Sunday, February 3, 2013

Crouch on Ezekiel: A Review


Article: C. L. Crouch, “Ezekiel's Oracles against the Nations in Light of a Royal Ideology of Warfare,” Journal of Biblical Literature 130 (2011): 473 – 492.


[A shorter version of this paper was submitted by Evangeline S. Santos to Prof. Sr. Miriam Alejandrino, OSB, under the course Prophetic Literature at the Divine Word Seminary, Tagaytay, 2nd sem, SY 2012-13]



If a human king's victory in a war1 is a reflection of the triumph of the divine king, how does a prophet explain the utter and devastating defeat of his people without conceding defeat in the divine realm? Crouch explores Ezekiel's use of mythological motifs and the oracles against the nations (OANs) as the prophet's attempt to explain the experience of exile in the light of pre-exilic royal military ideology and to reassert YHWH's claims to kingship.
     Crouch begins by discussing the studies of Christoph Auffarth and John B. Geyer. In a study on the creation theme in myth and ritual, Auffarth argues that Ezekiel's mythological allusions are ultimately directed towards a “subversive theological reinterpretation” (p. 474) of Babylon's New Year festivities in honor of Marduk.2 Auffarth contends that Ezekiel uses the mythological traditions of the foreign nations as a criticism directed outward, i.e., towards Babylon, and is an assertion of YHWH's triumph over chaos rather than Marduk's victory over Tiamat (pp. 474 – 475). However, Crouch counters that Ezekiel's message was internally-directed, “concerned not so much with the illegitimacy of the foreign forms of the tradition as with supporting the ongoing legitimacy of the tradition within the native Judahite tradition complex” (p. 476).
     In another study following the footsteps of Sigmund Mowinckel, Geyer proposes that the OANs form in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel (except Ezekiel 25) is connected to the cultic origins of the “Day of Yahweh”3 tradition, particularly the lament tradition. Geyer also further argues for the centrality of the enthronement of YHWH. However, Crouch criticizes that Geyer's study demands a context of liturgical celebration in the temple before Deuteronomic reforms were implemented, “which is patently not possible in the exilic context of Ezekiel” (p. 476), and presents a sociohistorical context that is mismatched to where “the relevant OAN material is found” (p. 477).
     For Crouch, the meshing of the “military endeavors of the human Judahite king” with Yahweh's defeat of chaos (from which YHWH's divine kingship arises) elucidates why Ezekiel used mythological motifs in a royal context (pp. 477 – 478). In the face of complete defeat (i.e., the destruction of the Davidic dynasty in light of the covenant promise), Ezekiel is obliged to reassert YHWH's claims to his status as divine king and creator—hence, the intended vindication as expressed in the OANs. Crouch sets out to reinforce “the link between the debasement of the nations and the vindication of Yahweh” by demonstrating that Ezekiel utilized “mythological traditions of Judah specifically and deliberately to affirm Yahweh's claims to kingship” (p. 479).
     Of the two dominant OANs, Egypt is discussed first. Described as a great dragon (NRSV), scholars are generally divided between the demythologized camp—of the “It’s-just-a-crocodile” perspective (Moshe Greenberg, Daniel I. Block, and Auffarth), and those who see the sea monster as representative of cosmic chaos (Lawrence Boadt).4 Crouch tends toward the latter.
     In claiming the creation and ownership of the Nile, Egypt is established as YHWH's primeval nemesis, therefore, YHWH has to reiterate his “royal authority over such manifestations of chaos” (p. 483). Crouch lays out the mythological evidence to convey this development: the assault on the great dragon evokes Job 40:25-32 and Enuma Elish IV 95-102; a “persistent and repeated use of language of the primeval waters” evinces the powers of chaos; and the drying up and containment thereof signal YHWH's victory. Echoes of the Garden of Eden and ANE parallelisms are also brought up.
     The net as a weapon (i.e., “In an assembly of many peoples I will throw my net over you...” [Ezek 32:3] vis-à-vis “Marduk trapped the eleven of Tiamat in his net...”5) is described as “one of the most deliberate allusions used in royal inscriptions to align the activities of the human king with those of the god (Enuma Elish IV 95).”6 It is a weapon of royalty indicating the king's clash with chaos.
     After Egypt, Crouch discusses Tyre. Being a coastal city, the geographic descriptions and mythological allusions are difficult to distinguish. Scholars are again divided: Greenberg and Block are on the demythologizing camp; H. J. Van Dijk and Margaret S. Odell are for the mythological.
     Historical and mythological language mix but a look at Eze 26:3 (“I will hurl many nations against you, as the sea hurls its waves”) shows how the second part immediately gives cosmic significance to the first part. In Eze 26:19-21, the oracle speaks of Tyre being “submerged by the waters of the cosmic flood, the abyss (tehom) or watery chaos from which the created world emerged at the beginning of time and to which it reverted at the great deluge (Gen. 1:2; 6-8),”7 followed by descent into the pit (sheol or the netherworld) from which there is no going back.
