Читать книгу Trusting YHWH - Lorne E. Weaver - Страница 11

The Psalter is divided into five distinct books, each of which, excepting Psalm 145, concludes with a benediction: Book I (3–41: Blessed be יהוה, the God of Israel, from eternity to eternity. Amen and Amen); Book II (42–72: Blessed be יהוה, the God of Israel, who alone does wondrous things. Blessed be his glorious name forever; Amen and Amen); Book III (73–89: Blessed be יהוה forever. Amen and Amen); Book IV (90–106: Blessed be יהוה, the God of Israel, from eternity to eternity. And let all the people say, “Amen.” Praise יהוה); and Book V (107–145). Psalms 146 through 150 serve as the postscript and the unitive doxology of praise to the entire Psalter. Each begins “Alleluia” or Praise יהוה! In these schema we take also Psalms 1 and 2 as the Introduction to the Psalter.

In Hebrew, Psalm 1 begins with aleph, the first letter of the alphabet; its final word begins with the letter taw, the last letter of the alphabet. Consequently, the letters aleph and taw are intended to symbolize all the letters and words in between, thereby embracing the entire Psalter. Psalm 2 alerts all readers who approach the book of Praises to listen carefully to what follows and meditate on it day and night for what they will encounter there reaches beyond time!

Psalm 2 is the second panel of the introduction to the Book of Psalms. It is united to the first psalm by the inclusion of the . . . (“Blessed,” or “How happy”) which open the first [Psalm] and conclude the second [Psalm], and by the repetition of themes from the first (1:6) in the second (2:12). Together Psalms 1 and 2 introduce major topics and terms that are woven through the texture of the entire book. The piety represented by these psalms is beset by the problems of the wicked and the nations. The reader is asked to take both psalms as the voice of the speaker, who identifies himself in 2:7 by an identity given him by God. ‘ The son’ pronounces the beatitude of Psalm 1 about the wicked and the righteous and discloses the policy of heaven concerning the nations in Psalm 2. 42

Likewise, the doxology, Psalms 146–150 is a collection of “Hallelujah Psalms” that constitutes the conclusion of the Psalter in a crescendo of praise. In this manner we are then left with one hundred and forty-three psalms (3–145). These are divided into two segments (3–89 and 90–145). With these divisions we are able to recognize more clearly the definitively intentional organizational structure and shaping of the book of Psalms. This lends the view that the Psalter in its final form is the result of a collection of collections, purposeful editing and arranging, resulting in a distinct shape. These sets of markers are, however, not immediately recognizable to us. What gives a distinct shape to the corpus as a whole, from the Introduction of Psalms 1 and 2, to the corporate Doxology of Psalms 146 to 150, is a consciously intentional ordering of a “collection of collections” and assumes a deliberate editorial arrangement.43 We tentatively posit a final, settled arrangement of the Psalter before the end of the first-century CE (ca. 90) or even into the early second-century. We know that the psalms were widely read and sung by the first-century Christian churches and in the Jewish synagogues that were scattered throughout the ancient Roman world.

This conscious arrangement of the Psalter, and its ready inclusion into the Hebrew canon, may be asserted as having come about rather early in the canonical process. We posit a second-century BCE time frame. The canon–as we now have it in our bibles—was not yet closed for all Judaism in the first-century BCE. Some of the psalms found at Qumran show that the last third of the Psalms was the section with the greatest textual fluidity. These manuscripts (4QPsf = 4Q8811; Qps a-b = 11Q 5–6)44 include additional apocryphal psalms, some of them known from the Greek Psalter (Ps 151) or the Syriac Psalter (Pss 151, 154, and 155). Some scholars view these Qumran psalters as biblical or “canonical,” all of which suggest that the number and sequence of the canonical psalms had not yet been definitively established in the Qumran period. Others view these scrolls as a secondary compilation for liturgical use or as library editions.45 However, this arrangement hinges on several other considerations relevant to our study.

The implication that follows is that both Psalms 1 and 2, the Introduction, and Psalms 146–150, the final Doxology, were added late in the development of the entire book. A late post-exilic setting in the Persian period of the restoration and the rebuilding of the walls of the temple under Ezra-Nehemiah can reasonably be postulated. This does not mean, however, that they were the last of the compositions to be included in the collection. Psalm 2 alone can reasonably be set in the tenth-century BCE and Psalm 1 “is more than an introduction to the Psalter; it is a precis of the Book of Psalms.46. This assessment of the shaping of the Psalter implies that the canon of the Hebrew scriptures was open for a very long time. We know now that the Hebrew canon was still quite fluid at the time of the LXX and included the book of Daniel, thought to be one of the last entries into the Hebrew canon. This is significant for determining a relative time of the closing of the canon of Hebrew scripture by the community of scribal authorities, toward the end of the first-century CE.

The earliest attestations of the Hebrew canon as a list come from the second half of the first century C. E. Between 250 B.C.E. and 50 C. E., it seems that there was no canon in the sense of a numerus fixus of holy books. The widely accepted doctrine of the era of revelation permitted discussion about the authenticity, antiquity, and authorship of specific books.47

But the closing of the Hebrew canon, which we postulate as ca. 90 to 125 CE does not preclude the Psalter’s continued shaping and editing right up to that time. Final canonization and the editing of the texts are two very different activities; and the consideration of the text of the Hebrew Bible as being in some sense sacred prior to canonicity is not a contradictory position.

The Psalms did not become “inspired scripture” the moment they were canonized. Indeed, they had functioned in the community as sacred songs for a very long time. They were received into the ancient canon as the primary witness to the great deeds of יהוה by a people who had sung and prayed them over many centuries. Indeed, they had functioned liturgically long before they were written compositions; before they were read, they were sung; before they were collected; before they were arranged; before they were edited; indeed, before they were text, they had nurtured and consoled the wider community of the faithful. Inspiration is implied in the Hebrew bible.

It only became a focus of the Christian church in the second and third centuries CE as it struggled with establishing its own criteria as to what constitutes an “inspired text.” Determining just how specific words come to be “enscripturated” is a process that takes place over an extended period of time. What is clear is that the early Christian church understood the Hebrew bible to be sacred scripture by its repeated use of the moniker “it is written.” That the Psalms were used widely throughout early Christian worship is attested by no less than Luke, Peter, Paul and the other evangelists. The Hebrew bible translated into Greek (LXX) was, for the early church, the book of the “law and the prophets.”

