear a marked similarity suggesting the existence of standard conventions, as found in the Amarna letters.

Divine Protection The theme of divine support is evident in the letters from the deity. The letters repeatedly refer to the command/support of the deity’s “great divinity” (SAA 3 41: 12, r. 13; 44:1, 22, 24; 46:1, 4). Ashur supported Ashurbanipal in his campaign against Shamash-shumukin (SAA 3 44: 1-2, 22-29, r. 5-6) and promises support against future enemies as well (SAA 3 44: 26-29). Ashur endowed Ashurbanipal with might against Elam (SAA 3 45: 2-3, 6-8, 15). Finally, the deity equipped the king with the weapons necessary to wage war (SAA 3 46: 9-10).

Divine Self-Identification Formula The formula appears twice in SAA 13 139 (lines 1, 6). It is coupled with the Encouragement Formula and linked to the promise that the Babylonian gods have been reconciled with the Assyrian gods.

Encouragement Formula The Encouragement Formula appears only once (SAA 13 139: 5), in the context of a promise that the gods of Babylon have been reconciled with the gods of Assyria. Although a dominant feature of prophecy, it is scarcely used in letters, even letters from deities.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

167

Enemy The king’s enemies include his brother, the Elamites, a land “not obedient” to Ashur (SAA 3 41, 44, 45, 46). The deity promises the king divine support in defeating all of his enemies. SAA 3 46 characterizes the offenders as the deity’s enemies (line 10).

Kingship The special relationship between deity and king is a recurring theme in the letters. The king is the beloved of Ashur (SAA 3 44: 8). Ashurbanipal was the just shepherd of the subjects of Illil (SAA 3 44: 11-12). Even the Igigi and Anunnaki are subject to the king’s command (SAA 3 44: r. 3). The deity desired and selected the king (SAA 46: 8; 47: 2-4). The deity has raised the king (SAA 13 139: 34). The deity intends to give the royal scepter of life to the king (SAA 13 43: 4-6). However, the letters lack any reference to a continuing dynasty.

Piety The king’s piety is revealed in his correspondence reporting his successful completion of the deity’s command (SAA 3 41:5, r.5; 42:1, 3, 7) Ashurbanipal’s fate was to perfect the shrines of the great gods, to renew offerings, and venerate Ashur’s divinity (SAA 3 44: 5-6, r. 23). The king enjoyed the deity’s support due to his “incessant prayers and supplications” (SAA 3 44: 28-29). The king makes the appropriate offerings to the deity (SAA 3 45: 11-12; SAA 13 43:1).

Trust in Divine Word The material lacks explicit references to trusting in the divine word employed in the prophecies, e.g. “Could you not rely on the previous utterances which I spoke to you?” (SAA 9 1.9). However, trust in the divine word is implicit in the king’s obedience to go to battle at the command of the deity (SAA 3 41: 12, r. 13; 44: 22). The deity’s command inspired the king with confidence (SAA 3 44: 1; 46:1).

Universal dominion Ashurbanipal is the universal sovereign to whom all the kings and princes will bow (SAA 3 44: r. 4; 45:5). SAA 3 46 contains a dam-

168

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

aged reference to the rulers of the four regions (lines 4-5). SAA 13 139 bears numerous features typical of prophecies and is political in character. The assurance that Bel is reconciled with Ashurbanipal and Assyria seems calculated to ensure Babylonian acquiescence to Assyrian rule.249

DIALOGUES BETWEEN DEITIES AND PEOPLE Of particular interest is a dialogue between Ashurbanipal and Nabû, the patron deity of writing. The king had a special relationship with this deity because of his scribal training. From the days of his childhood he has “lain at the feet of Nabû” studying. We do not know the particulars of how this dialogue transpired; however, the dialogue does refer to the king approaching Nabû in Ishtar’s temple. Are we to understand that this dialogue took place face to face as the king stood before the deity’s idol? Arguing against this is the fact that at one point a dream god appears to deliver part of Nabû’s message—lines 24-26, which can be classified as a prophecy. The two participants address one another in the first person, while a third party (lines 19, 23, r. 1) narrates portions of the dialogue. At one, point Ashurbanipal begins to speak of himself in the third person (line r. 2-3) before reverting to first person. These features point to the conclusion that this dialogue is a literary creation.

SAA 3 13 Dialogue Between Ashurbanipal and Nabû 1 [I constantly spe]ak in praise of you, Nabû, in the assembly of the great gods; may [the host of] those who [wish] me ill not take possession of my life! 3 [In the temple of the Queen of Ni]neveh I approach you, hero among the gods, his brothers; [you are the t]rust of Ashurbanipal forever and ever!

SAA 3 42 and 43 were not treated due to the extensive damage to the tablets. However, SAA 3 42 appears to contain references to kings fleeing the Assyrian monarch to save their lives (lines 2, 4, 6). SAA 3 43: 2 contains damaged reference to princes, governors, taxes, and tribute. 249

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 5 [Ever since] I was [a small child] I have lain at the feet of Nabû; [do not abandon me] to the assembly of my ill-wishers, O Nabû! 7 Pay a[tten]tion, Ashurbanipal! I am Nabû. Until the end of time your feet shall not grow slack, your hands not tremble; your lips shall not become weary in praying to me; your tongue shall not falter on your lips. 11 Because I will endow you with pleasant speech. I will lift your head and straighten your body in the House of Emashmash. 13 Nabû continues: “That pleasant mouth of yours which constantly prays to Urkittu; your figure, which I created, prays incessantly to me in Emashmash. 16 “Your fate, which I devised, incessantly prays to me thus: ‘Bring safety into Egashankalamma!’ 18 “Your soul incessantly prays to me: ‘Prolong the life of Ashurbanipal!’” 19 Ashurbanipal is on his knees, praying incessantly to Nabû, his lord: Please, Nabû do not abandon me! My life is written before you, my soul is deposited in the lap of Mulissu. Please, powerful Nabû, do not abandon me among those who wish me ill! 23 A dream god answered from the presence of Nabû, his lord: Fear not! Ashurbanipal! I will give you long life, I will entrust pleasant breezes with your soul; my pleasant mouth shall ever bless you in the assembly of the great gods. r.1 Ashurbanipal opened his hands, praying incessantly to Nabû, his lord: 2 May he who grasped the feet of the Queen of Nineveh not come to shame in the assembly of the great gods; may he who sits next to Urkittu not come to shame in the assembly of those who wish him ill! 4 Do not abandon me to the assembly of those who wish me ill, O Nabû! Do not abandon my life to the assembly of my adversaries!

169

170

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE 6 You were a child, Ashurbanipal, when I left you with the Queen of Nineveh; you were a baby, Ashurbanipal, when you sat in the lap of the Queen of Nineveh! Her four teats were placed in your mouth; two you would suckle two you would milk before you.250 9 Your ill-wishers, Ashurbanipal, will fly away like pollen on the surface of the water. They will be squashed before your feet like burbillātu insects in spring! 11 You, Ashurbanipal, you will stand before the great gods and praise Nabû! (Rest uninscribed)

Ashurbanipal’s lament to Nabû, made at the temple of Ishtar, initiates the dialogue (lines 1-6). The king pleads for two things: that his ill-wishers not take his life (napištu) (2) and that he not be abandoned (muššuru) to them (line 6). Ashurbanipal reminds Nabû of his past piety in an attempt to solicit the deity’s support in the present crisis. He also employs a rhetorical device: a play between the assembly of the great gods (line 1) and the assembly of illwishers (lines 2, 6). Nabû’s response (lines 7-18) contains numerous divine assurances that do not specifically address the king’s concerns, but there is a lexical link between the parts of the exchange. Nabû acknowledges the king’s request that his life (napištu) be prolonged, but Nabû does not utter the victory oracle Ashurbanipal is hoping for. The divine response then is only superficially related to the original lament. Having failed to receive the desired oracle of victory, Ashurbanipal repeats his lament (lines 19-22) requesting that he not be abandoned (muššuru) to his ill-wishers (lines 20, 22). This second lament employs rhetoric in an attempt to move the deity to action. Ashurbanipal refers to his life being “written” and his soul “deposited” in the lap of Mulissu. This is noteworthy because the request is made of Nabû who is responsible for “writing” the gods’ decisions and depositing the tablets. The response to the second la250 Following Alasdair Livingstone (COS 1, 476) and rendering this in the past tense.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

171

ment comes in the form of a prophecy delivered by a dream-god (lines 23-26). The prophecy begins with the encouragement formula “Fear not” characteristic of victory oracles, promises long life and blessing, but does not promise deliverance from the king’s illwishers. This prophecy does not directly address the king’s lament. The king’s third lament (lines r. 1-5) reminds the deity of his piety and pleads that he not come to shame and reiterates the request that Nabû not abandon (muššuru) him (lines r. 4, 5). It also reutilizes the play between the assembly of the great gods (line r. 2) and the assembly of ill-wishers (lines r. 3, 4, 5). Ashurbanipal has now requested that he not be abandoned five times; likewise, he has referred to his ill-wishers five times. Nabû’s response (lines r. 6-11) reminds the king of past divine support and nurture. This third response finally addresses the issue of the king’s ill-wishers (line r. 9). They will be driven away like pollen(?) and squashed like insects. Ashurbanipal will stand before the gods and praise Nabû. What is noteworthy is that Nabû’s initial two responses to the king’s laments communicate the deity’s intentions without specifically addressing the king’s concerns. The general thrust of the exchange is similar to the prophecies discussed in chapter 4 in that the king and deity discuss the king’s enemies. This exchange does not employ the two words for enemy (LÚ.KÚR or nakru) common to the prophecies. Instead, Ashurbanipal repeatedly asks Nabû to keep him from being handed over to the assembly of his ill-wishers (lines 2, 6, 22, r. 3, and 4). The dialogue also affirms Ashurbanipal’s destiny as king. It is interesting that Ashurbanipal approaches Nabû in the temple of Ishtar (line 3). Apparently, the temple of Ishtar contained multiple cult chambers housing various gods, as did the temple of Ashur (cf. Driel 1969, 37-45). In fact, the prominence of Ishtar in a dialogue between Nabû and the king is striking. Ishtar is identified by several appellatives: Queen of Nineveh (lines 3; r. 2, 6, and 7), Urkittu (lines 14 and r. 3), and Mulissu (line 21). Ashurbanipal prays to her, sat on her lap and was nursed by her as an infant.251 Her temples in Nineveh (Emashmash) and Kish (Egashankalamma) feature as well. 251 Parpola proposes that the king’s sons were raised by temple priestesses who played the role of wet-nurse (Parpola 1997, XXXIX-XL).

172

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Why does this document exist in the first place? The collections of prophecies serve to legitimize the king’s reign and safeguard the means of succession. The building inscriptions and letters that cite prophecies either commemorate royal activity or attempt to influence political decisions. The letters from deities legitimize the king’s military campaigns, asserting that the king was obeying the gods’ instructions. This dialogue serves none of these purposes. So why does it exist? Perhaps the answer lies in what it accomplishes. It highlights the belief that the king enjoys a special relationship with the deity, in this case Nabû, the keeper of destinies. The king is able to speak directly with the god. No other member of society enjoys this privilege. This piece of propaganda elevates Ashurbanipal to a unique position. He alone enjoys intimate knowledge of the gods and their plans. Therefore, he can be trusted with the fate of the empire. Alternatively, the notion of Nabû as judge is especially interesting here. Perhaps this dialogue should be understood in the context of a king standing before Nabû for reckoning, not as part of the Akitu Festival, but during a time of political strife such as the war with Shamash-shum-ukin. This dialogue also underscores the ascendancy of Nabû during the Sargonid period. By the seventh century, Nabû was the most common theophoric element in personal names in the NeoAssyrian Empire (Millard 1995, 607). The king corresponds with Ashur, but speaks with Nabû. The implied audience consists of members of the royal court and the community at large.

