Reviews for Vetus Testamentum
[Reproduced from Vetus Testamentum
1997–2004 by the kind permission of Brill Academic Publishers. Some
special fonts or characters may not be properly represented. Some unwanted
spaces have also been introduced during copying. For a correct text see the
Flashpaper version.]
47, 2 (1997), pp. 266–67
John Pairman Brown, Israel
and Hellas. BZAW 231. xxii + 407 pp. Walter
de Gruyter, Berlin and New
York, 1995. This book claims to be “the very first book
to compare at length classical Hebrew and Greek texts” (p. vii). The nine
chapters and five excursuses, most of which have been previously published
in some form, may be read individually or together, but their effect is
cumulative. The breadth of the study, with references to over thirty
languages and literary allusions ranging from the Rig Veda to Bob Dylan,
will mean that the book has something of interest to most. Brown sees a
plethora of parallels between Greek and Hebrew literature. These are
discovered by comparing the phrases or words from a variety of classical
texts with phrases and words from the Old Testament. Brown argues that
Israel and Hellas must have had much contact in the period
before Alexander the Great and that this gave rise to many words being
loaned both ways, common phraseology and even parallel preservation of
phraseology which survives from a common past in the Neolithic. Ch. 1 sets
the scene for such textual parallels in the similarity of social situation
and method of writing in the two cultures. Ch. 2 gives what Brown believes
to be the strongest argument for contact between the cultures: “items of
vocabulary common to Greek and Hebrew” (p. 63). Common phraseology is also
traced in cosmology (ch. 3), the vine (ch. 4), war and peace (ch. 5),
sacrifice and the cult (ch. 6), and women's roles (ch. 7). Ch. 8 deals with
common phraseology in treaties, but compares classical formulae with those
of the whole ancient Near East and
not Israel alone. Ch. 9 compares
common proverbs (particularly in connection with gold) including five
proverbs which are he claims are shared between the book of Proverbs and
Theognis of Megara. “Sometimes themes come so close in the two collections
as to suggest or demand literary connection” (p. 293). However, his
examples, such as the proverb that the rich have more friends than the poor,
could easily have arisen independently in the two societies, and they do not
demand a literary connection.
It is not possible here to evaluate each example of
shared vocabulary dealt with in this book. Some are certainly correct, while
others are not suggested with any degree of certainty. His method is to
search for parallel contexts for words and phrases and he hopes (p. 64) that
if “the examples of undisputed etymology are thought to validate the method,
perhaps in turn the method will buttress the speculative etymologies”. Some
of his connections fail semantically, for instance, few will be convinced
that Hebrew brkh “pool” “has a deep relation to” Greek âñï÷Þ “rain” (p. 24).
While it is difficult to disprove many of Brown's etymological connections,
we may say that he needs to adduce much more evidence than he has done for
some of his examples. If one searches the lexica of a few ancient languages
a parallel for almost any phonetic change can be found. It may well be
therefore that Brown overstates his case in connecting Hebrew rmh?
“lance” with Greek ëüã÷ç
“spear-head” (pp. 170-7), zbh? “sacrifice” with
óöÜæù “slaughter” (p. 187), zwnh “harlot” with ãõíÞ “woman” and thus with
English “queen” (pp. 226-7) and mt?r “rain” with œäùñ “water” (p. 330).
Regardless of whether we accept these suggestions or not, Brown's book is
all the more useful as a reference work because it has tended to include
rather than exclude possible connections, especially since it is well
supplied with 64 pages of indexes. If only half of Brown's etymologies,
loans or common phrases are correct then there is already evidence for more
contact between Israel and
Hellas in ancient times than we tend
to recognize—cultures which, as we are reminded on p. 1, were only “a week's
voyage apart with favorable winds”.
[P.J. Williams]
47, 3 (1997), pp. 416–17
Herbert Donner, Aufsätze zum Alten Testament.
BZAW 224. viii + 311 pp. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and New York, 1994. This is a collection of 15 essays
with no overarching theme, all previously published elsewhere between 1959
and 1992. Two appear in German for the first time. The opening three essays
concern social structures. The first, on the position of queen mother in the
O.T., briefly discusses biblical material and at greater length
extra-biblical material, especially material from Ugarit
, showing the political and economic influence of the
queen mother, and the reverence with which she was addressed. The O.T.
function is indirectly derived from the Hittites. The second essay is
concerning the “king's friend” and argues that this was an advisor's title,
taken from Egyptian administration. It is connected with a title ascribed to
Abdi h epa in
the El-Amarna letters, and a title in Gen. xxvi 26. Any connection between
the friend of the king and the šalîš is rejected. The third essay,
which concerns adoption, surveys ancient Near Eastern laws and texts before
arguing that the practices in Ex. ii 10; Esth. ii 7; Gen. xvi, xxx, xlviii
l; and Ruth iv 16 are not forms of adoption. The system of levirate marriage
and fixed property eliminated the need for adoption in Israel . Since adoption was not part of the O.T.
system Donner questions whether 1 Sam. vii 14; Ps. ii 7; Is. ix 5 can be
understood to refer to the action of adoption (pp. 60-1). There is an
appendix containing primary extra-biblical references to adoption.
The fourth essay argues that 1 Kgs. xii 28
should be translated “Hier sind deine Götter
, Israel !” with
'lhym being a plural. The plural does not represent a plurality of
gods, but rather a “Polyjahwismus” in which different locations had their
own Yahweh. Donner tentatively finds traces of this in 2 Sam. xv 7 where he
believes that Absalom asked David's permission to pay his vow before Yahweh
of Hebron .
The fifth and longest essay considers how
the Joseph story arrived in its present form and position within Genesis.
Donner's thesis is clear. “Man kann nicht beides haben: die
Josephsgeschichte als Novelle und als Bestandteil der
Pentateuchquellen J und E” (p. 84). Various reasons given for source
division, such as doublets and language analyses by H. Gunkel and O.
Procksch are examined before it is concluded that, “Die Kriterien der
Pentateuchquellenscheidung versagen an Gen. 37-50” (p. 94). J and E did have
their own account of the descent into Egypt and this was preserved by the Jehovistic Redactor's use Gen. xli
50-52, xlvi 1aß-5a, xlviii and 123-5, [1] which are not integral with the rest of the Joseph
account. Donner then considers how the Joseph story has a striking
penchant for the number two as part of its literary art. Despite
this, “Midianites” in xxxvii, “an Egyptian” in xxxix 1, and saq in
xlii are secondary. A brief bibliography of post-biblical use of the Joseph
story is appended.
The next essay considers the two characterizations of
Balaam as good and bad. Negative characterizations of Balaam in brief O.T.
notices outside Num. xxii-xxiv have been variously considered as remnants of
a Balaam tradition independent from Num. xxii-xxiv or as literary and
exegetical developments from those chapters. Donner argues for the latter,
considering how negative elements could easily be found in Num. xxii-xxiv.
The following essay compares four accounts related to
Yahweh's rejection of Saul as king. The narrative of Saul's visit to a
medium in 1 Sam. xxviii is considered early and pre-Deuteronomic. On the
other hand, Donner argues that the account of Saul's war with Amalek in 1
Sam. xv is post-exilic, dependent on passages inside and outside
1 Samuel, and without historical basis. The episode of Saul's sacrifice
at Gilgal in 1 Sam. xiii 7b-15a stems from an early priestly circle around
David, while the earliest account is that of Saul and Jonathan in 1 Sam. xiv
23b-46, which has an ambivalent attitude towards Saul.
The eighth essay argues that Isa. lvi 1-7 abrogates Dt.
xxiii 2-9, which was both near to its present form and regarded as canonical
at the time when Isa. lvi 1-7 was composed. The way that Isa. lvi does not
quote the exact wording of Deuteronomy is analogous to cases of abrogation
in the Koran.
A brief article on Jacob's pronouncement in
Gen. xlix 14-15 argues that it portrays Issachar as a non-sedentary tribe
which is criticized for too readily continuing as mas for the
Canaanites. Hebrew mas is primarily a collective-singular personal
term, which should be understood to mean “Fronarbeiter” (p. 185). The saying
gives a reliable insight into Israel 's early history.
The next essay seeks to resolve difficulties
in the translation of three verses from Ps. cxxii. Verse 2 should be
understood as “our feet were standing” with past tense, on the
analogy of other examples of the verb hyh with the participle. In
v. 3 the verb h?br refers notionally to the unity of the
people, not the architecture of Jerusalem . In v. 5 yšb should be translated by a past tense.
The eleventh essay argues that Isa. xxxiv is of a
different origin from Isa. xxxv. Isa. xxxiv 16-17 is a later addition to ch.
xxxiv which sanctions the authority of xxxiv 1-15. Next is an essay that
suggests reasons for a Maccabean dating of Ps. cx by comparing it with 1
Macc. xiv 41-9 where the most analogous combination of regal and priestly
offices is found.