That the psalms were considered authoritative witness by the Jews prior to the closing of the canon, is widely attested. The word canon means a reed or rule; a standard to be agreed on; a settled text. An early version of the book of Psalms (second-century BCE) gives every appearance of having been readily received into the Hebrew canon as sacred text of Scripture. It quickly secured the mantle of unparalleled authoritative and faithful witness to the historic acts and words of יהוה in the life of the ancient people of God. This is thoroughly demonstrated and it’s witnessed throughout the Christian scriptures in the church. Indeed, the first scriptures of the early Christians was the Hebrew bible. Its searching use of the Psalms bore witness to Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promises to all humanity. The promised Messiah was the subject of their investigations. Without the witness of the Psalms as scripture, this pattern of promise and fulfillment would not be nearly so transparent to the new community of God.

The two major Greek translations of the “Old Testament”, the LXX third-century BCE and the ninth-century CE Theodotion Text, 48 both include additional materials taken from the book of Daniel, and others which were relegated to the Apocrypha. In both the Hebrew and Protestant bibles, the First Testament books consist of 39 entries. Although they are arranged in a differing order, both canons contain exactly the same authorized books. These differ from their Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox counterparts, both of whom admit deutero-canonical books into their canons of Holy Scripture. The Protestant Anglican Communion admits some few apocryphal books for the purpose of reading and edification, but not for the constructing and establishing of any doctrine. This is a position that is theologically unique to the Anglican Communion—and in turn, the Episcopal Church in the United States.

Additionally, manuscript fragments of the prophecy of Daniel were also found among the Dead Sea Scrolls in three caves at Qumran including apocalyptic texts that employ language reminiscent of Daniel 7 and 12. The earliest date of the Dead Sea Scrolls is placed in the second-century BCE. The inclusion of sacred scriptures into the Hebrew canon occurs later than the LXX, which includes both of these books and is relatively fixed by the time of the council at Jamnia, ca. 90 CE.49 There are substantial differences in the Hebrew biblical canon, and that found in the Greek and Latin and modern Roman Catholic Bibles regarding the status and use of apocryphal books and their inclusion into the Hebrew canon of sacred scripture. These so-called deutero-canonical writings, with only one or two exceptions, are extant only in Greek and do not form part of the Hebrew canon. Further support may be garnered from the Dead Sea Scrolls where one may compare the arrangement of the Psalter to that found in the Masoretic Text (MT), the stabilization of which appear to take place in two distinct stages:

Psalms 1–89 (or thereabouts) prior to the first century BCE, and Psalms 90 onwards toward the end of the first century CE. The scrolls strongly suggest that during the entire Qumran period Psalms 1–89 were virtually finalized as a collection while Psalms 90 and beyond remained much more fluid. 50

For Christians, the value of the Psalter of course, lies chiefly in the relationship between the Hebrew bible and the Christian scriptures. Rather than resorting to analysis alone, the Psalms call for synthesis and constantly challenge the mind and the heart of the serious reader. Discussion of the shape of the book of Psalms cannot afford to overlook what this combination of earlier and later segments into a final form was intended to signify. An intentional and purposeful editorial arrangement and a collection of collections in the final shaping of the Psalter is clearly at work, bringing it to the final form we have today. The Psalms are normally assumed to be the poetic constructions of some of the more famous individuals in Israel’s history. But this is not necessarily accurate because the authorship of the various psalms is now thought to be a largely anonymous enterprise and the actual identity of any of the individual poets is now considered highly speculative.

These particular 150 poetic compositions (there were thousands of psalm compositions produced in ancient Israel) are filled with songs and hymns, prayers and praises, laments and thanksgiving. Whereas prayers of lament or complaint psalms dominate Books I-III, the hymns and songs of praise are more numerous in Books IV-V. Broadly speaking, most of the psalms in Books I-III are thought to be of pre-exilic origin while the latter Books IV and V are usually considered to be mostly postexilic in origin. In this same manner praise becomes the goal of the Psalter in the way that praise is the goal of human life.

Praise is fundamental to any right understanding of the Psalms. A dialogical relationship between God and the people of God reflects the faith experience of the community that cries out in hope for the plenitude of God’s mercy, deliverance and redemption. The Psalms speak directly to the human heart. This dynamic element lies more often than not in an inherent ambiguity which is the subject of the Psalter: יהוה, who in love or anger, forgiveness or punishment, seeks to be the God of Israel, and Israel, which can only exist as the people of this God, in each historic moment, seeks to hear and respond to God’s call to them. It is YHWH who gives this particular people their corporate identity.

The compositions of the Psalms are primarily poetic but certainly not in the way we have come to understand poetry. Biblical prose is highly linear and sequential, moving from one event in time to the next through the ever present and in our English Bible versions. Prose is much more accessible to the contemporary reader, encouraging and inviting a dynamic interaction with the text. But the various poetic forms of the Psalms do not move so smoothly. Hebrew poems don’t typically tell a story so they lack the connective sinew which ties prose together. The short half-verses are bonded together in verbal parallelism and in turn mark the transition from one line to the next -a relatively tenuous exercise. Each line in Hebrew poetry functions more like a brick in a wall than it does a length of rope or a cable. However, very few languages are better suited to the form of noble poetry than is biblical Hebrew. In part, this is due to its very great strength of accent which normally falls on the last syllable, thus bearing the weight of sound and meaning carried by the word. The result is such that even Hebrew prose has a very strongly marked cadence or rhythm. Although our efforts to reproduce the sounds of the sung psalms it in its ancient and original state are completely futile, its sung sound must have been melodious–even ethereal–and exceedingly pleasant to the human ear. Because of this style of composition, and combined with the fact that Hebrew is a terse, pithy language all make the poetry of the psalms more difficult to access than the “friendlier” prose to which we are accustomed in the Bible.

When it comes to the translation of the Hebrew text into English the terseness of the original is almost always lost. Translation is more art than science and translators typically elongate and smooth out features of Hebrew poetry making it more challenging to access the original meaning of the text.

Nevertheless, we are not without a relatively high degree of confidence that—with some very few exceptions—the text of the Psalter is fundamentally reliable. In conveying accurately, the essence of these poetic compositions, they are affirmed as a whole and contribute to some of the most deeply intimate, moving and affective language in the entire Bible. The Psalms are the product of a community of faithful and observant worshipers. Together they sang and prayed what would gradually become, over a very long period of time, these unparalleled poems, songs, and prayers in praise of יהוה. Taken as a whole, they tell us that this is the way of Israel’s life and standing before יהוה.

