A Prophetic Attestation of the Decalogue: Hosea 6:5 With Some Observations on Psalms 15 and 24

Shalom Spiegel

doi:10.1017/S0017816000021428

A Prophetic Attestation of the Decalogue: Hosea 6:5 With Some Observations on Psalms 15 and 24

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2011

Shalom Spiegel

Show author details

Shalom Spiegel: Affiliation:
Jewish Institute of Religion, New York

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

A dark and delphic verse, out of joint with what precedes and follows, the type of abrupt and fragmentary utterances which has made many a student of the little book complain with Jerome: Osee commaticus est et quasi per sententias loquens. The ready acquiescence in the familiar refuge of the fatigued philologist, ‘corrupt beyond restoration’, is nowhere more regrettable than in Hos 65. The verse, obviously defaced, mars a glorious bit of ancient Hebrew writing, the otherwise well preserved poem 61–6. Generations have used all their wit and skill of interpretation to read some coherent meaning into the puzzling passage, willing at times to forego rules of biblical grammar or even fundamentals of biblical faith. All in vain. For ḥāṣabtî can be as little squared with haragtîm as one can conceive of Hosea, a heart of deepest tenderness, believing the prophets to have been slayers of their people or God to have been the slayer of the prophets. Whatever ‘demonic’ features his concept of deity may contain—inherited from sterner generations or reflecting the transient moods to which a sensitive and impulsive poet is given—its innermost and abiding nature is inexhaustible love which no sin of man can wear out, let alone sway to cruel injustice.

Type: Research Article
Information: Harvard Theological Review , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 1934 , pp. 105 - 144

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816000021428 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1934

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 106 note 1} Praefatio in Duodecim Prophetas (Migne, Patr. Lat. vol. XXVIII p. 1015). Cf. also his Prologus in Osee (Migne, l.c. vol. XXV p. 855 f.); Smith, G. A., The Book of the Twelve Prophets, New York 1896, vol. I. p. 220 f.Google Scholar; Hölscher, G., Die Profeten, Leipzig 1914 p. 218.Google Scholar The passage is also mentioned in “The Oldest Collection of Bible Difficulties by a Jew” (JQR 13, 1901 p. 369; cf. about the author J. Mann, in: Tarbiz III 1932 p. 381 f.).

^{page 106 note 2} Cf. Hos 5_12.14 9₁₄ 13_7f.Volz, Paul, Das Dämonische in Jahwe, Tübingen 1924 p. 9Google Scholar, cites also Hos 6₅.

^{page 106 note 3} Cf. Hos. 11_4.8f. 2₂₁ 3₁ 14₅. See also Rud. Kittel, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, vol. II^{5 6} p. 345.

^{page 106 note 4} Cheyne, T. K., introduction to W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel², London 1895 p. xxi f.Google Scholar; P. Volz, Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie und der Messias, Göttingen 1897, p. 33; B. Stade, Biblische Theologie des A. T. I, Tübingen 1905, p. 222; H. Guthe, in: Kautzsch-Bertholet, Die hl. Schriften d. A. T., Tübingen, 1923, vol. II⁴ p. 10.

^{page 106 note 5} Hos 6₄ has been very frequently held to commence a new prophetic speech, so already J. G. Eichhorn, Die hebräischen Propheten, Göttingen 1816, vol. I. p. 98; J. C. Stuck, Hoseas Propheta, Lipsiae 1828 p. 256 ff. 269; Friedr, Carl. Keil, Bibl. Commentar über die zwölf kleinen Propheten³, Leipzig 1888 p. 66 f.Google Scholar 69. Of newer critics see K. Marti, Dodekapropheton, Tübingen 1903, p. 54 f.; W. Baumgartner, in: Schweizerische Theol. Zeitschr. 30, 1913 p. 118; Praetorius, Franz, Bemerkungen zum Buche Hosea, Berlin 1918, p. 31Google Scholar; Joh. Lindblom, Hosea literarisch untersucht, Åbo 1927, p. 83 ff. 114. That 5₁₅ is the finale of the preceding oracle has been shown by Schmidt, Hans, Hosea 6, 1–6 (in: Sellin Festschrift, Leipzig 1927, p. 111 f.).Google Scholar

^{page 106 note 6} Noticed by Abraham ibn Ezra when commenting on 6₄:

^{page 107 note 7} Georg Richter, Erläuterungen zu dunkeln Stellen in den kleinen Propheten, Gütersloh 1914 p. 28 who reads

^{page 107 note 8} Bernard Duhm, The Twelve Prophets, transl. by A. Duff, London 1912, p. 95.

^{page 107 note 9} The reading of the Sept. ἀπεθέρισα does not presuppose (so Cheyne, ZAW 31, 1911 p. 315 and Felix E. Peiser, Hosea, Philologische Studien zum A. T. Leipzig 1914 p. 25) but with the very frequent confusion of and the aramaicism So already Nöldeke (see K. Vollers, Das Dodekapropheton der Alexandriner, ZAW 3, 1883 p. 249); Felix Perles, Analekten zur Textkritik des A. T. Neue Folge, Leipzig 1922 p. 29, and A. Kaminka, Studien zur Septuaginta an der Hand der zwölf kleinen Prophetenbücher, Frankfurt a. M. 1928, p. 26 and 39.

^{page 107 note 10} The most recent example is Franz Wutz, Die Transkriptionen von der Septuaginta bis zu Hieronymus, Stuttgart 1933 p. 388 who metamorphoses ‘stones’ (Job 5₂₃) and ‘prophets’ (Hos 6₅) into unexampled ‘fruits’:

^{page 107 note 11} Mowinckel, Sigmund, Le Décalogue, Paris 1927 p. 54Google Scholar; Sellin, Ernst, Das Zwölfprophetenbuch³, Leipzig 1929 p. 75.Google Scholar

^{page 107 note 1} Septuagint; Syriac; Cyril of Alexandria (ed. Migne, Patr. Graeca vol. LXXI p. 165); Theodoret (ed. Migne l.c. vol. LXXXI p. 1265, differently ib. p. 1584); Abraham ibn Ezra; Eliezer of Beaugency (ed. S. Poznański in Haggōren, vol. III Berdichev, 1901, p. 114); the commentators reviewed by Edward Pococke, A Commentary on the Prophecy of Hosea, Oxford 1685, p. 306 ff.; Ferd. Hitzig, Die zwölf kleinen Propheten⁴, Leipzig 1881 p. 31Google Scholar; Paul Riessler, Die kleinen Propheten, Rottenburg a. N. 1911 p. 29 and 31 (reads n^ebi'êikem); Ehrlich, A. B., Randglossen zur hebr. Bibel, Leipzig 1912, vol. V p. 179Google Scholar; Franz Praetorius l.c. p. 31 and idem, Neue Bemerkungen zu Hosea, Berlin 1922 p. 28Google Scholar (reads rāṣaḥtî or r^eṣaḥtîm which he however drops as explanatory gloss to restore the “Doppeltrimeter”) recanted in his later Die Gedichte des Hosea, Halle 1926 p. 15 f. (reads and retains as “echter Text”: rāṣaḥtî n^ebi'êkem); E. Sellin l.c. p. 73 f.

^{page 108 note 2} Joseph, and Ḳimḥi, David and the Jewish commentators listed by Harry Cohen, The Commentary of Rabbi David Kimhi on Hosea, New York 1929 p. 54Google Scholar; Isaac b. Juda Abravanel, Pērûš ‘al n^ebi'îm aḥ^arōnîm, Amsterdam 1641; Friedman, Meir (in: A. Harkavy Festschrift, Petersburg 1908 p. 24Google Scholar, quoting Nu 11₁₅ I Re 19₄); Ehrlich l.c. when speaking of “Schläge and Todesgefahr” and referring to 1 Re 22₂₄ Jer 20₂ 26_20–24 38₉.

^{page 108 note 3} The Targum; Rashi; Joseph Kara, In Hoseam Commentarius, Breslau 1861; Heinr. Ewald, Die Propheten des Alten Bundes Stuttgart 1840 vol. I p. 144 f.; Keil l.c. p. 70; Wellhausen, J., Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, Berlin 1892, p. 114Google Scholar; C. von Orelli, The Twelve Minor Prophets, Edinburgh 1893 p. 38; Samuel Oettli, Amos and Hosea, Gütersloh 1901 p. 86 suggests ḥ^aṣabtîm or better m^eḥaṣtîm or l^eḥaṣtîm, emendations endorsed by W. Staerk, Das assyrische Weltreich im Urteil der Propheten, Göttingen 1908 p. 184; W. Nowack, Die kleinen Propheten, Göttingen 1897 p. 42; K. Marti l.c. p. 56 reads ḥ^aṣabtîkā and h^aragtîkā and transfers 5c corrected as umišpāṭēnū k^e'ōr to 6_3αβ, the latter transposition and the change of the second verb adopted also by O. Procksch, Die kleinen prophetischen Schriften vor dem Exil, Stuttgart 1910 p. 380 where the verse is construed as a question; van Hoonacker, A., Petits, Les Douze Prophèles, Paris 1908 p. 63Google Scholar; Adam C. Welch, The Religion of Israel under the Kingdom, Edinburgh 1912 p. 110 and 269, n. 27; Scott, Melville, The Message of Hosea, London 1921 p. 50Google Scholar; Brown, S. L., The Book of Hosea, London 1932 p. 57.Google Scholar

^{page 108 note 4} Jerome; Luther; Calvin; Gesenius, Thes. p. 509; August Simson, Der Prophet Hosea, Hamburg 1851 p. 183 f.; Wünsche, August Der Prophet Hosea, Leipzig 1868 p. 251Google Scholar; Scholz, Anton, Commentar zum Buche des Propheten Hoseas, Würzburg 1882 p. 76 f.Google Scholar; J. Halévy, Le Livre d'Osée (in: Revue Sémitique, vol. 10, 1902, p. 106 f. reads ḥ^aṣabtîm); Harper, W. R., Amos and Hosea (in: The Internat. Crit. Com.) New York 1905, p. 285 f.Google Scholar; Smith, J. M. P., A Commentary on the Books of Amos, Hosea and Micah, New York 1914 p. 113Google Scholar; Crafer, T. W., The Book of Hosea, Cambridge 1923, p. 44.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 5} J. Chr. Stuck l.c.; E. F. C. Rosenmüller, Prophetae Minores, Lipsiae 1812 p. 198.

