From formula to quotation: a study of intratextuality in the Hebrew text of the Psalms with comparisons from the LXX and Targum

Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 635 From Formula to Quotation: A Study of Intratextuality in the Hebrew Text of the Psalms with Comparisons from the LXX and Targum RANDALL GAUTHIER UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH ABSTRACT This article examines the use of the Psalms within the Psalms, where intratextual lexical recursion arguably indicates instances of formulaic expression, allusion, rewriting, and even quotation. Several examples from the Hebrew (MT) Psalms illustrate this phenomenon with comparisons from two ancient Jewish translations, the Septuagint and Psalm Targum. From the few examples examined in this article, the translations do not appear to replicate the same intratextual references as those of the MT. Evidence for intentional intratextual connections in the Psalms warrants a more systematic investigation, as this has implications for both form-critical assumptions and studies concerned with the final form of the text. A INTRODUCTION In the Hebrew Psalter scriptural allusions and quotations to other passages are well known.1 In the course of the compilation of the ‫תהלים‬, intertextual refer1 For example Ps 95:7-11 refers to the well-known incident at Meribah and Massah (‫ )כמריבה כיום מסה במדבר‬found in Exod. 17:1–7 and Num 20:1–13. Ps 72:17 partially alludes to Gen 12:3 (the Septuagint version [LXX-Ps 71:17] further contains additive ‘plus’ material, making the link to LXX-Gen 12:3 even more explicit than the Hebrew version). Of course, it is a matter of debate whether these instances in the Psalms (a) reference/quote other texts, or (b) are derivative of (unknown) external source material. For additional possible examples see: (1) Ps 7:15b (‫ )והרה עמל וילד שקר‬cf. Is 59:4c, Job 15:35b; (2) Ps 39:13b (‫)כי גר אנכי עמך תושב ככל אבותי‬, cf. 1Chr 29:15a; (3) Ps 54:2 (‫)הזיפים ויאמרו לשאול הלא דוד מסתתר עמנו‬, cf. 1 Sam 23:19; (4) Ps 68:2 ( ‫יקום‬ ‫)אלהים יפוצו אויביו וינוסו משנאיו מפניו‬, cf. Num 10:35b; (5) Ps 77:17-19 (allusion?), cf. Hab 3:10-11; (6) Ps 79:6-7, cf. Jer 10:25; (7) Ps 86:15 ( ‫ואתה אדני אל רחום וחנון ארך‬ ‫)אפים ורב חסד ואמת‬, cf. Num 14:18, Ex 34:6-7; (8) Ps 103:9 ( ‫לא לנצח יריב ולא לעולם‬ ‫)יטור‬, cf. Is 57:16, Jer 3:12 (?); (9) Ps 106:6 (‫)חטאנו עם אבותינו העוינו הרשענו‬, cf. 1 Kg 8:47c, Dan 9:5; (10) Ps 111:10a (‫)ראשית חכמה יראת יהוה‬, cf. Prov 1:7a, 9:10a; (11) Ps 113:7 (‫)מקימי מעפר דל מאשפת ירים אביון‬, cf. 1 Sam 2:8a; (12) Ps 115:2 ( ‫למה יאמרו‬ ‫)הגוים איה נא אלהיהם‬, cf. Joel 2:17c; (13) Ps 118:14 (‫)עזי וזמרת יה ויהי לי לישועה‬, cf. Ex 15:2a, Is 12:2b; (14) Ps 132:8-10 cf. 2 Chr 6:41-42; (15) Ps 135:7 ( ‫מעלה נשאים מקצה‬ 636 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 ences extending across virtually the whole of canonical scripture no doubt served to inculcate theological lessons within ancient Israel’s liturgical cycle. But the use of Psalms within the Psalms themselves has been under-emphasised in modern scholarship, perhaps in part because of the dominant force of formcritical approaches during the twentieth century, which have often blurred, with generalizing strokes, the ‘individual, personal, and unique features of the particular pericope’ (Muilenburg 1969:5), i.e. the unique rhetorical, literary and theological dimensions of the text. Instead, form criticism has in its view other developmental dimensions aimed primarily at reconstructing Israel’s history. Hermann Gunkel (1933), for example, classified individual psalms in terms of Gattungen, i.e. types, genres or ‘forms’ that were historically modified and adapted to various occasions. Ostensibly, the form could then reveal something about the underlying socio-religious occasion to which it related, and in particular, its Sitz im Leben. Thus ‘literary’ connections among psalms have been, generally speaking, explained in terms of codified socio-religious expression that was ultimately a derivative of the liturgical life of Israel, and in Sigmund Mowinckel’s terms, a function of the cult.2 For Erhard Gerstenberger, the language and forms of the Psalms had already been ‘formalized’ from the earliest times of Israel’s history, or even prehistory, that is, long before the compilation of anything reminiscent of a canonical ‘Book’ of Psalms.3 Related to the above issue of the ‘origins’ of the Psalms is the pronounced difficulty of dating. The commentaries proffer endless possibilities regarding the origin of individual psalms, but more often than not with little or no consensus. Albert Anderson (1988:64) concluded his discussion on the use of the Old Testament in the Psalms with the discouraged realization that ‘it is an almost impossible task to establish the precise nature of these interrelationships. Perhaps in many instances the explanation will be found in the shared common traditions.’ However, without necessarily contravening form-critical assumptions, it is possible to look at the aspect of intratextuality in the Psalms in terms of lite- ‫)הארץ ברקים למטר עשה מוצא רוח מאוצרותיו‬, cf. Jer 10:13, 51:16b; (16) Ps 135:14 ( ‫כי‬ ‫)ידין יהוה עמו ועל עבדיו יתנחם‬, cf. Deut 32:36; Ps 147:4 ( ‫מונה מספר לכוכבים לכלם שמות‬ ‫)יקרא‬, cf. Is 40:26. Undoubtedly, many other examples could be noted. For a discussion of the use of the OT in the Psalms, see especially Anderson 1988:56-66. 2 Included among the form-critical approaches is what has been called the cult-functional approach; see Mowinckel (1962:1:1-41). 3 Both Gerstenberger (1988:27) and Kraus (1960:xvii) argue for a compilation of the Psalms as a ‘book’ or collection somewhere between 500 and 200 B.C.E. Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 637 rary and lexical concerns.4 Psalms with a ‘double transmission’ (e.g. Ps 14/53) notwithstanding, there are numerous examples in which psalms may themselves have played an influential role in the literary landscape of other psalms; whether one can determine which psalm (or tradition) started off the influence must remain a separate matter.5 Barring similarities that are purely thematic, we shall take particular interest in instances of intratextual lexical recursion, namely, instances in which, based on lexical evidence, psalms arguably draw from, reference, rewrite, or even quote other psalms or portions of psalms. Whether intratextual connections can be attributed to something like a ‘quotation,’ or whether they are merely the product of formulaic language (or, of course, of some other alternative such as fixed expressions, frozen forms, etc.), lexical recursion within the psalms nevertheless offers the most concrete instances of intratextuality.6 Thus, while originating factors in the language of a psalm may be deemed ‘stock’ or formulaic language, there is no reason why the same form-critically recognized influences at play behind one psalm would not lead to the referencing, or drawing upon of other similar expressions in other psalms, for precisely the same purpose. To illustrate this phenomenon we shall briefly consider a number of examples from the Hebrew Psalter. As a point of comparison, we shall also consider if/how intra-psalm referencing may have been conceived of and/or achieved in the early history of interpretation, if at all, primarily by examining two independent Jewish translations: the Septuagint7 and the Targum,8 in addition to considering extant Qumran material and available Rabbinic sources 4 Brevard Childs (1976:377-388) has made a more deliberate break from Psalms studies in their inchoate forms to studies interested in the ‘final’ form for the purpose of theological interpretation. 5 Kraus (1960:x) includes the following psalms as having a ‘double transmission’: Ps 18 = 2 Sam 22; Ps 14 = Ps 53; Ps 70 = Ps 40:12-16; Ps 108 = 57:7-11, Ps 60:5-12. In addition to these we might also include various psalm sections that comprise 1 Chr 16:1-36, namely, 1 Chr 16:8-22 = Ps 105:1-15 (see also Is 12:4); 1 Chr 16:23-33 = Ps 96:1-13 (see also 98:7); 1 Chr 16:34-36 = Ps 106:1, 47-48. Even a double transmission of a Psalm shows a reworking of known Psalm material. Psalm studies that emphasize the final form of the text are better able to make sense of a reworked or retransmitted psalm within a canonical whole. For a lengthy article on Psalms in Chronicles, see especially Beentjes (2007:9-44). 6 Understanding the use of the Psalms within the Psalms should be of interest in both form-critical investigation as well as to those engaged in current trends in macrolevel Psalms study. 7 The Greek text used throughout is based on Psalmi cum Odis (Rahlfs 1931). 8 The Aramaic text used throughout is based on Lagarde (1873 [1967]). For a critical English Translation see Stec (2004). See also Edward Cook’s translation online at http://targum.info/?page id=11. 638 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 roughly contemporaneous with the Targum and tradition.9 B EXAMPLES Certainly there are many instances of formulaic language throughout the Psalter, for example in the closing doxologies (‫ אמן ואמן‬/ ‫)ברוך יהוה‬,10 fixed forms (‫)הללו יה‬,11 and commonly recurring language (e.g. ‫]כי טוב[כי לעולם חסדו‬.12 In other cases though, where parallels are less pervasive but nevertheless replicate other psalm material, intentional intratextual referencing may be a more appro- 9 While many texts could be compared with interesting results, the Septuagint version and Psalm Targum are two independent translations that represent, in translation, important witnesses antedating (though possibly overlapping with, in the case of the Targum?) the Masoretic text/tradition. On a continuum representing early Jewish history of interpretation – albeit not a monolithic one – the LXX version of the Psalms sits on one end as an important pre-Rabbinic witness. A tentative date for the Old Greek (or original Greek) Psalter may be located in the mid second century B.C.E. (Williams 2001:248-276). Schaper (1995:74) argues for a date in the second half of the 2nd century B.C.E. The other end of our continuum could have been situated in a number of ways and need not reflect a hard distinction in Jewish literature. Rather, having too often received short shrift in the scholarly literature, the Psalm Targum is an important (and potentially late) witnesses to the Rabbinic tradition in which it arose. Rabbinic commentary, then, falls within this framework. A date for the Psalm Targum (Tg Pss) is far less certain. Stec (2004:2) tentatively dates the Tg Pss some time between the 4th and 6th centuries C.E., though with a potentially much older tradition preceding it, whereas Briggs (1906:xxxii) locates Tg Pss in the 9th century, conceding that the ‘Targum on the Psalter represents a traditional oral translation, used in the services of the synagogue from the first century AD.’ Unlike the Greek Psalter, the Psalm Targum ‘possesses signs of not coming from a single hand,’ even though it ‘belongs, as a unity, to the traditions of Jewish Aramaic translations of the Bible’ (Bernstein 1994:326). Note, throughout the abbreviation Tg Pss is a reference to the Psalm Targum as a whole document (i.e. the ‘book’ of Psalms), or to multiple psalms, whereas Tg Ps represents an individual psalm. 10 Ps 41:14; 72:19; 89:53 and 106:48. 11 Ps 102:19; 104:35; 105:45-106:1; 106:48; 111:1; 112:1; 113:1, 9; 115:17-18; 116:19; 117:2; 135:1, 3, 21; 146:1, 10-147:1; 147:20-148:1; 148:14-149:1; 149:9150:1; 150:6. At times, however, the LXX translates ‫ הללו יה‬with αἰνέσει τὸν κύριον (LXX-Ps 101:19), while transliterating it with αλληλουια in other instances (LXX-Ps 111:1), though typically αλληλουια is reserved for the superscriptions (though cf. 150:6). The LXX convention appears to be true of Tg Pss as well, albeit inconsistently so (cf. Tg Ps 102:19 ‫ ;ישבח יה‬112:1 ‫ ;הללויה‬though ‫ הללויה‬in 104:35). 12 Ps 100:5; 106:1; 107:1; 118:1-4, 29; 136:1-26; see also Jer 33:11; Ezra 3:11; 1Chr 16:34, 41; 2Chr 5:13; 7:3, 6. The Greek Psalms treat this uniformly ([ὅτι ἀγαθός] ὅτι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τὸ ἔλεος αὐτοῦ) as does Tg Ps (‫)]ארום טב[ ארום לעלם טוביה‬. See also ‫עבדי ברכו עבדי יהוה‬/‫ הללו‬in Ps 113:1; 134:1; 135:1. Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 639 priate explanation than a purely formulaic usage. Consider Ps 2:4 and 59(58):9.13 Ps 2:4 with 59(58):9 2:4 MT 11Q7 Tg LXX ‫יושב בשמים ישחק אדני ילעג למו‬ ‫אדוני ילעג למו‬ ‫דיתיב בשמיא יגחך מימרא דיהוה ידהך להון‬ 59(58):9 ‫ואתה יהוה תשחק למו תלעג לכל גוים‬ ‫ואנת יהוה תגחיך להון תתלעב לכל עממיא‬ ὁ κατοικῶν ἐν οὐρανοῖς ἐκγελάσεται αὐτούς, καὶ ὁ κύριος ἐκμυκτηριεῖ αὐτούς καὶ σύ, κύριε, ἐκγελάσῃ αὐτούς, ἐξουδενώσεις πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. 2:4 He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord mocks them.14 59:8 But you, O’ YHWH, laugh at them; you mock all the nations. MT: Ps 2:4 is potentially referenced in 59:9 (or vice versa).15 In 2:4, the antecedent of ‫ למו‬is clearly ‫גוים ולאמים‬, (nations and peoples) in 2:1, a subset of which are the ‫( מלכי ארץ‬2:2).16 In 59:9 ‫ גוים‬appears in a verse that parallels 2:4, even though in Ps 2 ‫ גוים‬appears three verses earlier.17 In Ps 59 ‫ גוי‬appears for the first time in verse 9, clearly in reference to ‫( מאיבי‬my enemies) in verse 1. That YHWH ‘laughs’ (‫ ;שחק‬2:4, 59:9) at his opponents is not unique to these verses (cf. Ps 37:13), but the convergence of ‫שחק‬, ‫לעג‬, with ‫גוים‬, strengthens the argument for intratextual alignment. Versions: The versions betray slight adjustments from the MT. From the comparative chart below we can see that the verbal forms in both Tg Ps and 13 Verse references in parentheses, e.g. 59(58):9, refer to the MT and (LXX) versification differences. 14 English translations are my own and render the MT, following the Standard English Bible versification. 15 Dahood (1966:8; 1968:70) dates both Ps 2 and 59 to the tenth century because of their strong similarities between these verses. Other commentators, however, are far less certain and theories abound (e.g. see Tate 1990:413-18). 16 On the expression ‫לכי ארץ‬, Dahood (1966:8) remarks, ‘By the time of the composition of this psalm … they had become stock literary figures who belong to the genre of royal psalms.’ It is this type of form-critical suggestion that has strongly discouraged the notion of intentional intratextual connections in the Psalms in the past. For Dahood, the quest for what lies ‘behind’ the text, its Ancient Near Eastern and Ugaritic connections, and ‘archaic forms,’ becomes of predominantly methodological importance. Thus the presence of kings or such characters in either psalm is merely a product of the genre in any case. 17 Tate (1990:94-95) raises the possibility that ‫ גוים‬was originally ‫‘ גאים‬proud ones’ prior to its redaction, though he concedes that the text as it reads is sensible if the speaker is understood as a king. 640 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 LXX commonly deviate from the MT in 59:9 (‫לעב‬, ἐξουδενόω) as compared to 2:4.18 MT 2:1 11Q7 2:1 Tg 2:1 LXX 2:1 MT 2:4 11Q7 2:4 Tg 2:4 LXX 2:4 MT 59:9 11 Q7 59:9 Tg 59:9 LXX 58:9 ‫גוי לאם‬ ‫עם אומה‬ ἔθνη λαοί ‫שחק לעג‬ --- ‫לעג‬ ‫גחך דהך‬ ἐκγελάω ἐκμυκτηρίζω ‫שחק לעג גוי‬ ‫גחך לעב עם‬ ἐκγελάω, ἐξουδενόω, ἔθνη Although Tg Ps trades ‫( גוים‬LXX ἔθνη) for ‫ עממיא‬in 59:9, the renderings are consistent in Greek and Aramaic for both verses. Significantly ‫אדני‬ (‫ = אדוני‬11Q7) in 2:4 becomes ‫ יהוה‬in 59:9.19 However, the Greek and Aramaic render κύριος/‫ יהוה‬in both instances. Tg Ps 2:4 shows that the action of ‫ יהוה‬is mediated by his ‫‘ מימרא‬Memra’20 or ‘word’ (cf. 18:15), a characteristically (periphrastic) rendering in the Targum,21 though it is hardly observed consistently as it is absent in 59:9. If anything, Tg Pss has more in common with the LXX than the MT on this point.22 It remains unclear that a connection in the Interestingly, however, Tg Ps opts for ‫‘ לעב‬to deride,’ an orthographically close synonym to the Hebrew ‫לעג‬. 19 Several Hebrew manuscripts also read ‫ יהוה‬in 2:4. 20 Michael Klein (1981:162-77, especially 172) argues that Memra in the Targumim is ‘not a personification or a hypostasis, but rather a nominal substitute. … In the targumim memra appears as the subject of sentences in place of God’s name or pronoun, in almost every type of context.’ Thus Klein is of the opinion, contrary to many scholars, that the Targumim do not attempt to slight anthropomorphisms, which were not of theological significance anyway. 21 Ps 2:4, 12; 5:2, 11-12; 7:2, 9; 9:3, 8, 10; 10:3; 11:1; 14:5; 16:1; 17:4; 18:9, 13-16, 19, 25-26, 28, 30, 36; 19:3-4, 15; 22:5; 23:4; 25:21; 29:5, 8; 31:2, 25; 32:11; 33:21; 34:3, 9, 23; 35:9; 37:3, 5, 9, 17, 22, 34, 40; 40:4, 17; 41:4; 44:6, 9; 46:8, 12; 52:9; 53:6-7; 54:4; 55:3, 17, 19, 24; 56:5, 11-12; 57:2; 60:14; 62:9; 63:5, 7, 12; 64:11; 66:6; 68:12, 17, 34; 70:5; 71:1, 6; 77:2; 78:1; 81:9, 12; 84:6, 13; 85:7; 89:25; 91:2, 14; 95:7; 97:12; 102:9, 17; 104:34; 105:19; 106:7, 12, 23, 25; 107:11, 25; 109:15; 110:1; 112:7; 114:3; 115:9-12, 14; 116:7; 118:6-14, 26; 119:11, 38, 41, 50, 58, 67, 76, 82, 103, 116, 123, 133, 140, 148, 154, 158, 162, 170, 172; 121:7; 124:2, 8-125:2; 127:1; 135:14; 138:2, 4; 139:8, 12; 141:6, 8; 143:8-9; 144:2; 147:15; 148:4. 22 Without a doubt much more could be said about possible intertextual and intratextual links in this Psalm or in any other discussed in this paper. For Psalm 2, see espe- 18 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 641 Hebrew between 2:4 and 59:9 was interpreted as such in either translation, though Mek Shir 7.64, a Rabbinic midrash on Exodus 15:9-10, does in fact juxtapose Ps 2:4 and 59:9. 23 Ps 89:15 with 97:2-3 Ps 89:15 and 97:2-3 may offer an example where material from one psalm is reworked in another, thereby causing a dramatic shift in the literary-theological trajectory. 89(88):15 MT Tg ‫צדק ומשפט מכון כסאך חסד ואמת יקדמו‬ ‫פניך‬ ‫צדקתא ודינא מדור כורסי יקרך טיבו וקשוט‬ ‫מקדמין אפך‬ LXX δικαιοσύνη καὶ κρίμα ἑτοιμασία τοῦ θρόνου σου ἔλεος καὶ ἀλήθεια προπορεύσεται πρὸ προσώπου σου 88:14 Righteousness and judgement are the foundation of your throne; steadfast love and faithfulness go before you. 97(96):2-3 ‫ענן וערפל סביביו צדק ומשפט מכון כסאו‬ ‫אש לפניו תלך ותלהט סביב צריו‬ ‫ענני יקרא ואמיטתא חזור חזור די ליה צדקתא‬ ‫ודינא אתר די מכוון כורסיה׃‬ ‫אשא קדמוי תהלך ומצלהבא חזור חזור מעיקוי‬ νεφέλη καὶ γνόφος κύκλῳ αὐτοῦ δικαιοσύνη καὶ κρίμα κατόρθωσις τοῦ θρόνου αὐτοῦ πῦρ ἐναντίον αὐτοῦ προπορεύσεται καὶ φλογιεῖ κύκλῳ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὐτοῦ 97:2-3 Clouds and thick darkness surround him; righteousness and judgement are the foundation of his throne. 