Urbanization in Eighth Century B.C.E Jerusalem: Causes and Effects
I. Introduction
Urbanization is a modern phenomenon that is affecting traditional ways of life around the globe as persons move from the countryside to the city for a number of different reasons, largely economic. Urbanization has a large effect on the traditional ways of life in societies where it occurs. While it is accelerated today, research shows that it also happened in ancient times and Judah was no exception. In the time period of the ancient Hebrew kingdoms (tenth-sixth centuries B.C.E.), urbanization occurred for a few different reasons that are similar to the causes of urbanization today: 1) Government Policy: The king moved rural populations into fortresses and urban centers. This was done for strategic reasons and to take advantage of an economic asset. 2) Globalization: Israel was pulled into the orbit of more powerful neighbors and people moved into the city (or were moved) to take advantage of new opportunity. 3) Refugees: In the wake of the destruction of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and most of Judah by the Assyrians, refugees flooded into Jerusalem for protection, and due to the destruction of their traditional homes and ways of life.
II. Archaeological Evidence for Increased Urbanization in Eighth-Sixth Centuries B.C.E. Jerusalem
The nature of Jerusalem at the time of the United Monarchy as recorded in the Bible and how that relates to the archaeological record is a contentious point of debate in Old Testament scholarship. Scholars such as Niels Peter Lemche, drawing upon the work of Jamieson-Drake, sees no developed political entity in Judah during the tenth century B.C.E. What we have in the Biblical Text is a pious fiction written during the Persian-Hellenistic period. [1] P. R. Davies writes that, “One result of the events of the political and religious events of the 6th and 5th centuries was the creation of ‘biblical Israel’ itself.” [2]
Other archaeologists, such as Israel Finkelstein, are more moderate, but still dismissive of the biblical witness of a united monarchy based in Jerusalem in the tenth century B.C.E., saying that the archaeological data support an emergence of a state in Northern Israel in the ninth century B.C.E., and a state in Judah in the eighth. Before then, Jerusalem was a small town, and nothing more. [3] In a vein skeptical of the Biblical text as theologically and ideologically driven, but still valuable as a historical source to a significant degree, William Dever writes, “While the Hebrew Bible in its present, heavily edited form cannot be taken at face value as history in the modern sense, it nevertheless contains much history.” [4] Elsewhere, Dever challenges the positions of radical revisionists that say that Biblical Israel is simply a pious fiction, and writes, “once again, the arguments of Thompson and other revisionists treat the archaeological data selectively and cavalierly. Their obvious bias makes one suspect that we are dealing here with a tendentious ideology, not honest, competent scholarship.” [5]
Still others accept the biblical record as more or less reflective of the archaeology of tenth century B.C.E. Jerusalem, writing that although the archaeological remains of Jerusalem at that time are not extensive, it is still representative of a fortified capitol of a polity similar to what is described in the Bible. [6] Others in this vein reflect that the archaeological record confirms what is recorded in the Bible, and where the Bible does not reflect the archaeological record, then there are reasons why, such as subsequent destructions and rebuilding obscuring that record. The Bible is basically accurate history. [7]
Concerning Jerusalem in the eighth century B.C.E., however, Iron Age IIB, archaeologists are in relative agreement: Starting in the second half of the eighth century B.C.E. through its destruction by the Babylonians in the early sixth century B.C.E., Jerusalem expanded not only into the seat of a regional polity, but into a large residential city. The only difference here is a matter of scale concerning the expansion, and some discussion concerning its causes. What follows is a description of the size of Jerusalem in the eleventh-tenth (Time of the United Monarchy) centuries B.C.E. and in the eighth-sixth centuries B.C.E.
In the time of the United Monarchy, Jerusalem was limited to the small mound associated with the City of David, at its largest possible extent, about 12 Hectares and holding up to 2000 inhabitants. [8] Starting in the mid eighth century B.C.E., Jerusalem began to grow and continued to do so until the Babylonians destroyed it in the early sixth century B.C.E.
From a conservative view that this presentation is taking, Jerusalem was the royal and religious center of the United Monarchy, and this is consonant with the biblical text. This center, during the time of the United Monarchy, held about six percent of the Judean population.