CONCLUSIONS This chapter has analyzed prophecies in a secondary context, letters from deities, and a dialogue between a deity and the king. Several key motifs appear across the spectrum of material covered: divine protection, divine self-identification formula, encouragement formula, enemy, kingship, piety, trust in divine word, and universal dominion. First, the prophecies and letters available to us demonstrate that prophets played an important role in the administration of the empire. They advised the king in matters of military and religious

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

173

policy, protected him against harm from enemies and evil portents, and played a role in coronation ceremonies. Prophets were well integrated into the state apparatus. However, we have no narratives or heroic stories featuring prophets.252 There is no indication of prophets performing magic in the Akkadian material. Nor is there any indication of hostility directed towards prophets. Although it is certain that the king directed his hostility at any prophet who opposed him or his policies, we have no tales of royal-prophetic conflict. Prophets were but one component of the state apparatus that advanced the ideology and agenda of the king. Second, prophecies were never the final word on a subject. Extispicy was sometimes required to verify the legitimacy of a prophecy. It also appears as though the king were the one with final authority to determine whether a prophecy was legitimate and should be obeyed, at least with reference to matters of state. Temple officials are not willing to release temple property on the word of a prophet without the king’s authorization, but this would appear to be about protecting one’s own position. Priests, diviners, and palace officials do not imprison prophets or seek to have them killed. True and false prophets are not pitted against one another in competition for the loyalty of the people. However, there is evidence of tension between prophets who supported the king and

252 There is one possible exception: SAA 3 32, which recounts “The Underworld Vision of an Assyrian Prince” in which Kummâ (tentatively identified as Ashurbanipal) visits the underworld in a dream vision. Von Soden has dated this work to the latter years of Esarhaddon. The prince stands before Nergal who intends to kill him, but is dissuaded by Išum the god’s messenger. At Išum’s suggestion, the prince is allowed to return to the upper regions so that he can testify of Nergal’s greatness, the glory of the dead king standing beside Nergal (tentatively identified as Sennacherib), and the pervasity of Kummâ’s father (tentatively identified as Esarhaddon). Upon his return, Kummâ is ambivalent concerning the message he is to deliver on the part of Nergal (Buccellati 1976, 68-70). This text has not been treated for two reasons: (1) I have elected not to treat dream visions and (2) since the main character is identified as a prince of Assyria not a prophet, it is not clear whether this text can be properly cited as a prophetic call.

174

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

those who opposed him. Similarly, there is no focus on how to distinguish between true and false prophecy. Third, people cite prophecies to persuade the king to undertake a specific course of action. In each instance, this is done for political purposes. Fourth, the letters from deities have a greater affinity with ARI than with prophecies. Although one might expect divine letters to employ similar stock phrases to those found in prophecies, this is not the case. The stock phrases employed in the letters are similar to those of ARI; however, the letters and prophecies share numerous motifs (enemy, divine protection, divine intervention, etc.). Whereas prophecies contain prophetic ascriptions, the letters from deities generally fail to identify the writer. However, the ideology of the annals, letters, and prophecies is compatible. Monarchic patronage influences the content of all three genres. Finally, all the material studied in this chapter is political in nature. The inscriptions legitimate the king’s military and religious policies. The letters either support the king’s policies or attempt to influence them. Letters from deities affirm divine protection of the king, his universal dominion, and the deity’s protection from the king’s enemies. The dialogue between Ashurbanipal and Nabû advances the ideology that the king shares a special relationship with the deity. This chapter concludes my discussion of the Neo-Assyrian material. The following three chapters deal with the books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. I give special attention to correspondences between the biblical and Assyrian material. However, little correspondence exists. This is due in large part to the books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah being produced under a different social locus. These books bear none of the characteristic features of monarchic patronage. Either the king did not support the production of these books or they were produced at a time when the monarchy was weak and lacked the ability to influence text production.

6 NAHUM In chapters 4 and 5, I demonstrated that the interests of the monarchic patron shape the entire enterprise of political prophecy, which was affiliated with the temple. I now turn my attention to a discussion of three biblical books traditionally dated to the seventh century BCE—Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. These books are dated to the seventh century based on superscriptions, historical allusions, and perceived correspondences between the books’ contents and historical events. If (1) the social locus of the biblical prophet and nature of his ministry were the same as that of the Assyrian prophets (see Laato 1996, Wilson 1980, Grabbe 2000, Huffmon 2000, Hilber 2005) and (2) these books were written in the seventh century then we might expect the biblical material to reflect the same general concerns. However, such is not the case. Hebrew prophecy is of a different sort because the social and political structures of relevance are different. I analyze the book of Nahum in this chapter, Habakkuk in chapter 7, and Zephaniah in chapter 8. My discussion of Nahum begins with a review of current views concerning the book’s date. An examination of the book itself with careful attention paid to the genres employed, theme, content, and literary nature of the book as well as evidence of Assyrian influence follows. My work calls into question traditional scholarly views concerning the ministry of the prophet and the nature of prophetic literature. Most scholars assume that the prophets served their communities as criers who proclaimed mediated revelation from the deity. These prophecies were collected, transmitted, and edited over the centuries producing the final form of these prophetic books. To a large part, this theory relies on oral traces identified in the prophetic texts. However, it has been demonstrated that an oral aesthetic permeates all of the writing in the HB (Niditch 1996); therefore, such traces cannot be regarded as proof of oral performance. The contents of Na175

176

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

hum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah do not support traditional conceptions of the prophet’s ministry or prophetic literature. I demonstrate that the material preserved in the book of Nahum neither reflects the concerns of a monarchic patron nor does not it reflect prophetic genres attested in the seventh century; therefore, its seventh century BCE composition is called into question. This literature bears the mark of creative literary activity that witnessed the creation and transformation of genres and adaptation of old forms to meet needs not previously experienced.

DATE OF WRITING The majority of scholars rely on the reference to the destruction of Thebes (Nah 3:8) in 663 BCE to determine the terminus a quo and the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE to identify the terminus ad quem for the setting and date of the prophet’s ministry. Richard Patterson (1991, 3-7) places the book closer to the terminus a quo based on four factors: (1) the example of Thebe’s fall would take on lesser significance for the Assyrians after 645; (2) the civil war between Ashurbanipal and Shamash-shum-ukin was resolved at Babylon in 648. From that time on Babylon may well have served as an example rather than Thebes. (3) Had the book been written closer to 612, one may expect some mention of the forces that would be responsible for Nineveh’s destruction. (4) The description of Assyria’s strength in the book suggest a time during the reign of Ashurbanipal when Assyria’s strength was at its zenith. Klass Spronk (1997, 12-13) also dates the book to shortly after the fall of Thebes—when the Egyptian campaign of Ashurbanipal, with its consequences for Judah would be of immediate relevance. He argues that a comparison with Thebes would not have made much sense after 650 BCE when Egyptian power and influence had begun to reassert itself. He also proposes that the author wrote under a pseudonym because his views were in conflict with the official policy of Manasseh’s court. Bob Becking (1995b, 295) attributes the book to a member of the “YHWH-alone” movement that emerged in seventh century Jerusalem in response to the “pious evaluation” of the fall of Samaria and the liberal religious practices of Manasseh. Several scholars argue the book had a role in influencing Manasseh’s rebellion against Assyria. Duane Christensen (1975, 17375) proposes the book may have been composed ca. 650 to influ-

NAHUM

177

ence Manasseh to revolt against the Assyrians. Van der Woude (1977, 124) suggests the letter was written by someone of northern descent whose ancestors were exiled by the Assyrians. The author wrote to comfort people in Judah during the reign of Manasseh when Assyrian influence was at its most severe. J. J. M. Roberts (1991, 38-39) opts for a date between 640 and 630 BCE early in the reign of Josiah, but concedes the prophet may have ministered during the reign of Manasseh and been the impetus for that king’s revolt. O. Palmer Robertson (1990) takes a similar position. Ralph Smith (1984, 63-65) places the prophet’s ministry within this period, but does not attempt to be more precise in his dating. Tremper Longman (1993, 766-8) adopts a similar approach noting only that the internal contents (v. 1:12) suggest Assyria had not yet begun to show signs of weakness. David Baker (1988, 20) dates the prophecy to before the death of Ashurbanipal when the empire was still strong. Waylon Bailey (Barker & Bailey 1999, 137-41) agrees the book of Nahum must have been composed between the fall of Thebes in 663 and the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE. While the evidence does not allow for a firm dating, he suggests, “The weakness of Israel and the overwhelming strength of Assyria assumed in the book points to a time before 627.” He goes on to note that the message fits well into the historical context of Josiah’s reign. Peter Craigie (1985, 59), James Bruckner (2004, 136), and Lawrence Boadt (1982, 233-35) date the writing of the book to shortly before the fall of Nineveh in 612. Richard Coggins (Coggins and Re’emi 1985, 52) allows many possibilities for the dating of the prophet, but considers one shortly before the fall of Nineveh the most likely. Coggins also proposes that Nahum marks an important stage in the development of oracles against nations in which they came to be increasingly used as vehicles for asserting the universal sovereignty of YHWH (Coggins & Re’emi 1985, 13). Marvin Sweeney (2000, 421-22) argues the rhetorical strategy of the book rests on the prophet’s ability to point to the destruction of Nineveh as a demonstrable event. Therefore, it was likely written around the time of the fall of the city 612 BCE. He argues that some scholars date the book in relation to the reference to the fall of Thebes in 667 or 663 BCE, but the key is the rhetorical reference to Thebes as a comparison to the fall of Nineveh. Michael

178

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Floyd (2000, 9) dates the book to after the fall of Nineveh in 612. The author, having studied prophetic revelation received in the seventh century concerning the long-range implications of Assyria’s withdrawal from Jerusalem in 701, interpreted the fall of Nineveh as the fulfillment of these earlier predictions. Julia O’Brien (2004, 25-27) dates the ministry of the prophet to between 663 and 612, but notes that the superscription places the activity of the prophet in the past, suggesting the book was written later, possibly after the Assyrian period. These scholars agree the book was written in the seventh century. They disagree whether it was written closer to 663 or 612 BCE. Other scholars emphasize the redactional history of the book and view it as a post-exilic production. Such scholars allow for an original core that has been reshaped by later redactors to reflect the changing needs of the community. Hermann Schulz (1973, 1-5) dates the present form of the book to the post-exilic community whose life context profoundly influenced and shaped its final form and content. While an early core of the book signaled by the first title—“The Judgment Against Nineveh”—is plausibly dated to the seventh century, a second title—“The Book of the Vision of Nahum of Elkosh”—signals the work of a second, post-exilic author who recasts the original core as an eschatological event signaling salvation for Israel (Schulz 1973, 60-68). While Schulz rejects the view that Nahum was a cult prophet, he allows for a post-exilic author who rooted his plan for the book in the Second Temple cult. Therefore, the book’s relationship to the cult is a literary one.253 Schulz’s theory has not received much support (Longman 1993, 766). Frederick Holmgren (1974) is hesitant to accept Schulz’s mythological-eschatological understanding of the oracles in Nahum and cautions that Schulz is overly confident with regard to what a critical method can deliver. Klaus Seybold (1989, 14, 19-34) is concerned with the historical Schulz 1973, 111-32. Schulz devotes the final 20 pages of his work to an evaluation of Jörg Jeremias’ view (Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkündigung in der späten Königszeit (Neukircher Verlag, 1970) that the earliest stages of the book consisted of oracle against Israel. Schulz concludes Jeremias’ theory is without merit. 253

