Covenant Concepts Of Berit Diatheke And

Testamentum Proceedings Of The Conference At The

Lanier Theological Library In Houston Texas
November 2019 Christian A Eberhart download
https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-concepts-of-berit-
diatheke-and-testamentum-proceedings-of-the-conference-at-the-
lanier-theological-library-in-houston-texas-
november-2019-christian-a-eberhart-50619014

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

The Concept Of The Covenant In The Second Temple Period Supplements To

The Journal For The Study Of Judaism New Ed Porter

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-concept-of-the-covenant-in-the-
second-temple-period-supplements-to-the-journal-for-the-study-of-
judaism-new-ed-porter-55023736

Covenant And Grace In The Old Testament Robert D Miller Ii

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-and-grace-in-the-old-testament-
robert-d-miller-ii-49450236

Covenant Theology A Biblical Theological And Historical Study Of Gods

Covenants Dr J Ligon Duncan

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-theology-a-biblical-
theological-and-historical-study-of-gods-covenants-dr-j-ligon-
duncan-49590946

Covenant Relationships And The Editing Of The Hebrew Psalter Adam D

Hensley

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-relationships-and-the-editing-
of-the-hebrew-psalter-adam-d-hensley-50217720
Covenant And Grace In The Old Testament Assyrian Propaganda And
Israelite Faith Robert D Miller

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-and-grace-in-the-old-testament-
assyrian-propaganda-and-israelite-faith-robert-d-miller-50342574

Covenant Continuity And Fidelity A Study Of Innerbiblical Allusion And

Exegesis In Malachi Jonathan Gibson

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-continuity-and-fidelity-a-
study-of-innerbiblical-allusion-and-exegesis-in-malachi-jonathan-
gibson-50616976

Covenant Marriage The Movement To Reclaim Tradition In America 1st

Edition Steven Nock Laura Sanchez James Wright

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-marriage-the-movement-to-
reclaim-tradition-in-america-1st-edition-steven-nock-laura-sanchez-
james-wright-51434452

Covenant In The Persian Period From Genesis To Chronicles Richard J

Bautch Editor Gary N Knoppers Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-in-the-persian-period-from-
genesis-to-chronicles-richard-j-bautch-editor-gary-n-knoppers-
editor-51830534

Covenant Of Care Newark Beth Israel And The Jewish Hospital In America
Alan M Kraut Deborah Kraut

https://ebookbell.com/product/covenant-of-care-newark-beth-israel-and-
the-jewish-hospital-in-america-alan-m-kraut-deborah-kraut-51902188
 Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament

Herausgeber / Editor
Jörg Frey (Zürich)

Mitherausgeber / Associate Editors

Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) · James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala)
Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg) · Janet Spittler (Charlottesville, VA)
J. Ross Wagner (Durham, NC)

506
Covenant – Concepts of Berit,
Diatheke, and Testamentum
Proceedings of the Conference at the Lanier
Theological Library in Houston, Texas,
November 2019

edited by
Christian A. Eberhart and Wolfgang Kraus

in collaboration with
Richard J. Bautch, Matthias Henze,
and Martin Rösel

Mohr Siebeck
Christian A. Eberhart, born 1964; 2000 doctorate; 2011 Habilitation; Professor of Religious
Studies and Director of the Religious Studies Program at the University of Houston, Texas.
orcid.org/0000-0002-9634-1680

Wolfgang Kraus, born 1955; 1990 doctorate; 1994 Habilitation; Professor emeritus for New
Testament Studies at the University of the Saarland, Saarbruecken; Research Associate Dept.
of New Testament, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
orcid.org/0000-0003-0878-034X

ISBN 978-3-16-161773-7 / eISBN 978-3-16-161774-4

DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-161774-4
ISSN 0512-1604 / eISSN 2568-7476
(Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen ­Testament)
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

© 2023 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com

This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by
copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to repro-
ductions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems.
The book was printed by Gulde Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbin-
derei Spinner in Ottersweier.
Printed in Germany.
 Preface
Preface
Preface
This volume is based on the presentations delivered in November 19–22, 2019
at the conference “Berit, Diatheke, Foedus, Covenant, Bund” at the Lanier
Theological Library in Houston, Texas, supplemented by additional articles to
round out the topic. The conference was organized by the Program in Jewish
Studies at Rice University in Houston (Texas) and the Religious Studies
Program at the University of Houston in cooperation with the Universität des
Saarlandes, Saarbrücken (Germany) and the Universität Rostock (Germany)
and in collaboration with the Lanier Theological Library in Houston. The
scholars who organized it were (in alphabetical order) Richard J. Bautch,
Professor of Humanities at St. Edward’s University in Austin, Christian A.
Eberhart, Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Houston, Matthias
Henze, Professor of Hebrew Bible and Early Judaism at Rice University in
Houston, Wolfgang Kraus, Professor of New Testament Studies at Universität
des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, and Martin Rösel, Professor of Old Testament
Studies at Universität Rostock. This conference had its own prehistory that we
gratefully acknowledge. Already in 2012, Wolfgang Kraus, Martin Rösel, Gert
Steyn, and Florian Wilk had the idea of organizing an interdisciplinary confer-
ence on “covenant”. We are excited that, in 2019, this event could finally take
place in Houston and that this volume makes the presentations available to a
wider academic audience.
We are grateful to Mohr Siebeck publisher in Tübingen for the interest in
publishing the book, specifically Jörg Frey, the editor of the series Wissen-
schaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament (WUNT) and Henning
Ziebritzki, head of Mohr Siebeck. We would like to express our gratitude, in
the most cordial way possible, to Mark and Becky Lanier, founders of the
Lanier Theological Library, to its director Charles Mickey, to his assistant
Jennie Enright, and to all the other staff members. They offered to host this
event in the unique facilities of the Lanier Theological Library in Houston and
supported it in countless other ways. We are also grateful to the following co-
sponsors: Rice University, Program in Jewish Studies; University of Houston
– Religious Studies Program; University of Houston – Global Strategies and
Studies; University of Houston – Department of History; University of
Houston – the Honors College. Many thanks are in order to the stewards,
Véronique A. Eberhart and Clint Boyd, who helped and assisted in uncountable
ways before and during the conference. Furthermore, we acknowledge the hard
work of Joshua George, Jaden M. Urdiales, Véronique A. Eberhart, Paul Allen,
VI Preface

Ashlin Vance, and Claire Mummert for editorial assistance and support in the
post-conference phase. Special thanks go to the Dean’s Office of the College
of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences at the University of Houston for a generous
book completion grant as well as to the Internationalisierungsfond der
Universität des Saarlandes for additional funding for the work at these stages.
The German Academic Exchange Service / Deutscher Akademischer Aus-
tauschdienst (DAAD) generously reimbursed travel expenses of German
participants of the conference in Houston. We thank Andrea Töcker, Neuen-
dettelsau, for preparing the manuscript for publication and compiling the
indices.

Christian A. Eberhart, Houston, and Wolfgang Kraus, Saarbrücken,

in collaboration with
Richard J. Bautch, Austin, Matthias Henze, Houston, and Martin Rösel,
Rostock
 Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Preface .................................................................................................. V

Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

Introduction ........................................................................................... 1

History of Research and the Questions of Origin

Siegfried Kreuzer
Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the Hebrew Bible /
Old Testament ....................................................................................... 13

Ancient Near East

Poppy Tushingham
The adê Covenants of the Assyrian Empire:
Imposed by Humans, Enforced by the Gods .......................................... 43

Hebrew and Greek Bible

Thomas Hieke
Abram/Abraham as Prefiguration of the Covenant in the Torah .............. 69

Richard J. Bautch
Priestly Polemics in the Covenant of Levi ............................................. 89

Karin Finsterbusch
The New Covenant for Israel in Jeremiah. Notes on the Different Textual
Versions of the Pericope and their Meaning ........................................... 109

Karin Finsterbusch
Concepts of Covenant in the Variant Literary Editions of Ezekiel
(Old Greek Ezekiel and its Hebrew Vorlage and MT-Ezekiel) ............... 121
VIII Table of Contents

Eberhard Bons
Das Thema des Bundes in den Psalmen ................................................. 143

Manfred Oeming
Bundeskonzeptionen in der Achämenidenzeit unter besonderer
Berücksichtigung von Neh 8–10 ............................................................ 165

Bonifatia Gesche
Covenant and Holiness in the Book of Ben Sira .................................... 189

Francis M. Macatangay
Ideas of Covenant in the Apocrypha ...................................................... 207

Martin Rösel
Is διαθήκη an Appropriate Translation for ‫?ברית‬
Covenant, Contract, and Testament in the Septuagint ................................ 233

Second Temple Judaism

Brent A. Strawn
‫ ברית‬in the “Sectarian” Texts from Qumran .......................................... 249
Heinz-Josef Fabry
‫ ברית‬in den “non-sectarian” Schriften in Qumran ................................. 273
Gert J. Steyn
Covenant in the Writings of Philo and Josephus .................................... 309

Matthias Henze
Covenant in the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha .................................... 335

New Testament

Christian A. Eberhart
Between “My Blood of the Covenant” and the “New Covenant
in My Blood”. Origins, Meanings, Ramifications .................................. 361

Florian Wilk
Bundesterminologie und Bundeskonzeption in den
Korintherbriefen des Paulus .................................................................. 431
 Table of Contents IX

Jens Herzer
The Significance of Covenant Theology in Galatians and Romans ........ 457

Wolfgang Kraus
Διαθήκη in the Letter to the Hebrews .................................................... 495

Martin Karrer
The Ark of the Covenant in Revelation 11:19 ........................................ 511

Early Church

Martin Meiser
Covenant in the Early Church Writings ................................................. 541

Tobias Nicklas
The Covenant in Christian Apocrypha. Fragmentary Evidence
of a Spectrum of Ideas ........................................................................... 571

Late Antiquity

Jörg Ulrich
Diskurse über den Gottesbund im Dialog Justins mit dem Juden Trypho 587

Heinrich Schlange-Schöningen
Der Alte und der Neue Bund bei Hieronymus ........................................ 609

Sara Ronis
Sons of the Covenant? The Rabbinic Body
and the Covenant with God ................................................................... 625

Covenant in the Arts and in Systematic Discourse

Martin Karrer
The Mosaic of the Ark of the Covenant at Germigny-des-Prés .............. 647

Margit Ernst-Habib
Covenant as Convivence. The Relevance of Covenantal Theology
in Contemporary Theological Discourses .............................................. 661
X Table of Contents

Names of Contributors .......................................................................... 687

Index of Ancient Sources ....................................................................... 691

Index of Authors .................................................................................... 704
Subject Index ......................................................................................... 716
 Introduction
Introduction
CHRISTIAN A. EBERHART / WOLFGANG KRAUS
Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

