AN I N T R O D U C T I O N TO

THE BI BLE
Sacred Texts and Im perial Contexts

David M. C arr and C olleen M. C onway

(fiWILEY-BLACKWELL
A Jo h n W iley & S o n s, Ltd., Publication
 IN M O N A R C H A L ISRAEL

C hapter O utline

Chapter Overview 54
Imagining Early Monarchal Israel 55
The Rise of the Monarchy and Resistance to It 57
Influence of Ancient Empires on Early Israel’s Monarchy
and Writings 61
Echoes of Near Eastern Royal Theology in the Royal
and Zion Psalms 64
Echoes of Ancient Empires in Writings Attributed to Solomon 69
Uncovering Echoes of Past Empires Elsewhere in the Bible 74
Focus Text: The Garden of Eden Story 78
Conclusion 82
Chapter Three Review 83
Resources for Further Study 84
 -------------

C H A PT E R O V ERV IEW

his chapter outlines the huge changes in Israelite culture that led

T to the writing o f the first books o f the Hebrew Bible. Up to this

point, Israelite village culture had many and varied oral traditions. Texts
were something that empires and some smaller city-states had. But by
the tenth century - the 900s bce - the Israelites are being ruled by a
Davidic monarchy based in Jerusalem. Moreover, this new Israelite state
appears to have modeled itself on the older empires that preceded it,
dominating nearby regions.
This is the time when scribes in early Israel began to develop the
very first corpus o f written Hebrew texts, often modeling their new
com positions on yet older writings from Egypt and Mesopotamia. The
scribes created something like a “bible before our Bible.” But as we will
see, this “bible” was still a long way from the Old Testament as we have
it now. We can find traces o f this shorter, older “bible before our Bible”
in several texts now in the Old Testament that “echo” written traditions
o f more ancient cultures.
 Imagining Early Monarchal Israel
O nce again, we sta rt w ith an im aginary reconstruction o f the context in w hich these
biblical trad itio n s were w ritten. O u r sources are few, varied, an d disputed. A lthough
the Bible describes Israel as a w orld pow er at th e tim e o f D avid an d S olom on, archae­
ologists have n o t succeeded in finding extensive rem ains o f th eir kingdom s. Some
even suspect th a t the Bible’s entire p icture o f th eir glory is a fictional creation o f an
Israelite golden age. This book, however, takes an o th er perspective. Certainly, th e stories
su rro u n d in g D avid an d S olom on grew over tim e, an d th eir rep u ta tio n was enhanced.
Nevertheless, a com bination o f archaeology and a critical reading o f biblical texts
suggests th a t Israel u n d er D avid an d S olom on did develop th e beginnings o f a city-state
m onarchy, a m onarchy th a t apparently included short-lived d o m in a tio n o f som e
neighboring nations as well. T he follow ing im aginary reco n stru ctio n is based o n this
co m b ination o f archaeological an d biblical evidence.
O u r jo u rn ey takes us back to an o th er hilltop in ancient C anaan, this tim e M o u n t
Zion, a hilltop to th e south o f the h eartlan d o f trib al Israel. G enerally speaking,
“Z ion” and the city associated w ith it, “Jerusalem ,” are synonym ous in th e Bible.
W h at is less well know n is th a t Jerusalem h ad a long h isto ry as a city before D avid
conquered it and m ade it the capital o f his kingdom . T his pre-D avidic city h ad its ow n
cu ltural an d political trad itio n s, som e o f w hich m ay have been ad ap ted by D avid and
his successors in th e process o f setting up th eir fledgling kingdom . For exam ple, the
Bible contains a tantalizing suggestion th a t the pre-Israelite (Jebusite) in h ab itan ts
o f the city already had a belief in Jerusalem ’s invulnerability. W h en D avid laid siege
to Jerusalem , th e Jebusites are said to have told D avid th a t “you will n o t com e in,
even th e b lin d an d lam e will w ard you o ff” (2 Sam 5:6). Such a claim th a t Jerusalem
was u n conquerable anticipates later biblical Z ion th eo lo g y - th a t is, theology ab o u t
Jerusalem ’s specialness an d invulnerability - th a t we will see in som e o f Israel’s psalm s
an d o th e r literature.
Let us retu rn now to im agining th e Jerusalem o f later, S olom onic, tim es. As it tu rn e d
out, th e Jebusites were w rong. D avid conquered Jerusalem by stealth an d m ade it the
capital o f his kingdom u n itin g Judah in th e so u th an d Israel in th e n o rth . In o u r im ag­
ining exercise, we visit Jerusalem at the tim e o f S olom on, D avid’s son an d successor.
By this tim e, Jerusalem has becom e the center o f a fledgling m in i-em p ire. N o t only
does th e city have its ancient wall an d trad itio n s, b u t Solom on has b u ilt a new palace
for the king an d a tem ple to Yahweh (see Figure 3.1). T he tem ple contains th e “ark o f
th e covenant,” a sym bol o f older Israel’s tribal-E xodus god.
Solom on, the king, serves as b o th high priest an d co m m an d er o f the army. Below
him is a sm all b u t expanding class o f priestly, royal, and m ilitary officials. This is a new
form o f leadership, show ing an evolution u n d e r D avid from tribal stru ctu res to foreign
m odels o f m onarchy, particularly as seen in Egypt. S olom on’s co u rt bears a strong
resem blance to th e Egyptian royal court, and m any o f its p ositions are filled by th e sons
o f officials w ho served in D avid’s court. Indeed, one o f S olom on’s scribes m ay even
have had an Egyptian father, D avid’s scribe “Shisha,” w hose n am e is quite sim ilar to
56 Echo es of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

F ig u re 3.1 Artist’s reconstruction of Solomon’s Jerusalem. The Temple is on the upper right, next down
is the palace, and then the citadel of David with a stepped-stone structure supporting it.

the Egyptian w ord for “scribe.” These officials and those u n d e r th em ad m in istrated the
com plex kingdom . T hey were th e glue th a t held th is b ro ad k ingdom o f varied tribes
an d territories together.
This natio n , indeed this m in i-em p ire, h ad m any provisions for co n tin u ity across
space and tim e. W here trib al cu ltu re h ad charism atic leaders such as D eb o rah w ho
galvanized the people in a tim e o f crisis, this k in d o f m o n arch y achieved political
stability th ro u g h an ongoing royal dynasty. W here trib a l cu ltu re d ep en d ed on tribes
volunteering to jo in o thers in resisting enem ies, this m o n arch y h ad a standing army.
A nd w here groups in trib al culture shared ever-fluid oral trad itio n s, this m onarchy
resem bled o th e r such m onarchies in using w ritten texts to reinforce an d standardize
oral m em ory. These w ritten texts were n o t accessible to everyone in a largely n o n ­
literate society, b u t they p ro v id ed an essential w ay to educate th e new ru lin g class for
this m ore expansive realm . By m em o rizin g a specific collection o f w ritten texts, youths
prep arin g to be leaders learned a co m m o n w orldview th a t persisted across space an d
tim e. D avid’s and S olom on’s scribes are th e pro b ab le au th o rs o f th e first such collection
o f H ebrew , w ritten literary-theological texts.
 Echoes of Em pire in M on a r ch a l Israel 57

The Rise of the Monarchy and Resistance to It

* 0 /
READING EXERCISE
1 Sam uel 8 -1 2 , T he readings above are narratives ab o u t th e rise o f kingship to ld centuries
16-20, 31; 2 Sam uel after the events they describe. T he au th o rs o f these narratives reveal m uch
2 -1 0 and 1 Kings ab o u t th e ir values in the different reasons they give for w hy a m onarchy
1-10. rose in Israel. As you read 1 Sam uel 8 -1 2 m ake a list o f the different
reasons given for th e rise o f th e m o n arch y (including chapter an d verse)
an d n ote any o th e r clues you can find to w h eth er th e au th o rs o f these
texts approved o r disapproved o f the m onarchy. E xtrapolating from these
narratives, do you th in k th e au th o rs o f these texts th o u g h t th e m onarchy
was a good idea?

Before looking at the earliest H ebrew texts, w e need to appreciate th e city-state context
in w hich they w ere created. In C h ap ter 2 we saw how Israel em erged as a loose asso­
ciation o f villages organized into tribes, settled largely in th e n o rth e rn hill co u n try o f
Palestine. T hey were a “people,” n o t a city-state o r natio n . T h eir lim ited resources and
social organization m ade it difficult for th em to resist raids by n eig h b o rin g tribes o r
attem pts to d o m in ate th em by nearby city-states. Aside from th e rise o f te m p o rary
leaders in tim es o f crisis, “judges” in the Bible, there w ere n o elite classes. T he people
shared co m m o n access to the orally tran sm itte d “cultural m e m o ry ” th a t helped identify
th em as Israelites.
T he b o o k o f 1 Sam uel, w ritten h u n d red s o f years after th e p erio d it n arrates, gives
m any explanations for why this tribal existence u n d e r judges cam e to an end: the
people requested a king because Sam uel’s sons were co rru p t, o r because th ey w anted
to im itate o th e r nations, o r because they w anted a h u m a n king instead o f Yahweh
as king (see the exercise at th e outset o f this section). N evertheless, th e explanation
for kingship th a t m o st scholars find com pelling is th e following: th e Israelites accepted
kingship because it was the only form o f social organization th a t was centralized enough
to repel the Philistine invasions in to th e hill c o u n try o f central Palestine. T he Bible
records clashes betw een Israelites and Philistines in stories ab o u t Sam son (Judges 14-16),
the tim e o f Sam uel (1 Sam 4:1 —7:1), Saul (1 Sam uel 1 3 -3 1 ), an d D avid (2 Sam uel 5
an d 8). Saul, a m e m b er o f th e trib e o f B enjam in, was an o in ted as “king” to repel th e
Philistines; he really was little m ore th a n a w arlord. H e d id n o t develop a city capital
o r a professional army, and he achieved only lim ited success before being killed in
b attle w ith th e Philistines, along w ith his heir Jonathan (1 Sam uel 31//2 C hronicles 10).
Saul’s leadership was n o t th e so rt o f “kingship” needed to repel th e Philistines. It was
really m ore o f a “chieftainship.”
58 Echoes o f E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

Kingship w ould com e u n d er D avid an d especially his heir, Solom on. W ithin the m uch
later biblical texts, D avid is rem em b ered as a paradoxical m ix. O n th e one han d , several
texts depict him as a king “faithful” to Yahweh (e.g. 1 Kgs 3:6). O n th e o th e r han d , he
is flawed enough to seduce an officer’s wife, B athsheba, an d send h er h u sb an d to certain
d eath in o rd er to be able to m a rry h er (2 Sam uel 1 1 -1 2 ). In the b ro ad er schem e o f
things, however, D avid appears to have been an ex trao rd in arily gifted m ilitary co m ­
m an d er w ho to o k th e first steps o f establishing a m o n arch y th a t w ould last over four
h u n d re d years.

