Reconsidering the Date and Provenance of the Book of Hosea: The Case for Persian-Period Yehud

209 Pages·2014·1.19 MB·English

by  James M. Bos

LIBRARY OF HEBREW BIBLE/
OLD TESTAMENT STUDIES

580

Formerly Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series

Editors
Claudia V. Camp, Texas Christian University
Andrew Mein, Westcott House, Cambridge

Founding Editors
David J. A. Clines, Philip R. Davies and David M. Gunn

Editorial Board
Alan Cooper, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon,
Norman K. Gottwald, James Harding, John Jarick, Carol Meyers,
Patrick D. Miller, Francesca Stavrakopoulou,
Daniel L. Smith-Christopher

RECONSIDERING THE DATE
AND PROVENANCE OF THE BOOK OF HOSEA

The Case for Persian-Period Yehud

James M. Bos

NEW YORK • LONDON • NEW DELHI • SYDNEY
Bloomsbury T&T Clark
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

50 Bedford Square 175 Fifth Avenue
London New York
WC1B 3DP NY 10010
UK USA

www.bloomsbury.com

First published 2013

© James M. Bos, 2013

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any
information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the
publishers.

James M. Bos has asserted his rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988,
to be identified as Author of this work.

No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining
from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury
Academic or the author.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

eISBN: 978-0-567-06889-7

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

Typeset by Forthcoming Publications Ltd (www.forthpub.com)
Printed and bound in Great Britain
CONTENTS

Preface ix
Abbreviations xi

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1. The Implications of Literacy in Israel and Judah
for Understanding the Production of the Prophetic Books 8
2. Evidence for the Writing Down and Preservation
of Prophetic Materials in the Monarchic Period 10
3. Other Potential Literary Models for Understanding
the Prophetic Books 13
4. Linguistic Evidence for the Date or Provenance
of the Book of Hosea? 16
5. Earlier Treatments of the Book of Hosea That Fall
Within the “New Paradigm” 21
6. Dating the Book of Hosea 29

Chapter 2
THE ANTI-MONARCHICAL IDEOLOGY OF THE BOOK OF HOSEA
AS EVIDENCE FOR A PERSIAN-PERIOD DATE OF COMPOSITION
AND JUDAHITE PROVENANCE 35
1. Hosea 10:3–4, 7 39
2. Hosea 13:9–11 and 8:4a 48
3. Hosea 9:9 and 10:9; 9:15 53
4. Hosea 10:13b–14a; 8:14; 14:4b; 1:7; 2:20 56
5. Hosea 5:1–7; 7:3–7; 8:10 62
6. Hosea 2:2a and 3:5 64
7. Conclusion 68

Chapter 3
THE ANTI-BENJAMIN, ANTI-BETHEL, AND ANTI-SAMARIA POLEMIC
IN THE BOOK OF HOSEA READ AGAINST THE BACKGROUND
OF THE EARLY PERSIAN PERIOD 70
1. Jerusalem in Competition with Mizpah, Bethel,
and Samaria 72
2. The Polemic Against Benjamin in the Hebrew Bible 76
vi Contents

3. Analysis of the Anti-Benjamin Polemic
in the Book of Hosea 78
4. The Polemic Against Bethel in the Book of Hosea 87
5. Polemic Against the Benjaminite Site of Gilgal 96
6. The Polemic Against Samaria and Shechem 98
7. Conclusion 100

Chapter 4
THE PERVASIVENESS OF THE JUDAHITE DUAL THEME
OF EXILE–RETURN IN THE BOOK OF HOSEA
AS EVIDENCE FOR A PERSIAN-PERIOD DATE 102
1. Hosea 1:6 104
2. Hosea 2:1–2 106
3. The Name “Jezreel” 110
4. Hosea 3:5 111
5. Hosea 4:16, 19 113
6. Hosea 5:8–15 114
7. Hosea 6:1–3 116
8. Hosea 7:11 117
9. Reversal of the “Exodus” in 8:13, 9:3, and 11:5 122
10. Hosea 12:7, 10 125
11. The Final Restoration: Hosea 14:2–9 127
12. Summary and Conclusion 128

Chapter 5
THE TRADITIONS OF “ISRAEL” IN THE BOOK OF HOSEA:
EVIDENCE FOR A POST-MONARCHIC DATE
AND JUDAHITE PROVENANCE 130
1. The Date of Deuteronomy 133
2. The Covenant in the Book of Hosea 136
3. The Marriage in the Book of Hosea 137
4. Hosea 1:1 138
5. Hosea 1:4 139
6. Hosea 1:9 140
7. Hosea 2:1 142
8. Hosea 2:16–17 145
9. Hosea 9:1–9 148
10. Hosea 11:8 153
11. The Exodus Tradition in the Book of Hosea 154
12. The Wilderness Tradition in the Book of Hosea 155
13. The Jacob Tradition in the Book of Hosea 158
Contents vii
14. Hosea 13:10–11 (and 8:4) 163
15. Conclusion 163

Chapter 6
CONCLUSION 164

Bibliography 171
Index of References 181
Index of Authors 185
1

PREFACE

This book is a slightly revised version of my doctoral dissertation, which
was completed under the supervision of Professor Brian B. Schmidt at
the University of Michigan (Department of Near Eastern Studies). The
decision to write a dissertation on the book of Hosea was not made until
the summer of 2007 (when I happened to be in Israel, excavating (cid:191)rst at
Tell Halif and then later at Ramat Rahel), but looking back at my gradu-
ate coursework, it would appear that I was preparing to write such a
thesis several years earlier. Seminars on the deities of ancient Canaan
and Israel, on the history of Israel and Judah, and on literacy in the
ancient world, as well as a Hebrew course in which a substantial portion
of the book of Kings was read, all supplemented with a healthy dose of
secondary literature that questioned traditional paradigms and presented
new alternatives, had a formative impact on my thinking about the book
of Hosea. Readers of my monograph will see that the writings of Philip
R. Davies and Ehud Ben Zvi have played a particularly important role in
shaping how I understand the literature produced in ancient Judah. Yet
the arguments put forward in this book, I hope, make a unique contri-
bution to the scholarly discussion of the composition of the prophetic
books in the Hebrew Bible, the book of Hosea in particular. Any (cid:192)aws
perceived in my arguments are of course due to my own shortcomings,
not to the many brilliant scholars from whom I have learned so much.
Writing a dissertation, and then turning that dissertation into a book,
I have learned, is no easy task. Multiple individuals were in(cid:192)uential in
helping me bring this monograph to completion. Brian Schmidt was an
exemplary advisor, always pushing me to re(cid:191)ne my arguments while
simultaneously encouraging me to question traditional or consensus
viewpoints. The (cid:191)nal version of this monograph is substantially better
than it would have been without his guidance, and for that I am grateful.
Professors Gary Beckman, Gabriele Boccaccini, and David Potter also
read drafts of this manuscript and provided valuable feedback. I must
also thank my colleagues at the University of Michigan, particularly
Craig Tyson and Helen Dixon, who were a constant source of inspiration
and camaraderie.