CARMEN MARIS ALGOSI: AN EXEGETICAL STUDY
OF EXODUS 15:1-18
by
Robert V. McCabe, Jr.
Submitted in partial fulfillment of
requirements
for the degree of Master of
Theology in
Grace
Theological Seminary
May 1981
Carmen
Maris Algosi: An Exegetical Study of Exodus 15:1-18
Robert
V. McCabe, Jr.
Th.
M.
February
20, 1980
Professors
Fowler and Zemek
The literature of the ancient Near East has
given the invitation for a
conservative
interpreter to do an exegetical, study of Exodus 15:1-18. The
purpose
of this thesis was to use the historical grammatical hermeneutic to
examine
the interpretative problems in this pericope of Hebrew poetry.
The
problems focused upon the interpreter's hermeneutical approach, the
interpretation
of key terms, the examination of some of the textual problems,
and
an analysis of the important syntactical elements in the Song of the
The usage of form criticism and tradition history
as an hermeneutical
approach
was examined in reference to the critical interpretative considerations.
It
was demonstrated that the title "Song of Miriam" was affected by a
traditio-
historical
hermeneutic. It was observed that the usage of the form-critical and
traditio-historical
approach in answering the question about unity way not built
upon
objective proof but rather it was built of evolutionary presuppositions.
Mosaic
authorship was defended n light of the themes shared both in this song
and
the other books of the Pentateuch. A conservative date in the fifteenth
century
B.C. was confirmed by a number of philological arguments. The genre
of
this song has also been affected by form criticism. Five of the most prominent
explanations
of the Gattungen were examined and it was concluded that Exodus
15:1-18
may have had a number of literary types and hence it is an enigma for
form
critical purposes. It was also demonstrated that the traditio-historical
interpretation
of the setting has divorced Exodus 15:1-18 from its historical
setting.
The salient point of the strophic structure is the refrains in verses 6, 11,
and
16. In light of the confusion in the various metrical studies, it was concluded
that
this was an invalid method of study.
Chapter IV dealt with the exegesis of this song.
This involved an
examination
of problem terms. In many cases the cognate Semitic languages had
to
be consulted. It was discovered that Moses made use of parallel pairs. The
abundance
of them apparently implies that the poet had at his disposal a literary
tradition
from which he could draw these fixed pairs. In the process of inspiration,
the
Spirit of God guided Moses so that he used this literary tradition to help
in
composing the Song of the
in
light of the assumption that the Masoretic Text was terminus a quo in textual
criticism.
The syntactical aspects of this passage were examined. Ugaritic was
of
great benefit for this aspect of research. Its importance was most profound for
the
examination of an example of three-line staircase parallelism in verse 11. In
light
of this study, it would be appropriate to conclude that the Song of the Reed
Sea
is a classic example of archaic Hebrew poetry.
Accepted by the Faculty of Grace Theological
Seminary
in
partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree
Master of Theology
Examining Committee
Donald Fowler
George Zemek
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER
A Statement of Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 1
The Importance of This Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 5
The Method of This Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 6
The Limitations of This Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 11
CHAPTER
II. PRELIMINARY INTERPRETATIVE CONSIDERATIONS 12
Title . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 12
Song of Miriam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 12
Song of Moses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 13
Song of the
Unity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authorship
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 21
Date . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 26
Late Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Earlier Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Conservative Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 29
Philological Arguments
for a Conservative Date . . . . . . . . 29
CHAPTER
III. CRITICAL INTERPRETATIVE CONSIDERATIONS . . 40
Genre . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 40
The Gattungen Is a
Hymn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 41
The Gattungen Is a Hymn
of Thanksgiving . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42
The Gattungen Is a Hymn
of Divine Enthronement . . . . . . . 43
The Gattungen Is a
Litany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 44
The Gattungen Is a Hymn
of Victory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 46
An Evaluation of These
Studies of the
Gattungen of Exodus
15:1-18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 46
Setting .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 48
Enthronement Festival of
Yahweh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 51
Covenant Festival of
Yahweh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 52
Autumnal Festival of Yahweh
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 57
An Evaluation of Cultic
Interpretations . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 58
Strophe and Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Strophe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Meter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
71
CHAPTER
IV. EXEGESIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Prose Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
The Usage of the
Imperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 77
The Etymological Problem
with hw,mo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Exordium .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 83
A Textual Problem with hrAywixA . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 83
The Tetragrammaton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 84
An Examination of hxAGA. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
A Possible Anachronism Obk;ro? . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 91
iv
Strophe 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Hymnic Confession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 93
Historical
Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Refrain 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 122
An Anthropomorphism for
Yahweh's Strength. . . . . . . . . . . 122
An Etymological and
Morphological
Treatment of yriDAx;n,
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
123
Strophe 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 130
Hymnic Confession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 131
Historical Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 141
Refrain 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 145
Three-Line Staircase
Parallelism . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 146
The Parallel Usage of ymi
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 150
The Archaic Orthography
of hkAmoKA . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 150
A Parallel Pair
Reconsidered . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 150
Strophe 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Hymnic Confession. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Prophetic Narrative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 162
Refrain 3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 163
Coda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
A Reference to the Land
or Yahweh's Sanctuary? . . . . . . . . 164
An Examination of ynAdoxE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 171
Yahweh’s Eternal Kingship
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
CHAPTER
V. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
BIBLIOGRAPHY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
v
PREFACE
I would
like to thank some of the individuals who
have contributed their time an
effort, which without these,
it would have been impossible to
complete this thesis.
Foremost,
I would like to thank my God and Savior,
the Lord Jesus Christ, who
according to His sovereign grace
has saved me and guided me to this
seminary.
I would
also like to express my gratitude to Profes-
sor Fowler and Professor Zemek
for their patience and advice
in preparation of this paper.
At the outset of my research
Mr. Fowler suggested key articles
and books which were very
helpful in the composition of
his thesis.
A
special thanks goes to Dr. James Price and Profes-
sor Stephen Schrader of Temple
Baptist Theological Seminary
for their help. Professor Schrader
has suggested articles
and provided me with books from
his library.
It is
also necessary to express my thanks to the
faculty of Grace Theological
Seminary for their dedication
in training men for the
Christian ministry.
I would
also like to thank my wife and three child-
ren who have been patient and
helpful in my seminary educa-
tion. My parents have also been
helpful with their prayers
and love.
vi
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A Statement of Problems
Among
the poetic sections of the Old Testament, few
have captured the imagination
or scholars as has carmen
maris
algosi,1 Exodus 15:1-18. The discovery of Ugaritic
literature has been very influential
in stimulating interest
in Exodus 15:1-18 because of its
poetical nature. Freedman
has succinctly observed:
Continuing
discovery and publication of Canaanite
cuneiform tablets, current research into the
language
and forms of early Hebrew poetry, and recent
contribu-
tions to the elucidation of the poem in Exodus
15 have
recommended further reflections on and
reconsideration
of certain aspects of this national victory
song.
Hermeneutical Approach
An
aspect of this pericope of archaic Hebrew poetry
which has been problematic pertains
to the interpreter's
hermeneutical approach to Exodus
15:1-18. Most studies of
1 Translated: "The Song of the
taken
from the Old Latin Version. This was one of the few
translations
which was not influenced by the Septuagint's
translation
of JUs-Mya' as e]ruqrh> qa<lassa.
2 David Noel Freedman, "Strophe and
Meter in Exodus
15,"
A Light unto My Path: Old Testament
Studies in Honor
of Jacob M. Myers, ed. by Howard N.
Bream, Ralph D. Heim,
and
Carey A. Moore (
1974),
p. 163.
2
this passage which are examined
in the light of the ancient
Near Eastern literature are based
upon a form-critical and
traditio-historical methodology
This has influenced the
areas of dating, authorship, and
unity. Coats has con-
cluded that Exodus 15:1-18 is a
basic unit, "a form-critical
and a traditio-historical unit.”1
This approach has also
affected Cross and Freedman's preference
for a title for
this song. They have suggested
that Exodus 15:1-18 could
legitimately be called either
"the Song of Moses" or "the
Song of Miriam." They
prefer the latter title for verse 21
has preserved the latter title from
the superior tradition.2
Form criticism has also affected the analysis of the
Gattungen in
Exodus 15. Rozellar has classified this as a
hymn,3 Noth as a
hymn of thanksgiving,4 and Muilenburg as a
litany.5 Form
criticism has also influenced the interpre-
tation of the Sitz im Leben. Mowinckel has related
this to
1 George W. Coats, "The Song of the
Sea," Catholic
Bible Quarterly, XXXI:1 (January, 1969),
17.
2 Frank M. Cross, Jr. and David Noel
Freedman, "The
Song
of Miriam," Journal of Near Eastern
Studies, XIV:4
(October,
1955), 237.
3 Marc Rozellar,
"The Song of the Sea," Vetus
Testamentum, 11:3 (July, 1952),
227.
4 Martin Noth, Exodus, he Old Testament Library,
trans.
by J. S. Bowden (
1962),
p. 123.
5 James Muilenburg, "A Liturgy on the
Triumphs of
Yahweh,"
Studia Biblica et Semitica: Vriezen
Festschrift
(Wageningen:
H. Veenman and Zonen, 1966), pp. 236-37.
3
to the enthronement festival of
Yahweh.1 Cross has main-
tained that the cultic setting
is in the covenantal festival
of Yahweh.2
Muilenburg has however traced its provenance to
the autumnal festival of
Yahweh.3 A major problem, there-
fore, pertains to hermeneutical
approaches to the Song of
the
Interpretation of Terms
Another
problem relates to the interpretation of key
terms, in Exodus 15:1-18.
Should the term Obk;ro in
verse 1,
be translated as
"chariot" or "charioteer"? If the former
is preferred, this may suggest
that Obk;ro is anachronistic.