Timeline: Rise of the Monarchy

Saul’s chieftainship 1025-1010* bce

D avid’s reign 1010-970

In H ebron 1010-1002
In Jerusalem 1002-970

(*Note this date range is p articularly u n certain because o f incom plete preserva­
tion o f 1 Sam 13:1.)

D avid started as an officer in Saul’s Israelite army, an d he was so m ilitarily successful

against the Philistines th a t he h ad to flee Saul’s jealous w ra th (see 1 Sam uel 16-29).
Later, w hen Saul died, D avid ru led his tribe, Judah, for a few years from th e Judean
tow n o f H ebron, w hile Saul’s son Eshbaal ru led Israel (2 Sam uel 2 -3 ). T hen, w hen
Eshbaal was assassinated, the Israelite leaders an o in ted D avid as king over them , so th a t
D avid becam e king o f b o th Judah an d Israel (2 Sam 4:1—5:5). O ne o f th e first things
he did as ru ler o f b o th peoples was to start a series o f cam paigns against th e Philistines
th a t perm an en tly ended th eir th reat to Judah an d Israel (2 Sam 5 :17-25; 8:1; see also
2 Sam 21:15-22).
Yet D avid did m u ch m ore th an defeat the Philistines. In co n trast to (w arlord) Saul,
D avid in tro d u ced societal changes associated w ith tru e kingship: establishm ent o f a
state based in a w alled city, o rganization o f a professional army, an d enforcem ent o f
taxes o n the people to su p p o rt the fortified city (o r cities) an d army. First, D avid cap­
tu re d th e Jebusite city o f Jerusalem , by stealth, an d m ade it th e capital o f his new
k ingdom (2 Sam uel 5 :6 -1 6 ). T his was a politically sm a rt m ove for a Judean king
claim ing au th o rity over Israel. Jerusalem was n o t identified w ith th e so u th ern tribe o f
Judah the way th a t H ebron was. Second, D avid solidified Jerusalem ’s claim as the new
capital o f “Israel” by b rin g in g in to it th e ark o f the covenant, an object sacred to all the
Israelite tribes (2 Sam uel 6). T hird, he achieved ad d itio n al m ilitary success, subduing
 Echo es of Em pire in M o n a rchal Israel 59

neighboring kingdom s such as M oab, E dom , A m m on, and even D am ascus (w hich was
allied w ith A m m on; 2 Sam uel 8 ,1 0 -1 2 ). This allowed h im to pay m em bers o f his arm y
w ith land grants and su p p o rt his fledgling state w ith trib u te from n eighboring groups.
Fourth an d finally, he started to b u ild lon g er-term city-state structures: h e started plans
for a tem ple (2 Sam 24:18), solidified ties w ith neighboring groups th ro u g h m arriage
alliances (2 Sam 3 :2 -5 ), developed a professional army, an d p rep ared for form al taxa­
tion th ro u g h instituting a census o f th e people (2 Sam 2 4 :1 -9 ). H e even appears to
have followed Egyptian m odels in developing a royal court, eventually one th a t included
a position for “forced labor” o f his citizens to help w ith fortifying th e co u n try (2 Sam
20:23-6; com pare w ith 2 Sam 8:16 -1 8 ). M ap 3.1 surveys his kingdom .
D avid’s successor, S olom on, w ent yet fu rth e r in developing a city-state based in
Jerusalem. After being p u t in pow er by a v irtual coup d ’etat im p lem en ted by his m other,
B athsheba (w orking in concert w ith several o f D avid’s close associates; see 1 Kings 1 -2 ),
Solom on began building a full-fledged ancient N ear Eastern city-state. H e co n tin u ed
and expanded the royal cabinet, ap p o in tin g sons o f D avid’s officials to several crucial
positions, and adding som e new positions, again along the Egyptian m odel. H e expanded
the arm y and added chariots. H e m ade m arriage alliances w ith foreign kings. H e started
lucrative trad e exchanges w ith Tyre, A rabia, an d others. H e engaged in m ajo r co n stru c­
tio n projects in Jerusalem and several fortress cities, H azor, Gezer, an d possibly M egiddo
(see M ap 2.1, p. 42). M ost im portantly, draw ing heavily o n th e m aterial an d technical
resources o f the Tyrian king H iram , S olom on b u ilt the Jerusalem Tem ple for Yahweh
and a palace for himself.
To do this, Solom on required significant resources. H e divided the k in g d o m into
12 districts, each w ith a governor and each responsible for providing for th e royal
apparatus for one m o n th . M any scholars see this 12-district system, organized in
correspondence w ith th e lu n a r m o n th cycle, as the b eg inning o f th e idea th a t Israel
o riginated as 12 tribes. O nly later was this 12-trib e idea projected back into
Israel’s earlier history - th e tim e o f the judges an d before. T he m o st im p o rta n t shift
for village-culture Israelites was th a t they now h ad a new b u rd e n to ad d to th e struggle
for everyday existence. N ot only d id they need to find a way to provide for th eir
kin each year, b u t they also h ad to provide substantial resources to th e king an d his
city-state.
N o t all Israelites were h appy w ith th e changes th a t cam e w ith D avid’s an d S olom on’s
kingship. T hough surely they were glad to see th e P hilistine th rea t contained, m any
perceived D avid and especially S olom on as Judean versions o f th e oppressive kings they
had ju st defeated. This led to several rebellions, m ainly centered in th e n o rth , w here
people in the h eartlan d o f ancient tribal “Israel” were th e least h appy w ith being ruled
by Judah. O ne was led by A bsalom , D avid’s ow n son; an o th er was led by Sheba, a leader
from the Israelite n o rth ; an d th e final and successful on e was led by Jeroboam , w ho
will be discussed m ore in C hapter 4. W hat is im p o rta n t for o u r p urposes now is an
appreciation th a t the leaders in this early m on arch y h ad to con ten d w ith o p p o n en ts,
particularly those associated w ith th e Israelite n o rth , w ho d o u b te d th e benefits o f this
new m onarchy. T he m onarchy was a m ajo r new form o f co m m u n al life, w ith m any
foreign elem ents, th a t involved m any costs as well as benefits.
60 E choes of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

Map 3.1 Areas ruled and dominated by David and Solomon. Redrawn from
Yohanan Aharoni and Michael Avi-Yonah (eds.), The Macmillan Bible Atlas (revised edition).
New York: Macmillan, 1977, map 104.
 Echoes of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 61

Influence of Ancient Empires on Early Israel’s

Monarchy and Writings

D avid an d Solom on d id n o t start from scratch w hen they started to develop the
Israelite m onarchy and associated Jerusalem ite city-state. T hey w ere ad o p tin g a m o re
ancient social form th a t was know n elsewhere. After all, city-states h ad been aro u n d in
M esopotam ia, Syria, Egypt, an d even Palestine from th e th ird m illen n iu m onw ard.
Indeed, as m entioned before, Jerusalem itself was the site o f a small, pre-Israelite, Jebusite
city-state w hich h ad once been d o m in a te d by Egypt. T here are n u m e ro u s signs th a t
D avid an d Solom on drew deeply on older Egyptian an d o th e r m odels in b u ild in g the
m onarchy in Jerusalem: th e m ake-up o f th eir royal court, th e m odels used for co n stru c­
tio n o f tem ple and palace, etc. These are n o n -tex tu al “echoes o f em p ire” seen in the
em ergent D avidic m onarchy in Jerusalem .
Yet there is an o th er sort o f “echo o f em pire” to be discussed here, an d th a t is th e
way som e biblical texts appear to echo pre-Israelite texts th a t w ere used in th e m uch
o lder em pires o f M esopotam ia an d Egypt. O ne thing th a t d istinguished m any ancient
m onarchies from the tribal groups su rro u n d in g th em was th eir use o f w ritten texts,
including th e sorts o f texts fo u n d in the Bible: w isdom sayings, psalm s, m yths, and
stories (see Figure 3.2). These w ritten texts w ere a fo rm o f cu ltural m em o ry like th e
oral trad itio n s th a t co n tin u ed to exist. N evertheless, there were im p o rta n t differences.
M ost im portantly, th e relative firm ness o f w ritten trad itio n s m ad e th em good tools
for shaping elites across tim e and across space. W ritten texts do n o t change as readily
as oral trad itio n s do. This was im p o rta n t in city-states an d em pires, w hich spanned
large distances an d join ed disparate groups together. A n em pire o r even a centralized
city-state could b in d tog eth er its different parts by m aking sure th a t its leaders all
learned w riting and m em orized th e sam e ed ucational texts.
O u r best exam ples o f such literary education com e from Egypt an d M esopotam ia,
m u ch larger civilizations w hose texts are b e tte r preserved (in Egypt because o f clim ate,
in M esopotam ia because they used clay tablets). T he evidence from Egypt and
M esopotam ia shows ho w students learned in fam ily-based schools, often learning to
read texts from either th e ir ow n fathers o r teachers w h o m th ey called “father.” A ncient
ed ucation in Egypt an d M esopotam ia follow ed a sim ilar p attern , a p attern probably
co m m o n across the ancient w orld. S tudents started by learning to w rite and read basic
sym bols. T he next step was m em orizing and reciting basic “w isd o m ” in stru ctio n s on
how to live, and the final an d m o st advanced stage was in tern alizin g an d p erfo rm in g
o th er types o f texts, such as royal hym ns o r stories o f creation an d flood. C areful
analysis o f stu d e n t exercises from M esopotam ia, such as th a t seen in Figure 3.3, has
allowed scholars to see how stud en ts in these cultures w ere ta u g h t to m em o rize th eir
culture’s texts line by line. O nly a few in any ancient society h ad tim e to acquire such
know ledge, b u t it was an im p o rta n t m eans by w hich Egypt, M esopotam ia, an d o th e r
cultures train ed fu tu re leaders.
This back g ro u n d from the cultures o f Egypt an d M esopotam ia is im p o rta n t because
th eir ed ucational-literary systems w ere used as m odels for th e m onarchies o f Syro-
62 E c h o e s o f E m p ire in M o n a r c h a l I s r a e l

Figure 3.2 Scribe standing before the king of a small neighboring kingdom
with a scroll in his hand, dating from about a century after David and Solomon.
The image shows the prestige attached to scribal writing even in the small
kingdoms of the area.

