Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures XI: Comprising the Contents of Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 14 9781463241612

Citation preview

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures XI

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures and its Contexts 27

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

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures XI

Comprising the Contents of Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 14

Edited by

Christophe Nihan Anna Angelini

gp 2019

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2019 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. ‫ܝܒ‬

1

2019

ISBN 978-1-4632-0749-6

ISSN 1935-6897

A Cataloging-in-Publication Record is available from the Library of Congress.

Printed in the United States of America

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARTICLES Chiasm and Meaning in 1 Chronicles .................................................................. 1 Yitzhak Berger Antiochus IV and the Three Horns in Daniel 7............................................... 35 Benjamin Scolnic Prophetic Imagination in the Light of Narratology and Disability Studies in Isaiah 40–48 .............................................................................................. 65 Simeon Chavel Recounting -9¡'1/ =#'% in Psalm 78: What are the “Riddles” About? ...121 Thomas Wagner “The Lord Has Rejected You As King Over Israel”: Saul’s Deposal from the Throne .........................................................................................145 Yisca Zimran Vetting the Priest in Zechariah 3: The Satan between Divine and Achaemenid Administrations ...................................................................166 Jason M. Silverman The Ashkar-Gilson Manuscript: Remnant of a Proto-Masoretic Model Scroll of the Torah .....................................................................................197 Paul Sanders Analyzing ! ˜$ Grammar and Reading ! ˜$ Texts of Ps 68:9 and Judg 5:5 ......225 Robert D. Holmstedt The Biblical Hebrew Feminine Singular Qal Participle: A Historical Reconstruction ............................................................................................257 J.H. Price

v

vi

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

REVIEWS Stuart Lasine, Weighing Hearts: Character, Judgment, and the Ethics of Reading the Bible Reviewed by Jacqueline E. Lapsley..........................................................279 Jason M. Silverman, Persepolis and Jerusalem: Iranian Influence on the Apocalyptic Hermeneutic Reviewed by Bennie H. Reynolds III ......................................................282 Mary E. Mills, Urban Imagination in Biblical Prophecy Reviewed by Hilary Marlow ......................................................................285 Melissa A. Jackson, Comedy and Feminist Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible: A Subversive Collaboration Reviewed by Jennifer L. Koosed .............................................................288 Robert E. Wallace, The Narrative Effect of Book IV of the Hebrew Psalter Reviewed by Anthony R. Pyles ................................................................291 Brial Neil Peterson, Ezekiel in Context: Ezekiel’s Message Understood in its Historical Setting of Covenant Curses, and Ancient Near Eastern Mythological Motifs Reviewed by Daniel Block ........................................................................294 Jerry Hwang, The Rhetoric of Remembrance: An Investigation of the “Fathers” in Deuteronomy Reviewed by David Bergen .......................................................................297 Thomas Kazen, Emotions in Biblical Law: A Cognitive Science Approach Reviewed by Michael Hundley .................................................................299 Ed Noort (ed), The Book of Joshua Reviewed by Phillippe Guillaume ............................................................305 Alissa Jones Nelson, Power and Responsibility in Biblical Interpretation: Reading the Book of Job with Edward Said Reviewed by Edward Ho ..........................................................................310 Pierre Van Hecke, and Antje Labahn (eds), METAPHORS IN THE PSALMS Reviewed by Tremper Longman III........................................................315 Daniel E. Fleming, The Legacy of Israel in Judah’s Bible: History, Politics, and the Reinscribing of Tradition Reviewed by David J. Fuller .....................................................................318

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vii

Simon P. Stocks, The Form and Function of the Tricolon in the Psalms of Ascents. Introducing a New Paradigm for Hebrew Poetic Lineform Reviewed by John F. Hobbins .................................................................322 Mercedes L. García Bachmann, Women at Work in the Deuteronomistic History Reviewed by Sandra Richter .....................................................................326 Dalit Rom-Shiloni, Exclusive Inclusivity: Identity Conflicts Between the Exiles and the People Who Remained (6th–5th Centuries BCE) Reviewed by Michael A. Lyons ................................................................329 Moshe Garsiel, From Earth to Heaven: A Literary Study of the Elijah Stories in the Book of Kings Reviewed by Scott B. Noegel ...................................................................333 John Kessler, Old Testament Theology: Divine Call and Human Response Reviewed by Joseph Ryan Kelly ...............................................................339 Barat Ellman, Memory and Covenant: The Role of Israel’s and God’s Memory in Sustaining the Deuteronomic and Priestly Covenants Reviewed by A.J. Culp. .............................................................................341 Thomas D. Petter, The Land between the Two Rivers: Early Israelite Identities in Central Transjordan Reviewed by Stephen C. Russel ..............................................................345 Richard Ounsorth, Joshua Typology in the New Testament Reviewed by Lissa M. Wray Beal .............................................................348 Konrad Schmid and Raymond F. Person, Jr. (eds), Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch, Hexateuch, and the Deuteronomistic History Reviewed by Jeffrey G. Audirsch.............................................................351 C.L. Seow, Job 1–21: Interpretation and Commentary Reviewed by Alexander W. Breitkopf .....................................................356 Katherine J. Dell, Interpreting Ecclesiastes: Readers Old and New Reviewed by Russell L. Meek ...................................................................359 John Van Seters, The Yahwist: A Historian of Israelite Origins Reviewed by David J. Fuller .....................................................................360 Gary N. Knoppers, Jews and Samaritans: The Origins and History of Their Early Relations Reviewed by Magnar Kartveit ..................................................................364 Serge Frolov, JUDGES Reviewed by Mary L. Conway ..................................................................366 Paul J. Griffiths, SONG OF SONGS Reviewed by Jennifer Pfenniger ...............................................................370

viii

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Joseph Blenkinsopp, Creation, Un-Creation, Re-Creation: A Discursive Commentary on Genesis 1–11 Reviewed by Brian Lima............................................................................376 Anathea Portier-Young, Apocalypse Against Empire: Theologies of Resistance in Early Judaism Reviewed by Colin Toffelmire .................................................................381 Daniel M. Gurtner, Exodus: A Commentary on the Greek Text of Codex Vaticanus Reviewed by John Screnock .....................................................................384 Index ......................................................................................................................389

PREFACE The present volume includes all the articles and reviews published electronically in volume 14 (2014) of the Journal of Hebrew Scriptures. These articles and reviews are accessible online at http://www.jhsonline.org. The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures (JHS) provides free access to peerreviewed articles related to the history of ancient Israel and its literature. The journal’s general policy is to serve the production and diffusion of scholarly publications that are well-researched, original, adhere to high academic standards, and have the potential to open new avenues in the field. Because of its electronic format, the journal also contributes to the establishment of new discursive interactions between scholars, and opens increased possibilities for scholars, graduate students, public institutions, and a more general audience to access the journal’s publications. This also applies to scholars working in developing nations, where access to scholarly publications often remains an issue. By bringing together authors and readers from different countries, JHS thus contributes to a scholarly conversation which is not restricted by geographical boundaries. In addition, it is the policy of the journal to promote not only publications by scholars who are already well established in the field, but also appropriate publications by scholars who are in earlier stages of their academic careers. While the journal has substantially increased the number of its published contributions throughout the years, the editorial work remains managed, in the main, by volunteers. Mark J. Boda serves as Review Editor for books published in North America and elsewhere in the English speaking world. For this volume, Konrad Schmid and Peter Altmann have served as Review Editors for the book reviews published in “continental” Europe in any language except Spanish. Maria-Teresa Ortega Monasterio is the Review Editor for books published in Spanish. We thank all of them for their work, which represents a major contribution to JHS. The editorial board of the journal consists of Peter Altmann, Ehud Ben Zvi, Adele Berlin, Mark J. Boda, Michael V. Fox, William K. Gilders, Robert A. Kugler, Francis Landy, Niels Peter Lemche, Mark Leuchter, Oded Lipschits, Hanna Liss, John L. McLaughlin, Reinhard Müller, Hindy ix

x

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Najman, Scott B. Noegel, Maria-Teresa Ortega Monasterio, Gary A. Rendsburg, Konrad Schmid and Jacob L. Wright. We thank all of them for their continuous work with, and in support of, the journal. We also thank occasional reviewers of submissions, who have similarly contributed to maintaining the high standards of the journal and to improving the quality of the published articles with their comments and suggestions. The publication of the journal is supported by the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies at the Université de Lausanne (Switzerland), and is made possible by the work of many people. In particular, Hervé Gonzalez, Julia Rhyder and Melanie Marvin have significantly contributed to the production of the articles contained in the present volume. We wish to take this opportunity to thank them for all the work they have done, and continue to do, for JHS. The present manuscript was prepared by Melanie Marvin, with the assistance of Melonie Schmierer-Lee. Finally, we would like to thank George Kiraz for publishing the printed version of JHS through Gorgias Press. The present volume is also the first volume in the edition of which Ehud Ben Zvi was not involved. Ehud founded the Journal of Hebrew Scriptures in 1996 and served as its General Editor until 2013. The establishment of a peer-reviewed online journal devoted to the history of ancient Israel and its literature was a visionary act at the time. Throughout the years he served as General Editor, Ehud made sure that JHS remained a pioneering, innovative journal with very high academic standards. We wish to thank him for his dedication to JHS during all these years, for his legacy, as well as for the example he set as Editor of this journal. Anna Angelini Associate Editor University of Lausanne, Switzerland Christophe Nihan General Editor University of Lausanne, Switzerland

ABBREVIATIONS AASF AASOR AAR AB ABD ABRL ACJS AcOr ADPV AJBI AJSR ANES ANET AnBib AnOr AOAT AOS AOT AOTC ArBib AS ASOR ASV ATD AuOr AUSS BA

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

xii BAR BASOR BBB BBET BBR BDB BEATAJ BETL BH BHS Bib BibInt BibOr BJRL BJS BS BKAT BN BR BSOAS B.T. BWANT BZ BZAR BZAW CAD CANE CBC

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS CBOTS CBQ CBQMS CNEB CHANE ConBNT COS DCH DDD2

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

xiii

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

xiv HALOT

HAR HAT HBS HCSB HeyJ HS HSS HSM HTR HTS HUCA IAA IBC ICC IDAM IEJ IES Int IOSCS JAAR JANES JANESCU JAOS JB JBL JBQ JCS JESHO JETS JHS JJS JNES JNSL

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS JOTT JPS JQR JR JSem JSJSup JSOT JSOTSup JSPSup JSS JTS KAI KAT KBL KHC KJV KTU

LBH LCL LHBOTS LXX MH MSIA MT NAC NEAEHL

xv

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

xvi NEchtB NCB NCBC NIB NIBCOT NICOT NIDOTTE NIV NIVI NJB NJPS NJPSV NLT NRSV OBO ÖBS OG OIP OL OLA OLZ Or OTE OTG OTL OTS OTS OtSt PEQ PEF Proof QH RA RB REB

ABBREVIATIONS NeueEchterBibel New Century Bible New Century Bible Commentary The New Interpreter’s Bible New International Commentary on the Old Testament New International Commentary on the Old Testament New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by W. A. VanGemeren. 5 vols. Grand Rapids, 1997 New International Version New International Version, Inclusive Language Edition New Jerusalem Bible Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: The New JPS Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text New Jewish Publication Society Translation New Living Translation New Revised Standard Version Orbis biblicus et orientalis Österreichische biblische Studien Old Greek Oriental Institute Publications Old Latin Orientalia lovaniensia analecta Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Orientalia Old Testament Essays Old Testament Guides Old Testament Library Oudtestamentische Studiën Old Testament Studies Oudtestamentische Studiën Palestine Exploration Quarterly Palestine Exploration Fund Prooftexts Qumran Hebrew Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale Revue biblique Revised English Bible

TABLE OF CONTENTS RevExp RevQ RGG RIBLA RBL RSV SAAS SBAB SBL SBLDS SBLEJL SBLSCS SBLSP SBLSymS SBLWAW SBT SemeiaSt SHCANE SJOT SSN SubBi STDJ TA TBC TDOT ThStKr ThWAT TLZ TNIV TOTC TRE TRev

xvii

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

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

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

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES YITZHAK BERGER HUNTER COLLEGE In recent decades, it has become increasingly clear that late biblical writers made extensive use of chiasm. 1 In the case of Chronicles, numerous proposed chiastic patterns have gained substantial support, including some that govern notably large expanses of text. Structures of this kind have been observed to encompass, inter alia, the genealogical material in 1 Chr 1–9; the lists of supporters of David in 1 Chr 11–12; the song of praise and its narrative frame in 1 Chr 16; and the account of Solomon’s activities in 2 Chr 1–9. 2 According to one recent analysis, the ark narrative in 1 Chr 13–15 takes the form of still another chiastic pattern. 3 A generation ago, Y.T. Radday concluded that the presence of chiasm declines markedly in late biblical literature, to the point where its incidence provides a means of “roughly dating a book as pre- or post-exilic” (“Chiasmus in Biblical Hebrew Narrative,” in J.W. Welch [ed], Chiasmus in Antiquity: Structure, Analyses, Exegesis [Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1981], 50–112 [51]). However, the evidence that has accumulated since that time renders this position untenable. See, e.g., the remarks by I. Kalimi and the material he cites in The Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History in Chronicles (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 218. The sources mentioned in the next note provide a sense of the increasing discernment of chiasm in Chronicles specifically. 2 F. Michaeli first observed that the prominent tribes of Judah and Benjamin frame the Israelite genealogies, and that the Levites occupy the center (Les livres des Chroniques, d’Esdras et de Néhémie [Commentaire de l’Ancien Testament, 16; Neuchâtel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1967], 71). H.G.M. Williamson later expanded on this, providing fuller articulation to the structure generated by the placement of multiple, less distinctive tribes both before and after Levi (1 and 2 Chronicles [NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982], 46–47). A chiastic reading of 1 Chr 11–12 appeared first in H.G.M. Williamson, “‘We are Yours, O David’: The Setting and 1

1

2

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES

It will immediately be noted, especially if this last proposal is correct, that there emerges one striking gap in an otherwise uninterrupted, lengthy sequence of material believed to be chiastically arranged. I refer to 1 Chr 10, a chapter that recounts Saul’s death in battle, whose very role in the book has long presented a problem. 4 Another concern involves both the purpose and positioning of 1 Chr 9, which provides names of individuals who Purpose of 1 Chronicles xii 1–23,” OtSt 21 (1981), 164–76. A.E. Hill identified a chiastic design to the song in 1 Chr 16 (“Patchwork Poetry or Reasoned Verse: Connective Structure in 1 Chronicles xvi,” VT 33 [1983], 97–101); and two commentators independently observed a symmetrical correspondence between the narrative material before this poem and after it (S. Japhet, I & II Chronicles: A Commentary [OTL; Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1993], 312; M.J. Selman, 1 Chronicles: An Introduction and Commentary [Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, 10a; Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1994], 166). Finally, a chiastic pattern comprising 2 Chr 1–9 was first noted by R.B. Dillard, “The Literary Structure of the Chronicler’s Solomon Narrative,” JSOT 30 (1984), 85–93. Apart from this last example, additional citations in support of all these structures, as well as discussion of their precise parameters, appear in the appropriate sections below. Scholars have proposed a variety of other chiastic patterns in Chronicles, typically encompassing smaller stretches of text. See, e.g., Kalimi, Ancient Israelite History, ch. 11; M.K.Y.H. Hom, “Chiasmus in Chronicles: Investigating the Structures of 2 Chronicles 28:16–21; 33:1–20; and 31:20–32:33,” Andrews University Seminary Studies 47 (2009), 163–79; and the patterns mentioned below in the latter part of n. 18. In many instances, relatively confined chiasms may be present within broader ones. We shall be considering only the putative structures that are relevant to the thesis of this study. From 2 Chr 10 to the end of the book, the text more closely follows the royal history of Judah as it appears in Kings, so that instances of chiasm resulting from revision and rearrangement of material, as in the case of the structures proposed by Hom, appear to govern only relatively brief passages. 3 S. Zalewski, “Now rise up, O Lord, and go to your resting-place”: A Literary Study of the Ark Narrative in the Book of Chronicles (Beersheba: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2007), 74–75 (Hebrew). 4 For an overview and discussion of efforts to account for the presence of this story see G.N. Knoppers, “Israel’s First King and ‘the Kingdom of [the Lord] in the hands of the sons of David’: The Place of the Saulide Monarchy in the Chronicler’s Historiography,” in C.S. Ehrlich and M.C. White (eds), Saul in Story and Tradition (FAT, 47; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 187–213. An earlier, less expansive version appears in Knoppers, I Chronicles 10–29: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 12a; New York: Doubleday, 2004), 526–31.

YITZHAK BERGER

3

inhabited Jerusalem and Gibeon. 5 While commentators typically link this chapter to the genealogies that precede it, and some have attempted to justify this from a structural standpoint, the matter remains decidedly problematic. 6 Still another difficulty arises in connection with 1 Chr 11:4–9, As will be seen, the list of residents of Gibeon presents a particular problem, for it duplicates an account that appears shortly beforehand, near the end of 1 Chr 8. As for the list of residents of Jerusalem, which is dominated by Levites, most commentators explain this to be an account of postexilic settlers, in keeping with a substantially parallel list that appears in Neh 11. According to this view, after the genealogies in the preceding chapters underscore the selection of Israel, this account emphasizes the continued centrality of Israel and its cult in the Chronicler’s own day (see, e.g., G.N. Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB, 12; New York: Doubleday, 2004], 264, and the literature cited there). But if, indeed, the very purpose of the list here is to describe the settlement of postexilic Yehud, it is especially problematic that the text of Chronicles offers no clear indication that it is in fact referring to that time period (cf., e.g., Japhet, Chronicles, 207–8). Moreover, the Gibeonites in the subsequent list are pre-exilic; and, as I shall argue, the two lists strongly appear to parallel one another, under the rubric “the early inhabitants of their land” provided in 1 Chr 9:2. 6 Knoppers, after endorsing the chiastic structure of the genealogies, considers what purpose ch. 9 might serve within the unit; but despite linking ch. 9 to ch. 1 in his outline, he draws no sharp structural correspondence between them that I can detect (I Chronicles 1–9, 260–61, 264). J.T. Sparks’s proposal that the lively, varied description of a cultic community in 9:2–34 generates a contrast—and, in turn, a structural link—to the “barren” list of names in ch. 1 seems decidedly speculative (The Chronicler’s Genealogies: Towards an Understanding of 1 Chronicles 1–9 [Atlanta: SBL, 2008], 326–31). In the schemes of both of these scholars, moreover, the structural unit concludes before the list of inhabitants of Gibeon which, as will be seen, is best considered together with the account of residents of Jerusalem that appears before it. I recognize that if, indeed, 1 Chr 9 has not been convincingly shown to be part of the pattern that comprises the genealogical section, then the apparent gap in chiastically-arranged material may be considered less of a concern—for the more this gap widens, the less clear it becomes that the Chronicler sought to construct sustained chiastic units. I am nonetheless convinced that the thesis to be presented shortly, which provides that another such pattern encompasses 1 Chr 9–10, offers a strong case that the text exhibits a lengthy, uninterrupted sequence of chiastic structures. Moreover, it will be argued that the proposed chiastic reading of the ark narrative in 1 Chr 13–16 has considerable merit, making it that much more likely 5

4

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES

a description of David’s conquest and settlement of Jerusalem. Again, despite efforts to account for the placement of this passage, its inclusion near the beginning of a chiastic presentation of David’s supporters has resisted satisfactory explanation. 7 This essay makes the following primary claims: 1. 1 Chr 9 does not belong with the genealogical material in chs. 1–8. Rather, it marks the beginning of a new chiasm, one that continues through ch. 10 and ends with David’s conquest and settlement of Jerusalem in 11:4– 9. This independent pattern underscores the displacement of Saul and his cult city of Gibeon by David and his own cult city of Jerusalem, in line with several recent studies which, in evaluating the Chronicler’s attitude toward Saul and the tribe of Benjamin, consider the broader question of the postexilic status of Gibeon and the Saulides. 8 It will be argued that this that patterns of this kind dominate at least the first half of 1 Chronicles. 7 Discussion and citations appear in the relevant section below. 8 A relatively early and important discussion of the evidence suggesting a historical link between Saul and Gibeon appears in J. Blenkinsopp, “Did Saul Make Gibeon His Capital?” VT 24 (1974), 1–7. The relevance of this matter to Chronistic ideology is the primary subject of S.D. Walters, “Saul of Gibeon,” JSOT 52 (1991), 61–76. The foundational arguments, based on textual and archeological evidence, that Benjaminites in the postexilic period sought primacy for themselves and the city of Gibeon—and a consideration of the relevance of this to the interpretation of Chronicles—appear in D. Edelman, “Did Saulide-Davidic Rivalry Resurface in Early Persian Yehud?” in J.A. Dearman and M.P. Graham (eds), The Land that I Will Show You: Essays on the History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East in Honor of J. Maxwell Miller (JSOTSup, 343; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 69–91; see also D. Edelman, “Gibeon and Gibeonites Revisited,” in O. Lipschits and J. Blenkinsopp (eds), Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2003), 153–67. Edelman’s position finds further support and elaboration in Knoppers, “Israel’s First King,” esp. 206–10; Y. Amit, “The Saul Polemic in the Persian Period,” in O. Lipschits and M. Oeming (eds), Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 647–61, but more extensively in Y. Amit, In Praise of Editing in the Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays in Retrospect (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 39; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2012), 233–47; and L.C. Jonker, “Revisiting the Saul Narrative in Chronicles: Interacting with the Persian Imperial Context,” OTE 23 (2010), 283– 305. For citations of other studies suggesting that a pro-Saulide ideology persisted after the exile, and may even be present in some Rabbinic sources, see R. Rezetko, Source and Revision in the Narratives of David’s Transfer of the Ark: Text, Language, and Story in 2 Samuel 6 and 1 Chronicles 13, 15–16 (New York/London: T&T Clark,

YITZHAK BERGER

5

proposal resolves all the difficulties mentioned, and helps explain the movement from the genealogical introduction to the account of David’s rise. 2. A Saul-related frame surrounds the recently noted chiastic arrangement of the ark narrative. This pattern culminates in the last scene of 1 Chr 15, where the Chronicler, as is widely observed, revises his source material so that Michal’s reaction as the ark reaches its destination highlights the failure of Saul in the cultic realm. 9 It emerges, in turn, that the structural units composing the first half of 1 Chronicles play an important role in presenting David’s cultic initiatives in favorable contrast to those of his Benjaminite predecessor. What is more, this analysis gives rise to an important and suggestive hypothesis regarding the Chronicler’s method: in constructing a work primarily by means of judicious, often near-verbatim deployment of material that was already in circulation—even, at least in some instances, recognized as canonical—the Chronicler depended heavily upon structural design in order to produce new meaning and convey the book’s novel ideological message. 10 For the chiastic patterns chiefly to be discussed do not generate mere convenience or aesthetic quality, but rather underscore contrasts and inversions that contribute substantially to the development of theme. 11 Should this hypothesis prove correct, any effort to understand the 2007), 52; and note especially the argument of M.Z. Brettler, who concludes that the Chronicler shows pointed resistance to such an ideology (The Creation of History in Ancient Israel [London: Routledge, 1995], 109–11). With many scholars (e.g., Williamson, Chronicles, 16), I favor dating Chronicles around the middle of the fourth century BCE, in the late Persian period. An early Hellenistic date would not, however, undermine my argument, even as a number of the sources cited here address the Persian period specifically; for it stands to reason that the relevant ideological tensions and concerns would not have ceased with the emergence of a new power. 9 See, e.g., Knoppers, I Chronicles 10–29, 626. Regarding the assumption that the Chronicler was working off a text similar to that of Samuel, see below, n. 37. 10 It remains a fairly standard assumption that the principal sources utilized by the Chronicler were, at the time, already considered authoritative. For a recent articulation of this, see R.W. Klein, 1 Chronicles: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2006), 44. Furthermore, even according to those who express skepticism that Chronicles is secondary to Samuel–Kings (see below, n. 37), it remains highly plausible that the source-material in question was familiar to the Chronicler’s audience. 11 On the importance of purposefulness in proposed chiastic structures, see,

6

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES

book’s content and purpose would properly consider the literary design produced by the Chronicler’s selection, adaptation, and sequencing of expansive blocks of earlier material. In the concluding section, accordingly, in a provisional effort to apply such a methodology, I propose a broad symmetrical reading of 1 Chr 17–29 which, if judged to be persuasive, bears important thematic implications. Furthermore, in conjunction with the other structures to be presented, this proposal shall offer a tentative means of evaluating the entirety of 1 Chr 1– 2 Chr 9 as a series of chiastic units.

