JOURNAL OF NORTHWEST SEMITIC LANGUAGES

12 Pages·2008·0.7 MB·English

JOURNAL OF
NORTHWEST SEMITIC
LANGUAGES

VOLUME 16

1990

VOLUME EDITOR:

WALTER T CLAASSEN

Professor at the University of Stellenbosch
South Africa

Editorial Board:
Prof T J D Bothma, Prof W T W Cloete, Prof J Cook
Dr I Cornelius, Dr P A Kruger, Pfor, P J Nel,
Prof J P J Olivier, Prof H F van Rooy

Publihsed by the Department of Semitic Languages and Cultures
University of Stellenbosch
CONTENTS

Abbreviations i
From the Editorial Board vii
Claassen, W T, Bible Information Systems 1-11
Conradie, A F, The Standard Inscription of Ashurnasirpal II:
13-23
Historical Document or Decoration?
Cornelius, I, The sun epiphany in Job 38:12-15 and the
25-43
iconography of the gods in the Ancient Near East –
the Palestinian connection
Klein, G L, The ‘Prophetic Perfect’ 45-60
Kotzé, R J, Reading between the sentences: Notes on the
61-84
sentences relations in 1 Samuel 1:1-8

85-00
Laubscher, F du T, The Restoration of 1 QS 1:1A
Mittmann, S,. Hiskia und die Philister 91-106
Mulder, M J, 1 Koningen 8:31 en 32 107-114
Naudé, J A, A Syntactic Analysis of Dislocations in Biblical
115-130
Hebrew
Olivier, J P J, The Dawn of Biblical Archaeology 131-140
Pienaar, D N, A Critical Evaluation of Certain Leading
141-151
Concepts in Biblical Archaeology
Schmitt, G, Moreschet Gat und Libna: Mit einem Anhang: Zu
153-172
Micha 1:10-16
Snyman, S D, Anthitheses en the Book of Malachi 173-178
Swart, I, The Hebrew Vocabulary of Oppression: The State of
179-197
Semantic Description
Van Huÿssteen, P J J, Niqmaddu and the Receiver of Tribute
199-206
by Default: A New Interpretation of RS 17,227, 38-42