NAHUM

179

dimension of the emergence of the present book. He relies upon standard form critical criteria to identify the units of the work and then proceeds to date the composition of the different units. He believes the order of the material was inadvertently altered when columns of text were sown together in the incorrect sequence.254 He proposes that the oldest parts of the book are the latter portions and that the book grew forward, as it were. In a later work, (Seybold 1991, 11-12) he reiterates his view concerning the three stage development of the book: the first composed shortly after the fall of Thebes in 663, the second shortly after the fall of Jerusalem, and the final composed in the fourth century in the post-exilic community. James Nogalski (1993b) argues the book had a structured literary form prior to its post-exilic reshaping. This early form of the book incorporated the majority of material in chapters 2 and 3, which demonstrate parallel development, and the prediction of the death of the king of Assyria (1:11-12a, 14; 3:16f, 18-19). The theophanic hymn (1:2-8), a transition (1:9f), and references to locusts (3:15ac, 16b) reflect later redactional activity that was undertaken as Nahum was adapted for inclusion in the Book of the Twelve. Nogalski dates the early literary layer to the time around Nineveh’s destruction in 612 BCE and the later layer to the post-exilic period. Nogalski’s theory of composition is the result of attempts to trace the redactional development of the Book of the Twelve, which he identifies as a two-stage process. The first stage produced a Deuteronomistic corpus including Hosea, Amos, Micah, and Zephaniah that sought to explain the destruction of Jerusalem. This layer 254

Seybold dates the composition of individual units as follows: 3:819a ca. 660; 3:2f; 2:2, 4-13 ca. 650; 3:1, 4a ca. 650; 2:14; 3:5ff ca. 615; 1:12f; 2:1, 3 ca. 550; 1:11, 14 ca. 400; 1:2ff ca. 400 (Seybold 1989, 26-34). One problem with this proposed reconstruction is the lack of explicit references to Nineveh. One would expect later additions to the book to make what is implicit, explicit. Yet Seybold’s scheme requires us to believe that later redactor’s added material to the front of the book pushing the identity of the subject of the oracles further to the rear and not bringing it forward to aid in comprehension. Furthermore, not all of Seybold’s arguments for delimiting units as he does are compelling.

180

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

underwent revision as promises of an eschatological salvation were added during the late exilic or early post-exilic period. The second major stage involved the expansion of this corpus to incorporate Joel, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, and Malachi. This expanded corpus framed YHWH’s interactions with Israel/Judah against the larger backdrop of his control over the nations (Nogalski 1993a, 1993b). However, this undertaking is not without its pitfalls. In the process of this endeavor, he identifies motifs adapted from one author by another, but Nogalski fails to consider when the appearance of a motif in more than one book may simply be the result of the use of stock phrases and motifs. David Carr (2005) argues convincingly that master scribes memorized blocks of traditional material that they later inserted into original compositions. Furthermore, not all of the all allusions Nogalski identifies are convincing. Finally, not all scholars accept his claims regarding the direction of influence. John D. W. Watts stands outside of the debate. His concern is with how the book functioned in ancient Israel. He places the book of Nahum within the sphere of the cult. “The foreign prophecies, or oracles against nations, in each of the larger prophetic books fit into the setting of the royal Zion festival and ‘the day of the LORD’” (Watts 1975, 5). Nahum is an expansion of religious liturgy that gives expression to YHWH’s rule over the world. The origin and authorship of prophetic liturgies is not as important as their setting in worship festivals. “They, like the Psalms, belonged to services of worship which were repeated frequently” (Watts 1975, 6). I intend to argue for a different compositional model than those summarized above. The majority of scholars assume an original core has been reshaped by later redactors. However, my analysis reveals that nothing remains in these books that directly relates to the seventh century and they lack any evidence of monarchic patronage. The production of these books involved taking standard prophetic forms (demonstrable in the NAP corpus) and submitting them to genre adaptation that suits the literary purposes of the author(s) and reflects the socio-political locus of the author(s). In some respects, these adapted literary forms conform to the general characteristics of prophetic oracles, but there is no objective means available to test such a hypothesis. The book may have been written to appear to be a collection of prophetic oracles,

NAHUM

181

a literary strategy that met with a great deal of success (judging by most commentaries). In some instances, the writing process involved the creation of new literary forms that do not conform to any known seventh century prophetic form. Since there is no way to establish that this material is a collection of prophecies proclaimed by a prophet serving as a crier, I will refrain from using oracle as a designation for demarcating literary forms in an attempt to avoid creating confusion.

HISTORICAL SETTING The book of Nahum predicts the doom of Nineveh, a capital city of Assyria situated on the east bank of the Tigris River. Sennacherib (705-681) elevated Nineveh to the status of Assyria’s royal capital. Assyria exerted influence in Palestine from the time of Tiglath-Pileser III (747-727) until ca. 635 BCE. During this period, Sennacherib launched a devastating campaign against Judah in 701 as part of efforts to gain control over Canaan so that it could be used as a staging ground for campaigns into Egypt. The Assyrian kings cast a longing eye on Egypt and exercised control over Babylon for generations. Assyrian power reached its zenith under Esarhaddon (680-669) and Ashurbanipal (668-627) who extended Assyrian control into Egypt with the defeat of Thebes in 663. During most of the period of Assyrian domination, native kings reigning as Assyrian vassals governed Babylon. Esarhaddon’s experiences taught him that his son would likely face two problems: (1) Babylonian desire for independence and (2) attempts on the throne by his family members. Esarhaddon’s solution to both problems was to install his two sons on the thrones of Nineveh and Babylon—Ashurbanipal on the former and Shamash-shum-ukin on the latter. Esarhaddon’s fears proved well founded. The revolt of Shamash-shum-ukin (654-648) weakened the empire significantly, so much so, that the empire began to collapse with the death of Ashurbanipal. Babylon gained its independence under Nabopolassar in 626. The conflict between Assyria and Babylon came to a head with the fall of Nineveh in 612. Throughout the period of Assyrian imperialism, Assyria exercised varying degrees of influ-

182

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

ence and control over Canaan and collected tribute from Israel, Judah, and the other nations of the region.255

ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK The superscription is unique in that it identifies the material as a maśśā’, a book, and a vision: Nahum 1:1 1:1

A maśśā’ concerning Nineveh.256 The book of the revelation257 of Nahum the Elkoshite.258

The work is identified as a sēper, often translated book, though it is simply a neutral word for any written document (Brown-DriverBriggs 1906, 706-7). Hiezôn “vision” is derived from the word hiāzāh “to see” and originally designated the medium of reception of prophetic revelation, but it may have come to simply denote little more 255 For a summary of Israel’s political interaction with Egypt and Mesopotamia throughout the monarchical period, see Robert Haak 1992, 111-30. 256 While some scholars favor rendering the Hebrew term burden (e.g. Calvin, Hengenberg, Keil, Luther, Maier) the use of the noun and related verb in other biblical passages, as well as the Ugaritic parallels indicate the verb refers to a “lifting up” of the voice and the corresponding noun refers to an “oracle” (Patterson 1991, 19). Cathcart (1973, 36-37) also argues for translating ‫( משא‬maśśā’) as oracle. Roberts notes the fact that maśśā’ is both the technical term for an oracle and the word for burden; it was this very ambiguity that was open to prophetic exploitation (Roberts 1991, 40). For the opposing view, see De Boer (1948). Michael Floyd (2002) accepts Richard Weis’s thesis (1986) that the term maśśā’ is a genre designation that denotes a type of prophetic literature that “attempts to delineate how YHWH’s actions are manifested in human affairs.” While the word is frequently used in Isaiah with regard to Oracles Against a Nation (OAN), it is also employed with regard to prophecies against Jerusalem. 257 The Hebrew word ‫“ חזון‬vision” may be used as a general designation for a revelation or to denote visionary activity. I have chosen to translate the term as a general reference to revelation since the book lacks an explicit reference to visionary activity. 258 For the meaning of Nahum’s name, see Roberts 1991, 41.

NAHUM

183

than “revelation” (Hillers 1983, 13 note e). Obadiah is the only other prophetic book to refer to its contents as a vision in the superscription. J. J. M. Roberts (1991, 164-65) likens the attachment of the superscription to the practice of Mari scribes who included a fringe of the prophet(ess)’s garment or lock of hair along with a report of his/her oracle. Similarly, Assyrian prophecies of the seventh century were recorded along with the name of the prophet(ess) who delivered them. The superscription thus serves as a means of authentication of the validity of the following material. Roberts proposes that royal officials keeping a record of prophecies may have attached the superscriptions to prophetic works. Spronk finds no compelling evidence to conclude that a later redactor added the superscription. Indeed, he proposes that it is an integral part of the opening canticle 1:1-3a. It not only fits the contents of a pronouncement followed by visions, but is also an integral part of the prophetic message.259 The consensus is that superscriptions generally date later than the prophetic material and were added by redactors compiling the

259

Spronk 1997, 28-33. Spronk (1997, 26-38) argues the superscription is part of the poetic canticle 1:1-3a, but his arguments and poetic analysis are not convincing. He also includes a review of scholarship’s attempts to identify the village Elkosh since the 1eighth century. Marvin Sweeney (2000, 425-47) relies on form critical markers to identify the disputation speech as the primary form behind the book and divide it into 3 basic subunits: 1:2-10 addresses the view of God’s powerlessness; 1:11-2:1 is an address to Judah asserting the end of Assyrian Oppression as an act of YHWH; 2:2-3:19 is the prophet’s address to Nineveh and the Assyrian king. The disputation genre consists of three parts: statement of thesis or proposal that is to be challenged, statement of counter-thesis for which the speaker argues, and a refutation of argumentation in which the speaker attempts to challenge the initial thesis and argue on behalf of his counter-thesis. However, since 1:2-10 does not quote the people’s opinions directly but uses the form of a rhetorical question, Sweeny must admit that the three elements of Nah 1:2-3:19 do not constitute a prophetic disputation speech per se, but may be a prophet refutation speech that is derived from the basic disputation pattern.