^{page 199 note 6} The interpretation of ḥāṣabtî in the light of Ps 29₇ attempted by Ch. Michaëlis (“fulminavi per prophetas, eo nimirum sensu, quo Latini quoque de oratore dicunt: tonat, fulminat”) found little following, cf. Sam. Henr. Manger, Commentarius in Librum Propheticum Hoseae, Campis 1782, p. 293. Barth, J., Wurzeluntersuchungen zum hebr. und aram. Lexikon, Berlin 1902, p. 22Google Scholar renders Ps 29₇: “Horch, Gott entzündet Feuer Flammen” according to an additional signification of the root in Arabic, quoting Sura 21₉₈ which styles the sinners ḥaṣabu jahannama or fuel of hell. See however Friedr. Schulthess, in: Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen vol. 164, 1902 p. 671 who rejects the example as “exegetisches Experiment der Dogmatiker.., vielleicht eins der halbverdauten Fremdwörter mit denen Muḥammed imponieren wollte.” No attempt seems to have been made at an identification of ḥāṣabtî with the Arabic ḫṭb address words to, speak to; ḫaṭîb orator.

^{page 199 note 7} Pococke l.c. p. 308 f.; Harper l.c. p. 286; J. M. P. Smith l.c. p. 113.

^{page 199 note 8} Huxtable, E., in: Speakers Commentary, New York 1876, vol. VI p. 444Google Scholar; G. A. Smith l.c. p. 265; Crafer l.c.

^{page 199 note 9} David Pareus, Hoseas Propheta, Heidelbergae 1605 p. 132. See also Moses Alshekh, Mar'ôt Haṣ-ṣōb^e' ôt, Venice 1603:

^{page 110 note 10} Contrast Ernst Sellin, Das Zwölfprophetenbuch³ 1929 p. 73 and Klostermann in Sellin's Der alttestamentliche Prophetismus, Leipzig 1912, p. 37. The idea of god massacring his prophets for no other sin but praying for their people is not only entirely alien to Hosea, but to all Hebrew antiquity which, on the contrary, held it to be a sin against god if the prophet were to cease to pray for the people, cf. I Sa 12₂₃.

^{page 110 note 11} l.c. p. 114: “Eine Verbindung zwischen 6₄ und 6₅ lässt sich nicht entdecken; 6₄ schliesst abgebrochen und 6₅ beginnt abgebrochen.”

^{page 110 note 12} J. W. Nowack l.c. p. 43 and Harper, W. R., The Structure of the Text of the Book of Hosea, Chicago 1905 p. 23Google Scholar and in the Intern. Crit. Com. p. 280.

^{page 110 note 13} l.c. p. 16.

^{page 111 note 14} Emendationes in plerosque sacrae scripturae veteris testamenti libros, Breslau 1892.

^{page 111 note 15} Critical Remarks upon some Passages of the O. T. London 1896.

^{page 111 note 16} l.c. p. 12: “When I propose to write I assume the existence of a root (with a commutation of and only known to us in Syriac); God has, so to say, tattoed them by his words … Either the tenor of the whole sentence is ironical, or it is a question: ‘Indeed to this end I have inculcated (it) on the prophets, have impressed them by the words of My mouth, that I like’ etc.”

^{page 111 note 17} In: Theologisches Literaturblatt v. 26, 1905, p. 474 f.

^{page 112 note 18} Defended by E. König, Theologie des A. T.⁴ 1924 p. 233 and Norbert Peters, Osee und die Geschichte, Paderborn 1924 p. 11 f. See however Julius Rieger, Die Bedeutung der Geschichte für die Verkündigung des Amos und Hosea, Giessen 1929, p. 75, n. 3.

^{page 112 note 19} Praeparationen zu den kleinen Propheten, Heft 8: Hosea, Cap. I–VII, Berlin 1892, proposing as “freie Coniectur”; Cf. Luther's: “ich höfele sie durch die Propheten.”

^{page 113 note 20} of Franckh's Die Prophetie in der Zeit vor Amos, Gütersloh 1905 (Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie, IX).

^{page 113 note 21} Signed: A. K.; see Klostermann, Der Pentateuch II (Leipzig 1907) p. 578 f.Google Scholar Cf. also McFadyen, J. E., The Mosaic Origin of the Decalogue, in: The Expositor 12, 1916 p. 58.Google Scholar

^{page 113 note 22} Bemerkungen zu den zwölf Propheten, ZAW 31, 1911, p. 23.

^{page 113 note 23} So in the English transl. of Duhm, The Twelve Prophets p. 95. In the German article, cited in the foregoing note, Duhm rejects 6_5a as a reader's “Anmerkung … wo jedoch das Verbum ḥāṣab unverständlich ist … Man kann etwa ḥaḳḳōtî oder ha'idōtî oder nach v. 5^bhōṣē'tî dafür lesen.” Similarly Albrecht Alt, in: Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 30, 1919 p. 563, reading hōda'tî. H. Gressmann, Die älteste Geschichtsschreibung und Prophetie Israels², Göttingen 1921 p. 383 and p. 14 of the appended Textkritische Anmerkungen, reads with Duhm hōṣē'tî in the first verb and hōda'tîkā in the second, regards however the entire verse as authentic.

^{page 113 note 24} Der altestamentliche Prophetismus p. 37.

^{page 114 note 25} In the first ed. of his Zwölfprophetenbuch, Leipzig 1921 p. 48 f. and 53: “Der Glossator bezog das Wort auf den Dekalog, ein späterer missverstand die ‘Steine’ und machte ‘Propheten’ daraus.”

^{page 114 note 28} Mose und seine Bedeutung für die israelitisch- jüdische Religionsgeschichte, Leipzig-Erlangen 1922 p. 34.

^{page 114 note 27} ib., p. 35 and 38 f.

^{page 114 note 28} Die geschichtliche Orientierung der Prophetie des Hosea, in Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 36, 1925, p. 628.

^{page 114 note 29} Hosea und das Martyrium des Mose, ZAW 46, 1928 p. 33 and in Zwölfprophetebuch³ p. 66 ff.

^{page 114 note 30} See W. Caspari, Neue Versuche geschichtswissenschaftlicher Vergewisserung über Mose, ZAW 42, 1924 p. 310 ff. and Julien Weill, Hosée XII₁₃–XIII₁ et le prétendu martyre de Moïse, REJ 87, 1929 p. 89–93. Karl Budde, ZAW 50, 1932 p. 300 ff. calls attention to a like hypothesis of Goethe about the death of Moses. The similar theory of Micha Josef bin Gorion (Berdyczewski) in his: Sinai und Garizim, Berlin 1926 where the thought is traced in rabbinic and later literature, seems to have escaped his notice. On the biblical researches of Berdyczewski cf. my Reborn, Hebrew, New York 1930 p. 362 ff.Google Scholar and the literature cited on p. 464 f. to which now the two articles of Emanuel bin Gorion in: Gedächtnisschrift zum zehnten Todestage von M. J. bin Gorion, Berlin 1931 should be added.

^{page 115 note 31} See S. Mowinckel l.c. p. 53 whom this exegesis reminds of a Norwegian proverb: “Mieux vaut être mort que dans l'embarras.”

^{page 115 note 32} ḥāṣab can mean to hew out (a well Dt 6₁₁ Jer 2₁₃, a vat Is 5₂, a grave ib. 22₁₆) or to hew from (a quarry Is 51₁) or to hew with (an ax Is 10₁₅) or to hew in (the rock Job 19₂₄) or to hew through (a tunnel, Siloam inscr. 1.4 and 6) but it never means, as the customary exegesis of Hos 6₅ is wont to assume, to hew down—not even in Is 51₉ where many emend since Houbigant as in Job 26₁₂. Deutero-Isaiah refers to the miracles and myths of cosmogony when the arm of god hewed through or split Rahab in twain and thus divided the floods of the great deep beneath from the waters above the firmament (Gen 1₇ 7₁₁ 49₂₉ Dt 33₁₃). See Torrey, Charles C., The Second Isaiah, New York 1928 p. 400Google Scholar and Volz, P., Jesaia II, Leipzig 1932, p. 119.Google Scholar

^{page 115 note 33} Sellin, Mose etc. p. 39. N. Peters l.c. p. 21 labors to defend the plural as referring to Moses and Joshua cf. Jos 8₃₂ and Dt 27₃.

^{page 116 note 34} Hans Schmidt, in: Sellin Festschrift p. 120; “Das scheint mir nicht ursprünglich … Ich lese und ziehe das zum Folgenden: Im Rest des Wortes dürfte stecken See also notes 11, 12 and 23.

