Bulletin for Biblical Research 8 (1998) 15-37 [© 1998 Institute for Biblical Research]

 

 

                        The Return of the Ark

                        according to Josephus

 

                                       CHRISTOPHER BEGG

                                 CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA

  

            1 Sam 6:1-7:1 marks the third stage in the story of the ark's wanderings as

            related in the “Ark Narrative”: after its capture by the Philistines (1 Samuel

            4) and stay in Philistia (1 Samuel 5), the ark now returns to the land of

            Israel prior to its definitive transfer to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6). This article

            investigates Josephus's retelling of the biblical account of the ark's return in

            Ant. 6.7-18 comparing this both with the major witnesses to the text of

            1 Sam 6:1-7:1 (MT, 4QSam^a, LXX, and Targum) as well as extrabiblical

            traditions about the episode. Specific questions addressed include: the text-

            form(s) of 1 Sam 6:1-7:1 available to Josephus, the rewriting techniques

            applied by him, and the distinctive features of his presentation of the ark's

            homecoming.

 

            Key Words: Ark of Covenant, Josephus

 

 

                                        INTRODUCTION

 

Within the so-called "Ark Narrative," 1 Sam 6:1-7:1¹ constitutes a

pivotal moment: following its capture (1 Samuel 4) and "exile" (1 Sam-

uel 5), the ark now returns to the land of Israel prior to its even-

tual, definitive installation in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6). In this essay

I purpose to examine the retelling of 1 Sam 6:1-7:1 by Josephus in

his Jewish Antiquities (hereafter Ant.) 6.7-18.² My investigation will

 

            1. That 1 Sam 7:1 belongs with what precedes (6:1-21) rather than what follows

(7:2-17) is the general scholarly consensus; see the commentaries.

            2. For the writings of Josephus, I use the 10 volumes of the Loeb Classical Library

text and translation (Ant. 6.7-18 is found in vol. 5, where the translation and notes

are by R. Marcus). I have likewise consulted the text and apparatus for Ant. 6.7-18 in

B. Niese, Flavii Iosephi Opera, vol. 2 (2d ed.; Berlin: Weidmann, 1955).

16                     Bulletin for Biblical Research 8

 

involve a double comparison. First (and primarily), I shall compare

Josephus's rendition with its biblical source as represented by the fol-

lowing major witnesses: MT (BHS), 4QSam^a,³ Codex Vaticanus (here-

after B),⁴ and the Lucianic (hereafter L) or Antiochene MSS⁵ of the

LXX and Targum Jonathan on the Former Prophets (hereafter Tg. Jon.).⁶

Second (and secondarily), I shall also compare Josephus's version of

the ark's return with other postbiblical treatments of the episode—

that is, in the rabbinic corpus,⁷ Pseudo-Philo's Biblical Antiquities (here-

after Bib. Ant.) 55.4-10,⁸ and the "Samaritan Chronicle No. II."⁹ By way

of this double comparison, I aim to see what can be determined about

the following overarching questions: Which text-form(s) of 1 Sam

6:1-7:1 did Josephus have available? How, why, and with what results

has he modified the source data concerning the ark's return? Does his

treatment of the scriptural data evidence any affinities with those of

 

            3. This MS, which is not yet officially published, preserves (portions of) 1 Sam

6:1-7, 12-13, 16-18, 20-21; 7:1; see E. C. Ulrich, The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus

(HSM 19; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1978) 271. For its readings, I use the indications

provided by P. K. McCarter, 1 Samuel (AB 8; New York: Doubleday, 1989) 128-32.

            4. For B, I use A. E. Brooke, N. Maclean, and H. St. J. Thackeray, The Old Testament

in Greek according to the Text of Codex Vaticanus, 2/1: I and II Samuel (Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press, 1927). 1 Rgns 6:1-7:1 is part of one of the two "non-kaige" seg-

ments (1 Rgns 1:1-2 Rgns 1:11; 3 Rgns 22:1-4 Rgns 25:30) of B Reigns that have not

undergone the same degree of assimilation to the (proto-) MT text of Samuel–Kings

as have the MS's kaige sections. Accordingly, the former segments are often taken to

represent the "Old Greek" text of Reigns. See J. D. Shenkel, Chronology and Recensional

Development in the Greek Text of Kings (HSM 1; Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University

Press, 1968) 7-8, 11-18.