The topic of covenant – however it may be defined – is as important to the

study of ANE religions, Second Temple Judaism, early Christian literature, and
the early Christian Church and Rabbinic Judaism as it is complex and disputed
among ancient and modern scholars alike. Although there are voices suggesting
that the theme has been overemphasized in recent research, it cannot be denied
that it permeates much of biblical and cognate literature throughout many
centuries (while its absence in the literatures of certain periods and some
authors needs to be acknowledged). The present collection of essays explores
the diverse spectrum of covenantal concepts that emerged during this time
period in different parts of the ANE and the eastern Mediterranean. Its
contributions discuss, for example, the problem of translating the basic
terminology such as ‫ ברית‬and διαθήκη (together with in the Peshitta,
‫ ܕ‬in the Syrohexapla, and foedus in Latin) and the proper understanding
of these terms. They investigate the etymology of these terms and trace their
origins in the socio-political sphere of the legal culture of the pre-Hellenistic
ANE where they were often deployed to designate international contractual
connections. They also explore the theological implications of this terminology
and its later application in mostly religious texts from different scholarly
perspectives. The result is a detailed, comprehensive, and thorough presen-
tation of the tremendous range of covenantal concepts and their complexities
in biblical and cognate literature throughout the ages, together with a keen look
at the history of pertinent scholarly research.
This volume starts with remarks on the history of research and questions of
origin of the topic of ‫ ברית‬by Siegfried Kreuzer. Under the title “Background
and Origin of Covenant Theology in the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament”,
Kreuzer first highlights the importance of the covenant theme from antiquity
to modern discussions, not only in exegesis but also in theological thinking and
in Bible translations. His contribution outlines the history of research, briefly
introduces the most relevant biblical texts, explores the scholarly discussion
about ‫ ברית‬from the late 19th century up to the present, and relates it to its
literary, exegetical, ANE, and sociological contexts. It puts special emphasis
not only on Hittite, Neo-Assyrian and Old Aramaic, but also on Old
Babylonian covenant texts while, in addition, exploring ‘covenant’ thinking (in
the sense of expressing a close relation, be it between the people or with God)
2 Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

without and beyond the term ‫ברית‬. At this point, the paper presents the current
consensus that the idea of a covenant between God and his people developed
in ancient Israel and the Hebrew Bible in the late 7th century BCE as a counter
concept to the loyalty oaths imposed on the Israelites and on other people by
the Assyrian kings. However, Kreuzer questions if more or less a copy of these
‘texts of terror’ would have motivated the Israelites to embrace and follow such
a covenant with the God of Israel. He eventually suggests an origin in the
prophetic message and the reflection about it, for example that the idea of ‫ברית‬
would have expanded and substituted other expressions for close relations,
both in their critical and in their positive function.
The next contribution is dedicated to the ancient Near East. In her paper
“The adê Covenants of the Assyrian Empire: Imposed by Humans, Enforced
by the Gods”, Poppy Tushingham argues that “covenant” may be the closest
English equivalent term to the Neo-Assyrian adê. Neo-Assyrian covenants
were imposed by humans, most frequently the Assyrian king, and concerned
actions and attitudes towards them or their successors. The covenants were
enforced, meanwhile, by the gods, divine witnesses who inflicted curses on
anyone who broke them. In her paper, Tushingham explores the relationship
between these human imposers and divine enforcers. She illustrates how the
Underworld Vision of an Assyrian Prince, a 7th century BCE work of Assyrian
literature, grapples with this theme, particularly as regards the status of a
covenant after the king’s death.
A total of nine contributions reflect on the area of Hebrew and Greek Bible.
Thomas Hieke studies the character of “Abram/Abraham as Prefiguration of
the Covenant in the Torah”. Hieke observes that the few words (especially
verbs) syntactically associated with the 82 occurrences of the term ‫ברית‬,
“covenant”, in the Torah lead to certain thematic lines that all are connected to
the literary character of Abram/Abraham in one way or another. While the
universal covenant with Noah and every living creature uses almost the same
wording and references items as the passage in which God establishes the
covenant with Abraham, a different set of expressions about “covenant” exists
in the Abraham cycle that is later used for Israel’s special covenant with
YHWH. Hieke concludes that Abram/Abraham emerges as the pivot of the
important concept of “covenant” in the Torah.
Richard Bautch investigates “Priestly Polemics in the Covenant of Levi”.
His study of the Covenant of Levi in Mal 2:4–9 breaks new ground by
demonstrating how the text advances the leitmotif of Malachi, which is focused
on fearing and glorifying the name of God; second, how it aligns with the
allusions, puns and stinging reversals in Malachi that critique those Aaronide
priests deeply involved in the formation of the Pentateuch (the Torah of
Moses); third, how it serves as the manifesto of a Levitical group seeking
separation from dominant priestly cohorts such as the Aaronides in Yehud at
this time. Bautch shows how inconspicuous covenants such as the Covenant of
 Introduction 3

Levi function as part of an oppositional wave in the priestly politics of the

Second Temple period.
The first contribution of Karin Finsterbusch has the title “The New
Covenant for Israel in Jeremiah: Notes on the Different Textual Versions of the
Pericope and their Meaning”. Finsterbusch studies the three different versions
of the pericope of the New Covenant for Israel: the Old Greek translation (Jer
38:31–34LXX), its supposed Hebrew Vorlage – which should be considered as
the oldest accessible version of the pericope – and the Hebrew Masoretic
version (Jer 31:31–34MT). The differences between these versions are
undoubtedly significant, as her analysis demonstrates. Finsterbusch argues that
despite these differences, all versions share the same pessimistic view on the
ability of God’s people to live according to the Torah and the same utopian
expectation of God’s graceful action, for instance, of his making a new
covenant in connection with a supernatural change of human nature. With
regard to these views and hopes, the pericope is closely related to several other
texts in Second Temple Jewish literature, even if the term “new covenant” is
unique in the Hebrew Bible and has played a unique and most problematic role
in the Christian reception.
In her second contribution to this volume, Karin Finsterbusch explores
“Concepts of Covenant in the Variant Literary Editions of Ezekiel (Old Greek
Ezekiel and its Hebrew Vorlage and MT-Ezekiel)”. Finsterbusch considers
Ezekiel to be an interesting case displaying a rather unique covenantal flavor
for example completely ignoring the famous eternal covenant with Abraham.
Furthermore, there are significant covenantal differences between the variant
literary editions of the book. There is not only a difference in numbers (three
covenants versus two covenants), but supposedly proto-Masoretic editors-
scribes also reworked the older covenantal texts significantly. For example
they fixed the date of the old covenant and the beginning of Israel as God’s
chosen people during her stay in Egypt. These differences within such a major
authoritative prophetic book as Ezekiel may show that the concept of covenant
was adapted due to religious insight and developed due to changing political
circumstances in the course of the textual transmission until a rather late period
in Second Temple Judaism.
Eberhard Bons explores “the Topic of Covenant in the Psalms” (“Das
Thema des Bundes in den Psalmen”). His article provides an overview of the
various ideas associated with the word ‫ ברית‬in the Psalms, examining a total of
19 passages in which the word refers to a covenant between God and Israel. In
some cases – such as Psalm 105 and 106 – a similarity with priestly covenantal
ideas is evident. In most cases, however, like in Psalm 78, it is hardly possible
to draw lines of connection to specific texts in the Pentateuch where a covenant
is mentioned. In these texts, the memory of a specific covenant has probably
faded or – as in the communal laments Psalm 44 and 74 – the current misery is
so much in the foreground that concrete covenants of the past are no longer
4 Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

mentioned. In yet other texts – Psalm 25 and 50 – the collective aspect of the
covenant is faded out and the covenant becomes the obligation of the
individual.
Manfred Oeming examines covenant concepts in the Achaemenid period
with special consideration of Neh 8–10 (“Bundeskonzeptionen in der Achäme-
nidenzeit unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Neh 8–10”). His contribution
first outlines the research consensus on the dating of Deuteronomistic, Priestly,
and prophetic covenantal concepts to the period between 650 to 500 BCE while
also addressing their theological structures. Oeming then shows how recent
research has opened up a fresh look at covenant theologies in the Persian
period; numerous further developments and new approaches have been
proposed, some of which are contradictory. Achaemenid politics, for example,
inspired the idea of peaceful coexistence among peoples; there was an
emphasis on adoption into the covenant instead of rigid genealogical family
ties; aspects of individualization were emphasized, moving away from
collective thinking to the idea of the very personal radical sublimation of sexual
needs. But there was also, in some contrast, a hardline attitude of opposition to
any form of intermarriage as religious apostasy. The concluding third part uses
an exegesis of Neh 8–10 to show how covenant is tied to hearing and rightly
interpreting Scripture, to instruct about the very intent of the Torah. This
concept has had its own lengthy reception history (to Jesus, Paul, and the
Gospels, especially Matthew) through the Reformers, and its impact continues
to the present day. Ezra, priest and scribe, with his “covenant of the book”, has
predetermined critical theological parameters of Judaism and Christianity as
sometimes strongly competing interpretive communities.
In her contribution “Covenant and Holiness in the Book of Ben Sira”,
Bonifatia Gesche focuses on the praise of the ancestors, which lists individuals
of Israel’s history who deserve extraordinary honor. This text attributes special
honor to several of these people by mentioning a covenant with YHWH; these
covenants peak in the Aaronite priesthood while Moses’s covenant at Mount
Sinai is omitted. This can be explained when one distinguishes – according to
Assmann’s terminology – Moses’s covenant as a covenant of loyalty and the
covenants of truth that apply to the other bonds mentioned in this passage.
According to Gesche, the latter requires complete holiness of the priests.
Francis M. Macatangay studies “Ideas of Covenant in the Apocrypha”. His
essay analyzes a number of selected texts (Tob 1:3–8, Jdt 9:11–14; Sir 45:23–
25; Wis 18:20–22; 1 Macc 1:11 / Dan 9:26–27; 2 Macc 7:34–38; Pr. Azar 11–
13, and Bar 2:34–35) which consider it an axiom that God remains faithful and
has not given up on his people. And yet, these texts do not just recall the biblical
covenants. Their articulation and understanding of covenant take on a variety
of meanings and expressions. Macatangay concludes that, often embracing the
Deuteronomic calculus of blessing and curse, reward and punishment,
 Introduction 5