3 Fire goes before him, and scorches his enemies all around. MT: Ps 89 begins with the proclamation of the certainty of the Davidic covenant.24 More immediately, MT 89:12-19 amplifies a confession about YHWH’s power and strength. Verse 15 falls in the centre of this pericope by emphasizing what is characteristic of YHWH’s kingship, namely ‫צדק ומשפט‬ (righteousness and justice). This phrase serves as a metonymy for his ‘rule.’25 Steadfast love and truth (‫ )חסד ואמת‬are said to be in his presence (‫)פניך‬. Whereas Ps 89:15 extols the blessing of YHWH’s rule, Ps 97:2-3 sharply con- cially Moshe Bernstein’s (1994:332, 339) article, which suggests an ‘echo’ from Tg Ps 48:5 in 2:2. 23 See Lauterbach 1935. For discussion concerning the relationship between Targum and Midrash and the Sitz im Leben of the Targumim, see Alexander 1985:14-28. 24 Dahood (1968:311) dates Ps 89 to the post-Davidic monarchic period. 25 Dahood (1968:422) connects this verse with a Canaanite tradition (cf. 85:11). Tate (1990:422), however, links both verses (89:15 & 97:2) to similar concepts in Egyptian literature. 642 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 trasts with theophonic language of judgement on enemies.26 Following the elemental language in 97:2a (‫)ענן וערפל‬, ‫ צדק ומשפט מכון כסאו‬of 97:2b is identical to 89:15a. Yet in 97:3, ‫ חסד ואמת‬are not ‘in the presence’ of YHWH (‫ )לפניו‬as in 89:15, but ‫אש‬. Ps 89:15 or 97:2-3 possibly drew from the other by reworking an existing text with a new application. Versions: By stripping away shifts in word order and inflection, the following parallels may be seen more clearly, following the direction of the Hebrew: MT 89:15 ‫פנה‬ ‫קדם‬ ‫חסד אמת‬ ‫מכון כסא‬ ‫משפט‬ ‫צדק‬ MT 97:2-3 ‫פנה‬ ‫הלך‬ ‫אש‬ ‫מכון כסא‬ ‫משפט‬ ‫צדק‬ Tg 89:15 ‫אפא‬ ‫קדם‬ ‫טיבו קשוט‬ ‫מדור כורסי יקרך‬ ‫דין‬ ‫צדקה‬ Tg 97:2-3 ‫קדם‬ ‫הלך‬ ‫אשא‬ ‫אתר די מכוון‬ ‫כורסיה‬ ‫דין‬ ‫צדקה‬ LXX 88:15 πρόσωπον προπορεύομαι LXX 96:2- ἐναντίον 3 προπορεύομαι ἔλεος ἀλήθεια ἑτοιμασία θρόνος κρίμα πῦρ κατόρθωσις θρόνος κρίμα δικαιοσύνη δικαιοσύνη The Greek translation utilizes a number of common glosses typical of the present MT counterparts:27 δικαιοσύνη, κρίμα, θρόνος, πρόσωπον/ ἐναντίον.28 Since ‫( מכון‬place, site, support for, foundation) is uncommon in the Hebrew Psalms, occurring only four times, its Greek equivalent is of particular interest. In each instance the Greek renders ‫ מכון‬differently: 33(32):14 - ἕτοιμος - prepared, ready,29 (Tg Ps ‫)מדור‬ 89(88):15 - ἑτοιμασία - (cognate), preparation, foundation, base, (Tg Ps ‫)מדור‬ 97(96):2 - κατόρθωσις - setting up, preservation, (Tg Ps ‫‘ מכוון‬to follow direction’?) 104(103):5 - ἀσφάλεια - security, steadfastness, stability (Tg Ps ‫‘בסיס‬base) 26 Mid Teh for Ps 97 juxtaposes Ps 97:2-3 and 89:15 in the context of the ‘fourth exile,’ or the occupation of Rome. See Braude 1959:2:500. 27 Material in the Dead Sea Scrolls is lacking altogether. 28 In the Greek Psalms ‫ פנה‬prefixed with ‫ ל‬is typically rendered by ἐναντίον + genitive, whereas other prefixed and nonprefixed instances are typically rendered by πρόσωπον + genitive. Thus the ‘difference’ between the two verses here merely follows a convention. 29 All glosses come from The Greek English Lexicon of the Septuagint (LEH) unless specified otherwise. Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 643 A New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) renders the verses with similar diversity: LXX-88:15 ‘righteousness and judgment are a provision of your throne’ (though ‘foundation, base’ LEH 1:184); LXX-96:2 ‘righteousness and judgment keep his throne straight.’ The LXX translator seems to have missed the intratextual linkage, or has at least obscured it in translation, but this could just as well be a result of not understanding the Hebrew clearly, since ‫ מכון‬was evidently a cause of confusion among the translations. Like Tg Ps in 97:2, the LXX may have understood a form of ‫כון‬.30 In any case the Greek does not appear to be self-referential in the process of translation and thus it is unlikely that an intratextual link is present. Though the Psalm Targum is generally regarded as a ‘literal’ translation of the Hebrew,31 it occasionally interjects various interpretive pluses, which are suggestive of biblical rewriting. Tg Ps 89:15 glosses the Hebrew ‫מכון כסאך‬ (foundation of your throne) with ‫( מדור כורסי יקרך‬the dwelling place of the throne of your glory), and in 97:2 righteousness and justice are ‫אתר די מכוון‬ ‫( כורסיה‬the place to which his throne is directed), euphemisms that remove the offensive concreteness of the original. Further, the global language found in MT 97 is to some degree localized to the ‫( כנישתא‬assembly) of Zion (Tg Ps 97:8). Could the ‫ענני יקרא‬32 (the cloud of glory) reference the Shekinah glory33 30 NETS appears to have been more influenced by Liddell & Scott on this point by rendering κατορθόω as ‘to keep straight’ (cf. ὀρθόω). In other instances outside of the Psalms, ‫ מכון‬is rendered: ἕτοιμος (ready, prepared - Ex 15:17; 1 Kings 8:13, 43, 49; 2 Chr 6:2, 30, 33, 39); τόπος (place - Is 4:5; Dan 8:11); πόλις (city, town - Is 18:4); and ἑτοιμασία (preparation, foundation, base - Ezra 2:68). Indeed, ‫ מכון‬is not an easily translatable word. Psalmi cum Odis offers no variants for this verse. In Tg Ps 97:2 ‫( מכוון‬pe‘al passive participium from ‫ )כון‬may have been confused with Hebrew ‫(כון‬to prepare; establish). The same confusion may explain the seemingly odd rendering in the Greek as well (cf. ‫ יכין‬a proper name confused with ‫ ?כון‬cf. 2 Chr 3:17). The many variations in translational choices in Tg Pss, including this one where ‫ מכון‬appears to be understood in one context but is misunderstood in another, may suggest that the Psalm Targum was composed by more than one translator. On the contrary, the LXX Psalter is more unified in certain translational tendencies, which suggests that there was, more likely, a single translator. 