The last three essays consider the nature of Holy
Scripture. The first discusses the origin of the phrases for “as it is
written” used by Jews and Christians to refer to Holy Scripture. Donner
rightly rejects any view which maintains that the formula is built on Greek
models, and examines the roots of the formula in nineteen Old Testament
occurrences. He maintains that in the majority of O.T. occurrences the
written thing referred to is Deuteronomy, which was the first book of the
Old Testament to reach the status of “Holy Scripture”. The next essay
examines Spinoza's views on prophecy and prophets in his Tractatus
theologico-politicus . Spinoza, using a broad definition of “prophets”
including figures not specifically denoted as nby' in the O.T.,
held that the insights of prophets were only quantitatively, not
qualitatively distinct from natural insights. The final essay considers the
role of the redactor by drawing parallels between the Pentateuch and three
harmonies of the four Gospels. In particular, harmonies of the resurrection
accounts are compared with the flood account in Genesis. Just as harmonists
of the Gospels believed in the real historical agreement of the accounts
they combined, even so “R p meinte tatsächlich, J und P berichteten dasselbe
mit verschiedenen Worten, und zwar nicht nur generell, sondern auch im
Detail” (p. 284). Perhaps it is surprising that what R p ex hypothesi
was unable to distinguish can now be identified with such ease.
All the essays are of a high quality, and the volume,
though disparate, is made more usable by the presence of indexes of texts
cited, proper names and subjects.
[P.J. Williams]
47, 4 (1997), pp. 566–67
B.H. Stricker, Het
Beloofde
Land: De Scheuring van het Rijk
Israël. vi + 180 pp. Van Gorcum, Assen, 1993. NLG
39.50. This book is about Jewish and Samaritan historiography and history.
It is divided into two sections examining first Jewish accounts of their own
origin and the origin of the Samaritans, and then, more briefly, the
Samaritan accounts of the same subjects. The former section relates Jewish
history based mainly on the accounts of the Old Testament and Josephus. It
contains numerous lengthy quotations from these, and highlights material
which is of interest for an analysis of Jewish-Samaritan relations. The
latter section is based mainly on the Samaritan Pentateuch and Samaritan
Chronicles. Stricker maintains that both Jewish and Samaritan sources are
highly polemical. He believes that the Samaritans are descended from the
northern tribes of Israel (p. 4) which split from the southern ones in 933
B.C., that Shechem was rightfully the ancient centre of Mosaic cult (p. 73),
and that the earliest form of Israelite religion was Sun-worship (p. 59),
which may even have survived in some quarters into this era (p. 162). The
Samaritan Chronicles are later than and dependent on the historical books of
the O.T. but contain insertions original to the Samaritans, some of which
include memories of genuine events (p. 154). Although no date can be given
for the time when pre-exilic Samaritan literature was lost to posterity,
thirteen events which would impair preservation of literature took place
before the rise of Islam (pp. 170-1). Although the Book of Abishua as
currently extant is a later creation, a former book of that same name may
possibly be identified with one of the supposed sources of the Pentateuch, E
or J (p. 158). This book is entirely based on discussion of primary sources
and hence has virtually no discussion of the views of other scholars, no
bibliography and no indexes.
[Peter J. Williams]
48, 1 (1998), pp. 122–23
P.B. Dirksen and A. van der Kooij (ed.), The
Peshit?ta as a Translation: Papers Read at the II Peshit?ta Symposium Held
at Leiden , 19-21
August. 1993 . Monographs of the Peshit?ta
Institute Leiden 8. viii + 240 pp.
E.J. Brill, Leiden, New York, Köln, 1995. After the first Peshit?ta
Symposium considered the textual history of the Peshit?ta (P), it was
appropriate for this second Symposium to consider P as a translation. All
items are in English, except for the first, which is in French. This essay
by P.G. Borbone presents some preliminary results from the concordance to P
which is being co-ordinated by Borbone and K.D. Jenner. It discusses the
layout in the concordance of Syriac words and their corresponding Hebrew
words and observes (from Numbers and Deuteronomy) P's contrary tendencies
both to represent two Hebrew roots by a single Syriac root, thus levelling
semantic distinctions, and to use Syriac roots with a more precise meaning
than the Hebrew original. Next, P.B. Dirksen discusses the theological
profile of the translator of P-Chronicles: his “strong sense of community”
(p. 19), “emphasis on the law of God as the path to life” (p. 20), rendition
of Hebrew bryt “covenant” (pp. 21-2), and portrayal of David “more
or less as a religious example” (pp. 22-3). In the following essay G.
Goldenberg treats five diverse issues of idiom in P and briefly the issue of
Syriac pronunciation and transliteration. T. Muraoka's reply to Goldenberg's
paper seeks to refine or even correct some of his points. K.D. Jenner then
analyses (with particular focus on Gen. iv 9) the method that Jacob of
Edessa used to render nominal clauses as compared with the methods of P and
the Syrohexapla (Syh). He thereby attempts to establish criteria for the
reconstruction of non-extant portions of Syh from P and from Jacob of
Edessa's revision. J. Joosten considers doublet translations in P-Proverbs
and how they “do not indicate conflation of two originally distinct
translations, nor extensive editing of an ‘Old Syriac' version of Proverbs;
rather, they are typical of the working method of the author—possibly of the
group of authors . . .” (p. 63). The translation may have been produced as
late as the third century A.D. (p. 66). D.J. Lane
then positively evaluates the style of P-Song of
Solomon, and argues that variant readings within its manuscript tradition
show “a concern for acceptability in both meaning and literary style” (p.
80). J. Lund argues, by considering the divergences between LXX and P-Psalms
in the very contexts where four striking agreements occur between the two
versions, that P did not use the LXX and that “in the past, the direct
influence of the LXX on the P has been grossly exaggerated” (p. 102). Y.
Maori discusses the methodology for deciding whether a divergence from a
literal rendering of MT in P-Pentateuch attests a non-masoretic Vorlage
or is an example of exegesis. Though theoretically one could explain
nearly every divergence either way, the method that assumes the least should
be adopted, and it is the exegetical approach that is more often to be
preferred, with the methodological limitation that “a non-literal
translation of P should be ascribed to rabbinic influence only if a similar
exegesis can be traced in rabbinic literature to the text in question” (p.
113). R.P. Gordon in his response to Maori argues that the issue whether
rabbinic influence can be attested for a translation is not as clear-cut as
Maori has supposed. Maori remarks on Gordon's response that his delimitation
of rabbinic influence in particular terms was merely “to maintain
methodological discipline” (p. 127). The lengthiest contribution (pp.
129-76) is by J.C. de Moor and F. Sepmeijer considering the relationship
between P-Joshua and Tg-Joshua by both statistical and individual evaluation
of similarities and differences between the two translations. The
statistical evaluation (over half the essay consists of lists of renderings
by P and Tg side-by-side) indicates relatively consistent divergence between
Tg and P, and thus might lead one to suppose that they were not directly
connected. However, the individual consideration of some passages leads the
authors to suppose that the translator deliberately attempted to conceal his
use of Tg, a fact which can be most easily explained if he was a Christian
convert. This hypothesis, it is asserted, may also explain the statistical
divergence between the two translations. Thereafter, R.B. ter Haar Romeny
considers evidence that 5b1 was not a textually unusual manuscript at the
time that it was made. D.M. Walter then argues that P-Kings (represented by
all the mss), and also its revision (represented by all the mss except for
9a1), used P-Isaiah as a source in a number of texts where Kings and Isaiah
are parallel. P-Kings possibly, and its revision definitely, have likewise
used P-Jeremiah. Next, J. Cook outlines the method of the Stellenbosch
Peshit?ta data-base, and considers the relationship between the LXX and P in
Prov. ii and ix. “From the discussion it would seem appropriate to conclude
that the Peshit?ta was not dependent on the Septuagint to a large extent”
(p. 218). There follows a two-page report by A. van der Kooij on the
progress of projects related to the Peshit?ta Institute. A very important
feature of this volume is the Appendix by P.B. Dirksen which contains a
valuable supplement to his work An Annotated Bibliography of the
Peshit?ta of the Old Testament ( Leiden
, 1989). This volume may serve as a useful tool to both
specialists and beginners in P-studies.
[P.J. Williams]
48, 1 (1998), pp. 124–25
Friedrich Fechter, Bewältigung der Katastrophe:
Untersuchungen zu ausgewählten Fremdvölkersprüchen im Ezechielbuch.
BZAW 208. x + 350 pp. Walter de Gruyter , Berlin and New York , 1992. DM 144. This is an investigation
of the authorship, original function and composition of the oracles against
the nations (FVS) in Ezekiel, principally focusing on selections from chs
xxv to xxix. Fechter begins his study of each text with a detailed
text-critical analysis, usually followed by a literary-critical analysis. In
ch. 1 (pp. 26-103) he argues that Ezek. xxv 1-17 is not a unity, but is
composed of several units added to the oldest core ( vv. 1-5). This
leads to an investigation of the oracle against Ammon in xxv 1-5, which,
though it does imitate Ezekiel's style, was not composed by the prophet
himself. This text makes the first move towards questioning Yahweh's
exclusive relationship with Israel ,
and thus attempts to explain how Judah could have been visibly allowed by Yahweh to be humiliated. There
follows an investigation of ch. xxvi, in particular of xxvi 1-5, which is
supposed to be the oldest text concerned with Tyre in the book, and to have
served as the basis for the composition of further parts of ch. xxvi. The
style of xxvi 1-5 shows the author of that section to have had some close
connection with Ezekiel. Ch. 2 (pp. 104-24) is a briefer investigation of
the lament for the ship in Ezekiel xxvii. This contains a translation of the
original lament as reconstructed by Fechter. The chapter is supposed to have
arisen in at least three stages. Ch. 3 (pp. 125-207) investigates xxviii
1-19, which is regarded as composed of two essential units ( vv.
1-10 and 11-19). Vv. 1-10 contain the expansions of vv.