1. “EXTENDED CHIASMUS”: SOME OBSERVATIONS ON METHOD While the wide use of chiasm in ancient texts is hardly disputed, several scholars have attempted to formulate methodological principles to govern the search for such patterns. 12 Of particular relevance here is a relatively extensive set of criteria offered by Blomberg for assessing the persuasiveness of a perceived “extended chiasmus,” criteria which, to be sure, he rightly acknowledges cannot be applied rigidly and “are seldom fulfilled in toto even by well-established chiastic structures.” 13 Significantly, the patterns to be discussed score quite well when evaluated based on the constraints that Blomberg sets forth, for as a general matter we may affirm the following: 1. The proposed structures are at least as straightforward as other apparent structural options, and indeed resolve inter alia, J.W. Welch, “Criteria for Identifying and Evaluating the Presence of Chiasmus,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 4 (1995), 1–15 (5–6); M.J. Boda, “Chiasmus in Ubiquity: Symmetrical Mirages in Nehemiah 9,” JSOT 71 (1996), 55– 70 (58); and D.P. Wright, “The Fallacies of Chiasmus. A Critique of Structures Proposed for the Covenant Collection (Exodus 20:23–23:19),” ZAR 10 (2004), 143–68 (168). Concerning ways in which a chiastic arrangement of material might contribute to meaning, see also the important study by E. Assis, “Chiasmus in Biblical Narrative: Rhetoric of Characterization,” Prooftexts 22 (2003), 273–304; but note the critical remarks by Wright, “Fallacies of Chiasmus,” 143 n. 2. 12 For detailed lists of criteria see, e.g., C. Blomberg, “The Structure of 2 Corinthians 1–7,” Criswell Theological Review 4 (1989), 3–20; Welch, “Criteria”; Boda, “Chiasmus in Ubiquity,” 56–58; and Wright, “Fallacies of Chiasmus,” 166–68. 13 Blomberg, “Structure,” 5–7. Most of Blomberg’s criteria, as well as the qualification that I cite here, appear in one form or another in other treatments also.

YITZHAK BERGER

7

difficulties that others do not. 2. At least some connections between the two halves of each pattern have tended to be noticed irrespective of the question of design. 3. Whereas content-based correspondences dominate the structures to be presented, some distinctive lexical connections play an important role. 4. Corresponding terms, where present, give expression to ideas of some genuine importance. 5. Corresponding themes and terminology tend to be limited to the appropriate sections within each structure. 6. The proposed patterns divide the text at points that are decidedly reasonable. 7. In most instances, the thematic center—generally also a pivot-point—occupies the middle of the structure. 8. No pattern depends upon the shifting of components from their place in the textual sequence, notwithstanding one carefully-considered alternative that features an imperfection of this sort. Among the criteria on the list in question, only one remains unaddressed: the “desirable” presence of a substantial number of components (e.g., ABCC’B’A’) rather than just one or two corresponding sets (ABA’ or ABB’A’). The new patterns to be proposed in fact contain only two sets each, a disadvantage that, even if seen to carry some force, would likely not prove decisive where the vast majority of criteria are indeed met. Beyond this, two matters noted earlier must inform the evaluation of any observed deficiency in the patterns to be considered. First, there is wide recognition of multiple expansive chiasms in 1 Chronicles. Accordingly, additional perceived structures of this sort may be said, in methodological terminology set forth by Welch, to exhibit appropriate “compatibility” with the author’s literary preferences. 14 Especially in a case like the present one, 14

Welch, “Criteria,” 9.

8

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES

where the suggested patterns fill gaps in a sequence of material otherwise characterized by the same kind of design, evidence in their favor becomes substantially more likely to tip the balance in a positive direction. Second, and crucially, in keeping with other, more established chiasms in the book, my argument provides that the Chronicler designed new structures by adapting and rearranging large blocks of prior material. This doubtless posed a significant challenge, and we shall witness some notable ingenuity in the pattern comprising 1 Chr 13–15 which, among other considerations in its favor, contains an impressive quantity of corresponding elements. More typically, however, given the constraints of the Chronicler’s task, the quest for symmetry would understandably have yielded some imperfection, including structures that contain a relatively limited number of components despite the expansiveness of the material covered by them. This latter consideration, in fact, carries substantial force in connection with two other methodological concerns. First, I have acknowledged that thematic correlations are essential to the argument of this essay, even though criterion 3 above affirms that lexical correspondences provide a sounder basis for identifying chiasm than do thematic ones. Indeed, in support of this methodological criterion, recent scholars warn against excessive reliance on theme-based “sectional summary statements” in connection with proposed macro-chiastic patterns. Thus, highlighting the earlier work of Thomson, de Silva underscores the greater reliability of shared vocabulary and syntax—of the kind generally found in microchiastic structures—and calls attention to the dangers of “headings” that offer a putative synopsis of material said to compose a section of a chiasm. 15 Nevertheless, it bears emphasis that, if texts employ macro-chiasms at all, thematic correlations must invariably play a central role in them. In our case in particular, moreover, if the Chronicler sought to generate symmetrical structures by means of adaptation and organization of existing blocks of material, it would have proved especially difficult to produce consistent lexical correspondences. Rather, the desired chiastic relationships would inevitably have been constructed out of passages exhibiting similar content. Indeed, if the thesis advanced here is correct, the careful arrangement of such fundamentally analogous passages is precisely what D.A. deSilva, “X Marks the Spot? A Critique of the Use of Chiasmus in Macro-Structural Analyses of Revelation,” JSNT 30 (2008), 343–71 (347–48); I.H. Thomson, Chiasmus in the Pauline Letters (JSNTSup, 111; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 30–33. 15

YITZHAK BERGER

9

facilitates the expression of our book’s unique theological message. Accordingly, the added measure of subjectivity that characterizes this thematic variety of chiastic analysis ought not to prevent us from evaluating the evidence with an open mind, however important it might be to maintain an awareness of this indisputably genuine concern. Second, consider the crucial methodological preference for balance of length between corresponding elements within a chiastic pattern. 16 In the case of “extended chiasmus,” where a relatively large span of text may comprise just a single structural component, some measure of variability might be expected between elements that correspond to one another; and Blomberg’s omission of this oft-mentioned principle from his list, if not exploited beyond reason, would appear to be defensible. What is more, though, in our case, the Chronicler’s undertaking would likely have made it especially difficult to achieve consistent balance between components. A variety of concerns, after all, would have informed the decision of what sections of text to incorporate, what their boundaries should be, and how and to what extent to alter their content, so that the quest to deploy them in chiastic arrangements—however important to the Chronicler’s effort to generate structure and meaning—would probably, at least in some instances, have yielded some nontrivial imbalance of length. Additionally, in cases where the boundaries of the selected texts are discernible with little dif-ficulty, particularly to the reader familiar with their source, these texts could have remained identifiable as distinct, corresponding segments of a broad structure even in the presence of some such imbalance. Accordingly, I have given careful consideration to relevant methodological concerns when evaluating each hypothesis, taking into account the implications of the distinctive compositional nature of the book of Chronicles. In the analysis that follows, the persuasiveness of each argument shall depend on the soundness of my judgments.

2. CHIASTIC PATTERNS IN 1 CHR 1–12

T HE GENEALOGICAL PROLOGUE In the presentation of tribal genealogies in the early chapters of Chronicles, geographical considerations play an undeniable role. 17 Nevertheless, a See, e.g., Welch, “Criteria,” 11. Both Boda (“Chiasmus in Ubiquity,” 56) and Wright (“Fallacies of Chiasmus,” 166), moreover, place this criterion at the top of their respective lists. 17 Beyond what appears in the outline immediately below, note that the genealogy of the southern tribe of Simeon appears between those of Judah and the 16

10

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES

majority of scholars have, at a minimum, seen thematic significance in the placement of the royal tribes of Judah and Benjamin, respectively, at the beginning and at the end, and the tribe of Levi—including mention of its cultic role—in the middle. 18 A skeletal outline of this section of the book, Transjordanian tribes—for the Simeonites, we are told, lost substantial territory to the neighboring tribe of Judah, after which a group of them moved east of the Jordan where they conquered and settled an area that had been populated by Amalekites (1 Chr 4:41–43). For a recent discussion that incorporates geographical considerations as well as the basic chiastic framework emerging from the observations of Michaeli and Williamson (above, n. 2), see T. Willi, Chronik, vol. 1, 1. Chronik 1,1–10,14 (BKAT, 24; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2009), 54–62. 18 Since Williamson, a number of scholars have outlined one variation or another of this chiastic arrangement. These include L.C. Allen, “Kerygmatic Units in 1 & 2 Chronicles,” JSOT 41 (1988), 21–36 (22), and in his commentary on Chronicles in NIB III (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1999), 320; W. Johnstone, 1 and 2 Chronicles, vol. 1, 1 Chronicles 1–2 Chronicles 9: Israel’s Place Among the Nations (JSOTSup, 253; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 37–40; M.A. Throntveit, “Was the Chronicler a Spin Doctor? David in the Books of Chronicles,” Word & World 23 (2003), 374–81 (376). Cited 2/26/14. Online: http://www.luthersem.edu/word&world/Archives/23-4_David/234_Throntveit.pdf; and Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9, 260–61. An especially elaborate, more controversial version of the pattern forms the basis of the recent study by Sparks, Chronicler’s Genealogies. The only critic who poses a challenge to the fundamental validity of this chiasm is G. Galil in his online review of Sparks’s work, RBL, 7 (2009). Cited 2/26/14. Online: http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/ 6682_7246.pdf. Galil rejects even the more basic version of the pattern (as it is presented by Knoppers), on the grounds that descendants of Benjamin appear not only at the end but also in 1 Chr 7:6–12, among other tribes west of the Jordan. Rather, Galil proposes that these two sets of Benjaminite lines frame a more limited chiastic unit, one that is confined to chs. 7– 8 and comprises the non-Leahide genealogies: A) lines of Benjamin; B) descendants of Bilhah; C) lines of Manasseh; D) lines of Ephraim; D’) settlements of Ephraim; C’) settlements of Manasseh; B’) descendants of Zilpah; A’) lines of Benjamin. Yet however persuasive this pattern might be, it in no way precludes the presence of the more encompassing one under discussion. By way of analogy, consider that scholars endorsing the broader structure generally acknowledge that its first component, the genealogy of Judah, follows one or another chiastic arrangement of its own. See, e.g., the widely-cited proposal by H.G.M. William-son, “Sources and Redaction in the Chronicler’s Genealogy of Judah,” JBL 98 (1979), 351–59. Note

YITZHAK BERGER

11

following the basic arrangement endorsed by commentators, looks as follows: A Royal tribe of Judah B Transjordanian tribes X Tribe of Levi B’ Tribes west of the Jordan A’ Royal tribe of Benjamin Taken straightforwardly, however, this pattern spans only from 1 Chr 2:3 to the end of 1 Chr 8, leaving out the world ancestry and Patriarchal lines in 1:1–2:2 as well as the lists of inhabitants of Jerusalem and Gibeon in ch. 9. As noted, efforts to present ch. 9 as part of the pattern have proved unconvincing, including the argument that, in one way or another, it corresponds to 1:1–2:2. 19 Accordingly, we shall shortly consider the possibility that ch. 9 initiates a new, structurally independent sequence. As for 1:1–2:2, it might in principle be suggested that: 1. This introductory passage plays no role in any notable structural pattern; or alternatively, 2. It belongs with the lines of Judah, thereby commencing a process of election that extends from the beginning of human history up to the emergence of King David. A different proposal, however, favored by Braun, Klein, and Willi, would appear to merit serious consideration. These scholars, noting the Chronicler’s inversion of the birth order of Ishmael and Isaac, present the following dual chiastic outline of this material:20 I Ten generations from Adam to Noah A Shem B Ham C Japheth C’ Progeny of Japheth B’ Progeny of Ham A’ Progeny of Shem II Ten generations from Shem to Abraham A Isaac also Welch’s methodological assertion that “longer passages are more defensibly chiastic where the same text also contains a fair amount of short chiasmus” (J.W. Welch, “Introduction,” in idem, Chiasmus in Antiquity, 13). 19 See above, n. 6. 20 R.L. Braun, 1 Chronicles (WBC; Waco, Tex.: Word Books, 1986), 13; Klein, 1 Chronicles, 57; Willi, Chronik, 20.

12

CHIASM AND MEANING IN 1 CHRONICLES B Ishmael B’ Progeny of Ishmael (and Keturah) A’ Progeny of Isaac

It is, of course, rather unconventional for the corresponding elements of a chiasm to differ in size so dramatically. In this instance, however, the correspondences remain easily discernible notwithstanding this shortcoming. Accordingly, a chiastically-inclined author, after lifting the first of these two structural arrangements from Genesis intact (Gen 10), would have needed only to present Isaac’s name before that of his brother in order to complete this dual chiastic adaptation of the pre-Israelite genealogical records. 21

SAUL AND GIBEON VS . DAVID AND J ERUSALEM Let us now direct our attention to 1 Chr 9, where the opening verse provides a stark conclusion to the genealogical chapters: “And all Israel was registered by genealogical lines, and these are recorded in the Book of the Kings of Israel. And Judah was exiled to Babylonia because of its unfaithfulness.” 22 When the text then introduces an account of “the early inhabitants of their land” (v. 2), this would appear to mark something fundamentally new. The account itself consists of two sections with parallel introductions, the first of which reads “In Jerusalem there lived …” In addition to the imperfection regarding the progeny of Keturah, for which, if this suggestion is correct, the Chronicler found no attractive solution, we must also acknowledge, among the progeny of Isaac, the presence of the descendants of Seir within those of Esau (1 Chr 1:38–42) in accordance with the text in Genesis upon which the lines are based (Gen 36). It also bears mention—although this would by no means undermine the structure—that the reference to Isaac before Ishmael might show the influence of Gen 25:9, where Abraham is buried by “his sons Isaac and Ishmael.” (The nineteenth-century commentary of M.L. Malbim, printed in many Rabbinic Bibles, at 1 Chr 1:28, appears to be the first to acknowledge the similarity to this verse in Genesis.) 22 The role of this verse as some kind of transition finds recognition in numerous studies, including some that, in spite of it, do not hesitate to assign ch. 9 to the same structural unit as the genealogical material in chs. 1–8 (e.g., Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9, 486). Of particular note, on the other hand, is Walters’ more definitive assertion that the “genealogical material comes to an end” and “the rest of the book begins” at this point (“Saul of Gibeon,” 63). Not coincidentally, Walters, rightly in my opinion, evaluates the role of the duplicate Saulide genealogy in 1 Chr 9 in light of the prior material in that chapter specifically (“Saul of Gibeon,” 73–74). His conclusions, to be sure, differ substantially from my own. 21

YITZHAK BERGER

13

(# D in closed unaccented syllables in the ptc, it must have been before the Canaanite shift in general and before BH segolization in particular. The Canaanite shift has been placed as early as the fifteenth century (e.g., Harris, Development of the Canaanite Dialects, 43–45). A.F. Rainey (Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets: A Linguistic Analysis of the Mixed Dialect Used By Scribes From Canaan [4 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1996], 1:48) provides evidence that Canaanite ć > ň in the Jerusalem scribe’s mother-tongue, as the first person singular pronoun in EA 287:66 reads DQX-ki for expected D-QD-ku. Cf. also Garr, Dialect Geography, 31; J. Tropper and J.-P. Vita, Kanaano-akkadische der Amarnazeit (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2010), 88–89. Notice the ptc from EA 256:9: V×-ki-QL, showing the shift ć > ň in the ptc. Therefore Revell’s proposed phonological shift must have occurred quite early, before Canaanite *ć > ň. In light of this, is Revell’s shift indigenous to Hebrew only? If not, are other reflexes of this shift detectible elsewhere? The possibility of *ć influencing the quality of original i is particularly problematic if the Canaanite shift was conditioned by accent. If so, *TćʞLOWX ! TňʞLOWX, with *i in a doubly closed unaccented syllable. Therefore the ptc should show *i > D in all instances before the shift *ć!ň, and thus the preservation of i in TňʞʠO¿TňʞĔO¿ should not occur at all, if the suggestion made in section II (that the PH ptc *TňʞLOWX gave rise to the secondary TňʞʠO¿TňʞĔO¿ after the loss of *-DW) is accepted. (For ʠ in TňʞʠO¿ representing reduced i [not D], see page 10–11 and notes 46 and 62 above). Even if the Canaanite shift was not conditioned, such a suggestion (admittedly couched by Revell in hypothetical language) seems too conjectural to be helpful. 65 Justice cannot be done to Revell’s study in a single footnote, but for the purposes here, Revell finds the following reflexes of *CiCC in varying degrees: 1) in an open stressed syllable in context—ʜĔUÇ and VĖJňO; 2) in an open stressed syllable in pause—ʜĔUÇTćPHʜVĖJňO; 3) in closed unstressed syllables—VĖJňOʚËUHTSDWDʚ.

