![]()
TEXT AND COMMENTARY
HOSEA 1:1ā2a
Translation
1:1The word of yhwh which came to Hosea son of Beeri, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam son of Joash, king of Israel.
2The beginning of that which yhwh spoke through Hosea.
Notes on the text
2. ābeginningā: while tÄįø„ilah generally comes with a prep. (e.g. Gen. 13:3; 41:21; Judg. 20:18; 2 Sam. 21:9; Isa. 1:26; Amos 7:1), we find it in this form (tÄįø„ilat) often enough (Eccl. 10:13; Prov. 9:10) and functioning as translated above. Somewhat more uniquely we find it here in const. with a verbal phrase rather than a noun, but the above translation does justice both to its form elsewhere and the verbal phrase (cf. J-M Ā§129p: āthe beginning of (that which) Y. spokeā). Proposals to follow the lxx and turn the verb to a noun (āyhwhās wordā) are unnecessary, and leave us with little explanation for the mt. The lxx should be seen as simply assimilating the phrase to the more common formula.
Form and structure
The superscription stands as a general orientation to the book, sharing its form with the general (though not unanimous) manner of the prophets both in and outside Israel. As such it is clearly editorial, though in the most general sense included by necessity only upon the completion of the prophetic work and for the sake of those who would read/hear the scroll. The superscription has the curious dynamic of focusing on the southern kingdom, while the preaching focuses chiefly on the northern. It clearly indicates a scroll maintained and curated for an audience in the southern kingdom, but says very little. After all, by the time of the exile of Samaria we would expect remaining materials to be located chiefly in Judah. So, rather than offering any insight into dating the book, the Judean slant of the editorial superscript should be seen as an expected part of the work even if we were to imagine it completed before Hoseaās death.
Strangely this superscription itself has sometimes been taken as an indication of a late date because it is āwhat might be expected if the late author of the book wished to date his work back in the earlier timeā (Day 1909: 110). But by the same token we would expect it at any point of its conclusion if the purpose of the collection of Hoseaās prophecies was for them to be read and known among yhwh worshippers, or otherwise put by those in covenant with yhwh after the fall of the northern kingdom (i.e. Judah). And, as noted in the introduction above, that this form of superscription is shared only by other prophetic ābooksā from the eighth century cannot be dismissed as accidental: it seems to be the form used in the earliest collections of prophetic materials in Israel. Perhaps by the time of Jeremiah or Ezekiel in the sixth century such introductions were no longer required. Further, the use of Hoseaās family name (āson of Beeriā) indicates knowledge that is nowhere else preserved. It could, of course, simply have been invented for authenticity, but that kind of deliberate scepticism would leave us crippled regarding any form of historical investigation. And while some of the prophetic books list the family of the prophet (Jer. 1:1; Isa. 1:1; Ezek. 1:3; Joel 1:1; Zeph. 1:1), we have no reason to think this was required for identification (cf. Mic. 1:1; Amos 1:1; Nah. 1:1; Hab. 1:1; Mal. 1:1). In any case, to use the superscription as if confirming a late date of the book sets aside key parts of the evidence.
The introductory line of 2a likewise stands on its own in the mt, rather than as a part of the remainder of v. 2 (cf. note). But the difference is minimal between reading it as a general statement that introduces the whole book (as mt) or as a statement that immediately introduces the command to marry. In either case we are given two introductory remarks: historical location for the prophet, and the start of the scroll in which yhwhās words through the prophet are to be found.
Comment
The dual superscription breaks into standard forms: the first gives a historical setting in terms familiar for eighth-century prophetic collections (cf. āIntroduction: date and provenanceā). Apart from possibly Jeroboam II, none of the other kings play any role in the remainder of Hosea. Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah were all Judahite kings and Hosea throughout keeps his eyes on Samaria and its kings. And even the few exceptions to that rule come in contexts that make plain Hoseaās concern for the northern kingdom.
The second superscription emphasizes Hosea as a means by which yhwh speaks. That is, Hoseaās prophetic work began when yhwh began to speak through him. It is a unique line in the prophets, most of whom simply begin with the word of yhwh through the prophet (at least after a superscription) rather than an editorial remark telling us that they are about to begin. But such a line here fits the nature of chs. 1ā3 as a purposeful frame for the whole of the book. The command to marry (1:2b) formed the ābeginningā of Hoseaās acting the role of yhwhās prophet.
Explanation
The historical superscription draws on Israelās social memory to paint a picture that will loom over the whole of the book: the kings that stand at the end of the northern kingdomās life. It is hard to imagine the list of dates and kings (cf. introduction) not bringing this demise to mind. The kings are given in terms that would be most familiar for later Judean readers, with only the best known of the late Samarian kings listed (Jeroboam II). But, as noted above, that dynamic is unsurprising if we imagine Hosea as a collection of prophecies that were curated in Judah. (Where else would they be kept and edited after Samariaās fall?) Hosea bears closest similarities to other southern prophets, such as Isaiah of Jerusalem and Amos. So it should be little surprise that a āyhwh-aloneā prophet like Hosea would have his words collected and preserved at the only other place we know that shared such a view ā Judah. And to describe the close of the northern kingdomās life in Judah would, it seems, most naturally be done by listing the relevant Judahite kings. One imagines a similar scenario for AmericanāMexican relations: to introduce a document from Mexico as delivered during the days of George Washington or Abraham Lincoln would make perfect sense for later generations of American readers, indicating an audience and likely place of publication, but not itself compromising the material presented.
So given the superscription we are meant to read Hoseaās words as a part of history, woven into the fabric of what the readers knew happened. yhwh did not utter timeless utterances, but spoke to his people in a particular moment of their life. The social memory of Israelās life is meant to shape our reading of Hoseaās words. And at the same time the superscription prepares us for a text that will itself shape social memory. Hosea serves to construct a history as well as assume it. The ādays of the kingsā listed here become the canvas on which Hoseaās words paint a particular portrait of Israelās life, and it is unflattering at best. No social or political institution seems untouched by the infidelity with which Hosea paints the nation. The reader is expected to bring ideas to the text for what the ādays of the kingsā above looked like, a sketch of which is provided above in the introduction. But the reader will also have that sketch shaped by Hoseaās portrayal of Israelās life. Admittedly this comes only upon reading the whole of the book rather than a first reading. But Hoseaās uniformly negative view of Israelās life is deliberately imposed upon this setting. We are not merely given incidental historical information, but a superscription that calls an era to mind in order to shape social memory of that era and the exile that occurred.
And among the many other implications of that dynamic, perhaps the most poignant ...