This too is the genius of the Psalter. Its poetry speaks the language of every person because it mirrors not only the general and the typical, but also the particular and the specific. The first word is very often the personal divine name of God, יהוה. In the Book of Common Prayer, and in most English Bible versions as well, the name יהוה is translated LORD (all upper case); אדני Adonai, or Lord (lowercase), is translated as the epithet meaning Sovereign. This feature again represents the psalmists’ concern to preserve the sanctity of the holy and sacred Name: יהוה. In the use of this one word so much is compressed, especially allusions to the personal relationship with יהוה and the confession that [he] alone can save. Claus Westermann explains the structure of Hebrew poetry and rhyme in this way:

It is a feature of the Hebrew language (as well as the neighboring Semitic languages) that sentences rather than words or syllables are rhymed. The rhyme occurs neither in sound nor in the number of words but in the meaning of the sentences. In this feature the ancient idea is kept alive that all human speech consists not of words, but sentences. Not the single word but the sentence as a whole is the basic unit.51

It is from this perspective that thought-rhymes or sentence-rhymes called parallelism are to be understood. In the Psalms, singing and praying are still united; psalms are sung prayers or prayed singing. As songs they are at the same time what we call poetry but in a different sense than our modern poetry. The Psalms unite in themselves three separate types of word formulations: prayers (words directed to God in petition or praise), poetry (poetically formulated language), and songs (that go beyond the speaking or recital of a poem and become music). Poetic language, then, becomes the voice of the Hebrew Bible. This voice calls out to us from the distant vistas of history and is the community’s witness to ancient and foreign encounters with the Holy. It is never easy to determine the exact meaning of the text amid its many layered forms.

The full hearing of the psalms will be greatly enhanced when the familiar tendency to abstract content from form or to empty form of its content is overcome. To know the psalms are poetic is not to forget that they are Scripture. To read and hear them as Scripture requires that one receive them also as poetry. From either direction, understanding is all. 52

Establishing the historical context of a given psalm is all but impossible. The titles, where provided, are considered to be later additions. They are not part of the early text, and are thought not to be reliable for establishing any historical frame of reference. So at best we are confronted with material that is book-ended by the Babylonian exile–pre-exilic and post-exilic.

A critical and essential component of the hermeneutical task then involves interpreting the Psalms through a continuous reinterpretation as a method of studying how each psalm may be understood. Interacting with the texts themselves and paying close attention to the details of the language is demanded. Discerning the shape and shaping of the Psalter can provide the serious exegete with an interpretative vantage point. This is no modest task, as Klaus Seybold remarks:

In the practical work of exegesis on the Psalms it proves useful to begin by seeing how a psalmist opens his psalm, and how he closes it. In all speech, the first word is of paramount importance, as it marks the speaker’s point of attack, where he himself stands or professes to stand, from where he makes himself heard, in which direction he speaks or calls, and where he knows or presumes the listener to be. 53

An added complexity to early biblical Hebrew was the absence of vowel markings, punctuation, and cases. Sentence divisions—as we know them—as well as a system of notation indicating grammar were only added to the Hebrew text in the Middle Ages. The present division of the biblical text was adopted by Stephen Langton (1150–1228 CE) and was incorporated into the Hebrew text in the fourteenth-century CE. These divisions do not reflect the text’s original arrangement. With precious few exceptions, the dates and relative setting at which the hymns and prayers as they are now preserved in the Psalter, were originally composed, cannot be determined with anything like precision. It clearly appears that the great majority of them, like the proverbs and hymnic poems later collected in the wisdom literature of the Hebrew Bible, surfaced orally and were chanted or sung in communal worship in the temple before the fall of Jerusalem in the early sixth-century (587 BCE).

It is likely that some of them may come from David himself; others, not so likely. For example, we know that the psalms of Korah (Psalms 42, 44–49; 84–85; 87–88) most likely originated in at least the early eighth-century BCE near the ancient sanctuary of Dan in the far northern frontier of Israel. The head-waters of the ravines and torrents in the foothills of Mount Hermon is the most probable geographic location for many of these psalms. These “northern songs” most likely made their way south in the latter part of that century under the pressure of Assyrian incursion and the subsequent invasion of the territory of the northern tribes of Israel resulting in the wholesale destruction of Samaria in 722–21 BCE.

Our interpretative challenge in understanding so many of the psalms is a multi-layered one. The psalmists’ close bonds with יהוה are spelled out in striking images; the affirmation that each of the psalmists live in the grace of יהוה; that the cup of salvation comes only from יהוה (Ps 116:13); that each psalmist perceives their own individual identity and destiny; that all that makes up life in God is in the hands of יהוה to give and to shape. The gift is the presence of יהוה who will never abandon to death and nothingness [his] covenant-partner. Bonded in a love of extraordinary fidelity, the emphasis is on total devotion to יהוה and trust in [his] abiding presence.

The Hebrew “gospel” can be summed up as follows: You will show me the path of life. In your presence there is fullness of joy; in your right hand are unimagined glories forevermore (Ps 16:11, LW). The path of life (ארח חיים) is none other than יהוה who is the journey and the journey’s end. Life is a gift to be held in trust—like the land that was held in trust to God’s people. All statements about life are to be seen and understood in the liturgical context of Israel’s psalms without losing sight of the fact that Israel shared widely in the expressions and concepts of the ancient religious world and the neighboring peoples surrounding her.

The relative antiquity of psalms can be traced to their origins in Late Bronze Age II. We assess these relative dates by assigning to Israel’s origins some pertinent archaeological data. Important non-biblical sources for establishing Israelite origins in Palestine are the Merneptah Stele (ca. thirteenth-century BCE), which mentions an Egyptian defeat of “Israel” in Canaan, dated to ca. 1207 BCE, and the Amarna Letters, which disclose extensive political and social upheaval in the Canaanite city-states during the approximate period 1390–1362 BCE. The stele’s reference to Israel gives us a valuable chronological horizon for establishing the presence of Israel in Palestine by at least 1230 BCE, the beginning of Early Iron Age I. It is altogether probable that Israel—by the late thirteenth century BCE—was first a loosely confederated group of clans, and then, of tribes.