THE BIBLICAL HEBREW FEMININE SINGULAR QAL PARTICIPLE 275 consonantal sounds, syllable structure, and the relation of the word to surrounding context, and for these reasons there is no need to invoke analogy. 66 If one applies the reflexes of *CiCC enumerated by Revell to the fs Qal ptc TňʞHOHW, naturally affinities exist. 67 Yet a few significant anomalies occur. The ptc \ÑʰDʜWÑ (2 Chr 22:3) has SDWDʚ in a closed unstressed syllable, where I- ćOHSʲD\LQ segolates show VĖJňO (or ʚËUHT). 68 In stressed open syllables in context, I-ʱćOHS/ʲD\LQ *CiCC forms show ʜĔUÇ, 69 but II-ʯćOHS/ʰD\LQ fs Qal ptcs do not, e.g., PňʯHVHW (Ezek 21:15, 18), xňʯHOHW (1 Kgs 2:20, 22), EňʰHUHW (Jer 20:9), JňʰHOHW (Ezek 16:45), ʜňʰHTHW (2 Kgs 8:5). Since ʯćOHS and ʰD\LQ form a major extreme suggested by Revell, 70 the ptc’s II-ʯćOHS/ʰD\LQ anomalies are striking. That the above TňʞHOHW forms do not conform to the conditioning factors enumerated by Revell, but instead show consistent morphology (TňʞćOHW TňʞHOHW TňʞDOW-), demonstrates that the ptc’s paradigm has been leveled, accounting for the absence of expected phonetic conditioning through analogical leveling. In light of this analogical leveling, which has overridden the expected outcomes based on conditioning factors of *CiCC formations, it seems acceptable to consider that the inflected TňʞDOW- may have arisen not from the early influence of *ć, but through later (post-segolization) analogical influence. In this regard, it is difficult to overlook the fact that -CHOHW of the ptc regularly behaves in every way as do masculine *TDʞO nouns (e.g., CHOHW/ʯHUHʜ, -CDOW/ ʯDUʜ-, -CćOHW/ʯćUHʜ), in contradistinction to I-\ÑG infinitives and *TLʞO nouns. 71 For this reason, one may postulate that the inflected TňʞDOW- was formed on analogy with *TDʞO nouns, rather than being influenced by *ć. Given the identical structure and behavior between the ptc’s -CHOHW and *THʞHO  *TDʞO nouns, *TDʞO nouns likely influenced inflected TRʞHOHW to

E.J. Revell, “The Voweling of ‘i Type’ Segolates,” 327; cf. Revell’s comments concerning the ptc (ibid. 319–20). 67 Doing so means comparing *-C iC t of the ptc to *CiCC, and the shared 2  features between these suggests they are comparable, despite the presence of the morpheme boundary in the ptc. 68 Revell, “The Voweling of ‘i Type’ Segolates,” 320. This form, however, fits under Revell’s study in note 64 above which considers closed unaccented syllables in particular, where Revell states that all *CiCC nouns, where the vowel is preceded by ʱćOHS or ʲD\LQ, show ʜĔUÇ. See Revell, “The Tiberian Reflexes,” 191. Note also that first ʚÇW nouns show ʜĔUÇ (ibid.), but notice VňʚDUWĔN (Ezek 27:12, 16, 18) 69 Ibid. 70 Revell, “The Voweling of ‘i Type’ Segolates,” 322. 71 Cf. note 63 (end) and note 75 (end). 66

276

J.H. PRICE

TňʞDOW- through analogy after segolization. This analogy has thoroughly spread through the ptc’s paradigm. The importance of segolization for this analogy may be seen in BH synchronic data. When -HOHW, the most common of the segolate endings, 72 comes from -DOW, D is typically found in the BH inflected forms, but D sometimes occurs when the segolate ending comes from -LOt or original Ī. 73 Similarly, *TDʞO and *TLʞO nouns merged (via inflected forms), 74 complicating the identification of *TLʞO nouns. 75 The nature of VĖJňO itself facilitated reconstruction. 76 According to Blau, VĖJňO appears to be an allophone of i or D in certain cases, and may represent the cancellation of the opposition D : i. 77 Thus, synchronic data indicate that VĖJňO was able to absorb D and i, and therefore the onset of segolization enabled TňʞDOW- to emerge on analogy with structurally similar TDʞO- nouns. Such widespread reshaping of TňʞHOHW is not surprising if its most formally distinct characteristic (an initial long vowel) is its most Joüon and Muraoka, Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, §89g; Cf. GKC §89c. Ibid., §97Fb, 89g. Cf. the 3LʰHO fs ptcs mʠNDxxĔS¿ (Exod 22:17) vs. mʠGDEEHUHW (1 Sam 1:13), and the HiphʰLO ptcs kʠPDENËU¿ (Jer 4:31) vs. PDʚĉ]HTHW (Neh 4:11). Forms with -ĔOHW, which one would logically expect as the development of *TňʞLOW, are rare; see ibid., §89h. 74 Joüon and Muraoka, Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, §96Ac, f. 75 Joüon and Muraoka, Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, §96Af; Revell, “The Voweling of ‘i Type’ Segolates,” 319–20. Note that THʞHO nouns typically show ć in pause, though a few (originally *TLʞO) show e; cf. Joüon and Muraoka, Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, §96Ac; Revell, “The Voweling of ‘i Type’ Segolates,” 319. Geiger (“Schreibung und Vokalisierung,” 346) finds fs Qal ptcs without pausal lengthening in the following instances: Ruth 4:16, Gen 16:8, 1 Chr 7:18, Amos 9:11, 1 Kgs 1:2, and Eccl 7:27. Outside of Gen 16:8 (EňUDʚDW), all have VĖJňO. Perhaps these may be considered as evidence of original i, but their rarity suggests otherwise. 76 Significantly, VĖJňO is unique to Tiberian Hebrew, as Babylonian SDWDʚ corresponds to both Tiberian VĖJňO and SDWDʚ; see Blau, Phonology and Morphology, 118; Cf. Revell, “The Voweling of ‘i Type’ Segolates,” 325–26. 77 Blau, Phonology and Morphology, §3.5.6.2. In this regard, note that among the data contained in Origen’s Secunda collected by Janssens is a 1LSʰDO fs ptc from Ps 89:29: ÅŖŖĸŸ¿ for BH QHʯĖPHQHW. Though Tiberian VĖJňO is indicated by alpha and epsilon in transcription, that the VĖJňO is represented by epsilon whereas the expected segolate ending has two alphas, is noteworthy. For ÅŖŖĸŸ¿, see G. Janssens, Studies in Hebrew Historical Linguistics Based on Origen’s Secunda (Leuven: Peeters, 1982), 164. Additionally, it has been argued that VĖJňO is a reflex of *D, e.g., R.L. Goerwitz, “Tiberian Hebrew Segol: A Reappraisal,” ZAH 3/1 (1990), 310 (8). 72 73

THE BIBLICAL HEBREW FEMININE SINGULAR QAL PARTICIPLE 277 phonemically relevant characteristic. 78 In fact, this may explain why the paradigm of TňʞHOHW was so thoroughly leveled, contrary to *CiCC formations in general. In other words, the ptc’s form allowed reshaping insofar as it was primarily distinguished by its initial unchangeable long vowel. In short, the morphology of TňʞHOHW is not purely a product of conditioning factors, but also a product of paradigmatic leveling. Such leveling is apparent in those cases where *-C2iCt of the ptc does not conform to the expected outcome of *CiCC. Moreover, SDWDʚ in TňʞDOWentered the ptc’s paradigm via analogy with the structurally similar THʞHO nouns. Both segolization and VĖJňO created an environment in which TňʞHOHW, on analogy with THʞHO nouns, was reformed in the status pronominalis to TňʞDOW-, after the onset of segolization. The ptc’s (TňʞHOHW) structure lent itself to paradigmatic leveling, hence it’s consistent morphology. 79 In summary, this analysis has stressed that the forms of the Qal fs ptc can be explained from the PH level. The ptc’s susceptibility to be influenced by other morphological classes, a phenomenon reflected in both Akkadian and the Masoretic vocalization of BH, lies behind early changes in the ptc’s form. Extant BH evidence indicates the existence of one PH fs Qal ptc, *TňʞLOWX, from which the two BH forms developed. One BH form was occasionally rebuilt on analogy with the nominal systems’ preference for the -â morpheme in light of the ptc’s semantic and syntactic convergence in the construct state with nouns that had the -t morpheme. This form retained traces of *i in the BH form TňʞʠO¿TňʞĔO¿, and it arose Cf. note 6, as well as the anomalies in the masculine singular Qal ptc in note 79, which may also be permissible especially in light of the initial long vowel. 79 The consistent morphology of TňʞHOHW can be brought into clear view when compared to anomalies in the Qal masculine singular ptc. Original i between C2 and C3 in the Qal ptc has unexpected reflexes on a few occasions in the masculine singular (ultra-short vowels appearing in the place of a xĖZĉʯ are not included): D for expected Ĕ in ʯňEDG (Deut 32:28), QňʞDʰ (Ps 94:9), UňJDʰ (Isa 51:15), UňTDʰ (Isa 42:5), xňVDʰ (Lev 11:7) (the appearance of D in these forms is typical for nouns, not ptcs; cf. Revell, “The Tiberian Reflexes,” 196); e for expected Ĕ in PÑʜeʯ (Eccl 7:26), ʚÑʞeʯ (Isa 65:20), QňxHʯ (Isa 24:2), UňSHʯ (2 Kgs 20:5); i for expected Ĕ in WÑPËN (tmyk) (Ps 16:5) (cf. the orthographic oddity VňEÇE [VE\E] in 2 Kgs 8:21). With the addition of a pronominal suffix, some unexpected developments occur, such as: i for expected ʠ in ʯň\LEʠNć (Exod 23:4) and ʯňVLSʠNć (2 Kgs 22:20); e for expected ʠ in \ňʜHUʠNć (Isa 43:1) and QňWHQʠNć (Jer 20:4); and D for expected ʠ in ʯňKDEʠNć (2 Chr 20:7), JňʯDOʠNHP (Isa 43.14), JňʯDOʠNć (Isa 48:17). Note also he personal names ʰňEDG\ćK and ʰňEDG\ćKØ. One might also wish to note xňʯVD\LN in Jer 30:16. These are anomalies, whereas TňʞHOHW has become paradigmatically predictable. 78

278

J.H. PRICE

after the loss of *-DW but before segolization. Consequently, it does not reflect an early ptc with the *-DW morpheme. The second BH form, also developing from *TňʞLOWu, underwent segolization yielding TňʞHOHW. Though *CiCC formations show a complex array of reflexes, TňʞHOHW shows thorough paradigmatic leveling, resulting in consistent morphology. Analogy affected the status pronominalis, as TňʞDOW- was the result of analogical influence from monosyllabic nouns of the same structure aided by the preferred segolate ending -HOHW and the complex relationship of VĖJňO to both SDWDʚ and ʚËULT. As stressed above, all of these conclusions are largely controlled by the overwhelming BH data which suggest one PH participle with the -t morpheme, a preference which runs counter to the nominal system’s favored morpheme -â.

REVIEWS

Stuart Lasine, WEIGHING HEARTS: CHARACTER, JUDGMENT, AND THE ETHICS OF READING THE BIBLE (LHBOTS, 568; New York: T & T Clark, 2012). Pp. xviii + 302. Hardcover. US$130.00. ISBN 978-0-56743-081-6. Reviewed by Jacqueline E. Lapsley Princeton Theological Seminary In this ambitious volume Stuart Lasine examines a number of issues swirling around characters and ethics in the Hebrew Bible. Lasine sets out to integrate several methodologies in his approach to the evaluation of characters: social-psychological theories, literary theories, as well as theories related to moral philosophy. Taking up just one of these methodologies in relation to ethics and character in the Hebrew Bible would be a significant project, so the integration of all of these is monumental indeed. Yet Lasine has been actively working and writing in the area of character and ethics for many years, and is in many ways well-suited to the task. Overall, Lasine demonstrates broad knowledge of the relevant fields as they pertain to character and ethics, and asks penetrating methodological questions about how they might be integrated. The book divides into five parts. The three chapters in Part I ask methodological questions; Part II turns to texts, as chapters 4 and 5 examine the characters of some narrative prophets in 1 Kings; Part III (chs. 6 and 7) looks at Jeroboam, Jehoram, and Ahab, the latter in comparison to Herodotus’s Periander and Homer’s Agamemnon; Part IV (chs. 8 and 9) takes up the self-evaluations of Job and 279

280

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

David, and then an examination of David and of ourselves as readers. This last chapter on David and us, the readers, is the heart of the book. In chapter 2 Lasine asks to what extent the ancients were like us moderns. In other words, how fair is it to use modern standards to judge character when reading biblical characters? Lasine examines ancient and modern conceptions of selfhood, consciousness, and mental space. The secondary literature is reviewed here, as well as many significant biblical texts, including Gen 4, Ps 55, and Job’s speeches, to see how they represent the self, including inner conflict and deliberation. In the end, the answer seems to be a qualified yes; it is fair to see the biblical characters as close enough to ourselves to employ some modern standards in taking up ethical questions. Chapter 3 addresses the methodological questions that arise when looking at texts that appear heavily redacted. How does one talk about the coherence of character in such cases? Lasine examines the prologue to the book of Job, and then narratives involving Moses, Elijah, David, and Zedekiah. Lasine’s point here is that overall narrative coherence often includes inconsistencies of character, and redaction critics also have their assumptions of coherence which need to be examined. The point has been made before, but Lasine makes a good case for his larger argument. Two obscure prophets are the subject of chapter 4, the man of God from Judah in 1 Kgs 13, and the prophet who asks another prophet to hit him in 1 Kgs 20. Having looked at prophets apparently devoid of character, Lasine turns to the powerful figure of Elijah in chapter 5. For Lasine, Elijah shows clear signs of narcissistic personality disorder: he shows “excessive self-concern and [a] desire to be unique and superior” (p. 119). Lasine is evidently dismayed by the extent to which readers are biased in their view of Elijah by the opinions of other characters, including Israel’s deity, and by the “bracketing” of other narratives about “unreliable and untruthful prophets of Yahweh” (p. 122) around Elijah’s stories that may influence readers into taking a positive view of the prophet. In addition to this difference of opinion, it is also possible to account for some of the same features that Lasine sees as symptoms of narcissism as difficulties of the prophetic life—there is a certain torment in being a prophet of YHWH. It seems akin to saying that Jeremiah was clinically depressed; maybe, but it rather misses the point. There is no room at all, in Lasine’s account, for the prophet’s religious vocation, so important according to the narrative; in a sense, it is all just psychologized away. In Part III, Lasine turns to kings, looking at Jeroboam and Jehoram in chapter 6; then Ahab and Periander by comparison, and Ahab and Agamemnon, in chapter 7. Part IV pushes toward the heart of the book: an examination of King David, and an examination of ourselves, biblical

REVIEWS

281

scholars, as readers of the biblical narratives. Who are we as readers? What does the way we read biblical characters and their ethics say about the kind of readers we are? Here Lasine lifts a mirror to us, biblical scholars, that is illuminating in some ways. Through a detailed exploration of David Copperfield and Kafka’s Josef K., Lasine explores the character of King David—as leader, as adulterer, as murderer. He finds King David severely wanting—he, like Elijah, is a narcissist!—he is not “all-too-human” (p. 252) as he has often been depicted by biblical scholars, but is to be roundly condemned for his crimes. Yet Lasine’s ultimate goal is not to condemn David as much as to hold up the character of biblical scholars as readers to fierce scrutiny: why do we let David off the hook? Lasine pushes readers to think carefully about the assumptions behind our ethical judgments; the book is useful and engaging for this reason. Do we let David off lightly just because he is in the Bible and was a “man after God’s own heart”? Furthermore, Lasine integrates material from many disciplines into his work, and the wide range of his research yields numerous insights. Yet, the style of writing does not lend itself to absorption in the argument. Lasine often drops brief quotations into too many sentences, and strings them together. The result in some chapters is a choppy, almost hyperactive style that leaves the uneasy impression that depth has sometimes been sacrificed for breadth, or in some cases, that that which is abundantly clear in the author’s mind has been too quickly committed to the page. It would have served the reader better, perhaps, to paraphrase the views of many of these theorists, thus improving the flow of the prose. But the main difficulty for his analysis, to which allusion was already made in the discussion of the chapter on Elijah, arises in the way Lasine dismisses the religious sensibility and passions animating the authors, and by extension, the characters, of the biblical narratives. There is a power and complexity in these characters that does not come across in this book—the stirring music of the biblical narrative comes across as so many notes on the page.

282

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Jason M. Silverman, PERSEPOLIS AND JERUSALEM: IRANIAN INFLUENCE ON THE APOCALYPTIC HERMENEUTIC (LHBOTS, 558; London: T & T Clark, 2012). Pp. 320. Hardcover. US$146.00. ISBN 978-0567-20551-3. Reviewed by Bennie H. Reynolds III Millsaps College This monograph is a revised version of the author’s 2010 doctoral dissertation (Trinity College Dublin). It successfully attempts to answer a question that has for decades troubled those working on Second Temple Judaism: the types and extents of Persian influence on ideas and institutions within Jewish culture. Silverman proposes a reexamination of both the question and the evidence and produces a study of Jewish “apocalyptic” with enough methodological sophistication to justify his call for renewed scholarly attention. His analysis of Jewish texts in light of Persian texts and traditions is good, but does not form the primary strength of the volume. The author would seem to admit that the results are relatively modest and that the particular examples he examines have been known and debated by specialists for some time. Where Silverman succeeds in greater measure, however, is in reframing the question of how Iranian cultural components might have been integral in the production of apocalypses, apocalypticism, and apocalyptic movements within Second Temple Judaism. In doing so, he takes advantage of and contributes to a more sophisticated scholarly conception of ancient Jewish scribal practices. Since the days in which enthusiasm for finding Persian influences has waned, the sort of parallelomania that might have once sought direct Near Eastern or Greek source texts for every known Jewish text has also waned. It is now clear that even in texts where borrowing is patently obvious, it is rarely a process of copy-and-paste—even in, e.g., highly formulaic legal texts. In other words, most scholars who work on the book of Daniel would see a reflex of the Canaanite combat myth expressed in Dan 7, but I know of no one who would actually propose that the writer of Dan 7 possessed or read what we know as the Ugaritic Ba’al cycle. The process of transmission is complicated and the hermeneutics involved in appropriating and shaping a Bronze Age myth in the second century BCE are equally complex. So while Silverman does not, in most cases, present “smokinggun” evidence of direct borrowing between a Persian text and a Judean text, he often does show that the type of evidence that one finds for Persian influence is no less compelling than the types of parallels that could be found

REVIEWS

283

in Mesopotamia, Egypt, or Greece. Moreover, and even more impressive, he provides a methodology that allows scholars to reimagine and reconstruct the kinds of hermeneutical matrices that might have existed. As he shows, the cultural influences affecting a Judean scribe can hardly be limited to an either/or scenario. For example, to ask whether or not the writer of Dan 2 derived the four kingdoms motif from Hesiod or from the Wahman Yašt is to radically oversimplify the question and deny the literary and cultural sophistication of which Judean scribes were capable, as well as the diverse cultural matrices in which the scribe would have necessarily found themselves. There are points on which I disagree with the author, but these points tend to be related to debates already firmly entrenched among specialists, so it seems unnecessary to raise them here. Instead, I proceed to describe the contents of the book in more detail. Silverman opens the book by assessing the state of the question: what can be learned from past attempts to understand Persian influence on Jewish “apocalyptic?” (Silverman proposes using the adjective “apocalyptic” as a noun that embodies all the concerns relevant to apocalypses, apocalypticism, millenarian movements, etc. Whatever confusion or anachronisms this meta-term might create are overshadowed by its utility.) He suggests that previous studies have been less successful than they might have been because they have focused on the influence of Zoroastrianism. Silverman prefers to investigate “Iranian” rather than “Zoroastrian” influence because doing so allows him to investigate a wider spectrum of traditions, some of which might not have become prominent or permanent fixtures within the religion of the Sassanian period. Of course, Silverman’s primary interests lie in Achaemenid religion, but reconstructing that religion is hardly possible without processing data that is both considerably earlier and later. He spends the last half of the Prolegomena laying out the various debates and consensus points on the origins and development of Jewish “apocalyptic.” His summary is both succinct and even-handed, and he funnels the discussion into a statement of what his study can offer to advance the debates. He does a good job of incorporating theoretical work on religion, especially that of Vroom and Light, which helps to frame a Jewish apocalyptic within a discussion of how religio-cultural interactions take place and on what levels they take place.1 From the beginning, then, the reader understands that he wants to explain Iranian influence in Jewish apocalyptic not via specific instances of, e.g., textual quotations, but through a hermeneutic that was forged in part by interactions with Iranian religio-cultural ideas and institutions: “Each tradition has symbols and categories which are more central and others which are more peripheral. Central elements will be more resistant to influence, while more peripheral ones will be less so…it is necessary to determine the radicalness of the

284

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

proposed element within the perspective of that tradition: the ‘organizational rules’ of the receiving tradition must be taken into account” (p. 37). In other words, Silverman is looking for more than a “smoking gun” linguistic argument that links one Iranian text to one Jewish apocalypse. He is looking for a way in which the various symbols and organizational rules of one religio-cultural system might be imported or transposed onto another. Chapters 1–3 could be the most useful for students of ancient Judaism and the Hebrew Bible. He details the current state of knowledge about the relevant Iranian primary source material (ch. 1) as well as the Achaemenid context in which any cultural transmission would have taken place (ch. 2). Related to these chapters are two helpful appendices at the end of the book: one provides a bibliography of Iranian primary sources and the other a glossary of terms. Finally, he investigates the actual media of influence: the roles of orality and literacy in cultural interactions (ch. 3). Chapter 3 is strong enough to stand on its own, but it is also the most abstracted from the aims of the study. Its strength comes in the ability to demonstrate that apocalypses are more purely scribal (literary) phenomena than related genres like prophecy (even if persons did experience visions). This observation assists one in looking for the most relevant kinds of influences for the genre. Chapters 4–5 consider a selection of specific parallels and similarities between Iranian and Jewish texts. As already mentioned, the particular parallels discussed will already be known to specialists—though several have not been actively debated for some time. These include: Ezek 37:1–14, Ezek 38–39, Dan 2 (and 7), and several concepts and motifs found in 1 Enoch’s Book of Watchers, Book of Parables/Similitudes, and the Birth of Noah Fragment. It is possible that a Judean scribe borrowed directly from a Persian source in several of these cases. But I prefer to view the relationships according to the proposition Silverman articulates in his treatment of the Kulturentstehungsmythos integral to the forbidden knowledge motif found in the Book of Watchers: “One should perhaps posit a scholarly koine or stock of tropes from which the scribe could adapt or borrow. In this koine it is just as likely that the authors of 1 Enoch knew the current Persian variations on the myth as the Greek or Babylonian ones” (p. 185). I have argued recently that the symbolic language of apocalypses is best understood as being drawn from a broad repertoire of Near Eastern tropes and symbols.2 Even if direct and unambiguous evidence of influence is missing, the only logical conclusion is that Persian concepts were just as likely—if not more likely— to be part of the cultural encyclopedia of Jewish scribes during the Second Temple Period than Mesopotamian and Greek concepts.

