Article contents
A Prophetic Attestation of the Decalogue: Hosea 6:5 With Some Observations on Psalms 15 and 24
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2011
Extract
A dark and delphic verse, out of joint with what precedes and follows, the type of abrupt and fragmentary utterances which has made many a student of the little book complain with Jerome: Osee commaticus est et quasi per sententias loquens. The ready acquiescence in the familiar refuge of the fatigued philologist, ‘corrupt beyond restoration’, is nowhere more regrettable than in Hos 65. The verse, obviously defaced, mars a glorious bit of ancient Hebrew writing, the otherwise well preserved poem 61–6. Generations have used all their wit and skill of interpretation to read some coherent meaning into the puzzling passage, willing at times to forego rules of biblical grammar or even fundamentals of biblical faith. All in vain. For ḥāṣabtî can be as little squared with haragtîm as one can conceive of Hosea, a heart of deepest tenderness, believing the prophets to have been slayers of their people or God to have been the slayer of the prophets. Whatever ‘demonic’ features his concept of deity may contain—inherited from sterner generations or reflecting the transient moods to which a sensitive and impulsive poet is given—its innermost and abiding nature is inexhaustible love which no sin of man can wear out, let alone sway to cruel injustice.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1934
References
page 106 note 1 Praefatio in Duodecim Prophetas (Migne, Patr. Lat. vol. XXVIII p. 1015). Cf. also his Prologus in Osee (Migne, l.c. vol. XXV p. 855 f.); Smith, G. A., The Book of the Twelve Prophets, New York 1896, vol. I. p. 220 f.Google Scholar; Hölscher, G., Die Profeten, Leipzig 1914 p. 218.Google Scholar The passage is also mentioned in “The Oldest Collection of Bible Difficulties by a Jew” (JQR 13, 1901 p. 369; cf. about the author J. Mann, in: Tarbiz III 1932 p. 381 f.).
page 106 note 2 Cf. Hos 512.14 914 137f.Volz, Paul, Das Dämonische in Jahwe, Tübingen 1924 p. 9Google Scholar, cites also Hos 65.
page 106 note 3 Cf. Hos. 114.8f. 221 31 145. See also Rud. Kittel, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, vol. II5 6 p. 345.
page 106 note 4 Cheyne, T. K., introduction to W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel2, London 1895 p. xxi f.Google Scholar; P. Volz, Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie und der Messias, Göttingen 1897, p. 33; B. Stade, Biblische Theologie des A. T. I, Tübingen 1905, p. 222; H. Guthe, in: Kautzsch-Bertholet, Die hl. Schriften d. A. T., Tübingen, 1923, vol. II4 p. 10.
page 106 note 5 Hos 64 has been very frequently held to commence a new prophetic speech, so already J. G. Eichhorn, Die hebräischen Propheten, Göttingen 1816, vol. I. p. 98; J. C. Stuck, Hoseas Propheta, Lipsiae 1828 p. 256 ff. 269; Friedr, Carl. Keil, Bibl. Commentar über die zwölf kleinen Propheten3, Leipzig 1888 p. 66 f.Google Scholar 69. Of newer critics see K. Marti, Dodekapropheton, Tübingen 1903, p. 54 f.; W. Baumgartner, in: Schweizerische Theol. Zeitschr. 30, 1913 p. 118; Praetorius, Franz, Bemerkungen zum Buche Hosea, Berlin 1918, p. 31Google Scholar; Joh. Lindblom, Hosea literarisch untersucht, Åbo 1927, p. 83 ff. 114. That 515 is the finale of the preceding oracle has been shown by Schmidt, Hans, Hosea 6, 1–6 (in: Sellin Festschrift, Leipzig 1927, p. 111 f.).Google Scholar
page 106 note 6 Noticed by Abraham ibn Ezra when commenting on 64:
page 107 note 7 Georg Richter, Erläuterungen zu dunkeln Stellen in den kleinen Propheten, Gütersloh 1914 p. 28 who reads
page 107 note 8 Bernard Duhm, The Twelve Prophets, transl. by A. Duff, London 1912, p. 95.
page 107 note 9 The reading of the Sept. ἀπεθέρισα does not presuppose (so Cheyne, ZAW 31, 1911 p. 315 and Felix E. Peiser, Hosea, Philologische Studien zum A. T. Leipzig 1914 p. 25) but with the very frequent confusion of and the aramaicism So already Nöldeke (see K. Vollers, Das Dodekapropheton der Alexandriner, ZAW 3, 1883 p. 249); Felix Perles, Analekten zur Textkritik des A. T. Neue Folge, Leipzig 1922 p. 29, and A. Kaminka, Studien zur Septuaginta an der Hand der zwölf kleinen Prophetenbücher, Frankfurt a. M. 1928, p. 26 and 39.
page 107 note 10 The most recent example is Franz Wutz, Die Transkriptionen von der Septuaginta bis zu Hieronymus, Stuttgart 1933 p. 388 who metamorphoses ‘stones’ (Job 523) and ‘prophets’ (Hos 65) into unexampled ‘fruits’:
page 107 note 11 Mowinckel, Sigmund, Le Décalogue, Paris 1927 p. 54Google Scholar; Sellin, Ernst, Das Zwölfprophetenbuch3, Leipzig 1929 p. 75.Google Scholar
page 107 note 1 Septuagint; Syriac; Cyril of Alexandria (ed. Migne, Patr. Graeca vol. LXXI p. 165); Theodoret (ed. Migne l.c. vol. LXXXI p. 1265, differently ib. p. 1584); Abraham ibn Ezra; Eliezer of Beaugency (ed. S. Poznański in Haggōren, vol. III Berdichev, 1901, p. 114); the commentators reviewed by Edward Pococke, A Commentary on the Prophecy of Hosea, Oxford 1685, p. 306 ff.; Ferd. Hitzig, Die zwölf kleinen Propheten4, Leipzig 1881 p. 31Google Scholar; Paul Riessler, Die kleinen Propheten, Rottenburg a. N. 1911 p. 29 and 31 (reads nebi'êikem); Ehrlich, A. B., Randglossen zur hebr. Bibel, Leipzig 1912, vol. V p. 179Google Scholar; Franz Praetorius l.c. p. 31 and idem, Neue Bemerkungen zu Hosea, Berlin 1922 p. 28Google Scholar (reads rāṣaḥtî or reṣaḥtîm which he however drops as explanatory gloss to restore the “Doppeltrimeter”) recanted in his later Die Gedichte des Hosea, Halle 1926 p. 15 f. (reads and retains as “echter Text”: rāṣaḥtî nebi'êkem); E. Sellin l.c. p. 73 f.
page 108 note 2 Joseph, and Ḳimḥi, David and the Jewish commentators listed by Harry Cohen, The Commentary of Rabbi David Kimhi on Hosea, New York 1929 p. 54Google Scholar; Isaac b. Juda Abravanel, Pērûš ‘al nebi'îm aḥarōnîm, Amsterdam 1641; Friedman, Meir (in: A. Harkavy Festschrift, Petersburg 1908 p. 24Google Scholar, quoting Nu 1115 I Re 194); Ehrlich l.c. when speaking of “Schläge and Todesgefahr” and referring to 1 Re 2224 Jer 202 2620–24 389.
page 108 note 3 The Targum; Rashi; Joseph Kara, In Hoseam Commentarius, Breslau 1861; Heinr. Ewald, Die Propheten des Alten Bundes Stuttgart 1840 vol. I p. 144 f.; Keil l.c. p. 70; Wellhausen, J., Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, Berlin 1892, p. 114Google Scholar; C. von Orelli, The Twelve Minor Prophets, Edinburgh 1893 p. 38; Samuel Oettli, Amos and Hosea, Gütersloh 1901 p. 86 suggests ḥaṣabtîm or better meḥaṣtîm or leḥaṣtîm, emendations endorsed by W. Staerk, Das assyrische Weltreich im Urteil der Propheten, Göttingen 1908 p. 184; W. Nowack, Die kleinen Propheten, Göttingen 1897 p. 42; K. Marti l.c. p. 56 reads ḥaṣabtîkā and haragtîkā and transfers 5c corrected as umišpāṭēnū ke'ōr to 63αβ, the latter transposition and the change of the second verb adopted also by O. Procksch, Die kleinen prophetischen Schriften vor dem Exil, Stuttgart 1910 p. 380 where the verse is construed as a question; van Hoonacker, A., Petits, Les Douze Prophèles, Paris 1908 p. 63Google Scholar; Adam C. Welch, The Religion of Israel under the Kingdom, Edinburgh 1912 p. 110 and 269, n. 27; Scott, Melville, The Message of Hosea, London 1921 p. 50Google Scholar; Brown, S. L., The Book of Hosea, London 1932 p. 57.Google Scholar
page 108 note 4 Jerome; Luther; Calvin; Gesenius, Thes. p. 509; August Simson, Der Prophet Hosea, Hamburg 1851 p. 183 f.; Wünsche, August Der Prophet Hosea, Leipzig 1868 p. 251Google Scholar; Scholz, Anton, Commentar zum Buche des Propheten Hoseas, Würzburg 1882 p. 76 f.Google Scholar; J. Halévy, Le Livre d'Osée (in: Revue Sémitique, vol. 10, 1902, p. 106 f. reads ḥaṣabtîm); Harper, W. R., Amos and Hosea (in: The Internat. Crit. Com.) New York 1905, p. 285 f.Google Scholar; Smith, J. M. P., A Commentary on the Books of Amos, Hosea and Micah, New York 1914 p. 113Google Scholar; Crafer, T. W., The Book of Hosea, Cambridge 1923, p. 44.Google Scholar
page 199 note 5 J. Chr. Stuck l.c.; E. F. C. Rosenmüller, Prophetae Minores, Lipsiae 1812 p. 198.