            5. For the text of L, I use the edition by N. Fernandez Marcos and J. R. Busto Saiz,

El Texto Antioqueno de la Biblia Griega, vol. 1: 1-2 Samuel (Textos y Estudios "Cardenal

Cisneros" 50; Madrid: CSIC, 1989). A comparison between Ant. 6.7-18 and the L text

of 1 Sam 6:1-7:1 is of interest given the long-standing scholarly consensus that, for the

books of Samuel, Josephus is dependent primarily on a "proto-Lucianic" biblical text;

see Fernandez and Busto, 1-2 Samuel, xxxv–xxviii.

            6. For Tg. Jon. I use the text of A. Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic, vol. 2 (Leiden: Brill,

1959) and its translation by D. J. Harrington and A. J. Saldarini, Targum Jonathan of the

Former Prophets (The Aramaic Bible 10; Wilmington, Del.: Glazier, 1987).

            7. For the relevant references, see L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews (7 vols.;

Philadelphia: JPSA, 1909-38) 4.63; 6.223-25 nn. 34-39.

            8. For the Latin text of Bib. Ant. I use D. J. Harrington and J. Cazeaux, Pseudo-

Philon Les Antiquités Bibliques, vol. 1 (SC 229; Paris: Cerf, 1976) and the English trans-

lation by D. J. Harrington, "Pseudo-Philo," The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H.

Charlesworth; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983) 1.297-377. On Bib. Ant. 55, see

F. J. Murphy, Pseudo-Philo: Rewriting the Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993)

199-202.

            9. For the translation of this document's (abridged) version of 1 Sam 6:1-7:1, I use

J. Macdonald, The Samaritan Chronicle No. II (or Sepher Ha Yamim) from Joshua to Neb-

uchadnezzar (BZAW 107; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1969) 120-21.

            BEGG: The Return of the Ark according to Josephus               17

 

the above-mentioned extrabiblical documents? Finally, how, overall,

does Josephus's rendition compare with the Bible's own account?

            In proceeding now to the comparison itself, I divide up the bib-

lical and Josephan material into three parallel segments as follows:

(1) consultation (1 Sam 6:1-9//Ant. 6.7-12); (2) from Philistia to Beth-

shemesh (6:10-18/16.13-15); and (3) from Beth-shemesh to Kiriath-

jearim (6:19-7:1//6.16-18). I shall examine each of these segments

in turn before drawing some general conclusions based on my study

of them.

 

                                  CONSULTATION

 

1 Samuel 6 opens with a chronological indication (v. 1) about the

ark's seven-month stay in Philistia which functions as a kind of

summmary to the account of the ark's disruptive effects on various

Philistine cities in 1 Samuel 5 (// Ant. 6.1-6). Josephus reserves his

version of this item to what might seem a more logical point, that is,

at the very end of his narration of the ark's departure from Philistia;

see 6.18 (//7:1). In place thereof, he substitutes an expansive transi-

tional notice (6 7) linking what precedes (the ark's devastating im-

pact on the Philistines) and follows (the Philistine consultation about

what is to be done with the ark). This sequence runs:

 

            Exhausted by these miseries (kakoi=j),¹⁰ the victims, whose fate was

            becoming a lesson (didaskali/a) to all who heard it never to receive this

            ark among them at such a meed and price, henceforth sought ways and

            means to get rid of it.

 

            1 Sam 6:2a introduces the two parties to the ensuing "consulta-

tion"—that is, "the Philistines" and "their priests and diviners" (so

the MT).¹¹ Josephus (6.8a), by contrast, limits the deliberations that

now take place to a single group. The group in question, that is, "the

lords of the Philistines," is one which, in the Bible itself, has already

figured twice in what precedes (see 1 Sam 5:8, 11, where this body is

convened first by the Ashdodites and then by the Ekronites to render

a decision on the disposition of the ark). Josephus, for his part, re-

serves mention of the Philistines' supreme council until this climactic

point in his presentation—now when a definitive decision about the

 

            10. This phrase echoes the one used of the people in Azotus in Ant. 6.4: "being in

this evil plight (kakoi=j). . . ."

            11. BL add a t ird category of religious professionals, that is, tou_j e)paoidou/j, "ma-

gicians," while the (damaged) text of 4QSam^a would seem to have mentioned four such

groups, with "soothsayers" (Mynnw(m) as the last of these. See McCarter, 1 Samuel, 129.