Merneptah’s inscription is hardly sober fact, but royal propaganda. There are many points of dispute in its interpretation. Nevertheless, it establishes that a group called Israel had a recognized presence in Palestine around 1200 and was important enough for an Egyptian monarch to brag about defeating them. It is significant that Israel is not simply given the standard label Shasu or sand dwellers, stock terms for despised Asiatic folk in Egyptian materials. Instead, Israel is referred to by name as a foe worthy of mention. Israel must have been prominent enough to serve the inscription’s propaganda purpose of honoring the king and to be recognized by its intended readership.54

Although the stele does not locate the geographical site of the battle or tell us anything about the strained and often duplicitous relations between the Egyptian court and its Canaanite vassals, it enlightens us about the internecine struggles that occurred among the vassal states. They attest to social unrest and rebellion within some of the city-states that seem to display early stages in the decline of the power centers in Canaan. In the absence of regional powers, this political vacuum would have allowed Israel to emerge in the same region more than a century later. We presume, based on this data then, that Israel emerged as an amphictionic tribal formation somewhere toward the end of Late Bronze Age II extending into Early Iron Age I. This then positions Israel’s origins and beginnings in Late Bronze Age II and her subsequent emergence as a national state with the inception of the monarchy which may be dated from Iron Age I, ca. 1030 BCE. 55

A delicate balance must be struck, then, when engaging the task of interpreting the psalmic texts. For a long time, that is, a very long time, perhaps nearly a thousand years before the Psalter was received into its final canonical form, and before the principal parts of its contents were written, there existed a tradition of psalmody in ancient Israel. The evidence for this tradition is found in the poetic texts themselves, which are part of a few prose narratives concerning Israel’s earliest era. The body of this ancient poetic material—in the form of ancient books—is actually quite small. It is important to recognize and appreciate that the Psalter is situated within the larger literary context of the Hebrew Bible. Israel’s worship of יהוה only reached its climax in the praises of the Psalter. It is undeniable that some of these poems were broadly influenced by Canaanite literary style and mythical imagery.

By way of example, two ancient books, The Book of Jashar (the Book of the Upright) and The Book of the Wars of Yahweh, had survived from the dawn of Israel’s collective memory. The Hebrew bible offers us little information about these two ancient anthologies.

It is likely that many if not most of the poems . . .appeared in one or the other of two early anthologies which are mentioned in the Bible: The Book of the Wars of Yahweh (Num 21:14), and the Book of Jashar (Josh. 10:13; II Sam. 1:18). The earliest editions of these collections may well go back to the time of the Judges, but the final published form must be dated to the monarchic period. In fact, there is a reference to the Book of Jashar in the LXX of I Kings 8:13, as the source for a poetic utterance attributed to Solomon at the dedication of the temple.56

The applicable historical-political context for these extra-biblical books is the time of the Judges–around the time of the amphictyony where the various clans of Israel coalesced together and remained loosely knit for nearly two centuries in Canaan. The term amphictyony refers to regional worshiping communities that dwelt in close physical proximity around individual shrines and who conducted cultic rituals and celebrations in the worship of ancient Israel’s God. Such observances were conducted in a number of local sanctuaries: Hebron, Shechem, Dan, Bethel, Gilgal, Shiloh, Kadesh, Gibeah, and Sinai. In the major central amphictyonic shrines of Hebron and Shechem—and probably Shiloh—the historical traditions of Israel had been gathered and collected. Whether the northern traditions which had collected around the ark, were brought to Jerusalem during the united monarchy is uncertain, but it is also unlikely.

Whatever the content of these two ancient books may have been—apart from the few scant passages explicitly identified as having been drawn from them—both may indicate the earliest collection and preservation of some of the oral poetry of Israel. They may also have been a part of the earliest collections and served as examples of the rudimentary beginnings of the first psalms of ancient Israel (e.g. Ps 18, 29, 68) which were later incorporated into some final collections of the book of Psalms. Whether there existed any other “books” of Israel’s earliest poetic compositions is unknown and is currently unknowable.

What can be asserted with some degree of confidence is that there existed an early tradition of collecting songs and poetry. It follows then that in all probability there were various traditions and customs—unknown to us–which contributed to and culminated in the formation that resulted in the eventual book of Psalms. These types of poetry were the natural medium through which Israel gave expression to its most profound human feelings, aspirations and insights so obviously apparent in the compositions which comprise the book of Praises. Expressions of joy and celebration were intrinsic to their response to God’s mighty acts on their behalf. Some scholars find in the Song of Deborah and Barak (Judg 5) the original life-setting of theophany in the Hebrew bible.

A theophany is the human experience of a divine self-disclosure initiated solely by the deity. There is no human initiative undertaken nor are any special qualifications or preparation required. In the Bible the human response is always one of fear and awe. There is never a sense of entitlement or privilege in the person’s retrospect. Theophanies are manifested as temporal events; they are not permanent reality. Rather these momentary encounters with the divine occur in a particular place and at a particular time. A theophany is a transient happening. It impacts the totality of the human person who encounters it at a profoundly life-altering level. Nothing thereafter remains the same. This poem of Deborah and Barak, then, is one of a number of representative psalms that lie outside the Psalter; it is a victory song over an oppressive enemy and is regarded as the oldest poetry of ancient Israel. It is the sort of poem that an oppressed people might delight to recite, as it tells about the defeat of a despised enemy. This poem is the earliest extant writing found in the Hebrew Bible!57

Judges 5

Then Deborah and Barak son of Abinoam sang on that day, saying:

“When locks are long in Israel,

when the people offer themselves willingly -

bless יהוה!

“Hear, O kings; give ear, O princes;

to יהוה I will sing,

I will make melody to יהוה,

the God of Israel.

“יהוה, when you went out from Seir,

when you marched from the region of Edom,

the earth trembled,

and the heavens opened,

the clouds indeed poured water.

The mountains quaked before יהוה,

the One of Sinai,

before יהוה, the God of Israel.

“In the days of Shamgar son of Anath,

in the days of Jael, caravans ceased

and travelers kept to the byways.

The peasantry prospered in Israel,

they grew fat on plunder,

because you arose, Deborah,

arose as a mother in Israel.

When new gods were chosen,

when war was in the gates.

Was shield or spear to be seen

among forty thousand in Israel?

My heart goes out to the commanders of Israel

who offered themselves willingly among the people.

Bless יהוה.

“Tell of it, you caravaneers who ride on white donkeys,

you who sit on lush carpets

and you who walk by the way.