In the early eighth century B.C.E. new fortifications were built in the southeastern section of the City of David. These fortifications were abandoned in the following century. This represented a growth of about 15-20 percent.
Toward the end of eighth century B.C.E., there was a huge expansion onto the western hill, entirely encompassed by a broad, defensive wall. By this time, the city had expanded from thirty-forty thousand square meters in David’s time to about three-hundred thousand in the late eighth century. At this time, Jerusalem contained about twenty-four percent of the Judean population.
III. Causes of the Urbanization
Biblical scholars and archaeologists point to three basic causes for the urbanization of Jerusalem.
1) The urbanization trend was due to natural expansion and the emergence of Jerusalem as the main city of the kingdom of Judah in the late ninth and early eighth centuries B.C.E. This population increase caused Jerusalem to expand eastward, increasing its size by 15-20 percent. [9]
2) Jerusalem entered into the Assyrian Empire’s economic sphere due to Judah’s friendly relations with Assyria in the last third of the eighth century B.C.E., which turned Jerusalem into an important trade hub. [10]
3) The most explosive growth was due to refugees of the destruction of the Northern Kingdom and refugees from the subsequent destruction of 85 percent of the settlements of the Judean hinterlands by Sennacherib after Hezekiah’s revolt. [11] In addition to the people from the countryside being dislodged from patrimonial lands by Sennacherib’s invasion, there is archaeological evidence that Hezekiah himself moved much of the rural population into more urban centers and fortresses. [12] The proactive centralization of populations by Hezekiah and that which occurred as reaction to Assyrian aggression destroyed the traditional structure of Judean society.
2) Jerusalem entered into the Assyrian Empire’s economic sphere due to Judah’s friendly relations with Assyria in the last third of the eighth century B.C.E., which turned Jerusalem into an important trade hub. [10]
3) The most explosive growth was due to refugees of the destruction of the Northern Kingdom and refugees from the subsequent destruction of 85 percent of the settlements of the Judean hinterlands by Sennacherib after Hezekiah’s revolt. [11] In addition to the people from the countryside being dislodged from patrimonial lands by Sennacherib’s invasion, there is archaeological evidence that Hezekiah himself moved much of the rural population into more urban centers and fortresses. [12] The proactive centralization of populations by Hezekiah and that which occurred as reaction to Assyrian aggression destroyed the traditional structure of Judean society.
IV. Effects of Urbanization on the Religion and Culture of Judah and Jerusalem
1) After destruction of Northern Kingdom and Judean Shephelah, Jerusalem became a large residential city, and areas previously sparsely inhabited to the south and East of Jerusalem and the western coastland (Negev and less desirable farmland) became populated to the breaking point with settlements every 4-6 km.
2) There is both archaeological and biblical evidence for an increased stratification of society and an undermining of traditional patrilineal society. This led to higher class differentiation and intensified individualism with accompanying oppression. (Micah 3:10)
3) Individualism: Shebna’s Tomb, Ezekiel 18; Jer 31:27-30
With increased urbanization and stratification of society came increased individualism. The urbanization also undermined the traditional, patrilineal, extended family that was clan based on an ancestral land.
2) There is both archaeological and biblical evidence for an increased stratification of society and an undermining of traditional patrilineal society. This led to higher class differentiation and intensified individualism with accompanying oppression. (Micah 3:10)
3) Individualism: Shebna’s Tomb, Ezekiel 18; Jer 31:27-30
With increased urbanization and stratification of society came increased individualism. The urbanization also undermined the traditional, patrilineal, extended family that was clan based on an ancestral land.
The individualism and class stratification formed a synergy that altered traditional family connections. This is nowhere more powerfully depicted than in the change of Iron Age burial practices in which elites made tombs for themselves separate from traditional family tombs. [13] See for example, Isa 22:15-19, in which judgment is pronounced against the royal official Shebna for having a tomb built for himself apart from what would be his traditional family tomb, thus undermining traditional family ties and claims to a patrimony. [14] It also displays foreign, Egyptian influence on beliefs about death and afterlife. [15]
Another effect of the weakening of family ties and an increase in individualism is a shift in views concerning individual (in distinction to corporate and familial) responsibility for sin. Whereas in the clan-based theology before what can be properly called an urban upheaval and unsettling of traditional life in Judah, punishment was often corporate, and the ones who hated God were rooted out to the fourth generation (Exod 20:5, Deut 5:9), Jeremiah and Ezekiel argued that God would only punish the God hater’s offspring if they were evil, as well (Ezek 18:1-32, Jer 31:27-31). [16] With the radical change in social structure came a revisioning of some fundamental ways that God dealt with the corporate family and the individual.
