Hallaschka (P-Doc), University of Hamburg, Hosea 12 Hosea 12 and the foundation legends of the Kingdom of Israel: Discussing Hos 12 with Erhard Blum Paper presented at OTSEM conference, Helsinki 2017, Martin Hallaschka (Hamburg) 1. Introductory remarks This paper is some kind of spinoff from my postdoc project which deals with politics and religion in the northern kingdom of Israel. One of my questions for research is the question of genuinely northern traditions. The Jacob cycle and the exodus story are the usual suspects to come from the north and to be foundational myths. However, the date and origin of the Jacob and exodus stories is debated. Besides the pentateuchal or hexateuchal texts pertaining to these stories possible prophetic passages which may have their Sitz im Leben in the northern kingdom need to be taken into consideration. According to Wöhrle, Hos 12 is “[t]he most comprehensive and most important adaptation of pentateuchal traditions within the Book of the Twelve, if not within all the prophetic writings of the Hebrew Bible”.1 Therefore Hos 12 is sometimes regarded as a key witness not only for an early date of these narratives – being foundational myths of the northern kingdom – but also for an early date or early phase of the formation of the Tetrateuch, Pentateuch or Hexateuch. 2 The date of Hosea 12 as a whole and of the passages referring to Jacob and the exodus are – little wonder – a matter of debate. As far as I can see, a consensus on the formation of the book of Hosea is far from being reached. The scholarly positions range from models that regard most of the material to relate back to the prophet Hosea, possibly transmitted by the circle of his disciples, 3 via differentiated redaction critical models, which reckon with various layers ranging from preexilic to late texts, 4 to rather radical hypotheses dating the whole book to postexilic times. 5 While some scholars assign Hos 12 or at least the passages on Jacob and the exodus to a later date, Blum is among those who ascribe Hos 12 to Hosea himself and regards this chapter as “external evidence”6 not only for the connection of both traditions before the fall of Samaria but also for a literary version of the Jacob story.7 Finkelstein adopted this hypothesis 1 Wöhrle, Jacob, 998. 2 Cf. de Pury, Osée; idem , Erwägungen; Blum, Hosea; Carr, Formation, 474-475; Sweeney, Reading. For the sake of convenience I will use the term “Pentateuch” if not otherwise differentiation between Tetrateuch/Pentateuch/Hexateuch is necessary for the argumentation. 3 Cf., e.g., Wolff, BK XIV/1; Jeremias, ATD 24,1; Sweeney, Berit Olam, 1-144. 4 Cf. Nissinen, Prophet; Kratz, Erkenntnis; Vielhauer, Hosea; Rudnig-Zelt; Wöhrle, Sammlungen; idem , Abschluss. 5 Cf. Ben Zvi, FOTL XXIA/1; Bos, Date. 6 Blum, Traum, 43. 7 Cf. Blum, Hosea. A similar hypothesis was recently published by Sweeney, Reading, c.f. also earlier works by de Pury, Osée; idem , Erwägungen. Also Carr, Formation, 474-475, uses Hos 12 for an early dating of the Jacob cycle in Genesis. For a discussion of the problem raised by the redating of the pentateuchal strands see Holt, Prophesying, 32. A later date of Hos 12 or at least the passages on Jacob and the Exodus is proposed, e.g., by Nissinen, Prophetie, 152-156; Pfeiffer, Heiligtum, 68-100; Köhlmoos, Bet-El, 142-150; Rudnig-Zelt, - 1 - Hallaschka (P-Doc), University of Hamburg, Hosea 12 in his book on the forgotten kingdom. 8 Blum dates Hos 12 to the last years of the Israelite Kingdom and calls this chapter the epitome of Hosea’s theology. 9 Hence, apart from a few sentences, Blum assigns chap. 12 to the prophet Hosea himself. Blum does not analyse the first two verses of Hos 12. As to the remaining Hos 12,3- instead, which was done by many יִשְׂרָ אֵ ל in V 3 and inserts יְהוּדָ ה Blum replaces 15 interpreters though there is no textual evidence for this replacement. 10 With many others, 11 . צְבָ אוֹת Blum regards V 6 as a secondary insert because of the Jerusalemite epithet of the MT (V 5b β) to the עִמָּ נוּ Based on the LXX and with many others Blum emends 3 Sg. m. Thus, Jacob is the object of V 5b. 12 The change to the imperfect in V 5b could thus be understood as preterite or iterative. 13 The imperfect is also used in V 7, here with 2 Sg. m. According to Blum, the Jacob and exodus traditions are not only genuine foundation legends of the northern kingdom or at least in Hosea’s circle, 14 but also Hos 12 represents one of the few preexilic texts outside the Pentateuch that refer to pentateuchal traditions and is the only text that is clearly modelled after these traditions. According to Blum there is little wonder that a prophet of the northern kingdom uses genuine northern traditions, i.e. Jacob and Moses. 