Psalm 29: A Canaanite Hymn to Yhwh in the Psalter 9789042945920, 9789042945937, 9042945923

Citation preview

ÉTUDES BIBLIQUES

PSALM 29: A CANAANITE HYMN TO YHWH IN THE PSALTER by Nissim AMZALLAG

PEETERS

PSALM 29: A CANAANITE HYMN TO YHWH IN THE PSALTER

ÉTUDES BIBLIQUES (Nouvelle série. No 89)

PSALM 29: A CANAANITE HYMN TO YHWH IN THE PSALTER by Nissim AMZALLAG

PEETERS LEUVEN – PARIS – BRISTOL, CT 2021

ISBN 978-90-429-4592-0 eISBN 978-90-429-4593-7 D/2021/0602/178 A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. © 2021, Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

1 THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29 . 1 The claim of former affiliation to Baal . . . . . . 2 The arguments against a Baalist influence . . . 3 The look for rain in Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. The reference to rainfall . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2. The companion indications . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

12 12 16 20 21 22

2 THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The search for the Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 29. 1.1. The combat against the serpent monster . . . 1.2. The interpretation of mayîm rabbîm . . . . . 1.3. The reference to mabbûl . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The Chaoskampf motif in biblical poems . . . . . 2.1. Psalm 74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2. Psalm 77 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3. Psalm 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 The misuses of the Chaoskampf interpretation . . . 3.1. Psalm 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2. Psalm 46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Nahum 1:2-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 The restricted Chaoskampf perspective . . . . . . .

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

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

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

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

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

26 27 27 28 29 31 31 33 34 36 36 42 44 49

3 THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The thunderstorm dimension of YHWH’s voice . . . . . . . 1.1. The Elihu discourse in Job . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2. The divine voice in Job . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3. The voice as expression of divine control . . . . . . . 1.4. Thunder without storm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The volcanic voice of YHWH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1. Volcanism as essential attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2. The vocal theophany in Sinai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 The blowing voice of YHWH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. The metallurgical dimension of volcanism in antiquity 3.2. Metallurgical blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51 52 52 53 54 56 57 57 58 61 61 63

VIII

4 The 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

metallurgical dimension of ancient Yahwism Furnace symbolism in Jerusalem . . . . . . The celestial furnace . . . . . . . . . . . . YHWH’s tuyere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The divine blower . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

66 66 67 68 69

4 THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH . . . . . . . . . 1 The worship of YHWH in the Bronze Age . . . . 1.1. The corporation of metalworkers . . . . . . . . 1.2. The Shasus and YHWH . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3. The shasu peoples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The Iron Age worship of YHWH . . . . . . . . . . 2.1. Edom and the renewal of the copper industry . 2.2. Ammon, Moab and the sedentarization of the nomads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Esoteric versus public worship . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shasu . . . . . . . .

72 73 73 75 78 81 81

5 THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29 1 Verse 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Verse 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Verse 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Verse 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Verse 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Verse 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Synthesis. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

82 84

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. 87 . 88 . 92 . 93 . 95 . 97 . 100 . 103

6 THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Verse 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1. First colon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2. Second colon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Verse 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Verse 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Verse 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1. The classical interpretation of mabbûl as flood . . 4.2. The other meanings of mabbûl in biblical Hebrew . 4.3. Reinterpreting the content of verse 10 . . . . . . . 5 Verse 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 The new working translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

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

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

105 105 105 107 108 109 112 112 113 117 118 118

7 THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 1 The problem of awkwardness in Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . . . 120

TABLE OF CONTENTS

IX

2 A new look on biblical poetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1. Non-linearity as a constitutive dimension . . . . 2.2. Whole symmetry patterns and their implications . 2.3. The phenomenon of complex antiphony . . . . . 3 Complex antiphony in Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. The structural properties of Psalm 29. . . . . . . 3.2. The cross-responsa mode of complex antiphony . 3.3. The cross-responsa setting of Psalm 29 . . . . . 4 Analysis of the composite verses . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1. First half of the performance . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2. Echo singing of the central claim . . . . . . . . . 4.3. Second half of the performance . . . . . . . . . . 5 The composite text of Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL . 1 Psalm 96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1. Differences with Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . 1.2. The cross-responsa setting of Psalm 96 . . 1.3. Analysis of the composite verses . . . . . 1.4. The composite development in Psalm 96 . 2 Psalm 97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1. The cross-responsa setting of Psalm 97 . . 2.2. Analysis of the composite verses . . . . . 2.3. The message of the composite text . . . . 3 Psalm 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1. The canonic-responsa setting of Psalm 98 3.2. Analysis of the composite verses . . . . . 4 Psalm 114 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1. Canonic responsa in Psalm 114 . . . . . . 4.2. Parallels with Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . . . 4.3. Analysis of the composite verses . . . . . 4.4. The theology of Psalm 114 . . . . . . . . 5 Psalm 46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1. The canonic-responsa setting of Psalm 46 5.2. Analysis of the composite verses . . . . . 6 The divergence in Psalm 29 reception . . . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

122 123 125 126 127 127 129 130 133 133 138 139 140

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

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

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

144 144 146 149 151 156 158 160 163 167 168 170 172 185 177 178 180 182 184 186 188 192

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 1 The approach of YHWH in Psalm 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 2 YHWH in the influenced psalms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

TABLE OF CONTENTS

X

3 The opposition to the theology of Psalm 29 3.1. Psalms 96-98 and the Book of Isaiah . 3.2. The new Chaoskampf perspective . . 4 The storm re-interpretation of Psalm 29 . . Abbreviations Bibliography . Source index . Author index .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

202 204 206 208

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

211 214 241 249

INTRODUCTION Biblical poetry is of special interest in the investigation of the religion of Early Israel and pre-Israelite Yahwism. For Reinhard Müller, “Remnants of Ancient Hebrew literature attesting the early veneration of YHWH are found more often in the book of Psalms than in any other book of the Old Testament.”1 Henrik Pfeiffer is even more radical, in granting reliability only to poetic works concerning the early identity of YHWH, his origin and his cult in ancient Israel: “Only the cultic songs of the monarchic period – according to current scholarship most likely the oldest texts in the Hebrew Bible – preserved in the Psalter provide a secure traditionhistorical basis.”2 These claims are not surprising, some of the biblical songs being apparently dated from the early Israelite period (e.g. the Song of Deborah, Judges 5).3 This ancientness of some pieces of biblical poetry is especially important, today, because many of the biblical sources initially dated from the pre-monarchic and early monarchic period are now considered exilic or post-exilic compositions.4 However, exploiting the content of biblical poetry for reconstituting the early Israelite religion is not a simple affair, as examining the content of biblical poetry yields contrasting views. For example, the question of the geographical origin of the cult of YHWH, which is apparently simple, remains unclear from an analysis of the early biblical poetry.5 Some hymns 1

R. MÜLLER 2017, 208. H. PFEIFFER 2017, 143. 3 The ancientness of the Song of Deborah emanates from its linguistic singularities. See B. HALPERN 1983; L. STAGER 1988, 224 and J. SCHLOEN 1993, 20; F. CROSS and D. FREEDMAN 1997, 9-14. Focusing on a military conflict with the Canaanite cities of importance at the Late Bronze Age (Megiddo, Taanakh, and indirectly, Hazor), the song probably belongs to the period of emergence of Israel. It identifies Israel as a coalition of autonomous tribes, refers to Dan settlement on the shore, and ignores the tribe of Judah, all characteristics belonging to the early period of Israel. K. SPARKS (2007, 602) concludes that “...the Song of Deborah can be comfortably placed into the Late Bronze/Iron I milieu. To be sure, dating the song’s tradition this early is a scholarly judgment rather than a fool-proof conclusion. But it is a reasonable and sensible judgment, based on converging lines of evidence.” Nevertheless, on the basis of the use of prefixed verbal forms in biblical poetry, Ygal BLOCH (2009, 67) calls for revisiting the ancientness of some songs, such as the Song of the Sea, the Song of Moses, and 2 Sam 22 / Ps 18, frequently dated to the 10-13th centuries BCE. He rather concludes that these songs were probably composed between the 9-7th centuries BCE. 4 e.g. G. GARBINI 1988; R. KRATZ 2005; P. DAVIES 2007. 5 See Michael STAHL 2020 for a recent review about the debate concerning YHWH’s southern or northern origin and the central importance of biblical poetry in these positions. 2

2

INTRODUCTION

claim an origin of YHWH from the desert area southward of Israel (mainly the Sinai, Arabah and Negev), especially the Song of Deborah (Judg 5:4-5), the Song of Moses (Deut 33:2-3) and the Hymn of Habakkuk (Hab 3:3). These testimonies, combined with further indications, suggest a southern origin of YHWH.6 However, based on other hymns, further scholars deduced a northern origin of the god of Israel.7 Three main characteristics of the figure of YHWH in ancient poetry justify this hypothesis. The first argument comes from psalms interpreted as praising YHWH’s power over rain (e.g. Psalms 18; 29; 36; 65; 68; 77; 93; 96–98).8 They draw a parallel between YHWH and Baal-Haddu, the storm god originating from the Northern Levant (and his homolog from Anatolia, upper Euphrates and Mesopotamia).9 Second, many psalms refer to YHWH fighting his enemies (e.g. Psalms 18 and 68, the Song of the Sea [Ex 15: 1-21], Habakkuk 3). This representation of YHWH as a divine warrior recalls the warlike attribute of many storm gods, especially the figure of Baal.10 Third, the mention of YHWH subduing a mythical marine animal (e.g. Ps 74:12-17, Ps 89:10-13) echoes the combat between Baal and Yam, or between Morduk and the sea-monster Tiamat.11 The reference to biblical poetry yields therefore two contrasting views concerning the origin of YHWH. The promoters of both theories developed arguments for coping with the challenging evidences. Those arguing a 6 Among recent scholars identifying a southern origin of YHWH, see L. AXELSSON 1987; K. VAN DER TOORN 1999; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008; M. MONDRIAAN 2010, 406-442; T. RÖMER 2014, pp. 57-66; M. LEUENBERGER 2017; J. TEBES 2017; F. PFITZMANN 2019. Mark SMITH (2012, 8) even extends these testimonies beyond the ancient biblical poetry: “... the biblical prose story “narrativized” the ancient tradition of YHWH’s origins in the south, the setting of Yahwistic cult among a southern people other than Israel, and the secondary contact of Israel with this god.” 7 e.g. M. KÖCKERT 2001; R. MÜLLER 2017; H. PFEIFFER 2017. This theory is now defined as the Berlin hypothesis, challenging the Midianite-Qenite hypothesis arguing a southern origin of YHWH. See M. STAHL 2020, 9-10. 8 M. SMITH 2017, 32, 37-38; H. PFEIFFER 2017, 127, 143-144; R. MÜLLER 2017, 208209. 9 A. GREEN 2003; D. SCHWEMER 2008, 2009. Elizabeth WILLIAMS-FORTE (1983, 19) argues that “Rather than multiple gods of weather of distinctly Anatolian or Syrian nature, there appears to be a single, vigorous, young weapon-wielding storm god identifiable by his attributes (the bull, the mountains, and the snake) and most critically, by his actions or battles, on artifacts from each of these regions.” 10 E.g. M. WEINFELD 1983, 121-124; E. GREENSTEIN 1997, 54; J. DAY 2000, 91-127; A. GREEN 2003, 258-275; T. RÖMER 2013, 35-37. 11 F. CROSS 1973, 147-194. For example, Mark SMITH (2001, 84-85) argues that some elements of the Jerusalem temple, such as the sea of copper, explicitly refer to Baal’s victory over Yam praised in the Ugaritic mythology.

INTRODUCTION

3

southern origin of YHWH integrated the storm-god attributes in their own representation. They assume that YHWH was at origin a storm god worshipped in the arid areas of the Southern Levant, Arabah, Sinai, and Northwestern Arabia.12 Following this view, the god of Israel became the local expression of the storm-god Athtar anciently worshipped in the Levant and Arabia.13 By extension, the Baal-like attributes of YHWH became secondary features reflecting the acclimation of this desert storm god to his new milieu, the land of Canaan where Baal was traditionally worshipped.14 Alternately, those scholars arguing a northern origin of YHWH also found how to cope with an explicit reference to his southern origin in biblical poetry. They considered this claim being an artifice introduced for disconnecting the cult of YHWH from that of Baal, the northern storm-god. Alternately, the references to a southern origin became late additions to the original core of the poems. These supplements were dated to the postmonarchic period and conditioned by the theological conflict with Edom.15 Beyond these divergences about the geographical origin, the promoters of both opinions agree concerning the former identity of YHWH as a storm god. They also share the belief that the ancient representation of YHWH, as reflected by the biblical poetry, is conditioned by the figure of Baal-Haddu, the North Levantine storm god. This consensus became 12

For Walter GERHARDT (1966, 130), YHWH was already a storm god in his pre-Israelite cult originating from Sinai/Edom: “YHWH is the personification of environmental forces and energies of weather indigenous to the Sinai/Edom and Syro-Palestinian geographic locales.” 13 J. ROBERTS 1972, 96; P. MILLER 2000, 24; M. SMITH 2003, 272-274; T. RÖMER 2013, 35-36. Concerning the ancientness of Athtar, see M. SMITH 1995; A. GREEN 2003, 211. Mark SMITH (2003, 272-274) even identified traces of the figure of Athtar in the Song of Deborah. The god Athtar is an archaic deity already mentioned in Ebla at the third millennium BCE, and his worship was probably rooted in early Bronze Age traditions. See J. GRAY 1949, 77; R. MESNIL DU BUISSON 1971, 332; A. ARCHI 1979-1980, 171. The archaism of Athtar is confirmed by his identification with two of the earliest deities of the Levantine pantheon, Shahar and Shalim, the gracious sons of El and Asherah. See J. GRAY 1949, 73-76; A. CAQUOT 1958, 51-52. 14 M. SMITH 2017, 38. However, the idea of syncretism between Baal and Athtar in Israel remains speculative, as these two deities remain separate in Ugarit. The two gods even compete in the Ugarit mythology: Athtar calls for constructing his palace (KTU 1.2. iii 15-24) independently of Baal. 15 See M. KÖCKERT, 2010 and H. PFEIFFER 2017, 128. Heinrich PFEIFFER assumes that this southern origin emerged in Israel to recruit the warrior-like attributes of YHWH (that of a storm god) against the Edomite enemies in conflict with Judah in the 6-5th centuries BCE. This position is challenged by Fabian PFITZMANN (2019, 26) arguing that a foreign origin of Moses wife is difficult to conciliate, in the post-exilic period, with the prohibition of marriage with foreign women. Similarly, the post-exilic enmity between Israel and Edom makes improbable the invention of a Seirite/Edomite origin of YHWH at this time.

4

INTRODUCTION

fundamental to the current approach to YHWH and in time the key to reading biblical poetry. YHWH’s essential attributes, theophany, and modus operandi became systematically interpreted through the perspective of a storm-god identity, especially its northern expression. However, this storm-god approach cannot entirely satisfy. Many divine attributes attached to the figure of YHWH do not easily integrate the framework of a storm-god deity. Four examples illustrate this point. • Solar attributes: Scholars have long identified indications advocating a solar worship in ancient Israel both in biblical narratives (Num 25:4; Jos 10:12; 2 Sam 12:7-12; 2 Kgs 23:11; Isa 38:8; Ezek 8:16) and in poetry (e.g. Psalms 19, 84, 104).16 The hypothesis that YHWH was formerly a solar deity emerged on this basis.17 Frequently formulated in the 19th century, this opinion disappeared gradually from biblical scholarship in the second half of the 20th century, with the rise of the storm-god identity of YHWH.18 Then, the solar attributes of YHWH became grafted, in the monarchic period, to a storm-god original identity of the god of Israel.19 This trend became an Egyptian cultural influence that enhanced the royal authority and even the divine aura of the human king.20 Alternately, Psalm 19, where kābȏd-YHWH is explicitly likened with the sun (vv. 2-7), became a polemic song against the solar worship in Israel instead of praising the solar theophany of YHWH.21 However, these arguments remain speculative, and mainly accepted in the name of the consensus concerning the storm-god early identity of YHWH. • Volcanic theophany: A volcanic theophany of YHWH is explicit in some psalms (e.g. Deut 32; Psalms 18, 46, 97, 144), as well as in many biblical oracles (e.g. Mic 1:1-4; Nah 1:5-6).22 A volcanic theophany is also visible 16 See J. MCKAY 1973; M. SMITH 1990; E. VAN WOLDE 2003, and D. SARLO 2020, for an overview of the traces of solar cult in the Bible. 17 F. HOLLIS 1933; J. TAYLOR 1993; D. SARLO 2020. 18 D. SARLO 2020, 63-76. Daniel SARLO (2020, 70) noticed that “By the middle of the twentieth century, any possibility that YHWH was originally a solar deity had been replaced entirely with the notion that he (later) gradually accumulated solar characteristics.” For instance, Paul DION published in 1991 a paper identifying a mix of storm-god and sun-god characteristics in Psalm 104. 19 For example, Othmar KEEL (1994) assumes that the figure of YHWH combines the typical characters of the storm god with the attributes of the Egyptian sun god. 20 H. RINGGREN 1966, 97-98; M. SMITH 2002 (1990), 157-158. According to Angelika BERLEJUNG (2017, 80-81), the sun-god characteristics of YHWH result from a dual influence: a solar deity patronizing the pre-Israelite Jerusalem, and an Egyptian influence on the religion of Judah and Jerusalem, dated from the 8th century BCE. 21 N. SARNA 1967; H. STÄHLI 1985, 17-23. 22 G. FRANKLIN 1926; J. Dunn 2014; N. AMZALLAG 2014a. Jean KOENIG (1966) lists many expressions of this volcanic theophany in oracles (e.g. Isa 13:9-10; 30:27; 40:3-5; Jer 4:4; Hos 5:10; Amos 7:4; Nah 1:5-6; Mic 1:1-4; Zeph 1:15-16; Zech 14:6; Hab 3:6).

INTRODUCTION

5

in the description of the Sinai covenant (Ex 19:16-19; 24:17; Deut 4:11).23 This expression is so consistent, especially in psalms, that Othmar Keel concluded about the existence of a former relationship between YHWH and volcanism, even before the integration of the storm components: “Storm phenomena were transferred to YHWH primarily in contention with the cult of Baal [...] Volcanic phenomena, on the other hand, were apparently regarded as manifestations of YHWH from the very beginning. In the psalms, they serve as visualizations of the appearance of YHWH.”24 This importance of divine volcanism in the Bible is now generally minimized, if not denied, and replaced by a storm-god interpretation. Frank Cross, for example, explicitly excluded the volcanic dimension of YHWH when examining the parallels with El or Baal: “In the past, the theory that Israel in Sinai encountered a volcano was bound up with the view that YHWH was the local numen of the desert mountain. The latter view has collapsed and with it most of the underpinnings of the volcano theory.”25 However, as we will show here, the interpretation of the volcanic descriptions through the perspective of a storm-god theophany is not always easy, and remains speculative.26 • The master of winds: The wind is one of the modes of divine action frequently mentioned in the Bible, and especially in the Psalter.27 This reference to winds fits a storm-god nature of YHWH, but some scholars noted that the windy mode of divine action in some oracles may refer instead, for example, to the divine blowing drying vegetation and even ponds of water (Hos 13:14-15; Nah 1:2-8; Isa 19:1, 5-7; 50:2-3; Jer 51:34-37). These indications, combined with the effect of the divine wind related in some biblical poems (the Song of the Sea, Lamentations 2; Deut 32:2125), led Alosyus Fitzgerald to identify YHWH as formerly being a divine entity attached to the sirocco, the east wind blowing on the Levant at the end of spring (April–May), which withers the annual vegetation.28 If so, YHWH becomes the antithesis of the storm god mastering the winter rainstorm which provides fertility. In Ugarit, this hot wind coming from the east was identified with Mot, the god provoking the death/disappearance 23 M. NOTH 1962, 156; J. KOENIG 1966; Y. BENTOR 1990, 336; H. HUMPHREYS 2003, 83-87. This opinion was already defended in the 19th century by many authors. See J. DUNN 2014, 388-397 for review. 24 O. KEEL 1997, 218. 25 F. CROSS 1973, 169. 26 See Chapter 2 for Psalm 18 and Chapter 8 for Psalms 46 and 97. 27 For this reason, Steve WIGGINS (1999) likens YHWH not with the Mesopotamian storm deity, but with the great god Enlil. 28 A. FITZGERALD 2002.

6

INTRODUCTION

of Baal throughout the dry season.29 Like the enmity between Mot and Baal prevents their conflation in Ugarit, the mixing of the sirocco and thunderstorm in YHWH’s theophany is unexpected. Therefore, the interpretation of some poems (Psalms 18, 96-97; Hab 3:2-19) and oracles (Isa 29:1-8; 30:27-33) through the combination of sirocco and rainstorm, though defended today, remains unlikely.30 • YHWH and El: References to El are explicit in biblical poetry (e.g. Psalm 82; Deut 32:6-9). This is why YHWH, in biblical scholarship, is not only compared with the storm god Baal, but also with El, the supreme deity of the Ugarit pantheon.31 The supreme status of El better fits the figure of YHWH in the Bible than the figure of Baal, leading scholars in the past approaching YHWH as a local expression of El, instead of the storm god.32 This feature is especially important because El, unlike Baal, does not embrace the northern storm god’s typical attributes. El does not control rain, he does not fight against other gods to ensure his authority, and he does not act like a warrior god. However, scholars who defend this position frequently assume that the characters of the storm god rapidly integrated the figure of El, and that they even became the most prominent expression of his theophany.33 Alternatively, the reference to the storm god in early poetry led other scholars to assume that YHWH, as a storm god, rapidly integrated the character of El, the supreme deity, in the course of his ascension of the divine hierarchy.34 These examples illustrate how the storm-god early identity of YHWH became a dominant feature in modern scholarship, transcending even the 29

M. SMITH 2002 (1990), 88. A. FITZGERALD 2002, 71-109. 31 The name Israel even suggests that El, instead of Baal, was worshipped at first by the Israelites. See J. JEREMIAS 2017, 145. 32 F. CROSS 1973, 44-76; J. de MOOR 1990, 310-313; M. DIJKSTRA 2001. Frank CROSS (1973, 64-66) interprets YHWH as an epithet of El issued from a liturgical formula huwa᾿il (=El exists). Also Patrick MILLER (2000, 1-2) assumes a southern origin of YHWH and identifies this name as an epithet of El in use in the Southern Levant. For Meindert DIJKSTRA (2001, 102), “Israelite Yahwism had its origins in the early history of Israel, when YHWH became an independent Israelite manifestation of the pluriform Canaanite El.” 33 Frank CROSS (1973, 186), for example, clearly expresses the rise of Yahwism as the emergence of a hybrid entity mixing the characters of El and Baal. “... the epic sources conflate the ᾿El and Ba῾l modes and content of revelation. The only reasonable explanation of this conflation is to be found in the combination of Ba῾l elements from the theme of YHWH as Divine Warrior at the Sea and River, that is, in Exodus and Conquest, with the conceptions of YHWH as head of the Divine Council and giver of decrees, and as gracious patron, derivative in substantial part from the mythology of ᾿El.” 34 See for example M. SMITH 2002 (1990), 32. 30

INTRODUCTION

7

divergences concerning his geographical origin, northern or southern. In the 20th century, this approach gradually eradicated all the alternative views concerning the former identity of YHWH. It neutralized the volcanic approach of YHWH’s theophany, integrated the figure of El and even combined some antagonistic features, such as rainfall and a hot desert wind. These singular premises found some justifications. For example, the trend of exclusiveness characterizing the religion of Israel may cope easily with a coalescence of deities within the figure of YHWH. His supreme status may extend the prominent position of the storm god in most pantheons from the ancient Near East. However, we should ask whether these explanations reflect the overuse of the storm-god key to reading and interpreting the biblical sources. This question is especially relevant because the biblical poetry is generally not easy to understand, a feature contrasting with the relative clarity of the hymnic poetry from neighbor cultures, such as Egypt, the Northern Levant, Assyria, Mesopotamia and the Aegean. The rarity of verbs and actions, in biblical poetry, generates a chronic indeterminacy concerning the subjects and complements. In parallel, the high level of redundancy of claims combines with the extreme concision of most poems.35 Beyond these characteristics, the poetical discourse is frequently disrupted by stylistic difficulties, ellipses, abrupt transitions and other incongruities. These asperities transform the text of psalms into a succession of short segments of relatively autonomous nature, devoid of chronological development and outcome.36 It means that the interpretation of biblical poetry frequently depends, today, on the key to reading it. The blooming of interpretations of biblical poetry through the lens of a storm theophany may be a consequence of the prominence of the storm-god approach of YHWH in modern research, instead of demonstrating it. And here is the problem. The over-importance devoted by modern research to the figure of Baal or El concerning the early Israelite religion may have introduced a bias in the interpretation of ancient poetry and obfuscated its potential contribution to the investigation of the early identity of YHWH.37 35 F. DOBBS-ALLSOPP 2009, 551-552. The parallelismus membrorum, one of the most essential characteristics of biblical poetry, introduces a recurrence that disrupts, verse after verse, the continuity of the narrative. See P. NEL 1992; B. WEBER 2012. 36 A. NICCACCI 1997, 77-78; E. TALSTRA 1999, 103. 37 As recently noticed by Daniel FLEMING (2020, 22): “As I understand it, YHWH is not to be evaluated first of all by the measure of El as father of many gods or Baal-Haddu as warrior storm god: these considerations were secondary. The Bible remains relevant to the evaluation of YHWH before Israel, but not because Israel got him from desert peoples recalled as Midianite or Kenite and not because his going to war from the southern wilderness preserves the places of his earliest worship.”

8

INTRODUCTION

This situation stimulated us to re-examine the content of Psalm 29. This hymn is probably among the most ancient songs in the Bible.38 The parallel between YHWH’s voice (vv. 3-5, 7-9) and the thundering voice of Baal is generally interpreted in the context of hymn of praise of the storm god. Similarly, the mention of Sirion and Lebanon (Ps. 29:6) is frequently exploited for defending the idea of a northern origin of YHWH.39 Reinhardt Müller identifies Psalm 29 as the most impressive example of “poetic description of a divine epiphany in a thunderstorm.”40 Manfred Krebernik concurs, in assuming that Psalm 29 is “…one of the most impressive and best-known witness for YHWH’s character as a storm god.”41 Also Antti Laato affirms that “Psalm 29 contains some striking parallels to West Semitic descriptions of the storm god Adad, Haddu or Baal.”42 Today, most scholars assume that all the components of the storm-god identity may be identified in this short psalm.43 Rebeccah Watson resumes 38 See R. WATSON 2005, 40; J. GOLDINGAY 2009, 414 (note 5); H. PFEIFFER 2017, 143; R. MÜLLER 2017, 211. For Hans-Joachim Kraus (1988, 346), the core of Psalm 29 displays archaic, pre-Israelite characteristics, aiming for its ancientness. Rolf JACOBSON (2014, 282) assumes that “The hymn should be understood to reflect the cultic witness of the community during the period after which Israel had emerged from beneath her Canaanite oppressors.” These opinions are founded on the parallels with the Baal mythology, and on the similarities identified between the structure and syntax of Psalm 29 and that encountered in the Ugaritic poetry. See T. GASTER 1946; F. CROSS 1950; H. STRAUSS 1970. Peter CRAIGIE (1983, 246) considers that Psalm 29 as an original Israelite hymn which “...reflects a particular stage in the development of the Hebrew tradition of victory hymns” later than the composition of the Song of Deborah and the Song of the Sea. For this reason, he dates its composition to the eleventh/tenth centuries BC. A similar dating was proposed by Nahum SARNA (1969) and Antti LAATO (2018, 146). Against the assumption of its very ancientness (pre-monarchic period), Baruch MARGULIS (1970, 347-348) dates its composition to the monarchic period, probably prior to 800 BC. Also Lowell HANDY (2009, 1) assumes that Psalm 29 should be dated from the tenth to seventh centuries, and that it belonged to the religious circle of the Jerusalem temple. He adds, however, that “...no ones know when or by whom the text was written.” Psalm 29 was even dated to the post-exilic period by Charles BRIGGS and Emilie BRIGGS (1906, 252) and by more recent authors. Erhard GERSTENBERGER (1988, 132) does not exclude the idea of a Canaanite background of Psalm 29, but he assumes a post-exilic composition of the version of this song edited in the Psalter. In light of the parallels between Psalm 29 and oracles from Ezekiel, Isaiah and Zechariah, Raymond TOURNAY (1956, 179-180) deduced a post-exilic date of composition of this hymn. As we will see in the end of the present essay, these affinities know another explanation. 39 J. TIGAY 2008, 406-410; D. PARDEE and N. PARDEE 2009, 122-124. For Reinhard MÜLLER (2017, 211), “The monotonous sevenfold repetition of the words ‘the voice of YHWH’ sounds like a litany or magic incantation that tries to evoke the crashing sound of thunder.” 40 R. MÜLLER 2017, 211. 41 M. KREBERNIK 2017, 52. 42 A. LAATO 2018, 143. 43 This position is reiterated by Henrik PFEIFFER (2017, 143): “The core of Ps 29 is an old litany of the thunderous voice of YHWH. This voice is accompanied by the classic elements of a theophany of a storm-god: storm (v. 5,9), earthquake (v. 6,8) and fire (v. 7). Its power

INTRODUCTION

9

this position in mentioning that... “perhaps the aspect of Ps 29 which has exercised the greatest influence on historians of Israel’s prosody is its atmospheric – and to the modern mind, at least, unmistakably primitive – portrayal of the god of the thunderstorm.”44 As one of the most blatant sources supporting a storm-god interpretation of YHWH’s theophany, Psalm 29 became the cornerstone of the storm-god early identity of the god of Israel. Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that this song encloses eleven verses only, and that its high level of redundancy increases its elliptic character. Furthermore, rainfall is not explicitly mentioned in this psalm, and references to the beneficent, fertilizing effect of storms on crops and wild vegetation are also missing. These remarks do not challenge the storm-god interpretation, but they suggest that it might be influenced by some premises promoting it. We cannot exclude the eventual existence of another key to reading this song, especially because the voice of YHWH, the theme reiterated seven times in this song, is not exclusively associated with storms in the Bible. Rather, as we will see in Chapter 3, volcanic and metallurgical expressions of the vocal theophany of YHWH also exist in the Bible. They add two perspectives of interpretation of Psalm 29 that should be tested. The elliptic character of biblical poetry always preserves a substantial part of speculation in interpreting a hymn. It necessarily reduces the ability to compare the likelihood of each interpretation conditioned by a key to reading. However, concerning Psalm 29, two further elements compensate for this quandary. The first relates to its concentric structure. This pattern of symmetry reveals literary links between distant verses. This feature will help us, in Chapter 7, to clarify their meaning. The second element comes from the existence in the Psalter of songs influenced by Psalm 29 in their composition and content. Five of them (Psalms 46, 96–98, 114) are examined in Chapter 8. The claims, messages, and characteristics of these influenced psalms bestow opportunities to examine how their author understood the content of Psalm 29. As an additional benefit, this reception of Psalm 29 offers an outstanding opportunity to characterize some transformations of the Israelite religion throughout the centuries. These considerations conditioned the organization of the present monograph. The first chapter examines how the storm-god theophany is identified in Psalm 29 in the absence of explicit mention of rain and fertility. surpasses the chaotic sea’s power as the notorious adversary of the Syrian storm-god (v. 3f.).” 44 R. WATSON 2005, 42.

10

INTRODUCTION

The storm-god attributes do not resume to the control of rainfall. In the ancient Near East, they also frequently include the motif of cosmic struggle with a mythic serpent generally identified with the forces of chaos and disorder. This motif being integrated into the modern interpretation of Psalm 29, Chapter 2 examines its fundaments. Thereafter, the three expressions of the vocal theophany of YHWH in the Bible (storm, volcanism and metallurgy) are examined in Chapter 3. They constitute three potential keys to reading Psalm 29. The search for the identity of the us-group, in Psalm 29, provides in Chapter 4 a preliminary perspective concerning the content of this song. Then, the likelihood of the three potential expressions of the voice of YHWH (storm, volcanism and metallurgy) is examined in Chapter 5 for the six verses mentioning it (vv. 3-5, 7-9). Following this evaluation, Chapter 6 examines the appropriateness of the best of these three keys for interpreting the meaning of the five further verses of Psalm 29 (vv. 1-2, 6, 10-11). A psalm is not a mere succession of independent claims, but an integrated piece of work with its own claims, developments and themes. It is why the whole cohesiveness and message of Psalm 29 is examined in Chapter 7. The likelihood of the proposed interpretation is tested thereafter, in Chapter 8, through investigating the content of five psalms (Psalms 46, 96– 98, 114) whose composition was influenced by the content and message of Psalm 29. The unequivocal interpretation of Psalm 29 in the context of storm theophany, throughout more than a century, has deeply conditioned its reading and translation. It is why the current translations cannot serve as the substratum of a study re-examining the meaning of this psalm out of this storm-god context. Additionally, the translation of concepts and terms revisited in this study cannot be introduced before their elucidation. For these reasons, a transient working translation of Psalm 29 is proposed for starting the investigation. It includes the transliteration, instead of translation, of the concepts whose meaning will be discussed in the course of this study. 1 Ascribe to YHWH, sons of gods Ascribe to YHWH, kābȏd and ῾ōz 2 Ascribe to YHWH kābȏd [is] his name Bow down to YHWH in splendor of holiness 3 Voice of YHWH upon the water The god of kābȏd has thundered YHWH upon mighty waters

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּנֵ י ֵא ִלים‬ ‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬ ‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְכּבוֹד ְשׁמוֹ‬ ‫ק ֶֹדשׁ‬-‫ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ַה ְד ַרת‬ ‫ה ָמּיִ ם‬-‫ל‬ ַ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ַע‬ ‫ה ָכּבוֹד ִה ְר ִעים‬-‫ל‬ ַ ‫ֵא‬ ‫מיִ ם ַר ִבּים‬-‫ל‬ ַ ‫יְ הוָ ה ַע‬

INTRODUCTION

4 Voice of YHWH in power Voice of YHWH in magnificence 5 The voice of YHWH šōbēr cedars YHWH wayĕšabbēr the cedars of Lebanon 6 He causes [them] to skip as a calf Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox 7 The voice of YHWH hews Flames of fire

11 ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ַבּכּ ַֹח‬ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ֶבּ ָה ָדר‬ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה שׁ ֵֹבר ֲא ָרזִ ים‬ ‫א ְרזֵ י ַה ְלּ ָבנוֹן‬-‫ת‬ ַ ‫וַ יְ ַשׁ ֵבּר יְ הוָ ה ֶא‬ ‫עגֶ ל‬-‫מוֹ‬ ֵ ‫וַ יַּ ְר ִק ֵידם ְכּ‬ ‫ר ֵא ִמים‬-‫ן‬ ְ ‫ְל ָבנוֹן וְ ִשׂ ְרי ֹן ְכּמוֹ ֶב‬ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ח ֵֹצב‬ ‫ַל ֲהבוֹת ֵאשׁ‬

8 The voice of YHWH yāḥîl the wilderness YHWH yāḥîl the wilderness of Kadesh

‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה יָ ִחיל ִמ ְד ָבּר‬ ‫יָ ִחיל יְ הוָ ה ִמ ְד ַבּר ָק ֵדשׁ‬

9 The voice of YHWH yĕḥȏlēl ᾿ayyālȏt and   thins forests out And in his hêkāl All him says kābȏd

‫חוֹלל ַאיָּ לוֹת וַ יֶּ ֱחשׂ ֹף יְ ָערוֹת‬ ֵ ְ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה י‬

10 YHWH yāšāb on mabbûl YHWH wayyēšeb as king forever 11 YHWH gives ῾ōz to his people YHWH blesses his people with plenitude

ְ ‫יכלוֹ‬ ָ ‫וּב ֵה‬ ‫ֻכּלּוֹ א ֵֹמר ָכּבוֹד‬ ‫יְ הוָ ה ַל ַמּבּוּל יָ ָשׁב‬ ‫עוֹלם‬ ָ ‫וַ יֵּ ֶשׁב יְ הוָ ה ֶמ ֶלְך ְל‬ ‫יְ הוָ ה עֹז ְל ַעמּוֹ ֵיִתּן‬ ‫יְ הוָ ה יְ ָב ֵרְך ֶאת ַעמּוֹ ַב ָשּׁלוֹם‬

CHAPTER 1

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29 The storm-god interpretation of Psalm 29 has to account for a singularity: rain is not easily identifiable in this hymn. This situation is especially intriguing because rain is the essential issue of the storm-god theophany, the element granting fertility and conditioning crop cultivation. Considered alone, this anomaly does not disprove the storm-god key to reading, but it requires justification. Two main explanations coexist. The first presupposes that the storm dimension is so trivial that formulating it explicitly becomes unnecessary. This argument is especially relevant if Psalm 29 articulates the vocal theophany around the figure of Baal. The second assumes that rainfall is indirectly mentioned in the psalm, through metaphors, metonymies, euphemisms, allusions and alliteration, all introduced as poetical devices. These two possible explanations are now examined. 1. THE CLAIM OF FORMER AFFILIATION

TO

BAAL

Only six years after the discovery of the site of Ugarit (1929), Harold Ginsberg published a paper identifying Psalm 29 as being a former Ugaritic hymn.1 This opinion was justified by the glorification, throughout the whole hymn, of YHWH’s voice, interpreted by Ginsberg as a transposition to YHWH of the thunder theophany of Baal/Hadad, the Canaanite storm god. Rightly, the iterative reference to the voice of YHWH, in Psalm 29, may easily be a poetic mention of the thunder. It is especially tempting because the verb ‫( רעם‬hif.) in the expression ‫( אל הכבוד הרעים‬Ps 29:3) clearly associates the voice of YHWH with the thunder (as in 1 Sam 7:10).2 Furthermore, a parallel emerges between the vocal theophany of YHWH in Psalm 29 and the storm theophany of Baal in Ugarit. And like the seven mentions of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29, Baal utters seven thunders in KTU 1.101.3-4: 1 2

H. GINSBERG 1935. HALOT, 3:1267.

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

13

šb῾t . brqm [lh] Seven lightnings [he had] ṯmnt . ᾿iṣr r῾t . ῾ṣ . brqy[h] Eight storehouses of thunder the shaft of [his] lightning3

The parallels even extend. Like the voice of YHWH shakes the mountains (Ps 29:6), the thundering of Baal causes the earth to tremble in KTU 1.4 vii 29-32. qlh . qdš [.] b[῾l. y]tn yṯny. b῾l . ṣ[῾at . š] pth

His holy voice Ba῾lu forth repeatedly Repeatedly pronounces, does Ba῾lu the outpouring of his lips

qlh . q[dš . tr]r . ᾿arṣ His holy voice causes the earth to tremble [ṣ῾at . špth .] ǵrm [.] tḫšn At the outpouring of his lips, the mountains take fright 4

It is not surprising, in light of these parallels, that the Ginsberg interpretation rallied most scholars.5 Few years later, Theodore Gaster concluded that Psalm 29 is a “...typical hymn of laudation detached from its mythic context, Yahwized and preserved as an independent liturgical composition.”6 More recently, Dennis and Nancy Pardee claimed that “The echoes of the portrayal of Baal in this text from Ugarit in the description of YHWH in Psalm 29 are unmistakable. First and foremost, both gods are associated with the phenomenon of rain. The voice of Baal, that is, thunder comes out of the cloud with the result that the earth trembles, the mountains take fright, the high places of the earth totter, his enemies grasp the trees, his adversaries the slope of the mountains.” Beyond the parallel between the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29 and the thundery voice of Baal, scholars have identified many indications promoting a North-Canaanite origin of Psalm 29. • Baal supremacy: The reference, in Ps 29:10, to the kingship of YHWH fits the leadership of Baal in the Ugarit pantheon. Furthermore, the specification, in this verse, of YHWH sitting (= enthroned) upon the mabbûl became interpreted in reference to the famous victory of Baal over Yam, 3 Translated by J. DAY 1979, 143. John DAY (1979, 145) concludes: “There can surely be no doubt, in light of these parallels, that the sevenfold thunder of YHWH in Ps. XXIX is yet a further instance of this psalm’s appropriation of motifs deriving ultimately from Baal mythology, which should be added to the list of those noted by earlier scholars...” 4 Translated by D. PARDEE 2005, 173-175. 5 See for example, T. GASTER 1933; F. CROSS 1950; F. FENSHAM 1963; M. DAHOOD 1966, 3:175; A. ANDERSON 1972, 1: 233; A. FITZGERALD 1974; J. DAY 1979; 1985, 59; C. MACHOLZ 1980; K. SEYBOLD 1980; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 347; A. GREEN 2003, 262; A. LAATO 2018, 143-147. 6 T. GASTER 1946, 57. This position is also resumed by Frank CROSS (1973, 151): “H.L. Ginsberg in 1936 drew up conclusive evidence that Psalm 29 is an ancient Baal hymn, only slightly modified for use in early cultus of YHWH. Further study has steadily added confirmatory details.”

14

CHAPTER 1

the sea-god of the Ugarit pantheon. As Baal’s leadership emanates from this victory, YHWH’s kingship and his prominent position are mentioned in the same verse.7 • The sons of gods: An invitation to praise YHWH is addressed to the ‘sons of gods’ (‫ )בני אלים‬in Ps 29:1. This expression, which is unusual in Israelite poetry, knows parallels in the Ugarit pantheon, where it designates the community of gods, all considered as the sons of El (this latter being called ᾿abū banī ᾿ili, the father of the gods).8 Their appellation as the assembly of sons of El (pḫr bn ᾿ilm) stresses their formation of a divine council around El, the supreme deity.9 By extension, Psalm 29:1 might refer to the participation of the gods in a divine council, and their invitation to acknowledge the supremacy of YHWH.10 Such a request recalls the promotion of Baal to the rank of young leader of the Ugarit pantheon, and the invitation of all the sons of El to acknowledge his supremacy (KTU 1.4 vi 40-vii 45). • Geographical markers: The mention of Lebanon, in Ps 29:6, may easily argue a northern origin of the psalm. The same conclusion emanates from the reference to Sirion, which in Deut 3:9 is referred to as the name given to Mount Hermon by the Siddonians.11 This northern context led many scholars to identify midbar Qadesh, in Ps 29:8, as a wilderness near the city of Qadesh on the Orontes.12 The theme of destroying the forest of Lebanon is also encountered in the Gilgamesh epic, popular in the Near East at the Middle Bronze Age, where the hero fights the giant Humbaba.13 On the basis of these northern geographical indications, scholars deduced a Phoenician or Ugarit origin of this song.14 7 J. DAY 1985, 58. This opinion, surveyed by Michael STAHL (2020, 7), will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter. 8 T. MULLEN 1980, 15. Examining 55 Ugarit sources mentioning the notion of bn il, Jesus-Luis CUNCHILLOS (1985) concludes that this notion encompasses the family of gods organized around El, but also the famous heroes (such as Karet) divinized after their death. 9 T. MULLEN 1980, 117. 10 T. GASTER 1946, 58-59; M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:175-176; J. DAY 1979, 143. 11 H. GUNKEL 1926, 125; A. LAATO 2018, 142. 12 e.g. M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:176; F. CROSS 1973, 154; G. RENDSBURG 1990, 34; R. CLIFFORD 2002, 155; D. PARDEE 2005, 169-170; A. LAATO 2018, 141-142. Carola KLOOS (1986, 41) also argues that mdbr qdš is not a formula encountered in the Bible for designating the wilderness of Qadesh, in Southern Levant: “It is more plausible that mdbr qdš in Ps. XXIX is a reminiscence of the Ugaritic expression, than it refers to the southern region which is never called by this name.” 13 From this evidence, Abraham MALAMAT (1988, 160) concluded that Psalm 29 uses motives of great antiquity, independently of any Baalist and storm context. 14 See D. FREEDMAN and C. HYLAND (1973, 234) and ref. therein; M. SMITH 2014, 50.

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

15

• Linguistic parallels: Affinities exist between the language of Psalm 29 and the Ugarit literature.15 Mitchell Dahood even concluded that “Virtually every word in the psalm can now be duplicated in older Canaanite texts.”16 These claims strengthen the assumption of the northern, preIsraelite origin of Psalm 29. • Resonances and alliterations: Aloysius Fitzgerald found a higher level of phonetic fluency, sound properties and alliterations of Psalm 29 when Baal replaces the name YHWH. He deduced from this examination that the psalm was originally conceived as a hymn praising Baal instead of YHWH.17 All these arguments defend a northern origin of Psalm 29, and identify YHWH with Baal, the storm god of the Ugarit pantheon well known in the Southern Levant. But contrasting views challenge it. Ginsberg formulated his pioneer hypothesis when only several texts of the archives from Ugarit were analyzed, translated and available. Today, most of the literary texts from Ugarit are inventoried and deciphered. As of now, nothing similar to Psalm 29 exists in Ugarit or any other city from the Northern Levant. Alone, the uniqueness of Psalm 29 does not disprove the theory of its Ugarit ascendant. It remains, however, unexpected if the core of this song was a hymn to Baal so famous in the past that the Israelites naturalized it. Additionally, further arguments challenge the hypothesis of an Ugarit/North Canaanite origin of Psalm 29 and its primeval devotion to Baal. In the Ugaritic mythology, Baal is never mentioned as the lord reigning over the wilderness. Therefore, a discrepancy exists between the Baal mythology and the mention of the voice of YHWH over the wilderness of Qadesh in Ps 29:8, notwithstanding it designates a northern or southern location.18 Furthermore, Baal is the leader among the young gods, but not 15 P. CRAIGIE 1972, 144. For example, Frank CROSS (1950, 21) identifies the expression ‫( בהדרת קודש‬Ps 29:2) as being typically borrowed from the Ugarit liturgy. Charles FENSHAM (1963, 85) notices the similar use in Ugarit and in Ps 29:6 of the enclitic mem (‫)וירקידם‬, and of the preposition ‫כמו‬. Gary RENDSBURG (1990, 35-36) identifies some grammatical singularities of Psalm 29 (such as the double plural in ‫בני אלים‬, the plural of ‫ יער‬as ‫יערות‬, the lamed particle in ‫ )למבול‬as typical characteristics of the North Canaanite language. Michael BARRÉ (1991, pp. 25-26) stresses the parallel between the formulation in Ps 29:11 and a Phoenician inscription from Karatepe (KAI 26). 16 M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:175. 17 A. FITZGERALD 1974. 18 Andreas WAGNER (1996, 538) specifies that the desert is in no way mentioned in the Ugaritic source (KTU 1.4 vii) traditionally compared with Psalm 29. Mitchell DAHOOD

16

CHAPTER 1

the supreme deity and leader of the divine council.19 Consequently, if the expression ‘sons of god’, in Ps 29:1, refers to the divine council, this hymn might be better appropriate to El, the chief of the Ugarit pantheon, than Baal. Finally, verse 10 praises YHWH ruling forever. This attributes fits El, granted the epithet of king/father of the years (malku ᾿abŭ šanīma) in Ugarit20, better than Baal, the god who disappears periodically in the netherworld during the drought period (KTU 1.5 v-vi). Consequently, if Psalm 29 originates from a Canaanite/Ugaritic context, some of its elements are probably borrowed from the mythology of El rather than Baal.21 2. THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST A BAALIST INFLUENCE The premise of Israelite’s borrowing and naturalizing a hymn to Baal was a seducing hypothesis in the immediate aftermath of the discovery of the Ugarit archives, and it is still defended today. However, the pieces of evidence accumulated gradually, promoting a challenging interpretation of Psalm 29 as a hymn composed initially for YHWH. • Semantic considerations: Some of the words and expressions from Psalm 29 are ignored in the Ugarit literature, including the use of verbs such as yhb (= to bring, vv. 1-2), ᾿mr (= to say, v. 9) and ḥyl (= to tremble, in v. 8). Additionally, the noun lahăbâ (= flame, in v. 7) is absent in Ugaritic, where flame is designated as nblt. Perhaps the most singular anomaly is the absence of the word mabbûl (v. 10) in the Ugaritic literature. This lacuna is unexpected if Psalm 29 was originally an Ugaritic song praising Baal and his victory over Yam, the sea god symbolized by the flood.22 • Literary considerations: David Freedman and Frank Hyland identified in Psalm 29 some complex and sophisticated techniques of Hebrew (1966, 1:178) attempts to minimize this problem by assuming that mdbr in Psalm 29 should not be understood as the desert, but rather the pasture lands, the steppes. 19 According to Theodoree MULLEN (1980, 109-110), there is no conflict in the Ugarit mythology between Baal and El for authority in the divine council. MULLEN (1980, 110) concluded that “El’s proclamation of his decree is best displayed in his action in the divine council, the medium through which the decree of the high god was proclaimed.” 20 KTU 1.1 iii 23-24; 1.2 iii 5; 1.3 v 8; 1.4 iv 24; 1.5 vi 2; 1.6 i 36; 1.17 vi 49. The other epithet rapi᾿u malku ῾ȏlami (KTU 1.108.1) is also understood as attributing to El (under the appellation of rapi᾿u ) the title of ‘eternal king’ by most scholars (see D. PARDEE 1998, 84 [note 23]), but not by Dennis PARDEE himself (1998, 86-87). 21 According to Theodore MULLEN (1980, 272-273), the mention of dr ᾿il wpḫr b῾l (e.g. KTU 1.47.26) does not refer to an assembly of Baal distinct from the divine council presided by El, but only to the mention of his household, the few gods seconding him. 22 C. FENSHAM 1963, 86-92; Y. AVISHUR 1989, 36.

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

17

poetry, and concluded that this hymn was originally composed for liturgical uses in early Israel.23 This observation obviously does not disprove a potential Canaanite or Phoenician origin of this psalm. However, the style and the structural properties of the song, especially the pattern of whole concentric symmetry (see Chapter 7), better fit an Israelite rather than an Ugaritic origin of this hymn. • Geographical markers: Localizing Qadesh (Ps 29:8) near the Orontes strengthens the assumption of the northern Levant origin of Psalm 29. But it is not the only possible interpretation. For most ancient exegetes and modern scholars, it remains simpler to position Qadesh in the wilderness of Arabah, Negev or Northern Sinai.24 This location of Qadesh fits well the Israelite theological history. This site is mentioned in the wandering of the Israelites before the conquest of the Promised Land (Num 20:1), and likened to the Wilderness of Sin in Num 33:36. On this basis, scholars even identified allusions to the Exodus in Psalm 29.25 • The theme of kābȏd: The notion of kābȏd is recurrently associated with YHWH in Psalm 29 (vv. 1,2,3,9), the god even being called ᾿ēl hakābȏd in verse 3. Though the notion of kābȏd is also attached to the Ugaritic deities, an essential relationship between a god and his kābȏd remains a characteristic typical of YHWH.26 This is another argument promoting an Israelite origin of the psalm.27 • The final verse: YHWH blessing his people is the theme of the final verse of Psalm 29. Such a claim is recurrent in the Israelite theology, the Sinai alliance transforming the sons of Jacob into the people of YHWH. This observation became another argument towards an Israelite origin of this psalm.28 Despite these observations, identifying Psalm 29 as an original Israelite composition is not free of problems. The short heading (a probable editorial addition) dedicating the psalm to David excepted, there is no Israelite identity marker in Psalm 29. Nowhere is there the name of a patriarch, 23

D. FREEDMAN and F. HYLAND 1973, 237, 256. See also G. BARBIERO 2016, 384. See Benjamin SOMMER (2013, 238) concerning the identification of Qadesh by ancient exegetes. The Targum even identifies Qadesh with Rekem, a holy site in the land of Edom. See B. MARGULIS 1970, 346; Y. AVISHUR 1989, 30-31, P. VENTER 2004, 236; D. PARDEE 2005, 169; J. GOLDINGAY 2009, 418; G. BARBIERO 2016, 386. All these authors are among the modern scholars who localize Qadesh in South Canaan. 25 M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 150. 26 Tryggve METTINGER (1982, 80-83) identifies this kābȏd-theology of YHWH especially with the Priestly tradition. 27 B. MARGULIS 1970, 303. 28 C. KLOOS 1986, 90; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 351. 24

18

CHAPTER 1

famous leader or king. No tribe of Israel is mentioned, either. Neither Jerusalem nor any site of importance in ancient Israel is quoted in the song. Furthermore, nothing about the birth of Israel (Exodus, Sinai theophany, wandering, conquest of the Promised Land) or any other historical event is mentioned in Psalm 29. Instead, the three geographical markers visible in this hymn, Lebanon, Sirion and Qadesh, are all located outside the boundaries of ancient Israel. No element of the Israelite theology is recognizable, either.29 The worshippers mentioned in the bundle of the psalm (vv. 1-2, 10-11) are not explicitly invited to perform sacrifices or even to pilgrim to his holy place.30 They are not requested to participate in any ceremony identifiable with an Israelite festival. Unlike many songs from the Psalter, Psalm 29 does not formulate any supplication towards the peace of the nation of Israel and/ or the defeat of their enemies. It does not juxtapose Israel to other peoples and their practices. Scholars defending an Israelite origin attempted to identify allusions to Israel and its theology in the text of Psalm 29. For example, it is easy to identify Israel from the call to YHWH to bless his people (v. 11). Even people advocating a northern Canaanite origin of the hymn interpreted this last verse as an Israelite addition introduced to naturalize the hymn.31 This argument is relevant, however, only in a situation of exclusiveness of the relationship between YHWH and Israel, which will be challenged in Chapter 4. Localizing Qadesh in the Negeb/Arabah/Northern Sinai enabled authors to assume that its combination with the mounts of Lebanon trace the boundaries of the ‘Promised Land’.32 Furthermore, they notice that the region of Jerusalem is more or less positioned at a similar distance from the three geographical markers in Psalm 29. It was deduced from this finding that the psalm devotes a special attention to Jerusalem.33 By extension, the mention of YHWH’s palace (hêkāl, v. 9) became an allusion 29 For Erhard GERSTENBERGER (1988, 131), “Strangest of all is the fact that the body of the psalm does not – except perhaps the name of YHWH – refer to the community that is singing the song.” 30 The only element that may eventually be identified with an offering is the claim “Ascribe to YHWH, kābȏd and strength” (Ps 29:1b). It remains, however, too evasive to be approached as an Israelite marker. 31 T. GASTER 1946, 63; F. CROSS 1950, 19 (note 2); M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 152. 32 R. TOURNAY 1956, 176. Psalm 29 is therefore supposed to express YHWH’s theophany over the whole territory of Israel. However, nothing about the land between these northern and southern limits is related here, giving the embarrassing impression that this geographical space has no particular importance. 33 We may wonder how precise the geographical midst between these distant locations may have been in the past, and how, on this vague information, the poet may focus the song on the centrality of Jerusalem.

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

19

to the temple at Jerusalem, and the final blessing (v. 11) an allusion to the diffusion of the cult of YHWH from this sanctuary.34 However, these observations are no more than elliptic indications, so that the existence of Israelite markers in Psalm 29 remains an object of speculation. The absence of clear-cut evidence clarifying the origin of Psalm 29 stimulated hypotheses combining elements from the alternative interpretations. Scholars argued that the core of the poem (verses 3-9) expresses a Baalist background, leaving to an Israelite author the composition of the four verses (1-2, 10-11) surrounding it.35 Verses 1, 2, and 10 were also regarded as borrowed from the mythological background of El, the supreme deity of the Ugaritic pantheon, then restricting the Israelite addition to verse 11 only.36 These approaches of Psalm 29 as a composite opus are challenged, however, by the high level of cohesiveness, structural organization, and literary coherency characterizing this hymn.37 Alternately, Psalm 29 was identified as an original Israelite composition inspired by and modeled on a Canaanite hymn devoted to Baal.38 For John Day: “It is probably safer to suppose that Psalm 29 is an Israelite composition largely modeled on the language used by the Canaanites about Baal, rather than to suppose that it is a Baal psalm pure simple with the substitution of the name YHWH for Baal.”39 In such a perspective, the thunderstorm, the essential attribute of Baal, is recruited in this hymn to ‘doxologize’ YHWH.40 Authors even speculated that such a composition in imitation intended to rally the Canaanite worshippers of Baal to the cult of YHWH.41 The mixing of Israelite and Canaanite characters yielded also an interpretation of Psalm 29 through an anti-Baalist perspective. In this context, the mention of YHWH breaking the cedars from Lebanon (v. 5) became an allusion to YHWH’s destruction of Baal’s palace.42 This interpretation 34 B. MARGULIS 1970, 340; E. ZENGER 2003, 167-168; 2005, 407, 414-415; W. BRUEGGEMANN and W. BELLINGER 2014, 148; G. BARBIERO 2016, 386-388. 35 For example, Werner SCHMIDT (1961, 20-24) argues that verses 1-2 of Psalm 29 were originally devoted to El instead of Baal. See also R. MÜLLER 2017, 220-223. 36 E. ZENGER 2003, 164. Jörg JEREMIAS (1987, 41-42) limits the first baalist core of the psalm to vv. 5-9 only. 37 N. LUND 1933, 306-309; J-L. CUNCHILLOS 1976, 141-160; R. ALDEN 1976, 21-22; M. GIRARD 1984, 234-240; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 298-300. 38 P. CRAIGIE 1983, 244. D. PARDEE and N. PARDEE 2009, 121. 39 J. DAY 2000, 98. 40 J. MAYS 1985, 62. 41 C. FENSHAM 1963, 96. 42 F. GRADL 1979, 109; D. PARDEE 2005, 158; W. BRUEGGEMAN and W. BELLINGER 2014, 147.

20

CHAPTER 1

is founded on the use of cedars for building the Baal palace in the Ugarit mythology (KTU 1.4 v 10).43 It transforms the praise of YHWH’s voice over the earth, mountains and natural elements into the expression of the terror YHWH’s theophany stimulates among the Canaanite deities.44 The mingling of arguments from the two alternative views overcomes the difficulties encountered in each one of them. For example, Baruch Margulis defends an Israelite origin of Psalm 29, but concludes “That the author of Ps 29 has gone to school with the Canaanite bards – and this in a relatively early period – is undeniable, and is further strengthened by the comparative material newly available.”45 Also Carola Kloos concludes “Although I do not hold Ps XXIX to be an ancient Baal hymn, I do think that YHWH is pictured as Baal in this psalm from beginning to end.”46 John Day expresses a similar opinion, when he argues that “There can thus be no doubt that Ps. 29 stands remarkably close to the circle of mythological ideas surrounding Baal as they are attested in the Ugarit texts.”47 These approaches transform Psalm 29 into the missing link between the Canaanite religion and the early religion of Israel.48 However, we should keep in mind that the proposed combinations remain speculative and therefore cannot support an interpretation of Psalm 29 in the storm context. 3. THE LOOK

FOR RAIN IN

PSALM 29

The chronic indeterminacy concerning the origin of Psalm 29 and its relationship with the Baal theophany might be compensated for by considerations promoting a storm interpretation. And in the absence of explicit 43 H. SPIECKERMANN 1989, 177; P. VENTER 2004, 242. In this context, the storm-god characteristics attributed to YHWH in Psalm 29 become a mockery of Baal and his power. For P. CRAIGIE (1983, 246) “The praise of the Lord, by virtue of being expressed in language and imagery associated with the Canaanite weather-god, Baal, taunts the weak deity of the defeated foes, namely the Canaanites.” 44 A. WEISER 1962, 261; P. CRAIGIE 1972, 150; E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 137; M. GIRARD 1984, 241. 45 B. MARGULIS 1970, 346. 46 C. KLOOS 1986, 90. Carola KLOOS (1986, 94) surveys the many authors sharing the opinion that Psalm 29 expresses the cultural sphere of Baal, even though it was formerly an Israelite song. 47 J. DAY 1985, 59. 48 Pieter VENTER (2004, 242), for example, assumed that, “At the time when the psalm was composed YHWH was credited with the same properties as Baal in the Ugaritic BaalYam myth. The conception of God in terms of Baal trait was not polemical against Baal religion per se, but was done in a time and a region where these available notions were merely used to conceptualize YHWH’s identity.” For Carola KLOOS (1986, 123), “If Ps. XXIX expressed Yahwistic beliefs, YHWH was, at the time when Ps. XXIX was composed, credited with the same properties as Baal in the Ugaritic Baal-Yam myth.”

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

21

mention of rain, this approach is conditioned by identifying elements promoting rainfall in this song. They are briefly reviewed here. 3.1. The reference to rainfall The best way to cope with the abnormal silence about rain, in Psalm 29, is to challenge this claim by exhibiting a reference to rainfall in this hymn. The best candidate for this identification is verse 3, the verse mentioning not only YHWH thundering (3b) but also the voice of YHWH upon water (mayîm, 3a).49 Then, the subsequent reference to mayîm rabbîm (3c) becomes a designation of the heavy rain causing inundations.50 The designation of rain as water (mayîm) is found elsewhere in the Bible. In Job 5:10, mayîm is an appellation echoing the designation of rain as māṭār: “He gives rain (‫ )מטר‬on the earth; And sends waters (‫ )מים‬on the fields.” Also in Jeremiah, rain accumulating in the heavens is explicitly designated as water whose falling on the earth is conditioned by the voice of YHWH: “At his voice (‫)לקול תתו‬, there is a tumult of waters (‫)המון מים‬ in the heavens, and he makes the mist rise from the ends of the earth. He makes lightning for the rain (‫)למטר‬, and he brings forth the wind from his storehouses” (Jer 10:13 = Jer 51:16). In these verses, water is the raw matter constituting rain, rather than its synonym. A similar distinction between rainfall (māṭār) and the water constituting it (mayîm) is visible in Deut 11:11 and Job 36:27. This nuance may explain why water is not mentioned alone to designate rain in these verses. Then, we cannot exclude that the author of Psalm 29 here designates rain only by water. But in this case, it is likely that Ps 29:3 designates the heavenly reservoirs of water before their transformation into rain. This interpretation fits YHWH and his voice standing upon the waters. However, it should be noted that the clouds, the reservoirs of rain opened by lightning and the thundery voice of the storm god, are absent in this hymn.51 So we have here to assume that in Psalm 29, the reference to water replaces the two expected but missing mentions of rainfall: rain and/or clouds. Scholars filled this lacuna in assuming that mayîm rabbîm, in 3c, is an allusion to the cosmic waters, whose mention is echoed in verse 10 through the reference to mabbûl.52 Then, mabbûl becomes the celestial 49

H-J. KRAUS 1988, 349; HALOT, 3:1267; DCH, 7:1527. J-L. CUNCHILLOS 1976, 73-76. 51 R. MÜLLER 2017, 212-213. 52 For John DAY (1985, 58), “YHWH’s lordship over the cosmic waters is alluded to in v. 3, and it is most natural to suppose that this is also being referred to in v. 10, rather than that we there have an allusion to Noah’s flood.” 50

22

CHAPTER 1

reservoir of rain, whose ruling by YHWH (‘sitting upon it’ in verse 10) praises his control over rainfall.53 This interpretation is not devoid of problems, however. In the biblical cosmology, the celestial ocean upon the firmament (Gen 1:6-7) results from the separation of the primeval water into two parts.54 But these upper waters are not involved in normal rainfall.55 It could be argued that Noah’s Flood results from gathering these two water sources (Gen 7:11), especially because the water falling from the celestial ocean is designated as rain in Gen 7:12. However, one cannot deduce from this exceptional temporary regression to a pre-created status of the universe that rain is normally issued from the celestial ocean. The formation of rain is independent of the celestial ocean in Isa 55:1011, where it is the water fertilizing the earth that comes back cyclically to the heavens: “10 For as the rain (‫ )הגשם‬and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there before watering the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater; 11So shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.” The idea of continuous circulation of water between the earth (soil and plants) and the clouds is also visible in the Book of Job. There, the author provides further details on the formation of drops of rain from the condensation of water emanating from the earth: “For he draws up the drops of water; they distill his mist in rain” (Job 36:27). The authors of Isaiah 55 and Job 36 expound views about rain dating from the Persian period. Though this phenomenon is easy to observe in the Levant, we cannot preclude the existence of other views about the origin of rain and the mechanisms of its fall, especially in a hymn composed many centuries before the redaction of Job and Isaiah. In any way, the mere mention of water in Ps 29:3 is not sufficient to conclude that rain is explicitly mentioned in this song. 3.2. The companion indications Scholars identified many indirect indications that may compensate for the lack of explicit mention of rain in Psalm 29. 53

C. KLOOS 1986, 89. P. REYMOND 1958, 171-172. 55 P. REYMOND 1958, 29-31. Contra, David NEIMAN (1969) assumes that rain originates from the celestial ocean, based on the role of the window in the Baal temple on the control of rain, in the Ugarit mythology. However, we should remember that Baal is called the cloud rider (KTU 1.2 iv 8-9; 1.3 iii 37; 1.3 iv 4, 6, 26; 1.4 iii 10; 1.4 v 60) and not the master of the celestial ocean. 54

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

23

Storm dynamic Instead of designating the heavenly ocean, scholars identified in mayîm rabbîm (3c) a reference to the Mediterranean Sea, like in Psalm 77:20; 93:4; 107:23; Ezek 27:26 and Hab 3:15. In this light, the successive mention of the voice of YHWH over mayîm rabbîm (v. 3), Lebanon thereafter (v. 5) and the eastern desert ultimately (v. 8) became interpreted as the expression of the gradual movement of a storm from the Mediterranean Sea eastward.56 Martin Klingbeil clearly expresses this point, when he argues that “It seems nevertheless clear that, in the poet’s description of the thunderstorm, they follow a progressive geographical pattern, and do not serve as a mythological depiction of the Yahwistic thunderstorm in general.”57 There is a problem with this geography, however. If the song is of Ugarit origin, it mentions Qadesh as the desert area reached by the storm. But in this case, the mountain affected at first should be Mount Cassius, the mountain of Baal. If the psalm is of Phoenician origin, a reference to the mountains of Lebanon is likely. But in this case, the eastward progression brings the storm to the Syrian desert beyond the Bashan region, not the Qadesh area (notwithstanding it designates a Syrian location or a Negev one). And if the Psalm is Israelite, Mount Carmel is a more appropriate location than Lebanon for a storm coming from the sea. And even if we assume that an Israelite poet mentions the Lebanon mountains, the reference to the Qadesh wilderness implies a move of the northern storm to the desert area located a hundred kilometers southward. This description is unrealistic, however, because the storms from the Lebanon area have no influence on a region located many hundreds of kilometers southward. This interpretation should therefore be rejected. Semantic of rain Beyond the interpretation of mayîm as rain (see above), scholars attempted to find further allusions to rainfall in Psalm 29. For example, Frank Cross interpreted ‫ויחשף‬, in verse 9, as a reference to the Ugaritic verb ḥsp designating both to pour water, and to drench.58 In parallel, the flames of fire in verse 7 became a poetic description of lightning accompanying the thunder.59 Further authors assumed that strong winds and 56 M. KLINGBEIL 1999, 95-99; M. SMITH 2014, 48; R. MÜLLER 2017, 211. Herbert MAY (1955, 16) identifies mayîm rabbîm in Psalm 29 as the Mediterranean Sea, though he assimilates it with the chaotic elements in other biblical sources. He assumes (1955, 10) that “The ‘many waters’ are the chaotic, disorderly, insurgent elements which must be controlled.” 57 M. KLINGBEIL 1999, 96. 58 F. CROSS 1973, 154. 59 C. FENSHAM 1963, 88; R. ALDEN 1976, 22; D. PARDEE 2005, 122.

24

CHAPTER 1

thunder function in this song as a metonym for the storm, including the fall of heavy rain.60 Even the repetitive mention of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29 became an explicit reference to rain. Reinhardt Müller, for example, concluded that “The monotonous sevenfold repetition of the words “the voice of YHWH” sounds like a litany or magic incantation that tries to evoke the crashing sound of thunder.”61 All these observations may introduce some nuances into the description of a storm theophany. However, they cannot serve as a substitute for the explicit mention of rain in this song. Fertility and blessing The storm god is praised mainly for the beneficent issue of rain on agriculture. This dimension is explicit in the Baal mythology, where Baal self-glorifies for being the god who feeds both mortals and gods (KTU 1.4 vii 50-52):62 ᾿ aḥdy . d . ymlk . ᾿ l . ᾿ ilm d ymr᾿ u ᾿ ilm . w nšm d yšb[῾ ] . hmlt . ᾿ arṣ

I alone am the one who rules over the gods Who fattens gods and men Who states the hordes of the earth

For this reason, the references to fertility in Psalm 29 might compensate for the lack of any mention of rainfall. Though explicit references to fertility and plant growth are lacking in Psalm 29, scholars have interpreted some claims in this perspective. One of these indications substituted for the mention of rain is the interpretation of verse 9 in the context of animal birth. For Reinhardt Müller, “...although Psalm 29 does not explicitly mention the rain, the poet alludes to the divine gift of fertility through the ambivalent imagery of labor-pains that beset the wilderness when YHWH approaches.”63 Three problems remain, however. First, the imagery of animals in labor-pains is itself an interpretation (see Chapter 5). Second, there is no trivial relationship between the occurrence of a storm and the birth of mammals. Third, plant fertility is only indirectly related to this birth event. Alternatively, YHWH’s final blessing to his people (v. 11) is sometimes understood in a fertility context.64 This culmination coincides with the consequence of rain, and even its essential function (see Gen 2:5). 60 61 62 63 64

M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:176; J. TIGAY 2008, 406; D. PARDEE and N. PARDEE 2009, 122. R. MÜLLER 2017, 211. Translated by D. PARDEE 2005, 175. R. MÜLLER 2017, 212-213. E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 137. C. KLOOS 1986, 92-93.

THE FUNDAMENTS OF STORM THEOPHANY IN PSALM 29

25

Furthermore, the verb brk (Ps 29:11) is sometimes associated with abundant vegetation in the Bible (e.g. Gen 46:25; Ezek 34:26). But we may wonder why the blessing in Psalm 29 addresses the community of worshippers, without including the community of living beings, as expected for the fertilizing function of rain. It is not the only challenge. If the psalm culminates with plant growth, fertility and their consequences, we may wonder why the only references to vegetation, found in Ps 29:5, refer to the destruction of trees. Though storms are not less violent in the Northern Levant, Anatolia and Upper Euphrates than in Canaan, such devastating effect is not the ultimate characteristic of Baal or any other storm gods from the ancient Near East. If the storm god, in Psalm 29, provides his help in the human effort of deforestation towards extension of the arable lands, we may wonder why this imagery involves elevated mountains, where agriculture is ignored or incidental. In modern research, Psalm 29 became a cornerstone in determining the former identity of YHWH as a storm god. However, as shown here, many questions concerning the nature and meaning of Psalm 29 remain unsolved today. The cultural context of the composition of Psalm 29, Canaanite or Israelite, is a debated question. Even the storm-god context of the interpretation is founded on indirect pieces of evidence only, many of them of speculative nature. It is not surprising, in light of these observations and comments, to find scholars questioning the pertinence of the interpretation of Psalm 29 in the context of a storm theophany. For Peter Craigie, the storm concepts and terminology are introduced in Psalm 29 not for identifying YHWH as a storm god, but rather for praising his nature of war god in the archaic Israelite religion.65 Andreas Wagner assumes that the motif of the voice of Baal is transposed in Psalm 29 but emancipated from its original storm context.66 Also Eric Zenger argues that the storm dimension of YHWH’s theophany is probably not the central theme of Psalm 29.67

65 66 67

P. CRAIGIE 1983, 245-247. Martin KLINGBEIL (1999, 85) concurs. A. WAGNER 1996, 536. E. ZENGER 2005, 411.

CHAPTER 2

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29 The previous chapter has shown how the silence about rainfall or its beneficial effect on fertility challenges the interpretation of Psalm 29 in a storm context. In the ancient Near East, however, the storm gods did not only trigger thunder, lightning and rain. They were known also for their warlike character, symbolized by the mythic combat with the sea frequently identified with a serpent-dragon. Seals from Anatolia, Upper Syria and Mesopotamia dated from the early second millennium BCE depict this mythic event.1 The storm-god victory over a serpent monster is also a central literary motif.2 For example, the fourth section of the Kumarbi cycle reports Teššub slaying the dragon Ḫedammu, identified with the sea.3 Marduk’s struggle with Tiamat, the cosmic sea with serpentine attributes, is probably a Mesopotamian expression of the same motif.4 Also in Ugarit, Baal overcomes Yam, the sea god identified with a seven-headed writhing serpent called Lotan.5 This victory is one of the most prominent deeds that cement Baal’s status as the young leader of the pantheon.6 It transforms the storm god into the defender of order, authority and kingship against the forces of cosmic destruction threatening them.7 This widespread association of the mythic combat against a sea monster unveils the existence of a koiné in the ancient Near East centered on the figure of the storm god.8 Consequently, if Psalm 29 was indeed a hymn of praise of the storm god, we would expect to find expressions of these characteristics, independent of the question of the origin of this 1 W. LAMBERT 1985, 440-441; I. CORNELIUS 1994, 212; A. GREEN 2003, 116, 157-158; D. SCHWEMER 2009, 36. 2 E. WILLIAMS-FORTE 1983, 25-26; D. SCHWEMER 2009, 25. 3 R. MILLER 2014, 234. 4 For many scholars, the Enuma Elish struggle is an adaptation of a North Mesopotamian/ Northern Levant theme. See T. JACOBSEN 1968, 1975; M. KAPLAN 1976; W. LAMBERT 1982; D. TSUMURA 2007, 473; A. TUGENDHAFT 2018, 192. 5 KTU 1.5 i. See O. KEEL and C. UEHLINGER 1998, 13; N. GREENE 2017, 94-95. 6 KTU 1.2 iv. 7 Tryggve METTINGER (1997, 144) notes that “In the ancient Near East, the notion of kingship of the deity is closely linked up with the idea of Divine Warrior, who defeats the forces of chaos. The victory over chaos is the act through which the god attains his kingship.” 8 D. SCHWEMER 2008, 2009.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

27

song (Canaanite or Israelite). Consequently, identifying a warlike character to the god in Psalm 29, or detecting some traces of a mythic combat against the forces of chaos, may compensate for the lack of explicit mention of rainfall and fertility Scholars identified the figure of the divine warrior in Psalm 29. For example, Reinhardt Müller assumes that this hymn focuses primarily “... on the aggressive aspects of the divine epiphany.”9 Antti Laato interprets the mention of the voice of YHWH breaking cedars (Ps 29:5) in a warrior context.10 Referring to Baal’s epic combat against his enemies in Ugarit (KTU 1.4 vii 14-52), Laato assumes that the broken cedars in Psalm 29 recall their use as a mythic weapon of Baal. However, in the absence of further indication, this interpretation remains speculative. It cannot serve as conclusive evidence of YHWH’s portrayal as warrior god in Psalm 29. Alternately, scholars suggested that Psalm 29 relates a mythic combat of YHWH against a serpent monster, the sea or other figures of the forces of chaos. If this claim is founded, it may compensate for the absence of storm and rain in Psalm 29. 1. THE SEARCH FOR

THE

CHAOSKAMPF MOTIF IN PSALM 29

The god utters his voice extensively in Psalm 29, but this vocal theophany is not the prelude of any fight against enemies. Nevertheless, scholars proposed a reading of Psalm 29 through the lens of Chaoskampf, the mythic struggle of the storm god against the sea, a monster animal and the forces of chaos.11 For example, Mitchell Dahood assumes that “By his victory over the primeval forces of chaos, YHWH is mythopoeically conceived as acquiring full dominion over earth and sea.”12 The focus on YHWH’s voice in Psalm 29 is even approached as a way to affirm superiority over the sea’s voice.13 1.1. The combat against the serpent monster Serpents or other reptilian creatures are not identifiable in Psalm 29. Nevertheless, the mention of ‘flames of fire’ (lhbt ᾿š), in verse 7, is frequently 9

R. MÜLLER 2017, 218. A. LAATO 2018, 145. 11 F. CROSS 1973, 155-156. John DAY (1985, 19) assumes that Psalm 29 explicitly associates YHWH’s kingship, claimed in verse 10, with the Chaoskampf motif in the previous verses. Carola KLOOS (1986, 60) interprets verses 3-9 as the description of the combat against the archenemy of the storm god. 12 M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:180. 13 D. SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE 2015, 86. 10

28

CHAPTER 2

interpreted in reference to the serpentine dragon, the fiery creature identified with Yam in the Ugarit mythology.14 The verbal root ḥṣb linking the voice of YHWH (subject) with this fiery reality (complement), in verse 7, is also associated with the mythical victory of YHWH over the sea monster in Isa 51:9: Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of YHWH; Awake, as in days of old, the generations of long ago; Was it not you who hewed (‫ )המחצבת‬Rahab in pieces, who pierced the dragon (‫?)מחוללת תנין‬

This deed displays similarities with Baal’s victory against a mythic creature identified as Yam, Nahar, Tanin, and bṯn ῾qltn (twisting serpent) (KTU 1.3 iii 38-46).15 Also the verb ḥll describing the killing of the sea monster in Isa 51:9 is encountered in Psalm 29:9. And like in verse 7, the subject of this verb is the voice of YHWH in this oracle. Based on these observations, scholars suggested that Ps 29:7 expresses the victory of the god over the sea monster.16 The combined mention of the voice of YHWH and fire, in this verse, became interpreted as a reference to thunder and lightning, the weapons by which the storm god prevails over his arch-enemy. However, this interpretation of verse 7 remains speculative, especially in the absence of other elements confirming it in the surrounding verses.17 1.2. The interpretation of mayîm rabbîm The previous chapter mentioned how the search for rain in Psalm 29 conditioned the interpretation of mayîm rabbîm as the celestial ocean, and how the idea of storm progression from the sea to the eastern desert transformed it into a designation of the Mediterranean Sea. The search for Chaoskampf in Psalm 29 transformed mayîm rabbîm into the designation of the mighty waters, the primeval ocean of chaotic nature.18 By extension, 14

See C. KLOOS (1986, 59-60) and ref therein. For a comparison between Isa 51:9-11 and the Baal mythology, see J. HUTTON 2007. 16 C. KLOOS 1986, 59-60. 17 C. KLOOS (1986, 60) concedes the speculative nature of this interpretation: “My explanation remains of course hypothetical. Nevertheless, the other explanations are not satisfying; therefore I want to propose the translation ‘slays flames of fire’ – being a reference to a mythological monster – as a conjecture.” 18 For example, Herbert May (1955, 10) argued that “The dragon is the sea and the sea is frequently designated in contexts such as this by the expression mayîm rabbîm. The many waters are chaotic, disorderly, insurgent elements which must be controlled.” See also A. LAATO 2018, 143. 15

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

29

the image of the voice of YHWH upon mighty waters, in verse 3, became the expression of the divine victory over the forces of chaos.19 The possible interpretation of the preposition ῾l as against instead of upon, in 3c, further supports the combative dimension in this verse.20 Nevertheless, the absence of reference to Yam or the forces of chaos as mym rbym in Ugarit does not promote this interpretation.21 Also the association of mayîm rabbîm with the primeval ocean of chaotic nature is not found anywhere in the Bible. This expression may refer in psalms to flooding and destruction (Pss 18:17; 32:6; 144:7), but alternately, this association might be a mere consequence of its designation as abundant water in which one may be drowned.22 The Chaoskampf interpretation of Psalm 29 cannot be deduced, therefore, from an interpretation of mayîm rabbîm as the forces of chaos. 1.3. The reference to mabbûl The image of YHWH ‘sitting’ upon the mabbûl (Ps 29:10) is frequently interpreted an expression of the Chaoskampf motif.23 Three possible interpretations of mabbûl are recruited for this purpose: heavenly waters, the flood, and the insurgent primeval ocean. As the heavenly, cosmic ocean, mabbûl is interpreted as a threat to the created universe, so that YHWH sitting upon it prevents a regression to the chaotic state.24 Once interpreted as flood, mabbûl represents this regression of the universe to a predifferentiated state, characterizing the primeval stage of creation in which the upper and lower water were not yet separated.25 As the primeval ocean, mabbûl designates the insurgent sea constantly threatening the earth with 19

M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:176; E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 136; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 247; J. KENNEDY 2009, 15; B. SOMMER 2013, 135; G. BARBIERO 2016, 386. 20 C. KLOOS 1986, 52. 21 D. PARDEE 2005, 176. 22 Even in Isa 17:13, which mentions the nations roaring “like the roaring of many waters (‫”)מים רבים‬, this latter expression probably does not refer to chaotic forces of creation rebuked in the past by YHWH. This reservation is deduced from the imagery of chaff chased by wind introduced in this verse to illustrate their demise: “The nations roar like the roaring of many waters, but he will rebuke them, and they will flee far away, chased like chaff on the mountains before the wind and whirling dust before the storm.” (Isa 17:13). 23 C. FENSHAM 1963, 87; J. DAY 1979, 143-144; R. MÜLLER 2017, 222-223. 24 S. MITTMANN 1978. 25 M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:176; K. SEYBOLD 1996, 121. These views are not equivalent, however. For example, Antti LAATO (2018, 144) argues that “Even though it would be attractive to interpret mabbul in Ps 29:10 as a reference to heavenly stores of waters which YHWH pours on the earth, the word itself denotes flood and therefore a more probable interpretation for the word in the context of Ps 29 is waters of chaos.”