page 199 note 6 The interpretation of ḥāṣabtî in the light of Ps 297 attempted by Ch. Michaëlis (“fulminavi per prophetas, eo nimirum sensu, quo Latini quoque de oratore dicunt: tonat, fulminat”) found little following, cf. Sam. Henr. Manger, Commentarius in Librum Propheticum Hoseae, Campis 1782, p. 293. Barth, J., Wurzeluntersuchungen zum hebr. und aram. Lexikon, Berlin 1902, p. 22Google Scholar renders Ps 297: “Horch, Gott entzündet Feuer Flammen” according to an additional signification of the root in Arabic, quoting Sura 2198 which styles the sinners ḥaṣabu jahannama or fuel of hell. See however Friedr. Schulthess, in: Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen vol. 164, 1902 p. 671 who rejects the example as “exegetisches Experiment der Dogmatiker.., vielleicht eins der halbverdauten Fremdwörter mit denen Muḥammed imponieren wollte.” No attempt seems to have been made at an identification of ḥāṣabtî with the Arabic ḫṭb address words to, speak to; ḫaṭîb orator.
page 199 note 7 Pococke l.c. p. 308 f.; Harper l.c. p. 286; J. M. P. Smith l.c. p. 113.
page 199 note 8 Huxtable, E., in: Speakers Commentary, New York 1876, vol. VI p. 444Google Scholar; G. A. Smith l.c. p. 265; Crafer l.c.
page 199 note 9 David Pareus, Hoseas Propheta, Heidelbergae 1605 p. 132. See also Moses Alshekh, Mar'ôt Haṣ-ṣōbe' ôt, Venice 1603:
page 110 note 10 Contrast Ernst Sellin, Das Zwölfprophetenbuch3 1929 p. 73 and Klostermann in Sellin's Der alttestamentliche Prophetismus, Leipzig 1912, p. 37. The idea of god massacring his prophets for no other sin but praying for their people is not only entirely alien to Hosea, but to all Hebrew antiquity which, on the contrary, held it to be a sin against god if the prophet were to cease to pray for the people, cf. I Sa 1223.
page 110 note 11 l.c. p. 114: “Eine Verbindung zwischen 64 und 65 lässt sich nicht entdecken; 64 schliesst abgebrochen und 65 beginnt abgebrochen.”
page 110 note 12 J. W. Nowack l.c. p. 43 and Harper, W. R., The Structure of the Text of the Book of Hosea, Chicago 1905 p. 23Google Scholar and in the Intern. Crit. Com. p. 280.
page 110 note 13 l.c. p. 16.
page 111 note 14 Emendationes in plerosque sacrae scripturae veteris testamenti libros, Breslau 1892.
page 111 note 15 Critical Remarks upon some Passages of the O. T. London 1896.
page 111 note 16 l.c. p. 12: “When I propose to write I assume the existence of a root (with a commutation of and only known to us in Syriac); God has, so to say, tattoed them by his words … Either the tenor of the whole sentence is ironical, or it is a question: ‘Indeed to this end I have inculcated (it) on the prophets, have impressed them by the words of My mouth, that I like’ etc.”
page 111 note 17 In: Theologisches Literaturblatt v. 26, 1905, p. 474 f.
page 112 note 18 Defended by E. König, Theologie des A. T.4 1924 p. 233 and Norbert Peters, Osee und die Geschichte, Paderborn 1924 p. 11 f. See however Julius Rieger, Die Bedeutung der Geschichte für die Verkündigung des Amos und Hosea, Giessen 1929, p. 75, n. 3.
page 112 note 19 Praeparationen zu den kleinen Propheten, Heft 8: Hosea, Cap. I–VII, Berlin 1892, proposing as “freie Coniectur”; Cf. Luther's: “ich höfele sie durch die Propheten.”
page 113 note 20 of Franckh's Die Prophetie in der Zeit vor Amos, Gütersloh 1905 (Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie, IX).
page 113 note 21 Signed: A. K.; see Klostermann, Der Pentateuch II (Leipzig 1907) p. 578 f.Google Scholar Cf. also McFadyen, J. E., The Mosaic Origin of the Decalogue, in: The Expositor 12, 1916 p. 58.Google Scholar
page 113 note 22 Bemerkungen zu den zwölf Propheten, ZAW 31, 1911, p. 23.
page 113 note 23 So in the English transl. of Duhm, The Twelve Prophets p. 95. In the German article, cited in the foregoing note, Duhm rejects 65a as a reader's “Anmerkung … wo jedoch das Verbum ḥāṣab unverständlich ist … Man kann etwa ḥaḳḳōtî oder ha'idōtî oder nach v. 5bhōṣē'tî dafür lesen.” Similarly Albrecht Alt, in: Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 30, 1919 p. 563, reading hōda'tî. H. Gressmann, Die älteste Geschichtsschreibung und Prophetie Israels2, Göttingen 1921 p. 383 and p. 14 of the appended Textkritische Anmerkungen, reads with Duhm hōṣē'tî in the first verb and hōda'tîkā in the second, regards however the entire verse as authentic.
page 113 note 24 Der altestamentliche Prophetismus p. 37.
page 114 note 25 In the first ed. of his Zwölfprophetenbuch, Leipzig 1921 p. 48 f. and 53: “Der Glossator bezog das Wort auf den Dekalog, ein späterer missverstand die ‘Steine’ und machte ‘Propheten’ daraus.”
page 114 note 28 Mose und seine Bedeutung für die israelitisch- jüdische Religionsgeschichte, Leipzig-Erlangen 1922 p. 34.
page 114 note 27 ib., p. 35 and 38 f.
page 114 note 28 Die geschichtliche Orientierung der Prophetie des Hosea, in Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 36, 1925, p. 628.
page 114 note 29 Hosea und das Martyrium des Mose, ZAW 46, 1928 p. 33 and in Zwölfprophetebuch3 p. 66 ff.
page 114 note 30 See W. Caspari, Neue Versuche geschichtswissenschaftlicher Vergewisserung über Mose, ZAW 42, 1924 p. 310 ff. and Julien Weill, Hosée XII13–XIII1 et le prétendu martyre de Moïse, REJ 87, 1929 p. 89–93. Karl Budde, ZAW 50, 1932 p. 300 ff. calls attention to a like hypothesis of Goethe about the death of Moses. The similar theory of Micha Josef bin Gorion (Berdyczewski) in his: Sinai und Garizim, Berlin 1926 where the thought is traced in rabbinic and later literature, seems to have escaped his notice. On the biblical researches of Berdyczewski cf. my Reborn, Hebrew, New York 1930 p. 362 ff.Google Scholar and the literature cited on p. 464 f. to which now the two articles of Emanuel bin Gorion in: Gedächtnisschrift zum zehnten Todestage von M. J. bin Gorion, Berlin 1931 should be added.
page 115 note 31 See S. Mowinckel l.c. p. 53 whom this exegesis reminds of a Norwegian proverb: “Mieux vaut être mort que dans l'embarras.”
page 115 note 32 ḥāṣab can mean to hew out (a well Dt 611 Jer 213, a vat Is 52, a grave ib. 2216) or to hew from (a quarry Is 511) or to hew with (an ax Is 1015) or to hew in (the rock Job 1924) or to hew through (a tunnel, Siloam inscr. 1.4 and 6) but it never means, as the customary exegesis of Hos 65 is wont to assume, to hew down—not even in Is 519 where many emend since Houbigant as in Job 2612. Deutero-Isaiah refers to the miracles and myths of cosmogony when the arm of god hewed through or split Rahab in twain and thus divided the floods of the great deep beneath from the waters above the firmament (Gen 17 711 4929 Dt 3313). See Torrey, Charles C., The Second Isaiah, New York 1928 p. 400Google Scholar and Volz, P., Jesaia II, Leipzig 1932, p. 119.Google Scholar
page 115 note 33 Sellin, Mose etc. p. 39. N. Peters l.c. p. 21 labors to defend the plural as referring to Moses and Joshua cf. Jos 832 and Dt 273.