To the sound of musicians at the watering places,

there they repeat the triumphs of יהוה,

the triumphs of the people of יהוה in Israel.

Then down to the gates marched the people of יהוה.

“Awake, awake, Deborah!

Awake, awake, utter a song!

Arise, Barak, lead away your captives,

O son of Abinoam.”

Then down marched the remnant of the noble;

the people of יהוה marched down

for him against the mighty.

From Ephraim they set out into the valley,

following you, Benjamin, with your kin;

from Machir marched down the commanders,

and from Zebulun those who bear the marshal’s staff;

the chiefs of Issachar came with Deborah,

and Issachar faithful to Barak;

into the valley they rushed out at his heels.

Among the clans of Reuben

there were great searchings of the heart.

Why did you tarry among the sheepfolds?

to hear the piping for the flocks?

Gilead stayed beyond the Jordan;

and Dan, why did he abide with the ships?

Asher sat still at the coast of the sea,

settling down by his landings.

Zebulun is a people that scorned death;

Naphtali too, on the heights of the field.

“The kings came, they fought;

then fought the kings of Canaan,

at Taanach, by the waters of Megiddo;

they got no spoils of silver.”

The stars fought from heaven,

from their courses they fought against Sisera.

The torrent Kishon swept them away,

the onrushing torrent, the torrent Kishon.

March on, my soul, with might!

Then loud beat the horses’ hoofs

with the galloping, galloping of his steeds.

Curse Meroz, says the angel of יהוה,

curse bitterly its inhabitants,

because they did not come to the help of יהוה,

to the help of יהוה against the mighty.

Most blessed of women is Jael,

the wife of Heber the Kenite,

of tent-dwelling women most blessed.

He asked for water and she gave him milk,

she brought him curds in a lordly bowl.

She put her hand to the tent peg

and her right hand to the workmen’s mallet;

she struck Sisera a blow,

she crushed his head,

she shattered and pierced his temple.

He sank, he fell;

where he sank, there he fell dead.

Out of the window she peered,

the mother of Sisera gazed through the lattice:

“Why is his chariot so long in coming?

Why tarry the hoof beats of his chariots?

Her wisest ladies make answer,

indeed, she answers the question herself:

Are they not finding and dividing the spoil?”

A girl or two for every man;

spoil of dyed stuffs for Sisera,

spoil of dyed stuffs embroidered

for my neck as spoil?

So perish all your enemies, O יהוה!

But may your friends be like the sun

as it rises in its might.”

The importance of this poem or hymn of praise is striking in its similarity to the Ugaritic language wherein the poet in Judges 5 describes a theophany. In this earliest instance, the mountains quaked before YHWH, the One of Sinai, before YHWH, the God of Israel (Judg 5:5). The translation of the verb quake assumes the form נָזֹלּוּ (nazollu) from the root זָלַל (zalal, to shiver and shake). Some scholars interpret the Hebrew in the sense of flowing, liquid matter (as in volcanic magma). The LXX, the Syriac Peshitta, and the Targum all understand the word נָזֹלּוּ (nazollu) in this way. Indicative of the theophanic formula is the appearance of the angel of יהוה (Judg 5:23) with יהוה personified as the divine warrior defending the ancient clans from their enemies in Canaan.

It is an instructive bit of song for it introduces us into the world of Hebraic poetry–a world which in another thousand years will usher forth in Sepher Tehillim, the book of Praises. The theophany described as it is portrayed in Judges 5 is disclosed in this ancient poem dating from the late thirteent-century BCE—not far removed from the events being celebrated. Ancient Israel’s first psalm in Judges 5, Deborah’s Song, is “the oldest surviving extended fragment of Hebrew literature.” (REB p. 251).

It is explicitly described as having been sung and it is one of the earliest markers that can be traced to having been laid down at the dawn of the Hebraic traditions. The traditions of ancient Israel refer not only to the sacred texts that have come down to us but also include the life of worship and the liturgies that shaped that worship. Israel’s psalms are the best examples we have from the Hebrew scriptures of the shape and the shaping of ancient Israel’s worshiping life. In them we have the words Israel spoke in response to the word of יהוה being addressed to them. The origins of several other key markers, one of which is the Zion tradition, is directly connected to the ark narratives. The tradition of the election of Zion by יהוה is, of course, based upon the bringing of the ark to Jerusalem. 58 The connection of the ark tradition with the temple is later called into question by the prophets, particularly Jeremiah.59

There are many patterns of thought connected with the ark in the Hebrew scriptures. It was originally designated as the ark of Elohim which is the general usage in the books of Samuel. It was considered the place where יהוה was enthroned (Num 10:35–36; I Sam 4:4; II Sam 6:2). With the ark was connected the idea of יהוה as leader of the host. In deuteronomistic thought the ark and the covenant are joined and the “Ark of the Covenant” is said to contain the tables of the law. In chronistic thought, the cherubim are for the protection of the law and not for the place where יהוה sits enthroned. In the story of II Sam 6, the ark is brought to Jerusalem and merely placed in a tent. Later the building of the temple and the housing of the ark are combined.

The presence of the ark in Jerusalem meant that יהוה dwelt in the midst of [his] people. Centered around the choice of Jerusalem by יהוה as [his] dwelling place was, very much like the Davidic election tradition, joined to and expanded by pre-Israelite traditions. This is so from the very earliest compositions to the latter ones and brings the book of Psalms to its final resolution and close. The ark represented the presence of God at the heart of historic ancient Israel’s corporate life and worship. It is in these traditions rather than in the prophetic work of Isaiah, for example, that the origin of the tradition of Zion’s inviolability must be found. Memories of the ark of God continued to resonate deeply in the collective consciousness of the psalmists.