The etymological background of vywAliwA, in verse 4, has been
related to a Hittite, Egyptian,
and Ugaritic background.
ynAdoxE
in
verse 17, has been related to an Arabic, Egyptian,
and Ugaritic root. The usage of
Cr,x, in
verse 12 is an
enigma. Did the ground swallow
the Egyptian army or did
they drown in the
the underworld of mythology? It
may however be understood
1 Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in
trans.
by D. R. Ap-Thomas (2 vols. in 1:
Abingdon
Press, 1967), I, 126.
2 Frank Moore Cross, Jr., "The Divine
Warrior in
Transformations, ed. by Alexander
Altmann, Philip W. Lown
Institute
of Advanced Judaic Studies,
Studies and Texts, Vol. III (
3 Muilenburg, "A Liturgy on the
Triumphs of Yahweh,"
p.
236.
4
as a metaphor for death?
Another
question relates to the interpretation of
wdAq.;mi in
verse 17. This word is usually rendered "temple."
Some critical scholars have
consequently interpreted this as
a reference to the Solomonic
Tenple.1 If this is the case,
this is an anachronism; unless this
is to be regarded as a
prophetic reference.2
This may however be a reference to
another earthly tabernacle?
Possibly this could be a refer-
ence to the land?
There
are a number of fixed pairs in this song. The
mere mention of fixed pairs
with some conservatives is
tantamount to violating the
third commandment. The wide-
spread usage of parallel pairs indicates
that their appear-
ance in the Song of the
usage in this song demands interpretation.
How do these
relate to the Israelite poet?
Does this mean that
shared a common literary milieu
with the other nations in
the ancient Near East? This random
selection of key terms
reflects some of the problems
related to their interpreta-
tion.
1 S. R. Driver, The Book of Exodus, in The
Bible for Schools and
Colleges,
ed. by A. F. Kirkpatrick
(Cambridge:
University Press, 1918), p. 139.
2 See C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, The Pentateuch,
Vol.
II, trans. by James Martin, Commentary on
the Old
Testament (
Company,
1949), p. 55.
5
Textual-Problems
There
are a number of textual problems in this song
Verse 2 reads: h.yA
trAm;ziv; yzifA. The
Samaritan Pentateuch and
Vulgate have added the first
common singular pronominal
suffix to trAm;zi. Does this indicate that the Masoretic
Text
should be emended? Is this an
example of haplography? It
has also been suggested that this
might be an example of
"the Textual ambivalence
of Hebrew consonants"?l The
tual problems will be examined
in this thesis, yet this
writer has based his work on the
a priori assumption that
Masoretic Text is the fundamental
witness to the original
consonantal text which was qeo<pneustoj. Therefore, the
Masoretic Text is terminus a quo in textual criticism.
Many
more examples could have been chosen to show
the many problems which are an inherent
part of Exodus 15:
1-18; however, these will be discussed
in their proper
context. This provides an important
background for the
next section.
The Importance of this Study
Studies
in Exodus 15:1- 8 are legion. Most conser-
vative interpreters have not availed
themselves of the
various resources which modern scholarship
has unveiled from
the ancient Near East. Conservatives
who have written
1
Textual
Tradition Rediscovered," Journal of
Near Eastern
Studies, 26:2 (April, 1967),
93.
6
commentaries have usually given
an overview of this pericope
and may have done exegetical
work on a few key terms.1
Craigie has compared the Song
of the
Canaanite literature from
only one aspect of this song.2
Most of
the studies which have interacted with the
literature presently available
from the ancient Near East
were written by critical
scholars.3 These works were often
written from a form-critical
and/or a traditio-historical
perspective or they have been
strongly influenced with the
attendant presuppositions. It
would therefore appear that a
study written by a conservative
interpreter would be of some
benefit to the Christian
community.
The Method of this Study
The Relationship
to the Scope
The aim
of this study is not to do a verse by verse
exegesis. The aim rather is to
do a thorough exegesis and
1 See Alan R. Cole, Exodus (
Inter-Varsity
Press, 1973), 123-26.
2 P. C. Craigie, "The Poetry of
Tyndale Bulletin, 22 (1971), 19-26.
3 In this thesis the term critical will
generally be
used
in reference to those who use form criticism, tradition
history,
literary and redaction criticism to question the
Mosaic
authorship of Exodus 15:1-18. When the term critical
is
not used in this specific manner, but in a more general
sense,
it will usually be modifies by an adjective such as
conservative,
hence the conservative critical scholar.
7
to analyze problems which have been
elucidated from modern
scholarship. The aspects of this
song which are relevant to
this goal will accordingly be
examined.
The
Relationship to the Procedure
A
rejection of the critics' methodology
Rather
than using the hermeneutical methodology of
the critics, this writer will use
the historical-grammatical
hermeneutic. There are three reasons
for rejecting the
critics' methodology. First,
Biblical critics are not
trustworthy. This is not to say
that their work is desti-
tute of any value. Their
scholarship certainly has great
worth, however they do not have
sound literary judgment
because they do not respect the
quality of the Biblical
text.1 Second, they
are skeptical of the miraculous. If a
Biblical event is of a
miraculous nature, it must be ques-
tionable if it is unexplainable
with scientific or rational
reasons. If Exodus 15:1-18 is divested
of the supernatural,
then it is merely another
tradition as the critics claim.
These critics have been
influenced by "the spirit of the age
they grew up in."2
Third, the critics reconstruction of the
provenance of the texts which they
have studied is super-
ficial. They ask questions such
as: "what vanished
1 C. S. Lewis, "Faulting the Bible
Critics,"
Christianity Today, XI:18 (June 9, 1967),
7.
2 Ibid., p. 8.
8
documents each author used, w
en and where he wrote, with
what purposes, under what influences--the
whole Sitz im,
Leben
of
the text."1 The critics have overwhelming obsta-
cles against them. There is almost
a 3500 year gap between
them and Exodus 15. There are
tremendous religious and
cultural differences. The habits
of composition and assump-
tions of Biblical writers are
often nebulous. Although the
interpreter has greater light
than ever before, these
problems must mitigate the
critics' reconstruction of the
genesis of the Biblical texts.
The fact is, who is in a
position to say that the Song of
Miriam in Exodus 15:21
is the provenance of verses 1-
8. With the critics' pre-
suppositions their
reconstructions cannot be proven wrong,
unless Moses was here to defend
himself2 and even then his
authorship may still be
questioned. The labyrinthian maze
of the critics must therefore be
rejected.
A
return to historical grammatical exegesis
Definitions
There
are two key words which are significant to
this methodology and they will
need to be defined. The
Greek term e[rmhneu<w means to "explain,
interpret, proclaim,
1 Ibid.
2 Ibid.,
p. 9.
9
translate."1
The English term hermeneutics is derived from
this word. The word exegesis is
derived from the Greek word
e]chge<omai which
means to "explain, interpret, tell, report,
describe."2
Both terms are closely related as Mare has
observed:
Historical grammatical exegesis will be
developed from
the viewpoint that there is an inter-action and
inter-
relation between hermenia and exegesis and
that they
both are concerned with the principles of
interpretation
which the interpreter applies to the ancient
texts of
Scripture to determine its meaning in its own
setting
and culture.3
Presuppositions
The
conservative interpreter using the historical
grammatical approach to
hermeneutics needs to have certain
presuppositions. To say that an
interpreter has no presup-
positions may sound auspicious,
nevertheless this would
place one in a spurious
academic vacuum. The conservative
must be enamoured with two
presuppositions. The first pre-
supposition is that the
interpreter adhere to the doctrine
of verbal inerrancy and inspiration
of the canonical books
of the Bible. This is sine qua non for a conservative.4
1 William F. Arndt and Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-
English Lexicon of the
New Testament and other Early
Christian Literature (4th rev. and aug. ed.;
2 Ibid.,
p. 275.
3 W. Harold Mare, "Guiding Principles
for Historical
Grammatical
Exegesis," Grace Journal, 14:3
(Fall, 1973), 14.
4 Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation
(3rd
rev. ed.;
10
Another presupposition is a
belief in genuine history. Mare
has succinctly stated:
Another important presupposition for
conservative her-
meneutics is the principle of a personal
historical
scientific research which sincerely approaches
the
subject studied from an objective scientific
viewpoint
and, while doing so, realizes that there is
something
out there that really factually
happened in the past.1
Procedure
The use
of historical grammatical exegesis involves
the usage of language and
history. The usage of language
has two basic aspects: lexical2
and syntactical exegesis.
This not only involves the usage
of Hebrew but also the
other Semitic languages when necessary.
The historical
aspect of this exegetical method
pertains to such details
as authorship and cultural setting.3
It is especially
important with the cultural setting
to be acquainted with
the ancient Near Eastern milieu.
The method in this study
therefore is the historical grammatical
exegetical approach.
1 Mare, "Guiding Principles for
Historical Grammat-
ical
Exegesis," pp. 16-17; see also Merrill F. Unger,
"Scientific
Biblical Criticism and Exegesis," Bibliotheca
Sacra, 121:481
(January-March, 964), 57-65.
2 A very helpful article in this area is
by James L.
Boyer,
"Semantics in Biblical Interpretation," Grace
Journal, 3:2 (Spring, 1962), 25
34.
3 Mare, "Guiding Principles for
Historical Grammat-
ical
Exegesis," pp. 19-22.
11
The Limitations of this Study
There
are certain limitations which should be
acknowledged. Archeology has
illuminated many aspects of
the cultural milieu of the second
millennium B.C. Archeol-
ogy has also provided the student
of the Old Testament the
cognate languages which are
helpful in relation to the gram-
matical aspects of exegesis. It
is too early to speculate
about the influence that
studies, but it certainly makes
this writer cognizant of the
finite nature of this study.
Another
limitation pertains to the writer's academic
inabilities. In a number of
places it was necessary to use
cognate languages, yet the
writer must confess that he is a
novice in using comparative Semitic
languages. It is never-
theless hoped that their usage
as been enlightening and not
inhibiting.1 A goal
for this study has been to be as
thorough as possible, yet there
obviously will be areas
where this goal may not have
been achieved. It is never-
theless desired that this thesis
will be of some value for a
better understanding of carmen aris algosi.