Palestine in the centuries ju st before Israel em erged. T he kingdom o f D avid an d Solom on

was too sm all to develop its ow n b ra n d -n e w co u n te rp a rt to the massive literatures
o f those ancient em pires. T h u s w hen scribes began w ritin g the first H ebrew texts in
th e tim e o f D avid an d S olom on (see Figures 3.4 an d 3.5 for scribal exercises from th at
perio d ), it seems th a t they d id not focus o n creating textual versions o f earlier Israelite
o ral trad itio n s ab o u t ancestors, exodus, o r th e like. Instead, th e earliest au th o rs o f
H ebrew literature were dep en d en t o n foreign m odels for literary education an d im itated
foreign texts from Egypt an d M esopotam ia. Why? Perhaps because in creating Israel’s
first w ritten literature these early Judean scribes w ere m o st interested in adapting
earlier exam ples o f such w ritings (all o f w hich were foreign), rath e r th an tran sfo rm in g
properly oral trad itio n s from the Israelite n o rth . So th ey w rote H ebrew versions o f the
 E choes of Em pire in M o na r ch a l Israel 63

sorts o f texts used elsewhere to educate leaders fo r th eir em er­

gent m onarchy: creation an d flood m yths, hym ns ab o u t the
king, instructions on p ro p er living, etc.
In this chapter we will look at tw o types o f texts th a t show
particularly close links to th e m onarchy and som e reliance
on foreign m odels as well: royal an d Z ion psalm s. T hough
som e o f these texts are attrib u ted to D avid o r Solom on (see
the Miscellaneous Box below on “Labels (e.g. ‘Psalm o f D avid’):
W hat T hey (D on’t) Tell Us”), we ca n n o t be sure th a t all com e
from th a t tim e. To som e extent, because th e first m onarchal
scribes w ere particularly d ep en d en t on foreign m odels (and
later scribes often h ad a m ore com plicated perspective on
foreign influence), one possible indicator th a t a biblical
text is early is a set o f specific echoes o f foreign texts an d
traditions. Nevertheless, w henever one dates th e texts to
Figure 3.3 Student exercise tablet where the
be discussed here, a study o f th em in relationship to th eir
teacher wrote a couple of lines of an
non-biblical co u n terp arts can teach us m u ch ab o u t how these
educational text on the top half and the
biblical texts were used an d w h at m ade th em special.
student copied below.

Figure 3.4 Letters inscribed into the surface of a stone, with overlay indicating their shape.
The stone was found embedded in a wall from the tenth century b c e .
64 E cho es of Em pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

Echoes of Near Eastern Royal Theology

in the Royal and Zion Psalms

O*
EXERCISE
Read th e follow ing (royal) psalm s an d m ake a list o f
ideas th a t com e up tw o o r m o re tim es in them : 2 Sam
2 3 :1 -7 ; Psalm s 2, 21, 72, an d 110. Include citations in
y o u r notes o f w here each idea occurred. T hen read
the follow ing (Z ion) psalm s an d list ideas th a t occur
tw o o r m o re tim es in them : Pss 9, 15, 46, an d 48.
Finally, how do all these texts co n trast w ith th e values
im plicit in th e narratives ab o u t the rise o f kingship
in 1 Sam uel 8 -1 2 ? M ake a list o f sim ilarities and
(especially) differences.

Figure 3.5 The “Gezer Calendar.” This may O ne o f th e m ain em phases in th e literature o f ancient em pires
be a school exercise from the time of Solomon. was th e m onarchy. For exam ple, E gyptian e n th ro n e m en t texts
It lists what was done in the months of the describe th e new king (P h arao h ) receiving a d o cu m en t on
agricultural year of ancient Canaan. w hich was w ritten his th ro n e nam es, clim axing w ith the throne
nam e th a t m ark ed his status as the o nly b egotten son o f
th e sun god, Re. Tem ple reliefs show the process by w hich Re
conceived th e king, n o t th ro u g h intercourse, b u t th ro u g h
spreading his arom a over th e king’s m other. By th e en d o f the process Re equip p ed the
king w ith all he needed to rule th e w orld in Re’s place, proclaim ing:

Son o f m y body, beloved, lo rd o f th e righteousness [M aat] o f Re, w hose b o d y I have

m ade w ith m e in th e palace, I give you all life an d w ellbeing, to ap p ear as the king
o f u p p er and low er Egypt on th e th ro n e o f H orus.

M eanw hile, w e also have hym ns used in E gyptian ed u catio n th a t ta u g h t students to

celebrate the E gyptian king’s pow er to van q u ish w ro n g d o in g an d establish prosperity.
T he follow ing one focuses o n th e P h arao h M erneptah:

Be glad o f heart, th e entire land! T he good tim es have com e. A lo rd - life, p ro sp er­
ity, health - is given in all lands, an d n o rm ality has re tu rn e d to its place. T he king
o f U pper and Lower Egypt, th e lo rd o f m illions o f years, great o f kingship like
H o r u s . . . he w ho bestow s happiness o n Egypt, th e son o f Re, m o st co m p eten t o f
any king, M ern ep tah - life, prosperity, health.
 E choes of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 65

All you w ho are righteous, com e th a t you m ay see! R ight has b an ish ed w rong.
Evildoers have fallen on their faces. T he oppressors are ignored. (ANET 378, adapted)

Sim ilar them es appear in the royal literature o f ancien t M esopotam ia. For exam ple, we
find the following proclam ation to the king in an ancient Babylonian coronation ritual:

M ay A ssur an d N inlil, th e lords o f your crow n, set y o u r crow n on y o u r head for a

h u n d re d years! M ay y o u r foot in E kur an d y o u r h an d s stretched tow ard th e breast
o f Assur, your G od, be pleasing! M ay y o u r p riesth o o d an d th e p riesth o o d o f y o u r
sons be pleasing to Assur, your god! W ith your straig h t scepter w iden y o u r land!
M ay A ssur give you authority, obedience, concord, justice an d peace! (Translation:
Livingstone, 472)

Royal texts from b o th an cient M esopotam ia an d Egypt em phasized th e choosing o f the

king by the high god o f the p an th eo n , th e king’s ap p o in tm e n t as the highest au th o rity
an d priest o f th e land, his overcom ing o f all enem ies in th e nam e o f the god, a n d his
bestow ing o f justice and peace o n th e land th ro u g h his rule. Together, these an d o th er
them es com prise w hat is m e an t here by royal theology.

Labels (e.g. “Psalm of David”): What They (Don’t) Tell Us

T he attentive reader will notice th a t m an y o f th e Similarly, labels th a t assign th e Song o f Songs,

texts to be discussed in this chapter are attrib u ted Ecclesiastes, and m ost parts o f Proverbs to Solom on
to D avid and S olom on. For exam ple, th e b o o k probably do n o t m ean th a t Solom on w rote all these
o f Proverbs starts w ith th e follow ing label: “The texts. Instead, som e m ay have been w ritten at the
proverbs o f S olom on, son o f D avid, king o f Israel.” tim e o f S olom on, w hile others m ay ju st be p a rt o f
From this label we m ig h t conclude th a t everything a b ro ad e r stream o f “S olom onic” trad itio n ex ten d ­
in th e b o o k o f Proverbs was w ritten by S olom on. ing even to apocryphal texts, such as th e W isdom
N evertheless, we m u st be careful a b o u t how m uch o f Solom on.
w eight we p u t o n such ancient attrib u tio n s o f T h at said, th e Bible’s a ttrib u tio n o f texts to
au thorship. A ncient texts could be attrib u ted to figures such as D avid o r S olom on can still be
au thors for a variety o f reasons - to contin u e a significant. For on e thing, th ey are the first Judean
stream o f trad itio n associated w ith a given ancient o r Israelite figures in th e Bible to have w hole b ib ­
figure, to gain a u th o rity th ro u g h being associated lical texts attrib u ted to th em (M oses o nly becom es
w ith an ancient figure, etc. th e a u th o r o f th e P entateuch in post-biblical tra d i­
T herefore, w hen we see a text such as Psalm 110 tio n ). T he attrib u tio n s o f texts to D avid an d
assigned to D avid, this m ay m ean th a t it was S olom on m ay b e recollections, preserved in the
w ritten at the tim e o f D avid by o n e o f D avid’s Bible, th a t D avid a n d S olom on’s tim e was th e first
scribes, o r it m ay ju st m ean th a t this psalm was phase o f th e d evelopm ent o f Israelite literature.
seen as p a rt o f a longer trad itio n o f D avidic psalms.
66 Echo es o f E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

M any elem ents o f Egyptian an d M esopotam ian royal theology are co m m o n in the
royal psalms o f the H ebrew Bible (Psalm s 2, 18, 20, 21, 45, 72, 89, 110, an d 144; along
w ith 2 Sam 2 3 :1 -7 ). These poetic texts feature a distinctive focus o n th e king an d his
relationship w ith G od. For exam ple, Psalm 110 opens w ith a call for the king to sit at
th e right h an d o f G od (Ps 110:1), a co m m o n m o tif in ancient Egyptian royal art. Its
p icture o f th e king subduin g his enem ies (Ps 11 0 :l-3 a ) is typical o f ancient royal liter­
ature, w hether E gyptian o r M esopotam ian. T he latter p a rt o f verse 3, however, contains
an obscure text w hose m ean in g m ay be clarified w hen we look back to Egyptian royal
ideology. G od proclaim s to the king: “from th e w om b o f daw n, I fathered you like dew.”
Recall th a t th e sun G od, Re, in Egypt conceived the king th ro u g h spreading his arom a
over the king’s m other. T he E gyptian w ord for “arom a” rhym es w ith the w ord for “dew.”
In speaking o f Yahweh “fathering” th e king “like dew ” (see “arom a” in the Egyptian
m aterials) “before the w om b o f th e dawn,” Psalm 110 seems to apply these ideas to the
Judean king. T he psalm th en hearkens back to th e pre-Israelite royal trad itio n s o f
Jerusalem in rep o rtin g G od ’s oath to give th e king eternal p riesth o o d “according to the
o rd er o f M elkizedeq” (110:4), a figure rem em b ered elsewhere in th e Bible as on e o f
Jerusalem ’s kings in th e tim e before D avid (G en 14:18). N ext com e pictures o f the king
destroying his enem ies (Ps 110:5-6) th a t are q uite typical o f ancient royal literature,
before the psalm concludes w ith a reference to th e king’s d rin k in g from Jerusalem ’s
spring (Ps 110:7). A pparently th e Judean king was an o in ted by th e G ihon spring in
Jerusalem (1 Kgs 1:33-4, 3 8 -9 ). T hus Psalm 110 is a good exam ple o f a psalm w hose
obscure references can be u n d ersto o d w hen we see how it adapts ancient ideas ab o u t
kingship recalled from pre-D avidic Jerusalem an d the yet o lder royal theologies o f Egypt
an d M esopotam ia. It does n o t d ep en d o n any specific pre-Israelite text, b u t in a b ro ad er
w ay it contains “echoes o f ancient em pires.”
T he sam e can be said o f m any o th e r biblical royal psalm s. Just as th e Egyptian king
received a w ritten decree from th e gods proclaim ing his status as th e “son o f Re,” so
Psalm 2 has th e king re p o rt receiving a sim ilar decree from Yahweh:

I will proclaim th e decree o f Yahweh.