REVIEWS

285

Silverman closes the study by proposing to understand the possible relationships examined in chapters 4–5 through an intellectual model he describes as an apocalyptic hermeneutic. Integral to this hermeneutic (though to varying degrees) would be concepts such as the Jerusalem temple, immanence and transcendence, theodicy and pessimism, teleology, determinism and freedom, eschatology (imminent and deferred), typology, mythology, prediction, and epistemology. This constellation of concerns can be found in various ways within apocalypses, apocalypticism (as a worldview), and millenarianism (a social movement). It forms a useful basis from which to attempt to understand Iranian influences, not least of which because it does not require a mutually exclusive concept of cultural interactions. I commend this book to all those working on Second Temple Judaism. Specialists working on apocalypses should heed his call to take more seriously the influence of Persian religio-cultural concepts on ancient Judaism. 1 Hendrik M. Vroom, “Syncretism and Dialogue: A Philosophical Analysis,” in Anita M. Leopold and Jeppe S. Jensen (eds), Syncretism in Religion: A Reader (London: Equinox, 2004), 103–12. Timothy Light, “Orthosyncretism: An Account of Melding in Religion,” Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 12 (2000), 162–86. 2 Bennie H. Reynolds III, Between Symbolism and Realism: The Use of Symbolic and Non-Symbolic Language in Ancient Jewish Apocalypses 333–63 BCE (JAJSup, 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011).

Mary E. Mills, URBAN IMAGINATION IN BIBLICAL PROPHECY (FAT, II/51; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011). Pp. xv + 230. Sewn paper. €59.00. ISBN 978-3-16-150816-5. Reviewed by Hilary Marlow University of Cambridge Urban Imagination in Biblical Prophecy by UK scholar Mary Mills is concerned with the spatial aesthetics of biblical texts. In particular it aims “to explore…the embedded urban setting of written prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament” (p. ix). Mills draws on some of the

286

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

theoretical resources of cultural geography to investigate the symbolic cityscapes depicted by biblical prophetic literature. In particular, the concept of the “urban imaginary” taken from the field of psycho-geography enables her to highlight “the varieties of city life which are constructed by an imaginative response to an urban environment” (p. ix). In the short Introduction, Mills explains her rationale for using a modern discipline such as cultural geography to explore biblical urban concerns. Despite the considerable difference between modern and ancient cities, both are spaces that are constructed by means of imaginative responses to a particular environment, and, suggests Mills, her findings regarding biblical cities may offer insights for contemporary readers into modern urban life. The rest of the book falls into four parts: the first and fourth parts are concerned with establishing frameworks and parameters for the analysis, whilst the middle two parts comprise exploration of a number of biblical cityscapes. The work concludes with a bibliography, index of references, and index of authors. Part 1 elaborates on two approaches drawn from cultural geography that are central to Mills’s task: urban psycho-geography and the notion of urban “flaneur” or “drifter” (ch. 2). In chapter 1, cultural geographer Steven Pile’s book Real Cities, with its emphasis on the role of imagination in examining urban identity, is used as a lens through which to read prophetic depictions of the city.1 Chapter 2 develops the idea of the prophet as flaneur, drawing on the work of cultural critics Walter Benjamin and Peter Ackroyd.2 Here, the focus is on the way in which a city is depicted from the perspective of one who is both part of the community, yet separate from it, exemplified in the prophetic ministries of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. In Part 2 of the book, the role of space and place in the prophetic imagination is discussed, with particular regard to the twin icons of city and temple. Chapter 3 focuses on the cosmic and political models of the city in a range of prophetic texts and the tensions between divine and human authority that are depicted through the texts. In chapter 4, Mills draws the work of social thinker Gaston Bachelard into dialogue with the prophet Ezekiel’s two tours of the temple, resulting in a more subjective analysis of the role of spatial tools for evaluating human urban existence.3 The book of Joel is the subject of chapter 5, which examines the role of religious ritual in the restoration of temple-city culture, and in the transformation from fear to hope. Part 3 moves on from the wider considerations of the first two parts to offer three individual case studies of the prophetic treatment of cityspace, namely the great city of Nineveh in the book of Jonah (ch. 6), the simulated visionary city of Zech 1–8 (ch. 7), and the symbolism of death, memorial, and graves in the Minor Prophets (ch. 8). In each case, Mills

REVIEWS

287

draws on the work of contemporary cultural geographers and philosophers to inform, and interact with, her reading of the biblical texts. In Part 4 we return to more a conceptual analysis of certain issues pertaining to the book’s overall theme of prophetic imagination. Chapter 9 examines nature imagery and the theme of creation in prophetic books, drawing on geographer Denis Cosgrove’s approach to the interplay between vision and geography.4 The final chapter (ch. 10) brings together several elements from the rest of the book and asks whether the various individual urban portraits already considered constitute a single reality, namely the city in biblical prophecy. Mills concludes that, although there is no one blueprint for all cities in the prophetic books, a number of themes dominate. These include the importance of the urban temple to provide a link between urban space and cosmic space, the depictions of violence and the destruction of the city, and the prevalence of the imagery of fertility and abundance functioning as a critique of urban society. This book draws on an impressively wide range of studies in cultural geography and related disciplines and makes the case for using them to illuminate the biblical text. However, as with many studies that aim to relate the ancient to the postmodern, some of the links are more tenuous than others, and it is not always easy to see how text and theory connect. The reader’s imagination as well as that of the biblical prophets is in demand to make sense of what is often a confusing interplay between disparate worlds. 1 Steve Pile, Real Cities: Modernity, Space, and the Phantasmagorias of City Life (London: Sage, 2005). 2 Walter Benjamin and Peter Demetz (eds), Reflections, Essays, Aphorisms, Autobiographical Writings (trans Edmund Jephcott; New York: Shocken, 1978); Peter Ackroyd, Hawksmoor (London: Penguin, 1993). 3 Gaston Bachelard, The Poetics of Space (trans. Maria Jolas; Boston: Beacon, 1994). 4 Dennis Cosgrove, Geography of Vision: Seeing, Imagining and Representing the World (New York: I. B. Taurus, 2010).

288

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Melissa A. Jackson, COMEDY AND FEMINIST INTERPRETATION OF THE HEBREW BIBLE: A SUBVERSIVE COLLABORATION (OTM; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Pp. 285. Hardcover. US$136.50. ISBN 978-0-19965-677-6. Reviewed by Jennifer L. Koosed Albright College As her title states, Melissa A. Jackson proposes to read the Hebrew Bible through the lens of both comedy and feminist interpretation. The book begins with an introduction that briefly outlines her approach and methodology followed by a longer introduction to comedy that deals with definitions, features, and functions. The heart of the book consists of nine chapters, each centered on a biblical woman or a group of women: the matriarchs, the women of Exod 1–2, Rahab, Deborah and Jael, Delilah, David’s wives, Jezebel, Ruth, and Esther. She has chosen narratives that feature a female character, and she reads these stories through literarycritical methods with occasional reference to the possible historical-cultural situations of the communities out of which the stories arose. All of her characters have been subjects of feminist inquiry and all, at least from Jackson’s perspective, “have a compelling comic side as well” (p. 4). Jackson is not just looking for a funny incident here, a joke there. Instead, she argues that humor is “pervasive” (p. 5) in the Hebrew Scriptures. She intends to prove her point by the weight of cumulative evidence. She seeks to demonstrate that each female figure is the hero in a comic episode, and, since her nine chapters do cover a significant portion of the text, the conclusion that humor is pervasive will inevitably follow. The success of her thesis lies in her ability to convince her readers that all of the episodes are, indeed, funny. Her first chapter, “An Introduction to Comedy,” addresses the complicated definitions of such terms as “laughter,” “comedy,” and “humor.” In the end, Jackson does not employ a narrow and fixed definition of comedic terms, but instead takes a broad and flexible approach. She then recounts a brief history of comedy and its relationship to tragedy. This chapter also addresses the features of comedy, outlining comedy’s literary devices (characterization, plot, wordplay, irony, reversals, repetitions, and surprises) and psychological and social features (including complexity, a high tolerance for disorder and ambiguity, focus on materiality, the construction of an “anti-hero,” and egalitarian impulses).

REVIEWS

289

The next section looks at comedy’s psychological and social functions (including boundary drawing, instruction, subverting and preserving the status quo, and aiding survival). Jackson draws on historical, philosophical, and literary studies of comedy, and there is much in this chapter that could provide a framework for future studies of comedy in scripture. Jackson concludes her introduction by responding to the various objections that her study might elicit. Perhaps the most serious objections note the vast disparity between the biblical world and our own. In every definition of comedy there is the acknowledgment that “Comedy is tied inextricably to its originating culture, time, and context” (p. 29). Therefore, any study of comedy in the Hebrew Bible risks both mistakes in “translation” and also the imposition of categories on the text that are both anachronistic and alien. Of course, as Jackson notes, this risk is inherent in almost any approach to the Bible. However, the fact that comedy is deeply situational and subjective will continue to challenge Jackson’s interpretations as her work proceeds. The book makes its best cases for comedy when it addresses stories that have been called humorous in the past. The matriarchs can be characterized as tricksters, at least to some extent, and there is a certain comedic effect in their stories of deception and triumph (ch. 2); Ruth is also a trickster and her story is a bawdy harvest tale (ch. 9); Esther can be understood as a carnivalesque farce (ch. 10). In fact, all of Jackson’s arguments are deeply reliant on previous scholarship, and much of what she presents is not new. What she lacks in innovation, however, she gains in comprehensiveness. Not only does her scope render her book a good resource for anyone interested in comedy in general and these female figures in particular, it could also be used with much success in the classroom, even the undergraduate classroom. For example, chapter two presents various definitions and examples of trickster figures; in chapter six, the many different assessments of Delilah’s character are collected together. The thesis is clear and consistent, which enables student readers especially to engage and debate. The weakest cases for comedy are some of her more original proposals. It is hard to see Michal’s and Bathsheba’s stories as anything but tragic (ch. 7). Not only do these stories lack the classical narrative arc of comedy (comedies end in marriages or some other kind of celebration), there is nothing that strikes this reader, at least, as funny. For example, Jackson states that “Palti(el)’s portrayal is humorous” (p. 147); yet, I have always found this brief episode in Michal’s story poignantly sad. Jezebel (ch. 8) may be a joke, but one that relies on misogyny and xenophobia. To be fair, Jackson does occasionally acknowledge that the comedy may be hard to find in some of these more violent narratives, and she does explore with

290

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

nuance the ways in which the comedy depends on how the social boundaries are drawn with regard to gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and nationality. But if she is relying on critical mass to demonstrate the thesis that comedy is a pervasive feature of the Hebrew Bible, these questions undermine her larger project. Jackson’s book ends with two concluding chapters. The first pulls together her argument about comedy in the Hebrew Bible, and the second then links feminist interpretation to comedic understandings. In the first (ch. 11), she continues to build on her nuanced readings of violence and foreignness in the stories. The final statements about the earthy, embodied, redemptive power of laughter make a general case for comedy as the heart of Israel’s sacred Scripture. In the second conclusion (ch. 12), Jackson explores “nine points of contact” (p. 234) between her two lenses. Here and throughout, she does demonstrate how productive such collaboration can be. Jackson stops short, however, of a truly subversive collaboration. One of the affinities between comic readings and feminist approaches is the centrality of context and subjectivity. Jackson notes that “Feminist critique takes a positive position on the subjectivity of context and encourages scholars to utilize it, rather than to repress or deny it” (p. 238). Yet, Jackson never really explores this subjectivity, and, when she discusses context, she moves into historical criticism and attempts to construct the original setting of the story. Jackson carefully retains an objective, scholarly voice even as she discusses the ways in which feminist interpretation and comedic readings both undercut the claims of objectivity. In this way, she may be criticized for failing to take seriously the very affinity that she highlights. To return to an example I note above, Palti is not objectively funny, nor is there any data that would allow us to hear the reactions of the original audience. The only context to which I have access is the contemporary context. Palti is not funny to me; but Palti is funny to Jackson. It is feminism’s deep awareness of the subjectivity, experience, context, and social location of the reader which is absent in Jackson’s work. Jackson presents some interesting and compelling readings of biblical women at the intersections of comedy and feminist interpretation. But both comedy and feminist interpretation are about risk, and Jackson could have risked more.

REVIEWS

291

Robert E. Wallace, THE NARRATIVE EFFECT OF BOOK IV OF THE HEBREW PSALTER (Studies in Biblical Literature, 112; New York: Peter Lang, 2007). Pp. x + 132. Hardcover. US$60.95. ISBN 978-1-4331-0092-5. Reviewed by Anthony R. Pyles McMaster Divinity College Canonical readings of the book of Psalms are here to stay, though much work remains to flesh out the details. In this published version of his 2006 Baylor doctoral dissertation under W. H. Bellinger, Jr., Robert Wallace addresses the most elusive section for canonical considerations of the Psalter, Pss 90–106. Playing off of Robert Alter’s comments on the narrative impulse of poetry and building on Gerald Wilson and Nancy deClaissé-Walford’s works on the shaping of the Psalter, he asks what impact Book IV has on the narrative arc of the Psalter’s final shape.1 The work is divided into six chapters followed by endnotes, bibliography, and Scripture and subject indexes. An author index would have been welcome; one may likewise regret the omission from the present work of two figures included in the dissertation, which bring out the difference in Wilson’s concept of a Mosaic frame vs. Wallace’s argument for Mosaic permeation of Book IV. Chapter one, “The Context for the Study,” provides a synopsis of work on Psalms from Hermann Gunkel to Jerome Creach, as well as an outline of Wallace’s methodology. Samson Raphael Hirsch (d. 1888), though belonging to the previous generation, is highlighted for a psalm-bypsalm commentary approach focusing on David that stood over against Gunkel’s form-critical project at the end of the nineteenth century. A shift toward redaction- and canonical-critical concerns is traced through Westermann, Brennan, and especially Childs, and on to the major players in recent canonical reflection on the Psalter. For his methodology, Wallace is concerned not with the Sitz im Leben so much as what he later calls the Sitz im Buch (p. 87), the literary setting of individual psalms, asking “Is it profitable to consider the Psalter as a narrative whole?” (p. 11). Taking the answer for granted, his aim is to “articulate the narrative crafted by the whole of Book IV, and explore how that narrative functions within the story the whole book of Psalms suggests” (p. 11). One significant weakness of the work is that, though he sketches some possibilities others have put forward and draws some of his own connections, e.g., to Books III and V,

292

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Wallace does not lay out comprehensively for the reader his operating understanding of the story told by the Psalter. The heart of the project, chs. 2–5, comprises a psalm-by-psalm examination of Book IV. Chapter 2 focuses on Pss 90–92, drawing out the thematic unity of the movement from instruction to blessing and obedience to praise. Wallace draws numerous potential connections to Deut 32–33, both lexical and thematic (pp. 19–20, 23–25, 29–30). While some of the connections appear strained (e.g., the use of the phrase : #: in both Ps 90:1 and Deut 32:7 [p. 20]—a phrase which occurs 30 times in the Hebrew Bible, including 18 times in the Psalter alone), the objective value of connecting the fate of Israel to the curses of Deuteronomy as a way of enjoining a return to faithful obedience appears sound. “Moses’ message in the Psalter was to remind the people that it was not the Davidic monarchy in which they place their trust, but something long before the Davidic monarchy” (p. 30). Chapter 3 examines Pss 93–100 and the unifying theme '!#! /+(. Wallace argues for “a recurring emphasis on Moses and the Torah” (p. 50). Connections are drawn once again with Deut 32–33, as well as with Exod 15. The theme of '!#! /+( is an assertion of Yahweh’s kingship over against human kings, including the line of David. The mention of Samuel in Ps 99 is related to this by way of his opposition to a human king in 1 Sam 8 (p. 47). Psalms 93–100 cover Yahweh’s eternal dominion over both creation and the nations. “For the psalmist, however, YHWH has just now become king, and for the first time in Book IV, the psalmist is able to say that ‘YHWH is good’ (Ps 100:5)” (p. 50).2 The fourth chapter deals with Pss 101–103, two of which are psalms of David. Wallace views Ps 101 as a lament of David that “brings the reader back to Ps 89” (p. 56). Psalm 102 is not a psalm of David, and though it has clear royal allusions, “the most explicit royal allusions in the psalm are not associated with the psalmist; they are associated with YHWH” (p. 59). The psalm emphasizes the frail and transient nature of humanity in a way not found outside of Book IV (p. 60). The pair “mirrors” Pss 89–90: “Psalm 101 demonstrates a king of noble character who is an 31' by Ps 102. … The progeny of David were not faithful, and now Zion has no one to take pity on her” (p. 62). Psalm 103, then, places a remembrance of the Mosaic covenant into the mouth of David, looking back to the Golden Calf incident of Exod 34. Significantly, “David places himself below Moses, and venerates Mosaic Covenant” (p. 66). The “Davidic sanction of Moses’ primacy” begs the question of whether David remains a royal figure in and beyond Book IV (p. 68). Chapter 5 considers Pss 104–106 and includes a thumbnail sketch of Book V. Psalm 104 should be understood as a reminder of Yahweh as king

REVIEWS

293

to follow up the renewed focus on the Mosaic covenant in Ps 103 (p. 76), and Wallace follows Anderson in understanding the “disjunctive and imprecatory ending…as a statement for the preservation of the covenant” (p. 75).3 Psalm 105 shifts focus to Yahweh’s creation of his people, discussing Abraham for the first time in the Psalter and referring both to Abraham and Moses as Yahweh’s servant (cf. Ps 78:70; pp. 77–78). The emphasis is not laid on the patriarchs as such, but rather on the effect Yahweh’s covenant faithfulness should have (following Kraus; p. 80).4 Psalm 106 focuses on the other side of the coin, rehearsing the disobedience and unfaithfulness of the people and ending Book IV on a low note that emphasizes the importance of Yahweh’s faithfulness and the people’s adherence to Torah (p. 83). Book IV is widely accepted as the hinge on which the Psalter turns; the difficulty is in understanding how these psalms answer the questions of Book III. Wallace has done a great service to Psalms studies in detailing the way Moses and Sinai permeate rather than merely frame the answer Book IV presents, though in my opinion he is too uncritical in accepting the assertions of Wilson, DeClaissé-Walford, and others on the implications of Ps 89 for the Davidic covenant. The “narrative impulse” of the Psalter is key to interpreting both the parts and the whole, and Wallace has fruitfully extended his work already back into Book III and forward into Book V.5 I look forward to his continued contributions. 1 Gerald H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS, 76; Chico, CA: Scholars, 1985); Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford, Reading From the Beginning: The Shaping of the Hebrew Psalter (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1997). 2 Although Wallace is correct that this is the first time in Book IV, contra what is asserted on p. 92 this is not the first time in the Psalter; cf. Ps 34:8. 3 Cf. A. A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms (2 vols; NCB; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972), 725. 4 Cf. Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60–150 (trans H. C. Oswald; CC; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1993), 312. 5 Cf. Robert E. Wallace, “The Narrative Effect of Psalms 84–89,” JHS 11 (2011), article 10. Online: http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/article_157.pdf; idem, “Gerald Wilson & the Characterization of David in Book V of the Psalter” (paper presented at the annual meeting of the SBL. San Francisco, CA, November 2011), which is to appear in a forthcoming volume paying tribute to Gerald Wilson. In the latter Wallace critiques Wilson’s presentation of David in Book V, departing somewhat from his own views in the reviewed dissertation. I wish to extend my thanks to Dr. Wallace for providing me with a copy of the paper.