^{page 116 note 35} Other attempts to explain the verse either resort to an arbitrary emendation of both verbs (see T. K. Cheyne ZAW 31, 1911 p. 315: “for the scarcely possible h^aragtîm read gā'artî and in the parallel line for ḳāṣabtî read ḳāṣaftî.” If it be no misprint, ḳāṣabtî is the postulated reading of the Septuagint, see introd. note 9) or to an ad hoc conjectured novel signification of ḥāṣab (cf. Paul Joüon, Notes de critique textuelle, in: Mélanges de la Faculté Orientale, Université Saint-Joseph, Beyrouth, IV, 1910 p. 28 f.: “Chose étrange, la Bible qui est pleine de menaces prophétiques n'a pas de mot pour menacer!” The need is supplied by postulating the meaning of threaten for ḥāṣabtî, while the second verb is emended to read correspondingly It deserves mention, that Louis Ginzberg (in: Adolf Schwarz Festschrift, Vienna 1917 p. 353) suggests for the aram. ‘impudent’ the derivation from the Hebrew citing not only as did Joüon but also which has in Syriac also the meaning of ‘make bold.’ In the recent third edition of Kittel-Kahle's Biblia Hebraica, Stuttgart 1933 p. 7, O. Procksch discards his previous explanation (see note 3) and reverts to Klostermann's emendation, although retaining the transfer of 5c to 6₃. For other attempts see introd. notes 7 and 10.

^{page 116 note 1} II Re 16₅ ff. Is 7, 8, 9₂₀ 17.

^{page 116 note 2} See Driver, S. R., Introd. to the Lit. of the O. T. New York 1923, p. 302Google Scholar; Harper l.c. p. cxli quoting Nowack, Marti et al.

^{page 116 note 3} Israel und Ägypten, p. 53.

^{page 117 note 4} See A. Alt, Hosea 5₈–6₆. Ein Krieg und seine Folgen in prophetischer Beleuchtung, in: Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 30, 1919 pp. 537–568.

^{page 117 note 5} Cf. Seesemann, Otto, Israel und Juda bei Amos und Hosea, Leipzig 1898 p. 21 f.Google Scholar 31, and W. Baumgartner in Schweizer. Theol. Zeitschr. 30, 1913 p. 122 f.

^{page 117 note 6} Alt's thesis may be said to have won general acceptance. See R. Kittel, Gesch. d. Volkes Isr. vol. II⁶ p. 344, n. 3. H. Schmidt l.c. and Sellin's commentary³ p. 66 ff. Only Otto Procksch, Der Staatsgedanke in der Prophetie, Gütersloh 1933, p. 20 suggests an earlier date.

^{page 117 note 7} II Re 16₇.

^{page 117 note 8} Is 7₁₇.

^{page 117 note 9} II Re 16_10ff.

^{page 118 note 10} See Emil G. Kraeling, The Immanuel Prophecy, JBL 50, 1931 p. 279. For a defense of the course of action taken by Ahaz see Joachim Begrich, Der Syrish-Ephraimitishe Krieg und seine weltpolitischen Zusammenhänge, ZDMG 83, 1929 p. 213–237 and against it Karl Budde, Jesaja und Ahaz, ib. 84, 1930, p. 125–138 and Procksch, Otto, Jesaia I, Leipzig 1930 p. 4 f.Google Scholar, 118 f. Cf. also Olmstead, A. T., History of Palestine and Syria, New York 1931 p. 449 ff.Google Scholar; Mowinckel, in: Acta Orientalia 10, 1932 p. 182 ff.; Maisler, B., in: Bulletin of the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society 1933 p. 1 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 118 note 11} Hos 4₂ 6_8f. 10₄ Is 9_19f.

^{page 118 note 12} Is 9_10f. Hos 5₁₃ 7_8f. 11.

^{page 118 note 13} Hos 7_4–7 8_4.10 10_3f. 13_10f.

^{page 118 note 14} Cf. Hos 5₁₁ and Duhm ZAW 31, 1911 p. 23, endorsed by Alt l.c. p. 553.

^{page 118 note 15} II Re 15₂₉ Hos 5₁₄ Is 8₂₃ Jud 18₃₀.

^{page 118 note 16} However, the use of Ephraim for the remnant of old Israel can hardly be said to be “sicher nachweisbar erst seit der Deportation von Nord und Ost-Palästina durch Tiglat-Pilesar,” G. Hölscher l.c. p. 213; Winckler, H. in Ed. Schrader KAT³ Berlin 1902, p. 264Google Scholar, and Alt l.c. p. 554. Is 7_2.5.9.17 9_8.20 17₃ antedate the catastrophe of II Re 15₂₉.

^{page 118 note 17} Hos 5_14f.

^{page 118 note 18} Cf. II Re 15₃₀ 17₄ Hos 5₁₃.

^{page 118 note 19} Hos 5₁₅.

^{page 118 note 20} Hos 5₁₃.

^{page 118 note 21} Hos 4₆ 5₁ 6₉ 10₅ Is 9₁₄.

^{page 118 note 22} Hos 4₈.

^{page 118 note 23} Hos 4_6.14.

^{page 118 note 24} Hos 4_13.19 5₆ 6₆ 8_11.13 9₄ 10_{1 f. 8} 12₁₂ 13₂.

^{page 119 note 25} Hos 5₁ 7_3.7.16 8₄ 9₁₅ 13₁₀ Is 9₁₅.

^{page 119 note 26} Hos 5₁₃ 7_9.11 8₉ 9₃ 10_2.6 11₅ 12₂ 14₄.

^{page 119 note 27} Hos 5₁₂.

^{page 119 note 28} Hos 2₁₇ 9₁₀ 11₁ 12₁₀ 13₅.

^{page 119 note 29} Hos 2_2.25 3₅ 11_10f. 13₄ 14_4ff. Cf. W. Baumgartner, Kennen Amos und Hosea eine Heilseschatologie? in: Schweizerische Theol. Zeitschr. 30, 1913, p. 118 ff. 152 ff. and W. Caspari, in Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 41, 1931, p. 818 f.

^{page 119 note 30} Hos 5₁₃ 6₁ 7₁ 11₃ 14₅.

^{page 119 note 31} Hos 14₄.

^{page 119 note 32} Hos 2₉ 3₅ 5₄ 6₁ 7_10·16 11₅ 12₇ 14_2f.

^{page 119 note 33} Hos 6₁₁. Against the lately accepted derivation from (cf. E. L. Dietrich, Die endzeitliche Wiederherstellung bei den Propheten, Giessen 1925 p. 26, 36 f.) E. Baumann, ZAW 47, 1929 p. 27 f., 32 renews again the connection with

^{page 119 note 34} Hos 7₁.

^{page 119 note 35} Hos 6₆ cf. also 2_{21 f}. 10₁₂ 12₇.

^{page 119 note 36} Hos 4_1·3 8₃.

^{page 119 note 37} Hos 5₄.

^{page 119 note 38} Hos 5₆.

^{page 119 note 39} Hos 8₁₂.

^{page 120 note 40} Hos 8_11·13.

^{page 120 note 41} Hos 4₁₁ 9₁ 10₁.

^{page 120 note 42} I Sa 9₁₃.

^{page 120 note 43} II Sa 5₈ cf. Lev 21₁₈.

^{page 120 note 44} Lev 12₄ cf. also Thr 4₁₅.

^{page 120 note 45} Dt 23_2f.

^{page 120 note 46} Ps 51₉ Nu 19₁₈ Lev 14_6·49.

^{page 120 note 47} HOS 4_4.14

^{page 121 note 1} See Lev 15₃₁ Nu 19_13.20 about the danger of defiling the sanctuary.

^{page 121 note 2} See the Babylonian parallel to the story of Job: “I will praise the lord of wisdom,” cf. Gressmann, Hugo, Altorientalische Texte zum A. T. 2nd ed., Berlin 1926 p. 280Google Scholar; S. Langdon, Babylonian Wisdom, London 1923 p. 64; Lehmann-Haas, Textbuch zur Religionsgeschiehte², Leipzig 1922 p. 315 f.Google Scholar; also R. Reitzenstein, Das iranische Erlösungsmysterium, Bonn 1921 p. 157, 254 n. 3 and H. Zimmern, ZDMG 76, 1922 p. 49.

^{page 121 note 3} According to Albert Schott of Bonn (ZDMG 81, 1927 p. xlvii), dating from the Cossaean era, viz. 1400–1100 B.c.; cf. Albright, W. F., The Archaelogy of Palestine and the Bible, New York 1932 p. 167 f.Google Scholar See Gressmann l.c. p. 324 f. and Rogers, R. W., Cuneiform Parallels to the O. T²., New York 1926 p. 170 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 121 note 4} Cf. Gressmann, Die älteste Geschichtsschreibung p. 231 and Kurt Galling, Der Beichtspiegel, ZAW 47, 1929 p. 130.

^{page 122 note 5} Cf. chapter 125 of the Book of the Dead: Gressmann, Altor. Texte² p. 10 f.; Lehmann-Haas l.c. p. 273; Davis, Charles H. S., The Egyptian Book of the Dead, New York 1894 p. 135Google Scholar; Budge, E. A. W., The Lit. of the Ancient Egyptians, London 1924 p. 52.Google Scholar The term ‘negative confession’ is objected to by B. Gunn, The Religion of the Poor in Ancient Egypt, in: Journ. of Eg. Archaeol. 3, 1916 p. 81: “It is no ‘confession’ to persist through forty-two clauses that one has committed no conceivable sin.”

^{page 122 note 6} Pseudo Dositheus 10: “Praecepta in Delphis ab Apolline in columna scripta.” See H. Schmidt, Mose und der Dekalog, in: Eὐχαριστήριον, Gunkel Festschrift, Göttingen 1923, p. 113.