184

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

material into the present books.260 This view is linked to assumptions concerning transmission and composition. Once a prophetic book is dated to the seventh century and the superscriptions to the sixth, the inescapable conclusion is that a later redactor added the superscription. However, if the traditional dating of the book cannot be sustained, the relationship between the superscription and book must be re-examined. Susan Niditch (1996) examines the interplay between orality and writing in the HB and concludes that an oral aesthetic infuses the biblical text. Ancient Israel was primarily an oral society. Reading and writing were skills reserved for the elite. Writing has multiple possible uses in an oral society. (1) It is used for texts that are special, ritually framed, and testimonial in nature such as tomb inscriptions. (2) It serves as an aid to memory and oral presentation.261 (3) Writing was used to instill reverence and awe (e.g. monumental inscriptions). (4) Texts were perceived as having magic, transformative properties as evidenced in texts that preserve curses and blessings. (5) It could be used as a votive offering (similar to the High Priest’s garments). (6) Writing served as legal proof of transactions. (7) Finally, it could be a record of what was said for posterity or validation of a message (Niditch, 1996, 39-77). Attitudes towards writing in oral societies are fundamentally different from attitudes in literate societies. Texts are tools for creating and transforming reality. As such, they were the means of accomplishing specific goals, not the least of which was establishing and maintaining power. Contemporary scholars recognize that writing is “a potent instrument of political power” (Chartier 1997, 88). The forms and appropriations of writing “always imply power relations”: (1) the power of writing which is held by the person who has the necessary skills to create a text and exercises them and (2) the power to exercise control over what is written and by whom (Chartier 1997, 88). Ancient literature was a means of perpetuating For an extensive discussion of prophetic superscriptions, see Andersen and Freedman 1990, 143-49. Tucker (1977) outlines the traditional view regarding superscriptions. 261 David Carr (2005) explores the interplay or orality and writing in ancient education in Egypt, Greece, Mesopotamia, and Israel. 260

NAHUM

185

and legitimizing the status of the ruling class and imposing its social values on the working class. The creation and use of literature is an exercise of elite power (cf. Parkinson 2002, 112). The work of Niditch, Chartier, and Parkinson provides the necessary framework for understanding the use of the superscription in the book of Nahum. The superscription is a literary device employed by the elite to elicit a sense of awe and reverence and infuse the text with the power and presence of YHWH (cf. Niditch 1996, 79-81). This process of assigning meaning and infusing the text with power from an outside source, YHWH, is an example of what Eco identifies as overcoding. The superscription assumes a signification greater than the sum of its parts (Eco 1976, 129-35). Through overcoding, the superscription invokes an aura of authority in order to exert religious coercion (cf. Geertz 1973, 129-31). Since its purpose is to shape the audience’s attitude toward the following material, it is logical to conclude that it, in one form or another, has been a part of the written material since its first creation. The presumed authority of the utterance was crucial in establishing the ethical argument of the author. The literature, vested with divine authority, was ideally suited to the task of exerting psychological force and transforming the community’s perception of reality. Nahum 1:2-8 The first major unit in the work is an acrostic poem.262

‫א‬

A jealous God and avenging is YHWH; YHWH is avenging and master of wrath; YHWH is avenging on his adversaries, and he maintaining wrath for his enemies. 3 YHWH is slow to anger, and great in power, but will not remit all punishment. ‫ ב‬YHWH his way is in the whirlwind and in the storm, 2

262 The material is typically identified as a hymn. While this identification may be correct, there are no musical notations to support this classification. On the other hand, Babylonian and biblical acrostics are generally either hymns or liturgical prayers. Prayers can be distinguished from hymns on two grounds: (1) they contain a petition or (2) they contain a self-reference identifying them as prayers (Soll 1988, 308-10, 322).

186

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

‫ג‬ (‫)ד‬

‫ה‬ ‫ו‬ (‫)ז‬

‫ח‬ ‫ט‬ ' ‫כ‬

and the clouds are the dust of his feet. Rebuking the sea, he makes it dry, and dries up all the rivers. Bashan and Carmel languish; and the flower of Lebanon languishes. 5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt; the earth heaves in his presence, the world, and all that dwell therein. 6 Who can stand before his indignation? And who can rise up in the fierceness of his anger? His wrath is poured out like fire, and the rocks are broken asunder by him. 7 YHWH is a good stronghold in the day of trouble; he knows those seeking refuge in him. 8 But with an overwhelming flood he will make a full end of her place, and will pursue his enemies into darkness. 4

Scholars have long recognized Nahum 1:2-8 as a theophanic hymn that employs a partial acrostic. The acrostic is disrupted in four places. Verses 2 and 3 are both too long creating too large a block of text between the ‫ א‬and ‫ ב‬lines. There is an ‫ א‬in verse 4 where a ‫ ד‬is expected. The word order in 1:6 appears to have been disrupted, displacing ‫ זעמו‬from the beginning of the line. Finally, the ‫י‬ line begins with a ‫ו‬. Numerous explanations have been proffered to account for the present state of the hymn. Not all scholars accept the existence of the acrostic. Baker and Robertson question whether an acrostic was ever intended. They argue that the poetic parallelism in the present form of the text does not give evidence of a disturbed composition (Baker 1988, 22 and Robertson 1990, 57-58). A. Haldar argued a similar position in 1946.263 Michael Floyd (1994) argues the acrostic is a scholarly Smith 1984, 66. Smith briefly summarizes the treatment of the hymn by various scholars: Delitzsch (1867), Bickell (1880), Gunkel (1893), Wellhausen (1898), Arnold (1901), Haupt (1907), Humbert (1926), Haldar (1946), Maier (1959), Fohrer (1968), de Vries (1966), and Christensen (1975) (Smith 1984, 65-66). 263

NAHUM

187

chimera. Floyd identifies 1:1-10 as a prophetic interrogation. Floyd’s arguments can be summarized as follows: (1) too many letters of the Hebrew alphabet are missing; (2) the ’aleph-strophe is too long; (3) there are no known examples of partial acrostic texts; (4) acrostics always appear in the form of a hymn and the opening unit of Nahum cannot be classified as a hymn. O’Brien (2004, 3540) likewise questions whether the theophanic hymn employed a deliberate acrostic. She follows Floyd in identifying 1:2-10 as a coherent unit. Bob Becking (1995b, 282-83) refutes Floyd on 3 grounds: (1) the fact that known acrostics are part of a hymn does not preclude the use of an acrostic that is not part of a hymn; (2) Floyd fails to provide a meaningful definition of hymn; and (3) Floyd’s attempts to link 1:9-10 with 1:2-8 are unconvincing. Additional arguments against Floyd’s position are possible. (4) Nogalski has explained the absence of certain letters from the acrostic. (5) Nogalski has also accounted for the unusual length of the ’alephstrophe (Nogalski 1993b). (6) The presence of acrostic hymns may be the source of inspiration of a partial acrostic. (7) The “cutting off” of the acrostic composition can be explained as a literary device intended to foreshadow the “cutting off” of Nineveh. Scholars who accept the presence of the acrostic offer different explanations for its present form. Duane Christensen (1988, 5158) and A. S. van der Woude (1977, 108-26) argue the initial unit (1:1-10) contains an encoded message (though they differ on its reading). Both scholars rely upon a combination of initial letters and complete words to read the encoded message; however, this inconsistency in determining what letters and words to read render the results suspect. Longman (1993, 773-5) acknowledges the disrupted acrostic but proposes that the author uses it is a deliberate poetic device to invoke a sense of the cosmic upheaval that accompanies the arrival of the Divine Warrior.264 Charles Taylor (1956, 954) proposes that an original acrostic hymn was disrupted by a later redactor. Roberts, Spronk, and Coggins follow a long line of scholars in proposing that ‫“ אמלל‬languish” in v. 4 was originally a form of ‫דלל‬, “to become weak, small” (Roberts 1991, 43-44; 264 For Divine Warrior see Anchor Bible Dictionary s.v. Warrior, Divine in vol. 6, p. 876f.

188

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Spronk 1997, 40-45; Coggins and Re’emi 1985, 23). Roberts and Spronk resolve the problem in 1:6a by reordering the sequence and adding a pronominal suffix (‫ )זעמו מ' 'עמוד לפנ'ו‬creating a casus pendens. Spronk believes a scribe, who was unaware of the acrostic pattern, made the original change in an attempt to improve the chiastic structure (Roberts 1991, 43-44 and Spronk 1997, 40-45). Longman (1993, 774) opposes this emendation because it destroys the chiastic structure of the verse. Roberts proposes a minor emendation to verse 7; he suggests dropping the copulative ‫ ו‬from ‫“ ו'דע‬knowing” (Roberts 1991, 44-45). Nogalski proposes that the first three breaks in the acrostic pattern are the result of redactional activity creating literary links with Micah chapter 7. The subsequent break is the result of redactional activity intended to improve the grammar (Nogalski 1993b, 103-11). While Nogalski believes the hymn to be the addition of a post-exilic redactor (1993b, 128), Roberts believes Nahum adapted a cultic hymn for his own use (1991, 48-49). No scholarly consensus exists concerning whether the hymn is an original composition by the author of the book. In an earlier work, Christensen (1975, 171-72) turns his attention to the structure of the hymn and concludes it was written by a seventh century poet who attempted to archaize his composition; it is not a quotation of older material. Christensen’s view is supported by the work of Gordon Johnston (2001b, 2002) who argues that the hymn contains allusions to well-known Neo-Assyrian treaty curses and conquest motifs: the curse of darkness (Nah 1:8), the curse of dried up water sources (Nah 1:4), retaliation by the avenger (Nah 1:2) the raging storm (Nah 1:3), the overwhelming flood (Nah 1:8), overwhelming dust cloud (Nah 1:3), the destroyer of mountains and seas (Nah 1:4-5), and the compilation of selfpredication statements (Nah 1:2-8) (Johnston 2001b, 2002). It is possible that these motifs are merely part of the author’s cultural repertoire, but several factors lead to the conclusion they are deliberate allusions. (1) The thematic density in the hymn is quite high—8 motifs in 7 verses. Thematic density refers to the number of themes found in a text. (2) The conquest motifs employed are unique to Assyrian literature (Johnston 2002, 25). (3) The curses employed are unique to Neo-Assyrian treaties (Johnston 2001b, 422). (4) The source material, especially the treaties, would have been available to the author from the eighth century on. Assyrian vassals maintained copies of treaties in their native tongue to en-

NAHUM

189

sure compliance (Johnston 2001b, 416). (5) The proposed allusions serve a significant rhetorical function in the book by highlighting the coming divine reversal of Assyria’s fate (cf. Johnston 2001a, 288). YHWH will conquer Assyria, which threatened vassals with conquest in the face of treaty violations, because of her violations against the divine will. The presence of these allusions supports the conclusion that the poem was written for this book. The multiple allusions to Assyrian treaty curses and conquest motifs are evidence of genre cross-fertilization (cf. Duff 2000, 18). I believe Christensen is correct in his view that the poem was written for the book, but question whether it was composed in the seventh century (I will return to the issue of when it was written below). Acrostics are literary creations dependent upon the visual recognition of signs at the beginning of lines (Soll 1988, 312). This suggests the poem was a literary creation that was intended to be read, not heard. William Soll compares Mesopotamian and biblical acrostics. His conclusions are relevant for this study. (1) Acrostics are not a sign of wisdom literature. (2) They appear in a variety of genres (most frequently hymns and prayers). (3) Acrostics were written for aesthetic reasons that celebrate the enumerative character of Semitic poetry. (4) An acrostic either signals its presence or requires an external sign. (5) Finally, alphabetic acrostics were not mnemonics.265 David Carr rejects Soll’s fifth conclusion. His research into ancient Near Eastern education/enculturation processes supports the conclusion that acrostics are mnemonic devices that ensure material was learned in its entirety and in the proper sequence (Carr 2005, 125). What is most worthy of note is the use of a theophanic acrostic hymn to introduce prophetic material. Acrostic hymns are attested as early as seventh century Assyria (e.g. Ashurbanipal’s Acrostic Hymn to Marduk and Zarpanitu SAA 3 2).266 However, Soll 1988. Stephen Lieberman (1987) makes passing reference to Israelite and Mesopotamian acrostics in a discussion of ancient hermeneutic techniques. Lieberman identifies acrostics as a variation of notiariqon, the practice of abbreviating words or phrases. 266 Seven Mesopotamian acrostics have been identified: Hymn to Nabû, Hymn Concerning the Restoration of Babylon, Fragments of an 265