page 116 note 34 Hans Schmidt, in: Sellin Festschrift p. 120; “Das scheint mir nicht ursprünglich … Ich lese und ziehe das zum Folgenden: Im Rest des Wortes dürfte stecken See also notes 11, 12 and 23.
page 116 note 35 Other attempts to explain the verse either resort to an arbitrary emendation of both verbs (see T. K. Cheyne ZAW 31, 1911 p. 315: “for the scarcely possible haragtîm read gā'artî and in the parallel line for ḳāṣabtî read ḳāṣaftî.” If it be no misprint, ḳāṣabtî is the postulated reading of the Septuagint, see introd. note 9) or to an ad hoc conjectured novel signification of ḥāṣab (cf. Paul Joüon, Notes de critique textuelle, in: Mélanges de la Faculté Orientale, Université Saint-Joseph, Beyrouth, IV, 1910 p. 28 f.: “Chose étrange, la Bible qui est pleine de menaces prophétiques n'a pas de mot pour menacer!” The need is supplied by postulating the meaning of threaten for ḥāṣabtî, while the second verb is emended to read correspondingly It deserves mention, that Louis Ginzberg (in: Adolf Schwarz Festschrift, Vienna 1917 p. 353) suggests for the aram. ‘impudent’ the derivation from the Hebrew citing not only as did Joüon but also which has in Syriac also the meaning of ‘make bold.’ In the recent third edition of Kittel-Kahle's Biblia Hebraica, Stuttgart 1933 p. 7, O. Procksch discards his previous explanation (see note 3) and reverts to Klostermann's emendation, although retaining the transfer of 5c to 63. For other attempts see introd. notes 7 and 10.
page 116 note 1 II Re 165 ff. Is 7, 8, 920 17.
page 116 note 2 See Driver, S. R., Introd. to the Lit. of the O. T. New York 1923, p. 302Google Scholar; Harper l.c. p. cxli quoting Nowack, Marti et al.
page 116 note 3 Israel und Ägypten, p. 53.
page 117 note 4 See A. Alt, Hosea 58–66. Ein Krieg und seine Folgen in prophetischer Beleuchtung, in: Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 30, 1919 pp. 537–568.
page 117 note 5 Cf. Seesemann, Otto, Israel und Juda bei Amos und Hosea, Leipzig 1898 p. 21 f.Google Scholar 31, and W. Baumgartner in Schweizer. Theol. Zeitschr. 30, 1913 p. 122 f.
page 117 note 6 Alt's thesis may be said to have won general acceptance. See R. Kittel, Gesch. d. Volkes Isr. vol. II6 p. 344, n. 3. H. Schmidt l.c. and Sellin's commentary3 p. 66 ff. Only Otto Procksch, Der Staatsgedanke in der Prophetie, Gütersloh 1933, p. 20 suggests an earlier date.
page 117 note 7 II Re 167.
page 117 note 8 Is 717.
page 117 note 9 II Re 1610ff.
page 118 note 10 See Emil G. Kraeling, The Immanuel Prophecy, JBL 50, 1931 p. 279. For a defense of the course of action taken by Ahaz see Joachim Begrich, Der Syrish-Ephraimitishe Krieg und seine weltpolitischen Zusammenhänge, ZDMG 83, 1929 p. 213–237 and against it Karl Budde, Jesaja und Ahaz, ib. 84, 1930, p. 125–138 and Procksch, Otto, Jesaia I, Leipzig 1930 p. 4 f.Google Scholar, 118 f. Cf. also Olmstead, A. T., History of Palestine and Syria, New York 1931 p. 449 ff.Google Scholar; Mowinckel, in: Acta Orientalia 10, 1932 p. 182 ff.; Maisler, B., in: Bulletin of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society 1933 p. 1 ff.Google Scholar
page 118 note 11 Hos 42 68f. 104 Is 919f.
page 118 note 12 Is 910f. Hos 513 78f. 11.
page 118 note 13 Hos 74–7 84.10 103f. 1310f.
page 118 note 14 Cf. Hos 511 and Duhm ZAW 31, 1911 p. 23, endorsed by Alt l.c. p. 553.
page 118 note 15 II Re 1529 Hos 514 Is 823 Jud 1830.
page 118 note 16 However, the use of Ephraim for the remnant of old Israel can hardly be said to be “sicher nachweisbar erst seit der Deportation von Nord und Ost-Palästina durch Tiglat-Pilesar,” G. Hölscher l.c. p. 213; Winckler, H. in Ed. Schrader KAT3 Berlin 1902, p. 264Google Scholar, and Alt l.c. p. 554. Is 72.5.9.17 98.20 173 antedate the catastrophe of II Re 1529.
page 118 note 17 Hos 514f.
page 118 note 18 Cf. II Re 1530 174 Hos 513.
page 118 note 19 Hos 515.
page 118 note 20 Hos 513.
page 118 note 21 Hos 46 51 69 105 Is 914.
page 118 note 22 Hos 48.
page 118 note 23 Hos 46.14.
page 118 note 24 Hos 413.19 56 66 811.13 94 101 f. 8 1212 132.
page 119 note 25 Hos 51 73.7.16 84 915 1310 Is 915.
page 119 note 26 Hos 513 79.11 89 93 102.6 115 122 144.
page 119 note 27 Hos 512.
page 119 note 28 Hos 217 910 111 1210 135.
page 119 note 29 Hos 22.25 35 1110f. 134 144ff. Cf. W. Baumgartner, Kennen Amos und Hosea eine Heilseschatologie? in: Schweizerische Theol. Zeitschr. 30, 1913, p. 118 ff. 152 ff. and W. Caspari, in Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 41, 1931, p. 818 f.
page 119 note 30 Hos 513 61 71 113 145.
page 119 note 31 Hos 144.
page 119 note 32 Hos 29 35 54 61 710·16 115 127 142f.
page 119 note 33 Hos 611. Against the lately accepted derivation from (cf. E. L. Dietrich, Die endzeitliche Wiederherstellung bei den Propheten, Giessen 1925 p. 26, 36 f.) E. Baumann, ZAW 47, 1929 p. 27 f., 32 renews again the connection with
page 119 note 34 Hos 71.
page 119 note 35 Hos 66 cf. also 221 f. 1012 127.
page 119 note 36 Hos 41·3 83.
page 119 note 37 Hos 54.
page 119 note 38 Hos 56.
page 119 note 39 Hos 812.
page 120 note 40 Hos 811·13.
page 120 note 41 Hos 411 91 101.
page 120 note 42 I Sa 913.
page 120 note 43 II Sa 58 cf. Lev 2118.
page 120 note 44 Lev 124 cf. also Thr 415.
page 120 note 45 Dt 232f.
page 120 note 46 Ps 519 Nu 1918 Lev 146·49.
page 120 note 47 HOS 44.14
page 121 note 1 See Lev 1531 Nu 1913.20 about the danger of defiling the sanctuary.
page 121 note 2 See the Babylonian parallel to the story of Job: “I will praise the lord of wisdom,” cf. Gressmann, Hugo, Altorientalische Texte zum A. T. 2nd ed., Berlin 1926 p. 280Google Scholar; S. Langdon, Babylonian Wisdom, London 1923 p. 64; Lehmann-Haas, Textbuch zur Religionsgeschiehte2, Leipzig 1922 p. 315 f.Google Scholar; also R. Reitzenstein, Das iranische Erlösungsmysterium, Bonn 1921 p. 157, 254 n. 3 and H. Zimmern, ZDMG 76, 1922 p. 49.
page 121 note 3 According to Albert Schott of Bonn (ZDMG 81, 1927 p. xlvii), dating from the Cossaean era, viz. 1400–1100 B.c.; cf. Albright, W. F., The Archaelogy of Palestine and the Bible, New York 1932 p. 167 f.Google Scholar See Gressmann l.c. p. 324 f. and Rogers, R. W., Cuneiform Parallels to the O. T2., New York 1926 p. 170 ff.Google Scholar
page 121 note 4 Cf. Gressmann, Die älteste Geschichtsschreibung p. 231 and Kurt Galling, Der Beichtspiegel, ZAW 47, 1929 p. 130.
page 122 note 5 Cf. chapter 125 of the Book of the Dead: Gressmann, Altor. Texte2 p. 10 f.; Lehmann-Haas l.c. p. 273; Davis, Charles H. S., The Egyptian Book of the Dead, New York 1894 p. 135Google Scholar; Budge, E. A. W., The Lit. of the Ancient Egyptians, London 1924 p. 52.Google Scholar The term ‘negative confession’ is objected to by B. Gunn, The Religion of the Poor in Ancient Egypt, in: Journ. of Eg. Archaeol. 3, 1916 p. 81: “It is no ‘confession’ to persist through forty-two clauses that one has committed no conceivable sin.”