1 The writer has found these books
especially helpful
in
this regard: Zellig S. Harris, Development
of the
Canaanite Dialects,
American Oriental Series, Vol. 16 (New
Haven,
Sabatino
Moscati, et al., An Introduction to the
Comparative
Grammar of the Semitic
Languages
(
Harrassowitz,
1999; and William Wright, Lectures on the
Comparative Grammar of
the Semitic Languages
(
Philo
Press, 1966).
CHAPTER II
PRELIMINARY
INTERPRETATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
Title
Exodus
15:1-18 has been referred to by a number of
different titles. Cross and Freedman
have referred to this
as the "Song of
Miriam."1 Others have referred to this as
the "Song of Moses,"2
"Song of the Sea,"3 and "Song of the
Song of Miriam
Albright has also called Exodus
15:1-18 the "Song
of Miriam."5
Cross and Freed an have preferred this title
in order to maintain a distinction
between Exodus 15 and
1 Cross and Freedman, "The Song of
Miriam," p. 237.
2 S. R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of
the Old Testament (new rev. ed.
Scribner's
Sons, 1916), p. 12 .
3 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of
Exodus, trans. by Israel Abra
ams (
1974),
p. 173.
4 Philip J. Hyatt, Exodus, in The New Century
Bible,
ed.
by Ronald E. Clements and Matthew Black (
5 W. F. Albright, "A Catalogue of
Early Hebrew Lyric
Poems
(Psalm LXVIII),"
Part
1 (1950-51), 5, n. 9.
13
the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy
32.1 Another justification
is derived from the fact that
the incipit or the first line
of a song would have often
served as its title. One title
of the poem is preserved in verse
1 which would justify
labeling this as the Song of Moses,
but verse 21 reflects
the title of the song taken
from the superior tradition2
which would justify labeling
his as the Song of Miriam.
Verses 1-18 have been viewed as
an expansion of the sup-
posedly older or more predominant
cycle of tradition in
verse 21, the Song of Miriam.3
There may be a need to make
a distinction between Exodus 15
and Deuteronomy 32, but to
refer to Exodus 15:1-18 as the
Song of Miriam, in light of
Cross and Freedman's perspective,
seems to be unacceptable
for a conservative interpreter.
To be committed to this
perspective, it would almost
appear necessary that one would
have to be committed to a traditio-historical
hermeneutic.
Song
of Moses
If it
is true that the title of a song was derived
from the incipit, it would be
appropriate to refer to verses
1-18 as the Song of Moses. This
would also reflect the
author of the poem. This would
not create any theological
1 Cross and Freedman, "The Song of
Miriam," p. 237.
2 Cross and Freedman have suggested that
this is
possibly
E, Ibid.
3 Ibid.
14
problems for a conservative.
This, however, would not
assist in making a distinction
between Exodus 15 and the
Song of Moses in Deuteronomy
32.
Song
of the
The
titles Song of the Sea or Song of the
reflect the central theme of
this event. In Exodus 14 the
word MyA was used sixteen times. It was also used in
Exodus
15:19-21 five times. This word
also appears four times in
verses 1-18. In this song MyA has a number of synonyms and
synonymous phrases: JUs-MyA, verse 4; tmohoT;,
verses 5 and 8;
tloOcm;, verse
5; and Myima,
verses 8 and 10. Muilenburg has,
made this observation:
The Song belongs, too,
to the extensive literature
relating to the Sea in the Old Testament and in
the
literatures of the other peoples of the ancient
Near
East. That the motif is resigned to be of
central
importance for the author is demonstrated by the
imme-
diate framework in which it is enclosed.
It would not be spurious to use
the title Song of the Sea
or Song of the
of Exodus 15:1-18. It would
consequently appear that these
last two titles and the title
Song of Moses would be legit-
imate to use. In order to avoid
confusion with the Song of
Moses in Deuteronomy 32, Exodus
15:1-18 will be referred to
as the Song of the
1 Muilenburg, "A Liturgy on the
Triumphs of Yahweh,"
pp.
234-35.
15
Unity
The
question of the unity of Exodus 15:1-18 has been
a problem for critical
scholars. At the turn of the century,
Sievers contended that verses
1-13 were old and that verses
14-18 were added by a later
writer.1
tioned the unity of this
passage with this statement: "The
very loose, even poor, poetic
form makes one wonder what
happened to the verses."2
The critical scholars especially
concerned are those involved in
tradition history. Fohrer's
laconic remark is definitive:
"Traditio-historical study
not only inquires how the
textual units achieved their
final form but also seeks to
trace the entire process by
which the units-came into
being."3
l Eduard Sievers, Studien zur hebraischen Metrik,
Vol.
I, Metrische Studien (
1901),
p. 408.
2 John D.
Testamentum, VII:4 (October, 1957),
377.
3 Ernst Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament,
revised
and rewritten by George Fohrer, trans. by David E.
Green
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1968), p. 30; see also
the
concise paperback on tradition history by Walter E.
Rast,
Tradition History and the Old Testament,
Old Testament
Series,
ed. by J. Coert Rylaarsdam (
Press,
1972); the other two terse volumes in this Old Test-
ament
series were helpful in the writing of this thesis,
Norman
C. Habel, Literary Criticism and the Old
Testament
(Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1971) and Gene M. Tucker,
Form Criticism and the
Old Testament (
Fortress
Press, 1971); the editor has written the same
forward
for all three books; his forward is extremely
helpful
as far as providing a synthesis of literary
criticism,
form criticism, and tradition history.
16
Coats
has examined Exodus 15:1-18 by means of a
form critical and
traditio-historical study. He has con-
tended in this study that the origin
of Exodus 15:1-18 lies
in the Song of Miriam, verse 21.1
Coats has stated that it
was not certain that the Song of
Miriam2 extended back to
the time of Moses, but his
implication was that this was a
possibility.3 The
Song of Miriam, therefore, is to be
regarded as the oldest form of the
Song of the Reed Sea.4
Noth has indicated that the reason
why verse 21 was regarded
by some critical scholars as
the oldest formulation of the
Reed. Sea tradition is because
of its brevity.5 Coats
has
1 Coats, "The Song of the Sea,"
p. 8.
2 In this thesis the Song of Miriam will
be used in
reference
to Ex. 15:21b.
3 Coats, "The Song of the Sea,"
p. 8; it is inter-
esting
to observe that Westermann has suggested that it is
probable
that Ex. 15:21 originated at the historical time
of
deliverance. He calls this "the oldest Psalm of Israel,"
Claus
Westermann, The Praise of God in the
Psalms, trans. by
Keith
R. Crim (Richmond, Virginia: John Knox Press, 1965),
p.
89.
4 See Marc Rozellar, "The Song of the
Sea," p. 226;
cf.
also David M. G. Stalker, "Exodus," in Peake's Commen-
tary on the Bible, ed. by Matthew Black
and H. H. Rowley
(New
York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1962), p. 222.
5 Noth,
Exodus, p. 121; some critical scholars,
however,
regard this as a spurious conclusion, see Frank
Moore
Cross, Jr., "The Song of the Sea and Canaanite Myth,"
Journal for Theology and
the Church: God and Christ:
Existence and Province, V (1968), 11, n. 34;
cf. also Albert
B.
Lord, The Singer of Tales (
Lord
discusses is the use of formulas and formulaic expres-
sions
in composing oral poetry. This author recognizes that
this
approach has inherent problems for a conservative,
17
likewise set forth that the Song
of Miriam is the earliest
form of the Song of the Sea. Verses
1-18 were a later
stage in the development of the
methodology may not be a facsimile
of Noth's traditio-
historical approach, yet they both
share an evolutionary
approach because this is an inherent
part of the traditio-
historical interpretive
methodology.
According
to Coats verses 4-10 should be associated
with the Sea tradition. There
is internal disunity in
verses 4-10. There appears to
be a shift in image between
verses 4-5 and 6-10. The focus of
verses 4-5 lies on the
destruction of the enemy by casting
them into the Sea. This
suggests that a distinct tradition
supposedly lies behind
verses 4-5. This distinct
tradition was either an independ-
ent poem or the Song of Miriam.2
The focus of verses 6-10,
however, has changed to crossing
the water on a path in the
Sea.3 This
supposedly reflects the influence of the
tradition. but it may be used
to reflect the problems involved in
assuming that brevity is synonymous
with antiquity.
1 Coats, "The Song of the Sea,"
p. 17.
2 Ibid.
3 Cf. Frank E. Eakin, Jr., "The
Journal of Biblical
Literature,
LXXXVI:4 (December, 1967),
383;
Eakin explains the change in image by suggesting that
of
Yahweh's victory over Yam.
4 Coats, "The Song of the Sea,"
p. 17.
18
Verses
12-17, according to Coats, should be associ-
ated with the
tion from Sea to Conquest.
Verse 12 has a brief allusion to
the event at the sea while
verse 13 is the only allusion to
Yahweh's leadership in the
wilderness.1 Verses 14-17 allude
to the fear of the Canaanites.
This is a reference to the
conquest theme.2
Therefore, when Coats concludes that the
Song of the
the Song of the Sea constitutes
a basic whole, a form-
critical and traditio-historical
unit."3
To draw
this conclusion based upon this methodology
is certainly untenable for a conservative
interpreter. The
subjective nature of Coats'
approach is obvious. To accept
his thesis, one has to accept
that the Song of Miriam is
older than the Song of the
behind verses 4-5.4
The subjective element in this method-
ology is demonstrated by the
wide disagreement among crit-
ical scholars about the
traditio-historical development of
1 George W. Coats, "The
Traditio-Historical Character
of
the
1967),
263.
2 Ibid.
3 Coats, "The Song of the Sea,"
p. 17.
4 Cf. Cross and Freedman, "The Song
of Miriam,"
p.
237; they have not accepted this assumption.