294

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Brian Neil Peterson, EZEKIEL IN CONTEXT: EZEKIEL’S MESSAGE UNDERSTOOD IN ITS HISTORICAL SETTING OF COVENANT CURSES, AND ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN MYTHOLOGICAL MOTIFS (Princeton Theological Monograph Series, 182; Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2012). Pp. xviii + 416. Paperback. US$48.00. ISBN 978-160899-524-0. Reviewed by Daniel Block Wheaton College Ezekiel in Context is a revised edition of a University of Toronto dissertation (supervised by J. Glen Taylor). As declared by Peterson, “This study concludes that the book of Ezekiel is not an amalgam of visions and oracles compiled with no particular literary strategy but rather is a purposeful literary work, which betrays Ezekiel’s rhetorical intent” (p. 1). Selecting the visions and extended metaphors for particular analysis, the author argues on the one hand that the book is driven from beginning to end by the notion of covenant, and on the other that Ezekiel’s prophecies are to be interpreted in the light of both Old Testament precedents and the ancient Mesopotamian literary and religious environment in which the prophet ministered. The latter obligates him in the opening chapter to demonstrate first that the prophecies were delivered in Babylon, and second, that if Ezekiel used Mesopotamian motifs he must have been very familiar with the mythology and even the literature of the region. The former is not difficult; the latter requires more work, but Peterson presents a solid case for deliberate adaptation of Babylonian notions. He devotes much of the second half of the first chapter to arguing particularly that ancient Near Eastern treaty forms underlie the content and the structure of the book. The traditions of treaty curses for a vassal’s disloyalty to a suzerain provide a helpful lens through which to read this book. This notion is not new, but his attempt to interpret the broad sweep of the book in these terms is helpful. In fact, his impulse to view the structure of the book as being governed by the supreme curse, viz., a deity’s threat to abandon his temple, casts new light on what many have understood as a key motif in the book. Accordingly, Peterson structures his analysis around the visions in the book: chapter 2, the vision of an offended deity (Ezek 1–3) and his departure from his Temple (Ezek 8–11); chapter 4, the reversal of the curse

REVIEWS

295

of being abandoned by one’s deity (reflected in being left unburied) and the imposition of the curse on Israel’s enemies (Ezek 37–39); chapter 5, the restoration of the covenant relationship, symbolized by the return of YHWH to his temple (Ezek 40–48). In the middle of the discussion centered on the four visions Peterson considers the judgment oracles, concentrating on the metaphorical portrayal of Israel’s crimes that precipitated the curse and the divine abandonment in chapters 16 and 23 (ch. 3). Chapter 6 concludes the discussion with a survey of the ground that has been traveled and a brief consideration of the implications of the study. This is followed by a fifteen-page appendix on “Ezekiel and Apocalyptic,” thirty-four pages of bibliography, and a Scripture index. Peterson’s discussion of the opening vision in chapter 2 is compelling. In my own work I have emphasized the significance of the vision for the prophet himself and for his call (YHWH calls Ezekiel to priestly service in a foreign land), but Peterson helpfully highlights the ominous features of the vision, and its significance for the motifs of divine abandonment and the impending judgment of Jerusalem.1 Whereas the opening vision (Ezek 1–3) only anticipated YHWH’s departure from Jerusalem, the second vision (Ezek 8–11) portrays that reality in all its fearful fury. Following a consideration of inner-biblical antecedents to divine abandonment, the author provides a detailed review of extra-biblical analogues, not only to the central motif, but also to specific features of the vision (e.g., the eyes on the chariot; the four-headed cherubim). In chapter 3 Peterson discusses how Ezekiel uses the metaphor of adultery and the unfaithful wife in chapters 16 and 23 to explain why YHWH would abandon his wife and impose on her the most horrific of curses. Responding to feminist scholars who are so troubled by this portrayal of divine violence that they cannot see the grace that YHWH demonstrated toward Jerusalem in rescuing her and lavishing his love on her, let alone accept his public rejection of her, Peterson rightly reminds us that these texts should be read in the light of analogous biblical texts and ancient Near Eastern treaty curses. Although he is certainly right in recognizing the importance of these texts in exposing the causes underlying YHWH’s abandonment of his people, I wish he had provided stronger justification for isolating these metaphorical portrayals as pivotal to the overall argument of the book. Not only are some of Ezekiel’s other metaphors equally forceful, but also these two texts share with 20:1–44 and 22:1–16 both subject matter (exposing the nation’s history of rebellion) and generic features (all four are introduced as formal legal proceedings [cf. 16:12; 20:2–4; 22:1–2; 23:1, 36]). In light of a paper I read recently at SBL,2 I welcome the title of Peterson’s fourth chapter: “The Awesome Deity’s Love.” The author

296

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

highlights the contrast between Ezekiel’s vision of hope for Israel after judgment and the total failure of ancient Near Eastern treaties to hold out any positive prospect for unfaithful vassals. Israel’s hope is demonstrated dramatically in the vision of their own revival and restoration in chapter 37, and the imposition of the curses they had experienced on Israel’s enemies in chapters 38–39. After helpfully assembling the biblical and extra-biblical evidence for the significance of corpses being left unburied, he demonstrates how the punishment of Gog and his allies will be accompanied by the renewal of the covenant (Israel will “know” YHWH and enjoy the covenant of peace). Peterson suggests the precedent for this vision may be found in Deut 30 (pp. 248–9). Of course this interpretation assumes the chronological priority of Deut 30, which many scholars view to be a post-exilic addition to the book. I agree with his interpretation, but I wish he had provided some justification for this view. Responding to those who treat Ezekiel’s final vision as secondary, Peterson concludes his study by demonstrating its integral place within the flow and argument of the book. With powerful rhetorical force the vision of the new Temple, of the new Torah, and of the new land declares the ultimate restoration of the covenant, whose essential benefit is the presence of the deity among his people. Peterson rightfully notes that this theme is declared by the announcement of the name of the new city, “YHWH is there.” It might have been helpful at this point to relate this name to the longstanding covenant formula, “I will be your God, and you shall be my people,” and its corollary, “I will dwell in your midst” (Exod 25:8; 29:45– 46; etc.). Following in Moshe Greenberg’s “holistic” tradition, Brian Peterson has done us all a great service in trying to understand how the book of Ezekiel holds together.3 Peterson draws his evidence from a wide range of primary sources and interacts well with critical scholarship.4 His treatment is well-organized and presented in a very clean and readable style. 1 Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel Chapters 1–24 (NICOT; Grand Rapid, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 80–131. 2 Daniel Block, “The God Ezekiel Wants Us to Meet,” in By the River Chebar: Historical, Literary, and Theological Studies in the Book of Ezekiel (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013), 44–72. 3 Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 22; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983), 18–27. 4 In a few instances, his secondary sources have been eclipsed. (1) On the “bad laws” of 20:25 (p. 186), see Kelvin G. Friebel, “The Decrees of Yahweh That Are ‘Not Good’: Ezekiel 20:25–26,” in Ronald L. Troxel, Kelvin G. Friebel, and Dennis R. Magary (eds) Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael

REVIEWS

297

V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 21–36; (2) On boundary stones (pp. 246–7), see Kathryn E. Slanski, The Babylonian Entitlement narus (kudurrus): A Study in Their Form and Function (ASOR Books, 9; Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2003); (3) On the recognition formula (pp. 260–3), see John F. Evans, “An Inner-Biblical Interpretation and Intertextual Reading of Ezekiel’s Recognition Formulae with the Book of Exodus” (Th.D. Diss., University of Stellenbosch, 2006).

Jerry Hwang, THE RHETORIC OF REMEMBRANCE: AN INVESTIGATION OF THE “FATHERS” IN DEUTERONOMY (Siphrut, 8; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012). Pp. xiv + 290. Hardcover. US$39.50. ISBN 978-1-57506-238-9. Reviewed by David Bergen University of Calgary Hwang focuses on the 50-odd Deuteronomic references to the “fathers” that refer either to “the wandering Aramean” who sojourned in Egypt or to the “seventy persons in all” who resided in Egypt. While diachronic research presupposes two separate traditions behind the double “fathers” reference, Hwang holds that such postulate results in a “false dichotomy” (p. 5) that violates the holistic theology of Deuteronomy. Instead, he argues that “the fathers” should be understood as a rhetorical device that blends traditions so that present and future generations might contemporaneously actualize YHWH’s ancient promise. In developing his reading, Hwang’s ambitious dissertation presents a synchronic, final-form reassessment of key received-view positions that repeatedly date biblical passages according to the terminus of Deuteronomy, “caricaturize” Deuteronomic theology as conditional and quid pro quo, link Deuteronomy’s covenant theology to Sinai (thereby divorcing it from the unconditional Abrahamic covenant), and piecemeal the text into disparate sources or traditions. Hwang arranges his reading in three parts, each structured with an indepth history of research and method followed by an analysis of texts. Part One surveys semantic fields related to “the fathers,” unpacking variations in verbal action (divine and human) and unraveling multiple recipients to the

298

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

land promise. Hwang then investigates five case studies where land is promised to the “fathers” (Deut 1–3, 6, 26, 30, 34). Hwang highlights Deut 1:8 as a “lexical reservoir” from which later reiterations “draw selectively and creatively according to their rhetorical situation” (p. 79), resulting in a rhetorical performance that climaxes in Deut 30. Throughout Part One, Hwang labours steadily to refute diachronic positions, requiring the reader to wait some time before delivering on his synchronic promise. When that delivery arrives, the results are wrapped thick in theological garb: “the fathers” rhetoric progresses across “generational horizons” (p. 55), from the distant patriarchs through the recent Horeb generation to the present Moab group, cementing a single collective blessed with YHWH’s sovereign grace. Part Two investigates the phrase “God of the fathers,” one of several appositional epithets associated with the divine name. Hwang groups his investigation into three categories (population increase, land, and covenant) and in the process addresses most of the key issues in Deuteromomic scholarship: Urdeuteronomium, Numeruswechsel, Name-theology, centralization, DtrH versus Tetrateuch, ANE covenant. Hwang concludes that Deuteronomy’s YHWH is personal and cosmic, immanent and transcendent, localized and omnipresent, sovereign and intimate. Such theological description has greater affinity to the Tetrateuch than to the Deuteronomistic History, in Hwang’s view. Part Three utilizes speech-act theory (in particular, such concepts as declarative and imaginative speech acts, and institutional facts) to round out the unfinished business of the seven references linking “the fathers” with covenant. Having read thus far, the reader already anticipates a “both/and” theological coherence. Thus, the “irreducible relationship between divine initiative and human responsibility” is harmonized, the “dichotomy between unconditionality and conditionality” is abridged, and the relational (rather than merely legal) dimension of ANE treaty forms is revalorized (p. 156). Hwang’s dissertation is well written, with the occasional flourish spicing up the thickly descriptive read. His research demonstrates a comprehensive grasp of key issues and players in biblical studies; it also reflects the bifurcated diachronic-synchronic dynamic that persists in the field. Positioned squarely among synchronists, Hwang’s work is a sustained disputation that sings obstinately off-key to tunes of the diachronists. For readers attuned to discussions of this sort, Hwang’s work will impress. Others will be nonplussed, wondering why Hwang concedes (on rare occasion) the probability of disparate sources and a complex editorial history behind the Pentateuch (pp. 83, 95, 234). Such conciliation is largely

REVIEWS

299

silenced by the general perspective adopted by a work better suited, some might argue, to OT theology. In squaring off against diachronic “theological reductionism” (p. 156), Hwang bends final-form methods to support his particular theological reading. Hwang underplays the implications of voice structures, ontological hierarchy, implied reader situation, and book-within-a-book framing, likely to the chagrin of those preferring a stricter application of narrative or rhetorical theory. For such readers, the theo-rhetoric uncovered in Deuteronomy is (at best) little more than the ideological claim of a mere mortal living within Deuteronomy’s represented world. Narratologists in particular will likely challenge Hwang’s assumption that Deuteronomy represents itself, or that Moses equals Deuteronomy. Rhetorical specialists in turn will ask: What exigency motivates Moses’s ideology of “the fathers”? What is the narrator’s position on Moses’s rhetorical flourish? And what does the divine character himself think about Moses’s imaginative transhistorical claim of (un)conditional covenantal promise? Hwang’s book contributes to a contested field that is frequently polarized by champions of the biblical canon and critics of the same, between harmonizers of its final form and atomizers, between advocates of its ideology and opponents. Within this arena, The Rhetoric of Remembrance is likely to provoke renewed entrenchments.

Thomas Kazen, EMOTIONS IN BIBLICAL LAW: A COGNITIVE SCIENCE APPROACH (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 36; Sheffield: Sheffield-Phoenix, 2011). Hardcover. Pp. xiii + 211. £50.00 $90.00 €60.00. ISBN 978-1-90753429-4. Reviewed by Michael B. Hundley Georgetown University Kazen’s book ambitiously examines embodied religion by addressing the role of emotion in the pentateuchal legal corpora.1 The book begins with a short introduction (3–6), which argues for the centrality of the body in religion, including the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, and introduces the larger work. Although Christianity in the modern West has been a

REVIEWS

299

silenced by the general perspective adopted by a work better suited, some might argue, to OT theology. In squaring off against diachronic “theological reductionism” (p. 156), Hwang bends final-form methods to support his particular theological reading. Hwang underplays the implications of voice structures, ontological hierarchy, implied reader situation, and book-within-a-book framing, likely to the chagrin of those preferring a stricter application of narrative or rhetorical theory. For such readers, the theo-rhetoric uncovered in Deuteronomy is (at best) little more than the ideological claim of a mere mortal living within Deuteronomy’s represented world. Narratologists in particular will likely challenge Hwang’s assumption that Deuteronomy represents itself, or that Moses equals Deuteronomy. Rhetorical specialists in turn will ask: What exigency motivates Moses’s ideology of “the fathers”? What is the narrator’s position on Moses’s rhetorical flourish? And what does the divine character himself think about Moses’s imaginative transhistorical claim of (un)conditional covenantal promise? Hwang’s book contributes to a contested field that is frequently polarized by champions of the biblical canon and critics of the same, between harmonizers of its final form and atomizers, between advocates of its ideology and opponents. Within this arena, The Rhetoric of Remembrance is likely to provoke renewed entrenchments.

Thomas Kazen, EMOTIONS IN BIBLICAL LAW: A COGNITIVE SCIENCE APPROACH (Hebrew Bible Monographs, 36; Sheffield: Sheffield-Phoenix, 2011). Hardcover. Pp. xiii + 211. £50.00 $90.00 €60.00. ISBN 978-1-90753429-4. Reviewed by Michael B. Hundley Georgetown University Kazen’s book ambitiously examines embodied religion by addressing the role of emotion in the pentateuchal legal corpora.1 The book begins with a short introduction (3–6), which argues for the centrality of the body in religion, including the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, and introduces the larger work. Although Christianity in the modern West has been a

300

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

“matter of the head” (4), Kazen contends that the body remains the locus and seat of morality and indeed the center of human personality. In fact, he suggests that morality originated with and developed from bodily reactions. In order to understand the role of body and its emotions as the origin of morality and ritual, Kazen’s book turns to the cognitive sciences and offers a textual analysis of four bodily emotions in pentateuchal law. Chapter 2 (9–19) offers a biological perspective on evolution, emotions, and morality. Kazen suggests that insights can be gleaned from evolutionary biology, primatology, neuroscience, and developmental psychology that help interpret biblical texts addressing moral and ritual issues. Building on the work of Antonio Damasio, he argues that from an evolutionary perspective “beings existed before mind, and consciousness and thinking developed gradually” (11). In turn, emotions are integral to human morality, which results from “our emotions, our cognitive processes, and the complex relationship between the two” (13).2 In fact, “moral judgments are often triggered instantly, by intuition, and then only subsequently rationalized” (14).3 Nonetheless, although biologically based on the human emotional capacity, intuition is informed by rational conditions and culture. In other words, the mind and society in some way condition the body to respond intuitively and emotionally. Having examined the biology of morality, Chapter 3 (20–31) addresses the role of culture. Kazen contends that while morality is ultimately based on biology, it is also shaped by culture. Culture modifies innate morality through “selective loss of intuitions,” “immersion in cultural complexes,” and “peer socialization” (20), especially effecting the ethical domains of community and divinity. As a result, “even though people in all cultures have more or less the same bodies, they have different embodiments, and therefore they end up with different minds” (21).4 Kazen proceeds to explore the relationship between ritual and morality, especially in the realm of purity, concluding that “a clear dividing line between ritual and moral issues, between purity and morality, is not supported by ancient comparative textual evidence” (31). Chapter 4 (32–47) presents four moral emotions: disgust, empathy, fear, and a sense of justice. By moral emotions, Kazen means “emotions that are linked to the interests or welfare either of society as a whole or at least of persons other than the judge or agent” (32).5 For Kazen, disgust is “an emotional reaction against that which is experienced as revolting or objectionable” (33), which developed to protect the organism from dangerous elements. Tasting, smelling, or touching the objectionable causes instant recoil; the mere thought of it may also be repellant. Rather than being innate, disgust triggers are socially-conditioned, and the specific elements that trigger disgust vary across cultures. Empathy is “an affective

REVIEWS

301

response more appropriate to someone else’s situation than one’s own” (37).6 Kazen argues that “humanitarian behavior has a firm evolutionary base and is grounded in our neurobiological constitutions. At the same time, it is thoroughly shaped and constrained by culture” (41). Fear “manifests itself as a sudden response to direct stimuli” (42), and as broadly conceived includes post-stimulus fear and anticipatory anxiety. Fear evolved to protect “the physical organism from damage and death” (42), and its triggers can be classified into four broad categories: interpersonal situations; death, injury and illness; animals; and agoraphobic fears. “From a cognitive science perspective, the sense of justice is a more complex phenomenon…, involving an interaction between a number of different emotions” (44). Its goal is the restoration of equilibrium, the perception of which is also socially conditioned. Chapter 5 (51–70) provides a standard overview of the pentateuchal legal collections under investigation—those in the Covenant Code (CC), Deuteronomy (D), and the Priestly texts (P), which includes the Holiness Code (H). Kazen notes that the function of this legal material is particularly enigmatic since there is little indication that it was used for judicial purposes in the Bible and ancient Near East. Chapter 6 (71–94) analyzes disgust in the various purity laws. For Kazen, emotional disgust applies to certain perceived contact-contagions, as well as various prohibitions concerning the consumption of certain animals, inappropriate sexual behavior, and false worship. Kazen identifies three strategies for dealing with the objectionable—rejection, regulation, and removal. Chapter 7 (95–114) examines empathy in CC, D, and H, focusing on the multiple layers of empathy toward the vulnerable in society. For example, in Exod 22:20–26, which addresses the marginalized, Kazen argues that the laws appeal to the empathetic capacity of the recipients. “The prohibition against oppressing foreigners is motivated by experience of having been foreigners in Egypt (v. 20)” (99). In the narrative world of the text, an emotional match is envisioned that is based on the audience’s firsthand experience. For the intended audience, who have no experience as foreigners in Egypt, “a cognitive type of empathy, based on the human capacity for perspective-taking” likely features. Nonetheless, the shared inherited experience of being a foreigner adds an affective component. Based on his dating of CC to around 700 BCE, Kazen argues that the “complicated political situation and tribal demography…would have ensured that a number of people actually had first-hand experience of minority situations,” suggesting empathy based on mediated association (100). The appeal to Egypt is thus structured to “trigger a multilayered empathy” (100).

302

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Chapter 8 (115–40) addresses the fear of foreigners, of God, and of demons in the legal corpora. In this chapter especially, a conflicting interplay between emotions is apparent as foreigners elicit disgust, empathy, and fear. However, fear of foreigners is rarely explicit. Instead, the threats intended to limit foreign contact are grounded in fear of divine punishment. In fact, the texts use fear of divine retribution to enforce obedience to all manner of divine dictates, both “for reinforcing empathetic attitudes and counteracting them” (137). Kazen proceeds to address the perceived fear of demons in the ritual legislation. Chapter 9 (141–64) examines a sense of justice, focusing on reconciliation and the use of the root kpr to achieve it. For Kazen, kpr refers to the “removal of offense by a mitigating token that signifies a wish to restore balance,” while its disparate uses are linked by emotions of fairness (141). Whereas compensation involves full restitution, kofer (“ransom”) typically addresses situations in which “the value of what is at stake—human life—cannot be compensated for” (150). In such cases, a kofer is offered as a sign of reconciliation, such that the offense may be removed, life may be preserved, restoring a “fictional balance, a mitigated equilibrium” (152). Kazen argues that the verb kipper functions similarly. For example, he claims that the ʚDWWDʯW and Ҵasham offerings (the so-called sin and guilt offerings) address the imbalance in divine-human relations, not as “full restitution or payment for wrongs against the deity, but as a mitigating token of restitution, signaling a direction of will and appealing to the offended party, in this case the divine power, for emotional acceptance” (158). In chapter 10 (167–75), Kazen offers his conclusions. He suggests that human values and cultural development depend “as much on biologically evolved emotions as anything else” (168), and the complexity of life and its emotions interact to produce complex and often contradictory urges. The pentateuchal legal collections are emotional texts, and their emotional nature lends to their persuasive power. Within these corpora, attitudes and behaviors that at first seem at odds find common ground in that they are motivated by similar emotional reactions. Kazen concludes that rather than simply being a matter of the head, religion “involves the whole human embodied experience” (175). Kazen is to be applauded for an ambitious and helpful examination of the role that emotion plays in the biblical pentateuchal law. Rather than simply adding an insight or two, Kazen approaches law from a different perspective, stressing its emotional nature. He thereby adds an important interpretive tool to the study of biblical law in particular and biblical literature more generally. Kazen also appropriately redirects religious study away from an exclusive focus on the mind to that of the full body

REVIEWS

303

experience. Biblical scholarship will especially benefit from his introduction and application of the insights of the cognitive sciences and his four emotional categories, which are well-defined, appropriate to the texts, and useful as explanatory tools. His analysis of the complex interplay of emotions and their effect on formulations of law also provides an important contribution. As with any innovative and broad-reaching study, there is room for improvement. Broadly speaking, it would be helpful to differentiate between origin and rhetoric, between the emotions that helped to generate a law and the emotions used to promote it. While the former are more difficult to identify, the latter are more explicit. For example, while calling a practice an abomination to YHWH clearly uses disgust (and fear) to trigger obedience, it is less clear if the practice originally evoked disgust or that such disgust featured prominently in the development of the prohibition. In addition, it is also important to better distinguish between origin and justification, between the emotions prompting a law and those used to justify it. As Kazen notes, legislation is the result of a complex interplay of factors, including various emotions. As with any lived system or artificial system based on a lived system, it is impossible to pinpoint definitively how or why a law developed or to identify a principle or principles that explain all laws. Life and law are far too complicated for such simplifications. In turn, Kazen’s emotional categories are no doubt helpful, yet they remain limited in establishing the underlying and original rationale of pentateuchal legislation. At the same time, these categories (as well as others) are especially helpful in explaining how people justify their laws. Rather than inventing new categories, laws and other human explanations typically serve to codify and justify what people are already doing and what they already view as appropriate. For example, although it is difficult to tell if certain animals initially elicited disgust, their rejection no doubt enhanced if not produced disgust in those who accepted such a prohibition. As a result, people justify the prohibition of the consumption of certain animals with the very disgust their initial prohibition inspired. More specifically, Kazen’s identification of kipper as a mitigated token designed to appease the deity and restore a fictive equilibrium is problematic and requires further defense. While it is clear that a ransom (kofer) generally restores equilibrium without full restitution and that both kipper and kofer enable equilibrium in situations where straightforward and full restitution are not easily achieved, it does not follow that kipper functions like kofer. In the text, there is little indication that the deity’s emotions are at stake, that kipper redresses an emotional imbalance or assuages the offended deity with a token gesture. The issue is rather the pollution generated by an action or condition that is perceived to be real

304

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

and adversely affects the sanctuary and the individual. In fact, there is little indication that kipper functions as a mitigated token at all, and such an assumption may be reading New Testament Christology into the Hebrew Bible. Instead, it is equally if not more likely that an appropriate offering is understood to fully remove the pollution and restore equilibrium, the result of which is labeled with the verb kipper. The fact that the solution is not a direct match to the problem does not mean that it is a partial solution. Ritual is specially designed to redress immaterial but nonetheless real stains. The Priestly system culminating in Lev 16 seems to envision a full, albeit temporary, restitution. In addition, the sacrificial portions allotted to the deity and the priests may also be understood as payment for services rendered. Despite any limitations, Kazen’s book is original, creative, and often insightful. Anyone who seriously engages with biblical law should read it and apply its insights to her or his analysis. Those with other specializations will also greatly benefit from its use of the cognitive sciences and its appropriate focus on emotions and embodied religion. All in all, Kazen’s Emotions in Biblical Law is to be highly recommended. 1 See now also Y. Feder, “Contagion and Cognition: Bodily Experience and the Conceptualization of Pollution (ʞumʯDK) in the Hebrew Bible,” JNES 72 (2013), 151–67, which addresses the embodied logic of pollution in the Hebrew Bible, using the categories disgust, fear, and outrage. 2 Quoting J. Teehan, “Kantian Ethics: After Darwin,” Zygon 38 (2003), 49–60 (58). 3 In making this claim, he draws from J. Haidt, “The Emotional Dog and its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment,” Psychological Review 108 (2001), 814–34. 4 Quoting ibid., 827. 5 Quoting Haidt, “The Moral Emotions,” in R. J. Davidson, K. P. Scherer and H. H. Goldsmith (eds), Handbook of Affective Sciences (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 852–70 (853). 6 Quoting M. L. Hoffman, “The Contribution of Empathy to Justice and Moral Judgment,” in N. Eisenberg and J. Strayer (eds), Empathy and its Developments (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 47–80 (48).

