The Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature: A Historical Journey 9781575066028

Citation preview

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page i Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page ii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page iii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature A Historical Journey

Isaac Kalimi

Winona Lake, Indiana Eisenbrauns 2009

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page iv Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

ç Copyright 2009 by Eisenbrauns. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

www.eisenbrauns.com

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Kalimi, Isaac. The retelling of Chronicles in Jewish tradition and literature : a historical journey / Isaac Kalimi. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-57506-149-8 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Bible. O.T. Chronicles—Historiography. I. Title. BS1345.52.K35 2009 222u.60072—dc22 2009031001

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. †‘

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page v Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Dedicated to My beloved father, Rabbi Nisan Kalimi wyhy μynn[rw μynçd hbyçb ˆwbwny dw[ (Psalm 92:15)

and My beloved friend, Professor Moshe Aberbach zuu l twyçwnaw hmkj jwr alm,rçyw μt çya

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page vi Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page vii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii List of Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii Chapter 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

1. The Book of Chronicles and Its Status in the Hebrew Bible: Past and Present 1 2. The Purpose and Significance of the Current Study 3 3. The Present State of Scholarship 7 4. Sources, Methodological Approaches, and Coverage 11

Part 1 Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament Chapter 2

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Introduction 17 Use of Chronicles in the Books of Qoheleth and Daniel 17 The Supposed Use of Chronicles in the Book of Joshua 20 The Placement of Chronicles in the Hebrew Canon/Tanak 21 Chronicles as One of the Writings 26 Why Was Chronicles Located after Ezra–Nehemiah? 27 Was the Inclusion of Chronicles in the Hebrew Canon Disputed? 31 Conclusion 32

Chapter 3

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 1. The New Testament as a Jewish Literary Heritage 34 2. Chronicles and the New Testament 35 3. Murder in the Temple: The Chronicler’s Story of the Priest-Prophet Zechariah: Literary and Theological Features, Historical Credibility and Impact 36 4. The Story about the Murder of Zechariah in the Gospels and Its Relation to Chronicles 44

vii

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page viii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

viii

Contents 5. Matthew 23:34–37 and 2 Chronicles 36:15–16 54 6. The Murders of the Messengers: Stephen versus Zechariah and the Ethical Values of the “New” versus the “Old” Testament 56 7. Robbers on the Road to Jericho: Luke’s Story of the Good Samaritan and Its Origin in Kings/Chronicles 59 8. Chronicles and the Genealogies of John the Baptist and Jesus 66 9. “Deliver Us from the Gentiles”: Possible Use of 1 Chronicles 16:35a in Acts 26:17a 66 10. The Name of Zerubbabel’s Father in the Old Testament and the Gospels 67 11. Conclusion 68

Part 2 Chronicles in Jewish Hellenistic Sources Chapter 4

Chronicles’ Use in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha . . . . . . . . . . . 75 1. Apocrypha 75 2. Pseudepigrapha 81 3. Conclusion 84 Chapter 5

Chronicles in the Septuagint, the Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and the Philosopher Philo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 1. Chronicles and the Septuagint 86 2. The Use of Chronicles by Judeo-Hellenistic Historians 90 3. Chronicles and the Jewish Hellenistic Philosopher Philo of Alexandria 104 4. Conclusion 105

Part 3 Chronicles in Ancient Texts and Ancient Art Chapter 6

Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza . . . . . . . . . . . 111 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

A Fragment of Chronicles: 4QChr (= 4Q118) 111 The Use of Chronicles in the Qumran Manuscripts 115 “Prayer” of Hezekiah and Isaiah (4Q448) 118 Chronicles and the Cairo Geniza 119 Conclusion 121

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page ix Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Contents

ix

Chapter 7

Chronicles at Dura-Europos and in the Cognate Arts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 1. The Number of Jesse’s Sons according to Samuel and Chronicles 123 2. Dura-Europos Synagogue and Its Fresco: Samuel Anointing David 124 3. Excursus: The Number of Brothers— The State of the Research 128 4. Josephus, the Artist of Dura-Europos, Rabbinic Sources, and Medieval Christian Art 129 5. Conclusion 132 Chapter 8

Chronicles in the Mosaic Inscription of the Ancient Synagogue at Ein-Gedi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 1. The Mosaic Inscription and 1 Chronicles 1:1–4 133 2. The Mosaic Aramaic Expressions and Chronicles 134 3. The Use of 1 Chronicles 1:1–4 and the Aramaic Expressions in the Mosaic Inscription: An Observation 136 4. Conclusion to Part 3 137

Part 4 Chronicles in Classical Rabbinic Literature Chapter 9

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 1. Introduction 141 2. Unity, Authorship, and the Relationship of Chronicles to Ezra–Nehemiah 142 3. Mishnah Yoma: The Reading of Chronicles to the High Priest 143 4. Chronicles in the Talmudic and Midrashic Literature 145 5. The Genealogical Lists of Chronicles and the Rabbinic Midrash 149 6. Conclusion 152 Chapter 10

Targum Chronicles: Historical Setting, Lack of Interest, and Translation Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 1. Introduction 155 2. The Authorship and Historical Setting of Targum Chronicles 155 3. Lack of Interest in Targum Chronicles 157 4. Translation Methods of Targum Chronicles 158 5. Conclusion 174

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page x Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

x

Contents

Chapter 11

Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Introduction 177 Prayers and Blessings 177 Haftarot 182 Passover Haggadah 182 Excursus: The Lord’s Tefillin 183 Conclusion 185

Part 5 Chronicles in Medieval Jewish Literature Chapter 12

Medieval Jewish Biblical Interpretation: Comments and Commentaries on Chronicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 1. Introduction 189 2. Saadia Gaon and the Book of Chronicles 191 3. The Commentary on Chronicles Ascribed to Saadia Gaon’s Student 193 4. The Translation of the Karaite Japheth ben ºEli/Ali Halevi Habasri 197 5. Rabbi Jonah ibn Jana˙ 198 6. Rabbi Judah ibn Balºam 198 7. Pseudo-Rashi on Chronicles 199 8. Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki (Rashi) and Chronicles 209 9. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra 216 10. Rabbi David Kimchi 220 11. Tan˙um ben Joseph Yerushalmi and Chronicles 228 12. Rabbi Samuel Masnut and His Work on Chronicles 230 13. Rabbi Benjamin ben Judah Bozecco on Chronicles 231 14. Rabbi Levi ben Gershon (Gersonides) on Chronicles 232 15. Don Isaac Abarbanel and Chronicles 234 16. The Metzudot Commentaries on Chronicles: Rabbis David Altschuler and Je˙iel Hillel Altschuler 237 17. The Lost Commentaries of Rabbi Joseph Kara and Rabbi Meyu˙as 238 18. Chronicles’ Interpretation in the Responsa 238 19. Conclusion 241 Chapter 13

Chronicles in Medieval Jewish Mystical Writing: The Zohar . . . . . . . . 243 1. Introduction 243 2. Chronicles and the Zohar 243 3. Conclusion 252

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xi Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Contents

xi

Chapter 14

Chronicles in Medieval Jewish Poetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 1. Introduction 256 2. Solomon ibn Gabirol 256 3. Moses ibn Ezra 258 4. Judah Halevi 260 5. Murder of Zechariah: Chronicles, Rabbinic Legend, and Judah Halevi’s Lamentation 261 6. Murder of Zechariah in a Qina for the Ninth of Ab 266 7. Conclusion 267 Chapter 15

Chronicles in Medieval Jewish-Christian Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 1. 2. 3. 4.

Introduction 269 Use of Chronicles in Historic Disputes 270 Use of Chronicles in Polemical Writings 276 Conclusion 282

Part 6 Chronicles and the Dawn of Modern Jewish Biblical Critical Scholarship Chapter 16

Chronicles on the Threshold: Azariah de’Rossi, Uriel da Costa, Joseph Solomon Delmedigo, and Baruch Spinoza . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Introduction 287 Azariah de’Rossi 287 Uriel da Costa 291 Joseph Solomon Delmedigo 294 Baruch Spinoza 296 Conclusion 302

Chapter 17

Summary and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 1. In General 304 2. In Particular 307 3. All in All 321

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index of Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index of Scripture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index of Ancient Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Index of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

351 351 356 366 377

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xiii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Preface The rabbinic statement, “everything depends on luck, even the Torah Scroll in the shrine,” 1 certainly applies to the book of Chronicles as well. The book that ends the corpus of the Hebrew Bible, relatively abandoned through the generations, has moved in recent decades to the center of biblical scholarship. It was the first book of the Hebrew Bible to receive a comprehensive scholarly bibliography. 2 Now the book of Chronicles has the fortune of being the first book of Hebrew Scripture to receive a comprehensive study of its interpretation, reception, and usage in, as well as its impact on, Jewish literature and tradition from the Hellenistic age to early modern times (ca. 3rd century b.c.e. to the 17th century c.e.). The preparation of The Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature has been challenging and intriguing, both in the scope of the subject matter and in research, analysis, and writing. This volume is an interdisciplinary work. It deals with numerous sources through the long history of the Jewish people in the land of Israel and in the lands of the Diaspora. More than once I recalled Solomon’s assertion, as recounted in Chronicles: “And who is able to build him a House, seeing the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain him? Who am I then, that I should build him a House?” (2 Chr 2:5). The trust and conviction that “the House that I am about to build shall be wonderful and great,” which concludes the paragraph in Chronicles (2:8), has encouraged me to bring the composition to its successful conclusion. Nevertheless, despite all the effort, I cannot but feel that there is still some material concerning the possible effect and use/misuse of Chronicles buried somewhere in the rich Jewish heritage that remains to be researched. In order to appeal to a variety of audiences—professional scholars, teachers, clergy, graduate and undergraduate students, as well as a wide range of intellectual laypersons—each topic in the volume (i.e., written sources and archaeological discoveries, authors and commentators, etc.) is briefly described, prior to its analysis and synthesis into the theme of 1. See Zohar III 134; III 289; and compare the Targum Qoheleth 9:2: aylt alzmb alwk ‘everything depends on luck’. 2. See I. Kalimi, The Books of Chronicles: A Classified Bibliography (Simor Bible Bibliography 1; Jerusalem: Simor, 1990).

xiii

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xiv Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

xiv

Preface

the monograph. In this way, I attempt to avoid, as much as possible, unnecessary scholarly terminology. I am grateful to friends and colleagues who read part(s) of the manuscript. Useful suggestions and comments on particular chapters came from professors R. L. Hubbard, A. Maman, B. P. Mortensen, B. L. Sherwin, E. Tov, J. T. Townsend, and B. Wimpfheimer. My thanks go as well to Ms. E. R. Kalimi for her competence in proofreading. Obviously, the work on this volume spanned several years. Most of the research and writing took place during the years 2005–2009, when I served as Visiting Professor in Religion (Hebrew Bible and Ancient Jewish History and Religion) at Northwestern University (Evanston/Chicago, Illinois), and the manuscript was completed during the year I served as the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Senior Fellow at the W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research ( Jerusalem, Israel). I would like to thank my wonderful colleagues in both institutions for their welcomes and support. This volume is dedicated to my beloved father and teacher, Rabbi Nisan Kalimi, whose wisdom and loving concern accompany me always and everywhere. May the Almighty bless him with a healthy, long, and peaceful life. This book is also dedicated to the blessed memory of my beloved, trustworthy friend and colleague, Professor Moshe Aberbach, rkz hkrbl rçyw qydx, from whom I learned so much. May the Almighty bless his immortal soul forever. Isaac Kalimi Northwestern University and The University of Chicago

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xv Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

List of Illustrations Figure 1. The Manuscript of 2 Chr 28:27; 29:1–3 from Qumran Cave 4 (4QChr = 4Q118) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 [Reproduced by permission of the Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem]

Figure 2. A fresco on the west wall of the Dura-Europos Synagogue: Samuel Anointing David (244–245 c.e.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 [Reprinted from Encyclopedia Judaica (1973) 6.300]

Figure 3. Mosaic inscription in the floor of the Ein-gedi Synagogue (5th to 7th centuries c.e.), lines 1–2: a citation of 1 Chr 1:1–4 . . 135 [Reproduced by permission of the Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem]

Figure 4. The first page of Targum Chronicles (Vatican, Urb. Ebr. 1; fol. 895a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 [Reproduced by permission of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome]

Figure 5. The first page of Mikraot Gedolot on Chronicles: [ascribed to] Rashi, Radak, and Metzudot commentaries . . . . . . . . 227 Figure 6. A portrait of Joseph Solomon Delmedigo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 [Reprinted from the first edition of Elim, by Delmedigo (Amsterdam: ben Israel, 1629)]

Figure 7. A portrait of Baruch Spinoza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 [Reproduced by permission of the Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel, Germany]

xv

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xvi Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xvii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Abbreviations General A Ag. Ap. Ant. B b. b. b.c.e. B.M. c.e. d. diss. ed(s). ET fig(s). fol. frg(s). lit. LXX m. ms(s) MT n(n). no(s). pl(s). Ps.r. t. Tg. trans. v. y.

Alexandrian Codex of the Septuagint Josephus, Against Apion Josephus, Jewish Antiquities Vatican Codex of the Septuagint Babylonian Talmud born before the Common Era British Museum inventory number the Common Era died dissertation editor(s)/edition/edited by English Translation figure(s) folio fragment(s) literally The Septuagint Mishnah manuscript(s) The Masoretic Text note(s) number(s) plate(s) Pseudorecto (right) side of a folio or tablet Tosefta Targum translated by verso (left) side of a folio or tablet Jerusalem Talmud

Reference Works and Periodicals AB ABD ABR

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992 Australian Biblical Review

xvii

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xviii Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

xviii AS ATR Bar-Ilan BASOR BHS BibInt BKAT BSac BWANT BZ BZAW CBQ DJD DSD ErIsr ETL EvQ ExpTim FOTL HTR HUCA IBS ICC JANES JBL JHI JHS JJA JJS JNES JQR JR JSOT JSOTSup JSP JSQ JTS JWAG JWH Les Lesonénu Laºam MGWJ NTS OTE OTL PAAJR

Abbreviations Aramaic Studies (formerly Journal for the Aramaic Bible) Anglican Theological Review Annual of Bar-Ilan University: Studies in Judaica and Humanities Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia Biblical Interpretation Biblischer Kommentar: Altes Testament Bibliotheca Sacra Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Catholic Biblical Quarterly Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Dead Sea Discoveries Eretz-Israel Ephemerides theologicae Lovanienses Evangelical Quarterly Expository Times Forms of the Old Testament Literature Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual Irish Biblical Studies International Critical Commentary Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of the History of Ideas Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Journal of Jewish Art Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Near Eastern Studies Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Religion Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplements Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Jewish Studies Quarterly Journal of Theological Studies Journal of the Walters Art Gallery Journal of World History Lesonénu Lesonénu Laºam: A Popular Journal for the Hebrew Language Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums New Testament Studies Old Testament Essays Old Testament Library Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xix Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

xix

Abbreviations PG PL RB REJ RevQ RGG

RiB SBLDS SJT SSN TP TRE TZ VT VTSup WBC WTJ ZA ZAW ZNW

Patrologia Graeca. Edited by J.-P. Migne. 162 vols. Paris, 1857–86 Patrologia Latina. Edited by J.-P. Migne. 217 vols. Paris, 1844–64 Revue Biblique Revue des Études Juives Revue de Qumran Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Edited by H. D. Betz, D. S. Browning, B. Janowski, and E. Jüngel. 4th ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998–2005 Rivista Biblica Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Scottish Journal of Theology Studia Semitica Neerlandica Theologie und Philosophie Theologische Realenzyklopädie. Edited by G. Krause and G. Müller. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1977–2004 Theologische Zeitschrift Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum Supplements Word Biblical Commentary Westminster Theological Journal Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

Biblical, Apocryphal, and Pseudepigraphical Books Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh Judg 1–2 Sam 1–2 Kgs Isa Jer Ezek Hos Joel Amos Obad Jonah Mic

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges 1–2 Samuel 1–2 Kings Isaiah Jeremiah Ezekiel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah

Nah Hab Zeph Hag Zech Mal Ps Job Prov Ruth Song Qoh Lam Esth Dan Ezra Neh 1–2 Chr

Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi Psalms Job Proverbs Ruth Song of Songs Qoheleth Lamentations Esther Daniel Ezra Nehemiah 1–2 Chronicles

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page xx Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

xx

Abbreviations

1–2–3–4 Macc 1–2 Esd Sir Tob

1–2–3–4 Maccabees 1–2 Esdras Sirach/Ben Sira Tobit

1–2 Bar Liv. Pro. T. Mos.

1–2 Baruch Lives of the Prophets Testament of Moses

Matt Mark Luke John Acts Rom

Matthew Mark Luke John Acts of the Apostles Romans

1–2 Cor Gal Eph Phil Col 1–2 Thess 1–2 Tim Titus Phlm Heb Jas 1–2 Pet 1–2–3 John Jude Rev

1–2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1–2 Thessalonians 1–2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrews James 1–2 Peter 1–2–3 John Jude Revelation

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 1 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 1

Introduction 1. The Book of Chronicles and Its Status in the Hebrew Bible: Past and Present Biblical scholars, both ancient and modern, have often referred to the underappreciated and neglected status of the book of Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible. Indeed, this statement is true especially when the study, interpretation, treatment, and use of Chronicles are compared with those of other biblical—or even biblical-historical—books. Several reasons have combined to make this late historical book one of the least popular, least studied, and least appreciated books of the entire corpus of Hebrew Scriptures: 1. The book opens with nine chapters of long, “dry” genealogical and geographical lists (1 Chronicles 1–9) that do not appeal to the general audience or to most scholars. 1 2. Almost half the book has parallel texts in the earlier biblical books, especially Samuel–Kings. 2 These parallel texts in Chronicles have generally been unjustly considered dull, worthless repetitions/ rewriting of the earlier books. 3 A reader with this sort of attitude

1. See, for example, N. Golb, Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls? The Search for the Secret of Qumran (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996) 337: “Inversely, while the Bible is a careful, deliberate selection, including many outstanding writings of ancient Hebrew culture, it also includes writings possessing somewhat less ‘intrinsic value.’ . . . For instance, the long catalogues of animal sacrifices and incense burnings in the Pentateuch, and Chronicles with its seemingly endless lists of names.” 2. That is, in the Torah/Pentateuch and Former Prophets—mainly, Samuel and Kings, Psalms, Ruth, Ezra and Nehemiah. See I. Kalimi, The Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History in Chronicles (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005) 1 n. 1 (for early versions, see I. Kalimi, Zur Geschichtsschreibung des Chronisten: Literarisch-historiographische Abweichungen der Chronik von ihren Paralleltexten in den Samuel- und Königsbüchern [BZAW 226; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1995] 1 n. 1; idem, The Book of Chronicles: Historical Writing and Literary Devices [Biblical Encyclopaedia Library 18; Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2000] 1 n. 1 [Hebrew]). 3. For this issue, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 407–10; idem, “The Characterization of the Chronicler and His Writing,” An Ancient Israelite Historian: Studies in the Chronicler, His Time, Place, and Writing (SSN 46; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005) 19–39.

1

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 2 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

2

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

3.

4.

5.

6.

naturally turns his or her attention to the “original,” earlier passages in Samuel–Kings rather than to their “copies” in Chronicles. 4 The rest of the book, the nonparallel texts (Zusätze/Sondergut/the “additions”), 5 also do not attract much attention, because: a. Many additional geographical and genealogical lists are scattered throughout the composition, such as: 1 Chr 11:26–47; 12:1–38; 23:3–24; 24–27; 2 Chr 11:5–10; 17:14–19; 31:12–16. b. The form, language, and style of the narrative sections of Chronicles that have no parallels in other biblical books do not particularly interest students and scholars as much as those of Samuel and Kings. The Greco-Roman Jewish communities and later, the Christian world, both of which followed the Septuagint’s misevaluation of Chronicles as being no more than a mere “supplement” to the earlier biblical historical books, 6 did not leave much of a legacy for a positive consideration of Chronicles with regard to its own merit and value. 7 In addition to the usual difficulties (linguistic, textual, theological, historical, etc.) involved in the study of any biblical text on its own terms, there are many varied, fundamental contradictions between the book of Chronicles and the earlier biblical books from the perspective of religion, beliefs and opinions, historical information, textual variations, and so on. Every student and exegete of Chronicles must struggle with these contradictions, the resolution of which is not an easy task. Thus, few laypersons or even scholars have been eager to engage in the study of the book and accept the challenge of its many complexities. Because the Chronicler related to written sources that were composed prior to his time, scholarly study of Chronicles requires familiarity with the content and nature of those sources—the earlier biblical books—which were composed in classical Biblical Hebrew, on the one hand, and the content and nature of the late biblical literature, which was composed in late Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic, on the other hand. It also requires knowledge of the various social, religious, cultural, and historical backgrounds of each period of the early and late literary works, respectively. Because this

4. On this view of the parallel texts, see additional details below, chap. 5, §1b, pp. 87–88; chap. 12, §15, p. 235. 5. By the word addition, I mean an insertion that the Chronicler presumably made in the earlier “biblical” texts, mainly in the Deuteronomistic History. 6. See for instance, below, chap. 5, §1b, pp. 88–89. 7. See in detail, below, chap. 5, §1b, pp. 87–89.

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 3 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Introduction

3

is not an easy task for any scholar at any time, the heavy burden of researching Chronicles has generally been avoided. In the current volume, I do not attempt to rehabilitate the book of Chronicles. After all, Chronicles is an integral part of the Jewish and Christian canons, while many other books, definitely no less valuable (such as 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Ben Sira [= The Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach = Ecclesiasticus]), were excluded, at least from the Jewish (as well as the Protestant) Bible. 8 The book of Chronicles received great praise from a major scholar and Church Father, Saint Jerome. 9 In the same vein, it is worthwhile to mention the recent positive statements by modern Jewish and Christian biblical scholars with regard to the book of Chronicles. For example, W. A. L. Elmslie states: “Chronicles is one of the most stimulating books in the Bible, courageous and practical—a splendid achievement.” 10 Simon J. De Vries labels the book a “treasure” and admits: “I regard Chronicles as one of the richest mines of spirituality in all Scripture” (italics mine). 11 William Johnstone asserts, “Chronicles is a challenging work, not just in its format but in the way in which it throws widely held views into question.” 12 Elsewhere, I name the book micro Biblia and call for moving it “to the center of 21st century’s biblical scholarship” and making it foundational to modern research of ancient Israelite history and historiography. 13 Indeed, in the last decades the book has undergone a scholarly renaissance. The undeniably sophisticated qualifications of the Chronicler have been clearly shown. 14 Chronicles has begun to receive due scholarly attention and holds a respectable place in contemporary biblical scholarship.

2. The Purpose and Significance of the Current Study a. The Purpose of the Current Study Any valuable literary work written long ago has its own unique history of transmission, reception, treatment, study, translation, and interpretation 8. In contrast to the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles, which include the Apocrypha. 9. See below, chap. 2, §6e, p. 29. 10. See W. A. L. Elmslie, The Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 3: 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Tobit, Judith (New York: Abingdon, 1954) 341. 11. See S. J. De Vries, 1 and 2 Chronicles (FOTL 11; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989) xiv. 12. W. Johnstone, 1 and 2 Chronicles, vol. 1: 1 Chronicles1–2 Chronicles 9: Israel’s Place among the Nations ( JSOTSup 253; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997) 9. 13. See Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 160. 14. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History; idem, An Ancient Israelite Historian.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 4 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

4

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

as well as an impact on society, culture, and civilization. Through the generations, a work of this sort becomes a part of the spiritual heritage of a group of people, a nation, or even a universal human culture. Without a doubt, this is the case with regard to biblical literature as a whole 15 and each of its books—including particularly μymyh yrbd rps (‘book of the acts/ events of the days/years’), that is, the book of Chronicles. 16 My intention in the present volume is not only to unfold the fascinating history of one of the largest books of the Hebrew Bible (1,765 verses assembled within 65 chapters) 17 but also to reveal the extent to which the book was neglected. I will also examine the authors who interpreted, translated, treated, and applied Chronicles during the long course of Jewish cultural tradition. I begin with the earliest evidence, from the Hellenistic period—evidence that is included in the Hebrew Bible itself—and I continue until the dawn of modern Jewish critical biblical scholarship in the 17th century c.e. In an earlier study, I pointed out that the Hebrew Bible (Mikra, Tanak) as a whole is deemed the most essential Scripture in Judaism and, theologically, the most venerable of all Jewish writings. It is the foundation text for all sorts of Judaism in all times. Throughout all the generations, the Hebrew Bible with its religious, ethical, and theological concepts—its variety of laws, prophecies, and poetry, historical writings, and stories—has been a source of inspiration for the Jewish people. It was and is the solid rock on which Jewish faith, theology, culture, and literature stand, the trunk of the tree from which grew the branches of Jewish spirituality: the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, rabbinical literature, Jewish religious (or, if you wish, “theological,” in the wide sense of the word) thought and 15. Indeed, the Bible is the world’s best-seller: “no book has been more pored over, has been the subject of more commentary and controversy, or has had more influence not only on our religious beliefs but also on our culture and language than the Bible. Certainly no book has been as widely read.” See J. Pelikan, Whose Bible Is It? A History of the Scriptures through the Ages (New York: Viking, 2005) on the inside dust jacket. 16. The Hebrew root rbd means ‘act’ (see, for example, Gen 18:25; 39:19: μyrbdk ˚db[ yl hç[ hlah; 2 Chr 32:1) or ‘word’ (e.g., Gen 39:17; 44:4–7; Deut 1:1; 4:12). Similarly, the word μymy means ‘days’, but it may also mean ‘years’ (Gen 24:55; Lev 25:29c; and the Mesha Inscription, line 5: ˆbr ˆmy bam ta wn[yw). On the various names given to Chronicles, see G. N. Knoppers and P. B. Harvey Jr., “Omitted and Remaining Matters: On the Names Given to the Book of Chronicles in Antiquity,” JBL 121 (2002) 227–43. 17. The book of Chronicles (along with the other books of the Bible) was divided into verses by the scribes (b. Qiddusin 30a) and into consecutively numbered chapters (first in the Vulgate) in 1225 c.e. by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton (ca. 1155–1228). These entered Jewish Bibles for the first time in the Mikraot Gedolot editions, which were published by Daniel Bomberg in 1517 and 1525 (see also below, chap. 10, §3, p. 158).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 5 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Introduction

5

philosophy, and Jewish historiography. All these originate within and continue from the Hebrew Bible. Generations of Jewish sages studied, translated, and expounded the Bible, while transmitting its spiritual heritage through their own creative insights and thoughts. A never-drying spring, the Bible supplied oppressed people with strength and courage throughout the long and painful exile and provided them with comfort and hope for better times. 18 The words of the immortal German Jewish poet Heinrich Heine (Düsseldorf, 1797–1856, Paris) 19 magnificently express this view: It is the book of books, Biblia. . . . Unless I am in error, it was Mohammed who called the Jews the “People of the Book [ahl al-kitab—I. K.].” . . . A book is their fatherland, their possession, their ruler, their fortune and misfortune. They live within its peaceful precincts. Here they exercise their inalienable civil rights. From here they cannot be driven out. Here they cannot be despised. Here they are strong and admirable. Immersed in the reading of this book, they paid little heed to the changes which took place in the real world outside them. Nations rose and fell; states flourished and decayed; revolutions shook the land, but the Jews were bowed over their book and scarcely marked the turmoil of the times which swept over their heads!20

In this volume, I present the place of a single biblical book, the book of Chronicles, in this process and against the background of this perspective through 20 centuries. I attempt to shed light on the role and function of this particular biblical text within the rich mosaic of Jewish history and cultures. I hope to give examples of the ways that the many different Jewish literatures, historiographies, exegeses, theologies, philosophies, disputations, arts, and mosaics encountered this intriguing tome named Chronicles. Throughout the volume, I strive to describe the journey of Chronicles along the route of Jewish culture, literature, history, and interpretation. This journey reflects the major course of the history of Jewish biblical interpretation generally, in the various historical settings through the many ages. In addition, I will compare the Jewish tradition with regard to the 18. See I. Kalimi, “Die Bibel und die klassisch-jüdische Bibelauslegung: Eine Interpretations- und Religionsgeschichtliche Studie,” ZAW 114 (2002) 594–610, esp. pp. 594–96. 19. On the life and work of Heinrich Heine, see L. Browne, That Man Heine: A Biography (New York: Macmillan, 1927); J.-C. Hauschild and M. Werner, “Der Zweck des Lebens ist das Leben selbst.” Heinrich Heine: Eine Biographie (2nd ed.; Cologne: Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1997). 20. H. Heine, Sämtliche Werke, vol. 4: Schriften zu Literatur und Politik II Vermischtes (Munich: Winkler, 1969) 35–36 (Ludwin Börne, Eine Denkschrift; Zweites Buch). The English translation is from F. Ewen (ed.), The Poetry and Prose of Heinrich Heine (New York: Citadel, 1948) 657–58.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 6 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

6

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

book of Chronicles with the non-Jewish tradition (namely, Christianity), while demonstrating the differences and distinctiveness of the former.

b. The Significance of the Current Study It is important to be familiar with the history of a biblical book and its interpretation and use in Jewish (and, of course, Christian) tradition, 21 literature, and the various sources. Nevertheless, the significance of the current volume goes beyond this and what I already expressed above by describing the intention of the volume. B. Sanhedrin 38b states: wymkjw rwd rwd wyçrwdw rwd rwd ‘each generation and its expositors, each generation and its sages’. 22 A similar line of thought is expressed in Western culture by the Latin dictum: veritas filia temporis (‘truth is a daughter of time’). 23 To paraphrase the latter, “(each) interpretation is a daughter of time,” and I would add “place and circumstance.” Therefore, it is important, on the one hand, to observe the continuity of interpretation, while on the other hand it is critical to note exegetical developments through the ages. Indeed, each generation has its own unique “truths,” concerns, questions, and specific viewpoints on biblical texts. It is undeniable, however, that many scores of questions on the biblical text today are the same as questions raised in earlier generations. The necessity to explain unclear words, phrases, syntax, duplicates, and contradictions between texts as well as theological difficulties and conflicts in the very same paragraph or book, or between one biblical book and another existed and still exist. The premodern Jewish commentaries show great sensibility to various difficulties in the biblical text and make the reader aware of a range of problems in it. Furthermore, many commendable and valuable insights for understanding the text (i.e., a single word, idiom, verse, paragraph, collection of passages, etc.) have been accumulated during the generations that are still useful today. In many cases, the earlier interpretations and insights are entirely convincing, and in countless examples they supplement contemporary arguments. Are we allowed to dispose of these great efforts and achievements by earlier generations? Thorough knowledge of interpretation’s history can eliminate scholars’ repeating of the same thoughts, interpretations, and arguments. Unfortunately, too many scholars claim to have discovered new understandings, ideas, literary devices, and so on that already appeared in earlier literature. There are numerous examples 21. By the term tradition, I refer here to its Hebrew equivalent, masoret, which in Jewish usage connotes transmission and reception by the living community. 22. Compare Abot deRabbi Nathan, version A, chap. 31. 23. On this dictum, see the recent stimulating article of B. Dooley, “Veritas filia Temporis: Experience and Belief in Early Modern Culture,” JHI 60 (1999) 487–504.

spread is 12 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 7 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Introduction

7

of this problem in biblical scholarship in general and in works on Chronicles in particular. Some examples follow: 1. Nachmanides and Gersonides considered Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah to be a single work. 24 However, in Chronicles scholarship, the credit for this assumption is given to L. Zunz (1832) and F. C. Movers (1834). 25 2. The literary device of resumptive repetition (Wiederaufnahme) was noted already by the medieval Jewish commentators Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Kimchi, 26 and the commentary on Chronicles that is ascribed to Rashi. 27 In the second half of the 20th century, C. Kuhl published his article, “Die ‘Wiederaufnahme’: Ein literarisches Prinzip?” 28 as if he was identifying a new literary principle of the Hebrew Bible. Indeed, his work has been accepted as original by many biblical scholars. 3. At the end of the 1st century c.e., Josephus combined the stories of Samuel and Chronicles in his description of the conquest of Jerusalem. The same method was also used by a number of Jewish medieval commentators (e.g., Abarbanel). This method was revitalized in modern historical-critical research by several German, British, American, and Israeli scholars, who were unaware that it was not new at all. 29

3. The Present State of Scholarship In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the history of interpretation, reader-response criticism, and the sociology of sacred texts. There is growing interest “in what the text does as much as what it 24. See below, chap. 12, §14 (Gersonides) 232–34, and nn. 176–77; and compare to Abarbanel, §15, p. 236. 25. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 9–10 n. 37. 26. See the examples listed in ibid., 275–76, 292–93, and also Rashi’s commentary on Gen 28:10; 39:1. 27. See for instance, his commentary on 2 Chr 2:17. 28. See ZAW 64 (1952) 1–11. 29. See in detail I. Kalimi, “The Capture of Jerusalem in the Deuteronomistic and Chronistic History,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 95–108, esp. pp. 104–5. There are several other examples that were discussed in my earlier study: (1) Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 293 n. 46 (David Kimchi; E. L. Curtis and A. A. Madsen on 1 Chr 5:1– 3a); (2) ibid., 22–23 and n. 20 (the commentary on Chronicles ascribed to Rashi; A. B. Ehrlich and W. A. L. Elmslie on 2 Chr 35:20); (3) ibid., 58 n. 83 (David Kimchi; W. Rudolph concerning Ps 105:6 and 1 Chr 16:13); (4) ibid., 393–94 n. 44 (Abarbanel; M. Elat on the phrase “fleet/ship of Tarshish” in the Hebrew Bible); (5) ibid., 94 n. 25 (talmudic and medieval Jewish commentaries and several modern exegetes on 2 Sam 7:14b).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 8 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

8

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

means” (italics mine). 30 To cite the renowned French Jewish philosopher, Emmanuel Levinas (1906–95): . . . in the very anthropology of the human—and not only in the superstructure and fragility of its cultures—the eminent role played by so-called national literatures, Shakespeare, Molière, Dante, Cervantes, Goethe and Pushkin. Signifying beyond their plain meaning, they invite the exegesis—be it straightforward or tortuous, but by no means frivolous—that is spiritual life.31 Language which has become Holy Scriptures . . . is not solely a matter of the engagement of speaking beings in the fabric of the world and History, where they are concerned with themselves—that is to say, with their perseverance in being. In language a signified does not signify only from words which, as a conjunction of signs, move towards this signified. Beyond what it wants me to know, it co-ordinates me with the other to whom I speak; it signifies in every discourse from the face of the other.32

A number of studies have been published in recent decades on the use of Chronicles in modern biblical scholarship. These studies mostly investigate the use of Chronicles in modern research since the 19th century, specifically, its association with the Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch—that is, the dating of the Deuteronomistic (D) and Priestly (P) sources. 33

30. See J. F. A. Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel: Isaiah in the History of Christianity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), on the opening page. 31. E. Levinas, Beyond the Verse: Talmudic Readings and Lectures (trans. G. D. Mole; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994) xi. 32. Ibid., xii. However, I must stress that, even “what it means”—the most objective, simple meaning—is not always so simple, because an idiom, verse, or some other form of language could hold in essence more than one “original” meaning. It seems that Rashi was aware of this feature of Scripture: he opens his commentary on the Song of Songs, saying: arqm ˚l ˆya rbd πwsw μym[f hmkl axwy dja arqm .yt[mç wz μytç μyhla rbd tja . . . wfwçp ydym axwy “ ‘One thing God has spoken; two things have I heard’ (Ps 62:12)— one scripture could be interpreted in several ways. However, ultimately scripture does not depart from its simple meaning and its implication.” Notably, peshat—‘the simple meaning’—of Scripture could also have more than one meaning, because the wording of the author himself indicates this fact. 33. See, for example, D. Mathias, Die Geschichte der Chronikforschung im 19. Jahrhundert unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der exegetischen Behandlung der Prophetennachrichten des chronistischen Geschichtswerkes (Ph.D. dissertation; Leipzig: Karl Marx University, 1977); S. Japhet, “The Historical Reliability of Chronicles: The History of the Problem and Its Place in Biblical Research,” JSOT 33 (1985) 83–107; M. P. Graham, The Utilization of 1 and 2 Chronicles in the Reconstruction of Israelite History in the Nineteenth Century (SBLDS 116; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990); K. Peltonen, History Debated: The Historical Reliability of Chronicles in Pre-critical and Critical Research (2 vols.; Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 9 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Introduction

9

Kai Peltonen, for instance, offers a detailed historical survey of the wellknown debate over the reliability of Chronicles as a source for reconstructing Israelite history in the preexilic era. He briefly reviews the precritical Jewish and Christian exegesis of Chronicles, specifically regarding his topic. 34 In my The Books of Chronicles: A Classified Bibliography, I attempted “to bring together, systematically and in great detail, the entire spectrum of studies dealing with Chronicles, with particular emphasis on biblical criticism, from the early parts of the 19th century to the present day (i.e., 1990).” I arranged the entries not alphabetically as most bibliographies do, but chronologically, by date of publication. “The idea is that the entries should serve as a kind of ‘history of research/interpretation,’ and enable the reader to see at a glance not only what is the most up-to-date work on the topic, but also to observe the trends of scholarship.” 35 Nonetheless, the vast majority of the almost 60 commentaries on the book of Chronicles written from the mid-19th century to the present day 36 contain nothing or very little about the application and interpretation of Chronicles by Jews and Christians for hundreds of years. In fact, even today, reception history (Rezeptionsgeschichte) and impact history (Wirkungsgeschichte) are beyond the scope of most of the introductions to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, the encyclopedia, dictionary, or lexical entries, or the many monographs on the book of Chronicles. Only a handful of commentaries and dictionary items have reviewed (and then, very briefly) the study of Chronicles in the precritical period, specifically in the Christian world. 37 In A Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, 38 a very short

34. See ibid., 1:18–35 (“Chronicles in Jewish Exegesis”), 36–56 (“Chronicles in Christian Exegesis”). 35. See Kalimi, The Books of Chronicles: A Classified Bibliography, xv. 36. For a list of the 50 commentaries since E. Bertheau’s in 1854, see ibid., 45–52, items 112–62. Since the publication of my Classified Bibliography, several additional commentaries have been published. These include, to mention only a few, De Vries, 1 and 2 Chronicles; S. Japhet, I and II Chronicles: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1993); W. Johnstone, 1 and 2 Chronicles ( JSOTSup 253–54; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997); J. Jarick, 1 Chronicles (Readings: A New Biblical Commentary; New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002); G. N. Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9 (AB 12; New York: Doubleday, 2004); idem, I Chronicles 10–29 (AB 12A; New York: Doubleday, 2004); P. B. Dirksen, 1 Chronicles (Historical Commentary, Old Testament; Leuven: Peeters, 2005); R. W. Klein, 1 Chronicles: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2006). 37. See, for example, E. L. Curtis and A. A. Madsen, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1910) 1–2, 44–45; J. Goettsberger, Die Bücher der Chronik oder Paralipomenon übersetzt und erklärt (Die Heilige Schrift

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 10 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

10

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

entry of two columns (about one page) is dedicated to Chronicles, which mostly attempts to show how the Chronicler interpreted the earlier sources. However, very little is said there about the interpretation or use of Chronicles itself by Jews and Christians in premodern times. In fact, the entire premodern period is discussed in three sentences! 39 In another example, the recently published Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation, two short paragraphs are dedicated to “Early Jewish Interpretation” and “Early Christian Interpretation,” each less than a single column long, 40 while the majority of the item deals with interpretation in the 19th and 20th centuries. 41 In fact, modern biblical scholars mostly centered their interest on the biblical text and its “original” meaning and neglected all the premodern “religious” or “fundamentalist” compositions and commentaries. This point is clearly expressed by John F. A. Sawyer regarding the book of Isaiah. In his introduction to The Fifth Gospel: Isaiah in the History of Christianity, Sawyer states: For most modern biblical experts, including the majority of those who have written commentaries on Isaiah, I think it is true to say, the role of Isaiah in Christian tradition is of marginal interest, and scarcely worthy of serious scholarly attention. Their sole concern has been with the original meaning of the original text: anything later than that is rejected as at best unimportant, at worst rubbish. If anything, they want their main contribution to the study of the Bible to be a corrective one, explicitly rejecting what people believe about it: “Ah, but that is not what the original Hebrew meant!” [italics mine] 42

Indeed, everything Sawyer says about the book of Isaiah could easily—or even more categorically—be said about the book of Chronicles. What he says about “Christian tradition” could be said about “Jewish and Christian des Alten Testamentes 4/1; Bonn: Hanstein, 1939) 22–23; R. J. Coggins, The First and Second Books of the Chronicles (Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976) 1. See also, in relative detail, the survey by T. Willi, Die Chronik als Auslegung: Untersuchungen zur literarischen Gestaltung der historischen Überlieferung Israels (FRLANT 106; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 12–30; Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 3 n. 9, 409. 38. See R. J. Coggins and J. L. Houlden (eds.), A Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (London: SCM / Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990). 39. The entry has been written by Coggins, “Chronicles,” in ibid., 119–20. 40. See S. Japhet, “Chronicles, Books of,” in Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (ed. J. H. Hayes; 2 vols.; Nashville: Abingdon, 1999) 1:179–80. 41. Ibid., 180–86. In her commentary (I and II Chronicles, viii), Japhet apologetically excuses herself from the task, saying: “Because of limitation of time and space I could not devote all due attention to the history of exegesis and research.” 42. Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel, 8–9.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 11 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Introduction

11

traditions” on Chronicles. Many premodern works investigate the biblical text from important aspects that are still relevant today. They contain many valuable insights on the biblical text. By expressing a negative attitude toward them, these scholars unfortunately “throw out the baby with the bath water.” In fact, there is no recent comprehensive, fully documented, competent study available on the subject under discussion. Some studies published in the last decades of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries either cover specific topics (within a limited time span) or briefly touch on the issue. 43 The present study, therefore, intends to fill a lacuna in the field of biblical and historical studies. It is the first comprehensive study on Chronicles primarily devoted to the history of its interpretation and usage as well as its impact on numerous Jewish (and to some extent Christian) sources. It furnishes the reader with an overview covering approximately two thousand years of history on this unique late biblical historical book. Furthermore, this study contributes to the intellectual history of Jewish literature, thought, interpretation, and tradition.

4. Sources, Methodological Approaches, and Coverage This study is interdisciplinary. It is based, first and foremost, on a wide range of written sources in several languages and literary genres from various places and times. It also takes into account archaeological remains and artistic works. All the sources are examined from historical-critical, philological, literary, and comparative perspectives. Each source is placed within its appropriate historical, sociocultural, and theological context. Because over the generations, religion played a central role in the identity of Jews and Jewish heritage and had a great impact on Jewish literature, art, thought, and history, special attention has been given to the religious texts. The vast span of time and the range of literary sources and topics in this volume require familiarity with a large variety of scholarly disciplines, 43. See E. Ben-Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles in the Late Second Temple Period,” JSP 3 (1988) 59–88 (= idem, History, Literature, and Theology in the Book of Chronicles [London: Equinox, 2006] 243–68; this essay is discussed in the 4th chapter of the current volume); I. Kalimi, “A Transmission of Tradition: The Number of Jesse’s Sons— Biblical Writings, Judeo-Hellenistic Arts, Rabbinic Literature and Medieval Christian Art,” TZ 57 (2001) 1–9 (this article is discussed below, in chap. 7); Knoppers and Harvey, “Omitted and Remaining Matters.” See I. Kalimi, Das Chronikbuch in der jüdischen Tradition von Daniel bis Spinoza (Oldenburger Universitätsreden 91; Oldenburg: BIS, 1997); idem, “History of Interpretation: The Book of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition— From Daniel to Spinoza,” RB 105 (1998) 5–41.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 12 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

12

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

scores of textual sources and literary genres, as well as related archaeological findings. The diverse material requires command of several ancient and modern languages. One must constantly be aware of recent developments, both methodological and theoretical in these disciplines. Furthermore, familiarity with the various historical settings of the written sources and other materials, their authors, dates, places, writing styles, implications, and specific research on the individual/material involved is necessary. By no means is it an easy assignment for any one scholar. Without a doubt, in an era that is becoming more and more specialized and “one knows everything on (almost) nothing,” it is an ambitious project to undertake. Nonetheless, in order to obtain a wide perspective and appropriate sense of the use, interpretation, and impact of this fascinating latebiblical book on Jews and Jewish works, we must trace its Jewish history and wealthy cultural tradition in the appropriate general, exegetical, and historical contexts. We will converse with the many rich studies on the individual sources and themes involved. Although I frequently refer to various Christian literary, exegetical, and liturgical traditions, theologians, writers, and artists regarding their attitudes toward and treatment of the book of Chronicles, especially from the comparative viewpoint, the core of the current volume centers on the Jewish sources and Jewish world. It is apparent that comprehensive treatment of Chronicles in Christian literature, tradition, and exegesis requires a separate study, on its own merit, written by a scholar with different experience. 44 Certainly, the same argument could be made for the place and impact of the Hebrew Bible (as a whole or any part/book of it) on Islamic literature and tradition. Some parts of this volume analyze the history of interpretation of the book of Chronicles in Judaism and stress specifically the use/misuse of the book by Jews as well as its impact on their culture, such as literature and art. This part, in fact, is comparable to the part of John F. A. Sawyer’s volume The Fifth Gospel: Isaiah in the History of Christianity that scrutinizes the history of interpretation of the book of Isaiah in Christianity and the misuse of the book by the Church and its impact on Christian culture. 45 Other parts of the volume under discussion treat Chronicles from a different viewpoint—that is, the way that some exegetes, historians, philosophers, and others interpreted, translated, understood, and used the book of Chronicles. These parts include particularly chap. 5, which discusses 44. Meanwhile, in addition to several places in this volume, I am in the process of preparing an essay on this issue. See I. Kalimi, “History of Interpretation: I and II Chronicles in Christian Tradition and Exegesis,” forthcoming. 45. See Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 13 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Introduction

13

the Hellenistic Jewish historians Eupolemus and Josephus and the philosopher Philo; chap. 10, which deals with Targum Chronicles; chap. 12, which explores many medieval Jewish commentators and theologians and their specific work on Chronicles; and chap. 16, which evaluates the remarks of the Jewish scholars and philosophers de’Rossi, da Costa, Delmedigo, and Spinoza on Chronicles. Generally speaking, these chapters are comparable to those of Brevard S. Childs, in The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture, 46 who concentrates on particular Christian individuals (such as Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Jerome, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, and John Calvin) and their “struggle with interpreting the Bible largely within the context of the church.” 47 However, as my earlier publications attest, 48 the foundations of this volume preceded the respective publications of both Sawyer and Childs. 46. See B. S. Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004). 47. Ibid., xi. 48. See, for example, the references listed in n. 41. Though the items I listed in the latter note were released from press in 1997 and 1998, the research was completed in 1995, well before the appearance of Sawyer’s book.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 14 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 17 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 2

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible 1. Introduction In this chapter I will discuss two clearly demarcated issues: one is the use of Chronicles within books that were written after the composition of Chronicles and were included in the corpus that in later times was named the Mikra/Tanak/Hebrew Bible. 1 This includes the use of Chronicles in Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes) and Daniel; and the hypothesis of the use of Chronicles in Joshua. The other issue is the placement of Chronicles itself—as a whole—in the Tanak/Hebrew canon (I will handle this issue by examining the testimonies of Ben Sira’s grandson, Miqßat Maºa¶ê haTorah, 2 Maccabees, and the Gospel of Luke); the location of Chronicles in the third part of the Tanak, the Ketubim; and the question whether the inclusion of Chronicles in the Hebrew canon was disputed.

2. Use of Chronicles in the Books of Qoheleth and Daniel a. Chronicles and Qoheleth Chronicles was used to a limited extent in the book of Qoheleth, which was apparently written in the Hellenistic era (3rd century b.c.e.). 2 2 Chr 1:11b, 12b (// 1 Kgs 3:11c, 13a) was used in Qoh 6:2, as I indicated in another study on Chronicles. 3

b. Chronicles and Daniel Unambiguous use of Chronicles is apparent twice in the book of Daniel: (1) The first is in the introductory account (Dan 1:1–21). This account was 1. Because these terms were developed in much later times, obviously, they are used here somewhat anachronistically, for the sake of convenience. 2. For the dating of the book of Qoheleth, see the references listed in I. Kalimi, “The Date of the Book of Chronicles: Biblical Text, Elephantine Papyri and El-Ibrahimiah’s Aramaic Grave Inscription,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 41–65, esp. p. 51 n. 52. 3. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 133–34.

17

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 18 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

18

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

composed “sometime before the Maccabean period” 4 or even at the very beginning of the Maccabean period 5 and opens with this story: hyl[ rxyw μlçwry lbb ˚lm rxandkwbn ab hdwhy ˚lm μyqywhy twklml çwlç tnçb μyhlah tyb ylk txqmw hdwhy ˚lm μyqywhy ta wdyb ynda ˆtyw wyhla rxwa tyb aybh μylkh taw wyhla tyb r[nç ≈ra μaybyw In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and laid siege to it. And the Lord delivered Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, together with some of the vessels of the House of God; and he brought them to the land of Shinar, to the house of his god, and placed the vessels in the treasury of his god. (Dan 1:1–2) 6

As already recognized by some exegetes of Daniel, 7 the second verse of this account has a parallel in 2 Chr 36:6–7: hlbb wkylhl μytçjnb whrsayw lbb ˚lm rxandkwbn hl[ wyl[ lbbb wlkyhb μntyw lbbl rxandkwbn aybh hwhy tyb ylkmw Against him [i.e., Jehoiakim] came up Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and bound him in fetters to take him [wkylhl] 8 to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar also carried some of the vessels of the House of the Lord to Babylon and placed them in his temple in Babylon.

Only the first part of 2 Chr 36:6 has a parallel in the Deuteronomistic History (2 Kgs 24:1a), and the narrative of vv. 6b–7 is by the Chronicler exclusively. Thus, there is no doubt that the author of the introductory account in Daniel depended on the earlier narrative of Chronicles. 9 The author of the introduction correctly interpreted the words hwhy tyb ylkmw in 2 Chronicles as μyhlah tyb ylk txqmw, that is, ‘with some of the vessels of the House of God’. Instead of hwhy, he wrote the equivalent name, μyhlah; and in 4. See J. J. Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 129, and cf. p. 38. 5. See M. Aberbach, “The Role of Nebuchadnezzar in the Book of Daniel,” Beit Mikra 31 (1985/86) 23–30, esp. pp. 23–24 [Hebrew]. 6. All biblical and talmudic translations are my own, unless specified otherwise. 7. See for example, J. A. Montgomery, The Book of Daniel (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1927) 114, 116; K. Koch, Daniel (BKAT 22/1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986) 27; Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 132. 8. In 1 Esdras (see also below, chap. 4, §1d) 1:38 and in the Septuagint, it is written: whkylwyw ‘and they led him to Babylon’. On the reports on the destiny and death of Jehoiakim, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 49–50; O. Lipschits, “ ‘Jehoiakim Slept with His Fathers . . .’ (II Kings 24:6): Did He?” JHS 4 (2002) 1–33. 9. On the presumable date of the book of Chronicles in the first quarter of the 4th century b.c.e, see Kalimi, “The Date of the Book of Chronicles,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 41–65.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 19 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

19

place of ‘Babylon’, he wrote the parallel name, ‘Shinar’. 10 All these phenomena are well-known strategies used by the Chronicler himself in his work on the earlier texts of Samuel and Kings. 11 Why did the author of the introductory account of Daniel 2–6 prefer to use these specific verses from Chronicles? The vessels of the Temple are not mentioned in the parallel verse, 2 Kgs 24:1. Moreover, according to 2 Kgs 24:13 Nebuchadnezzar II broke all the golden vessels of the Lord’s House into pieces and carried them to Babylon, following the exile of King Jehoiachin, the queen mother, and so on (598/7 b.c.e). Several years later, the Babylonian army destroyed Jerusalem’s Temple (587/6 b.c.e). The author of 2 Kgs 25:13–16 (// Jer 52:17–23) relates that the bronze pillars . . . as well as the stands and the bronze sea . . . the Chaldeans broke in pieces, and carried the bronze to Babylon. They took away the pots, the shovels, the snuffers, the dishes for incense and all the bronze vessels used in the Temple service, as well as the fire pans and the basins. What was made of gold the captain of the guard took away for the gold and what was made of silver, for the silver.

However, in the story of the last plundering of the Temple, golden vessels are not mentioned. By contrast, 2 Chr 36:6–7 12 fits perfectly with the story about the use of the golden vessels from the Jerusalem Temple by Belshazzar, the vessels that his father, Nebuchadnezzar, delivered to Babylon (Dan 5:2–3, 23). Apparently the author of Daniel preferred—or at least agreed with—the Chronicler’s viewpoint about the moving of the Temple’s vessels intact to Babylon, their return to Jerusalem with Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1:7–11), and the continuity of their usage in the Second Temple (2 Chr 36:6–7; Jer 27:19–22; 28:3, 6; Ezek 1:7–11; 5:13–15; 6:5) instead of the viewpoint of 2 Kgs 24:1, 13. 13

10. See Gen 11:2, 9; Isa 11:11; Zech 5:11 (Septuagint: ejn ghÅ BabulÍΩoÍ); Akkadian: Sanhara; Egyptian: Sngr. The same phenomena is found in the documents of the NeoHittite Empire: one reports the campaign of Mursili I against ‘Babylon’ (Bab-ili), whereas the other comments about the campaign of the same king against ‘Shinar’ (uru Sa-an-ha-ra). For this information about Shinar, see R. Zadok, “The Origin of the Name Shinar,” ZA 74 (1984) 240–44, esp. pp. 240–41 (and reference in n. 5 there); I. Kalimi, “Shinar,” in Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (ed. D. N. Freedman, A. C. Myers, and A. B. Beck; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 1213. 11. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 100–104, 345–46. 12. See also 2 Chr 36:10b; compare Jer 27:19–22; 28:3, 6. 13. On this issue, see, in detail, I. Kalimi, “The Twilight of Jerusalem: King Jehoiachin and the Temple’s Vessels in the Deuteronomistic and Chronistic History,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 115–23; I. Kalimi and J. D. Purvis, “The Hiding of the Temple Vessels in Jewish and Samaritan Literature,” CBQ 56 (1994) 679–85.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 20 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

20

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

(2) The second use of Chronicles in Daniel probably occurs in 9:2. It relates: hymry la hwhy rbd hyh rça μynçh rpsm μyrpsb ytnyb laynd yna wklml tja hnçb hnç μy[bç μlçwry twbrjl twalml aybnh In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years, which, according to the word of the Lord that came to Jeremiah the prophet must pass before the end of the desolations of Jerusalem: seventy years.

In this verse, the author most likely uses 2 Chr 36:21 (an “addition”): htbç hmçh ymy lk hytwtbç ta ≈rah htxr d[ whymry ypb hwhy rbd twalml hnç μy[bç twalml To fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths; for as long as it lay desolate, it kept the sabbath, to fulfill seventy years.

The wording of the verse in Daniel is closer to Chronicles than to Jeremiah (25:11–12: ˚lm ta hlah μywgh wdb[w hmçl hbrjl tazh ≈rah lk htyhw lbb ˚lm l[ dqpa hnç μy[bç twalmb hyhw hnç μy[bç lbb; or Jer 29:10) 14 or Zechariah (1:12; 7:5), although, doubtless, the Chronicler combined Jeremiah’s prophecy about the “seventy years” with the sabbatical year referred to in Lev 26:43.

3. The Supposed Use of Chronicles in the Book of Joshua 1 Chr 6:39–66 [ET: 6:54–81], which lists the Aaronites’ and Levites’ cities, is parallel to Josh 21:5–39. 15 There are several minor and major differences between the lists. The essential differences lie in the arrangement of the common material. The list in Josh 21:5–39 is also longer than the list in 1 Chr 6:39–66. J. P. Ross and A. G. Auld both claim that the list in Josh 21:5–39 is dependent on 1 Chr 6:39–66, with the exclusion of the remark about Caleb and Hebron ( Josh 21:10b–12 and 1 Chr 6:39b–41), which is “an isolated 14. Contra A. LaCocque, Daniel in His Time (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1988) 113 n. 14; Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 349; and M. Haran, The Biblical Collection: Its Consolidation to the End of the Second Temple Times and Changes in Form to the End of the Middle Ages ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1996) 1.71, 82 [Hebrew]. Daniel mentions the prophet Jeremiah but not the book of Jeremiah, as Haran claims (p. 82)! 15. For the Priestly character of this passage in Joshua and its presumed origin, see M. N. van der Meer, Formation and Reformulation: The Redaction of the Book of Joshua in the Light of the Oldest Textual Witnesses (VTSup 102; Leiden: Brill, 2004) 140–43.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 21 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

21

example of influence in the opposite direction.” 16 However, I am of the opposite opinion, which is accepted by the vast majority of biblical scholars. In other words, the list in Chronicles is dependent on the list in Joshua 21, as proved over and over again. 17 Though the Chronicler’s Vorlage of Joshua 21 was apparently different from “both MT and LXX Joshua in a numbers of ways,” as indicated correctly by Gary N. Knoppers, 18 the source of 1 Chr 6:39–66 was most likely Josh 21:5–39 rather than vice versa. Consequently, nothing in Chronicles was used in Joshua.

