No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 June 2011
In his suggestion of a “concatenous literary pattern” in Amos 1–2, S. Paul has drawn attention once again to the prosodic structure of the oracles against foreign nations preserved in Amos. His argument is most provocative but is seriously weakened by that troublesome verse, Amos I:II. As Paul has implicitly noted, the key to a proper reconstruction and interpretation of Amos 1–2 lies in a more accurate understanding of its prosodic structure.
1 Paul, S. M., Amos 1:3–2:3: A Concatenous Literary Pattern, JBL 90 (1971), 397–403.Google Scholar
2 Paul himself noted that the concatenous link between Edom and Ammon in this verse “is admittedly the only one which does not contain an exact word or phrase” (ibid., 402). On the historical background reflected in this verse see Fishbane, M., The Treaty Background of Amos 5:11 and Related Matters, JBL 89 (1970), 313–18Google Scholar, and rejoinders by Coote, R. B., Amos 1:11: RHMYW, JBL 90 (1971), 206–08Google Scholar, and S. Paul, ibid., 402–03; with a subsequent response by Fishbane, , Additional Remarks on Rhmyw (Amos 1:11), JBL 91 (1972), 391–93.Google Scholar Cf. also Muntingh, L. M., Political and International Relations of Israel's Neighboring Peoples according to the Oracles of Amos, OTWSA 7 (1966), 134–42Google Scholar, and Haran, M., Observations on the Historical Background of Amos 1:2–2:6, IEJ 18 (1968), 201–12.Google Scholar
3 Not only does it seem strange to hear Yahweh “roaring from Zion/Jerusalem” (Amos 1:2) against Judah; the language utilized within the Judah oracle is clearly Deuteronomic and prosaic. The tôrat Yahweh (“instruction of Yahweh”) is used as a collective concept in parallel with huqqîm (“statutes”), which implies a collection of law established as Yahweh's tōr¯h. See Mays, J. L., Amos: A Commentary (Philadelphia, 1969), 25–42Google Scholar, for a discussion of the Deuteronomic style in this oracle. Moreover, it should be noted that the prosaic line in vs. 4c cannot be reduced to poetic balance without major emendation. It would appear that the Judah oracle was added to the series by the Deuteronomic editors of the book; cf. Schmidt, W., Die deuteronomistische Redaktion des Amosbuches, ZAW 77 (1965), 168–92.Google Scholar
4 Studies in the historical development of Hebrew poetry have shown that several prosaic particles which appear frequently in MT were not at home in classical Hebrew poetry, especially the 'et direct object marker, the relative particle 'āĆer, the definite article (except when it has demonstrative force), and, in many cases, the waw conjunction. These particles are deleted here without further discussion. Segholate formations were originally pronounced monosyllabic and are so rendered here for purposes of syllable count. [See the discussion of secondary vowels and syllable count by Freedman, D. N., Acrostics and Metrics in Hebrew Poetry, HTR 65 (1972), 369.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar The number in the right hand margin indicates the syllable count in the original pronunciation, which tends to be constant within individual bicola or tricola.
5 On the translation of this colon I am following W. F. Albright and H. Tur-Sinai (see note 23 below). This interpretation as such does not affect the prosodic analysis as the tradition retained in MT would render the same syllable count.
6 For detailed discussion of the individual changes in the text, see notes 8 through 26 below.
7 Recent studies in Hebrew prosody have shown that syllable count is in general a fairly reliable and obvious measure of metrical balance. The present analysis is based on the prosodic methodology developed by Professor Cross and summarized in the recent doctoral dissertation of Stuart, D. K., An Approach to the Meter of Early Hebrew Poetry (Harvard Ph.D. Thesis, 1971), 1–77.Google Scholar For sake of clarity in the analysis of prosodic structure the extra-metrical elements, such as messenger formulae, are omitted here.
8 This reading was suggested by F. M. Cross, Jr. (private communication) to improve the metrical balance in the various strophes (Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11; 2:1, 4, 6). The suffixed particle may originally have been -a/en(nu), which functioned as a sort of ballast variant over against the place names in the previous cola which varied in length.
9 Deleting hab-barzel of MT to improve the metrical balance. This particular element in the oracles against Damascus, Philistia, Ammon, and Moab has suffered considerable textual expansion and conflation.
10 The two place names are interchanged to achieve closer metrical balance. The confusion of paired words in poetic transmission is strikingly illustrated in a recent release of a recording by the popular singer Jack Jones. In his rendition of the song “Everybody's Beautiful” he sings the following line: “We shouldn't care about the color of his hair / or the length of his skin” (emphasis mine). The exchange of the paired words “color/length” yields nonsense, and still it got through to final publication in 1971. When the sense of the poem is not impaired and when the metrical balance of the spoken (or sung) word is no longer operative, paired words are frequently displaced in the transmission of poetry.
11 This colon has been relocated to achieve poetic balance within this strophe and to balance the structure observed in the second strophe (Amos 1:6–8) where the line in question corresponds to the first half of the final bicolon.
12 Nougayrol, Jean [Iraq 25 (1963), 110]Google Scholar remarked that for the Hittites in particular the word sulummū had the double value of “peace” and “treaty.” Albright, [Basor 163 (1961), 52]Google Scholar in a discussion of Genesis 14 translated šelôm (oh) as “(a king) allied to him.” Other parallels cited by Albright include Ps. 41:10; Ob. 7; Jer. 20:10; and Isa. 54:10. Dahood, [Psalms I (1966), 42]Google Scholar gives further parallels and suggests the reading of a qal passive participle, šělūmāyw, in Ps. 7:5. BDB (p. 1023) lists 
as a “sacrifice for alliance of friendship.” The failure to understand this particular meaning of the term in Amos 1:6 may have led to expansion of the text in MT.