REVIEWS

305

Ed Noort (ed), THE BOOK OF JOSHUA (BETL, 250; Leuven, Peeters, 2012). Softcover. Pp. xvi + 698. € 90.00 ISBN 978-90-429-2726-1. Reviewed by Philippe Guillaume The review of a 700 page volume cannot adequately highlight the wealth of information found in the proceedings of the 2010 Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense devoted to the book of Joshua, which follows previous seminars that covered the books of the Pentateuch. Published less than two years after the colloquium, the editorial quality of this volume is excellent. After the editor’s review of the history of research, the 33 chapters are arranged in six clusters covering most current methodological approaches in French, German, and English. Only the papers from the Dutch seminar are published in English. The volume deliberately juxtaposes different approaches, which unfortunately hardly interact with one another. The compartmentalization of research is even more flagrant within the various European cultures. German language Joshua commentaries remain overwhelmingly quoted in German articles and English language Joshua commentaries in English contributions. Only Noth’s commentary is quoted more frequently in non-German articles. After the editor’s Einführung and his substantial history of research, “Josua im Wandel der Zeiten” (21–47), the first section Texts, Versions and Terminology gathers articles by Hans Debel, “A Quest for Appropriate Terminology: The Joshua Texts as a Case in Point,” Emanuel Tov, “Literary Development of the Book of Joshua as Reflected in the MT, the LXX and 4QJosha,” and Michaël van der Meer, “Clustering Clustered Areas: Textual and Literary Criticism in Joshua 18:1–10.” The MT cannot serve as the yardstick against which to measure the other Joshua texts (Debel), nor can the LXX be used as a direct witness of a pre-MT stage (van der Meer). “All three texts thus contain early and late elements, not in a neat pattern as observed in the Jeremiah texts, but in a much more complicated way…each of them is also multi-layered” (Tov, 85). The difficulty of reconstructing the history of the text when three separate versions are at hand is an ill omen for the next section. The second section, Tradition, Composition and Text, opens with a fine narratological analysis of the first part of Joshua by André Wénin, “Josué 1– 12 comme récit.” The reversal of exodus patterns and the changing tempo underline the coherence of these chapters, which close the era of the exodus. The next contributions point out the weaknesses of the

REVIEWS

305

Ed Noort (ed), THE BOOK OF JOSHUA (BETL, 250; Leuven, Peeters, 2012). Softcover. Pp. xvi + 698. € 90.00 ISBN 978-90-429-2726-1. Reviewed by Philippe Guillaume The review of a 700 page volume cannot adequately highlight the wealth of information found in the proceedings of the 2010 Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense devoted to the book of Joshua, which follows previous seminars that covered the books of the Pentateuch. Published less than two years after the colloquium, the editorial quality of this volume is excellent. After the editor’s review of the history of research, the 33 chapters are arranged in six clusters covering most current methodological approaches in French, German, and English. Only the papers from the Dutch seminar are published in English. The volume deliberately juxtaposes different approaches, which unfortunately hardly interact with one another. The compartmentalization of research is even more flagrant within the various European cultures. German language Joshua commentaries remain overwhelmingly quoted in German articles and English language Joshua commentaries in English contributions. Only Noth’s commentary is quoted more frequently in non-German articles. After the editor’s Einführung and his substantial history of research, “Josua im Wandel der Zeiten” (21–47), the first section Texts, Versions and Terminology gathers articles by Hans Debel, “A Quest for Appropriate Terminology: The Joshua Texts as a Case in Point,” Emanuel Tov, “Literary Development of the Book of Joshua as Reflected in the MT, the LXX and 4QJosha,” and Michaël van der Meer, “Clustering Clustered Areas: Textual and Literary Criticism in Joshua 18:1–10.” The MT cannot serve as the yardstick against which to measure the other Joshua texts (Debel), nor can the LXX be used as a direct witness of a pre-MT stage (van der Meer). “All three texts thus contain early and late elements, not in a neat pattern as observed in the Jeremiah texts, but in a much more complicated way…each of them is also multi-layered” (Tov, 85). The difficulty of reconstructing the history of the text when three separate versions are at hand is an ill omen for the next section. The second section, Tradition, Composition and Text, opens with a fine narratological analysis of the first part of Joshua by André Wénin, “Josué 1– 12 comme récit.” The reversal of exodus patterns and the changing tempo underline the coherence of these chapters, which close the era of the exodus. The next contributions point out the weaknesses of the

306

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Deuteronomistic History model and deal with the central issues concerning the place of the book of Joshua inherited from the previous century: Hexateuch versus DtrH. Erhard Blum, “Überlegungen zur Kompositionsgeschichte des Josuabuches,” identifies pre-Deuteronomistic material in Joshua 6*, 8*–12* and, like Knauf’s 1998 Joshua commentary, views the Deuteronomistic reworking of these chapters as a Josianic elaboration of a pan-Israelite identity built in opposition to a Canaanite identity. In “Joshua 1,1–9: The Beginning of a Book or a Literary Bridge?” Thomas Dozeman shows that the question was never really resolved. “The MT of Josh 1.1–9 tends to separate the book of Joshua from Deuteronomy, while the LXX ties Josh 1,1–9 more closely to Deuteronomy, merging the stories of Moses and Joshua into a continuous history.” (Dozeman, 182). In “Die Adressatenkreise von Josua,” Axel Knauf reconstitutes the intended audience of the different stages he identified in his commentary. These stages consist primarily of the Moses–Joshua narrative, addressing the Benjaminites within the kingdom of Judah to counter the Judean David legend, the Deuteronomistic Tetrateuch (Exodus*-Numbers*Deuteronomy*-Joshua*), for returnees from the Babylonian Golah, and the Hexateuch, intended for the Samarians after the destruction of Bethel. Once the constitution of the Torah turned Joshua into a “Deuterocanonical” book, Joshua became the paradigmatic Torah prophet like Moses. Finally, the Joshua-Judges redaction (Joshua and Judges remaining separate books until the formation of the Hasmonean prophetic canon as shown by the presence of the ark at Shiloh in Joshua 18 and in 1 Samuel 1) mainly concerns the settlement of Judeans/Jews in Galilee. Knauf continues with a detailed depiction of how Jesus followed in the steps of Joshua, which should not leave New Testament scholars indifferent. In “Are the Conquest Narratives of Joshua 6–11 Shaped According to Traditions in the Books of Judges, Samuel and Kings?” Haim Hamiel and Harmut Rösel present some points from a Haifa thesis by Haim Hamiel on the conquest narratives. Long considered local etiologies reshaped into panIsraelite stories, the similarities between Joshua 8 and Judges 20, Joshua 6 and Judges 7, and Joshua 6 with 1 Kings 20 are evidence that “the Deuteronomistic History did not work from Joshua to Kings, but backwards from Kings to Joshua” (Hamiel and Rösel, 217). The next essay operates from entirely different premises: it presupposes a series of authors and origins, in the eleventh century BCE for the book of Joshua and in the tenth century BCE for the book of Samuel. Yet, Hendrik Koorevaar, “The Book of Joshua and the Hypothesis of the Deuteronomistic History: Indications for an Open Serial Model” reaches conclusions that are remarkably close to Knauf’s. He argues that Joshua, Judges, and Samuel are separate works that were “attached to the previous one without making any

REVIEWS

307

changes to it” (231), and that in Joshua “the place YHWH would choose” (Josh 9:6) is an open formulation for the various temporary sites at which the mobile sanctuary would be set up and not a cryptic reference to Jerusalem. The opposite approach pertains in the next two contributions. They use similar methods but reach quite different conclusions. Olivier Artus, “Josué 13–14 et le livre des Nombres,” contends that the function of Caleb and Eleazar in Joshua 13–14 aligns the theology of Joshua with the primacy of the priesthood presented in Numbers. In “Das Buch Josua als nichtFortsetzung des Buches Numeri,” Horst Seebass argues, however, that the book of Joshua arose as part of the Deuteronomistic History, thus mostly independently from Numbers. In this, Seebass is one of the few contributors who remains explicitly within the framework of the Deuteronomistic History. Hans Ausloos, “The Book of Joshua, Exodus 23 and the Hexateuch,” focuses on Exod 23:20–33 and the similarities with Joshua while abstaining from any definitive conclusions regarding the redactional process. Similar to Knauf’s contribution, “Hearing Esther after Joshua: Rest in the Exile and the Diaspora” by Arie Leder explores, “What does Israel hear when she hears Joshua read to her in exile?” (265), especially in light of the evaluation of Israel’s management of the land in Kings. “Esther’s allusions to Joshua’s theme of rest challenge the auditor to re-imagine rest from the enemy” (278). Rest can be landed or landless: when it is landed it includes the duty “…to include the Other in the project of survival, as Esther did with Xerxes (and the Gibeonites with Israel)” (279). Regarding Josh 22:9–34, Graeme Auld, “Re-telling the Disputed ‘Altar’ in Joshua 22,” suggests that an earlier version on which the LXX is based was more sympathetic to the builders of the Transjordan altar and that the tamed Phinehas of Joshua 22 is an Abraham-like negotiating figure. The Abrahamic model is also operative in Joshua 24 where, according to Bernard Gosse, “Abraham père des exilés en Josué 24,” the mentions of Shechem, Abraham, Nahor, and Terah broaden the horizon from the Jordan to the Euphrates. Noting the oddity of the Israelites’ granting of Timnat ʗeres to Joshua so that he may dwell among them after dividing up the entire land, Zev Farber, “Timnat ʗeres and the Origins of the Joshua Tradition,” argues that “Joshua started as a military hero or legend in the Mount ʗeres region. He was particularly associated with his burial site in the town of Timnat ʗeres.” (311) The name of the town was explained in relation to the miraculous halt of the sun during Joshua’s battle at Gibeon and Ayalon, a miracle which perhaps pushed the local hero to the pinnacle of Israelite history.

308

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

The next section on History, Archaeology and Geography opens with a final article in French by Damien Noël, “Josué: de la géographie à l'histoire, l'impossible conquête.” Starting with the loud silence of the Bible over the Egyptian presence in Canaan when Joshua and Israel supposedly conquered the area, Noël deconstructs Israel Finkelstein’s scenario of Israel’s ethnogenesis (and logically ignores Faust’s volume on the subject). Although Finkelstein’s model is based upon updated archaeological data presented as an alternative to previous models, reading the settlement of the highland in the Iron Age I as Israelite or proto-Israelite is devoid of any historical basis. Moreover, Finkelstein’s debates with William Dever over the issue are in effect unhelpful. On the basis of the geographic and ethnic designations in Josh 13:1–7, Koert van Bekkum, “Remembering and Claiming Ramesside Canaan,” concludes that the geographical conception of the Egyptian province of Asia was applied to the story of the conquest of the promised land already in the ninth century or earlier, and in any case in the eighth century BCE at the latest. Similarly, Yigal Levin claims in “Conquered and Unconquered, Reality and Historiography in the Geography of Joshua” that the territories mapped out in Joshua betray an acute awareness of the political situation in the Iron Age I. Markus Saur, “Die Bedeutung von Sidon und Tyros in Josua 19,24–31,” explores the significance of the mention of the two Phoenician metropoles to mark out Israelite territory. In the section Crossing the Jordan, Joachim Krause, “Der Zug durch den Jordan nach Josua 3–4: eine neue Analyse,” identifies a Deuteronomistic Grundschicht, two post-Priestly redactions, and various additions in the intricate narration of Joshua 3–4. By contrast, Elie Assis, “A Literary Approach to Complex Narratives,” understands the many repetitions and inconsistencies in these chapters as the result of a multi-dimensional presentation from different vantage points to produce a sophisticated meaning. The last contribution of this section, “Die Gestaltung des Gilgal (Josua 3–4): Das Buch Josua als Heterotopie,” by Egbert Ballhorn applies Michel Foucault’s architectural concept of heterotopie to the stones of Gilgal. Four contributions follow in the section Jericho and Violence. Arguing that conquest narratives should be read metaphorically, Ludger Schwienhorst-Schönberger, “Josua 6 und die Gewalt,” provides a thorough analysis of the conquest of Jericho in eight different layers (Grundschicht, Jehowist, Dtr, DtrP, DtrN, priestly, late Chronistic, and additions from the traditions of the War Scroll from Qumran). Jannica de Prenter, “The Contrastive Polysemous Meaning of %:- in the Book of Joshua: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach,” applies Eleanor Rosch’s Prototype Theory to the term %:- understood as taboo: “something can be taboo either

REVIEWS

309

because it belongs to the category of holiness or to the category of defilement” (479). Both meanings appear in the book of Joshua. The possible overlap of the consecrated and desecrated connotations invalidate diachronic argumentations to explain the different meaning of the term. Marieke den Brader, “‘They keep going on…’: Repetition in Joshua 6,20,” combines the synchronic approach of Nicolai Winther-Nielsen and the more diachronic approach of Graeme Auld to study the rhetorical techniques of the MT and LXX texts of the shouts that shattered the walls of Jericho. Archibald van Wieringen, “The Literary Function of the JoshuaReference in 1 Kings 16,34,” discusses the function of the reference to Joshua’s curse in reference to the portrayal of King Ahab as the worst king in the history of Israel. The final History of Reception section covers the Maccabees with Johannes Schnocks, “Die Rezeption des Josuabuches in den Makkabäerbüchern,” the New Testament with Cornelis de Vos, “Josua und Jesus im Neuen Testament,” and Stefan Koch, “‘Mose sagt zu Jesus’—Zur Wahrnehmung von Josua im Neuen Testament,” as well as Josephus and Pseudo-Philo: Christopher Begg, “Josephus’ and Pseudo-Philo’s Rewritings of the Book of Joshua.” This section and the volume close with two German contributions. The first one by Michael Rohde, “Die kontextuelle Theologie Mitri Rahebs: ein Beispiel für die exegetische und hermeneutische Bedeutung des Buches Josua für die Frage nach dem ‘Heiligem Land,’” is about the contemporary appropriations of Joshua’s conquests as they are reflected in the writings of a Lutheran Palestinian theologian and pastor at Bethlehem. The last one is a view from the other side. Marie-Theres Wacker, “Feldherr und Löwensohn: das Buch Josua—angeeignet durch David Ben-Gurion,” is an excellent introduction to the reception of Joshua in the Zionist mytho-history of the founder of the State of Israel with a closing section on the Settlers Movement and its critique. Had these two contributions been translated in English, the volume would have made an even more significant contribution to the academic discussion since they focus on some relevant contemporary issues regarding the book of Joshua. Still, the bibliography at the end of Wacker’s article (646–47) lists a good selection of German and English sources. A similar issue pertains to the four articles in French; translating these articles in English would have made them accessible to a broader audience. Thanks to the 50 pages of indices, the volume is a treasure-trove and an essential resource for the study of any particular theme or passage in the book of Joshua. Significantly enough, the dozen quotes of Martin Noth’s Ueberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien confirm the wane of the theory of the Deuteronomistic History. Other recent syntheses, like Thomas Römer’s

310

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

recent monograph on the Deuteronomistic History, likewise receive less than a handful of quotes.

Alissa Jones Nelson, POWER AND RESPONSIBILITY IN BIBLICAL INTRPRETATION: READING THE BOOK OF JOB WITH EDWARD SAID (BibleWorld; Sheffield: Equinox, 2012). Pp. 257. Hardcover. US$99.95. ISBN 978-1-84553-889-7. Reviewed by Edward Ho Chinese Online School of Theology In this monograph Alissa Jones Nelson seeks to adapt Edward Said’s concept of contrapuntal reading to the interpretation of the book of Job. As Nelson specifies in the introduction, her ultimate endeavour is to close “the gap between academic and vernacular hermeneutics” (p. 11). She defines the former as idea-primary approaches that strive for scientific objectivity as a goal while the latter she defines as experience-primary approaches that acknowledge the subjectivity of the interpreter and the centrality of contextual concerns. In addition to the brief introduction, interlude and conclusion, the book consists of two parts, with three chapters each. Part I is concerned with methodological matters while Part II deals with issues related to the interpretation of Job. Chapter 1 is an introduction to some general vital ideas of Said. According to Nelson, the existence of an inherent relationship between knowledge, interpretation, and power is the foundation underlying Said’s theories. All knowledge is interested and thus subjective. No representation is purely neutral. Another topic that Nelson argues as crucial to Said is the role of the intellectual, whose mandate is to criticize authority and to alleviate human suffering. Said’s unique understanding of the notions of “secular” and “religious” is the third area that Nelson highlights. Said uses the former to refer to a self-conscious attitude that critically examines authority while the latter is used to refer to “a tendency to uncritically accept authority and uphold orthodoxy” (p. 40). According to Nelson, all

310

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

recent monograph on the Deuteronomistic History, likewise receive less than a handful of quotes.

Alissa Jones Nelson, POWER AND RESPONSIBILITY IN BIBLICAL INTRPRETATION: READING THE BOOK OF JOB WITH EDWARD SAID (BibleWorld; Sheffield: Equinox, 2012). Pp. 257. Hardcover. US$99.95. ISBN 978-1-84553-889-7. Reviewed by Edward Ho Chinese Online School of Theology In this monograph Alissa Jones Nelson seeks to adapt Edward Said’s concept of contrapuntal reading to the interpretation of the book of Job. As Nelson specifies in the introduction, her ultimate endeavour is to close “the gap between academic and vernacular hermeneutics” (p. 11). She defines the former as idea-primary approaches that strive for scientific objectivity as a goal while the latter she defines as experience-primary approaches that acknowledge the subjectivity of the interpreter and the centrality of contextual concerns. In addition to the brief introduction, interlude and conclusion, the book consists of two parts, with three chapters each. Part I is concerned with methodological matters while Part II deals with issues related to the interpretation of Job. Chapter 1 is an introduction to some general vital ideas of Said. According to Nelson, the existence of an inherent relationship between knowledge, interpretation, and power is the foundation underlying Said’s theories. All knowledge is interested and thus subjective. No representation is purely neutral. Another topic that Nelson argues as crucial to Said is the role of the intellectual, whose mandate is to criticize authority and to alleviate human suffering. Said’s unique understanding of the notions of “secular” and “religious” is the third area that Nelson highlights. Said uses the former to refer to a self-conscious attitude that critically examines authority while the latter is used to refer to “a tendency to uncritically accept authority and uphold orthodoxy” (p. 40). According to Nelson, all

REVIEWS

311

these concepts constitute the backbone of Said’s approaches to textuality and interpretation. Her brief introduction to Said in this chapter provides sufficient and helpful background for an audience which is unfamiliar with his works. In chapter 2 Nelson discusses Said’s notion of contrapuntal reading and contemplates the possibility of adapting his approach for biblical hermeneutics. Nelson argues that Said’s view of textual interpretation is influenced by his interaction with literary critics Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault. In commenting on Said’s critique of postcolonial studies, Nelson suggests that Said considers each of those readings as a form of centrism, which intends to promote ethnic particularity. As a response, Said has introduced his concept of contrapuntal reading that seeks to provide an arena in which an intellectual dialogue between a variety of particular voices is able to take place. The goal is integration, that is, the inclusion of “dissenting voices in the dominant discourses with the aim of decentring the dominant” (p. 62). The resulting voices are often polyphonic rather than harmonized. This inevitably leads Nelson to compare Said’s interpretive approach with that of Mikhail Bakhtin. To Nelson, Said’s approach is superior because it has the potential to overcome the implicit categorization of the dominant and the peripheral, a dualism inherent in Bakhtin’s approach. Nelson admits that it is not a straightforward task to adapt Said’s theory to the interpretation of biblical texts: “Contrapuntal reading involves a dialogue between primary texts, while contrapuntal biblical hermeneutics will necessarily mean dealing with secondary texts that offer particular and often contradictory interpretations of a single primary text” (p. 78). Contrapuntal hermeneutics, according to her, has the great potential to promote a mutual enriching dialogue that allows the process of boundary crossing. Nelson’s proposal of adaptation implicitly identifies academic approaches as the dominant voice in biblical interpretation. Nevertheless, she appears to have lost sight of the fact that even among those academic approaches, some of them are still considered as marginal by mainstream biblical scholarship. The third chapter is a review of various interpretive approaches that address the gap between academic and vernacular hermeneutics. Scholars under scrutiny include Pui-lan Kwok, Elsa Tamez, Gerald West, Justin Ukpong, Fernando Segovia and R. S. Sugirtharajah.1 Nelson contends that none of these scholars has successfully proffered a solution for bridging that gap. Each of these approaches either fails to provide praxiological interpretive grounds or results in further ghettoization. She goes on to suggest that the contrapuntal approach as proposed has the potential to even eliminate that “gap through the creation of a mutual space for hermeneutical interaction” (p. 118).