18                      Bulletin for Biblical Research 8

 

ark's fate is to be taken.¹² In thus bringing the "lords" on the scene

for the first time here, Josephus likewise has them deliberate among

themselves about what is to be done, rather than (compare 6:2a) turn-

ing to "priests and diviners" for guidance.¹³ Josephus's replacement

for the introductory notice of 6:2a reads, then: "So the lords (a!rxontej)

of the five cities¹⁴—Gitta, Akkaron, Ascalon, along with Gaza and

Azotus¹⁵—met to deliberate what they ought to do."

            In 1 Sam 6:2b-9 the "consultation" about the ark proceeds by a

way of a double question-answer sequence (6:2b-3, 4-9) involving

"the Philistines" as the interrogators and "their priests and diviners"

as the respondents. Josephus (6.8b-12) recasts this presentation into

an account of three varying opinions about the "ark problem" on

the part of different groups among the Philistine "lords" (see 6.8a).

R. Marcus attributes this divergence from the source narrative to the

penchant for "trichotomy," characteristic of Josephus's "Sophoclean

assistant"¹⁶ who, also elsewhere, introduces reference to three com-

peting viewpoints on some issue.¹⁷

 

            12. In his version of both earlier instances where the Bible has the Philistine

"lords" being convened, Josephus represents the inhabitants of the given city, Ashdod/

Azotus (6.4//5:8) and Ashkelon ([so LXX; compare Ekron, MT] 6.5//5:11) taking the

initiative in ridding themselves of the ark.

            13. Josephus's introduction of the "lords" here as the group that is to make the

final decision regarding the ark might likewise be inspired by the continuation of the

biblical account where the "lords"—somewhat unexpectedly—reemerge as those who

follow the ark (6:12) and then return after seeing what becomes of it (6:16). By making

the "lords" the subject of the deliberation about the ark, Josephus better accounts for

the role they assume in carrying out the decision taken in what follows.

            14. Subsequently, Josephus will use the phrase "lords of the Philistines" see 6.13,

15. In all three instances the Greek term rendered "lords" by Marcus is a!rxontej. This

contrasts with BL's consistent translation of Hebrew Mynrs in the phrase "lords of the

Philistines" by satra/ptai (a term used some 36x by Josephus but never in his rendition

of 1 Samuel 5-6); see 5:8, 11; 6:12, 16.

            15. Josephus likely "anticipates" the names for the five cities making up the

Philistine Pentapolis from the continuation of 1 Samuel 6; see v. 17 (cf. Josh 13:3). In so

doing, he employs the Greek forms for the cities' names, even while diverging from

the order in which these are mentioned in both the MT and BL 6:17—that is, Ashdod/

Azotus, Gaza, Ashkelon/Ascalon, Gath/Geth, and Ekron/Akkaron; see above in the

text.

            16. Marcus (trans.), Josephus, 5.168-69, note a. Marcus derives the idea of such

an assistant from H. St. J. Thackeray (see the latter's characterization of the figure, in

Josephus, 4.xv-xvi).

            17. See, for example, Ant. 3.96-97 (the three opinions among the Israelites con-

cerning the fate of Moses, who had been absent forty days on the mountain [cf. Exod

32:1, which mentions only Moses' "delay" in returning, as the occasion for the making

of the calf, an episode passed over by Josephus]); 4.36-37a (the three expectations

regarding the outcome of the assembly convened by Moses to adjudicate the claims of

Korah; cf. Num 16:19).

           BEGG: The Return of the Ark according to Josephus             19

 

            Of the three proposals Josephus cites, the one mentioned first

and most briefly is that the ark simply be returned (6.8b): "Their first

resolution was to send the ark back (a)pope/mpein) to its own people

inasmuch as God was championing its cause (u(perekdikou=ntoj tou=

qeou=)¹⁸ and that was why these horrors (deinw=n) had accompanied

(sunepidhmsa/nton)¹⁹ it and burst along with (suneisbalo/ntwn)²⁰ it into

their cities." He becomes more expansive with respect to the second

proposal and the motivation adduced for this (6.9):

 

            But there were others who said that they should not do thus nor be

            deluded (e)capata=sqai) into attributing the cause of their misfortunes

            (kakw=n; see kakoi=j, 6.7) to the ark: it (au)th|=)²¹ possessed no such power

            and might (du/namin . . . kai_ i)sxu/n), for, were it under the care of God

            (khdome/nou tou= qeou=),²² it would never have fallen into the hands of men.