3-5 and 6. Vv. 11-19 tell of a beautiful seal given to a
cherub. xxviii 13 has been expanded by a glossator from his memory of the
list of precious stones in Exod. xxviii, and the original lament is
reconstructed without glosses. It was, perhaps, originally directed towards
Zedekiah. Ch. 4 (pp. 208-59) analyses Ezek. xxix: vv. 1-16 contain
three levels of expansion of the original text, which was directed only to
Pharaoh, not to the inhabitants of Egypt generally, and spoke of a dragon, not a crocodile. Vv. 17-20
and 21 are of separate origin from the rest. Ch. 5 (pp. 260-81) examines
xxviii 20-26, of which v. 24 is the oldest part. Ch. 6 (pp.
282-303) brings together the issues of composition and authorial intention
from the previous chapters, and surveys separately the redaction of material
connected with Tyre and Egypt . Generally, Fechter sees the growth of
texts as a complex process. None of the texts investigated are attributed to
Ezekiel himself as author: “Ezechiel ist nicht Verfasser der
Fremdvölkersprüche . . .” (p. 286). Decisions as to authorship, or the
disunity of a text are often made confidently on the basis of small
phraseological variations, or a previous critical decision that is itself
uncertain. As a standard by which to judge what comes from Ezekiel himself
the conclusions of W. Zimmerli and G. Fohrer are provisionally accepted (p.
23). Using this fixed point Fechter applied his axiom “Sollten sich unter
den FVS genuine Worte des Propheten finden lassen, so dürfen sich diese
sprachlich , vorstellungsmäßig und strukturell
nicht signifikant von den ‘echten' Worten des übrigen Buches
unterscheiden” (p. 283). The key point of disagreement one may have concerns
the precise definition of “signifikant” when one is investigating issues of
authorship. A consequence of Fechter's investigation is his conclusion that
there is no “ Gattung Fremdvölkerspruch ” (p. 303). The book is
full of helpful discussion of details of textual criticism and literary
criticism, but shows some weakness in its overall argument. At relevant
points in the discussion there are excursuses on subjects, such as the
designations of God in Ezekiel (pp. 29-34), quotations of direct speech in
the FVS (pp. 41-8), and seven regular formulae in the FVS (pp. 57-73).
[P.J. Williams]
48, 1 (1998), pp. 129–30
R . E. LONGACRE,
Joseph: A Story of Divine Providence: A Text Theoretical and
Textlinguistic Analysis of Genesis 37 and 39-48.
xiv + 322 pp. Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake , 1989 $27.50. This book
is written for both O.T. scholars and contemporary text-linguists. “Perhaps
the deepest and most pervasive assumption of this volume is the assumption
that variation in a text is not random but motivated ” (p. xiii).
Longacre, after describing his reasons for “complete skepticism toward the
classical sources (JEPD) and their contemporary derivatives” (p. 11),
describes in broad outline in chs 1 and 2 the literary structures and
setting of the Joseph story. In chs 3 and 4 he expounds his theory of “verb
rank” with regard to Hebrew verbs. According to this theory to discover a
verb's function we must first discover the type of discourse (narrative,
predictive, hortatory, etc.) of a given passage. “Within each of these types
[of discourse] the verb forms/clauses used in that type can be arranged on a
scale from the most relevant (mainline) in that discourse type, down to the
type of verb/clause that is least relevant” (p. 60). Thus although the
waw -consecutive (prefix conjugation) holds the highest rank in
narrative discourse it does not in other kinds of discourse. Ch. 5 considers
the rank of command-type forms, e.g. imperative, jussive, second person
waw -consecutive (suffix conjugation) etc., and the ways in which
commands may or may not be mitigated. Ch. 6 discusses how participants are
referred to, whether nominally or pronominally. Longacre believes pronominal
object suffixes on verbs to be distinct in function from the independent
object pronoun. The pronominal object suffix is used “to express a dominance
pattern in which the participant(s) referred to by the object suffix is
under the dominance of someone else”. “Indication of the object participant
via 'et + pronoun is the more neutral or unmarked form . . .” (p.
155). Ch. 7 examines the use of nouns and pronouns for speaker and
addressees in formulae introducing direct speech, and explains the patterns
in terms of the dynamics of the individual dialogues of which they form a
part. Ch. 8 discusses the function of dialogue more generally within the
Joseph story. Pp. 209-310 contain a display of the “constituent structure”
of the Joseph story (at least till Genesis xlv), using indentation to show
the hierarchy of various levels of analysis. There is a brief appendix on
tagmemics (pp. 311-13). The proposals of the book are generally original,
and are also sufficiently distinct from each other that overstatements in
some areas do not undermine the value of other parts.
[P. J. WILLIAMS]
48, 1 (1998), p. 134
R.A. Taylor, The Peshit?ta of Daniel.
Monographs of the Peshit?ta Institute Leiden
7. xiv + 344 pp. E. J. Brill, Leiden
, New York ,
Köln, 1994. NLG 189, $122. This study, which developed from a Ph.D.
dissertation, is the most thorough and balanced analysis of the Peshit?ta of
Daniel to date, and addresses in detail the relationship between the
Peshit?ta, MT and the Greek texts of that book (including the
deuterocanonical additions with the exception of Susanna). Its methodology
has been to list and categorize every “potentially meaningful deviation”
from the MT. The MT has been taken, for methodological reasons, as the point
of reference, and therefore deviations between the MT and the LXX (Old
Greek) and “Theodotion” have also been listed, though they have not been
categorized. The combination of these lists takes up over a third of the
book. The text is dealt with chapter by chapter. After the list of
variations between the texts there is a commentary which brings together
variations from the MT of the same type and assesses whether these
variations were caused by a non-masoretic Vorlage , translation
technique, influence from the Greek versions, or some other cause.
Taylor concludes that the
Vorlage of the Peshit?ta of Daniel was “very close to the
consonantal text of MT”, and that for the deuterocanonical texts examined
the “translator seems to have made use of a Greek text similar to, but not
identical with, Theodotion-Daniel” (p. 309). In iii 7, v 11, x 9, and xi 10
the Peshit?ta has a reading that “is probably to be preferred over that of
MT” (p. 310). Taylor has found “only
minimal influence of LXX upon the Peshit?ta of the Book of Daniel”, while
“affinities between the Peshit?ta and Theodotion-Daniel are much more
pronounced than possible affinities between the Peshit?ta and LXX” (pp.
311-12). Therefore, as a text-critical witness the Peshit?ta is to be valued
most “when it differs from Theodotion-Daniel against MT” (p. 313).
The translation is tentatively dated to the
3rd [2] century A.D., and
there is no evidence suggesting more than one translator. The author
expresses his disappointment at his conclusion that “there is nothing in
either the text or the translation technique of the Syriac version of the
Book of Daniel that enables us to identify the religious background of the
translator or his community” (p. 323). At appropriate points throughout the
work Taylor interacts with a wide
range of literature on the text of Daniel, and as a result this volume will
be useful to those outside Peshit?ta studies, particularly those studying
the Greek texts of Daniel.
[P.J. Williams]
48, 2 (1998), p. 274
M. Baldacci, La Scoperta di Ugarit: La città-stato
ai primordi della Bibbia. 414 pp + 32 plates. Piemme, Casale
Monferrato, 1996. L. It. 48,000. This is both a comprehensive and a vivid
account of the discovery of Ugarit ,
of its literature, and of the way Ugarit has affected our understanding of the O.T. This book is divided into
four sections, the first recounting many of the parallels between Ugaritic
texts and the Bible, with a critique of those who seek to minimize the value
of such parallels. The second records the archaeological setting of
Ugarit, giving a detailed account of
the successive stages of construction of the palaces, and describing each
part of the city with particular reference to the locations where texts have
been discovered. The third section records the historical position of
Ugarit from the Early Bronze Period
to the abandonment of the city and reconstructs the succession of kings in
Ugarit . The final section, after
briefly describing how Ugaritic was deciphered, introduces the literature of
Ugarit with a particular focus on
its mythology. The section also contains translations of the Baal Cycle and
the Story of Aqhat, each work having its own introduction. Both translations
have been copiously supplied with footnotes, and will no doubt be welcomed
by Italian readers since, as the author notes (p. 14), for the most part
these texts have not previously been translated into Italian.
Baldacci could in no way be described as
understating the connections between Ugarit and the Bible. He sees the area of Syria
and Palestine during the Late Bronze Period as generally uniform culturally, and he
is therefore prepared to describe the culture of the Ugarit as ancestral rather than avuncular in its
relationship to the culture of the Bible (though, for instance, he is more
nuanced in his description on p. 227). Thus, numerous parallels between
biblical and Ugaritic phraseology are found and throughout the book many
retranslations of biblical passages are given on the basis of Ugaritic.
Baldacci's translation method is often as radical in its extent as that of
Mitchell Dahood with whom he studied. The parallels between Ugaritic
literature and the Bible are used to argue for an early dating of some
documents. Thus, for instance, it is claimed that Ps. lxviii may contain
elements from as early as the 13th century B.C. (p. 21), and the book of Job
elements from at least the 11th century B.C. (pp. 39 and 90). In one case of
early dating Baldacci goes so far as to call his case “inconfutabile” (p.
41). One of the errors of fact in this book is that several times (pp. 40
twice, 56, 196, 197, 277) Pharaohs from the nineteenth dynasty are said to
be from the seventeenth (although this mistake is not made consistently; see
pp. 106 and 197). The book is superbly illustrated with tables, drawings and
colour photographs, and certainly provides an account of Ugarit that will be of help to those of all
levels of interest in things Ugaritic.