312

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Nelson, in the interlude at the beginning of Part II, elucidates that the dialogic nature of the book of Job, the numerous interpretive approaches to it, and the many issues raised in it all make the work a suitable candidate for her project. Her choice of Job as test case is both reasonable and problematic. It is reasonable because, as she explains, the book of Job has been interpreted by various communities using divergent approaches. Juxtaposition of these interpretations in a symphonic manner is expected to yield fruitful results. However, the uniqueness of this biblical book also makes Nelson’s pick problematic. It is open to question whether this contrapuntal reading strategy can be applied to other biblical books that are less polyphonic in nature. If Nelson can demonstrate her theory using a biblical book other than Job, it would make her primary argument that contrapuntal hermeneutics has the potential to close the gap between academic and vernacular interpretations more convincing. In chapter 4 Nelson moves on to examine the contribution of Gerhard von Rad and Gustavo Gutiérrez to Joban scholarship.2 In order to demonstrate a contrapuntal interaction between these two scholars, Nelson singles out Job 38:1–42:6 as the focus of examination. She argues that although both scholars recognize the centrality of the content of the divine speeches to the overall message, Gutiérrez also considers Job’s final responses as crucial to the meaning of the book. This leads Gutiérrez to conclude that Job serves as a role model for the contemporary audience who is undergoing suffering. Moreover, according to Nelson, “Gutiérrez sees in this text a basis for a call to action on behalf of the marginalized, those who suffer unjustly but are nevertheless loved by the God of justice” (p. 143). At this point, Nelson also introduces the voices of David Clines, Elsa Tamez, and Enrique Dussel into the contrapuntal conversation.3 While Clines aligns with von Rad in arguing that the problem of suffering is not the central issue in Job, Tamez and Dussel are in agreement with Gutiérrez that the oppressed could benefit from their interaction between their own experience and the biblical book. Nelson observes that traditional biblical criticism has sometimes suggested a misleading dichotomy between interpretation and application. She further contends that it would be a mistake to dismiss the validity of vernacular interpretations by simply relegating them to the realm of application of the text. Having justified the legitimacy of vernacular hermeneutics, she sets up a symphonic conversation between those academic and vernacular voices. Nelson’s argument that divergent interpretive opinions on Job mirror the gap between academic and vernacular hermeneutics is not as compelling as it stands. Noteworthy is the existence of other academic interpreters who see the problem of suffering as one of the central problems in Job. Even Nelson herself is aware that this is the previous position espoused by

REVIEWS

313

Clines. Perhaps there is more than one reason why two individual interpreters may come up with conflicting readings. Chapter 5 juxtaposes academic, psychological perspectives on Job in the Western contexts with vernacular, HIV-positive perspectives on Job in African contexts. On the one hand, Nelson scrutinizes various voices that “utilize extant psychoanalytic models and theories to explicate and illuminate the biblical text with the goal of establishing an objective interpretation of the ‘meaning’ of the text” (p. 167). On the other hand, she analyzes other voices that begin the hermeneutical process with the experience of HIV/AIDS victims who are being rejected by their community of faith. The themes explored include the transformation of the sufferer, the integration of good and evil in human experience, the relational restoration of the sufferer, the sufferer’s encounter with the deity, and the sufferer’s questioning of the purpose of one’s own catastrophic experience. Again, Nelson adroitly sets up an illuminating dialogue between the numerous voices with regard to how a person can cope with innocent suffering. She argues that academic approaches may provide helpful insights into psychological, spiritual, and communal healing in real-life contexts while vernacular approaches may call into question the practicality and the claim to universality of certain psychoanalytic theories. Whereas Nelson takes pain in establishing the credibility of vernacular interpreters in the previous chapter, she appears to be less concerned with exerting the same energy in this chapter. For those psychoanalytic approaches that Nelson classifies as academic, not all appear to be informed by the biblical text to the same degree. This exposes one of the weaknesses of Nelson’s contrapuntal hermeneutics, which apparently considers each interpretation as an equally satisfactory reading of the biblical text. In the final chapter Nelson juxtaposes academic and vernacular interpretations of Job from various Asian contexts. Before performing a contrapuntal dialogue, she first gives an overview of the distinctive features of Asian hermeneutics. She has selected Duck-Woo Nam and Yohan Pyeon, both of whom were educated in the West, as representatives for the academic approaches.4 The themes considered include the divine mystery, the purpose of pain, the nature of the created order, and the reinscription of tradition. After careful analysis of the numerous voices from academic and vernacular approaches, Nelson concludes that all of them are quite harmonious and complementary to one another. She suggests that academic interpretations can be enhanced by vernacular insights, and vice versa. Although Nelson’s analysis is well-researched, I find her suspect of stereotyping the Asians. As an Asian scholar who is educated in the West, I hardly credit my own interpretation of Job to my Asian heritage. Although

314

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Nam and Pyeon are both Asians in ethnicity, I wonder to what extent their interpretations are characteristic of typical Asian biblical hermeneutics. In a brief conclusion, Nelson gives a summary of her project and suggests a few implications of contrapuntal hermeneutics to biblical hermeneutical pedagogy. Overall, Nelson’s succinct overview of Said’s theories and her attempt to adapt Said’s contrapuntal reading for the purpose of biblical hermeneutics is to be applauded. Moreover, she has performed a masterful job in juxtaposing various interpretations of Job that result from different approaches and perspectives. Although Nelson’s analysis of the role of subjectivity in biblical interpretation is not something novel, this is certainly a topic worthy of further exploration. Nevertheless, I remain unconvinced that contrapuntal hermeneutics, as proposed and demonstrated in this monograph, has successfully closed the gap between academic and vernacular hermeneutics. 1 Pui-lan Kwok, Discovering the Bible in the Non-Biblical World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1995); idem, “The Future of Feminist Theology: An Asian Perspective,” Voices from the Third World 15 (1992), 141–61; Elsa Tamez, The Amnesty of Grace: Justification by Faith from a Latin American Perspective (trans. Sharon H. Ringe; Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1993); idem, The Scandalous Message of James: Faith without Works Is Dead (New York: Crossroad, 1992); idem, When the Horizons Close: Rereading Ecclesiastes (trans Margaret Wilde; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2000); Gerald O. West, The Academy of the Poor: Towards a Dialogical Reading of the Bible (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999); idem, Contextual Bible Study (Pietermaritzburg: Cluster, 1993); idem, “Reading the Bible Differently: Giving Shape to the Discourses of the Dominated,” Semeia 73 (1996), 21–41; Justin Ukpong, “Developments in Biblical Interpretation in Africa: Historical and Hermeneutical Directions,” in R. S. Sugirtharajah (ed), Voices from the Margin: Interpeting the Bible in the Third World (3rd ed; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2006), 49–63; idem, “Inculturation Hermeneutics: An African Approach to Biblical Interpretation,” in Walter Dietrich and Ulrich Luz (eds), The Bible in a World Context: An Experiment in Contextual Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 17–32; idem, “Developments in Biblical interpretation in Africa: Historical and Hermeneutical Direction,” in Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube (eds), The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories, and Trends (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 11–28; Fernando F. Segovia, “Interpreting beyond Borders: Postcolonial Studies and Diasporic Studies in Biblical Criticism,” in Fernando F. Segovia (ed), Interpreting Beyond Borders (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000), 11–34; idem, Decolonizing Biblical Studies: A View from the Margins (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004); idem, The Bible and the Third World: Precolonial, Colonial and Postcolonial Encounters (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); idem, Postcolonial Criticism and Biblical Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); idem, “A Postcolonial Exploration of Collusion and Construction in Biblical Interpretation,” in R. S. Sugirtharajah (ed), The Postcolonial Bible (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic,

REVIEWS

315

1998), 91–116. 2 Gerhard von Rad, Wisdom in Israel (London: SCM Press, 1972); idem, “Job XXXVIII and Ancient Egyptian Wisdom,” in E. W. Trueman Dicken (ed), The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1966), 281–91; idem, Old Testament Theology (trans D. M. G. Stalker; 2 vols.; London: SCM Press, 1975); Gustavo Gutiérrez, On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent (trans M. J. O’Connell; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987); idem, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation (ed and trans Caridad Inda and John Eagleson; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1973). 3 David J. A. Clines, “Does the Book of Job Suggest that Suffering Is Not a Problem?” (paper presented at the Symposium for the 100th Birthday of Gerhard von Rad: Das Alte Testament und die Kultur der Moderne, Heidelberg, 18–21 October 2001); idem, “Deconstructing the Book of Job,” in M. Warner (ed), The Bible as Rhetoric: Studies in Biblical Persuasion and Creditability (London: Routledge, 1990), 65–80; idem, “Job’s God,” Concilium 4 (2004), 39–51; idem, “Job’s Fifth Friend: An Ethical Critique of the Book of Job,” BibInt 12 (2004), 232–50; Elsa Tamez, “From Father to the Needy to Brother of Jackals and Companion of Ostriches: A Meditation on Job,” Concilium 4 (2004), 103–11; idem, “A Letter to Job,” in J. S. Pobee and B. von Wartenburg-Potter (eds), New Eyes for Reading: Biblical and Theological Reflections by Women from the Third World (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1986), 50–52; Enrique Dussel, “The People of El Salvador: The Communal Sufferings of Job,” Concilium 169 (1983), 61–68. 4 Duck-Woo Nam, Talking about God: Job 42:7–9 and the Nature of God in the Book of Job (Studies in Biblical Literature, 49; New York: Peter Lang, 2003); Yohan Pyeon, You Have Not Spoken What Is Right about Me: Intertextuality and the Book of Job (Studies in Biblical Literature, 45; New York: Peter Lang, 2003).

Pierre Van Hecke, and Antje Labahn (eds), METAPHORS IN THE PSALMS (London: Continuum, 2010). Pp. 289. Hardcover. US$70.00. ISBN 978-0-56725-389-7. Reviewed by Tremper Longman III Westmount College The book under review is a contribution of the “Research Group on Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible” that began their study back in 2001 during the meetings of the European Association of Biblical Studies. They earlier

REVIEWS

315

1998), 91–116. 2 Gerhard von Rad, Wisdom in Israel (London: SCM Press, 1972); idem, “Job XXXVIII and Ancient Egyptian Wisdom,” in E. W. Trueman Dicken (ed), The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1966), 281–91; idem, Old Testament Theology (trans D. M. G. Stalker; 2 vols.; London: SCM Press, 1975); Gustavo Gutiérrez, On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent (trans M. J. O’Connell; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987); idem, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation (ed and trans Caridad Inda and John Eagleson; Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1973). 3 David J. A. Clines, “Does the Book of Job Suggest that Suffering Is Not a Problem?” (paper presented at the Symposium for the 100th Birthday of Gerhard von Rad: Das Alte Testament und die Kultur der Moderne, Heidelberg, 18–21 October 2001); idem, “Deconstructing the Book of Job,” in M. Warner (ed), The Bible as Rhetoric: Studies in Biblical Persuasion and Creditability (London: Routledge, 1990), 65–80; idem, “Job’s God,” Concilium 4 (2004), 39–51; idem, “Job’s Fifth Friend: An Ethical Critique of the Book of Job,” BibInt 12 (2004), 232–50; Elsa Tamez, “From Father to the Needy to Brother of Jackals and Companion of Ostriches: A Meditation on Job,” Concilium 4 (2004), 103–11; idem, “A Letter to Job,” in J. S. Pobee and B. von Wartenburg-Potter (eds), New Eyes for Reading: Biblical and Theological Reflections by Women from the Third World (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1986), 50–52; Enrique Dussel, “The People of El Salvador: The Communal Sufferings of Job,” Concilium 169 (1983), 61–68. 4 Duck-Woo Nam, Talking about God: Job 42:7–9 and the Nature of God in the Book of Job (Studies in Biblical Literature, 49; New York: Peter Lang, 2003); Yohan Pyeon, You Have Not Spoken What Is Right about Me: Intertextuality and the Book of Job (Studies in Biblical Literature, 45; New York: Peter Lang, 2003).

Pierre Van Hecke, and Antje Labahn (eds), METAPHORS IN THE PSALMS (London: Continuum, 2010). Pp. 289. Hardcover. US$70.00. ISBN 978-0-56725-389-7. Reviewed by Tremper Longman III Westmount College The book under review is a contribution of the “Research Group on Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible” that began their study back in 2001 during the meetings of the European Association of Biblical Studies. They earlier

316

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

produced a book on Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible, edited by P. Van Hecke (Peeters, 2005), and in the present book they turn their attention to the Psalms, a particularly ripe repository of metaphoric language, where “abstract concepts” are presented in “concrete terms.”1 A number of the chapters treat individual metaphors across the Psalms or a sizable portion of them. For instance, C. de Vos (“Es Gibt Mehr Felsen in Israel,” pp. 1–11) studies the metaphor of rock or fortress across the individual lament psalms of the Psalter. While denying that the rock/fortress is Zion or the temple, she does believe that the metaphor depicts God as a place where the petitioner finds protection, citing Psalm 71:1–3 as a particularly rich example. B. Janowski provides an illuminating study of the metaphor of light in the Psalms (“Das Licht des Lebens: Zur Lichtmetaphorik in den Psalmen,” pp. 87–113) where, in agreement with cognitive linguistic theory, metaphors make concrete more abstract or vague concepts. He concludes that light is connected to four main themes in various psalms including (1) life (Ps 13), (2) justice (Pss 17 and 27), (3) the king—not as light himself but as mediator of God’s light, and (4) the Torah, though the Torah is not light, but God’s instruction in the Torah illuminates the life of the reader (Ps 119:105, 130). In a stimulating discussion of the metaphor of God’s wings as a place of protection, G. Kwakkel (“Under YHWH’s Wings,” pp. 141–65) surveys the possible sources of the image of wings found in Pss 17:8; 36:8; 57:2; 61:5; 63:8; 91:4. While highlighting the idea that this may be a polemical appropriation of the picture of false gods who are winged, he allows for the possibility that more than one suggestion is possible, including the picture of a bird protecting its young with its wings (cf. Deut 32:11; Matt 23:37), a reference to the wings of the cherubim in the temple, or a reference to the winged solar disk. A second type of chapter looks at what might be called metaphorical fields across the book of Psalms. G. Eidevall’s chapter provides a good example, as he examines the figurative use of landscapes through the book (“Metaphorical Landscapes in the Psalms,” pp. 13–21). Though few, these metaphorical landscapes tend to be desolate, as for example when wicked people are compared to pastureland that perishes (Ps 63). He also points out that the psalms use various landscapes to denote different experiences, for instance Ps 63:1: “my soul thirsts for you, my flesh faints for you, as in a dry and weary land.” Metaphors of life and death across the psalms is the subject of K. Liess’ chapter (“Von der Gottesferne zur Gottesnahe: Zur Todes- und Lebensmetaphorik in den Psalmen,” pp. 167–95). She discusses the wide range of metaphors that lead from life to death from the perspective of the enemies’ action (crushing) to God’s (turning away his face). The dying psalmist himself is said to draw close to death or being on

REVIEWS

317

the brink of death. He also examines the metaphors of the underworld as a dark, dry, and deep place. C. Sticher also surveys a theme (plant metaphors) throughout the Psalms, covering some of the same themes as Eidevall, though the concentration in this chapter is really on tree metaphors in Psalms 37 and 92. Two other contributors take the same approach to the topic of metaphor by talking about a metaphorical field in the Psalms as a whole: S. Wälchli (“Zorn JHWH’s im Psalter—Eine Metapher des Leidens?,” pp. 269–77) points out that the psalmist describes God’s anger concretely (metaphorically) through the emotion’s “observable effects” with a concentration on Psalms 6 and 38. Finally, B. Willmes provides a stimulating study of the metaphor of God’s kingship and adds a diachronic development (“Israels Erwartungen an Jahwe als König: Zum Gottesbild im Psalter,” 279–323). Of course the difficulty of dating psalms throws some doubt on his reconstruction, where he suggests that preexilic and exilic psalms share a view that the divine king was like a human king who protects his people, whereas in later times God the king was like a judge. Most of the chapters in this book focus on a single psalm and sometimes a single metaphor in a psalm. M. Grohman brings to our attention the fact that God is presented as both male and female in the Bible in her chapter entitled “Metaphors of God, Nature and Birth in Psalm 90,2 and 110,3” (pp. 22-33). P. Guillaume (“Bull-Leaping in Psalm 18,” pp. 35–46) suggests translating Psalm 18:30 as “By you I [over]run a bullock, and by my God I leap over a bull.” He then places this idea in the context of the ritual of bull-leaping in the ancient world (with illustrations) and identifies the significance by calling this a ritual of imitation where a person takes on the divinity’s strength. Other articles that take the form of a study of a specific psalm or psalms include those by J. Hausmann (“Zur Sprachwelt von Psalm 121,” pp. 47–54), Z. Kotze (“9:7 3'0 as Conceptual Metaphor for the Evil Eye in Psalm 35:19,” pp. 135–39, K. Nielsen (“Metaphorical Language and Theophany in Psalm 18,” pp. 197–207), P. Reide, (“‘Doch du erhöhtest wie einem Wildstier mein Horn’: Zur Metaphorik in Ps 92,11,” pp. 209–16), P. Reide (“Du bereitest vor mir einen Tisch: Zum Tischmotiv in den Psalmen 23 und 69,” pp. 217–33), and J. Schnocks, (“Metaphern für Leben und Tod in den Psalmen 23 und 88,” pp. 235–49). Two of the most theoretically sophisticated and interesting of this overall very profitable collection of studies are those by E. Hayes (“‘Where is the Lord?’: The Extended Chain of Being as a Source Domain for Conceptual Metaphor in the Egyptian Hallel, Psalms 113–118,” pp. 55–69) and M. Klingbeil (“Metaphors that Travel and (Almost) Vanish: Mapping Diachronic Changes in the Intertextual Usage of the Heavenly Warrior Metaphor in Psalms 18 and 144,” pp. 115–34). Both of these studies have

318

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

fairly lengthy discussions of metaphor theory. Both (and others in the collection) are interested in the insights provided by cognitive linguistics. I particularly value Klingbeil’s interest in diachronic and intertextual uses of a particular metaphor—in his case the divine warrior. Hayes helpfully distinguishes conceptual from literary metaphor and then applies her understanding to metaphors of space and in particular how the psalmist in the Egyptian Hallel (Psalms 113–118) speaks of the location of God. This book presents a rich collection of reflection on various metaphors and the psalms in which they are found. The strength of the book is in the insightful close reading of the text often with a profound awareness of ancient Near Eastern background. One wonders, though, how important the theoretical background is to the results of this study; at times it appears that many of the insights do not require the extensive theoretical structure in which they are embedded. 1

S. Pinker, How the Mind Works (New York: Norton, 1997), 391.

Daniel E. Fleming, THE LEGACY OF ISRAEL IN JUDAH’S BIBLE: HISTORY, POLICTICS, AND THE REINSCRIBING OF TRADITION (HBM, 34; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2011). Pp. 212. Hardcover. US$95.00. ISBN 978-1-90753-420-1. Reviewed by David J. Fuller McMaster Divinity College Daniel E. Fleming’s The Legacy of Israel in Judah’s Bible is an interdisciplinary study that draws together the fruits of diligent engagement with the fields of biblical studies, anthropology, archeology, and historiography. Fleming’s brief preface clearly sets forth the starting problems and goals of the book. The Enneateuch, or Primary History of the Hebrew Bible, was clearly composed (or assembled into its final shape) by those who identified as Judahites. However, its large-scale story arc describes a single “people of Israel” that divided into the separate kingdoms of Israel and Judah during the monarchial period. Additionally, the available inscriptional evidence only reflects the existence of the separate kingdoms.

318

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

fairly lengthy discussions of metaphor theory. Both (and others in the collection) are interested in the insights provided by cognitive linguistics. I particularly value Klingbeil’s interest in diachronic and intertextual uses of a particular metaphor—in his case the divine warrior. Hayes helpfully distinguishes conceptual from literary metaphor and then applies her understanding to metaphors of space and in particular how the psalmist in the Egyptian Hallel (Psalms 113–118) speaks of the location of God. This book presents a rich collection of reflection on various metaphors and the psalms in which they are found. The strength of the book is in the insightful close reading of the text often with a profound awareness of ancient Near Eastern background. One wonders, though, how important the theoretical background is to the results of this study; at times it appears that many of the insights do not require the extensive theoretical structure in which they are embedded. 1

S. Pinker, How the Mind Works (New York: Norton, 1997), 391.

Daniel E. Fleming, THE LEGACY OF ISRAEL IN JUDAH’S BIBLE: HISTORY, POLICTICS, AND THE REINSCRIBING OF TRADITION (HBM, 34; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2011). Pp. 212. Hardcover. US$95.00. ISBN 978-1-90753-420-1. Reviewed by David J. Fuller McMaster Divinity College Daniel E. Fleming’s The Legacy of Israel in Judah’s Bible is an interdisciplinary study that draws together the fruits of diligent engagement with the fields of biblical studies, anthropology, archeology, and historiography. Fleming’s brief preface clearly sets forth the starting problems and goals of the book. The Enneateuch, or Primary History of the Hebrew Bible, was clearly composed (or assembled into its final shape) by those who identified as Judahites. However, its large-scale story arc describes a single “people of Israel” that divided into the separate kingdoms of Israel and Judah during the monarchial period. Additionally, the available inscriptional evidence only reflects the existence of the separate kingdoms.