            Their advice was to sit still (h)suxa/zein) and to bear these accidents

            with equanimity (pra|/wj e!xein),²³ accounting their cause to be no other

____________________________________________________________________

            Pseudo-Philo, in his version of 1 Sam 6:2-9 in Bib. Ant. 55.4-7, also relates varying

proposals regarding the handling of the ark. There, however, the proposals emanate,

not from different factions among the Philistine "lords" (so Josephus), but rather from

two groups of "wise men" (sapientes; see 55.5, 7 [in this latter text "diviners" (divinis) are

mentioned as well]; compare the "priests and diviners" of 6:2a). In addition, again in

contrast to Josephus (see below), there is no real difference of opinion among Pseudo-

Philo's two groups of "sages," the second of whom merely supplement the proposal of

the first (the ark should be carried off on a cart drawn by cows who had recently

calved; see 6:7) with an additional one (that is, the cows are to positioned at the junc-

ture of three roads, a detail without parallel in the Bible itself but having an equivalent

in Ant. 6.11; see below). Finally, in contrast to the Bible, Josephus and Pseudo-Philo, the

"Samaritan Chronicle No. II" (see Macdonald, p. 120) represents the Philistines as sim-

ply loading the ark upon cows in order to return it to Israel (see 1 Sam 6:10) without

any prior "consultation" on the matter (in fact, the Chronicle's rendition of 6:10 follows

directly on its version of 1 Sam 5:1-5 [the ark at Ashdod], thus passing over the whole

of 5:6-6:9).

            18. The verb u(perekdike/w is a hapax in Josephus.

            19. The verb sunepidhme/w is a hapax in Josephus.

            20. Josephus's three other uses of the verb suneisba/llw are in Jewish War (here-

after J.W.) 3.292; Ant. 1.77; 14.334.

            21. This is the emendation by J. Hudson, followed by Niese and Marcus (cf. Lat

ei), for u(gih= in the codices.

            22. Josephus also uses the verb kh/dw with God as subject in J.W. 6.310; Ant. 1.209;

3.191; 4.2; 5.312; 6.61, 187, 305. In the last of these texts (David says to Abigail, "thou

art in God's care" [khdome/nou sou= tou= qeou=), one finds the same genitival construction

as here in 6.9.

            23. As Marcus (trans.) (Josephus, 5.169, note a) points out, this same phrase occurs

in Josephus's—likewise "invented"—account of the varying opinions concerning the

fate of Moses on the mountain (see n. 17 above); see Ant. 3.97, where the third group

is led to "retain their composure" (pra|/wj e!xein).

20                      Bulletin for Biblical Research 8

 

            than nature (fu/sin) itself, who periodically produces such changes in

            men's bodies, and in plants (futoi=j)²⁴ and all the products of earth.²⁵

 

            Josephus allots still more space to the third and final of the three

opinions (6.10-12), into which he incorporates elements of the re-

sponses of the Philistine priests and diviners (6:3, 4b-9). He begins his

rendition with an introductory notice (6.10a) which makes clear that

this opinion is the one that should, and did in fact, prevail: "However,

both these proposals were defeated (nika|=)²⁶ by the counsel (gnw/maj) of

men who in times past had gained credit for superior (diafe/rein

pepisteume/nwn)²⁷ intelligence and sagacity (sune/sei kai_ fronh/sei)²⁸ and

who now above all seemed to say just what befitted (a(rmozo/ntwj)²⁹ the

occasion." Thereafter, he relates these figures' proposal concerning

the "offerings" which are to accompany the returning ark; for this he

draws on, while also modifying³⁰ the wording of, 6:3, 4b-6:

 

            Their verdict was neither to send back (a)pope/mpein)³¹ the ark nor to retain

            it,³² but to dedicate to God (a)naqei=nai tw|= qew|=)³³ five images of gold

 

            24. The speakers' use of this word here echoes Josephus's notice in 6.3 that the

mice ravaged the Philistines' land, "sparing neither plant (futw=n) nor fruit."

            25. Neither the Bible nor the other extrabiblical traditions being studied has an

equivalent to Josephus's second proposal here, namely, that the Philistines simply hold

onto the ark, despite the devastation it is causing.

            26. Note the historic present, a form introduced very frequently by Josephus in

his rewriting of the Bible's history; see C. T. Begg, Josephus' Account of the Early Divided

Monarchy (AJ 8, 212-420) (BETL 108; Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 1993)

10-11 n. 32 and the literature cited there.