[P.J. Williams]
48, 2 (1998), pp. 286-87
Jan A. Wagenaar, Oordeel en heil: een onderzoek naar
samenhang tussen de heils- en onheilsprofetieën in Micha 2-5 . x + 310
pp. Author's edition of a doctoral dissertation at the University of Utrecht
, 1995. A copy may be obtained by transferring NLG 45 to
the Giro account 4400195 of J.A. Wagenaar in Utrecht
, the Netherlands , mentioning “dissertation”. This dissertation poses the familiar
question why in the book of Micah we find the juxtaposition of oracles of
judgement and salvation. Before considering this question in detail the
author makes a thorough analysis from a textual and philological angle of
the section of the book in question (Micah ii-v). The analysis on the whole
supports the validity of the MT, and argues that the LXX was translated from
a text that was, at least consonantally, close to the MT, even if the LXX
translators interpreted the consonants differently from the Masoretes.
Wagenaar also offers his own translation of these chapters. After this first
section he expounds three models for explaining the alternation between
oracles of judgement and salvation. In each case he describes individually
the views of proponents of the particular model in question, before
considering the validity of the model.
The first model is the composition model, according to
which the alternation between oracles of judgement and salvation is due to
deliberate arrangement and shows signs of internal cohesion. A coherent
message is conveyed in the book by this alternation. As proponents of this
model Wagenaar considers in turn J.T. Willis, W. Rudolph, L.C. Allen, D.G.
Hagstrom and K.H. Cuffey. On the whole, Wagenaar is unimpressed by these
authors' claims of the use of chiasmus, inclusio, catchwords or ideas, and
other such literary devices within the seven chapters of the book of Micah.
After all, he notes, prophecies with similarities in vocabulary can be
placed next to each other precisely because of the similarities they have
(p. 114), but this does not prove that an overall structure is marked when a
scholar finds such patterns. Some patterns arise from chance and some are
found only when the scholar is artificially selective in dealing with the
evidence. For instance, the calls to hear in i 2, iii 1 and vi 1 cannot be
regarded as catch-phrases marking the three sections of the book, since such
a tripartite division ignores similar calls in iii 9 and vi 9 (pp. 117-8).
Wagenaar concludes that the composition model does not provide an adequate
explanation for the alternation of oracles evident in the book.
The second model is what Wagenaar calls the “discussion
model”. This model, proposed by A.S. van der Woude and J. de Waard, holds
that Micah ii-v is a discussion between Micah and his opponents. The oracles
of judgement are attributed to Micah, and the oracles of salvation to his
opponents. Wagenaar agrees with Van der Woude's proposal that chs vi and vii
are of a different origin from the rest of the book. However, he believes
that there is insufficient evidence in the text to suppose the regular
changes in speaker supposed by the discussion model. Other texts which have
been held to show similar unmarked changes in speaker are shown not to
provide true parallels. Wagenaar also finds it difficult to believe that in
a discussion Micah's opponents would be given the final word as in v 9-14
(p. 155). The discussion model, like the composition model is thus weighed
and found wanting.
The third model for explaining the book's origin is the
redaction-historical model, which regards the book of Micah as the result of
a long process of growth, rather than as a literary unity. The
representatives of this position whose work is analysed are Th. Lescow, I.
Willi-Plein, J. Jeremias, J.L. Mays, H.W. Wolff and E. Otto. According to
most of these the oracles of doom can mainly be ascribed to the prophet
Micah himself. The salvation oracles have been added at later stages in the
history of the book. Different types of oracle correspond to the different
phases of history during which the book has been redacted. Wagenaar finds
the redaction-historical approach the most plausible, but is not convinced
that merely the fact that an oracle is one of doom can be used as a
criterion for its authenticity.
Having thus favoured the third model Wagenaar finally
turns to his own explanation of the oracles from the redaction-historical
angle. He considers the background of each oracle individually and concludes
that ii 1-5 is the work of “disciples” of Micah in the 7th century. ii 6-11
is the product of a similar group at the end of the 7th century, or during
the 6th century. ii 12-13, which is very much connected to iv 6-7, dates
from the post-exilic, or late exilic period. iii 1-12 is the work of people
who may have had some connection with the prophet Jeremiah (p. 239).
Although Micah iv 1-5 contains wording and ideas almost identical with those
found in Isa. ii 2-5, the small variations in wording are such as fit the
oracle in both books to its own context within each book. The passage is
probably from the post-exilic period inserted into Isaiah and Micah either
by a single redactor, or by two different redactors. iv 8, v 1-4a and v 9-13
are late or post-exilic, and iv 9-10 and 14 early exilic, while iv 11-13 and
v 6-8 are certainly post-exilic. v 14 and i 2 provide a redactional
framework from the post-exilic period. Wagenaar concludes that, even though
certain are of similar date, this does not necessarily point to only a
single level of redaction in that period. New oracles are called for by new
situations, and these are laid in the mouth of the “legendary” prophet Micah
(pp. 288-90). There is a five-page English summary at the end of the book.
One possibility that Wagenaar has not considered sufficiently is the
possibility of adjacent oracles being compositional units and yet displaying
no literary structures indicating unity. Just as the presence of literary
structures need not indicate compositional unity, the absence of such
structures need not indicate disunity. Wagenaar, however, does provide a
searching critique of prevalent methodologies for finding literary
structures, a critique that should not be ignored.
[P.J. Williams]
48, 4 (1998), pp. 565–66
E. Bons, Psalm 31—Rettung als Paradigma: Eine
synchron-leserorientierte Analyse. Frankfurter theologische Studien 48.
xii + 307 pp. Joseph Knecht, Frankfurt am Main, 1994. According to the
author Ps. xxxi has suffered neglect from scholars, and, when it has
received attention, has generally also received negative evaluation. Thus J.
Olshausen is quoted as saying, “Das Ganze ist ein Gedicht ohne Originalität”
(p. 2). After the introduction Bons undertakes a re-evaluation of the psalm
in two stages. The first is a detailed analysis of words and phrases of the
text under consideration (pp. 33-138). This provides the foundation for the
second stage, namely the analysis of the psalm as a whole (pp. 139-274). The
author suggests (p. xii) that readers who do not have the time or
inclination to wade through the first part of the work may proceed directly
from the introduction to the second part. So that the distinctives of the MT
and LXX are not mixed, the text analysed by Bons is that of BHS
(i.e. Codex Firkowitsch) and not an eclectic text. However, this does
not mean that other witnesses such as the LXX are ignored. In Bons's words
(p. 27), “Bleibt aber somit die LXX als ‘eigenständiger' Text erhalten, so
entsteht auch nicht der Nachteil, daß sie nach ihrer textkritischen Nutzung
beiseite gelegt und aus der weiteren Untersuchung ausgeschlossen wird.”
Before the detailed analysis of Part 1, Bons produces an
“Arbeitsübersetzung” printed alongside the MT (with 15 accidental changes
from the text of BHS ). Part 1 then discusses in detail the meaning
of the words and phrases, with particular concentration on difficulties.
This focus on difficulties means that, whereas v. 14 receives
lengthy attention (pp. 92-114), vv. 15-17 are passed over in
silence.
Part 2 then considers issues throughout the psalm under
various headings: “Das Verhältnis des Sprechers zu Jahwe”, “Die Situation
des Sprechers”, “Jahwes Verhalten gegenüber den Menschen” and “Die Rettung
des Sprechers”. Rather than seeing the psalm as containing a rather
incongruous juxtaposition of expressions of thanksgiving for deliverance
already received, and of pleas for future deliverance (compare for instance
vv. 9 and 10) Bons perceives a development through the psalm. Thus
while vv. 16b and 17b ask for deliverance in words based on vv.
2-5, the formulation of the plea is less urgent in the later passage,
because of the fact that meanwhile (e.g. v. 15) the speaker has
found himself able to express trust in God (pp. 170-1). The speaker is
sufficiently encouraged by the end to exhort others to take heart in their
wait for deliverance ( v. 25). Bons divides the psalm into five
strophes ( vv. 2-5, 6-9, 10-14, 15-21 and 22-5) marked as units at
the levels of both form and content. The psalm does not spring from a
specific situation of need and deliverance, but is rather paradigmatic. Its
lack of concrete detail about the situation of the speaker, rather than
being a weakness of an artificial composition, is a strength that allows
readers to apply the psalm to their own situation. Moreover, the author of
the psalm should not uncritically be identified with the speaker in the
psalm, since there is no way of knowing the extent to which the author based
the speaker's expressions upon his own experiences (p. 257).
A final section called “Wirkungsgeschichtliche
Beobachtungen” (pp. 259-74) examines four levels of reception of the psalm.
First, it considers the way Ps. xxxi was placed within the first book of
Psalms, and especially its relationship to Ps. xxx, xxxii and xxxiii.
Secondly and briefly, it considers the use of Ps. xxxi in the Qumran
Hodayoth. Thirdly, the LXX of Ps. xxxi is examined, and finally the use of
Ps. xxxi 6 in the mouth of Jesus on the cross in Lk. xxiii 46.
Though Bons deals with only one psalm, some of the
detailed arguments in this book should make a significant contribution to
questions about the Sitz im Leben of psalms generally.