Willis, J T q˚mAh yhwh 207-221
Review Article 223-228
Cloete, W T W, A Guide to the Techniques of Hebrew Verse
Reviews 229-236
Book List 237
Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 16 (1990)
NO ABSTRACTS
JournalofNorthwestSemiticLanguagesXVI(1990)
REVIEWS
DanielBodi,ThebookofEzekielandthepoemofErra(OBO 104). 1991.ISBN3-7278
0731-8.Freiburg/Switzerland: Universi따tsverlag.Noprice.
This book by Bodi, at present working in the Department of Old Testament at the
UniversityofNeuchatel,representsaremodeledandexpandedversionofhisPh0 disser
tation,Terminological and Thematic Comparisons Between the Book ofEzekiel and
Akkadian Literature with SpecialReference to the Poem ofErra (Union Theological
Seminary,New York,NY,1987).
Thecontentionofhisresearchistwofold:
*
the themes and motifs ofthe Book ofEzekiel lose theirpoint unless they are
interpreted in the light oftheir contemporary literature,religious beliefs and
practices-withthefocusonthePoemofErra;
*
thereisthelikelihoodthatintheformulation ofcertainthemesandmotifsofthe
BookofEzekielitsauthororredactorkneworemulatedthe Akkadian literary
masterpiece,thePoemofErra.
In·the light ofthe impossibility ofconducting exegesis without presuppositions, Bodi
stateshisbasicassumptionsasfollows:
*
theBookofEzekielshouldbestudiedasaworkofparticularliterary따디stry;
* thereexistsaninter-connectednessofthemes,motifsandexpressionsamongthe
literaturesofthe ancientNearEastandtheOldTestamentispartofthis broad
culturalandliterarycontinuum;
*
theBookofEzekielwasoriginallycomposedinaBabylonianenvironment;
*
withoutsharing adogmatic beliefin the supremacy ofthe Masoretic text,the
researchmakesuseoftheBookofEzekielinitsfinalform.
Inshort,itallboilsdowntothefollowingworkinghypothesis:“theexistenceofadefinite
relationshipbetweenexpressions,themesandmotifsintheBookofEzekielandthePoem
ofErra"(pp22-3). Thisrelationshipisbestillustratedbytwelvefeatures sharedbyboth
works and these points ofcontact are discussed in descending degree ofprobability,
dividedintotwomaincategories.
The first category consists of four features which, in the Old Testament, appear
uniquelyintheBookofEzekielandarealsopresentinthePoemofEπa:
*
correspondingverbsfor‘“‘toshowcoαont않l.emptνItre따atwithdesψpite"
*
etymologicallyrelatednounsfor“amber";
*
themotifofthesevenexecutionersinEzekiel9andthedivineseveninErra;
*
Thecommonmotifofthepreservationfromtheflood.
ThesecondcategorycompriseseightfeaturesfoundinantecedentOldTestamenttraditions
butusedinsuchawaytosuggestsomeinfluencebythePoemofEπa:
* termsmeaning“din"or“noise",whichalsohaveametaphoricalmeaninghybris;
229
230 REVIEWS
* correspondingverbsfor“tothrowanet";
*
acommontheme:‘“‘t야theabsenceofthedivinityfrom따itsshrineε"
* themotifofthenaveloftheearth(JerusalemandBabylon);
* thesongofthesword;
*
theroleofthewatchmanandintercessor;
*
theremnantandrestorationmotifs;
* therecognitionformulainEzekielandthestatementofrecognitioninErra.
Bodialso perceivestwo majordifferen,ces between theWeltanschauung in theBookof
EzekielandinthePoemofErra: ontheonehand,thePoemofErraissσictly polytheistic,
whilstaradicaldemandformonolatrydominatestheBookofEzekiel; ontheotherhand,
thePoemofErrareflectsmagicalpracticesasbeingeffectivebyvirtueofperfonnanceand
bycontrasttheBookofEzekielcontainsnomagicaldevicewhichcanmanipulatethefuror
ofYahweh.
ThedetailedanalysisofthetwelvefeaturescommontoboththeBookofEzekieland
thePoemofErracontributestoabetterunderstandingofOldTestamentprophetictradition
andofAkkadianliterature.Bodi’sresearchshowstheheuristicpotentialandtheinevitable
