THE SCRIPTURES

AND
THE SCROLLS
 SUPPLEMENTS
TO

VETUS TESTAMENTUM
EDITED BY
THE BOARD OF THE QUARTERLY

JA. EMERTON - PHYLLIS A. BIRD - W.L. HOLLADAY

A. VAN DER KOOIJ - A. LEMAIRE - R.E. MURPHY - B. OTZEN
R. SMEND - JA. SOGGIN - Je. VANDERKAM - M. WEINFELD
H.G.M. WILLIAMSON

VOLUME XLIX
 THE SCRIPTURES
AND
THE SCROLLS
STUDIES IN HONOUR OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE
ON THE OCCASION OF HIS 65TH BIRTHDAY

EDITED BY

F. GARCtA MARTtNEZ
A. HILHORST AND cJ. LABUSCHAGNE

EJ. BRILL
LEIDEN • NEW YORK • KÖLN
1992
The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the
Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library
Resources.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The Scriptures and the serolls: studies in honour of A.S. van der
Woude on the occasion of his 65th birthday / by F. Garcia Martinez,
A. Hilhorst, and CJ. Labuschagne.
p. cm.-(Supplements to Vetus testamentum, ISSN 0083-5889;
v.49)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 9004097465 (alk. paper)
I. Bible-Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Apocryphal books-
Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Woude, A. S. van der.
11. Garcia Martinez, Florentino. 111. Hilhorst, A.
IV. Labuschagne, C. J. V. Series.
BS410.V452 vol. 49
[BS413]
221 s-dc20
[221.6] 92-33127
CIP

ISSN 0083-5889
ISBN 90 04 09746 5

© Copyright 1992 by E.J. BrilI, Leiden, The Netherlands

All rights reserved. No part 01 this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any Jorm or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written
permission rif the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items Jor internal or personal

use is gran ted by E.J. Brill provided that
the appropriate fies are paid directly to Copyright
Clearance Center, 27 Congress Street, SALEM MA
01970, USA. Fees are subject to change.
PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS
 CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
List of Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Xl
E. Tov, 4QLevd (4Q26) .............................. 1
c.J. LABUSCHAGNE, 'You Shall not Boil a Kid in its Mother's
Milk'. A New Proposal for the Origin of the Prohibition ... 6
J.A. EMERTON, The Translation of Isaiah 5,1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUlTEN, The Intertextual Relationship between
Isa 11,6-9 and Isa 65,25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
W.A.M. BEUKEN, Isa 29,15-24: Perversion Reverted ......... 43
W. McKANE, Jeremiah 30,1-3, Especially 'Israel' . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
R.P. CARROLL, Night without Vision. Micah and the Prophets ... 74
C. VAN LEEUWEN, The 'Northern One' in the Composition of
Joel2,19-27 .................................. 85
G. WALLIS, A Note on Ps 45,7aa ....................... 100
M.J. MULDER, Does Canticles 6,12 Make Sense? 104
B. OTZEN, Michael and Gabriel. Angelological Problems in the
Book of Daniel ................................ 114
J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG, Some Remarks on a Newly Found
Syriac Text of the Book of Judith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
A. HILHORST, The Speech on Truth in 1 Esdras 4,34-41 ....... 135
P.R. DAVIES, Redaction and Sectarianism in the Qumran Scrolls. 152
M.A. KNffiB, A Note on 4Q372 and 4Q390 ................ 164
F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ, The Last Surviving Columns of 11 QNJ ... 178
G. STEMBERGER, The Maccabees in Rabbinic Tradition .. . . . . . . 193
J. NEUSNER, How the Bavli Shaped Rabbinic Discourse: The
Case of Sifra ................................. 204
J.W. ROGERSON, Writing the History of Israel in the 17th &
18th Centuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ, A Bibliography of A.S. van der Woude ... 228
Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
Plates 286
 PREFACE

The present volume was compiled as a respectful tribute to A.S. v AN DER

WOUDE and presented to hirn on the occasion of his 65th birthday, which
coincided with his retirement as professor of Old Testament and Intertes-
tamental Studies at the State University in Groningen, achair he held for
more than thirty years.
The purpose of the contributions constituting this FestschriJt is to
honour this renowned scholar for his invaluable contribution to the study
of the Old Testament, the Dead Sea Scrolls and related literature. The
wide range of his scholarly work is attested by the impressive list of
publications brought together at the end of the volume.
The title, The Scriptures and the Scrolls, reflects the two fields of
study to which he has devoted his scholarly life, not only by doing re-
search hirnself, but also by stimulating many of his colleagues to collab-
orate in publications initiated by hirn. His great ability to initiate joint
publications is evidenced by his editorship of the famous Dutch series
Oudtestamentische Studien and of the handsome introduction to the study
of the Old Testament, lnleiding tot de studie van het Oude Testament, by
his co-editorship of the great Dutch commentary series De Prediking van
het Oude Testament and of the popular series Tekst en Toelichting. Een
praktische bijbelverklaring, by his being Editor-in-Chief of the three-
volume Bijbels Handboek (of which two volumes have so far been
published in English translation), and, last but not least, by his founding,
developing and editing of the internationally highly valued Journal for the
Study of Judaism.
The contributions, a melange of studies covering the wide range of
VAN DER WOUDE's interests, have been arranged according to the order:
Hebrew Bible (following the sequence of the books), Apocrypha, Dead
Sea Scrolls, Rabbinic Tradition, etc. The editors and the other contributors
to the volume feel that they represent scholars all over the world, who
know hirn and his work and hold hirn in great esteern.

The editors
 LIST OF PLATES

Plate 1: 4QLevd, Frags. 1 - 4 PAM 43.046

Plate 2: 4QLevd , Unidentified frags. 1 - 7 PAM 43.046; Frag. 4
PAM 42.163 + 42.748
Plate 3: llQNJ Co!. - X, PAM 43.993 + 43.997
Plate 4: 11 QNJ CO!. - VIII, PAM 43.999
Plate 5: 11QNJ Cols. - VII - VI, PAM 43.999 + 43.998
PIate 6: llQNJ Co!. - V, PAM 43.998
Plate 7: llQNJ Co!. - IV, PAM 43.996
Plate 8: llQNJ Co!. - III, PAM 43.995
Plate 9: llQNJ Cols. - 11 - I, PAM43.994 + 44.009
 ABBREVIATIONS

AB Anchor Bible.
AGJU Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des
Urchristentums.
AJSL American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature.
ALGHJ Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen
Judentums.
AnBib Analecta Biblica.
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament.
AV Authorized Version.
BBB Bonner Biblische Beiträge.
BDB F. BROWN, S.R. DRIVER, and c.A. BRIGGS, Hebrew and
English Lexicon of the Old Testament.
BETL Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium.
BHS Biblia hebraica stuttgartiensia.
Bib Biblica.
BiOr Bibiotheca Orientalis.
BJ Bible de Jerusalem.
BJS Brown Judaic Studies.
BKAT Biblischer Kommentar: Altes Testament.
BO Biblica et Orientalia.
BOT Boeken van het Oude Testament.
BZAW Beihefte zur Z4 W.
BZNW Beihefte zur ZNW.
CB Coniectanea Biblica.
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly.
DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert.
DIT Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift.
BB Btudes Bibliques
EC Evangelisch Commentaar
EHAT Exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament.
ETL Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses.
EÜ Einheitsübersetzung.
FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen
Testaments
GK Gesenius's Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch, tr. A.E. Cow-
ley.
xu ABBREVIA TIONS

HAL Hebräisches und aramäisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament.

HAT Handbuch zum Alten Testament.
HTR Harvard Theological Review.
HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual.
HUCM Monographs of the Hebrew Union College.
ICOT International Commentary of the Old Testament.
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature.
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies.
J.-M P. JOÜON - T. MURAOKA, AGrammar of Biblical Hebrew.
JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism.
JSHRZ Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit.
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament.
JSOTS Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement
Series.
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies.
JTS Journal of Theological Studies.
KAT Kommentar zum Alten Testament.
KBS Katholieke Bijbelstichting.
KJV King James Version.
MT Masoretic Text.
NAB New American Bible.
NBG Vertaling van het Nederlands Bijbelgenootschap.
NCBC New Century Bible Commentary.
NEB New English Bible.
NJV New Jewish Version.
NKZ Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift.
NTS New Testament Studies.
NTT Nederlands theologisch tijdschrift.
OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis.
OLZ Orientalistiche Literaturzeitung.
OS Orientalia Suecana.
OTL Old Testament Library.
OTS Oudtestamentische Studien.
POT De prediking van het Oude Testament.
PVTG Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece.
RB Revue Biblique.
REB Revised English Bible.
RechBib Recherches Bibliques.
RQ Revue de Qumran.
 ABBREVIATIONS xiii

RSV Revised Standard Version.

RV Revised Version.
RVV Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten.
SANT Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament.
SBB Stuttgarter biblische Beiträge.
SBL Society of Biblical Literature.
SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series.
SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series.
SBM Stuttgarter biblische Monographien.
SBS Stuttgarter Bibelstudien.
SFSHJ South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism.
SJLA Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity.
SNT Supplements to Novum Testamentum.
SOTS The Society for Old Testament Study.
SPB Studia Post-Biblica.
STDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah.
SUNT Studien zum Umwelt des Neuen Testaments.
SV Statenvertaling.
SVT Supplements to Vetus Testamentum
SVTP Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha.
THAT Theologischer Handkommentar zum Alten Testmaent.
ThB Theologisch Bücherei.
TOB Traduction Oecumenique de la Bible.
TSAJ Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum.
TU Texte und Untersuchungen.
TWAT Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament.
VT Vetus Testamentum.
WBC Word Biblical Commentary.
WMANT Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen
Testament.
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament.
ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft.
ZB Zürcher Bibel.
ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft.
 4QLevd (4Q26)

BY

Emanuel Tov

Jerusalem, Israel

Physical description

The text of these fragments is not easily readable as the ink has corroded
and eaten through the leather, thus often creating the impression of a
negative. At times this process has caused the disintegration of the leather
itself (note lines 12-13).

Technical data

Fragment 4 probably encompassed at least one additional line (0) before

the preserved text, containing the beginning of chapter 17 which would
have started at the beginning of the line. The column would thus have
contained at least 18 lines.
Average numbers of letters per line for fragment 4 is 55, and average
reconstructed width is 13,5 cm.
The distance between the lines is 0.7 to 1.0 cm. for fragment 4. There
is no evidence for ruling for fragments 1-4. Note however unidentified
fragments 1-2.
The various fragments composing fragment 4 presented separatelyon
photographs 42.163 and 42.748 have been combined on photograph
43.046.

Contents

The fragments preserve the following passages from Leviticus:

14,[26]-[30] 14,33-[37] 15,20-24 17,[1]-[12]

Orthography

The orthography is very elose to MT.

Mus. Inv. 197,198 PAM 43.046 (42.748,42.741,42.163)
Earlier numbers: CI5A, C15B.
2 E. TOV

Frg. 1 Lev 14:[26]-[30]

PAM 43.046 (42.748, 42.741, 42.163)

[1"l'l7J'il 1li::J~l'\::J 1il~il ilTil1" 1"l'?l'\7JlVil 1il~il Ip ?li 1il~il i'~'

j?~' 17JlVil 17J1]

[vacat 1m1 il1il' 'JD? O'7JliD li::JlV 1"l'?l'\7JlVil 'D~ ?li 1lV]N 17JlVil 'l[7J]

Fl'\ l'J1"l
[1"l'J7J'il 1ilO7Jil 11l'\ ?]11 itö ?11 itilN 'l[7JlVil 17J 1il~il28]

[01 t:l1j?7J ?li 1"l'l7J'il '?]11 (JJi11::J ?li' 1"l'J7J'il '1'[ 1ilJ ?li']
[1ilO7Jil lVl'\1 ?li 11"l' 1il~il rp ?]li 29
1lVl'\ 17JlVil 1~ ':U"l[i11 ClVl'\il]

[ilJ1'il 'J::J 17J 0'11"li1 17J 1nl'\il 1"ll'\ illVli''''' i11il' 'JD? 1'?li 1D~?]

Undecipherable rernnants of letters on lines 1,6.

VARIANfS

14:28 (4) [j]il1J .w. ] lilJ tri

14:29 (5) l1.)Ulil 1il tri] l1.)UlJ.w.

Frg.2 Lev 14:33-[37]

PAM 43.046 (42.163, 42,748)

3 lines of text separated between fragments 1 and 3, which probably

belonged to the same column

['MJ' ilTnl'\? O~? 1m 'Jl'\ 1lVl'\ 1liD Y1l'\ ?l'\ 'l'\J1"l ']5" 1ml'\? l'1il[l'\ ?l'\']

[17Jl'\? 1il~? 1'1i111"l'::Jil ,? 1lVl'\ l'\::J1 o~mnl'\

O~1"lTnl'\
3S
y]1N 1"l'JJ nl1[1~ li1J]

Oil~il l'\::J' 010::J 1"l'::Jil1"ll'\ UD' 1il~il] ;1[']~i36 1"l;:):) '? il~[1J li1J~]

[l'\J' P 1nl'\' 1"l'::J::J 1lVl'\?:l l'\7JO'] l'\'?1 1"ll1i~il li1J 1'1[l'\ 1'11l'\1?]

[lilJil ilJil1 lilJil1"ll'\ ill'\1,37 1"l'::Jil1"ll'\ 1'11l'\1? 1il~il]

 4QLEV D (4Q26) 3

VARIANTS

14:33 (1) l~'iilN ] liilN ftI

14:33 (1) i~~~;] il:)N'? ftI
14:36 (4) mi'i~il ;)11
;)11 ] ;)llil ftIml5
14:36 (4) N~'?~] N'?~ ftIm

Frg. 3 Lev 15:20-24

PAM 43.046 (42.163)

(1'11:J O:J::>' il:J::>Ill7J:J lJlJil ?::>1" ~7Jö' 1'?lJ :JlllI1 i]rVN[ ?::>1 ~7Jö']

[1'?lJ :JlllI1 illl~ '?::> ?::>:J lJ]ijil ?1::>;" :Ji17il 1lJ ~i,)[ö1 tJ'7J:J yni1]

[?lJ 1~ ~1i1 :J::>Ill7Jil ?lJ tJ~123 :Ji]17il 1lJ ~r.,6'[ tJ']7J:J[ ym1 1']1[1:J O:J::>']

:J::>lll' :J::>]til tJ[~]i" :J[ilJil 1lJ ~7Jö' 1:J 1lJ1l:J 1'?lJ I1:Jlll' ~1il illl~ '?::>il]

VARIANTS

15:22 (2) '?~:,,] '?~~ ftIm

4 E. TOV

Frg.4 Lev 17:[1]-[12]

N
.......
.......
........

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

.......
r-

I
PAM 43.046 (42.163, 42.748)

['JJ ?::l ?~, ,'JJ ?~, 11il~ ?~ 1J" 17.)~? illzm ?~ i11il' 1J"']

0;::0
,
r
n
r
.,r:
·r
[lV'~ lV'~' 17.)~? i11];1[' ];11~ 1lb[~] 1:Jiil ilT O;1'?~[ n17.)~' ?~1lV']

·n

--r:
[Tl] ,~ JlV::l ,~ 1'lV tm]lb' 1lV~ ?X1lV'J 1l[il 1li11 ?~1lV' n'J7.)]

['~'Jil ~? ,11,7.) ?il~ n]fl!) ?[~];4 mn7.)? il~m7.) O[nlV' 1lV~ ,~ mn7.)J]
.·n...,
.I"-

.I"-

.I"-
tl'-

['iltmlV" nn'J n'1]? 0:Sj1~1? i11il'? C'7.)?lV 1X[ il?l1 ,n~ mlVl1?]
·0

;~
.......
...,
rr

r-
e
e
e
r

o
r
R
r:
r:

t:)
.I"-

.I"-

.I"-

[PlV7.) 'm? i11il'? P1]~ iJ'1j?il? 'J~"J' ~,? i37[m ?i11~ nn!:l ?N' ymJ]
.ß..
.P

.r
.......
E
...,

rr
r

r
CI

ß..

z;
r:

r:

n
~

['7.)11 J1j?7.) ~'ilil lV'~il ]fli::lJ' l!:llV ci [~]1;1[il lV'~? JlVn' c, i11il']

.......
,r:
r-
o

r
r:
.I"-

['J!:l ?11 C'nJT Cil 1lV]X o;i'rbT m~ ?x1lb[' 'JJ '~'J' 1lV~ 1117.)?5]
.I"-

.z;

.r

·r
·0

.'5 ;r:
.z;
.z;
·n
·e
.r:
"-'

~
n
...,

...,
h
er
o
r

r
r

r
r
CI

r:

n
~

~
.I"-

.I"-
.,

[C'7.)?lV 'nJT mJn 1il::lil ?~] i37;7.) ?i11~ nn!:l ?[~ i11il'? C~'Ji11 il'lVil]
.~
.!1

.......
,
E
2

r
CI

o
z;

z;
r:
~

r:

n
r:
t:)
r:
['1117.) ?il'~ nn!:l il'il' ]r1:JT7.) ?11 C'il nx[ 1il::lil v1n6 cm~ il'il'?]

,,]17 mJT'
.I"-

.I"-
-r::.

[C1'l1lV? Cil'nJT n~ ~,?,7 i11;1[']? [nn'J n'1? J?ni1 1'tJj?i11]

or: ..r:
.5

.......
E
...,
rr

r
n
e
e

r
r

r
E

ß..
n
r:

'0
.I"-

.I"-

[vacat Cn1'? Cil? n~T il'iln C?,l1 nj?n Cil'1n~ C'JT Cil 1lV~]
'i'
r
,

rr

...,
r
h

--
o

o
r

o
ß..

z;
r:

r:
r:
h

r:

r:
t:)
~

="
[1lV~ C::l,m 1'P 1lVN 1lil ]1)'j[, ?~1lV' n'J7.) lV'~ lV'N 17.)~n Cil?~,8] 12

[i11:i'? 1T1N mlVl1? 'JNJ'j' ~? i37;7.) ?;1[1]X r1l1[!:l ?N" mT 1N i1?11 i1?11'] 13

[C::l,m 1lil 1lil 1m ?]XilV' n'J7.) lV'~ lV'~110 ;['7.)l17.) ~'ilil lV'~i1 n1::lJ']
"-'

r
....r:
....rr:
o
n
n

'4
.I"-

.I"-

[iln~ 'T11::li11 C'il n~ n?::l~];1 lV!:lJ:J 'J!:l n~ 'nm, 0[, ?::l ?::l~' 1lV~]
...., ·r,n

:-0
.r

15
,

r
CI

n
n
z;

z;
h
.I"-

.I"-

.I"-

[mmil ?11 C::l? 1'nm 'J]X1 X1;1 m'J ilVJ ?,::l lV!:lJ[ '::l" il7.)l1 J1j?7.)]
.5
n

r-
o
n

P
R

R
r:
~

t:)
n

16
:;::

12
.I"-

.I"-

['JJ? 'T117.)~ P ?11 1!:l::l' lV!:lJJ ~'il C'il '::l C::l'nlV!:lJ ?11 1!:l::l?]
-~

,
...,
n

at:)
r
h
n

r
n
n

CI
n
t:)

r:

~
r

o
r
CI

CI
n

r:
~

17

The transcription is mainly based on photograph 43.046. Some details are

better visible on photograph 42.748 which is also included in the plates.
Undecipherable remains of letters are visible on lines 11 and 17.
 4QLEy D (4Q26) 5

YARIANTS

This fragment partly overlaps with 11 QpaleoLev. fragment H (Lev 16:34-

17:5).
17:3 (2) ?N;lIJ'J .,l[il .,lil1 cf. (5ABFMalii 1\ niiv lTPOO'T'JMTWV TWV
lTPO<1KH~EVWV EV fJ~tv and 16:29; 17:8, 10, 13] >
11 QpaleoLev JII Jf1

17:3 (3) il:;m~] rm~ 11QpaleoLev JII Jf1

17:4 (4-5) 1J~"'J' - [n1l1J!.1?] = nn') n',,? D:ll1:;.,? il1i1'? D'~?lIJ 1~ il?!.1 1M n1l1J!.1?
1~'Jil N? 1!.1m ?il~ nI1;) ?~1 rmJ 1ilönllJ'1 Jf1 ; IOOT€ lToLilcraL
airro €ls bhoKal'JT~a 1\ crWn']PLOV KVpl'll B€KTOV ds
6cr~Ttv €vwBlas Kat ßs liv crc/xi'o ~~W Kat ElTt TTtV
6upav Tils crKT]vils TOU ~apTvplov ~Tt EVE'YKlJ airr6 (5 ]
> 11 QpaleoLev (for 1J~'J' in 4Q see v 9 JII) JII

17:4 (5) 1J'''j7il? =(5mssJf1 ] J'''j7il? 11 QpaleoLev JII 11:01

17:5 (8) ?il1~ ] ?il~ JII Jf1

17:6 (9) ri:Sb = Jf1 JII] TO 6vcrLacrn']pLov KUK~ fLlTEVaVTL (5*

17:6 (9) [i11il'] there is room here for an added ,tON as in Jf1
17:7 (10) ~1?1] ~?1 JII Jf1

17:9 (13) ?;;[1]N ] ?il~ JII Jf1

17:10 (14) I1'J~ = Jf1 JII] 'l:J~ JIIms =TWV v"wv (5~ cf. v 13
17:10 (15) I1~] > Jf1 JII
17: II (16) ;lIJJ ?1::l = (5 (miO'T'JS craPK6s) 10, cf. v 14] .,lIJJil JII

17:11 (16) 1~1J = (5 at~a aVToU, cf. v 14] D1J JII Jf1
 'YOU SHALL NOT BOIL A KID IN ITS MOTHER' S MILK'
A NEW PROPOSAL FOR THE ORIGIN OF THE PROHIBITION

BY

C.J. Labuschagne

Haren, The Netherlands

This prohibition, occurring in Ex 23,19b; 34,26b and Deut 14,21 b, might

serve as the perfect example of a text which is in itself straightforward
and unambiguous, but whose true function and precise intention are far
from clear and are hard to elucidate. It might also be taken as an example
of how we as exegetes, interpreting a text, often devote little attention to
its literary context, but are inclined to concentrate on the Sitz im Leben
and the historical, more particularly the religious background, in terms of
which we try to explain it. This does not mean that historical research is
of minor importance: on the contrary, it remains a vitally important aspect
of exegesis. However, it must not be entered into at the expense of or as
a substitute for the primary study of the text in its context.
If we look up the commentaries and detailed studies on the prohibition
we cannot avoid the impression that no more than lip service has been
done to the literary context, while answers to the questions raised have
been sought in the historical background. There i~, however, an explana-
tion - and this may be adduced as a mitigating circumstance - namely
that the prohibition, in all three literary contexts, is placed at the very end
and so may give the impression of being a sort of appendix, with little or
no connection with the context. But even if it were an appendix, we
would still be obliged to ask what might be the function and the point of
such a 'loose addition' in its literary context. Further examination might
reveal that the apparent 'loose addition' was no mere appendix, but a
structural, functional and integral part of the context.
Before proceeding to a further investigation of the three literary
contexts I shall fIrst provide abrief survey of the ideas that have been
 YOU SHALL NOT BOIL A KID IN ITS MOTHER' S MILK 7

offered in explanation of this fascinating prohibition l . When I review the

various opinions, my intention is not to select any one of them as the
correct one or the most plausible; my aim is to make use of these inter-
pretations and their background in carrying out a new investigation of the
literary context, out of which I hope the true interpretation should emerge.
I cannot agree with Menahem HARAN, who says: "The plain meaning of
this prohibition has been explained in a number of ways throughout the
ages, and all we need to do is to examine the various suggestions and
select that which seems the most plausible and appropriate"2. I think we
have to do far more than merely consider the opinions already presented
and take our pick, if our aim is to take scholarly understanding on this
point a step further.
The rabbinical interpretation of the prohibition, as a general prohibition
on the simultaneous consumption of meat and milk products is well-
known. This interpretation is already to be found in the Targums (with
the exception of the Samaritan Pentateuch Targum). Onkelos, for
example, renders: "You shall not eat meat with (in) milk". It is clearly a
kind of allegorie al or symbolic explanation, a midrash halakah (WEIN-
GREEN) which goes further than the plain meaning of the text and may be
compared with the interpretation in the New Testament of the prohibition
(Deut 25,4) of muzzling the ox that treads out the com (l Cor 9,9 and I
Tim 5,18). I leave this interpretation, which gave rise to Jewish Kosher
cooking, to one side for the moment and pass on to the interpretations
based on the plain meaning of the text.
The explanation given by J.G. FRAZER 3 , among others, is based on the
principle of 'sympathetic magie' and on a taboo found among many
peoples regarding the boiling of milk: "a belief that a cow, whose milk
has been boiled, will yield no more milk and that the animal may even
die of the injury done to it,,4. A similar view is expressed by B.D. EERD-

1 For a more complete survey see M. HARAN, "Seething a Kid in its Mothers's

Milk", JJS 30 (1979), 23-35 and O. KEEL, Das Bäcklein in der Milch seiner Mutter und
Verwandtes (OBO 33, FreiburglGöttingen, 1980).
2 M. HARAN, op. eit., p. 23

3 I.G. FRAZER, Folk-lore in the O.T. III (London, 1919), 111-164, especially p. 118.

4 FRAZER, op. eit. p. 118. T.H. GASTER, Myth, Legend and Custom in the O. T. (New

York, 1969) quotes hirn with approval and J. MORGENSTERN [see HUCA 15 (1940),
116n)] also concurs, though not without critical reservations.
8 C.J. LABUSCHAGNE

5
MANS who thinks that the prohibition is based on the fear that misuse
,

of the milk might make the mother animal barren. However, our prohib-
ition was certainly not meant to safeguard milk production, and any aim
of that kind is completely irrelevant in the context, as should be obvious
to anyone.
There is a good deal of support for a number of mutually related ideas
based on the notion that what we are concerned with is a humanitarian
principle. A humanitarian interpretation in the strict sense was already put
forward by Augustine and Chrysostom, by Luther, and in modern times
by Eduard KÖNIG, the words lfJ N J'JnJ being understood as a temporal
clause: 'as long as it is still on its mother' s milk,6. In addition to linguis-
tic difficulties we might also object to this interpretation that we should
expect in this case rather a prohibition on slaughtering than on boiling.
As a matter of fact such a prohibition would clash with the fact that a
kid, lamb or calf could be sacrificed from as early as the eighth day
according to Ex 22,29(30) and Lev 22,27. Moreover, the ancient Israelites
had no objection to consuming quite young animals. Compare 1 Sam 7,9,
where it is said that Samuel offered a 'sucking lamb' - J'Jn il'JU. See also
Gen 18,8, where Abraham set before his guests, as weIl as curds and
milk, 'a fine tender calf' - JUl lllj?J p.
A humanitarian interpretation in a general sense based on the
assumption that the prohibition is directed against cruelty, goes back to
Philo and is partly based on the LXX which in all three cases renders "Tl
not with the usual ~Pl(1)o~, but with ap'flv, 'larnb, sheep'. Philo thought
that the prohibition referred in general to the boiling (seething) in the
mother's milk of 'lambs, kids or any other young animal' and not
exclusively to a kid. Since he also took account of the possibility that the
prescription might not forbid cooking in other milk than that of the
mother, his idea diverges widely from that of the orthodox rabbis. Philo's
interpretation is followed by Clement of Alexandria, Ibn Ezra and
Calvin7 , and recently by Menahem HARAN.
Since the 'humanitarian' prohibition is supposed to be directed against
cruelty, it is associated with two other prohibitions likewise presumed to

5 B.D. EERDMANS, De Gadsdienst van Israel I (Huis ter Heide, 1930), 46 and 70.

CL also G. BEER, Exodus (HAT, Tübingen, 1939), 120.

6 Luther translated: " ... dieweil es (noch) an seiner Mutter milch ist" - cL HARAN,

ap. eit., p. 27 - E. KÖNIG: " ... während es noch ein Säugling ist" - KAT, 1917, 127n.
7 See for particulars O. KEEL, ap. eit., 22ff.
 YOU SHALL NOT BOIL A KID IN ITS MOTHER' S MILK 9

be directed against cruelty, namely Lev 22,28, "You shall not slaughter a
cow or sheep at the same time as its young" and Deut 22,6, "When you
come across a bird's nest by the road ... , do not take both mother and
young". The cruel practice of muzzling the ox that treads out the corn
might also have been mentioned in this connection. Be that as it may,
there are no indications in the context to justify this interpretation.
Othmar KEEL supports this general humanitarian interpretation, but
goes somewhat further. He refers to another two related and relevant
texts, Ex 22,28b.29 (29b.30), "You shall give me your first-born sons.
You shall do the same with your oxen and your sheep. They shall stay
with the mother for seven days; on the eighth day you shall give them to
me"; and Lev 22,27, "When a calf, a lamb, or a kid is born, it must not
be taken from its mother for seven days. From the eighth day onwards it
will be acceptable as a food-offering to Yahweh".
KEEL calls his own interpretation 'religiös', because he, unlike Philo
and his followers up to and including HARAN, does not leave it at a
merely humanitarian level, but adds a religious dimension. He takes the
context very seriously and concludes that the prohibition (both Ex 23,19
and 34,26 and Deut 14,21) occurs in a sacrificial context, the offering of
the firstborn in connection with the yearly feasts. In principle he is right
as far as he goes, but further study of the context will put us in a position
to say something more precise about the Sitz im Leben.
KEEL claims to see a development from an originally Canaanite
sacrifice taboo to an expression of respect for the mother-young relation-
ship as a 'Schöpfungsordnung' and as an example of tenderness and love
that "den Fluss des Lebens im Gang hält" and a symbol of blessing and
the caring love of the godhead. He supports this claim with a great
number of representations from ancient oriental iconography, which are
fascinating in themselves, even moving. However, in my opinion, KEEL is
in this way distancing hirnself more and more from the literary context
and at the same time also from the real Sitz im Leben. It is perfectly
possible that the respect he dwells on for the order of creation and the
process of life may have had a role to play, but this role is secondary and
can be seen only in reception history. It simply cannot be deduced from
the literary context. This might well be done in the case of Lev 22,28 and
Deut 22,6, but not in the case of our prohibition. We must look even
more closely than KEEL at the literary context and let our course be
directed by the Sitz im Leben.
10 C,J. LABUSCHAGNE

KEEL's idea has recently been further worked out critically by Ernst
Axel KNAUF, who proposes a secular 'sozialgeschichtliche' interpreta-
tions. In his view it is not a question, in the context concerned, of a
cultic prohibition, since, he says, 'boiling (seething)' is not a cultic
treatment, regardless of whether it is done in milk or not. The prescription
refers to the way in which the festive meal was prepared at great celebra-
tions. He argues, rightly in my opinion, that the prohibition at the yearly
fe asts of cooking a kid in its mother' s milk only makes sense "wenn bei
diesen Festen regelmässig oder wiederholt Fleisch in Milch gekocht
wurde".
This was the favourite recipe at the feasts and the greatest luxury one
could afford for oneself or set before one's guests - cf. Gen 18,8 and the
tale of Sinuhe, in which it is said: " ... there was milk in everything that
was cooked" - and we may imagine what recipe Rebecca used when she
prepared the kid for Isaac! To this day the Arabs prepare mansaf (in
Palestine and Jordan called 'bedouin'): lamb or kid cooked in dzjamid,
i.e. reconstituted dried sour milk. Fresh milk would be unsuitable, as it
continually boils over, unless a lot of water is added 9 , or unless the milk
is added towards the end of the cooking.
KNAUF suggests that this prohibition appears in the Book of the
Covenant in its original context, whereas in Deuteronomy it has acquired
another context since, in his view, the compilers of Deuteronomy no
longer fully understood it and had made it into a general food regulation,
intended to preserve the identity of Israel, specifically in the face of the
first great influx of Arabs, who came into Palestine in the 6th or the
beginning of the 5th century B.C.E. These were the people above all who
practised this form of cookery.
KNAUF may weIl on the whole be right. I cannot agree with hirn,
however, that the deuteronomists were no longer aware of the intention of
the prohibition and for that reason turned it into a general food regulation.
To this point I shall shortly return. Nor do I find hirn justified in detach-
ing the prohibition from its cultic connections and giving it a wholly
secular interpretation. In any case KNAUF too, like so many before hirn,
has unfortunately failed to make it clear why the kid should not be boiled
in its mother's milk.

8 E.A. KNAUF, "Zur Herkunft und Sozialgeschichte Israels. 'Das Böckchen in der
Milch seiner Mutter''', Bib 69 (1988), 153-169.
9 Cf. also M. HARAN, ap. eit., 31.
 YOU SHALL NOT BOIL A KID IN ITS MOTHER'S MILK 11

Many scholars have sought the explanation for the prohibition direct1y
in the sphere of the cult. Thus B. DAUBE considered that the aim of the
prohibition was to forbid the maintaining of the old nomadic milk sacri-
fice along with the later animal sacrifices iO • The remarkable formulation
was to be explained, he thought, by the fact that its mother' s milk was
the most readily available for the preparation of the young sacrificial
animal. DAUBE has, as far as I can gather, found no supporters, since it is
a solution for which no proof can be shown (see KEEL, 35). But he must
be given credit for managing to say something meaningful on the issue of
the mother' s milk.
The idea that the prohibition deals with something within the frame-
work of the cult has well-established credentials. It goes back to an
addition in the Samaritan Pentateuch to Ex 23,19b, which can be regarded
as a possible Vorlage to a number of variant readings of the LXX: 11
Jj?Y" "il'J ~ ') ~"il illJYl nJVi nJlJ n ~T ilWY "J - "For if ye do this, it is as a
nJVi-sacrifice, an object of wrath for the God of Jacob". In a LXX
manuscript (K) the same text is furnished with the following note: öu 6
nOlWV 'tOla'(ytTlv 8umav ~to"Oc; Kat napußamc; Ecr'tlV 'tCl> 8ECl> IaK(()ß -
"For if anyone bring such a sacrifice, it is an object of hate and a trans-
gression for the God of Jacob".
In Ex 34,26b one codex reads instead of OUX e'Jlfl crE1C; - "Y ou shall
not seethe (boil)", OU npocro{cretC; - "Y ou shall not offer" , i.e. present as
a sacrifice. In Deut 14,21b a number of Greek manuscripts, including
Codex Freer, have the addition öC; yap nOlet 'tou'to, WcrEt acrnuAaKa
8'ÖcrEl öu ~tacr~a (~ta~~a/~'f\vl~a) Ecr'tlV 't4> 8E4> IaK(()ß (cf. Septua-
ginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum, Deuteronomium, ed. J.W. WEVERS) -
"Whoever does so, does as if he offered a mole; for it is an uncleanness
(object of wrath) for the God of Jacob". From these notes it is clear, in
my view, that the issue is that of a forbidden sacrificial practice. As to
what practice is concerned, I shall return to that question later. In these
notes nothing emerges that could point to the rejection of one or other
heathen practice. It is a question of practice that will not find favour with
YHWH and this in itself need not necessarily be a heathen practice.

10 B. DAUBE, "A Note on a Jewish Dietary Law", JTS 37 (1936),289-291.

11 See M. HARAN, op. eit., 33 note 28, and B. HOLWERDA, Oudtestamentische
Voordrachten nagelaten door Prof. B. Holwerda, deel IIl, Exegese Oude Testament
(Deuteronomium) (Kampen, 1957), 387f.
12 C.J. LABUSCHAGNE

The cultie-polemie interpretation, in which OpposItIOn to a Canaanite

cult practice is assumed, has Maimonides (1135-1204) as its spiritual
father. In his treatment of the dietary laws he expressed the supposition
that the prohibition covered a cultic practice in one of the heathen
festivals, but he could adduce no proof, as he himself admitted. KEEL (p.
29) speaks sharply of a cooked-up story and 'reine Spekulation'.
Three centuries 1ater Abrabanel (1437-1508) c1aimed to be able to
support the idea with what he had heard tell of a Karaitic writer, namely
that the adherents of false gods, with magie intentions, would boil
(seethe) a kid in milk (not its mother's!) and with this milk (sic!)
sprinkled trees, fields, gardens and orchards to enhance their fruitful-
ness l2 . In J.G. FRAZER'S book (op. cit., 117) the milk from the Karaitic
story has become 'its mother's milk' and since then the myth has taken
its place in modern biblical scholarship although no evidence of any such
fertility rite has ever been found.
When in 1933 C. VIROLLEAUD published a somewhat imperfect text
found in Ugarit, the later Text 52 in GORDON (= CTA 23), there beg an a
remarkable piece of interpretation history. In GORDON's translation this
text reads: "By the fire, seven times, the heroes coo(k a ki)d in milk, a
lamb in butter". H.L. GINSBERG in 1935 connected this faintly obscure
and ambiguous text with the prohibition on cooking (boiling/seething) a
kid in its mother' s milk. That in this text there was no mention of
mother's milk was a pity but did not seem to be an objection!
Many exegetes have since then been convinced that evidence for the
existence of such a rite among the Canaanites(!) has been supplied. Since
the end of the sixties, however, the fallibility of this idea began to show,
when research by DE MOOR, HERDNER, LOEWENSTAMM and others
suggested that quite probably something different occurred in the text, 13
so that little of the kid or of the milk remained. In the translation by
CAQUOT, SZNYCER and HERDNER, the text runs: "Que sur le feu, les
jeunes heros piongent sept fois le coriandre dans le 1ait, la menthe dans le
beurre fondu" (KEEL, 37).
Towards the end of the seventies this truth began to work its way
through to the exegetes. P.C. CRAIGIE'S dramatie volte-face may serve as
an example of the switch. In his commentary on Deuteronomy (Grand

12 This account comes in fact not from Abrabane! himself, but from S. BOCHARTUS,

who quotes it in his Hierozoican I, 639f. - see KEEL, 33.

13 For details see O. KEEL, ap. cit., 37ff. and M. HARAN, ap. cit., 25ff.
 YOU SHALL NOT BOlL A KID IN ITS MOTHER' S MILK 13

Rapids 1976, pp. 232f.) he came out in favour of it, admittedly with some
reservations, but in a later artic1e, "Deuteronomy and Ugaritic Studies"'\
he indicates that there are no grounds for assuming a U garitic parallel (let
alone a Canaanite one !). The supposed evidence for a supposed Canaanite
rite, against which our prohibition is supposed to have been directed, is a
bubble which in the meantime has burst.

***

Let us in the light of these experiences take a fresh look at the text in its
three contexts. In the so-called Book of the Covenant the immediate
context of the prohibition is Ex 23,14-19. This passage falls into two
sections, verses 14-17 and verses 18-19. The first section, verses 14-17,
contains the prescriptions as to the three great yearly feasts. The Massot-
fe ast, no doubt because of its separate character and its connection with
the Pesach celebration (Ex 34,25 !), is c1early distinguished from the two
mutually connected genuine harvest festivals, Pentecost and Tabemac1es.
These two harvest festivals belong together, because at these feasts the
firstfruits of the crops and the firstborn of the cattle were offered, though
there is perhaps a possibility that firstborn were already offered at the
Massot-feast.
The second section, verses 18-19, c1early deals with further prescrip-
tions connected with these three feasts:

1) as regards the Massot-feast, connected with the Pesach celebration: the

blood of the paschal sacrifice must not be offered with anything
unleavened and itsfat must not be left ovemight (l8b);

2) as regards the Feast of Weeks: only the best of the firstfruits must be
brought to the sanctuary (19a);

3) as regards the Feast of Tabernac1es: a kid must not be boiled (seethed)

in its mother's milk.

It is c1ear that the lawmaker is here legislating against a number of abuses

within Israelite cult practice in relation to the three great feasts; careless-

14 Tyndale Bulletin 28 (1977), 155-169, especially 155-159.

14 C.J. LABUSCHAGNE

ness with regard to the paschal sacrifice, the offering of poor quality first
fruits and an impermissible practice in the offerings at the Feast of
Tabernac1es. There is nothing whatsoever in this context to suggest that in
any of these stipulations we are dealing with measures directed against
Canaanite or other heathen practices.
Our prohibition seems primarily to relate to an abuse connected with
the celebration of the Feast of Tabernac1es 15 , and the feast of Weeks -
the most important occasion for offering the firstborn - and possibly
more particularly to a malpractice with regard to the firstborn offerings
themselves.
The fundamentally important question we have to answer is why the
boiling (seething) of a kid in its mother's milk should be regarded as a
malpractice. Let us consider the following: the ewes and she-goats begin
to bear their young, whether in the autumn, from October onwards, or in
the spring, from April (cf. HARAN, 35). In conformity with the prescrip-
tion in Ex 22,30 a newborn kid, which has opened its mother's womb and
is destined to be offered when it is eight days old, is taken with its
mother to the sanctuary on the occasion of the Feast of Tabernac1es or the
Feast of Weeks. There it is prepared as a firstborn sacrifice for consump-
tion by the priests or by the donor and his family, and in the tastiest way:
cooked by boiling it in gravy with milk. What milk is readily available?
That of its own mother! At that stage, eight days after the birth of the
firstborn, the mother is still producing beestings.
Beestings in the first few days, as anyone familiar with life on a farm
no doubt knows, are of a reddish colour. Modern science has taught us
that this is due to the high concentration of alburnen and globulin,
proteins which occur in blood, and owing to. the fact that to a greater or
lesser extent beestings do contain actual blood. The transition from
beestings to ordinary milk is a gradual process and nobody can say
exactly when the milk becomes 'ordinary'.
It is thus quite easy to imagine that on account of the reddish colour of
the beestings, in ancient Israel the mother's milk was considered to
contain blood. Therefore the eating of a kid cooked in its mother' s milk
came to be regarded as the eating of meat with blood. As this conflicted
with the most important ancient Israelite dietary law of all , that against
the eating of flesh with blood (cf. Gen 9,4; Lev 7,26f.; l7, 10-14; Deut

15 Cf. HOLWERDA, ap. cit., 387 and HARAN, ap. cit., 34.
 YOU SHALL NOT BOIL A KID IN ITS MOTHER'S MILK 15

12,16.23; 15,23), the prohibition was fonnulated and incorporated in the

Book of the Covenant.
This thesis is not of course dependent on the assumption that the
firstborn were to be offered on the occasion of the great feasts (specifi-
cally the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Tabemacles). It is valid for
every firstborn-sacrifice offered according to the prescription in Ex
22,29(30).
The literary context of the prohibition in the so-called 'Privilege Law
of YHWH', Ex 34,10-26, adds nothing essential to what we have been
able to conclude on the basis of the Book of the Covenant. So let us now
turn to the Deuteronomy-context, 14,1-21. Here the prohibition is placed
in the context of certain purity regulations, whose purpose is to ensure
that Israel remain the holy people of YHWH. These purity regulations are
placed in their turn within the wider framework of warnings to Israel not
to let itself be led into doing wh at is hateful and abominable in the sight
of YHWH (cf. 12,29-31 and 13,1-19). The connecting key word is here
ilJVm (12,31; 13,15(14) and 14,3). Of these purity regulations our
prohibition makes the last in the series of dietary ruIes, the final item: the
last banned bonne bouche.
As to the unity of this textual seetion opinions differ, but my con-
clusion is that it is unquestionably a literary unity. It consists of a central
nucleus, dealing with pennitted and prohibited animals (vss. 4-20), which
the deuteronomist(ic editor) has put into a broader framework (vss. 1-2
and vs. 3 and likewise vs. 21). MERENDINO comes to the same con-
clusion, but he is of the opinion that vs. 21 b, from the point of view of
historical transmission, is not part of vss. 1-21a, but belongs with vss. 22-
29 16 • Holwerda too thinks that vs. 21 b belongs with the following pass-
age 17 • In my view, however, this is impossible, since in the masoretic
tradition the -P- between vss. 21 and 22 so marks off the text that vs. 21
belongs with the preceding seetion. Vs. 21 should not be split up into 2la
and 21 b, since the verse is an undivided unity. The open space in BHS
between 21 a and 21 b is misleading and should be disregarded, being
based upon the subjective view of the editor of the printed BHS text, 1.
HEMPEL. There is no such caesura in the text of Codex Leningradensis.

16 P. MERENDINO, Das deuteronomische Gesetz. Eine literarkritische, gattungs- und

überliejerungsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zu Dt 12-26 (BBB 31, Bonn, 1969),88-96.

17 B. HOLWERDA, op. cit., 391.
16 C.J. LABUSCHAGNE

As I have shown in my commentary on Deuteronomy, the significant

numerical structure of verses 1-21 testifies to the unity of this passage 18 •
The numerical data make it ciear that the deuteronomic version of the
dietary Iaws was not simpIy a text, even with minor alterations, taken
over from an oider source, as has often been maintained. On the contrary,
it is a most carefully considered Iiterary composition, and one provided
with an equally carefully composed framework. The framework moreover
includes a triple inclusio: first, the motivation 'you are a people holy to
YHWH your God' (vs. 2 and vs. 2Ia); secondly, the dead body (vs. 1 and
vs. 2la); and thirdly, the blood motif (implicit in vs. 1, blood as a result
of the gashing, and in 21 a, blood in the cadaver, and in 21 b, blood in the
milk of the mother animai).
The Sitz im Leben is here clearly no longer the sacrificial context in
relation to the agricultural feasts, as in the old Book of the Covenant, but
Israel's struggle to maintain its identity as the holy people of YHWH, in
wh ich the dietary laws had a role of paramount importance. Certain
animals (carrion feeders, omnivores and scavengers) were not eaten in
Israel and the kid recipe remained prohibited. The reason why the prohib-
ition in Deuteronomy serves as a dietary rule is certainly not that the
original intention was no longer understood, so that it was made a dietary
law 'only out of respect for tradition d9 •
It is rather that the old prohibition had lost its original relevance in the
time of Deuteronomy. The campaign against the abuse in connection with
the firstborn sacrifice had been crowned with success. Moreover, the old
practice of sacrificing a week-old first-born animal was evidently no
longer so strictly observed. This emerges clearly from the prescription in
Deut 15,19 that the male firstborn of the herds and flocks be treated as
holy and that the cattle should not be used to plough with and that the
sheep should not be shorn. This only makes sense, if the first-born have
the chance to mature. Perhaps the old practice fell into disuse simply for
economic reasons. And the possibility that humanitarian considerations
may have played a role need not be excluded.
In Deuteronomy, however, the old rule acquired a new currency. Not
eating a kid boiled (seethed) in its mother's milk had become a distin-

18 C.J. LABUSCHAGNE, Deuteronomium (POT), deel IA en IB, (Nijkerk, 1987); deel

II, (Nijkerk, 1990), 59-62.

19 A.D.H. MAYES, Deuteronomy (NCBC, Grand Rapids, 1981), 243; see also M.

HARAN, op. eit., 33 and E.A. KNAUF, op. eit., 167.

 YOU SHALL NOT BOIL A KID IN ITS MOTHER' S MILK 17

guishing rule of life for the Israelites. It was something that only other
peoples, with different dietary habits, did, people who would even eat
carrion (vs. 21a!). And so the prohibition acquired the function of a
dietary law in the wider framework of the maintaining of their own
identity in a heathen environment. The fact that in Deuteronomy the
original intention of the prescription from the Book of the Covenant was
still well understood, as essentially directed against the consumption of
blood20 , is unmistakably clear in the fact that the prohibition is placed as
the final item in aseries of prescriptions in vss. 1-21 inclusive, through
which the blood motif runs like a red thread.
Indeed the blood aspect is the red thread that runs through the his tory
of our prohibition. We have observed the following development:
initially, in the Book of the Covenant, it was a prohibition directed
against the practice of cooking a kid in its mother' s milk, which in the
early stages was considered to contain blood; then, in Deuteronomy, it
became a dietary law, still ultimately based on the prohibition on the
consumption of blood. After this, in its further Wirkungsgeschichte, the
prohibition was subsumed in Kosher cooking: no consumption of blood
and no simultaneous consumption of meat and milk.

20W. Robertson SMITH, Lectures on the Religion 0/ the Semites (London, 18942),
221, came quite dose to my view of the true interpretation, when he wrote: "Many
primitive peoples regard milk as a kind of equivalent for blood, and thus to eat a kid,
seethed in its mother's milk, might be taken as equivalent to eating 'with blood', and be
forbidden to the Hebrews along with the bloody sacraments of the heathen".
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAIAH 5,1

BY

J.A. Emerton

Cambridge, Great Britain

'äsfra nnä' lfdfdf sfrat dadf ['kanna

kerem hilya lfdfdf b'qeren ben-sämen

The problems of Isa 5,1-7, the Song of the Vineyard, continue to exercise
scholars, and many discussions of the passage are to be found in articles
as well as in commentaries 1• J.T. WILLIS lists twelve different types of
interpretation, and his survey of the debate is not exhaustive. The present
article ventures to offer one more discussion of verse 1a but must inevi-
tab1y discuss it in relation to the rest of the pericope.
This discussion seeks to discover whether it is possible to make sense
of the MT as it stands. To say that is not to suggest that the traditional
text is always correct and shou1d never be emended. It is only to say that
the MT must be the starting point, and that every effort should be made
to understand what it is saying, and to enquire whether a plausible
interpretation of it is possible. It is reasonable to try to find a coherent
meaning. Even if G.R. WILLIAMS is right in believing that there are
deliberate ambiguities in Isa 5,1-7, it is still necessary to look for such a
coherent meaning, or perhaps more than one.

A preliminary question of decisive importance for the exegesis of the

passage is that of the meaning of lfdfdi and dodf in verse 1. yädfd offers
few problems: it can be used in a context of sexual love (Jer 11,15; cp.

I A list of publications cited in the text of this article will be found at the end. I am

grateful to Professor H.G.M. WILLIAMSON for reading a draft of the artic\e and making
some helpful comments.
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAlAH 5,1 19

ye dfdöt in Ps 45,1), but it can also be used without sexual associations

with reference to Yahweh' s love for Benjamin (Deut 33,12) or for his
people (Ps 60,7 = 108,7; 127,2). The word is in the masculine gen der in
verse 1 and is construed with verbs in the third person masculine singular
in verse 2, and so it is clear that it is used of a man. If the speaker is
Isaiah, who is also male, it is natural to suppose that the word here means
'friend' or the like. Since verse 2 refers to the friend in the third person,
it is unlikely that the preposition at the beginning of lfdfdf means 'to'. It
may mean 'for' (so the Revised Standard Version and the New RSV, and
the New English Bible and the Revised English Bible). Alternatively, and
more probably in this context, it may mean 'about' or 'concerning' like
the same preposition with ['karma.
The noun dod has several meanings 2 • It can mean 'uncle', and A.B.
EHRLICH thinks that it has that meaning here. But he does not relate his
understanding of verse 1 adequately to the problems of the passage as a
wh oie, and he describes the position of uncles in Israelite society in a
way that makes too much use of his imagination. The meaning 'uncle'
may be disregarded because it does not appear to fit the context. In the
plural, the word can denote sexual love; and the Song of Songs uses it in
the singular of a woman's lover in a sexual sense (though it does not use
the feminine form dada of a woman, but prefers ra 'ya or kalla).
It is disputed whether dod can mean 'friend' without any sexual
overtones, as many translators and commentators have supposed. We have
seen that yädfd has both a sexual and a non-sexual meaning, and the same

2 Some scholars have seen in dodf in Isa 5,1 the name of a god Dod, and have found

the same deity in the song of Songs; e.g. H. WINCKLER, "Dido", Altorientalische
Forschungen 1/4 (Leipzig, 1896), 339-343; and TJ. MEEK, "The Song of Songs: the
fertility cult", in W.H. SCHOFF (ed.), The Song 0/ Songs: A Symposium (Philadelphia,
1924), 48-79. MEEK maintains that 'In dOdf we have none other than a survival of the
god name Dod or Adad, the fertility god of the west and the Palestinian counterpart of
Tammuz' (p. 56), because 'Dod was identified with Yahweh' (p. 56). On p. 67 he
advances the view that in Isa 5,1 ff. and elsewhere 'we have the prophets railing at the
cult and derisively using technical terms and phrases from its liturgy'. W.C. GRAHAM,
"Notes on the Interpretation of Isaiah: 1-14", AJSL 45 (1928-9), 167-178 (especially pp.
167-171), follows MEEK in seeing here a polemic against popular religion. Such views
are not discussed in the present artide because they seem to me to be far-fetched, and
the alleged evidence for a god with a related name in Mesopotamia is open to question
(see SANMARTIN ASCASO, 145-146). See also the discussion by BJ0RNDALEN, pp. 57-66.
I had overlooked his discussion of the passage when I wrote the first draft of the present
artide, and I am indebted to Professor H.G.M. WILLIAMSON for drawing my attention to
it.
20 J.A. EMERTON

is true of 'öheb. It has therefore seemed plausible to believe that d8d too
can denote a friend. In the present context, if lidfdf earlier in the verse is
thought to mean 'about my friend', it is tempting to ascribe a similar
meaning to d8df. Such a supposition has, however, been challenged by J.
SANMARTfN ASCASO, who maintains that d8d always has a sexual sense
(except when it means 'uncle'); or rather, he believes that the meaning
'friend' is not found until Middle Hebrew (col. 163).
The fact that the use of a word in a particular sense is clearly attested
in Post-Biblical Hebrew does not necessarily imply that it did not exist in
biblical times, even if it is not abundantly attested in the Hebrew Bible.
Some words that certainly existed in both biblical and post-biblical times
are not attested in the Hebrew Bible purely by chance\ and the same
may be assumed for some meanings, even though the words are found in
the Old Testament in other senses. Further, it is reasonable to postulate
for a word in the Hebrew Bible a meaning found in Post-Biblical Hebrew,
if it yields the best sense in the context.
It has, indeed, been claimed that there is evidence from before the
Christian era that dOd can mean 'friend'. After pointing out that the use
of the word in an erotic sense need not exclude other connotations,
WILLIAMS claims that the plural d8dfm in Cant 5,1 means 'friends': 'ikLU
re'im we§ikru d8dfm. However, while it is possible to understand d8dfm,
which is here parallel to re 'fm, in the way favoured by WILLIAMS, it is
also possible to regard it as an abstract plural meaning 'love' as the
object of the verb, and SANMARTfN ASCASO understands it thus.
A stronger case can be made for the meaning 'friends' in Ben Sira
40,2: yyn wskr y'lsw lb wmSnyhm 'hbt dwdym, 'Wine and strong drink
rejoice the heart, but more than both the love of dwdym'. SANMARTfN
ASCASO maintains that dwdym here denotes 'körperliche Liebe', and he
compares Prov 7,18, though that verse scarcely proves that the same
meaning is present in Ben Sira 40,2. A difficulty for his view is 'hbt,
which is superfluous if dwdym has the meaning that he favours: 'love of
love' is an im probable interpretation of the phrase. He suggests that 'hbt
here has the meaning 'Neigung, Begierde', but that does not really
remove the difficulty. Altematively, he suggests that 'hbt may be a gloss
on dwdym. It is, however, hardly likely that dwdym needed to be
explained by a gloss (quite apart from the question why 'hbt should be in

3 For example, 'swh in lines 9 and 23 of the Moabite Stone is probably to be

identified with 'syh in Ben Sira 50,3, and 3Q15 V 6, VII 4, X 5, XI 12.
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAIAH 5,1 21

the construct state). Moreover, verses 18-26 follow a common pattern,

and all of them have three words in the second half; if 'hbt is deleted as a
gloss, then the second half of this verse has only two words. It is surely
better to regard 'hbt as an original part of the text and to give the phrase
a meaning that is more satisfactory than the one proposed by SANMARTfN
ASCASO. It appears from 6,14-17; 7,18; 9,10; 37,5 that Ben Sira valued
friendship. In those passages, the word used is 'whb, but 'hbt 'whbym
would have been a clumsy phrase, and so Ben Sira may have used dwydm
as a synonym of 'whbym. SANMARTfN ASCASO'S objection that the mean-
ing 'friends' is later merely begs the question; and his argument that other
words with a closer meaning could have been used, such as 'al(im (which
might, however, have been understood to mean only literal 'brothers') and
re 'fm, is valid only if d8dfm did not mean 'friends', which is the point at
issue. Ben Sira 40,2 is best understood to imply that d8dfm could mean
'friends' soon after 200 B.C.
It must further be asked whether SANMARTfN ASCASO offers a convinc-
ing explanation of Isa 5,1. He argues that the meaning 'Freund' does not
fit the context, which demands the meaning 'Geliebter'; the latter mean-
ing is therefore 'unersetzbar' (co!. 160). According to hirn, the prophet's
use of 'Geliebter' has a double sense: 'JHWH ist einerseits seiner
Geliebter, insofern Jesaja von ihm erzählt und in seinem Auftrag als
Prophet spricht.' On the other hand, Yahweh is also the 'beloved' in the
erotic allegory of the vineyard, and SANMARTfN ASCASO refers to an
article by A. BENTZEN. BENTZEN's theory will be considered later, and
this aspect of SANMARTfN ASCASO' s understanding of the passage need
not be discussed here. It is enough to note the difficulty of the first way
in which he thinks that d8df is used. The fact that Isaiah speaks in his
office as prophet does not explain why he should refer to Yahweh as his
beloved, if the word has a sexual sense - especially if, as is commonly
and plausibly believed, he begins by telling what appears to be a purely
human story and only later makes it plain that he is speaking of Yahweh
and his people. Yahweh is not Isaiah's beloved in that sense; nor is the
vineyard owner, presented as a human being. On the other hand, the
translation 'friend' fits the context, and may be accepted.
If both yädfd and dOd can mean 'friend', and if the words are thought
to have that meaning in Isa 5,1, a possible translation of the first part of
the verse is: 'I will sing about my friend the song of my friend about his
vineyard.' The repetition of the word 'friend' is clumsy in English, but it
brings out a possible meaning of the two Hebrew words used. In any
22 J.A. EMERTON

case, the translation is no more than a provisional possibility, and we

shall see later that it probably needs to be modified.

11

Wh at is the extent of the sirat dOdf, which the prophet says in Isa 5,1 that
he intends to sing? At first sight, the song might appear to beg in in verse
1b ('My friend had a vineyard') and continue until the end of the verse 2
('and he waited for it to yield grapes, but it yielded rotten ones'). These
verses refer to the owner of the vineyard in the third person, and the
metre appears to be regular. On the other hand, if the prophet is singing a
song of his friend, the owner of the vineyard, it is strange that the owner
appears in the third person.
The first person appears in verses 3-6, in which the prophet speaks in
the name of the owner of the vineyard, and expresses his intention of
destroying the vineyard. This passage might, therefore, appear to be the
song of the friend mentioned in verse l. But P. CERSOY rightly argues
that verses 3-6 are dependent on verses Ib-2. They do not make sense
unless one knows the story of the vineyard to which verse 3 refers. The
difficulty is not removed by supposing that verses Ib-2 are the prophet's
introduction to the story (so W. SCHOTTROFF). CERSOY also maintains
that verses 3ff. are prose, not verse. In view of the differences of opinion
about Hebrew verse that exist among scholars, CERSOY'S opinion may be
regarded by some as an exaggeration. Nevertheless, verses 3-6 do not
display the same regularity as verses 1b-2 - and uniformity of metre is
achieved by P. HAUPT only at the cost of drastic and arbitrary surgery on
the text.
If verses 3-6 are unintelligible without Ib-2, and the third person in the
latter is difficult if they are part of the song of the owner of the vineyard,
is it possible that the prophet substituted his own introduction for the
song's original beginning? In the LXX, the verbs in verse 2 are in the
first person, and verse Ib has 'my vineyard', not 'his vineyard'; but the
difference may be explained as an attempt to solve the problem rather
than as evidence for a different Vorlage. Be that as it may, some scholars
(e.g. B. STADE, without appealing to the LXX) suggest that verses Ib-2
were originally in the first person. If so, then something needs to be done
to Lididi in verse 1b, since the owner of the vineyard cannot refer to
himself as 'my friend'. If, as G.B. GRAY suggests, it is conjecturally
emended to Li (without support in the LXX), then the first clause of verse
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAlAH 5,1 23

1b becomes undu1y short. In addition, it must be asked why the prophet

shou1d alter the song that he says he is about to sing. He uses the suppos-
ed original first person in verses 3-6; why shou1d he change it to the third
person in verses 1b-2? Dillmann suggests that 'Gott selbst lässt Jes. kein
Volkslied vortragen'. It is not, however, at once obvious why Isaiah
should think it inappropriate that God should sing such a song. At this
stage, it was not yet clear to the original hearers that the friend was
Yahweh. Moreover, if the first person in verses 1b-2 was changed to the
third person, why was the first person left in verses 3-6? The difficulty is
at its greatest if the change is ascribed to Isaiah himself, who had to
deli ver a comprehensible message to his contemporaries (which would not
have been helped by introducing an inconsistency between strat d8dt and
the third person in verse 1b), but it does not disappear even if it is
attributed to a later editor.
Verses 1b-2 must, therefore, belong to the song, and the change of
person suggests that verses 3-6 do not. Verses 3-6, together with 7, are
probably to be regarded as the message delivered by the prophet on the
basis of the song. There thus appears to be an inconsistency between the
statement in verse 1a that Isaiah will sing a song of the vineyard owner
and the use of the third person with reference to the owner in verses 1b-2.

III

If there is an apparent inconsistency between verse 1a, as usually under-

stood, and the use of the third person in verses 1b-2, then it is necessary
to look again at the phrase strat d8di in the former half verse. We have
seen that the meaning 'the song of my friend' does not fit what follows,
and the difficulty remains with EHRLICH' s fanciful theory that d8di here
means 'my (paternal) uncle'. If d8di means 'my beloved' in an erotic
sense, then the words seem inappropriate on the lips of the male prophet
Isaiah.
V. ZAPLETAL simply deletes d8di on the ground that it spoils wh at is
otherwise the regular metre of the 'Vorgesang' , that is, of the first part of
verse 1. But how can he decide what is the regular metre of these five
Hebrew words (six in the MT) unless he has already deleted dOdi? He
appears to argue in a circle.
The passage has been compared to a rfb or legal dispute, and H.
GUNKEL and J. HEMPEL emend d8di to riM. The individual parts of the
emendation are not implausible: confusion between waw and yodh is easy
24 J.A. EMERTON

in the square script, between daleth and beth in the old script, and
between daleth and resh in either script. But it is a weakness in the
theory that every one of the four letters in the word has to be changed
and, of course, the emendation is conjectural. GUNKEL's solution of the
problem is a counsel of despair.
Another approach to the problem is to see in Syrt dwdy a reference to a
love song, and to understand the second word as an abstract plural. The
suggestion of c.F. HOUBIGANT is that dwdy should be emended to
dwdyw, 'amoris ejus' (he could have kept closer to the MT by suggesting
dwdw, for the third person masculine singular suffix is sometimes written
defectively after a plural noun), while R. LOWTH's emendation is dodfm,
'A song of loves', on the supposition that the final mem has been acci-
dentally omitted. It is possible, however, to obtain a similar meaning
without altering the consonantal text. Thus, P. CERSOY reads doday, 'mon
chant amical', and A. CONDAMIN dode, a noun in the construct state
before apreposition: 'le chant de [son] "amour" pour sa vigne'.
CERSOY argues in support of the change of vocalization from dodf to
dOday that the presence of both ye dfdf and dodf in the present text
involves 'repetition disgracieuse et superflue' (p.4l). If the prophet is to
sing his friend's song, the statement that it is about his friend is redun-
dant; but if dwdy is pointed dOday, the redundancy is removed. Against
CERSOY, it may be argued that parallelism in Hebrew often involves
repetition, and that a word may be original even when its presence is not
logically necessary. There is no inherent difficulty about the presence of
two words, yedfdf and dodf, to refer to the same person by way of elegant
variation. The weakness of this part of CERSOY' s argument does not,
however, invalidate his main point, namely, that verses Ib-2 are not, in
fact, the song of the prophet' s friend.
The question raised by CERSOY's minimal emendation is whether it
yields a satisfactory sense in the context. He explains the phrase sfrat
doday as 'un chant d'amour, ou d'affection; en autres termes: un chant
affectueux, ou amical' (p.43). But is that a justifiable translation of the
phrase? The abstract noun dodfm, elsewhere expresses sexual love
('amour', not 'amitie', as A. CONDAMIN puts it); while the possibility that
the word could be used in a non-sexual sense cannot be excluded, it is
doubtful whether 'un chant ... amical' is justifiable.
Is it, then, possible after all to make sense of the phrase Syrt dwdy
(whether or not the pointing is changed) if dwdy is given an erotic sense?
In the Song of Songs there are a number of references to a vineyard.
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAIAH 5,1 25

There the man will give the woman his love (7,14). (E. JACOB also
compares Judg 21,20 for the idea of the vineyard as the place of love,
although it seems more appropriate to think of it as a place of ambush.)
The woman refers to 'my vineyard' in 1,6; 8,12 (cp. 8,11), and the
vineyards spoiled by the little foxes in 2,15 are often understood in a
sexual sense. There are references to vines or grapes in 6,11; 7,9.13 in
erotic contexts. Further, it has been thought relevant to consider passages
in which the woman is spoken of as a garden (4,12; 5,1; 6,2); and
non-Israelite texts from the ancient Near East have been compared (e.g.
by WILDBERGER). JACOB even sees in way"azzeqehu in verse 2 an
allusion to the figure of a woman as a sown field, and in yeqeb an
assonanee with the word neqeb/1 (which does not appear in the passage),
but this part of the argument can scareely be deemed convineing.
Therefore, it has been suggested, the imagery used in Isa 5,1-7 would
have had erotie overtones for the prophet's hearers. It is eertainly true
that vines and vineyards have sexual associations in the Song of Songs,
and it is possible that such ideas were familiar to Isaiah's eontemporaries.
The Song of Songs, however, is probably much later than the eighth
century in date, and we eannot be sure that the sexual imagery in it would
at onee have been recognized as such in Isaiah's time. Moreover, it is not
only vines that have erotic associations in the Song of Songs: the same is
true of apples, pomegranates, dates and lilies. It is scareely to be suppos-
ed that whenever any of these common fruits was mentioned in ancient
Israel sexual thoughts would at onee spring to mind in the hearers. Still,
let us eonsider further the possibility that they are present in the Song of
the Vineyard.
Although CERSOY emends d6di to dOday, he does not speak of sexual
imagery in the passage for, as we have seen, he understands the phrase to
mean no more than 'un chant ... amical'. Even CONDAMIN, who reads
d6de and sees here a song of the owner's 'amour pour sa vigne', does not
appear to understand the poem in a sexual sense, but speaks rather of
'amour plein de sollicitude'. MARTI too does not develop his understand-
ing in a sexual way, despite the fact that he sees in d6di an abbreviation
for d6dim and translates the phrase 'Liebeslied' (he recognizes the
pointing d6day as a possible alternative), and eompares Cant 1,15; 8,12.
Yet BENTZEN, who interprets the passage as an allegory of an unfaithful
woman, makes no change to d6di. He believes that the imagery of the
vineyard is itself sufficient evidence for an erotic interpretation. Further,
in his view, it is all right to translate the relevant phrase in verse 1 as
26 J.A. EMERTON

'Das Lied meines Freundes von seinem Weingarten', because the owner
of the vineyard speaks in the first person in verse 3. According to
BENTZEN, verse 2 can be understood 'als Erklärung des Propheten zum
eigentlichen "Lied"'. Such an account of verse 2 was, however, shown
above to be unsatisfactory.
H. WILD BERG ER understands the Song of the Vineyard in a way similar
to BENTZEN, but he offers a different justification for retaining dOdf. He
follows H. JUNKER in supposing that Isaiah speaks in the person of 'the
friend of the bridegroom' (John 3,29). In his view, we have here a
'Gerichtsrede " more precisely an 'Anklagerede', and the friend makes the
accusation against the bride in the name of the bridegroom before Isaiah
goes on to speak as judge in verses 5-6. In verse 1, however, the prophet
'bezeichnet als harmlose syrh, was sich alsbald als scharfe Anklage
entpuppt'. For the bringing of an accusation by the friend of the bride-
groom against the bride and the tearing up of the marriage contract before
the wedding, WILDBERGER compares Exodus Rabbah 46. His interpreta-
tion of Isa 5,1-7 is unconvincing. He has not shown satisfactorily how
words spoken by the friend of the bridegroom, even when he is represent-
ing the bridegroom, could be said to be the song of the bridegroom
himself, quite apart from the question whether a custom attested in the
midrash was already known centuries before. Even if the use of the third
person in verses I b-2 could be justified, how were the hearers to know
that Isaiah was speaking as the friend of the bridegroom? Further, if the
passage contains an allegory of the relationship between a man and a
woman, it is far from obvious that it refers to infidelity before the
wedding rather than after it. The owner destroys his vineyard in verses
5-6 and, if the passage refers to a woman's unfaithfulness, then these two
verses perhaps suggest that a husband is taking vengeance on an adulter-
ous wife, rather than the friend of a bridegroom cancelling a wedding
before it takes place. Perhaps too the account of all that the owner did for
the vineyard would fit a husband's care for his wife better than the
attention paid (in the form of gifts?) by a man to a woman before mar-
riage. If so, then the reference is to what happened some time after the
wedding, and so after the time when, according to WILDBERGER'S theory,
the friend of the bridegroom could act.
A different way of interpreting the Song of the Vineyard as a song
about love is to suppose that the singer is the woman of the story, or
rather the prophet speaking in her name. H. SCHMIDT reads dOdfm in
place of dßdf, and thinks of the occasion as the autumn festival, when the
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAIAH 5,1 27

inhabitants of Jerusalem spent seven days among the vines in exuberant

joy 'mit Gesang und Wein und Liebesspiel' . He pictures singers wander-
ing around and singing love songs. 'Dabei gaben sich die Lieder fast
immer so, als wenn sie das liebende Mädchen singt.' Isaiah is supposed
by hirn to have acted the part of one of the singers. SCHMIDT' s imagin-
ative (and probably largely imaginary) reconstruction of what happened at
the feast of tabernacles was followed by K. BUOOE' s more restrained
hypothesis that Isaiah took on the role of the woman in the Song of the
Vineyard (' ... indem er die Rolle der Geliebten bzw. der Braut oder
jungen Frau übernimmt', p.53). This adoption of a role is comparable, he
argues, to the taking over by Amos (5,1-2) of the role of the wailing
women. BUOOE adopts CERSOY's emendation dOday ("'Mein" Liebes-
lied'). A similar explanation is offered by G. FOHRER. This type of inter-
pretation fai1s to carry conviction. Not only is the attempt to make Isaiah,
who is male, speak in the person of a woman strained. Further, as WILD-
BERGER points out, the 'I' of verses 3-6 who speaks of his punishing the
vineyard is its owner, not the vineyard itself or the woman whom it
represents; and it is implausible to suppose that the woman speaks of
herself as bearing rotten grapes in verse 2. The theory that the prophet
speaks in the name of a woman is thus as unconvincing as the theory that
the rendering 'the song of my friend' in verse 1 can be defended by the
presence of the first person in verses 3-6.
The objections to understanding (or emending) firat d6di to denote a
love song or a song of the prophet's beloved do not, however, necessarily
exclude the possibility that the song was originally about a vineyard
which symbolized an unfaithful woman. It may still be arguable that the
story is to be understood in such a way. But such an interpretation should
not be based on an improbab1e understanding of szrat d6dz.

IV

There is another possibility to be considered, which involves no change to

either the consonantal text or the vocalization. It is to explain the con-
struct relationship in firat d6dz differently from 'the song of my friend' or
'of my beloved'. The possibility of a different understanding occurred to
me when I was preparing to lecture on the Hebrew text of Isaiah and
puzzling over 5,1-7. Further investigation revealed, as is so often the case
with supposed1y fresh ideas, that this alternative explanation had been
28 J.A. EMERTON

proposed long before, although it had been noticed by only a minority of

scholars.
F. HITZIG suggested in 1833 that in sirat d8df the second word is an
objective genitive, and that the phrase should be translated 'Ein Lied über
meinen Freund'. A. KNOBEL followed HITZIG nine years later and
explained the words, together with [ekarm8, to mean 'ein Lied, welches
meinen Freund und dessen Verhältnis zu seinem Weinberge betrifft'.
Against the rendering 'Lied meines Freundes von seinem Weinberge' he
rightly argued that the words that folIoware the words of the Verfasser,
not of his friend. More recently, G. FOHRER has adopted a similar transla-
tion, though without reference to HITZIG or KNOBEL. He renders the
phrase 'ein Lied über meinen Liebsten'. Nevertheless, as we have seen,
he understands the reference to be to a love song, and a love song of a
woman: 'Nach la will er [sc. the prophet] ein Liebeslied singen, wie so
das Mädchen dem zu Ehegatten bestimmten Geliebten singt und in dem
es selbst der "Weinberg" ist, so dass es sich von sich selber und seiner
Beziehung zum Geliebte handelt.' It was seen above that FOHRER's inter-
pretation of the passage as a whole is open to question, but it does not
necessarily follow that his translation of sfrat d8df is wrong.
DILLMANN rejects the explanation of the phrase by HITZIG and KNOBEL
because he understands it to mean 'das Lied meines Liebsten'. But his
interpretation of the passage involves the difficulty that he has to suppose
that Isaiah has changed the first person to the third person in verses Ib-2
to avoid making Yahweh sing a popular song. He offers no other reason
for rejecting the interpretation of the phrase by HITZIG and KNOBEL.
The construct state can be used to express more than one kind of
relationship. lf its use in Isa 5,1 is comparable to that of a subjective
genitive, then it means, as most scholars believe, 'the song of my friend'
or 'beloved', Le. the song composed by my friend or beloved. But it is
also possible to think in terms of an objective genitive. In Ps 36,2 pahad
"Jöhfm, 'the fear of God', is mentioned by HITZIG as an example. Simi-
larly, h"mas 'ähfkä in Obad 10 means 'the violence done to thy brother' ,
and za'"qat sedöm in Gen 18,20 means 'the cry concerning Sodom' (cp.
GK § 128 h). It is therefore possible that strat d8df means 'the song
about my friend'. Although the expression is definite in Hebrew, it would
perhaps be more idiomatic in English to render it 'a song about my
friend' .
BJ0RNDALEN, pp.251-2, notes the possibility of understanding d8df as
an objective genitive, but he thinks it more likely that it is a subjective
 THE TRANSLATION OF ISAIAH 5,1 29

gemtIve. His reason is that the phrase expected would have been sfrat
dOdf w ekarma (p.252, n.II). It may be gran ted that the prophet could have
expressed the meaning thus, but it is questionable whether he would
necessarily have done so. BJ0RNDALEN offers no argument to support his
assertion.
If sfrat dadf is understood to mean 'a [or, the] song about my friend',
the difficulties considered above disappear. Since Isaiah is singing about
his friend, verses I b-2 can be the song, although they refer to the friend
in the third person. Then, in verses 3-6, the prophet speaks in the person
of the owner of the vineyard. All the other interpretations of the phrase
considered above have been found to be open to objection. It may
therefore be concluded that sfrat dadf should be translated 'a song about
my friend', and that there is no need to alter the text.
It is a pleasure to dedicate this essay to Professor Adam vAN DER
WOUDE, a friend for many years, who has contributed much to the study
of the prophetie books of the Hebrew Bible.

A LIST OF WORKS CITED

A BENTZEN, "Zur Erläuterung von Jesaja 5, 1-7", Archiv für Orientfors-

chung 4 (1927), 209-210.
AJ. BJ0RNDALEN, Untersuchungen zur allegorischen Rede der Propheten
Amos und Jesaja, BZA W 165 (Berlin and New York, 1986).
K. BUDDE, "Zu Jesaja 1-5", ZA W 49 (1931), 16-40, 182-212; and 50
(1932), 38-72; Isa 5,1-7 is discussed on pp. 52-57.
P. CERSOY, "L'apologue de la vigne au chapitre ye d'Isa"ie (versets 1-7)",
Revue Biblique 8 (1899), 40-49.
A CONDAMIN, Le livre d'Isai"e (Paris, 1905).
A DILLMANN, Der Prophet Jesaia (Leipzig, 1890).
AB. EHRLICH, Randglossen zur hebräischen Bibel 4 (Leipzig, 1912),
19-20.
G. FOHRER, Das Buch Jesaja I (Zürich and Stuttgart, 1960; 2nd edn.,
1966).
GK = A.E. COWLEY (ed.), Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar as edited and
enlarged by the late E. Kautzsch (2nd edn., Oxford, 1910 = 28th German
edn.).
G.B. GRAY, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Isaiah
... I-XXVII (Edinburgh, 1912).
30 LA. EMERTON

H. GUNKEL, Das Märchen im Alten Testament (Tübingen, 1917), 26-28.

P. HAUPT, "Isaiah's Parable of the Vineyard", AJSL 19 (1902-3), 193-
-202.
J. HEMPEL, "Jahwegleichnisse der israelitischen Propheten", ZA W 42
(1924), 74-104; reprinted in APOXYSMATA (BZAW 81, Berlin, 1961),
1-29. Isa 5,1-7 is discussed on pp. 77-78 of the former and pp. 3-5 of the
latter.
F. HITZIG, Der Prophet Jesaja (Heidelberg, 1833).
C.F. HOUBIGANT, Notae criticae in universos Veteris Testamenti libros 2
(Frankfurt am Main, 1777), 348.
E. JACOB, Esai"e 1-12 (Geneva, 1987).
H. JUNKER, "Die literarische Art von Is 5,1-7", Biblica 40 (1959), 259-
-266.
A. KNOBEL, Der Prophet Jesaia (Leipzig, 1843).
R. LOWTH, 1saiah (London, 1778).
K. MARTI, Das Buch Jesaja (Tübingen, Freiburg im Breisgau and
Leipzig, 1900).
J. SANMARTfN ASCASO, "da!!', Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten
Testament 2 (Stuttgart, Berlin, Köln and Mainz, 1977), 152-167.
H. SCHMIDT, Die grossen Propheten (2nd edn., Göttingen, 1923), 39-41.
W. SCHOTTROFF, "Das Weinberglied Jesajas (Jes 5 1-7)", ZAW 82 (1970),
68-91, especially 68-74.
B. STADE, "Zu Jes. 3,1.17.24. 5,1. 8,lf.12-14.16. 9,7-20. 10,26", ZAW 26
(1906), 129-141, especially 134-135.
H. WILDBERGER, Jesaja 1: Jesaja 1-12 (Neukirchen-V1uyn, 1972).
G.R. WILLIAMS, "Frustrated expectations in Isaiah v 1-7: a literary inter-
pretation", VT 35 (1985), 459-465.
J.T. WILLIS, "The Genre of Isaiah 5:1-7", JBL 96 (1977), 337-362.
V. ZAPLETAL, Alttestamentliches (Freiburg [Schweiz], 1903).
 THE INTERTEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN ISAIAH 65,25 AND ISAIAH 11,6-9

BY

J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten

Haren, The Netherlands

1. INTRODUCTION: ISAIAH 65,25 IN ITS LITERARY CONTEXT

According to many commentators Isa 65,25 is a later addition, p1acing

Isa 65 in its entirety in an apoca1yptic perspective 1 • Its purpose is to
comp1ete the description of the new cosmos, beginning in v. 17, with a
description of harmony ru1ing also in the anima1 world. This description
of a new cosmos is influenced by Isa 11,6-9.
Others2 have correct1y pointed out that Isa 65,25 is embedded very
weH in the 1iterary context of Isa 65. In the first p1ace, the harmonious

I According to C. WESTERMANN, Das Buch Jesaja. Kapitel 40-66 (ATD 19,

Göttingen, 1966), 326, a later redactor changed the original oracle of salvation to
Jerusalem and Juda into an apocalyptic portrayal. CL K. PAURITSCH, Die neue Gemein-
de: Gott sammelt Ausgestossene und Arme (Jesaia 56-66) (AnBib 47, Rome, 1971), 173;
E. SEHMSDORF, "Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte von Is 56-66", ZAW 84 (1972),
517-576 (pp. 522fL); A. SCHOORS, Jesaja (BOT IX, Roermond, 1972), 472; R. N.
WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40-66 (NCB, London, 1975),266; 1. VERMEYLEN, Du prophete Isafe
a l'Apocalyptique. ISai"e, I-XXXV, miroir d'un demi-millenaire d'experience religieuse en
Israel (EB, Paris, 1978),497.
2 The authenticity of (a part of) v. 25 is defended by J. A. ALEXANDER, Commentary

on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Grand Rapids, 1980) [=1846-47; 1875 2], 455v.; F. DE-
L1lZSCH, Commentar über das Buch Jesaia (Biblischer Corrunentar über das Alte Testa-
ment IIU1, Leipzig, 18894 ), 633; K. ELLIGER, Die Einheit des Tritojesaia (Jesaia 56-66)
(BW ANT 63, Stuttgart, 1928), 33-36; W.A.M. BEUKEN, Jesaja, deel IIIB (POT)
(Nijkerk, 1989), 9lf. We have discussed elsewhere the view that vv. 24-25 are prosodi-
cally, syntactically and also semantically included in the structure of Isa 65,13-25.
Besides, these verses show connections, particularly with v. 1 and v. 12, which go
beyond the limits of Isa 65,13-25. See: J. VAN RUITEN, "Tbe Role of Syntax in Versifi-
cation of Is 65: 13-25", in: E. T ALSTRA (ed.), The Prophet on the Screen. Computerized
Description and Literary Interpretation of Isaianic Texts (Applicatio, Amsterdam, 1992)
[forthcoming].
32 J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN

state of the animal world reflects the perfect relationship between YHWH
and his servant.. , described in v. 24. This relationship results in the
disappearence of evil and ruin from the holy mountain. In the second
place, a strong connection exists between vv. 24-25 and v. 12a"b: v. 24
is saying, using the same words, the opposite of v. 12a", whereas v.
25de 3 forms a contrast with v. 12b, as far as content is concemed. In
addition, the relation between v. 24 and v. 25de is the opposite of that
between v. 12a" and v. 12b. In v. 12 the refusal the unfaithful to heed
God results in their 'evil doing', whereas in v. 25 the willingness of the
servants results in the situation that no evil will happen any more on the
holy mountain. The modifier 'in all my holy mountain' (v. 25) fits very
weil in the message of Trito-Isaiah. In Isa 65,9 the prophet speaks about
'inheritors of my moutains', whereas in 65,11 he speaks about leaving the
mountain: 'But you, you who forsake YHWH, who forget my holy
mountain'. Only Isa 65,25a-c seem to be separated from the rest of the
chapter. However, these parts of v. 25 are also closely connected with
im portant lines of meaning in the chapter. One of these lines is 'eating'.
The author describes in v. 25ab the harmony in the animal realm under
the aspect of their peaceful eating together4 •
As opposed to those 'who eat swine' s flesh' (65,4; compare 66,17),
65,13.21-22 depict the meal of the servants of God. The blessings for the
servants are described in terms of 'eating'. Isa 65,10 ('Sharon shall
become a pasture for flocks') is in line with this view. The word 'pasture'
evokes the image of 'grazing', and by that the image of 'eating'. In 65,10
another theme within Isa 65 can be found, namely that of the peaceful
animals (' ... a pasture for flocks, ... a place for herds'). Isa 65,25c ('and
dust shall be the serpent's food') also fits in within the idea of 'eating',
although the intention seems to be different, since it expresses not a
blessing, but a curse. Many authors who do not consider v. 25ab a later
addition do think that v. 25c is an additions.

3 The numbering of Isa 11,6-9 and Isa 65,25 is according to their successive cola (e.
g. 65,25a, 65,25b, 65,25c etc.) and not according to the massoretic accents. See the
scheme in section two of this article.
4 The root 'JJ ~ ('to eat') occurs eleven times in Trito-Isaiah as a whole and five
times in Isa 65 in particular: Isa 56,9; 58,14; 59,5; 61,6; 62,9; 65,4.13.21.22.25; 66,17.
5 K. MARTI, Das Buch Jesaja (KHC X, Tübingen - Leipzig, 1900), 406; B. DUHM,

Das Buch Jesaia (HK III/1, Göttingen, 1968 5 = 19224 ), 481; ELLIGER, op. cit., 33;
MARTlN-AcHARD, "L'esperance des croyants face a la mort selon Esaie 65,16c-25 et
selon Daniel 12,1-4", RHPhR 69 (1979), 439451 (p. 444); BEUKEN, op. cit., 92.
 INTERTEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ISA 65,25 AND 11,6-9 33

2. THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN ISA 65,25 AND ISA 11,6-9

Although Isa 65,25 is embedded very weIl in the literary context of Isa
65, the connection between Isa 65,25 and Isa 11,6-9 is obvious, as most
commentators have pointed out. In this artic1e we would like to explore
the intertextual relationship of both texts6 • This relationship can help the
reader to understand the function and intention of Isa 65,25. In order to
get a serious insight into the relationship of Isa 11,6-9 and Isa 65,25, it is
necessary to look not only at the similarities of both texts, but also at
their differences. We give both the translations of Isa 11,6-9 and of 65,25
in the following scheme side by side.

Isa 11,6-9 Isa 65,25

6 a The wolf shall dweIl with the 25 a The wolf and the lamb young
ram, shall graze together,
band the leopard shall lie down
with the kid,
c and the calf and the lion and
the fatling togethee,
d and a little child shall lead
them.

SCHOORS, op. cit., 472, spraks about a second gloss.