     Crouch states that the imagery of the net, the flood, and Tyre as a naked rock are indicative of chaos. The ship metaphor could have the cosmological meaning of Tyre being on the way to the depths of the primeval sea (Van Dijk). Auffarth postulates that boats were used in the processions of the New Year festival in Babylon; therefore, the destruction of the Tyre-ship would symbolize the end of Tyre's pretentions to having dominion over the sea—a power reserved for YHWH alone (Odell) (p. 486).
     As for the prince of Tyre, Van Dijk claims there is no allusion to Canaanite mythology but translates tynIëk.T' ~teäAx as “serpent of perfection” to concur with Edenic imagery in later verses (p. 486). In contrast, P.-M. Bogaert argues that this passage was directed to the high priest in Jerusalem.
    Overall, Crouch finds a consistent use of mythological motifs that identifies Egypt and Tyre with the forces of chaos over which YHWH had triumphed at creation.
   In the remaining OANs, there is an absence of mythological elements. Rather than accepting the view that the oracles against Ammon, Moab, Edom and Philistia were simply added to get the symbolic “seven” nations, Crouch observes a correlation between the nation's offense and corresponding punishment of Philistia and Edom. There is a three-fold use of ~q'n" (vengeance) in accusing the nation of its wrongdoing and a two-fold use when announcing judgment. The connection, however, is not clear in the first two oracles. In exploring the possibility of a principle of lex talionis underlining the OANs against Edom and Philistia, Crouch acknowledges the observations made by scholars (Wong and Miller). However, the relation between offenses and punishments are so loose, such connections might just be due to purposes of metaphorical consistency (Michael A. Fishbane) (see footnote 74, p. 490).
     One persuasive example of lex talionis is Egypt's forty-year exile declared in Ezek 29:13. Because the announcement of Egypt's restoration seems out of place amidst the more foreboding text, Crouch proposes this to be a later addition, among others (p. 491).
    Crouch concludes that Ezekiel's efforts to affirm the power of YHWH by means of cosmological imagery were perceived to have failed. A shift in strategy was thus the addition of passages describing the defeat of the nations under the principle of lex talionis (p. 492).
Methodology
  Ezekiel’s mythological motifs in the OANs are approached from sociohistorical perspective of pre-exilic royal military ideology, taking into account the varying mythological motifs across cultures of the ancient Near East when applicable.
    Crouch first analyzes and compares the mythological elements of the dominant OANs (Egypt and Tyre) before discussing the non-mythological oracles. Examination of selected texts (e.g., noting repetitions, applying exegesis to certain words) and intertextuality are used from time to time.
Critique
     Crouch seems well-grounded in current research and presents contrasting perspectives on various aspects of the study while setting forth his own arguments. The argument that the mythological motifs of Ezekiel’s OANs were a direct response to the theological threat posed to YHWH by Judah’s military defeat seems well supported and convincing.
    However, the article leaves unexplained why Crouch says Ezekiel's attempts to assert YHWH's kingship were perceived to have failed. Was Ezekiel perceived as a failure because his prophecies had not come true soon after he spoke? Or that people had not listened? Many prophets might be considered failures if measured by that criterion. The fact that the text has been preserved indicates that enough people were sufficiently affected to think Ezekiel worthy of conservation, which in itself seems to be an argument against the assumed (?) perceived failure.
     Due to this question, it is difficult to accept the proposition that Ezekiel introduced passages underlined by a lex talionis principle because of a perceived failure of assertion of YHWH’s kingship.
Findings
     Crouch gives persuasive arguments that the mythological motifs in the OANs of Ezekiel are an attempt to reassert YHWH’s claims to kingship in the light of royal military ideology. Since the human king’s success or failure was a reflection of what happened in the realm of the divine, Judah’s military defeat posed a crisis of faith which Ezekiel attempted to address. The latter part of the article, however, leaves one hanging in terms of the lex talionis proposition.
Reflection
     The prophet's unwavering faith in the face of a complete defeat is inspiring. The exile proved to be the cleansing fire that purified a remnant who would go forth with greater conviction in their identity as a covenant people of God. Echoing Qoheleth, it was a “time of death and a time of re-creation,”8 and Ezekiel was one of the prophets called to help in that re-creation.
     Similarly, trials in life serve to strengthen those who manage to go through the dark tunnel and emerge into a new day. Whether it is a challenge regarding our faith or our identity, a crisis can spur one to search for answers, to seek God when he seems silent, and to lament with that undercurrent of trust that God hears the cries of the brokenhearted and will answer in due time.
     One intriguing question is what happened to the nations against which Ezekiel prophesied. Israel and Egypt, both of which were promised different degrees of restoration, are the ones that still exist as nations today. It may not be a conclusion scholars would accept but theologically, we could surmise that historical events are weaved into the divine plan according to the Word of God.