31 Cf. Bernstein 1994:326 and Stec 2004:2-3. 32 Though ‫( ענני‬clouds) is in the masculine plural construct from ‫ענן‬, Stec’s translation opts for the singular, citing several witnesses in its support. 33 However, see the introduction to David Stec’s translation. Stec (2004:12) regards the many references to ‘Memra, Shekinah, and Glory’ throughout the Tg Pss as ‘largely stereotypical,’ and ‘best regarded as a feature of translation rather than an expression of specific religious concepts.’ Whether this means that they are a mere ‘feature’ of translation remains ambiguous. For references to the Shekinah in Tg Pss, see 7:8; 9:12; 16:8; 17:8; 18:12; 22:25; 27:9; 30:8; 36:8; 42:3; 43:3; 44:10, 25; 46:6; 48:15; 49:15; 57:2; 61:5; 63:8; 65:2; 68:6, 16-19, 25, 30; 69:18; 74:2, 12; 76:3-4; 644 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 revealed to his devout people (97:10) who do not worship idols (97:7 cf. Tg Ps 81:10)? Tg Ps 89, contra MT, is anchored in the Abrahamic promise (Tg Ps 89:1, 4) and even references the deliverance from Pharaoh (v.11). Thus it would appear that the Targum radically recontextualizes both psalms, thereby losing a clear intratextual reference. By contrast, the Rabbinic Mek Shab 1.123 (cf. Ex 31:17) had no trouble conflating Ps 89:15 and 97:2 for a new purpose, this time in reference to creation and rest on the Sabbath. Ps 18:15 with 144:6 In at least one instance items from one psalm are reworked in the reverse order of the same items in another psalm. Although Mek cites Ps 18:15 as a midrashic explanation for Ex 14:9-14, where God delivered Moses and the people of Israel from Pharaoh, the superscription of MT-Ps 18 and LXX-17 connects it to David’s deliverance from Saul. No doubt the parallel psalm in 2 Sam 22 stands behind the superscriptions of the Psalms (or vice versa).34 It is reasonable to suppose that Ps 144:6 drew from Ps 18 or (2 Sam 22), since Ps 18:15 and 2 Sam 22:15 witness the same order of items, other differences notwithstanding. 18(17):15 MT Tg 144(143):6 ‫וישלח חציו ויפיצם וברקים רב ויהמם‬ ‫ברוק ברק ותפיצם שלח חציך ותהמם‬ ‫ושדר מימריה היך גיררין ובדרינון וברקין‬ ‫סגיאין ושגישינון‬ ‫אבריק ברקא ובדרינון שדר גיררין ותשגשינון‬ LXX Καὶ ἐξαπέστειλεν βέλη καὶ ἐσκόρπισεν αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀστραπὰς ἐπλή-θυνεν καὶ συνετάραξεν αὐτούς ἄστραψον ἀστραπὴν καὶ σκορπιεῖς αὐτούς, ἐξαπόστειλον τὰ βέλη σου καὶ συνταράξεις αὐτούς 144:6 Flash forth lightening and 18:14 And he sent his arrows, and dispersed them; and many lightening disperse them; send out your arrows and confuse them. flashes, and confused them. MT: Whereas MT-Ps 18:15 moves from ‫( חציו‬his arrows) in the first stiche to ‫( ברקים‬lightening) in the second, Ps 144:6 reverses the order. Here is a key example where ‘stock’ language in the Psalms, e.g. ‫( חץ‬cf. Ps 7:14; 11:2; 18:15; 38:3; 45:6; 57:5; 58:8; 64:4, 8; 77:18; 91:5; 120:4; 127:4) could be de- 77:17; 78:60; 80:2; 81:8; 82:1; 84:8; 88:6; 89:47; 90:1; 91:1, 4, 9; 98:1; 99:1; 102:3; 104:29; 108:8, 12; 110:5; 115:16; 122:4; 132:14; 135:21; 143:7. 34 Since there are numerous works that investigate the relationship between Ps 18 and 2 Sam 22 – what Kraus has called a double transmission (see note 5) – we shall not further engage that issue here. Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 645 rivative of another, for by retaining key terms throughout35 (‫שלח‬, ‫חץ‬, ‫פוץ‬, ‫ברק‬, ‫)המם‬, Ps 18:15 and 144:6 show similarities that extend beyond mere coincidence. As mentioned above, 144:6 was more likely a derivative of 18:15, though admitting that 2 Sam 22 is a possibility. In this sense Ps 144 not only contributes theologically to the divine warrior motif (cf. Hab 3:4), but actualizes Ps 18 by citing it indirectly. The retelling of David’s escape from Saul, if we follow the superscription of Ps 18, is recast in the imperative in 144 (also Davidic by superscription in the MT) as a reason for praise. Versions: MT 18:15 MT 144:6 Tg 18:15 Tg 144:6 LXX 17:15 LXX 143:6 ‫המם‬ ‫ברק‬ ‫פוץ‬ ‫חץ‬ ‫שלח‬ ‫המם‬ ‫ברק‬ ‫פוץ‬ ‫חץ‬ ‫שלח‬ ‫שגש‬ ‫ברק‬ ‫בדר‬ ‫גיר‬ ‫שדר‬ ‫שגש‬ ‫ברק‬ ‫בדר‬ ‫גיר‬ ‫שדר‬ συνταράσσω ἀστραπή σκορπίζω βέλος ἐξαποστέλλω συνταράσσω ἀστραπή σκορπίζω βέλος ἐξαποστέλλω LXX-Ps 17:5 follows the MT in its major formal features, likewise retaining the lexemes in both versions. The Greek Psalms (17/143) seem to reference each other rather than 2 Kgdm, since in 2 Kgdm 22:15 we find ἀποστέλλω and 36 ἐξίστημι, not ἐξαποστέλλω and συνταράσσω. While this could suggest that an intratextual connection was enforced by the LXX translator, the plus in the Tg Ps obscures the issue. Although the retelling in Tg Ps144:6 retains all five lexemes in each verse, the common Targum addition ‫( מימריה‬Memra) becomes the divine weapon in Tg Ps 18:15 (i.e. ‘he sent his Memra like37 arrows’), which does not transfer in 144:6. 35 DSS material is lacking for these verses. The superscription to LXX-143 adds πρὸς τὸν Γολιαδ (NETS referring to Goliad [Goliath]; cf. 1 Kgdm 17:42; 22:10; 151:1) following τῷ Δαυιδ (cf. ‫ לדוד‬in the MT) and so does not follow the tradition of David’s deliverance from Saul (cf. 2 Sam 22). 37 Bernstein (1994:336) maintains that indicative of the Psalm Targum’s translation technique is the conversion of a Hebrew metaphor into a simile using ‫( היך‬like) quite apart from a Vorlage reading utilizing ‫כ״‬. 