“The narratives on the youth of Samuel (eleventh century B.C.E.) were written in later times and edited by the Deuteronomistic school, but they include an incidental note on the ark, which bears the mark of authenticity . . . the ark was apparently kept in the temple of Shiloh, in the central mountain range of Ephraim, but there is no indication that it played any significant part in the life of the nation. The narrative merely states: ‘The lamp of Elohim had not yet gone out, and Samuel was lying down in the temple of Yahweh, where the ark of Elohim was . . .’ (I Sam. 3:3). The text does not suggest that the cultic object was considered as the visible sign of the permanent presence of Yahweh in the shrine. On the contrary, the recital of the vision in which Samuel was called to a prophetic mission clearly implies that the divine manifestation was distinct from the ark. The renaissance of interest in the ark under David was the prelude to a most important development in the Hebraic theology of presence. It contributed to the astounding development of the myth of Zion.”60

The concept of God’s dwelling in Zion has its origins in, and is based on, the presence of the ark of God in the temple in Jerusalem. 61A variant prophetic tradition made certain distinctions relative to the ark and temple. 62From several narratives in the Hebrew Scriptures, we know that the ark was closely associated with the presence of God. In some 75 psalms dispersed throughout all five books of the Psalter, the presence of God in Zion is an essential feature, whether in the prayers of the communal longing to return “home” after the exile, or in the hymns of the community experiencing the presence of יהוה in their midst.

The title Psalms of David so-called, indicates something of the relationship of David and his line with The Psalter as a communal document; those psalms which are entitled A Psalm of David, and appear to suggest Davidic authorship, must be understood with the following caveat: The prepositions in Hebrew are not distinct and may be imprecise. For example, those certain psalms may be understood as meaning “for, dedicated to, concerning, David”. Such psalms seem to evoke his persona as the chief representative of the dynasty of David without implying that he himself was the author of each psalm.

There are many psalms that might be assumed as having been authored by David.63 Such speak too of David as the founder of the temple (2 Sam. 7), even though David did not build it, which marks out the temple as the focal point for the good life and the hope for the future. It is not surprising then that the ark would embody memories of the celebrations and the triumphs of יהוה during the early days of the conquest of Canaan. In Shechem, and likely Bethel and Shiloh as well, the ark conferred its cultic concreteness upon both dimensions of the Mosaic covenant: vertical, since it exhibited the bond which united יהוה to Israel; and horizontal, since it cemented the solidarity of the heterogeneous tribes under their shared allegiance. The ark of Elohim became known as the ark of the covenant only in the later deuteronomistic traditions, which date from the seventh-century BCE and constituted part of the major reforms instituted at that time during the reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah.

The Deuteronomists are, of course, responsible for the book of Deuteronomy. The other pentateuchal sources reflect the ongoing editorial process of the Yahwistic theologians. In 2 Sam. 6, which is fairly late in the tradition, the ark is first referred to as the ark of יהוה. In the editorial composition by the Deuteronomist historian(s) it is clear that the ark of יהוה will be housed in a tent or tabernacle rather than the temple which David longs to erect to the glory of the LORD.64 The locus of Jerusalem was always understood by Jewish historians, prophets, and psalmists who perceived Zion clearly in theological terms, as Israel’s theological home. The theology of Zion is given its clearest expression in the book of Psalms. Jerusalem as a symbol runs like a sacred, golden thread through the entire fabric of Judaism.

At the center of the thought of Judaism about the land stands Jerusalem. The foundations of the Davidic monarchy were understood in purely sacral terms. Monarchy in the ancient Near east was a sacred and religious institution. A synthesis between Yahwism and the objective realities of the ancient neighborhood resolved the crisis during the age of the Judges, subsequently resulting in David and his kingdom. Prior to the monarchy, Israel was complete as the people of God as a theocracy, Yhwh having been anointed ‘the lamp of Israel and the breath of the life of the nation’ (Lam. 4:20).65

Jerusalem and Zion are clearly closely linked in the Psalter. I was glad when they said to me, “Let us go to the house of יהוה!” Now our feet are standing within your gates, O Jerusalem. Jerusalem– built as a city that is bound firmly together. (Psalm 122:1–3, NRSV); and, those who trust in יהוה are like Mount Zion, which cannot be moved, but abides forever (Psalm 125:1, NRSV). cf. (65:1; 76:1,2; 87:1,2; 137:7; 147:12).

Whereas the founding of the monarchy may be viewed as the culminating point of the First Testament, the establishment of the temple and its cultic aspects served as the highpoint of Israel’s post-nomadic settled life in Palestine. The meaning and even the memory of the institution of the monarchy in Israel differed dramatically from that of its neighbors. From its seat of power in Jerusalem the bond between יהוה in Israel and the city in which יהוה is worshiped is never as pronounced as elsewhere. For instance, nowhere in the Hebrew Bible is יהוה ever described as the God of Jerusalem. Such a direct involvement between יהוה their God, and a city made by human hands—as other cities elsewhere in the ancient Near East do commonly associate—is not feasible, in principle, in Israel. This important distinction clearly sets ancient Israel apart from the neighboring monarchies. יהוה will rule over Israel and the kings will be the anointed ones of the LORD. They will always and only derive their sovereignty and their legitimacy from יהוה before whom all serve and are subservient. יהוה will not be confined in a house or a city or any sacred space made with human hands.

In the coronation (enthronement) psalms (Pss 2, 45, 93, 95–99, 110) it’s been argued that the king is there addressed as a god. But there is no evidence in the Hebrew Bible to support such speculations. 66On the contrary, many scholars dispute the idea of any divine enthronement festival, and draw attention to the significant connections that exist between these psalms and Third Isaiah. In Isaiah 52:7 the exclamation מלך אלהיך (your God reigns!) was the glad news proclaimed to an exiled Israel and provided assurance of a coming deliverance and restoration—not just of exiled Israel but of an exiled planet. Psalm 45:7, where the king appears to be addressed as God, is best rendered: Your divine throne is for all time and eternity; and in 45:8, Therefore has God your God anointed you (NRSV).

This no more presumes an apotheosis of the king than Israel is thought of as being divinized as a people when she is referred to in a divine utterance from the eighth-century BCE prophet Hosea: When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my chosen/son (Hosea 11:1, LW). The glory/power of יהוה will be revealed in these sacred spaces, but the power and the glory will never be contained in them or circumscribed by them. In contrast to her neighbors, there is nothing in Israel’s history that would suggest any sort of divine kingship having been adopted. 67

As was noted previously, the Song of Deborah in Judges 5 is not only the earliest psalm which attributes decisive activity to יהוה, it is also the oldest extant fragment in the entire Hebrew Bible. So the origins of the Hebrew Bible, it may be said, can be traced to this late Bronze Age song. The story is passed down and centuries later, it extols יהוה as the delivering agent. Its context is mid-late twelfth century BCE, and lies a little distance from the events celebrated. It is a psalm of thanksgiving and praise to Yhwh (ברכו י יהוה) for victory over the Canaanite forces at Megiddo. In Judges 5:11, 13, Israel is called “the people of Yahweh,” but יהוה is not a part of the local Canaanite pantheon.