6 This is not the place for a fuH discussion of the concept of 'intertextuality', but see

elsewhere for example: Z. BEN-PORAT, "The Poetics of Literary AHusion", PTL I

(1976), 105-128; P. CLAES, De mot zit in de mythe. Antieke intertextualiteit in het werk
van Hugo Claus (Leuven, 1981); U. BROICH - M. PFISTER, (eds.), lntertextualität.
Formen, Funktionen. anglistische Fallstudien (Konzepte der Sprach- und Literaturwissen-
schaft 35, Tübingen, 1985); the journal for Dutch history of literature Spiegel der
Letteren 29 (1987) devoted a double issue to the theme of 'intertextuality'. Cf.: B.
VEDDER, "Kennistheoretische beschouwingen bij een interpretatie van teksten in het
perspectief van "wirkungsgeschichtliche" exegese", Bijdragen 49 (1988), 238-263.
7 This is a translation of MT. However, lQlsrf' has nn' llil', which should

probably be read as 11n' ~'lD' or nn' ,~,n'. The root ~lD is not attested in Biblical
Hebrew, yet it occurs in later Hebrew, where it means: 'to become fat'. The Septuagint
also inserts a verb in the sentence: ßoolCTJ81loov'tat, wh ich could be a mere insertion
from v. 7b, but could also reflect the reading ~'lD' or ,~,n': cf. Peshitta. Combined
evidence suggests that a verb is read in the colon. However, it is also possible that these
renderings as verbs are changes based on the translator's desire to achieve a more perfect
parallelism. See: M. H. GOSHEN-GOTTSTEIN, The Book 0/ lsaiah. Sampie Edition with
lntroduction (HUBP), 51 [Hebrew pagination].
34 J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN

7 a The cow and the bear shall

graze8 ;
b their young shall lie down
together;
c and the lion shall eat straw band the /ion shall eat straw
like the ox. like the OX;
8 a The sucking child shall play
b over the hole of the asp, c and dust shall be the serpent' s
food.
c and the weaned child shall put
his hand
d to the young9 of the adder.
9 a They shall not hurt or destroy d They shall not hurt or destroy
b in alt my holy mountain; e in alt my holy mountain;
c for the earth shall be full of the
knowledge of YHWH
d as the waters cover the bottom
of the sea.
f says YHWH.

Many exegetes have argued for the influence of Proto- and Deutero-Isaiah
on Trito-Isaiah 1o • The impact of Isa 11,6-9 on Isa 65,25 fits very well
into this general picture ll . Conceming vocabulary, 11,6-9 and 65,25

8 There is no reason to change i1J~Yln, 'they graze', into i1J~Ylnn, 'they are friendly

together' .
9 On the basis of the Septuagint ('tp6l'yATj, 'cave') many have argued that mH\ll of

MT should be emended to mYll, 'cave', or nJlYll, 'den, dwelling'. See, however, 1Q!saa,
wh ich reads mll Nll. The meaning of the word was established by F. PERLES, Journal 0/
the Society 0/ Oriental Research 9 (1925), 126f, ['the young one'].
10 See the commentary of W. A. M. BEUKEN on Trito-Isaiah (Jesaja, deel lIlA, deel

IIIß (POT, Nijkerk, 1989). Cf. H. ODEBERG, Trito-!saiah (!saiah 56-66). A Literary and
Stilistic Analysis (Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift 1931. Teologi I, Uppsala, 1931); W.
ZIMMERLI, "Zur Sprache Tritojesajas", in: W. ZIMMERLI, Gottes Offenbarung. Gesam-
melte Aufsätze (TB 19, München, 19692), 217-233; O. H. STECK, "Tritojesaja im Jesaja-
buch", in: J. VERMEYLEN (ed.), The Book 0/ !saiah. Le Livre d'!sai"e. Les oracles et leurs
relectures. Unite et complexite de l'ouvrage (BETL LXXXI, Leuven, 1989), 361-406.
11 We join the majority of commentators, who make the assumption that Isa 65,25 is

a summarizing quotation of Isa 11,6-9. In this view Isa 11,6-9 precedes Isa 65,25. See: J.
A. ALEXANDER, op. eit., 455; F. DELITZSCH, op. eit., 633; A. CONDAMIN, Le livre
d'!sai"e. Traduction critique avec notes et commentaires (Paris, 1905), 386; F. FELD-
 INTERTEXTUAL RELATIONS HIP BETWEEN ISA 65,25 AND 11,6-9 35

have three sentences and one word in common. These sentences show the
same syntactic structure, while the common vocabulary is unique in the
OT. Firstly, 11,7c (pn ';lJ N" lj'JJ iPl Nl: 'and the lion shall eat straw
like the ox') is similar to 65,25b. Secondly, the first part of 11,9
C'Vilj' lil ';lJJ m "nVi" N ';lllYV N ';l: 'They shall not hurt or destroy in all
my holy mountain') corresponds to 65,25de. Finally, the word J NT
('wolf) occurs both in 11,6a and 65,25a.
But in addition there are thematic similarities between both texts. In
the first place, we can point to 65,25a, ln N J lYl" il';lUl J NT, 'The wolf
and the lamb shall graze together'. Thematically, this corresponds to Isa
11,6-7b. Both texts refer to predatory and non-predatory animals, and the
activities descrbied in both texts are similar. In the second place we can
point to the occurrence of the serpent both in 11,8ab and 65,25c, although
the exact terminology differs: 'asp' <ln~) and 'adder' (" JlY~~) in 11 ,8ab,
and 'serpent' (VinJ) in 65,25c.

3. THE DISSIMILARITIES BETWEEN ISA 11,6-9 AND ISA 65,25

a) A different literary context

When a text exerts influence on another text, several procedures of

transformation operate at the same time. Two texts are ne ver entirely

MANN, Das Buch lsaias, 1-11 (EHAT 14, Münster in Westf., 1925-26), I, p. 157f.; 11, p.
281; O. PROCKSCH, Jesaia I (KAT IX, Leipzig, 1930), 156; P. VOLZ, Jesaja /I (KAT
IXI2, Leipzig, 1932), 287; C. WESTERMANN ap. eit., 326; J. L. McKENZIE, Secand
lsaiah (AB 20, New York, 1968), 199; H. WILDBERGER, Jesaja, I, p. 444; P. -E.
BONNARD, Le Second Isafe. San disciple et leurs editeurs. lsafe 40-66 (EB, Paris, 1972),
476; SEHMSDORF, ap. cit., 522; W. HOLLADAY, lsaiah. Seroil a/ a Prophetie Heritage
(Grand Rapids, 1978), 112; VERMEYLEN (1978), ap. eit., 276, 497; R. MARTIN-AcHARD,
RHPhR 69 (1979), 444, n. 6; BEUKEN, ap. eil. IIIB, 9lf. Some commentators, however,
consider on the one hand Isa 65,25a to be a quotation of Isa 11,6-9, but on the other
hand Isa 11,9a to be a quotation of Isa 65,25b. See: K. MARTI, ap. cit., 112f.; B. DUHM,
ap. cit., 108, 481; R. N. WHYBRAY (1975), ap. cit., 278; R. E. CLEMENTS, lsaiah 1-39
(NCBC, Grand Rapids), 124; O. KAISER, Das Buch des Propheten Jesaja. Kapitel 1-12
(ATD 17, Göttingen, 1981 5), 245ff. The argument in favor of this view (MARTI, DUHM)
is that Isa 65,25b fits better in its literary context than Isa 11,9a does (Cf. subject of the
verbs; suffix 1st person singular in ~'!l11P lil. According to one author, G. FOHRER, Das
Buch Jesaja, I-III (ZBK, Zürich, 1960-64), Isa 11,6-9a in its entirety is dependent of Isa
65,25. A. SCHOORS, ap. cit., 472, hesitates to give one of the two texts the priority; he
makes no choice.
36 J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN

identical. Therefore, besides the resemblances, there are differences

between Isa 11,6-9 and 65,25: a different literary context (see 3.a); a
shortening of the text of Isa 1l,6-7b in 65,25a (see 3.b); and different
utterances about the serpent (see 3.c).
First of all, the sentences which Isa 65,25 has taken over from Isa
11,6-9 are removed from their context. Therefore, it is necessary to take
also the context of Isa 11,6-9 into consideration: Isa 11,1-9 12 • In these
verses the theme is the flourishing of a new sprout of David. A future
ideal ruler of his house is predicted. His coming will result in a time of
peace and justice. In the first part of the text (vv. 1-5) the prophet
describes the endowment of the spirit of YHWH to the new ruler (v. 2),
and the righteous rule resulting from it (vv. 3-5). In the second part (vv.
6-8) he describes the harmony in the animal world: predatory animals
(wolf, leopard, lion, bear, asp, adder) will live in peaceful harmony with
the domesticated animals (young ram, kid, calf, cow, ox) and defenceless
children (little child, suckling child, weaned child). After the animal
intermezzo the text returns in v. 9 to the theme of vv. 1-5. A righteous
rule means that no evil will be done on God's holy mountain. The
description of a righteous ruler combined with the description of harmony
in the animal world is not found elshewere in the OT 13 •
This connection seems to be absent in Isa 65,25 as weIl. Trito-Isaiah
guotes only from the description of the harmonious animal worid (Isa
11,6-9), whereas he omits the mentioning of a future righteous ruier.
However, when we look more closely at the text, the thematic connection
between Isa 11,3-5 and the context of Isa 65,25 is obvious. On the one
hand, the prophet speaks about judging the poor and the meek with
righteousness in Isa 11,4, and on the other hand, about the killing of the
wicked. The main theme in the first part of Isa 65 is similar. In vv. 1-16
the prophet describes aseparation of the servants and the wicked. The
wicked will perish, whereas the servants will be blessed.

12 An extensive discussion of Isa 11,1-9 can be found far example in: H. WILDBER-

GER, Jesaja. I. Teilband. Jesaja 1-12 (BKAT XII, Neukirchen, 1972), 436-462; O.
KAISER, Das Buch des Propheten Jesaja. Kapitel 1-12 (Göttingen, 1981 5), 239-248; E.
JACOB, Esai'e 1-12 (Commentaire de J'Ancien Testament VIlla) (Geneve, 1987),
159-166.
13 Tbe coming salvation illustrated by the description of peace in the animal world (a

covenant with anirnals) can be found in Hos 2,20 and Ez 34,25ff. Isa 35,9 and Lev 26,6
speak about the extermination of predatory anirnals.
 INTERTEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ISA 65,25 AND 11,6-9 37

b) lsaiah 65,25ab as a recapitulation of lsaiah 11,6-7b

The text of Isa 65,25a represents a substantial reduction of Isa ll,6-7b, in

which there is a much fuller description. It is striking that Isa 65,25a
(1n NJ lYT' ilJUl] NT, : 'The wolf and the lamb shall graze together') is
modelled mainly on Isa Il,6a (VJ]J OY ] NT lJ.l: 'The wolf shall dweIl
with the young rarn'), but at the same time it refers to the wh oie context.
One can point to the following transformations. Firstly, the verb llJ. (lJ.'
: 'he shall dwell') is changed into a form of the verb ilYl (lYl" : 'they
graze'). Secondly, the preposition OY ('with') is changed in ln NJ ('as one;
together'). Thirdly, VJ]J ('young ram') is changed in ilJU ('larnb'). We
should ask what was the basis on which Trito-Isaiah adapted the text of
Proto-Isaiah. How are these alterations to be interpreted?
First, we think that the parties which Trito-Isaiah mentions in 65,25a
('the wolf and the lamb') are a recapitulation of the parties mentioned in
Isa 11,6-7b. The word ] NT ('wolf) does occur in 11,6a, and is in line
with the other predatory animals: leopard, li on and bear. In 65,25 the wolf
serves as an example of all predatory animals mentioned in Isa 11,6-7b.
On the other hand, the word ilJU ('larnb') represents all the non-preda-
tory animals: young ram, kid, calf, fatling and cow. It is striking, how-
ever, that whereas ] NT ('wolf) does occur in Isa 11,6-9, the word ilJU
('larnb') does not. Moreover, the word ilJU ('larnb') is to be found
outside Isa 65,25a only in two pi aces in the Hebrew Bible: 1 Sam 7,9 and
Isa 40,11. Trito-Isaiah may be alluding to the flock of 'lambs'(O"NJU)
which YHWH carries back to Zion in Isa 40,11, when he uses the word
ilJU ('larnb') to represent the weak party in Isa 11,6-9 14 •
Second, the activity mentioned in Isa 65,25a is one of 'grazing': ilYl
(lYT': 'they shall graze'). In 11,6-9 several verbs describe the activities
of the predatory and domesticated animals: llJ. ('to dwell'), Y]l ('to lie
down'), ilYl ('to graze'). According to Beuken l5 , Trito-Isaiah has
chosen the verb ilYl ('to graze') instead of the other verbs, firstly
because ilYl is a very important theme in Trito-Isaiah I6 • Especially
56,11 is important, in which the wicked shepherds (0 "Yl) neglect the
righteous. Secondly, the use of ilYl could be prompted by Deutero-Isaiah

14 Cf. BEUKEN, op. cit. IIlB, 92.

15 ibidem.
16 See: Isa 56,11; (57,1); 61,5; 63,11.
38 J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN

(40,11 (2x); 44,28; 49,9). We can fefer particularly to Isa 40,11, because
the word ilYl occurs there twice (ilYl" ... ilY1J: 'as a shepherd feed'), and
because another word from 65,25 ('the lambs') also occurs there. YHWH
will gently lead, and feed his lambs.
These arguments may have played a part in the use of ilYl in Isa 65,25,
and the occurrence of ilYl and il'JU in Isa 40,11 is especially striking.
However, the connotation of ilYl in Isa 40,11 is rather different from that
in Isa 11,7 and 65,25. In 40,11 (and 56,11) the connotation is one of
'leading' or 'tending the flock', whereas in 11,7 and 65,25 the connota-
tion is one of 'grazing'. In our opinion some other arguments are more
plausible.
In the first place the verb ilYl is found in 11,6a-7b at the end of the
passage (v. 7a). Taking a word from the beginning (J ~l: 'wolf') and from
the end ilYl ('graze'), Trito-Isaiah recapitulates the passage. Thus we
might speak about 'a framed quotation'. In addition, in 1l,7a the word
ilYl is followed by nn" ('together'). According to the prosodie stucture
of the text, and according to the massoretic accents, nn" belongs to v.
7a", but in a text without accents, one can read ilYl together with nn" in
one breath. Of course, nn" is not identical with ln ~ J, but it comes close
to it, as far as content is concerned.
In the second place, ilYl is the only verb in Isa 11 ,6-7 a, which has a
connotation of 'eating'. The aspect of 'eating' is very important for Trito-
Isaiah. Particularly, in Isa 65,25a-c the author is interested in 'eating' as
is showed by the words 'JJ~ ('to eat') in 65,25b, and Dn'J ('food') in 65,2-
5c l7 .
The text of Isa 65,25b is a literal quotation from 1l,7c ('and the lion
shall eat straw like the ox'). Omitting so many elements of 11,6-7b, the
author does repeat 11,7c. A plausible reason seems to be on the one hand
the activity mentioned in 11,7c (pn 'JJ~, 'to eat straw'), and on the other
the mentioning of lpJ ('ox'). In the introduction we pointed out that the
word 'JJ ~ ('to eat') is of special importance in Trito-Isaiah, especially in
Isa 65, whereas lpJ ('ox') also occurs in 65,10 ('a place for oxes to lie
down'). Besides, with the word ilYl (in the meaning of 'grazing') Isa

17 Besides both arguments Ca summanzmg reduction', and the connotation of

eating), we would Iike to mention a possible pun in Isa 65,25 as reason for the choice of
iWl. There is an (unpunctuated) homonymy of lYV (65,25a: 'they shall graze') and lYV
(65,25d = 11,9a: 'they shall hurt').
 INTERTEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ISA 65,25 AND 11,6-9 39

65,25 adopts the second verb in 11,6-8 with a connotation of 'eating' as

weH.

c) The serpent

In Isa 11,8 ('The sucking child shall play over the hole of the asp, and
the weaned child shall put his hand to the young of the adder') the author
continues the antithesis between the predatory and the domesticated
animals with that between the serpent and the defenceless child ('a
sucking child', 'a weaned child'). It is striking that the text of 11,8 is
lacking in 65,25, in which only the animal world is in view. Nevertheless,
there is a connection between 11,8 and 65,25. Although the word Vin J
('serpent') in 65,25c differs from 1n!J ('asp') and ., JlY!JX ('adder'), it does
create a thematic connection with 11,8 18 • The preceding (11,7c = 65,25b)
and the following sentence (11,9ab = 65,25de), being identical in both
texts, emphasize this connection. Therefore we assurne that Trito-Isaiah
tries to fit in the message of 11,8 through the related expression 'serpent'
in 65,25c.
Taking notice of the literary context, we find that the structure of the
sentence 65,25c is divergent from the preceding lines: a noun clause
instead of a compound noun clause. Moreover, the predatory party only is
mentioned (namely the serpent), whereas the weak party is omitted.
Nevertheless the semantic connection between 65,25c and 65,25ab is
quite strong, in all three sentences a predatory animal (wolf, lion, sperp-
ent) is mentioned, and an aspect of 'eating' (to graze, to eat straw, food).
An equivalent of the weak animal (larnb, ox) does not occur in 65,25c.
Therefore, the point of 65,25c is not 'being together in harmony' of
predatory and tarne animal, but 'eating' dust.
In spite of the resemblances between 11,8 and 65,25c, the tenor seems
to be different. In 11,8 the (once) dangerous serpent is now keeping corn-
pany with the little child without harming it. The text of 65,25c does not

18 The word "'nJ ('serpent') occurs about 30 times in OT. It seems to be the broader

expression, whereas both other expressions are more specific: ~ JlY~ ('adder') occurs
five times in OT, in three cases parallel to "'nJ (Isa 14,29, Jer 8,17 and Prov 23,32) and
once parallel to ln!J ('asp': Isa 11,8). The word ln!J occurs six times, once as a parallel
of ~ JlY~ (Isa 11,8), and once as a parallel of "'nJ (Ps 58,5). Besides, compare also 1 ~ Jn
('sea-monster', 'serpent'), which occurs often in parallelism with one or more of the
expressions mentioned.
40 J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN

say that the serpent is now harmless, but it only mentions that dust is the
serpent' s food.
What is the meaning of lfJn) l~V VJn J1, 'and dust shall be the serpent's
food'? The eolloeation of the three words VJnJ, l~V, and on) oeeurs only
in Isa 65,25e, like the eolloeation of the words VJnJ and on), and of l~V
and on)19. However, the eolloeation of VJnJ and l~V oeeurs outside Isa
65,25e also in Gen 3,14 (with the verb )JN: 'to eat'), and in Mieah 7,17
(with the verb 1n): 'to liek').
Gen 3,14 may funetion as the souree for the alteration in Isa 65,25e. In
Gen 3,14 the eolloeation of the words VJnJ ('serpent') and l~V ('dust') is
found. Besides, in Gen 3,14 the verb )J N ('to eat') oeeurs, and this is a
parallel of on) ('food'). The words in Gen 3,14 eorresponding to Isa
65,25e are, however, in a different syntaetie relation. In Gen. 3,14 one
ean read, after Eve said that the serpent has beguiled her, ' ... YHWH God
said to the serpent: 'Beeause you have done this, eursed are you above all
eattle, and above all wild animals; upon your belly you shall go, and dust
yau shall eat all the days of your life'. The remark that dust is the
serpent's food is put in the framework of a eurse. Beeause the serpent
beguiled Eve to eat from the tree, therefore the serpent must eat dust.
The aspeet of 'eating dust' is elaborated elsewhere in the OT. In the
first plaee we ean refer to Mieah 7,17a ('(l N ")mJ VJnJJ l~V 1]n)": 'They
shall liek the dust like a serpent, like the erawling things of the earth').
Mieah 7,17 has two words in eommon with Isa 65,25e: l~V ('dust') and
VJn J ('serpent'). However, the words are plaeed in the inverse order in
Mieah 7,17, and whereas VJnJ has a particle of eomparison k: ('like a
serpent'), in Isa 65,25e the serpent is put in apposition to 'dust' and
'food'. In Mieah 7,17 a the subjeet of the sentenee is 3rd person maseuline
plural, whieh are 'the nations' (0 "1J.) of v. 16. They will see the exodus
of the people, the marvellous things of YHWH and they will be ashamed
of all their might, they will not speak any more, they will not hear, they
tremble and shall be in dread before YHWH. In this eontext the utteranee
'they shall liek the dust like a serpent' indicates an attitude of humility;
they stand in awe of the might of YHWH, and of his people. Their own
strength is useless. The serpent that eats dust is explieitly used as express-
ion of eomparison for the attitude of humility among nations, which were
onee violent and hostile.

19 In one verse, but not in the same sentence, this collocation can be found also in

Gen 3,19 and Ps 78,27.

 INTERTEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ISA 65,25 AND 11,6-9 41

A meaning of 'lieking dust' eomparab1e to that in Mieah 7,17 is found

in Psalm 72,9 (lJn'p l~V l']"~l: 'and his enemies liek the dust'). In the
eontext it means awe for the righteous king, and it brings about an
attitude of humility and awe (to bow down, to render tribute, to bring
gifts, to fall down, to serve). Those who do the 'lieking' in Psalm 72,9
are again the enemies (foes, the kings of Tarshish and of isles, the kings
of Sheba and Seba, all kings, all nations). In Isa 49,22-23 'lieking dust'
has a eomparable eonnotation. Here there is adescription of how the
nations shall earry the exiled people on their shou1der, and shall bring
them back to Jerusalern. They shall bow down to Israel and 'liek the dust'
of their feet.
The expression 'liek the dust' refers to an attitude of humility of ru1ers
and nations with regard to YHWH and his people. This expression
eontains an element of eurse with regard to the nations, at the same time
being a blessing for Israel. App1ied to Isa 65,25 this wou1d mean that the
expression 'eating dust' is used to indieate an attitude of humi1ity, and
servi1ity of an ho stile group. This eurse for the party that was onee mueh
stronger is at the same time a blessing for the weak party, a1though the
weak party is not mentioned in v. 25e. This aspeet is eonfirmed by the
eontext: 'They shall not hurt or destroy in all my ho1y mountain'
(65,25d).
We wou1d 1ike to suggest that the same meaning ean be app1ied to Isa
65,25ab. The grazing of the wolf, the eating straw of the 1ion ean be
interpreted as eurses for these predatory anima1s. At the same time these
eurses are b1essings for the domestieated anima1s, the 1amb and the ox.
Grazing and eating straw is their sustenanee, and moreover they are not
endangered by the predatory anima1s any more. In a metaphoriea1 way Isa
65,25 eontinues the blessings for the servants, deseribed in vv. 17-24. The
verse reeapitulates the who1e ehapter, as weB: the downfaB of the wieked
peop1e in the judgement (vv. 1-16) entai1s the b1essing for the servants
(vv. 17-24).

Summarizing, it may be said that Isa 65,25 eontains a framed quotation of

Isa 11,6-9. This quotation reeapitu1ates the text. The words of Isa 11,6-9
have been removed from their eontext, nevertheless they presuppose
(indireetly) this context (11,3-5): the judgement of the poor and the meek
with righteousness and the destruetion of the wieked. Isa 65,25 is partieu-
1ar1y interested in the aspect of eating. On1y verbs with a eonnotation of
'eating' are taken up. With regard to the serpent the aspeet of 'eating' is
42 J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN

added to the text. The meaning of Isa 11,6-9 is modified. It is not the
harmony between the strong and the weak, whieh is the most important
point In Isa 65,25, but the righteous judgement in whieh the eurse for the
strong will be a blessing for the weak.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED

BY

W.A.M. Beuken*

Leuven. BeLgium

The pericope which we will examine in this study is rarely considered a

literary unityl. This is especially so if one does not accept v. 15 as a new
opening but places vv. 15-16 with the previous passage2 • By doing so
one puts an obstacle in the way of understanding the particular purpose of
29,15-24. There is, however, every reason to consider the five woe-cries
of 28, I; 29,1.15; 30,1; 31,1 as form elements which mark the major
redaction-historical composition of Isaiah 28-323 • 1. CHERYL EXUM,
furthermore, in an in-depth study, has shown the internal unity of
29,1-144 • It seems reasonable, therefore, to assume that 29,15-24, the
third passage in this complex which begins with a woe-cry, is a unity at
least on a redactional level.

* I am greatly indebted to my translator, Brian A. DOYLE (Leuven), for his aeeurate

translation of this article.
1 F. FELDMANN, Das Buch Isaias (EHAT 14/1, Münster in Westf., 1925), 35lf.; A.

PENNA, Isaia (La Saera Bibbia, Torino-Roma, 1957), 270f.; J.N. OSWALT, The Book oj
Isaiah. Chapters 1-39 (ICOT, Grand Rapids, 1986), 535f.
2 Vertaling van het Nederlands Bijbelgenootschap, New American Bible, Die Bibel -

Einheitsübersetzung.
3 W. JANZEN, Mourning Cry and Woe Oraele (BZAW 125, Berlin, 1972), 54; L.

LABERGE, "The Woe-Oracles of Isaiah 28-33", Eglise et Theologie 13 (1982), 157-190,

esp. 158f. - F. DELITZSCH [Das Buch Jesaja (BCAT nUl, Leipzig, 1889/4), 311] under-
stands eh. 29 as one woe-ery but takes eh. 33 as the fifth woe-cry in the 'book of the
woes' as a whole (ehs. 28-33); likewise J.D.W. WATTS, Isaiah 1-33 (WBC 24, Waeo,
1985), 352f., 378. With referenee to the unique plaee of eh. 33, cf. W.A.M. BEUKEN,
"Jesaja 33 als Spiegeltext im Jes~abueh", ETL 67 (1991), 5-35.
4 J. CHERYL EXUM, "Of Broken Pots, Fluttering Birds and Visions in the Night:

Extended Simile and Poetie Teehnique in Isaiah", CBQ 43 (1981). 331-352 (esp. 338).
44 W.A.M. BEUKEN

1. THE TEXT FORM OF THE PASSAGE

Literary genre

The literary genre of our passage does not make it easy to accept that a
unity is being aimed at. The woe-cry itself follows the most common
construction in as far as the participle which follows "lil contains an
accusation (vv. lS-16)5. Even the announcement of the contrastive des-
ti nies of the poor and their oppressors has paralleis (vv. 17-21; cf.
2S,I-St The appeal to available foreknowledge from the addressees
conceming an event which will soon take place is, however, unusual (v.
17a). What is most at variance is the construction of vv. 22-24, which are
introduced by the traditional prophetic messenger formula, due to the fact
that the element of God's intervention (often ., JJil with a participle) is
missing. The last verse is reminiscent of the 'knowledge of God', which
is often given by the prophets as the reason for YHWH's intervention (Isa
4,7; 37,20; 43,10; 4S,3.6; 49,23; Jer 16,21; 24,27; 44,29; Ezek S,13;
14,23; 20,20; Zech 2,13)7. Here, however, specific knowledge of God is
not the question. Furthermore, the concepts 'understanding / instruction'
seem to point more to a chokmatic form element than to a prophetie
one8 •

Colometry

A second aspect of the passage whieh raises questions is the verse

construction. The colometric divisions in BHS are insuffieient in a
number of places. We have to avoid the tendency to systematize in two
respects. Firstly there is no getting round the postulation of three monoco-
la: v. ISa, v. 16a and v. 17a' (or prose lines ?). Secondly we have
certainly to consider two other lines, v. 22a and v. 23a, as pro se because

5CL tlIe survey given in 1WAT, 11, 383-386 (H.-J. ZOBEL).

6J. VERMEYLEN, Du Prophete Isai"e a l'Apocalyptique. Isai"e, I-XXXV, miroir d'un
demi-millenaire d'experience religieuse en IsraelI cEtudes Bibliques, Paris, 1977),407f.
7 The relevant texts are collected and discussed by W. ZIMMERLI, "Erkenntnis Gottes

nach dem Buche Ezechiel", in: Gottes Offenbarung. Gesammelte Aufsätze zum Alten
Testament (ThB 19, München, 1969),54-78.
8 H. WILDBERGER [Jesaja 1., 2. und 3. Teilband (BKAT XlI-2-3, Neukirchen, 1972-

1978-1982), 1145] suspects a tlIeme from tlIe wildemess tradition in v. 24, worded in
wisdom language.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 45

of their length and the former, moreover, because of its formulary nature.
On top of this the verse lines change from normal to very long without
bin ding each other to a defined metrical theme 9 • We find very long lines
in v. l6b, v. 18 and v. 19, and a very short line in v. 20a. Finally, v. 23a
creates a separate problem. BHS appears to read a tricolon, but parallel-
ism between the cola is barely visible. It is unlikely that MT provides us
with the original text form, which seems to be irretrievable except at the
cost of making changes which the versions nowhere support.
[If we consider the word ,.,,';,., as a gloss (BHS), then v. 23a certainly
constitutes a line of prose. Moreover, the third person singular suffixes of
m ~'J and lJ,pJ then do not correspond with the plural verb lVi "'P'"
thus forcing us to read a singular here too lO • The plural verb form is
acceptable if "")", as subject, makes the suffix of m ~'J explicit (cf.
LXX). If we maintain the reading of MT, the line offers a good bridge
between 'Jacob', understood as singular, in v. 22b and the plural subject
'they' in vv. 23b-24, which represents 'JacoblIsrael' understood collec-
tively.]
With these considerations in mind we can arrange the colometry as
follows:

ilXY lnu) illil"lJ O"P"lJYlJil "lil 15

:lJY'''' "fJllJ ~l "lJ lllJ ~ "1 Oil"\UYlJ lVinlJJ il"ill
JV.7n" lX "illlJnJ""'[] ~ OJJ~il 16
pJil ~) llX,.,) llJ ~ lX"l ., ]\UY ~) lil\UY) il\UYlJ llJ ~ "-"J
lYllJ UYlJ 11Y-~1)il 17
JVin" lY") )fJlJill )fJlJ) llJJ) JVil
:il]" ~ln 0 "llY "]"Y lVinfJl 'J~ ~fJl 1~U-"lJ1 0 "Vilnil ~lilil""'[]"'J WlJVil 18
1'J":l" 'J ~1\U" VinpJ []1 ~ ., ],.,J ~l ilnlJ\U illil"J 0 "lJY l~U"l 19
y'J il'JJl Y"'lY U~ ~-"J 20
lJ1J []l ~ ., ~ "unlJ 21 : 11 ~ "VVi-)J lnlJ]l
:P"lX lilnJ m"l llVip" lYViJ n"JllJ'Jl
OillJ ~-n ~ il1~ lVi ~ Jpy" n"J-) ~ illil" llJ ~-ilJ p) 22
:llln" ,.,]~ ilny ~)l Jpy" VilJ" ilny- ~ )
"lJVi lVi",p" lJlPJ .,,., il\UYlJ ,.,,)., m~lJ"J 23
:lX"lY" 'J~1\U" "il'J~-n~l Jpy" Vinp-n~ lVi"Vill
:np)-"lJ'J" O"]:llll il]"J my"yn W'''l 24

9 H.W.M. VAN GROL, De versbouw in het klassieke Hebreeuws. Fundamenteie

verkenningen. Deel Een: Metriek (Amsterdam 1986).

10 WILDBERGER, 1135.
46 W.A.M. BEUKEN

Translation (Revised Standard Version, with adaptations in italics ll )

15 Woe to those who, away jrom YHWH, hide deep their counsel ! *
Their deeds are in the dark, /
and they say, 'Who sees us ? Who knows us ?'
16 You turn things upside down! Shall the potter be regarded as the clay; *
that the thing made should say of its maker, 'He did not make me'; /
or the thing forrned say of him who forrned it, 'He has no understanding' ?
17 Is it not yet a very little while *
until Lebanon shall turn back to a fruitful field, /
and the fruitful field shall be regarded as a thicket ?
18 In that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book, /
and out of (their) gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall see.
19 The meek shall obtain fresh joy in YHWH, /
and the poor among men shall exult in the Holy One of Israel.
20 For the ruthless shall come to nought /
and the scoffer cease,
and all who watch to do evil shall be cut off, /
21 who by a word make a man out to be an offender,
and lay asnare for hirn who reproves in the gate, /
and with an empty plea turn aside hirn who is in the right.
22 Therefore thus says YHWH - who redeemed Abraham -
concerning the house of Jacob: / (f
'Jacob shall no more be shamed, /
no more shall his face grow pale.
23 For when he - his children - see(s) the work of my hands, in bis midst,
they will sanctify my name; (f
they will sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, /
and will stand in awe of the God of Israel.
24 And those who err in spirit will come to understanding, /
and those who murrnur will accept instruction'.

On the basis of this colometric division we can take note of the follow-
ing:
l. V. 15b is centred around the chiasm 'their deeds' and 'they say'.
Moreover, 'in the dark' and 'Who sees us ? Who knows us ?' form a
parallel with respect to content.
2. The parallelism in v. 16b is synonymous, setting aside the inversio
of the subject in the second colon.

11 The symbol/marks the division between the first and second colon, the symbol *
marks the end of a monocolon and the symbol (f marks the end of a prose line.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 47

3. Vv. 17b-19 are very regu1arly constructed. The verbs in each line
are in a chiastic position: a perfect consecutive at the beginning and an
imperfect at the end.
4. V. 20a functions best as a bicolon with rhyme of final letters.
5. Vv. 20b-21a' and v. 21a"-b revea1 a chiasm in the middle of the
1ines: two plural particip1es in construct state and two finite verb forms
(imperfect or perfect and imperfect consecutive) respectively12.
6. The remaining lines follow common parallel patterns: v. 22b: abc /
a c' b' ; v. 23b: a b-c / b'-c' a' ; v. 24: abc / b' a' c'.

Structure

Taken as a who1e the text is not narrative but dia10gical in nature. There
are three macrosyntactic words: 'lil (v. 15), ~'')i1 (v.17) and p') (v. 22),
which introduce monocola or prose 1ines. Each of the three has a word
with a deictic function nearby which produces a subordinate section:
[]JJ~i1 (v. 16a: 'You turn things upside down!'; the word is an answer to
the quotation: 'Who sees us? Who knows us?' in v.15b")I3, and three
tim es the word 'J (vv.16, 20, 23). That 'J in each of these three cases
brings about a subordinate section is apparent from what follows: v. 16b
is an e1aboration of v. 16a, v. 20 beg ins the description of the second cat-
egory of people who are subject to the time adjunct 'Is it not yet a very
little while until...' (v. 17) and in v. 23 'J is not followed by a finite verb
but by an infinitive construct.
These observations lead us to the following arrangement. The first
segment consists of a woe-cry (vv. 15-16), of which the first part is an
accusation in the third person, illustrated with a quotation (v. 15), and the
second part is an accusation in the second person, illustrated with a
mashal (v. 16). The second segment (vv. 17-21) is difficult to classify. In
any case adescription is given, in the form of a diptych, of how the lot
of the unfortunate and of those who commit injustice will change (vv. 18-
-19 and vv. 20-21) This diptych, however, is taken up in a rhetorical
question which emphasises that this event is going to take place very

12 With reference to the unusal form Tl'l1j?' (v. 21), see WILDBERGER, 1134; L.
KOEHLER, W. BAUMGARTNER. J.1. STAMM and others, Hebräisches und aramäisches
Lexikon zum Alten Testament III (Leiden, 1983), 1020 - hencefortb quoted as HAL.
13 P. JOÜON and T. MURAOKA, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Subsidia Biblica

1411-2, Rome, 1991), § 111 i: 'substantive as exclamation' (hencefortb quoted as J-M).

48 W.A.M. BEUKEN

soon (v. 17a'). The third segment (vv. 22-24) opens with a prophetic
messenger formula (v. 22a) but does not continue to follow the normal
pattern of an announcement of salvation or judgment, that is to say God's
intervention and its consequences. In this case we only find the last
element. In terms of type of sentence this is worked out both negatively
(v. 22b) and positively (vv. 23-24), but in terms of content both parts
have to do with salvation since the former element is a litotes. Besides,
both elements are connected by an adjunct of time: 'no more' (v. 22b)
and 'When he sees' (v. 23a).
The preceding analysis of the form of the text serves as a basis for the
exegesis of the passage in the following section.

2. THE PURPOSE OF THE PASSAGE

The predominant theme

The question whether the passage has a clear purpose or is simply a loose
collection of fragments, is suggested by the fact that the connection
between the three major segments is unclear at the outset. The title of this
article, however, proposes the direction in which we are going to look for
an answer: 'reversion'. We find this theme expressed literally in the cry
of v. 16: 'You turn things upside down !' and in the announcement of v.
17: 'Lebanon shall turn back to a fruitful field'. It is apparent here that
there is talk of reversion for evil (expressed by the stern 19i1) and of
reversion for the good (expressed by the stern Jl'l1 ), in whatever propor-
tion to one another they stand. These two reversions, however, also
appear at the statement level. To the first category belongs the fact that
the potter has come to be esteemed as clay, that the artefact denies its
maker and the pot the potter as their origin (v. 16). To the second cat-
egory belong the hearing of the deaf and the seeing of the blind (v. 18),
the joy of the poor (v. 19) and the ruin of the oppressors (vv. 20-21), the
end of Jacob's shame (v. 22) and the fact that those who err in spirit will
come to understanding (v. 24).
Hidden beneath these surface facts lies a subtle rhetorical development
conceming the 'reversion' theme. The woe-cry itself already discloses an
absurd reversion of affairs. Firstly, reality is turned around when people
think that they can keep their 'counsel' hidden from God. History is
pre-eminently defined by God's 'counsel' (Isa 5,9; 11,2; 14,24.26f.;
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 49

19,17; 23,8f.; 25,1; 28,29), and human plans only have real worth if they
are in agreement with that 'counsel' (7,5; 8,10; 16,3; 19,3.11f.; 30,1;
36,5). The attempt, however, to keep God out of humanly devised plans
contains something more. It contains a withdrawal from YHWH (v.
15a)14, to such an extent that one expects to fall outside his field of
vision, witness the quotation: 'Who sees us? Who knows us?' (v. 15b").
And so, immediately thereafter comes the accusation in direct speech:
'You turn things upside down!' (v. 16a), a free translation of the excla-
mative noun []JJ~il15, which literally means 'perversion' rather than
'perverseness 416.
The accusation of 'perversion' is then substantiated with a double
appeal, on the one hand to the clear difference between 'clay' and 'the
potter>17 and on the other hand to the fact that no one ever hears from
the mouth of an artefact: 'He did not make me / He has no understand-
ing' (v. 16b). Thus this fictitious quotation clarifies the absurd but real
attitude of those who would make their own plans to the exclusion of
God : 'Who sees us? Who knows us?' (v. 15b; cf. the tripie verb 'to say'
[lfJ~] in vv. 15-16). Especially the last sentence of v. 16: 'He has no
understanding' , points back to: 'Who knows us ?', because, if the paral-
le1ism between v. 16b' and v. 16b" were completely synonymous, it
wou1d ron: 'He did not form me'. Thus, vv. 15-16 sketch a situation in
which the real re1ationships between maker and artefact are turned on
their head. They do this in such a rhetorical way that the accused, who in
v. 16 are also the audience, are forced to agree.

14 According to C. VITRINGA [Commentarius in librum prophetiarum Jesaiae I

(Herbomae Nassaviorum, 1722) 181] the inversion of miPll makes this adjunct of place
refer not only to the object i1YY but also to the subject []'j' 'llYllil.
15 I-M, § 162 c. For the difficulties conceming this word cf. E.F.C. ROSENMÜllER.

Scholia in Vetus Testamentum II (Lipsiae, 1835), 442; WILDBERGER, 1125f.; WATIS,

387f.
16 I.A. ALEXANDER, Commentary on the Prophecies 0/ Isaiah (Grand Rapids,
1976/7), 467.
17 The Massoretic accents regard lY'il llln:J as construct state: 'Surely your tuming

of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay' (A V); cf. ROSENMÜllER,
442. There is hardly an author nowadays who still follows this explanation (even
VITRINGA, 181, and ALEXANDER, 467. - A.I. ROSENBERG, Isaiah I [Miqra'ot Gedolot,
New York, 1982], 238 still does). At the end of this study we shall onee again question
the validity of the Massoretic interpretation.
50 W.A.M. BEUKEN

The addressees

The way in which speech is directed in this pericope fonns a problem in

itself. The accusation of v. 16 contains the first explicit address: 'You
turn things upside down!' An implicit address follows in v. l7a: 'Is it not
yet a very little while until ... '. The prophet is appealing to infonnation
concerning a forthcoming event which he assurnes to be available to the
audience (Nl';Jil)18. Who are these people? Considering the content, it is
unlikely that he is addressing here the same people as in v. 16.
In the remainder of the passage we find no further 2nd persons
singular or plural. It is a fact, however, that vv. 22-24 contain a message
from YHWH for 'the house of Jacob', even though this intention never
boils down to a direct address. In vv. 17b-21 the matter is not so clear.
These verses concern two parties, the needy (vv. 18-19) and the
oppressors (vv. 20-21). The fonner seem to be the interested party, since
an announcement of the end is being made with regard to the latter group
(v. 20). Their ruin is secondary to the joy of the former group (v. 19).
These also will have something to do with the 'house of Jacob', for
whom the announcement of salvation of vv. 22-24 is intended. In short,
the diptych in vv. l7b-2l does not deal with the needy and those who do
violence in exactly the same way as subject matter of discussion. It is
true that the prophet does not direct hirnself towards a specific group as
being the needy to whom the promise of the diptych applies, but the
mention of the target group 'the house of Jacob' (v. 22a) still has a
retroactive power in that those who can identify themselves with the
needy in vv. 18-21 may consider vv. 22b-24 as intended for them.
The same cannot be said for the overconfident ones who are addressed
in v. 16. These people do not show up in the remainder of the section nor
are they further implied. Consequently, in the one piece of direct speech
in the passage (v. l6a: 'You turn things upside down'), the actual inter-

18 It is true that recent studies have noted that Nl'Jil does not always have the value

of an interrogative particle (already noted by W. GESENIUS and F. BUHL, Hebräisches

und aramäisches Handwärterbuch über das Alte Testament [Leipzig, 1921/17], 374a).
Sometimes it does not introduce a question but functions in a similar way to ilJil.
Perhaps the 1atter meaning has a different etymo1ogical origin; cf. H.A. BRONGERS,
"Some Remarks on the Biblical Particle ha 16"', in: Remembering All The Way ... , OTS 21
(1981), 177-189: M.L. BROWN, '''Is it not?' or 'Indeed': Nl'Jil in Northwest Semitic",
Maarav 4 (1987), 201-219. In Isa 29,17 the versions interpret Nl'Jil as an interrogative
particle. It will be shown below that this interpretation is, in all aspects, required.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 51

ested party is not exposed. On the contrary, in the presence of the implied
audience of the passage, the prophet turns, for amoment, direct1y to the
guilty party. In vv. 17-24 they remain subject matter of discussion.

Explanation of v. 17b

As we have said, in v. 17 the prophet appeals to foreknowledge. The

question as to where this information previously arose depends a lot on
the correct interpretation of v. l7b: ' ... until Lebanon shall turn back to a
fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be regarded as a thicket,19. A
number of difficulties present themselves at this point.
The first concerns whether we are talking only about a change in the
landscape or whether this change can be seen, at least simultaneously, as
a metaphor for what follows, a change in human society ? From the
outset, the latter option has a greater measure of probability because we
would expect a longer text if a change in the countryside itself was the
only intention (cf. 33,9; 35,lf.; 51,3; 55,12f.). Furthermore, the verb J'lil
('shall return') is difficult to understand without a metaphorical interpre-
tation. The verb J1Vi always means 'turning back to a point of departure'.
That Lebanon would turn back to the landscape condition of a 'fruitful
field' is difficult to accept since nowhere in the Scripture do we find that
Lebanon once was a 'fruitful field'. The dictionaries, in which it appears
that the non-metaphoric interpretation has been adopted, suggest that only
in this verse does the meaning 'to turn back' not hold good and that the
term here me ans something similar to 'to become like'20. Many transla-
tions 21 and most commentaries follow this explanation. That this text is
the only exception to the general meaning of the verb, 'to turn back',
arouses suspicion.

19 In view of tbe definite article tbe word ~ll'Ji1 must be a common noun and not tbe

proper name of tbe fertile Cannel mountain range; cf. TWAT, IV, 343-345 (MJ. MUL-
DER).
20 J. FüRST, Hebräisches und chaldäisches Handwärterbuch zum Alten Testament 11
(Leipzig, 1876), 416a; F. BROWN, S.R. DRIVER and C.A. BRIGGs. A Hebrew and English
Lexicon oj the Old Testament (Oxford, 1906), s.v., 998a (henceforth BDB); HAL S.V.,
1328a-b; W.L. HOLLADA Y, The Root SUBH in the Old Testament with Particular
Rejerence to its Usages in Covenantal Contexts (Leiden, 1958), 55.
21 Already in LXX: flE't(X'tEe1\oE'tm; Dutch: SV, NBG, KBS; English: AV, RSV,

NAB, NJV; French: TOB; German: EÜ. - M. BUBER, NEB, REB, BJ form an exception.
52 W.A.M. BEUKEN

It is conjectured that a number of Old Testament texts build on the

ancient near eastern (Mesopotamian and Canaanite) mythologoumenon of
an endangered divine garden on mount Lebanon. With the reception of
this idea in Israel, Jerusalern could be conceived of as Lebanon, her
inhabitants as trees (mainly cedars) or the forest and YHWH as their
owner (chiefly in Ezekiel 31; also in I Kgs 7,2; 10,17.21; 11 Kgs 19,23;
Isa 2,13; 1O,33f.; 14,8; 22,8; 37,24; 60,l3; Jer 21,13f.; Ezek 21,2f.; Zech
11,1-3; Ps 29,5f.; 80,11; 104,16)22. It is true that the reconstruction of
the mythologoumenon is disputed and not every text is equally convinc-
ing. Those from Isaiah, however, and especial1y 10,33-34, are considered
strong evidence of the influence of this mytho10gical topoS23.
If we connect Isa 29,17 with this mythological idea, the tenn 'to turn
back' becomes comprehensible. It functions both on the level of the
original myth and in this context on the level of metaphorical use. On the
first level 'to turn back' means the recovery of the ideal proto-condition.
On the level of the context it means the recovery of the correct attitude
and behaviour, i.e. the end of the abuse described in vv. 15-16. If 'Leban-
on' is a metaphor for those who have raised themselves up in their pride
against YHWH, as is the case elsewhere in Proto-Isaiah (henceforth PI)
(2,13; 10,34; 14,8; 33,9; 37,24), then the general meaning of the verb 'to
turn back', which also fulfils a role in the myth, can be properly applied
here. Arrogant Lebanon shall turn back to the condition of a 'fruitful
field'. On this level 'to turn back to' need not imp1y so much a past
situation as the normal and normative attitude.
The use of the phrase 'fruitful field' (';llJlJil) in the book of Isaiah
(henceforth BI) supports this interpretation. It arises in the context of
concern for what people experience of God (10,18; 16,10; 32,15f.) or how
they treat hirn (37,24). Even when this word functions as a proper name,
mount 'Karmel', it still has to do with empathizing with God's works
(33,9; 35,2).
The second half of v.17b ('and the fruitful field shall be regarded as a
thicket') produces further difficulties. Are we talking here of a change for
the good, as was the case in the first half of the verse, or a change for the

22 F. STOLZ, "Die Bäume des Gottesgartens auf dem Libanon", ZAW 84 (1972), 141-
156.
23 H. BARTH, Die Jesaja-Worte in der Josiazeit. Israel und Assur als Thema einer

produktiven Neuinterpretation der Jesajaüberliejerung (WMANT 48, Neukirchen, 1977),

71-72.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 53

worse, paraphrased 'The proud forest becomes a garden, the garden a

proud forest'? The latter position seems to be ruled out because the result
of the change is not 'Lebanon' but lY". This word is not the equivalent of
'forest' but implies a terrain which, due to its luxuriant though not very
useful bushes, is difficult to get at and to cultivate ('thicket'; NJV: 'mere
brush')24. Subsequently, the verb used here is not 'to turn back' (Jl'l1) or
'to become like' ('J i1"il) but 'to be regarded as' (J'l1n niph'al). This does
not mean that the qualitatively higher landscape, the 'fruitful field', shall
degenerate into the qualitatively lesser one, 'thicket', but that the 'fruitful
field' - normally an exception in the landscape, brought about by careful
cultivation - shall pass for the normal form of the landscape, as the
thicket does nowZ5 •
We see then that the verb 'to be regarded as' functions in the two
reversions which form the main theme of the passage. A negative rever-
sion of values takes place when the potter is esteemed as clay (v. l6a)
and a positive reversion takes place when 'the fruitful field' is regarded
just as the steppe with its copse. V. l7b" is not, therefore, antithetically
parallel with v. l7b,z6, but progressively parallel27 •

Appeal to a previous prophecy

We return now to the question concerning the origin of the information

about the coming reversion for good to which v. l7a ('Is it not yet a very
little while until .. .') makes appeal. It appears to go without saying that
we will find that origin in texts which talk about 'yet a very little while'
(lVllJ DYlJ llY). This expression appears as it is in one more place in BI:
'For in a very little while the indignation will come to an end, and my

24 C. HOUTMAN, "De jubelzang van de struiken der wildemis in Psalm 96:I2b", in:
Loven en Gefoven (Feestbundel N.H. Ridderbos, Amsterdam, 1975), 151-174, esp. 168;
1WAT, III, 783-787, esp. 786 (MJ. MULDER).
25 In itseIf, the root ::wn does not have any negative connotation; cf. 1WAT, III, 248:
'Tatigkeit und Vorgang sind wertfrei bezeichnet, wenn sich ::wn auf ein gegenständliches
Objekt bezieht' (K. SEYBOLD). Accordingly HOUTMAN, ibidem: 'De vruchtbaarheid zal
zo groot zijn, dat plantages de functie van hakhout vervullen'.
26 Pace REDAK (in ROSENBERG), VITRINGA, WATTS, ad focum; G. FÖHRER, Das

Buch Jesaja 1I, (ZB, Zürich 196712), 86.

27 In principie the Targum: 'Lebanon shall again be as a fruitful fieId, and the

fruitful field shall cause many cities to be inhabited' [J.F. STENNING, The Targum 0/
Isaiah (Oxford, 1953/3),94]; A. SCHOORS, Jesaja (BOT IX, Roennond, 1972), 176.
54 W.A.M. BEUKEN

anger will be directed to their destruction' (10,25)28. The only difference

between the two texts is that 10,25 is introduced by "J and 29,17 by
l'nJil. This leads us to believe that ~lJil is functioning here as an inter-
rogative particle and that the sentence is calling another text to mind 29 •
The text we are referred to, 10,25, announces the end of the Assyrian
oppression and a turn for the good for Israel. It does so in a striking way
in that 'the indignation' concerns Israel whi1e 'my anger' concerns
Assyria30 • (The related text 26,20 has the same purpose.) On the one
hand it is not very 1ikely that 10,25 constitutes the reference text of 29,17
since 29,15-24 is not dealing with a foreign enemy (cf. the sorts of crimes
in vv. 20-21). On the other hand in 10,5-34 we find a number of striking
agreements in word usage and style with our passage:
1. The introductory word 'woe' ("ln: 10,1 and 29,15)
2. The end of 'Lebanon' (10,33f. and 29,17) and the words 'fruitful
field' (JmJ) and 'thicket' (lV"), although these two are not used in the
same way (1O,18f.; cf. 29,17)
3. The proper names 'the Holy One of Israel' (10,17.20 and 29,19.23)
and '(the house) of Jacob' (l0,20f. and 29,22f.)
4. The theme 'the work of God' (10,12.23 and 29,23) as opposed to
the work of Assyria and human work (10,11.13 and 29,16)
5. The terms 'to cease' (ilJJ: 10,18 and 29,20), 'to (be) cut off' (nlJ
hiph'il and niph'al: 10,7 and 29,20) and 'reversion' (J1Vi 10,2lf. and
29,17)
6. Quotations which disclose arrogance (l0,8-11 and 29,16) and an
appeal to the natural order in the form of a question (10,15 and 29,16).
This veritable harvest of agreements could lead us to consider the
entire passage, 29,15-24, not as a prophecy against Israel or a group
within Israel but as a prophecy against Assyria. The use of the word
'ruthless' (29,20: Y"lV) in BI might also constitute a supporting argument
for this since it always refers to foreign powers (13,11; 25,3-5; 49,25; cf.
the corresponding verb in 47,12). This is often the case with the term 'to

28In 26,20 we still find Yl., UYO:J.

29Cf. note 18.
30 A suggestion exists that we change the reading of the MT in 1O,25b", ')y ~!Hn
Dn~'J:m to Dn~ 'J:Jn ')y ~~Hn: 'my anger will be wholly brought to an end' [G.R. DRIVER,
JTS 38 (1937), 39]. Reading the text this way means that God's wrath is directed only to
one nation, Israel. Some authors have adopted the reading (WILDBERGER, 417,420). On
the basis of the discussion of this text change in HAL (1552) they should be advised
otherwise.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 55

cease' (i1JJ: 10,18; 15,6; 16,4; 21,16; 31,3). Conversely the word 'scoffer'
(YJ) refers to behaviour found in Israel itself (28,14.22; 43,27), as is
certainly the case with the various forms of injustice which are the charge
of vv. 20b-2I.
If we are to do justice to all of these facts then we will arrive at the
following position. With an appeal to a prophecy against Assyria (10,25),
the overconfident who work out their 'counsel' to the exclusion of God
(vv. 15-16) and those who commit injustice in Israel (vv. 20-21) are
notified of the soon to come reversion of relationships. In this way the
negative content of the idea 'Assyria' is projected in all its fullness
against this domestic class of people. The reference text itself offered the
possibility of broadening the application of the prophecy because in it we
find that Assyria, Midian and Egypt are already placed in one line as
Israel' s oppressors, against whom God' s wrath is directed (10,24-27).
Moreover, we find a similar phenomenon of interpretation in the ambigu-
ous function of 10,34: 'He will cut down the thickets of the forest with an
axe, and Lebanon with its majestic trees shall fall'. (As we have seen, this
text has the same mythological background as 29,17.) The final redactor
of Isa 10,5-34 intended 'Lebanon' to be the Assyrian world power, which
God would destroy. Originally, however, vv. 33-34 were directed to a
party in Jerusalem who were in favour of a political alliance with Ashdod
against Assyria31 •

Excursus. It might be expected that we would also consider 32,15b ('The

wildemess shall become a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be regarded
as a thicket') as a text which is of referential value for 29,17b. The
similarity in wording is certainly striking, but the differences ('to become'
[J iPi1] instead of 'to return' and 'wildemess' [lJlfJ] instead of 'Leban-
on'), in fact, make it clear that we are dealing here with a different
contextualization of what in origin may have been the same saying.
Furthermore, the fact that this text comes after 29,17 in the canonical
sequence is a reason not to consider it the text to which v. 17a makes an
appeal.

31 SCHOORS, 9lf.; WILDBERGER, 427f., 433-435.

56 W.A.M. BEUKEN

For whom shall the former prophecy be realized ?

Is the follow up to the appeal to a former prophecy also recognizable as a

quotation (vv. 18-21)? It is a justifiable question since due to the adjunct
of time 'in that day' (v. 18) the application of the metaphor (vv. 18-21) is
subsumed under 'Is it not yet a very little while until .. .' (v. 17a). We
have shown, it is true, that our passage has an important number of words
and phrases in common with vv. 10,5-34 but can we say that the state-
ments in vv. 18-21 also achieve a level of affinity with certain statements
in that reference text? As far as vv. 18-19 are concemed, 'the deaf' and
'the blind' ([PViln and 0 'lW) do not appear in BI before 29: 18. 'The
meek' and 'the poor' represent a theme which we find elsewhere in Isaiah
but the passages concemed are not so connected that they could count as
a reference text for 29,18-21 (O"JV in 3,15; 10,2; 14,32; 26,6, 0'1JV in
11,4 and 0' Jl'J N in 14,30; 25,4).
From a thematic and idiomatic point of view we can say that vv.
18-19 do not pick up on a former prophecy in BI. The correct purpose of
these verses, however, is far from c1ear. It is striking that the phrase 'the
words of a book' has not received much attention 32• Sometimes we find,
justifiably, the explanation that we need not interpret 'book' as the
canonical final form of the Scriptures but as the beginning of the record-
ing of Israel's traditions 33 • Commentators have traditionally made a link
with 'the words of a book that is sealed' in vv. 11_1234 • The c10se con-
nection between the two sections of ch. 29, vv. 1-14 and vv. 15-24, which
are both introduced by a woe-cry, makes this probable. In that case the
sentence 'the deaf shall hear' need no longer be understood in a purely
physical way, as the healing of a bodily handicap, but rather with the
fuller meaning of 'learning, being instructed'. This is exactly the case
whenever the verb 'to hear' (VlJVi) has the term 'word(s)' (lJ1, 0'lJ1) as

32 The following dictionaries do not mention this text under the lemma l!JU : BDB;

F. ZORELL, Lexicon Hebraicum et Aramaicum Veteris Testamenti (Roma, 1968); HAL,

THAT, TWAT.
33 PENNA, 272; WILDBERGER, 1140.

34 RASHI and REOAK (ROSENBERG 239f.); F. HIlZIG, Der Prophet Jesaja (Heidel-
berg, 1833); ALEXANOER; E. KÖNIG, Das Buch Jesaja (Gütersloh, 1926); EJ. KISSANE,
The Book o/lsaiah I (Dublin, 1941); SCHOORS, all ad locum.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 57

its objed5 • In any event '(not) hearing' (often coupled with '[not]
seeing') in the not exclusive1y physical understanding of the word, i.e. as
the unwillingness or inabi1ity to receive and understand God's word, is an
important theme in the first part of BI. YHWH himself has given a
mission to the prophet which has in mind that Israel shall not hear and
shall not understand (6,10; cf. 1,19; 7,13; 28,9.12.14; 32,3.9; 33,13). If we
apply this to 29,18 and take seriously the connection with vv. 11-12, then
'the deaf come to mean those who never get to hear anything and
consequently cannot take cognizance of a message. They are the victims
of the fact that, according to vv. 11-12, there is no one to be found who
can read the book. It is notable that this verb, 'to read' (NlP), dominates
vv. 11-12, while 'to hear' is missing there.
Is the same true for v. 18b: 'and out of gloom and darkness the eyes
of the blind shall see'? Does 'to see' in this context also mean 'to
understand' , coup1ed with 'to perceive'? In any case '(not) to see' in the
fullest meaning of sensua1 experience together with understanding is a
theme of PI (5,12; 6,10; 22,11; 26,10; 30,10). A great deal depends,
however, on the exact meaning of 'out of gloom and darkness' (')~ N/J
l'tl.1nIJ1). Nowhere do we find this word pair signifying the physica1 condi-
tion of blindness. Only once does it signify physical darkness (Ex 10,22;
in the construct state). Elsewhere it refers to profound unhappiness (Job
3,4-636) brought about by 'the day of YHWH' or by his judgment
(Amos 5,20; Joel 2,2; Zeph 1,15 and Isa 8,22; 58,10; 59,9; Job 23,17
respective1y). The indications are, therefore, that Isa 29,18b shou1d also
be understood in this way, the more so since 8,22, the on1y text prior to
this in PI where the word pair can be found, has the judgment of YHWH
as its background 37 • The darkness out of which the blind shall escape is
not one of failing eyesight but has to do with the inabi1ity to recognize a
certain cognitive content via the eyes, as a consequence of the disaster in
which they find themse1ves as a result of YHWH's judgment.

35 J. ARAMBARRI, Der Wortstamm 'hören' im Alten Testament. Semantik und Syntax

eines hebräischen Verbs (SBB 20, Stuttgart, 1990), 2oof., contains the complete list of
texts.
36 For the stylistic distribution of this word pair over more than one verse, cf. Y.

A VISHUR, Stylistic Studies oj Ward-Pairs in Biblical and Ancient Semitic Literatures

(AOAT 210, Neukirehen, 1984),81.
37 8,22 is c10sely Iinked to 8,23-9,6 in which the comparison is drawn with 'the day

of Midian' (v. 3); cf. 5,30, where l'I1" without ';J!JN has the same meaning.
58 W.A.M. BEUKEN

One objection to this interpretation of v. 18b might be that it wou1d be

difficult for the seeing of the blind, otherwise than the hearing of the deaf
in v. 18a, to have 'the words of a book' as its object. We wou1d, there-
fore, be wrong to read v. 18b against the background of vv. 11-12. This,
however, would also be valid for v. 18a if we consider the parallelism
between v. 18a and v. 18b. Does this sti111ead us to the explanation that
'to hear' and 'to see' have to do with physical handicap?
It seems possible and also desirable to interpret the seeing of the blind
against the background of vv. 11-12. 'The (words of a) book', mentioned
in these verses, are areport of 'the vision of all this' ('JJiI nnn) in v. 11,
a phrase which in turn harks back to the 'vision of the night', which is
related to 'the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel' (v. 7).
As a matter of fact, blindness is an important topic in the c10se context of
vv. 11-12. The addressees are sarcastical1y summoned to make themselves
blind: 'Blind yourselves and be blind (lVVJllVVJVnVJiI) ... For YHWH has
poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and he has closed your eyes,
the prophets, and covered your heads, the seers ([Plnil)' (vv. 9_10)38. In
short, blindness with respect to the vision goes hand in hand with the
sealed book from which no one is able to read (vv. 11-12). It is YHWH's
one punitive measure against his people.
Interpreted thus, v. 18a and v. 18b are in harmony with regard to the
not purely physical meaning of 'to hear' and 'to see'. This explanation,
which is supported by most commentators39 , has the advantage that
justice is done to the connection with vv. 11-12 and that we know which
book is being referred to in v. 18. It c1arifies, furthermore, the identity of
the deaf and the blind. They do not stand in a general way for the physi-
cally and therefore socially deprived nor do they stand for people with a
hardened heart who refuse to accept God's word. A more precise explana-
tion is required. There is c1early a difference between those who cannot
read (vv. 11-12) and the deaf who do not understand the words of the
book (v. 18). The latter are the victims of the former. Consequently we
must postulate the same distinction between the blind who are going to
see 'out of gloom and darkness' (v. 18b) and the people who, under

38 It is true that many exegetes accept that the words 'the prophets' and 'the seers'

are an insertion. The sentence 'he bas closed his eyes' remains, and witb it tbe topic of
blindness; cf. further 'the eyes of the blind' in v. 18.
39 With the exception of R.E. CLEMENTS, Isaiah 1-39 (NCBC, Grand Rapids -

London, 1980), 241; WATTS, 389. - OSWALT, 538, empbatically defends the going
together of the Iiteral and the metaphorical meaning.
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 59

God's punishing hand, are to strike themse1ves with stupor and blindness.
The use of different words for 'blind' functions weIl here (v. 9: root YYW
v.18:[]"lly)40.
The deaf and the blind, therefore, are people who are suffering from
the consequences of the judgment which YHWH, in the form of blinding
(v. 9) and a closed book (vv. 11-12), has had to bring upon his people
(cf. 30,20f.). For that reason the change of fortune spoken of in v. 18
does not concern those to whom the 'woe cry' in v. 15 was announced
but the victims of the judgment that these have called down upon Israel.
While the former group perform their deeds 'in the dark' (v. 15), the
latter group are allowed to leave their 'gloom and darkness' (v. 18).
If we have correctly interpreted 'the deaf / the blind', then at the same
time it be comes easier to situate 'the meek / the poor' (v. 19). They too,
earlier on in PI, are presented as the victims of those who rise up against
YHWH (3,15; 10,2; 11,4; 25,4; 26,6). The condition of happiness, which
this turnabout will provide for them, is profound1y opposed to the situ-
ation into which those who make plans without God have manoeuvered
themselves. Whi1e the former 'shal1 obtain fresh joy in YHWH' (v. 19),
the latter, in the hatching of plans which they hide, move 'away from
YHWH' (v. 15).
In summary, the context of vv. 17-19 can be outlined in the following
way. At the moment when the prophecy, which has been proclaimed
against those who raise themselves above YHWH, is fu1filled and
Lebanon turns back to the normative condition of a 'fruitful field' (v. 17),
there will be a change in fortune for those who cannot understand 'the
words of a book' and are thereby denied 'the vision of all this', and as a
consequence live their lives in darkness (v. 18). These poor ones will find
their joy 'in YHWH' (v. 19).

The oraele (w. 22-24)

The mention of 'the house of Jacob' in the messenger formula in v. 22a

and the double appearance of the name 'Jacob' in the proclarnation of
salvation in the ensuing vv. 22b-23 are sufficient proof that this name
must arouse the interest of those who stand to gain from the message of

40 If we accept the word 'seers' as original then this creates a distinetion between the

addressees and those who have to see for them. This confirms the distinction between
the blind in vv. 9-10 and v. 18.
60 W AM. BEUKEN

YHWH which is about to follow. What in particular and in general does

the name 'Jacob' call to mind in BI?
We find the name 15 tim es in Isaiah 1-39, mostly several tim es in one
particular context: 2,3.5f.; 10,20f.; 14,1 (twice); 27,6.9; and further in
8,17; 9,7; 17,4. We also find the combination 'house of Jacob' (v. 22) in
2,6; 8,17; 10,20; 14,1, and the word pair 'Jacob / Israel' in 9,7; 14,1;
27,6. It is striking that the context frequently has to do with Israel's sins
or the Law which should be the norm for her behaviour (2,3.5f.; 8,17;
9,7; 1O,20f.; 27,6.9). We probably have here the continuation of the
tradition about Jacob with whom the prophets above all have identified
Israel (Isa 43,27f.; Jer 9,3; Hos 12,4; cf. also Deut 32,14f. [cf. LXX] ; Ps
85,3t l • This can also be the case here in vv. 22-23. The announcement
that 'Jacob shall no more be ashamed / no more shall his face grow pale'
(v. 22), if we take the function of the root Vil] in PI 0,29; 20,5; 26,11;
30,3.5; 37,27) into account42 , leads us to suspect that the cause of this
shame lies in Jacob's faulty trust in political alliances.
Perhaps the unusual verb i119 (v. 22: 'who redeemed Abraham') is
connected with this. It is generally said that it is unclear, as this text pres-
ents it, from whose power or from what need YHWH has redeemed
Abraham 43 • However, since Abraham functions here as a motif of confi-
dence for Jacob, it would be better to ask from whose power or from
what need Jacob is to be redeemed. We should interpret i119 in connec-
tion with VilJ. Since the verb i119 in its actual juridical sense means 'to
ransom from some sort of bondage', it goes weIl with 'to be no more
ashamed'. The need for redemption lies in the fact that placing confidence
in foreign powers has not worked out weil, all the more since this tactic
has an idolotrous aspect to it. (Compare the correlation between i119 and
VilJ in connection with the service of idols in 1:27 and 29).
If the name 'Jacob' arouses this kind of association, the question arises
whether the new situation, as announced in vv. 22-24, describes the

417WAT, III, 771f. (H.-J. ZOBEL).

42For the use of the same root with the same meaning outside of Proto-Isaiah cf.
7WAT, I, 573-578 (H. SEEBASS). The adjunct of time 'no more' (ilIlY tot'}) is weil set out
in BDB, 774a: 'of a time ideally present (= then, from OUf point of view): Isa 29,22;
Hos 10,3; Micah 4,9.10.1 1.14; 5,3'; cf. GESENIUS and BUHL, 629b: 'von einer proph.
vergegenwärtigten Zukunft'.
43 J. VOLLMER, Geschichtliche Rückblicke und Motive in der Prophetie des Amos,

Hosea und Jesaja (BZAW 119, Berlin, 1971), 169f.; THAT, 11, 403 (1.J. STAMM);
7WAT, VI, 517 (H. CAZELLES).
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 61

turnabout of the wayward 'makers of plans' (vv. 15-16), rather than

describing the behaviour of the oppressed (vv. 18-21). At first glance it is
perhaps tempting to equate those who will sanctify YHWH (v. 23) with
those who will rejoice in hirn (v. 19), but this identification depends
entirely on the two related terms: 'the Holy One of Israel' (v. 19) and
'the Holy One of Jacob / the God of Israel' (v. 23b). At the same time
we have to allow the differences their weight: the needy in v. 19 shall
'obtain fresh joy / exult', the folk in v. 23 shall 'sanctify / stand in awe'.
Furthermore it is not a change of fortune which is being announced to
this 'house of Jacob' (as is the case in vv. 18-21) but a change in moral-
ity. Expressions such as 'to be no more ashamed' (v. 22b), 'when he sees
... the work of my hands' (v. 23) and 'to come to understanding' (v. 24)
are indicative of this. For this reason it is not recommended to equate
'(the house of) Jacob' with the needy in vv. 18-21. The sentence 'when
he sees ... the work of my hands' (v. 23: ",,, ilVJVlJ) points precisely in
another direction, that of the 'makers of plans' in vv. 15-16. With the
'makers of plans' the deeds of YHWH are up for discussion both themati-
cally (v. 16: 'He did not make me' ["JVJV N)]) and practically in that they
try to hide their own deeds from hirn (v. 15: []il"VJVlJ).
The suspicion arises that 'they will sanctify my name' is in contrast
with the behaviour complained about in v. 15. It goes without saying that
the recognition of God as 'the Holy One (of Israel)' forms a central part
in the preaching of PI (1,4; 5,16.l9.24; 6,3; 10,17.20; 12,6; 17,7;
30,llf.15; 31,1; 37,23). It is likewise characteristic of PI that the denial
of YHWH' s holiness is not a cultic matter but an ethical one (1,4; 5,16.
18-20; 6,5.7; 1O,20f.; 30,11f.; 31,lf.)44. The expression 'to sanctify my
name', moreover, points to a specific Sitz im Leben. 'Sanctifying God'
(VJ'j' hiph 'il with God as object) appears only five times in the OT (Num
20,12; 27,14; Isa 8,13; 29,23 [bis]). It is noteworthy that in the other text
of PI the hiph 'il of the verb VJ'j' is also parallel to a word from the root
,,'V: 'But YHWH of hosts, hirn shall you sanctify; let hirn be your fear,
and let hirn be your dread' (8, 13:1VJ "'j'n m N llJ~'VlJ Nlill; cf 29,23:
lVJ "'j'ill Il~ "'v "). The addressees in 8,13 are people in Jerusalern who
show themselves receptive to the preaching of the prophet. They stand in
opposition to 'this people' who are busy with other things than their
relationship with YHWH (vv. 11-12)45. The affinity between the two

44 TWAT, VI, 1193f., (H. RINGGREN).

45 WILDBERGER, 337.
62 W.A.M. BEUKEN

texts makes it probable that a similar opposition is present in 29,23. It is

promised to a group of socially powerless faithful of YHWH that the
ruling class of political and social pragmatists, for whom YHWH's name
has taken on a perspective of inconvenience, will one day recognise hirn
as 'the Holy One of Jacob'. This shall take place when Jacob 'sees the
work of my hands' (v. 23). Here too we run into PI's special vocabulary
(iHn in this sense: 5,12.19; 17,7; 22,11; cf. 26,10), sometimes even in
connection with 'the Holy One of Israel' (5,19; 17,7)46.
Finally, it seems also to be the plan of v. 24 ('And those who err in
spirit will come to understanding, / and those who murmur will accept
instruction') to identify those who from now on will sanctify YHWH with
the self-willed policy makers of vv. 15-16, who themselves are like the
fools of vv. 13-14. By denying 'understanding' to YHWH (v. 16: N';J
l"Jil) they have shown the inferiority of their own 'understanding' (v. 14:
'the understanding of their understanding men ['" JJ J n J "J] shall be hid').
By sanctifying God's name these people will make room for genuine
understanding (v. 24: il J"J 'V1"'). Likewise, the 'instruction' which they
will receive (v. 24: np';Jl1/J';J") is in contrast to the previous false 'in-
struction' (v. 13: 'Their fear of me is a commandment of men learned by
rote' [il1/J';J/J]). For that matter it is also true of these chokmatic terms that
they appear e1sewhere in PI in the accusation and the proclamation of
judgment over the ruling classes ('to err' [ilVn]: 3,12; 9,15; 19,13f.; 28,7;
for 'come to understanding' cf. V1": 1,3; 5,13; 6,9; 28,9; 32,4; ilJ"J: 11,2;
27,11; pJ: 1,3; 5,21; 6,9f.; 28,9.19; 32,4).
The conclusion, therefore, is this. The liberation of 'the house of
Jacob' will bring an end to the shame which the self-willed 'makers of
plans' (vv. 15-16) have brought upon it. The new situation is described in
language which is characteristic of PI' s preaching against the ruling
classes and is accordingly not from the point of view of the policy
makers themselves but from that of the needy who suffer under the shame
of Jacob and under the oppressive activities against them (vv. 18-21). The
same God in whom they will rejoice (v. 19: 'The Holy One of Israel')
will also be sanctified and respected by the policy makers (v. 23: 'The
Holy One of Jacob / the God of Israel'). Both groups together make up
'the house of Jacob'.

46 The adjunct of place 'in the midst of (:nP:J), too, only appears in chs. 1-39 (and

once more in 63,11), often accompanied by an action of YHWH (5,25; 6,12; 10,23;
12,6).
 ISA 29,15-24: PERVERSION REVERTED 63

3. CONCLUSION

From this examination of Isa 29,15-24 it would appear that the third
woe-cry in the greater complex of chs. 28-32 connects, on the one hand,
with the preceding prophecy against Ariel (29,9-14) and on the other hand
abundantly draws on the vocabulary and themes of PI, explicitly pointing,
in fact, to the woe-cry concerning Assyria in 10,5-34 (29,17 takes up
10,25).
These observations raise the question as to whether and to what extent
we can ascribe this passage to the prophet Isaiah hirnself. We have seen
that the textual form of this pericope reveals a large amount of freedom,
especially in its mixture of poetry and prose, the irregular length of the
verse lines and consequently the lack of a metrical theme. The tradition al
patterns of prophetic literary genres are also missing. We are led to
suspect, therefore, that the final form of the text in itself came into
existence at a later date.
This suspicion is confirmed by evidence with respect to content. The
explicit reference to another Isaianic text (v. 17 to 10,25), the interest in
written words (v. 18), the theme of 'the poor' (v. 19) and the reference to
the redemption of Abraham make it advisable not to place our text during
the time of Isaiah, the 2nd half of the 8th C.
Finally, the woe-cry concerning Assyria to which our passage refers,
from which it borrows what it needs and which seems to be known as a
whole (10,5-34), is itself a redactional composition47 • It would seem to
be a justifiable conclusion that Isa 29,15-24 is a product of the redaction
of the book. The question in what phase of the redaction of PI or of the
book as a whole did our passage come into existence, along with the
historical-critical division of the text, are outside the ambit of this study.
It is important, however, to take note of two matters. Firstly, the
people who think that they can withdraw themselves from YHWH in their
daily lives (vv. 15-16) are described in words and images which remind
us of Assyria. An oracle against that major power is put to use in pro-
claiming judgment over them. Nevertheless, their social misconduct
shows that they form an oppressive element within their own community
(vv. 20-21). From this it would appear that Assyria, as it is found in the
prophecies of Isaiah, has developed in the tradition of the prophet into a

47 WILDBERGER, 1553, 1557f., 1570; BARTH, 17-76.

64 W.A.M. BEUKEN

metaphor for any power which oppresses those who are faithful to
YHWH 48 •
Secondly, unique to this prophecy is the fact that the material which
makes up the Assyria metaphor is used to apply the fuH seriousness of
the accusation and pronouncement of judgment against the ruling classes
and their abuse of power. At the same time, however, there is an expecta-
tion of a sort of turnabout in this upper layer of society (vv. 17.22-24).
While Assyria will be destroyed (10,25-26.33-34), these people will, in
the last analysis, sanctify the name of YHWH and achieve wisdom in
their conduct (29,22-24). The name 'Jacob' is apparently an expression of
salvation which can even be applied to those who proudly defy YHWH.
From all this it would appear that the enigmatic expression 'Lebanon
shall turn back to a fruitful field' (v. 17) has a very real function. The
verb 'to return', in full agreement with its function in PI, contains a
programme which 'the house of Jacob' will undergo (cf. 1,27; 6,10; 9,12;
10,22; 31,6). This 'return' undoes the 'perversion' (v. 16). REDAK's
explanation of v. 16a, although difficult to defend philologically, still
aptly reflects the intention of the entire passage: 'Changing you is indeed
regarded as the potter's clay. Just as the potter forms avesselout of clay
and then changes it into another vessel if he so chooses, so can I change
you ,49. This transformation is 'the work of the Holy One of Jacob'.

***
With this contribution to the homage to my colleague and friend who, in
the last decades, has been such a potent force in shaping the science of
the Old Testament in the Netherlands, I would like to express the wish
that through his scientific research, with all the depth and breadth that
characterise it, he will continue to serve both church and society in
explaining and interpreting the Scriptures and that he will continue to find
happiness therein.
D""n 'lPlJ DJn nlm (Prov 13,14).

48 This phenomenon is also to be observed elsewhere in the book of Isaiah; cf.

BEUKEN, 16, 29.
49 Translation of ROSENBERG, 239 (original text on p. 238). This explanation is based

on the interpretation of the suffix ofllJ:mil as objective, ofllN as 'indeed' and OflllnJ as
construct state.
 JEREMIAH 30,1-3, ESPECIALLY 'ISRAEL'

BY

William MeKane

SI. Andrews, Greal Britain

Whether the foreword is defined as 30,1-3 (GIESEBRECHT 1, DUHM 2 ,

CORNILL?3, PEAKE4 , BRIGHT5 , NICHOLSON6) or 30,1-4 (SMEND 7 , STREA-
NE8 , VOLZ 9 , RUOOLPH IO , WEISER l1 , CARROLL I2 ) is not an important
matter. GIESEBRECHT supposes that 30,1 eonneets with 31,2 and that what
intervenes is seeondary. The introduetory formula (v. 1) is virtually the
same as that at 36,1 13 and the seroll on which the promises of weal are

I F. GIESEBRECHT, Das Buch leremia (Handkommentar zum AT. III.2, Göttingen,

1894, 19072). 'Giesenbrecht' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.
2 B. DUHM, Das Buch Jeremia (Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum AT 9, Tübingen and

Leipzig, 1901). 'Duhm' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.
3 C.H. CORNILL, Das Buch leremiah (Leipzig, 1905). 'Comill' elsewhere in the text

refers to this work.

4 A.S. PEAKE, Jeremiah and Lamentations ii (The Century Bible, London, 1912).

'Peake' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.

5 J. BRIGHT, leremiah: Introduction. Translation and Notes (Anchor Bible 21, New

York, 1965), 'Bright' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.
6 E.W. NICHOLSON, leremiah 26-52 (The Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New
English Bible, Cambridge, 1975). 'Nicholson' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in
loc.
7 R. SMEND, Lehrbuch der alttestamentlichen Religionsgeschichte (Leipzig, 1983),
241.
8 AS. STREANE, The Book oj the Prophet leremiah together with the Lamentations
(The Cambridge Bible, Cambridge, 1913). 'Streane' elscwhere in the text refers to this
work in loc.
9 P. VOLZ, Der Prophet leremia (Kommentar zum AT 10, Leipzig, 1928). 'Volz'
2

elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.

3
10 W. RUDOLPH, leremia (Handbuch zum AT 12, Tübingen, 1968). 'Rudolph'
elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.
11 A WEISER, Das Buch leremia (Das Alte Testament Deutsch 20-21, Göttingen,
6

1969). 'Weiser' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.

12 R.P. CARROLL, leremiah: A Commentary (Old Testament Library, London, 1986).

'Carroll' elsewhere in the text refers to this work in loc.

13 Cf. 7,1; 11,1; 18,1; 34,1; 35,1; 40,1, regarded by RUDOLPH as a mark of Source C.
66 W. MCKANE

to be recorded begs comparison with the one which is informed with dark
threats of doom, only to be averted if repentance is forthcoming (36,3).
GIESEBRECHT finds the lack of an overt reference to the scroll of chapter
36 odd and DUHM remarks that the author of vv. 1-3 was probably
acquainted with 36, but that it was not then part of the book of Jeremiah.
With this is to be associated CORNILL' s discussion on the location of
chapters 30-31 in the then extant book of Jeremiah after 25 and 46-51,
conforming to a general pattern in the prophetic books: oracles of doom,
oracles against foreign nations and promises of weal (cf. STREANE). But
29,13 or 29 as a whole (also STREANE, PEAKE and WEISER) is identified
as a subsequent link with 30-31, following the addition of 26-29. It is not
clear to me that 29,32 sets up an antithetic connection with 30 (pace
CARROLL) and the function attributed to 29 as a whole would only be
discharged if 29,10-14 (which 1 identify as secondary) were already part
of it.
The lack of overt mention of the scroll of 36 is not surprising (pace
GIESEBRECHT) and if there is an allusion to this other contrasting scroll at
30,2, its subtlety would be destroyed by such over-statement. The differ-
ing functions of the two scrolls have been detected and compared (VOLZ,
RUDOLPH, WEISER). The one was inscribed with a view to public procla-
rnation and the other in order to create a permanent record and to estab-
lish the genuineness of the predictions when the time of fulfilment came.
Moreover, there is the assumption (VOLZ, RUDOLPH, WEISER) that the
setting of chapters 30-31 is Jeremiah's early prophetie activity and that
the dispersed of the former northern kingdom to whom weal is promised
are far away in exile and inaccessible to the prophet (see further below).
The extent of the contents of the scroll is not entirely clear, though
most scholars have concluded, probably correctly, that they extend to
31,40 14 • The principal argument used to support this is that v. 3 may be
regarded as a summary of the contents of the scroll wh ich it equates with
30,4-31,40 (RUDOLPH, WEISER). Not so convincingly EHRLICH 15 had
argued that if the outreach of the scroll were greater and its contents more
comprehensive, this would have been established in the form of the
command given to the prophet, after the manner of 36,2 ('from the first

14 Cf. C. LEVIN, Die Verheissung des neuen Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtli-

chen Zusammenhang ausgelegt (Göttingen, 1985), 178: 31,26 is the conclusion.

15 A.B. EHRLICH, Randglossen zur hebräischen Bibel. Textkritisches, Sprachliches

und Sachliches, iv., Jesaia, Jeremia (Leipzig, 1912),317.

 JEREMIAH 30,1-3, ESPECIALLY 'ISRAEL' 67

day I spoke to you during the reign of Josiah down to the present day').
There can be 1ittle doubt that the promise of wea1 not only contrasts with
the doom of chapter 36, but is to be interpreted as an assurance of
eventual emergence from it into a hopeful future. The scroll will consti-
tute a permanent record of this promise.
Another concern of scholars (CORNILL, PEAKE) has been to establish
that there is no 'collision' between 'all the words' (36,2) and 'all that I
have said to you' (30,2). CORNILL's comment that 30-31 was not then
uni ted with 34-45 has the disadvantage of fashioning an explanation out
of the assumed ignorance of the author. PEAKE's remark that 'all' must be
taken cum granD saUs and that the meaning is 'all the words in 30-31' is
not noticeably cogent. In any case there is a more proximate problem
which GIESEBRECHT noticed: 'all that I have said' does not sit easily with
the concentration on hopeful oracles addressed to the future (v.3). Nor
can WEISER's proposal that 'all' calls attention to the circumstance that
chapters 30-31 are a compilation of separate short sayings on a common
theme and affirms that that they are 'all' attributable to Jeremiah be
regarded as a satisfactory ans wer.
DUHM, focusing on vv. 2-3, stands back somewhat from the particular
contents of the text and undertakes to disclose the barely expressed
intentions of the author. 'All I have said' alludes to the existence of 1-25
and their concentration on oracles of doom. This had created an imbal-
ance which 30-31 would serve to remove: not everything that Jeremiah
had said was contained in 1-25. Such an elucidation is hard to swallow,
but it does help with the transition from v. 2 to v. 3 which is otherwise
difficult (cf. GIESEBRECHT, above). 'All' is pointed towards those oracles
predicting a hopeful future which must be recorded to restore the bal-
ance I6 •
DUHM, however, shows a lack of interest in the particularities of the
text of v. 3 and his justification of this is that vv. 1-3 are not at all
concerned, despite the detail of v. 3, with the return of the exiles of either
the former northern kingdom or Judah. The 'booklet' (30-31) is, on the
whole, much later than this period and the foreword (vv. 1-3) is the
coping-stone of the compilation and is even later I7 (see further below).
Verses 1-3 have to be decoded and the puzzle which is then solved is a

16 Cf. C. LEVIN, ap. cit., 178: the seroll was rebom without the eongenital defeets of

the seroll of 36,2.