19
the
The widely divergent solutions offered for the
literary
puzzle, each supported by plausible but
unconvincing
arguments, leave us no certainty about the
literary
structure except in regards to a single
conclusion: the
story as it now stands is a composite of several
tradi-
tions which, having been brought together, fail to
present a
clear picture of a comprehensible event.
Whether by their own arguments to that end, or
uninten-
tionally by their failure to provide a credible solution,
the critics have placed this fact beyond doubt.2
The
presupposed evolutionary aspects of tradition
history are also detrimental
for this approach. Noth, also,
has reasoned that the Song of Miriam
lies behind the Song
of the
that brevity reflects
antiquity.3 Albright has demonstrated
the fallacy of this rational.4
The truth is that ancient
Oriental literature may have a
variety of lengths. There
1 This disagreement is readily noticeable
by comparing
Cross,
"The Song of the Sea and Canaanite Myth"; Eakin, "The
Historical
Study of the
Testamentum, XX:4 (October, 19 0),
406-18; Coats, "The
Traditio-Historical
Character of the
Coats,
"The Song of the Sea."
2 Lewis S. Hay,
"What Really Happened at the Sea of
Reeds?"
Journal of Biblical Literature,
LXXXIII:4 (December,
1964),
399; Hay after recognizing this dilemma with the
Song
of the
encounter
in which
same
criticism that he has applied to others also applies to
his
thesis, it is “supported by plausible but unconvincing
arguments.”
3 Noth, Exodus, p. 121.
4 W. F. Albright,
"Some Oriental Glosses on the
Homeric
Problem," American Journal of
Archaeology, 54 (1950)
20
are nine Sumerian epic tales
from about 1800 B.C. which vary
in length from approximately
one hundred to six hundred
lines.1 The Egyptian
story of Sinuhe, which dates about
1900 B.C.,2 is
slightly longer than the Tale of the Two
Brothers3 and the
Contendings of Horus and Seth.4 Both are
preserved in versions dating
about the thirteenth century
B.C. Kitchen makes this
interesting observation about these
Egyptian stories: "These exhibit
a constancy of average
length over six centuries
(alongside shorter and longer
pieces, both 'late' and
'early'), and they did not grow by
gradual accretion."5
As far as the interpretive method-
ologies used by critical
scholars in connection with the
unity of the Song of the
almost conclude that
"every man did that which was right in
his own eyes."
This
thesis is based upon the a priori assumption
that the Scriptures are the
Word of God, as they claim to
1 Samuel Noah Kramer, "Sumerian
Literature, A General
Survey,"
in The Bible and the Ancient Near East,
ed. by G.
Ernest
Wright (
1961),
p. 255; see also James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient
Near Eastern Texts (hereinafter referred
to as ANET)(2nd,
ed.;
1955),
pp. 37-39.
2 Ibid.,
pp. 18-22.
3 Ibid., pp. 23-25.
4 Ibid.,
pp. 14-17.
5 K. A. Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament
(Chicago:
Inter-Varsity Press, 1966), pp. 131-32.
21
be, and hence the unity of
Exodus 15 would be the logical
result of this assumption. The
strophic structure of this
poem also demonstrates the
unity in Exodus 15:1-18. This
will be examined in chapter 3.
The poetical pericope of
Exodus 15 was composed by Moses
after the great deliverance
of Yahweh. He and the children
of
which is recorded in verses
1-18. Verse 21, which is a
repetition of verse 1, possibly
functioned as an anti-
strophe.1 Moses
subsequently recorded this song which has
been preserved in the
Scriptures. It is this piece of
poetry which is regarded as a
basic unit in this thesis.
Authorship
The
subject of authorship is usually regarded as a
subject in the field of
literary criticism. Literary critics
have been divided about the
authorship of Exodus 15:1-18.
Driver has assigned verses 1-18
to the Elohistic writer who
took this from a collection of
national hymns.2 Some have
questioned the validity of
assigning the work of Exodus
15:1-18 to the literary sources
JEDP.3 Albright has
1 John J. Davis, Moses and the God's of
Studies in the Book of
Exodus
(
House,
1971), p. 173-
2 S. R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of
the Old Testament, p. 30.
3 Muilenburg, "A Liturgy on the
Triumphs of Yahweh,"
p.
234, n. 2.
22
reflected this with the
following statement:
The Wellhausen structure, which divided the
Pentateuch
into a number of different documents and even
attempted
to split single verses among three or more
different
sources, has proved to be an exaggerated system
against
which many protests have been leveled.1
The knowledge of Egyptian,
Assyrian, and especially Ugaritic
literature has revamped the
critic's understanding of Old
Testament literature in general
and Exodus 15:1-18 in par-
ticular. The result is that
many critical scholars have
abandoned this artificial
hermeneutic.
Some
contemporary critical scholars have assigned
Exodus 15:1-18 to either the
Yahwist or Elohistic tradi-
tions.2 Cross has
assigned this "to the Yahwist no later
than the early tenth century,
and is more easily explained
as belonging to common
traditions in the shrines of the
league."3
Cross' conclusions have been drawn from his
traditio-historical study of
this poem.4 A commitment to
this methodology is quite
unacceptable for a conservative
interpreter.
Westermann
has indicated that the Song of Miriam was
1 William F. Albright, Archaeology, Historical
Analogy, and Early
Biblical Tradition
(
2 Muilenburg, "A
Liturgy on the Triumphs of Yahweh,"
p.
234, n. 2.
3 Cross, "The Song of the Sea and
Canaanite Myth,"
p.
11.
4 Ibid.
23
uttered as a declarative praise
to God immediately after God
delivered them.1 It
would appear that if one has made this
concession and if one has
interacted with the literature of
the ancient Near East, the
conclusion could then be drawn
that it is possible that Moses
wrote this song or at least
that it was compiled in the
general time span of Moses'
life. The point is, even for
the critical scholar the
Mosaic authorship of the Song
of the
within the realm of
possibility.
There
appears to be a number of reasons for accept-
ing the Mosaic authorship of
the Song of the
Exodus 15:1 indicates that
Moses took the lead in singing
this song. This also indicates
that Moses was responsible
for the composition of this
song.
Further
verification comes from Moses' development
of the theme
"covenant-faithfulness." The noun ds,H, is
used
twenty-one times in the
Pentateuch. Moses used this noun
in Exodus 15:13, "You have
guided with your covenant-
faithfulness (ds,H,) the people whom You have redeemed." God
had made a covenant with
Abraham in Genesis 15. The ele-
ments of this covenant included
a posterity who would belong
to Yahweh and the
posterity was called Yahweh's
people for He had purchased
1 Westermann, The Praise of God in the Psalms, pp.
83-88;
Westermann has used the title "Song of Miriam" to
refer
to verse 21b of Exodus 15.
24
had been faithful to His
covenant.1 The usage of this theme
in Exodus 15:13 is consistent
with the other usages of ds,H,
in the Pentateuch.
Moses
has developed two other motifs2 or themes
which confirm his authorship of
the Song of the
The first theme relates to
Yahweh's description as a warrior
in verse 3. This was not a
novel theme for it had been
introduced in the religions of
the ancient Near East in
reference to other deities and
it may have been inherent in
some of the patriarchal
traditions. If there was any novelty,
it would have been that it was
on the "international" level.3
In Deuteronomy 1:30 God fought
for
done at the
in Deuteronomy 7. Deuteronomy
7:18 is a reference to the
Exodus. Deuteronomy 33:2-5,
26-29 relates to war and the
1 See Stephen R. Schrader, "Hesed in
the Ancient
Near
Eastern Milieu" (unpublished Th. M. thesis, Grace
Theological
Seminary, 1974); cf. also Nelson Glueck, Hesed
in the Bible, trans. by Alfred
Gottschalk (
Distinctive Ideas of the
Old Testament
(
Books,
1969), pp. 94-130.
2 ”Motif” is used in this thesis to refer
to the
theme
or content and not to external form.
3 Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, in The
New International
Commentary on the Old Testament, ed. by
R.
K. Harrison (
ing
Company, 1976), p. 64.
25
need to depend upon Yahweh for
victory.1
The
second theme is the conception of Yahweh as
king in verse 18. This motif is
found in other literature
from the ancient Near East. It
is not novel in the Old
Testament. The novelty is
derived from "the setting and
broader horizons of the
conception."2 Yahweh, a victorious
warrior, was very appropriately
acclaimed king. The acknow-
ledgment of Yahweh as king is a
theme in the book of Exodus.
This concept should be
coalesced with the usage of fdayA in
Exodus. In Exodus fdayA often has the nuance of acknowledging
Yahweh's sovereignty. In Exodus
5:2 Pharaoh stated that he
did not know, fdayA, Yahweh. Pharaoh did not recognize the
sovereignty of Yahweh. Yahweh
used His plagues to demon-
strate to Pharaoh that Yahweh
was Lord of all and not Pharaoh.
This concept of fdayA is stated in Exodus 8:10, 22, 9:14, and
9:29. In Exodus 9:29 Moses told
Pharaoh that he would stretch
out his hands to stop the
plague of hail so that Pharaoh
would know (fdayA) that the earth belonged to Yahweh.
Yahweh
also wanted the Egyptians to know that He
was sovereign. This is demonstrated
in Exodus 7:5. In
Exodus 14:4, 18 Yahweh stated
that He would use the drowning
of Pharaoh's army so that
sovereignty, Exodus 6:7, 10:2,
and 11:7. The deliverance
1 Ibid.,
p. 65.
2 Ibid.,
p. 64.
26
from the Egyptians is used
approximately one hundred times
in the Old Testament. The
purpose of this event was for
Exodus 16:6.1 The
acknowledgment of Yahweh as king in
Exodus 15:18 is a grand climax
to the God who has demon-
strated His absolute
sovereignty over the Egyptians and
their gods.
This
theme is also mentioned in Deuteronomy 33:5.
The whole book of Deuteronomy
was written in the form of the
Near Eastern covenant treaties
of the second millennium B.C.