limitationsofthecomparativestudyofancientNearEasternliterature.
B.L. Bosman
Dept.ofOldTestament
UniversityofStellenbosch
STELLENBOSCB7600
SouthAfrica
*****
JohannesP. Floss,DavidundJerusalem. Ziele undFolgen desStα， dteroberungsberichts
2 Sam5,6-9 literaturwissenschaftlichbetrachtet(ATS 30). 1987,pp.XI+72. ISBN3
88096-530-7. EOS Verlag. 51.Ottilien.Price:OM 19,--.
InthisbookFlossoffersareworkedpaperfrom 1986incorporatingalso thepreparatory
detail analyses. Hisinvestigationof2Sam5:6-9waslargelystimulatedbyapartofthe
dissertation of Christa Sch하fer-Li야eht않enberg앉er， 앙Stadt und Eidgenιo‘ss
Testament(BZA찌r냐156) 1983.Itwasoriginallymeanttofocusontheaimsandresultsof
theconquestofthecity,butalreadyinthepaperFlosshadchangedthesubtitletoindicate
thefocus on thereportitself. HispointofdepartureistheclassichypothesisofAlbrecht
AltthatDavidhadhisprivateannycaptureJerusalemsothathecoulduseitasacentral
and neutral capital for the combined realm, took its crown as his third and renamed
JerusalemthecityofDavid.
AstomethodhefollowsAlt’sdictumthatoneshouldworkwiththetextfromaliterary
pointofviewbeforeattemptingahistoricalevaluation.Fromhisinitialanalysesof2Sam
5:6-9and 1Chr 11:4-8 heconcludesthatthelatterissecondaryandunreliable. Therest
ofhisstudyisthenbasedon2Sam5:6-9only.TruetotheRichterapproachheprovides
the textin transcription and analysedaccordingto itssyntactical structure. He then dis
tinguishesbetweencompleteandincompleteinfonnationuptothesentencelevel,aswell
REVIEWS 231
ason the textlevel. On the sentencelevel heregards、Q~~ i1~Q-"~ (his sentence 8b) as
incomplete,agreeingon thispointwithSch헤fer-Lichtenberger，andrejectingtheviewof
Gross thatitisapendensconstruction. Nexthediscusses Sch헤fer-Lichtenberger’ssolu
tiontotheproblemsof2Sam5:6-9andespeciallyherinterpretation of，~"asachange
ofownership. His study of1그딩 and its directobjects leads him to the conclusion that
wherethedirectobjectisalexemeindicatinglocality,theverbrefersto militarycapture
withorwithoutfighting. Therefollows aredactioncriticaldiscussion ofthe function of
thereportwithinitscontext,andadiscussionofthereferencestoJerusaleminJos 15:63,
Jdg 1:21 and 1Sam17:54,afterwhichhesummarisestheresultsofhisstudy.
Floss proposes the following view: The expression implied in or miss,ing from sen
tence 8bis not'~재 asSch하fer-Lichtenberger suggested,butrat~erno~’ nc,by theuse
ofwhichDavidwantedtoprotectthelivesoftheJebusites.Theinversionofthesequence
inwhichtheblindandlamearementionedseekstoexpressinverseproportionality.There
isnoconnectionbetweentheconquestreportandthevariousreferencesto the lameand
blind,althoughthelatterarerelatedamongstthemselves.Itisthereforelikelythatonlyone
personaddedtotheoriginalreport.Thel'씻 nJ￥Q isnotJerusalem,andthecitydoesnot
come into the story at all. The placing of2Sam 5:6-9 in its present position does not
derive from DtrH,butfrom alaterredactor who put it there because ofthe naming of
Jerusalemin5:5.BothDtrHandhissourcedidnotknowaconquestreportaswehaveit.
ThecityofJerusalemhadlongbeeninIsraelitehandsalready.Theredactormadeuseofa
separate tradition concerning the capture of끼쐐 nJ￥Q to glorify David. David’sown
intentionwasnottogainacentralandneutralcapital,butmerelytofindaplacewherethe
arkcouldstayfinally. Thisview,Flosspointsout,wasalreadystatedbyW.E. Barnesin
1914,buthasnotfounditswayintotherecenthistoriographyoftheperiod.
One could raise some questions in response to Floss. In his discussion of the
referencesto JerusaleminJoshua,Judges and 1Samuelhedoes notrefertoJdg 19:10
12,whereJerusalemisidentifiedwith Jebus,andiscalled’렌그’η-，’p， and describedas
