Why Nabonidus? Excavating Traditions from Qumran, the Hebrew Bible, and Neo-Babylonian Sources
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
WHY NABONIDUS? EXCAVATING TRADITIONS FROM QUMRAN, THE HEBREW BIBLE, AND NEO-BABYLONIAN SOURCES Carol A. Newsom Emory University One of the most fruitful places for examining the transmission of traditions and the production of texts is surely the literature associ- ated with the figure of Daniel. Even before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars explored the differences between the versions of Daniel found in the Masoretic Text of Daniel and the Septuagint, with its additional narratives and poems, as well as the different version of Daniel 4–6 in the Old Greek manuscripts. The Qumran finds showed that there was an even more extensive Danielic literature, with two compositions featuring Daniel making historical and eschatological predictions in a court setting (4Q243–244, 4Q245), and two com- positions using language or motifs similar to those of Daniel 2 and 7 (4Q246, 4Q552–553).1 The longstanding suspicion of scholars that Daniel 4 was originally a narrative about Nabonidus received additional support from the discovery of 4Q242 Prayer of Nabonidus.2 These texts are evidence both for the complexity of the Danielic tradition and the creativity of its authors, as they appropriated and recycled useful elements, combining them with usable bits and pieces from other literary and oral traditions in order to produce new com- positions. Nowhere are we better positioned to examine this process 1 For discussion of these texts see Peter W. Flint, “The Daniel Tradition at Qum- ran,” in The Book of Daniel: Composition and Reception (ed. J. J. Collins and P. W. Flint; 2 vols.; VTSup 83; Leiden: Brill, 2001), 2:329–67; and Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “The Formation and Re-Formation of Daniel in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. J. H. Charlesworth; 3 vols.; Waco, Tex.: Baylor, 2006), 1:101–30. 2 The identification was originally suggested by P. Reissler,Das Buch Daniel (Kurzgefasster wissenschaftlicher Kommentar zu den Heiligen Schriften des alten Tes- taments 3/3/2; Stuttgart: Roth, 1899), 43, and by F. Hommel, “Die Abfassungszeit des Buches Daniel und der Wahrsinn Nabonids,” Theologisches Literaturblatt 23 (1902): 145–50. The official publication of the Prayer of Nabonidus is John J. Collins, “Prayer of Nabonidus,” in Qumran Cave 4.XVII: Parabiblical Texts, Part 3 (ed. G. J. Brooke et al.; DJD 22; Oxford: Clarendon, 1996), 83–93. 58 carol a. newsom than with the texts that were originally associated with Nabonidus, for in addition to the Jewish narratives, we also have an extensive neo-Babylonian literature, including both Nabonidus’ own self-pre- sentation in his inscriptions and literary representations of Nabonidus by his enemies.3 Although this material has been intensively studied, recent research on the historical Nabonidus may shed additional light on the composition and development of the Jewish Nabonidus litera- ture. In addition, two questions have not heretofore received sufficient attention. First, to the extent that one can peer through the Jewish Nabonidus texts to the early stages of their composition, what can one say about the motivation for their composition and their pos- sible function as social rhetoric? Second, since important comparative material exists, is it possible to develop a model that suggests how the authors of this literature actually produced new stories from their source material? The Corpus of Jewish Nabonidus Literature One of the initial issues to be explored is the extent of Jewish Naboni- dus literature. The Prayer of Nabonidus is the one text explicitly iden- tified with him. But within the canonical book of Daniel, Daniel 4 is widely agreed to be originally a Nabonidus story.4 To this one can add Daniel 5, since it is a story about Nabonidus’ son Belshazzar. It has also been suggested that other compositions of the Daniel cycle may have originated as stories about Nabonidus, notably Daniel 3. Although the details of the narrative do not correspond to anything actually done by either Nebuchadnezzar or Nabonidus, the erecting of a strange image and requiring worship of it may well preserve a parodic echo of Nabonidus’ notorious championing of the moon god Sin.5 Indeed, two of his most controversial actions were the installa- tion of a new and non-traditional cult statue of the moon god in Sin’s temple in Harran and his attempt to persuade the priests of Marduk 3 These documents have recently been edited and translated by Hanspeter Schau- dig, Die Inschriften Nabonids von Babylon und Kyros’ des Grossen samt den in ihrem Umfeld entstandenen Tendenzschriften (AOAT 256; Ugarit-Verlag: Münster, 2001). 4 See n. 2. 5 Martin McNamara, “Nabonidus and the Book of Daniel,” ITQ 37 (1970): 144–48. See most recently Paul-Alain Beaulieu, “The Babylonian Background of the Motif of the Fiery Furnace in Daniel 3,” JBL 128 (2009): 273–90..