This is significant for Yahweh,
the king, made a covenant
with His vassal,
Yahweh was recognized as King.2
Since the motifs developed
in Exodus 15 are also developed
in the whole book of Exodus
and Deuteronomy, this would
tend to verify that Moses was
responsible for the composition
of the Song of the
Date
Late Date
The
subject of the date for the Song of the
has not gone without debate in
this century. One of the
1 Stephen R. Schrader, "Exodus to
Deuteronomy,"
(unpublished
lecture notes, Temple Baptist Theological
Seminary,
1979); see also Hebert B. Huffmon, "The Treaty
Background
of Hebrew Yada’," Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental
Research,
181 (February, 1966), 31-37.
2 Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, p. 65.
27
latest dates suggested was 350
B.C. which was defended by
Haupt.1 Bender dated
it in 450 B.C.2 Pfeiffer has placed
it in the second half of the
fifth century B.C.3 Noth
has
more recently stated that this
is a relatively late piece
which was inserted secondarily
into its context.4 Fohrer
has placed it in the late
preexilic period.5 Three reasons
have been suggested for these
late dates. Verses 13-18 have
presumably presupposed the
conquest of the
Another argument for a late
date was the supposed anach-
ronistic reference to the
Philistines in verse 14. It has
finally been proposed that
verse 17 presupposes the building
of the Solomonic Temple.7
1 Paul Haupt, "Moses' Song of
Triumph," The American
Journal of Semitic
Languages and Literatures, 20 (April,
1904),
153-54.
2 A. Bender, "Das
Lied Exodus 15," Zeitschrift fur
die Alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft,
23 (1903), 47.
3 Robert H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old
Testament (New York: Harper and
Brothers Publishers, 1948),
p.
281.
4 Noth, Exodus, p. 123; Noth has indicated that the
Song
of the
it
essentially has no role in the sources; Coats has agreed
with
Noth's conclusions in "The Song of the Sea," pp. 4-5.
5 Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 189.
6 Philip J. Hyatt, "Yahweh as 'the
God of My
Father,'"
Vetus Testamentum, V:2 (April, 1955),
13
7 Cf. Mowinckel's argument against an
early date, see
Sigmund
Mowinckel, "Psalm Criticism between 1900 and 1935
(
(January,
1955), 13-33.
28
Earlier
Date
The
Song of the
century B.C. by Sellin1
and Driver.2 Cross and Freedman
have also argued for an early
date. They have affirmed that
the song was written in the
tenth century B.C. and as early
as the twelfth century in its
original form.3 Robertson has
placed the date of this song in
the twelfth century B.C.4
Albright has gone so far as to
date it in the early thir-
teenth century B.C.5
Most of the scholars who would adhere
to a date between the tenth and
thirteenth centuries B.C.
have also defended the
essential unity of Exodus 15:1-18.
Most of these scholars maintain
this early date because of
the archaic language of this
song. A great influence on
these scholars has been the
study of Ugaritic for it has
provided an early language
which is cognate with Hebrew and
it has provided an early corpus
of literature which is
1 Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 189.
2 S. R. Driver, The Book of Exodus, in The
Bible for Schools and
Colleges,
ed. by A. F. Kirkpatrick
(Cambridge:
University Press, 1918), p. 130.
3 Cross and Freedman, "The Song of
Miriam," p. 240.
4 David A. Robertson, Linguistic Evidence in Dating
Early Hebrew Poetry (hereinafter referred
to as Linguistic
Evidence),
Dissertation Series, no. 3 (
Society
of Biblical Literature, 1972), p. 155.
5 W. F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of
(Garden
City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1968), p. 10.
29
characterized by parallelism.1
Conservative
Date
The
conservative date is established by the evidence
of Scripture. Of a definitive
nature on this subject is
1 Kings 6:1. According to this
passage the exodus from
Solomon's reign which is
generally regarded as 966 B.C.2
The children of
Exodus 15:1 indicates that the
Song of the
composed after the crossing of
the
shortly after their departure
from
Philological Arguments for a
Conservative Date
Very
often faith in the God of the Bible is viewed
as a faith of ignorance. The
faith of ignorance relegates
the aspects of a grammatical
and historical hermeneutic to a
superficial acquaintance.
However, since the Bible is the
Word of God, it will be
confirmed by true history and
grammar. The conservative
interpreter should therefore be
1 David Noel Freedman, "Divine Names
and Titles in
Early
Hebrew Poetry," in Magnalia Dei: The
Mighty Acts of
God, ed. by Frank Moore
Cross, Werner Lemke, and Patrick D.
Miller,
Jr. (
1976),
p. 55.
2 See Edwin R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the
Hebrew Kings (rev. ed.;
Publishing
Company, 1951).
30
a diligent student of all the
aspects of grammar and history
which can elucidate a given
passage of Scripture. The
confirmation of this early date
for the writing of Exodus
15 is corroborated primarily by
philological arguments.
Although Childs does not agree
with a date as early as Cross
and Freedman have suggested,
nevertheless he does recognize
the importance of their
philological arguments. His remarks
are germane: "Of the
various arguments brought forth, the
philological arguments carry
the most weight."1
The
preterite
A
possible philological argument for a conservative
date pertains to the usage of
the preterite in Exodus 15:1-
18. The preterite in form is an
imperfect, however it
functions as a preterite.2
Battenfield has succinctly
1 Brevard S. Childs, The Book of Exodus: A Critical
Theological Commentary (hereinafter referred
to as The Book
of
Exodus) (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974),
pp.
245-46.
2 The preterite is often found with waw. The El
Amarna
letters suggest that the preterite appeared without
waw. This suggests that
Hebrew poetry reflects an older
usage
than the prose; see G. Douglas Young, "The Language
of
the Old Testament," in vol. I of The
Expositor's Bible
Commentary, ed. by Frank E.
Gaebelein, et al. (
Zondervan
Publishing House, 1979), pp. 203-4; see also J.
Weingreen,
A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew
(2nd
ed.;
Fensham,
"The Use of the Suffix Conjugation and the Prefix
Conjugation
in a Few Old Hebrew Poems," Journal
of Northwest
Semitic Languages, VI (1978), 9-18; cf.
also William Sanford
LaSor,
"Further Information about Tell Mardikh," The Journal
of the Evangelical
Theological Society,
19:4 (Fall, 1976),
31
summarized the usage of the
preterite, "The point is, an
imperfect, when indicating a
preterite aspect'' is translated
as a 'past,' in poetry by the
context only and in prose
following ‘az."1 In order to use legitimately the argument
that the usage of the preterite
is evidence of archaic
Hebrew poetry, it is first
necessary to demonstrate that the
perfect and imperfect aspects
are predominantly used to
narrate past events.2
The context of Exodus 15 is a lucid
reference to the recent victory
of Yahweh over the Egyptian
army at the
aspect is used quite often. It
needs to be demonstrated that
the imperfect aspects function
in a parallel sense to the
perfect aspect. Two examples
are found in verse 5, Umyus;kay;,
and in verse 12, OmfelAb;Ti. In verse 5 Umyus;kay;
obviously does
not refer to a frequent
happening for "the deeps" only
covered the Egyptian army once.
Also Umyus;kay; is
parallel
with Udr;yA. Although OmfelAb;Ti
morphologically is in the imper-
fect aspect, it obviously is
not referring to frequentative
action
for the earth swallowed them at the time of the death
270;
LaSor has indicated, that there was a preterite at
similar
to Akkadian iprus and Hebrew yiqtol"; if this has
been
correctly identified this would support the theory that
there
was an original yqtl preterite in
West Semitic.
1 James R. Battenfield, "Advanced
Hebrew Grammar,"
(unpublished
lecture notes, Grace Theological Seminary,
1977)
2 Robertson, Linguistic Evidence, p. 27.
32
of the Egyptian army. It should
also be observed that
OmfelAb;Ti is in
a parallel relation with tAyFnA. In verses 14-
16 a succession of verbal forms
are used: perfect-imperfect-
perfect-perfect-imperfect-perfect-imperfect-imperfect.
It
is therefore clear that there
is a parallel relationship
between the perfect and
imperfect aspects of the verbs in
these verses and that these
verbs do not describe action
which is qualitatively
different. The comments of Robertson
aver this:
If the suff1 and pref forms describe
qualitatively
different types of action or states, the poet
went from
one to another in a bewildering fashion. It is
easier
to take all the verbs as syntactically
equivalent.2
This distribution between the
perfect and imperfect aspects
of the various verbs also has
occurred in Ugaritic poems.
In the Ugaritic poem Anat I an
example of this is found in
lines 4-9.
qm yt’r He arose, he served
w yslhmnh and he ate
ybrd td
lpnwh he extended a breast before him
bhrb mlht with a sharp sword
qs mr’i
ndd a slice of fatling, he went
y’sr
wysqynh he
served drinks and he gave him to
drink.3
This
pattern in Ugaritic reflects its antiquity. It would
1 This is how Robertson refers to the
perfect aspect;
he
also refers to the imperfect aspect as the prefix;
Ibid., pp. 8-9.
2 Ibid.,
p. 30.
3 Cyrus H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook (hereinafter
referred
to as UT), Analecta Orientalia, 38 (
Pontifical
Biblical Institute, 1965), p. 253.
33
appear that the perfect and
imperfect aspects of the verbs
are equivalent syntactically.
Exodus 15 has this same
distribution and it indicates
that the imperfect aspect
functioned as a preterite. This
reflects the antiquity of
the poem.
The preservation of a y/v in a final y/v verb when it opens
a syllable
Another
philological argument for an early date of
Exodus 15 is the preservation
of a yod or waw when it opens
a syllable. There are a number
of examples of this found in
Ugaritic literature. Text
125:24 reads wy’ny krt, "and
Keret answers";1
Anat 1:9 wysqynh, "and he gave
him to
drink";2 and
Keret 1:26 ybky, "he
cried."3 In
Hebrew the
y/v was not usually preserved. There are some
examples of
this, however, in early Hebrew
where the final y was
pre-
served. An example of this is
found in Exodus 15:5 Umyus;kay;.