            27. The term diafe/rein in the above Greek phrase is absent from the codices ROM.

Both Niese and Marcus retain the word in their respective texts, although the former

qualifies its omission by the three codices as "fort. recte."

            28. This collocation occurs only here in Josephus. Compare Ant. 4.36 where, in

citing the varying expectations regarding the upcoming contest between Moses and

Korah, Josephus qualifies the holders of the second view (that is, the hope that Korah's

"sedition" would be checked) as "others of the sager (froni/mwn) sort." See n. 17 above.

            29. This term is a hapax in Josephus.

            30. One such "modification" involves the substitution of indirect for the direct

discourse of the source. On this recurrent feature of Josephus's rewriting of biblical

history in the Antiquities, see Begg, Josephus' Account, 12-13 n. 38.

            31. This is the same verb used by the first group of "lords" in urging the return

of the ark in 6.8. In fact, as will emerge from what follows, Josephus does not represent

the third group in 6.10 as calling for the retention of the ark (so the second group).

Rather, that group is advising that the ark be sent back to its own land (so the first

group) but only together with suitable offerings for its divine owner. Compare 6:3a,

where their priests and diviners enjoin the Philistines: "If you send away the ark . . . by

all means do not send it empty . . . ."

            32. I italicize elements of Josephus's presentation, such as the above, that have no

counterpart in the biblical source as such (as also biblical items without parallel in Josephus).

            33. Josephus uses the above phrase, "dedicate to God," eleven times in his writ-

ings: J.W. 1.357; Ant. 3.219; 5.347; 6.10, 133, 194, 244; 7.108; 12.47; 14.488; compare 10.154,

            BEGG: The Return of the Ark according to Josephus                  21

 

            (a)ndria/ntaj . . . xrusou=j),³⁴ one on behalf of each city,³⁵ as a thank-

            offering (xaristh/rion),³⁶ to him for His care for their salvation (proeno/-

            hsen . . . th=j swthri/aj)³⁷ and having kept them in the land of the living when

            they were like to be harried (diwkome/nouj) out of it by plagues (paqh/masin)

            which they could no longer face (a)ntible/yai),³⁸ and withal as many golden

            mice (mu/aj xrusou=j)³⁹ like to those that had overrun and ruined their

            land (diafqei/rasi th_n xw/ran).⁴⁰

______________________________________________________________________________

where it is used in reference to the Babylonian gods. Compare 6:5 "make" (so the MT

and L 6:4 [poih/sate]; > B).

            34. This expression seems to reflect a conflation of the phrases "golden tumors"

(?, so Rsv) of 6:4 (MT bhz ylp( [ketiv] / bhz yrh+ [qere], BL e#daj xrusa=j) and "images of

your tumors" of 6:5 (MT Mkylp( ymlc [ketiv] / Mkyrh+ ymlc [qere], L e#daj xrusa=j

o(moi/wma tw=n e(drw=n u(mw=n). On the meaning of the terms Mylp(, Myrwh+ and e#dra (tumors?;

anuses?; seats, i.e., residences?), see J. Lust, "EDRA and the Philistine Plague," in Septuagint,

Scrolls and Cognate Writings: Papers Presented to the International Symposium on the Sep-

tuagint and Its Relations to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings (ed. G. J. Brooke and

B. Lindars; SBLSCS 33; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992) 569-97. (Josephus himself em-

ploys the word e!dra of BL 6:4, etc., a total of four times [J.W. 2.224; 5.435; 6.278; Ant.

19.137] but never in his rendition of 1 Samuel 5-6 in Ant. 6.1-18, notwithstanding its

status as a Leitwort in the BL version of those chapters.)

            35. That is, the five cities of the Philistine Pentapolis cited by name in 6.8. Compare

6:4b, "(five golden tumors) acccording to the number of the lords of the Philistines; for

the same plague was upon you and upon your lords." Josephus's reformulation of this

phrase might reflect the fact that the Bible had not previously spoken of a plague be-

falling the Philistine "lords" in particular.

            36. Compare 1 Sam 6:3-4, "a guilt offering" (MT M#$), BL to_ [L + u(pe_r] th=j

basa/nou). Josephus's alternative designation for the offering seems to have in view the appended

indication concerning its intended purpose; see above in the text.

            37. The above phrase with God as subject recurs in Ant. 8.334; 9.153; 11.231; Life

301. Here in 6.10, the phrase is noteworthy for the fact that it is put on the lips of

(enemy) Gentiles, who thereby acknowledge God's providential concern for them.