page 122 note 6 Pseudo Dositheus 10: “Praecepta in Delphis ab Apolline in columna scripta.” See H. Schmidt, Mose und der Dekalog, in: Eὐχαριστήριον, Gunkel Festschrift, Göttingen 1923, p. 113.
page 122 note 7 S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstuden V. Kristiania 1924 p. 58 and Le Décalogue, p. 150 f. Cf. the inscription of Astypalaia: [᾽Ε]ς τὸ ἱερὸν μὴ ἐσέρπεν ὄστις μὴ ἁγνός ἐστι (Ziehen, Leges Graec. Sacr. II n. 123) as well as the other examples listed by Theod. Wächter, Reinheitsvorschriften im griech. Kultus, Giessen 1910 p. 6 ff. and Eugen Fehrle, Die kultische Keuschheit im Altertum, Giessen 1910 p. 42 ff. 206 ff.
page 122 note 8 Erman, A., Ägyptische Religion2, Berlin, 1909 p. 86.Google Scholar
page 122 note 9 Ps 243.
page 122 note 10 Ps 244f.
page 123 note 11 Ps 246, see Galling l.c. p. 129. Kittel, R., Die Psalmen6 Leipzig 1929 p. 95Google Scholar puts also v. 6 in the mouth of the priest. See the description by Gunkel, Die Psalmen, Göttingen 1926 p. 102 f. 48 ff. and in ZAW 42, 1924 p. 193 ff. where also the definition of ‘liturgy’ as a composite literary genre will be found.
page 123 note 12 Ps 11819 Is 262, see Gunnar Hylmö, in: Lunds Universitets Årsskrift 25, 1929, No. 5, contended against by Wilhelm Rudolph, Jesaia 24–27, Stuttgart 1933 p. 35 ff.
page 123 note 13 Ps 1004.
page 123 note 14 Ps 11826. About the rabbinic traditions as to the choral arrangements of the psalm, see A. Büchler, Zur Geschichte der Tempelmusik und der Tempelpsalmen, ZAW 20, 1900 p. 124 f.
page 123 note 15 Joh. Hempel, Gott und Mensch im A. T. Stuttgart 1926 p. 6, and Die israelitischen Anschaûûngen von Segen und Fluch im Lichte altorientalischer Parallelen, ZDMG 79, 1925 p. 97. See also his Die althebräische Literatur p. 72.
page 123 note 16 Dt 2615. See Gressmann, Die ält. Geschichtsschr.2 p. 230 and Hempel, l.c. ZDMG 1925, p. 101.
page 123 note 17 See note 5. Cf. also Ps 1311 f.
page 123 note 18 H. Ewald, Dichter des alten Bundes3 Göttingen 1866, vol. I, 2 p. 20; Kautzsch-Bertholet, Hl. Schrift. des A. T.4 Tübingen 1923 II p. 134; Mowinckel, Le Décalogue, p. 146.
page 124 note 19 Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien V. p. 116.
page 124 note 20 Le Décalogue p. 141 ff.
page 124 note 21 Their identification has been suggested by P. Volz, Das Neujahrfest Jahwes, Tübingen 1912 p. 12 ff. and Die biblischen Altertümer, Stuttgart 1914 p. 99 f.; Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien II. Das Thronbesteigungsfest Jahwähs und der Ursprung der Eschatologie, Kristiania 1922 p. 83 ff.; Hans Schmidt, Die Thronfahrt Jahves am Fest der Jahreswende im alten Israel, Tübingen 1927 p. 25 ff. See Morgenstern, Julian, The Three Calendars of Ancient Israel, HUCA I 1924 p. 22 ff.Google Scholar and ib. III, 1926, p. 77 ff.
page 124 note 22 Sukka 55a prescribes indeed their use for the feast of tabernacles.
page 124 note 23 Ex 202 Dt 56 Ps 507 8111.
page 124 note 24 See Gunkel, H., Einleitung in die Psalmen, Göttingen 1928, p. 100 ff.Google Scholar and Eissfeldt, Otto, Jahwe als König ZAW 46, 1928 p. 81–105.Google Scholar
page 124 note 25 See Lev 192ff 12.14ff and the many examples from oriental and classical antiquity in Norden, E., Agnostos Theos, Leipzig 1913 p. 207 ff.Google Scholar, cf. also the pertinent correction of Gressmann, ZAW 34, 1914 p. 286Google Scholar: “Der Dekalog hat eine ältere Stufe des Stiles bewahrt als der Kodex Hammurapi.”
page 124 note 26 Hos 1210 134. See Torczyner, Harry, Die Bundeslade und die Anfänge der Religion Israels, Berlin 1930 p. 52Google Scholar n. 77 and p. 54.
page 125 note 27 Psalmenstudien V, p. 76, 103. About the date of the festival, or rather of its interpretation as the throne ascension holiday, Mowinckel has changed his mind in the meantime, relinquishing “mindestens die älteste Königszeit” (Ps. St. II, p. 203, cf. the references to Hos 75, ib. p. 43, 190) as an error (“Nachwirkung der chronologischen Irrtümer der ‘religionsgeschichtlichen Schule’!”); see his Der Ursprung der Bileamsage, ZAW 48, 1930 p. 267, n. 3. He now accepts with A. von Gall, Βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, Heidelberg 1926, p. 21 both the late date (“späteste Königszeit”) and the influence of the Babylonian cultus. See, however, O. Eissfeldt, Baal Zaphon, Halle 1932 p. 21 f. about the likelihood of north Syrian rather than Babylonian origin.
page 125 note 28 Ps 815.6.
page 125 note 29 Cf. Ps 762 1142.
page 125 note 30 Cf. Hos 213, also Am 523.
page 125 note 31 Ps 8110.11. Cf. Gunkel, Psalmen p. 359 and Max Haller, Ein Jahrzehnt Psalmenforschung, in: Theol. Runsdchau I, 1929 p. 398. The postexilic date of Ps 81 postulated by Mowinckel, Ps. St. II p. 87 and Le Déc. p. 138 f. is very unlikely, as Mowinckel himself inadvertently admits cf. Ps. St. II p. 191.
page 125 note 32 E.g. practices such as in Ex 35 3019 Ps 266 retained until this day in the synagogue, cf. b. Soṭa 39a and 40a.
page 125 note 33 Hence the danger, if not error in the prevalent assumption of late origin, on the ground of ‘prophetic’ influence in psalms that do not mention or stress the elements of cultus.
page 126 note 34 Note the allusion to Ex 2014.15.16 = Dt 517, and of course in Ps 507 to Ex 202 = Dt 56.
page 126 note 35 Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien V, p. 69, 79
page 126 note 36 Běrākōt 28b.
page 126 note 37 Cf. Welch, Adam C., Deuteronomy, London 1932 p. 126.Google ScholarMeyer, Eduard, Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstämme, Halle a. S. 1906, p. 557Google Scholar argues for the priority of the formulae of ban and blessing uttered at the great festival at Shechem and sees in them an archetype of the decalogue. See also Pfeiffer, Robert H., The Oldest Decalogue, JBL 43, 1924, p. 309 f.Google Scholar; Hempel l.c. 99; Mowinckel, Ps. St. V, p. 111, reconsidered in his Le Décalogue p. 134 ff.
page 126 note 38 See vs. 14 and 16 and Gunkel, Jes 33. Eine prophetische Liturgie, ZAW 42, 1924, 177 ff. Still another tōrā of entry seems to be preserved in Ps 101, as has been repeatedly argued by Budde, Exp. Times 8, 1897, p. 202 ff. and ZAW 35, 1915 p. 191 f. and is now partly conceded by Mowinckel Ps. St. VI, 1924, p. 33, n. 2. See esp. vs. 2b [cf. Lev. 162!] 6cd and 7.
page 127 note 39 Kittel, Psalmen6 p. 47 and 95.
page 127 note 40 Cf. Nu 624f. Jer 3123 Ps 2714 913ff. 1215ff. 1285 1343. Against Galling, l.c. p. 127 f. who connects the decalogue with the Beichtspiegel.
page 127 note 41 Dt 712ff. 281ff.
page 127 note 42 Ta'anit iv, 1. One could term correspondingly the liturgy of entry cf. Is 262 Ps 11819 and Mishna Sukka V, 5. See also Morgenstern, Julian, The Gates of Righteousness, HUCA vol. vi, 1929 p. 36 f.Google Scholar where Pss 24 and 118 are interpreted in connection with the solemn opening of the eastern gate of the temple on the two annual equinoctial days.
page 127 note 43 Galling l.c. p. 128 f. assumes that the wording of Pss 15 and 24 “zeigt bereits den Loslösungsprozess vom Kultus” as argued by him also for the second person singular of the decalogue, see above, note 40. Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 134 ff. having changed his view about the genesis of the decalogues from cultic bans and benedictions, rescinds his former agreement with Kittel in Ps. St. V, p. 60 and explains Ps 245 “‘recevoir la bénédiction’ est, d'après le sens, synonyme de ‘monter à la montagne de Yahvé’ pour y recevoir les bienfaits que procure le culte” (Le Déc. p. 142). But his translation ‘recevoir’ attenuates the meaning of to carry away from, cf. Ju 2123 I Sa 1734 Cant 57 also Hos 514 and Dan 116. seems perhaps also to presuppose departure from before the deity, cf. Gen 2631 and 2730. may also carry the connotation of a (parting) gift as in II Re 515 the two verbs being synonymously used cf. the idiom or and Ps 245 = Gen 2735f.: “he has taken away thy blessing.” Translate therefore in the psalm also: he shall carry away (i.e. take home) a blessing from the Lord.
