1 The Old Testament in its Context: 5 Judah, Exile and Return K A Kitchen We present a further instalment of Mr Kitchen's out­ nezzar eventually attacked Egypt in 568/7 BC,8 as line-appreciation of the Old Testament. The series will predicted there by Jeremiah (46: 13ff.) and Ezekiel be concluded with a general survey of I profiles and in Babylonia (29: 17ff.), among the exiles. Cyrus n perspectives' in our next issue. took ov:er Media (550) then Babyllon (539). JUDAH ALONE AND BABYLONIAN EXILE, 2. Literary prophets, 7th-6th centuries BC c. 640-539 BC a. Nahum, Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Obadiah. As the 1. Historical outlines and background Assyrians had sacked Egyptian Thebes (c.663 8. Josiah, c. 640-609 BC. This king is most famed BC),9 so would Nineveh crash (as it did, c.612)10 and for his attempts at religious reform (2 Ki. 22-23; 2 Ch. his people be free of her, proclaimed Nahum (1: 34-35), when a ' book of the law' was found.1 The new 12-15). Zephaniah upbraided the sins of Judah and XXVIth Dynasty in Egypt began as an Assyrian her neighbours in Josiah's time. With the Babylonian vassal, but became Assyria's ally (out of self-interest) triumph (605 BC and after), Habakkuk was concerned against Babylon and Media. In 609 BC, Necho 11 thus over the judgment of his people and the wickedness marched to Assyria's aid. Josiah saw his chance to of the oppressor. Edom treacherously rose against bring down Assyria by hindering the pharaoh, but paid ludah c.586 BC when struck down by Babylon; Obad­ for his effort with his life (2 Ki. 23: 28-29; 2 Ch. 35: iah's brief utterance may date from this episode (or 20-24). And in 609/8, the shrunken Assyrian realm perhaps later). There is 00 cause to deny authorship vanished forever,2 leaving Babylon master. of any of these books to the men named. b. DecUoe and fall of Judah, 609-581 BC. In 605 b. Jeremiah. Active .from c.627 BC (Je. 1: 2; 25: 3) BC, the Babylonians decisively defeated Necho 11 of until at least 582 when he was carried into Egypt Egypt, claiming Syria-Palestine (cf. 2 Ki. 24: 1, 7), (le. 40-43; 52: 30); his book shows real personal taking hostages (On. 1: 1-7); at this time, Nebuchad­ qualities. Its composition may be threefold: (i) In­ nezzar II became king of Babylon.3 Babylon was less dividual prophecies could be written down as given successful against Egypt in 601, and Jehoiakim foolish­ (e.g.by Baruch), and at one stage everything from ly rebelled against Babylon (2 Ki. 24: 1). Mter siege, 627 BC (' the beginning .• .') down to 604 BC (cf. Je. Jerusalem capitulated in March 597 BC; young Jehoi­ 36, 604). (ii) Once in Egypt, Jeremiah and Baruch achin and many Judaeans were carried off to Babylon probably ended by putting together all that is in le. (2 Ki. 24: 10-17; 2 Ch. 36: 5-10; Je. 24: 1), as the 1-51 (1-36+37-51), ending with the colophon, 'Thus Babylonian chronicle also records .• Zedekiah learned far are the words of leremiah' (51: 64 end). (ill) Je. nothing from his predecessors' errors, and in turn reb­ 52 is substantiallyll the same as 2 Ki. 25, ending with elled (2 Ki. 24: 20) with the connivance of the pharaoh EviI-Merodach favouring lehoiachin in Babylon in Hophra (Je.44: 30; cf. 37: 5). This time the Baby- 562 BC, some twenty years (and many hundred miles) 10Dians utterly swept away city, temple and state from phase (ii). Thus, when copies reached Babylon, in 587/6 BC,5 and more people· after the trouble in its account of the kingdom's end (Je. 39) was supple­ 582 BC.6 mented with chapter 52. This ' appendix' apart, there is no reason to deny the authenticity of the book as c. The Babylonian exUe. At court, lehoiachin a whole. The book has no marked structure, but one and family were on regular allowances; ration-tablets may see12 (a) a series of oracles, 1~25 from the time for 595-570 BC were found at Babylon.7 Nebuchad- of losiah to Zedekiah and (b) narratives, 26-52 (in­ corporating oracles, e.g. 30, 31. 46-51, from the time 1 See D. W. B. Robinson, loslah', Reform and the Book of lehoiakim and afterwards). 01 the Law (Tyndale Press, 1951). 2 CCK, p. 19; ANET, p. 305 (17th year). 3 CCK, pp. 23-26, 67/69. 4 C:;CK, pp. 32-35, 73; ANET3 (and Supplt), p. 564, ' 7th 8 ANET, p. 308 end; CCK, pp. 94-95. year'. 9 Assyrian accounts, cf. ANET, pp. 295b, 291a; back- 52 Ki. 25: 2-21; le. 39; 52: 3-27,29. ground, ThlP. 6 2 !G. 25: 22~26; le. 52: 30, cf. le. 40-41. 