Table Of ContentThe hand of The lord
The hand of the lord
by Patrick d. Miller Jr. and J. J. M. roberts
The hand of The lord
a reassessment of the “ark
narrative” of 1 Samuel
Patrick d. Miller Jr.
J. J. M. roberts
Society of Biblical literature
atlanta
The hand of The lord
Copyright © 2008 by the Society of Biblical literature
all rights reserved. no part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by
means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permit-
ted by the 1976 Copyright act or in writing from the publisher. requests for permission
should be addressed in writing to the rights and Permissions office, Society of Biblical
literature, 825 houston Mill road, atlanta, Ga 30329 USa.
library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data
Miller, Patrick d.
The hand of the lord: a reassessment of the “ark narrative” of 1 Samuel / Patrick d.
Miller, Jr., J. J. M. roberts.
p. cm.
originally published: Baltimore : Johns hopkins University Press, c1977, in series:
Johns hopkins University. near eastern Studies.
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBn 978-1-58983-294-7 (paper binding : alk. paper)
1. Bible. o.T. Samuel, 1st, II, 12–VII, 1—Theology. 2. ark of the Covenant. I. rob-
erts, J. J. M. (Jimmy Jack McBee), 1939– II. Title.
BS1325.52.M55 2008
222'.4306—dc22 2007036001
16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 5 4 3 2 1
Printed in the United States of america on acid-free, recycled paper
conforming to anSI/nISo Z39.48-1992 (r1997) and ISo 9706:1994
standards for paper permanence.
ConTenTS
Preface .....................................................................................................................vii
abbreviations .......................................................................................................viii
1. Introduction to the Study ...................................................................................1
2. The extent of the narrative ..............................................................................27
3. exegesis of 1 Samuel 2:12–17, 22–25, 27–36 .................................................37
4. exegesis of 1 Samuel 4 ......................................................................................43
5. exegesis of 1 Samuel 5 ......................................................................................53
6. exegesis of 1 Samuel 6 ......................................................................................69
7. The Structure and Intention of 1 Samuel 2:12–17, 22–25,
27–36; 4:1b–7:1 ..................................................................................................79
appendix ................................................................................................................95
Bibliography .........................................................................................................107
Index ...............................................................................................................113
PrefaCe
This book had its inception out of the coincidence that both authors inde-
pendently and within a short period presented papers on aspects of the
so-called “ark narrative” to The Colloquium for old Testament research
(Miller) and The Biblical Colloquium (roberts). each of us had an oppor-
tunity to hear or read the other’s paper. The discovery that we had pursued
different aspects of the passage within a common understanding of its
nature and purpose that did not generally correspond to the scholarly
consensus about these chapters led us to combine efforts in a larger study
of this important unit that would give due attention to the illumination of
it by reference to comparative materials, to the careful exegesis of its com-
ponent parts, and to an overall analysis of its theological character.
The work presented here is a joint effort in the full sense of the term.
While each author necessarily had to prepare basic drafts of parts of the
book, both authors participated fully in the shaping and content of all
parts. The accomplishment of such a cooperative literary and scholarly
endeavor has turned out to be more feasible and enjoyable than we had
expected and encourages us about the possibility and usefulness of such
team projects.
We would like to express our gratitude to The Johns hopkins Univer-
sity Press and the editors of the The Johns hopkins near eastern Studies
for including this volume in that distinguished series.
-vii-
aBBreVIaTIonS
The abbreviations used in this work follow the style sheet of the Journal of
Biblical literature. Biblical works not listed in that work are cited accord-
ing to the index of abbreviations given in otto eissfeldt’s standard The
Old Testament: An Introduction (trans. P. r. ackroyd; new York: harper &
row, 1965), 854–61. assyriological works are cited according to the Chi-
cago Assyrian Dictionary or r. Borger’s Handbuch der Keilschriftliteratur
(3 vols.; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1967–1875).