Endnotes:
1 For the peoples of antiquity, “war was linked with religion. It was begun at the command of the gods, or at least with their approval, manifested by omens; it was accompanied by sacrifices, and conducted with the help of the gods who ensured victory, for which they were thanked by an offering of part of the booty...
Before Israel would march out to war “a sacrifice was offered to Yahweh (1 S 7:9; 13: 9, 12); most important of all, Yahweh was consulted (Jg 20: 23, 28; 1 S 14: 37; 23: 2, 4) by means of the ephod and sacred lots (1 S 23: 9f.; 30: 7f.) and he decided when to go to war. He himself marched in the van of the army (Jg 4:14; 2 S 5:24; cf. Dt 20:4).”
Note that “it was Yahweh who fought for Israel, not Israel which fought for its God,” at least before the establishment of the monarchy when the concept of “holy war” was “profaned” in the sense that the war, out of necessity, became a concern of the state. A human king led the people out to fight wars, sometimes in opposition to Yahweh's prophets who predicted disaster.
See “The Holy War,” chapter 5 in Ancient Israel: Social Institutions, Volume 1, Roland de Vaux, ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965), pp. 258-9; 262-3.

2  “...the New Year festival at Babylon was really a commemoration of the construction of the temple of Marduk in heaven after he had defeated Chaos and ordered the universe.”
See Sidney Smith, “The Practice of Kingship in Early Semitic Kingdoms,” in Myth, Ritual, and Kingship: Essays on the Theory and Practice of Kingship in the Ancient Near East and in Israel, ed. S. H. Hooke (London: Oxford University Press, 1958), p. 40.

3  The “day of Yahweh” before the exile was probably interpreted as “a day when Yahweh would come for a victorious battle” (Ancient Israel, p. 265); however, the exile marked a turning point as the day of Yahweh's victory became a day of his judgment and wrath instead. “With the fall of Jerusalem and the temple, the 'day' has already come and the prediction has been fulfilled...” (Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, s.v. “~AyÝ"  yôm”). On the other hand, Schuller asserts that the prophets proclaimed a bold victory despite the historical reality of defeat: “The final battle, still to come, would bring absolute victory on the Day of the Lord.” See Ellen Schuller, Post-Exilic Prophets (Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1988), p.89.

4  Blenkinsopp believes the crocodile imagery is appropriate to Egypt but rather than a demythologized animal, the great dragon is “one of those mysterious and fearful projections of monstrous evil” lurking in dark waters (waters = chaos).
See Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1990), pp. 128-9.

5  Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels: Laws and Stories from the Ancient Near East, rev. ed. (New York: Paulist Press, 1997), p. 16.

6  C. L. Crouch, War and Ethics in the Ancient Near East: Military Violence in the Light of Cosmology and History (BZAW 407; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2009). Cited in C. L. Crouch, “Ezekiel's Oracles against the Nations in Light of a Royal Ideology of Warfare,” JBL 130 (2011): 473 – 492.

7  Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel, p. 118.

8  Ellen Schuller, Post-Exilic Prophets (Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1988), p. 91.

No comments:

Post a Comment