10 eCK, pp. 13-17. 7 ANET, p. 308; W. 1. Martin in D. W. Thomas (ed.), 11 In 2 Ki. 25 and le. 52 (cf. 39-41), the differing sections Dpcuments /rom ()T Times, 1958, pp. 84-86. Cf. Albright. are complementary. BA 5 (1942), pp. 49~55. Later, 2 !G. 2S: 27-30•.. 12 With F. Cawley and A. R. ~d. N~ lJjbl(Com- 2 c. Ezekiel. like his elder colleague Jeremiah, both (ll) Psalms. To the Exile belongs at least the an­ prophet and priest. He too had to proclaim the down­ guish of Psalm 137. fall of Judah and Jerusalem (1-24) as well as against the sinful nations around (25-32). Thereafter, once b. The prophetic history - KIngs. This hook downfall came, he was then commissioned to proclaim takes the story of the Hebrews from. the death of restoration in .given conditions (33-35) of the people David to the fall of his dynasty and its fortunes in (36-37, despite future threats, 38-39), and of the exile, c.561 BC (2 Ki. 25: 31-34). Like the book of temple as focus of restored worship in a renewed na­ Samuel which it follows,19 it is an anonymous narra­ tion and land (40-48). False confidence had to be tive. Its standpoint is that of the prophets, and it destroyed, and a thereafter dispirited people given sets forth the failure of kings and people on the central new and true hope. matters of apostasy in terms of the law and covenant, and the dissolution of Israel and exile of Judah as d. Daniel. A work of six chapters mainly narra­ the consequential punishment from God. The term tive, and six of complementary visions; its datelines , Deuteronomic history' is understandable, but is too run from' the thi<rd year of Jehoiakim' (c. 605) and narrow a label, :perhaps even erroneous, as the basic Nebuchadnezzar II to the first and third year of concepts involved reached far beyond Deuteronomy Cyrus II (c.538, 536; 1: 21; 10: I), and it is essentially and even beyond just the Old Testament.2o The chron­ a unity. It purports to be by Daniel under the Neo­ icular style, and synchronisms between the two Babylonian and Persian Empires, serving its rulers kingdoms, find some analogy in Mesopotamian and baving visions of empires and kingdoms to.come historiography;21 the chronological data in Kings with periods of time. Here, the point on which all exhibit the highest standards of accuracy.22 turns is the reader's own attitude to biblical prophecy, and specifically whether it may include the future or RESTORATION AND DIASPORA UNDER PERSIA, not. If so, no problem need arise. If not, tension is Co 539-330 BC immediate, and the work will be dated (regardless of 4. Historic:aI outlines and background anything else) to the second century BC.l3 Linguistic­ ally, there is no valid support for the late date,14 a. The· return. Bahylon fell quickly to Cyrus in 539 nor are the historical errors securely founded;15 an BC,23 after a sharp battle at Opis for the province of 24 early date is feasible, despite strongly-held prejudices Babylon. The new ruler brought in a new policy of to the contrary. returning subject peoples and deities to their homelands.25 The decrees of Cy,rus sent images of Babylonian deities back to their cities - and the 3. Jodab and exile: other literature Jews back to Judea, as many as wished (Bzr. 1: l1I.). a. Poetry. (i) Lamentations. This touching lament There is no warrant to dispute the authenticity of breathes the atmosphere of fallen Jerusalem, while the decrees of Cyrus or Darius I (Ezr. 6 ~ 2-5).26 its poetic form indicates reflection on and after the Darius confirmed a similar decree of Cyrus in Asia event. It may well date to the 580s BC; no rea1evid­ Minor;27 Cambyses and Darius I showed interest in ence exists either for or against Jeremiah's supposed temples in Egypt;28 and in the late fifth century Darius authorship. The literary category of lamentation over the fall of a notable city is very ancient in the 19' But not directly; it overlaps 2 Samuel slightly (starting biblical Near East. Some ten to fifteen centuries be­ with the last days of David), and so should not be treated fore, Mesopotamia produced the Curse of Agade as a mere continuation. :a:J Cf. Kitchen, NPOT, pp. 1-24, esp. 16-19, provision- (c.2000 BC)16 and Lamentations over the Destruction ally. of Sumer and Ur17 (including hope of restoration) 21 For latter, cf.