[P.J. Williams]
48, 4 (1998), pp. 566–67
Kristin De Troyer, Het einde van de Alpha-tekst van
Ester: Vertaal- en verhaaltechniek van MT 8,1-17, LXX 8,1-17 en AT
7,14-41. 361 pp. Peeters, Leuven, 1997. BEF 1600. This monograph is more than an examination of a
brief section of the second Greek text of Esther sometimes known as the
Alpha Text (AT). A thorough introduction discusses the various editions of
the Greek texts and the varying systems of versification used for Esther and
its appendices. The history of research on the relationship between the MT
and LXX with its appendices is surveyed from the 18th century to the
present. From this survey it emerges that the unity of the MT is contested,
that LXX it generally viewed as a translation of the MT, and that AT could
be (1) a recension of the LXX, (2) a translation following the LXX, or (3)
translated from a Hebrew Vorlage differing from the MT (p. 25). The
views of R. Hanhart, H.J. Cook, E. Tov, D.J.A. Clines and M.V. Fox are then
further examined before De Troyer outlines her own methodology. Her
examination concentrates on ch. viii in the MT and LXX and the AT parallel
since the three texts show greater differences here than in previous
chapters. Moreover, according to some this chapter contains the ending of an
older form of the book of Esther (p. 50). What follows in the next three
chapters is a “close reading” of the chosen section in the MT, LXX and AT.
An examination of the MT ch. viii reveals that it is a
careful composition using much material from previous chapters of the book
(listed on p. 129). De Troyer concludes that the author of the chapter was
the same as the author of the rest of the book, and that the MT is a
coherent whole. The LXX is then examined with particular reference to its
relationship with the MT. It uses good Greek, makes syntactic and semantic
changes, and introduces simplifications, but was certainly made from a
Hebrew Vorlage like the MT. The LXX changes the story at points:
Haman is called a “Macedonian”, and Mordecai is a priestly figure. AT vii
14-41 (investigated without appendix E = AT vii 22-32) is found to be a
complete retelling and restructuring of the story found in LXX—a sort of
“rewritten Bible” (p. 261). Mordecai rather than Esther is the main
character. Some parts of the story of the LXX are entirely dropped in AT,
while AT contains additional parts composed on the basis of material it has
already used. Hebrew colouring in AT is to be explained as from the LXX's
influence and does not testify to a non-Masoretic Hebrew Vorlage .
From its use of Macedonian month names AT is to be dated after A.D. 15.
Having examined the three main texts in chs 2-4, in ch. 5
De Troyer examines appendix E in the LXX and AT. A consequence of her view
that AT is a retelling of the LXX should be that the LXX appendix E has also
been retold by AT. From an examination of the two texts De Troyer concludes
that AT has deliberately integrated appendix E with its surrounding context,
and that therefore contra K.H. Jobes it is the LXX not AT that
preserves the older form of the appendix. Moreover, De Troyer argues that
the LXX has never existed without appendix E, and that appendices B and E
(unlike the other appendices) were originally composed in Greek.
Ch. 6 brings together the conclusions of
previous chapters and adds some additional hypotheses. AT is a rewriting of
the LXX with a specific person and historical context in mind. Mordecai is
Agrippa, Haman is Flaccus and King Ahasuerus is Claudius Caesar. No guess is
made as to the identity of Esther. AT is about Agrippa who persuaded
Claudius to allow the Jews to live according to their own laws. It was
written by a Jew in Rome around A.D.
40-41. AT should now be taken to stand for “Agrippa Text”. This book will
interest historian, textual critic and literary critic alike.
A brief English summary follows. Greek accentuation is
frequently wrong.
[P.J. Williams]
49, 2 (1999), pp. 268–70
Jan J. Boersema, Thora en Stoa: over mens en natuur:
een bijdrage aan het milieudebat over duurzaamheid en kwaliteit. iv +
319 pp. G.F. Callenbach, Baarn, 1997. NLG 39.90. In this book Boersema, a
scientist, seeks to investigate the relevance of the O.T. and of Greek
philosophy (especially that of the Stoics) to modern environmental debates.
The first of five chapters considers the problem of the environment in
western culture, particularly focusing on environmental debates in the
Netherlands. For a lasting solution
to these problems we are directed to consider the cosmologies that have most
influenced our modern culture, namely those found in the O.T. and in Greek
philosophy. Lynn White has blamed the modern ecological crisis on
“Judeo-Christian teleology” that has no regard for long-term sustainability.
Boersema therefore investigates in particular the relationship between
humans and nature presented in the cosmologies that have moulded our
cultures. The chapter ends with a brief introduction to the Bible, for those
who need it. Ch. 2 is devoted to the study of Gen. i-iii. Gen. i 1-ii 4a is
analysed with particular attention paid to the “image of God”, and the verbs
rdh and kbš . These verbs do have a harsh overtone in
other occurrences, but given the original vegetarian diet of human beings,
and the absence of animal death which this implies, the verbs rdh
and kbš cannot be understood to condone exploitation of nature
by humans. Since in Gen. i 1-ii 4a humans are not in any way mediators
between the Creator and the rest of nature, nature does not derive its value
from its usefulness to them (p. 74). Gen. ii presents a harmonious
relationship between the man and nature, but the changes introduced by the
curses in Gen. iii affect the very order of creation. For ch. 3 Boersema
examines the lists of clean and unclean animals in Lev. xi and Deut. xiv.
Following Mary Douglas, these laws are understood to be connected to
fundamental social values. As in Gen. i, the method of locomotion used by
each animal is an important feature for their classification. Rumination is
seen as a guarantee that an animal is vegetarian (p. 131), and therefore
reflects the ideal of the absence of death seen in Gen. i. Carnivores cause
death and therefore are unclean. Animals that traverse fundamental
boundaries by lacking the usual characteristics of their environment are
considered unclean because they violate the principle of separation found in
Gen. i. Thus water creatures without fins and scales and birds that do not
generally fly are considered unclean. No single principle underlying the
whole of the food laws can be found (p. 159). However, the Israelites needed
to keep the laws in order to be a holy people in the midst of peoples who
were not holy. By the food laws they demonstrated that death and bloodshed,
mixing of order, and blemishes of any kind were not consistent with the
ideal of the creation and the Creator (p. 178).
Ch. 4 is a brief consideration of Greek attitudes to
nature. Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus and the Stoics held nature to be an
ordered whole. They also believed in a scale of nature in which human beings
were at the top. Everything below on that scale (and thus the rest of
nature) derived its value from what was above it. Nature was there to serve
human beings and had no intrinsic value. Pythagoras, Plutarch and Porphyry
constitute rare dissenters from this view. Ch. 5 introduces a comparison
between the attitude towards nature in the O.T. and in the Greek
philosophers already considered. While in the Greek philosophies nature is
there for human beings (i.e. it is subordinate in a linear hierarchy), in
the O.T. Boersema sees a triangular hierarchy with God at the highest
corner, and non-human creation as the lowest. Human beings stand in-between,
but not directly (p. 209). Nature's value is derived from God, not from
them. From the 2nd century A.D. onwards the author sees a clear
Hellenization among the Church Fathers in their explanations of the O.T.'s
attitude to nature. There arose a linear hierarchy so that nature was seen
as entirely created for humans. A second stage of Hellenization took place
during the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance as conceptions of the world
became more mechanized. These Hellenized views and the anthropocentric
environmental policies based on them can now be re-evaluated without
severing the links that modern societies have with their heritage if
re-evaluation is carried out on the basis of the texts that have deeply
influenced our cultures. A summary of the book is contained on pp. 238-45,
and an English version of this summary on pp. 246-53. Boersema writes with
considerable competence as far as O.T. criticism is concerned, and
therefore, regardless of one's view of his general argument, his treatment
of biblical passages will be of benefit to biblical scholars, as well as to
wider audiences.
[P.J. Williams]
49, 4 (1999), pp. 568–70
J.A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume:
Cambridge 1995. SVT 66. viii + 420 pp. E.J. Brill,
Leiden, 1997. The volume opens with
J.A. Emerton's presidential address on the use of comparative Semitic
philology in Hebrew lexicography. Against recent negative evaluations of the
comparative method by J.F. Elwolde and D.J.A. Clines, Emerton argues for a
“sober, careful and disciplined application” of cognate languages to shed
light on the meaning of some Hebrew words. The following twenty essays
present versions of the invited papers for the congress. Adele Berlin argues
that while biblical narrative has recently enjoyed the attention of literary
critics, biblical poetry has not enjoyed any comparable research into how it
achieves its meaning. In poetry, in addition to parallelism, metaphor plays
a leading role. “Parallelism juxtaposes verbal similarities and differences
while metaphor juxtaposes non-verbal similarities and differences” (p. 28).
Phyllis A. Bird (pp. 37-80) argues at length on both sociological and
literary grounds that the male cult prostitute did not exist in ancient
Israel , and that the term
qdš(h) should not be translated “sacred prostitute”. In sum, “The
‘male cult prostitute' is a literary creation of a later age, beginning with
the shadowy complement of the qdšh in Deut. xxiii 18 and
culminating in the collective representation of male hierodules by a late
Deuteronomistic editor” (p. 63). K.J. Cathcart surveys the relationship
between O. T. studies and the emerging disciplines of Egyptology and
Assyriology in the nineteenth century. Particular attention is paid to the
role of Edward Hincks (1792-1866) and to his decipherment of Akkadian. J.-L.