-viii-
1
InTrodUCTIon To The STUdY
In light of the two monographs on the ark narratives of 1 Samuel recently
published by franz Schicklberger1 and antony Campbell,2 one may well
question the need for a new monograph on the same topic. Certainly their
work has rendered some aspects of the typical monograph redundant in
this case. Schicklberger’s summary3 and especially Campbell’s survey4 of
the earlier investigation of the ark narratives are adequate and need not
be repeated as an introduction to our own analysis of the narratives. even
on the more detailed level, Schicklberger’s critique5 of leonhard rost’s
basic study6 is cogent enough that one need not rehash rost’s views before
proceeding to an explication of one’s own. Moreover, one must commend
both Schicklberger and Campbell for following up a potentially fruitful
insight of M. delcor.7 They again call attention to the extrabiblical texts
concerning the capture and return of divine images8 that delcor had noted
as providing possible parallels to the biblical ark narratives.9 This open-
ness to the broader cultural context in which Israel’s faith developed could
freshen up a scholarly discussion grown stale within the narrow confines
1. Die Ladeerzählungen des ersten Samuel-Buches, Eine literaturwissenschaftliche und
theologiegeschichtliche Untersuchung (forschung zur Bibel 7; Würzburg: echter, 1973).
2. The Ark Narrative (1 Sam 4–6; 2 Sam 6): A Form-Critical and Traditio-Historical
Study (SBldS 16; Missoula, Mont.: SBl and Scholars’ Press, 1975).
3. Ladeerzählungen, 11–12, 17–25.
4. Ark Narrative, 1–54.
5. Ladeerzählungen, 11–17.
6. leonhard rost, Die Überlieferung von der Thronnachfolge davids (BWanT 111/6;
Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1926); reprinted in rost’s Das kleine Credo und andere Studien
zum Alten Testament (heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1965), 119–253.
7. M. delcor, “Jahweh et dagon ou le Jahwisme face à la religion des Philistins, d’après
1 Sam. V,” VT 14 (1964): 136–54.
8. Schicklberger, Ladeerzählungen, 149, 181–86; Campbell, Ark Narrative, 179–91.
9. VT 14 (1964), 138.
-1-
2 The hand of The lord
of internal biblical analysis. Scholarly discussion of the ark narrative has
undoubtedly suffered from a strange lack of interest in extrabiblical paral-
lels10—a point to which we must return.
nevertheless, while Schicklberger and Campbell have made our work
easier, they have not made it unnecessary. We cannot accept the radically
different literary-critical analysis of either author, and given that basic
disagreement, it is not surprising that we must also reject much of their
form- and genre-critical analyses, as well as their views on the date and
intention of the narrative. Moreover, neither Schicklberger nor Campbell,
as refreshing as their use of the comparative material is, exploits fully the
valuable insights these sources provide.
Schicklberger
Schicklberger’s analytic work is quite original and will require a detailed
discussion.
The Katastrophenerzählung
The key element in Schicklberger’s interpretation is his isolation and
interpretation of 1 Sam 4:1a(lXX)b, 2–4, 10–12, 13 (without whnh ‘ly yšb
‘l hks’), 14b–18a, 19–21 as an old, relatively complete, “novelistic catas-
trophe narrative.”11 he bases this analysis first of all on literary-critical
observations that suggest the separation of 1 Sam 4 from the following
10. hugo Gressmann is one of the very few commentators of any note, prior to
delcor, who cites parallels (Die älteste Geschichtsschreibung und Prophetie Israels [SaT 2/1;
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & ruprecht, 1921], 16), and they are all quite late, if not remote.
Most scholars after Gressmann seem to have given up the search for comparative material.
leonard rost’s treatment of the ark narrative—the only one ever to achieve even a limited
consensus—totally ignores the question of literary parallels, and few of his later critics have
improved on him in this regard. even such thoroughgoing myth-and-ritual partisans as
Sigmund Mowinckel (The Psalms in Israel’s Worship [2 vols.; new York: abingdon, 1962],
1:175–76) and aage Bentzen (“The Cultic Use of the Story of the ark in Samuel,” JBL 67
[1948]: 37–53) have been content with quite general comparisons between 2 Sam 6 and
the cultic rites and processions associated with the Babylonian new Year festival. even less
understandable is the lack of interest recent commentators have shown in delcor’s paral-
lels. hans Joachim Stoebe, for instance, cites delcor’s work and then proceeds to ignore it
in his exegesis of 1 Sam 5–6 (Das erste Buch Samuelis [KaT 8/1; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1973],
138ff.).
11. Ladeerzählungen, 42, 70, 177.