30

CHAPTER 2

flooding.26 This latter interpretation traces a parallel between Ps 29:10 and the Babylonian representation of Morduk standing upon the dead body of Tiamat, the defeated patroness of the primeval ocean.27 It also permits a bridge with the Baal mythology from Ugarit, representing the storm god standing upon the deep water/flood (mdb) (KTU 1.101.1): ba῾lu yāṯibu ka ṯibti ǵūri haddu r[ābiṣu] ka madūbi28

Baal sits like a mountain stands Haddu [lies down] like deep waters29

These interpretations are not devoid of problems, however. For example, the image of a god enthroned on the despised and defeated ‘forces of chaos’ is ignored both in the Ugaritic mythology and in other Near Eastern mythologies of the storm god. Even Marduk does not set his throne on Tiamat’s body, the vanquished Mesopotamian sea-dragon. The only Mesopotamian god enthroned upon the deep water (Apsu) is Ea/Enki, who is not a storm god. Furthermore, his sitting upon the deep waters does not result from any struggle or Chaoskampf event. Finally, Ea/Enki displays substantial affinities with El rather than Baal.30 The reference to the Baal mythology is not appropriate in Ps 29:10 either, because Baal’s leadership over Yam is seasonal in Ugarit, whereas the dominion of YHWH over the mabbûl is permanent in Psalm 29. Even the reference to mabbûl as Noah’s flood remains problematic, because this story (Genesis 6-8) does not account for any conflict between YHWH and this chaotic element. Rather, mabbûl in Genesis is an instrument of destruction powered by YHWH. It is not surprising that even scholars identifying a Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 29 exclude the idea of a reference to the Flood in verse 10.31 This survey indicates that many elements in Psalm 29 may be interpreted in reference to the Chaoskampf motif. Nevertheless, these various details, sometimes conflicting, do not generate any coherent image of 26

R. CLIFFORD, 1979, 241; R. LUYSTER 1981; D. SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE 2015, 81-82. T. METTINGER 1982, 69-70. 28 mdb is assimilated with Yam by L. FISHER and F. KNUTSON (1969, 158 note 7) based on their interpretation of the Baal deeds reported in the Ugarit mythology. However, David TSUMURA (2005, 154-155) challenges the extension of Baal’s victory over Yam to mdb, designating flood events. 29 Reconstitution and translation by Dennis PARDEE 1998, 124-125. The same verse is translated by Theodore MULLEN (1980, 85) as follows: “Baal sits enthroned, his mountain is like throne; Haddu the [shepherd], like the Flood.” Loren FISHER and Brent KNUDSON (1969, 158) concur: “Baal returns because of the throne to his mountain, Hadd, the [shepherd], because of the Flood, to the midst of his mountain.” 30 D. TSUMURA 1988, 352-353; 1989, 145-154. 31 C. KLOOS 1986, 62, 66-68. 27

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

31

victory against chaos in Psalm 29.32 The lack of explicit description of the struggle (or any literary development towards YHWH’s victory) does not promote this interpretation anymore. If Psalm 29 truly articulates around the Chaoskampf motif, it is in an abnormally diffuse and elliptical way. 2. THE CHAOSKAMPF MOTIF IN BIBLICAL POEMS Another way to appreciate the likelihood of the Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 29 is to examine how it is exposed in other songs or poetic oracles. One of them, Isa 51:9, refers unambiguously to YHWH vanquishing the mythic animal (dragon, sea monster) as the famous deed from the past (see above). A similar reference to the Chaoskampf motif is also explicit in three poems from the Psalter: Psalms 74, 77 and 89.33 2.1. Psalm 74 Psalm 74 is a complaint consecutive to the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple of YHWH. The lament follows the description of the devastation (vv. 2-8) for YHWH’s lack of intervention for his people, which contrasts with his involvement in the early history of Israel (vv 9-11). This evocation of the past deeds of YHWH extends with the reference to the mythological times of creation (vv. 12-15), followed by a praise of YHWH as the creator and master of the organized world (vv. 16-17). The song ends with a poignant call to YHWH (vv. 18-23) to intervene for protecting Israel against its oppressors and for making justice on the earth. Unlike most biblical texts referring to YHWH as the creator of the universe,34 Psalm 74 conditions this demiurgic activity (vv. 16-17) by a 32 For example, Dennis SYLVA (2011, 245) doubts that the mention of the waters (mayîm rabbîm, mabbûl) in Psalm 29 is an expression of the Chaoskampf mythological motif: “There is no specific action taken against the water, as there is against the cedars, Lebanon, the wilderness, and the oaks (vv. 5-9), suggesting that v. 3 describes a sea storm. The statement “YHWH sits enthroned over the flood” (v. 10a) may refer to a torrential downpour, the chaotic waters, or to both. But that YHWH is so enthroned does not necessarily suggest a Chaoskampf.” 33 D. FRAYNE 2013, 64-65. According to Dennis SYLVA (2011, 244), only five poems from the Psalter include the Chaoskampf motif: Psalms 18, 65, 74, 77 and 89. Three of these mentions will be examined here. The case of Psalm 18 will be treated thereafter in this chapter. Concerning Psalm 65, I consider the reference to Chaoskampf, in verse 8 (“[YHWH] who stills [‫ ]משביח‬the roaring of the seas, the roaring of their waves, the tumult of the peoples”) as being too elliptical to explicitly express the Chaoskampf mythological motif. 34 There are no traces of struggle with the sea in the story of creation related in Genesis 13, Psalm 136, Neh 9:6, Prov 3:19-20; 8:22-31 and Job 38:4-11.

32

CHAPTER 2

mythical deed (vv. 12-14) leading to the emergence of the dry land (v. 15) on which the organized world has emerged: 12Yet

God my King is from of old,   Working salvation in the midst of the earth. 13You divided (‫ )פוררת‬the sea by your might;   You broke the heads of the sea monsters (‫ )ראשי תנינים‬on the waters. 14You crushed (‫ )רצצת‬the heads of Leviathan (‫;)ראשי לויתן‬   You gave him as food for the creatures of the wilderness. 15You split open (‫ )בקעת‬springs and brooks;   You dried up (‫ )הובשת‬ever-flowing streams.

The reference to a mythical combat against a sea monster is unmistakable in verses 13-14. Furthermore, the mention of the creation event immediately after (vv. 16-17) bonds these two features. It promotes the idea that the creation of the organized world is the direct consequence of YHWH’s victory against the sea monsters.35 In this hymn, YHWH’s kingship emanates from a violent combat leading to the death, mutilation or entire submission of the enemy identified as multi-headed sea monsters. This victory finds a clear echo in the Ugarit mythology, through the combat of Baal against Yam.36 Also the kingship of YHWH following his victory recalls the Ugaritic mythology in which the reign of Baal is preceded by his victory over Yammu/Naharu (= Sea/River) and the seven-headed marine monster called tnn or lwtn.37 The linkage between the mythical victory (vv. 13-15) and the subsequent creation events (vv. 16-7) does not fit the victory of Baal over Yam in which a demiurgic dimension is absent. Instead, Baal is, in the Ugarit mythology, the promoter of a newly organized world, religious authority, and social order. His special relationship with the king and his dynasty even emphasizes the political dimension of this new order. The scheme expressed in Psalm 74 likens rather the emergence of the world following the victory of Morduk over Tiamat related in the Enuma Elish (iv 123-140; v 1-66), in which Morduk’s victory transforms the silent original universe into the organized world through the splitting of the body of Tiamat. Psalm 74 introduces a novelty regarding the classical Chaoskampf motif. Here, the mythic victory becomes the theological 35 J. MCKENZIE 1950, 282; T. METTINGER 1997, 145; D. SYLVA 2011, 246; D. SCOGGINSBALLANTINE 2015, 84-85; M. STAHL 2020, 7. 36 KTU 1.2 iv 21-27; 1.6 ii 30-37; 1.6 v 11-19; 1.83. 37 KTU 1.2 iv 27-34; 1.3 iii-iv; 1.5 i 1-3. See for example J. DAY 1985, 23-24; M. GOULDER 1996, 71; D. TSUMURA 2015, 552; D. SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE 2015, 84-85.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

33

fundament for promoting the idea of divine intervention on earth and the call for its occurrence.38 2.2. Psalm 77 Psalm 77 is a lament in which the psalmist mixes his personal distress with that of his nation. Like in Psalm 74, the first verses (2-11) interpret the deplorable situation as a consequence of YHWH’s cessation of the protection of his people (“Has his steadfast love forever ceased? Are his promises at an end for all time?” v. 8). This complaint climaxes in verse 11, which compares the divine inaction in the present times with his active involvement in the past. The second part of the psalm (vv. 12-21) exposes these famous events. After expounding on the majesty of YHWH (vv. 1214), the psalm identifies the Exodus as the famous deed (“15You are the God who works wonders; you have made known your might among the peoples. 16You with your arm redeemed your people, the children of Jacob and Joseph. Selah” vv. 15-16). This reference recurs in verses 20-21, claiming that the miracle of the Sea is the event which reveals the divine intervention: “20Your way was through the sea, your path through the great waters; Yet your footprints were unseen. 21You led your people like a flock; By the hand of Moses and Aaron.” The three verses separating these two expressions of the Exodus and the miracle of the Sea suddenly describe YHWH as a storm god. 17When

the waters saw you, O God,   When the waters saw you, they were afraid;   Indeed, the deep trembled. 18The clouds poured out water;   The skies gave forth thunder;   Your arrows flashed on every side. ַ 39; 19The crash of your thunder was in the dome of the heaven (‫)בּ גַּ ְלגַּ ל‬ 38 David TSUMURA (2015, 548) denies the idea of extrapolation in history of any mythic struggle in Psalm 74. He also challenges the reference to such mythic struggle in this psalm, assuming that verses 12-15 are no more than “...a metaphorical description of the Lord’s destroying his people’s enemies throughout history.” However, the similar feature observed in Psalms 77 and 89, and this historicization of the mythic struggle integrates a theological trend promoted in Isaiah (see the Conclusion section). This conjunction suggests a genuine reference to a mythic struggle attached to the figure of YHWH in these sources. However, this interpretation is convincingly challenged by Nathaniel GREENE (2017): a historical dimension exists in Psalm 74, but it seems entirely mingled with a cosmic Chaoskampf. 39 M. DAHOOD (1966, 2:232) translates ‫ גלגל‬not as whirlwind, as generally assumed, but as the dome of the heavens, assuming that glgl (formerly skull) designates something domed

34

CHAPTER 2

Your lightnings lighted up the world; The earth trembled and shook.

This insertion of the storm element stresses two points. First, the storm is an essential attribute expressing the majesty, power and intervention on the earth, and promoting an approach of YHWH as a storm god.40 Second, this storm reality is inserted into the description of the miracle of the Sea, inviting us to interpret this famous deed in a storm-god context.41 Consequently, the description of the sea frightened by YHWH (v. 17) probably mixes the miracle of the sea with the mythical struggle of the storm god against the primeval watery element. In the two subsequent verses, the reference to thunder, rainfall, and lightning confirms the storm-god description of YHWH, echoing the thunder and lightning used by Baal as mythical weapons for vanquishing Yam in the Ugarit mythology.42 For these reasons, Psalm 77 expresses the Chaoskampf motif classically associated with the storm gods in the ancient Near East.43 And like in Psalm 74, the Chaoskampf is here transposed into the historical time through the Exodus and the miracle of the Sea.44 2.3. Psalm 89 Psalm 89 is a lament in which the poet compares the prestigious status of Israel and its king in the past with the downfall of the kingdom of Judah and the Davidic dynasty. To amplify this contrast, the poem opens with a praise of YHWH as supreme deity (vv. 2, 6-9). By mentioning the alliance with David (vv. 4-5) in this introduction, the poet grants it an everlasting and even cosmic dimension. After this introduction, the psalm exposes (vv. 10-15) the deeds promoting YHWH to this ultimate status, the privileged position of Israel (vv. 16-19), and the special covenant with David and his lineage (vv. 2038). After this overview, the poem transforms into a complaint about the collapse of the kingdom of Judah, the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Davidic dynasty (vv. 39-52). The rhetoric and the arguments developed in Psalm 89 are very similar to those in Psalms 74 and 77. An or vaulted. This interpretation is strengthened by the parallel reference to tbl (created universe) in this verse. 40 F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 279. 41 J.S. KSELMAN 1983, 51-53; H-J. KRAUS 1989, 116. 42 R. CLIFFORD 1985, 511; B. WEBER 2007, 116; D. SYLVA 2011, 263. 43 M. GOULDER 1996, 105; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 279; D. SYLVA 2011, 255; R. MÜLLER 2017, 215. 44 J. DAY 1985, 97; O. KEEL 1997, 227; D. SYLVA 2011, 263.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

35

examination of the verses praising the deeds of YHWH in Psalm 89 (vv. 915) reveals a similar theological perspective. 9 YHWH,

God of hosts,   Who is mighty as you are, YHWH,   With your faithfulness all around you? 10 You rule the raging of the sea (‫;)גֵ אוּת ַהיָּ ם‬   When its waves rise, you still them. 11You crushed (‫ )דכאת‬Rahab like a carcass;   You scattered your enemies with your mighty arm. 12 The heavens are yours; the earth also is yours;   The world and all that is in it, you have founded them. 13 The north and the south, you have created them;   Tabor and Hermon joyously praise your name. 14 You have a mighty arm;   Strong is your hand, high your right hand. 15 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne;   Steadfast love and faithfulness go before you.

First, the praise of the greatness of YHWH (v. 9) is immediately followed by the deed justifying it: YHWH subdued the primeval ocean (v. 10) through his victory in a mythical struggle against Rahab, the sea monster (v. 11).45 The subsequent reference to YHWH’s supremacy (v. 12) even suggests that this ultimate position is the consequence of the issue of this mythic combat, like in the Baal and Marduk mythologies.46 As in Psalm 74, the Chaoskampf motif (vv. 10-11) here precedes the reference to YHWH’s demiurgic activity (vv. 12-13), and after that, the god is praised for intervening on the earth (v. 14) as the master of justice (v. 15).47 The insertion of these deeds, especially the mythic struggle, after the reference to the covenant with Israel and the David dynasty is probably meaningful. Like in Psalms 74 and 77, it promotes a parallel between the Chaoskampf motif and the divine intervention, here on behalf of Israel and the Davidic dynasty.48 For this reason, scholars assume that Rahab, 45 M. DAHOOD 1966, 2:314; H-J. KRAUS 1989, 206; M. TATE 1990, 421; R. CLIFFORD 2003, 92. 46 See Ki-Min BANG (2020, 91-92) concerning the parallels between Psalm 89: 10-13 and the Enuma Elish. J. HUTTON (2007, 284) stresses the striking parallels between these verses and Baal’s mythology, in KTU 1.3 iii 38-46. These parallels between Bronze Age mythologies from northern Syria and Mesopotamia, and poems composed in the mid-first millennium BCE in Israel reveal a high level of preservation of ancient traditions in the ancient Near East, and their availability in some of the circles of biblical authors. 47 About the theological significance of this succession of events, see C. CROUCH 2011, 262-263. This author notes that the protection of the royal dynasty is also one of the essential attributes of the storm god in the ancient Near East. 48 On this concern, John DAY (1985, 26) concludes that “...YHWH’s defeat of the chaotic sea at the time of creation is presented as a ground of confidence in YHWH’s power to

36

CHAPTER 2

in Ps 89:11, does not only designate the mythic marine monster, but also Egypt (like in Ps 87:4).49 By this means, Psalm 89 links the mythic events (the Chaoskampf) and their historical counterpart (the Exodus). The content of Psalms 74, 77 and 89 reveals that the Chaoskampf mythic motif may be attached to YHWH in the Psalter. But it also shows how this reference is unambiguous in these songs. Unlike in Psalm 29, it includes an explicit mention of the deed, of its background and especially of its consequence, the rise of YHWH’s kingship and supremacy on the Universe. In these three psalms, the demiurgic component of the Chaoskampf motif recalls the Babylonian mythology of Morduk, rather than the Ugaritic mythology of Baal. Another common feature of these three psalms is the extension to History of the Chaoskampf motif. This claim accredits the idea of YHWH’s intervention on the earth, as the Lord of Justice. It is noteworthy that Psalm 29, unlike these three psalms, does not express any clear-cut reference to the Chaoskampf mythic theme. Furthermore, none of the derived themes shared by these three ‘Chaoskampf psalms’ find an expression in Psalm 29. 3. THE MISUSES OF THE CHAOSKAMPF INTERPRETATION The lack of explicit reference to the Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 29 does not necessarily exclude its expression in this hymn. Nevertheless, it suggests that this theme, if truly present, is no more than an allusion. But here again, transforming those ‘allusions’ into fundaments of the interpretation might obfuscate its content and meaning. Several examples will illustrate this point. 3.1. Psalm 18 Psalm 18 (= 2 Samuel 22) is classically integrated with Psalms 74, 77 and 89 in the category of songs expressing the theme of the Chaoskampf.50 Unlike them, Psalm 18 is not a lament about the collapse of the Judah kingdom and YHWH’s passiveness. Instead, Psalm 18 praises YHWH deliver Israel from present distress, here a situation in which the Davidic covenant seems abrogated.” Carly CROUCH (2011, 262-263) argues similar views. 49 A. MAILLOT and A. LELIÈVRE 1966, 237; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 409. Patricia WILLEY (1997, 149) adds to this interpretation the observation that “...the defeat of Rahab in Isa 51:9 is followed almost immediately by a reference to the story of the Israelites’s exodus from Egypt.” This parallel is especially important in light of the affinities existing between Psalm 89 and Isaiah 40-55, shown by Patricia WILLEY (1997, 148-149). 50 R. COLE 2000, 59; D. SYLVA 2011, 244.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

37

protecting the psalmist, here identified with King David, against his enemies (vv. 2-7). A divine intervention follows this preamble. It begins with an impressive theophany involving the natural elements (vv. 8-16), followed by the description of the divine fight towards the psalmist (vv. 17-19). From this miraculous rescue, the poet promotes an equation between man’s rightfulness and devotion to YHWH, and the divine protection in return (vv. 20-31). Verse 26 resumes this doctrine of divine retribution: “With the merciful you show yourself merciful; with the blameless man you show yourself blameless.” The end of the psalm (vv. 32-51) is a hymnic section praising the strength given by YHWH to the faithful servant for successfully fighting all his enemies. Beyond the interpretation of the theophany (vv. 8-16) in a storm context, scholars also emphasized its warlike dimension. Clearly, YHWH seems to descend from the heaven for fighting David’s enemies.51 This struggling dimension of YHWH (v. 15) concerns especially the king (vv. 30-43) leading Steven Shnider to conclude that ...“the imagery in Psalm xviii reflects the special relation between God and the king. God gives the king His weapons, surrounds him with His divine glory, and assures him victory in battle.”52 This singularity strenghtens the parallels with the warrior attributes of Baal in Ugarit and his special commitment to the king.53 Consequently, it is not surprising to see Psalm 18 so frequently approached as a case-study for advocating an early identity of YHWH as a storm god.54 Let’s now examine the likelihood of this premise. Storm and Chaoskampf in Psalm 18 The fundamental element promoting a storm-god identity of YHWH in Psalm 18 is the theophany exposed in verses 8-16 leading to divine intervention for protecting the king (vv. 17-19). 8 Then the earth overflowed (‫ )ותרעש‬and quaked; the foundations also of the   mountains trembled;   They overflowed (‫ )ויתגעשו‬because he was enflamed.

51

M. KLINGBEIL 1999, 74. S. SHNIDER 2006, 398. For Steven SHNIDER (2006, 394), the king-god relationship extends considerably, here, through the parallel stressed between the divine theophany (vv. 816) and the king fighting his enemies (vv. 30-43). Since the content of Psalm 18 ensures the divine protection to the king, Leonard MARÉ (2010, 102) even deduced that “... the psalm was probably utilized by a succession of Davidic kings in various liturgical settings, including the great festivals.” 53 P. CRAIGIE 1983, 173-174; M. SMITH 2002 (1990), 56; A. GREEN 2003, 269-271; L. MARÉ 2010, 106-108; A. GRAY 2014, 83. 54 C. CROUCH 2011, 263; M. STAHL 2020, 7. 52

38

CHAPTER 2 9 Smoke

went up from his nostrils, and devouring fire from his mouth;   Glowing coals flamed forth from him. 10 He bowed (‫ )ויט‬the heavens and came down;   Thick darkness was under his feet. 11 He rode on a cherub and flew;   He came swiftly (‫ )וידא‬on the wings of the wind. 12 He made darkness his covering, his canopy around him (‫;)סביבותיו‬   Dark water (‫ )השכת מים‬in thick clouds. 13 Out of the brightness (‫ )מנגה‬before him   The clouds passed, hailstones and coals of fire. 14 YHWH thundered in the heavens, The Most High uttered his voice (‫;)קלו‬   Hailstones and coals of fire. 15 And he sent out his arrows and scattered them;   He multiplied lightning and dispersed them. 16 Then the channels of the sea were seen,   And the foundations of the world were laid bare   At your rebuke (‫)מגערתך‬, YHWH,   At the blast of the breath of your nostrils (‫)רוח אפך‬.

This section of Psalm 18 is approached as a “vivid description of YHWH’s violent storm theophany”, including references to convulsions of the earth (v. 8) and dark storm clouds surrounding the god (vv. 10, 12).55 The voice of YHWH thundering in the sky (v. 14) concurs, especially once combined with the divine supremacy advanced by his appellation as Elyion. Further attributes, such as the combination between arrows and lightning (v. 15), or the ability to split the waters (v. 16), are easily interpreted in the context of the storm-god theophany. Finally, the image of YHWH ‘riding’ on a cherub, in verse 11, might describe YHWH on a winged-cloud chariot. This would parallel Baal as a cloud-rider (rkb ῾rpt) in the Ugarit literature.56 Whereas the storm is undoubtedly a component of the theophany in Psalm 18, it does not necessarily transform YHWH into a storm god. Identifying a Chaoskampf dimension is therefore important for in this interpretation. Many scholars identified a Chaoskampf in Psalm 18, and especially in the section devoted to YHWH’s theophany (vv. 8-16).57 Dennis Sylva even includes Psalm 18 among the five songs expressing the Chaoskampf motif 55

M. STAHL 2020, 7. L. MARÉ 2010, 107; C. STRINE and C. CROUCH 2013, 885; A. GRAY 2014, 88. However, this homology emanates from a parallel between the cherub in Psalm 18 and the clouds in Baal mythology. This approach is valid if YHWH identifies with Baal in this song, but not as evidence demonstrating it. See O. KEEL 1997, 214. 57 M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:108; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 173-174; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 260-261; O. KEEL and C. UEHLINGER 1998, 215; M. KLINGBEIL 1999, 73; L. MARÉ 2010, 106, 108; C. STRINE and C. CROUCH 2013, 885; W. BRUEGGEMANN and W. BELLINGER 2014, 97; R. MÜLLER 2017, 213-221. 56

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

39

in the Psalter.58 However, unlike in the three ‘Chaoskampf psalms’ examined above (Psalms 74, 77, 89), no struggle with a mythic monster or with the sea is explicit in Psalm 18. This deed is deduced from the moving of the water laying bare the earth’s fundaments, in verse 16, interpreted as an allusion to the creation of the dry land after vanquishing a sea monster.59 However, no reference to such a mythic animal or any conflicting natural element is visible in the preceding verses. Alternately, the Chaoskampf is deduced from the conflicting vocabulary introduced in the description of the theophany.60 However, this singularity may also refer to the global context of war against the king’s enemies, especially in light of the parallels stressed in Psalm 18 between YHWH’s theophany and the king’s combat.61 Indications pointing towards a Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 18 are therefore only allusive and result from a triad of indirect shreds of evidence: (i) the reference to a storm in the section devoted to YHWH’s theophany, (ii) the description of YHWH as a warrior, and (iii) the reaction of the natural elements to YHWH’s theophany. In such a situation, the Chaoskampf approach of Psalm 18 is tenable only if nothing in the text of this song explicitly challenges or denies this interpretation. The challenging evidences The storm god fights against a monster in the Chaoskampf epic, but he does not identify with it in any way. The two protagonists constantly remain well-differentiated and separated. But this situation is not observed in Psalm 18. In verse 9, the mention of smoke and fire emanating from YHWH’s nostrils and mouth is not a feature characterizing the storm-god iconography. Even in the Bible, this attribute is attached to the Leviathan, the mythic sea monster producing smoke from its nostrils and fire and glowing coals from its mouth (Job 41:10-12). The description of YHWH in Ps 18:9 curiously recalls the figure of the arch-enemy of the storm god.62 58

D. SYLVA 2011, 244. H-J. KRAUS 1988, 260; C. STRINE and C. CROUCH 2013, 885. 60 L. MARÉ 2010, 106. 61 P. CRAIGIE 1983, 173-174; M. SMITH 2002 (1990), 56. Carly CROUCH (2011, 264) even concluded that “YHWH’s coronation as king and his actions as creator are predicated on his military victory over the chaotic forces which threaten the Universe.” These parallels even introduce another problem. The enemies of the psalmist are worshippers of YHWH in Psalm 18. This point is explicit in verse 42: “They cried for help, but there was none to save; they cried to YHWH, but he did not answer them.” Unlike the Baal or storm god mythology, Psalm 18 focuses on a religious conflict between two brother groups. It reflects a struggle for authority and legitimacy as servants of YHWH, a very different context from the wars of conquest conducted by Baal’s servants. 62 In the Enuma Elish (ii, 246-252), Humbaba, the guardian of the forest cedar and enemy of Morduk, breathes fire and smoke. 59

40

CHAPTER 2

Identifying YHWH as a dragon deity in Psalm 18 then challenges the idea of Chaoskampf in this hymn63. It even challenges the interpretation of YHWH as a storm god. As an isolated claim, verse 9 recalls the description of a dragon. But following the mountain earthquakes mentioned in verse 8, it better recalls the crater of an erupting volcano. It is why scholars have long identified a volcanic theophany of YHWH in Psalm 18.64 Here, the double use of the verb g῾š (= to flow up) in verse 8 fits the lava flowing from an erupting volcano. Even the poetic description of a divine fiery ‘mouth’ (v. 9) matches the crater of an active volcano. The causality stressed in verse 8 between the earthquake and the divine heating (‫ )כי חרה לו‬concurs. Volcanism is in no way an essential attribute of the storm god in the ancient Near East, so that a volcanic theophany challenges identifying YHWH as a storm god in Psalm 18. The simplest solution is to assume that the theophany of YHWH does not follow logical rules, so that it may encompass any outstanding phenomenon used to illustrate his coming and intervention.65 However, it undermines any ability to investigate the early nature of YHWH. Alternately, scholars have suggested the gathering of two traditions in Ps 18:8-16. The first one (YHWH as a volcanic deity, vv. 8-9) becomes a southern tradition originating from the volcanic field of Western Arabia, and the other one, of northern origin, identifies YHWH as a storm god in verses 10-16.66 However, a combination of these two contrasting theophanies (destructive in vv. 8-9 and preserving the created universe in vv. 10-16) can hardly integrate any unified interpretation of Psalm 18. Another problem threatens the fundaments of this interpretation. Verse 13 mentions hailstones and coals of fire. This latter element has nothing to do with storms, but it fits the description of molten lava, the pyroclasts emitted 63 T. CARTLEDGE 2001, 653; G. WILSON 2002, 341; L. MARÉ 2010, 107; B. KIM and C. TRIMM 2014, 169-172. 64 Concerning the volcanic character of this description, see J. KOENIG 1966, 5, 25; E. LESLIE 1956, 260; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 260; O. KEEL 1997, 218. 65 Regarding this crux, Hans-Joachim KRAUS (1988, 261) concludes that “In many respects, the theophany descriptions of the OT still represent an impenetrable problem.” 66 J. JEREMIAS 1965, 34-36; T. MANN 1971, 16-17; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 260-261; O. KEEL 1997, 217-218. Their combination became interpreted as the survival of a vestigial southCanaanite tradition of volcanic theophany in a religious universe conditioned by YHWH’s storm-god dimension and adapted to the Israelite agricultural reality. For Leonard MARÉ (2010, 111), the blending of these contrasting realities even emphasizes the supernatural character of the divine intervention. Alternately, the description of the devouring fire and smoke emanating from the ‘mouth’ and ‘nose’ of YHWH respectively (v. 9) became interpreted as a figuration of YHWH as a dragon deity. See G. WILSON 2002, 431; B. KIM and C. TRIMM 2014, 169-173; R. MÜLLER 2017, 214-215.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

41

from the crater of a volcano in eruption. The combination of both phenomena (‫ )ברד וגחלי אש‬is reiterated in verse 14, confirming the importance of this singular conjunction for understanding the theophany and its significance. It challenges the assumption of two distinct traditions gathered in Psalm 18.67 Already in 1926, George Franklin identified in these verses the description of wet volcanism, a phenomenon in which volcanic eruptions provoke violent storms around the crater.68 The singularities of the storm in Psalm 18 support this interpretation. First, the occurrence of the storm (vv. 10-15) after the volcanic eruption (vv. 8-9) matches the sequence of events observed in wet volcanism. Furthermore, the rainfall of dark water (‫)חשכת מים‬, in verse 12, is consistent with the mixing of water and volcanic ash typical of rain in wet volcanism. The intense source of light in verse 13 fits the fiery radiance emanating from the top of an erupting volcano, visible even during the violent rainfall. The mix of hail and ‘coals of fire’ (‫)גחלי אש‬, in verses 13-14, reflects the simultaneous fall of hail and pyroclasts, a phenomenon exclusively observed in wet volcanism.69 The mention, in verse 15, of YHWH scattering (‫ )ויפיצם‬his lightning fits the emission of bolts and lightning from the crater of an erupting volcano, where YHWH’s presence is previously identified (v. 9). Even the final verse where sources of water become visible fits the intense drying consecutive to the emission of hot, dry gases from volcanoes. In conclusion, the reference to wet volcanism accounts for all the singularities of the theophany described in verses 8–16 and should be preferred to all the interpretations denying the unity of the text. The storm god and Chaoskampf readings of Psalm 18 survived these explanations. But this choice is conjectural rather than founded on observations.70 John Day exposes the arguments motivating the primacy of the 67 Alison GRAY (2014, 94) tries to resolve the crux in interpreting the coals of fire as a mere expression of divine anger. By extension, she denies a volcanic theophany in verses 8-9 in interpreting the fiery mouth and smoking nostrils as other expressions of this divine anger (p. 84). However, the combination of volcanic details in verses 8 and 9 challenges a figurative interpretation of ‫ אף‬as anger in verse 9. See N. AMZALLAG (2017a, 2018a). 68 George FRANKLIN (1926, 189) concluded: “Faut-il se méprendre sur le sens de cette description? Il s’agit bien d’une éruption volcanique, avec la plupart de ses manifestations: ténèbres envahissantes, nuées épaisses poussées en tourbillon, les flammes qui embrasent, la grêle, des pierres incandescentes, un raz de marée, et même l’orage avec les éclairs et tonnerres qui accompagnent généralement ce paroxysme de la nature.” 69 It is noteworthy, too, that hail, instead of rain, generally accompanies a volcanic eruption. Hail, instead of small ice crystals, is generated by the rapid elevation of wet air with hot gas emitted from the crater. 70 Alternative interpretations exist, however. For example, Aloysius FITZGERALD (2002, 92) identifies the natural phenomenon associated with YHWH, in Psalm 18, as a sirocco of outstanding intensity. Steven SHNIDER (2006, 390) suggests that the theophany in Psalm 18

42

CHAPTER 2

storm god and Chaoskampf readings of Psalm 18: “I maintain strongly that the theophany is simply in the storm, involving lightning and thunder, and that we should not also see here allusions to volcanic phenomena. That we do not have volcanic allusions here is supported by the fact that so far as we know, nowhere else in the ancient near east are volcanic features attested in theophanies, the manifestations rather being in the storm and earthquake.”71 This opinion reveals that the storm god interpretation is fed by the assumption that the religion of Israel, in its origin, likened that of its neighbors. It ignores the reference to volcanism in Psalm 18 and in many other songs from the Psalter.72 This examination reveals that the description of the storm, even in the context of theophany, does not necessarily promote YHWH’s storm-god identity. It shows that the similitudes in the storm descriptions with the Ugarit literature may advance misleading parallels between YHWH and Baal. Also, the peripheral indications of a storm-god identity may be misleading. In Psalm 18, YHWH is the protector of the royal dynasty independent of any storm-god identity. The same is true concerning his warrior attributes and those of the king.73 These motifs cannot then represent indirect pieces of evidence promoting a storm god and Chaoskampf interpretation of these psalms. Finally, the volcanic theophany and mode of action in Psalm 18 reveal that YHWH is not necessarily approached in the Bible as the warrant of order fighting against the forces of chaos. Rather, he may himself promote a return of the creation, or parts of it, to a pre-organized stage. 3.2. Psalm 46 Psalm 46 is generally presented as a song of Zion articulated around the Chaoskampf motif.74 The mention of mountains collapsing into the sea refers to YHWH standing in a winged disc similar to those found in the neo-Assyrian and Egyptian iconography. Both eventualities challenge the storm-god identity of YHWH in Psalm 18. 71 J. DAY 1985, 125. 72 J. KOENIG 1966. As Othmar KEEL (1997, 217) observes, “Volcanic phenomena [...] were apparently regarded as manifestations of YHWH from the very beginning. In the psalms, they serve as visualizations of the appearance of YHWH.” 73 In ancient Egypt, for example, the ureaus, a serpent icon devoid of any storm-god connotation, was the symbol of royalty. It was also the animal conferring strength and victory at war to the Pharaoh. Interestingly, this power was frequently identified as a fiery breath, transforming the king himself into a dragon-like creature. See B. KIM and C. TRIMM 2014, 168. 74 H. GUNKEL 1988 (1933), 22, 55-57; B. OLLENBURGER 1987, 16. This genre is also supposed to include Psalms 48, 76, 84, 87 and 122.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

43

(and in the slipping of mountains into the depth of the seas, v. 3) and other cataclysmic events (vv. 4, 7, 9) led scholars to identify a cosmic fight between YHWH and the primeval forces of chaos threatening the organized universe.75 The mention of YHWH interrupting wars and their disorders (“The bow he breaks and he has cut asunder the spear, Chariots he will burn with fire”, v. 10) became an extension to the human societies of the divine fight against chaos.76 The theme of YHWH as the refuge and ‘help in adversity’ (v. 2) even transforms Psalm 46 into a hymn praising Zion’s stability in a universe still threatened by the destructive power of chaos.77 In a recent paper, Ki-Min Bang proposed a historical support for the Chaoskampf motif in the form of the strong earthquake that affected the Southern Levant in the mid-eight century BC (mentioned in Amos 1:1).78 As the epicenter of the earthquake was localized to the northern part of Israel’s kingdom, the kingdom of Judah and Jerusalem were preserved better than the northern kingdom and its cities. Therefore, Psalm 46 becomes a hymn praising YHWH for fighting against the forces of chaos, here identified with an ‘earth monster’, and protecting Jerusalem and its temple from destruction.79 This interpretation shows how the Chaoskampf motif is plastic in biblical studies, and how an earth monster promoting chaos and destruction may easily replace the sea monster. However, the destruction is not attributed to any earth monster in Psalm 46, but to YHWH himself. For example, the expression “[He] Will shake mountains by his power” (v. 4) refers to YHWH as the source of the cataclysm, not the protector of the world against chaotic powers of destruction. The parallel between the fall of mountains (v. 4) and the fall of kingdoms (v. 7), both stimulated by YHWH, confirms this particular feature.80 It is also noteworthy that the cataclysms and disorders are not 75 See for example A. MAILLOT and A. LELIÈVRE 1962, 291; S. KELLY 1970, 306; A. ANDERSON 1972, 1:356; L. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1981, 418; E. GERSTENBERGER 1988, 192; J-M. SCHÄDER 2010, 145-147. This psalm has been paralleled with Ps 74:13-16, where YHWH shatters the sea monster’s head. 76 S. MOWINCKEL 1967, 1:151-152. 77 S. KELLY 1970, 308; R. WATSON 2005, 135; P. VAN DER LUGT 2010, 45. By extension, Jerusalem becomes the nucleus of stability from which YHWH’s peace and order expand to the whole earth. See H. GUNKEL 1903; 1988 (1933) 57; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 496-499. 78 K-M. BANG 2017, 81-84. Concerning this earthquake, its epicenter and amplitude, see S. AUSTIN et al., 2000. 79 Ki-Min BANG (2017, 85) concludes that “All three parts of Ps 46 describe an earthquake at approximately 750 BCE and God’s battle against the earth monster behind the earthquake.” 80 D. TSUMURA 1980.

44

CHAPTER 2

deplored in Psalm 46. Rather, they actually seem to be a source of joy for the psalmist.81 These observations signify that Psalm 46 is not a hymn of Zion praising the storm god for vanquishing the forces of chaos, as generally assumed.82 Nor is it a song commemorating any famous military victory. In fact, the divine salvation of Jerusalem from any other form of destruction is not the central theme at all. Instead, in this poem, YHWH is praised for his overwhelming power of destruction of the organized world. Like in Psalm 18, a volcanic dimension seems to exist in Psalm 46. It is visible in verse 7, where the voice of YHWH provokes melting: “He uttered his voice, let be melted (‫ )תמוג‬the earth” (v. 7).83 The volcanism is present also in verse 3, where the poet refers to YHWH triggering the collapse of mountains into the sea, a description recalling a caldera event.84 Also, the destruction evoked in verse 9 by ‫ שמות‬particularly fits the vast desolation caused by volcanism. This praise of the volcanic, all-destructive powers of YHWH challenges the reading of Psalm 46 through the lens of the Baal mythology, where this dimension is absent. It also reveals how isolated hints of Chaoskampf are insufficient for conditioning the interpretation of the whole song, and for inverting the way YHWH is praised there. 3.3. Nahum 1:2-10 The opening oracle in Nahum (Nah 1:2-10) is a piece of poetry classically integrated into the biblical sources advocating the Chaoskampf motif in the Bible and YHWH’s early identity as a storm god. For example, Theodore Gaster integrates this oracle among the biblical sources (Isa 51:9-11; Ps 74:13-14; 89:9-10) exposing the Chaoskampf motif in the Bible.85 Other scholars identify a Chaoskampf motif in Nah1:2-10 in 81 Erhard GERSTENBERGER (1988, 192) noticed this singularity: “Strangely enough for our way of reasoning, vv. 5-6, flanked as they are by battle and victory, express joy and trust.” See also P. RAABE 1989, 55. This joy and trust are visible in verse 5 and especially in verse 9, where the parallelism of members identifies the destructive actions (‫ )שמות‬as the great works of YHWH (‫)מפעלות‬. 82 N. AMZALLAG 2015a. 83 N. AMZALLAG 2015a, 30-32. This point is noted by M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:281, and A. HAKHAM 1990, 1:266. 84 This cataclysm occurred at Thera during the middle of the second millennium BCE. See W. FRIEDRICH 2000, 67-81. This outstanding event was probably echoed in Canaan, accounting for the cultural relations between Thera and the East Mediterranean coast in the Middle Bronze Age. See A. RABAN 1984. 85 T. GASTER 1977 [1950], 142-145.

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

45

light of the parallels with the theophany in Psalms 29 and 97.86 Furthermore, the Chaoskampf reading of Nah 1:2-10 is especially deduced from its parallels with the theophany described in Ps 18:8-16.87 The approach of Psalm 18 exposed here invites us to re-examine the content of Nah 1:210, and the nature of the arguments promoting the Chaoskampf reading. 2 YHWH

is a zealous (‫ )קנוא‬and avenging God (‫;)אל‬   YHWH is avenging and wrathful (‫;)ובעל חמה‬   YHWH takes vengeance on his adversaries   And keeps wrath for his enemies. 88 3 YHWH is long in tuyeres (‫ )ארך אפים‬and great in power,   and YHWH will by no means clear the guilty.   His way is in whirlwind and storm (‫)בסופה ובשערה‬,   And clouds are the dust of his feet. 89 4 He blows (‫ )גוער‬on the sea and makes it dry;   He dries up all the rivers;   Bashan and Carmel wither;   The bloom of Lebanon withers. 5 The mountains quake (‫ )רעשו‬before him;   The hills melt (‫;)התמגגו‬   The earth lifts up (‫ )תשא‬before him,   The world and all who dwell in it. 6 Who can stand before his indignation?   Who can endure the heat of his tuyere (‫?)חרון אפו‬90   His heat (‫ )חמתו‬is poured out like fire,   And the rocks are broken into pieces (‫ )נתצו‬by him. 7 YHWH is good, A stronghold in the day of trouble;   He knows those who take refuge in him. 86 See J. DAY 1985, 61; K. BARKER and W. BAILEY 1998, 165; D. SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE 2015, 86, concerning the affinities with Psalm 29, and K. SPRONK (1997, 27) for affinities with 97. 87 K. SPRONK 1997, 38; J. O’BRIEN 2009, 39. More specifically, Kevin CATHCART (1973, 48) stresses the interference between Nah 1:4 and Ps 18:16. Duane CHRISTENSEN (2009, 182) traces the similarities between Nah 1:3 and Ps 18:10. 88 The expression ‫ ארך אפים‬is generally translated as “slow to anger”, like in Ex 34:6. However, even there, the image of long nostrils does not easily figurates divine patience and mercy. See N. AMZALLAG 2017a. Furthermore, the general context in Nahum 1 is not of divine patience, but rather of an imminent divine intervention through a volcanic eruption. It is why the alternative interpretation of appayim as tuyeres fits the volcanic context of this theophany (see below), because volcanism was in antiquity approached as a giant furnacelike process, in which the god blows intensely. See P. RICHET 2007. Here the poet claims probably that the long tuyeres of YHWH and his great blowing power enable him to reach everyone so that no one may hope to escape his vengeance. 89 The verb ‫ גער‬followed by the preposition ‫ב‬, in this verse, better fits the translation as to blast than to rebuke. See T. LONGMAN III 1993, 789; D. CHRISTENSEN 2009, 183. 90 The noun ‫ אף‬here has apparently a double meaning. It expresses a feeling parallel to indignation, but it also designates the divine tuyere by which YHWH blasts. See N. AMZALLAG 2018a.

46

CHAPTER 2

with an overflowing flood (‫)ובשטף עבר‬,   He will make a complete end of the adversaries;   And will pursue his enemies into darkness.

8 But

The Chaoskampf reading Unlike in the Chaoskampf psalms, there is no explicit reference in Nah 1:2-10 to any mythic struggle with the sea or a monster. The conflict is deduced from the mention of YHWH drying the sea in verse 4. Also the reference to both the sea (Yam) and the river (Nahar) in this verse recalls their pairing in the Baal mythology from Ugarit.91 Most scholars assume that Nah 1:2-10 expresses a storm theophany with allusions to a mythic struggle.92 The reference to a whirlwind, storm and cloud in verse 3 is compatible with this premise. Additionally, the reference to the clouds as ‘dust of YHWH’s feet’ may echo the Baal attribute of cloud rider (rkb ῾rpt) in Ugarit, while the flood related in verse 8 advances a storm-god identity of YHWH. In this context, the verb ‫התמגגו‬ (hitpael mwg) in verse 5 becomes a metaphor expressing the panic of the natural elements when faced with YHWH’s theophany.93 Alternately, it is a poetic image expressing the flow of water consecutive to abundant rain.94 Beyond these indications, YHWH’s warlike character in this text likens the Baal essential attribute of divine warrior in the Ugarit mythology. Finally, scholars identified in the appellation of YHWH as ‫ בעל חמה‬in verse 2 an intentional reference to the god Baal. They stress that the Canaanite ascendant even extends through the reference to El in the same verse.95 As with Psalm 29, the affinities with the Baal theophany yielded the assumption that Nah 1:2-10 represents the naturalization by the Israelites of a hymn initially devoted to Baal, praising his storm and warrior attributes.96 91 J. DAY 1985, 61; T. LONGMAN III 1993, 792; K. SPRONK 1997, 39; J. O’BRIEN 2009, 39; D. CHRISTENSEN 2009, 182. For Debra SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE (2015, 86), Nah 1:2-10 “...resembles descriptions in Pss 93, 29 and 65, which refer to YHWH’s voice being superior to the sea’s voice or waves, and especially Nah 1: 3b-5, in which YHWH rebukes the sea during a storm theophany.” Such a drying event has also a demiurgic connotation, the dry land being generally envisioned in the ancient Near East as emerging from the sea’s withdrawal, frequently following mythic combat. In the Enuma Elish, for example, Marduk creates the dry land after vanquishing Tiamat, the sea monster, and splitting her body. 92 See for example T. LONGMAN III 1993, 791; K. SPRONK 1997, 38-39; K. BARKER and W. BAILEY 1997, 173; D. CHRISTENSEN 2009, 182. 93 K. CATHCART 1973, 51-52; T. LONGMAN III 1993, 792. 94 K. SPRONK 2009, 42; D. CHRISTENSEN 2009, 187-188. 95 K. CATHCART 1973, 41; D. CHRISTENSEN 2009, 179. For Kenneth BARKER and Waylon BAILEY (1997, 166), the reference to YHWH, Baal and El in the same verse is an intentional device referring to the Canaanite pantheon. 96 T. GASTER 1977 [1950], 143. John GRAY (1956, 280) assumes also that Nah 1:2-10 (and even the whole Book of Nahum) originate from the Israelite liturgy of the so-called

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

47

The challenging interpretation Like in Psalms 18, 29 and 46, the Chaoskampf perspective in Nah 1:210 is not devoid of problems. For example, verse 4 (with the presumed reference to the Chaoskampf motif) mentions the drying and destruction of vegetation, an unusual effect for a storm god. Furthermore, the perfect tense of the verbs, in verse 4, fits a present rather than past action. Further exegetical efforts are necessary for integrating the combination, in verses 56, of an earthquake, the lifting up of mountains and their explosion – all associated with fire – in the context of a storm theophany. For example, the abnormal tense verbs in verse 4 became a wish for the poet to actualize the theme of “subjugation of the water” for expressing the divine power in the present time.97 The extensive destruction on the earth stimulated by YHWH became the expression of a mythic conflict with the dry land, perpetuating the conflict between Baal and Mot in the Ugarit mythology.98 Alternately, scholars advocated that traces of a mythic struggle with a primordial mountain are visible in the Bible, and assume its expression both in Nah 1:2-10 and in Psalm 46.99 However, all these interpretations introduce a series of ad hoc hypotheses which substantially weaken the Chaoskampf reading. This situation may explain why alternative interpretations were proposed. The destruction of the vegetation became an expression of YHWH’s struggle against Baal.100 The reference to a collapse of the mountains became interpreted as a way to advance the idea that nothing is stable in the world, out of the fear of YHWH.101 The drying of the sea and river were regarded as allusions to the miracle of the Sea and of the crossing of the Jordan River.102 Alternately, the wonders attached to YHWH became approached New Year Festival. Like in Psalm 29, the opposite view is also defended, arguing that the Israelites integrated the Baal attribute to YHWH’s figure for their own purposes. Tremper LONGMANN III (1993, 791) assumes that “The biblical psalmists and prophets appropriated this Baal imagery and applied it to YHWH in order to make clear particularly to the apostate Israelites within their midst, that YHWH and not Baal was the rider of the clouds who controlled weather and war.” 97 T. LONGMANN III 1993, 792. Similarly, for John DAY (1985, 61), “God’s conflict with the sea in v. 4a would seem to be alluding to his present power over the chaotic sea within the world of nature, in view of the context, as in Ps 29: 3, 10.” These arguments may help us understand the use of the Chaoskampf motif in Nahum 1, but they cannot support such a reading. 98 J. GRAY 1961, 16. 99 M. WAKEMAN 1969. 100 D. CHRISTENSEN 2009, 184. 101 T. LONGMAN III 1993, 793. 102 K. BARKER and W. BAILEY 1997, 174. The theophany has even been approached as the blowing of dry, hot wind, a sirocco of exceptional intensity. See A. FITZGERALD 2002, 35.

48

CHAPTER 2

as miracles, that is, some unique expressions of the overwhelming power of the deity.103 This status exonerates us from looking for any material reality beyond the descriptions, and for its significance concerning the divine essential attributes, theophany and modus operandi. Like in Psalm 46, YHWH is in Nahum 1 the source of chaos, disorders and blind destructions on the earth. The same image of a local stronghold in this chaotic universe is emphasized in both (Ps 46:8, 12; Nah 1:7). In Psalm 46, this view refers to a volcanic theophany of YHWH. A similar reality is identifiable in Nah 1:2-10, where all the successive phases of a volcanic eruption are visible.104 The first stage of a volcanic eruption is the emission of a cloud of ash accompanied by atmospheric perturbations (v. 3b). At the same time, a massive release of hot gases from the crater dries both ponds of water and the evergreen vegetation (v. 4). These preliminaries are accompanied by earthquakes (v. 5a) provoked by the increasing pressure of the underground gases and molten lava. The molten lava filling the crater follows this explosion, giving the illusion that the mountain melts (v. 5). The lava flows out of the crater, accompanied with an explosion of pyroclasts and stones (v. 6). It spreads on the ground, provoking extensive destruction (v. 8). Even the reference to tuyeres, in verses 3 and 6, is meaningful in the volcanic context because volcanism was approached in antiquity as a metallurgical-like activity. Issued from divine blasting on the top of a mountain, it was supposed to transform stones into lava, like blasting on a furnace transforms silicates into slag.105 A volcanic perspective, unlike all the alternative interpretations, is able to account for all the descriptions and even for their sequential order. It is also the only explanation preserving the primary meaning of the root mwg (= to melt) in 5a. For all these reasons, the volcanic interpretation of YHWH’s theophany should be preferred to the Chaoskampf, storm god and the alternative readings currently proposed. This conclusion implies that YHWH in Nah 1:2-10 is not described as the god defending the created universe from the forces of destruction. At best, like in Psalm 46, it specifies that islands of stability may exist in this volcanic return to chaos, and that these shelters are not randomly scattered on the Earth, but preserve the rightful and sincere worshippers from destruction. 103

Ibid., 175. The volcanic dimension of this theophany is exposed in J. KOENIG 1964, 219-220. 105 For example, the anonymous poet of the Aetna (first century CE) even identifies erupting volcanoes as great furnaces with sulfur and bitumen serving as fuel, and whose fire was boosted by the bellow-action of winds. This opinion is defended by Hesiod, Aristotle, Seneca and others. See P. RICHET 2007, 201-203; M. GARANI 2009, 104-110. 104

THE COMBAT MYTH IN PSALM 29

49

4. THE RESTRICTED CHAOSKAMPF PERSPECTIVE A few years ago, Eric Ortlund argued that “...the binding of theophany and the divine defeat of chaos is so widespread in Hebrew poetry that any occurrence of a theophany in a poetic context without such conflict leaps out by contrast [...] In light of these considerations, one could legitimately describe theophany in the Psalms and Prophets as the visible and direct appearance of YHWH as he defeats the powers of chaos.”106 This claim leaves few doubts concerning the early identity of YHWH as a storm god, and the interpretation of Psalm 29 in such a context. However, the present overview reveals a more complicated situation. Though the Chaoskampf motif is explicit in a few songs (Psalms 74, 77, 89), the mere mention of the sea, rivers, or earthquakes does not ensure the motif’s presence in others. Similarly, an examination of Psalms 18, 46, and Nah 1:2-10 reveals that even the explicit combination of storm, thunder, lightning and flood with destruction does not necessarily warrant the expression of the Chaoskampf motif. A volcanic theophany may also include all these elements without referring to the Chaoskampf or storm-god imagery. Though they express similar elements, the volcanic and Chaoskampf motifs carry opposed messages concerning the deity. Further contrasting situations concerning the figure of YHWH exist in the Bible. For example, the enmity between YHWH and the mythic serpentine monster, exposed in the ‘Chaoskampf psalms’, contrasts with the positive relationship between YHWH and the serpent identified in other pieces of poetry. For example, Psalm 104:26 and Job 40:25-41:26 claim that YHWH created the sea monsters for his enjoyment. In Ps 148:7, the poet confirms that the dragons (‫ )תנינים‬and the chaotic depths (‫)תהומות‬ praise YHWH.107 These conclusions have many consequences for the analysis of Psalm 29. The lack of explicit reference to the mythic combat does not exclude a Chaoskampf dimension in this psalm. However, the distance from the Chaoskampf interpretation of Psalms 18, 46, and Hab 1:2-10, all songs frequently compared with Psalm 29, indicates that this interpretation might be erroneous in its concern. This is especially relevant because 106

E. ORTLUND 2010, 2-3. Similarly, the emergence of great sea dragons (‫ )תנינים הגדולים‬in the fifth day of creation is positively considered in Gen 1:21. As stressed by David TSUMURA (2005, 143), the semantic closeness between tehom in Genesis 1 and Tiamat, the chaos monster defeated by Morduk in the Enuma Elish, aims first of all for their common etymological origin from the protosemitic *tihām rather than from any borrowing of Akkadian tales by the biblical authors. 107

50

CHAPTER 2

the overwhelming destruction conducted by the god (Ps 29:5, 9) is not consecutive to any divine anger. It is not the side-effect of any struggle with the forces of chaos or any other mythic arch-enemy.108 Consequently, clarifying whether or not the Chaoskampf motif and the storm-god theophany are expressed in Psalm 29 requires more than listing allusions to them and looking for rhetoric arguments neutralizing the challenging observations. At this current stage of the investigation, we may conclude that the Chaoskampf motif does not provide the support required for an interpretation of YHWH as a storm god in this hymn.

108 Rather, as Norman HABEL and Geraldine AVENT (2001, 43) concluded, “A close reading of the psalm, however, reveals that there is no specific enemy, either historical or mythic, no battle, no acclamation of YHWH as a warrior (as in Exod. 15.3) and no mountain as the spoil of victory (as in Exod. 15.17).”

CHAPTER 3

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH Mentioned seven times between verses 3 and 9, the voice of YHWH is the main motif of the hymnic core of Psalm 29. It is why identifying the nature of this vocal theophany determines the way this hymn should be interpreted. Until now, the voice of YHWH was systematically approached in the context of storm theophany, a feature leading to a representation of YHWH as storm god in this hymn. This approach was justified by the parallel with the thundering voice of Baal in the Ugarit mythology.1 The premise of a hymn entirely devoted to the thundering voice of a storm god is not devoid of fundaments. The thunderstorm is an impressive phenomenon, accompanied with other outstanding features, such as bolt and lightning. Issued from the heavens, it was in the past spontaneously considered of divine origin. Clearly, the omnipotence of YHWH, in the Bible, spontaneously integrates the thunderstorm into the divine sphere of action. However, this gathering does not necessarily transform the storm into an essential attribute of YHWH, a means by which the god of Israel self-reveals. Like concerning the Chaoskampf motif, some biblical authors might approach the thunderstorm as the vocal theophany of YHWH, whereas others exclude this eventuality for associating the voice of YHWH with further phenomena. In such a case, the storm-god reading of Psalm 29 cannot be merely deduced from the thunderstorm expression of the voice of YHWH in some biblical sources. It cannot anymore be argued exclusively on the basis of Psalm 29:3, where the voice of YHWH is the subject of the verb r῾m (hif.), the meaning of which (= to roar, to thunder, or to produce a loud and powerful sound) promotes the idea of storm theophany in this hymn.2 It is why the phenomena associated with the vocal theophany should be identified before examining the seven mentions of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29.

1 KTU 1.4 v 8-9; 1.4 vii 29,31; 1.5 v 7. See for example F. FENSHAM 1963, 89; M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:176; P. CRAIGIE 1972, 169. 2 HALOT, 3:1267.

52

CHAPTER 3

1. THE THUNDERSTORM DIMENSION OF YHWH’S VOICE 1.1. The Elihu discourse in Job The Elihu speech (Job 36-37) devotes a special attention to rain and its control by YHWH (Job 36:26-37:24). There, Elihu advocates that YHWH produces rain, and even that he judges the earth through its distribution: “For by these he judges (‫ )ידין‬peoples, he gives food in abundance” (Job 36:31). Beyond these views, Elihu supplies details about the divine mode of action on rainfall. He explains that YHWH controls the filling of clouds with water (Job 36:27-28), and that he is involved in the production of lightning: “He covers his hands with thunderbolt/lightning (‫;)אור‬ and commands it to strike the mark (‫( ”)במפגיע‬Job 36:32). This description fits the classical imagery of the storm god with arrows/lightning or a thunderbolt, and their use for opening clouds for rainfall.3 The homology with storm gods extends through the mention of the “thunderings of his pavilion (‫( ”)תשאות סכתו‬Job 36:29b), identifiable with the heavenly tent from which the storm god conducts the atmospheric elements and initiates a storm.4 This speech does not only praise YHWH’s power over a storm, it also transforms this atmospheric phenomenon into his privileged manifestation, his theophany.5 In exposing the complexity of the atmospheric processes involved in rain production, Elihu assumes that the storm reveals the deep mysteries of YHWH and his modus operandi on the earth (Job 36:26-27,29; 37:6, 14-16).6 Clearly, YHWH looks like a storm god in this speech. He is described as the master of all rain and every storm, the god riding on the clouds and feeding the entire earth by this means (Job 36:29-31).7 We also learn that the fertility induced by storms is a means for YHWH to bless, to exert his justice and to rule over the whole earth (Job 37:12-13).8 In light of his Baallike representation, it is not surprising to see the thunder identified with YHWH’s theophany in this speech. This point is explicit in Job 36:33a (“Its crashing declares his presence”), and exposed in further details in Job 37:2-5: listening to the tumult of his voice (‫)ברגז קלו‬   And the rumbling that comes from his mouth.

2 Keep

3 4 5 6 7 8

D. CLINES 2006, 873; T. LONGMAN III 2012, 404. N. HABEL 1985, 511. A. LUC 2000, 122. N. HABEL 1985, 512-513; J. HARTLEY 1988, 482. J. HARTLEY 1988, 479-480. J. HARTLEY 1988, 481; R. MCCABE 1997, 64.

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

53

3  Under

the whole heaven he lets it go,   And his lightning to the ends of the earth. 4  After it, a voice (‫ )קול‬roars, he thunders (‫ )ירעם‬with the voice of his majesty,   And he does not restrain them when his voice is heard. 5  God thunders (‫ )ירעם‬wondrously with his voice;   He does great things that we cannot comprehend. 6  For to the snow he says, ‘Fall on the earth’, and the water rains (‫;)גשם מטר‬   The shower of his mighty rain.

In this text, an intensification of the voice of YHWH follows the gradual development of a storm. The diffuse roaring of a storm coming from far is identified as the preliminary expression of the voice of YHWH (v. 2) accompanied by lightning erupting far away (the ends of the earth) (v. 3). Thereafter, the thunder is explicitly approached as the voice of YHWH (vv. 4-5), and followed by violent rainfall (v.6). In the Elihu speech, thunder is the preferential (if not exclusive) expression of the voice of YHWH, promoting a representation of the god of Israel as a Baal-like storm god. 1.2. The divine voice in Job The question of the divine involvement on the earth is the central theme of the Book of Job. In this debate, the author advances opinions revealed as erroneous at the end of the book, when YHWH rejects the views of Job’s friends (Job 42:8). This divine discredit concerns only the opinion of the three elders; Elihu’s intervention and his representation of YHWH as a storm god being ignored here. However, the nature and style of the Elihu speeches (Job 32-37) leave few doubts about the author’s opinion concerning their content and theological relevancy. Today, many authors approach Elihu as a comic figure introduced in Job to debunk the theology defended in his speeches.9 If so, the author of Job might denounce the theology advancing a storm-god representation of YHWH and the idea of thunder theophany. Some aspects of YHWH’s speech (Job 38:1-42:8) corroborate this interpretation. First, unlike the storm god fighting the sea monster, the divine speech devotes a special importance to the Leviathan, the sea monster source of divine pride concerning his creation (Job 40:25-41:26). In Job 38:25-26, the divine speech also instructs us that thunderstorms are truly under divine control: 9

A. DAVIDSON and C. TOY, 1960; N. HABEL 1984; J. WHEDBEE 1990, 234-236; A. PELHAM 2010.

54

CHAPTER 3 25 Who

has cleft a channel for the torrents of rain? And a way for the thundery voices (‫?)לחזיז קלות‬ 26 To bring rain on a land where no man is? On the desert in which there is no man?

Verse 25 announces that YHWH controls and even channels the expression of the various components of storms, and it also identifies thunderstorms as ‘voices” (‫)קלות‬. However, two elements here introduce a distance between the thunderstorm and YHWH’s theophany. First, the thunderstorm is gathered with all other elements whose expression is guided by YHWH. It has no special importance or dimension of theophany. The second objection is the plural designating the thunder as ‘voices’, rather than the voice of YHWH expected if thunder is identified as YHWH’s theophany. This plural integrates the thunder into the many processes ruled by YHWH, through which the world exists. This view is confirmed in Job 28, where the author reveals how rain and thunder, in their expression, follow laws determined by YHWH from the time of creation: “When he gave to the wind its weight; and apportioned the waters by measure. When he made a law for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder” (Job 28:25-26). In this claim, thunder and rain reveal the wisdom of the creator determining the laws conditioning their expression, but this feature does not grant these atmospheric processes any theophanic dimension. Through the Elihu discourse, the Book of Job instructs us that the thunder was identified with the voice of YHWH by some people. However, the author of this book uses the divine speech to challenge this view and the correlated representation of YHWH as a storm god. 1.3. The voice as expression of divine control Job is a late book with numerous eccentric views on the Israelite theology. It is why the opinions exposed in Job cannot condition the interpretation of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29, probably composed many centuries before. After all, the voice of Elihu might express the old theology of Israel that the author of this book denounces and attempts to replace.10 In such a case, the storm-god representation of YHWH defended by Elihu might have been widespread in ancient Israel.11 10 Though the Elihu speech was considered in the past as a late addition, it is now approached by many authors as an integrative part of the book. See J. CURTIS 1989; A. STEINMANN 1996, p. 88 and ref therein; A. PELHAM 2010, 97. 11 For John CURTIS (1988), the figure of Elihu is introduced to denounce the mechanical view of divine justice characterizing the ‘theological bigots’ in ancient Israel. CURTIS even

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

55

However, the Book of Job is not the only source where YHWH’s involvement in storms is not interpreted as his vocal theophany. In Jer 10:12-13 (= Jer 51:15-16), the prophet explores the wonders of creation, and he devotes special attention to the divine involvement in rainfall: 12  It is he who made the earth by his power,   Who established the world by his wisdom,   And by his understanding stretched out the heavens. 13  He gives his voice (‫)לקול תתו‬, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens,   And rise the mist from the ends of the earth.   He makes lightning for the rain,   And brings forth the wind from his storehouses.

Here, YHWH is explicitly praised for stimulating storms. And again, we find the voice of YHWH involved in this phenomenon. But this text differs from the classical description of the storm god. Here, the voice of YHWH is concerned more with the early stages of cloud formation than the final stages of rainfall. YHWH’s voice is figured as giving order, and it symbolizes his control over the atmospheric elements leading to storms, rain and thunder. Though this description is generally interpreted in the classical context of storm-god theophany, an explicit identification of the thunderstorm as YHWH’s voice does not apply here. A similar conclusion stems from 1 Sam 12:18. There, Samuel invites YHWH to ‘give’ voices (‫ )קולות‬of thunder and rain from the sky: “Is it not wheat harvest today? I will call upon YHWH, that he may give voices and rain (‫)ויתן קלות ומטר‬. And you shall know and see that your wickedness is great, which you have done in the sight of YHWH, in asking for yourselves a king”. Here again, YHWH is clearly at the origin of the storm and rainfall. However, the call to ‘give’ thunder and rain differs from an invitation to YHWH to self-reveal through a storm. It instead recalls YHWH’s control over the storm mentioned in Jer 10:12-13. In Joel 4:16a, the future revelation of YHWH begins with the god ‘giving’ his voice from Jerusalem, whereas the immediate consequence is the quacking of both earth and heavens: “16 YHWH roars from Zion, and gives his voice (‫ )יתן קולו‬from Jerusalem, and quake (‫ )רעשו‬the heavens and the earth.” The storm dimension of this effect is confirmed two verses later, describing the exceptional fertility of the land consecutive to this divine intervention (v. 18). However, the image of YHWH operating from Zion suggests, here again, that his voice is not involved in every storm event concludes (1988, 98) that “Elihu is the reductio as absurdum of traditional theology. Once he has spoken, traditional dogma can no longer be defended.”

56

CHAPTER 3

or every instance of thunder. Rather, YHWH here operates on the earth from Jerusalem, in a fashion similar to the divine control over the storm in Jer 10:12-13. 1.4. Thunder without storm In the Song of Hanna, the poet mentions YHWH ‘thundering’ from heaven: “The adversaries of YHWH shall be broken to pieces; against them he will thunder (‫ )ירעם‬in heaven, YHWH will judge (‫ )ידין‬the ends of the earth; He will give strength to his king and exalt the horn of his anointed” (1 Sam 2:10). Though this description is compatible with an interpretation of YHWH’s voice as a thunderstorm, no storm is mentioned in the previous verses. Furthermore, there is no mention of a storm as weapon for divine justice in this song. Rather, the thunder seems to be disconnected from any storm or rainfall. The divine thunder in the Song of Hanna (1 Sam 2:1-10) therefore does not necessarily identify YHWH as a storm god. The same disconnection from storm is visible in 1 Sam 7:10. Here again, the verse refers to a loud divine voice roaring from the heavens during a battle between the Israelites and the Philistines. This divine intervention is considered critical for the Israelite victory: “As Samuel was offering up the burnt offering, the Philistines drew near to attack Israel. But YHWH thundered (‫ )וירעם‬with a mighty sound (‫ )בקול גדול‬that day against the Philistines and threw them into confusion, and they were defeated before Israel.” Though this description globally fits the context of a thunderstorm, the narration does not describe it. Nothing indicates that the victory emanates from inundations or other consequences of a storm on the battle. Rather, the confusion this phenomenon provokes among the Philistines suggests that the thundering was of exceptional nature, disconnected from any storm event. Though the thunder clearly emanates from YHWH in the Bible, it is not necessarily regarded as his theophany or essential attribute. Even the most explicit biblical reference to the thunder as the theophany of YHWH, the Elihu speech, is apparently mentioned to undermine this view about the god of Israel. Obviously this position may reflect late theological developments attempting to disconnect YHWH from a storm-god background. It is why the examples mentioned above do not challenge the interpretation of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29. Nevertheless, they call us to devote further attention to the alternative expressions of this vocal theophany in the Bible.

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

57

2. THE VOLCANIC VOICE OF YHWH 2.1. Volcanism as essential attribute The analysis of Psalms 18 and 46 has revealed a volcanic dimension of YHWH’s theophany in biblical poetry. Among the many examples confirming this view, we may mention Ps 104:32 (“He looks at the earth, and it trembles. He touches the mountains and they smoke”), and Ps 144:5 (“YHWH, bow Your heavens and come down, touch the mountains that they may smoke”). The same dimension identified in Nah 1:2-10 finds a confirmation in further oracles, such as Amos 9:5 (“My Lord, YHWHSebaoth, he touches the land and it melts, and all that dwell therein mourn”), and Isa 63:19 (“That you would rend the heavens, that you would come down, that the mountains may be liquefied (‫ )נָ זֹלּוּ‬at your presence”). Volcanism has not only a theophanic dimension, but it is also a divine mode of action in the Bible. This point is visible in Psalms 18, 46 and Nah 1: 2-10, and it is confirmed in further sources (e.g. Mic 1:3-4; Job 9:5). The extensive destruction it provokes (Deut 32:22, Ezek 22:31; Hos 5:10, Zeph 3:8) might even explain why volcanism integrates many eschatological visions in the Bible.12 Volcanism is even expected to reveal YHWH to humankind (Joel 4:1517; Zeph 3:8-9). The linkage between volcanism and kābȏd-YHWH becomes explicit in Isa 40:4-5: “Every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and hill shall be made low; and the rugged shall be made level, and the rough places a plain. And the kābȏd-YHWH shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together; for the mouth of YHWH has spoken it.”13 The same reality is expressed in Psalm 97, a song beginning with the emission of smoke darkening the sky (v.2), followed by an eruption of lava (v. 3) accompanied by lighting and earthquakes (v. 4). Thereafter, a massive flow of molten lava (v.5) is expected to reveal the kābȏd-YHWH to everyone (v. 6): “5 The mountains melted like wax at the presence of YHWH, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth. 6 The heavens declared His righteousness, and all the peoples saw His kābȏd.” These descriptions identify kābȏd-YHWH, the visible theophany of YHWH, with the yellow-orange radiance emitted by molten silicates.14

12

E.g. Amos 5:18; Isa 13:9-10; 40:4; 42:14-15. J. KOENIG 1966, 22-23. 14 For further examples of the essential relation between YHWH and volcanism, see J. KOENIG 1966; J. DUNN 2014; N. AMZALLAG 2014a. 13

58

CHAPTER 3

Volcanism being an essential attribute of YHWH, it is not surprising to see the thundering sounds of volcanic eruptions interpreted as ‘divine voices.’15 For example, the Book of Amos begins with mentioning the roaring of YHWH’s voice (Amos 1:2). However, instead of providing life and fertility, this thundery voice dries the vegetation: “And he [Amos] said: “YHWH roars (‫ )ישאג‬from Zion and utters his voice (‫ )יתן קולו‬from Jerusalem; The pastures of the shepherds mourn, and the top of Carmel withers” (Amos 1:2). This withering effect includes even the evergreen trees, a feature excluding its interpretation as the consequence of the sirocco, the hot wind which dries the annual plants at the end of the rain season. Rather, Amos apparently describes here the spread of a cloud of hot toxic gas, such as that emanating from erupting volcanoes, whose destructive effects extend over great distances.16 This interpretation corroborates the vision of the day of YHWH, in Amos 5:18, as a huge volcanic event of blind destructive nature, anticipated by YHWH ‘giving’ his voice. Also in Psalm 46, the voice of YHWH is praised by the psalmist for its power to stimulate volcanism: “He uttered his voice (‫)נתן בקולו‬, let be melted (‫)תּמוּג‬ ָ the earth” (Ps 46:7).17 The mention of the quaking of mountains (v. 3), the overflow of the sea and the collapse of mountains in their midst (vv. 3-4) accompany this vocal theophany of volcanic nature, but no allusion to rain or hail is visible there. Consequently, the voice ‘given’ by YHWH in Psalm 46 does probably not refer to storm. Here, the divine voice seems being the primary trigger of the eruption, exactly as it is the primary trigger for the storm in Jer 10:12-13 and Joel 4:16. 2.2. The vocal theophany in Sinai The Sinai revelation of YHWH is described as a volcanic event in Ex 19:16-19.18 Two types of sounds characterize this theophany from 15 Many loud noises are heard throughout a volcanic eruption. Those accompanying earthquakes are the first sounds. Then, loud sounds emanate from around the crater, produced by hot gases released through lateral chimneys (secondary craters) and earthquakeinduced cracks. Thereafter, the thunder accompanies the lightning emanating from the column of volcanic ashes, and the flow of molten lava and pyroclasts from the crater produces roaring. Finally, the sound of the thunderstorm superimposes onto the other sources of noise in the case of wet volcanism. 16 See K. MÖLLER 2003, 161-164. Shalom PAUL (1991, 38-40) compares this description with that of Nah 1:1-5, where the drying of vegetation is an explicit consequence of volcanism. 17 This volcanic dimension is acknowledged by Mitchell DAHOOD (1966, 1:281) and Amos HAKHAM (1990, 1:266). Also the destruction evoked in verse 9 by ‫ שמות‬especially fits the extensive desolation caused by volcanism. 18 Concerning the volcanic nature of this description, see M. NOTH 1962, 156; J. KOENIG 1966, 1-5; Y. BENTOR 1989, 336; O. KEEL 1997, 217; C. HUMPHREYS 2003, 84-87; J. DUNN 2014; N. AMZALLAG 2014a, 12-13.

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

59

its very beginning: “On the morning of the third day there were ‘thunders’ (‫ )קֹֹלת‬and lightning and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud shofar blast (‫)קֹל שׁ ָֹפר‬, so that all the people in the camp trembled” (v. 16). Since no storm or rain is mentioned here, the two voices seem closely related to the volcanic eruption. The first type of sound, called ‫קולות‬ (= sounds, voices) is associated with lightning (issued from the electric discharge of volcanic ash emanating from the crater). It is why it probably designates the volcanic thunder. The other sound, distinct from the first one, is likened to the shofar blast. It apparently corresponds with the sound produced by the hot gases released from the crater and the lateral chimneys of a volcano.19 This second type of sound is mentioned again in verse 19, in which the voice of YHWH is explicitly mentioned: “And as the sound of the shofar grew louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him in voice (‫( ”)בקול‬Ex 19:19). This other YHWH’s voice being distinct from the thunder, it cannot be interpreted as the mere extension to the volcanic context of a thunder theophany more or less inherited from a storm-god background. Rather, in identifying the voice of YHWH specifically with the blasting sound of the shofar, it is the thunder which becomes here a secondary phenomenon.20 An examination of the Sinai theophany in Deuteronomy corroborates these conclusions. Here again, the voice of YHWH speaking to the Israelites at Sinai is associated not with the thunder, but with a loud sound emanating from the fiery crater of the volcano: “11And you [the Israelites] came near and stood at the foot of the mountain, while the mountain burned with fire to the heart of heaven, wrapped in darkness, cloud, and gloom. 12 Then YHWH spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of words, but saw no form; there was only a voice” (Deut 4:11-12).21 The other description associating the Sinai theophany with volcanism, in Deut 5:22-26, corroborates this interpretation. There, the description specifies that the voice of YHWH is heard in the vicinity of the crater, and even in the midst of the molten lava: 19 This sound has been identified with the subterranean rumble of the volcano (E. MEYER 1906, 69; H. GRESSMANN 1913, 37) or even with the volcanic gases released by fissures originating from an earthquake associated with the volcanic activity. See J. DUNN 2014, 411. 20 According to Jean KOENIG (1966, 12), the assimilation of the thunder with the voice of YHWH is a secondary extension of its identification with the volcanic thunder. 21 A similar volcanic dimension of the expression of the voice of YHWH is encountered in Deut 4:33 and Deut 18:16. Wilhelm WESSELS (2011, 507) concludes: “The context in which the fire metaphor is applied here strongly urges listeners or readers of the biblical text to take note of the devouring power of YHWH’s word.”

60

CHAPTER 3 22 These

words YHWH spoke to all your assembly at the mountain out of the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a loud voice (‫;)קול גדול‬ and he added no more. And he wrote them on two tablets of stone and gave them to me. 23  And as soon as you heard the voice (‫ )הקול‬out of the midst of the darkness, while the mountain was burning with fire, you came near to me, all the heads of your tribes, and your elders. 24  And you said, ‘Behold, YHWH our God has shown us his kābȏd and greatness, and we have heard his voice (‫ )קלו‬out of the midst of the fire. This day we have seen God speak with man, and man still live. 25  Now therefore why should we die? For this great fire will consume us. If we hear the voice (‫ )קול‬of YHWH our God any more, we shall die. 26  For who is there of all flesh, that has heard the voice (‫ )קול‬of the living God speaking out of the midst of fire as we have, and has still lived?

The association between the voice of YHWH and volcanism is visible in verse 22. In the next verse, we read that the divine voice emerges from the crater and its periphery, rather than from the heavens. And here again, the sound specifically identified with the voice of YHWH is not the thunder, but rather the loud sound produced by the gases released from around the crater. Verse 24 confirms that the crater is the site where the voice of YHWH may be heard. The toxicity of these gases clarifies why hearing the voice of YHWH may be a dangerous feature (vv. 25-26). Also in Deut 18:16, the vision of the great fire of YHWH is paralleled with the frightening perception of his great voice: “Just as you desired YHWH your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of YHWH my God and see this great fire any more, lest I die.’” Here, the fear of the Israelites for their lives concerns not only the fire but also the vocal theophany, suggesting that both phenomena combine. Again, this description better fits the dangerous release of toxic gases from the soil than the sound of thunder emanating from the sky. The descriptions of the Sinai theophany confirm that the voice of YHWH does not associate exclusively with the thunder accompanying lightning during storms, and similar noises (such as the thunder accompanying earthquake at the beginning of a volcanic eruption). It is also identifiable with the noise of gases released from the volcano, likened with the sound of the shofar. This vocal theophany is especially interesting, because it is approached both in Exodus and Deuteronomy as the mode of direct communication of YHWH with the Israelites, in a context where thunder is also present. It suggests that the blowing voice is an attribute of YHWH even more essential than the thundery voice. Consequently, the volcanic representation of the voice of YHWH might be preferred to the thunder dimension, where both sounds coexist.

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

61

3. THE BLOWING VOICE OF YHWH Scholars have suggested that the name of the god of Israel derives from the Semitic root hwy, expressing both the action of blowing and the wind resulting from it.22 If so, the name YHWH designates the god of Israel as the blower. This etymology is generally justified in the context of a stormgod identity of YHWH.23 But the nature of YHWH’s vocal theophany at Sinai suggests another interpretation. In assimilating the voice of YHWH with the sound of the shofar rather than the thunder, the blowing essential attribute of YHWH does probably not refer to any former storm-god identity, but to another reality. The symbolic meaning of volcanism in antiquity reveals it. 3.1. The metallurgical dimension of volcanism in antiquity In antiquity, volcanism was likened with metallurgy, the only human activity involving stone melting.24 Furthermore, lava flowing from the crater of a volcano and slag released from a furnace at work radiate a similar yellow-orange light. They have a similar viscosity and sulfur smell, and are also alike once solidified. This homology explains why erupting volcanoes were traditionally approached as powered by the gods of metallurgy in antiquity.25 It is not surprising, therefore, to see the anonymous poet of the Aetna (first century CE) interpreting erupting volcanoes as giant furnaces positioned under the crater, in which bitumen and sulfur served as fuel. In this furnace-like representation of volcanism, the poet assumed that air was 22 A. KNAUF 1984; K. VAN DER TOORN 1999, 915-916; T. RÖMER 2014, 49-50; M. SMITH 2017, 37. This blowing meaning of hwy is preserved in Arabic. See DRS 5:386. 23 See J. ANDERSON 2015, 101; R. MÜLLER 2017, 209; A. BERLEJUNG 2017, 75; M. KREBERNIK 2017, 65. Karel VAN DER TOORN (1999, 916) concluded that “The interpretation of the name Yahweh is not entirely devoid of meaning, then, when it comes to establishing his character. If ‘yhwh’ does indeed mean ‘He blows’, YHWH is originally a storm god.” 24 See Virgil, Enneid iii 571.582; Georg. i. 471, Ovid. Metam. xv, 340. In Scandinavia, for example, the furnace (aflar) is explicitly identified with a volcano. See R. DIETERLE 1987, 5; L. EINARSON 2011, 63, 84. 25 In ancient Greece, Hephaestus was called the prince of Etna (Euripides, Cyclops, v. 600). The Cyclops and his servants dwelled around the Etna and Lipari volcanoes (M. GREENE 1992, 79). In the Odyssey, Polyphemus, the most famous Cyclop, is even assimilated with the volcanic activity of the Etna (A. SCARTH 1989). The Etruscan and Roman counterparts of Hephaestus (respectively Sethlans and Vulcan) are also fully identified with volcanoes. See R. DAVIDSON 1958, 158; R. DIETERLE 1987, 3-6; P. RICHET 2007, 201. In any way, the metallurgical activity of these divine smiths was supposed to occur at the heart of volcanoes, confirming the homology between volcanism and metallurgy.