obedience and disobedience, these texts also creatively conceptualize the

covenantal demands and the promises of God differently.
Investigating covenant, contract, and testament in the Septuagint, Martin
Rösel asks the question: “Is διαθήκη an appropriate translation for ‫ ”?ברית‬His
article deals with the problem of why the translators of the Septuagint chose
the word διαθήκη to translate Hebrew ‫ברית‬. In Classical and Hellenistic Greek,
διαθήκη has the meaning of “testament” or “last will”, with an emphasis on the
one-sidedness of the testator. A contract or alliance between equal partners
usually does not lie within the semantic range of διαθήκη. Rösel argues that
the Greek term has been chosen because it accentuates the one-sidedness of
God’s deeds for his people, enhanced by the aspects of reliability and legal
security. Thus the semantics of διαθήκη in the Septuagint include the religious
idea of a “covenantal decree”.
Four contributions are dedicated to Second Temple Judaism. Brent A.
Strawn investigates “‫ ברית‬in the ‘Sectarian’ Texts from Qumran”. The word
‫“( ברית‬covenant”) occurs frequently in these texts. Strawn’s essay reviews
these occurrences; instances of ‫ ברית‬in “non-sectarian” texts are treated in the
subsequent contribution. After discussing the philological data, including the
distribution, morphology, and syntax of ‫ §( ברית‬1), Strawn assesses what ‫ברית‬
means in these texts, covering how the term is employed in both “profane” and
“theological” ways (§ 2).
Heinz-Josef Fabry explores ‫ ברית‬in the non-sectarian Qumran texts (“‫ ברית‬in
den ‘non-sectarian’ Schriften in Qumran”). Fabry shows that, in the non-
sectarian Qumran texts, there are nearly 40 instances of ‫“( ברית‬covenant”) that,
according to the majority view, date to the pre-Qumran period. They could be
and were received by the later Qumran community as important specifications.
This paper attempts to fathom the ideas of “covenant” with the help of the
various noun-verb and verb-noun occurrences. The non-secratian texts feature
approx. 20 of the total of 70 occurrences; especially their neologisms are
significant. They certainly take up themes and ideas from the Old Testament,
but also from apocryphal literature (especially the Book of Jubilees). God is
often the subject of the meaning of the covenant, as the one who gives, makes,
keeps, and remembers it. By contrast, the sectarian texts develop a clearly
greater variety. The pre-Qumran conceptualization of “covenant”, which was
seen as being mediated through the hand of Moses, was influenced by historical
experiences with the pagan regime of Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Phrases such
as “sinning against the covenant” and the ambivalent “fighting against the
covenant” show the difficulties the Jewish people faced. According to Fabry,
the transition from the theological to the ecclesiological concept of “covenant”
is attested exclusively in the sectarian texts.
Gert J. Steyn studies “Covenant the Writings of Philo and Josephus”. Steyn
observes that Philo engages with the covenant concept, although it is not the
focal point of his theology. Key aspects, such as the signs of the covenant, are
6 Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

missing in διαθήκη contexts. Closely linking διαθήκη to LXX quotations and

interpreting it allegorically with symbolic associations, Philo identifies divine
justice, law, and logos as synonymous with διαθήκη. The term encapsulates the
very essence of God himself, which is consistently closely associated with
God’s χάρις. Josephus, in turn, seeks common ground with his Gentile readers
and avoids the technical use of διαθήκη as “covenant”. He rather uses different
other related expressions and does not link God’s promises to citations from
the Jewish Scriptures.
To close out the thematic area of Second Temple Judaism, Matthias Henze
examines “Covenant in the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha”. Henze notes that
the concept of “covenant” is widespread but not ubiquitous in Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha. There are many ways in which the biblical covenants are
remembered and reimagined. The Book of Jubilees remembers God’s
covenants with the patriarchs. Subsequent covenants in the Bible have merged
to become reiterations of the one covenant God has established with Israel.
Other Old Testament Pseudepigrapha align themselves with the book of
Deuteronomy and adopt its covenantal tradition, among them the Psalms of
Solomon, the Testament of Moses, 2 Baruch, and 4 Ezra. Henze finally
observes that texts not adhering to the Deuteronomic paradigm either make
covenant part of their sapiential thinking, such as Ben Sira, or largely avoid
covenant altogether, such as 1 Enoch.
Five contributions specifically reflect on the New Testament / early Chris-
tian literature. In his contribution “Between ‘My Blood of the Covenant’ and
the ‘New Covenant in My Blood’: Origins, Meanings, Ramifications”, Chris-
tian A. Eberhart reflects on the meaning of the term διαθήκη with reference to
HB / OT / LXX texts, specifically the covenant ritual at Mt. Sinai (Exod 24:3–
8) and the “new covenant” (Jer 31MT / 38LXX). Eberhart shows that the term
‫“ – ברית‬covenant” has its roots in ancient inter- and transnational diplomacy
and in the local / domestic realm of family and household settings with some
Achaemenid Persian influence. It conveys notions of connections, relationship,
and bonds. At the stage of Deuteronomic-Deuteronomistic redactions, the
concept of covenant had gradually attained the quality of a unilateral promise
of divine grace. The Mosaic covenant ritual at Mt. Sinai, a ceremonial
establishment of an existential bond between God and Israel, is actualized
through an idiosyncratic blood rite that prepares a subsequent close encounter
with God, which may be seen as a graphic illustration of new identity as a result
of the covenantal promise. The “new covenant” of Jeremiah envisages a
gracious God as the sole guarantor of the covenant and humans who will be
capable of fulfilling it because it is written on their hearts (Jer 31MT / Jer 38LXX).
In the synoptic Gospels, Mark and Matthew draw on the rare “blood of the
covenant” in Exod 24; Luke (via Paul in 1 Cor 11) draws on the unique “new
covenant” in Jer 38LXX. Wine instead of blood as the covenantal sign in Mark
 Introduction 7

and Matthew conveys a promise of continuous relationship beyond the impend-

ing death of Jesus. Referencing the “new covenant” in 1 Cor 11:23, Luke’s
version evokes a sympotic libation. According to Eberhart, the word spoken
over the chalice, as a creative new-covenant formula imbued with deep mean-
ing, conveys the bond of Jesus with his disciples and others.
Florian Wilk studies “Bundes-Terminologie und Bundes-Vorstellungen in
den Korintherbriefen des Paulus” (“Terminology and Concepts of Covenant in
the Corinthian Correspondence of Paul”). Wilk explores the significance of this
concept in the Corinthian letters, the terminology about the establishment of a
new covenant in connection with Jer 38(31)LXX determines important theolo-
gical corollaries; these concern the celebration of the Lord’s Supper and the
role and function of the apostolate. In this respect, a line of thought continues
that has its origin in Paul’s foundational preaching. Wilk shows that both letters
instruct the addressees regarding a mode of existence and a relationship with
the apostle that are related to the biblical concept of covenant in essential ways
through the term “fellowship” and the formula “God is faithful”.
Jens Herzer investigates “The Significance of Covenant Theology in
Galatians and Romans”. He argues that the theme of “covenant” does not
belong to the prominent theologoumena in Paul. Nevertheless, the few referen-
ces to the lexeme indicate a significance that connects the idea of covenant in
Galatians and Romans not only with the issue of the law, but especially with
that of Israel. According to Herzer, especially Rom 9–11 suggests that Paul’s
main theological convictions are grounded on a certain concept of covenant or
a certain perspective on covenant respectively. Within this context, Herzer
shows how the disputes about the law influence the formation of a specific
conception of covenant, which does not dissolve the Israel relation but, on the
contrary, strengthens it. An important indicator for this is the change of the
argumentative strategy from the polemical situation of Galatians to the reflec-
tion on Israel in Rom 9–11.
Wolfgang Kraus reflects on “Διαθήκη in the Letter to the Hebrews”. Kraus
shows that the author of Hebrews quotes the promise of the new διαθήκη from
Jer 38(31):31‒34LXX in Heb 8:7‒13 in full and later in Heb 10:15‒18 in
excerpts. These quotations form an inclusion of the central Christological
middle part of the letter. This paper focuses on the understanding of the term
διαθήκη that applies to all 17 (resp. 21) occurrences of the term. It analyzes the
different aspects and the theological value of διαθήκη throughout Hebrews.
Kraus argues that διαθήκη does not only denote a disposition or an obligation
but also designates an order for life, a (legally) binding principle. The only
exception is Heb 9:16, 17, where the meaning is “testament” or “last will”.
Martin Karrer explores “The Ark of the Covenant in Revelation (11:19)”.
Karrer notes that the Book of Revelation mentions the covenant of God only
once, in 11:19. However, this one instance has a highly significant meaning.
The author seizes upon Israel’s notion of the ark of the covenant in order to
8 Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

construct his own concept of the covenant for Israel and all of humanity.
According to the author of Rev, Israel’s God is a powerful God who makes his
covenant visible to humans from all nations. He, the one God, is present at the
heavenly ark of the covenant proving his universal power, wrath and mercy.
God’s covenant for Israel endures and simultaneously has a universal reach;
mercy surpasses wrath in 21:3. The intriguing ekphrasis of the ark of the
covenant in Rev 11:19 reminds Christianity not to forget its roots and the
enduring relevance of God’s covenant for Israel.
The next section of this volume is dedicated to the Early Church. In a first
contribution, Martin Meiser reflects on “Covenant in Early Church Writings”.
He argues that early Christian scholars employed the term “covenant” to refer
to complex concepts of the history of salvation, comprising both continuity and
discontinuity with regard to the recipients of divine action and the coherent
nature of the one Holy Scripture. Continuity is manifest in the identity of the
one who gives the covenant and the promise of the “new covenant” in the Old
Testament, which is adopted in the New Testament. The “new covenant”
corresponds to an “old covenant” which, however, had only transitory
character. Early Christian scholars justify this with the failure of Israel in the
development of biblical history, which points to the lack of efficacy of the old
covenant. The end of the old covenant and the relativization of the ceremonial
law were already indicated in the Old Testament. According to Meiser, the
discontinuity of old and new covenant is manifest in the covenant mediator and
the group of recipients of the new covenant, furthermore in stricter ethics and
the new focus on love (instead of fear) for life within the new covenant.
In his contribution “The Covenant in Christian Apocrypha: Fragmentary
Evidence of a Spectrum of Ideas”, Tobias Nicklas discusses a range of ideas
related to Covenant Theology to be found in ancient Christian Apocrypha.
Nicklas draws three main conclusions. First, the idea of a covenant does not
play a major role in many Greek and Latin Christian apocryphal writings. This
may have to do with the fact that many Apocrypha became less interested in
Christians’ Jewish heritage than in the exploration of new worlds and the
conflicts with the agents of Greco-Roman cults. This is certainly not due to a
kind of a positive attitude towards Jews, but has to do with an attitude which
forgets Christian roots in Israel’s traditions, in many of the texts mentioned.
Second, one has to be aware that much of the remaining evidence is highly
fragmentary. One would assume that texts like the Gospels of Marcion, but
even more, the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Nazarenes, or the
Gospel of the Hebrews took a position regarding the question of God’s
covenant with Israel. One would also like to know more about the lost parts of
the Gospel of Peter or the Book of Elchasai. However, all that is left today are
fragments. Third, Nicklas demonstrates that the remaining cases represent a
spectrum of voices which certainly must have been even broader than the
fragmentary evidence still extant today. Besides texts which (probably) pre-
 Introduction 9