^{page 122 note 7} S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstuden V. Kristiania 1924 p. 58 and Le Décalogue, p. 150 f. Cf. the inscription of Astypalaia: [᾽Ε]ς τὸ ἱερὸν μὴ ἐσέρπεν ὄστις μὴ ἁγνός ἐστι (Ziehen, Leges Graec. Sacr. II n. 123) as well as the other examples listed by Theod. Wächter, Reinheitsvorschriften im griech. Kultus, Giessen 1910 p. 6 ff. and Eugen Fehrle, Die kultische Keuschheit im Altertum, Giessen 1910 p. 42 ff. 206 ff.

^{page 122 note 8} Erman, A., Ägyptische Religion², Berlin, 1909 p. 86.Google Scholar

^{page 122 note 9} Ps 24₃.

^{page 122 note 10} Ps 24_4f.

^{page 123 note 11} Ps 24₆, see Galling l.c. p. 129. Kittel, R., Die Psalmen⁶ Leipzig 1929 p. 95Google Scholar puts also v. 6 in the mouth of the priest. See the description by Gunkel, Die Psalmen, Göttingen 1926 p. 102 f. 48 ff. and in ZAW 42, 1924 p. 193 ff. where also the definition of ‘liturgy’ as a composite literary genre will be found.

^{page 123 note 12} Ps 118₁₉ Is 26₂, see Gunnar Hylmö, in: Lunds Universitets Årsskrift 25, 1929, No. 5, contended against by Wilhelm Rudolph, Jesaia 24–27, Stuttgart 1933 p. 35 ff.

^{page 123 note 13} Ps 100₄.

^{page 123 note 14} Ps 118₂₆. About the rabbinic traditions as to the choral arrangements of the psalm, see A. Büchler, Zur Geschichte der Tempelmusik und der Tempelpsalmen, ZAW 20, 1900 p. 124 f.

^{page 123 note 15} Joh. Hempel, Gott und Mensch im A. T. Stuttgart 1926 p. 6, and Die israelitischen Anschaûûngen von Segen und Fluch im Lichte altorientalischer Parallelen, ZDMG 79, 1925 p. 97. See also his Die althebräische Literatur p. 72.

^{page 123 note 16} Dt 26₁₅. See Gressmann, Die ält. Geschichtsschr.² p. 230 and Hempel, l.c. ZDMG 1925, p. 101.

^{page 123 note 17} See note 5. Cf. also Ps 131_{1 f}.

^{page 123 note 18} H. Ewald, Dichter des alten Bundes³ Göttingen 1866, vol. I, 2 p. 20; Kautzsch-Bertholet, Hl. Schrift. des A. T.⁴ Tübingen 1923 II p. 134; Mowinckel, Le Décalogue, p. 146.

^{page 124 note 19} Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien V. p. 116.

^{page 124 note 20} Le Décalogue p. 141 ff.

^{page 124 note 21} Their identification has been suggested by P. Volz, Das Neujahrfest Jahwes, Tübingen 1912 p. 12 ff. and Die biblischen Altertümer, Stuttgart 1914 p. 99 f.; Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien II. Das Thronbesteigungsfest Jahwähs und der Ursprung der Eschatologie, Kristiania 1922 p. 83 ff.; Hans Schmidt, Die Thronfahrt Jahves am Fest der Jahreswende im alten Israel, Tübingen 1927 p. 25 ff. See Morgenstern, Julian, The Three Calendars of Ancient Israel, HUCA I 1924 p. 22 ff.Google Scholar and ib. III, 1926, p. 77 ff.

^{page 124 note 22} Sukka 55a prescribes indeed their use for the feast of tabernacles.

^{page 124 note 23} Ex 20₂ Dt 5₆ Ps 50₇ 81₁₁.

^{page 124 note 24} See Gunkel, H., Einleitung in die Psalmen, Göttingen 1928, p. 100 ff.Google Scholar and Eissfeldt, Otto, Jahwe als König ZAW 46, 1928 p. 81–105.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note 25} See Lev 19_{2ff 12.14ff} and the many examples from oriental and classical antiquity in Norden, E., Agnostos Theos, Leipzig 1913 p. 207 ff.Google Scholar, cf. also the pertinent correction of Gressmann, ZAW 34, 1914 p. 286Google Scholar: “Der Dekalog hat eine ältere Stufe des Stiles bewahrt als der Kodex Hammurapi.”

^{page 124 note 26} Hos 12₁₀ 13₄. See Torczyner, Harry, Die Bundeslade und die Anfänge der Religion Israels, Berlin 1930 p. 52Google Scholar n. 77 and p. 54.

^{page 125 note 27} Psalmenstudien V, p. 76, 103. About the date of the festival, or rather of its interpretation as the throne ascension holiday, Mowinckel has changed his mind in the meantime, relinquishing “mindestens die älteste Königszeit” (Ps. St. II, p. 203, cf. the references to Hos 7₅, ib. p. 43, 190) as an error (“Nachwirkung der chronologischen Irrtümer der ‘religionsgeschichtlichen Schule’!”); see his Der Ursprung der Bileamsage, ZAW 48, 1930 p. 267, n. 3. He now accepts with A. von Gall, Βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, Heidelberg 1926, p. 21 both the late date (“späteste Königszeit”) and the influence of the Babylonian cultus. See, however, O. Eissfeldt, Baal Zaphon, Halle 1932 p. 21 f. about the likelihood of north Syrian rather than Babylonian origin.

^{page 125 note 28} Ps 81_5.6.

^{page 125 note 29} Cf. Ps 76₂ 114₂.

^{page 125 note 30} Cf. Hos 2₁₃, also Am 5₂₃.

^{page 125 note 31} Ps 81_10.11. Cf. Gunkel, Psalmen p. 359 and Max Haller, Ein Jahrzehnt Psalmenforschung, in: Theol. Runsdchau I, 1929 p. 398. The postexilic date of Ps 81 postulated by Mowinckel, Ps. St. II p. 87 and Le Déc. p. 138 f. is very unlikely, as Mowinckel himself inadvertently admits cf. Ps. St. II p. 191.

^{page 125 note 32} E.g. practices such as in Ex 3₅ 30₁₉ Ps 26₆ retained until this day in the synagogue, cf. b. Soṭa 39^a and 40^a.

^{page 125 note 33} Hence the danger, if not error in the prevalent assumption of late origin, on the ground of ‘prophetic’ influence in psalms that do not mention or stress the elements of cultus.

^{page 126 note 34} Note the allusion to Ex 20_14.15.16 = Dt 5₁₇, and of course in Ps 50₇ to Ex 20₂ = Dt 5₆.

^{page 126 note 35} Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien V, p. 69, 79

^{page 126 note 36} Běrākōt 28^b.

^{page 126 note 37} Cf. Welch, Adam C., Deuteronomy, London 1932 p. 126.Google ScholarMeyer, Eduard, Die Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstämme, Halle a. S. 1906, p. 557Google Scholar argues for the priority of the formulae of ban and blessing uttered at the great festival at Shechem and sees in them an archetype of the decalogue. See also Pfeiffer, Robert H., The Oldest Decalogue, JBL 43, 1924, p. 309 f.Google Scholar; Hempel l.c. 99; Mowinckel, Ps. St. V, p. 111, reconsidered in his Le Décalogue p. 134 ff.

^{page 126 note 38} See vs. 14 and 16 and Gunkel, Jes 33. Eine prophetische Liturgie, ZAW 42, 1924, 177 ff. Still another tōrā of entry seems to be preserved in Ps 101, as has been repeatedly argued by Budde, Exp. Times 8, 1897, p. 202 ff. and ZAW 35, 1915 p. 191 f. and is now partly conceded by Mowinckel Ps. St. VI, 1924, p. 33, n. 2. See esp. vs. 2^b [cf. Lev. 16₂!] 6^cd and 7.

^{page 127 note 39} Kittel, Psalmen⁶ p. 47 and 95.

^{page 127 note 40} Cf. Nu 6_24f. Jer 31₂₃ Ps 27₁₄ 91_3ff. 121_5ff. 128₅ 134₃. Against Galling, l.c. p. 127 f. who connects the decalogue with the Beichtspiegel.

^{page 127 note 41} Dt 7_12ff. 28_1ff.

^{page 127 note 42} Ta'anit iv, 1. One could term correspondingly the liturgy of entry cf. Is 26₂ Ps 118₁₉ and Mishna Sukka V, 5. See also Morgenstern, Julian, The Gates of Righteousness, HUCA vol. vi, 1929 p. 36 f.Google Scholar where Pss 24 and 118 are interpreted in connection with the solemn opening of the eastern gate of the temple on the two annual equinoctial days.

^{page 127 note 43} Galling l.c. p. 128 f. assumes that the wording of Pss 15 and 24 “zeigt bereits den Loslösungsprozess vom Kultus” as argued by him also for the second person singular of the decalogue, see above, note 40. Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 134 ff. having changed his view about the genesis of the decalogues from cultic bans and benedictions, rescinds his former agreement with Kittel in Ps. St. V, p. 60 and explains Ps 24₅ “‘recevoir la bénédiction’ est, d'après le sens, synonyme de ‘monter à la montagne de Yahvé’ pour y recevoir les bienfaits que procure le culte” (Le Déc. p. 142). But his translation ‘recevoir’ attenuates the meaning of to carry away from, cf. Ju 21₂₃ I Sa 17₃₄ Cant 5₇ also Hos 5₁₄ and Dan 1₁₆. seems perhaps also to presuppose departure from before the deity, cf. Gen 26₃₁ and 27₃₀. may also carry the connotation of a (parting) gift as in II Re 5₁₅ the two verbs being synonymously used cf. the idiom or and Ps 24₅ = Gen 27_35f.: “he has taken away thy blessing.” Translate therefore in the psalm also: he shall carry away (i.e. take home) a blessing from the Lord.