17 Similarly R. SMEND, ap. cit., 241.
68 W.MCKANE

literary-critical rather than a theological one. The concern expressed and

the problem tackled by the author is the lop-sided representation of
Jeremiah's prophetic output in the extant book of Jeremiah and he aims to
put this right by incorporating 30-31 in the book, vv. 1-3 having been
tailored in connection with this enterprise. Verse 3 does not require
investigation and unravelling as an expression of future hope, whether
historicalor eschatological, and DUHM abstains from the task.
At v. 3 wyhwdh is represented by the versions (Sept., Vulg., Targ.,
Pesh.), yet the phrase 'my ysr'l is more convincing than 'my ysr'l wyhwdh
which does not occur elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible and is thought to be
an addition by VOLZ and RUDOLPH (also w'l yhwdh at v. 4). It may be an
addition connected with the meaning which has been attached to sbwt.
The phrase wsbty 't sbwt has been taken by Sept., Targ. and Pesh. as a
reference to areturn from exile and KlMcHl 18 following this interpreta-
tion, observes that only Judah and Benjamin were exiled in Babyion.
Since he is following MT, this comment reveals that he equated ysr'l with
the former northern Kingdom. Whoever was responsible for the addition
wyhwdh shared this assumption and his intention was to include Judaeans
among those who had been deported. There are 43 occurrences of the
phrase 'my ysr'l and 'my ysr'l wyhwdh does not occur, no more does
'your people, Israel and Judah' or 'his people, Israel and Judah', so there
are very good reasons for suspecting that wyhwdh is secondary (agreeing
with VOLZ, RUDOLPH, WEISER; pace GIESEBRECHT, DUHM, CORNILL, RV,
BRIGHT, NEB[REB], CARROLL).
The conjecture that yir'l in wsbty 't sbwt 'my ysr'l refers to 'all Israel'
is slightly reinforced if the word-string means 'change the fortunes of my
people Israel' (NEB, REB) not 'bring back from exile (or 'captivity') my
people Israel'. That is, sbwt or sbyt should be derived from swb not
sbh 19 and sbwt is cognate with the verb. It should also be noticed that
the match is between the Qal of the verb and sbwt, whereas the reference
to bringing back from exile later in the verse features the Hiphil of swb
(whsbtym). Moreover, were 'bring back from exile my people Israel'
correct, the continuation of the verse, if not redundant, would have to be
regarded as an epexegesis of wsbty 't sbwt 'my yir'l rather than a

18 Cited from Miqra'ot GedoLOth. 'Kimchi' elsewhere in the text refers to this work
in loc.
19 Pace F. BROWN, S.R. DRIVER, C.A. BRIGGS, A Hebrew and English Lexicon oj the

Old Testament (1907; 1951 reprint), 986; also GIESEBRECHT, CORNILL and PEAKE.
 JEREMIAH 30,1-3, ESPECIALLY 'ISRAEL' 69

particularizing of how this promise would be implemented. The verse

intimates a radical turn-around or reversal in Israel's fortunes, as Vulgo
correctly indicates (et convertam conversionem), and, as a manifestation
of this, their return to possess again the land which Yahweh gave to their
fathers.
The principal issue, however, is whether y.sr'l is to be equated with the
former northern kingdom (VOLZ, RUDOLPH) or whether it is a comprehen-
sive term denoting 'all Israel', the sense of kl msp!Jwt y.sr'l at 31,1,
according to RUDOLPH. The first consideration is perhaps that wsbty 't
sbwt 'my ysr'l is a replica of Amos 9,14 and probably derives from it,
and that ysr'l in Amos refers to the northern kingdom (also 7,15; 8,2).
Moreover, there are occurrences of 'my y.sr'l in the book of Jeremiah
where ysr'l has to be equated with the northern kingdom (7,12; 12,14;
23,13) and, less particularly, there are evidences of the use of ysr'l in this
sense (3,12ff.). Even if there is a borrowing from Amos, this would not
be a decisive indication that the author's intention at v. 3 was to equate
y.sr'[ with the northern kingdom.
Further progress cannot be made without taking into the discussion the
question of the relation of 30,1-3 or 1-4 with the remainder·of 30-31 and
the matter is then further complicated by different critical positions. A
beginning can be made by picking out the clear-cut positions of
SMEND 20 and DUHM to 30,1-3(4), namely, that these verses have the
ex ta nt contents of 30-31 in view and are later than them, in which case v.
3 is a conspectus or summary of the whole. According to DUHM (also
CARROLL) vv. 1-3(4) may have been generated by the incorporation of
30,4(5) - 31,40 into the book of Jeremiah. Were this conclusion accepted,
and it seems to me probable, ysr'l at v. 3 would mean 'all Israel' not
'northern Israel', because the contents of 30-31 feature both Israel
(Ephraim) and Judah. The discernment that references to Judah are
secondary would not destroy it, because the argument begins with what
the text now is and not with what it allegedly once was.
In connection with the exegesis of v. 3 whether or not 30-31 contains
genuine sayings of the prophet Jeremiah is not a primary consideration.
For example, DUHM holds that there is such material, while SMEND
contends that there is none. Scholars who emphasize Jeremiah's contribu-
tion more, but who accept that 30-31 is a compilation later than the return

20 R. SMEND, ap. cil., 241; also C. LEVIN, ap. cil., 30.

70 W. MCKANE

of Jewish exiles from Babyion (CORNILL, STREANE?, PEAKE) have

essentially the same context for the exegesis of v. 3 as SMEND and
DUHM. The hope for the days that are coming cannot refer to the return
of the exiles from Babyion. It matters not what kind of compilation 30-31
is, whether one that can be broken into pieces (GIESEBRECHT) or one
unified not only by a common theme but by a cumulative structure
(CORNILL). Such considerations will not provide a way of escape from the
argument which has been formulated.
New premises like those of VOLZ, RUDOLPH, WEISER and BRIGHT have
to be entered in order to make this escape possible. WEISER (BRIGHT)
accepts that 30-31 is a compilation rather than a seamless poem by
Jeremiah which has been interpolated (VOLZ, RUDOLPH), but not that it is
a late compilation. References to Judah are not to be removed from 30-31
and a scenario where Ephraim and Judah are united agrees weIl with the
concept of covenant, beloved of WEISER, and attached by him to the
historical Jeremiah. It follows from this that the historical context of 30-
31, including vv. 1-3(4), is the age of Jeremiah, that ysr'l (v. 3) is 'all
Israel' and that the 'coming days' are those when both the exiles of the
former northern kingdom and the Judaeans in Babyion will return to the
land which Yahweh gave to their fathers and repossess it.
According to VOLZ and RUDOLPH, chapters 30-31, shorn of the addi-
tions which feature Judah or Zion, is a poem by Jeremiah, of considerable
aesthetic merit, featuring the return of those exiled from the former
northern kingdom, a poem which begins at v. 2 (so explicitly RUDOLPH).
If so, v. 3 has to be interpreted in the same historical context as that
postulated by WEISER, but ysr'l (v. 3) is to be equated with Ephraim.
The verse gives expression to Jeremiah's concern (cf. 3,12ff.) for the
return and reintegration of the community which was destroyed in 722
B.C.
The contention that the historical context in which the exegesis of v. 3
should be set is the time of Jeremiah should be discounted, but everything
does not hinge on different critical opinions. The pre-critical scholarship
of KIMCHI is not so far removed from the conservative criticism of VOLZ,
RUOOLPH and WEISER with respect to v. 3, but his exegetical emphasis is
greatly different. That the historical Jeremiah should have made a predic-
tion stretching into the remote future does not worry KIMCHI, but he
rejects an association of v. 3 with the return of Ephraim or of the
Judaeans from Babyion principally because it makes no sense to him
existentiaIly, for as a medieval Jew the fact of dispersion is ever with
 JEREMIAH 30,1-3, ESPECIALLY 'ISRAEL' 71

hirn. He has empirical proof that the promise of areturn to the land
which Yahweh gave to the fathers and its repossession has not been
fulfilled and that the coming days of v. 3 are still in the future. So he
looks to the Messianic Age, here and throughout chapter 30 (vv. 8-11. 17.
18-21): the scroll does not anticipate a future which is proximate (qrwb)
but a fulfilment at the end of days (,hryt hymym). Kimchi, as in his
commentary on Psalms, displays a healthy realism towards prediction of
weal from which he will not be moved. Whether v. 3 refers to past
fulfilment or future hope is form hirn not just a matter of academic debate
but a matter which impinges on his existence.
If v. 3 is post-exilic and if the 'coming days' are later than that period,
is it a short, medium or long-term future which is anticipated? How long
is the span of time which will precede the happy fulfilment? The days of
weal are coming, but how far into the future must expectation reach and
when will it be replaced by realized hope? SMEN0 21 argues that v. 3, in
the context of chapters 30-31, presupposes that the Jerusalem community
and cult (31,6) have been re-established, though morale is low and
conditions wretched: the community is ruinous and unfulfilled. The weal
predicted in v. 3 is thought to lie in the near future but it is conditional
on the return of Ephraim, the subject of 31,1-21. When this has taken
place, fulfilment will no longer be pitifully stunted and a newage will
dawn.
But what if the future of v. 3 is much vaster than this, so that the
coming days stretch out for a great distance, as KIMCHI supposed? The
question whether a fulfilment is thought of as historicalor eschatological
can degenerate into somewhat barren logomachy, but there is a significant
difference between a hope for the future which attends to power constel-
lations among the nations in the present and one which thumbs its nose at
historical probabilities, its future hope more remote and defiant - a
resounding 'nevertheless'. The one finds support for a radical turn-about
and transformation in a present where great movements of history are
interpreted as Yahweh's shaking of the nations. The other, like KIMCHI's,
is disengaged from a present which offers no support for it and demands
nothing less than a newage - a Messianic age.
These are considerations which demand attention throughout chapter
30, at vv. 8-9, 10-11, 17 and 18-21. If vv. 8-11 are secondary, it makes
no difference, because I am assuming that they were in place be fore vv.

21 R. SMEND, ap. eit., 241.

72 w. MCKANE

1-3. For exampIe, KIMCHI commented on v. 21 that foreigners wou1d no

longer rule over Yahweh's peopIe in the Messianic age and a similar
sentiment finds expression in v. 8 ('Foreigners will no longer ens1ave
them'). This antithesis between native and foreign ruIers was discerned by
GIESEBRECHT, CORNILL and PEAKE, and historica1 corre1ations agreeable
to it were sought. It is thought to arise from the author's experience of
foreign ruIe in the post-exilic period and so is seized on as a clue to the
date of composition. PEAKE suggests that the date may be as 1ate as the
Greek period and CARROLL opts for the Persian period, DUHM remarks
that the kind of settlement achieved under a Maccabaean High Priest
(Sirnon 142-135 B.C.) wou1d have satisfied the author. DUHM detects the
destruction wrought by the Se1eucids as a background to v. 18 and
CARROLL a rebui1ding programme in the Persian period. But the vision of
the future in chapter 30 (see above) is perhaps not to be so nice1y
matched to movements of history which are reflected in it or appear to be
tending towards it. It may be rather a refusa1 to surrender hope, though
the future is uncharted and the present supplies little nourishment to
sustain it.
Finally I return to yfr'l in vv. 1-3 and combine this with a consider-
ation of y'qwb at vv. 7. 11 and 2l. If the argument that chapter 30-31
contains an address of Jeremiah to the northern kingdom early in his
ministry cannot be sustained by an appeal to ysr'l (v. 3), much 1ess can
it win the day by an appeal to y'qwb which is an altogether more appro-
priate model for 'all Israel' ('Jacob' the 'father' of the twelve tribes) than
for northern Israel. Further, it is certain that vv. 12-17 are addressed to
Zion, even if measures are taken to remove sywn from the text at v. 17.
CORNILL and RUDOLPH do this by preferring Sept., but if sywn is a gloss
(DUHM, VOLZ, WEISER), it is a correct gloss. The sobriquet ndhh is
enough to establish that Zion is in view. It is reminiscent of k'sh 'zwbh
(Isa 54,6) and 'yr I' n 'zbh (Isa 62,12). It is true that ndhh is not used in
any of these sobriquets, but 'yr I' n 'zbh is matched with drwsh at Isa
62,12 and CORNILL is misguided in deleting drS 'yn Ih at Jer 30,17. Thus
there is no satisfactory evidence that northern Israel is addressed in
chapter 30 (pace VOLZ, RUDOLPH, WEISER, BRIGHT, LOHFINK 22,

22 N. LOH FINK, "Der junge Jeremia als Propagandist und Poet. Zum Grundstock von

Jer. 30-31", BETL 54 (1981),351-368.

 JEREMlAH 30,1-3, ESPECIALLY 'ISRAEL' 73

SCHRÖTER23 ) and the argument which fai1s at vv. 1-4 cannot succeed
anywhere else in the chapter.
It is a privilege to pay this small tribute to Professor A.S. VAN DER
WOUDE's distinction on his sixty-fifth birthday and it is fitting that it
should come from the University of St. Andrews of which he is a hono-
rary Doctor of Divinity.

23 U. SCHRÖTER, "Jeremias Botschaft für das Nordreich. Zu N. Lohfink's Überle-

gungen zum Grundbestand von Jeremia xxx-xxxi", VT 35 (1985), 312-329.

 NIGHT WITHOUT VISION
MICAH AND THE PROPHETS

BY

RP. Carroll

Glasgow, Great Rritain

In every man sleeps a prophet, and when he

awakes there is a little more evil in the world
E.M. CIORAN 1

The books gathered together from Isaiah to Malachi in the Hebrew Bible
are almost uniformly outspoken against prophets. With the exception of
cliched phrases such as 'Yahweh's servants the prophets' (a deuterono-
mistic topos) and its variations, and the book of Amos, prophets are the
targets for considerable negative criticism. Jeremiah 23,9-40 and Ezekiel
13,1-14,9 may be prime examples of this hostile attitude, but there are
many other references in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea and Micah in particular
which denounce prophets as worthless liars, deceivers and pompous
windbags. A close reading of all the texts in Isaiah-Malachi would
convince the careful reader that the writers of these texts loathed and
despised prophets. And not just so me prophets, but all prophets (general
and particular) large and small are denounced as wicked. A couple of
lines from Jeremiah would serve as a general summation of the attitude of
these books towards prophets: 'for from the prophets of Jerusalem
ungodliness has gone forth into all the land' (23,15). That judgment could
be multiplied a hundredfold if all the references to prophets throughout
Isaiah-Malachi were to be scrutinized. Only a few generalized allusions to
'prophets' (e.g. 'the former prophets' in Zech 7,12) and the commanding
of the prophets not to prophesy motif in Amos provide any alternative

I E.M. CIORAN, "The Anti-Prophet" in A Short History 0/ Decay (Oxford, 1975; ET

of Precis de decomposition [Paris, 1949] trs. R. HOWARD), 6.

 NIGHT WITHOUT VISION: MICAH AND THE PROPHETS 75

view of prophets to this dominant viewpoint. But they are only straws in
the wind compared to the overwhelming force of the cumulative denunci-
ations of prophets throughout the collection of the texts.
It is therefore quite a startling reversal of values to discover that the
framing devices controlling Isaiah-Malachi include the partial repre-
sentation of some of these texts as the output of prophets. Strictly speak-
ing only three books in the collection are attributed to prophets (Habak-
kuk, Haggai, Zechariah) and none of the other twelve books has such an
attribution. In the editing and reception of these books there has been an
overwhelming tendency to treat them as the work of prophets, so that aIl
the fifteen figures associated with the texts (the titles by which we know
the books are not genuine book titles) traditionally have been viewed as
prophets. Ben Sira's generalized phrase 'the law and the prophets'
(prologue) has tended to be taken as if it were a reference to the fifteen
prophets, though the only prophets Ben Sira ever mentions by name in his
justly famous poem 'Let Us Now Praise Famous Men' (44-50) are more
from the Deuteronomistic History (Samuel, Nathan, Elijah, Elisha) than
from the so-called Prophets (Isaiah, leremiah, Ezekiel: 48,22; 49,6.8). So
the redaction and reception of the texts would appear to have introduced
certain discombobulations into the tradition 2 •
The most obvious way in whieh the collection of writings in the
section Isaiah-Malachi has been discombobulated is in the rendering of
the figures associated with each individual 'book' or scroll as prophets.
Thus these figures become examples of the very thing which their seroIls
den ounce so emphatically. All the prophets are treated as liars, deceivers,
idolaters and wicked and then the various individuals (e.g. Amos, Isaiah,
leremiah, Ezekiel, Micah etc) associated with the scrolls are caIled
prophets and thus themselves become liars, deceivers, idolaters and
wicked per definitionem! In this way the so-called 'prophetie' tradition
deconstructs itself by becoming the work of those who are false. Two
different things contribute to this deconstruction. The redaction of each
scroll which tends to identify the contents of the scroll with a specific,
named individual. The incorporation of these individuals into a tradition
of prophets and the development of that incorporation by means of the

2 On this aspect of the reception of texts see R.P. CARROLL, "The Discombobula-

tions of Time and the Diversities of Text: Notes on the Rezeptionsgeschichte of the
Bible" in Text as Pretext: Essays in Honour of Robert Davidson, ed., R.P. CARROLL
(JSOTS 138, Sheffield, 1992), 61-85.
76 R.P. CARROLL

canonizing processes so that the 'prophetic' material becomes part of 'the

law and the prophets' furthers the deconstructive turn. Misprision of the
tradition becomes inevitable after the canonization of the material and the
scrolls are treated as if they were the work of prophets. Hence a reading
of the tradition makes canon conscious readers accept the deformations of
the redacting and canonizing processes. If the denouncers of the prophets
are themselves prophets, then it must be a case of 'true' prophets against
'false' prophets. Evidence for this reading may be seen in the develop-
ment of the book of Jeremiah where the Hebrew differs considerably
from the LXX in relation to 'Jeremiah the prophet' 3. The clash of
prophets is inscribed in Jer 27-29.
An example of this reading of the tradition which is more germane to
this paper is that of Micah and the prophets. In Micah 3,5-8 there is a
very strong denunciation of the prophets set into a section devoted to
attacking the 'heads of Jacob and rulers of the house of Israel' (3,1.9-11).
In conventional accounts of these verses it is usual to interpret them as
the prophet Micah's condemnation of all the other prophets. That is, they
are an example of the topos 'prophet versus prophet'. It is a perfectly fair
way of reading the text in relation to redaction, tradition, canonizing
processes and the current intellectual holdings of the interpretative
community which we call the Guild of Biblical Studies. It is also the way
which Adam VAN DER WOUDE, in what is by now a famous paper, reads
the piece. In his justly well-known SOTS paper "Micah in dispute with
the pseudo-prophets" VAN DER WOUDE offers an interesting and rational
way of reading the complexities of the book of Micah4 • As all generalist
biblical scholars know the text of Micah is rather difficult and the book
defies easy explanation because of the way the text constantly shifts
between oracles of judgment and oracles of salvation 5• By identifying

3 For the references in Jeremiah see RP. CARROLL, leremiah: A Commentary (OTL,

London, 1986), 53.

4 vr 19 (1969), 244-60. See also his analysis of Micah in "Three c1assical prophets:

Amos, Hosea and Micah" in Israel's Prophetie Tradition: Essays in Honour of Peter R.
Ackroyd, ed., R COGGINS, A. PHILLIPS & M. KNIBB (Cambridge, 1982), 48-53. See also
A.H. EOELKOORT, "Prophet and Prophet", OTS 5 (1948), 179-89.
5 See the standard commentaries on Micah; also see in particular the following

studies on Micah: T. LESCOW, "Redaktionsgeschichtliche Analyse von Micha 1-5/6-7",

Z4 W 84 (1972), 46-85, 182-212; K. JEPPESEN, "New Aspects of Micah Research", lSOT
8 (1978), 3-32; B. RENAUO, La formation du livre de Miehee: Tradition et Aetualisation
CEB, Paris, 1977). For the briefest of comments on Micah see RP. CARROLL, "Micah" in
A Dictionary of Biblieal Interpretation, ed., RJ. COGGINS & J.L. HOULDEN (London,
 NIGHT WITHOUT VISION: MICAH AND THE PROPHETS 77

many of the salvation oracles with the work of the pseudo-prophets VAN
DER WOUDE is able to explain the book of Micah in rational terms as a
dispute between the true prophet and the pseudo-prophet. Whereas I wish
to focus on 3,5-8, he focuses on 2,6-11 and ch. 4 and reads the text of 4
as 'neither more nor less than a disputation between the pseudo-prophets
and Micah, in which the words of the arguing parties are juxtaposed'6.
This is an illuminating approach, though not one which I wish to follow
in this paper.
For my purposes the key phrases in 3,5-8 are to be found at the
beginnings of verses 5 and 8: 'Thus says YHWH concerning the prophets
... but as for me ... ,7. These phrases make a sharp distinction between the
prophets and the speaker. The prophets are condemned for leading the
people astray, whereas the speaker is empowered with justice and strength
to inform Jacob/Israel of its rebellion/sin. The whole piece is a very fine
denunciation of prophets:

Thus says YHWH conceming the prophets

who lead my people astray,
who cry "Peace":
when they have something to eat,
but declare war against hirn
who puts nothing into their mouths.
Therefore it shall be night to you, without vision,
and darkness to you, without divination.
The sun shail go down upon the prophets,
and the day shall be black over them;
the seers shall be disgraced,
and the diviners put to shame;
they shall all cover their Iips,
for there is no answer from God.
But as for me, I am filled with power,

1990),451-4522.
6 A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, VT 19 (1969), 249.

7 The phrase 'al-hann'bi'im is not quite the lann'bf'fm of Jer 23,9. In v. 8 w'ulam

'but, howbeit' is an infrequent word in the Hebrew BibIe; perhaps here it has assonant
associations with kulläm in v. 7.
78 R.P. CARROLL

with the Spirit of YWWH8 ,

and with justice and might,
to declare to Jacob his transgression
and to Israel his sin9 •

An analysis of the passage, phrase by phrase, would provide a very good

analytical introduction to biblical prophets, but it would take up enough
space for a small monograph. The prophets are represented as misleaders
of the people (cf. Isa 3,12), as speakers who declare either war or peace
(cf. Jer 28,8-9). The determinant of what they say is whatever the people
give them or fail to give them. In other words, the prophets are reaction-
aries. They react to the stimulus of gifts or prepare war against anybody
who does not feed them. In more general terms 3,11 denounces them
because 'its (Le. ZionlJerusalem) prophets divine for money' (cf. 1 Sam
9,6-10). Prophets are there to be bought and their services reflect what-
ever their going rate may be. Because the effect of what they do is to
mislead the people - the seetion on prophets is part of a larger piece
directed against 'the heads of Jacob/ rulers of Israel' (3,1.9) - they will
lose their prophetie powers and functions. Prophets in 3,5-7 are speakers,
diviners, dreamers and visionaries, so instead of speech, divination and
vision there will be nothing. The incubation oracles and dreams of the
night (cf. Zechariah's night-visions) will cease and the light will give way
to darkness. The prophets will be silenced because there will be no divine
ans wer to their enquiries. In the destruction of the leadership/city will
come the silencing of the prophets (cf. Ps 74,9; Lam 2,9.20). A silencing
brought on by themselves - the prophets have silenced themselves by
their corrupt practices (cf. Hos 6,5; 9,7 for somewhat different evaluations
of prophets).
It is in contrast to the prophets that the speaker of 3,5-7 is now pres-
ented. Having mocked the prophets with a 'thus says YHWH' oracle (a
rare form in Micah, cf. 2,3), the speaker's self-affirmation uses very
different language. This speaker is filled with 'power, justice and might'
(mispa ( here might allude to 'vindication' and thus line up with the other

8 Many commentators treat this phrase as a gloss; cf. J.L. MA YS, Micah: A Commen-

tary (OTL, London, 1976), 81; D.R. HILLERS, Micah: A Commentary on the Book of the
Prophet Micah (Hermeneia, Philadelphia, 1984), 4446. The REB omits it from the text
and consigns it to a footnote where it is treated as an addition in the Hebrew text.
9 The translation used here is that of the RSV with the substitution of the tetragram-
maton for the euphemism 'LORD' in vv. 5.8.
 NIGHT WITHOUT VISION: MICAH AND THE PROPHETS 79

two tenns denoting strength) and so empowered is able to inform

Jacob/Israel of its rebellion/sin. The prophets having forfeited the right to
speak because of their corrupt ways (i.e. their preparedness to be so
biddable), the speaker takes over and informs the nation of its rebellion
and offence. While most modern readers of the text (especially scholars)
have a tendency 10 read v. 8 as if it were the utterance of a prophet and
therefore interpret 3,5-8 as a conflict between prophets (or between the
prophet Micah and the pseudo-prophets), this is not a necessary reading
of the text. The division of speakers between prophets, 'true' and 'false',
is quite unnecessary. The force of v. 8 is simply a contrast between the
prophets and the speaker. It does not follow that the speaker of v. 8 must
necessarily be another prophet. All the prophets are condemned in v. 5-7,
so why should a prophet be the speaker of v. 8? If v. 8 is read as the
utterance of a prophet, then what is there to prevent that prophet coming
under the bl anket condemnation of vv. 5-7?
One of the central problems in the modem scholarly interpretation of
the biblical prophets is the notion that in the Bible there are 'true' and
'false' prophets as if that were a problem-free analysis of prophets.
Prophets are only 'true' or 'false' from a particular point of view. From
that point of view prophet x is false and prophet y is true. But from a
different point of view the perspectives change and prophet y becomes
false and prophet x becomes true. There is no such a thing as a 'true' or
'false' prophet. Prophets are prophets. They belong to groups and com-
munities and the epithetic qualifiers 'true', 'false' reflect inner community
conflicts. The evaluation of prophets is relative. One group's 'true' (a
redundant term here) prophet is another group's 'false' prophet (the same
relativities apply to messiahs and magicians). The matter is more complex
than that simple observation suggests. The 'truth' and 'falsity' of a
prophet is also time and occasion bound. That is, one and the same
prophet may on occasion be 'true' and on another occasion be 'false'.
The depiction of the 'man of God' from Judah in the narrative of 1 Kings
13 illustrates that point very clearly and underlines the shifting quality of
the values we attach to 'true' and 'false' when applied to prophets lO •
The force of these fairly obvious remarks is this: the notion of 'prophet'

10 The literature on ! Kings 13 is now considerable and the competent reader will

know where to find it. In spite of its theological overdetermination Kar! BARTH's reading
of 1 Kings 13 remains one of the finest pieces of Rezeptionsgeschichte available: see his
Church Dogmatics 11/2 (Edinburgh, 1957), 393-409.
80 R.P. CARROLL

has to be a flexible one rather than a static or definitional phenomenon.

Such flexibility means that we cannot define 'true' and 'false' prophets as
if there were static entities to which these epithetic judgments referred. In
terms of Micah 3,5-8 it is not a case of the 'true' prophet (i.e. Micah)
speaking out against the pseudo-prophets (a Greek term occasionally used
in the LXX, especially in the book of leremiah, to describe the prophets
criticized in the text), but it seems to me to be a case of the speaker
represented by the tradition (i.e. the book of Micah) speaking out against
(all) the prophets (i.e. that group of people identified by the word han-
nebi'im in v. 5).
Taking this interpretative line of reading 3,5-8 means that I must
dissent from VAN DER WOUDE's fascinating reading of the book of Micah
as the conflict between the prophet Micah and the pseudo-prophets who
represent Zionist ideology. I differ from VAN DER WOUDE, but there is
room for both our interpretations in the Rezeptionsgeschichte of Micah.
The gloss in v. 8 'et-ruah yhwh 'with the spirit of YHWH' may mislead
the uncareful reader into thinking that the speaker of v. 8 must be a
prophet or some such charismatic figure ll . This, in my opinion, is an
unnecessarily restrictive reading of the word 'spirit'. As an explanatory
gloss it is conceivable that a later reader of the text understood the
reference to power (köah), the power with which the speaker claims to be
filled, as divine spirit. This, in turn, could be understood as an allusion to
the spirit of YHWH coming upon a prophet (cf. 1 Sam 10,5-10). That
possibility cannot be ruled out. But it is not a necessary reading of the
text. The final form of the text approach to reading the Bible would
ignore treating the phrase as gloss and thus remove it from the history of
the text' s interpretation. While I think this approach to anything as
complex and complicated as the text of the Hebrew Bible is utterly
indefensible, taking the phrase 'with the spirit of YHWH' as an integral
part of Micah 3 does not inevitably make the speaker of v. 8 a prophet.
The speaker might weIl claim to be filled with the divine spirit without
being constituted a prophet by such a filling. Such spirit discourse is not
a major feature of prophetie language, though it is occasionally associated
with prophesying and prophets. Prophets may prophesy by the power of
the spirit or people, who are not themselves prophets, may prophesy by

11 Cf. HILLERS, ap.cit., 45-46; H.W. WOLFF, Micha (BKAT XIV/4, Neukirchen-

Vluyn, 1982), 75-76. Elsewhere in the Bible the spirit comes on judges (vindicators), so
that true leadership may be the point of v. 8 in contrast to the bad leaders of 3,1-3.9-11.
 NIGHT WITHOUT VISION: MICAH AND THE PROPHETS 81

the empowennent of the spirit (e.g. Num 11,24-30; Joel 2,28-29 [Heb 3,1-
2]). The Joe1 reference is quite interesting and instructive: the outpouring
of the (divine) spirit will cause sons and daughters to prophesy, old men
to dream and young men to see visions. While the tenns 'prophesy',
'dream dreams', 'see visions' all describe prophetie actions, it does not
follow that al1 peop1e (i.e. the 'all flesh' of v. 28) will become prophets.
On the contrary, the spirit will be poured out on everybody (even male
and fema1e servants), thus rendering prophets a redundant entity. It is not
the case that sons and daughters will become prophets, but that forms of
inspiration and divine communication (via prophesyings, dreams and
visions) will become accessib1e to all. Here the capacities to prophesy, to
have dreams and to see visions are matters more diffused than the
professional ro1es of prophets. Prophesying is a 1arger and more widely
dispensed phenomenon than that of being a (professional) prophet. The
point is well made by Amos in his response to Amaziah where he denies
being a prophet but does admit to having been sent to Israel by YHWH
in order to 'prophesy' (Amos 7,12-15).
The claim to be fil1ed with YHWH' s spirit in 3,8 may also be read as
a contrastive point with the preachers of wind (ruah) and falsehood
denounced in 2,11. The attack on preachers in 2,6-11, with its punning
'do not preach they preach' {v. 6), is a comp1ex piece of writing. There
are 1inguistic connections between the use of nif in 2,6.11 and Amos 7,16.
Both 2,6 and Amos 7,16 represent the prohibition on preaching and in the
context of the book of Amos such a prohibition refers to the ban on
prophets (cf. Amos 2,12; 7,12-13). It is more comp1ex in Micah 2,6-11.
The preachers who preach 'do not preach' may well be prophets, but that
is not obvious from reading vv. 6-11. References are made to 'spirit': in
v. 7 it is the spirit of YHWH, hence connections may be made between
2,6-7 and 3,8; in v. 11 ruah 'spirit' is more 1ike1y to mean 'wind' because
of its association with fa1sehood and lying (seqer kizzeb), though spirits
mayaiso be false (seqer) and yet be associated with YHWH (e.g. 1 Kings
22,19-23). Taking 3,5-8 and 2,6-11 intertextually the subject-matter is the
denunciation of the prophets. But the preacher of v.6 who is commanded
'not to preach' need not be a prophet. The attacks on prophets in the
book of Micah make perfectly good sense as denunciations of prophets by
somebody who is not a prophet. All preachers are not prophets, so it is
unnecessary to posit a conflict between 'good' and 'bad' prophets in
order to explain the material in Micah. Nor is it necessary to regard the
prophets preached against in 3,5-7 (or even in 2,11 if prophets they be) as
82 R.P. CARROLL

'Shalom-prophets'12. The various epithets used for so-called 'false'

prophets (e.g. Zion ideologists, preachers of saLOm etc.) really do not do
enough work to justify their usage. In 3,5 it is quite explicit that the
prophets pro claim shalom or war (SaLOm, milhämah), just as in the
encounter between Hananiah and Jeremiah the exhaustive terms of
reference for prophetie activity are war and peace (milhämah, säLOm Jer
28,8-9). It may be arguable that the prophets of 3,5 seIl säLOm for food
and their words only turn to the preparation of war (qidcfsu ... milhämah)
when they receive nothing, but that still makes them preachers of peace
and war. So, in my opinion, categorizing 'false' prophets as preachers of
salom is an inadequate reading of the text. Again, the relativities of the
matter make me insist on the flexibility of how we describe prophets.
Micah 3,5 is a nice example of the relativity of prophets: what they have
to say depends entirely on what the audience are prepared to expect and
to pay for.
The whole 'prophetie' tradition in the Hebrew Bible is glossed by
generalizations and ideologie al value judgments. Collectivities of prophets
are praised as YHWH' s servants or damned as preachers of falsehood,
windbags and misleaders of the community. The perspective for making
these judgements is outside the text, as it is in all canon consciousness
approaches to the Bible. We cannot judge prophets from the Bible unless
we embrace the ideological values of the canonizers and if we do that we
disqualify ourselves from being able to make reliable social or historie al
judgments at all. In the matter of the prophets we have to abandon the
socio-historical approach because the biblical text is too ideologically
compromised to afford us any objective data. From a literary approach to
the books traditionally ascribed to named prophets it is of no importance
what category we assign to the putative 'authors' of the books. The
colophons introducing each book are redactionally determined and
contribute to the invention of the prophets!3. The insistent and unrelent-
ing opposition to prophets in these books is, in my opinion, better
explained in terms of non-prophets versus prophets than in terms of the
more conventionally favoured prophet versus prophet approach. Determin-

12 E.g. W. BEYERLIN, Die Kulttraditionen Israels in der Verkündigung des Propheten

Micha (FRLANT NP 54, Göttingen, 1959), 16 (on 3,5-8). BEYERLIN's important

diseussion of the 'cult traditions' used in Micah is signifieant in tbe light of more recent
analysis of the 'prophetie' texts as intertextual construetions.
13 On this point ef. RP. CARROLL, "Inventing tbe Prophets", Irish Biblical Studies 10

(1988), 24-36.
 NIGHT WITHOUT VISION: MICAH AND THE PROPHETS 83

ing the category of speaker in the books is quite beyond our powers of
description, but the failure to find an adequate descriptive term is not an
obstacle to persisting in this approach to the analysis of the books.
Whether they be treated as 'poets' or 'intellectuals', 'sages' or 'writers' is
a moot point and matter for quarrel at the secondary level of debating the
text's Rezeptionsgeschichte. Elsewhere the matter has been discussed at
length and I have contributed my pennyworth to that discussion l4 . That
debate goes on and space here only permits me to add one further
observation germane to the larger discussion.
Writers on the book of Micah readily acknowledge the similarity
between it and Isaiah. It would be easy to multiply statements such as the
following, but I shall resist so easy a temptation. 'In its variety and
historical scope the book of Micah is a miniature of the book of Isaiah to
wh ich it is related in so many ways.' (J.L. MA YS)15; ' ... the present
shaping of Micah's prophecy has interpreted the book by placing it within
a larger context shared by the prophet Isaiah. This common moulding has
the effect that Isaiah serves as a commentary on Micah and vice versa.'
(B.S. CHILDS)16. It is also easy to do a joint study of the two books and
to produce very similar accounts of the treatment of common topoi in
them 17 • Apart from the glaringly obvious common text (Isa 2,2-4 = Mic
4,1-3), both books are shot through with liturgical material (the most
effective form of the appropriation of texts within the community).
Echoes and common topoi, same texts and variations, quotations and
allusions all point to the phenomenon known as intertextuality. Such
intertextual documents do not speak of independent figures going about
their respective spheres of activity proclaiming their oracles to groups of
he arers , rather they indicate a literary activity far from the madding
crowd. Within each book are to be found texts which have generated
other texts and between each book are texts which belong to the textual

14 See the AULD-WILLIAMSON-CARROLL contributions to JSOT 27 (1983), 3-44 and

the OVERHOLT-AuLD-CARROLL contributions to JSOT 48 (1990), 3-54. See also S.A.

GELLER, "Were the Prophets Poets?", Prooftexts 3 (1983), 221-21; B. VAWTER, "Were
the Prophets nabf's", Biblica 66 (1985), 206-20. This discussion will run and run.
15 Micah, 1.
16 lntroduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (London, 1979), 438 (emphasis
added). I should add that the canonizers did not see fit to juxtapose Isaiah and Micah
together.
17 See G. STANSELL, Micah and Isaiah: A Form and Tradition Historical Compari-

son (SBLDS 85, Atlanta, 1988).

84 R.P. CARROLL

generation of texts. Intertextuality of this density speaks very mueh

against the eonventional figure of the original prophet preaehing oracles
and having them written down by 'faithful amanuenses'.
The intertextuality of Mieah should not be eonfined to Isaiah. All the
'prophetie' books give fair evidenee of their intertextual nature, though
few seholars have yet produeed an adequate aeeount of the eonditions for
the produetion of sueh texts. While it is always possible that behind many
of the 'prophetie' books there may be (I must stress the hypothetieal
nature of this claim) an original speaker long sinee swamped by the
development of a few 'original' oracles into the eomplex serolls we know
as the prophetie text, the intertextual nature of the eolleetion removes the
books from being the intelleetual property of sueh imagined figures. It is
in the redaetion and reeeption-history of the texts that the prophets
exise s. In themselves the books eould not be further from being the
produetion of 'prophets' beeause they are too developed in literary and
rhetorieal ways. The momentary glimpses readers imagine they have of
prophets in some of these texts are more the produetion of imaginative
and literary layers of the text than of historie al 'prophets'19. In Micah
there are no sueh glimpses. I guess that means, among other things, that
the 'night without vision' to whieh the prophets in Mieah are eondemned
is also the fate of Mieah 'the prophet'. In offering these few thoughts to
Adam van der W oude I wish to aeknowledge the inspiration of his
writings on the prophets in my work, while reeognizing that he has
inspired me to go in a direetion other than his. Yet I believe this little
offering to be a eontribution to the inauguration of what he has ealled 'a
re-evaluation of the established views that have found their way into Old
Testament introduetions and are often reprodueed quite uneritieally'zo.

18 On this see J. BARTON, Oracles oj God: Pereeptions oj Aneient Propheey in Israel

after the Exile (London, 1986).

19 Cf. " ... it is much less immediate and much more filtered and imaginative and

'literary' ", so A.G. AULD in his 'Rejoinder' to OVERHOLT in JSOT 48 (1990), 32.
20 A.S. v AN DER WOUDE in "Three classica1 prophets", Israel's Prophetie Tradition,

53.
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN THE COMPOSITION OF JOEL 2,19-27

BY

C. van Leeuwen

Ennelo, The Netherlands

The passage Joel 2,19-27 presents YHWH's answer to Israel's repentance

after the trial of locusts and drought and the announcement of the
approach of the Day of YHWH. After an introduction proclaiming
YHWH's zeal and compassion (hml) for his land and people (2,18), vs.
19 starts the 'Erhörungszuspruch' (WOLFF 1). This is a form of oracle of
salvation, in which YHWH encourages his people, transforming the
earlier words of doom (Joel 1,1-20; 2,1-11) into words of salvation and
blessing. Typical of such words of divine answering and salvation are:

a. the I of YHWH addressing his people in the 2nd person plural (in
vs. 19 hinenr + participle2);
b. the phrase 'be not afraid,3 (vss. 21-22; cf. Lam 3,57; Isa 41,10;
54,4), connected in vs. 21 with hymnic elements mentioning
YHWH in the 3rd person.

As in Deutero-Isaiah, the words of salvation are linked with the so-called

'Erkenntnisforme1'4, revealing the aim of God's acts: 'you shall know ...
that I am YHWH your God' (vs. 27; cf. I Kings 20,13.28; Isa 45,3;
49,23.26; Ez 6,7.13). This formula contains at the same time a 'Wort des
göttlichen Selbsterweises's, in which YHWH proclaims himself not only

I H.W. WOLFF, Dodekapropheton. Joel-Amos (BKAT XIV 2), 67f.

2 Cf. P. HUMBERT, "La formule MbflÜque en hineni suivi d'un participe", in:
Opuseules d'un hebraisant. Memoires de I'Universite de Neuchatei 26 (1958), 54-59.
3 Cf. J. BEGRICH, "Das priesterliche Heilsorakel", ZA W 53 (1934), 81-92.

4 Cf. W. ZIMMERLI, '''Ich bin Jahwe' and 'Erkenntnis Gottes nach ... Ezechiei"" in:

Gottes Offenbarung (Theologische Bücherei 19, 1963), 11-40; 41-119.

5 W. ZIMMERLI, "Das Wort des göttlichen Selbsterweises", ThB 19 (1963), 120-132.
86 c. VAN LEEUWEN

as 'your God' for Israel, but also as the only one, beside whom there
does not exist any other god (cf. Isa 45,5f.).
The composition of the pericope vss. 18-27 shows after the introduc-
tion (vss. 18,19a') three strophes in which successively YHWH (vss. 19-
20), the prophet (vss. 21-24) and again YHWH (vss. 25-27) render God's
answer to Israel's complaint and repentance.
The first strophe, a word of YHWH hirnself, is God's answer to
Israel' s prayer in which the peop1e asked for removal of the herpä, the
'reproach' or 'defamation' form the side of other nations (vs. 19b" /I vs.
17b"; cf. in both verses nätan and göyrm). The removal of the defamation
is the counterpart of the new satiation with 'corn, new wine and oil' (vs.
19a); these were the b1essings that Israel had 1acked for a 10ng time since
the locusts had ruined all vegetation in the country (1,10). The restitution
of the products of the earth and the removal of Israel' s defamation are
linked up in vs. 20 with the destruction of the 'northern one' by YHWH
hirnself.
In the second strophe (vss. 21-23) the prophet interprets the saving acts
of YHWH (cf. Ps 85,9ff.). He summons the people to gladness and
rejoicing; this is opposite to the lament and mourning that dominates the
minds in 1,5-13, and presents a literal contrast with 1,16, where simhä
and gl1 (in a reversed order compared to 2,21.23) have been cut off from
the house of God. Both the 'cattle in the field' (vs. 22) and the 'greening
pastures of the wilderness' remind us of the languishing cattle and the
'pastures of the wilderness devoured by fire' in 1,20. Though the prophet
with the words 'the fig and the vine' relates to the same plants in 1,7.12
(in a reversed order), where they have been destroyed by the locusts, the
emphasis in 2,21-22 is on the removal of the other plague: the terrible
drought that in 1,16-20 was depicted as allied to the plague of locusts
(1,4-13). The circumstantial promise of rain, resulting in a new fertility of
the earth and an abundant harvest of grain, new wine and oil (vss. 23-24),
proves that the main issue in vss. 21ff. is the rem oval of the drought that
previously withered any vegetation.
The third strophe (vss. 25-27), in which YHWH himself speaks again,
wants to be understood as YHWH' sanswer to the need caused by the
locusts. YHWH will restore (Sälam pi 'eI) 'the years that the locusts have
eaten'. The damage caused by the locusts has probably lasted longer than
just the year in which the plague took place. The four designations of the
locusts refer obviously to the same names in 1,4 (though in a different
order) and the phrase MIr haggädöl, 'my great army', refers to 2,11 helö
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 87

... rab ... 'aS.üm, 'his anny ... great ... mighty (in number)'. The con-
clusion of vs. 27, 'my people shall never be ashamed' (böS), gives the
impression of being God's answer to Israel's prayer (1,14) that was
addressed to YHWH in the state of extreme emergency caused by the
locusts and in 1,10-12 described four times with höbis. This verbal form
can not only be understood as a hiph 'il of yabes, 'to be dried up', but
also as a hiph 'il of bös, 'to be ashamed'. The new blessed destiny of the
people is, however, inseparably associated with Israel's 'knowledge' and
'acknowledgement' (both meanings are represented in the Hebrew yada ')
of YHWH as the only God.
The three strophes are strikingly different in style and in their use of
verbal forms. The fact that in vss. 21-23 - apart from the imperatives that
command rejoicing - qatal forms (without preceding w) predominate (in
vs. 23b followed by the wayyiqtol form wayyöred) has led several
scholars to conceive this strophe as describing events that had already
happened in the recent past. So WELLHAUSEN, BUDDE6 , MARTI, NÖT-
SCHER and DEDEN suppose that the second strophe was pronounced
during a stage in which the first rain had already come down and the
harvest would follow. It is, however, precarious to apply our modern
conceptions of time to the classical Hebrew verbal conjugations. The
different verbal forms used in the three strophes are rather connected with
the various literary genres the prophet uses for his message. It is not
impossible that he has been inspired by passages form the liturgy of the
autumn festival, where the items of blessing and fertility play a prominent
part besides those of driving away the enemy's powers7 •
It is not right either to transpose vss. 25-27 and put them before vss.
21-24 with the argument that the two strophes (vss. 19-20 and 25-27)
belong together as prophecies in which YHWH hirnself is the speaker,
while vss. 21-24 is then supposed to close the pericope as a song of
thanksgiving (SELLIN, cf. BEWER) pronounced by the prophet. The strophe
vss. 21-24 cannot, however, be characterized as a 'song of thanksgiving';
the announced blessings have not yet been realized and are still awaited.
Moreover, the sequence of the strophes as given in the masoretic text is
exact1y in agreement with Joel's predilection for a concentric composition

6K. BUDDE, "Der Umschwung in Joel 2", OLZ 22 (1919), 109.

7 This remark does not imply that the prophecy of Joel had its Sitz im Leben in the
autumn festival (so rigbtiy KELLER).
88 C. VAN LEEUWEN

(e.g. 2,1-11 and 3,1-5, English 2,28-328 ). In this case the two prophecies
interpreting the promises of YHWH himself constitute the inclusion for
the prophet's call to rejoicing.
Though vss. 19-27 represent three different prophecies of blessings,
they have been composed in such a way that they constitute, if read as a
whole, the concentric structure also in a more detailed way than men-
tioned above. On each side of the centre, promising the mOre li~däqä,
three promises are grouped, each corresponding with a parallel one on the
other side. The first pair (c - c'), positioned immediately around the
centre, promises on one side the greening of pastures and trees (vs. 22)
and on the corresponding side abundant rains and, as a result, grain, new
wine and oil (vss. 23b, 24). The second pair (b - b') promises on one side
(vs. 20) the destruction of the 'northern one' (vs. 20) and on the other the
repair of the damage caused by the locusts (vs. 25). The enclosing pair (a
- a') contains on both si des the promises of satiation and removal of
herpä, 'reproach, indignity' (vs. 19) or bös, 'shame' (vss. 26, 27).
In a schematized presentation we see the following pattern of the
promises:

a. satiation with corn, new wine, oil; no indignity any more (vs. 19)
b. destruction of the 'northern one' (vs. 20)
c. greening pastures and fruit-bearing trees (vs. 22)
d. the teacher of righteousness (vs. 23a)
c'. abundant rains resulting in copious harvests (vss. 23b, 24)
b'. restoration of the damage caused by the locusts (vs. 25)
a'. satiation with food; no shame any more (vss. 26, 27)

So the promises fit all of them in the concentric composition of seven

sentences. On account of the 'seven' sentences contained in the construc-
tion, this structure is also known as the menora pattern9 (named after the
candlestick with the two sides and seven branches with lamps, Ex 25,31-
37). It is noteworthy that this structure is only valid for the promises
pronounced in the three prophecies of Joel 2,19-27. The promises are
introduced in the second and third strophes by the praise of 'the Lord

B Cf. C. VAN LEEUWEN, "Tekst, structuur en betekenis van Joel 2:1-11", NTT 42

(1988),89-98, esp. 94; C. VAN LEEUWEN, lk zal mijn geest uitstorten ... (Nijkerk, 1977),
7.
9 See e.g. C.I. LABUSCHAGNE, Deuteronomium IA (POT, Nijkerk, 1987), 30ff.
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 89

who has done great things' (vs. 21; corresponding with 'the great things'
the 'northern one' has done, vs. 20) and 'who dealt wondrous1y with you'
(vs. 26).
There are in the pericope two main issues that have been discussed by
severa1 scholars. One of them, the problem of the !nÖre li~däqä (vs. 23a)
was treated by the present writer in a previous memorial volume, also
dedicated to Professor VAN DER WOUDEIO • The other one is the question
what is to be understood by the 'northern one' in vs. 20.
From a textcritical point of view, the reading sjönf of MT, derived
from ~äjön, the 'north', appears to be correct. It is confirrned by the old
versions: LXX ('tÖV anö ßoppa), V g (eum qui ab aquilone est) and Tg.
So there is no occasion to assurne another significance for ~jöm~ like
TU<l>(J)VtKÖ~ (Acts 27,14), 'tempestuous, pernicious' (HITZIG) or to sup-
pose any corruption of the text. Nevertheless several scholars have tried
to em end the word: EWALD read hassifönr, 'the soldier', derived from
Arabic, ~afa 'fighting-line'. SELLIN 1 quoting Ed. MEYER: ~ebä'r, 'my
army', SELLIN2 considered MT as representing a haplography of hassif~e­
föm~ 'the chirper' (cf. BHS ha~~af~eföni), derived from ~äfäf, 'to coo, to
hum, to chirp'. K. BUDDEII went as far in his desire to emend the text
as to change the whole of vs. 21a' into a new sentence: ha~ ~äfön yarhrq
hayyeleq me'Qlekem, 'the north wind will remove the locusts from you',
or: '} command (+ 'Q~awwe) the north wind that he remove .. .'.
The abundance of emendations demonstrates the fact that many
scholars have seen the significance of has sjönf in Joel 2,20 as problem-
atic. In fact, in a later time (1985) W.F. PRINSLOO l2 still observes: "Who
or what is meant by the sjoni is not at all clear: the enemy is a mysteri-
ous one for our purpose." Nevertheless the mentioned emendations show
two different views in the interpretation of vs. 20a', one considering the
sentence as referring to the locusts, the other considering the word as
relating to enemy armies directed against Israel. The same main streams
of explanation are to be found in the views of those scholars who prefer,
rightly, to maintain MT. The supporters of the interpretation of haHejönf

10 C. VAN LEEUWEN, "De möre U:jdäqä in Joel 2:23", in: Projeten en projetische

geschrijten, Festschrift A.S. VAN DER WOUDE (Kampen-Nijkerk, 1987),86-99.

11 K. BUDDE, '''Der von Norden' in Joel 2:20", OLZ 22 (1919), 1-5; cf. W. BAUM-

GARTNER, loel 1 und 2 (BZAW 34, Berlin, 1920), 16; 1. MEINHOLD, Einführung in das
AT (Giessen, 19262 ), 282.
12 W.S. PRINSLOO, The Theotogy oj the Book oj loet (BZAW 163, Berlin-New York,
1985), 77.
90 C. VAN LEEUWEN

as representing enemy armies, either contemporary or eschatological, are,

generall y speaking, the same scholars as those who regard 2,1-11 also as
spoken of ho stile armies and who translate limlöl bäm göyiin in 2,17 as:
'that the he athen people should rule over them' (V AN HOONACKER,
WOLFF\3) instead of: 'that other nations make them a byword'.
For the interpretation of the hapax legomenon 'northern one' as
relating to human enemies of Israel, the following argumentation has been
advanced:
The name $Jönr is to be connected with prophecies of Jeremiah which
speak of rä'ä ... miHäjön, 'the disaster out of the north' (Jer 4,6, cf.
1,14; 6,1; 10,22), caused by the 'am bä me'ere$ s.äjön, 'the people
coming from the northern land' (Jer 6,22; cf. 1,15; 13,20; 25,9; 46,20.24;
47,2; against Babel 50,3.9.41; 51,48). That people is also designated as a
nation that rouses itself from the yarkete 'äre$, 'the farthest ends of the
earth' (Jer 6,22) or 'invaders coming' me'eres. hammerhäq, 'from the
distant land' (Jer 4,16). The last mentioned phrase reminds us of Isaiah's
prophecies about a 'ruin from afar' (mimmerhäq, Isa 10,3) and 'people
from far away' (merähöq, Isa 5,26). For Isaiah the historical enemy was
the Assyrian people, while for Jeremiah the enemies were the
Babylonians 14 • The 'northern one' in Joel 2,20 should be understood in
the same way as the 'disaster from the north' and the 'people from far
away' in the books of Jeremiah and Isaiah, where these phrases always
indicate historical human enemies:

The 'northem one' means the Babylonian anny. This anny, which in Habakuk too is
depicted in images of the enemy from the north, has put an end to the Assyrian
empire. Nineveh has been destroyed; cf. also the book of Nahum. Now Judah is
threatened. Does this signify the ruin of Judah, as Jeremiah announces? In contrast to
Jeremiah, in Joel the driving away of the Babylonians is spoken of. They will be
scattered to the area that is described as 'ere.$ siyyä üS'mämä. This indication reminds
us of Joel 2,3: The advancing people leaves only devastation behind. 2,20 seems to be
the reversal. Instead of operating as a devastator this enemy will himself have to
suffer a devastated countryl5.

13 W. VAN DER MEER, Oude woorden worden nieuw. De opbouw van het boek Joe[
(Kampen, 1989), 169, 175.
14 HD. STOCKS ["Der Nördliche und die Komposition des Buches Joel", NKZ 19

(1908), 725ff.] stipulated that Jeremiah's and Joel's haSSJOnrreferred to the Scythians.
15 W. VAN DER MEER, op. cit., 177. The Dutch text is here given in English translati-
on.
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 91

Like in the book of Isaiah, the people that fIrst acted as an instrument of
doom for YHWH will perish by their own hybris 16.
S. BERGLER, who signals several paralleis between Joel and the
tradition of the plagues in Egypt and who considers the Exodus account -
in a typological way17 - as a typos of Joel's contemporary situation,
adds some other arguments: While Ex 10,13 describes the origin of the
plague of locusts in a natural way by attributing to the east wind the
bringing of the locusts into Egypt, the description of Joel is unrealistic 18.

Gegenüber der Ex. 1O:13-19-Vorlage erwähnt Jo den Wind weder für das Kommen
noch für die Vertreibung der Heuschrecken, sondern begnügt sich mit dem Hinweis
auf das dahinterstehende Jahwehandeln. Dadurch werden jene Juda-Feinde aus dem
Bereich der Natur / des Natürlichen herausgenommen und zu einem militärischen
Gegner hochstilisiert, dessen Name "der Nördliche" zwar die Herkunft aus der Feind-
aus-dem-Norden-Tradition verrät, dessen Entfernung aber in das Bildmaterial des Ex-
Plagennarrativs gekleidet wird, wie speziell der Zug vom aufsteigenden Verwe-
sungsgeruch belegt [in Exodus related to the Nile stinking as a result of the dying
fish, Ex 7,17.21 and to the land, stinking as a result of the perishing frogs, Ex 8,10,
English 8,14, CvL]. Die Überzeichnung jenes 'letzten' Feindes erfolgt ferner durch
die hyperbolische Aussage von seiner Zerstreuung in drei Windrichtungen und zwei
Meere, durch die Verwendung des auf die Nordfeind-Thematik anspielenden Begriffes
rhq hi. [instead of sür hi., Ex 10,17, cf. Ex 8,4.27, English 8,8.31] sowie des vor
allem bei Jer.-D an die Vertreibung des Gottesvolkes erinnernden Verbs TUfh hi. Das
Ende der Nordfeindplage wird heuschreckenartig gezeichnet!19

BERGLER'S conclusion is: "der 'Nördliche' (ist) Titulatur für das Völker-
kollekti V,,20.
Having considered the arguments that have been advanced in favour of
the view that the 'northern one' designates human enemies, we are of the
opinion that these arguments are not convincing. The word s.efänr should
not only be connected with the 'people coming from the north' as pre-
dicted by Jeremiah, but also and primarily with s.äfän as a mythological
indication of the dwelling-place of the deity or deities (see later on). The
emphasis on YHWH's acting, the absence of the wind in Joel's prophecy
and his use of rhq hi. instead of sür hi. and of ndh hi. can hardly prove

16 [dem, 177f.

17 S. BERGLER, Jael als Sehrijtinterpret (Frankfurt a. M., 1988), 250ff., 266.

18 [dem, 265.

19 [dem, 268; the argument of the use of rhq and ndh is also given by W. VAN DER

MEER, ap.eit., 176.

20 S. BERGLER, ap. eit., 266.
92 C. VAN LEEUWEN

that this prophet has transformed the locusts of the Exodus tradition into a
military adversary. The verb rhq hi. is so generally used in the Old Testa-
ment that one cannot draw such a far-reaching conclusion. And both rhq
hi. and ndh hi. are used in Jeremiah for the chasing of Israel from its own
land (e.g. Jer 27,10.15; 50,17), while in Joel 2,20 the verbs have the
opposite meaning: the chasing of hostile beings.
Other scholars draw attention to the mythical background of the term
hassejönf (KELLER2I, cf. WOLFF) ami/or the connection with the mighty
army of the curious Gog coming from the 'far recesses of the north' (Ez
38,6.15; 39,2; VAN HOONACKER, FREY, BRANDENBURG, KELLER,
WOLFF)22. They generally stress the eschatological or even apocalyptical
(WOLFF)23 nature of Joel's prophecy conceming the 'northem one'
(DEISSLER; vs. 20 deals with locusts, but "als der Vortrab des apokalyp-
tischen Feindes").
In the early part of this century VAN HOONACKER already subscribed
to the view of the Jews who - according to Jerome's commentary, about
400 A.D. - regarded Joel 2,12 as relating to Gog's nations coming up
against Israel. According to VAN HOONACKER the 'northem one' has to
be understood also as the enemy coming form the north, the army of Gog
(Ezekiel 38-39). Whereas in the view of VAN HOONACKER the escha-
tological enemies, represented by ha~ ~ejöm~ were human beings, "des
peuples ennemis, une puissance humaine", "dont l'apparition etait atten-
due a Ja fin des temps", in later years an 'eschatoJogicaJ' interpreter of
Joel 2,20 described the 'northem one' as "Heerbann der Dämonen ...
jener Feind, den Hesekiel am Ende der Tage ... von Norden hereinbrechen
sieht, der die dämonisierten Völker gegen die Gemeinde heraufführt ...
Der Grund des Gerichts, sein Grosstun, ist ... Angriff auf ihren Glauben,
Empörung wider ihren Gott" (FREY, 1941; cf. BRANDENBURG, 1963: "Es
geht zutiefst um den letzten Empörer gegen Gott, den Antichristen ... Das

2\ Also H. GRESSMANN, Der Messias (FRLANT, Göttingen, 1929), 137; A. LAUHA,

Zaphon. Der Norden und die Nordvölker im Alten Testament (Annales Academiae
Scientiarum Fennicae, B49,2, 1943), 53f.; G.W. AHLSTRÖM, Joel and the Temple Cult of
Jerusalem (SVT 21, 1971), 32ff.
22 Cf. B.S. CHILDS, "The enemy from the North and the Chaos Tradition", JBL 78

(1959), 187-198, esp. 194f.

23 Since B. DUHM several exegetes have regarded Joel 2,18-4,21 as the work of an

apocalyptic prose writer, added to the original work of Joel. BEWER thinks that the term
s'fonr in vs. 20 is due to the same 'interpolator of the day of JHWH', though for the rest
BEWER relates VS. 20 to the locusts.
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 93

Bild weitet sich auch hier zu eschatologischer Tiefe"). KELLER (1965)

explains that the 'northern one' can neither be identified with the 10custs
(because they typically come from the east or the south-east) nor with the
heavenly army of YHWH, spoken of in 2,11. The northern one "c'est
l'ennemi par excellence, ce sont les dieux derisoires, rivalisant, fantömes
insaisissables, avec YHWH .... le 'septentrional' c'est tout ce qu'il peut y
avoir de negatif dans l'existence du peuple de Dieu. YHWH l'eloigne de
son peuple; ... il le disperse dans le pays de la mort ou il a sa pi ace".
WOLFF (1969) is of the opinion that Joel's prophecy gives expression to
the prophetic eschatology of doom. Joel "vermag aber ihre Erfüllung nur
in der Gestalt heuschrecken artiger apokalyptischer Wesen zu schildern
und bedient sich im gleichen Masse der mythisch klingenden Chiffre des
'Nördlichen' als des 'letzten Feindes"'. The supporters of the eschatol-
ogical interpretation of the 'northern one' consider the promises of vs. 20
(WOLFF also vs. 19b) as relating to the final judgment of the yöm yhwh.
The locust plague that Joel and his contemporaries experienced was seen
and proc1aimed by the prophet as the prelude to the terrible 'Day of
YHWH' that he considered to be near at hand (1,15; 2,l.l1). So now in
God' sanswer to Israel' s prayer for liberation from the distress (2,18ff.),
YHWH not only promises the end of the locust plague and the restoration
of all the vegetation they had destroyed, but also the liberation from the
fear of the terrible judgment of the yöm yhwh. It is the latter item that,
according to these scholars, is intended in vs. 20, where YHWH promises
to remove the 'northern one' far away from his people. Now there should
be no doubt about the question whether God's answer inc1udes the two
aspects of Israel's distress and prayer. It may be wondered, however,
whether the second aspect is already meant in vs. 20. We have see before
that, in spite of the three different prophecies contained in vss. 19-27,
there is a great unity in the concentric structure of the passage, that seems
to deal as a whole with the restoration of the agricultural problems. The
removal of an eschatological enemy would not fit in weIl with this
context. WOLFF tries to solve this problem by interpreting vss. 19-20 as
an introduction to the detailed promises of God in 2,21-27; 3,1 - 4,21
(English 2,21 - 3,19):

So stellen 19a und 19b.20 als einleitende Erhörungsworte des Erbarmen Jahwes in
seiner zweifachen Gestalt dar: zunächst als Erbarmen über die schon eingetretene Not,
wie sie in Kap. 1 als Vorzeichen des Tages Jahwes erschien, und dann als Erhörung
der Gebete über der Androhung des Tages Jahwes selbst in 2:21-27. Was im Eröff-
nungswort aufklingt, wird im folgenden entfaltet. 2:21-27 verdeutlichen die Wende
94 C. VAN LEEUWEN

der eingetretenen Wirtschaftsnot (191), 3,1 - 4,21 die Umkehrung der angekündigten
eschatologischen Nöte (19b-20).

There are, however, some objections to be raised against WOLFF's view.

First, there is no indication in the text that vss. 19-20 should be con-
sidered as an introduction to the further promises. In fact, WOLFF is, as
far as I know, the only scholar who represents this view. Secondly, it is
hardly plausible that the promise of the removal of the 'northern one'
would refer to astate of national emergency that is still to be expected in
the far future. The text rather suggests that the prophet speaks, in 2,19b-
20 as weIl as in 2,21 ff., of an actual distress from which the people is
suffering in his own time and from which YHWH will liberate it fairly
soon.
The misery that Israel is enduring in the days of Joel's speaking is first
of all the lack of food, caused by two plagues: locusts (1 ,4-l3) and
drought (l, 16-20). So the withdrawal of the existing misery must have
these two aspects as weIl: (a) removal of the locusts and restoration of the
damage they brought about, and (b) suppression of the drought and a new
abundance of agricultural products, resulting in plenty of food. The latter
item is clearly spoken of in vss. 21-24, the first in vs. 25. So there
remains the question what distress the prophet is designating in vs. 20.
The drought cannot be intended, because a drought cannot be driven away
'into a waste land' or 'into the sea', as is said in vs. 20. The only poss-
ible interpretation of vs. 20 is that the prophet promises here the rem oval
of the locusts.
Several objections have been raised against the view that the 'northern
one' designates the locusts:
1. Locusts in Israel do not come from the north, but from the
(south)east or the south (VAN HOONACKER, FREY, KELLER, WOLFF)24.
2. An ordinary wind cannot drive locusts to the south (the desert), to
the east and to the west (the seas) at the same time (FREY, VAN HOONA-
CKER).
3. It is impossible to attribute to locusts the qualification higdll La 'aMt.
While the same phrase in vs. 21 is used in a positive sense, saying that
YHWH 'has done great things'25 (NEB 'a pro ud deed') in favour of his
people, it is used in vs. 20 in a negative sense for the sjänf who 'has

24 A. DALMAN, Arbeit und Sitte I, 393ff.; S. BERGLER, ap. eit., 266, n. 108.
25 For this meaning of gädal hi., see GK, 114 n.
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 95

done proud deeds', indicating obviously the hybris with which he accom-
plished his actions (KEIL, KAPELRUD, BIt, WOLFF, KELLER, RUDOLPH,
ALLEN; for the sense of presumptuous pride in higdlt, cf. e.g. Jer
48,26.42; Ez 35,13; Zeph 2,8.10; Ps 35,26; 38,17; Dan 8,25, etc.). Such a
hybris would only be applicable to human enemies (FREY, BRANDEN-
BURG) and certainly not to animals like locusts (FREY).
KEIL replied to the first objection, saying that the locusts exceptionally
may have come into Israel from the north (cf. VON ÜRELLI, DRIVER,
RIDDERBOS) and quoting some testimonies of ancient writers who
witnessed in the ancient Near East the locusts coming from the north. It
is, however, very unlikely that Joel would have entitled the 10custs 'the
northem one' for the mere reason that they invaded this time from the
north (cf. VAN HOONACKER, RUDOLPH). It is doubtful whether Joel meant
to give a geographic indication at all. He rather refers with :(jönf to the
prophecies of Jeremiah about a disaster coming from the north and -
particularly - to säjön, 'the north' as a mythical term, originally indicat-
ing in U garitic texts the mountain of the deity, notably of Baal (I AB I, 1,
11; 11 AB IV, 1, 19; V 1.85.117; VI, etc., cf. KAPELRUD). In spite of
several attempts to find a geographical 10cation for this Canaanite moun-
tain 26 , we agree with KAPELRUD quoting J. üBERMANN: "Whatever SPN
had originally meant to the U garitic people, at the time of our tablets it
came to be a name of transcendental signification, designating the mytho-
logical centre of their gods"27.
As for the üld Testament the mythological sense of säjön is evident in
Isa 14,12f., where the 'moming star', fallen from heaven, is said to have
harboured presumptuous plans saying: "I will ascend into heaven ... I will
sit on the mountain of council gatherings 'in the farthest north', beyark"te
säjön."
The mythological aspect seems also to be present in the rather mysteri-
ous description of the threatening hordes of Gog, whose horne is suppos-
ed to be 'in the farthest north' (Ez 38,15), from where YHWH will cause
hirn to come up against Israel (Ez 39,2). This may be a kind of geo-
graphical indication (reminiscent of Jeremiah's foe coming from the

26 E.g. O. EISSFELDT, Baal Zaphon, Zeus Kasios und der Durchzug der Israeliten

durchs Meer (Beiträge zur Religionsgeschichte des Altertums 1, 1932), 5ff.: Djebel 'ei
, aqra' = mons Casius.
27 J. OBERMANN, "An Antiphonal Psalm from RSh", JBL 55 (1936), 21-44, esp. 25.
OBERMANN hirnself adds however a geographical suggestion: "perhaps at the site of Ras
Shamra".
96 C. V AN LEElJWEN

north, Jer 1,13-15; 4,6; 6,22) as usually enemy armies entered Israel from
the north. Some people participating in Gog's army, like Gomer and
Togarmah, are indeed situated in 'the farthest north' (Ez 38,6), but the
other ones, like the men of Cush and Put (Ez 38,5) come rather from the
south. The easiest course is to delete Ez 38,5f., as some exegetes indeed
have done 28 • One might, however, wonder whether the supernatural traits
in the description ofthe punishment ofGog's acting (Ez 38,18-34; 39,17-
20) do not point to a more or less mythical designation of the north as the
area of disaster 'par excellence' (cf. KAPELRUD).
In Ps 48,3 mount Zion is designated as yarltte ~äfän, 'the farthest
north, the city of the great King'. As a geographical indication the phrase
'far in the north' would be absolutely incorrect for Zion. However, 'the
north' is not meant here in a geographical sense, but as a polemic against
the Baal cult, saying that not the Canaanite mountain of the gods but Zion
is the real säfän and that not Baal but YHWH is the great King, who has
his dwelling on the true mountain of God. So in Israel the Canaanite
tradition about the säfän had been assimilated to Israel's own religion of
YHWH, the word säfän had become a designation for Zion as YHWH's
residence and anything that was considered to come from YHWH could
be described as coming from haHäfän, from 'the north'. It is not imposs-
ible that in the disaster form 'the north' (Jeremiah) and the enemy coming
from 'the farthest north' (Ezekiel) this notion should be understood as
weB, because they are regarded as punishments coming from YHWH.
When Joel designates the locust plague of his days as the 'northern
one', he can have done so on account of two different motives. The first
possible motive may have been that Joe1 regarded the locusts as enemies,
just like Jeremiah and Ezekiel spoke of enemies coming from the north.
In 2, I-lI he described them indeed as enemies29 "storming forth abrupt-
Iy and unexpectedly, with none able to check them, and with darkness
and desolation following in their tracks. All these were traits ascribed to
the arch-enemy, the foe from the north. Therefore also the locusts may be
ascribed as has ~efänr even if they did not come from the north" (KAPEL-
RUD, cf. DELCOR). The second motive is in our opinion at least as
important as the first one: Joe1 regarded the locust plague as a punishment

28 So W. ZIMMERLI [Ezechiel II (BKAT XIII 2, Neukirchen, 1969), 925f., 948f.]

regards vss. 5f. as 'jüngere Nachträge'.

29 Cf. C. VAN LEEUWEN, "Tekst, structuur en betekenis van Joel 2: 1-11", NIT 42
(1988), 89-98.
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 97

coming from YHWH, and so from Zion, the Israelite s.äjön, the mountain
of God's residence. Therefore the host of 10custs could be called
haH'jönf, 'the northem one dO • So in this name the locusts are desig-
nated as sent by YHWH. That is exact1y the same notion as the prophet
expresses in 2,25, where he calls the 10custs 'my great army which I se nt
against you' (cf. 2,11 'his host', 'his army '" that does his bidding'; cf.
RUDOLPH).
As for the dispersion of the locusts in three different directions: to the
south ('a land, parched and waste' = the southem desert), the east ('the
sea at the front side' = the Oead Sea3 1, cf. Zech 14,8) and the west ('the
hindmost sea' = the Mediterranean), the text does not mean of course
that the wind blew in the three directions at the same time. As often
happens, the wind may have tumed from the northwest via north to the
north east (KEIL, cf. BEWER) and have driven the locusts one wave after
another32 to the indicated desert and seas, where they perished and filied
the air with 'the stench33 of their rotting corpses. In any case, the cir-
cumstantial description probably intends to define a rapid and complete
destruction of the locusts (KEIL, cf. BEWER, OEOEN, RUDOLPH). The fact
that the phrase 'älä b"Ö§, 'the stench shall rise .. .' occurs also in Am 4,10
and designates there the stench that rises from the corpses of the fallen
Israelite soldiers (cf. Isa 34,3 conceming Edomite corpses) does not prove
that Joel is necessarily speaking of human corpses as weU 34 • In the
account of the plagues of Egypt the 'stench' refers to dead animals, in Ex
7,18.21 to the dead fish in the Nile, in Ex 8, lOb to the dead frogs on the
land. So why would it be impossible that Joel too means the stench of
dead animals, to wit the rotting corpses of the locusts? The driving away
of the 'northern one' into the sea is indeed easier understood as relating
to locusts (Ex 10,19) than to human beings35 (OEOEN, p. 87, RUDOLPH).

30 G.W. AHLSTRÖM, ap. cit., 32f.

31 Aeeording to WATIS: "the Persian Gulf'.
32 The word sä! is Aramaie, but that does not necessarily point to a late date (cf.
BAUER-LEANDER, 26f.).
33 The word sahanä oeeuring only here and in Sir 11,12 may have been explained

later on by the gloss (W"älä) b"öSä (DRIVER, RUDOLPH). The signifieanee is known
from the Syriae equivaJent. Other authors regard, on the eontrary, the words w'ta 'al
sähanätä as a gloss (WELLHAUSEN, Now ACK, VAN HOONACKER).
34 Against W. VAN DER MEER, ap. cit., 178; cf. S. BERGLER, ap. cit., 268.

35 Even W. VAN DER MEER (ap. cit., 178) attributes this deseription to the 'image' of
the loeusts.
98 C. VAN LEEUWEN

Classical authors testify indeed to having seen that hosts of locusts

perished in seas and lakes36 .
As for the last objection, namely that the hybris, the temerity that is
ascribed to the s,/önf in the phrase higdrl La ,asöf1, cannot be attributed
to irresponsible beings like locusts (BLEEKER), one might point to Gen
9,5 and Ex 21,28-32, where animals that cause a person's death are pun-
ished with death as weIl as men (KEIL, RUDOLPH). More important, in our
opinion, is the argument that the locusts in their destructiveness are
compared by Joel to soldiers invading the city of Jerusalem (2,1-11)38.
Thus in the same way, he compares the action of the locusts here with an
army that has accomplished presumptuous deeds against Israel. Though
they have been sent by YHWH himself as an instrument in his hand in
order to punish his people, they will be punished in their turn because
they have gone too far 'doing presumptuous deeds' and so exceeding the
mandate that YHWH had given them. We agree with RUDOLPH's state-
ment: "Wie Jesaja Assur, dem Strafwerkzeug Jahwes für Israel, selbst die
Strafe ankündigt, weil sie zu weit gegangen sind (Jes 10,5 ff.), so tut es
Joel hier". The 'temerity' of the locusts results in an end that presents a
violent contrast with their presumptuous behaviour: the stench of their
rotting corpses (cf. a similar contrast in 2 Macc 9,9f., relating to Antio-
chus Epiphanes39).
Overlooking the arguments that have been brought forward in favour of
the different interpretations of hassefönrin Joel 2,20 - a hostile army, an
eschatological power or a host of locusts - we are of the opinion that we
have to opt for the last-mentioned one. Most of the arguments we

36 Hieronymus: "Etiam nostris temporibus vidimus agmina locustarum terram texisse

Judaeam, quae postea, vento surgente, in mare primum et novissimum (mortuum et
mediterraneum) praecipitata sunt ... putredo earum et foetor in tantum noxius fuit, ut
aerem quoque corrumperet '" ". Pliny (Hist. Nat. 11, 103): "Gregatim sublatae vento in
maria aut stagna decidunt".
37 The fact that the same words in vs. 21 are related to YHWH is no reason to

regard them in vs. 20 as a gloss (against MARTIN, BLEEKER, DEDEN, EDELKOORT,

DELCOR, DEISSLER). They rather underline the contrast between the acts of ha$ $'fönr
and YHWH's acts. Therefore it is not correct either to change the wording to: "I (=
YHWH) will do great things" (against BEWER; SELLIN 23).
38 See note 28.

39 According to K. JENSEN ["Inlednungsspörgmaal i Joels bog", DIT 4 (1941), 98-

112, esp. 111], who wrongly dates the book of Joel as late as the Maccabean era, the
'northem one' was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who on account of his behaviour against
Jerusalem was punished by God with such a severe ilIness that "the whole camp had to
endure the smell of bis body that rotted away" (2 Macc 9,5-10).
 THE 'NORTHERN ONE' IN JOEL 2,19-27 99

advanced above have been proposed by other exegetes before. We think

we can add a new argument in favour of the interpretation of vs. 20 as
relating to the locusts. On the third page of this articIe we have seen that
the pericope Joel 2,19-27 displays Joel's favourite style structure: the
concentric composition. In this construction the corresponding sentences
generaIly deal in each case with the same item. So in our text both a and
a' (vss. 19 and 26f.) contain the promises of satiation and removal of the
reproach/the shame (to wit that other people defame Israel on account of
the miserable lot that it had to endure as a result of locusts and drought);
both c and c' (vss. 22 and 23b-24) promise abundant harvests as a result
of God's terminating the period of drought (greening pastures, vs. 22;
rain, vs. 23). The most plausible inference is that the corresponding
sentence b and b' (vss. 20 and 25) must deal with the same item as weIl.
As vs. 25 promises God' s restoring of the damage caused by the locusts,
vs. 20 must also speak of the locusts. So haHjönf can only designate the
host of locusts that had been sent to Israel as a punishment from YHWH
and that now, according to God's promise of vs. 20, will be totaIly
destroyed because of their presumptuous way of acting.
In our view, the whole pericope 2,19-27 is dealing with God's removal
of the contemporary misery, caused by locusts and drought. God's
removal of the other distress, Israel' s fear of the approaching yöm yhwh,
is dealt with in Joel's chapters 3 and 4 (English 2,28 - 3,21), and is not
yet announced in 2,19b-20 (against WOLFF)40.

40 References to commentaries on Joel or the Twelve Prophets have been indicated

by the sumames of the authors. For the bibliographical data of the commentaries, see
e.g. H.W. WOLFF, Dodekapropheton (BKAT XIV 2, Neukirchen, 1969), 17; W.
RUDOLPH, Joel-Amos-Obadja-Jona (KAT XIII 2, Gütersloh, 1971), 29f.; W. VAN DER
MEER, Oude woorden worden nieuw (Kampen, 1989), 295ff.
 A NOTE ON PS 45,7aa.

BY

Gerhard Wallis

Halle, Germany

In Old Testament research Psalm 45,7aa. has often been discussed. The
literal translation of this verse would be: 'Thy throne, God, is for ever
and ever'. As in the rest of the first part of the Psalm, vv. 3-10, the suffix
of the second pers. masc. sing. of 'thy throne', and of 'thy kingdom' (v.
7aß), undoubtedly refers to the king, who is addressed here personally
(see v. 2aß; also 12aa.; 16b). This interpretation is adopted in Martin
Luther's translation, the Elbeifelder Übersetzung (1897), the Jerusalem
Bible 2 (1980), and is also followed by MJ. HARRIS (1984) and I.R.
PORTER (1961). Here [Pi") ~ is taken as a vocative.
The Septuagint translates: Ö epövo~ 0'0'0, ö et6~; the Vulgata: sedis
tua, Deus (Psalterium Gallicanum), thronus tuus, Deus (Psalterium iuxta
Hebraeos). In all cases D"ilJ ~, et6~ and Deus are understood as a voca-
tive.
These translations and interpretations give rise to the question as to
whether it is possible in the Old Testament, and more specifically in the
Psalms, that an earthly king is addressed as 'God'. It is not wholly
unlikely in view of the fact that the king of Judah/Jerusalem is more than
once called 'son of God' (2 Sam 7,14; 14,17; 1 ehr 22,16; Ps 2,7), and
that God is referred to as the 'father' of the king (2 Sam 7,14; 2 ehr
22,10; Ps 89,27). Moreover, the throne and the dynasty of the Judaean
king are based on the will of Yahweh (1 Kings 1,37; 1 ehr 17,12; 2 ehr
7,13).
However, it is very unusual to address the human king as God. There-
fore many scholars interpret the vocative as '0 Godlike', e.g. the Zürcher
Übersetzung (Lizenz-ausgabe 1951), Einheitsübersetzung (1980), the
commentaries: T.H. GUNKEL4 (1926) H. SCHMIDT (1934), HJ. KRAus
(1961), H. RINGGREN (1963); the theological monographs: S. MOWINCKEL
(1922), J. SCHILDENBERGER (1959), W. ZIMMERLl2 (1975), W.H.
SCHMIDT 6 (1987). All these interpretations are influenced by the idea of
the oriental 'Hofstil' - see H. GREßMANN (1929) and A. NEUWIRTH
 A NOTE ON PS 45,7aa 101

(Diss. Graz, 1964). W. STAERK 2 (1920) translates: 'Gottesheld', 'Divine

Hero'. It is not worthwhile to dweIl here any longer on the method of the
myth and ritual school, because in my opinion it is nothing but a transi-
tory period in the history of biblieal interpretation - see M. NOTH (1950)
and K.H. BERNHARDT (1961).
Since none of these explanations was regarded as satisfying, some
scholars preferred to resort to emendations. Let me give some examples.
First those based on the fact that Ps 45 belongs to the Elohim Psalms. It
has been suggested that the original text read illiP instead of D"il') N , and
that the name Yahweh is a misreading of il"il". The text originally read:
lYl D')lY') il"il" 1 N UJ 'Thy throne will be (will exist) for ever and ever'
(Chr. BRUSTON 1873, 1. WELLHAUSEN 1888, B. DUHM 2 1923, B. HEHN
1921, F. WUTZ 1925, E. KAUTZSCH 1 A. BERTHOLE't 1922).
However, this emendation is not in accordance with the language of the
Psalms and especially not with that of Ps 45. Moreover, the use of il"il as
verbum finitum is rare. In later Hebrew it came to be used in such a way
more generally under the influence of Aramaic. But the authors of the
Psalms tried to write in an archaie style.
T.H. GASTER reads instead ofD "il') NIil"il" : D"il') N/pJil (1 Sam 13,13;
2 Sam 7,12; Isa 9,6; 1 Chr 17,11). But this conjecture is very unlikely,
because of the word order of the verbal sentence: the object at the
beginning of the phrase!
The emendation proposed by Ibn Ezra has found more followers. He
added a supposedly lost N UJ after 1 N UJ and read: 'Thy throne is the
throne of God for ever and ever'. He was followed by D. QIMCHI, F.
HITZIG (1863/5), H. EWALD 3 (1866), H. GRÄTZ (1882/3), R. DRIVER
(1926), E. KÖNIG (1927), CR. NORTH (1932), J. SCHILDENBERGER
(1957/59), M. BUBER (1962) and R. TOURNA Y (1963).
A similar sense is conceivable, if one considers the brachylogie style of
Hebrew poetry: 'Thy throne is (like) God's for ever and ever' (I.R.
PORTER 1961, LA. EMERTON 1968). The RSV translates: 'Your divine
throne endures for ever and ever'. (Footnote: 'Y our throne is of God').
T.H. GASTER (see above) regards this Psalm generally as a solemn song
or hymn for a wedding ritual, not particularly a song for/of a king,
because according to ancient oriental custom every bridegroom and bride
were dressed out and regarded as king and queen on their wedding day.
However, this interpretation would contradiet what is being said in v. 13.
But in view of the brachylogie style an emendation of the text is not
necessary.
102 G. WALLIS

In honour of his retiring friend the present author wants to make a new
attempt at solving the textual problem of Ps 45, 7aa. In the first part of
the Psalm, vv. 3-10, in which the king is addressed personally, the
appellative 0 "il'J ~ is used three times: apart from v. 7aa also in 3ba:
OJlV'J O"il'J ~ lJlJ I1Y'Jv), and and in 8ba: lnvJlJ I1J-'JV) 11'll1'1l11IJVJ O"il'J~.
The construction of these sentences is always the same: the verb (3.masc.
sing. perf. with the suffix of the 2. masc. sing.) stands at the beginning of
the sentence, followed by the subject 0 "il'J ~, and by an adverbial determi-
nation O'JlV'J (temporal), 11'll1'1l1 llJVJ (acc., instr.). In both cases God is
the acting person and the human being, the king, is the gram m atical
object.
In v. 7aa we find the same sequence of the words in the verbal sen-
tence: (verb) - noun - adverbial determination. How can this observation
be utilized for the interpretation of v. 7aa? In this verse lV10'JlV 0 "il'J ~
1 ~ OJ the adverbial determination (temporal, as in v. 3ba) stands at the
end, with the nomen O"il 'J ~ in the middle. At the beginning of the sen-
tence we find the word 1 ~ OJ, which has the suffix of the 2nd pers. masc.
sing. (analogous with v. 3ba and 8ba). If all three sentences are con-
structed in the same way, then 1 ~ OJ could be a verb, more specifically a
verbum denominativum.
It is weIl known, that the substantive ~lJ is a loanword from the
Sumerian gis GU-ZA, which evolved via the Akkadian kussu to the
Hebrew word ~ OJ, 'throne' (of the king). Verba denominativa were
particularly formed by nomina from 'Kulturimport' . When foreign words
are adopted, the matters expressed by them are accepted, and
subsequently they signify verbal derivatives of these nomina when the
above mentioned matters are raised. Derived verbal sterns are used for
constructing denominated verbs. In addition other conjugations are used,
such as the pi 'eI (W. GESENIUS - E. KAUTzSCH 27 , 1902, 118 § 43c; H.
BAUER - P. LEANDER, 1922, 291; G. BERGSTRÄSSER, Hebr. Gramm, 11,
1929/62, S.7.74f. 91.94f. 98.102f.; E. JENNI, Das hebräische Pi'el, 1968,
264-274). All these opinions are based upon J. GERBER, Das hebräische
Determinativ im theologischen Sprachgebrauch im AT (1896).
These verbs have a transitive and a factitive resultative sense, such as
1iJ3, 'priest', lilJ pi. 'to serve as a priest', 9W~ (Akk. kassapu) 'magi-
cian', 9VJ::J (kispu), 'magic', and 9VJ3 pi. 'to enchant'; WOJ 'omen', VJnJ pi.
'work as a soothsayer'; 'J"~IJ 'flute' (Akk. ~al~allu), 'J'Jn 11 pi. 'to play
the flute', 0 "\1::ly. (pt) 'anklets', OJV pi. 'to rattle the anklets'. So it is
quite possible that a verbum denominativum was derived from the noun
 A NOTE ON PS 45,7aa 103

N~~, in the pi 'eI, 3rd person masc. sing. petf. It could be understood in
an intransitive sense: 'to sit on the throne', or transitively: 'to set upon
the throne', 'to enthrone'. Therefore the first word of the text of Ps 45,
7aa could be taken as a 3rd person masc. sing. petf. pi. (trans.). The word
[] "il'J N is the subject of the sentence. We translate the sentence as follows:
'God has enthroned thee for ever and ever'.
The logical consequence is: 'The sceptre of thy kingdom is a right
sceptre', RSV 'Your royal sceptre is a sceptre of equity'. So we have
three parallel items: v. 3ba 'God has blessed thee 'for ever", 'God has
enthroned thee for ever and ever', and finally v. 8ba 'God, thy God, has
anointed thee with the oil of gladness'. This makes it quite plausible to
regard the word NOJ as a transitive verb. The absence of the dagesh in
the middle radieal can be explained by the presence of the shewa under
this letter. It is unnecessary to alter the !etters or the vocalization. The
text can remain as it has been transmitted.
However, this interpretation raises one problem. The verbum denomi-
nativum NOJ is nowhere attested in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament
or in related literature. This could be a brought forward as an objection
against our interpretation of Ps 45, 7aa. But couldn't the author of the
Psalm have availed hirnself of poetic licence to form a new verbum deno-
minativum?
At school we had a teacher of history. Sometimes, when we were
inattentive and he wanted to offer us the results of his scientific research,
he tried to encourage us to listen to hirn, with the following words: 'Gen-
tlemen, be attentive now please, for what I am going to tell you now
cannot be found in any book' - in which he mostly succeeded. WeIl, I
hope now that the present interpretation of this problematic text, which I
have only proposed in my lectures but ne ver published, will be read in
this jubilee volume. Perhaps my proposal will find some successors.
 DOES CANTICLES 6,12 MAKE SENSE?