suppose an unbroken covenant between God and Israel, there are writings that,
for example, see only parts of the Torah and its ideas of God’s covenant as
valid. Others purport that the covenant has been taken away from Israel and
given to another people: This new people is not always simply “the Christians”,
but can also be identified with the (miaphysite) Egyptians or the Ethiopians. If
one wants to understand ancient Christian developments of the “covenant”
theme, these voices have to be added to the evidence from the New Testament,
the Apostolic Fathers, so-called “heretics” and “orthodox” authors of the
ancient Church.
In the first of three contributions exploring Late Antiquity, Jörg Ulrich
explores discourses on the covenant of God in Justin’s dialogue with the Jew
Trypho (“Diskurse über den Gottesbund im Dialog Justins mit dem Juden
Trypho”). According to Ulrich, Justin’s Dialogue reveals both Justin’s and
Trypho’s contrarian views of the old and new διαθήκη. Although the theme
appears only as a subsidiary matter within broader and more elaborate debates,
it is still a distinguishing feature between Judaism and Christianity. Referring
to Jer 38(31):31–32, Isa 55:3–5, and Isa 51:4–5, Justin finds the new covenant
predicted by the prophets and fulfilled in Christ and therefore rejects any
Christian observation of the Sinaitic law, whereas Trypho regards the Christian
rejection of the law as a contempt of the διαθήκη between God and his people.
Ulrich argues that, even if both positions are directly opposed, the tone of the
debate remains remarkably sympathetic and moderate.
The old and the new covenant in the writings of Jerome (“Der Alte und der
Neue Bund bei Hieronymus”) is the topic of Heinrich Schlange-Schöningen.
He notes that the late antiquity church father Jerome, whose Latin Bible
translation, commentaries, and treatises were of the greatest importance for the
medieval and modern church and theology, clearly distinguished between the
old and new covenants. Again and again, Jerome uses this difference to explain
the Christian history of salvation. Schlange-Schöningen shows how this is done
in different works of Jerome. By way of introduction he considers the obituary
of Paula, which Jerome wrote in 404 AD. Here, the account of the common
pilgrimage through the Holy Land is influenced significantly by the tension
between the old and the new covenant. The other sections of the article trace
the development of Jerome’s covenant theology, beginning with the theolo-
gical explanations he gave to Damasus, the Bishop of Rome, in 383 AD and
ending with its impact on his translation work in Bethlehem. A strong anti-
Jewish orientation of the theology of the covenant is also manifest in some of
Jerome’s works; evidence of this is his interpretation of the book of Job. The
reference of Jerome’s terminology to the foedus concept of the late antique
state as well as his connection of moral theology and historical interpretation
under the sign of the covenant theology are also investigated.
Sara Ronis investigates “Sons of the Covenant? The Rabbinic Body and the
Covenant with God”. According to Ronis, the rabbis construct an exclusive
10 Christian A. Eberhart / Wolfgang Kraus

covenantal theology of circumcision by exegetically limiting the Abrahamic

covenant to Jacob’s offspring. And yet, their own understanding of themselves
as Jacob’s offspring – inheritors of the Torah and Tannaitic teachings,
obligated and privileged in particular ways, within the context of late antique
Sasanian Babylonia led them to insist that the covenant required them to
circumcise their non-Jewish enslaved men. Jewish identity was thus tied to the
physical bodies of Jewish men, but perhaps even more importantly, it was tied
to the actions undertaken by those men upon their households, properties, and
communities. When the focus is on the actions of free Jewish men, the ethnic
and religious identity of the enslaved person and their relationship to the
covenant are more malleable, more liminal, than we might have thought. Ronis
suggests that this liminality centers the body of rabbis – themselves as a
religious body, and the actions of their actual bodies – in a covenantal
relationship to God.
Two concluding contributions are dedicated to the topic of covenant in the
Arts and in Systematic Discourse. In his contribution, Martin Karrer focuses
specifically on “The Mosaic of the Ark of the Covenant at Germigny-des-
Prés”. Created around 806 AD, the apse mosaic of the Carolingian chapel in
Germigny-des-Prés was influenced by Thodulf of Orléans’ reservations about
a pictorial representation of God and Christ (cf. the Libri Carolini). Therefore,
the mosaic refers to the presence of God through the symbol of the ark and
avoids christological motifs. Aspects from Rev 11:19; Exod 25:10–22 and
1 Kings 6:23–28 are combined in an iconographically unusual image creation.
Angels join in, symbolizing Christianity and Judaism. Karrer suggests that the
positive appreciation of Judaism and the reluctance to use images can be
compared with the theology of the book of Revelation and deserve high
attention.
Under this rubric, Margit Ernst-Habib’s essay is called “From Covenant to
Convivence: The Relevance of Covenantal Theology in Contemporary Theolo-
gical Discourse”. Ernst-Habib observes that much of contemporary Systematic
Theology does not employ covenantal theologies or biblical concepts of
covenant(s) at the center of its theological discourse. She argues that it is
exactly the theme of covenant that may prove to be inspiring in responding to
major contemporary challenges. A biblically grounded, carefully reconstructed
and (self-)critical covenantal theology may provide a starting point in theolo-
gical discourses on the subjects of Israel and the Church, the relation of
covenant and creation, covenantal “the-anthropology”, covenantal living and
ethics. With this understanding, her contribution describes God’s covenant
with all of creation not only as a subversive paradigm, but also as creating
space and spirit for Living Togetherness (convivence).
History of Research and
the Questions of Origin
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology
in the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament
Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT
SIEGFRIED KREUZER
Siegfried Kreuzer

1. Preliminary Remarks

Covenant and covenant theology / Bund and Bundestheologie are among the
most interesting subjects in biblical exegesis and theology.1 These concepts
have left their traces throughout history, beginning from the designation of the
Old and the New Testament as παλαιά and καινὴ διαθήκη or, in the Latin
version, as vetus and novum testamentum.
In the modern era, with its historical thinking and historical differentiation,
the idea of different covenants that succeed one another became a means of
allowing for historical development within the Bible and beyond: There was
the covenant with Noah, the covenant with the patriarchs, the Sinai covenant,
the covenant with David, and finally also the new covenant. This sequence can
be continued in the New Testament with its age of the apostles and the age of
the church with different phases. This idea of successive covenants was
especially developed in the reformed tradition and called “federal theology”,
from Latin foedus, “covenant”.2
On the other hand, the idea of covenant has, at times, been seriously
questioned. A covenant or a treaty designates a relation between two more or
less equal parties, such as in marriage or in diplomatic relations between two
states. Is it at all possible to apply this category to the relation between God
and humans? Is God not so far above humans that it is impossible to speak
about a covenant, especially if one considers the basic meaning of the word,
which derives from Latin convenire, “to come together, to agree”; similarly,
the German word “Bund” relates to “binden”, i.e. binding together, being
bound together. Such criticism against the theological use of covenant was
voiced already in the 17th and 18th cent. for dogmatic reasons and it came up
repeatedly in different variations over time.3

1
For overview articles on this subject see MENDENHALL/HERION, “Covenant”; KUTSCH,
“Bund”; BARRÉ, “Treaties”; KOCH, “Covenant”.
2
ASSELT, Federal Theology; HORTON, God of Promise; HORTON, “Covenant Theology”.
3
It is interesting to note that the large Realenzyklopädie für protestantische Theologie
und Kirche, edited by Johann Jakob Herzog and later on by Albert Hauck does not contain,
14 Siegfried Kreuzer

In the 20th century, variations of this criticism were put forward by Joachim
Begrich in 1944, by Alfred Jepsen in 1961, and by Ernst Kutsch around 1970.
While Begrich and Jepsen basically argued exegetically,4 Kutsch not only
analyzed the biblical texts and their ancient Near Eastern (ANE) background,
but he also criticized the rendering as “Bund” in Bible translations.5 The
rationale was that in the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament (HB / OT), God is never
on the same level as humans or as the people of Israel. The word “Bund” (like
its English equivalent “covenant”), therefore, is a mistranslation of Hebrew
‫( ברית‬berit). It should rather be rendered as “Verfügung”, i.e. “regulation” or
“decree”.6
In general, this suggestion was not followed. Most exegetes agreed to the
observation (which was not entirely new) that the Hebrew term ‫ ברית‬has a wide
semantic spectrum ranging from bilateral to unilateral relations.7 However, the
German word “Bund”, for example, also covers a broad semantic spectrum. In
practice, this matter has had some consequence in our German translation of
the Septuagint. For instance, it can be observed that the one-sidedness of God’s
covenant is emphasized in the Greek translation (although in different degrees
in the different books). Therefore, the Pentateuch group under the leadership
of Martin Rösel decided to render Greek διαθήκη not as “Bund” but as
“Verfügung”, i.e. “decree”.8
Besides exegetical research, the significance of the covenant theme also
varied with sociological assumptions, with the discovery of extra biblical
sources, and with the dating of the biblical texts. In his research on and
interpretation of ancient Judaism, Max Weber considered the concept of
covenant to be highly important for Israel from its very beginning. He observed
that social life and order were more and more related to God and that the
covenant idea was a driving force in this development. It is significant that the

in any of its three editions, a separate article on “Bund”. However, its English version, the
New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (13 volumes, 1908–1914), had an
article on “Covenant” (Old and New Testament) by J.F. MCCURDY in vol. 3, 1909, 287–
289.
4
BEGRICH, “Berit”; JEPSEN, “Berith”. While Begrich emphasized the one-sidedness of
the ‫ברית‬-relation, Jepsen questioned that a ‫ ברית‬constituted a relation at all.
5
KUTSCH, “Bund”; IDEM, Verheißung und Gesetz.
6
KUTSCH, “Fehlübersetzung”.
7
One of the most influential defenders of the rendering as “Bund” was HERRMANN,
“Fehlübersetzung?” Originally it was an oral presentation given in the presence of Kutsch in
1974, but printed only later in 1986.
8
See KRAUS/KARRER, Septuaginta Deutsch (Pentateuch). It is interesting that Martin
Rösel maintains his insights and convictions, but that, especially in the sense of continuity
of the word, today he would choose a combined term like, e.g., “Bundesverfügung”
(covenantal decree); see also his contribution in this volume.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 15

oldest law book carries the name “book of the covenant” (Exod 21–23, cf.
24:7).9
The translation of Weber’s Das Antike Judentum into English in 1952
became a great stimulus for the subject. It was especially taken up by George
E. Mendenhall who, in his essay “Ancient Oriental and Biblical Law” (1954),
explicitly referred to Weber. Contrary to exegetes like Julius Wellhausen who
considered the Sinai covenant (and covenant theology) as a late projection into
early times, Mendenhall states “on the contrary now we know that the covenant
relationships were the very foundation of relations between originally separate
groups …”; this insight applies to the earliest Israel as well and includes the
relation between God and people.10 On the other hand, the translation of
Mendenhall’s studies into German became an additional stimulus to covenant
studies in Europe.
Engagement with covenant themes was also heavily encouraged by the
discovery of the Hittite treaties published by Viktor Korošec in the 1930s. As
these treaties belonged to the 14th and 13th cent. BCE, the comparison with
them seemed to confirm the early existence and the high age of covenants in
Israel and in the HB / OT. Klaus Baltzer’s book Das Bundesformular (1960)
and Dennis J. McCarthy’s Treaty and Covenant (1963) may have been the peak
of covenant studies.11
Only a few years later, this development was severely undermined by
scholarship redating the origin of the covenant theme into the seventh century
under Assyrian influence, such as that by Lothar Perlitt in 1969.12 Other authors
soon took this trend even a step further. As a consequence, covenant and
covenant theology were neglected for about two decades.
New interest arose from the side of Jewish-Christian dialogue. In this
context, the abandoned13 themes “covenant” and “covenant theology” gained
new attention. Owing to the new perspective, the age of the covenant concept
was less important, but instead its different aspects in the Bible and its
influence on Jewish and Christian traditions.
Yet, also exegetical studies and the historical quest for the age and roots of
covenant traditions gained new interest, especially by comparison with the
Assyrian vassal treaties. However, after a period of exclusive concentration on
Assyrian texts of the 7th cent. BCE, the perspectives were being broadened
again, and not only the (Late-)Assyrian treaties and loyalty oaths were