H e said to m e, “You are m y son,
I have fathered you today.
Ask me, an d I will give n atio n s as y o u r b irth rig h t,
The entire w orld as y o u r possession.” (Ps 2 :7 -8 )

T his them e o f G od offering th e king w hatever he w ants, especially m ilitary victory

(Ps 2:8), is found in other royal psalm s as well (Ps 21:2; see also 1 Kgs 3:5), an d is a m ajor
feature o f ancient E gyptian and M esopotam ian royal theology. O ver an d over again the
texts o f these ancient em pires em phasize th a t it is th e king w ho is au th o rized to call
on G od for m ilitary help. T he king, an d the king alone, is au th o rized by G od to ask
for and achieve m ilitary success for his people, an d on e o f th e m ain jobs o f the king
in ancient Egyptian an d M esopotam ian royal texts is to destroy the people’s enem ies.
This em phasis in royal psalm s o n th e king’s v iolent pow er can seem harsh to
co n tem p o rary readers, particularly th o se in E urope o r N o rth A m erica w ho have n ot
 Echoes of Em pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 67

experienced the direct th rea t o f m ilitary attack. To ancient Israelites, however, such
w ords so u n d ed differently. T ho u g h m any m ay have been inclined to follow calls such
as A bsalom o r Sheba’s to reject the m onarchy, these royal psalm s insist th a t th e king
was ap pointed by G od and w ould pro tect an d defend th em against any th reat like the
Philistines. In th e process, th e psalm s draw o n older N ear Eastern royal im agery - e.g.
divine “fathering” o f the king, setting th e king at G o d ’s rig h t han d , th e g ran t o f the
king’s w ishes - to justify th e Jerusalem m onarchy to skeptical Israelites.

basics Book of Psalms: Part 1

(For “B ook o f Psalms: P art 2,” see Basics Box on p. 201.)

M ultiple levels T he b o o k o f Psalm s was created over a very long p erio d o f tim e. It contains som e
in the book o f Israel’s earliest texts. Yet it was still being expanded late in to Israel’s history. This
o f Psalm s m ix o f ancient and later texts in Psalms reflects th e fact th at these texts were integrally
linked to and reflected shifts in th e lives o f Israelites as they faced ever different in d i­
vidual and natio n al challenges.

Tracking dow n It is im possible to be sure w hether a given Psalm com es from th e pre-exilic period,
the earliest let alone from the tim e o f D avid an d Solom on. N evertheless, m o st scholars agree
psalm s th a t som e psalm s are good candidates for being am o n g Israel’s earliest literature.
Som e hym ns, such as the praise o f th e sto rm god in Psalm 29 o r th e praise o f G o d ’s
pow er for fertility in Psalm 104, m ay have o rig in ated as pre-Israelite hym ns to o th er
gods before being adap ted for Israelite use. Some o th e r potentially early psalm s
m e n tio n the king, ark, o r Zion, such as th e celebration in Psalm 132 o f Yahweh’s
choice o f Z ion and D avid’s m oving o f th e ark there. It is relatively unlikely th a t an
a u th o r w rote such references after th e d estru ctio n o f the m o n arch y an d th e Z ion
Tem ple w ith its ark.

O ther T he psalm s discussed above p o in t to the probable existence o f early psalm s across
p otentially the b o o k o f Psalms. T hey stand as p otential indicators th a t some o f th e o th e r psalm s
early psalms? th a t lack such historical references, such as som e psalm s o f lam en t o r tru st, m ay also
date from Israel’s early periods. Such texts ab o u t individual suffering o r rescue are
inherently difficult to date. Luckily, such d atin g is relatively u n im p o rta n t for th eir
in terpretation.

O ne o th e r im p o rta n t them e in these royal psalm s is th e em phasis o n th e im p o rtan ce

to th e kingship o f “social responsibility” - H ebrew tsedeqah. T his H ebrew w o rd is
usually translated into English as “righteousness,” b u t it refers m o re specifically to the
68 Echo es o f E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

v irtu e o f fulfilling o n e’s social obligations to o th ers, p articu larly defending those m ost
vulnerable in ancient society: th e o rp h an , w idow , an d foreign im m ig ran t (the “stranger”
o r “alien”). For exam ple, 2 Sam 23:3 notes th a t th e king m u st rule w ith such “social
solidarity” to daw n o n his people like th e m o rn in g light, an d virtually all o f Psalm 72,
a “Psalm o f Solom on,” is a prayer th a t G od m ay give th e king the pow er to rule his
people w ith such tsedeqah:

Give th e king y o u r justice, O G od,

an d y o u r social solidarity to th e royal son!
M ay he judge y o u r people w ith social solidarity [tsedeqah],
a n d y o u r p o o r w ith justice! (Ps 7 2 :1 -2 )

M ore on M et h o d : Poetic A nalysis

P oetry in th e Bible does n o t have th e kin d o f so u n d rhym es fo u n d in m u ch E nglish-language poetry.

Instead, it is characterized by a p h e n o m e n o n called “seconding,” w here th e second line o f a poetic
couplet - o r p air o f lines - builds on the idea o r im agery o f th e first line, b u t som ehow takes it further.
Som e poem s m ay have a trip let (o r m o re). In trip lets th e stress is o n th e final, th ird line, w hich builds
o n an d advances the idea(s) o r im agery o f th e first two. Take th e exam ple o f th e follow ing trip let from
Psalm 110, a royal psalm :

2) T he LORD sends o u t from Z ion

your m igh ty scepter
Rule in the m idst o f your foes. (NRSV)

N ote how a tran slatio n like the NRSV m arks a trip le t like th is th ro u g h slightly in d en tin g th e second
an d th ird lines. T hese in d en tatio n s o f a b o u t 2 spaces indicate w here th e tran slato rs locate th e H ebrew
line breaks.
T he exam ple above uses italics for th e th ird an d clim actic, seconding, line o f th e triplet. If you
are analyzing a couplet o r triplet, it is a good idea to w rite it o u t this way an d u n d erlin e o r highlight
th e final line. Look at th e parallels an d differences betw een this final line an d th e tw o lines th a t precede
it. H ow do th e first tw o lines prepare for th e final line and w hat is th e im pact o f concluding the triplet
this way? C an you identify an em otional im pact o f this poetic couplet in ad d itio n to sum m arizing it?
Take a Bible w ith the NRSV a n d try to find an d analyze th e p o etic u n its in verse 3 o f Psalm 110.
(H int: according to th e NRSV, there is a trip le t an d a couplet here.)
For m o re see R obert Alter, The A rt o f Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985).

These texts show th a t Israelite kingship aim ed to be an in stitu tio n th a t p rotected the
form erly vulnerable peoples o f Israel’s hill c o u n try an d p rovided tru e justice. As we will
see in C hapter 4, th e m onarch y - like all h u m a n in stitu tio n s - d id n o t always live up
 Echo es of Em pire in M o n a r c h a l Israel 69

to its highest aims, and Israelites rebelled against the m onarchy several times. Nevertheless,
these psalm s show how Israel’s kingship was m ean t to be an in stitu tio n th ro u g h w hich
G od p rovided b o th p ro tectio n an d care for th e m o st vulnerable o f G o d ’s people.
These same values o f justice and social solidarity are also p ro m in e n t in an o th er group
o f psalm s, often te rm ed “Z ion p salm s” because o f th eir co m m o n em phasis o n the
special significance o f Z ion/Jerusalem , th e capital o f th e new m onarchy. For exam ple,
Psalm 9 describes how G od w ho dwells in Z ion “judges th e peoples w ith social solidar­
ity” (9:8) an d is “a stro n g h o ld for the o ppressed” (9:9). Psalm s 15 an d 24 are ancient
liturgies for those m aking a pilgrim age to Z ion. T hese psalm s b a r from Z ion those w ho
can n o t affirm th a t th ey have “clean h an d s an d a p ure h e a rt” (24:4) an d do n o t exploit
others th ro u g h lending practices (15:5). Z ion, at the h e a rt o f ancient Jerusalem , was
th e m o u n ta in w here G od dwelt. T hose w ho w ould com e th ere h ad to h o ld them selves
to a higher stan d ard o f behavior. T hey w ere expected to be ju st as th e G od o f Z io n is
just. F u rtherm ore, these an d o th e r psalm s repeatedly assert w h at will b e on e o f the
m o st im p o rta n t claim s o f Z ion theology: th a t Jerusalem , th e dw elling place o f G od, is
invulnerable to foreign attack. See, for exam ple, the d escrip tio n o f Jeru salem /Z io n in
Psalm 46:

T here is a river w hose stream s b rin g joy to th e city o f God,

T he holy dw elling o f th e m o st high.
G od is in the m id st o f h er [the city], she shall n o t fall.
G od will rescue her at th e break o f day. (4 6 :4 -5 )

T h o u gh parts o f these royal and Z ion psalm s m ay have been w ritten at later p o in ts
in th e h istory o f th e Jerusalem m onarchy, they stand as excellent exam ples o f how early
Israelites - w ho had lived for h u n d red s o f years in hilltop villages - m ade theological
sense o f this new social form : a new m onarch y set in a new capital city, Jerusalem . Later
Jewish an d C hristian interpreters, o f course, have rein terp reted m any o f these psalm s,
so th a t - for exam ple - the king praised in texts such as Psalm 2 o r
110 is u n d ersto o d to be th e M essiah. Such rein terp retatio n s can be
legitim ate, since these texts w ould n o t have survived an d becom e p a rt
o f the H ebrew Bible if later readers h ad u n d ersto o d th e m only to be
relevant to a m onarchy th a t w ould eventually perish. Yet these texts
READING
sh o u ld also be u n d ersto o d in th e ir historical context. As such, they
Prov 6:20-8:36; 10:1-32;
are a w itness to som e o f Israel’s earliest ideas ab o u t pow er an d co m ­
22:17-29.
m unity, ideas w hich w o uld prove very im p o rta n t to th e later w riters
o f prophecies and histories. In stru ctio n o f
A m en em o p e (www.
w iley.com /go/carr).
Echoes of Ancient Empires in Writings
Ecclesiastes 1:1-3:22 an d
Attributed to Solomon Song o f Songs l:l - 2 : 7 .

Som e o f the m o st striking echoes o f ancient em pires in the entire

O ld Testam ent are fo u n d in books associated w ith S olom on, D avid’s
70 Echoes of E m pire in M o na r ch a l Israel

successor: Proverbs, Song o f Songs, an d Ecclesiastes. T his is a b it o f a surprise, since

virtually all historical-critics do n o t th in k Solom on actually w ro te all three books, and
m o st w ould date these boo k s to w idely different periods. Nevertheless, despite th eir
differences, these “S olom onic” books each echo trad itio n s th a t w ere p ro m in e n t in the
ancient N ear East.

basics Song of Songs

It has proven difficult to find a system atic p attern in th e loosely connected love
p oem s th a t m ake u p the Song o f Songs. T he follow ing is a ro u g h overview based
particularly o n th e striking set o f parallel refrains across th e Song (2:7; 3:5; 8:4).

O utline I In tro d u c tio n o f them es 1:1—2:7

Seeking day/night scenes 2 :8-3:5
Riches an d praise 3:6-5:1
Seeking night scene 5 :2-6:3
Riches an d praise 6 :4-8:3
j II C oncluding statem ents on them es 8 :4 -1 4

D ate M ost scholars w ould date th e Song o f Songs to th e th ird o r fo u rth centuries bce,

1 centuries after S olom on, particularly because o f late features in its language. A
m in o rity see indicators o f earlier origins o f these m aterials, such as the way they
resem ble Egyptian and o th e r early love songs.