190

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

the hymn stands alone as an independent composition. The NAP corpus does not incorporate acrostic hymns. Akkadian acrostics are of the name/sentence type. Six of the seven Akkadian acrostic poems are stanzaic, that is, the first syllable of each strophe, read vertically in sequence from the first strophe to the last, spells out a name or a sentence. In five of the stanzaic acrostics, each line in a strophe begins with the same sign that began the line. Two Akkadian acrostics also incorporate a telestic; i.e. the terminal letters of each line, read downwards, form a phrase as well (Soll 1988, 306). By way of comparison, the acrostic preserved in Nahum is a simple partial alphabetic acrostic. Previous generations of scholars have argued that biblical authors learned the acrostic pattern from Hellenistic literature (Craigie 1983, 130). However, the existence of Akkadian acrostics raises the possibility that the form was adapted from Mesopotamian models prior to the Hellenistic period. The use of acrostics in the HB is limited to late texts (Pss 910, 25, 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, 145; Prov 31:10-31; Lamentations). Acrostic poems appeared in Israel during the exilic to post-exilic period (Kraus 1993a, 383). Acrostic poetry presupposes a level of literacy among the elite attained during the exilic and post-exilic periods (Gerstenberger 2001, 271-3). Recognition of acrostic patterns is dependent upon visual clues and presupposes working from a written text. This activity is closer to the literary spectrum of the oral-writing continuum (cf. Niditch 1996); as such, acrostic poems were a late literary development in Israel. Psalm 9-10 is dated to the exilic period on the basis of content and theme—YHWH’s worldwide judgment and kingship over nations” (Gerstenberger 1988, 75 and Kraus1993a, 193). Psalm 25 reflects the altered conditions of community life and education in late Israel (Gerstenberger 1988, 120-21). Kraus dates Ps 25 to postexilic times based on linguistic and formal considerations (1993a, 319). Craigie dates it late based on its literary nature (1983, 218). Acrostic Prayer, Prayer of Ashurbanipal to Marduk, A Pair of Acrostic/Telestic Prayers, An Acrostic/Telestic Prayer to Nabû, and The Babylonian Theodicy. For a bibliography including the text, transliteration, and translation of these acrostics see the accompanying notes in Soll 1988, 307-11.

NAHUM

191

Gerstenberger dates Ps 34 to the postexilic age based on vocabulary, concepts, and formulas (1988, 147). The acrostic form in Ps 34 does not conform to any formal characteristics, but rather demonstrates a development of a new genre form (Kraus 1993a, 383). Psalm 37 evidences themes and connections to traditions that are post-exilic (Kraus 1993a, 404). Gerstenberger classifies Ps 37 as a homily used in synagogue worship (1988, 158). There is a consensus that Ps 111 is post-exilic (Allen 1983, 91). Kraus directs attention to Ps 111’s focus on YHWH’s wondrous deeds in Israel, not the individual, as evidence of a post-exilic date of composition (1993b, 357). Gerstenberger writes, “[T]he celebration of Yahweh’s power and glory [in Ps 111] revolves around the gift of the (holy) land, which, of course is an eminent them of exilic and postexilic theology” (2001, 272). The use of rare expressions like pĕdût “redemption” and dĕrûš “sought for” rooted in late canonical history are additional indicators of Ps 111’s late date (Gerstenberger 2001, 272). Palms 111 and 112 are very closely related; this points to their being written by the same author(s) in the post-exilic period (Allen 1983, 95; Kraus 2001, 362-3; and Gerstenberger 2001, 274-7). Psalm 119 has its roots in the wisdom school of the later postexilic period (Kraus 1993b, 412). Allen dates Ps 119 to the post-exilic period on the basis of pronounced Aramaisms and terms characteristic of late or post-biblical Hebrew (1983, 141). Psalm 145 makes use of the term ‫מלכות‬, which is only documented in late biblical texts (Allen 1983, 297 and Kraus 1993b, 547). Gerstenberger dates Ps 145 to the Persian period based on vocabulary and content (2001, 436). The majority of biblical acrostics are either exilic or post-exilic texts suggesting that the literary form was learned during the Babylonian sojourn. Based on the work of Christensen, Johnston, Soll, Gerstenberger, and Kraus, I conclude the acrostic hymn is an original literary composition crafted by the author of the book of Nahum in response to the fall of Jerusalem. Subsequent copyists who failed to recognize its presence introduced interruptions in the acrostic. It sets the stage for what will follow by enumerating a specific conception of God that develops throughout the book. The hymn contains numerous motifs attested elsewhere in the HB. Because of the problems with dating biblical materials, sequencing them remains uncertain—a problem not shared by Akkadian sources. That makes it difficult to establish the target of

192

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

inner-biblical allusions with confidence. Michael Fishbane (1985) identifies 1:2-3 as an allusion to Exod 34:6-7 and 1:6-9 as an allusion to Isa 10:22-23. James Nogalski (1993b, 115-17) discusses 1:28’s literary allusions to the Book of the Twelve. Patterson lists the numerous biblical passages that incorporate the same motifs found in this hymn. The multiplicity of references in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Judges, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, Joel, Habakkuk, and Zechariah indicate the complexity of the problem of determining the presence and direction of allusions in the Hebrew Bible. The motifs common to this hymn and the Hebrew Bible include YHWH as a jealous and avenging god; theophany accompanied by clouds, shaking of the earth, and melting hills; rebuking the sea; and his wrath likened to fire. What these authors fail to consider, and I intend to explore in a subsequent article is whether the hymn was composed combining floating motifs. A floating motif is a “highly adaptable set of themes that frequently travel together as part of a culture’s ideological, linguistic aesthetic, or literary” repertoire (Aaron 2006, 48), in which case no specific inner-biblical allusions are intended. The Nahum hymn functions to assure the audience that YHWH will take vengeance on “his” foes and enemies, not the king’s. The ambiguity characteristic of the book is evident in the hymn—the enemies and foes of YHWH are not identified until much later in the work. This ambiguity is an example of the type of blank that Iser argues is characteristic of literary, as opposed to propagandistic, works. Literary texts play a pivotal role in reformulating reality (Iser 1978). The author’s goal is to reformulate the community’s perception of the roles of YHWH and the community in history. YHWH is the universal judge and controlling force in history. The community enjoys a special relationship with YHWH that ensures that historical events will not overrun it.

NAHUM

193

Nahum 1:9-10 The following unit is a disputation that serves as a transition from the acrostic hymn to the Nineveh material (Nogalski 1993b, 93).267 What do you (2 m.p.) devise against YHWH? he will make a full destruction; no adversary shall have a second chance. 10 For like entangled thorns, and as their liquor being imbibed, they are consumed utterly as dry stubble.268 9

Nogalski proposes that the imagery in this unit is partly derived from Isaiah 10: devising against YHWH (cf. Isa 10:6f.), entangled thorns (cf. Isa 10:16-18), and YHWH will make a complete end (cf. Isa 10:23) (Nogalski 1993b, 111-13). Smith on the other hand, understands the reference to thorns to be an allusion to Isa 33:11-12 (1984, 77). This identification is attractive in that Isa 33:7-10 includes references to Lebanon, Bashan and Carmel in a ruined state, as does the preceding pericope in Nahum. However, it is not clear whether these are deliberate allusions to either passage or simply an example of prophets employing stock phrases and imagery. The use of personal pronouns without clear antecedents complicates efforts to interpret this passage. The “you” in 1:9 is ambiguous and may be a reference to the Assyrian king (cf. v. 14), the Assyrian enemy as a collective, or the inhabitants of Judah/Jerusalem. Roberts (1991, 52-3) identifies the “you” of v. 9 as a reference to the inhabitants of Judah/Jerusalem who harbor unworthy thoughts of YHWH. Longman (1993, 795) believes 1:9 addresses Judah’s enemy for the first time. This ambiguity in the 267 For recent scholarship on disputations see Roche 1983 and Daniels 1987; for the relationship between disputations and lawsuits see Murray 1987. 268 The Hebrew of this verse presents a couple of difficulties: (1) the preposition ‘ad “unto” is rendered “like” on the basis of a few passages in BDB, 724; (2) the root sb’ “imbibe, drink to excess” does not seem to fit the context. For an excellent summary of interpretations of v. 10 see Schulz (1973, 12). O’Brien (2004, 24, 35-36) delimits the unit 1:2-10 noting that 1: 9-10, though not part of the theophanic hymn, “follows directly from and belongs with the theophany.”

194

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

use of personal pronouns is additional evidence of the literary nature of the book. The ambiguity forces the reader to resolve the issue with little help to guide ideation (cf. Iser 1978). Despite the uncertainty relating to the use of pronouns, the unit is clearly cognizant of the poem. In response to the poem’s description of YHWH the audience is essentially asked, “Who is going to fight against YHWH?” The NAP corpus (discussed in ch. 4) provides two examples of prophetic disputations. In SAA 9 3.4, Ishtar rebukes attendees at the king’s coronation feast. The officials plan on disregarding the covenant they are entering into, but Ishtar assures them that they will remember the oaths they have taken. The following prophecy, SAA 9 3.5, contains a dispute between Ishtar and Esarhaddon. The goddess enters into a dispute with the king because she has performed numerous deeds on his behalf only to have him neglect her temple. The dispute appears throughout the HB, with prophetic disputes appearing in the books of Isaiah, Hosea, Amos, and Micah. The form may have developed concurrently in Mesopotamia and Israel as a natural outgrowth of the tendency to view divine human relationships in human terms. In other words, the fact that disputes arose regularly between people led to the conclusion that they could arise between human and deities as well. Nahum 1:11-2:1 The following unit promises victory to the inhabitants of Judah/Jerusalem. 11

From you (2 f.s.) has departed one devising evil against YHWH, one counseling wickedness.269

Longman proposes translating the verse: “He departs from you, you who plan evil concerning the Lord, you who counsel wickedness.” Longman identifies the “he” as YHWH who departs from Nineveh due to its sinfulness. The participles then modify “you”—a reference to Nineveh. This translation and interpretation is based on identifying the “he” of v. 9 with the “he” implied in the Qal. pf. 3 m.s. verb in v. 11 (Longman 1993, 794-97). While Longman is correct that scripture speaks of YHWH abandoning a city (he cites Lam. 1:6 and Ezek 10:18-19) these passages 269