4. The Placement of Chronicles in the Hebrew Canon/Tanak Traditionally, the Hebrew canon 19 comprises 24 books, placed in three divisions (at least in the land of Israel and Babylonia): 20 Torah (Pentateuch), Nebiªim (Prophets) and Ketubim (Hagiographa, or Writings), the acronym of which is Tanak. The collection of 8 books (4 in the Former 16. See J. P. Ross, The “Cities of the Levites” in Joshua 21 and 1 Chronicles 6 (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh, 1973); A. G. Auld, “Cities of Refuge in Israelite Tradition,” JSOT 10 (1978) 26–40, esp. pp. 32–35; idem, “The ‘Levitical Cities’: Texts and History,” ZAW 91 (1979) 194–206 (= idem, Joshua Retold: Synoptic Perspectives [Old Testament Studies; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998] 25–36); idem, Joshua, Moses and the Land (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1980) 65, 93–94, 109–11 (quotation on p. 109). See also his chapter “Joshua and 1 Chronicles,” in Joshua Retold, 113–19. 17. To mention just some scholars from the last decades, for example: J. Becker, 1 Chronik (Neue Echter Bibel 18; Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1986) 37–38; R. L. Braun, 1 Chronicles (WBC 14; Waco, TX: Word, 1986) 98; De Vries, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 66–67; M. Kartveit, Motive und Schichten der Landtheologie in I Chronik 1–9 (Coniectanea biblica, Old Testament 28; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1989) 69–78; M. Oeming, Das wahre Israel: Die “genealogische Vorhalle” 1 Chronik 1–9 (BWANT 128; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1990) 146–49; Japhet, I and II Chronicles: A Commentary, 146–47; Johnstone, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 1.95; S. S. Tuell, First and Second Chronicles (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2001) 37; and most recently Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9, 437; Dirksen, 1 Chronicles, 108–10; and R. W. Klein (1 Chronicles, 183–85), who adds valuable arguments to support the dependence of Chronicles on Joshua. Williamson takes a comfortable approach on Auld’s problematic supposition: he decides not to decide on this issue; see H. G. M. Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles (New Century Bible Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans / London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1982) 68. 18. Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9, 437, and see his textual notes on pp. 431–36. 19. The inclusion of this and the following parts of the chapter under discussion reflects my opinion that canonical issues related to the Hebrew Bible are, in fact, part and parcel of biblical studies in the broad sense of the term, rather than simply being an isolated, separate branch called “canonical studies.” 20. A different classification system was used in the Jewish-Hellenistic communities, as reflected in the Septuagint; see below, chap. 5.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 22 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

22

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Prophets and 4 in the Latter Prophets) in the second division of the Tanak, the Nebiªim, was probably completed sometime after the composition of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi 21 (included in the Nebiªim) but before the composition of Daniel (excluded from the Nebiªim) 22 in the first half of the 2nd century b.c.e 23 Furthermore, in the first quarter of the 4th century b.c.e, the Chronicler considered Samuel–Kings to be noncanonical books because he freely altered them and used them as raw material; 24 on the other hand, the author of Dan 9:2 says that Daniel “observed in the books. . . .” As already discussed above, the wording of Dan 9:2 is probably based on (or at least agreed with) 2 Chr 36:21 (which combines Jeremiah’s words with Lev 26:43). Nevertheless, the phrase “the books” apparently refers to the Nebiªim, as commonly assumed by many interpreters. 25 Thus, the collection of the Nebiªim was closed and canonized sometime between 400–375 and 200 b.c.e. In contrast to the Nebiªim, the collection of 11 books of various thematic and literary genres (which were composed in different periods) that was later named the Ketubim and became the third division of the Hebrew Bible was not closed until roughly the last decade of the 1st century c.e. This viewpoint is supported in various sources, as follows:

a. The Testimony of Ben Sira’s Grandson Joshua Ben Sira’s 26 grandson mentions in the introduction to his Greek translation of his grandfather’s Hebrew book: “The Torah, the Prophets, and the other books [kaμ tΩn aßllwn] of our fathers that come [i.e., are positioned] after them”; “the Torah itself, the Prophets, and the rest of the books,” 27 to which his grandfather dedicated himself. In other words, in 21. Malachi is considered the latest composition of the three and generally is dated in the first decades of the 5th century b.c.e; see A. E. Hill, “Malachi, Book of,” ABD 4.478–85. Hill suggests (p. 481) a terminus ad quem of ca. 475 b.c.e for Malachi (and Zechariah 9–14). On the possible relationship between Malachi and Zechariah 9–14, see p. 485. 22. Contrary to the Septuagint, in which the book of Daniel is located after Ezekiel; see below, chap. 5, §2b (3–4), pp. 98–101. 23. For the date of the book of Daniel, see above, §2b, pp. 17–18. 24. See, in detail, Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 6–7; idem, “The Characterization of the Chronicler and His Writing,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 19–39, esp. p. 25. 25. See, for example, O. Plöger, Das Buch Daniel (Kommentar zum Alten Testament 18; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1965) 135; Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 348; see also LaCocque, Daniel in His Time, 85: “During this dramatic period the prophetic books were gathered and collected.” 26. On Ben Sira and his writing, see below, chap. 4, §1 e, pp. 80–81. 27. See M. Z. (H.) Segal, The Complete Book of Ben Sira ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1953) 1 [Hebrew]. See also H. M. Orlinsky, “Some Terms in the Prologue to Ben Sira

spread is 9 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 23 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

23

the time of Ben Sira (ca. 180 b.c.e), and certainly in the time of his grandson (ca. 132 b.c.e), the collection of the Nebiªim was already closed, but “the other books,” “the rest of the books” (which probably were considered part of the Jewish Scriptures and later on were included in the collection of the Ketubim) had not yet been completed.

b. Miqßat Maºa¶ê haTorah, 2 Maccabees, and Rabbinic Sources This situation is also reflected in the halachic letter from Qumran Cave 4 known as Miqßat Maºa¶ê haTorah (4QMMT) C, line 10 (4Q397 14–21), which is dated to the second half of the 1st century b.c.e. 28 It states: ] [. . . d]ywdbw μyayb[nh y]rpsb[w] hçwm rpsb ˆybtç hkyla wn[btk We have [written] to you so that you may study (carefully) the book of Moses [Pentateuch, I.K.] and the books of the Prophets and (the writings) of Davi[d . . .]. 29

Contrary to Elisha Qimron and John Strugnell, the name [d]ywd in this text refers only to the book of Psalms rather than to all the Writings. 30 The book of Psalms is also known as “the writings of David” in 2 Macc 2:13 (ca. 143 b.c.e.) 31 as well as in the rabbinic sources. 2 Macc 2:13 relates: “he [Nehemiah] founded a library and collected the books about the kings and the prophets, and the writings of David.” Most likely, the phrase “the books about the kings and the prophets” refers to the books of Joshua through Kings, and Isaiah through the Twelve Prophets (which were later named the Former and Latter Prophets, respectively). 32 The phrase was probably equivalent to the complete “books of the Prophets” in 4QMMT, which stood side by side immediately after the Torah on the one hand, and before “the writings of David” (Psalms) on the other. and the Hebrew Canon,” JBL 110 (1991) 483–90. 28. For the dating of 4QMMT, see L. H. Schiffman, “Miqßat Maºa¶ê haTorah,” in Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. L. H. Schiffman and J. C. VanderKam; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 1.558–60, esp. p. 558. 29. See E. Qimron and J. Strugnell, Qumran Cave 4—V: Miqßat Maºa¶ê ha-Torah (DJD 10; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994) 58 (text), 59 (translation). 30. See ibid., 59 n. 10. 31. For the dating of 2 Maccabees, see D. R. Schwartz, The Second Book of Maccabees: Introduction, Hebrew Translation, and Commentary ( Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2004) 16–19 [Hebrew]. 32. Cf. H. M. Orlinsky, “The Canonization of the Bible and the Exclusion of the Apocrypha,” Essays in Biblical Culture and Bible Translation (New York: Ktav, 1974) 257– 86, esp. p. 264. For another opinion, see J. A. Goldstein, II Maccabees: A New Translation, Introduction and Commentary (AB 41A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983) 187. Goldstein is of the opinion that “the author’s conception of the library probably included the books of Chronicles and Ezra and Nehemiah as we have them.”

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 24 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

24

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

The beraita in b. Baba Batra 14b–15a recounts: ydy l[ μylht rps btk dwd μynqz hrç[ ‘David composed the book of Psalms by ten sages [lit., elders]’. Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov 1:2 compares David with Moses in many ways, including: larçyl μylhtbç μyrps hçmj ˆtn dwdw . . . larçyl hrwt yçmwj hçmj ˆtn hçm As Moses gave five books of Torah to Israel, so David gave five books of Psalms to Israel. 33

Because the Jewish Sages considered David the author (or at least the main author and editor) of the book of Psalms, the very name David sometimes represents the book itself. All in all, in these sources David = the writings of David = the five books of Psalms = Psalms/Psalter.

c. The Gospel according to Luke The Gospel of Luke cites the tradition that the risen Jesus said to his followers: “all things must be fulfilled that were written in the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me” (Luke 24:44). 34 In fact, all the other New Testament sources (ca. mid-1st to mid2nd century c.e.) 35 speak about “the Law” and “the Prophets” but not even once about “the Writings,” a section that was not yet closed or canonized as the third division of Hebrew Scripture. 36

33. See S. Buber (ed.), Midrash Tehillim (Vilna: Reem, 1891; reprinted Jerusalem: Wagschal, 1977) 3 [Hebrew]; W. G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms (Yale Judaica Series 13; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976) 1.5. 34. The term the Psalms appears only once in the New Testament, in Luke 24:44, and refers to the book of Psalms only rather than to the “whole of the third division [of the Tanak]—the Writings,” as claims F. F. Bruce (The Canon of Scripture [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1988] 32); or to the books of Psalms, Proverbs, Qoheleth, and the Song of Songs—“God’s Hymns,” as claims Haran (The Biblical Collection, 84). Can the didactics of Proverbs and the pessimism of Qoheleth really be considered “God’s Hymns”? (it seems that Haran, though he does not refer to him, has been influenced by Josephus (Against Apion 1.38–42), who says that “the remaining four books contain hymns to God” [Psalms, Song of Songs, Proverbs, and Qoheleth]; see in detail, below, chap. 5, §2b). Moreover, why should one interpret the Psalms in Luke otherwise than by its common meaning in all other sources across the generations? 35. See Matt 5:17; 7:12; 11:13; 22:40; Luke 16:16; John 1:45; Acts 13:15; 24:14; 28:23; Rom 3:21. 36. On the possible testimony of Luke 11:48–51 and Matt 23:34–35, see the detailed discussion below, in chap. 3, §3 (especially part d). The assumption of J. Trebolle Barrera (The Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible [trans. W. G. E. Watson; Leiden: Brill / Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998] 160) that “Psalms were originally related to the collection of the Former Prophets, given that David is considered to be a prophet,” is an interesting

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 25 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

25

So, although the historical books of Samuel and Kings were accepted into the Prophets, presumably due to their antiquity and holiness, the book of Chronicles was not accepted into this collection because of its relatively late composition. Chronicles was accepted, however, into the Writings (the holiness of which was considered by the rabbis to be less than that of the Prophets), which included various other late compositions (such as Ezra–Nehemiah, Esther, Qoheleth, Daniel, and so on) as well. The classification of Chronicles among the collection of books in the third and last division of the Hebrew Bible (Writings) and not among the Former Prophets (as were Samuel and Kings) does not indicate a bias of the rabbinic Sages against Chronicles. The academy of Jewish Sages in Yabneh/Jamnia (ca. 90 c.e.) 37 could only categorize this late biblical historical book as a Writing because the Prophets had already been a closed corpus for at least two hundred years. Moreover, the location of Chronicles in the Writings was based on the Sages’ opinion that the book of Chronicles was composed by Ezra the scribe and Nehemiah, who were not considered prophets (b. Baba Batra 14b–15a). 38 In other words, even if theoretically the collection of the Prophets was still open, the rabbis could not have classified Chronicles within that collection without contradicting themselves.

opinion but seems baseless, because there is no evidence from the entire Jewish and Christian literary heritage for it (not to speak of a lack of manuscripts, etc.). 37. I am of the opinion that the acceptance and canonization of each book of the Writings and the division as a whole passed some testing procedure. The process was most likely finalized by the authoritative council of the Jewish Sages in Yabneh as a response to the new historical and social circumstances: the failure of the Great Revolt against Rome with all its disastrous consequences, on the one hand, and the growing danger of Christianity and its writings, on the other. The rabbis made several important decisions regarding the spiritual-religious distinctions of the Jewish people. One of these was the necessity of distinguishing the Jewish Scriptures by drawing a clear-cut boundary with regard to what was in and in which order and what was out. Although they fixed the list and finalized the order of the 11 books included in the last division of the Hebrew canon, the Writings (inclusion of some of the books was disputed; see below, §7 of this chapter), they excluded all the books later called the Apocrypha, the already-existing books of the Pseuepigrapha (see below, chap. 4), and all the properly Christian writings (see chap. 3, §1). For a different view, see S. J. D. Cohen, From Maccabees to the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987) 228–29. 38. In another view, the composition of Samuel and Kings was attributed to the prophets Samuel and Jeremiah (see b. Baba Batra 14b–15a). For different views by Josephus on the one hand, and by medieval exegetes such as Pseudo-Rashi, Radak, and Isaac Abarbanel on the other, see below, chap. 5, §§3–4, pp. 98–102; chap. 12, §§7b, 10d, 15, pp. 203–205, 223, 235.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 26 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

26

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

5. Chronicles as One of the Writings The order of the 5 books of Moses (Torah/Pentateuch) and the 4 books of the Former Prophets was fixed: they were classified in historical-chronological order. The order of the 4 books of the Latter Prophets and the 11 books of the Writings, however, was not yet entirely fixed. 39 The beraita cited in the Babylonian Talmud (Baba Batra 14b) 40 places Chronicles after Daniel, Esther, and Ezra (i.e., Ezra–Nehemiah) 41—in fact, at the end of the Writings (therefore, at the end of the entire Hebrew Canon): Our rabbis taught: . . . the order of the Ketubim is Ruth, the book of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, the Scroll of Esther, Ezra, and Chronicles [μymyh yrbd].

Indeed, Chronicles is also placed last after Ezra–Nehemiah in the list of books mentioned in m. Yoma 1:6: “Job and Ezra and Chronicles.” This classification of Chronicles at the end of the Hebrew Canon is probably also reflected in the Jewish-Christian literary heritage—namely, in Matt 23:35 and Luke 11:50–51. Here Jesus refers to the first and last homicides recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures: Abel (Gen 4:8–16) and Zechariah (2 Chr 24:20–22). 42 Indeed, Chronicles is located at the end of the Hebrew Bible in the vast majority of the old manuscripts and the printed editions of the book known to us today. In the Aleppo Codex (written by Aaron ben-Asher; Tiberias, ca. 920 c.e.; also known as Keter Aram Tßova) and the Leningrad (/St. Petersburg) Codex (probably 1009 c.e.) as well as some other manuscripts, however, Chronicles opens the Ketubim. It seems that the order of the books of the Ketubim in the beraita, Mishnah, New Testament, and the vast majority of 39. See further discussion below, §7 in the current chapter. 40. The beraita is one of the earliest sources of rabbinic literature but was excluded from the canon of the Mishnah (ca. 200 c.e.) by Rabbi Judah the Patriarch. However, from time to time it is cited in the Talmud. For a detailed discussion of the beraita from the technical, bookmaking viewpoint, see M. Haran, “Archives, Libraries, and the Order of the Biblical Books,” JANES 22 (1993) 51–61. Haran assumes (p. 61) that “the beraita is based on the assumption that it is already possible to use longer scrolls to comprise a series of books—the whole Pentateuch, all the Prophets, all the Hagiographa (infrequently, even more than one series on the same scroll).” 41. Compare b. Sanhedrin 93b; Josephus, Against Apion 1.8; LXX-A; and the Peshi†ta. 42. See in detail, below, chap. 3, §4b, pp. 48–49. To be sure, the word last in the context under review defines not a historical-chronological sequence but a literary (or even canonical) sequence, because the murder of the prophet Uriah, son of Shemaiah, from Kiriath-jearim, by Jehoiakim (ca. 609 b.c.e; Jer 26:1, 20–23) took place approximately two hundred years after the murder of Zechariah, son of Jehoiada (ca. 800 b.c.e).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 27 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

27

the old manuscripts and the printed editions is much older. In all probability, the scribes of the Aleppo and St. Petersburg codexes found the placing of Chronicles after Ezra difficult and “abnormal.” Accordingly, they attempted to reorganize the books of the Ketubim in a “logical” and “correct” order; that is, to open it with Adam in Chronicles and conclude it with Ezra–Nehemiah, which deals with the late history of the Jews. Another explanation has been suggested by McIvor: “the position of Chronicles just before Psalms in the St. Petersburg Codex may have been because Chronicles, in which David plays such a leading role, was regarded as a good introduction to the book attributed to him.” 43

6. Why Was Chronicles Located after Ezra–Nehemiah? Because the book of Chronicles deals, first and foremost, with the history of ancient Israel in the First Temple period, 44 and the books of Daniel, Esther, and Ezra–Nehemiah deal with events that took place later, mainly in the Second Temple period, the traditional classification of Chronicles after Ezra–Nehemiah is surprising. Moreover, since Ezra–Nehemiah describes the history of Israel from the very point at which Chronicles ends, the placement of Chronicles after Ezra–Nehemiah seems abnormal and could not have been just an accident. Thus, the question arises: what was the reason(s) for this unusual arrangement?

a. Chronological Arrangement In b. Baba Batra 14b–15a, Rashi notes that the beraita arranged the biblical books of the Ketubim chronologically, according to their date of composition (corresponding to rabbinic tradition, of course): Ruth [which was written by Samuel—I.K.] comes first [because Ruth the Moabite lived] in the Judges period; Psalms was composed by David; Job was in the time of the Queen of Sheba; afterward come the three books of Solomon: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs . . . ; Lamentations spoken by Jeremiah; Daniel was after Jeremiah, in the time of Nebuchadnezzar . . . ; Esther was in the time of Ahasuerus; Ezra [who composed his book and the book of Chronicles (together with Nehemiah, son of Hacaliah)] was at the time of Darius the second.

43. See J. S. McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles: Translated, with Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes (Aramaic Bible 19; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1994) 13. 44. For the place and originality of Cyrus’s decree in Chronicles, see I. Kalimi, “ ‘So Let Him Go Up [to Jerusalem]!’: A Historical and Theological Observation on Cyrus’ Decree in Chronicles,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 143–57.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 28 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

28

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

This explanation, however, is complex: if the beraita organized these books chronologically, Job should have opened the Ketubim, because according to the same beraita Job was written by Moses. The answers offered by the Gemara as well as by Rashi himself are not convincing.

b. “A Useless and Repetitious Book” Some scholars are of the opinion that the location of the book of Chronicles at the end of the Ketubim and the Hebrew Bible, even after Ezra–Nehemiah, must indicate a negative assessment of the book by the rabbis. This was expressed, for example, by Abram Spiro: “it was given the last place in the Hagiographa, as a useless and repetitious book.” 45 But if Chronicles was considered “a useless and repetitious book,” who forced the rabbis to include it in the Jewish canon and to exclude remarkable books such as Ben Sira, Tobias, Judith, Maccabees, and many others?

c. Connecting the Beginning and the End Julio Trebolle Barrera is of the opinion that Chronicles is located at the end of the Hebrew Bible “certainly with the intention of connecting the beginning and the end of sacred history, which starts from Adam and ends with the return from Exile.” 46 But if this is so—indeed, for the very same reason that Trebolle Barrera gives—the Hebrew Bible should end with Chronicles and Ezra–Nehemiah, not vice versa. Ezra–Nehemiah narrates in detail the story of the restoration from the Babylonian Exile and for some time after. The last two verses of Chronicles (2 Chr 36:22–23) are no more than a partial citing of Cyrus’s decree, not the story of “the return from Exile.” Further, claims Trebolle Barrera: “the New Testament (Matt 23:35 and Luke 11:51) established a relationship between the blood spilt by Abel (Gen 4:3–15) and the blood of Zechariah (2 Chr 24:19–22); in this way it accepts that Chronicles forms an inclusio with the book of Genesis, denoting the Bible as a whole.” 47 The problem with this claim is that the story of the murder of Zechariah appears more than 12 chapters before the end of the book of Chronicles. Thus the existence of an inclusio is very questionable. The Gospels only refer to the first and last murders recounted in the tripartite form of the Hebrew Bible. 48

45. See A. Spiro, “Samaritans, Tobiads, and Judahites in Pseudo-Philo,” PAAJR 20 (1951) 279–355, esp. p. 308 n. 65. 46. Trebolle Barrera, The Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible, 160. 47. Ibid., 160–61. 48. See in detail, below, chap. 3, §4b, pp. 48–49. spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 29 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

29

d. “Chronicles Was ‘Canonized’ after Ezra–Nehemiah” F. F. Bruce is of the opinion that, “when the canon of Old Testament scripture was in course of formation, Chronicles was ‘canonized’ (included in the canon) after Ezra–Nehemiah.” However, as Bruce himself admitted, “there is no firm evidence that this is how it happened.” To this point he adds, immediately, “but it is difficult to think of a more probable answer.” 49 Allow me to suggest two “probable answers” to this question: to summarize the Hebrew Bible or because of “Zionist” intentions.

e. Summary of the Hebrew Bible Though it is not clearly expressed in Jewish sources, it is conceivable that the Sages considered the book of Chronicles a good summary of the whole Hebrew Bible, from Adam to Cyrus’s decree, and therefore put it at the end of the biblical corpus. Similarly, the book of Chronicles was considered to be a condensed version of the entire Old Testament by Jerome (Eusebius Hieronymus Sophronius, ca. 331–420 c.e.), 50 one of the most significant figures in the history of the exegesis of Christian Scriptures. In his introduction to Chronicles in the Vulgate, Jerome says: “all the studying of Scripture is included in this book.” 51 He also expressed this opinion clearly in his letter to Paulinus of Nola, 52 around the year 395 c.e.: The book of Chronicles is condensed to such an extent and so well abridged, that whoever claims to know Scriptures without having a knowledge of Chronicles, makes himself a laughingstock.53 49. See Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 30–31. 50. For the date of Jerome’s birth, see J. N. D. Kelly, Jerome: His Life, Writings and Controversies (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000) 1, 337–39. Kelly argues, successfully, that this date (i.e., 331 for Jerome’s birth) is preferable to 347/8, which has generally been cited. 51. Praefationes Sancti Hieronymi in Liber Paralipomenon; see Biblia Sacra, Iuxta Latinam Vulgatam Versionem, vol. 7: Verba Dierum (Rome: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1948) 9. 52. On Paulinus of Nola, see D. Trout, Paulinus of Nola: Life, Letters and Poems (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999). 53. Jerome, Epistola 53.8; see J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae Latinae (= PL; Paris, 1859) vol. 22, col. 548; J. Labourt, Saint Jérôme Lettres (8 vols.; Paris: Les belles lettres, 1949– 63) 3.21. Kelly ( Jerome: His Life, Writings and Controversies, 158–59) mentions that, “for Chronicles, which abounded in proper names defectively reproduced in the Greek and Latin codices, [ Jerome] received special assistance from a learned, highly respected Jew from Tiberias, who read the book through from start to finish.” See Jerome’s Preface to Chronicles (LXX, PL, vol. 29, cols. 401–2). If Chronicles is considered to be a good summary of the whole Hebrew Bible/Old Testament as claimed by Jerome, then its location after the books of Samuel–Kings in the Christian Bible (which follows the Septuagint and Vulgate) is unfavorable. Did Jerome challenge the location of the book of Chronicles in the Christian Bible? As far as we know, he never expressed this explicitly.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 30 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

30

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

f. “Zionist” Intention As I already suggested in another study, 54 it is also possible that the Sages placed Chronicles at the end of the Hebrew Bible to express a “Zionist” intention. This means that they ended the Holy Scriptures with the words that call for a return to the land of Israel, rebuilding the Lord’s House and Jerusalem: “Whoever is among you of all his people, may the Lord his God be with him, and let him go up” (2 Chr 36:23). If the order of the books in the Ketubim as it appears in the beraita under discussion was formed during the century following the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by Titus (70 c.e.), particularly if it was the era of the ruin and depopulation of Judea during and after the unsuccessful Bar-Kochba war (132–135 c.e.), then the historical background of the order is clear: the Sages of the beraita strove to emphasize the necessity of immigrating to and residing in the land of Israel, despite the tremendous socioeconomic, religious, and political difficulties. 55 The Zionist viewpoint may be seen primarily in contrast to the Christian Bible. Here the canonist(s) closed the Old Testament (generally considered in Christian theology to be preparing for the New Testament) 56 with the prophecy of Malachi: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the land with a curse” (Mal 3:23–24 [ET: 4:5–6]). This closing serves as preparation for the messianic time and as an introduction to the immediate description of the birth of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, in the opening book of the New Testament, the Gospel of Matthew. 57 Indeed, “the early church regarded Malachi as an important theological bridge between the two dispensations, the Old and New Covenants.” 58 54. See Kalimi, “So Let Him Go Up [to Jerusalem],” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 155–56. 55. For the various difficulties in Palestine after the Bar-Kochba war, see G. Alon, The History of the Jewish People in the Land of Israel in the Ages of the Mishnah and Talmud ( Jerusalem: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1977) 2.53–58 [Hebrew]; M. Avi-Yonah, In the Days of Rome and Byzantium ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1980) 21–22 [Hebrew]. 56. See below, chap. 3. 57. This order of the Christian Bible may also attempt to emphasize another Christian theological concept. According to that concept, Jesus and his new religion were the continuation of the ancient Israelites’ “prophetic spirit,” while the Jews and Judaism continue the postexilic, misdirected ‘Law religion’ (gesetzliche Religion). See also in this regard the discussion on the definition of the book of Chronicles by J. Wellhausen, in Kalimi, “Characterization of the Chronicler and His Writing,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 19–39, esp. pp. 20–23. 58. See A. E. Hill, Malachi: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 25D; New York: Doubleday, 1998) 12, and the references to the Church Fathers

spread is 9 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 31 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

31

Although this classification of the books of the Old Testament (that is, placement of the book of Malachi at the end) appeared already in the Septuagint, we can firmly establish that Christianity adopted it because it suited its theology. The talmudic Sages, therefore, may have attempted also to contrast the climax of the Hebrew Canon (returning to Jerusalem) with the climax of the Christian Bible (the appearance of Jesus Christ).

7. Was the Inclusion of Chronicles in the Hebrew Canon Disputed? Though the inclusion of the books of Esther, Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and the Song of Songs in the Ketubim was disputed, 59 the inclusion of Chronicles in the Jewish/Hebrew Canon was undisputed by the rabbis and seems to have been readily accepted. In contrast, in some ancient Christian Canons, for instance the ancient Ethiopian Bible, the inclusion of Chronicles was disputed and doubtful. 60 Moreover, Roger Beckwith concludes that all Christian authorities in the Syrian and Egyptian churches between the 4th and the 7th centuries “agree on the canonicity of the books of the Hebrew Old Testament, apart from the books of Chronicles, Ezra–Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs.” 61 Moreover, just several hundred years later, the Christian theologian Hugh of Saint-Cher and the Jewish philosopher Baruch (Benedictus) de Spinoza expressed surprise at the inclusion of Chronicles in the Hebrew canon. 62 Nevertheless, the inclusion of the book of Chronicles in the Hebrew Canon is not surprising and certainly does not simply demonstrate the kindness of the Jewish Sages toward the book. As I have stated in another study, the inclusion of Chronicles in the Jewish Canon should not be surprising, because the concepts of the book are even closer to the viewpoint of the canonist(s) than the concepts of Samuel and Kings. 63

mentioned there. It is worthwhile to notice also the numerous citations from, and allusions to the book of Malachi in the New Testament and its use in Christian liturgy, which altogether show the importance of this minor book in the theology of Christianity (pp. 84–88, 90–91). 59. See b. Sabbat 30b; Abot deRabbi Nathan, version A, chap. 1 ( J. Goldin [ed.], The Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan [Yale Judaica Series 10; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1955] 5). 60. See R. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (London: SPCK, 1985) 500. 61. Ibid., 498. 62. On this issue, see in detail, below, chap. 16, §5, pp. 296–302. 63. For this, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 408–9.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 32 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

32

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

8. Conclusion There is a quotation of 2 Chr 1:11b, 12b in Qoh 6:2 (3rd century b.c.e), and Daniel (first half of the 2nd century b.c.e) quotes 2 Chronicles as well: Dan 1:1–2 is parallel to 2 Chr 36:6–7; and Dan 9:2 apparently uses 2 Chr 36:21. The hypothesis about the use of 1 Chr 6:39–66 [ET: 6:54–81] in Josh 21:5–39 is probably incorrect; rather, the source of 1 Chr 6:39–66 was Josh 21:5–39. The Nebiªim section was closed sometime after the composition of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi (included in the Nebiªim) but before the composition of Daniel (excluded from the Nebiªim). Furthermore, in the first quarter of the 4th century b.c.e., the Chronicler considered Samuel–Kings to be noncanonical and freely revised them. Thus, the Nebiªim collection was closed and canonized sometime between 400–375 and 200 b.c.e. In contrast, the collection of books later called the Ketubim was not closed until the last decade of the 1st century c.e. This viewpoint is supported by the testimonies of Ben Sira’s grandson; Miqßat Maºa¶ê haTorah (4QMMT); 2 Maccabees; rabbinic sources; and the Gospel of Luke, as well as other New Testament writings. However, although Samuel and Kings were accepted into Nebiªim due to their antiquity and holiness, Chronicles was not, because of its relatively late composition. It was accepted into the Ketubim (which was considered by rabbis less holy than the Nebiªim). The classification of Chronicles in the last section of the Hebrew Bible does not indicate prejudice by rabbinic Sages against it, because it could only be categorized as one of the Ketubim. Moreover, this location of Chronicles in the Ketubim fits the Sages’ opinion that it was written by Ezra and Nehemiah, who were not considered prophets. As several ancient sources reflect, Chronicles was located at the end of the third part of the Tanak despite the fact that it deals with the history of the First Temple period. It was even placed after Daniel, Esther, and Ezra– Nehemiah, which recount events of the later periods. The explanations suggested by Rashi (chronological order), Abram Spiro (“a useless and repetitious book”), Julio Trebolle Barrera (connecting the beginning and the end of sacred history), and F. F. Bruce (“when the canon of Old Testament scripture was in course of formation, Chronicles was ‘canonized’ . . . after Ezra–Nehemiah”) are not convincing. Though it is not stated in the Jewish sources, it is conceivable that the Sages considered Chronicles to be a summary of the Hebrew Bible, from Adam to Cyrus, and therefore located it at the end of the Bible. It is also possible that the Sages placed Chronicles at the end of the Bible to express a “Zionist” intention. This is particularly apparent in contrast to the ending of the first part of the Christian Bible (i.e., the Old Testament).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 33 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible

33

Although there was a dispute over whether some books were to be included in the Hebrew Bible, as far as we know, the inclusion of Chronicles was not disputed by the rabbis. In contrast, in some Christian traditions— such as the Ethiopian, Syrian, and Egyptian churches—the canonicity of the book of Chronicles (and some other books) was disputed. Hugh of Saint-Cher and Spinoza even stated their astonishment over the inclusion of Chronicles in the Bible.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 34 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 3

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament 1. The New Testament as a Jewish Literary Heritage The Epistles attributed to the apostles (Paul, Peter, James, and John), 1 the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), the Acts of the Apostles, and the Revelation/Apocalypse (altogether 27 books), which were composed roughly between 50 and 150 c.e., became the “New Testament.” 2 This corpus unquestionably contains the core Scripture of Christianity. Although the New Testament was rejected by mainstream Jews in favor of another theological path, rabbinic normative Judaism, this rejection does not negate the fact that the New Testament 3 is part of the ancient Jewish religious-literary heritage. Indeed, in contrast to Moses who (by tradition) composed the Torah, Jesus the Jew did not leave any written material. 4 However, his apostles and the vast majority, if not all, of his other adherents who authored these works were born, educated, and behaved first and foremost as Jews. The New Testament was avoided by mainstream Jewish religious Sages and ultimately was excluded from the authoritative canonical Jewish Scriptures. Similarly, apocryphal and pseudepigraphical books, of which at least a large number were written by Jews, were excluded from the Jewish Canon. 5 However, the exclusion of the New Testament from Jewish Scripture does not change its Jewish origins or its Jewish historical contexts and roots, just as the exclusion of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigra1. The vast majority of the letters (14) are attributed to Paul. Within the corpus of the 14 letters, 7 are unanimously agreed to have been authentically written by Paul (1 Thessalonians [ca. 50 c.e.; which is the first and the oldest document of the New Testament], Romans, Galatians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Philemon); 4 were not written by Paul (Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Hebrews); the authenticity of the rest (2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians) is disputed by scholars. 2. For the nature of the term New Testament and its historical development, see R. E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York: Doubleday, 1997) 3–5. 3. To be sure, I am using familiar Christian terminology for the corpus under review, without referring to any of the theological connotations. 4. Compare Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, 5. 5. See below, chap. 4, and additional bibliographical references there.

34

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 35 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

35

pha from the Jewish Canon proper, or the Tanak, does not invalidate their undeniable Jewish origin. Furthermore, just as the acceptance of the Old Testament (including the apocryphal books in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles) as Christian Scripture does not counteract the Israelite/Jewish origin of these books, so too the inclusion of the New Testament in the Christian Canon does not counteract its Jewish roots. It should, therefore, be no surprise that a discussion of this important Jewish literary, religious legacy, the New Testament, is included in this present volume. 6 In fact, there are several passages in the New Testament that relate to the book of Chronicles and even shed light on its place in Hebrew Scripture in the 1st century of the Common Era as well as on some other significant issues, as detailed below.

2. Chronicles and the New Testament From a very early stage of Christianity, the New Testament’s authors attempted to connect their writings, especially writings relating to Jesus, to the well-known, core Jewish Scriptures that Christians call the Old Testament. 7 However, as F. Scott Spencer remarks, “in a typical table listing all New Testament citations of the Old Testament, the books of Chronicles are conspicuous only by their absence.” 8 This viewpoint has not changed, 6. From a chronological viewpoint, this chapter could also be located after chap. 4, “Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha” (which, in Christian terminology is also called Intertestamental literature). However, my decision to locate it in the current place stems from a desire to have thematic proximity between chaps. 4–5, “Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha” and “Jewish-Hellenistic Sources,” which are related in many ways; and to follow the previous chapter, “Chronicles in the Hebrew Bible,” because the New Testament is better known to general biblical scholars, especially Christian scholars, and is more appealing to diverse audiences in this order. 7. See, for example, Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel, 21–41; S. Moyise and M. J. J. Menken (eds.), Isaiah in the New Testament (New Testament and the Scripture of Israel; London: T. & T. Clark, 2005); M. J. J. Menken, Old Testament Quotations in the Fourth Gospel: Studies in Textual Form (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 15; Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1995); idem, Matthew’s Bible: The Old Testament Text of the Evangelist (Leuven: Peeters, 2004); I. Kalimi, “The Task of Hebrew Bible / Old Testament Theology: Between Judaism and Christianity,” Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy: Studies in Scriptures in the Shadow of Internal and External Controversies ( Jewish and Christian Heritage 2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2002) 135–59, esp. pp. 144–48. 8. F. S. Spencer, “2 Chronicles 28:5–15 and the Parable of the Good Samaritan,” WTJ 46 (1984) 317–49, esp. p. 318 and references to various bibliographical sources there. Later he concludes: “the bias of scholars cataloguing the New Testament usage of the Old Testament against Chronicles in favor of Samuel–Kings where they parallel should be forever abandoned” (p. 348).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 36 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

36

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

at any rate not much, since Spencer’s 1984 paper. 9 The purpose of this chapter is to analyze possible references to the book of Chronicles in the fundamental Christian Scripture, the New Testament. Particular attention will be paid to the story of the murder of the priestprophet Zechariah as told in 2 Chr 24:20–22. The story will be researched from literary, theological, and historical viewpoints, and a survey of its impact on Jewish and Christian writings will be provided (§3). Naturally, the parallel passages about the murder in Luke 11:50–51a and Matt 23:35, the various theories regarding the identity of Zechariah, and the possible relationship of these New Testament sources to the story in Chronicles will be detailed (§4). Furthermore, the possible use of 2 Chr 36:15–16 in Matt 23:33–37 (§5), and a story in the Acts of the Apostles, namely, the murders of Stephen versus Zechariah and the ethical values of the “New” versus “Old” Testament will be scrutinized (§6). Luke’s story of the Good Samaritan and its possible origin in Kings/Chronicles will be discussed in detail (§7). We will investigate Chronicles and the genealogies of John the Baptist and Jesus (§8), the possible use of 1 Chr 16:35a in Acts 26:17a (§9), the name of Zerubbabel’s father in the Old Testament and the Gospels (§10), and end the chapter with a conclusion (§11).

3. Murder in the Temple: The Chronicler’s Story of the Priest-Prophet Zechariah: Literary and Theological Features, Historical Credibility and Impact a. The Story in Chronicles and Its Literary and Theological Features The murder of the priest-prophet Zechariah son of Jehoiada the high priest is related in 2 Chr 24:20–22: Zechariah was stoned in the Temple courtyard by command of King Joash of Judah: And the spirit of God came upon Zechariah son of Jehoiada the priest, who stood above the people, 10 and said to them, “Thus said God, Why do you transgress the commandments of the Lord, so that you cannot succeed? Because you have forsaken the Lord, he has also forsaken you.” And they conspired against him and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the courtyard of the House of the Lord. Thus Joash the king did 9. Thus, for instance, just a single “by the way” reference has been made to Chronicles by D. S. New, Old Testament Quotations in the Synoptic Gospels, and the Two-Document Hypothesis (Septuagint and Cognate Studies 37; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993) 31. 10. Compare this expression with a similar one in Neh 8:4–5, “Ezra the scribe stood on a platform of wood that they had made for the purpose . . . ; he was above all the people.” Apparently, Zechariah also stood on a high platform when he talked to the people gathered in the Temple courtyard.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 37 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

37

not remember the kindness that Jehoiada his father had shown him but slew his son. And when he died, he said, “May the Lord look and avenge!”

This story is unique to the book of Chronicles; that is to say, it does not appear in the parallel account of Joash in Kings or in any other biblical or extrabiblical source. The story fits the usual literary and theological format in Chronicles, because it correlates completely with the Chronicler’s theological scheme of “reward (for good deeds) and punishment (for sins).” It functions as an act of “transgression” that caused the events reported immediately afterward—that is, the Aramean campaign against the Kingdom of Judah and the wounding of Joash and his murder (2 Chr 24:23–27 // 2 Kgs 12:18–21). These events were considered acts of “punishment” by the Chronicler, as his conclusion indicates: “. . . because they had forsaken the Lord God of their fathers. They inflicted punishments on Joash. When they had departed from him, leaving him seriously wounded, his own servants conspired against him because of the blood of the sons [read “son” as in LXX and Vulgate] of Jehoiada the priest, and killed him on his bed. He died. . . .” Zechariah opens his speech with a rhetorical question, “Why do you transgress the commandments of the Lord?” and states the unpleasant consequence of transgressing the commandments briefly and clearly: “You cannot prosper.” He justifies the destructive result with theodicy that is in accordance with a “measure-for-measure” principle of justice: “because you have forsaken the Lord, He has also forsaken you,” a principle that is well anchored in the theology of the Chronicler and also appears in other places in his writing. 11 Furthermore, in order to show the shockingly disgraceful act of the king, the Chronicler contrasts a prior command by the father, Jehoiada, not to kill the wicked Queen Athalia in the Temple (2 Chr 23:14 // 2 Kgs 11:15) with the conspiracy of Joash to kill his righteous son, Zechariah, in the Temple. 12 Moreover, the murder of Zechariah by King Joash is the complete opposite of Jehoiada’s act in saving Joash from the sword of Athaliah. 13 The story is structured around a brief prophetic speech of Zechariah, who rebuked the king and his audience; a short report of conspiracy; the

11. Compare the expression “because you have forsaken the Lord, he has also forsaken you” with the parallels in 1 Chr 28:9; 2 Chr 15:2; and see, in detail, Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 186–93. For application of this principle in the Hebrew Bible, see also J. Jacobs, Measure for Measure in the Storytelling Bible (Alon Shvot: Tvonot, 2006; Hebrew). 12. On this feature in Chronicles, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 325–49; for more discussion on this particular issue, see pp. 171–72, 337. 13. Compare R. B. Dillard, 2 Chronicles (WBC 15; Waco, TX: Word, 1987) 192–93.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 38 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

38

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

act of the murder; 14 and Zechariah’s last words. The opening words of the speech, the speech itself, and the last words of Zechariah are built on phrases that appear in the Torah and Former Prophets, slightly rephrased by the Chronicler. 15 (1) The phrase “and the spirit of God [μyhla] came upon/seized Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, the priest,” probably taken from Judg 6:34, “then the spirit of the Lord [hwhy] seized Gideon.” 16 (2) The phrase “thus said God,” which establishes the divine source of the prophetic words, is a variation of the well-known phrase “thus says the Lord” that appears in the Torah and the Former Prophets (e.g., Exod 11:4; 32:27; 2 Sam 7:5//1 Chr 17:3) and frequently in the Latter Prophets (e.g., Jer 2:1; 4:3; 5:14). 17 (3) The sentence yk wjylxt alw hwhy twxm ta μyrb[ μta hml μyhlah rma hk μkta bz[yw hwhy ta μtbz[ ‘Thus said God, Why do you transgress the commandments of the Lord, so that you cannot succeed? Because you have forsaken the Lord, He has also forsaken you’ is a paraphrase of Moses’ words to the Israelites in Num 14:41–43: yp ta μyrb[ μta hz hml hçm rmayw ˆk l[ yk . . . μkybya ynpl wpgnt alw μkbrqb hwhy ˆya yk wl[t la .jlxt al awhw hwhy μkm[ hwhy hyhy alw hwhy yrjam μtbç ‘But Moses said, Why do you transgress the commandment of the Lord? This will not succeed. Do not go up, for the Lord is not in your midst, lest you be routed by your enemies . . . because you have turned away from the Lord, the Lord will not be with you’. 18 (4) Zechariah’s last words, çrdyw hwhy ary ‘May the Lord look and avenge!’ are similar to what the Israelite officers said to Moses and Aaron in Exod 5:21a: fpçyw μkyl[ hwhy ary ‘May the Lord look upon you and judge’. The Chronicler just changed one word: instead of ‘and judge’, he wrote 14. Here we recall Heinrich Heine’s words, “Wherever a great spirit speaks his thoughts—there you have Golgotha,” (see Ewen [trans.], The Poetry and Prose of Heinrich Heine, 682). Heine is referring to the fate of Spinoza, who was expelled from the Jewish community for uttering his thoughts, while comparing him with Jesus, who was crucified because of expressing his unique religious opinions. But, obviously, there is a long list of examples that verify Heine’s statement. 15. This writing device, which could be defined as a “mosaic style,” is well known from the Chronicler’s writing. 16. Compare also with the short use of the phrase, without the theophoric name, in 1 Chr 12:19, “then the spirit ______ seized Amasai.” 17. In the last two phrases, the Chronicler wrote ‘God’ (μyhla) instead of ‘the Lord’ (hwhy), a phenomenon that is well known from other places in Chronicles; compare, for example, 1 Chr 14:10–16 with the parallel text of 2 Sam 5:19–25. For a detailed discussion on this issue and additional bibliographical references, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 326–28. 18. Compare this verse with the parallel verse in Deut 1:42.

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 39 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

39

‘and avenge’, despite the fact that the word fpçyw sounds better with what is written later on in 24:24 of 1 Chronicles regarding the punishment of Joash (μyfpç wç[ çawy taw). 19 By making this change, the Chronicler was most likely attempting to relate Zechariah’s words to Gen 9:5: μkmd ta ˚aw μdah çpn ta çrda wyja çya dym μdah dymw . . . çrda μkytçpnl ‘But for your own life-blood I will avenge your lives . . . at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s fellowman will I avenge the life of man’. 20 In other words, Zechariah requested that God perform justice as he promises in his Law. 21

b. The Historical Credibility of the Speech and the Story of the Murder (1) The Speech Because the Torah and Former Prophets probably were not available to Zechariah at the end of the 9th century b.c.e., it is unreasonable to assume that he composed the speech and his last words, quoted above—at least he didn’t say them in the form they appear in the book of Chronicles. In other words, the originality and antiquity of these words are highly questionable. They were probably composed by the Chronicler, who knew the Torah and Former Prophets very well and ascribed them to Zechariah. Indeed, the phenomenon of a speech, prayer, and letter composed by a late historian and attributed to earlier heroes of the past is well known from other places in the book of Chronicles (e.g., 2 Chronicles 13), from the early biblical historical writings, and from other ancient Mediterranean cultures, particularly Greek, Hellenistic, and Roman historiography. 22 19. The Greek translators of the LXX were not aware of the two distinct connotations of the Hebrew verbs, and they used the same verb in both places—‘judge’: kaμ krÇnai (Exod 5:21a), kaμ krinavtw (2 Chr 24:22). On the other hand, the translator(s) used a different Greek verb for the same Hebrew root, çrd, in Gen 9:5: ejkzhthvsw (‘require’). The possibility that the translators had a different Hebrew Vorlage cannot be totally excluded either. 20. On the double translation of Targum Chronicles here and the targumist’s attempt to relate Zechariah’s words to Gen 9:5, as well as the relationship of Targum Chronicles to Targum Onqelos and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, see below, chap. 10, §4c, pp. 162–64. 21. Tuell is of the opinion that in his last words Zechariah is asking for revenge not only for his murder but also for the fact that the murder took place in the Temple and caused its uncleanliness; see S. S. Tuell, First and Second Chronicles (Interpretation; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2001) 196. However, it is doubtful that bloody, wounded Zechariah was preoccupied with such a thought at the time of his death. Another issue: is the blood of innocent Abel crying out for justice, or revenge: “Listen, your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground” (Gen 4:10)? Abel himself, who was murdered suddenly, could not cry for justice, so his blood did instead. 22. For details, see I. Kalimi, “Placing the Chronicler in His Own Historical Context: A Closer Examination,” JNES 68 (2009) 179–92. For the phenomenon in the New

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 40 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

40

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

(2) The Story of the Murder The question of the historical probability of the information about the very murder of a priest-prophet in the courtyard of the Lord’s House has two sides: On the one hand, we should not automatically discredit the story of the murder because there is no parallel account in the book of Kings or because of the above-mentioned literary and theological features. 23 The very existence of the speech and the story of the murder could be based either on a written exegetical source such as the Midrash on the Book of Kings that is mentioned in 2 Chr 24:27, or on an oral tradition that was available to the Chronicler 24 (although neither of these possibilities on its own merit automatically establishes historical trustworthiness). Indeed, the speech of Zechariah and his last words were most likely stylized by the Chronicler himself, while using expressions from the Torah and Former Prophets. However, the use of old expressions in writing a story does not negate the basic historical credibility of the story itself. After all, a late historian is allowed to quote expressions from earlier sources in order to formulate his character’s speech. In other words, it is possible that there were a speech and last words by Zechariah himself, but later on they were restylized and reshaped by the Chronicler. The phenomenon of conspiracy against an innocent person is also known from the case of Naboth the Jezreelite (ca. mid-9th century b.c.e.; 1 Kgs 21:9–10). Like Naboth, perhaps Zechariah was blamed for blasphemy and stoned to death in accordance with a similar law that appears in Lev 24:11–16, 23. 25 Testament, see J. T. Townsend, “The Speeches in Acts, ATR 42 (1960) 150–59. 23. Contra J. W. Wright, “Zechariah,” ABD 6.1058–59. 24. On the antiquity of the tradition about the murder, compare W. Rudolph, Chronikbücher (Handbuch zum Alten Testament 21; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1955) 273–74; and R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961) 377. Miller and Hayes, for instance, seem to categorize this incident as historical; see J. M. Miller and J. H. Hayes, A History of Ancient Israel and Judah (2nd ed.; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2006) 350. Japhet states: “It is difficult to believe that the Chronicler ‘invented’ the story of Zechariah; more likely, he found it in one of his sources.” See S. Japhet, The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and Its Place in Biblical Thought (trans. A. Barber; Beiträge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des Antiken Judentums 9; Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 1989; repr., Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009) 174 n. 504 (136 n. 504 in the reprint). 25. For the stoning penalty, see R. Hirzel, Die Strafge der Steinigung (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1967). Hirzel discusses the issue particularly in classical literature. For a short biblical survey of the issue, see Japhet, I and II Chronicles: A Commentary, 850.

spread is 6 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 41 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

41

Moreover, the experience of a murder of the Lord’s messenger(s) in general and an attempt to murder a prophet in the Jerusalem Temple in particular are well known in biblical literature. For example, Uriah son of Shemaiah, the prophet from Kiriath-jearim, was murdered by King Jehoiakim of Judah. 26 Jeremiah, who was also a priest from Anathoth ( Jer 1:1), was saved at the last moment from the hands of the people who wished to kill him in the Temple because of his tough rebuke and unpleasant prophecy about the future of Jerusalem and its Temple ( Jeremiah 26; see also 7:1–14). Indeed, the punishment of Zechariah was much more severe than that of Uriah and Jeremiah, because Zechariah’s rebuke was quite conventional, but this fact does not discredit the accuracy of the event of Zechariah’s murder. 27 Furthermore, let us keep in mind that, in fact, the story of the murder of Zechariah in Chronicles completely contradicts the Chronicler’s theological concept of “reward” and “punishment,” because the story does not ascribe any transgression to Zechariah, although he was executed. 28 Does the inclusion of the story show, once again, the inconsistency in the Chronicler’s work, 29 or does it credit the historical accuracy of it? The issue is vexed indeed. From the perspective of historical reality in the Kingdom of Judah, one may situate the incident under review in the context of a power struggle between the king and priesthood. Joash was interested in weakening the power of the Jerusalem priesthood, which had reached a climax in the days of his patron, Jehoiada the high priest, the father of Zechariah, who was in fact the real ruler of the kingdom (2 Kgs 11:4–20//2 Chr 23:1–21). The considerable power that had been acquired by the Jerusalem priesthood is clearly reflected by the refusal of the priest to fulfill the instructions of King Joash to repair the damages of the Temple out of the Temple’s treasures. As a matter of fact, the king was unable to impose his will upon the priests, and a compromise had to be made (2 Kgs 12:5–10 // 2 Chr 24:4–9). Supported by the officials of Judah (2 Chr 24:17), Joash apparently wished 26. There is no connection between this prophet and the prophet mentioned in the Lachish Ostraca; see in detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 111–12 n. 18. 27. If the murder of Zechariah was known in the Second Temple era, it may have been what was being alluded to in Neh 9:26: ‘They were disobedient and rebelled against you and cast your Law behind their backs and killed your prophets, who had warned them in order to turn them back to you, and they committed great blasphemies.” However, Neh 9:26 could refer to 1 Kgs 19:10 or Jer 26:20–23. 28. See on this issue also below, in this volume, chap. 14, §5, pp. 261–63. 29. For other examples of inconsistency in the book of Chronicles, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Israelite History, 381–92.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 42 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

42

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

to demonstrate that the king is the one and only to rule over all and there is no room for any priest—including the high priest, even if he is the son of Jehoiada—to interfere in royal matters or in his officials’ actions or behavior. 30 Indeed, it is likely that King Joash feared the political power of Zechariah, but at the same time he trusted his own power and felt secure enough to completely eliminate Zechariah from political life. 31 On the other hand, one should not exclude the possibility that the story of the murder of Zechariah in the Jerusalem Temple could be the development of a statement read in Lamentations: ˆhk ynda çdqmb grhy μa aybnw ‘should priest and prophet be slain in the Temple of the Lord’ (Lam 2:20c). If this is the case, then the Chronicler himself invented the very story of the murder, composed the speech and the last words of the priestprophet (weaving into it various expressions from the earlier "biblical" books), and ascribed them all to Zechariah. The necessity of developing such a story on the verse from Lamentations stemmed from the Chronicler’s need to create a sin to balance what he considered to be a punishment—that is, the Aramean campaign against the Kingdom of Judah, the severe wounding of King Joash, and his murder by his own servants. If indeed the story was created around the verse in Lamentations, then we must conclude: 1. The Chronicler was unaware of the historical context of the lament, which in fact refers to the murder of priests and prophets by the Babylonian enemy at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (587/6 b.c.e.). 32 2. The Chronicler’s story under review has no historical credibility whatsoever. The two contrasting evaluations of the historical probability of the murder story of Zechariah exemplify the ambiguity involved with the stories 30. Obviously, this is a very different attitude toward a prophet’s rebuke from the attitude, for instance, in 2 Sam 12:1–15a, when the king was powerful and ruled without any real opposition. In Samuel, David humbled himself and accepted the rebuke of his court prophet, Nathan. 31. Compare H. Reviv, “On the Times of Athaliah and Joash,” Beit Mikra 16 (1971– 72) 541–48, esp. p. 547 [Hebrew]. Alexander Rofé holds a different approach, which is interesting in itself. He examines the fate of Zechariah against the general attitude toward prophets in the First Temple period and the understanding of that attitude in the Second Temple era; see his entry on “2 Chr 24:17–22,” in Companion on the Bible: The Second Book of Chronicles (ed. B. Oded; Tel Aviv: Davidson-Etti, 1995), 186, 188 [Hebrew]. 32. On Lam 2:20c, see below, §4, pp. 50–51.

spread is 12 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 43 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

43

that appear in the book of Chronicles only—that is, there are no biblical or extrabiblical parallel source(s). The problem has no solution, at least not with regard to the murder of Zechariah, as represented in the current study. In any case, we must not generalize, saying that such stories in Chronicles have no historical reliability. 33 After all, there are a number of stories that appear in Chronicles only that still are highly likely, even if not absolutely accurate. 34

c. Impact of the Story on Postbiblical Jewish and Christian Literature Any murder is, of course, strictly prohibited in the Bible and is considered an unforgivable sin (e.g., Gen 9:5; 42:22; Exod 20:13//Deut 5:17). A murder of the Lord’s messenger, who was carrying out God’s will, was considered an intolerable crime. Thus, the murder of the prophet-priest Zechariah in the House of the Lord by a king who was saved from Athaliah’s sword in the same place by Zechariah’s father (2 Chr 22:10–23:21// 2 Kings 12), regardless of the question of the historicity of the story in Chronicles, has been viewed through the generations as a disgraceful event, has penetrated deeply into the collective national memory, and has had a strong impact on numerous postbiblical Jewish and Christian writings. Indeed, the case is probably alluded to in the noncanonical book of Jubilees; 35 it is definitely mentioned in the pseudepigraphic Lives of the Prophets 23:1–2; 36 Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 9.168–69; the New Testament twice (Matt 23:35//Luke 11:50–51); 37 the Ethiopian exegetical tradition; 38 various talmudic, midrashic, and targumic sources; 39 and is used as

33. This is claimed, for instance, by C. C. Torrey, The Composition and Historical Value of Ezra–Nehemiah (BZAW 2; Gießen: Ricker, 1896) 52. For further discussion, see Kalimi, “Placing the Chronicler in His Own Historical Context.” 34. See the examples listed in ibid. 35. See Jub. 1:12: “I will send to them witnesses . . . they will even kill the witnesses. And they will persecute those who search out the Law” (O. S. Wintermute, “Jubilees: A New Translation and Introduction,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha [ed. J. H. Charlesworth; 2 vols.; Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York: Doubleday, 1985] 2.53). 36. See below, chap. 4, §2a, p. 82. 37. For the relationship between these New Testament sources and 2 Chr 24:20–22, see below, §4. 38. See R. W. Cowley, “The ‘Blood of Zechariah’ (Mt. 23:35) in Ethiopian Exegetical Tradition,” Studia Patristica 18 (ed. E. A. Livingstone; Berlin: Akademie, 1985) 293–302. 39. See below in this chapter, and (in much more detail) in chap. 14, §5, pp. 261–63.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 44 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

44

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

a theme in Jewish medieval poetry. 40 These sources determined the murder to be an evil offense of blood guilt. None of the authors of these sources questioned the historicity of the Chronicler’s story. For these authors, the literary-history and historicity of the Chronicler’s story did not play a role. For them the story happened exactly as it is told in Chronicles—that is, in the Holy Scriptures. Moreover, it is worthwhile to mention that, traditionally, the grave of Zechariah is identified with the monumental tombstone in the Kidron Valley on the east side of Jerusalem, from the Second Temple period. 41 Indeed, the practice of erecting monumental tombstones, at least in the late Second Temple period, is reflected in Matt 23:29–30, “You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the tombs of the just, and you say, ‘If we had been living in the days of our fathers, we would not have joined them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ ”

4. The Story about the Murder of Zechariah in the Gospels and Its Relation to Chronicles a. The Story in the Gospels There are two references in the Gospels comparable to the persecution of Zechariah. Matt 23:35 claims that Jesus said: So that upon you may come all the innocent blood shed on the earth, from the blood of innocent Abel 42 to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Barachiah, 43 whom you murdered between the Temple and the altar.

A slightly different form of the saying attributed to Jesus appears in the parallel text, Luke 11:50–51a: 44 The blood 45 of all the prophets that was shed from the foundation of the 40. See below, chap. 14, §§5 and 6, pp. 263–66. 41. See N. Avigad, “The Tombs around Jerusalem,” in Jerusalem through the Ages: The Twenty-Fifth Archaeological Convention, October 1967 (ed. J. Aviram; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1968) 49–61, esp. pp. 52–53 [Hebrew]. 42. On this issue, see below, §5, pp. 55–56. 43. On the various versions of this text, see below. 44. The possibly literary relationship between the Gospels of Matthew and Luke in general, and between the forms under review in particular, is beyond the scope of this study. It is worthwhile to mention that these texts of the Gospels under review appear in the Q source; see J. M. Robinson, P. Hoffmann, and J. S. Kloppenborg (eds.), The Critical Edition of Q (Leuven: Peeters, 2000) 286–89. 45. “Luke has omitted the adjective dikaiou, ‘innocent’, which Matt 23:35 has retained”; see J. A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke (X–XXIV): Introduction, Translation, and Notes (AB 28A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 951.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 45 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

45

world may be required of this generation—from the blood of Abel46 to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the Temple.