36 646 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 Ps 38:22-23 with 71:12 Another intratextual example occurs in Ps 38:22-23 and 71:12. Here the parallel material begins in 38:22b following the soph pasuq and extends into a new Hebrew line (v.23a), whereas 71:12 captures both ideas in one line. 38(37):22-23 MT 4QPsa Tg LXX ‫אל תעזבני יהוה אלהי אל תרחק ממני‬ ‫חושה לעזרתי אדני תשועתי‬ ‫מני‬ ‫אל תעזבני אלה‬ ‫חושה לי לעזרתי אדני תשועתי‬ ‫לא תשבקינני יהוה אלהי לא תרחיק מיני זרין‬ ‫לסיועי יהוה פורקני‬ μὴ ἐγκαταλίπῃς με κύριε ὁ θεός μου μὴ ἀποστῇς ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ 23 πρόσχες εἰς τὴν βοήθειάν μου κύριε τῆς σωτηρίας μου 71(70):12 ‫אלהים אל תרחק ממני אלהי לעזרתי חושה‬ ‫זרתי חושה‬ ‫ל ם‬ ‫אלהא לא תרחיק מיני אלהי לסעדי זריז‬ ὁ θεός μὴ μακρύνῃς ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ ὁ θεός μου εἰς τὴν βοήθειάν μου πρόσχες 38:21-22 Do not forsake me, 70:12 O God, do not be far from YHWH my God, do not be far away me; O my God, hurry to help me! from me; 22 hurry to help me, my Lord, my salvation. MT: Ps 71:12 appears to streamline material from Ps 38:22-23,38 which is at any rate an expansive pseudo-acrostic psalm. That Ps 71 draws from 38, rather than the reverse, finds support in 4QPsa where the order of psalms progresses from Ps 38:16-23 immediately to 71:1-14.39 While there can be little doubt that the Qumran scrolls witness an intratextual connection in these verses, perhaps for liturgical purposes, little can be said regarding its raison d’être, be it literary or formulaic. Incontestable, however, is the fact that the parallel line appears in both verses, whereas in other instances only ‫ אל תרחק ממני‬of 38:22a is found (e.g. Ps 22:12; 35:22). Clearly lengthier and more specific examples of lexical recursion invite a literary explanation over a purely formulaic one.40 38 Craigie (1983:305) describes the language in these verses as ‘the overtones of the liturgical psalm of sickness’ characteristic of Ps 22 (cf. 22:2,12, 20). Tate (1990:214) likewise references Ps 22 as a close parallel. 39 Even in the MT the qere vocalization of the qal imperative ‫ הישה‬in 71:12 is identical to that of 38:23 (‫)הושה‬, and so the Masoretic reading tradition in 71:12 matches that of 38:23 (though see ‫ הושה‬also in 1Sam 20:38; 60:22; Ps 22:20; 40:14; 70:2, 6). 40 Kraus (1960:490) remarks of the intratextuality in Ps 71 as follows: ‘Man hat in Ps 71 eine Sammlung von Zitaten sehen wollen. Auffallend ist fraglos, wie häufig in Ps 71 einzelne Stücke anderer Psalmen auftreten. Auf Ps 22 und 31 wird vor allem Bezug genommen … Aber alle diese Beobachtungen zeigen nur, daß der Dichter in der Psalmentradition lebt und aus dem Reichtum des Vorgegebenen schöpft.’ Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 647 Versions: MT 38:22-23 MT 71:12 4QPsa 38:22-23 4QPsa 71:12 Tg 38:22-23 Tg 71:12 LXX 37:22-23 LXX 70:12 ‫ י‬+ ‫ עזרה‬+ ‫ל‬ ‫ י‬+ ‫ עזרה‬+ ‫ל‬ ‫ י‬+ ‫ עזרה‬+ ‫ל‬ ‫ י‬+ ‫עזרה‬ ‫ י‬+ ‫ סיוע‬+ ‫ל‬ ‫ י‬+ ‫ סעד‬+ ‫ל‬ ‫חוש‬ ‫חוש‬ ‫חוש‬ ‫חוש‬ ‫זרז‬ ‫זרז‬ ‫ ני‬+ ‫מן‬ ‫ ני‬+ ‫מן‬ ‫ ני‬+ [ [ ‫ י‬+ ‫מן‬ ‫ י‬+ ‫מן‬ ‫אל רחק‬ ‫אל רחק‬ ] ‫לא רחק‬ ‫לא רחק‬ εἰς τὴν βοήθειάν μου εἰς τὴν βοήθειάν μου προσέχω προσέχω ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ μὴ ἀφίστημι μὴ μακρύνω Where 4QPsa is available, it follows the MT identically. The Greek, however, deviates only in the prohibitive subjunctives (μὴ ἀποστῇς ‘do not depart, withdraw,’ μὴ μακρύνῃς ‘do not delay’). The underlying Hebrew (‫)רחוק‬ ‘distant, remote, far away from’ occurs 13x in the Psalms. The negated jussive ‫ אל תרחק‬construction, which occurs five times and exclusively in Pss 1-72 (Books 1-2), is rendered every time with either ἀφίστημι or μακρύνω: Ps 22(21):12 μὴ ἀποστῇς, 20 μὴ μακρύνῃς; 35(34):22 μὴ ἀποστῇς; 38(37):22 μὴ 41 Given the semantic overlap between ἀποστῇς; 71(70):12 μὴ μακρύνῃς. 42 ἀφίστημι and μακρύνω in this regard, the presence of each in these verses offers little by way of semantic significance. Nevertheless, if anything, the shift works against the notion of intentional intertextuality in the LXX version. Further, the stilted translation of the prepositional phrase (εἰς τὴν βοήθειάν μου) more likely shadows the formal features of ‫ י‬+ ‫ עזרה‬+ ‫ל‬, while inserting the article for style. The Targum does not present any addition of interest. Further, jussive prohibition in the MT (‫ לא‬in Aramaic), remains consistent throughout, appearing only in the Aphel and Ithpeel stems of ‫( רחק‬to be far, distant): Aphel, 38:22 (‫)לא תרחיק‬, 71:12 (‫)לא תרחיק‬ Ithpeel, 22:12 (‫)לא תתרחק‬, 20 (‫)לא תתרחיק‬, 35:22 (‫)לא תתרחיק‬ Nevertheless, where there is lexical deviation – even where terms are synonymous – the argument for a demonstrable link between 38:22-23 and 71:12 is weakened.43 41 The non-negated jussive form occurs in 55(54):8 as a cohortative ‫ ארחיק‬and is nevertheless rendered by μακρύνω. 42 Cf. LXX-Ps 21:12, 20 where the two are found in the same psalm. 43 Tg Ps 38:23 reads ‫( סיוע‬hasten to my help), whereas 71:12, though synonymous, reads ‫( סעד‬hasten to my aid). 648 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 Ps 9:9 with 96:13 & 98:9 Our final example illustrates intratextuality in the MT across three different psalms. It would appear that, intentionally or not, MT-Ps 96:13b and 98:9b more fully develop Ps 9:9.44 9:9 MT Tg LXX 96(95):13 98(97):9 ‫והוא ישפט תבל בצדק ידין‬ ‫לאמים במישרים‬ ‫לפני יהוה כי בא כי בא‬ ‫לשפט הארץ ישפט תבל‬ ‫בצדק ועמים באמונתו‬ ‫לפני יהוה כי בא לשפט‬ ‫הארץ ישפט תבל בצדק‬ ‫ועמים במישרים‬ ‫ואיהוא ידין עמא דארעא‬ ‫בזכותא ידין עממיא‬ ‫בתריצותא‬ ‫קדם יהוה ארום אתא ארום‬ ‫אתא למידן ארעא ידון תבל‬ ‫בצדקתא ועמיא בהימנותיה‬ ‫קדם יהוה ארום אתא‬ ‫למידן ארעא ידון תבל‬ ‫בצדקתא ועמיא‬ ‫בתירוצתא‬ καὶ αὐτὸς κρινεῖ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ κρινεῖ λαοὺς ἐν εὐθύτητι πρὸ προσώπου κυρίου ὅτι ἔρχεται ὅτι ἔρχεται κρῖναι τὴν γῆν κρινεῖ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ λαοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ αὐτοῦ ὅτι ἥκει κρῖναι τὴν γῆν κρινεῖ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ λαοὺς ἐν εὐθύτητι 9:8 He will judge the world with righteousness; he will execute judgement for the people with fairness. 96:13 before YHWH; for he is coming, for he is coming to judge the earth. He will judge the world with righteousness, and the peoples with his trustworthiness. 98:9 before YHWH, for he is coming to judge the earth. He will judge the world with righteousness, and the peoples with fairness. MT: In the MT, of the three verses it is clear that 96:13 and 98:9 share the greatest similarities (cf. 99:4); their juxtaposition as eternal kingship psalms likewise is appropriate to the lexical similarities within that collection.45 On a text-critical note, we might question whether the second appearance of ‫ כי בא‬in the first stich of 96:13 is dittographic,46 or if perhaps it was omitted in 98:9. 