Another example is found in
Numbers 24:6 vyFAni. This does
not mean that if a standard
form appears in the same poem
that this is not genuine
archaic Hebrew poetry. An example
of this is Deuteronomy 32 for
verse 37 preserves the form
vysAHA and
verse 3 preserves the form UbhA.
Certain
words probably had a tendency to preserve
the archaic orthography. A
reason for this tendency is that
1 Ibid.,
p. 192.
2 Ibid.,
p. 253.
3 Ibid.,
p. 250.
34
a syllable closing y or v would
have formed a diphthong,
but the vowel following would
have had a tendency to pre-
serve y/v.1
With the loss of the final short vowel, y/v
would have closed the syllable
and would have eventually
been lost. When yod or waw was in the intervocalic position
even though it remained
syllable opening, they were eventu-
ally lost through elision. This
apparently was the case in
verb forms with afformatives
beginning with a vowel. Such
would be the case with the
third feminine singular and third
common plural of the imperfect
aspect.2 Thus, it would not
be out of place to discover the
usage of archaic forms in
early Hebrew poetry as is the
case in Exodus 15:5, in fact
it verifies that this is
genuine archaic Hebrew poetry.
The
archaic relative pronoun
A
conservative date is further corroborated by the
use of the archaic relative
pronoun. In Ugaritic the rel-
ative pronoun was d and dt. An important concern which is
derived from the usage of the
relative pronoun in Exodus 15
is the usage of d. This relative pronoun appears to be
inflected according to number,
gender, and case but at the
same time it appears as if this
relative pronoun was treated
1 There are a number of passages where the
yod and
waw are preserved: Numbers
24:6, Deuteronomy 32:37, Psalms
36:1,
9, 57:2, 77:4, 78:44, 122:6, Job 12:6, 19:2, 31:8, and
Proverbs
26:7.
2 Robertson, Linguistic Evidence, pp. 58-59.
35
indeclinably.1 This
relative pronoun can be traced to the
Proto-Semitic relative pronoun d. The Ugaritic relative
pronoun is cognate with the
Arabic relative pronoun, the
nominative is , du,
the genitive is , di, and the accu-
sative is da.
The Proto-Semitic d became yDi in Aramaic
and Uz in Hebrew. The relative pronoun Uz is used twice in
verses 13 and 16 of Exodus 15.
This once again reflects the
archaic nature of Exodus
15:1-18.
The
nun energicum
The
appearance of the archaic pronominal suffix Uhn;-,
supplies further support for a
conservative date of Exodus
15. This suffix is found in
Exodus 15:2 on Uhn;m,m;roxE. The
generally used third masculine
singular pronominal suffix is
Uh-e or Un.-,. The
latter, nun energicum, is a vestige
of its
predcessor Uhn;-,. The
implication is that this archaic form
would have a tendency to appear
in genuine archaic poetry.2
If this is true, it should be
possible to confirm this hypo-
thesis from Ugaritic. In
Ugaritic there are four different
forms of the third masculine
singular pronominal suffix: -h,
-nh, -nn, -n.3 The two forms of this -nn and -nh are ger-
mane to this discussion. There
are a number of examples of
1
2 The exception to this would be if this
was an
example
of archaizing in a latter poem.
3 Gordon, UT, pp. 37-38, par. 6.16.
36
the former. Text 127:26
reflects this by the usage of
wywsrnn,
"and (it/) they instruct(s) him";1 1 Aqht 59,
tstnn,
"she set him";2 76:1:12, yhnnn, "he shows him favor"3
and 151, tshtnn, "they caused him to wake up."4 There are a
number of examples of the
latter: ‘Ant 1:5, yslhmnh, "he
feeds him"5 and
1:9, wysqynh, "and he gave him
to drink."6
Consequently, this demonstrates
the antiquity of the nun
energicum and
hence this is further confirmation of the
archaic nature of the Song of
the
The
pronominal suffix
Another
suffix which is characteristic of early
Hebrew poetry is the third
masculine plural7 pronominal
suffix
18. This consistent usage has
caused various reactions
among scholars. Some have
explained this as conscious and
artificial archaizing.8
Cross and Freedman have however
indicated that the consistent
usage of this suffix is
1 Ibid.,
p. 38, par. 6.17.
2 Ibid. 3
Ibid.
4 Ibid. 5
Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Hereinafter referred to as 3mp; also
other such
references
will be abbreviated in the same manner.
8 E. Kautzsch, ed., Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, rev. by
A.
E. Cowley (2nd English ed.;
1970),
p. 258.
37
indicative of the genuine
antiquity of Exodus 15.1 There
are two reasons for this latter
position. First, archaizing
is usually characterized by the
misuse or mixed usage of
archaic forms. This, however,
is not the case in Exodus
15:1-18. The second proof of
this is a rebuttal to the argu-
ment that this suffix only
occurs with verbs.2 This kind of
argument overlooks the fact
that there are no examples in
Exodus 15 of a noun with a 3mp
suffix affixed to it.3 The
presence of
conclusion that Exodus 15 is an
example of archaizing.
The
enclitic mem
The
last confirmation of a conservative date for the
Song of the
of the enclitic mem.4 The usage of the
enclitic mem is
still enigmatic for scholars
are not certain whether its
absence or presence causes any
difference.5 Hummel has
1 Cross and Freedman, "The Song of
Miriam," p. 245,
par.
10; see also David Noel Freedman, "Archaic Forms in
Early
Hebrew Poetry," Zeitschrift fur die
Alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft, 72:2 (June, 1960),
105.
2 See Kautzsch, Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, p. 258.
3 Cross and Freedman, "The Song of
Miriam," p. 245,
par.
10.
4 Robertson, Linguistic Evidence, p. 80.
5 James Barr, Comparative Philology and the Text of
the Old Testament (hereinafter referred
to as Comparative
Philology)
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), p. 31.
38
added seventy-six examples to
an already established list of
thirty-one examples in Hebrew.1
Since many of the examples
were not recognized by the
Masoretes, the interpretation of
the data has not been without
problems.2 In Exodus 15 these
problems are not of consequence
for the enclitic mem is pre-
fixed to the preposition K;. Since the Amarna letters and
Ugaritic literature attest to
the usage of enclitic mem, the
antiquity of it is well established.
If it can be estab-
lished that it was present in
early Hebrew and that it was
used more frequently in early
Hebrew poetry than in standard
Hebrew poetry, this could be
used as further confirmation of
an early date. There are
fifty-two examples of the usage of
OmK; in
poetry and two of these are found in Exodus 15:5, 8.
It has been established that
the majority of these examples
occur in early Hebrew poetry.3
This does not establish
solid proof for an early date,
but it does verify that it
was used regularly in early
Hebrew poetry.
When
these arguments are viewed collectively, they
provide strong support for a
conservative date. The point
to be made is that Mosaic
authorship and hence a late fif-
teenth century B.C. date is not
refuted by the philological
1 H. D. Hummel, "Enclitic Mem in Early Northwest
Semitic,"
Journal of Biblical Literature,
LXXVI:2 (June,
1957),
85-107.
2 Robertson, Linguistic Evidence, pp. 77-110.
3 Ibid., p. 108.
39
arguments, rather it is
supported by them in that these
philological considerations are
characteristic of Northwest
Semitic languages in that
general time period.
CHAPTER III
CRITICAL
INTERPRETATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
Genre
The
study of literary types or Gattungen
is a means
of determining, for the form
critic, insights into the
beliefs of a people. This
methodology is based upon the
assumption that prior to
written literature there was an
oral tradition.1
Gunkel had indicated that the narratives
of Genesis were communicated
orally by means of sagas.2
The work of Gunkel is the
foundation for the investigation
of Gattungen.3 Gunkel's methodology was demonstrated in his
extensive research in Genesis
and Psalms. The disciples of
Gunkel used his approach for
other portions of Scripture.4
1 Herbert F. Hahn, The Old Testament in Modern
Research (with a Survey
of Recent Literature)
(hereinafter
referred
to as Old Testament in Modern Research)
(expanded
ed.;
2 Hermann Gunkel, The Legends of Genesis, Mans. by
W.
H. Carruth with an Introduction by William F. Albright
(New
York: Schocken Books, 1964), p. 4.
3 See Gunkel, What Remains of the Old Testament and
Other Essays, trans. by A. K. Dallas
(
Company,
1928), pp. 57-114; Gunkel also discusses the
literary
types on pages 69-114.
4 A. R. Johnson, "The Psalms,"
in The Old Testament
and Modern Study, ed. by H. H. Rowley
(n.p.: Clarendon
Press,
1951; reprint ed.:
1956),
p. 162, n. 3.
40
41
For example Hugo Gressman
examined the genre of the histor-
ical writings outside the
Hexateuch.1
The usage of the literary genre by the form critic
has made some valuable
contributions for the exegesis of the
Old Testament. One of these
contributions is that form
criticism has demonstrated the
artificial nature of the doc-
umentary hypothesis.2
Another contribution is the classifi-
cation of Formgeschichte by literary types. This has been
enhanced by the investigation
of literary types in the
larger background of other
literature of the ancient Near
East. This has given the
conservative interpreter a much
greater understanding of the Old
Testament, especially the
poetical sections.3
Exodus 15:1-18 will presently be exam-
ined in light of the various
literary types which have been
used to describe this song.
The Gattungen
Is a Hymn
The Song of the
ence to its literary type.
Inspite of the great attention
1 Hahn, The Old Testament in Modern Research, p.
130.
2 Gleason L. Archer, Jr.,
A Survey of Old Testament
Introduction (rev. ed.;
see
J. Coert Rylaarsdam's foreword to Literary
Criticism of
the Old Testament by Norman C. Habel.
3 R. K.
(
1969),
pp. 36-37.