62

CHAPTER 3

blasted to the ‘hearth’ through subterranean conducts. Such a representation might be valid also for the sound of the shofar accompanying the Sinai theophany.26 A similar furnace-like representation of volcanism is visible in Isa 30:2733. The vision begins (v. 27) with a mention of the ‘nose’, ‘lips’ and ‘tongue’ of YHWH expressing the volcanic imagery of a crater in activity: “Behold, the name of YHWH comes from afar, Burning is his nose (‫)אף‬, in thick rising smoke (‫ ;)וכבד משאה‬His lips (‫ )שפתיו‬are full of fury (‫)זעם‬, And his tongue (‫ )ולשונו‬is like a devouring fire”.27 As in the Sinai theophany, this volcanic theophany (similar to the one described in Ps 18:89) causes the voice of YHWH to be heard: “And YHWH will cause his majestic voice (‫ )הוד קולו‬to be heard, and shall show the terror of his arm, in furious ᾿ap (‫ )בזעף אף‬and flame of devouring fire (‫ ;)אש אוכלה‬destruction (‫)נפץ‬, storm and hailstones” (Isa 30:30). The following verses detail how YHWH’s blowing feeds this volcanic activity. Verse 33 describes the blowing of pressured air on the hearth that heats the whole area: “For a burning place has long been prepared; indeed, for the king it is made ready, its pyre made deep and wide, with fire and wood in abundance; the breath of YHWH, like a stream of gofrit, kindles it” (Isa 30:33). The likening of the breath of YHWH with a stream of gofrit (a stone material with a sulfurous smell) is especially relevant in this description, because it introduces a parallel with the gases released from volcanoes, characterized by a sulfurous smell. The release of gases near the crater of a volcano becomes therefore an indication of YHWH blowing on fire and provoking stone melting. An equivalence emerges therefore between the hot gases emitted by a volcano (the release of which is identified as the voice of YHWH), and the air blown on a furnace. The metallurgical significance of volcanism clarifies the volcanic representation of YHWH’s theophany at Sinai, an area where volcanism is unknown in the historical period. To account for this discrepancy, scholars have previously displaced the covenant from Mount Sinai to one of the volcanic fields of Northwestern Arabia.28 However, in the absence of positive evidence supporting this premise, it remains simpler to assume that volcanism is a marker of the theophany of the god patronizing metallurgy, the only one known for his ability to melt stone.

26 27 28

See Chapter 2, note 105. J. KOENIG 1966, 25-26. J. KOENIG 1971; J. DUNN 2014.

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

63

3.2. Metallurgical blasting In the volcanic context, the ethereal voice of YHWH emanates from the sudden drop in pressure of the gases reaching the surface through a soil fissure. A similar phenomenon is observed in metallurgy, where a roaring sound is heard near the nozzles, due to the sudden drop of pressure of the air supplied to the furnace. It is especially relevant concerning windpowered furnaces whose use is attested from the Early Bronze Age in the metallurgical areas from the Southern Levant.29 In light of the homology between a furnace and volcano, we should examine whether the air blast in a furnace was perceived as an expression of the voice of YHWH similar to the volcanic ‘sound of shofar’. The divine voice from the burning bush The Book of Exodus describes the first encounter with YHWH around the phenomenon of the burning bush (Ex 3:2-4). The nature of this wonder is not detailed in this chapter, but verse 4 reveals that the voice of YHWH emanates from a fiery reality: “YHWH saw that he [Moses] turned aside to see; God called to him out of the midst of the bush [‫]מתוך הסנה‬, ‘Moses, Moses!’ And he said, ‘Here I am’.” Apparently, the voice of YHWH here originates from the hearth. Looking for a realistic explanation behind this description is in vain if we consider it a miracle. However, if the vocal theophany corresponds to a physical reality (as does the Sinai theophany), the voice of YHWH here should be identified with the sound emitted by a wind-powered hearth. The metallurgical dimension of this fiery activity is supported by two indications. The first is the transformation of Moses’ scepter into a serpent once set on the ‘holy’ ground of the hearth and its close vicinity (Ex 4:1-5). Here, the wordplay between serpent (‫ )נחש‬and copper (‫)נחש‬, together with the fiery context of the transformation and its reversibility, invites us to interpret the wonder as the remelting of an old copper artifact (the scepter) and the production of a new one (new scepter) from the molten raw copper (the serpent).30 29 A. HAUPTMAN 2007, 88-89; K. PFEIFFER 2013, 95-98; E. BEN-YOSEF et al. 2016, 7476. A similar wind-processed smelting furnace has been identified in the Early Bronze Age Crete. See V. KASSIANIDOU and A. KNAPP 2005, 233. This exploitation of wind for natural blasting was extensively developed in Sinai, as revealed by the 3,000 wind furnaces identified at the Bir Nasib site and dated to the late second millennium BCE. See P. FLUZIN et al. 2011, 80, 88; K. PFEIFFER 2013, 96. 30 N. AMZALLAG 2009, 396.

64

CHAPTER 3

The second indication comes from the general context of occurrence of the encounter. The holy site of YHWH is located in the vicinity of the camp of Jethro the priest (Ex 3:1). The affiliation of Moses’ father-in-law to the clan of Qenites (Judg 1:16) suggests that this holy site reflected the traditions of the Qenites, the congregation of metalworkers from Southern Canaan.31 Consequently, it is likely that the locus of encounter between YHWH and Moses was a site of cultic metallurgy.32 And in such a case, the description of the site, and especially the absence of any priest or metalworker in its vicinity, suggests that the voice of YHWH emanates here from a wind-powered furnace.33 The encounter in the tent of meeting The Pentateuch refers to the tent of meeting (᾿ōhel mȏ῾ēd) as the earliest shrine of the Israelites. This sanctuary is mentioned in Ex 33:7-11 and briefly evoked before in Ex 18:7, 12-16 as the tent where Moses consulted YHWH in the name of the Israelites. Though the tabernacle (miškan) mentioned later (Exodus 35-40) is also called the tent of meeting, it differs from the former one by its high level of sophistication, the richness of its components, and the diversity of its artifacts.34 The original tent of meeting is a shrine combining a theophany, evidenced by the pillar of fire and cloud, with an ‘encounter’ with the deity. Its dialogical dimension appears in Ex 33:12-23, a section in literary continuity with the description of this shrine (Ex 33:7-11).35 From the 31 The Qenites were identified as the Canaanite metalworkers by S. ABRAMSKY 1953; I. LEWY 1956; W. ALBRIGHT 1963; B. MAZAR 1965; J. MILLER 1974; J. SAWYER 1986; P. MCNUTT 1990, 235-249; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 140-141; J. DAY 2009, 337; M. MONDRIAAN 2010, 312-320; N. AMZALLAG 2018b, 29-33. The Cain genealogy as well as allusions in 1 Chr 2:55, their way of life and their social marginality confirm this identity. This specialty is deduced from the metallurgical meaning of the root qyn used for designating them. See N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2017a. 32 John LAUGHLIN (1975, 16 [note 41]) concluded that “the ‘burning bush’ could very well have been a metal altar of the Kenites. The presence of such an altar would explain both the cultic nature of the site prior to Moses, and, of course, the reason why the ‘bush’ did not burn.” 33 This premise finds support in archaeology. Several small and isolated wind-powered furnaces have been identified in Sinai on hilltops far from mining areas. See K. PFEIFFER 2013, 96. Their isolation being difficult to justify by practical considerations, a cultic dimension was probably associated with this activity. 34 B. CHILDS 1974, 590; C. HOUTMAN 2000, 693; W. PROPP 2006, 599. 35 U. CASSUTO 1967, 432; V. HAMILTON 2011, 565. Scholars frequently isolate vv. 711 from their literary environment. This trend is, however, challenged by the coherence of Exodus 33 as a whole. See B. CHILDS 1970, 592; R. MOBERLY 1983, 182; C. HOUTMAN 2000, 683-686; T. DOZEMAN 2009, 719. According to Mark O’BRIEN (2012), this segment even integrates a complete chiasm generated by chapters 32-34.

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

65

description of Moses and YHWH speaking ‘face to face’ (Ex 33:11), we may conclude there is a vocal theophany in the tent of meeting. In other words, the voice of YHWH emanates, here again, from a fiery reality unrelated to storm and thunder. The pillar of cloud and fire standing at the entrance of the tent of meeting (Ex 33:9), we may guess that the meeting with YHWH occurs outside the tent.36 Unlike in the Tabernacle, the interior of the tent of meeting is merely a site of preparation for the meeting.37 The metallurgical dimension of this vocal theophany is suggested by the combination of fire and smoke signaling the divine presence, and by the affinities of this first Israelite shrine with the tent-sanctuary discovered in the mining area of Timna. This shrine, apparently in activity between the 13–11th centuries BCE, had furnaces positioned outside, near its entrance.38 The mortars for crushing the ore and other tools found inside the tent indicate that the inner part of the shrine was devoted to the preparation of the metallurgical operation performed outside, near the entrance.39 This stresses another parallel with the Israelite tent of meeting.40 The first reference to the tent of meeting, in Exodus 18, relates its inauguration through a ceremony conducted by Jethro, in the presence of Moses, Aaron and the elders of Israel (Ex 18:12).41 The Book of Exodus presents therefore the tent of meeting as a Qenite shrine introduced in early Israel. The instructions Jethro addressed to Moses concerning its efficient use (Ex 18:17-23) support this premise. Consequently, a ritual involving cultic metallurgy is expected to occur in the encounter with YHWH near the entrance of the tent of meeting. These instances reveal that the vocal theophany of YHWH had also a metallurgical dimension in ancient Israel 36

M. HARAN 1960, 55. Menahem HARAN (1960, 56) deduces this from the report that Joshua not departed from the tent (Ex 33:11) even though it is not mentioned anywhere that he encountered the deity there. Concerning the preparatory function of the tent, see M. HARAN 1978, 266-267. See N. AMZALLAG 2019a for further details about the metallurgical dimension of this early Israelite shrine. 38 Two furnaces, active in both the Egyptian and the Canaanite periods, are positioned near the entrance of the shrine (locus 109). Another metallurgical workshop, at the periphery of the shrine near the entrance (locus 101), was even added later, at the Canaanite period. See B. ROTHENBERG 1988, 192-198; 1999, 172. 39 B. ROTHENBERG 1988, 192-198. 40 The parallel between the earliest Israelite shrine related in the Bible, and the tentsanctuary from Timna was already argued by Benno ROTHENBERG, the discoverer of the Timna shrine. See B. ROTHENBERG 1988, 184. Also Thomas RÖMER (2014, 78) stressed the homology of the Israelite tent of meeting with the tent-sanctuary from Timna. For a comparative analysis of these two sanctuaries, see N. AMZALLAG 2018c; 2019a. 41 N. AMZALLAG 2019a, 302-304. 37

66

CHAPTER 3

which was apparently inherited from the Qenite traditions of cultic metallurgy. By its nature, the vocal theophany of the tent of meeting finds a parallel in the sound of the shofar associated with volcanic eruptions, rather than the thunder accompanying a storm. 4. THE METALLURGICAL

DIMENSION OF ANCIENT

YAHWISM

The ancient Israelites were a people of breeders and farmers, rather than metallurgists. It is why we may expect storms, rainfall and fertility to be the most essential attributes of the god of Israel. It is tempting to assume that the metallurgical dimension of ancient Yahwism was in Israel no more than a vestigial feature inherited from the Qenite religious traditions. Two indications invite us to revisit this opinion, however. The first one concerns the volcanic representation of YHWH’s theophany, and its importance in the Israelite theology (Sinai covenant, eschatology). This centrality of volcanism is unrelated to the geological reality of the Southern Levant, and was probably introduced for its symbolic meaning, suggesting that the metallurgical background of YHWH remained of central importance in the Israelite theology. The second indication comes from the preferential identification of the vocal theophany of YHWH in Sinai with the sound of the gases flowing from the ground of a volcano, rather than the thunders accompanying the eruption. This detail reveals that many Israelite theologians did not promote a syncretism between the volcanic (metallurgical) dimension of YHWH and storm, despite the central importance of rain for the wealth of the Israelites. Further observations confirm the outstanding conservation in the Bible of the metallurgical dimension of ancient Yahwism. 4.1. Furnace symbolism in Jerusalem Following the representation of YHWH as a Baal-like storm god, scholars attempted to integrate the temple artifacts in the Chaoskampf perspective. The two columns Boaz and Yakin flanking the entrance of the temple became the mythical weapons by which YHWH struggled against the forces of chaos.42 The sea of copper became the symbol of the chaotic 42 A. LAATO 2018, 156-159. Antti LAATO (2018, 158) concludes that “these two maces of Baal received symbolic names – and there is reason to assume that this was the precise meaning of the two pillars of the Temple of Solomon. [...] Where the names of the maces in the Ugaritic text emphasize the actual struggle between Baal and Yammu, the biblical tradition has related the names Boaz and Jachin, on the one hand, to YHWH’s struggle against chaos (Boaz) and, on the other hand, to his power to establish harmony in the cosmos (Jachin).”

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

67

primeval water subjugated by YHWH.43 However, the vitalizing and purifying properties of the water of this basin may hardly integrate this view. Furthermore, the appellation of the Jerusalem temple as ‘furnace of YHWH’, in Isa 31:9, attests for the preservation of the metallurgical background of the god of Israel. It also invites us to look for a metallurgical symbolism in the Jerusalem temple. The Book of Kings refers to an abundance of copper-made artifacts in the courtyard of the Jerusalem temple, including ten copper-made chariots with a copper-made basin (‫( )כיור‬1 Kgs 7:27-39), and a copper basin of outstanding dimensions (1 Kgs 7:23-26). Its appellation as ‘sea of copper’ (2 Kgs 25:13; Jer 52:17; 1 Chr 18:8) even suggests a metallurgical symbolism likening the water filling it with molten copper.44 The two giant columns of copper flanking the entry of the Jerusalem temple, weighing 59 tons each,45 look like two huge ingots promoting a homology between the sanctuary and an area of copper production. Like the furnace in the tent of meeting, the copper-coated altar is positioned at the entrance of the Jerusalem temple. The homology between the two is enhanced by its appellation as an altar for burnt-offerings (Ex 30:28; 31:9; 35:16; 38:1; 40:6, 10, 29). This type of sacrifices requires a temperature of close to 1000 C for the whole combustion of the animal (including the bones). The thermal radiance emitted by the copper coating of the altar reaching this temperature strengthens the metallurgical symbolism of this ritual. Furthermore, the air necessary for reaching this temperature is not supplied by bellows, but from the action of wind (interpreted as the marker of divine agreement to the sacrifice). Consequently, the coppercoated altar of the Jerusalem temple looks like a symbolic homolog of wind-powered furnaces where the voice of YHWH was heard.46 4.2. The celestial furnace The inaugural vision in the Book of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1) unveils how the celestial universe was conceived in ancient Israel. Once the prophet 43 Antti LAATO (2018, 172-179) combines these two dimensions in the interpretation of the sea of copper symbolism. Also Reinhard MÜLLER (2017, 223) assumes that the sea of copper in front of the temple symbolizes the ‘tamed primeval flood’. 44 In biblical Hebrew, mayîm designates not only the water element but also every other matter at a molten state. In Ps 114:8, ‫ מים‬explicitly evokes molten stone (see N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2011, 312-314). Similarly, the molten lava poured by YHWH as an expression of his wrath is equated to water in Mic 1:4 and Hos 5:10. See J. KOENIG 1966, 16-17. 45 S. MOISA 2011, 174-187. 46 N. AMZALLAG (in press [a]).

68

CHAPTER 3

accesses this divine domain, the first reality he describes is an intense fire with flames and embers: “And I looked, and, behold, a stormy wind came out of the north, a great cloud, with a fire flashing up, so that a brightness was round about it; and out of the midst thereof as the likeness of ḥašmal, out of the midst of the fire” (Ezek 1:4). The mention of ḥašmal in the midst of this fiery reality betrays its nature. The cognate terms in Egyptian, Akkadian and Elamite all designate amber or a pale-yellow alloy (such as electrum). Its translation as ἠλέκτρου in the Septuagint expresses the same two meanings.47 Among them, amber is unlikely in Ezekiel 1, because this fossil resin releases dark smoke instead of shining light, once set in fire.48 It is why ḥašmal apparently designates a metal in Ezekiel 1. Mixed with glowing embers, it is probably in a molten state. Consequently, the inaugural vision in Ezekiel apparently describes the divine throne of YHWH as a furnace in which molten metal produces a halo of radiance.49 4.3. YHWH’s tuyere In biblical Hebrew, the term ᾿ap designates not only nose and anger, but also the tuyere bringing the pressured air from the bellows to the furnace.50 This metallurgical meaning is especially relevant in the divine context. In Job 4:9, for example, the divine tuyere boosts the fire to destructive strengths: “By the breath of God they perish, and by the blast of his ᾿ap they are consumed”. Also in Job 9:5, the divine tuyere is the main factor involved in volcanism: “He who removes mountains, and they know it not (‫ ;)ולא ידעו‬when he overturns them in his ᾿ap” (Job 9:5).51 This meaning is also blatant in Ps 18:16, the last verse resuming the volcanic 47

D. BODI 1991, 82-90. Godfrey DRIVER (1951, 62) already concluded that the Ezekiel vision identifies the celestial throne of YHWH with a furnace of copper smelting. 49 N. AMZALLAG 2013, 172-175. Ezekiel is not the only Israelite envisioning this fiery celestial reality. The elders of Israel already contemplate the ‘celestial throne’ in Ex 24:10. However, nothing about this experience is detailed in the Bible, except the intense radiance emanating from it (a detail probably introduced to confirm that they truly contemplated the celestial domain). This silence is not fortuitous. The specification that these elders should have died because they contemplated the celestial domain (Ex 24:11) indicates that the access to this knowledge was restricted and its divulgation forbidden. This deduction is corroborated by an Assyrian text from the early first millennium BC (KAR 307, 30-38) enigmatically evoking the celestial universe (once again, of fiery metallurgical nature), and ending with the following formula: “Secret of the great gods: let the initiate reveal it to the initiate, but do not let the uninitiated see it.” See A. LIVINGSTONE 1986, 82-83; W. HOROWITZ 1998, 3-15. 50 N. AMZALLAG, 2018a. 51 The translation of ᾿ap as anger is here unlikely, because this verse integrates a speech in which Job refutes the assumption of a correlation between human and divine actions. 48

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

69

theophany: “Then the channels of the sea were seen, And the foundations of the world were laid bare, At your roaring (‫)מגערתך‬, YHWH, At the breath of the wind of your tuyere (‫”)מנשמת רוח אפך‬.52 It is noteworthy that blowing is here the only divine modus operandi required to cause a volcanic eruption, exactly as blowing is the only action required for stimulating the smelting of metal in a furnace.53 These examples reveal how ᾿ap, in a divine context, may designate not only the divine nose or anger, but also the blowing apparatus used by YHWH.54 And by extension, the dual ᾿appayim, in divine context, does probably not designate a pair of divine nostrils, but rather the nozzles, the ceramic terminal elements of tuyères.55 Consequently, the extensive mention of ᾿ap and ᾿appayim in a divine context does not necessarily emphasize the angry nature of the god of Israel, introduced for spreading fear among his worshippers. Rather, it is mostly an expression of the metallurgical background of YHWH, and the illustration of his appellation as the blower. That the blowing activity provokes total destruction is not denied, but it is apparently a secondary consequence of the metallurgical background of YHWH acknowledged by the Israelites. 4.4. The divine blower Psalm 104:4 expresses YHWH’s closeness to the phenomenon of windboosted fire: “He makes his messengers winds, his ministers a flaming 52 In this verse, the noun gĕ῾ārâh is generally translated as rebuke due to its parallel with ᾿ap, understood as anger. However, the expression ‫ מנשמת רוח אפך‬evokes wind (breath) so explicitly that ᾿ap is frequently translated as nostrils instead of anger. Consequently, gĕ῾ārâh here probably denotes roaring, the sound produced by the propulsion of this wind (exactly as in Isa 50:2; Ps 104:7; Job 26:11), rather than rebuke. 53 Further examples confirm this view. The link between divine ᾿ap as tuyere and volcanism is explicit in Isaiah: “Behold, the name of YHWH comes from afar, Burning is his ᾿ap, in thick rising smoke (‫ ;)וכבד משאה‬His lips (‫ )שפתיו‬are full of fury (‫)זעם‬, And his tongue (‫ )ולשונו‬is like a devouring fire” (Isa 30:27). The interpretation of ᾿ap as anger is here challenged by the mention of two other ‘anatomical’ components both interpretable in a volcanic context: the lips as borders of the crater, and the tongue as flowing lava. See M. GRUBER 1980, 500; W. BEUKEN 2000, 175-176, 179. For Deena GRANT (2015, 151), ᾿ap in Isa 30:27 is multivalent, concurrently denoting anger and nose. Also in Deut 32:22, the divine ᾿ap is involved in volcanism: “For a fire is kindled by (‫ )קדחה ב‬my ᾿ap, And it burns to the depths of Sheol, Devours the earth and its increase, and sets on fire the foundations of the mountains.” See J. KOENIG 1966, 20. Without excluding the meaning as wrath, Paul SANDERS (1996, 191 [esp. note 510]) suggests that ᾿ap in this verse designates something else identified as the divine ‘nose/nostrils’. 54 N. AMZALLAG 2018a. 55 N. AMZALLAG 2017a.

70

CHAPTER 3

fire.” The metallurgical dimension of this combination is visible in many instances. For example, the divine blowing generates an all-consuming fiery molten substance in Ezek 21:36: “And I will pour out upon you my indignation; With the fire of my wrath I will blow (‫ )אפיח‬upon you; and I will give you into the hands of fiery men, smiths of destruction.”56 The metallurgical dimension of YHWH’s blowing is visible also in Ps 21:10: “You will make them as a blazing furnace (‫)כתנור אש‬57, When you appear (‫)לעת פניך‬. YHWH, through his tuyere (‫)באפו‬, He will swallow them, And fire will consume them.” The same blowing imagery is found in Isa 66:15 where, here again, it leads to an all-consuming fire: “For behold, YHWH in fire will come, and like the whirlwind his chariots; To blow [‫]להשיב‬58 his tuyere (‫ )אפו‬in heat, his roaring in flames of fire.” These images of divine action are generally interpreted as metaphors devoid of genuine significance concerning the divine universe. Through this view, the representations of the divine, his theophany and modus operandi are borrowed from the metallurgical universe, only because the extreme physical conditions attached to this activity are close to supernatural. However, the possible etymology of YHWH as the blower challenges this view, blowing being the essential activity in metalworking.59 This survey shows that the voice of YHWH is attached to three phenomena in the Bible. The first is thunder, heard both in thunderstorms and in atmospheric phenomena related to volcanic eruptions. The second is the loud sound emanating from the release of gases during a volcanic eruption. The third phenomenon belongs to the metallurgical context. There, the voice of YHWH identifies with the roaring sound produced either by the air released from the nozzle of a tuyere or accompanying air convection in wind-powered furnaces. These three modes of expression are not equivalent. A homology exists between the vocal theophany attached to volcanism and metallurgy. 56

J. KOENIG 1966; D. GRANT 2015, 149. Concerning the translation of ‫ תנור אש‬as a fiery furnace, see HALOT, 4:1763. 58 The text remains obscure as long as lhšyb is understood as the hif šwb (= to return). However, lhšyb is also the hif of nšb (= to blow, e.g. Gen 15:11; Isa 40:7; Ps 147:18) and this “windy” context clarifies the meaning of the second hemiverse. 59 An explicit mention of YHWH blowing on genuine metallurgical fire exists in Isa 54:16a, a verse which introduces an indeterminacy in the subject (YHWH or the metalworker) of the verbs expressing metalworking, a potential means to express the collaboration between the two: “See, it is I who created the blacksmith who fans the coals into flame and brings forth an instrument for his [= the smith] work/purpose.” See N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2018a. 57

THE VOCAL THEOPHANY OF YHWH

71

However, both phenomena remain distant from the thunderstorm. These examinations, once combined with the absence of explicit reference to rainfall in Psalm 29, indicate that the thunderstorm interpretation of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29 should not be taken for granted. It is not even the most likely interpretation.

CHAPTER 4

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH Identifying the us-group in Psalm 29 may help us to clarify the meaning of this elliptic song. As shown in Chapter 1, the presumption of Israelite context of its composition led many authors to identify references to Jerusalem and its religious festivals. Alternately, the assumption of a Canaanite origin of this song stimulated its reading through the lens of the Baal mythology. The metallurgical background of ancient Yahwism and the volcanic representation of his theophany introduce further eventualities concerning the possible identity of the us-group. Metallurgy is an ancient activity in the Southern Levant, and the early Iron Age is a period of renewal of the copper industry in the Arabah valley.1 It is evidenced by the massive amount of slag in the Faynan area (up to 80,000 tons) mostly dated to this period, and by the heavy metals pollution traced in the early Iron Age sediments from the middle Arabah.2 A significant increase in copper production is also observed in Timna at the same time.3 For these reasons, if YHWH was the god sponsoring the metallurgical activity in the Southern Levant, we may expect him being well-known, honored and even worshipped before the rise of Israel and in parallel with it. This conclusion is not as surprising as it may appear at first. In Genesis, for example, the first man who offers to YHWH is Cain the forefather of the Qenites (Gen 4:3).4 Thereafter, Hanokh, the son of Seth and grandson of Adam and Eve, is acknowledged as the first man to “call upon the name 1 T. LEVY 2009, 152; E. BEN-YOSEF and T. LEVY 2014; N. YAHALOM-MACK and I. SEGAL 2018, 314-315; T. LEVY et al. 2018, 251-253. This renewal of the copper industry is probably a consequence of the collapse of its Cyprus counterpart, at the end of the Late Bronze Age. See I. FINKELSTEIN 2005, 122; E. BEN-YOSEF and O. SERGI 2018, 461, 464-464. Copper production was maintained in Cyprus at the end of the second millennium BCE, but it remained of minor importance compared to the previous metallurgical activity. See A. SHERRATT 1994. 2 T. LEVY et al. 2004a; J. GRATTAN et al. 2007; T. LEVY 2008. 3 For example, an analysis of a slag mound from the smelting site 30 of Timna attests for a considerable metallurgical activity during the 11-10th centuries BCE, in a post-Egyptian context (see E. BEN-YOSEF et al. 2012, 64). Concerning the amplitude of copper production in the middle Arabah (the region of Faynan) at the early Iron Age, see E. BEN-YOSEF et al. 2014. 4 See Bruce WALTKE (1986, 365-367) and Kenneth CRAIG (1999, 110-113) for an analysis of the Cain’s offering.

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

73

of YHWH” (Gen 4:26). It transforms Hanokh into the founder of the cult of YHWH, long before Noah and the famous figures of the Israelite early history. Furthermore, we read in the Book of Exodus that the actual name of the god, though ignored by the Israelites before the Exodus (Ex 3:1314; 6:3), was transmitted from generation to generation from the earliest times (Ex 3:15). We may conclude that an old, pre-Israelite Yahwistic tradition is acknowledged in the Pentateuch.5 Consequently, in the absence of Israelite markers in Psalm 29, we cannot exclude that this hymn might have been dedicated to YHWH by a non-Israelite poet. 1. THE WORSHIP OF YHWH IN THE BRONZE AGE 1.1. The corporation of metalworkers YHWH and the Qenites In Genesis, the first man offering to YHWH is Cain (Gen 4:3), the eponymous ancestor of the Qenites. Cain is also the only man for whom the divine participation in his procreation is explicitly mentioned (Gen 4:1). The divine protection offered to Cain and all his descendants (Gen 4:15) even suggests YHWH’s special commitment to this tribe.6 The Israelites granted the Qenites and their affiliated clans (Qenizites, Rekhabites, Jerahmaelites) a zealous devotion to YHWH (Num 32:12; Jos 14:13-14; Judg 3:9-11; 2 Kgs 10:15-24; Jer 35:18-19). The reference to the Rekhabites in Jeremiah 35 is especially interesting. It stresses first of all that non-Israelite Yahwistic traditions survived alongside the Israelite religion, even in Israel. Furthermore, it emphasizes that these traditions, by including prohibitions on agriculture, wine, and a sedentary lifestyle, differed from those followed by the Israelites. The reference to the Qenite worship of YHWH in the Bible, combined with the Qenite context of Moses discovery of YHWH related in Exodus 3-4, led from the 19th Century to the formulation of the Qenite hypothesis of the origin of the Israelite religion.7 The Qenite ascendant 5 The survival of a Yahwistic tradition up to the birth of Israel is evidenced in the Book of Numbers, through the figure of Balaam, the non-Israelite prophet of YHWH (Numbers 22-24). 6 The sign expected to protect against everyone who kills Cain (‫כל הורג קין‬, Gen 4:15) reveals that the mark of YHWH’s protection does not concern only Cain, but also all his descendants. See B. HALPERN 1992, 19; R. MOBERLY 2007; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 142; J. LOHR 2009; E. PFOH 2009, 41-42. 7 The Qenite (Kenite) hypothesis of the origin of YHWH was first enounced by Friedrich GHILLANY in 1862 (under the pseudonym of Richard VON DER ALM), and formulated in more

74

CHAPTER 4

upon the first Israelite sanctuary, the tent of meeting (see Chapter 3), corroborates this premise.8 Also the discovery of traditions of Qenite origin in the Pentateuch (such as the Sotah prescription in Num 5:11-31) confirms the reality of a Qenite heritage among the Israelites.9 The Qenites were the South Levantine congregation of metalworkers. This identity may be deduced from the etymology of their name, derived from the root qyn designating metal production.10 The affinities between the name of some Qenite figures and toponyms from the Arabah, the South Levantine area of copper production, strengthen this view.11 It also emanates from an examination of the lineage of Cain (Genesis 4), the eponymous ancestor of the tribe. His genealogy includes the mention of Tubal-Cain, explicitly acknowledged as a smith, and Jabal, his half-brother involved in the production of metal (and not breeding as generally presumed).12 The metallurgical background of ancient Yahwism necessarily antedates the emergence of the Israelite religion, because the land of Israel was devoid of substantial mineral resources for metal production, and most of the Israelites were breeders and farmers. Here again, this reality, combined with the traces of metallurgical background in early Yahwism, promotes a former worship of the deity among the Qenites.

details few after by Cornelis P. TIELE, in 1872. For a survey of the history of the ‘Kenite theory’, see R. ALBERTZ 1994, 51-54; K. VAN DER TOORN 1999, 912; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 140-144; J. DAY 2009, 335; M. MONDRIAAN 2010, 307-405; D. FLEMING 2020, 67-110. 8 N. AMZALLAG 2019a. Concerning the question of Qenite ascendant on the Israelite religion, see W. ALBRIGHT 1963; R. NORTH 1964, 381; M. WEINFELD 1988; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 133-136. 9 N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2017b. 10 N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2017a. 11 This affinity is stressed by the parallel between Jithran, the founding father of a clan of Seirites (Gen 36:26) and Jethro, Moses’s father-in-law. See W. ALBRIGHT 1963; M. WEINFELD 1988, J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 136. Furthermore, Ada, Lamekh’s first wife (Gen 4:19), is also the name of the first wife of Esau (Gen 36:2), the forefather of Edom (the nation organized around the Arabah valley). Reu’el, the appellation given to Moses’s father in law (Ex 2:18, identified as a Qenite in Judg 1:16), is also the name of a son of Esau (Gen 36:10). Qenaz, a branch of the Qenite tribe living in Judah (Jos 14:14), is also mentioned in Gen 36:11 as Esau’s son. 12 The Qenites are identified as Canaanite metalworkers by S. ABRAMSKY 1953; I. LEWY 1956; W. ALBRIGHT 1963; B. MAZAR 1965; J. MILLER 1974; J. SAWYER 1986; P. MCNUTT 1990, 235-249; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 140-141; J. DAY 2009, 337; M. MONDRIAAN 2010, 312-320; N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2017a. It is deduced from the explicit mention of TubalCain the smith in the genealogy of Cain (Gen 4:22), from some allusions in 1 Chr 2:55 to the metalworking of the Simeathites, a clan of Qenites, and from the lifestyle of the Qenites. Concerning the metallurgical dimension of the Cain genealogy, see N. AMZALLAG, 2018b and Chapter 6 of the present book.

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

75

The metalworkers as emissaries of YHWH Beyond the few verses mentioning the Qenites, the Bible devotes a special attention to the metalworkers and their closeness to YHWH. In Exodus, the metalworkers appointed for constructing the tabernacle are inspired by YHWH (Ex 31:1-5), independently of any investiture by Moses or any other Israelite authority. This closeness is confirmed in Exodus 3–4, the chapters promoting Moses to the rank of emissary of YHWH. To convince the Israelites that YHWH truly sent him, Moses has to perform a reversible scepter-serpent transformation (Ex 4:1-5), interpreted as the remelting of an old copper artifact (scepter to serpent transformation) and the casting of a new scepter (serpent to scepter transformation).13 If the exhibition of Moses’s metallurgical skill reveals his status of emissary of YHWH, we may conclude that, in the Southern Levant, those who mastered metallurgy were approached in such a fashion. They were even the only people authorized to speak in his name. A similar conclusion emanates from Gen 32:1, a verse reporting the unpremeditated encounter of Jacob with emissaries of YHWH in Mahanaim/Penuel. Jacob’s fearlessness suggests that these emissaries are not divine beings, but rather mortals with a special closeness to YHWH. Nothing here reveals how Jacob identifies them, except their location at Mahanaim, identified as the camp of God (Gen 32:2). This site belongs to the Sukkot valley (Deir Alla area), where an important metal industry existed at the Early Iron Age.14 So we may conclude that the people Jacob met were identified as emissaries of YHWH because the site was a camp of metalworkers. This special status of the metalworkers survived for a long time in Israel. The Zechariah vision accounts for four metalworkers that YHWH will send to deliver the Israelites from their oppressors (Zech 2:2-4). 1.2. The Shasus and YHWH Before the rise of Israel, the name Yahu (yhw) is found in an Egyptian cartouche from the temple of Amon at Soleb (upper Egypt) dated to the reign of Amenophis III (1402–1363 BCE).15 The exact meaning of the 13

N. AMZALLAG 2009, 394-396. See also Chapter 3. M. HAR-EL 1977, 76, 83; J. TEBES 2007, 82. At the end of the tenth century BC, Penuel was even the administrative center of this metallurgical activity. See R. COUGHENOUR 1989. 15 R. GIVEON 1971, 26-28; 14

76

CHAPTER 4

inscription (tꜢ šsw yhw ) remains debated, but Shasu is clearly the name of a nomad people located by the Egyptians in the Southern Levant, Northwestern Arabia and Sinai.16 The expression tꜢ šsw yhw has many possible translations (the land of Shasu-Yahu / Yahu in the land of the Shasus / the Yahu land of the Shasus), but most scholars acknowledge today that the expression denotes an interference between YHWH and the Shasus in the Southern Levant at the end of the Bronze Age.17 The metallurgical affinities Among the Egyptian mentions of the Shasus, at least three associate these nomads with the region of Seir.18 One of these inscriptions (tꜢ šsw s’rr) even mentions Seir as their homeland.19 This importance of Seir is confirmed in the mention of ‘the Shasu clans of Edom’ in further Egyptian inscriptions from the Late Bronze Age.20 The interference between the Shasus, Seir and YHWH, reflected by Egyptian documents, corroborates the link between YHWH and the Arabah region in the early biblical poetry. Once gathered, these observations suggest a worship of YHWH among the Shasu nomads attached to the Arabah region, before the rise of Israel.21 Though the Arabah was not an area of important metallurgical activity in the Late Bronze Age, there are some indications of a possible relationship between these ‘Shasu-Yahu’ and the production of copper. First, the main center for copper production in the Arabah was the Timna mining area in the Late Bronze Age. A papyrus from the Amon temple from Thebes dated from the end of the second millennium BCE mentions the Shasu nomads living in a region named qḥqḥ, a term apparently derived from the verb to hammer metal. Raphael Giveon deduces from this mention that the Shasus lived in the mining district of Sinai or Arabah.22 Other Egyptian documents identify the Shasus as worshippers of Hathor, the 16 If the name Shasu truly derives from the Egyptian verb šꜢs (= to move on foot), it betrays their nomadic lifestyle and their involvement in terrestrial transportation. See D. REDFORD 1992, 271-272. 17 R. GIVEON 1971, 26-28; D. REDFORD 1992, 272-273; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 139; T. RÖMER 2015, 313 and ref therein. 18 It comprises an inscription on a Tanis obelisk dated from the reign of Ramses II and in the papyrus Harris (I, 76, 9-11) dated from the reign of Ramses III. See R. GIVEON 1971, 28; 100; 137-139. 19 M. WEIPPERT 1974, 270-271. 20 Papyrus Anastasi VI, lines 51-61. See GIVEON 1971, 132-133; G. RICE 1993, 29-30; T. LEVY et al. 2004b, 66-67. 21 D. REDFORD 1992, 273. 22 R. GIVEON 1969-1970, 52.

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

77

Egyptian goddess of mines who had a sanctuary in Timna in the Late Bronze Age.23 Another indication supporting the participation of the Shasus in metal production is their association with the term smt in a context designating their land (tꜢ šsw smt). This mention, introduced immediately after the famous link between Yahu and the Shasu (tꜢ šsw yhw), is interpreted as a reference to the people designated as Simeathites in the Bible (1 Chr 2:55), and affiliated to the Qenites.24 This interpretation associates the Shasus both with YHWH and the Qenites, before the emergence of Israel. The Shasu identity The production of copper was a prosperous activity in the Arabah in the fourth and third millennia BCE.25 This metal industry collapsed following the development of its Cyprus counterpart, from the mid-third millennium BCE. However, the production of copper did not entirely cease in the Arabah after the hegemony of the Cyprus copper industry. In the Late Bronze Age, it involved a small fraction of the nomad people the Egyptians identified as Shasus, which spread in the Jordan Valley, and the desert areas of the Southern Levant, Northwestern Arabia and Sinai.26 Beyond these peaceful activities, the Shasus were denounced for their plundering incursions in the cultivated areas of Canaan, especially in drought years. This bellicose character is probably the source of their many conflicts with the Egyptians.27 The term Shasu is ignored in the Bible. However, the Book of Judges might contribute to identify them. Its chapter 6 reveals that the sedentary population of early Israel was threatened by nomads coming annually from the east with their herds:

23 R. GIVEON 1971, 241. Raphael GIVEON (1969-1970, 51) even concludes that “...Hathor of the Shosu may be the Hathor of the mining centers, well known, for instance, at Serabit el Khadim.” Concerning the worship of Hathor in Timna during the Egyptian period, see B. ROTHENBERG 1988. 24 R. GIVEON 1971, 26-28; D. REDFORD 1992, 272; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 140. 25 N. YAHALOM-MACK et al. 2014; I. LÖFFLER 2018, 264-265. 26 The demographic importance of the Shasus in the Southern Levant is revealed by Egyptian documents listing them among the prisoners they brought from their military campaign. Raphael GIVEON (1971, 241) concludes that the Shasus were a population of demographic importance similar to the Kharou, an Egyptian term designating the sedentary population from Canaan. Other documents reveal that the Shasus were also installed in the Nile Delta and Lower Egypt at the Late Bronze Age. See R. GIVEON 1971, 237-239; D. REDFORD 1992, 271-272. 27 R. GIVEON 1971, 236-237.

78

CHAPTER 4 3 For

whenever the Israelites planted crops, the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East would come up against them. 4 They would encamp against them and devour the produce of the land, as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel and no sheep or ox or donkey. 5 For they would come up with their livestock and their tents; they would come like locusts in number – both they and their camels could not be counted – so that they laid waste the land as they came in. (Judg 6:3-5)

This description corroborates the Egyptian documents denouncing the frequent incursions of the Shasus among the sedentary population of Canaan. And like the Shasu nomads, the Midianites, Amaleqites and sons of Qedem come from the east. They have to cross the Jordan River to plunder the Israelites farmers (Judg 6:33). These parallels suggest that the peoples the Egyptians designated as Shasus correspond in the Bible with the Midianites, Amaleqites and sons of Qedem. This conclusion enables us to examine whether the Shasu populations living out of the Arabah also worshipped YHWH. 1.3. The Shasu peoples Midian The Horeb, the holy mountain of YHWH, is located in the territory of Midian (Ex 3:1).28 This mere evidence implies that YHWH was acknowledged as a prestigious deity there. The status of Jethro the Qenite as priest of Midian (Ex 2:16; 3:1) concurs. Furthermore, Midian is identified in Gen 25:2 as the son of Abraham. This affiliation integrates this tribe into the family of peoples blessed by YHWH through this patriarch. Furthermore, the mention of the elders of Midian joining those of Moab to recruit Balaam (Num 22:4,7) to curse Israel in the name of YHWH is meaningful only if the deity was also well-known, worshipped and even committed to them. Further indications of YHWH’s worship emanate from the ‘Shasu’ invasion exposed in Judges 6-7. It is there reported that Gideon heard a dream that a Midianite plunderer told to his friend (Judg 7:13). He also overheard the interpretation of this dream: “And his comrade answered: This is no other than the sword of Gideon the son of Joash, a man of Israel; the God (‫ )האלהים‬has given into his hand Midian and all the camp” (Judg 7:14). In the absence of any other mentioned deity, the appellation 28

M. WEINFELD 1988, 449; M. DIJKSTRA 2001, 83.

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

79

the God here probably refers to YHWH. And in this case, we may conclude that YHWH was a great deity for the Midianites, the god granting them victory over their enemies and success in plundering. Amaleq Amaleq is a people closely related to Seir in the Bible, as revealed first by the integration of Amaleq among the clans of Edom in Gen 36:16. Identifying Amaleq as the son of Timna (Gen 36:12) and the grand-son of Seir (Gen 36:20-22) even affiliates them to the ancient population inhabiting the region of Seir before the Iron Age. The Timna ‘motherhood’ of Amaleq even links this tribe with the mining area from the Arabah which was active in the Late Bronze Age. These elements invite us to integrate Amaleq within the group identified as Shasu-Seir and worshippers of YHWH. This latter conclusion is further confirmed by the way the Amaleqites are approached in the Bible. The Book of Chronicles reveals that the mountain of Seir was the last refuge for the ‘remnant of Amaleq’ (1 Chr 4:42-43). This detail suggests a special relationship of Amaleq with this area, which is quoted as the domain of origin of YHWH in biblical poetry (Deut 33:2; Judg 5:4). In Deuteronomy, the war of extermination conducted by the Israelites against Amaleq is justified by their treacherous attack of Israel, few after its emergence. Remember what Amaleq did to you on the way as you came out of Egypt. How he attacked you on the way when you were faint and weary, and cut off your tail, those who were lagging behind you, and he did not fear God (‫ולא‬ ‫( ”)ירא אלהים‬Deut 25:17-18).

If the attack of the Amaleqites is regarded here as a sin against YHWH, we should deduce that they were expected to fear God, meaning that the Israelites regarded the Amaleqites as YHWH’s worshippers. The Balaam oracle in Num 24:15-24 supports this premise. This vision addresses three groups: Israel (vv 17-19), Amaleq (v. 20) and Cain (the Qenites, vv. 21-22). Amaleq is granted there the prestigious title of ‘first among the nations.’ Its gathering with two nations acknowledged for their worship of YHWH suggests that Amaleq is concerned, too. An Amaleqite worship of YHWH may explain why the god remains neutral in the conflict between Israel and Amaleq immediately after the crossing of the Sea (Ex 17:8-16). There, Moses, Aaron, and the elders of Israel do not consult YHWH concerning the war’s issue. They do not supplicate YHWH to help them against their enemy. Rather, the narration

80

CHAPTER 4

relates that the issue of the battle curiously depended on a magic-like operation performed by Moses with his staff: “Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed, and whenever he lowered his hand, Amaleq prevailed” (Ex 17:11). Apparently, the author of Exodus approaches the conflict between Israel and Amaleq as a ‘domestic’ war between two groups worshipping YHWH in parallel. Committed to both, the god here remains neutral during the conflict. A kinship between Amaleq and the tribe of Ephraim is revealed in the Song of Deborah (Judg 5:14).29 The Amaleqite background of this Israelite tribe is confirmed by the mention of a Mount Amaleq as a prestigious place within the territory of Ephraim (Judg 12:15), supporting the argument for the existence of Amaleqite worship of YHWH prior to the rise of Israel. Sons of Qedem In Genesis, ‘sons of Qedem’ is the general appellation of the sons born from Abraham’s concubines (Gen 25:6). It comprises all the descendants of Ismael the son of Hagar (Nebaioth, Qedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish and Qedem, Gen 25:13-16) and all the sons of Qeturah (Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, Shuah, and also Sheba and Dedan, Gen 25:2-3). From these names (which also includes Midian), we may deduce that the biblical appellation ‘sons of Qedem’ gathers small tribes and clans scattered in Northwestern Arabia. This localization corresponds to their position as easterners (Qedem = east) in the eyes of people living in the Southern Levant. Affiliating all these tribes to Abraham indicates, here again, that they all benefitted from YHWH’s blessing given to the patriarch.30 Further indications confirm that YHWH was a great deity among them. The sons of Qedem were reputed in Israel for their wisdom (1 Kgs 5:10), which in a biblical context reflects a deep knowledge of YHWH. Fragments of this wisdom are even integrated in Proverbs. The content of chapter 30 is attributed to Agur the son of Jakeh, a man of Massa (Prov 30:1). This latter designation refers apparently to an Arabian tribe affiliated to Ismael in Gen 25:14.31 Proverbs 31 is also attributed to another author from Massa, 29

M. SMITH 2001, 145; B. BENZ 2016, 375; C. LEMARDELÉ 2019, 78. This transfer of blessing is even explicit in Gen 16:10-11 concerning the sons of Ismael. 31 R. CLIFFORD 1999, 260. T. LONGMANN III, 2006, 518-519. Contra, Bruce WALTKE (2005, 465) interprets hamaśśā᾿ as a prophetic technical term meaning oracle, proclamation. But this interpretation is challenged by the further information about the worship of YHWH among the sons of Qedem. 30

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

81

a king named Lemuel (Prov 31:1). Both chapters express wisdom and devotion to YHWH. Even Job, the hero of the book devoted to thorough theological questions, is identified as a son of Qedem (Job 1:3), providing another indication that the Israelites granted these people an in-depth knowledge of YHWH. We may conclude that YHWH was acknowledged as a great deity by the nomad peoples designated as Shasus by the Egyptians in the Bronze Age. Among these groups, it seems that the metalworkers enjoyed the prestigious title of emissaries, prophets and priests of YHWH. 2. THE IRON AGE WORSHIP OF YHWH Jeremiah 35 unveils that the Qenite Yahwistic traditions survived for centuries alongside the Israelite religion. Furthermore, new national entities (Edom, Moab, and Ammon) emerged at the Iron Age on the territory previously identified with the Shasus. Their rise was accompanied by a process of sedentarization and a change in lifestyle. These new nations had each one a patron deity (Qos, Kamoš and Milcom for Edom, Moab and Ammon respectively), and the biblical sources do not explicitly refer to the worship of YHWH in their midst. However, some indications suggest that local Yahwistic traditions survived these changes. 2.1. Edom and the renewal of the copper industry The emergence of Edom is consubstantial with the renewal of the copper industry, the main source of wealth in this arid region.32 Traces of coordination at a large scale are visible in the Arabah valley, including fortifications, large workshops, and infrastructure supporting an intense mining activity.33 However, instead of a centralized kingdom, Edom was rather a confederation of scattered semi-nomad tribes cooperating in the production of copper.34 The material culture of these peoples suggests continuity with the Shasus previously living in the region of Seir.35 The people of Edom being mainly composed of metalworkers and other Shasu tribes, the traditional worship of YHWH is expected to extend to 32 For Edward LIPINSKI (2006, 381), “The Edomite economy and even the State itself seem to be derivatives of this “international” trade, while the internal exchange of goods appears to have been minimal in Edom, as shown by the great variety of pottery assemblages.” 33 T. LEVY et al. 2004a. 34 T. LEVY 2009, 159; U. AVNER 2014, 141-143. 35 T. LEVY et al. 2004b; T. LEVY 2009.

82

CHAPTER 4

the Iron Age. Its importance is even supposed to increase with the renewal of the copper industry.36 Such worship of YHWH among the Edomites finds support in the Bible. First of all, the oracles gathering Seir/Edom with Dumah (Isa 21:11) and Dedan (Jer 49:8; Ezek 25:13) detail the closeness between Edom and the sons of Qedem.37 Like the clans associated with the sons of Qedem, the Edomites are acknowledged for their famous wisdom in the Bible (Jer 49:7; Obad 8).38 The Edomite origin of some poets and singers appointed to the Jerusalem temple in the early Persian period confirms their status as religious elite for the Israelites.39 YHWH’s commitment to Edom is supported by the genealogy affiliating Esau to Isaac, and enjoying by this means the divine blessing of this patriarch. His first-born status and the content of the original blessing (“Cursed be everyone who curses you, and blessed be everyone who blesses you!” Gen 27:29) Isaac devoted to Edom promotes its indefectible leadership in the matter of Yahwism. The mention, in Deut 2:5, of YHWH giving Mount Seir (the area of origin of his cult in Judg 5:4) to the sons of Esau corroborates this conclusion.40 This Edomite leadership is confirmed in an Amos oracle mentioning Edom as the head of the nations ‘calling’ YHWH’s name (Amos 9:12).41 2.2. Ammon, Moab and the Shasu sedentarization The Amos oracle conceals the identity of the nations following Edom. However, the story of the Jehoshaphat war in 2 Chr 30:1-31, a conflict for 36 The idea of a cult of YHWH in Edom has been defended for a long time, and is even integrated in the Qenite hypothesis concerning the origin of YHWH. For recent views, see J. DEARMAN 1995, 126-127; L. HANEY 2007; J. BLENKINSOPP 2008, 149-151; J. KELLEY 2009; N. AMZALLAG 2015b, 39-42. Many decades before, Robert PFEIFFER (1948, 159-167) even suggested the existence of an Edomite source (source S) in the Bible. 37 The Book of Job presents the hero as a son of Qedem (Job 1:3) originating from the land of Uz (Job 1:1), a region identified with Edom in Lam 4:21. Concerning the localization of the land of Uz, see D. WOLFERS (1995, 83-91). About the Edomite origin of Job and its theological implications, see J. DAY 1994; M. POPE (1973, xxxvi); E. Good 1990, 3. From similar observations, Robert PFEIFFER (1926, 17-22), even concluded that the Book of Job is written by an author of Edomite origin. Mervin POPE (1973, xli) also argues that the author of Job is not necessarily Israelite. 38 R. PFEIFFER 1926; J. TEBES 2009. 39 N. AMZALLAG 2015b, 35-39. 40 The divine gift of Mount Seir to Esau is also mentioned in Jos 24:4: “And to Isaac I gave Jacob and Esau; And I gave Esau the hill country of Seir to possess, and Jacob and his children went down to Egypt.” 41 It also appears in Malachi’s answer to those Israelites who complained that YHWH was committed to the Edomites even before Israel: “‘I have loved you,’ says YHWH. But you [Israel] say, ‘How have you loved us? Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?’” (Mal 1:2).

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

83

religious authority between Judah and Edom/Seir, reveals that Amon and Moab followed Edom in this conflict.42 A worship of YHWH in these nations is not surprising if they emerged from the sedentarization of Shasu tribes.43 The rise of local favorable conditions, rather than the coming of a new population from afar, was the main factor promoting this sedentarization process.44 In the absence of favorable climatic conditions for agriculture, this sedentarization was likely stimulated by the opportunities arising from the copper industry.45 The discovery of important workshops for metallurgy on the eastern side of the Jordan Valley (e.g. the Deir Alla region) indicates that, beyond the development settlements alongside the King’s Highway supplying logistic support to the transportation of copper, people living in Moab and Ammon were involved in the purification, alloying and casting of copper en route to Aram and the Mediterranean shore.46 Combining these observations with the metallurgical background of ancient Yahwism makes the assumption of the worship of YHWH in these nations plausible. Few biblical indications support such a premise. First, the Book of Genesis identifies Moab and Ammon as the sons of Lot (Gen 19:36-38), Abraham’s nephew (Gen 12:5). YHWH’s commitment to Lot is visible when he sends the divine emissaries to rescue him and his family before the destruction of Sodom (Gen 19:14-15). Furthermore, we read in Deuteronomy that YHWH granted Moab and Ammon their land (Deut 2:9, 19). This claim reflects the divine commitment to these two nations, and their divine protection against potential aggressors, including Israel. Also, in Numbers 22, YHWH does not look like a foreign deity to the Moabites. There, Balak calls Balaam to curse the Israelites in the name of YHWH, instead of recruiting the priests of Kemoš, the national deity, for this purpose. The representation of Balak sacrificing holocausts to YHWH 42

N. AMZALLAG 2016a, 189-192 E. VAN DER STEEN 1996, 60; E. GASS 2009, 232-238 (esp. 236). A stele from Khirbet Balu῾a, the first fortified city of Moab in the early Iron Age, represents divine beings conferring authority to a human leader figured with attributes typically associated with the Shasu in the Egyptian iconography. See I. FINKELSTEIN and O. LIPSCHITS (2011, 146-147), who date this stele from the 11-10th centuries BCE. 44 R. YOUNKER 1999, 199-201, 206. 45 G. MATTINGLY 1997, 219; A. MAZAR 2003, 88; E. LIPINSKI 2006, 322. Israel FINKELSTEIN and Oded LIPSCHITS (2011, 145) concluded: “...it seems reasonable to link the prosperity of southern Moab to the sudden rise in copper production at Khirbet en-Nahas (and neighbouring sites) south of the Dead Sea and the transportation of large quantities of this copper through the ‘King’s Highway’ along the Transjordanian plateau to the north.” 46 O. NEGBI 1998, 196; X. VELDHUIJZEN and E. VAN DER STEEN 1999, 195, 198; J. TEBES 2007, 82. 43

84

CHAPTER 4

(Num 23:2-3,15) confirms this premise. The same conclusion concerns Ammon. In the Book of Judges, the declaration of war Jephtah addresses to the king of the Ammonites ends with the following sentence: “YHWH the Judge, decide this day between the people of Israel and the people of Ammon” (Judg 11:27). Here again, this claim fits a domestic war between two peoples to which YHWH is similarly committed. The oracles addressed to Moab and Ammon confirm their integration into the sphere of YHWH’s authority. As in Israel, the sin of idolatry is in Jeremiah 48 curiously approached as the cause of Moab’s expected exile: “And I will bring to an end in Moab, declares YHWH, him who sacrifices in the high place and burns incense to its gods” (Jer 48:35). In the prophetic books, this relation of causality is normally reserved to a people committed to YHWH and concerned with the exclusiveness of his cult. The parallel between Israel and Moab becomes even explicit in this lament: “Then Moab shall be ashamed of Kemoš, as the house of Israel was ashamed of Bethel, their confidence” (Jer 48:13). Also, the punishment of Ammon’s sins by exile (Amos 1:15; Jer 49:3) and YHWH’s promise to bring back the Ammonites from captivity in the future (Jer 49:6) draw obvious parallels with the YHWH-Israel relationship. Therefore, we should conclude that Ammon and Moab acknowledged YHWH as a great deity and considered Edom/Seir, instead of Israel, as the leading people in his worship. 3. ESOTERIC VERSUS PUBLIC WORSHIP Ignoring YHWH’s worship among the eastern neighbors of Israel is easy, today, because it did not leave any trace. YHWH does not appear in the ancient documents relative to these nations. Sanctuaries to YHWH are unknown, and the god is even absent from the theophoric names.47 But once gathering the information in the Bible about the status of YHWH in these nations, it appears that this god was not officially worshipped there, and that a taboo even existed concerning the public use of his name. This presumption of taboo concerning the name and identity of YHWH is supported by the claim that the Israelites ignored the actual name of the god 47

A mention of YHWH is attested in the Moabite stele of Mesha (8th Century BCE), where the king declares that he carried off “[the ve]ssels of YHWH (w᾿qḥ.mšm.᾿[t.k]ly.yhwh) from the Israelite sanctuary of Atarot, and dragged them before Kemoš (w᾿sḥb.hm.lpny.kmš)” (line 18. Translated by A. NICCACCI 1994, 230). For Juan TEBES (2018, 174), this report “...is hardly evidence of the Moabite recognition of YHWH as ‘the official god of the Israelites’, as some have argued.” Rather, it might merely inform us that King Mesha preserved YHWH’s cultic vessel from destruction and hosted it in the temple of Kemoš.

THE NON-ISRAELITE WORSHIP OF YHWH

85

of their fathers, before the Exodus, concurs: “Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” (Ex 3:13). Later, we read in Ex 6:3 that even Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did not use YHWH’s name. If so, a worship and even devotion to YHWH may have existed in the past without any explicit reference to the god.48 The revelation of YHWH’s name (Ex 20:2) is even the Decalogue’s opening claim, the covenant transforming Israel into the people of YHWH. Through this ‘revelation’, the Israelite religion probably introduced a novelty. Whereas the name YHWH remained concealed in all other nations and was known only by small elite, it became public in Israel and was freely used, even in theophoric names. This conclusion finds further supports in the Bible. The Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 33), for example, introduces a difference between the esoteric knowledge of YHWH outside of Israel, and his public worship by the sons of Jacob, through the Torah: “Yes, he loves peoples (‫)חבב עמים‬, all his holy ones are in your hand; So they followed in your steps, receiving direction from you. Moses commanded us a Torah, a possession for the assembly of Jacob” (Deut 33:3-4). In Isa 24:1415, we even see an attempt to extend to other nations (here the Phoenicians) the public worship of YHWH characterizing Israel: They lift up their voices, they sing for joy;   Over the majesty of YHWH they shout from the sea. Therefore in full light (‫)בּ ֻא ִר ים‬ ָ give glory to YHWH;   In the islands of the sea, [glorify] the name YHWH, the God of Israel

The absence of a public cult to YHWH outside of Israel might explain the worship of a national deity in these nations, such as Milcom (Ammon), Kemoš (Moab) and Qos (Edom).49 Their cult becomes a public counterpart to the esoteric worship of YHWH, in which these patron gods could be identified as divine emissaries of YHWH.50 These considerations have many consequences concerning our approach to Psalm 29. If this psalm was initially devoted to YHWH, its author was not necessarily an Israelite, due to the absence of specific Israelite markers. 48 T. RÖMER 2014, 12. The way Moses’ question is formulated, in Ex 3:13, suggests that he also ignored this genuine name before. The use of the name Elohim/Haelohim in the dialog between Moses and YHWH (vv. 6, 11-13) before the revelation of the name (v. 15) supports this premise. 49 Qos is curiously ignored in the Bible. His mention in Edomite theophoric names suggests that this divine figure was the patron-god of Edom. See A. KNAUF 1999, 674-677; E. LIPINSKI 2006, 364, 400-401; J. KELLEY 2009. 50 This situation is suggested in Deut 32:8-9.

86

CHAPTER 4

Even the explicit use of YHWH’s name cannot serve as an indication of its Israelite origin. Instead, the song might belong to the small circle of metalworkers to whom YHWH’s esoteric name was apparently revealed. If Psalm 29 originates from a metallurgical horizon, the voice of YHWH likely has no direct relation with rain, fertility and agriculture, as the Qenites considered agriculture a taboo (as revealed in Gen 4:12 and Jer 35:7). In this case, Psalm 29 is probably organized around the metallurgical dimension of this vocal theophany.

CHAPTER 5

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29 The voice of YHWH is a central feature in Psalm 29. Reiterated seven times, it is the main element supporting the interpretation of this hymn in a storm-god context.1 Verily, the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29 does not speak; it thunders. It is the subject of verbs of motion, some of them with a destructive connotation.2 These features are undoubtedly compatible with a thunderstorm dimension to this vocal theophany.3 Nonetheless, this interpretation is not devoid of problems. For example, the over-importance of the voice of YHWH, in regard to the deity himself, is unexpected in a hymn devoted to a storm god.4 This problem became resolved by interpreting the noun qȏl as an exclamation meaning ‘hark’ instead of considering qȏl YHWH as a construct expression designating the voice of YHWH. Through this artifice, YHWH, instead of his voice, recovers his function as the agent of the actions.5 The actions following the vocal theophany in verses 5, 7, 8, and 9, do not include rainfall, however. It is why scholars have argued that the thunder could not fully explain the vocal theophany in Psalm 29. Others suggest that the thunderstorm is not the genuine theophany, but only a metaphor in Psalm 29.6 As shown in Chapter 3, however, the thunderstorm is only one of the three possible vocal theophanies of YHWH in the Bible. If Psalm 29 was initially devoted to YHWH, the vocal theophany might refer to a volcanic/metallurgical rather than a storm context. With these considerations in mind, the three possible expressions of the voice of YHWH are evaluated in the six verses quoting it. 1 A. WEISER 1962, 260-261; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 245; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 346; J. VAN DER WESTHUIZEN 1993, 113; J. TIGAY 2008, 406. 2 B. SCHRAMM 2009, 18; R. JACOBSON 2014, 285. 3 M. KLINGBEIL 1986, 89; G. BARBIERO 2016, 386. 4 For Erhard GERSTENBERGER (1988, 131), “It is stranger still that the thundering voice of YHWH is so much at the center of the attention [...] The voice almost obscures the figure of YHWH himself.” 5 C. PETERS 1939; E. VOGT 1960, 17-18; E. GREENSTEIN 1992, 56. 6 G. BARBIERO 2016, 383; R. JACOBSON 2014, 285-287. Peter CRAIGIE (1983, 246) argues that “The poet, in Ps 29, has developed the general storm imagery of war poetry and highlighted the ‘voice’ of God as an echo of the battle cry.”

88

CHAPTER 5

1. VERSE 3

‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ַע ל ַה ָמּיִ ם ֵאל ַה ָכּבוֹד ִה ְר ִעים יְ הוָ ה ַע ל ַמיִ ם ַר ִבּים‬

The parallel mention of the voice of YHWH upon water (3a), and of YHWH upon mighty waters (3c), stresses a correspondence between YHWH and his vocal theophany. It even promotes the voice of YHWH to the rank of essential attribute and hypostasis of the deity. It also associates this voice with a liquid element designated as mayîm in 3a and mayîm rabbîm in 3c. A colon mentioning YHWH thundering (3b) separates these two references to water. There, YHWH is called ᾿el-hakābȏd, an expression generally translated as ‘god of glory’. The concept of glory is generalist, so that it cannot supply any specific information concerning the meaning of the voice of YHWH in this verse. However, the construct form ᾿el-hakābȏd promotes a specific bondage between YHWH and the concept of kābȏd, transforming it into an essential attribute of YHWH.7 The claim from the verse before (2a) identifying kābȏd as the name of YHWH (kābȏd šemȏ = kābȏd is his name) supports this view. The four mentions of kābȏd in Psalm 29 (vv. 1,2,3,9) confirm that clarifying its meaning may be critical to understanding the meaning of verse 3, and even the whole hymn.8 The thunderstorm context – kābȏd as glory A survey of the translations of Psalm 29 indicates that kābȏd is classically approached as glory, both in verse 3 and in its other mentions in Psalm 29 (vv. 1,2,9). A translation of 3b into ‘the god of glory thunders’ is compatible with the storm interpretation. It transforms the thunder, through its loudness, into a powerful expression of the ‘divine glory.’9 As the center of a chiastic structure, the content of 3b interferes with the meaning of the two parallel claims formulated in 3a and 3c. The first colon (3a) mentioning ‘YHWH upon water’ becomes a poetic image of the god standing upon clouds filled with rainwater, which fits, again, the classical imagery of the storm god opening the clouds to release their rain. The mention of YHWH upon mighty waters, in 3c, echoes the claim in 3a. In the storm-god interpretation, it adds praise for the abundance of water (e.g. Num 20:11; 2 Chr 32:4), here the rain falling immediately after YHWH’s thundering (3b). Then, understanding kābȏd as glory in verse 3 promotes the storm interpretation of the voice of YHWH, and both in times, it resolves the problem of the missing mention of rain in the hymn. 7 For Rolf JACOBSON (2014, 285), this expression reveals that “glory is a quality that belongs to God ... and God alone.” 8 B. MARGULIS 1970, 333, 336. 9 C. KLOOS 1986, 24, 58.

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

89

The volcanic context – kābȏd as radiant molten lava In his analysis of Psalm 29:3, Frank Cross approaches kābȏd “... as a technical term, namely the refulgent and radiant aureole which surround the deity and his manifestation or theophanies.” He adds that “The original image giving rise to this technical usage is not clear” and compares it with the Akkadian notion of melammu referring to an emission of light.10 This view converges with the opinion of scholars who have identified kābȏd-YHWH as a technical term describing something attached specifically to YHWH, rather than an abstract concept.11 Further scholars assume that kābȏd refers to a concrete reality in Psalm 29.12 For Benjamin Sommer, kābȏd in Psalm 29 refers to the heavy, fiery and radiant nature of YHWH’s body: “Since the Israelites conceived of the divine body as stunningly bright or surrounded by an extraordinary radiance, we would expect this body to be made of or surrounded by an intense fire. Hence, the kābȏd would refer to God’s fiery presence.”13 The expression “the kābȏd-YHWH was seen/revealed” encountered in many other sources corroborates this premise.14 Some sources even describe it as a shining reality, as in Isa 60:1 (“The kābȏd-YHWH is shining [‫]זָ ָרח‬ upon you”) and Ezek 10:4b (“And the court was filled with the radiance [‫ ]נֹגַ הּ‬of kābȏd –YHWH”).15 Radiance is even the typical marker of kābȏd-YHWH in Ex 40:34-35; Numb 14:10; 16:9; 17:7; 20:6, and 1 Kgs 8:11. The contemplation of kābȏd-YHWH through the consumption of sacrifices on the copper altar (Lev 9:6,13-14) reveals its specific association with fire, not with the thunder. This fiery dimension is confirmed in Isa 10:16-17: “...under his kābȏd there shall be kindled a burning like the burning of fire. And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame”. In his analysis of Psalm 29, Frank Cross integrates this luminous and fiery imagery in a storm-god context of interpretation, in assuming that ...“kābȏd can be taken to have originated in the dark but fiery storm 10

F. CROSS 1973, 153 (note 30). Concerning the material nature of kābȏd-YHWH as a technical term, see J. COLLINS 1997, 580-584; J. KUTSKO 2000, 80. 12 C. FENSHAM 1963, 88. For James MAYS (1985, 63), “Psalm 29 is the only text in the Old Testament in which the glory of the Lord is so extensively and directly said to be manifested in what we moderns call natural phenomena.” For Hans-Joachim KRAUS (1988, 347348), kābȏd in Psalm 29 evokes a reality closely related to YHWH’s theophany and of concrete nature, which may be experienced 13 J. KENNEDY 2009, 10; B. SOMMER 2013, 133. 14 e.g. Ex 16:10; Lev 9:6, 23; Num 14:10; 16:19; 17:7; 20:6; Isa 35:2; 40:5; 60:2; 66:18; Ps 97:6 15 Ex 33:22-23; Lev 9:6, 23; Num 16:19; 17:7; 20:6; Isa 35:2; 40:5. 11

90

CHAPTER 5

cloud especially associated with the theophany of the storm god.”16 However, the kābȏd-YHWH knows also a volcanic expression in the Bible, revealed in the Sinai theophany: “The appearance of the kābȏd-YHWH was like devouring fire on the top of the mount” (Ex 24:17). This description even promotes identifying kābȏd-YHWH with the radiance emitted by the molten lava flowing from the top of a volcano. The description of the same event in Deuteronomy confirms this link between molten lava and kābȏd-YHWH: “And you said, ‘Behold, YHWH our God has shown us his kābȏd and greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire” (Deut 5:24a). This last statement is especially interesting for our purpose as it combines the hearing of the voice of YHWH with his kābȏd, both expressed in a volcanic context. Consequently, kābȏd-YHWH may designate the thermal radiance emanating from molten lava.17 The mention of water in Ps 29:3 apparently disproves the volcanic interpretation of kābȏd-YHWH. However, it should be remembered that the volcanic event is described as a liquefying process in Judges 5:5 (“The mountains flowed [‫ ]נזלו‬before YHWH, That Sinai before YHWH, the God of Israel”) and in Isa 64:2 (“at your presence the mountains flowed” [‫)]מפניך הרים נזלו‬. The flowing lava is even explicitly identified with mayîm in Micah: “And the mountains will melt under Him, and the valleys will split open; like wax before the fire, like water poured down a steep place (‫( ”)כמים ֻמגָּ ִר ים במורד‬Mic 1:4). The same watery mention of the lava is encountered in Hosea: “The princes of Judah have become like those who move the landmark; upon them I will pour out my wrath like water (‫אשפוך‬ ‫( ”)כמים עברתי‬Hos 5:10).18 These observations make the volcanic interpretation possible in Ps 29:3: YHWH blows (through his voice) on the stone to transform it into lava in 3a. Then, the 3b colon focuses on the thermal radiance (kābȏd) emanating from this blowing activity, and the 3c colon mentions the resulting abundance of lava (mayîm).

16

F. CROSS 1973, 153 (note 30). N. AMZALLAG, 2015c. 18 Even the expression mayîm rabbîm may be interpreted as an abundant flow of lava. In the volcanic theophany described in Psalm 18, verse 16 mentions YHWH’s roaring (‫)מגערתך‬ through the blowing of air from his tuyères (‫)מנשמת רוח אפך‬. Immediately after this verse resuming the volcanic activity of YHWH, the psalmist praises YHWH for rescuing him from mayîm rabbîm (‫( )ימשני ממים רבים‬v. 17). This designation is not surprising. As Jean KOENIG (1966, 16) noticed, no appellation other than mayîm exists in biblical Hebrew for designating a liquid element. 17

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

91

The metallurgical context – kābȏd as radiant molten metal Identifying kābȏd with thermal radiance extends its expression to the domain of metallurgy. In the Ezekiel vision of the celestial universe (Ezekiel 1), the term ḥašmal in Ezek 1:4 probably designates molten metal from which intense light radiates (see Chapter 2). Later in this vision, Ezekiel likens this ḥašmal radiant reality with kābȏd-YHWH (Ezek 1:27-28). The likening of the solar radiance with kābȏd-YHWH confirms this view. It is visible in Isa 59:19 (“So shall they fear the name of YHWH from the west, and His kābȏd from the rising of the sun.”) and in Ps 84:12 (“For sun and shield YHWH Elohim; Grace and kābȏd will give YHWH”).19 The relationship between the two becomes explicit in Psalm 19:2-7, where the sun becomes the ultimate expression of kābȏd-YHWH.20 These quotations confirm that kābȏd-YHWH is not an abstract concept here, but rather a reality that should be identified with thermal radiance. Furthermore, the radiance and heat emanating from the sun were likened in antiquity with that of molten metal, so that the sun was conceived as a giant piece of metal heated daily in the celestial furnace.21 So the relationship between the sun and kābȏd-YHWH in the Bible promotes both its radiant nature and a metallurgical context of its expression.22 The metallurgical approach to kābȏd-YHWH transforms the appellation ᾿el-hakābȏd into a reference to the metallurgical background of YHWH. It also potentially coheres with interpreting the divine voice in 3a with blasting, referring to the metallurgical activity. In this context, the 3c colon praises the abundance of molten metal (mayîm rabbîm) resulting from the divine blasting in the furnace.

19 Mark SMITH (2002 [1990], 152) concluded: “Psalm 84 and other evidences for solar language predicated of YHWH militates against interpreting solar worship in the temple as non-Yahwistic.” 20 C. BOYD-TAYLOR 1998, 78-79. The claim that the heavens declare kābȏd-YHWH (v. 2) is echoed by the mention of the sun rising daily from his ‘tent’ (᾿ōhel, v. 5) or ‘his canopy’ (ḥūpātȏ, v. 6). 21 For example, in ancient Egypt, the sun was approached as a mass of copper arising daily from the primeval ocean. See S. SAUNERON and J. YOYOTTE 1959, 38. According to Kristian KRISTIANSEN and Thomas LARSSON (2005, 294-296), the discovery of the sun chariot from Trundholm (1500-1300 BCE) betrays a representation of the daily change in the composition of the sun from gold to bronze during the nightly netherworld journey. 22 Also ἠλέκτρον, the Septuagint translation of ḥašmal and the designation of electrum, is a term closely related to elector, one of the Greek names for the sun.

92

CHAPTER 5

The three possible expressions of the vocal theophany of YHWH (atmospheric, volcanic and metallurgical) yield a coherent meaning in Ps 29:3. They are not equally likely, however. If, as suggested, the appellation of YHWH as the ‘god of kābȏd’ (᾿el-hakābȏd, Ps 29:3) transforms kābȏd into an essential attribute (as in Ps 24:7-8, 10), it does probably not express the abstract concept of glory and magnificence, two qualities associated with all divine beings. Rather, kābȏd apparently refers in verse 3 to radiance as YHWH’s specific attribute, promoting an interpretation of the vocal theophany in the context of metallurgy or volcanism, rather than storm. 2. VERSE 4 ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ַבּכּ ַֹח; קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ֶבּ ָה ָדר‬ Verse 4 is the only verse from Psalm 29 with two mentions of the voice of YHWH. The two parallel hemiverses are generally approached as exclamations praising the power (4a) and majesty (4b) of the voice of YHWH.23 The semantic field of ‫ =( כוח‬strength) in 4a is so broad that it is equally compatible with the three possible interpretations of the voice of YHWH: atmospheric, volcanic or metallurgical. The hadar attribute of the voice of YHWH (4b) is less evasive, however. In biblical Hebrew, this adjective is attached both to human and divine beings. As for kābȏd, the meaning of hādār is not necessarily similar in both. In the human domain, hādār expresses the magnificence of garments, buildings, cities, landscapes, and peoples.24 In a divine context, it designates splendor. A radiant connotation of this divine splendor is visible in Ps 104:1-2: “1 Bless YHWH, O my soul! YHWH my God, you are very great! You are clothed with splendor and majesty (‫)הוד והדר‬. 2 Covering yourself with light as with a garment; stretching out the heavens like a tent.” In Psalm 145, hādār is paralleled with kābȏd in expressing the divine majesty (‫הדר כבוד הודך‬, v. 5a) and sovereignty (‫וכבוד הדר מלכותו‬, v. 12b). If kābȏd here designates radiance, hādār probably has a similar meaning in Psalm 145. This radiance is confirmed in Isa 35:2, where the divine hādār is explicitly likened with kābȏd-YHWH: “They shall see kābȏd-YHWH, the hādār (‫ )הדר‬of our God” (Isa 35:2b). 23 Alternately, the 4a and 4b cola were considered as subjects of the verb ‫ שבר‬in 5a, after reading the expressions ‫ בכוח‬and ‫ בהדר‬as adverbs instead of predicates. See D. PARDEE 2005, 161; J. KENNEDY 2009, 15. This possible reading, however, does not supply further information for determining the nature of the voice of YHWH in verse 4. It conditions its interpretation to the meaning of the voice of YHWH in verse 5. 24 Ezek 16:4; Isa 35:2; 53:2; Lev 23:40; Ps 8:6; Prov 20:29; Lam 1:6.

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

93

In contrast, we do not find biblical sources linking the divine hādār with storm and thunder. These considerations support the interpretation of hādār in 4b in the context of thermal radiance. They promote a volcanic or metallurgical dimension of the voice of YHWH in verse 4, rather than their atmospheric counterpart. 3. VERSE 5 ‫א ְרזֵ י ַה ְלּ ָבנוֹן‬-‫ת‬ ַ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה שׁ ֵֹבר ֲא ָרזִ ים; וַ יְ ַשׁ ֵבּר יְ הוָ ה ֶא‬ A strong parallelism characterizes the two hemiverses of verse 5. The homology between the voice of YHWH in 5a and YHWH in 5b even transforms the vocal theophany into an essential attribute. In both hemiverses, YHWH and his voice are the subject of a verb of action (šbr), with a change of verbal form (qatal in 5a and yqtol in 5b) typically encountered in biblical poetry. In both hemiverses, cedars are the complement of the verb šbr. Verse 5 is of special importance for our purpose, because it is the first verse where the voice of YHWH is the subject of a verb of action. The first hemiverse praises the ability of the voice of YHWH to break (šbr, qal) cedars. This destroying power is meaningful in the three possible expressions of the vocal theophany: • Thunderstorm: Violent storms are frequently accompanied by strong winds. This is especially true in the mountainous regions where the cedars grow. Consequently, the thunder expression of the voice of YHWH may easily account for the fall of trees during storms. Then, the fall of cedars, the strongest trees in Canaan, emphasizes YHWH’s outstanding power through his storm theophany. • Volcanism: The destructive consequences of the volcanic theophany of YHWH are explicit in the Bible. They include a desertification effect (“Behold, by my roaring (‫ )בגערתי‬I dry up the sea, I make the rivers a desert” Isa 50:2a). The destructive consequences for the vegetation are detailed in Nah 1:4-5: “4 He roars (‫ )גוער‬on the sea and makes it dry; He dries up all the rivers; Bashan and Carmel wither; The bloom of Lebanon withers. 5 The mountains quake before him; The hills melt (‫ ;)התמגגו‬The earth heaves before him, The world and all who dwell in it.” In both examples, the lethal effect of the volcanic eruption is consecutive to the ‘roaring’ of YHWH. It is why the ravaging action of the voice of YHWH in Ps 29:5a is compatible with a volcanic interpretation. • Metallurgy: The metallurgical expression of the voice of YHWH requires fuel. Consequently, verse 5a might also express the use of cedar wood for fuel. Such a purpose is attested in Num 19:6, a verse mentioning

94

CHAPTER 5

the setting of cedarwood on the altar for the combustion of sacrifices (“And the priest shall take cedarwood and hyssop and scarlet yarn, and throw them into the fire burning the heifer”). Thus, associating the voice of YHWH with the blast of air in a furnace is compatible, too, with the content of 5a. In situations of parallelism between the two hemiverses, the second one frequently introduces details illuminating the meaning of the first one. Here, the two cola differ by three points: (i) the voice of YHWH (5a) versus YHWH (5b) as subject; (ii) a change in stem/tense of the verb, šōbēr (qal šbr = to break) in 5a and wayĕšabbēr (piel šbr = to shatter) in 5b; (iii) an undefined reference to cedars in 5a versus the definite reference, in 5b, to the cedars from Lebanon. All these changes display the same trend of amplification of claims: from YHWH’s theophany in 5a to the genuine presence of the god in 5b; from the action of breaking in 5a to the action of shattering in 5b25; and from the mention of a few cedars in 5a to all of them in 5b. This last change is intriguing, however. It is odd for a hymn to praise YHWH for destroying all the cedars from Lebanon, especially when no reason for such destruction is reported. This overwhelming destructive power is unusual even if Psalm 29 was initially devoted to a god other than YHWH. The claim in 5b is especially intriguing because cedars are acknowledged in the Bible not only for their strength and majesty but also for being trees planted in the garden of god (Ezek 31:8) and belonging to the deity (Ps 80:11). This special status of the cedars from Lebanon is explicit in Ps 104:16: “The trees of YHWH are watered abundantly; the cedars of Lebanon that he planted.” Therefore, it becomes difficult to assume that verse 5b praises the blind destruction of (all) the cedars from Lebanon by YHWH. Of course, this incongruity could always express the poetical amplification of a trait independent of any theological basis. But another potential interpretation resolves this anomaly. At first sight, the qatal/yqtol pattern in verse 5 promotes the same meaning of šbr in the two occurrences. The Masoretic vocalization of wyšbr as wayĕšabēr (piel stem, he shutters/shuttered) expresses this parallel meaning.26 Other vocalizations are possible, however. For example, the waw preposition may introduce a qal imperfect (wayšbor = and he breaks), stipulating that the action mentioned in 5a as qal perfect extends to the future. 25

B. SOMMER 2013, 136. Vocalization of the hifil stem of šbr is theoretically possible, but this stem is not found in the Bible. 26

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

95

The root šbr has other meanings in biblical Hebrew. In qal stem, it means to buy, to acquire, or to receive, mainly in the context of food transactions.27 In its hifil stem, this root means to supply (e.g. Prov 11:26). This meaning is especially interesting because the third singular person of hifil šbr (to supply) is vocalized wayašĕbēr, another possible reading of wyšbr in 5b. In this case, YHWH becomes praised in 5b for supplying the cedars from Lebanon which are destroyed by the voice of YHWH in 5a. The hifil of šbr also signifies to bring into being/existence in biblical Hebrew.28 We find this other meaning in Isa 66:9: “Shall I bring to existence (‫ )אשביר‬and not cause to bring forth?” says YHWH; shall I, who cause to bring forth, shut the womb?” Extending this meaning to Psalm 29 transforms 5b into a praise to YHWH for his multiplying the cedars in Mount Lebanon. Such a claim is echoed in Ps 104:16, revealing that YHWH plants the cedars of Lebanon. Two of the three possible readings of wyšbr resolve the problematic mention of YHWH destroying all the cedars. The voice of YHWH remains in 5a the factor that breaks the cedars. However, verse 5b now praises YHWH for planting, cultivating and even supplying the cedars of Lebanon. The image of YHWH supplying trees (5b) for their destruction by the voice of YHWH (5a) has no special meaning in the thunderstorm context. The supply of wood is also meaningless in the volcanic context, because bitumen and sulfur, instead of wood, were regarded as the (divine) fuel igniting a volcanic eruption.29 However, this wood supply is relevant in the metallurgical context because wood served as fuel in the furnace, and because air blasting (the voice of YHWH) was the agent accelerating its combustion. The wordplay on šbr in verse 5 promotes, therefore, a metallurgical interpretation of the voice of YHWH. 4. VERSE 7 ‫יְ הוָ ה ח ֵֹצב; ַל ֲהבוֹת ֵאשׁ‬-‫קוֹל‬ The two halves of verse 7 yield a sentence in which the voice of YHWH is, again, the subject of an action. The only verb in this verse (qal ḥṣb, to hew, to carve, to split) designates the quarrying of stones for construction. It also refers to similar actions, such as hewing out from rocks, digging cisterns, channels and burials, excavating stones, and mining ore.30 27

HALOT, 4:1404, DCH, 8:252-253. BDB, 991. 29 See Chapter 2, note 105. 30 BDB, 345; HALOT, 1:342; DCH, 3:291-292. According to K. SCHUNK (1986, 125), to cut off is probably the basic meaning of this verb from which all the other meanings derivate. 28

96

CHAPTER 5

In verse 7, the subject of this verb is the voice of YHWH, describing its effect on flames of fire. Storm Reading Psalm 29 in a storm context, most scholars interpret the mention of flames of fire (‫ )להבות אש‬as a poetic reference to lightning splitting the sky.31 Furthermore, the use of the verb ḥṣb reflects a representation of lightning carved from a heavenly coarse substance of both solid and fiery nature.32 However, this representation is supported neither by the Canaanite mythology nor by its Near Eastern counterparts. In verse 7, the voice of YHWH is explicitly designated as being the agent generating the flames of fire. However, in a storm, lightning is visible before the thunder, so that this latter cannot easily be identified as the source of lightning. These considerations challenge the thunder interpretation of the voice of YHWH in verse 7. Volcanism Lightning emanates from the crater of an erupting volcano, generated by the sudden electric discharge of the polarized ash particles emanating from the crater. Thus, if the voice of YHWH thunders from the crater (e.g. Deut 4:15, 33, 36; 5:24), lightning might potentially be considered as its consequence. However, this representation does not easily justify using the verb ḥṣb (to hew, to carve, to split) in verse 7.33 This reduces the likelihood of the volcanic interpretation of the voice of YHWH in verse 7. Metallurgy The most straightforward interpretation of verse 7 is to consider the flames as emanating from an authentic fire. In this interpretation, the verb ḥṣb describes the skewing effect of the voice of YHWH on the flames. Such influence is easy to understand in a metallurgical context. In a furnace at work, each blast of pressured air modifies the flames’ shape, carving the fire. Furthermore, precisely as described in verse 7, this effect follows the 31 M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 154; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 248; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 349; E. GREENSTEIN 1992; B. SOMMER 2013, 138; G. BARBIERO 2016, 382. 32 For Dennis PARDEE (2005, 168), the verb ‫ חצב‬elicits “...the chipping off of lightning bolts by striking some heavenly substance that would be analogous to earthly flint.” 33 It always remains possible to imagine a solid-state reality above the clouds (such as the firmament), which becomes split by lightning during an atmospheric storm. But this premise does not fit volcanic storms, because the lightning emanates from the crater, not from the upper sky.

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

97

roaring provoked by the airflow. The metallurgical dimension of the voice of YHWH therefore provides the most appropriate reading of verse 7. 5. VERSE 8 ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה יָ ִחיל ִמ ְד ָבּר; יָ ִחיל יְ הוָ ה ִמ ְד ַבּר ָק ֵדשׁ‬ Verse 8 comprises two cola with a high level of parallelism. Like in verse 5, the vocal theophany is the subject in the first colon, and YHWH in the second. And here too, both YHWH and his vocal theophany are the subject of the same verb ḥwl (hif). The complement is almost the same (mdbr) in both, with the second colon adding a geographical detail (Qadesh). The location of Qadesh in northern Syria stems mainly from an interpretation of Psalm 29 in the Ugarit context of a storm god. Out of it, however, positioning Qadesh in the Southern Levant is more likely. Qadesh is identified in Gen 14:6-7 as an oasis (also called Ein Mishpat), probably located in the Dead Sea–Arabah area. This localization in the southeastern region of Canaan is confirmed by its proximity to the desert of Paran (Num 13:26) and to the desert of Zin (Num 20:1; 27:14; Deut 32:51). The interpretation of verse 8 is mainly conditioned by the meaning of the verb ḥwl (hif). A first meaning expresses the giving of birth (Isa 26:7; 66:7; Jer 6:24; 50:43), and designates the various expressions of a woman in labor (pain, contractions, weakness, trembling).34 It extends in biblical Hebrew to further situation of fear and panic accompanied by spasms and uncontrolled writhing and trembling, all behaviors characterizing a woman in labor (Mic 4:9, Ps 48:7).35 In biblical Hebrew, a second meaning of the root ḥwl (hif) expresses the idea of strength, power, endurance, prosperity/ wealth.36 Until now, only the first meaning of ḥwl (to tremble, to writhe) was considered in Ps 29:8. The LXX translates this verb as συσσείοντος (to make to shake) in 8a and as συσσείω (to shake) in 8b, followed by most exegetes, translators, and modern scholars. Nevertheless, this approach should be reconsidered, in light of the frequent meaning of ḥwl in the nominal forms for designating strength, wealth, or even military forces, in the Bible.37 For example, the formulation “YHWH ῾ōśâ ḥāyîl” (Ps 118:15-16) 34

BDB, 297; HALOT, 1:311; DCH, 3:212. A. BAUMAN (1980, 346) concludes that ‫ חיל‬in biblical Hebrew evokes “...involuntary and uncontrolled spasmodic movements to which the body is surrended, accompanied by a sense of weakness and heat.” 36 BDB, 298; HALOT, 1:311; DCH, 3:213; H. EISING 1980, 348. 37 H. EISING 1980, 353. 35

98

CHAPTER 5

undoubtedly refers to YHWH as the god giving strength and prosperity.38 Indeed, Psalm 29 is the only biblical instance where the hifil stem of ḥwl is translated as cause to be in anguish or cause to tremble.39 In the two other biblical uses (Ps 10:5; Job 20:21), the hifil ḥwl expresses the second meaning: to strengthen, prosper, and endure. These observations invite us to examine the nature of the voice of YHWH in verse 8 in light of the two possible meanings of ḥwl (hifil). The thunderstorm context The classical approach of ḥwl as to tremble in Ps. 29:8 promotes the vision of the voice of YHWH thundering so violently that it shakes the desert. Scholars deduced that the verb ḥwl likens this effect with the convulsions of a woman in labor.40 Others interpret it as YHWH fighting the forces of chaos, here associated with the wilderness.41 The labor of birth is also identified as poetic imagery for the ‘childbearing’ of the desert, the explosion of life following a violent storm.42 These interpretations are not entirely satisfying in light of the mention of the desert of Qadesh in the second colon. It would be unusual for the forces of chaos to be identified with a specific desert, especially a desert designated as Qadesh (= holy/holiness). Independent of this Chaoskampf interpretation, mentioning a specific location is unexpected if YHWH is praised for supplying rain even in desert areas. Through midbar qādēš, the poet may eventually refer to the southernmost desert, expressing the action of the storm god even in the most arid environments of the Southern Levant. But the use of the location Qadesh (holiness) for designating a hyper-arid region is not the best way to praise the overwhelming powers of a storm god. The volcanic context The combination of the voice of YHWH with ḥwl (hif) as to tremble is appropriate for describing earthquakes and their thundering sounds accompanying a volcanic eruption. However, here again, the location of this activity in the desert of Qadesh, in 8b, does not fit this interpretation, because The expression ‫באלהים נעשה חיל‬, encountered in Ps 60:14 and Ps 108:14, accounts for the strength given by YHWH to his followers. It should here again be considered as a substitution of the use of hif ḥwl. 39 BDB, 297; HALOT, 1:311; DCH, 3:212. 40 E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 137. 41 A. BAUMAN 1980, 347. 42 G. BARBIERO 2016, 380. 38

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

99

there is no volcanic activity in the Sinai, Negeb, and Arabah valley. A volcanic interpretation is always possible after transforming Qadesh in this verse into a cryptic reference to the Sinai theophany.43 Alternately, the existence of a Qadesh volcanic site in Arabia is possible, also. However, both solutions remain speculative. The second meaning of ‫ חיל‬as strength does not fit anymore the volcanic interpretation of the voice of YHWH in this verse. The metallurgical context In Num 20:14-16, we learn that the Israelites sent messengers from the oasis of Qadesh where they encamped. They addressed a request to the Edomites to cross their land (Num 20:17), informing us that a Qadesh oasis was located at the western boundary of the Arabah valley, the land of Edom. The Deuteronomy confirms this point in localizing Qadesh at the vicinity of Mount Seir, on the west bank of the Arabah valley: “46 So you remained at Qadesh many days, the days that you remained there. 1 Then we turned and journeyed into the wilderness in the direction of the Red Sea, as YHWH told me. And for many days we traveled around Mount Seir” (Deut 1:46-2:1). The vicinity of the oasis of Qadesh to the area of copper production is suggested in Numbers 33. There we read that two stations only (Hor and Tsalmona) separate the oasis of Qadesh from the mining area of Punon (Num 33:37-42), the central area of copper mining in the Early Iron Age. In verse 5, the two meanings of the verb šbr are used, the first for the voice of YHWH ‘breaking’ the wood (5a) and the other for YHWH planting the trees, and then supplying them for fuel in the furnace. The same exploitation of the two meanings of ḥwl is here meaningful in the metallurgical context of interpretation of the voice of YHWH. The 8a colon evokes the sound of the air blast in the many furnaces involved in copper production in the Arabah valley. This breathing sound, by its intermittent nature, breaks the silence characterizing this desert area in a way recalling a trembling voice. The second meaning of the hifil of ḥwl (to strengthen, to prosper, to endure) becomes the logical consequence of the interpretation of the voice of YHWH in a metallurgical context. Copper was a material of high economic value, so this activity became the most important source of wealth in this area. And YHWH (rather than his voice) becomes praised for providing it. Then, the reference to Qadesh rather than Punon or another mining site might be an intentional feature restricting 43

A. WEISER 1962, 264.

100

CHAPTER 5

the mercantile dimension of metallurgy regarding the holy dimension of this activity patronized by YHWH. Also in verse 8, the metallurgical context yields the simplest interpretation. 6. VERSE 9 ‫יכ לוֹ ֻכּ לּוֹ א ֵֹמר ָכּבוֹד‬ ָ ‫וּב ֵה‬ ְ :‫חוֹלל ַאיָּ לוֹת וַ יֶּ ֱחשׂ ֹף יְ ָערוֹת‬ ֵ ְ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה י‬ Verse 9 is the last verse of Psalm 29 mentioning the voice of YHWH. It should therefore be regarded as the culmination of the seven expressions of the vocal theophany in this song.44 Like the first verse mentioning the voice of YHWH (verse 3), it comprises three subunits (here individualized by the pausal indications of the Masoretic cantillation). Here again, the voice of YHWH is the subject of two verbs of action (ḥll and ḥśp), the first one being phonetically close to the verb ḥwl twice mentioned in the previous verse. Here too, the likelihood of the three possible expressions of the voice of YHWH may be compared. The storm context The meaning of verse 9 remains obscure in the storm context of interpretation.45 The imagery of pain and trembling in the previous verse (storm context) stimulates the interpretation of the verbal form yḥll in verse 9 as the polel stem of ḥwl in the third singular person.46 Then, the interpretation of ᾿ayālȏt as hinds/deer advances a translation of 9aα as “The voice of YHWH causes hinds to calve”, a poetical expression describing the miscarriage or premature birth of wild animals provoked by a violent thunderstorm.47 However, scholars have noted that the voice of YHWH and the mother animals may hardly be respectively the subject and the complement of a verb expressing the action of giving birth.48 An emendation of ‫ =( אילות‬deer) into ‫ =( אלות‬oaks or terebinths) resolves this crux.49 This reading is compatible with a view of yḥwll as the qal stem of ḥll (= to break, to crush).50 In this case, verse 9a praises the wind and thunderbolt destructive effects on trees during a violent storm.51 44

W. BRUEGGEMANN and W. BELLINGER 2014, 147-148. F. FENSHAM 1963, 92. 46 HALOT, 1:311. 47 E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 137; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 244; J. TIGAY 2008, 402. 48 B. SOMMER 2013, 139. 49 C. BRIGGS and E. BRIGGS 1906, 254; M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 154; D. PARDEE 2005, 162; B. SOMMER 2013, 140; G. BARBIERO 2016, 380. 50 M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 154; M. GIRARD 1984, 234. 51 Another variant comes from the interpretation of ‫ יחולל‬as a polel stem of the verb ‫חול‬ (= to dance, to writhe). See B. SOMMER 2013, 139. In this context, the verse relates trees 45

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

101

The subsequent action is compatible with the two interpretations. An interpretation of the verb ḥśp as to cause a premature birth has been proposed after changing the Masoretic vocalization wayḥĕśōp (qal ḥśp) in the piel wayĕḥaśōp.52 Combined with the complement y῾rwt interpreted as goats or young animals, the verb then expresses the premature birth provoked by the thunder.53 Alternately, an interpretation of the verb ḥśp as to lay bare evokes the thunder’s destructive effect not only on individual trees (first proposition), but on the thinning of the whole forest. Lightning and thunder were in the past supposed to reflect the activity of the storm god upon the clouds. It is why the interpretation of the hêkal (9b) as the heavenly residence of YHWH is justifiable in the storm context.This interpretation is not easy to reconcile, however, with the subsequent colon mentioning this hêkal entirely filled with kābȏd, because this singularity has no special relevancy in the storm god perspective. Alternately, the hêkal of YHWH has been identified as the Jerusalem temple.54 The explicit presence of kābȏd-YHWH in the Jerusalem temple authorizes this premise, but the lack of Israelite markers in Psalm 29 renders this interpretation speculative. Furthermore, the Jerusalem temple may hardly be identified as the palace from where the storm god stimulates the storm, because he is expected to operate from the heavens. The volcanic context The volcanic interpretation of the voice of YHWH may easily account for the destructive effect exposed in verse 9. A parallel phenomenon is explicitly detailed in Nah 1:4-6, where volcanism of divine origin causes the sea and rivers to dry up and the evergreen mountains to wither. And here again, the thundery voice of YHWH is at the source of this destruction: “He roars (‫ )גוער‬on the sea and makes it dry, he dries up all the rivers; Bashan and Carmel wither, the bloom of Lebanon withers” (Nah 1:4). The volcanic context may also account for the kābȏd mentioned in Ps 29:9, identifying it with the radiance emitted by molten lava. In this context, YHWH’s hêkal becomes no other than the crater where the lava accumulates. A problem remains, however. In the storm interpretation, the storm’s destructive power is compensated for by rainfall and its beneficial effects violently agitated by wind and imaged as frenetically dancing to the sound of the voice of YHWH. 52 HALOT, 1:359. Ps 29:9 being the only biblical occurrence of such meaning, it becomes dependent on the storm interpretation of this verse and the whole psalm. 53 HALOT, 1:423 and G. DRIVER 1931, 255; H. STRAUSS 1970, 96. 54 See Chapter 1, note 34

102

CHAPTER 5

on vegetation. In Psalm 46, the destructive power of YHWH associated with volcanism is used to fight against war and tyrants. In Nahum 1, this destructive volcanic dimension expresses the deity’s anger. Also in Psalm 18, the volcanic theophany is transformed into a weapon fighting against enemies. Nothing similar exists in Psalm 29, however. Sinners are absent in this psalm. YHWH’s anger is ignored too, as well as supplications of his worshippers for intervention on their behalf. In these conditions, it remains unclear why YHWH is praised in Psalm 29 for his deleterious effect on the wild. In the absence of a convincing answer, the volcanic interpretation of the voice of YHWH is unlikely in verse 9. The metallurgical context Here, the first colon focuses on the supply of wood for fuel in the furnace. This meaning becomes visible once reading ᾿ylwt as ᾿êlȏt (oaks, terebinths) instead of ᾿ayālȏt (wild goats, deers, as vocalized by the Masoretes).55 In this context, the verb ḥll refers to the fragmentation of pieces of wood by the action of fire boosted by blasting. Then, the whole colon claims that the voice of YHWH heard in the furnace causes deforestation. This first part of 9a has also another meaning if ᾿ylwt refers to the South Arabah area of Eilot, a region including the mining area of Timna.56 In this context, the verb ḥll may designate the action of digging and mining. If these two meanings are gathered, the 9a colon designates the two elements combining in the furnace, the copper ore and wood, with a poetical mention of the voice of YHWH promoting their mixing in the furnace. The second and third subunits can also be interpreted in the metallurgical context. Once kābȏd in 9c is identified as the radiance emitted by molten metal (see verse 3), the hêkal mentioned in 9b is no other than the furnace. This interpretation fits the representation of YHWH’s celestial universe as a giant furnace filled with the radiance of molten metal (see Chapter 3). Even the participation of the voice of YHWH in ‘saying’ this kābȏd, suggested in 9c, becomes explicit. It reflects the contribution of air blasting in the furnace for reaching the molten state and its consecutive radiance. In this perspective, verse 9 resumes the whole metallurgical activity, beginning with the accumulation of ore and wood (9a), their mixing in the furnace (9b) and the production of copper once it has reached the molten state, materialized by the radiance revealing YHWH (9c). 55 Many authors argue this reading of ‫אילות‬. See for example C. BRIGGS and E. BRIGGS 1906, 254; M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 154; D. PARDEE 2005, 162; B. SOMMER 2013, 140. 56 B. MARGULIS 1970, 339-342.

THE VOICE OF YHWH IN PSALM 29

103

The voice of YHWH has many meanings in this metallurgical interpretation. It expresses the action of wind on the fire of a furnace. This voice also calls the metalworkers to gather the raw materials (wood and ore). Surprisingly, this call’s issue is not the production of more and more copper and the consecutive perspectives of wealth. Instead, as exposed in 9c, YHWH’s theophany (the transformation of the furnace into his terrestrial ‘palace’ in 9b) and the contemplation of his kābȏd (9c) are the researched issues. The religious dimension of metallurgy, visible in 9bc, also finds an expression in 9a. The noun ya῾ărâ designates a honeycomb in biblical Hebrew, a place where a blowing voice is audible, too, and where honey, the sweet food coming from YHWH (Ps 81:17) and symbolizing wisdom (Isa 7:15,22), accumulates. So, the voice of YHWH, in 9a, leads to the discovery of this treasure identified with the knowledge of YHWH. The first part of 9a corroborates this interpretation, through allusions to dancing (ḥll) goddesses (᾿êlȏt). If we identify Ashera as being initially the goddess of mines, dance and wisdom (as Hathor, her Egyptian counterpart), so the voice of YHWH, here again, stimulates knowledge and wisdom through their presence. 7. SYNTHESIS The present investigation has evaluated the likelihood of the three possible expressions of the voice of YHWH (storm, volcanic and metallurgical) in the six verses mentioning it. The results of this investigation may be summarized as follows: • Verse 3: the voice of YHWH fits the three possible expressions. However, the atmospheric meaning remains possible only if kābȏd expresses glory/magnificence instead of YHWH’s essential attribute. Otherwise, the volcanic and metallurgical expressions should be preferred. • Verse 4: The three possible expressions of YHWH’s voice have the same likelihood in 4a. However, the parallel in 4b between hādār and kābȏd promotes, again, a volcanic or metallurgical dimension, rather than their atmospheric counterpart (in the case kābȏd expresses an essential attribute of YHWH). • Verse 5: The three expressions of the voice of YHWH are equally possible in verse 5 as long as we ignore the wordplay in šbr. This latter, however, advances especially the metallurgical dimension of YHWH’s vocal theophany.

104

CHAPTER 5

• Verse 7: The metallurgical dimension of the vocal theophany provides the most straightforward interpretation of verse 7. The two alternatives require emendations and allegorical interpretations for formulating a coherent interpretation. • Verse 8: The reference to midbar Qadesh in verse 8 promotes, here again, the metallurgical dimension of meaning at the expense of the two others. • Verse 9: The content of verse 9 is compatible with the three dimensions of the voice of YHWH. Nevertheless, the many layers of meanings and wordplays find expression in the metallurgical dimension only. A general trend emerges from this overview. The metallurgical dimension is the only one compatible with all the expressions of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29. The volcanic dimension is incompatible with the content of verse 7 and with the mention of midbar Qadesh in verse 8. It also ignores the wordplays in verses 5 and 9. The atmospheric dimension remains plausible as long as the two others eventualities are ignored. However, in most cases, these latter dimensions, and especially the metallurgical one, yield more appropriate interpretations. This finding strengthens the assumption that Psalm 29 belongs to a pre-Israelite form of Yahwism, in which the god, his theophany, and mode of action are closely related to the experience of metallurgy.

CHAPTER 6

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29 In the previous chapter, we deduced that the sound of the air flowing in the furnace is the most appropriate expression of the vocal theophany in Psalm 29. This conclusion invites us to examine the five further verses of Psalm 29 (vv. 1-2, 6, 10-11) through this perspective. 1. VERSE 1 ‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּנֵ י ֵא ִלים; ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬ The opening verse of Psalm 29 comprises two parallel cola beginning with the same invitation to ascribe to YHWH. The first colon identifies the recipients of this call as sons of god(s) (bĕnê ᾿ēlîm).1 The second details what these sons of god(s) are invited to ascribe: kābȏd and strength. Determining the identity of the addressees is therefore critical for understanding the whole psalm. 1.1. The first colon The classical interpretation of Psalm 29 privileged two possible identities of the ‘sons of god(s)’: minor deities or heroes among mortals. Minor deities In reference to the Ugarit literature, the sons of god(s) became in Psalm 29 the designation of minor deities, here invited to acknowledge and praise the victory of the storm god against his arch-enemy, the deed granting him authority on the pantheon.2 It even stimulates the reading of bĕnê ᾿ēlîm as sons of El (bĕnê ᾿ēl) after interpreting the final mem as enclitic.3 This divine nature is compatible in the Bible with the description of 1 In the expression bĕnê ᾿ēlîm, both terms of the construct are plural. This double plural structure fits both a translation as sons of gods and as sons of God. See G. RENDSBURG 1990, 36. 2 T. GASTER 1946, 58; M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:175; C. KLOOS 1986, 16; R. CLIFFORD 2002, 154-155; G. BARBIERO 2016, 385-386. 3 C. KLOOS 1986, 16. However, the use of enclitic mem in biblical Hebrew being a matter of debate (A. LAATO 2018, 140 [note 123]), this interpretation is well-founded only if Psalm 29 (or at least parts of it) is borrowed from the Ugarit or North Canaanite poetic traditions.

106

CHAPTER 6

heavenly creatures singing around the throne of YHWH (e.g. Isa 6:2-3), but also of the divine emissaries participating in the divine council and receiving instructions from YHWH (e.g. Psalm 82; Job 1:6-12).4 The mention of bĕnê ᾿ēlîm in the first verse echoes the mention of the people of YHWH in the last verse. These people were generally identified as the Israelites (see Chapter 1), on the basis of a presumed correspondence in Psalm 29 between the heavenly sanctuary (v. 1) and its terrestrial counterpart, the Jerusalem temple (v. 9).5 If verse 11 is original in Psalm 29, and if the sons of gods are divine beings, their mention in verse 1 becomes an invitation addressed to the heavenly choir to join the musical worship by the people of YHWH (= the Israelites), through the performance of Psalm 29.6 Mortals The bĕnê ᾿ēlîm in verse 1 might also designate the same mortals identified as the people of YHWH in verse 11. Such an interpretation is supported by the kings and heroes’ designation as bĕnê ᾿ēlîm in Ugarit, beside the mention of immortal beings through the same appellation.7 This status also concerns mortals chosen or cherished by a god.8 Also in the Bible, the Rephaim are mentioned as valiant and mighty warriors. Their semidivine nature is not explicit, but they are gathered in Deut 2:11 with a people called Anakim, endowed of outstanding powers, at least in the eyes of the Israelites (Num 13:22, 33; Deut 9:2). The semi-divine nature of these people is confirmed in Gen 6:4, where these heroes (called here Nephilim) are issued from the union of the sons of Elohim with the daughters of Adam.9 4

C. BRIGGS and E. BRIGGS 1906, 251-252; L. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1981, 124; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 246; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 347; R. CLIFFORD 2002, 153; B. SOMMER 2013, 130; R. JACOBSON 2014, 283. See Theodore MULLEN (1980) concerning the parallel between the divine council in Ugarit and ancient Israel. For Walter BRUEGGEMANN and William BELLINGER (2014, 147-148), the psalm addresses the secondary Canaanite deities deposed by the rise of YHWH. 5 G. BARBIERO 2016, 385-386. 6 R. JACOBSON 2014, 283. 7 For example, King Karet self-defines as son of El when he supplicates his ‘father’ to heal him from illness (KTU 1.16 i. 9-11, 20-23). 8 J-L. CUNCHILLOS 1976, 208-209. Jesus-Luis CUNCHILLOS (1976, 212-216) even concludes that El’s son was an honorific title attached to kings, great warriors, and high-ranking peoples evoked in the Ugarit literature as rp᾿uma. 9 R. HENDEL 1987. The identification of bĕnê ᾿ēlîm in Psalm 29 as heroes from the past is already suggested by Saadia Gaon in his commentary on the Psalms. Interestingly, these sons of god all belong to the pre-Israelite period in Canaan, and the Bible even specifies that they disappear with the emergence of Israel, Ammon and Moab (Deut 2:11, 20-21; 3:11; Jos 11:21-22; 13:12).

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

107

The metalworkers are another group with the status of semi-gods in the Southern Levant. This feature is revealed in Gen 4:1, the verse relating the divine involvement in the birth of Cain: “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten/created a man with YHWH (‫)קניתי איש את יהיה‬.” Cain, and with him all the corporation members, are the only mortals enjoying such a privilege.10 Further biblical indications confirm this status. The first is the closeness stressed in Genesis 32–33 between the divine being struggling with Jacob on the Jabbok and Esau, the forefather of Edom. In Genesis 32, the mysterious creature is called both mortal (᾿îš) in verse 25 and divine being in verse 30. Furthermore, Esau appears in Gen 33:1, immediately after the ‘divine being’ evanesces with sunrise (Gen 32:29-31). A few verses later, Jacob explicitly likens Esau to a divine being: “For I have seen your face, which is like seeing the face of God, and you have accepted me” (Gen 32:10b). The second set of indications comes from the Book of Isaiah. There, the prophet tries to minimize the prestige of the metalworkers in the eyes of the Israelites through incriminating them of producing metallic figurines used as idols (Isaiah 44).11 In this sermon, the prophet claims that “the metalworkers are (only) of man (‫( ”)וחרשים המה מאדם‬Isa 44:11). This vituperation is meaningful only if the Israelites granted the metalworkers a semi-divine status. Such a belief is not surprising. Unlike all the other crafts, the production of copper was approached in antiquity as a creation of matter, which granted the metalworkers demiurgic powers traditionally reserved for the gods.12 Consequently, if a correspondence truly exists between verses 1 and 11, it is especially adapted to the metalworkers, who enjoy a semi-divine status (supernatural powers and YHWH’s participation in their generation) and self-define as the people of YHWH, at least before the rise of Israel. 1.2. The second colon The second colon is generally translated as an invitation to bring/ ascribe glory and strength to YHWH. Understanding kābȏd as glory may easily integrate the perspective of praise of YHWH by divine beings and mortals. It may represent the storm god receiving homage and tributes 10 This singularity is echoed in Isa 54:16, the verse recalling that YHWH created the smith. See Chapter 2. 11 N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2018a, 2019. 12 Concerning the supernatural powers of metalworkers in antiquity, see S. BLAKELY 2006, 113-114; M. MARTIN 2005, 17-28. A similar status of the metalworkers is observed in traditional societies. See M. ELIADE 1977, 21-24.

108

CHAPTER 6

after his mythic victory.13 Strength, the other component of this homage, is unexpected, however. Whereas gods are classically called on to provide strength to their worshippers, the inverse situation is generally not encountered. This is especially true concerning YHWH, whose powers are praised in Psalm 29 through his vocal theophany. Strength (῾ōz) might express an intense faith in YHWH, but this meaning is quite inappropriate in a verse praising the semi-divine status of the participants, and their consecutive closeness to the god. The term ῾ōz is also encountered in verse 11, with which the parallels with verse 1 have already been noted (sons of god/people of YHWH). And there, the opposite reality is found: YHWH gives ῾ōz to his people (11a). Though the strength meaning of ῾ōz is always possible in 11a, another meaning of this noun, protection (e.g. Ps 28:8), might be more appropriate.14 The metallurgical context of the interpretation of Psalm 29 makes the understanding of ῾ōz as protection meaningful in verse 1. In Isa 4:5, we read that the kābȏd-YHWH, here explicitly identified as fiery radiance (‫)נגה‬, is not easy to contemplate. A ‘canopy’ of smoke conceals it, limiting its observation: “Then YHWH will create over the whole site of Mount Zion and her assemblies a cloud by day, and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for over all kābȏd there will be a canopy (‫”)ח ָפּה‬ ֻ (Isa 4:5). The same detail is attested in Ps 63:3, where the psalmist contemplates both the divine radiance (kābȏd) and something surrounding it, designated as ῾ōz: “So I have looked upon you in the sanctuary, beholding your ῾ōz and kābȏd” (Ps 63:3).15 The same combination of ῾ōz as canopy of smoke with kābȏd as thermal radiance might exist in Ps 29:1. In this case, the opening verse becomes an invitation addressed to the metalworkers (= the sons of god) to activate their furnace and stimulate the kābȏd theophany of YHWH in its canopy of smoke. 2. VERSE 2 ‫ק ֶֹדשׁ‬-‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְכּבוֹד ְשׁמוֹ; ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ַה ְד ַרת‬ Verse 2a begins like verse 1b (“ascribe to YHWH kābȏd”) in adding new elements. Now, kābȏd becomes the name of YHWH through the 13

C. KLOOS 1986, 55; R. MÜLLER 2017, 220-221. HALOT, 2:806; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 243-244. 15 The phenomenon of thermal radiance surrounded by a cloud of smoke fits the description of a volcano and a furnace at work. These two situations are likened when the cloud of smoke emanating from the volcanic theophany of YHWH in Sinai is likened with the smoke emitted by a furnace at work: “Now Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke because YHWH had descended on it in fire. The smoke of it went up like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain trembled greatly” (Ex 19:18). 14

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

109

expression kĕbȏd šĕmȏ. This expression is generally understood as a construct designating the glory of his name.16 Then, verse 2a becomes an invitation to ‘provide’ glory to YHWH’s name through the performance of this hymn.17 In 2b, kābȏd is also paired with holiness18, itself correlated with the vocal theophany of YHWH. However, kĕbȏd šĕmȏ is not necessarily only a construct expressing ‘the glory of his name’. It is also a formula claiming that “kābȏd is YHWH’s name”.19 If kābȏd is here an attribute of YHWH so essential that it expresses his identity, it probably refers to kābȏd-YHWH, the technical term expressing the thermal radiance emanating from molten metal or lava (see Chapter 5). The conjunction of the two meanings of kābȏd transforms metallurgy into the way to ‘glorify’ YHWH. This meaning extends the call to set a furnace working to reveal YHWH, formulated in the previous verse. And the ‘splendor of holiness’, in 2b, echoes the mention of the furnace as a sanctuary of YHWH in verse 9.20 The translation of hdrt as ‘apparition’, proposed by Frank Cross21, is especially appropriate if kābȏd is interpreted here not as the figurate notion of glory, but as thermal radiance in the spectrum of visible light. 3. VERSE 6 ‫ר ֵא ִמים‬-‫ן‬ ְ ‫עגֶ ל; ְל ָבנוֹן וְ ִשׂ ְר י ֹן ְכּמוֹ ֶב‬-‫מוֹ‬ ֵ ‫וַ יַּ ְר ִק ֵידם ְכּ‬ Verse 6 splits into two subunits, in which the first one encloses the verb and the second one, the complement of this verb. It is why they are frequently approached as a single grammatical entity. The subject of the verb is not mentioned, but this is either YHWH or his voice, the only subjects of the verbs from the three previous verses. Both cola express a likening with young quadrupeds, a calf in 6a and a wild ox in 6b. Two indeterminacies characterize this verse. The first one results from the absence of complement in 6a, which generates ambiguity concerning its nature. The complement may be the trees mentioned in verse 5, if the 16

T. GASTER 1946, 58. Such a meaning is encountered in Psalm 66, where the poet invites the audience to sing the ‘glory’ of his (YHWH) name: “sing the glory of his name (‫ ;)כמו שמו‬give to him glorious praise!” (Ps 66:2). 18 Mitchell DAHOOD (1966, 1:176) suggests a parallel between qōdeš in 2b and kābȏd in 2a, which even amplifies this mingling effect. 19 B. MARGULIS 1970, 336; D. FREEDMAN and F. HYLAND 1973, 243. 20 Based on Ugaritic sources, the term ‫ הדרה‬is interpreted as evoking YHWH’s theophany. See F. CROSS 1950, 21-22; F. FENSHAM 1963, 89; M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:176. Such a meaning in Ugarit is however contested today. See P. CRAIGIE 1983, 242-243; B. SOMMER 2013, 134. 21 F. CROSS 1973, 152-153 (note 28). 17

110

CHAPTER 6

mem final in wyrqdm is understood as a pronominal suffix referring to the cedars from Lebanon mentioned just before.22 Alternately, if the final mem is a stylistic feature (enclitic mem) emphasizing the action, the complement of wyrqdm becomes instead Lebanon and Sirion, the two mountains mentioned in the second colon.23 The second indeterminacy concerns the meaning of the hifil of rqd, because this verbal form is attested only in this psalm. Its meaning is deduced from the other stems of rqd, especially from the piel one expressing to leap about. Here, YHWH (or his vocal theophany) is identified as the agent stimulating the agitation among the trees and/or the mountains, which likens them to turbulent young quadrupeds. This imagery is classically interpreted in the context of a storm god theophany, in describing a violent thunderstorm breaking trees in verse 5 and quaking mountains in verse 6. The literary context of verse 6, however, invites us to revisit this interpretation. Verse 6 is flanked by two sets of three verses referring to the voice of YHWH. In this central position, it probably expresses the culmination of YHWH’s vocal theophany.24 That vocal theophany refers to metallurgy rather than storm (as suggested in Chapter 5) invites us to look for another interpretation of these two indeterminacies, and of verse 6 as a whole.25 The ambiguity concerning the complement of the verb in 6a – the trees from 5a or the mountains from 6b – introduces a link between the two. It insinuates that the mountains (verse 6) are agitated by the same cause that leads the trees to explode during their combustion in a hearth through the effect of the voice of YHWH (5a). The metaphor of young turbulent animals combined with the verb rqd announces that the voice of YHWH stimulates a frenetic agitation even among the most stable and imposing mountains, Lebanon and Hermon/ Sirion. This image even suggests that the agitation involves not only quaking, but also some violent and even uncontrolled small ‘jumping-like’ events. This latter description unfits the storm context of interpretation. It is not easily accounted for in a metallurgical context, either. Among the three possible connotations of the vocal theophany, the only one 22

G. BARBIERO 2016, 380. B. SOMMER 2013, 137. 24 Y. AVISHUR 1989, 62. 25 The mention in verse 5 of the voice of YHWH consuming the wood in the furnace confirms that the imagery in verse 6 might not refer to the storm. 23

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

111

accounting for such a ‘jumping’ is volcanism, with flows of lava suddenly thrown away from the mountain with unpredictable frequency and intensity.26 Authors have noticed the unusual appellation of young ox as ‫בן ראמים‬ and justified it through literary constraints inherent to the verse structure and alliteration.27 This may be true, but we should keep in mind that many wordplays and double meanings exist in Psalm 29 (such as in verses 2, 5 and 8). Combined with the extensive use of the name of animals as a source of wordplays and double meanings in ancient poetry,28 this characteristic calls for examining whether the name of the animals mentioned in verse 6 has a special significance. In biblical Hebrew, ‫ ראם‬is not only a noun designating the wild ox, but also a verb, to elevate, to tower, and to rise. In Zech 14:10, it refers to expected strong tectonic changes, the elevation of the mountain of Jerusalem (‫ )וראמה‬at a time when all the surrounding mountains will become plains. Thus, ‫ ראם‬may therefore be associated with something elevated. And in the semantic context of verse 6, this wordplay probably refers to Sirion and Lebanon, the two highest mountains of the Southern Levant. Through this wordplay, verse 6b claims that the voice of YHWH is able to agitate even the highest mountains. The wordplay around the appellation of the wild ox may extend to the calf. The term ‫ עגל‬is a homonym of ‫ =( עגול‬round). Through this homonymy, verse 6 illustrates how YHWH transforms the high mountains (Sirion and Lebanon) into round mountains. This description fits volcanoes. In Ps 68:16, the volcanic mountains of Bashan are identified both as mountains of god (‫ )הר אלהים‬and as rounded mountains (‫)הר גַּ ְבנֻ נִּ ים‬.29 The wordplays around the animal metaphors in verse 6 promote the idea of the volcanic transformation of mountains through the action of the voice of YHWH. Through this image, the voice of YHWH is associated not only with metallurgy, but also with its outstanding consequence: the melting of stone in the furnace, likened to a volcanic event. 26 The wild ox is reputed in the Bible as an animal that cannot be domesticated (Job 39:910). Also the calf is considered a wild and turbulent animal in Jer 31:18. See A. BERLIN 2009, 114-115; C. COHEN 2015, 85, 90. 27 C. COHEN 2015, 87. 28 See for example Christophe CUSSET (2001) and Christophe CUSSET and Antje KOLDE (2013) concerning wordplays and hidden meanings of animal names in ancient Greek poetry. 29 For the meaning of ‫ גבנון‬as round summit, see BDB, 148. This meaning may be deduced from the derivation of this adjective from the adjective ‫ =( גבן‬hunchbacked, see Lev 21:20). In the subsequent verse (Ps 68:17), comparing these Bashan mountains with Mount Zion even suggests their small size.

112

CHAPTER 6

4. VERSE 10 ‫עוֹלם‬ ָ ‫יְ הוָ ה ַל ַמּבּוּל יָ ָשׁב; וַ יֵּ ֶשׁב יְ הוָ ה ֶמ ֶלְך ְל‬ The content of verse 10 is traditionally quoted to justify the interpretation of Psalm 29 in the context of a storm theophany. This perspective emanates from the mention of mabbûl, generally interpreted as flood, in reference to the mabbûl appellation of the flood in Genesis 6-8. Let now examine first the fundaments of this interpretation. 4.1. The classical interpretation of mabbûl as flood Once mabbûl is approached as flood, the lamed prefix in lamabbûl becomes an abbreviation of the preposition ‫( על‬upon), as in Ps 9:5.30 This understanding promotes a representation of YHWH standing or even sitting upon the mabbûl, in verse 10. This image recalls the victory of Baal over the forces of chaos, the deed granting him power and authority in the Ugarit pantheon.31 If the flood refers to the primeval ocean overlaying the earth at the early time of creation, verse 10a becomes a praise of YHWH for subordinating the primeval ocean (sitting upon it) and setting the organized world.32 Psalm 29 becomes a hymn celebrating the victory of YHWH over the forces of chaos and the subsequent stabilization of the universe, like Morduk in Babylon.33 The image of YHWH sitting upon the forces of chaos remains strange, however. As mentioned in Chapter 1, Morduk and Baal do not sit upon their arch-enemy, and they do not transform it into their throne. Furthermore, no blatant sign of mythical conflict between YHWH and the primeval forces of chaos emanates from Psalm 29. A conflict is no more observable in Genesis 6-11. Rather, the flood looks in these chapters like an instrument of destruction mastered and powered by YHWH himself.34 Other biblical sources exposing the myth of creation do not formulate any explicit struggle between YHWH and the primeval ocean, but only its obedience to the creator (Job 38:8-11; Prov 8:28-29). Even the location of the divine garden of Eden near the source of the primeval waters 30

M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 154. R. CLIFFORD 2002, 154. 32 B. SOMMER 2013, 141. 33 M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:180; P. CRAIGIE 1972, 148-149; F. CROSS 1973, 147, 155; O. LORETZ 1987; R. CLIFFORD 2002, 156; D. PARDEE 2005, 171; W. BRUEGGEMANN et W. BELLINGER 2014, 148. In this perspective, the claim “YHWH upon the mighty waters” (verse 3c) becomes another mention of the subjugation of the primeval ocean which threatens creation. See C. KLOOS 1986, 60. 34 D. TSUMURA 1988, 352; 2005, 153-154. 31

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

113

flowing out to fertilize the earth (cf Gen 2:10; Isa 8:6; Ezek 28:2; 47:112; Joel 4:18; Zech 14:8; Pss 46:5; 65:10; Hag 1:9-11; 2:9) challenges the idea of their conflict with YHWH, as well as the identification of YHWH with the Canaanite storm god. This situation may explain why scholars proposed alternatives to the figuration of a mythic struggle with the forces of chaos in Ps 29:10. In preserving the interpretation of mabbûl as flood, they suggested that the expression lamabbûl might refer to ancientness (= from the time of the biblical flood) of the reign of YHWH, which echoes the mention of YHWH reigning for eternity (‫ )לעולם‬in 10b.35 Consequently, like in Genesis 6-8, even the interpretation of mabbûl as flood in Ps 29:10 does not promote necessarily a storm-god identity of YHWH. 4.2. The other meanings of mabbûl in biblical Hebrew In the Bible, the term mabbûl is encountered only in Genesis 6–11 and Ps 29:10. It has no parallel appellation in cognate Semitic languages for designating a flood or inundation. In the Bible, too, this word is curiously absent from the descriptions of inundations, even those of destructive nature. In the Song of Deborah, the flood carrying the Sisera chariots of war is called the ‘waters of Megiddo’ (Judg 5:19-21). Mabbûl is also ignored from the description of the flooding of the Egyptian army in the Song of the Sea (Ex 15:1-21), though the event is mentioned in seven of its verses (vv. 1, 4, 5, 10, 12, 19, 21). The metaphor of perdition by inundation is frequently introduced in Psalms (e.g. Pss 32:6; 69:3,16; 124:45). However, this reality is never called mabbûl by the psalmist, who describes it through the flowing of water (zerem in Isa 28:2; šēṭep mayîm rabbîm in Ps 32:6), its strength (mayîm kabbîrîm in Isa 28:2; mayîm ᾿addîrîm in Ex 15:10; hamayîm hazêdȏnîm in Ps 124:5; mê hanāhār hā῾ăṣûmîm wĕhārabbîm in Isa 8:7; šībbōlet mayîm in Ps 69:16) or its power of destruction (šṭp in Isa 8:8; Pss 69:3,16; 124:4; grp in Judg 5:21). Noah’s flood is explicitly referred to in Isa 54:9, but even there, it is not called mabbûl but merely the ‘waters of Noah’.36 These observations indicate that flood might be a meaning of mabbûl typically introduced by the author of Genesis, but ignored by all others. 35 D. TSUMURA 1989, 353; G. RENDSBURG 1990, 35-36. Mitchell DAHOOD (1966, 1:180), Chaim COHEN (1989, 200) and Benjamin SOMMER (2013, 141-142) defend this interpretation at the expense of the one assuming that lamabbûl positions YHWH upon the mabbûl. 36 “This is like the waters of Noah (‫ )מי נח‬to me: as I swore that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so I have sworn that I will not be angry with you, and will not rebuke you” (Isa 54:9).

114

CHAPTER 6

This premise finds support in the way the term mabbûl is introduced in Gen 6:17, the first verse where this word appears. There, mabbûl is immediately followed by a gloss clarifying its meaning: “For behold, I will bring the mabbûl, water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under heaven. Everything that is on the earth shall die.” The similar gloss (‘water upon the earth’) follows the second occurrence of mabbûl, in Gen 7:6.37 This repeated intent to define mabbûl suggests that its meaning as flood is new or rare in biblical Hebrew. It is therefore possible that mabbûl in Psalm 29 designates a reality other than the flood. Already in 1928, Joachim Begrich noticed that the term mabbûl, in Genesis 6-8, does not describe all the phases of the flood, but only its beginning. He also deduced from the reference to the water of mabbûl (‫ ומי המבול‬Gen 7:10) that this term designates a reality other than the mere accumulation of rain on the earth. He concluded that mabbûl relates a reality prior to rainfall, and identified it with the heavenly ocean, the upper water separated from its terrestrial counterpart from the times of creation (Gen 1:6-7).38 This approach led scholars to conclude that mabbûl in Psalm 29 does not designate the flood and the correlated forces of chaos, but the heavenly ocean interpreted as the reservoir of rain. In this perspective, Psalm 29 advances the representation of YHWH as storm god controlling (= standing on) the distribution of rain on the earth (10a). And the second hemiverse (10b) claims that this power is the source of his prestige and kingship among the gods and mortals.39 However, we have already noticed in Chapter 1 that the ‘heavenly ocean’ is probably not involved in normal rainfall. For this reason, the image of YHWH standing upon it may account for his prestige, but it does not transform him into a storm god. The term mabbûl is generally approached as the maqtûl form of the root ybl / wbl.40 For justifying the meaning of mabbûl as flood, a verb 37 “Noah was six hundred years old, and the mabbul was water upon the earth (‫והמבול‬ ‫( ”)היה מים על הארץ‬Gen 7:6). 38 J. BEGRICH 1928, followed by G. VON RAD 1972 (1952), 128; COWLEY 1986, 21; HALOT, 2:541. 39 Among the scholars arguing this interpretation, we may mention J-L. CUNCHILLOS 1976, 111-121; L. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1981, 124; C. KLOOS 1986, 89; H-J. KRAUS 1988, 349; D. PARDEE 2005, 171; P. STENMANS 1997, 64; R. WATSON 2005, 49. 40 HALOT, 2:541; DCH, 5:124-125; P. STENMANS 1997, 61. Contra, the BDB (page 550) assumes an origin of mabbul from the root ‫נבל‬. Chaim COHEN (1989, 193) correlates it with abubu, the Akkadian designation of the flood.

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

115

ybl (qal) signifying to rain hard is presumed to have existed in ancient Hebrew.41 But this use is not attested in the Bible. Alternately, the mabbûl designation of the heavenly ocean became deduced from the supposed basic meaning of ybl as flow, stream.42 But the root ybl/wbl has also a metallurgical meaning, expressed in the appellation Tubal Cain in Gen 4:22.43 Also Jabal and Jubal, the two other sons of Lamekh, bear names derived from the same root, and their activity is closely related to the metallurgical universe. Jabal, the first-born, is mentioned as “...the father of those who ‘stay’ in tent and mīqneh” (᾿ăbî yōšēb ᾿ōhel ûmīqneh) (Gen 4:20). This sentence displays grammatical inconsistency when mīqneh means flock, because livestock cannot complement a verb designating the action of sitting and/ or dwelling.44 In the context of the genealogy of metalworkers (the Cain lineage), ‫ מקנה‬is better interpreted as the piel of ‫ =( קנה‬to produce metal), and ‫ ישב‬as the conjugate form (hifil) of ‫נשב‬, a verb expressing the action of blowing air (as in Ps 147.18; Prov 20:26).45 Then, Gen 4:20 refers to Jabal as the metal producer, whereas his half-brother, Tubal-Cain, is the producer of metal artifacts. Music and song-poetry are fundamentally associated with metalworking in the Southern Levant. The representation, in an Egyptian tombpainting from Beni-Hassan (early second millennium BCE), of a group of Canaanite-like people with their lyres, bellows and tuyères confirms this association.46 At Ugarit, Byblos, and Cyprus, the smith god Koṯar 41

P. REYMOND 1958, 23; P. STENMANS 1997, 61; HALOT, 2:383. This premise is founded mainly on the meaning of wabala as to rain heavily in Arabic and the designation of a small river/canal as yubal in Jer 17:8. An allusion to this meaning exists in Job 20:28a, where the devastating treatment reserved for the wicked (‫ )יגל יבול ביתו‬is interpreted as a ‘flood’ on his house (P. REYMOND 1958, 23). This premise (which challenges the interpretation of ‫ יְ בוּל‬as a general designation of goods) is justified by the flow imagery evoked in the subsequent colon (‫)נגרות ביום אפו‬. 42 R. WATSON 2005, 49. 43 HALOT, 4:1694. A similar appellation of metalworkers as tbr/tbl is attested in Akkadian. See J. LEWY 1950, 358, 361, 366. 44 Concerning the grammatical problem of Gen 4:20 with miqneh as cattle, see B. STADE 1894, 259-260; A. DILLMANN 1897, 200-201; C. WESTERMANN 1984, 330; V. HAMILTON 1990, 239; P. MCNUTT, 1999, 45; C. LOMBAARD 2006, 45; J. DAY 2009, 338; J. BLENKINSOPP 2011, 86. This problem is reflected by the LXX, which translates miqneh in Gen 4:20 as κτηνοτρόφων (= cattle rearer). See N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2018b. But the problem is not only grammatical in this verse. Defining Jabal as the father of the tent-living breeders is unlikely because Abel was already a shepherd (Gen 4:2), and because all the cattle-breeders from the Southern Levant do not affiliate with the Cain lineage. 45 N. AMZALLAG 2018b, 32-33. 46 Tomb of Chnumhotep II, a royal servant of Amenemhet II. See A. SHEDID 1994, 5365.

116

CHAPTER 6

is frequently paired, and even confounded, with the lyre god Kinyras.47 In ancient Egypt, mining, music, poetry, and dance were sponsored by Hathor.48 In ancient Crete and Greece, as well, music and dance were closely related to metalworking.49 The essential link between metallurgy and music is further supported by using the root qyn in many Semitic languages to designate metallurgy and/or singing.50 Consequently, the name Jubal, attributed to the ancestor of the musicians in Gen 4:21, integrates well into the metallurgical context of the Cain genealogy. If the three sons of Lemekh, Jabal, Jubal and Tubal-Cain, have affinities with the metallurgical activity and all have names derived from the root ybl/wbl, we may guess that this root fundamentally expresses something closely related to this craft. Further observations suggest a meaning closely related to the liquid state of the metal. The first is using the root wbl/ybl for designating both the smelter and the smith, who have in common the melting of metal in furnaces (smelters) and crucibles (smiths). The second is the association of this root with the liquid element (small river, chenal) in biblical Hebrew (Jer 17:8). The third emanates from etymological considerations affiliating the root ybl/wbl to the C2 proto-Semitic root *bl expressing the ideas of liquefaction, mixing, flowing, and pouring.51 It is likely, therefore, that mabbûl, in its primary meaning, anciently designated the beginning of a liquefaction process.52 This stage is critical in metalworking, because it reveals that the temperature for smelting, purifying, alloying, casting or soldering was reached. 47 J. BROWN 1965, 197-219; J. FRANKLIN 2016 (esp. chapters 18-19). The link between metallurgy and music, already acknowledged in the Bronze Age, remains visible in the Levantine and Arabian traditional societies. See W. ALBRIGHT 1956, 98; P. MCNUTT 1999, 49. 48 The many votive inscriptions where Hathor is called ‘the green’ (= copper ore), ‘the lady of turquoise’ (mafek), ‘the golden’, or ‘the mistress of galena’, as well as her temples edified in mining areas, reveal that she sponsored mining. See D. VALBELLE and C. BONNET 1996, 37; A. AL-AYEDI 2007, 23-25. Hathor was also the patroness of choral songs, music and dance. See E. BUDGE 1904, 435. 49 S. BLAKELY 2007, 5-7; CHINN 2011, 87. Exactly as in Genesis 4, the Dactyls are considered in Greece to be the inventors of both metalworking and wind instruments. See C. BONNET 1988, 386, who mentions Hesiod, Fr 176; Strabo X 3,12; Diodorus siculus V, 64; Apollinius Rhodius I, 1125; Dionysus of Halicarnassus I, 61,4. In ancient Greece, the Kabeiroi, the sons of Hephaestus, were the masters of choral singing and of the mysteries accompanying it. See S. BLAKELY 2006, 36-38. 50 G. FLEISCHER 2004, 18; N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2017a. 51 M. MASSON 1991, 1039-1041. 52 N. AMZALLAG 2019b.

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

117

4.3. Reinterpreting the content of verse 10 Verse 10 displays a qal/wayqtol pattern (‫ יָ ָשׁב‬/ ‫ )וַ יֵּ ֶשׁב‬similar to the one attested in verse 5. In this latter, a wordplay in the root šbr generated new meanings, beyond the redundancy of claims between the two cola. Here again, the metallurgical dimension of meaning of mabbûl enables the emergence of a wordplay through this qal/wayqtol pattern. yšb as to sit The semantic context of the second hemiverse leads unambiguously to the interpretation of yšb as ‘to sit’: “YHWH shall sit enthroned (‫)וַ יֵּ ֶשׁב‬ king forever.” The parallel between the two hemiverses promotes an understanding of yašab in 10a as the qal form of yšb (= to sit). The first hemiverse advances, therefore, the image of YHWH sitting (= divine presence) in or upon the furnace. This vision corroborates the many references to kābȏd in Psalm 29, where this term connotes the thermal radiance of molten metal (kābȏd-YHWH). Furthermore, the representation of YHWH ‘sitting upon the furnace’ finds also an echo in further sources. The first Ezekiel vision, which describes the cosmic universe as a furnace (Ezekiel 1), ends with the representation of a divine being sitting on a throne positioned upon this furnace full of molten metal (Ezek 1:26-27). A similar description is encountered in Daniel, where YHWH’s throne is set upon a ‘stream of fire’ (Dan 7:9-10). Through the understanding of yšb as ‘to sit’, verse 10 acknowledges the supremacy of YHWH (10b) inherent of his mastering (= sit upon) the processes occurring in the furnace (10a). nšb as to blow A wordplay in the qatal/yaqtal pattern emerges in verse 10, because yšb may be vocalized as yāšāb (qal yšb = to sit) but also as yašēb, the hifil stem of the root nšb signifying to blow. The use of yšb to express divine blowing is explicit in Ps 147:18: “He sends out his word, and melts them; He blows (‫ )יַ ֵשּׁב‬his wind and the waters flow.” In this hymn, the psalmist relates the melting of the ice mentioned in the previous verse, exactly as mabbûl in Ps 29:10a denotes the beginning of melting the ore/ metal in the furnace. Also in Gen 4:20, the combination of yšb with ᾿hl in the expression ‫וּמ ְקנֶ ה‬ ִ ‫ י ֵֹשׁב א ֶֹהל‬promotes its understanding as to sit. Simultaneously, however, its combination with mqnh (= metal production) promotes its interpretation as a verbal form of nšb (= to blow). In

118

CHAPTER 6

combining the two meanings, Jabal becomes the one who “was the father of everyone who dwells (yōšēb) in a tent and blows (yašēb) for producing metal (maqneh).”53 In Psalm 29, this reading of yšb fits the interpretation of the voice of YHWH in the context of air blasting, and even the suggested etymology of the name YHWH as the blower. This wordplay is especially significant here because blowing is the specific activity required for reaching the melting point of copper, the transition phase expressed explicitly by the term mabbûl. As in Gen 4:20, it is likely that the two meanings of yšb combine in Ps 29:10a to express both the status of YHWH as the god sponsoring the metallurgical processes (= to sit on mabbûl, the melting process) and participating in the work of the metalworkers (as in Isa 54:16), through his blow (YHWH’s voice boosting the fire up to the melting point of both metal and ore). YHWH is therefore acknowledged in Ps 29:10 as the ‘Lord of mabbûl’, but not as a storm god controlling the rain. Rather, he is the god patronizing the process of creation of matter (the production of metal) and of vitalization (the recycling of metal through its remeling in the furnace). 5. VERSE 11 ‫יְ הוָ ה עֹז ְל ַעמּוֹ יִ ֵתּן; יְ הוָ ה יְ ָב ֵרְך ֶאת ַעמּוֹ ַב ָשּׁלוֹם‬ Verse 11 closes the hymn by a blessing expressed in parallel in the two hemiverses. Both identify the receivers of the blessing as the people of YHWH (‫)עמו‬, generally identified as Israel. The lack of Israelite markers in the psalm combined with a metallurgical dimension of meaning open new perspectives of interpretation of this verse. The reference to the usgroup as YHWH’s people and the open expression of his genuine name, YHWH, invites us to identify this us-group either as Israel or as the Qenites. However, if the metallurgical interpretation of the voice of YHWH should be preferred to its atmospheric counterpart (Chapter 5), verse 11 privileges a Qenite rather than Israelite interpretation of this hymn. The metallurgical context of interpretation of verses 1-2, 6, and 10 concurs. 6. THE NEW WORKING TRANSLATION An examination of the six verses referring to YHWH’s voice led to the conclusion that the metallurgical expression of this vocal theophany should be preferred to the atmospheric and even the volcanic interpretation. 53

N. AMZALLAG 2018b, 33.

THE FIVE OTHER VERSES OF PSALM 29

119

The examination of the five other verses of Psalm 29 corroborates this conclusion. Verses 1-2 apparently invite the metalworkers to activate their furnace. The expected consequence is a visual theophany of YHWH, through the radiance of his kābȏd (vv. 1-2). This phenomenon accompanies the vocal theophany (vv. 3-5, 7-9) inherent to the bellows’ activity around the furnace. This conjunction appears in two verses praising the beginning of the melting of solid matter in the furnace: the volcanic metaphor in verse 6 announces the melting of silicates, and the mabbûl in verse 10 expresses the melting occurring in the furnace. The last verse (v. 11) blesses the metalworkers for stimulating YHWH’s theophany through their activity. The examination of all the verses of Psalm 29 enables us to propose a new working translation of Psalm 29 integrating the metallurgical dimension of meaning here identified, and replacing the one proposed in the Introduction section. This new working translation will serve in the next chapter for an analysis of Psalm 29 as a whole, necessary for identifying its main theme, messages and literary developments. 1 Ascribe

to YHWH, sons of gods   Ascribe to YHWH, radiance*54 and smoke* 2 Ascribe to YHWH radiance* [is] his name   Bow down to YHWH in splendor of holiness 3 Voice of YHWH upon the water   The god of radiance* has thundered   YHWH upon mighty waters 4 Voice of YHWH in power   Voice of YHWH in magnificence 5 The voice of YHWH breaks cedars   YHWH supplies* the cedars of Lebanon 6 He causes [them] to skip as a calf   Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox 7 The voice of YHWH hews flames of fire 8 The voice of YHWH shakes the wilderness   YHWH brings wealth* to the wilderness of Qadesh 9 The voice of YHWH breaks oats and thins forests out   And in his palace   All him says radiance* 10 YHWH blows* on mabbûl   YHWH sits as king forever 11 YHWH gives strength* to his people   YHWH blesses his people with plenitude

54

The asterisk mentions the wordplays and double meanings.

CHAPTER 7

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29 The two previous chapters intended to clarify the meaning of each verse considered separately. However, the working translation issued from this investigation yields neither a fluent reading nor any linear development. Instead, the articulation of claims and ideas remains obscure and even disruptive. For example, if verse 5 refers to the use of cedarwood as fuel in the furnace, as suggested here, the flames of fire consuming this wood are mentioned only in verse 7. Between them, verse 6 introduces another image. The supply of wood as fuel is mentioned again in verse 9, but this claim is not in continuity with the flames of fire evoked in verse 7. Between them, verse 8 introduces another reference to metallurgy. Similarly, the climax of the whole process, melting, is visible in verse 10 through the mabbûl. However, this climax already exists in verse 6 (the volcanic imagery), and even in verse 3 (the liquid element). Even the radiance accompanying this melting event, kābȏd, is scattered throughout the psalm. This discontinuity prevents any poetic tension towards this visual theophany marking the completion of the whole process. 1. THE PROBLEM OF AWKWARDNESS IN PSALM 29 The absence of a definite succession of events characterizing a storm makes its description compatible with the lack of literary development of the successive verses in Psalm 29. This is an argument promoting the stormgod reading regarding its alternatives. Nevertheless, scholars have long noted inconsistencies in the articulation of claims in Psalm 29 interpreted in a storm context, together with the abnormal abruptness of their transitions.1 Many possible explanations have been proposed to justify this situation. The hypothesis of composite work Inconsistencies may reflect an origin of Psalm 29 from the compilation of fragments of songs that were initially independent. For example, Oswald Loretz assumed that this hymn results from the gathering of three distinct 1

T. GASTER 1946, 61; B. SCHRAMM 2009, 12.

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

121

fragments of originally independent poems, a first one (vv. 1-2 and 9c) borrowed from a hymn devoted to El, and the two others (vv. 3-9b and 10-11) extracted from two hymns addressed to Baal.2 Other authors assume a complex process of accretion. Jörg Jeremias approaches verses 59a as the core of Psalm 29 borrowed from an Ugarit hymn to Baal. He assumed the addition to this kernel of three verses (vv. 1, 2, 9bc) issued from a hymn devoted to El, and of three further verses (vv. 3-4 and 10) added during the Yahwistic editing of such a composite opus.3 Pieter Venter identified four sequences of claims in Psalm 29 and their borrowing each one from another source.4 Possible glosses and additions Independently of debating whether or not Psalm 29 is an original opus, scholars approached small fragments of this hymn as late exegetical additions. The presumed replacement of the name Baal by the name YHWH integrates this category of changes.5 Verse 7 is eccentric by its metric and its sudden reference to fire which interrupts a description of the storm. To justify this anomaly, this verse is sometimes approached as a gloss.6 The final verse is also frequently identified as an addition intending to naturalize this Canaanite psalm in Israel. Alternately, verse 11 became a ‘liturgical appendix’ introduced in order to adapt this hymn to one of the religious festivals (Sukkoth) of the Israelites, or merely for amplifying its patriotic dimension.7 Assumptions of post-editorial alterations Based on the distich structure characterizing eight of the verses of Psalm 29 (vv. 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10-11), scholars have assumed that the three cola of verses 3 and 9, as well as the abnormal structure of verse 7 aim for post-editorial corruptions of the text of the song. That the 3b claim is interspaced by two cola (3a and 3c) with similar features accredits this premise. Then, 3b became a gloss or the fruit of a misleading displacement of a colon initially positioned somewhere else. Similarly, the end of verse 9 was displaced to generate a homogeneous structure of Psalm 29, based on the argument that this third colon is not directly related to the 2 3 4 5 6 7

O. LORETZ 1984, 149-152. J. JEREMIAS 1987, 29-45. P. VENTER 2004, 241. T. GASTER 1946, 63. C. BRIGGS and E. BRIGGS 1906, 253. F. FENSHAM 1963, 93; M. BUTTENWEISER 1969, 152.

122

CHAPTER 7

previous claims.8 These stylistic, metrical and literary considerations stimulated the ‘reconstitution’ of a so-called original version of Psalm 29 comprising only bicolic verses with internal parallelism. Scholars removed the 3b and 9c cola, and gather them as a new verse (“The god of kābȏd thunders; In his palace, all of him says kābȏd”).9 A new colon was also added to verse 7, on the model of the qtl/yqtl pattern expressed in verses 5 and 10: “The voice of YHWH hews flames; YHWH will hew flames of fire”.10 And to improve the readability of the whole hymn, verse 7 (in its original or modified form) became displaced before verse 6 or after verse 8.11 All these modifications are founded on the assumption of an original pattern of regular metric and verse structure in Psalm 29. This premise is however challenged by some considerations. 2. A NEW LOOK ON BIBLICAL POETRY In biblical poetry, the inconsistencies identified in Psalm 29 are the rule rather than exception. Unlike its homolog from Egypt, the Northern Levant, Assyria, Mesopotamia and the Aegean, the biblical poetry is not easy to understand. The rarity of verbs and actions creates a chronic indeterminacy concerning the subjects and complements. In parallel, the high level of redundancy of the claims is combined with the extreme concision of most poems.12 Beyond these characteristics, the poetical discourse is frequently disrupted by stylistic difficulties, ellipses, abrupt transitions and other incongruities. These asperities transform the text of psalms into a succession of short segments of relatively autonomous nature, devoid of chronological development and outcome.13 These singularities of biblical poetry have been justified in many ways in the past. The textual obscurities and indeterminacies of some psalms were supposed to reflect a low artistic value.14 Alternately, inconsistencies 8

D. PARDEE 2005, 172; G. BARBIERO 2016, 379. R. TOURNAY 1956, 173; E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 135. 10 P. CRAIGIE 1983, 244; J. VAN DER WESTHUIZEN 1993, 115. Alternately, scholars gathered the 3b colon with verse 7, the other verse of singular nature, generating the following new verse: “The voice of YHWH hews flames of fire; The god of kābȏd thunders.” See H-J. KRAUS 1988, 345. 11 M. DAHOOD 1966, 1:178; J. VAN DER WESTHUIZEN 1993, 119. 12 F. DOBBS-ALLSOPP 2009, 551-552. The parallelismus membrorum, one of the most essential characteristics of biblical poetry, introduces a recurrence that disrupts, verse after verse, the continuity of the narrative. See P. NEL 1992 and B. WEBER 2012. 13 A. NICCACCI 1997, 77-78; E. TALSTRA 1999, 103. 14 W. BRUEGGEMANN 1980, 7; S. GELLER 1984, 414-415. This eventuality was already suggested by Hermann GUNKEL (1926, 610) concerning some psalms. In this interpretative 9

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

123

became the pointer of the psalm’s heterogeneous nature and a fundamental to their analysis. Asperities became the markers of transitions between the gathered fragments,15 indicators of glosses and other post-compositional modifications,16 or even the consequences of copyist errors in the course of the transmission of the song. Like in Psalm 29, these interpretations authorized scholars to perform emendations for smoothing the incongruities and ‘reconstituting’ an original version of the song. All these explanations converge in denying any critical importance of these incongruities in the expression of the song’s original message.17 Simultaneously, they legitimate modifications of the text before its interpretation, and authorize the analysis of small fragments of a song independently of their poetical context. 2.1. Non-linearity as a constitutive dimension Throughout the second half of the 20th century, an increasing number of scholars ceased viewing hymnic poetry from the ancient Near East as the ideal model of biblical poetry.18 For example, Robert Alter does not consider biblical poetry’s low narrative dimension as a sign of its reduced artistic value or its low state of conservation. Rather, he assumes that this characteristic is constitutive of the ancient Hebrew poetry: “Perhaps the greatest peculiarity of biblical poetry among the literatures of the ancient Mediterranean world is its seeming avoidance of narrative […] This absence of narrative is all the more striking against the background of the surrounding and antecedent literatures of the ancient Near East that have been uncovered by archaeological research.”19 Literary fluency and the linear development of a narration need no longer being the ultimate criterion context, Moses BUTTENWIESER (1969, 849) assumed that Psalm 145, for example, belongs to a phase of ‘literary decadence’ of biblical poetry. 15 Charles and Emilie BRIGGS detail these assumptions in their analysis of the Psalms from 1906 (pages 49-52). 16 The classical evidence aiming at such changes is the comparison of Psalm 18 and 2 Samuel 22. These two versions of the same song display many minor variations. See D. CLINES 2001, 76-78. 17 B. TANNER 2001, 53-56. 18 This attitude, which previously dominated the research in biblical poetry, is denounced by Rolf RENDTORFF (1993, 52): “Scholars still seem to be proud of knowing things better than the final redactors or compilers. This is a kind of nineteenth-century hubris we should have left behind us.” Similarly, Terence KEEGAN (1995, 8) recalls that the literary approaches characterizing the modern and post-modern research require considerably more humility than previously seen. 19 R. ALTER 1984, 27.

124

CHAPTER 7

for the appreciation of a psalm’s integrity and quality.20 Also the absence of verse regularity is now considered a constitutive dimension of biblical poetry.21 These views challenged the legitimacy of the many emendations made by generations of scholars attempting to reconstitute a hypothetical original version with verses all displaying a regular pattern of stresses and feet. In parallel, the abrupt transitions between verses are no more systematically interpreted as markers of the awkward gathering of segments of independent songs, poor poetical quality or textual erosion. Instead, the ‘inconsistencies’ are increasingly acknowledged as intentionally introduced to stress special claims.22 Additionally, the dialogic dimension inherent in many of the songs is a potential source of discontinuity of the narration and incongruities in the expression and syntax.23 This new approach acknowledges a level of subtlety to biblical poetry which was previously ignored. This change has many consequences. First, the discrepancies between the text and its interpretation cannot merely be smoothed by arguments issued from the form-criticism approach. They should rather be approached as potentially meaningful. Furthermore, the messages emanating from an individual verse or a small section are frequently conditioned by the atmosphere and claims from the surrounding verses. Consequently, the meaning of a psalm, or even a small cluster of verses, may be dismissed if those verses are examined in isolation from their literary context. If biblical poetry is a precious source of knowledge concerning ancient Yahwism, special tools of poetic analysis are required to extract it. Until now, however, this epistemological shift regarding biblical poetry had no significant incidence in the investigation of the early Yahwism. Whereas integrative approaches developed gradually in the late 20th century, the exploitation of biblical poetry for exploring the nature of ancient Yahwism remains too frequently founded on the form-criticism premises and the quotation of isolated verses.

20

B. WEBER 2012, 166. F. DOBBS-ALLSOPP 2015, 99-103. 22 M. WEISS 2001, 16-17. For example, roughness is sometimes regarded as having been introduced for emotional purposes. See R. AHRONI 1982, 31-33; Z. ZEVITT 1986, 362-363. This interpretation extends to the Book of Lamentations, especially characterized by an absence of chronologic development and narrative continuity. These features are now regarded as literary devices expressing the fall of Jerusalem through the intentional use of chaotic syntax and structure. See D. GROSSBERG 1989, 87; C. MILLER 2001, 394, 397; B. MORSE 2003, 119. 23 H. IRSIGLER 1997, 47, 57; T. GILES and W. DOAN 2009, 12-16. 21

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

125

2.2. Whole symmetry patterns and their implications Throughout the 20th century, scholars identified an unexpected level of whole-psalm organization in many biblical songs.24 Based on literary bonds, recurrences, and alliterations, they revealed the existence of symmetry patterns encompassing all the verses of a song.25 One of these patterns, forward symmetry, reflects interrelations between parallel verselines from two successive cantos (A–B–C–A’–B’–C’).26 A concentric pattern with verselines symmetrically positioned regarding the center (A–B–C– B’–A’, with chiastic pattern as variant: A–B–C–C’–B’–A’) is also widespread in biblical poetry.27 The discovery of patterns of whole symmetry and their widespread occurrence profoundly modifies the approach to biblical poetry.28 First of all, it challenges the previous assumptions of a low poetic value of some psalms, of their composite nature, or their approach as conglomerates recycling verses or sections borrowed from older songs. It also calls for prudence in identifying post-compositional modifications (glosses and intentional alterations) or textual erosion. Consequently, a high level of indeterminacy in the linear reading is not inevitably a marker of deterioration, poor editing or an absence of cohesiveness. It does not denote necessarily the composition of an impressionistic patchwork of claims devoid of literary development. Rather, the existence of a pattern of whole symmetry confirms that many psalms are carefully composed and in relatively good state of conservation. Furthermore, behind the apparent simplicity of its claims, a psalm’s message may be both complex and distant from the boundaries of the classical exegesis.29 24

C. LABUSCHAGNE 2009; P. VAN DER LUGT 2010. For a survey of the history of research and achievements in rhetorical analysis, see R. MEYNET 1990; K. SMITH and B. DOMERIS 2008. 26 For details about the patterns of symmetry, see L. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1972, 86-89; J. MAGONET 1982, 367; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 22-29; R. MEYNET 2007, 31-112; B. WEBER 2012, 182-184. 27 The concentric symmetry pattern, first characterized by the German scholar Johan Albrecht BENGEL (1687-1752) (reviewed in R. MEYNET 2007, 44-46), is now identified in more than a third of the poems edited in the Psalter. Robert ALDEN (1974, 1976, 1978) argues that 56 of the 150 Psalms of the Psalter follow this concentric structural pattern. 28 Among the many studies of biblical poetry integrating this approach, we may mention M. GIRARD 1984 and 1994; J. RENKEMA 1998, E. GERSTENBERGER 1988 and 2001; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 2010 and 2014; J. FOKKELMAN 1998, 2000 and 2003. 29 For Beat WEBER (2012, 168), this general character of poetry is especially accentuated in the Bible: “The text does not embody ‘sense’ in static fashion, but creates sense dynamically through the reciprocal interaction of structures in the world of the text on the one hand and between text and (extratextual) ‘culture’ on the other.” 25

126

CHAPTER 7

2.3. The phenomenon of complex antiphony If many of the ‘problematic’ features identified in biblical poetry are original and intentional, their contribution to the meaning of the psalm cannot be ignored anymore. Furthermore, the existence of a network of literary bonds between distant verses highlights that the meaning of a verse is not only conditioned by its own content, but also by the content of those distant verses interacting with it.30 For example, the central verse of a concentric symmetry pattern shows frequently unique characteristics concerning its structure, rhythm, tone, and content. It also frequently expresses the main message of the song, then constituting the key to reading and interpreting the surrounding verses, and even the whole poem.31 However, patterns of whole symmetry are invisible in the mere reading, declamation or cantillation of a psalm. It implies that something other than a linear reading is required for expressing these meanings. This latter might be related to choral performance and especially to antiphony, because choirs were frequently organized in two dialogic entities in antiquity. 32 The whole-psalm patterns of symmetry hold a new dimension in an antiphonal mode of performance, if this latter generates a dialog between the interfering distant verses. In such a case, the pattern of whole-psalm symmetry might reflect the existence of two distinct ‘scores’ in the song, each one sung by another choir, and the way they mingle dialogically. This mode of performance is defined as complex antiphony, and it was apparently designated as maśkîl in the Bible.33 The setting of a psalm in complex antiphony generates a composite text issued from the gathering of fragments of distant verses to be mingled in the course of the performance. In most cases, the composite text is not only clearer than the source song (the edited version), but it also unveils a level of meaning ignored in the linear reading.34 These properties indicate that the source text (the 30

B. WEBER and A. MOSTER 2003, 482-484. These properties have been especially characterized by A. CONDAMIN 1933, 29. Peter VAN DER LUGT (2010) stressed the extensive mention of the name of God in the central verse (pp. 508-523), the use of specific rhetorical devices emphasizing the claims of this verse (pp. 537-542) and the specific mention of words of central importance (pp. 543-548). 32 A. SENDREY 1969, 44-49, 161; D. COLLON 2010, 60-62. 33 N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2016. This term is apprently derived from the root skl, expressing the idea of bonding two elements in a non-trivial fashion (e.g. Gen 48:14). 34 Throughout the last decade, complex antiphony has been identified in the songs of Ascents, such as Psalms 121, 122, 126, 128 and 132. See N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2010a, 2016 and W-P. LEOW 2019. It is also encountered in other songs from the Psalter, such as Psalm 46, 67, 87, 92, 100, 111, 112 and 114. See N. AMZALLAG 2014b; 2014c; 31

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

127

edited version) might be no more than raw poetic material from which the composite text emerges in the course of the performance.35 This premise may explain many singularities of biblical poetry, such as the lack of linear development, the obscure meaning of verses, the inconsistencies, the abrupt transitions, and the chronic underrepresentation of verbal forms.36 3. COMPLEX ANTIPHONY IN PSALM 29 That Psalm 29 was sung antiphonally is already argued. Erhard Gerstenberger suggests that the bundle of the hymn (vv. 1-2 and vv. 10-11) was recited by a liturgist, whereas the core of the psalm (vv. 3-9) was sung antiphonally by two choirs.37 Alternately, Kemper Fullerton assumes that the aperture (vv. 1-2) and closure (vv. 10-11) of the hymn were designed for a dialogical mode of performance, but not the core (vv. 3-9).38 Indeed, the mix of tricolic and bicolic verses in the core (vv. 3-9) is not well adapted to an antiphonal dialog between the two parallel halves of verses, each sung by another choir (plain antiphony), so that emendations are required to adapt the song to this mode of performance. However, as abovementioned, songs designed for antiphony were not necessarily edited in their final form, so that the dialog between voices does not inevitably occur between the two halves of the same verse. In other words, Psalm 29, as edited in the Psalter, might be no other than the source text of an opus designed for complex antiphony. The structural properties of this hymn support this premise. 3.1. The structural properties of Psalm 29 Scholars have for a long time identified a pattern of whole concentric symmetry in Psalm 29.39 This pattern is visible first of all in the structure of the hymn. It comprises a central core (vv. 3-9) with repeated mentions 2015a; 2015b, 190-220; 2015d; 2017b; N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2011. Complex antiphony exists also outside of the Psalter. The David’s Lament (2 Sam 1:19-27), the hymn in Isaiah 12 and the taunt elegy in Isaiah 14 were also identified as being designed for this performance mode. See N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2010b, 2012; N. AMZALLAG 2016b. 35 N. AMZALLAG 2014d. 36 C. MILLER 2003, 251-253. Stanley GREENFIELD (1971, 139) considers ellipsis as the most important poetical artifice: “…ellipsis is an omission of a form or forms in a clause or sentence, the presence of which is demanded or suggested by existing forms and context in order to make sense – and in poetry, to make the most or richest sense – of the message.” 37 E. GESTENBERGER 1988, 132. 38 K. FULLERTON 1929, 281-282; E. BEAUCAMP 1976, 135. 39 N. LUND 1933, 306-307; R. ALDEN 1976, 21-22.

128

CHAPTER 7

of the voice of YHWH flanked by two bundle parts of two verses each: an opening section inviting the us-group to praise YHWH (vv. 1-2) and a concluding section (vv. 10-11) ending the hymn.40 It is generally interpreted in terms of liturgical performance, or as a rhetoric device emphasizing the theophanic dimension expressed in the core of the psalm.41 The core of this hymn displays structural properties of its own, too: (i) the two peripheral verses of this core (verses 3 and 9) are also the two only verses of the hymn enclosing three cola; (ii) the only verse in which the voice of YHWH is not mentioned is verse 6, positioned at the mathematical center of this core and even of the whole psalm. An examination of the pattern of literary bonds between distant verses confirms this structural property. A thematic parallel exists between the first and last verses.42 The opening verse (v. 1), an exhortation addressed to the sons of god to give/provide kābȏd and ῾oz to YHWH, is echoed in verse 11 by YHWH blessing his people and giving them ῾oz (strength). The parallels between the second verse calling to worship YHWH and the penultimate one expressing YHWH’s eternal sovereignty extend this concentric pattern.43 This symmetry pattern concerns also the core of the psalm (vv. 3-9). There, the two pools of three verses mentioning the voice of YHWH (vv. 3-5 and vv. 7-9) display literary bonds symmetrically arranged around verse 6.44 Therefore, all the verses of Psalm 29 are symmetrically arranged (in their theme, semantic fields or phonetic closeness) around verse 6, the poem’s mathematical center. This whole pattern of concentric symmetry leaves few doubts that Psalm 29 is a well-structured, coherent work. Consequently, the Masoretic version of Psalm 29 is probably not damaged. It does not anymore result from the gathering of many sources or editorial modifications and 40 For a review of 150 years of structural analysis of Psalm 29, see P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 297-298. This tripartite division of Psalm 29 is now acknowledged by most scholars examining the structural properties of this hymn. See for example N. RIDDERBOS 1972, 217; A. ANDERSON 1972, 233; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 243; D. FREEDMAN 1997; J. FOKKELMAN 1998, 45-49; B. WEBER 2001, 147; D. PARDEE 2005, 158-159; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 294; G. BARBIERO 2016, 381. 41 According to Erhard GERSTENBERGER (1988, 132), “Psalm 29 easily lends itself to being recited by a liturgist (vv. 1-2, 10-11) and two corresponding choirs or congregational groups (vv. 3-9, each group speaking one colon every line).” 42 D. FREEDMAN and F. HYLAND 1973, 240; L. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1981, 126-128; M. GIRARD 1984, 240; D. PARDEE 2005, 158; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 294. 43 D. FREEDMAN and F. HYLAND 1973, 240; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 296, 298; G. BARBIERO 2016, 381. 44 N. LUND 1933, 306; R. ALDEN 1974, 21; M. GIRARD 1984, 236-240; Y. AVISHUR 1989, 49; P. VENTER 2004, 237; P. VAN DER LUGT 2010, 645. These literary bonds are exposed later in this chapter through the analysis of the composite verses.

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

129

glosses.45 This reality, combined with the lack of linear development in the whole psalm, invites us to examine whether Psalm 29 was designed for complex antiphony. 3.2. The cross responsa mode of complex antiphony In complex antiphony, the pattern of literary bonds between distant verses reflects how the claims from the two voices mingle. For example, the division of a psalm into two cantos of equal length, each with its aperture, finale, and themes, does not necessarily aim for its issue from the gathering of two independent songs. In the case of literary bonds between verses similarly positioned in both, the two cantos may be the ‘scores’ of the two dialoguing choirs, a mode defined as steady responsa.46 In this case, already identified in Isaiah 12 and Psalms 100, 121, 126, 128 and 132, the composite text emerges from the pairing of fragments of verses similarly positioned in both cantos.47 Alternately, a concentric pattern of literary bonds encompassing the whole psalm transforms its text into a palindrome, read with a similar coherency level in ascending order (from the first to the last verse) or descending order (from the last to the first verse). Consequently, a dialogic pattern may emerge between a first choir singing the text as edited, in the ascending order of verses (the sense voice), and a second choir answering the first, colon after colon, in singing the same text in descending order of verses (the antisense voice). Songs from the Psalter with concentric symmetry (e.g. Psalms 67, 87, 92) have already been identified as designed for such a performance mode, defined as cross responsa.48 The cross-responsa mode may account for the existence of a whole concentric pattern of symmetry otherwise invisible to an audience hearing the text in its linear form. In cross responsa, the two voices meet at the center of the psalm. As the middle verse is sung in echo, its message and claims are especially emphasized compared to all the other verses. This situation clarifies why the 45 Ytzhak AviShur (1989, 72) noticed that the seven total mentions of the voice of YHWH and 18 total mentions of the name YHWH in Psalm 29 is of significance, due to the theological importance of these numbers. Daniel FREEDMAN and Frank HYLAND (1973, 241) concluded: “Since these numbers are used repeatedly in the Bible for organizational and symbolic purposes, we may infer not only that the selection was deliberate but also that the poem is substantially complete in the form we have it.” 46 N. AMZALLAG 2014d. 47 N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL, 2010a, N. AMZALLAG 2014b; 2016a; W-P. LEOW 2019. 48 N. AMZALLAG, 2014c; 2015d; 2017a; N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2010b; 2012.

130

CHAPTER 7

central verse of psalms with concentric structures so frequently carries the main theme of the song and summarizes it.49 This condition is also encountered in Psalm 29, where the central verse (v. 6) expresses the culmination of the smelting process. Also the structure of Psalm 29 also supports this premise. Complex antiphony requires the paired verses to have the same number of antiphonal units. And in the cross responsa setting of Psalm 29, verses 3 and 9, the two only verses with three antiphonal units, are paired together. 3.3. The cross responsa setting of Psalm 29 The cross responsa mode of performance generates a dialog between an opening voice singing the text as edited (sense voice), and a responding voice singing the same text in inverse order (antisense voice). In Psalm 29, this mode of performance yields a succession of eleven pairs of verses: 1//11 → 2//10 → 3//9 → 4//8 → 5//7 → 6//6 → 7//5 → 8//4 → 9//3 → 10//2 → 11//1.

Structural properties of the composite text The cross responsa pairing creates a structural pattern of its own. The composite text subdivides in two halves with the same pairing pattern (first half: 1//11 → 2//10 → 3//9 → 4//8 → 5//7; second half: 7//5 → 8//4 → 9//3 → 10//2 → 11//1), separated by verse 6 sung in echo by the two voices. The second half introduces changes regarding the first one: (i) an inversion of the ranking order of the pairs of verses; (ii) an inversion between the opening and responding claims in the composite verses of the second half, regarding their homolog from the first half. This invites us to examine separately the two parts of the setting. Structural parallels between pairs of verses The size of antiphonal units is revealed in Psalm 136, a song designed for antiphonal performance (plain antiphony) in which each first hemiverse is answered by the claim “For his mercy endures forever” found in each second hemiverse. This reality suggests that complex antiphony does involve a dialog not between whole verses, but between antiphonal units 49 In a book first published in 1923, Albert CONDAMIN (1933, 29) characterized the intermediate strophe in the following ways: (1) it generally expresses the most important claims of the song; (2) its tone is especially lyrical; (3) its rhythm frequently differs from that of the other strophes; and (4) it is positioned in the middle of the psalm or the poetic entity, which often corresponds to the mathematical median of the total count of verses.

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

131

of colon-like size. Consequently, the most straightforward approach is identifying antiphonal units as cola in Psalm 29. However, this segregation depends on grammatical and structural features, and on identifying the rhetoric entities, all conditioned by a linear reading of the text. To minimize this influence, the splitting of verses into antiphonal units was based on the pausal indications of the Masoretic cantillation, which are apparently rooted in ancient traditions of psalm performance.50 This splitting mode represents therefore a criterion independent of the linear reading and both in time emancipated from any attempt to improve cohesiveness of the composite text. In Psalm 29, the splitting following the pausal indications introduces changes only in verses 7 and 9, regarding the division of verses in cola performed in modern investigations. Where verse 7 encloses a single colon, the pausal indications split it in two subunits (The voice of YHWH hews / fiery flames), each one defining here an antiphonal unit. In verse 9, the pausal indications define a first antiphonal unit that is especially long (The voice of YHWH breaks oats and thins forests out), followed by a short intermediate one (And in his palace), and a third unit (All him says kābȏd) of length similar to most others from this song. The setting of Psalm 29 yields a composite text of 24 composite verses (CV), each one generated by the pairing of two antiphonal units.

CV1

Opening (sense) voice

Responding (antisense) voice

verse

Verse

1 Ascribe to YHWH, sons of gods

→ YHWH gives strength to his people  

CV2

Ascribe to YHWH radiance* → YHWH blesses his people and smoke* with plenitude

CV3

2 Ascribe to YHWH radiance* → YHWH blows* on mabbûl [is] his name

CV4

Bow down to YHWH in splendor of holiness

→ YHWH sits as king forever

CV5

3 Voice of YHWH upon the water

→ The voice of YHWH breaks oats and thins forests out

CV6

The god of radiance* has thundered

50

E. REVELL 1981.

→ And in his palace

11

10

9

132

CV7 CV8 CV9

CHAPTER 7

Opening (sense) voice

Responding (antisense) voice

verse

Verse

YHWH upon mighty waters 4 Voice of YHWH in power Voice of YHWH in magnificence

CV10

5 The voice of YHWH breaks cedars

CV11

YHWH supplies* the cedars of Lebanon

CV12

6 He causes [them] to skip as a calf

CV13

Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox

CV14

7 The voice of YHWH hews

CV15 CV16 CV17 CV18

flames of fire 8 The voice of YHWH shakes the wilderness

→ All him says radiance* → The voice of YHWH shakes the wilderness → YHWH brings wealth* to the wilderness of Qadesh → The voice of YHWH hews

→ He causes [them] to skip as a calf

6

→ Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox → The voice of YHWH breaks cedars

5

→ YHWH supplies* the cedars of Lebanon → Voice of YHWH in power

4

YHWH brings wealth* to the → Voice of YHWH in wilderness of Qadesh magnificence 9 The voice of YHWH breaks oats and thins forests out

→ Voice of YHWH upon the water

And in his palace

→ The god of radiance* has thundered

CV20

All him says radiance*

→ YHWH upon mighty waters

CV21 10 YHWH blows* on mabbûl YHWH sits as king forever

CV23 11 YHWH gives strength to his people   CV24

7

→ flames of fire

CV19

CV22

8

YHWH blesses his people with plenitude

→ Ascribe to YHWH radiance* [is] his name

3

2

→ Bow down to YHWH in splendor of holiness → Ascribe to YHWH, sons of gods → Ascribe to YHWH, radiance* and smoke*

1

133

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

4. ANALYSIS OF THE

COMPOSITE VERSES

The setting of Psalm 29 in cross responsa fashion yields a text of 24 composite verses. If the song was designed for this mode of performance, we expect the composite text to display literary cohesiveness, to clarify the indeterminacies, and to unveil the meanings missed by the linear reading. This expectation invites us, at first, to analyze each composite verse separately. 4.1. First half of the performance (CV1-11) Composite verses 1-2 (pairing verses 1 and 11) 11a 11b

‫יְ הוָ ה עֹז ְל ַעמּוֹ יִ ֵתּן‬ ‫עמּוֹ ַב ָשּׁלוֹ‬-‫ת‬ ַ ‫יְ הוָ ה יְ ָב ֵר ְך ֶא‬

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּנֵ י ֵא ִלים‬ ‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬

1a 1b

Almost all the terms of the two hemiverses (1a and 11a) are parallel in CV1. YHWH is mentioned in both, and the verbs hby (1a) and ntn (11a) express the same idea of giving. Furthermore, the mention of the sons of gods in 1a echoes the mention of people of YHWH in 11a. Links also exist between the two halves of CV2. Here again, YHWH is found in both. Furthermore, to the invitation of the people to ascribe (hby) to YHWH in 1b, corresponds the blessing (brk) YHWH grants his people in 11b. In stressing a parallel between the sons of god and the people of YHWH, the first two composite verses suggest that the appellation ‘sons of gods’ (1a) does not refer to secondary deities, but rather to a group of mortals enjoying a privileged status and closeness to YHWH. The mention of YHWH granting them strength and plenitude is more appropriate to mortals than to gods, plenitude being the mere consequence of their immortality. The first two composite verses promote a relation of symmetry between YHWH and ‘his people’. In CV1, YHWH gives ῾oz to his people, whereas in CV2, it is the people who, in return, bring ῾oz to YHWH. This interrelation fits the approach of metallurgy as a craft involving YHWH’s participation, the god blowing on the hearth to reach the temperature of fusion of silicates and metal. The symmetrical mention of ῾oz also expresses wordplay between the two meanings: strength and cloud of smoke. The first mention (11a) expresses the strength (῾oz) YHWH grants his people. These people exploit it for producing kābȏd w῾oz (1b), a radiance combined with a cloud of smoke, the markers of YHWH’s theophany through metalworking. This wordplay even enhances the interference between YHWH

134

CHAPTER 7

giving strength to the metalworkers, and the emissaries propagating his presence on the earth through their craft. Composite verses 3-4 (pairing verses 2 and 10) 10a 10b

‫יְ הוָ ה ַל ַמּבּוּל יָ ָשׁב‬ ‫עוֹלם‬ ָ ‫וַ יֵּ ֶשׁב יְ הוָ ה ֶמ ֶלְך ְל‬

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְכּבוֹד ְשׁמוֹ‬ ‫ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ַה ְד ַרת ק ֶֹדשׁ‬

2a 2b

CV3 The situation exposed in CV1-2 extends in CV3. The people of YHWH are invited to bring kābȏd to YHWH (2a). The expression kābȏd šĕmȏ (kābȏd is his name) promotes kābȏd as an essential attribute (radiance), rather than glory. This transforms 2a, again, into an invitation to blow on the furnace. At the same time, the second half of CV3 (10a) claims that YHWH blows on the furnace to reach the temperature of fusion (mabbûl) of the silicates and metal. Consequently, CV3 resumes the interference between YHWH and the metalworkers exposed in the two previous composite verses. It also confirms that the contribution of YHWH focuses on boosting the fire through blowing. Also, the conjunction of 2a and 10a introduces a novelty. Once 2a is considered alone, the expression kābȏd šĕmȏ invites us to identify kābȏd as an essential attribute of YHWH, his radiance. However, once 2a and 10a combine, the last word of 2a may become the first word of 10a. Consequently, the invitation to bring kābȏd to YHWH in 2a becomes similar to that formulated in 1b. But beginning 10a with the locution šĕmȏ provides a new meaning: his name is YHWH; he blows up to reach the mabbûl [molten state]. This artifice inherent of the performance reveals therefore the etymology of the name YHWH as the blower and its metallurgical context. CV4 The pairing of 2b and 10b generates literary links similar to the echoes identified in CV1-2. To the invitation to bow down to YHWH in 2b corresponds his representation as an enthroned king in 10b. Similarly, holiness in 2b echoes the ‘eternity of YHWH’s reign’ in 10b. In the name of this parallel, CV4 becomes an invitation to worship YHWH as the supreme master of the earth (10b). In the metallurgical context identified before, this claim probably refers to the demiurgic and revitalizing powers of the god patronizing metallurgy in antiquity, promoting his status of supreme being. Further meanings of CV4 superimpose on this first one. For example, a vocalization of wyšb (10b) as wayašub (he answers, qal šwb) instead

135

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

of wayešeb (= he sits, qal ysb) praises YHWH as the god who answers from the heights of his throne. This meaning is especially relevant after a composite verse (CV3) praising the cooperation between YHWH and the metalworkers around the furnace. But this wordplay also holds other significance when 10b combines with 2b, due to one of the meanings of bĕhadrat qōdeš. This rare expression is encountered in 2 Chr 20:21, when the text evokes the procession of Qorahite singers performing in the battlefield.: “And when he [Jehoshaphat] had taken counsel with the people, he appointed those who were to sing to YHWH and praise (‫ומהללים להדרת‬ ‫ )קדש‬him in hadrat qōdeš, as they went before the army, and say, “Sing antiphonally (‫ )הודו‬to YHWH, for his steadfast love endures forever.” Here, hadrat qōdeš might designate the holy attire worn by the singers in this unusual circumstance. However, this appellation is immediately followed, in the second hemiverse, by the detail not of the garments, but the song performed in antiphony. It is why the expression hadrat qōdeš probably refers to antiphonal performance.51 In Psalm 29, this meaning transforms 2b into an invitation addressed to the people of YHWH to sing antiphonally. It is especially relevant here, with Psalm 29 interpreted as a song designed for antiphonal performance. The combination of this meaning with the reading of wyšb as wayašub adds a new dimension to the pairing of 2b with 10b: the claim that YHWH himself participates in the antiphonal performance, in answering the opening voice (2b) sung by the metalworkers. Then, CV4 endows the following meaning: 2b Bow down to YHWH in antiphonal singing → 10b YHWH will answer [to you], he reigns for eternity. This second meaning extends to antiphonal singing the participation of YHWH in the work of the metallurgists. It also introduces the subsequent series of composite verses referring to the vocal theophany of YHWH. Through the wordplays between nšb / yšb / šwb expressed in verse 10 (wyšb and yšb), the composite verses 3-4 introduce the metallurgical dimension of the vocal theophany of YHWH. Composite verses 5-7 (pairing verses 3 and 9) 9a 9b 9c 51

‫חוֹל ל ַאיָּ לוֹת וַ יֶּ ֱחשׂ ֹף יְ ָערוֹת‬ ֵ ְ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה י‬ ‫יכ לוֹ‬ ָ ‫וּב ֵה‬ ְ .‫ֻכּ לּוֹ א ֵֹמר ָכּבוֹד‬

‫ה ָמּיִ ם‬-‫ל‬ ַ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ַע‬ ‫ֵאל ַה ָכּבוֹד ִה ְר ִעים‬ ‫יְ הוָ ה ַע ל ַמיִ ם ַר ִבּים‬

3a 3b 3c

N. AMZALLAG 2016a, 195-196. This is reflected by the verb lehodot, which in liturgical context, designates first of all the performance of antiphonal songs. See N. AMZALLAG 2015e.

136

CHAPTER 7

Verses 3 and 9 are the only ones from Psalm 29 with three antiphonal units each, so their pairing yields three composite verses (CV5-7). CV5 The pairing of 3a and 9a generates an echo pattern between the dialoging voices beginning with the same mention of the voice of YHWH. The opening voice (3a) introduces a watery context echoed in 9a by devastating forests and trees. As shown in Chapter 5, the storm dimension of vocal theophany is not the most fitting choice in Psalm 29. The metallurgical dimension of meaning of the four previous composite verses confirms this premise. Nevertheless, the pairing of 3a with 9a might advance an atmospheric dimension of the vocal theophany. The voice of YHWH upon the water in 3a especially associates with rainfall when YHWH blows on forests and it may potentially cause trees to fall in 9a. CV6 The beginning of this composite verse (3b) fits the thunderstorm context, in claiming that the voice of YHWH thunders. It extends the atmospheric dimension of YHWH’s vocal theophany advanced in CV5. However, two elements indicate that it is not the only interpretation. First, kābȏd is in 3b an essential attribute of YHWH, and for this reason, it invites us to interpret the thunder in a metallurgical rather than atmospheric context. The second part of this CV confirms this view. The waw conjunction attached to the only word of 9b (ûbĕhêkālȏ) cannot be the conjunction and without generating an incomplete sentence in CV6. The waw preposition therefore likely means even, also, instead of and.52 Then, CV6 claims that the god of kābȏd thunders even in his palace, that is, not only outside, through the storm (as in CV5). This turning point brings us to consider here the metallurgical dimension of the vocal theophany. CV7 The mention of kābȏd in CV6 promotes a metallurgical interpretation of the divine palace which extends in CV7. The mighty waters mentioned in 3c echo the reference to kābȏd in 9c, a feature stimulating their interpretation as molten radiant material. Bonding 3c with 9c transforms YHWH into the subject of the verb ᾿mr (qal = to say). By this means, the end of CV7, in claiming that YHWH ‘says’ kābȏd, interprets the voice of 52

This use of the waw conjunction as even is evidenced in 2 Sam 1:23; Amos 1:3, see HALOT, 1:258.

137

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

YHWH mentioned before (CV5, 3a) in a metallurgical context. The triplet CV5-7 of composite verses, the first one mentioning the vocal theophany of YHWH, introduces a subtle transformation from a mere representation of the vocal theophany as thunder (CV5) towards a gradual revelation of its metallurgical dimension (CV6-7). Composite verses 8-9 (pairing verses 4 and 8) 8a 8b

‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה יָ ִחיל ִמ ְד ָבּר‬ ‫יָ ִחיל יְ הוָ ה ִמ ְד ַבּר ָק ֵדשׁ‬

‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ַבּכּ ַֹח‬ ‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה ֶבּ ָה ָדר‬

4a 4b

The pairing of verses 4 and 8 yields echoing claims. The voice of YHWH is mentioned in the two halves of CV8 (4a, 8a). In CV9, YHWH in 8b echoes the voice of YHWH in 4b. Beyond these features, literary bonds exist in CV8 between kōaḥ (4a) and yāḥîl (8a), expressing the same notions of strength and vitality.53 Also hādār in 4b interferes with qdš in 8b, especially after these two notions are gathered in the expression hadrat qōdeš in 2b. CV8 Immediately after mentioning the metallurgical dimension of meaning of the voice of YHWH in CV5-7, his palace and his kābȏd, the eighth composite verse positions the voice of YHWH in a desert area. It also specifies that, besides the destruction of trees and forests mentioned in CV 5, here, the voice of YHWH promotes life and wealth. This contrast may theoretically reflect the beneficial effect of rain on steppes, and the subsequent renewal of life. Alternately, with the areas of copper production being located in desert areas in the Southern Levant, CV8 may express the life and wealth issued from the metallurgical activity occurring in this desert area. CV9 Whereas the two abovementioned interpretations of the voice of YHWH (atmospheric and metallurgical) remain possible in CV8, the reference to mīdbar qādeš, in CV9, promotes the metallurgical interpretation preferentially (see Chapter 5). Beyond this geographical reference, Qadesh (= holiness) follows the representation of the palace of YHWH as a furnace (CV6). It confirms, therefore, the holiness of this activity which stimulates 53

These two notions interfere in Deut 8:17-18 and they are set in parallel in the two hemiverses of Ps 33:16.

138

CHAPTER 7

both a vocal (voice of YHWH) and visual (kābȏd) theophany. Here again, through CV8-9, wealth and holiness attached to the production of metal become intertwined. Composite verses 10-11 (pairing verses 5 and 7) 7a 7b

‫יְ הוָ ה ח ֵֹצב‬-‫קוֹל‬ ‫ַל ֲהבוֹת ֵאשׁ‬

‫קוֹל יְ הוָ ה שׁ ֵֹבר ֲא ָר זִ ים‬ ‫וַ יְ ַשׁ ֵבּר יְ הוָ ה ֶאת ַא ְר זֵ י ַה ְלּ ָבנוֹן‬

5a 5b

CV10 The pairing of verses 5 and 7 generates further echo patterns in CV10: the first one concerns the mention of the voice of YHWH in both 5a and 7a. The other emerges from the similar meaning of qal šbr (= to break) in 5a and of qal ḥṣb (= to cut, to hew) in 7a. These parallels suggest that the voice of YHWH, in 7a, operates on wood, exactly as in 5a. Furthermore, the verb ḥṣb in 7a, once following a reference to the mining area of Qadesh (8b), expresses another meaning: to make a hole, that is, to mine galleries and digs. Then, CV10 refers to the two elements mixing in a furnace: coals (5a) and ores (7a). CV11 Once considered alone, CV10 remains mysterious because nothing reveals how the voice of YHWH breaks and cuts wood. This information is supplied immediately after, in CV11. There the wordplay on šbr becomes significant. On the one side, YHWH supplies the wood (5b) serving as fuel in the furnace (7b). On the other, YHWH, through his voice, breaks the wood through his action on flames. CV11 confirms, therefore, the fiery (and metallurgical) context of expression of the voice of YHWH. It also provides further information. Praising YHWH as the supplier of wood for the furnace echoes the praise of YHWH for his destructive effect on forests and trees, in CV5. Once gathered, these two claims may justify the sudden reference to a storm in CV5, otherwise singular in this metallurgical context. Here the storm expresses the two dimensions of the claim from 5b: in controlling rain, YHWH ensures the growth and development of the trees. Through the violence of storms, YHWH transforms the old trees into wood used as fuel in the furnace. 4.2. Echo singing of the central claim (CV12-13) 6a 6b

‫ע גֶ ל‬-‫מוֹ‬ ֵ ‫וַ יַּ ְר ִק ֵידם ְכּ‬ ‫ר ֵא ִמים‬-‫ן‬ ְ ‫ְל ָבנוֹן וְ ִשׂ ְר י ֹן ְכּמוֹ ֶב‬

‫ע גֶ ל‬-‫מוֹ‬ ֵ ‫וַ יַּ ְר ִק ֵידם ְכּ‬ ‫ר ֵא ִמים‬-‫ן‬ ְ ‫ְל ָבנוֹן וְ ִשׂ ְר י ֹן ְכּמוֹ ֶב‬

6a 6b

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

139

In the cross responsa setting, the two voices meet in performing the verse 6 in echo. This singularity confers to this central verse a special importance. The animal imagery in verse 6 was interpreted in the previous chapter as a metaphor of a volcanic event, itself expressing the successful liquefaction of silicates. In the metallurgical context, this transition from solid to liquid phase in the furnace announces the success of the smelting process. It represents its apotheosis, the power of YHWH blasting on the fire, and its issue: the expression of the kābȏd theophany. This central verse sung in echo therefore resumes the metallurgical reality exposed in Psalm 29. But a double meaning exists in CV12. It emanates from the indeterminacy of the complement of the action related in 6a. The succession of CV12 and 13 makes the mountains of Lebanon the object of the volcanic transformation induced by the voice of YHWH. But the last segment of CV11, flames of fire, introduces another complement to the following 6a claim: it relates how the blasting voice of YHWH causes the flames of fire to get up, to jump, and to move like young animals. It is exactly the way blowing acts on a hearth. 4.3. Second half of the performance (CV14-24) Following the singing in echo of the central verse, we observe the same pairing of antiphonal units in inverse order of their precedence, and an inverse ranking order of the composite verses. Through minors, these changes introduce meanings and literary developments concealed in the first half of the composite text. • CV14-15: The meaning of CV14-15 is similar to its counterpart from CV10-11, but it adds a few new elements. After mentioning the liquid state reached in the furnace (CV12-13), the opening claim from CV14 (7a) also mentions the deformation of the molten phase by the air blast from the tuyères. Furthermore, the locution ‘flames of fire’, in 7b, now completes the sentence expressed immediately before, in 5a. • CV16-17: The parallel in claims between verses 4 and 8 reduces the importance of their inversion of order. Consequently, CV8-9 and CV1617 express similar meanings. • CV18-20: The inversion of the order of precedence between verses 3 and 9 introduces substantial modifications. In following the preternatural combustion related in the previous composite verses, the meaning of CV18 likely differs from that of CV5. The wood and forest mentioned in 9a no longer refer to the thunderstorm but rather to their use as fuel in the furnace. By extension, its paired claim (3a) refers to the liquid

140

CHAPTER 7

phase generated in the furnace. The meaning of CV19 is modified, too. Whereas CV6 operates a transition from thunderstorm to metallurgy, this dynamic is no longer necessary in the second part of the composite text. Now, CV19 begins with the mention of the furnace (9b) as the divine ‘palace’ where the vocal and visual theophany of YHWH occur (3b). This combination of visual and vocal theophany becomes the theme of CV20. • CV21-22: The mention of the mabbûl (10a) is now introduced immediately after the claim “YHWH upon the mighty water” (3c), the imagery referring to the molten phase generated in the furnace. This continuity strengthens the metallurgical interpretation of mabbûl and yšb in 10a. In CV21, the answering claim (2a) emphasizes the nature of essential attribute of kābȏd, and its metallurgical meaning. These developments promote the interpretation of CV22 in this context: YHWH’s kingship emanates from his involvement in metallurgy and the holiness attached to this activity. • CV23-24: As in CV1-2, this final pair of composite verses exposes the nature of the interaction between YHWH and the metalworkers. It begins with YHWH blessing the metallurgists (11a) after completing the smelting process. It transforms the mention of sons of god in 1a into the issue of the whole process exposed in the previous composite verses. In other words, CV23 affirms that metallurgy transforms mere mortals into sons of god, through the strength and power issued from this activity. In CV24, these sons of god blessed by YHWH (11b) are those stimulating YHWH’s theophany (1b), a feature transforming them into his emissaries. This analysis shows that all the pairs of segments of distant verses display a high level of coherency, including parallels in claims, literary continuity and even wordplays and new meanings. Such an achievement is not expected to emerge in a poem conceived in a linear perspective of reading or singing. Therefore, the high level of literary coherency of the composite verses supports the premise that Psalm 29 was designed for a crossresponsa mode of antiphonal performance. 5. THE COMPOSITE TEXT OF PSALM 29 A poem is not a mere succession of verses displaying inner coherency. If Psalm 29 was truly designed for cross responsa, the composite text issued from this setting is expected to reveal a literary development ignored

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

141

in the linear reading. Here, the four first composite verses (CV1-4) formulate an invitation to stimulate YHWH’s theophany through the furnace. This call is followed by a series of composite verses (CV5-11) expressing YHWH’s participation in the work of the furnace. It begins with a praise of YHWH for producing wood for fuel (CV5), for its use in the furnace (CV6), and for reaching the high temperatures required to melt silicates and produce thermal radiance (CV7). Thereafter, the composite text focuses on the mining area (CV8-9) where the metallurgical activity occurs. After describing the effect of (divine) blasting on the fire (CV10-11), the melting of silicates (CV12-13) becomes the climax, the change announcing the success of the smelting process resulting from the collaboration of YHWH and the metalworkers. The composite verses of the second half of the performance express almost the same contents in inverse order of precedence, from the fiery reality stimulating a melting event (CV14-15) to the blessing of the metalworkers for their work (CV23-24). It reflects the completion of the smelting process following the first melting event. The liquid element combined with kābȏd, in CV18-20, reflects the liquefying of ore in the furnace, marking the completion of the smelting process. This issue appears immediately before the four concluding composite verses (CV21-24) about the essential link between YHWH and the metalworkers. Performed in such a way, the bundle of the composite text (CV5-20) accounts for the metallurgical process from fuel and ore preparation to the melting enabling the separation of the two liquid phases (metal and silicates) in the furnace. As expected, blowing is the central activity in this process. This blast of pressured air is identified as the voice of YHWH and acknowledged as a consequence of his participation. The central composite verses (CV12-13) announce the turning point in the process, identified with the early melting of silicates. It indicates the beginning of the smelting process that ends with the separation between metal and silicates in CV19-20. The composite text of Psalm 29 yields, therefore, a coherent succession of claims. It reveals the participation of YHWH in the smelting process. It also stresses the complex relationship existing between the deity and the metalworkers. Instead of being a god merely sponsoring a craft, Psalm 29 expresses the active participation of YHWH in the metallurgical process, which stimulates his theophany in return. These dynamics grant the metalworkers a complex mode of relationship with their deity. Instead of mere worshippers, these craftsmen stimulate the divine presence on the earth, materialized by thermal radiance (kābȏd). This interference elucidates the

142

CHAPTER 7

call addressed to them to ‘ascribe’ kābȏd to YHWH (v. 1). It also clarifies why YHWH blesses them for this action (v. 11). And the mingling of these two verses, in the composite text (CV1-2, 23-24) even reveals a relationship of ‘symbiosis’ between the divine presence on the earth on the one side, and the metalworkers and their wealth on the other. YHWH’s autonomous action is briefly acknowledged in this psalm, through the mention of the god supplying the wood used for fuel (CV5-6). However, this reality is of minor importance in the composite text compared to the relationship between YHWH and the metalworkers. In Psalm 29, instead of being feared for his autonomous intervention on the earth, YHWH is praised for the intimacy of his interrelation with the metalworkers, through their cooperation around the furnace. This feature has consequences for the two partners: concerning YHWH, the work around the furnace generates a visual theophany (kābȏd) and its vocal counterpart, the blowing of the tuyeres. Concerning the metalworkers, the furnace transforms them into emissaries (sons of gods, people of god) enjoying closeness to the god and the subsequent blessing this status brings. The allusion to antiphony (hadrat qōdeš in v. 2) materialized by the performance of Psalm 29 even introduces a human counterpart to the vocal theophany of tuyeres working in alternation. This intricate relation may explain the singular approach to YHWH in Psalm 29. On the one side, YHWH is acknowledged in verse 10 as the supreme deity and the ‘Lord of mabbûl’. This feature probably includes his powers of revitalization of matter through total destruction of shape. On the other side, YHWH is not addressed here by his worshippers for his support, intervention in their midst, deliverance from their enemies, or even his healing of them. A blessing component undoubtedly exists in verse 11. However, it mingles with the appellation of the metalworkers as sons of god (v. 1), suggesting that this status is the blessing’s genuine issue. In Psalm 29, YHWH is not then a classical deity intervening on his worshippers’ behalf. Instead, the relation to YHWH in Psalm 29 looks like practical cooperation around the furnace accompanied by the contemplation of the kābȏd-YHWH, and a dialogical relation involving both metallurgy and poetry. The present interpretation confirms the metallurgical context of the composition of Psalm 29. It also reveals that metallurgy is not merely a craft in this song. It is not even a circumstantial element by which metalworkers address a powerful god who sponsors their corporation. Instead, metallurgy is considered essential for YHWH’s theophany and the man-god relationship. YHWH is the patron of the metalworkers, granting them outstanding

THE INTEGRATIVE APPROACH OF PSALM 29

143

powers, and the supreme deity and master of the forces of rejuvenation. This double dimension of YHWH in Psalm 29 advances its Qenite origin. The extensive mention of YHWH’s name, which remained esoteric outside of Israel, even suggests that Psalm 29 was conceived for the Qenites only. The invitation to stimulate a metallurgical theophany of YHWH supports this conclusion. The description of the gradual stages of transformation of ore in the furnace, throughout the succession of composite verses, confirms that this Qenite song was composed for inner-group use, probably during the smelting process.

CHAPTER 8

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL The previous chapters identified Psalm 29 as a Qenite hymn. Its presence in the Psalter betrays, therefore, the influence of Qenite Yahwism on the Israelite religion. Its insertion also reveals that the Qenite influence extended far beyond the period of emergence of the Israelite religion. The present chapter intends to examine this impact through the investigation of Psalms 46, 96-98 and 114, five poems with markers of Israelite identity which are influenced by Psalm 29 in their content. This investigation is expected to yield three achievements. First, a comparison of the theme and content of these ‘influenced psalms’ enables us to evaluate the likelihood of the metallurgical interpretation of Psalm 29 regarding its stormgod alternative. Second, this examination is expected to reveal the nature of the text of Psalm 29 which served as reference for the authors of the influenced psalms: the MT version (source text) or the composite text issued from its cross-responsa setting. Third, the message of these influenced psalms, and especially their theology, provides an outstanding opportunity to discover the metamorphoses the Qenite Yahwism underwent in ancient Israel. 1. Psalm 96 1 Sing

to YHWH a new song; Sing to YHWH all the earth! Sing to YHWH, bless his name; Declare from day to day his salvation. 2 3 Tell among the nations his kābȏd, His marvelous works among all the peoples! 4 For great is YHWH, and greatly praised; He is feared above all gods. 5 For all the gods of the peoples are worthless deities; YHWH made the heavens. 6 Splendor and majesty [are] before him; Strength and beauty [are] in his sanc  tuary. 7 Ascribe to YHWH, Families of the peoples; Ascribe to YHWH kābȏd and   strength! 8 Ascribe to YHWH Kābȏd [is] his name; Bring an offering, and come into his   courts! 9 Worship YHWH in splendor of holiness; Tremble before him, all the earth! 10 Say among the nations, YHWH reigns! The world is established; it shall never   be moved; He governs the peoples with equity. 11 Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice; Let the sea roar, and all   that fills it;

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

145

12 Let

the field exult, and everything in it! Then shall all the trees of the forest   sing for joy 13 Before YHWH, for he comes, for he comes to govern the earth; He will   govern the world in righteousness, and the peoples in his faithfulness.

Psalm 96 is probably the hymn from the Psalter with the highest affinities with Psalm 29, whose first two verses are almost entirely transferred in Ps 96:7-9 (Table 1). Table 1. Parallels claims between Ps 29:1-2 and Ps 96:7-9. Psalm 96

Psalm 29

7a

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ִמ ְשׁ ְפּחוֹת ַע ִמּים‬

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּנֵ י ֵא ִלים‬

1a

7b

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬

1b

8a

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְכּבוֹד ְשׁמוֹ‬

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְכּבוֹד ְשׁמוֹ‬

2a

9a

‫ק ֶֹדשׁ‬-‫ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ַה ְד ַרת‬

‫ק ֶֹדשׁ‬-‫ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ַה ְד ַרת‬

2b

The parallels extend beyond these two verses. Both songs mention trees and forests (Ps 29:9 and Ps 96:12). Like in Psalm 29, kābȏd is an essential attribute of YHWH in Ps 96:3, and the deity is similarly surrounded by magnificence (hādār) in Ps 29:4 and Ps 96:6. Both hymns mention YHWH’s eternal kingship in their final verses (Ps 29:10; Ps 96:10, 13). The multiplicity of parallels between the two songs led most investigators to assume that Psalm 29 served as a reference for the composition of Psalm 96.1 For example, Richard Clifford assumes that Psalm 96 freely reformulates the combat myth from Psalm 29, inviting the whole earth to acknowledge YHWH.2 The invitation to sing a new song (Ps 96:1) is sometimes interpreted as a consequence of YHWH’s cosmic victory, which opens a new universe of stability and blessing on the earth.3 Alternately, the invitation to sing a ‘new song’ might also announce a theological novelty in Psalm 96, which extends or even challenges the ancient one.4 For 1 M. BUTTENWIESER 1969, 153; Y. AVISHUR 1989, 54-55; E. GERSTENBERGER 2001, 188; R. WATSON 2005, 42; D. PARDEE 2005, 178; D. PARDEE and N. PARDEE 2009, 128; A. LAATO 2018, 148. Erich ZENGER (2005, 434) suggests that Psalm 96:1-9 elaborates and is even structured on Ps 29:1-2. For Jörg JEREMIAS (1987, 125), Psalm 96 as a whole represents an exegesis of the first two verses of Psalm 29. 2 R. CLIFFORD 2003, 120. 3 M. DAHOOD 1966, 2:357; R. CLIFFORD 2003, 121. For Evode BEAUCAMP (1979, 122, 124), Psalm 96 envisions the peaceful and serene world consecutive to YHWH’s ultimate victory over the forces of chaos, detailed in Psalm 29. 4 R. GOLDINGAY 2007, 965.

146

CHAPTER 8

example, the kingship of YHWH, briefly mentioned in Ps 29:10, becomes the central theme of Psalm 96.5 Proclaiming this statement even becomes an integrative component of the worship of YHWH in Psalm 96.6 This perspective also included the Chaoskampf motif, the classical fundament of interpretation of Psalm 29. For scholars, the salvation and deliverance praised in Ps 96:2 became the ultimate consequence of the subjugation of the forces of chaos identified in Psalm 29.7 Others identified the roaring of the sea (v. 11) and the subsequent rejoicing of the trees (v. 12) as expressions of the storm god theophany in the created world now emancipated from the threat of chaos and destruction.8 These contrasting views concerning the Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 96 reveal how this framework of interpretation accomodates with a diversity of situations.9 1.1. Differences with Psalm 29 The significance of a ‘new song’ in Psalm 96 is generally determined on the ground of a storm-god interpretation of Psalm 29. The alternative interpretation proposed in this study calls for re-examining the theological differences between these two songs. Public versus secret cult Psalm 96:7-9, the triplet reproducing the content of Ps 29:1-2, introduces a few changes. The most visible is the replacement of the sons of gods (Ps 29:1a) by the families of nations (Ps 96:7a). This transformation denotes an enlargement of the audience. In Psalm 96, the psalmist addresses not only Israel but all of humankind. This message becomes an invitation to worship YHWH openly everywhere, as Israel does. Therefore, it is a call to leave behind the esoteric cult traditionally concerning a 5

M. DAHOOD 1966, 2:359. E. GERSTENBERGER 2001, 189. 7 A. ANDERSON 1972, 2:683. 8 A. FITZGERALD 2002, 105. Alternately, Norman HABEL and Geraldine AVENT (2001, 48-50) identify YHWH as a threatening storm god in Psalm 29. Then, Psalm 96 becomes a hymn of the earth’s deliverance from this threat and the emancipation from the storm-god identity of YHWH. Though considering YHWH as a storm god in Psalm 29, these authors reject the Chaoskampf interpretation. They conclude (ibid., 50) that “The hymnic celebration of Psalms 96-97, by subverting this ancient storm-god tradition, challenges the validity of a theophany that is a destructive display of divine might.” 9 Some scholars deny an expression of the Chaoskampf motif in Psalm 96 (as well as in Psalms 97 and 98, two further influenced psalms). See J. GRAY 1979, 67-68; O. LORETZ 1988, 357; M. BRETTLER 1989, 157. 6

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

147

small elite affiliated to the ‘people of YHWH’, similar to the call addressed to the Phoenicians to worship YHWH ‘in light’, formulated in Isa 24:15. The changes in man-god relationship The invitation to bring offerings to YHWH (Ps 96:8) introduces another novelty in the triplet of verses (vv. 7-9) quoting Ps 29:1-2. It confirms that, unlike its source song, Psalm 96 was conceived for the public worship of YHWH. A traditional form of worship now substitutes to the invitation to perform metallurgy (= to ascribe kābȏd to YHWH, Ps 29:1). The holiness of a shrine also replaces that of the furnace. Whereas Psalm 29 exposes a cooperative mode of interaction between YHWH and the metalworkers, the relationship is more classical in Psalm 96. It involves the giving of an offering to an autonomous deity who provides blessings in return (8b). Its position after the claim ‫( הבו ליהוה כבוד שמו‬Ps 29:2a and Ps 96:8a) expresses this transformation. The combination of the 8a and 8b cola also casts a different significance on the concept of kābȏd. In Psalm 29, this term designates first of all the radiance of molten metal emanating from the man-god cooperation around the furnace. It is now associated with the offerings to YHWH, so that it carries a connotation of glory and magnificence. YHWH and the stabilized universe YHWH is the master of the stabilized universe in Ps 96:10. This claim contrasts with his approach as Lord of mabbûl in Ps 29:10, an appellation referring to YHWH’s forces of creation and vitalization (through his power of liquefying matter). If the stabilized universe is associated with the solid state, Psalm 96 announces the cessation of perpetual cycles of destruction and rejuvenation, towards the rise of a harmonious world stabilized and ruled by YHWH. This new reality may justify the mention of the Nature spontaneously rejoicing (Ps 96:10-12). The forest trees praising YHWH, in Ps 96:12, even opposes the voice of YHWH destroying trees in Ps 29:9. Formulating YHWH’s intervention on the earth, the final verse (Ps 96:13) becomes the ultimate consequence of this change. The stabilization of the earth, which replaces the successive cycles of destruction and recreation, implies YHWH’s active participation in protecting his created universe from deterioration, a reality which gradually but inexorably brings about a new cycle of destruction-recreation. Now, the claim of divine intervention in History replaces the previous distance of the deity

148

CHAPTER 8

up to his intervention through a cyclic destruction, the dynamics characterizing the reign of the Lord of mabbûl.10 The Book of Genesis formulates a similar shift. Though mabbûl there designates a flood of water, the Flood story (Genesis 6-11) accounts for the end of Cain’s lineage (= the metallurgical traditions), and its substitution with the descendants of Seth, from whom Noah and the Abraham lineage (= the new form of Yahwism) emerge. The myth accounts for the last mabbûl performed by YHWH, towards a definite stabilization of the created universe. The divine promise to Noah emphasizes this change: “I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of mabbûl, and never again shall there be a mabbûl to destroy the earth” (Gen 9:11).11 In Genesis, the promise of the stabilization of the universe (Gen 8:21) immediately follows the first holocaust sacrifice to YHWH (Gen 8:20). The beginning of Gen 8:21 stresses the causal relationship between the two, in claiming that the smoke of the sacrifice motivates the divine decision to stabilize the world: “And when YHWH smelled the pleasing aroma, YHWH said in his heart, “I will no more curse the earth for the sake of man…” The transformation of the man-god relationship is therefore consubstantial with the divine promise to renounce being the ‘Lord of mabbûl’. Like in Psalm 96, an approach to YHWH as an autonomous deity receiving sacrifices substitutes the relationship originally promoted by the Cain lineage (the Qenites). Silenced in the Flood story, the nature of this former approach of YHWH is visible in Psalm 29. Consequently, the lack of reference to mabbûl in Psalm 96 is probably not incidental. It recalls the reference to the last the flood in Genesis 6-9.12 Both express a similar demise of the representation of YHWH as the Lord of mabbûl. The changes identified here in Psalm 96, regarding Psalm 29, cohere with the transition from an esoteric cult of YHWH to his public worship. All of them articulate around the transformation of an intimate cooperation between man and YHWH, stimulating his theophany and contemplation, into an approach of YHWH as an autonomous deity warranting stability of the universe. This transformation is accompanied by downgrading the metallurgical component, including a reinterpretation of kābȏd from thermal radiance to epithet of divine glory. 10 Raymond VAN LEEUWEN (2005, 28-29) already noticed that the main change in Psalm 96, regarding Psalm 29, is the claim of divine intervention in History. 11 Like in Psalm 29, the mabbûl in Genesis has a singular connotation of recycling the corroded metal to renew it, revealed by the widespread corruption of life on the earth (“the end of all flesh comes before me”, Gen 6:13), thus justifying it. 12 N. AMZALLAG 2019b.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

149

1.2. The cross responsa setting of Psalm 96 The concentric symmetry pattern of literary bonds between distant verses revealed the cross responsa mode of performance in Psalm 29. A similar pattern also exists in Psalm 96. It organizes around verse 7, the mathematical center of the psalm. • Verses 1 and 13: to the mention of the whole earth (‫ )כל הארץ‬in verse 1 corresponds the reference to the universe (‫ )תבל‬and peoples (‫)ועמים‬ in verse 13. • Verses 2 and 12: the invitation to sing in verse 2 (‫ )שירו‬echoes the expression of musical rejoicing in verse 12 (‫ יעלז‬and ‫)ירננו‬. • Verses 3 and 11: the nations (‫ )גוים‬in verse 3 correlate with the earth (‫ )הארץ‬in verse 11. • Verses 4 and 10: a similar praise of YHWH’s greatness exists in verse 4 (‫ )גדול יהוה‬and verse 10 (‫)יהוה מלך‬. • Verses 5 and 9: these two verses include a similar reference to YHWH (‫ אלהי העמים‬in v. 5 and ‫ יהוה‬in v. 9) and two complementary claims, heavens (‫)שׁ ַמיִ ם‬ ָ in verse 5 and the whole earth (‫ )כל הארץ‬in verse 9. • Verses 6 and 8: parallel divine attributes exist in verses 6 (‫)הוד והדר‬ and 8 (‫)כבוד‬. A similar reference to holy sites of worship exists in both (‫ במקדשו‬in verse 6 and ‫ לחצרותיו‬in verse 8). These literary bonds invite us to set Psalm 96 in cross responsa fashion and to examine the issued composite text. For this purpose, all the verses of this song were split into two antiphonal units according to the main pausal indication of the Masoretic cantillation. This process yields 26 successive composite verses: Opening voice (sense)

Responding voice (antisense)

verse

verse

CV1

1a Sing to YHWH a new song

→ Before YHWH, for he comes, for he comes to govern the earth

13a

CV2

1b Sing to YHWH all the earth! → He will govern the world in righteousness, and the peoples in his faithfulness

13b

CV3

2a Sing to YHWH, bless his name

→ Let the field exult, and everything in it!

12a

CV4

2b Declare from day to day his salvation

→ Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy

12b

150

CHAPTER 8

Opening voice (sense)

Responding voice (antisense)

verse

verse

CV5

3a Tell among the nations his kābȏd

→ Let the heavens be glad, and 11a let the earth rejoice

CV6

3b His marvelous works among → Let the sea roar, and all that 11b all the peoples! fills it

CV7

4a For great is YHWH, and greatly praised

→ Say among the nations, 10a YHWH reigns! The world is established; it shall never be moved

CV8

4b He is feared above all gods

→ He governs the peoples with 10b equity

CV9

5a For all the gods of the → Worship YHWH in splendor 9a peoples are worthless deities of holiness

CV10

5b YHWH made the heavens

→ Exalt before him, all the earth!

9b

CV11

6a Splendor and majesty [are] before him

→ Ascribe to YHWH Kābȏd [is] his name

8a

CV12

6b Strength and beauty [are] in → Bring an offering, and come 8b his sanctuary into his courts!

CV13

7a Ascribe to YHWH, Families of the peoples

→ Ascribe to YHWH, Families of the peoples

7a

CV14

7b Ascribe to YHWH kābȏd and strength!

→ Ascribe to YHWH kābȏd and strength!

7b

CV15

8a Ascribe to YHWH Kābȏd [is] his name

→ Splendor and majesty [are] before him

6a

CV16

8b Bring an offering, and come → Strength and beauty [are] in 6b into his courts! his sanctuary

CV17

9a Worship YHWH in splendor → For all the gods of the 5a of holiness peoples are worthless deities

CV18

9b Exalt before him, all the earth!

→ YHWH made the heavens

5b

CV19 10a Say among the nations, → For great is YHWH, and YHWH reigns! The world is greatly praised established; it shall never be moved

4a

CV20 10b He governs the peoples with → He is feared above all gods equity

4b

CV21 11a Let the heavens be glad, and → Tell among the nations his let the earth rejoice kābȏd

3a

151

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

Opening voice (sense)

Responding voice (antisense)

verse

verse

CV22 11b Let the sea roar, and all that → His marvelous works among 3b fills it all the peoples! CV23 12a Let the field exult, and everything in it!

→ Sing to YHWH, bless his name

2a

CV24 12b Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy

→ Declare from day to day his salvation

2b

CV25 13a Before YHWH, for he comes, for he comes to govern the earth

→ Sing to YHWH a new song

1a

CV26 13b He will govern the world in righteousness, and the peoples in his faithfulness

→ Sing to YHWH all the earth! 1b

In this setting, the central claim, verse 7, is also the only verse with two cola borrowed from Psalm 29. By singing the opening claim of Psalm 29 in echo (CV13-14), Psalm 96 exacerbates the reference to this song, which becomes its main theme. 1.3. Analysis of the composite verses The first half of the performance (CV1-12) CV1-2 (pairing verses 1 and 13) 13

:‫ִל ְפנֵ י יְ הוָ ה ִכּי ָבא – ִכּי ָבא ִל ְשׁפֹּט ָה ָא ֶרץ‬ .‫תּ ֵבל ְבּ ֶצ ֶדק – וְ ַע ִמּים ֶבּ ֱאמוּנָ תוֹ‬-‫ֹט‬ ֵ ‫יִ ְשׁפּ‬

;‫ִשׁירוּ ַליהוָ ה ִשׁיר ָח ָדשׁ‬ ‫ה ָא ֶרץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ִשׁירוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּ‬

1

The composite text opens (CV1) with an invitation to sing to YHWH a new song of praise (1a). In light of the explicit references to Psalm 29, this psalm is probably the ‘older song’ inspiring the composition of Psalm 96. This ‘new song’ introduces a theological novelty regarding the ancient one. It appears in the second hemiverse (13a), through the double mention of YHWH coming to the earth to rule it. The consequence of this theological novelty appears immediately after, in CV2: if YHWH, the Lord of the earth, intervenes in its governance, his public worship now concerns all the peoples. All are now invited to participate in musical worship of YHWH (1b) justified by his successful ruling of the earth (13b).

152

CHAPTER 8

The theological novelty of Psalm 96, regarding Psalm 29, opens the song. It claims that the esoteric cult of YHWH traditionally reserved to a small group (the metallurgists) now extends to all the nations. The cause of this transformation is exposed here as a sudden involvement of YHWH in the terrestrial affairs, instead of the secondary deities which had classically governed the earth in his name. CV3-4 (pairing verses 2 and 12) 12

;‫בּוֹ‬-‫א ֶשׁר‬-‫ל‬ ֲ ‫יַ ֲע ֹלז ָשׂ ַד י וְ ָכ‬ .‫יָ ַער‬-‫ע ֵצ י‬-‫ל‬ ֲ ‫ָאז יְ ַרנְּ נוּ ָכּ‬

;‫ִשׁירוּ ַליהוָ ה ָבּ ְרכוּ ְשׁמוֹ‬ ‫שׁוּעתוֹ‬ ָ ְ‫ליוֹם י‬-‫יּוֹם‬ ְ ‫ַבּ ְשּׂרוּ ִמ‬

2

Following the invitation to worship YHWH, the two subsequent composite verses promote a cause/effect relationship between the public worship (verse 2a-b) and YHWH’s blessing (verse 12a-b). This invitation concerns peoples in CV3, and it extends to the wild in CV4. There, the causal relationship between the two is even emphasized through the preposition ‫ ָאז‬linking 2b and 12b. The ancient relationship to YHWH centered on the activity of the furnace is now replaced by a musical worship that stimulates the divine blessing of the whole earth. CV5-6 (pairing verses 3 and 11) 11

;‫יִ ְשׂ ְמחוּ ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם וְ ָתגֵ ל ָה ָא ֶר ץ‬ .‫וּמל ֹאוֹ‬ ְ ‫יִ ְר ַעם ַהיָּ ם‬

;‫ַס ְפּרוּ ַבגּוֹיִ ם ְכּבוֹדוֹ‬ ‫אוֹתיו‬ ָ ‫ה ַע ִמּים נִ ְפ ְל‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ְבּ ָכ‬

3

The composite verse 5 invites the poets and musicians to diffuse the musical worship of YHWH among the nations (3a).13 Here, the poets and musicians become the agents of YHWH. They replace the metalworkers and their esoteric cult of YHWH, with the consequences exposed in 11a: joy and festivals on the earth. This conjunction of heavenly and terrestrial entities stimulates a parallel with the former worship of YHWH through metallurgy, in which the divine and mortals cooperate around the furnace. The reference to kābȏd in 3a even strengthens the parallel between this musical worship and the metallurgical theophany. What the poets tell the nations is announced in the next composite verse (CV6) as the deeds of YHWH, but without mentioning their nature. In the Psalter, the divine deeds called ‫ נפלאות‬refer to the demiurgic and overwhelming powers of YHWH (Pss 26:7; 72:18; 75:2; 86:10; 136:4; 145:5), and his wisdom (Pss 71:17; 119:18, 27). The deeds refer also 13

A similar call is the central theme of Psalm 67 and 87. See N. AMZALLAG 2014c; 2015d.

153

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

to the outstanding birth of Israel (Pss 77:12, 15-16; 77:17; 78:4-5, 12; 106:7; 111:4; 105:1-6). They may also express the divine protection or salvation of the whole Israel (Ps 40:6) or individuals (Pss 9:2-4; 17:7-9). All these eventualities remain possible through a linear reading, but the pairing of 3b with 11b clarifies the nature of the deeds. The ‘roaring’ of the sea (‫ )ירעם הים‬somewhat recalls the mention, in Ps 29:3, of YHWH roaring upon the mighty waters. But in the Israelite context of interpretation, this abnormal agitation probably refers to the miracle of the sea at Exodus.14 This wonder is one of the events praised preferentially by the Israelite poets (e.g. Ps 77:17). Psalm 105 (vv. 1-6) even invites the poets to sing this deed among the nations, lauding the overwhelming powers of YHWH’s intervention in the world. CV7-8 (pairing verses 4 and 10) 10

‫תּמּוֹט‬-‫ל‬ ִ ‫תּכּוֹן ֵתּ ֵבל ַבּ‬-‫ף‬ ִ ‫ִא ְמרוּ ַבגּוֹיִ ם יְ הוָ ה ָמ ָלְך ַא‬ .‫ישׁ ִר ים‬ ָ ‫יָ ִד ין ַע ִמּים ְבּ ֵמ‬

;‫וּמ ֻה ָלּ ל ְמאֹד‬ ְ ‫ִכּי גָ דוֹל יְ הוָ ה‬ .‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫א‬-‫ל‬ ֱ ‫כּ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫נוֹרא הוּא ַע‬ ָ

4

The composite verse 7 refers to YHWH as the supreme deity (4a) and the god warranting the stability of the universe (10a). It confirms that YHWH is no more the Lord of mabbûl in Psalm 96. The next composite verse (CV8) reiterates the supreme status of YHWH exposed in CV7. It adds, however, new elements issued from the pairing of 4b and 10b. This power of stabilization comes from YHWH judging peoples for their sins and deviations. In avoiding the consequences and enduring influence of these deviations, this intervention prevents their devitalizing effect and the need to periodically ‘remelt’ the world through a mabbûl event. CV9-10 (pairing verses 5 and 9) 9

‫ק ֶֹדשׁ‬-‫ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ַה ְד ַרת‬ .‫ה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ִחילוּ ִמ ָפּנָ יו ָכּ‬

‫ילים‬ ִ ‫ֹלהי ָה ַע ִמּים ֱא ִל‬ ֵ ‫א‬-‫ל‬ ֱ ‫ִכּי ָכּ‬ ‫וַ יהוָ ה ָשׁ ַמיִ ם ָע ָשׂה‬

5

In the former Yahwism, YHWH is approached only by the small elite of metalworkers, and he remains otherwise distant from the terrestrial affairs. This situation grants the secondary deities the function of intermediaries 14 Bernard GOSSE (1999, 273) formulates this conclusion based on the parallels existing between Psalm 96 and the Book of Isaiah, in which the deed of Exodus is of central importance for the development of the new theology. The interrelation between Isaiah (especially Isaiah 40–55) and Psalms 96–98 is well acknowledged. See A. MAILLOT and A. LELIÈVRE 1966, 275; E. BEAUCAMP 1979, 122; B. GOSSE 1999; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 465.

154

CHAPTER 8

between the earth and the celestial domain of YHWH. Now, YHWH’s direct involvement on the earth (formulated in CV7-8) logically brings about the demise of the secondary deities. This consequence is the theme of CV9. The first part of this composite verse (5a) claims the inefficiency of the patron deities of all the nations once YHWH intervenes on the earth (mentioned just before, in CV7-8). It abolishes the previous situation, in which YHWH delegated a divine emissary to each nation.15 The second hemiverse (9a) expresses the consequence of such a new theological reality: a call addressed to all the nations to worship YHWH directly rather than through their patron god. By this means, it extends to the nations the message initially addressed to the small elite of metalworkers in Ps 29:2b. The subsequent composite verse (CV10) completes the arguments developed in CV7-9 in stressing the ultimate status of YHWH as the creator of the heavens (5b), that is, of the universe. This claim is enough to undermine the need for other deities once YHWH intervenes on the earth to rule the nations. The double meaning of the verb ḥyl (qal) in 9b carries this message. The first meaning expresses fear regarding the new status of YHWH (5b). The other meaning mentions the rejoicings (dances) stimulated by this novelty, through the musical worship (‫ק ֶֹדשׁ‬-‫ ַה ְד ַרת‬in 9a) spreading across the whole earth. CV11-12 (pairing verses 6 and 8) 8

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ְכּבוֹד ְשׁמוֹ‬ ‫רוֹתיו‬ ָ ‫מנְ ָחה וּבֹאוּ ְל ַח ְצ‬-‫אוּ‬ ִ ‫ְשׂ‬

‫וְ ָה ָדר ְל ָפנָ יו‬-‫הוֹד‬ ‫עֹז וְ ִת ְפ ֶא ֶרת ְבּ ִמ ְק ָדּשׁוֹ‬

6

The second hemiverse (8a) of CV11 is similar to Ps 29:2a. In its original meaning, this claim was an explicit invitation to work around the furnace to stimulate a theophany of YHWH through the radiance of molten metal and slag. Also, here, in CV11, the complementary antiphonal unit (6a) mentions hôd and hādār, two divine attributes associated with metallurgy in Ps 29:4b. Considered independently, CV11 is deeply conditioned by the metallurgical approach exposed in Psalm 29. However, the next composite verse (CV12) undermines this conclusion. Verse 6b acknowledges the sanctuary as the site of the residence of the divine kābȏd (6b). The complementary claim (8b) dissipates ambiguities about the nature of this sanctuary (‫)במקדשו‬. In mentioning the bringing of offerings, it refers not to the furnace identified as YHWH’s palace in Ps 29:9, but to a genuine 15 This original situation is deduced from Deut 32:8 after replacing the sons of Israel with the sons of god (attested in the Septuagint): “when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.” (Deut 32:8b).

155

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

temple where offerings may be set. The content of CV12 confirms the transition from an esoteric cult of YHWH performed by the metallurgists towards an official religion devoted to a god dwelling in a sanctuary and intervening on his worshipper’s behalf. The echo singing of the central claim (CV13-14) 7

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ִמ ְשׁ ְפּחוֹת ַע ִמּים‬ ‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬

‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ִמ ְשׁ ְפּחוֹת ַע ִמּים‬ ‫ָהבוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּבוֹד וָ עֹז‬

7

The central verse sung in echo resumes the development of the composite verses preceding it. The invitation addressed to all the families of nations to worship YHWH directly, publicly, and not through secondary deities, represents the climax of the song. Maybe the most exciting feature here is the fact that this theme, distinct from Psalm 29, is formulated through the verse with the highest borrowing level from Psalm 29. This feature anchors this new theology in the old Yahwistic traditions represented by Psalm 29. The second half of the performance (CV15-26) The first part of the composite text addresses the corporation of Israelite singers, inviting them to diffuse the musical worship of YHWH together with a new theology. Following the central claim (CV13-14) resuming this call, the second part is no longer an invitation. It instead focuses on the diffused message. In CV15, for example, the first hemiverse (8a) reproduces integrally Ps 29:2a. We previously noted that the last word of this hemiverse, šĕmȏ, had two functions. In Psalm 29, it ended the 2a proposition (ascribe to YHWH kābȏd [is] his name) transforming kābȏd into an essential attribute. But šĕmȏ became also the first word of the second hemiverse, a feature revealing the etymology of the name YHWH as the blower. In Psalm 96, this duality is absent in CV11, but visible in CV15, its counterpart from the second half. There, we may read: “Ascribe to YHWH, kābȏd is his name – Splendor and magnificence are before him” but also “Ascribe to YHWH kābȏd – his name is splendor – magnificence is before him.” Though the double use of šĕmȏ is maintained here, it does not anymore reveal the etymology of YHWH and its metallurgical background. Instead, the song transforms the name into an essential attribute, the subject of praise and adoration whose meaning remains concealed. In CV12, the mention of YHWH’s sanctuary (6b) prior to the places of his open worship (8b) expresses the universal spread of this new cult from its homeland. The inversion of precedence between the two hemiverses,

156

CHAPTER 8

in CV16, generates a new movement from the scattered courtyards to the temple of YHWH (a probable reference to Jerusalem). It introduces a new finality beyond the diffusion of YHWH’s worship: the promotion of Israel as the people of (emissaries of) YHWH scattering his knowledge everywhere through the theological novelties advanced in this song: the divine intervention in History. The call for leaving the cult of national deities in favor of the direct worship of YHWH (CV9) finds a similar expression in CV17. But the transition between CV17-18 (5a-9b) introduces a novelty. If the appellation of the gods of the nations as elilim (5a) minimizes their prestige, the subsequent claim (9b) integrates them into the community of creatures fearing YHWH, and acknowledging his supreme status of creator (5b). 1.4. The composite development in Psalm 96 The analysis of the composite text of Psalm 96 reveals a high level of compatibility between the two segments constituting each composite verse, the emergence of new meanings ignored in the literary reading, and even a coherent literary development in their succession. The composite text begins (CV1) with an invitation to diffuse the new theology of YHWH through musical worship. This latter theology is exposed thereafter: CV2-4 focus on YHWH’s direct intervention on the earth and the consecutive blessing for humankind and for the wild. The case-study promoting this new theology is the wonder of Exodus and the following birth of Israel (CV5-6), evidencing the beginning of a direct involvement of YHWH in History. This novelty introduces a new era of stability, harmony and justice in the universe (CV7-8). It renders obsolete the cult of the gods of nations, which were traditionally identified as the emissaries of YHWH (CV9-12). The invitation to worship YHWH addressed to the nations, in CV13-14, represents the climax of this poetic development. It is followed by the worship of YHWH acknowledging Jerusalem (the site of his temple) as his residence. The Israelite poets become his emissaries calling to abolish the cult of secondary deities (CV15-18) and instructing the peoples about the new theology (CV19-22). This activity is expected to open a new era of peace and prosperity under the authority of YHWH (CV23-26). The setting of both Psalm 29 and 96 in complex antiphony authorizes another comparison between them, through the content of the composite verses and their articulation. This comparison is exposed in Table 2 for the first half of the composite text of both.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

157

Table 2. The themes of the successive composite verses of the first part of Psalms 29 and 96 set in cross-responsa fashion. Psalm 29

Psalm 96

CV1-2

Invitation to produce metal Invitation to diffuse a new CV1-2 for contemplating theology praising kābȏd-YHWH. YHWH’s governance of the earth.

CV3-4

The man-YHWH cooperation in metal production stimulates theophany.

The musical worship is the CV3-4 means to reveal YHWH to the peoples.

CV 5-7

YHWH is the autonomous supplier of wood for fuel, and he interferes with mortals around the furnace.

The birth of Israel is the CV5-6 epos revealing the new theology to the nations: the intervention of YHWH in History.

CV8-9

The beneficent power of YHWH is revealed through wealth issued from metal production.

The beneficent power of YHWH is revealed through his governing all the nations.

CV7-8

CV10-11 The furnace is the palace of YHWH where his kābȏd self-reveals.

The nations leave the cult of secondary deities towards the exclusive worship of YHWH.

CV9-10

CV11-12 The public worship of YHWH occurs in holy places and in the sanctuary of his residence. CV12-13 The melting of silicates is the turning point in the smelting process, the marker of its success.

CV13-14 The successful public worship of YHWH among the nations is the turning point for the whole earth.

The comparison exposed in Table 2 reveals that the highest parallels between Psalm 29 and 96 are concealed in the source text of both, and become visible only in comparing their composite text. Like Psalm 29, Psalm 96 opens (CV1-2) with an invitation to stimulate the divine presence on the earth. This occurs not through metallurgy (as in Psalm 29) but through songs praising the coming of YHWH. In Psalm 96, the next pair of composite verses (CV3-4) argues the importance of musical worship in disseminating this new worship of YHWH on the earth. Also in Psalm 29, CV4 alludes that the musical worship stimulates the divine presence.

158

CHAPTER 8

The epos of Israel becomes in CV5-6 of Psalm 96 the case-study illustrating the direct involvement of YHWH on the earth. In parallel, CV5-6 in Psalm 29 are the only composite verses arguing for the autonomous action of YHWH, supplying the wood used as fuel in the furnace. Then, both psalms praise the beneficent effect of YHWH’s participation, the wealth consecutive to copper production in Psalm 29 (CV8-9), and the wealth issued from fertility and agriculture in Psalm 96 (CV7-8). Thereafter, the two composite texts deal in parallel with the site of YHWH’s residence or theophany, the furnace in Psalm 29 (CV10-11), and the ritual areas or the temple in Psalm 96 (CV9-12). A parallel climax characterizes the next composite verses: the success of the smelting process in Psalm 29 (CV12-13) and the success in the diffusion of the public worship of YHWH in Psalm 96 (CV13-14). This parallel reveals that Psalm 96 does not merely borrow some liturgical formulas from Psalm 29, reusing them in its theology. Rather, the parallels exposed in Table 2 demonstrate that the cross responsa setting of Psalm 29 was well-known by the author of Psalm 96, who imitates this mode of performance and its articulation of claims.16 Finally, the verbatim insertion of fragments of Psalm 29 presents the new theology as an extension of the former one. The fundaments of ancient Yahwism are not denied, but rather actualized and enlarged, after the birth of Israel, the famous deed used as a cornerstone of the new theology. Though Psalm 96 imitates Psalm 29 in its form and articulation of claims, their message differs radically. Instead of focusing on an esoteric cult of YHWH reserved to a small congregation, Psalm 96 promotes a public cult of YHWH everywhere. And unlike Psalm 29, the worship of YHWH is not derived from the experience of metallurgy and its consecutive theophany. It rather articulates around the diffusion of the epos of Exodus, demonstrating a new mode of presence and action of YHWH in the world. 2. PSALM 97 Psalms 96 and 97 are interrelated psalms. Within the Psalter, some words and expressions exist only in both, such as ‫( אליל‬Ps 96:5 and Ps 97:7) or the combination of ‫ גיל‬and ‫( ארץ‬Ps 96:11 and Ps 97:1). Furthermore, the 16 This imitation of the cross-responsa dimension of Psalm 29 seems to be especially important here. Another, shorter (11 verses) and modified version of Psalm 96 exists in 1 Chr 16:23-33. There, this song is inserted between two fragments of other songs, Psalm 105:1-15 (as 1 Chr 16:8-22) and Ps 106:1, 47-48 (as 1 Chr 16:34-36). It is noteworthy that, despite the modifications of Psalm 96, this shorter version also displays concentric symmetry around its sixth verse (1 Chr 16:28), which is no other than Ps 96:7.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

159

end of Psalm 96, claiming that YHWH comes to rule the earth (Ps 96:13), is prolonged by the opening claim of Psalm 97 announcing that “YHWH reigns”.17 It is why Psalms 96 and 97 have sometimes been approached as twin psalms performed in close relation to one another.18 From such a linkage, we may expect the influence of Psalm 29 to extend to Psalm 97. 1 YHWH

reigns, let the earth rejoice; Let many islands be glad! and thick darkness are all around him; Righteousness and justice are   the foundation of his throne. 3 Fire goes before him; And burns up all around his adversaries. 4 His lightnings light up the world; The earth sees and trembles (‫)ותחל‬. 5 The mountains melt like wax before YHWH; Before the Lord of all the earth. 6 The heavens proclaim his righteousness; And all the peoples see his kābȏd. 7 All servants of idols will shame, who praise worthless deities; Worship him,   all you gods! 8 Zion hears and is glad, and the daughters of Judah rejoice; Because of your   judgments, YHWH. 9 For you, YHWH, are most high over all the earth; You are exalted far above   all gods. 10 You who love YHWH, hate evil! He preserves the lives of his devotees; From   the hand of the wicked he delivers them. 11 Light is sown for the righteous; And joy for the upright in heart. 12 Rejoice, you righteous, in YHWH; And sing antiphonally (‫ )והודו‬for praising   (‫ )לזכר‬his holiness!19 2 Clouds

The content of Psalm 97 confirms its affinities with Psalm 29, through the praise of YHWH’s kingship (as in Ps 29:10)20 and the importance of natural elements (as in Ps 29:3-9).21 Like in Ps 29:8, YHWH causes the earth to ‘tremble’ (ḥyl) in Ps 97:4b.22 Also the assembly of the righteous and devotees in Ps 97:11-13 recalls the assembly of the sons of god in Ps 29:1.23 These parallels are traditionally approached as the extension to Psalm 97 of the storm-god interpretation in Psalm 29. In this light, the natural elements mentioned in Ps 97:2-6 become a poetic description of 17 D. HOWARD 1997, 142; E. ZENGER 2005, 477; E. ORTLUND 2006, 280; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 111. 18 E. ZENGER 2005, 477. 19 Concerning the meaning of lehodot as to sing antiphonally, see N. AMZALLAG 2015e. The meaning of the root zkr as to profess, to make know, to praise (see HALOT, 1: 270) is preferred here. 20 N. HABEL and G. AVENT 2001, 45, 49; E. ZENGER 2005, 425. 21 Erich ZENGER (2005, 439) approaches Ps 97:1-9 as a transformation of the theophany of YHWH related in Ps 29:3-9, and Ps 97:10-12 as an exegesis of the last verse of Psalm 29. 22 This effect being mentioned immediately after the lightning (Ps 97:4a) is frequently interpreted as an allusion to YHWH’s thundering voice, exactly as in Psalm 29. See N. HABEL and G. AVENT 2001, 49. 23 R. CLIFFORD 2003, 125.

160

CHAPTER 8

the thunder.24 This approach transforms Psalm 97 into a hymn praising the victory of YHWH, as storm god, over the forces of chaos and its corelated deities.25 The description of a volcanic event in Ps 97:5 does not easily integrate the storm god theophany, however.26 To reconcile these views, the volcanic dimension of this description is frequently denied and replaced by the reference to a sirocco of outstanding intensity.27 Alternately, like in Psalm 18, the volcanic and storm traditions became telescoped in Psalm 97.28 Also, the fiery element became interpreted as a poetic device added to the storm theophany for magnifying the power of YHWH.29 But volcanism is apparently not restricted to a lonely verse in Psalm 97. Rather, the cloud described in verse 2 as ‫ ָענָ ן וַ ֲע ָר ֶפל‬surrounding YHWH is probably a cloud of smoke, because a volcanic fire (with melting powers) is mentioned immediately after, in verse 3.30 The combination of lightning and earthquakes, in verse 4, is preceded by two verses describing a volcanic eruption (vv. 2-3), and followed by a verse relating a flow of lava (v. 5). Consequently, the lightning in verse 4 likely belongs to volcanism rather than storm theophany. Furthermore, the specific mention of people seeing YHWH’s kābȏd in verse 6, immediately after the flow of lava, confirms that this notion here holds a meaning similar to that expressed in Psalm 29. It refers to the thermal radiance emanating from hot molten silicates or metal. Consequently, Psalm 97 is probably not a hymn praising YHWH’s victory over the forces of chaos combined with a storm theophany. Like Psalm 29, it rather focuses on the volcanic/ metallurgical theophany of YHWH. 2.1. The cross-responsa setting of Psalm 97 Psalm 97 comprises two parts of unequal length. The first one (vv. 1-9) articulates on YHWH’s theophany and its consequences. In the second 24

N. HABEL and G. AVENT 2001, 49-50; E. ORTLUND 2006, 276-277; R. MÜLLER 2017,

224. 25 R. CLIFFORD 2003, 123; R. MÜLLER 2017, 213. Eric ORTLUND (2007, 277) concluded, concerning Psalm 97, that “The inner meaning implied in divine warfare in thunder and lightning is, in other words, that chaos is going to be defeated and order restored under divine rule from the temple.” 26 O. KEEL 1997, 218; J. DUNN 2014, 421. 27 A. FITZGERALD 2002, 107. 28 H-J. KRAUS 1989, 260. 29 M. TATE 1990, 518; E. ORTLUND 2006, 277. A similar argument is used to justify the combination of storm and fire in other sources, such as Psalm 18. 30 E. ZENGER 2005, 472, 474; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 112.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

161

(vv. 10-12), the psalm addresses the faithful servants of YHWH and invites them to preserve the purity of their heart and to rejoice in the praise of YHWH. Scholars noticed a hiatus between verses 9 and 10, and a literary discontinuity between these two parts.31 This is why the second part (vv. 10-12) is sometime approached as a late addition to a psalm originally comprising verses 1-9 only.32 Alternatively, if the psalm was performed antiphonally by two choirs, the last section (vv. 10-12) may be a conclusive epode sung by the two choirs gathering their voice to express a straightforward final message. The combination of an invitation to sing antiphonally for praising YHWH with the preservation of moral values, in the last verse (v. 12), fits its function as final doxology. In this analysis, we will consider Psalm 97 constituted of a main section (vv. 1-9) designed for antiphonal performance, followed by an epode of three verses (vv. 1012) sung al unissono by the two choirs. Verse 5, the mathematical center of the first section, is also the verse referring explicitly to YHWH’s volcanic theophany. It is therefore the perfect homolog of the central verse of Psalm 29 (verse 6), the only verse from this hymn referring to volcanism. It is also the center of a pattern of concentric symmetry visible in this first section: • Verses 1 and 9: the supremacy of YHWH appears in verse 1 through kingship (‫ )מלך‬and in verse 9 through his appellation of ‘most high’ (‫)עליון‬. Furthermore, the earth (‫ הארץ‬with definite article) is mentioned in both verses. • Verses 2 and 8: both verses mention the noun ‫משפט‬. • Verses 3 and 7: to the enemies (‫ )צריו‬of YHWH in verse 3 correspond the worshippers of statuettes (‫ )עבד פסל‬and idols (‫ )אלילים‬in verse 7. • Verses 4 and 6: the verb ‫( ראה‬qal) is encountered in both verses. The lightning in verse 4 echoes the heaven in verse 6. Together with the main message carried by the central verse (v. 5), these literary bonds invite us to examine whether, like Psalms 29 and 96, Ps 97:1-9 was designed for cross-responsa performance. The composite text issued from such a setting of this first section (Ps 97:1-9) comprises the following composite verses:

31 32

D. HOWARD 1997, 73, 75; E. GERSTENBERGER 2001, 193. E. BEAUCAMP 1979, 128; E. ZENGER 2005, 471.

162

CHAPTER 8

Opening voice (sense)

Responding voice (antisense)

CV1

1a YHWH reigns, let the earth → For you, YHWH, are most rejoice high over all the earth

9a

CV2

1b Let many islands be glad!

→ You are exalted far above all gods

9b

CV3

2a Clouds and thick darkness are all around him

→ Zion hears and is glad, and 8a the daughters of Judah rejoice

CV4

2b Righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne

→ Because of your judgments, 8b YHWH

CV5

3a Fire goes before him

→ All servants of idols will shame, who praise worthless deities

CV6

3b And burns up all around his adversaries (‫)צריו‬

→ Worship him, all you gods! 7b

CV7

4a His lightning light up the world

→ The heavens proclaim his righteousness

6a

CV8

4b The earth sees and trembles (‫)ותחל‬

→ And all the peoples see his kābȏd

6b

CV9

5a The mountains melt like wax before YHWH

→ The mountains melt like wax before YHWH

5a

CV10 5b Before the Lord of all the earth

→ Before the Lord of all the earth

5b

CV11 6a The heavens proclaim his righteousness

→ His lightning light up the world

4a

CV12 6b And all the peoples see his kābȏd

→ The earth sees and trembles (‫)ותחל‬

4b

CV13 7a All servants of idols will shame, who praise worthless deities

→ Fire goes before him

3a

7a

CV14 7b Worship him, all you gods! → And burns up all around his adversaries (‫)צריו‬

3b

CV15 8a Zion hears and is glad, and → Clouds and thick darkness are all around him the daughters of Judah rejoice

2a

CV16 8b Because of your judgments, → Righteousness and justice YHWH are the foundation of his throne

2b

163

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

Opening voice (sense)

Responding voice (antisense)

CV17 9a For you, YHWH, are most high over all the earth

→ YHWH reigns, let the earth 1a rejoice

CV18 9b You are exalted far above all gods

→ Let many islands be glad!

1b

2.2. Analysis of the composite verses The first half of the performance (CV1-8) CV1-2 (pairing verses 1 and 9) 9

‫ה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫כּ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫א ָתּה יְ הוָ ה ֶע ְליוֹן ַע‬-‫י‬ ַ ‫ִכּ‬ ‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫א‬-‫ל‬ ֱ ‫כּ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ית ַע‬ ָ ‫ְמאֹד נַ ֲע ֵל‬

‫יְ הוָ ה ָמ ָלְך ָתּגֵ ל ָה ָא ֶר ץ‬ ‫יִ ְשׂ ְמחוּ ִאיִּ ים ַר ִבּים‬

1

The composite song opens (CV1) with the claim of supremacy and kingship of YHWH. It fits both the ancient theology acknowledging YHWH’s supremacy (Psalm 29) and the new one, claiming his ruling over the earth (Psalm 96). The consecutive happiness on the earth (1a) fits these two positions equally. The second set of antiphonal units (CV2) expresses a similar claim. It adds, however, some precisions regarding CV1, in mentioning the enthusiastic reaction of the inhabitants of the ‘islands’ (1b). The term ‫ ִאיִּ ים‬has many meanings in the Bible. It designates islands,33 and more generally the Mediterranean coastlands.34 But this term may also designate the Phoenician colonies scattered on islands and coastlands of the Mediterranean.35 Scholars have suggested this latter meaning in Ps 97:136, which casts a new significance to CV2. This composite verse becomes an invitation to worship YHWH openly, similar to the call addressed to the Phoenician colonies in Isa 24:15: “Therefore in light give glory to YHWH; In the coastlands of the sea, give glory to the name of YHWH, the God of Israel.” CV3-4 (pairing verses 2 and 8) 8

33 34 35 36

‫הוּדה‬ ָ ְ‫ָשׁ ְמ ָעה וַ ִתּ ְשׂ ַמח ִציּוֹן וַ ָתּגֵ ְלנָ ה ְבּנוֹת י‬ ‫יביו‬ ָ ‫ָענָ ן וַ ֲע ָר ֶפל ְס ִב‬ ִ ‫ֶצ ֶדק‬ ‫וּמ ְשׁ ָפּט ְמכוֹן ִכּ ְסאוֹ ְל ַמ ַע ן ִמ ְשׁ ָפּ ֶטיָך יְ הוָ ה‬

Isa 11:11, Jer 2:10, Ezek 27:6-7. Isa 20:6, 66:19. Isa 23:2; Jer 25:22; Ezek 26:15,18; 27:35. M. DAHOOD 1966, 2:361; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 112.

2

164

CHAPTER 8

After recalling the supreme status of YHWH (9b) among the gods, the next composite verse (CV3) envisions the expressions of his theophany: cloud and thick smoke (2a). If their occurrence stimulates happiness in Jerusalem and Judah (8a), we may deduce that the cloud of smoke, in 2a, refers to the temple of Jerusalem. It stresses a parallel with the composite text of Psalm 96, where the public cult of YHWH organizes around the Jerusalem temple (CV12,15). This interpretation stimulates a wordplay around the meaning of ‫ תגלנה‬in 8a. Vocalized as in the MT (tāgēlnâ, qal form of gyl), it refers to the Judeans rejoicing for the contemplation of the divine attributes related in 2a. Alternately, tglnh may be vocalized as tĕgalenâ, the piel of gly (= to uncover, to reveal). It denotes both the centrality of Jerusalem in the promotion of the public cult of YHWH across the world and the involvement of singing and dancing in its diffusion. The subsequent composite pair (CV4) expresses the quintessence of the theology attached to this public worship: the belief of the direct involvement of YHWH in ruling and spreading justice on the earth. CV5-6 (pairing verses 3 and 7) 7

‫ילים‬ ִ ‫ע ְֹב ֵד י ֶפ ֶסל ַה ִמּ ְת ַה ְל ִלים ָבּ ֱא ִל‬-‫יֵ בֹשׁוּ ָכּ ל‬ ‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫א‬-‫ל‬ ֱ ‫לוֹ ָכּ‬-‫ִה ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחווּ‬

‫ֵאשׁ ְל ָפנָ יו ֵתּ ֵלְך‬ ‫וּת ַל ֵהט ָס ִביב ָצ ָר יו‬ ְ

3

CV5-6 details the implications of this new theology. The first hemiverse (3a) of CV5 exposes the divine participation in terrestrial affairs through the image of YHWH sending his fire before him. The echoing claim (7a) answers in shaming those ignoring this new reality and perpetuating the worship of the secondary deities. CV6 exposes the same reality more dramatically. Those worshippers of idols (7a) now become regarded as YHWH’s enemies consumed by fire (3b), the same fire revealing the divine intervention on the earth (3a). The second hemiverse exposes the irony of this situation, showing the secondary deities acknowledging the new situation (7b), at the same time their worshippers reject it (7a). CV7-8 (pairing verses 4 and 6) 6

‫ִהגִּ ידוּ ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם ִצ ְדקוֹ‬ ‫ה ַע ִמּים ְכּבוֹדוֹ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫וְ ָראוּ ָכ‬

‫ֵה ִאירוּ ְב ָר ָקיו ֵתּ ֵבל‬ ‫ָר ֲא ָתה וַ ָתּ ֵחל ָה ָא ֶר ץ‬

4

The first composite verses discredited the ancient theological system founded on the distance of YHWH (CV1-4) and the consecutive necessity

165

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

of intermediate deities (CV5-6). Now, CV7-8 expose the other dimension of the theological change advanced by the Israelites: the metamorphosis of the esoteric knowledge into a public cult. It begins (CV7) with the description of YHWH’s theophany through lightning (4a) and sounds (6a). Considered alone, this composite verse may promote a storm theophany of YHWH, a feature making it perceptible by everyone. However, the mention of both the earth (4a) and people (6a) seeing the divine kābȏd, in CV8, reveals that the composite text does not advance a storm theophany. This contemplation rather refers to the thermal radiance identified as kābȏd in the metallurgical and volcanic context. This interpretation corroborates the mention of YHWH coming with fire in CV5-6. The echo singing of the central claim (CV9-10) 5

‫ָה ִר ים ַכּדּוֹנַ ג נָ ַמסּוּ ִמ ִלּ ְפנֵ י יְ הוָ ה‬ ‫ה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ִמ ִלּ ְפנֵ י ֲאדוֹן ָכּ‬

‫ָה ִר ים ַכּדּוֹנַ ג נָ ַמסּוּ ִמ ִלּ ְפנֵ י יְ הוָ ה‬ ‫ה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ִמ ִלּ ְפנֵ י ֲאדוֹן ָכּ‬

5

The reference to kābȏd as thermal radiance in CV8 finds an echo in CV9-10, two composite verses praising the transformation of mountains into volcanoes at the coming of YHWH. This imagery reveals that the new theophany promoted in Psalm 97 does not abolish the ancient identity of YHWH and his essential affinity with metallurgy. Rather, the theme of divine participation in the terrestrial affairs apparently becomes here an enlargement of the divine participation in metallurgy. Instead of self-revealing to the small circle of metalworkers, YHWH enables the whole earth to contemplate the phenomenon on a giant scale through volcanism. The transition from metallurgy to volcano adds another essential element. Unlike the furnace where YHWH cooperates with mortals, volcanic eruptions express the autonomous action of YHWH on the earth. This volcanism, which was exploited in Psalm 29 as a poetic imagery of the smelting process, now becomes the fundament of the new theological position. It emancipates the revelation of YHWH and his contemplation from the practice of metallurgy, transforming it into an independent reality. This central claim from Psalm 97 corroborates the representation of the Sinai theophany as a volcanic event (Ex 19:16-19; Deut 4:10-13). By this means, YHWH may self-reveal to a people who are not involved in metallurgy and non-initiated to the esoteric traditions. The volcanic event becomes a public revelation of kābȏd-YHWH, opening a new mode of relationship with the deity (Ex 24:16-17; Deut 5:24).

166

CHAPTER 8

The second half of the performance (CV11-18) Like in Psalms 29 and 96, the inversion of precedence of the composite verses, and of the couples of antiphonal units constituting them, introduce some new meanings and understandings. For example, the central importance devoted to the volcanic theophany, in the claims sung in echo (CV910), now conditions the understanding of the subsequent composite verses. In this perspective, the lightning and atmospheric events (CV11) are no more isolated phenomena potentially interpretable in a storm context. They rather accompany the revelation of kābȏd-YHWH as thermal radiance (CV12) inherent of volcanic eruptions. The special fate of the secondary deity The volcanic context emanating from CV9-12 also modifies the interpretation of CV13-14. Their corresponding composite verses (CV5-6) denigrated the worship of secondary deities after the coming of YHWH. Now, the volcanic dimension accentuates the destroying effect of his theophany. In CV13, this combination suggests the melting of the idols (metal-made figurines in 13a) by the divine fire (3a). In CV14, this situation stimulates a new worshipping attitude among the deities (7b) after the melting of those idols figuring them (3b). The wordplay around the locution ṣryw (3b) extends this interpretation. This term ‫ צריו‬designates oppressors once vocalized as ṣārāyw (as in the MT). It expresses the emancipation from the cult of idols after the divine intervention on the earth. But ‫ צריו‬has another possible reading as ṣīrāyw (metal statuettes), deduced from the expression the forgers of idols (‫ )חרשי צירים‬in Isa 45:16. In this case, the 3b segment designates the melting, by the divine (= metallurgical) fire, of the statuettes made for worshipping the secondary deities. Losing their prominent status among humankind, these gods are therefore invited to worship YHWH, exactly as humans are (7b). The prestigious status of the ‘sons of god’ (the secondary deities) vanishes after inviting them to worship YHWH like mortals. This demise also emanates from the third meaning of ‫( צריו‬3b), once vocalized as ṣīrāyw. In many biblical sources, the noun ‫( ציר‬ṣr in Isa 57:9) designates an emissary.37 By this means, CV14 expresses the loss of emissary function of the secondary deities following the action of the divine fire on the earth (3b).

37

Isa 18:2; 57:9; Jer 49:14; Obad 1; Prov 13:17; 25:13.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

167

The demise of the metalworkers Destroying the statuettes by melting integrates the metallurgical background of YHWH. Simultaneously, it probably charges the metalworkers of being the makers of these statuettes and the promoters of the cult of secondary deities among peoples. Many indications reflect such a charge against the metalworkers in CV13. The first is the mention of shame, which concerns those who are not expected to be involved in idolatry, people with in-depth knowledge of YHWH. The second is the curious expression ‫עבדי‬ ‫פסל‬, encountered only in Psalm 97. The verb ῾bd expresses the worship of a god, but it also means to work. Consequently, whereas the expression ‫ עבדי פסל‬probably designates the worshippers of idols in CV5, it refers in CV13 to the metalworkers producing the idols. A third indication comes from the subsequent expression ‫המתהללים‬ ‫באלילים‬. According to the parallel between ‫ פסל‬and ‫ אלילים‬in 7a, both similarly designate statuettes in CV13.38 In this perspective, the hitpael form of the verb hll, in 7a, evokes people self-glorifying face to the statuettes. Such an attitude would be unusual for worshippers, but it makes sense for idol-makers proud of their artistic production. The metalworkers are apparently criticized in CV13-14 for promoting the cult of idols among the public and restricting the worship of YHWH to their own congregation. A similar accusation is formulated in Isa 45:1516. After referring to the esoteric dimension of the worship of YHWH, the prophet virulently disapproves the producers of idols, here explicitly identified as metalworkers (‫)חרשי צירים‬: “15 Truly, you are a God who hides himself; O God of Israel, the Savior. 16 All of them are put to shame and confounded; They go in confusion together, the forgers of idols (‫)חרשי צירים‬.” 2.3. The message of the composite text The present analysis reveals the high level of inner cohesiveness of the composite verses of the first part (vv. 1-9) of Psalm 97. Also their sequential order expresses new literary properties and developments ignored in the linear reading. The song begins (CV1-2) with the extension to the whole earth of the public cult of YHWH consecutive to a theological novelty: the beginning of YHWH’s intervention on the earth (CV3-4). This premise invalidates the worship of secondary deities (CV5-6). It also 38

It is even likely in light of the appellation of the secondary deities as elohim in 7b.

168

CHAPTER 8

overcomes the esoteric metallurgical traditions. As assumed in CV7-8, YHWH self-reveals independently of any human activity, through the natural elements, and especially through volcanism (CV9-10). Volcanism enables, in the second half (CV11-CV18), an extension to the whole earth of the metallurgical theophany of YHWH. The Sinai covenant, the cornerstone of the Israelite theology, becomes the archetype of the volcanic revelation of YHWH and its consequences. By this means, the public worship of YHWH initiated by the Israelites enlarges to the whole earth. This overview reveals that Psalm 97 is not a mere adaptation to the Israelite context of the content of Psalm 29. It instead introduces a breakdown regarding the traditional form of Yahwism. It criticizes the metalworkers for restricting the worship of YHWH to their own circle and diffusing the cult of idols among the nations. The references to Psalm 29 are introduced in Psalm 97 for the same reasons as in Psalm 96: for debunking this ancient theology and replacing it with a new one organized around YHWH’s revelation and intervention in History. 3. PSALM 98 1 Sing

to YHWH a new song, for he has done wonderful things! Have worked   salvation for him his right, and his holy arm 2 Has made known YHWH his salvation; In the sight of the nations He has   revealed his righteousness. 3 He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness to the house of Israel;   All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God. 4 Acclaim joyfully YHWH, all the earth; Break forth into joyous song and sing   praises! 5 Sing praises to YHWH with the lyre; With the lyre and melodious voice! 6 With trumpets and the sound of the shofar; Acclaim joyfully the King,   YHWH! 7 Let the sea roar, and all that fills it; The world and those who dwell in it! 8 Let the rivers clap hands; Together let the hills sing for joy 9 Before YHWH, for he comes to rule the earth; He will rule the world with   righteousness, and peoples with equity.

Psalm 98 displays only a few parallels with Psalm 29.39 Its composition is therefore generally not considered to have been influenced by Psalm 29. However, the special closeness between Psalms 96 and 98 invites us to revisit this opinion. These two psalms display similarities in their first and 39 The main affinity is the parallel mention of the verb ‫ רעם‬in Ps 29:3 and Ps 98:7, in the context of the sea and mighty waters.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

169

their last verses. Similar expressions are found in both (compare, for example, Ps 96:11b and Ps 98:7a), and the same words, clauses and themes characterize these two songs.40 Scholars even approach Psalms 96 and 98 as twin psalms.41 If the author of Psalm 98 truly reformulates some of the themes exposed in Psalm 96, s/he can hardly ignore the content and message of Psalm 29. Today, Psalms 96, 97 and 98 are frequently approached as a coherent entity developing the same themes and theological views.42 Consequently, the opposition, in Psalms 96 and 97, to the theology formulated in Psalm 29 might explain why Psalm 98 is closely related to Psalm 96 even though traces of Psalm 29 are difficult to identify. A gradient of decreasing influence of Psalm 29 on this triplet, from Psalm 96 to Psalm 98, might express the gradual emancipation from its theological incidence. Further examinations of the content of Psalm 98 corroborate this premise. Metallurgy and even its volcanic representation disappear in Psalm 98. The notion of kābȏd, being of central importance in Psalm 29 and mentioned in Psalms 96 and 97, is ignored in Psalm 98. This is also true for stone melting, the reality associated with divine kābȏd in Psalms 96 and 97. In Psalm 98, YHWH intervenes on the earth (1b) through the exercise of justice (v. 2).43 Equity and rightfulness now become the theophany by which YHWH self-reveals to the whole earth. It may explain why the voice of YHWH, the prominent theme of Psalm 29 conditioning both his theophany and his metallurgical mode of action, is no longer present in Psalm 98. It is now replaced by the singing, acclaiming and joyful voice of mankind (vv. 1, 4-6) and the natural elements (vv. 7-8). The mention of wind instruments (trumpets and shofar, v. 6), together with singing, even strengthens the idea that they now replace the blowing voice of YHWH praised in Psalm 29. Also the participation of the earth in this musical praise (vv. 7-8) contrasts with the destructive effect of the voice of YHWH on the wild evoked in Ps 29:9. Instead of Lord of mabbûl, YHWH is now the Lord of justice and salvation.44

40 D. HOWARD 1997, 143-144, 147; E. GERSTENBERGER 2001, 195; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 480; R. PATTERSON 2007, 423. 41 C. WESTERMANN 1981, 148; R. VAN LEEUWEN 2005, 30; B. TANNER 2014, 726. 42 E. BEAUCAMP 1979, 127; E. ZENGER 2005, 422; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 964. Eric ORTLUND (2006, 279) includes also Psalm 99 into this cluster. 43 The mention of the right (hand) and the holy arm of YHWH, in verse 1b, promoted a representation of YHWH as a holy warrior. See T. LONGMAN III 1984, 269. 44 M. DAHOOD 1966, 2:365; T. LONGMAN III 1984, 269; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 119.

170

CHAPTER 8

3.1. The canonic-responsa setting of Psalm 98 Psalms 96 and 97 were influenced by Psalm 29 not only in their content but also in their mode of performance. This invites us to examine whether Psalm 98 was conceived for complex antiphony, and whether an examination of the composite text may add substantial information concerning the message of this song. For this purpose, we should look at first for a global pattern of symmetry of literary bonds. Psalm 98 is generally divided into three strophes of three verses each, articulating a global invitation to worship YHWH by singing.45 The first strophe (vv. 1-3) is an invitation addressed to Israel. The second (vv. 4-6) extends this celebration of YHWH as king to the other nations. The third strophe (vv. 7-9) enlarges to the wild the call to praise YHWH.46 Such a division in three strophes of equal length, together with the lack of concentric symmetry in literary bonds in the whole psalm, renders cross responsa an unlikely mode of performance. The division of Psalm 98 into two parts of equal length, sung in parallel by two responding choirs (steady-responsa mode of complex antiphony)47, is unlikely, too. However, a pattern of global symmetry may be identified between verses similarly positioned in the successive strophes (see Table 3). Table 3. Literary bonds between verses similarly positioned in two successive strophes of Psalm 98. Strophe 1 versus Strophe 2

Strophe 2 versus Strophe 3

Strophe 1

Strophe 2

Strophe 2

Strophe 3

First verse

‫שירו לה׳‬

‫הרעיו לה׳‬ ‫פצחו ורינו וזמרו‬

‫כל‬ ‫הריעו‬

‫מלואו‬ ‫ירעם‬

Second verse

YHWH ‫הודיעו‬

YHWH ‫זמרו‬

‫זמרו‬

‫קול זמרה‬ ‫ימחאו כף‬ ‫ירננו‬

Third verse

‫אלהנו‬

‫המלך ה׳‬

‫המלך ה׳‬

‫ישפוט תבל‬

45 E. BEAUCAMP 1979, 2:129-130; T. LONGMAN III 1984, 268-269; J. MAYS 1994, 312; D. HOWARD 1997, 149; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 480. Alternately, Peter VAN DER LUGT (2014, 92) divides this psalm into two strophes (vv. 1-3 and vv. 4-9). 46 T. LONGMAN III 1984, 271; J. MAYS 1994, 312; R. CLIFFORD 2003, 127; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 480; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 119. Alternately, David HOWARD (1997, 80) interprets the first strophe as a call to worship YHWH, the second as an exaltation of YHWH as king and the third as his exaltation as a judge. 47 See N. AMZALLAG (2014d, 30-32) for further details about the steady responsa mode of performance.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

171

The correspondences observed in Table 3 call for examining whether Psalm 98 was conceived for canonic responsa, a mode of complex antiphony in which the two voices sing the same text with a delay. Here, the pattern of literary bonds suggests a four-verse lag in the mingling claims of the two choirs. It means that the opening voice sings the strophes 1-2 (verses 1-6), and the responding voice answers in singing the strophes 2-3 (verses 4-9). The four-verse interval between the two voices defines this mode as a C4 canonic responsa. In Psalm 98, it yields a composite text of 12 composite verses organized in two composite strophes, a first one (CV1-6) mingling verses 1-3 (first voice) with verses 4-6 (second voice), and a second one (CV7-12) mingling verses 4-6 (first voice) with verses 79 (second voice). Opening voice

Responding voice

CV1

1a Sing to YHWH a new song, → Acclaim joyfully YHWH, for he has done wonderful all the earth things!

4a

CV2

1b Have worked salvation for him his right, and his holy arm

→ Break forth into joyous song and sing praises!

4b

CV3

2a Has made known YHWH his salvation

→ Sing praises to YHWH with 5a the lyre

CV4

2b In the sight of the nations He has revealed his righteousness

→ With the lyre and melodious voice!

5b

CV5

3a He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness to the house of Israel

→ With trumpets and the sound of the shofar

6a

CV6

3b All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God

→ Acclaim joyfully the King, YHWH!

6b

CV7

4a Acclaim joyfully YHWH, all → Let the sea roar, and all the earth that fills it

7a

CV8

4b Break forth into joyous song and sing praises!

→ The world and those who dwell in it!

7b

CV9

5a Sing praises to YHWH with → Let the rivers clap hands the lyre

8a

CV10 5b With the lyre and melodious voice!

→ Together let the hills sing for joy

8b

172

CHAPTER 8

Opening voice

Responding voice

CV11 6a With trumpets and the sound of the shofar

→ Before YHWH, for he comes to rule the earth

9a

CV12 6b Acclaim joyfully the King, YHWH!

→ He will rule the world with 9b righteousness, and peoples with equity

An overview of the composite text reveals, here again, a high level of readability of all the composite verses. It even generates some parallels or echo patterns typically expected in an antiphonal performance. The opening 4a claim (Acclaim joyfully YHWH, all the earth) found at the beginning of the first and the second composite strophes functions probably as a marker delimiting these two literary entities. The first strophe ends (6b) with an almost similar claim (Acclaim joyfully the King, YHWH!). This feature even accentuates the perception of the boundary between the two composite strophes. 3.2. Analysis of the composite verses The first composite strophe (CV1-6) CV1-2 (pairing verses 1 and 4) 4

‫ה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫נִ ְפ ָלאוֹת ָע ָשׂה ָה ִר יעוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּ‬-‫ִשׁירוּ ַליהוָ ה ִשׁיר ָח ָדשׁ ִכּי‬ ‫ִפּ ְצחוּ וְ ַרנְּ נוּ וְ זַ ֵמּרוּ‬ ‫רוֹע ָק ְדשׁוֹ‬ ַ ְ‫לּוֹ יְ ִמינוֹ וּז‬-‫יעה‬ ָ ‫הוֹשׁ‬ ִ

1

The first composite verse (CV1) is an invitation to praise and sing for YHWH formulated by the two responding voices (1a, 4a). The motivation for singing this ‘new song’ is the new theology advancing the idea of divine intervention on the earth. The second composite verse introduces this idea through the explosion of musical worship (4b) following the claim of divine salvation (1b). The nature of the ‘old theology’ is not exposed here. However, the parallel with Psalm 96 suggests that it is probably the ancient Yahwism centered on the experience of metallurgy, expressed in Psalm 29. YHWH and the nations being the only entities in these opening composite verses, the third singular person in the preposition ‫ =( לו‬to him) in 1b probably refers to YHWH.48 Now, instead of revealing his kābȏd to the nations (through metallurgy or volcanism), YHWH reveals the wonders attached to his salutary intervention on the earth. 48

A. MAILLOT and A. LELIÈVRE 1966, 284-285.

173

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

CV3-4 (pairing verses 2 and 5) 5

‫זַ ְמּרוּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ִכנּוֹר‬ ‫ְבּ ִכנּוֹר וְ קוֹל זִ ְמ ָרה‬

‫שׁוּעתוֹ‬ ָ ְ‫הוֹד ַיע יְ הוָ ה י‬ ִ ‫ְל ֵעינֵ י ַהגּוֹיִ ם גִּ ָלּה ִצ ְד ָקתוֹ‬

2

The third composite verse mingles the previous claims. It invites peoples to sing the new ‘theology of salvation’ by which YHWH now intervenes on the earth. YHWH announcing his new involvement in terrestrial affairs (2a) is followed by the people announcing this feature through hymns and (new) songs (5a). The fourth composite verse extends this perspective. It reiterates the interference between YHWH self-revealing his righteousness to the eyes of all the nations (2b) and the peoples singing it and diffusing this new theology everywhere (5b). This call to diffuse the new theology through musical worship may especially concern the Israelite poets and singers.49 It transforms them into the new heralds of YHWH replacing the metalworkers, the sons of gods and traditional emissaries of YHWH. CV5-6 (pairing verses 3 and 6) 6

‫שׁוֹפר‬ ָ ‫ַבּ ֲחצ ְֹצרוֹת וְ קוֹל‬ ‫ָה ִר יעוּ ִל ְפנֵ י ַה ֶמּ ֶלְך יְ הוָ ה‬

‫זָ ַכר ַח ְסדּוֹ וֶ ֱאמוּנָ תוֹ ְל ֵבית יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬ ‫ֹלהינוּ‬ ֵ ‫שׁוּעת ֱא‬ ַ ְ‫א ֶר ץ ֵאת י‬-‫י‬ ָ ‫א ְפ ֵס‬-‫ל‬ ַ ‫ָראוּ ָכ‬

3

Though the intervention of YHWH towards Israel is already suggested in CV1-4, this feature becomes explicit only in CV5. And here again, the pairing of this claim (3a) with the invitation to sing (6a) illuminates what was only alluded before: the Exodus is the fundamental event supporting the new theology of divine intervention and stimulating its diffusion to the whole earth. The mention of shofar is here meaningful because only trumpets were associated with YHWH’s musical worship in Jerusalem.50 The sound of the shofar has many connotations, however. Announcing a Jubilee (as in Lev 25:9-10), it is the ultimate symbol of deliverance, here concerning the whole earth. The sound of the shofar is closely related to the voice of YHWH on Mount Sinai (Ex 19:16,19; 20:18), an expression of the vocal theophany (as in Zech 9:14; Ps 47:6) substituting the one exposed in Psalm 29. The subsequent composite verse (CV6) reiterates the importance of the extraordinary birth of Israel (3b) in the new theology of salvation diffused through the musical worship (6b).

49 50

See Pss 9:2; 16:7; 40:6; 71:17; 75:2; 96:3; 105:2; 145:5. See Ezra 3:10; Neh 12:35, 41; 1 Chr 13:8; 15:24, 28; 16:42; 2 Chr 5:13.

174

CHAPTER 8

The second composite strophe (CV7-12) CV7-8 (pairing verses 4 and 7) 7

‫וּמל ֹאוֹ‬ ְ ‫יִ ְר ַעם ַהיָּ ם‬ ‫ֵתּ ֵבל וְ י ְֹשׁ ֵבי ָבהּ‬

‫ה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ל‬ ָ ‫ָה ִר יעוּ ַליהוָ ה ָכּ‬ ‫ִפּ ְצחוּ וְ ַרנְּ נוּ וְ זַ ֵמּרוּ‬

4

The call for musical worship of YHWH (vv. 4-6, responding voice) was in the first strophe the consequence of the divine intervention towards the birth of Israel, claimed by the opening voice (vv. 1-3). Now, in the second strophe, verses 4-6 sung by the opening voice become the trigger for a new reaction. Revealed by the responding voice, it extends the celebration of the new theology to the wild (vv. 7-9). This message is identifiable in CV7, where the expression ‫( כל הארץ‬the whole earth) in 4a, previously referring to peoples (CV1), is now complemented by the mention of the sea and its dwellers (v. 7a). This enlargement even extends to the whole universe in CV8, through the mention of all living beings (7b). CV9-10 (pairing verses 5 and 8) 8

‫נְ ָהרוֹת יִ ְמ ֲחאוּ ָכ ף‬ ‫יַ ַחד ָה ִר ים יְ ַרנֵּ נוּ‬

‫זַ ְמּרוּ ַליהוָ ה ְבּ ִכנּוֹר‬ ‫ְבּ ִכנּוֹר וְ קוֹל זִ ְמ ָרה‬

5

The subsequent pair of composite verses further extends the theme previously expressed (CV7-8). The musical instruments mentioned by the opening voice (5a-b) refer to a human performance and are echoed in the responding voice (8a-b) by the singing of the wild. In this order of precedence, the composite verses 9-10 explicitly mention the blessing influence of the new worship of YHWH on the whole universe, its ability to promote a new era of harmony of the creation. Unlike the voice of YHWH destroying forests and trees in Ps 29:5, the new theology encompasses the whole earth in the blessing. CV11-12 (pairing verses 6 and 9) 9

‫ִל ְפנֵ י יְ הוָ ה ִכּי ָבא ִל ְשׁפֹּט ָה ָא ֶר‬ ‫ישׁ ִר ים‬ ָ ‫תּ ֵבל ְבּ ֶצ ֶדק וְ ַע ִמּים ְבּ ֵמ‬-‫ֹט‬ ֵ ‫יִ ְשׁפּ‬

‫שׁוֹפר‬ ָ ‫ַבּ ֲחצ ְֹצרוֹת וְ קוֹל‬ ‫ָה ִר יעוּ ִל ְפנֵ י ַה ֶמּ ֶלְך יְ הוָ ה‬

6

The final pair of composite verses resumes the message of the composite text. It exposes how the musical worship acknowledging the divine intervention is expected to yield a new era of blessing and harmony on the whole earth. The last composite verse (CV12) adds new information. If ‫ ישפט‬in 9b is the future tense (3rd person, qal imperf) of the verb ‫שפט‬

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

175

(to rule), it becomes a consequence of the claim formulated in 6b. Their combination promotes the idea that musical worship is the device preparing the earth for the divine presence and stimulating YHWH’s participation and involvement in the terrestrial affairs. Through this collaboration, the musical worship plays for the new theology the same role that the work around the furnace in the former one exposed in Psalm 29. Explicit references to Psalm 29 are absent from Psalm 98, but its setting in complex antiphony reveals a thematic continuity with Psalms 96–97. Consequently, promoting the musical worship to stimulate YHWH’s theophany in Psalm 98 should be compared with the metallurgical theophany in Psalm 29. And in its regard, the content of Psalm 98 formulates two messages. The first expresses the ability to replace metallurgy with choral singing in the interrelation with YHWH. It includes the ability of musical worship to stimulate the divine presence on the earth. The other message emanates from the advantage of the latter regarding the former: the musical worship replaces the esoteric relation to YHWH by a public worship, so that it may potentially embrace the whole earth (including the trees exploited as a source of fuel in the metallurgical practice). Therefore, the birth of Israel becomes the marker of the change of divine involvement in the earth and the way to spread the consecutive new theology. 4. PSALM 114 1 When

Israel came out of Egypt; The house of Jacob from a foreign-speaking   p eople 2 Became Judah His sanctuary; Israel His dominion 3 The sea looked and fled; The Jordan turned back 4 The mountains skipped as rams; Hills as sons of flock 5 What ails you, O sea, you will flee; O Jordan, you will turn back 6 Mountains will skip as rams! Hills, as sons of a flock! 7 From before the Lord displacing the earth; From before the God of Jacob 8 He who turns the rock to a pool of waters; Flint to a fountain of waters!

A parallel between Psalms 29 and 114 emanates from the comparison between the central verse of Psalm 29 (He causes [them] to skip as a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox, verse 6) and the content of verses 4 and 6 of Psalm 114: (The mountains skipped like rams; Hills like lambs [v. 4] and The mountains skip like rams; Hills like lambs [v. 6]).51 51 Many scholars acknowledge this parallel. See for example A. WEISER 1962, 711; M. DAHOOD 1966, 3:136; E. BEAUCAMP 1979, 206; M. WEISS 1984, 366-367; W. PRINSLOO 1992, 167; L. ALLEN 2001, 142; R. CLIFFORD 2003, 193; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 323; A. BERLIN

176

CHAPTER 8

Both verses refer to the unusual image of moving mountains, and both illustrate it with the jumping of young quadrupeds. This double affinity of two verses of Psalm 114 with the central claim of Psalm 29 invites us to integrate it in this comparative analysis. Like Psalm 29, Psalm 114 is generally approached as a hymn of victory of YHWH over the forces of chaos, here symbolized by the sea fleeing from before YHWH (verses 3, 5). This triumph is deduced from the interrogative structure of verses 5-6, interpreted as a taunting reiteration of the claims already mentioned in verses 3-4.52 Extending this view, the birth of Israel, referenced in the first verse (Ps 114:1), is supposed to mix the theme of Psalm 29 with the theology of Israel. By this means, Psalm 114 is supposed to gather the definitive reign of YHWH, the stability of the universe, and the birth of Israel.53 Like for many other psalms, this interpretation is conditioned by identifying YHWH as a storm god and the victory on the forces of chaos as his main deed. However, no allusion to a conflict with the liquid element emanates from Psalm 114.54 Rather, the move of the sea (v. 5) occurs apparently in a festive atmosphere, especially once the verb ḥyl (v. 7) is interpreted as joyful dancing.55 The mention in verses 4 and 6 of the skipping mountains through the verb rqd confirms this view, as this verb expresses frenetic dancing in 1 Chr 15:29. In this song, the flux and reflux 2008, 354; R. NELSON 2009, 172; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2011, 192; N. DECLAISSÉWALFORD 2014, 851-852. 52 A. WEISER 1962, 711-712; G. PRINSLOO 1998, 316. Erhard GERSTENBERGER (2001, 281-283) even suggests a parallel between this so-called taunting and ridicule of the natural elements and Baal’s victory over Yam in Ugaritic mythology. A triumph over the chaotic forces is also suggested by Hans-Joachim KRAUS (1989, 374-375), Willem PRINSLOO (1992, 168-169) and Gert PRINSLOO (1998, 314-315). 53 WEISS 1984, 365, 394; G. PRINSLOO 1998, 314-315; A. BERLIN 2007, 69; W. BRUEGGEMANN and W. BELLINGER 2014, 493. Richard NELSON (2009, 172) concludes that Psalm 114 “links Israel’s foundational story of election to the mythic story of creation as God’s victory over the forces of chaos.” For Debra SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE (2015, 95), “In Ps 114, the conflict motif serves to cast the narrative events of exodus and entry into the land as moments of divine victory, specifically over water-based entities.” 54 R. WATSON 2005, 71. Willem PRINSLOO (1992, 168) notices that, “there is no sign of a battle or conflict in Psalm 114, and that the only consideration should be the theophany motif.” Similarly, Adele BERLIN (2008, 355) assumes that “The battle aspect of the chaos myth is absent here, because the natural elements react on their own volition, not through God’s force.” 55 See Frank HOSSFELD and Erich ZENGER (2011, 197) for arguments supporting an interpretation of ḥyl as dance in Ps 114:7. Indeed, a double-entendre is probably introduced here between the two meanings to writhe and to dance, as suggested by Meir WEISS (1984, 373). The dancing context of interpretation is confirmed by the skipping animal metaphor in verses 4 and 6, interpreted as expressing joy. See E. GERSTENBERGER 2001, 283; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 323.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

177

of the sea and the Jordan River become movements of a dance performed between the liquid element and the skipping mountains. It invites us to revisit the Chaoskampf perspective of interpretation of Psalm 114. 4.1. Canonic responsa in Psalm 114 The succession of verses, in Psalm 114, shows an absence of chronological order of the related events. The conquest of Canaan (v. 2) is mentioned between the coming out of Egypt (v. 1) and the crossing of the sea (v. 3). Such asynchrony suggests that the meaning of this psalm does not necessarily emanate from its linear reading. It rather characterizes the psalms designed for complex antiphony. Psalm 114 comprises four strophes of two verses each, with a strong level of redundancy between the second (vv. 3-4) and the third (vv. 5-6). This ABB’C structure is meaningful in complex antiphony, because the singing of the strophes B and B’ by two voices in dialog generates an echolike pattern typical of antiphonal performances. This singularity invites us to examine whether Psalm 114 was conceived for canonic responsa between an opening voice singing the verses 1-6 (ABB’ strophes) and a responding voice singing in echo the verses 3-8 (BB’C strophes).56 This mode of complex antiphony, C3 canonic responsa, yields the following composite text of Psalm 114: Opening voice

Responding voice

CV1

1a When Israel came out of Egypt

→ The sea looked and fled

3a

CV2

1b The house of Jacob from a → The Jordan turned back foreign-speaking people

3b

CV3

2a Became Judah His sanctuary

→ The mountains skipped as rams

4a

CV4

2b Israel His dominion

→ Hills as sons of flock

4b

CV5

3a The sea looked and fled

→ What ails you, O sea, you will flee

5a

CV6

3b The Jordan turned back

→ O Jordan, you will turn back 5b

CV7

4a The mountains skipped as rams

→ Mountains will skip as rams! 6a

56

For a justification of this mode of performance and a detailed analysis of the composite verses, see N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2011.

178

CHAPTER 8

Opening voice

Responding voice

CV8

4b Hills as sons of flock

→ Hills, as sons of a flock!

6b

CV9

5a What ails you, O sea, you will flee

→ From before the Lord displacing the earth

7a

CV10 5b O Jordan, you will turn back

→ From before the God of Jacob

7b

CV11 6a Mountains will skip as rams!

→ He who turns the rock to a pool of waters

8a

CV12 6b Hills, as sons of a flock!

→ Flint to a fountain of waters! 8b

This setting of Psalm 114 generates a highly structured composite text. It comprises a central strophe of four composite verses (CV5-8) characterized each one by an echo-like pattern between the two hemiverses. This entity is flanked by two strophes of four composite verses each (CV1-4 and CV9-12), in which the claims of central strophe (vv. 3-6) combine with others (vv. 1-2 and vv. 7-8 respectively). 4.2. Parallels with Psalm 29 The composite text of Psalm 114 reveals further affinities with Psalm 29. The central verse (v. 6) sung in echo in Psalm 29 (CV11-12) corresponds in Psalm 114 to verses 4 and 6 yielding an echo pattern (CV7-8). Like in Psalm 96, this parallel is probably an allusion to Psalm 29 emerging during the performance. In Psalm 29, the verse 6 sung in echo introduces a volcanic imagery. The same representation is visible in the composite text of Psalm 114. There, verse 8 praises YHWH for his ability to transform the roc (‫ )צור‬and the silicates (‫ )חלמיש‬into water: “[YHWH] who turns (‫ )ההפכי‬the rock into a pool of water; the flint into a spring of water.” This transformation is traditionally interpreted as the divine supply of drinkable water to the Israelites in the wanderings at Exodus. This understanding is apparently confirmed by the parallel mention of rock (‫ )צור‬and flint (‫ )חלמיש‬in Deut 8:15, a verse unambiguously referring to the Exodus epos: “... and thirsty ground where was no water; who brought you forth water out of the rock (‫ )צור‬of flint (‫)חלמיש‬.” However, this interpretation does not account for the differences between these two claims. In Deut 8:15 (as in Ex 17:6; Num 20:8; Isa 41:18 and Ps 78:16), YHWH brings out (‫ )המוציא‬water from the rock, while YHWH turns/transforms (‫)ההופכי‬

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

179

the rock into waters in Ps 114:8. This difference is probably meaningful because the verb hpk is never used elsewhere in the Bible for mentioning the springing of water. It means that Ps 114:8 might not refer specifically to the famous miracle from the time of Exodus. This conclusion is supported by the verbal tense of hpk, which indicates that such an action occurs continuously, up to the present time.57 The term ‫ הפך‬has a specific meaning when referring to YHWH. This is revealed in Amos 4:11 talking about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorra as a ‘divine overthrowing’ (‫)מהפכת אלוהים‬. The same expression (‫ )ויהפך אלהים‬is encountered in Gen 19:25 and Deut 29:22 for the destruction of the two cities. This destruction is even likened with a giant metallurgical event in Gen 19:28b, claiming that “the smoke of the land went up as the smoke of a furnace (‫)כקיטור הכבשן‬.” We may conclude that YHWH, in Ps 114:8, is praised for his ability to melt silicates, and not for supplying drinking water to the Israelites. In CV11, the antiphonal unit praising YHWH’s ability to melt stone (8a) combines with the image of dancing mountains (6a).58 The volcanic association emanating from this pairing is confirmed in the subsequent composite verse (CV12), where the volcanic metaphor (6b) interferes with the explicit transformation of silicates into ‘his’ (= divine) water (8b).59 In other words, CV12 identifies the capacity of YHWH to melt silicates as an essential attribute. This approach corroborates the volcanic interpretation of the animal metaphor in Ps 114:4, 6. Like in Ps 29:6, the jumping rams and young sheep in Psalm 114 probably refer to volcanism, the liquefaction and flow of the silicates and projection of pyroclasts from the crater. In the composite text of Psalm 114, this animal metaphor is of central importance. It appears in CV3-4 and CV11-12, and it is even sung in echo in CV 7-8.

57

R. NELSON 2009, 172. Some scholars deduced that such singular expression evokes an alteration of the rock, and even its complete liquefaction. See M. GOULDER 1998, 165; A. BERLIN 2008, 356. However, the volcanic/metallurgical interpretation is more straightforward here. 59 The verb hpk has a strong fiery connotation in the divine context (e.g. Gen 19:25; Deut 29:22 and Amos 4:11). It suggests that 8b (like 8a) refers to the melting of rock and flint. So, the expression ‘his source of water’ (‫מעינו מים‬, 8b) refers specifically to a ‘divine liquid matter’, which may correspond to molten silicates or metal emanating thermal radiance (kābȏd). This challenges the classical interpretation (e.g. A. HAKHAM 1990, 346) approaching the waw final as a poetical ornament devoid of significance for the interpretation of Psalm 114. Mitchell DAHOOD (1966, 2:132-133) even considers this final waw as an incorrect grammatical form, due to a confusion of the poet or a scribe. 58

180

CHAPTER 8

4.3. Analysis of the composite verses First composite strophe (CV1-4) 3 4

‫ַהיָּ ם ָר ָאה וַ יָּ נֹס‬ ‫ַהיַּ ְר ֵדּ ן יִ סֹּב ְל ָאחוֹר‬ ‫ילים‬ ִ ‫ֶה ָה ִר ים ָר ְקדוּ ְכ ֵא‬ ‫צ ֹאן‬-‫גְּ ָבעוֹת ִכּ ְבנֵ י‬

‫ְבּ ֵצאת יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל ִמ ִמּ ְצ ָר יִ ם‬ ‫ֹלעז‬ ֵ ‫ֵבּית יַ ֲעקֹב ֵמ ַעם‬ ‫הוּדה ְל ָק ְדשׁוֹ‬ ָ ְ‫ָהיְ ָתה י‬ ‫לוֹתיו‬ ָ ‫יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל ַמ ְמ ְשׁ‬

1 2

The opening composite verse (CV1) combines two themes, the birth of Israel (1a) with the retraction of the sea (3a). This latter imagery obviously refers to the miracle of the sea at Exodus, but the formulation of 3a recalls also a cosmic event: the emergence of the dry land by retraction of the sea at the times of creation (Gen 1: 9-10) or even after the Flood (Gen 8:3). Through this double meaning, the poet promotes the birth of Israel to the status of a new creation event which, like the Noah’s Flood, brings forth the emergence of a new world. After this introduction, the second composite verse relates the end of the birth process, through the crossing the Jordan River leading to settlement of the Israelites. Here too, the miracle of the Jordan (3b) extends the miracle of the Sea (3a), granting the installation in Canaan a cosmic dimension. The CV3-4 introduces two essential features. The first is the transformation of Judah/Israel into the new people of YHWH, expressed in the first half of these two composite verses. The second emanates from the complementary claim. When considered alone, verse 4 extends the cosmic dimension related in verse 3, in mentioning the creation of mountains and hills after the withdrawal of the cosmic ocean. However, once mingled with verse 2, the claims of verse 4 hold a new meaning: they account for YHWH moving his residence to the land of Israel following the transformation of the Israelites into his people. This novelty explains the jubilation of the mountains and hills from Canaan. The animal imagery already visible in this explosion of joy introduces another dimension of meaning. In reference to Psalm 29, it announces the melting of mountains consecutive to the divine presence, a feature which finds confirmation in the last composite verses (CV11-12, see below). Second composite strophe (CV5-8) 5 6

‫לָּך ַהיָּ ם ִכּי ָתנוּס‬-‫ה‬ ְ ‫ַמ‬ ‫ַהיַּ ְר ֵדּ ן ִתּסֹּב ְל ָאחוֹר‬ ‫ילים‬ ִ ‫ֶה ָה ִר ים ִתּ ְר ְקדוּ ְכ ֵא‬ ‫צ ֹאן‬-‫גְּ ָבעוֹת ִכּ ְבנֵ י‬

‫ַהיָּ ם ָר ָאה וַ יָּ נֹס‬ ‫ַהיַּ ְר ֵדּ ן יִ סֹּב ְל ָאחוֹר‬ ‫ילים‬ ִ ‫ֶה ָה ִר ים ָר ְקדוּ ְכ ֵא‬ ‫צ ֹאן‬-‫גְּ ָבעוֹת ִכּ ְבנֵ י‬

3 4

181

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

The second strophe is a series of four composite verses characterized by an echo pattern. It reiterates the reference to the sea and river already mentioned in CV1-2, and of the hills and mountains and sea in CV 3-4. But it also introduces some novelties. The first is an interrogative mode promoted by the expression ‫( מה לך‬what ails you) in the second hemiverse of CV5. The second is the change in the tense, from perfect to imperfect, of the verb in the first and second hemiverses of CV 5-7. This grammatical change is especially emphasized because the same verb is present in the two hemiverses of CV5 (nws), 6 (sbb) and 7 (rqd). In the linear reading, the change from perfect (vv. 3-4) to imperfect tense (vv. 5-6) accompanies the transformation from the affirmative to the interrogative mode. In the composite text, however, this grammatical constraint remains relevant only for CV5. Concerning CV6-7, this change in tense claims that the past events related in the first hemiverse (perfect tense) occur also after it (imperfect tense, second hemiverse). Consequently, the question asked in CV5 does not concern only the events relative to the Exodus. It rather becomes an interrogation whether similar wonders may occur after the birth of Israel. This question is especially relevant after the cosmic changes accompanying the emergence of this nation, related in the first strophe. The author of Psalm 114 is not the only one devoting importance to this question. Also in Psalms 96-98, the birth of Israel was regarded as a cosmic event. And there, this issue opens a new era of stability of the Universe. The authors of Psalms 96-98 answer the question asked here by the negative. For them, the birth of Israel announces the metamorphosis of YHWH from the Lord of mabbûl (as in Psalm 29) into the Lord of Justice. Third composite strophe (CV9-12) 7 8

‫חוּלי ָא ֶר ץ‬ ִ ‫ִמ ִלּ ְפנֵ י ָאדוֹן‬ ‫לוֹהּ יַ ֲעקֹב‬ ַ ‫ִמ ִלּ ְפנֵ י ֱא‬ ‫מיִ ם‬-‫ם‬ ָ ַ‫ַהה ְֹפ ִכי ַהצּוּר ֲאג‬ .‫מיִ ם‬-‫נוֹ‬ ָ ְ‫ַח ָלּ ִמישׁ ְל ַמ ְעי‬

‫לָּך ַהיָּ ם ִכּי ָתנוּס‬-‫ה‬ ְ ‫ַמ‬ ‫ַהיַּ ְר ֵדּ ן ִתּסֹּב ְל ָאחוֹר‬ ‫ילים‬ ִ ‫ֶה ָה ִר ים ִתּ ְר ְקדוּ ְכ ֵא‬ ‫צ ֹאן‬-‫גְּ ָבעוֹת ִכּ ְבנֵ י‬

5 6

The third strophe articulates the answer to the interrogations formulated in the second one. The question (5a) asked in the second hemiverse in CV5 now opens the third composite strophe. Immediately after, the second hemiverse of CV9 provides an answer to this question: the appellation ‫( אדון חולי ארץ‬the Lord displacing the earth) given to YHWH in 7a ensures that the god preserves his power of transformation of the earth, even after the birth of Israel. This claim finds confirmation immediately after, in CV10,

182

CHAPTER 8

where the wonder challenging the rules of the Universe (5b) is attached to YHWH, called here the god of Jacob (7b). Unlike in Psalms 96–98, the author of Psalm 114 claims that YHWH does not transform into the lord of the stabilized universe after the birth of Israel. The content of the two subsequent composite verses (CV11-12) corroborate this conclusion. Here, unlike in Psalms 96-98, the movements of the mountains and hills (v. 6) are not merely explosions of happiness of the nature following the birth of Israel and the beginning of a new era of stability. Rather, the explicit reference to the melting of silicates by the presence of YHWH, in verse 8, promotes a volcanic interpretation of the movement of mountains in verse 6. These ending claims confirm that YHWH remains the Lord of mabbûl even after the birth of Israel. As a whole, the third composite strophe should be therefore considered the answer to the question asked in the second one, itself stimulated by the theological changes consecutive to birth of Israel in the first strophe. 4.4. The theology of Psalm 114 The above considerations reveal that the birth of Israel has not the same theological consequences in Psalm 114 and in Psalms 96-98. In parallel, a distinct attitude is expected regarding the content of Psalm 29 and its relevancy concerning the Israelites. These points are now examined. • Metallurgical theophany: Unlike in Psalms 96–98, there is no musical theophany replacing the metallurgical one in Psalm 114. Rather, praising YHWH’s capacity to melt stone (Ps 114:4, 6, 8) extends the approach of the deity in Psalm 29. • The new dominion: Unlike in Psalm 29, the melting process in Psalm 114 does no longer occur in the Arabah. Here, the mountains melting and dancing are the hills of Judah and Israel, in CV3-4. Like volcanism denotes the divine presence at Sinai, Psalm 114 approaches the transformation of the mounts of Israel and Judah into volcanoes (CV7-8, 11-12) as evidences of their transformation into the new dominion of YHWH.60 • The new people of YHWH: The term Israel designates the people in CV1-2 and the land in CV3-4. This duality (and the confusion it generates) promotes a new reality: the dwelling of YHWH not only in the 60 N. AMZALLAG and M. AVRIEL 2011, 312-314. The plural, together with the mention of hills beside mountains, led most scholars to assume that the reference to Sinai theophany is only of secondary importance in Psalm 114. See M. DAHOOD 1966, 3:136; W. PRINSLOO 1992, 167; L. ALLEN 2001, 142; N. DECLAISSÉ-WALFORD 2014, 851-852.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

183

holy land, but also among the Israelites. The use of the plural in verse 2b (‫ ;ישראל ממשלותיו‬literally: Israel, his dominions) strengthens this interpretation, fitting better the mention of people (plural) than the land (singular). The occasional designation of the whole army as ‫ ממשלה‬in the Bible even transforms the Israelites into the ‘armies/hosts of YHWH’ (= YHWH Sebaoth).61 By this means, verse 2 promotes the transformation of the Israelites into the new sons of gods, a status traditionally reserved to the Canaanite metalworkers (Ps 29:1). • YHWH’s intervention in History: The idea of YHWH’s intervention in the birth of Israel is the cornerstone of the new theology promoted in Psalms 96–98. Though this epos is also the theme of Psalm 114, we do not find in this song any visible trace of YHWH’s action on the elements, or any other divine ruling or exercise of justice on the earth. In Psalm 114, the sea and the Jordan flee spontaneously, as a mere consequence of YHWH’s theophany. Unlike in Psalms 96–98, YHWH is not celebrated in Psalm 114 as the god intervening in History, but as the god choosing Israel as his people and the mountains of Canaan as his residence. • Public worship: Unlike in Psalms 96–98, the noun YHWH is not revealed in Psalm 114. In the first verses, the god is evoked only through pronouns (his sanctuary, his dominion, in verse 2), or simply anonymously alluded to in verses 3-6. Then, when YHWH is explicitly mentioned in verse 7, he is called the god of Jacob. Psalm 114 was probably designed for a public cult of the deity among the Israelites. However, the secrecy around the name YHWH suggests that the birth of Israel does not abolish the esoteric dimensions of his traditional worship. Furthermore, unlike in Psalms 96–98, we find no trace of extensive diffusion, among the nations, of the worship of YHWH. This analysis confirms the influence of Psalm 29 on the composition of Psalm 114. It also corroborates some interpretations of Psalm 29, especially the volcanic imagery exposed in its central verse. Beyond these achievements, the examination of Psalms 96–98 and 114 reveals a divergence of views regarding the status of the original, pre-Israelite theology exposed in Psalm 29. The psalms 96–98 refer to the ancient Yahwism through Psalm 29 in order to debunk it. In contrast, Psalm 114 self-inscribes in continuity with Psalm 29 and its representation of the divine. 61 See 2 Chr 32:9. This meaning is deduced from the parallel expression in 2 Kg 18:7, where ‫( ממשלה‬2 Chr 32:9) is replaced by ‫חיל כבד‬. See BDB, 606; DCH, 5:336 and HALOT, 2:596.

184

CHAPTER 8

5. PSALM 46 1 To

the Overseer, to the sons of Qorah; At the upper voice (Alamoth), A song. [is] to us refuge and strength; A help in adversities found most surely. 3 Therefore we fear not in the changing of the earth;And in the slipping of   mountains into the depth of the seas 4 Roar and be troubled his waters; Will shake mountains by his power – Selah 5 A river, its rivulets will rejoice (the) city of God; Holy, the shrines of Elyion 6 God [is] in her midst, she shall not be moved; Will help her God, at the dawn   of the morning! 7 Troubled have been nations, Moved have been kingdoms; He uttered his   voice, let be melted the earth! 8 YHWH-Sebaoth is with us; A fortress for us, the God of Jacob – Selah. 9 Come behold the works of YWHW; Who provokes devastations on the earth. 10 Causes wars to cease unto the end of the earth; The bow he breaks and he   has cut asunder the spear, Chariots he will burn with fire. 11 Desist and know, for I am God; Exalted among nations, exalted over the   earth. 12 YHWH-Sebaoth is with us; A fortress for us, the God of Jacob – Selah. 2 God

Psalm 46 is frequently interpreted in the context of divine conflict with the forces of chaos.62 This thesis finds support in the mention of mountains slipping in the sea and other cataclysmic events (vv. 3-4), assimilated to the primeval forces of chaos threatening the organized universe.63 Also the references to war in Psalm 46 became an extension of the concept of chaos to the political conflicts and their devastating influence.64 Sigmund Mowinckel resumes this view about Psalm 46: “Following this reference [vv. 3-4] to the victory over the primeval sea is a mention [v. 5] of the wondrous ‘river of God’ which is now safeguarding and sanctifying Jerusalem; further, we hear of the Lord’s presence in his Temple – The victory over all the peoples of the earth which his coming will secure, the subjugation of all evil powers, and the peace which he establishes on earth.”65 This approach of Psalm 46 as a hymn celebrating YHWH’s victory over the forces of chaos spontaneously generates a parallel with Psalm 29 interpreted in similar fashion.66 Scholars also identified more specific parallels between these two psalms, including the mention of YHWH as a source of strength, blessing and protection (Ps 46:8, 12; Ps 29:11), and his (presumed) subjugation of chaotic waters (Ps 46:3-4; Ps 29:3).67 62 A. WEISER 1962, 248; M. DAHOOD 1966, 1: 279; A. ANDERSON 1972 1:356; K. SEYBOLD 1996, 189. 63 See Chapter 2, note 75. 64 S. MOWINCKEL 1967, 1:151-152; A. LAATO 2018, 169. 65 S. MOWINCKEL 1967, 1:87. 66 E. ZENGER 2005, 408, 415. A. LAATO 2018, 168. 67 Peter CRAIGIE (1983, 344) concluded from these parallels that the content of Psalm 29 (and also the song of the Sea [Exodus 15]) inspired the conception of Psalm 46.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

185

However, some observations challenge this Chaoskampf approach of Psalm 46. For example, the expression “[He] Will shake mountains by his power” (v. 4) refers to YHWH as the source of the cataclysm. The parallel between the fall of mountains (v. 4) and the fall of kingdoms (v. 7) confirms this interpretation.68 Furthermore, we do not see the psalmist deploring the cataclysms and the disorders mentioned in Psalm 46. They are rather a source of rejoicing.69 In verse 9, for example, the destructive action of YHWH (‫ )שמות‬is mentioned in parallel with his great work (‫)מפעלות‬. That scholars challenged the Chaoskampf interpretation of Psalm 46 is not surprising, therefore.70 Instead of fighting the forces of chaos, it seems that the poet of Psalm 46 celebrates YHWH triggering deep transformations, and Zion as an island of stability in this turbulent universe. These observations do not invalidate the affinities with Psalm 29, however. YHWH is praised for his capacity to melt stone in Psalm 46. Like in Psalm 29, this power is the consequence of a vocal theophany: “He utters his voice, the earth melts” (‫( )נתן בקולו תמוג ארץ‬Ps 46:7b).71 The volcanic imagery is not limited to this claim. The deep transformations of landscape (‫ )בהמיר ארץ‬in Ps 46:3 evoke volcanic events, and the mention of mountains collapsing within the sea, in this verse, recalls the collapse of a volcano island (caldera) following an eruption of exceptional intensity.72 As in Psalm 29, YHWH is praised here as the god mastering the remelting events, the Lord of mabbûl. In this chaotic reality, the mention of YHWH as refuge and strength (‫( )אלהים לנו מחסה ועז‬Ps 46:2a) is similar to the praise of YHWH giving strength to his people in Ps 29:11. YHWH’s theophany is of central importance in Psalm 46.73 However, the claims “God [is] in her midst” or that “YHWH is among us” (vv. 6, 8, 68

D. TSUMURA 1980. See Chapter 2, note 81. The locution ‫( יחמרו מימיו‬v. 4) likens the chaotic fall of the mountains with the production of wine and beer by fermentation. See D. TSUMURA 1981. 70 M. WEISS 1984, 349; P. RAABE 1989, 64; J-M. SCHÄDER 2010, 142. Indeed, Burkard ZAPPF (1998) suggests that Psalm 46 is not a song of Zion, but rather a song devoted to the glory of YHWH in which Jerusalem is elusively evoked. For Meir WEISS (1984, 350), “...the lack of any specific indication of ‘God’s city’, and the absence of national designations can only be explained by assuming that the psalm has a universal purpose.” For Luis ALONSOSCHÖKEL (1981, 419, 423), the mention of ‫ עיר אלוהים‬refers at the same time to a heavenly reality, to the city of Jerusalem and to all the places where the god is sanctified. 71 This point is noted by Mitchell DAHOOD (1966, 1:281) and Amos HAKHAM (1990, 1:266). Also the destruction evoked in verse 9 by ‫ שמות‬especially fits the extensive desolation provoked by volcanism. 72 This description recalls the Thera explosion (middle of the second millennium BCE, see W. FRIEDRICH 2000, 67-81). Walter FRIEDRICH (2000, 147-159) argues that the myth of Atlantis related by Plato is reminiscent of this event. It indicates that the memory of this event was vivid in the Mediterranean for centuries. 73 B. ZAPPF 1998, 79. 69

186

CHAPTER 8

12) do not explicitly refer to volcanism or metallurgy. Rather, the expression will rejoice the city of God (v. 5), and its following locution Holy the shrines of Elyion rather suggest a reference to the musical worship of YHWH.74 This change recalls the transition from metallurgical to musical worship of YHWH observed in Psalms 96-98, regarding Psalm 29. 5.1. The canonic-responsa setting of Psalm 46 The repetition of the content of verse 8 in verse 12 led many authors to approach this verse as a refrain also inserted originally between verses 4 and 5.75 Through this addition, Psalm 46 becomes a highly structured psalm of three stanzas of three verses each (vv. 2-4, vv, 5-7, vv. 9-11) interrelated by a refrain.76 However, the addition of a refrain between verses 4 and 5 is now rejected by many authors.77 This emendation eliminates a pattern of literary bonds between four distant verses throughout the whole song. These bonds are trivial in verses 8 and 12, because they are identical. Literary bonds also exist between other verses similarly distant: verses 2 and 6 (v.2: ‫ אלהים‬// v.6: ‫ ;אלהים‬and v. 2: ‫ עזרה‬// v. 6: ‫)יעזרה‬, verses 3 and 7 (v. 3: ‫ ארץ‬// v. 7: ‫ גוים‬,‫ )ממלכות‬and verses 7 and 11 (v. 7: ‫ ארץ‬// v. 11: ‫ ;ארץ‬v. 7: ‫ גוים‬// v. 11: ‫ גוים‬and v.7: ‫ המו‬// v. 11: ‫)הרפו‬.78 This pattern of literary bonds suggests that Psalm 46 was designed for performance in C4 canonic responsa.79 The link between the sons of Qorah (v. 1) and the city of god (v. 5), and the musical performance mentioned 74 A musical connotation of the verb ‫ שמח‬emanates from its interference in psalms with ‫( רנן‬e.g. Pss 5:12; 32:11; 35:27; 67:5; 90:14; 92:5 and 100:2). A similar parallel exists between ‫ שמח‬and ‫ זמר‬in Ps 9:3) and ‫ מחול‬in Ps 30:12. 75 This emendation has long been accepted. Hermann GUNKEL (1903, 28), for example, assumed that “The refrain must be supplied in this place for the sake of the symmetry of the strophes.” See also C. BRIGGS and E. BRIGGS 1906, 393; A. WEISER 1962, 365, 368369; A. ANDERSON 1972, 1:355,357; L. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1981, 416; E. GESTENBERGER 1988, 191. 76 See P. RAABE 1989, 59-60, and ref. therein. To preserve the symmetry of the entire psalm (including selah), Paul RAABE suggested (1989, 52, 56) reinserting the ‘refrain’ between the two last words (‫ גאותו‬and ‫ )סלה‬of verse 4. 77 Pieter VAN DER LUGT (2006, 50) stated that “the rhetorical structure of Psalm 46 is for an important part determined by a deliberate positioning of verbal repetitions at exactly corresponding spots in the text.” See also A. CONDAMIN 1933, 144; M. DAHOOD 1966, 1: 277-278; J. GOLDINGAY 1972, 66; J. ALETTI and J. TRUBLET 1983, 37; P. CRAIGIE 1983, 341; M. GIRARD 1984, 373; M. WEISS 1984, 331, 335; A. HAKHAM 1990, 1:264; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 1993, 285; J. FOKKELMAN 2001, 214; R. CLIFFORD 2002, 228. 78 P. CRAIGIE 1983, 46; M. WEISS 1984, 337, 339, 351; P. AUFFRET 2003, 173, 176; P. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 46. 79 This mode of performance is already identified in biblical poetry. See N. AMZALLAG 2014d, 34-35.

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

187

in both, invite us to integrate verse 1 into the body of Psalm 46.80 It promotes the emergence of two strophes of eight composite verses each (1//5 → 2//6 → 3//7 → 4//8 for the first strophe and 5//9 → 6//10 → 7//11 → 8//12 for the second), each one ending with a double selah (4//8 and 8//12).81 Opening voice

Responding voice

CV1

1a To the Overseer, to the sons of Qorah

→ A river, its rivulets will rejoice (the) city of God

5a

CV2

1b At the upper voice (Alamoth), A song.

→ Holy, the shrines of Elyion

5b

CV3

2a God [is] to us refuge and strength

→ God [is] in her midst, she shall not be moved

6a

CV4

2b A help in adversities found → Will help her God, at the most surely dawn of the morning!

6b

CV5

3a Therefore we fear not in the changing of the earth

→ Troubled have been nations, Moved have been kingdoms

7a

CV6

3b And in the slipping of mountains into the depth of the seas

→ He uttered his voice, let be melted the earth

7b

CV7

4a Roar and be troubled his waters

→ YHWH-Sebaoth is with us

8a

CV8

4b Will shake mountains by his power – Selah

→ A fortress for us, the God of Jacob – Selah

8b

CV9

5a A river, its rivulets will rejoice (the) city of God

→ Come behold the works of YWHW

9a

CV10 5b Holy, the shrines of Elyion → Who provokes devastations on the earth CV11 6a God [is] in her midst, she shall not be moved

→ Causes wars to cease unto the end of the earth

9b 10a

80 D. CHRISTENSEN 2004, 1. Joseph SAALSCHÜTZ (1825, 117) proposed this integration of verse 1 in the body of the text already in the 19th century. Also in Psalm 87, verse 1a (Psalm of the sons of Qorah; a Song) generally approached as a title, integrates the body of the psalm. See N. AMZALLAG 2014c, 368. 81 For further details concerning the setting of Psalm 46 in canonic responsa fashion, see N. AMZALLAG 2015a. In this paper, the analysis of the composite text was performed after splitting each verse into four antiphonal units. To simplify the present analysis (focusing mainly on the relationship with Psalm 29), the verses are divided here into two antiphonal units only.

188

CHAPTER 8

Opening voice

Responding voice

CV12 6b Will help her God, at the dawn of the morning!

→ The bow he breaks and he has cut asunder the spear, Chariots he will burn with fire

10b

CV13 7a Troubled have been nations, Moved have been kingdoms

→ Desist and know, for I am God

11a

CV14 7b He uttered his voice, let be → Exalted among nations, melted the earth exalted over the earth.

11b

CV15 8a YHWH-Sebaoth is with us

→ YHWH-Sebaoth is with us

12a

CV16 8b A fortress for us, the God of Jacob – Selah

→ A fortress for us, the God of Jacob – Selah

12b

5.2. Analysis of the composite verses The first composite strophe (CV1-8) CV1-2 (pairing verses 1 and 5) 5a 5b

;‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫א‬-‫יר‬ ֱ ‫נָ ָהר ְפּ ָלגָ יו יְ ַשׂ ְמּחוּ ִע‬ .‫ְקד ֹשׁ ִמ ְשׁ ְכּנֵ י ֶע ְליוֹן‬

‫ק ַֹרח‬-‫ַל ְמנַ ֵצּ ַח ִל ְבנֵ י‬ ‫ע ָלמוֹת ִשׁיר‬-‫ל‬ ֲ ‫ַע‬

1a 1b

The first composite verse identifies the overseer with a stream and its sons with its rivulets. It localizes the city of God (Jerusalem) as the homeland of the congregation. This opening composite verse identifies the Qorahites as the living source (stream) diffusing the knowledge of YHWH from the city of God, through its members (‘rivulets’). Immediately after, CV2 details how it occurs: the Qorahites are involved in the musical worship of YHWH. The parallel between ‫( עלמות‬1b) and ‫( קדש‬5b) is especially significant, here, because ‫ עלמות‬also means secrets in biblical Hebrew. Then, CV2 announces that the Qorahites diffuse what remained secret before, through their musical worship. This opening couple of composite verse displays similarities with Psalms 96–98. In these psalms, too, the musical worship promoted the public cult of YHWH, in supplanting the esoteric relationship founded on the metallurgical experience. CV3-4 (pairing verses 2 and 6) 6a 6b

‫תּמּוֹט‬-‫ל‬ ִ ‫ֹלהים ְבּ ִק ְר ָבּהּ ַבּ‬ ִ ‫ֱא‬ ‫ֹלהים ִל ְפנוֹת בּ ֶֹקר‬ ִ ‫יַ ְעזְ ֶר ָה ֱא‬

;‫ֹלהים ָלנוּ ַמ ֲח ֶסה וָ עֹז‬ ִ ‫ֱא‬ ‫ֶעזְ ָרה ְב ָצרוֹת נִ ְמ ָצא ְמאֹד‬

2a 2b

189

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

The content of CV3 recalls the blessing of the metalworkers in Ps 29:11. Like in their concern, strength and protection of the sons of Qorah emanates from the divine presence in their midst. Unlike in Psalm 29, however, this theophany emanates here from the musical worship. This is another parallel between Psalm 46 and Psalms 96–98. Psalm 46 differs, however, from this triplet of songs by the nature of the divine protection. Psalms 96– 98 claim YHWH’s involvement in the exercise of justice, whereas the god gives strength to his people in CV3. The content of CV4 confirms this point. The identity of the helping agent is silenced in 2b. The 6b unit mentions Elohim, but his help resumes in transforming the city into a stronghold, an island of stability within the turbulent universe. CV5-6 (pairing verses 3 and 7) 7a 7b

‫ָהמוּ גוֹיִ ם ָמטוּ ַמ ְמ ָלכוֹת‬ ‫נָ ַתן ְבּקוֹלוֹ ָתּמוּג ָא ֶר ץ‬

‫נִ ָירא ְבּ ָה ִמיר ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫כּ ן ל ֹא‬-‫ל‬ ֵ ‫ַע‬ ‫וּבמוֹט ָה ִר ים ְבּ ֵלב יַ ִמּים‬ ְ

3a 3b

The subsequent composite verse (CV5) mentions YHWH’s destructions in the wild and human societies. It confirms that YHWH in Psalm 46 is not the god defending the stability of the created universe. Unlike in Psalms 96– 98, he looks like the Lord of mabbûl from Psalm 29. The subsequent composite verse (CV6) confirms this interpretation. There, YHWH is explicitly the agent transforming the landscape through volcanic eruptions (3b). Like in Psalm 29, the voice of YHWH in 7b is the factor stimulating this volcanic reality. This reference to the voice of YHWH also echoes the voice of the Qorahites involved in musical worship. This composite verse highlights another interrelation between YHWH and ‘his people’ (here the congregation of singers), promoting his theophany on the earth. CV7-8 (pairing verses 4 and 8) 8a 8b

‫יְ הוָ ה ְצ ָבאוֹת ִע ָמּנוּ‬ ‫ֹלהי יַ ֲעקֹב ֶס ָלה‬ ֵ ‫לנוּ ֱא‬-‫ב‬ ָ ָ‫ִמ ְשׂגּ‬

‫ימיו‬ ָ ‫יֶ ֱהמוּ יֶ ְח ְמרוּ ֵמ‬ ‫יִ ְר ֲעשׁוּ ָה ִר ים ְבּגַ ֲאוָ תוֹ ֶס ָלה‬

4a 4b

The two composite verses ending the first strophe combine the melting powers of YHWH (verse 4) with the stability ensured for the people close to the deity (verse 8). This contrast is visible in CV7 through the mention of the (destroying) effect of the ‘divine water’ (a probable reference to molten lava) in 4a and the protection granted by the closeness to YHWH in 8a. Also in CV8, the volcanic imagery (4b) contrasts with the description of Jerusalem, the mountain of Elohim, as a secure place, and even a stronghold (8b). Though the reference to the god of Jacob (8b) advocates

190

CHAPTER 8

an Israelite context, the content of this composite verse is close to the spirit of Psalm 29 and its Qenite background. The affiliation of Psalm 46 to the Qorahites is especially interesting in this regard, due to the insertion of Qorah in the Edomite genealogy (Gen 36:5, 14, 16, 18; 1 Chr 1:35). The Qorahite apparently extended the Qenite-Edomite traditions through their poetic tradition and musical performances.82 The second composite strophe (CV9-16) CV9-10 (pairing verses 5 and 9) 9a 9b

‫חזוּ ִמ ְפ ֲע לוֹת יְ הוָ ה‬-‫כוּ‬ ֲ ‫ְל‬ ‫ֲא ֶשׁר ָשׂם ַשׁמּוֹת ָבּ ָא ֶר ץ‬

‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫א‬-‫יר‬ ֱ ‫נָ ָהר ְפּ ָלגָ יו יְ ַשׂ ְמּחוּ ִע‬ ‫ְקד ֹשׁ ִמ ְשׁ ְכּנֵ י ֶע ְליוֹן‬

5a 5b

The volcanic imagery developed in the first strophe determines the interpretation of the second one. For example, ‫( נהר‬5a) is also a verb signifying to shine, to radiate. This meaning is especially relevant, here, the verb ‫חזה‬ (= to see, to contemplate) in 9a mentioning a visual theophany of YHWH. Consequently, the first meaning of ‫ נהר‬as stream, acknowledged in CV1, is now compatible in CV9 with the description of a flow of lava, whose radiance is an essential attribute of YHWH. The next composite verse (CV10) confirms this volcanic interpretation. The reference to sanctuaries (5b) mingles with the mention of devastation (9b). This conjunction again fits the volcanic reality approached both as theophany and destruction. Here again, CV10 announces that YHWH is not the warrant of the stability of the organized world, defending it against the forces of chaos. It rather promotes a figure of YHWH close to the Lord of mabbûl in Psalm 29. CV11-12 (pairing verses 6 and 10) 10a ‫ק ֵצה ָה ָא ֶר ץ‬-‫ד‬ ְ ‫תּמּוֹט ַמ ְשׁ ִבּית ִמ ְל ָחמוֹת ַע‬-‫ל‬ ִ ‫ֹלהים ְבּ ִק ְר ָבּהּ ַבּ‬ ִ ‫ֱא‬ ִ ‫יַ ְעזְ ֶר ָה ֱא‬ 10b ‫ֹלהים ִל ְפנוֹת בּ ֶֹקר ֶק ֶשׁת יְ ַשׁ ֵבּר וְ ִק ֵצּץ ֲחנִ ית ֲעגָ לוֹת יִ ְשׂר ֹף ָבּ ֵאשׁ‬

6a 6b

In the first composite strophe, verse 6a followed two composite verses referring to the city of God (CV1-2), hence eplaining why the singular feminine entity in ‫( בקרבה‬in her midst) was probably Jerusalem. Here, the feminine singular noun preceding 6a is the whole earth (‫ ארץ‬in 9b). In CV11, 6a refers to a divine involvement on the earth, at the time its paired unit, 10a, 82 This premise is not surprising once it is remembered that music and poetry are skills closely related to metallurgy, a feature revealed by the integration of Jubal (the father of musicians) in the Cain genealogy (Gen 4:21-22).

191

THE RECEPTION OF PSALM 29 IN ANCIENT ISRAEL

announces that YHWH intervenes by interrupting wars. This composite verse expresses, therefore, the involvement of YHWH in terrestrial affairs. However, unlike in Psalms 96–98, this power of destruction is not specifically targeted in CV11. It blindly interrupts wars, instead of contributing to the victory of a protagonist. This trend extends in the next composite verse (CV12), where the destruction of armies by the divine fire (10b) recalls the blind destructive action of a volcanic eruption. This divine mode of action is guided only by general principles, such as cessation of war and the collapse of empires. CV13-14 (pairing verses 7 and 11) 11a 11b

‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫אנ ִֹכי ֱא‬-‫י‬ ָ ‫ ִכּ‬,‫ַה ְרפּוּ ְוּד עוּ‬ .‫ ָארוּם ָבּ ָא ֶר ץ‬,‫ָארוּם ַבּגּוֹיִ ם‬

;‫ָהמוּ גוֹיִ ם ָמטוּ ַמ ְמ ָלכוֹת‬ .‫נָ ַתן ְבּקוֹלוֹ ָתּמוּג ָא ֶר ץ‬

7a 7b

The musical theophany replaces the metallurgical theophany in Psalms 96– 98, a novelty stimulating the spreading of the cult of YHWH among the nations. Here, the couple of composite verses introduces an intermediate point of view. On the one hand, CV13 claims that YHWH now self-reveals across the whole earth, like in Psalms 96–98. On the other, CV14 stresses that this revelation results from volcanism, like in Psalms 29, 97, and 114. CV15-16 (pairing verses 8 and 12) 12a 12b

‫יְ הוָ ה ְצ ָבאוֹת ִע ָמּנוּ‬ ‫ֹלהי יַ ֲעקֹב ֶס ָלה‬ ֵ ‫לנוּ ֱא‬-‫ב‬ ָ ָ‫ִמ ְשׂגּ‬

;‫יְ הוָ ה ְצ ָבאוֹת ִע ָמּנוּ‬ ‫ֹלהי יַ ֲעקֹב ֶס ָלה‬ ֵ ‫לנוּ ֱא‬-‫ב‬ ָ ָ‫ִמ ְשׂגּ‬

8a 8b

The last composite verses claim in echo the closeness to YHWH of the us-group, the Qorahite singers (CV15), and their consecutive blessing (CV16). The content of these final claims is similar to the opening and final composite verses of Psalm 29, with two changes: the blessing now concerns the Qorahites, and YHWH is called the ‘god of Jacob’, a feature expressing the allegiance of the Qorahites to the Israelite, rather than Qenite theology. Therefore, Psalm 46 appears in continuity with the ancient Yahwistic traditions, especially the identification of YHWH as the Lord of mabbûl self-revealing through the phenomenon of thermal radiance. Both in time, this song promotes the diffusion of the public knowledge of YHWH, through the musical worship. The author of Psalm 46 acknowledges a divine intervention on the earth, but unlike in Psalms 96–98, this latter is not welltargeted. It may explain why this intervention is not interpreted here as the

192

CHAPTER 8

expression of divine justice. It may also explain why the Exodus, the most famous deed of the Israelite theology, is not quoted in this hymn. As a byproduct of volcanic theophany, this divine activity advances rather general principles, and among them, an anti-war ideology. 6. THE DIVERGENCE IN PSALM 29

RECEPTION

Psalms 46, 96–98 and 114 are influenced by Psalm 29 in their content, form and composition. This ascendant casts light on the reference song itself. For example, the lack of importance of storm in any of these five songs is difficult to reconcile with the classical interpretation of Psalm 29 in a storm context. In contrast, the reference to volcanism, fire and/or stone melting in Psalms 46, 97 and 114 supports the interpretation of Psalm 29 proposed here. Furthermore, identifying complex antiphony in the five influenced psalms strengthens the assumption that Psalm 29 was designed for this mode of performance. The analysis of Psalms 46, 96–98 and 114 reflects two contrasting approaches in ancient Israel. Whereas Psalms 46 and 114 extend the theme and message of Psalm 29, Psalms 96–98 quote this latter to undermine its theology, or to transcend it. This divergence of views echoes the way the Qenites are presented in the Bible. The Book of Judges quotes them in a relatively positive fashion (Judg 1:16; 4:17; 5:24), and the author of Samuel even recalls an old debt of the Israelites in their regard (1 Sam 15:6). In Exodus, the Qenite ascendant on the Israelite Yahwism is visible through the figure of Jethro, though his Qenite identity remains concealed. Psalms 46 and 114, through their positive approach to Psalm 29, integrate this cluster. Other biblical sources are less positive concerning the Qenites. The Deuteronomy ignores them and their contribution. The Book of Isaiah discredits the metalworkers and their prestige (Isa 41:6-7; 44:9-12). In Genesis, the Qenites are acknowledged as the first worshippers of YHWH (Gen 4:13), but their lineage is cursed (Gen 4:11) and they are supposed to disappear in the Flood. The Qenites are even included in the list of peoples to be dispossessed by YHWH in favor of the Abraham lineage (Gen 15:1821). This hostility finds an echo in Psalms 96–98 through the denouncing of Psalm 29’s content.

CONCLUSION Psalm 29 is considered for a long time an essential source of information concerning the early worship of YHWH. It is also a cornerstone for identifying YHWH as a Baal-like storm deity, at origin. The present study confirms the first premise, but it challenges the second. The content of Psalm 29 illuminates the nature of the pre-Israelite Yahwism. Its reference in other psalms reveals its extended and durable influence on the Israelite theology. However, none of the influenced psalms examined here (Psalms 46, 96–98, 114) organize around the storm as YHWH’s theophany. Rainfall and its consecutive fertility are no more mentioned in these songs, an unusual anomaly if these psalms are influenced by a hymn centered on the storm theophany of YHWH. An examination of the six verses from Psalm 29 mentioning the vocal theophany confirms this view. Once these verses are considered together, the storm interpretation becomes less likely than its two alternatives, volcanic and metallurgical (see Chapter 5). Also, concerning the five other verses of Psalm 29, metallurgy remains the best context of interpretation for the expression of coherent claims, wordplays, and multiple meanings (see Chapter 6). This primacy of the metallurgical interpretation is not as surprising as it might appear at first, because the Bible contains many allusions to the metallurgical background of ancient Yahwism (see Chapter 3). These achievements reveal that the storm and its companion features are not the central theme in Psalm 29 and the influenced psalms. Additionally, the Chaoskampf perspective of their interpretation is not valid anymore. Chapter 2 has shown that this motif is explicit in a few psalms. However, its overuse for approaching the psalms led to misuderstanding their content and a misrepresentation of the early figure of YHWH as a storm god. As a counterpart, this approach dismissed the importance of volcanism in the attributes, theophany and mode of action of YHWH, and its metallurgical symbolism. Thus far, scholarship has only considered two options concerning the possible origin of Psalm 29: an Israelite composition if the hymn was initially devoted to YHWH, or a Canaanite opus if Baal was the god initially praised in it. The present findings challenge this duality. First, Chapter 4 shows that YHWH was acknowledged and even worshipped outside of

194

CONCLUSION

Israel. The main difference concerns his public worship in Israel whereas he remained an esoteric deity everywhere else. In the case the hymn was originally devoted to YHWH, the extensive use of the name of the deity generates two possibilities concerning its authorship. It may have been composed by an Israelite author self-authorizing to use and divulge YHWH’s name. Alternately, the hymn may belong to the esoteric circle of nonIsraelite worshippers attached to the deity. The analysis of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29 (Chapter 5) concluded that it probably refers to its metallurgical expression. The author of this song should therefore not be identified as an Israelite, but as a member of the Qenites, the small corporation of Canaanite metalworkers. The biblical testimonies about their closeness to YHWH, combined with the metallurgical background of ancient Yahwism, invite us to identify the Qenites as the small circle of worshippers to whom Psalm 29 belongs. This song was formerly a Canaanite hymn to YHWH with a thorough influence on the Israelite theology, which became integrated into the Psalter. This conclusion has many consequences. First, the reinterpretation of Psalm 29 exposed here challenges the idea of a northern origin of YHWH and his former identity as a storm god. Second, it substantiates the hypothesis assuming the emergence of the Israelite religion from the Qenite Yahwistic traditions. Third, if Psalm 29 is a song first addressing the congregation of metalworkers, it offers an outstanding opportunity to discover the nature of the Qenite doctrine, not through the prism of the Israelite theology, but through a Qenite author addressing to his/her peers.1 Fourth, a comparison between the content of Psalm 29 and the influenced psalms provides an opportunity to appreciate the way the Qenite doctrine influenced the emergence and/or developments of the Israelite religion. The last two points are detailed here. 1. THE APPROACH OF YHWH IN PSALM 29 The nature and cult of the gods of metallurgy remain poorly understood today, due to the esoteric nature of the metallurgical traditions in the Near East and Mediterranean cultures from the past.2 The content of Psalm 29 cast light on these traditions, at least in their Levantine expression. 1 The invitation to stimulate a metallurgical theophany of YHWH supports this conclusion. The description of the gradual stages of transformation of ore in the furnace, throughout the succession of composite verses, confirms that this Qenite song was closely related to metalworking. 2 K. KRISTIANSEN and T. LARSSON 2005, 43-51.

CONCLUSION

195

Metallurgy as a ritual activity Psalm 29 stresses the importance of YHWH’s vocal theophany. It promotes the blowing of air in the furnace to the rank of YHWH’s essential attribute. This aspect of the deity exposed in Psalm 29 corroborates the etymology of the name YHWH as the blower, deduced from the meaning of the root hyw as to blow. It also refers to metallurgy as a craft and a holy activity, a way to worship YHWH and to promote his theophany. The identification of kābȏd-YHWH as thermal radiance supports these conclusions, as well as the description of the encounter between YHWH and Moses in the tent of meeting (Ex 33:7-11).3 Nothing except a furnace at the tent’s entrance (identified through the column of smoke and fire) seems essential in the tent of meeting where the voice of YHWH was heard.4 It means that this vocal theophany is not merely an epiphenomenon of the functioning of the furnace but an essential feature with oracular dimension. This view extends to Psalm 29, where the voice of YHWH is apparently a reference to the sound emitted by the furnace at work. The holiness of the furnace adds another dimension visible in Psalm 29:8. In this verse, the metallurgical activity located in Qadesh (= holiness) is also the source of wealth in this desert area. The production of metal, a material of high commercial value, represents the divine blessing for those worshiping him around the furnace. The issue of this activity is the source of their strength, status, and power. Unlike in the Israelite Yahwism where the divine blessing is a reference to past events or a promise waiting for realization, the blessing in Psalm 29 is consubstantial with the metallurgical activity. It is the issue, the end-product of the ‘worship’ of YHWH around the furnace. The supreme deity The self-definition of the Qenites as sons of gods (v. 1) acknowledges the existence of divine beings other than YHWH. However, out of this indirect mention, the hymn is entirely devoted to YHWH, his theophany, and his relationship with the Qenites. Though the us-group self-defines in verse 11 as ‘his people’, YHWH is not merely an artisan god in Psalm 29. Rather, verse 10 praises his status as the supreme master of the Universe with eternal kingship. 3 The Qenite origin of this earliest shrine may be deduced from the mention of Jethro inaugurating it (Ex 18:12) and instructing Moses in the way it should be used for consulting YHWH in Israel (Ex 18:14-23). See N. AMZALLAG 2019a, 302-303. 4 Ibid., 308-313.

196

CONCLUSION

This view is confirmed by YHWH’s prominent status over all other gods advanced in the biblical references to the divine council (e.g. 1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 82:1; Job 1:6). In Deut 32:8, the deities are all identified as ‘sons of God’, a feature transforming them into emissaries who are each one assigned to a nation: “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God” (LXX version).5 The metalworkers’ appellation as ‘sons of gods’ (Ps 29:1) may therefore refer to their parallel status as mortal emissaries of YHWH, those stimulating his theophany on the earth and perceiving his oracular speech. The wordplay around the verbal form wyšb, in verse 10, suggests that the eternal kingship of YHWH is conditioned by the blowing activity and its metallurgical dimension. Today, this claim remains obscure because our chemical knowledge reduces blowing to the supply of oxygen for boosting the combustion process. However, before the modern era, this blowing was the source of three wonders. • It grants fire the capacity to melt silicates (a feature materialized by YHWH’s volcanic powers). • It enables the production of copper from ore (malachite, azurite). Since ore is sandstone devoid of metallic properties, this operation performed in the furnace becomes an act of creation of matter. So the blowing deity sponsoring it becomes the master of the forces of creation, the Supreme Being. • It is required for recycling old, corroded copper through furnace remelting. Occurring without any loss of matter, this operation becomes the only rejuvenation process experienced by man. It may explain why the god patronizing it becomes the master of the revitalization processes. The exclusivity of metallurgy for the occurrence of these wonders, in antiquity, combined with the centrality of the demiurgic and revitalization processes in ancient religions, promoted YHWH to the unchallenged status of Supreme Being, long before the rise of Israel. The Lord of mabbûl Interpreting the verb yšb as to sit in Ps 29:10a expresses the image of YHWH sitting (= being enthroned) on the mabbûl. In designating YHWH as blowing, the other meaning of yšb refers to the metallurgical dimension 5 The MT version mentions the sons of Israel instead of the sons of God, but this seems today to be a late modification of the original appellation, sons of God, still attested in the Septuagint. See M. HEISER 2001; 2008, 7-10; A. LAATO 2018, 119.

CONCLUSION

197

of mabbûl. Through this wordplay, YHWH becomes in verse 10 the Lord of mabbûl, and this attribute becomes the consequence of his involvement in metallurgy. If mabbûl designates the transition from solid to molten state, the appellation ‘Lord of mabbûl’ integrates the demiurgic-like dimension of copper production. It also praises YHWH for his power to revitalize through the destruction of shape – the temporary return of the solid matter to a liquid state. This association between vitality, liquid state and metallurgy is also visible in Mesopotamia. There, Ea/Enki, the patron of the metalworkers, is also the Lord of the Apsu, the subterranean waters of creation and the source of vitality.6 And here too, the transient destruction of shape mastered by the god was considered essential to the process of healing and recovering vitality.7 The integration of the serpent symbol in the Yahwistic sphere, acknowledged in the official religion of Israel up to the Hezekiah reform (2 Kgs 18:4), corroborates this interpretation.8 In the ancient Near East, this animal was associated with mining, metallurgy, and with the god sponsoring these activities.9 In time, the serpent became closely related to the tree of life.10 It was also associated with vitality, healing and rejuvenation (including the transition to the afterlife).11 Therefore, it is not surprising to see the serpent symbolizing the pre-created chaotic state, itself generally identified with the liquid element.12 In the same cultures, the serpent symbol was also attached to the devouring fire, whose combination with the liquid element recalls a remelting process.13 6

H. GALTER 2015, 67. Ea/Enki in Mesopotamia is granted all the characteristics of the civilizing hero, a feature enlarging his domain of specialty to all the crafts, magic and wisdom. See V. HUROWITZ 2013. 7 K. DICKSON 2005, 499. 8 N. AMZALLAG 2016c, 235-236. 9 Already in the nineteenth century, Ann Walbank BUCKLAND (1875, 60-61) concluded that “A large number of the old-serpent myths represent this reptile as associated in some way with precious metals and precious stones; the serpent constantly appears as the guardian of hidden treasures and the revealing of precious knowledge; whilst the deities, kings and heroes who are either symbolized by the serpent, or supposed to partake its nature, are commonly described as the pioneers of civilization and the instructors of mankind in the arts of agriculture and mining.” 10 W. LAMBERT 1985. Also, in Egypt, the secrets of vitality are mastered by Ptah, the smith god providing the vitalizing ka (the source of their immortality) to all the other deities via the cosmic serpent Mehen. See P. PICCIONE 1990. 11 E. JAMES 1968; L. WILSON 2001, 183-194. 12 In the Ancient Near East, Apopis (Egypt), Tanin (Canaan) and Tiamat (Mesopotamia) are giant snakes identified with the primeval ocean. 13 The frequent representation of the cosmic serpent dwelling in water as a dragon confirms the frequent mixing of these two contrasting elements through the serpent symbol. For example, Apophis, the Egyptian cosmic serpent dwelling in the primeval ocean is approached as a ‘shapeless serpent of fire’. See J. BORGHOUTS 1974; L. MORENZ 2004.

198

CONCLUSION

The combination of symbols attached to the serpent corroborates the approach of furnace remelting as the archetype of the process of rejuvenation. It also makes the temporary return to the liquid, pre-organized state a paradoxical prerequisite for preserving the vitality of the Universe. It may explain why the appellation of Lord of mabbûl, though its connotation of destruction, is a positive attribute of YHWH in Psalm 29. In this psalm, YHWH destroys forests (vv. 5, 9), and he causes the highest mountains (= the symbols of stability) to melt. These effects are not the expressions of any divine anger against the elements or the gods representing them. Rather, they are the very issue of his blowing activity and its vitalizing consequences. The man-god relationship The content of Psalm 29 unveils an unusual man-god relationship. There is no mention of offerings or sacrifices, and this hymn ignores temples, ceremonials and festivals. Also absent are thanksgivings for divine salvation, calls for protection, deliverance or pleas for wealth and blessing. No one in Psalm 29 supplicates YHWH to exert his justice on the earth. The metallurgical interpretation casts light on these singularities. In Psalm 29, metallurgy is approached as a craft and holy activity. Invited to ‘ascribe’ kābȏd to YHWH (verse 1), the metalworkers are the agent conditioning the theophany. Though the god is the unchallenged master of the Universe in verse 10, the human initiative (the practice of metallurgy) conditions his presence on the earth. This issue has two consequences. First, YHWH is a distant deity who does not intervene on the earth, clarifying why no call for YHWH’s intervention emanates from Psalm 29. Second, this hymn describes metallurgy as an activity involving both YHWH blowing on the fire and the metalworkers preparing the furnace and working around it. This situation generates cooperation between YHWH and the Qenites, rather than the craftsmen’s submission to their patron god. This cooperation likely grants the Qenites the status of ‘people of YHWH’, the homolog among mortals of the divine emissaries. 2. YHWH IN THE INFLUENCED PSALMS The Israelites introduced substantial novelties in the cult of YHWH regarding the approach identified here in Psalm 29. They promoted a public worship involving festivals and sacrifices performed in holy areas. Furthermore, YHWH became in ancient Israel the receiver of the supplications

CONCLUSION

199

and the source of blessings. These changes aim for an approach emphasizing YHWH’s autonomous dimension at the expense of his collaboration with mortals around the furnace. Beyond these features, comparing the content of the five influenced psalms reveals a diversity of positions regarding the theology expressed in Psalm 29. Volcanism Volcanism remains a secondary phenomenon in Psalm 29, introduced in verse 6 for referring to YHWH’s power to melt stone. Though the five influenced psalms ignore metallurgy, three of them (Psalms 46, 97, 114) preserve traces of this background through a special emphasis on volcanism. It is an essential attribute in Psalms 97 and 114, and a modus operandi in Psalm 46. Additionally, the radiant dimension of kābȏd is preserved in Psalm 97 through its integration within the volcanic theophany (v. 6b). Unlike in Psalm 29, the extensive use of the volcanic imagery privileges an autonomous mode of divine revelation and action, at the expense of the man-god cooperation around the furnace. It enables the integration of the novelties promoted by the Israelite theology. Musical theophany Despite the centrality of the voice of YHWH in Psalm 29, this hymn does not explicitly promote musical worship as the way to reveal the deity or to stimulate his theophany. The act of singing is no longer the main task in Psalm 114. Even in Psalm 46, a song devoted to the congregation of Qorahite singers, song-poetry is mainly the means for diffusing a message. The situation differs in Psalms 96–98. Like Psalm 29 inviting the metalworkers to smelt ore in a furnace, Psalm 96 calls peoples to perform hymns. The invitation to ascribe kābȏd to YHWH, initially formulated in Psalm 29 in a metallurgical context, now refers to musical performances in Psalm 96. It suggests that the musical worship stimulates YHWH’s theophany in Psalm 96 like metallurgy does in Psalm 29. The same emphasis exists in Psalm 98, where music infers YHWH’s theophany to human initiative. By this means, the subtle man-god relationship exposed in Psalm 29 becomes preserved, at least partly, out of any metallurgical experience. Public worship The extension to a broad audience of the esoteric knowledge of YHWH is apparently a fundament of the Israelite theology. Though the five influenced songs all display Israelite markers, they do not express the same level

200

CONCLUSION

of divulgation of the former esoteric traditions. For example, Psalm 114 claims that the god now dwells among the Israelites, but the name ‘YHWH’ is not used in this song. It is also absent from Psalm 46, where the poet, in the name of the Qorahite congregation, addresses a broad audience. For the singers who here self-identify as YHWH’s emissaries, promoting the ‘god of Jacob’ among the nations is not conditioned by the revelation of his genuine name and identity. This attitude differs in Psalms 96–98, where the poets and singers are invited to reveal YHWH’s deeds and his genuine name through the spread of his musical worship. This divulgation finds a support in Psalm 97, where YHWH self-reveals to the nations through volcanism, in parallel with the Israelites revealing his secrets through the musical worship. Israel and the nations The status of Israel differs in the five influenced psalms. The transfer of divine residence to the land of Israel, in Psalm 114, indicates that the public worship concerns the Israelites becoming the new people of YHWH. Psalm 46 combines Jerusalem’s centrality with a message addressed to all the nations concerning the primacy of the ‘god of Jacob’. Unlike Psalm 114, this song refers to YHWH’s knowledge outside of Israel (v. 11), but it does not explicitly invite peoples to follow the Israelites in their public cult. The situation differs in Psalms 96–98, where Israel is the first step in a worldwide diffusion of the public cult of YHWH. Stabilized world versus mabbûl The birth of Israel, in Psalm 114, coincides with a remelting of the ancient world, materialized by creation-like events (the fleeing of the sea and volcanism). Consequently, YHWH was probably approached as the Lord of mabbûl at the time of the creation of Israel. The final verse praising YHWH’s power to liquefy silicates suggests that this power of remelting the creation did not cease with the birth of Israel. YHWH is the Lord of mabbûl also in Psalm 46, a hymn praising his destructive powers (vv. 3, 4, 9). This song also introduces an island of stability, Jerusalem, in the turbulent Universe. If Jerusalem in Psalm 46 represents the nucleus from which the public worship of YHWH spreads worldwide, this song announces a potential expansion to the whole world of this island of stability. And in this case, YHWH is not expected to remain the Lord of mabbûl forever. But this conclusion remains hypothetical.

CONCLUSION

201

Psalm 96 expresses a deep theological change compared to Psalm 29, transforming YHWH into the god promoting stability of the Universe (v. 10). In parallel, the blindly destructive dimension of YHWH’s volcanic theophany is minimized in Psalm 97. It is replaced by the revelation of his kābȏd and powers, like in the Sinai theophany. Psalm 98 also contains no trace of future destruction. Unlike Psalms 46 and 114, Psalms 96– 98 reject the approach of YHWH as Lord of mabbûl after the birth of Israel. The divine targeted intervention In Psalm 114, the birth of Israel does not explicitly result from targeted actions of the divine. Rather, the miracles accompanying this issue look like spontaneous reactions of the natural elements to the sudden theophany of YHWH.14 It suggests that YHWH, though being involved in the birth of Israel, does not explicitly intervene in this song. The situation differs in Psalms 96–98. The deeds (v. 3) associated with the birth of Israel become in Psalm 96 the fundaments of the new theology metamorphosing YHWH into the Lord of Justice protecting the stabilized Universe against its gradual corruption (v. 10). In Psalm 98, YHWH’s transformation into the Lord of Justice is the ‘good news’ the poets and singers are invited to spread on the earth. Here again, the Exodus is the event revealing the coming of this new era. The same trend appears in Psalm 97, which recruits the volcanic theophany and mode of action to reflect the exercise of divine justice (vv. 2, 8). The theme of YHWH now ruling the earth even becomes the doxology uttered in the epode (verses 10-12). Psalm 46 exposes an intermediate position between these two approaches. In this psalm, YHWH is the Lord of mabbûl, but his volcanic theophany interferes with historical events. Due to its blind effect, volcanism interrupts wars not by providing victory to the righteous side, as expected for a Lord of Justice, but by destroying the fighting armies. It is, therefore, a semi-targeted mode of divine action on the earth. The status of the secondary deities The secondary deities and their worship are ignored in Psalms 46 and 114, the two Israelite songs displaying a relative continuity with Psalm 29 14 Concerning Psalm 114, Rebecca WATSON (2005, 71) concludes: “God does not act to intimidate or subdue nature; rather, it independently responds in fear to his presence.”

202

CONCLUSION

concerning their approach of the divine. Alternately, this theme becomes of importance in Psalms 96–98. There, the peoples are invited to reject the worship of all the deities toward that of YHWH (Pss 96:5; 97:7). In parallel, the secondary deities become in Psalm 97:7 invited to join the mortals in their worship of YHWH.15 This trend is probably a consequence of YHWH’s transformation into the ‘Lord of Justice’ in these songs. The targeted intervention of YHWH on the earth deprives all the secondary deities of their traditional function of intermediaries and their consecutive worship by humankind. 3. THE OPPOSITION TO THE THEOLOGY OF PSALM 29 A comparison of the message of the five influenced psalms splits them into two clusters. In the first one, comprising Psalms 46 and 114, YHWH remains the Lord of mabbûl, and his worship, though public, preserves an esoteric component. The metallurgical attributes of the deity are preserved, too. These characteristics disappear in Psalms 96–98, the other cluster of influenced psalms in which Psalm 29 is referred to for rejecting its fundaments. This attitude is the consequence of the miraculous birth of Israel, aiming for YHWH intervening on the earth and transforming him into the Lord of Justice, the warrant of the stability of the created universe and its blessing. This metamorphosis is accompanied by the spread of the public worship of YHWH and the eradication of the cult of all secondary deities. These contrasting positions reveal a multiplicity of approaches of the pre-Israelite Yahwism in ancient Israel. This diversity does not result, however, from a gradual erosion of the Qenite influence on the Israelite religion throughout the centuries. Rather, the answer of Malachi to those Israelites acknowledging the primacy of the Edom religious leadership highlights the vivid memory of the roots of the Israelite religion, even during the Persian period: 1 The

oracle of the word of YHWH to Israel by Malachi. 2 I have loved you, says YHWH. But you say: How have you loved us? Is not Esau Jacob’s brother? YHWH declares: Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert. (Mal 1:1-3)

15 The call to mountains, the sea, and other natural elements to participate in this musical worship (Pss 96:11-12; Ps 98:7-8), might express an invitation addressed to the family of gods representing them.

CONCLUSION

203

Consequently, the theology of Psalms 96–98 does probably not reflect any gradual move away of the Israelites from the beliefs exposed in Psalm 29. Rather, it apparently betrays a conflict between two theological views at the time these influenced psalms were composed. The detestation of Edom is a classical motif in biblical prophecy.16 In Isaiah 34-35 and Ezekiel 35-36, the definite redemption of Israel even becomes conditioned by the definite desolation of the nation of Edom.17 But contrasting views also existed. The Book of Job, for example, articulates around the integrity and piety of an Edomite hero. The integration of Ezrahites singers, of Edomite origin, in the Jerusalem temple at the Persian period, concurs. And the conflict this initiative aroused in Yehud confirms the divergence of opinions concerning the Qenite/Edomite ascendency on the Israelite religion.18 This quarrel began before the collapse of the Judean kingdom. The Chronicler reports that King Amaziah introduced in the Jerusalem temple the ritual implements of the Edomites, following his victorious military campaign against this nation (2 Chr 25:13-15, 20). This initiative probably reflects the belief of an Edomite ascendant on the Israelite worship of YHWH. And the prophet condemning Amaziah for his position (2 Chr 25:15-16) expresses the view clashing with this opinion.19 In light of these indications, the opposition to the theology of Psalm 29, expressed in Psalms 96–98, reflects an affiliation of their authors to the circle of Israelite prophets detaching the Israelite religion from its Qenite background, and casting an alternative theology.

16 B. DICOU 1994, 20-115; 182-197; C. MATHEWS 1995, 69-119. Elie ASSIS (2016, 74-91) rightly notices that the presumed participation of Edom to the destruction of Jerusalem, in 586 BC, cannot justify the abyssal hate of Edom expressed in most prophetic books. 17 E. ASSIS 2016, 107-130. Concerning the prophecy against Edom in Isaiah 34, Elie ASSIS concludes (2016, 130) that ... “the main theme is not Edom’s sin against Israel and ensuing punishment but the fundamental notion that Israel’s redemption is necessarily preceded by Edom’s destruction. This prophecy focuses on Israel’s redemption; Edom’s punishment is a preliminary stage of this redemption. Like Ezek 35-36, the prophecy of Edom’s downfall is not part of the prophet’s series of oracles against the nations, but rather is an integral part of the description of Israel’s salvation.” Göran EIDEVALL (2009, 156) even compares the demonization of Edom in Isaiah 34 with Sodom and its destruction in Genesis 19. Claire MATHEWS (1995, 120-139 and 161-165) bonds the views exposed in Isaiah 34-35 with the further prophecies in Isaiah 40–66. 18 N. AMZALLAG 2015b. 19 The opposition of the prophets to Nehemiah (Neh 6:14), the promoter of the integration of the Ezrahite singers in the Jerusalem temple, confirms this antagonism. See N. AMZALLAG 2015b, 77-96.

204

CONCLUSION

3.1. Psalms 96-98 and the Book of Isaiah The Book of Isaiah displays a special affinity with many songs of the Psalter.20 Whereas Psalms 46 and 114 do not show any special relationship with this opus, scholars have for a long time acknowledged the affinities between Psalms 96, 97 and 98 and this prophetic book, and especially with its second part (Isaiah 40–55).21 This finding, combined with their probable composition at the Persian period, suggests that the messages of both interact.22 Literary affinities Many parallels exist between the content of Psalm 96 and Isaiah (Isa 42:10-12; 43:16-19; 44:23; 49:13; 59:15-20).23 They include the vehement rejection of the cult of secondary deities in Psalm 96 and Isaiah (e.g. Isa 40:19-22; 42:16-17; 46:6-7), both characterized by a similar ‘monotheistic stance’.24 Also indicative is the rare term ‫ אלילים‬designating these idols, encountered both in Isaiah (Isa 2:8, 18; 19:3) and in Ps 96:5. Also found in Ps 97:7, this term integrates the many parallels between Psalm 97 and Isaiah (e.g. Isa 40:5, 9-10; 42:10-12, 17, 25 and 52:7-10).25 Especially relevant is the volcanic theophany exposed both in Psalm 97 and in Isaiah (Isa 40:3-5; 42:14-15). Parallels also exist between Psalm 98 and Isaiah (Isa 42:10; 44:23; 49:13; 52:9-12).26 Among this triplet of influenced psalms, the parallel with the language of Isaiah culminates in Psalm 98. The similar motif of YHWH’s holy arm 20 Among the 74 inner-biblical allusions identified in Isaiah 40–55, Risto NURMELA (2006, 80) found 28 interferences between these chapters and the Psalter, followed by fourteen interferences with Isaiah 1-39; thirteen with the Pentateuch, four with Isaiah 56–66, and three or less with the other books. Examining the interference of Isaiah 56–66 with the other biblical sources, Risto NURMELA (2006, 139) identifies the Psalter, again, as the most interacting source, even before Isaiah 1–39 and Isaiah 40–55. 21 A. MAILLOT and A. LELIÈVRE 1966, 275, 280, 285; E. BEAUCAMP 1979, 122, 130131; E. DAVIS 1992, 172; J. MAYS 1994, 313; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 465, 471, 480-481; R. WATSON 2005, 197; J. GOLDINGAY 2007, 964. Evode BEAUCAMP (1979, 122) considers Psalms 96–98 as a whole opus conditioned in its composition by Isa 42:10-12; 44:23; 49:19; 52:9-10; 55:12-13. 22 E. DAVIS 1992, 172; B. GOSSE 1999; E. GERSTENBERGER 2001, 187; F. HOSSFELD and E. ZENGER 2005, 471; E. ORTLUND 2010; D. LEWICKI 2015, 210. Contra, David HOWARD (1997) suggests a pre-exilic origin of Psalms 96–98. 23 P. WILLEY 1997, 121; B. GOSSE 1999; R. NURMELA 2006, 37. 24 R. WATSON 2005, 197. A similar position is encountered in Isa 34:4-5, where YHWH eliminates the celestial cohort. 25 J. MAYS 1994, 311; P. WILLEY 1997, 121; R. NURMELA 2006, 25. 26 R. NURMELA 2006, 37, 73. Patricia WILLEY (1997, 121) found that “In Isa 52:10 an extensive quotation of Ps 98:3 appears, with references preceding it to verses 1,2,4 and 8.”

CONCLUSION

205

bringing justice and salvation exists in Ps 98:1 and in Isaiah (Isa 52:10; 59:16; 63:5). The pairing of righteousness (‫ )צדקה‬and salvation (‫)ישועה‬ is also a characteristic of both (Ps 98:2; Isa 51:6,8; 56:1; 59:17), as well as the musical expression of this salvation (Ps 98:4-5,8; Isa 51:3; 52:9; 55:12) and the ecstatic explosion of euphoria (Ps 98:4; Isa 44:23; 49:13; 52:9; 54:1; 55:12).27 Theological parallels The challenge of the theology of Psalm 29 in Psalms 96–98 finds a parallel in the rejection of the ‘old’ theology in Isaiah: “Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it?” (Isa 43:18-19a). Like in this triplet of influenced psalms, the victory of YHWH over Rahab (Isa 51:9-10), the marine monster identified with the forces of chaos, transforms the god of Israel into the master of the stabilized universe. This change is similarly accompanied by YHWH’s explicit involvement in History and his transformation into the Lord of Justice (Isa 29:20; Isa 40:1011; 42:4,6; 59:16,18).28 Like in Psalms 96–98, the prophet invites the whole earth to celebrate the event (Isa 23:18; 49:6-7; 56:6-7; 59:19-20), especially through the musical performances in which YHWH is openly worshipped (Isa 24:15; 42:10-13; 44:23-24). Even the earth is invited to participate in this praise and jubilation (Isa 24:3-6). To these optimistic perspectives, we may add a parallel between Psalms 96–98 denying legitimacy to the theology of Psalm 29, and the Book of Isaiah demystifying the metalworkers and their traditions. Like in Ps 97:7, the craftsmen are discredited in Isaiah for producing the idols (Isa 41:6-7; 4: 44:9-11).29 Their prestige and closeness to YHWH is challenged too (see Isa 44:11; 54:16).30 The Book of Isaiah even scorns their theology assuming the non-intervention of YHWH on the earth (Isa 33:1315).31 The virulent attack against Edom, in Isaiah 34 and Isa 63:1-6, probably represents an expression of this trend.32 27

These parallels are listed by Rebecca WATSON 2005, 201. For Patricia WILLEY (1997, 123), “Second Isaiah asserts unyieldingly YHWH’s control over the events of history, even the disastrous ones.” 29 Concerning the metalworkers mentioned in these sources, see A. FITZGERALD 1989. 30 N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2018a. 31 N. AMZALLAG and S. YONA 2019. 32 The relationship between these two sections of Isaiah is exposed by Claire MATHEWS (1995, 162-167). 28

206

CONCLUSION

3.2. The new Chaoskampf perspective The stability of the world accompanying the transformation of YHWH into the ‘Lord of Justice’, in Psalms 96–98, challenges his approach as the Lord of mabbûl advanced in Psalm 29. As shown here, this change transforms YHWH into the warrant of the stabilized universe, like the storm god after his victory over the forces of chaos. Though the Chaoskampf motif is not expressed in Psalms 96–98, it might belong to the set of premises supporting this metamorphosis of YHWH. This suggestion emanates from the parallel theology formulated in Psalms 96–98 and Isaiah, combined with the explicit reference to YHWH’s victory over the mythic monster in Isa 51:9-10. According to Tyggrve Mettinger, the archaic motif of the victory over the forces of chaos is an essential element of the theology developed in Isaiah 40–55.33 Further scholars concur and signal that the extensive presence of the Chaoskampf motif in Isaiah contrasts with its absence in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.34 For a long time, the Chaoskampf motif in Isaiah was interpreted as a post-exilic extension of an archaic theme of the old Israelite theology. Sigmund Mowinckel, the promoter of this view, identified the parallels existing between the Chaoskampf motif in Deutero-Isaiah and in songs he defined as ‘enthronement psalms’ (including Psalms 96–98) performed in the autumn New Year festival of the Israelites.35 He assumed that this festival celebrated YHWH’s storm-god identity and commemorated the mythic combat leading to his victory over the forces of chaos. Mowinckel acknowledged the inability to confidently date some of the ‘enthronement psalms’ to the pre-exilic period.36 However, he considered the Israelite agrarian lifestyle a sufficient evidence for assuming similar religious fundaments in Ugarit and in the Southern Levant.37 The other essential 33 For Tyggrve METTINGER (1997, 150), “The idea of Divine Warrior, who vindicates his kingship in a new victory over the forces of chaos, is something that gives a profound unity to the whole Book of Isaiah 40-55. From the point of view of contents 51:9-52:12 with the proclamation of YHWH as king in 52:7 constitutes the summit.” 34 C. CROUCH 2011, 265-271. Eric ORTLUND (2010, 2-3) claims the centrality of the Chaoskampf motif in the whole Book of Isaiah, and he identifies it in Isa 2:10-21; 13:1-3; 24:21-23; 26:20-27:1; 29:1-8; 30:23-33; 35:1-10; 40:1-11; 42:14-17; 51:7-10; 59:1519; 66:15-17. This author also identified allusions to this motif in Isa 17:12-14; 31:4-9; 33:1-16; 50:1-3; 63: 1-6; 63:19-64:2. 35 Sigmund MOWINCKEL (1967, 1:118) assumes that the Chaoskampf motif in Isaiah 40-55 “ ... is a witness to the existence of the enthronement psalm type in pre-exilic days. And should this type of psalm presuppose a corresponding cultic ‘enthronement festival’, then such a festival must have existed in pre-exilic times.” 36 S. MOWINCKEL 1967, 1:124. 37 Ibid., 125.

CONCLUSION

207

argument supporting this premise became the expression of the Chaoskampf motif in the old biblical poetry, including in Psalm 29. The present study shows how both assumptions are unfounded. With its metallurgical and volcanic essential attributes and modus operandi, the figure of YHWH does not resemble the storm gods of the ancient Near East and does not display any continuity with them. Furthermore, the Chaoskampf interpretation is mistakenly identified in many ancient pieces of biblical poetry, including in Psalm 29. Consequently, the Chaoskampf motif in Isaiah is probably not the mere resurgence of an archaic theme of the Israelite religion, referring to the mythic time of creation. The reference to this mythic theme in Isaiah has rather another origin and purpose. The three psalms with an explicit reference to the Chaoskampf motif, Psalms 74, 77, and 89, are all post-exilic compositions. Furthermore, they all display affinities with the Book of Isaiah in their language, motifs and theology.38 In all of them, the Chaoskampf motif expresses a cosmologic dimension absent of the Baal myth but explicit in the Enuma Elish. Scholars have therefore identified a Babylonian influence in these opuses, rather than the resurgence of an archaic Canaanite theme in the exilic or post-exilic Israelite theology.39 By extension, the insertion of the Chaoskampf motif in the Israelite theology, after the monarchic period, may denote a Babylonian influence consecutive to the exile, and its reinterpretation by some poets and theologians.40 If so, the assumption of the centrality of the Chaoskampf motif in the early biblical poetry may merely be a misleading retrojection of this Babylonian influence.41 Unlike in the Mesopotamian or North Levantine mythology, the motif of the mythic combat against the cosmic monster is not advanced in 38 J. DAY 1985, 22, 28; P. WILLEY 1997, 146; R. NURMELA 2006, 70; J. HUTTON 2007, 278, 282, 284. 39 R. CLIFFORD 1985, 513; P. WILLEY 1997, 147. 40 Joseph BLENKINSOPP (1990, 7, 17-19) and Brooks SCHRAMM (1995, 179-181) identified the authors of the third part of Isaiah (chapters 56-66) as a small circle of theologians originating from the Babylonian Diaspora or influenced by it. In light of the present considerations, this conclusion should be extended to further parts of the Book of Isaiah. 41 Theodore GASTER already suggested for a long time that the Chaoskampf motif might have been introduced in the Israelite religion through the Babylonian exile. Examining the main sources relating the Chaoskampf motif in the Bible, he noticed (1977 [1950], 142) that “Without exception, the passages in question are of exilic or post-exilic date – the product of a general archaeological revival which swept the whole of the Near East in the sixthfifth centuries B.C. and, more specifically, of an attempt to recapture the allegiance of the returning and assimilated Jewish exiles by representing their ancestral religion in terms of the ‘heathen’ mythologies with which they had become acquainted.”

208

CONCLUSION

Isaiah to praise YHWH’s superiority over all the other gods. Rather, the Chaoskampf becomes the archetype for a cosmic change marked by the divine intervention in History. In Isaiah, like in the Chaoskampf psalms and in Psalms 96–98, the Exodus becomes the archetype of this metamorphosis and its consequences, the advent of an era of deliverance and justice on the earth.42 In Isa 27:1, the Chaoskampf motif expresses an eschatological dimension, in conditioning the future redemption of the whole earth by the ultimate victory against the forces of chaos: “In that day YHWH with his hard and great and strong sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will slay the dragon that is in the sea.” 4. THE STORM RE-INTERPRETATION

OF

PSALM 29

According to the present interpretation, Psalm 29 was not originally conceived as a hymn of praise of the storm god, his victory over the mythic monster and his power over storm and rain. Furthermore, an examination of the influenced psalms indicates that the content of Psalm 29 was correctly interpreted up to the Persian period, including by the opponents of the theology underlying it. The design of the influenced psalms for complex antiphony, as well as their explicit reference to the composite text of Psalm 29, reveal that the tradition of complex antiphony survived up to the Persian period too. Both evanesced, however, in the Hellenistic period. The earliest interpretation of Psalm 29 in the storm context belongs to the Hellenistic period, as revealed by a gloss added to the Septuagint translation of the first verse, showing that this song integrates the Sukkot liturgy at this time.43 Since this autumn festival opens the rain season, we may guess from this gloss that Psalm 29 was included in the liturgy opening the rain season, especially the Sukkot ceremonials asking for abundant rain. In modern scholarship, this liturgical use of Psalm 29 in the Hellenistic period became an argument supporting the storm-god identity of YHWH in this hymn, and its ancientness in the religion of Israel. By this means, investigators made the assumption of a continuous and gradual evolution of the ancient Israelite traditions and beliefs up to the Hellenistic period. But this premise is not necessarily correct, as the metallurgical identity of ancient Yahwism was ignored in the Hellenistic period. 42 43

T. METTINGER 1997, 149; J. HUTTON 2007, 274, 281-282. The Talmud (b. Rosh hashana 30b; Sukkah 55a) corroborates this testimony.

CONCLUSION

209

For example, the link between the Sukkot festival and ceremonials for abundant rain is not necessarily an ancient feature in the Israelite religion. The source acknowledging it, Zech 14:16-19, only mentions such a reality. The idea that novelties were introduced in the Sukkot festival, from the Persian period, is supported by two indications. The first is the replacement of the ancient Israelite calendar renewing the year in Passover (spring) by a calendar of Babylonian origin organizing the New Year festival around the ceremonial of Sukkot. The second is the testimony, in Nehemiah, of a reformation of the Sukkot festival introduced by those people coming back from Exile: “And all the assembly of those who had returned from the captivity made booths and lived in the booths, for from the days of Jeshua the son of Nun to that day the people of Israel had not done so. And there was very great rejoicing” (Neh 8:17). These elements suggest that the first extensive integration of the storm god identity (including the Chaoskampf mythic motif) within the theology of Israel occurred from the Persian period. Consequently, unlike generally assumed today, the religion of ancient Israel is probably not a system of beliefs rooted in the agricultural rites of fertility and storm theophany. It rather looks like a broad extension of the Bronze Age traditions of the Canaanite metalworkers. Psalm 29 is one of the rare documents in the Bible that enable us to examine the nature and content of these traditions independently of the way the Israelites approached and transformed them. It also helps us to understand how the Israelites adapted these beliefs to their own purposes. The Book of Exodus apparently organizes around this question, and the content of Psalms 46 and 114, by their association with Psalm 29, reveal other aspects of this metamorphosis. It is likely that other modifications, including the agrarian rites and the theophany of the storm god reigning in Canaan in the Late Bronze Age, found an expression in the ancient Israelite religion. But the present study reveals that their importance has been overestimated in biblical research. Instead of constituting a reminiscence of the storm god’s local archaic traditions, the Chaoskampf motif found the Bible denotes an influence of the Babylonian mythology and religion, adapted to the Israelite theology and reinterpreted in a historical and even eschatological perspective. This trend contributed to transform YHWH from the Lord of mabbûl into the Lord of Justice who warrants the stability of the organized universe. The present study suggests the overwhelming importance, in this metamorphosis, of the authors involved in the redaction of the Book of Isaiah.

210

CONCLUSION

It also denotes the influence of this small group in the composition of many songs from the Psalter. Both realities converge in promoting a new approach to YHWH disconnecting the Israelite theology from its Qenite roots. It is why the debunking of the Qenite traditions, observable both in Isaiah and in Psalms 96–98, might be a factor of importance in the gradual loss of the Israelite religion’s metallurgical background. The amnesia becomes clearly visible at the Hellenistic period, through the mistranslation in the Septuagint of the Hebrew metallurgical lexicon attached to the figure of YHWH.44 From this time onwards, the memory of the metallurgical background of ancient Yahwism disappeared, and with it, the ability to understand the content of many pieces of ancient biblical poetry. Unavoidly, the god of Israel became gradually approached like the other great deities of the ancient Near East.

44

N. AMZALLAG, in press (b).

ABBREVIATIONS AAAS ABD ABR AJA AJBI AJSLL ANES AntOr ArchO ATS BA BASOR BBR BDB BEM BibInt BICS BIOSC BN BS BSNAF BSOAS BuK BW CBQ CBW CFHG CW DBSJ DCH DDD DRS HAC

Annales Archéologiques Arabes Syriennes The Anchor Bible Dictionary, David N. FREEDMAN (ed.), New York, Doubleday, 1992 Australian Biblical Review Americal Journal of Archaeology Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures Ancient Near Eastern Studies Antiguo Oriente Archiv Orientalni Acta Theologica Supplementum Biblical Archaeologist Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Bulletin for Biblical Research A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Francis BROWN, S.R. DRIVER and Charles A. BRIGGS, Boston and New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1907. Bulletin of the Egyptian Museum Biblical Interpretation Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies Biblische Notizen Bibliotheca Sacra Bulletin de la Société Nationale des Antiquaires de France Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies Bible und Kirche Biblical World Catholic Biblical Quarterly Conversations with the Biblical World Comité Français d’Histoire de la Géologie Classical World Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, David J.A. CLINES (ed.), Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1993-2011 Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, Karel VAN DER TOORN, Bob BECKING and Pieter W. VAN DER HORST (eds.), Leiden, Brill, 19992 Dictionnaire des racines sémitiques ou attestées dans les langues sémitiques, David COHEN (ed.), Paris, Mouton / Leuven, Peters, 19702012 Hebrew Annual College

212 HALOT HAR HeyJ HR HS HTR IEJ IGR JAIGBI JANER JANES JAOS JARCE JAS JBL JEA JETS JHS JNES JNSL JQR JRT JSem JSOT JSS JTS LASBFJ NEA NID NIDOTTE OTE OTWSA PEQ PGLMBS RA RB RC RHPR RHR RSR RT SDB SJOT

ABBREVIATIONS

The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Ludwig KOEHLER and Walter BAUMGARTNER, Leiden, Brill, 2001 (1953) Hebrew Annual Review Heythrop Journal History of Religions Hebrew Studies Harvard Theological Review Israel Exploration Journal International Geology Review Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt Journal of Archaeological Science Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Egyptian Archaeology Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Journal of the Near Eastern Studies Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Religious Thought Journal for Semitics Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of Theological Studies Liber Annuus Studii Biblici Franciscani Jerusalem Near Eastern Archaeology The New Interpreter’s Dictionary, Katharine D. SAKENFELD (ed.), Nashville, Abidgon Press, 2009 The New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, Willem A. VAN GEMEREN (ed.), Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1997 Old Testament Essays Oud Testamentiese Werkgemeenskap in Suid-Afrika Palestine Exploration Quarterly Proceedings of the Great Lakes and Midwest Bible Societies Revue Archéologique Revue Biblique Religion Compass Revue d’Histoire et de Philosophe Religieuse Revue de l’Histoire des Religions Revue des Sciences Religieuses Religion and Theology Supplément au Dictionnaire de la Bible, Henri CAZELLES, Louis PIROT and André ROBERT (eds.), Paris, Letouzey, 1926-1996 Scandinavian Journal for the Old Testament

ABBREVIATIONS

TA TBT TDOT TSLL TynBul TS TZ UF VT ZAW WTJ

213

Tel Aviv The Bible Translator Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, G. Johannes BOTTERWECK, Helmer RINGGREN and Heinz-Josef FABRY (eds.), Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1974-2006 (1970-1995, German original edition) Texas Studies in Literature and Language Tyndale Bulletin Theological Studies Theologische Zeitschrift Ugaritische Forschungen Vetus Testamentum Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentlische Wissenschaft Westminster Theological Journal

BIBLIOGRAPHY ABRAMSKY 1953 - Samuel ABRAMSKY, “The Qenites”, Eretz-Israel 3 (1953) 116124 (Heb.). AHRONI 1982 - Reuben AHRONI, “The Unity of Psalm 23”, HAR 6 (1982) 21-34. AL-AYEDI 2007 - Abdul E.R. AL-AYEDI, “The Cult of Hathor as Represented on the Stelae at Serabit el Kadim”, BEM 4 (2007) 23-26. ALBERTZ 1994 - Rainer ALBERTZ, A History of the Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period. Vol. 1 From the Beginnings to the End of the Exile, London, SCM, 1994. ALBRIGHT 1956 - William F. ALBRIGHT Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1956. ALBRIGHT 1963 - William F. ALBRIGHT, “Jethro, Hobab and Reuel in Early Hebrew Tradition”, CBQ 25 (1963) 1-11. ALBRIGHT 1968 - William F. ALBRIGHT, YHWH and the Gods of Canaan: A Historical Analysis of two Contrasting Faiths, Garden City, Doubleday, 19685. ALDEN 1974 - Robert L. ALDEN, “Chiastic Psalms: A Study in the Mechanics of Semitic Poetry in Psalms 1-50”, JETS 17 (1974) 11-28. ALDEN 1976 - Robert L. ALDEN, “Chiastic Psalms (II): A Study in the Mechanics of Semitic Poetry in Psalms 51-100”, JETS 19 (1976) 191-200. ALDEN 1978 - Robert L. ALDEN, “Chiastic Psalms (III): A Study in the Mechanics of Semitic Poetry in Psalms 101-150”, JETS 21(1978) 199-210. ALETTI and TRUBLET 1983 - Jean-Noel ALETTI and Jacques TRUBLET, Approche poétique et théologique des Psaumes: Analyse et méthodes, Paris, Cerf, 1983. ALLEN 2001 - Leslie C. ALLEN, Psalms 101-150, Nashville, Thomas Nelson, 2001. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1972 - Luis ALONSO-SCHÖKEL, “Poésie hébraïque”, in SDB 8, 1972, 47-90. ALONSO-SCHÖKEL 1981 - Luis ALONSO-SCHÖKEL, Treinta salmos: poesia y oracion, Madrid, Christiandad, 1981. ALTER 1984. Robert ALTER, The Art of Biblical Poetry, New York, Basic Books, 1984. AMZALLAG 2009 - Nissim AMZALLAG. 2009. “YHWH: the Canaanite god of metallurgy?” JSOT 33 (2009) 387-404. AMZALLAG 2013 - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Copper Metallurgy: A Hidden Fundament of the Theology of Ancient Israel?” SJOT 27 (2013) 155-180. AMZALLAG 2014a - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Some Implication of the Volcanic Theophany of YHWH on his Primeval Identity”, AntOr 12 (2014) 11-38. AMZALLAG 2014b - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Meaning of todah in the Title of Psalm 100”, ZAW 126 (2014) 535-545. AMZALLAG 2014c - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Cosmopolitan Nature of the Korahite Musical Congregation - Evidence from Psalm 87”, VT 64 (2014) 361-381. AMZALLAG 2014d - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Musical Mode of Writing of the Psalms and its Significance”, OTE 27 (2014)17-40.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

215

AMZALLAG 2015a - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Cryptic Theme of Psalm 46 and the Theology of the Korahites”, RB 122 (2015) 26-45. AMZALLAG 2015b - Nissim AMZALLAG, Esau in Jerusalem – The Rise of a Seirite Religious Elite in Zion at the Persian Period, Leuven, Peeters, 2015. AMZALLAG 2015c - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Material Nature of the Divine Radiance and its Theological Implications,” SJOT 29 (2015) 80-96. AMZALLAG 2015d - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Psalm 67 and the Cosmopolite Musical Worship of YHWH”, BBR 25 (2015) 31-48. AMZALLAG 2015e - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Praise or Antiphonal Singing? The Meaning of ‫ להודות‬Revisited”, HS 56 (2015) 115-128. AMZALLAG 2015f - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Furnace Re-melting as Expression of YHWH’s Holiness: Evidence from the Meaning of qanna (‫ )קנא‬in Divine Context”, JBL 134 (2015) 233-252. AMZALLAG 2016a - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Subversive Dimension of the Story of Jehoshaphat’s War against the Nations (2 Chr 20:1-30)”, BibInt 24 (2016) 178-202. AMZALLAG 2016b - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Paradoxical Source of Hope in Isaiah 12”, RB 123 (2016) 357-377. AMZALLAG 2016c - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Serpent as a Symbol of Primeval Yahwism,” Semitica 58 (2016) 208-239. AMZALLAG 2017a - Nissim AMZALLAG, “What are the ‘Long Nostrils’ of YHWH?” Religions 8 (2017) 190; doi: 10.3390/rel8090190. AMZALLAG 2017b - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Foreign Yahwistic Singers in the Jerusalem Temple? Evidence from Psalm 92”, SJOT 31 (2017) 213-235. AMZALLAG 2018a - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Beyond Nose and Anger – A Reinterpretation of ‫ אף‬in YHWH’s Context”, RB 125 (2018) 5-28. AMZALLAG 2018b - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Why is the Cain genealogy (Gen 4:1724) Integrated into the Book of Genesis?” ANES 55 (2018) 23-50. AMZALLAG 2018c - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Who Was the Deity Worshipped at the Tent-Sanctuary of Timna?” in: Erez BEN-YOSEF (ed.), Mining for Ancient Copper – Essays in Memory of Beno Rothenberg, Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv University Press, 2018, 127-136. AMZALLAG 2019a - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Moses’ Tent of Meeting – A Theological Interface between Qenite Yahwism and the Israelite Religion”, SJOT 33 (2019) 298-317. AMZALLAG 2019b - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Beyond the Flood: The Original Meaning of mabbûl in Biblical Hebrew”, ANES 56 (2019) 289-310. AMZALLAG (in press a) - Nissim AMZALLAG, “Revisiting the Ezekiel Theodicy”, RB (in press). AMZALLAG (in press b) - Nissim AMZALLAG, “The Septuagint as a Marker of the Transformations of the Religion of Israel in the Hellenistic Period”, in: Paolo GARUTI; Marc LEROY and Martin STASZAK (eds.), L’univers de Flavius Josèphe. Judaïsmes et christianismes au début de l’Empire romain. – Mélanges offerts à Étienne Nodet, O.P. à l’occasion de son 75e anniversaire, Leuven, Peters (in press). AMZALLAG and AVRIEL 2010a - Nissim AMZALLAG and Mikhal AVRIEL, “Complex Antiphony in Psalms 121, 126 and 128: The Steady Responsa Hypothesis”, OTE 23 (2010) 502-518.

216

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AMZALLAG and AVRIEL 2010b - Nissim AMZALLAG and Mikhal AVRIEL, “Complex Antiphony in David’s Lament (2 Sam 1, 19-27) and its Literary Significance”, VT (2010) 60, 1-14. AMZALLAG and AVRIEL 2011 - Nissim AMZALLAG and Mikhal AVRIEL, “The Canonic Responsa Reading of Psalm 114 and Its Theological Significance”, OTE 24 (2011) 303-323. AMZALLAG and AVRIEL 2012 - Nissim AMZALLAG and Mikhal AVRIEL, “The Cryptic Meaning of the Isaiah 14 mashal”, JBL 131 (2012) 643-662. AMZALLAG and AVRIEL 2016 - Nissim AMZALLAG and Mikhal AVRIEL, “Psalm 122 as the Song Performed at the Ceremony of Dedication of the City Wall of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 12, 27-43)”, SJOT 30 (2016) 44-66. AMZALLAG and YONA 2016 - Nissim AMZALLAG and Shamir YONA, “What Does maskil in the Heading of a Psalm Mean?” ANES 53 (2016) 41-57. AMZALLAG and YONA 2017a - Nissim AMZALLAG and Shamir YONA, “Differentiation of the qayin Family of Roots in Biblical Hebrew”, Semitica 59 (2017) 297-332. AMZALLAG and YONA 2017b - Nissim AMZALLAG and Shamir YONA, “The Kenite Origin of the Sotah Prescription (Numbers 5.11-31)”, JSOT 41 (2017) 383412. AMZALLAG and YONA 2018a - Nissim AMZALLAG and Shamir YONA, “The Significance of the Rhetorical Ambiguity in Isaiah 54:16”, OTE 31 (2018) 323338. AMZALLAG and YONA 2018b - Nissim AMZALLAG and Shamir YONA, “The Metallurgical Meaning of Miqneh in Biblical Hebrew”, HS 59 (2018) 201-228. AMZALLAG and YONA 2019 - Nissim AMZALLAG and Shamir YONA, “A New Meaning of gwr in Biblical Hebrew: Evidence from the Theological Conflict in Isa 33:14”, HS 60 (2019) 175-189. ANDERSON 1972 - Arnold A. ANDERSON, The book of Psalms Vol. 1-2, Grand Rapids, Oliphants, 1972. ANDERSON 2015 - James S. ANDERSON, Monotheism and YHWH’s Appropriation of Baal, New York, Bloomsbury, 2015. ARCHI 1979-1980 - Alfonso ARCHI, « Les dieux d’Ébla au IIIe millénaire avant J.C. et les dieux d’Ougarit », AAAS 29-30 (1979-1980) 161-171. ASSIS 2016 - Elie ASSIS, Identity in Conflict. The Struggle between Esau and Jacob, Edom and Israel, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2016. AUFFRET 2003 - Pierre AUFFRET, Que Seulement de tes yeux tu regardes, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2003. AUSTIN et al. 2000 - Steven A. AUSTIN; Gordon W. FRANZ and Eric G. FROST. “Amos’s Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C.”, IGR 42 (2000) 657-671. AVISHUR 1979 - Ytzhak AVISHUR, “Psalm 29 – Canaanite or Hebrew?” in: BenZion Luria volume. Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1979, 247-274. AVISHUR 1989 - Ytzhak AVISHUR, Studies in Hebrew and Ugaritic psalms, Jerusalem, Magnes Press, 1989. AVNER 2014 - Uzi AVNER, “Egyptian Timna – Reconsidered”, in: Juan M. TEBES (ed.), Unearthing the Wilderness – Studies on the History and Archaeology of the Negev and Edom in the Iron Age, Leuven, Peeters, 2014, 103162.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

217

AXELSSON 1987 - Lars E. AXELSSON, The Lord Rose Up from Seir: Studies in the History and Traditions of the Negev and Southern Judah, Stockholm, Almqvist and Wiksell International, 1987. BANG 2017 - Ki-Min BANG, “A Missing Key to Understanding Psalm 46: Revisiting the Chaoskampf”, CBW 37 (2017) 68-89. BANG 2020 - Ki-Min BANG, The Combat Myth Motif in Psalm 89: Redaction Historical and Environmental Analyses (PhD Dissertation), Chicago, The Lutherian School of Theology at Chicago, 2020. BARBIERO 2016 - Gianni BARBIERO, “The Two Structures of Psalm 29”, VT 66 (2016) 378-392. BARKER and BAILEY 1998 - Kenneth L. BARKER, and Waylon BAILEY, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah, Nashville, Broadman and Holman, 1998. BARRÉ 1991 - Michael L. BARRÉ, “A Phoenician Parallel to Psalm 29”, HTR 13 (1991) 25-32. BAUMAN 1980 - A. BAUMAN, “‫”חיל‬, in TDOT 4, 1980, 344-347. BEAUCAMP 1976 - Évode BEAUCAMP, Le Psautier I - Ps 1-72, Paris, Gabalda, 1976. BEAUCAMP 1979 - Évode BEAUCAMP, Le Psautier II – Ps 73-150, Paris, Gabalda, 1979. BEGRICH 1928 - Joachim BEGRICH, “Mabbûl – Eine exegetisch – Lexikalische Studie”, ZSVG 6 (1928) 135-153. BEN-YOSEF et al. 2012 - Erez BEN-YOSEF; Ron SHAAR; Lisa TAUXE and Hagai RON, “A New Chronological Framework for Iron Age Copper Production at Timna (Israel)”, BASOR 367 (2012) 31-71. BEN-YOSEF et al. 2014 - Erez BEN-YOSEF; Mohammad NAJJAR and Thomas E. LEVY, “New Iron Age Excavations at Copper Production Sites, Mines and Fortresses in Faynan, Jordan”, in: Thomas E. LEVY, Mohammad NAJJAR and Erez BEN-YOSEF (eds.), New Insights into the Iron Age Archaeology of Edom, Southern Jordan, Los Angeles, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, 2014, 767-885. BEN-YOSEF et al. 2016 - Erez BEN-YOSEF; A. GIDDING; Lisa TAUXE; U. DAVIDOVICH; Mohammad NAJJAR and Thomas E. LEVY, “Early Bronze Age Copper Production Systems in the Northern Arabah Valley: New Insights from Archaeomagnetic Study of Slag Deposits in Jordan and Israel”, JAS 72 (2016) 71-84. BEN-YOSEF and LEVY 2014 - Erez BEN-YOSEF; Thomas E. LEVY, “The Material Culture of Iron Age Copper Production in Faynan”, in: Thomas E. LEVY; Mohammad NAJJAR and Erez BEN-YOSEF (eds.), New Insights into the Iron Age Archaeology of Edom, Southern Jordan, Los Angeles, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA, 2014, 887-959. BEN-YOSEF and SERGI 2018 - Erez BEN-YOSEF and Omer SERGI, The Destruction of Gath by Hazael and the Arabah Copper Industry: A Reassessment, in: Itzhaq SHAI, Jeffrey R. CHADWICK, Louise HITCHCOCK, Amit DAGAN, Chris MCKINNY and Joe UZIEL, (eds.), Tell it in Gat: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel. Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday, Münster, Zaphon, 2018, 461-480. BENTOR 1990 - Yaakov K. BENTOR, “Geological Events in the Bible”, TN 1 (1990) 326-338.

218

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BENZ 2016 - Brendon C. BENZ, The Land before the Kingdom of Israel – A History of the Southern Levant and the People Who Populated It, Winona Lake (IN), Eisenbrauns, 2016. BERLEJUNG 2017 - Angelika BERLEJUNG, “The Origins and Beginnings of the Worship of YHWH: The Iconographic Evidence”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 67-92. BERLIN 2007 - Adele BERLIN, “Myth and Meaning in Psalm 114,” in: Joel S. BURNETT; William H. BELLINGER and W. Dennis TUCKER (eds.), Diachronic and Synchronic. Reading the Psalms in Real Time: Proceedings of the Baylor Symposium on the Book of Psalms, New York, T & T Clark, 2007, 67-80. BERLIN 2008 - Adele BERLIN, “The Message of Psalm 114”, in: Chaim COHEN; Victor Avigdor HUROWITZ; Avi HURVITZ; Yochanan MUFFS; Baruch J. SCHWARTZ and Jeffrey H. TIGAY (eds.), Birkat Shalom. Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature and Post-Biblical Judaism (vol. 1), Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2008, 347-363. BERLIN, 2009 - Adele BERLIN, “Rams and Lambs in Psalm 114:4 and 6: The Septuagint’s Translation of X // ‫ בן‬Y Parallelisms”, Textus 24 (2009) 107117. BEUKEN 2000 - Willem A.M. BEUKEN, Isaiah II, Leuven, Peeters, 2000. BLAKELY 2006 - Sandra BLAKELY, Myth, Ritual and Metallurgy in Ancient Greece and Recent Africa, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006. BLAKELY 2007 - Sandra BLAKELY, “Pherekydes’s Daktyloi”, Kernos 20 (2007) 119 (http://kernos.revues.org/161). BLENKINSOPP 1990 - Joseph BLENKINSOPP, “A Jewish Sect of the Persian Period”, CBQ 52 (1990) 5-20. BLENKINSOPP 2008 - Joseph BLENKINSOPP, “The Midianite-Kenite Hypothesis Revisited and the Origin of Judah”, JSOT 33 (2008) 131-153. BLENKINSOPP 2011 - Joseph BLENKINSOPP, Creation, Un-creation, Re-creation. A Discursive Commentary on Genesis 1-11, London, T & T Clark, 2011. BLOCH 2009 - Yigal BLOCH, “The Prefixed Perfective and the Dating of Early Hebrew Poetry – A Re-Evaluation”, VT 59 (2009) 34-70. BODI 1991 - Daniel BODI, The Book of Ezekiel and the Poem of Erra, Gottingen, Vandehoeck and Ruprecht, 1991. BONNET 1988 - Corinne BONNET, Melqart: cultes et mythes de l’Héraclès tyrien en Méditerranée, Leuven, Peeters, 1988. BORGHOUTS 1974 - Joris F. BORGHOUTS, “The Evil Eye of Apopis”, JEA 59 (1974) 114-150. BOYD-TAYLOR 1998 - Cameron BOYD-TAYLOR, “A Place in the Sun: The Interpretative Significance of LXX-Psalm 18,5c”, BIOSC 31 (1998) 71-105, BRETTLER 1989 - Marc Z. BRETTLER, God is King: Understanding an Israelite Metaphor, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1989. BRIGGS and BRIGGS 1906 - Charles A. BRIGGS and Emilie G. BRIGGS. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, vol. 1, Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1906. BROWN 1965 - John P. BROWN, “Kothar, Konyras and Kytheraia”, JSS 10 (1965) 197-219.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

219

BRUEGGEMANN 1980 - Walter BRUEGGEMANN, “The Psalms and the Life of Faith: A Suggested Typology of Functions”, JSOT 17 (1980) 3-32. BRUEGGEMANN and BELLINGER 2014 - Walter BRUEGGEMANN and William H. BELLINGER, Psalms, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014. BUCKLAND 1875 - Ann Walbank BUCKLAND, “The Serpent in Connection with Primitive Metallurgy”, JAIGBI 4 (1875) 60-61. BUDGE 1904 - E.A.Wallis BUDGE, The Gods of the Egyptians (vol. 1), London, Methuen, 1904. BUTTENWEISER 1969 - Moses BUTTENWEISER, The Psalms, New York, Ktav Publishing, 1969. CAQUOT 1958 - André CAQUOT, « Le dieu ‘Athtar et les textes de Ras Shamra », Syria 35 (1958) 45-60. CARTLEDGE 2001 - Tony W. CARTLEDGE, 1 & 2 Samuel, Macon, Smyth & Helwys, 2001. CASSUTO 1967 - Umberto CASSUTO, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, Jerusalem, Magnes Press, 1967, CATHCART 1973 - Kevin J. CATHCART - Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitic, Rome, Biblical Institute, 1973. CHILDS 1974 - Brevard S. CHILDS, Exodus - A commentary, London, SCM Press, 1974. CHINN 2011 - Christopher M. CHINN, “Statius, Orpheus, and Callimachus Thebaid 2.269-96”, Helios 38 (2011) 79-101. CHRISTENSEN 2004 - Duane L. CHRISTENSEN, “Psalm 46”, Bibal.net Project (2004) 1-7. CHRISTENSEN 2009 - D.L. CHRISTENSEN, Nahum – An New translation with Introduction and Commentary, New Haven, Yale University Press, 2009. CLIFFORD 1979 - Richard J. CLIFFORD, “The Temple in the Ugarit Myth of Baal”, in: Frank M. CROSS (ed.), Symposia Celebrating the Seventy-fifth Anniversary of the Founding of the American Schools of Oriental Research (19001975), Cambridge (MA), American School of Oriental Research, 1979, 137145. CLIFFORD 1985 - Richard J. CLIFFORD, “The Hebrew Scriptures and the Theology of Creation”, TS 46 (1985) 507-523. CLIFFORD 1999 - R.J. CLIFFORD, Proverbs - A Commentary, Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 1999. CLIFFORD 2002 - R.J. CLIFFORD, Psalms 1-72, Nashville, Abingdon Press, 2002. CLIFFORD 2003 - R.J. CLIFFORD, Psalms 73-150, Nashville, Abingdon Press, 2003. CLINES 2001 - David J. A. CLINES, “What Remains from the Hebrew Bible? Its Text and Language in a Postmodern Age”, Studia Theologica 54 (2001) 7695. CLINES 2006 - D.J.A. CLINES, Job 21-37, Nashville, Thomas Nelson, 2006. COHEN 1989 - Chaim COHEN, “The Lord Was Enthroned at the Flood – A New Interpretation”, Leshonenu 53 (1989) 193-201 (Heb). COHEN 2015 - Chaim COHEN, “The Well-Attested BH-Akk. Simile ‫כראים‬ (Ps 92:11) / ‫ראמים‬-‫( כמו בן‬Ps 29:6) = Akk/ kīma rīmi/rīmāniš and Its Semantic Equivalent ‫( כאביר‬Isa 10:13 [Kethiv] in the Speech of the Assyrian King”, in: Shamir YONA; Edward L. GREENSTEIN; Meir I. GRUBER; Peter MACHINIST

220

BIBLIOGRAPHY

and Shalom M. PAUL, Marbeh Ḥokmah – Studies in the Bible and Ancient Near East in the Loving Memory of Avigdor Hurowitz, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2015, 83-110. COLE 2000 - Robert L. COLE, The Shape and Message of Book III (Psalms 73-89), Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2000. COLLINS 1997 - C. John COLLINS, “kābȏd,” in: NIDOTTE 2, 1997, 577-587. COLLON 2010 - Dominique COLLON, “Playing in Concert in the Ancient Near East”, in: Richard DUMBRILL and Irvin FINKEL (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of Near Eastern Archaeomusicology, London, Iconea Publications, 2010, 47-66. CONDAMIN 1933 - Albert CONDAMIN, Poèmes de la Bible, Paris, Beauchesne, 19332. CORNELIUS 1994 - Izak CORNELIUS, The Iconography of the Canaanite Gods Reshef and Ba῾al: Late Bronze and Iron Age I Perios (c 1500-1000 BCE), Fribourg (Switzerland), Fribourg University Press / Göttingen (Germany), Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1994. COUGHENOUR 1989 - Robert A. COUGHENOUR, “A Search for Mahanaim”, BASOR 273 (1989) 57-66. COWLEY 1986 - Roger W. COWLEY, “Technical Terms in Biblical Hebrew?” TynBul 37 (1986) 21-28. CRAIG 1999 - Kenneth M. CRAIG, “Questions Oustide Eden (Genesis 4.1-16): YHWH, Cain and their Rhetorical Interchange”, JSOT 86 (1999) 107-128. CRAIGIE 1972 - P.C. CRAIGIE, “Psalm 29 in the Hebrew Poetic Tradition”, VT 22 (1972) 143-151. CRAIGIE 1983 - P.C. CRAIGIE, Psalms 1-50, Waco (TX), Word Books, 1983. CROSS 1950 - F.M. CROSS, “Notes on a Canaanite Psalm in the Old Testament”, BASOR 117 (1950) 19-21. CROSS 1973 - Frank M. CROSS, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1973. CROSS and FREEDMAN 1997 - Frank M. CROSS and David N. FREEDMAN, Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 19972. CROUCH 2011 - Carly L. CROUCH, “Adapting the Cosmological Tradition in Isaiah 40-45”, SJOT 25 (2011) 260-275. CUNCHILLOS 1976 - Jesus-Luis CUNCHILLOS, Estudio del Salmo 29, Valencia, Libreria Diocesana, 1976. CURTIS 1988 - John B. CURTIS, “Why Were the Elihu Speeches Added to the Book of Job?” PGLMBS 8 (1988) 93-99. CURTIS 1989 - J.B. CURTIS, “Were the Elihu Speeches Added to the Book of Job?” PGLMBS 9, 113-123. CUSSET 2001 - Christophe CUSSET, “Le bestiaire de Lycophron : Entre chien et loup”, Anthropozoologica 33-34 (2001) 61-72. CUSSET and KOLDE 2013 - Christophe CUSSET and Antje KOLDE, “The Rhetoric of the Riddle in the Alexandra of Lycophron”, in: Jan KWAPISZ; David PETRAIN and Mikolaj SZYMANSKI (eds.), The Muse at Play: Riddles and Wordplay in Greek and Latin Poetry, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2013, 167-182 DAHOOD 1966 - Mitchell DAHOOD, Psalms (3 vol.), Doubleday and company, New York, 1966.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

221

DAVIDSON 1958 - H. R. Ellis DAVIDSON, “Weland the Smith”, Folklore 69 (1958) 145-159. DAVIDSON and TOY 1960 - Andrew B. DAVIDSON and Crawford H. TOY, “The Book of Job”, in: R. HONE (ed.), The Voice Out of the Whirlwind, San Francisco, Chandler, 1960, 87-103. DAVIES 2007 - Phillip R. DAVIES, The Origins of Biblical Israel, London, T & T Clark, 2007. DAVIS 1992 - Ellen F. DAVIS, “Psalm 98”, Interpretation 46 (1992) 171-175. DAY 1979 - John DAY, “Echoes of Baal’s Seven Thunders and Lightnings in Psalm 29 and Habakkuk 3:9 and the Identity of the Seraphim in Isaiah 6”, VT 29 (1979) 143-151. DAY 1985 - John DAY, God’s conflict with the Dragon and the Sea. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1985. DAY 1994 - John DAY, “How Could Be Job and Edomite?” in: Wim A.M. BEUKEN (ed.), The Book of Job, Leuven, Peeters, 1994, 392-399. DAY 2000 - John DAY, Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan, Sheffield, Sheffield University Press, 2000. DAY 2009 - John DAY, “Cain and the Kenites”, in: Gershon GALIL; Markham GELLER and Alan MILLARD (eds.), Homeland and Exile – Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of Bustenay Oded; Leiden, Brill, 2009, 335-346. DE MOOR 1990 - Johannes, C. DE MOOR, The Rise of Yahwism – The Roots of Israelite Monotheism, Leuven, Peeters, 1990. DEARMAN 1995 - J. Andrew DEARMAN, “Edomite Religion – A Survey and Examination of Some Recent Contributions”, in: Diana V. EDELMAN (ed.), You Should not Abhor an Edomite for He is Your Brother – Edom and Seir in History and Tradition, Atlanta, SBL Press, 1995, 119-131. DECLAISSÉ-WALFORD 2014 - Nancy L. DECLAISSÉ-Walford, “Psalm 114”, in: Nancy DECLAISSÉ-WALFORD; Rolf A. JACOBSON and Beth L. TANNER, The Book of Psalms, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2014, 850-852. DICKSON 2005 - Keith DICKSON, “Enki and the Embodied World”, JAOS 125 (2005) 499-515. DICOU 1994 - Bert DICOU, Edom, Israel’s Brother and Antagonist – The Role of Edom in Biblical Prophecy and Story. Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1994. DIETERLE 1987 - Richard L. DIETERLE, “The Metallurgical Code of the Volundarkvida and its Theoretical Import”, HR 27 (1987) 1-31. DIJKSTRA 2001 - Meindert DIJKSTRA, “El, The God of Israel – Israel, the People of YHWH. On the Origin of Ancient Israelite Yahwism”, in: Bob BECKING; Meindert DIJKSTRA; Marjo C.A. KORPEL; Karel J.H. VRIEZEN (eds.), Only One God? Monotheism in Ancient Israel and the Veneration of the Goddess Asherah, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2001, 81-126. DILLMANN 1897 - August DILLMANN, Genesis Critically and Exegetically Expounded. vol. 1, Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1897. DION 1991 - Paul E. DION, “YHWH as Storm-God and Sun-God: The Double Legacy of Egypt and Canaan as Reflected in Psalm 104”, ZAW 103 (1991) 43-71. DOBBS-ALLSOPP 2009 - Frederick W. DOBBS-ALLSOPP, “Poetry,” in: NID 4, 2009, 550-558.

222

BIBLIOGRAPHY

DOBBS-ALLSOPP 2015 - F.W. DOBBS-ALLSOPP, On Biblical Poetry, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015. DOZEMAN 2009 - Thomas D. DOZEMAN, Commentary on Exodus, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2009. DRIVER 1931 - Godfrey R. DRIVER, “Studies in the Vocabulary of the Old Testament II”, JTS 32 (1931) 250-257. DRIVER 1951 - G.R. DRIVER, “Ezekiel’s Inaugural Vision”, VT 1 (1951) 60-62. DUNN 2014 - Jacob E. DUNN, “A God of Volcanoes: Did Yahwism Take Root in Volcanic Ashes?” JSOT 38 (2014) 387-424. EIDEVALL 2009 - Göran EIDEVALL, Prophecy and Propaganda - Images of Enemies in the Book of Isaiah, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2009. EINARSON 2011 - Leif EINARSON, Re-forging the Smith: An Interdisciplinary Study of Smithing Motifs in Volupsa and Volundarkvida (PhD Dissertation), London (Ontario, Canada), University of Western Ontario, 2011. EISING 1980 - H. EISING, “‫”חיל‬, in: TDOT 4, 1980, 348-355. ELIADE 1977 - Mircea ELIADE, Forgerons et Alchimistes, Paris, Flammarion, 1977. FENSHAM 1963 - F. Charles FENSHAM, “Psalm 29 and Ugarit”, OTWSA 6 (1963) 84-99. FINKELSTEIN 2005 - Israel FINKELSTEIN, “Khirbet en-Nahas, Edom and Biblical History”, TA 32 (2005) 119-125. FINKELSTEIN and LIPSCHITZ 2011 - Israel FINKELSTEIN and Oded LIPSCHITS, “The Genesis of Moab: A Proposal”, Levant 43 (2011) 139-152. FISHER and KNUTSON 1969 - Loren R. FISHER and F. Brent KNUTSON, “An Enthronement Ritual at Ugarit”, JNES 28 (1969) 157-167. FITZGERALD 1974 - Aloysius FITZGERALD, “A Note on Psalm 29”, BASOR 215 (1974) 61-63. FITZGERALD 1989 - Aloysius FITZGERALD, “The Technology of Isaiah 40:19-20 + 41: 6-7”, CBQ 51 (1989) 426-446. FITZGERALD 2002 - Aloysius FITZGERALD, The Lord of the East Wind, Washington, Catholic Biblical Association of America, 2002. FLEMING 2020 - Daniel FLEMING, YHWH before Israel – Glimpses of History in a Divine Name, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2020. FLUZIN et al. 2011 - Philippe FLUZIN, George CASTEL and Pierre TALLET, “Metallurgical Sites of South Sinai (Egypt) in the Pharaonic Era: New Discoveries”, Paléorient 37 (2011) 79-89. FOKKELMAN 1998, 2000, 2003 - Jan P. FOKKELMAN, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible, Leiden, Brill, vol 1: 1998, vol 2: 2000, vol 3: 2003. FOKKELMAN 2001 - J.P. FOKKELMAN, Reading Biblical Poetry, Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. FRANKLIN 1926 - George FRANKLIN, « Volcans et dieux », RA 23 (1926) 188249. FRANKLIN 2016 - John C. FRANKLIN, Kinyras—The Divine Lyre. Hellenic Studies Series 70; Washington, DC, Center for Hellenic Studies, 2016 (http://nrs. harvard.edu/urn-3:hul.ebook:CHS_FranklinJ.Kinyras.2016) FRAYNE 2013 - Douglas FRAYNE, “The Sixth Day of Creation in Ancient Syrian and Neo-Hittite Art”, in: JoAnn SCURLOCK and Richard H. BEAL (eds.), Creation and Chaos: A Reconsideration of Hermann Gunkel’s Chaoskampf Hypothesis, Winona Lake (IN), Eisenbrauns, 2013, 63-97.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

223

FREEDMAN 1997 - David N. FREEDMAN, “Psalm 29: A Structural Analysis”, in: David N. FREEDMAN and John R. HUDDLESTUN (ed.), Divine Commitment and Human Obligation, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1997, 70-87. FREEDMAN and Hyland 1973 - David N. FREEDMAN and Frank C. HYLAND, “Psalm 29: A Structural Analysis”, HTR 66 (1973) 237-256. FRIEDRICH 2000 - Walter L. FRIEDRICH, Fire in the Sea. The Santorini Volcano: Natural History and the Legend of Atlantis, Cambridge, McBirney, 2000. FULLERTON 1929 - Kemper FULLERTON, “The Strophe in Hebrew Poetry and Psalm 29”, JBL 48 (1929) 274-290. GALTER 2015 - Hannes D. GALTER, “The Mesopotamian God Enki/Ea”, RC 9 (2015) 66-76. GARANI 2009 - Myrto GARANI, “Going with the Wind: Visualizing Volcanic Eruptions in the Pseudo-Vergilian Aetna”, BICS 52 (2009) 103-121. GARBINI 1988 - Giovanni GARBINI, History and Ideology in Ancient Israel, New York, Crossroad, 1988. GASS 2009 - Erasmus GASS, Die Moabiter – Geschichte und Kultur eines ostjordanischen Voles im 1. Jahrtausend v. Chr, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 2009. GASTER 1933 - Theodore H. GASTER, “The Earliest Known Miracle-Day?” Folklore 44 (1933) 379-390. GASTER 1946 - Theodore H. GASTER, “Psalm 29”, JQR 37 (1946) 55-65. GASTER 1977 - Theodore H. GASTER, Thespis – Ritual, Myth, and Drama in the Ancient Near East, New York, Norton and Company, [1950] 1977. GELLER 1984 - Stephen A. GELLER, “Some Pitfalls in the ‘Literary Approach’ to Biblical Narrative”, JQR 74 (1984) 408-415. GERHARDT 1966 - Walter GERHARDT, “The Hebrew/Israelite Weather Deity”, Numen 13 (1966) 128-143. GERSTENBERGER 1988 - Erhard S. GERSTENBERGER, Psalms 1 – With and Introduction to Cultic Poetry, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1988. GERSTENBERGER 2001 - Erhard GERSTENBERGER, Psalms II and Lamentations, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2001. GILES and DOAN 2009 - Terry GILES and William J. DOAN, Twice Used Songs: Performance Criticism of the Songs of Ancient Israel, Peabody (MS), Hendrickson, 2009. GINSBERG 1935 - Harold L. GINSBERG, “A Phoenician Hymn in the Psalter”, XIX Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti, Rome, 472-476. GIRARD 1984, 1994 - Marc GIRARD, Les Psaumes redécouverts – Analyse structurelle et interprétation, Montréal, Bellarmin, vol. 1: 1984, vol 2-3: 1994. GIVEON 1969-1970 - Raphael GIVEON, “The Shosu of the Late XXth Dynasty”, JARCE 8 (1969-1970), 51-53. GIVEON 1971 - Raphael GIVEON, Les bédouins Shosu des documents Égyptiens, Leiden, Brill, 1971. GOLDINGAY 1972 - John GOLDINGAY, Songs From a Strange Land. Psalms 42-51, Carlisle (UK), Piquant, 1972. GOLDINGAY 2007, 2009 - John GOLDINGAY, Psalms, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, vol 1: 2007, vol 3: 2009. GOOD 1990 - Edwin M. GOOD, In Turns of Tempest - A Reading of Job, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1990. GOSSE 1999 - Bernard GOSSE, «Deux usages du Psaume 96 », OTE 12, 266-278.

224

BIBLIOGRAPHY

GOULDER 1996 - Michael D. GOULDER, The Psalms of Asaph and the Pentateuch, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1996. GOULDER 1998, Michael D. GOULDER, The Psalms of the Return (Book V, Psalms 107-150), Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1998. GRADL 1979 - F. GRADL, “Abermals Überlegungen zur Struktur und Finalität von Ps. 29”, LASBFJ 29 (1979) 91-110. GRANT 2015. Deena E. GRANT, “Fire and the Body of YHWH”, JSOT 40 (2015) 139-161. GRATTAN et. al. 2007 - J.P. GRATTAN, D.D. GILBERTSON, C.O. HUNT, “The Local and Global Dimensions of Metalliferous Pollution Derived from a Reconstruction of an Eight Thousand Year Record of Copper Smelting and Mining at a Desert-Mountain Frontier in Southern Jordan”, JAS 34 (2007) 83-110. GRAY 1949 - John GRAY, “The Desert God ῾Aṯtr in the Literature and Religion of Canaan”, JNES 8 (1949) 72-83. GRAY 1956, John GRAY, “The Hebrew Conception of the Kingship of God: Its Origin and Development”, VT 3 (1956) 268-285. GRAY 1961 - John GRAY, “The Kingship of God in Prophets and Psalms”, VT 11 (1961) 1-29. GRAY 1979 - John GRAY, The Biblical Doctrine of the Reign of God, Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1979. GRAY 2014 - Alison R. GRAY, Psalm 18 in Words and Pictures. A Reading through Metaphor, Leiden, Brill, 2014. GREEN 2003 - Alberto R.W. GREEN, The Storm-God in the Ancient Near East, Winona Lake (IN), Eisenbrauns, 2003. GREENE 1992 - Mott T. GREENE, Natural Knowledge in Preclassical Antiquity, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1992. GREENE 2017, Nathaniel E. GREENE, “Creation, Destruction, and a Psalmist’s Plea: Rethinking the Poetic Structure of Psalm 74”, JBL 136 (2017) 85-101. GREENFIELD 1971 - Stanley B. GREENFIELD, “Ellipsis and Meaning in Poetry”, TSLL 13 (1971) 137-147. GREENSTEIN 1992 - Edward L. GREENSTEIN, “YHWH’s Lightnings in Psalm 29:7”, Maarav 8 (1992) 49-57. GREENSTEIN 1997 - Edward L. GREENSTEIN, “The God of Israel and the Gods of Canaan: How different Were They?” Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies A, 1997, 47*-58*. GRESSMANN 1913 - Hugo GRESSMANN, Moses und seine Zeit: Ein Kommentar zu den Mose-Sagen, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1913. GROSSBERG 1989 - Daniel GROSSBERG, Centripetal and Centrifugal Structures in Biblical Poetry, Atlanta, SBL Press, 1989. GRUBER 1980 - Meir I. GRUBER, Aspects of Nonverbal Communication in the Ancient Near East, Rome, Pontifical Institute, 1980. GUNKEL 1903 - Hermann GUNKEL, “Psalm 46: An Interpretation”, BW 21 (1903) 28-31. GUNKEL 1926 - H. GUNKEL, Die Psalmen, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1926. GUNKEL 1998 - Hermann GUNKEL, Introduction to Psalms. The Genre of the Religion Lyric of Israel, Macon (Georgia): Mercer University Press, 1998 (1933).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

225

HABEL 1984 - Norman C. HABEL, “The Role of Elihu in the Design of the Book of Job”, in: W. Boyd BARRICK and John R. SPENCER (eds.), In the Shelter of Elyon, Sheffield, JSOT Press, 1984, 81-98. HABEL 1985 - Norman, C. HABEL, The Book of Job. A Commentary, London, SCM Press, 1985. HABEL and AVENT 2001 - Norman C. HABEL and Geralding AVENT, “Rescuing Earth from a Storm God: Psalms 29 and 96-97”, in: Norman C. HABEL (ed.), The Earth Story in the Psalms and the Prophets, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2001, 42-50. HAKHAM 1990 - Amos HAKHAM, The Book of Psalms, Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 19906. HALPERN 1983 - Baruch HALPERN, “The Resourceful Israelite Historian: The Song of Deborah and Israelite Historiography”, HTR 76 (1983) 379-401. HALPERN 1992 - B. HALPERN, “Kenites”, in: ABD 4, 1992, 17-22. HAMILTON 1990 - Victor P. HAMILTON, The Book of Genesis – Chapters 1-17, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1990. HAMILTON 2011 - V.P. HAMILTON, Exodus – An Exegetical Commentary, Grand Rapids (MI), Baker Academics, 2011. HANDY 2009 - Lowell K. HANDY, “Introduction”, in: Lowell K. HANDY (ed.), Psalm 29 Through Time and Tradition, Eugene (OR), Pickwick publications, 2009, 1-8. HANEY 2007 - Linda, HANEY, “YHWH, the God of Israel and ... of Edom? The Relationships in the Oracle to Edom in Jeremiah 49:7-22”, in: John GOLDINGAY (ed.); Uprooting and Planting, Essays on Jeremiah for Leslie Allen, New York, T & T Clark, 2007, 78-115. HAR-EL 1977 - Menashe HAR-EL, “The Valley of the Craftsmen (Ge’ Harašim)”, PEQ 109 (1977) 75-86. HARAN 1960 - Menahem HARAN, “The Nature of the ‘ohel mo’ed in Pentateuchal Sources”, JSS 5 (1960) 50-65. HARAN 1978 - Menahem HARAN, Temple Service in Ancient Israel – An Inquiry into the Character of Cult-Phenomena and the Historical Setting of the Priestly School, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1978. HARTLEY 1988 - John E. HARTLEY, The Book of Job, Grand Rapids (MI), Eerdmans Publishing, 1988. HAUPTMAN 2007 - Andreas HAUPTMAN, The Archaeometallurgy of Copper. Evidence from Faynan, Jordan, Berlin, Springer, 2007. HENDEL 1987 - Ronald HENDEL, “Of Demigods and the Deluge: Towards an Interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4”, JBL 106 (1987) 13-26. HEISER 2001 - Michael S. HEISER, “Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God”, BS 158 (2001) 52-74. HEISER 2008 - Michael S. HEISER, “Monotheism, Polytheism, Monolatry, or Henotheism? Toward an Assessment of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible”, BBR 18 (2008) 1-30. HOLLIS 1933 - Frederick J. HOLLIS, “The Sun-Cult and the Temple at Jerusalem”, in: Samuel H. HOOKE (ed.), Myth and Ritual: Essays on the Myth and Ritual of the Hebrews in Relation to the Culture Pattern of the Ancient Near East, London, Oxford University Press, 1933, 87-110.

226

BIBLIOGRAPHY

HOROWITZ 1998 - Wayne HOROWITZ, Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1998. HOSSFELD and ZENGER 1993 - Frank L. HOSSFELD and Erich ZENGER, Die Psalmen, vol 1 (1-50), Wurzburg, Echter, 1993. HOSSFELD and ZENGER 2005 - Frank L. HOSSFELD and Erich ZENGER, Psalms 2 – A Commentary on Psalms 51-100, Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2005. HOSSFELD and ZENGER 2011 - Frank L. HOSSFELD and Erich ZENGER, Psalms 3 – A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2011. HOUTMAN 2000 - Cornelis HOUTMAN, Exodus, vol. 3, Leuven, Peeters, 2000. HOWARD 1997 - David M. HOWARD, The Structure of Psalms 93-100, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1997. HUMPHREYS 2003 - Colin HUMPHREYS, The Miracles of Exodus, London, Continuum Press, 2003. HUROWITZ 2013 - Victor A. HUROWITZ, “An Underestimated Aspect of Ea/ Enki”, JANER 13 (2013) 3-10. HUTTON 2007 - Jeremy M. HUTTON, “Isaiah 51: 9-11 and the Rhetorical Appropriation and Subversion of Hostile Theologies”, JBL 126 (2007) 271-303. JACOBSEN 1968 - Thorkild JACOBSEN, “The Battle Between Marduk and Tiamat”, JAOS 88 (1968) 104-108. JACOBSON 2014 - Rolf A. JACOBSON, “Psalm 29: Ascribe to the Lord”, in: Nancy DECLAISSÉ-WALFORD; Rolf A. JACOBSON and Beth L. TANNER (eds.), The Book of Psalms, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2014, 281-288. JAMES 1968 - Edwin O. JAMES, “The Tree of Life”, Folklore 79 (1968) 241-249. JEREMIAS 1965 - Jörg JEREMIAS, Theophanie: Die Geschichte einer alttestamentlischen Gattung, Neukirchen-Vluyn, Neukirchener Verlag, 1965. JEREMIAS 1987 - Jörg JEREMIAS, Das Königtum Gottes in der Psalmen. Israel Begebubg nit dem kanaanäischen Mythos in den Jahwe-König-Psalmen, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1987. JEREMIAS 2017 - Jörg JEREMIAS, “Three Theses on the Early History of Israel”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 145-156. KAPLAN 1976 - Maureen F. KAPLAN, “Another Slaying of Tiamat?” IEJ 26 (1976) 174-177. KASSIANIDOU and KNAPP 2005 - Vasiliki KASSIANIDOU and A. Bernard KNAPP, “Archaeometallurgy in the Mediterranean: The Social Context of Mining, Technology and Trade”, in Emma BLAKE and A. Bernard KNAPP (eds.), The Archaeology of Mediterranean Prehistory, Malden (MA), Blackwell, 2005, 215-251. KEEGAN 1995 - Terence J. KEEGAN, “Biblical Criticism and the Challenge of Postmodernism”, BibInt 3 (1995) 1-14. KEEL 1994 - Othmar KEEL, “Sturmgott – Sonnegott – Einziger”, BuK 49 (1994) 82-92. KEEL 1997 - Othmar KEEL, The Symbolism of the Biblical World – Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 1997. KEEL and UEHLINGER 1998 - Othmar KEEL and Christoph UEHLINGER, Gods, Goddesses and Images of Gods in Ancient Israel, Minneapolis, Augsburg – Fortress, 1998.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

227

KELLEY 2009 - Justin KELLEY, “Toward a New Synthesis between the God of Edom and YHWH”, AntOr 7 (2009) 255-280. KELLY 1970 - Sidney KELLY, “Psalm 46: A Study in Imagery”, JBL 89 (1970) 305-312. KENNEDY 2009 - James M. KENNEDY, “Psalm 29 as a Semiotic System: A Linguistic Reading”, JHS 9 (2009) 1-21. KIM and TRIMM 2014 - Brittany KIM and Charlie TRIMM, “YHWH the Dragon: Exploring a Neglected Biblical Metaphor for the Divine Warrior and the Translation of ‘Ap”, TBT 65 (2014) 165-184. KLINGBEIL 1999 - Martin KLINGBEIL, Yahweh Fighting from Heaven. God as Warrior and as God of Heaven in the Hebrew Psalter and Ancient Near Eastern Iconography, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1999. KLOOS 1986 - Carola KLOOS, YHWH’s Combat with the Sea, Amsterdam, van Oorschot, 1986. KNAUF 1984 - Ernst A. KNAUF, “Yahwe”, VT 34 (1984) 467-472. KNAUF 1999 - E.A. KNAUF, “Qôs”, in: DDD, 1999, 674-677. KÖCKERT 2001 - Matthias KÖCKERT, “Die Theophanie des Wettergottes Jahwe in Psalm 18”, in: Thomas RICHTER; Doris PRECHEL and Jörg KLINGER (eds.), Kulturgeschichten: Altorientalistische Studien für Volkert Haas Zum 65. Geburstag, Saarbrücken, Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag, 2001, 209-226. KÖCKERT 2010 - Matthias KÖCKERT, “YHWH in the Northern and Southern Kingdom”, in: Reinhard G. KRATZ and Hermann SPIECKERMANN (eds.), One God – One Cult – One Nation. Archaeological and Biblical Perspectives, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2010, 357-394. KOENIG 1964 - Jean KOENIG, « La localisation du Sinaï et les traditions des scribes », RHPR 44 (1964) 200-235. KOENIG 1966 - Jean KOENIG, « Aux origines des théophanies iahvistes », RHR 169 (1966) 1-36. KOENIG 1971 - J. KOENIG, Le site de Al-Jaw dans l’ancien pays de Madian, Paris, Geuthner, 1971. KRATZ 2005 - Reinhard. G. KRATZ, The Composition of the Narrative Books of the Old Testament, London, T & T Clark, 2005. KRAUS 1988 - Hans-Joachim KRAUS, Psalms 1-59 – A Commentary, Minneapolis, Augsburg, 1988. KRAUS 1989 - Hans-Joachim KRAUS, Psalms 60-150 – A Commentary, Minneapolis, Augsburg, 1989. KREBERNIK 2017 - Manfred KREBERNIK 2017, “The Beginnings of Yahwism from Assyriological Perspective”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 45-66. KRISTIANSEN and LARSSON 2005 - Kristian KRISTIANSEN and Thomas LARSSON, The Rise of the Bronze Age Society – Travels, Transmissions and Transformations, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005. KSELMAN 1983 - John S. KSELMAN, “Psalm 77 and the Book of Exodus”, JANES 15 (1983) 51-58. KUTSKO 2000 - John F. KUTSKO, Between Heaven and Earth. Divine Presence and Absence in the Book of Ezekiel, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2000. LAATO 2018 - Antti LAATO, The Origin of Israelite Zion Theology, London, T & T Clark, 2018.

228

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LABUSCHAGNE 2009 - Caspar J. LABUSCHAGNE, “Significant Compositional Techniques in the Psalms: Evidence for the Use of Numbers as an Organizing Principle”, VT 59 (2009) 583-605. LAMBERT 1982 - Wilfred G. LAMBERT, “Interchange of Ideas between Southern Mesopotamia and Syria-Palestine as Seen in Literature”, in: Hans Jörg Nissen and Johannes Renger (eds.), Mesopotamien und seine Nachbarn, Berlin, Dietrich Reimer, 1982, 311-315. LAMBERT 1985 - Wilfred G. LAMBERT, “Trees, Snakes and Gods in Ancient Syria and Anatolia”, BSOAS 48 (1985) 435-451. LAUGHLIN 1975 - John C.H. LAUGHLIN, A Study of the Motif of Holy Fire in the Old Testament (PhD Dissertation), Louisville, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1975. LEMARDELÉ 2019 - Christophe LEMARDELÉ, Archéologie de la Bible hébraique. Culture scribale et yahwismes, Oxford, Archaeopress, 2019. LEOW 2019 - Wen-Pin LEOW, “Changing One’s Tune: Re-reading the Structure of Psalm 132 as Complex Antiphony”, OTE 32 (2019) 32-57. LESLIE 1956 - Elmer A. LESLIE, The Psalms, Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1956. LEUENBERGER 2017 - Martin LEUENBERGER, “YHWH’s Provenance from the South”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 157- 180. LEVY 2008 - Thomas E. LEVY, “Ethnic Identity in Biblical Edom, Israel and Midian: Some Insights from Mortuary Contexts in the Lowland of Edom”, in: J. David SCHLOEN (ed.), Exploring the Longue Durée, Essays in Honor of Lawrence A. Stager, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2008, 251-261. LEVY 2009 - Thomas E. LEVY, “Pastoral Nomads and Iron Age Metal Production in Ancient Edom”, in: Jeffrey SZUCHMAN (ed.), Nomads, Tribes and the State in the Ancient Near East – Cross Disciplinary Perspectives, Chicago, The Oriental Institute, 2009, 147-177. LEVY et al. 2004a - Thomas E. LEVY, Russel B. ADAMS, Mohammad, NAJJAR, Andreas HAUPTMANN, James D. ANDERSON, Baruch BRANDL, Mark A. ROBINSON, Thomas HIGHAM, “Reassessing the Chronology of Biblical Edom: New Excavations and 14C Dates from Khirbat en-Nahas (Jordan)” Antiquity 302 (2004) 865-879. LEVY et al. 2004b - Thomas E. LEVY, Russel B. ADAMS, Adolfo MUNIZ, “Archaeology and the Shasu Nomads: Recent Excavations in the Jabal Hamrat Fidan, Jordan”, in: William H.C. PROPP and Richard E. FRIEDMAN (eds.), Le-David Maskil: A Birthday Tribute for David Noel Freedman, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns (2004), 63-89. LEVY et al. 2018 - Thomas E. LEVY, Erez BEN-YOSEF, Mohammad NAJJAR, “Intensive Surveys, Large-scale Excavation Strategies and Iron Age Industrial Metallurgy in Faynan, Jordan: Fairy Tales Don’t Come True”, in: Erez BEN-YOSEF (ed.), Mining for Ancient Copper – Essays in Memory of Beno Rothenberg, Tel Aviv, The Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, 2018, 245-258. LEWICKI 2015 - David LEWICKI, “Between Text and Sermon – Psalm 98”, Interpretation 69 (2015) 209-211. LEWY 1950 - Julius LEWY, “Tabor, Tibar, Atabyros”, HAC 23 (1950) 357386.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

229

LEWY 1956 - Immanuel LEWY, “The Beginnings of the Worship of Yahweh: Conflicting Biblical Views”, VT 6 (1956) 429-435. LIPINSKI 2006 - Edward LIPINSKI, On the Skirts of Canaan in the Iron Age: Historical and Topographical Researches, Leuven, Peeters, 2006. LIVINGSTONE 1986 - Alasdair LIVINGSTONE, Mystical and Mythological Explanatory Works of Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1986. LÖFFLER 2018 - Ingolf LÖFFLER, “Key Features for Deducing Technological Innovations and Organizational Structures in the Bronze Age Mining District of Faynan, Jordan”, in: Erez BEN-YOSEF (ed.), Mining for Ancient Copper – Essays in Memory of Beno Rothenberg, Tel Aviv, The Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, 2018, 259-269. LOHR 2009 - Joel N. LOHR, “So YHWH Established a Sign for Cain. Rethinking Genesis 4,15”, ZAW 121 (2009) 101-103. LOMBAARD 2006 - Christo LOMBAARD, “Genealogies and Spiritualities in Genesis 4:17-22, 4:25-26, 5:1-32”, ATS 8 (2006) 145-164. LONGMAN III 1984 - Tremper LONGMAN III, “Psalm 98: A Divine Warrior Victory Song”, JETS 27 (1984) 267-274. LONGMAN III 1993 - Tremper LONGMAN III, “Nahum”, in: Thomas E. MCCOMISKEY (ed.), The Minor Prophets – An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, vol. 2., Grand Rapids, Baker Academics, 1993, 765-830. LONGMAN III 2006 - Tremper LONGMAN III, Proverbs, Grand Rapid, Baker Academics, 2006. LONGMAN III 2012 - Tremper LONGMAN III, Job, Grand Rapids, Baker Academics, 2012. LORETZ 1984 - Oswald LORETZ, Psalm 29, Kannanäische El- und Baaltraditionen in jüdischer Sicht. Altenberge, Altenberge, CIS Verlag, 1984. LORETZ 1987 - Oswald LORETZ, “KTU 1.101:1-3a und 1.2 IV als Parallelen zu Ps 29,10”, ZAW 99 (1987) 415-421. LORETZ 1988 - Oswald LORETZ, Ugarit-Texte und Thronbesteigungspsalmen: die Metamorphose des Regenspenders Baal-Jahwe (Ps 24, 7-10; 29; 47; 93; 95-100 sowie Ps 77, 17-20; 114, Münster - Ugarit-Verlag, 1988. LUC 2000 - Alec LUC, “Storm and the Message of Job”, JSOT 87 (2000) 111-123. LUND 1933 - Nils W. LUND, “Chiasmus in the Psalms”, AJSLL 49 (1933) 281312. LUYSTER 1981 - Robert LUYSTER, “Wind and Water: Cosmogonic Symbolism in the Old Testament”, ZAW 93 (1981) 1-10. MACHOLZ 1980 - Christian MACHOLZ, “Psalm 29 und I Könige 19”, in: Rainer ALBERTZ, Hans-Peter MÜLLER; Walther C. ZIMMERLI; Hans W. WOLFF (eds.), Werden und Wirken des Alten Testaments: Festschrift für Claus Westermann zum 70 Geburstag, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980, 325333. MAGONET 1982 - Jonathan MAGONET, “Some Concentric Structures in Psalms”, HeyJ 23 (1982) 365-373. MAILLOT and LELIÈVRE 1962 and 1966 - Alphonse MAILLOT and André LELIÈVRE, Les Psaumes, Genève, Labor et Fides, vol. 1: 1962, vol. 2: 1966. MALAMAT 1988 - Abraham MALAMAT, “The Amorite Background of Psalm 29”, ZAW 100 (1988) 156-160.

230

BIBLIOGRAPHY

MANN 1971 - Thomas W. MANN, “The Pillar of Cloud in the Reed Sea Narrative”, JBL 90 (1971) 15-30. MARÉ 2010 - Leonard P. MARÉ, “The Theophany Report in Psalm 18 as Expression of an Alternative Reality”, JSem 19 (2010) 98-112. MARGULIS 1970 - Baruch MARGULIS, “The Canaanite Origin of Psalm 29 Reconsidered”, Biblica 51 (1970) 332-348. MARTIN 2005 - Michael MARTIN, Magie et magiciens dans le monde gréco-romain, Paris, Errance, 2005. MASSON 1991 - Michel MASSON, « Quelques parallélismes sémantiques en relation avec la notion de couler », in: Alan S. KAYE (ed.), Semitic Studies in Honor of Wolf Leslau, vol. 2, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, 1991, 1024-1041. MATHEWS 1995 - Claire R. MATHEWS, Defending Zion. Edom’s Desolation and Jacob’s Restoration (Isaiah 34-35) in Context, Berlin, De Gruyter, 1995. MATTINGLY 1997 - Gerald L. MATTINGLY, “A New Agenda for Research on Ancient Moab”, BA 60 (1997) 214-221. MAY 1955 - Herbert G. MAY, “Some Cosmic Connotations of mayim rabbim, ‘Many Waters’”, JBL 74 (1955) 9-21. MAYS 1985 - James L. MAYS, Psalm 29, Interpretation 39 (1985) 60-64. MAYS 1994 - James L. MAYS, Psalms. Louisville, John Knox, 1994. MAZAR 1965 - Benjamin MAZAR, “The Sanctuary of Arad and the Family of Hobab the Kenite”, JNES 24 (1965) 297-303. MAZAR 2003 - Amihai MAZAR, “Remarks on Biblical Traditions and Archaeological Evidence concerning Early Israel”, in: William G. DEVER and Seymour GITIN (eds.), Symbiosis, Symbolism, and the Power of the Past: Canaan, Ancient Israel, and Their Neighbors from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palaestina, Winona Lake (IN), Eisenbrauns, 2003, 85-98. MCCABE 1997 - Robert V. MCCABE, “Elihu’s Contribution to the Thought of the Book of Job”, DBSJ 2 (1997) 47-80. MCKAY 1973 - John W. MCKAY, “Further Light on the Horses and Chariot of the Sun in the Jerusalem Temple (2 Kings 23:11)”, PEQ 105 (1973) 167169. MCKENZIE 1950 - John, L. MCKENZIE, “A Note on Psalm 73(74):13-15”, TS 11 (1950) 275-282. MCNUTT 1990 - Paula M. MCNUTT, The Forging of Israel. Iron Technology, Symbolism and Tradition in Ancient Society, Sheffield, Almond Press, 1990. MCNUTT 1999 - Paula MCNUTT, “In the Shadow of Cain”, Semeia 87 (1999) 45-64. MESNIL DU BUISSON 1971 - Robert de MESNIL DU BUISSON, « La légende d’un temple phénicien, d’après une tablette de Ras Shamra et l’origine orientale des Dioscures », BSNAF 1969 (1971) 328-351. METTINGER 1982 - Tryggve N.D. METTINGER, The Dethronement of Sabaoth. Studies in the Shem and Kābȏd theologies, Lund, CWK Gleerup, 1982. METTINGER 1997 - Tryggve N.D. METTINGER, “In Search of the Hidden Structure : YHWH as King in Isaiah 40-55”, in: Craig C. BROYLES and Craig A. EVANS (eds.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah vol 1., Brill, Leiden, 1997, 143-154. MEYER 1906 - Eduard MEYER, Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstämme, Halle, Max Niemeyer, 1906.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

231

MEYNET 1990 - Roland MEYNET, « Histoire de l’analyse rhétorique en exégèse biblique », Rhetorica 8 (1990) 295-310. MEYNET 2007 - Roland MEYNET, Traité de rhétorique biblique, Paris, Lethielleux, 2007. MILLER 1974 - J. Maxwell MILLER, “The Descendents of Cain: Notes on Genesis 4”, ZAW 86 (1974) 164-174. MILLER 2000 - Patrick D. MILLER, The Religion of Ancient Israel, London, SPCK and Louisville (KT), Westminster John Knox Press, 2000. MILLER 2001 - Charles W. MILLER, “Reading Voices: Personification, Dialogism, and the Reader of Lamentation I.” BibInt 9 (2001) 393-408. MILLER 2003 - Cynthia L. MILLER, “A Linguistic Approach to Ellipsis in Biblical Poetry”, BBR 13 (2003) 251-270. MILLER 2014 - Robert D. MILLER, “Tracking the Dragon across the Ancient Near East”, ArchO (82) 225-245. MITTMANN 1978 - Siegfried MITTMANN, “Komposition und Redaktion von Psalm xxix”, VT 28 (1978) 172-194. MOBERLY 1983 - R.Walter L. MOBERLY, At The Mountain of God. Story and Theology in Exodus 32-34, Sheffield, JSOT Press, 1983. MOBERLY 2007 - R.Walter L. MOBERLY, “The Mark of Cain – Revealed at Last?” HTR 100 (2007) 11-28. MOISA 2011 - Struhl MOISA, Biblia şi Metalurgia, Târgu Lăpuş (Romania), Galaxia Gutenberg, 2011. MÖLLER 2003 - Karl MÖLLER, A Prophet in Debate – The Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Book of Amos, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2003. MONDRIAAN 2010 - Marleen E. MONDRIAAN, The Rise of Yahwism – Role of Marginalized Group (PhD Dissertation), Pretoria, University of Pretoria, 2010. MORENZ 2004 - Ludwig D. MORENZ, “Apophis: On the Origin, Name and Nature of an Ancient Egyptian Anti-God”, JNES 63 (2004) 201-205. MORSE 2003 - Benjamin MORSE, “The Lamentation Project: Biblical Mourning through Modern Montage”, JSOT 28 (2003) 113-127. MOWINCKEL 1962 - Sigmund MOWINCKEL, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, New York, Abingdon Press, 1967 (1962). MULLEN 1980 - E.Theodore MULLEN, The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature, Atlanta, Scholar Press, 1980. MÜLLER 2017 - Reinhard MÜLLER, “The Origins of YHWH in Light of the Earliest Psalms”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 207-238. NEGBI 1998 - Omer NEGBI, “Were there Sea Peoples in the Central Jordan Valley at the Transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age? Once Again”, TA 25 (1998) 184-207. NEIMAN 1969 - David NEIMAN, “The Supercaelian Sea”, JNES 28 (1969) 243249. NEL 1992 - Philip J. NEL, “Parallelism and Recurrence in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: A Theoretical Proposal”, JNSL 18 (1992) 135-139. NELSON 2009 - Richard D. NELSON, “Psalm 114”, Interpretation 63 (2009) 172174. NICCACCI 1994 - Alviero NICCACCI, “The Stele of Mesha and the Bible Verbal System and Narrativity”, Orientalia 63 (1994) 226-248.

232

BIBLIOGRAPHY

NICCACCI 1997 - Alviero NICCACCI, “Analyzing Biblical Hebrew Poetry”, JSOT 74 (1997) 77-93. NORTH 1964 - Robert NORTH, “The Cain Music”, JBL 83 (1964) 373-389. NOTH 1960 - Martin NOTH, The History of Israel, London, A & C Black, 1960 (1950). NOTH 1962 - Martin NOTH, Exodus, a Commentary, Philadelphia - Westminster, 1962 (1959). NURMELA 2006 - Risto NURMELA, The Mouth of the Lord has Spoken – InnerBiblical Allusions in Second and Third Isaiah, Lanham - University Press of America, 2006. O’BRIEN 2009 - Julia M. O’BRIEN, Nahum, Sheffield, Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009. O’BRIEN 2012 - Mark A. O’BRIEN, “The Dynamics of the Golden Calf Story [Exodus 32-34]”, ABR 60 (2012) 18-31. OLLENBURGER 1987 - Ben C. OLLENBURGER, Zion the City of the Great King: A Theological Symbol of the Jerusalem Cult, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1987. ORTLUND 2006 - Eric N. ORTLUND, “An Intertextual Reading of the Theophany of Psalm 97”, SJOT 20 (2006) 273-285. ORTLUND 2010 - E.N. ORTLUND, Theophany and Chaoskampf: The Interpretation of Theophanic Imagery in the Baal Epic, Isaiah, and the Twelve, Piscataway (NJ), Gorgias Press, 2010. PARDEE 1998 - Dennis PARDEE, Les textes para-mythologiques de la 24e campagne, Paris, Éditions recherche sur les civilisations, 1998. PARDEE 2005 - Dennis PARDEE, “On Psalm 29: Structure and Meaning”, in: Patrick D. MILLER and Peter W. FLINT (eds.), The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception, Leiden, Brill, 2005, 153-183. PARDEE and PARDEE 2009 - Dennis PARDEE and Nancy PARDEE, “Gods of Glory Ought to Thunder”, in: Lowell K. HANDY (ed.), Psalm 29 Through Time and Tradition, Eugene (OR), Pickwick publications, 2009, 115-125. PATTERSON 2007 - Richard D. PATTERSON, “Singing the New Song: An Examination of Psalms 33, 96, 98, and 149”, BS 164 (2007) 416-434. PAUL 1991 - Shalom M. PAUL, Amos – A Commentary on the Book of Amos, Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 1991. PELHAM 2010 - Abigail PELHAM, “Job as Comedy, Revisited”, JSOT 35 (2010) 89-112. PETERS 1939 - C. PETERS, “Hebräische ‫ קול‬as interjektion”, Biblica 20 (1939) 288-293. PFEIFFER 1926 - Robert H. PFEIFFER, “Edomite Wisdom”, ZAW 3 (1926) 13-25. PFEIFFER 1948 - R.H. PFEIFFER, Introduction to the Old Testament, New York, Harper, 19482. PFEIFFER 2013 - Kristina PFEIFFER, “Archaeometallurgy in Sinai – The Innovations of Copper Metallurgy”, in: Stefan BURMEISTER, Svend HANSEN, Michael KUNST and Nils MÜLLER-SCHEESSEL (eds.), Metal Matters – Innovative Technologies and Social Change in Prehistory and Antiquity, Leidorf, Rahden, 2013, 91-103. PFEIFFER 2017 - Henrik PFEIFFER, “The Origin of YHWH and its Attestation”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 115-144.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

233

PFITZMANN 2019 - Fabian PFITZMANN, Un YHWH venant du sud? De la réception vétérotestamentaire des traditions méridionales et du lien entre Midian, le Néguev et l’exode (Ex-Nb; Jg 5; Ps 68; Ha 3; Dt 33), Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2019. PFOH 2009 - Emanuel PFOH, “Genesis 4 Revisited – Some Remarks on Divine Patronage”, SJOT 23 (2009), 38-45. PICCIONE 1990 - Peter A. PICCIONE, “Mehen, Mysteries and Resurrection from the Coiled Serpent”, JARCE 27 (1990) 43-52. POPE 1973 - Marvin H. POPE, Job, New York, Doubleday, 1973. PRINSLOO 1992 - Willem S. PRINSLOO, “Psalm 114: It is YHWH who Transforms the Rock into a Fountain”, JNSL 18 (1992) 163-176. PRINSLOO 1998 - Gert T.M. PRINSLOO, “Tremble Before the Lord: Myth and History in Psalm 114”, OTE 11 (1998) 306-325. PROPP 2006 - William H.C. PROPP, Exodus 19-40 – A New translation with Introduction and Commentary, New York, Doubleday, 2006. RAABE 1989 - Paul R. Raabe, Psalm Structures. A Study of Psalms with Refrains, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1989. RABAN 1984 - Avner RABAN, “The Thera Ships: Another Interpretation”, AJA 88 (1984) 11-19. REDFORD 1992 - Donald B. REDFORD, Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1992. RENDSBURG 1990 - Gary A. RENDSBURG, Linguistic Evidence for the Northern Origin of Selected Psalms, Atlanta, Scholar Press, 1990. RENDTORFF 1993 - Rolf RENDTORFF, “The Paradigm is Changing: Hopes and Fears”, BibInt 1 (1993) 34-53. RENKEMA 1998 - Johan RENKEMA, Lamentations, Leuven, Peeters, 1998. REVELL 1981 - Ernest J. REVELL, “Pausal Forms and the Structure of Biblical Poetry”, VT 31 (1981) 186-199. REYMOND 1958 - Philippe REYMOND, L’eau, sa vie et sa signification dans l’Ancien Testament, Leiden, Brill, 1958. RICE 1993 - Gene RICE, “Africans and the Origin of the Worship of YHWH”, JRT 50 (1993) 27-44. RICHET 2007 - Pascal RICHET, « L’imaginaire des volcans et les progrès de la volcanologie », CFHG 21 (2007) 197-220. RIDDERBOS 1972 - Nicolaas H. RIDDERBOS, Die Psalmen. Stilistische Verfahren und Aufbau. Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Ps 1-41, Berlin, De Gruyter, 1972. RINGGREN 1966 - Helmer RINGGREN, Israelite Religion, Philadelphia, Fortress, 1966. ROBERTS 1972 - Jimmy J.M. ROBERTS, The Earliest Semitic Pantheon: A Study of the Semitic Deities Attested in Mesopotamia before Ur III, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1972. RÖMER 2013 - Thomas RÖMER, « Le Baal d’Ougarit et le Yahvé biblique », in: Pierre Bordreuil et al. (eds.), Les écritures mises au jour sur le site antique d’Ougarit (Syrie) et leur déchiffrement, Paris, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 2013, 33-44. RÖMER 2014 - Thomas RÖMER, L’invention de dieu, Paris, Seuil, 2014. RÖMER 2015 - Thomas RÖMER, “The Revelation of the Divine Name to Moses and the Construction of a Memory About the Origins of the Encounter

234

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Between YHWH and Israel”, in: Thomas E. LEVY; Thomas SCHNEIDER and William H.C. PROPP (eds.), Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective, Berlin, Springer, 2015, 305-315. ROTHENBERG 1988 - Benno ROTHENBERG, The Egyptian Mining Temple at Timna, London, 1988. ROTHENBERG 1999 - Benno ROTHENBERG, “Archaeo-Metallurgical Researches in the Southern Arabah 1959-1990. Part 2: Egyptian New Kingdom to Early Islam”, PEQ 131 (1999) 149-175. SAALSCHÜTZ 1825 - Joseph L. SAALSCHÜTZ, Von der Form der hebraïschen Poesie, Königsberg 1825. SANDERS 1996 - Paul SANDERS, The Provenance of Deuteronomy 32, Leiden, Brill, 1996. SARLO 2020 - Daniel SARLO, Heliolatry in the Hebrew Bible: An Investigation into YHWH’s Original Nature (PhD Dissertation), Toronto, University of Toronto, 2020. SARNA 1967 - Nahum SARNA, “Psalm xix and the Near Eastern Sun-God Literature”, Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies, vol. 1, Jerusalem, World Union of Jewish Studies, 1967, 171-175. SAUNERON and YOYOTTE 1959 - Serge SAUNERON and Jean YOYOTTE, « La naissance du monde selon l’Égypte ancienne », in: La Naissance du Monde – Sources Orientales, Paris, Le Seuil, 1959, 17-91. SAWYER 1986 - John, F.A. SAWYER, “Cain and Hephaestus - Possible Relics of Metalworking Traditions in Genesis 4”, Abr-Nahrain 24 (1986) 155-166. SCARTH 1989 - Alwyn SCARTH, “Volcanic Origins of the Polyphemus Story in the Odyssey: A non-Classicist’s Interpretation”, CW 83 (1989) 89-95. SCHÄDER 2010 - Jo-Mari SCHÄDER, “A Spatial Reading of Psalms 46-48”, OTE 23 (2010) 129-160. SCHLOEN 1993 - J. David SCHLOEN, “Caravans, Kenites, and Casus Belli: Enmity and Alliance in the Song of Deborah”, CBQ 55 (1993) 18-38. SCHMIDT 1961 - Werner H. SCHMIDT, Königtum Gottes in Ugarit und Israel. Zur Herkunft der Königsprädikation Jahwes, Berlin, De Gruyter, 1961. SCHRAMM 1995 - Brooks SCHRAMM, The Opponents of Third Isaiah – Reconstructing the Cultic History of the Restoration, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1995. SCHRAMM 2009 - Brooks SCHRAMM, “Adapting Psalm 29 Through Translation”, in: Lowell K. Handy (ed.), Psalm 29 Through Time and Tradition, Eugene (OR), Pickwick publications, 2009, 9-24. SCHUNK 1986 - K.D. SCHUNK, “‫”חצב‬, in: TDOT 5, 1986, 125-127. SCHWEMER 2008 - Daniel SCHWEMER, “The Storm-Gods of the Ancient Near East: Summary, Synthesis, Recent Studies, part II”, JANER 7 (2008) 121-168. SCHWEMER 2009 - Daniel SCHWEMER, “The Storm-Gods of the Ancient Near East: Summary, Synthesis, Recent Studies. Part I”, JANER 8 (2009) 1-44. SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE 2015 - Debra SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE, The Conflict Myth and the Biblical Tradition, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015. SEYBOLD 1980 - Klaus SEYBOLD, “Die Geschichte des 29. Psalms und ihre theologische Bedeutung”, TZ 36 (1980) 208-219. SEYBOLD 1996 - K. SEYBOLD, Die Psalmen, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 1996.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

235

SHERRATT 1994 - Susan SHERRATT, “Commerce, Iron and Ideology: Metallurgical Innovation in the 12th-11th Century Cyprus”, in: Vassos KARAGEORGHIS (ed.), Proceedings of the International Symposium Cyprus in the 11th Century B.C., Nicosia, University of Cyprus, 1994, 59-106. SHNIDER 2006 - Steven SHNIDER, “Psalm XVIII: Theophany, Epiphany Empowerment”, VT 56 (2006) 386-398. SMITH and DOMERIS 2008 - Kevin G. SMITH and Bill DOMERIS, “A Brief History of Psalms Studies”, Conspectus 6 (2008) 100-104. SMITH 1990 - Mark, S. SMITH, “The Near Eastern Background of Solar Language for YHWH”, JBL 109 (1990) 29-39. SMITH 1995 - Mark S. SMITH, “The God Athtar in the Ancient Near East and His Place in KTU 1.61”, in: Ziony ZEVIT, Seymour GITIN and Michael SOKOLOFF (eds.), Solving Riddles and Untying Knots – Biblical, Epigraphic and Semitic Studies in Honor of Jonas C. Greenfield, Winona Lake (IN), Eisenbrauns, 1995, 627-640. SMITH 2001 - Mark S. SMITH, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. Israel Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001. SMITH 2002 - Mark S. SMITH, The Early History of God: YHWH and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 20022 (1990). SMITH 2003 - Mark S. SMITH, “When the Heavens Darkened: Yahweh, El, and the Divine Astral Family in Iron Age II Judah”, in: Seymour GITIN and William G. DEVER (eds.), Symbiosis, Symbolism and the Power of the Past: Canaan, Ancient Israel and their Neighbors From the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palaestina, Winona Lake (IN), Eisenbrauns, 2003, 265-277. SMITH 2012 - Mark S. SMITH, “God in Israel’s Bible: Divinity Between the World and Israel, Between the Old and the New”, CBQ 74 (2012) 1-27. SMITH 2014 - Mark S. SMITH, “Canaanite Background to the Psalms”, in: William P. BROWN (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014, 43-56. SMITH 2017 - Mark S. SMITH, “YHWH’s Original Character: Questions about an Unknown God”, in: Jurgen VAN OORSCHOT and Markus WITTE (eds.), The Origins of Yahwism, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2017, 23-44. SOMMER 2013 - Benjamin D. SOMMER, “A Little Higher than Angels – Psalm 29 and the Genre of Heavenly Praise”, in: Maxine L. GROSSMAN (ed.), Built by Wisdom, Established by Understanding: Essays on Biblical and Near Eastern Literature in Honor of Adele Berlin, Bethesda, University Press of Maryland, 2013, 129-153. SPARKS 2007 - Kenton L. SPARKS, “Religion, Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel”, RC 1 (2007) 587-614. SPIECKERMANN 1989 - Hermann SPIECKERMANN, Heilsgegenwart. Eine Theologie der Psalmen, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1989. SPRONK 1997 - Klaas SPRONK, Nahum, Kampen, Kok Pharos, 1997. STADE 1894 - Bernhard STADE, “Das Kainszeichen”, ZAW 14 (1894) 250-318. STAGER 1988 - Lawrence E. STAGER, “Archaeology, Ecology and Social History: Background Themes to the Song of Deborah”, in: John A. EMERTON (ed.), Congress Volume: Jerusalem 1986, Leiden, Brill, 1988, 221-234.

236

BIBLIOGRAPHY

STAHL 2020 - Michael J. STAHL, “The Theological Origins of the Biblical God YHWH”, RC (2020) e12378 http://doi.org/10.1111/rec3.12378 STÄHLI 1985 - Hans-Peter STÄHLI, Solare Elemente im Jahweglauben des Alten Testaments, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985. STEINMANN 1996 - Andrew E. STEINMANN, “The Structure and Message of the Book of Job”, VT 46 (1996) 85-100. STENMANS 1997 - P. STENMANS, “Mabbûl”, in: TDOT 8, 1997, 60-65. STRAUSS 1970 - Hans STRAUSS, “Zur Auslegung von Ps 29 auf dem Hintergrund seiner kanaanäischen Bezüge”, ZAW 82 (1970) 91-102. STRINE and CROUCH 2013 - Casey A. STRINE and Carly L. CROUCH, “YHWH’s Battle Against Chaos in Ezekiel: The Transformation of Judahite Mythology for a New Situation”, JBL 132 (2013) 883-903. SYLVA 2011 - Dennis SYLVA, “Precreation Discourse in Psalms 74 and 77: Stuggling with Chaoskämpfe”, RT 18 (2011) 244-267. TALSTRA 1999 - Epp TALSTRA, “Reading Biblical Hebrew Poetry. Linguistic Structure or Rhetorical Device?” JNSL 25 (1999) 101-126. TANNER 2001 - Beth L. TANNER, The Book of Psalms Through the Lens of Intertextuality, New York, Peter Lang, 2001. TANNER 2014 - Beth TANNER, “Psalm 98”, in: Nancy DECLAISSÉ-WALFORD; Rolf A. JACOBSON and Beth L. TANNER, The Book of Psalms, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2014, 726-728. TATE 1990 - Marvin E. TATE, Psalms 51-100, Dallas, Word Books, 1990. TAYLOR 1993 - J. Glen TAYLOR, YHWH and the Sun: Biblical and Archaeological Evidence for Sun Worship in Ancient Israel, Sheffield, JSOT Press, 1993. TEBES 2007 - Juan M. TEBES, “A Land Whose Stones are Iron, and Out of Whose Hills You Can Dig Copper: The Exploitation and Circulation of Copper in the Iron Age Negev and Edom”, DavarLogos 6 (2007) 69-91. TEBES 2009 - Juan M. TEBES, “The ‘Wisdom’ of Edom”, BN 143 (2009) 97-117. TEBES 2017 - Juan M. TEBES, “The Southern Home of YHWH and Pre-Priestly Patriarchal/Exodus Traditions from a Southen Perspective”, Biblica 98 (2017) 166-188. TEBES 2018 - Juan M. TEBES, “The Mesha Inscription and Relations with Moab and Edom”, in: Jonathan S. GREER; John W. HILBER and John H. WALTON (eds.), Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament – Cultural, Social and Historical Contexts, Grand Rapids [MI], Baker Academics, 2018, 286-292. TIGAY 2008 - Jeffrey H. TIGAY, “The Voice of YHWH Causes Hinds to Calve (Psalm 29:9)”, in: Chaim COHEN, Victor A. HUROWITZ, Avi M. HURVITZ, Yochanan MUFFS, Baruch J. SCHWARTZ and Jeffrey H. TIGAY (eds.), Birkat Shalom – Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2008, 399-411. TOURNAY 1956 - Raymond J. TOURNAY, « En marge d’une traduction des psaumes », RB 63 (1956) 161-181. TSUMURA 1980 - David T. TSUMURA, “Literary Structure of Psalm 46:2-8”, AJBI 6 (1980) 29-55. TSUMURA 1981 - David T. TSUMURA, “Twofold Image of Wine in Psalm 46:45”, JQR 71 (1981) 167-175.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

237

TSUMURA 1988 - David T. TSUMURA, “The ‘Deluge’ (mabbûl) in Psalm 29:10”, UF 20 (1988) 351-355. TSUMURA 1989 - David T. TSUMURA, The Earth and the Water in Genesis 1 and 2 – A Linguistic Investigation, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1989. TSUMURA 2005 - David T. TSUMURA, Creation and Destruction – A Reappraisal of the Chaoskampf theory in the Old Testament, Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns, 2005. TSUMURA 2007 - David T. TSUMURA, “The ‘Chaoskampf’ Motif in Ugaritic and Hebrew Literatures”, in : J.M. MICHAUD (ed.), Le royaume d’Ougarit de la Crète à l’Euphrate – Nouveaux axes de recherche, Sherbrooke, GGC editions, 2007, 473-499. TSUMURA 2015 - David T. TSUMURA, “The Creation Motif in Psalm 74: 12-14? A Reappraisal of the Theory of the Dragon Myth”, JBL 134 (2015) 547-555. TUGENDHAFT 2018 - Aaron TUGENDHAFT, Baal and the Politics of Poetry, Abindgon, Routledge, 2018. VALBELLE and BONNET 1996 - Dominique VALBELLE and Charles BONNET, Le sanctuaire d’Hathor, maîtresse de la turquoise, Paris, Picard, 1996. VAN DER LUGT 2006, 2010, 2014 - Pieter VAN DER LUGT, Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry, Leiden, Brill, vol 1: 2006, vol 2: 2010, vol 3: 2014. VAN DER LUGT 2010 - Pieter VAN DER LUGT, “The Mathematical Centre and its Meaning in the Psalms”, in: Erich ZENGER (ed.), The Composition of the Book of Psalms, Leuven, Peeters, 2010, 643-651. VAN DER TOORN 1999 - Karel VAN DER TOORN, “Yahweh”, in: DDD, 1999, 910919. VAN DER STEEN 1996 - Eveline J. VAN DER STEEN, “The Central East Jordan Valley in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages”, BASOR 302 (1996) 51-74. VAN DER WESTHUIZEN 1993 - Janis P. VAN der WESTHUIZEN, “A Proposed Reinterpretation of Psalm 29 Based on a Stylistic-Exegetical Analysis”, JSem 5 (1993) 111-122. VAN WOLDE 2003 - Ellen VAN WOLDE, “In Words and Pictures: The Sun in 2 Samuel 12: 7-12”, BibInt 11 (2003) 259-178. VELDHUIJZEN and VAN DER STEEN 1999 - Xander VELDHUIJZEN and Eveline VAN DER STEEN, “Iron Production Center Found in the Jordan Valley”, NEA 62 (1999) 195-199. VENTER 2004 - Pieter M. VENTER, “Spatiality in Psalm 29”, in: Dirk J. HUMAN and Cas A.J. VOS (eds.), Psalms and liturgy, London, T & T Clark, 2004, 235-250. VOGT 1960 - Ernst VOGT, “Der Aufbau von Ps. 29”, Biblica 41 (1960) 17-24. VON RAD 1972 - Gerhard VON RAD, Genesis, London, SCM, 1972 [1952]. WAKEMAN 1969 - Mary K. WAKEMAN, “The Biblical Earth Monster in the Cosmogonic Combat Myth”, JBL 88 (1969) 313-320. WAGNER 1996 - Andreas WAGNER, “Ist Ps 29 die Bearbeitung eines Baal-Hymnus?” Biblica 77 (1996) 538-539. WALTKE 1986 - Bruce K. WALTKE, “Cain and his Offering”, WTJ 48 (1986) 363372. WALTKE 2005 - Bruce K. WALTKE, Proverbs – Chapters 15-31, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2005.

238

BIBLIOGRAPHY

WATSON 2005 - Rebecca S. WATSON, Chaos Uncreated – A Reassessment of the Theme of Chaos in the Hebrew Bible, Berlin, de Gruyter, 2005. WEBER 2001 - Beat WEBER, Werkbuch Psalmen 1, Stuttgart, W. Kohlhammer, 2001. WEBER and MOSTER 2003 - Beat WEBER and Alain MOSTER, « Le caractère poétique des Psaumes et son incidence sur leur interprétation. Quelques considérations sur une approche littéraire des Psaumes », RSR 77 (2003) 481-496. WEBER 2012 - Beat WEBER, “Toward a Theory of the Poetry of the Hebrew Bible: The Poetry of the Psalms as a Test Case”, BBR 22 (2012) 157-188. WEINFELD 1983 - Moshe WEINFELD, “Divine Intervention in War in Ancient Israel and the Ancient Near East”, in: Hayim TADMOR and Moshe WEINFELD (eds.), History, Historiography and Interpretation, Jerusalem, Magnes Press, 1983, 121-147. WEINFELD 1988 - Moshe WEINFELD, “The Tradition about Moses and Jethro on the Mountain of God”, Tarbitz 56 (1988) 449-460. WEIPPERT 1974 - Manfred WEIPPERT, “Semitische Nomaden des zweiten Jahrtausends. Über die Šȝśw des ägyptischen Quellen”, Biblica 55 (1974) 265-280. WEISER 1962 - Artur WEISER, The Psalms – A Commentary, London, SCM Press, 1962. WEISS 1984 - Meir WEISS, The Bible from Within – The Method of Total Interpretation, Jerusalem, Magnes, 1984. WEISS 2001 - Meir WEISS, Ideas and Beliefs in the Book of Psalms, Jerusalem, Mossad Bialik, 2001. WESSELS 2011 - Wilhelm J. WESSELS, “My Word is Like Fire: the Consuming Power of YHWH’s Word”, OTE 24 (2001) 492-510. WESTERMANN 1981 - Claus WESTERMANN, Praise and Lament in the Psalms, Atlanta, John Knox Press, 1981. WESTERMANN 1984 - Claus WESTERMANN, Genesis 1-11 – A Commentary, Minneapolis, Augsburg, 1984 [1974]. WHEDBEE 1990 - J. William WHEDBEE, “The Comedy of Job”, in: Yehuda T. Radday and Athalia Brenner (eds.), On Humour and the Comic in the Hebrew Bible, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1990, 217-250. WIGGINS 1999 - Steve A. WIGGINS, “Tempestuous Wind Doing YHWH’s Will – Perceptions of the Wind in the Psalms”, SJOT 13 (1999) 3-23. WILLEY 1997 - Patricia Tull WILLEY, Remember the Former Things. The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah, Atlanta, Scholar Press, 1997. WILLIAMS-FORTE 1983 - Elizabeth WILLIAMS-FORTE, “The Snake and the Tree in the Iconography and Texts of Syria During the Bronze Age”, in: Leonard GORELICK and Elisabeth WILLIAMS-FORTE (eds.) Ancient Seals and the Bible, Malibu, Undena Publications, 1983, 18-43. WILSON 2001 - Leslie S. WILSON, The Serpent Symbol in the Ancient Near East. Nahash and Asherah: Death, Life and Healing, Lanham (MD), University Press of America, 2001. WILSON 2002 - Gerald H. WILSON, Psalms Volume 1, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2002. WOLFERS 1995 - David WOLFERS, Deep Things out of Darkness. The Book of Job: Essays and a New English translation, Kampen, Kok Pharos / Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1995.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

239

YAHALOM-MACK et al. 2014 - Naama YAHALOM-MACK, Ehud GALILI, Irina SEGAL, Adi ELIYAHU-BEHAR, Elisabetta BOARETTO, Sana SHILSTEIN, and Israel FINKELSTEIN, “New Insights into Levantine Copper Trade: Analysis of Ingots from the Bronze and Iron Ages in Israel”, JAS 45 (2014) 159-177. YAHALOM-MACK and SEGAL 2018 - Naama YAHALOM-MACK and Irina SEGAL, “The Origin of the Copper Used in Canaan During the Late Bronze/Iron Age transition”, in: Erez BEN-YOSEF (ed.), Mining for Ancient Copper – Essays in Memory of Beno Rothenberg, Tel Aviv, The Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, 2018, 313-331. YOUNKER 1999 - Randall W. YOUNKER, “The Emergence of the Ammonites”, in: Burton MACDONALD and Randall W. YOUNKER (eds.), Ancient Ammon, Leiden, Brill, 1999, 189-218. ZAPPF 1998 - Burkard M. ZAPPF, “Eine feste Burg is unser Gott - Beobachtungen zu Ps 46”, BN 95 (1998) 79-93. ZENGER 2003 - Erich ZENGER, “Theophanien des Königsgottes JHWH. Transformationen von Psalm 29 im Psalter”, in: Erich ZENGER (ed.), Ritual und Poesie, Freiburg, Herder, 2003, 163-190. ZENGER 2005 - Erich ZENGER, “Thephanien des Königsgottes JHWH: Transformationen von Psalm 29 in den Teilkompositionen Ps 28-30 und Ps 93100”, in: Peter W. FLINT and Patrick D. MILLER (eds.), The Book of Psalms – Composition and Reception, Leiden, Brill, 2005, 407-442. ZEVITT 1986 - Ziony ZEVITT, “Psalms at the Poetic Precipice”, HAR 10 (1986) 351-366.

SOURCE INDEX Genesis 1-3 1: 6-7 1: 9-10 1: 21 2: 5 2: 10 4 4: 1 4: 1-3 4: 2 4: 3 4: 11 4: 12 4: 15 4: 19 4: 20 4: 21 4: 21-22 4: 22 4: 26 6-8 6-9 6-11 6: 4 6: 13 6: 17 7: 6 7: 10 7:11 7:12 8: 3 8: 20 8: 21 9: 11 12: 5 14: 6-7 15: 11 15: 18-21 19 19: 14-15 19: 25 19: 28 19: 36-38 25: 2 25: 2-3

31 22, 114, 180 49 24 113 74 73, 107 192 115 72, 73 192 86 73 74 115 116 190 74, 115 73 30, 114 148 112, 148 106 148 114 114 114 22 22 180 148 148 148 83 97 70 192 203 83 179 179 83 78 80

25: 6 25: 13-16 27: 29 32 32-33 32: 1 32: 10 32: 29-31 33: 1 36: 2 36: 5 36: 11 36: 12 36: 14 36: 16 36: 18 36: 20-22 36: 26 46: 25 48: 14

80 80 82 107 107 75 107 107 107 74 190 74 79 190 79, 190 190 79 74 25 126

Exodus 2: 16 2: 18 3-4 3: 1 3: 2-4 3: 13 3: 13-14 3: 15 4: 1-5 6: 3 15:1-21 15: 3 15: 10 15: 17 16: 10 17: 6 17: 8-16 17: 11 18: 7 18: 12 18: 12-16 18: 14-23 19: 16-19 19: 18

78 74 75 64, 78 63 85 72 73 63, 75 73, 85 2, 8, 113 50 113 50 89 178 79 80 64 65, 195 64 195 5, 58, 59, 165, 173 108

242

SOURCE INDEX

20: 2 20: 18 24: 10 24: 11 24: 16-17 24: 17 30: 28 31: 5 31: 9 32: 1 32: 2 32-34 33: 7-11 33: 9 33: 11 33: 12-23 33: 22-23 34: 6 35-40 35: 16 38: 1 40: 6 40: 10 40: 29 40: 34-35

85 173 68 68 165 5, 90 67 75 67 75 75 64 64, 195 65 65 64 89 45 64 67 67 67 67 67 89

Leviticus 9: 6 9: 13-14 9: 23 21: 20 23: 40 25:4 25: 9-10

89 89 89 111 92 4 173

Numbers 5: 11-31 13: 22 13: 26 13: 33 14: 10 16: 9 16: 19 17: 7 19: 6 20: 1 20: 6 20: 8 20: 11 20: 14-16 20: 17 22

74 106 97 106 89 89 89 89 93 17, 97 89 178 88 99 99 83

22-24 22: 4 22: 7 23: 2-3 23: 15 24: 15-24 27: 14 32: 12 33: 36 33: 37-42

73 78 78 84 84 79 97 73 17 99

Deuteronomy 1: 46-2: 1 2: 5 2: 9 2: 11 2: 19 2: 20-21 3: 9 3: 11 4: 10-13 4: 11 4: 11-12 4: 15 4: 33 4: 36 5: 22-26 5: 24 8: 15 8: 17-18 9: 2 18: 16 25: 17-18 29: 22 29: 28 32 32: 6-9 32: 8 32: 8-9 32: 21-25 32: 22 32: 51 33 33: 2 33:2-3 33: 3-4

99 82 83 106 83 106 14 106 165 5 59 96 59, 96 96 59, 60 90, 96, 165 178 137 106 59, 60 79 179 179 4 6 154, 196 85 5 57, 69 97 85 79 2 85

Joshua 10: 12 11: 21-22 13: 12 14: 13-14

4 106 106 73

243

SOURCE INDEX

14: 14 24: 4

74 82

Judges 1: 16 3: 9-11 4: 17 5 5: 4 5:4-5 5: 5 5: 14 5: 19-21 5: 24 6-7 6: 3-5 6: 33 7: 13 7: 14 11: 27 12: 15

64, 74, 192 73 192 1, 8 79, 82 2 90 80 113 192 78 78 78 78 78 84 80

1 Samuel 2: 1-10 7: 10 12: 18 15: 6

56 12, 56 54 192

2 Samuel 1: 23 12: 7-12 22

136 4 1

1 Kings 5: 10 7: 23-26 7: 27-39 8: 11 22: 19

80 67 67 89 196

2 Kings 10: 15-24 18: 4 18: 7 25: 13

73 197 183 67

Isaiah 1-39 2: 8 2: 10-21 2: 18 4: 5

204 204 206 204 108

6: 2-3 7: 15 7: 22 8: 6 8: 8 10: 16-17 12 13: 1-3 13: 9-10 17: 12-14 17: 13 18: 2 19: 1 19: 3 19: 5-7 21:11 23: 18 24: 3-6 24: 14-15 24: 15 24: 21-23 26: 7 26: 20-27: 1 27: 1 28: 2 29: 1-8 29: 20 30: 23-33 30: 27 30: 27-33 31: 4-9 31: 9 33: 1-16 33: 13-15 34 34-35 35: 1-10 35: 2 38: 8 40-55 40: 1-11 40: 3-5 40: 4-5 40: 5 40: 7 40: 9-10 40: 10-11 40: 19-22 41: 6-7 41: 18 42: 4 42: 6

106 103 103 113 113 89 129 206 4, 57 206 29 166 5 204 5 82 205 205 85 205 206 97 206 208 113 6, 206 205 206 4, 69 6, 62 206 67 206 205 205 203 206 89, 92 4 36, 153, 204, 206 206 4, 204 57 89, 204 70 204 205 204 192, 205 178 205 205

244 42: 10 42: 10-12 42: 10-13 42: 14-15 42: 14-17 42: 16-17 42: 17 42: 25 43: 16-19 43: 18-19 44 44: 9-11 44: 9-12 44: 11 44: 23 44: 23-24 45: 15-16 45: 16 46: 6-7 49: 6-7 49: 13 49: 19 50: 1-3 50: 2 50: 2-3 51: 3 51: 6-8 51: 7-10 51: 9 51: 9-10 51: 9-11 51: 9-52: 12 52: 7 52: 7-10 52: 9 52: 9-12 52: 10 53: 2 54: 9 54: 16 55: 10-11 55: 12 55: 12-13 56-66 56: 1 56: 6-7 57: 9 59: 15-19 59: 15-20 59: 16 59: 17 59: 18

SOURCE INDEX

204 204 205 57, 204 206 204 204 204 204 205 107 205 192 107, 205 204 205 167 166 204 205 204 204 206 69, 93 5 205 205 206 28, 31, 36 205, 206 28, 44 206 206 204 205 204 204, 205 92 113 70, 107, 118, 205 22 205 204 204, 207 205 205 166 206 204 205 205 205

59: 59: 60: 60: 63: 63: 63: 63: 64: 66: 66: 66: 66: 66:

19 19-20 1 2 1-6 5 19 19-64: 2 2 7 9 15 15-17 18

Jeremiah 4: 4 6: 24 10: 12-13 10: 13 17: 8 31: 18 35: 7 35: 18-19 48: 13 48: 35 49: 3 49: 6 49: 7 49: 8 49: 13 49: 14 50: 43 51: 15 51: 16 51: 34-37 52: 17 Ezekiel 1 1: 4 1: 26-27 1: 27-28 8: 16 10: 4 16: 4 21: 36 22: 31 25: 13 27:26 31: 8 34: 26

91 205 89 89 205 205 57 206 90 97 95 70 206 89 4 97 54, 56, 58 21 115, 116 111 86 73 84 84 84 84 82 82 84 166 97 54 21, 54 5

68 68, 91 117 91 4 89 92 70 57 82 23 94 25

245

SOURCE INDEX

35-36 47: 1-12

203 113

Haggai 1: 9-11 2: 9

113 113

Hosea 5: 10 13: 14-15

4, 57, 67, 90 5

Joel 4: 15-17 4: 16 4: 18

57 54, 58 54, 113,

Zechariah 2: 2-4 9: 14 14: 6 14: 8 14: 10 14: 16-19

75 173 4 113 111 209

Malachi 1: 2 1: 1-3

82 202

Amos 1:1 1:2 1: 3 1: 15 4: 11 5: 18 7: 4 9: 5 9: 9

43 58 136 84 179 57, 58 4 57 82

Obadiah 1: 1 1: 8

166 82

Micah 1: 1-4 1: 3-4 1: 4 4: 9

4 57 67, 90 97

Nahum 1 1: 1-5 1: 2-8 1: 2-10 1: 4-5 1: 406 1: 5-6

102 58 5 44-48, 57 93 101 4

Habakkuk 3 3: 2-19 3:3 3: 6 3:15

2 6 2 4 23

Zephaniah 1: 15-16 3: 8-9

4 57

Psalms 5: 12 8: 6 9: 2 9: 2-4 9: 3 9: 5 10: 5 16: 7 17: 7-9 18 18: 8-9 18: 8-16 18:16 18: 17 19 19: 2-7 21: 10 24: 7-8 24: 10 26: 7 28: 8 29

1-2 3-9

186 92 173 153 186 112 98 173 153 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 31, 36-42, 44, 47, 49, 57, 102, 160 62 45 68, 69, 90 29, 90 4 4, 91 70 92 92 152 108 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 36, 46, 47, 49, 50, 51, 54, 56, 71, 72, 73, 85, 86, 87, 118, 119, 120-143, 144, 148, 155, 157, 158, 159, 168, 169, 175, 178, 181, 182, 192, 193, 194, 195, 199, 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207, 209 19, 145, 146 19, 159

246 10-11 29:1 29:2 29:3 29:4 29:5 29:6 29:7 29:8 29:9 29:10 29:11 30: 32: 32: 33: 35: 36 40: 46

12 6 11 36 27 6

46:3 46:4 46: 5 46:7 46:8 46: 12 47: 6 48 48: 7 60: 14 63: 3 65 65: 10 66: 2 67

SOURCE INDEX

19 14, 16, 17, 18, 88, 105108, 159, 183 15, 17, 18, 88, 108-109, 111, 146, 154, 155 12, 17, 21, 22, 23, 29, 47, 88-92, 103, 145, 153, 168, 184 92-93, 103, 145, 154 23, 25, 27, 50, 93-95, 103, 110, 111, 174, 198 13, 14, 15, 109-111, 145, 179 16, 23, 27, 28, 95-97, 104, 14, 17, 23, 97-100, 104, 111, 159, 195 16, 17, 18, 23, 24, 28, 50, 88, 100-103, 104, 106, 145, 154, 169, 198 13, 16, 18, 21, 27, 29, 30, 47, 112-118, 145, 197 15, 18, 19, 24, 25, 106, 108, 118, 184, 185 186 29, 113 186 137 186 2 153, 173 4, 5, 9, 42-44, 47, 49, 57, 58, 102, 126, 184192, 193, 199, 200, 201, 202, 204, 209 58 58 113 58 48 48 173 42 97 98 108 2, 31, 46 113 109 126, 129, 152

67: 5 68 68: 16 68: 17 69: 3 71: 17 72: 18 74 74: 12-17 74: 13-14 75: 2 76 77 77: 12 77: 15-16 77: 17 77: 20 78: 4-5 78: 12 78: 16 80: 11 81: 17 82 82: 1 84 84: 12 86: 10 87 87: 4 89 89: 9-10 89: 10-13 89: 11 90: 14 92 92: 5 93 93: 4 96-97 96-98

96 96: 3 96: 5 96: 7-9

186 2 111 111 113 152, 173 152 31-33, 35, 36, 39, 49, 207 2 44 152, 173 42 2, 31, 33-34, 35, 36, 39, 49, 207 153 153 153 23 153 153 178 94 103 6, 106, 196 4, 42, 91 91 152 42, 126, 129, 152, 187 36 31, 33, 34-36, 39, 49, 207 44 2, 35 36 186 126, 129 186 2, 46 23 6 2, 9, 153, 181, 182, 183, 186, 192, 193, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 210 144-158, 159, 168, 169, 199, 204 173 158, 202, 204 145, 146

247

SOURCE INDEX

96: 11 96: 11-12 97 97: 6 97: 7 98 98: 1 98: 2 98: 3 98: 4-5 98: 7-8 98: 8 100 100: 2 104 104: 1-2 104: 4 104: 7 104: 16 104: 26 104: 32 105: 1-6 105: 2 106: 1 106: 47-48 106: 7 107: 23 108: 14 111 111: 4 105: 1-6 112 114 114: 118: 119: 119: 121 122 124: 126 128 132 133: 136 136: 144 144: 144:

8 15-16 18 27 4-5

3 4 5 7

158, 169 202 4, 5, 57, 146, 158-168, 169, 199, 204 89 158, 202, 204, 205 146, 168-175, 199, 204 205 205 204 205 202 205 126, 129 186 4 92 69 69 94, 95 49 57 153 173 158 158 153 23 98 126 153 153 126 9, 126, 175-183, 192, 193, 199, 200, 202, 204, 209 67 97 152 152 126, 129 42, 126 113 126, 129 126, 129 126, 129 113 31 152 4 57 29

145: 145: 147: 148:

5 12 18 7

92, 152, 173 92 70, 115, 117 49

Proverbs 3: 19-20 8: 22-31 8: 28-29 11: 26 13: 17 20: 26 20: 29 25: 13 30: 1 31 31:1

31 31 112 95 166 115 92 166 80 80 81

Job 1:1 1: 3 1: 6 1: 6-12 4: 9 5: 10 9: 5 20: 21 20: 28 26: 11 28 28: 25-26 32-37 36-37 36: 26-27 36: 26-37: 24 36: 27 36: 27-28 36: 29-31 36: 32 37: 2-5 37: 6 37: 12-13 37: 14-16 38: 4-11 38: 8-11 38: 25-26 38: 1-42: 8 39: 9-10 40: 25-41: 26 41: 10-12 42: 8

82 81 196 106 68 21 57, 68 98 115 69 54 54 53 52 52 52 21, 22 52 52 52 52, 53 52 52 52 31 112 53, 54 53 111 49, 53 39 53

248

SOURCE INDEX

Lamentations 1: 6 2 4: 21

92 5 82

Daniel 7: 9-10

117

Ezra 3: 1

173

Nehemiah 6: 14 8: 17 9: 6 12: 35 12: 41

203 209 31 173 173

1 Chronicles 1: 35 2: 55 4: 42-43 13: 8 15: 24 15: 28 15: 29 16: 8-22 16: 23-33 16: 28 16: 34-36 16: 42 18: 8

190 74, 77 79 173 173 173 176 158 158 158 158 173 67

2 Chronicles 5: 13 20: 21 25: 13-15 25: 15-16 30: 1-31 32: 9 32: 24

173 135 203 203 82 183 88

KTU 1.1 iii 23-24

16

1.2 iii 5 1.2 iii 15-24 1.2 iv 1.2 iv 8-9 1.2 iv 21-27 1.2 iv 27-34 1.3 iii 37 1.3 iii-iv 1.3 iii 38-46 1.3 iv 4, 6 1.3 iv 26 1.3 v 8 1.4 iii 10 1.4 iv 24 1.4 v 8-9 1.4 v 10 1.4 v 60 1.4 vi 40 – vii 45 1.4 vii 1.4 vii 14-52 1.4 vii 29-32 1.4 vii 50-52 1.5 i 1.5 i 1-3 1.5 v-vi 1.5 v 7 1.5 vi 2 1.6 i 36 1.6 ii 30-37 v 11-19 1.16 i 9-11 1.16 i 20-23 1.17 vi 49 1.47.26 1.83 1.101.1 1.101.3-4 1.108.1

16 3 26 22 32 32 22 32 28 22 22 16 22 16 51 20 22 14 15 27 13, 51 24 26 32 16 51 16 16 32 32 106 106 16 16 32 30 12 16

Enuma Elish Ii 246-252 iv 123-140 v 1-66

39 32 32

AUTHOR INDEX ABRAMSKY, S. 64, 74 ADAMS, R. 72, 76, 81 AHRONI, R. 124 AL-AYEDI, A. 116 ALBERTZ, R. 74 ALBRIGHT, W. 64, 74, 116 ALDEN, R. 19, 23, 125, 127, 128 ALETTI, J-N. 186 ALLEN, L. 175, 182 ALONSO-SCHÖKEL, L. 43, 106, 114, 125, 128, 185, 186 ALTER, R. 123 AMZALLAG. N. 4, 41, 44, 45, 57, 58, 63-65, 67-70, 74, 75, 82, 83, 90, 107, 115, 116, 118, 126, 127, 129, 135, 148, 152, 159, 170, 177, 182, 186, 187, 195, 197, 203, 205 ANDERSON, A. 13, 43, 128, 146, 184, 186 ANDERSON, J. 61 ARCHI, A. 3 ASSIS, E. 203 AUFFRET, P. 186 AUSTIN, S. 43 AVENT, G. 50, 146, 159, 160 AVISHUR, Y. 16, 17, 110, 128, 129, 145 AVNER, U. 81 AVRIEL, M. 67, 126, 127, 129, 177, 182 AXELSSON, L. 2 BANG, K-M. 35, 43 BARKER, K. 45-47 BARRÉ, M. 15 BAUMAN, A. 97, 98 BAILEY, W. 45-47 BEAUCAMP, E. 20, 24, 29, 98, 100, 122, 127, 145, 153, 161, 169, 170, 175, 204 BEGRICH, J. 114 BELLINGER, W. 19, 38, 100, 106, 112, 176 BEN-YOSEF, E. 63, 72 BENTOR, Y. 5, 58 BENZ, B. 80 BERLEJUNG, A. 4, 61

BERLIN, A. 111, 175, 176, 179 BEUKEN, W. 69 BLAKELY, S. 107, 116 BLENKINSOPP, J. 2, 64, 73, 74, 76, 77, 82, 115, 207 BLOCH, Y. 1 BOARETTO, E. 77 BODI, D. 68 BONNET, C. 116 BORGHOUTS, J. 197 BOYD-TAYLOR, C. 91 BRANDL, B. 72, 81 BRETTLER, M. 146 BRIGGS, C. 8, 100, 102, 106, 121, 123, 186 BRIGGS, E. 8, 100, 102, 106, 121, 123, 186 BROWN, J.P. 116 BRUEGGEMANN, W. 19, 38, 100, 106, 112, 176 BUCKLAND, A. 197 BUDGE, E. 116 BUTTENWEISER, M. 17, 18, 96, 100, 102, 112, 121 CAQUOT, A. 3 CARTLEDGE, T. 40 CASSUTO, U. 64 CASTEL, G. 63 CATHCART, K. 45, 46 CHILDS, B. 64 CHINN, C. 116 CHRISTENSEN, D. 45-47, 187 CLIFFORD, R. 14, 30, 34, 35, 80, 105, 106, 112, 145, 159, 160, 170, 175, 186, 207 CLINES, D. 52, 123 COHEN, C. 111, 113, 114 COLE, R. 36 COLLINS, C. 89 COLLON, D. 126 CONDAMIN, A. 126, 130, 186 CORNELIUS, I. 26 COUGHENOUR, R. 75 COWLEY, R. 114

250

AUTHOR INDEX

CRAIG, K. 72 CRAIGIE, P. 8, 15, 19, 20, 25, 29, 37-39, 51, 87, 96, 100, 106, 108, 109, 112, 122, 128, 184, 186 CROSS, F. 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 13-15, 18, 23, 27, 89, 90, 109, 112 CROUCH, C. 35-39, 206 CUNCHILLOS, J.L. 14, 19, 21, 106, 114 CURTIS, J. 54 CUSSET, C. 111

FOKKELMAN, J. 125, 128, 186 FRANKLIN, G. 4, 41 FRANKLIN, J. 116 FRANZ, G. 43 FRAYNE, D. 31 FREEDMAN, D. 1, 14, 16, 17, 109, 128, 129 FRIEDRICH, W. 44, 185 FROST, E. 43 FULLERTON, K. 127

DAHOOD, M. 13-15, 24, 27, 29, 33, 35, 38, 44, 51, 58, 105, 109, 112, 113, 122, 145, 146, 163, 169, 175, 179, 182, 184-186 DAVIDOVICH, U. 63 DAVIDSON, H. 53, 61 DAVIS, E. 204 DAVIES, P. 1 DAY, J. 2, 13, 14, 20, 21, 27, 29, 32, 34, 35, 41, 42, 45-47, 64, 74, 82, 115, 207 DE Moor, J. 6 DEARMAN, J. 82 DECLAISSÉ-WALFORD, N. 176, 182 DICKSON, K. 197 DICOU, B. 203 DIETERLE, R. 61 DIJKSTRA, M. 6, 78 DILLMANN, A. 115 DION, P. 4, 116 DOAN, W. 124 DOBBS-ALLSOPP, F. 7, 122, 124 DOMERIS, B. 125 DOZEMAN, T. 64 DRIVER, G. 68, 101 DUNN, J. 4, 5, 57-59, 62, 160

GALILI, E. 77 GALTER, H. 197 GARANI, M. 48 GARBINI, G. 1 GASS, E. 83 GASTER, T. 8, 13, 14, 18, 44, 46, 105, 109, 120, 121, 207 GELLER, S. 122 GERHARDT, W. 3 GERSTENBERGER, E. 8, 18, 43, 44, 87, 125, 127, 128, 145, 146, 161, 169, 176, 204 GIDDING, A. 63 GILBERTSON, D. 72 GILES, T. 124 GINSBERG, H. 12, 13, 15 GIRARD, M. 19, 20, 100, 125, 128, 186 GIVEON, R. 75-77 GOLDINGAY, J. 8, 17, 145, 159, 160, 163, 169, 170, 175, 176, 186, 204 GOOD, E. 82 GOSSE, B. 153, 204 GOULDER, M. 32, 34, 179 GRADL, F. 19 GRANT, D. 69, 70 GRATTAN, J. 72 GRAY, A. 37, 38, 41 GRAY, J. 3, 46, 47, 146 GREEN, A. 2, 3, 13, 26, 37 GREENE, M. 61 GREENE, N. 26, 33 GREENFIELD, S. 127 GREENSTEIN, E. 2, 87, 96 GRESSMANN, H. 59 GROSSBERG, D. 124 GRUBER, M. 69 GUNKEL, H. 14, 42, 43, 122, 186

EIDEVALL, G. 203 EINARSON, L. 61 EISING, H. 97 ELIADE, M. 107 ELIYAHU-BEHAR, A.

77

FENSHAM, F. 13, 15, 16, 19, 23, 29, 51, 89, 100, 109, 121 FINKELSTEIN, I. 72, 83 FISHER, L. 30 FITZGERALD, A. 5, 6, 13, 15, 41, 47, 146, 160, 205 FLEMING, D. 7, 74 FLUZIN, P. 63

HABEL, N. 50, 52, 53, 146, 159, 160 HAKHAM, A. 44, 58, 179, 185, 186 HALPERN, B. 1, 73

AUTHOR INDEX

HAMILTON, V. 64, 115 HANDY, L. 8 HANEY, L. 82 HAR-EL, M. 75 HARAN, M. 65 HARTLEY, J. 52 HAUPTMAN, A. 63 HENDEL, R. 106 HEISER, M. 196 HIGHAM, T. 72, 81 HOLLIS, F. 4 HOROWITZ, W. 68 HOSSFELD, F. 34, 36, 153, 169, 170, 176, 186, 204 HOUTMAN, C. 64 HOWARD, D. 159, 161, 169, 170, 204 HUMPHREYS, C. 5, 58 HUNT, C. 72 HUROWITZ, V. 197 HUTTON, J. 28, 35, 207, 208 HYLAND, F. 14, 16, 109, 128, 129 JACOBSEN, T. 26 JACOBSON, R. 8, 87, 88, 106 JAMES, E. 197 JEREMIAS, J. 6, 19, 40, 121, 145 KAPLAN, M. 26 KASSIANIDOU, V. 63 KEEGAN, T. 123 KEEL, O. 4, 5, 26, 34, 38, 40, 42, 58, 160 KELLEY, J. 82, 85 KELLY, S. 43 KENNEDY, J. 29, 89, 92 KIM, B. 40, 42 KLINGBEIL, M. 23, 25, 37, 38, 87 KLOOS, C. 14, 17, 20, 22, 24, 27, 30, 88, 105, 108, 112, 114 KNAPP, B. 63 KNAUF, E. 61, 85 KNUTSON, F. 30 KÖCKERT, M. 23 KOENIG, J. 4, 5, 40, 42, 48, 57-59, 62, 67, 69, 70, 90 KOLDE, A. 111 KRATZ, R. 1 KRAUS, H.-J. 8, 13, 17, 21, 34, 35, 38-40, 43, 87, 89, 96, 106, 114, 122, 160, 176 KREBERNIK, M. 8, 61 KRISTIANSEN, K. 91, 194

251

KSELMAN, J. 34 KUTSKO, J. 89 LAATO, A. 8, 13, 14, 27, 29, 66, 67, 105, 145, 184, 196 LABUSCHAGNE, C. 125 LAMBERT, W. 26, 197 LARSSON, T. 91, 194 LAUGHLIN, J. 64 LELIÈVRE, A. 36, 43, 153, 172, 204 LEMARDELÉ, C. 80 LEOW, W.-P. 126, 129 LESLIE, E. 40 LEUENBERGER, M. 2 LEVY, T. 72, 76, 81 LEWICKI, D. 204 LEWY, I. 64, 74 LEWY, J. 115 LIPINSKI, E. 81, 83, 85 LIPSCHITS, O. 83 LIVINGSTONE, A. 68 LÖFFLER, I. 77 LOHR, J. 73 LOMBAARD, C. 115 LONGMAN III, T. 45-47, 52, 80, 169, 170 LORETZ, O. 112, 120, 121, 146 LUC, A. 52 LUND, N. 19, 127, 128 LUYSTER, R. 30 MACHOLZ, C. 13 MAGONET, J. 125 MAILLOT, A. 36, 42, 153, 172, 204 MALAMAT, A. 14 MANN, T. 40 MARÉ, L. 37-40 MARGULIS, B. 8, 17, 19, 20, 88, 102, 109 MARTIN, M. 107 MASSON, M. 116 MATHEWS, C. 203, 205 MATTINGLY, G. 83 MAY, H. 23, 28 MAYS, J. 19, 89, 170, 204 MAZAR, B. 64, 74 MAZAR, A. 83 MCCABE, R. 52 MCKAY, J. 4 MCKENZIE, J. 32 MCNUTT, P. 64, 74, 115, 116 MESNIL DU BUISSON, R. 3 METTINGER, T. 17, 26, 30, 32, 206, 208

252

AUTHOR INDEX

MEYER, E. 59 MEYNET, R. 125 MILLER, J. 64, 74 MILLER, P. 3, 6 MILLER, C. 124, 127 MILLER, R. 26 MITTMANN, S. 29 MOBERLY, L. 64, 73 MOISA, S. 67 MÖLLER, K. 58 MONDRIAAN, M. 2, 64, 73 MORENZ, L. 197 MORSE, B. 124 MOSTER, A. 126 MOWINCKEL, S. 43, 184, 206 MULLEN, E. 14, 16, 30, 106 MÜLLER, R. 1, 2, 8, 19, 21, 23, 24, 27, 29, 34, 38, 40, 58, 61, 67, 108, 160 MUNIZ, A. 76, 81

PRINSLOO, W. 175, 176, 182 PROPP, W. 64

NAJJAR, M. 76, 81 NEGBI, O. 83 NEIMAN, D. 22 NEL, P. 7, 122 NELSON, R. 176, 179 NICCACCI, A. 7, 84, 122 NORTH, R. 74 NOTH, M. 5, 58 NURMELA, R. 204, 207

SAALSCHÜTZ, J. 187 SANDERS, P. 96 SARLO, D. 4 SARNA, N. 4 SAUNERON, S. 91 SAWYER, J. 64, 74 SCARTH, A. 61 SCHÄDER, J.-M. 43, 185 SCHLOEN, J. 1 SCHMIDT, W. 19 SCHRAMM, B. 87, 120, 207 SCHUNK, K. 95 SCHWEMER, D. 2, 26 SCOGGINS-BALLANTINE, D. 27, 30, 32, 45, 46, 176 SEGAL, I. 72, 77 SERGI, O. 72 SEYBOLD, K. 13, 29, 184 SHAAR, R. 72 SHERRATT, S. 72 SHILSTEIN, S. 72, 77 SHNIDER, S. 72, 77 SMITH, K. 125 SMITH, M. 2-4, 6, 14, 23, 37, 39, 61, 80, 91 SOMMER, B. 17, 29, 89, 94, 96, 100, 102, 106, 109, 110, 112, 113 SPARKS, K. 1 SPIECKERMANN, H. 20 SPRONK, K. 45, 46 STADE, B. 115

O’BRIEN, J. 45, 46, 64 OLLENBURGER, B. 42 ORTLUND, E. 49, 159, 160, 169, 204, 206 PARDEE, D. 8, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 23, 24, 29, 30, 92, 96, 100, 102, 112, 114, 122, 128, 145 PARDEE, N. 8, 13, 19, 24, 145 PATTERSON, R. 169 PAUL, S. 58 PELHAM, A. 53, 54 PETERS, C. 87 PFEIFFER, H. 1-3, 8 PFEIFFER, K. 63, 64 PFEIFFER, R. 82 PFITZMANN, F. 2, 3 PFOH, E. 73 PICCIONE, P. 197 POPE, M. 82 PRINSLOO, G. 176

RAABE, P. 44, 185, 186 RABAN, A. 44 REDFORD, D. 76, 77 RENDSBURG, G. 14, 15, 105, 113 RENDTORFF, R. 123 RENKEMA, J. 131 REVELL, E. 22, 115 REYMOND, P. 76 RICE, G. 76 RICHET, P. 45, 48, 61 RIDDERBOS, N. 128 RINGGREN, H. 4 ROBERTS, J. 3 ROBINSON, M. 72, 81 RÖMER, T. 2, 3, 61, 65, 76, 85 RON, H. 72 ROTHENBERG, B. 65, 77

253

AUTHOR INDEX

STAGER, L. 1 STAHL, M. 1, 2, 14, 32, 37, 38 STÄHLI, H.-P. 4 STEINMANN, A. 54 STENMANS, P. 114, 115 STRAUSS, H. 8, 101 STRINE, C. 38, 39 SYLVA, D. 31, 32, 34, 36, 38, 39 TALLET, P. 63 TALSTRA, E. 7, 122 TANNER, B. 123, 169 TATE, M. 35, 160 TAUXE, L. 72 TAYLOR, J. 4 TEBES, J. 2, 75, 82-84 TIGAY, J. 8, 24, 87, 100 TOURNAY, R. 8, 18, 122 TOY, C. 53 TRIMM, C. 40, 42 TSUMURA, D. 26, 30, 32, 33, 43, 49, 112, 113, 185 TRUBLET, J. 186 TUGENDHAFT, A. 26 UEHLINGER, C.

26, 38

VALBELLE, D. 116 VAN DER LUGT, P. 19, 43, 125, 126, 128, 170, 186 VAN DER TOORN, K. 2, 61, 74 VAN DER STEEN, E. 83 VAN DER WESTHUIZEN, J. 87, 122 VAN WOLDE, E. 4 VENTER, P. 17, 20, 121, 128

VOGT, P. VON RAD,

87 G. 114

WAKEMAN, M. 47 WAGNER, A. 15, 25 WALTKE, B. 72, 80 WATSON, R. 8, 9, 43, 114, 115, 145, 176, 201, 204, 205 WEBER, B. 7, 34, 122, 124-126, 128 WEINFELD, M. 2, 74, 78 WEIPPERT, M. 76 WEISER, A. 20, 87, 99, 175, 176, 184, 186 WEISS, M. 124, 175, 176, 185, 186 WESSELS, W. 59 WESTERMANN, C. 115, 169 WHEDBEE, J. 53 WIGGINS, S. 5 WILLEY, P. 36, 204, 205, 207 WILLIAMS-FORTE, E. 2, 26 WILSON, L. 197 WILSON, G. 40 WOLFERS, D. 82 YAHALOM-MACK, N. 72, 77 YONA, S. 64, 70, 74, 107, 115, 116, 126, 205 YOUNKER, R. 83 YOYOTTE, J. 91 ZAPPF, B. 185 ZENGER, E. 19, 25, 34, 36, 145, 153, 159-161, 169, 170, 176, 184, 186, 204 ZEVITT, Z. 124

PRINTED ON PERMANENT PAPER

• IMPRIME

SUR PAPIER PERMANENT

N.V. PEETERS S.A., WAROTSTRAAT

• GEDRUKT

OP DUURZAAM PAPIER

50, B-3020 HERENT

- ISO 9706