            38. Josephus's only other use of the verb a)ntible/pw is in Against Apion (hereafter

Ag. Ap.) 2.235. The reference to the Philistines' being unable to "face" their plagues

here echoes Josephus's language in 6.4 (the Azotians were "powerless to withstand their

calamities"); what was there a editorial remark for the benefit of the reader has now

become the Philistines' own realization about their situation. The whole of the phrase

italicized above spells out what God is being thanked for by means of the proposed

"thank-offering" see previous note. Perhaps Josephus found a certain inspiration for

the phrase—as also for his previous designation of the offering itself as a "thank-

offering" rather than a "guilt-offering" (so 6:3)—in 6:5ba, where the Philistines are

instructed, "give glory to [L + the Lord] the God of Israel," a directive that might seem

to have in view more an expression of "thanks" than a confession of "guilt."

            39. Thus L 6:5 (B mu=j xrusou=j). In the MT the "mice" are mentioned for the first

time in the Ark Narrative in 6:4, whereas in both BL (see 5:6; cf. also their plus in 6:1)

and Josephus (see Ant. 6.3), they already figure in these documents' respective accounts

of the ark's stay in Philistia.

            40. Compare 6:5, "(your mice) that ravage the land (BL deafqeiro/ntwn th_n gh_n).  
From the words of the "priests and diviners" in 6:3, 4-6, Josephus omits the (presump-

tuous) promise of v. 3b, "Then you will be healed, and it will be known to you [so the

MT; BL 4QSam^a, when you have been ransomed] why his hand does not turn away

22                         Bulletin for Biblical Research 8

 

            The proposals of the third group continue in Ant. 6.11-12, Jose-

phus's version of the concluding directives of the priests and diviners

as reported in 1 Sam 6:7-9. In reproducing the source sequence,

Josephus not only recasts it in indirect discourse (see n. 30), but also

rearranges the order of its component elements. In particular, he "an-

ticipates," at the opening of 6.11, the item concerning the disposition

of the "offerings" from v. 8ab, juxtaposing this directly with the pro-

posal about the making of those offerings, 6.10b (//6:3, 4b-5). His

version of the item reads: "Then, having placed these [the golden

images and mice] in a coffer (glwsso/komon)⁴¹ and set (qe/ntaj) it upon

the ark (e)pi_ th_n kibwto/n). . ."⁴²  He then continues with the directives

regarding the ark's mode of transport from v. 7: "they should make

for this [the ark] a new wain (a#macan . . . kainh_n = BL 6:7), and should

yoke (u(pozeu/zantaj, BL zeu/cate)⁴³ thereto kine (bo/aj = BL)⁴⁴ that had

freshly calved (a)rtito/kouj)⁴⁵ and should shut up and retain (e)gklei=sai

kai_ katasxei=n) their calves (po/rtij). . . ."⁴⁶ To the last part of this direc-

tive Josephus further appends a "motivation" without parallel in the

source: "in order that these might not retard their mothers by following

tkem, and they, through yearning for their young, might make more speed

on their way."⁴⁷

______________________________________________________________________

from you [so the MT; BL, should not his hand be stayed from off you?]." He likewise

leaves out the further tentative promise of v. 5bb ("perhaps he will lighten his hand

from off you and your gods and your land"). Finally, he also eliminates from his

version the admonitory question of 6:6 ("Why should you harden your hearts as the

Egyptians and Pharoah hardened their hearts? After he had made sport of them, did

not they let the people go, and they departed?"), which seems out of place at this junc-

ture, when the Philistines are already eager to return the ark.

            In contrast to Josephus, Pseudo-Philo does not reproduce the directives of 6:3,

4b-6 about the making of the offerings that are to accompany the ark. Instead, he has

th Philistine wise men begin immediately with the question of how the ark is to be

transported and the rationale for the "test-character" of their proposal on the matter;

see Bib. Ant. 55.5-7//6:7-9.

            41. This word is a hapax in Josephus.

            42. Compare 6:8a13, "and (B + do not) put in a box (MT zgr)b; BL e)n qe)mati [+ B

berexqa/n, L baerga/z, both apparent transliterations/corruptions of the rare Hebrew

word for "box"]) at its [the ark's] side (B e)k [L + plagi/wn] me/rouj) the figures (BL skeu/h)

of gold which you are returning to him as a sin offering [see 6:3]."