. Themes sex, M any readers insist th a t on e m u st decide th at th e Song is either ab o u t h u m an desire

God, and the or ab o u t d iv in e -h u m a n love. T he p o etry o f the Song, however, is m ore elusive. The
( p oetics o f dense m etaphors and disconnected dialogues invite readers to build th eir ow n images
| th e S on g o f w hat is happening. T he lack o f explicit divine references an d o th e r features o f the
; Song suggest th a t th e b o o k was m ean t to evoke the d ram a o f h u m a n love. Still, the
p o etry allows m ultiple readings, especially now th a t the Song stands in a Bible th at
elsewhere depicts G od’s love for G od’s people (e.g. th e book o f Hosea, to be discussed
I later in this textbook).

Take, for exam ple, the Song o f Songs (otherw ise k now n as Song o f Solom on or
C anticles), an often overlooked b o o k o f passionate love p o etry at the h eart o f the O ld
T estam ent. T hough early Jewish an d C h ristian co m m u n ities often read this b o o k as a
love dialogue betw een G od an d G o d ’s beloved co m m u n ity (w hether church o r syna­
gogue), the b o o k ’s closest parallels are secular love songs fo u n d in Egypt ju st before
the em ergence o f Israel. T hose ancient Egyptian love poem s an d th eir parallels in the
 E choes of Em pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 71

biblical Song o f Songs do n o t describe th e love affairs o f gods. T he Song o f Songs does
n o t ever clearly refer to Yahweh! Instead, like th e Egyptian love p o etry it m o st resembles,
th e Song o f Songs is focused o n th e d ra m a o f h u m a n physical love: desiring, seeking,
losing, and seeking again h u m a n passion w ith o n e’s tru e love. M oreover, like th e love
literature th a t it echoes, th e Song o f Songs presents a positive, n o t fearful, p ictu re o f
female desire. T he w om an o f th e Song o f Songs is a pow erful figure, n o t afraid to ask
h er lover for w hat she w ants an d speaking m o re th a n h alf o f th e w ords o f th e book.
N ow here in the b o o k is she judged for h er desire, n o r is her lover, even th o u g h th eir
love rem ains frustratingly secret an d forbidden (Song 8 :1 -2 ). Scholars are n o t sure
w hen to date th e book, b u t its u n iq u e poetic picture o f h u m a n love is deeply indebted
to p o etry ab o u t h u m a n love fo u n d elsew here in the N ear East.
Ecclesiastes (also know n by its H ebrew nam e “Q ohelet”) is sim ilarly difficult to date,
an d it likewise echoes literature from th e ancient N ear East. T h o u g h the b o o k is a ttri­
b u te d to “th e teacher, th e son o f D avid in Jerusalem ” (trad itio n ally S olom on), its date
and au thorship are debated. W h at we can say is th a t E cclesiastes/Q ohelet is a com plex
co m b ination o f skepticism ab o u t w isdom an d affirm ation o f life’s sm all joys. Its m ain
idea is th e way all values are called in to question by th e fact th a t everyone dies and
“you can’t take it w ith you.” D u rin g ancient Israel’s history, th ere was n o belief in a
heaven o r hell w here people w ould be rew arded o r p u n ish ed for th eir b ehavior d u rin g
life. In light o f this, th e “teacher” o f Ecclesiastes ends u p deciding th a t “em ptiness,
em ptiness, all is em ptiness” (Eccl 1:2, 14; 2:1; etc.). Since everyone dies so o n er o r later,
b o th frantic pleasure seeking (Eccl 2 :1 -1 1 ) an d excessive w isdom an d righteousness
(2:12-23) are pointless, “chasing after w ind.” R ather th a n getting to o attached to any
great project, th e teacher o f this text urges all to enjoy each day’s m o d erate pleasures:

Go, eat your food w ith pleasure, an d d rin k y o u r w ine w ith a h ap p y heart; for G od
has long approved w hat you do. Let y o u r clothing always be w hite, do n o t let oil be
lacking on your head. Enjoy life w ith the w om an you love, all th e days o f y o u r em p ty
life that you are given u n d er th e sun. For th a t is you r p o rtio n in life an d y o u r w ork
w hich you w ork u n d er the sun. (Eccl. 9:7 -9 ; see also 2 :24-5; 5:18-20; 8:15)

This k ind o f day-to-day living, eating, drinking, and enjoying ro m antic love, this “im p er­
ative o f joy” (as one scholar has called it), is the “teacher’s” p rescrip tio n for life lived
in a w orld w here “em ptiness, em ptiness, all is em ptiness.” M oreover, we find a close
parallel to b o th the concern ab o u t d eath a n d Ecclesiastes/Q ohelet’s “im perative o f joy”
in a very ancient M esopotam ian text, th e epic o f Gilgam esh. T here G ilgam esh expresses
his te rro r in th e face o f m o rtality and is told, “let your belly b e f u ll,. . . every day m ake
m erry . . . let your clothes be clean, let y o u r head be w a s h e d ,. . . let a wife enjoy your
repeated em brace.”
W henever one dates Ecclesiastes/Q ohelet, th a t b o o k seems to be resp o n d in g w ith
skepticism to older w isdom o f th e kin d seen in Proverbs, the “S olom onic” b o o k w ith
the best claim to being datable (at least in p art) to th e tim e o f D avid an d Solom on.
This one biblical b o o k actually contains m ultiple collections, m any o f w hich are id e n ti­
fied by separate headings: “th e Proverbs o f S olom on, son o f D avid, king o f Israel”
72 Echo es of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

basics Ecclesiastes/Qohelet

Outline: I In tro d u c to ry royal te stam en t 1:1-2:26

counter-w isdom II In stru ctio n in skeptical w isdom 3:1-12:8
instruction III Epilogue w ith later affirm ations 12:9-14

Date M ost scholars consider Ecclesiastes/Q ohelet to be am o n g th e latest books in the

H ebrew Bible. T he H ebrew in w hich it is w ritten is u nusual for an early text, and
m any w ould see its perspective to b e Greek. As in the case o f th e Song o f Songs,
however, there are som e reasons to th in k a form o f Ecclesiastes m ay have been ear­
lier, such as its resem blance to th e older form o f th e G ilgam esh epic (see below).

Major them es: T he lead them es th ro u g h m o st o f Ecclesiastes are th e ab su rd ity o f all h u m a n striv­
Q ohelet’s ing (Eccl 1:2,14; 2:1; etc.) an d th e benefits o f daily pleasures in life (2 :2 4 -5 ; 5:18-20;
contradictions etc.). Yet the last verses o f th e b o o k (1 2 :1 3 -1 4 ) as well as isolated sections in its
m id st (e.g. 2:26; 3:17) affirm th e m o re trad itio n al idea th a t good eventually is
rew arded and evil punished . M any w ould take these m o re trad itio n al affirm ations
to be late additions to th e book.

(Prov 1:1-9:18), “the Proverbs o f Solom on” (Prov 10:1-22:16), “th e Proverbs o f Solom on
th a t w ere collected by H ezekiah’s m en ” (Prov 25: Iff.), an d so on. W h at we have in
Proverbs, then, is a collection o f collections o f an cien t Israel’s edu catio n al m aterials.
T his collection o f collections in Proverbs contains som e o f th e clearest echoes o f
foreign educational texts fo u n d in th e Bible. For exam ple, we find a collection o f “w ords
o f the w ise” in Proverbs 22:17-24:22 w hose “th irty sayings” (Prov 22:20) loosely adapt
an d echo som e o f th e 30 chapters o f th e E gyptian In stru ctio n o f A m enem ope (see
Figure 3.6). Both collections begin w ith a call to m em o rize th e follow ing in stru ctio n
(A m enem ope chapter 1; Prov 2 2 :1 7 -2 1 ), an d co n tin u e w ith sim ilar in stru ctio n s n o t
to oppress th e p o o r (A m enem ope 2; Prov 2 2 :2 2 -3 ), n o t to m ove b o u n d a ry stones
(A m enem ope 6; Prov 22:28), n o t get tied up in p u rsu in g w ealth (A m enem ope 7; Prov
2 3 :4 -5 ), to avoid fools (A m enem ope 9; Prov 2 2 :2 4 -5 ), an d to take care in eating in
fro n t o f nobles (A m enem ope 23; P rov 2 3 :1 -3 ). To be sure, th e a u th o r o f Proverbs d id
n o t translate the ancient Egyptian in stru ctio n . T he existing parallels betw een th e texts
are parallels in general content, an d there are m any p arts o f P rov 22:17-24:22 th a t have
no co u n te rp a rt in th e In stru ctio n o f A m enenope. Nevertheless, th e shared concept o f
30 sayings an d m ultiple parallels betw een these texts are g o o d reason to conclude th a t
the au th o r o f P rov 22:17-24:22 knew o f an d loosely ap p ro p riated p arts o f th e Egyptian
 Echoes of Em pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 73

SAj
x Oiif-

m J h -u- i-s S *
.VWn«j4.«*^

fcvt&iu#
iifri/tegfr.

M r ^ -

Figure 3.6 Copy of the Egyptian Instruction of Amenemope, dated approximately 1200 bce. The topics of its
30 sayings (cf. Prov 22:20) loosely parallel those found in Prov 22:17-24:22.

basics Book of Proverbs

Outline: treasury I In tro d u c to ry instru ctio n : seek w isdom ! 1:1-9:18
o f ancient II A dditional w isdom collections 10:1-31:9
Israelite w isdom III A good w om an as em b o d im e n t o f w isdom 31:10-31

D ate M ost scholars see a great diversity o f date in th e m aterial o f Proverbs. Sections such
as Proverbs 1 -9 are dated m an y centuries after S olom on, w hile p arts o f o th e r sec­
tions, such as P rov 22:17-24:22, are th o u g h t to be am o n g th e earliest p arts o f th e
Bible. A m in o rity o f scholars, however, find indicators o f early date in sections such
as Proverbs 1 -9 as well.

Major them es Since Proverbs is a collection o f collections, it is p articularly difficult to sum m arize
w ith a single them e o r set o f them es. Nevertheless, m ajo r features o f th e b o o k include
its p ro m in e n t focus o n fem ale figures tow ard th e b eg inning (Proverbs 1 -9 ) an d en d
(Prov 31:10-31), an d its repeated em phasis o n th e im p o rta n ce o f “fear ofY ahw eh”
(Prov 1:7, 29; 2:5; etc.) th ro u g h o u t.
74 E choes of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

in stru ctio n o f A m enem ope, along w ith o th e r w isd o m trad itio n s, in com posing his ow n
version o f “30” sayings. In this sense Prov 22:17-24:22 is an im p o rta n t “echo o f ancient
[Egyptian] em pire” in the Bible.
T he b o o k o f Proverbs also shows th e im p o rtan ce o f female w isdom in ancient Israel.
Proverbs starts an d continues w ith calls for stu d en ts to atten d to b o th the father’s and
the m o th e r’s w isdom (Prov 1:8; 6:20; 23:22). T he early chapters o f Proverbs feature a
pow erful depiction o f w isdom as a female, sem i-divine figure (e.g. Prov 1:20-33; 8:1-36).
A nd Proverbs concludes w ith an in stru ctio n attrib u ted to King Lem uel’s m other (Prov
3 1 :1 -9 ) an d an A -Z praise o f th e “w o m an o f p o w er” w hich Jewish m en often sing to
th eir wives over the table o f th e Friday evening Sabbath m eal (Prov 31:10-31).
A longside all this, there also is a religious elem ent. Both th e instructions an d proverbs
in th e b o o k o f Proverbs have a distinctive em phasis o n th e “fear o f Yahweh” as crucial
to the successful life (Prov 1:7, 29; 14:26-7; 23:17; etc.). N evertheless, th e collections o f
educational texts in Proverbs are b ro ad e r in stru c tio n in ho w to succeed w ith b o th god
an d h u m a n beings. C o m b in ed w ith assertions o f th e im p o rtan ce o f fearing Yahweh
(e.g. Prov 14:26) are pragm atic sayings such as the affirm ation in Prov 17:8 th a t bribes
often w ork well. All these m aterials in Proverbs (in co n trast to Q ohelet) affirm th e basic
idea o f m oral act-consequence: th e idea th a t fear o f G od a n d /o r good actions produce
good results, w hile b ad beh av io r leads to disaster. T he task o f th e stu d en t is to w alk the
p ath tow ard success, n o t tow ard death.