π뀐 "~l때， '~~~-κ한 「앨얀 껴-?~ ,’p. Assuming Floss has an explanation why this text
shouldnotbetakenatfacevalue,onewouldha
W.T.W. Cloete
Dept.ofSemitics
UniversityoftheWesternC~p~
BELLVILLE7530
SouthAfrica
*****
232 REVIEWS
Jean Koenig,OraclesetliturgiesdeI’exilBabylonien(Etudesd’histoireetdephilosophie
religieuses,69.). 1988,pp. 210. ISBN 2-13-041688-8. Paris. Presses Universitaires de
France. Noprice.
Inthisthoughtprovoking book,Koenigengagesin afresh interpretation ofanumberof
enigmatic passages in Deutero-Isaiah. Throughout his analysis, he is concerned to
demonstrate that the modern preoccupation with coherence has often obscured the
interpretativeprocesses which were at work in the shaping ofthe Biblical text. In this
respecthepaysparticularattentiontothehenneneuticalprocesseswhichcanbeidentified
invarioustextualtraditions.
In the first passage under consideration,namely Isaiah 40:6-8,Koenig points to the
textualevidencefor bothalongerreadingascontainedintheMassoretic text(MT),but
alsoashorterreading(withoutv7)ascontainedin 1QISa(Qa),andalsopossiblyinpre
originalversionsoftheSeptuagint.Thesignificanceoftheshortertextisthatitcontainsa
pointertothehistoryofinterpretationbyhighlightingoneofthetwofunctionswhichthe
MTtextassumed,namely an oraclewhichdepicts theimminentdemise ofBabylon (vv
6,8).
Inhissecondanalysis,KoenigturnstotheinterpretationofIsaiah40:1-26.Thewhole
passageofIsaiah40:12-26isunderstoodasapolemicagainsttheclaimswhichweremade
for the Babylonian gods in the Table ofDestiniesduringthe annual New Yearfeast. A
crucial aspect ofthis proposal turns on theinterpretation ofverse 13b as areferenceto
CyrusastheobjectofGod’sdecree. Avarietyoftextualwitnesses,includingQaandQb
(I Q ISb), thetranslation ofSymachus and the Massoretic Ketib ofIsaiah 46:11,are
inducedin supportofthisreading. In my opinion,Koenigeffectivelydemonstrates that
textualwitnesses,assourcesforunderstandingthehenneneuticalprocesseswhichwereat
workinJewishcommunities,lendplausibilitytoareadingwhichhasbeendiscountedby
mostexegetes.
AsforIsaiah40:1-11,therecognitionthatthepassageisdominatedbythedescription
ofthetheophanyinverses3-5,pro끼desthebasisforunderstandingtheintegralrelation
shipbetween40:1-11and40:12-26.Thecontentionthatthepassagesareheldtogetherby
thestructuralelementsofthetheophany,providesaveryplausiblethesiswhichopensthe
texttonewandsuggestiveinterpretativepossibilities.
In his third and mo
REVIEWS 233
Withregard to Is 52:13-15,Koenig addresses two majorproblems. In bothcases his
argumentamountstotheretentionofthelectiodifficilioroftheMT,andarejectionofthe
attemptsattextualemendation-whicharebasedonvarioustextualwitnesses.
Firstly, the term mishat in the MT of 52:14a is interpreted on the principle of
homonymy, according to which it enjoys the double connotation of ‘disfigured’ and
‘anointed’.Koenigproceedstodemonstratethatthetextualwitnessesconfirmthepriority
ofthe MTreading by providing readings in which both inherent meanings ofthe MT
homonymyareemployed.Thisfactservesasacaveatthatmodernexegetesshouldnotσy
to resolve the text’s interpretative difficulties by making an exclusive choice for one
particularreading.
Secondly,Koenigdiscussesthesemanticproblemsconnectedtotheuseofthetechni
calcultictermfor‘sprinkling’ (yazzeh)in52:15.Onceagain,apainstakingevaluationof
the hermeneutical considerations which were at stake in the various textual witnesses,
leadstotheconclusionthatthereadingoftheMT,which isalsopreservedinQa,should
bemaintained.ThereasonforthespecificsemanticusageinIsaiah52:15issoughtinthe
establishmentofatypologicalconnectionbetweentheritualpracticesofthecultandthe
activityoftheservantintheexilicsituation.
Throughouttheanalysisofthefourth servantpoem,thereadercanonlybeimpressed
by the painstaking and rigorous nature of Koenig’s analysis. His proposals for new
approachestooldcrucesinterpretumarebasedonacarefulassessmentofalltheavailable
evidence,whetherofaphilologicalorhistoricalnature,andpresentinsightsofwhichthe
ensuingdebatewillcertainlyhavetotakecognizance.
In hisfinal essay,Koenig contends that the motifofthe liberation ofcaptives from
prison allowed the oracles ofIsaiah42:5-9 and49:8-9a,which originallydescribed the
liberativeactivityofCyrus,tobereinterpretedasadepictionoftheservant’sroleinfree
ingthe nationsfrom theobscurityofpolytheism. Onceagain,therefore,Koenig’sargu
mentamountstoapleathatmodernexegetesshouldmodifytheirnotionsofcoherencein
ordertobesympathetictothepolivalencyofthetext.
Inclosing,Irecommendthisbookasavaluablediscussionofthetreatmentoftextual
witnesses thatpertain to the analyis ofDeutero-Isaiah. On abroaderscale,however,i
M.J. Oosthuizen
Dept.ofBiblicalStudies
UniversityofPortElizabeth
PORTELIZABETH6001
SouthAfrica
*****
234 REVIEWS
Walter E. Rast (ed.) assisted by Marion Zeiger, Preliminary Reports of ASOR
SponsoredExcavations 1983-87(BASORSupp!. 26). 1990,pp. 177 + 150figures + 16
tables.JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress. Baltimore. Noprice.
ThispublicationisconcernedwiththepreliminaryreportsonASOR-sponsoredexca
vationscoveringthefollowing:
* TheBronzeAgeSettlementsatTellHalif:PhaseIIExcavations 1983-1987.
The multidisciplinary approach followed at Tell Halifresulted in a report that
covers a wide range ofsubjects such as the excavations,stratigraphy,ancient
economy,human ecology,botanicalremainsandanimalexploitation. Although
themain aimofthisexpeditionwastoresearchtheBronzeAgesettlements,the
information gained covers aspectsdating from the Chalcolithic to the Modem
Arabperiod.
* The 1987ExpeditiontoKhirbetIskanderanditsVicinity:FourthPreliminaryReport.
The primary objectives of the fourth and final season of Phase I at Khirbet
Iskander were to clarify previous work and to unravel some stratigraphical
problems before publishing the final report. The expedition’s hypothesis that
permanεntsedentaryadaptationintheEarlyBronzeIVandvillagesandtownsof
urban.-EBII-IIIperiods wasaviable alternativelifestylewasvindicatedby the
resultsofthiscampaign.
* MadabaPlainsProject: APreliminaryReportofthe 1987SeasonatTellEI-cUmeiri
andVicinity.
TheaimofthisprojectwastosurveyandexcavateTellel-‘Umeiriandtheregion
within a 5 km radius around the tell. In 1987 attention was focussed on the
growth and decline of the economy, society, and agriculture from the Early
BronzeAgetotTIoderntimes.
*
PreliminaryReportonthe 1987SeasonoftheLimesArabicusProject.
Theactivitiesofthefourth seasonfocusedontheLejjfinfortress andtheconclu
sion ofthe surveyofthelimesregion.Theaimofthisprojectistoexaminethe
historicalevolutionoftheRomanfrontiereastoftheDeadSeabetweenthelate
thirdandmid-sixthcenturies.
Thefourth season ofthis projectyielded useful additional information on this
subject. Theheadquartersbuilding,barTacks,andfortificationsofthelegionary
fortressofel-l져ijfinwerefurtherexposedandseveralotherareaswereopened.A
kitchenintheheadquaτtersprovidedinterestingartifactsandinformationonthe
militarydietwhilethesurveyyieldedatotalof500sites.
Thisreportisaccornpaniedbyappendicescontainingcataloguesanddiscussions
ofcoinsandfaunalremainsrecoveredduringthe 1987excavations.
*
TheSardisCampaignof1986.
Thepurposeofthe 1986campaign was toexcavate,conserveandexamin