9
WEBER, Judentum, 81, speaks about an increasing “Theokratisierung der israelitischen
Sozialordnung” through the covenant idea.
10
MENDENHALL, “Biblical Law”, 28, with reference to WEBER, Judaism, 75.
11
BALTZER, Bundesformular; engl. translation: The Covenant Formulary; MCCARTHY,
Treaty and Covenant.
12
PERLITT, Bundestheologie.
13
Cf. the title of ZENGER, “Bundestheologie – ein derzeit vernachlässigtes Thema der
Bibelwissenschaft” (1993).
16 Siegfried Kreuzer

considered, but (once more) also the Hittite and the Aramaic treaties,14 not to
forget authors like Jean-Georges Heintz, who repeatedly referred to the Old
Babylonian treaties from Mari in the 18th cent.15
This may suffice as introductory remarks about covenant and covenant
theology. We now turn to exegetical questions, first in light of the history of
research.

2. Biblical Texts and the History of Research

2.1 The Most Important Texts and their Characteristics

As already mentioned, there are several covenants in the HB / OT, beginning
in Gen 9 with the covenant given to Noah and, indeed, to all of humanity in
perpetuity. Its famous sign is the rainbow. God promises that a deluge will
never come again to extinguish all life on earth. In that sense, the covenant in
Gen 9 is God’s one-sided promise. If one reads the whole text of Gen 9, this
covenant is actually connected with certain stipulations, the so-called Noachide
laws (Gen 9:1–6). But the covenant as such does not depend on these laws, it
is indeed a gift from God. Therefore, it may be called a decree; however, this
decree establishes and protects both vertical and horizontal relations, that is to
say, between God and humanity and between the people on earth.
The next covenant is with Abra(ha)m; however, there are two covenant
texts, Gen 15 and 17. It is widely accepted that Gen 17 belongs to the priestly
source. God reveals himself to Abram as the ‫אל שׁדי‬, usually rendered as the
“Almighty God”. The covenant aims at God’s promise of land to the
descendants of Abram. This is again underscored by a sign: Abram’s name is
changed to Abraham, Sarai is changed to Sara, and circumcision is introduced.
Once more, this is clearly God’s one-sided action, a decree, which certainly
initiates a relation, and also with some human reaction, namely circumcision.16
Gen 15 is different. It begins with Abraham’s questions and doubts to which
God answers by confirming his promises about the future. The first act in Gen

14
See especially KOCH, Vertrag, and also KOCH, “Covenant”.
15
HEINTZ, “Alliance humaine – Alliance divine”.
16
Genesis 17 is treated in the commentaries on Genesis, like GUNKEL, Genesis,
WESTERMANN, Genesis; WENHAM, Genesis 16–50. It is certainly correct that the so-called
priestly covenant of Gen 17 is entirely God’s unilateral activity and not dependant on the
people and their keeping the law as in the Sinai covenant, cf. especially ZIMMERLI, “Sinai-
bund und Abrahambund”. Yet, circumcision as the “sign” of this covenant is supposed to be
performed throughout the generations (17:10). Insofar, KRAUSE, Bedingungen des Bundes,
correctly highlights the – although very different – “conditions” of the different covenants.
However, breaking this covenant by not practising circumcision would be an individual
offense that could not invalidate God’s covenant with all of Israel. For the discussion it may
be helpful to differentiate between condition and obligation.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 17

15:1–6 is that God makes Abram aware of the stars: Abram’s descendants will
be as innumerable as the stars in the sky. The second act comes closer to a
covenant and even to a specific covenant ceremony: Abram has to slaughter
some animals and split them in half. The halves should be placed opposite to
each other. Abram does so and – while Abram falls into a kind of sleep – God,
in the form of a flaming oven that is reminiscent of the fiery column at Mount
Sinai, passes between the divided halves of the animals. This scene is similar
to scenes that are part of ANE treaties, especially the Sefire treaties.17 But such
a scene can also be found in the Bible; in Jer 34:18–20, the people of Jerusalem
had made a covenant to free slaves as a measure to gain additional manpower
for the defense of Jerusalem against the Babylonians. This covenant was
enforced by a ceremony in which a calf was cut in half; then the “people” of
Jerusalem, i.e. the representatives of Jerusalem’s upper class, passed between
the parts of the animals with the solemn declaration that, if the treaty was not
accomplished, they should be cut in pieces like the animal. This ceremony was
done before the eyes of the Lord. It can be understood as the underscoring of
an oath and as a self-obligation of the Jerusalem slave owners. After the danger
had gone by, however, they failed to liberate the slaves. This caused a prophetic
word of God that allows us to reconstruct what had happened:
18
And I will give the men who have transgressed my covenant, who have not fulfilled the
words of the covenant which they made before me, when they cut the calf in two and passed
between its parts –
19
the officials of Judah, and the officials of Jerusalem, the court officers, and the priests,
and all the people of the land, who passed between the parts of the calf –
20
and I will give them into the hand of their enemies and into the hand of those who seek
their life. And their dead bodies shall be food for the birds of the sky and the beasts of the
earth.

Certainly, this impressive ceremony was not invented for the occasion; it must
have been known before. Indeed, the Sefire treaties from the 8th cent. BCE
mention similar ceremonies.
In Gen 15, it is significant that the role of passing between the pieces of the
animals is taken on by God to reassure his promise.18 One can hardly imagine
a stronger reassurance of God’s promise! It should also be noted that, while in
Jer 34 God is witness and guardian over a treaty between humans, in Gen 15
God himself is a partner in the treaty.
Gen 15 has been dated to different centuries, from the 10th cent. down to the
6 or even the 5th cent. BCE. There are indeed good reasons for a later dating,
th

i.e. to the 7th cent. as e.g. Lothar Perlitt had maintained, or maybe even to the

17
On the Sefire treaties, see FITZMYER, Sefire, and below.
18
Therefore in Jewish tradition, it is called “the covenant between the pieces”.
18 Siegfried Kreuzer

late 6th cent.19 However, the dating must be done on literary grounds. Jer 34:18
is not a terminus a quo but only shows that such a rite was known in Jerusalem.
From Gen 15 we go on to the Sinai covenant in Exod 19–24. Exod 19
describes the arrival of the Israelites at Mount Sinai and the preparations for
God’s appearance and the theophany itself. Ch. 20 contains the Decalogue and
chs. 21–23 another collection of laws, usually called “book of the covenant”
(German Bundesbuch) because Exod 24:7 refers to these laws by that name.
Exod 24:3–8 describes the covenant ceremony with a blood rite in which the
blood of animal offerings is applied to the people and unto the base of the altar,
which represents God. This singular blood rite evidently establishes and
expresses the relation between God and the people; this relation is explicitly
called ‫ברית‬, “covenant”. The next scene is up on the mountain (v. 9–11). There
the elders of Israel enjoy a meal before God whose presence is indicated in a
somewhat mysterious way:
10
They saw the God of Israel; and under his feet there it appeared like of sapphire, as clear
as the sky itself.20
11
Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they beheld
God, and they ate and drank.

The common meal is another element belonging to the covenant tradition.

While Exod 24:1–2 and 9–11 now frame the ‫ברית‬-ceremony that takes place at
the foot of the mountain, it is also its counterpart. The meal of the 70 elders is
combined with the other story. The emphasis is not on the sacrifice and the
blood rite in v. 3–8, but on the meal in the presence of the Lord.21 This also
expresses the close relationship between the community, represented by the
elders, and God. It rather seems to express and confirm the close relation
between the community and the deity, not its establishment. There is, however,
no specific term used for this relationship.
A common meal is also mentioned as the concluding element in the covenant
between Jacob and Laban in Gen 31:43–54. This covenant comprises other
interesting aspects: In the context of the Jacob story, it concerns the family
story of the conflict between Jacob and Laban, his father in law, and their
reconciliation (or maybe better: peace agreement). These aspects are connected

19
E.g. PERLITT, Bundestheologie, 55–77. For more recent discussions, see the commen-
taries on Genesis.
20
The question is how the words “they saw God” may be understood. I would like to
propose the interpretation that the narrator only lifts his eyes to what can be seen under God’s
feet, and what, e.g., at the high place of sacrifice in Petra (Southern Jordan), can really be
seen: the blue sky “below God”. This narrator’s perspective is shared with the readers and
consciously also the one of the elders of Israel. The phrase “he did not stretch out his hand”
in v. 11 is not a proof for seeing God’s hand but the traditional metaphoric expression for
God’s power that occurs elsewhere, too.
21
Although on a different level, it resembles the meal of elders at a holy place in 1 Sam
9:17–27.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 19

with the relation between two tribes or local groups and their territory. A heap
of stones is a witness and marks the border. It serves as a reminder of the
covenant, which in this case is rather an agreement about the border between
two social and territorial entities (v. 52). V. 44 (“And now, let us make a
covenant, you and I”) features the term ‫“ ברית‬covenant” but there is a number
of different ceremonies.
Beyond the texts already mentioned, there are other covenant texts, e.g. the
repetition of the covenant in Exod 34, and the covenant(s) in Deuteronomy. In
Exod 34 the emphasis is once more on law giving (the so-called Cultic
Decalogue). This covenant is God’s initiative (34:10) and, interestingly, there
is a brief remark about what he will do for his people, before the obligations
are enumerated, but at the end, the emphasis is on the obligations, i.e. the
commandments (“for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant
with you and with Israel”, v. 27).
The covenant(s) in the book of Deuteronomy will be taken up in the
following chapters. However, at this point it should be said that, while the texts
mentioned so far relate to the future or the present Israel, there is also a
covenant with individuals in Israel, especially the covenant with king David
and his dynasty as expressed in Pss 89 and 132.

2.2 History of Research

As long as scholars considered the HB / OT texts to be somewhat close to the
narrated events and no ANE texts were available, the events were thought to
have happened more or less as they were described in the texts.22 This changed
in the middle of the 19th cent. when the Pentateuch sources, especially the
Priestly Code, were redated by Abraham Kuenen, Julius Wellhausen, and
others.23 Now the Priestly Code, for example, was no longer close to the events
at and on Mt. Sinai, but it was about 600 years younger; likewise the other
sources would not have been written before 900 BCE. What then was the basis
for these texts? Were they based on old reliable traditions or did their stories
rather reflect their own time? For Wellhausen the answer was clear: The
sources project their time back into the past, often in an idealized way. In other
words, we know very little about the early history of Israel.24
The situation changed around the turn of the 19th to the 20th century. There
were now ANE texts that showed Israel as part of an ancient culture that
stretched back over the centuries, in some cases even millennia. The new
perspectives of HB / OT scholarship were taken up also by Max Weber. He

22
In spite of the fact that certain aspects were questioned, such details can be left aside
for the moment.
23
For the important contribution by Abraham Kuenen see LOADER, “Exilic Period”,
especially 12–17.
24
WELLHAUSEN, Prolegomena.
20 Siegfried Kreuzer

integrated them into his sociological approach and his description of ancient
Judaism. As briefly mentioned above, for Max Weber, covenant was the most
important element of Israelite society and religion. Covenants shaped and
stabilized the relationship between the different groups and tribes in Israel as
well as the relationship between Israel and Yhwh, the God and Lord of Israel.
Max Weber’s book Das Antike Judentum that originally appeared in two
volumes in 1917 and 1919 was translated into English and published in the
USA in 1952 under the title Ancient Judaism.25 It was read by George
Mendenhall who drew the conclusion that – in contrast to Wellhausen’s late
dating of the covenant – “we now know that the covenant relationships were
the very foundation of relations between originally separate groups …”26
Similar developments occurred within HB / OT exegesis. Form criticism and
tradition history gave rise to a more optimistic view of oral tradition and for a
reconstruction of civic and cultic institutions and rituals. One may mention
especially Hermann Gunkel, with his commentaries on Genesis and on the
Psalms, or Hugo Gressmann and many others with their reliance on form-
criticism and traditions history.27
The idea of an early covenant was taken up or maintained by many authors.
Probably best known is the Theologie des Alten Testaments by Walter Eichrodt
from 1933–35 (with expanded and updated editions until 1968), who centered
his three parts around the basic relation of covenant: God and Israel, God and
the World, God and the Individual. By the way, Eichrodt was the first to put
the relation between God and Israel at first place, before “God and the world”,
i.e. before the theme of creation, a priority that would, a few years later, be
adopted by Gerhard von Rad.28
At this point it should be remembered that Wellhausen had not denied that
the close relation between Yhwh and Israel was an old concept and at the center
of Israelite religion from its very beginning. But this was, as he expressed, a
natural religious relationship, while its conceptualization as a covenant
developed only later on, in the times of crisis.29 This distinction between the
basic relationship and its later expression by the specific term ‫ ברית‬also means
that Eichrodt’s theology is less dependent on the ‫ ברית‬terminology than is often
assumed.
In the 1930’s, interesting new sources were published. In his Hethitische
Staatsverträge (1931), Victor Korošec presented all the Hittite treaty or

25
WEBER, Ancient Judaism.
26
MENDENHALL, “Ancient Oriental and Biblical Law”, 28, with explicit reference to
Weber.
27
On these developments see KRAUS, Geschichte der historisch kritischen Erforschung,
a book which to my knowledge has not been translated into English. But see also: REVENT-
LOW, History of Biblical Interpretation IV.
28
VON RAD, “Problem”.
29
See WELLHAUSEN, Prolegomena.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 21

covenant texts that were known at that time,30 thus providing external
comparative material for the biblical covenants. It demonstrated that treaties
were well known in the ANE of the 2nd millennium BCE for creating and
regulating relationships and that there was a specific formal tradition. Most of
the treaties were between unequal partners, i.e. suzerainty or vassal treaties,
some also between equal partners such as the treaty between the Hittite king
Hattušili III and the Egyptian Pharaoh Ramses II.31
Besides some variations in detail, these treaties or covenants shared a
specific form. Normally, they start with the identification of the king that made
the treaty and a review of the historical relation between the partners, especially
what the overlord had done so far for his vassal. Then stipulations followed,
i.e. the obligations for the vassal and conditions for further relations. Then
came provisions for storing the treaty in a location like a temple and for regular
public reading. They closed with a list of deities from both covenantal partners
and representing all areas of life. These deities would affirm the treaty and
watch over it, which means they would especially punish the transgression of
the covenant. Such punishments are expressed in the form of curses that
enumerate various potential tragedies that may occur; occasionally, blessings
for the keeping of the covenant are also mentioned.
This collection of the Hittite vassal treaties became most important in
George Mendenhall’s publications from 1954, especially in his Covenant
Forms in Israelite Tradition and the expanded German version Recht und Bund
in Israel und im Alten Vorderen Orient from 1960. Comparing the Hittite
treaties with the covenants in the Bible, Mendenhall found many similarities
with the Sinai pericope and especially the Decalogue: There was the self-
presentation and the historical review: “I am Yhwh, your God who delivered
you from Egypt, the house of slavery”, and there were the rules for the future
relationship: you may not have other gods, you shall not do this or that, you
shall, etc. While the Decalogue lacks curses or blessings, other texts do feature
them.32 This proved to be a successful research trajectory; the Hittite vassal
treaties became an important tool for an early dating of the biblical covenant
texts, especially those of the Mt. Sinai tradition. However, the problem of
contact and transmission remained unsolved. The Hittite empire ended around

30
KOROŠEC, Hethitische Staatsverträge, 1931. As a matter of fact, the treaties had also
been published a few years earlier and at about the same time by FRIEDRICH, Staatsverträge
des Ḫatti-Reiches (1926 and 1930). These texts and those discovered later can now be found
in TUAT I/2, 1983, in TUAT.Erg (2001), and in TUAT.NF 2 (2005).
31
EDEL, “Vertrag”. It should be noted that this treaty in both versions has not only curses
for transgression but also blessings for keeping it. This is an interesting detail, especially as
it is missing in the treaties from neo-Assyrian times, but can be found in Deut 28:1–14. This
does not mean that there is a direct relation, but it may indicate that treaties may have
contained more than just stipulations and threats.
32
See also MENDENHALL/HERION, “Covenant”, 1179–1202.
22 Siegfried Kreuzer

1200 BCE, just before Israel came into existence. One had to assume some way
of transmission, e.g. via Syria, i.e. via the Syro-Hittite states.
The comparison with Hittite treaties was also being proposed in Germany;
one example was, as mentioned above, Klaus Baltzer’s book Das Bundes-
formular published in 1960.33 Baltzer subsumed many texts under the genre of
covenant, not only the above-mentioned traditional texts but also, e.g., the
structure of the whole book of Deuteronomy (historical prologue, chs. 1–11;
stipulations of the covenant, i.e. the Deuteronomic laws, ch. 12–26; mutual
declaration of the covenant, end of ch. 26; blessings and curses especially in
ch. 28; provision for the safekeeping and the regular reading of the treaty,
31:10–14).34 For several years, the covenant formula and the covenant genre
became a general key to the exploration of the HB / OT with the corollary of
an early dating of many texts, especially the Decalogue.35 Certainly, not every
text represented the whole genre, but this did not matter, because also in the
Hittite treaties some elements were often missing; however it was clear that the
individual texts drew on a general and widely used tradition. The same would
be true for the biblical use of the covenant tradition.
The publication of three stelas from Sefire supported this development in
scholarship. The first two stelas were discovered in 1930 some ten miles
southeast of Aleppo and then published in the 1950s. They present – in
Aramaic language – a treaty between two kings around 750 BCE. Beyond the
usual features of a covenant text, they contained impressive curses much like
the curses in Deut 28 and a ceremony close to Jer 34. As these treaty texts were
later than the Hittite treaties, they confirmed that this kind of covenant tradition
was known and practiced over centuries, not only in Hatti and in Assyria, but
especially in Syria, which is much closer to Israel.36 They presented the missing
link between the Hittite treaties from before 1200 BCE and ancient Israel.
As often, when things become too one-sided, the pendulum swings back. In
1969, Lothar Perlitt published his study Bundestheologie im Alten Testament.
Analyzing the central texts on covenant like Gen 15, Exod 19–24, and Josh 24,
he came to the conclusion that they belong to the 7th century at the earliest,
probably its second half. In other words: covenant theology is a product of the
Deuteronomists and their time, probably having originated at its earlier phase.37
This trend fit well with new perspectives on the Pentateuch; traditional theories

33
English translation: The covenant formulary, 1971.
34
This idea was not entirely new; in his commentary on Deuteronomy, Gerhard von Rad
had likewise identified such a structure (VON RAD, Deuteronomium, 15).
35
As the subtitle of Baltzer’s book (“In Old Testament, Jewish, and early Christian
writings”) indicates, covenant and the covenant formulary had become a general key for the
whole tradition.
36
Among the many publications on the stele, see especially FITZMYER, Sefire.
37
PERLITT, Bundestheologie.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 23

about the Pentateuch sources, especially the time of their composition, were
being scrutinized at the same time.
These developments and especially Perlitt’s late dating caused a debate at
first, yet within a few years, interest in the subject of covenant waned in literary
and historical studies as well as regarding its theological relevance. It had an
impact on the above-mentioned Theology of the Old Testament by Walter
Eichrodt that had appeared in 1933–35 and was expanded and reprinted for
several decades.38 Its three parts referred to God’s relation to Israel, to the
world, and to the individuals under the – in his time undisputed – category of
covenant (“Bund”). In the mid 1960’s, it was not only superseded by the Old
Testament Theology of Gerhard von Rad, but also heavily criticized for its very
use of the idea of covenant.
For some decades, the topics of “covenant” or “covenant theology” became
almost a no-go in HB / OT scholarship, at least in Germany. In 1993, Erich
Zenger introduced his book Der neue Bund im Alten with an essay by the title
“Die Bundestheologie – ein derzeit vernachlässigtes Thema der Bibelwissen-
schaft und ein wichtiges Thema für das Verhältnis Israel – Kirche” (“The
covenant theology – a presently neglected subject of biblical scholarship and
an important subject for the relationship between Israel and the Church”). As
Zenger’s title conveys, one reason for this new interest was that covenant had
emerged as an important subject in the Jewish–Christian dialogue, which
required a theological approach relevant for both. In addition, there was the
growing influence of the so-called canonical approach in biblical studies; with
all of that, the question of dating the “Bundestheologie” was now considered
less important. The contributions to Zenger’s volume show this trend as they
deal with texts mainly belonging to the exilic or post-exilic period, like Jer 31,
Ezek 16–17 or Ben Sira. Even Exod 19–34 is treated under the aspect of “new
covenant”.39 The same applies to another comprehensive volume on the subject
from that period, edited by Christoph Dohmen and Christian Frevel.40
While these aspects led to some recovery of the theme of covenant and
covenant theology in the HB / OT, they also led not only to new questions, but
also to some theologically sensitive issues. For example, the number of cove-
nants and their human parties were now being scrutinized; was the covenant
with Noah and the creation, or was it exclusively with Israel? Was there also a
covenant with David and the Levites, or is there just one covenant? Further-
more, the question of continuity of the covenant in Jeremiah 31 emerged: Could
there possibly be a “new” or “renewed” covenant? These rather doctrinal

38
EICHRODT, Theologie; the last edition appeared in 1968.
39
DOHMEN, “Sinaibund als Neuer Bund” (“Sinai Covenant as New Covenant in Exod
19–34”).
40
DOHMEN/FREVEL, Studien.
24 Siegfried Kreuzer

questions could lead to new insights, but also to exegetical restrictions. These
aspects cannot be treated here, but should at least be noted.
In German and continental European scholarship, covenant texts were now
considered to be younger and covenant theology was being associated with
exilic or postexilic times. Likewise, texts like Jer 31 were now seen as
secondary to the book of Jeremiah.41 However, there was also a counter
movement. One of its representatives is Eckart Otto who studied legal and
ethical traditions in the ANE and in the Bible.42 Otto also addressed the
problem of dating and influence of covenant traditions, for which he drew on
the Assyrian treaties, especially the vassal treaty of Esarhaddon.43 This treaty
was established in 672 BCE by Esarhaddon in order to secure the irregular
succession of his son Assurbanipal (while his older son Šamaš-šumu-ukin
would become king of Babylon only). All the vassal kings should agree to this
“treaty”, i.e. swear a loyalty oath to the king and especially to the designated
successor. There were good reasons to assume that all the vassal kings had
come to the capital in order to take the oath before the king, most probably also
king Manasseh from Jerusalem. And it seems highly probable that a copy of
the treaty was not only brought to Media but also the other capitals of the vassal
kings, including Jerusalem.44 It is only an assumption that the Esarhaddon
treaty was known in Jerusalem, but it is supported by the discovery of
fragments of the treaty in Tell Tayinat in the north-west of traditional Syria/in
the south-east of Turkey.45
With the discovery of the Esarhaddon Treaty, other treaties from neo-
Assyria and the neo-Assyrian times came in view. With Dennis J. McCarty’s
Treaty and Covenant from 1963, the focus of the covenant discussion moved
from Hittite to neo-Assyrian treaties.
The Esarhaddon treaty is interesting because of a number of close
similarities, especially with the curses in Deut 28. As mentioned before, there
are also commonalities between the curses and some rites in the Sefire stelas
and in the HB / OT, yet those with the Esarhaddon treaty are even closer. As
the similarities between some passages in Deut 28 and the VTE pertain not
only to their topics but also to their structural arrangement, it is warranted to

41
See e.g., LEVIN, Verheißung des neuen Bundes.
42
See e.g., the title of the journal Zeitschrift für Altorientalische und Biblische Rechts-
geschichte, founded by Eckart Otto.
43
A version of this text was found in Nimrud in 1955 and had been published by Donald
J. Wiseman in 1958; cf. WISEMAN, “Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon”.
44
Already Wiseman knew about nine copies in Nimrud. Besides them, there are three
fragmentary copies of the Assur version. Instead of speaking about the vassal treaty of
Esarhaddon (VTE), some authors prefer to speak about the oath(s), e.g., now WATANABE,
“Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents” (ESOD), thereby more correctly taking up the
Assyrian term adȇ.
45
LAUINGER, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty at Tell Tayinat”.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 25

assume a literary dependence. Furthermore, there are parallels between the

stipulations against prophets that would instigate an insurgency against the
great king and the rules against false prophets in Deut 13.46 However, these
rules are also the subject of other treaties.
The similarities between Deut 13 and 28 and the vassal treaty of Esarhaddon
became most important for the recent discussion. The basic assumption is that
the Esarhaddon treaty was available in Jerusalem, at least for the time of the
Assyrian domination, i.e. until about 650 or 640 BCE; therefore, it would have
triggered the composition of the book of Deuteronomy or was at least a very
important factor for it. Deuteronomy would have been the counter concept: as
the Assyrian treaty text claimed loyalty to the Assyrian king, so the book of
Deuteronomy would claim loyalty to the true king, i.e. to Yhwh, the God of
Israel. With this idea, a new anchor was found, not only for the origin of the
book of Deuteronomy but also for the origin of covenant theology in the sense
that now the idea of covenant was applied to the relation to God.
With this anchor in history, it was confirmed that covenant theology was not
old but rather belongs to the end of the First Temple period. However, the
majority of the biblical texts were dated only to the exilic period or thereafter.
Hence, the combination of Deut 13 and 28 with the Esarhaddon treaty also
became an anchor for dating at least the beginnings of Deuteronomy and of
covenant theology before the (Babylonian) exile.
The similarities between the Esarhaddon treaty and Deuteronomy were
discussed in detail by a number of scholars, e.g., Ulrich Steymans.47 In his
writings and in his large commentary, Eckart Otto likewise emphasized the
close relationship of this treaty not only to Deut 28 but also to Deut 13 with its
law against false prophets.48 For him, it was a strong argument for a pre-exilic
date not only for some parts of Deuteronomy, but also for the covenant with
Yhwh.
While basically keeping with the late, i.e. Deuteronomistic, dating of the
covenant theology that featured the term ‫ברית‬, Udo Rüteswörden pointed to the
existence of a “covenant theology without ‫”ברית‬, i.e. that the relation between
God and his people (before and after the use of ‫ )ברית‬could also be articulated
in different ways, for instance through kinship terminology.49 Before going on,
we briefly return to the ANE treaty or covenant texts.

46
The similarities were especially studied by STEYMANS, Deuteronomium 28.
47
STEYMANS, Deuteronomium 28.
48
On this subject see especially OTTO, “Ursprünge der Bundestheologie”, and his com-
mentary: OTTO, Deuteronomium, 12–34.
49
RÜTERSWÖRDEN, “Bundestheologie”.
26 Siegfried Kreuzer

2.3 Ancient Near Eastern Treaties and Covenant Texts

It is interesting that, in contrast to the vast amount of treaty texts from other
regions of the ANE, there are no treaty texts from Egypt.50 Pharaoh was
probably considered so much above all others that he did not need to bother
about making treaties with human beings, at least within his dominion. Yet in
the other parts of the ANE, treaties and loyalty oaths were widespread.51
According to the Ebla texts from northern Syria, this tradition was already used
in the course of the 3rd millennium BCE. There is also an Akkadian treaty by
Naram Sin from the 23rd cent. From Hatti, i.e. the Hittite empire, some 50 treaty
texts are known for the time between 1450 and 1200 BCE. Most famous is the
above-mentioned parity treaty with Ramses II, while most of the other treaties
are rather unilateral vassal treaties. They oblige the king to provide protection
and military assistance and the vassal king to exclusive loyalty; the latter
typically implies no relations with foreign kings, respecting the borders of the
other vassal kings, and the extradition of political refugees.
We already mentioned the typical treaty elements like the identification of
the partners, a historical prologue, the stipulations or the treaty conditions,
invocation of the divine witnesses and blessings and curses, connected with an
oath ceremony. While the curses are generally quite daunting, it may be
observed that they were less so if the vassal king was a relative of the emperor.
The relation could be called “peace” or “brotherhood”, the partners could be
called father and son although these words have the same meaning as overlord
and vassal.
From Syria, two treaties from the 15th century are known, both between
vassal kings of the Mitanni empire. Then, there are also the above-mentioned
Sefire treaties from around 750 BCE. They feature extensive curses and
interesting ritual elements like the cutting in half of a calf as in Jer 34:18 and
the incineration of wax figures, which conveys a graphic threat and is alluded
to in Psalm 68:3 (68:2 ET). There were likewise treaties in the Middle Assyrian
empire, i.e. from the second half of the 2nd millennium. For the treaties of the
1st millennium it is interesting that the traditional Akkadian terms riksu and
rikiltu were being replaced by the term adê, which goes back to Aramaic ‘dy
(‘adiya).52 While the term riksu refers to “binding” and “being bound”, which
is surprisingly close to the German word “Bund” – and most probably also to

50
The exception is the treaty between the Hittite king Hattušili III and the Egyptian
Pharaoh Ramses II. However, there are no intern treaties like loyalty oaths.
51
For the following overview see MENDENHALL/HERION, “Covenant”, 1179–1202;
BARRÉ, “Treaties”; KOCH, “Covenant”; MCCARTHY, Treaty and Covenant. The covenant
texts are presented in TUAT I/2 and TUAT.NF 2 and to some extent in HALLO/YOUNGER,
Context of Scripture, II, 93–106, 211–216, 327–332.
52
For a possible Akkadian etymology see Tushingham, p. 43f. in this volume. In any
case, the word developed its specific meaning in the neo-Assyrian period.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 27

the original meaning of ‫– ברית‬,53 the new term adê relates to curses and oath
ceremonies. This indicates a semantic change, yet one has to remember that by
metonymy, the different terms refer to the full procedure.
According to Simo Parpola’s 1987 study, 20 neo-Assyrian treaties were
known at that time and about 50 further references to such treaties.54 Parpola
goes even further: As only four of these treaties can be identified among the
extant texts, he extrapolates that “the total number of Assyrian treaties
concluded between 745 and 620 B.C. would rise to 160.”55 Impressive as this
number is, the State-Archives-of-Assyria collection shows that only eight of
these texts have survived and are known to modern scholars.56
Most of these treaties were on internal political affairs, and only some are
considered diplomatic treaties. However, one may question this differentiation
because for the Assyrians, a treaty with a vassal king in Media or in Tell
Tayinat or with the king of Jerusalem was likely to be considered an internal
matter of the empire. Yet there were certainly different levels of status and
importance. Maybe the treaty with King Baal from Tyre in Phoenicia can be
considered an external treaty as it deals with economic obligations, yet this is
unknown to modern scholars because the concluding curses are lost.
Unfortunately, most extant treaties are indeed fragmentary. In light of this
situation, it is all the more important that the different fragments of the
Esarhaddon Treaty text allow its reconstruction in its entirety. It contains 670
lines of which 230 lines, i.e. about one third, comprise the curses.
Beyond the treaty texts themselves, it is of interest that the treaties or some
of their phrases are also mentioned in letters of state officials. Thus, the treaties
were not only kept in temples, but copies were also in use, and specific
regulations of a treaty or the treaty tradition as such were known and referred
to in the administration.57 They were probably known even beyond these
administrative ranks. In a petition to the king, for example, a merchant referred
to the adjured loyalty of the king using words that are characteristic of an adê.
It shows that the loyalty oath contained not only obligations for the subjects
but for the king as well. This is also manifest in the case of king Padi from
Ekron, who was dethroned by his people but re-instated by the Assyrian king.
All of these documents demonstrate that the loyalty oath, while being a
unilateral covenant, was important for both sides.

