The Problem of Prologue and Epilogue to the Book of the Covenant and Leading Features of Biblical Law

Home , Epilogue, Prologue, Section (typography)

THE PROBLEM OF PROLOGUE AND EPILOGUE TO THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT AND LEADING FEATURES OF BIBLICAL LAW

Since some early Mesopotamian legal compilations are encased within a prologue-epilogue frame, the question arises whether a similar literary device is found in the corresponding biblical collections of law. A striking parallel to such a tripartite division is present in the book of Deuteronomy, where the legal corpus (Dt. 12-26:15) is introduced by a lengthy hortatory prologue section 1) replete with historical references and parenetic material (Dt. 1-11), and is fol lowed by an epilogue section (Dt. 26:16-31 :30) which consists, in part, of a traditional collection of blessings and curses.2) And, in true Mesopotamian fashion, the legal corpus of Leviticus, known as the Laws of Holiness, also concludes with a catalogue listing of sanctions (Lev. 26).3) It is the suggestion of the present study that the earliest collection of biblicallaw, the Book of the Covenant, as it is now presented in Exodus, also betrays the influence of a threefold structure, even though it deviates from the traditional pattern as studied above. The point to be emphasized is the present collocation of the various literary units included within Ex. 19-24. For although several oE these sections might weH have had an originally different Sitz im

1) Or, better, sections: 1: 1-4:40 and 4:44-11 :32. Cf. O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction, trans. P. R. Ackroyd (New York, 1965), pp. 221 ff. 2) For the literary genre of blessings and curses found in epilogues, cf. above p. 17, n. 1. The latest study of the similarity between aseries of imprecations in Deuteronomy and in Assyrian treaties was made by M. Weinfeld, "Traces of Assyrian Treaty Formulae in Deuteronomy," Biblica 46 (1965), pp. 417-427. Cf. R. Frankena, "The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon and the Dating of Deuterono my," OTS 14 (1965), pp. 122-154; F. C. Fensham, "Maledictions and Benedictions in Ancient Near Eastern Vassal-Treaties and the Old Testament," ZAW 74 (1962), pp. 1-9; D. J. McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant (= Analeeta Biblica 21 [Rome, 1963]), pp. 122-123; and D. R. Hillers, Treaty Curses and the Old Testament Prophets (= Biblica et Orientalia 16 [Rome, 1964]), pp. 30-42. 3) See above, n. 2. The "Laws of Holiness" in Leviticus actually consist of small independent blocks of law combined into one formal legal corpus. Thus the sanctions of Lev. 26 are meant to apply to the entire collection even though the individual units themselves may still preserve their own codas, e.g., 18:1-5,24-30; 19:37; 20:26; and others. 28 CHAPTER FOUR

Leben and thus are to be studied as independent units,1) when once arranged in their present literary complex, they exhibit an overall structure which must be subject to further investigation.2) Here, then, the whole may consist of more than its component parts. The mosaic of Ex. 19-24 presents a number of difficult literary critical problems: How does one separate the various strands of tradition that have been woven together to form the fabric of the account of the preparations for the theophany in Ex. 19? Does the term "Book of the Covenant" (Ex. 24:7) refer originally to the legal corpus of Ex. 20 :22-23 :30 or merel y to the Decalogue, Ex. 20 :2-17? What is the relationship of the legal corpus to the Decalogue-is it original or a secondary insertion? How does the pericope of Ex. 20:18-21 (describing the people's reaction to the theophany) relate to the sequence of events? Furthermore, what is the explanation for the heterogeneous combination of cultic, legal, and moral injunctions within the juridical corpus: (1) 20 :22-26, cultic prescriptions, (2) 21 :2-22:16, legal precepts casuistically formulated (together with a block of participially formulated laws, 21 :12, 15-17), (3) 22:17-23 :13, moral instructions interspersed with additional religious obligations, e.g., 22:19, 28-30; 23:10-13, (4) 23:14-19, cultic calendar? What, in turn, is the relations hip between this cultic calendar and the alm ost identical one found in Ex. 34:14-26? Finally, what is the nature of the concluding section, Ex. 23 :20-33, which itself is most likely a compos ite of two separate units, vss. 20-25 and vss. 26-33, and is analogous, in turn, to Ex. 34 :9-13? While it is not within the scope of this study to attempt to ans wer all these questions, several of them do relate directly to our thesis and thus must be carefully analyzed. To help clarify the general structure of these chapters, the following pattern of events should be kept in mind:

1) Eissfeldt, op. eit., pp. 212-219, and "Die Komposition der Sinai-Erzählung Ex. 19-34," pp 40 (1966), pp. 213-215 = Kleine Schriften, Vol. 4 (Tübingen, 1968), pp. 231-237. 2) !dem, The Old Testament, p. 241: "The important point is indeed, in the last analysis, not this or that individual disseetion of the material, but the total out look." In Rosenzweig's letter to Rosenheim wherein he identifies the assumed final redactor of the Torah "not as redactor but as rabbenu-for he is our teacher," he comments in a postcript on the importance of "a preoccupation with the new (R) formulation of the question alongside of the old (J, E, and P) formulation of the question." F. Rosenzweig, "Die Einheit der Bibel," Kleinere Schriften (Berlin, 1937), pp. 129, 133, respectively. The role of R in the final juxtaposition of the various heterogeneous literary units must not be overlooked.