That the wording in Ps 155 is not apposite for the cultic situation of entry to the sanctuary, is obvious. For its connection with the formula of priestly blessing, see Ps 5523 and 1213, where the second person sing, characteristic of the priestly benediction (see note 40) must not be emended; hence more correctly in Mowinckel, Ps. St. II, 1922, p. 171 than in Ps. St. V, 1924, p. 49 which misled also Gunkel, Psalmen, p. 541 despite his better knowledge ib. p. 177 and 238; correctly Kittel, Psalmen6, p. 390. See also Ps 218 clearly anticipating the following benediction or oracle, as Mowinckel himself has noticed (Ps. St. III, 1923, p. 76); comp. also Ps 155 and 1126 or 245 and 1123 where the sacerdotal has faded into the didactic
page 128 note 44 Ps 151, 243 which would read: Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? etc. He that hath clean hands, etc. He shall ascend into the hill of the Lord, he shall stand in His holy place. Similarly also Ps 15.
page 128 note 45 Ps 155, 245: Who shall carry away a blessing from the Lord and strength from the God of his salvation? He that hath clean hands etc. He shall carry away a blessing from the Lord etc. Similarly in Ps 15. For ṣedāḳā, strength, victory, success, prosperity cf. Is 458.24 5417 Pr 818.
page 128 note 46 Cf. the biblical portions or codices written (b. Yoma 38a, cf. Yer. Meg. II 2 f. 73a and Perles, F., Analekten, München 1895 p. 8 f.)Google Scholar and preserved in the Genizah of Cairo, see Kahle, P., Masoreten des Westens, Stuttgart 1930, vol. II p. 88 ff.Google Scholar See also the recent suggestions of Slotki, I. W., Typographic Arrangement of Ancient Hebrew Poetry, ZAW, 1931, p. 211 ff.Google Scholar and on Ps 24 in: JBL 51, 1932, p. 214 ff., also Montgomery, James A., Notes on the Mythological Epic Texts from Ras Shamra, Philadelphia 1933, p. 4 (= JAOS v. 53, p. 100).Google Scholar
page 128 note 47 Ewald, Delitzsch, more recently Staerk and Kittel thought of the days of David (II Sa 612ff) which is objected to by Gunkel p. 104: “aus sehr alter Zeit.., immerhin dürfen wir nicht an die Zeit Davids oder Salomos denken, da der Tempel schon als ‘uralt’ gilt.” See however Ps 1104 Jer 1712 about continuity of pre-Israelitish memories of the site, or cf. Harry Torczyner l.c. p. 41 and 63 who sees here reference to the heavenly abode. Ps 2410 (cf. II Sa 62) and in Ps 247ff. (cf. I Sa 421f. I Re 811) suggest to most scholars the existence of the ark, and hence certainly preexilic date; Mowinckel, Ps. St. II p. 190 f.; ib. V p. 60; Le Déc. p. 151. Gunkel l.c. rightly dismisses Stade's eschatological interpretation (in his: Akademische Reden 1899 p. 70) renewed JBL 52, 1933 p. 175 ff.
page 129 note 48 The oldest worship of the synagogue included the decalogue (see Tamid V, 1 and Ismar Elbogen, Der jüdische Gottesdienst, Frankf. a. M. 1924 p. 24) which was later in days of primitive Christianity omitted: cf. Yer. Berakot I, 8 f. 3°; b. Berakot f. 12a.
page 129 note 49 Cf. Mi 16ff and Sellin, Zwölfprophetenbuch3 p. 306 ff. Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 152, citing his Jesajadisiplene, Oslo 1926 p. 141 f. denies the genuineness of Mi 6–7, assigning it to an Isaiah disciple in the days of Manasseh. On the other hand, Is 33 is postulated l.c. p. 151 f. to antedate the exile and reach back to the Assyrian era (cf. also his “Die Komposition des Jesaiabuches,” in: Acta Orientalia XI, 1933 p. 280, but also p. 284 and 290)Google Scholar, while Gunkel ZAW 42, 1924 p. 177 f. thinks of the early fifth cent., Buhl, Jesaia2 1912 p. 430 of the later Persian period, Procksch, Jesaia I p. 425 of about 300 B.C., still later Duhm, Jesaia3 p. 214 and Julius A. Bewer, The Literature of the O. T. p. 422 f. In any case, the ritual of entry is to be regarded according to Mowinckel l.c. p. 152 also as certainly completed “au plus tard vers 700 avant J.-Chr.; mais il peut aussi être sensiblement plus ancien.”
page 129 note 50 Cf. Jos 76 Jud 2026 212 1 Sa 76 I Re 833.
page 129 note 51 1 Re 219.12 Jer 369 Joel 114 etc.
page 129 note 52 Joel 215.
page 129 note 53 I Sa 75 Joel 216 Jon 35 Ezra 821 II Chr 2013.
page 129 note 54 Esth 43.
page 129 note 55 Hos 714 Is 2212.
page 129 note 56 Jos 76 Joel 213.
page 129 note 57 Jer 48 Jon 35f. Ps 3512.
page 130 note 58 Is 585 Mi 64 Ps 6911 cf. Margolis, ZAW 31, 1911, p. 314.
page 130 note 59 Jer 626 Neh 91.
page 130 note 60 Joel 214 Jon 39.
page 130 note 61 To which reference is made in Hos 66, see also Ju 2026 214 1 Sa 79 Jer 1412. Is 111 and Mi 67f (cf. 2 Re 163 and Is 72) are often interpreted as presupposing the frantic sacrifices in days of calamity.
page 130 note 62 See 1 Sa 1438ff or II Sa 211–14.
page 130 note 63 Thr 340.
page 130 note 64 Joel 213.
page 130 note 65 Mišna Ta'anit II 1, Tos. ib. I 8, all old customs. cf. e.g. the and 1 Re 219.12.
page 130 note 66 i.e. Lev. 26 and Dt 28, cf. Miš. Megilla III 6, Tos. ib. IV 9. The custom of reading on historic fast days the sections Ex 3211ff and 341ff prefacing the so-called cultic dodecalogue dates from geonic times, see Elbogen l.c. p. 164.
page 130 note 67 Johs. Pedersen, Israel, London 1926 p. 349. On the primary meaning of mišpāṭ cf. Ludwig Köhler, Die hebräische Rechtsgemeinde, Zürich 1931 p. 9.
page 130 note 68 See the use of šālōm and berîth, words of different origin and scope, yet employed interchangeably I Re 526 Ps 5521; Pedersen l.c. p. 285.
page 131 note 1 Clearly recognizable by its first words, cf. I Sa 99 Is 23 = Mi 42 Ps 951.
page 131 note 2 Comp. the use of here and in 143 with I Re 833 Joel 212 Thr 340 Is 912 = 2 Chr 203 Ps 7834 = as in Hos 515, cf. also 710 and 56.15; and perhaps 714 82 and 63, though in the latter passage not altogether in the narrower cultual, but wider religious, ethical or legal sense as in 41, cf. Jer 2216, as often the best commentator of Hos! See now also Krause, ZAW 50, 1932 p. 238 ff. who rendering Am 46ff. 54 too literally as a call to the worship in Zion only (Am 12) makes him a precursor of Ps 872.
page 131 note 3 For the use of misconstrued by H. Schmidt l.c. p. 121, cf. Is 3026 Jer 614 (811) 3017 Thr 213 2 Chr 714 3020 et fr.
page 131 note 4 So rightly interpreted by the rabbis, b. Berakot 6b. The words need not be emended (against Sellin3 p. 72) nor interpreted as portraying shallow or sham repentance, against Ewald, Smith, G. A. et al., also David Rosin, in Zunz Jubelschrift, Berlin 1884 p. 54.Google Scholar
page 131 note 5 Gunkel, Psalmen, p. 16, 114, 548 and Einl. p. 131. Characteristic of the Vertrauenspsalm is the third person and the jussive instead of the direct apostrophe and imperative of prayer cf. Ps 3, 4, 11, 23, 27, 62 or Mi 77ff.