4) Although there is evidence of literacy and writing in Israel from an early period, in the eighth century B.C.E., it explodes, and there is evidence for literacy and a prizing of writing to varying degrees at all levels of society. A production of a national literature through which a society attempts to recapture a golden age is prevalent throughout the ancient Near East at this time. It is helpful to view this as a reaction to trauma and a reorientation of life after the extreme disorienting event of the destruction of much of Judah by Sennacherib’s invasion. This started the reorientation of ancient Israelite religion into a book religion. This reorientation would continue and intensify throughout the post-exilic period. [17] Although there were religious texts before then, of course, the disruption of traditional ways of life on which such a family and land based religion moved the text into the center as the society sought to reconstruct identity and meaning.
V. Hezekiah’s Response to the Crisis in Second Chronicles
How does the biblical narrative portray the leadership of Judah’s response to this crisis of identity that occurred in Ancient Judah? 2 Chron 29:24 shows King Hezekiah’s concern for “all Israel.” [18] This not only reflects the concerns of the Post Exilic community that produced Second Chronicles, but also reflected a realistic concern of Hezekiah overseeing a situation in which the disparate and displaced peoples of Israel and Judah now living together had to form a new, unified identity. [19] His incorporating repentant remnants of the Northern Kingdom into the Celebration of the Passover portrayed in 2 Chron 30:1-31:1 can be seen as the forming of a new kinship based on shared religious tradition, which can be seen as a replacement for the institutional structures that were destroyed by the Assyrians. [20] These institutions would have been increasingly based on the nascent Hebrew Bible that is beginning to come into shape at this time. [21] In the place of land and ancestry, worship focused on Scripture and a central temple would become more prominent. [22]
VI. Takeaway
The takeaway from a survey of the urbanization of Jerusalem and its causes is that the Bible not only responds to urbanization and its effects, both positive and negative, but is even largely a product of those large forces that drove it. Urbanization has irrevocably changed the social landscape of our globalized world, and as people of biblical faith, we can turn to the Bible and the response to the urban crisis that it records in order to inform our own.
The urbanization in eighth century B.C.E. Jerusalem occurred for similar reasons that urbanization occurs today. Jerusalem became the capital of a regional power, and due to administrative decisions by leaders for strategic and economic reasons, it grew. Also, similar to the globalization process today, Jerusalem got caught by the economic gravity well of a major power, Assyria, and benefited due to its friendly relationship, and suffered horribly when they became adversaries. Both the benefit and suffering drove urbanization to varying degrees.
The urbanization, especially the dramatic urbanization brought on by Assyrian aggression, altered Judah’s religious and social structures. This was done by Hezekiah’s proactive response that centralized religious life and the Judean populace, and in the Judeans’ forced migration as the Assyrians ravaged the land of Judah. Israelite society became more individualistic and stratified. Literacy dramatically increased. Hezekiah’s response helped establish a kinship based on a common religious heritage based increasingly around Scriptures and a central sanctuary, replacing a tradition that was based on the land and ancestry.
Endnotes
1. Niels Peter Lemche, Israelites in History and Tradition. Westminster John Knox Press, 1998, accessed August 12, 2011, EBSCOhost eBook collection.
2. Philip R. Davies, “The Origin of Biblical Israel,” in Essays on Ancient Israel in Its Near Eastern Context. A Tribute to Nadav Na’aman (Eds, Yairah Amit, Ehud Ben Zvi, Israel Finkelstein and Oded Lipschits; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns), 147.
3. Israel Finkelstein, “State Formation in Israel and Judah: A Contrast in Context, A Contrast in Trajectory.” Near Eastern Archaeology 62, no. 1 (1999), 35-52, accessed August 12, 2011, ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost.