Uncovering Echoes of Past Empires Elsewhere

in the Bible

V*
R E A D IN G E X E R C ISE
Genesis 1-11, Before reading this section, read G en 6 :5-9:17 an d n o te every place w here
Gilgam esh (tablet th e sam e o r quite sim ilar event is n arrate d twice. A n exam ple w ould be
11), and A trahasis G od’s an n o u n cem en t o f th e flood b o th in G en 6:13 an d in 7:4. A nother
(www.wiley.com/ is N oah’s m ultiple en tries in to th e ark in 7:7 an d 7:13. O nce you have
go/carr). developed a list o f such d oubly n arrate d events, see w h eth er “G o d ” or
“LORD” is used to refer to G od in any o f these doublets. C om e up w ith
your ow n th eo ry ab o u t how th e biblical flood story end ed up this way.

So far we have fo u n d echoes o f ancient em pires in entire texts (e.g. royal psalm s) or
books (e.g. Song o f Songs) th a t are associated in different ways w ith th e tim e o f D avid
an d Solom on. N evertheless, o th e r texts from th e Bible also contain strong echoes
o f ancient N ear Eastern literature, m an y o f w hich sim ilarly m ay be datable to the
 E choes of Em pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 75

beginnings o f the monarchy. For example, recent scholar­

ship by D avid W right (Inventing G od’s Law: H ow the
Covenant Code o f the Bible Used and Revised the Laws
o f H am m urabi [New York: O xford U niversity Press,
2009]) has identified m ultiple and specific parallels
between the ancient M esopotam ian code o f H am m urabi
(w w w .w iley.com /go/carr) an d a collection o f biblical
laws in Exodus 20:22-23:33 called the “C ovenant
C ode” (see Exod 24:7). For over a century scholars
have judged th a t this “C ovenant C ode” was one o f the
earliest collections o f laws in the Bible, because its laws
ab o u t topics such as b uilding altars (Exod 2 0 :2 4 -6 )
an d celebrating festivals (Exod 2 3 :14-17) reflect early
practices o f offering sacrifices all over the land and
n o t ju st in Jerusalem . O nly recently, however, have
scholars seen ways th a t th e C ovenant C ode m ay be
loosely m odeled o n parts o f th e C ode o f H am m u rab i
(see Figure 3.7), m uch as Prov 22:17-24:22 was
m odeled partially on the In stru ctio n o f A m enem ope.
Indeed, it is likely th a t m any o f the p u rity an d ritual
regulations o f Leviticus and N um bers also h ad ancient
precursors, since we have extensive exam ples o f sim ­
ilar sorts o f docum ents ab o u t priestly m atters fo u n d
am ong th e rem ains o f th e peoples preceding and
su rro u n d in g ancient Israel. Law, w hether royal decree
o r priestly instruction, was one o f th e m o st im p o rta n t
form s o f ancient w riting.
Perhaps the m ost fam ous echoes o f texts from
ancient em pires are found at the very beginning o f the
Bible, in the prim eval h istory (Genesis 1 -1 1 ), w hich
tells th e stories ab o u t the w hole earth an d its peoples.
Before looking at these echoes, however, it is im p o rta n t
Figure 3.7 The stela of Hammurabi (c.1700 b c e ) .
to realize th a t these chapters o f G enesis contain two
The top image depicts the king showing respect before
parallel sets o f stories ab o u t the early history o f the
the enthroned Mesopotamian god of justice, Shamash.
w orld. Lots o f things are described tw ice in these
The text below describes his appointment by the gods
chapters. “G od” creates plants, anim als, and h u m an s to give justice and then quotes his proclamation of laws
(m ale and female) in Genesis 1, and th en “LORD G od” that roughly parallel (in topic) parts of the Covenant
creates the first m an, anim als, an d then w om an in Code in Exod 20:22-23:33.
Genesis 2. Genesis 3 - 4 tell stories ab o u t these first
hu m an s and th eir descendants up to th e tim e o f N oah,
an d th en Genesis 5 gives a genealogy from A dam to
N oah. T hen, the flood story o f Genesis 6 - 9 is full o f d o u b ly n arrate d events: tw o
descriptions o f th e problem leading to th e flood (6 :1 -4 an d 6:11), tw o descriptions
o f G o d ’s perception o f th e problem (6:5 an d 6:12), tw o assertions th a t N oah was
76 E cho es of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

exceptional in his righteousness (6:8 an d 9), an d so on. L ooking at these duplicate

narratives in th e flood an d across G enesis 1-11 m o re generally, it appears as if an
Israelite a u th o r had tw o com plete, w ritten stories o f creation an d flood, an d th a t au th o r
w ove those older w ritten stories, these an cien t “sources” o f Genesis, together to create
th e present biblical text.
O ver th e last tw o h u n d re d years, biblical scholars have reached a high level o f
agreem ent on how to u ntan g le these interw oven creation an d flood w ritings (sources)
em bedded in Genesis 1-11. T hey call one o f these sources “P ” o r th e Priestly Source,
because its sequence o f stories (G en 1:1—2:3; 5 :1 -3 2 ; 6 :9 -2 2 ; 7:6, 11, an d o th e r parts
o f th e flood up th ro u g h 9 :1 -1 7 ) links w ith o th e r p arts o f th e Tetrateuch (Genesis,
Exodus, Leviticus, an d N um b ers) th a t focus o n priests. T he o th e r source starts w ith the
garden o f Eden story in G enesis 2 :4 -3 :2 4 , con tin u es w ith th e C ain an d Abel sto ry an d
genealogies o f G enesis 4, includes its ow n flood n arrative (G en 6 :1 -8 ; 7 :1 -5 , 10, 12,
an d o th e r parts u p th ro u g h 8 :2 0 -2 ), an d contains an epilogue ab o u t N oah an d his
sons (G en 9 :18-27). This source is often called “J” o r the “Yahwistic Source,” since this
source uses th e holy H ebrew n am e Yahweh to refer to G od. (T he G erm an scholars
w ho first discovered th e “J” source tw o h u n d re d years ago used th e letter “j” for th eir
“y” so und an d spelled th e n am e Yahwist “Jah w ist”) As will b e discussed later, in the
M iscellaneous Box in C hap ter 6 o n “T he L Source: Terms for It an d Pictures o f Its
F orm ation,” m any scholars see this J source, like P, co n tin u in g across th e Tetrateuch,
b u t there are good reasons to be skeptical o f th e ir claim s. Instead, this textbook co n ­
siders any early “J” source to be lim ited to a “J prim eval h isto ry ” fo u n d exclusively in
G enesis 1-11.
B oth o f these sources, J an d P, echo texts from ancient em pires th a t preceded Israel.
For exam ple, th e P creation story in G enesis 1:1—2:3 echoes aspects o f th e ancient
M esopotam ian E num a Elish epic (w w w .w iley.com /go/carr). Both texts describe the
begin n in g o f creation as a w atery chaos before th e god(s) spoke th e w orld in to being:

Enuma Elish Genesis 1:1-3

When on high no heaven had been named, When God first created the heaven and
when no earth had been called, the earth, and the earth was completely
When there were no divine elders. . . without form and darkness was on the face
When there was nothing, nothing b u t . . . of the deep, and a divine wind howled over
Godfather Apsu and Mummu-Tiamat, the face of the water . . .
Godmother of All Living, two bodies
of water becoming one . . .
When there were no divine warriors,
When no names had been called,
When no tasks had been assigned . . .
(Translation: OT Parallels 12) God said, [“let there be lig h t. . . ”]

T he E num a Elish goes o n to describe th e creation o f th e in h ab ited w orld o u t o f a

conflict betw een the gods, in clu d in g th e triu m p h o f th e god M ard u k over the goddess
 Echo es o f E m pire in M o n a r c h a l Israel 77

M ore on M et h o d : Source C riticism

T he te rm “source criticism ” refers to th e scholarly attem p t to identify separate sources stan d in g b eh in d

the existing biblical text. As discussed in th e m ain text, we have no m an u scrip ts o f these earlier sources.
Instead, scholars m u st exam ine th e biblical text we n o w have an d look for clues to earlier sources,
such as doublets, contradictions, an d m ajo r shifts in language. S om etim es scholars can achieve
substantial consensus in reconstructing hypothetical earlier d o cu m en ts, such as th e P riestly/P and
Yahwistic/J prim eval histo ry sources discussed in this chapter. As we will see in later chapters, the
p icture is less clear as we m ove beyond G enesis 1—11.

o f the prim eval salt water, T iam at. Such a focus o n divine conflict is absent from th e
biblical story, b u t T iam at is distantly echoed in th e H ebrew w o rd for “deep” th a t appears
in th e initial description o f chaotic w aters in G en 1:2. M oreover, th e biblical chapter
shares w ith its M esopotam ian c o u n te rp a rt a p icture o f creation th a t m oves from w atery
chaos to the creation o f light, th e n a heavenly d o m e d ceiling to separate th e two
prim eval oceans (the “firm am en t” o f G en 1:6 an d follow ing), d ry g ro u n d , an d h u m an s.
In these and o th e r ways th e story o f creation o f the cosm os in Genesis 1 echoes
m ultiple elem ents o f th e E n u m a Elish epic, even as the biblical story also has its ow n
distinctive em phases, som e o f w hich will be discussed w hen we re tu rn to the P d o c u ­
m en t in C hapter 6.
M eanw hile, the echoes o f ancient em pires are ju st as w idespread in th e J prim eval
history. M any scholars have noted th a t this stra n d o f G enesis 1-11 links at m ultiple
p o in ts w ith the ancient M esopotam ian A trahasis epic, w ritte n alm ost o n e th o u sa n d
years before the tim e o f D avid an d S olom on. T h at epic starts w ith a creation story th a t
resem bles parts o f th e garden o f E den story (G en 2 :4 -2 5 ), continues w ith m ultiple
accounts o f h u m a n m ultiplication th a t anticipate th e biblical rep o rt o f h u m a n m u lti­
plication (G en 6:1), an d concludes w ith an ancient M esopotam ian sto ry o f the flood
w ith m ultiple links to th e story o f N oah an d th e flood. In A trahasis th e gods o rd ain a
flood, the flood is an n o u n c ed to a flood hero, th e hero b u ild s an ark an d survives the
flood, the flood eventually abates and th e ark lands o n a m o u n ta in , th e flood h ero offers
a sacrifice, an d th e god(s) resolve never to send an o th e r flood once th ey sm ell the
sacrifice. Sometimes, the links can be very specific. For example, a version o f the Atrahasis
flood narrative th a t was included in the G ilgam esh epic tells o f how th e flood hero,
U tn ap ishtim in th a t story, sent fo rth a dove, a swallow, an d a raven to find o u t if the
flood was over, closely paralleling th e story (in J) o f N oah sending birds to find o u t the
sam e th in g (G en 8 :6 -1 2 ). These an d o th e r parallels have convinced m an y scholars th a t
the a u th o r o f the J prim eval histo ry knew som e form o f these ancient M esopotam ian
trad itio ns. H e m ay even have been crafting his ow n distinctively Israelite version o f the
A trahasis prim eval history.
78 Echo es of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

We do n o t know for sure w hen the au th o rs o f th e J an d P narratives d id th eir w ork.