Yahweh seems to have been a cultural import to Palestine from the south. This is indicated by the Bible’s early theophany poetry (Deut 33:2; Judg 5:4–5; Hab 3:3). According to Exod 17:8, 15–16, a shrine called Throne of Yahweh (following MT) was located in Sinai as one of the station points on the exodus itinerary. A home base for Yahweh in the south also synchronizes with the tradition that this god’s particular mountain was situated in the Sinai Peninsula, which stands in sharp contrast to the alternative, “Canaanite” concept of Mount Zaphon in the north (cf. Ps 68:9).68

The Judges 5 poem also highlights the role of יהוה as Divine Warrior who dictates the outcome of the battle by causing an earthquake and sending violent storms (Judg 5:4, 5). Deborah’s song elicits the response of all nature in praise of the mighty acts of God. The Song of Deborah exhibits repetitive parallelisms that are reminiscent of fourteenth-century BCE Ugaritic texts. The poem’s language is archaic Hebrew and renders the task of translating the text very difficult. Nevertheless, this is precisely what one would expect from the Hebrew Bible’s earliest fragment. As was mentioned at the beginning שדי (shaddai, the god of the mountains), largely translated the Almighty in the LXX, appears in the Psalter in Psalms 91 and 68.

In Psalm 91, שדי (Shaddai) is indicative of the place of refuge and shelter. The fact that Shaddai is included along with the other three divine appellatives, in just one strophe, is singularly notable. Psalm 91 expresses a bedrock confidence in God. Our poet is focused on the character of God’s protective refuge of the faithful. To seek refuge in יהוה means one recognizes that nothing is analogous to the God of Israel. Trust is confidence of life in the face of all threats and all three dimensions of the psalmist’s being—heart, soul, and mind—participate in this joyous security and the enjoyment of a fullness of life and serenity of spirit, shalom.

People who dwell near God, live. People who are far from God, die! The psalmist’s concentrated images of refuge seek to repose the sheltering of the soul within the shadow of the divine presence. The entirety of ultimate refuge and security resides in God–the Almighty One. Helmer Ringgren connects these refuge images to Israel’s worshiping life in the temple. Ancient Israel’s experience of

the immanence of God in the temple . . . could not be described appropriately otherwise than by using verbs as ‘to see ‘ and ‘ to behold.’ This experience filled them with joy and happiness and gratitude. In other words, it strengthened their religious life and was a source of their inspiration.69

The presence of יהוה reflects very early on the basic and central theological conviction that יהוה acts on behalf of the people of יהוה.

Another early psalm of praise to יהוה was initiated in that crucial hour following the event of the Exodus (15:1–17). Women under the leadership of Miriam sang and danced to an astounding poem accompanied by music, inviting all the people to join them in hymnic praise. The text in Ex 15:20–21 is very explicit that instrumentation was used to accompany the women in song.

Israel’s history of worship, which reached its climax in the praises of the Psalter, was initiated in that crucial hour at the beginning of the tradition when women, under the leadership of Miriam, sang and danced to music, inviting the people to join them in hymnic praise (cf. The Song of Miriam in Ex 15); cf. The Song of the Sea, a longer poem, influenced by Canaanite literary style and mythical imagery, apparently comes from the period of the tribal confederacy that flourished before the rise of the Davidic monarchy (1200–1000 BCE).70

Dance and song are forms of religious prayer and praise in the Hebrew Bible and there are many references to Israel’s singing and dancing before יהוה. Perhaps the most famous instance of celebratory song and dance involves David in a later era (2 Sam. 6), dancing openly and in joyful abandon before יהוה and in the sight of the people! This was considered scandalous by his wife, Saul’s daughter Michal, and David was upbraided by her for his unrestrained exuberance. She failed to appreciate the depth of the intimacy in the relationship that existed between David and יהוה.

The Jewish Study Bible [Tanakh] says: “she despised him for it!” This bond between the anointed of יהוה and יהוה was never more evident, never more pronounced, than in the charismatic and gifted person of the young shepherd lad who was to receive Samuel’s approbation, the man after God’s own heart (I Sam 13:14). Luke’s account of Paul’s sermon in Antioch in Pisidia includes the following quotation: In his (Samuel’s) testimony about him (David) he said, ‘I have found David, son of Jesse, to be a man after my (Yhwh) heart, who will carry out all my wishes. Of this man’s posterity God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, just as he promised’ (Acts 13:22, 23, NRSV).

It was David who celebrated the entrance of the ark of יהוה into the newly captured royal city of Jerusalem.

It has often been suggested that David’s decision to bring the ark to Jerusalem in the presence of all the elite warriors of Israel (2 Sam. 6:1) indicates the acuity of his political flair. To be sure, the king probably saw in the cultic object of the ancient tribal confederation a rallying force that was attractive to both northerners and southerners. Beyond its Philistine fiasco, the ark summoned to the popular mind the memories of the Holy Warrior in Sinai and Edom as well as the Magnalia Dei in the conquest of Canaan. David’s act was probably meant to unite under Yahweh the tribesmen of Israel properly speaking with the brash young heroes of Judah as well as the keepers of the Yahwist tradition in the southern shrine of Hebron. There is no evidence, however, that his move was solely dictated by political opportunism.71

It is there and then that the Davidic dynasty is announced to David by the prophet Nathan. This is confirmed subsequently in the entering of יהוה into a solemn oath or covenant with David (2 Sam 7). Here we have the beginning of the royal theology of Jerusalem that is to dominate the Psalter. Psalms 2 and 110 are fine examples of this motif.72

The event of the Exodus ordeal and subsequent deliverance was celebrated in another unparalleled hymn of praise and thanksgiving. Liberation from Egypt became the core hallmark of the religion of the Hebrews. As a celebration of thanksgiving and gratitude Exodus 15 is unrivaled by any of Israel’s later deliverance hymns. Though it was never incorporated into the Psalter, it is used effectively by the writer (s) of the book of Exodus to make the central theological point: God is involved in Israel’s history and thereby in her deliverance. The psalm of Moses is written in archaic Hebrew verse and, using parallelism, expresses Israel’s trust. Egyptian paintings and reliefs dating to the late second millennium BCE picture horses pulling chariots but not being ridden. But other biblical texts of the eighth-century BCE (Isa 31:1) write of Egyptians traveling on horseback. Regardless, this psalm is a potent hymn marking their deliverance by יהוה and the defeat of the Egyptian pharaoh. This hymn accentuates the fact that Israel’s God, Yhwh, acted directly in human history on Israel’s behalf. This is the core event in ancient Israel’s story.

Exodus 15: 1–18

The Song of Moses

Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to יהוה

I will sing to יהוה, who has triumphed gloriously;

horse and rider are thrown into the sea.

יהוה is my strength and my might,

and has become my salvation;

this is my God whom I will praise,

my father’s God, whom I will exalt.

יהוה is a mighty warrior;

יהוה is [his] name.

Pharaoh’s chariots and his whole army

are cast into the sea;

his elite officers sank in the Sea of Reeds.

The floods covered them;

they sank down into the depths like a stone.

Your right hand O יהוה, glorious in power -

your right hand, O יהוה, shattered our enemies.

In the greatness of your majesty you overthrow your enemies;

you sent out your wrath, and it consumed them like stubble.

At the blast of your nostrils the waters were gathered in a heap;

the deeps congealed in the midst of the sea.

The enemy said, “I will pursue, I will overtake them,

I will divide the spoil; my desire shall have its fill of them.

I will draw my sword; my hand shall destroy them.”

Then you blew with your wind, the sea covered them;

they sank like lead in the mighty waters.

Who is like you, O יהוה, among the gods?

Who is like you, majestic in holiness,

awesome in splendor, doing wonders?

You stretched out your right hand,

the earth swallowed them up.

In your constant love you led the people whom you redeemed;

you guided them by your strength to your holy dwelling.

The peoples heard and they all trembled;

terror seized the inhabitants of Philistia.

Then the chiefs of Edom were dismayed;

trembling seized the leaders of Moab;

all the inhabitants of Canaan melted away.

Terror and dread fell upon them;

by the might of your arm, they became still as stone

until your people, O יהוה, passed by,

until the people whom you purchased passed by.

You brought them in and planted them especially

on the mountain of your own possession,

the place, O יהוה, that you made your dwelling,

the sanctuary, O יהוה, that your hands have established.

יהוה will reign forever and ever!”

The Song of Moses is accompanied by the Song of the Sea in a later tradition, which served an instructional purpose, and the Blessing of Moses (Deut 32) possesses a prophetic and oracular character. It is rather likely that Israel’s earliest poetry was arranged and transmitted orally rather than being the creation of any particular literary composition. It would be another two centuries until the time of Samuel, Saul, and David and the flowering of Israel’s psalmic musical poetry. Other traditional hymns of praise likely were sung but no additional compositions are extant to our knowledge. One of the scrolls from the Dead Sea (11QPs a) attributes the composition of over four thousand psalms to David.

And he [David] wrote psalms: three thousand six hundred; and songs to be sung before the altar over the perpetual offering of every day, for all the days of the year: three hundred and sixty-four; and for the sabbath offerings: fifty-two songs; and for the offering for the beginning of the month, and for all the days of the festivals, and for the day of atonement: thirty songs. And all the songs which he composed were four hundred and forty-six. And songs to be sung over the possessed: four. The total was four thousand and fifty. He composed them all through the spirit of prophecy which had been given to him from before the Most High. 73

David was a prodigious figure and revered well into the second-century CE down to today. The tradition of Davidic authorial compositions was established fairly early on. The objective was to fuse singularly the person of David with the Psalter. This fixed and early tradition suggests the Davidization of the book of Psalms thereby conferring a particular special authority to the writings. Even so, the Five Books of the Psalms, which provide a certain arrangement and structure to the Psalter is reminiscent of the Five Books of Moses. Scribal intentions were most likely intended to attest to a privileged authority and the mantle of certainty of authorship of these two giants in ancient Israel’s saga. The legitimization of a Davidic tradition is the subject of some of the oldest historical writings in the Hebrew Bible and consists of the account of David’s rise to power (I Sam 16:14; II Sam 5:12) and the throne succession narrative in II Sam 6:28–20:26 and I Kings 1–2. The divine legitimization of the Davidic kingship originated in Jerusalem following the fall of the north (Israel) in 721 BCE, and played a crucial role in ancient Israel’s evolving story and lived experience of a learned, experiential trust in יהוה.

The psalmist testifies to his intimate trust in Yahweh and expresses confidence (a kind of indirect prayer) that the offenders will be destroyed by Yahweh, from whom they have gone astray. The language is especially appropriate for the king: he is perpetually beside God, who has taken hold of his right hand. God conducts him by the agency of his ‘counsel’, which is here rather like the personified word and the covenant-graces which assist in guidance. ‘Counsel’ itself is commonly associated with kings and their political affairs. 74

While the exact dates at which time the hymns and prayers now preserved in the Psalter were originally composed cannot be determined with anything like precision, it appears that the great majority of them first surfaced orally. Some of these songs may have come from the poet king himself. Many of these were songs of thanksgiving and were then chanted or sung to instrumental accompaniment before the fall of Jerusalem and during the exile, when in a clearly exilic poem, they are chided and taunted by their captors to sing us one of the songs of Zion (cf. Psalm 137).

A thanksgiving hymn to be sung in a foreign land following the loss of Jerusalem and the temple was beyond the ken of a suffering people who never imagined they would ever sing songs of thanks and praise again. Although the Hebrew language does not have a word for thank, these psalms, sometimes designated as thanksgiving, or todah psalms, capture the essence of Israel’s praises offered to יהוה. Claus Westermann contends that since there is no word for thank in Hebrew this fact has never been properly evaluated.

The ignoring of this fact can be explained only in that we live so unquestioningly in the rhythm between the poles of thanks and request, of please and thank you; the thought does not occur to anyone that these concepts are not common to all, have not always been present as a matter of course, do not belong to the presuppositions of social intercourse, nor to those of the contrast between God and humanity. According to the book of Exodus, these very earliest songs of thanksgiving and unbridled joy, gratitude and unitive praise, very soon give way to murmurings, complaints and, ultimately, an outright rebellion against Moses’ leadership by the community at Meribah. Harvey Guthrie was the first to observe that

when we find passages in the Psalter, as well as the prophetic books, in which Yahweh accuses [his] people of misunderstanding and rebellion, passages which seem to conform in general to a fairly fixed pattern, we find ourselves squarely in the ethos of the faith and institutions of the pre-monarchical tribal confederation.75