That the wording in Ps 15₅ is not apposite for the cultic situation of entry to the sanctuary, is obvious. For its connection with the formula of priestly blessing, see Ps 55₂₃ and 121₃, where the second person sing, characteristic of the priestly benediction (see note 40) must not be emended; hence more correctly in Mowinckel, Ps. St. II, 1922, p. 171 than in Ps. St. V, 1924, p. 49 which misled also Gunkel, Psalmen, p. 541 despite his better knowledge ib. p. 177 and 238; correctly Kittel, Psalmen⁶, p. 390. See also Ps 21₈ clearly anticipating the following benediction or oracle, as Mowinckel himself has noticed (Ps. St. III, 1923, p. 76); comp. also Ps 15₅ and 112₆ or 24₅ and 112₃ where the sacerdotal has faded into the didactic

^{page 128 note 44} Ps 15₁, 24₃ which would read: Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? etc. He that hath clean hands, etc. He shall ascend into the hill of the Lord, he shall stand in His holy place. Similarly also Ps 15.

^{page 128 note 45} Ps 15₅, 24₅: Who shall carry away a blessing from the Lord and strength from the God of his salvation? He that hath clean hands etc. He shall carry away a blessing from the Lord etc. Similarly in Ps 15. For ṣ^edāḳā, strength, victory, success, prosperity cf. Is 45_8.24 54₁₇ Pr 8₁₈.

^{page 128 note 46} Cf. the biblical portions or codices written (b. Yoma 38^a, cf. Yer. Meg. II 2 f. 73^a and Perles, F., Analekten, München 1895 p. 8 f.)Google Scholar and preserved in the Genizah of Cairo, see Kahle, P., Masoreten des Westens, Stuttgart 1930, vol. II p. 88 ff.Google Scholar See also the recent suggestions of Slotki, I. W., Typographic Arrangement of Ancient Hebrew Poetry, ZAW, 1931, p. 211 ff.Google Scholar and on Ps 24 in: JBL 51, 1932, p. 214 ff., also Montgomery, James A., Notes on the Mythological Epic Texts from Ras Shamra, Philadelphia 1933, p. 4 (= JAOS v. 53, p. 100).Google Scholar

^{page 128 note 47} Ewald, Delitzsch, more recently Staerk and Kittel thought of the days of David (II Sa 6_12ff) which is objected to by Gunkel p. 104: “aus sehr alter Zeit.., immerhin dürfen wir nicht an die Zeit Davids oder Salomos denken, da der Tempel schon als ‘uralt’ gilt.” See however Ps 110₄ Jer 17₁₂ about continuity of pre-Israelitish memories of the site, or cf. Harry Torczyner l.c. p. 41 and 63 who sees here reference to the heavenly abode. Ps 24₁₀ (cf. II Sa 6₂) and in Ps 24_7ff. (cf. I Sa 4_21f. I Re 8₁₁) suggest to most scholars the existence of the ark, and hence certainly preexilic date; Mowinckel, Ps. St. II p. 190 f.; ib. V p. 60; Le Déc. p. 151. Gunkel l.c. rightly dismisses Stade's eschatological interpretation (in his: Akademische Reden 1899 p. 70) renewed JBL 52, 1933 p. 175 ff.

^{page 129 note 48} The oldest worship of the synagogue included the decalogue (see Tamid V, 1 and Ismar Elbogen, Der jüdische Gottesdienst, Frankf. a. M. 1924 p. 24) which was later in days of primitive Christianity omitted: cf. Yer. Berakot I, 8 f. 3°; b. Berakot f. 12^a.

^{page 129 note 49} Cf. Mi 1_6ff and Sellin, Zwölfprophetenbuch³ p. 306 ff. Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 152, citing his Jesajadisiplene, Oslo 1926 p. 141 f. denies the genuineness of Mi 6–7, assigning it to an Isaiah disciple in the days of Manasseh. On the other hand, Is 33 is postulated l.c. p. 151 f. to antedate the exile and reach back to the Assyrian era (cf. also his “Die Komposition des Jesaiabuches,” in: Acta Orientalia XI, 1933 p. 280, but also p. 284 and 290)Google Scholar, while Gunkel ZAW 42, 1924 p. 177 f. thinks of the early fifth cent., Buhl, Jesaia₂ 1912 p. 430 of the later Persian period, Procksch, Jesaia I p. 425 of about 300 B.C., still later Duhm, Jesaia³ p. 214 and Julius A. Bewer, The Literature of the O. T. p. 422 f. In any case, the ritual of entry is to be regarded according to Mowinckel l.c. p. 152 also as certainly completed “au plus tard vers 700 avant J.-Chr.; mais il peut aussi être sensiblement plus ancien.”

^{page 129 note 50} Cf. Jos 7₆ Jud 20₂₆ 21₂ 1 Sa 7₆ I Re 8₃₃.

^{page 129 note 51} 1 Re 21_9.12 Jer 36₉ Joel 1₁₄ etc.

^{page 129 note 52} Joel 2₁₅.

^{page 129 note 53} I Sa 7₅ Joel 2₁₆ Jon 3₅ Ezra 8₂₁ II Chr 20₁₃.

^{page 129 note 54} Esth 4₃.

^{page 129 note 55} Hos 7₁₄ Is 22₁₂.

^{page 129 note 56} Jos 7₆ Joel 2₁₃.

^{page 129 note 57} Jer 4₈ Jon 3_5f. Ps 35₁₂.

^{page 130 note 58} Is 58₅ Mi 6₄ Ps 69₁₁ cf. Margolis, ZAW 31, 1911, p. 314.

^{page 130 note 59} Jer 6₂₆ Neh 9₁.

^{page 130 note 60} Joel 2₁₄ Jon 3₉.

^{page 130 note 61} To which reference is made in Hos 6₆, see also Ju 20₂₆ 21₄ 1 Sa 7₉ Jer 14₁₂. Is 1₁₁ and Mi 6_7f (cf. 2 Re 16₃ and Is 7₂) are often interpreted as presupposing the frantic sacrifices in days of calamity.

^{page 130 note 62} See 1 Sa 14_38ff or II Sa 21_1–14.

^{page 130 note 63} Thr 3₄₀.

^{page 130 note 64} Joel 2₁₃.

^{page 130 note 65} Mišna Ta'anit II 1, Tos. ib. I 8, all old customs. cf. e.g. the and 1 Re 21_9.12.

^{page 130 note 66} i.e. Lev. 26 and Dt 28, cf. Miš. Megilla III 6, Tos. ib. IV 9. The custom of reading on historic fast days the sections Ex 32_11ff and 34_1ff prefacing the so-called cultic dodecalogue dates from geonic times, see Elbogen l.c. p. 164.

^{page 130 note 67} Johs. Pedersen, Israel, London 1926 p. 349. On the primary meaning of mišpāṭ cf. Ludwig Köhler, Die hebräische Rechtsgemeinde, Zürich 1931 p. 9.

^{page 130 note 68} See the use of šālōm and b^erîth, words of different origin and scope, yet employed interchangeably I Re 5₂₆ Ps 55₂₁; Pedersen l.c. p. 285.

^{page 131 note 1} Clearly recognizable by its first words, cf. I Sa 9₉ Is 2₃ = Mi 4₂ Ps 95₁.

^{page 131 note 2} Comp. the use of here and in 14₃ with I Re 8₃₃ Joel 2₁₂ Thr 3₄₀ Is 9₁₂ = 2 Chr 20₃ Ps 78₃₄ = as in Hos 5₁₅, cf. also 7₁₀ and 5_6.15; and perhaps 7₁₄ 8₂ and 6₃, though in the latter passage not altogether in the narrower cultual, but wider religious, ethical or legal sense as in 4₁, cf. Jer 22₁₆, as often the best commentator of Hos! See now also Krause, ZAW 50, 1932 p. 238 ff. who rendering Am 4_6ff. 5₄ too literally as a call to the worship in Zion only (Am 1₂) makes him a precursor of Ps 87₂.

^{page 131 note 3} For the use of misconstrued by H. Schmidt l.c. p. 121, cf. Is 30₂₆ Jer 6₁₄ (8₁₁) 30₁₇ Thr 2₁₃ 2 Chr 7₁₄ 30₂₀ et fr.

^{page 131 note 4} So rightly interpreted by the rabbis, b. Berakot 6^b. The words need not be emended (against Sellin³ p. 72) nor interpreted as portraying shallow or sham repentance, against Ewald, Smith, G. A. et al., also David Rosin, in Zunz Jubelschrift, Berlin 1884 p. 54.Google Scholar

^{page 131 note 5} Gunkel, Psalmen, p. 16, 114, 548 and Einl. p. 131. Characteristic of the Vertrauenspsalm is the third person and the jussive instead of the direct apostrophe and imperative of prayer cf. Ps 3, 4, 11, 23, 27, 62 or Mi 7_7ff.

^{page 131 note 6} Only the “want of connection between the prayer and what follows it,” as G. A. Smith l.c. p. 264 admirably states, earned for the poem 6_1–3 the designation of a Leichtsinnspsalm and for the faith expressed therein the censure: “Leichtglaube ohne sittliches Gewicht,” see Procksch, l.c.; Paul Humbert, Osée le prophète bédouin, Revue d'hist. et de philos. relig. 1, 1921 p. 116 f.; Harper l. c. p. 280, 283 et al. As soon as the prophetic rejoinder 6_4ff. is detached, as is wrongly done by Lindblom l. c. p. 82, the easy religiousness of the psalm is gone.