M ost w ould date th e overall P source to a relatively late p erio d in Israelite history, b u t
there are signs th a t som e p arts o f th e P source, in clu d in g som e form o f th e Genesis 1
creation story, m ay have existed m u ch earlier. M eanw hile, m any w ould date the J
prim eval history early in Israelite history, possibly as early as th e tim e o f Solom on.
Its w idespread and specific dependence on older non-biblical M esopotam ian texts makes
good sense in th e early perio d o f th e m onarchy, an d it does n o t clearly anticipate o r
refer to them es o f T orah an d law th a t are im p o rta n t in later periods o f Israelite history.
In sum , if there is m aterial from aro u n d th e tim e o f D avid o r Solom on in the b o o k o f
Genesis, the J prim eval histo ry is on e o f th e m o st likely places to find it.

The Garden of Eden Story (Gen 2:4-3:24)

We tu rn next to look m ore closely at the text th a t opens the J/Yahwistic source discussed
above: th e garden o f Eden sto ry in G en 2:4-3:24. M ost people approach this text w ith
presuppositions shaped by its h isto ry o f in terp retatio n . For exam ple, if asked to nam e
the fru it th a t A dam and Eve ate in th e garden, m ost w ould instantly reply “an apple.”
T he Genesis text, however, does n o t say this. Similarly, th o u g h m any assum e th a t the
snake in the garden was “Satan,” th a t is never specified in th e Bible. These an d o th er
elem ents w ere added to th e biblical sto ry by later in terp reters (see Figure 3.8).
This history o f in te rp re tatio n o f the garden o f Eden text has also influenced w hat
people th in k the w hole story is about. For exam ple, m any have u n d ersto o d Paul in Rom
5:18-21 to im ply th a t Genesis 2 - 3 is a tale o f how sin entered the w orld, p u ttin g all
h u m a n s u n d er the curse o f death. In the post-P auline letter o f 1 Tim othy, this tragedy
is b lam ed o n w om en, w ho m u st n o w pay th e price by bearin g children:

For A dam was form ed first, th e n Eve; an d A dam was n o t deceived, b u t th e w om an

was deceived and becam e a transgressor. Yet she will be saved th ro u g h childbearing,
provided they continue in faith an d love an d holiness, w ith m odesty. (1 T im 2:13-15;
translation: NRSV)

Later C hristian interpreters expanded o n this type o f in terp retatio n , w ith the early
theologian G regory N azianzen talking o f h o w Eve “beguiled th e m an by m eans o f
pleasure” and Tertullian saying to a group o f w om en, “Are n o t each o f you an Eve?. . . You
are the D evil’s gateway.” W ith these an d m any o th e r in terp retatio n s setting th e stage
for co n tem p o rary readings, it is little w o n d er th a t m any people today assum e th a t this
text is an anti-fem ale text b lam in g Eve for seducing A dam an d in tro d u cin g sin and
death into th e w orld.
Yet particularly thanks to groundbreaking w ork by Phyllis Trible (God and the Rhetoric
o f Sexuality [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978]) an d o th ers in th e m id-1970s, scholars have
gradually recognized th a t there is no m o re basis for th a t reading in th e text itself th an
there is for th e idea th a t th e fru it w hich th e first h u m a n s ate was an “apple” (th a t w ord
 Echoes of E m pire in M on a r ch a l Israel 79

Figure 3.8 Titian’s painting of Adam and Eve taking the apple from a snake-tailed cherubic
Satan. It well illustrates how later interpretation of Genesis 2-3 influenced people’s visions of
the scene.

never occurs in Genesis 3). Both o f these ideas are later in terp retatio n s th a t have been
laid on a text th a t has very different concerns. Trible an d o th ers have p o in ted o u t th a t
the text actually celebrates the w o m an as th e culm in atio n o f creation. “Sin” is never
m en tio ned in it, and th e w om an an d m an share responsibility for th e garden crim e.
M oreover, th e consequences for this act th a t com e o n th em are depicted in th e text as
tragic, n o t divinely willed elem ents o f creation. Let us now take a new look at this
o ften -in terpreted text.
T he story is organized into three m ain parts: a d escrip tio n o f G o d ’s creation o f a
deeply connected p artn ersh ip o f m en and w om en w orking th e earth (G en 2 :4 -2 5 ), a
crim e scene describing th eir disobedience o f G od’s on e p ro h ib itio n (3 :1 -6 ), an d an
80 Echo es of E m pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel

account o f th e tragic loss o f original connectedness to each o th e r an d th e earth as a

result o f the crim e (3:7 -2 5 ). T he story opens w ith G od creating the first “h u m a n ”
(H ebrew A dam ) o u t o f the earth (H ebrew adam ah), an d giving h im life th ro u g h b rea th ­
ing the divine b rea th into him . G od sets h im in th e garden to w ork an d p ro tect it, an d
the w ord play o n A d a m /A d a m a h (m u ch like “h u m a n ” an d “h u m u s”) em phasizes the
original connectedness o f th e h u m a n to th e earth he was d estined to w ork.
Yet G od im m ediately recognizes th a t th ere is a pro b lem w ith this picture: “It is n o t
good for th e h u m a n to be alone” (G en 2:18). G od th en decides to create a p a rtn e r
“corresponding to him .” G od creates th e anim als, an d brings each to th e h u m a n for
him to nam e them , b u t n o n e tru ly “co rresp o n d s” to h im (G en 2 :1 9 -2 0 ). So God
tries a new approach, anesthetizing the first h u m a n by p u ttin g h im to sleep, rem oving
a rib, an d “b uilding” the w o m an o u t o f it. W h en th e h u m a n awakens an d sees the
w om an, he sings th e first song o f creation, on e th a t em phasizes th e connectedness
they share:

This is it! Bone o f m y bones, flesh o f m y flesh;

This one will be called w o m an [H ebrew ishah]
for o u t o f m an [H ebrew ish] she was taken. (G en 2:23)

T he text concludes by saying th a t th is is th e orig in o f love a n d m arriage, it is th e reason

a m a n leaves his p arents a n d “clings to his wife an d th ey b ecom e one flesh.” In stark
c o n trast to m any o th e r w o rld -creatio n stories, sex is n o t co nnected at all here to having
children. Instead, sex is a sign o f th e original connectedness o f th e m an an d th e w om an
created o u t o f a p a rt o f h im so th a t they w o u ld tru ly co rresp o n d to each other. This is
a story o f G od’s will th a t h u m a n s be in close relationship w ith each o th e r an d the earth.
In the wake o f this creation, b o th m an an d w om an “w ere naked an d n o t asham ed”
(G en 2:25). T hey m ay w ork th e garden to g eth er an d eat o f its fruit, w ith on e exception:
they m ay n o t eat o f th e “tree o f know ledge o f good an d evil” o n p enalty o f death
(G en 2:17).
T he scene shifts in G en 3 :1 -6 to a new cast o f characters, th e m an, w om an, an d now
a “clever” snake in place o f G od (G en 3:1). A gain, th e h isto ry o f in terp retatio n has often
p ictu red Satan as th e snake, b u t th ere is n o basis for th a t in th e H ebrew text. Instead,
th e snake stands as an ancient sym bol o f w isdom an d im m ortality, and the adjective
used to describe him - arum (“clever” ) - is a v irtu e frequently praised in th e w isdom
w ritings o f Proverbs. F urth erm o re, th o u g h in terp reters have often supposed th a t the
sin o f th e first h u m a n s som ehow consisted o f sex o r desire, there is n o h in t o f th a t here.
As we saw, G enesis 2 already explains th e first sexual p artn ersh ip o f h u m an s as the
result o f G od’s creation o f a w om an o u t o f p a rt o f a m an. Instead, th e issue is h u m an
acquisition o f godlike “w isdom .” N o t only is th e “clever” snake associated w ith w isdom ,
b u t the “tree o f know ledge o f good an d evil” is a sym bol o f w isdom ’s fruits. This then
is und erlin ed w hen th e snake convinces the w o m an to consider eating o f th e tree, and
she sees th a t the “tree was good for food, a delight to th e eyes, an d good for becom ing
w ise” (G en 3:6). She eats o f th e fru it o f w isdom , gives fru it to h e r h u sb an d an d he does
th e sam e, an d th e text says th a t “th e eyes o f b o th were o p en e d ” (G en 3:7). This is a
 Echo es of Em pire in M o n a r c h a l Israel 81

frequent expression for gaining education. T hus G en 3 :1 -7 describes th e first act o f

h u m a n disobedience as the defiance o f G od an d the gaining o f a form o f “w isdom ”
th a t shows m any signs o f being associated w ith the ancient Israelite textual w isdom we
have seen in books such as Proverbs.
This th en sets in m o tio n a tragic unraveling o f m u ch o f th e connectedness th a t G od
h ad created at the outset. T he text already illustrates this w hen G od arrives in th e gar­
den, the h u m a n s hide, an d w hen q uestioned ab o u t w hy th ey are hiding, begin to blam e
each other. T he m an blam es b o th th e w om an an d G od w h o m ade th e w om an (3:12),
an d the w om an blam es th e snake (3:13). In response, G o d proclaim s consequences for
all three. T he snake will now crawl o n the g ro u n d an d be an eternal enem y o f h um ans.
T he w om an will n o t longer enjoy idyllic life in the garden, b u t G od will “m u ltiply h er
toil an d pregnancies” (n o t “increase pangs in childbearing” as often translated). A nd
th e idyllic life o f the m an likewise will com e to an end. H is toil is to w o rk the g ro u n d
from w hich he was m ade u n til he dies an d retu rn s to it. W here once th ere was m u tu al
desire, now th e w om an’s desire will be for h er h usband , an d w here once th ere was
m u tu ality betw een corresponding partn ers, now the h u sb a n d will “ru le” over his wife
(3:16). T he story goes on to describe A dam ’s n am in g o f his wife “Eve” (a n am e m ade
from the H ebrew w ord for “life” ) to reflect h er new jo b o f p ro d u cin g children (3:20).
G od gives th e h u m a n p air clothes (3:21) - a sign o f h u m a n civilization th a t is also seen
in ancient non-biblical texts such as th e G ilgam esh epic. Finally, G od expels th em from
the garden for fear th a t they m ig h t gain godlike im m o rtality m u ch as th ey h ad already
gained godlike w isdom (G en 3 :2 2 -4 ).
In this way th e text accurately depicts the non-ideal w o rld th a t actual Israelites lived
in, b u t w ith a tw ist. M ost Israelites still lived lives closely tied to th e land, w orking it
by the sweat o f th eir brow u n til they re tu rn e d to it. T he w o rk was h ard , fam ine was
frequent, and death cam e m uch sooner th a n it does for people in th e developed w orld
today. W om en lived in patriarchal m arriages, sustaining th e h o u seh o ld w ith th e ir w ork,
w hile undergoing an endless series o f pregnancies, m any o f w hich w ere very dangerous.
Analysis o f female rem ains has suggested th a t as m any as h a lf o f w om en eventually
died in childbirth. In this sense, the realities described in the latter p a rt o f Genesis 3
all held tru e for th e ancient Israelite m en and w om en. Yet w h at is rem arkable ab o u t
this text is its suggestion th a t this often h arsh an d patriarch al reality is n o t w hat G od
originally inten d ed for hum ans. G od originally m ade h u m a n s for fruitful farm ing,
long life, and m utual, tru ly co rresponding life an d desire betw een m en an d w om en. It
was o nly w ith th e h u m a n step tow ard godlike w isdom th a t they em erged in to the harsh
reality th a t they experience today. “W isdom ” - n o t w om en - is th e source o f the tragic
endless labor, patriarchy, an d death th a t characterize the present.
T his k ind o f narrative ab o u t h u m a n origins is as tim eless as m any texts discussed
above, b u t it m ay also stand as a reflection o n w hat “w isdom ” was com ing to m ean in
m onarchal Israel. T ho u g h m o st still lived in villages, Judah an d Israel were increasingly
d o m in ated by u rb an elites w ho w ere educated in new literary trad itio n s m o d eled on
n on-biblical sources. The leaders o f Israel w ho w ere touched by this process w ere u n d er­
going a m om entous shift in th eir collective m em ory. Before this m onarchy, tribal villages
all h ad th e ir oral traditions, such as tales o f trickster ancestors, th e exodus, o r m ilitary
82 Echo es of E m pire in M o n a rchal Israel

triu m p h . But now - w ith th e m onarchy - we have seen th e em ergence o f an early

Israelite literary trad itio n recited an d m em orized from w ritten texts: royal psalms,
stories o f royalty, royal w isdom an d (possibly) early love literature, stories o f creation
an d flood. M oreover, m any o f these w ritten texts w ere based on educational literature
from outside Israel, such as E gyptian w isdom an d love songs o r M esopotam ian tra d i­
tions ab o u t creation and flood. This grow ing Israelite literary corpus, so difficult to
identify precisely now, was th e m eans by w hich a sm all an d grow ing n u m b e r o f literate
Israelites gained “know ledge o f good an d evil” an d h ad th eir “eyes” “opened.”
Read in this context, th e garden o f E den sto ry - itself a text - suggests th a t w isdom
is b o th an essential p a rt o f h u m an growing up and a source o f m any h u m an ills. O n the
one hand, it suggests th a t there is no re tu rn to an idyllic life in th e garden, m u nching
on fruit and obeying G o d ’s on e clear co m m an d - n o t to eat o f th e tree o f know ledge
o f good and evil. O n th e o th e r h an d , th is en lig h ten m en t, this h u m a n jo u rn ey to m ature
civilization, has b ro u g h t m any o f th e ills o f ad u lt life w ith it: endless pregnancies and
agricultural w ork. T he m arks o f original creation persist, such as th e way h u m an s still
are draw n to “cleave to each o th e r” an d “becom e one flesh.” Yet th e story recognizes
th a t adult life also has its toil an d tragic im perfections. T he jo u rn ey o u t o f the garden
has b ro u g h t a life w here hu m an s have w ork in place o f leisure, “w isdom ” in place o f the
single garden com m and, an d - all to o often - m ale ru le over w om en in place o f the
connectedness th a t G od originally w ished.

Conclusion

Ultim ately, we can n o t know for sure w h eth er any o f th e texts discussed in this chapter
date from th e tim e o f D avid o r S olom on’s m onarchy. Som e texts are associated w ith
D avid o r Solom on, b u t this is n o t a sufficient basis for datin g th em to th a t tim e. The
form o f th e H ebrew language can be an o th er clue, b u t it is n o t reliable for d atin g texts
tran sm itte d - often by m em o ry - over centuries. Even the tracing o f “echoes” o f ancient
non-biblical texts in th e Bible is n o t a sure sign o f early dating. In sum , there are no
sure guideposts for dating biblical texts, p articularly to a p erio d so long before o u r
earliest m anuscripts. T he m ost we could do in this chapter is focus o n a few biblical
texts, som e associated w ith D avid an d S olom on and som e n o t, th a t show a distinctive
“echoing” o f foreign, pre-Israelite trad itio n s. Such n o n -p o lem ical echoing, we are
suggesting, w ould be m ost typical o f w ritings form ed at th e o u tset o f Israelite w riting
a n d less typical o f later tim es w hen hostility tow ard foreign culture was greater.
These echoes o f ancient texts can teach us ab o u t how ancient Israelites used the sorts
o f w ritten texts now in th e Bible. For exam ple, th e In stru ctio n o f A m enem ope, the epic
o f A trahasis, an d th e laws in the C ode o f H am m u rab i w ere all used in ancient Egyptian
o r M esopotam ian education. M esopotam ian an d E gyptian leaders were qualified for
th e ir jobs by learning to read an d m em o rize these texts. W h en we tu rn to sim ilar b ib ­
lical texts, such as th e “w ords o f the w ise” in Prov 22:17-24:34 th a t echo A m enem ope,
it is logical to hypothesize th a t such biblical texts likewise w ere used to educate leaders
in th e early m onarchy. W hatever the original fu nction o f earlier oral trad itio n s now
■

Echoes of Em pire in M o n a r ch a l Israel 83

em bedded in such biblical texts, as writings they probably helped educate th e leadership
elite in an em ergent m onarchy.
M eanwhile, th e differences betw een biblical texts and th e ir non-biblical co u n terp arts
are as im p o rta n t as th e sim ilarities. We can learn m uch ab o u t th e p articu lar values and
perspectives o f biblical authors thro u g h com paring the C ovenant Code w ith H am m urabi,
the “w ords o f the wise” in Prov 22:17-24:34 w ith the In stru ctio n o f A m enem ope, the
J source in Genesis 1-11 w ith A trahasis, an d so on. Biblical au th o rs d id n o t ju st copy
m ajor texts o f M esopotam ia an d Egypt. T hey refram ed non-biblical trad itio n s in light
o f th eir p articular values. T here is a m ajor difference, for exam ple, betw een th e biblical
story o f the flood in G enesis 6 - 9 , w here ju st o n e god brin g s th e flood an d rescues a
h u m an from it, an d the polytheistic tale in A trahasis, w here m o st o f th e gods b rin g the
flood w hile one god rescues a h u m a n from it. In this and o th e r biblical texts discussed
here, we see ancient Israelite au th o rs b uilding freely o n and yet radically adapting
m ore ancient literary trad itio n s from elsewhere. These u n k n o w n au th o rs, th e earliest
o f w hom w orked in the tim e o f D avid an d S olom on, are responsible for w ritin g the
first b u ilding blocks for w hat w ould m uch later becom e the H ebrew Bible.

C H A P T E R T H R E E RE VI E W

1. Know the meaning and significance of the following 2. What are two different ways in which comparison
terms discussed in this chapter: of a biblical text with an ancient non-biblical text can
■ couplet be useful? Give two examples of such comparison from
■ Covenant Code this chapter.
■ I
3. What are the multiple clues to the presence of two
■ moral act-consequence
sources in Genesis 1-11?
■ P
■ Priestly Source 4. What is source criticism and how does it compare to
■ primeval history
tradition history and transmission history? What is an
■ royal psalms example of a conclusion from source criticism?
■ royal theology
■ seconding 5. Know the basic character of the following ancient
■ Tetrateuch Near Eastern texts and how they are related by scholars
■ triplet to biblical texts that were discussed in this chapter:
■ tsedeqah ■ Atrahasis Epic
■ Yahwistic Source ■ Code of Hammurabi
■ Zion ■ Egyptian love songs
■ Zion psalms ■ Gilgamesh epic
■ Zion theology ■ Instruction of Amenemope
 RESO U R C ES FOR F U R T H E R STUDY

General introductions to wisdom literature Song o f Songs

Crenshaw, James. Old Testament Wisdom: An Introduction. Exum, Cheryl. Song o f Songs. Old Testament Library.
Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005.
Murphy, Roland. The Tree o f Life: An Exploration of Bib­ Keel, Othmar. Song o f Songs: A Continental Commentary,
lical Wisdom Literature. New York: Doubleday, 1990. trans. Frederick J. Gaiser. Minneapolis: MN: Fortress,
1997. Translation of a 1986 original.
Proverbs Weems, Renita. “Song of Songs.” Pp. 361-434 in vol. 5 of
the New Interpreters Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997.
Fox, Michael V. Proverbs. 2 volumes. Anchor Bible. New
York: Doubleday, 2000-9.
Genesis 1-11
Leeuwen, Raymond C. Van. “Proverbs.” Pp. 17-264 in
vol. 5 of the New Interpreters Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, Carr, David. Reading the Fractures o f Genesis. Louisville,
1997. KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. For more
Newsom, Carol A. “Woman and the Discourse of Patri­ detail on indicators of sources in Genesis 1-11.
archal Wisdom: A Study of Proverbs 1-9.” Pp. 142-60 Gowan, Donald E. From Eden to Babel: A Commentary
in Peggy L. Day (ed.), Gender and Difference in Ancient on the Book o f Genesis 1-11. International Theological
Israel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989. Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Ecclesiastes Discussion o f Song o f Songs, Genesis, and other

texts relating to sexuality
Brown, William. Ecclesiastes. Interpretation. Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox Press, 2000. Carr, David M. The Erotic Word: Sexuality and Spirituality
Crenshaw, James L. Ecclesiastes. Old Testament Library. in the Hebrew Bible. New York: Oxford University Press,
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987. 2003.
Gordis, R. Kohelet: The Man and His World: A Study o f
Ecclesiastes (revised edition). New York: Schocken
Books, 1988.
Lohfink, Norbert. Qohelet: A Continental Commentary,
trans. Sean McEvenue. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress,
2003. Translation of a 1980 original.