42
it has received, there still
remains no consensus of agree-
ment among form critical
scholars about the genre of Exodus
15:1-18. Fohrer has maintained
that this song is a hymn.1
His conclusions are based upon
his classifications of the
literary types in the poetry of
ancient Israel.2 Fohrer has
defined a hymn as "a song
praising the greatness and majesty
of Yahweh in his creation and
governance of the destiny of
men and nations."3
There are hymnic elements in the Song of
the
example of the poem's hymnic
elements. Watts4 and Rozellar5
have also classified Exodus 15
as a hymn.
The Gattungen Is a Hymn of Thanksgiving
Martin Noth primarily views the Song of the
as a hymn with elements of a
thanksgiving song incorporated
into it.6 One of the
aspects of a thanksgiving hymn is that
the body of the hymn is made up
of a narrative interwoven
with elements of confession and
confidence.7 In the Psalms
this need is expressed either
through the sin of the
1 Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 188.
2 Ibid., pp. 260-72.
3 Ibid., p. 263.
4 Watts, "The Song
of the Sea--Ex. XV," p. 380.
5 Rozellar, "The
Song of the Sea," p. 227.
6 Noth, Exodus, p. 123.
7 Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament, p.
269.
43
individual or through the
enemies' wickedness from which the
individual is then freed.1
This latter need appears to be
represented in this song. It
must be pointed out however
that even Noth has recognized
that it is not primarily a
thanksgiving song.2
The Gattungen
Is a Hymn of Divine Enthronement
Mowinckel has indicated that this is a hymn of the
divine enthronement.3
According to Mowinckel's classifi-
cation of psalms, an
enthronement psalm is one where Yahweh
is saluted as king. Often in
the introduction the charac-
teristic phrase j`lamA hvhy, appears. This phrase does not
appear in the introduction of
the Song of the
hvhy does
appear with the imperfect aspect of j`lamA in
verse
18. This psalm was supposedly
connected with the harvest
and new year festival. The poet
had experienced a vicarious
vision in which Yahweh had done
some great deeds, such as
1 Ibid., cf. also J. Hempel, "The Book of Psalms,"
The Interpreter's
Dictionary of the Bible, ed. by George
Arthur
Buttrick (4 vols.:
III
, 949-50.
2 Noth, Exodus, p . 123.
3 Mowinckel, The Psalms in
4 Ibid., p. 107; it should be observed that the
interpretation
of Mowinckel of j`lamA hvhy, is very speculative;
this
phrase would be better understood as "the Lord is king"
or
"the Lord reigns," instead of "the Lord has become king,"
Otto
Eissfeldt, "Jahwe als Konig," Zeitschrift
fur die
Alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft,
4.6 (1928), pp. 84-88; John
Gray
disagrees with Eissfeldt's criticism, John Gray, "The
Kingship
of God in the Prophets and Psalms," Vetus
Testamentum, XI:1 (January, 1961),
1-29.
44
defeating Pharaoh and his army.
He has also conquered their
gods, Exodus 15:11. Yahweh then
took the throne. The Reed
Sea becomes the primeval sea
and
primeval dragon.1
Mowinckel was not referring to a partic-
ular historical event but
rather to a mythical event which
was real to the poet. Since the
events of each are associ-
ated with the creation of the
world and the exodus from
which the poet refers. As
Mowinckel has stated:
They take it for granted that the
series of events
referred to is well known beforehand
to those who are
to hear or sing the psalm; they
refer to a (mythical)
conception which they share with a
larger group. The
enthronement of Yahweh must to them
have been an event
which could be both presented and
alluded to, because
the group knew that it had now taken
place.
The Gattungen Is a Litany
Muilenburg regards this as a liturgy or litany.3
A
litany is a sentence followed
by a response.4 Fohrer has
indicated that a liturgy
"results from the linking of sev-
eral literary types to form a
larger composition."5 A hymn
is a general classification of
a literary type which may
1 Ibid., pp. 106-8. 2 Ibid., p. 112.
3 Muilenburg, "A
Liturgy on the Triumphs of Yahweh,"
pp.
236-37.
4 J. D. A. Clines,
"Psalm Research since 1955: I.
The
Psalms and the Cult," Tyndale
Bulletin, 18 (1967), 107.
5 Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament, p.
270.
45
include aspects of other
literary types. Likewise the term
liturgy is a broad term which
may contain a number of
Gattungen.
Muilenburg has further indicated that this psalm
was composed for liturgical
purposes in the cult. It was
supposedly used for the
celebration at the autumnal festi-
val.1 Muilenburg has
several reasons for this being a lit-
urgy. This song has a specific
beginning and ending.
Although they are separate,
they still stand in relation to
each other. The primary
divisions are of the same approx-
imate length and they are
permeated by hymnic refrains in
strategic places, such as
verses 6, 11, and 16. These pri-
mary divisions are divided into
strophes. Key words are
found in key positions in order
to help the poem make pro-
gress. The images are also
found in climatic contexts.
Similar cola will be repeated
in the same literary context,
such as verse 5, Umyus;kay; tmohoT;, and verse 10, MyA
Oms.AKi.
A
very important factor is the
alternation between confes-
sional speech of praise and the
narrative concerning the
enemy.2
1 Muilenburg, "A
Liturgy on the Triumphs of Yahweh,"
p.
236.
2 Ibid., p . 237.
46
The Gattungen Is a Hymn of Victory
The
genre of this psalm has been regarded as one of
victory by Cross and Freedman1
and also Cassuto.2 Kitchen
also regards this as a song of
triumph.3 Kitchen advocates
this view because of the
external background. This is the
Hebrew counterpart to the
Egyptian hymns of triumph by
Tuthmosis III, Amenophis III,
Ramesses II, and Merenptah.4
This also supposedly fits the
context.5 It also fits the
historical
background.6
An Evaluation of these
Studies of the
Gattungen
of Exodus 15:1-18
It
would appear that the preceding analysis of the
various literary types leaves
one with no consensus on this
subject. One of the basic
problems with most of these
views is that most scholars
regard the genesis of Exodus
15:1-18 as the cult. This
separates the Song of the Reed
Sea from the historical context
of Exodus 14-15. Mowinckel,
who has interpreted this song
as an enthronement psalm, has
based his arguments upon his
speculations about
1 Cross and Freedman, "The Song of
Miriam," p. 237.
2 Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus,
p.
173.
3 Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament, p.
133,
n.
89.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
47
New Year Festival. He has drawn
some of his conclusions
about
Year Festival.1 By
doing this Mowinckel has divorced this
song from its immediate context
in Scripture.
This
song appears to be a concatenation of many
literary types. The song
apparently does have hymnic ele-
ments. It appears to have the
characteristics of a thanks-
giving song. It does have
liturgical elements. Finally, it
does have the characteristics
of a hymn of triumph. If
Fohrer's statement is accurate
that a liturgy "results from
the linking of several types to
form a larger composition,"2
the liturgical genre may
tentatively be preferred.
Muilenburg's
analysis of Exodus 15 as a liturgy,
however, is not without
problems for the conservative inter-
preter. The Hungarian scholar
Szorenyi has listed some
criteria for determining if a
psalm may be classified as
cultic or non-cultic.3
He indicates that if a psalm had a
liturgical usage in the cult
there should be certain
intrinsic evidences for a
cultic setting, such as a descrip-
tion of the
1 Mowinckel, The Psalms in
34;
Mowinckel's reasoning is not based on solid objective
facts,
see
P.
955.
2 Sellin, Introduction to the Old Testament, p.
290.
3 J. D. A. Clines, "Psalm Research
since 1955: II.
The
Literary Genres," Tyndale Bulletin,
20 (1969), 114-15.
48
other cultic act.1
If there is no cultic emphasis, this
psalm is not liturgical.
The
Song of the
the concatenation of many
literary genres. A poem with many
literary types is an enigma for
form critical purposes
because the form critic's
purpose in determining the liter-
ary genre is to determine the
cultic setting of a psalm. A
similar situation is found in
Psalm 36. Psalm 36 tentatively
has three literary genres in
thirteen verses. Dahood has
drawn this conclusion:
"The coexistence of three literary
types within a poem of thirteen
verses points up the limita-
tions of the form-critical
approach to the Psalter."2 This
conclusion should be applied to
Exodus 15:1-18 as Childs'
conclusions reflect, "the
Song does not reflect any one
genre in its form which would
give the key to its function
within the early life of the
nation."3
Setting
The
word setting is used as a synonym for the
German expression Sitz im Leben.4 Gunkel was
not satisfied
1 Ibid.
2 Mitchell Dahood, Psalms, in The Anchor Bible
(3
vols.:
Garden City,
218.
3 Childs, The Book of Exodus, p. 244.
4 Tucker, Form Criticism and the Old Testament,
p.
15.
49
with only classifying the
literature of the Old Testament by
literary types, but he also
attempted to discover the Sitz
im
Leben or the situation in life from which a specific
literary genre arose.1
Every ancient literary genre was
initially related to a specific
aspect of the national life
of
type of Gattungen, the situation in life in which it was
used could be located.2
An example of this was Gunkel's
analysis of the Psalms. Gunkel
had raised a question which
needed an answer. In essence this
question was, were the
Psalms used by the community of
Israelite as he worshipped?
Since many of them seemed to
express a personal religious
feeling, they were assigned to
the postexilic period because
it was regarded as the age of
the individual. Gunkel
maintained that the oral form
regressed in time to the days
of the worshipping community.