            43. Josephus uses the verb u(pozeu/gnumi elsewhere in J.W. 2.61; Ant. 8.41; Ag. Ap. 2.127.

            44. As in B, Josephus has no equivalent to the specification of the MT L 6:7 con-

cerning the cows, that is, that they are to be ones "upon which there has never come

a yoke."

            45. This term is a hapax in Josephus. It is his equivalent to the word prwtotokou/saj

of BL 6:7. Compare the MT, where the cows are specified as "milch" (twl() cows.

            46. This word is a hapax in Josephus. Compare 6:7bb, "take (BL a)paga/gete) the

calves (BL te/kna) home, away from them."

            47. With Josephus's above expansion concerning the proposed measure involving

the cows and their calves, compare Bib. Ant. 55.5, where the wise men represent the

cows and their separation from their calves as a kind of "substitute" for the Philistine

         BEGG: The Return of the Ark according to Josephus              23

 

            Josephus's third party rounds off its proposal with a final injunc-

tion, this expatiating on that of 6:8b: "Then having driven them [the

cows], drawing the ark, out to a place where three roads meet (e)pi_ tri/sdou),⁴⁸

they should there leave (kartalipei=n) them, suffering them to take which

of the roads they would."⁴⁹ To this concluding proposal he then adds (6.12//6:9)

mention of the "test" which the dispatch of the cows is intended to provide:

 

            Should the kine take the route to the Hebrews (  (Ebrai/wn)⁵⁰ and mount

            to their country; they must regard the ark as the cause of all these ills

            (ai)ti/an tw=n kakw=n);⁵¹ but should they turn elsewhere, "then," said they,

            "let us pursue (metadiw/cwmen)⁵² after it, having learnt (maqo/ntej) that it

            possesses no such power (i)sxu/n)."⁵³

___________________________________________________________________

mothers and their infants who had perished in the ark-brought plague. The wise men's

statement here, in turn, picks up on the Philistines' general confession in 55.4 (no bib-

lical parallel): "Behold now we see that destruction is great among us, and the fruit of

our womb will perish because the creeping things that have been sent among us will

destroy those who are with child or sucklings and those who are nursing." Cf. Murphy,

Pseudo-Philo, 201.

            48. Josephus's only other use of the word tri/odoj is in 6.13. The above specification

about the site from which the cows are to be dispatched has a noteworthy counterpart

in Pseudo-Philo (Bib. Ant. 55.7), where "some of the wise men and diviners" make the

following additional proposal: "Not only will we try this [that is, placing the ark upon

a cart drawn by cows, 55.6//6:7], but also we shall set the cows at the juncture of the

three roads (initio trium viarum) that are around Ekron. For the middle road goes

straight to Ekron and the right-hand one to Judah, and the left-hand one to Samaria."

Both Josephus and Pseudo-Philo were likely inspired, in their respective elaborations

of the biblical presentation on the matter, by the reference in 6:9 to the possible "ways"

the cows might take. The two postbiblical authors "set up" this possibility with their

reference to the "juncture of three roads."

            49. Compare 6:8b, "Then send it [the ark] off (BL e)capostelei=te) and let it goes its

way (L a)peleu/seutai, B a)pela/sate au)th_n) [B + and it shall depart, a)peleu/setai]."

            50. On Josephus's oscillating designations for the chosen people at the various mo-

ments of their history, see A. Arazy, The Appelations of the Jews (Ioudaios, Hebraios, Israel)

in the Literature from Alexander to Justinian (Ph. Diss., New York University, 1973) 170-81.

            51. This phrase echoes the one used by the second party among the Philistine

"lords" who according to 6.9, "warned that they should not be deluded into attributing

the cause of their misfortunes (th_n ai)ti/an tw=n kakw=n) to the ark." With Josephus's for-

mulation of the first possible outcome of the "test," compare 1 Sam 6:9a ". . . if it goes

up on the way to its own land, to Beth-shemesh, then it is he [God] who has done us

this great harm (BL kaki/an)." Compare also Bib. Ant. 55.7b, "And if they [the cows] set

out on the right-hand road and go straight to Judah, we will know indeed that the God

of the Jews has destroyed (exterminavit) us."

            52. Josephus's two remaining uses of the verb metadiw/kw are in J.W. 1.320; Ant.

6.287. Note how here, at the very end of the third party's proposal, Josephus switches

from indirect to direct discourse in line with the direct discourse of 6:9b. Such switches

(and their reverse) also occur within one and the same speech elsewhere in Josephus;

see Begg, Josephus' Account, 123-24 n. 772.