BY

Martin J. Mulder

Badhoevedorp, The Netherlands

It is not without some hesitation that I dedicate this article on Canticles

6,12 to my dear collegue Adam VAN DER WOUDE. To the best of my
knowledge, he has never written an article on this verse in the Song of
Songs, but in his lengthy and illustrious career he has clarified many
obscure verses in the Old Testament in a convincing way, earning from
many colleagues recognition for his expertise in explaining the Old
Testament and the Dead Sea SeraIls. Thus, it is with due respect that I
offer my view on Cant 6,12, an interpretation which came to me while
working on a popular edition of the Song of Songs in Dutch!. It is gene-
raIlyadmitted that Cant 6,12 has been aptly designated as a crux inter-
pretum and that in the course of time the verse has been given many
translations, emendations, explanations, interpretations and non liquets 2•
The most obscure part of MT Cant 6,12 is perhaps the last three words:
J"1 r"OY nlJJ10. Some Hebrew manuscripts of the OT, as weIl as the
Septuaginta and the Vulgata read the name of Amminadab instead of
Ammi-nadib. Although in the Old Testament one can find persons with
the name Amminadab (Ex 6,23; Num 1,7; 2,3; 7,12.17; 10,14; Ruth
4,19s.; 1 Chr 2,10; 6,7; 15,10s.), none of these individuals can be ident-
ified with the Ammi-nadib of our verse. A scholar as TOURNA y interprets

I M. J. MULDER, Hooglied. Een praktische bijbelverklaring (Tekst en Toelichting,

Kampen, 1991). I owe a large debt of gratitude to Mrs. Drs. J.W. DYK, Amsterdam, for
improving my English manuscript.
2 See e.g. R. TOURNAY, "Les chariots d' Aminadab (Cant. vi 12): Israel, peuple

theophore", vr 9 (1959), 288-309; A. ROBERT - R. TOURNAY - A. FEUILLET, Le

Cantique des Cantiques (EB, Paris, 1963), 244-248; M. H. POPE, Song 0/ Songs (AB,
Garden City, 1977), 584-592.
 DOES CANTICLES 6,12 MAKE SENSE? 105

Ammi-nadib to be the Abinadab of 2 Sam 6,3s (cf. 1 Sam 7,1; 1 Chr

13,7), in whose house the ark of the Lord was stationed after returning
from the Philistines (1 Sam 7,1). In his opinion the name of Abinadab
should be converted into 'Ammi-nadib' in just as allegorical-messianic a
way as the name 'Shunammith' (1 Kings 1,3.15; 2,17.21s.) should be
converted into 'Shulammith' (Cant 7,1). According to hirn the 'chariots'
of our verse have a relation to the new cart on which the people mounted
the ark of God (2 Sam 6,3)3. In our opinion, however, this identification
is unfounded.
TUR-SINAI suggests connecting 6,12 with 7,1 reading: "'li~ J "ny," ~ ';J
lllJ ., Jn rl'li: "I did not know myself. There give me your myrrh"; nJ
:lJ-ilTnJl Jl'li "Jl'li n"lJ';Jl'liil "Jl'li "Jl'li J",J"IJY: "Daugther of
Amminadab return! Return, 0 Shulammite! Return, return, and let us look
at you"4. The first sentence is taken as being spoken by the youth, the
second by a group. But, as Fox remarked 5, "this interpretation leaves the
youth with an enigmatic remark outside the poetic structure, brings in a
name of a man (Amminadib) not mentioned elsewhere in the Song ... ,
and takes 'myrrh' as a substitution-symbol for love, an usage not paral-
leled elsewhere in the poem". He suggests reading 6, 12b: rlY nJJ11J ., Jnmu
J'" J, thus only eliminating the yod of "IJY. This change seems supported
by the reading of Peshitta: smtny mrkbt' d'm' dmtyb 6 , "people who are
willing (to do something)". Nonetheless, it remains difficult to emend an
obscure text. The fact that the name Ammi-nadib is not mentioned
elswhere in Canticles, does not mean that the name can not be ahapax
legomenon in this verse. EIsewhere in Canticles we find other hapax
legomena as weW.
As to the first part of our verse: ., Jnmu "'li~ J "ny," ~ ';J, Y'" ~ ';J
l'li~J has, according to S. M. PAUL, an equivalent in the Akkadian
medical phrase ramänsu ul fde, which connotes amental disturbance: "be

3R. TOURNA Y, op. eit., 292-309.

4N. H. TUR-SINAI, ~lPl) 'JvJ lUl'!l1!J IVb (Jerusalern, 1968), 1305.; M. V. Fox, "Scholia
to Canticles", vr 33 (1983),2055.
5M. V. Fox, op. eil., 206.
6J. A. EMERTON and D. J. LANE, Song 01 Songs, in: The Old Testament in Syriae
aeeording to the Peshitta Version, II v (Leiden, 1979).
7 E.g. Shulammite in 7,1; the gate of 'Bat Rabbim' in Chesbon in 7,5; Baal-Hamon
in 8,11.
106 M.J. MULDER

beside myself with ... ,,8. PAUL may be right in his observation that "the
context of the passage is one of great expectation and overwhelming
joy,,9. It may be questioned, however, whether it is necessary to read
''VJ9 J together with Yl' N ';I, going against the division of the Masoretic
text, though this division seems to be supported by the reading of the
Septuagint: oux ~yvü) 1'1 \j!ux1't /lOU' ~eE't6 /lE I'iP/lu'tu A/llVUÖUß (cf. Vulgata:
nescivi: anima mea conturbavit me propter quadrigas Aminadab).
To show how great the difficulties in our verse are we have only to look
at a few random examples of current translations and contemporary
commentaries of Canticles. The translation of the 01d Testament by
James MOFFATT 10 has only dots; the Revised Standard Version 11 reads:
"Before I was aware, my fancy set me in a chariot beside my prince",
and observes in a note that this is a correction, for "the meaning of the
Hebrew is uncertain". The translation of the Jewish Publication Society of
America of 1917 12 has: "Before I was aware, my soul set me upon the
chariots of my prince1y people"; and the new translation of this society
(in 1982)13 reads: "Before I knew it, my desire set me mid the chariots
of Ammi-nadib", but remarks: "Meaning of Heb. uncertain". The New
English Bible of 1970 has: "I did not know myself; she made me fee1
more than a prince reigning over the myriads of his peop1e", with the
comment appended, that "myriads" is an probable reading for "Heb.
chariots". In the Revised English Bible of 1989 we read: "I did not
recognize myself: she made me a prince chosen from myriads of my
people"14. The New American Bible 15 reads: "Before I knew it, my
he art had made me the blessed one of my kinswomen", and in the Good

8 S. M. PAUL, "An Unrecognized Medical Idiom in Canticles 6, 12 and Job 9,21",

Bih 59 (1978), 545ss.

9 PAUL, op. eit., 546.

10 James MOFFATT, The Old Testament. A New Translation, 11 (London, w.y.), 181.

11 The Holy Bihle. An Ecumenical Edition (New York - Glasgow - Toronto, 1973).

12 The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text. A New Translation (Phila-

delphia, 18 1944).
13 The Writings. A new translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic

text, third section (Philadelphia, 1982).

14 The reading 'myriads' for 'chariots' we find in L. H. BROCKINGTON, The Hehrew

Text 0/ the Old Testament. The readings adopted by the translators of the New English
Bible (Oxford - Cambridge, 1973), 174: m:J:T111 instead of m:l:llll.
15 Saint Joseph Edition 0/ the New American Bihle (New York, 1970), 748. In a
footnote the observation is made: "The text is obscure in Hebrew and in the ancient
versions".
 DOES CANTICLES 6,12 MAKE SENSE? 107

News Bib1e 16 the translation runs: "I am trembling; you have made me
as eager for love as a chariot driver is for batt1e", with in a note the com-
ment: "Verse 12 in Hebrew is unclear".
To these English translations we add two modern French translations.
In the first place "la Bible de Jerusalem,,17: "Je ne sais, mais mon desir
m'a jett sur les chars d' Amminadib". In a note we read the comment:
"Le v. 12 est le plus diffici1e du Cantigue et defie toute interpretation.
Peut-etre cet Amminadib est-il l'eguivalent pa1estinien du 'Prince Mehi',
un personnage accessoire des chants egyptiens, gui circule en char et
s'ingere dans les amours d'autrui". In the "Traduction Oecumenigue de la
Bible,,18 the translation runs: "[Elle] Je ne reconnais pas mon propre
moi: il me rend timide, bien gue fille de nobles gens". The translator
comments i.a. on 'mon propre moi': "Sans doute ce mot est-il a la fois le
complement du verbe precedent et le sujet du verbe suivant"; and on the
last line of the verse: "La traduction proposee se contente ... de diviser en
deux le mot lu 'chars' (markebot est lu morek bat). On retrouve ainsi
l'appellation de 7,2. Ceci est la suite de ce gui precede et prepare ce gui
suit: son amour l'a transformee en princesse ... , mais aussi l'a rendue
timide, d'ou sa fuite, suivie de son rappel,,19.
Also the commentaries on Canticles demonstrate the many difficulties
which our verse presents. P. JOÜON 20 translates this verse as folIows:
"Soudain, mon desir a fait de moi 'un' char pour la 'fille' du noble
peup1e (?)"; and M. HALLER 21 : "Ich kenne mich selbst nicht mehr, 'du

16 Good News Bible. Today's English Version (New York, 1976).

17 La Bible de Jerusalem. La sainte Bible traduite en francais sous la direction de
I'Ecole biblique de Jerusalem (Paris, 21979), 956.
18 Traduction Oecumenique de la Bible. Edition integrale. Ancient Testament (Paris,

1976), 1608.
19 Tbe Dutch translations also bear witness to the difficulties of the text. Some

examples are: Statenvertaling (1637): "Eer ik het wist, zette mij mijne ziel [op] de
wagens van mijn vrijwiIlig volk"; Leidsehe Vertaling (1901): "Zonderdat ik bet zelf wist,
hadt gij mij gezet op wagens met een edelman"; Petrus Canisius-vertaling (1941): "En
zander dat ik het wist, Hebt gij mij in de vorstelijke draagkoets gezet ... "; Nieuwe
Vertaling Ned. Bijbelgenootschap (1951): "Ik kende mijzelve niet; gij hebt mij op
vorstelijke wagens geplaatst"; Willibrard-vertaling (1975): "en de wagen van Ammina-
dab maakte dat ik mezelf niet meer herkende"; Graot Nieuws-Bijbel (1983): "Ik kende
die verrukking niet, zij heeft mij doen rijden op vorstelijke wagens".
20 P. JOÜON, Le Cantique des Cantiques. Commentaire philologique et exegerique
(Paris, 1909), 272.
21 M. HALLER, Die Fünf Megilloth (HAT, Tübingen, 1940),40.
108 M.J. MULDER

hast mich furchtsam gemacht, meines Volkes Tochter"'. R. GORDIS 22

reads: "I am beside myself with joy, For there thou wilt give me thy
myrrh, 0 noble kinsman's daughter!". G. GERLEMAN23 offers as a poss-
ible translation: "Ich weiss nicht, wie mir zumute wurde - in solchen
Zustand setzten mich die Wagen Amminadibs", whereas M. H. POPE 24
translates: "(a) Unawares I was set (b) In the chariot with the prince".
Francis LANDy 25 translates the beginning of our verse: "I did not know /
my soul set me", but continues: "the incoherence that follows ... 'chariots
of my princely people', is presumably contingent, yet reflects, through a
remarkably appropriate serendipity, the disturbance of the narrative". In a
note she remarks that she follows some others "in not see king to translate
it,,26. M.D. GOULDER 27 translates: "Ere I had thought it, he made me,
my life did, my own people's chariot, Come from Nadiv", and R. E.
MURPHy28 has: "Before I knew it, my heart made me (the blessed one)
of the prince's people". KRINETZKl 29 translated in 1964: "Ich wusste
nicht, wie, da verwandelte mich mein Herz in ein Gefährt 'des Amina-
dab "', but in 1981, denying his former translation, he joins with others in
not translating this difficult verse 30 • We will conclude this selection of
the efforts to translate this verse with a peculiar remark of A. B. EHR-

22 R. GORDIS, The Song 0/ Songs. A Study, Modem Translation and Commentary

(New York, 1954 [1974 2]), 67. Originally Ibis commentary appeared in Ibe Mordecai M.
Kaplan Jubilee Volume (New York 1953),281-379.
23 G. GERLEMAN, Ruth. Das Hohelied (BKAT, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1965), 188; cf.

M.A. BEEK, Hooglied (POT, Nijkerk, 1984), 186s.

24 M. H. POPE, op. eit., 552.

25 F. LANDY, Paradoxes 0/ Paradise. Identity and Difference in the Song 0/ Songs

(Sheffield, 1983), 205.
26 F. LANDY, op. cit., 333 note 34.

27 M. D. GOULDER, The Song 0/ Fourteen Songs (Sheffield, 1986),48.

28 R. E. MURPHY, The Song 0/ Songs. A Commentary on the Book 0/ Canticles or
the Song 0/ Songs (Minneapolis, 1990), 174.
29 L. (= G.) KRINETZKI, Das Hohe Lied. Kommentar zu Gestalt und Kerygma eines

alttestamentlichen Liebesliedes (Düsseldorf, 1964), 209.

30 G. KRINETZKI, Kommentar zum Hohenlied. Bildsprache und Theologische Bot-

schaft (FrankfurtIM. - Bem, 1981), 188. He interprets (with i.a. P. HAUPT, 1907) the
words ·'1 don't understand" as a "resignierte Randbemerkung eines Abschreibers, die
unglücklicherweise in den Text geriet". Cf. also O. LORETZ, Studien zur althebräischen
Poesie f. Das althebräische Liebeslied (AOAT 14/1, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1971),41: "Die
Glosse betrifft vielleicht einen bereits unverständlichen Text, oder man will den Text auf
das Volk Israel beziehen".
 DOES CANTICLES 6,12 MAKE SENSE? 109

LICH 31 • He presumes, "dass hier ursprünglich davon die Rede war, dass
die Sulamitin auf dem Wege nach dem Nussgarten einer Gesellschaft von
Magnaten begegnete, die in ihren Wagen eine Spazierfahrt machte ... ".
GERLEMAN is right in his observation that the old translations "trotz
ihrer auseinandergehenden Übersetzungen keinen anderen Text als M
gehabt haben,m. Not only LXX, Vulgo and Pesh., as shown above, prove
this, but also the translations of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion even
for the second part of our verse: Aq.: exP/lutU "uoi) eKoucrta~O~vou
[expxovtosl; Symm.: (mö ap/lutmv "uo'\) 1'l')QUO/l~VOU; Theod.: "UU\) /lOU
eKOUmU~o/l~vOu33. eKOUmU~O/lm means "to take on something voluntarily",
"offer freely" (see LXX: Jud 5,2.9; 11 Es 2,68; 3,5; 7,13. ISs.; 21,2), and
is always a translation of Hebrew or Aramaic ]1 J (hithpa. or ithpa.).
Likewise one can also agree with GERLEMAN when he writes in his
commentary to our verse: "Andererseits läßt der knappe Wortlaut vermu-
ten, daß es sich um etwas durchaus Bekanntes handelt". Therefore, he
who is persuaded that our verse is not nonsense, or at most a gloss of a
desperate interpreter, will try to understand this verse within its own
context. In 6,4-10 the young man confesses the nearly divine beauty of
his girl. In v. 10 the queens and concubines praise her: "Who is this that
has a magic as the dawn of day, fair as the moon, bright as the sun,
awesome as a fata morgana?" The word for 'to praise' in v. 9 is used in
other places in the Old Testament mostly for the praise of God 34 • And
'prostrating' oneself before the sun and the moon and all the host of
heaven is in the Old Testament nearly the same as to serve them as gods
(Deut 17,3; Jer 8,2). Albeit that the adjective 'divine' is not mentioned
here in connection with the girl, nevertheless, the sphere has been evoked:
the girl is like a goddess, even in the eyes of other women!
In our opinion in the verses Ilf. the speaker is the man, who went
down to his garden (cf. v. 2). The word 1T' in v. 11 means not only a
descending from a high er location to the bank of the brook, but also a
coming down from the 'seventh heaven' to the reality of every day,
which is in itself still delicious enough: his love life with his sweetheart.
The garden is a metaphor for the beloved woman (cf. 4,13f.). The man

31 A. B. EHRLICH, Randglossen zur hebräischen Bibel, VII (Leipzig, 1914 [1968 2

HildesheimJ), 15.
32 G. GERLEMAN, op. eil, 191.

33 F. FIELD, Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt, 11 (Oxford, 1875), 420s.

34 H. RINGGREN, "hll I und II", TWAT 11, 434.

110 M.J. MULDER

comes down to his garden to see how the vita1ity of 1ife renews its forces
in the circular course of fertility and acts of love. The love life, on the
one hand so lofty for the spirit, is, on the other hand, ordinary and
natural: by descending to the bank of a small river one can see in spring-
time the budding of life.
At this point of the song, the verse not only contrasts with the preced-
ing verse, but also constitutes the connection with the following statement
or 'confession' of the man in v. 12. In v. 10 the woman is declared nearly
divine, in this verse she, but also the young man, are brought down to
earth. Sometimes, however, there are moments in one's life that one does
not perceive the diverting of the spirit away from everyday life to some-
thing exceptional and exalted. This is particularly true in the fascinating
area of love. The 'confession' of exact1y this feeling is in our opinion the
meaning of verse 12. We try to translate v. 12 in this way:

I had not noticed it, my mood had set me (as it were) in the char-
iot(s) of Ammi-Nadib.

According to the Masoretic punctuation there are two sentences: N ';J

"ny," and ., JnlJVJ "'\l1~ J etc. (with double object). '\l1~ J is here the subject
of the second sentence and not the object of the first, nor the substitute
for the reflexive pronoun or something of that order35 • The meaning of
the Hebrew word '\l1~J is to indicate the seat of emotions and passions: the
state of mind, the mood36 • The verb D1VJ or []'lVJ (and not DlJ'\l1, 'disturb',
as e.g. Vulgata has it) has a double object.
The man, who is still speaking in our verse, says that his 'mood',
being in the ecstasies of love, had set hirn in "the chariot(s) of Ammi-
nadib". He means that he had had a mindblowing, even divine experience.
The idea of our verse is clear. What, however, is the meaning of the
"chariot(s) of Ammi-nadib"? Many scholars and commentaries have tried
to translate or interpret 'Ammi-nadid', as we have demonstrated above.
]",J can mean 'noble' (Num 21,18; 1 Sam 2,8; Isa 32,5.8; Ps 47,10;
Prov 8,16 etc.), so the translation could be: "my kinsman is a noble". But

35 Cf. also J. H. BECKER, Het begrip nejesj in het Oude Testament (Amsterdam,
1942), 52; P. JOÜON - T. MURAOKA, A Grammar oj Biblical Hebrew H (Roma, 1991), §
146k.
36 Cf. e.g. F. BROWN - S. R. DRIVER - C. A. BRIGGS, A Hebrew and English Lexicon
oj the Old Testament (1907), 660f.; C. WESTERMANN, art. 'naejaes, THAT H, 71-96; H.
SEEBASS, art. 'naepaes, TWATV, 531-555.
 DOES CANTICL ES 6,12 MAKE SENSE? 111

in OUf verse Ammi-nadib is a personal name, a name wh ich at the time of

the composition of Canticles was easily understood, much as we under-
stand when e.g. people are speaking about "Littie Red Riding-hood". In
our opinion, the meaning of "to be set on the chariot(s) of Ammi-nadib"
is to indicate an old standing phrase or proverb: "to be over the moon",
"to be out of this world".
The question is now, how there can be a link between this phrase and
the chariot(s) of Ammi-nadib? As is known, in the Pharasaic and Tan-
naitic circles of Judaism, Merkaba-mysticism became an esoteric tradition.
Different fragments were scattered in the Talmud and the Midrash,
interpreting Mishna Chagiga 2: 137 . This mishna runs38 :

The forbidden degrees may not be expounded before three persons, nor the Story of
Creation before two, nor [the chapter of] of the Chariot before one alone, unless he is
a Sage that understands of his own knowledge. Whosoever gives his mind to four
things it were better for hirn if he had not corne into the world - what is above? what
is beneath? what was beforetime? and what will be hereafter? And whosoever takes
no thought for the honour of his Maker, it were better for hirn if he had not come
into the world.

The "chapter of the Chariot" is Ezekiel I (cf. also 8 and 10), in which the
word merkaba does not appear. But this term "was used by the rabbis to
designate the complex of speculations, homilies and visions connected
with the Throne of Glory and the chariot ... which bears it and all that is
embodied in this divine world,,39. The term merkaba is first found with
the meaning Merkaba-mysticism in Ben Sira 49,8: "Ezekiel beheld the
vision of the Glory, wh ich was revealed enthroned on the chariot of the
cherubim"40. OESTERLEY and Box say that this is the earliest use of the
term merkaba in the technical sense of a sacred mystery41. In the
Hebrew Version of Ecclesiasticus, found in the famous geniza of the Ezra

37 G. SCHOLEM, art. "Mcrkabah Mysticisrn", Encycl. ludaica II (Jerusalern, 1971),

1386-1389.
38 H. DANBY, The Mishnah (Oxford, 1933), 212f.; cf. W. H. ZUIDEMA, Der Mischna-

traktat HAG/GA oder Was zum Wallfahren gehört (diss. Leiden, 1987), 90-98. Also in
Mishna Megilla 4: 10 the 'Chariot' is mentionned: "They may not use the chapter of the
Chariot as a reading from the Prophets; but R. Judah permits it".
39 G. SCHOLEM, op. eil., 1386.

40 The New English Bible. The Apocrypha, 188.

41 W.O.E. OESTERLEY and G. H. Box in: R.H. CHARLES, The Apocrypha and the

Pseudepigrapha 0/ the Old Testament in English I (Oxford, 1913), 505.

112 M.J. MULDER

Synagogue in Cairo, the text reads ilJJlO ' JT 42 , 'kinds of chariots',

which can be interpreted as the different sights of the vision of the
chariot, or as the different parts of the chariot, or as the four living
creatures near the chariots43 •
There is an early conception in Israel of JHWH riding on cherubim
(Deut 33,26; Ps 18,11; Ps 68,5) and in 1 Chron 28,18 the ark with the
cherubim is called merkaba. In 2 Kings 23,11 also Assyrian influence is
suggested, when it is told that king Josiah had burnt the chariots (mJJlO)
of the sun. And especially the story in 2 Kings 2 is interesting in connec-
tion with Cant 6,12. In 2 Kings 2 it is told that Elijah is taken up to
heaven in a whirlwind. Before this event when Elijah asked Elisha what
he could do for hirn, Elisha asked to inherit a double share of Elijah's
spirit. Elijah said: "If you see me taken from you, may your wish be
granted". Then 'chariots of fire' and 'horses of fire' appeared suddenly,
carrying Elijah up in the whirlwind to heaven. When Elisha saw this, he
cried: "My father, my father, the chariot(s) of Israel, and the horsemen
thereof" [KJV], and he saw hirn no more.
Not only in later rabbinic tradition, but already in Old Testament
tradition, the 'chariot tradition' is coverd with a shroud of secrecy,
perhaps deeply rooted in folklore. He who steeps oneself in this secrecy
can become an ln N, 'another', i.e. 'an apostate', or 'loose his mind'. So
the young man was 'in the clouds' with his 'divine' girl, but he did not
know it, for he was "set upon the chariot(s) of Ammi-nadib".
Who was this Ammi-nadib? In the old Westsemitic world there were
many personal names with the element 'Amm(i)'44. One of the original
meanings of the word is patruus, 'paternal uncle'. "Es handelt sich um
ein Nomen der Verwandtschaft zum Ausdruck eines agnatischen Verhält-
nisses", so LIPINSKt 5• NYBERG has pointed out, that amm is a name of a
South-Arabian god, and that sometimes also in the religion of JHWH this
name is found 46 • Who then is described by the name 'Ammi-nadib' ('the

I. LEVY, The Hebrew Text 0/ the Book 0/ Ecclesiasticus (Leiden, 1904), 69.
42

43 G. SCHOLEM, l.c.; M.z. SEGAL, []'n1i1 NVU r::ll~U (Jerusalern, 1972), 338
(Hebrew).
44 E.g.: M. NOTH, Die israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemiti-

schen Namengebung (Stuttgart, 1928),76-79; H. B. HUFFMON, Amorite Personal Names

in the Mari Texts (Baltimore, 1965), 196ff.; A. R. HULST, art. '''amJgoj'', THAT II,
290ff.; E. LrPINsKI, art. '''rn'', TWATVI, 177-185.
45 E. LrPINSKI, loc. cit., 180.

46 H.S. NYBERG, Studien zum Hoseabuche (Uppsala, 1935), 27.

 DOES CANTICLES 6,12 MAKE SENSE? 113

noble kinsman' , or 'the kinsman is noble')? Is it perhaps a folkloric name

for Elijah, or adescription of a 'heavenly' creature, or is it even a
description for JHWH himself? This question remains as yet unsolved.
But in our opinion the meaning of our verse is not obscure: in his love
for his girl the young man had unconsciously passed the boundary
between this world and the divine. Is it not true that only those who love
understand this?
 MICHAEL AND GABRIEL
ANGELOLOGICAL PROBLEMS IN THE BOOK OF DANIEL'

BY

Benedikt Otzen

Aarhus, Denmark

In 1930 a very young Gerhard VON RAD wrote part of the article {XytEAOC,
for the second fascicle of Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament.
He outlines the development of the conception of mal'äk in the various parts
of the Old Testament, and when, eventually, he arrives at the Book of
Daniei, he says: "hier endlich - im letzten kanonischen Buch des AT - kann
man von einer alttestamentlichen Angelologie sprechen"2. It is evident that
employing the word 'angelology' VON RAD does not think of the occur-
rences of angels in the first part of the Book of Daniei: the angels in the
well-known and popular legends about the three friends of Daniei in the
blazing furnace (eh. 3), or about Daniel in the lions' pit (eh. 6). In these
stories the angels play the role of the guardian angel rescuing Daniel and his
friends. But neither in the Book of Daniei nor in the Old Testament as such
is the guardian angel - understood as an angel protecting the single person -
a typical figure. As is weIl known, angels in the Old Testament (as the word
mal'äk indicates) are normally divine messengers. If they have a protecting
function it is Israel that is protected, as in Exod 14,19 where the angel of
God takes his stand between the Egyptians and the Israelites, or in 2 Kings
19,35 when the angel of the Lord kills 185.000 men in the Assyrian army.
Only in a few instances in the Psalms is the angel seen as a representative
of the divine proteetion of a single person (Ps 91,11, etc.).

1 The article represents a lecture given at the Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense, August

1991: "The Book of Daniel in Light of Recent Findings". The Colloquium was under the
presidency of Adam S. VAN DER WOUDE.
2 Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, Bd. 1 (Stuttgart, 1933), (G. VON

RAD, mal'ak im AT, 75-79), 78.

 MICHAEL AND GABRIEL 115

Thus it is natural that when in the above-mentioned article VON RAD

refers to 'angelology' in the Book of Daniel, he is not thinking of the
legends, but rather of the occurrences of angels in the visions in the second
part of the Book. In the following we shall concentrate on the angelology in
Dan 7-12. First, I shall make a short exegetical exposition of the relevant
passages, but I have chosen to begin with chapters 8-12 and conclude with
chapter 7.
In his vision in chapter 8 Daniel sees a ram with two horns (signifying
the kings of Media and Persia) and a he-goat from the west with one large
horn (representing Alexander the Great). The he-go at overpowers the ram,
and later the horn of the he-goat is replaced by four horns (the four
monarchies after Alexander), and 'out of one of them there issued one small
horn' (Antiochus IV Epiphanes). The small horn attacks 'the Host of
Heaven' (the angels) and some of the stars and aspires 'to be as great as the
Prince of the Host' (God or the archangel Michael?); it suppresses the
offerings and disturbs world order (Dan 8,1-12, cf. vv. 20-25)3.
The two 'holy ones' discussing the duration of the misery are angels of
the rank and file (8, l3f). But in the following verses there suddenly stands
before Daniel 'one with the semblance of a man'4; he is addressed as
Gabriel and receives the order to interpret the vision, which he does (8,15-
26). He is one of the archangels, and here he has the function of angelus
interpres.
In chapter 9 Daniel tries to make out the meaning of the 'seventy years'
in the Book of Jeremiah, and 'the man Gabriel' comes flying at eventide and
acts again as angelus interpres (9,20-27).
In chapter 10 there is, eventually, a throng of angels. In vv. 5-6 Daniel is
confronted with a remarkable figure of a superterrestrial character. He struts
in borrowed feathers, so to speak. I mean: the description of hirn is a
combination of various passages from the Book of Ezekiel (chapters 1; 9,

3 Klaus KOCH, Das Buch Daniel (Ertr. der Forschung 144, Dannstadt, 1980), 207, thinks

that the 'Prince of the Host' is Michael. But most commentators are of the opinion that he
is God and is identical with the 'Prince of princes', v. 25; see M. DELCOR, Le Livre de
Daniel (Paris, 1971), 173f; cf. J.J. COLLINS, The Apocalyptic Vision 01 the Book 01 Daniel
(Missoula, Montana, 1977), 106f. The expression 'world order' represents Hebrew '''meet.
It is normally understood, in this context, as 'true religion'. I follow LEBRAM [J.-c.
LEBRAM, Das Buch Daniel (Zürich, 1984), 98J,
4 lCmar'eh geebeer (v. 15). A pun upon the name Gabriel [see DELCOR, Le Livre de

Daniel (Paris, 1971), 178].

116 BENEDIKT OTZEN

and 40). But we can hardly doubt that again we have Gabriel before us as
angelus interpres (see v. 14(
The problem is that we cannot be sure whether from v. 16 we still have
Gabriel before us or whether another figure is introduced as 'the one like a
man'. Most commentators trace Gabriel throughout the chapter. But there are
several circumstances that compel us to consider the possibility that two
different figures are found in the chapter. Some scholars have observed that
a new figure seems to appear in v. 16, but they think that it is God hirnself,
so that we have a kind of theophany in the following verses6 • I think the
text indicates rather clearly that from v. 16 we still have an angelic figure
before us - but another one than Gabriel. In the first place he is introduced
with the formula which is, in the Book of Daniel, normally used about
angels: wehinneh kidmüt bene 'adam 'and behold, one in the likeness of a
man touches my lips .. .' (v. 16), and again in v. 18: k'mar'eh 'adam 'the one
looking like a man touched me .. .' (cf. Dan 7,13; 8,15; 10,6f). In the second
place, the angel met with in vv. 1-14 is an angelus interpres, presumably
Gabriel, as already mentioned. Gabriel has, in this context, only an
interpreting task, and he is not described as a fighting angel. On the
contrary, he explains how Michael had to fight for hirn when he was
retained for 21 days by the 'angel prince of the kingdom of Persia' (v. 13f.
The angel appearing from v. 16, however, is clearly a fighting angel. Could
he be Michael? To this idea anybody would raise the objection: he refers to
Michael in the third person in the last verse of the chapter. That seems to
be decisive! But: the last sentence in the chapter seems (according to the
masoretic text) to be a quotation from the Book of Truth - surely to be
understood as a quotation of a divine remark, aremark in the mouth of
Yahweh: Michael is quoting what Yahweh has been saying about hirn, about
Michael. In paraphrase Michael says: I shall go back to fight with the Prince
of Persia; and after hirn comes the Prince of Greece. But I will tell you what

5 This is the opinion of most commentators; see also COLLINS, The Apocalyptic Vision,
134.
6 Cf. O. PLÖGER, Das Buch Daniel (KAT XVIII, Gütersloh, 1965), 149 and H. HAAG,

Theol. Wörterbuch z. AT, I (Stuttgart, 1973), 688.

7 In recent literature J.J. COLLINS, The Apocalyptic Vision, 134, and K. KOCH, Das Buch

Daniel, 207, both assume that Gabriel in Dan 1O,13ff is described as a fighting angel. This
is hardly right - and certainly not if you accept that from v. 16 another angel than Gabriel
is on the scene of action. But even in v. 13 Gabriel is not represented as a fighting angel:
he teils Daniei that the prince of the kingdom of Persia 'was standing in his way' ( 'omed
l'ncegdi), a rather neutral expression (cf. Jos 5,13; Dan 10,16), and he is only released from
the retention when Michael comes to his rescue.
 MICHAEL AND GABRIEL 117

is written in the Book of Truth - and then he guotes Yahweh, who in the
Book of Truth is saying to Israel: 'I have no ally on my side against them
except Michael, your Prince'. Precisely the plural suffix in sarkcem, 'your
Prince', said to Israel by its God Yahweh, is an indication that it is not a
remark by the angel to Daniel. The angels in the visions always talk directly
to Daniel with the suffix or pronoun in the 2nd person singular.
Thus we have two angelic figures in chapter 10: Gabriel, the angelus
interpres, vv. 1-15, and Michael, the fighting angel, Israel's guardian angel,
vv. 16-21. Besides them we have in ch. 10 another conspicuous feature, as
far as the angelology is concerned: the idea of the national angels, the Prince
of Persia and the Prince of Greece. We shall return to this idea later.
Chapter 11 is apparently an explanation given by Gabriel. The detailed
exposition is in all probability an addition 8 • The chapter has no angelologi-
cal information.
In chapter 12, however, we meet in the first verses with Michael as the
fighting angel and the guardian angel of Israel. The 'man clothed in linen'
(vv. 6f) must be Gabriel as the interpreting angd.
The angelological problems in chapter 7 are great and many, but we must
confine ourselves to a few remarks. The interpreting angel v. 16 may be
Gabriel, but it may just as well be one of the thousands of angels standing
before the throne. More interesting is the expression 'The Saints of the Most
High' occurring v. 18, (v. 21), v. 22, and v. 25. I shall only refer to
DEQUEKER, COLLINS and others, who in a most convincing manner have
demonstrated that the Saints are an gels (corresponding to the Host of Heaven
in chapter 8), and that only the conspicuous expression the 'People of the
Saints of the Most High' (7,27) refers to Israel 10.
The discussion of the 'Son of Man' in the Book of Daniel is intermi-
nable ll . Here I shall confine myself to putting two guestions: (1) is the

8 P.R. DAVIES, Daniel (Sheffield, 1988), 63f, convincingly explains the problems of
chapter 11 and the enigmatic verse 11,1.
9 P.R. DAVIES, Daniel, 64f thinks that from 12,5 we have several additions to the
original sequence of visions.
10 The most recent treatments of this much-discussed problem: L. DEQUEKER, "The

'Saints of the Most High' in Qurnran and Daniel", OS 18 (1973), 108-187; J.J. COLLINS,
The Apocalyptic Vision, 123-132; 167ff; P.R. DAVIES, Daniel, 100-108 (with further refer-
ences). Above all DEQUEKER includes Qumran-material. Cf. also K. KOCH, Das Buch
Daniel, 234-239 and M. MÜLLER, Der Ausdruck 'Menschensohn' in den Evangelien (Acta
Theol. Dan. XVII, Leiden, 1984), 63-65.
11 An up-to-date survey of the modem discussion of the 'Son of Man' in Daniel is found

in M. MÜLLER, Der Ausdruck 'Menschensohn', 10-63.

118 BENEDIKT OTZEN

'Son of Man' a human being functioning as a symbol opposed to the four

beasts? or (2) is he an angel symbolizing the Kingdom of God? It makes
good sense to perceive the 'Son of Man' as a human being. As the worldly
empires are totally different from the Kingdom of God, so the be asts are
totally different from a human being. That kind of reasoning I have accepted
before l2 • But, on second thoughts, I think COLLINS is right in assuming that
the 'Son of Man' is an angelic figure connected with the Saints of the Most
High. As a matter of fact, the text is unambiguous: it does not mention a
human being but someone who looks like a human being (kebar ''''näsh) (Dan
7,13)13. Furthermore: there are good reasons to suppose that this manlike
angelic being is to be viewed as the Jewish equivalent of the 'princes of the
nations' - the Prince of Persia and the Prince of Greece mentioned in chapter
10. And this means that the 'Son of Man' in Dan 7 is to be identified with
Michael, Israel's guardian angel 14 •
This survey of the visions in the Book of Daniei has demonstrated the
following: as far as the angelo10gy of the Book is concerned, you meet with
1) an interpreting angel, Gabriel; 2) a fighting angel, functioning as the
guardian angel of Israel, Michael; 3) the Host of Heaven or the Saints of the
Most High, the ordinary angels, and 4) the guardian or tute1ary angels of the
nations (The Prince of Persia, the Prince of Greece) as figures parallel to
Michael, Israel' s tutelary angel.
In the following we shall concentrate on the two figures that are dominant
in the angelology of the Book of Daniel: Michael and Gabriel. A feature that
is common to them both is conspicuous in an Old Testament context: they
have names. There has been a development from the anonymous mal) ak
YHWH of the Old Testament to archangeis, individualized, with special
functions and with personal names. This development may have taken place

12Benedikt OTZEN, ludaism in Antiquity (Sheffield, 1990), 209f.

13A strong argument for the assumption that the 'Son of Man' is an angelie figure is
found precisely in the 'k' -formula': the angels in the visions of the Book of Daniei are gen-
era1ly introdueed with a formula with k' indicating their resemblanee to a human being:
8,15; 10,16.18 [see above p. 115 and note 4; see further J.J. COLLINS, The Apocalyptic
Vision, 142 and C. COLPE, Theol. Wörterbuch z. NT, 8 (1969), 423f]. Other and earlier
arguments for the angelie interpretation are eolleeted in M. MÜLLER, Der Ausdruck
'Menschensohn', 44-46.
14 The identification of the 'Son of Man' with Michael is found in J.J. COLLINS, The

Apocalyptic Vision, 144-147, cf. COLLINS' artic1e on the same subjeet: IBL 93 (1974), 50-
66; a broad argumentation for the identifieation is given in J. DAY, God's Conflict with the
Dragon and the Sea (Cambridge, 1985, repr. 1988), 151-178.
 MICHAEL AND GABRIEL 119

under foreign, perhaps Persian, perhaps also Babylonian, influence, and it is

always of great interest to trace foreign influence in Jewish religion 15 •
Here, however, I want to do something else: my intention is to trace in
the angelology of the Book of Daniel features that represent an interior
development, i.e.: features that have grown out of ideas or notions that can
be found in cIassical Israelite religion as we know it from the earlier books
of the Old Testament. This means that we shall try to indicate the basic
characters and the typical functions of these two angelic figures, and at the
same time we shall try to view them in a deeper Old Testament perspective.
First Michael. It seems rather obvious to try to understand Michael in the
light of the conception of the 'Divine W arrior', a notion that has been
developed by American scholars in recent years. Nevertheless, as far as I can
see, Patrick MILLER, who nearly twenty years aga wrote the principal work
on the Divine Warrior does not mention the figure of Michael - not even in
the short chapter on 'Some Post-Old Testament Developments', where he
treats texts from 1 Enoch, 2 Maccabees, and the Qumran War Serail; in
these texts he, above all' traces descriptions of God hirnself as the leader of
the heavenly armies, as a corollary of his observations in the earlier Old
Testament texts 16 • Neither does Patrick MILLER'S teacher, Frank Moore
CROSS, mention Michael in connection with the Divine Warrior 17 • But John
COLLINS does - not in his monograph on the Book of Daniel but in an
article from 1975 about "Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll".
In that article COLLINS traces the roots of the idea of Yahweh as Divine
Warrior in ancient Near East mythology. He finds them in the 'Götterkampf
as we know it from the Ugaritic texts, where the battles between Ba'al and
the other gods are described 18 • As a conspicuous feature in this 'Holy
War' -mythology COLLINS mentions the idea that war on earth between the

15 See e.g. W. BOUSSET, Die Religion des Judentums, 3. Aufl. hrsg. von H. GRESSMANN,
(Tübingen, 1926), 320-331 and 499f; D.S. RUSSELL, The Method and Message of Jewish
Apocalyptic (London, 1964),257-262; A. HULTGARD, "Das Judentum in der hellenistisch-
römischen Zeit und die iranische Religion", in: Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen
Welt, II, 19, 1 (Berlin, 1979),454-547.
16 Patrick D. MILLER, The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (Harvard Semit. Monogr. 5,

Cambridge Mass., 1973). The chapter on Post-OT Developments: pp. 141-144.

17 Frank M. CROSS, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Mass., 1973),

specially chapter 5 'The Divine Warrior' (pp. 92-111), and chapter 12 on Apocalyptics (pp.
326-346).
18 J.J. COLLINS, "The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War SerolI:

A Point of Transition in Jewish Apocalyptic", VT 25 (1975), 596-612. Patrick MILLER, of

course, treats the same Ugaritic material in his book (note 16), pp. 8-63.
120 BENEDIKT OTZEN

nations is seen as a reflection of the celestial war between the gods. Such
ideas are also met with in the Old Testament; COLLINS refers to e.g. 2 Kings
18,33; 19,12; Isa 24,21; 51,9-10. It is seen from these passages that the idea
survived in Israelite monotheism in more or less mythological raiment.
COLLINS traces the idea down into Early Judaism and ends at the passage in
the Book of Daniel we have already mentioned: Dan 1O,20f, where the battle
on earth is reflected in the struggle at the heavenly level between Michael
(and Gabriel, COLLINS adds!) on the one hand, and the princes of Persia and
Greece on the other. The gods of the ancient myth, he says, "have been
reduced to the status of !esser heavenly beings. So Michael, not Yahweh, is
the heavenly warrior who fights for Israel"19.
COLLINS does not expatiate on the figure of Michael in the Book of
Daniel, but concentrates in the following on the War Serail. He has,
however, a footnote where he mentions that 'the figure of Michael must be
seen as a development of the Prince of the Host of Yahweh who appears to
Joshua in Jos 5,13 and of the angel of the Exodus'20. The observation is
valuable; MILLER in his book treats Jos 5,13 at some length, but, oddly
enough, he does not see this line of development21 . MILLER, however, does
another thing: he mentions what he calls so me 'parallel passages' to Jos
5,13: in Jos 5,13 the 'Prince of the Host of Yahweh' is not called mal'ak
YHWH, but is only described as a man weharbö §elüfäh bejadö 'with his
sword drawn in his hand'. In the parallel texts we have a similar figure
explicitly characterized as mal'ak YHWH: Numbers 22,23 'the messenger of
Yahweh' stops Balaam in the road; also he is described as having 'his sword
drawn in his hand'. And precisely the same expressions are found in the
Chronicler's reproduction of the story of the threshing-floor of Araunah (1
Chron 21,16). Thus we have some connecting links from the 'Prince of the
Host of Yahweh' to the mal'äk with his sword and from there to the figure
of the fighting Michael.

COLLINS, VT 25 (1975), 597-600; the quotation p. 600f.

19

COLLINS, VT 25 (1975), 601.

20

21 Patrick MILLER, The Divine Warrior, pp. 128-131. Some ofthe commentaries on Jos

5,13 have seen the 'Prince of the Host of Yahweh' as aprefiguration of Michael (e.g. H.
HOLZINGER, Das Buch losua (Kurzer Hand-Comm. z. AT., VI, Tübingen, 1901), 12; W.
HERTZBERG, Die Bücher losua, Richter, Ruth (ATD 9, 2. AufI., Tübingen, 1959), 36f).
MILLER follows NOTH a.o. in seeing Jos 5,13-15 as a fragment of GilgaI's cult legend; as
a matter of fact the pericope has the elements that normally characterize cult legends cf.
Benedikt OTZEN, "Heavenly Visions in Early Judaism: Origin and Function", in: In the
Shelter oj Elyon (Ahlström-Festschrift, Sheffield, 1984), 200-202.
 MICHAEL AND GABRIEL 121

In the later rabbinic tradition, by the way, it is quite common to interpret

various martial angels figuring in Old Testament narratives as Michael: the
'Prince of the Host of Yahweh' Jos 5,13 is Michael; the angel stopping
Balaam Numbers 22,23 is Michael; it is Michael who goes out and kills
185.000 Assyrians in Sancherib's camp, etc. 22 These traditions are late, of
course. But together with the other material mentioned they can help us to
see the development from Yahweh as the divine warrior to a figure of a
fighting angel who represents Yahweh in his capacity of warrior and who
may even be seen as the 'warrior aspect' of Yahweh split off as an
independent figure, eventually being personalized as Michael.
We shall leave Michael and proceed with Gabriel. Also in this case it
would be possible to include comparative religio-historical material of a
mythological sort to throw light upon the figure of Gabriel. But again: we
shall try to look at hirn as a development of Jewish ideas, so we shall have
a closer look at his functions.
Gabriel to a much higher degree than Michael officiates as the classical,
Israelite mal' äk. As angelus interpres - and as such we saw hirn in most
cases in the Book of Daniel - he brings a divine message. He is a messen-
ger. But we can get a litde further: he does not only remind us of the
classical mal' äk, but also of the classical Israelite prophet. And a special
aspect of the Israelite prophet is important in this connection. The Divine
Warrior has been a central topic in modern Old Testament scholarship, and
so has the 'Divine Assembly', the idea that the heavenly world is structured
as an assembly or council of divine beings. As far as the prophet is
concerned, the idea is that the prophet is seen as a messenger that brings the
decision taken in the divine council to man. I cannot go into detail, and I
presume that the idea is well known. I shall refer only to two works: James
Ross' article in the Muilenburg Festschrift, and the monograph by E. Th.
MULLEN, The Divine Council from 1980 23 •
But we shall consider a few passages in the Book of Daniel that may
support the idea that Gabriel is seen as a messenger from the Divine

22 See L. GINZBERG, The Legends olthe lews (Philadelphia, 1909ft), IV, 7; VI, 173f.;
VI, 127; VI, 362f.
23 James F. Ross, "The Prophet as Yahweh's Messenger", in: Israel's Prophetie

Heritage (Muilenburg-Festschrift), ed. B.W. ANDERSON and W. HARRELSON (New York,

1962), 98-107 (reprinted in: Propheey in Israel, ed. by David L. PETERSEN (Philadelphia and
London, 1987), 112-121); E. Th. MULLEN, The Assembly 01 the Gods. The Divine Couneil
in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (Harvard Semit. Monogr. 24, Cambridge, Mass.
1980), esp. pp. 209-226.
122 BENEDIKT OTZEN

Assembly, that he is seen - more or less - as a prophet. Let us for a

moment move outside the vision-part of Daniel: chapter 4, about Nebukad-
nessar's insanity, has a conspicuous passage: in v. 10 (v. 13 in NEB) 'a
Watcher, a Holy One' commands the tree to be hewn down. And in v. 14
(v. 17 in NEB) we get the reason for this command: 'The issue has been
determined by the Watchers, and the sentence pronounced by the Holy
Ones'. The angels in the Heavenly Assembly have decided the fate of the
king.
Maybe we have the same idea in Dan 9,23, a passage at first sight
enigmatic: Gabriel says to Daniel: 'As you were beginning your supplica-
tions, a word went forth; this 1 have co me to pass on to you'. The verb 'go
forth' isjasa', the same verb used 1 Kgs 22,22 about the lying spirit 'going
forth' from the Divine Assembly to entice Ahab. So we may surmise that
the meaning of Dan 9,23 is: ' ... a word went forthJrom the Divine Assembly;
this 1 have come to pass on to you'. Similarly Dan 8,16: the heavenly voice
commanding Gabriel to interpret the vision apparently comes from Heaven
- from the Assembly or from God hirnself as head of the Assembly. In
chapter 10, v. 11 Gabriel says to Daniei: 'Stand up where you are, for I am
now sent to you', and he continues in v. 12: 'Your prayers have been heard,
and 1 have come in answer to them'. It can be God that has heard the
prayers and sent Gabriel. But it is likely that Gabriel was sent by the
Assembly also in this case.
Thus Gabriel is seen as a representative of the Heavenly Council or
Assembly. It fits weIl with 1 Enoch 20, where Gabriel is said to be 'over the
Paradise, the serpents and the cherubs', and with 1 Enoch 40, where he is
over the 'elementary angels'. He has a leading position in the Heavenly
Assembly, and it is natural that he should speak on behalf of the Assembly
- as the prophets did in earlier times.
Michael as the Divine Warrior, and Gabriel as the representative of the
Heavenly Assembly. If we look at them both in one perspective we, can say
that they meet, or rather that their functions meet in several of the stories in
Daniel: in chapter 7 the Heavenly Assembly functions as the Heavenly
Court. We saw Michael as 'the Son of Man', at the same time symbolizing
the Kingdom of God and representing Israel, the people of the Saints of the
Most High. The interpreting angel was given no name, but he could be
Gabriel, as he is the interpreting angel elsewhere in the Book of Daniel.
In chapter 10 - according to the interpretation I tried to carry through -
Gabriel comes to Daniel with a message from the Divine Assembly. And in
the last part of the chapter Daniel is confronted with Michael as the fighting
 MICHAEL AND GABRIEL 123

angel who will be at God's side in the final battle against the worldly
powers. And again in chapter 12 we see them in their typical functions:
Michael fighting and Gabriel explaining to Daniel the divine decisions about
the end. The two angelic figures supplement each other neatly in the Book
of Daniei; there are no traces of the 'competition' between them, that is
found in later pseudepigraphic and rabbinic texts24 •

*
If we try to sum up the view of angelology in Jewish apocalyptic apart from
the Book of Daniel, we shall see that it is dominated by two themes: (1) the
Fall of the Angels, and (2) the idea of elementary angels, in the New
Testament called exousiai, dynameis, etc., i.e. angels that have their special
functions in maintaining world order. Those ideas are not found in the Book
of Danie1 25 •
Most interesting is the relationship between the angelology of the Book
of Daniel and Qumran angelology. These manifold problems have been
treated in some detail by several scholars26 • Not least in the War Seroil is
it obvious that Qumran theology combines angelology with the dualistic
teaching in a special way: Michael is not only - as in the Book of Daniel -
the 'Prince of Israel', but he is also the leader of the Sons of Light in the
final battle when the end of the world is approaching. And the nations
represent the Sons of Darkness under the leadership of the fallen angel
Beliar. The idea about the 'angels of the nations' that we met with in the
Book of Daniel here obtains a 'cosmic dimension', to use COLLINS'
expression. But as the Sons of Light are identified with the true Israel, the
distance between the angelology of Daniel and the angelology of the
Qumran writings is not greae7 •

24 See The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. James H. CHARLESWORTH, vol 1

(London, 1983), 136, note e, and L. GINZBERG, The Legends ofthe Jews, V, 4f (note 8).
25 About angelology in Early Judaism see e.g. W. BOUSSET, Religion des Judentums,
3. Aufl. (1926), 320-342, and D.S. RUSSELL, The Method and Message of Jewish
Apocalyptic (London, 1964), 235-262.
26 E.g. DEQUEKER (above note 10), and COLLINS (above note 18); further: Peter VON

DER OSTEN-SACKEN, Gott und Belial (SUNT 6, Göttingen, 1969), 30-34, and G.
BAMPFYLDE, "Tbe Prinee of Host in the Book of Daniel and the Dead Sea Serolls", JSJ 14
(1983), 129-134.
27 See above aJI VON DER OSTEN-SACKEN (note 26), 33f who emphasizes this view.
124 BENEDIKT OTZEN

Finally, a few words about the Book of Daniei in the Old Testament
canon. Also this problem has - perhaps somewhat indirectly - a connection
to the question of angelology. When the problem of Daniel in the canon is
on the agenda, scholars mostly discuss whether Daniei belongs in the
Prophets or in the Writings. Aage BENTZEN, in his commentary, discusses
whether Daniel was first placed among the Prophets and was later removed
to the Writings by the rabbis, or whether (the possibility adhered to by most
scholars) Daniel was so late that the collection of prophetie books was
closed, and he was placed in the Writings28 • I would rather put another
question: why was precisely the Book of Daniel accepted in the Jewish
canon and not any of the other apocalyptic writings, so me of them even
older than Daniel (parts of 1 Enoch)? As already said, it has to do with
angelology: the more elaborate angelology in apocalyptic literature is given
in the heavenly visions or in the descriptions of heavenly journeys. The
chosen persons, Enoch, Levi, Baruch or whoever, were allowed to obtain
insight into the heavenly world. Thus they were able to give descriptions of
the systems of heavens and of the heavenly hierarchy of angels. They could
give details about the various angels, their functions and their fields of
jurisdiction. This means that the visionary acquires insight into the divine
world-order and into the heavenly secrets.
Nothing of the kind is found in the Book of Daniel. As we have seen, in
his visions Daniel is confronted with the 'Host of the Most High', i.e. the
myriads of unspecified angels, and besides them he meets Michael end
Gabriel, whose functions are deeply rooted in Old Testament tradition. They
do not escort Daniel through the seven heavens, neither do they inform
Daniei about the contents of the various heavens, about the power and
domain of specific angels, nor about the secrets of the movements of the
celestial bodies. The information Daniel obtains has exclusively to do with
the secrets of history. Those who formed the Jewish canon perceived that
with his concentration on history Daniel - in spite of his obvious visionary
gifts - was related to the classical Israelite prophet to quite another degree
than genuine visionaries like Enoch and Baruch, who with their heavenly
visions and journeys ventured into areas where only angels need not fear to
tread. Therefore Daniel was admitted into canon, but the others were kept
oue9 •

28 Aa. BENTZEN, Daniel (Handb. z. AT 1,19,2. Aufl., Tübingen, 1952),5; cf. K. KOCH,

Das Buch Daniel, 28-29.

29 See further about this problem in Benedikt OTZEN, ludaism in Antiquity, 163.
 SOME REMARKS ON A NEWL Y FOUND
SYRIAC TEXT OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH

BY

J.P.M. van der Ploeg

Nijmegen. The Netherlands

When I was collecting material for my book The Christians of St. Thomas
and their Syriac Manuscripts l , I discovered in the library of the Catholic
Syro-Malankara Bishop's house at Trivandrum (Kerala / India) a badly
damaged manuscript with various texts and amongst them a Syriac one of
the book of Judith 2 • The large volume (29112 x 18112 cm.) had been
partially eaten by worms, which had dug large holes in it, but fortunately
the 33 pages of Judith (f. 123r - 129r) were intact. A colophon at the end
of the text (f. 139r) indicates that it was copied in 1734 A.D., most
probably by a Catholic priest or deacon, who does not mention his name.
The text may be translated as follows:

This holy book was completed and finished in the days

of the corporeal Cherub and bodily Seraf and angel in the flesh
Mar John Baptist Mary, Apostöliqa of all
Hindö and Gögin, of the order of the discalced Cannelites,
and in the days
of the govemment of Mar Antönis, Metropolitan
of all Hendö, of the order of the Jesuits. Our Lord
may make long their days, as Metusalal).
Amen
I have written this in the holy church of Mar Thoma,
the blessed Apostle, which is calle1 in Indian
Mattam, and is called the region of the north,
and of Nambudimar, king of Talapilly,
in the year 1734
of Christ our Lord.

I J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG, The Christians of St. Thomas and their Syriac Manuscripts

(Bangalore / India, 1983, xvii + 301 pp.).

2 For adescription of the manuscript, see op. cit., 87-88.
126 J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG

The three names in 1ines 12 and 13 of the colophon are written in Mala-
yalam Garshuni (Malayalam written in Syriac characters and some other
ones). Metropolitan Mar Philexinos, formerly of Thozhiur, transcribed
them for me. In January 1988 I was able to visit the place where the
manuscript had been copied. The copyist must have worked in the
presbytery of an old Syro-Malabar church, on the entrance arch of which
is proudly painted that it was (first) built in 140 A.D. It is situated c. 13
km NNW of Trichur, a Roman Catholic Chaldean centre in the midd1e of
Kerala. I took photographs of the manuscript, a copy of which I gave to
the Peshitta Institute of Leyden University, which is pub1ishing a critical
edition of the Old Testament in Syriac. Because its text of Judith has not
yet appeared, I did not make a definitive study of the text for this article.
But I published a (not too bad) photographic edition of it, with a transla-
tion and some notes, in the Publications of the St. Ephrem Ecumenical
Research Institute3 • The director of the Institute is the Rev. Dr. Jacob
Thekeparampil, who studied in Paris and in Germany. In this study we
quote the pages and lines of the text, not the folios of the manuscript.

1. THE BOOK OF JUDITH

The newly found Syriac text of Judith is interesting for various reasons. It
seems clear that it was brought to India by Catho1ic priests or monks,
possibly by one of the monks of the Lebanon who were sent by the
Roman Congregation of the Propaganda Fidei to Kerala (as I shall
henceforth call the country, formally called by the Europeans "Malabar" -
now only the name of a part of the Indian state of Kerala). We know that
some Maronites were sent to South India in 16604 • I suspect that it was
these Maronites who invented the Malayalam Garshuni. In their country
Arabic was written in Syriac characters, and they may have wanted this
example to be followed, mutatis mutandis, in Kerala. As far as I can see,
the book of Judith did not belong to the canon of the books of the Old
Testament in the "Church of the East" (= the Nestorian Church). I did not
find any other copy of it amongst the Syriac manuscripts, as I indicated at
the beginning of this study. At the end, immediately after Judith, follow

3 J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG, The Book o/ludith (SEERl, Baker Hili, Kottayam 686001

/India, 1991, 53 + 38 pp.).

4 See my The Christians 0/ St. Thomas, 243.
 SOME REMARKS ON A SYRIAC TEXT OF JUDITH 127

Romans and 1 Cor 1,1-10,18. In a manuscript the available space had to

be used and there was no room for the remainder of 1 Corinthians.
Judith Syr has not been the subject of any special study, which makes
it difficult to judge its textual problems. For this we have to await the
publication of the text by the Leyden Peshitta Institute. Therefore I shall
only give some notes.
The Leyden List of Old Testament Peshitta Manuscripts (1961) men-
tions 37 biblical manuscripts containing the text of Judith, and the various
Supplements published in Vetus Testamentum mention a few more. The
oldest one is the famous Ceriani manuscript of Milan (6th cent.), which
contains the complete text.
As far as I know, the Syriac text of Judith has been published four
times: in the Polyglot of WALTON, in Paul DE LAGARDE's Libri Veteris
Testamenti Apocryphi Syriace (1861; pp. 102-126), in the Mosul Peshitta
(1887; reprint Beirut 1951) and in the photolithographic edition of the
Ceriani manuscript (1878). Leo HAEFEU 5 dedicates only 8 lines to both
the books of Tobit and Judith. In the commentaries on Judith 6 there is
hardly a word on the Syriac Judith. This is certainly a gap in our knowl-
edge, because Judith is a highly interesting book and deserves to be
studied not only in the Greek and Latin versions, but in the Syriac text as
weIl. It is a pity that A.M. DUBARLE, O.P. 7 does not pay attention to the
Syriac text. All this may be due to the fact that the Protestant and
Nestorian editions (under Protestant influence) of the Syriac Old Testa-
ment omit Judith with the other deuterocanonical books. I proposed one
of my students to write a thesis on the Judith text of Trivandrum, but the
proposal has not been taken up.
The original Aramaic of the Hebrew text of Judith is lost. At Qumrän
there is no trace of it. The oldest texts we have are Greek ones. The
Syriac translations are depending on Greek manuscripts. For his transla-
tion of Judith (now in the Vulgate) St. Jerome used an Aramaic text, as
he did for his translation of Tobit; because he did not know enough
Aramaic, this text had first been translated for hirn into Hebrew. How-
ever, Jerome may have used a Hebrew text of Judith, because the Greek

5 Leo HAEFELI, Die Peschitta des Alten Testaments mit Rücksicht auf ihre textkriti-
sche Bearbeitung und Herausgabe (Altt. Abh. XI, I, Münster i.W., 1927).
6 The last one by Carey A. MOORE (AB, New York, 1985), and a fonner one by

M.S. ENSLIN (Leiden, 1972).

7 In his ludith, Formes et sens des diverses traditions (2 val., AnBib 24, Rome,
1966).
128 J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG

version is a translation of a Hebrew Vorlage, as we shall see. Jerome's

translation is very free and has to be used with great caution for textcri-
tical purposes 8 •
The book of Judith has the form of a novel, very possibly written in
the second century B.C. Though some historical details may be accurate,
as a wh oie it is not a historical book. This is dear from its style (novel),
its general contents and the beginning verses. In these verses the great
war, described in the book, is said to have been waged at the command
of Nabuchodonosor (NebQkadne~ar) "king of the Assyrians" in Nineveh.
Every Jew knew that NebQkadne~ar, one of the great historical enemies
of the Jews (as in later times Antiochus Epiphanes and Hitler) was king
of Babel, quite a number of years after the Assyrian empire had disap-
peared (Nineveh was destroyed in 612, NebQkadne~ar was king of Babel
from 604-561). To present NebQkadne~ar as king of Assyria in Nineveh
was a cryptic key for the reader that somebody else was meant, most
probably Antiochus Epiphanes. This makes it dear from the beginning
that the intention of the author of the book was not to unearth ancient
history. He wrote a book to encourage the Jews of his time in their
struggle against foreign oppressors and to teach them how they should
behave, i.e. to have confidence in God who will save his people, even by
extraordinary means, and to observe the law. The name of the heroine,
Judith, is not without meaning; outside the book it occurs only once in
the Old Testament, Gen 24,36, where Judith is the daughter of a Hittite
and a wife of Esau.
The book of Judith is one of the first novels in the Old Testament and
(if only for this reason) of considerable merit. The book of Tobit is
another one. The copyists of this kind of book did not feel bound to
reproduce them literally. On the contrary, they feit free to embellish them,
to add some words or even passages and to omit other ones. For this
reason it is still impossible to reconstruct the original text of a book like
Tobit of which the edition of RAHLFS (1935) presents two parallel texts.
This should be borne in mind when the question of the original text of
Judith is raised.

8 See J.N.D. KELLY, Jerome (London, 1975), 285, and F. KAULEN, Geschichte der

Vulgata (Mainz, 1868), 91.

 SOME REMARKS ON A SYRIAC TEXT OF mDITH 129

After the Polyglot of WALTON9 the flrst complete edition of the Syriac
'Bible' which contains the book of Judith is the Peshitta of Mosul lO • P.
DE LAGARDE published a rather small number of variants of the lost
Syro-Hexaplaric text. For a well-founded judgment on the value and
possible origin of the Trivandrum text (henceforth cited as Tr, the Ceriani
ms. as Cer, the Mosul edition as Mo) we have to await the publication of
Judith in the Leyden Peshitta.
The text of Tr is divided into sl).an€ (sections), like the other books of
the Peshitta, which do not always coincide with the chapters of the
Vulgate. Tr has 16 of them, as the Vulgate has, but not all of them
coincide with those of the Vulgate.
The most interesting deviation of Judith from the tradition al text is
found in the beginning of the book, where "Nebukadnesar of Assyria" is
identified with the Persian king Ahslras (Tr p. 1, line 21/22; compare
ibid. line 4). With this Ahslras is meant Xerxes I (of Ezra 4,6 and Est
1,lss.). In those texts the name of the king is written 'hswr(w)S ("Aha-
sverus"), but in Est 10,1 the ktfb reads 'hsrs (in Persian the name is
hSajarsa). In Tr the orthography is closest to the Persian and Est 10,1.
In the Peshitta of Est 1,1 etc, the king is called 'hUrs. AMiras is
clumsily introduced in the text of Tr:

In the twelfth year of the reign of Nebukadnesar, king of the Assyrians, who was
king in Nineve, that large town, in the days of Arpaksad, who was king over the
Medes at Eqbatana, a town of Media, a war broke out between those two kings,
whilst Al)siraS was king over the Persians, having great power over the Persians and
the Chaldeans and the Assyrians, and from India to Egypt. He wished to conquer and
to occupy also the country of the Medes ... And the country of the Medes was not
subject to the king of the Persians '" (Tr I, 1-11).

In 1, 21/2 the identification is clear: "And in those days Nebfikadnesar,

that is (awkh) Al).siras, waged war against king Arpaksad ... " Later in
the text there is no further mention of Xerxes but only of Nebfikadnesar.
The other variants of Tr are of minor importance compared with the
one mentioned above, but this does not mean that they are devoid of
interest. The character of Tr as a translation of a Greek text (very often a
slavish one) is clear and does not need to be proved in this study. But the
Greek Vorlage was not the one published by RAHLFS or HANHART. A

9Vol. IV, 1657; reprinted in 1964.

Vol. I 1887; reprinted in 1951 in Beirut. Judith is reprinted from the CERIANI
IO

manuscript, with some minor corrections made by the editors.

130 J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG

number of variants, noted by HANHART, point to another Greek Vorlage.

This means that at least some variants cannot be attributed to the transla-
tor (= Tr). In the following pages we present a small anthology of them.
The text of HANHART ll will be cited as G.
The translation of G 1,1 to 1,2 is abrupt and not grammatically correct;
the same, though to a lesser extent, is true of Mo. But in Tr the style is
good. Tr. 1, 4-11 are missing in Cer, Mo, Gr and in the text St. Jerome
had before hirn, but his Latin is impeccable.
There are also differences with regard to the measures of the wall of
Qaptan (Ecbatana), as can be seen from the following scheme:

G: stones: 3 x 6 cubits
wall: height 70 cubits, breadth 50 cubits
towers of the gates: 100 x 60 cubits
gates: 70 x 40 cubits.

Cer, Mo: stones: 3 x 6 cubits

wall: 70 cubits high
towers of the gates: 100 cubits high
breadth of the gates: 60 cubits
doors and door-post: 60 x 40 cubits

Tr: stones: 3 x 6 cubits

wall: 70 x 50 cubits
towers all around the wall: 80 x 60 cubits
towers of the gates: 100 x 80 cubits
doors: 60 x 40 cubits.

In the Greek edition of HANHART some variants are noted. A comparison

of the three texts indicates that they are not direcdy dependent upon each
other. Tr adds to the description of the wall the mention of the (defens-
ive) towers between the various gates; a strong wall of a big city used to
have these.
Tr 1,21. Literally: "And made war in those days king Nebukadneliar,
that is AhSlras, against Arpaksad, king". In its order of the words Tr
closely follows G, whereas in Mo it is more natural 0,5): "And in those

11 R. HANHART, Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum auctoritate Academiae

Scientiarum Gottingensis, VIIU4, 1979.

 SOME REMARKS ON A SYRlAC TEXT OF JUDITH 131

days made war Nebfikadnesar, king, against Arpaksad, king". This is an

indication that Tr is dependent on its Greek Vorlage. There are more
examples of this; one is the quite superfluous use of the Syriae pronoun
haw, e.g. in Tr 1,5: kd 'hSyrs mn mlk haw dprsy' "when Ahsiras was king
of the Persians". It is weIl known that in a eertain period of its literary
history Syriae made a redundant use of pronouns, particles, ete., to imitate
the Greek style. But here we find that pronouns are used which Cer and
Mo do not have, but which are found in G.
Tr 1,21/22. The plain which is ealled in G and Vulgate Ragau, and in
Cer and Mos Dora, is ealled in Tr Rag '0. Here again Tr follows the
Greek tradition, whereas it transeribes the Greek gamma with and 'ayin,
as is often done, even nowadays.
Tr 1,28. For 'Chaldeans' G has XEAeOUÖ (with variants), but Tr and Mo
kldy'.
Tr 2,2. In Tr Damascus gets its Greek name, as in G, but in Cer, Mo it
is ealled Darmesoq.
Tr 2,3. 'Near the seashore' is in G 1((X'tI'L 1tp6crol1toV T11~ 1tapaA.{a~, clearly
a translation from a Semitie original, which must have been written in
Hebrew 'al pne ha-yäm. This was too bad for the Syriac translators; Cer,
Mo: 'al yad yamma, but Tr: 'l spr' ym'.
Tr 2,17. Tr slavishly follows G, translating crq,6öpa by sgy, plaeing it at
the end of the sentenee, as in the Greek text. Here the Syriae of Cer, Mo
is definitely better: w'thmt (b nbwkdn~r.
Tr 3,18. The name of the 'Assyrian' general is written 'wlp'rn " as
everywhere else in Tr; Mo ' elparna; G OA.Oq,~pvll~. In Tr the orthography
of the name deviates from G in the third syllable. We transeribe oLOpärna
rather the uWparna, because of the Greek and Latin transeriptions of the
name as (H)olofernes. The name is Persian and in the seeond eentury
B.C. there was a Cappadoeian king of that name l2 •
Tr 4,3/4. 'dm' lywm' dmsknwthwn; in Cer and Mo last word: mksnwthwn;
Gr tAewoi). The wording in Tr is clearly due to a seribal error.
Tr 4,28. dtwr' dr'gye; Cer, Mo (urä d'agne. G (ed. HANHART) omits
the name, but in a Greek manuseript and some Latin ones a name like
agne has been preserved, though not the Ragayye of Tr. The mountain is

12 See SCHÜRER-VERMES, The History 0/ the Jewish People in the Age 0/ Jesus
Christ, HIlI (Edinburgh, 1986), 218; see also SCHÜRER, Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes
im Zeitalter Jesu Christi III (Leipzig, 1909), 233.
132 J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG

said to be to 'the left' (= the north, a Hebraism) of Upper Cilicia. Tr's

deviation from the tradition is enigmatic.
Tr 6,28. The name of the town, called Bethulia in the Vulgate, Batt'\)-
Aoua in G, is written Bet Ulwa, but in Cer and Mo it is always Bh Palo,
for which HANHART (LXX edition) refers to BOGAERT, Rev. Benedictine
78 (1968), 190 13 .
Tr l5,3ff. The genealogy of Judith is different in the various texts. Tr
mentions no fewer than 19 generations, Mos 16 and G (ed. HANHART)
also 16. Not all are identical, as can be seen from the following synopsis:

JUDITH

Tr Mos G Vulg

Merari Merari Merari Merari

'Uz 'Us n~ Idox
Joseph Joseph Joseph Joseph
'Uzi'el 'Uzll Uziel Oziae
Belqana Alqana Elkia Elai
Banan Banan Ananiou Jamnor
Ged'on Geb'on Gedeon Gedeon
Rapsin Rapnin Raphain Raphaim
Al).itob Al).itob Akitho Achitob
EllhO Na'in Eliou
Belqiya Xelkiou Melchiae
Ellb Eliab Enan
Malkiya Malkiya
'Ir 'Ir
Natani'€l Natanya Natanel Nathanael
Sleml'el SalmO el Salamiel Salatiel
Surisday Sarasaday
Sem'on Sem'on Simeon
Israel Israel Israel Ruben

Tr 15, 27/28. The words "if the Lord does not show them mercy" are
not in Mo, G.

13 The reference is to M. BOGAERT, "La version latine du livre de Judith dans la

premiere Bible d' Alcala", Revue Benedictine 78 (1968), 7-32; 181-212.

 SOME REMARKS ON A SYRIAC TEXT OF JUDITH 133

Tr 16,5. "In these five days" is not found in Mo 8, I 0 and "five days"
is left out in G, where some manuscripts have it and also Vulgo "Five
days" must have been original in G, but was soon lost in most of the
manuscripts. It seems that Tr here follows an old Greek text. But it may
also be that Tr has corrected its Greek Vorlage.
Tr 16,7. "That you tempt God today"; the last word is found in G but
not in Mo.
Tr 16,8. "That you stand amongst men in the place of God" is also
found in G, but in Mo 8,11 and Cer (8,12): "and you became gods
amongst men". The plural 'gods' is found in Cer, Mos. The expression
seems to have been too strong for the Greek translator, followed in this
by Tr.
Tr 16,11. "... which no man can ever know or understand" is in
conformity with G, Cer "which no man can ever know or understand";
Mo mistakenly leaves out the negation.
G 8,25 1tUP~ 'tuiYra 1tw'tu surely means "on account of all this" (so also
ENSLIN), but the Syriac translator understood rrapa as 'above ... ', a
meaning which is not in accordance with the context and proves that our
Syriac texts (Tr, Cer, Mo) are translations from the Greek.
Tr 19,2l. "and she washed her mouth with water". The same in Cer,
Mo. Instead of 'mouth', G 10,3 reads OUlJlU 'body', which must be correct.
But some mss. mistakenly read 0"t6Jlu, which was the Vorlage of our
Syriac translations. Here again we see that both Syriac translations depend
on a Greek Vorlage which is not represented by the great majority of the
manuscripts. This should lead to further research.
Tr 23,2 and Mo 11,12 avoid to say that the people of lerusalem
already started to eat unclean food, whereas according to the text of G
11,14 the inhabitants of lerusalem had already begun to eat food which
was forbidden to them.
Tr 26,5. According to this text and Mo l3,6 ludith was standing near
the head of Holofernes; according to G l3,4 she was standing near his
bed. One Greek ms. and the Vulgate also have head.
Tr 27,3/4. The mosquito net had fallen and Holofernes was lying on it;
according to G Holofernes was lying in (= under) the net, according to
Mo 13,19 he had fallen on the mosquito net in his drunkenness 14 •

14 In my translation, ap. eil., p. 45 line 2 "which had fallen" is to be read "on which

he had fallen" (printer's error).

134 J.P.M. V AN DER PLOEG

Tr 28,7/8. "Blessed are you in the wh01e peop1e"; id. Mo, with minor
variants. G 14,7 " ... in every tent of ludah and in every nation".
Tr 28,17-18. Ozi sent runners to four townships in Israel: "Bet Tu-
masta, Abel-maim, Buba and Q'ila, and to all the territories of Israel, to
announce to them what had happened" (the death of Holofernes); Mo
19,5 does not mention the names of the places; G 15,4 has only three
names: "Baitomasthaim, Chobai, Kola and the whole territory of Israel".
Tr 29,2. The high priest is called Elyqim, in Mo 10uaqim, in G IOa-
keim.
Tr 29,5 and Mo: "and when they went out to meet her (= ludith)"; G
"And when they went in to her". Ther variant is significant: according to
the Greek text men entered the house of a woman; for the Syriac transla-
tors (or their "Vorlage") ludith went out to meet the men, she could not
receive them in her house.
In the foregoing pages we have mentioned only a small number of
variants, enough to show that the Trivandrum text of ludith has a value of
its own. It has its own place in the tradition of text and versions of the
book.

2. SOME PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS

The Vorlage of the Greek translation was a Hebrew text, not an Aramaic
one. In general Tr closely follows his Greek Vorlage, which is not the
same as that published by RAHLFS and HANHART.
The Syriac translator, or the person who prepared his Vorlage was a
man with a critical mind; he did not wish to present Nebukadne~ar to his
readers as king of Assyria, but proposed to see in hirn the Persian king
Xerxes, known to the readers of Esther and Ezra.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41

BY

A. Hilhorst

Groningen, The Netherlands

In the third and fourth chapters of the apocrypha1 book entitled I Esdras
in the Septuagint and III Esdras in the Vu1gate, we have the charming
story of the bodyguards of king Darius. Three youths engage in a contest
in which the winner will be the one who will have given the most
convincing answer to the question: what is the strongest? They p1ead their
respective cases before the king and his dignitaries. The first speaker
argues in favour of wine, the second of the king, the third of women. The
last named, however, does not 1eave it at that, but immediate1y proceeds
to prove that there is something still stronger, name1y truth. The winner
of the conquest, who is no other than Zerubbabe1, is invited by the king
to ask whatever he wishes in addition to the price stated; so he chooses
that Darius rebuild Jerusa1em and the Temple and send back its vessels.
The story is generally recognized as being an interpolation. Not only that:
within it, the speech on truth is again an interpolation for it makes the
section on women meaning1ess. Why, then, was it inserted?
W. RUDOLPH 1 conceives the genesis of our story as follows. The
original version (1 Esdras 3,16-4,33.42) was a piece of Greek entertain-
ment literature. Sometime this was located at the Persian court. Later on a
thoughtfu1 man, who judged the story too 1ight-hearted as it was, enriched
it with a dignified 'philosophical' closure: the plea for truth (4,34-41). He
was a pagan; a Jew wou1d have talked about God as the supreme power
in a personal way, not have presented Hirn as abstract aA1'\8ncx. The
version of the story thus enlarged (3,1-4,42) was used by a Jew in order
to explain why Darius I was so generous towards the Jews, a fact he
knew from the canonical Book Ezra, ch.6: he in his turn added 4,43-5,6.
This final version was inserted into 1 Esdras in spite of resulting incon-

1 W. RUDOLPH, "Der Wettstreit der Leibwächter des Darius 3 Esr 31 - 56'" Z4.W 61

(1945-1948), 176-190, esp. 178-182; id., Esra und Nehemia samt 3. Esra (Handbuch
zum Alten Testament 120, Tübingen, 1949), V-VIII.
136 A. HILHORST

sistencies. K.-F. POHLMANN 2 in a number of respects agrees with this

image, but he seeks the provenance of the original story rather in Oriental
or even Israelitic-lewish circles. As to the passage on truth, he is pretty
sure that it was written by a lew, first because of the many agreements it
shows with Old Testament passages, and second because this explains
why it was added at aB: by making the third youth speak about the divine
truth he characterized hirn as a lew.
As POHLMANN admits, the origin of the story is hard to establish, since
there was a continuous interaction between the Greek world and the Near
East; motifs might wander to both sides 3 • Linguistic analysis does not
settle the question either. Many scholars, especially e.e.
TORREY, have
drawn attention to what they suppose to be Aramaisms, but conclusive
proof has not been fumished. Even the crown witness, 'tö'te in the sense of
'then, thereupon', occurs in such Greek texts as the Gospel of Luke and
the Acts of the Apostles4 •
Therefore we will leave the issue of the original language, which is not
material to our discussion, undecided. More important is the questio as to
who was responsible for the addition of the speech on truth. Here POHL-
MANN's case seems to be definitely stronger. In fact it is hardly credible
that a story with asolid structure such as the contest about wine, king and
women should be distorted by making three orators plead four cases, if
the only motive to do so was dissatisfaction with its frivolity. If, on the

2 K.-F. POHLMANN, Studien zum dritten Esra. Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem

ursprünglichen Schluß des chronistischen Geschichtswerkes (FRLANT 104, Göttingen,

1970),37-52; id., 3. Esra-Buch (JSHRZ 1,5, Gütersloh, 1980),381-382.
3 POHLMANN 1970 (n.2), 41 n.30. For the spread of the motif under discussion cf. S.

THOMPSON, Motif-Index of Folk-Literature. A Classijication of Narrative Elements in

Folktales. Ballads. Myths. Fables. Mediaeval Romances. Exempla, Fabliaux. Jest-Books
and Local Legends III (Copenhagen, 1956), 436 (H631.5), V (Copenhagen, 1957), 548
(Z42.1); W.R. GOOOMAN, A Study of I Esdras 3:1-5:6 (Diss. Duke, 1972), 164-216. For
Greek interest in this type of tales, cf. WJ. FROLEYKS, Der dymv A6yrov in der antiken
Literatur, Diss. Bonn 1973, 40-86 (Weisheitsagone; 70-72 the 1 Esdras story). Cf. also
A. Loos, Histoire de La litterature hebrai'que et juive depuis les origines jusqu'a la ruine
de !'etat juif (135 apres J.-c.) (Bibliotheque Historique, Paris, 1950), 952-953.
4 Cf. C.C. TORREY, Ezra Studies (Chicago, 1910; reprint New York, 1970, with a
"Prolegomenon" by W.F. STINESPRING), 20-25.50-56. On the contrary, W. RUOOLPH
1949 (n.!), VIII-X, champions a Greek original of the story. On 'tö'te, cf. POHLMANN
1970 (n.2), 49; P.-M. BOGAERT, "Relecture et refonte historicisantes du livre de Daniel
attestees par la premiere version grecque (Papyrus 967)", in R. KUNTZMANN - J.
SCHLOSSER (eds.), Etudes sur le judai'sme hellenistique. Congres de Strasbourg (1983)
(Lectio Divina 119, Paris, 1984), 197-224, esp. 220-223. Cf. also Latin tum 'then,
thereupon', e.g. Virgil Aen.5,500; Tacitus Germ.22; Hist.2,49; P.G.W. GLARE (ed.),
Oxford Latin Dictionary (Oxford, 1982), s.v.8a.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 137

other hand, the addition had a vital function in a larger context, as it has
in POHLMANN'S theory, it can be tolerated in spite of its spoiling the
original structure. Yet also POHLMANN' s view has a weak side. He too
easily waves aside RUOOLPH'S argument of abstract äA.f(9Wl as the
supreme power. It is this topic I should like to examine in the present
article.

1. 1 Esdras 34-41

First, then, let us have a look at the passage in question 5•

34.• AVOPE~, ouXt tO"Xupat crl YUVatKE~; IlEy(lAT] 1'\ yI), Kat u'JlTlA.ö~ Ö oupavö~,
KUt 'tUXU~ 't<V OPÖIlQl ö 1'tAtO~, Ö'tl O"'tP~<I>E't(lt t.v 't<V lCÜKA.cp 'to'\) oupavo'\) Kat
7tc<tALV (mo'tp~XEt Et~ 'tÖV t.UU'tO'\) 'tÖ7tOV tv Ilt~ 1'\1l~P«;l. 35. ouXt Il~ya~ O~ 'tu'\)'tu
7tOtEt; Kat 1'\ <'xAf(9EtU IlEy(lAT] Kat to"XUP0't~pu 7tUptt 7tc<tv'tu. 36. 7tl'to"U 1'\ yI) 't1'\v
aAft9Etav KUAEt, Kat ö oupavö~ uu't1'\v EUAo)'Et, Kat 7tc<tv'tu 'ttt ~pyu O"UE'tat Kat
'tP~IlEt, Kat OUK ~O"'tlV J.1E't. UU'tO'\)6 i'tOtKOV ouo~v. 37. l'tOtKO~ ö O{VO~, l'tOtKO~ Ö
ßumAEf>~, l'tOtKOl crl YUVatKE~, l'tOtKOt nav'tE~ oi utot 'tUlV av9p6mwv, Kat l'tOlKa
nav'tu 'ttt ~pya UU'tUlV, nav'tu 'ttt 'tOta'\)'tu· Kat OUK ~O"'tlV tv UU'tor~ äA.f(9nu,
KUt tv 't1) aotldr,x UU'tUlV anoAo'\)V'tut. 38. 1'\ ~ aAf(9Etu ~VEt Kat tO"xf>Et Et~ 'töv
crlUlVU Kat Cl1 Kat KPU'tEt Et~ 'tÖV crlUlVU 'tO'\) crlUlVO~. 39. Kat OUK ~O"'tlV nup·
uu't1) AUIlßavEtV npöO"wnu ouo~ Otc<t<l>opu, aAAtt 'ttt OfKatU nOlEt anö nav'tlOv
'tUlV !'xÖfKWV Kat nOVT]pUlV· Kat nav'tE~ EUOOKo'\)mv 'tot~ ~P)Ul~ uu'tft~, 40. Kat
7
OUK ~O"'tlV tv 't11 KpfO"Et UU't1'l~ OUO~V l'tOtKOV. Kat a1Yt11 1'\ to"XU~ Kat 'tö
ßUcrtAEtOV KUt 1'\ t.~oumu Kat 1'\ IlEyaAEtÖ'tT]~ 'tUlV nav'twv crl6:Jvwv. EUAoY'l'tÖ~ ö
9EÖ~ 'tft~ äA.T]9Efu~. 41. Kat tm6:J1tT]O"EV 'tO'\) AuAEtV· Kat nl't~ ö AUÖ~ 'tÖ'tE
t.<I>6:JVT]O"EV, KUt 'tO'tE dnav MEy(lAT] 1'\ aAf(9Etu Kat unEptO"Xf>H.

34. "Men, are not wornen strong? Great is the earth, high is heaven, and swift is the
sun in his course, for he rnoves around his circuit of the heavens and returns again to
his place in a single day. 35. Is not he who does these things great? But8 truth is
great and stronger than all things. 36. The whole earth calls on truth, heaven praises

5 I follow the text of R. HANHART (ed.), Esdrae libu I (Septuaginta VIII,I, Göttin-

gen, 1991 2 ). Cf. id., Text und Textgeschichte des 1. Esrabuches (Abhandlungen der
Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse 3,92,
Göttingen, 1974). Earlier scholarly editions include those by A. RAHLFS (1935), A.E.
BROOKE - N. McLEAN - H. ST J. THACKERAY (1935), and S.S. TEDESCHE (1928).
6 V.!. uU'tiK
7 Vv.ll. ut'>'tT], uU'tft~.

8 For this rendering of Ka{ cf. J.D. DENNISTON, The Greek Particles (Oxford,

1954),292; W. BAUER - K. ALAND - B. ALAND, Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den

Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frühchristlichen Literatur (Berlin-New York,
19886), s.v. I2g.
138 A. HILHORST

her, and all things totter and trernble (before her). With 9 him there is nothing unjust.
37. Wine is unjust, the king is unjust, wornen are unjust, all the sons of rnen are
unjust, together with all their works, and all such things, and truth is not in thern, and
in their injustice they will perish. 38. But truth persists and is strong for ever; she
lives and mIes for ever and ever. 39. With her there is neither partiality nor bri-
berylO, but she does the things that are just without all unjust and wicked thingslI,
and all approve of her deeds, 40. and in her judgernent there is nothing unjust. To her
belongs the strength, the kingdorn, the authority and the rnajesty of all ages. Blessed
is the God of truth." 41. And with that he ended his speech, and all the people
shouted and said, "Great is truth and strong above all things."