15 This means, according to Blum, that Hos 12 serves as eminent external evidence 16 showing that the connection of ancestral and exodus traditions must have been prior to the downfall of the northern kingdom of Israel in 720 BCE or even of the southern kingdom of Judah in 587 BCE. Yet, Blum has to concede that northern traditions cannot be understood in an exclusive sense. He cites the Jacob traditions as an example: Even disregarding the issue of Hoseastudien, 68-72.261-278; Vielhauer, Werden, 178-180. See also recently Schott, Jakobpassagen; Wöhrle, Jacob. 8 Cf. Finkelstein, Kingdom, 141-151, esp. 141-143 with reference to Blum. 9 Blum, Hosea, 291: „in mancher Hinsicht eine Summe hoseanischer Theologie“. 10 Blum, Hosea, 297 (Blum, Hosea, 299 n. 39, proposes the reading “Ephraim”). Cf., e.g., Wellhausen, Propheten, 18; Wolff, BK XIV/1, 267 n. 3b; Willi-Plein, Vorformen, 210; Jeremias, ATD 24,1, 152; Holt, Prophesying, 31 n. 3. The MT is maintained by, e.g., Duhm, Anmerkungen, 37; Rudolph, Hosea; Pfeiffer, Heiligtum, 72 n. 29; Köhlmoos, Bet-El, 142; Nogalski, Book, 167; Schott, 11 n. 47; Wöhrle, Jacob, 999. Since all textual evidence attests to Judah and the text is well understandable with this reading the conjecture “Israel” should be avoided. 11 Blum, 300, n. 44. Cf., e.g., Marti, KHC XIII, 95; Wolff, BK XIV/1, 276; Willi-Plein, Vorformen, 211.213; Jeremias, ATD 24,1, 150.154; Wöhrle, Jacob, 998 n. 3. 12 Blum, Hosea, 296 n. 25 and 300 n. 43. Cf., e.g., Wolff, BK XIV/1, 268 n. 5c; Jeremias, 148 n. 6; Holt, Prophesying, 37-39. The MT is kept and LXX is considered a secondary harmonization by Utzschneider, Hosea, 191; Pfeiffer, Heiligtum, 71; Gelston, BHQ; Schott, Jakobpassagen, 12 n. 52. Regarding the parallelism of V 5b α and 5b β the MT should be changed into 3 Sg.m. Nevertheless, V 5b in toto can be understood as a ( יִמְ צָאֶ נּוּ) paradigm for the present generation, the descendants of Jacob, cf. Holt, Prophesying, 39. 13 Cf. Nowack, Prophet, 220; Köhlmoos, Bet-El, 142 n. 243; Blum, Hosea, 300 n. 42. 14 Cf. Blum, 318: „Jakob- und Exodustradition gehörten beide zu der im Nordreich (bzw. im Umkreis Hoseas) fraglos anerkannten Ursprungsgeschichte Israels.“ 15 Cf. Blum, Hosea, 312: „Hos 12* ist unter den ganz wenigen vorexilischen Texten außerhalb des Pentateuchs, die auf pentateuchische Traditionen Bezug nehmen, der einzige, der insgesamt und substantiell von solchen Traditionen bestimmt ist. Der Umstand, dass es sich dabei um einen nordisraelitischen Prophetentext und um dominant ‚nördliche‘ Traditionen (Jakob, Mose) handelt, kommt gewiss nicht von ungefähr.“ 16 Blum, Hosea, 319: “‘externe’ Quelle von erheblicher Bedeutung”. - 2 - Hallaschka (P-Doc), University of Hamburg, Hosea 12 Jacob’s sons – including Judah – according to Blum the connection to Esau, i.e. Edom, is an integral part of the plot. 17 I will return to that question, see below. In the following I shall present some remarks on the final form of Hosea 12 before I consider if one can find traces of literary growth within this chapter. Finally I shall examine the issue of the relationship or connection of the Jacob and exodus traditions and of the 8 th century prophet Hosea. 2. Remarks on the final form of Hosea 12 Regarding the final text, V 1 together with V 15 serve as a framework for the chapter Hos 12. 18 st also ( סְבָבֻנִ י ) By using the 1 Sg. of god in the suffix of the first word of the chapter and ( כַּחַ שׁ ) the following is presented as god’s oracle mediated by the prophet Hosea. Lie cf. V. 8) by Ephraim and Israel are introduced as topics in V 1a and Judah’s , מִרְ מָ ה) deceit faithlessness 19 in V 1b though god, the Holy One, 20 remains faithful. In accordance with its function serving as a superscription V 1a uses the 1 st Sg. thus designating the text as god’s word. God’s 1 st Sg. is also found in V 10-11 and V 7 could also be understood as god’s direct speech to Jacob. The remaining text of Hos 12 however is formulated as prophetic speech. In Hos 12,1b.3.4.6.14.15 god is referred to in 3rd person. The next verse, V 2 is also concerned with Ephraim. After depicting Ephraim in 2a α and chases the hot ( רוּחַ + .Part. Qal m. Sg רעה ) as being foolish because it pastures the wind the accusation in 2a β is formulated as a general ,( קָדִ ים + .Part.