NAHUM

195

Thus said YHWH: Though they are in full strength, and thus many, so they shall be sheared, and shall pass away.270 I have afflicted you (2 f.s.), I will afflict you no more. 13 And now will I break his yoke from off you (2 f.s.), and I will sever your (2 f.s.) bonds. 14 YHWH has commanded concerning you (2 m.s.),271 Your (2 m.s.) name shall not be sown again: out of the house of your (2 m.s.) gods will I cut off the graven image and the molten image; I will prepare your (2 m.s.) grave; for you (2 m.s.) are cursed/contemptible. 2:1 Look!272upon the mountains a messenger that brings273 good news, One proclaiming peace!274 Keep your (2 f.s.) feasts, O Judah, perform your (2 f.s.) vows; for the wicked shall no more pass through you (2 f.s.); he is utterly cut off. 12

refer to YHWH abandoning Jerusalem and the Temple. ANE literature attests various gods departing their cities and their temples when they grew angry with the population. However, it seems extremely unlikely that the prophet would speak of YHWH departing Nineveh when there are no references to his taking up residence there. Sweeney translates 1:11: “From you has gone forth evil thinking about YHWH, worthless counsel” and understands it to be a correction of Judah’s mistaken beliefs about YHWH (2000, 432). 270 Dividing w‘br w‘nytk as w‘brw ‘nytk. 271 Roberts proposes emending the text to reflect an original thirdperson suffix, which was changed to a second-person suffix under the influence of the following quotation (1991, 54). 271 272 ‫ הנה‬is a demonstrative particle that serves as an attention-getting device generally rendered “lo!” or “Behold!” “Look” would be the modern English equivalent of this expression. 273 Literally: “the feet of one bearing.” 274 Nogalski (1993b, 113) argues that Nahum 2:1 alludes to Isaiah 52:7. Spronk (1997, 61) identifies the allusion as going the other way.

196

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Patterson (1991, 43) delimits the unit on the basis of an inclusio that he identifies in 1:11 and 2:1 (l[ylb) “ruin, worthlessness.” Scholars debate the identities of the referents in 1:11-2:1. Patterson understands the unit to be YHWH’s message against Nineveh, but he does not address the identity of the recipient of the prophecy or the problem created by the use of personal pronouns without clearly marked antecedents. Roberts and Floyd identify the second person feminine pronoun throughout the unit as a reference to God’s people (Roberts 1991, 52-3; Floyd 2000, 25-30). However, some scholars understand the second person feminine pronoun in 1:11 to be a reference to the Assyrian king (Longman 1993, 797). I indentify two subjects in the unit: Judah/Jerusalem referred to by the second person feminine person pronoun (1:11-13; 2:1) and the King of Assyria referred to by two qal active participles (1:11), the second person masculine pronoun (1:14), and the Hebrew word ‫“ בל'על‬ruin, worthlessness” in 2:1. If this identification is correct, the entire unit addresses Judah/Jerusalem and contains second person speech directed to the king of Assyria (1:14). This embedding of a personal message to an Assyrian king in a message delivered to the inhabitants of Jerusalem is comparable to 2 Kgs 19:21-31 where a prophecy delivered to Hezekiah also contains second person speech directed against the Assyrian king. Floyd proposes the unit is a reference to Sennacherib’s withdrawal from Jerusalem in 701 BCE. He understands the two prophecies that follow (vv. 12-13 and v. 14) to be an interpretation of the departure reported in v. 11 (Floyd 2002, 412-13). The messenger formula in 1:12—‫“—כה אמר יהוה‬thus says YHWH” precedes the promise of victory. The majority of scholars identify this formula as introducing a previously proclaimed prophetic oracle (e.g. Longman 1993, 798). This view is based on the assumption that earlier oracular prophesies have been collected and transmitted, but another possibility exists. The messenger formula is a stock phrase that originated in either the royal court or the realm of prophetic performance (cf.

NAHUM

197

SAA 9 2 ii 30; 2 ii 38; 3 ii 33; 3 iii 16; 5: 1; 6:1; 7:2, 12).275 The formula appears at the beginning and within the body of Assyrian prophecies. Like the divine self-identification formula, it functioned to inspire confidence in the prophet’s message by associating that message with a specific deity. In that it evoked specific conceptions associated with the specified deity and infused the text with divine power, it has a semiotic value and has undergone overcoding (cf. Eco 1976, 129-35); just like the divine self-identification statements (see my discussion in ch. 4). By linking the message with the deity, the formula also invokes an aura of authority in order to exert psychological coercion by means of religion (cf. Geertz 1973, 129-31). Formulas are one of the characteristic features of an oral culture that infuse the biblical text (Niditch 1996, 8-24). Niditch demonstrates that even late texts evidence an oral mentality and concedes that authors, mimicking oral forms, may have composed portions of the Hebrew Bible. These authors would have been fully conscious of and immersed in the oral culture (Niditch 1996, 8998, 117-25). The formula is used here as a rhetorical device to persuade the community to accept a new formulation of reality as espoused by the literati, who by virtue of their control over text are the representatives of YHWH. The preceding unit contains elements common to Assyrian victory oracles, but with minor variations: (1) direct address to the recipient (2:1bα). The entire unit is addressed to Judah/Jerusalem, though the pronouns have varying references. (2) The divine selfidentification formula appears in modified form (1:12). (3) The message of victory promises deliverance from the king of Assyria and employs numerous Assyrian motifs. The image of shearing the Assyrians as sheep (1:12) makes use of a common Assyrian conquest motif (Johnston 2002, 39-40). The promise to break the Assyrian yoke employs another common Assyrian conquest metaphor (Johnston 2002, 27-29). The Assyrian army will be cut down and pass away, and its idols cut off, while the king’s seed will fail. This curse most closely parallels a curse from the Vassal Treaty of 275 Marc Brettler explores the function of the metaphor God is King. He proposes the messenger formula was likely borrowed from the royal court (1989, 100-109).

198

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Esarhaddon (Johnston 2001b, 425). Although this promise of victory contains the assurance that YHWH will no longer afflict his people, it lacks utopian motifs.276 Its concern is limited to the immediate threat posed by Nineveh. This unit also reflects a positive attitude towards Judah’s cult—it exhorts the people to keep their feasts and fulfill their vows, a concern of temple personnel during all periods. (4) The announcement of a messenger proclaiming good news replaces the encouragement formula. This unit is an example of genre adaptation. The author has appropriated and modified a standard prophetic form, the victory oracle, well attested in Assyria, to fit his purposes. Several questions emerge. Why, when, and how did this transformation occur? The production of text is an ideological activity. It is a means of representing reality either as it was, is, or should be (cf. Chartier 1997, 90-103). In the ancient Near East, temples were the primary locus of text production. In monarchic Israel, the palace and temple were part of one royal complex. Whether produced for the palace or temple, texts were produced under monarchic patronage and reflect monarchic concerns (van der Toorn 2007, 82-89). When a community’s representation of reality has been challenged, one of the ways it responds to this loss of orientation is by producing new texts that aim to re-center its representation of reality—its ideology. Ideologies emerge in response to social strain and attempts to provide meaning. Geertz observes that, “It is the loss of orientation that most directly gives rise to ideological activity” such as text formation and genre transformation (Geertz 1973, 219). Terry Eagleton reminds us that, “Forms are historically determined by the kind of ‘content’ they have to embody; they are changed, transformed, broken down and revolutionized as that content itself changes” (Eagleton 1976, 22). The genre transformation evidenced 276 Utopia can exist in the present, thus no link between utopia and eschatology is required. The central feature of utopian literature is the depiction of society that it portrays, “Whatever else utopian literature may be, the term utopian must describe a good society that is better than that of the author’s present” (Schweitzer 2006, 16). The organizational structure of the utopia is implicitly a critique of the present social setting inviting the reader to re-examine societal norms (Schweitzer 2006, 18).

NAHUM

199

in this unit is what one would expect to emerge in the context of the formation of new ideologies when Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians. This loss would have necessitated transforming cultural assumptions and aspirations. Old genres associated with the king, such as the victory oracle, would have been unsuitable to speak to a new political situation in which there was no king. A form of speech with royal associations would have to be modified in order to be relevant. Here we find a prophetic form normally addressed to the king addressed to the community instead (cf. Harner 1969, 434). Since the forms and appropriations of writing reveal who is exercising power over the production of texts and literary patrons exercise control over what is written (Chartier 1997, 88) it can be concluded that this literature was not commissioned by a monarchic patron. What is the trajectory of this genre development? It is impossible to trace the trajectory with certainty. However, some possibilities may be set forth. I provide them here in chronological order. First, the form may have been used in Israel prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The Mari archives attest the existence of victory oracles. A Victory oracle addressed to Zimri-Lim (1779-1757) (ARM 26 214) provides evidence the form was known in the ancient Near East prior to the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Two truncated oracles of victory may be preserved in 1 Kgs 20:13 and 28. These prophecies delivered to the King of Israel lack the encouragement formula. Schniedewind identifies Hezekiah as the king responsible for the earliest edition of Kings so the form may have been known during the eighth century (2004, 77-8). Second, the form may have been learned from the Assyrians during the eighth century and continued as part of the cultural repertoire. However, it is not clear how the people living in Judah would have gained access to prophecies orally delivered to the Assyrian king and kept in his archives. Unlike the Neo-Assyrian treaties, there is no evidence that Neo-Assyrian prophecies were publicly proclaimed in the outer regions of the empire. Third, it seems unlikely that the form was learned from the Assyrians through Babylonian mediation. Even if Schniedewind’s reconstruction of scribal activity during the Babylonian sojourn is correct (see below), how would scribes have gained access to Nineveh’s archives that lay buried since the city was destroyed in 612 BCE?

200

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

Finally, the form may have been learned from the Babylonians. Harner cites a portion of the Babylonian New Year’s Festival as recorded in AOTAT pages 281-83 and the poem “I Will Praise the Lord of Wisdom,” also known as the “Story of a Sufferer and his Deliverance,” (AOTAT 278; ANET 434 ff.) as evidence the form was known to the Babylonians. The form is attested in Babylon, Arbela, Hamath (ca. 800 BCE), and Nineveh (Harner 1969). How would Hebrew scribes have learned the form? The book of 2 Kings 25:27-30 reports that King Jehoiachin was released from chains in the thirty-seventh year of his exile and received a place of honor at the Babylonian king’s table. Babylonian records report Jehoiachin received a regular allotment of oil during his captivity. Schniedewind proposes that Jehoiachin used this allotment to support limited scribal activity during the Babylonian sojourn. The biblical material produced under his patronage supports his royal claims, absolves him from direct blame for the exile, and counsels submission to Babylon (Schniedewind 2004, 157). Given the favor Jehoiachin eventually gained in the Babylonian court, it is possible scribes in his employ were allowed to study Mesopotamian religious texts alongside their Mesopotamian counterparts. David Carr (2005, 47-61) demonstrates that the Mesopotamian education/enculturation system, with its mastery of Akkadian, influenced scribal education throughout the ancient Near East prior to the foundation of the Israelite monarchy. The Amarna letters preserve letters written in Akkadian from Jerusalem in the Bronze Age. We know that a locally developed education system utilizing a form of alphabetic cuneiform operated concurrently with the Mesopotamian cuneiform system in Ugarit. It is possible that a similar development occurred in Israel; however, due to the perishable nature of the writing materials used in Israel, we do not know whether knowledge of Akkadian or Akkadian literary forms were promoted during the Israelite monarchy . Nogalski (Nogalski 1993b, 113) calls attention to the use of Isaian imagery (cf. Isa 52:1-4) in this pericope. He argues the language in Nahum was appropriated from Deutero-Isaiah as a “theological reflection upon YHWH’s action in history.” The use of Deutero-Isaiah, genre adaptation, and positive view towards the cult support the conclusion that the book of Nahum was written subsequent to seventh century BCE.