13 Deleting lěhasgir le-'Ědôm of MT metri causa. There is textual interdependence between Amos 1:6 (oracle against Philistia) and Amos 1:9 (oracle against Tyre). It is generally assumed that the oracle against Tyre is secondary and dependent on the earlier oracle against Philistia. The textual relationship reflected in MT seems to indicate mutual dependence. Both poetic lines have suffered expansion from the parallel text in the course of textual transmission.
14 Deleting šělēmāh of MT metri causa. There is textual conflation here; see note 13 above.
15 The colon in MT is too short. LXX adds πι γης; the Lucianic tradition reads πι της γης or its grammatical equivalent. A possible restoration is to read ᾽ arṣāh and to compare the idiom in Gen. 38:9. In the story of Onan where he refused to fulfill his kinship obligation to Tamar the text reads: wě-šiḥēt, 'arṣāh lěbiltî nětān zera' lě-'āhîw. Here in Amos 1:11 Edom refuses to fulfill his covenant obligation to his brother. The reading 
was suggested by Professor Cross (private communication) and is to be preferred. The consonants would render both the place name Edom and the idiom, “to the ground,” 'âdāmā(h). The deletion of the word “Edom” in MT is then understandable, as the word is redundant as far as sense is concerned.
16 The following bicolon of MT is deleted in order to achieve structural balance with the folowing strophe: way-yiṭṭōr pě-lā‘ad (MT way-yiṭrōp lā‘ad) ‘appō/wě-‘ebrātō šāměrāh (MT šěmārāh) neṣaḥ, “He kept his wrath continually; his anger he maintained relentlessly.” Cf. Dahood, [Psalms II (1968), 201]Google Scholar, who cites W. L. Moran on the conjunction pě in the first colon. The couplet appears in slightly different form in Jer. 3:5. For a similar rejection of the authenticity of this bicolon, on different grounds, see the recent article by Rudolph, W., Die angefochtenen Völkersprüche in Amos 1 and 2, Schalom (Arbeiten zur Theologie I/46; Stuttgart, 1971), 47–49.Google Scholar
17 Deleting the běnê of MT metri causa.
18 Deleting lěma‘an harḥîb et gêbûlam of MT as an expansionary gloss.
19 The pointing of MT běsa‘ar results in metrical imbalance. The longer term sě‘ārāh gives better assonance in parallel with těru‘āh and is found with sûpāh in Isa. 29:6.
20 Repointing MT malkām with a number of commentators. Cf. Jer. 49:1, 3 and Zeph. 1:5.
21 The colon as it stands in MT is too short. LXX adds οἱ ἰερεις αὐτων,, and the parallel bicolon in Jer. 49:3 supports the emendation.
22 Deleting ‘aṣmôt of MT metri causa. This particular poetic element in the oracles against Damascus, Philistia, Ammon and Moab has suffered textual expansion and conflation.
23 Following the suggestion of Albright, [ Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan (1968), 240]Google Scholar, which is in turn based on the earlier work of Tur-Sinai, [LS I (1948), 64ff.].Google Scholar By changing the pointing to read mǒlek ‘ādām laš-šēd instead of melek ‘Ědôm laś-śîd, one obtains a perfectly satisfactory text, parallel to that of Ps. 106:37. Either reading renders the same syllable count as far as prosodic analysis is concerned.
24 “The colon is too short as it stands in Elliger, MT. [BHS 10 (1970), 27]Google Scholar proposes the insertion of qîr here and the substitution of 'arměnôtêhᾱ for 'arměnôt haq-qěrîôt of MT. Th. H. Robinson has also suggested Kir-Moab as the city in question [HAT 14 (1964), 76]. One can also read Ar-Moab (cf. Isa. 15:1, where Kir-Moab and Ar-Moab appear as poetic variants). The emendation proposed here involves only one change in the text and attains poetic balance, both in syllable count and in plurality (cities of Moab—strongholds of Kerioth).
25 If we are correct in reading the name of the god Milcom in vs. 15 above (see note 20), the name of the god Chemosh may originally have appeared here. Note the manner in which Moab is personified in the present quatrain as preserved in MT. His ruler (šôpēt) and his nobles (śārâ<w>) will be slain with him. The picture is that of Ps. 82:6–7, where the gods of the nations are to die like men.
26 Following the Lucianic recension of LXX and numerous commentators who read the masculine suffix here. No change is required in the consonantal text.
27 Emending the pronominal suffix with various commentators, as the antecedent (šôpēt) is masculine.
28 On the system of poetic scansion adopted here see Cross, F. M., The Song of the Sea and Canaanite Myth, JThC 5 (1968), 4–5, note 12.Google Scholar All the cola here are long and hence are signified / (longum) as opposed to short cola which are signified b (breve).
29 Ibid., 403.
30 For a detailed prosodic-textual analysis of the oracle against Israel (Amos 2:6–16) see my doctoral dissertation, Studies in the Oracles Against the Nations: Transformations of the War Oracle in Old Testament Prophecy (Harvard Th.D. Thesis, 1971), 89–95.