page 131 note 6 Only the “want of connection between the prayer and what follows it,” as G. A. Smith l.c. p. 264 admirably states, earned for the poem 61–3 the designation of a Leichtsinnspsalm and for the faith expressed therein the censure: “Leichtglaube ohne sittliches Gewicht,” see Procksch, l.c.; Paul Humbert, Osée le prophète bédouin, Revue d'hist. et de philos. relig. 1, 1921 p. 116 f.; Harper l. c. p. 280, 283 et al. As soon as the prophetic rejoinder 64ff. is detached, as is wrongly done by Lindblom l. c. p. 82, the easy religiousness of the psalm is gone.
page 132 note 7 This translation is erroneous as is also the reference to II Re 932 Am 48 Is 176 (against Wellhausen, G. A. Smith, Harper et al.). The numbers do not express vaguely, as in the above parallels: in two, three days, but specify exactly one definite date: after two days, on the third day. The preposition has the force of cf. Gen. 43 and Jud 114 etc., and the use of the asyndeton is more frequent in Hos than in any other book of the O. T.
page 132 note 8 Kleine Propheten3 p. 116.
page 132 note 9 Adonis und Esmun, Leipzig 1911 p. 409 f.; cf. also Humbert, l.c. p. 117; Julius Rieger l.c. p. 93 and H. G. May, The Fertility Cult in Hosea AJSL 48, 1932, p. 75 where Hos 513–63 is conceived as a unit and called “a satire on the normal cult reaction.”
page 132 note 10 See H. Schmidt l.c. p. 121 f.
page 132 note 11 Sellin3 p. 72.
page 132 note 12 Hans Schmidt and Paul Kahle: Volkserzählungen aus Palästina, Göttingen 1918, 115, 16; 203, 8. H. Schmidt l.c. p. 122.
page 132 note 13 Gen. r. § 56 and 91 interprets our scripture quite correctly when drawing there-from and from examples of biblical history the assurance: The difficult passage in Am 44 may contain the similar customary duration of pilgrimages to Bethel and Gilgal, if the prophet is describing, in an ironical vein, the offerings brought on the morning after arrival at the sanctuary and the large gifts left on the third day, before the parting benediction. Every morning or every third day, as the passage is sometimes rendered, would seem to require either the plural (Ps 7314) or the repetition (I Chr 927). See Nowack ad loc. and Harper l.c. p. 92 ff. 94. Cf. also Ex 1910f. 15 cited by Schmidt l.c. who mentions as possible also the interpretation of Hos 62 in the simpler sense of duration of penance. Gen. 4218 Jos 216 I Re 125 Jon 21 Ezr 815 106.8.9. would show the popularity of the interval in folk-tale, custom and cult. Cf. ἁγνεύσας ἡμέρας τρεῖς (Kenyon, Greek pap. I, 1893, p. 108) and other parallels quoted by E. Fehrle l.c. p. 157.
page 133 note 14 See Midraš Tanḥuma, ad Gen 421: cf. also b. Mo'ed ḳaṭan 21b or else Gen. r. § 50 ad 5010 (corrected but seldom by the identical versions Lev. r. § 18 ad 151, Eccl. r. § 12 ad 126, Yer. Mo'ed ḳaṭan III 82b, Yer. Yebamot XVI 15c, b. Šabbat 151b): This physiological observation made independently by various peoples (see Baudissin l.c. p. 413 f.) would explain the interval of mourning; the customs of fast in Hos 62 would repeat, as often, funebrial rites.
page 133 note 15 Comp. I Sa 3113 II Sa 111f. Jer 626 729 and Hos 714 Is 2212; also in the customs of the synagogue cf. Mas. Sōferîm XVIII, 4 ff. ed. J. Müller, Leipzig 1878 p. 255 ff.
page 133 note 16 Dt 918.25 Jos 76 Ezr 101 Neh 14; Is 294 Jer 325 1318 142 Ps 4426 11925; all night also II Sa 1216 Joel 113. For cf. II Sa 1217.20; Ezra 95 Jos 710.
page 133 note 17 Cf. Ps 3319 2227 Gen 4725 and the kindred idiom Thr 111 I Sa 3012.
page 133 note 18 Hence in prayers also figuratively Ps 7120 857 as the similar use of and in Ps 603f. See above note 3.
page 133 note 19 Both folk and prophet seem to point deictically to the rising sun 63.5 which the imagery in 64 likewise confirms. Hence Giesebrecht's emendation in: Beiträge zur Jesaiakritik 1890 p. 208: on the basis of εὐρήσομεν αὐτόν in the Sept., adopted by many critics (Harper p. 283, G. A. Smith, Guthe l.c., Sellin3 p. 72, H. W. Hertzberg, Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 43, 1932 p. 525, et al.) is no improvement.
page 134 note 20 See e.g. Ju 2023.27 and the detailed description of the ritual in II Chr 203.14ff. Ps 608 is a good example, for also presupposing penance after a defeat: Hugo Winkler, Gesch. Isr. II p. 204 ff. thinks of Davidic times, so also Mowinckel, Ps. St. III p. 67, later in Ps. St. VI p. 92 preferring the Solomonic era; Ps 602 would thus not be utterly devoid of correct historic information, cf. now the very clever vindication of biblical superscriptions by Torczyner, Harry, Das literarische Problem der Bibel, ZDMG 85, 1931, p. 287 ff.Google Scholar
page 134 note 21 Cf. Ps 207 spoken at the sacrifice (v. 4), also Ps 13211ff. in answer to prayer or sacrifice (cf. v. 10). About the oracle in the cultus see Friedr. Küchler, Das priesterliche Orakel in Israel und Juda, in: Baudissin Festschrift, Giessen 1918 p. 297 ff.; Mowinckel, Ps St. III. Kultprophetie und prophetiscbe Psalmen, Kristiania 1923, p. 23 ff. The bible contains some twenty examples of prophetic liturgies in which the folk-lament is followed by an oracle, cf. Gunkel ZAW 42, 1924, p. 195.
page 134 note 22 See Ju 214 after a penance and II Re 320 also when seeking help and oracle, ib. vs. 11 ff. and Jos 76.16. For the morning sacrifice cf. Gen. 2818 Ex 244 2939 326 Lev 65 Nu 284 II Re 1615 Am 44 Ez 4613.
page 134 note 23 Ps 54 579 5917 8814 1083 Sir 4710.
page 134 note 24 Gunkel, Das Märchen im A. T., Tübingen 1921, p. 70.
page 134 note 25 Ps 1306 9014 1438, see also Ps 466 and Is 269 where the Sept. reads ϕῶς = “as light are thy judgments to earth,” see William Popper, The Prophetic Poetry of Isaiah, Berkeley 1931, p. 195. To enforce and bring to light justice is one of the functions of all oriental sun-gods: hence the frequent association of light and right Is 588 621 Ps 376 cf. also Ps 306 Is 1714; perhaps also the customs of secular law II Sa 152 Jer 2112 Job 297LXX.
page 134 note 26 Ps 11925.147 (read as in vs. 81 and 114 and cf. Ps 4426) yearns as in Hos 62 for the reviving word, cf. the similar use of and in vs. 25 and 28, and of in Ps 10720 Is 5715.18f. where the metaphor is taken from the bent and bowed down in fast days (cf. Ps 119107). Ps 8019, a north-Israelitish psalm, hence also a good parallel to Hos, is generally mistranslated or needlessly altered (against W. Staerk, Schr. d. A. T. in Auswahl III 12 Göttingen 1920 p. 144 and Gunkel, Psalmen p. 351); the verse is to be rendered much alike Gen 3227, the latter happening indeed at dawn: We will not retreat from thee (i.e. leave the sanctuary) lest thou bless us! Cf. the refrain Ps 804ff. and Nu 625, also the passages quoted above note 18.
page 135 note 27 Hans Schmidt, Das Gebet der Angeklagten im A. T., Giessen 1928 p. 23 ff. interprets Ps 36 54 1715 274 (emending ) 579 and 13918 as showing that the exoneration of the indicted and detained in the temple (I Re 831 f) took place in the morning. See also R. Press, ZAW 51, 1933 p. 139 f.
page 135 note 28 Lev 922 f. I Sa 220 II Sa 618 I Re 854 f.; the worshippers rising for the benediction ib. v. 14 and Neh 85f. See B. Jacob, Beiträge zu einer Einleitung in die Psalmen, ZAW 16, 1896, p. 149 ff.
page 135 note 29 Cf. II Sa 1213, Mat 95.
page 135 note 30 Jer 366.9.19.26, cf. also Jer 26 and the allusions to the decalogue in 79 as if to say: you should be barred from entrance to the sanctuary altogether! See Ps 5015 ff. and chap. III, text and note 34.
page 135 note 31 For example Jer 322 = Hos 145, Jer 43 = Hos 1012, Jer 1410 = Hos 813. In his review of my Ezekiel or Pseudo-Ezekiel? (repr. from Harv. Theol. Rev. 24, 1931, p. 247 ff. esp. p. 297) the lamented Dr. A. Zifroni (in Lešōnēnū v. 4, Tel Aviv 1932, p. 248–252) rightly detected in Jer 3127f. a commentary upon Hos 225. See also Gross, K., Die literarische Verwandtschaft Jeremias mit Hosea, Leipzig 1930 p. 32 f.Google Scholar complemented in Neue Kirchliche Zeitschr. 42, 1931 p. 241 ff., 327 ff.