Cunchillos introduces “La banque de données philologiques sémitiques
nord-occidentales”, or BDFSN, a data-base initially for Ugaritic, but which
ultimately may contain data from all north-west Semitic languages. The aim
is that BDFSN may be used for “l'herméneumatique”, a term coined by
Cunchillos meaning “interprétation automatique”, which fortunately does not
make the humans entirely redundant. John Day
considers resurrection imagery from the Ugaritic Baal
myth to the book of Daniel. In brief, the Canaanite imagery is
demythologized in Hos. v-vi and xiii-xiv; Hos. xiii-xiv influences Isa.
xxvi-xxvii (the two passages show a series of eight parallels) and Hos. xiii
14 is reinterpreted in Isa. xxvi 19; finally, Isa. xxvi 19 is reinterpreted
and remythologized in Dan. xii 2, which Day believes is the earliest
indisputable reference to a literal resurrection of the dead in the O.T.
K.J. Dell argues that wisdom literature still holds too marginal a place in
O.T. studies, and that it has been thus marginalized due to scholarly
preoccupation, following Wellhausen, with plotting linear development in the
religion of Israel. M.V. Fox answers the question “What is the book of
Proverbs about?” by plotting five themes that distinguish it both from
antecedent Israelite literature, and from wisdom literature of other A.N.E.
cultures. Judith Hadley takes up the theme of Lady Wisdom and argues that
she is a compensation for an eradication of the goddesses Asherah and
Astarte from Israel . Thus she
maintains that the meaning of asherah developed from denoting a goddess
during the monarchic period to referring to a mere object during the exile
(p. 169). To this development the appearance of Lady Wisdom is a “counter
reaction (perhaps even subconsciously) where the feminine needs to be
expressed” (p. 181). A. van der Kooij considers the relationship between
literary criticism and textual criticism with particular focus on Josh. xx,
1 Sam. xvii and Jer. xxxiii where LXX and MT notoriously differ. He
maintains that a seemingly literal translation technique in LXX does not
preclude the possibility that the translator also carried out major
editorial changes. He finds the second century B.C. an important time for
such editorial activity and it is to this period, for instance, that he
attributes the omission of Jer. xxxiii 14-26 in the LXX tradition. Alfred
Marx stresses the central role of sacrifice in ancient Israel , and to demonstrate this examines a wide
range of O.T. texts, and in particular Exod. xx 23-26, which he regards as a
carefully structured and crucial pericope. Tryggve Mettinger searches for
the roots of Israelite aniconism. By looking for de facto aniconism
rather than specifically “programmatic repudiation of images” he finds signs
of “material aniconism” among the Phoenicians, Nabateans, pre-Islamic Arabs
and in Bronze Age Syria . This, he
believes, is the West Semitic background from which Israelite iconoclasm
developed after the fall of the Northern Kingdom
. Alexander Rofé seeks to identify aggadic
interpolations and elaborations within MT, LXX and DSS. Techniques of
elaboration discussed include indentification of originally distinct
characters, the attribution of actions to additional characters, and the
diversification of roles played originally by a single group of characters.
Hedwige Rouillard-Bonraisin considers the history of botany in the A.N.E.
during the last one hundred years, and surveys the contribution to the
discipline made directly and indirectly by scholars such as I. Löw and G.
Dalman. H.-C. Schmitt argues on the grounds of overarching themes that the
narrative from Gen. i to 2 Kgs xxv is bound together by a late
deuteronomistic redaction—a redaction “die die Priesterschrift samt
spätpriesterlicher Erweiterungen bereits voraussetzt” (p. 278). H.
Spieckermann analyses the O.T. concept of Stellvertretung , and
finds five features central to this concept in the unique passage of Isa.
liii. He sees the roots of the concept in the tension between the
intercessory and the suffering roles of the prophet, particularly in the
books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. C. Uehlinger discusses at length, and with
copious illustrations, the issues of figurative policy and visual
propaganda of the Assyrians and Achaemenids, especially in Palestine . The visions in the book of Zechariah
display a knowledge of the propaganda of Darius I. D. Ussishkin compares
Jezreel, Samaria and Megiddo as cities of the Northern Kingdom . He argues from the latest
archaeological evidence that Jezreel was not a royal capital but rather a
military base, Samaria was the royal
capital, and Megiddo was an
important administrative centre. M. Vervenne considers how to identify
deuteronomic elements in the Tetrateuch, deliberately leaving aside the
traditional allocation of texts to particular sources. He uses criteria of
both form and style, and concludes that Exod. xiii 17-xiv 31 contains
“éléments de type deutéronomique” (p. 379). The late Michael Weitzman
examines “serious discrepancies” between the Hebrew and Syriac texts of Job.
These may be due to a non-Masoretic Vorlage of the Peshitta, to
change within the Peshitta's own transmission history, or to the process of
translation itself. All other things being equal the explanation of
translation technique is to be preferred because both Hebrew and Syriac
transmission was in principal faithful. Weitzman argues that there are cases
where the Hebrew consonantal text has been manipulated by the translator, or
where the translator has followed tenuous word associations within the
Syriac to produce a meaning. I. Willi-Plein shows from scrutiny of a range
of texts that Michal plays a key role within the texts describing the
beginnings of the Davidic monarchy.
[P.J. Williams]
49, 4 (1999), p. 576
Harry A. Hoffner, Hittite Myths (2nd edn). xii
+ 121 pp. SBL Writings from the Ancient World 2. Scholars Press,
Atlanta, Georgia, 1998. This English translation of
Hittite myths flows about as smoothly as one could expect, given the
fragmentary state of some of the texts. While its initial survey of matters
Hittite and the introductions to each of the twenty-four myths make the
volume accessible to the novice, the careful translation contains many
details that will also enlighten the specialist. Of particular interest to
O.T. scholars is the inclusion in this edition of the “Song of Release”,
which provides parallels to the d e rôr of Lev. xxv. The volume
concludes inter alia with a bibliography, a much needed glossary
and an index. On p. 72 “Parables Two and Six” should read “Parables Three
and Six”.
[P.J. Williams]
50, 1 (2000), p. 135
M.J. Selman, 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles (2
vols). Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. 551 pp. Inter-Varsity Press,
Leicester, 1994. This careful and original commentary sees Chronicles as a
work separate from Ezra and Nehemiah (p. 69), composed around 400 B.C., or
slightly later (p. 71), the real interest of which “lies outside the purely
historical sphere” (p. 21). Chronicles is held to be arranged carefully,
ordering history into patterns (p. 29), including several examples of
chiasmus (pp. 93, 285, 297, 385), with its main thrust in the combined
narrative of David and Solomon (p. 27). Contrary to prevailing opinion,
Selman maintains that in Chronicles “David's sins have been highlighted
rather than suppressed” (p. 36; see also a similar statement concerning
Solomon, p. 344). At various points the relevance of passages for Christians
is explained (e.g. pp. 88, 322-23).
[P.J. Williams]
50, 2 (2000), p. 265
P. Buis, Le Livre des Rois. Sources Bibliques.
312 pp. J. Gabalda, Paris, 1997. A
literal translation is placed alongside an insightful and original
commentary. Though the theological nature of Kings is recognized it remains
“une source incontournable pour écrire l'histoire d'Israël et du
Moyen-Orient du x e au vi e siècle avant J.-C.” (p. 9). Its sources may be
as early as Abiathar the priest (p. 43). The author's broad hypothesis for
the formation of much of Kings (excluding inter alia the history of
Solomon, the Elijah cycle, and the Assyrian invasion) is that a first
edition during Hezekiah's reign narrated events until Ahaz and Hoshea, a
Deuteronomistic redaction at the end of the seventh century narrated events
until Josiah, and an exilic redaction included the history of the last four
kings of Judah (p. 19). The history of Solomon developed in at least five
stages over four hundred years (p. 103). Buis does not comment on every
verse. For instance, the verses in 1 Kgs i 42-49 receive no individual
comment. This leaves space for discussion of the more substantial issues
raised by each passage. The Septuagint's account of Jeroboam's rise to power
is printed in full on pp. 124-6. There are some signs of carelessness:
multiple typos appear on some pages (53, 83, 144, 152), Cyrus Gordon's
Ugaritic Textbook is ascribed to R.P. Gordon (pp. 8, 36), and it is
said that a fast commemorated the death of Jehoiachin through the tenth
century (for “dixième” read “sixième”, p. 301). The index also contains a
number of errors.
[P.J. Williams]
50, 2 (2000), pp. 278–79
Ulrike Schorn, Ruben und das System der zwölf Stämme
Israels:
Redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Bedeutung des Erstgeborenen
Jakobs . BZAW 248. xiv, + 302 pp. Walter
de Gruyter , Berlin , 1997. This is an abbreviated revision of
a doctoral dissertation at the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität
Erlangen-Nürnberg. It is a detailed investigation of all the O.T. texts that
in any way list the tribes of Israel, or the sons of Jacob From an analysis
of all these texts it considers the role of Reuben. Whereas Noth has
maintained that both the tribal eponym (i.e. sons of Jacob) system and the
tribe system are pre-monarchic, Schorn maintains that neither of these
systems dates from before 722 B.C. (p. 104). The relevant O.T. texts are
usually divided by Schorn into redactional layers, e.g. Gen. xxix 31-xxx 24
with a Grundschicht and two further layers (p. 72). Texts are
generally dated late, e.g. Gen. xxxxix, not before the fifth century (p.
263), Deut. xxxiii, post-exilic (p. 109). While Jdg. v contains an older
core the mention of Reuben in that chapter is considered a later addition
(p. 121). The silence of the Mesha Inscription about Reuben is interpreted
to indicate that Reuben could never have possessed the territories assigned
to it in Num. xxxii (p. 95).
