In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Hebrew Studies 31 (1990) 246 Reviews ticular societies demands explanations that must rest on a broader social and cultural base than simply theology. If van der Toom's volume, then, is not definitive, it is certainly provocative , as well as infonnative, on a wide and significant range of topics for Biblicists, Assyriologists, and others interested in the ancient Near East. It marks an unusually auspicious beginning for the author's career, and happily the wish for more such studies is already being answered (e.g., "L'oracle de victoire comme expression prophetique au Proche-Orient ancien," RB 94 [1987]:63-97). Peter Machinist University ofMichigan Ann Arbor, Ml48109 DAS HEILIGTUM UND DAS GESETZ: STUDIEN ZUR BEDEUTUNG DER SINAITISCHEN HEILIGTUMSTEXTE (EX 25-40; LEV 8-9). By Helmut Utzschneider. Orbis biblicus et orientalis 77. pp. 320. Freiburg Schweiz: UniversiUUsverlag I Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1988. Cloth. This is the Munich "Habilitationsschrift" of Dr. Utzschneider whose doctoral dissertation was on the book of Hosea (published in 1980, aBO 31). The subtitle of this new monograph may be somewhat misleading for the book does not examine the importance of the sanctuary texts of Exodus and Leviticus but rather examines their meaning, purpose, and origin. According to Utzschneider, these chapters, produced after the destruction of the old royal Jerusalem sanctuary in 587 D.C.E. and the collapse of its foundational concepts, outline a new conception of the sanctuary which links the sanctuary with the traditions of divine law. In that way, an "Israel" which had to live under Persian domination was put on a new institutional and theological basis (p. 1). This is an original and important thesis, especially-as the author himselfemphasizes-because it is proposed by a Protestant scholar who, by his own traditions, must have special difficulties with a positive vision of law. Utzschneider starts with a chapter on the theoretical and methodological principles to be applied (pp. 4-18). His main authority seems to be R. A. de Beaugrande and W. Dressler, Einfiihrung in die Textlinguistik (Tiibingen, Hebrew Studies 31 (1990) 247 Reviews 1981). Following these authors, he introduces many new words or new meanings for old words, for instance a distinction between "Kotext" and "Kontext" neither of which expresses for him what the German word "Kontext" generally means-the word "Kotext" even not existing according to the dictionaries. As these words later on recur again and again, whoever wants to continue reading has to learn them and their meanings. The general intention of this methodological reflection is to find a way of combining diachronic and synchronic reading. The second chapter is a critical discussion of earlier research under the headings of style, stages of textual development, texts and patterns presupposed , traditional ideas used, dating, and purpose (pp. 19-73). The third chapter, in which the discussion proper begins, is on the "Kotexts" (pp. 74133 ). Utzschneider compares the persons and their activities, as well as the objects (ark, tablets, tabernacle) and their functions in the sanctuary texts with the same entities in the surrounding texts (Exod 13 through Deut 31). He notes commonalities and differences. Chap. 4 is on the deep structures of the sanctuary texts themselves (pp. 134-184). Utzschneider discusses the roles of Moses (prophet and king), of the people, and of the priests. Comparisons with texts from other books of the Bible are made. Small inconsistencies within the texts begin to appear. Chap. 5 is an analysis of the surface structure of the text (pp. 185-235). Utzschneider gradually arrives at the distinction of three different but interwoven concepts. He calls them "ark-dwelling-concept," "peoplesanctuary -concept," and "ohe!-mo'ed-concept." Corresponding to these three concepts, he then in chap. 6 (pp. 236-258) reconstructs three historical stages of the text, the second and third being enlargements and reworkings of the first one. This first one, furthermore, never was an independent text but had been created as an addition to what generally is called the old sources of the Pentateuch. There are further subdivisions within the three main priestly strata as well as a final redaction. In chap. 7 (pp. 259-297), Utzschneider relates the main strata of his texts to other literary activities of the...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 246-249
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.