            53. Here again (see n. 51 above), Josephus has his third party echo language used

earlier by the second party; see 6.9, where the second party affirms that the ark "pos-

sessed no such power and might (i)sxu/n)."

24                           Bulletin for Biblical Research 8

 

                             PHILISTIA TO BETH-SHEMESH

 

The second segment I distinguish within 1 Sam 6:1-7:1 1/ Ant. 6.7–

18 concerns the ark's arrival at Beth-shemesh (6:10-18//6.13-15).

This new section begins with a notice on the "execution" of the

directives laid down in what precedes. Josephus (6.13a) gives the

source indications on the subject (6:10-11) a content of his own:

"Judging this to be well spoken, they⁵⁴ straightway ratified the counsel

(gnw/mhn)⁵⁵ by acting thereon (toi=j e!rgoij . . . e)ku/rwsan).⁵⁶ Having made

the objects aforesaid,⁵⁷ they conducted (proa/gousi)⁵⁸ the wain to the

cross-roads (e)pi_ th_n tri/odon; see 6.11),⁵⁹ where they left it ( katalipo/-

_________________________________________________________________________

            Josephus's wording of the second eventuality above, with its invocation of a pos-

sible "pursuit" of the ark, represents an "activistic intensification" of the merely "in-

tellectual" formulation of 1 Sam 6:9b, "but if not, then we shall know (BL gnwso/meqa)

that it is not his hand (Tg. Jon. stroke, hytxm) that struck us (Tg. Jon. was near to us), it

happened by chance (MT hrqm, BL su/mptwma)." Compare Bib. Ant. 55.7c, which goes its

own way with respect to the second possible outcome of the proposed "test": "But if

they go forth by other roads, we will know that this very violent time has come upon

us because now we have denied our own gods." (In Bib. Ant. 55.5 one finds (at least

in Harrington's English translation) a formulation by the first group of Philistine wise

men about the outcome of the proposed test comparable to that of 1 Sam 6:9 (and Ant.

6.12), that is, "we can learn about this, if the Lord has sent destruction upon us on

account of the ark or an evil power has come upon us by chance [conveniens]". This

rendering of the word conveniens is, however, not the only one possible; see the French

translation of Harrington-Cazeaux (Pseudo-Philon, I, 353), "ou si vraiment un pouvoir

(maléfique) nous atteint"; and the discussion in C. Perrot and P.-M. Bogaert, Pseudo-

Philon: Les Antiquités Bibliques (SC 230; Paris: Cerf, 1976) 2.225, ad loc.

            54. That is, apparently the "lords of the Philistines," the subjects of the deliber-

ation in 6.7-12; see also 6.13b, where these figures are cited explicitly.

            55. This term picks up on the phrase used in reference to the third party among

the "lords" in 6.10, "both these proposals were defeated by the counsel (gnw/maj) of men

who. . . ."

            56. Compare 6:10aa, "The men (so the MT, BL the Philistines) did (BL e)poi/hsan) so."

            57. That is, the golden images and mice; see 6.10b. The source does not mention

the fabrication of these items as such; compare, however, 1 Sam 6:11b, "(they put) the

box with the golden mice and the images of their tumors," (so the MT) which presup-

poses that they were, in fact, made.

            58. Note the historic present.

            59. Also this notice has no equivalent in 1 Sam 6:10-11 as such; conversely, Josephus

leaves out the source's enumeration of a variety of preparatory measures involving the

cart and its bearers: that is, the yoking of the cows, shutting up of the calves (v. 10),

and loading of the ark and the "box" with its contents onto the cart (v. 11). Compare

Bib. Ant. 55.8a, which parallels 6:10-11 more closely, while also including a reference

to the "positioning" of the cart at the crossroads comparable to Josephus's: "And the

Philistines took the cows that gave milk and yoked them to the new cart (see 6:10a) and

put the ark on it (see 6:11a) and set them at the juncture of the roads (see Ant. 6.13) and shut

up their calves at home (see 6:10b)." Compare also the notice of the "Samaritan Chronicle

No. II" (Macdonald, p. 120), which seems to represent the ark as being placed directly

on the cows, rather than on a cart drawn by cows: "Thereafter the Philistines took the

ark and carried it on cows and they sent the cows along the way to the cities of Israel."

          BEGG: The Return of the Ark according to Josephus               25

 

ntej)⁶⁰ and retired." The segment next recor