[P.J. Williams]
50, 2 (2000), p. 279
Horacio Simian-Yofre, La “Chiesa” dell'Antico
Testamento: Costituzione, crisi e speranza della comunit à credente
dell'Antico Testamento. 176 pp. Edizioni Dehoniane, Bologna, 1996. The result of lectures given in
1991 at the Pontifical theological faculty of San Giovanni Evangelista
in Sicily, this book divides
into three sections considering respectively the constitution, the crises
and the hope of the believing community in the O.T. The section on
constitution considers the roles of Abraham (ch. 1) and Jacob (ch. 2), the
significance of the Exodus (ch. 3), and the function of covenants (ch. 4).
Each teaches something to the believing community today. Abraham illustrates
leaving a familiar culture in a move of faith, Jacob demonstrates inter
alia the need for reconciliation with brothers, the Exodus shows the
connection between faith and political liberation, and covenants reflect the
duty of humans to follow God. The section on crisis in the believing
community considers conflict between civil and religious authorities (ch.
5), prophetic confrontation of priests (ch. 6), and the tensions between
rich and poor (ch. 7). The final chapters of the book are concerned with
hope. Ch. 8 considers the family as a sign from God among the believing
group (Isaiah vii-viii, Hosea i-iii). Ch. 9 shows the importance of a
balanced evaluation of human history, as illustrated in Hosea's reflection
on events of the conflict recorded in Judges xix-xxi. Ch. 10 considers peace
as an expression of universal salvation, dealing with Isaiah ii 2-5, which
is viewed not as an absolute promise by God, but as a prediction conditional
upon the behaviour of God's people (p. 151). The final chapter considers the
significance of time, past, present and future on the basis of Qohelet. Hope
broadens our view of the present, but without the control of memory it will
be unrealistic. Throughout the book the author seeks to apply biblical
principles to contemporary society.
[P.J. Williams]
50, 2 (2000), p. 283
Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar, Prophets of Old and The Day
of the End: Zechariah, the Book of Watchers and Apocalyptic. OTS 35. x
+ 278 pp. E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1996.
A slightly revised version of a doctoral dissertation at the University of Groningen, this book is a consideration of
apocalyptic from studies in Zech. i-vi; ix-xiv and 1 Enoch i-xxxvi. These
particular texts have been selected by the author on the grounds of their
datability (p. 13). After a chapter introducing apocalyptic and the
difficulty of defining it, Tigchelaar proceeds to examine sections of each
text in turn, discussing inter alia issues of composition, literary
structure and theme. In his investigation of passages he suggests a number
of original emendations or rereadings of texts, such as “… (the olive trees)
whose leaves are shining like gold” (Zech. iv 12; p. 41); “Where then are
your fathers? Or did the prophets talk idly to them?” (Zech. i 5; p. 84);
the rod usually known as “Favour” is understood as “Community” or “Unity”
(Zech. xi 7; p. 113); “and Yahweh will come to his holy temple … his
standing place” (Zech. xiv 5; p. 227). He argues for the following positions
on the composition of texts: Zech. xii 1-xiii 6 was originally separate from
Zech. ix-xi (p. 116); Zech. xiv is a “deliberate fusion of traditions which
were originally distinct”, though with some secondary material (p. 218); 1
Enoch vi-xi is “the product of an author who joined several traditions into
a literary text” (p. 176), though it is separate from chs xii-xvi (p. 166),
which display less compositional unity (p. 183); chs i-v and xxxiii-xxxvi
are the work of the final editor of the Book of Watchers (p. 163).
Tigchelaar's concluding chapter seeks to bring a number of themes from the
previous pages together. One of these is that in all the texts examined
“revelation stems from the interpretation of tradition” (p. 260). This fact
seems to be the inspiration for the main title of the monograph. As he puts
it for Zech. i 2-6, “it is hardly possible to distinguish between revelation
and interpretation. The words of Yahweh which were proclaimed by the
prophets of old remain valid. Hence revelation coincides with or arises from
interpretation” (p. 244). The book ends with a challenge to clearer thinking
about the view that apocalyptic writing arises from situations of crisis.
[P.J. Williams]
50, 3 (2000), p. 415
Cyrus H. Gordon and Gary A. Rendsburg, The Bible and
the Ancient Near East. 345 pp. W.W. Norton, New
York, 1997. With Rendsburg's collaboration this is a
thoroughly revised version of Gordon's previous three editions,
Introduction to Old Testament Times (1953), The World of the
Old Testament (1958) and The Ancient Near East (1965), now
updated to include discussions on such topics as Ebla and the “House of
David” inscription from Tel Dan. It is a panoramic survey of the literature
and history of the ancient Near East, finding extensive parallels to the
Bible in sources ranging from Homer to the Nuzi texts. The book is aimed at
a popular audience, retelling well-known biblical and extrabiblical
narratives with copious explanatory asides. Since the territory is so
familiar the book may prove less attractive to scholars, but because of its
range it throws up possible parallels and causal connections that should be
of great interest even to specialists. Among the many unusual suggestions
made is that Elisha asked not for a double portion of Elijah's spirit, but
for two-thirds of it (p. 228). At the level of framework the authors argue
for a twelfth-century exodus, a Pentateuch basically from the time of David
and Solomon and pure monotheism developing in the sixth century B.C. The
authors state their views unguardedly at times: “It cannot be overemphasized
that the discoveries of archeology tend to justify the literal meaning of
the text as against scholarly and traditional interpretation. This holds not
only for the Bible but for ancient texts in general” (p. 117, n. 17). The
authors' desire to read the text literally and yet rationalistically
produces the following analysis of Joshua's activities at Jericho: “When the
Israelites finally attacked, they shouted and blasted their horns, and it is
quite possible that the sound waves created by these actions would have
weakened the walls to force them to collapse” (p. 170). If it were as simple
as that it is surprising that the Big Bad Wolf approach to house demolition
was not adopted in subsequent military history. A couple of dittographies of
about a line each occur on pp. 230 and 233, but in general the book is well
produced and is one that should be read widely.
[P.J. Williams]
50, 3 (2000), p. 416
Michael D. Goulder, The Psalms of the Return (Book
V, Psalms 107-150). JSOT Supplement Series 258. 352 pp. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, 1998. This is the fourth of Goulder's
innovative studies of the Psalter in which he argues that the collection to
which psalms belong (often reflected in the superscriptions) is the key to
understanding them correctly. In elegant prose, indulging in much tangential
to his main theses, he maintains that there are three collections of psalms
in the fifth book of the Psalter: cvii-cxix, cxx-cxxxiv, and cxxxv-cl. The
Songs of Ascent show parallels to the Nehemiah “Memoir”, which Goulder
divides into consecutive sections, each printed alongside its matching
psalm. With only minor tinkering with the order of the material in Nehemiah
he is able to find some rather striking parallels. He also finds alternation
between morning and evening songs in all three collections of psalms. Pss.
cv-cvi from book four of the Psalter were formerly more closely connected to
Pss. cvii-cxviii. Each collection thus has about the right number of psalms
for two to be sung per day during a festival. Pss. cv-cxviii were sung at
the Passover in 516 B.C. when the Temple was rebuilt (p. 236, or was it 517 [p. 36]?). [3] Goulder finds that Ps. cxiv
appropriately was set at the time when the crossing of the Red Sea was remembered, and that Ps. cviii, which
mentions Succoth (v. 8), was sung on 16 Nisan, the time he claims
Israel encamped in Succoth according
to the book of Exodus. Pss. cv-cxviii were created for Passover after the
first Ascent of exiles (under Sheshbazzar, Joshua and Zerubbabel), Pss.
cxx-cxxxiv were compiled for the feast of Tabernacles in 445 B.C. after the
second Ascent (under Nehemiah), and Pss. cxxxv-cl, were modelled on Pss.
cv-cxviii and were created after the third Ascent (under Ezra), also for the
feast of Tabernacles (p. 316). “By 400 BCE, we must think, the Jerusalem Temple had all our 150 psalms …” (p. 304). An appendix deals with the
relevant history as related in the book of Ezra, which in large part is
considered “valueless” (p. 322).
[P.J. Williams]
50, 3 (2000), pp. 423–24
New Light Bible: New International Reader's
Version. vi + 2105 pp. Hodder & Stoughton,
London , 1998. For those who find
the New International Version too hard to read because “the older a
translation gets, the harder it becomes to understand” (Introduction, p. v),
its offshoot the NIrV is offered as the ideal Bible translation.
The NIrV attempts to be readable by using single clause sentences.
Sometimes the short sentences are the result of the use of full-stops where
others would use commas. By the proliferation of full-stops a relative
clause is separated from its main clause (Hag. ii 9), and an apodosis is
separated from its protasis (Mal. iv 6). Lk xiv 26 seems to contain an
example of a full-stop that replaced a comma in the editing process without
capitalisation being introduced. There are typos in Hos. i 1 and Joel i 12,
while “You sacrifice disabled or animals that are ill” (Mal. i 8) can hardly
boast the readability the translation is seeking to achieve. If potential
users of this translation really are as simple as the level of the
translation indicates, they will certainly be perplexed by the significance
of the line before Mk xvi 9-20, and the lines before and after Jn vii
53-viii 11, since the absence of footnotes leaves the textual situation
unexplained. Jonah's Nineveh is
shrunk to Theodoret's scale: “In fact, it took about three days to see all
of it” (Jon. 3:3). We are told in the introduction to the book of Nehemiah
that Nehemiah was appointed governor by Cyrus.
[P.J. Williams]
51, 3 (2001), p. 427
José Vílchez, Rut y Ester. Nueva Biblia Española:
Narraciones II. 418 pp. Verbo Divino, Estella (Navarra), 1998. Introduction,
extensive bibliography, translation, textual notes and discursive comment
are masterfully provided for these two megillot. The commentary is
especially strong in its appreciation of the nuances of the dramas affecting
the protagonists. Vílchez maintains that the book of Ruth is from the last
third of the fourth century and that prior to its composition its stories
had a long period of oral transmission (p. 37). Replete with literary
structures, nearly every section is covered by a chiasm or at least an
inclusio: in fact the whole book is structured, with chapters i and iv
corresponding (p. 63). Somehow Vílchez accidentally supposes that Naomi
mentions Boaz to Ruth in ii 1 (p. 91). At the crux in iv 5 the kethib
qanîtî is adopted (p. 126). The treatment ends with excursuses
on the significance of the go'el and of levirate marriage. Esther,
being longer than Ruth, has more commentary devoted to it, with the
deuterocanonical additions dealt with in their Greek positions. The book is
dated to around 160 B.C., since it looks back on vanquished persecution (p.
181), while the additions, all originally composed in Greek (p. 174), are
said to have been most probably added in 114 B.C. (p. 182). The Greek A-text
is not Lucianic (p. 172). Not all readers with agree that Mordecai is
presented as particularly proud (p. 264) or that the ethical problem of the
mass slaughter of enemies of the Jews can be disposed of simply by stating
that the book of Esther is fiction (pp. 359, 362), but, such cavils aside,
the commentary generally shows sound judgement. Transliterations are at
times peculiar, with silent shewas as vocal (pp. 65, 127), and
qames? h?at?uph as a (p. 120 n. 39).
[P.J. Williams]
52, 1 (2002), p. 137
Frederick E. Greenspahn, An Introduction to
Aramaic. SBL Resources for Biblical Study 38. xii + 232 pp. Scholars
Press, Atlanta, 1999. This is one of
the best introductions to Aramaic to appear in recent years. It is
appropriate for both class teaching and for self-tuition, though it is not
adapted for reference. From p. 8 onwards copious authentic Aramaic texts
introduce a sensible progression of grammatical topics. The bulk of the book
(chs. 3-27) deals with Biblical Aramaic. With the help of vocabularies and
notes the reader works first through Ezra, then Daniel. Grammatical points
illustrated by each reading are recapped by exercises, including
translations into Aramaic. By the time Daniel vii is reached, all basic
grammar has been covered. Thereafter the final chapters (28-32) broaden to
consider inscriptions (Bar Rakib, Uzziah, Ein Gedi Synagogue), letters (
Elephantine and Bar Kochba), the
Genesis Apocryphon, Genesis Rabbah and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. The book ends
with two pages of (incomplete) errata, mainly relating to pointing. Careless
pointing of Aramaic is a significant drawback of this book. May a subsequent
edition give students a better example of precision!
[P.J. Williams]
52, 4 (2002), p. 573
W. Lee Humphreys, The Character of God in the Book
of Genesis: A Narrative Appraisal. x + 284 pp. Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville, 2001. £20. Like other recent studies,
this suggestive and original rereading of Genesis is prepared to tackle the
Bible's primary character. After a discussion of method, Genesis is analysed
in seven sections, each concluding with a table of characterizations of God.
Humphreys carefully distinguishes primary characterization by the narrator
from secondary characterization by other figures within the narrative, and
plots a development through Genesis from primary characterization of God to
secondary characterization, going alongside a gradual withdrawal of God from
direct involvement in human affairs. The author, “at best, an approximation
of any ‘ideal' or ‘implied' reader of Genesis” (p. 19), seems to give
audience a significant role in assigning meaning, yet on p. 78 also adopts
the language of authorial intent, saying that a passage is “designed”.
Certainly, if authorial intent were the standard, this study would leave a
gap between the conclusions drawn and the evidence given. The author
introduces a reading as possible , thereafter to assume it, and
takes formal grammatical indeterminacy to give interpretative freedom: the
't of Gen. iv 1 means that Eve claims to have created Cain in the
manner in which God created man (p. 54), and in Gen. xv 6 Abram may accredit
righteousness to Yahweh (pp. 95-6). For Humphreys primary images of
God include a “struggling parent” (Gen. ii-iii), and a “patron” (chapters
throughout Genesis). However, other readers may fail to see God's “struggle”
or parental role in Genesis ii-iii, or may find the title “patron”,
Humphreys' biggest category, which he nowhere defines, unenlightening.
Frequently Humphreys is sure of God's personal uncertainty: “we cannot
escape a sense of Yahweh's shock and struggle here” (p. 59), or “God is on a
learning curve” (p. 252). Section numbers on pp. 47-52 are wrong.
[P.J. Williams]
53, 2 (2003), pp. 281–82
Michael James Williams, Deception in Genesis: An
Investigation into the Morality of a Unique Biblical Phenomenon.
Studies in Biblical Literature 32. xviii + 252 pp. Peter Lang: New York, 2001. Against the backdrop that many
simply presume deception is always morally negative, this revised
University of Pennsylvania doctoral dissertation examines
afresh deception in Genesis. Deception is defined broadly so as to include
both distortion and withholding of information in order to stimulate wrong
belief. Williams argues, rather briefly in fact, that of the fifteen
deception events in Genesis, three are evaluated positively: Tamar deceiving
Judah and Joseph twice deceiving his brothers. He concludes that “deception
is evaluated positively when the perpetrator deceives one who has previously
wronged him in order to restore his own condition to what it would have been
had it not been disrupted, while, at the same time, not harming the victim.
This license to act deceptively in order to restore the previous status quo
appears to intersect the biblical concept of shalom ” (p. 54). [4] Similarly, when biblical
deception events outside Genesis are examined it is found that positively
evaluated deception is particularly associated with safeguarding the
wellbeing of Israelites. However, examination of the LXX, Josephus,
Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, three Targums, and Midrash with respect to the
fifteen events in Genesis leads Williams to detect “a growing negative
regard for deception in post-biblical Jewish tradition” (p. 103), the last
possible positive evaluation of deception being a.d. 150. A brief survey of
Sumerian, Akkadian, Egyptian, Ugaritic, and Hittite literature shows that in
ANE literature, although some deception by gods and humans is regarded
positively, there is no parallel to Genesis' positive evaluation of
intra-societal deceptions. Consideration of folklore parallels from Stith
Thompson's index leads to the conclusion that their contribution to the
understanding of the biblical material is minimal. The biblical material,
then, is unique and according to Williams it is linked to the concept of
shalom. Deception is acceptable in order to restore
shalom, and unacceptable when it disrupts it. Yet, although this
probably represents the central conclusion of the book, there is no attempt
either to show how the Bible connects shalom with its evaluation of
deception, or even to demonstrate that shalom may legitimately be
called a “concept”.
[P.J. Williams]
54, 1 (2004), p. 141
G. Greenberg , Translation Technique in the Peshitta
to Jeremiah, Monographs of the Peshitta Institute Leiden 13. xiv + 242 pp. Brill, Leiden , 2002. This is the published version of
the author's doctoral thesis, supervised initially by Michael Weitzman, and
latterly by Robert Murray. Although the definitive Leiden edition of the Peshitta of Jeremiah has
not yet been published, the author has been able to use the collations for
that edition, and her analysis is thus set on a firm textual basis. She sees
the Peshitta of Jeremiah as produced “in the middle or later part of the
first century ce ” (pp. 4-5), made from a text close to the Proto-Masoretic,
and with occasional reference to the Septuagint. The translation is
basically homogeneous, and its profile is sufficiently close to that of
other books of the Peshitta to allow them to have come from a single hand.
The various chapter headings under which the translation is considered give
some idea of the approach: “changes in the sense of the Hebrew”,
“additions”, “the selection of lexical equivalents”, “harmonization”,
“figurative language and anthropomorphism”, “grammatical inconsistency and
logical precision”, “duplicate passages” (either when two versions of a
passage occur within Jeremiah, or when one of two versions occurs in Isaiah,
Kings or Obadiah), “the causes of minuses”, “the work of the scribes”,
“difficult Hebrew: influence from the LXX”, “difficult Hebrew: the use of
guesswork”, “difficult Hebrew: influence from elsewhere in the Hebrew
Bible”, “difficult Hebrew: other strategies”. The book ends with three
appendices: citations in Aphrahat, the rendering of Kethiv and Qere, and the
translation throughout the whole Peshitta of Hebrew ???
, “field”. The monograph considerably furthers our
knowledge of the Peshitta of Jeremiah, though there is plenty of room for
disagreement with the author's analysis of individual texts.
[P.J. Williams]
[1] Sic VT. My manuscript
read ‘l 23-5', where l is the Roman numeral 50 , not the
Arabic numeral 1.
[2] Sic VT, but
my manuscript read ‘second', which actually represents Taylor 's position
(p. 322). It seems that the erroneous number was entered during copyediting
when the written ordinal was changed to an Arabic one.
[3] VT reads ‘p.
36'. My manuscript correctly reads ‘p. 316'.
[4] Here the quotation has the wording of
Williams' original and my manuscript rather than the form printed in
VT.