page 135 note 32 That is the meaning of here and in Hos 103, cf. I Sa 146 = and in the frequent oath II Sa 325 etc.
page 136 note 33 Comment. on Hos 66. Again Jer 1410 (227 34f.) may serve as a parallel.
page 136 note 34 See the Targum: the Sept.: τὸ κρίμα μου ὡς ϕῶς, the Syriac: even some MSS. of the Vulgate: judicium meum.
page 136 note 35 One can also translate with Diodati: “the law which I have given thee for a rule” or with the Geneva Engl. Bible: “my doctrine” (both cited by Pococke, l.c. p. 308) or with L. W. Batten, JBL 11, 1892 p. 209 “my religion.” Note the connotation of help in cf. 1 Sa 2416 II Sa 1819.31 et fr., also Hos 511: stripped of its right, helpless.
page 136 note 36 Cf. Zeph 35 Is 514 and Job 1222 2811. See also the kindred similes in ancient oriental literature cited by L. Dürr, in: Sellin Festschrift p. 44 ff., esp. the references to the Hammurapi code where aṣû = is used for both sunrise and law promulgation. Against Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 53 f.
page 136 note 37 See Albrecht Alt, Neue Kirchl. Zts. 1919 p. 563.
page 136 note 38 See its impeachment or deletion by Wellhausen, Nowack, Duhm, Praetorius, Alt, Schmidt et al., ch. I notes 11, 12, 23 and 34.
page 137 note 39 Cod. Alex, ἐν πέτραις ἐνγλυϕῆναι which calls to mind: σὐ κληθήσῃ Κηϕᾶς John 142 Mt 1618 and the midraš based on Is 511 where God says of Abraham: I have found a rock to build on it and to establish the world; Yalkut Šime'oni on N um 239 from Yelammedenu.
accad. kâpu, aram. and cf. Targ. Ps. 11822 for Targ. Nu 239 for and Targ. Yer. Dt. 3213 for Significantly the word occurs in the language of Hosea's kinsman Jer 49 where (cf. also Job 306) is to be interpreted as in I Sa 136 Is 219.21 Jer 1616. See also Sir 4014. The word has been conjectured into the difficult I Sa 1321 though with little luck, cf. Caspari, W., Die Samuelbücher, Leipzig 1926, p. 158Google Scholar and the recent treatment of the passage by Auerbach, Elias, Wüste und Gelobtes Land, Berlin 1932 p. 175.Google Scholar
If the noun be an aramaism, the dialect of our book exhibits also otherwise similar influence: Hos 513 812 105.14 113.8.9 122 which is but natural with so kindred a language and so frequent contacts in peace and war, cf. I Re 2034 Am 312 (see A. Weiser, Die Prophetie des Amos, Giessen 1929 p. 150, differently H. G. May, PEFQS 65, 1933 p. 88 f.); II Re 133.7 Am 13; Is 911 Hos 79; II Re 165 Is 72 Hos 511. See also Martin Noth, Die israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung, Stuttgart 1928 p. 43 who finds the formation of names in the imperfect (e.g. I Re 228f. or Is 82) in the later period of kings inexplicable unless borrowed from the Aramaic. Early Aramaic letters were found on the back of ivories from Samaria, discovered in a stratum full of Israelite potsherds of the eighth and ninth cts. B.C. Their workmanship is closely related to the ivory inlays of a bed of Hazael of Damascus cf. Am 315 64 and J. W. Crowfoot, PEFQS 64, 1932 p. 132 f. and 65, 1933 p. 18, also JPOS 13, 1933 p. 124. Much water has flown the Jordan since the days of E. Kautzsch, Die Aramaismen im A. T., Halle a. S. 1902 p. 42 and 104, who believed an aramaism to be “immer eine starke Instanz für die Ansetzung des betreffenden Abschnittes in exilischer oder nachexilischer Zeit” — as has been indeed attempted with Hos 61 ff., see intr. note 4.
page 137 note 40 is construed with or in analogy with the similar Is 308 Job 1923 or Ex 3216 or Jer 171 and Dt 278. Indeed = ṣḥf is in Ethiopic the regular verb for write, borrowed also from south-semitic usage in the Arabic maṣḥaf for a copy of the Koran; see Fraenkel, Siegmund, Die aramäischen Fremdwörter im Arabischen, Leiden 1886, p. 248Google Scholar and idem, Zum sporadischen Lautwandel in den semitischen Sprachen, in: Beiträge zur Assyriologie, v. III, 1895, p. 69; cf. also the mediaeval Hebrew codex, taken over from the Arabic, e.g. P. Kahle, Masoreten des Westens Stuttgart 1927 I, p. 3.
page 137 note 41 Sellin3 p. 23; cf. Enno Littmann, Zum wechselnden Rhythmus in der hebr. Poesie, in: Zeitschr. f. Semit. 2, 1924 p. 272 ff. and Gunkel, ib. p. 148.
page 137 note 42 The corruption of M. T. is palpably patent in 5c “which is nonsense,” G. A. Smith l.c. p. 221. The misreading of but a single, hardly distinguishable letter ( for ), facilitated by the rarity of the noun kēf and the frequency of the lectio facilior ('al-)kēn, gave the verse at once the character of a threat and led almost inavoidably to its misdivision and corruption: for bannebî'îm became the object or instrument of ḥāṣabtî and thus made any salutary meaning in the second verb inappropriate.
In restoration of the second verb one thinks naturally of the confusion of and often mistaken for each other in both the old Hebrew alphabet and the square character (cf. Friedr. Delitzsch, Die Lese- und Schreibfehler im A. T. Berlin 1920 p. 105 ff.) and attested to in the Sept. to our book alone 15 times. A slight transposition of letters, frequent in our book (cf. Hos 109) would give I have declared or revealed, cf. Dt 413 Mi 68 Jer 423. For the construction with = by the agency of, cf. Hos 1214 (also 17 144) Jud. 77 I Sa 146, in the ancient judicial formula Gen 96 and most esp. in connection with the deity Dt 3329 Is 4517 Ps 1830 446 6014. The final of the verb, though it could be retained and explained by the changes of address traced by Lindblom l.c. in ‘revelatory’ style, is probably a dittogram or adaptation to the foregoing word. Another guess would be cf. Ex 3313 (also Nu 126) Jer 1118 and Ez 2011, the latter both in language and thought a very instructive parallel and hence rightly cited along the traditional lines of exegesis by older critics, see Rosenmüller l.c. p. 198. As to the construction cf. Ju 816 emended by some as in Ju 87, but see I Sa 1412 Jer 1621. Klostermann's cf. Ex 2412 Hos 1012 and for construction Job 2711, used of seers as well as of priests Ex 412 I Sa 1223 Is 914, could also be thought of. But the assonance liked by Hos (e.g. 27 87) does not speak in its favor.
page 138 note 43 Which is forbidden even by 'al-kēn if it were properly used, see about the conjunction S. D. Luzzato in vol. VIII Vienna 1827 p. 137.
page 138 note 44 Cf. the good old Pococke l.c. p. 303: “The words import great affection and trouble of bowels (if we may say so) in him that utters them and shew him to be loath to do what he is forced by the waywardness of them whom he hath to deal with.”
page 139 note 45 Ex 2412 3118 3215f. 341.28 Dt 413 519 910 104 I Re 89. For a novel interpretation of Dt 272 ff. and Jos 832 cf. B. Gabirol, Die zehn Gebote ursprünglich eine Felsinschrift? in: Arch. f. Religionswiss. 25, 1927 p. 221 f.
page 139 note 46 Teachings such as I Sa 1522 f. or Am 524 f. are here thought of. The association of Mose and Samuel as in Jer 151 and Ps 996, cf. also the midrašic fancy in b. Ta'anit 5b connecting our verse with Samuel. About the authenticity of I Sa 1522 f. doubted by Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 99 f., see W. Caspari, Samuelbücher, p. 176; Rud. Kittel, Die Rel. des Volkes Israel2, Lpz. 1929, p. 64.
page 139 note 47 be'imrê-fî (cf. Jos 2427) suggests as in Mi 68 Jer 722 reference to Ex 201 ff. Alt l.c. refers it to Hosea's own prophecies.
page 139 note 48 The interpretation of the conjunction in as privativum (Sellin3 p. 75) is forbidden by Hos 34 or 94. Cf. when in doubt, Hosea's best commentator Jer 723!