44 Other alternative possibilities include: (1) 96:13 may quote 98:9, (2) the reverse could be true, (3) 9:9 may have been derived from either of the other two psalms, and (4) as always, an older tradition could have been responsible for all three or any combination. It could in fact be that 9:9 is itself the older ‘source’ from which the others grew. 45 For an example of lexical juxtaposition in psalm collections, see especially Howard (1986). Of Ps 98:7-9, Tate (1990:525) remarks, ‘These verses are similar to 96:11-13 and function in a similar way in this psalm.’ 46 Several Hebrew manuscripts omit ‫כי בא‬. The BHS editors likewise seek to harmonize this text with 1 Chr 16:33, along with 98:9. Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 649 Further, in LXX-97:9 ‫ לפני יהוה‬is a minus, which could signify scribal harmonization of the Hebrew.47 But barring an emendation either way, the remainder of both Hebrew verses beginning with ‫ לפני יהוה‬is replicated verbatim until the final bound form, ‫( באמונתו‬with his truth), and ‫( בתירוצתא‬with equity - so NRSV), respectively. The variation of lexemes in these verses hints towards common couplets used in poetic speech.48 Evidently the gnomic enthronement motif of Ps 9:8 (‫ויהוה לעולם ישב כונן למשפט כסאו‬, ‘But the LORD sits enthroned forever, he has established his throne for judgment’ - NRSV) was an interpretive impetus for the later enthronement, or eternal kingship Psalms to quote, or rework 9:9 into an eschatological setting, that is, if we understand ‫ בא‬to be a futurum instans participle in 96:13 and 98:9.49 Thus we might propose that Ps 98:9 quotes 9:9 for its theological contribution.50 Ps 96:13 may then have adapted to 98:9. Versions: From the outset we can see that both the LXX and Tg Ps, as translations, remain formally close to the Hebrew. MT 9:9 MT 96:13 MT 98:9 Tg 9:9 Tg 96:13 Tg 98:9 LXX 9:9 47 ‫ מישרים‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫ עם‬+ ‫ל‬ ‫ ו‬+ ‫ אמונה‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫דין‬ ‫ צדק‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫תבל‬ ‫שפט‬ ‫ עם‬+ ‫ו‬ ‫ צדק‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫תבל‬ ‫שפט‬ ‫ מישרים‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫ עם‬+ ‫ו‬ ‫ צדק‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫תבל‬ ‫שפט‬ ‫ תריצו‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫עם‬ ‫ זכו‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫עם ארע‬ ‫דין‬ ‫ הימנו‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫ עם‬+ ‫ו‬ ‫ צדקה‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫תבל‬ ‫דון‬ ‫ תיריצה‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫ עם‬+ ‫ו‬ ‫ צדקה‬+ ‫ב‬ ‫תבל‬ ‫דון‬ ἐν + εὐθύτης λαός ἐν + δικαιοσύνη οἰκουμένη κρίνω ‫דין‬ κρίνω Qumran is lacking in these verses. ‫ באמונתו‬is found in other psalms (Ps 89:34, 50; 96:13; 143:1). The juxtaposition of ‫ אמונה‬with other common terms is suggestive of formulaic speech (cf. 89:34, 50 ‫;חסד‬ 96:13 ‫ ;צדק‬143:1 ‫)צדקה‬, though the verses in question offer more than these common elements. 49 Pesiq Rab 12.9 uses 9:8-9 as a midrash of judgement against the ‘seed of Amalek’ in Ex. 17:16. Pesiq Rab 40.3/4, however, indicates that the Lord will judge Israel (and declare them acquitted, but the heathen nations will be judged). Pesiq Rab 51.6 uses Ps 96:13 to explain that God will judge all people, both faithful Israel and the unbelieving people. In preparation of the lulab offering during the Feast of Tabernacles, the four plants of the lulab cluster are used metaphorically to describe Israel. 50 The BHS editors propose the inclusion of the verb ‫ וידין‬preceding ‫עמים‬, perhaps based on the precedent of 9:9. 48 650 LXX 95:13 LXX 97:9 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 ἐν + ἀλήθεια + αὐτοῦ καί + λαός ἐν + δικαιοσύνη οἰκουμένη κρίνω ἐν + εὐθύτης καί + λαός ἐν + δικαιοσύνη οἰκουμένη κρίνω Only in 9:9 does a verb appear again in the second stich (‫[ ידין‬Aph impf]; κρινεῖ [fut]), though a few Hebrew manuscripts omit it (Craigie 1983:115). Beginning the second stich, the LXX and Tg Pss are unified in their formal adherence to the Hebrew in 96(95):13 and 98(87):9, in which καὶ λαούς and ‫ ועמיא‬render ‫ועמים‬. Whereas the LXX is consistent with the Hebrew with respect to the final forms in these later psalms: ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ αὐτοῦ (MT-96:13 = ‫)באמונתו‬, ἐν εὐθύτητι (MT-98:9 = ‫במישרים‬, which ultimately comes from 9:9), the Tg Pss are varied in all three instances: 9:9 ‫( תריצו‬honesty); 96:13 ‫הימנו‬ (faithfulness); 98:9 ‫( תירוצה‬uprightness). However, that Tg Ps 96:13 and 98:9 opt for a pe‘al infinitive (‫ )למידן‬and imperfect (‫( )ידון‬cf. the Aphel of 9:9 ‫ )ידין‬could suggest that the later two verses were held in common, whereas 9:9 was all but forgotten in terms of intratextual connections. Additionally, Tg Ps 9:9 trades ‫( עמא דארעא‬the people of the earth) for ‫( תבל‬world; LXX = οἰκουμένη (inhabited world)). The Hebrew metonymy ‘‫ ’תבל‬is traded in Tg Ps for what it represents, the people who inhabit it. Thus, in seeking to clarify the meaning of 9:9, as well as the fact that it probably comes from multiple hands, Tg Ps once again obscures the intratextual reference. Since the Greek on the other hand remains closer to the Hebrew, i.e. it does not appear to reference itself it may or may not witness an understood intratextual connection. C CONCLUSION In the present study we have only considered a few examples of intratextuality within the Psalms, leaving many others for further investigation, including: Ps 6:2; 38:2, ‫יהוה אל באפך תוכיחני ואל בחמתך תיסרני‬ Ps 8:5; 144:3, ‫שבה‬/‫אנוש כי פקד‬/‫ידע ובן אדם‬/‫אדם כי זכר‬/‫מה אנוש‬ Ps 33:2-3; 144:9 (cf. Is 42:10), ‫ שיר חדש‬...‫ בנבל עשור‬...‫בנבל עשור‬ Ps 34:15; 37:27, ‫סור מרע ועשה טוב‬ Ps 35:4, 26; 71:13, ‫יבשו ויכלמו מבקשי נפשי יסגו אחור ויחפרו חשבי רעתי‬ Ps 36:6; 57:11, ‫יהוה בהשמים חסדך אמונתך עד שחקים‬ Ps 39:13; 102:2, ‫שמעה תפלתי יהוה ושועתי האזינה‬ Ps 42:6, 12; 43:5, ‫מה תשתוחחי נפשי ותהמי עלי הוחילי לאלהים כי עוד אודנו ישועות פניו‬ Ps 44:14; 79:4, ‫חרפה לשכנינו לעג וקלס לסביבותינו‬ Ps 48:12; 97:8, ‫ישמח הר ציון תגלנה בנות יהודה למען משפטיך‬ Ps 50:7; 81:9, ‫שמעה עמי …ישראל‬ Ps 54:5; 86:14, ‫זרים קמו עלי ועריצים בקשו נפשי לא שמו אלהים לנגדם‬ Ps 56:14; 116:8-9, ‫בארצות החיים‬/‫יהוה באור‬/‫כי הצלת נפשי ממות…להתהלך לפני אלהים‬ Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 651 Ps 77:6; 143:5, ‫זכר ימים מקדם‬/‫חשב‬ Ps 104:33; 146:2, ‫אשירה ליהוה בחיי אזמרה לאלהי בעודי‬ Ps 121:2; 124:8, ‫עזרי מעם יהוה עשה שמים וארץ‬ Other extended intratextual references worthy of note include: Ps 15:1-3; 24:3-5 Ps 31:2-4; 71:1-3 Ps 40: 12-16; 70 Ps 57:8-11; 108:2-5 (cf. 36:6) Ps 60:8-14; 108:7-14 Ps 115:4-13; 135:15-20 Ps 135:8-12; 136:10, 17-22 If nothing else, clearly a more systematic treatment is justified. In many instances it would appear that inner Psalm referencing may pay tribute through formulaic replication, quotation, the rewriting of (portions of) Psalms, actualization, etcetera. It is not difficult to imagine a range of possibilities. Additionally, some evidence from Qumran material (cf. 4 QPsa Ps 38:22-23 > 71:12) as well as other rabbinic sources also appear to recognize instances of intratextuality in the Psalms as in the MT. With respect to the translated versions, from the few examples considered we may conclude that the LXX may have recognized intratextual references (e.g. LXX 9:9; 95:13; 97:9), but more likely did not. Likewise, the Targum more often than not obscures lexical recursion with plus material for the sake of clarifying a local interpretation (e.g. Tg Ps 9:9). None of this suggests that intratextuality was ignored in the versions. While our present goal has been a comparative one, with the MT as the controlling text, there is evidence that both the LXX and Tg Pss formulate intratextual references differently from the MT (e.g. LXX 70:17 & Gen 12:3; Tg Pss 2:2 & 48:5). Nevertheless, with the MT in view, it appears that where an intratextual reference may have played a formative role in a new Psalm, the translations as examined do not seem to follow suit.51 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, P. S. 1985. The Targumim and the Rabbinic Rules for the Delivery of the Targum, in: Emerton, J. A. (ed.), Congress Volume: Salamanca 1983. VT Supp 36, 14-28. Leiden: Brill. Anderson, A. A. 1988. Psalms, in: Carson, D. A. & Williamson, H. G. M. (eds.), It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture: Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars. 5666. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 51 I would like to thank Andrew Schmutzer for his substantive remarks and critique of an earlier draft of this article. 652 Gauthier: From Formula to Quotation OTE 21/3 (2008), 635-652 Beentjes, P. C. 2007. Psalms and Prayers in the Book of Chronicles, in: Becking, B. & Peels E. (eds.), Psalms and Prayers: Papers Read at the Joint Meeting of the Society of Old Testament Study and Het Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland en België, Apeldoorn August 2006. OTS 55, 9-44. Leiden: Brill. Bernstein, M. J. 1994. Translation Technique in the Targum to Psalms Two Test Cases: Psalms 2 and 137, in: Lovering, E. H. (ed.), SBL Seminar Papers 1994, 326-45. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Braude, W. G. (trans), 1959. The Midrash on Psalms. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Yale Judaica Series 13[1-2]). Briggs, E. G. 1906. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms. Edinburgh: T&T Clark. (ICC.) Childs, B. 1976. Reflections on the Modern Study of the Psalms, in: Cross, F. M., Lemke, E. and Miller, P. D. (eds.), Magnalia Dei, The Mighty Acts of God: Essays in Memory of G. Ernest Wright. 377-388. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Craigie, P. C. 1983. Psalms 1-50. Waco, TX: Word Books. (WBC 19.) Dahood, M. 1966. Psalms I, 1-50. New York: Doubleday & Company. (AncB 16.) Dahood, M. 1968. Psalms II, 51-100. New York: Doubleday & Company. (AncB 17.) Gerstenberger, E. 1988. Psalms (Part 1), With an Introduction to Cult Poetry, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. (FOTL 14.) Gunkel, H. (& Begrich, J.) 1933. Einleitung in die Psalmen. Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. (Göttinger Handkommentar zum Alten Testament II / Ergänzungsband, completed by J. Begrich.) Howard, D. M., Jr. 1986. The Structure of Psalms 93-100. The University of Michigan. Dissertation Ph.D.; Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International. Klein, M. L. 1981. ‘The Translation of Anthropomorphisms and Anthropopathisms in the Targumim,’ in: Emerton, J. A. (ed.), Congress Volume: Vienna 1980. 16277. Leiden: Brill. Kraus, H.-J. 1960. Psalmen. 1. Teilband. Neukirchen-Vluyn. (BKAT XV/1). Lagarde, P. de, 1967. Hagiographa Chaldaice. Leipzig, 1873; reprint. Osnabrück: O. Zeller. Lauterbach, J. Z. trans. 1935. Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael. 3 vols. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America. Mowinkel, S. 1962. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, trans. D. R. Ap-Thomas. 2 vols. Nashville: Abingdon Press. Muilenburg, J. 1969. ‘Form Criticism and Beyond,’ JBL 88:5-18. Rahlfs, A. (ed.) 1931. Psalmi cum Odis. Septuaginta Societatis Scientiarum Gottingenis Auctoritate, X. Göttingen: Vandenhoek and Ruprecht. Schaper, J. Eschatology in the Greek Psalter. Mohr Siebeck, 1995. Stec, D. M. The Targum of Psalms: Translated, with a Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes. The Aramaic Bible. Vol 16. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004. Tate, M. E. 1990. Psalms 51-100. Waco: Word Publishers. (WBC 20.) Williams, T. F. 2001. Towards a Date for the Old Greek Psalter, in: Robert Hiebert, Claude Cox, and Peter Gentry, (eds.), The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma. JSOTSupp 332. 248-276. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. Randall Gauthier, Dept. of Ancient Studies, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag XI, 7602 Matieland. Email: rxgauthier@gmail.com