NAHUM

201

An invasion report follows. Invasion reports are not attested in the NAP corpus. However, invasion reports share numerous elements with ARI that report the king’s military campaigns: (1) depiction of military forces (Nah 2:4-6 cf. COS 2, 263: ii 86b-102), (2) role of deity (Nah 2:3 cf.COS 2, 261: i 29b-36a), (3) reference to a fierce weapon (Nah 2:1 cf. COS 2, 262: i 41b-51a), destruction likened to a devastating flood (Nah 2:7-9 cf. COS 2, 262: i 41b51a), (4) destruction of city using a trilogy of stock phrases (Nah 2:11 cf. COS 2, 266: 29-34), (5) plunder of a defeated city (Nah 2:10 cf. COS 2, 263: ii 78b-81a), fear of the defenders (Nah 2:11 cf. COS 2, 263: ii 78b-81a), and the flight of the defenders (Nah 2:9 cf. COS 2, 262: ii 30b-35a). Nahum 2:2-14 The invasion report outlines Assyria’s reversal of fortune.277 A club278 is come up against you: Guard the ramparts! Watch the way! Strengthen your loins! Marshall all your strength! 3 For YHWH will restore the majesty/pride of Jacob as the majesty/pride of Israel; though plunderers have plundered them, and destroyed their vine-branches.279 2

277 James Nogalski identifies the form as a victory song (1993b, 11314). Michael Floyd classifies 2:1-11 as a sentinel report (2000, 30). 278 Amending the text to read ‫“ מפץ‬war-club” following Johnston 2002, 42. 279 Nogalski identifies this pericope (2:1-3) as a later redactional addition on the basis of a motif it shares with Micah 7—both share an emphasis on the restoration of Northern and Southern regions with references to Jerusalem, Carmel and Bashan. He also argues that the reference to “his warriors” in Nah 2:4 better follows the reference to the King of Nineveh in 1:14, and Nah 2:3 alludes to Joel 1. In addition to the literary links it (2:1-3) creates, it functions here as an introduction to the victory song in 2:4-13. The earlier frame introducing the song would therefore be Nah 1:11-12a, 14 (Nogalski 1993b, 113-14). Spronk notes scholars have long puzzled over the shifts in address in 2:1-3 and summarizes scholar-

202

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE The shield of his mighty men is reddened, the troops are in scarlet. The chariots flash with steel in the day of his preparation, and the cypress spears are brandished.280 5 The chariots rage in the streets; they rush to and fro in the plazas: Their appearance is like torches; they race like the lightning. 6 He musters his commanders; they stumble in their march; they hasten to the wall, and the mantelet is deployed.281 7 The sluice gates are opened, and the palace is swept away. 8 its column bases are broken off282 and carried away; 4

ship’s attempts to expound upon them (Spronk 1997, 63-66). Longman (1993, 795) identifies 1:9-2:3 as one unit with alternating oracles of judgment and salvation: judgment (1:9-11), salvation (1:12-13), judgment (1:14), salvation (2:1 [1:15]), judgment (2:2 [1]), salvation (2:3[2]). Longman suggests three roots may stand behind the form in 2:3. He notes that LXX and Vulgate connect ‫ זמ ריהם‬with ‫“ זםר‬to prune vines”; however, he favors associating the noun with ‫“ זמר‬to sing” and translates the last colon: “”They have wiped out their songs.” He notes such a translation fits with the motif of songs ceasing during battle (cf. Isa 24) (Longman 1993, 794, 802). Coggins identifies 2:2-3 as a unit that functions as a transition between judgment on Judah and judgment on Nineveh. Accordingly 2:4-13 is a poem against Nineveh (Coggins & Re’emi 1985, 7). 280 JPS renders the line: “The [arrows of] cypress wood are poisoned; AKOT renders it: “The cypresses are made to quiver” understanding the verb to be a Hophal perfect 3 c.p. pausal form of ‫“רעל‬quiver, shake, reel;” the RSV, LXX, and Syriac read ‫“ פרש‬horses” instead of ‫ברש‬ “spear-shaft.” BDB identifies the word as “spear-shaft” and associates it with ‫“ ברוש‬cypress.” 281 A mantelet was a portable, defensive shield used by besiegers when attacking a fortified location. 282 Relating husisiab to Akkadian hasiābu “to break off” and the following glth with Akkadian gullatu “column base.” H. W. F. Saggs identifies husisiab as a Hophal of a verb nsib, cognate with Akkadian nasiābu “to suck out” in this context “dissolved.” The following glth is a noun related to Akkadian gullatu “column base.” Cathcart reads hasisei bī “The beauty” and

NAHUM

203

her handmaids moan as with the voice of doves, beating upon their breasts. 9 But Nineveh has been from of old like a pool of water: let them flee away. Halt! Halt! they cry; but none turns back. 10 Plunder the silver! Plunder the gold! for there is no end to the treasure, an abundance of precious things. 11 Desolation, devastation, and destruction; Melting hearts and quaking knees, and trembling is in all loins, the faces of them all grow pale. 12 Where is the den of the lions, and the meadow283 of the young lions, where the lion and the lioness walked, the lion's whelp, and none made them afraid? 13 The lion did tear in pieces enough for his whelps, and strangled for his lionesses, and filled his caves with prey, his dens with torn flesh. 14 I am against you, says YHWH Siĕbāôt,284 I will burn your abundance in the smoke,285

understands it as a reference to the cult statue of Ishtar (Cathcart 1973, 97). Roberts amends the line to read wehusisei bāh baggālūt hā‘atallāh. He relates hā‘atallāh to Akkadian etiēlu “princess” and renders the line “the princess is made to stand among the captives, (her maidservants are led away)” (Roberts 1991, 60). 283 Cathcart amends ‫“ מרעה‬meadow, pasture” to ‫“ מרעה‬cave” which is a perfect parallel to ‫“ מעון‬den”(Cathcart 1973, 105); the NJB, NEB, and RSV follow this emendation. JPS and AKOT render the word “pasture.” Either reading would fit the context. The reading I have chosen emphasizes the connection with the following line and understands it to be a reference to the lion and lioness hunting. 284 For a discussion of this epithet to identify YHWH as Israel’s Divine Warrior, see Kang 1989, 198-202.

204

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE and the sword shall devour your young lions; I will cut off your prey from the earth; the voice of your messengers shall no more be heard.286

The staccato style of the report serves to convey an impression of frenzied activity associated with battle. Roberts reasons this unit must be addressed to Assyria since the warning of a looming threat against Jerusalem would be perceived as a contradiction if it followed a unit predicting deliverance from oppressors.287 I believe Roberts is correct in identifying Assyria as the putative audience; however, the real audience is Jerusalem. The unit opens with an announcement that a weapon is come against Assyria. This motif of a mighty weapon is common in Assyrian conquest accounts (Johnston 2002, 40-42). The overall unit is harmonious with the exception of v. 3, which Roberts identifies as a redactional insertion that functions to create a link between this unit and the preceding material (1:2-2:1 [1:2-15]).288 However, it also serves to illustrate Assyria’s reversal of fortune, the plunderers (2:3) will in turn be plundered (2:10). The pairing of Israel and Jacob in 2:3 may have implications for the dating of this material. It contains a conceptual link to the Pentateuch established by means of a cultural allusion. The postMT preserves ‫“ רכבה‬her chariots,” but this is objectionable because the 3rd person suffix is out of place in the immediate context. LXX and S read ‫“ רבך‬your multitude, abundance. T and some versions of V preserve ‫“ רכבך‬your chariots.” Reading ‫“ רכבך‬your chariots” would maintain the lexical links Nogalski identifies between 2:14 and 3:1 (Nogalski 1993b, 117). 286 Coggins (Coggins & Re’emi 1985, 7) identifies 2:14 as a “prose oracle; an announcement of judgment, now applied to Nineveh.” O’Brien (2004, 24) delimits the unit 2:1-14. Michael Floyd (2000, 66-67) delimits 2:12-14 as a unit and it as a prophecy of punishment against a foreign nation. 287 It is not clear how Roberts reconciles this reasoning with his assertion in the introduction of his commentary that there is no overarching purpose to the arrangement of oracles in this book (1991, 11). 288 Roberts 1991, 63-65. See Roberts’ detailed discussion of v. 3 (Roberts 1991, 64-65). Patterson (1991, 74-79) identifies 12-14 [11-13] as a separate unit and classifies it as a taunt song. 285

NAHUM

205

exilic community sought to legitimize its presence in Yehud by establishing links to pre-exilic Israel. The Chronicler sought to establish the continuity between the pre- and post-exilic communities by means of genealogies (e.g. 1 Chr 1-9). John van Seters argues that the writing of a national history featuring the patriarchs and early promises of the land was another component of this strategy (Seters 1997). Jacob is the focal point for traditions linking the post-exilic people group with the pre-exilic kingdom. The story of his name change appears in Gen 32:22-32 and 35:9-15. John van Seters identifies Gen 32:22-32 as an itinerary text and argues that such texts, along with genealogies, are structuring devices used by a post-exilic author to combine traditions of national origins into a history for the people. Genealogy and itinerary do not reflect pre-state nomadic traditions as Westermann suggests, but are the basic components of a “western antiquarian tradition of national origins” influenced by Greek historiographers (Seters 1997, 210-13). In other words, the post-exilic author follows Greek exempla and uses itineraries to write a national history. The older folk legends in Genesis lack an ancestor named Israel. The author had to account for a patriarch who could eponymously yield the name of the people. If van Seters is correct, the story of Jacob’s name change is part of the post-exilic strategy to link the pre- and post-exilic communities. The story is an etiological tale for a people group that closes with a reference to ethnic boundaries, specifically diet. Mullen argues that ethnic identity is a post-exilic concern that shaped the formation of the Pentateuch (Mullen 1997). The story of Jacob’s name change thus forms a bridge between post- and pre-exilic Israel by identifying Israel as a people group. This linkage is reinforced in Gen 35:10-15, which repeats the name change and combines it with promises of a nation, land, and kings that will descend from Jacob. These two stories combine to establish continuity between the preand post-exilic communities. The first explains how Israel became an ethnic designation; the second explicitly links this ethnic community descended from Jacob with the pre-exilic political entity. To summarize, the political designation “Israel” becomes an ethnic designation by means of the Jacob narratives in Genesis. These stories provide the basis for using “Israel” to refer to a kingdom or a people group.