4. William G. Dever, What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 97.
5. Dever, Biblical Writers, 44.
6. Amihai Mazar, . 2006. “Jerusalem in the 10th Century B.C.E.: The Glass Half Full,” in Essays on Ancient Israel in Its Near Eastern Context. A Tribute to Nadav Na’aman (Eds, Yairah Amit, Ehud Ben Zvi, Israel Finkelstein and Oded Lipschits; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 255-72; Joe Uziel and Itzaq Shai, “Iron Age Jerusalem: Temple-Palace, Capital City,” JAOS 127.2 (2007): 161-170.
7. See, for example, the discussion in Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2003), 137-58.
8. Margaret Steiner. “Jerusalem in the Tenth and Seventh Centuries BCE: From Administrative Town to Commercial City,” in Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan (ed. Amihai Mazar; JSOTSup 331; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 283.
9. Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron, “The Urban Development of Jerusalem in the Late Eighth Century B.C.E.,” in Jerusalem in Bible and archaeology: the First Temple period (ed. Andrew G. Vaughn and Ann E. Killebrew; SSBL 18; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 216. See Nadav Na’aman’s response to Reich and Shukron, Nadav Na’aman, “When and How Did Jerusalem Become a Great City? The Rise of Jerusalem as Judah’s Premier City in the Eighth-Seventh Centuries B.C.E.,” BASOR347 (2007), 38-40.
10. Israel Finkelstein, “Jerusalem in the Iron Age: Archaeology and Text; Reality and Myth,” inUnearthing Jerusalem: 150 Years of Archaeological Research in the Holy City (ed. Gideon Avni and Katharina Galor; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 194. See also, Finkelstein, “The Rise of Jerusalem and Judah: The Missing Link,” in Jerusalem in Bible and archaeology: the First Temple period (ed. Andrew G. Vaughn and Ann E. Killebrew; SSBL 18; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 82-83. For a good glimpse at how close the relationship between Assyria and Judah became, see Stephanie Dalley, “Recent Evidence from Assyrian Sources for Judaean History
from Uzziah to Manasseh,” JSOT 28.4 (2004), 387-401. Jerusalem was important for the Assyrian trade routes from Egypt.
11. Finkelstein, “Jerusalem in the Iron Age,” 195; Finkelstein, “Rise of Jerusalem,” 101; William Schniedewind, How the Bible Became a Book (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 66-73; Reich and Shukron, “Urban Development,” 217. See, however, Nadav Na’aman who argues that it is unlikely that refugees from the Northern Kingdom would have been allowed to flee to Judah if it was faithful vassal of Assyria at the time, which it was, due to extradition clauses that commonly existed in ancient Near Eastern treaties. He argues that if Judah harbored refugees from the Northern Kingdom, Assyria would have had a strong response. Also, Na’aman deconstructs the arguments of scholars who argue that there was such a migration. See Na’aman, “When and How,” 31-38.
12. See Baruch Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages in Seventh-Century BCE: Kinship and the Rise of Individual Moral Liability,” in Law and Ideology in Monarchic Israel (JSOTSup 124; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 26-27. In conjunction with this centralization of population into fortresses and urban centers, Hezekiah centralized the cult there, as well.
13. See Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages,” 71-72. For a complete overview of the archaeological and biblical evidence pertaining to Judean burial practices, see Elizabeth Bloch-Smith, Judahite Burial Practices and Beliefs About the Dead (JSOTSup 123; JSOT/ASOR 7; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992). Bloch-Smith writes that the family tomb was a physical marker to a family’s claim on the land (Bloch-Smith, Judahite Burial Practices, 111). A problem with Halpern’s interpretation of the biblical and archaeological data as he sees the “amputation of the ancestors” as deliberate on the part of Hezekiah to support his program of cultic and population centralization (Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages,” 73-74). It seems that this is an unfortunate result of a necessity. It is also important to remember that this was probably occurring at a slower pace as Judah was brought into the economic and political orbit of Assyria and people were moving to the urban centers for economic opportunity. After the Assyrian crisis was over, there is evidence that many Judeans went back to the countryside (See Na’amam, “When and How,” 40-42), but no doubt irreparable damage was done to the old social structures. This is remarkable as it is analogous to the globalization and urbanization dynamic that is occurring today in the majority world. As majority world societies are brought into the political and economic orbit of economic powers such as the US and China, social structures in the majority world are changed.