This text shows a curious ambiguity: is it a hymn to truth, as most of the

statements suggest, or to the God of truth, as is explicitly stated in the
final sentence of the speech? POHLMANN chooses the latter option 12.
According to hirn, it was impossible to bring up God's supreme power
suddenly, especially because a direct succession wine - king - woman -
God would have been offending or taste1ess. Therefore in verse 35a the
speaker cautiously drops a question wh ich remains as yet unanswered, in
verse 36 his al),wO instead of aü't1'\~ betrays that God as the possessor of
truth is in his mind, and only in the very last sentence he reaches his goal
by saying 'Blessed is the God of truth'. Is POHLMANN right? To pass
judgment on that, a fresh discussion of the verses in question is in order.
As to 4,35a, POHLMANN is struck by the fact that the entry in 4,34 is a
reference to the order of creation. It is the author of this order, God, he
feels, who is the subject of 4,35a. However, the mention of earth, heaven
and sun was not meant to refer to God's creatorship, but rather to pro-
vide, beside the women, examples of things which are strong, all of
which serve as a background to make the superior strength of truth stand
out all the better. Our interpolator carefully imitates the technique used in
the original account, where the second and third orator endorse the

9 Km introduces a new idea here and rnay best be left untranslated, cf. ibid., s.v. 15.
Therefore TEDESCHE 1928 (n.5) puts a full stop after 'rpt~et; cf. also TORREY 1910 (nA),
339.
10 For Aa~ßWetV 1tpöcHtl7ta cf. P. HARLE - D. PRALON, Le Uvitique (La Bible

d' Alexandrie 3, Paris, 1988), 166-167. For öt<i<j>opa "rnoney" cf. K. WEIß in G.
KITTEL - G. FRIEDRICH (eds.), Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament 9
(Stuttgart 1973), 65; J.M. MYERS, land II Esdras. lntroduction, Translation and
Commentary (The Anchor Bible 42, New York, 1974), 51 (ad 4,39). The expression
Aa~ßWetV Ött'x<j>opa "receive presents" occurs 2 Macc 1,35.
11 Opinions are divided as to the question whether 1tW'rülV 'rlOv aÖ{KülV Kat

1tOVllpmV is to be taken as neutre, as I do here, or rnasculine.

12 POHLMANN 1970 (n.2), 45.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 139

strength of the thing praised before, only to overtrump it by their own

candidates 13 • Therefore also here a candidate for overpowering strength
doomed to be defeated by the following one must be meant. This clearly
cannot be God; instead, the rhetorical question simply aims at the subject
mentioned just before, namely the sun; 'tai)'m refers to its daily tour, and
1totei is 'does, achieves'.
Before treating 4,36, let us consider 4,40c, the final sentence of the
speech, which praises the God of truth. As TORREY and RUDOLPH have
shown 14 , this is obviously secondary for two reasons. First, it mis-
matches with the preceding sentence, which was about truth and in its
turn perfect1y fitted in with the previous statements. Secondly, the reac-
tion of the audience, 'Great is truth and strong above all things' (4,41),
totally ignores it.
So far, we have a consistent praise of truth, apart from 4,36d: 'With
hirn there is nothing unjust'. As we have seen, POHLMANN regards this as
a sort of echo of the rhetorical question in 35a and a forerunner of the
final sentence. If, however, 35a is not about God and 40c is secondary,
36d has to do without these supports and should be judged on its own
merits. The fact of the matter is that two readings have been transmitted,
aÜ'toi) and aÜT1)<;, referring to God and truth respectively; whereas the first
reading has better manuscript authority15, the second fits the context
much better. Both readings, I suspect, were susceptible to alteration. If
aÜ'tOi) was original, as a lectio difficilior it might easily change into au'tf(<;.
If, however, auT1)<; was original, some scribe, who might have read a
reference to God into the rhetorical question of the previous verse (and as
we shall see, there have been such interpretations), might hae lingered on
this idea and thus, consciously or absent-mindedly, written au'toü. Both
processes might have repeated themselves in the course of textual trans-
mission; therefore witnesses to the text sharing either the masculine or the
feminine reading need not be genetically related. This means, however,
that we cannot decide here on the basis of the quality of the witnesses;
what remains is the context. Since au'toü would seriously disturb the logic
of the argument (the author identifies truth with God only to undo that

13 Cf. 4,2-3.14.28-32. Likewise the rhetorical question introduced by a negation

reminds of the previous speeches, cf. 3,24; 4,2.12.14.22.28.32.

14 C.C. TORREY 1910 (n.4), 56 note f; RUDOLPH 1949 (n.l), VI.

15 Cf. HANHART 1974 Text (n.5), 76; id., "Zu Text und Textgeschichte des Ersten

Esrabuches", Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies I (Jerusalern,

1977), 201-212, esp. 209.
140 A. HlLHORST

identification subsequently), the reading al)'rfl~ in my opinion imposes

itselfl6 •
Now that we have given our reasons for regarding the speech on truth
as a speech on truth, let us have a closer look at the character of truth
portrayed here. Three features stand out in the description. First, truth is
presented as a personification. She 'lives' and 'rules' (38), is 'called on'
(36), and is opposed to mankind because of her just behaviour (36-40).
Secondly, the concept of truth is unusual: it is not so much opposed to
falsity as to injustice, so as to mean virtually 'justice'; in verse 39, her
activity is described as that of an uncorruptible judge. Thirdly, her power
is stressed. She is 'stronger than all things' (35), 'all things totter and
tremble' before her (36), 'she is strong for ever' (38). Following the train
of thought, we become increasingly aware that truth is depicted with the
traits biblical texts use to attribute to God I7 • This culminates in the
second sentence of verse 40: 'To her belongs the strength, the kingdom,
the authority and the majesty of all ages', which is a regular doxology,

16 Cf. GOODMAN 1972 (n.3), 158, n. 3: 'The parallelism of tbe verse conftrms tbe

judgment tbat tbe original reading was JlE't' ai)'t1'l~'. Interestingly, while tbe critical
editions offer au'tOiJ in tbe text, translators tend to ren der tbe feminine form: ZÖCKLER
1891, GUTHE 1900, TORREY 1910, COOK 1913, RIEßLER 1928, VAN SELMS 1935,
GOODMAN 1972, MYERS 1974, COGGINs-KNIBB 1979 (RUDOLPH 1949, HAMMERSHAIMB
1963, SACCHI 1981, FERNANDEZ MARCOS 1983 opt for tbe masculine form). Cf. also tbe
cOlmnent by TORREY 1910 (n.4), 55 n. e, who works witb an Aramaic original: 'it is
most likely tbat tbe translator himself chose tbe masculine pronoun here. But in tbe
original, tbe suffix pronoun certainly referred to "Trutb." The necessity of tbis is so
obvious tbat some Greek codices and tbe Latin version have corrected accordingly'.
Likewise, RUDOLPH 1949 (n.l), 180, ascribes tbe alteration into tbe masculine form to
tbe Jewish adaptor of tbe originally pagan trutb text.
17 Cf. U. SCHMID, Die Priamel der Werte im Griechischen von Homer bis Paulus

(Wiesbaden, 1964), p.112; H. HOMMEL, "Wahrheit und Gerechtigkeit. Zur Geschichte

und Deutung eines Begriffspaars", in id., Symbola. Kleine Schriften zur Literatur- und
Kulturgeschichte der Antike II (Collectanea 5, Hildesheim-Zürich-New York, 1988), 1-
31, esp. 26 n.90 (tbe article is a reprint witb Nachträge of an article published in 1969);
P. SACCHI, Apocriji dell'Antico Testamento (Classici delle religioni, Torino, 1981), 119-
120. J.L. CRENSHAW, "The Contest of Darius' Guards" in B.O. LONG (cd.), Images 0/
Man and God. Old Testament Short Stories in Literary Focus (Bible and Literature
Series, Sheffield, 1981),75-88, esp., 82.88, regards 'heaven' in verse 36 as adesignation
of God. This, however, is improbable: it attributes to tbe couple 'eartb and heaven' an
import contrasting witb tbat of tbe previous verse; it swears at tbe surrounding concepts
of 'eartb' and 'all tbings', botb of which are trutb's subordinates; and it enervates tbe
plea for trutb as strongest. In my opinion, 'eartb and heaven' denote here, like so often,
tbe totality of creation.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 141

i.e. a liturgical formula of praise to GOd 18 • What is the ongm of this

truth conception? Has it been inherited from the Old Testament, is it a
creation of early ludaism, or are there foreign, i.e. either Greek or
Ancient Eastern influences at work? This is the question which will
occupy us in the second part of the inquiry.

2. Possible origins of this conception

Since we are dealing with a Greek text, we may begin with the Greek
world. The Greeks have always been fond of personifications, witness, to
mention two examples out of many, the myth of Heracles enticed by Vice
and Virtue, as told by Prodicus (5th century B.C.), or Plato's prosopo-
poeia of the Laws in the second part of his Crito 19• They also knew
truth as a personification. It may be worthwhile to present some classical
instances of it.
As far as we can gather, truth is treated as a person for the first time
by the lyric poet Pindar, who in his Tenth Olympian Ode calls upon the
'Muse, and Truth, daughter of Zeus' (Ol.10,4-5: mMOlo', (J),').,ll. OU Km
9Uy(x'tTlP . AM9Eta Mös), invoking their help to write a song for the
Olympian winner Hagesidamus. Likewise in a fragment preserved by
Stobaeus (fr.205 Maehler) Pindar invokes Truth; the few words which
remain make it clear that he opposes her to lie:

. APXa IlEy(xAru; UpE'tfu;, t'l:lvaoo' • AM9Eta,

,.n'lma{enJs tllw OUV9EOlV 'tpaxü 1tOn 'VEUÖEt.

Queen of Truth, who art the beginning of great virtue, keep my good-faith from
stumbling against rough falsehood.
(trans. J. SANDYS).

Filled with respect, he greets her as waocra 'queen, mistress', a current

term of address for goddesses.

IB Examples of this type of doxology include 1 Chron 29,11; Dan 2,20; 4 Maee
18,24; Jude 24-25; Rev 1,6; 5,13; 7,12; Didaehe 8,2 (cf. Matt 6,13 v.l.); 10,5.
19 Cf. KJ. STELKENS, Untersuchungen zu griechischen Personifikationen abstrakter

Begriffe (Diss. Bonn, 1963); F.W. HAMDORF, Griechische Kultpersonijikationen der

vorhellenistischen Zeit (Mainz, 1964); W. PÖTSCHER, "Personifikation", Der Kleine
Pauly 4 (München, 1972),661-663. Lucian Deor.Conc.l3 makes merry over it.
142 A. HILHORST

Plato in a number of writings offers a semi-personified use of <'xA:flSEta,

but there is at least one passage, however elusive, where truth figures as a
person. In the Crito (48a) Soerates, having demonstrated by a variety of
examples that one should disregard the opinion of the many and be led
only by the knowledge of the expert, applies this idea to moral matters:

OUK l'lpa, m ßo..:ncr'tE, 1tWU 1'\lltv of)'t(j) <l>pov'ttcr't~ov, TI tpo'Omv ot 1tOAAOt

1'\1l{k~, (lA')..: ö 'tt Ö t1tC:xtrov 1tEpt 'tuN omnrov KOO aO{Krov, Ö ef~, KOO at:m'l 1'\
af..:f}SEla.

Then, most excellent friend, we must not consider at all what the many will say of us,
but what he who knows about right and wrong, the one man, and truth herself will
say.
(trans. H.N. FOWLER).

All the preeeding examples have a human being as an expert. This one
too begins by deseribing sueh an expert. This expert, however, is equated
with 'truth herself . So truth is aperson, and a unique one at that. Indeed
M. CROISET, in his Bude edition ad loc., does not hesitate to eomment:
'La verite, eonc;:ue eomme un attribut essentiel de Dieu, semble etre iei
identifiee aDieu lui-meme'. This may be stating too much, for the
eontext does not speak about God, but in any ease some superior being
seems to be meant.
Finally we should mention the ease of Epimenides, who lived about
600 B.e. and was the subjeet of many legends. Aeeording to Maximus of
Tyre (eh.1O,!) 'during his many years' sleep he personally met with gods
and gods' words and truth and justice' (ev'tUXEiv at:)'t()~ SEOi~ KOO SEUlV Mrut~
KOO aAT]SUQ: Kat O{KU). Gods, oraeles, truth and justiee are put on a par,
thus the last three are as mueh persons as the gods are; truth and justiee
are distinguished.
It would lead us too far afield to diseuss instanees from the later
periods20 , but the evidenee diseussed here suffiees to show, I trust, that
Greek eulture was aequainted with the idea of a personified truth, and that

20 Such as Hermas 92,2; Lucian Nigr.l8; Cal.5; Pisc.16-18.38.45-46; Marcus

Aurelius 5,33; 9,1,2; Philostratus Im. 1,27. For Truth as a Valentinian aeon cf. G.W.H.
LAMPE, A Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford, 1961-1968), s.v. aA,1'lSEta N. Divinities
calling themselves truth, examples of which are provided by BAUER - ALAND - ALAND
(n.8), s.v. af..:f}SEta 2b, is a different matter.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 143

this truth was regarded as powerful 21 and even more or less divine. In
fact, . AA:f\9nu is the daughter of Zeus, is invoked as ö.vuaau, and appears,
together with gods, to a blessed seer during his sleep. However, her
essence is not justice, but reality or truthfulness 22•
Yet the link between truth and justice is not totally absent. First of all,
truth in the sense of truthfulness is a moral quality kindred to justice, and
particularly required of a judge. Secondly, as was pointed out some years
aga by H. HOMMEL23 , there is a fragment of a poem by the Greek poet
Mimnermus (± 600 B.C.) which is remarkably close to the idea of truth
being justice. It runs as follows (fr.2 Gentili-Prato = fr.8 West):

UATJ9dTJ ö~ 1tup~a'tw
aot Kat t/lot, 1tUv'twv xp1)/lU ötKm6'tu'tov.

Betwixt thee and me let there be truth, the most righteous of a11 things.
(trans. I.M. EDMONDS).

Although our source for this fragment, Stobaeus, does not provide a
context, HOMMEL on good grounds suggests a connexion between Mim-
nermus' living in Colophon in western Asia Minor, which just then came
into touch with the Persians, and the specifically Persian idea of truth.
This leads us to the world of Persia.
According to the Greek historian Herodotus 0,136,2), who spent much
of his li fe studying them, the Persians taught their children three things:
riding, archery, and speaking the truth. This concern for truth is men-
tioned also in other Greek testimonies on the Persians24 , and is con-
firmed in the Persian sources themselves. An early specimen of this is a

21 For this idea apart from personification cf. Bacchylides fr.14 Maehler; Sophocles
fr.955 Radt; Demosthenes 19,208; Aeschines 1,84: Menander fr.421 Körte; Chariton
3,4,13; Lucian Cal.ll.
22 For a weil documented survey of the shades of meaning of uAf!9nu cf. C. SPICQ,
Notes de lexicographie neo-testamentaire. Supplement (OBO 22/3, Fribourg Suisse-
Göttingen 1982), 16-37; cf. also the dictionaries of PASSOW-CRÖNERT (s.v. 3 some
passages where the meaning is "Gerechtigkeit"), LIDDELL-SCOTT-loNES and ADRADOS.
Stobaeus (fifth century A.D.) in his Ecl.3,11 collects a number of excerpts on truth from
ancient writers, many of which have not been preserved otherwise.
23 HOMMEL 1988 (n.17), 23-25.

24 Cf. C. CLEMEN, Die griechischen und lateinischen Nachrichten über die persische

Religion (RVV 17,1, Giessen, 1920), 112-113; id., Fontes historiae religionis Persicae
(Fontes historiae religionum ex auctoribus Graecis et Latinis collecti 1, Bonnae, 1920),
6.22.30.31.36.50; HOMMEL 1988 (n.17), 24 n.84.
144 A. HILHORST

passage in the famous Behistan (or: Behistun) inscription which records

statements by Darius (DB 4,36-40 25 ):

Saith Darius the King: Thou who shalt be king hereafter, protect thyself vigorously
from the Lie; the man who shall be a Lie-foIlower, hirn do thou punish weIl, if thus
thou shalt think, 'May my country be secure!'

Whoever familiarizes himself with these matters, soon encounters the

principle of Avestan asa (Persian arta), which is described by Mary
BOYCE in the following way: 'This term ... stands, it seems, for "order" in
the widest sense: cosmic order, by which night gives place to day and the
seasons change; the order of sacrifice, by which this natural rhythm is
strengthened and maintained; social order, by which men can live together
in harmony and prosperity; and moral order or "truth". ,26 Obviously,
both the elements 'justice' and 'truth' belong to it.
However, this is not the only point it has in common with the aA;fl9eta
concept we are searching for. As a matter of fact, in the teachings of
Zoroaster the abstract idea of asa doubles as a personification; to quote
the same scholar: 'asa, "righteousness" or "justice" is a quality which can
manifest itself in many ways in daily life; and Asa is a divine being who
personifies that quality, and who may be invoked and prayed to for its
possession like any other god.'27 Indeed, of all the Amesa Spentas, the
seven great divinities created by Ahura Mazda to aid him, Asa is the one
most frequently invoked by Zoroaste~. In the Greek world, Plutarchus
De Is. et Os.47 shows an intimate knowledge of this religious system:

ou ,.I1,\V <aUa> KaKÜVOt 1tüAAa ,.1U96:löll 1tept 't&v ge&V At')Uumv, o{a Kat
'ta1)'t' Ecrnv. <'> Il~V • npOIl(xClls EK 't01) Ka9apüYt(x'tou <j>(xous <'> Ö· . ApetllWtOs
EK 't01) C6<j>ou )'E)'Ovc'l:ls 1tOA.eIl01)mv aAA1'\AOts' Kat <'> Il~V ~~ 9eotls e1to{llcre, 'tÖV
Il~V 1tpiil'tov eUVo{as, 'töv ~ &{)'tepOV aA1l9etas, 'tÖV ö~ 'tp{'tOV eUVoll{as, 't&V ö~
AOt1t&V 'töv ~V cro<j>{as, 'tÖV ö~ 1tAO{)'tOU, 'tÖV ö~ 't&V ent 'tois KaAoi s 1'lötOlV
ÖllIlWUPy6V' <'> ~ 'to{)'tOts <'I>cr1tep av'tt'ttxvous tcrous 'tÖV apt91l6v.

25 As edited in transliteration and translated by R.G. KENT, Old Persian. Grammar,

Texts, Lexicon (American Oriental Series 33, New Haven, Connecticut, 1953 2), 129.131.
26 M. BOYCE, A History 0/ Zoroastrianism I (Handbuch der Orientalistik 1,8,1,2,230

Leiden-Köln, 1975), 27.

27 Ibid. 199-200. Cf. also G. WIDENGREN, Die Religionen Irans (Die Religionen der

Menschheit 14, Stuttgart, 1965), 79-83.

28 BOYCE 1975 (n.26), 212.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 145

But they (the Persians) also reIate many mythical details about the gods, and the
following are instances. Horomazes is born from the purest light and Areimanius
from darkness, and they are at war with one another. The former (Horomazes) created
six gods, the ftrst being god of good will, the second god of truth, the third god of
good order, and the others gods of wisdom and wealth, the sixth being the creator of
pleasure in beautiful things. Tbe other (Areimanius) created an equal number as rivals
to these.
(trans. J.G. GRIFFITHS).

In this statement eX).:ft0eta is clearly Asa29 ; it is a testimony independent

of 1 Esdras showing that asa could be rendered by that term.
Even the question 'what is the strongest?' has been answered in the
Avesta in such a way that Asa is involved; here, however, it is not so
much a divinity of its own as a quality of the supreme god Ahura Mazda.
The quotation is from Yast 1,1.3):

Zarathustra asked Abura Mazda: '0 Abura Mazda, most beneftcent Spirit, Maker of
the material world, thou Holy One! What of the Holy Word is the strongest? Wbat is
the most victorious? What is the most glorious? What is the most effective? .. .' Abura
Mazda answered: 'Our Name, 0 Spitama Zarathustra! who are the Amesha-Spentas,
that is the strongest part of the Holy Word; that is the most victorious; that is the
most glorious; that is the most effective.'
(trans. J. DARMESTETER).

All in all the conception of truth in 1 Esdras 4,34-40 is remarkably

close to the Persian asa idea30 • What divides the two is omnipotence:
whereas eX).:ft0eta rules supreme, Asa is invariably depicted either as a
subordinate divinity or as a property of Ahura Mazda.
We cannot, however, take our leave of the Near Eastern world without
paying attention to Egypt. In 1928, P. HUMBERT pointed out that the
Egyptian word ma-a-t has the same components 'truth' and 'justice' as
eX).:ft0eta in our text, and even adduced striking Egyptian paralleIs to the
ideas of truth being mighty and truth remaining for ever31 • Since these

29 CLEMEN 1920 Nachrichten (n.24), 136. 162-163.

30 Tbe same conclusion was reacbed by HOMMEL 1988 (n.17), 25-26. R.H. PFEIFFER,
History oj New Testament Times. With an lntroduction to the Apocrypha (London, 1949),
253 even suspected 'an echo of a hymn to Asha no Ion ger extant in the surviving parts
of the Avesta' in it. Cf. also GOODMAN 1972 (n. 3), 204-209.
31 P. HUMBERT, ""Magna est veritas et praevalet" (3 Esra 4,35)", Orientalistische

Literaturzeitung 1928, 148-150; id., Recherches sur les sources egyptiennes de la

litterature sapientiale d'lsrael (Memoires de l'universite de Neuchatel 7, Neuchätel,
1929), 148-151.
146 A. HILHORST

paralIeIs date from ca. 2000 B.e., some have questioned HUMBERT's
conc1usion that they are the prototype of the argument in 1 Esdras. We
should, however, keep in mind that the shades of meaning in ma-a-t have
stayed alive, and lived on in Coptic me 32• A further point of relevance is
that ma-a-t occurs as a personification; indeed, Ma-a-t is one of the more
important gods of the Egyptian pantheon33 . So we cannot exclude influ-
ence from Egypt too.
There is, however, more to it. At the end of 1972, a French expedition,
performing excavations in Susa, unearthed astatue of Darius which was
provided with inscriptions in Egyptian, Old Persian, Elamite and Akka-
dian 34 . The statue itself, with its remarkab1e intermingling of Egyptian
and Persian elements, cannot occupy us here, but the hieroglyphs give us
a veritable piece of interpretatio Aegyptiaca of Persian concepts, includ-
ing arta under the guise of ma-a-t. One quotation, in which we even
seem to come across the circuit of the sun in 1 Esdras 4,34, must suffice:

The perfect god [sc. Darius] who rejoices in Maat, he whom Atum, lord of Heliopo-
lis, has chosen to be master of all that is encompassed by the solar orb, for he
recognizes hirn as his son, bis steward ... The goddess Neith has given him the bow
which she loosens.
(trans. M. BOYCE).

J. YOYOTTE, who first published the Egyptian inscriptions, has the

following comment: Darius 'est choisi par Atoum comme il a ete choisi
par Ahura-Mazda. L'arc, arme favorite des Perses et embleme de royaute,
se trouve etre l'arme que la deesse dynastique de Sals aremise a Darius.
Le concept de Maat, l'ordre qui s'oppose au desordre, a l'injustice, au
mensonge recouvre un principe politique et social comparable a la Verite
(arta) qui s'oppose au Mensonge (drauja), force de subversion.'35 For
our 1 Esdras passage this means that inspiration may have come from
Persia, from Egypt, and from both cultures in conjunction. A final

32 Possibly also Papyri Graecae Magicae 5,148-150 [the magician is speaking] tyro

dill 1'\ aA:f}SEUx, 6 Illcr(l)V al5ud'lllata )1:vecrSm tv tc'i> K6crllQJ reflects Egyptian ideas.
33 Cf. J. ASSMANN, Ma 'at. Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im Alten Ägypten
(München, 1990).
34 Cf. the preliminary report by M. KERVRAN - D. STRONACH - F. VALLAT - J.
YOYOTTE, "Une statue de Darius decouverte a Suse", Journal Asiatique 260 (1972), 235-
266.
35 Ibid. 265. Cf. also M. BOYCE, A History oi Zoroastrianism 11 (Handbuch der
Orientalistik 1,8,1,2,2a, Leiden-Köln, 1982), 124-127.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 147

possible factor, however, remains to be examined: the Israelite and Jewish

past.
This subject has been investigated by POHLMANN, who makes every
effort to show the agreement of the statements on truth in 1 Esdras 4,34-
41 with comparable ones in the Old Testament, at least in the Septua-
gine 6 • Unfortunately, none of his references represents truth as an inde-
pendent entity. Thus Ps LXX 116,2 Kat 1') W.,:flSua toß 1('\)p{ou Iltvu e{e; töv
ai&va may displaya striking resemblance with 1 Esdras 4,38 1') ö~ uA:flSua
IltVEt Kat icrX{)Et Eie; tÖV ai&va, but the absence of toi) 1('\)p{ou in the latter
makes all the difference. The fact is, neither the Hebrew Bible nor the
Septuagint have any example to offer of truth as the supreme power tout
courf 7 • There were, to be sure, preliminary stages from which it could
have developed. The Old Testament, especially its poetic parts, offers
many instances of personification, e.g. Isa 59,14:

J ustice is withheld
and integrity stands aloof;
in the public square sincerity is brought to its knees
and uprightness forbidden to enter
(trans. Jerusalern Bible),

or Ps 85,11-l2, where various personified attributes of God are evoked:

Love and Loyalty now meet,

Righteousness and Peace now embrace;
Loyalty reaches up from earth
and Righteousness leans down from heaven.
(trans. Jerusalern Bible).

Especially important is the picture of Wisdom in Proverbs 8, Ecclesias-

ticus 24 and Wisdom of Solomon 6-10. The last writing in 10,15-19 even
attributes to Wisdom's leadership the exodus from Egypt, including her
presence in the cloud and the pillar of fire. All this, however, ends in
extolling the Lord's holy name: the decisive step of handling one of
God's attributes as if it were God, without a subsequent relativization, is
not taken.

36 POHLMANN 1973 (n.2), 42-45.

37 Cf. PFEIFFER 1949 (n.30), 254 n.16; HOMMEL 1988 (n.17), 26 n.90; SACCHI 1981
(n.17), 119-120.
148 A. HILHORST

Another aspect is vocabu1ary. In many Old Testament passages the

word for 'truth', nlJ ~ is closely associated with justice (the Psalm text just
quoted, where the translation renders 'loyalty', is a case in point), and the
expression 'to do the truth' denotes a righteous behaviour. Thus nlJ ~ is
not far remote from the idea of justice. In the Septuagint its usual render-
ing is äA:f}8eta, although also mcrw; and even ollCmocr'6vll occur38 .
To review the discussion so far: while we have noted various points of
contact with ideas current in Greece, Persia, Egypt, and Israel, none of
these worlds yielded exact paralleis for a truth concept combining the
characteristics personified, supreme power, and meaning lustice'. Each of
the areas was familiar with personification, each of them showed
examples of personified and more or less divine truth, and at least two of
them could use one word both for 'truth' and 'justice', but nowhere have
we found the idea of personified truth ruling supreme. So apparently the
image of truth in 1 Esdras was unique in this respect.
This is not to say that the Jewish author responsible for the speech on
truth seriously meant to substitute the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
for a fresh monotheistic god cal1ed Truth. Mter all the raison d'etre of
the speech was to explain why the Persian king was so willing to support
the Jewish exiles in rebuilding the Temple of the God of Israel. Indeed
when speaking about truth he meant God who is true, and an orthodox
Jewish view is formulated here, but this is done with a daringness we
search for in vain elsewhere. This is especially true of the doxology form.
There may be a literary subtlety in this treating of God in the form of
one of his essential characteristics. On the one hand, deifying truth is an
overstatement weH suited to rouse curiosity. On the other hand, speaking
about God in the disguise of truth is calculated to satisfy two audiences
with different religious ideas but a common fondness of 'truth': the
Persian, which had to judge the speaker's achievement, and the Jewish,
which, even if it was not attending the contest, was to leam afterwards
what the speaker had argued. Has this subtlety been recognized by later
readers of the speech? To find that out, let us have a look at the docu-
ments which show familiarity with OUf pericope.

38 Cf. H. WILDBERGER, "''''m<et'', in E. JENNI - C. WESTERMANN (eds.), Theologi-

sches Handwärterbuch zum Alten Testament I (München-Zürich, 1971), 201-209;

HOMMEL 1988 (n.17), 8.29. In the New Testament truth may have a strongly practical
side, which expresses itself in virtues like righteousness and holiness, cf. BAUER -
ALAND - ALAND (n.8), s.v. 2b.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 149

3. Reception of the passage

The fIrst of these is in the eleventh book of Josephus' Antiquities,

A.I.II ,33-57, where he candidly retells the story of the youths. In the
introductory part he makes some adjustments which need not detain us,
but to the speeches he sticks closely, apart from stylistic changes39 • The
last of them, however, the truth speech, he subjects to a more thorough
revision; it runs as folIows:

55. (mtöu~a j.lfv .. öcrov icrxuoUOlV ai yuvmKe~, acrgevtcr'tepm ö· ÖIlW~ Km

autm Kat 6 ßa<nJ..eu~ t1l~ W.:rI9e{a~ u1tapxouOlv. Ei y((p tcrnv 1'\ yfl lley(crtll
Kat U'V1l}J)~ 6 oupavö~ Km taXU~ (') 1'tAW~, 'taflta ~ 1twta lClveitm K(X't~
ßOUAllOlV 'tof> geof>, aAll9tvö~ öt tcrnv omo~ Km ö{Kmo~, a1tö t1l~ aut1l~
mna~ oci Km 't1)v aA1'\9uav icrxupotatllv 1'\)ticr9m Kat 1l1l~V 1tPÖ~ at't1)v tö
c'XötKOV öuvallEVOV. 56. ~n ye Ilflv t~ Il~ l'iA.Aa 9v1lt~ Km roKUllopa etvm
crWßtßllKe tl'bv icrxuv tX6vtWv, a9w(X'tov ~ 1'\ aA1'\geta XP~lla Km a{öwv.
1taptxu ö· 1'\lliv ou KaAAO~ XP6vQ) l.tapmv6llevov otö~ 1tepwucrtav aepmpe't1)v
U1tÖ tUXll~ aAA~ t~ ö{Kma Km t~ v6lltlla, ÖtaKp{voucra a1t' autl'bv t~ c'XötKa
Kat a1teAty/"oucra. 57. K(X'ta1taUet ~v (') ZopoßaßllAo~ töv 1tept t1l~ aA1l9e(a~
Myov, tmßo1'\cravto~ ~ tof> 1tA1'\90u~ ro~ l'tptcrta ei1t6vto~, Kat ön tÖ aA1l9~~
icrxuv «'Xtpe1ttov Km ayftpw 1l6vov ~XOt ..

55. 'I have now shown how great is the strength of women, but none the less both
they and the king are weaker than truth. For, although the earth is very great and the
heavens high and the sun swift, yet alI these move in accordance with the will of
God, and, since He is true and just, we must for the same reason believe truth also to
be the strongest thing, against wbich no injustice can prevail. 56. Furthermore, all
other things that possess strength are by nature mortaI and swift-lived, but truth is a
thing immortaI and eternal. And it gives us, not beauty, that fades with time, nor
wealth, of which fortune may rob us, but what is just and lawful, and from this it
keeps away injustice and puts it to shame'. 57. And so Zorobabelos ended bis speech
on truth, whereupon the assembly acclaimed him as the best speaker, saying that it
was truth alone which had unchanging and unaging strength.
(trans. R. MARCUS).

Among the alterations Josephus makes is that he takes the sting out of I
Esdras' mention (4,37) of man's essential wickedness; instead, 'all things
are mortal'. He retains truth's qualities of strength, justice and etemity,
but again renders the argument harmless by fmnly making truth an
attribute of God: truth is the strongest thing precisely because it is a
property of God. He further domesticates the truth concept by toning
down its picture as a personification. Here truth is not invoked nor

39 Cf. POHLMANN 1970 (n.2), 82-83.98-99.

150 A. HILHORST

praised nor trembled at, she is not said to live and to rule, and all that
remains of her implacable refusal of favouritism is a gentle 'giving us
what is just and lawfu1'.
I am not aware of further reflexions of the speech on truth in Jewish
texts from antiquitlo. Only in the tenth century A.D. it reappears in
J osippon 6,129-134 (I p.41 FLUSSER). This version, if it depends upon
that of 1 Esdras41 , is a free revision of it, omitting the aspect of justice,
but stressing truth's power. The essential thing, however, is that it puts
truth and God in the right relation: 'truth prevails before God and man,
for in the lodgement of truth 1ie cannot be established, for on truth
heaven and earth were founded, and the truth of the Lord our God is
foreverrnore'. God has a natural place here, and the doxology of truth is
ab se nt.
In Christian circles, 1 Esdras lived on so as to be translated into Syriac,
Ethiopic, Armenian, Georgian and Arabic and twice into Latin, and to be
quoted or alluded to by several Fathers of the Church42• The translations
do not show major divergences from the Greek text. Instead of /JE't' au'to'l)
in 4,36, which refers to God, the Latin, Ethiopic and Armenian versions
have a reference to truth, and the doxology of truth is lost in the Latin
rendition Et non est in iudicio eius iniquum (iniustitia), sed jortitudo et
regnum et potestas et maiestas omnium aeuorum (saeculorum). Quota-
tions of parts of 1 Esdras are usually short and in the main confirrn the
readings of the direct witnesses; thus in Latin the doxo10gy looses its
character also in the quotations with the exception of Ps. Augustine Spec.
(CSEL 12, 359). There is, however, a long citation of the whole account
of the contest in a fifth century Latin chronicle, the Liber Genealogus,

40 Cf. MYERS 1974 (n.10), 18-19.

41 A.A. NEUMAN, "Josippon and the Apocrypha", The Jewish Quarterly Review
N.S.43 (1952-1953), 1-26, esp. 19, rnainly on the basis of the order of the speeches,
wh ich is in Josippon king - wine - wornen - truth, pretends that Josippon's version of the
story of the tbree youths 'indicates a superiority which is not one of style but of interna!
genuineness, attributable to a better source' . Cf. also POHLMANN 1970 (n.2), 47 n.59.
42 Cf. HANHART 1991 Esdrae (n.5), 15-24. Copious information on patristic and
rnediaeval citations is offered by TH. DENTER, Die Stellung der Bücher Esdras im Kanon
des Alten Testamentes. Eine kanongeschichtliche Untersuchung (Marienstatt, 1962). Cf.
also R. KÖHLER, "Die stärksten Dinge", in id., Kleinere Schriften. Il. Zur erzählenden
Literatur des Mittelalters (Berlin, 1900), 47-56, esp. 55; E. LOMMAlZSCH, ""Die
stärksten Dinge"", Jahrbuch 1961 der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in
Mainz (Wiesbaden, s.a.), 236-238; P.L. v AN VELDHUIJSEN, ""Wat is het sterkste, de
wijn, de vrouw, de koning of de waarheid?" Een quodlibetale kwestie van Thornas van
Aquino", Millennium 2 (1988), 144-149.
 THE SPEECH ON TRUTH IN 1 ESDRAS 4,34-41 151

which is partly independent of the Latin versions43 and has some inter-
esting renderings. In 4,35 it reads feeit for 1totef and so clearly interprets
the rhetorical question as a reference to the Creator. In 4,36 it retains the
masculine Ile't' ulno'\) by rendering in eo. Finally it keeps the doxology: et
ipsi fortitudo et regnum et potestas et magnifieentia omnium seeulorum.
When referring to 1 Esdras, not quoting it, the Church Fathers had of
course more 1atitude to handle it their own way. Their interest in the book
focuses on 4,34-41. None of them regards truth as depicted in 1 Esdras as
a sort of competitor of God. Instead, they like to connect our passage
with the statement Jesus makes in John 14,6: 'I am the Way, the Truth
and the Life,44. The exact shade of meaning of truth in 1 Esdras is not
discussed.
The result of our exploration may be summarized as follows. In 1
Esdras 4,34-41 truth is depicted with the features of God. This device
enables the author to satisfy a Persian as weIl as a Jewish audience, both
of which had a special interest in truth. It satisfies the Persian audience
still more by using the word aA:fleau in such a way that it denotes both
truth and justice, which is, though not going squarely against Jewish
views, specifically Persian. The responses of the readers of the speech on
truth do not show awareness of the special form of expression of the
passage. They simply use to resolve truth into God; this tendency has
even found its way into the text, which at a later stage was rounded off
by the addition of eUAo'Y'l'tö<; ö eeö<; 't1'\<; aAT\ee1u<;45.

43 Cf. RC. YORK, "The Latin Versions of First Esdras", The American Journal 0/
Semitic Languages and Literatures 26 (1909-1910), 253-302, esp. 253-258; HANHART
1974 Text (n.5), 19.
44 Eusebius E.th.l,20,18 (GCS Eus.4,94); Athanasius Ar.2,20 (PG 26,189B);
Sermjid.35 (PG 26,1288); Didymus of Alexandria Trin.2,23 (PG 39,744); Cyril of
Alexandria Thes. (pG 75,248C.628A.648B); Cyprian Ep.74,9 (CSEL 3,2,807); Augustine
Ciu.dei 18,36 (CCSL 48,631).
45 I am grateful to Jan BREMMER, Florentino GARCfA MARTINEZ and Cas LABU-
SCHAGNE for their detailed comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM
IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS

BY

Philip R. Davies

Sheffield, Greal Bri/ain

1. THE SCROLLS AS PRODUCTS OF RECENSION

Evidence of recensional history in the production of many of the Dead

Sea scroIls has been available for a long time. The Community Rule
(MURPHY-O'CONNOR 1969; POUILLY, 1976), the War Scroll (DAVIES,
1977), the Damascus Document (DA VIES, 1982, following the lead given
by MURPHY-O'CONNOR) and the Temple Scroll (WILSON & WILLS, 1982;
WISE, 1990) have been the most successfully analyzed in this way. In
large measure, however, these analyses have been based on internal
criteria, aided in a few cases by conclusions derived from the excavations
of Khirbet Qumran. Verification of such analyses is obviously out of the
question, and thus the unlikelihood of a general consensus about the
conclusions, even where (as is the case) an initial reluctance to acknowl-
edge evidence of recension has now been largely abandoned.
It has in any case been confirmed that at least the three texts men-
tioned (lQM, lQS, CD) are the result of redaction, thanks to the dis-
covery of fragments containing passages found in these manuscripts yet
exhibiting significant variants. It is the on evidence of such fragments,
and their implication, that the present essay is focussed. The clearest and
most extensive examples of the phenomenon so far available are the 4QM
fragments, of which C.-H. HUNZINGER was the first to publish a sm all
selection (HUNZINGER 1957). These he immediately identified as a
'shorter, earlier edition (Fassung)' than lQM. Subsequently, M. BAILLET
(BAlLLET, 1972) published the entire set of 4QM fragments, though
extensively and unhelpfully reconstructed on the basis of IQM. Very
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS 153

recently, G. VERMES has also offered a comparison of 4QS fragments a

and d with their parallel texts in lQS (VERMES, 1991).
In my own opinion, the most important aspect of such comparisons, at
least in the case of both the M and S materials, is the indieation of
important terminological variation, suggesting ideological or organisa-
tional evolution or revision. It is not, of course, remarkable that any
community (such as CD and lQS appear to portray) should undergo such
development, and that this development should be reflected in its own
literature - although the tendency to present the beliefs and practices of
the 'Qumran community' in a synchronie manner has persisted until
recently. Nor is it unexpected that a community might draw upon older
sources and ideas in creating its own literature. What is signifieant is
evidence that the M and S material existed in a fairly developed form,
and not just as source-material, before the formation of what is commonly
known as the 'Qumran community'. In other words, we cannot assume
that the formation of this community is a precondition for the origin of
these documents. Or, put another way, a group such as the 'Qumran com-
munity' would have inherited, and did not create, either a 'War Scroll' or
a 'Community Rule'. The evidence within the literary history of these
materials shows, in my opinion, the formation of the 'Qumran communi-
ty', or at least its ideology, only in the process of redaction, and not in
the original creation. lQM and lQS are evidence of a 'Qumran commun-
ity' only in the sense that they may have played a role in the develop-
ment of these texts.

2. 1QM AND 4QM

If the case of the S material is perhaps the more remarkable, it is the M

material that affords more ample evidence and allows more sec ure
deduction. It was already c1ear to HUNZINGER that the 4QM fragments he
published displayed a shorter version of the text than 1QM, and this by
virtue of the absence of certain expressions. Thus, for example, where
lQM XIV,5 has ml'!J []V';J, 4QMa has 1lJV';J; where lQM XIV,9 has ilJllV
n"'jNVi';J, 4QM a again has 1lJV';J; where lQM XIV,12 has ilJVinp []V,
4QM a has 1]]. In all, there are eight instances in whieh lQM has a
one-word plus and two cases where the plus is longer. Metrical consider-
ations make it probable that the 4QM a version is the more original. P.
VON DER OSTEN-SACKEN (1969) further argued that even within 4QMa
signs of expansion could be detected, while DA VIES (1977) traced termi-
154 P.R. DAVIES

nological and ideological development in 1QM itself, comparing cols.

XIV and XV -XIX. In this way the text of 4QMa could be seen as repre-
senting one stage of a longer process of textual and ideological develop-
ment. Its earliest detectable phase was nationalistic (4QMa ); it became
more strongly ethically marked (lQM XIV) and finally formally dualistic
(1QM XV-XIX). But however plausible such a reconstruction of the evol-
ution of dualistic ideology in the history of the M material, the evidence
of HUNZINGER's fragments remained suggestive rather than probative.
The publication of all the 4QM fragments afforded potentially further
evidence for (or against) such a theory of terminological and ideological
development. Their editor, M. BAILLET, had already expressed so me
doubts (BAlLLET, 1972; cf. CARMIGNAC, 1958) about HUNZINGER'S
interpretation of the variants, preferring the suggestion that 4QM a was a
fragment of a secondary, 'pocket-book' edition. In the full publication,
Baillet retained this hypothesis that the 4Q fragments belonged to a
recension which contained excerpts and/or a digest of the earlier 1QM
version, though he was obliged 10 conclude that 4QM also included
materials not in 1QM, and so allowed for some 'personal additions'
having been made to the 'pocket-book'.
The most recent - and most thorough - comparison of the 1QM and
4QM materials by J. DUHAIME (1987) endorses the view of HUNZINGER,
VON DER OSTEN-SACKEN and DA VIES that the 4Q fragments exhibit an
earlier text than 1QM. DUHAIME examined a few lines of 4QMa (frg. 11 ii
8-18) which parallel lQM XVI,11-XVII,14, and noted the presence of
four terms in 1QM which appear to have been deliberately rewritten into
a more dualistic expression. DUHAIME's conclusion, nevertheless, based
on this material and also on a comparison of 4QMa frgs. 1-3 and lQM
(DUHAIME, 1990), is that the authors of the two manuscripts worked
independently from common sources or traditions, though with the
prob ability that 4QMa exhibits typologically an earlier version. This order
of priority was also advocated by F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ (GARCfA MARTf-
NEZ, 1988).
In the light of these investigations, the literary history of the M
material in the Qumran manuscripts, though not amenable to reconstruc-
tion in every detail, can be suggested in outline: to begin with, the
replacement of [] ')"lnJ for J'l N within 1QM XV -XX which had earlier
(DA VIES, 1977) been posited on the basis of internal evidence, seems
confirmed by the evidence of 4QMa , where only J'l N occurs. There is
also no dualistic terminology in the 4QM fragments. There is no evident
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS 155

seven-stage single battle such as lQM XV-XIX contains. What had, in

earlier years of Qumran research, been identified as the distinctive
characteristic of 'Qumran theology' seems, therefore, to be the product of
a particular redactional activity. Earlier versions of what we know as
lQM are devoid of the characteristic 'Qumran' traits so prominent in
lQM itse1f. But the 4Q materials do seem to belong to a 'pre-Qumranic
War ScroIl', as we might call it. Therefore, in the case of the M material
at any rate, the formation of a particular community (at least, not the
'Qumran community') did not generate the text: instead, an already
existing text was recast into a form which exhibited a distinctive ideologi-
cal quality, namely a dualistic one, where a long series of battles between
Israel and the nations becomes a seven-stage battle between the 'children
of light' and the 'children of darkness', the latter comprising in particular
the 'Kittim '.

3. 1QS AND 4QSb,d

The case of 1QM is important, though since this manuscript does not
actually describe a particular community, evidence of its deve10pment
over aperiod of time, including the introduction of ideology, cannot
contribute directly to our understanding of the formation of any groups
such as the 'Qumran community'. More important for our purposes is
evidence of such development in the S material OQS, 4QS, 5QS), of
which our only knowledge until recently depended, as has so often been
the case, on statements from J. MILIK (MILIK, 1960, 1977). However, as
with IQM, earlier attempts to infer the literary history of the S material
from I QS itse1f are to be noted. The proposal that 1QS VIII and IX
reflect aperiod anterior to the formation of the yahad, first suggested by
E. SUTCLIFFE (SUTCLIFFE, 1959), were developed by MURPHY-ü'CONNOR
(MURPHY-ü'CONNOR, 1969) and POUILLY (POUILLY, 1976) into a basi-
cally four-stage theory of the growth of the yahad. In a more recent study
of the supposedly earliest parts of lQS, I analysed certain problems raised
(though not previously discussed) by agreements and discrepancies in the
terminology of 1QS VIII-IX and CD XIX,33b-XX,34 (DAVIES, 1991).
The outcome of all these studies is to cast some doubt upon our presumed
knowledge of the origin of the yahad and the relationship of the 'Teacher
of Righteousness' to it.
In an earlier study of the term 'Sons of Zadok' in the Qumran manu-
scripts I had suggested that this phrase is confined to only one literary
156 P.R.DAVIES

stratum in 1QS, and did not at any time designate any community at all,
as most commentators continued to hold (and still do!). This observation
now seems to be borne out by the 4QS material. A preliminary publica-
tion of parts of 4QSb and 4QSd by VERMES (VERMES, 1991), which
greatly improves the reading of MILIK (MILIK, 1977) has added a new
dimension to the problem. In VERMES's publication, the following
important differences emerge between 1QS V,1-4 and the parallel passage
in 4QSd:

lQS

PT1:ll ' J] ,~ ';Jy []'] 'ViIJl ..... 1n'il 'Vi J ~ ';J 110il ilTl
[] 'prnlJil 1n'il 'Vi J ~ ]11 ,~ ';JYl n 'l]il 'llJVi [1' JillJil
..... n'l]]

4QS

[]']lil ,~ ';Jy []']'ViIJl ..... il1lnil 'ViJ~ ')Y ';J'JVJlJ';J Vi11lJ

As VERMES has emphasized, 4QS, which, like 4QM, has a shorter text
than its Cave 1 counterpart, is lacking two key terms from the parallel
text cited. One is the term 'sons of Zadok', the other, even more import-
antly, is yahad. In the case of the former, we might conclude that the
presence of the 'sons of Zadok' in certain parts of lQS is not, as I
previously surmised, due to the fact that this section of lQS belongs to a
later period in its literary development, when it was inserted into the
existing text, but rather to recensional activity within that section itself.
How else can one explain the existence of an otherwise parallel text
which omits the phrase? Moreover, the substitution of 'anse hayyahad by
'anse hattora can only be regarded as remarkable. What might be made
of these two divergences? MILIK'S opinion, that lQS's text here repre-
sents a 'recension paraphrasee et glossee' while 4QSd,S text is 'indubita-
blement originale' (MILIK, 1977, 78) is blunt. VERMES concludes, more
cautiously, that we have two 'traditions', of which that in 4QS is the
earlier. But on either interpretation we have an intriguing problem.
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS 157

4. REDACTION AND REALITY

On VERMES's view, in what relationship are we to understand the two

'traditions' as standing with the actualities of a supposedly historical
community? Were there two views of how this community was to be
called, or how it was to be ruled? It may be that 'anse hayyahad and
'anse hattora can be treated as alternatives for the same entity, however
unlikely this suggestion may strike one; but this cannot be said for the
other variant. Either the 'sons of Zadok' exercised authority or they did
not! Indeed, even IQS V,2-3 shows some sign of tampering: it is very
likely that here, and in the identical expression in V,9, the addition of the
phrase 'and of the multitude of the men of the yahad who hold fast to the
covenant' is secondary (the repetition of the term 'covenant' being
particularly suspicious). The result of the additional phrase is, of course,
like the final edict of the king in the book of Esther, to make nonsense of
the original. The 'sons of Zadok' have no authority if they share it with
everyone else! The problem, then, is this: if there are traditions, i.e. if the
explanation must be given in terms of parallel contemporary texts, how
can either have functioned at the same time as a rule for a community?
MILIK's view, which implies that differences between - and within -
manuscripts can be assigned chronological or typological priority (and
here MURPHY-O'CONNOR and POUILLY would concur) avoids that diffi-
culty, but leaves unresolved the problem of why an obsolete version of a
'community rule' should be in existence at all alongside an updated one.
For MILIK's own dating of 4QSd places it at 50-25 BCE (MILIK, 1977, 78),
which is certainly no earlier than the date assigned to 1QS! The fact of
apparently 'obsolete' texts being present in the Qumran corpus creates
severe difficulties when such texts are being used to reconstruct the
structure, practice and belief a community. If such texts are to be under-
stood as rules for a living community, we have to ask why older versions
of such a rule should be copied (not merely preserved) when newer
versions are apparently in existence and presumably in effect?
The evidence of simultaneous and yet variant versions of what is called
a 'community rule' at first sight suggests a paradox: if the 'rule' is a rule,
there can only be one version in effect at any one time. The paradox
obliges us to reconsider our premises: is 1 QS a 'community rufe' at all?
Once the question has been posed, the answer offers itself with surprising
clarity. Quite obviously lQS has not been composed as a rule for a
community. It is incoherent, unsystematic and contradictory. Parts of it
158 P.R.DAVIES

have the rubric appropriate to such a genre (e.g. V,I), and several head-
ings contain the word serek. But whether or not any of its sources may
have been fragments of rules for a community or communities, the
contents of the manuscript 1QS belong to some other genre, a mixture of
rules of behaviour for a group called a yahad, some instruction reminis-
cent of wisdom teaching, a blueprint for a future group called 'asat
hayyahad or 'asat hattora (cp. the variants between yahad [lQS] and tora
[4QSd] above), rules for the behaviour of a maskil, and a hymn. No
community could actually function by using this text as a basis for its
identity, belief or conduct. At best, it is a rather muddled archive, a
receptacle of bits and pieces from different tim es and authors.
How, where, and for what purpose, then, has lQS come into being?
The question has indeed been addressed before, in MURPHy-O'CONNOR's
analysis of the manuscript. Here I shall try to take the implications of his
analysis a little further. My own starting point is that the Sitz im Leben of
1QS is not a living community; the manuscript has not been written to
serve as a rule for a community, or even necessarily written at all within
a community. It is a repository of rules and other material relating
perhaps to some community or communities whether past, present or
future, and whether real or ideal. But the existence of variants to 1QS,
simultaneously preserved and recopied, suggests that they almost certainly
did not function as regulative texts within a community: as already stated,
the form of 1QS is inapposite to this purpose. Perhaps, then, the S
material is not directly the product of a community at all? What I mean is
that whether the S material was written within a community or not is
irrelevant, since it has no communal purpose and if written within a
community is best regarded as a product of individuals or groups, for
their own individual or group purposes.
This line of deduction leads us to consider the feasibility of a literary
genre which describes, even legislates, for a community which is strictly
non-existent, whether or not this community bears a relationship to a past
or presently existing one. Let us consider such a genre for a moment.
There are texts among the Qumran corpus that quite obviously do not
describe an actual community but an ideal one, whether envisaged or only
imagined. The phrase 'J ~lVJ'J il'J ~ nPilJ, which occurs in lQS VIII and
IX (and where the text is the product of two different hands) seems to
point to a future community. The same is widely held to be the case with
lQS', generally designated as an 'eschatological' or 'messianic' rule. Is
the reference to the assembly of its members by 'thousands, hundred,
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS 159

fifties and tens' (1 QS" II,21-22) to be taken as rea1istic or idealistic? Is

the presence of the 'Messiah of Israel' a reality or not? Is the Temple
Scroll, too, referring to an actua1 society or an ideal one?
Any scholar familiar with the history of Judaean/Jewish literature will
be aware of the genre of utopia-writing, which often revels in the most
specific details, and often takes the form of a concrete description of a
past reality. Ezekiel's city and temple, it is true, claim no historical
reality, but what of the Pentateuch al 'tent of meeting', the temple of
Solomon, or the cult of the Chronicler? If we turn our attention to laws,
what of Deuteronomy itself, which is hardly the law code of areal
community but rather the product of a scribal ideal (see WEINFELD,
1972)? Or the Holiness Code, or the supreme instance, the Mishnah,
which is a mixture of historical reality and unreality, whose Sanhedrin,
for example, is certainly fictional, and whose laws regarding execution (in
the same tractate, Sanhedrin) hardly credible as historical practice? Quite
clearly, there exists a literary tradition of utopian description, of idealistic
legislation, of invented societies.
We are, of course, dealing not with pure fantasy in every instance;
there is an element, great or small, of historical reality underlying most of
these descriptions. But, as with the pre-exilic 'all Israel', the most ambi-
tious idealistic creation of all, the community or society depicted in the
literature is not translatable simply or directly into an historical one. The
literary profile is an ideological projection from a society or class whose
own nature is hidden within the text and needs to be discovered before
the literature can be properly interpreted historically. With this literary
tradition in mind, we ought to approach any Qumran literature that
describes or legislates for societies or communities with more circumspec-
tion. The fact that the literature projects a community or communities
does not mean that these communities are real as described, nor indeed
that there are even communities which produced the literature. Perhaps
the strongest testimony to the distance between real historical commun-
ities and the production of manuscripts is CD itself, which consists of two
mediaeval manuscripts written a thousand years after the time of the other
texts in which its 'teacher of righteousness' and its yahad appear. Who
copied these manuscripts, and for what purpose? How far is the commun-
ity of CD an historical one, and how far a literary one, for the mediaeval
copyists? If a community can be preserved in ink for a thousand years
after it is believed to have been defunct, should we not take note of the
fact that literary communities and historical ones do not have a straight-
160 P.R.DAVIES

forward relationship to one another and indeed frequently do not corre-

spond very much at all?

5. LITERATURE AND HISTORY

The history of Qumran scholarship reflects in many ways the contours of

biblical scholarship. There has always been in each a strong underlying
tendency to translate realistic description into historical fact, and equally a
strong desire to import archaeological data into the historical construct
formed by such a reading of the biblical narrative. Recognition by biblical
scholarship of the value of a literary criticism which is not driven solely
by historical enquiry, and an analysis and interpretation of archaeological
data which is independent of biblical constructs has led recently to a
much more careful reading of biblical texts as historical artifacts them-
selves. Such a reading, in historical terms, sees the primary task as the
elucidation of the historical profile of the community, dass and society
from which the texts arise and not the community which the text con-
structs. Whether a literary community, by which I mean any community
described in texts, has an historical existence outside the text, and if so,
to what extent the reality and the text correspond, needs to be deduced
from literary analysis and historical investigation, and not presupposed.
I am advocating a programmatic caution, even a programmatic scepti-
cism, as the proper methodology for interpretation of the Qumran texts.
But I do not wish to be accused either of outright negativity nor of a
dogmatic refusal to permit texts to speak of real societies and commun-
ities. The existence of the ruins at Khirbet Qumran and such references as
Pliny the EIder' s to the Essenes by the Dead Sea do fumish evidence for
the existence of an historical community such as might underlie refer-
ences in the Qumran scrolls. These Essenes might be the communi-
ty/communities described in the ScroIls, or their authors, or both. There is
no justification to reject apriori the possibility of such historical com-
munities. But the relationship between literary descriptions of commun-
ities which surface in the Scrolls and any historical communities must be
delicately explored, and the nature of the literary evidence must be fully
and accurately appreciated. That literary evidence raises, as I have tried to
make plain, very serious difficulties in reconstructing from it an historical
'Qumran community'. The S materials we have do not present us neatly
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS 161

with an historical community. Can we at least say who might have been
responsible for the production of lQS itself?
1QS itself is almost certainly, as is most of the biblical literature, the
product of scribal revision and redaction, the literary and ideological
output of a group of writers. Is the presence of, for example, dualistic
glosses and revisions in several of the scrolls the outcome of a community
ideology or of the ideology of a scribal group, which has written its own
perspective into this and other texts as part of the process of preservation
and collation of library texts? A possible implication of the suggestion
that the Qumran texts are products of Jerusalem libraries - a suggestion to
which I am by no means committed, but which deserves respectful
consideration - is that the literature has its Sitz im Leben in a scribal
ethos. Now it is also true that the same Sitz im Leben can be postulated
within the buildings on ce standing at Qumran. But in either case the point
of suggesting this rather narrower setting is to highlight the facility of
scribes for inventing or transforming communities and their rules, embel-
lishing texts once belonging to communities with imaginative amend-
ments and developments, to the point where the historical almost vanishes
beneath the ideal. The phenomenon of 'literary sectarianism' is a possibil-
ity that needs to be entertained, and can be added to the growing list of
new and reopened questions about the Dead Sea Scrolls which is now
promising an exciting agenda for the foreseeable future, inviting that
breadth of knowledge, fastidious exegesis and capacity for critical innova-
tion which Adam VAN DER WOUDE combines in such large measure, for
wh ich reason I am honoured to dedicate these ruminations to hirn.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

M. BAlLLET
1972 "Les manuscrits de la Regle de la Guerre de la grotte 4 de Qum-
ran", RB 79, 221.
1982 Qumran Grotte 4, III (DJD 7), Oxford, pp. 12-72, pI. V-VIII, x-
XVII, XXIV, XXVI.
J. CARMIGNAC
1958 La Regle de La Guerre (Autour de la Bible), Paris.
P.R. DAVIES
1977 lQM, The War Scroll from Qumran: Its Structure and History
(BibOr 32), Rome.
162 P.R. DAVIES

1982 The Damascus Covenant: An Interpretation of the 'Damascus

Document' (JSOTS 25), Sheffield.
1987 Behind the Essenes (BJS 94), Atlanta.
1991 "Communities at Qumran and the Case of the Missing 'Teacher"',
RQ 15 (Memorial Jean Starcky), 275-286.
J. DUHAIME
1987 "Dualistic Reworking in the Scrolls from Qumran", CBQ 49,
32-56.
1990 "Etude comparative de 4QMa fgg. 1-3 et lQM", RQ 55, 459-472.
F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ
1988 "Estudios qumninicos 1975-1985: panorama critico (III)", Estudios
Bfblicos 46, 351-354.
C.-H. HUNZINGER
1957 "Fragmente einer älteren Fassung des Buches Milbama aus Höhle
4 von Qumran", ZAW 69, 131-151.
J.T. MILIK
1960 Review of P. WERNBERG-M0LLER, The Manual of Discipline
Translated and Annotated, RB 67, 410-416.
1962 DJD III, Oxford, 180-183.
1977 "Numerotation des Feuilles des Rou1eaux dans 1e Scriptorium de
Qumran», Semitica 27, 75-81.
J. MURPHY-O'CONNOR
1969 "La genese litteraire de la Regle de 1a communaute", RB 76,
528-549.
P. VON DER OSTEN-SACKEN
1969 Gott und Belial. Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zum
Dualismus in den Texten aus Qumran (SUNT 6), Göttingen.
J. POUILLY
1976 La Regle de la communaute de Qumran: son evolution litteraire,
Paris.
E. F. SUTCLIFFE
1959 "The First Fifteen Members of the Qumran Community: A Note
on 1QS 8.lff.", iSS 4, 134-138.
G. VERMES
1991 "Pre1iminary Remarks on Unpub1ished Fragments of the Commun-
ity Ru1e from Qumran Cave 4", JJS 42, 250-255.
M. WEINFELD
1972 Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, Oxford.
 REDACTION AND SECTARIANISM IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS 163

A. WILSON & L. WILLS

1982 "Literary Süurces für the Temple Scrüll", HTR 75, 275-288.
M.O. WISE
1990 A Critical Study of the Temple Scroll from Qumran Cave 11
(Studies in Ancient Orienta1 Civi1izatiün 49), Chicagü.
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390

BY

Michael A. Knibb

London, G real B ritain

A number of writings from the Early Jewish period, despite many differ-
ences in presentation, share the view that Israel remained in a condition
of exile long after the actual return from Babyion at the end of the sixth
century, and within these writings the post-exilic period is depicted both
as a time of oppression and suffering and also as a time of apostasy.
Views such as these are to be found, for example, in Daniel 9 (see verses
24-27), in the Vision of the Animals (1 Enoch 85-90: see 89,59-90,38), or
in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93,1-10 + 91,11-17: see 93,8-10),
and are presented, explicitly or implicitly, in a wide range of other
documents. In an article published in 1976 I discussed this kind of
interpretation of the exilic and post-exilic periods as it was reflected in
the writings that were known at the time.! However, two documents from
Qumran that have only recently been published, 4Q372 and 4Q390, also
contain material that deserves consideration in this context, and the
purpose of this study is to offer some brief comments on these writings
from the point of view of their understanding of the exilic and post-exilic
periods.
The contribution to scholarship which Adam VAN DER WOUDE has
made by his numerous writings, by his work as an editor, and by his
encouragement of younger scholars, has been enormous and has covered
many fields, including, not least, the literature of Early Judaism and the
Dead Sea Scrolls. This brief note is offered to hirn as a token of gratitude
both for the scholarly contribution he has made and for the great kindness
he has shown and the encouragement he has offered over many years.

I M.A. KNIBB, "The Exile in the Literature of the Intertestamental Period", Heythrop
Journal 17 (1976), 253-272.
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 165

1.4Q372

4Q372 is a manuscript of a work that is apparently also represented in

three other manuscripts: 2Q22, 4Q371, and 4Q373. Abrief discussion of
the manuscript evidence for the work as a whole and a preliminary
edition of 4Q372 1 was given by Eileen SCHULLER at the Groningen
Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, and at the Madrid Conference she also
provided preliminary editions of 4Q371 3, 4Q372 2, and 4Q373 2 • The
work has subsequently been discussed by GARCfA MARTfNEZ3 • As
SCHULLER notes, much about this work remains obscure. But it is clear
that the fragments that survive consist alm ost without exception of
narrative and psalmic material, and it appears that the narrative sections
provided a historical setting for autobiographical psalms in which heroes
from the past acknowledged God's actions on their behalt. Thus, apart
from the Joseph fragment discussed here, several fragments (2Q22,
4Q372 19, 4Q373), consisting of both narrative and hymnic material, are
apparently concerned with David's defeat of Goliath.
Fragment 1 of 4Q372, entitled by SCHULLER 'A Text about Joseph' is
the Iargest fragment of the manuscript to have survived and is indeed far
Iarger than any of the fragments of the other manuscripts. It consists of a
narrative section (lines I-ISa) and a psalm in the form of a lament (lines
I5b-32). The psalmist is not named, but Joseph is clearly the speaker. It
is, however, the narrative that is our concern, and 1 give this here in
SCHULLER's translation:

2 the one who does [... ] ... ; strangers [... ]

3 and the idol-priests, and they honoured those who serve[ idols ... ]

2 E. SCHULLER, "4Q372 1: A Text about Joseph", The Texts 0/ Qumran and the

History 0/ the Community: Proceedings 0/ the Groningen Congress on the Dead Sea
Serolls (20-23 August 1989), Vol. Il: Non-Biblical Texts [RQ 14/3 (1990)], 349-76; id.,
"A Preliminary Study of 4Q373 and Some Related (?) Fragments", in J. TREBOLLE
BARRERA and L. VEGAS MONTANER (eds.), Proceedings 0/ the International Congress
on the Dead Sea Serolls, Madrid, 18-21 March 1991 (Studies on the Texts of the Desert
of Judah), 2 vols., forthcoming - see the report in GARclA MARTINEZ (below, note 3).
For 2Q22, see M. BAILLET, "Un Apocryphe de David (?)", DJD III, 81-82 and PI. xv.
See also R.H. EISENMAN and J.M. ROBINSON (eds.), A Facsimile Edition 0/ the Dead
Sea Serolls, 2 vols. (Washington DC, 1991), plates 869, 870, 1027.
3 F. GARclA MARTINEZ, "Nuevos Textos no Bfblicos procedentes de Qumran",
Estudios Bfblicos 49 (1991), 97-134 (here 116-123).
4 Cf. GARclA MARTINEZ, Estudios Btblicos 49 (1991), 121-123.
166 M.A. KNIBB

4 the Most High, and he gave them into the hand of the nations .[ ... and
he scattered]
5 them in all the lands, and among all [the nations he dispersed them ...
they did not come ... ]
6 Israel. And he destroyed them from the land [... ].[ ... from the place ...
they did not give them rest ... ]
7 The nations were given a position in the valley of vision and [... ]. [...
Zion and they did ... and they made]
8 Jerusalem into ruins and the mountain of my God into wooded
heigh[ts ... ].[ ... the laws of ... ]
9 God and also Judah together with him, and he stood at the crossroads
to d[o ... ]
10 to be together with his two brothers. And in all this, Joseph was cast
into lands he did not k[now ... ]
11 among a foreign nation and dispersed in all the world. All their
mountains were appalled at them .. [... fools ... ]
12 and making for themselves a high place upon a high mountain to
provoke Israel to jealousy; and they spoke with wor[ds of ... ]
13 the sons of Jacob and they acted terribly with the words of their
mouth to revile against the tent of Zion; and they spoke .. [words of
falsehood, and all]
14 words of deceit they spoke to anger Levi and Judah and Benjamin
with their words. And in all this Joseph [was given]
15 into the hands of foreigners, devouring his strength and breaking all
his bones until the time of his end 5•

SCHULLER has convincingly argued that this text is not an exegetical

reflection on Genesis, but is concerned with Joseph as representative of
the northern tribes. On this basis the text can be seen to follow the
Sin-Exile-Return pattern (lines 2-lOa)6, and then to depict the post-exilic
period, which, as SCHULLER notes, is seen here - as elsewhere - as a time
of suffering and oppression (lines 10b-15af. SCHULLER further argues
that 4Q372 I is a specifically anti-Samaritan text: the group to which

5 There is an overlap between lines 5-14 of 4Q372 1 and 4Q371, which contained a
second copy of this text. 4Q371 has only survived in a very fragmentary form, but the
preserved fragments did enable SCHULLER to make a number of restorations in lines 5-13
of 4Q372 1.
6 The Texts ojQumran [RQ 14/3 (1990)], 367-371.

7 The Texts oj Qumran, 370-371 and note 33.

 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 167

reference is made in 1ines lIff. are described as 'fools' (cf. Sir 50,25-26;
T. Levi 7,2) and are accused of building 'a high place upon a high
mountain'; this is seen by SCHULLER as referring either to the temple
erected by the Samaritans on Mt. Gerizim that is mentioned by Josephus
(Ant. XI, 306-312.321-324), or at least as referring to some sort of cu1t
p1ace on Mt. Gerizim. SCHULLER concludes that 4Q372 1 is one of the
small group of texts concerned with the fate of the tribes exiled from the
north, and that it is specifically concerned with the question who in the
Second Temple period were the true descendants of Joseph. Were they
those who were living at the time in the former territories of Ephraim and
Manasseh, or were they the descendants of the northern tribes 1iving in
exile?8
If SCHULLER's overall line of interpretation is correct, the emp10yment
of the S.E.R. pattern is not without problems. Although the text is
severely damaged, the treatment of the periods of Sin (lines 2-3) and
Exile, where the narrative covers the events of both 722 and (in lines 7,
8a) of 587, is straightforward. But the treatment of the Return (lines
8b-lOa) remains enigmatic, partly because of the damage the text has
suffered, and partly because the meaning of what has survived is not
immediately obvious.
The first point to be noticed is that it seems virtually certain that lines
8b-10a referred in some way to the return from exile of Levi, Judah and
Benjamin. These three are clearly the three 'brothers' with whom 1ines
8b-10a are concerned, and their presence in the land, where the erection
of the 'high place upon a high mountain' and the revi1ing of the temple in
Jerusa1em arouse their anger, is presupposed in 1ine 14; the presence of
Levi, Judah and Benjamin is in marked contrast to the continued absence
in exile of Joseph. But while it seems almost certain that the return was
mentioned in some way, we can on1y guess at what stood in the portions
of lines 8 and 9 that are lost. SCHULLER specu1ates that the return of Levi
was mentioned at the end of line 8, and that Benjamin was introduced at
the very end of line 9, and she suggests that line 8 is possibly to be
restored as something like [WYSB LWY LHB]YN LHQY[] 'L : 'and Levi
returned to teach the statutes of God'9. This is an attractive suggestion,
but cannot be more than this.

8 The Texts 0/ Qumran, 371-376.

9 The Texts 0/ Qumran, 359.
168 M.A. KNIBB

The second point is that the significance of the c1ause 'and he stood at
the crossroads to d[o' (WHW' 'L 'M HDRKYM Y'MWD L'[SWT)lO is
unc1ear. An allusion to Ezek 21,26 (KY 'MD MLK BBL 'L 'M HDRK BR'S
SNY HDRKYM) is apparently intended, just as there are c1ear allusions to
Isa 22, land 5 in line 7 (BOY HHZWN [4Q371 1 3 HZYWN]), and to a
combination of Ps 79,1 and Micah 3,12 in lines 7-8 ([WYSYMW 'T]
YRWSLYM L'YYM W'T HR 'LHY LBMWT Y'[R]). But whereas the biblical
allusions in lines 7 and 8 are entirely appropriate in that the passages in
question are all concerned with the destruction of Jerusalem - explicitly
presented in Isaiah ll and Micah as a punishment for sin, the appropriate-
ness of the allusion to Ezek 21,26 is less obvious. In 4Q372 1 9 the
natural assumption is that Judah is the one who 'stood at the crossroads',
but in Ezekiel it is the king of Babyion. Furthermore, the king is
described as using divination in order to decide whether to take the road
for Rabbah or Jerusalem, and the statement about the king occurs in the
context of a passage (Ezek 21,23-32) which signifies judgement on
Jerusalem and its prince. However, it is worth observing that although it
has often been assumed that the scene is set at Riblah, where Nebuchad-
nezzar had his headquarters (cf. 2 Kings 25,6), it is perhaps more likely
that the setting intended by Ezekiel for the decision to take the route to
Jerusalem was at the borders of Mesopotamia 12. If the author of 4Q372
believed that the scene was set in Mesopotamia, then the statement 'and
he stood at the crossroads to d[o' might be understood to refer to Judah
in exile on the point of return, and the allusion to Ezekiel might have
been intended to mark a deli berate contrast with the action of Nebuchad-
nezzar with its negative intent.
Lines IOb-15a cover the post-exilic period and refer to the erection by
the 'fools' of a 'high place upon a high mountain' and to the blasphem-
ous words spoken by them against the temple in Jerusalem. As we have
already seen, SCHULLER has convincingly argued that the text refers to
the Samaritans (or perhaps better 'proto-Samaritans') and that 4Q372 1 is
to be understood as a specifically anti-Samaritan text 13 • The emphasis in
lines 10b-15a is on the continued exile of the northern tribes, represented

The restoration L'[SWT is supported by 4Q371 1 7, which has L'S[WT.

10

For the interpretation of the passage in Isaiah, see R.E. CLEMENTS, 1saiah 1-39
11

(NCBC, Grand Rapids-London, 1980), 182ff.

12 Cf. W. ZIMMERLI, Ezechiel (BKAT XIIVI, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1969),488.
13 See The Texts ojQumran, 371-376.
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 169

by Joseph, who in exile suffer oppression and persecution (lines lOb-lla,

14b-15a), although the effect of the actions of the 'foo1s' on the Judaean
community, represented by Levi, Judah and Benjamin, is also clear1y in
mind (line 14a). SCHULLER has properly observed that in 4Q372 1 13-14,
as in other post-exi1ic texts, 'the present is still experienced as a time of
suffering and oppression'J4, and 4Q372 1 should certainly be considered
a10ngside these other texts in which the post-exilic period is depicted both
as a time of apostasy (cf. e.g. Dan 9,24; 1 Enoch 89,73-74a; 90,7 (Vision
of the Animals); 93,9 (Apocalypse of Weeks); Jub. 1,14; Testament of
Moses 4,5-5,6) and as a time of oppression and persecution (cf. e.g. Dan
9,25; 1 Enoch 89,74b; 90,2-4; Baruch 3,8). But 4Q372 1 clearly has
particular concerns, which to some extent set it apart; and its distinctive-
ness becomes apparent when it is observed that these other texts are
primarily concerned with the situation in Jerusalem itself and in the
Judaean community. Thus, for example, in contrast to the attack on the
'high place upon a high mountain' (4Q372 1), the Vision of the Animals
refers to the impurity of the restored cult in Jerusalem, and the Testament
of Moses similarly contains a strong condemnation of the post-exilic
cultus (4,8). There is a further difference from the Testament of Moses in
that although this is one of the texts that is concerned, 1ike 4Q372 1, with
the fate of the (ten) northern tribes (cf. 3,4-4,9), in the Testament, accord-
ing to what is probably the correct reading of 4,9, the northern tribes do
not survive in exile, but 'disappear into oblivion,J5.
One further point deserves to be made. Sc HULLER , as we have seen,
argues that 'Joseph' in 4Q372 1 represents the northem tribes, although
she does suggest that in line 27 of the psalmic material ('and to teach
sinners your laws and all who abandon you [your] Tor[ah)' "there may be
some influence ... from the Genesis Joseph-figure who came to be viewed
as a wise teacher"J6. However, GARCfA MARTfNEZ has argued that both
interpretations of 'Joseph' (as patriarch and as representing the northem
tribes) can be recognized in the text. He argues that the author interpreted
the situation of the exile of the northern tribes in the light of the Genesis
narrative, and that in effect he transposed the story of Joseph to his own
time and situation, that of polemic against the Samaritans in the Macca-

The Texts 0/ Qumran, 370 and note (33).

14
See SCHULLER, The Texts 0/ Qumran, 369, note (30), with reference to D.R.
15
SCHWARTZ, 'The Tribes of As. Mos. 4:7-9", JBL 99 (1980),222.
16 The Texts 0/ Qumran, 366
170 M.A. KNIBB

be an epoch, and 'p1aced in the mouth of the patriarch a hymn which

expressed the hope of liberation of the exiled tribes'17. Although the
fragments that are apparently concemed with David's defeat of Goliath
(2Q22, 4Q372 19, 4Q373) are too small to permit firm conclusions,
GARCfA MARTfNEZ be1ieves that the author may have handled this
incident in a similar fashion, and he suggests that recognition of this kind
of transposition of a biblica1 incident to a 1ater historical reality pro vi des
a key to understanding the work as a who1e 18 •
It is not my wish to comment on the character of this work as a who1e.
But so far as the Joseph fragment is concemed, it seems to me doubtful
whether any real influence from the story of the patriarch Joseph can be
discemed in the text. It is true that the psalm uttered by 'Joseph' is
uttered by Joseph as an individual. But this seems to me to stay within
the legitimate bounds of the representation of the tribes by their epony-
mous ancestor, and, with the possible exception of the idea of Joseph as a
wise teacher (li ne 27), there is nothing in the psalm, or in the fragment as
a whole, that reflects in any concrete way the story of Joseph in Genesis.
The fact that the patriarch was in exile in Egypt does not seem to me of
sufficient significance to show that in this text the exile of the northem
tribes was interpreted in the light of the Genesis story, or that the mod,el
provided by Genesis was transposed to a later historical situation.

2.4Q390

The fragments of 4Q390 form part of a historical review that is cast in

the form of a vaticinium ex eventu. Some phrases from the manuscript
were given by MILIK in 1976 in The Books of Enoch 19 , and the manu-
script was briefly mentioned by Devorah DIMANT in her two articles on
4QSecond Ezekiepo. However, it was on1y at the Madrid Conference on
the Dead Sea Scrolls that DIMANT gave a preliminary edition of the two

Estudios BibUcos 49 (1991), 121-122.

17
Estudios BibUcos 49 (1991), 122-123.
18

19 J.T, MILIK, The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4 (Oxford,

1976), 255.
20 J. STRUGNELL and D. DIMANT, "4QSecond Ezekiel", MEMORIAL JEAN CARMIG-

NAC [RQ 13 (1988)], 45; D. DIMANT and J. STRUGNELL, "The Merkabah Vision in
Second Ezekiel (4Q3854)", The Texts of Qumran [RQ 14/3 (1990)], 331.
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 171

largest fragments from the manuscript (4Q390 1 and 4Q390 2 i-ii)21.

These fragments also formed the subject of a lecture by her at the Jour-
nees Bibliques de Louvain in 1991 and have subsequently been discussed
by GARCfA MARTfNEZ22 .
The historical review is given in the form of a divine address to an
unnamed figure; DIMANT believes that this figure is Moses, but there is
no unambiguous evidence to show that this is S023. The events that are
covered in the review form part of a sequence of jubilee periods (1 7-8, 2
i 4), but reference is also made to periods of seventy years (1 2 SB 'YM
SNH, 2 i 6 SNYM SB 'YM)24 and to a week of years (2 i 4 SBW' SN[YM).
The details of this time sequence are not very clear, but the view that the
events described in fragment 2 i-ii come before those of fragment I seems
to me clearly correcf5• I now give a translation of the two fragments in
this order; the translation largely follows that of DIMANT, but I have also
consulted the translations of GARCfA MARTfNEZ and BROOKE26 .

Fragment 2, Column i

2 [and my] house, [ ... t]he holy sanctua[ry

3 it was thus done(?) [... ] fo[r] these things will come upon them [... ].
and th[er]e will be
4 the rule of Belial over them so as to deliver them to the sword for a
week of yea[rs ... in] that jubilee they will
5 violate all my statutes and all my commandments which I will
command t[hem and send (to them) by the hand of] my servants the
prophets.

21 D. DIMANT, "New Light from Qumran on the Jewish Pseudepigrapha" in Procee-

dings 0/ the International Congress on the Dead Sea Serails, Madrid (above, note 2),
forthcoming - see the report by GARCfA MARTfNEZ, Estudios Bfblicos 49 (1991), 130-34.
See also EISEN MAN and ROBINSON, A Facsimile Edition 0/ the Dead Sea Serolls, plate
1456.
22 See note 21.
23 Cf. GARCIA MARTINEZ, Estudios B{blicos 49 (1991), 130-131.

24 Note, however, that in both cases MILIK (The Books 0/ Enoch, 255) argued that
the text referred to 'weeks of years', not to periods of seventy years.
25 Cf. GARCIA MARTINEZ, Estudios B{blicos 49 (1991), 131, 133.
26 My knowledge of DIMANT's translation is based on the translation she provided at

the Joumees Bibliques de Louvain. Cf. GARCIA MARTfNEZ, Estudios Biblicos 49 (1991),
131-133; GJ. BROOKE, The Dead Sea Serails in Recent Research (The Frankland-West
Weekend School, 28-29 March 1992), University of London Centre for Extra-MuraJ
Studies, 12.
172 M.A. KNIBB

6 And th[ey] will [beg]in to quarrel with each other for seventy years
from the day when they violate the [oath and the] covenant. And I
will gi ve them
7 [into the hand of the ang]els of hatred, and they will ru1e over them.
And they will not know and will not understand that I am angry with
them because of their unfaithfulness
8 [in that] they will [forsa]ke me, and do that which is evil in my eyes,
and that which I do not desire they will choose, acting arrogantly for
the sake of wealth and gain
9 [ ... And eac]h will steal what (belongs) to his neighbour, and they
will oppress one another. My sanctuary they will make unclean,
10 [... ] my [festi]vals ... [... ]. And with forei[gners they] will profane
their offs[pr]ing. Their priests will commit violence
11 [... ]... [... ] .. and
12 [... ] their sons

Fragment 2, Column ii

4 the ascen[ts (?) ... ]

5 and by the word [... ]
6 we .. [ ... ]
7 they will [not (?)] know, and I will sen[d ... ]
8 and with spears to see[k ... ]
9 in the midst of the land and on [... ]
10 their possession, and they will sacrifice in [ ... ]
11 they will profane it, and the altar [... ]

Fragment I

2 rand] viol[ating ... ]( re)turn [... ] into the hand of the sons of Aar[on ... ]
seventy years [... ]
3 And the sons of Aaron will rule over them, but they will not walk
[in] my [wa]ys which I comma[nd] you so that
4 you may warn them. And they also will do that which is evil in my
eyes according to all that Israel did
5 in the former days of its kingdom, except for those who come up first
from the land of their captivity in order to build
6 the sanctuary. And I will speak to them and will send them com-
mandment(s), and they will understand all that
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 173

7 they have forsaken, they and their fathers. And when that generation
passes away, in the seventh jubilee
8 of the desolation of the land, they will forget law, and appointed time,
and sabbath and covenant. And they will violate everything, and will
do
9 that which is evil in my eyes. And I will hide my face from them,
and give them into the hand of their enemies, and deli ver [them]
10 to the sword. But I will cause survivors to remain from them in
orde[r] that [they] may not be [wiped] out by my fury [and] by the
hiding of [my] fa[ce]
11 from them. And the angels of ha[t]red will rule over them and .. [...
and they] will again
12 do [... that which is] evil in [my] eyes, and they will walk in the
stubb[ornness of their heart

The chronological scheme of jubilees, weeks of years, and years

employed in 4Q390 inevitably invites comparison with the schemes used
in Jubilees and in T. Levi 17, but because of the fragmentary state of the
manuscript many of the details are obscure. However, the two large
fragments that have survived may be seen to form part of a Sin-Exile-Re-
turn pattern: fragment 1 is clearly concerned with the post-exilic period,
and it is reasonable to argue that column i of fragment 2 is concerned
with the pre-exilic period, wh ich is depicted as being dominated by sin.
Certainly the accusation that is made in line 5 of failure to heed the
commandments of God given through 'my servants the prophets' fits in
with this view of 4Q390 2 i. Such an accusation is frequently made in the
Hebrew Bible against both Israel and Judah (cf. e.g. 2 Kings 17,13-23;
Jer 26,4-6; 29,17-19; 44,2-6; Zech 1,4-6a), and the failure to heed Yah-
weh's word given through his prophets is seen as the cause of the disas-
ters of 722 and 587. In the light of this it is possible that the jubilee-pe-
riod to which reference is made in line 4b marks the period leading up to
the exile, and that the description of sin in lines 7b-10 is intended to
explain why the exile occurred, and is to be compared with a passage
such as CD III 10b-12a. But the accusations made in 4Q390 2 i 7b-1O -
of forsaking God, of acting contrary to his will, of crimes against fellow
members of society, of defilement of the temple, and of cultic sin - are all
cast in fairly general terms and could be applied to a number of different
periods in Israel's history; and it may be that, as in other contemporary
documents such as the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the author
174 M.A. KNIBB

had in mind the circumstances of his own age as much as those of the
pre-exilic period27 •
So far as 4Q390 2 i is concerned, it is difficult to advance beyond
these general observations to know what specific historical events lie
behind the reference to the deliverance of the nation to the sword 'for a
week of years' (line 4a) and the reference to inter-communal strife 'for
seventy years' (line 6a). The latter period of time obviously merits
comparison with the seventy years that were predicted as the length of the
exile in Jer 25,11-12; 29,10-14, but in 4Q390 2 i the seventy years mark
the length of something that happened in the pre-exilic period, not the
duration of the exile. However, it may be that SNYM SB'YM is, as MILIK
argued, to be understood as 'two weeks (of years)'28. In either case the
'week of years' of line 4a and the 'seventy years' (or 'two weeks (of
years)') of line 6a are conventional, not precise, periods of time within
the overall chronological scheme of 4Q390.
Little can be said about column ii of fragment 2. It is possible, but no
more than this, that it formed part of adescription of the exile. We are,
however, on much firmer ground with fragment 1, which - as the refer-
ences to the 'former days' of Israel's 'kingdom' (lines 4b-5a), and to the
return from captivity in order to rebuild the temple (lines 5b-6a) make
quite clear - is concerned with the post-exilic period. Here a number of
points call for comment.
The material that has survived in fragment I divides into two sections,
lines 2-7a and 7b-12, which appear to be concerned with events in
respectively the Persian and the Greek periods. Within the first, when the
community is said to have been under the rule of the sons of Aaron, the
precise significance of the 'seventy years' of line 2 is unclear because of
the lacuna in the line and the generally damaged state of the manuscript.
But the seventy years are again to be understood as a conventional period
of time within the overall chronological scheme of 4Q390. On the other
hand the statement in lines 6b-7a ('And I will speak to them and will
send them commandment(s), and they will understand all that they have
forsaken, they and their fathers') may very weIl refer, as GARCtA MARTt-
NEZ suggests, to the reform of Ezra29 •

27 Cf. KNIBB, Heythrop Journall7 (1976),265, and the references there.

28 MILIK, The Books 0/ Enoch, 255.
29 Estudios Bfblicos 49 (1991), 134.
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 175

It is noticeable that the Jewish community in the Persian period, with

the exception of those who returned from exile at the beginning to rebuild
the temple, is characterized as sinful: 'but they will not walk [in] my
[wa]ys which I comma[nd] you so that you may warn them. And they
also will do that which is evil in my eyes according to all that Israel did
in the former days of its kingdom' (lines 3b- 5a), 'and they will under-
stand all that they have foresaken, they and their fathers' (lines 6b-7a).
This may be compared with the view of the Persian period reflected in
the Vision of the Animals in 1 Enoch 89,73-74a, aIthough the material in
Enoch is primarily concerned with the rebuilding of the temple and the
restoration of sacrifice and reflects the view that the cuItus of the post-ex-
ilic temple was polluted. Comparison mayaiso be made with the general
condemnation of the exilic and post-exilic periods in the Apocalypse of
Weeks in 1 Enoch 93,9.
The words of line 7b ('And when that generation passes away') mark a
new beginning, and the events that follow are said to take place 'in the
seventh jubilee of the desolation of the land' (BYWBL HSBY'Y LHRBN
H'RS). The phrase 'the desolation of the land' is used in CD V 20 to refer
to the desolation of the land at the time of the exile, and if 587 is taken
as the starting point, the seventh jubilee would carry us down to the
period between 293 and 244 Be. However, aIthough it is reasonable to
assurne that the events which follow belong in the Greek period, it is not
at all clear that the reference to 'the seventh jubilee' provides an accurate
indication of the date of these events - but this is a point to which we
will need to return.
The judgement that is passed on those who live in this jubilee - 'they
will forget law, and appointed time, and sabbath and covenant. And they
will violate everything, and will do that which is evil in my eyes' (lines
8b-9a) - corresponds to the generally negative view of the post-exilic
period as a time of apostasy that we have observed in such writings as
the Vision of the Animals or the Testament of Moses. But the words used
invite specific comparison with Jub. 23,19b: 'for they will forget com-
mandment, and covenant, and festivals, and new moons, and sabbaths,
and jubilees and all judgements'; and with Jub. 1,14: 'And they will
forget all my law and all my commandments and all my judgements, and
will go astray as to new moons, and sabbaths, and festivals, and jubilees,
and ordinances'. The latter verse represents ablanket condemnation of the
exilic and post-exilic periods on the part of the author of the book of
176 M.A. KNIEB

Jubilees; but it is the former verse that is perhaps of more significance for
our immediate purpose.
Jub. 23,19b forms part of an apocalypse (23,14-31) that depicts the
future of Israel and is arranged according to the pattern: sin (verse 14-21),
punishment (verses 22-25), and restoration (verses 26-31). I have argued
e1sewhere 30 that the book of Jubilees reflects the views of a Palestinian
priestly reform movement which, in the period shortly after 175 BC, was
concerned that the law was not being observed and the covenant was
being broken. It seems clear that the description of the period of sin in
Jub. 23,14-21 is meant as an account of the author's own age, and it is
possible, but perhaps 1ess certain, that the description of the period of
punishment in 23,22-25 refers to the initial measures taken by Antiochus
Epiphanes against the lews from 169 onwards (cf. 1 Macc 1,20-40; 2
Macc 5,1-26)31. In any event the similarity of language between Jubilees
and 4Q390 1 8 is striking, and this makes it plausible to think that lines
8b-9a specifically reflect the author' s attitude towards the circumstances
of the early second century. It is also noticeable that as in Jub. 23,22-23
the author immediately then refers to God handing the nation over to their
enemies and delivering them to the sword (lines 9b-l0a). This may well,
as in lubilees, be an allusion to Antiochus's reprisals against the lews.
But it is difficult to press this in detail, both because of the brevity and
schematic nature of the narrative, and because the remainder of the
narrative is damaged or has disappeared altogether. Thus in the material
which follows we do not have sufficient evidence to identify the 'survi-
vors' (PLYTYM, line 10), who may have represented the group from which
the author stemmed. Nor do we possess the description of the era of
salvation that presumably formed the climax of this text.
If 4Q390 1 8ff. does refer to the events of the early second century
BC, then the author, in dating these events to the 'seventh jubilee of the
desolation of the land', has underestimated the period from the start of
the exile to the second century by at least half a century. This is not,
however, a decisive argument against the view that these lines refer to the
events of the early second century. The underestimation of the length of

30 M.A. KNIBB, Jubilees and the Origins 0/ the Qumran Community. An Inaugural
Lecture delivered on Tuesday 17 January 1989 at King's College London (see here p.
17).
31 Cf. G.W.E. NICKELSBURG, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah
(Philadelphia, 1981),76-77.
 A NOTE ON 4Q372 AND 4Q390 177

the time derives from the fact that the author has used a schematic
chronology based on jubilee-periods, and it may be compared with the
overestimation of approximately the same period of time that occurs in
Dan 9,24-27 and is Iikewise based on the use of a schematic chronolo-
gy32. On the other hand the use of the word HRBN in the time reference
is significant in that it underlines the point that is apparent throughout
fragment 1, namely that the author viewed the whole post-exilic period as
a time of continuing 'desolation' - of exile.

32 Cf. E. SCHÜRER, The History oj the Jewish People in the Age oj Jesus Christ, A
New English Version Revised and Edited by G. VERMES, F. MILLAR, and M. GOODMAN,
Val. I1I.1 (Edinburgh, 1986), 248-249.
 THE LAST SURVIVING COLUMNS OF llQNJ

BY

F. Garc{a Martinez

Groningen, The Netherlaruis

The 'Description of the New Jerusalem' of Qumran Cave 11 (11 Q18 =

11 QNJ) is the only manuscript of a considerable size in the Dutch lot
which is still unpublished. It seems thus appropriate to include its prelimi-
nary publication 1 in a volume in honour of Prof. A.S. VAN DER WOUDE,
as a fitting tribute to his achievements in publishing the Dutch share of
Qumran scrolls2 •
At the time of its discovery 11QNJ was a seemly complete scro1l 3, but
in such a bad state of preservation that only isolated fragments from a
protuberance on the upper exterior part could be recovered. In all aspects
the appearance of the scroll was similar to the scroll of Ezekiel from 11 Q
which has been amply described by W.H. BROWNLEE4 • This scroll was
also complete when acquired, but after many efforts by H.J. PLENDER-
LEITH, the foremost expert, only a few fragments could in the end be
recovered.

I The preliminary character of this pUblication is evident in the fact that it is based

not on a study of the originals but on the study of the photographs present at the
Qumrän Instituut in Groningen. This is the reason why no material description of the
fragments nor palaeographic analysis of the script are included here. I want to express
my thanks to Prof. I.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG for having entrusted to me the publication of
this text.
2 See VAN DER WOUDE's "Bihliography" at the end of this volwne.

3 See the photograph P AM 43,891, published by A.S. v AN DER WOUDE, "Fragmente

einer Rolle der Liederen für das Sabbatopfer aus Höhle XI von Qumran (1 I QSirSabb)",
in Von Kanaan bis Kerala. Festschrift für Prof. Mag. Dr. Dr. J.P.M. van der Ploeg G.P.
(AOAT 211, Kevelaer/Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1982), 333.
4 W.H. BROWNLEE, "The Scroll of Ezekiel from the eleventh Qumran Cave", RQ

4/13 (1963), 11-28.

 LAST COLUMNS OF llQNJ 179

The 11 QNJ fragments recovered come from at least two different

sheets of leather. One of the fragments has preserved part of the stitching.
This fragment also shows that the system used to trace the dry lines was
not in this case by piercing a hole, but by drawing ink points to guide the
ruler. The manuscript has been carefu11y prepared. Vertical and horizontal
dry lines are clearly visible in most of the fragments. The distance
between the lines is 0.7 cm 5.; the intercolumnar margins oscillate around
1.8 cm., except at the end of a sheet. In this case (frag. 17), the distance
between the points and the edge of the leather is 1.5 cm, which implies a
margin of about 3 cm. between the last column of a sheet and the first
column of the next one. Most of the fragments preserve the upper margin,
up to 1.8 cm. in frag. 16. and 2.5 cm. in frag. 25, but I suspect that in
this case part of the upper margin is formed by extraneous elements
which have become adhered to the original leather.
Most of the fragments recovered are reproduced in the PAM photo-
graphs 43.993-44.002 (the photographs which I received from VAN DER
PLOEG). An examen of the rest of PAM photographs of llQ materials of
the Qumrän Instituut shows that also all the fragments of PAM 44.009
belong to this scro11 6 • These fragments are probably the sma11 fragments
detached during the process of unrolling the seroll. Some of them have
been tentatively assembled with the biggest fragments to which they
could have belonged, but others remain as unidentified fragments. These
joints are, of course, provisional, and must be verified from the originals
in Jerusalem.
In this presentation I give no palaeographical analysis of the script,
since this can be offered only after study of the original manuscript. But,
as is apparent from a cursory perus al of the photographs, the script
clearly belongs to the sort described by CROSS 7 as a 'Round' semiformal

5 The mea~ured distances in the I: 1 photographs are: 1.8 frag. 3; 1.9 frag. 11; 1.8
frag. 16; 2.0 frag. 19; 2.0 frag. 21; 1.6 frag. 22; 1.8 frag. 24. But a margin must be
allowed for distortion.
6 All these photographs are reproduced in A Facsimile Edition 0/ the Dead Sea

SeroIls, Prepared with an Introduction and Index by R.H. EISENMAN and I.M. ROBINSON
(Biblical Archaeology Society, Washington 1991). The llQNJ plates are 1702-I711 and
1718 in Volume 11.
7 The hand described by F.M. CROSS, 'The Developments of the Jewish Scripts",

The Bible and the Ancient Near East. Essays in Honor 0/ W.F. Albright (Garden City,
1965), 176, figure 2, line 5, using as model 4QNumb, now published by N.R. JASTRAM,
The book 0/ Numbers /rom Qumran Cave IV (4QNum b) (Harvard University Diss., 1990)
180 F. GARCfA MARTfNEz

hand of the Early Herodian period and can be dated in the last quarter of
the first century BCEs .
There is no doubt that the fragments of 11 QNJ have preserved part of
the same composition partially recovered in copies of caves 2, 4 and 59.
We find in our fragments, as in the other copies, the same narrative frame
(to the writer is shown the city and the temple, which measures he
carefully record), the same attention to architectonic details, and the same
mixture of descriptions of buildings and of ceremonies in the temple, not
completely unlike the mixture of elements found in the Temple SerolI. In
all copies the same sort of expressions are used in order to describe the
buildings, although our manuscript does not duplicate the measures in
reeds and in cubits as 5Q15 does. As far as I can see, our manuscript has
no more overlapping with the other copies that the one already noted by
JONGELING between our co\. - VII and 2Q24 frag. 2. As a matter of fact,
the fragments preserved of 11 QNJ more than descriptions of the city
seem to contain descriptions of the temple itself and especially of the
ceremonies and rituals celebrated there. Our fragments contain a high
number of words previously unattested in Aramaic, but weIl known in
late targumic Aramaic.

1. ORDER OF THE FRAGMENTS

The state of the 11 QNJ scroB when acquired from the bedouin in 1956
and the process of unrolling it is described thus by Prof. vAN DER
PLOEG IO :

8 CROSS originally dated the script between 30 BCE and 20 CE ("The Development of

the Jewish Scripts", 138, note far line 5) but as JASTRAM reports (The Book 0/ Numbers
/ram Qumran, 31), 'he now prefers the earlier portion of that range'.
9 The following eopies have already been published: 1Q32 : J.T. MILlK, DJD I, 134-

135, PI. XXXI; 2Q24 : M. BAlllET, «Fragments arameens de Qumriin 2: description de

la Jerusalem Nouvelle», RB 62 (1955), 222-245, PI. 1-11, and DJD III, 84-89, PI. XVI;
5Q15 : J.T. MILlK, DJD III, 184-193, PI. XL-XLI. Of the two copies of 4QNJ (4Q554
and 4Q555, soon to be published by E. PUECH) J. STARCKY has published a photograph
and translation of col. ii of 4Q554 in <<1erusalem et les manuscrits de la Mer Morte», Le
Monde de La BibLe 1 (1977), 38-40. The photographs of these copies are to be found in
Plates 1512 and 1536, Volume 11, of the Facsimile Edition 0/ the Dead Sea Serolls. Of
the 11 QNJ one fragment, here designated as col. - VII, was already publishes by B.
JONGELING, "Publication provisoire d'un fragment provenant de la grotte II de Qumrän
(lIQJer Nouv ar)", JSJ 1 (1970),58-64, and "Note additionelle", JSJ 1 (1970), 185-186.
10 J.P. M. VAN DER PLOEG, "Les manuscrits de la grotte XI de Qumrän", RQ 12/45

(1985), 14.
 LAST COLUMNS OF 11QNJ 181

Tout un rouleau de meme ouvrage [la Description de la Jerusalem Nouvelle] a ete

retrouve dans IIQ. Malheureusement il etait presque entierement pretrifie Cl dur
comme la pierre, a tel point qu'il etait bien evident qu'il serait impossible de le
derouler ou de le lire. Pendant une de mes trois periodes d' etudes au Musee Palestin-
ien, le D' HJ. PLENDERLEITH etait la, le meme specialiste que avait ete consulte sur
des questions techniques regardant les rouleau x de IQ (voir sa Technical Note dans
Discoveries ... I, pp. 39-40) et je l'ai consulte sur l'etat du rouleau et sur la possibilite
eventuelle de le derouler. Il etait d'avis que la seule chose a faire etait de decouper
une protuberance non petrifiee du rouleau et de considerer tout le reste comme perdu.
J'ai estime pouvoir suivre ce conseil et ainsi j'ai obtenu 26 fragments, correspondant
a 25 circonvolutions du rouleau et quelques fragments plus petits. Le plus grands
mesurent environ 6 x 8 cm; un fragment est large de 7,5 cm.

This deseription by VAN DER PLOEG is extremely helpful, although a

number of essential aspeets of the material deseription of the seroll whieh
eould have helped us in reeonstrueting it are not included. We do not
known the total height of the seroIl, its diameter, the thiekness of the
leather, the angle of the eutting, ete., but we ean extraet from VAN DER
PLOEG'S deseription a eertain number of eonclusions which can help us to
establish the position of the fragments in the original scroIl and to give
each a sequential number.
According to this description 25 conseeutive convolutions were
recovered. This description also implies not only that all the fragments
come from the same horizontal axis of the scroll (a fact evident from the
way almost all the fragments show the upper margin of the respective
columns) but that all of them are consecutive, without any layer missing
between the first and the last of the recovered fragments reproduced in
the plates.
But in fact the situation is different. In view of the impossibility to
logically arrange the fragments and distribute them in consecutive co 1-
umns, I asked Dr. A. MAURER and Dr. A. STEUDEL of Göttingen Univer-
sity to check for me the originals during their visit to the RockefeIler
Museum after the Paris congress of the IOQS (18-19 of July 1992). They
discovered that behind the main fragment reproduced in PAM 43.993
three other layers of leather were still attached ll . In each layer three to
five lines of text are visible. These three additional fragments of 11 QNJ
have now been separated and they can be found in the Museum Plate
573, but they have not been photographed yet. These three fragments

11 I am most grateful for their efforts and for immediately sending a transcription of

the letters visible in the additional fragments.

182 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

followed in the original scroll the column here designated col. - X and
preceded all the other columns here edited. It is not excluded that the
third of the new fragments can be assembled in one column with the
fragment here edited as column - VIII, but all study must wait until the
infra-red photographs are available.
Because the diameter of the scroll when found is not known, we can
not ascertain the size of the protuberance in relation to the scroll nor can
we establish how much text is missing between any two consecutive
convolutions. But, because the layers are consecutive, we should not
expect the gaps between the fragments to be extended excessively. And,
of course, we should expect that the gaps are progressively shorter from
the outside to the inside.
Regrettably there is no other record of the order in which the consecu-
tive convolutions were originalIy in the scroll than the order in which the
fragments are reproduced in the PAM photographs. Although, in general,
the photographs show fragments of decreasing size (as expected), this is
not always the case. PAM 43.997 makes it clear that the original order
has been disturbed somehow. The two fragments reproduced there clearly
disturb the sequence. Besides, the two fragments contain the left margin
of a column. Another clear indication of the fact that the order of the
fragments in the photographs does not represent accurately the original
order is that no other photographs seem to have been taken of the frag-
ments shown in PAM 43.993 after the separation of the different layers
(at least no such photographs are present in our Qumran Instituut at
Groningen, nor are they to be found in the Facsimile Edition of the Dead
Sea Serolls). We are thus forced to arrange the fragments of the seroll in
order independently of the order in the PAM plates, taking into aeeount
material elements, sueh as sizes and shapes, as weIl as the eontents.
PAM 43.993 (the first photograph of the se ries eontaining llQNJ frag-
ments) makes it clear that these eonvolutions of the non petrified protu-
beranee were first separated in two wads, eaeh eontaining several layers.
In view of the different size of the two wads, it is clear that the small one
was enfolded within the bigger one. We are thus foreed to eonclude that
the small wad represents the innermost part of the seroll. We are also
foreed to eonclude that the remains of four lines to be seen in the exterior
layer of the small wad are part of the last preserved eolumn of the scrolI
(if the seroll was originally rolIed with the beginning on the outside), or
of the first preserved eolumn of the seroIl, sinee the seroll was rolIed with
the beginning in the innermost part. We do not know the angle at whieh
 LAST COLUMNS OF llQNJ 183

the cutting of the protuberance was done, so that the small size of this
first fragment does not necessarily imply that this first preserved column
was the first of the original serolI.
I left here out of consideration the fragments coming from the sm all
wad, so me of them quite interesting, and publish those of the biggest wad
with the exception of the additional fragments. The joining of the two
wads is to be found, in my opinion, in the column here designated Co\. -
X. The size, the shape and the contents of the fragment reproduced in
PAM 43.997 indicate that it belongs to the same column as the big
fragment reproduced in PAM 43.993. Besides, the presence of the stitch-
ing with a thong or thread of leather should have made the separation of
the two wads easier at this point. Following the example of MILIK in his
edition of the 4QprEsther texts 12 , I have adopted a provisional number-
ing of the columns starting with the last preserved one, here designated as
Col. - I.

2. TRANSCRIPTION, TRANSLATION AND NOTES

Col. - X (Plate 3)
PAM 43.993 + 43.997
. 1'ln 1'Ylnl l[ ....']l ~ n ')y) llnU[ ... ]
. ~n')y 'n[!:ll ... ]l ilYJVi 1'lllJY 1'1J~[ •.. ]
. 'nl~ ln N J!i' ... ] nViJ nVi 1'1J ~ 11il'[n~1 11ilJl ~ ... ]
. 1lJ1 ~ [ llY 'l)Y l' JJ ~ JJ1 ~ J[ ... ]
. ~:lll[ ... ] 1l ~ J' JJ )1]1 ~T[ ... ' J ~ 'm ~)
[... 1')Jj:' l[ ... ]

1 [... ] around the upper room whi[ch ... ] and the two doors
2 [... ] cubits, seven columns [... and the wi]dth of the upper room
3 [... their length] and their [width] are six by six cubits [ ... ] one reed;
the width of
4 [... ] and the building buiIt upon it [... ] And likewise
5 [he showed me ... ] and all this building [ ... ] the stair
6 [ ... ] ree[ds ... ]

12 J.T. MILlK, "Les modeles arameens du livre d'Esther dans la Grotte 4 de Qum-

ran", in E. PUECH - F. GARCIA MARTINEz (eds.), Memorial Jean Starclcy Vol. II [ = RQ

15/59 (1992)1, 321-406.
184 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

Notes
Lin. 1 The parallel pasages allow the reconstruction of either -'J llnO or
-'J llnO llnO. ~n')'JY must mean something like 'upper room', as in Dan
6,11; the attested form for 'entrance' in 5Q15 is 'J'JY.

Lin. 3 We do not know for sure which sort of measures are indicated,
except that there must be two; the yod of the edge (if vera leetio) would
suggests the reconstruction adopted. The reading of ~ Ji' seems sure,
although the nun is only partially preserved.

Lin. 5 The reading of the zayin seems assured. A possible reconstruction

could be ~n!J, 'the block'.

Col. - VIII (Plate 4)

PAM 43.999
[... )'J ~ 'JJ'j] 'JJlj''J '), ~ 'Yln j][ ... )
[... ~'l11)n 'VJ ~l Dl ']1 ~, ~ ']'l1 ~1Jl')][ ... )

[... ~ )Jl ~1i"1 ~ 'JJ'j] ~li1 'l1 'lW ... ]

[... ) Vacat PIJ'JY 'J1J'J[ ... )
[... ]IJJ] , 'J ~1i'1J 'J 1l'l1[l ... )
[... )J ]nJ ''J ~mlJ[ ... ]
[... ]'J[] 'J[]IJ[ .... ]

[... ] the doors which are for the temple [... ]

2 [... ] on the seventh day, and on the day of the beginning of the
mo[nth ... ]
3 [ ... ]holy is the temple, and the great glory [... ]
4 [... ] for all ages. Vaeat [... ]
5 [... And] they begin to call to me [... ]
6 [... ] showing to me a writing [... ]
7 [ ... ] ... [ ... ]

Notes
Lin. 2 JONGELING 13 quoted this line reading the last letter as a he and
translated: 'le septieme jour et le jour des premices de .. .'. K. BEYER 14

11 In his publication of the fragment of llQNJ, see an. cit., 64.

14 K. BEYER, Die aramäischen Texte vom Toten Meer (Göttingen 1983), 222, n. 1.
 LAST COLUMNS OF llQN] 185

already corrected the meaning of 'premices' given to 'w Nl; but the
reading of the het seems to me completely sure. Hence my reconstruction.

Lin. 5 The plural is unexpected, but, before the infinitive, we are forced
to reconstruct the verb goveming it. Another possible reconstruction could
be lW', 'sent forth', but the plural form remains equally unexplained. The
last letter of the last preserved word is very uncertain, and I am not able
to offer a reconstruction.

Lin. 6 The lack of context renders impossible to precise what sort of

writing is shown to the seer, althoug a reference to a JnJ is not altogether
unexpected in an apocalyptic writing.

CoI. - VII (plate 5)

PAM 43.999 + 43.998

11ilnlln1[ ... NJIlJ1 ';lN rnw 'Y'JW!]l' ';l[1] ... 1

p';lJpO N 'lil[1 ... 1n. ';l~n '1 IYJ1YO 1'0 '';l N ';lJ 'il 10 N1J';l[ ... 1
[)';l[ ... IW pJilJ ilYJ1N1pJOn';l J.['I';l[~ '11Y n'Tn11
'lln~ nJ.1';l~ nYJW ';l1] 10[ ... )
[... l' J)ilJ l'tl1Y nYJl N1 11[ilJ '1 N 'JW ...
[ ... Pil '';lYI N n J1J';l n1il '1 N [on';l 'mn N 'Jil1JI
[ilOY ... N:::ll) N JilJ';l nJ'il[' Non';l 'mn 10 N1n 1Y n'1il 'Tnl
[ ... )lJJ~!][NP '1 ilJ'Jn';l nJ'il' Nn'lnN1)

[... ev]ery seventh day before God, a memori[al ... ] and their thank-
offering
2 [... ] outside of the temple, to the right of the west, [and it shall be
divided ... ] and they will be accepted.
3 [And I watched until (the bread ?) was di]vided among the eighty-four
priests [... ]
3a [... ] from everything the division of the tables filled itself [... ]
4 [... the eidest who are among th]em, and fourteen prie[sts ... ]
5 [priests ... Two (loaves) of breald [upon which] was the incense [... ]
6 [I kep watching until one of the two loaves 1 was given to the [high]
priest [... with hirn.]
7 [And the other was given to the second who was stan]ding apart [... ]
186 F. GARCiA MARTfNEZ

Notes
The main fragment has already been published by B. JONGELINd 5 • I use
the English translation of FITZMYER-HARRINGTON I6 and incorporate in
the lacunae the preserved elements of 2Q26. Although the distant joining
of the fragments remains hypothetical, the contents of the two preserved
words at the end of the column agree with the main fragment.

Col. • VI (Plate 5)
PAM 43.998
[... ' J N 'Tn] Nl NYJ'liJ NYJ'l1
[ ... PIYln ml1 Nn';:ln P]P
[... 1PYln l'VJY 'ln ';:IlJ';:I
[... N ';:IlnlJ 'm~ 'J1Yl pmn
[... lil NlJ 1']P 1lilmp
[... PIJP 1[ ... 1

I seven by seven. And he sho[ wed me the ... ]

2 three reeds; and the height of the doors [... ]
3 to aB the twelve door[s ... ]
4 two [reeds,] and its breath is the width of the wa[B ... ]
5 before them, hundred reeds [... ]
6 [... ] reeds [... ]

Notes
1 Because we do not know which structure is being described, we do not
know if the measures indicated are in reeds or in cubits. The recon-
struction of the introductory formula remains, of course, quite hypo-
thetical; only the first two letters are partially preserved, and the reading
is not completely certain.

Lin. 3 4QNJ mentions the twelve doors of the city.

Lin. 4 The beginning of the line corresponds in wording with 5Q15 ii,12,
but apparently it deals with a different structure.

15 B. JONGELING, an. eit ..

16 J.A. FITZMYER and DJ. HARRINGTON, A Manual of Palestinian Aramaie Texts
(BO 34) (Rama, 1978).64-65.
 LAST COLUMNS OF llQNJ 187

Lin. 5 The reading 11ilfJ1P is not sure; a scrath in the leather has distorted
the last three letters making the reading uncertain.

Col. - V (Plate 6)
PAM 43.998
[· .. In"l nlfJ'J p'J~m ilYJVj PU]
[... N IYl N 'Jy p~n P111 NYJVj N "'JYl "[1
[... ill NfJ yVjm 1"~'J N l"lm l"n'Jn 11il'J[lJ1J
[... I Vacat [ I
[... I ilnJ N Nln .,'J lfJ[ N )
[... )'Jl N11n lnJ'J[
[... )'J[ )'J'J[

1 seven cups and bowls to smell an odour [

2 [... ] and above seven caldrons, stoves over the ea[rth ...
3 [and all] of them (are) thirty two thousand and nine hundred [
4 [... ] Vacat [.. ]
5 [... ] said to me: See l .. ]
6 [... ] to my house the joy and to [... ]
7 [... ] ... [... ]

Notes
Lin. 1-2 p'J~U, N111 and "~n were previously only attested in targumic
Aramaic.

Lin. 2 Only one letter seems to be missing at the beginning of the line
and the yod is clear. "1 or "'J would fit the space, but the function of
either in the sentence is unclear.

Lin. 3 Also it is unclear to which antecedent the high numbers of the line
refer. The addition of the seven cups and bowls, caldrons and other
possible utensils described in the lost part scarcely amount to even a
small part of such a large number.

Lin. 6 Palaeographically a yod is bettel' than a waw, although in the

manuscript it is not always possible to distinguish these letters from one
another. The first p. suffix is rather strange, since n"J apparently refers to
the temple but nowhere in the text is God the one who talks. Could we be
dealing with a quotation?
188 F. GARClA MARTfNEz

Col. - IV (Plate 7)
PAM 43.996
I ... ) iIlil';l ")1 1il';l11Y Knl'l101 ... KPJ';l1';l 10 'ffl!J ")lJ 1!J1.
[. 11)il")nVJVJ pwo 111il';l ">1 ';llJ1 K[ ... K ">VJpon K';l">';lJ1 11ilJ YJO
[ ... i1] KO VJl K 11il!J';ln p';l';lv 11il">n KI ... K">m "'nVJ K ';l">';lJ1 ill!JJ KU
[ ... ) nVJ1 P1VJV';l ">';lll) K1 1"'[ ... )111:n nlOlJ K ">l"'JVJ
I ... )';l[) K">VJ">ljJ ">VJ")njJ ... )KJl KJilJ VJJ';l illil';l
[... 111 "»)';l';l[V ) []">[ I

the grape when separates fonn the palm [... ] Ioosed yet for them,
which is [... ]
2 from the radiance in them, and the fi[fth] crown [... ] and all which
have finished his seven [... ]
3 interior of the cover, and the sixth crown [... ] his brothers entered in
their place, four hundred [... and the]
4 seventh [crown], according to the radiance and the [... ] ... And he said
to me: to the twenty six [... ]
5 rAnd] the High Priest was clothed [... ]
6 r... ] the holy of holies [... ]
7 [... they] entered [... 1

Notes
Lin. I 1~J. The meaning remains obscure. A reading 1(')~J. is excluded;
the word must be sing. Although traces of the mem are minimal, the
reading seems sure. The meaning and the syntax of the sentence are
uncIear to me: I read the word as a part. fern pI. form (although one
would expect a yod), but the verb following is a 3. m. s.

Lin. 2 Tg N. Ex 25,11 uses the word 'p';lJ to designate the golden wreath
around the ark.

Lin 3 il1~J apparently designates the ml~J, the ilm~]J or ~ m1~J of the
Targumim.

Lin. 4 ]l11. The reconstruction of the word is problematic, because it is

not known if the word is linked to what precedes it or whether it beg ins a
new sentence.
 LAST COLUMNS OF llQNJ 189

Lin. 5 The title is clear. The reeonstruetion of BAlllET in 2Q26 4,15 and
the eorresponding note (DJD III, 88) should be eorreeted aeeordingly.

Col. - III (Plate 8)

PAM 43.995

'1 ~'P';JJ1V11';JN 1fJ [... )N1lnUVJ!J1'm';J1.1VJ1NJ[ ...1

N 'l\lJVfJ '11 NVJ 'l!J N '[ ... ]il';JlJ n';JfJl 'illJ1P1 'm';J1.1 VJ[l NJ)
NnJJtll NV1'l!J 11il[ ... )n';J1O nfJp 'n'N1 N1lJ ';JV il'l.[ ... 1
Vacat [••• lil';JlJ NnJ1fJ';J ilpUN1 INnUIVJ[lN ... )
J1VfJ nn ';J1J[ ... )J1'fJ Nll. ';J 1U J1 Nnu VJ[l N... )
N11VJ[ ... ) N1nJ J1VnfJ N1\lJJ1 N[... 1
P1il 1'[ ... ) Vacat N m1[ ';J1] ... )
N 'fJ'J[ ... )1'';J N[')U!J1fJ[ ...1
[ •.. ]... [ ..• )J[ ]

1 [... ] in its four feet and stretch the bull [ ... ] from these and the
mixtures which
2 [... its fo ]ur feet and they will sacrifice it and aB the salt [... ] ... separ-
ated and of the tithes
3 [... ] on the fire, and there is flour, shifted fine-flour, [... ] separated and
prepared
4 [... fo]ur lambs, and bring up all to the altar [... ] Vacat.
5 [... fo]ur lambs and a drink offering to the interior ... [... ] all west side
6 [... ] and the flesh is mixed together [... ] the wall
7 [... every] side. Vacat [... ] ... given
8 [... ] beaten near [... ] in the right
9 [ ... ] ... [ ... ] ... [ ... ]

Notes
Lin. 1 UVJ!J The reading of the first letter is uncertain. A scratch on the
leather has destroyed part of the top, but enough remains to make the
reading of a nun less likely. The verb ';JJ1V is attested in Targumic
Aramaie with the meaning 'to confound, to disturb', as weIl as the sub.
pI. l' N';JJ1V, 'mixed multitude', both as secondary derivations of J1V,'to
mix'; hence, our very tentative translation.
190 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

Lin 3. On the edge of the fragment a vertical trace has been preserved. It
could be the rest of a qof, allowing to restore, for example, il 'W'J1, 'they
burn hirn'. nJ10 nlJp Although the rest of the sentence is missing, both
terms seems to be understood as synonymous. nJ10 is also partially pre-
served in 2Q24 4,4.

Un. 4 ~ no, inserted above the line here and appearing again in lin. 5 can
hardly in this context be anything but the Aramaic equivalent of the
Hebrew il\lJ, 'larnb' , attested in targumic Aramaic both as a masc. noun '\lJ
and as a fern. ~ n'\lJ or ~ n'o 17. 1 understand ilPO ~ as an afel form of PO J,
suitable in a sacrificial context.

Un. 5 From the last letter only a vertical bar has been preserved, but 1
am unable to offer a suggestion to complete the word.

Lin 7 The first letter on the right border of fragment 25 looks at first
sight like a qoph, but upon consideration it is c1ear that only the upper
part of a resh is preserved with a darkened spot on the edge. It is unclear
if after the Vacat a new topic begins; the first visible word, 1J1il, is diffi-
cult to understand and the elements preserved in the next line are not
connected with the text of the next column.

CoI. - 11 (Plate 9)
PAM 43.995 + 44.994

p'n PIJ '[ ...1 PIJ ~ 1'lJl ~VJl ~ "il1JI"l1 ... 1

JU Jnl 71 ~11[ ... IJ lnO '1 ~JmJ 1'J ~~['lm ... 1
11J ~'IJ 1'[ ... 1l'mn 1'1J ~ illJ111 pmn [1'1J ~ il 'n~ ...1
Vacat [ ... n JU Jil1 ilJ1J1 illJ ~ J[ .•• ]IJ
11il' JJ ~ J1) 1J[ ... I Vacat [ ... 1~l
Jn1 V~n[ ... VlnlJ Vln llJ lnO 1'1mV '11 ... 7J']JU
[... In llVJJ VlnJ Vln llJ[ ...1~ JV1
[ ... I 'il1~JJ l[],J[ ... lil

17 On the spelling of the original Sin in Qumran Aramaic and its substitution by

samek, see M. SOKOLOFF, The Targum 10 Job fram Qumran Cave Xl, (Ramat-Gan,
1974), 14-15.
 LAST COLUMNS OF llQNJ 191

1[ ... and] its four si des were high: [... ] cubits, [ ... ] living waters
2 [... and the chan]nel near the wall which surrounds the [... ] this ??? is
of pure gold
3 [... its width is] two [cubits] and its height two cubits [... ] water from
4 [ ... ] is beautiful and all is of pure gold [... ] Vacat
5 [... ] Vacat [... ] ... all their stones
6 are co[ vered with ... ] of columns turning from a door to [another door
... ] overlay with gold
7 and above [... ] from a door to another in the city-wall [... 1 ....
8 ... [... ] ... in his hand [... ]

Notes
Lin. 1 The remains of the first letter could be read as a beth, but a taw
cannot be excluded. A plural verb with a 3. m. sing. suffix seems out of
context, so that the more logical reading would be a noun with a 3. m.
suffix. A possible reconstruction could be "inJ)..

Lin. 2 The first preserved letter is clearly atsade. A possible recon-

struction of the word could be ~~ "ln, channel.

lin. 4 The reading of the nun is certain and it is clearly attached to the
letter that follow; ilfJ ~ is thus excluded, both in the meaning of 'cubit'
and in the meaning of 'channel' attested in 4QNJ. As an independent
word, ilfJ ~ J do not seems to be attested; we could reconstruct the adverb
~fJJJ were it not for the different orthography. It seems easier to assurne
a Hebrew loan word with an Aramaic ending.

Lin 6 The singular form of lno excludes Pl1fJV as the object of the
reconstructed verb in the lacuna; one can think of something like pJVJ or
~ n "lJ, if the description corresponds which the beginning of the pre-
served text of 2Q24 and 5Q15.

Lin. 7 The context here permits us to make the meaning of llVJ in 2Q24
precise 8,1: not 'rangee', but 'muraille', as in Ezr.

Lin. 8 ~n"nJ (compare Nnn and pn in 5Q15) cannot be completely

excluded, though it seems palaeographically less certain than "in!]]] and
would give an anomalous form.
192 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

CoI. - I (Plate 9)
PAM 43.994 + 44.009
~YIJl~
]lJ
I.
]lJl
I')il
"J~"m~ lnJl
"J ~ "ml~l
~ln"1T
n"lill ~m

1 four [... ]
2 [... ]
3 [... ]
4 [ ... ]
5 [... ]
6 And then [he showed me ... ]
7 And he sho[wed me ... ]
8 the corner [... ]
9 I looked [... ]

Notes
Lins. 6-9 The place of the small fragment from PAM 44.009, joint to the
lower part of the column, is not completely certain, and the material join
needs to be verified. The readings seem certain. The reconstructions of
line. 6 is suggested by the use of the expression in 5Q15 1,2.

Lin. 9 Only the het is completely sure. For the construction, see 2Q24
4,16
 THE MACCABEES IN RABBINIC TRADITION

BY

G. Stemberger

Vienna, Austria

One of the perennial problems of research in rabbinic literature is its

reliability for historical purposes. Traditional studies tend to consider
rabbinic texts, whatever their age, as arepository of earlier traditions,
transmitted orally through the ages. The rabbis, normally seen as the
direct successors to the Pharisees and bound up with them by the com-
mon name 'the Sages', are thought to have received from them a large
store of traditions from the period of the Second Temple. According to
this school of thought, at least a kernel of historical truth is to be found
in almost any rabbinic text. In this paper, I do not intend to enter direct1y
into this vast and complex problem, although I think to throw some light
on it by studying the small corpus of rabbinic texts about the Maccabees:
no new information on the Maccabees, not yet known from earlier
sources, is to be gained from these texts; but for the very reason that
nothing is at stake, they may serve as a test-case for the ways historical
memories are dealt with in rabbinic tradition. I shall proceed in two steps.
In a first part, I shall present all the (very few) rabbinic texts in which the
Maccabees are mentioned, in - as far as possible - historical sequence; the
second part of this paper will deal with so me of the problems arising
from this evidence.

I. THE RABBINIC EVIDENCE

Nowhere in classical rabbinic literature do we find the name 'Maccabee'.

The family is always called the 'sons of Hashmonay' or 'the house of
Hashmonay'. This name includes, of course, the whole dynasty down to
Herod's wife Mariamne. Here, I do not consider rabbinic texts dealing
with lohn Hyrcan, Alexander Yannay, Hyrcan 11 and Aristobul 11 or
194 G. STEMBERGER

Mariamne, but only those that speak of Hashmonay or collectively of the

betlbne Hashmonay.

a) The only text of the Mishnah which mentions the Hasmoneans, is

Middot 1,6, part of adescription of the Temple:

There were four offices in the mom of the hearth ... In the one to the north-east the
Hasmoneans (bne Hashmonay) put away the stones of the altar wbich bad been
defiled by the kings of Greece.

This corresponds to the information of 1 Macc 4,44-46 that under the

direction of Judah priests tore down the altar polluted by the nations and
stored away its stones in a fitting place on the Temple Mount. Josephus
(Al XII,318) mentions the destruction of the polluted altar, but not that its
stones were put away on the Temple Mount. It is difficult to evaluate this
text since Middot is quite a particular tractate without parallel in the
Mishnah. In our context it does not matter whether the precise indication
where the polluted stones were deposited relies on an older description of
the Temple or not; at any rate, Middot knows of the purification of the
Temple by the Maccabees. The main concern of the text is topographie
and not historical.
The only other text which may be considered Tannaitic is a saying
attributed to R.Yose in Seder Olam Rabbah 30:

The kingdom of Persia (ruled) during the time of the Temple thirty-four years; the
king dom of Greece one hundred and eighty; the kingdom of the House of the
Hasmoneans (bef Hashmonay) one hundred and three; the king dom of Hemd one
hundred and three. Fmm here and on go and count according to the destruction of
the Temple.

Seder Olam, too, is unique, being the only chronography in early Rab-
binic literature. If CJ. MILIKOWSKY is right that R. Yose has only
redacted an earlier texe, then this text might go back to the early second
century or even earlier. I am not sure if we can date Seder Olam so early.
The number of years indicated for the Hasmonean dynasty would be
rather exact: the other dates, however, are fraught with such problems that
we should not make too much of this number. The memory of the

1 C.l. MILIKOWSKY, Seder Olam: A Rabbinie Chronography (PhD. thesis, Yale

University, 1981), 15ff.
 THE MACCABEES IN RABBINIC TRADITION 195

Hasmonean dynasty with an approximate indication of its duration is aB

we can deduce from this text. Where it comes from, we do not know.

b) Neither the Tosefta nor the halakhic midrashim ever mention the
Hasmoneans. It is only in the Palestinian Talmud that we meet them
again in an explanation of the Nicanor Day (yMegillah 1,6, 70c = yTaan
II,13,66a):

On !he !hirteen!h in it (Adar) is Nicanor Day. What is Nicanor Day? A commander

of !he Greek govemment was on his way to Alexandria and saw Jerusalem. And he
mocked and reviled and blasphemed and said: When I'll come safely back, I shall
tear down !his tower. And one of !he Hasmoneans (ehad mishel Hashmonay) went
out and killed some of his troops until he reached his chariot. And when he had
reached bis chariot, he cut off his hands and severed his head and stuck !hem on
wood. And he wrote undemea!h: 'Tbe mou!h !hat spoke full of guilt, and !he hand
wh ich was stretched out fuH of pride'. And he suspended !hem on a pole opposite
Jerusalern.

The story looks like a shortened version of what is known from I Macc
7,26.34.43.47 and 2 Macc 14,12f.31-34; 15,25-35. Josephus (Al XII,
406-412) teHs the same story, but without the details about the mutilation
of Nicanor's body. The talmudic account is closer to 2 Macc in attribut-
ing a central role to the Hasmonean hirnself, but many of its details have
no earlier parallel.
Genesis Rabba which like the Yerushalmi is dated to the early 5th
century, says twice that the Greek government shall fall by the hands of
the Hasmoneans:

Through whose hand will the Greek government fall? Tbrough the hand of !he
Hasmoneans (bne Hashmonay) that descend from Levi (GenR 99, THEODOR-ALBECK
1274).

And Moses paired the tribe of Levi with the Greek govemment because the Hasmo-
neans (bne Hashmonay) belonged to the tri be of Levi (GenR 97, THEODOR-ALBECK
1225; Tan Wayehi 14; cd. BUBER Wayehi \3, IlOa).

Pesiqta de Rav Kahana 5,18 (MANDELBAUM 107 = PesRabbati 15,25,

FRIEDMANN 79a) seems to provide a new detail, but certainly refers to the
war between Hyrcanus and Aristobulos, as is made explicit in the
Babylonian Talmud (Baba Qamma 82b):
196 G. STEMBERGER

Who will requite Greece for you? The Hasmoneans (bne Hashmonay) who offered
up the two Tamid-offerings each day.

c) I add some more midrashic texts although it is not certain that they are
earlier than the Bavli. ExRabbah 15,6 (Mirkin 167) applies Ps 19,6f to the
Greek kingdom:

All f1ed from it; but the priest Mattatiah and his sons stood up in their faith in the
Holy One, blessed be he, and the crowds of Greece f1ed before them and were all
killed. And thus the Holy One, blessed be he, says to them: 'Beat your ploughshares
into swords, and your pruning-hooks into spears; let the weak say: I am strong' (Joel
4,10).

This is the first text to name the father of the Hasmonean brothers,
although they are not explicitly identified as Hasmoneans. The next text
comes from Pesiqta Rabbati 2,1 (FRIEDMANN 5a), normally considered to
be a sermon for Hanukkah:

And why does one kin die lights at Hanukkah? Because at the time when the sons of
Hashmonay the high priest defeated the Greek Kingdom ... they entered the Temple.
There, they found iron spits and fixed them (or: grooved them out) and kindled lights
in them.

To this may be added Pesiqta Rabbati 6,1 (FRIEDMANN 23a):

y ou find out that this Hanukkah which we celebrate is in remembrance of the

dedication by the Hasmonean family (bet Hashmonay) because they made war and
defeated thc people of Greece.

Pesiqta Rabbati 2,6 (FRIEDMANN 7b) and 6,5 (FRIEDMANN 24b) mention
the dedication by the Hasmonean family (bet Hashmonay) without any
further information. Midrash Psalms 30,6 (BUBER 236) applies the text to
Israel' s exiles among the kingdoms:

'0 Lord my God, I cricd unto Thee' in my exile in Greece; 'and Thou didst heal me'
(30,3) through the Hasmonean and his sons (al jede Hashmonay u-banaw). '0 Lord
... Thou hast restored me to life from among them that go down to the pi!' (v.4) -
restored mc despite the many decrees imposed upon me to bring me down into the
pit of Gehenna. 'Sing praise unto the Lord, 0 ye saints of His' (v.5a) - that is ye
sons of Mattathias (translation W.G. BRAUDE).
 THE MACCABEES IN RABBIN1C TRADITION 197

It is worth mentioning that Ps 30 has the title: 'A Psalm and song at the
dedication of the house of David'. As in the Pesiqta, the Maccabees are
recalled because of the context of Hanukkah.

d) The next group of texts come from the Babylonian Talmud. Here, the
Hasmoneans (bet Hashmonay) are mentioned quite frequently. A good
number of the texts, however, deal with the Hasmonean dynasty of the
Ist century B.e. Thus, BQ 82b and paralleis speak of the Hasmonean
princes Hyrcanos and Aristobulos, BB 3b of Herod as a slave of the
Hasmoneans; Mariamne (not mentioned by name) who does not want to
get married to hirn, before jumping from the roof proclaims that every-
body who in the future claims to descend from the Hasmoneans, in reality
is a slave (BB 3b, Qid 70b).
Another group of texts (Sanh 82a, AZ 36b) mentions a bet dino shel
[bet] Hashmonay which is said to have forbidden sexual contacts between
a lew and a gentile woman. Rab Dimi is said to have brought this
tradition from Israel, but there are no Palestinian texts mentioning a Court
of the Hasmoneans. The Gemara also reports dissension what exactly this
Court had decreed and whether, in reality, the decree attributed to it was
not much earlier. 1. DERENBOURG proposed to date this decree under
Simeon (143-135)2. It is, of course, quite possible that there was Hasmo-
nean legislation against too close contacts between lews and their heathen
environment. Without earlier support, it would, however, be unwise to use
for historical purposes a discussion in which not even the Babylonian
masters pretend to have reliable traditions.
AZ 8b-9a quotes the saying of R.Yose (SOR 30) that the dynasty of
the Hasmoneans reigned 103 years, a text we have already seen.
The other passages, all but one without earlier paralleIs, are of greater
interest in our context. Four of them have in common that they start with
some action of the Greeks wh ich is remedied, 'when the Govemment of
the Hasmoneans became strong and they defeated them' (ukheshegabra
malkhut bet Hashmonay ve-nitzhum).
Three of the texts occur in the context of a discussion of Megillat
Taanit.
The only text having an earlier parallel (yMegillah I,6,70c, quoted
above) is Taanit 18b about Nicanor's Day. There are a number of differ-

2 J. DERENBOURG, Essai sur l'histoire et La geographie de la PaLestine (Paris, 1867,

reprint Wesunead, 1971), 84.
198 G. STEMBERGER

ences between the two texts, the Yerushalmi version being more coherent.
On1y the version of the Bav1i is qualified as baraita; on1y here do we find
the stock phrase 'and when the Govemment of the Hasmoneans became
strong and they defeated them' whereas in the Yerushalmi 'one of the
Hasmoneans' is the hero of the story. Instead of the heroic feat of one of
the Hasmoneans we have in the Bavli a dynastie action. The standard
formula is not old: in Tannaitie texts gabar qal occurs only once (Tosef-
ta): gab rah yadan shel bet Hille!; only this same formula is to be found
in the Yerushalmi. The same pattern as in Taanit is to be found in
Shabbat 21b:

What is [thc rcason for] Hanukkah? For our Rabbis taught: 'On the 25th of Kislew
[eommenee] the days of Hanukkah. They are eight on which one may not lament and
on whieh one may not fast'. For when the Greeks entered the Temple, they defiled
all the oil whieh was in the Temple. And when the Govemment of the Hasmoneans
became strang and they defeated them, they searebed and found only one eruse of oil
whieh lay with the seal of the High Priest, and it was sufficient for onc day's
lightning only. A miracIe bappened and they lit with it for eigbt days. The next year,
thcy fixed them and made them feast days [eelebrated] with Halle! and Thanksgiving.

The story is, of course, based on what we know from 1 Macc 1,41-64.
The only Rabbinie parallel is Pesiqta Rabbati 2,1, quoted above, where,
however, there is no real miracle.
The next example of this series of texts is Rosh H ashanah 18b. The
context is a discussion if the Scroll of Fasts is still in force:

R.Aha b. Huna objeeted: 'On the third of Tishri the mention [of God] in doeuments
was abolished'.
For the wieked Government had decreed a perseeution 3 that they should not mention
God's name. And when the Govemment of the Hasmoneans became strong and they
defeated them, they ordained that they should mention God's name [even) on
doeuments ... But when the Sages heard of it, they said: Tomorrow, this man will
pay his debt and the doeument will be thrown on the dunghilI. And they annulled
[this decree]. And they made this day a feast day.

The on1y part of the text which has an earlier parallel, is a measure of the
Greek govemment against the use of God's name (GenRabbah 2,4,

3 Text of MS Munich; cf. the Genizah text in A.I. KATSH, Ginze Talmud Babli

(Jerusalern, 1975), plate 109: she-gazrah malkhut Jawan shmad; printed editions: 'For
the Greek Government had issued a decree'.
 THE MACCABEES IN RAßBINIC TRADITION 199

THEODOR-ALBECK l6f). Scholars who take the text at face value, have to
date the second part of the story either in the time of John Hyrcanus
when he broke with the Pharisees, or under Salome Alexandra when the
Pharisees had the power to intervene in legal affairs4 • This is not the
place to enter this discussion; let us proceed to the other texts. Megillah
6a quotes R.Abbahu:

'Ekron shall be rooted up' (Zech 9,7). This is Qisri the daughter of Edom which is
situated among the sands, and which was a thom pushed into Israel in the days of thc
Greeks. And when the Government oj the Hasmoneans became strong and defeated
them and they conquered it, they called it 'the capture of the Tower of Shir'.

The Munich manuscript (and also MS Vatican 134) reads Tsor, Tyre,
whereas the Arukh quotes the reading migdal shed, 'Tower of the
Demon'. G. REEd prefers to maintain the reading shyr, vocalized sher;
the name is supposed to be a variant of Migdal Sharshan, the name of the
Hellenistic part of Caesarea. This city (more exact1y, its predecessor
Straton's Tower) was conquered by Alexander Yannay (Josephus, Al
XIII,15). For the Bavli, there is no difference between the different stages
of the Hasmonean dynasty.
Of the remaining two texts of the Bavli, Rosh Hashanah 24b deals
with the prohibition of making a lampstand like the menorah in the
Temple:

R.Yose bar Yehudah says: One should not make [a candlestick with seven lightsj
even of wood, the way the Hasmonean kings (malkhe bet Hashmonay) did it.
They said to him: Is this a proof? They were spits of iron which they covered with
wood lets: MS Munieh; printed version: ba'ats, tin]. When they grew rich, they made
them of silver; when they grew richer, they made them of gold.

This text is, in a way, parallel to Pesiqta Rabbati 2,1 quoted above; but
the situation is not (at least not explicitly) the rededication of the Temple
after the expulsion of the Greeks; there is no question of amirade or of a
feast lasting eight days.
Megillah lla sees in Lev 26,44 God's everlasting providence for
Israel:

4 Cf. H. LICHTENSTEIN, "Die Fastenrolle. Eine Untersuchung zur jüdisch-hellenisti-

schen Geschichte", HUCA 8-9 (l931f) 257-351, 283ff.

5 G. REEG, Die Ortsnamen Israels nach der rabbinischen Literatur (Wiesbaden,
1989), 395f.
200 G. STEMBERGER

In a baraita it was taught:

'I have nol rejecled Ihern' in the days of the Chaldeans, when I raised up for them
DanieI, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah.
'Neitller did 1 abhor Illern' in the days of the Greeks, when I raised up for them
Simeon the Righteous and Hashmonay and his sons and Mattatiah the High Priest.
'To deslroy Illern ullerly' in thc days of Haman, when I raised up for them Mordecai
and Esther.
'To break rny covenant wilh Ihern' in the days of the Persians, when I raised up for
them members of the house of Rabbi and the Sages of the Generations.
'For 1 arn Ihe Lord Illeir God' in the time to come, when no nation or people will be
able to rule over them.

The translated text is that of the printed versions. It is strange that it

distinguishes between Hashmonay and Mattatiah. The problem does not
exist in MS Munich which reads: "'/ have not rejected them" in the days
of the Chaldeans, when I raised up for them Simeon the Righteous.
"Neither did / abhor them" in the days of the Greeks when I raised up for
them Y ohanan the son of Mattatiah the High Priest .. .'. MS Vatican 134,
however, is much closer to the printed version: 'when I raised up for
them Simeon the Righteous and Mattatiah ben Yohanan the High Priest
and Hashmonay and his sons'. It seems that the MSS reflect different
stages of the development of the text which has been supplemented
several times.

e) Posttalmudic texts: In this last group, I include the Hebrew scholion to

Megillat Taanit and Megillat Antiokhos although some scholars propose
much earlier dates for both writings, as weIl as Hanukkah Midrashim.
Dated texts like Yosippon and some Piyyutim also belong into this period.
As to the Scholion, most of the occurrences of the Hasmoneans have
their paralleis in the Talmud and are most certainly taken from there.
Typical is the formula ukhshegabra yad (instead of the Babylonian
malkhut) bet Hashmonay (with small variants: LICHTENSTEIN 327.334.-
337.341. 15th of Sivan, p. 328: taqfa yad bne Hashmonay alehem, cf.
13th of Marheshvan, p. 337, and Nicanor Day, p. 346 ukhshetaqfah yad
bet Hashmonay). The option for yad instead of malkhut is in accordance
with Palestinian usage. Of interest in our context are the rare instances
where the information is not paralleled in earlier Rabbinic texts. The most
important example is the scholion for the 17th of EIuI: 'The Romans left
lerusalem' (LIcHTENSTEIN 335f). This is 'commented upon' with the
wellknown story of the jus primae noctis enforced by the Greek kings:
 THE MACCABEES IN RABBINIC TRADITION 201

And Mattatiah ben Yobanan lbe Higb Priest bad one daugbter. And wben ber time
came to get married, lbe officer came to defile ber; but Mattatiab and bis sons did
not let bim and acted full of zeal. And tbey became Slronger lban lbe Greek govem-
ment and tbey were given into lbeir bands and tbey killed lbem and lbe day lbat lbey
did away witb lbem, lbey appointed as a feast day.

The story has a parallel in the third midrash for Hanukkah. We met
'Mattatiah ben Yohanan the High Priest' already in MS Vatican 134 of
Megillah lla. He is also known from the Yosippon (FLUSS ER 76) and is
mentioned also in the prayer Al ha-nissim, as quoted in Mahzor Vitry
(p.198): ' ... in the days of Mattatiah ben Yohanan the Hasmonean High
Priest and his sons, when the frivolous Greek kingdom stood up against
your people Israel to let them forget your Torah'. Megillat Antiokhos
knows a number of details common with the books of Maccabees but not
found in rabbinic literature (e.g. the death of Eleazar under an elephant).
It also speaks of 'Yohanan ben Mattatiah the High Priest' and gives the
names of the five sons of Mattatiah in agreement with I Macc 2,2-5
although not in the same order. A text which demonstrates the careless-
ness (or lack of precise knowledge) when dealing with historical data, is
the Targum to Songs of Songs 6,7-8:

And lbe dynasty of tbe Hasmoneans, lbey alt were filled witb statutes... Mattalbias
tbe High Priest and bis sons, wbo were more righteous lban a11 of lbem, fulfilled tbe
statutes and lbe words of tbe Law zealously ... Then tbe Greeks stood up ... and lbey
appointed tbe wicked Alexander over tbem and he came to wage war against
Jerusalern ... tben lbe Hasmoneans and Mattatbias, and all tbe people of Israel went
out and waged war against lbem, and lbe Lord delivered lbem into tbeir hands.

It would be easy to add more material from posttalmudic Jewish literature

(especially the Hanukkah midrashim), but we may weIl stop at this point.

2. WHAT RESULTS FROM THIS EVIDENCE?

It is astonishing how little information about the Maccabees is to be

found in early rabbinic writings. It is only later on that more details
emerge. This has frequently been explained as the result of rabbinie
censorship: the rabbis, it is said, detested the Hasmoneans as opponents of
the Pharisees; another reason frequently alleged is political: after the
tragic results of two Jewish revolts against Rome, the rabbis did not want
to talk too much about the revolt-inspiring deeds of the Maccabees; for
202 G. STEMBERGER

this same reason, the feast of Hanukkah, too, lost much of its import-
ance 6 • The validity of these arguments is open to debate. What interests
me more, however, is not so much why the Maccabees are not mentioned
more frequently in early rabbinic literature, but where the additional
information in later rabbinic and early medieval writings comes from.
Many authors attribute this increase of information to tradition. As to
written tradition, one may quote Jerome who asserts in his Prologus
galeatus: Macchabaeorum primum librum Hebraicum repperi. But Jerome
is not always a very trustworthy witness. There are also authors who date
Megillat Antiokhos to the second century, consider the Hebrew scholion
to Megillat Ta'anit as a baraita, and regard the Al ha-Nissim in its actual
wording as a very early text. If these datings were correct, the lack of
evidence in rabbinic writings would be due to chance. But the arguments
for an early date of the aforementioned texts are very shaky. They are
attested only much later and the information contained in them corre-
sponds to what is known only from the latest layers of rabbinic literature
or from early medieval texts. It is, therefore, more plausible to put these
texts in a historical framework corresponding to their range of informa-
tion.
There remains the appeal to oral tradition. But one should be wary of
using oral tradition as a deus ex machina; its importance has been over-
rated for apologetic motives. A dose analysis of many rabbinic texts
shows them to be the product of literary work dealing much more with
written texts than with oral tradition. Another explanation seems more
plausible and needs fe wer hypotheses: In certain historical circumstances
the rabbis had access to and found interest in additional information from
the outside.
As to the explanation of the Nicanor Day in the Yerushalmi, we might,
of course, appeal to the Hebrew version of the First Book of Maccabees
mentioned by Jerome; it might still have been in use in synagogues not so
much influenced by the rabbinic movement or among Jewish Christians.
In that case, however, we should expect more exact informations in the
Talmudic story which looks more like a popular tradition. One might

6 See G. ALON, "'Did the Jewish PeopJe and its Sages Cause the Hasmoneans to be

Forgotten?", in: idem, lews, ludaism and the Classical World (Jerusalem, 1977), 1-17;
Ph. KIEV AL, The Talmudic View 01 the Hasmonean and Early Herodian Periods in
lewish History (Ph.D. thesis, Brandeis, 1970); E. NODET, "La decticace, Jes MaccaMes
et Je Messic", RB 93 (1986), 321-375.
 THE MACCABEES IN RABBINIC TRADITION 203

think of stories circulated in Antioch where the Jewish community

revered the tombs of the Maccabean martyrs, taken over later on by the
Christians. The increasing influence of the rabbinic movement in fourth-
century Palestine brought it into closer contact with popular Jewish
traditions; but also contacts with the growing Christi an community (which
was very interested in the Maccabean tradition!) could not be avoided and
might have caused a reflux of traditions of Jewish origin (this also
explains the re-emergence of many traditions known from the Pseudepi-
grapha). As to the concrete circumstances, only hypotheses are possible;
they are, however, not less plausible than the idea of a timeless oral
tradition within the Rabbinic movement.
As to the additional informations in the Bavli, we may point to
increased contacts with Arabs and Christians in Babylonia in the late
Sasanian and early Islamie periods when many originally Jewish tradi-
tions came horne again. Whether these informations were handed on
orally or in some written form, does not matter. We are on even firmer
ground as to Megillat Antiokhos and later texts. In Baghdad, but also in
other major centers of Iraq, there was in the eighth and ninth centuries a
c1imate of discussion and exchange among the different religious com-
munities; writings like the Books of the Maceabees (and other texts!)
might become known again in the Jewish community and taken up by it
for a number of reasons. This return of Jewish traditions to their origins
was reinforced in the tenth century when an anonymous author in South-
ern Italy used a Christian library for his Hebrew version of the story of
Josephus which then influenced later Hanukkah midrashim.
This is not the place to demonstrate more in detail the literary devel-
opment of the rabbinic traditions about the Maccabees. They were only an
example; the important thing is the problem of oral tradition. Our
example (one among many others) shows c1early that the appeal to oral
tradition is not the only and not the most plausible explanation for the
increase of information in later rabbinic literature. We have to consider
the rabbi nie documents within their limits and in historical sequenee
instead of thinking of a timeless reservoir of tradition at the disposal of
the rabbis whenever they want to make use of it. Rabbinic texts are first
of aB literature and not tradition.
 HOW THE BAVLI SHAPED RABBINIC DISCOURSE
THE CASE OF SIFRA

BY

lacob Neusner

Tampa, U.S.A.

Not only did the framers of the Bavli define rabbinic discourse for the
future, but they also redefined the discourse of the prior centuries. They
were the on es who decided that only the Mishnah would receive a
talmud, that is, a sustained exercise in applied reason and practical logic,
set forth in a moving or dialectical argument aimed at holding together in
a single, coherent structure a variety of facts and principles. The Mishnah
would have a talmud, which then was The Talmud (whether of Babylonia
or of the Land of Israel) - but not the Sifra, the Tosefta, or other received
compositions and composites assigned Tannaite standing along with the
Mishnah. Other talmuds, for those other Tannaite materials, can have
been and were composed. But only one document, the Mishnah, would in
the end have a talmud, and the other talmuds that were under way prior
to the closure of the Talmud were either never brought to conclusion and
closure or were simply suppressed. I think the former the more likely of
the possibilities. So the Talmud, meaning both Talmuds, the Talmud of
the Land of Israel and the Talmud of Babylonia, decisively shaped
rabbinic discourse not only by what was done but also what was not done
but left half-done. That the framers of the Bavli decided to do, and that
they did,
The Mishnah is not the sole document of the initial writings of the
canon of the ludaism of the dual Torah - those classified as Tannaite in
authority or standing - that was subjected to the sustained application of
practical reason and critical analysis that, for the Mishnah, yielded the
Talmud of Babylonia. Three other classifications of materials enjoyed that
same remarkable reading: the Tosefta, the Sifra, and statements marked as
Tannaite (e.g., with such sigla as TNY', TN', and the like), Each of these
 HOW THE BA VLI SHAPED RABBINIC DISCOURSE 205

classifications of received statements was read exactly as was the Mish-

nah, and the results of that reading were expressed in the rhetorical and
logical program that characterizes the Talmud to the Mishnah. Not only
so, but at a determinate age in the unfolding of the rabbinic writings,
defined solely by the point of redaction of various writings, people
working on the Mishnah and on these other compilations contemplated a
talmud not only for the Mishnah, but also for the Tosefta, the Sifra, and
some other compositions and even composites bearing Tannaite standing.
So - from the perspective of the treatment of those other documents,
besides the Mishnah - there can have been a talmud to the Tosefta, the
Sifra, and other Tannaite formations or conglomerations of sayings. I
shall show precisely wh at those other talmuds would have looked like by
citing passages, sustained and weil executed, of Sifra-, Tosefta-, and
baraita-criticism and amplification that are indistinguishable in any detail
from passages of Mishnah-criticism.
When the reading of the Mishnah that yielded our Talmud was under
way, these other documents, or materials of the same status - Tannaite -
as the Mishnah, also were being read along the same lines. But those
other talmuds ne ver reached us, and although the Bavli contains ample
indication that such talmuds could have come into being, it also contains
no evidence that, in any sustained way, they did. Once we realize that
ours is not the only Talmud that was under way from the closure of the
Mishnah to the conclusion of the Bavli, 200-600, we then grasp how
profoundly the framers of the Talmud of Babylonia reshaped ail prior
discourse, since they made certain that there would be only one talmud,
the Talmud, and only one privileged document entitled to such a talmud,
namely, the Mishnah. The compositors of the Bavli, or the Talmud of
Babylonia preserve evidence that, just as the Talmud of Babylonia was
worked out as an analysis and critique of the Mishnah, so other docu-
ments were subjected to the same kind of critical analysis. These compo-
sitors provide us with important sampies of the written result of that
analysis. Just as the Mishnah was studied in a systematic and orderly way
so as to yield the Bavli as we have it, so the Sifra and the Tosefta
(among numerous documents closed prior to the Bavli) were studied in
the same way. Not only so, but certain types of statements, accorded the
status of Tannaite, were systematically analyzed in their own terms as
weIl.
The bearing of these facts upon the problem of how to find out wh at
passages of the Bavli attest to opinion held prior to the closure of the
206 1. NEUSNER

Bavli is simple. The Mishnah was not the only book produced in the
earlier centuries of the Common Era to have been subjected to that
sustained analytical criticism that yielded the Bavli (and the Yerushalmi).
Other books, and other classifications of statements, also were subjected
to that same critical exegetical process. But while the Mishnah' s exegesis
led to the Bavli, the Sifra's and the Tosefta's did not. A kind of writing
that addressed several documents then can have yielded not only the
Bavli but an equivalent exegesis, a talmud so to speak, für the Sifra and
the Tosefta and other materials as well - but we do not have the talmud
for any other book but the Mishnah. The conclusion I draw from that fact
is that, where we find writing in the Bavli but not pertinent to the re-
quirements of the Bavli's framers, that writing was carried out separate
from the work on the Mishnah that Ied to the Bavli. These talmuds that
serve documents other than the Mishnah not only are distinct from the
BavIi's redactional program but also give evidence of a type of writing
that served documents prior to the Bavli. That is what J mean when J
speak of how the Bavli shaped rabbinic discourse.
The upshot is that the framers of the Bavli imposed upon the entirety
of rabbinic discourse their own definition of not only what would be said,
but also what would not be said: how matters would be organized and
categorized, and how they would not be so set forth. The Mishnah would
be the only received document that would be accorded a talmud, not the
Sifra or the Tosefta or the compositions or composites of sayings marked
as Tannaite. Not only so, but, still more important, the talmud that the
Mishnah would receive would be framed by the framers of the Bavli
acting on their own, and not as mere heirs and glossators of prior exe-
gesis of the Mishnah. So the Mishnah would have as its talmud the only
talmud, The Talmud, the Bavli (in succession after the Yerushalmi). That
is precisely how the Talmud shaped rabbinic discourse - not only for
time to come, but also for time past. The Bavli reshaped what its authors
had received and defined what its heirs would discuss: the Mishnah as
they read it, that alone. But that sufficed.
Wh at we now shall see is how the analysis, in the Bavli, of a passage
in the Sifra follows the precisely the same rhetorical and logical roles that
govern the analysis in the Bavli of a passage of the Mishnah. That fact by
itself shows that the same way framers of a passage of analysis and criti-
cism of the Mishnah that found its way into the Bavli's commentary to
the Mishnah characterized the work of framers of a passage of the Sifra
that the Bavli has preserved for uso It would seem to me that the preva-
 HOW THE BA VLI SHAPED RABBINlC DISCOURSE 207

lence of the same literary conventions in the reading of two distinct

documents, each with its own indicative traits, strongly suggests the work
was done more or less within the same period of literary formulation and
among people responsive to the same conventions of analysis. Then a
further fact will prove exceedingly suggestive. It is that the analysis of
the Sifra's passage proceeds wholly in terms required by that passage and
ignores the setting, within the composite of the Bavli, in which the Sifra's
passage has been preserved. That seems to me to mean that the framers of
the commentary on the Sifra's passage had in mind a document that
would be devoted to not the Mishnah but Sifra. Then the framers of the
critical analysis of the Sifra's materials proposed to produce a commen-
tary to the Sifra, parallel to wh at was being accomplished for the
Mishnah. But that commentary to the Sifra, that is, that talmud to Sifra,
did not survive, except in bits and pieces in the Bavli itself. Consider-
ations of space limit my presentation to a single example.
Sifra's complement to the following Mishnah-paragraph amplifies the
Mishnah-paragraph's own scriptural demonstration. What is important to
us will be whether or not the further extension of discussion concerns the
Mishnah's or the Sifra's formulations of matters, and, as we shall see, it
is with the latter.

MISHNAH-TRACTATE MENAHOT 8:2D-I

D. [BavIi Menahot 77B] And from all of them did one take one [loaf of each
kind] out of ten as heave offering, as it is said, "And he shall offer one out of
each offering as a heave offering to the Lord" (Lev 8,14) -
E. "one" - that hc should not take a brokcn one;
F. "out of each offering" - (I) that all the offerings should be cquivalent [ten
loavcs for each kind of animaI],
G. and (2) that he should not take [two loaves] from one offering rand none at
all] for its fellow [that is, he should take onc loaf of each kind],
H. "to the priest who tosses thc blood of the peace offerings it shall belong"
(Lev 8,14)-
I. and thc remainder [of the bread] is eaten by the owncr.
I.I A. Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority:
B. "[And of such he shaIl offer one cake from each offering, as an offering that
is raised up to the Lord;] it shaIl belong to the priest who throws the blood of
the peace offerings:"
C. [The one cake is to be taken] from the mass [of cakes that are] joined
together.
D. "one:"
208 1. NEUSNER

E. meaning that one should not take half a loaf [of five, but ratller, a whole loaf
of ten. [That is, one should not prepare five loaves of each required type and
take of the five loaves a half of a loaf, which would then yield tlle requisile
one of ten in proposition. Rather, tllere must be ten loaves of each type, and
one takes one loaf of each type, for the requisite tenth.]
F. "from each offering:"
G. This teaches that all of the offerings should be equal in size [so that one is
not large, another small]. [Or: that all should be treated in one and the same
manner.]
H. [Further,] that one should not take a loaf from one offering in behalf of what
is owing from its fellow, [that is, four loaves of a single variety in behalf of
all of the loaves of the tllree sorts.]
I. "as an offering that is raised up to the Lord:"
l. I do not know how many are required.
K. Lo, I reason as folIows:
L. We find here reference to "an offering that is raised up," and we fmd the
same usage with regard to the offering that is raised up out of the tithe. lust
as the latter usage involves one tenth, so here too the requirement is one
tenth. [The offering to the Lord is one tenth of the number of cakes and
wafers of various sorts, e.g., four out of forty, and the residue is left for the
priesthood.]
M. Or take this route:
N. We find here reference to "an offering that is raised up," and we find the
same usage with regard to the first fruits.
O. lust as when we find the usage, "an offering that is raised up" in regard to
first fruits, there is no fixed volurne that is required, so when we find that
same usage here, there is no fixed volume that is required.
P. Let us then determine the correct analogy:
Q. Let us draw an analogy for "an offering that is raised up" in wh ich there is
no further offering to be made, [namely, the offering of tlle cakes and wafers]
from a case of "an offering tllat is raised up" in which tllere is no further
offering to be made [namely, tlle offering raised up from tlle tithe itself, from
which no further offerings are exacted],
R. but let not tlle case of the offering of first fruits serve as the generative
analogy, from which a furtller offering thereafler is raised up [specifically, the
great offering that is raised up and also the offering that is raised up out of
the tithe].
S. Or take this route:
T. We draw an analogy for a case of an offering tllat is raised up and tllen ealen
in the place in which the offering is made [that is, the offering of the loaves]
from the case of an offering that is raised up and then ealen in the place in
which the offering is made, [namely, the offering of first fruits, both of them
being ealen in lerusalem],
U. but the offering that is raised up from tithe, which is not eaten in the place in
which the offering is made, should not give lestimony [since it may be ealen
even in the provinces, and not only in lerusalem].
V. Accordingly, Scripture seltles the issue when it says, "as an offering that is
raised up lO the Lord,"
W. for the use of the language, "raised up," serves to establish an analogy
[between offerings in which exactly that language is used:]
 HOW THE BA VLI SHAPED RABBINIC DISCOURSE 209

X. We fmd here reference to "an offering that is raised up," and we fmd the
same usage with regard to the offering that is raised up out of the tithe. Just
as the latter usage involves one tenth, so here too the requirement is one
tenth. [The offering to the Lord is one tenth of the number of cakes and
wafers of various sorts, and the residue is left for the priesthood.)
Y. Now we have learned that in the case of an offering that is raised up, the
requisite proportion is one out of ten.
Z. But I do not know how large a loaf is involved.
AA. Lo, I reason in this way:
BB. Here we find a reference to "leavened bread" ["This offering, with cakes of
leavened bread added, he shall offer along with his thanksgiving sacrifice of
weil being" (Lev 7,13»), and elsewhere, with reference to the Two Loaves,
we find the same ["Y ou shall bake choice f10ur and bake of it twelve loaves"
(Lev 24,5»).
ce. Just as leavened bread with reference to the Two Loaves involves a tenth
ephah per loaf, so leavened bread here involves a tenth ephah for each loaf.
DD. Or take this route:
EE. We find reference to loaves here and likewise with reference to the show
bread.
FF. Just as when we find a reference to loaf in regard to the show bread, two
tenths of an ephah are required per loaf, so here too, two tenths of an ephah
are required for each loaf.
00. Let us then detennine the correct analogy:
HH. Let us derive an appropriate analogy for a meal offering which is presented
leavened and is presented along with a sacrifice from a meal offering which
is offered leavened and is presented with a sacrifice, but let the Show Bread
not serve, for it is not offered leavened [but only as unleavened bread) and it
also is not presented with a sacrifice.
11. Or take this route:
JJ. Let us draw an analogy for a meal offering wh ich derives from grain grown
both in the land and abroad, grain that is of the new season along with grain
of the old, from a meal offering the grain of wh ich may derive from the land
or from abroad, and from grain grown in the new season or grain of the old.
KK. But let the case of the Two Loaves not provide an analogy, for these derive
only from grain grown in the land, and they are presented only from loaves
back from grain grown in the new growing season.
LL. Scripture states [with references to the Two Loaves], "You shall bring from
your settlements two loaves of bread as an elevation offering; [each one made
of two tenths of a measure of choice f1our, baked after leavening, as first
fruits to the Lord. With the bread you shall present as bumt offerings to the
Lord seven yearling lambs without blemish ... Tbe priest shall elevate these -
the two lambs - together with the bread of first fruits as an elevation offering
before the Lord ... )" (Lev 23,17-18).
MM. Now Scripture's reference to "you shall bring" can only mean that you must
bring the offering which is analogous to one that is specified in another
passage [hence the analogy is between the show bread and the bread offering
that goes along with a thanksgiving offering (following the commentary of
Rabbenu HilleI)).
NN. Lo, the one is Iike the other.
210 J. NEUSNER

00. lust as the one involves a tenth ephah of fine flour per loaf, so what you
bring that is analogous but in another connection involves a single tenth
ephah of fine flour per loaf. [That would prove that the two loaves of the
show bread are made each of a tenth of a measure of choice flour!]
PP. Or take this route:
QQ. just as these [namely, the Two Loaves of Lev 23,17-18] have to be made of
two tenths of an ephah of fine flour, so those must be two two tenths of an
ephah of fine flour.
RR. [These contlicting resulL~ require attention to the language before us.]
Scripture states, "will be ... ," and the use of the plural indicates that two
tenths of an ephah of fine flour are required here.
SS. We have learned in regard to the leavened bread that it is to be ten tenths [in
all , for the required loaves).
TT. How do we know that the unieavened bread also is to be made of ten tenths
of an ephah of fine flour in all?
UU. Scripture states, "This offering, with cakes of leavened bread added, he shall
offer along with his thanksgiving sacrifice of weil being" (Lev 7,13).
VV. As a counterpart to the leavened bread, bring unleavened bread.
WW. lust as the leavened bread involves ten tenths, so the unleavened bread should
involve ten tenths of an ephah.
XX. Might one suppose that the ten tenths of an ephah of fine flour involved in
the unleavened bread should form a single offering?
YY. Scripture states explicitly, "then he shall offer with the thank offering unleav-
ened cakes mixed with oil, unleavened wafers spread with oil, and cakes of
fine flour weil mixed with oil."
ZZ. And then: "And of such he shall offer one cake from each offering, ras an
offering to the Lord)."
AAA. The upshot is a third of a tenth from each species and so three loaves per
tenth, and, further, the ups hot is that the bread of a thanksgiving offering is
made up of forty loaves. One takes one of them for each species, thus four
loaves, and gives them to the priest,
BBB. "it shall belong to the priest who throws the blood of the peace offerings:"
CCC. and the remainder is eaten by the owner [LXXXVI:I.I-7)

Now the Bavli gives its talmud to the foregoing passages. At Nos. 2-6
italics represent Aramaic.

2. A. A master has said, "'[And of such hc shall offer one cake from each offering,
as an offering that is raised up to the Lord;] it shall belong to the priest who
throws the blood of the peace offerings:' [The one cake is to be takcn] from
the mass [of cakes that are] joined together:"
B. But what about the following: "And all the fat thereof shall he take off from
it" (Lev 4,19) - how here can we carry out the rute of taking the ojfering
from the mass that is joined together?
C. The answer accords with wh at R. Hisda said Abimi said, for said R. Hisda
said Abirni, "The meat may not be cut up be fore the portions that are
presented as a sacrifice have been removed" [Cashdan: when the fat is taken
off, the animal thcrefore is all connected in a mass].
 HOW THE BA VLl SHAPED RABBINIC DISCOURSE 211

3. A. A master has said, "We find here reference to 'an offering that is raised up,'
and we find the same usage with regard to the offering that is raised up out
of the tithe. Just as the lauer usage involves one tenth, so here too the
requirement is one tenth. [The offering to the Lord is one tenth of the number
of cakes and wafers of various sorts, and the residue is left for the priest-
hood]:"
B. But why not derive the apprapriate rule from the analogy oj the heave
ojfering at Midian [the portion of the spoil at Num 31,28-29, which was a
five hundredth part given to the priest, Eleazar (Cashdan)]?
c. We adopt as our goveming analogy for heave offering that is given through-
out all generations the law applying to heave offering that is given throughout
a11 generations, but let not the case of heave offering presented at the episode
of Midian decide matters, for it does not apply for all generations to come.
D. But how about injerring the rule lram the analogy 01 the heave ojfering in the
matter oldough ojfering [Num 15,19, a twenty-fourth]?
E. A Tannaite authority of the household of R. Ishmael [statedj, "We adopt as
our goveming analogy for heave offering conceming which the language 'of
it ... as heave offering unto the Lord' (Lev 7,14) the rule that pertains to
heave offering conceming which the language 'of it ... as heave offering unto
the Lord' (Num 18,26, the heave offering of the tithe) is used, and that
eliminates the heave ojJering 01 dough, concerning which the language '01 it
... as heave ojJering unto the Lord' is not used. "
4. A. Raba raised this question: "As to the heave offering taken up from the cakes
of thank offering, are people Iiable on that account [should non-priests ea!
this offering deliberately] to the death penalty or [if the act was inadvertent]
to the sanclion of paying the added fifth of the value, or is that not the case?
Since an analogy is drawn to heave offering of tithe, then in this matter too
the analogy applies, or perbaps the All-Merciful has exc\uded this type of
heave offering, otherwise analogous to the other, when it uses the language
'therein' (Lev 22,9) and 'from it' (Lev 22,14) [which pertain only to heave
offering of produce, not any other kind of heave offering]?
B. "If it falls into ordinary food, does it impose upon that food the status of
heave offering or not ras would be the case of heave offering of ordinary
food was mixed with other produce]?"
C. The questions stand.
5. A. A master has said, "[These conflicting results require attention to the lan-
guage before us.]. Scripture states, 'will be ... ,' and the use of the plural
indicates that two tenths of an ephah of fine flour are required here:"
B. What is the exegesis that pertains here?
C. [78A] Said R. Isaac bar Abdimi, '''will be' in the plural is used here" rand
the word is written with two Ys, each bearing the numerical value of ten, so
ten tenths, wh ich can refer not to the Two Loaves. which are said explicitly
to be made up of two tenths, it can refer only to the leavened cakes of the
thank offering (Cashdan)).
D. But maybe it means ten qapizas [ten half-qabs/?
E. Said Raba, "In context, Scripture is speaking of tenth ephahs."
6. A. We have leamed in regard to the leavened bread that it is to be ten tenths [in
all, for thc required loaves]. How do we know that the unleavened bread also
is to be made of tcn lenths of an ephah of fine flour in all? Scriplure states,
"This offcring, with cakes of leavened bread added, he shall offer along with
212 J. NEUSNER

his tbanksgiving sacrifice of weil being" (Lev 7,13). As a counterpart to tbe

leavened bread, bring unleavened bread. Just as tbe leavened bread involves
ten tentbs, so tbe unleavened bread should involve ten tentbs of an ephah:
B. But can a role tbat is derived by analogy based on tbe congroence of otber
shared traits [but not verbal ones in eontext] turn around and teach a lesson
tbrough an analogy based on on tbe congroenee of otber shared traits [but not
verbal on es in context]?
c. It is a case in which tbe original role was derived on a polytbetie basis
["from itself and sometbing else"] [Casbdan: tbe original inferenee tbat tbe
leavened cakes of tbe tbank offering sb all consist of ten tentbs, a tentb for
every cake, was not entirely drawn from tbe case of tbe two loaves, in as
much as tbe number of cakes, ten, is deemed to be expressly stated in
connection witb tbe leavened cakes of tbe tbank offering by virtue of tbe
expression 'they sball be.' Accordingly, tbe leavened cakes supplied tbe role
tbat there must be ten cakes, and tbe two loaves supplied tbe role tbat tbere
must be a tenth for eaeh cake.] And any case of polytbetic congroence is not
classified as an argument tbat is basically one from congroence.
D. That poses no problem to him who takes the view that it indeed is not
classijied as an argument jrom congruence. Rut jrom the perspective oj him
who maintains that it is indeed an argument jrom congruence, what is to be
said?
E. The language "you shall bring" is augmentative [== Scripture states explicitly,
"tben he shall offer witb tbe tbank offering unleavened cakes mixed witb oil,
unleavened wafers spread witb oil, and cakes of fine flour weil mixed with
oil." And tben: "And of such hc shall offer one cake from each offering, ras
an offering to tbe Lord]." The upshot is a tbird of a tentb from eacb species
and so tbree loaves per tentb, and, furtber, tbe upsbot is tbat the bread of a
tbanksgiving offering is made up of forty loaves].

There can be no doubt that in this enormous and successful dialectical

argument, Sifra' s vast complement and restatement is expounded in its
own framework. In context, the Mishnah' s brief version looks like a
summary; or Sifra's like a vast expansion. But in actuality, Sifra's
authorship states this matter the way it commonly works matters out, the
modes of argument being routine for that document, the rhetoric being
standard. So there is no settling the question. It is clear that Nos. 2, 3-4,
5, 6 form a talmud to the Sifra's text. It was this passage that first alerted
me to the phenomenon which we now see is routine.
What are we to make of a datum of this kind? Now everybody knows
that the compilers of the Bavli and even the authors of some of its
compositions will adduce important passages of the Sifra for their own
purposes. What is important for our purpose is how these abstracts are
treated when they have served the Bavli's framers' purpose. Are they then
left unexamined, as inert facts? Yes indeed, in our sampie we found that
 HOW THE BA VLI SHAPED RABBINIC DISCOURSE 213

that was sometimes the case. Are they examined in relationship to the
exegesis of the Mishnah? Yes, that is quite so.
But are the Sifra-passages read in terms of their own interests, pro gram ,
foci, points of cogency and coherent discourse? Indeed they are , and for
the present purpose, that is the key. For what I have aimed to show in
this part of the exposition is not that there certainly was a talmud to the
Sifra equivalent to the Talmud of Babylonia to the Mishnah. Nor do I
mean to suggest that a sizable proportion of what we find in the Sifra has
been subjected to that program of critical analysis that the Bavli brings to
the Mishnah. Those pro positions do not pertain to the thesis I here set
forth. All I wish to show is two facts.

[1] The way in which the framers of the Bav li read the Mishnah is the
way in which the framers of passages, in the Bavli, on the Sifra read
the Sifra.
[2] Passages in the Sifra that are subjected to exegesis may be read not
for purposes of Mishnah-exegesis but for purposes of Sifra-exegesis.

So, it folIows, we may classify certain passages now preserved in the

Bavli as talmud to not the Mishnah but Sifra (or Tosefta or baraita-com-
positions and compilations, not presented here). These writings clearly
took shape in response to the documentary requirements of a writing
other than the Bavli, and I think that they took shape not in the time of
the closure of the Bavli but at some prior time.
Whether the classification of writing be given a temporal or merely
taxonomie valence, the issue is the same: have these writers done their
work with documentary considerations in mind? I believe I have shown
that they have not. Then where did they expeet their work to makes its
way? Anywhere it might, because, so they assumed, fitting in nowhere in
particular, it found a suitable locus everywhere it tumed up. But I think
temporal, not merely taxonomic, eonsiderations pertain. The third kind of
writing seems to me to originate in aperiod prior to the other two. It is
carried on in a manner independent of all redactional considerations such
as are known to us. Then it should derive from a time when redactional
considerations played no paramount role in the making of compositions.
A brief essay, rather than a sustained composition, was then the dominant
mode of writing. My hypothesis is that people can have written both long
and short compositions - compositions and composites, in my language -
at one and the same time. But writing that does not presuppose a second-
214 J. NEUSNER

ary labor of redaction, e.g., in a composite, probably originated when

authors or authorships did not anticipate any fate for their writing beyond
their labor of composition itself. Along these same lines of argument, this
writing may or may not travel from one document to another. Wh at that
means is that the author or authorship does not imagine a future for his
writing. What fits anywhere is composed to go nowhere in particular.
Accordingly, what matters is not whether a writing fits one document or
another, but whether, as the author or authorship has composed a piece of
writing, that writing meets the requirements of any document we now
have or can even imagine. If it does not, then we deal with a literary
period in which the main kind of writing was ad hoc and episodic, not
sustained and documentary.
Three classifications of writing, all assigned Tannaite standing, all
formed after the time of the Mishnah, were read precisely as the Mishnah
was read: the Sifra, the Tosefta, and compositions bearing Tannaite
marking known as baraitot. We know that fact because in the pages of the
Talmud of Babylonia, substantial passages of all three types are preser-
ved, not solely for the purposes of the compositions concerning the
Mishnah or propositions deriving from Mishnah exegesis that the framers
of the Bavli formulated. They were preserved along with sustained
discussions of their own statements, whether or not those discussions
were required for the purposes of the framers of the passages in which
they occur. In point of fact, where we find a sustained analysis. of a
passage of the Sifra or Tosefta, it is clear, that analysis concerns itself
with the requirements of the Sifra or the Tosefta and its meanings in its
context; we cannot account for the analytical program by appeal to the
interests of Mishnah-exegesis and its amplification, but only, to the
concerns of Sifra- or Tosefta- or baraita-exegesis. That means that the
critical analytical reading of passages, sometimes sizable, of the Sifra, the
Tosefta, and the baraita-corpus, was undertaken in its own terms. This
leads to three conclusions.