206

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

The pairing of Jacob and Israel in Nah 2:3 capitalizes on this meme—a unit of cultural transmission—by accessing both the ethnic and political symbolization. This is apparent when one considers how “Jacob” and “Israel” function in this verse. It seems highly unlikely that both function as ethnic designations. That would be the equivalent of saying the majesty of the Americans will be restored like the majesty of the Americans, a meaningless construction. In order to convey a concrete idea, the second clause would have to be amended to refer to a specific historic period. It would seem then that the best way to interpret Nah 2:3 is: the majesty of Jacob (an ethnic group) will be restored like the majesty of the Kingdom of Israel. If this is what is intended, Nah 2:3 bears evidence of an awareness of the meme introduced into the cultural repertoire by means of the Jacob narratives. If scholars who date the Pentateuch late are correct, this leads to the conclusion that this reference is post-exilic, and the material was written at a time when Israel lacks a king and the status of a kingdom.289 The intended referents in this pericope are not always clear. This stylistic feature was encountered above in the use of personal pronouns in Nah 1:11-14. Ralph Smith, S. R. Driver, and A. B. Davidson identify the characters in 2:6 as the defenders of the city, while Stonehouse, Wade, Taylor, and Dalglish understand it to be a reference to the invaders.290 James Bruckner (2004, 167) believes these verses alternate between references to the Assyrian defenders (2:5-6a) and the Babylonian besiegers (2:4, 6b).291 Given that the mustered troops “stumble” (an image consistent with an army about to be defeated) and the mantelet is a besieger’s defensive device, it seems best to follow Bruckner in understanding the references in this battle depiction to alternate between defending and attacking troops. This ambiguity is additional evidence of the literary nature of the book. Ambiguity is one of the textual strategies used in literature to guide ideation in the formation of new percepWilliam Schniedewind (2004) argues for a pre-exilic composition of the Pentateuch, noting that its concern with northern traditions does not reflect the attitudes of the post-exilic community. 290 Smith 1984, 83. 291 Bruckner actually utilizes the English Bible versification. 289

NAHUM

207

tions of reality (cf. Iser 1978). The book of Nahum is a work of literature aimed at transforming the community and its selfconception. It is not readily clear whether vs. 7-8 [8-9] are intended as literal or metaphorical descriptions of the impending fall of the city. Greek tradition attributes the fall of Nineveh to flooding. However, given the prevalent use of flood imagery to describe the movement of armies in Mesopotamia, we must allow for the possibility that Greek historians misunderstood the metaphorical language of an unknown Babylonian source.292 The motif of an overwhelming flood appears in numerous Neo-Assyrian treaty curses. Two such examples appear in the Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon: “With a great flood, may he (Adad) submerge your land” (Wiseman 1958, 442) and “May an irresistible flood come up from the earth and devastate you” (Wiseman 1958, 448-49). The motif also occurs in ARI, as evidenced by an example from Shalmaneser III’s Kurkh monolith: “Like Adad, I rained down upon them a devastating flood” (COS 2, 262a). Nahum is most likely invoking this motif to highlight Nineveh’s ironic reversal (cf. Johnston 2001b, 430-31; 2002, 32-34) as a means of reconstructing reality for the community. Verses 9-10 seemingly paint a picture of Nineveh’s armies fleeing while attackers plunder the city. Verse 11 is a classic example of paronomasia (‫“ )בוקה ומבוקה ומבלקה‬desolation, devastation, and destruction” highlighting the complete destruction that will befall the city (Smith 1984, 83). The motif of changing skin color in 2:11 is most likely an allusion to a curse in the Vassal Treaty of Esarhaddon (Johnston 2001b, 432). Although 2:12-14 may be treated as a separate unit, it seems to have an intimate connection with 2:2-11. I follow Roberts in identifying it as a “concluding rhetorical movement.” Verse 14 employs the messenger formula—‫“ נאם יהוה‬utterance of YHWH”—and frames the entire chapter as a discourse of YHWH. The formula is a stock phrase that invokes YHWH’s authority and power by 292 Roberts 1991, 65-6. For the classical traditions see: Diodorus Siculus, History 2.26-27, especially 27.1-3; Xenophon, Anabasis 3.4.12 (Roberts 1991, 66).

208

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

means of overcoding (see my discussion above). The shift between third-person self-reference (2:2) and first-person divine speech (2:14) is comparable to shifts found in the NAP corpus (cf. SAA 9 3.2: “I” ii 1 and “Ashur” ii 3; SAA 9 3.4: “she” iii 6 and “me” iii 13; SAA 9 5: “Mulissu” 3 and “I” 8; SAA 9 9: “Mulissu” 1 and “I” 8). These verses resolve the unit with a rhetorical taunt that plays upon the connection between the Assyrian royal house and lions. Gordon Johnston (2001a) demonstrates that this oracle contains a deliberate allusion to the lion motif, which is used in Neo-Assyrian literature and art to depict the king as a fearless and ferocious warrior. Ashurbanipal was Assyria’s most illustrious lion-hunter and last “lion” king.293 The allusion employs the rhetorical device “ironic reversal.” The once mighty empire will fall as it loses its hunting grounds. Ashurbanipal is no longer the lion-hunter; he is the lion who will be hunted by YHWH. Ashurbanipal viewed the lion hunt as a divinely sanctioned means of protecting his people; Nahum capitalizes on this conception in depicting YHWH’s protection of Israel. The metaphor also highlights the rapacious appetite of the Assyrians (cf. 2:10). They had devoured others to satisfy their desires; they will in turn be devoured. Nogalski demonstrates that 2:14 [2:13] has been composed as a transition to the lament that follows. It incorporates catchwords from the previous unit (“young lion” and “prey”) as well as from the following one (“prey,” “sword,” and “chariot,” assuming one follows MT or T which preserve a form of the word ‫( )רכב‬Nogalski 1993b, 117). This supports the claim that the book has a purposeful literary structure. As pointed out above, invasion reports have no parallel in Assyrian prophecies of the seventh century. Rather, the material has a great degree of affinity with ARI, which Israel would have been exposed to from the eighth century on. How should we account for this genre adaptation? As discussed above, genre adaptation typically occurs when changing historical/political realities require The royal lion hunt was deeply rooted in Assyrian conceptions of monarchy. The royal seal portrayed a king in face-to-face combat with a lion. Ashurbanipal’s court elevated this motif to new levels (Weissert 1997). 293

NAHUM

209

accompanying ideological changes. While there is little doubt that the fall of Samaria may have prompted creative literary activity, this activity is more likely to be characterized by the fusion of Northern and Southern traditions (cf. Schniedewind 2004, 64-90). The author(s) of Nahum write with the goal of reshaping the community’s understanding of YHWH’s control over, and the community’s place in, history. The invasion report supports this goal by asserting YHWH brought these events to pass and communicated them in advance to his prophet. When we attempt to identify a historical period that would have prompted such an ideological shift, the fall of Jerusalem and subsequent return would have provided the greatest impetus for re-examining the community’s place in the historical process and YHWH’s control over events. What is the trajectory of this genre development? Like the victory oracle, it is impossible to trace the trajectory of this genre adaptation with certainty. The same possibilities may be set forth. (1) The form may have been used in Israel prior to the fall of Jerusalem. However, no Israelite monumental inscriptions have survived. (2) The form may have been learned from the Assyrians during the eighth century, and continued as part of the cultural repertoire. Assyrian inscriptions have been found in Syria and on the Orontes River. It is also possible that Jerusalem elite made trips to Assyrian capital cities where the inscriptions were prominently displayed. (3) Finally, the form may have been learned during the Babylonian sojourn when exposure to such monumental inscriptions would have been more frequent and prolonged. Many scholars, such as Janzen, classify the following pericope as a woe oracle. Waldemar Janzen demonstrates that the woe-cry developed through the funerary lament. The lamentationvengeance pattern “forms a context within which the woe-cry can evolve from grief and mourning to accusation, threat, and even curse.” This metamorphosis is evident in the Hebrew Bible. Janzen writes, “We are able to trace an unbroken continuum in the function of the woe-cry, a continuum which, in arc-like manner, spans those hôy-words clearly expressive of funerary lamentation and those which are hurled against a slayer, literal or metaphorical, in a spirit of bitterness and revenge” (Janzen 1972, 39). Richard Clifford (1966, 458-464) similarly argues that hôy enters the prophets through funerary cries and develops into a curse-like formula in the books of Jeremiah and Habakkuk. The formulaic expression takes

210

NEO-ASSYRIAN PROPHECY AND THE HEBREW BIBLE

on associations of death through the process of overcoding (Eco 1976, 129-35). Formulaic expressions are a characteristic oral feature employed in biblical literature. The presence of such formulae is evidence of an oral aesthetic that permeates the HB (cf. Niditch 1996, 9-24), not proof of oracular delivery. The classification—“woe oracle”—presumes that the material was orally delivered by a prophet. However, the book of Nahum bears evidence of being a literary work. Aside from oracular formulae, which were also used in literary works, nothing in it demonstrates oral transmission. Since the genre has been adapted from a funerary lament, I will classify the unit as a lament. Similar pericopes appear in Isaiah, Amos, and Micah, three books traditionally dated to the eighth century BCE. The adaptation of the lament, as a prophetic form, may have been a response to the fall of Samaria and the destruction of northern cult centers. What is certain is that laments played a significant role in the literary response to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple (Middlemas 2007, 28-51). Nahum 3:1-17 3:1

Woe to the bloody city!294

utterly treacherous295 full of victims;296 never without prey. 2 The crack of the whip, and the clatter of wheels, The initial indictment introduced by ‫ הוי‬may be followed by a threat, lament, ironical questions, proverbial saying, accusation, rhetorical question, applications of the woe-saying to a different realm of world history, or a further indictment in a different style (Gerstenberger 1962, 25253). Fee and Stuart identify the three elements of a woe oracle as: an announcement of distress, the reason for the distress, and a prediction of doom. Using these criteria, the oracle would end with v. 4 (Fee & Stuart 2003, 195). Patterson identifies 1-7 as a woe oracle whose elements are arranged in a chiasmus: invective (vv. 1, 7), threat (vv. 2-3, 5-6), and criticism (v. 4) (Patterson 1991, 81-86). 295 Literally: “full of lies.” 296 Rendering ‫“ פרק‬something torn away, apart” as victims to fit the context. 294

NAHUM

211

prancing horses, and jolting chariots, 3 Charging cavalry, flashing swords, glittering spears! Hosts of slain, heaps of corpses, bodies without number; they stumble over corpses; because of the numerous297 whoredoms of the prostitute, Seductive298 mistress of sorceries, Who is known by the nations299 for her harlotries, and by the clan for her sorceries.300 5 I am against you, says YHWH Siĕbāôt, I shall lift your skirts over your face; I shall show the nations your nakedness, and the kingdoms your shame. 6 I shall cast abominable filth upon you, I shall treat you with contempt, I shall make you a spectacle. 7 All who see you will recoil and say, Nineveh is devastated: who will grieve for her? From where shall I seek comforters for you? 8 Are you better than No-amon (Thebes),301 4

Cathcart points to this as an example of the causal force of min. Literally: “excellent of grace.” 299 Repointing the text to read hammukkeret, the hophal feminine participle of nkr, the hiphil of which means “know, recognize.” The h- is a relative pronoun. Gôyim and mišpāhiôt are genitives of cause (Cathcart 1973, 129-30); Cathcart does not address the absence of a preposition in the line. Roberts amends the text to read hamm ešakkeret “who made (the nations) drunk” (Roberts 1991, 70). AKOT follows MT in reading tr