14. Or does this represent family ties that have already been substantially undermined?
15. For this interpretation of Isa 22:15-19, see Christopher B. Hays, “Re-Excavating Shebna’s Tomb: A New Reading of 22,15-19 in its Ancient Near Eastern Context,” ZAW 122 (2010), 558-75.
16. Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages,” 11-13.
17. See William Schniedewind, How the Bible Became a Book (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 68-75.
18. Leslie C. Allen, “The First and Second Books of Chronicles,” in New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 3 (ed. Katharine Doob Sackenfeld; Nashville: Abingdon, 2011). Accessed 6/05/2014, Ministry Matters.
19. I am interpreting the 2 Chronicles passage in light of the realities on the ground reflected in the archaeology surveyed in the paper.
20. At this point, it really doesn’t matter whether or not Nadav Na’aman’s view that Northern Kingdom exiles would have been accepted as refugees into the Southern Kingdom. Hezekiah is clearly in violation of the treaty he had with Assyria, or is getting ready to do so. The celebration of the Passover with the faithful remnant of the Northern Kingdom is just as easily a tradition that the Chronicler has faithfully rendered(for his own rhetorical purposes, of course), as his own invention. See J. Barton Payne, “1 and 2 Chronicles,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 4 (ed. Frank E. Gabelein; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1988), 533.
21. The reign of Hezekiah can be seen as a time of the consolidation and codification of much of the earlier portions of the Hebrew Bible. This process would continue into the Persian and Hellenistic periods.
22. The text would move even further into the center of ancient Israelite religion in the reign of Josiah.
2. Philip R. Davies, “The Origin of Biblical Israel,” in Essays on Ancient Israel in Its Near Eastern Context. A Tribute to Nadav Na’aman (Eds, Yairah Amit, Ehud Ben Zvi, Israel Finkelstein and Oded Lipschits; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns), 147.
3. Israel Finkelstein, “State Formation in Israel and Judah: A Contrast in Context, A Contrast in Trajectory.” Near Eastern Archaeology 62, no. 1 (1999), 35-52, accessed August 12, 2011, ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost.
4. William G. Dever, What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 97.
5. Dever, Biblical Writers, 44.
6. Amihai Mazar, . 2006. “Jerusalem in the 10th Century B.C.E.: The Glass Half Full,” in Essays on Ancient Israel in Its Near Eastern Context. A Tribute to Nadav Na’aman (Eds, Yairah Amit, Ehud Ben Zvi, Israel Finkelstein and Oded Lipschits; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 255-72; Joe Uziel and Itzaq Shai, “Iron Age Jerusalem: Temple-Palace, Capital City,” JAOS 127.2 (2007): 161-170.
7. See, for example, the discussion in Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2003), 137-58.
8. Margaret Steiner. “Jerusalem in the Tenth and Seventh Centuries BCE: From Administrative Town to Commercial City,” in Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan (ed. Amihai Mazar; JSOTSup 331; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 283.
9. Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron, “The Urban Development of Jerusalem in the Late Eighth Century B.C.E.,” in Jerusalem in Bible and archaeology: the First Temple period (ed. Andrew G. Vaughn and Ann E. Killebrew; SSBL 18; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 216. See Nadav Na’aman’s response to Reich and Shukron, Nadav Na’aman, “When and How Did Jerusalem Become a Great City? The Rise of Jerusalem as Judah’s Premier City in the Eighth-Seventh Centuries B.C.E.,” BASOR347 (2007), 38-40.
10. Israel Finkelstein, “Jerusalem in the Iron Age: Archaeology and Text; Reality and Myth,” inUnearthing Jerusalem: 150 Years of Archaeological Research in the Holy City (ed. Gideon Avni and Katharina Galor; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 194. See also, Finkelstein, “The Rise of Jerusalem and Judah: The Missing Link,” in Jerusalem in Bible and archaeology: the First Temple period (ed. Andrew G. Vaughn and Ann E. Killebrew; SSBL 18; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 82-83. For a good glimpse at how close the relationship between Assyria and Judah became, see Stephanie Dalley, “Recent Evidence from Assyrian Sources for Judaean History
from Uzziah to Manasseh,” JSOT 28.4 (2004), 387-401. Jerusalem was important for the Assyrian trade routes from Egypt.