[11 Because the modes of thought and analysis concerning the Sifra, the
Tosefta, and the baraita-corpus in no way diverged from those that
guided inquiry into the Mishnah, I claim that the work that was done
falls into the category of talmud, as defined earlier.

[2] And because some of these passages are sustained, I alle ge that, in
addition to The Talmud, the one that imposes meaning upon the
 HOW THE BA VLI SHAPED RABBINlC DISCOURSE 215

Mishnah, there not only can have been, but alm ost certainly were,
other talmuds, in progress for the Sifra, the Tosefta, and components
of the baraita-compositions and even compilations.

[3] Where a talmud was taking shape around the Tosefta, the Talmud to
the Mishnah would consist of the Tosefta's talmud, itself amplified
and revised in relationship to the Mishnah's statements, thus,
Mishnah-paragraph, Tosefta-amplification through restatement, in the
Mishnah' s language, of what the Mishnah was supposed to mean, and,
third, further analysis of the Tosefta's judgment of the Mishnah's
meaning and the Mishnah's unresolved issues.

These facts, set forth here as foundations for a hypothesis to be tested

against a variety of other passages of the Talmud of Babylonia, yield a
rather unanticipated conclusion, which is that the framers of the Bavli not
only set forth a statement of their own, out of a sizable corpus of
received materials. That point I have maintained in prior monographs and
requires no amplification here l . The framers of the Bavli also took
control of, and closed off, prior discourse. They not only chose what
would form the systemic statement that defined what we should call
"Judaism" and what their apologists would caU "the one whole Torah of
Moses, our rabbi." They also privileged one document of choice, making
its exegesis critical, and set in the background other documents that, in
earlier times, were subjected to exactly the same engaged exegesis as the
Mishnah had long enjoyed. Alongside the Talmuds to the Mishnah (the
Yerushalmi and the Bavli as we know them), there might have been a
variety of talmuds - the taLmud to Sifra, the taLmud to Tosefta; the
Talmud that we do have, had it emerged only as a secondary development
of the talmud to Tosefta, might have been a very different document from
what it iso But that is not what we have. And the extant components of
such other talmuds as have reached us hardly lead us to suppose that

I The Bavli and its Sources: The Question oJ Tradition in the Case oJ Trac/ate

Sukkah (BJS, Atlanta, 1987); Tradition as Selec/ivity: Scrip/ure, Mishnah, Tosefta, and
Midrash in the Talmud oJ Babylonia. The Case oJ Tractate Arakhin (SFSHJ, Atlanta,
1990); Language as Taxonomy, The Rufes Jor Using Hebrew and Aramaic in the
Babylonian Talmud (SFSHJ, Atlanta, 1990); The Rules oJ Composition oJ the Talmud oJ
Babylonia. The Cogency oJ the Bavli's Composite (SFSHJ, AtIanta, 1991); The Bavli's
One Voice: Types and Forms oJ Analyticaf Discourse and their Fixed Order oJ Appea-
rance (SFSHJ, AtIanta, 1991).
216 1. NEUSNER

somewhere along the line such talmuds existed and then were suppressed,
though that judgment must be classed as a merely reasonable guess.
Since, it is clear, a variety of received writings were read in one and the
same way and even produced writing of a singularly uniform character as
to both rhetoric and logic, we must conclude that the talmud to the Sifra
and the talmud to the Tosefta as weH as the Talmuds to the Mishnah
were taking shape among pretty much the same sorts of persons and at
the same time. That proposition, ignoring the document's own aHegations
conceming the names of the authorities cited therein, which in fact are
the same names as those who dominate Mishnah-exegesis 2 , seems to me
a plausible way of explaining the facts in our hands about the uniformity
of the exegetical discourse on the variety of documents. At a given point,
a variety of writings were read in the same way, so that documentary
lines played no important role. But then the other fact, that the results of
the exegesis of one document were formed into a massive and authoritat-
ive writing, the Talmud (of Babylonia, of the Land of Israel), while the
results of the exegesis of the other documents, as weH as of received
materials not formed into a sustained document at aB, comes into play.
And that other fact teUs me that at some point the received program of
exegesis, and the forms that that exegesis was to take for preservation and
transmission to the future, were radically redefined. At that point, as I
have now suggested, the Mishnah assumed a position of priority; all other
(potential) talmuds were moved off-stage, and their contents would form a
part of the background scenery for the principal drama: the reading of the
Mishnah.

2 We cannot verify the attributions, so we cannot use them as historical facts or

indicators: what we cannot show we do not know. That the same names occur in a
variety of passages can form a convention of later pseudoepigraphic authors, so by
themselves, names that recur prove nothing.
 WRITING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL
IN THE 17th & 18th CENTURIES

BY

J.W. Rogerson

Shefjield, Greal Britain

What we call, rightly or wrongly, the scientific writing of the history of

ancient Israel, did not emerge until the 19th century. It depended upon the
development of source criticism, that is, the investigation of the Iiterary
and other sources that lay behind the narratives of the Old Testament in
their final form, and the reconstruction of their literary history. These
findings were then used to reconstruct ancient Israel's history in a way
that went behind the final form of the narratives, so that the schoIarly
reconstructions were often at variance with the picture of Israel's history
presented by a surface reading of the Old Testamene.
Source criticism did not become a serious item of Old Testament study
until the end of the 18th century, and it did not establish itscIf as a
schoIarIy paradigm until the beginning of the 19th century. Consequently,
all treatment" of the history of Israel prior to the 19th century assumed
the overall reIiabiIity of the Old Testament even if miraculous incidents
were de-mythologised or the accuracy of particular details was questioned
(as in REIMARUS's treatment of the crossing of the Red Sea)2.
Granted this fact, there emerged three main ways of writing Israel's
history. First, it was set within a chronology of the history of the world
and of the histories of the surrounding nations. Second, it was investi-
gated from the point of view of how the civil government of the Hebrews
had functioned. Third, it was read in a hostiie manner by free-thinkers

I See J. W. ROGERSON, Old Testament Criticism in fhe Nineteenth Century:

England and Germany (London, 1984) chs. 1-2. The subject is not weil documented.
See further J. H. HAYES, "Fram the Renaissance LO the Enlightcnment", in J. H. HAYES
and J. M. MILLER (eds.) Israelite and Judean History (London, 1977), 33-53.
2 S. H. REIMARUS's treatment was published in 1777 by LESSING. See Gotthold

Ephraim Lessings sämmtliche Schriften, (ed. Kar1 LACHMANN), Book 12 (Leipzig,

18973 ), 359-368.
218 J.W. ROGERSON

who wished to discredit the Old Testament as a document of divine

revelation. I shall discuss these three forms, the fIrst more briefly than the
other two, be fore making some comparisons with the later, so-called,
scientific writing of Israel's history.

1. SETTING ISRAEL'S HISTORY IN THE FRAMEWORK OF UNIVERSAL HIS-

TORY

The origins of biblical chronolgy have been traced back to a Hellenistic

Jewish writer of the 3rd century B.e. named Demetrius, while Pseudo-Eu-
polemus, a Samaritan of possibly 200 B.e. has been credited with the
first attempt to fuse biblical records with Greek and Oriental mythology.
In the 2nd century B.e. there apparently already existed a world chronicle
which integrated Jewish with Greek history3. By the time we reach
Josephus, therefore, and his Antiquities 0/ the lews (A.D. 93/4) we are
dealing with a well-established genre. However, for writers of the history
of Israel in the 17th and 18th centuries Josephus's account of the history
of the Jewish people from the creation of the world to the 12th year of
Nero (A.D. 66) was an important model. For those centuries where the
text of the O.T. was his primary source, Josephus re-told its narratives in
a lively style, with observations about why particular events had taken
place. For example, the setbacks suffered by the tribes after the death of
Joshua happened because the tribes failed to put the tribe of Judah in
charge of defeating the Canaanites4 • Another classical model was the
Chronicon of Eusebius of Caesarea, of AD 288 (or 303)5.
For writers in the 17th and 18th centuries, then, there existed a way of
writing the history of Israel in the context of universal history that went
back to antiquity, and the contribution of the 17th and 18th centuries lay
in the area of refinement rather than innovation. The most famous
contributions to this field were those of PETA VIUS, NEWTON, 1. SCALIGER
and USSHER to the establishing of absolute chronologies6 • The latter is

3 See Ben Zion WACHOLDER, "BiblieaJ Chronology in the Hellenistie World Chroni-

eie", HTR 61 (1968), 451-48l.

4 Josephus, Antiquites Book V Ch.2.

5 Eusebius, Die Chronik (ed. J. KORST, GCS 20, Berlin, 1911).

6 J. SCALIGER, De emendatione tempo rum (1583); D. PETAVIUS, Opus de doctrina

temporum (Paris, 1627); 1. NEWTON, Chronology, in Isaac NEWTON, Opera quae exstant
omnia, Vol. 5 (London, 1785, reprint Stuugart, 1964); J. USSHER, The Annals oj the
 WRITING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL 219

famous for dating the creation of the world to 'the entrance of the night
preceding the twenty third day of October' 40047 ; but the work of
USSHER and others became the basis for what we can caU the standard
histories of Israel that were written in the 18th century: Humphrey PR 1-
OEAUX'S The Old and New Testament connected in the history of the
lews and neighbouring nations, London 1716-18 and Samuel SHUCK-
FORO's The Sacred and Profane history connected, London 17288 •
PRIDEAUX'S book began with the accession of the Assyrian king
Tiglath-Pileser III in 746, and SHUCKFORO, who wrote to supplement
PRIDEAUX'S work, began with the creation. Both works were translated
into German, enjoyed many English editions weU into the 19th century,
and were recommended as among die bedeutendsten Hü/fsmittel by OE
WETIE9 • At the level of method, they offer no advance on the work of
losephus and Eusebius, and no doubt the reason for this was their belief
in the inerrancy of the biblical text. That they could handle their sources
critically there can be no doubt; but where there was a clash between the
Bible and other sources 'the profane writer must give place to the
sacred ... The sacred writ, as being dictated by the holy spirit of God, must
ever be of infallible truth .. .' 10. This meant that while the records of the
history of other nations could be questioned, the prime source for Israel's
history was privileged; and this is why we must spend more time on the
other two approaches, which handled the biblical text in a critical manner
without, however, questioning its basic accuracy.

World (London, 1658). NEWTON proposed very late dates for the kings of Egypt:
Thuttnosis III is dated to 1070 and Arnenophis to 909. The lattds pyramids were built
in 901. This has the effect of making the Israelite kingdoms earlier, cuIturally, than
those of Egypt.
7 Ibid., p. I. It is interesting that USSHER uses three parallel methods of dating: the
year of the world, the Julian period and the period before Christ.
8 PRlDEAUX wa'i translated into German by August TITTELN (Dresden, 1726).

Because PRIDEAUX beg an with the 8th century, the German edition included E. Lö-
SCHER'S Älteste Geschichte der Welt. The German translator commented: 'Zu dem Ende
gehet er über Ahaz Zeiten nicht hinaus, weil er wohl sahe, dass er alsdenn in die finstern
Zeiten, da er jene Fusstapfen weltlicher Scribenten, denen er trauen könnte, sondern
lauter mythologische Gedichte der Alten vor sich finden würde, gerathen müsste'.
SHUCKFORO was also translated into German under the title of Harmonie der heiligen
und Pro!aflScribefllen in der Geschichte der Welt (Berlin, 1731-38).
9 W. M. L. OE WETTE, Lehrbuch der hebräisch-jüdischen Archäologie (Leipzig,
18302) 21-22.
10 PRlDEAUX, vol. I, 337.
220 LW. ROGERSON

2. INVESTIGATING THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT OF THE HEBREWS

One of the most influential books of this type was the De republica
Hebraeorum, first published in 1617, by Petrus CUNAEUS (1586-1638). Its
author was born near Leyden, and studied Law and Theology, holding
professorships in Law at Leyden and then The Hague. The De republica
was translated into many languages, and was still being recommended in
Britain in 1825 as 'a very learned work ... which, till lately, continued to
be a text book whence the continental professors of Hebrew antiquities
lectured'lI.
CUNAEUS'S sources were, in addition to the Bible, Josephus and
Eusebius, the great Jewish scholar of the 12th century Mamonides, 'the
only man of that Nation, who had the good fortune to understand wh at it
is to write seriously and to the purpose'12. CUNAEUS'S interests seem to
be twofold: to commend the equality of all mankind and to condemn the
accumulation of power, whether by kings, land-owners or clergy. The
his tory of Israel is read by CUNAEUS so as to affirm these interests.
His starting-point is what he calls the Agrarian Law, that is, the law of
Jubilee as described in Leviticus 25 and elaborated by Maimonides in his
Mishneh Torah I3 • According to this, all debts were to be cancelled and
all pieces of land were to revert to their owners (or their families) every
fifty years. The purpose of this law was so that 'the wealth of some might
not tend to the oppression of the rest' 14. When Joshua divided the land
among the tribes it was the intention that all (families) would be equally
provided for. The Agrarian Law, then, was directed against the fact that,
when land is accumulated, 'the Lords of so much land disdain to perform
... honest labours with their own hands'. The dispossessed go to the cities
'and are corrupted with an idle kind of life, supported by some soft and
liberal art .. .'15.
The Hebrew commonwealth was established in Palestine only, and
came to an end with the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans, although the
state of affairs after the destruction of the First Temple never rose to the

11 T. H. HORNE, All lmroductioll to the Critical Study alld Kllowledge 0/ the Holy

Scrip/ures (London, 1835 5), vol. II, 736. Reference to CUNAEUS is to the English
translation.
I~ CUNAEUS, 14.
" Maimonidcs, MisJmeh Torah (Jerusalem. 1955), Book 8, chs. 12-22.
14 CUNAEliS. 12-13.

1.; Ibid., 20-21.

 WRITING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL 221

same level under the Second Temple. For instance, after the Babylonian
captivity, the Agrarian Law and the Jubilee were never enforced. The
Council that Moses had established to rule the nation lasted only until the
fall of Judah in the 6th century, and after the return of the Jews from
captivity in Babyion, power was seized by the levites, who trod under
foot both divine and human things l6 • Jeroboam, who led the revolt of the
northern tribes after the death of Solomon, deliberately deceived the
people. CUNAEUS clearly sees hirn as an example of the worst kind of
king:

Liberty and other specious names (he) here pretended, when his secret thoughts were,
how to enslave others, and get Dominion himselfl7 •

Further, when Jeroboam could not rally his people to the goodness of his
cause, he renewed old superstition and made religion 'a tye upon the
people'18.
We have, in CUNAEUS's De republica, an essentially negative reading
of Israel' s his tory , which is designed to show that the accumulation of
power and the neglect of the rights of individuals lead to the downfall of
anation. It is meant to be an object-Iesson to the readers of the author's
own day, to convince them that

by concord a small Estate is raised, and the greatest is by discord overthrown

(preface).

A much more positive reading of Israel's constitution is found in Moses

LOWMAN's Dissertation on the Civil Government of the Hebrews pub-
lished in 1745 19. LOWMAN (1680-1752) was a Reformed clergyman who
studied in Leyden and Utrecht and had charge of a Reformed congrega-
tion in a village near London. Three main interests stand out in his work:
a defence of the levites, the view that the power of the king depends on
the consent of the people, and an attempt to define carefully which acts
constituted treason against the Hebrew government.

16 Ibid., 141.
17 Ibid., 134.
18 Ibid., 135.
19 M. LOWMAN, Dissenation on the Civil Govemment 0/ the Hebrews (London,
1745).
222 J.W. ROGERSON

The defence of the levites is the longest chapter in the book. We

remember that CUNAEUS had described the period after the return from
the Babylonian captivity as one of accumulation of power by the levites.
Thomas MORGAN, with whom I shall deal in part 3, had likewise attacked
the Mosaic constitution for permitting the levites 10 gain great wealth and
power at the expense of the ordinary people. LOWMAN distinguished
carefully between taxes that were paid to the temple and taxes that were
paid to the levites. The former went to defray the very considerable cost
of maintaining the temple fabric and its day-to-day administration, not to
mention the payment of pensions to retired clergy and officials, and the
salaries of those who copied and corrected the sacred books 20 •
LOWMAN next deals with the charge that the people were required to
pay an annual poIl tax to the levites amounting, on one calculation, to
over a million pounds per year, at 1723 prices! A careful examination of
ancient weights and values reduced this sum to a mere f44,000; but
LOWMAN' s strongest argument is that the only evidence for the poIl tax
comes from the Talmud, not the Bible. The real biblical provision for the
levites was the setting-aside for them of 48 cities, and a tithe of the
produce of fruit and cattle. LOWMAN estimates the proportion of land held
by the Levites to have been 1/200 of the whole land of Israel. The tithe
of the produce of fruit and cattle occasions a discussion as to which parts
of the land were suitable for agriculture and husbandry and" which were
not.
LOWMAN's chief defence of the levites, however, is that they had
voluntarily given up any claim to the possession of land in Israel (apart
from their 48 cities), with the result that

they trusted solely to the national Faith, for the secure payment of their Annuity; they
divested themselves of all Power of Re-entry upon Non-payment, and ran the hazard
of the Insolvency of any Tribe, or any part of the Country, either by i11 Husbandry or
accidental Damages, by reason of Contentions at Horne or Invasions from Abroad; so
that no Misfortune could befall either the Hebrew Nation, or any one of the tribes,
but the Levites Annuity must feel it, and suffer a Deficiency by ie 1•

On the matter of the power of the king, LOWMAN argued that the author-
ity of a king rested upon the consent of the people, and illustrated this
from an incident in I Samuel 14. Saul and his army had taken a sacred

20 Ibid., 89.
21 Ibid., 122.
 WRITING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL 223

oath to eat no food until they had defeated the Philistines in battle.
Jonathan, Saul's son, had been absent when the oath was taken. He had
eaten some honey, with the result that the sacred orade on which Saul
relied for guidance, had gone silent. That same orade then indicated that
Jonathan had broken the sacred oath, and Saul solemnly condemned
Jonathan to death. The people responded:

Shall Jonathan die? ... As the Lord Jives, there shall not one hair of his head fall to
thc ground.

LOWMAN comments that this was not a mutiny against their king on the
part of the people. It was to the assembly of the people that there
belonged the right of condemning criminals or of setting them free - a
right exercised in this case against the decision of the king 22 •
Mutiny and treason were sensitive issues in England in 1745, the year
of publication of LOWMAN's book. Ever since the overthrow of the
Roman Catholic James II by the Protestant William of Orange in 1688,
the heirs of James had retained some support in Britain, and in 1745
Prince Charles Edward raised the standard of revoIt in Scotland and
invaded England, reaching as far as Derby. The Old Testament has a
number of examples of kings being overthrown. The definition of what
constituted treason in ancient Israel was therefore a very topical matter,
and the misdeeds of James 11 are, in fact, alluded to by LOWMAN 23 •
LOWMAN defined treason as rebellion against the God of Israel, and the
wish to depose hirn in favour of other gods. From this point of view, it
was not treason when the prophets foretold the downfall of the houses of
kings Jeroboam, Baasha and Omri. Each king had introduced idolatry into
Israel. Further, when the prophets actively opposed king Ahab, and
actually anointed Jehu to overthrow Ahab's successor, the prophets were
opposing one of the most wicked kings of Israel whose wife, Jezebel, had
introduced the worship of a false god into Israel. All these kings, Low-
MAN maintained, had broken the first commandment of the original
contract between Jehovah and the Hebrew nation: 'you shall have no
other gods be fore me'.

22Ibid., 146
23 Ibid., 278-279.
224 J.W. ROGERSON

It was not rebellion to oppose kings who broke lehovah's contract. It

would be rebellion if such kings were allowed 10 break lehovah's contact
with impunity.
Convincing as this may sound, it is noteworthy that LOWMAN failed to
mention that leroboam's revoIt against Solomon's son Rehoboam was
actually inspired by prophets, because of the harsh injustices inflicted by
Solomon upon the people. In other words, LOWMAN' s reading of the
history of Israel is selective, and shaped by the pressing issues of his day.
This is clearly indicated by the following observation:

The Wisdom of our Govemment has declared it inconsistent with the Safety and
Welfare of this Protestant Kingdom, to be govemed by a Popish Prince ... I hope no
honest Englishman, who has seen in experience that Popery is inconsistent with the
Safcty and Welfare of this Protestant Kingdom but will own it to be a wise and
necessary Provision, to preserve his Religion, Libeny and Propeny, and endeavour to
prevent the least Breach in this Security to our Happiness from the present Protestant
Succession 24 •

3. USING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL TO UNDERMINE THE AUTHORITY OF THE

Ow TESTAMENT

Thomas MORGAN' s 7he Moral Philosoph er, published in 1737, is an

example of the third way of reading the history of Israel, that of the
opponent of the Old Testamenes. MORGAN, who died in 1743, and who
was ordained as a nonconformist minister in 1716 but dismissed from his
post in 1720, described hirnself as a Christi an deist. The Moral Philos-
opher is a dialogue between a Christian deist, Philalethes, and a Christian
lew Theophanes, the difference between them being that the Christian
lew accepts the Old Testament as divine revelation, while the Christian
deist rejects the Old Testament. Central to the beliefs of Philalethes are
that the doctrines of lesus are the 'true and genuine Prinicples of Nature
and Reason'26, that Christianity is choked with lewish ideas 27 and that
Paul was the great free-thinker of his age, 'the bold and brave Defender
of Reason against Authority, in Opposition to those who had set up a

24 Ibid., 265.
25 Thomas MORGAN, The Moral Philosopher (London, 1737).
26 Ibid., 144.
27 Ibid., 145.
 WRITING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL 225

wretched Scheme of Superstition, Blindness and Slavery, contrary to all

Reason and common sense,28.
MORGAN (Philalethes) read the history of Israel as follows: the original,
true religion of God and Nature became corrupted when humans tumed
their own heroes into gods and worshipped them. This development was
assisted by the Israelite Joseph when, as govemor of Egypt, he made the
priesthood independent of the monarchy. The priests were thus able to
enslave the consciences of the people, and this so affected the Israelites,
that Moses and the prophets had to try to win the Israelites back from this
Egyptianization 29 • Part of the programme for achieving this was the
institution by Moses of the ceremonial religion of sacrifices.
The prophets, who succeeded Moses in the task of reforming Israel,
committed a major error in the matter of the rape of the concubine at
Gibea, and the near-extermination of the tribe of Benjamin as a result of
a divine oracle. It was necessary for Samuel to establish a new prophetic
assembly at Naioth, but their task of reforming the people was a hopeless
one, and after the establishment of the monarchy, the main role of the
prophets was to keep in check the power of the kings 30 •
Samuel tricked Saul into going to war against the Amalekites, in the
hope that Saul would be killed in battle, and when this failed, he then
anointed David in order to oppose Saul. Unfortunately, David favoured
the priests, and Solomon ' s encouragement of foreign wives and their gods
corrupted the people even more. When Jeroboam made the northem tribes
rebe1 after the death of Solomon, he was the too1 of the prophets, and he
was soon rejected by the prophets when he began to displayasense of
tolerance that was not to their liking. Other kings were overthrown at the
insistence of the prophets, a noteworthy example being the destruction of
the house of Omri and Ahab by Jehu, who was anointed king by the
prophets specifically for this purpose. With the fall of the northem
kingdom Israel in 721, prophecy came to end. Few prophets remained in
Judah, and those that did were mostly killed. The prophets had fai1ed in
the task assigned to them, and their failure was nowhere more obvious
than in their championing of David. David, the man who committed
adultery and murder, was, for the prophets, the man after God's own
heart.

28 Ibid., 71.
29 Ibid., 247.
30 Ibid., 192.
226 J.W. ROGERSON

MORGAN'S Moral Philosopher is an interesting synthesis of views that

had been suggested before his time. lohn SPENCER in his De legibus
Hebraeorum of 1685 had suggested an Egyptian origin for the Israelite
rituals. The idea of Samuel as the second founder of the Hebrew theoc-
racy was very old, while an attack on the character and morality of David
can be found in P. BA YLE' s Dictionnaire historique et critique of 1692--
95. What is unusual in MORGAN's treatment is his handling of prophecy.
It was necessary for hirn to discredit Old Testament prophecy if he
wished to sever the link between the Old and New Testaments. The
prophecies in the Old Testament about the coming of Christ provided the
main focus of the unity of the two testaments. If the Old Testament was
to be rejected by a Christian deist as divine revelation, its prophecies
about the coming of Christ presented a problem. MORGAN solved this
problem by a highly unusual account of the history of the prophetie
movement in ancient Israel, whose purpose was to discredit this move-
mene 1•
The writing of the history of Israel in the 17th and 18th centuries
suffered from certain constraints. Not only was there as yet no source
cnhclsm, neither were there Palestinian archaeology, nor the
decipherment of Babylonian and Assyrian, and the rise of social anthro-
pology, all of which would totally transform Old Testament study in the
19th century. A further constraint was the belief in the infallibility of the
sacred text. Quite likely, less progress was made in the historie al study of
the Hebrews than in the study of other peoples in spite of all the attention
devoted to the Old Testament.
Wh at is particularly striking to a modern scholar is the way in which
Old Testament history could function as a mirror in this period for the
special interests of the writers and their times. The Dutchman CUNAEUS
read it as an egalitarian story opposing the misuse of power by kings,
landowners and clergy. The English nonconformist LOWMAN, who was a
cJergyman, cJeared the levites of biarne, but was especially concerned to
see Israelite history as a reason for defending the Protestant monarchy of
England. MORGAN, for whom the Old Testament contained a religion
unworthy of an enlightened conscience, nevertheless feit that the 01d
Testament was sufficiently important to have to be debunked. The writers
who integrated the history of Israel into that of the world similarly recog-

31 See further H Graf REVENTLOW, Bibelautlwrilät und Geist der Modeme (GÖltin-

gen, 1980).
 WRITING THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL 227

nised the centrality of the Old Testament. Whatever else the emergence of
the 19th century historiography did, it removed the history of Israel from
the central position that it occupied up to the 18th century. From now on,
the history of Israel would be of interest mainly to theologians. For
historians. it would become the account of a small people in the Fertile
Crescent of the First Millennium B.C.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN OER WOUOE

BY

F. Garcfa Martfnez

Groningen, T!re Nether/ands

A. BOOKS

De HabakukroL van 'Ain Fasha. Tekst en vertaling (Assen, 1954)

[with F.A.W. VAN 'T LAND].
2 Die messianischen Vorstellungen der Gemeinde von Qumrtln (Studia
Semitica Neerlandica 3, Assen, 1957).
3 De Dankpsalmen (Oe handschriften van de Oode Zee in nederlandse
vertaling, Amsterdam, 1957).
4 Bijbelcommentaren en bijbelse verhalen (Oe handschriften van de
Oode Zee in nederlandse venaling, Amsterdam 1958).
5 Le Targum de Job de La grotte Xl de Qumran (Leiden, 1971) [with
J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG and B. JONGELING].
6 Aramaic Texts from Qumran with Translations and Annotations
(Leiden, 1976) [with B. JONGELING en C.J. LABUSCHAGNE].
7 Micha (Oe Prediking van het Oude Testament, Nijkerk, 1976,
1977 2 , 1985 3 ).
8 De bevrijdende God. Acht bijbelbesprekingen (Oriebergen, 1977)
[with M. OE JONGE].
9 Jona - Nahum (Oe Prediking van het Oude Testament, Nijkerk,
1978, 1985 2 ).
10 Habakuk - Zejanja (Oe Prediking van het Oude Testament, Nijkerk,
1978, 1985 3).
11 Haggai en Maleachi (Oe Prediking van het Oude Testament, Nij-
kerk, 1982).
12 Zacharia (Oe Prediking van het Oude Testament, Nijkerk, 1984).
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 229

13 Pro/eet en establishment. Een verklaring van het boek Micha

(Exegetische Studies 1, Kampen, 1985).

B. BOOKS EDITED

Adhuc loquitur. Collected Essays of Dr. B. Gemser (Leiden, 1988)

[with A. VAN SELMS].
2 Revolte in de theologie. Een bundel beschouwingen over de zoge-
naamde vemieuwingstheologie (Nijkerk, 1968) [with G.c. BERK-
OUWER].
3 Gaan en staan. Een bunde1 beschouwingen over gemeente-zijn in
deze tijd (Amsterdam, 1968) [with G.C. BERKOUWER].
4 De Bijbel in het geding. Een bunde1 beschouwingen over Schrift-
kritiek en Schriftgezag (Nijkerk, 1968) [with G.c. BERKOUWER].
5 In gesprek met van Ruler (Nijkerk, 1969) [with G.c. BERKOUWER].
6 Grensgesprekken. Evangelie en wetenschappen (Kampen, 1969)
[with P.J. ROSCAM ABBING].
7 Wat dunkt u van de mens? Een reeks beschouwingen over de mens
in bijbel en maatschappij (Kampen, 1970) [with H. BERKHOF].
8 The Witness 0/ Tradition. Papers Read at the Joint British-Dutch
01d Testament Conference Held at Woudschoten, 1970 (OTS 17,
Leiden, 1972).
9 Syntax and Meaning. Studies in Hebrew Syntax and Biblica1 Exe-
gesis (OTS 18, Leiden, 1973).
10 Wat is waarheid? Waarheid en verificatie in kerk en theologie
(Kampen, 1973) [with G.c. BERKOUWER].
11 Language and Meaning. Studies in Hebrew Language and Biblical
Exegesis. Papers Read at the Joint British-Dutch Old Testament
Conference Held at London, 1973 (OTS 19, Leiden, 1974).
12 Th. VRlEZEN - A. S. VAN DER WOUDE, De Literatuur van Oud-
Israel (Wassenaar, 19734 ) [Katwijk aan Zee, 19899 ].
13 Instruction and Interpretation. Studies in Hebrew Language,
Palestinian Archaeology and Biblica1 Exegesis. Papers Read at the
Joint British-Dutch Old Testament Conference Held at Louvain,
1976 (OTS 20, Leiden, 1977).
14 Remembering All The Way ... A Collection of Old Testament
Studies Published on the Occasion of the Fortieth Anniversary of
the Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland (OTS 21,
Leiden, 1981).
230 F. GARCiA MARTfNEZ

15 Bijbels Handboek, I (Kampen, 1981).

16 Bijbels Handboek, IIA (Kampen, 1982).
17 Bijbels Handboek, IIb (Kampen, 1983).
18 Prophets, Worship and Theodicy. Studies in Prophetism, Biblical
Theology and Structural and Rhetorical Analysis and on the Place
of Music in Worship. Papers Read at the Joint British-Dutch Old
Testament Conference Held at Woudschoten, 1982 (OTS 23, Lei-
den, 1984).
19 The World of the Old Testament. Bible Handbook, Volume I (Grand
Rapids, 1986) [English translation of B-7].
20 Crisis and Perspectives. Studies in Ancient Near Eastem Polythe-
ism, Biblical Theology, Palestinian Archaeology and Intertesta-
mental Literature. Papers Read at the Joint British-Dutch Old
Testament Conference Held at Cambridge, U.K. 1985 (OTS 24,
Leiden, 1986).
21 lnleiding tot de studie van het Oude Testament (Kampen, 1986).
22 Bijbels Handboek, III (Kampen, 1987).
23 New Avenues in the Study of the Old Testament. A Collection of
Old Testament Studies Published on the Occasion of the Fiftieth
Anniversary of the Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap and the
Retirement of Prof. Dr. MJ. Mulder (OTS 25, Leiden, 1989).
24 The World of the Old Testament. Bible Handbook, Volume II (Grand
Rapids, 1989) [English translation of B-8].
25 In Quest of the Past. Studies on Israelite Religion, Literature and
Prophetism. Papers Read at the Joint British-Dutch Old Testament
Conference Held at Elspeet, 1988 (OTS 26, Leiden, 1990).
26 Daniel in the Light of Recent Findings (BETL 65, Leuven, 1992)
[forthcoming] .

C. OTHER EDITORIAL ACTIVITIES

Periodicals

Evangelisch Commentaar (Kampen) [since 1983].

Journal for the Study of Judaism (Editor in Chief) (Leiden) [since 1970].
Kerk en Theologie ('s-Gravenhage) [since 1969].
Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift ('s-Gravenhage) [1968-1974].
Revue de Qumran (Paris) [since 1986].
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 231

Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft (Berlin) [contributions to

the "Zeitschriftenschau" since 1972].

Series

Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des Hellenistischen Judentums

(Leiden) [since 1972].
Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology (Kampen) [since 1990].
Exegetische Studies (Kampen) [since 1983].
Oe Prediking van het Oude Testament (Nijkerk) [since 1961].
Oudtestamentische Studien (Leiden) [since 1972].
Studies in the Texts of the Oesert of Judah (Leiden) [since 1990].
Tekst en Toelichting (Kampen) [since 1982].

O. ARTICLES

1953
"Oe Habakukrol van 'Ain Feschka", Vox Theologica 23 (1952-53),
41-49 (with F.A.W. VAN 'T LAND).
1954
2 "Het Habakukcommentaar van 'Ain Feschka", Vox Iheologica 24
(1953-54),47-54.
1957
3 "Oe eerste twee kolommen van de Hymnenrol (1Q H)", Vox Theo-
logica 27 (1956-57),46-56.
4 "Oe rollen van de Oode Zee en het Nieuwe Testament", Theologie
en Praktijk 17 (1957), 121-132.
1959
5 "Oe datum van het laatste Avondmaal en de oud-priesterlijke kalen-
der", Vox Theologica 19 (1958-59), 8-11.
6 "Le Maitre de Justice et les Oeux Messies de la Communaute de
Qumrän", in: La Seete de Qumran et les Origines du Christianisme
(RechBib 4, Paris-Brugge, 1959), 121-134.
7 Several articles in: Calwer Bibellexikon (Stuttgart, 1959).
1962
8 "Oe vondsten in de woestijn van Juda r', Vox Theologica 32 (1961-
62), 1-9.
9 "Oe vondsten in de woestijn van Juda Ir', Vox Theologica 32
(1961-62), 83-90.
232 F. GARcfA MARTfNEZ

10 "Oe vondsten in de woestijn van Juda ur', Vox Theologica 32

(1961-62), 159-168.
11 "Lijden en verzoening in de handschriften van de Dode Zee", NTT
16 (1961-62), 81-93.
1963
12 "Oe theologische betekenis van de rollen van de Dode Zee", Kerk
en Theologie 14 (1963), 110-122.
13 "Oe handschriften uit grot XI van Qumran", Phoenix 9 (1963), 33-
37.
14 "Das Hiobtargum aus Qumran Höhle XI", in: Supplements to Vetus
Testamentum, Val. IX (Congress Vol. Bonn 1962) (Leiden, 1963),
322-331.
15 "Oe Tien geboden in Exodus 20 en Deuteronomium 5", in: De
thora in de thora (Aalten, 1963), 10-25.
16 "Zwei alte Cruces im Psalter (Psalm XXXII, 6 und LXXXIX, 20)",
OTS XIII (1963), 131-136.
1964
17 "Oe mal'ak Jahweh: een godsbode", NTT 18 (1963-64), 1-13.
18 "1 Reg. 20:34", Z4.W76 (1964),188-191.
19 Several articles in: Biblisches-Historisches Handwörterbuch 11
(Göttingen, 1964).
20 "Joodse stromingen en bewegingen in Jezus' tijd", Ad Fontes XI
(1963-64), 105-110.
21 "Das hebräische Pronomen Demonstrativum als hinweisende Inter-
jektion", laarbericht Ex Oriente Lux 18 (1964), 307-313.
1965
22 "Melchisedek als himmlische Erlösergestalt in den neugefundenen
eschatologischen Midraschim aus Qumran Höhle xr', OTS 14
(1965), 354-373.
23 "Nieuwe publicaties over de godsdienst van Israel", Kerk en Theo-
logie 16 (1965), 114-128.
24 "Oe liederen van de Knecht des Heren", Homiletica en Biblica 24
(1965), 1-6; 25-31; 49-51.
1966
25 "Predikte Zefanja een wereldgericht?", NTT 20 (1965-66) 1-6.
26 "Wat is de betekenis van ABN AYIM in Exodus 1: 161" NTT 20
(1965-66),241-254 (with H.A. BRONGERS).
 A BmLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 233

27 "Der Gerechte wird durch seine Treue leben. Erwägungen zu

Habakuk 2:4-5", in: Studia Biblica et Semitica T.C. Vriezen dedi-
cata (Wageningen, 1966), 367-375.
28 "Nieuwe gegevens over de handschriften uit grot 11 van Chirbet
Qumrän", Phoenix 12 (1966), 300-306.
29 "11QMelchizedek and the New Testament", NTS 12 (1965-66), 301-
326 (with M. DE lONGE).
1967
30 "loodse Messiasverwachtingen rondom het begin van onze laartel-
ling", Rondom het Woord 9 (1966-67), 78-83.
31 "Het tweede gebod", Rondom het Woord 9 (1966-67),221-223.
32 "Wijnproeven op synodale verzoek", Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967),
189-198.
1968
33 "Ein neuer Segensspruch aus Qumran (11QBer)", in: Bibel und
Qumr[m (Fesl<;chrift H. Bardtke) (Berlin, 1968), 253-258.
34 "Micha 11,7 und der Bund Jahwes mit Israel", VT XVIII (1968),
388-391.
35 "Het tweede gebod", in: Revolte in de Theologie (Nijkerk, 1968),
174-184.
1969
36 "Genesis en Exodus. Beschouwingen over de plaats van de schep-
ping in het Oude Testament", Kerk en Theologie 20 (1969), 1-17.
37 "'Hebreeuws' en 'Grieks' denken", Kerk en Theologie 20 (1969),
249-265.
38 "Micha in dispute with the pseudoprophets", VT 19 (1969), 244-
260.
39 "Oe ambten van het Oude Testament en hun heilshistorische be-
paaldheid", Woord en Dienst 18 (1969), 231.
1970
40 "Waarheid als leugen (Micha 2:6-11)", Vox Theologica 40 (1970),
65-70.
41 "Habakuk 2:4", Z4. W 82 (1970), 281-282.
42 "Schepping", in: Kernwoorden in het christelijk geloof, Kampen
1970,7-14.
43 "Anthropologische noties in het Oude Testament", Rondom het
Woord 12 (1970), 111-118 [= H. BERKOHF - A.S. VAN DER WOUDE
(eds.) Wat dunkt u van de mens? (Kampen, 1970),75-821.
234 F. GARC~MARTThmz

44 "Een fragmentarische bijbe1se anthropologie?", Rondom het Woord

12 (1970), 144-147 [= H. BERKHOF - A.S. VAN DER WOUDE (eds.),
Wat dunkt u van de mens? (Kampen, 1970), 108-111]
1971
45 "Deutero-Micha: ein Prophet aus Nord-Israel?", NTT 25 (1971),
365-378.
46 "Micha 1, 10-16", in Melanges a Andre Dupont-Sommer (Paris,
1971),347-353.
47 "Onsterfelijkheid, leven en dood", Kerk en Theologie 22 (1971),
313-316.
48 "Fragmente des Buches Jubiläen aus Qumrän Höhle XI (11Q Jub)",
in Tradition und Glaube (Festschrift K.G. Kuhn, Göttingen, 1971),
140-146.
1972
49 "Melchizedek and the Neighing Horse: A Dutch Contribution to the
Study of the Dead Sea ScroIls", Delta 15 (1972), 37-44.
50 "Ware en valse profetie in het Oude Testament", Rondom het
Woord 14 (1972), 7-14.
51 "Messianische Vorstellungen im Spätjudentum", in Theologisches
Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament IX, 505-518 (with M. DE JONGE).
52 Severa1 articles in: De Bijbel (Amsterdam, 1971-72).
53 Several artic1es in: Theologisches Handwörterbuch zum Alten
Testament, Band I (München, 1972).
1973
54 "Ware en valse profetie in Israel", in: G.c. BERKOUWER - A.S. VAN
DER WOUDE (eds.), Wat is waarheid? Waarheid en verificatie in
kerk en theologie (Kampen, 1973), 13-20.
55 "Micha IV,l-5: an Instance of the Pseudo-Prophets Quoting Isaiah",
in: Symbolae Biblicae et Mesopotamicae F.M.Th. de Liagre Böht
dedicatae (Leiden, 1973), 396-402.
56 "Exegetische schetsen van Zacharia 3:2, 4:6b en 5:5-11", Postille
1973-1974 Cs-Gravenhage, 1973),66-75.
57 "De oorsprong van Israels messiaanse verwachtingen", Kerk en
Theologie 24 (1973), 1-11.
58 "Nabloeiers en uitlopers: apocriefen, pseudepigrafen en Dode Zee
Rollen", in De Literatuur van Oud-Israel (Wassenaar, 19734 ), 307-
380, 408-433.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 235

1974
59 "Die fünf syrischen Psalmen (einschliesslich Psalm 151 )", in: Jüdi-
sche Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit, Bd IV/1 (Gütersloh,
1974),29-47.
60 "Die bei den Söhne des Öls (Sach. 4:14): messianische Gestalten?",
in: TraveIs in the World of the Old Testament (Festschrift M.A.
Beek) (Assen, 1974), 262-268.
1975
61 "Psalm 45: 11-18: Ein neuer Interpretationsversuch" , in: Loven en
geloven (Festschrift Prof. dr. N.H. Ridderbos) (Amsterdam, 1975),
111-116.
62 '''Nun danket alle Gott'. Oe voorgeschiedenis van een beroemd
kerklied", in: Gratias Agimus. Festschrift Profdr. W.F. Dankbaar
(Groningen, 1975), 141-148.
1976
63 Articles in Theologisches Handwörterbuch zum Alten Testament,
Band 11 (München, 1976).
64 "Melchizedek" in: The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Supple-
ment (Nashville, 1976), 585-586.
65 "Micha 6:2b. Amos 5:4b. Schetsen", in: Keus uit twaalf postillen,
('s-Gravenhage, 1976), 169-173.
66 "Jodendom en Christendom als uitlopers van het Oude Testament",
Rondom het Woord 18 (1976), 2-9.
1977
67 "Gibt es eine Theologie des Jahwe-Namens im Deutoronomium?",
in: Übersetzung und Deutung. Studien zu dem Alten Testament und
seiner Umwelt A.R. Hulst gewidmet (Nijkerk, 1977),204-210.
68 "The book of Nahum: a letter written in exile", OTS 20 (1977),
108-126.
1978
69 "Bemerkungen zum Gebet des Nabonid", in: Qumrfm. Sa piete, sa
theologie et son milieu (Gembloux-Paris, 1978), 121-129.
70 "Compositie, strekking en plaats van het boek Jona", Kerk en
Theologie 29 (1978), 285-298.
71 "Hoe de Here naar Sion wederkeert ... Traditiohistorische over-
wegingen bij Jesaja 52: 7-8", in De Knecht, Studies rondom Deu-
tero-Jesaja, aangeboden aan Profdr. J.L. Koole (Kampen, 1978),
188-196.
236 F. GARC~MARTThmz

72 "Nahum: bericht uit de Assyrische ballingschap", Schrift 59 (1978),

163-198.
73 "De bijgewerkte Statenvertaling: een stap terug", Woord en Dienst
27 (1978), 181-182.
74 "Jona 4:4. Nahum 1:2-3a. Habakuk 2:12-14. Zefania 2:3 - Preek-
schetsen", Postille 1978-79 (s'-Gravenhage, 1978), 145-156.
75 Contributions to the Bibel ut de oarspronkelike talen op 'e nij yn it
Frysk oerset (Amsterdam-Boxtel, 1978).
1979
76 "Een betere weg? Antwoord aan dr. K.A. Deurloo", Kerk en Theo-
logie 30 (1979), 276-284.
1980
77 "Seid nicht wie eure Väter ! Bemerkungen zu Sacharia 1:5 und
seinem Kontext", in Prophecy, Essays Presented to Georg Fohrer
(Berlin-New York, 1980), 163-173.
78 "De plaats van de Wet in Israels volksgemeente", in Praktische
TheoLogie. Een bunde! opstellen ... aangeboden aan P.J. Roscam
Abbing (Den Haag, 1980), 119-130.
79 "De tempelrol van Qumran (I)", NIT 34 (1980), 177-190.
80 "De tempelrol van Qumran (11)", NIT 34 (1980), 281-293.
1981
81 "Der Engel des Bundes. Bemerkungen zu Maleachi 3, lc und
seinem Kontext", in: Die Botschaft und die Boten (Festschrift H.W.
Wolff) (Neukirchen, 1981), 289-300.
82 "Bemerkungen zu einigen umstrittenen Stellen im Zwölfpropheten-
buch", in: Milanges bibliques et orientaux en L'honneur de M.
Henri Cazelles (AOAT 212, Kevelaer-NeukirchenIVluyn, 1981),
483-499.
83 "Veertig jaar Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland", OTS
21 (1981), 1-3.
84 "In memoriam Prof. Dr. Tb.c. Vriezen (1899-1981)", NIT 35
(1981), 229-230.
1982
85 "Three cIassical Prophets: Amos, Hosea and Micha", in: IsraeL's
Prophetie Tradition, Essays in Honour of Peter R. Ackroyd (Cam-
bridge, 1982), 32-57.
86 "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests? Reflections on the Identification
of the Wicked Priest in the Habakkuk Commentary", JJS 33 (1982),
349-359 (Festschrift Y. Yadin).
 A BffiLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 237

87 "Fragmente einer Rolle der Lieder für das Sabbatopfer aus Höhle
XI von Qumrän (lIQ SirSabb)", in: Von Kanaan bis Kerala
(Festschrift für lP.M. van der Ploeg) (Kevelaer-Neukirchen/Vluyn,
1982),311-337.
88 "Geschiedenis van Israel en zijn godsdienst vanaf de tijd van de
Babylonische ballingschap tot de komst van Alexander de Grote",
in: Bijbels Handboek, lilA (Kampen, 1982), 141-171.
1983
89 "Ontstaansgeschiedenis en exegese", in: Het boek Henoch (Oeven-
ter, 1983),7-13.
90 "Geschiedenis en godsdienst van het palestijnse Jodendom vanaf
Alexander de Grote tot aan de komst van de Romeinen", in: Bijbels
Handboek, IIIß (Kampen, 1983), 5-89.
91 "Een gedeelte uit de Tempelrol van Qumrän", in: Schrijvend Ver/e-
den (Leiden-Zutphen, 1983), 387-391.
92 "Nachholende Erzählung im Buche Jona", in Isac Leo Seeligmann
Vo/ume. Essays in the Bible and the Ancient World, Volume III
(Jerusalem, 1983), 263-272.
93 "Oe Groot Nieuws Bijbel: een handreiking", EC 14 (1983), 1-2.
94 "Oe vraag naar God in oudtestamentisch perspectief', EC 1/14
(1983), 10-12.
95 "Blinde liefde (over verhouding modern Jodendom-Christendom)",
EC 1/19 (1983), 1-2; 1/20 (1983), 6-7; 1/21 (1983), 5-6; 1/22
(1983), 7-8; 1/24 (1983), 8-9.
1984
96 "Oie Hirtenallegorie von Sacharja XI", Journal of Northwest Semitic
Languages (In memoriam A. van Seims) 12 (1984), 139-149.
97 "In memoriam Prof. Or. A. van SeIms (1906-1984)", Kerk en
Theologie 35 (1984), 265-266.
98 "Oe 'wrede God' van Jozua", EC 2/2 (1984), 8.
99 "Tekst en toelichting: een uniek Bijbelcommentaar", EC 2/12
(1984), 5.
100 "Loon", EC 2/17 (1984), 7-8.
101 "Veel heil en zegen", EC 1/21 (1984),9.
102 "Gods messias", EC 2/24 (1984), 4-6.
1985
103 "Sacharja 14: 18", Z4. W 97 (1985), 254-255.
104 "Zerubbabel en de messiaanse verwachting van de profeet Zacha-
ria", Kerk en Theologie 36 (1985), 89-98.
238 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

105 "Jona's protest tegen de genade", EC 3/3 (1985), 4-5.

106 "Oe wrekende God van Nahum", EC 3/5 (1985), 4-5.
107 "Oe verbijsterende God van Habakuk", EC 3/11 (1985), 10-11.
108 "Sefanja's God der ontmoedigden", EC 3/14 (1985), 4-5.
109 "Oe veronachtzaamde God van Haggai", EC 3/15 (1985), 7-8.
110 "Oe verkiezende God van Maleachi", EC 3/19 (1985), 4-5.
111 "Profeet en politiek", EC 3/23 (1985), 6-7.
1986
112 "Erwägungen zur Ooppelsprachigkeit des Buches Oaniel", in:
Scripta Signa Vocis. Studies ... Presented to J.H. Hospers (Gronin-
gen, 1986), 305-316.
113 "Malachi's Struggle for a Pure Community. Reflections on Malachi
2: 10-16", in Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early
Christian Literature. Essays in Honour 01 J.CH. Lebram (Leiden,
1986), 65-71.
114 "Oe wordingsgeschiedenis van het Oude Testament", in Inleiding tot
de studie van het Oude Testament (Kampen, 1986), 11-28.
115 "Tweeerlei maat", EC 4/2 (1986), 4-5.
116 "Nogmaals: tweeerlei maat", EC 4/10 (1986), 4-5.
117 "Geweld in het Oude Testament", EC 4/13 (1986),6-7.
118 "Oe onzinnige en onmenselijke God als noodzakelijke hypothese",
EC 4/20 (1986), 4-5.
119 "Een kind is ons geboren ... ", EC 4/23 (1986), 4-5.
1987
120 "Heeft God onze informatie nodig?", EC 5/3 (1987), 4-5.
121 "Als een gespeend kind - een methodische benadering van Psalm
131", EC 5/6 (1987), 4-5.
122 "Een acte van afscheiding. Een merkwaardige brief uit de tweede
eeuw v. Chr.", EC 5/9 (1987), 4-5.
123 "Oe heerser van Betlehem Efrata en het lijdende kind van Betle-
hem", EC 5/24 (1987), 5-6.
1988
124 "Zion as Primeval Stone in Zechariah 3 and 4", in: Text and Con-
text. Old Testament and Semitic Studies lor F.C Fensham (Shef-
field, 1988),237-248.
125 "Serubbabel und die messianischen Erwartungen des Propheten
Sacharja", Z4W 100 (1988) Supplement, 138-156.
126 "Ein bisher unveröffentlichtes Fragment der Tempelrolle" , in:
Memorial Jean Carmignac (Paris, 1988), 89-92.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 239

127 "De Thora als heilsweg?", EC 6/2 (1988), 5-6.

128 "Geboden en wetten", EC 6/23 (1988), 8-9.
1989
129 "Fünfzehn Jahre Qumranforschung (1974-1988)", Theologische
Rundschau 54 (1989), 221-261.
130 "Oe rollen van de Oode Zee: Ontcijferingsmethoden en nieuwe
tekststen", in: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschap-
pen, Verslag van de verenigde vergadering van beide a/delingen der
Akademie (Amsterdam, 1989), 13-23.
131 "Zur Geschichte der Grenze zwischen Juda und Israel", in: New
A venues in the Study 0/ the Old Testament (OTS 25, Leiden, 1989),
38-48.
132 "Fünfzig Jahre Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap", in: New
Avenues in the Study 0/ the Old Testament (OTS 25, Leiden 1989,
vii-ix.
133 "Christelijke traditie en jodendom", Voorwerk 5 (1989), 12-17.
134 "Wet en Wijsheid", EC 7/2 (1989), 5-6.
1990
135 "A 'Groningen' Hypothesis of Qumran Origins and Ear1y
History", in: The Texts 0/ Qumran and the History 0/ the
Community , Vol. III (Paris, 1990), 521-542 (with F. GARCfA
MARTfNEZ).
136 "Fünfzehn Jahre Qumranforschung (1974-1988) (11) (Fortset-
zung)", Theologische Rundschau 55 (1990), 245-307.
137 "De rollen van de Oode Zee: ontcijferingsmethoden en nieuwe
teksten", Kerk en Theologie 41 (1990),92-102.
1991
138 "Bemerkungen zum historischen Hintergrund von Hosea 5:8-
6:6", in: Storia e tradizioni di Israele. Scritti in onore di J.Al-
berto Soggin (Brescia, 1991), 299-308.
139 "Oe Oode Zee-Rollen", Natuur en Techniek 59 (1991), 920-931.
1992
140 "Fünfzehn Jahre Qumranforschung (1974-1988) (l1l) (Fortsetzung)",
Theologische Rundschau 57 (1992), 1-57.
141 "God staat in de vergadering der goden", Kerk en Theologie 43
(1992), 89-91.
240 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

Forthcoming
142 "Erwägungen zur Doppelsprachigkeit des Buches Daniel", in A.S.
VAN DER WOUDE (ed.), DanieL in the Light oj Recent Findings
(BETL lxv, Leuven, 1992).
143 "Fünfzehn Jahre Qumranforschung (1974-1988) (IV) (Fortsetzung)"
TheoLogische Rundschau.

E. BOOK REVIEWS

1958
A. VAN SELMS, De roL van de Lojprijzingen. Een der Dode Zee-
Rollen vertaald en toegelicht (Baarn, 1957), NIT 12 (1957-58), 387-
389.
1959
2 K. SCHUBERT, Die Gemeinde vom Toten Meer. Ihre Entstehung und
ihre Lehren (München/Basel, 1958), NIT 13 (1958-59), 150-152.
1960
3 C. BROCKELMANN, Hebräische Syntax (Neukirchen, 1956), BiOr 17
(1960),246-247.
1961
4 J. VAN DER PLOEG, The excavations at Qumran. A Survey of the
Judaean brotherhood and its ideas (New Yorkfforonto, 1958), BiOr
18 (1961), 90-91.
1962
5 S. WAGNER, Die Essener in der wissenschaftlichen Diskussion vom
Ausgang des 18. bis zum Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts (BZAW 79,
Berlin, 1960), NIT 16 (1961-62), 220-221.
6 L. KOEHLER - W. BAUMGARTNER, Supplementum ad Lexicon in
Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden, 1958), BiOr 19 (1962), 266-267.
7 Konkordanz zu den Qumrantexten, in Verbindung mit A.-M. DENIS,
R. DEICHGRÄBER, W. EISS, G. JEREMlAS und H.-W. KUHN heraus-
gegeben von K.G. KUHN (Göttingen, 1960), BiOr 19 (1962), 279-
280.
8 J. MAlER, Die Texte vom Toten Meer. Band I-lI (München, 1960),
BiOr 19 (1962), 280-281.
9 A. ADAM, Antike Berichte über die Essener (Berlin, 1961), BiOr 19
(1962), 281.
10 M. MANSOOR, The Thanksgiving Hymns (STDJ 3, Leiden, 1961),
BiOr 19 (1962), 281-283.
 A BffiLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 241

11 Studien zur Theologie der alttestamentlichen Überlieferungen

(Gerhard von Rad zum 60. Geburtstag), herausgegeben von R.
RENDTORFF und K. KOCH (Neukirchen, 1961), Kerk en Theologie
13 (1962), 53-54.
12 Verbannung und Heimkehr. Beiträge zur Geschichte und Theologie
Israels im 6. und 5. Jahrhundert v. ehr. Festschrift für Wilhelm
Rudolph, herausgegeben von A. KUSCHKE (Tübingen, 1961), Kerk
en Theologie 13 (1962), 205-206.
1963
13 c.J. GOSLINGA, Het tweede boek Samuel (Kampen, 1962), Kerk en
Theologie 14 (1963), 62-63.
14 J.H. KOEZE, Het boek Job (Kampen, 1961), Kerk en Theologie 14
(1963),63-64.
15 G. FOHRER, Das Buch Jesaja, 2. Band (Jes. 24-39) (ZürichlStuttgart,
1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963), 64.
16 B.J. OOSTERHOFF, Israels Profeten (Baarn, n. y.), Kerk en Theologie
14 (1963), 64.
17 A. KRUYSWIJK, Geen gesneden beeld... (Franeker, 1962), Kerk en
Theologie 14 (1963), 65.
18 E. JACOB, Ras Sjamra en het Oude Testament (Bijbel en Archaeo-
logie 11, Nijkerk, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963), 65.
19 J. HEMPEL, Die Texte von Qumran in der heutigen Forschung
(Göttingen, 1962); J. JEREMIAS, Die theologische Bedeutung der
Funde von Qumran (Göttingen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14
(1963), 66.
20 R.M. GRANT - D.N. FREEDMAN, Het Thomas-evangelie (vertaling en
toelichting) (Utrecht, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963), 66.
21 O. BÄCHLI, Israel und die Völker. Eine Studie zum Deuteronomium
(ZürichlStuttgart, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963), 138-139.
22 H.A. BRONGERS, De Jozefsgeschiedenis bij Joden, Christenen en
Mohammedanen (Wageningen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963),
139-140.
23 E. JENNI, Die alttestamentliche Prophetie (Zürich, 1962), Kerk en
Theologie 14 (1963), 140-141.
24 N. GLUECK, Rivieren in de wildemis. Een geschiedenis van de
Negeb (Kampen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963), 141.
25 A. WEISER, Glaube und Geschichte im Alten Testament und andere
ausgewählte Schriften (Göttingen, 1961), Kerk en Theologie 14
(1963),227.
242 F. GARClA MARTfNEz

26 A. WEISER, Samuel. Seine geschichtliche Aufgabe und religiöse

Bedeutung (Göttingen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963), 227-
228.
27 Zoals er gezegd is over ... de Schepping; - het Paradijs; - de Vloed
en de Toren (ZeistlAntwerpen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 14 (1963),
228-229.
1964
28 Y. YADIN, The Sero 11 of the War of the Sons of Light against the
Sons of Darkness (Oxford, 1962), NTT 18 (1963-64), 308-309.
29 U. CASSUTO, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis. Part 1. From
Adam to Noah (Genesis I-VI,8) (Jerusalem, 1961), BiOr 21 (1964),
211-213.
30 M. BLACK, The Scrolls and Christian Origins. Studies in the Jewish
Background of the New Testament (Edinburgh, 1961), BiOr 21
(1964), 214-216.
31 H. BARDTKE, Die Handschriftenfunde am Toten Meer. Band II. Die
Sekte von Qumrän (Berlin, 1961), BiOr 21 (1964),216-217.
32 J.B. PRITCHARD, Archeologie en het Oude Testament (Baarn, 1962),
Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964),59-60.
33 G. EICHHOLZ, Landschappen van de Bijbel (Wageningen, n.y.),
Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964),60.
34 W. RUDOLPH, Das Buch Ruth. Das Hohe Lied. Die Klagelieder
(Kommentar zum Alten Testament, XVWI-3, Gütersloh, 1962),
Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964), 61-62.
35 N.H. RIDDERBOS, De Psalmen. Eerste deel (Psalm 1-41) (Kampen,
1962), Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964),62-63.
36 B. GEMSER, Sprüche Salomos (Handbuch zum Alten Testament, 16,
Tübingen, 1963), Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964), 63-64.
37 G.c. AALDERS, Daniel (Kampen, 1963), Kerk en Theologie 15
(1964), 64-65.
38 Das Alte Testament Deutsch, Teilband 16: H. RINGGREN - A.
WEISER - W. ZIMMERLI: Sprüche, Prediger, Das Hohe Lied, Klage-
lieder, Das Buch Esther; Teilband 6: M. NOTH, Das dritte Buch
Mose, Leviticus; Teilband 23: N.W. PORTEOUS, Das Danielbuch
(Göttingen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964),65-67.
39 O. EISSFELDT, Kleine Schriften, herausgegeben von R. SELLHEIM
und F. MAASS, 1. Band (Tübingen, 1962), Kerk en Theologie 15
(1964), 67-68.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 243

40 O. PLÖGER, Theokratie und Eschatologie (Neukirehen, 1959), Kerk

en Theologie 15 (1964),68-69.
41 O. EISSFELDT, Einleitung in das Alte Testament unter Einschluss der
Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen sowie der apokryphen und
pseudepigraphenartigen Qumran-Schriften. Entstehungsgeschichte
des Alten Testaments (Tübingen, 1964), Kerk en Theologie 15
(1964), 157-158.
42 B. MAARSING, Het huwelijk in het Oude Testament (Baarn, 1963),
Kerk en Theologie 15 (1964),320.
1965
43 H.J. KRAUS, Gottesdienst in Israel. Grundriss einer alttestament-
lichen Kultgeschichte (München, 1963), Kerk en Theologie 16
(1965), 261-262.
44 Tradition und Situation. Studien zur alttestamentlichen Prophetie
(Göttingen, 1963), Kerk en Theologie 16 (1965), 262-263.
45 J. BEGRICH, Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament (München,
1964), Kerk en Theologie 16 (1965), 263.
46 J.H. GROLLE, Dit komt u tegen in Israel. Ontmoetingen met Joden
en Christenen Cs-Gravenhage, 1963); M. KRUPP, Vergesse ich dein
Jerusalem. Von der Zionssehnsucht zu Israels Wiedergeburt (Met-
zingen/Württ., 1962), Kerk en Theologie 16 (1965), 264-265.
1966
47 M.J. MULDER, Kanaänitische goden in het Oude Testament (Den
Haag, 1965), Kerk en Theologie 17 (1966), 78-79.
48 K. GALLING, Studien zur Geschichte Israels im persischen Zeitalter
(Tübingen, 1964), Kerk en Theologie 17 (1966), 79-80.
49 N.A. VAN UCHELEN, Abraham de Hebreeer (Assen, 1964), Kerk en
Theologie 17 (1966), 80-81.
50 H.W. HERTZBERG, Der Prediger; H. BARDTKE, Das Buch Esther
(Kommentar zum Alten Testament XVII/4-5); G. FOHRER, Das
Buch Hiob (Kommentar zum Alten Testament XVI) (Gütersloh,
1963), Kerk en Theologie 17 (1966), 181-183.
51 J. HEMPEL, Geschichten und Geschichte im Alten Testament bis zur
persischen Zeit (Gütersloh, 1964), Kerk en Theologie 17 (1966),
284-285.
52 O. PLÖGER, Das Buch Daniel (Kommentar zum Alten Testament
XVIII, Gütersloh, 1965), Kerk en Theologie 17 (1966), 285-286.
244 F. GARC~MART~

53 O. EISSFELDT, Kleine Schriften. Dritter Band, herausgegeben von R.

SELLHEIM und F. MAAss (Tübingen, 1966), Kerk en Theologie 17
(1966),287.
54 R. KNIERIM, Die Hauptbegriffe für Sünde im Alten Testament
(Gütersloh, 1965), Kerk en Theologie 17 (1966),377-379.
1967
55 U. CASSUTO, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis. Part Ir. From
Noah to Abraham (Genesis VI,9-XI,32) (Jerusalem, 1964), BiOr 24
(1967), 206.
56 B. GÄRTNER, The Temple and the Community in Qumran and in the
New Testament (Cambridge, 1965), BiOr 24 (1967), 210-211.
57 R. DE VAUX, Les sacrifices de l'Ancien Testament (Paris, 1964),
BiOr 24 (1967), 353.
58 H.W. WOLFF, Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament (München,
1964), NTT 21 (1966-67), 128-129.
59 A.HJ. GUNNEWEG, Leviten und Priester. Hauptlinien der Tradi-
tionsbildung und Geschichte des israelitisch-jüdischen Kultpersonals
(Göttingen, 1965), NTT 21 (1966-67), 129-132.
60 H. GOEDHART, De slothymne van het Manual of Discipline. A
theological-exegetical Study of lQS X,9-XI,22 (Rotterdam, 1965),
NTT 21 (1966-67), 387-389.
61 W.H. GISPEN, Schepping en paradijs. Verk1aring van Genesis 1-3
(Kampen, 1966), Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967), 164-166.
62 J.L. KOOLE, Verhaal en feit in het Oude Testament (Kampen n. y.),
Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967),166.
63 T. LESCOW, Micha 6:6-8. Studien zu Sprache, Form und Auslegung
(Stuttgart, 1966), Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967), 166-167.
64 H. BRAUN, Qumran und das Neue Testament, Band I-lI (Tübingen
1966), Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967), 167.
65 K. SCHOLDER, Ursprünge und Probleme der Bibelkritik im 17.
Jahrhundert (München, 1966), Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967), 374-
375.
66 J.L. KOOLE, Haggai" (Kampen, 1967), Kerk en Theologie 18 (1967),
377-378.
1968
67 H. BRAUN, Qumran und das Neue Testament. Band I - Ir (Tübin-
gen, 1966), NTT 22 (1967-68), 50-51.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 245

68 C.J. LABUSCHAGNE, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old

Testament (Pretoria Oriental Series 5, Leiden, 1966), NTT 22 (1967-
68), 51-53.
69 G.c. BERKOUWER, De Heilige Schrift, I - 11 (Kampen, 1966-1967),
Kerk en Theologie 19 (1968), 88-91.
70 Schriften der Bibel - Literaturgeschichtlich geordnet. Band I. Vom
Thronfolgebuch bis zur Priesterschrift, Auswahl und Einleitungen
von H. SCHWAGER (Stuttgart-München, 1968), Kerk en Theologie
19 (1968),413.
71 W. RUDOLPH, Hosea (Kommentar zum Alten Testament XIIVI,
Gütersloh, 1966), Kerk en Theologie 19 (1968), 413-414.
72 O. EISSFELDT, Kleine Schriften. Vierter Band, herausgegeben von R.
SELLHEIM und F. MAASS (Tübingen, 1968), Kerk en Theologie 19
(1968), 414-415.
73 K.H. BERNHARDT, Die Umwelt des Alten Testaments, I (Gütersloh,
1967), Kerk en Theologie 19 (1968),415.
1969
74 H.W. KUHN, Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil. Untersuchun-
gen zu den Gemeindeliedern von Qumran mit einem Anhang über
Eschatologie und Gegenwart in der Verkündigung Jesu (SUNT 4,
Göttingen, 1966), NTT23 (1968-69),123-125.
75 H. KOSAK, Wegweisung in das Alte Testament (Stuttgart, 1968),
Kerk en Theologie 20 (1969),419.
76 C. WESTERMANN, Der Segen in der Bibel und im Handeln der
Kirche (München, 1968), Kerk en Theologie 20 (1969), 419-420.
1970
77 G. FOHRER, Geschichte der israelitischen Religion (Berlin, 1969),
NTT 24 (1969-70), 125-126.
78 H.M. LUTZ, Jahwe, Jerusalem und die Völker. Zur Vorgeschichte
von Sach 12:1-8 und 14:1-5 (NeukirchenlVluyn, 1968), NTT 24
(1969-70), 126-128.
79 In Memoriam Paul Kahle, herausgegeben von M. BLACK und G.
FOHRER (BZAW 103, Berlin, 1968), NTT 24 (1969-70), 134-135.
80 Die fünf Megillot (Handbuch zum Alten Testament V18, Tübingen,
1969), NTT 24 (1969-70), 135-137.
81 A. CODY, A History of Old Testament Priesthood (AnBib 35, Roma,
1969), NTT 24 (1969-70), 218-219.
82 Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem (Stuttgart, 1969), NTT 24
(1969-70), 385-386.
246 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

83 Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, editio funditus renovata, ed. K.

ELLIGER et W. RUDOLPH. Liber Jesaiae, praeparavit D. WINTON
THOMAS (Stuttgart 1968), N1T 24 (1969-70), 386-388.
84 H. SCHMIDT, Mose. Überlieferung und Geschichte (BZAW 110,
Berlin, 1968), N1T 24 (1969-70), 388-389.
85 G.H. COHN, Das Buch Jona im Lichte der biblischen ErzähLkunst
(Assen, 1969), N1T 24 (1969-70), 389-390.
86 N. POULSEN, Judith (Roennond, 1969), N1T 24 (1969-70), 448.
87 G. FOHRER, Studien zur alttestamentlichen Theologie und Ge-
schichte (1949-1966) (BZAW 115, Berlin, 1969), N1T 24 (1969-
70), 449-450.
88 M.L. HENRY, Prophet und Tradition. Versuch einer Problemstellung
(BZAW 116, Berlin, 1969), N1T24 (1969-70),450.
89 W. KORNFELD, Religion und Offenbarung in der Geschichte Israels
(lnnsbruck/ WienJMünchen, 1970), N1T 24 (1969-70), 451.
90 CH. BURCHARD, J. JERVELL, J. THOMAS, Studien zu den Testamen-
ten der zwölf Patriarchen (BZNW 36, Berlin, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970),
85.
91 M. HENGEL, Judentum und Hellenismus. Studien zu ihrer Begeg-
nung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Palästinas bis zur Mitte des
2. Jh. v. Chr. (WUNT 10, Tübingen, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970), 86.
92 c. LARCHER, Etudes sur le Livre de La Sagesse (Etudes Bibliques,
Paris, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970),86-87.
93 O. MICHEL, S. SAFRAI, R. LE DEAUT, M. DE JONGE, J. VAN GOUD-
OEVER, Studies on the Jewish Background of the New Testament
(Assen, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970), 87.
94 P. VON DER OSTEN-SACKEN, Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu
Prophetie und Weisheit (Theologische Existenz Heute 157, Mün-
chen, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970), 87.
95 P. VON DER OSTEN-SACKEN, Gott und Belial. Traditionsgeschichtli-
che Untersuchungen zum Dualismus in den Texten aus Qumran
(SUNT 6, Tübingen, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970), 88.
96 A. SCHALlT, König Herodes (Studia Judaica 4, Berlin, 1969), JSJ 1
(1970), 88-89.
97 J.M. SCHMIDT, Die jüdische Apokalyptik. Die Geschichte ihrer
Erforschung von den Anfängen bis zu den Textfunden von Qumran
(Neukirchen, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970), 89.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 247

98 J. SCHREINER, Alttestamentlich-jüdische Apokalyptik. Eine Einfüh-

rung (Biblische Handbibliothek 6, München, 1969), JSJ 1 (1970),
89.
99 Y. YADIN, Tefillin from Qumran (xQ Phyl 1-4) (Jerusalern, 1969),
JSJ 1 (1970), 89-90.
100 M. BLACK, The Scrolls and Christianity (London, 1969), JSJ 1
(1970), 188-189.
101 J. BOWKER, The Targums and Rabbinic Literature (Cambridge,
1969), JSJ 1 (1970), 189.
102 A.-M. DENIS, Introduction aux Pseudepigraphes grecs d'Ancien
Testament (SVTP 1, Leiden, 1970), JSJ 1 (1970), 190-191.
103 Neotestamentica et Semitica. Studies in honour of Matthew Black,
ed. by E. EARLE ELLIS and M. WILCOX (Edinburgh, 1969), JSJ 1
(1970), 192-193.
104 K.W. KLATT, Hermann Gunkel. Zu seiner Theologie der Religions-
geschichte und zur Entstehung der formgeschichtlichen Methode
(Göttingen, 1969), Kerk en Theologie 21 (1970), 91-92.
1971
105 Entdeckungen im Alten Testament, herausgegeben von T. SARTORY
(Göttingen, 1970), NTf 25 (1971), 334.
106 H. SCHULZ, Das Todesrecht im Alten Testament. Studien zur
Rechtsform der Mot-Jamut-Sätze (BZA W 114, Berlin, 1969), NTf
25 (1971), 335-336.
107 A Rigid Scrutiny. Critical essays on the Old Testament by Ivan
ENGNELL, translated from the Swedish and edited by J.T. WILLIS
with the col1aboration of H. RINGGREN (Nashville, 1969), NTf 25
(1971), 336.
108 F. CRÜSEMANN, Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und
Danklied in Israel (Neukirchen, 1969), NTf 25 (1971),336-337.
109 W. BEYERLIN, Die Rettung der Bedrängten in den Feindpsalmen
der Einzelnen auf institutionelle Zusammenhänge untersucht
(Göttingen, 1970), N1T 25 (1971),337-339.
110 W. EISENBElS, Die Wurzel sh-I-m im Alten Testament (BZA W 113,
Berlin, 1969), NTf 25 (1971),339-340.
111 S. ERLANDSSON, The Burden of Babylon. A Study of Isaiah 13:2-
14:23 (CB 4, Lund, 1970), NTf 25 (1971), 340-341.
112 c. BURCHARD - J. JERVELL - J. THOMAS, Studien zu den Testamen-
ten der zwölf Patriarchen (BZNW 36, Berlin, 1969), NTf 25
(1971),341-342.
248 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

113 M. BLACK, Apocalypsis Henochi Graece; A-M. DENlS, Fragmenta

Pseudepigraphorum quae supersunt graeca una cum historicorum et
auctorum Judaeorum hellenistarum fragmentis (PVTG 3, Leiden,
1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 83-84.
114 G. DELLING (in Verbindung mit G. ZACHHUBER und H. BERTOLD),
Bibliographie zur jüdisch-hellenistischen und intertestamentarischen
Literatur 1900-1965 (TU 106, Berlin, 1969), JSJ 2 (1971), 84-85.
115 L. GINZBERG, Yerushalmi Fragments from the Genizah I (Hildes-
heim/New York, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 85-86.
116 Das Institutum Judaicum der Universität Tübingen in den Jahren
1968-1970, JSJ 2 (1971), 86-87.
117 B. JONGELING, A Classified Bibliography of the Finds in the Desert
of Judah 1958-1969 (STDJ 7, Leiden, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 87.
118 K. KOCH, Ratlos vor der Apokalyptik (Gütersloh, 1970), JSJ 2
(1971), 87-88.
119 A PAUL, Ecrits de Qumran et sectes juives aux premiers siecles de
{'Islam (Paris, 1960), JSJ 2 (1971), 90.
120 Studies in the History of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel.
In memory of Z. Avneri, ed. by AGILBOA, B. MEVORACH, U.
RAPPAPORT and A SCHOCHAT (Haifa, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 91-92.
121 Theokratia I (Leiden, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 92-93.
122 E.W. TUINSTRA, Hermeneutische aspecten van de targum van Job
uit grat Xl van Qumran (Groningen, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 93-95.
123 eH. ALBECK, Einführung in die Mischna (Berlin/New York, 1971),
JSJ 2 (1971), 183-184.
124 M. BOERTIEN, Nazir (Nasiräer). Text, Übersetzung und Erklärung
nebst einem textkritischen Anhang (Die Mishna, III. Seder, 4.
Traktat) (Berlin, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 184-185.
125 G.L. DAVENPORT, The Eschatology of the Book of Jubilees (SPB
20, Leiden, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 185-186.
126 W.D. DAVIES, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism. Some Rabbinic
Elements in Pauline Theology (London, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 186.
127 R. LE DEAUT, J. ROBERT, Targum des Chraniques. Torne I. Intro-
duction et traduction; Torne 11. Text et glossaire (AnBib 51, Rorna,
1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 186-187.
128 H.G. KIPPENBERG, Garizim und Synagoge. Traditionsgeschichtliche
Untersuchungen zur samaritanischen Religion der aramäischen
Periode (R VV 30, Berlin, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 188-190.
 A BffiLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 249

129 S. PINES, An Arabic Version 0/ the Testimonium Flavianum and lts

lmplications (Jerusa1em, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 191-192.
130 O. PLÖGER, Aus der Spätzeit des Alten Testaments. Studien zu
seinem 60. Geburtstag am 27.11.1970, herausgegeben von Freunden
und Schülern (Göttingen, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 192-193.
131 K.F. POHLMANN, Studien zum dritten Esra. Ein Beitrag zur Frage
nach dem ursprünglichen Schluss des chronistischten Geschichts-
werkes (FRLANT 104, Göttingen, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 193.
132 J.M. REESE, Hellenistic lnfluence on the Book 0/ Wisdom and its
Consequences (AnBib 41, Roma, 1970), JSJ 2 (1971), 193-194.
133 L. ROST, Einleitung in die alttestamentlichen Apokryphen und
Pseudepigraphen, einschliesslich der grossen Qumran-Handschriften
(Heide1berg, 1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 193-194.
134 H. STEGEMANN, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde (Bonn,
1971), JSJ 2 (1971), 195-196.
135 J.C.M. VAN WINDEN, An Early Christian Philosopher. Justin
Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho. Chapters one to nine. lntroduction,
Text and Commentary (Philosophia Patrum 1, Leiden, 1971), JSJ 2
(1971), 196-197.
136 M. REHM, Der königliche Messias im Licht der lmmanuel - Weis-
sagungen des Buches Jesaja (Keve1aer, 1968), Kerk en Theologie 22
(1971), 183-184.
1972
137 De fructu oris sui. Essays in honour 0/ Adrianus van SeIms, edited
by I.H. EYBERS, F.C. FENSHAM, C.J. LABUSCHAGNE, W.C. VAN
WIJK, A.H. VAN ZUL (Pretoria Orienta1 Series 9, Leiden, 1971), JSJ
3 (1972), 63.
138 M. DELCOR, Le livre de Daniel (Sources Bib1iques, Paris, 1971),
JSJ 3 (1972), 63.
139 J.M. GAGER, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (SBLMS 16,Nash-
ville, 1972), JSJ 3 (1972), 64.
140 Hommages a Andre Dupont-Sommer, A. CAQUOT - M. PHILONENKO
(eds.), (Paris, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972),64-67.
141 G. KLINZING, Die Umdeutung des Kultus in der Qumrangemeinde
und im Neuen Testament (SUNT 7, Göuingen, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972),
67-68.
142 M. KRUPP 'Arakin (Schätzungen). Text, Übersetzung und Erklärung
nebst einem textkritischen Anhang (Die Mischna, V. Seder, 5.
Traktat) (Berlin/New York, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972), 68-69.
250 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

143 J. MARBÖCK, Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie bei Ben Sira

(BBB 37, Bonn, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972), 69-70.
144 E.M. MEYERS, Jewish Ossuaries. Reburial and Rebirth (BO 24,
Roma, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972),70-71.
145 J. NEUSNER, The Rabbinic Tradition about Pharisees be/are 70,
Parts I, II and III (Leiden, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972), 71-72.
146 Probleme biblischer Theologie. G. von Rad zum 70. Geburtstag,
herausgegeben von H.W. WOLFF (München, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972),
74.
147 P. SCHÄFER, Die Vorstellungen vom Heiligen Geist in der rabbini-
schen Literatur (SANT 28, München, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972), 74-75.
148 Tradition und Glaube. Das frühe Christentum in seiner Umwelt.
Festgabe für K.G. Kuhn zum 65 Geburtstag, herausgegeben von G.
JEREMIAS, H.-W. KUHN und H. STEGEMANN (Göttingen, 1971), JSJ
3 (1972), 76-77.
149 Congress Volume Uppsala 1971 (SVT 22, Leiden, 1972), JSJ 3
(1972), 182.
150 X. JACQUES, List 0/ Septuagint Words Sharing Common Elements
(Subsidia Biblica 1, Roma, 1972), JSJ 3 (1972), 185.
151 E. JANSSEN, Das Gottesvolk und seine Geschichte. Geschichtbild
und Selbstverständnis im palästinensischen Schrifttum von Jesus
Sirach bis Jehuda ha-Nashi (NeukirchenIVluyn, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972),
185.
152 J. NEUSNER (ed.), Religions in Antiquity. Essays in Memory of E.R.
Goodenough (Supplements to Numen 14, Leiden, 1970), JSJ 3
(1972), 188-190.
153 B. NOACK, Spätjudentum und Heilsgeschichte (Frans Delitzsch-
Vorlesungen 1968) (Stuttgart, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972), 190-191.
154 H.M. ORLINSKY, Understanding the Bible through History and
Archaeology (New York, 1972), JSJ 3 (1972), 191.
155 H. SCHRECKENBERG, Die Flavius-Josephus-Tradition in Antike und
Mittelalter (ALGHJ 5, Leiden, 1972), JSJ 3 (1972), 191-192.
156 The Witness 0/ Tradition, ed. by A.S. VAN DER WOUDE (OTS 18,
Leiden, 1972), JSJ 3 (1972), 192.
157 Wort, Lied und Gottesspruch (Forschung zur Bibel 1-2). Festschrift
für J. Ziegler, herausgegeben von J. SCHREINER: 1. Beiträge zur
Septuaginta; 11. Beiträge zu Psalmen und Propheten (Stuttgart,
1972), JSJ 3 (1972), 192-193.
 A BmLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 251

158 J. ZIEGLER, 5ylloge. Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Septuaginta (Mit-

teilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens der Akademie der Wis-
senschaften in Göttingen 10, Göttingen, 1971), JSJ 3 (1972), 193-
194.
159 Leven en sterven met verwachting Cs-Gravenhage, 1972), Kerk en
Theologie 23 (1972), 288-289.
1973
160 A. ADAM, Antike Berichte über die Essener. 2. neubearbeitete und
erweiterte Auflage von C. BURCHARD (Berlin, 1972), JSJ 4 (1972),
66.
161 Die Apokryphen nach der deutschen Übersetzung Martin Luthers.
Revidierter Text 1970 (WittenlStuttgart, 1971), JSJ 4 (1973), 66-67.
162 J.M. EFRID (ed.), The Use 0/ the Old Testament in the New and
Other Essays. Studies in Honor of W.F. Stinespring (Durham, NC,
1972), JSJ 4 (1973), 72-74.
163 M.S. ENSLIN, The Book 0/ Judith. Greek Text with an English
Translation, Commentary and Critica1 Notes. Edited with a General
Introduction and Appendices by S. ZEITLIN (Jewish Apocryphal
Literature 7, Leiden, 1972), J5J 4 (1973), 74-75.
164 P. GRELOT, Documents arameens d'Egypte. Introduction, traduction,
presentation (Litteratures anciennes du Proche-Orient, Paris, 1972),
J5J 4 (1973), 79-80.
165 M. McNAMARA, Targum and Testament. Aramaic Paraphrases 0/
the Hebrew Bible. A Light on the New Testament (Shannon, 1972),
JSJ 4 (1973), 87.
166 A. MERTENS, Das Buch Daniel im Lichte der Texte vom Toten Meer
(SBM 12, Würzburg/Stuttgart, 1971), J5J 4 (1973),87-88.
167 Studies in the History 0/ the Jewish People and the Land 0/ Israel.
Second Vo1ume, ed. by 8. ODED, U. RAPPAPORT, A. SCHOCHAT, Y.
SCHATZMILLER (Haifa, 1972), J5J 4 (1973), 90-92.
168 Vetus Testamentum 5yriace iuxta simplicem 5yrorum versionem. The
Old Testament in 5yriac according to the Peshiua Version. Part IV,
fascicle 6 (Leiden, 1972), JSJ 4 (1973), 92-94.
169 CH. A. WAHL, Clavis Librorum Veteris Testamenti Apocryphorum
Philologica. Indicem Verborum in Libris Pseudepigraphis Usur-
patorum adiecit 1.8. BAUER (Graz, 1972), JSJ 4 (1973), 94-95.
170 B. GROSSFELD, A Bibliography 0/ Targum Literature (Bibliographia
Judaica 2, CincinnatilNew York, 1972), JSJ 4 (1973), 193.
252 F. GARCfA MARTfNEz

171 Judaica. Beiträge zum Verständnis des jüdischen Schicksals in

Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Band 27 (Zürich, 1971), JSJ 4
(1973), 194.
172 Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit. Band I, Liefe-
rung 1; Band 11, Lieferung 1 (Gütersloh, 1973), JSJ 4 (1973), 194-
196.
173 J. NELlS, I Makkabeeen (De Boeken van het Oude Testament VIlla,
Roermond, 1972), JSJ 4 (1973), 198-199.
174 H.K. RENGSTORF (in co-operation with E. BUCK, E. GÜTING, B.
JUSTUS, H. SCHRECKENBERG), A Complete Concordance to Flavius
Josephus. Volume 1: A-11 (Leiden, 1973), JSJ 4 (1973), 199-201.
175 W. SCHMITHALS, Die Apokalyptik. Einführung und Deutung
(Göttingen, 1973), JSJ 4 (1973), 201-202.
176 BJ. OOSTERHOFF, Hoe fezen wij Genesis 2 en 3? Een hermeneuti-
sche studie (Kampen, 1972), Kerk en Theologie 24 (1973), 79-80.
1974
177 A. MARTENS, Das Buch Daniel im Lichte des Texte vom Toten
Meer (SBM 12, Würzburg/Stuttgart 1971), Biblica 55 (1974), 109-
111.
178 S.P. BROCK, eH. T. FRITSCH, S. JELLlCOE, A Classified Bibliogra-
phy of the Septuagint (ALGHJ 6, Leiden, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 64.
179 Campendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum. Section I:
The Jewish People in the First Century. Volume I, ed. by S. SAFRAI
and M. STERN in co-operation with D. FLuSSER and W.c. VAN
UNNIK (Assen, 1974), JSJ 5 (1974), 69-70.
180 A.-M. DENIS (avec la collaboration de Yvonne JANSSENS), Concord-
ance Latine du Liher Jubilaeorum sive Parva Genesis (Louvain,
1973), JSJ 5 (1974),70-71.
181 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge, 1 (Frankfurt am Main, 1973), JSJ
5 (1974),72.
182 J. E. MENARD (ed.), Exegese Biblique et Judai"sme (Strasbourg,
1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 82-83.
183 A. SCHALlT (ed.), Zur Josephus-Forschung (Wege der Forschung
84, Darmstadt, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 91-93.
184 E. SCHÜRER, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus
Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135). A New English Version Revised and
Edited by G. VERMES and F. MILLAR. Vol. I (Edinburgh, 1973), JSJ
5 (1974), 93-94.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 253