Therefore, in oral form they
originally were cultic hymns
which were composed for worship
in the pre-exilic days of
Mowinckel
carried this process a step further "by
refusing the artificiality of
detaching the psalms from the
1 Hahn, The Old Testament in Modern Research, pp.
137-38.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
50
rituals that had supposedly shaped
them."1 There is a meth-
odological difference between
Mowinckel and Gunkel. The
latter began with similarities
of form and worked to a
common cultic Sitz im Leben for all the forms of a
literary
type. Mowinckel reversed this
procedure and "begins with
the cult, and derives the
various literary forms from the
exigencies of the cult."2
A primary difference between
Mowinckel and Gunkel,
therefore, is Mowinckel's cultic
emphasis.3 This
cultic emphasis of Mowinckel has laid a
foundation for modern day Old
Testament studies.4 Of course,
some in their zeal have gone
further than Mowinckel. Others
however have cautiously
questioned and modified Mowinckel's
approach to the Psalter as well
as the other Hebrew poetical
sections.5 Those who
approach the poetical sections of the
Old Testament consequently
approach it with a cultic
1 Derek Kidner, Psalms 1-72, The Tyndale Old
Test-
ament Commentaries, ed. by D. J. Wiseman (
2 Clines, "Psalm Research since 1955:
11. The
Literary
Genres," p. 109; cf. also Mowinckel, The
Psalms in
3 Johnson, "The Psalms," p. 205;
Johnson gives a
concise
summary of Gunkel and Mowinckel's work in the
Psalms.
4 See Walter Eichrodt's
informative chapter on the
cult
in Theology of the Old Testament, The Old
Testament
Library, trans. by J. A. Baker
(2 vols.:
5 Kidner, Psalms 1-72, p. 9.
51
consciousness. Davies' comments
are germane: "It is the
quest for 'cultic reality' and
the cultic nucleus; which now
dominates contemporary study of
the Psalms.”1 The various
settings for Exodus 15:1-18
will presently be examined.
Enthronement
Festival of Yahweh
Exodus
15 has been associated with the enthronement
festival of Yahweh.2
Mowinckel maintains this presupposi-
tion. Weiser associates Exodus
15 with the covenant fes-
tival, but this is essentially
the same presupposition as
Mowinckel's. Weiser verifies
this conclusion when he states
that Exodus 15:1-18 "is a
festival hymn to Yahweh . . .
and to have been composed for
the enthronement of Yahweh,
which was celebrated at the
national feast of the cove-
nant."3 Weiser's festival of the covenant is the
cultic
1 G. Henton Davies, "Worship in the
Old Testament,"
The Interpreter's
Dictionary of the Bible, ed. by George
Arthur
Buttrick (4 vols.:
IV,
881; cf. also Martin J. Buss, "The Meaning of 'Cult'
and
the Interpretation of the Old Testament," Journal of
Bible and Religion, XXXII:4 (October,
1964), 317-25.
2 Mowinckel, The Psalms in
126-28.
3 Arthur Weiser, The Old Testament: Its Formation
and Development, trans. from the 4th
ed., with revisions by
the
author, by Dorothea M. Barton (
Press,
1961), p. 106; Weiser would probably not agree with
this
statement, but Mowinckel would, see Mowinckel, The
Psalms in Israel's
Worship,
II, 228-29; cf. also Helmer
Ringgren,
"Enthronement Festival or Covenant Renewal?"
Biblical Research, 7 (1962), 45-48;
Ringgren has observed
that
there are many similarities between Mowinckel and
Weiser,
but he has also recognized that each has a different
emphasis.
52
basis from which he interprets
most of the Psalms.1 An
important caution must be mentioned
in reference to
Mowinckel and Weiser's use of
the cult. Muilenburg has
stated that Mowinckel sees too
many types under the rubric
of the enthronement festival of
the New Year.2 This same
criticism should be applied to
Weiser.
Covenant
Festival of Yahweh
Cross
has associated the Song of the
the covenant festival of the
spring New Year.3 Cross has
maintained that Exodus 15
possibly originated in the cult at
Gilgal in the twelfth century
B.C.4 His conclusions have
been stimulated by his studies
in early Hebrew orthography.5
Cross has further been
influenced by the assumption that
Ugaritic literature has
provided a basis for this assumption.
In Ugaritic literature Baal was
a divine warrior who
1 Arthur Weiser, The Psalms, Old Testament Library,
trans.
from the 5th German rev. ed. by Herbert Hartwell
(Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1962), pp. 23-35.
2 James Muilenburg, "Form Criticism
and Beyond,"
Journal of Biblical Literature, LXXXVIII:1 (March,
1969), 6.
3 Cross, "The Divine Warrior in
Cult,"
p. 27.
4 Ibid.
5 Cf. Frank
Early Hebrew
Orthography: A Study of the Epigraphic
Evidence, American Oriental Series, Vol. 36 (hereinafter
referred
to as Early Hebrew Orthography) (
Conneticut:
American Oriental Society, 1952).
53
overcame Yamm. After this victory a palace was built for
Ba’l on
and then the temple cult was
inaugurated.1 After this Ba’l
became a slave to Mot. Ba’l's
consort ‘Anat defeated Mot
and Ba’l was consequently released. Ba’l
entered into
another conflict with Mot and defeated him.2 Ba’l and ‘Anat
next went to war with Lotan, a dragon who corresponds sup-
posedly to the biblical
Leviathan. Lotan was equated with
Yamm. The
result of this victory over the dragon was "to
establish the rule of the
warrior-king of the gods."3 Cross
has stated his purpose for
discussing the Ba’l cycle:
The Ba’l
cycle relates the emergence of kingship among
the gods. The tale of the establishment of a
dynastic
temple and its cultus is a typical subtheme of
the
cosmogony and its ritual, and is found also in Enuma,
The motifs of the Ugaritic
literature are supposedly trans-
parent in the Song of the
which are observable are the
following: the divine warrior
enters into combat and gains
the victory at the Sea, a
sanctuary is built on the mount
of inheritance, and the god
manifests his eternal kingship.5
Cross'
interpretation of these motifs has not left
his presuppositions unaffected.
He has observed in Exodus
1 Cross, "The Song of the Sea and
Canaanite Myth,"
p.
5.
2 Ibid., pp. 6-7.
4 Ibid.,
p. 9.
3 Ibid.,
p. 8.
5 Ibid.,
p. 24.
54
15 that there is no reference
to an east wind blowing to
split the sea so that the
Israelites are able to cross on
a dry sea bed. Neither is there
reference to the Egyptians
drowning in the sea.1
In the so-called late prose sources
in the Bible, the primary motif
becomes the dividing of the
sea and
tions developed in two
directions. In one group the lan-
guage is mythical and in the
other the creation battle with
Yamm is
interwoven with the historical tradition of Exodus.3
Cross has derived the following
conclusion:
Our
survey brings us to the conclusion that the Song
of the Sea cannot be fitted into the history of
the
prose and poetic traditions of the Exodus,
except at the
beginning of the development in the period of
the judges.
Its independence is remarkable, preserved by the
fixity
of its poetic form while prose traditions,
especially
those orally transmitted, developed and
crystallized in
a complex development.4
It is
from this analysis that Cross has concluded
that Exodus 15:1-18 was
composed for the cultus of the early
league shrine at Gilgal. It is
at Gilgal that the Exodus
and Conquest are brought
together in these cultic acts.
Verses 1-12 of Exodus 15
represent the victory at the Reed
Sea and verses 13-28 the
conquest of the land. Cross has
reconstructed the cultic
festival at Gilgal around Joshua
3-5.5 The ark was
carried in a formal procession to Gilgal.
1 Ibid.,
p. 16. 2 Ibid., pp. 17-19.
3 Ibid.,
pp. 19-20. 4 Ibid., pp. 20-21.
5 Cross, "The Divine Warrior in
pp.
26-27.
55
The
mitted to pass over on dry
ground, but it pictured the
crossing of the
the new land. When they had
traveled from Shittim to Gilgal,
they set up twelve memorial
stones to the twelve tribes when
they celebrated the covenant
festival. Then the circumci-
sion etiology was carried out
and the general of the host of
Yahweh made an appearance.
Cross calls this the "Passover-
Massot," the old spring
festival of the New Year. Therefore,
the provenance of Exodus 15 is
found in the Gilgal cult in
the twelfth century B.C.1
Some
cautions must be observed in reference to
Cross' analysis of this song.
Cross has stated that there
is no reference to an east wind
blowing to split the sea so
that
stated that there is no
reference to the Egyptians' drowning
in the sea.2 Cross'
interpretation of some of the informa-
tion contained in this song is
questionable. Although
Exodus 15 does not specifically
mention the strong east wind
and the path through the sea,
it certainly depicts these in
verses 8-10. The strong east
wind is referred to in verse 8
"the blast of your
nostrils" and in verse 10 "blew with your
wind." Verse 8 seems to
indicate that there was a path in
1 Ibid.
2 Cross, "The Song of the Sea and
Canaanite Myth,"
p.
16.
56
the sea. The prepositional
phrase dne-OmK; is used in Joshua
3:13, 16 to refer to a path for
crossing the Jordan River.1
Cross has also stated that the
Song of the
brought together in the early
days of the judges.2 If this
is the case, this would have
been one of the few times that
all of the tribes of
the judges.
A final
caution deals with the motifs. There may
be a similarity between the
motifs of the Song of the Reed
Sea and the mythological texts
pertaining to Ba’l.3 The
Hebrews were undoubtedly aware
of some of the mythology of
her neighbors due to their
cultural contacts and undoubtedly
some of the imagery would be
shared because they shared a
common cultural setting.
However, if there are common
motifs, a conservative
interpreter must insist that there
is certainly a theological
distinction. Knife's remarks
are germane:
In
the common culture of the ancient Near East,
similar vocabulary, thought forms, poetic
structure,
figures of speech, etc., belonged to each ethnic
group
in common. Hence, the parallels that crop up
every-
where. But the meaning in biblical literature,
is often
1 Coats, "The Song of the Sea,"
p. 14, n. 50.
2 Cross, "The Song of the Sea and
Canaanite Myth,"
20-21.
3 Craigie, "The Poetry of
57
unique
because of its distinctly different theological
and philosophical viewpoint.1
Harris has appropriately
concluded "that mythological
symbols are used in the Bible
for purposes of illustration
and communication of truth
without in the least adopting