REVIEWS

319

Therefore, significant amounts of the pre-monarchic material in the Enneateuch must have been traditions that originated in Israel before being incorporated into Judah’s larger body of historical writings. Fleming argues that when one isolates these “Israelite” narratives, one discovers a host of assumptions regarding political practice and social organization that are vastly different from those expressed in texts penned in Judah. Thus, Fleming’s study contributes to two different fields. In biblical studies, a source analysis based primarily on political grounds is quite novel. Also, historical studies based on archeology have yet to interact with such a reconstruction of the composition of the Primary History. Part 1, “Introduction: Israel and Judah” contains two chapters. Chapter 1, “Why Israel?” reiterates in greater detail the starting problems laid out in the preface and offers a history of research on the reconstructions of the provenances of the writing and transmission of Israel’s origins traditions. In brief, scholars of the Noth/von Rad era generally assumed that the united monarchy was responsible for the writing of the origins accounts, but recent scholars working both in the United States (Van Seters) and Europe (Schmid) have tended towards pushing the dates for these materials further forward into the Persian period.1 Fleming surveys other specialized studies that address similar questions, but he notes a general tendency towards narrowly relying on geographical criteria. Chapter 2, “Israel without Judah,” lays out the criteria for the textual analysis, which is the means of answering the question, “how do the contrasting social and political characters of Israel and Judah help distinguish material from each domain, and then help judge the implications of such distinctions?” (p. 16). The political assumptions which highlight Judahite material are said to be the centralization of both king and temple in Jerusalem, a leadership legitimated by continuity with the line of David, and the lack within Judah of subgroups with their own substantial political clout. Israelite material, on the other hand, can be distinguished by traditions focusing on separate locations for the palace and cult, replacement of leadership not needing justification by lineage, as well as by the smaller divisions of tribes having the rights to make their own decisions (pp. 25–27). Fleming then lays out two hypotheses regarding this mixture of Israelite and Judahite traditions in the Enneateuch: “Only in Israel was there a perceived need to explain this people’s existence before and apart from kings,” and, “All primary phases of the Bible’s account of the past before David originate in Israel and reflect Israel’s political perspective” (p. 28). Part 2, “Israelite Content in the Bible,” is the core exegetical section of the book, exploring the placement and use of texts with an Israelite origin in the Primary History. Chapter 3, “Writing from Judah,” notes the

320

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

centrality of Jerusalem assumed throughout the Samuel-Kings narrative and draws a contrast between this portrayal and that of the Chronicler, who clearly sought to appropriate Israelite identity for the house of David. Chapter 4 covers the book of Judges, which Fleming views as largely Israelite material framed by a later Judahite introduction and conclusion. Chapter 5, “The Family of Jacob,” attempts to reconstruct an original eighttribe group that comprised Israel, isolating certain “sons” of Jacob as later additions for the purpose of legitimating political power during the monarchic period. Chapter 6 isolates passages betraying Israelite political assumptions from the Omri and David narratives. Chapter 7, “Moses and the Conquest of Eastern Israel,” begins from the intriguing premise that separate sources can be posited for the exodus tradition (and its recounting in Hosea and Amos) and the wilderness tradition, on the bases of both Moses’s style of leadership and the geographical foci of the narratives. Fleming further analyzes Deut 2–3 as offering a conquest account independent of Num 20–21. These accounts reflect separate western and eastern Israelite traditions that illustrate the decentralized, variegated nature of Israel. Chapter 8 argues that Joshua is an originally Israelite tradition thoroughly reworked by Judahite editing until the only recognizably Israelite content is the conquest of Ai in ch. 8. Chapter 9 explores the problematic place of the seemingly independent Benjaminites. Chapter 10, “Israelite Writers on Early Israel,” briefly surveys the pastoralist tradition typical of descriptions of early Israelite life before offering some reflections on what the purely Israelite accounts of Israel’s origins looked like as a whole. Part 3, “Collaborative Politics,” examines other cultures for evidence of comparable models of loose tribal alliances that could illuminate the nature of Israel’s organizational structure. Chapter 11 lays out several theoretical models and taxonomies that have been used to classify different varieties of decentralized power structures. Chapter 12, “Outside the Near East,” surveys specific examples of people groups operating with decentralized structures, some of which eventually transitioned into monarchies. Chapters 13 and 14 analyze the organizational models of the Amorites (drawing from Fleming’s expertise on the Mari archives)2 and Arameans. Part 4, “Israel in History,” begins with Chapter 15, which analyzes the name “Israel” archeologically and concludes that the title serves as a political, not an ethnic, signifier. Chapter 16 reviews the evidence surrounding the “Hapiru” people and compares them to the pastoralist tradition in Genesis and Exodus. Chapters 17 and 18 analyze Israel in the historical periods of the co-existence with Canaan and the time of SamuelKings. Finally, Chapter 19, “Genuine (versus invented) Tradition in the

REVIEWS

321

Bible,” reflects on how to make historical use of the Israelite traditions that have been reworked into Judahite texts. Obviously, a book of this depth deserves a far more thorough critical engagement than can be offered here. Nevertheless, several broad tendencies throughout the exegetical sections need to be noted. While none of these hermeneutical moves are patently indefensible, Fleming’s case would have been much more solid if he had more thoroughly developed a defense for them. In several places throughout, the mere fact that a narrative describes a certain region is taken as a virtual guarantee that it was written from that region and was crafted to serve its political interests (an example would be the treatment of the narratives of eastern Israel, p. 117). Similarly, the fact that a character is from a given region or tribe is often considered sufficient evidence that the character’s story was written to support the political interests of that region or tribe (one example being the Benjaminite interests said to underlie portions of the Saul narrative, p. 151). Finally, the conclusions of the wooden literary aesthetic of much critical scholarship are sometimes treated far too generously (as in the assumption of different underlying sources for the Jericho and Ai narratives based on differing modes of military engagement, pp. 138–39). However, none of these observations detract from the fact that The Legacy of Israel in Judah’s Bible is a highly insightful volume, which makes suggestions and raises questions that no Hebrew Bible specialist should ignore. 1 John Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1975); idem, In Search of History: Historiography in the Ancient World and the Origins of Biblical History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983); Konrad Schmid, Genesis and the Moses Story: Israel’s Dual Origins in the Hebrew Bible (Siphrut: Literature and Theology of the Hebrew Scriptures, 3; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2010). 2 Daniel E. Fleming, Democracy’s Ancient Ancestors: Mari and Early Collective Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).

322

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Simon P. Stocks, THE FORM AND FUNCTION OF THE TRICOLON IN THE PSALMS OF ASCENTS. INTRODUCING A NEW PARADIGM FOR HEBREW POETIC LINE-FORM (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2012). Pp. xv + 274. Softcover. US$32.00. ISBN 978-1-61097-808-8. Reviewed by John F. Hobbins University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh The volume under review contains the PhD thesis of Simon Stocks completed under David Firth at Cliff College, Derbyshire. Firth is now at St. John’s College, University of Chester; Stocks is now at the Southeast Institute for Theological Education, London. The thesis is the fruit of research carried out by Stocks between 2007 and 2010 at Cliff College. The monograph takes a close look at aspects of the poetry, structure, themes, and rhetoric of Pss 120–134. Particular attention is given to the division of each psalm into cola, lines, and strophes. The goal of the monograph is to investigate lines of verse divisible into three as opposed to the usual two parts. “Tricolon” is the adopted label for a tripartite line in ancient Hebrew verse, over against the more frequent “bicolon” and the rare to non-existent “monocolon.” With a minimum of hard and fast presuppositions, Stocks investigates the form and function of tricola in his corpus of choice. He also interacts in a responsible manner with a wide range of approaches to the same corpus, strophic, rhetorical, and thematic analyses included. Ultimately, Stocks shies away from generalizable conclusions in his discussion of the function of tricola and paratricola. The corpus Stocks investigates is limited: roughly 120 lines of song across 15 biblical songs. Stocks identifies 117 lines and concludes that five of the 117 lines are to be classified with relative certainty as tricola, five as possible tricola, ten as probable and nine as possible “paratricola” (bicola in which the “a” colon is divisible in two roughly equal parts), and one as a monocolon. By “tricolon” Stocks means a line of Hebrew verse half again as long as the bicola which dominate the corpus under review: grosso modo 3 + 3 + 3 versus 3 + 3 lines, according to the counting units of a strong stress theory of ancient Hebrew verse. Beyond what one might refer to as genuine tricola, Stocks focuses on another kind of line, lines that divide easily into three equal parts but which are no longer than a typical bicolon: grosso modo 2 + 2 + 2 lines. As already noted, he calls these lines “paratricola” and

322

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Simon P. Stocks, THE FORM AND FUNCTION OF THE TRICOLON IN THE PSALMS OF ASCENTS. INTRODUCING A NEW PARADIGM FOR HEBREW POETIC LINE-FORM (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2012). Pp. xv + 274. Softcover. US$32.00. ISBN 978-1-61097-808-8. Reviewed by John F. Hobbins University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh The volume under review contains the PhD thesis of Simon Stocks completed under David Firth at Cliff College, Derbyshire. Firth is now at St. John’s College, University of Chester; Stocks is now at the Southeast Institute for Theological Education, London. The thesis is the fruit of research carried out by Stocks between 2007 and 2010 at Cliff College. The monograph takes a close look at aspects of the poetry, structure, themes, and rhetoric of Pss 120–134. Particular attention is given to the division of each psalm into cola, lines, and strophes. The goal of the monograph is to investigate lines of verse divisible into three as opposed to the usual two parts. “Tricolon” is the adopted label for a tripartite line in ancient Hebrew verse, over against the more frequent “bicolon” and the rare to non-existent “monocolon.” With a minimum of hard and fast presuppositions, Stocks investigates the form and function of tricola in his corpus of choice. He also interacts in a responsible manner with a wide range of approaches to the same corpus, strophic, rhetorical, and thematic analyses included. Ultimately, Stocks shies away from generalizable conclusions in his discussion of the function of tricola and paratricola. The corpus Stocks investigates is limited: roughly 120 lines of song across 15 biblical songs. Stocks identifies 117 lines and concludes that five of the 117 lines are to be classified with relative certainty as tricola, five as possible tricola, ten as probable and nine as possible “paratricola” (bicola in which the “a” colon is divisible in two roughly equal parts), and one as a monocolon. By “tricolon” Stocks means a line of Hebrew verse half again as long as the bicola which dominate the corpus under review: grosso modo 3 + 3 + 3 versus 3 + 3 lines, according to the counting units of a strong stress theory of ancient Hebrew verse. Beyond what one might refer to as genuine tricola, Stocks focuses on another kind of line, lines that divide easily into three equal parts but which are no longer than a typical bicolon: grosso modo 2 + 2 + 2 lines. As already noted, he calls these lines “paratricola” and

REVIEWS

323

identifies ten relatively certain and nine possible cases in the corpus (pp. 180–81). Stocks’s overview of past research on tricola (pp. 3–8) and “theories of poetic structure” (ch. 2) is thorough and laced with pertinent observations. He chooses to adopt Jan Fokkelman’s description of a well-formed colon— typically, six to nine syllables in length, with cola as short as four and as long as 12 syllables nonetheless allowed.1 At the same time, Stocks wishes to ascribe normative value to the accents of the Masoretic tradition for the purposes of interpretation and proposes to use major disjunctive accents as a criterion for determining the boundaries of cola within a Masoretic pasuq or prosodic sentence and the boundaries of lines in pesuqim which contain more than one line of verse. However, though he adopts Fokkelman’s definition of a colon, Stocks and Fokkelman disagree in a very high percentage of cases when it comes to the subdivision of Masoretic pesuqim into tripartite lines (or into a bipartite followed by a monopartite line). An author Stocks overlooks is Beat Weber.2 Like Stocks, Weber pays a great deal of attention to form and function and divides psalms into cola, lines, and strophes on a case-by-case basis. Stocks’s analysis represents an advance over that of Weber and Fokkelman thanks to the distinction Stocks makes between “true” tricola and “false” tricola, or paratricola. Nonetheless, it is symptomatic of the arbitrary nature of prosodic analysis, if not undertaken within the bounds of a discriminating working hypothesis, that Fokkelman, Weber, and Stocks seldom agree on the identification and internal partition of lines except in the case of straightforward bicola. With respect to the divisibility of lines into one, three, or four parts (Weber makes 128:5–6a into a tetracolon), Fokkelman, Weber, and Stocks concur in four cases only, to wit, that 123:4; 125:2; and 130:5, 6 are tripartite lines. Even this tiny list of agreements is compromised, since Fokkelman and Weber classify 130:5, 6 as tricola, whereas Stocks (rightly) identifies them as bicola with a longer, bipartite “a” colon (“paratricola”). In the following table, strong stress counts are given in the leftmost column; syllable counts in the adjacent column. Double-stressed orthographic units in the Hebrew are marked with a circulus where the second strong stress occurs.

324

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

3:3:3

8:6:6

-' –1L'— ’+– $KC!™

-' –^ ™1” i ‘™ !™ 4™ X™ !™

K1f— 6’ ™1 IX¡! š 4š ’ gš =C™ :™

123:4

4:3:3

9:8:7

-+L3¡ š 4™ ’# !kš 4™ /—

L]4™ +’ '– 2š !#!' ™#

I+' š – 2š -':– !š –-+™ fK š :‘ ’'

125:2

(2:2):3

(4:4):7

'k– ’+%L! š L:š ’ +– ‘ ’#

'f– 6’ ™1 !=š ’K9!#!' – '=' – –K9–

130:5

(2:2):2

(5:5):4

:9œ˜ C+™ -':– /œ’ f

:9œ˜ C+™ -':– /œ’ i/' – š1œ +™ 'f– 6’ ™1

130:6

Fokkelman, Weber, and Stocks are sensitive, close readers of ancient Hebrew poetry. But without a strong hypothesis that stipulates prosodic constraints specific to identifiable varieties of ancient Hebrew verse, such that a majority of controversial cases are ruled in or out based on recursive induction and the hypothesis itself, there is no way to adjudicate between the findings of these three scholars. As an example, the working hypothesis I published in 2007 rules out monocola and tetracola and stipulates, in the case of mashal and qinah meters, that each colon range in length from six to nine syllables, with four, five, and ten syllable cola also allowed but (against Fokkelman) eleven and twelve syllable cola disallowed.3 The bicola of qinah and mashal poems are characterized almost without exception by a long “a” versus a shorter “b” colon in the case of qinah, and by roughly identical “a” and “b” cola in the case of mashal. True tricola in mashal and qinah poetry are rare; when they occur, they have a “c” colon with a length range very much like that of “a” and “b” cola: 5–9 syllables. On this hypothesis: (1) Pss 120–125, 128–130, and 133–134 are written in qinah meter, and Pss 126–127 and 131–132 in mashal meter. (2) Almost all of Stocks’s paratricola (unbalanced bicola with a longer “a” colon divisible into two roughly equal parts)—his “probable,” “possible,” and even some of his rejected paratricola—are confirmed (120:2, 3, 7; 121:4, 5, 8 [not 6]; 122:5; 124:6; 125:1, 3ab [not 5abc]; 126:1, 2abc, 2def [“b–a” paratricolon, very rare], 3; 127:2abc, 5abc; 130:5, 6; 133:3cde; 134: last word of 1 + 2a [with LXX]), with other cases to be so classified (120:5; 129:7; 132:17; 133:1). 130:5, 6 are set out in the table above. (3) Four out of five of Stocks’s probable tricola are confirmed (123:4; 125:2; 129:8; and 130:7; the lineation of 122:3–4 is a crux), with Stocks’s

REVIEWS

325

“possible tricola” to be classified as a tricolon in one instance (128:5); paratricola in two instances (124:1, 2); and as two bicola, with Fokkelman and Weber, in another instance (131:2). 134:1–2 is a crux with the lineation offered by the LXX remaining the preferable guess. 123:4 and 125:2 are set out in the table above.

As this example hopefully shows, the interest of a strong working hypothesis is that in almost all cases, line identification and internal division of lines flow from the hypothesis itself, rather than from ad hoc judgments developed on a case-by-case basis. The chief difference between the results obtained by Stocks and those obtained if the model I propose is applied is the classification of the Psalms of Ascents into two distinct varieties of meter both of which are wellattested in the larger corpus of ancient Hebrew verse: qinah or long/short meter and mashal meter. In sum, this volume by Stocks is marked by sound judgment and a breadth of interaction with previous scholarship. The distinction Stocks makes between “true” and “false” tricola is helpful. However, Stocks fails to put forward a testable model of ancient Hebrew verse capable of being confirmed or disconfirmed on a case-by-case basis. 1 J. P. Fokkelman, The Psalms in Form: The Hebrew Psalter in its Poetic Shape (Leiden: Deo, 2002). 2 Beat Weber, Werkbuch Psalmen II. Die Psalmen 73 bis 150 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2003). 3 John F. Hobbins, “Regularities in Ancient Hebrew Verse: A New Descriptive Model,” ZAW 119 (2007), 564–85.

326

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Mercedes L. García Bachmann, WOMEN AT WORK IN THE DEUTERONOMISTIC HISTORY (International Voices in Biblical Studies, 4; Atlanta: SBL, 2013). Pp. xv + 413. Paperback. US$54.95. ISBN 978-1-58983-755-3. Reviewed by Sandra Richter Wheaton College A revised version of García Bachmann’s dissertation, this book sets out to investigate the lives of female laborers in the Deuteronomistic History. The objective is to find in the intersection of liberation feminist perspectives and exegetical study a portrait of the voiceless women in Israel. These are the women who gave their lives to tasks necessary to the survival of the community, but whose stories were never told, either by the original authors, or by the generations who have studied the Deuteronomistic History since (p. 17). The author seeks to define the social categories into which these women were placed by their own communities (p. 7), and to identify their own unique perspectives as “lower-class, hard-working women,” especially regarding how their values might differ from those of the middle and upper class female (pp. 3–4, n. 7). She proposes accomplishing this investigation by means of a thorough socio-historical, linguistic, and gender-based study of the Deuteronomistic History. García Bachmann’s thesis is compelling, and her agenda has much potential for contributing significantly to the study of the biblical text. Unfortunately, this book disappoints on several fronts. The introduction and first chapters of the book are, logically, designed to define the focus of the study: who are the “working women” of Israel? But the author’s categories are amorphous, shifting so frequently that the reader struggles to identify exactly who it is she is pursuing. She speaks of her study being targeted at “those serving household needs, as opposed to religious and political occupations” (p. 9), yet circles back to include TeGĔxËP (i.e., sacred prostitutes, p. 11) and palace servants (p. 9). The stated goal is women who were forced to work outside their own homes, “economically dependent and thus bound to work for others and/or depend on others’ good will” (pp. 1, 3, 5, 7), yet much is made of women belonging to a patriarchal system (i.e., the EÇW ʯćb of Israelite society). As a result, the reader is too-often confused over the identity of the target of this study. A similar confusion permeates the book regarding genre and corpus. Although the book is an investigation of the Deuteronomistic History, the focus regularly shifts into the Pentateuch (pp. 14, 101, 118, 178, 221, 271, 279–80), the

REVIEWS

327

post-exilic prophets (pp. 109, 174, 179, 322, 340), and the Writings (pp. 26– 27, 99, 148, 167, 179, 285–91). As these boundaries of corpus and historical era are neglected, the cultural profiles necessary to any study of this sort evaporate, leaving the reader with the impression that the discussion has no anchor in any particular incarnation of the Israelite experience. And as the definitions desired will, of course, be embedded in culture, this methodological error seriously impedes the success of the author’s objectives. Chapters two and three focus upon current scholarship regarding the broader contributions of feminist and gender studies as well as societal conditions in ancient Israel and how these would affect female laborers both slave and free. Building upon the concept of “peasantry” (Erik Wolf and Theodor Shanin),1 García Bachmann attempts a model of a working woman's place in Israelite society by pursuing conditions in various eras and settings in Egypt, the Hittite Empire, and Mesopotamia. The author concludes with three categories in Israel: “indentured servants” (ʯćmâ, xLSW¿), dependent women away from paternal protection (QeʰĉUâ), and “captive women” from the hapax in Jdg 5:30 (UDʚDP UDʚĉPćWDËP). Her research here is uneven, with general anthropological themes and Mesopotamian society handled more carefully than material directly addressing Israelite society. (For example, the works of Johannes Pedersen and Timothy Laniak are presented as competing models of social-scientific interpretation of “honor and shame,” as opposed to models differentiated by seventy years of research).2 Conspicuous lacunae here are contributions from the current social scientists of the Old Testament world: Carol Meyers, Lawrence Stager, Mary Douglas, David Hopkins, Israel Finkelstein, Rainer Albertz and Rüdiger Schmitt, etc. Chapters four through six are dedicated to a survey of the various Hebrew terms that may or may not be attributed to female laborers. A necessary aspect of García Bachmann’s study, here the reader finds some clarification regarding her categories (e.g., “Unfree Labor in the ANE,” pp. 91–114). But clarification is hindered by the author’s curious approach to Hebrew language word study. Her discussions of Hebrew and Semitic linguistics are difficult, belaboring the most elementary aspects of Hebrew grammar (pp. 23–29). In combination with the privileging of older lexicons (e.g., pp. 26, n. 18; 179, n. 44; 189, n. 76), lengthy quotations from the theological word books (p. 178, n. 41), the regular juxtaposition of Akkadian qadištu and Hebrew 9