^{page 132 note 7} This translation is erroneous as is also the reference to II Re 9₃₂ Am 4₈ Is 17₆ (against Wellhausen, G. A. Smith, Harper et al.). The numbers do not express vaguely, as in the above parallels: in two, three days, but specify exactly one definite date: after two days, on the third day. The preposition has the force of cf. Gen. 4₃ and Jud 11₄ etc., and the use of the asyndeton is more frequent in Hos than in any other book of the O. T.

^{page 132 note 8} Kleine Propheten³ p. 116.

^{page 132 note 9} Adonis und Esmun, Leipzig 1911 p. 409 f.; cf. also Humbert, l.c. p. 117; Julius Rieger l.c. p. 93 and H. G. May, The Fertility Cult in Hosea AJSL 48, 1932, p. 75 where Hos 5₁₃–6₃ is conceived as a unit and called “a satire on the normal cult reaction.”

^{page 132 note 10} See H. Schmidt l.c. p. 121 f.

^{page 132 note 11} Sellin³ p. 72.

^{page 132 note 12} Hans Schmidt and Paul Kahle: Volkserzählungen aus Palästina, Göttingen 1918, 115, 16; 203, 8. H. Schmidt l.c. p. 122.

^{page 132 note 13} Gen. r. § 56 and 91 interprets our scripture quite correctly when drawing there-from and from examples of biblical history the assurance: The difficult passage in Am 4₄ may contain the similar customary duration of pilgrimages to Bethel and Gilgal, if the prophet is describing, in an ironical vein, the offerings brought on the morning after arrival at the sanctuary and the large gifts left on the third day, before the parting benediction. Every morning or every third day, as the passage is sometimes rendered, would seem to require either the plural (Ps 73₁₄) or the repetition (I Chr 9₂₇). See Nowack ad loc. and Harper l.c. p. 92 ff. 94. Cf. also Ex 19_{10f. 15} cited by Schmidt l.c. who mentions as possible also the interpretation of Hos 6₂ in the simpler sense of duration of penance. Gen. 42₁₈ Jos 2₁₆ I Re 12₅ Jon 2₁ Ezr 8₁₅ 10_6.8.9. would show the popularity of the interval in folk-tale, custom and cult. Cf. ἁγνεύσας ἡμέρας τρεῖς (Kenyon, Greek pap. I, 1893, p. 108) and other parallels quoted by E. Fehrle l.c. p. 157.

^{page 133 note 14} See Midraš Tanḥuma, ad Gen 42₁: cf. also b. Mo'ed ḳaṭan 21^b or else Gen. r. § 50 ad 50₁₀ (corrected but seldom by the identical versions Lev. r. § 18 ad 15₁, Eccl. r. § 12 ad 12₆, Yer. Mo'ed ḳaṭan III 82^b, Yer. Yebamot XVI 15^c, b. Šabbat 151^b): This physiological observation made independently by various peoples (see Baudissin l.c. p. 413 f.) would explain the interval of mourning; the customs of fast in Hos 6₂ would repeat, as often, funebrial rites.

^{page 133 note 15} Comp. I Sa 31₁₃ II Sa 1_11f. Jer 6₂₆ 7₂₉ and Hos 7₁₄ Is 22₁₂; also in the customs of the synagogue cf. Mas. Sōf^erîm XVIII, 4 ff. ed. J. Müller, Leipzig 1878 p. 255 ff.

^{page 133 note 16} Dt 9_18.25 Jos 7₆ Ezr 10₁ Neh 1₄; Is 29₄ Jer 3₂₅ 13₁₈ 14₂ Ps 44₂₆ 119₂₅; all night also II Sa 12₁₆ Joel 1₁₃. For cf. II Sa 12_17.20; Ezra 9₅ Jos 7₁₀.

^{page 133 note 17} Cf. Ps 33₁₉ 22₂₇ Gen 47₂₅ and the kindred idiom Thr 1₁₁ I Sa 30₁₂.

^{page 133 note 18} Hence in prayers also figuratively Ps 71₂₀ 85₇ as the similar use of and in Ps 60_3f. See above note 3.

^{page 133 note 19} Both folk and prophet seem to point deictically to the rising sun 6_3.5 which the imagery in 6₄ likewise confirms. Hence Giesebrecht's emendation in: Beiträge zur Jesaiakritik 1890 p. 208: on the basis of εὐρήσομεν αὐτόν in the Sept., adopted by many critics (Harper p. 283, G. A. Smith, Guthe l.c., Sellin³ p. 72, H. W. Hertzberg, Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 43, 1932 p. 525, et al.) is no improvement.

^{page 134 note 20} See e.g. Ju 20_23.27 and the detailed description of the ritual in II Chr 20_3.14ff. Ps 60₈ is a good example, for also presupposing penance after a defeat: Hugo Winkler, Gesch. Isr. II p. 204 ff. thinks of Davidic times, so also Mowinckel, Ps. St. III p. 67, later in Ps. St. VI p. 92 preferring the Solomonic era; Ps 60₂ would thus not be utterly devoid of correct historic information, cf. now the very clever vindication of biblical superscriptions by Torczyner, Harry, Das literarische Problem der Bibel, ZDMG 85, 1931, p. 287 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 134 note 21} Cf. Ps 20₇ spoken at the sacrifice (v. 4), also Ps 132_11ff. in answer to prayer or sacrifice (cf. v. 10). About the oracle in the cultus see Friedr. Küchler, Das priesterliche Orakel in Israel und Juda, in: Baudissin Festschrift, Giessen 1918 p. 297 ff.; Mowinckel, Ps St. III. Kultprophetie und prophetiscbe Psalmen, Kristiania 1923, p. 23 ff. The bible contains some twenty examples of prophetic liturgies in which the folk-lament is followed by an oracle, cf. Gunkel ZAW 42, 1924, p. 195.

^{page 134 note 22} See Ju 21₄ after a penance and II Re 3₂₀ also when seeking help and oracle, ib. vs. 11 ff. and Jos 7_6.16. For the morning sacrifice cf. Gen. 28₁₈ Ex 24₄ 29₃₉ 32₆ Lev 6₅ Nu 28₄ II Re 16₁₅ Am 4₄ Ez 46₁₃.

^{page 134 note 23} Ps 5₄ 57₉ 59₁₇ 88₁₄ 108₃ Sir 47₁₀.

^{page 134 note 24} Gunkel, Das Märchen im A. T., Tübingen 1921, p. 70.

^{page 134 note 25} Ps 130₆ 90₁₄ 143₈, see also Ps 46₆ and Is 26₉ where the Sept. reads ϕῶς = “as light are thy judgments to earth,” see William Popper, The Prophetic Poetry of Isaiah, Berkeley 1931, p. 195. To enforce and bring to light justice is one of the functions of all oriental sun-gods: hence the frequent association of light and right Is 58₈ 62₁ Ps 37₆ cf. also Ps 30₆ Is 17₁₄; perhaps also the customs of secular law II Sa 15₂ Jer 21₁₂ Job 29_7LXX.

^{page 134 note 26} Ps 119_25.147 (read as in vs. 81 and 114 and cf. Ps 44₂₆) yearns as in Hos 6₂ for the reviving word, cf. the similar use of and in vs. 25 and 28, and of in Ps 107₂₀ Is 57_15.18f. where the metaphor is taken from the bent and bowed down in fast days (cf. Ps 119₁₀₇). Ps 80₁₉, a north-Israelitish psalm, hence also a good parallel to Hos, is generally mistranslated or needlessly altered (against W. Staerk, Schr. d. A. T. in Auswahl III 1² Göttingen 1920 p. 144 and Gunkel, Psalmen p. 351); the verse is to be rendered much alike Gen 32₂₇, the latter happening indeed at dawn: We will not retreat from thee (i.e. leave the sanctuary) lest thou bless us! Cf. the refrain Ps 80_4ff. and Nu 6₂₅, also the passages quoted above note 18.

^{page 135 note 27} Hans Schmidt, Das Gebet der Angeklagten im A. T., Giessen 1928 p. 23 ff. interprets Ps 3₆ 5₄ 17₁₅ 27₄ (emending ) 57₉ and 139₁₈ as showing that the exoneration of the indicted and detained in the temple (I Re 8_{31 f}) took place in the morning. See also R. Press, ZAW 51, 1933 p. 139 f.

^{page 135 note 28} Lev 9_{22 f}. I Sa 2₂₀ II Sa 6₁₈ I Re 8_{54 f}.; the worshippers rising for the benediction ib. v. 14 and Neh 8_5f. See B. Jacob, Beiträge zu einer Einleitung in die Psalmen, ZAW 16, 1896, p. 149 ff.

^{page 135 note 29} Cf. II Sa 12₁₃, Mat 9₅.

^{page 135 note 30} Jer 36_6.9.19.26, cf. also Jer 26 and the allusions to the decalogue in 7₉ as if to say: you should be barred from entrance to the sanctuary altogether! See Ps 50_{15 ff}. and chap. III, text and note 34.

^{page 135 note 31} For example Jer 3₂₂ = Hos 14₅, Jer 4₃ = Hos 10₁₂, Jer 14₁₀ = Hos 8₁₃. In his review of my Ezekiel or Pseudo-Ezekiel? (repr. from Harv. Theol. Rev. 24, 1931, p. 247 ff. esp. p. 297) the lamented Dr. A. Zifroni (in Lešōnēnū v. 4, Tel Aviv 1932, p. 248–252) rightly detected in Jer 31_27f. a commentary upon Hos 2₂₅. See also Gross, K., Die literarische Verwandtschaft Jeremias mit Hosea, Leipzig 1930 p. 32 f.Google Scholar complemented in Neue Kirchliche Zeitschr. 42, 1931 p. 241 ff., 327 ff.