11. Finkelstein, “Jerusalem in the Iron Age,” 195; Finkelstein, “Rise of Jerusalem,” 101; William Schniedewind, How the Bible Became a Book (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 66-73; Reich and Shukron, “Urban Development,” 217. See, however, Nadav Na’aman who argues that it is unlikely that refugees from the Northern Kingdom would have been allowed to flee to Judah if it was faithful vassal of Assyria at the time, which it was, due to extradition clauses that commonly existed in ancient Near Eastern treaties. He argues that if Judah harbored refugees from the Northern Kingdom, Assyria would have had a strong response. Also, Na’aman deconstructs the arguments of scholars who argue that there was such a migration. See Na’aman, “When and How,” 31-38.
12. See Baruch Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages in Seventh-Century BCE: Kinship and the Rise of Individual Moral Liability,” in Law and Ideology in Monarchic Israel (JSOTSup 124; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 26-27. In conjunction with this centralization of population into fortresses and urban centers, Hezekiah centralized the cult there, as well.
13. See Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages,” 71-72. For a complete overview of the archaeological and biblical evidence pertaining to Judean burial practices, see Elizabeth Bloch-Smith, Judahite Burial Practices and Beliefs About the Dead (JSOTSup 123; JSOT/ASOR 7; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992). Bloch-Smith writes that the family tomb was a physical marker to a family’s claim on the land (Bloch-Smith, Judahite Burial Practices, 111). A problem with Halpern’s interpretation of the biblical and archaeological data as he sees the “amputation of the ancestors” as deliberate on the part of Hezekiah to support his program of cultic and population centralization (Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages,” 73-74). It seems that this is an unfortunate result of a necessity. It is also important to remember that this was probably occurring at a slower pace as Judah was brought into the economic and political orbit of Assyria and people were moving to the urban centers for economic opportunity. After the Assyrian crisis was over, there is evidence that many Judeans went back to the countryside (See Na’amam, “When and How,” 40-42), but no doubt irreparable damage was done to the old social structures. This is remarkable as it is analogous to the globalization and urbanization dynamic that is occurring today in the majority world. As majority world societies are brought into the political and economic orbit of economic powers such as the US and China, social structures in the majority world are changed.
14. Or does this represent family ties that have already been substantially undermined?
15. For this interpretation of Isa 22:15-19, see Christopher B. Hays, “Re-Excavating Shebna’s Tomb: A New Reading of 22,15-19 in its Ancient Near Eastern Context,” ZAW 122 (2010), 558-75.
16. Halpern, “Jerusalem and the Lineages,” 11-13.
17. See William Schniedewind, How the Bible Became a Book (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 68-75.
18. Leslie C. Allen, “The First and Second Books of Chronicles,” in New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 3 (ed. Katharine Doob Sackenfeld; Nashville: Abingdon, 2011). Accessed 6/05/2014, Ministry Matters.
19. I am interpreting the 2 Chronicles passage in light of the realities on the ground reflected in the archaeology surveyed in the paper.
20. At this point, it really doesn’t matter whether or not Nadav Na’aman’s view that Northern Kingdom exiles would have been accepted as refugees into the Southern Kingdom. Hezekiah is clearly in violation of the treaty he had with Assyria, or is getting ready to do so. The celebration of the Passover with the faithful remnant of the Northern Kingdom is just as easily a tradition that the Chronicler has faithfully rendered(for his own rhetorical purposes, of course), as his own invention. See J. Barton Payne, “1 and 2 Chronicles,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 4 (ed. Frank E. Gabelein; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1988), 533.
21. The reign of Hezekiah can be seen as a time of the consolidation and codification of much of the earlier portions of the Hebrew Bible. This process would continue into the Persian and Hellenistic periods.
22. The text would move even further into the center of ancient Israelite religion in the reign of Josiah.
No comments:
Post a Comment