page 139 note 49 A good parallel to our poem is Ps 95 consisting also of a song of pilgrims, though not elegiac as in Hos, but hymnic in character, and of a rejoinder, almost a rebuke of the cult-prophet. The difference in mood between the two parts has led to a similar dissection into independent units (by Nowack and Cheyne) as in Hos 61–6. Ps 81, combining also folk-song and cult-oracle and a good example of the use of the decalogue (see vs. 10 f.) in the worship of northern Israel, ends in the sad, though not hopeless optative (vs. 14 f.) which could conclude as well Ps 95 or Hos 64ff.: “O that my people had hearkened unto me! I should soon have subdued their enemies.”
page 139 note 50 Hos 81.3 cf. the equation Am 54 = 514; see also Hos 512 78f. 88 92.16—all signs of a society dried of the source of life (cf. Ps 3610), or sapped of all ‘weight’ or worth of soul, hence ‘light’ or cursed, see Joh. Pedersen, Der Eid bei den Semiten, Strassburg 1914 p. 80.
page 140 note 1 Mose und seine Zeit, Göttingen 1913, p. 471 ff.
page 140 note 2 Geschichte des Volkes Israel, Gotha 1923 v. I5 p. 383 f. 445 ff.
page 140 note 3 Mose und seine Bedeutung für die isr. jüd. Gesch. 1922; Einl. in d. A. T.5, Leipzig 1929 p. 25 f.; Isr. jüd. Religionsgeschichte Lpz. 1933 p. 22.
page 140 note 4 Die neuesten Verhandlungen über den Dekalog, in: Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 17, 1906, pp. 565–584; Das Deuteronomium, Leipzig 1917 p. 91 ff.
page 140 note 5 See now the second ed. of his: Mose und sein Werk, Tübingen 1932 p. 23 ff.
page 140 note 6 Die Elohimquelle, Leipzig 1906, p. 371.
page 140 note 7 Die Schichten des Deuteronomiums, Leipzig 1914 p. 159 f. and ZDMG 79, 1925 p. 99.
page 140 note 8 Mose und der Dekalog, in: Gunkel Festschrift 1923 pp. 78–119.
page 140 note 9 Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 113 assigns Dt 5 to about 600 and Ex 20 to about 450 B.C. Neither was ever used in worship, hence the consistent reference to “l'usage cultuel des décalogues primitifs dans le culte,” p. 131 et fr.
page 140 note 10 i.e., reproduction of the drama of the cultus in the language of historic myth: present-day rites and symbols of the people are projected back into legendary antiquity. See now the criticism of Buber, M., Königtum Gottes, Berlin 1932 p. 120 ff.Google Scholar
page 140 note 11 Hist krit. Einleitung in die Bücher des A. T. v. I2 p. 233.
page 140 note 12 Skizzen und Vorarbeiten 1884, I p. 68; Isr. jüd. Geschichte, 1897 p. 11 f. 30 f. Prolegomena 1899 p. 349.
page 141 note 13 Gesch. d. Volkes Israel 1887 I p. 58, 457, 584; Bibl. Theologie des A. T. p. 36 f.
page 141 note 14 Lehrbuch d. alttest. Religionsgeschichte2 Leipzig 1899 p. 16, 273.
page 141 note 15 Geschichte der althebr. Litteratur, Leipzig 1906, p. 95, 100.
page 141 note 16 Geschichte der israel. Religion4, Strassburg 1903 p. 68.
page 141 note 17 Der erste Dekalog, in: Baudissin Festschrift 1918 p. 381 ff.
page 141 note 18 Lehrbuch der Einleitung in das A. T., Tübingen, 1912 p. 259 ff.; Das Deuteronomium2, Göttingen 1923 p. 29.
page 141 note 19 Einführung in das A. T.2 Giessen, 1926 p. 103 and 188 ff.; Der Dekalog, Giessen 1927.
page 141 note 20 Geschichte der isr. und jüd. Religion, Giessen 1922, p. 130. For additional literature on the decalogue see Smith, J. M. Powis, The Origin and History of Hebrew Law, Chicago 1931, p. 7.Google Scholar
page 141 note 21 Der Dekalog, in: Theol. Rundschau N. F. I, 1929, pp. 159–184.
page 141 note 22 See ib. p. 178 f. The quest for a single author is dismissed by Köhler “weil jeder Dekalog seiner schriftellerischen Art nach unpersönlich ist.” If Shiloh had no immediate pre-Israelitish occupation, 1 Sa 215 (cf. ib. 143 2211) would suggest that the Israelite tōrōt of entry mirror not Canaanitish rites (Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 155) but their own pristine and pre-Palestinian traditions. See Alt, Der Gott der Väter, Stuttg. 1929 p. 64. However, the latest brief campaign at Shiloh produced numerous sherds from Late Bronze, cf. BASOR 48, 1932 p. 14 f. and QDAP III 1933 p. 180.
page 141 note 23 Stade, Biblische Theologie, p. 37; Meinhold, Einführung2, p. 7, 102 and Der Dekalog p. 31; Aug. Gampert, Le Décalogue, in: Revue de Théologie et de Philos., n.s. 14, 1926, p. 201 f.
page 142 note 24 Paul Vetter, Die Zeugnisse der vorexilischen Propheten über den Pentateuch, II. Hoseas, in: Theol. Quartalschrift 83, 1901 p. 102 and Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 55.
page 142 note 25 Jer 3218 Sir 126 2423 or Hos 812 1211 143 as pleaded by Sellin, Mose, p. 23 f. 36 f., 39 ff., the emendation of the last passage is however revoked in Zwölfprophetenbuch3 p. 138.
page 142 note 26 About the difficulties of chronology, esp. about the duration of the reign of Pekah, see Joachim Begrich, Die Chronologie der Könige von Israel und Juda, Tübingen 1929 p. 103 ff. and S. Mowinckel, Die Chronologie der isr. und jüd. Könige, Leiden 1932 (= Acta Orientalia 10, p. 213 ff.).
page 142 note 27 Cf. also Hos 142 otherwise rare in classical prophecy: Am 915 Is 710 374, see Procksch, Jesaia I, p. 119. Cf. also Umberto Cassuto, in: Livre d' hommage a la mémoire du Dr. Samuel Poznanski, Warsaw 1927 p. 129, and his recent treatment of Hosea and the decalogue in: Abhandlungen zur Erinnerung an H. P. Chajes, Vienna 1933, p. 268 ff. of the Hebrew part.
page 142 note 28 Gunkel Festschrift, p. 103, cf. also R. H. Charles, The Decalogue, Edinburgh 1923 p. xlviii f. Note that the allusions to the decalogue are made by the author of Hos 1214 and 111 910 217 and of the frequent 813 93 115 (cf. Dt 1716 2868).
page 143 note 29 G. A. Smith l.c. p. 220; Harper p. clxxiii.
page 143 note 30 Notes on the Books of Samuel, Oxford 1913 p. xi.
page 143 note 31 Cf. Gunkel, Zeitschr. f. Semit. 2, 1924 p. 146: “Der einzelne Abschnitt ist oft schwer genug zu erfassen, aber er tritt nicht selten sofort in helles Licht, sobald wir seine Verwandschaft mit anderen bemerkt haben: Wir gewinnen ein neues Mittel, Verderbnisse des Textes zu heilen.”
page 143 note 32 See the discussion in chapter III and notes 30 and 49 of chapter IV.
page 143 note 33 What seemed an awkward third of parallelism led to a transfer of the verse by Marti and Procksch (cf. n. 3 of chapter I), by F. E. Peiser, Hosea, Lpz. 1914 p. 25 and Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 54 n. 1 or to its deletion by Ruben (cf. n. 15 and 16 of chapter I) and more recently by Lindblom, l.c. p. 85: “5c stört den Zusammenhang und ist als falscher Bestandteil des Textes auszuscheiden.”
page 143 note 34 See note 42 of Chapter IV.
Postscript: Since the completion of this paper, some pertinent discussion has appeared. W. Baumgartner, Der Auferstehungsglaube im Alten Orient (in Zts. f. Missionskunde u. Religionswiss. 48, 1933, p. 212 f.) finds the imagery of Hos. 62 f. borrowed “offenbar von der Auferstehung eines Gottes am dritten Tage …, für Osiris, Attis, und wohl auch für Tammuz bezeugt.” See above, ch. IV, notes 9 and 14. Unconscious pagan survivals in the Israelitish customs of mourning are naturally not to be denied. But Hos. 62 militates no more against them than Jer. 2218 (345).
In the recent issue of the JPOS 14, 1934, pp. 1–42, Karl Budde discusses with accustomed thoroughness Hos. 51–66. Since ḥāṣab “bedeutet überall nur die Arbeit des Steinmetzen” (ib. p. 38 f.), Oettli's emendation is adopted in 65: meḥaṣtîm. See above, ch. I. n. 3. As to the date of the prophecy, Budde also places Hos. 58–10 in the last phase of the Syro-Ephraimitish war, assigning 511–66 to an earlier period, “wohl näher bei 738 als bei 735” (ib. p. 41). He must, however, emend all the four references to Judah in 512.13.14 and 64 (ib. p. 26).
- 1
- Cited by