^{page 135 note 32} That is the meaning of here and in Hos 10₃, cf. I Sa 14₆ = and in the frequent oath II Sa 3₂₅ etc.

^{page 136 note 33} Comment. on Hos 6₆. Again Jer 14₁₀ (2₂₇ 3_4f.) may serve as a parallel.

^{page 136 note 34} See the Targum: the Sept.: τὸ κρίμα μου ὡς ϕῶς, the Syriac: even some MSS. of the Vulgate: judicium meum.

^{page 136 note 35} One can also translate with Diodati: “the law which I have given thee for a rule” or with the Geneva Engl. Bible: “my doctrine” (both cited by Pococke, l.c. p. 308) or with L. W. Batten, JBL 11, 1892 p. 209 “my religion.” Note the connotation of help in cf. 1 Sa 24₁₆ II Sa 18_19.31 et fr., also Hos 5₁₁: stripped of its right, helpless.

^{page 136 note 36} Cf. Zeph 3₅ Is 51₄ and Job 12₂₂ 28₁₁. See also the kindred similes in ancient oriental literature cited by L. Dürr, in: Sellin Festschrift p. 44 ff., esp. the references to the Hammurapi code where aṣû = is used for both sunrise and law promulgation. Against Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 53 f.

^{page 136 note 37} See Albrecht Alt, Neue Kirchl. Zts. 1919 p. 563.

^{page 136 note 38} See its impeachment or deletion by Wellhausen, Nowack, Duhm, Praetorius, Alt, Schmidt et al., ch. I notes 11, 12, 23 and 34.

^{page 137 note 39} Cod. Alex, ἐν πέτραις ἐνγλυϕῆναι which calls to mind: σὐ κληθήσῃ Κηϕᾶς John 1₄₂ Mt 16₁₈ and the midraš based on Is 51₁ where God says of Abraham: I have found a rock to build on it and to establish the world; Yalkut Šime'oni on N um 23₉ from Yelammedenu.

accad. kâpu, aram. and cf. Targ. Ps. 118₂₂ for Targ. Nu 23₉ for and Targ. Yer. Dt. 32₁₃ for Significantly the word occurs in the language of Hosea's kinsman Jer 4₉ where (cf. also Job 30₆) is to be interpreted as in I Sa 13₆ Is 2_19.21 Jer 16₁₆. See also Sir 40₁₄. The word has been conjectured into the difficult I Sa 13₂₁ though with little luck, cf. Caspari, W., Die Samuelbücher, Leipzig 1926, p. 158Google Scholar and the recent treatment of the passage by Auerbach, Elias, Wüste und Gelobtes Land, Berlin 1932 p. 175.Google Scholar

If the noun be an aramaism, the dialect of our book exhibits also otherwise similar influence: Hos 5₁₃ 8₁₂ 10_5.14 11_3.8.9 12₂ which is but natural with so kindred a language and so frequent contacts in peace and war, cf. I Re 20₃₄ Am 3₁₂ (see A. Weiser, Die Prophetie des Amos, Giessen 1929 p. 150, differently H. G. May, PEFQS 65, 1933 p. 88 f.); II Re 13_3.7 Am 1₃; Is 9₁₁ Hos 7₉; II Re 16₅ Is 7₂ Hos 5₁₁. See also Martin Noth, Die israelitischen Personennamen im Rahmen der gemeinsemitischen Namengebung, Stuttgart 1928 p. 43 who finds the formation of names in the imperfect (e.g. I Re 22_8f. or Is 8₂) in the later period of kings inexplicable unless borrowed from the Aramaic. Early Aramaic letters were found on the back of ivories from Samaria, discovered in a stratum full of Israelite potsherds of the eighth and ninth cts. B.C. Their workmanship is closely related to the ivory inlays of a bed of Hazael of Damascus cf. Am 3₁₅ 6₄ and J. W. Crowfoot, PEFQS 64, 1932 p. 132 f. and 65, 1933 p. 18, also JPOS 13, 1933 p. 124. Much water has flown the Jordan since the days of E. Kautzsch, Die Aramaismen im A. T., Halle a. S. 1902 p. 42 and 104, who believed an aramaism to be “immer eine starke Instanz für die Ansetzung des betreffenden Abschnittes in exilischer oder nachexilischer Zeit” — as has been indeed attempted with Hos 6₁ ff., see intr. note 4.

^{page 137 note 40} is construed with or in analogy with the similar Is 30₈ Job 19₂₃ or Ex 32₁₆ or Jer 17₁ and Dt 27₈. Indeed = ṣḥf is in Ethiopic the regular verb for write, borrowed also from south-semitic usage in the Arabic maṣḥaf for a copy of the Koran; see Fraenkel, Siegmund, Die aramäischen Fremdwörter im Arabischen, Leiden 1886, p. 248Google Scholar and idem, Zum sporadischen Lautwandel in den semitischen Sprachen, in: Beiträge zur Assyriologie, v. III, 1895, p. 69; cf. also the mediaeval Hebrew codex, taken over from the Arabic, e.g. P. Kahle, Masoreten des Westens Stuttgart 1927 I, p. 3.

^{page 137 note 41} Sellin³ p. 23; cf. Enno Littmann, Zum wechselnden Rhythmus in der hebr. Poesie, in: Zeitschr. f. Semit. 2, 1924 p. 272 ff. and Gunkel, ib. p. 148.

^{page 137 note 42} The corruption of M. T. is palpably patent in 5c “which is nonsense,” G. A. Smith l.c. p. 221. The misreading of but a single, hardly distinguishable letter ( for ), facilitated by the rarity of the noun kēf and the frequency of the lectio facilior ('al-)kēn, gave the verse at once the character of a threat and led almost inavoidably to its misdivision and corruption: for bann^ebî'îm became the object or instrument of ḥāṣabtî and thus made any salutary meaning in the second verb inappropriate.

In restoration of the second verb one thinks naturally of the confusion of and often mistaken for each other in both the old Hebrew alphabet and the square character (cf. Friedr. Delitzsch, Die Lese- und Schreibfehler im A. T. Berlin 1920 p. 105 ff.) and attested to in the Sept. to our book alone 15 times. A slight transposition of letters, frequent in our book (cf. Hos 10₉) would give I have declared or revealed, cf. Dt 4₁₃ Mi 6₈ Jer 42₃. For the construction with = by the agency of, cf. Hos 12₁₄ (also 1₇ 14₄) Jud. 7₇ I Sa 14₆, in the ancient judicial formula Gen 9₆ and most esp. in connection with the deity Dt 33₂₉ Is 45₁₇ Ps 18₃₀ 44₆ 60₁₄. The final of the verb, though it could be retained and explained by the changes of address traced by Lindblom l.c. in ‘revelatory’ style, is probably a dittogram or adaptation to the foregoing word. Another guess would be cf. Ex 33₁₃ (also Nu 12₆) Jer 11₁₈ and Ez 20₁₁, the latter both in language and thought a very instructive parallel and hence rightly cited along the traditional lines of exegesis by older critics, see Rosenmüller l.c. p. 198. As to the construction cf. Ju 8₁₆ emended by some as in Ju 8₇, but see I Sa 14₁₂ Jer 16₂₁. Klostermann's cf. Ex 24₁₂ Hos 10₁₂ and for construction Job 27₁₁, used of seers as well as of priests Ex 4₁₂ I Sa 12₂₃ Is 9₁₄, could also be thought of. But the assonance liked by Hos (e.g. 2₇ 8₇) does not speak in its favor.

^{page 138 note 43} Which is forbidden even by 'al-kēn if it were properly used, see about the conjunction S. D. Luzzato in vol. VIII Vienna 1827 p. 137.

^{page 138 note 44} Cf. the good old Pococke l.c. p. 303: “The words import great affection and trouble of bowels (if we may say so) in him that utters them and shew him to be loath to do what he is forced by the waywardness of them whom he hath to deal with.”

^{page 139 note 45} Ex 24₁₂ 31₁₈ 32_15f. 34_1.28 Dt 4₁₃ 5₁₉ 9₁₀ 10₄ I Re 8₉. For a novel interpretation of Dt 27₂ ff. and Jos 8₃₂ cf. B. Gabirol, Die zehn Gebote ursprünglich eine Felsinschrift? in: Arch. f. Religionswiss. 25, 1927 p. 221 f.

^{page 139 note 46} Teachings such as I Sa 15_{22 f}. or Am 5_{24 f}. are here thought of. The association of Mose and Samuel as in Jer 15₁ and Ps 99₆, cf. also the midrašic fancy in b. Ta'anit 5^b connecting our verse with Samuel. About the authenticity of I Sa 15_{22 f}. doubted by Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 99 f., see W. Caspari, Samuelbücher, p. 176; Rud. Kittel, Die Rel. des Volkes Israel², Lpz. 1929, p. 64.

^{page 139 note 47} b^e'imrê-fî (cf. Jos 24₂₇) suggests as in Mi 6₈ Jer 7₂₂ reference to Ex 20_{1 ff}. Alt l.c. refers it to Hosea's own prophecies.

^{page 139 note 48} The interpretation of the conjunction in as privativum (Sellin³ p. 75) is forbidden by Hos 3₄ or 9₄. Cf. when in doubt, Hosea's best commentator Jer 7₂₃!