185 Scrolls from Qumran Cave I: The Great Isaiah SerolI, The Order of
the Community, The Pesher of Habakkuk. From photographs by J.c.
TREVER (Jerusalern, 1972), JSJ 5 (1974), 94-95.
186 Symbolae Biblicae et Mesopotamicae Francisco Mario Theodoro de
Liagre Böht Dedicatae, ediderunt M.A. BEEK, A.A. KAMPMAN, C.
NULAND, J. RYCKMANS (Leiden, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 95.
187 Syntax and Meaning (OTS 18, Leiden, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974),96.
188 Vetus Testamentum Syriace iuxta simplicem Syrorum versionem. The
Old Testament in Syriac According to the Peshitta Version. Part IV,
fascic1e 3 (Leiden, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 96-97.
189 Wort und Geschichte. Festschrift für K. EIliger zum 70. Geburtstag,
herausgegeben von H. GESE und H.P. RÜGER (AOAT 18, Kevelaer/-
Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 99-100.
190 De gammeltestamentlige Pseudepigrafer i oversa:ttelse med ind-
ledning og noter ved E. HAMMERSHAIMB, J. MUNCK, B. NOACK, P.
SEIDELIN. 7. Ha:fte (K~benhavn, 1974), JSJ 5 (1974),213.
191 Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit. Band V, Liefe-
rung 1 (Gütersloh, 1974), JSJ 5 (1974), 214.
192 S. LIEBERMAN, Texts and Studies (New York, 1974), JSJ 5 (1974),
215-216.
193 Theokratia 11. Festgabe für K.H. Rengstorf zum 70. Geburtstag
(Leiden, 1973), JSJ 5 (1974), 223-224.
194 F. STOLZ, Strukturen und Figuren im Kult von Jerusalem. Studien
zur aItorientalischen, vor- und frühisraelitischen Religion (BZAW
118, Berlin, 1970), NTT 28 (1974), 82-84.
195 E. JANSSEN, Das Gottesvolk und seine Geschichte. Geschichtsbild
und Selbstverständnis im palästinischen Schrifttum von Jesus Sirach
bis Jehuda ha-Nasi (Neukirchen/Vluyn, 1971), NTT 28 (1974), 84-
85.
196 Antike Berichte über die Essener, ausgewählt von A.ADAM. 2.
Auflage von C. BURCHARD (Berlin, 1972), NTT 28 (1974), 85.
1975
197 M. DELCOR, Le Testament d'Abraham. Introduction, traduction du
texte grec et commentaire de la recension grecque longue. Suivi de
la traduction des Testaments d' Abraham, d'Isaac et de Jacob d'apres
les versions orientales (SVTP 2, Leiden, 1973), JSJ 6 (1975), 102-
103.
198 L. DlEz MERINO, La Biblia Babil6nica (Madrid, 1975), JSJ 6
(1975), 103-104.
254 F. GARCfA MARTmEZ

199 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge, 2 (Frankfurt am Main, 1974), JSJ

6 (1975), 104.
200 S.H. LEVEY, The Messiah. An Aramaie Interpretation. The Messia-
nie Exegesis of the Targum (Cincinnati/New YorklLos Angeles/
Jerusalem, 1974), JSJ 6 (1975), 105-107.
201 Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults. Studies for
Morton Smith at Sixty, Part I, 11, III and IV, edited by 1. NEUSNER
(SJLA 12, Leiden, 1975) JSJ 6 (1975), 209-210.
202 Der Jerusalemer Talmud in deutscher Übersetzung. Band I. Berak-
hoth, übersetzt von C. HOROWITZ (Tübingen, 1975), JSJ 6 (1975),
211.
203 L.L. LEVINE, Caesarea under Roman Rule (SJLA 6) (Leiden, 1975),
JSJ 6 (1975), 212-213.
204 Studies in the History of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel.
Third Volume, ed. by B. ODED, U. RApPAPORT, A. SCHOCHAT, Y.
SCHATZMILLER, Z. SCHAECHTER (Haifa, 1974), JSJ 6 (1975), 236-
237.
205 G. VERMES, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies (SJLA 8, Leiden, 1975),
JSJ 6 (1975), 237.
206 O. EISSFELDT, Kleine Schriften. Fünfter Band, herausgegeben von R.
SELLHEIM und F. MAASS (Tübingen, 1973), Kerk en Theologie 26
(1975), 95.
207 N.H. RIDDERBOS, De Psalmen. Deel 2 (Kampen, 1973), Kerk en
Theologie 26 (1975), 95-96.
1976
208 B. JONGELING, C.J. LABUSCHAGNE, A.S. VAN DER WOUDE, Aramaic
Texts from Qumran. With Translations and Annotations (Semitic
Study Series, New Series IV, Leiden, 1976), JSJ 7 (1976), 59-60.
209 G. DELLING (in Verbindung mit Malwine MASER), Bibliographie
zur jüdisch-hellenistischen und intertestamentarischen Literatur
1900-1970 (Berlin, 1975), JSJ 7 (1976) 60-61.
210 J.A. FITZMYER The Dead Sea Serails. Major Publications and Tools
for Study (Sources for Biblical Study 8, Missoula, 1975), JSJ 7
(1976),62.
211 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 3, JSJ 7 (1976), 61-62.
212 Jahrbuch der Deutschen Sporthochschule Köln 1972, JSJ 7 (1976),
64-66.
 A BffiLlOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 255

213 M. OE JONGE (ed.), Studies on the Testaments 01 the Twelve

Patriarchs (Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha III, Leiden,
1975), JSJ 7 (1976), 66-67.
214 MJ. MULDER, De Targum op het Hooglied. Inleiding, vertaling en
korte verklaring (Exegetica 4, Amsterdam, 1975), JSJ 7 (1976), 69.
215 K. RENGSTORF (in cooperation with B. JuSTUS, G.W.E. NICKELS-
BURG, H. SCHRECKENBERG, J. SCHWARK, W.L. WEILER), A Com-
plete Concordance to Flavius Josephus. Volume 11 (Leiden, 1975),
JSJ 7 (1976), 74-75.
1977
216 E. BICKERMAN, Studies in Jewish and Christian History. Part One
(Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Antiken Judentums und des Urchris-
tentums 9, Leiden, 1976), JSJ 8 (1977), 85.
217 Heinz-Josef FABRY, Die Wurzel SUB in der Qumran-Literatur. Zur
Semantik eines Grundbegriffes (BBB 46, Köln/Bonn, 1975), JSJ 8
(1977), 87-88.
218 M. HENGEL, Juden, Griechen und Barbaren. Aspekte der Helle-
nisierung des Judentums in vorchristlicher Zeit (SBS 76, Stuttgart,
1976), JSJ 8 (1977), 88-89.
219 L.H. SCHIFFMAN, The Halakhah at Qumran (Studies in Judaism in
Late Antiquity 16) (Leiden, 1975), JSJ 8 (1977), 97-99.
220 M. WINTER, A Concordance to the Peshiua Version 01 Ben Sira
(Monographs of the Peshi tta Institute Leiden, 2) (Leiden, 1976),
JSJ 8 (1977), 108.
221 Christian WOLFF, Jeremiah im Frühjudentum und Urchristentum
(Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen
Literatur, 118) (Berlin, 1976), JSJ 8 (1977), 108-110.
222 Joachim BECKER, Messiaserwartung im Alten Testament (SBS 83)
(Stuttgart, 1977), JSJ 8 (1977), 192-194.
223 Urs BREITENBACH, Beobachtungen zu Sprache, Stil und Gedanken-
gut des Vierten Makkabäerbuches (BaseUStuttgart, 1976), JSJ 8
(1977), 194-195.
224 Compendia Rerum ludaicarum ad Novum Testamentum. Section I:
The Jewish People in the First Centu ry, Volume 11, ed. by S.
SAFRAI and M. STERN in cooperation with D. FLUSSER and W.c.
VAN UNNIK (Assen/Amsterdam, 1976), JSJ 8 (1977), 195-196.
225 E. CORTES, Los discursos de adios. Pistas para la historia de un
genero literario en la antigua literatura judfa (Co1ectanea San
Paciano 23, Barcelona, 1976), JSJ 8 (1977), 196-197.
256 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

226 L. DEQUEKER (ed.), Tradition Orale et Ecrite (Publications de

J'Institutum Iudaicum Bruxelles, Bruxelles, 1976), JSJ 8 (1977),
198.
227 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 4, JSJ 8 (1977), 198-199.
228 De gammeltestamentlige Pseudepigrajer i oversrettelse med ind-
ledning og noter ved E. HAMMERSHAIMB, J. MUNCK, B. NOACK, P.
SEIDELIN. 8. Hrefte, JSJ 8 (1977), 199-200.
229 Donald E. GOWAN, Bridge Between the Testaments. A Reappraisal
of Judaism from Exile to the Birth of Christianity (Pittsburgh
Theological Monograph Series 14, Pittsburg, Penns., 1976), JSJ 8
(1977), 200-20 I.
230 Je ws, Creeks and Christians. Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity.
Essays in Honor of William David Davies, ed. by R. HAMERTON-
KELLY and R. SCROGGS (SJLA 21, Leiden, 1976), JSJ 8 (1977),
201-202.
231 Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit. Band I. Liefe-
rung 2 N. WALTER, Fragmente jüdisch-hellenistischer Historiker;
Band 1. Lieferung 3 Ch. HABICHT, 2 Makkabäerbuch; Band II.
Lieferung 2 Ch. DIETZFELBINGER, Pseudo-Philo: Antiquitates Bibli-
cae; Band III. Lieferung 2 A.H.J. GUNNEWEG, Das Buch Baruch,
der Brief Jeremias; E. JANSSEN, Testament Abrahams; N. W ALTER,
Fragmente jüdisch-hellenistischer Exegeten: Aristobulos, Demetrios,
Aristeas; Band V. Lieferung 2 E. BRANDENBURGER, Himmelfahrt
Moses; V.B. MÜLLER, Die griechische Esra-Apokalypse; A.F.J.
KLIJN, Die syrische Baruch-Apokalypse (Gütersloh, 1975, 1976),
JSJ 8 (1977), 203-206.
232 Hennann LICHTENBERGER, Studien zum Menschenbild in Texten der
Qumrangemeinde (Marburg, 1975), JSJ 8 (1977),206-207.
233 Memoria Jerusalem. Freundesgabe Franz SAUER zum 70. Geburts-
tag, herausgegeben von J.B. BAUER und J. MARBÖCK (Graz, 1977),
JSJ 8 (1977), 207.
234 R.B. MOTZO, Ricerche sulla letteratura e la storia Ciudaico-Elle-
nistica, a cura di F. PARENTE (Roma, 1977), JSJ 8 (1977), 207-208.
235 G. NADOR, Ein Spruch Hillels (London, 1974), JSJ 8 (1977), 208.
236 F. RAPHAEL, F. DUNAND, J.G. HEINTZ, J. SCHWARTZ, M. PHILO-
NENKO, P. PRIGENT, J.E. MENARD, T. FAHD, F. RAPP, L'apocalyp-
tique (Etudes d'histoire des religions 3, Paris, 1977), JSJ 8 (1977),
210.
 A BffiLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 257

237 U. RApPAPORT, Bibliography of Works on Jewish History in the

Hellenistic and Roman Periods 1971-1975 (Jerusalern, 1976), JSJ 8
(1977),210-211.
238 P. SACCHI, Storia deI mundo giudaico (Manua1i universitari, Torino,
1976), JSJ 8 (1977), 21l.
239 P. SCHÄFER, Rivalität zwischen Engeln und Menschen. Untersu-
chungen zur rabbinischen Engelvorstellung (Studia Judaica 8,
BerlinlNew York, 1975), JSJ 8 (1977), 211-213.
240 Übersetzung und Deutung. Studien zu dem Alten Testament und
seiner Umwelt A1exander Reinard Hulst gewidmet von Freunden
und Kollegen (Nijkerk, 1977), JSJ 8 (1977), 213.
241 H.G.M. WILLIAMSON, Israel in the Books of Chronicles (Cam-
bridge, 1977), JSJ 8 (1977), 214-215.
242 Zukunft und Gegenwart. Wegweisungen in Judentum und Christen-
tum, herausgegeben von Cl. THOMA (Bern/Frankfurt, 1976), JSJ 8
(1977),215-216.
1978
243 Apocalypses et theologie de l'esperance. Congres de Tou1ouse 1975
(Paris, 1977), JSJ 9 (1978), 89-90.
244 Biblia Polyglotta Matritensia. Series IV. Targum Palaestinense in
Pentateuchum. IV. Numeri (Madrid, 1971), JSJ 9 (1978), 91-92.
245 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 5, JS1 9 (1978), 94-95.
246 God's Christ and His People. Studies in Honour of N.A. Dahl
(OsI0, 1977), 1S1 9 (1978), 95.
247 B. GROSSFELD, Bibliography of Targum Literature, Vo1ume II
(Bibliographia Judaica 8), (Cincinnati/New York, 1977), 1S1 9
(1978), 95-96.
248 M. HENGEL, Jesus, Fils de Dieu (Lectio Divina 94, Paris, 1977),
1S19 (1978), 96.
249 P. JÖCKEN, Das Buch Habakuk. Darstellung der Geschichte seiner
kritischen Erforschung mit einer eigenen Beurteilung (BBB 48,
KölnlBonn, 1977), JS1 9 (1978), 96-97.
250 G. STEMBERGER, Geschichte der jüdischen Literatur. Eine Einfüh-
rung (München, 1977), JS1 9 (1978), 111-112.
251 J.M. BAUMGARTEN, Studies in Qumran Law (SJLA 24, Leiden,
1977), 1S19 (1978), 213-214.
252 M.C. DA VIES, Hebrew Bible Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah
Collections. Volume 1: Taylor-Schechter Old Se ries and other
258 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

Genizah Collections in Cambridge University Library (Cambridge,

1978), J5J 9 (1978), 215-216.
253 M. DEL VERME, Comunione e condivisione dei beni. Chiesa primiti-
va e giudaismo esseno-qumranico a confronto (Brescia, 1977), J5J 9
(19780,216-217.
254 F. DEXINGER, Henochs Zehnwochenapokalypse und offene Probleme
der Apokalyptikjorschung (SPB 29, Leiden, 1977), J5J 9 (1978),
217-219.
255 E. FELDMAN, Biblical and Post-Biblical Defilement and Mourning:
Laws as Theology (The Library of Jewish Law and Ethics, New
York, 1977), J5J 9 (1978), 220-221.
256 S. HOPKINS, A Miscellany of Literary Pie ces from the Cambridge
Genizah Collections. A Catalogue and 5election of Texts in the
Taylor-5chechter Collection, Old 5eries, Box A 45 (Cambridge,
1978), J5J 9 (1978), 223-224.
257 P.W. VAN DER HORST, The 5entences of Pseudo-Phocylides. With
Introduction and Commentary (SVTP 4, Leiden, 1978), J5J 9
(1978), 224-225.
258 M. DE JONGE (in cooperation with H.W. HOLLAND ER , H.J. DE
JONGE, TH. KORTEWEG), The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
A Critical Edition of the Greek Text (PVTG IJ2, Leiden, 1978), J5J
9 (1978), 225-227.
259 Miscellanea Neotestamentica. Studia ad Novum Testamentum
praesertim pertinentia a sociis sodalicii batavi c.n. studiosorum Novi
Testamenti conventus anno MCMLXXVI quintum lustrum feliciter
complentis suscepta edenda curaverunt T. BAARDA, AF.J. KLUN,
W.c. VAN UNNIK (SNT 47-48, Leiden, 1978), J5J 9 (1978), 227-
228.
260 Paganisme, Judai'sme, Christianisme. Influences et affrontements
dans le monde antique. Melanges offerts a Marcel Simon (Paris,
1978), J5J 9 (1978), 231-232.
261 Qumran. 5a piete, sa theologie et son milieu, M. DELCOR (ed.)
(BETL 46, Paris/Leuven, 1978), J5J 9 (1978), 234-235.
262 L. TROlANI, Commento storico al 'Contro Apione' di Giuseppe.
Introduzione, Commento Storico, Traduzione e Indici (Pisa, 1977),
J5J 9 (1978), 237.
263 A WIEDER, The Prophet Elijah in the Development of Judaism
(The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, London, 1978), J5J 9
(1978), 238-239.
 A BffiLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 259

1979
264 P.-M. BOGAERT. L. DEQUEKER, H. JAGERSMA. A. GUIGUI, J. LAMB-
RECHT, Abraham dans la Bible et dans la tradition juive (Bruxelles,
1978), JSJ 10 (1979), 87.
265 J.A. FITZMYER - D.J. HARRINGTON, A Manual of Palestinian
Aramaic Texts (Second Century B.C. - Second Century A.D.) (BO
34, Roma, 1978), JSJ 10 (1979), 94-95.
266 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 6, JSJ 10 (1979), 95-96.
267 P. GARNET, Salvation and Atonement in the Qumran Scralls
(WUNT 3, Tübingen, 1977), JSJ 10 (1979), 96-97.
268 S. HOLM-NIELSEN, Die Psalmen Salomos (JSHRZ IV/2, Gütersloh,
1977), JSJ 10 (1979), 99-100.
269 J.C.H. LEBRAM, Lijden en redding in het antieke Jodendom (Oosters
Genootschap in Nederland 8, Leiden, 1978), JSJ 10 (1979), 105.
270 J. MAlER, Die Tempelrolle vom Toten Meer übersetzt und erläutert
(München, 1978), JSJ 10 (1979), 106.
271 P. SCHÄFER, Studien zur Geschichte und Theologie des rabbinischen
Judentums (AGJU 15, Leiden, 1978), JSJ 10 (1979), 106-107.
272 J. SCHÜPPHAUS, Die Psalmen Salomos. Ein Zeugnis Jerusalemer
Theologie und Frömmigkeit in der Mitte des vorchristlichen Jahr-
hunderts (ALGHJ 7, Leiden 1977), JSJ 10 (1979), 108-109.
273 Studies in the History of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel.
Fourth Volume. In honour of A. Schochat on the occasion of his
seventieth birthday, U. RApPAPORT (ed.) (Haifa, 1978), JSJ 10
(1979), 108-109.
274 G. VON RAD, Das erste Buch Moses. Genesis (Göuingen, 1976),
Kerk en Theologie 30 (1979), 81.
275 Elke morgen nieuw. Inleiding tot de jodse gedachtenwereid aan de
hand van het Achttiengebed, samengesteid door DJ. VAN DER
SLUIS, PJ. TOMSON, DJ. VAN UDEN en W.A.c. WHITLAU
(Arnhem, 1978), Kerk en Theologie 30 (1979), 83-84.
276 Heinrich Graetz Tagebuch und Briefe, herausgegeben und mit
Anmerkungen versehen von R. MICHAEL (Tübingen, 1977), Kerk en
Theologie 30 (1979), 88.
1980
277 J.L. CRENSHAW, S. SANDMEL (eds.), The Divine Helmsman. Studies
on God's Contral of Human Events Presented to LH. Silberman
(New York, 1980), JSJ 11 (1980), 225-226.
278 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 7, JSJ 11 (1980), 227.
260 F. GARCfA MARTfNEZ

279 Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit. Band III.

Lieferung 3: B. SCHALLER, Das Testament Hiobs (Gütersloh, 1979);
Band I, Lieferung 4: K.D. SCHUNK, 1. Makkabäerbuch (Gütersloh,
1980), JSJ 11 (1980), 227-229.
280 K.H. RENGSTORF (in co-operation with B. JusTUS, G.W.E.
NICKELS BURG, J.R. ROYSE, H. SCHRECKENBERG, J. SCHWARK), A
Complele Concordance to Flavius Josephus. Volume III: A-n
(Leiden, 1979), JSJ 11 (1980), 229.
281 Theokratia. III. Festgabe für H. Koch zum 70. Geburtstag (Leiden,
1979), JSJ 11 (1980), 232.
1981
282 E. NOORT, Biblisch-archäologische Hermeneutik und alttestament-
liche Exegese (Kamper Cahiers 39, Kampen, 1979), Book List 1981,
31-32.
283 H. VAN LEEUWEN, Zefanja. VerkJaring van een Bijbelgedeelte
(Kampen, 1979), Book List 1981,57-58.
284 H. LEENE, De stem van de knecht als metafoor. Beschouwingen
over de compositie van Jesaja 50 (Kampen, 1980), Book List 1981,
73.
285 M. DE GOEIJ, De Pseudepigrafen. De Psalmen van Salomo. IV
Ezra. Martyrium van Jesaja (Kampen, 1980), Book List 1981, 116.
1982
286 Hommage a G. Vajda. Etudes d'histoire et de pensee juives editees
par G. NAHON et Ch. TOUATI (Louvain, 1980), JSJ 13 (1982), 197-
199.
287 lnterpreting the Hebrew Bible. Essays in Honour of E.I.J.
Rosenthai, edited by J.A. EMERTON and S.C. REIF (Cambridge,
1982), JSJ 13 (1982), 199-200.
288 J.P. LEMONON, Pilate et le gouvernement de la Judee. Textes et
monuments (Etudes Bibliques, Paris, 1981), JSJ 13 (1982), 200-201.
289 J. MAlER - P. SCHÄFER, Kleines Lexikon des Judentums (Stuttgart,
1981), JSJ 13 (1982), 205-206.
290 C. MCCARTHY, The Tiqqune Sopherim and Other Theological
Corrections in the Masoretic Text of the Gld Testament (OBO 36,
Freiburg, 1981), JSJ 13 (1982),206-207.
291 Standing before God. Studies on Prayer in Scripture and in Tradi-
tion with Essays in Honor of John M. Oesterreicher, edited by A.
FINKEL and L. FRrzZELL (New York, 1981), JSJ 13 (1982), 211-
213.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. V AN DER WOUDE 261

292 Studies in Hebrew and Semitic Languages. Dedicated to the Mem-

ory of Prof. E. Y. Kutscher, edited by G.B. SARFATTI, P. ARTZI, J.
GREENFIELD, M. KADDARI (Ramat Gan, 1980), JSJ 13 (1982), 213-
214.
293 E. TALSTRA, F. POSTMA, H.A. VAN ZWET, Deuterojesaja. Proeve
van automatische tekstverwerking ten dienste van de exegese (Am-
sterdam, 1981), Book List 1982, 74.
294 M. DIJKSTRA, Gods voorstelling. Predikatieve expressie van zelf-
openbaring in oudoosterse teksten en Deutero-Jesaja (Kampen,
1980), Book List 1982, 81.
1983
295 Bar Ilan. Annual of Bar-Ilan University. Studies in Judaica and the
Humanities 18-19 (Ramat-Gan, 1981), JSJ 14 (1983), 52-53.
296 P.c. BEENTJES, Jesus Sirach en Tenach (Nieuwegein, 1981), JSJ 14
(1983), 54.
297 E. BICKERMAN, The God of the Maccabees (SJLA 32, Leiden,
1979), JSJ 14 (1983), 55.
298 J.H. CHARLESWORTH, Papyri and Leather Manuscripts of the Odes
of Solomon (Durham, NC, 1981), JSJ 14 (1983), 56-58.
299 Essays in Honour of Yigael Yadin, edited by G. VERMES and J.
NEUSNER (Oxford, 1982), JSJ 14 (1983), 58-63.
300 J.H. CHARLESWORTH, The History of the Rechabites. Volume I: The
Greek Recension (Texts and Translations 17. Pseudepigrapha Series
10, Chico, 1982), JSJ 14 (1983), 57-58.
301 T. FISCHER, Seleukiden und Makkabäer. Beiträge zur Seleukidenge-
schichte und zu den politischen Ereignissen in Judäa während der 1.
Hälfte des 2. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Bochum, 1980), JSJ 14 (1983),
63-66.
302 J. MAIER, Grundzüge der Geschichte des Judentums im Altertum
(Darm stadt, 1981), JSJ 14 (1983), 83-84.
303 M. MOHR and U. RApPAPORT, Bibliography of Works on Jewish
History in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods, 1976-1980
(Jerusalern, 1982), JSJ 14 (1983), 84-85.
304 A. PAUL, Le monde des juifs a ['heure de Jisus. Histoire politique
(Petite Bibliotheque des Sciences Bibliques, Nouveau Testament I,
Paris, 1981), JSJ 14 (1983),85-86.
305 H. STADELMANN, Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter. Eine Untersuchung
zum Berufsbild des vor-makkabäischen Sofer unter Berücksich-
262 F. GARCfA MARTfNEz

tigung seines Verhältnisses zu Priester-, Propheten- und Weisheits-

lehrerturn (WUNT 6, Tübingen, 1980), JSJ 14 (1983), 94-96.
306 G. STEMBERGER, Der Talmud. Einführung - Text - Erläuterungen
(München, 1982), JSJ 14 (1983), 96-97.
307 H.L. STRACK - G. STEMBERGER, Einleitung in Talmud und Mi-
drasch (München, 1982), JSJ 14 (1983), 97-98.
308 W.c. TRENCHARD, Ben Sira 's Vision of Women. A Literary Analysis
(BJS 18, Chico, 1982), JSJ 14 (1983), 100.
309 G. VERMES, The Gospel of Jesus the Jew (Newcastle upon Tyne,
1981), JSJ 14 (1983), 100-102.
310 Auf~tieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, Teil II Principat,
Band 19, 2. Halbband: Religion (Judentum: Allgemeines; Paläs-
tinisches Judentum), herausgegeben von W. HAASE (Berlin/New
York, 1979), JSJ 14 (1983), 182-185.
311 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 8 (1980), 9 (1981), 10 (1982), JSJ
13 (1984), 199-20 l.
312 J. NEUSNER, Formative Judaism. Religious, Historical, and Literary
Studies (BJS 37, Chico, 1982); Formative Judaism. Second Series
(BJS 41, Chico, 1983); Formative Judaism. Third Series (BJS 46,
Chico, 1983), JSJ 14 (1983), 211-213.
313 O. KAISER, Das Buch des Propheten Jesaja. Kapitel 1-12
(Göttingen, 1983), Kerk en Theologie 34 (1983), 56-57.
1984
314 Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, Teil 11 Principat,
Band 19, 2. Halbband: Religion (Judentum: Palästinisches Judentum
[Forts.]), herausgegeben von W. HAASE (BerlinJNew York, 1979),
JSJ 15 (1984), 155-157.
315 Biblia Polyglotta Matritensia. Series IV. Targum Palaestinense in
Pentateuchum. 2. Exodus, 3. Leviticus, 5. Deuteronomium (Madrid,
1980), JSJ 15 (1984), 164-165.
316 K. BRINGMANN, Hellenistische Reform und Religionsveifolgung in
Judäa. Eine Untersuchung zur jüdisch-hellenistischen Geschichte
(175-163 v. Chr.) (Göttingen, 1983), JSJ 15 (1984), 167-169.
317 T. FISCHER, Silber aus dem Grab Davids? Jüdisches und Hellenis-
tisches auf Münzen des Seleukidenkönigs Antiochos' VII. 132-130
v. Chr. (Bochum, 1983), JSJ 15 (1984), 179.
318 J. GUTMANN, Ancient Synagogues. The State of Research (BJS 22,
Chico, 1981), JSJ 15 (1984),180-181.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 263

319 M.L. KLEIN. The Fragment Targums of the Pentateuch According to

the Extant Sources. Vol. I: Texts, Indices and Introductory Essays;
Vol. 11: Translation (AnBib 76. Roma, 1980), lSJ 15 (1984), 184-
185.
320 Lectures Bibliques par P.-M. BOGAERT, J. CHOPlNEAU e.a.
(Bruxelles, n. y.), JSJ 15 (1984), 186.
321 J. NEUSNER, Major Trends in Formative Judaism (BJS 60, Chico,
1983); Major Trends in Formative Judaism. Second Series (BJS 61,
Chico, 1984), JSJ 15 (1984), 193.
322 J. NEUSNER, Ancient Judaism. Debates and Disputes (BJS 64.
Chico, 1984), JSJ 15 (1984), 194-195.
323 K.H. RENGSTORF (in co-operation with B. JUSTUs, G. KONTOULlS,
J.R. ROYSE, H. SCHRECKENBERG, J. SCHWARK), A Complete Con-
cordance to Flavius Josephus. Volume IV: n-Q (Leiden, 1983), JSJ
15 (1984), 197-198.
324 M. SOKOLOFF (ed.), Arameans, Aramaic and the Aramaic Literary
Tradition (Bar-Han Studies in Near Eastem Languages and Cultures,
Ramat-Gan, 1983), JSJ 15 (1984), 209-210.
325 Die Tosefta. Text. Seder I: Zeraim. In Zusammenarbeit mit P.
FREIMARK, W.E. GERBER, W.F. KRÄMER, G. LISOWSKY, E. LoHSE,
G. MA YER und G. SCHLICHTING herausgegeben von K. H.
RENGSTORF (Rabbinische Texte, Erste Reihe, Stuttgart!-
BerlinlKöln/Mainz, 1983), JSJ 15 (1984). 211-212.
326 G. WEWERS, Übersetzung des Talmud Yerushalmi. Band IVI7:
Avoda Zara. Götzendienst (Tübingen, 1980); Band IV/4: Sanhedrin.
Gerichtshof (Tübingen, 1981); Band 11/11: Hagiga. Festopfer
(Tübingen, 1983); Band IV/5 und IV/6: Makkot. Geißelung. Schevu-
ot. Schwüre (Tübingen, 1983), JSJ 15 (1984),212-214.
327 A. VAN DER WAL, Amos. A Classified Bibliography (Amsterdam,
1983), Book List 1984. 26.
328 J. RENKEMA, 'Misschien is er hoop ... ' Oe theologische vooronder-
stellingen van het boek Klaagliederen (Franeker, 1983), Book List
1984, 79.
1985
329 A. DEISSLER, Zwölf Propheten /I, Obadja, Jona, Micha, Nah um,
Habakuk (Die Neue Echter Bibel AT, Würzburg, 1984), Theolo-
gische Revue 81 (1985),364-366.
330 Frankfurter ludaistische Beiträge 11 (1983), JSJ 16 (1985), 131-
132.
264 F. GARCiA MARTfNEZ

331 K.A. DEURLOO, B.P.M. HEMELSOET, F.J. HOOGEWOUD, K.A.D.

SMELIK and R. ZUURMOND (eds.), Amsterdamse Cahiers voor
Exegese en Bijbelse Theologie 3 (1982), 4 (1983), 5 (1984), Book
List 1985, 9-10.
1986
332 W.E. AUFRECHT (ed.), Studies in the Book of Job (Studies in
Religion Supplements 16, Waterloo, Ont., 1985), JSJ 17 (1986), 80.
333 G.K. BEALE, The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature
and in the Revelation 0/ John (Lanham/New YorkILondon, 1984),
JSJ 17 (1986), 80-82.
334 O. CAMPONOVO, Königtum, Königsherrschajt und Reich Gottes in
den frühjüdischen Schriften (OBO 58, Freiburg/Göttingen, 1984),
JSJ 17 (1986), 94-96.
335 M. HENGEL, Rabbinische Legende und frühpharisäische Geschichte.
Schimeon b. Schetach und die achtzig Hexen von Askalon (Hei-
delberg, 1984), JSJ 17 (1986), 106-107.
336 Index 0/ Articles on Jewish Studies. No. 24. 1983, JSJ 17 (1986),
107-108.
337 B. OTZEN, Den antike jIPdendom. Politisk udvikling og religi~se
str~mninger fra Aleksander den Store til Kejser Hadrian (K~­
benhavn, 1984), JSJ 17 (1986), 112-113.
338 CH. SAULNIER avec la collaboration de Ch. PERROT, Histoire
d'lsrael III. De la conquere d'Alexandre ii la destruction du temple
(331 a.c. - 135 a.D.), JSJ 17 (1986), 118.
339 B.Z. WACHOLDER, The Dawn 0/ Qumran. The Sectarian Torah and
the Teacher of Righteousness (HUCM 8, Cincinnati, 1983), JSJ 17
(1986), 120-124.
340 M. AUGUSTIN, Der schöne Mensch im Alten Testament und im
hellenistischen Judentum (Frankfurt am MainIBernlNew York,
1983), JSJ 17 (1986), 233-234.
341 Biblical Archaeology Today. Proceedings of the International
Congress on Biblical Archaeology (Jerusalern, 1985), JSJ 17 (1986),
235-238.
342 J. NEUSNER, The Pharisees. Rabbinic Perspectives (Studies in
Ancient Judaism 1, New York, 1985), JSJ 17 (1986), 263.
1987
343 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 12 (1984), 13 (1985), 14 (1986),
JSJ 18 (1987), 87-88.
 A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 265

344 G. WEWERS, Übersetzung des Talmud Yerushalmi. Band U6: Teru-

mot-Priesterhebe (Tübingen, 1985); Band U2: Pea - Ackerecke (Tü-
bingen, 1986), JSJ 18 (1987), 105.
345 G.H. WILSON, The Editing 0/ the Hebrew Psalter (SBLOS 76,
Chico, 1985), JSJ 18 (1987), 107-108.
346 Y. AMIR, Studien zum Antiken Judentum (Beiträge zur Etforschung
des Alten Testaments und des Antiken Judentums 2, Frankfurt am
MainlBernlNew York, 1985) JSJ 18 (1987),227-228.
347 La Litterature Intertestamentaire. Colloque de Strasbourg (Paris,
1985), JSJ 18 (1987), 243-244.
1988
348 Hellenica et Judaica. Hommage a Valentin Nikiprowetzky. Edite
par A. CAQUOT, M. HADAS-LEBEL et J. RIAUD (LeuvenlParis,
1986), JSJ 19 (1988), 99-104.
349 E. BAMMEL, Judaica. Kleine Schriften I (WUNT 37, Tübingen,
1986), JSJ 19 (1988), 241-242.
350 W.D. DAVIES - L. FINKELSTEIN (eds.), The Cambridge History 0/
Judaism. Volume I: Introduction. The Persian Period (Cambridge,
1984), JSJ 19 (1988), 245-248.
351 D. DIMANT, M. MOHR, U. RAPPAPORT (eds.), Bibliography 0/
Works on Jewish History in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman
Periods. Publications 0/ the Years 1981-1985 (Jerusalem, 1987), JSJ
19 (1988), 248.
352 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 15 (1987), JSJ 19 (1988), 250-
251.
353 G. SCHIMANOWSKI, Weisheit und Messias. Die jüdischen Vorausset-
zungen der urchristlichen Präexistenzchristologie (WUNT 17,
Tübingen, 1985), JSJ 19 (1988), 259-263.
354 La vie de la paroLe. De l'Ancien Testament au Nouveau Testament.
Etudes d'exegese et d'henneneutique bibliques offertes a Pierre
Grelot (Paris, 1987), JSJ 19 (1988), 266-268.
1989
355 J. EFRON, Studies on the Hasmonean Period (SJLA 39, Leiden,
1987), JSJ 20 (1989), 91-94.
356 K.-W. NIEBUHR, Gesetz und Paränese. Katechismusartige
Weisungsreihen in der frühjüdischen Literatur (WUNT 28,
Tübingen, 1987), JSJ 20 (1989), 100-104.
266 F. GARCfA MARTtNEZ

357 E. T ÄUBLER, Ausgewählte Schriften zur Alten Geschichte (Heidel-

berger AIthistorische Beiträge und Epigraphische Studien 3,
Stuttgart, 1987), JSJ 20 (1989), 116-117.
358 M. TREVES, The Dates of the Psalms. History and Poetry in Ancient
Israel (Pisa, 1988), JSJ 20 (1989), 119.
359 La Bible. Ecrits intertestamentaires (Bibliotheque de la Pleiade,
Paris, 1987), JSJ 20 (1989), 214-216.
360 K.G. HOGLUND, E.F. HUWILER, J.T. GLASS and R.W. LEE (eds.),
The Listening Heart. Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in honor of
R. E. Murphy (JSOTS 58, Sheffield, 1987), JSJ 20 (1989), 231-232.
361 D. MENDELS, The Land of Israel as a Political Concept in Hasmo-
nean Literature (TSAJ 15, Tübingen, 1987), JSJ 29 (1989), 243-
246.
362 J. NEUSNER, W.S. GREEN, E. FRERICHS (eds.), Judaisms and their
Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge, 1987), JSJ
20 (1989), 248-252.
1990
363 B. BAR-KocHVA, Judas Maccabaeus. The Jewish Struggle Against
the Seleucids (Cambridge, 1989), JSJ 21 (1990),87-91.
364 B. BECKING, J. VAN DORP, A. VAN DER KOOIJ (eds.), Door het oog
van de profeten. Exegetische studies aangeboden aan prof. dr. C.
van Leeuwen (Utrechtse Theologische Reeks 8, Utrecht, 1989), JSJ
21 (1990), 92.
365 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 16 (1988), JSJ 21 (1990), 111-
113.
366 W.S. PRINSLOO, The Theology of the Book of Joel (BerlinINew
York, 1985), BiOr 47 (1990), 767-769.
367 Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 17 (1989), JSJ 21 (1990), 259-
261.
368 J. ROGERSON and P. DAVIES, The Old Testament World (Cam-
bridge, 1989), JSJ 21 (1990), 276.
369 E. SPIER, Das Sabbat (Das Judentum 1, Berlin, 1989), JSJ 21
(1990),291.
370 N.M. WALDMAN, The Recent Study of Hebrew. A Survey of the
Literature with Select Bibliography (Bibliographia Judaica 10,
CincinnatiIWinona Lake, 1989), JSJ 21 (1990), 299-300.
371 B.K. W ALTER and M. O'CONNOR, An Introduction to Biblical
Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, 1990), JSJ 21 (1990), 300-301.
 A BffiLIOGRAPHY OF A.S. VAN DER WOUDE 267

372 P.W. VAN DER HORST, loods-hellenistische poezie. Oe fragmenten

der gedichten van Ezechiel Tragicus, Philo Epicus en Theodotus, en
de vervalste dichtercitaten (Na de Schriften 3, Kampen, 1987), N1T
44 (1990), 91-72.
1991
373 T. BAARDA, H.J. DE JONGE, M.J.J. MENKEN (eds.), lodendom en
vroeg christendom: continurteit en discontinui"teit (Kampen, 1991),
lS122 (1991), 254-255.
374 H. BURGMANN, Vorgeschichte und Frühgeschichte der essenischen
Gemeinden von Qumran und Damaskus (Arbeiten zum Neuen
Testament und Judentum 7, Frankfurt, 1987); Die essenischen
Gemeinden von Qumran und Damaskus in der Zeit der Hasmonäer
und Herodier (130 ante-68 post) (Arbeiten zum Neuen Testament
und Judentum 8, Frankfurt, 1988), lS122 (1991), 255-259.
375 W.O. OAVIES and L. FINKELSTEIN (eds.) The Cambridge History of
ludaism. Volume II: The Hellenistic Age (Cambridge, 1989), lS122
(1991),259-264.
376 J.A. FITZMYER, The Dead Sea Scrolls. Major PubLications and
Tools for Study (SBL Resources for Biblical Study 20, revised
edition, Atlanta, 1990), lSl 22 (1991), 265-266.
377 Frankfurter ludaistische Beiträge 18 (1990), lSl 22 (1991), 266-
267.
378 A. KUYT, E.G.L. SCHRUVER, N.A. VAN UCHELEN (eds.), Variety of
Forms. Dutch Studies in Midrash (Publications of the Juda Palache
Institute 5, Amsterdam, 1990), lS122 (1991), 268-269.
379 J. SIEVERS, The Hasmoneans and their Supporters. From Mattathias
to the Death of lohn Hyrcanus I (South Rorida Studies in the
History of Judaism 6, Atlanta, 1990), lSl 22 (1991), 285-286.
380 A. OEISSLER, Zwölf Propheten lII: Zefanja, Haggai, Sacharia,
Maleachi (Neue Echter Bibel AT, Würzburg, 1988), N1T 45 (1991),
66-67.
1992
381 J.P.M. VAN DER PLOEG, The Book of ludith (Daughter of Merari).
Syriac Text with Translation and Footnotes (Kottayam, Kerala,
1991), lS123 (1992), 129-130.
382 P. RIcHARDSON and S. WESTERHOLM with A.1. BAUMGARTEN, M.
PETTEM and C. WASSEN, Law in Religious Communities in the
Roman Period. The Debate over TOrah and Nomos in Post-Biblical
268 F. GARClA MARTfNEz

Judaism and Early Christianity (Waterloo, Ont., 1991), JSJ 23

(1992), 130-133.
383 F. ROHRHIRSCH, Markus in Qumran? Eine Auseinandersetzung mit
den Argumenten für und gegen das Fragment 7Q5 mit Hilfe des
methodischen Fallibilismusprinzips (Wuppertal 1990), JSJ 23
(1992), 133-134.
 INDEX OF AUTHORS

Adrados, F.R. 143 Boyce, M. 144, 146, 147

Ahlström, G.W. 92, 97 Brandenburg, E. 92, 93, 95
Aland, B. 138, 143, 148 Braude, W.G. 196
Aland, K. 138, 143, 148 Bremmer, J.N. 151
Albeck, Cb. 195, 199 Briggs, CA 51, 58, 68, 110
Alexander, JA 31, 34,49, 56 Brigbt., J. 65, 68,70,73
Allen, E.L. 95 Brockington, L.H. 106
Alon, G. 202 Broicb, U. 33
Anderson, B.W. 122 Brongers, H.A. 50
Arambarri, J. 57 Brooke, A.E. 137
Assmann, J. 146 Brooke, GJ. 171
Auld, A.G. 83, 84 Brown, F. 51, 68, 11 0
Avisbur, Y. 57 Brown, M.L. 50
Baillet., M. 152, 154, 161, 165, Brownlee, W.H. 178
180, 189 Bruston, Chr. 101
Bampfylde, G. 124 Buher, M. 51, 101
Bartb, H. 52, 63 Buher, S. 195, 196
Bartb, K. 79 Budde, K. 27, 29, 87, 89
Banon, J. 84 BubI, F. 50, 60
Bauer, H. 97, 102 Caquot., A. 12
Bauer, W. 138, 143, 148 Carmignac, J. 154, 161
Baumgartner, W. 47,89 Carroll, RP. 65, 66, 68, 69, 72,
Bayle, P. 226 75, 76, 82, 83
Becker, J.H. 110 Cazelles, H. 60
Beek, M.A. 108 Ceriani, A.M. 129
Beer, G. 7 Cersoy, P. 22, 24, 25, 27, 29
Begricb, J. 85 Cbarles, R.H. 111
Ben-Porat., Z. 33 Cbarlesworth, J.H. 123
Bentzen, A. 21, 25, 26, 29, 124 Cberyl Exum, J. 43
Bergler, S. 91, 94, 97 Cbilds, B.S. 83, 92
Bergsträsser, G. 102 Cioran, E.M. 74
Bernbardt., K.H. 101 Claes, P. 33
Bertholet., A. 10 1 Clemen, C. 144, 145
Beuken, WAM. 31, 32, 34, 35, Clements, R.E. 35, 58, 168
37,43,64 Coggins, R 76, 140
Bewer, JA 87, 92, 97, 98 Collins, U. 115-120, 124
Beyer, K. 185 Colpe, C. 118
Beyerlin, W. 82 Condamin,A. 24,25,29,34
Bie, M. 95 Cook, S.A. 140
Bj~mdaJen, A.l. 19,28,29 Comill, C.H. 65-68, 70, 72
Bleeker, L.H.K. 98 Cowley, A.E. 29
Bocbartus, S. 12 Craigie, P.c. 12
Bogaert., P.-M. 132, 136 Crensbaw, J.L. 140
Bonnard, P.-E. 35 Crönert., W. 143
Bousset., W. 119, 123 Croiset., M. 142
Box, G.H. 111 Cross, F.M. 119, 179, 180
270 INDEXES

Cunaeus, P. 220-222,226 Frey, H. 92-95

Dalman, A. 94 Friedmann, M. 195, 196
Danby, H. 111 Friedricb, G. 138
Dannesteter, J. 145 Froleyks, W J. 136
Daube, ß. 11 Fürst, J. 51
Davies, P.R. 117, 152-155, 161 Garcfa Martlnez, F. 151, 154, 162,
Day, J. 118 165, 169-171, 174, 183
De Lagarde, P. 127, 129 Gaster, T.H. 7, 101, 102
De Moor, J.C. 12 Geller, SA 83
De Wette, W.M.L. 219 Gerber, J. 103
Deden, D. 87,97,98 Gerleman, G. 108, 109
Deissler, A. 92, 98 Gesenius, W. 50,60, 102
Delcor, M. 97, 98, 115 Giesebrecbt, F. 65-68, 70, 72
Delitzscb, F. 31, 34,43 Ginsberg, H.L. 12
Denniston, J.D. 138 Ginzberg, L. 121, 123
Denter, Th. 150 Glare, P.G.W. 136
Dequeker, L. 117, 124 Goodman, M. 177
Derenbourg, J. 197 Goodman, W.L. 136, 140, 145
Dillmann, A. 28, 29 Gordis, R. 108
Diman~ D. 170, 171 Gordon, C. 12
Doyle, BA 43 Gosben-Gottstein, M.H. 33
Driver, G.R. 54 Goulder, M.D. 108
Driver, S.R. 51, 68, 95, 97, 101, Grätz, H. 101
110 Grabam, W.c. 19
Duberle, A.M. 127 Gray, G.ß. 22, 29
Dubaime, J. 154, 162 Gressmann, H. 92, 100, 119
Duhm, B. 32, 35, 65-70, 72, 92, Griffitbs, J.G. 145
101 Gunkel, H. 23, 24, 30, 101
Dyk, J.w. 104 Gutbe, H. 140
Edelkoort, A.H. 76, 98 Haag, H. 116
Edmonds, J.M. 143 Haefeli, L. 127
Eerdmans, B.o. 7 Haller, M. 107
Ehrlich, A.B. 19, 23, 29, 66, 108, Hamdorf, F.W. 141
109 Hammersbaimb, E. 140
Eisenman, R.H. 165, 171, 179 Hanbart, R. 130-132, 134, 137,
Eissfeldt, O. 95 139, 150, 151
EIliger, K. 31, 32 Haran, M. 7-9, 14, 16
Emerton, JA 10 1, 105 Harle, P. 138
Enslin, M.S. 127, 133 Harrelson, W. 122
Ewald, H. 89, 101 Harrington, DJ. 186
Feldmann, F. 34, 43 Harris, MJ. 100
Femandez Marcos, N. 140 Haupt, P. 22, 30, 108
Feuillet, A. 104 Hayes, J.H. 217
Field, F. 109 Hebn, B. 101
Fitzmyer, JA 186 Hempel, J. 15,23, 30
Flusser, D. 150,201 Herdner, A. 12
Fohrer, G. 27-29, 35, 53 Hertzberg, W. 120
Fowler, H.N. 142 Hillers, D.R. 78, 80
Fox, M.V. 105 Hitzig, F. 28, 30, 56, 89, 101
Frazer, J.G. 7, 12 Holladay, W.L. 35, 51
 INDEXES 271

Holwerda, B. 11, 14, 15 Kuntzrnann, R. 136

Holzinger, H. 120 Laberge, L. 43
Hommel, H. 140, 143-145, 147, Labuschagne, C.J. 15, 88, 151
148 Lachmann, K. 217
Horne, T.H. 220 Lampe, G.W.H. 143
Houbigant, c.F. 24, 30 Landy, F. 108
Houlden, J.L. 76 Lane, DJ. 105
Houtman, C. 53 Lauha, A. 92
Howard, R. 74 Leander, P. 97, 102
Huffmon, H.B. 112 Lebram, J.C. 115
Hulst, A.R. I 12 Lescow, T. 76
Hultgärd, A. 119 Lessing 217
Humbert, P. 85, 145, 146 Levin, C. 66,67,69
Hunzinger, C.-H. 152-154, 162 Levy, I. 112
Jacob, E. 25, 30, 36 Lichtenstein, H. 199, 200
Janzen, W. 43 LiddelI, H.G. 143
Jastram, N.R. 179, 180 Lipitiski, E. 112
Jenni, E. 102, 148 Lods, A. 136
Jensen, K. 98 Löscher, E. 219
Jeppesen, K. 76 Loewenstamm, S.E. 12
Jones, H.S. 143 Lohfink, N. 73
Jongeling, J. 180, 185, 186 Lommatzsch, E. 150
Joüon, P. 47, 49, 107, 110 Long, B.O. 140
Junker, H. 26, 30 Loretz, O. 108
Kaiser, O. 35, 36 Lowman, M. 221-224
Kapelrud, A.S. 95-97 Lowth, R. 24, 30
Katsh, AI. 198 Mandelbaum, B. 195
Kaulen, F. 128 Marcus, R. 149
Kautzsch, A. 101, 102 Marti, K. 25, 30, 32, 35, 87
Keel, O. 7,9-12 Martin 98
Keil, C.F. 95, 97, 98 Martin-Achard, R. 32, 35
Keller, C.A. 87, 92-95 Maurer, A 181
Kelly, J.N.D. 128 Mayes, A.D.H. 16
Kent, R.G. 144 Mays, J.L. 78, 83
Kervran, M. 146 McKenzie, J.L. 34
Kieval, Ph. 202 McLean, N. 137
Kimchi, D. 68, 70-72, 101 Meek, TJ. 19
Kissane, EJ. 56 Meinhold, J. 89
Kittel, G. 138 Merendino, P. 15
Knauf, E.A. 9, 10, 16 Meyer 89
Knibb, M.A. 76, 140, 164, 174, Milik, J.T. 155-157, 162, 170,
176 171, 174, 180, 183
Knobel, A 28, 30 Milikowsky, CJ. 194
Koch, K. 115-117, 124 Miliar, F. 177
Koehler, L. 47 Miller, I.M. 217
Köhler, R. 150 Miller, P.D. 119, 120
König, E. 8,56, 101 Moffatt, J. 106
Korst, J. 218 Moore, c.A. 127
Kraus, HJ. 101 Morgan, T. 222, 224-226
Krinetzki, L. (=G.) 108 Morgenstern, J. 7
272 INDEXES

Mowinckel, S. 101 Puecb, E. 180, 183

Müller,M. 117,118 RabIfs, A. 128, 130, 134, 137
Mulder, M.J. 51,53, 104 Rasbi 56
Mullen, E.Th. 122 Redak 53, 56, 64
Muraoka, T. 47, 49, 110 Reeg, G. 199
Murpby, R.E. 108 Reimarus, S.H. 217
Murpby-ü'Connor, J. 152, 155, Renaud, B. 76
157, 158, 162 Reventlow, H. 226
Myers, J.M. 138, 140, 150 Ridderbos 95
Neuman, A.A. 150 RießIer, P. 140
Neusner, J. 215 Ringgren, H. 61, 101, 109
Neuwirtb, A. 100 Robert, A. 104
Newton, I. 218 Robinson, J.M. 165, 17l, 179
Nicbolson, E.W. 65 Rogerson. J.W. 217
Nickelsburg, G.W.E. 176 Rosenberg, A.J. 49, 53, 56, 64
Nodet, E. 202 Rosenmüller, E.F.C. 49
Nötscber, F. 87 Ross, J.F. 122
Nortb, C.R. 101 Rudolpb, W. 65, 66, 68-70, 72,
Notb, M. 101, 112, 120 73, 95, 97-99, 135-137,
Nowack, W. 97 139, 140
Nyberg, H.S. 112 RusselI, D.S. 119, 123
übermann, J. 95 Saccbi, P. 140, 147
üdeberg, H. 34 Sandys, J. 142
üesterley, W.Ü.E. 111 Sanmartin Ascaso, J. 19-21, 30
Oswalt, J.N. 43, 58 Scaliger, J. 218
ützen, B. 118, 120, 125 Scbildenberger, 1. 10 1
üverbolt, T.W. 83,84 Schlosser, J. 136
Passow, F. 143 Scbmid, U. 140
Paul, S.M. 105, 106 Schmidt, H. 26,27,30, 100
Pauritscb, K. 31 Schoff, W.H. 19
Peake, A.S. 65-68, 70, 72 Scbolem, G. 111, 112
Penna, A. 43, 56 Schoors, A. 31, 32, 35, 53, 55, 56
Perles, F. 34 Scbottroff, W. 22, 30
Petavius, D. 218 Schröter, U. 73
Petersen, D.L. 122 Scbürer, E. 131, 177
Pfeiffer, R.H. 145, 147 Scbuller, E. 165-169
Pfister, M. 33 Schwartz, D.R. 169
Pbillips, A. 76 Scott 143
Plenderleitb, H.J. 178, 181 Seebass, H. 60, 110
Plöger, O. 116 Segal, M.Z. 112
Pötscber, W. 141 Sehmsdorf, E. 31,35
Poblmann, K.-F. 136-139, 147, Sellin, E. 87, 89, 98
149,150 Seybold, K. 53
Pope, M.H. 104, 108 Sbuckford, S. 219
Porter, I.R. 100, 10 I Smend, R. 65, 68-71
Pouilly, J. 152, 155, 157, 162 Smith, W.R. 17
Pralon, D. 138 Sokoloff, M. 190
Prideaux, H. 219 Spencer, J. 226
Prinsloo, W.S. 89 Spicq, C. 143
Procksch, Ü. 34 Stade, B. 22, 30
 INDEXES 273

Staerk, W. 101 Vermes, G. 153, 156, 157, 162,

Stamm, J.J. 47,60 177
Stansell 83 Vermeylen, J. 31,34,35,44
Starcky, J. 180 Virolleaud, C. 12
Steck, O.H. 34 Vitringa, C. 49, 53
Stelkens, KJ. 141 Vollmer, J. 60
Stenning, J.F. 53 Volz, P. 34,65,66,68-70, 72, 73
Steudel, A. 181 Von der Osten-Sacken, P. 124,
Stinespring, W.F. 136 153, 154, 162
Stocks, H'o. 90 Von Orelli, C. 95
Stolz, F. 52 Von Rad, G. 114, 115
Streane, A.S. 65, 66, 70 Wacholder, B.Z. 218
Stronach, D. 146 Walton, W. 127, 129
Strugnell, J. 170 Watts, J'o.W. 43, 49, 53, 58, 97
Sutcliffe, E.F. 155, 162 Weinfeld, M. 159, 162
Sznycer, M. 12 Weingreen, J. 7
Talstra, E. 31 Weiß, K. 138
Tedesche, S.S. 137, 138 Weiser, A. 65-68, 70, 72, 73
Thackeray, H.St J. 137 Wellhausen, J. 87, 97, 10 I
Theodor, J. 195, 199 Wernberg-M~lIer 162
Thompson, S. 136 Westermann, C. 31,34,110,148
Titteln, A. 219 Wevers, J.W. 1I
Torrey, C.C. 136, 138-140 Whybray, R.N. 31, 35
Tournay, R. 101, 104, 105 Widengren, G. 144
Trebolle Barrera, J. 165 Wildberger, H. 25-27, 30, 35, 36,
Tur-Sinai, N.H. 105 44, 45, 47, 49, 54-56, 61,
Ussher, J. 218, 219 63, 148
Vallat, F. 146 Williams, G.R. 18,20,30
Van der Meer, W. 89, 90, 91, Williamson, H.G.M. 18, 19, 83
97-99 Willis, J.T. 18, 30
Van der Ploeg, J.P.M. 125, 126, WiIls, L. 152, 163
133,178,179,181 Wilson, A. 152, 163
Van der Woude, A.S. 29, 73, 76, Winckler, H. 19
77, 80, 84, 89, 104, 114, Wise, M.O. 152, 163
161, 164, 178 Wolff, H.W. 80, 85, 90, 92-95, 99
Van Grol, H.w.M. 45 Wutz, F. 101
Van Hoonacker, A. 90, 92, 94, York, H.C. 151
95, 97 Yoyotte, J. 146
Van Leeuwen, C. 88, 89, 96 Zapletal, V. 23, 30
Van Ruiten, J. 31 Zimmerli, W. 34, 44, 85, 86, 96,
Van Seims 140 101, 168
Vawter, B. 83 Zobel, H.-J. 44, 60
Vedder, B. 33 Zöckler, O. 140
Vegas Montaner, L. 165 ZoreIl, F. 56
Veldhuijsen, P.L. 150 Zuidema, W.H. 111
 INDEX OF REFERENCES

HEBREW BIBLE, SEPTUAGINT, NEW TESTAMENT

Gen 22,9 211

3,14 40 22,14 211
3,19 40 22,27 8
9,4 14 22,28 9
9,5 98 23,17-18 209,210
18,8 8, 10 24,5 209
18,20 28 25 220
24,36 128 26,6 36
26,44 199
Exod
6,23 104 Num
7,17 91 1,7 104
7,18 97 2,3 104
7,21 91,97 7,12 104
8,4 91 7,17 104
8,10 91 10,14 104
8,lOb 97 11,24-30 81
8,27 91 15,19 211
10,13 91 18,26 211
10,13-19 91 20,12 61
10,17 91 21,18 111
10,19 98 22,23 121
10,22 57 27,14 61
14,19 114 31,28-29 211
22,28b.29 9
22,29 8, 15 Deut
22,30 14 12,16 14
23,14-19 13 12,29-31 15
23,19 9 12,31 15
23,19b 6 13,1-19 15
25,31-37 88 13,15(14) 15
34,10-26 15 14,1-21 15
34,25 13 14,3 15
34,26 9 14,21 9
34,26b 6, 11 14,21b 6, 11
15,19 16
Lev \7,3 109
4,19 210 22,6 9
7,13 209, 210, 212 25,4 7
7,14 211 32,14f. 60
7,26f. 14 32,14f. (LXX) 60
8,14 207 33,12 19
12,23 15 33,26 112
14,33-[37] 1
14,[26]-[30] 1 Josh
15,20-24 1 5,13 116, 120, 121
15,23 15
17,[1]-[12] 1 Judg
17,10-14 14 5,2.9 (LXX) 109
 INDEXES 275

21,20 25 2,3 60
2,5f. 60
I Sam 2,6 60
2,8 111 2,13 52
7,1 105 3,12 62,78
7,9 8, 37 3,15 56, 59
9,6-10 78 4,7 44
10,5-10 80 4,24 61
13,13 101 5,1 19,21, 22, 25, 27, 28
14 222 5,la 23
5,lb-2 22, 23, 26, 29
2 Sam 5,1 ff. 19
6,3 105 5,1-7 18, 26, 27
6,3f. 105 5,2 19, 22, 26, 27
7,12 101 5,3 26
7,14 100 5,3-6 22, 27, 29
14,17 100 5,5-6 26
5,7 23
1 Kgs 5,9 48
1,3 105 5,12 57,62
1,15 105 5,13 62
1,37 100 5,16 61
2,17 105 5,18-20 61
2,2lf. 105 5,19 61,62
7,2 52 5,21 62
10,17 52 5,25 62
10,21 52 5,26 90
13 79 5,30 57
20,13 85 6,3 61
22,19-23 81 6,5 61
22,22 122 6,7 61
6,9 62
2 Kgs 6,9f. 62
2 112 6,10 57,64
17,13-23 173 6,12 62
18,33 120 7,5 49
19,12 120 7,13 57
19,23 52 8,10 49
19,35 114 8,11-12 61
23,IJ 112 8,13 61
25,6 168 8,17 60
8,22 57
Isa 8,23-9,6 57
1-39 60, 62 9,3 57
1,3 62 9,6 101
1,4 61 9,7 60
1,19 57 9,12 64
1,27 60,64 9,15 62
1,29 60 10,1 54
2,2-4 83 10,2 56,59
276 INDEXES

10,3 90 14,30 56
10,5-34 54-56, 63 14,32 56
lO,5ff. 98 15,6 55
10,7 54 16,3 49
10,8-11 54 16,4 55
10,11 54 16,10 52
10,12 54 17,4 60
10,13 54 17,7 61,62
10,15 54 19,3 49
10,17 54,61 19,1lf. 49
10,18 52, 54, 55 19,13f. 62
1O,18f. 54 19,17 49
10,20 54, 60, 61 20,5 60
1O,20f. 54, 60, 61 20,25b" 54
1O,21f. 54 20,28 85
10,22 64 21,16 55
10,23 62 22,1
10,24-27 55 22,5 168
10,25 54, 55, 63 22,8 52
10,25-26 64 22,11 62
10,33 54 23,8f. 49
10,33-34 52, 55, 64 24,21 120
1O,33f. 52, 54 25,1 49
10,34 52,55 25,1-5 44
11,1-9 36 25,3-4 54
11,2 48,62 25,4 59
11,3-5 36,41 26,6 56,59
11,4 36, 56, 59 26,10 57,62
11,6-7b 35-38 26,11 60
11,6-8 38 26,20 54
11,6-9 31-37,41 27,6 60
11,6a 35 27,9 60
11,6a-Th 38 27,11 62
11,7 38 28-32 43,63
11,7a 38 28-33 43
1l,7b 33 28,1 43
11,7c 38, 39 28,7 62
11,8 39 28,9 57,62
11,8ah 35 28,12 57
11,9 35 28,14 55,57
11,9a 38 28,19 62
11,9ab 39 28,22 55
12,6 61,62 28,29 49
13,11 54 29 43
14,1 60 29,1 43
14,8 52 29,1-14 43, 56
14,12f. 95 29,7 58
14,24 48 29,9 59
14,26f. 48 29,9-10 58, 59
14,29 39 29,9-14 63
 INDEXES 277

29,11-12 56,57,58,59 30,11f. 61

29,13 62 30,15 61
29,13-14 62 30,20f. 59
29,14 62 31,1 43,61
29,15 43,54, 59,61 31,lf. 61
29,15a 44,49 31,3 55
29,15b 49 31,6 64
29,15b" 49 32,3 57
29,15-16 43,44,49, 52, 55,61-63 32,4 62
29,15-24 43, 54, 56 32,5 111
29,16 49, 50, 54, 61, 62, 64 32,8 111
29,16a 44,49, 50, 53 32,9 57
29,16b 45, 49 32,15b 55
29,17 50, 52, 54, 55, 63, 64 32,15f. 52
29,17a 44,50,53,55, 56 33 43
29, 17a' 44 33,9 51, 52
29,17b 51,52,55 33,13 57
29,17b' 53 34,3 97
29,17b" 53 35,lf. 51
29,17-19 59 35,2 52
29,17-21 44 35,9 36
29,17-24 51 36,5 49
29,17b-21 50 37,20 44
29,18 45, 56-59, 63 37,23 61
29,18a 58 37,24 52
29,18b 57, 58 37,27 60
29,18-19 50, 56 40,11 37,38
29,18-21 50, 56, 61, 62 41,10 85
29,19 45, 50, 54, 59, 61-63 43,10 44
29,20 50,54 43,27 55
29,20a 45 43,27f. 60
29,20b-21 55 44,28 37
29,20-21 50, 54, 55, 63 45,3 44,85
29,22 60 45,5f. 86
29,22a 44, 50, 59 45,6 44
29,22b 45, 61 47,12 54
29,22-23 60 49,22-23 41
29,22b-23 59 49,23 44,85
29,22-24 44, 50, 59, 60, 64 49,25 54
29,22b-24 50 49,26 85
29,22f. 54 49,9 37
29,23 54,61,62 51,3 51
29,23a 44, 45 51,9-10 120
29,23b 61 54,4 85
29,23b-24 45 54,6 72
29,24 44,61,62 55,12f. 51
30,1 43,49 56,9 32
30,3 60 56,11 37,38
30,5 60 57,1 37
30,10 57 58,10 57
278 INDEXES

58,14 32 10,22 90
59,5 32 11,1 65
59,9 57 lI,15 18
59,14 147 12,14 69
60,13 52 13,20 90
61,5 37 16,21 44
61,6 32 18,1 65
62,9 32 21,13f. 52
62,12 72 23,9 77
63,11 37,62 23,9-40 74
65 31-33, 38 23,13 69
65,1 31 23,15 74
65,1-16 36,41 24,27 44
65,4 32 25 66
65,9 32 25,9 90
65,10 32,38 25,11-12 174
65,11 32 26,4-6 173
65,12 31 26-29 66
65,12a"b 32 27,10 92
65,13 32 27,15 92
65,13-25 31 27-29 76
65,17 31 28,8-9 78, 82
65,17-24 41 29 66
65,21-22 32 29,10-14 66,174
65,24 32 29,13 66
65,24-25 31, 32 29,17-19 173
65,25 31-36, 38, 39, 41 29,32 66
65,25a 35, 36 30 66,72
65,25a-c 32 30,1 65
65,25ab 32, 37 30,1-3 65-73
65,25b 35 30,1-4 65,69, 70, 73
65,25c 32, 35, 40 30,2 66, 67, 70
65,25de 35 30,2-3 67
66,17 32 30,3 66-72
30,4 68
ler 30,4(5)-31,40 69
1,13-15 96 30,4-31,40 66
1,14 90 30,7 72
1,15 90 30,8 72
1-25 67 30,8-9 71
3,12ff. 69,70 30,8-lI 71
4,6 90,96 30,10-11 71
4,16 90 30,11 72
6,1 90 30,12-17 72
6,22 90,96 30,17 71, 72
7,1 65 30,18 72
7,12 69 30,18-21 71
8,17 39 30,21 72
8,2 109 30-31 66-70, 72
9,3 60 31,1 69
 INDEXES 279

31,1-21 71 39,2 92,96

31,2 65 39,17-20 96
31,6 71 40 116
31,26 66
31,40 66 Hos
34,1 65 2,20 36
34-45 67 6,5 78
35,1 65 9,7 78
36 66,67 10,3 60
36,1 65 12,4 60
36,2 66,67
36,3 66 Joel
40,1 65 1,1-20 85
44,2-6 173 1,4 87
44,29 44 1,4-13 86,94
46,20 90 1,5-13 86
46,24 90 1,7 86
46-51 66 1,10 86
47,2 90 1,10-12 87
48,26 95 1,12 86
48,42 95 1,14 87
50,3 90 1,15 93
50,9 90 1,16 86
50,17 92 1,16-20 86, 94
50,41 90 1,20 86
51,48 90 2,1 93
2,1-11 85, 88,90,96,98
Ezek 2,2 57
1 111,116 2,3 90
5,13 44 2,11 87,93,97
6,7 85 2,12 92
6,13 85 2,17 90
8 111 2,17b" 86
9 116 2,18-4,21 92
10 111 2,19-27
13,1-14,9 74 2,28 81
14,23 44 2,28-29 81
20,20 44 3,1-4,21 94
21,2f. 52 3,1-4,21 93
21,23-32 168 3,1-5 88
21,26 168 3-4 99
31 52
34,25ff. 36 Amos
35,13 95 2,12 81
38,5 96 4,10 97
38,5f. 96 5,1-2 27
38,6 92,96 5,20 57
38-39 92 7,12-13 81
38,15 92, 96 7,12-15 81
38,18-34 96 7,15 69
280 INDEXES

7,16 81 19,6f. 196

8,2 69 29,5f. 52
9,14 69 30 197
35,26 95
Obad 36,2 28
10 28 38,17 95
45 101
Mic 45,1 19
I 83 45,2aß IOD
2,3 78 45,3ba 102, 103
2,6 81 45,3-10 100, 102
2,6-7 81 45,7aß IOD
2,6-11 77. 81 45,8ba 102, 103
2,7 81 45,I2aa 100
2,11 81, 82 45,13 102
3,1 76, 78 45,I6b 100
3,1-3 80 47,10 III
3,5 78, 80, 82 48,3 96
3,5-7 78, 79, 82 58,5 39
3,5-8 76, 77. 79-82 60,7 19
3,7 77 68,5 112
3,8 77-81 72,9 40
3,9 78 74,9 78
3,9-11 76, 80 78,27 40
3,11 78 79,1 168
3,12 168 80,11 52
4 77 85,3 60
4,1-3 83 85,9ff. 86
4,9-11 60 85,ll-12 147
4,14 60 89,27 100
5,3 60 91,11115
7,17 40 104,16 52
7,17a 40 108,7 19
116,2 (LXX) 147
Zcph 127,2 19
1,15 57
2,10 95 Job
2,8 95 3,4-7 57
23,17 57
Zech
1,4-6a 173 Prov
2,13 44 7,18 20
7,12 74 7,18-26 21
9,7 199 8 147
11,1-3 52 8,16 111
14,8 97 13,14 64
23,32 39
Ps
2,7 100 Ruth
18,11 112 4,19f. 104
 INDEXES 281

Cant 9,9 7
1,6 25 13,7 105
1,15 25 15,1Of. 104
2,15 25 17,11 101
4,12 25 17,12 100
4,13f. 110 21,16 121
5,1 20,25 22,16 100
6,2 25, 109 28,18 112
6,4-10 109 29,11 141
6,10 110
6,11 25, 109 2 Chr
6,11f. 109 7,13 100
6,12 104 22,10 100
7,1 105
7,2 107 Bar
7,5 105 3,8 169
7,9 25
7,13 25 1 Esdr
7,14 25 3,1-4,42 136
8,11 25, 105 3,16-4,33 135
8,12 25 3,24 139
4,2 139
Lam 4,2-3 139
2,9 78 4,12 139
2,20 78 4,14 139
3,57 85 4,22 139
4,28 139
Eslh 4,28-32 139
l,lff. 129 4,32 139
10,1 129 4,34-41 135
4,42 135
Dan 4,43-5,6 136
2,20 141
3 114 2 Esdr
4,10 122 2,68 109
4,14 122 3,5 109
6 114 7,13.15s 109
7-12 115 21,2 109
8,25 95
9,24 169 Jdt 125-134
9,24-27 164, 177
9,25 169 1 Macc
1,20-40 176
Ezra 1,41-64 198
4,6 129 2,2-5 201
6 136 4,44-46 194
7,26 195
IChr 7,34 195
2,10 104 7,43 195
6,7 104 7,47 195
282 INDEXES

14,31-34 195 Wis

15,25-35 195 6-10 147
10,15-19 147
2 Macc
1,35 138 Matt
5,1-26 176 6,13 141
9,5-10 98
9,9f. 98 John
14,12f. 195 3,29 26
14,6 151
4 Macc
18,24 141 Acts
27,14 89
Sir
6,14-17 21 1 Tim
7,18 21 5,18 7
9,10 21
24 147 Heb
37,5 21 3,1-2 81
40,2 20,21
44-50 75 Jude
48,22 75 24-25 141
49,6 75
49,8 75, III Rev
50,3 20 1,6 141
50,25-26 167 5,13 141
7,12 141

QUMRAN TEXTS

Damascus Document V,9 157

III 1Ob-12a 173 VIII-IX 155, 158
V 20 175
XIX,33b-XX,34 155 lQSa
2,21-22 159
IQM 22,11 57
XIV 154 25,4 56
XIV,5 153
XIV,9 153 lQlsaa 34
XIV,12 153
XV-XIX 154, 155 lQ32 173
XV-XX 154
XVI,11-XVII,14 154 2Q22 165, 170

lQS 2Q24 173, 180

V,1 158 4,4 190
V,I-4 156 4,16 192
V,2-3 157 8,1 191
 INDEXES 283

3Q15
V 6 20 1,7 168
VII 4 20 3 165
X 5 20
XI12 20 4Q372 164
1 165
4QLev d 1
4Q373 165, 170
4QM' 153
frg. 11 ii 8-18 154 4Q390 164
frgs. 1-3 154
4Q554 180
4QNJ 173
4Q555 180
4QprEsther 183
5QI5 173
4QSd 156 1,2 192
I1,2 188
4Q26 1-5
llQEz 178
4Q371 165
1,3 168 llQNJ 178-192

üTHER ANCIENT WRITINGS

Aeschines Cyril of Alexandria

1,84 143 Thes. PG 75,248C 151
Thes. PG 75,628A 151
AI ha-nissim 201,202 Thes. PG 75,648B 151

Athanasius Demosthenes 19,208 143

Ar.2,20 151
Serm. fid. 35 151 Didache
8,2 141
Augustine 10,5 141
Ciu. dei 18,36 151
Didymus of Alexandria
Avesta Yast Trin.2,23 151
1,1.3 145
1 Enoch
Bacchylides 20 122
fr.14 Maehler 143 40 122
85-90 164
Chariton 89,59-90,38 164
3,4,13 143 89,73-73a 175
89,73-74a 169
Cyprian 89,74b 169
Ep.74,9 151 90,2-4 169
284 INDEXES

90,7 169 Nigr. 18 143

91,11-17 164 Pisc. 16-18 143
93,1-10 164 Pisc. 38 143
93,8-10 164 Pisc. 45-46 143
93,9 169, 175
Marcus Aurelius
Eusebius 5,33 143
E.th. 1,20,18 151 9,1,2 143

Exodus Rabbah Maximus of Tyre

15,6 196 10,1 142
46 26
Menander
Genesis Rabbah fr,421 Körte 143
2,4 198
97 195 Megillat Antiokhos 200, 201, 203
99 195
Megillat Taanit
Hennas Scholion for the 17th of Elul 200
92,2 143
Midrash Psalms
Herodotus 30,6 196
1,136,2 143
Mimnennus
Jcrome fr.2 GentiIi-Prato = fr.8 West 143
Prologus galeatus 202
Mishna
Josephus Chagiga 2:1 111
A.1. 5 ch.2 218 Megillah 4: 10 111
A.1. 11,33-57 149 Middot 1,6 194
A.I. 11,306-312 167 Menahot 8:2D-I 207
A.1. 11,321-324 167
A.I.12,318 194 Moabite Stone
A.1. 12,406412 195 1.9 20
A.I. 13,15 199 1.23 20

Josippon Old Persian Irnsc.

6,129-134 150 DB 4,36-40 144

Jubilees Papyri Graecae Magicae

1,14 169, 175 5,148-150 146
23,14-31 176
23,19b 175, 176 Pesiqta de Rav Kahana
5,18 195
Liber Genealogus 151
Pesiqta Rabbati
Lucian 2,1 196, 198, 199
CaI.5 143 2,6 196
CaI.lI 143 6,1 196
Deor. Conc. 13 141 6,5 196
 INDEXES 285

15,25 195 AZ 36b 197

BB 3b 197
Philostratus BQ 82b 195, 197
Im. 1,27 143 Megillah lla 199, 201
Menahot 77B 207
Pindar Qid 70b 197
fr.205 Maehler 141 Rosh Hashanah 18b 198
01.10,4-5 141 Rosh Hashanah 24b 199
Sanh 82a 197
Plato Shabbat 21b 198
Crito 48a 142 Taanit 18b 197

Pliny Talmud Yerushalmi

Hist. Nat. 11,103 98 Megillah 1,6, 70c 195, 197
Taan II,13,66a 195
Plutarchus
De Is. et Os. 47 144 Tanhuma
Wayehi 14 195
Ps. Augustine
Spec. (CSEL 12,359) 151 Targum to Song of Songs
6,7-8 201
Samaritan Pentateuch
Ex 23,19b 11 Testament of Levi
7,2 167
Seder Olam Rabbah 17 173
30 194
Testament of Moses
Sophoc1es 3,4-4,9 169
fr.955 Radt 143 4,5-5,6 169
4,8 169
Stobaeus 4,9 169
Ec!. 3,11 143
Ugarit I AB 1,1,11 95
Tacitus Ugarit 11 AB IV,I,19 95
Germ. 22 136 Ugarit V 1.85.117 95
Hist. 2,49 136 Ugarit VI 95

Talmud Bavli Virgil

AZ 8b-9a 197 Aen. 5,500 136
PLATES
 '"

Fragment 1
cm

YII" I""11I"I"" Y""I"llf"" h, ,J

Fragment 2

3 Fragment 4-

Fragment 3

Platc I E. Tüv , 4QLev d , Frags. I - 4 PAM 43.046

 cm

f""I""l" "I ""Y"" I""f"" I""i

Fragment 1

6
Fragmen t 2

Fragment 3 - 7 Fragment 4

Platc 2 E. Tüv, 4QLev d , Unidentified frags. 1 - 7 PAM 43.046;

Frag. 4 PAM 42.163 + 42.748
 ..J
~ ~
3\-
~ n ~
z
.,
':t: ~
@
r
'"0;
0'>

e")
'<I'
+
e")
0'>
0;
e")
'<I'

::E
~
c...
~
Ö
Ü

-t--= ~
C)
-.
-.
--
~ c<"i
-- v
öl
;- - i5:
~
-
=
. . .--=--
E -
u
..... 0-=
-
 r -""
I

, ~\,~ \'!:11~\'.4\'1 ~~.

cm

1"" I"" I"" I" "f" "I ""T"',I ""i

Platc 4. llQ NJ Col.-VIII, PAM 43.999 © KNAW.
 ·-

~'l!l ~1 U\l ,~ ,
..
~ ~~ ~,.".,~

u
..

E
cm ~
...';:tlA .'

0-=
=
=
1""I""I""I ""i, "'I" "T"" I" ,,1
Plate 5. llQ NJ Cols -VII-VI, PAM 43.999 + 43.998 © KNAW.
 cm

f"" I"" 11 111111 1If'",I" "f" "I,, ,,1

Plale 6. llQ NJ Col. -V, PAM 43.998 © KNAW.

 /
· ."

~ )~~~~,~
Ittl~ ~~~l\ ~y~
~ ,-(\,~\-~~ ~~ x~
~y~ ~~~ ~A.Y'\!S'f- •

'-«l~~~~'

u
E
cm

0-=
1IIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIf

=
=
Platc 7. llQ NJ Col. -IV, PAM 43.996 © KNAW.
 ~~ ~~b'\ ~14 ~_ ~ tSl~ ,1 ~1 ~~, »;:1'1((;

~~~"tM~ 'f~'~ N' w,~'\ ~'\.'l"\'f" ~A~ ~ t

~'O'\ NY'~ "frt ~f~' to(-'l1\'.V
tl ~~~ ~~'t7~
~!) t\\"\,~... ~ N.",J, '11..1' ~
}J."~y,J
\'\l !l,,\»~ N"'iJ.!:S,\ H
~~

u
cm

E
~+,. -..,~~~

0-=
1111I 111111, lllIlI llfl llllll llrlll lllll ,i

-==
U
Ci

-.
-.
Plate 8. llQ NJ Col. -III, PAM 43.995 © KNAW .
~
01
--
 ~ ~ t~
~1fl
~.~
-:c ~ ~
t
~
J:f:t: «
z
::.::

i~.r
@

-t--= s.&\ 0>

0
0
~
~
+
~
~ 0>
-- 0>

- ...
C")

~ ~
-- «
0-
, .....,-
.---=- t" ~ .. ~
E =
u
- .. tt: ~ ö'"

1~ 1
0-=
~~:t.: ~ .. ü
~
t;~ ~
Ci
....,
....,
~
u

~
~
v-- ii:
 SUPPLEMENTS TO VETUS TEST AMENTUM

2. POPE, M.H. EI in the Ugaritie texts. 1955. ISBN 90 04 04000 5

3. Wisdom in Israel and in the Aneient Near East. Presented to Harold Henry
Rowley by the Editorial Board of Vetus Testamentum in celebration of his
65th birthday, 24 March 1955. Edited by M. NOTH and D. WINTON THoMAs.
2nd reprint of the first (1955) ed. 1969. ISBN 90 04 02326 7
4. Volume du Congres [International pour I'etude de I'Ancien Testament].
Strasbourg 1956. 1957. ISBN 90 04 02327 5
8. BERNHARDT, K.-H. Das Problem der alt-orientalischen Königsideologie im Alten
Testament. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Geschichte der
Psalmenexegese dargestellt und kritisch gewürdigt. 1961.
ISBN 90 04 02331 3
9. Congress Volurne, Bonn 1962. 1963. ISBN 900402332 1
11. DONNER, H. Israel unter den Völkern. Die Stellung der klassischen Propheten
des 8. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. zur Aussenpolitik der Könige von Israel und
Juda. 1964. ISBN 90 04 02334 8
12. REIDER, J. An Index 10 Aquilla. Completed and revised by N. Turner. 1966.
ISBN 90 04 02335 6
13. ROTH, W.M.W. Numerical sayings in the Old Testament. A form-critical study.
1965. ISBN 90 04 02336 4
14. ORLINSKY, H .M. Studies on the second part 0] Ihe Book 0] Isaiah. - The so-called
'Servant of the Lord' and 'Suffering Servant' in Second Isaiah.-Snaith,
N. H. Isaiah 40-66. A study of the teaching of the Second Isaiah and its conse-
quences. Repr. with additions and corrections. 1977. ISBN 90 04 05437 5
15. Volume du Congres [International pour l'etude de l'Ancien Testament].
Geneve 1965. 1966. ISBN 90 04 02337 2
17. Congress Volume, Rome 1968. 1969. ISBN 90 04 02339 9
19. THoMPsoN, R.J. Moses and the Law in a century 0] criticism since Gra] 1970.
ISBN 90 04 02341 0
20. REDFORD, D. B. A study 0] the biblical story 0]Joseph. 1970. ISBN 900402342 9
21. AHLSTRÖM, G. W. Joel and the temple cult 0]Jerusalem. 1971. ISBN 90 04 02620 7
22. CongreJS Volume, Uppsala 1971. 1972. ISBN 90 04 03521 4
23. Studies in the religion 0] aneient Israel. 1972. ISBN 90 04 03525 7
24. SCHOORS, A. I am God your Saviour. A form-critical study of the main genres
in Is. xl-Iv. 1973. ISBN 90 04 03792 2
25. ALLEN, L.C. The Greek Chronicles. The relation of the Septuagint land II
Chronicles to the Massoretic text. Part 1. The translator' s craft. 1974.
ISBN 90 04 03913 9
26. Studies on prophecy. A collection of twelve papers. 1974. ISBN 90 04 03877 9
27. ALLEN, L.C. The Greek Chronicles. Part 2. Textual criticism. 1974.
ISBN 90 04 03933 3
28. Congress Volume, Edinburgh 1974. 1975. ISBN 90 04 04321 7
29. Congress Volume, Göttingen 1977. 1978. ISBN 90 04 05835 4
30. EMERTON, J.A. (ed.). Studies in the historical books of the Old Testament.
1979. ISBN 9004060170
 SUPPLEMENTS TO VETUS TEST AMENTUM

ISSN 0083-5889

31 . MEREDINO, R. P. Der Erste und der Letzte. Eine Untersuchung von J es 40-48.
1981. ISBN 90 04 06199 1
32. EMERTON, J.A. (ed.). Gongress Vienna 1980. 1981. ISBN 90 04 06514 8
33. KOEN1G, J. L 'hermeneutique analogique du Judai'sme antique d'apres les temoim tex-
tuefs d'Isai"e. 1982. ISBN 90 04 06762 0
34. BARsTAD, H.M. The religious polemies oJ Amos. Studies in the preaching of
Amos ii 7B-8, iv 1-13, v 1-27, vi 4-7, viii 14. 1984. ISBN 90 04 07017 6
35. KRAsovEc, J. Antithetie structure in Biblical Hebrew poetry. 1984.
ISBN 90 04 07244 6
36. EMERTON, J.A. (ed.). Gongress Volume, Salamanca 1983. 1985.
ISBN 90 04 07281 0
37. LEMcHE, N.P. Early Israel. Anthropological and historical studies on the
Israelite society before the monarchy. 1985. ISBN 90 04 07853 3
38. ;'\[IELSEN, K. Incense in Ancient Israel. 1986. ISBN 90 04 07702 2
39. PARDEE, D. Ugaritic and Hehrew poetic parallelism. A trial cut. 1988.
ISBN 90 04 08368 5
40. EMERTON, J.A. (cd.). Gongress Volume, Jerusalem 1986. 1988.
ISBN 90 04 08499 1
41. EMERTON, J.A. (ed.). Studies in the Pentateuch. 1990. ISBN 90 04 09195 5
42. McKENZIE, S.L. The Trouble with Kings. The composition of the Book of
Kings in the Deu teronomistic History . 1991. ISBN 90 04 09402 4
43. EMERTON, J.A. (ed.). Gongress Volume, Leuven 1989. 1991.
ISBN 90 04 09398 2
44. HAAK, R.D. Habakkuk. 1992. ISBN 9004095063
45. BEYERLIN, W. Im Licht der Traditionen. Psalm LXVII und CXV. Ein Ent-
wicklungszusammenhang. 1992. ISB:\T 90 04 09635 3
46. MEIER, S.A. Speaking oJ Speaking. Marking direct discourse in the Hebrew
Bible. 1992. ISBN 90 04 09602 7
47. KESSLER, R. Staat und Gesellschaft im vorexilischenJuda. Vom 8. Jahrhundert bis
zum Exil. 1992. ISBN 90 04 09646 9
48. AUFFRET, P. Voyez de vos yeux. Etude structurclle de vingt psaumes, dont le
psaume 119. 1993. ISBN 90 04 097074
49. GARciA MARriNEZ, F., A. HILHORST AND C..J. LABGSCHAGNE (eds.). The Scrip-
tures and the Scrolls. Stuclies in honour of A.S. van der Woude on the occasion
of his 65th birthday. 1992. ISBN 900409746 5