A quick glance at these passages in the Gospels shows that their details differ, at least at first sight, from the story of the murder of Zechariah in 2 Chr 24:20–22. 47 First, the Chronicler speaks about the murder of Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the high priest, while Matthew speaks of Zechariah the son of Barachiah (Luke does not mention Zechariah’s father). Second, according to the Chronicler the murder took place generally, “in the courtyard of the House of the Lord,” while Matthew and Luke place the murder in a specific location, “between the Temple and the altar / the altar and the Temple.” The question arises, therefore, whether the parallel accounts in the Gospels concerning the murder of Zechariah refer to the same story as told in the book of Chronicles, or are Chronicles and the Gospels representing two independent stories about two persons who prophesied in different periods and were both killed in the Temple but in different locations? And if so, who is the Zechariah in Matthew’s story?

b. The Identification of the Gospels’ Zechariah Because Zechariah was a common name in the biblical period, we need to establish who precisely the Zechariah is who is mentioned in the Gospel. Generations of scholars have debated this issue without reaching any consensus. I present here the various suggestions and review them critically: (1) Does the “Zechariah son of Barachiah” in Matthew refer to the “Zechariah son of Jeberechiah” who is mentioned in Isa 8:2? Apparently, the answer is no, because there is no evidence whatsoever that the latter was murdered, particularly not in the Temple courtyard. 48 (2) By the name “Zechariah son of Barachiah,” the Evangelist is not referring to the prophet of the early Second Temple era either (Zech 1:1; Ezra 5:1; 6:14), 49 the author of the canonical writing that bears his name 46. In fact, Abel was not a prophet. On this issue, see ibid. 47. For a detailed discussion of the story in Chronicles, see above in this chapter, §3, pp. 36–43. 48. Some commentators identify “Zechariah son of Jeberechiah” of Isa 8:2 with Zechariah of the sons of Asaph, from the time of Ahaz and Hezekiah, mentioned in 2 Chr 29:13. See, for instance, S. D. Luzzato, Commentary to the Book of Isaiah (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1970) 82 [Hebrew]. 49. According to Zech 1:1, Zechariah was the son of Berachiah and the grandson of Iddo. However, Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 refer to Zechariah as the son of Iddo. For possible solutions to this issue, see S. H. Blank, “The Death of Zechariah in Rabbinic literature,”

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 46 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

46

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

(Zechariah 1–8). None of the available sources say that this Zechariah was murdered. 50 (3) For the same reason, one must disagree with the identification of Zechariah in Matthew and Luke with Zechariah father of John the Baptist (Luke 1:5–80). 51 (4) Julius Wellhausen assumed that Jesus did not know the book of Chronicles, which was an unpopular part of Scripture. 52 Furthermore, he was of the opinion that, by saying “from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah,” Jesus meant “to demark a long time span [italics mine]: all the righteous blood from Abel to Zechariah— that is, from the first one at the very beginning of the sacred history to the last one at the destruction of the Jerusalem.” 53 Thus, states Wellhausen, Zechariah in the New Testament should allude to someone who was timely at the very end of the “Jewish theocracy” [italics mine]. In other words, the statement in the Gospels relates not to the murder of Zechariah son of Jehoiada as described by the Chronicler but to a murder reported by Josephus (Jewish War 4.335–44). 54 Josephus narrates the murder of Zechariah son of Baris (or, Bariscaeus) by the Zealots in the Temple just a few years prior to the destruction of the Second Temple. 55 In fact, Wellhausen follows earlier Christian theologians. He mentions that Chrysostom and, later on, Hugo Grotius and J. G. Herder were probably of the same opinion. In addition, this identification was suggested by Ulrich Zwingli (1484–1531). 56 In recent modern scholarship, this suggesHUCA 12–13 (1937–38) 327–46, esp. pp. 328–30. Blank considers the words “the son of Berachiah” in Zech 1:1 an early gloss intended to identify Zechariah the prophet of early Second Temple with the Zechariah who is mentioned in Isa 8:2. This identification reflects the story about Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues (b. Makkoth 24b). 50. Contra the opinion of (doubtfully attributed to) St. Epiphanius, bishop of Cyprus (Codex Augustanus; PG [Paris, 1858] vol. 43, cols. 411–12 n. 55]), which identifies the Zechariah in Matthew with the Zechariah under review, and the Zechariah in Matthew with the Zechariah mentioned in 2 Chr 24:20–22, from the time of King Joash of Judah! 51. See below, in this section, on the apocryphal Protevangelium of James. See also the references in W. D. Davies and D. C. Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew, Volume III: Commentary on Matthew XIX–XXVIII (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1997) 318 n. 46. 52. J. Wellhausen, Einleitung in die drei ersten Evangelien (2nd ed.; Berlin: Reimer, 1911) 119. 53. Ibid., 121 (translation mine). 54. See H. St. J. Thackeray, Josephus: The Jewish War, Books IV–VII (Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1928) 98–101. 55. Wellhausen, Einleitung in die drei ersten Evangelien, 118–23. 56. See U. Luz, Matthew 21–28: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2005) 155.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 47 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

47

tion was advanced by several other scholars, sometimes without referring to Wellhausen. 57 At any rate, it is unlikely that Jesus knew the Jewish writings except for the book of Chronicles. Why should we ascribe to this Jewish sage ( Jesus of the Gospels/the historical Jesus) a lack of knowledge of Chronicles when other Jewish sages before, during, and after Jesus’ lifetime read and used the book of Chronicles? This view is proven in various apocryphal, pseudepigraphic, and Qumranic sources as well as in the writings of Josephus and the early Mishnah (such as the passage that discusses the reading of Chronicles to the high priest in the Temple, on the night of Atonement) and other rabbinic sources. 58 Moreover, as we will see below in this chapter, various Jewish-Christian authors of the New Testament used Chronicles. So why should one exclude the possibility that Jesus knew the book? Thus, the reference to “Zechariah the son of Barachiah” rather than “Zechariah the son of Jehoiada” by the Evangelist does not justify Wellhausen’s assumption. Furthermore, because the historical Jesus died ca. 33 c.e., it is hard to believe that anyone would attribute to him a saying (in the form either in Matthew or in Luke) referring to the murder of Zechariah son of Baris, who was killed 33 years later (ca. 66 c.e.). Moreover, according to Josephus, Zechariah son of Baris was a wealthy man, while the contexts in which Zechariah appears in the New Testament clarify that Jesus was talking about a prophet (Matt 23:34–35, 37; Luke 11:50–51). In addition, Josephus reports generally that Zechariah was killed within the Temple but not “between the Temple and the altar” as recounted in the New Testament. Furthermore, the name of Zechariah’s father in Matthew is similar, but not identical, to the name of the father mentioned by Josephus: Barachiah versus Baris (or, Bariscaeus).

57. For example, L. Baeck, “Secharja ben Berechja,” MGWJ 76 (1932) 313–19 (who is of the opinion that the murdered Zechariah who is mentioned in midrashic literature is the man described by Josephus in the Jewish War); Rudolph, Chronikbücher, 279 n. 1; L. M. McDonald, The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority (3rd ed.; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007) 96 n. 61. 58. Thus, for example, the Prayer of Manasseh, which was written probably sometime before the destruction of the Second Temple; 3 Ezra which was composed sometime between 165 b.c.e. and mid-1st century c.e.; The Lives of the Prophets, which was presumably written in the 1st century c.e.; Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, which apparently was written in the time before the destruction of the Second Temple or even, roughly speaking, in the time of Jesus; 2 Baruch, which dates to the early 2nd century c.e.; and perhaps also the Testament of Moses, the proposed dates of composition of which range from the first half of the 2nd century b.c.e. to the middle of the 2nd century c.e. On these issues, see below, chaps. 4–6, 9–11.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 48 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

48

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

(5) Another solution was offered by W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, “that this Zechariah [in the Gospels] was a person of whom otherwise we have no knowledge.” 59 The improbability of this solution stems from the fact that the murder of a priest in the Temple courtyard made a great impact on various audiences, and one would expect it to have left a trace elsewhere in the rich Jewish and Christian literature, in addition to what we have in the Gospels. (6) A different direction was taken by Immanuel Benzinger. He was of the opinion that the Chronicler and the Gospels preserved two traditions (Überlieferungen) of a single story about the murder of the same man. 60 Because the following verse in Matthew tells about the prophet who was stoned, and because we do not know any other biblical story about a prophet who was stoned in the Temple except Zechariah son of Jehoiada, it is reasonable to assume that both are referring to the same story. However, the differences between Chronicles and the Gospels do not seem to be due to equal traditions, as Benzinger claims, one of which survived in Chronicles and the other in Matthew. If this were true, one would expect that we would find at least a trace of the tradition in the various ancient manuscripts and versions of the book of Chronicles. We do not. (7) It seems reasonable to assume that the Gospels refer to Zechariah son of Jehoiada, the priest-prophet who was stoned by command of Joash in the First Temple courtyard, as recounted in 2 Chr 24:20–22. 61 What is commonly and correctly recognized is that Jesus’ remarks about the first and last innocents murdered were documented in a 1st-century collection of Hebrew Scripture. 62 Accordingly, the phrase “from . . . Abel to . . . Ze59. W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (AB 26; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971) 282. J. M. Ross (“Which Zechariah?” IBS 9 [1987] 70–73, esp. p. 73) is of the same opinion (he is not referring to Albright and Mann). 60. Cf. I. Benzinger, Bücher der Chronik—erklärt (Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testament 20; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1901) 114. 61. Compare, for example, Blank, “The Death of Zechariah in Rabbinic literature,” 331; Luz, Matthew 21–28: A Commentary, 155. See also the references in the following footnote. 62. See, for example, E. Nestle, “Über Zacharias in Matth 23,” ZNW 6 (1905) 198– 200; Blank, “The Death of Zechariah in Rabbinic literature,” 331; Curtis and Madsen, The Books of Chronicles, 438; Goettsberger, Die Bücher der Chronik, 316; Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 324; Dillard, 2 Chronicles, 193; Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke (X– XXIV) 951; W. Wiefel, Das Evangelium nach Lukas (Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 3; Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1988) 230; F. Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas (Evangelisch–Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 3/2; Zurich: Benziger / Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1996) 236 n. 96; Davies and Allison, Commentary on Matthew XIX–XXVIII, 318–19; H. Klein, Das Lukasevangelium:

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 49 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

49

chariah” probably defined murders that were recorded at two ends of the Scriptures’ collection, which extended from Genesis to Chronicles (Gen 4:8– 16 and 2 Chr 24:20–22). In other words, the idiom “from . . . to . . .” functions in these texts as a literary definition rather than a historical definition. Thus, Matt 23:34–35 and Luke 11:50–51a confirm a rising tripartite biblical canon in the 1st century c.e., but the precise contents of the third part, the Ketubim, cannot be discerned from these sources. 63 Moreover, these passages in the New Testament reflect the presence and location of Chronicles in at least some collections of Hebrew Scripture in the late 1st century c.e. In other words, Chronicles was located at the close of that collection of Scriptures, in the same position as it was placed in the Hebrew Bible by the Tannaim (mishnaic Sages) of the beraita in b. Baba Batra 14b. 64 The difference between the story in Chronicles and its references in the Gospels, particularly in Matthew, to the name of Zechariah’s father can be explained by one of the following options. The Evangelist Mistakenly Changed Zechariah’s Father’s Name. One option is that the change of the name of the father of Zechariah is due to the confusion of the Evangelist. He probably cited from memory (as many Sages in rabbinic literature did) and simply was confused between “Zechariah son of Jehoiada” and the well-known Second Temple era prophet’s father “Zechariah son of Barachiah son of Iddo.” 65 Indeed, the words ‘son of Barachiah’ (uÇou BaracÇou) in Matt 23:35 do not appear in Codex Sinaiticus or in the parallel story in Luke. Moreover, in his commentary on Matthew, Jerome notes that he found in the Nazarene Gospel (ca. first half of the 2nd century c.e.) the version “Zechariah son of Jehoiada.” 66 Nevertheless, Übersetzt und erklärt (Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament 1/3; 10. Auflage; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006) 433; Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church, 211–22; Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 31. However, for a different conclusion, see Ross, “Which Zechariah?” 72–73; H. G. L. Peels, “The Blood “from Abel to Zechariah” (Matthew 23,35; Luke 11,50f.) and the Canon of the Old Testament,” ZAW 113 (2001) 583–601, esp. p. 600; McDonald, The Biblical Canon, 100; M. Wolter, Das Lukasevangelium (Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 5; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008) 436. 63. See above, chap. 2, §4; compare with McDonald, The Biblical Canon, 100. 64. On this issue and on the place of Chronicles in the Aleppo and the St. Petersburg (Leningrad) Codices and in some other manuscripts, see in detail, above, chap. 2, §5, pp. 26–27. 65. Cf. Thackeray, Josephus: The Jewish War, 98–99 note a; Baeck, “Secharja ben Berechja,” 314; Luz, Matthew 21–28: A Commentary, 155. 66. See PL (Paris, 1864) vol. 26, col. 180c; on the Nazarene Gospel, see R. Hanig, “Nazareans, Gospel of the,” in Dictionary of Early Christian Literature (ed. S. Döpp and W. Geerlings; New York: Crossroad, 1998) 430–31.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 50 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

50

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

the current version of Matthew is, in fact, a lectio difficilior. In other words, the erroneous name in Matthew is the more difficult reading from the viewpoint of the subject matter, 67 therefore it should be preferred as the most likelly to be authentic over all other versions—Codex Sinaiticus and the Gospel of Luke on the one hand, and the version of the Nazarene Gospel on the other. The latter reading (“son of Jehoiada”) should be considered an “improvement” on the earlier difficult text, either by omission (Sinaiticus and Luke) or by addition (Nazarene Gospel). 68 Moreover, the following are additional facts supporting my conclusion: 1. Similar confusion appears in the apocryphal Protevangelium of James 23–24. 69 Here the author mistakenly combines the story about Zechariah, the aged father of John the Baptist (Luke 1:5–80), with Zechariah, the prophet who was killed in the Temple courtyard (2 Chr 24:20–22). The mixup was again primarily because of the identical names of the figures and the tradition about their function as priests in the Jerusalem Temple. 70 2. This story is not the only instance of confusion of names in the New Testament. In Acts 7:15–16, for instance, the writer confuses Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite, from whom Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a family burial site (Genesis 23), with Hamor, Shechem’s father, from whose children Jacob purchased the parcel of land (Gen 33:19). 3. The verse “should priest and prophet be slain in the Temple of the Lord” (Lam 2:20c) is speaking generally about the killing of prophets and priests in the First Temple by the Babylonians. Nonetheless, the talmudic Sages interpret this verse as applying to a specific case, the murder of Zechariah as related in Chronicles. 71 67. However, it is not a textual error. There is no sign in any old textual transformation of the text for this supposed error (which kind of error? and how could it have happened?). 68. Blank (“The Death of Zechariah in Rabbinic literature,” 332) is of the opinion that the original text had only “Zechariah,” as in Luke (he does not refer to Codex Sinaiticus), and considers the words “the son of Barachiah” in Matthew a late gloss. He offers the same solution for the version of the Nazarene Gospel: he considers it a late gloss. 69. On this work, see R. F. Hock, The Infancy Gospels of James and Thomas (Santa Rosa, CA: Polebridge, 1995). For a brief description of the work and its incorrect knowledge of Judaism, see Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, 836. 70. Fitzmyer (The Gospel according to Luke [X–XXIV] 951) also refers to Origen’s commentary. This approach also developed in the Ethiopian exegetical tradition; see below, chap. 13, §3a. 71. On this issue, see in detail below, chap. 13, §2a.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 51 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

51

Targum Lamentations (early 7th century c.e.), 72 for instance, translates the verse as follows: 73 awd[ rb hyrkzl ˆwtlfqd amk yyd açdqm tybb ayybnw anhk lfqml yzj μa trma ˆykw ayrwpkd amwyb ˆyd açdqwm tybb ˆmyhm aybnw abr anhk Is it right to kill in the Temple of the Lord the priest and the prophet, as they killed Zechariah son of Iddo, the high priest and faithful prophet, in the Temple on the Day of Atonement?74

Seemingly, the targumist (and the midrashist) were confused here, as was the author of Matthew: these authors both confused the priest-prophet Zechariah son of Jehoiada, who was murdered in the First Temple period (ca. 800 b.c.e.; 2 Chr 24:20–22), with the well-known prophet Zechariah son of Berechiah son of Iddo, of the book of Zechariah (Zech 1:1; Ezra 5:1; 6:14), the contemporary of Haggai, who lived and prophesied in postexilic Judah (in the last decades of the 6th century b.c.e.). 75 Moreover, the Targumist mistakenly related the biblical verse to the Israelites’ behavior in the preexilic era, although originally the verse refers to the murderous actions of the Babylonians at the time of the destruction of the First Temple! 76 In fact, the Targumist is even more confused about the two Zechariahs than the Evangelist: he anachronistically connects the prophet Zechariah of the Restoration/postexilic period with a lament that was composed in the exilic period and mourned the destruction of the First Temple and Jerusalem (which is to say that the prophet Zechariah son of Berechiah son of Iddo of the postexilic era already was “murdered” at the time of the destruction of the First Temple [587/6 b.c.e.]; i.e., in the preexilic era!). 77 72. For the date of Targum Lamentations, see Y. Komlosh, The Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translation (Tel Aviv: Bar-Ilan University Press and Dvir, 1973) 90 [Hebrew]. 73. The text of the Targum is according to A. Sperber (ed.), The Bible in Aramaic Based on Old Manuscripts and Texts, Volume IV A: The Hagiographa (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 145. 74. See also Targum Lamentations on 4:13; and compare Lamentations Rabbah introduction 23; 2.4, which states that it was the Day of Atonement and Shabbat. 75. Due to the deep animosity between Jews and Christians in the early 7th century c.e. (for the presumed time of the composition of Targum Lamentations, see above, n. 72), I doubt that the Targumist read Matthew and was influenced by it, particularly regarding the mistaken information under review. It is too hypothetical to suppose the existence of an ancient tradition (that did not reach us!) on which both Matthew and the Targum may have drawn, despite the Targumist’s evident anachronistic interpretation (see the following lines in this section’s text). 76. In fact, from this viewpoint, the talmudic Sages who related the verse in Lamentations to the murder of Zechariah son of Jehoiadah made the same mistake. 77. Wiefel (Das Evangelium nach Lukas, 230) suggests that the confusion of names between Chronicles and Matthew is due to events that took place in the time of Matthew:

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 52 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

52

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

The Evangelist Purposely Changed Zechariah’s Father’s Name. The other option is that Evangelist purposely changed the name of Zechariah’s father in order to identify a lesser-known Zechariah (son of Jehoiada) from the time of Joash in the First Temple period with the well-known Zechariah (son of Barachiah) from the early Second Temple period whose name is borne by the canonical book in the Twelve Minor Prophets (Dodeka Propheten). This phenomenon of changing names for the purpose of identification is attested in rabbinic literature as well as in the work of copyists of the Hebrew Bible and Septuagint: 1. As we saw above, in Targum Lamentations, Zechariah son of Jehoiada is identified with/changed to Zechariah [son of Barachiah], son of Iddo. 2. The unknown Obadiah, an official of King Ahab of Israel (ca. mid9th century b.c.e.; 1 Kgs 18:3–16), was identified by the talmudic rabbis (b. Sanhedrin 39b) with the well-known late prophet Obadiah of the book named after him in the Minor Prophets. 3. The unknown prophet Micaiah son of Imlah, who is mentioned only in 1 Kgs 22:8–28 (// 2 Chr 18:4–27) in the story about Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah, was identified with the well-known prophet Micah whose book appears in the Minor Prophets. In fact, the words μlk μym[ w[mç rmayw ‘and he said: “Hear, all you people” ’ (1 Kgs 22:28b // 2 Chr 18:27b), which is an exact quotation from Mic 1:2a (μlk μym[ w[mç), is a gloss from the hand of a late Hebrew scribe who wished to identify the lesser-known prophet of ca. the mid-9th century b.c.e. with the well-known Micah the Morashtite of the late 8th century b.c.e. In fact, these words do not appear in the LXX (BL) version of 1 Kgs 22:28. 78 4. The expression μkbbl an wmyç / μkbbl wmyç ‘lay [this] in your hearts’ appears three times in the book of Haggai (1:5b; 2:15a, 18a) and became a recognition sign of this prophet. Because the name of the prophet of the so-called book of Malachi is in fact unknown, a scribe the author/editor of Matt 23:35 changed the name of Zechariah’s father in accordance with the event of the Zealots’ killing of Zechariah son of Baris in the Second Temple. However, if this were true, why is the name in Matthew not identical with the man who is mentioned by Josephus? Because confusion of the names appears in other sources as well, it seems more reasonable to assume as I detailed above. 78. Compare J. A. Montgomery and H. S. Gehman, The Books of Kings (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1951) 340 (however, the phrase is not “absent in Chronicles,” as they mistakenly state; see 2 Chr 18:27); J. Gray, I and II Kings: A Commentary (Old Testament Library; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970) 447 note b; M. Cogan, 1 Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 10; New York: Doubleday, 2000) 493.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 53 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

53

who copied the Greek version of the book inserted the known expression from Haggai into the first verse of Malachi (1:1): qevsqe dh epi taÍ kardÇaÍ umwn ‘lay [this] therefore to your hearts’, which is to say: “Malachi” (the word that he translated ajggevlou aujtou ‘his messenger’) is none other than Haggai the prophet! 79 5. The talmudic rabbis, who identified Malachi with Ezra the scribe (b. Megilla 15a), were moving in a similar direction. Some versions of Targum Malachi added here: arps arz[ hymç yrqtyd ykalm ‘my messenger, whose name was Ezra the scribe’. 80 However, as already stated by David Kimchi, 81 in the Hebrew Bible, Ezra is always accompanied by the appelation scribe, not prophet. If this was indeed the purpose of the Evangelist, changing the name of Zechariah’s father from Jehoiada to Barachiah in order to identify him with the Zechariah of the early Second Temple period, the Second Temple period began with the murder of the prophet/God’s messenger Zechariah son of Barachiah, and it closed with the murder of God’s messenger Jesus! That is to say, the Jews were and are murderers of prophets!

c. The Identification of the Murder’s Place The difference between Matthew and Chronicles on the location of the murder may not be a real contradiction, because, in fact, the big burntoffering altar of the Second Temple stood in the courtyard of the Temple (Josephus, Ant. 15.419; m. Middot 5:1). 82 Davies and Allison note: “ ‘Between the sanctuary and altar’ [altar of burnt-offering] has a parallel in Ezek 8:16 and Joel 2:17. . . . The words interpret the ‘in the court of the house of the Lord’ of 2 Chr 24:21 to mean ‘in the court [of the priest].’ ” 83 There is no assurance, however, that this was also the location of the altar in the First Temple. It may be that the location of the altar in the First Temple was different from the location in the Second Temple. However, though the Chronicler is speaking about an incident that happened in the First Temple period, it is possible that he had in front of his eyes the familiar image of his own Temple, the Second Temple. Similar to the Chronicler, the Evangelist could have anachronistically interpreted Chronicles, 79. Cf. A. Rofé, “Cassuto the Bible Critic: His Program in 1939 as Viewed in 2002,” Beit Mikra 47 (2002) 289–304, esp. pp. 302–3 [Hebrew]. 80. The phenomenon of the ascription of names to unnamed figures is known as far back as the work of the Chronicler; see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 74– 77. 81. See Kimchi’s commentary on Mal 1:1. 82. Cf. Baeck, “Secharja ben Berechja,” 315. 83. See Davies and Allison, Commentary on Matthew XIX–XXVIII, 318.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 54 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

54

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

which speaks of the First Temple, from the vantage point of the Second Temple, which was familiar to him. Alternatively, one may claim that the Evangelist did not refer to the location of the murder precisely as it appears in Chronicles because it was not really an important part of his core message.

5. Matthew 23:34–37 and 2 Chronicles 36:15–16 In Matt 23:34–37, the Evangelist states: Therefore, behold, I send to you prophets, wise men, and teachers; some of them you will kill and crucify; and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city. So, upon you will come all the innocent blood shed on the earth. . . . O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones the messengers sent to her! How often have I longed to gather your children . . . but you would not let me. Look, look! there is your Temple, forsaken by God.84

These verses are related to the story of Zechariah son of Jehoiada, who was stoned and killed in Jerusalem’s Temple courtyard (2 Chr 24:20–22), as recounted in Matt 23:35. They also probably follow the Chronicler’s epilogue in 2 Chr 36:15–16: Now, the Lord, the God of their ancestors, had sent to them early and often through his messengers, because He had compassion on His people and His dwelling place. But they kept mocking the messengers of God, despising His words, and ridiculing His prophets, until the rage of the Lord mounted against his people to the point of no cure.

The possible use of these passages from the book of Chronicles (2 Chr 24:20–22; 36:15–16) integrates organically with the sharp criticism by the Jewish and/or Gentile followers of Jesus of the other Jews, who rejected him as Messiah. Generally, it fits the anti-Jewish statements made by JewishChristians and Gentile-Christians against the mainstream of Judaism (that is, the vast majority of the Jewish people, who did not follow Jesus). Some negative deeds of the biblical Israelites as well as the sharp rebukes of the prophets were used against the Jewish people by the early Christians. The Israelites’ persecution of prophets is frequently stressed in the New Testament (Matt 5:12; Luke 11:47–51; 13:34; 16:31; Acts 7:52; Rom 11:3 [//1 Kgs 19:10]; Heb 11:36–37; Rev 16:6; 18:24). 85 This feature is comprehensible 84. Some versions add: “and laid waste.” For the possible context of these verses, see Albright and Mann, Matthew, 284. 85. See also the parable of the wicked tenants in Matt 21:33–46 // Mark 12:1–12 // Luke 20:9–19, which probably hints at the issue under review; see also Kalimi, “Bibel und die klassisch-jüdische Bibelauslegung,” 608.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 55 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

55

against the background of Jesus’ persecution; that is, Jesus was not the first or the only messenger/prophet of God who was killed by the Jews. 86 “The Jews” collectively and continuously acted against God’s prophets and messengers and even murdered them. The present persecution of God’s messengers, which is climaxed by Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, is a continuation of their forefathers’ similar evil acts in the past. They are collectively guilty of shedding the blood of the innocent prophets, messengers, and righteous servants of God. One of the worst (and perhaps also the first) anti-Jewish statements in the New Testament is in 1 Thess 2:14–16 (either by Paul himself [ca. 50 c.e.] or by a later Christian interpolator who “updated” Paul’s letter, probably sometime after 70 c.e.): You have fared like the congregations in Judea, God’s people in Christ Jesus. You have been treated by your countrymen as they are treated by the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets 87 and drove us out, the Jews who are neglectful of God’s will and enemies of their fellow-men.88 . . . All this time they have been making up the full measure of their guilt, for the wrath is come upon them at last. (italics mine)

In this regard, it is worthwhile mentioning that, though Cain was not a Jew, the Jews were nevertheless blamed for the wicked murder of his

86. Historically speaking, however, Jesus was crucified by the Romans for their own political agenda, by verdict of Pontius Pilate, rather than by Jews. 87. Note that Jesus was considered parallel to one of the prophets. For consideration of Jesus as a prophet, see, for example, Matt 21:46: “they took him for a prophet”; and Luke 13:33, “it is impossible for a prophet to be killed outside of Jerusalem.” 88. Compare this assault to the attack, for instance, by the pagan Roman historian Tacitus (ca. 56–120 c.e.): “Moses warned them not to hope for help from gods or men, for they were deserted by both” (The Histories 5.3); “The Jews regard as profane all that we hold sacred; on the other hand, they permit all that we abhor” (5.4); “The Jews are extremely loyal toward one another . . . but toward every other people they feel only hate and enmity . . . the ways of the Jews are preposterous and mean” (5.5); “A nation which is the slave of superstition and the enemy of true beliefs” (5.13; cf. 2.4 [all italics mine]). The translation is mostly according to C. H. Moore, Tacitus in Five Volumes. III—The Histories, Books IV–V (Loeb Classical Library; London: Heinemann / Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969) 178–87; for a full discussion of Tacitus’s words about Jews and their character, see J. H. Levy, Studies in Jewish Hellenism ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1960) 115–96 [Hebrew]. Thus, Paul (or a late Christian interpolator) attacks his own people as an outsider, a bitter pagan enemy did. How can one explain this? I think that, after the refusal of the Jews to follow Jesus, and when he, Paul, was convinced that he was unable to change their position, he turned back and changed his attitude toward them altogether! From a comparative-historical viewpoint, Paul’s attitude toward the Jews is similar to the earlier (friendly) and later (hateful) attitudes of Martin Luther and Mohammad toward the Jews.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 56 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

56

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

righteous brother, Abel, and they were certain to be punished also for Abel’s blood. 89

6. The Murders of the Messengers: Stephen versus Zechariah and the Ethical Values of the “New” versus the “Old” Testament a. The Ethical Values of the “Old” versus the “New” Testament: Matthew and Marcion The “Old Testament” has frequently been disparaged by its detractors on account of the vengefulness and wrath expressed in it, in contrast to the love-teaching of the “New Testament.” Thus, for instance, according to Matt 5:38–39, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus states the following contra-position of the “Old Testament” teaching: You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, do not resist evil. If someone smites you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Here Jesus quotes either Exod 21:24a or one of the parallels in Lev 24:20b and Deut 19:21b that deals with lex talionis (‘law of retaliation’). 90 He states exactly the opposite (even with some exaggeration), that is, show love and friendship to an enemy rather than any kind of retaliation or hostility. 91 89. Some Christian interpreters were aware of this difficulty. They still attempted either to Judaize Cain or somehow to relate him to the Jews; see the detailed references by Luz, Matthew 21–28: A Commentary, 154 n. 34. 90. For a detailed discussion of this law against its ancient Near Eastern background and its continuity and development in rabbinic and medieval literature, see I. Kalimi, “Targumic and Midrashic Exegesis in Contradiction to the Peshat of Biblical Text,” in Biblical Interpretation in Judaism and Christianity (ed. I. Kalimi and P. J. Haas; Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 439; London: T. & T. Clark, 2006) 13–32, esp. pp. 13–18. 91. For the idea of love for an enemy, see also Matt 5:40–44; Luke 6:27–38; and cf. Isa 50:6; Lam 3:30 (“Let him offer his cheek to him who strikes him; let him take his fill of insults”). This idea is developed, in fact, especially in the late Second Temple period as well as in rabbinic literature, as part of Jewish humanism; see D. Flusser, “Love a Human Being,” in Judaism of the Second Temple Period: Sages and Literature (ed. S. Ruzer; Jerusalem: Magnes and Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, 2002) 146–50 [Hebrew]. On the verses in the New Testament, see R. C. Tannehill, “The ‘Focal Instance’ as a Form of New Testament Speech: A Study of Matthew 5:39b-42,” JR 50 (1970) 372–85; W. Wolbert, “Bergpredigt und Gewaltlosigkeit,” TP 57 (1982) 498–525.

spread is 12 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 57 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

57

Probably drawing on Matthew 5, Marcion of Sinope (Asia Minor, ca. 85–160 c.e.), 92 and his followers, eliminated the whole “Old Testament” from his collection of Scriptures (together with some parts of the New Testament). 93 According to Marcion, “the Old Testament God cannot be the Father of Jesus. The Old Testament speaks of a creator whose foremost quality is ‘righteousness’; ‘an eye for an eye’. . . . his Son . . . taught people to overcome the law of righteousness with love and refuted the law of retaliation.” 94 Unfortunately, he and others overlooked the many well-known ethical concepts of “love” in the Hebrew Bible/“Old Testament,” such as: “You shall not hate your brother in your heart . . . you shall not avenge, nor bear any grudge against . . . , but you shall love your fellow (/neighbor) as yourself . . .” (Lev 19:17–18; even a foreigner, Lev 19:34); “Do not say, ‘I will do to him as he has done to me; I will pay the man back for what he has done’ ” (Prov 24:29; cf. 20:22); the great mercy and kindness that the Israelites demonstrated toward the Aramean captives (2 Kgs 6:20–23); and the Judean captivity, as reported in 2 Chr 28:8–15. 95

b. Zechariah versus Stephen As already discussed above, 2 Chr 24:20–22 (an “addition” to 2 Kings) narrates the story of the murder of Zechariah son of Jehoiada, the high priest. Zechariah was stoned in the Temple courtyard by command of King Joash of Judah, after he rebuked his people in a short speech. Zechariah’s last words were: “May the Lord look and avenge [çrdyw hwhy ary]!” The Acts of the Apostles narrates the martyrdom of Stephen, who rebuked his people with a long speech and was stoned to death, due to a conspiracy of false witnesses against him (Acts 6:8–7:60). Like the case of Zechariah, apparently Stephen also was blamed for blasphemy (Acts

92. For Marcion’s biography and writing, see the classic work by A. von Harnack, Marcion: The Gospel of the Alien God (trans. J. E. Steely; Durham, NC: Labyrinth, 1990); B. Aland, “Marcion (ca. 85–160) / Marcioniten,” TRE 22.89–101; G. May, “Markion/ Markioniten,” RGG 5.834–36. 93. See D. L. Baker, Two Testaments: One Bible (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1976) 45–47; H. D. Betz, The Sermon on the Mount (Hermenia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995) 200; H. Räisänen, “Marcion and the Origins of Christian Anti-Judaism,” Temenos 33 (1997) 121–35; H. König, “Marcion of Sinope,” in Dictionary of Early Christian Literature (ed. S. Döpp and W. Geerlings; New York: Crossroad, 1998) 398–400. 94. Räisänen, “Marcion and the Origins of Christian Anti-Judaism,” 122. 95. On this issue, see the discussion below. See also Kalimi, “Targumic and Midrashic Exegesis in Contradiction to the Peshat,” 14–15.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 58 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

58

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

6:11), and punished according to the precedent-setting story and law such as in the Pentateuch (Lev 24:11–16, 23): 96 And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out and prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 97 And he knelt down, and called with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” 98 Having said this, he passed away. (Acts 7:59–60)

In his last words Stephen called for forgiveness, in contrast to the last words of Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, who called for vengeance. Was the story in Acts written to counter the vengeance story of Zechariah in Second Chronicles? In other words, was the author/editor of Acts attempting by this story also to highlight the supposed greater ethical merit of the new religion (later called Christianity), a religion of love and forgiveness, in contrast to the incompatible vengeance of Zechariah’s story of Chronicles in the Old Testament? Let us not forget that, after all, Stephen was the first “Christian” to die for Jesus and his message—a message of love and forgiveness. Thus, is it apparent that the author(s)/editor(s) of Acts presents the merit of Stephen’s last message against the background of and in contrast to Zechariah’s last words in the Old Testament? In any case, the contrast between the last words of Zechariah and the last words of Stephen is unambiguous, whether the allusion was intended by the writer or not. We must discuss what we find, as it appears in the current text; this is the important determining factor. 99 Furthermore, because of the structural, thematic, stylistic, and other issues binding the Gospel of Luke and Acts together, contemporary scholars are of the opinion that these books were composed by the same author. 100 Now, the murder of Zechariah is mentioned in Luke 11:50–51a 96. See above in this chapter, and compare J. A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 31; New York: Doubleday, 1998) 390. 97. Compare Ps 31:6: “Into your hand I commit my spirit; you have redeemed me, O Lord God of truth.” In Acts, Stephen replaces “God” with “Jesus.” The phrase “into your hand I commit my spirit” was also the last word of Jesus according to Luke 23:46. 98. Also stated by Jesus before his death (Luke 23:34a). For lack of these words in some textual witnesses, see J. Jervell, Die Apostelgeschichte: Übersetzt und erklärt (Kritischexegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament 3; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998) 254 n. 767. 99. For a similar writing feature elsewhere, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 26–27. 100. Luke is considered “the first book” (Acts 1:1). See L. T. Johnson, “Luke–Acts, Book of,” ABD 4.403–20. For the purpose of the double-work Luke–Acts, see the detailed survey by J. A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke (I–IX): Introduction, Translation, and Notes (AB 28; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1981) 8–14.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 59 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

59

(//Matt 23:35). 101 This means that the author of Acts knew the story of the murder of Zechariah as recounted in 2 Chr 24:20–22. Thus, the story of the death of Stephen in Acts could have been written to counter the story of Zechariah in Chronicles. The last words of Stephen according to Acts are reminiscent of one of the last words of another messenger of God, Jesus, who was killed on the cross according to Luke 23:34: “Father, forgive them!” 102 In other words, the author of Stephen’s death story in Acts, who is in fact the same author who composed the story of Jesus’ death in Luke, used the same words in both cases: in both cases, the last words of the victims teach forgiveness and are against revenge. They are quite the opposite of the last words of Zechariah as formed in the book of Chronicles. In fact, the contrast sharpens the anti-Jewish rhetoric of the early Christian writer(s)/editor(s). 103

7. Robbers on the Road to Jericho: Luke’s Story of the Good Samaritan and Its Origin in Kings/Chronicles a. The Story: Its Literary Nature and Historical Credibility The story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:30–35 appears in the framework of a dialogue between Jesus and a lawyer in which Jesus exemplifies how one should treat a fellow human being (Luke 10:25–37), 104 as required by the ethical law in the Torah: ˚wmk ˚[rl tbhaw (Lev 19:18b): A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, who stripped him of his raiment, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. By chance a certain priest was going down that same way and, seeing him, went by on the other side. Similarly, a Levite came to the place and, seeing him, went by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came near him; and when he saw him, he had compassion on him. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; he set him on his own beast, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, 101. See above in this chapter, §§3c and 4, pp. 43–54. 102. For this point, see H. Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 60; J. A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke (X–XXIV): Introduction, Translation, and Notes (AB 28A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 390. 103. This paragraph is based on I. Kalimi, “The Murders of the Messengers: Stephen versus Zechariah and the Ethical Values of ‘New’ versus ‘Old’ Testament,” ABR 56 (2008) 69–73. 104. On the question whether Luke 10:30–35 is a parable or an example, see J. D. Crossan, “Parable and Example in the Teaching of Jesus,” NTS 18 (1971–72) 285–307, esp. pp. 285–96.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 60 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

60

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature “Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I return.”

There is dispute about whether the story goes back to the historical Jesus or whether Luke created it, completely or in part. 105 According to the story as it appears in Luke, Jesus interprets ˚[r (usually translated ‘your neighbor/fellow’) in the widest sense, as “anyone in need with whom one comes into contact and to whom one can show pity and kindness, even beyond the bounds of one’s own ethnic or religious group.” 106 From a literary viewpoint, the story is constructed with the numerical form “two–three.” That is to say, after the two members of Jerusalem Temple priesthood, the spiritual and social leaders of Jews (the priest and Levite), 107 refused to help the unlucky, anonymous victim whose life was in danger, the third man (the Samaritan) came and offered him kindness— both personal and material. 108 Alfred Plummer considers Luke 10:30–35, “not fiction, but history.” In his opinion, “Jesus would not be likely to invent such behaviour, and attribute it to priest, Levite, and Samaritan, if it had not actually occurred.” 109 Some scholars go even further and suggest the presumed historical reality behind the story, 110 even the specific scriptural, economic, and social context of Luke 10:30–35. 111 Nonetheless, one must keep in mind that after all, the story under review is a parable or illustrative tale—very similar to a rabbinic aggadic midrash that clarifies an interpretation of a passage— rather than a historical description. Furthermore, the literary-numerical 105. See the recent discussion by J. Nolland, Luke 9:21–18:34 (WBC 35B; Dallas: Word, 1993) 590, 597. Nolland concludes: “there is still every reason for thinking that the historical Jesus is the creative source of the parable” (p. 597). 106. Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke (X–XXIV) 884. 107. For the spiritual and social leadership of the priests and Levites, see Lev 10:10– 11; Deut 16:8–11; 21:5; 33:8–11; Mal 2:7; 1 Chr 23:2–5. Is the choosing of “priest” and “Levite” connected to Jesus’ criticism of the Temple and its service-givers? It seems that the story alludes to the heartlessness of these elements. For the question whether Luke is this parable’s anti-Semitic, see the discussion and references to earlier secondary literature by Fitzmyer, ibid., 885. 108. For another instance of the literary numerical form “two–three,” see 2 Kgs 7:8– 10. On numerical patterns in the biblical and extrabiblical literature, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 362–68, as well as various examples and a list of earlier references. 109. See A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Luke (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1910) 285–86. 110. See the discussion of E. F. F. Bishop, “People on the Road to Jericho: The Good Samaritan—and the Others,” EvQ 42 (1970) 2–6. 111. See M. P. Knowles, “What was the Victim Wearing? Literary, Economic, and Social Contexts for the Parable of the Good Samaritan,” BibInt 12 (2004) 145–74.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 61 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

61

construction of the story and the similarity of the story’s concept to 2 Chr 28:8–15 (see below) add to its fictional nature. Thus, the historical reliability of the story seems doubtful.

b. The Gospel Story and the Stories in Chronicles and Kings The Good Samaritan is, in fact, an individual from a collective, the community of Samaritans, who were generally considered enemies of Judeans (cf. John 4:9). 112 Despite the hostile background, he is good to his unfortunate fellow human being, or even his enemy (if he indeed recognized the victim as a Judean). 113 It appears that the concept of the story of Luke (however, not the story itself) concerning the Good Samaritan may have been taken from the book of Chronicles. In 2 Chr 28:8–15 (an “addition” to 2 Kings), following the war between Ahaz of Judah and Pekah of Israel, Judean captives were taken to Samaria. In Samaria, they were released after the involvement of the prophet Oded, 114 who also encouraged the Israelites—Judah’s enemies—to care for the captives: 112. See I. Kalimi, “Affiliation of Abraham and the Aqedah with Zion/Gerizim in Jewish and Samaritan Sources,” Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy: Studies in Scriptures in the Shadow of Internal and External Controversies ( Jewish and Christian Heritage 2; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2002) 33–58, esp. pp. 33, 56–58. 113. The story speaks on the one hand about “a certain man,” that is, someone like the audience that Jesus is addressing—Jews. On the other hand, the victim is badly wounded and stripped. This means that the victim’s ethnicity was hardly recognizable. However, the storyteller chose three people—priest, Levite, and Samaritan—rather than simply Israel, probably in order to show that the Good Samaritan fulfilled the principle expressed elsewhere by Jesus (e.g., in his Sermon on the Mount, Luke 6:27–38 // Matt 5:43–48; cf. Rom 12:14, 20), that is, love your enemy. Richard Bauckham is of the opinion that the parable “confronts a priest with a dead or dying man, it sets up an unusual, halakhically debatable situation, since the commandment that a priest avoid contracting corpse-impurity conflicts with the commandment to love the neighbour . . . the parable suggests—that the love commandment should always override others in cases of conflict.” See R. Bauckham, “The Scrupulous Priest and the Good Samaritan: Jesus’ Parabolic Interpretation of the Law of Moses,” NTS 44 (1998) 475–89 (the quotation is from p. 475). However, the parable in Luke speaks clearly about a live man, though he was badly wounded and “half dead.” The impurity law applies only to a dead person, not to a “half dead” person. Moreover, according to the contemporary Jewish law, saving life is more important even than the commandment of keeping the Sabbath (1 Macc 2:31–41 [cf. 2 Macc 6:11]; m. Sabbat 18:3; Yoma 8:6: tbç hjwd twçpn qps lk ‘whenever there is doubt whether life is in danger this overrides the Sabbath’). The Sabbath commandment is much higher than any commandment about impurity. 114. Oded, father of the prophet Azariah, who is mentioned in 2 Chr 15:1–8 (an “addition”) is not identical to the Oded under review, because according to the Chronicler the former prophesied in the time of King Asa (908–867 b.c.e.), while the latter

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 62 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

62

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature Then the men . . . rose and took the captives in hand, and with the booty they clothed all the naked among them; they clothed them, gave them sandals, and gave them to eat and drink, and anointed them, and provided donkeys for all who were failing, and brought them to their kinfolk at Jericho, the city of palms. Then, they returned to Samaria. (v. 15)

It is worth mentioning that, for whatever reason, this story from Chronicles did not leave the impact on the Jewish and Christian literature that the story of the murder of Zechariah did. A number of scholars who have dealt with the books of Chronicles and Luke have not even acknowledged the Luke-Chronicles parallel of this concept. For example, Alfred Plummer and Hans Klein were not aware of the issue in their commentaries on Luke. 115 Joseph A. Fitzmyer’s lengthy discussion of “The Parable of the Good Samaritan” does not touch on the possible relationship between Luke 10:30–35 and 2 Chr 28:8–15. 116 The same can be said of John Nolland. 117 Most recently, Luise Schottroff, in The Parables of Jesus, dedicated several pages to the parable in Luke. However, she does not refer to Chronicles at all. 118 Similarly, the lack of awareness of this issue is apparent in some Chronicles exegesis. 119 However, there are scholars of Chronicles and Luke who acknowledge the Luke-Chronicles parallel. Mostly it has been accomplished by a brief cross-reference, without working out the details and implications of the parallel. 120 For instance, Otto Zöckler states: “The thought that Christ prophesied many decades later on, in the time of King Ahaz (743–727 b.c.e.). On this issue, see also chap. 4, §2a, p. 82. 115. See Plummer, The Gospel according to S. Luke, 285–86; H. Klein, Das Lukasevangelium, 391–93. 116. See Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke (X–XXIV) 882–90. 117. See Nolland, Luke 9:21–18:34, 588–98. 118. See L. Schottroff, The Parables of Jesus (trans. L. M. Maloney; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2006) 131–37. 119. See, for example, Curtis and Madsen, The Books of Chronicles, 458–59; J. M. Myers, II Chronicles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 13; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1965) 162–63; Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 346; Japhet, I and II Chronicles, 900–901. 120. See, for example, K. Kastner, “Zwei Paralleltexte,” BZ 12 (1914) 29–31 esp. 29– 30; G. Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 110–11 n. 40; Rudolph, Chronikbücher, 291; P. R. Ackroyd, I and II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah: Introduction and Commentary (Torch Bible Commentaries; London: SCM, 1973) 177; Coggins, The First and Second Books of the Chronicles, 259; Dillard, 2 Chronicles, 223; J. Becker, 2 Chronik (Neue Echter Bibel 20; Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1988) 92; I. H. Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text (New International Greek Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978) 445; H. Schürmann, Das Lukasevangelium (Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament; Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 1993) 2.149;

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 63 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

63

drew directly from this episode of the present war [i.e., 2 Chr 28:8–15] several points of his noble lesson should by no means be absolutely rejected.” 121 Rudolf Bultmann also notes that Kastner 122 and Orth, both writing in 1914, “have drawn attention to the parallelism of Lk. 10:30–37 (The Good Samaritan) and 2 Chron. 28:5–15.” 123 There have also been other scholars who were a bit more detailed. The only careful treatment of the Chronicles-Luke connection was provided by F. Scott Spencer. 124 However, there are some scholars who deny the dependence of Jesus’ parable on Chronicles, probably because of their wish to confirm the originality of Jesus’ words. For example, Frank H. Wilkinson states that “the Word of God, spoken of old by His Prophet, Oded, was spoken to us by His Son.” 125 Michael Wolter states that the story in Luke 10:30–35 “has nothing to do” with the story in 2 Chr 28:8–15. 126 These scholars attempt to “protect” Jesus’ originality—that is, he said what he said on his own without relating to or depending on the Old Testament source. What has not been noticed in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament or New Testament scholarship is that the Chronicler himself, presumably, used a similar concept of moral kindness already expressed in the Deuteronomistic History, namely in 2 Kgs 6:20–23, as a paradigm. 127 Here, the prophet Elisha instructed the king of Israel to handle the Aramean captives humanely: And it came to pass, when they [Arameans] came to Samaria, that Elisha said, “Lord, open the eyes of these men, that they may see.” And the Lord opened their eyes, and they saw; and, behold, they were in the midst of Samaria. And the king of Israel said to Elisha, when he saw them, “my D. L. Bock, Luke 9:51–24:53 (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996) 2.1029. 121. See O. Zöckler, The Books of the Chronicles: Theological and Homiletically Expounded (A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 10; trans., enlarged, and ed. J. G. Murphy; New York: Scribner, 1876) 241–42, esp. 242. 122. See above, n. 118. 123. See R. Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition (2nd ed.; trans. J. Marsh; New York: Harper & Row, 1968) 204. 124. See Spencer, “2 Chronicles 28:5–15 and the Parable of the Good Samaritan,” 317–49. 125. See F. H. Wilkinson, “Oded: Proto-Type of the Good Samaritan,” ExpTim 69 (1957–58) 94. 126. See Wolter, Das Lukasevangelium, 395. 127. The historical credibility of the Chronicler’s story is questionable. For additional arguments, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 334–36. A different opinion is expressed by Reviv, who consider 2 Chr 28:8–15 to be a reliable historical story from the First Temple period; see H. Reviv, “The Historical Background of 2 Chronicles 28:8–15,” in Nation and History: Studies in the History of the Jewish People (ed. M. Stern; Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 1983) 1.11–16 [Hebrew].

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 64 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

64

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature father, shall I strike them? shall I strike them?” And he answered, “You shall not strike them. Would you strike those whom you have taken captive with your sword and with your bow? Place bread and water before them that they may eat and drink, and go to their master.” And he prepared a great feast for them; and when they had eaten and drunk, he sent them away, and they went to their master. And the bands of Aram came no more to the land of Israel.

Both stories do indeed involve an extraordinary display of nobility toward prisoners of war, with an Israelite prophet in both cases (Elisha and Oded) playing a decisive role. But there are also significant differences, such as who plays the role of villain (bad character) and the kind of villainy envisioned. In 2 Kings 6, Elisha prevents the impulsive Israelite king from slaughtering Arameans, whereas Oded in 2 Chronicles 28 prevents the Israelite army from enslaving Judahites. The Israelite King Pekah, who was earlier (28:6) credited with killing 120,000 brave Judahite warriors in one day, is not even mentioned in the story once Oded appears, being functionally supplanted in the narrative, by the Ephraimite chiefs, who similarly oppose the army’s (and possibly the king’s) intended enslavement of the Judahites. In short, there are both similarities and differences between 2 Kings 6 and 2 Chronicles 28, just as there are similarities and differences between 2 Chronicles 28 and Luke 10 (and also 2 Kings 6). For example, neither slaughter nor slavery—key features in the Hebrew Bible stories—plays any role in the parable of the Good Samaritan. For the Chronicler, if the Israelites acted so mercifully toward an Aramean enemy in Samaria, there is no reason that they would not have done the same toward their own relatives in the Southern Kingdom—the people of Judah. 128 It is reasonable to assume that the story in Chronicles was used by the Evangelist as a paradigm for his story, 129 rather than the story in Kings. The Chronicles story is much more detailed than Kings, and it clearly shows the Samaritans’ humanitarian help, kindness, and love toward the Judean captives—yesterday’s enemies—without hesitation, precisely as Jesus intends in his parable. Moreover, anointing the captives with oil is mentioned only in the stories of Chronicles and Luke. Both of the stories are somehow related not only to Samaria but also to Jericho and Jerusalem. These elements, however, are not mentioned in Kings. Furthermore, though Spencer does not remark on the possible connection between 2 Chronicles 28 and 2 Kings 6, he correctly concludes: “the multiplicity and specificity of the connections [between Luke 10:30–35 and 2 Chr 128. Note that generally the Israelite kings are characterized as “kings of kindness” (1 Kgs 20:31). 129. See also the Sermon on the Mount, Matt 5:7–9.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 65 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

65

28:5–15] are just too strong to itnore. But a mere drawing of linking lines between people, places, and events hardly illumines the hermeneutical significance of Jesus’ utilization of the Chronicles tradition in his parable.” 130

c. Probable Explanation for the Use of the Story in Chronicles and Luke The story in 2 Chr 18:15–28 in fact shows the Northern Kingdom of Israel in a favorable light, just contrary to what the Chronicler attemps to show, for instance, in 2 Chronicles 13. According to the Chronicler, the very existence of the Northern Kingdom was a transgression of the Lord’s will; furthermore, it had the wrong dynasty and the wrong cult. Thus, most likely, in 2 Chr 18:15–28 he wishes to deliver the message that the Kingdom of Judah under King Ahaz was even worse that the Kingdom of Israel. In addition, the Chronicler is perhaps showing his fundamental belief that, despite all, the northern Israelites/Samaritans have a brotherhood relationship with Judeans (see also 2 Chr 30:11 [an “addition”]; and compare 2 Chr 34:9 with 2 Kgs 22:4), and there is hope that in future days they will be united to Judah. 131 Similarly, it is reasonable to assume that the use of Chronicles’ paradigm in Luke (either by Jesus himself or by the author of Luke) is to say that even a Samaritan’s behavior was according to the Torah’s teaching in Lev 19:18b and its spirit and was much more admirable than the behavior of the priest and Levite from Jerusalem. In other words, the priest and Levite, even though they were of the Jewish spiritual elite in Jerusalem, were not following an important Torah commandment and preferred to neglect a miserable, wounded person. This approach to Luke 10 correlates well with the general presentation of Jerusalem and Jews as the ones who act against God’s will and against his messengers. 132 130. Spencer, “2 Chronicles 28:5–15 and the Parable of the Good Samaritan,” 321; see also p. 348. 131. A different explanation for this issue is expressed by Bückers. He is of the opinion that the episode was important for the time of the Chronicler himself: he wanted to show the Samaritans how dangerous their hatred of and animosity toward Judah was, and only the last-minute demand of the prophet changed the situation a bit. See H. Bückers, Die Bücher der Chronik oder Paralipomenon: Übersetzt und Erklärt (Herders Bibelkommentar die Heilige Schrift 4/1; Freiburg i.Br.: Herder, 1952) 324. Some scholars assume that the essentials of the passage under review originated in the Chronicler’s sources, because the story stands in contrast to his usual view of the illegitimacy of the Northern Kingdom; see Myers, II Chronicles, 162; cf. Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 346; Japhet, I and II Chronicles, 900. 132. See, for example, Luke 11:47–51 (// Matt 23:32–37); 13:34; 16:31; Acts 7:52; Matt 5:12; Rom 11:3 (// 1 Kgs 19:10); Heb 11:36–37; Rev 16:6; 18:24.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 66 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

66

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

8. Chronicles and the Genealogies of John the Baptist and Jesus The relationship between some genealogical lists in Chronicles and in the New Testament is noteworthy: 1. The story about the birth of John the Baptist to his aged parents, Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:5–25), 133 relates John’s father to Abijah, head of the eighth priestly division (Luke 1:5), which is mentioned only in 1 Chr 24:10 (an “addition”). 2. The genealogy of Jesus in Luke 3:31–38c probably depends on 1 Chr 1:1–4, 24–27; 2:1–15; 3:5//14:4 (an “addition”; these are the only places in the Hebrew Bible that mention Nathan as a son of David). 134 However, the list may also have been compiled according to the information provided in the parallel texts of Genesis and Ruth (Gen 5:1–32; 10:11–32; Ruth 4:18–22). 3. The genealogy of Jesus in Matt 1:2–12 is most likely based on the lists in 1 Chr 2:1–15; 3:10–17. Nonetheless, theoretically it could also have been compiled, one by one from genealogies in Ruth and Kings.

9. “Deliver Us from the Gentiles”: Possible Use of 1 Chronicles 16:35a in Acts 26:17a 1 Chr 16:35a, μywgh ˆm wnlyxhw wnxbqw wn[çy yhla wn[yçwh (‘save us, God of our salvation, gather us 135 and deliver us from the nations’), is essentially 133. For this motif, see Gen 18:11–14; 21:1–7—the birth of Isaac to the aged Abraham and Sarah. For the motif of a unique person who was born to a barren mother, compare Gen 21:1–7 (Sarah); Gen 25:21 (Rebekah); Gen 29:31; 30:22–23 (Rachel); Judg 13:2 (Samson’s mother); and 1 Samuel 1–2 (Hannah). By the way, the story of Zechariah and Elizabeth and their son, John, was widely used in the Koran (Qurªan), Sura 3.37–41; 6.85; 19.1–12; 21.87–89; see N. J. Dawood, The Koran with a Parallel Arabic Text (London: Penguin, 2000) 53–54, 137, 304–5, 328. 134. Luke 3:31–38c is similar to the mosaic inscription of the ancient synagogue in Ein-gedi (5th–7th centuries c.e.), which describes the world’s forefathers according to 1 Chr 1:1–4; see below, chap. 8, pp. 133–134. In contrast, Matt 1:6 relates Jesus to Solomon, son of David by Bathsheba, the youngest brother of Nathan according to 1 Chr 3:5//14:4. Willi is of the opinion that both genealogies of Jesus, Matt 1:2–16 and Luke 3:23–38, are based on data in Genesis rather than Chronicles; see T. Willi, Chronik (Biblischer Kommentar Altes Testament 24/1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991) 49. 135. The word wnxbqw (‘gather us’) is lacking in the Septuagint, probably lost by homoioarcton between kaμ and kaμ; see R. W. Klein, 1 Chronicles, 360.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 67 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

67

based on Ps 106:47a, μywgh ˆm wnxbqw wnyhla hwhy wn[yçwh. However, the Chronicler inserts the word wnlyxhw (‘and deliver us’) into the borrowed text. 136 It is possible that the expression under review, “deliver us from the nations [which was understood as Gentiles, i.e., non-Jews],” was used in singular form in Acts 26:17: “delivering (evxaireisqai) you from the people [i.e., Jews] and from the Gentiles unto whom I now send you.” 137 The connection between 1 Chr 16:35a and Acts 26:17 is strengthened by the fact that the same Greek verb appears in both the Septuagint version of Chronicles and the New Testament passages.