^{page 139 note 49} A good parallel to our poem is Ps 95 consisting also of a song of pilgrims, though not elegiac as in Hos, but hymnic in character, and of a rejoinder, almost a rebuke of the cult-prophet. The difference in mood between the two parts has led to a similar dissection into independent units (by Nowack and Cheyne) as in Hos 6_1–6. Ps 81, combining also folk-song and cult-oracle and a good example of the use of the decalogue (see vs. 10 f.) in the worship of northern Israel, ends in the sad, though not hopeless optative (vs. 14 f.) which could conclude as well Ps 95 or Hos 6_4ff.: “O that my people had hearkened unto me! I should soon have subdued their enemies.”

^{page 139 note 50} Hos 8_1.3 cf. the equation Am 5₄ = 5₁₄; see also Hos 5₁₂ 7_8f. 8₈ 9_2.16—all signs of a society dried of the source of life (cf. Ps 36₁₀), or sapped of all ‘weight’ or worth of soul, hence ‘light’ or cursed, see Joh. Pedersen, Der Eid bei den Semiten, Strassburg 1914 p. 80.

^{page 140 note 1} Mose und seine Zeit, Göttingen 1913, p. 471 ff.

^{page 140 note 2} Geschichte des Volkes Israel, Gotha 1923 v. I⁵ p. 383 f. 445 ff.

^{page 140 note 3} Mose und seine Bedeutung für die isr. jüd. Gesch. 1922; Einl. in d. A. T.⁵, Leipzig 1929 p. 25 f.; Isr. jüd. Religionsgeschichte Lpz. 1933 p. 22.

^{page 140 note 4} Die neuesten Verhandlungen über den Dekalog, in: Neue Kirchl. Zeitschr. 17, 1906, pp. 565–584; Das Deuteronomium, Leipzig 1917 p. 91 ff.

^{page 140 note 5} See now the second ed. of his: Mose und sein Werk, Tübingen 1932 p. 23 ff.

^{page 140 note 6} Die Elohimquelle, Leipzig 1906, p. 371.

^{page 140 note 7} Die Schichten des Deuteronomiums, Leipzig 1914 p. 159 f. and ZDMG 79, 1925 p. 99.

^{page 140 note 8} Mose und der Dekalog, in: Gunkel Festschrift 1923 pp. 78–119.

^{page 140 note 9} Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 113 assigns Dt 5 to about 600 and Ex 20 to about 450 B.C. Neither was ever used in worship, hence the consistent reference to “l'usage cultuel des décalogues primitifs dans le culte,” p. 131 et fr.

^{page 140 note 10} i.e., reproduction of the drama of the cultus in the language of historic myth: present-day rites and symbols of the people are projected back into legendary antiquity. See now the criticism of Buber, M., Königtum Gottes, Berlin 1932 p. 120 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 140 note 11} Hist krit. Einleitung in die Bücher des A. T. v. I² p. 233.

^{page 140 note 12} Skizzen und Vorarbeiten 1884, I p. 68; Isr. jüd. Geschichte, 1897 p. 11 f. 30 f. Prolegomena 1899 p. 349.

^{page 141 note 13} Gesch. d. Volkes Israel 1887 I p. 58, 457, 584; Bibl. Theologie des A. T. p. 36 f.

^{page 141 note 14} Lehrbuch d. alttest. Religionsgeschichte² Leipzig 1899 p. 16, 273.

^{page 141 note 15} Geschichte der althebr. Litteratur, Leipzig 1906, p. 95, 100.

^{page 141 note 16} Geschichte der israel. Religion⁴, Strassburg 1903 p. 68.

^{page 141 note 17} Der erste Dekalog, in: Baudissin Festschrift 1918 p. 381 ff.

^{page 141 note 18} Lehrbuch der Einleitung in das A. T., Tübingen, 1912 p. 259 ff.; Das Deuteronomium², Göttingen 1923 p. 29.

^{page 141 note 19} Einführung in das A. T.² Giessen, 1926 p. 103 and 188 ff.; Der Dekalog, Giessen 1927.

^{page 141 note 20} Geschichte der isr. und jüd. Religion, Giessen 1922, p. 130. For additional literature on the decalogue see Smith, J. M. Powis, The Origin and History of Hebrew Law, Chicago 1931, p. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 141 note 21} Der Dekalog, in: Theol. Rundschau N. F. I, 1929, pp. 159–184.

^{page 141 note 22} See ib. p. 178 f. The quest for a single author is dismissed by Köhler “weil jeder Dekalog seiner schriftellerischen Art nach unpersönlich ist.” If Shiloh had no immediate pre-Israelitish occupation, 1 Sa 21₅ (cf. ib. 14₃ 22₁₁) would suggest that the Israelite tōrōt of entry mirror not Canaanitish rites (Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 155) but their own pristine and pre-Palestinian traditions. See Alt, Der Gott der Väter, Stuttg. 1929 p. 64. However, the latest brief campaign at Shiloh produced numerous sherds from Late Bronze, cf. BASOR 48, 1932 p. 14 f. and QDAP III 1933 p. 180.

^{page 141 note 23} Stade, Biblische Theologie, p. 37; Meinhold, Einführung², p. 7, 102 and Der Dekalog p. 31; Aug. Gampert, Le Décalogue, in: Revue de Théologie et de Philos., n.s. 14, 1926, p. 201 f.

^{page 142 note 24} Paul Vetter, Die Zeugnisse der vorexilischen Propheten über den Pentateuch, II. Hoseas, in: Theol. Quartalschrift 83, 1901 p. 102 and Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 55.

^{page 142 note 25} Jer 32₁₈ Sir 1₂₆ 24₂₃ or Hos 8₁₂ 12₁₁ 14₃ as pleaded by Sellin, Mose, p. 23 f. 36 f., 39 ff., the emendation of the last passage is however revoked in Zwölfprophetenbuch³ p. 138.

^{page 142 note 26} About the difficulties of chronology, esp. about the duration of the reign of Pekah, see Joachim Begrich, Die Chronologie der Könige von Israel und Juda, Tübingen 1929 p. 103 ff. and S. Mowinckel, Die Chronologie der isr. und jüd. Könige, Leiden 1932 (= Acta Orientalia 10, p. 213 ff.).

^{page 142 note 27} Cf. also Hos 14₂ otherwise rare in classical prophecy: Am 9₁₅ Is 7₁₀ 37₄, see Procksch, Jesaia I, p. 119. Cf. also Umberto Cassuto, in: Livre d' hommage a la mémoire du Dr. Samuel Poznanski, Warsaw 1927 p. 129, and his recent treatment of Hosea and the decalogue in: Abhandlungen zur Erinnerung an H. P. Chajes, Vienna 1933, p. 268 ff. of the Hebrew part.

^{page 142 note 28} Gunkel Festschrift, p. 103, cf. also R. H. Charles, The Decalogue, Edinburgh 1923 p. xlviii f. Note that the allusions to the decalogue are made by the author of Hos 12₁₄ and 11₁ 9₁₀ 2₁₇ and of the frequent 8₁₃ 9₃ 11₅ (cf. Dt 17₁₆ 28₆₈).

^{page 143 note 29} G. A. Smith l.c. p. 220; Harper p. clxxiii.

^{page 143 note 30} Notes on the Books of Samuel, Oxford 1913 p. xi.

^{page 143 note 31} Cf. Gunkel, Zeitschr. f. Semit. 2, 1924 p. 146: “Der einzelne Abschnitt ist oft schwer genug zu erfassen, aber er tritt nicht selten sofort in helles Licht, sobald wir seine Verwandschaft mit anderen bemerkt haben: Wir gewinnen ein neues Mittel, Verderbnisse des Textes zu heilen.”

^{page 143 note 32} See the discussion in chapter III and notes 30 and 49 of chapter IV.

^{page 143 note 33} What seemed an awkward third of parallelism led to a transfer of the verse by Marti and Procksch (cf. n. 3 of chapter I), by F. E. Peiser, Hosea, Lpz. 1914 p. 25 and Mowinckel, Le Déc. p. 54 n. 1 or to its deletion by Ruben (cf. n. 15 and 16 of chapter I) and more recently by Lindblom, l.c. p. 85: “5c stört den Zusammenhang und ist als falscher Bestandteil des Textes auszuscheiden.”

^{page 143 note 34} See note 42 of Chapter IV.

Postscript: Since the completion of this paper, some pertinent discussion has appeared. W. Baumgartner, Der Auferstehungsglaube im Alten Orient (in Zts. f. Missionskunde u. Religionswiss. 48, 1933, p. 212 f.) finds the imagery of Hos. 6₂ f. borrowed “offenbar von der Auferstehung eines Gottes am dritten Tage …, für Osiris, Attis, und wohl auch für Tammuz bezeugt.” See above, ch. IV, notes 9 and 14. Unconscious pagan survivals in the Israelitish customs of mourning are naturally not to be denied. But Hos. 6₂ militates no more against them than Jer. 22₁₈ (34₅).

In the recent issue of the JPOS 14, 1934, pp. 1–42, Karl Budde discusses with accustomed thoroughness Hos. 5₁–6₆. Since ḥāṣab “bedeutet überall nur die Arbeit des Steinmetzen” (ib. p. 38 f.), Oettli's emendation is adopted in 6₅: m^eḥaṣtîm. See above, ch. I. n. 3. As to the date of the prophecy, Budde also places Hos. 5_8–10 in the last phase of the Syro-Ephraimitish war, assigning 5₁₁–6₆ to an earlier period, “wohl näher bei 738 als bei 735” (ib. p. 41). He must, however, emend all the four references to Judah in 5_12.13.14 and 6₄ (ib. p. 26).

Article contents

A Prophetic Attestation of the Decalogue: Hosea 6:5 With Some Observations on Psalms 15 and 24

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests