We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Chapter 5 describes the rhetorical and theological relationship between the Elijah/Elisha narratives and the greater book of Kings, both the Solomon stories on one hand (1 Kings 1–11) and the episodes dealing with Israel’s and Judah’s political demise on the other (2 Kings 9–25). It argues that Elijah and Elisha become the “hereditary carriers” of two theological concepts introduced through Solomon: the hope that children might surpass their ancestors in life-giving wisdom and that the temple might provide a durable paradigm through which to imagine Yhwh’s ongoing care for Israel’s land and people together. In this sense, Elijah and Elisha “prophetize” the Davidic promise of 2 Samuel 7, showing that Yhwh responds to sin with a power capable of reversing death. The chapter likewise maintains that a series of Davidic kings – Joash, Hezekiah, and Josiah – “re-royalize” the two prophets’ characteristic acts of resurrection and other forms of life preservation as depicted in 1 Kings 17–2 Kings 8. Because Elijah functions as their typological ancestor, these prophet-kings become the seeds through which Israel’s redemption after catastrophe might be imagined.
In Chapter 9, Strand BIII reflects the historical Sitz im Leben of the source in the Neo-Babylonian Period (the reigns of Nabopolassar and the early years of Nebuchadnezzar II). The author of this strand incorporated echoes of the events connected to the demise of the Assyrian Empire. More particularly, these echoes reflect the following events: a) the wars of the Babylonians under Nabopolassar on Assyrian soil from 616 to 609 BCE, during which the Babylonians devastated the heartland of Assyria and conquered its Western provinces, thus sealing Assyria’s demise; and b) the subsequent campaigns of the Neo-Babylonian Empire under Nebuchadnezzar II, during which the Babylonians crossed the Euphrates and conquered the Levant (605–598/7). The struggle between Assyria and Egypt over the Levant is omitted. During the siege of Jerusalem between 588 and 586 BCE, the people of Jerusalem decided to oppose the besieging Babylonians and not surrender. Jerusalem withstood a siege for a far longer time than any of the nations listed in Isa 37:12–13, namely during the conquests of the Neo-Babylonian Kings. Therefore, the people of Jerusalem could claim that God was protecting them and Jerusalem.
The question of the priority of Isa 36–37 over 2 Kgs 18–19 or vice versa has been raised in research for many years. There are numerous variations between the parallel texts. In comparing the Kings and Isaiah versions, Gesenius concluded that the Kings version was the original setting of the Hezekiah-Isaiah narratives. This view began to change with the study of Ackroyd. Profiting from Ackroyd’s work, Smelik raised several arguments for the primacy of the Isaiah text.
In Chapter 10, I present the differences created by the process of transmission. In the second part of the chapter, I present the results of the text-critical investigation according to the new proposal to divide the comprehensive text into sources A, BI, BII, and BIII. Most of the variations can be explained as a result of the attempt to integrate the different sources into one coherent narrative. In most cases, it can be shown that the prior version was in Isaiah; the editor of Kings attempted to hide the coarse stitches in the final narrative.
In Chapter 5, it is shown that Source BI reflects the events and atmosphere during the days of the Assyrian campaign of Sennacherib in 701 BCE. The Assyrians devastated Judah in Sennacherib’s third campaign – a claim corroborated by 2 Kgs 18:14–16; Mic 1:10–16 and Isa 1:4–9, and the extensive archaeological excavations and surveys of the Judean kingdom. 2 Kings 18:14–16 (source A) preserves an account of Hezekiah’s subjugation to Sennacherib and payment of an enormous tribute. Hezekiah’s submission occurred, according to the biblical narrative, at the beginning of Sennacherib’s campaign against Judah. Following the payment, Sennacherib sent his envoys to demand Hezekiah’s capitulation. The Assyrian annals describe the total submission of Hezekiah and a victory over his Egyptian allies. Hezekiah remained king of Judah and was not punished. The original Source BI, portraying the events during the 701 campaign, did not contain a description of an Assyrian defeat nor of the murder of Sennacherib, which occurred twenty years after his campaign to the Levant.
In Chapter 12, I investigate the intertextual relations between Isa 36–37 and the rest of the book of Isaiah. First, Isa 36–39 uses terminology that is characteristic of the entire book of Isaiah. The question arises if these terms are characteristic of Isaiah son of Amoz, and later authors and redactors embraced them, or whether these terms stem from a later hand, and a later redactor inserted them into Proto-Isaiah. Secondly, the intertextual relations between Isa 36–39 and Proto-Isaiah are investigated. I focus primarily on the so-called Denkschrift (Isa 6:1–9:6, and esp. Isa 7), Isa 20, and Isa 31. Thirdly, the suggestion that Isa 36–39 was originally part of an independent scroll, which contained historical narratives about Isaiah (Isa 7; 20; 36–39), is evaluated. Lastly, the claim that Isa 36–39 is a literary bridge between Proto-Isaiah and Deutero-Isaiah is explored.
Isaiah 36–39 was not always a literary unit. Initially, the chapters deal with different historical events. The historical setting of Isa 38 and 39 is in the time of Sargon II (possibly 711 BCE). At some point in time, Isa 36–37 were joined to Isa 38 and 39, which were consequently moved to the end of the unit. This newly created block of stories about Hezekiah and Isaiah was inserted as a self-contained and coherent literary unit in the book of Isaiah (Isaiah 36–39) and the book of Kings (2 Kgs 18:13–20:19).
Previous scholars noticed the differences between the versions of Isa 38, 39 and 2 Kgs 20. Isaiah 38 diverges significantly from 2 Kgs 20:1–11. The differences between Isa 39 and 2 Kgs 20:12–19 are minor. The stages of redaction in these chapters are similar to the stages, which were identified in Isa 36–37. Source BI and Strand BIII, as well as the deuteronomistic redactor of Kings, can be detected. A late redactor added Hezekiah’s prayer in Isa 38:9–20. Verses 21–22 were possibly added to ch. 38 at a later stage by Trito-Isaiah.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.