10. The Name of Zerubbabel’s Father in the Old Testament and the Gospels According to Ezra 3:2, 8; 5:2; Neh 12:1; and Hag 1:1, 12, 14; 2:2, 23, Zerubbabel was the son of Shealtiel, the oldest son of Jehoiachin, king of Judah. However, 1 Chr 3:19 says that Zerubbabel was the son of Pedaiah, the third son of Jeconiah. 138 Now, Matt 1:12 (// Luke 3:27) recounts: “Jeconiah begat Shealtiel; and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel. At first glance, it appears that the evangelists preferred the tradition as it appears in Ezra–Nehemiah and Haggai regarding the father of Zerubbabel over the tradition that appears in 1 Chr 3:19. But because LXX (Vaticanus and Alexandrinus) 1 Chr 3:19 reads: kaμ uJioμ Salaqih;l Zorobavbel (‘son of Shealtiel: Zerubbabel’), probably the evangelist used the Greek version rather than the Masoretic Text. In other words, he read in all the Old Testament sources (i.e., Ezra–Nehemiah, Haggai, and Chronicles) that Zerubbabel was the son of Shealtiel. 139

136. For a possible explanation for this addition, see Curtis and Madsen, The Books of Chronicles, 224. 137. On this verse, see the detailed commentary by Jervell, Die Apostelgeschichte, 594–95. Jervell does not discuss the possible use of Chronicles by the author of Acts. In a table listing all New Testament citations of Chronicles, E. Nestle and K. Aland suggest several other places where the New Testament authors used Chronicles (Novum Testamentum Graece [7th ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983] 751). However, a careful examination of that list leaves no space for the additional places that were listed by them. 138. For the various proposals to solve this problem, see the survey of Knoppers, 1 Chronicle 1–9, 328; R. W. Klein, 1 Chronicles, 120. 139. Most likely, the Greek version itself is a harmonization created by the ancient translator or by a later copyist who tried to reconcile the contradictory information. See Kalimi, “The Date of the Book of Chronicles,” in An Ancient Israelite Historian, 56.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 68 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

68

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

11. Conclusion The New Testament is an integral part of the ancient Jewish cultural heritage. In this chapter, I have demonstrated that the book of Chronicles was not excluded from the view of the early Jewish-Christian/GentileChristian writers. Except the expression in Acts 26:17, which is perhaps drawn from 1 Chr 16:35a, there is no evidence of a direct quotation from Chronicles in the New Testament as there is from various other books of the Hebrew Bible (especially in the prophetic literature, such as Isaiah), to show the process of prediction or promise (about Jesus in the Old Testament) and fulfillment (in the New Testament). 140 However, Chronicles was used in a number of ways: by referring (twice) to a story exclusively recounted in Chronicles (the murder of Zechariah); by contrasting the merit of the “New Covenant” with that of the “Old Covenant” (Stephen versus Zechariah); by the imitation of a story that appears in Chronicles only (story of the Good Samaritan and 2 Chr 28:8–15); and by referring to Chronicles’ wording (2 Chr 36:15–16) and genealogies (1 Chr 24:10; 1 Chr 1:1–4, 24–27; 2:1–15; 3:5//14:4; and 1 Chr 2:1–15; 3:10–17). The probable use of 2 Chr 24:20–22; 36:15–16 in Matthew fits naturally with the general early Jewish-Christian and Gentile-Christian writers’ use of the negative deeds of the ancient Israelites and the harsh rebukes of the classical prophets against the Jews in the post-Jesus era. The New Testament frequently stresses the Israelites’ persecution of prophets to point out the similarities with the hounding of Jesus by critics. Some Christians say that Jews, especially the non-followers of Jesus as Messiah, acted against God’s prophets and messengers. In the same way, Jesus’ crucifixion—the death that had one of the greatest affects on world history—stood in continuity with and was the climax of the Jewish ancestors’ wickedness toward the Lord’s innocent messengers and servants. In this chapter, we have examined the short story of the murder of the priest-prophet Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, in the Temple courtyard, as recounted in 2 Chr 24:20–22. This examination revealed that the story contains phrases from the Torah and Former Prophets; and its theological and literary concepts fit well with the themes that guide the Chronicler’s work in general. The speech and the last words of Zechariah, as they appear in the book of Chronicles, have various expressions from the earlier 140. See Luke 24:27; it is worthwhile also to cite Saint Augustine of Hippo (modern Annaba, Algeria; 354–430 c.e.): et in Vetere Novum lateat, et in Novo Vetus pateat ‘[The meaning of ] the New Testament lies hidden in the Old, and [the meaning of ] the Old becomes clear in the New’; PL (Paris, 1864) vol. 34, col. 623. For references to secondary literature, see Kalimi, “Task of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Theology,” Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy, 144 n. 24.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 69 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

69

“biblical” books woven into them and seem to be composed by the Chronicler himself. Nevertheless, and despite the fact that the story has no parallel in Kings or elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, the historical reality of the murder itself is not unlikely if considered against the historical background of the conspiracies against innocents and murders of prophets in ancient Israel and Judah and of the political situation in the Kingdom of Judah in the late 9th century b.c.e. On the other hand, it is also possible that the Chronicler composed the story based on a saying in the book of Lamentations. In this scenario, the story would not be historically reliable. Thus, this study exemplifies the problems involved with considering the historical reliability of stories in Chronicles that have no parallel elsewhere. Detached from the question of the historicity of the story in Chronicles, the murder of the prophet and priest in the House of the Lord has been viewed through the generations as a most disgraceful event and had a strong impact on numerous postbiblical Jewish and Christian writings. A brief look at the references in the Gospels (Matt 23:35 and Luke 11:50–51a) to the murder of Zechariah shows that their details differ from the story in 2 Chr 24:20–22. The Chronicler indicates that Zechariah son of Jehoiada was murdered, while Matthew relates that Zechariah son of Barachiah (Zechariah’s father is not mentioned in Luke) was put to death. Moreover, according to the Chronicler, the murder took place “in the courtyard of the House of the Lord,” while Matthew and Luke place the murder “between the Temple and the altar / the altar and the Temple.” In this study we examined whether the parallel stories in the Gospels refer to the story in Chronicles or refer to a different story about a person in a different time who was also named Zechariah and was executed in a different location in the Temple. Following a critical review of six suggestions, we concluded that the Gospels refer to the priest-prophet Zechariah son of Jehoiada, who was stoned in the First Temple courtyard, as reported in 2 Chr 24:20–22. The phrase “from . . . Abel to . . . Zechariah” in the Gospels probably refers to the murders that were recorded at the two ends of the collection of Hebrew Scriptures (Gen 4:8–16 and 2 Chr 24:20–22). Matt 23:34–35 and Luke 11:50–51a confirm the rising of the tripartite biblical canon in the 1st century c.e. Though the precise contents of the Ketubim cannot be discerned, apparently Chronicles was located at the end of this collection, as it was placed in the beraita. The difference between the story in Chronicles and its references in the Gospels, particularly Matthew, to the name of Zechariah’s father can be explained in either of two ways: (a) the Evangelist mistakenly changed the name, as in other cases in the New Testament and rabbinic literature;

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 70 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

70

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

or (b) he did it purposely in order to identify the less-well-known Zechariah (son of Jehoiada) of the First Temple period with the well-known Zechariah (son of Barachiah) of the early Second Temple period. The dissimilarity between Matthew and Chronicles about the location of the murder is not a real contradiction, because according to Josephus and the Mishnah the altar of burnt-offering in the Second Temple stood in the courtyard. Some scholars think that the words of Matthew interpret the phrase “in the courtyard of the House of the Lord” (2 Chr 24:21). Though the Chronicler is speaking about an incident that happened in the First Temple period, it is possible that he had in front of his eyes the familiar image of his own Temple, the Second Temple. Similarly, the Evangelist could have anachronistically interpreted Chronicles, which speaks of the First Temple, from the vantage point of the Second Temple which was familiar to him. One could also theorize that the Evangelist did not refer to the location of the murder precisely as it appears in Chronicles, because it was not really important to his core message. Matt 23:33–37 is related to the story of the Zechariah son of Jehoiada who was stoned in the Temple courtyard (2 Chr 24:20–22). Nonetheless, it also probably follows the Chronicler’s epilogue in 2 Chr 36:15–16. The use of 2 Chr 24:20–22; 36:15–16 fits the sharp criticism by Jesus’ followers of the Jews who rejected him as Messiah and the Israelites’ persecution of prophets, which is frequently stressed in the New Testament. The emphasis is comprehensible against the background of Jesus’ crucifixion—that is, the evil act of the Jews is a continuation of their forefathers’ acts. Although Cain lived before the existence of Jews, the latter were assigned blame for the wicked murder of Abel, and they were certainly to be punished. In the book of Chronicles and in the Acts of the Apostles, a similar story is told about the martyrdom of two divine messengers: Zechariah son Jehoiada (2 Chr 24:20–22) and Stephen (Acts 6:8–7:60). Both messengers, who rebuked their people in a speech, were stoned to death due to a conspiracy, probably based on a law such as might be found in the book of Leviticus. However, while the story of Zechariah ends with the words “May the Lord look and avenge!” (2 Chr 24:22), Stephen’s story ends, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” I raise the question of the possibility that the author of Luke–Acts was contrasting his story of Stephen with the story of the Chronicler in order to highlight the supposed ethical merit of the “love and forgiveness” of the new religion (New Testament/Christianity) over the incompatible vengeance of the old religion (Old Testament/Judaism). This contrast is evident again in a comparison of 2 Chronicles 24 and the last words ascribed to Jesus in Luke (23:34)—that is, the first book of

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 71 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles’ Use in the New Testament

71

Luke–Acts. In the 2nd century, some followers of Jesus, such as the Marcionites, may have read Chronicles and Luke–Acts against the background of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5). The idea behind the Lucan story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30– 37), the man who acted very kindly toward the robbers’ victim on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, was taken from the story in 2 Chr 28:8–15. Here the Chronicler refers to the unusual treatment of the Judean captives by the Israelites of Samaria. Seemingly, 2 Chr 28:15–28 is attempting to convey the message that the Kingdom of Judah under King Ahaz was even worse than the Kingdom of Israel. In the same way, it is possible that the use of Chronicles’ paradigm in Luke is to say that even Samaritan behavior is more according to the Torah than the behavior of the people in the highest levels in Jerusalem. The Chronicler himself, as a paradigm for his story, may have used a similar view already articulated in the Deuteronomistic History (2 Kgs 6:20–23), where the prophet Elisha instructs the king of Israel to deal with the Aramean captives humanely. The Gospel story form is the literary-numerical structure “two–three.” It is a parable or an illustrative tale, similar to the rabbis’ aggadic midrashim, not a historical report. The similarity of the story’s concept to 2 Chr 28:8–15 enhances its fictional nature. The story is used as an interpretation of the well-known ethical law in Lev 19:18. Though the Old Testament is the first part of the Christian Bible, in fact only the second part of it, the New Testament, reflects the unique Christian religion. Even today, the relationship between the two “testaments”—the “New” (novum) and the “Old” (vetus)—is an unsolved problem in Christianity. 141 Nevertheless, because Jesus and at least some of his adherents (for example, the apostles) were Jews—raised and educated in Judaism—it is very hard, if not impossible, to understand the New Testament without knowledge of and background from the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and early Judaism. The current study follows the origins of some of the episodes told in the New Testament from the book of Chronicles. It demonstrates, once again, that for better understanding of some stories 141. See A. H. J. Gunneweg, Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments: Eine Religionsgeschichte Israels in biblisch-theologischer Sicht (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1993) 52; see also idem, Vom Verstehen des Alten Testaments: Eine Hermeneutik (Grundrisse zum Alten Testament: Das Alte Testament Deutsch Ergänzungsreihe 5; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1977) 37–41, where Gunneweg writes (p. 41): “[D]as hermeneutische Problem des Verhältnisses der beiden Kanonteile und der christlichen Geltung des Alten Testaments bleibt eine jetzt erst recht unerledigte.” Cf. I. Kalimi, “The Task of Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament Theology,” in Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy, 147–48, and additional references there.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 72 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

72

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

in the New Testament, one must be aware of their origins in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. Moreover, though from a scholarly viewpoint (that is, scientific objectivity without one-sided confessional preconceptions), the New Testament is not a direct continuation of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, the examples introduced here show that at least from the literary viewpoint there is some organic connection between the two corpora. 142 In other words, it is necessary to read the New against the background of the Old for better understanding of it. 142. Thus, here I have changed a bit in comparison with what I expressed some years ago in ibid.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 75 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 4

Chronicles’ Use in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha 1. Apocrypha The Apocrypha (from the Greek noun apokrypha ‘hidden’), or sometimes “Deuterocanonical books,” is a collection of 15 Jewish works, whose dates of composition range from the end of the 3rd century b.c.e. to the 1st century c.e. The earliest complete form of these writings (except 4 Ezra) is known from copies of the Septuagint. Generally speaking, these writings were excluded from the canon of Jewish Scriptures and were only considered canonical by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. 1 As the following discussion will show, Chronicles was used by several apocryphal works. Some of the uses depend on the “additional” texts of Chronicles, and others fill in the gaps in the “additional” texts of Chronicles.

a. The Second Book of Maccabees 2 Macc 2:9–10 (ca. 143 b.c.e.) narrates: 2 Further, it is indicated that Solomon, who had the gift of wisdom, offered a dedication sacrifice at the completion of the Temple; and that, just as Moses had prayed to the Lord and fire had come down from heaven and burnt up the sacrificial offerings, so in answer to Solomon’s prayer fire came down and consumed the burnt offerings. 3

This analogy between Solomon and his Temple and Moses and the Tabernacle, both of which were inaugurated by divine fire falling from heaven, is based on 2 Chr 7:1–3. These verses are an “addition” to the earlier text 1. For further information on the Apocrypha, see J. H. Charlesworth, “Apocrypha,” ABD 1.292–94; A.-J. Levine, “Apocrypha,” in Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (ed. D. N. Freedman, A. C. Myers, and A. B. Beck; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 73–75; E. Oikonomos, “Die Bedeutung der deuterokanonischen Schriften in der ortodoxen Kirche,” in Die Apokryphenfrage im ökumenischen Horizont (ed. S. Meurer; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1989) 26–40; F. J. Stendebach, “Der Kanon des Alten Testaments in der Katholischen Kirche,” in ibid., 41–50. 2. On the dating of the book of 2 Maccabees, see above, chap. 2, §3b and n. 31. 3. For a parallel story of fire falling from heaven, see 1 Kgs 18:30–39, esp. v. 38.

75

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 76 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

76

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

of 1 Kgs 8:54 and the only verses in the Hebrew Bible that mention the fall of divine fire from heaven at the inauguration of Solomon’s Temple: Now when Solomon had finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord filled the House. The priests could not enter the House of the Lord, because the glory of the Lord had filled the Lord’s House. And when all the people of Israel saw the fire come down and the glory of the Lord on the House, they bowed with their faces to the ground upon the pavement and worshiped and gave thanks to the Lord, saying, “For he is good; for his lovingkindness endures forever.” 4

b. Prayer of Manasseh The book about one individual’s grief over transgression, the so-called Prayer of Manasseh, was written, presumably, by a Jew sometime before the destruction of the Second Temple (70 c.e.). 5 The Prayer is known only in Greek and Syriac, and the question of its original language—whether it was Semitic (Hebrew/Aramaic) or Greek—is still a matter of dispute among scholars. 6 Pace Thomas Aquinas (Naples, ca. 1225–74), 7 most likely the Prayer of Manasseh was never an integral part of Chronicles but was only an expansion of Chronicles’ story about one of the most wicked kings of Judah, Manasseh, who at some stage of his life regretted his evil actions and prayed 4. Compare 2 Chr 7:1–3 with Exod 40:34–38 and Lev 9:24; and see the detailed discussion by Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 224–27, 299–300. 5. See J. H. Charlesworth, “Manasseh, Prayer of,” ABD 4.499–500, esp. p. 499. For a critical survey of the different opinions on the date of the prayer, see idem, “Prayer of Manasseh,” The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 2.625–37, esp. p. 627. In this early work, Charlesworth dates the prayer “sometime in the last two centuries b.c.” (p. 627; however, on p. 625 the date is the “second century b.c.–first century a.d.”). 6. On the various opinions regarding the original language of the prayer, see R. H. Pfeiffer, History of New Testament Times with an Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Harper, 1949) 458–59; E. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 b.c.–a.d. 135) (ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987) 3/2.730–33; Charlesworth, “Prayer of Manasseh,” 624–27. 7. See St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologicae (ed. R. Masterson and T. C. O’Brien; London: Cambridge University Press, 1966) 3.984.10. This opinion is repeated at the beginning of the 20th century; see H. H. Howorth, “Some Unconventional Views on the Text of the Bible: The Prayer of Manasseh and the Book of Esther,” Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 31 (1909) 89–99, esp. p. 95: “the main conclusion I would press for, therefore, is that the narrative in the Apostolical Constitutions represents a portion of true Septuagint text of 2 Chronicles xxxiii, and that it was like the rest of the true Septuagint Chronicles.”

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 77 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

77

to the Lord for forgiveness. In other words, the author of the Prayer of Manasseh completed the prayer that is mentioned in 2 Chr 33:12–13, 19 (an “addition” to 2 Kgs 21:16–17). The prayer under review is similar to the prayers of Esther and Mordechai that were composed by a Hellenistic author and preserved in the Additions to Esther. 8 As a matter of fact, the Prayer of Manasseh does not appear in any ancient version of the book of Chronicles. 9

c. Prayer of Manasseh and 4QapPsb The Hebrew fragmentary manuscript with the superscription hlpt hçnml ‘Prayer of Manasseh’ (4QapPsb = 4Q381, frg. 33:8–11) was found among the noncanonical Psalms in Qumran Cave 4. 10 There is no relation between the Qumran Prayer of Manasseh and the Apocryphal Greek (and Syraic) Prayer. In contrast to the Greek Prayer, it seems that the Qumran prayer is “independent of the Manasseh tradition known in II Chr 33,1– 19.” 11 Indeed, the only compositional link between the Qumran fragment and the story of 2 Chr 33:1–19 is the title.

8. See C. A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah: The Additions—A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 44; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1977) 203–22; I. Kottsieper, Zusätze zu Ester (Alte Testament Deutsch Apokryphen 5; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998) 160–78; S. White Crawford, The Additions to Esther: Introduction, Commentary and Reflections (New Interpreter’s Bible 3; Nashville: Abingdon, 1999) 955–60. 9. Cf. Charlesworth, “Prayer of Manasseh,” 629–31. Manasseh is also mentioned in Tob. 14:10: “Manasseh gave alms, and escaped the snare of death which he set for him.” This reference, however, does not appear in Codex Sinaiticus, “the most original form of the text” (R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament [Oxford: Clarendon, 1913] 1.240). As stressed by Ben-Zvi (“The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 61): “It is commonly considered a scribal error, and in any case is a late addition to the text. Thus, Tob 14.10 does not indicate utilization of Chronicles.” On the other hand, 2 Bar 64:8 (early 2nd century c.e.) confirms that the author knew about the Prayer of Manasseh, which is mentioned in 2 Chr 33:12–13, 19 only. However, the author did not fill the prayer-gap in his writing. Instead, this author is hostile to Manasseh: “For although the Most High had heard his prayer, in the end when he fell into the brazen horse, and the brazen horse was melted. . . . For he had not lived perfectly since he was not worthy.” See F. J. Klijn, “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch,” in J. H. Charlesworth (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 1.643. 10. See E. M. Schuller, Non-canonical Psalms from Qumran: A Pseudepigraphic Collection (Harvard Semitic Studies 28; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986) 25–27, 155. 11. See W. M. Schniedewind, “A Qumran Fragment of the Ancient ‘Prayer of Manasseh’?” ZAW 108 (1996) 105–7, esp. p. 107.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 78 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

78

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

d. The Third Book of Ezra 3 Ezra (= Apocryphal Ezra = the Greek Ezra = EsdraÍ a / 1 Esdras of Septuagint Codex Alexanderus and Codex Vaticanus 12 = 3 Esdras of the Vulgate) was probably composed between 165 b.c.e. and mid-1st century c.e. 13 It is, as a matter of fact, a combination of 2 Chr 35:1–36:21, the entire canonical book of Ezra, Neh 7:38–8:12, and some short and lengthy additional materials, both of which cannot be found elsewhere. The lengthiest addition appears in 3 Ezra 3:1–5:6. This section of 3 Ezra is a court tale about three youths, the bodyguards of Darius of Persia. The historical leader, Zerubbabel, was the third of the three youths. 14 Let us turn our attention to these matters in some detail: the first 20 verses of chap. 1 tell the story of Josiah’s Passover. These verses are based on the book of Chronicles: 3 Ezra 1:1–20 // 2 Chr 35:1–19. The next two verses (3 Ezra 1:21–22), which evaluate Josiah’s acts, have no parallel in Chronicles (see below). However, the rest of the chapter (3 Ezra 1:23–55), which tells about the end of Josiah and the last days of Jerusalem, has a parallel in 2 Chr 35:20–36:21. Despite the claim of Abraham Kahana, 15 it is unlikely that the Chronicler and the author of 3 Ezra shared a common “third source.” A comparison of the parallel texts indicates that the author of 3 Ezra translated these passages into Greek from the Hebrew of 2 Chronicles. 16 Moreover, the fragmentary nature of 3 Ezra 17 leads us to assume that we have only part of a lengthy, comprehensive composition including more passages from Chronicles and Ezra–Nehemiah. 18 The opinion of Tamara C. Eskenazi that 3 Ezra is another composition by the Chronicler is not convincing. 19 She compares the Chronicler, who rewrites the books of Samuel and Kings, to the composer of 3 Ezra, who rewrites the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and comes to the conclusion 12. It is also called 1 Esdras in a number of English Bibles, such as the King James Version and the Revised Standard Version. 13. See W. R. Goodman, “Esdras, First Book of,” ABD 2.609–11, esp. p. 610. 14. It is worthwhile to mention that in a Greek manuscript from Florence the book is called “3 Paralipomenon,” probably due to this additional material. 15. See A. Kahana, “Apocryphal Ezra,” Apocryphal Books (Tel Aviv: Makor, 1936) 1/2.577 [Hebrew]. 16. Cf. K.-F. Pohlmann, “3. Esra-Buch,” in Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit, Band I: Historische und legendarische Erzählungen (Lieferung 5; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1980) 377–78. 17. The book opens in the middle of Josiah’s history and ends in the middle of Neh 8:13 (cf. 3 Ezra 9:55). 18. Cf. Pohlmann, “3. Esra-Buch,” 378. For previous works, see p. 378 n. 6. 19. See T. C. Eskenazi, “The Chronicler and the Composition of 1 Esdras,” CBQ 48 (1986) 39–61.

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 79 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

79

that they must be the same writer. However, Eskenazi does not base her opinion on reasonable philological research. 20 Cyrus’s decree, which is detailed in the four and a half verses that open the second chapter (3 Ezra 2:1–5a), could theoretically depend either on 2 Chr 36:22–23 or on the parallel verses in Ezra 1:1–3a. However, because the rest of the chapter and the chapters following are taken from the book of Ezra, it is reasonable to assume that these verses are also dependent on Ezra rather than Chronicles. 21 3 Ezra 1:21–22 is the only noteworthy addition to the story of 2 Chronicles 36. It is an addition that was compiled from several elements in different contexts: 22 And the deeds of Josiah were upright before his Lord with a heart full of godliness. Moreover, the things that came to pass in his days have been written in times past, concerning those that sinned and did wickedly against the Lord above every people and kingdom, and how they grieved him exceedingly, so that the words of the Lord were confirmed against Israel.

Charles C. Torrey assumed that the text of the Hebrew version from which the Greek of 3 Ezra was translated was damaged. He states: The passage originally written by the Chronicler was the victim of more than one serious accident of transcription. The corruption, doubtless [italics mine] appearing even worse in the Hebrew than in its Greek translation, rendered the passage impossible. It was cut out, and replaced by the passage taken from 2 Kings [23:24–28]. Later, in a more critical age, this telltale substitute was dispensed with, leaving our present Hebrew text.23

Torrey even attempted to restore the Hebrew text that the Chronicler “must have used.” 24 However, because it is very hard to defend this assumption from a textual viewpoint, and because these verses differ from the Chronicler’s retribution theology, it seems that they derive from the 20. Cf. Z. Talshir, “The Three Deaths of Josiah and the Strata of Biblical Historiography (2 Kings XXIII 29–30; 2 Chronicles XXXV 20–5; 1 Esdras I 23–31),” VT 46 (1996) 213–36, esp. p. 233. 21. See in detail Kalimi, “ ‘So Let Him Go up [to Jerusalem]!’: A Historical and Theological Observation on Cyrus’ Decree in Chronicles,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 143–57. Accordingly, it is inaccurate to state: “There is no doubt [italics mine] that 1 Esd. 1.1–2.5a parallels 2 Chr 35.1–36.23” (Ben-Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 63). 22. Thus, for example, compare v. 22 with 1 Kgs 13:2, 32. See also the discussion of H. G. M. Williamson, Israel in the Book of Chronicles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977) 18–21. 23. See C. C. Torrey, “A Revised View of First Esdras,” in Louis Ginzberg: Jubilee Volume on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday (English section; New York: American Academy for Jewish Research, 1945) 395–410, esp. p. 407. 24. Ibid., 407.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 80 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

80

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

hand of the author/compiler of 3 Ezra rather than from an omission in a presumed corrupted version of Chronicles. 25 There are also some other minor, insignificant differences between the parallel texts of Chronicles and 3 Ezra. Thus, for instance: 2 Chr 35:25 reads: Jeremiah composed lamentations for Josiah, and all the singers—both men and women [twrvhw μyrvh lk]—commemorate Josiah in their lamentations to this day. These became a custom in Israel and are written in the Lamentations. 3 Ezra 1:30 reads at the same point: Jeremiah the prophet composed laments for Josiah, and all the ministers and their wives commemorate Josiah in their laments to this day. These became a tradition for all Israel and are written in the book of Chronicles of the Kings of Judah.

Apparently, the title “the prophet” is a free addition to the text. The phrase “all the ministers and their wives” in 3 Ezra is a mistranslation of the Chronicles’ twrchw μyrch lk—that is, the translator read a ¶in instead of the original Hebrew sin. It is worth mentioning that according to 3 Ezra 4:45 the destruction of the Temple was done by the Edomites. This information contradicts 2 Chr 36:17–19 (see also 2 Kgs 25:8–10 // Jer 52:12–13), which maintains that the same destruction occurred at the hands of the Babylonians. This example may indicate that, though the author of 3 Ezra used the book of Chronicles, he took the liberty of differing from its content as he found appropriate. This correction may have been influenced somehow by Ps 137:7–9: Remember, O Lord, against the Edomites the day of Jerusalem’s fall, how they said, “Raze it, raze it to its foundation.” O daughter of Babylon, you are to be destroyed! Happy shall he be who repays you for what you have done to us! Happy shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!

Furthermore, if the author of 3 Ezra indeed lived in the Herodian age (see above), it is possible that he was influenced by the general hatred of the Jews toward King Herod the Edomite and other Herodian rulers in Judea, who frequently clashed with the Jews. Thus, the author of 3 Ezra desired to blacken the name of the earlier wicked Edomite ruler(s). Obviously, this author was not concerned with complete historical accuracy.

e. The Wisdom of Ben Sira The Wisdom of Simeon son of Joshua called Ben Sira (in Greek translation, Jesus Son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus) was composed sometime around 25. Compare Rudolph, Chronikbücher, 330–31. For a different opinion, see Pohlmann, “3. Esra-Buch,” 391–92 n. 21.

spread is 12 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 81 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

81

180 b.c.e., in Jerusalem. 26 The description of David in “The Praise of the Fathers” as the king who established and arranged the singers and musical groups in the Jerusalem Temple cult (Sir 47:8–10) is apparently based on the detailed description of David in several places in Chronicles (1 Chr 15:16–21, an “addition” to 2 Samuel 6, 16:4–42; 27 and 1 Chr 25:1–31, an “addition”): In every work of his, he [David] gave thanks to the Holy One Most High with words of glory; with his whole heart, he sang praise and loved him that made him. Also he set singers before the altar to make sweet melody by their music. He gave attractiveness to the feasts, and arranged the seasons throughout the year, while they praised his holy name, and the sanctuary resounded from early morning.

Because Ezra–Nehemiah also attributes the establishment of the Temple’s musical teams to David, though very briefly (Ezra 3:10, Neh 12:24), one cannot be completely sure that Sir 47:8–10 is necessarily dependent on Chronicles. 28 Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that Ben Sira was influenced by the detailed descriptions of Chronicles rather than the short notes of Ezra–Nehemiah. It is also possible that he knew both sources and depended on them equally.

2. Pseudepigrapha The term Pseudepigrapha (i.e., ‘falsely ascribed writings’) that in Christian terminology is also referred to as intertestamental literature, refers to the various noncanonical Jewish (and/or Jewish-Christian) writings composed in the Hellenistic and Roman ages (ca. 250 b.c.e.–200 c.e.). In other words, these writings are not part of the Jewish/Hebrew Bible or any of the Christian Canons. 29 Just as in the case of the Apocrypha, here also Chronicles is used by some writings, which depend on the nonparallel (“additional”) texts of Chronicles, and some other writings fill in gaps by using the additions in Chronicles.

26. For the portrayal of Ben Sira, see the description of his grandson in Sir 34:9–12; 39:1–4. 27. Verses 8–36 are parallel to Ps 105:1–15; 96:1–13; 107:1; 106:47–48. 28. Compare Ben-Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 62. 29. While there is no certainty about precisely which works belong to the “Pseudepigrapha,” I use the titles found in J. H. Charlesworth’s two-volume set: The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985). See also idem, “Pseudepigrapha,” ABD 5.537–40; J. R. Mueller, “Pseudepigrapha,” in Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (ed. D. N. Freedman, A. C. Myers, and A. B. Beck; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 1096–97.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 82 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

82

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

a. The Lives of Prophets The Lives of Prophets was presumably written originally in Greek by a Jew from the land of Israel, apparently in the 1st century of the Common Era. 30 The book provides some information about the literary as well as the nonliterary prophets mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. Among the latter are two prophets who appear only in the book of Chronicles: The first prophet is Azariah “from the district of Subatha; 31 [it was he] who turned from Israel the captives of Judah, and he died and was buried in his own field” (Liv. Pro. 20:1–2). As pointed out already by several scholars, it seems that the “tradition has confused Azariah son of Oded of 2 Chr 15:1 with the later prophet Oded of 2 Chr 28:9; it was the latter, but not the former, who reversed Israel’s intended enslavement of Judahites in the war between Pekah and Ahaz,” 32 over 200 years earlier. The second prophet is Zechariah son of Jehoiada, who is mentioned exclusively in 2 Chr 24:20–22 (an “addition” to 2 Kings 12). 33 In Lives of the Prophets 23, only the general features of the story are based on 2 Chronicles: Zechariah was from Jerusalem, son of Jehoiada the priest, and Joash, the king of Judah, killed him near the altar, and the house of David poured out his blood in front of the Ailam; and the priests took him and buried him with his father. From that time visible portents occurred in the Temple, and the priests were not able to see a vision of angels of God or to give oracles from the Dabeir, or to inquire by the Ephod, or to answer the people through Urim as formerly. (Liv. Pro. 23:1–2) 34

b. Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum was apparently written in the land of Israel, originally in Hebrew, translated into Greek and then into Latin, the form in which it is preserved today. 35 Generally, the book 30. For the date of the book, original language, and provenance of the author, see C. C. Torrey, The Lives of the Prophet: Greek Text and Translation ( Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph 1; Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1946) 3–17; D. R. A. Hare, “The Lives of the Prophets,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 2.380–82. 31. On the geographical identification of this place, see Torrey, Lives of the Prophets, 46 n. 76; Hare, “Lives of the Prophets,” 396, note a. 32. See ibid., 396, note b; cf. Torrey, Lives of the Prophets, 46 n. 77. For additional details, see above, chap. 3, pp. 61–62 n. 114. 33. See in detail, above, chap. 3, §3, pp. 36–44. 34. The English translations of both texts are according to Hare, “Lives of the Prophets,” 396, 398. 35. See L. Cohn, “An Apocryphal Work Ascribed to Philo of Alexandria,” JQR 10 (1898) 277–332; D. J. Harrington, “The Original Language of Pseudo-Philo’s Liber

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 83 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

83

is dated to the time before the destruction of the Second Temple (70 c.e.), or, to cite Daniel J. Harrington, “around the time of Jesus.” 36 However, David Flusser, for one, is of the opinion that the book was composed during the first two decades after the destruction of the Temple. 37 The Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum describes in detailed narrative the era that the Chronicler attempted to cover by genealogical and geographical lists as well as by historical notes in the first nine chapters of his book (1 Chronicles 1–9). It relates the history of the period from the time of Adam to the death of Saul, 38 which is precisely the point where the Chronicler begins in 1 Chronicles 10 (//1 Samuel 31). Thus, Pseudo-Philo ends his composition with the same story with which the Chronicler has begun the history of ancient Israel. Thus, Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum has content parallel to the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, and 1 Samuel; similar to 1 Chronicles 10–2 Chronicles 36, which has parallel accounts to 1 Samuel 31–2 Samuel 24 and the book of Kings. The earlier books served for Pseudo-Philo as raw material for manipulating as he saw fit: he adapted, supplemented, extended, and omitted from them according to his own theological views (such as reward and punishment), applying his literary and historiographical methods as well as his linguistic and stylistic tastes, exactly the same way that the Chronicler worked on his earlier “biblical” sources. Therefore, it seems that Pseudo-Philo desired to supplement Chronicles with his Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 39 and thus to fill the gap in the Chronicler’s history. Most likely, he modeled his writing on the form and style used in the book of Chronicles.

Antiquitatum Biblicarum,” HTR 63 (1970) 503–14; idem, “Pseudo-Philo,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 2.298–300. For a new translation, introduction, and commentary on the book see H. Jacobson, A Commentary on Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, with Latin Text and English Translation (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 31; Leiden: Brill, 1996). 36. See Harrington, “Pseudo-Philo,” 299. 37. See D. Flusser, “A New Commentary on Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum,” Tarbiz 67 (1997/98) 135–38, esp. p. 136 [Hebrew]. 38. Because all the manuscripts of Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum end in the middle of King Saul’s final speech, it seems that the book did not extend beyond that period. 39. Similarly stated by Riessler: “Thus, it [Pseudo-Philo] is established as complementary to the book of Chronicles” (“So bildet es eine Ergänzung zum 1. Chronikbuch”). See, P. Riessler, Altjüdisches Schrifttum ausserhalb der Bibel: Übersetzt und erläutert (Augsburg: Filser, 1928) 1315 (Erläuterung no. 44: “Zu Philo”).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 84 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

84

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

c. 2 Baruch It is noteworthy that 2 Bar. 64:8 (dated early 2nd century c.e.) reflects the author’s knowledge of the prayer ascribed to Manasseh by the Chronicler, which is mentioned only in 2 Chr 33:12–13, 19. However, this author composed a specific prayer and attributed it to Manasseh. Furthermore, he portrays an ambivalent attitude toward Manasseh: For although the Most High had heard his prayer, in the end when he fell into the brazen horse and the brazen horse was melted. . . . For he had not lived perfectly since he was not worthy.40

This attitude, obviously, is not in accordance with the Chronicler’s positive attitude toward Manasseh of Judah. 41

d. The Testament of Moses The Testament of Moses recounts the last words of Moses to Joshua prior to his death (obviously expounding on Deuteronomy 31–34). Presumably, this writing was composed in a Semitic language (Hebrew or Aramaic), translated into Greek, and later on translated into Latin, the language in which is available today. Proposed dates for The Testament of Moses range from the first half of the 2nd century b.c.e. to the middle of the 2nd century c.e. Nonetheless, it seems that the most accurate date that contemporary research “can affirm is that the extant text of the Testament of Moses should be dated after 4 b.c.e., and probably before 30 c.e.” 42 Some scholars assume that the history of the divided kingdom as described in the T. Mos. 2:5–9 reflects the description in Chronicles rather than Kings. 43 However, because the numbers mentioned there (“seven [kings],” “twenty years,” etc.) appear to be typological, there is little to support this assumption.

3. Conclusion Though the apocryphal and pseudepigraphical texts were written (mostly if not entirely) by Jews, they were almost totally neglected by the 40. See Klijn, “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; New York: Doubleday, 1983) 1.643. A similar ambivalent attitude toward Manasseh is reflected in m. Sanhedrin 10:2. Based on the account about the prayer of Manasseh in 2 Chr 33:12–13, 19, the rabbis dispute whether or not Manasseh has a part in the next world. See also the discussion of this issue in b. Sanhedrin 102b– 103a. 41. Cf. Ben-Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 70–71. 42. See J. F. Priest, “Moses, Testament of,” ABD 4.920–22, esp. p. 921. 43. See Ben-Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 63–64.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 85 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

85

Jewish transmission heritage but were preserved by Christians. The book of Chronicles was used by several writers of Jewish literature, whose works were later classified as Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Chronicles was used as a source of reference by these authors either by direct citation or by gathering information from Chronicles’ accounts. In both cases, these writers used only the nonparallel materials in the book; that is, the material that is found only in Chronicles (not in Samuel or Kings). It is possible, therefore, that the book of Chronicles was considered by these writers first and foremost as a source of supplementary material lacking in the earlier biblical historical books. This concept was also manifested in the title that the translator(s) of the Septuagint gave to Chronicles. 44 This view of Chronicles was generally shared at least by some of the Hellenistic and Roman Jewish authors, translators, and communities, both in the Diaspora (for instance, Alexandria) and in the land of Israel. Apparently, the book of Chronicles was also used as a “literary model” by the author of Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum. 44. See below, chap. 5, §1b, p. 87.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 86 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 5

Chronicles in the Septuagint, the Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and the Philosopher Philo 1. Chronicles and the Septuagint a. The Septuagint and Its Place in Greco-Roman Judaism The Septuagint (LXX), the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible (plus some additional texts and books that were later called the Apocrypha), is the first comprehensive Jewish “biblical” writing known in this most-influential European language. For the first time, the Eastern—Jewish/Semitic— literature and thoughts were presented in Western “cloth”—that is, in Greek words, idioms, and metaphors. Moreover, the Septuagint is the oldest complete interpretation of the Hebrew text. The translation-interpretation was addressed first and foremost to Hellenistic Jews, most of whom were not versed in the languages of the biblical texts (Hebrew and Aramaic). Furthermore, because later on the rabbinic texts and studies (such as the Mishnah, Tosefta, midrashic, and talmudic literature) were also composed in Hebrew and Aramaic only, and were not translated into Greek and Latin, they remained totally “sealed off” as far as the Hellenistic Jewish communities were concerned. Thus, for several centuries, the LXX became the main Jewish Scripture for the Jews of the Greco-Roman world. Certainly it was the most accessible and essential Scripture. This important team-work translation-interpretation (i.e., the Septuagint) reflects one of the significant textual witnesses of the Bible, though because it is a Greek translation—and not the original languages of the books—it still should be considered indirect and secondary. It also presents the biblical books in a different order and reflects the translator(s)/editor(s) evaluation of and attitude toward at least some of the books. 86

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 87 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

87

b. Chronicles and Its Place in the Septuagint: Status and Consequences What is true about the Septuagint in general also applies, of course, to LXX Chronicles. Because the literary genre of the book of Chronicles was considered to be history, it was classified as one of the historical books of the ancient Israelites and located immediately after (hJ bÇbloÍ) BasileiΩn ‘(the books of) Reigns/Kingdoms’ (roughly equivalent to MT Samuel and Kings), prior to the books of Ezra–Nehemiah and Esther. As a consequence of its large size (65 chapters), the Greek translator(s) divided the book of Chronicles into two portions: Paraleipomevnwn A and Paraleipomevnwn B, as had been done with the other, earlier historical writings, The Books of Kingdoms (1–2 Kingdoms [roughly, 1–2 Samuel], 3–4 Kingdoms [roughly, 1–2 Kings]). 1 The division of Chronicles into two was followed by Vetus Latina (/Old Latin) as well as Jerome’s Vulgate, all the Christian Bible translations in many languages (1–2 Chronicles), and later on by the printed editions of the Hebrew Bible (b–a μymyh yrbd)—and still today. The translator(s) mainly considered the book of Chronicles to be a supplement to what was “lacking” in the earlier biblical historical books. This concept reflects the Greek title, Paraleipomevnwn (Paralipomenon), a word meaning ‘(matters) omitted / left out’, presumably from Samuel and Kings—that is, material that appears only in Chronicles. 2 Accordingly, the book was regarded essentially a composition that fills in the gaps in ancient Israelite history (especially the history of the Southern Kingdom— Judah) in “(the book of ) Kings,” which was placed just before Chronicles. Thus, the Septuagint translator(s) ignored the value of parallel texts between Chronicles and the Pentateuch, the Former Prophets, and other biblical books. In other words, almost half the book of Chronicles, in which the Chronicler invested so much skillful, creative work by selecting, reorganizing, and reshaping the earlier texts according to literary, linguistic, historical, and theological viewpoints, 3 either was not appreciated by 1. Contrary to the rabbinic traditions that speak of one each of the historical books. See below, chap. 9, §2, p. 142. 2. LXX Codex Alexandrinus gives a slightly more detailed name to the book of Chronicles: Paraleipomenwn Basile∂n Iouda ‘The Things Omitted concerning the Kings of Judah’, apparently because Chronicles concentrates mainly on the history of the Southern Kingdom rather than the Northern, as does the book of Kings. The Syriac translation, the Peshi†ta, follows Codex Alexandrinus’s naming of the book: “The book of Chronicles, namely, the book remembering the days of the kings of Judah.” See Knoppers and Harvey, “Omitted and Remaining Matters,” 235–36. 3. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, for several examples of the various categories.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 88 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

88

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

the translator(s) or was simply considered to be insignificant repetition! 4 Furthermore, the other half of the book—the nonparallel texts (the “additions”)—was not evaluated on its own merit but was considered supplementary, therefore also secondary material. No wonder, therefore, that Chronicles as a whole received such a low priority and was translated, relatively speaking, much later than the Deuteronomistic History. While the books of Samuel and Kings were translated in the mid-3rd or beginning of the 2nd century b.c.e. (the “Old Greek” translation), 5 the book of Chronicles was translated into Greek several generations later, around the mid-2nd century b.c.e.—that is, in the Hasmonean period. 6 The Septuagint in general, including the translation of Chronicles, was created by Jews for Jewish purposes. Later on, in the first centuries of the first millennium c.e., however, the translation was adopted by Christianity (for reasons that we will not go into here), and therefore it also was totally neglected in Rabbinic Judaism. 7 Thus, the translators’ attitude toward the content and form of Chronicles influenced mainly the Christians. Indeed, the equivalent Latin name—(Libri) Paralipomenon—was used in Vetus Latina and the Vulgate. 8 Moreover, some church fathers explicitly

4. On this material and its value, see in detail ibid., 1–11, 404–12. 5. On the Greek translation of Samuel and Kings, see P. K. McCarter, I Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 8; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1980) 5–11; Gray, I and II Kings, 44–46. 6. For the date of LXX Chronicles, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 13 n. 46 and earlier references. 7. It is worthwhile to mention the dispute between Justin Martyr and Trypho the Jew (Neapolis/Nablus, ca. 100–165 c.e., Rome) over Isa 7:14. There the MT version has hml[h (‘the young woman’; interpreted by Jews as referring to the queen, that is, Hezekiah’s mother; see also the quotation of Rabbi Joseph Kimchi, The Book of the Covenant, below, in chap. 15, §3a, p. 278; and the commentary of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra on Isa 7:14) while the LXX has parqevnoÍ (‘the virgin’; interpreted by Christian as referring to the Virgin Mary, that is, Christ’s mother). At some point, Justin states: “if . . . I shall show that this prophecy of Isaiah refers to our Christ, and not to Hezekiah, as you say, shall I not in this matter, too, compel you not to believe your teachers, who venture to assert that the explanation which your seventy elders that were with Ptolemy the king of Egyptians gave, is untrue in certain respects?” (italics mine). See Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 67.1– 68.7; A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (eds.), Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translation of the Writings of the Fathers down to a.d. 325 (American reprints of Edinburgh edition; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951) 1.231–33, esp. pp. 232–33. 8. The name continued to be used in later generations by several Christian translators of Chronicles—for example, in the English translations of Wycliffe, Thomas Matthew, and William Tyndale; see the survey of Knoppers and Harvey, “Omitted and Remaining Matters,” 241–43.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 89 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

89

expressed the LXX translators’ views as the ultimate essence of the book. For example, the leading Antiochian theologian, historian, and commentator Theodoret of Cyrrhus (ca. 393–466 c.e.), 9 in his work On the First (Book of) Paralipomenon, said: The opening of the book of Paralipomenon makes apparent the issue. What the royal scribe [the author of the books of Samuel and Kings] omitted, the author [the Chronicler] who took up this specific task set down, using as sources many of the books of prophecy. Much of what was written in those books he harmonized with these events [in Chronicles] thus that he might demonstrate historical consistency. He starts at the beginning with a genealogy, in consequence to show concisely how all the groups of human beings arose from one man. 10

In his major didactic writing, Etymologiarum (or Originum), Isidore of Seville (ca. 560–636 c.e.) states: 11 What is called Paralipomenon in Greek, we are able to call “[the book] of omitted or remaining matters,” because the things that were omitted or not fully accounted in the Pentateuch or the books of Kingdoms [MT Samuel and Kings] are in this book [Chronicles] set out in a few words. (Etymologiarum 6.2.12) 12

It seems, without doubt, that the misevaluation of Chronicles by the Septuagint translator(s), which was automatically followed by the Christian translators and writers, added tremendously to the underestimation and subsequent neglect of the book in the Church communities through centuries to come. 13 9. Cyrrhus is the name of a town that was located east of Antioch, Syria. 10. See PG (Paris, 1860) vol. 80, cols. 801 (Greek), 802 (Latin). For the English translation, compare Knoppers and Harvey, “Omitted and Remaining Matters,” 233. On Theodoret of Cyrrhus, see J.-N. Guinot, “Theodoret of Cyrrhus: Bishop and Exegete,” in The Bible in Greek Christian Antiquity (ed. P. M. Blowers; Bible through the Ages 1; Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997) 163–93; J. W. Trigg, “Theodoret of Cyrrhus,” in Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (ed. J. H. Hayes; Nashville: Abingdon, 1999) 2.552–53; P. Bruns, “Theodoret of Cyrrhus,” in Dictionary of Early Christian Literature (ed. S. Döpp and W. Geerlings; New York: Crossroad, 2000) 567– 68, where there is a detailed list of Theodoret’s works and secondary sources. 11. For the life and work of Isidore of Seville, see J. Pérez de Urbel, Isidore von Sevilla: Sein Leben, sein Werk und seine Zeit (Cologne: Bachem, 1962); G. Röwekamp, “Isidore of Seville,” in Dictionary of Early Christian Literature (ed. S. Döpp and W. Geerlings; New York: Crossroad, 2000) 309–11. 12. The quotation is translated from W. M. Lindsay, Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi: Etymologiarum siue Originum (Scriptorum classicorum bibliotheca Oxoniensis; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1911) 1.219. 13. Compare Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 4.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 90 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

90

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

c. MT and LXX Chronicles and the Qumran Texts The textual problem of the Hebrew Chronicler’s Vorlage and its relation to the Qumran texts as well as the Hebrew Vorlage of the Greek Chronicles, well treated in the biblical scholarship. 14 Here I must mention that some of the Dead Sea Scrolls may represent a similar or very close Hebrew text (Vorlage) that may have been used for the LXX Greek translation. 15 It is also worthy to note that “the wording of certain sections of the Septuagint of Samuel–Kings differs from the wording of the Masoretic Text of these books, while closely resembling the parallel passages in the Masoretic Text of Chronicles.” 16

2. The Use of Chronicles by Judeo-Hellenistic Historians We know of at least two Hellenized Jewish historians who used the Chronicler’s writing: Eupolemus, who lived in Judea in the 2nd century b.c.e.; and Josephus, who wrote the history of his nation while in exile in Rome, during the last decades of the 1st century c.e. Contrariwise, the Jewish-Hellenistic philosopher Philo of Alexandria, who rarely quoted from outside the Pentateuch, totally ignored the book of Chronicles. Let us turn our attention to these writers in more detail. 17

a. Eupolemus Only five fragments of the work of Eupolemus are preserved, presumably entitled On the Kings in Judea. 18 The work was composed in Greek, in 14. See the references listed below, n. 16. 15. See, for instance, E. C. Ulrich, The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus (Harvard Semitic Monograph 19; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1978) 257. 16. On these and other issues, see in detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 12–16 (quotation, p. 13); idem, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 16 (and there references to additional secondary literature). See also M. Rehm, Textkritische Untersuchungen zu den Parallelstellen der Samuel-Königsbücher und der Chronik (Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen 13/3; Münster i.W.: Aschendorff, 1937); L. C. Allen, The Greek Chronicles: The Relationship of the Septuagint of I and II Chronicles to the Massoretic Text (VTSup 25 and 27; Leiden: Brill, 1974); the references listed in Kalimi, The Books of Chronicles: A Classified Bibliography, 52– 66, items 163–302; and the recent survey by R. W. Klein, 1 Chronicles, 28–30. 17. Though from the chronological viewpoint Philo of Alexandria should be situated here between Eupolemus and Josephus, I prefer to delay the discussion of Philo because of the similar genres of Eupolemus and Josephus. 18. The book is called so by Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 1.153.4. For more details, see N. Walter, Fragmente jüdisch-hellenistischer Historiker: “Eupolemos,” in Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit 1/2 (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1976) 93; F. Fallon, “Eupolemus,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; 2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985) 2.861–72, esp. pp. 861–62.

spread is 12 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 91 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

91

the Hasmonean Age (ca. 159/8 b.c.e.), most likely in Judah. 19 The author briefly discusses the history of Israel from the time of Moses to the beginning of the monarchic period, and in more detail, the era from David to the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah by the Neo-Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II in 587/6 b.c.e. Thus this historical work was somewhat parallel to the work of the Chronicler, who concentrated on the period of Judahite history from David to the fall of Judah. Unquestionably, Eupolemus depended largely on the early and late biblical historical books of Samuel–Kings and Chronicles. However, he preferred to rely more on the book of Chronicles than on Samuel–Kings (apparently in both the Greek and the Hebrew versions). 20 This opinion, which was stated by J. Freudenthal in the 19th century, 21 is proved by the following evidence (all of the points stem from frag. 2 of Eupolemus): 1. The detail in Eupolemus that David was not allowed to build the Temple because he had shed much blood is dependent on 1 Chr 22:7–8; 28:2–3 (“additions”). This detail is lacking in the books of Samuel and Kings. 2. The report by Eupolemus on the preparation of the construction material by David for the Temple building depends on 1 Chronicles 22; 28 (“additions”). Again, this detail is lacking in the Former Prophets. 3. The information that Solomon paid Hiram, king of Tyre, for cedar and cypress from Lebanon, not only with wheat and oil but also with wine is mentioned only in 2 Chr 2:9 [ET: 10] and in the story of Eupolemus. It is not mentioned in the parallel text of 1 Kgs 5:25. 4. Eupolemus mentions that the artist who knew how to work with gold, silver, and copper, and so on was “the son of a Danite woman,” exactly as in 2 Chr 2:13, in contrast to 1 Kgs 7:14, which says that the artist was “the son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali.”

19. See, for example, H. W. Attridge, “Historiography,” in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (ed. M. E. Stone; Assen: Van Gorcum / Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 157–84, esp. pp. 162–65; Fallon, “Eupolemus,” 861–63. 20. See J. Freudenthal, “Eupolemos, der judäische Geschichtsschreiber,” Hellenistische Studien ( Jahresbericht des jüdisch-theologischen Seminars; Breslau: Skutsch, 1875) 2.108, 114, 119, 185, 211; H. B. Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (rev. R. R. Ottley; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902; repr. New York: Ktav, 1968) 370; E. Schürer, The Literature of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus (ed. N. N. Glatzer; New York: Schocken, 1972) 162 (“The Septuagint translation of Chronicles was certainly known to Eupolemus”); Allen, The Greek Chronicles, part 1, 11–12; Fallon, “Eupolemus,” 862–63. 21. Freudenthal, “Eupolemos, der judäische Geschichtsschreiber,” 105–30, esp. pp. 106–8, 119, 209 n. 10.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 92 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

92

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

5. The statement by Eupolemus that the timbers brought from Lebanon to Jerusalem via Jaffa seaport depends on 2 Chr 2:15. This item does not appear in the parallel text of 1 Kgs 5:23. 6. Eupolemus’s account of the exchange of letters between Solomon and Hiram depends on an additional story in 2 Chr 2:2–14, which does not appear in the book of Kings. 7. Eupolemus’s report that Hiram reigned not only over Tyre as in 1 Kgs 5:15 but also over Sidon and all of Phoenicia most likely depends on 1 Chr 22:4, which relates that “the Sidonians and Tyrians brought great quantities of cedar to David” (an “addition”); and on 2 Chr 2:2 (an “addition” to 1 Kgs 5:16), according to which Solomon requested Hiram, king of Tyre: “as you dealt with David, my father, and sent him cedar to build himself a house to dwell in, so deal with me.” 8. Eupolemus stated that Solomon had made a bronze platform to stand on whenever he prayed. This point is made only in 2 Chr 6:13, not in the parallel text of 1 Kings (1 Kgs 8:22–23). 22 Does the reliance of Eupolemus on the book of Chronicles demonstrate that “Chronicles was better known than Samuel and Kings,” as claimed by Abram Spiro, 23 or does it only show the personal preference of the historian? Because the book of Chronicles was written against the background of the complete Torah, it was probably more suited to Eupolemus’s theology. Moreover, Chronicles contains much more information on the Kingdom of Judah, 24 on which Eupolemos concentrates. Let us not forget that Eupolemus used the book of Kings as well; that is, both books were equally known to him, and he used them in his composition. There are several items in Eupolemus’s writing that are not according to either Chronicles or Samuel–Kings. For example, David is the son of Saul (in order to provide full legitimacy for David succession?) rather than Jesse (e.g., 1 Samuel 16; 17:12; 1 Chr 10:14; Ruth 4:22); King Solomon went to sacrifice not in Gibeon, as in Kings and Chronicles (1 Kings 3 // 2 Chronicles 1), but in Shilo, following the erection of the Temple in Jerusalem! Thus, it seems that Eupolemus used biblical as well as some extrabiblical material in his work, even when the extrabiblical contradicted the biblical. 22. The absence of this particular point in 1 Kings did not happen accidentally (homoioteleuton), as several scholars have argued; rather, it was an addition to the text of 1 Kgs 8:22b by the Chronicler; see in detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 276–78. 23. See Spiro, “Samaritans, Tobiads, and Judahites in Pseudo-Philo,” 303–8 n. 65. 24. The historical reliability of that information is an entirely different issue, and it is questionable whether Eupolemus even bothered himself with this sort of question.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 93 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

93

In other words, neither Chronicles nor Samuel–Kings was an exclusive source for Eupolemus! 25

b. Josephus Flavius About 250 years after Eupolemus, Josephus (ca. 37/38–ca. 100 c.e.), another Jewish Hellenistic historian used the book of Chronicles. 26 Even though Josephus was not a Hellenized Jew in the sense that Eupolemus was, his historical writing is clearly Hellenistic. Josephus was one of the well-educated, aristocratic, Pharisaic priests in Jerusalem who experienced the horrific changes in the second half of the 1st century c.e.

(1) The Use of Chronicles in Jewish Antiquities Josephus used Chronicles extensively in his magnum opus, Jewish Antiquities (Antiquitatas Judaicae). This composition was written in Greek and was published in Rome ca. 93/94 c.e. 27 Writing basically for a Gentile Hellenistic audience, Josephus presented the complete history of the Jewish people from earliest times to the outbreak of the Great War (in which he took part as a commander in Galilee) between the Jews and Romans at the time of the Roman governor of Judea, Gessius Florus (66 c.e.). 28 It is impossible to know for sure whether Josephus’s Vorlage was the MT or the LXX. Thus, Christopher T. Begg, who investigated Josephus’s account of the late monarchy (Ant. 9.1–10.185), deduces as follows: A whole range of factors militates against one’s drawing conclusions concerning Josephus’ Bible text(s) in 9.1–10.85 (as throughout AJ 1–11), i.e., uncertainties about the Josephan text itself. . . . Nonetheless, we have, over the course of this study, encountered noteworthy points of contacts between 25. Compare, Ben Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 72–73, and additional examples there. 26. On the life and work of Josephus, see L. H. Feldman, “Josephus (c.e. 37–c. 100),” in The Cambridge History of Judaism, volume 3: The Early Roman Period (ed. W. Horbury, W. D. Davies, and J. Sturdy; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 901–21. 27. As Josephus notes at the end of his composition, it was completed in “the thirteenth year of the reign of Domitian Caesar and to the fifty-sixth of my life” (Ant. 20.267). 28. Josephus dedicated his earliest composition to the war of the Jews against the Romans (Jewish War; see Ant. 1.1–9), which was composed between 75 and 79 c.e.; first, as he puts it, “in my ancestor’s language” (i.e., in Hebrew or Aramaic), and later in Greek. Interestingly, more than two-thirds of the Jewish War (books 3–7) was devoted to the seven years of the war (66–73 c.e.), but the first two books contain a brief history of the Jewish people in the last centuries prior to the war (from Antiochus IV Epiphanes, ca. 170 b.c.e., down to the outbreak of the war in 66 c.e.) and are used as a long introduction. Later on, however, Josephus expanded that long period into seven and a half books (Jewish Antiquities 13–20).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 94 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

94

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature Josephus’ presentation and the distinctive readings of MT, LXX (BL), and Targums for his two primary sources, i.e., 2 Kings 1–25 and 2 Chronicles 19–36. . . . Overall, then, it seems possible to conclude that Josephus did know the biblical books utilized by him in 9,1–10,185 in a variety of textforms. 29

Begg remarks further, 30 “this conclusion with regard to Josephus’ Bible text(s) for 9.1–10.185 coincides with the one reached by me concerning the biblical text-form(s) utilized by him in AJ 8.212–420.” 31 He reaches a similar conclusion in his more-recent article: “the results were mixed. He [ Josephus] agrees, first of all, with MT against LXX 1 Kgs 5:15–32 on several points . . . on the other hand, Josephus (8.57) goes together with LXX 5:25. . . . These findings suggest that Josephus drew on various text-forms of 1 Kgs 5:15–32 (and 2 Chr 1:18–2:17) in developing his own account of Solomon’s measures.” 32 Nevertheless, this issue does not make any difference in the examples quoted below in this chapter. Concerning the use of Samuel–Kings and Chronicles as sources, Begg, in his investigation of Josephus’s account of the early Divided Monarchy (Ant. 8.212–420), concludes: The historian did not opt to follow one source to the exclusion of the other. Rather, he aims to give both sources their due via a maximal utilization of their peculiar materials in his own account. Specifically, taking Kings’ more extensive and Northern-oriented sequence as a basis, Josephus integrates therein the Chronicler’s detailed treatment of the Judean rulers.33

I would like not only to reinforce Begg’s conclusion generally by citing examples from other parts of Josephus’s Jewish Antiquities regarding the use of Samuel–Kings and Chronicles but also to stress the following points: (a) Usually, when Josephus relies on Samuel–Kings, he prefers to overlook the differences between them and the parallel passages in Chronicles, and vice versa; for example:

29. See C. [T.] Begg, Josephus’ Story of the Later Monarchy (AJ 9,1–10,185) (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 145; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Peeters, 2000) 625–26. 30. Ibid., 626 n. 7. 31. See also idem, Josephus’ Account of the Early Divided Monarchy (JA 8,212–420): Rewriting the Bible (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 108; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Peeters, 1993) 271–76. 32. Idem, “Solomon’s Preparations for Building the Temple according to Josephus,” RiB 55 (2007) 25–39, esp. pp. 36–37. 33. See idem, Josephus’ Account of the Early Divided Monarchy, 270.

spread is 3 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 95 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

95

1. 1 Sam 31:10–12 relates: “They [the Philistines] deposited his [Saul’s] armor in the temple of Astaroth, and they impaled his corpse on the wall of Beth-shan.” The parallel story in 1 Chr 10:10 is different: “And they put his armor in the house of their gods, and fastened his head in the temple of Dagon.” In Ant. 6.374, Josephus disregarded Chronicles’ story and relied only on Samuel: “Their armor they set up as an offering in the temple of Astaroth and impaled their bodies to the walls of the city of Beth-shan.” 2. According to 2 Sam 24:24, David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. The parallel story in 1 Chr 21:25 says that “David paid Ornan six hundred shekels of gold by weight for the site.” In Ant. 7.332, Josephus states that David bought the threshing floor for fifty shekels. 3. According to 1 Kgs 7:14, Hiram’s mother was from the tribe of Naphtali; but the Chronicler comments that she was from the Danites (2 Chr 2:13). In Ant. 8.76, Josephus ignored Chronicles’ data and followed 1 Kings. 4. 1 Kgs 9:11 states: “King Solomon gave to Hiram twenty cities in the land of Galilee.” The parallel text of 2 Chr 8:2, however, says just the opposite: “Solomon rebuilt the cities which Huram had given to him.” In Against Apion 1.110 (Contra Apionem; Rome, ca. 95 c.e.), Josephus represents only the story in Kings: “In return Solomon, among many other gifts, made him a present of land in Galilee in the district called Chabulon.” 34 5. In Ant. 9.165, Josephus uses 2 Chr 24:14a and ignores the contradictory story in 2 Kgs 12:14. 35 Occasionally Josephus harmonizes the parallel contradictory accounts of Chronicles and Samuel–Kings. For instance, in his earlier work, Josephus harmonized the contradictory stories of 1 Kgs 9:11 and 2 Chr 8:2 concerning the cities in Galilee: “he [Solomon] made him a present of some cities in Galilee, twenty in number, which lay not far from Tyre; but when Eiromos went to them and looked them over, he was ill pleased with the gift and sent word to Solomon that he had no use for the cities” (Ant. 8.142). In other words, Solomon indeed gave 20 cities to Hiram (1 Kings); but later on, Hiram gave the 20 cities (back) to Solomon (2 Chronicles). Thus, Josephus was not always consistent in his writing.

34. For the Greek text of Josephus’s composition and its English translation, see Josephus, The Life, Against Apion (trans. H. St. J. Thackeray; Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956) 206–7. 35. On this example, see in detail below, §(d) no. 2, p. 97.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 96 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

96

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

(b) Josephus intensively uses the nonparallel texts of Chronicles, the “additions,” as a supplementary source of data for the ancient Israelite history as told in Samuel–Kings. Thus, it seems that his attitude toward Chronicles was in continuity with the Greek translator(s) and some of the authors of the pseudepigraphical literature—that is, Paralipomenon. There are many examples of Josephus’s use of this feature in Chronicles. Following are some examples: 1. The designation of the Temple site and preparation of the materials for its construction in 1 Chr 22:1–5 are integrated into Ant. 7.334–35. 2. The story about David’s charge to Solomon in Ant. 7.337–42 is clearly found in 1 Chr 22:6–19. 3. The account in Ant. 7.305–6 about the Levite singers that David organized is based on 1 Chronicles 25. 4. The war of King Asa of Judah against Zaraios, the king of Ethiopia (= Zera˙ the Cushite) in Ant. 8.290–95 is based on 2 Chr 14:8–14. 5. The rebuke by the prophet Jehu of Jehoshaphat of Judah for his alliance with Ahab and his appointment of judges in Ant. 9.1–6 rely on 2 Chr 19:1–11. 6. The story in 2 Chr 20:1–30 about the invasion of the Kingdom of Judah by the Moabites and Ammonites and the great victory over them after Jehoshaphat’s prayer and the prophecy of Ja˙aziel is included in Ant. 9.7–16. 7. The report about the stoning of the prophet-priest Zechariah son of Jehoiada in Josephus, Ant. 9.168–69 is dependent on 2 Chr 24:20–22. 36 8. The description of the cultic reform and Passover celebration of Hezekiah in Ant. 9.260–74 is according to 2 Chronicles 29–31. 9. The description of Josiah of Judah in Ant. 10.78, “Great was the mourning for him [ Josiah] observed by all the people. . . . And the prophet Jeremiah composed a song of lament for his funeral, which remains to this day,” follows 2 Chr 35:24a–25. All of these texts appear in Chronicles only—that is, they have no counterpart in Samuel–Kings or in any other place (i.e., they are “additions”). 37 (c) From time to time, Josephus combines a story in Samuel–Kings with a story in Chronicles. For example: 36. On this story in Chronicles, see above, chap. 3, §3, pp. 36–43. 37. For an additional example, a detailed comparative study of 1 Chronicles 23–29 and Josephus, Ant. 7.363–82, see C. [T.] Begg, “David’s Final Depositions in Chronicles and Josephus,” OTE 19 (2006) 1064–88; see also idem, “Solomon’s Preparations for Building the Temple,” 25–39.

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 97 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

97

1. In Ant. 7.63–64, Josephus combined 2 Sam 5:8 and 1 Chr 11:6 for his description of the conquest of Jerusalem by David. 38 2. In Ant. 10.21–22, he combined 2 Kgs 19:35 about the fall of Sennacherib’s army in front of Jerusalem’s gates with 2 Chr 32:21. 39 (d) Sometimes Josephus preferred the Chronicler’s accounts to Samuel–Kings’, for example: 1. Ant. 8.141 relates that Solomon paid Huram with “grain and wine and oil.” As explained above regarding Eupolemus (example no. 3), the word “wine” appears only in the parallel text of 2 Chronicles. 2. In Ant. 9.165, Josephus writes: “when the Temple had been repaired, they spent the money that was left over . . . for bowls and pitchers and cups and other vessels,” as related in 2 Chr 24:14a, contrary to 2 Kgs 12:14. In this case as well, Josephus did not attempt to harmonize the contradictory parallel stories.

(2) Interim Conclusion In Jewish Antiquities, Josephus used the book of Chronicles extensively in several ways. He especially used the passages without a parallel (the “additions”) as complementary data to Samuel and Kings. In his rewriting of biblical history, he desired to represent the antiquity and accuracy of the ancient Israelites’ descriptions and their historical credibility, matters that some Gentile authors denied (Ag. Ap. 1.1–5). 40 Josephus repeatedly blames the Gentile historians (i.e., Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, and Phoenician) for their frequent contradictions of each other and even themselves. For example, he writes about the Greek historians: “More often than not they confute each other in their works, not hesitating to give the most contradictory accounts of the same events” (Ag. Ap. 1.15). 41 Later on, he comments on the Egyptian historians: “Some of them carried their folly and narrow-mindedness so far that they did not hesitate to contradict their ancient chronicles, nay, in the blindness of their passion, they failed to perceive that in what they wrote they actually 38. On this issue, see in detail Kalimi, “The Capture of Jerusalem in the Deuteronomistic and Chronistic History,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 104–6. 39. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 33 n. 47. This literary technique is also well known from the Greek translation of Chronicles. For example, LXX 1 Chr 11:4 is a combination of MT 1 Chr 11:4 and the parallel text in 2 Sam 5:6; LXX 2 Chr 36:4 is a combination of MT 2 Chr 36:4 and 2 Kgs 23:34–35; see Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 21 n. 10, 45 n. 36, 50 n. 52. 40. Josephus, The Life, Against Apion (trans. Thackeray), 163–65. See further in this chapter, below. 41. Ibid., 168–69.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 98 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

98

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

contradicted themselves” (Ag. Ap. 1.226). 42 Moreover, Josephus stresses that “we [i.e., the Jews] do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time” (Ag. Ap. 1.38). 43 Therefore, when Josephus recounts the history of ancient Israel, he either overlooks the contradictions in the parallel texts of Chronicles and Samuel–Kings while mostly using the latter due to their antiquity (and perhaps their holiness), or he harmonizes them and creates a coherent, smooth version wherever he finds it appropriate to do so. In harmonizing some parallel texts, he goes one step further than the Chronicler. 44

(3) The Jewish Canon as Reflected in Against Apion: A Comparative View The importance of Josephus’s testimony in his apologia, Against Apion, to the history of the canonization of the Hebrew Bible lies not only in “the fact that he is the first witness to a closed canon of Hebrew Scripture” 45 but also in the fact that his witness is mid-point between the Dead Sea Scrolls and “the rabbinic canon.” 46 Though Josephus does not provide an exact date for the close of the biblical canon, in Against Apion he refers to (probably according to the tradition that he held) 22 books of Jewish Scripture: Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. This period falls only a little short of three thousand years. From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of Persia,47 the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts

42. Ibid., 254–55. In the following pages, Josephus attempts to show the contradictions and absurdities in the historical writing of Manetho, and between him and other Egyptian historians such as Chaeremon and Lysimachus; see Ag. Ap. 1.227–320 (Thackeray, 254–91). 43. Thackeray, ibid., 178–79. 44. See also below, in this chapter, §(5) “The Authorship of Chronicles and Its Historical and Religious Value” (pp. 102–104). 45. See S. Z. Leiman, “Josephus and the Canon of the Bible,” in Josephus, the Bible, and History (ed. L. H. Feldman and G. Hata; Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989) 50–58, esp. p. 50. 46. On the presumed “canon” of the Dead Sea Scrolls’ community, see I. Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” TZ 60 (2004) 101–6, esp. pp. 104–5. On the rabbinic canon, see above, chap. 2, §4, pp. 21–25. 47. It seems that here Josephus is referring to Artaxerxes I (Longimanus; biblical ats}væjtra; 465–425/4 b.c.e.). However, see below, on Ant. 11.184.

spread is 6 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 99 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

99

for the conduct of human life. From Artaxerxes to our own time the complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets. (1.38–41; italics mine)48

Intriguingly, Josephus counts only 22 books in his threefold division of the canon, rather than 24 as in more or less his contemporaries’ works, for instance, 4 Ezra 14:45 (ca. 100 c.e.); 49 and as the Sages of the beraita noted in b. Baba Batra 14b–15a. However, it seems that Josephus’s biblical canon contained the same books as the canon of 4 Ezra and the beraita’s Sages. The difference between the two canons stems from different classifications of the books. Because Ruth was composed “in the days when the judges ruled” (Ruth 1:1), and Lamentations was traditionally ascribed to Jeremiah (2 Chr 35:25—an “addition”; Ant. 10.78), 50 Josephus combined Ruth with Judges and Lamentations with Jeremiah. In fact, in Ant. 5.318ff., Josephus tells the story of Ruth after the death of Samson, which in the Antiquities is the last event drawn from what we call Judges. In Ant. 10.78–79, the books of Jeremiah and Lamentations are mentioned in the same breath. 51 The total number 22 could be coincidental, or, as stated by Origen (see below), it may have been contrived to relate to the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. 52 There are some similarities between the “canon” of Josephus and the canon reflected by the Septuagint—on the one hand—and by rabbinic sources—on the other hand: the threefold division and the books that are included in the “canon” are as in the rabbinic sources/MT; the classification of the books according to their genre is as in the Septuagint. However, though in the Septuagint Ruth was located after Judges and Lamentation after Jeremiah, they ( Judges-Ruth and Jeremiah-Lamentations) were not considered one book as in Josephus. 53

48. See Josephus: The Life, Against Apion (trans. Thackeray), 178–79. 49. See B. M. Metzger, “The Fourth Book of Ezra,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York: Doubleday, 1985) 1.517, 520 (for the date, which is based mainly on 4 Ezra 3:1 [p. 528]) 555 (text and notes m and n). 50. See the citation of this source above, §2b, (b) no. 9 (p. 96), and compare with b. Baba Batra 15a. 51. Compare Leiman, “Josephus and the Canon of the Bible,” 54. 52. Bruce (The Canon of Scripture, 33 n. 15, 90) repeated this claim, though without directly referring to Origen, who is cited by Eusebius. 53. On additional similarities between the Septuagint and Josephus’s canon, see also below in this section.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 100 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

100

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Interestingly, Josephus’s canon is also reflected in a later period by some Christian writers, such as Origen (185–254 c.e.), who is cited by Eusebius: But it should be known that there are twenty-two canonical books of the Old Testament, according to the tradition of the Hebrews; corresponding to the number of letters in their alphabet. (Ecclesiastical History 6.25.1) 54

Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in his 39th letter announcing the exact date of Easter for 367 c.e., also mentions the canon of the Old and New Testaments. He writes: There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. . . .55

(4) The Presumed Place of Chronicles in “Josephus’s Canon” In view of the fact that Josephus used the books of Chronicles, Ezra– Nehemiah, and Esther extensively in his Antiquities, 56 these books should not be excluded from his canon, as some scholars have suggested. 57 Moreover, Josephus gives the chronological time span for the 13 books: “From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes.” Now in Ant. 11.184, he identifies Artaxerxes with Ahasuerus in the book of Esther; that is, Esther is included among the 13 books. 54. See Eusebius, The Ecclesiastical History (trans. J. E. L. Oulton and H. J. Lawlor; Loeb Classical Library; London: Heinemann / New York: Putnam, 1932) 72–73. Leiman (“Josephus and the Canon of the Bible,” 57 n. 25) mentions in this category also: “Epiphanius, Jerome . . . Cyril, the anonymous Bryennios list, and others.” Obviously, the above-mentioned citation from Eusebius leaves no room for Leiman’s words: “and probably Eusebius” (italics mine). See also the references to secondary literature that are listed there. 55. See P. Schaff and H. Wace (eds.), A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church (2nd Series; 14 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976) (“St. Athanasius: Selected Works and Letters”) 4.551–52, esp. p. 552. Note that Athanasius’s sum is “the same as Origen’s, but he lists Ruth separately from Judges and omits Esther” (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 79). 56. On the use of Chronicles, see above in this chapter; on the use of Ezra– Nehemiah (and LXX Esdras A / 1 Esdras) and Esther, see Ant. 11.1–296. 57. See also W. Fell, “Der Bibelkanon des Flavius Josephus,” BZ 7 (1909) 1–16, esp. p. 8 n. 1. Fell refers to Hanebeg, who claimed that Josephus did not include the biblical books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther in his canon, because these books were not acknowledged (as Holy Scripture) until a later period. It is noteworthy that most likely the book of Esther was excluded from the “canon” of the Dead Sea Scrolls’ community; see Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” 104–5.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 101 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

101

By “the five books of Moses” Josephus is referring without a doubt to the books of the Torah/Pentateuch in the order that reached us, which could be written on one scroll. In contrast, though the meaning of the rest of his assertion is obvious, “the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the events of their own times in thirteen books; 58 the remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life,” it is not quite clear which precise titles were included within each of the two categories, or in which order they were organized. Most likely, Josephus considered the book of Chronicles one of the “thirteen books” of “history” that had been composed by the prophets. Now in his Antiquities, Josephus also used the Greek text of Samuel–Kings (= LXX 1–4 Kingdoms) and Chronicles. 59 Moreover, his attitude toward Chronicles is similar to the attitude of its Greek translator(s)—that is, Chronicles was a historical book and essentially it was “left out” (Paralipomenon) of the earlier historical works, Samuel–Kings. 60 Accordingly, it is reasonable to assume that Josephus followed the same sequence as in the Septuagint. 61 In other words, Josephus classified the books mainly by genre (except Lamentations) and situated Chronicles after Samuel–Kings but before Ezra–Nehemiah and Esther (which chronologically would follow Chronicles), similar to the arrangement in the Septuagint. Thus, presumably the order of the books was as follows: (1) Joshua, (2) Judges + Ruth, (3) Samuel, (4) Kings, (5) Chronicles, (6) Ezra–Nehemiah, (7) Esther, (8) Job, 62 (9) Isaiah, (10) Jeremiah + Lamentations, (11) Ezekiel, (12) Daniel, (13) Twelve Minor Prophets (which are usually counted as one book). 63 The last four books, which included “hymns to God and precepts 58. It is noteworthy that, although the Pentateuch was composed by the Prophet Moses (as traditionally believed) and in essence was considered “history,” Josephus distinguished it from the other 13 historical books due to its unique holiness, as a fundamental Scripture of the Jewish people, with their ancestral divine laws and covenants. 59. Concerning the text—MT or LXX—used by Josephus, see above in this chapter. 60. See in detail in this chapter, above, §2b (1) (a), pp. 94–95. 61. At least until Job; see below for the presumed list and order of the books in Josephus’s biblical canon. 62. Job may have been considered a prophet (see Sir 49:8–9; James 5:10–11). However, he could also have been placed after Ezekiel, as was done by Ben Sira, who mentions Ezekiel and Job in the same breath (Sir 49:8–9); see also the discussion in the following note about Daniel, who is mentioned together with Noah and Job in Ezek 14:14, 20. 63. Compare with the classification of the books by Thackeray in Josephus, The Life, Against Apion (trans. Thackeray), 179 note b. However, in contrast to Thackeray, I locate the book of Daniel after the book of Ezekiel, as in the Septuagint. This order is based on the traditional identification of Daniel, the hero of the book named after him, with the Daniel mentioned in Ezek 14:14, 20; 28:3. Historically, however, this identification

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 102 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

102

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

for the conduct of human life,” probably were: (1) Psalms, (2) Song of Songs, (3) Proverbs, and (4) Ecclesiastes. 64 Obviously, as a historian and polemicist, Josephus was much less interested in these nonhistorical books than in the early and later biblical historical books. He used the latter as a key historical source for his Jewish Antiquities and for his dispute with Gentile historians.

(5) The Authorship of Chronicles and Its Historical and Religious Value As previously stated in this chapter, Josephus considered Chronicles one of the historical books of the Hebrew Bible. For the first time, the authorship of the historical books was discussed, and according to Josephus they were composed by prophets. The notion that the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings were composed by prophets also emerges from the rabbinic tradition, from the beraita in b. Baba Batra 14b–15a. 65 It is also clearly reflected in their location in the Hebrew Bible, which is within the framework of the Former Prophets. In contrast, the rabbis of the beraita classified Chronicles as a book that was composed by scribes (Ezra is incorrect; see I. Kalimi, “ ‘Behold, Are You Wiser Than Daniel?’ (Ezek 28:3),” in Companion to the Biblical World: The Book of Ezekiel (ed. G. Brin and M. Haran; Ramat Gan: Revivim, 1984) 141 [Hebrew]. Contra R. Meyer, “Bemerkungen zum literargeschichtlichen Hintergrund der Kanontheorie des Josephus,” in Josephus-Studien: Untersuchungen zu Josephus, dem antiken Judentum und dem Neuen Testament—Otto Michel Festschrift (ed. O. Betz, K. Haacker and M. Hengel; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974) 285– 99, esp. p. 286; and Leiman, “Josephus and the Canon of the Bible,” 53. Meyer places Chronicles almost at the end of “the thirteen books,” just before Ezra(–Nehemiah) and Esther (so too Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church, 451— chronological order); while Leiman classifies it after Ezra(–Nehemiah) but before Esther. It is unclear if Josephus is hinting in Ant. 10.35 at the “thirteen” prophetic books that he mentions later in Against Apion. R. Marcus replies positively on this issue; see Josephus, Jewish Antiquities (trans. R. Marcus; Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1937) 176–77 note c; his view is followed by Leiman (“Josephus and the Canon of the Bible,” 55). On this issue, see also A. Schalit, Josephus Flavius: Jewish Antiquities—Translation, Introduction and Notes ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute/ Tel Aviv: Masada, 1967) 2.346, and n. 45a on p. gnq/153 [Hebrew]. 64. This order makes much more sense than Meyer’s (“Bemerkungen zum literargeschichtlichen Hintergrund der Kanontheorie des Josephus,” 286); he concludes with Song of Songs. It is reasonable to assume that Josephus ended his Holy Scriptures with Ecclesiastes, which closes with the words: “The end of the matter, all has been heard. Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it is good, or whether it is evil” (Qoh 12:13–14), rather than with the last words of Song of Songs: “Make haste, my beloved, and be like a gazelle or like a young hart upon the mountains of spices” (Song 8:14). 65. See also the discussion above, chap. 2, §4, pp. 21–25.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 103 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

103

and Nehemiah), who were inspired by a divine spirit but did not prophesy. Hence, the rabbis placed Chronicles with other books that were composed similarly—in the Ketubim/Writings. 66 Moreover, in the classical rabbinic literature the opinion about the book of Job was that it was composed by Moses—that is, by the “father of the prophets.” 67 There is not a tradition of this sort, however, about the books of Chronicles (or Ezra–Nehemiah and Esther). Josephus’s Against Apion is, therefore, the only early source that ascribes the composition of Chronicles (as well as other late historical books) to prophet(s). The question arises why he ascribed the composition of the late biblical historical books, including Chronicles, to prophets. Indeed, the Chronicler himself frequently refers to prophets and prophetic writings as his primary source (1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29; 12:15; 13:22; 20:34; 26:22; 32:32). 68 The distance from there to attributing the entire book to a prophet is not very far. But this was probably obvious to the rabbis as well, yet they classified Chronicles differently. Presumably, the attribution of the composition of Chronicles (as well as other books) to prophets stemmed from Josephus’s desire to characterize as accurate and credible his own retelling of his people’s history in the Antiquities, which was mostly based on all the “biblical” historical books, including Chronicles. If anyone inquired how the Chronicler knew about all the events that he described in the nonparallel texts of his work, events that took place hundreds of years prior to his own time, Josephus’s response would have been that the Chronicler not only had extraordinary sources that he cited in his book but was a prophet who derived his information from accurate divine sources. 69 Indeed, Josephus states this just prior to the statement about the number of biblical books: The prophets alone had this privilege, obtaining their knowledge of the most remote and ancient history through the inspiration which they owed to God, and committing to writing a clear account of the events of their own time just as they occurred. (Ag. Ap. 1.37–38) 70 66. On this issue, see in detail above, chap. 2, §§4–5, pp. 21–27. 67. See b. Baba Batra 14b: “Moses wrote his own book and the portion of Balaam, and Job.” 68. See also the prophets and their prophecies which are mentioned in 2 Chr 15:1– 8; 20:14–17; 24:20–22; 28:9–11. 69. It is noteworthy that: (1) the Chronicler himself attributes many of his unique sources to the historical writings of various prophets (e.g., 1 Chr 29:29; 2 Chr 9:29 [cf. 1 Kgs 11:41], 13:22 [cf. 1 Kgs 15:7], 20:34 [cf. 1 Kgs 22:46], 26:22 [cf. 2 Kgs 15:6], 32:32 [cf. 2 Kgs 20:20]); (2) interestingly, in the Middle Ages, Pseudo-Rashi and Rabbi David Kimchi expressed (probably independently) in their introductions to their commentaries on Chronicles a similar opinion—that is, Chronicles was composed by prophet(s). See in detail, chap. 12, §§7b and 10d, pp. 203, 223. 70. Josephus, The Life, Against Apion (trans. Thackeray), 178–81.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 104 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

104

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Once more, let us not forget that this view was written against a background of polemic with Gentile (Greek, Egyptian, etc.) historians who were criticized by Josephus because their historical writings were based on inaccurate sources and falsifications and because they contradicted each other and even themselves. 71 Regarding the religious value, the holiness, and the treatment of these 22 books (including Chronicles) by Jews, Josephus states as follows: We have given practical proof of our reverence for our own Scriptures. For, although such long ages have now passed, no one has ventured either to add, or to remove, 72 or to alter a syllable; and it is an instinct with every Jew, from the day of his birth, to regard them as the decrees of God, to abide by them, and, if need be, cheerfully to die for them. Time and again ere now the sight has been witnessed of prisoners enduring tortures and death in every form in the theaters, rather than utter a single word against the law and the allied documents. (Ag. Ap. 1.42–43) 73

3. Chronicles and the Jewish Hellenistic Philosopher Philo of Alexandria The Jewish Hellenistic philosopher and Bible commentator who was defined by Josephus as “a man eminent on all accounts” (Ant. 18.259), Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20 b.c.e.–50 c.e.), 74 concentrates in his biblicalphilosophical writings mostly on the Torah. From a total of about 2,050 biblical references in his writing, about 2,000 refer to the Torah and about 50 to the rest of the Hebrew Bible 75—that is, a ratio of 40:1. Out of the 50 references to the Prophets and Writings, 4 refer to Kings, and not even one refers to the book of Chronicles. Thus, I concur, without hesitation, with the conclusion of Ehud Ben Zvi: “The biblical account of the monarchic period is scarcely quoted in Philo’s work. Concerning Chronicles, there is no solid support for any of the probable quotations. It does not imply that 71. See above in this chapter, §2b, pp. 97–98. 72. Compare Deut 4:2. 73. See Josephus, The Life, Against Apion (trans. Thackeray), 179–81. Cf. Ag. Ap. 2.219 (trans. Thackeray), 380–81. 74. On Philo’s life, writings, world view, and status among Jews and Gentiles, see C. Mondésert, “Philo of Alexandria,” in The Cambridge History of Judaism, vol. 3: The Early Roman Period (ed. W. Horbury, W. D. Davies, and J. Sturdy; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 877–900; K. Schenck, A Brief Guide to Philo (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005); M. Hadas-Lebel, Philo of Alexandria: Between Judaism and Hellenism (Tel Aviv: Yediot Ahronot and Sifre Hemed, 2006 [Hebrew]). 75. See H. E. Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture (London: Macmillan, 1895); W. L. Knox, “A Note on Philo’s Use of the Old Testament,” JTS 41 (1940) 30–34; F. H. Colson, “Philo’s Quotations from the Old Testament,” JTS 41 (1940) 237–51.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 105 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

105

Philo considered the book non-Biblical, but it implies that Philo did not pay much attention to Chronicles.” 76

4. Conclusion The Septuagint presented Jewish writings (including Chronicles) first and foremost to the Jewish Hellenistic audience, which was not usually familiar with Hebrew and Aramaic. Thus it became the only accessible Jewish Scripture for the Jews of the Greco-Roman world. In the Septuagint, Chronicles was considered “history” and was placed among the historical books after the books of Kingdoms (= Samuel–Kings) but before Ezra– Nehemiah and Esther. Because of its length, the book was divided into two portions. It was considered to be “(matters) omitted/left out” of the books of Kingdoms and to be filling in what was “lacking” there. The nonparallel texts of the book had not been evaluated on their own merit, and the value of its parallel texts was totally ignored. Moreover, Chronicles as a whole was low in priority with regard to its translation, which took place much later than that of the Deuteronomistic History. Though the Septuagint was created by Jews for Jews, after its adoption by Christianity it was neglected by Judaism. Thus, the Greek translator(s)’ and editor(s)’ attitude toward Chronicles was routinely followed by the Christian translators and writers and caused further neglect of the book in the Christian world. In contrast to Philo of Alexandria, who totally ignored Chronicles, the Jewish Hellenistic historians Eupolemus and Josephus used it extensively. Eupolemus’s writing was to some extent parallel to that of the Chronicler, who concentrated on the history of Judah in the First Temple period. Although Eupolemus depended considerably on both historical works— Samuel–Kings and Chronicles—he preferred to rely mostly on the latter rather than on the former. His reliance on Chronicles does not show that Chronicles was better known than Samuel–Kings, because both works were equally known to him. However, because Chronicles was composed against a background of the complete Pentateuch, it was better suited to Eupolemus’s theology. There is also much more material on the Kingdom of Judah, on which his work concentrated, as did the Chronicler himself. Josephus used Chronicles (and Samuel–Kings) a great deal in his Jewish Antiquities. For many reasons, we should not draw conclusions about Josephus’s Bible version(s). However, it appears that he used both the MT and LXX of the books under review. He endeavored to give both histories, 76. See Ben Zvi, “The Authority of 1–2 Chronicles,” 72, and the detailed discussion on pp. 71–72.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 106 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

106

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Deuteronomistic and Chronistic, their due via maximum use of their specific materials in his work. Generally, Josephus took Kings’ more-extensive and Northern-oriented work as a basis, but he integrated it with the Chronicler’s detailed treatment of the Southern Kingdom. He used the nonparallel texts in Chronicles exhaustively as supplementary data for Samuel– Kings. His attitude toward Chronicles was in line with the attitude of the Septuagint’s translator(s) and editor(s) as well as some of the Pseudepigrapha’s authors. In his rewriting of biblical history, Josephus desired to represent the antiquity and accuracy of the ancient Israelites’ descriptions and their historical reliability—matters that were denied by some non-Jewish writers. He repeatedly blames the Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, and Phoenician historians for their frequent contradictions of each other and even themselves. In contrast, the Jews “do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time.” For these reasons, Josephus either overlooked the contradictions between the parallel texts of Chronicles and Samuel–Kings when he was using Samuel–Kings due to their antiquity and holiness, or he harmonized the two histories and created a smoothly coherent version. In some cases, he combined a story from Samuel–Kings with the parallel story in Chronicles, while in other cases he preferred the Chronicler’s accounts to those in Samuel–Kings. The importance of Josephus’s testimony to the history of the canonization of the Hebrew Bible lies in the fact that it is the first witness to a three-division closed canon, with the unique classification of the second and third divisions. His witness was midpoint between the presumed canon of the Dead Sea Scrolls’ community, on the one hand, and “the rabbinic canon,” on the other. Josephus counted 22 books, rather than 24, as in 4 Ezra and the beraita, because he classified some books differently. His numbering of the books was reflected in some later Christian writers, such as Origen and Athanasius. Because Josephus used Chronicles, Ezra–Nehemiah, and Esther extensively in his Antiquities, it is unlikely that he excluded these books from his “canon.” He probably classified Chronicles as one of the “13 books” of “history” (and “prophets”) that had been composed by the prophets. Since in his Antiquities Josephus used LXX 1–4 Kingdoms (= MT Samuel– Kings) and Chronicles, and his attitude about Chronicles was similar to the attitude of the Greek translators, presumably he also followed the sequence and order of those books in the Septuagint and situated Chronicles after Samuel–Kings but before Ezra–Nehemiah and Esther. Josephus discussed the authorship of the historical books, including Chronicles, and ascribed their composition to prophets, in contrast to the

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 107 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

The Septuagint, Judeo-Hellenistic Historians, and Philo

107

beraita that ascribed Chronicles to the scribes Ezra and Nehemiah. This attribution of the authorship of Chronicles and other historical books to prophets stems from Josephus’s desire to characterize as accurate and credible his own history in the Antiquities, which was mostly based on the biblical historical books: “the prophets alone had this privilege, obtaining their knowledge of the most remote and ancient history.” This desire should be viewed against the background of Josephus’s polemic with Gentile historians, whom he accused of having historical writings that were based on inaccurate sources, and of being guilty of falsifications and contradictions. His aims were also prompted by counteraccusations of pagan historians against him. Philo of Alexandria, on the other hand, concentrated mostly on the Torah in his biblical-philosophical writings. He referred four times to Kings, but not once did he refer to Chronicles. Because the history of the monarchic period was outside Philo’s purview, he had no need to pay attention to Chronicles.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 108 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 111 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 6

Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza 1. A Fragment of Chronicles: 4QChr (= 4Q118) a. 4QChr (= 4Q118) and the Place of Chronicles in the Qumran Community From the book of Esther, not even a small fragment has been preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1 but the book of Chronicles is represented in the biblical manuscripts of Qumran by one tiny fragment: a three-inch strip of leather that was found in Cave 4 and designated 4QChr (= 4Q118; see fig. 1). 2 The fragment was dated by means of paleography to ca. 50–25 b.c.e.—that is, to the late Hasmonean or early Herodian era. Only five or six lines of two columns were preserved on this fragment: that is, 2 Chr 28:27; 29:1–3. Unfortunately, the fragment was severely damaged, and of the 4 extant verses, only several complete words remain! 3 This means that, of the entire book of Chronicles, one of the largest books of the Hebrew Bible (with 65 chapters and 1,765 verses), less than 4 verses were found among about 800 manuscripts (of which, only 200 are biblical manuscripts) from the 11 caves of Qumran! To put this strange situation in 1. No remains from Nehemiah were found among the Qumran biblical scrolls. Probably, it was considered in ancient times to be part of Ezra, of which several fragments were found. On all these issues, see in detail Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” 101–6. 2. Here I refer only to the manuscript that is a remnant of the book of Chronicles proper. Thus, the similarity of some Masoretic texts of Chronicles with 4QSama (for instance, 1 Chr 21:16 with 4QSama at 2 Sam 24:16; see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 245–46) is beyond the scope of this study. 3. See F. M. Cross, “A Report on the Biblical Fragments of Cave Four in Wâdi-Qumran,” BASOR 141 (1956) 9–13, esp. p. 11; idem, The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1958) 31–32 (repr., 3rd ed.; Biblical Seminar 30; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995) 41–42; J. Trebolle Barrera, “Édition préliminaire de 4QChroniques,” RevQ 15 (1991–92) 523–29; E. C. Ulrich, “An Index of the Passages in the Biblical Manuscripts from the Judean Desert (Part 2: Isaiah– Chronicles),” DSD 2 (1995) 86–107, esp. p. 107.

111

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 112 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

112

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Fig. 1. The Manuscript of 2 Chr 28:27; 29:1–3 from Qumran Cave 4 (4QChr = 4Q118).

perspective, I should note that from the same literary genre (historiography) there were many large fragments of other biblical books. For example, the book of Samuel, which is shorter than Chronicles (55 chapters, 1,506 verses), survives in several long manuscripts (1QSam, 4QSama, 4QSamb, 4QSamc) of numerous verses. 4 The book of Kings, which is also much shorter than Chronicles (1,534 verses in 47 chapters), appears in 3 manuscripts (4QKgs, 5QKgs, pap6QKgs) of many verses. 5 Although (except for the Torah) we do not have much information about the exact order and hierarchy of the other biblical books in use by the Qumran community, compared with other books in the category later called Ketubim, Chronicles apparently was much less popular. For instance, from another late historical book, Ezra (MT Ezra–Nehemiah), which is also part of the Ketubim, 3 fragments have been found that contain 14 verses (Ezra 4:2– 6:9–11; 5:17; 6:1–5). 6 From the book of Ruth (85 verses), 6 fragments survived with 48 verses altogether (some of them duplicates) from all 4 chapters of the book (Ruth 1:1–12; 1:6, 12–15; 2:13–23; 3:1–8, 13–18; 4:3–4). 4. For an index of the passages from the book of Samuel, see E. C. Ulrich, “An Index of the Passages in the Biblical Manuscripts from the Judean Desert (Part 1: Genesis– Kings),” DSD 1 (1994) 127–29. 5. For an index of the passages from the book of Kings, see ibid., 129. 6. On the absence of Nehemiah from the Dead Sea Scrolls, see Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” 101 n. 1.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 113 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza

113

In the case of Psalms, the most popular book in the Qumran community, 39 manuscripts with thousands of verses were found 7 (and note also Psalm 151, which exists only in Qumran and in the Septuagint, as well as some other psalms that appear in the Syriac tradition as well). Of course, Chronicles also “lags far behind” in comparison with the pentateuchal books, such as Deuteronomy with 27 remnants of copies, Genesis with remnants of 17–20 copies, and Exodus with 16 copies. The situation is similar if we compare the single tiny remnant of Chronicles with the prophetic books, such as the book of Isaiah with remnants of 21 copies. 8 Furthermore, the book of Chronicles was not a subject of pesher (commentary) in the community of Qumran, as were Psalms and prophetic books such as Isaiah, of which remnants of three pesharim were found, as well as pesharim on Hosea, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. 9 On the basis of these data, we may conclude that the book of Chronicles was used by the Qumran community less than the majority of the biblical books and clearly much less than the parallel books of Samuel and Kings. Chronicles was even much less popular than some extrabiblical books, such as Jubilees, from which 14–15 manuscripts have been found. 10 In other words, the situation is not a matter of chance 11 but of reality. Because the book was not considered attractive, imperative, or authoritative from literary and theological points of view, it was appreciated and studied less and therefore also copied less, and little of it remains. Obviously, this conclusion contrasts with the extensive use of Chronicles by the Jewish Hellenistic historians, who worked roughly around the time that the Qumran biblical manuscripts were written. What caused the book of Chronicles to become so unpopular in the Qumran community? It seems that there are a few reasons in addition to the “conventional” reasons for Chronicles’ being neglected: 12 (1) The Qumran community did not tolerate intermarriage between 7. P. W. Flint, The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 17; Leiden: Brill, 1997). See also Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” 101–2. 8. For the information about the number of biblical manuscripts at Qumran, see also E. Tov, “The Biblical Scrolls from the Dead Sea Desert,” Qadmoniot 30 (1997) 75– 76 [Hebrew]. 9. For more details, see Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” 102 n. 7. 10. See ibid., 104 and references to earlier secondary literature there. 11. Contra Tov, “The Biblical Scrolls from the Dead Sea Desert,” 75. Tov is of the opinion that it is only circumstantial that little remains from the book of Chronicles at Qumran. 12. See in detail above, chap. 1, §1, pp. 1–3.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 114 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

114

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Jews and non-Jews. 13 Now, compared with earlier historical books and certainly with Ezra–Nehemiah, the Chronicler had a relatively liberal attitude on this issue. He did not refrain from clearly mentioning the Canaanite wife of Judah (1 Chr 2:3), 14 and the aunt of David was married to “Jether the Ishmaelite” (1 Chr 2:17; cf. 2 Sam 17:25: “Ithra the Israelite”). 15 Moreover, it is worth mentioning that in 2 Chr 24:26 the author wrote: “and these are they who conspired against him; Zabad the son of Shimeath, an Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shimrith a Moabitess,” in place of simply “Jozacar the son of Shimeath and Jehozabad the son of Shomer” in the parallel text of 2 Kgs 12:23. 16 (2) The strong bias of Chronicles toward Jerusalem and its Temple, 17 “from which the Qumran community had removed itself,” 18 could also have cause the members of the Qumranic sect (the Essenes) to avoid the book of Chronicles.

b. Textual Conclusion Based on Fragment 4QChr (= 4Q118) Julio Trebolle Barrera draws the following conclusion with regard to 4QChr (= 4Q118): The reading vetaºaleni (‘raise me’) in column I, 1. 3 does not have any counterpart in the Masoretic Text of Chronicles and Kings nor in the presumed original of Septuagint Chronicles.19 It suggests a psalmodic context (cf. Ps 71:20; 102:25), raising the possibility that 4QChronicles is rather a historiographic work parallel to Chronicles that contains a prayer or psalm; also the Paraphrase of Kings et al. (4Q382) seems to intercalate prayers and prophecies (A. Rofé, private communication).20 13. See in detail Kalimi, “The Book of Esther and the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Community,” 101–6. 14. Though this information is reported in Gen 38:2. 15. The Chronicler probably reproduced the original version, which the text of 2 Sam 17:25 changed—in some stage of transformation—to “Israelite” in order to preserve the “purity” of the ancestry of Amasa and Joab. 16. See in detail Kalimi, “The Date of the Book of Chronicles,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 41–65. 17. See I. Kalimi, “Jerusalem—The Divine City: The Representation of Jerusalem in Chronicles Compared with Earlier and Later Jewish Compositions,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 125–41. 18. For this argument, see M. Abegg Jr., P. W. Flint, and E. Ulrich, Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible Translated for the First Time in English (San Francisco: Harper, 1999) 632–33, esp. p. 632. 19. Cf. Trebolle Barrera, “Édition préliminaire de 4QChroniques,” 523–29. 20. See idem, “Chronicles, First and Second Books of,” in Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. L. H. Schiffman and J. C. VanderKam; 2 vols.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 1.129.

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 115 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza

115

However, this conclusion seems to be an example of “too much depending on too little,” in fact, on only one word! Although the word ynl[tw at the beginning of the passage is puzzling, it is hard to say what exactly it indicates. Perhaps it represents a slightly different version of the text than the MT version of Chronicles. 21

2. The Use of Chronicles in the Qumran Manuscripts There is no way to tell whether the above-mentioned fragment from Qumran (4Q118) is a piece of the book of Chronicles itself or only a quotation of the book in another writing. 22 However, there were some Qumran authors who most likely were referring to the book of Chronicles, as revealed by a number of fragments. In addition, I will examine some scholars’ assumptions about other fragments in the paragraphs below.

a. Pseudo-Jubileesa (4Q225) In Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 13, three fragments that have a narrative similar to the Abrahamic section of the book of Jubilees (4Q225, 4Q226, and 4Q227) were published and named Pseudo-Jubilees by J. C. VanderKam and J. T. Milik. 23 In 4Q225 (Pseudo-Jubileesa; paleographically dated to ca. 30 b.c.e.–20 c.e.), I 13, the editors read: [hyrwm r]h la twrabh ˆm [˚]l[yw μw]qyw . . . And he ro[se up and we]n[t] from the wells24 to Mo[unt Moriah].

21. With regard to the texts describing the building of the Solomonic Temple in 2 Chronicles 3–4, Georg Steins suggests that, in addition to 1 Kings 6–8, the Chronicler knew a text akin to the Temple Scroll (11QT [11Q19] cols. V–VII). He compares 2 Chr 3:8–14 with 11QT VI 6; VII 10, 13, where he finds words in common; see G. Steins, Die Chronik als kanonisches Abschlussphänomen: Studien zur Entstehung und Theologie von 1/2 Chronik (Bonner Biblische Beiträge 93; Weinheim: Athenäum, 1995) 393–94. This suggestion, however, is problematic and speculative. Steins is attempting to support his (unacceptable) presupposition of a late date for the composition of the book of Chronicles (for detailed discussion of the latter issue, see I. Kalimi, “The Date of the Book of Chronicles,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 46–52). Steins does not even consider the possibility that the case could be (and in my opinion, actually is) just the opposite of what he suggests; that is, the author of the Temple Scroll (end of 2nd—beginning of the 1st century b.c.e.) used the earlier text of Chronicles as well as Kings and other biblical sources. 22. Contra Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich (Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, 632), who assume that the fragment under discussion is just a quotation from Chronicles. 23. See J. C. VanderKam and J. T. Milik, “4QPseudo-Jubileesa,” in Qumran Cave 4— VIII (DJD 13; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994) 141–55, esp. pp. 146–47. 24. “The wells,” that is, Beer-sheba, which according to Gen 21:33; 22:19 was where Abraham was residing then. The author probably interpreted “Beer-sheba” as “seven

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 116 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

116

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

In the light of 2 Chr 3:1, which names the Jerusalem Temple Mount “Mount Moriah,” the reconstruction [hyrwm r]h ‘Mo[unt Moriah]’ in line 13 is reasonable. 25 The identification of “on one of the mountains that I will point out to you” (Gen 22:2) by the writer of 4Q225 as Mount Moriah appears to be in continuity with the Chronicler’s interpretive line of thought as well as that of the author of Jub. 18:13b. 26

b. Text of 4Q252 A phrase from the prayer of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, in 2 Chr 20:7 (an “addition”), “Are you not our God, who drove out the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel, and gave it to the seed of Abraham, your friend (˚bha μhrba) for ever?” is alluded to in 4Q252 (II 7–8), where the “tents of Shem” (Gen 9:27a) are recognized as the land given ‘to Abraham, his friend’ (wbha μhrbal): wbha μhrbal ˆtn ≈ra ˆwkçy μç ylhabw jwn ynb ta la ˚rb yk because God blessed the sons of Noah [Gen 9:1] and in the tents of Shem may He dwell [Gen 9:27a]; a land He gave to Abraham, his friend [2 Chr 20:7]. 27

c. Prayer of Manasseh (4Q381, frg. 33:8–11) We have already discussed the Prayer of Manasseh, which fills in the gap in the story related only in Chronicles (2 Chr 33:12–13, 19, an “addition” to 2 Kgs 21:16, 17) and was found among the noncanonical psalms at Qumran (4QapPsb = 4Q381, frg. 33:8–11). 28 d. Text of 4Q504 4Q504 IV 2–3, μç h[kmç] twyhl ≈rah lwkm hb htr[jb rça ry[h μyl]çwryb μlw[l ‘in Jerus[alem the city that you cho]se it from entire land for [your

wells.” Compare VanderKam and Milik, Qumran Cave 4—VIII, 149; G. Vermes, “New Light on the Sacrifice of Isaac,” JJS 47 (1996) 140–46, esp. p. 142 n. 8. 25. For detailed discussion on this fragment, see also ibid., 140–46. 26. The Chronicles and Jubilees passages are probably a covert response to the Samaritans’ identification of the site of the Aqedah with Mount Gerizim; see I. Kalimi, “The Affiliation of Abraham and the Aqedah with Zion/Gerizim in Jewish and Samaritan Sources,” Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy, 33–58. 27. G. Brooke, “4QCommentary on Genesis A, Genesis B, and Malachi,” in Qumran Cave 4—XVII: Parabiblical Texts, Part 3 (ed. G. Brooke et al.; DJD 22; Oxford: Clarendon, 1996) 185–207, esp. pp. 198–200. 28. See above, chap. 4, §1c, p. 77.

spread is 12 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 117 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza

117

nam]e to be there for ever’, could be based either on 1 Kgs 8:16–17 or on the parallel text in 2 Chr 6:34. 29

e. Joshua Cycles (4Q522) In 1992, Émile Puech published a Hebrew fragment from Qumran Cave 4, the so-called “Joshua Cycles” (4Q522). 30 Among other things, the fragment describes David’s preparations for the Temple construction: “gold and silver [and copper prepared], cedars and cypress brought [from] Lebanon to build it; and his youngest son [will build it and Zadok] will serve there” (frg. 9 ii 5–7). Because David’s preparations for building the Temple are mentioned only in Chronicles (1 Chr 22:2–6, 14–16; 29:2– 5; 2 Chr 2:6), it is obvious that the author of the Qumran composition depended on the story in Chronicles. Furthermore, several expressions in this fragment are similar to expressions in Chronicles, for example: 1. the expression “to build a house for the Lord, the God of Israel” appears in the preparations for the building of the Temple in 1 Chr 22:6: “then he [David] called for Solomon his son and charged him to build a house for the Lord, the God of Israel”; 31

29. For the text, see M. Baillet, Qumran Grotte 4—III (4Q482–4Q520) (DJD 7; Oxford: Clarendon, 1982) 143. There is textual corruption (homoioteleuton) in MT 1 Kgs 8:16– 17; see Kalimi, “Jerusalem—The Divine City,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 127–29. On 4QEschatological Hymn, from Hasmonean times, text 457b II 2: ] byçhl dywd jmç ‘David rejoiced to bring back [’, see E. Chazon, “457a. 4QCreation?; 457b. 4QEschatological Hymn,” in Qumran Cave 4—XX: Political and Liturgical Texts, Part 2 (DJD 29; Oxford: Clarendon, 1999) 416 (the text and translation), and the note on the line, pp. 417–18. 30. See É. Puech, “La pierre de Sion et l’autel des holocaustes d’après un manuscrit hébreu de la grotte 4 (4Q522),” RB 99 (1992) 676–96. The fragment was republished with different readings by E. Qimron, “Concerning ‘Joshua Cycles’ from Qumran,” Tarbiz 63 (1994) 503–8 [Hebrew]; E. Tov, “The Rewritten Book of Joshua as Found at Qumran and Masada,” in Biblical Perspectives: Early Use and Interpretation of the Bible in the Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. M. E. Stone and E. G. Chazon; Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 28; Leiden: Brill, 1998) 233–56; É. Puech, “522. 4QProphétie de Josué (4QapocrJosué c?),” Qumrân Grotte 4—XVIII: Textes Hébreux (4Q521–4Q528, 4Q576–4Q579) (DJD 25; Oxford: Clarendon, 1998) 39–74, esp. pp. 55–62; D. Dimant, “The Apocryphon of Joshua—4Q522 9 ii: A Reappraisal,” in Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (ed. S. Paul et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2003) 179–204. 31. Compare also 2 Chr 3:1 (an “addition” to 1 Kgs 6:1): “Then Solomon began to build the house of the Lord in Jerusalem.” In 1 Kgs 5:17, 19, we read, “to build a house for the name of the Lord his/my God”; see also 1 Kgs 8:17 // 2 Chr 6:7; cf. Puech, “La pierre de Sion,” 681.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 118 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

118

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

2. line 6 states, “cedars and cypress he brought from Lebanon to build it,” similar to 1 Chr 22:4: “and cedar timbers without number, for the Sidonians and Tyrians brought great quantities of cedar to David”; 3. compare “and his young son” in the fragment with 1 Chr 22:5: “For David said, ‘Solomon my son is young and inexperienced.’ ”

f. 1QS (Rule of the Community) (1) 1QS V 1–VI 23 A. Fitzgerald shows that the author of 1QS borrowed vocabulary from 1 Chr 29:1–22. Because the Essenes of the Qumran community referred to its members as mtndbym, he suggests quite convincingly that the latter text “was on the minds of the Qumraners when they verbalized their understanding of themselves.” 32 (2) 1QS IX 5–6 1 Chr 23:13 states: awh μyçdq çdq wçydqhl ˆrha ldbyw hçmw ˆrha μrm[ ynb μlw[ d[ wynbw ‘The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses; and Aaron was set apart, that he should sanctify the most holy things, he and his sons forever’. Several scholars are of the opinion that the Essenes may have “understood this verse as saying ‘Aaron was set apart to be hallowed, he and his sons for ever as most holy.’ They may have deduced from it that priests should be separated from the Israelites.” Accordingly, 1QS IX 5–6 states: djy tybw μyçdwq çdwq djyhl ˆwrhal çdwq tyb djyh yçna wlydby hayhh t[b ˚rd μymtb μyklwhh larçyl At that time the men of the community shall separate themselves as a house of holiness (consisting) of Aaron to participate (with the community) as most holy, and a house of community (consisting) of Israelites who walk in integrity. 33

3. “Prayer” of Hezekiah and Isaiah (4Q448) In the story about the Assyrian crisis in Judah in 701 b.c.e., the Chronicler informs us that Hezekiah and Isaiah prayed to the Lord (2 Chr 32:20, an “addition”). However, for the reason that I have detailed elsewhere, the author does not mention the content of the prayer; rather, he just al32. See A. Fitzgerald, “MTNDBYM in 1QS,” CBQ 36 (1974) 495–502, esp. pp. 498– 99. Cf. C. A. Newsom, The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 52; Leiden: Brill, 2004) 114–15. 33. See Qimron and Strugnell, Qumran Cave 4: Miqßat Maºa¶ê haTorah, 173, and there (n. 190), references to previous scholars. See also R. A. Kugler, “Rewriting Rubrics: Sacrifice and Religion of Qumran,” in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. J. J. Collins and R. A. Kugler; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 90–112, esp. p. 111 n. 60.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 119 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza

119

ludes to the prayer of Hezekiah that is recounted in 2 Kgs 19:15–19 (// Isa 37:15–20). 34 Nevertheless, H. Eshel believes that frg. 4Q448 from Qumran was composed by an anonymous scribe in the Second Temple period and attributed to Hezekiah and Isaiah on the basis of 2 Chr 32:20: 35 [wq[zyw byrj]n˝sm warywM [wtrapt w[]ymçh μybr [lhqb μyhla wrap lwdg lwqb] [ˆwyl[ rapl] μymy˝mÏtlw [μktwçpn μybwfl wrbj] [lwmjt μybwf l[ hwhy yny[ hnh] [μçpn lyxy h[r t[m wdsj ldg]y˝ wyrapm l[w [μy[çr dym μymymt lyxmw] μÏyrx dym yn[ [lawg] [μylçwryb jxnl rjw]bÏ ˆwyxb wnkçm hwa]

A brief glance at the manuscript shows two clear facts: 1. Unfortunately, not much of the original text was preserved: all in all, 10 complete, scattered words and some letters, the readings of which (both words and letters) are not certain. 2. The fragment was mostly reconstructed and filled in (altogether, 45 words) by Eshel himself. In the light of these facts, therefore, it is quite speculative to conclude that this is a “prayer” and then attribute it to Hezekiah and Isaiah, who are not mentioned in the heading or anywhere else in the fragment. Furthermore, the uncertainty about the fragment 36 is reflected in the completely different explanation for 4Q448 suggested by other scholars. Thus, for instance, Hartmut Stegemann is of the opinion that 4Q448 is part of a “congratulatory text” that was prepared for King Alexander Yannai ( Jannaeus or Jonathan; died 76 b.c.e.) but in fact was never sent. 37

4. Chronicles and the Cairo Geniza Fragments from almost all books of the Hebrew Bible were found in the Cairo Geniza, 38 amounting to about 200,000 fragments from a time 34. See, in detail, Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 27–29, 205–7; idem, The Book of Chronicles: Historical Writing and Literary Devices, 32–34, 202–4. 35. See H. Eshel, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hasmonean State ( Jerusalem: Yad BenZvi, 2004) 102–4 [Hebrew]. 36. Therefore, I avoid presenting any translation of it! 37. See H. Stegemann, The Library of Qumran: On the Essenes, Qumran, John the Baptist, and Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 133–34. 38. A geniza is a storage room, a depository for worn-out texts, generally kept in a synagogue, because according to Jewish law, material with sacred writing on it cannot be discarded.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 120 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

120

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

span of several centuries. A number of decades ago, Shelomo Dov Goitein (1900–1985) characterized the biblical fragments from the Cairo Geniza as follows: Fragments of the Prophets and Writings (except the book of Chronicles [italics mine]) found in the Geniza were no fewer than those of the Torah. Fragments of Psalms and the Five Megilloth are reasonably prominent. There are a considerable number of fragments of the Former Prophets; likewise, the Latter Prophets. 39

Fragments of Targum Chronicles, Pseudo-Rashi’s commentary on Chronicles, the commentary by Rabbi Judah ibn Balºam on 2 Chr 8:16–34:6, and a fragment of Rabbi Jonah ibn Jana˙’s commentary on 1 Chr 28:19–29:11 were also found in the Cairo Geniza. 40 It seems, therefore, that Chronicles was studied and used for educational purposes in the old Ben Ezra Synagogue (erected in 882 c.e.) 41 of Fostat-Cairo’s Jewish community, though not very often and less than many other Hebrew Scriptures. In contrast, other books in the Writings, the Former Prophets, the Latter Prophets and, of course, the Pentateuch were used and studied a great deal. Generally speaking, in the society reflected by the Cairo Geniza, the study of the Hebrew Bible, “together with its commentaries, its translations into Aramaic and Arabic (which also served as commentaries), its homiletic expositions, and the special treatises to which it was devoted— were the most important constituents of the general curriculum of an educated man.” 42

39. See S. D. Goitein, Jewish Education in Muslim Countries Based on Records from the Cairo Geniza (Studies and Texts; Jerusalem: Sivan, 1962) 53 [Hebrew]. 40. See also S. C. Reif, Hebrew Manuscripts at Cambridge University Library: A Description and Introduction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) 47–117 (a list of biblical texts) esp. p. 70; M. Perez, “The Commentary of R. Jehuda Ibn Balºam to 2 Chronicles 8:16–34:6,” HUCA 63 (1992) 1–17 (Hebrew section); idem, “A Vestige of Rabbi Jonah ibn Jana˙’s Commentary on the Book of Chronicles,” Tarbiz 58 (1989) 283–88 [Hebrew]. A “Tafsir (i.e., commentary) of Chronicles” is mentioned in a list of books from the Cairo Geniza (no. 27a, lines 12–13). For the commentary identified by Sokolov as that of Rabbi Judah ibn Balºam (“because it is the only commentary of Chronicles from Cairo Geniza”), see M. Sokolov, “Four Book-Lists from Cairo Geniza,” Sefunot 6 (1993) 257–312, esp. pp. 266–67, 299 [Hebrew]. However, fragments of other commentaries on Chronicles have been found in the Cairo Geniza, as mentioned above, so there is no certainty regarding this identification by Sokolov. 41. However, see below, chap. 8, n. 7, p. 137. 42. See S. D. Goitein, A Mediterranean Society (rev. and ed. J. Lassner; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999) 272–73, esp. p. 273; see also pp. 262–63.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 121 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

subhead drop Chronicles, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Cairo Geniza

121

5. Conclusion The book of Chronicles, one of the largest books of the Hebrew Bible, is represented among the bulk of about 800 manuscripts from Qumran by one tiny fragment, 4QChr (= 4Q118; ca. 50–25 b.c.e.). The fragment probably preserves a slightly different version of 2 Chr 28:27; 29:1–3. It was severely damaged, and in the four verses extant, there are only several words that remain intact. In contrast, from Samuel and Kings, each of which is shorter than Chronicles, several long manuscripts of numerous verses remain. Chronicles also “lags far behind” any other book in the Writings except Esther. It was not the subject of a pesher, as were Psalms and many prophetic books. Thus, apparently Chronicles was used in the Qumran community less than the majority of biblical books and clearly much less than other parallel historical books or even the extrabiblical books, such as Jubilees. This situation is not just an accident of chance; because the book was considered unattractive, unessential, and nonauthoritative, it was studied much less and therefore also copied less, and thus little remains. In addition to the general reasons for Chronicles’ being one of the neglected Scriptures, the intolerance of the Qumran community toward intermarriage also probably caused them to stay away from Chronicles, which tolerates some intermarriage. Another reason that the Essenes may have refrained from studying Chronicles is its strong bias toward Jerusalem and the Temple, from which the community had distanced itself. Noticeably, this is in contrast to the extensive use of Chronicles by the Jewish Hellenistic historians. Conclusions about text-type that have been drawn on the basis of the tiny Chronicles fragment under review should be considered “too much depending on too little.” It is hard to know if 4Q118 is part of the manuscript of Chronicles itself or only a quotation of it in a manuscript that was discussing another issue. Nevertheless, there were some Qumran authors who were most likely referring to Chronicles, as we know from several fragments: (a) 4Q225 (Pseudo-Jubilees a; ca. 30 b.c.e. to 20 c.e.), “And he ro[se up and we]n[t] from the wells to Mo[unt Moriah],” reflects 2 Chr 3:1, which calls the Jerusalem Temple Mount “Mount Moriah.” The identification of “on one of the mountains that I will point out to you” in Gen 22:2 by the author of 4Q225 as “Mount Moriah” sounds similar to the interpretive line taken by the Chronicler as well as the author of Jub. 18:13b. (b) A phrase from Jehoshaphat’s prayer in 2 Chr 20:7 is hinted at in 4Q252. (c) The Prayer of Manasseh that fills in the gap in the story of 2 Chr 33:12–13, 19 was found among the noncanonical psalms of Qumran (4QapPsb = 4Q381, frg. 33:8– 11). (d) 4Q504 IV 2–3: “in Jerus[alem the city that you cho]se it from entire land for [your nam]e to be there for ever” could be based either on

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 122 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

122

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

1 Kgs 8:16–17 or on the parallel text of 2 Chr 6:34. (e) The so-called Joshua Cycles (4Q522) described, among other things, David’s preparations for the Temple construction. Because David’s preparations for building the Temple are mentioned only in 1 Chr 22:2–6, 14–16; 29:2–5; 2 Chr 2:6, it is obvious that the author of this Qumran composition depended on the story of Chronicles. Several expressions in the fragment under discussion are very similar to Chronicles. (f) The author of 1QS (The Rule of the Community) borrowed vocabulary from 1 Chr 29:1–22. The background of 1QS is that the Essenes probably understood 1 Chr 23:13 as saying, “Aaron was set apart to be hallowed, he and his sons for ever as most holy,” and they may have deduced from this that priests should be separated from the Israelites. The assumption regarding frg. 4Q448 that it was composed by an anonymous scribe in the Second Temple era and ascribed to Hezekiah and Isaiah on the basis of 2 Chr 32:20 is invalid in light of the fact that there is not much of the original Qumran text that remains (10 complete, scattered words and some letters, the readings of which are uncertain). Moreover, Eshel’s reconstruction by filling in 45 words is very speculative. The ambiguous nature of the fragment is also revealed by the fact that a completely different restoration is suggested by other scholars. Fragments from almost all the books of the Hebrew Bible were found in the Cairo Geniza, from a time spanning many centuries. Fragments of Targum Chronicles, Pseudo-Rashi’s commentary on Chronicles, the commentary of Rabbi Judah ibn Balºam, and a fragment of Rabbi Jonah ibn Jana˙’s commentary were found in the Geniza; thus, it appears that Chronicles was used for educational purposes in Cairo’s Jewish community, though perhaps less than other Hebrew Scriptures.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 123 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 7

Chronicles at Dura-Europos and in the Cognate Arts 1. The Number of Jesse’s Sons according to Samuel and Chronicles In 1 Samuel 16–17 two traditions are recorded regarding the number of sons of Jesse. According to the earlier tradition, Jesse had four sons: Eliab, Abinadab, Shammah, and David (1 Sam 16:6–9, 11–13; 17:13–14); whereas according to the later tradition, Jesse had double that number— eight sons: the four whose names appear in the text and four additional sons whom the text leaves anonymous (1 Sam 16:10–11; 17:12). 1 However, neither one of these traditions about the sons of Jesse is presented in the Chronicler’s writings. He created an alternative list, in which he set the number of Jesse’s sons at seven: Jesse begot his first-born Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimea the third, Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the seventh. (1 Chr 2:13–15) 2

It seems to me that listing seven sons for Jesse and formulating them according to the numerical pattern “six–seven” (that is, the six older sons of Jesse were disqualified from the kingdom, while David, who was the youngest son and the seventh, was elected to succeed Saul) was not done 1. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 365–68, and detailed discussion there. For a discussion of MT and LXX 1 Samuel 17 (vv. 12–31 are lacking in Codex Vaticanus and are signed with an asterisk in some manuscripts of the MT), see McCarter, I Samuel, 299–309; D. Barthélemy et al., The Story of David and Goliath: Textual and Literary Criticism (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 73; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). 2. The names Eliab, Abinadab, Shimea, and David appear in 1 Sam 16:6–9; 17:13, while the names Nethanel, Raddai, and Ozem were created by the Chronicler himself; see in detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 75–76, 365–66. In 1 Chr 27:18 David’s brother Elihu is mentioned. However, it should probably be read Eliab, as in the Greek version. In the Peshi†ta the name Elihu is inserted into 1 Chr 2:13–15 in order to harmonize 1 Chr 2:13–15 and 1 Sam 16:10–11; 17:12—that is, in both books Jesse has eight sons.

123

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 124 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

124

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

accidentally, as some scholars assume. 3 The Chronicler probably ascribed special importance to the perfect, mystical number seven. 4

2. Dura-Europos Synagogue and Its Fresco: Samuel Anointing David The Hellenistic city of Dura-Europos, which is located on the upper west bank of the Euphrates River (contemporary a-Salichiyeh, at the northeast edge of the Syrian Desert), was uncovered accidentally by British forces during the First World War. In the course of the archaeological excavations of 1932–33, the ancient synagogues of the city were discovered: an earlier, smaller synagogue; and a later, larger synagogue built above it, which according to an Aramaic inscription was completed in 244–245 c.e. The synagogue was destroyed by the Sassanid Persians along with the entire city around 256 c.e. The walls of the second synagogue were covered with a variety of precious colorful paintings, portraying especially biblical scenes. Some of the themes of the scenes are taken from the prophetic stories in Ezekiel, but most are from the historical books of the Pentateuch (patriarchs, Moses), Former Prophets ( Joshua, Samuel, David, Solomon, and Elijah), Ezra, and Esther. Although this is to be expected, it is reasonable to anticipate that, among the 58 paintings of episodes and persons depicted on the synagogue’s walls, at least one or two scenes would be found that were derived from stories that appear only in Chronicles. However, there is not even 3. So, for instance, Y. Zakovitch, The Pattern of the Numerical Sequence Three–Four in the Bible (Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1978) 49 [Hebrew]. See in detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 365–68. 4. On the role of number seven in the Hebrew Bible, see Ibn Ezra’s commentary on Lev 26:18. For detailed discussion on the issue, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 367–68. Several Jewish as well as Christian medieval commentators attempted to harmonize the contradictory writings of Chronicles and Samuel. For example, the commentary ascribed to Rashi expounds on the notion that the Chronicler stopped counting before the eighth son of Jesse, Elijah, because when he reached David, “he had already found the pearl!” In other words, after mentioning the most important person, he saw no need to list another name (compare Genesis Rabbah 39:13; Ruth Rabbah 8:3; Tan˙uma [Buber], Wayyesheb 1). Kimchi was of the opinion that Jesse had a second wife by whom he had a son. Thus, the Chronicler mentioned only David’s brothers by his own mother, while in Samuel all of Jesse’s sons were taken into account, including David’s step-brother. A similar observation was made by a midrash that was preserved in the 9th-century Christian source Pseudo-Jerome (for details, see below). All in all, the contradiction between Chronicles and Samuel about the number of David’s brothers has been a cause for imaginative interpretation among Jews and Christians— stories that have hardly any basis in the biblical text.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 125 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles at Dura-Europos and in the Cognate Arts

125

one fresco taken directly from Chronicles. Let us not forget that the unparalleled passages (the “additions”) in Chronicles constitute approximately half the composition, that is, ca. 32–33 chapters (three times larger than the whole book of Esther), and the stories are no less significant or appealing than other stories, such as Esther. There are, for example, the account of the divine response to Solomon’s prayer (2 Chr 7:1–3); Abijah’s victory over Jeroboam (2 Chr 13:3–22); Jehoshaphat’s victory over the Moabites and Ammonites (2 Chronicles 20); and many other stories that are not mentioned previously either in biblical or nonbiblical sources, but they are not represented in Dura-Europos frescoes. Thus, one may conclude that Chronicles did not play a special role in the life and thought of the Jewish community in Dura-Europos. Nevertheless, it seems that one morsel of Chronicles’ literary heritage did influence the synagogue’s paintings and also shaped the historical view of its audience. Among the frescoes on the west wall of the synagogue, above the benches and on the right side of the niche (most likely, the Torah shrine), appears Samuel anointing David in the presence of his brothers. 5 The fresco illustrates the final act of the prophet Samuel, the anointing of David as successor to the rejected King Saul (1 Sam 16:13), 6 and also portrays the story of the election as detailed in 1 Sam 16:1–12. The fresco (remarkably, preserved in top condition) represents Samuel in a white pallium (i.e., a square woolen robe generally worn by Hellenic men), pouring oil from a dark brown horn onto the head of David. Although most of Dura’s frescoes lack written explanation, the fresco under discussion has a caption: 7 to the left of Samuel’s head and above his shoulder appears an Aramaic inscription of two lines, which reads: dyw[d] jçmdk [l]wmç Samuel When He Anointed David8 5. Regarding the issue of ancient synagogues with figurative paintings and the 2nd commandment of the Decalogue (Exod 20:4//Deut 5:8), see J. Gutmann, “The DuraEuropos Synagogue Paintings: The State of Research,” in The Synagogue in Late Antiquity (ed. L. I. Levine; Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1987) 61– 72, esp. pp. 65–66. 6. Indeed, this point is specifically noted in the Aramaic inscription on the fresco; see below. 7. A question all its own is what precisely were the criteria for adding a short inscription to a fresco? 8. See C. H. Kraeling, The Synagogue (The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Final Report 8/1; New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1956) 272, fig. 87, inscription no. 11. Sukenik suggested reading: ‘Samuel Son of Hannah Anoints David’; see E. L. Sukenik, The Synagogue of Dura-Europos and Its Frescoes ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1947) 104 [Hebrew]. Nevertheless, the space available for the entire inscription does not permit

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 126 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

126

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

In addition to the prophet at the left of the fresco, who is also distinguished by being the largest figure, there are seven portraits: six of David’s brothers and David himself, the seventh. In order to emphasize this view, the painter presented all the brothers as overlapping each other and standing behind David, who is equal to them in size but visible in his entirety. Furthermore, although the six young men behind are dressed in white or a light-colored pallia, the seventh in front is wearing a purple pallium, which symbolizes his forthcoming royal authority. 9 The six brothers are represented with right hands raised, presumably in honor of their youngest brother (acclamatio). David’s hands are covered by his pallium. 10 Thus, at first glance one can see the uniqueness of David among Jesse’s sons and his election from among them. 11 Apparently the artist/painter was not acting simply as an illustrator of biblical scenes; rather, he was interpreting the biblical texts and selected one of the different traditions: 1. The artist interpreted the verse wyja brqb wta jçmyw (1 Sam 16:13b) correctly as ‘and anointed him in the midst of his brothers’ by picturing David’s anointing with all his brothers nearby. However, at the same time David is depicted as the one who was elected out of all the brothers; that is, the painter correctly understood the word brqb

the insertion of the words “son of Hannah.” Note that the name dywd is written here with y. The author of the inscription used the late, full orthography of the name as it always appears in Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah but only sometimes in other books, for example: 1 Kgs 3:14; 11:4; Amos 9:11; Ezek 34:23; Lam 4:4; and specifically in (the late) Deutero-Zechariah 12:7–8, 10, 12; 13:1. This late version of the name is not common in rabbinic literature. However, it also appears on the David mosaic of the Gaza synagogue from the 6th century; see M. Barasch, “The David Mosaic at Gaza,” ErIsr 10 (Zalman Shazar Volume; 1971) 94–99 and pls. 51a–b [Hebrew]. 9. Purple was the common color to use in descriptions of Roman emperors at that time; see Kraeling, The Synagogue, 166 n. 624, and the earlier references listed there. 10. Compare Sukenik, The Synagogue of Dura-Europos, 104. For a detailed interpretation of this issue, see Kraeling, The Synagogue, 166–67. 11. Because 1 Sam 16:11; 17:14 described David as ˆfqh ‘the youngest’ of the brothers, one might expect the artist to have represented David smaller than his brothers, as is indeed the case in several medieval Christian illustrations, such as in the miniatures of the Sacra Parallela and of the Athos Vatopedi Monastery (see below). However, David is actually depicted somewhat taller than the men behind him in the Dura-Europos fresco. Sonne is of the opinion that the painter “apparently follows the midrashic interpretation of ‘little,’ i.e. that he [David] considered himself little, or that he humbled himself before Samuel, the tallest figure in the panel. On account of his humility, according to the midrashic conception, David was preferred to his brethren”; see I. Sonne, “The Paintings of the Dura Synagogue,” HUCA 20 (1947) 255–362, esp. pp. 316–18.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 127 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles at Dura-Europos and in the Cognate Arts

127

Fig. 2. A fresco on the west wall of the Dura-Europos Synagogue: Samuel Anointing David (244–245 c.e).

also to mean brqm ‘from among/from the midst of’ (exchange of b/m). 12 2. From all the biblical traditions regarding the number of Jesse’s sons, the artist chose precisely the number that appears in the late historiography. He attempted to express an esthetic-pictorial form for the literary heritage of 1 Chr 2:13–15, which speaks of the seven sons of Jesse, with David as the seventh and most distinguished. So, the painter was actually illustrating the scene recounted in 1 Sam 16:13 while preferring the Chronicler’s number for David’s brothers (1 Chr 2:13–15). He combined the two passages and represented them in a single work.

12. See, for example, Lev 8:32; 22:4. Several Jewish medieval commentators interpreted the phrase the same way, such as Rabbi Joseph Kara (see S. Epenstein [ed.], The Commentary of Rabbi Joseph Kara on the Former Prophets [ Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1972] 65 [Hebrew]); see also David Kimchi and Isaac Abarbanel, ad loc.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 128 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

128

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

3. Excursus: The Number of Brothers—The State of the Research In his description of the fresco under discussion, Eliezer L. Sukenik does not refer at all to the problem of the number of brothers standing behind David. 13 Isaiah Sonne does indeed mention the “six brethren” of David. 14 However, he does not specifically discuss the number of Jesse’s sons in the fresco or refer to the contradictory biblical traditions or the relationship between them. Rachel Wischnitzer states that “there are seven brothers in all, although according to 1 Sam 16:10 Jesse had seven sons besides young David” but does not offer any solution to the problem. 15 Erwin R. Goodenough and Michael Avi-Yonah are of the opinion that the six figures in a row behind David represent “Jesse and five brothers” of David. 16 This assumption seems unreasonable. There is no tradition in either biblical or extrabiblical sources with five brothers for David or six sons for Jesse. Moreover, the painter did not show any distinction between one man who could have represented the father ( Jesse) and the other figures representing his sons (the “five brothers”). He made a clear distinction between David and the six young men behind him, as well as between Samuel and all the other figures in the drawing. The six young men behind David bear a resemblance to each other. All of them are almost the same height and stature, have a youthful appearance, and no one in particular is distinguished by his pallium from the others. If the artist had desired to represent Jesse, most likely he would have identified him by changing his style of clothes, facial features (older appearance), or stature (i.e., somehow taller than the others, as with Samuel), as was done, for instance, in the miniature painting of the Sacra Parallela, which also shows Samuel anointing David, or in the Paris Psalter, Bibliothèque Nationale Cod. gr. 139, fol. 3v (10th century c.e.). 17 The absence of Jesse from the fresco is probably due to the artist’s concentration on the main action of the prophetic anointing of the future king, just as indicated in 1 Sam 16:13. After I realized that the artist of the fresco from Dura-Europos adopted the number of brothers found in 1 Chr 2:13–15, I read that Carl H. Krae13. See Sukenik, The Synagogue of Dura-Europos, 103–5. 14. See Sonne, “The Paintings of the Dura Synagogue,” 316–20, esp. p. 316. 15. See R. Wischnitzer, The Messianic Theme in the Paintings of the Dura Synagogue (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948) 50–52, esp. p. 50. 16. See E. R. Goodenough and M. Avi-Yonah, “Dura-Europos,” Encyclopedia Judaica ( Jerusalem: Keter, 1971) 6.275–98, esp. p. 295. 17. See the illustrations in K. Weitzmann and H. L. Kessler, The Frescoes of the Dura Synagogue and Christian Art (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1990) fig. nos. 111 and 115.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 129 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles at Dura-Europos and in the Cognate Arts

129

ling had made a similar observation. 18 However, Kraeling did not suggest any explanation for the artist’s preference for Chronicles over the Former Prophets. Although Kurt Weitzmann and Herbert L. Kessler do not deny the possibility that the fresco is based on Chronicles, they assume that “there simply was not enough space left for an additional figure.” 19 In other words, the illustrator intended to base his fresco on 1 Samuel but could not squeeze in one more figure. But surely he could have planned the figures a bit smaller so as to leave room for all the figures or would have anticipated from the beginning that more space would be needed for the size chosen for the figures. Joseph Gutmann assumes 20 that the artist of Dura based his fresco, Samuel Anointing David, on a midrash that appears in the 9th-century Christian source Pseudo-Jerome. According to this midrash, one of Jesse’s eight sons, Nethanel (who was identified as Nathan the prophet), was not really Jesse’s own son but his grandson, the son of Shimea, whom he had raised as his own child. 21 Thus, Jesse had only seven sons. But the probability that the artist under discussion based his fresco in the synagogue of Dura-Europos on a neglected Jewish midrash that later was found in Christian literature, rather than basing it on the handy biblical source, the book of Chronicles, is very unlikely. All in all, although one scholar (Kraeling) pointed out the fact that there are seven sons portrayed in the fresco, as of today, no one has attempted to explain why the fresco follows the tradition of Chronicles.

4. Josephus, the Artist of Dura-Europos, Rabbinic Sources, and Medieval Christian Art The combination of part of the earlier biblical text and the later text had already been done about one hundred fifty years earlier by Josephus. In his historical writing, Josephus relied on the story of 1 Samuel 16 but referred to only six brothers for David, as in the Chronistic History (Ant. 6.156–65, esp. §§161–63). Apparently, the artist of Dura-Europos referred to the Scriptures independently (although it was not impossible for him to have relied on Josephus’s description, if we assume that he had access to the Jewish 18. Kraeling, The Synagogue, 168. 19. Weitzmann and Kessler, The Frescoes of the Dura Synagogue and Christian Art, 81. 20. See J. Gutmann, “The Illustrated Midrash in the Dura Synagogue Paintings: A New Dimension for the Study of Judaism,” PAAJR 50 (1983) 91–104, esp. pp. 96–98. 21. See A. Saltman (ed.), Pseudo-Jerome: Questions on the Book of Samuel (Leiden: Brill, 1975) 91; Gutmann, “The Illustrated Midrash in the Dura Synagogue Paintings,” 97–98.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 130 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

130

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Antiquities). The main point is that the historian and the artist worked in different times and in different places in the Hellenistic-Roman world: the one in the center, Rome, ca. 93–94 c.e.; and the other in the periphery, the outpost of Dura, ca. 244–245 c.e. Both works, the written and the visual, represent a preference for the late biblical tradition on the number of Jesse’s sons over the earlier traditions. Indeed, Josephus and the artist of the fresco were confronted by contradictory traditions in the Scriptures and must have decided which tradition to follow. But why did they prefer the Chronicler’s viewpoint to the much earlier traditions of Samuel? In fact, the artist of the fresco had to draw a precise number of figures and decided to draw seven sons for Jesse. Josephus, however, could certainly have chosen another point of view, as did Pseudo-Philo who, just a bit earlier, composed an early history of Israel, also based on the biblical books. In Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, Pseudo-Philo relates the story of Samuel anointing David based on 1 Sam 16:1–13, while ignoring the contradictory biblical traditions about the number of brothers (L.A.B. 59.1–3). He simply narrates the anointing of David, “the youngest shepherd among all of them” (59.2–3), without indicating the number of brothers. 22 Apparently the preference for the late biblical tradition by Josephus and the artist of Dura stemmed from these facts: 1. It is most “complete”; that is, Chronicles includes all the sons’ names, but Samuel only names four. Naturally, the artist chose the most “complete.” 2. The number seven (and the seventh place) still played a special role in the religious view of their generations. Indeed, the Chronicler’s view also found its way into the rabbinic literature and into some medieval Christian artistic compositions. Pesikta deRab Kahana 23.10 (Palestine, 3rd–4th century c.e.), for example, states: 23 “Anything that comes seventh in order is the one most loved. Thus in the order of the realms. . . . Of [ Jesse’s] sons also, the seventh is the one most loved: Eliab, Abinadab, Shimeael, Nethanel, Raddai,

22. For the English translation of Pseudo-Philo, see Harrington, “Pseudo-Philo,” 372. For a recent translation of the book, see Jacobson, A Commentary on Pseudo-Philo’s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, ad loc. 23. See B. Mandelbaum (ed.), Pesikta deRab Kahana according to an Oxford Manuscript (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1962) 2.343–44, esp. p. 344 [Hebrew]; English translation: I. J. Kapstein, Pesikta deRab Kahana (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975) 359–60, esp. p. 360.

spread is 6 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 131 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles at Dura-Europos and in the Cognate Arts

131

Ozem, and David the seventh (1 Chr 2:15).” 24 Similarly, the later, parallel version, Leviticus Rabbah 29:11 (Palestine, ca. 5th century c.e.) states: 25 “All sevenths [in a series] are always favored. . . . Among the sons the seventh is favored, as it is said: ‘David—the seventh’ (1 Chr 2:15).” 26 Some examples of Christian art, for instance, the famous Paris Psalter (Bibliothèque Nationale, Cod. gr. 139, fol. 3v.; 10th century c.e.), show Samuel anointing David, while Jesse and the six brothers of David (as in 1 Chr 2:13–15) are in the background, 27 similar to the fresco from DuraEuropos. The same number of brothers can also be seen in the miniature Samuel Anointing David at the Athos Vatopedi Monastery (Cod. 761, fol. 12r.) in the Byzantine Psalters of the so-called artistic recension (the last quarter of the 11th century). 28 It is worth mentioning, on the other hand, that there are examples of artistic works that follow the tradition of 1 Samuel 16 with regard to the number of Jesse’s sons. For example, one of the Byzantine miniatures in the outer margin of the Greek manuscript known as the Sacra Parallela (9th century) shows Samuel Anointing David, with Jesse and his other seven sons behind. 29 Similarly, seven additional brothers may be seen in

24. It is worthwhile to mention that this midrashic writing was used in the 13th century as a source by Peter Comestor (Historia Scholiastica, Genesis 30, PL, 198.1080 C, D); and Eike von Repgow (Sachsenspiegel 3.42.4). See, in detail, G. Kisch, Sachsenspiegel and Bible (Publications in Medieval Studies 5; Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 1941) 163–69. For the repeated usage of 2 Chr 19:6–7 and 9–10 in Sachsenspiegel, see Kisch, ibid., 49, 62–63, 67, 92, 113 n. 38, 131 n. 27, 155. 25. See M. Margulies (ed.), Midrash Wayyikra Rabbah: A Critical Edition Based on Manuscripts and Genizah Fragments with Variants and Notes ( Jerusalem: Central Press, 1956) 680–81, esp. p. 681 [Hebrew]. 26. See also the parallel version in Midrash Psalms, Shocher Tov 9:11; Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 87–88; for the English translation, see Braude, The Midrash on Psalms, 1.143. 27. See Weitzmann and Kessler, The Frescoes of the Dura Synagogue and Christian Art, fig. no. 115. 28. For the illustration, see ibid., fig. no. 112; A. Cutler, “A Psalter from Mar Saba and the Evaluation of the Byzantine David Cycle,” JJA 5 (1978) 43, fig. 5, and see also p. 46. On the Psalter itself, see K. Weitzmann, “The Psalter Vatopedi 761: Its Place in the Aristocratic Psalter Recension,” JWAG 10 (1947) 21–51, and fig. 5 there. 29. See idem, The Miniatures of the Sacra Parallela: Parisinus Graecus 923 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979) 77–78, and pl. 117, fol. 80r., on p. xxxi. Sacra Parallela is a collection of quotations from the Bible and patristic texts for moral and ethical edification. For the history of the manuscript, its text, author, date, and so on, see pp. 3–25. For a very detailed comparison of the fresco from Dura and the miniature of the Sacra Parallela, see Weitzmann and Kessler, The Frescoes of the Dura Synagogue and Christian Art, 80–84.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 132 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

132

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

the illustration Samuel Anointing David in the Vatican book of Kings (Bibliotheca, Cod. gr. 333, fol. 22v.). 30

5. Conclusion This chapter traces the versions of the number of Jesse’s sons in several biblical and postbiblical works and in art. The biblical literature reflects three opposing views about the number of Jesse’s sons. Two of them appear in the early historical book of 1 Samuel 16–17: in one, Jesse has four sons in all; in the other, he has eight. The third is in the late historiography of 1 Chronicles 2, in which Jesse has seven sons, with David in the seventh position. A close observation of the transmission of these traditions reveals that, in the Judeo-Hellenistic arts, in the rabbinic literature, and in some Christian art, a preference was given to the later tradition. In other words, Josephus in his historical writing on the monarchic period, the artist/painter of the fresco Samuel Anointing David in the synagogue of Dura-Europos, the rabbis of the midrashic literature, and some medieval Christian illustrators all preferred the Chronicler’s view on the sum of David’s brothers (six brothers) over the traditions preserved in Samuel (three/seven brothers). It seems that Chronicles’ list of sons’ names was considered the “complete” list, for one thing. For another thing, belief in the uniqueness of the number seven, the significance attributed to this perfect, mystical number, and the special function of being in the seventh place motivated a preference for the later tradition in Chronicles over the earlier traditions in Samuel. Thus, the artists were not merely illustrating scriptural scenes but were exegeting the ancient texts and choosing among the different traditions. 31

30. See ibid., fig. 114. 31. For a different version of this chapter, see Kalimi, “A Transmission of Tradition,” 1–9.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 133 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 8

Chronicles in the Mosaic Inscription of the Ancient Synagogue at Ein-Gedi 1. The Mosaic Inscription and 1 Chronicles 1:1–4 The archaeological excavations of the ancient synagogue at Ein-gedi in 1970 uncovered an impressive mosaic inscription located near the main entrance of the synagogue. Its first two paragraphs are in Hebrew and the last two in Aramaic. The inscription is dated from the 5th to the early 7th centuries c.e., which was during the Byzantine period. 1 The first paragraph (lines 1–2; see fig. 3) contains the genealogical list of the world’s 13 ancestors from Adam to Noah and his sons: dry lallhm ˆnyq çwna tç μda .1 typyw μj μç jwn ˚ml jlçwtm ˚wnj .2 Line 1: Adam, Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared Line 2: Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth

Theoretically, these names also could be taken from Gen 4:1–6:10, which is parallel to 1 Chr 1:1–4. However, because the names are detailed in exactly the same order in 1 Chr 1:1–4, it is more reasonable to consider Chronicles the source used by the artist of the mosaic inscription than to assume that the artist looked all over Genesis and collected the names, one by one. There are three minor differences between the cited verses in the mosaic inscription and the Masoretic Text of Chronicles. The first two differences are in the orthography of the names jn and tpy. These names were 1. See B. Mazar, “The Inscription on the Floor of the Synagogue in Ein-Gedi,” Tarbiz 40 (1971) 18–23 [Hebrew]; J. Naveh, On Stone and Mosaic: The Aramaic and Hebrew Inscriptions from Ancient Synagogues ( Jerusalem: Keter / Tel Aviv: Pelie, 1978) 105–9 [Hebrew]; D. Barag, Y. Porat, and E. Netzer, “The Synagogue at ºEn Gedi,” in Ancient Synagogues Revealed (ed. L. I. Levine; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1981) 116–19; L. I. Levine, “The Inscription in the ºEn Gedi Synagogue,” in ibid., 140–45; R. Hachlili, Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Land of Israel (Handbuch der Orientalistik 7; Leiden: Brill, 1988) 225, 226, and pl. 51.

133

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 134 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

134

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

written at Ein-gedi with the vowels y/w: jwn and typy. It is doubtful that the small community of Ein-gedi was purposely changing the spelling of the sacred canonical text. It is also hard to imagine that hundreds of years after the canonization of the biblical text they would have had a slightly different Vorlage of the Hebrew Scriptures. Instead, these differences were probably due to citing from memory. Therefore, we see the full spelling of the names that was customary in the Byzantine period. This custom is also evident in the spelling of the Babylonian/Hebrew names of the months lwlya tybf and in the spelling of the signs of the zodiac μyynzwam tçyq. Thus y appears in the second paragraph of the inscription (lines 4 and 5–6) as well as in the spelling of the personal name wyqyzj in line 9. The third difference, which previous scholars have not noted, is in the size of the first letter of the name μda ‘Adam’. In MT 1 Chr 1:1, it is written with a large a (ªalep), 2 but in the mosaic inscription it appears in the same size as the other letters. The writer/artist either did not know the tradition under review or did not attribute any significance to it and simply ignored it.

2. The Mosaic Aramaic Expressions and Chronicles The third paragraph of the inscription (lines 9–16) contains several biblical expressions in Aramaic. 3 Two of them are probably translations of 2 Chr 16:9b and 1 Chr 16:36b: (a)

Line 13: h[ra lkb ˆffwçm whwny[d ˆyd He whose eyes range throughout the whole earth

≈rah lkb twffçm wyny[ hwhy yk 2 Chr 16:9b: For the Lord, His eyes range throughout the whole earth (b)

hls ˆmaw ˆma hm[ lk ˆwrmyw Line 16: And all the people said, “Amen and Amen Selah” hwhyl llhw ˆma μ[h lk wrmayw 1 Chr 16:36b: All the people said, “Amen!” and praised the Lord

Although line 13 could be based on Zech 4:10c (compare Prov 15:3), and line 16 could be based on Ps 106:48b, one cannot ignore the fact that it is more plausible that the artist was quoting Chronicles in these lines. 4

2. In contrast, the letter a that ends the word arqyw in Lev 1:1 is written smaller. On this issue, see also below, chap. 13, §2, p. 244. 3. Compare lines 14–15 with Lev 20:3, 5; Jer 10:11. 4. For additional discussion on this expression in Chronicles and Zechariah, see below, chap. 13, §2 no. 7, pp. 250–51.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 135 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mosaic Inscription at Ein-Gedi

135

Fig. 3. Mosaic inscription in the floor of the Ein-gedi Synagogue (5th to 7th centuries c.e.), lines 1–2: a citation of 1 Chr 1:1–4.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 136 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

136

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

3. The Use of 1 Chronicles 1:1–4 and the Aramaic Expressions in the Mosaic Inscription: An Observation Though the use of the biblical expressions under review by the artist/author of the inscription is understandable, it is unclear (at least at first glance) why he cited the 13 names from 1 Chr 1:1–4. What is the relationship between this list and the other elements of the inscription? It seems that the persons listed in 1 Chr 1:1–4 were considered the founders of the earth, while those listed in the second part—the three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Daniel’s three friends, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah—were regarded as the pillars of the earth. This is similar to the saying in Midrash Psalms, Shocher Tov 1.15 (in the last section of the paragraph): qjxy μhrba yrmad tya ,μydwm[ hçlç l[ ,aml[ μyaq ˆam l[ atyyrb yrmad awhw jrq ynb atlt yrmad tyaw ,hyrz[w laçym hynnj yrmad tyaw ,bq[yw in the popular saying, “On what does the earth stand? On three pillars,” the three are said by some to refer to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, by others to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, and by still others to three sons of Korah.5

Furthermore, this concept of the Midrash is probably behind the use of the unique expression “He whose eyes survey the whole earth” in line 13 (// 2 Chr 16:9b // Zech 4:10c). In other words, the mosaic’s artist/author may have been attempting to state that the “founders” and the “pillars” of the world also have some function in it, and they will punish “whoever slanders his friend . . . steals . . . or reveals the secret of the Town” (lines 10–12). 6 As of today, the inscription at Ein-gedi is the only one of all the ancient synagogue inscriptions in the land of Israel to quote the book of Chronicles. In all the synagogues of the Jewish Diaspora, the only evidence of the use of Chronicles is the fresco in the Dura-Europos Synagogue of Samuel Anointing David, which we discussed in chap. 7. 5. See Buber, Midrash Tehillim, p. 15; Braude, The Midrash on Psalms, 1.22. Compare Levine, “The Inscription in the ºEn Gedi Synagogue,” 142–43. For a slightly different explanation, see Y. Komlosh, “Notes on the Synagogue Inscription of Ein-Gedi,” Beit Mikra 16 (1971) 569–70 [Hebrew]. 6. For discussion on “the secret of the Town” from Ein-gedi, see the list of references in n. 1 above, p. 133; and S. Lieberman, “A Preliminary Remark on the Inscription of Ein-Gedi,” Tarbiz 40 (1971) 24–26 [Hebrew]; E. E. Urbach, “The Secret of the Ein-Gedi Inscription’ and Its Formula,” Tarbiz 40 (1971) 27–30 (= idem, Studies in Judaica [ed. M. D. Herr and J. Fraenkel; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1998] 2.563–66; both in Hebrew); A. Dothan, “The ‘Secret’ in the Synagogue Inscription of Ein-Gedi,” Les 35 (1971) 211– 17 [Hebrew]; D. Barag, “ ‘Qarta’ in the Inscriptions from the Synagogue of Ein-Gedi,” Tarbiz 40 (1971) 433–34 [Hebrew].

spread is 3 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 137 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mosaic Inscription at Ein-Gedi

137

4. Conclusion to Part 3 The archaeological discoveries in the land of Israel (Qumran and Eingedi on the west coast of the Dead Sea) and in two different corners of the Jewish Diaspora (Dura-Europos and Cairo) reveal that generally the book of Chronicles was used, though in a limited fashion, in the various Jewish communities. These discoveries testify to the use of Chronicles in various places and times: from ca. the 1st century b.c.e. to the first decades of the 1st century c.e. at Qumran; in ca. the mid-3rd century c.e. in the DuraEuropos Synagogue; in the 5th- to early 7th-century Ein-gedi Synagogue; and in the 8th–15th-century Ben Ezra Synagogue in Cairo. 7 Thus, even the most isolated Jewish communities, Dura-Europos (which is located at the northeast edge of the Syrian Desert) and Ein-gedi (which is located at the edge of the Judean Desert), used the book of Chronicles in their writing. The book inspired mosaic and fresco artists and was studied in Qumran and in Cairo, along with the Targum and commentaries written on it by Ibn Jana˙, Ibn Balºam, and Pseudo-Rashi. Is it going too far to deduce that both the genealogical lists and the narrative sections of Chronicles were, in fact, never completely excluded from the artistic, educational, or spiritual programs of Jewish communities? In contrast, some Christian communities excluded the entire book of Chronicles from their religious program. For example, “in the sixteenth century Cranmer was anxious to ensure that the whole Bible [i.e., the Old and the New Testaments] was covered in his Church of England offices of Morning and Evening Prayer—the only significant omission from the annual scheme was Chronicles.” 8 Similarly, the book of Chronicles is absent in the Stuttgarter Familienbibel of Germany. The editor, D. Groß, explained the absence of the book as follows: “Since most all of the stories in both books of Chronicles are the same as those we have in the books of Kings, we therefore omit them here.” 9

7. Though the Ben Ezra Synagogue was erected in 882 c.e., the earliest document found there is from 750 c.e. 8. See Coggins, “Chronicles,” 120. However, note that the NT book of Revelation was also excluded from the weekly lectionary of the Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer (1489–1556), who was the leader of the English Reformation and compiled two prayer books in 1549 and 1552 under King Edward VI; see The First and Second Prayer-Books of King Edward the Sixth (London: Dent, n.d.). 9. Stuttgarter Familienbibel zur Einfürung ins Bibellesen (ed. D. Groß; Nach der deutschen Übersetzung Martin Luther; Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1939) 262 (translation mine).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 138 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 141 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

chapter opening is high

Chapter 9

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash 1. Introduction Without a doubt, the book of Chronicles is much closer to the rabbis’ way of thinking than the books of Samuel and Kings. 1 Certainly, Chronicles reflects some of the methods of interpretation and explanation of the Scriptures, such as the attribution of names to unnamed figures; content harmonization; “measure-for-measure” retribution; “generalization and specification”; “purifying” of the core personalities of ancient Israelite history; 2 and even some seeds of midrashic interpretation 3—all of these methods of interpretation developed further and were widely used in rabbinic literature. Thus, obviously, in this chapter I inquire about how, in fact, the rabbis handled the book of Chronicles. I provide the main features of the mishnaic, talmudic, and midrashic use of Chronicles, illustrating each with a variety of representative examples. I also present the rabbis’ opinion about the authorship of Chronicles and its relationship with Ezra–Nehemiah. The placing of Chronicles in the Hebrew Canon as well as its location in the Writings, and the question whether the rabbis disputed the inclusion of Chronicles in the Jewish canon, I have dealt with above, in chap. 2, together with other views on these issues. Needless to say, it is not my intention to discuss here all the references to the book of Chronicles in the extremely rich, complex rabbinic literature. The succeeding discussions in this part of the volume, “Chronicles Targum” and “Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual” (chaps. 10 and 11), which, due to their unique merits are dealt with separately, should also be considered part and parcel of the classical rabbinic literary activities related to Chronicles. 4

1. Cf. Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 408. 2. For explanations and illustrations of these terms, see in detail, ibid., 74–77, 140– 58, 186–93, 369–80. 3. See I. Kalimi, “The Characterization of the Chronicler and His Writing,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 20–23; idem, “Utilization of Pun/Paronomasia in the Chronistic Writing,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 67–81. 4. Additionally, see below, chap. 14, §5a, pp. 261–63.

141

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 142 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

142

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

2. Unity, Authorship, and the Relationship of Chronicles to Ezra–Nehemiah In contrast to the Septuagint, where the book of Chronicles was divided into two portions, 5 the classical rabbinic tradition according to the beraita attested one comprehensive Hebrew book called μymyh yrbd, as well as one book of Samuel and one book of Kings (b. Baba Batra 14b, 15a). This tradition was also reflected in the work of the Masoretic scribes (“traditionalists”). At the end of 2 Chronicles, they noted: “the sum of all the verses of the book is 1,765.” Accordingly, they considered 1 Chr 27:25 to be “the middle of the book in verses.” 6 The division of the book into two parts in the Hebrew manuscripts and printed editions of the Jewish Bibles (that remain to the present time) was secondary and came after 1448. This division was due to the length of the book and most likely was influenced by the various Christian translations, which followed the form of the Septuagint and the Vulgate. 7 According to the above-mentioned beraita and the following sentence stated by the Gemara, the authors of Chronicles were Ezra, the scribe, and Nehemiah, son of Hacaliah: :br rma hdwhy br rmad ,brl hyl a[yysm .wl d[ μymyh yrbd lç sjyw wrps btk arz[ .hylkj ˆb hymjn ?hyqsa ˆamw .hl[w wmx[ sjyç d[ lbbm arz[ hl[ al Ezra wrote the book that bears his name [i.e., the book of Ezra = Ezra–Nehemiah] 8 and the genealogies of the book of Chronicles up to himself [or, his own time]. 9 This confirms the opinion of Rab, since Rab Judah has said in the name of Rab: Ezra did not leave Babylon to go up [to the land of Israel] until he had written his own genealogy. Who then completed it [Chronicles]?10— Nehemiah, son of Hacaliah. (b. Baba Batra 15a) 11 5. See above, chap. 5, §1b, p. 87. 6. See BHS, pp. 1509, 1574, and compare with the notes on Samuel and Kings on pp. 556, 674. 7. See above, chap. 5, §1b, pp. 87–89. 8. However, Neh 1:1 which opens Nehemiah’s Memoirs, “The words of Nehemiah, the son of Hachaliah,” suggest that Nehemiah composed at least part of the book of Ezra (= Ezra–Nehemiah). 9. Concerning this translation, see the discussion below. 10. Some scholars consider the question in the Gemara to be related to not Chronicles (as I suggested in brackets) but Ezra. That is, the question is: “Who then completed it [Ezra]?” See, for instance, Knoppers, I Chronicles 1–9, 72 n. 49: “In explaining how Nehemiah follows Ezra in the work ascribed to Ezra, the aforementioned tractate (b. B. Bat. 15a) concedes that Nehemiah must have finished the book.” However, if this suggestion were correct, the question “who then completed it?” would have come immediately after the words “Ezra wrote the book that bears his name.” 11. This is also the view of the Church Fathers; see Curtis and Madsen, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles, 3. Moreover, some modern biblical

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 143 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash

143

Because Ezra did not mention where exactly in Chronicles he left off, the statement is too vague. Thus, perhaps it is better to translate the Hebrew phrase wl d[ as ‘up to his own time’. However, if the name Seraiah in 1 Chr 5:40 was considered by the rabbis to be the Seraiah who was the father of Ezra (Ezra 7:1), 12 then they meant that Ezra wrote the genealogies in Chronicles up to 1 Chr 5:40. In other words, Ezra composed, all in all, 1 Chr 1:1–5:40, and Nehemiah composed the rest of the book: 1 Chr 5:41–2 Chr 36:23. Accordingly, it is inaccurate to claim that the talmudic source under review makes Ezra responsible for the composition of the entire book of Chronicles, as some modern scholars mistakenly assert. 13

3. Mishnah Yoma: The Reading of Chronicles to the High Priest The rabbis forbade the high priest to sleep on the night preceding the Day of Atonement. This was to avoid the possibility of accidental impurity during his sleep, 14 because ritual uncleanness would disqualify him from serving in the Temple on the Day of Atonement. In order to keep him alert and to drive sleep away, m. Yoma 1:6 informs us that: “If he was a sage he used to expound [from the Scriptures], but if not, the disciples of the sages used to expound before him. If he was versed in reading [the Scriptures], he read, and if not, they read before him. 15 And from what did they read before him?—From out of Job and Ezra and Chronicles. Zechariah ben Kabutal says: Many times I read before him out of Daniel.” 16 Note that the books mentioned in this Mishnah (probably from the Second Temple period) are all in the Writings. In fact, this passage may attest that the Temple library included, at some point in time, not only the

scholars have adopted this view partially and identified the Chronicler with Ezra, the scribe; see Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 42. 12. Compare particularly 1 Chr 5:29–40 with Ezra 7:1–5, and see the commentary ascribed to Saadia Gaon’s student on 1 Chr 3:24 (R. Kirchheim [ed.], Ein Commentar zur Chronik aus den 10ten Jahrhundert [Frankfurt a.M.: Brünner, 1874], 17 [Hebrew]; see below, chap. 12, §3, pp. 193–97). 13. See, for example, Knoppers (I Chronicles 1–9, 72): “In the Babylonian Talmud . . . Ezra is presented as responsible for Chronicles and Ezra–Nehemiah (b. B. Bat. 15a)”; and R. W. Klein (1 Chronicles, 16 n. 154): “b. B. Batra 15a ascribed authorship to Ezra.” 14. See Deut 23:11–12. 15. On the low intellectual, spiritual, and moral levels of some high priests in the last centuries of the Second Temple period, see, for instance, 2 Macc 4:7–50. 16. The English translation is according to H. Danby, The Mishnah (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933) 163. It is interesting to mention that the Gemara in the Jerusalem Talmud, Yoma 1.6 (7a), cites a beraita that mentions Proverbs and Psalms as well.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 144 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

144

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Torah 17 and Prophetic books, but also the book of Chronicles, alongside Psalms and other books that were later called the Ketubim (Writings). 18 Why precisely these specific passages from these books were chosen to be read to the unversed high priest the text does not state. Rashi was of the opinion that these books were chosen because they “attract the attention of the listener and prevent his falling asleep.” 19 But what precisely is in these books that attracts more attention than other books? Maimonides presents slightly more detail, saying that μyrwps μhb çy μyrkznh μyrpsh wla μnmnty alw çpnh w[ç[çy wrb[ç μynmzl twnwbçjw ‘these books that are mentioned contain stories and histories of the past times which draw interest and drive away sleep’. 20 In the following generation, the Mishnah’s commentators accepted this explanation without hesitation. 21 But why would someone not read to the high priest from the many compelling stories and events in the various books of the Torah and Former Prophets that are so wonderfully styled? Why precisely from these late historical books, Job and Daniel? Eduard Baneth assumes that these books were chosen to read from because they were unfamiliar to the unlearned high priest. 22 However, if the high priest was not well educated, probably there were several other biblical books of which he knew very little, if anything. Thus, again the question: why these books? William Riley has expressed the following opinion: It has been taken as an engrossing narrative which would help to pass the sleepless night; various themes, such as retribution and seeking Yahweh, may have been found particularly appropriate to the feast; the Chronicler’s

17. See Abot deRabbi Nathan, B, chap. 46 (the last section; see S. Schechter [ed.], Avoth de-Rabbi Nathan [2nd ed.; New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1997] 129); y. Taºanit 4.2 (68a); and see S. Talmon, “Three Scrolls of the Law That Were Found in the Temple Court,” Textus 2 (1962) 14–27. 18. On the Temple’s library, see also 2 Macc 2:13–15: “and how he [Nehemiah] founding a library, gathered together the books about the kings and prophets [Former and Latter Prophets], and the Writings of David [collections of Psalms], and letters of kings about sacred gifts.” 19. See Rashi’s commentary on b. Yoma 18b. 20. See Maimonides’ commentary on m. Yoma 1:6. 21. See, for example, Rabbi Obadiah Bartinero’s commentary on the Mishnah in the traditional editions of the Mishnah; and in recent times, P. Kehati, Mishnah: Yoma— A New Translation with a Commentary (trans. E. Levine; ed. R. Fisch; Jerusalem: Maor Wallach, 1994) 9; and now see also the ArtScroll Mishnah. 22. See E. Baneth, Die sechs Ordnungen der Mischna—Übersetzt und erklärt, Teil II: Ordnung Moºed (= Festzeit ; Berlin: Itzkowski, 1927; 3rd ed., Basel: Goldschmidt, 1968) 299 n. 21.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 145 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash

145

story of worship under the kings might have served to instill the proper attitude in the high priest as he prepared to exercise his most sacred function. However, there might also be in this practice a shadow of the Chronicles’ original purpose: a cultic history written by cultic functionaries especially for the use of cult personnel. 23

This may explain why they read to the high priest from the book of Chronicles. It does not explain, however, why they read Job, Ezra, and Daniel or why the passages were regarded as appealing and exciting material to prevent the high priest from falling asleep. It seems that Job, Ezra, Chronicles, and Daniel were chosen mainly because of their style and language. These books were composed in Late Biblical Hebrew and contain many Aramaic words and idioms. In the case of Ezra and Daniel, there is a large amount of Aramaic. Books written in Late Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic were more understandable to the unlearned high priest of the Second Temple period than the earlier biblical books. There were also other advantages to reading Chronicles to an illiterate high priest rather than reading the earlier historical books: 1. The Chronicler harmonizes the text of Samuel–Kings with the Torah. These harmonizations are “intended to soothe the average reader, who encountered contradictions between the narratives in Samuel–Kings concerning the activities of national heroes and others who shaped national history and the demands of the Torah and the standards operative in his own days. This reader, lacking the knowledge and the instruments needed for the research and the study to reconcile the contradictions, was liable to lose his selfconfidence.” 24 2. The Chronicler constructs many well-known figures in the history of Israel as carefully observing the commandments of the Torah and being worthy of emulation and imitation by everyone in every place and time. Certainly, for an uneducated high priest, it would have been worth reading, for example, stories about David and Solomon from Chronicles rather than from Samuel–Kings.

4. Chronicles in the Talmudic and Midrashic Literature The many differences (and sometimes even clear-cut contradictions) between the parallel texts of Chronicles and Samuel–Kings, presumably, were obvious to the Sages. Indeed, the various dissimilarities between 23. See W. Riley, King and Cultus in Chronicles: Worship and the Reinterpretation of History ( JSOTSup 160; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993) 24. 24. See Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 140–58, esp. p. 141.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 146 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

146

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Chronicles and the books of the Torah and Former Prophets provided excellent opportunity for midrashic expounding. It is not accidental that the midrash states: “Chronicles was given for purposes of [midrashic] interpretation [çrdyl] alone” (Leviticus Rabbah 1:3 // Ruth Rabbah 2:1; b. Megillah 13a). It is very unlikely that, as stated by J. Stanley McIvor, “such a saying had a certain derogatory tone, implying that there was little else one could do with the book.” 25 In fact, any statement on the Hebrew Bible expressed in a “derogatory tone” would have been contrary to the spirit and generally positive attitude of the rabbinic Sages toward any passage in Holy Scripture. Contrary to other books in the Former Prophets and Writings, which almost all have a midrashic rabbinic commentary written on them, 26 there is no such midrashic work written on the book of Chronicles. In his introduction to the Book of Josephen, Rabbi Jacob Tam ibn Ya˙ya (b. Lisbon, ca. 1475; d. Constantinople 1542) refers to “the Midrash on Ezra and Midrash Chronicles.” Yalqut Reubeni 75b (written by Reuben Abraham Katz, d. Prague, 1673) refers to “Sefer haAggadah of Chronicles.” Leopold Zunz, who cited these sources, is of the opinion that sometime in the past there were midrashic books on Ezra and Chronicles. 27 However, is it possible that these late, solitary references were referring to the midrashim on Chronicles that are collected in Yalqut Shimeoni (see below)? The fact that none of the ancient Jewish commentators on Chronicles (and Ezra) referred to such a midrashic book may also indicate that a rabbinic Midrash was not available. There are interpretations of various verses in Chronicles, in particular the genealogical lists (see below), that are scattered throughout the Talmudim and Midrashim. For example, b. ºAbodah Zarah 44a refers to 1 Chr 14:12//2 Sam 5:21 on David’s handling of the loot left by the Philistines; b. Zeba˙im 115b discusses the contradictory reports on David’s payment to Ornan, the Jebusite, for the site of the threshing-floor in 1 Chr 21:25// 2 Sam 24:24; b. Sanhedrin 21b deals with the different number of Solomon’s stalls in 2 Chr 9:25 and 1 Kgs 5:6; Midrash Psalms, Shocher Tov 3:4 deals with the name Shobach/Shophach (2 Sam 10:16//1 Chr 19:16); 9.11 re25. See McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 12. 26. For example, Midrash Samuel, Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov, the midrashim on Ruth, Esther, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Qoheleth, Midrash Proverbs, as well as the midrashim on many other biblical books. 27. See L. Zunz, Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden: Historisch entwickelt (Berlin: Ascher, 1832; 2nd ed.; Frankfurt a.M.: Kauffmann, 1892; repr. Darmstadt, 1966) 283 note a. I am citing here the C. Albeck edition ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1974) 133, 416 n. 99 [Hebrew].

spread is 3 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 147 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash

147

fers to the name “Ithra, the Israelite” / “Jether, the Ishmaelite” (2 Sam 17:25//1 Chr 2:17). All the classical rabbinic references to Chronicles have been collected by Hyman and classified according to chapter and verse. 28 Generally, the solutions that the rabbis offered to the contradictory parallel passages in Chronicles and Samuel–Kings were attempts to harmonize. Sometimes, information that is included in the book of Chronicles only—that is, there is no parallel text in the Bible—is reflected in the rabbinic midrash without a clear reference to the fact. For instance, in Midrash Psalms, Shocher Tov 1:1, the writer opens as follows: 29 “ˆwxr çqby bwf rjç” bwtkh rmaç whz—uwgw μy[çr tx[b ˚lh al rça çyah yrça μhm dym[hl ,larçy lç ˆtbwfb rjwç ,larçy ˚lm dwd hz ?hz awh ym ,(zk ,ay ylçm) .hywl twrmçm h[braw μyrç[w ,hnwhk twrmçm h[braw μyrç[ “Blessed is the man” (Ps 1:1). These words are to be considered in the light of what Scripture says elsewhere: He that diligently seeketh good, procureth favor (Prov 11:27). Who was such a person? David, king of Israel, who diligently sought to do good to the children of Israel, setting up among them twentyfour watches of priests and twenty-four watches of Levites.30

The story about setting up 24 watches of priests and 24 watches of Levites appears in the Hebrew Bible only in 1 Chronicles 23 (Levites) and 24:1– 19 (priests). 31 Chronicles is also is quoted by the rabbis in describing attributes of God. For instance, in b. Óagigah 5b: But is there any weeping in the presence of the Holy One, blessed be He? For behold, Rab Papa has said: “There is no grief in the Presence of the Holy

28. See A. Hyman, Torah Hakethubah Vehamessurah: A Reference Book of the Scriptural Passages Quoted in Talmudic, Midrashic and Early Rabbinic Literature (2nd ed.; Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1979) part 3: Hagiographa, 244–72. In the classical rabbinic literature, Hyman also takes into account Sefer haZohar, which was composed by Moses ben Shem Tov de León in the 13th–14th centuries but is traditionally ascribed to the Tanna Rabbi Shimeon bar/ben Yo˙ai. 29. On Midrash Psalms and its structure, date, and various features, see I. Kalimi, “Midrash Psalms Shocher-Tov: Some Theological-Methodological Features and a Case Study—The View of God,” in God’s Word for Our World, vol. 2: Theological and Cultural Studies in Honor of Simon John de Vries (ed. J. H. Ellens et al.; JSOTSup 389; London: T. & T. Clark, 2004) 63–76. 30. Buber, Midrash Tehillim, p. 1; Braude, The Midrash on Psalms, 1.3. 31. Interestingly, the midrashist refers to the watches in chiastic order compared with their order in Chronicles. This can be explained as a technical way of quoting in the ancient world (see, in detail, Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 232–74, esp. pp. 232–34). It is also possible that the writer formatted his reference according to the hierarchical status of the groups in the Jewish society of his own time.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 148 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

148

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

One, blessed be he; as is said: wmqmb hwdjw z[ wynpl rdhw dwh ‘Majesty and splendor are before him; strength and joy are in his dwelling’ (1 Chr 16:27)!”— There is no contradiction; this [the weeping] refers to the inner chambers; that [the joy] refers to the outer chambers. But behold it is written: “And in that day did the Lord, the God of Hosts, call for weeping and lamentation and baldness and girding with sackcloth!” (Isa 22:12)—The destruction of the Temple is different, for even the angels of peace wept [over it]; for it is said: “Behold, for their altar they cried out; the angels of peace wept bitterly” (Isa 33:7).

Interestingly, here the rabbis cite from Chronicles rather than from the parallel text in Ps 96:6, which reads: wçdqmb traptw z[ wynpl rdhw dwh ‘Majesty and splendor are before him; strength and beauty are in his sanctuary’. Perhaps, the preference was given to Chronicles’ expression because it refers more generally to “his dwelling” rather than particularly to “his sanctuary,” as in Psalms. In the Middle Ages, the classical rabbinic midrashim on Chronicles were collected in an anthology by Rabbi Shimeon Kara, the so-called Yalqut Shimeoni (probably Frankfurt am Main, ca. 1200–1300), §§1072– 85. 32 Their limited quantity shows how little the book was used or studied in general. In fact, in the same anthology, Midrashim on Samuel and Kings comprises §§76 [partially] through 252—that is, over 12 times more than sections on Chronicles. Furthermore, if we use the rabbinic references listed by Aaron and Arthur B. Hyman as another model, Chronicles “lags far behind” the references to Samuel and Kings. On Samuel–Kings, there are almost 87 pages of references; on Chronicles, there are only 27 pages (i.e., a ratio of 3.2 to 1). 33 A good example is Midrash Tan˙uma B (so-called Midrash Yelammedenu; Codex Vaticanus Ebr. 34). Here the books of Samuel and Kings are mentioned 323 times, but the book of Chronicles appears only 90 times (a ratio of 3.59 to 1). 34 One more example will suffice: according to the list of biblical references in Jacob Neusner’s Mishnah (Eng. trans.), Samuel is mentioned 23 times and Kings 10 times; in contrast, Chronicles appears only 6 times! 35 Here, the ratio between Samuel–Kings and Chronicles is 5.5 to 1. 32. See Shimeon Kara (ed.), Yalqut Shimeoni: Midrash on the Torah, Nebiªim, and Ketubim ( Jerusalem: Brochmann, 1980) 2.1031–38 [Hebrew]. 33. See Hyman, Torah Hakethubah Vehamessurah, part 2: Prophets, 33–119 (on Samuel and Kings); part 3: Hagiographa, 244–272 (on Chronicles). 34. According to the indexes of H. Bietenhard, Midrasch Tan˙uma B: R. Tan˙uma über die Tora, genannt Midrasch Jelammedenu ( Judaica et Christiana 5–6; Bern: Peter Lang), vol. 1 (1980), 278–80, 445–46; vol. 2 (1982), 179–80, 425–26, 522. 35. See J. Neusner, The Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988) 1158, 1160, 1162.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 149 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash

149

5. The Genealogical Lists of Chronicles and the Rabbinic Midrash Specific attention was given by the rabbis to the genealogical and ethnological lists in Chronicles. This is evident, first and foremost, because most of the rabbis’ midrashic interpretations were devoted to these lists. B. Pesa˙im 62b recounts: Rabbi Simlai came to Rabbi Johanan [and] asked him, “Let the Master teach me the Book of Genealogies.” Said he to him, “Where are you originally from?” He replied, “From Lod.” “And where is your residence now?” “In Nehardea [which is on the bank of the Euphrates River in Babylonia].” Said he to him, “We do not teach it either to the Lodians or to the Nehardeans, and how much more so to you, who are from Lod and live in Nehardea!” But he insisted, so he consented. “Let us learn it in three months,” he proposed. [Thereupon] he took a clod and threw it at him, saying, “Beruriah, wife of Rabbi Meir [and] daughter of Rabbi Hanina ben Teradion, who studied three hundred laws from three hundred teachers in [one] day, could nonetheless not study it in three years, yet you propose [to study it] in three months!”

In one of the following passages, the Gemara relates: Rami, the son of Rab Judah, said: “Since the day that the Book of Genealogies [ˆysjwy rps] was hidden [zngn, i.e., ‘forgotten’ or even ‘ruined’], the strength of the Sages has been impaired, and the light of their eyes has been dimmed” [Rashi comments, ad loc., “for explanations of Torah that it contained were hidden from them”].

The Book of Genealogies was not identical to the book of Chronicles. Most likely, it was a commentary on the many biblical genealogical lists, including those in Chronicles, especially 1 Chronicles 1–9. 36 Indeed, the Gemara continues: “Mar Zutra said, ‘Between Azel’ [1 Chr 8:37–38] and Azel [1 Chr 9:43–44] they were laden with four hundred camels of exegetical interpretations’ (açrdd)!” Of course, the rabbis were exaggerating the number of exegetical interpretations that were based on a single chapter of genealogy (1 Chr 8:37–9:44). 37 Nevertheless, this was a testament to 36. Interestingly, Targum Chronicles stresses both literary features of the book (that is, the lists of genealogies and the narrative) by combining the names ˆysjwy rps and μymyh yrbd :aml[ ymwy ˆmd aymwy ymgtp ayswjy rps ˆyd ‘This is the book of the genealogies, the Chronicles from earliest times’. 37. Similar is the story about Rabbi Prida, who repeatedly taught the same chapter to the same student, four hundred times! (b. Erubin 54b). See also the legend about Beitar in b. Gi††in 58a: “there were four hundred synagogues; in each of them there were four hundred teachers, and every one of them taught four hundred pupils”! That is, in that small city of Judea, Beitar, sixty-four million pupils were studying! Moreover, b. Baba

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 150 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

150

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

the study of Chronicles by the rabbis and the many conclusions drawn from the midrashic (even allegorical) interpretations, especially on the genealogical chapters of the book. We do not know why exactly the Book of Genealogies was “hidden.” Nevertheless, regarding the nature and quality of the exegetical interpretations that it contained, we can study the following examples from both the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud: (a) Y. Yebamot 8.3 (48b) expounds: It is written, “And Shaharaim had sons in the country of Moab after he had sent away his wives Hushim and Baara” [1 Chr 8:8]—“Shaharaim” is Boaz, that he was free from sins. “Had sons in the country of Moab”—that he married Ruth, the Moabitess. . . . “His wives Hushim and Baara”—is there anyone who gave birth to his wives? Rather [the verse would like to say], that he was quick as a tiger and explained the halacha [i.e., he was allowed to marry his Moabitess wives]. He had sons by his wife Óodesh” [çdj, 1 Chr 8:9]; it should have said, “And he was born to him by Baara, his wife,” but through her was learned a new [hçdj tn] halacha: “Ammonite” but not Ammonitess; “Moabite” but not Moabitess. 38 One Scripture says, “Ithra, the Israelite” [2 Sam 17:25], another says, “Jether, the Ishmaelite” [1 Chr 2:17]. Rabbi Samuel bar Nachman says, He was “Ishmaelite” and you say that he was an “Israelite”?—Rather, the explanation is that he went into the court of Jesse and found him sitting and expounding, “Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth!” [Isa 45:22]. Thus he converted [to Judaism] and he [ Jesse] gave him his daughter [Abigail] as wife. 39

(b) B. Megillah 13a comments: Rabbi Simon ben Pazzi once introduced an exposition of the book of Chronicles as follows: “All your words are one, and we know how to find their inner meaning.” 40 [It is written,] “And his wife the Jewess bore Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Socho, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah; and these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took” [1 Chr 4:18]. Why was she [the daughter of Pharaoh] called a Jewess? Because she repudiated idolatry, as it is written, “and the daughter of Pharaoh went down to bathe in the river” [Exod 2:5], and Rabbi Johanan, [commenting on this,] said that she went down to cleanse herself from the Batra 14a says that Rabbi Ammi wrote “four hundred scrolls of Torah . . . and Rabbi Yannai planted four hundred vineyards.” 38. This is referring to Deut 23:3–4: “No Ammonite or Moabite shall be admitted to the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of their descendants shall be admitted to the assembly of the Lord, because. . . .” 39. See also the commentary of Rabbi Samuel Masnut on 1 Chr 2:17. 40. That is, numerous names in the book of Chronicles refer to the same person.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 151 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash

151

idols of her father’s house. “Bore”: but she only brought him [Moses] up?— This tells us that if anyone brings up an orphan boy or girl in his house, the Scripture accounts it as if he had begotten him. “Jered”: this is Moses. Why was he called “Jered”? because manna came down [yarad] for Israel in his days. “Gedor”: [he was so called] because he fenced in [gadar] the breaches of Israel. “Heber,” because he joined [hiber] Israel to their Father in heaven. “Socho,” because he was like a sheltering booth [sukkah] for Israel. “Jekuthiel,” because Israel trusted in God [laytwqy from hwq and la, kiwu leªel] in his days. “Zanoah,” because he made Israel abandon [hiznia˙] their iniquities. “Father of,” “father of,” “father of”: he was a father in Torah, a father in wisdom, a father in prophecy. “These are the sons of Bithiah whom Mered took.” Was Mered his name? Was not Caleb his name [see 1 Chr 4:15]?—The Holy One, blessed be he, said: Let Caleb who rebelled [marad] against the plan of the spies [see Num 14:6ff.] come and take the daughter of Pharaoh who rebelled against the idols of her father’s house.41

Obviously, these examples illustrate that the long genealogical lists of Chronicles were explained by the rabbis allegorically/typologically in order to furnish them with extra meaning. They formed some “popular/folk etymologies” from the lists based on wordplays. It goes without saying that these midrashic interpretations are far removed from the simple, plain meaning (peshat) of Scripture and from the historical, ethnological, and geographical reality. 42 Did the rabbis’ specific attention to the ethnological and genealogical lists stem from a desire to justify at least some of the intermarriage with non-Israelites reflected in these lists? 43 Were they attempting to validate the intermarriage retroactively? It seems that the rabbis may have been attempting to harmonize the intermarriage mentioned in genealogical lists of Chronicles with the opposition to intermarriage stated in Ezra–

41. For the English translation, see the Soncino Talmud, Megillah, translated by M. Simon (London: Soncino, 1990). A parallel source for this midrash is Leviticus Rabbah 1:3 (for English translation, see J. Israelstam and J. J. Slotki, Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus [London: Soncino, 1939] 4–6). 42. For other examples for this kind of midrash on the genealogical lists of Chronicles, see Ruth Rabbah 2:1–4 (for English translation, see L. Rabinowitz, Midrash Rabbah: Ruth [London: Soncino, 1939] 23–28). Here the rabbis based exegetical interpretations on the same genealogical list (1 Chr 4:21–23) for four different biblical personalities: Rahab, David, Moses, and Elimelech. 43. On the issue of intermarriage in Chronicles and Ezra–Nehemiah, see Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 54–55; idem, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 383; G. N. Knoppers, “Intermarriage, Social Complexity, and Ethnic Diversity in the Genealogy of Judah,” JBL 120 (2001) 15–30; A. P. Brown II, “The Problem of Mixed Marriages in Ezra 9–10,” BSac 162 (2005) 437–58.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 152 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

152

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Nehemiah (Ezra 9–10; Neh 13:1–3, 23–27). This assumption is reasonable because the beraita in b. Baba Batra 15a attributes part of the composition of Chronicles (particularly the genealogies) to Ezra and to Nehemiah (see above). Ezra and Nehemiah composed the lists, including the intermarriage, because intermarriage was acceptable under certain conditions. Thus, for instance, the rabbis state that David’s sister’s husband, Jether, the Ishmaelite (1 Chr 2:17), converted to Judaism. The daughter of Pharaoh, who saved Moses, though she was an Egyptian, repudiated idolatry and cleansed herself from the idols of her father’s house (that is, she converted). Caleb, who was originally a non-Israelite, Kenezite (1 Chr 4:13– 18), rebelled [marad] against the plan of the spies (Num 14:6–10, 24; Deut 1:36) and thus behaved better than even the “pure” Israelites. He married the daughter of Pharaoh, who “rebelled against the idols of her father’s house.” Moreover, according to the rabbis, all the names mentioned in Chronicles: Jered, Gedor, Heber, Socho, Jekuthiel, Zanoah, and so on refer to one person: Moses, who was the father in Torah, in wisdom, and in prophecy. Each name has an allegorical meaning that refers to the leader’s quality/activity. Thus, the rabbis also used the long, “dry” lists to laud the founder of the Israelite people and religion, Moses, and his savior, the daughter of Pharaoh!

6. Conclusion Unlike the Septuagint and Christian translations of the Bible, rabbinic tradition speaks of one comprehensive Hebrew book called μymyh yrbd. The division of Chronicles into two parts in the Hebrew manuscripts and the printed editions of the Jewish Bible was done after 1448 because of the influence of various Christian translations. According to the rabbis, the authors of the book were Ezra (presumably the first five chapters) and Nehemiah, not including any late prophet. In order to drive sleep away from the eyes of the high priest during the night preceding the Day of Atonement, m. Yoma says that, if the high priest was not educated, the disciples of the literati expounded to him from Job, Daniel, Ezra, and Chronicles. Though several suggestions have been made to explain the choice of these particular books to be read to the unlearned high priest (e.g., see comments of Rashi, Maimonides, Baneth, Riley), the best explanation is that these books were chosen mainly because of their style and language: these books were composed in Late Biblical Hebrew and contained numerous Aramaic words and idioms, which were more understandable to an unlearned high priest of the Second Temple era than other biblical books. Reading Chronicles had addi-

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 153 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in the Mishnah, Talmud, and Midrash

153

tional advantages for an ignorant high priest over reading the earlier historical books, because the Chronicler reconciled passages in Samuel– Kings with the Torah. The harmonizations were made to soothe the average reader, who encountered contradictions between the narratives in Samuel–Kings, about the activities of national heroes and others who shaped the national history, and the requirements of the Torah. The high priest under review, who lacked the knowledge and the tools needed for reconciling the contradictions, was liable to lose his self-confidence. Chronicles reshapes many famous figures in Israelite history into individuals who carefully followed the instructions of the Pentateuch and were thus worthy of emulation and imitation. Perhaps the Mishnah under review indicates that the Temple library included, at some point, not only the books of the Torah and Prophets, but also the book of Chronicles, along with Psalms and other books that later were classified as Ketubim. The many differences between Chronicles and Samuel–Kings were probably obvious to the rabbis. Indeed, the various dissimilarities between Chronicles and the Torah and Former Prophets provided excellent opportunities for midrashic interpretations. The rabbis’ statement, “Chronicles was given for purposes of [midrashic] interpretation,” was not derogatory in tone (i.e., “there is little else one can do with Chronicles”), which would be contrary to the positive spirit and attitude of the rabbis toward any part of Scripture. However, although several biblical books have a midrashic commentary, there is no such complete work on Chronicles. The sole, late references to Midrash Ezra and Midrash Chronicles or Sefer haAggadah of Chronicles refer to the midrashim on Chronicles that are included in Yalqut Shimeoni. The complete absence of references by Jewish commentators to a midrashic work on Chronicles is also an indication that there was no such work. Throughout the Talmudim and midrashim, there are scattered midrashic interpretations on passages in Chronicles, particularly the genealogical lists. Usually, the solutions that the rabbis offered to the contradictory parallel passages in Chronicles and Samuel–Kings are characterized by a harmonistic approach. Sometimes information from Chronicles is reflected in rabbinic midrash without mentioning the source. Passages in Chronicles are also used to describe God’s image(s). In medieval times, the midrashim on Chronicles (along with other biblical books) were compiled by Rabbi Shimeon Kara into a midrashic anthology named after him, Yalqut Shimeoni. Their limited quantity may show how little the book had been studied. In fact, the midrashim on Samuel–Kings in the same anthology are twelve times more than on Chronicles. The use of Chronicles “lags far behind” the use of Samuel–Kings in several other rabbinic writings as well (for instance, the Mishnah and Midrash Tan˙uma Yelammedenu).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 154 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

154

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

The rabbis paid specific attention to the genealogical and ethnological lists of Chronicles. In fact, most midrashic interpretations were devoted to these lists. The rabbis exaggerated the number of interpretations that could be derived from a single chapter of genealogy (1 Chr 8:37–9:44). Perhaps the many midrashic and allegorical interpretations drawn from the genealogical lists should be considered a representative study of Chronicles by them. The Book of Genealogies is not identical to the book of Chronicles. Most likely it was a commentary on biblical genealogies in general, including those that appear in Chronicles—especially in the first nine chapters. It is unclear exactly why the Book of Genealogies was hidden. Nevertheless, one can study the nature and quality of those exegetical interpretations from examples that occur in talmudic literature. The examples discussed in this chapter illustrate that the genealogical lists were explained by the rabbis allegorically/typologically in order to endow them with extra meaning. The explanations were formed as popular/folk etymologies based on wordplay. These etymologies are in addition to and far removed from the simple meaning (peshat) of Scripture and any possible historical, ethnological, or geographical reality. The rabbis tried to reconcile the intermarriages mentioned in Chronicles’ genealogical lists with the opposition to intermarriage in Ezra–Nehemiah. This is apparent because the beraita quoted in b. Baba Batra 15a and the Gemara following it attribute the composition of Chronicles to Ezra and Nehemiah. Ezra composed at least some of the lists, including the intermarriages mentioned there, because those intermarriages were acceptable under certain conditions. Thus, for example, the rabbis state that David’s sister’s husband, Jether, the Ishmaelite (1 Chr 2:17), converted to Judaism. The daughter of Pharaoh repudiated idolatry and cleansed herself from the idols of her father’s house and became a Jewess. According to the rabbis, all the following names mentioned in Chronicles, Jered, Gedor, Heber, Socho, Jekuthiel, Zanoah, and so on, refer to one person—Moses— who was the father in Torah, in wisdom, and in prophecy. Each name has an allegorical meaning that refers to one of his qualities/activities. Thus, the long, “dry” lists were used by the rabbis to laud Moses and his savior, the daughter of Pharaoh!

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 155 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

chapter opens high

Chapter 10

Targum Chronicles: Historical Setting, Lack of Interest, and Translation Methods 1. Introduction In this chapter, I present a selection of the most important topics about the Targum Chronicles in order to provide the reader with a feel for this unique rabbinic work. These topics include the authorship and historical setting of Targum Chronicles; the literary nature and translation methods used by this targum as compared with other targumim; and its lack of distribution and lack of use by Jews (not to speak of Christians!) over many centuries.

2. The Authorship and Historical Setting of Targum Chronicles 1 In contrast to the books of Ezra–Nehemiah and Daniel, which were not translated into Aramaic at all (probably because of their relatively large Aramaic sections), Chronicles has a comprehensive targum. 2 However, 1. The term targum derives from the Akkadian targumannu (probably originally a Hittite word), meaning ‘translator’. It appears only once in the Hebrew Bible, in Ezra 4:7, meaning ‘translate, mediate [from one language to another]’. In rabbinic literature, the term refers to the Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible and means ‘translation’ as well as ‘commentary’. Because generally the Peshi†ta (the Syriac [Eastern Aramaic] version) is considered to be a Christian translation, it is beyond this volume’s scope. 2. Targum Chronicles is extant in three manuscripts from the 13th and 14th centuries: “ms E = the Erfurt Codex (now ms or.fol. 1210 and 1211, Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, Berlin); ms C = ms Or.Ee.5.9, University Library, Cambridge; and ms V = Codex Urbinas 1 (Urb. Ebr. 1, Vatican Library). These three provide “two rather different recensions of the Targum, one represented by E, the other by C and V”; see P. S. Alexander, “Targum, Targumim,” ABD 6.320–31, esp. p. 328. For recent editions and translations of the Chronicles Targum, see A. Sperber (ed.), The Bible in Aramaic, Volume IV A: The Hagiographa; R. Le Déaut and J. Robert, Targum des Chroniques (Cod. Vat. urb. Ebr. 1), Tome II: Texte et Glossaire (Analecta Biblica 51; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1971); McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles. For other editions of the Targum and additional secondary literature, see R. Le Deaut, Introduction à la Littérature Targumique (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1966) 144–46; B. Grossfeld, “(Bible. Translation: Ancient Version. Aramaic):

155

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 156 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

156

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

while the parallel historical books of the Former Prophets received a standard, authoritative translation, Targum Jonathan, as early as the 2nd century c.e., the book of Chronicles was not translated until much later. Traditionally Targum Chronicles is attributed to Rab Joseph, The Blind (rwhn ygs; the third-generation Babylonian Amora [talmudic Sage]; Pumbeditha, ca. first quarter of the 4th century c.e.). 3 However, as already recognized by scholars, 4 Targum Chronicles contains a wide range of aggadic midrashim from the Babylonian Talmud; therefore, it could not have been completed prior to the main conclusion of the Talmud (ca. 500 c.e.). It is also worth noting that, because Targum Chronicles was most probably composed in the land of Israel (see below), it is incorrect to ascribe it to a Babylonian Amora. It is reasonable to assume that the Sitz im Leben 5 of the targum under review was the talmudic academies rather than synagogues. Le Déaut and Robert argue that Targum Chronicles was begun sometime in the late talmudic era, was developed and composed gradually over several generations, and achieved its final form not prior to the 8th century. 6 This assumption was recently adopted by McIvor. 7 It is also possible that the author of Targum Chronicles used sources of varying antiquity that developed gradually, and the composition itself did not undergo such a development. Many Greek and Latin loanwords were used in Targum Chronicles for many aspects of daily life, though Aramaic equivalents were available. 8 The Targumim,” Encyclopaedia Judaica ( Jerusalem: Keter, 1970) 4.849–50; Kalimi, The Books of Chronicles: A Classified Bibliography, 62–64, items 260–84. 3. See S. B. Urbach, “Rab Joseph,” in Encyclopedia of the Talmudic and Geonic Sages (ed. M. Margaliyot; 2nd ed.; Tel Aviv: Yavneh, 1995) 2.551–56, esp. p. 552 [Hebrew]. 4. See, for example, P. Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa (New York: Horeb, 1945) 236 [Hebrew]; Komlosh, The Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translation, 97; idem, “Tanak, Targumim,” Encyclopedia Biblica ( Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1982) 8.740–70, esp. p. 764 [Hebrew]. 5. This term was coined by Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932), in his Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels (Handkommentar zum Alten Testament; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1933) 10; see also pp. 18, 22, 27. 6. See R. Le Déaut and J. Robert, Targum des Chroniques (Cod. Vat. urb. Ebr. 1), Tome I: Introduction et Traduction (Analecta Biblica 51; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1971) 24–28. 7. See McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 16–17, esp. p. 17. 8. See, for example, ˆwhtwrfsq (1 Chr 4:32, 33; from Latin castra ‘camp’); ˆyfsypws (1 Chr 12:32; from Greek sophist ‘scholar’); ˆynwplq (1 Chr 15:20; from Greek kalliphonoi ‘with fine vocies’); ˆyfwydrfsa/ˆyfwyfrfsa (1 Chr 18:6, 13; from Greek stratiotes ‘soldier’); anwkra ˆwkra (1 Chr 11:2; 2 Chr 11:22; 19:11; 28:7; from Greek archon ‘ruler’; however, this is not consistent: in 1 Chr 26:24, the translator translated the same term adwgn); ˆyryflp (1 Chr 9:18, cf. 2 Chr 28:7; 36:7; from Greek praitorion and Latin praetorium ‘palace’); ayqynmwryk (2 Chr 33:11; cf. 36:6; from Greek cheiromanika ‘handcuffs, manacles’).

spread is 12 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 157 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

157

This evidently means that Targum Chronicles was composed in a land inhabited by Aramaic speakers who needed a translation to understand the Hebrew Scripture, though their surrounding culture was Greco-Roman. Thus, it is reasonable to suppose that the targum was composed in the land of Israel, like all other targumim. The targum’s language and style, which resemble to some extent Targum Yerushalmi (usually called the “Palestinian Targum”) and the Fragmentary Targum of the Torah (so-called Western features), support this conclusion. 9 Le Déaut and Robert support this position by showing the targumist’s special interest in the toponomy of the land of Israel and its Torah institutions. 10

3. Lack of Interest in Targum Chronicles Targum Chronicles was unheard of even among Jewish exegetes and scholars. It was unknown to the Karaite commentator and grammarian David ben Abraham Alfasi (Fès, Morocco; second half of the 10th century c.e.). 11 Moreover, the Spanish lexicographer Rabbi Solomon (ibn) Par˙on (12th century c.e.), author of the Jewish dictionary Ma˙beret Haºaruk (published, 1160 c.e.), included no entry on Targum Chronicles. 12 The targum was unknown even to the leading medieval Jewish commentators on Chronicles, such as Pseudo-Rashi and Rabbi David Kimchi. 13 In his commentary on Chronicles, Pseudo-Rashi mentions Targum Jonathan but not Targum Chronicles. 14 In his commentaries on the Prophets, Kimchi frequently uses Targum Jonathan, 15 but in his commentary on Chronicles, he never mentions Targum Chronicles! Moreover, in the latter commentary, he cites Targum Jonathan on Samuel and Kings, where the See Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 236; Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic, Volume IV A: The Hagiographa, 71–72; McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 31–33, 63 n. 44, 80 n. 17 (cf. p. 213 n. 10) 94 n. 53; 100 n. 13, 108 n. 11, 170, 213 n. 10, 230 n. 5, 241 n. 5. 9. See Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 236; Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic, Volume IV A: The Hagiographa, 71–72; McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 16. 10. See Le Déaut and Robert, Targum des Chroniques, 1.16. 11. See A. Maman, Comparative Semitic Philology in the Middle Ages: From Saºadiah Gaon to Ibn Barun (10th–12th c.) (Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics 40; Leiden: Brill, 2004) 253–54. 12. See Solomon Par˙on, Ma˙beret Haºaruk (= Salomonis ben Abrahami Par˙on Aragonesis, Lexicon Hebraicum [ed. S. Gottlieb Stern; Pressburg [= Bratislava]: Schmid, 1844); repr., Jerusalem: Makor, 1970 [Hebrew]. 13. On these commentators, see below, chap. 12, §7, pp. 199–209, and §10, pp. 220– 28. 14. See, for example, his commentary on 2 Chr 7:16; 25:24. 15. See Radak’s declaration at the end of his introduction to the book of Joshua: “in some places I will cite Targum Jonathan ben Uziel that has good and nice exegesis [μyanw μybwf μyçwryp].” See also, for example, Radak’s commentary on 1 Sam 1:1; 15:9, 23, 32; 2 Sam 5:20, 21, 23, 24; Jer 1:1.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 158 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

158

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

texts under discussion also appear in parallel passages in Chronicles, but he entirely overlooks the fact that the identical translation is also given in Targum Chronicles. 16 Thus, Kimchi never saw a Targum Chronicles and did not know of its existence. Targum Chronicles was not printed in the first editions of Mikraot Gedolot: neither in the first edition of Mikraot Gedolot, which was edited by Felix da Prato, nor in the second, edited by Jacob ben Hayyim (both were published by Daniel Bomberg in 1517 and 1525, respectively). 17 This reality points up the unfavorable attitude of the early 16th-century scholars toward Targum Chronicles. In other words, either there was no need to include Targum Chronicles in the Rabbinic Bible because there was no interest in it by the potential audience, or even worse, the editors and the publisher were not aware of its existence! In fact, their contemporary, the renowned Hebrew grammarian and lexicographer Elijah Levita 18 (or Elia ben Asher Halevi Ashkenazi; b. Neustadt, 1468/9; d. Venice, 1549), 19 who spent the last years of his life working as a proofreader in Daniel Bomberg’s printing house, writes in his Aramaic dictionary of the targumim, entitled Sefer Meturgeman: ˆyaç ,μymyh yrbdb qr . . . μybr ˆwçlb μyrwk axmn alw μwgrt wb ‘kwrs does not exist in the plural . . . except in Chronicles, which has no targum’ [italics mine]. 20 On the other hand, fragments of Targum Chronicles were found in the Cairo Geniza. 21 Thus, presumably, the targum that was unknown at least in medieval European countries was known in Egypt, but we do not know for sure when it was in use.

4. Translation Methods of Targum Chronicles Below is a series of select features in Targum Chronicles that reflect the basic methodology of the translator. The methods that apply to Targum 16. See, for example, Radak’s commentary on 1 Chr 11:22; 20:5; 2 Chr 4:17; 9:21; 13:23; 22:11; 34:31; 35:20; compare Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic, Volume IV A: The Hagiographa, 70–71. 17. On these editions of Mikraot Gedolot, see W. F. Smelik, “Trouble in the Tree! Variant Selection and Tree Construction Illustrated by the Texts of Targum Judges,” AS 1 (2003) 247–87, esp. p. 253 and references to earlier works there. 18. He is also called Eliyahu Bachur, after his grammar book entitled Sefer haBachur (Rome, 1518). 19. On Elijah Levita and his writings, see H. Hirschfeld, Literary History of Hebrew Grammarians and Lexicographers (Oxford: Oxford University Press / London: Humphrey Milford, 1926) 99–100; M. Medan, “Levita, Elijah,” Encyclopedia Judaica (2nd ed.; Jerusalem: Keter / New York: Gale, 2007) 12.730–32. 20. See Elijah Levita, Meturgeman (Isny, 1514) 64b, root rwk/kwr (Hebrew, with a Latin preface by Paul Fagius). 21. See in detail above, chap. 6, §4, pp. 119–20.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 159 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

159

Chronicles as a whole appear first. They are succeeded by the methods that apply to particular part(s) of the book, such as the parallel texts.

a. Midrashic and Aggadic Features Generally, the Aramaic translation of Chronicles centers on the meaning of the Hebrew text of the book. However, Targum Chronicles is not a semi-literal translation as Targum Onqelos on the Torah is or Targum Jonathan on the Prophets. 22 Numerous additions, expansions, and interpretations of the Hebrew text have been based on or in the spirit of midrashicaggadic literature. 23 Following are some examples that illustrate this feature of the targum. (1) The targumist interprets the names Hazarmaveth and Jerah (1 Chr 1:20) as follows: “Hazarmaveth—who prepared ambushes to kill passersby; Jerah—who set up inns and administered a deadly poison to everyone who came in to eat and drink, and took everything he had.” (2) On 1 Chr 11:2, “also when Saul was king, it was you who led Israel out and brought them in,” he writes: “even when Saul was king, you were the one who led us out to battle, and who brought us in to the House of Study [açrdm tyb] and who taught Israel.” David is thus described as a Torah scholar who taught his people in talmudic school! 24 (3) The short verse 1 Chr 11:11, “This is the number of David’s mighty men: Jashobeam, the son of Hachmoni, the chief of the captains; he lifted up his spear against . . . ,” appears in Targum Chronicles as an extensive, creative exposition: These are the numbers of mighty men who were with David, the mighty man, the leader of the camp, sitting on the judgment seat, anointed with holy oil, with all the prophets and wise men round about him. When he went forth to battle, he received help from on high; when he sat down to give instruction

22. For midrashic and aggadic elements in Targum Onqelos and Targum Jonathan, see the examples collected by Komlosh, “Tanak, Targumim,” 747–48 (Onqelos), 755 ( Jonathan). 23. Of course, it would be interesting to scrutinize the types of additions, their rabbinic sources, the meaning of specific additions, and so on. However, an investigation of that sort is beyond the scope of this volume. 24. This feature is also common in rabbinic literature in general and in other targumim in particular. For example: Rebekah went to the “House of Study of the Great Shem” (Tg. Ps.-Jonathan and Tg. Neofiti 1 on Gen 25:22; cf. Tg. Onqelos: ˆplwa; Genesis Rabbah 63:6); Jacob studied Torah in “Eber’s House of Study” (Tg. Ps.-Jonathan and Tg. Neofiti 1 on Gen 25:27; cf. Tg. Onqelos: anplwa tyb; Genesis Rabbah 63:10; Midrash Tan˙uma [Buber], Vayeshlach 9); Judah went to Goshen earlier in order to prepare a “House of Study” for his father, Jacob (Genesis Rabbah 105:3; cf. Tg. Ps.-Jonathan and Tg. Neofiti 1 on Gen 46:28).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 160 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

160

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

in the Law, the correct decision came to his mind; select and fastidious, handsome in his appearance and comely in looks, skilled in wisdom, intelligent in counsel, mighty in strength, head of Yeshiva (atbytym çyr), with a pleasant voice, an outstanding singer, officer in charge of all the warriors, equipped with weapons, carrying a spear on which was hung the sign of the formation of the camp of Judah, going forth in the instruction of the spirit of holiness, he was victorious in battle and with the spear cut down. . . .25

To be sure, there are many additional examples of midrashic-aggadic expansion in Targum Chronicles. 26 This phenomenon is readily apparent in the targum and is not usually overlooked in the research. 27 Thus, Targum Chronicles became an integral part of rabbinic exegetical activity.

b. Eschatological, Messianic, and “Theological” Features Except for the reference to Messiah in the targum on 1 Chr 3:24 (“The sons of Elioenai: Hodaviah, Eliashib, Pelaiah, Akkub, Johanan, Delaiah, and Anani—he is the King Messiah who will be revealed [ajyçm aklm awh halgtal dyt[d]—in all, seven”), 28 eschatological and messianic issues do not usually appear in Targum Chronicles, because they are in fact absent from the book of Chronicles itself. 29 Every other targum contains some modifications of this topic, particularly Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. Thus the lack of development of this feature is rather “unrabbinic.” Cardinal themes, such as the concept of God, angelology, the gift of the Law, the mission of prophets, and the merit of Israel’s ancestors (twba twkz), are developed in Targum Chronicles. 30 The “theological” issue of Targum Chronicles is the portrayal of God, with an emphasis on memra (that is, ‘the word’) and related anti-anthropo25. The English translation follows, with some slight changes, McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 86–87. 26. See the targum on 1 Chr 2:6, 18, 54–55; 4:9–10, 18, 22; 7:21; 8:29; 11:11; 12:32; 18:17; 21:15; 22:25 (see also below, §j); 29:11; 2 Chr 3:1; 7:10; 18:20; 23:11; 28:3; 32:21; 33:11–13. On the targum on 1 Chr 21:15, see Kalimi, Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy, 18–19 n. 26; on the targum on 2 Chr 33:11–13, see E. Nestle, “Miscellen 6: Das eherne Maultier des Manasse,” ZAW 22 (1902) 309–312; ZAW 23 (1903) 337. Concerning 1 Chr 11:11, see also the reference to Stummer’s study, below, p. 174 n. 88. 27. In addition to the references mentioned in the previous note, see particularly Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 244–46. 28. On this issue, see the detailed discussion below, chap. 15, §2d, pp. 274–76. 29. See Kalimi, “Jerusalem—The Divine City: The Representation of Jerusalem in Chronicles Compared with Earlier and Later Jewish Compositions,” in An Ancient Israelite Historian, 131–36, esp. pp. 135–36. 30. See McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 28–31; J. Ribera-Florit, “Doctrinal Peculiarities of TgChr,” in Encyclopedia of Midrash (ed. J. Neusner and A. J. Avery-Peck; Leiden: Brill, 2005) 170–73.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 161 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

161

morphic constructions. In order to avoid personifications of God, the targumists usually translated differently from the plain meaning (peshat) of the biblical text. This was a rather mechanical (though inconsistent) translation technique. It was used in nearly all extant targumim (but seems to be rather uncommon in other rabbinic literature) 31 and is prominent in Targum Chronicles. Sometimes the targum is identical to Jonathan’s translation of the parallel texts in Samuel–Kings; sometimes it is similar to Onqelos on the Torah. For example: (1) The expression hwhy dyb an hlpa ‘let me fall into the hand of the Lord’ in 1 Chr 21:13 was translated hwhyd armym dyb ˆwdk rsmta ‘let me then be given over into the hand of the memra of the Lord’. The translation of the Hebrew words here is identical to Tg. Jonathan on the parallel text in 2 Sam 24:14, ywyd armym ˆ[k rsmtn dyb. Indeed, already Onqelos had translated rxqt hwhy dyh (Num 11:23) as bk[ty yyd armymh. (2) The words wnyhla ynzabw ‘in the hearing of our God’ (1 Chr 28:8, an “addition”) were translated ‘before the memra of the Lord’. However, compare the targum on 2 Chr 6:40 and 16:9, where the targumist translated verbatim. In other words, the targumist was not consistent. (3) The Chronicler “cites” Huram, saying: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel . . . who has given to David the king a wise son . . . to build a House for the Lord [hwhyl tyb]” (2 Chr 2:11). The targumist changed the original version and wrote: yyd amçl açdqm tyb hnby (‘to build a Temple for the name of the Lord’). 32 (4) The targumist also showed a certain respect for the Lord by translating words such as ytwa μtbz[ ‘you have abandoned me’ (2 Chr 12:5, an “addition”) as ytljd ty ˆwtqbç ‘you have abandoned my fear’; whwnbz[ alw ‘we have not abandoned him’ (2 Chr 13:10, an “addition”) was translated hytljd anqbç alw ‘we have not abandoned his fear’. However, Jonathan translates Isa 1:4, hwhy ta wbz[ ‘they have abandoned the Lord’, using double translation: açydq tljdb wxq ywyd anjlwp ty wqbç ‘they have abandoned the worship of the Lord; they deserted the fear of the Holy’. The similarity between the latter and the former targums is quite apparent. 31. For this feature of the Aramaic translations of the Bible, see M. L. Klein, Anthropomorphisms and Anthropopathisms in the Targumim of the Pentateuch ( Jerusalem: Makor, 1982; Hebrew); A. Chester, Divine Revelation and Divine Titles in the Pentateuchal Targumim (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986); Komlosh, “Tanak, Targumim,” 745 (Onqelos), 755 (Tg. Jonathan). 32. Indeed, it is similar to the way that Tg. Onqelos handles, for example, Exod 25:2: while the biblical text states, “Speak to the people of Israel that they bring me [yl wjqyw] an offering,” the targumist writes, “that they set apart [yamdq] an offering for me.” See also Rashi’s commentary, ad loc.: “for my name [ymçl].”

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 162 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

162

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

All in all, it seems that Targum Chronicles follows the “theological” approach and translation techniques of Onqelos on the Torah and Jonathan on the Prophets: 33 In some cases, it directly uses or is somehow influenced by Onqelos and Jonathan, 34 while in other cases, the approach/technique is mechanical, as part of the targumic heritage.

c. Double Translation and Use of an Aramaic Word for Double Hebrew Words There are several double translations of words and phrases in Targum Chronicles. For example: (1) In 1 Chr 18:2, the words hjnm yaçn (‘bringing tribute’) were translated ˆwrwd ybrqm srp ylfn ‘bringing tribute and presenting gifts’. The same words received a double translation in v. 6 of the same chapter, though slightly different (probably a stylistic variation so as not to repeat the same words): ˆysm yqsm srp ylfn ‘bringing tribute and paying taxes’. 35 Since Targum Jonathan translates the same words in the parallel text (2 Sam 8:2) as srp ylfn, it is possible that Targum Chronicles used what he found in Jonathan and added his own translation as well. 36 (2) The last words of Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, the priest (2 Chr 24:22; an “addition”), çrdyw hwhy ary ‘May the Lord see and avenge!’ are translated [btyw [rqtyw hwhy μdq ylgty ‘May it be revealed before the Lord! May it be avenged! May He take account of it!’ In this case, Targum Chronicles was probably attempting to relate Zechariah’s words to Gen 9:5: ˚aw μdah çpn ta çrda wyja çya dym μdah dymw . . . çrda μkytçpnl μkmd ta ‘But for your own life-blood I will avenge . . . at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s fellowman will I avenge the life of man’. 37 Now, Onqelos on Gen 9:5 (and Pseudo-Jonathan) translates the word çrda as [bta. In other words, perhaps Targum Chronicles used Onqelos’s word and added his own translation/interpretation as well. (3) In 1 Chr 21:2, the targumist wrote ˆwhnynm tyw ˆwhmwks ty ‘their total and their number’ for the Hebrew words μrpsm ta ‘their number’. 38 Similarly, the words rpsm ˆya ‘there is no number [without limit]’ in 1 Chr 33. For additional examples as well as comparisons with other targumim, see Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 237–44. For targumist theological concerns, see also McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 24–28. 34. See also below, §k, p. 174. 35. Some scholars assume that the word prs in the targum is borrowed from Greek phoros ‘tax, tribute, gift’; see McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 108 n. 4. 36. For such a possibility, see also example 2. 37. For a detailed discussion on these and related verses, see above, chap. 3, §2, §a. 38. Jonathan translates the parallel text (2 Sam 24:2) am[ ˆwbçj ty ‘the number of the people’.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 163 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

163

22:16 (an “addition”) were translated ˆynmw μwks tyl ‘there is no calculation or number’. (4) The word μynqzhw ‘and the elders’ in 1 Chr 21:16 (an “addition” to 2 Sam 24:17) 39 is translated aybsw ayrpsw ‘the scribes and the elders/aged persons’. We must consider this double translation in the context of the rabbinic interpretation of Lev 19:32 on ˆqz ‘an aged person’. While according to biblical Law, one should respect and rise before any aged person, at least some of the targumic (including Onqelos, Neofiti, and PseudoJonathan) 40 and talmudic rabbis rendered this to respect a Torah scholar only. 41 This probably explains the double translation in Targum Chronicles: ‘the elders/aged persons’ were none other than ‘the scribes’ (of Torah, of course!). (5) The phrases μbl lkb ˚ynpl μyklhh ‘who go before you with all their heart’ in Solomon’s prayer (2 Chr 6:14//1 Kgs 8:23) were each translated twice: ˚mdq ˆyjlpw ˚tjrab ˆyklhm yd ˆwhbld arxy lkbw ˆwhçpn tw[r lkb who go in your ways and worship before you with all the desire of their soul and with all the inclination of their heart. 42

(6) For Hezekiah’s request of the Levites, wçdqth ‘consecrate yourself’ (2 Chr 29:5, an “addition”), Targum Chronicles translated ˆwçdqttw ˆynymz wwh ‘be ready and consecrate yourself’. 43 In the cases discussed in examples 3, 5–6, it is possible that the targumist was uncertain which Aramaic word/expression applied to the Hebrew word(s), though he had the example of Targum Jonathan available to him. It is also possible that he inferred that the Hebrew word(s) had similar dual meanings. Another possibility is that, at least in some cases, he was attempting to stress the Scripture’s viewpoint in a clearer way. Nevertheless, quite interestingly, there are several cases in which the targumist translated two or more Hebrew words that are similar in meaning with one Aramaic word; for instance, the words lkw . . . fpçwhy dqyw hwhy ynpl wlpn . . . hdwhy ‘And Jehoshaphat bowed . . . and all Judah . . . fell 39. On this verse in Chronicles compared with MT 2 Sam 24:17 and 4QSama, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 245–46. 40. However, the Peshi†ta translates almost verbatim: rqym tywhw ,μaq tywh abs μdq ˆm ˚nm çyçqd ˆml. 41. On this issue, see in detail Kalimi, “Targumic and Midrashic Exegesis in Contradiction to the Peshat of Biblical Text,” 13–32, esp. p. 24. 42. Jonathan translates in the parallel place (1 Kgs 8:23) simply: lkb ˚mdq ˆwklhmd ˆwhbl ‘who go before you with all their heart’. 43. Compare Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 243.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 164 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

164

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

before the Lord’ (2 Chr 20:18, an “addition”) are translated . . . fpçwhy [rk w yy μdq w[rk . . . hdwhy çna lkw ‘And Jehoshaphat bowed . . . and all Judah . . . bowed before the Lord’. 44

d. Treatment of Geographical, Ethnographic, and Personal Names The targumist identifies the biblical geographical and ethnographic names with his own contemporary sites and people, for example: to 1 Chr 1:5, “The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras,” he adds, “The names of their provinces are Phrygia, Germania, the Medes, Macedonia, Bithynia, Usia, and Thrace [another version reads: Germania, Gethia, Hamadan, Ephesus, Bithynia, Musia, and Thrace]”; 45 in 1 Chr 1:16, Hamathite is identified as Antiochite. He makes the same identification in his targum on 1 Chr 18:9. 46 However, interestingly, earlier in the same chapter (1 Chr 18:3), the targumist simply uses the name Hamath. In other words, he is not consistent with his translation method. Some more examples are: in 1 Chr 1:29, Qedar is identified as Arab; and similarly with many other names listed in 1 Chr 1:5–25. 47 In 1 Chr 5:10, 20, the Arabian tribe’s name, the Hagrites, is equated with the Hongarites, probably based on the similarity of the words’ sounds. 48 In 1 Chr 21:2, the place-name Dan is identified as Pameas (modern Banias, which is in the Golan Heights). Sometimes the targumist simply translates/interprets a biblical proper name based on its similarity (or even semi-similarity) to a Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek word: (1) The name rbg ˆwyx[ (Ezion-geber) appears in Targum Jonathan on 1 Kgs 9:26; 22:49 as it is in the Hebrew text, rbg ˆwyx[. However, Targum Chronicles on 2 Chr 8:17; 20:36 translates the name alwgnrt ˚rk ‘the City of Chickens’. 49 (2) The name μym lba ‘Abel-maim’ (2 Chr 16:4) 50 is transliterated/interpreted abr[mm lba ‘Abel from the west’. Most likely, he understood (or, he read in his Vorlage) μym as μy ˆm/m ‘from the west’. 51 44. See also the Targum on 2 Chr 20:21; 25:4 compared with the Hebrew text, and discussion by McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 22, and additional examples there. 45. On these names, see the detailed discussion in ibid., 36. 46. Cf. Ps.-Jonathan on Num 13:21; 34:8. 47. See also the erudite notes on the sites by McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 36–41. 48. Compare Targum Psalms 83:7. 49. The word rbg with the meaning of ‘chicken’; see, for example, b. Yoma 21a: “If one starts out on a journey before qeriªat ha-geber, his blood comes upon his own head!” 50. The parallel text in 1 Kgs 15:20 reads: hk[m tyb lba ‘Abel-beth-maacah’. 51. Compare Gen 12:8 (μdqm y[hw μym la tyb ‘Bethel on the west, and Ai on the east’) and Gen 28:14; in both places, Onqelos correctly translates abr[m.

spread is 12 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 165 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

165

(3) The name Tarshish in 2 Chr 20:36 is transliterated swsrwf, 52 alongside the explanation abr amy ‘the Great Sea’. The targumist probably understood Tarshish to be related to qalavsshÍ ‘sea’, as also understood in the Septuagint and Targum Jonathan on Isa 2:16. 53 (4) The name rmt ˆwxxj (Hazazon-tamar, 2 Chr 20:2, an “addition”) was translated aylqd ˚ybsb (‘Thicket of Palms’). Hazazon-tamar is mentioned once more in the Hebrew Bible, in Gen 14:7. There, Onqelos and PseudoJonathan wrote Ein-gedi; that is, they identified the name Hazazon-tamar in the Hebrew Text with the common name Ein-gedi, as in fact was done by the Chronicler in 2 Chr 20:2 (followed by Targum Chronicles). 54 In contrast to Targum Chronicles, however, Onqelos and Pseudo-Jonathan did not translate the name Hazazon-tamar. (5) The names of Ishmael’s sons, “Mishma, and Dumah, Massa, Hadad, and Tema” in 1 Chr 1:30, are translated in Targum Chronicles with Aramaic words equivalent to the meanings of the names in Hebrew: aqwtçw atyxw amwrdaw apyrj arbwsmw ‘Listening and Silence and Bearer, Sharp One, and South’. The same method is used in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan in the earlier, parallel text of Gen 25:14; however, Targum Onqelos did not do this. In conclusion, though these features of Targum Chronicles occasionally appear in other targumim, namely, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (e.g., on Gen 25:14) and Targum Jonathan (e.g., on Isa 2:16), they are particularly apparent in Targum Chronicles. Perhaps, this late targumist was no longer familiar with the geographical sites and personal names that were not in use at his time.

e. Identification of Unnamed/Unknown People and of a Date Similar to the Chronicler himself, as well as other postbiblical writers and earlier rabbinic interpreters and translators, Targum Chronicles attributes names to unnamed figures mentioned in the biblical texts. As did the Chronicler, the targumist also identifies unknown persons with wellknown figures: 55 (1) The unfamiliar Edomite king Bela ben Beor (1 Chr 1:43) is identified with the well-known “Balaam ben Beor, the wicked [Num 22:5], he is, Laban the Aramean.” Here, Targum Chronicles is similar to Tg. Pseudo52. See also the targum on 1 Chr 1:7. 53. See the discussion in Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 395. Interestingly, in Tg. Jonathan on 1 Kgs 22:49, Tarshish appears as aqrypa tnyps ‘African ship’; probably it means ‘Tarshish ships’ = ‘ships that sail to Africa’. 54. For this feature of Chronicles, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 64–67. 55. On this issue, see in detail ibid., 74–77.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 166 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

166

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Jonathan on Gen 36:32 56 and to b. Sanhedrin 105a, which identifies Beor with Laban. (2) In 1 Chr 3:3, the unknown wife of David, Eglah, is identified with the well-known wife, Michal, Saul’s daughter. This equation was also made in b. Sanhedrin 21a and Genesis Rabbah 82:7. 57 (3) In a similar manner, for “Shebuel, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses” (1 Chr 26:24), the targumist wrote: “Shebuel, that is, Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses.” 58 (4) In contrast to Targum Jonathan, which translates the Hebrew text of 2 Kgs 19:35 and the parallel Isa 37:36 verbatim, ywyd akalm ‘the angel of the Lord’, the Chronicles targumist translated “the Lord sent an angel” in the parallel text of 2 Chr 32:21 as ‘the Lord sent the angel Gabriel [another version has Gabriel and Michael]’. (5) The targumist also identifies a date in his translation of 2 Chr 15:10– 11 (an “addition”), which reads, “And they gathered themselves together at Jerusalem in the third month, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Asa. And they offered to the Lord on that day the booty which they had brought, seven hundred oxen and seven thousand sheep.” Because the event happened in the third month, the month of Sivan, the targumist identified the undefined “on that day” with the well-known event in that month: ‘on that day in the Feast of Weeks’!

f. Explanations of Problematic Words and Phrases The book of Chronicles contains several difficult words and idioms that require clarification for the average reader. Some of them are hapax legomena, appearing only in Chronicles or only in Chronicles and its parallels in Samuel–Kings. The targumist approaches this problem in various ways. (1) 1 Chr 16:3 (// 2 Sam 6:19) recounts that David gave everyone “a loaf of bread and an eshpar and an ashisha.” The meaning of the two last terms is unclear. 59 Though it is questionable that the biblical authors abbreviated some words in their writing, 60 Targum Chronicles explained these words as follows: ˆm dj anmw arwtb htça ˆm dj gwlpw adj amjld amlwf dj lkl armjd anyhb htça ‘[he gave] everyone a loaf of bread, one-sixth of a bull, and one-sixth of a hin of wine’. The targumist followed the interpretation 56. However, see Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra’s commentary on the verse, which rejects this identification. 57. For more details, see McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 56 n. 7. 58. For additional cases, see the targum on 1 Chr 2:7, 19, 55; 4:15; 8:33. 59. In fact, the exact meaning of these words remains unclear to this day; see in detail Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 26 n. 34. 60. On this issue, see S. R. Driver, “Abbreviations in the Massoretic Text,” Textus 1 (1960) 112–31; Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 302.

spread is 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 167 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

167

suggested by Rab Óanan bar Abba and Shmuel in b. Pesa˙im 36b. These rabbis considered the word rpça and hçyça to be abbreviations of =] a rp [hçyç =] ç [dja ‘one-sixth of a bull’; [ˆyh(b) =] h [hçyç(m) =] çyç [dja =] a ‘one-sixth of a hin of wine’. Thus, the targumist used traditional talmudic exposition. (2) By a similar method, the targumist interpreted the idiom fwjç bhz (mentioned three times in 2 Chr 9:15–16 // 1 Kgs 10:16–17 [twice only]) as afwjk [yh hyty ˆylz[d] anyns abhd ‘gold that they spun like thread’. That is, [rça =] ç ‘that, which’ and fwj ‘thread’. 61 Similarly, he translated 1 Chr 2:24, blkb, as blk tybb ‘in the house of Caleb’. (3) Most likely the word ynfq in the extraordinary expression hb[ ynfq yba yntmm (2 Chr 10:10 // 1 Kgs 12:10) was used as a euphemism for the male organ. However, it is generally translated/interpreted as ‘my little finger is thicker than my father’s loins’. The targumist offers an explanation for the phrase, as follows: abad ytrwbg ˆm apyqt ytwçlj ‘my weakness is more powerful than my father’s strength’. This explanation obviously roams far from the simple meaning of the Hebrew text. (4) The metaphor jlm tyrb ‘a covenant of salt’ (2 Chr 13:5) 62 is nicely interpreted in Targum Chronicles: ˆqtmtmd rçpa tyl amyd ywmd amkyh jlm μyq aml[ d[ dwd tybdm anflç yd[td rçpa tyl ˆydk yh μl[l ‘by a covenant of salt— just as it is impossible that the waters of the sea could ever be sweetened, so it is impossible that authority should ever pass from those of the house of David’. (5) The enigmatic expression in 2 Chr 26:15 (an “addition”) twnbçj bçwj tbçjm was identified in the LXX with the translator’s contemporary mhcana;Í (‘machines’). In the Peshi†ta, the expression is completely omitted, most likely because it was vague to the translator himself. Targum Chronicles, however, translates twnmwa dbw[b aylylj yqçwq atbçjmb atwnmwa anma ‘through the work of a skilled craftsman, he made cleverly designed devices, hollow towers’. 63 However, this translation/interpretation also became problematic: what is the purpose of locating hollow towers “on the towers and on the corners”? (6) The difficult idiom twçpjh tyb (Qere: tyçpjh) in 2 Chr 26:21 (// 2 Kgs 15:5) is translated simply atwrygs tyb ‘Leprosy House’. 64 The targumist understood the ‘Free House’ in Scripture euphemistically, meaning just the opposite, the ‘Locked House’ (i.e., ‘Leprosy House’). Similarly, the idiom 61. Compare the commentary ascribed to Rashi, ad loc. 62. On this term, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 354–55, and additional references there. 63. For a detailed discussion of this expression, see Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 49 n. 45. 64. On this idiom, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 112–14.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 168 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

168

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

‘Life House’ (μyyjh tyb) means just the opposite: the ‘Death House’ (tyb μytmh, i.e., ‘cemetery’); and rwhn ygs ‘lots of brightness/eyesight’, means ‘the blind’.

g. Handling Contradictory Parallel Texts The targumist attempted to harmonize contradictions between Chronicles and its parallel texts in the earlier historical books. His technique was unique: combining both contradictory versions of a story and creating a “complete,” third version: (1) According to 2 Sam 17:25, Abigail married a man named Ithra, the Israelite, while in 1 Chr 2:17, she married Jether, the Ishmaelite. The Aramaic Targum Chronicles combined the contradictory parallel texts and asserted: rty hyl ˆyjwwx wwhw alarçy rty açm[d abaw açm[ ty tdyly lygybaw 65ala[mçy ‘Abigail beget Amasa, whose father was Jether, the Israelite, but was called Jether, the Ishmaelite’. 66 (2) In order to reconcile 2 Chr 2:13, “the son of a woman of the daughters of Dan, and his father a man of Tyre,” and 1 Kgs 7:14, “he was the son of a widow of the tribe of Naphtali, and his father was a man of Tyre,” the targumist combined the texts and wrote: “the son of a woman of the daughter of Dan; this woman’s father belonged to the tribe of Naphtali, and she was married to a man of Tyre.” 67 (3) 2 Sam 23:11 tells us that the Philistines gathered together at Lehi, where “there was a plot of ground full of lentils,” while 1 Chr 11:13 remarks that “there was a plot of ground full of barley.” Targum Chronicles harmonized the contradictory texts by combining the two versions: wçynkta yatçylpw ˆyr[s aglpw ˆyjpwlf aglp atll[ aylm alqj tnsja twhw abrq yrdsl ˆmt ‘There was a plot of ground, full of crops, half of it in lentils, half of it in barley’. This interpretation is quite different from attempts in other rabbinic sources. 68 65. For the use of the phrase hyl ˆyjwwx wwhw, see also the targum on 1 Chr 2:18, 55; 8:33. 66. Targum Jonathan on 2 Sam 17:25 translates verbatim. For more on this issue, see Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 55 n. 80. 67. The same method was used later on in Kimchi’s commentary and in the commentary ascribed to Rashi, at 2 Chr 2:13. 68. See, for example, b. Baba Qama 60b, where the contradiction is solved as follows: “in one verse it is written, ‘where there was a plot of ground full of lentils’ (2 Sam 23:11), and in another verse it is written, ‘where there was a plot of ground full of barley’ (1 Chr 11:13)—He, however, might say to you that there were also stacks of lentils there that belonged to Israelites, in which Philistines were hidden.” In Ruth Rabbah 5:1, there are two quite different explanations: “Rabbi Jacob said: there were indeed lentils, but they look like barley. Rabbi Levi said: the Philistines that came tall as barley escaped short as lentils.”

spread is 9 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 169 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

169

(4) 1 Chr 21:1 states that “Satan stood up against Israel,” but the earlier text, 2 Sam 24:1, reports that “again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel.” Targum Chronicles combined the texts and observed: μyqaw larçy l[ anfs yy ‘the Lord raised up Satan against Israel’. Consequently, in harmonizing the texts, he was also stating that the act of Satan was determined by God. (5) According to 1 Sam 17:40–51, the Philistine giant Goliath of Gath was smitten by David, son of Jesse, while according to 2 Sam 21:19, he was killed by Elhanan, son of Jaare. The Chronicler harmonized the contradictory texts of Samuel, stating that Elhanan smote the brother of Goliath, who was named Lahmi (1 Chr 20:5). In other words, the two texts in Samuel speak about two different Philistine heroes, Goliath and his brother, who were killed by two different Israelites, David and Elhanan. Targum Jonathan on 2 Sam 21:19 harmonizes the contradiction by inserting “David, son of Jesse” in place of Elhanan. In fact, this approach was also used in Midrash Ruth Rabbah 2:2: “Elhanan smote—he is David”! Thus, Elhanan is understood as just another name for David himself. 69 Probably Targum Chronicles was not completely satisfied with the harmonization that was provided by the Chronicler. Instead, the targumist followed the harmonization in the earlier rabbinic sources, that is, Targum Jonathan and Midrash Ruth Rabbah, asserting: yhwja ymjl ty . . . yçy dwd lfqw tg ˆmd tylg ty lfqd amwyb tylgd ‘David, the son of Jesse . . . killed Lahmi, the brother of Goliath, on the same day that he killed Goliath who was from Gath’. Thus, David was the one who killed Goliath and his brother! He understood Elhanan to be another name for David without saying it overtly, as did Jonathan and Ruth Rabbah. In the first four cases described above, the targumist attempted to keep both parallel Scriptures, as being trustworthy: each mentions only a part of the truth, but the complete truth/information is available by combining the two texts! 70 However, the targumist did not harmonize the contradictory parallel texts consistently. Thus, for instance, he did not attempt to resolve the clear-cut contradiction between 2 Chr 8:2 and 1 Kgs 9:11–13 regarding the 20 towns in Galilee. He simply translated the verse in Chronicles verbatim, just as Targum Jonathan did earlier with the parallel verse in Kings.

69. Later this approach was also adopted by Rashi. 70. Astonishingly, this method has also been used in modern biblical scholarship. See the cases that I criticized in my Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 40–42, esp. p. 42 n. 19; idem, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 104–6.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 170 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

170

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

h. Harmonization with the Law Harmonizing the content of Samuel–Kings and the Torah is one of the characteristic features of the Chronicler’s writing. 71 It seems that the targumist not only followed the Chronicler in translating the harmonization wherever he found it in Chronicles but also in adding to it in several cases where the Chronicler had overlooked the earlier texts. Thus, the targumist’s activity (as in other rabbinic sources) reflects one step forward in the exegetical development of the Israelite/Jewish law: (1) The ritual of pouring water out before/for God is mentioned twice in the Hebrew Bible: once by Samuel (1 Sam 7:6) and the other time by David (2 Sam 23:16–17 // 1 Chr 11:18–19). This ritual was practiced during the Second Temple period. It was performed by a Temple priest at the time of the daily offering during the Feast of Sukkot. 72 Because David was not a priest, and the pouring out of water for God did not take place in the Temple, the targumist harmonized the text of 1 Chr 11:18–19 according to the standards of his time: ytçml dwd abx alw yy μdq ˆwhty aksnl rmaw ˆwhty ‘David was unwilling to drink it and gave order to pour it out before the Lord’. Consequently, David did not pour the water out himself; he gave order to an appropriate person, a priest, to pour it out “before the Lord”—that is, in the Temple! Apparently, the targumist was depending here on the harmonization of Jonathan in 2 Sam 23:16–17: ywy μdq ˆwhty aksnl rmaw ˆwhytçml dwd aba alw. 73 However, quite a different approach was taken in Midrash Samuel 20:1: 74 hyh hmbb rtwhw hyh μym ˚synw hyh gj rma arpq rb ‘Bar Kapara 75 said: it was the Feast of Sukkot, and he poured out the water on the altar, because it was in a time that allowed worship on the bamah’. 76 71. See in detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 140–56. 72. See m. Sukkah 4:9–10; 5:1–4; y. Sanhedrin 2.5; b. Taºanit 2b–3a; b. Sukkah 48b. 73. In 1 Sam 7:6, however, Jonathan solves the problem differently: for the Hebrew words hwhy ynpl wkpçyw μym wbaçyw htpxmh wxbqyw ‘they assembled at Mizpah, and they drew water and poured it out before the Lord’, he wrote, ˆwhbl wkpçw aypxml wçnktaw ywy μdq aymk abwytb ‘and they gathered at Mizpah, and they poured out their hearts as water before the Lord’. 74. See S. Buber (ed.), Midrash Samuel (Krakow: Fisher, 1893; repr., Jerusalem: Wagshal, 1965) 105–6, esp. p. 106 [Hebrew]. 75. Bar Kapara was an Israelite Sage at the end of the tanaitic–beginning of the amoraic period. His first name was the same as his father’s: Elazar. He was a student of Rabbi Judah the Patriarch, the editor of the Mishnah. 76. See also the commentary ascribed to Rashi at 1 Chr 11:19. Interestingly, the Chronicler himself did not make any harmonistic change in 2 Sam 23:6. Is this just another case of his inconsistency (for inconsistency in the Chronistic writing, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 381–92)? Or maybe the ritual under discussion was

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 171 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

171

(2) The Ephod appears in the Hebrew Bible as an item of priestly clothing. 77 However, 1 Chr 15:27 (// 2 Sam 6:14) states that “David wore a linen ephod.” Since David was not a priest (an Aaronite descendant), Targum Chronicles considered his clothing to be inappropriate. Accordingly, the targumist changed the Masoretic Text when he translated, fwdrk dwd l[w ≈wbd ‘David also wore a sleeved linen tunic’. 78 Because Targum Jonathan on the parallel text in 2 Sam 6:14 was translated ≈wbd fwdrk rysa dywdw (which it also stated about the young lad Samuel in 1 Sam 2:18), possibly Targum Chronicles relied on Jonathan. (3) 2 Chr 9:11 (// 1 Kgs 10:12) relates that Solomon made of the algum wood “steps for the House of the Lord and for the king’s palace, and harps and lyres for the singers.” Targum Chronicles made sure that the “harps and lyres for the singers” were given to the appropriate group: “for the sons of Levi who were to offer praise on them.” Once again, the targumist probably relied on the same addition in Targum Jonathan at the parallel text of 1 Kgs 10:12. (4) 2 Chr 26:21 (// 2 Kgs 15:5) states: “Uzziah the king was a leper until the day of his death. He lived in twçpjh tyb [Qere: tyçpjh] as a leper, for he was cut off from the House of the Lord.” Because according to the Torah lepers must live “outside the camp” (Lev 13:46), 79 the targumist added the words μlçwrym rb ‘outside Jerusalem’ after the phrase atwrygs tyb ‘Leprosy House’, exactly as was done in Targum Jonathan at the parallel place in 2 Kgs 15:5, and earlier by Josephus (Ant. 9.227): “and so for a time he dwelt outside the city.” 80 These examples demonstrate that the targumist was even stricter than the Chronicler himself in harmonizing the ancient text with current Jewish law: he generally harmonized wherever the author of Chronicles failed to do so. Furthermore, as reflected in the examples, Targum Chronicles borrowed several translations from Targum Jonathan on the Prophets.

i. Textual Variants/Harmonization As usual in the ancient translations of Scripture, including the Aramaic targum, several passages reflect a reading slightly different (a diverse developed and stabilized in the period after the Chronicler? It is hard to provide a definite answer. 77. See C. Meyers, “Ephod,” ABD 2.550. 78. For the Greek loanword fwdrk ‘having sleeves’, see McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles, 100 n. 19. 79. See also Num 5:1–4; 12:10–15; 2 Kgs 7:3. 80. See also in this chapter, above, §4f, no. 6, pp. 167–68.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 172 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

172

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Vorlage) from the Masoretic Text. 81 For instance, the phrase whyrkz ymyb μyhlah tarb ˆybmh ‘in the days of Zechariah, who had understanding in the seeing of God’ (2 Chr 26:5, an “addition”) appears in the targum as yyd atljdb πylmd whyrkz ymwyb ‘in the days of Zechariah, who had understanding in the fear of the Lord’. Now, on the one hand, it is possible that the targumist had a different Vorlage, which read taryb, which also appears in some Hebrew manuscripts and may also reflect the Greek, Syriac, and Vulgate versions. 82 On the other hand, it is possible that the targumist was attempting to harmonize the theologically difficult phrase with the Lord’s statement in the Torah, “for no man shall see me and live” (Exod 33:20). If so, this would have been in line with memra, the anti-anthropomorphizing of Elohim/Adonai.

j. Anachronism Due to the strong influence of the targumist’s contemporary social and economic institutions and norms, there are many anachronisms in Targum Chronicles. Thus, the targumist assumed the existence of the later educational institution House of Study (açrdm tyb) / Yeshiva (atbytym, talmudic academy) in premonarchic and monarchic Israel: David’s ancestor Boaz is μjl tyb tbytmd aymkj br ‘the head of the [Torah] scholars in the Yeshiva of Bethlehem’ (1 Chr 4:22); his warrior, Benaiah, is described as ywdymlt l[ atbytm çyr ‘head of the Yeshiva of [David’s] students’ (1 Chr 11:25); and David himself is described as a talmudic scholar. The words “in Gibeon lived the father of Gibeon” (1 Chr 8:29) are translated ‘in Gibeon lived the rabbis of Gibeon’ (ˆw[bgd ynbr). 83 The gold shekels that David paid Ornan, the Jebusite, became bhdd ˆy[ls ‘gold selas’. Similarly the targumist translated 2 Chr 9:16 as ‘three hundred golden selas were used on each shield’. Moreover, the anachronistic items in Chronicles itself were replaced by the targumist’s own anachronisms: the thousands of Persian μynkrda ‘darics’ that David received as a contribution for the Temple construction (1 Chr 29:7) 84 were replaced by thousands of ˆyzwz ‘zuzes’, which commonly appear in midrashic literature.

81. Targum Onqelos and Jonathan also sometimes reflect a version different from the MT; see the examples collected in Komlosh, “Tanak, Targumim,” 744–45 (Onqelos), 754–55 ( Jonathan). 82. So also the version in y. So†ah 9.5; see also the commentary ascribed to Rashi and Ralbag. For additional examples of a possibly different version behind the targumist, see the notes in BH and BHS and in the various modern commentaries on Chronicles. 83. See also above, §4a, no. 3, pp. 159–60. 84. On this issue, see Kalimi, An Ancient Israelite Historian, 42, 45 n. 16, 65.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 173 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

173

Fig. 4. The first page of Targum Chronicles (Vatican, Urb. Ebr. 1; fol. 895a).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 174 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

174

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

k. Borrowing from the Earlier Parallel Targumim The parallel texts in Targum Chronicles depend a great deal on PseudoJonathan / Targum Yerushalmi on the Torah and on Targum Jonathan on the Former Prophets. 85 Several parallel texts demonstrate that Targum Chronicles is identical, or very similar, to Targum Jonathan on Samuel–Kings. 86 In several sections above, we have discussed cases in which Targum Chronicles may reflect use of Targum Onqelos and/or Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on the Torah, and Targum Jonathan on Samuel–Kings. 87 Further, compare, for instance, Tg. Chronicles on 1 Chr 10:3, 8 and 13:6 with Tg. Jonathan to 1 Sam 31:3, 8 and 2 Sam 6:2. There are several other examples that are discussed by other biblical scholars. 88 Moreover, sometimes Targum Chronicles cites directly from Targum Jonathan on Samuel, without paying attention to the differences that exist between the parallel Hebrew passages in Chronicles and Samuel. 89 Accordingly, Philip S. Alexander presumes that Targum Chronicles “may originally have been created by taking a Targum of the parallel passages in Kings and Samuel [sic] and extending its general style to the rest of Chronicles.” 90 Most likely, Targum Chronicles did not know about the existence of Targum Psalms, however.

5. Conclusion In contrast to some late biblical books that do not have a targum at all, Chronicles has a complete targum, though from a much later time than the translations of the earlier historical books. Rab Joseph, the Blind, probably did not write Targum Chronicles. The Sitz im Leben of the targum was the talmudic academies of the land of Israel, and its form was not finalized prior to the 8th century. Targum Chronicles was unfamiliar to the 85. For detailed research and examples, see Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 263–75. 86. For a list of the parallel passages in Targum Chronicles and Targum Jonathan on Samuel–Kings, see Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic, Volume IV A: The Hagiographa, 73–119. 87. See above, §2b, example 1 ( Jonathan and Onqelos) and example 4 ( Jonathan); §2c, examples 1 ( Jonathan), 2 (Onqelos [similarly in Pseudo-Jonathan]), and 4 (Onqelos, Neofiti, and Pseudo-Jonathan); §2g, example 5 ( Jonathan); §2h, examples 1–4 ( Jonathan). 88. On the targum on 1 Chr 11:11 compared with Targum Jonathan on the parallel text in 2 Sam 23:8, see F. Stummer, “Zur Stilgeschichte der alten Bibelübersetzungen,” ZAW 61 (1945–48) 195–231, esp. pp. 210–12. On the targum on 2 Chr 20:36 compared with Tg. Jonathan on Isa 2:16, see above, in §4d no. 3, p. 165. For some other examples, see Churgin, The Targum to Hagiographa, 266–72. It seems that further detailed research on this subject is desirable. 89. See the examples collected by Churgin, ibid., 272–73. 90. See Alexander, “Targum, Targumim,” 328.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 175 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Targum Chronicles: Setting, Lack of Interest, Translation

175

leading medieval Jewish scholars (who were even exegetes of Chronicles) Pseudo-Rashi and Radak. It was not printed in the first editions of the Rabbinic Bible. Though Targum Chronicles focuses on the meaning of the Hebrew text and generally follows the MT, it is not a literal translation: countless additions, expansions, interpretations, and interpolations have been inserted based on or in the spirit of the midrashic and aggadic sources. Similar to the theological approaches and translation techniques of Onqelos and Jonathan, Targum Chronicles prevents any personification of God by translating differently from the plain meaning of the Scriptures. Thus, it became an integral part of the rabbinic biblical exegetical process. Usually, eschatological and messianic issues do not appear in Targum Chronicles, just as they are not present in Chronicles itself. Themes such as the concept of God, angelology, the gift of the Law, the mission of the prophets, and the merit of Israel’s fathers are developed. Sometimes the targumist was uncertain which Aramaic word/expression to use in translating the Hebrew text; consequently, he suggested two similar words/translations. In some cases, he attempted to stress the Scripture’s viewpoint in a clearer way. Conversely, there are several cases in which the targumist translated two or more Hebrew words that are similar in meaning by using one Aramaic word for both. The targumist identified biblical geographical and ethnographic names with his own contemporary places and people, though he was not consistent in this. He sometimes translated/interpreted a biblical proper name based on similarity to a Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek word. These attempts are occasionally apparent in other targumim but are particularly noticeable in Targum Chronicles. Similar to the Chronicler and some postbiblical writers and earlier rabbinic interpreters and translators, the targumist under review attributed names to unnamed figures and identified unknown persons with well-known individuals. The targumist approached difficult words and idioms that require clarification in various ways. He also attempted, though not consistently, to harmonize the contradictions between Chronicles and its parallel passages in Samuel–Kings. His technique is distinct: he combined the two contradictory versions of one story and created a “complete,” third version. He attempted to retain both Scriptures as being trustworthy: each mentions only one part of the truth, but the “complete truth/information” is available by the combination of the two texts. Creating a harmonization of Samuel–Kings and the Torah is also a characteristic of the Chronicler’s writing. Targum Chronicles not only follows the Chronicler by translating these harmonizations wherever the targumist found them but also by adding other harmonizations. Thus, the

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 176 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

176

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

targumist reveals evidence of another step forward (in addition to other rabbinic activities) in the development of Jewish law. Due to the strong influence of contemporary social and economic institutions and norms on the targumist, there are many anachronisms in Targum Chronicles. As usual in ancient biblical translations, several passages in the targum reflect a slightly different Vorlage. The parallel texts in Targum Chronicles show dependence on Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on the Torah and Targum Jonathan on the Prophets. Targum Chronicles also reflects possible use of Onqelos. However, apparently Targum Chronicles did not know of Targum Psalms.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 177 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chapter 11

Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual 1. Introduction In this chapter I will review the use of Chronicles in various religious liturgies and ceremonies that have become important elements of Jewish daily life. 1 I begin by compiling some of the texts from Chronicles that are used in various Jewish prayers and blessings. I will examine the possible use of Chronicles in a Haftarah reading (which precedes the reading of the Torah portion in the synagogue on Saturdays, holidays, and fast days). Included in this chapter will be discussion of a phrase from Chronicles that appears in the Passover Haggadah. And, finally, I will discuss the midrashic description of the Lord as donning tefillin containing a citation from the book of Chronicles.

2. Prayers and Blessings The Jewish daily prayer book, the Siddur, is the most popular book in Jewish life. No book so completely unites the dispersed people of Israel. If any single volume can tell us what it means to be a Jew, it is the Siddur which embodies the visions and aspirations, the sorrows and joys of many generations. The whole gamut of Jewish history may be traversed in its pages; it is a mirror that reflects the development of the Jewish spirit throughout the ages. Interwoven into the texture of the prayers are passages from the Bible, the Mishnah, the Talmud and the Zohar. The poetic and philosophic creations of numerous known and unknown authors constitute a considerable part of the Siddur. No other book so thoroughly expresses the creative genius of our people [= the Jewish people] across the centuries. 2

1. On Jewish liturgy and its historical development, see I. Elbogen, Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History (trans. R. P. Scheindlin; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society / New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1993). 2. P. Birnbaum, Daily Prayer Book: haSiddur haShalem (New York: Hebrew Publishing, 1977) xi.

177

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 178 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

178

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

What is the place of the book of Chronicles in the Siddur compared with the Siddur’s use of other biblical books? The following paragraphs attempt to clarify this issue. The daily Jewish liturgy as well as the liturgies of various holidays and special occasions include many citations of idioms, verses, and paragraphs—first and foremost from the Hebrew Bible. Generally speaking, many of the prayers were formed by combining a variety of large and/or short phrases and passages from several biblical books and by bringing many literary genres together into a single literary unit. This unique literary method can be defined figuratively as a “mosaic style.” 3 The biblical citations mostly come from all the Five Books of Moses, from all the books of the Latter Prophets and, naturally, from numerous poems and rhymes drawn from the deep well of human expressions wonderfully uttered in the Five Books of David—the book of Psalms. However, there are also a few citations from all the other biblical books and genres, such as from the wisdom literature (e.g., Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Job), poetic books (e.g., Lamentations, Song of Songs), the book of Daniel, and the story of Esther. From the early historical books—or if you wish, the Deuteronomistic History—the citations are taken (not surprisingly) from a variety of prayers, speeches, and unique expressions scattered throughout a number of texts. Thus, for instance, there are citations from the Song of Hannah (1 Sam 2:1–10), David’s song of deliverance (2 Samuel 22), the prayer of Solomon (1 Kings 8), the prayer of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 19:15–19), 4 the prayer in Ezra 9:6–15, and the communal prayer in Nehemiah 9. In the liturgies, there are also citations of a few short expressions from these books. Note, for example, the famous reply of David to Gad the prophet in 2 Sam 24:14, “David said to Gad, ‘I am in great distress. Let us now fall into the hand of the Lord, for his mercies are great; but let me not fall into the hand of man,’ ” and in another passage the acknowledgment of the Israelites, “The Lord alone is God; the Lord alone is God!” (1 Kgs 18:39b). 5 Citations from Chronicles in the Jewish liturgies are selected similarly. There are a number of passages that come from the prayers, speeches, 3. This literary device is well known as having been used in Chronicles itself: the Chronicler combined a variety of verses from many biblical books in his writing. See, for example, the last section of David’s words in 1 Chr 12:18: yhla ary ypkb smj alb jkwyw wnytwba (‘for no wrong on my hands, then let the God of our fathers see it and rebuke you’). This is a paraphrase of Gen 31:42c: jkwyw μyhla har ypk [ygy ta (‘God has seen my affliction and the labor of my hands and rebuked you last night’); also compare 2 Chr 15:5 with Zech 8:10; 2 Chr 16:9 with Zech 4:10; and 2 Chr 30:9 with Mal 1:9. 4. This text is parallel to Isa 37:15–20 but was omitted by the Chronicler (see 2 Chr 32:20ff.). On the omission, see Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 27–29. 5. See the daily Ta˙anun service and Seli˙ot.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 179 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual

179

and poetic expressions that appear exclusively in Chronicles, as well as from a psalm in Chronicles that has a parallel in the Psalter, which was used on various occasions: (1) The longest passage from Chronicles is the psalm that appears in 1 Chr 16:8–36, which is a combination of several passages (with some modifications) from the book of Psalms (Ps 105:1–15; 96:1–13; 106:1, 47– 48). This passage, which recounts the thanksgiving of David and all Israel as they transferred the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:1–16:3 // 2 Sam 6:1–19), is cited completely in the Verses of Praise and Song (Pesuqei deZimrah), a part of the daily, Sabbath, and festival morning prayers/ service (Sa˙rit). 6 Additionally, 1 Chr 16:31, “The heavens will be glad and the earth will rejoice; they will proclaim among the nations, ‘The Lord reigns!’ ” is also recited in a text named dwbk yhy ‘May the glory of the Lord endure forever’, which is also included in the Verses of Praise and Song and was compiled from an anthology of verses, first and foremost from the Psalter. The text revolves around the sovereignty of God and the role of his nation, Israel. Furthermore, v. 35 (// Ps 106:47), “And say, Save us, O God of our salvation, and gather us together, and deliver us from the nations, that we may give thanks to your holy name, and glory in your praise,” is cited in Seli˙ot (Forgiveness) on the third day of the Ten Days of Repentance (hbwçt ymy trç[), as well as before the Ark is opened on Sim˙at Torah Haqafot (Circuits), among the various biblical verses recited. The Sages’ preference for citing Chronicles rather than the Psalms probably stemmed from their view that Chronicles is a more complete and coherent collection of verses than scattered verses from Psalms. (2) The second text I want to discuss is the prayer of David in 1 Chr 29:10–19, which has no parallel in any other biblical book (an “addition”). The opening words of David, larçy yhla hwhy hta ˚wrb ‘Blessed are you, Lord, God of Israel’ (1 Chr 29:10a), form the integral opening of almost every blessing (for anything whatsoever) that the Sages composed: ˚wrb . . . wnyhla hwhy hta ‘Blessed are you, Lord, our God . . .’. Moreover, part(s) of this prayer is cited in several important liturgical events, for example:

6. Pesuqei deZimrah, also called the Hallel; see, for instance, b. Sabbat 118b: “Rabbi Jose said: ‘May my portion be of those who recite the entire Hallel every day.’ But that is not so, for a Master said: He who reads Hallel every day blasphemes and reproaches [the Divine Name]?—We refer to the ‘Verses of Song.’ ” Generally, Pesuqei deZimrah is considered a late (2nd century c.e.), less-important part of the prayer. See I. Ta-Shma, “Pesuqei deZimrah and Their Status in the Prayer Book,” in Studies in Memory of Professor Zeªev Falk (ed. M. Corinaldi et al.; Jerusalem: Mesharim, 2005) 269–75 [Hebrew].

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 180 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

180

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

(2a) 1 Chr 29:10–13 is recited in the Verses of Praise and Song (Pesuqei deZimrah): (10) And David blessed the Lord in the presence of the entire congregation; David said: “Blessed are you, Lord, God of Israel, our forefather, forever and ever. (11) Yours, O Lord, is the greatness, and the strength, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in heaven and in earth is yours; yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and you are exalted as head above all. (12) Both riches and honor come from you, and you rule over all; and in your hand is power and might; and in your hand it is to make great, and to give strength to all” (lkl qzjlw ldgl ˚dybw hrwbgw jk ˚dybw lkb lçwm htaw). 7

(2b) One (v. 11) or two verses (vv. 11–12) from this passage are also used on all occasions of removing the Torah Scroll from the Ark in synagogue services and in the Seli˙ot service of the High Holidays. It is also used in some medieval piyyutim (i.e., Jewish liturgical poetry), for instance, in Solomon ibn Gabirol’s The Kingly Crown (1.8–9), which is integrated into the evening Atonement liturgy. 8 (2c) The third chapter of twba tksm Mishnah 7 states, “Rabbi Eleazar of Bartotha 9 says: Give Him from His own, for you and what you have are His. And so has David said, ˚l wntn ˚dymw lkh ˚mm yk ‘For everything is from You, and from Your own we have given You’.” The last phrase in the Mishnah is a citation from David’s prayer in 1 Chr 29:14b. Because each of the six chapters of the tractate is read in synagogues on the six Sabbaths between Passover and the Sabuot Festival, this chapter is recited every year on the third Sabbath following Passover. 10

7. Compare these words with those in the prayer of Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 20:6): ‘and you rule over all the kingdoms of the nations; and in your hand there are power and might, so that none is able to withstand you’ (ˆyaw hrwbgw jk ˚dybw μywgh twklmm lkb lçwm htaw bxythl ˚m[). 8. See in detail, below, chap. 14, §2, pp. 256–58. 9. The exact location of Bartotha is unknown. However, it is probably identical with the village of Totha located in Galilee. Thus, it should be read, ‘Rabbi Eleazar, son/man (rb) of Totha’. For additional references to Rabbi Eleazar of Bartotha, see A. Hyman, The History of Tannaim and Amoraim ( Jerusalem: Boys Town, 1964) 1.177 [Hebrew]. 10. Note that the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church ([New York: Seabury, 1953] 73), which has been adopted by the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A., uses 1 Chr 29:11 and 14b in the worship service. The editor of the book (his name is not provided) adds: “These sentences may be used on any other occasion of public worship when the Offerings of the People are to be received.” Furthermore, The Book of Common Prayer . . . in the Dominion of Canada ([Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1918] 273) inserted 1 Chr 29:14b into the morning and evening prayers. Thus, these verses from 1 Chronicles 29 are commonly appreciated and used by Christians as well as Jews.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 181 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual

181

(2d) 1 Chr 29:18 in David’s prayer, “O Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, our fathers, keep this to the eternal credit of the thoughts of your people’s heart, and direct their heart to you,” is combined with the well-known prayer lawg ˆwyxl abw ‘A Redeemer Shall Come to Zion’, which is said on several occasions: in the weekday morning service, in the Min˙ah (afternoon service) for Sabbath and festivals, and in the Maariv (evening service) for the conclusion of Sabbath. (3) A phrase from David’s prayer and thanks in 1 Chr 17:16–27 (// 2 Sam 7:18–29) is included in the central prayer of the Sabbath Min˙ah service: ≈rab dja ywg larçy ˚m[k ymw ‘And who is like your people, Israel, a unique nation on the earth?’ (1 Chr 17:21 // 2 Sam 7:23). All these texts were most likely chosen for their unique significance and the eye-catching lyrical style in which they praise God and/or express mankind’s longings. (4) There are some other, much shorter texts that were taken from Chronicles. One is 1 Chr 12:19b [ET: 18b], the poetic reply of Amasai, chief of the captains, to David’s inquiry about whether the men have come to him in friendship: yçyAˆb ˚m[w dywd ˚l ˚rz[l μwlçw ˚l μwlç ,μwlç ˚yhla ˚rz[ yk We are yours, O David; and on your side, O son of Jesse! Peace, peace to you, and peace to the one who supports you! For your God supports you.

This text is included in a collection of various biblical texts revolving around the topic of ‘peace’ (μwlç), which is used along with other collections of verses of blessing (i.e., on redemption, salvation, knowledge of God, rescue, etc.) at every Sabbath Conclusion (tbç yaxwm). (5) Another text is taken from the speech of Jehoshaphat in 2 Chr 20:12 (an “addition”): wnyny[ ˚yl[ yk hç[n hm [dn al wnjnaw ‘we do not know what we should do, but our eyes are on you’. This verse is cited in the Ta˙anun prayer (Bowing the Head), which is normally read on weekdays in the morning service (Sa˙rit) and in the noon/afternoon service (Min˙ah), following the Amida (the so-called Eighteen/Nineteen Benedictions), in the Seli˙ot service, and on special occasions and festival days. (6) In a funeral service, when the deceased is taken to the cemetery, the mourners recite a prayer entitled Acceptance of Judgment. One of the passages says: “Blessed is he, for his judgment is true. He ranges throughout everything with his eye, and he recompenses each man according to his account and with a just sentence. All must acknowledge his name.” Now the short phrase wny[b lkh ffwçmw ‘he ranges throughout everything with his

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 182 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

182

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

eye’ is based either on Zech 4:10, “The eyes of the Lord, which range throughout the whole earth,” or on the same phrase cited in chiastic order in the speech of Hannani, the seer, to Asa, king of Judah (2 Chr 16:9), hwhy ≈rah lkb tffwçm wyny[ ‘The Lord—his eyes range throughout the whole earth’; 11 or perhaps both passages appeared “before the writer’s eyes.”

3. Haftarot As with the other books in the Writings, Chronicles is not used for the Haftarah reading in synagogues on the Sabbath or on holidays in any of the versions of the Haftarot (i.e., Sephardi, Oriental, Ashkenazi, Italian, or Yemeni). Because all the Haftarot were derived from the Former and Latter Prophets only, 12 the Haftarah reading was always taken from Samuel (7 times) or Kings (16 times), even if there was a parallel text in Chronicles. I must emphasize that, even when a Haftarah from a book of the Former Prophets had a parallel in one of the other books of the Writings, the reading from the Former Prophets was preferred. For instance, the Haftarah of the Torah portion Haazinu (The Song of Moses, Deuteronomy 32) must be read from 2 Sam 22:1–51, even though there is a parallel in Ps 18:1–51. Furthermore, the Haftarot reading of Shemini Azeret in the Diaspora is 1 Kgs 8:54–66, which in fact clearly shows that Solomon and “all Israel” were unfamiliar with or at least did not celebrate the Shemini Azeret! This reading from Kings is preferred to the parallel text in 2 Chr 7:4–10, where the Chronicler harmonizes the content of 1 Kgs 8:65–66 and the law about Azeret in Lev 23:33–36, showing that Solomon and “all Israel” were celebrating the Shemini Azeret (2 Chr 7:7–8). 13 In other words, the Haftarot reading was taken from the Prophets even though it contradicted the very existence of the holiday, rather than from Chronicles, which clearly attests its ritual celebration!

4. Passover Haggadah The most cited book in the Passover Haggadah is, of course, the book of Exodus. However, there are also many citations from Genesis and Deuteronomy (once from Numbers [Num 9:11] but not even once from Leviticus), Psalms (e.g., 69:25; 113–18 [Hallel], 126, 136, and a few verses from other psalms), and a few from prophetic books, such as Jeremiah (10:25 // Ps 79:6–7), Ezekiel (16:6–7), Joel (3:3), and Lamentations (3:66). There is only one quotation in the Haggadah from Chronicles: when the rabbis in11. See in more detail Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 253. 12. For an interpreted collection of Haftarot, see M. Fishbane, The JPS Bible Commentary: Haftarot (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2002). 13. See, in detail, Kalimi, Reshaping of Ancient Israelite History, 147–49.

sprea dis 6 points long

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 183 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual

183

terpreted the expression hywfn [rzbw ‘and [I will redeem you] with an outstretched arm’ (Exod 6:6), they used 1 Chr 21:16c, hywfn wdyb hpwlç wbrjw μlçwry l[ ‘and his [the angel’s] sword drawn in his hand, outstretched over Jerusalem’, 14 for their supporting Scripture: “And with an outstretched arm—refers to the sword, as it is expressed: ‘His drawn sword in his hand, outstretched over Jerusalem.’ ” 15 According to the rabbis, therefore, the “outstretched arm” of God refers to the wielding of a sword, although the word sword is not mentioned in the Exodus story. It seems that “the sword” is interpreted here as a metaphor for God’s sentence and retribution. It is also worth mentioning that Josh 24:2–4 is the only text from the Former Prophets that is cited in the Haggadah. 16

5. Excursus: The Lord’s Tefillin Aspects of the mutual relationship between the Lord and Israel are discussed in a midrashic passage in b. Berakot 6a. The presumption of the midrashic rabbis is: just as Jewish people wear ˆylypt (tefillin ‘phylacteries’) 17 in order to revere the Lord and demonstrate love for him, so the Lord wears them in order to show his love and special attitude toward his people, Israel. Characteristically, the rabbis attempt to relate their own theological concepts to various biblical verses. First, they try to verify from the Bible that God puts on tefillin: Rab Avin, son of Rab Ada, in the name of Rab Isaac, says: How do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, puts on tefillin? For it is said: “The Lord has sworn by his right hand and by the arm of his strength” (Isa 62:8). “By his right hand”—this is the Torah; as it is said: “At his right hand was a fiery law unto them” (Deut 33:2). “And by the arm of his strength”—this is the tefillin; as it is said: “The Lord will give strength unto his people” (Ps 29:11). And how do we know that the tefillin are a strength to Israel? For it is written: “And all the peoples of the earth shall see that the name of the Lord is proclaimed over you, and they shall be afraid of you” (Deut 28:10), and it has 14. These words do not appear in the parallel text of the MT version of 2 Sam 24:17. Although the words of 1 Chr 21:16d do appear in 4QSama as well (in chiastic order), 1 Chr 21:16c is missing! See ibid., 245. 15. I am grateful to my son, Etai Kalimi, for this reference. 16. See also the medieval qina for the Ninth of Ab, which refers to the murder of the prophet-priest Zechariah (2 Chr 24: 20–22) below, chap. 14, §§5–6, pp. 261–66. 17. Tefillin are two black leather boxes containing four passages from the Pentateuch written on parchment: Exod 13:1–10; 13:11–16; Deut 6:4–9; 11:13–21. They are bound by black leather straps on the head and the left arm during every morning service (Sa˙rit) except the Sabbath or a holy day.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 184 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

184

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

been taught: Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: This refers to the tefillin of the head. 18

Following the personification of the Lord as someone who puts on tefillin, the rabbis inquire what is written in God’s tefillin. They suggest various biblical verses; among them (in fact, the first one) is a verse from Chronicles: Rab Na˙man, ben Isaac, said to Rab Óiyya bar Avin: What is written in the tefillin of the Master of the Universe?—He replied to him: larçy ˚m[k ymw ≈rab dja ywg ‘And who is like your people, Israel, a unique nation on the earth’ (1 Chr 17:21//2 Sam 7:23). Does, then, the Holy One, blessed be He, sing the praises of Israel?—Yes, for it is written: “You have affirmed the Lord this day . . . and the Lord has affirmed you this day” (Deut 26:17–18). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel: “You have made me a unique entity in the world, and I shall make you a unique entity in the world.” “You have made me a unique entity in the world,” as it is said: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deut 6:4). “And I shall make you a unique entity in the world,” as it is said: “And who is like your people, Israel, a unique nation on the earth” (1 Chr 17:21). Rab A˙a, bar Rava, said to Rab Ashi: [since the tefillin of the head have four cases,] this accounts for one case; what about the other cases?—He replied to him: [They contain the following verses]: “For what great nation is there . . .”; and “What great nation is there . . .” (Deut 4:7, 8); “Happy are you, O Israel . . .” (Deut 33:29); “Or has any god ever attempted . . .” (Deut 4:34); and “to make you high above all nations” (Deut 26:19).

It is possible that, by personification of the Lord as someone who puts on tefillin, the rabbis are attempting to encourage Jews to put on tefillin—that is, to resemble the Lord’s act. Interestingly, this issue is repeatedly discussed in Sefer haZohar. 19 Similarly, Daniel C. Matt notes that “the commandment of tefillin was widely disregarded in France and Spain in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The Zohar, seeking to reinforce the commitment to this mitzvah, emphasizes its mystical significance.” 20 Indeed, an echo of this disregard clearly emerges in the commentary of Bechor Shor (France, 12th century) on Num 12:8: hnwbl[m μhl ywaw . . . μdhAywsykw twzwzmw ˆylpt l[ ˆyqpqpmç yt[mç wnym[ ynbm μg 21 ˆydh ta ˆtyl μydyt[ μh πa yk ,hrwt lç 18. Because the tefillin on the left arm are usually covered by one’s sleeves, “the peoples of the earth” cannot see him; they can only see the tefillin on the head. 19. See Haqdamat Sefer haZohar I 13b (D. C. Matt, The Zohar: Translation and Commentary [Pritzker edition; Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004–6] 1.96); Sefer haZohar, Parashat Lek Leka I 141a; Parashat waYetße I 147a (ibid., 2.282, 321). 20. See ibid., 2.282 n. 186. 21. See H. J. Issar (ed.), The Commentary of Rabbi Joseph Bechor Shor zuul, part 2: On Leviticus and Numbers (London: Hamadpis, 1960) 78 [Hebrew].

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 185 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Chronicles in Jewish Liturgy and Religious Ritual

185

And also I heard from some of our people who doubt [i.e., disregard] tefillin, and mezuzot and the covering of blood [with dust]. . . . Shame on those who disrespect the Torah; they will be judged [punished]!22

Nonetheless, the attribution of a verse from the book of Chronicles in the first case discussed on God’s tefillin shows a remarkably positive attitude by the rabbis toward Chronicles.

6. Conclusion The various Jewish liturgical and religious rituals do not refer to the book of Chronicles very often. The citations from Chronicles in the Jewish liturgy naturally are from the prayers, speeches, and poetic expressions recorded solely in Chronicles, as well as from a psalm in the book that was compiled from several passages in the biblical book of Psalms. This situation is similar to citations from the early biblical historical books, from Joshua to Kings, in a range of Jewish liturgies. The Chronicles passages used on various occasions in Jewish prayers are mainly from the psalm in 1 Chr 16:8–36 and the prayer of David in 1 Chronicles 29. A few other phrases in the book are cited: David’s prayer (1 Chr 17:16–27); the speech of Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 20:12); and perhaps a phrase from the speech of Hanani, the seer (2 Chr 16:9). As a matter of fact, many of the quotations from Chronicles appear in the central prayers of the liturgies, for example, in the Verses of Praise and Song (Pesuqei deZimrah) and A Redeemer Shall Come to Zion, which are used in daily and holiday prayers; likewise the use of 1 Chr 29:11–12 on every occasion of removing the Torah Scroll(s) from the Holy Ark in the synagogue services. As with all other books in the Ketubim, Chronicles does not appear in the Haftarah reading for the Sabbath, holidays, or feasts. In view of the fact that all the Haftarot were derived from the Prophets, the Haftarah readings were largely taken from Samuel and Kings, even if there was a parallel passage in Chronicles or Psalms. Thus, for example, the Haftarah of Haazinu (Deuteronomy 32) is from 2 Samuel 22 rather than the parallel text, Psalm 18. Moreover, this preference for taking the Haftarot readings from the Prophets was done even when the passage contradicts the very existence of the holy day and when a parallel text in Chronicles that obviously attests the celebration of it could have been used.

22. See I. Kalimi, “Die Auseinandersetzung mit den internen und äußeren Opponenten in mittelalterlich-jüdischer Schriftauslegung,” ZAW 115 (2003) 73–87, esp. p. 75. On the neglect of the command regarding the cover of blood, see also the discussion below in chap. 14, §5a, pp. 262–63.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 186 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

186

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

Only one passage from the Former Prophets appears in the Passover Haggadah, Josh 24:2–4. Against this background, even a small phrase quoted from Chronicles in the Haggadah (1 Chr 21:16c) should be considered significant. The Jews wear tefillin in order to revere God and show love for him; God also shows his love and unique attitude toward Israel in this way. Probably by personifying God as donning tefillin, the rabbis were trying to persuade Jews to put on tefillin (that is, to imitate God’s act). They attributed a verse from Chronicles (1 Chr 17:21) that appears in the first case of God’s tefillin. This is significant as a demonstration of reverence toward the book.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 189 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

chapter opening is high

Chapter 12

Medieval Jewish Biblical Interpretation: Comments and Commentaries on Chronicles 1. Introduction Compared with earlier times, in the medieval period Chronicles was given renewed attention. For the first time, comprehensive commentaries were written on the book for its own sake. Let us turn our attention to this period in detail. As I already stated in another study, in medieval times Jewish biblical exegesis flourished in a variety of locations in the Jewish Diaspora: in northern France, southern France (Provence), Spain, and the Near East. During this period, Judaism interacted closely with Christianity and Islam. This interaction saved Judaism from becoming fossilized and nonproductive and forced scholars to search for new horizons in scriptural interpretation. Indeed, disputes between Jews and non-Jews (especially Christians and Moslems) on a variety of theological issues in general and exegetical methods applied to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament in particular motivated many Jewish scholars to study the Bible on its own merits. They attempted to search and interpret the Scriptures by methods that were profoundly different from the methods of the classical rabbis in talmudic and midrashic literature. Moreover, internal disputes among several Jewish groups, such as between Rabbanite Judaism and the Karaites, pushed Sephardi Jewish scholars especially to search for new directions in biblical study and interpretation. Jewish scholars in the Islamic world were surrounded by the rich, welldeveloped Arabic language and philology. They were influenced by this and encouraged to develop their own literary languages, above all, Hebrew. Thus, the Koran’s interpretive methods and techniques began to be applied to the Hebrew Bible. Just as Moslem interpreters attempted to harmonize Greek philosophy and the Koran, Jewish exegetes sought to harmonize the theologies of the Hebrew Bible with Greek and Arabic philosophy. Sephardi-Oriental biblical exegesis developed and established itself, especially in Jewish communities under Islamic reign, such as Egypt, Babylonia, Persia, and Spain. It also developed in several Christian lands, such 189

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 190 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

190

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

as southern France, Italy, and Christian Iberia. Two primary clusters are distinguishable in Sephardi-Oriental biblical interpretation: Karaite biblical exegesis, and Rabbinite biblical exegesis. 1 While all this is true with regard to Jewish medieval biblical interpretation as a whole, it also reflects the situation for each biblical book, including the book of Chronicles. In contrast to the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and even some books in the Writings such as Psalms, Chronicles did not benefit as much from the wealth of Jewish exegetical activity in the Middle Ages, because it was never considered up to the rabbis’ standards. Nevertheless, an impressive harvest was reaped: several Jewish commentators of this period wrote worthy commentaries or made comments on the book of Chronicles. Some of this material is available to us although some was lost over time. The purpose of this chapter is to survey these exegetical works and identify authors of the anonymous works and describe the works within the framework of all the other exegetical and intellectual activity of the commentators on the one hand and their unique historical setting on the other hand. I attempt to reveal their main features and hermeneutic qualities, and I try to discover the methods and purposes underlying their interpretations. Furthermore, when the surviving material makes it possible, I strive to examine the interpretation of Chronicles against the backdrop of the commentator’s lifework. The exegetical works will be presented chronologically. 2 Because the Chronicler clarified some of the passages he drew from the earlier books, there are indeed exegetical elements in Chronicles. Principally, the Chronicler used common words and phrases instead of the archaic words found in Samuel and Kings. 3 Nevertheless, the commentaries on Chronicles as a whole should not be considered “commentaries on a commentary” or “supercommentaries,” because the essence of the book is still historiography rather than commentary. 4 1. See I. Kalimi, “Medieval Sephardic-Oriental Jewish Bible Exegesis: The Contributions of Saadia Gaon and Abraham Ibn Ezra,” in Sephardic and Mizrahi Jewry: From the Golden Age of Spain to Modern Times (ed. Z. Zohar; New York: New York University Press, 2005) 101–19, esp. pp. 101–3. 2. Except the discussion on “Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki (Rashi) and Chronicles (§8) that follows the discussion on “Pseudo-Rashi on Chronicles” (§7). Although chronologically the former preceded the latter, thematically it was convenient to present them as they appear in this chapter. I also prefer to locate the brief discussion on “The Lost Commentaries of Rabbi Joseph Kara and Rabbi Meyu˙as” (§17) and the discussion on the representative selection from Responsa literature (§18) at the end. 3. See Kalimi, “Placing the Chronicler in His Own Historical Context,” 183–84. 4. On this issue, see in detail ibid., “The Characterization of the Chronicler and His Writing,” An Ancient Israelite Historian, 19–39.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 191 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Medieval Jewish Biblical Interpretation

191

2. Saadia Gaon and the Book of Chronicles In the opening words of his Mozne Leshon haKodesh (or Sefer Moznayim; Rome, 1140 c.e.), Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra 5 describes Rab Saadia Gaon (acronym Rasag) as number one among “the elders of the Holy Language” and names him μwqm lkb μyrbdmh çar ‘foremost among commentators [lit., speakers] in every place’. 6 Furthermore, in the following generation, Ibn Ezra’s and Rabbi Judah Halevi’s disciple, the Spanish lexicographer Rabbi Solomon Par˙on, author of the well-known Jewish dictionary Ma˙beret Haºaruk (published in 1160 c.e.), describes Saadia Gaon as follows: hnqtk arqmh ta raybç μyçrpmh tlyjtw μyrbdmh çar luuxz ˆwag hyd[s wnybr wnwqytk çdqh ˆwçl [dy awhw ,μyçrpmh lk wdml wtmkjmw htnwktm l[ hdym[hw .twrja twnwçlw la[mçy ˆwçl μgw Our Rabbi, Saadia Gaon (may the memory of the righteous be for a blessing), was foremost among commentators [lit., speakers] and first among exegetes who expounded the Bible appropriately and elucidated its true meaning. All the commentators benefited from his wisdom, and he knew the Holy Language [Hebrew] accurately as well as the Ishmaelite language [Arabic] and other languages. 7

Maimonides, another colossal medieval Sephardi Jewish scholar, said of Saadia: hlyg awhç ypl ,μwlçh wyl[ ,(ˆwag hyd[s br =) awh alwl hwhy trwt dbatç f[mkw wswmlwqw wbtkbw wnwçlb w[ydwhw ,ldldynç hm hnmm qzyjw ,μl[n hyhç hm hrwth ˆm If not for our master Saadia Gaon, Torah would have been forgotten among the Jewish people, because he discovered the hidden [matters of the Torah], strengthened all that was weakened, and clarified it by his teaching and writing. 8

This well-respected, renowned theologian, commentator, and grammarian of the Gaonic era, Rab Saadia Gaon (b. Dilaz, Egypt, 882, d. 942, Baghdad), believed that “our nation of the children of Israel is a nation only by

5. See below, §9, pp. 216–19. 6. See Abraham ibn Ezra, Mozne Leshon haKodesh (Offenbach: Zvi Hirsch Segal Schpitz, 1791) 1b [Hebrew]. For a new critical edition of Sefer Moznayim, see L. J. Patón and A. Sáenz-Badillos (eds.), Abraham Ibn Ezra, Sefer Moznayim, Introducción (en castellano e inglés): Edición crítica del texto hebreo y versión castellana (Cordoba: Almendro, 2002) 4*. 7. See Par˙on, Ma˙beret Haºaruk, sub jrp, p. 54a–b. 8. See I. Shilat (ed.), Iggerot haRambam ( Jerusalem: Maºalot, 1987) 1.144 [Hebrew]. The quotation is from Iggeret Teman (‘The Letter [to the] Yemenites’). Compare Kalimi, “Medieval Sephardic-Oriental Jewish Bible Exegesis.”

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 192 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

192

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

virtue of its Torahs” (Book of Beliefs and Opinions, treatise III, chap. 7). 9 It is no wonder, therefore, that he invested untold time and energy in making these Torahs accessible to his generation. Among his rich literary activities, Saadia translated into Arabic and interpreted the whole Torah (twice: a large and detailed work called Tafsir alTafasir [‘The Commentary of Commentaries’] by Yemenite Jews, and written for scholars; and a much shorter commentary, without philological, theological, polemical, or halachic discussions, called Tafsir, which was prepared for use by laymen), 10 Isaiah, the Twelve Minor Prophets (for which we have no manuscript, only testimony), and several books of the Ketubim, the Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Daniel, and almost all the Five Megillot. 11 As far as we know, Saadia Gaon did not produce any work (either translation or commentary) on Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings (the Former Prophets), Ezra–Nehemiah, or Chronicles. Presumably, he worked first and foremost on the biblical books that were used in everyday life in the synagogue and in Jewish liturgy and ceremonies, such as the Five Books of Moses, the “Five Books of David” (Tehillim), and the Five Megillot, as well as the prophetic and wisdom literature, which supported his philosophical-theological views on the one hand and appealed to his broad audience as useful wisdom for the present and as a source of ethical guidelines and encouragement for a better future on the other hand. If this assumption is correct, it means that, in the time of Saadia Gaon, the early and late biblical historical books (that tell about the past of the nation but do not relate to contemporary or future issues) were not of much interest, at least 9. See J. Kafich (ed.), Saadia Gaon: Book of Beliefs and Opinions: Arabic and Hebrew Versions ( Jerusalem: Research Institute and Sura / New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1970) 132 [Hebrew]; for the English version, see Saadia Gaon, The Book of Beliefs and Opinions: Translated from the Arabic and the Hebrew (trans. S. Rosenblatt; New Haven: Yale University Press / Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1948) 158. The word Torahs, plural, means the Written Torah (Hebrew Bible) and the Oral Torah (i.e., rabbinic interpretation), a polemic against the Karaites, who denied the latter. Saadia also discusses the relationship between the two Torahs in his introduction to his commentary on the Pentateuch. On this issue and on Rasag and his exegetical and theological activities, see in detail Kalimi, “Medieval Sephardic-Oriental Jewish Bible Exegesis,” 103–9; H. Ben-Shammai, “The Exegetical and Philosophical Writing of Saadia Gaon: A Leader’s Endeavor,” Peºamim 54 (1993) 63–81 [Hebrew]. 10. See the end of Saadia’s introduction to his Torah Tafsir; N. Dérenbourg (ed.), R. Saadia Ben Iosef al-Fayyoumi: Version Arabe du Pentateuque (Paris: Société Asiatique, 1893) 4. 11. For a detailed discussion on the breadth of Saadia Gaon commentaries on the Hebrew Bible, see E. Schlossberg, “An Additional View on the Exegetical Research of Rab Saadia Gaon,” Sinai 123–24 (Sefer Raphael; 2000) 581–93 [Hebrew].

spread is 12 points short

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 193 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Medieval Jewish Biblical Interpretation

193

among Rabbanite Jews. However, it is also possible that, because of Saadia’s relatively short life span, he was unable to complete an exegetical project on all of Scripture. Nonetheless, Saadia Gaon occasionally commented on Chronicles, and these comments were cited later on by his disciples and various scholars in medieval times. 12

3. The Commentary on Chronicles Ascribed to Saadia Gaon’s Student a. The Commentary and Its Author In 1874, Raphael Kirchheim published a commentary on the book of Chronicles from the Middle Ages, based on three manuscripts: (a) Rostock Hebrew Manuscript 32 (Universität Bibliothek); (b) Turin Hebrew Manuscript 124 (Königlichen Bibliothek); and (c) Munich Hebrew Manuscript 5 (Königlichen Bibliothek). 13 Kirchheim assumed that all three manuscripts were originally copied from one codex. 14 The commentary is anonymous. Based on the tosafot note on b. Yoma 9a and on the commentary under discussion, at 1 Chr 5:36, 15 Kirchheim ascribes the commentary to a student of Rab Saadia Gaon in the 10th century. Indeed, the commentator interprets several verses in the name of Saadia Gaon. 16 Notable is his testimony that Saadia Gaon cited some commentaries “from the books of the yeshiva,” without referring to what sort of books there were, who composed them, or what their quality was. Thus, Saadia’s student comments on 1 Chr 23:5 that he wrote his commentary, not by himself and not as a poet; “rather Rab Saadia Gaon, who stayed thirteen years in prison, copied from the books of the yeshiva and himself revealed comments that none had heard, and after him I worked to reveal the things in their full truth.” 17

12. See below in this chap., §3, and n. 21. For a collection of these comments from Saadia’s various writings as well as other medieval exegesis and literature (except for Karaite commentaries), see Y. Ratzaby, Collection from Rab Saadia Gaon’s Commentary on the Bible ( Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 2004; Hebrew). On Chronicles, see pp. 316– 24. 13. See Kirchheim (ed.), Ein Commentar zur Chronik. 14. Ibid., iii. 15. Ibid., 21. 16. See the commentary on 1 Chr 2:52 (Kirchheim, p. 14); 3:1 (p. 15); 4:18 (pp. 18– 19); 8:7 (p. 27); 23:3, 5 (pp. 36–37 [2x]). 17. My translation (here and below). See the commentary on 1 Chr 23:3 (Kirchheim’s ed., pp. 36–37).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 194 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

194

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

The commentator also provides explanations in the name of Rabbi Judah ibn Quraysh; 18 and in the names of the Sages of Kairouan, 19 whom he praises as μylwdg μymkj hnçmw arqm yl[b ‘learned in Bible and Mishnah; great scholars’ (1 Chr 4:18). 20 Sometimes he also refers to an unknown scholar named Yiream of Magdiel, who cites Saadia Gaon. 21 He also cites extensively from various texts of classical rabbinic literature (see below). Interestingly, in the later period, the commentary under discussion was itself cited (without mentioning its author’s name), not only by Rabbanite exegetes such as Moses Taku of Bohemia in the 13th century, but also by some Karaite commentators, such as Jacob ben Reuben (12th century), and Aaron ben Joseph I, “the Physician” (ca. 1250–1320). 22

b. The Structure and Main Features of the Commentary Generally speaking, the commentary is quite short. It comprises 55 small-format pages in the Kirchheim edition, on 65 chapters of Chronicles. It can be divided into three parts: (a) a beautiful, lyrical (although partially unclear) opening (pp. 1–3); (b) a relatively detailed commentary on the genealogical lists in 1 Chronicles 1–9 (pp. 4–31); and (c) comments on some chapters in the narrative section of the book, 1 Chronicles 10— 2 Chronicles 36 (pp. 31–55), with special attention given to the organization and duties of the Levites in 1 Chronicles 23 (almost ten pages in length, pp. 35–45). He justifies his detailed discussion of the 24 divisions of the priests by saying: μyçq μyrbdh yk ,μyrbdh wla dwmll μyabh w[fy alç μymwtsw μymwtjw ‘[I detailed this in order] to avoid students’ confusion on these issues, because they are difficult, sealed, and unclear’. 23 The importance of the genealogies in the commentary under review is reflected, first and foremost, in the large amount of space that the exegete devotes to them. Furthermore, at 1 Chr 7:19, the commentator draws the readers’ attention to the value of the genealogical lists, which are mostly related to the genealogies in Genesis, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and require very careful reading. He speaks on the textual corruptions in these lists of Chronicles: 18. See the commentary on 1 Chr 2:6, 15, 24, 55 (Kirchheim, pp. 9, 10, 12–13, 15); 3:1, 17, 24 (pp. 15, 16 [2x]); 4:21 (p. 19); 6:16 (p. 22); 8:7 (p. 27). 19. Kairouan (also known as Kairwan, Kayrawan, or Al Qayrawan) is located in Tunisia (ca. 160 km south of Tunis). 20. See the commentary on 1 Chr 3:17 (Kirchheim, p. 16); 4:9 (p. 18); 6:16 (p. 22); 8:7 (p. 27). 21. See the commentary on 1 Chr 3:1 (Kirchheim, p. 15); 1 Chr 6:16 (p. 22); and 1 Chr 8:7 (p. 27). 22. Kirchheim, pp. vi–vii, and references to their writings there. 23. See ibid., 38.

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 195 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

Medieval Jewish Biblical Interpretation

195

,ˆysjwy rps tarwm rmwj wtyjçh μywwya ynpmw ,μyrbdb μyqdqdm μnyaw μyawr μyarwqhw μhb qwdqd ylbm μysnw μysrhmw μysrwg The readers see the material inaccurately, and due to their misunderstanding, they promptly change, corrupt, and run away [from the text] without [reading] accurately. 24

Because he frequently bases his comments on the midrashic literature, and because it mainly comments on the genealogical lists in Chronicles, 25 it is no wonder that this particular part of the commentary is disproportionably large. The exegetical approach of the commentator is essentially midrashic. At the end of his commentary on 2 Chr 36:13, he states his exegetical intention as follows: wayxwhlw tma rbd [dyl ,hdgab ˆyy[l hxwrhw ,rxql μa yk ˚yrahl ytab al yna lba hzyaw bwfb çrpm hzya μyçrpmh ˆwçl [dtç ,twah ˚l hzw .hkrb wyl[ awbt—wtmal aybm ˚k rjaw ˆwçl rwxqb arqm lç wfwçp hljt çrpmç ˆçrp lk ,bwfb alç çrpm .μlwgb ˆhypwljw bwf ˆwrtp hz—wnytwbr çrdm txq But I did not come to [compose] a long [commentary]—rather, a short one. Anyone who wants to go in depth, to know a true explanation, and to bring out its truth, may a blessing come to him. This should indicate to you who is a good commentator and who is not: any commentator who explains at the outset the simple meaning [peshat] of the Scripture briefly and afterward presents some midrashim from our Sages—he is a good commentator [lit., solution]; but the opposite [i.e., a great deal of midrashim and some peshat], he is an uncultivated person [lit., golem].

In addition to the above-mentioned scholars from Babylonia and North Africa, he frequently cites a range of talmudic (both Jerusalem and Babylonian), midrashic, and targumic sources. 26 Once he also refers to the piyyut of haKalir (1 Chr 23:5). 27 Thus, scattered classical rabbinic material is gathered into one central location. Though he makes clear that wnytwbr yrbdm zwzl ˆyaw ‘there is no way to depart from our rabbis’ words [explanations]’, 28 sometimes he rejects interpretations of talmudic rabbis. 29 From time to time, he even addresses 24. See ibid., 25. All of the English translations are mine. 25. See above, chap. 9, §5, pp. 149–52. 26. He refers to Targum Onqelos, Targum Jonathan, and Targum Chronicles. See, for example, the commentary on 1 Chr 6:42 (Kirchheim, p. 22); 1 Chr 12:33 (p. 32); 1 Chr 15:18 (p. 33); 1 Chr 18:17 (p. 34); 2 Chr 15:16 (p. 51); 2 Chr 20:2 (p. 52). 27. Kirchheim, Ein Commentar zur Chronik, 40. 28. See the commentary on 1 Chr 4:23 (ibid., 19). 29. See, for instance, the commentary on 1 Chr 11:13, 22 (ibid., 32); see also the commentary on 1 Chr 9:20 (p. 30).

00-Kalimi-Chronicles.book Page 196 Friday, October 9, 2009 4:14 PM

196

Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature

some “historical-critical” questions. Thus, he remarks on 1 Chr 3:24: 30 ynn[ d[ lbbwrzmw wyh djyb arz[w lbbwrz alh wyrjalç twrwd sjyl lwky ˚ayh arz[w twrwd hrç[ ‘ “And Anani, seven”—. . . Since Zerubbabel and Ezra lived at the same time, 31 and from Zerubbabel to Anani there were ten generations, how could Ezra account for the genealogies after his time?’ 32 Some of the additions/omissions in the parallel texts of Chronicles and other biblical books are explained this way: “this is the method of the two books: what is detailed by one is shortened by the other as much as he can” (at 1 Chr 9:3). 33 The commentator sometimes stresses the possibility of scribal errors in the copying of some Hebrew letters. For example, he ascribes the difference between tpyd in 1 Chr 1:6 and tpyr in Gen 10:3 to a mistaken interchange of the letters d and r because of their graphic similarity. 34 Sometimes he illustrates his comments with parables, 35 creative folk etymologies, and wordplays. In 1 Chr 4:41, 36 for instance, the nomadic tribal name Meunim (Meunites) is explained as “those who dwell in caravans [twnw[mb], villages, and towns.” In his commentary on 1 Chr 21:12, he bases his explanation on a wordplay between rbd (‘reply, answer’) and rb