53
The etymology of ‫ ברית‬is still debated (cf. WEINFELD, “‫)”ברית‬, but a term in the sense
of relation and binding is most probable.
54
PARPOLA, “Treaties”.
55
PARPOLA, “Treaties”, 162, fn. 7.
56
PARPOLA/WATANABE, Neo-Assyrian Treaties.
57
See KOCH, Vertrag, 43–45. Regulations and also references to the curses can be found
in letters of different state officials. This shows that treaties and loyalty oath were known
and adopted at different occasions, especially by court officials.
28 Siegfried Kreuzer

It should be mentioned that the treaty genre was just as well used for loyalty
obligations of the inner circle of the royal family and the administration. There
is, for instance, an oath by which Zakutu, the mother of Esarhaddon, had the
royal family elite of the state affirm its loyalty toward her son.58 Such an inner-
state loyalty pact is already known for the 9th century BCE. But loyalty oaths
did not end with the neo-Assyrian empire. According to Watanabe’s collection,
there are either texts documents, or references to such texts dating from the
times of the Babylonian kings Nebukadnezar, Neriglissar, and Nabonid, and of
the Persian Kings from Kyros to Artaxerxes.59
To sum up, covenants and loyalty oaths existed and were in use in Hatti, in
Syria, and in Assyria in the 2nd and in the 1st millennium. They were important
means to establish, to regulate, and to protect the relations between political
entities, but they were also used to ensure loyalty within the political entities.
Most texts were preserved in cuneiform writings, probably because the writing
material for alphabetic writings was organic and therefore did not survive the
climate. As the neo-Assyrian designation adê was taken over from Aramaic,
one may assume that the oath and covenant tradition was also employed in
Syria, although we only have the Sefire treaty texts that were written on stone.60
There is one limitation that is important for comparison with the biblical
covenant tradition. In spite of the importance of the deities as witnesses and
guardians of the treaties and covenants, all of these treaties are between
humans, be it between kings or with their officials. Deities are invoked at the
moment of establishing the covenant and function as guardians and witnesses
of the treaty or the covenant.
With these observations we turn back to the HB / OT tradition.

3. The Present Debate on Covenant in the

Hebrew Bible / Old Testament

As shown above, the attention in HB / OT research regarding the covenant

tradition has shifted from the Hittite to the neo-Assyrian treaties; its corollary
was a substantial re-dating of the covenant tradition and pertinent reference
texts. While in older research, the focus was on the Sinai covenant and that of
Joshua 24, recent research has focused almost exclusively on Deuteronomy and
on the stipulations and curses in Deut 13 and 28. At the same time, the entire
picture of the literary development of the HB / OT has changed drastically.
Recent scholarship classifies almost all of the texts as exilic or post-exilic. This
also concerns the book of Deuteronomy and its different layers.

58
PARPOLA/WATANABE, Neo-Assyrian Treaties; cf. KOCH, Vertrag, 41.
59
WATANABE, Adȇ-Vereidigung.
60
Cf. BARRÉ, “Treaties”; KOCH, “Covenant”, 897–899.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 29

By relating Deut 28 and later ch. 13 to the Vassal Treaty of Esarhaddon, one
may say that Steymans and especially Otto found a new Archimedean point for
the origin of Deuteronomy and also of covenant theology.61 The basic idea is
that the loyalty required by the Assyrian king was contrasted by a counter
loyalty, namely to Yhwh, the Lord of Israel. This loyalty was connected with
specific regulations and combined the loyalty to God with social relations
among the people.
However, Deut 13 with its stipulations concerning false prophets are
different from other laws of the book of Deuteronomy, in particular those laws
that adopt the book of covenant in Exod 21–23. It is also important to note that
the concluding expression of the close and exclusive relation between God and
Israel at the end of the Deuteronomic law in Deut 26:17–18 does not use the
term ‫ברית‬.
In spite of the similarities of the subject and the expressions in Deut 13 and
28, it is hard to imagine that the stipulations of the loyalty oaths were the base
texts for Deuteronomy and that all the legal matters were filled in. Also, Deut
13 in itself has different literary layers, which makes it difficult to simply
consider it as the oldest part of Deuteronomy and as an analogy to the Esar-
haddon treaty. Especially, it could not have been the starting point for the
development of the book of Deuteronomy. In view of the relations of Deutero-
nomy to the older juridical material, it seems more likely that Deut 13 and 28
were added to an already existing (reform-)law book so as to emphasize the
exclusive relationship between God and Israel.
Besides such literary problems, there is the additional question about the
basic transfer. Is it really plausible that the loyalty oath tradition was used to
claim loyalty to Yhwh? Certainly, Deuteronomy is strong on the exclusive
veneration and obedience towards Yhwh. But is it plausible that this alternative
loyalty would be adopted from a foreign political entity that was not
appreciated in Jerusalem and accepted nevertheless? If one dates such an event
closely to the end of Assyrian dominance and control or shortly thereafter,
would the words and especially the drastic curses of the Assyrian loyalty oath
be acceptable or even attractive for expressing the relation to Yhwh, the God
of Israel? This hypothesis has been proposed in a new book by Richard Jude
Thompson, Terror of Radiance: Aššur Covenant to YHWH Covenant (2013).
Thompson discusses all the ANE treaties and finally focusses on the neo-
Assyrian treaties and their role as an instrument of domination by the “terror
of the radiance” of the Assyrian rulers and their gods. He then proposes: “The
Assyrian emperors employed a consistent theme of a radiant and brilliant light
(melammȗ) that brings terror and fear of an overwhelming army led by an

61
STEYMANS, Deuteronomium 28 und die Adê zur Thronfolgeregelung Asarhaddons.
From his several contributions to the subject see esp. OTTO, “Die Ursprünge der Bundes-
theologie” and Deuteronomy: OTTO, Deuteronomium.
30 Siegfried Kreuzer

omnipotent god …”62 Thompson then parallels the image of Yhwh in the
Deuteronomistic History (DH) to the image of the Assyrian kings. Yhwh rules
in a similar way over his enemies and over his own people. “The authors of the
DH portray Yhwh in a similar imagery of terror and fear accompanied by
overwhelming light, radiance, flame, and lightning”.63 For this, Thompson
refers to the terror and fear that befalls the inhabitants of Canaan (Deut 2:25;
Josh 2:9). However, these passages do not refer to Yhwh but to the Israelites,
while the passages he mentions about the flames (2 Sam 22:13–14) belong to
the theophany tradition; and the light of the morning and the rising sun (2 Sam
23:3–4) is rather a positive image.
For Thompson the rule of this dreadful terror is administered by the scribes
who know the rules, who inform the king, and who control the vassals. The
scribes relate to the god Nabu, therefore they are called nabu, or in Hebrew
nabi’, “prophet”. This would also explain the crucial role of prophets in the
Deuteronomistic History, which is rightly called the “Former Prophets”: “The
nebȋ’ȋm knew the mind of YHWH in the same way that the ardū or ardātu
Nabȗ/ȋ knew, by means of their vast intelligence system, the detailed facts of
the empire. They would have appeared god-like in their ability to advise the
king in the name of the god”.64
This scholarly hypothesis may be somewhat exaggerated beyond what Deut
13 and 28 indicate, yet it illustrates that it is questionable if the threats and the
curses would be the channel for the idea of covenant to become the model for
the relation between Yhwh and his people. While Deuteronomy certainly
demands exclusive loyalty to Yhwh, the historical situation with the Assyrians
and especially all the threats and curses would not have made such a counter
model particularly attractive.
I am not the only one who doubts that covenant theology in ancient Israel
arose from this background. Manfred Oeming has suggested a different origin,
namely from covenant as a metaphor for marriage that would have been
transferred to the relation of Yhwh and Israel. Oeming looks for a positive
approach to inform the idea of covenant. He mentions Ezek 16 and considers
the “psychology” of love as the factual core of covenant theology in the HB /
OT.65 He traces the idea of God’s love for his people in the bridal and marriage
metaphor back to Hosea, especially the famous chapters Hos 1–3, and assumes
its reception in Deuteronomy, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Malachi. He concludes
that “the dynamics of the emotional relation is the factual core of the covenant
theology. ‫ ברית‬is not law-centered but love-centered. By God’s love, and only
by love can it be explained why God does not implement his threats and curses.

62
THOMPSON, Terror, 226.
63
THOMPSON, Terror, 228.
64
THOMPSON, Terror, 232.
65
OEMING, “Deine Zeit”, 151–160.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 31

The legal categories (oath, vow, treaty) are on the surface, only below this
rugged surface one enters the depths of covenant thinking, which is a ‘sphere’
of ‘illegally’ pardoning and loving personal relation.”66
I agree with Oeming on his basic idea, and in spite of the tendency to date
practically everything of theological relevance to exilic and post exilic times,
at least the core traditions of the book of Hosea go back to the pre-exilic period.
Also in the book of Deuteronomy, there is more than just the spirit of loyalty
oaths and curses, and to love God in Deuteronomy is more than a “friendly”
and euphemistic circumscription of the stipulated loyalty to the overlord.67
There is also the message of the prophets, for instance Hosea’s message of
God’s – although disappointed – love to his people, which ultimately limits his
wrath and destruction, be it in the picture of marriage (Hos 1–3) or in the
relation of a father (or as parents) to his (their) son (Hos 11, especially v. 8–9).
Also, the bridal and marriage metaphors in Jeremiah and Ezekiel do not come
out of the blue, although later they underwent a process of reflection and were
challenged and changed in different ways. At their core, there is a natural and
immediate relation of a deity and humans, which is not substantially different
from, for example, that between Kamosh and the Moabites.68
However, even if one agrees to this, it may be asked how the category of
covenant was being applied to the basic theological concept.

4. A New Suggestion for the Origin of Covenant Theology

Covenant relations and covenant traditions within the human realm were
certainly known in Israel for a longer time. A typical example is the covenant
between Jacob and Laban in Gen 31, which serves two purposes; on the one
hand, it defines the individual relationship between the two parties, and on the
other hand, it regulates further matters, like their mutual areas and border
protection. Another example is Hos 12:2 where Ephraim is criticized for its

66
OEMING, “Deine Zeit”, 159: “Als sachliche Mitte der Bundestheologie erweist sich die
‘emotionale’ Beziehungsdynamik. ‫ ברית‬ist nicht ius-zentriert, sondern amor-zentriert. Aus
der Liebe Gottes, und allein aus der Liebe, erklärt sich, warum Gott seine Fluch- und Straf-
androhungen nicht umsetzt. Der Rechtstitel (Eid, Schwur, Vertrag) liegt an der Oberfläche;
erst unter dieser rauen Schale kommt man in die Tiefe des Bundesdenkens hinein, nämlich
in eine Sphäre ‘illegal’ verzeihender und liebender personaler Relation.”
67
See, e.g., KREUZER, “Sache”.
68
For this quasi natural relation between a deity and humans and, specifically, between
Yhwh and Israel, see already WELLHAUSEN, Prolegomena, 415: “Das Verhältnis Jahves zu
Israel war von Haus aus ein natürliches; kein zum Nachdenken geeignetes Zwischen trennte
ihn von seinem Volke.” (“The relation of Yhwh to Israel was originally a natural one; no in-
between that was the object of reflection separated him from his people.”)
32 Siegfried Kreuzer

treaty with Assyria while engaging in a relationship with Egypt. Hosea

criticizes Ephraim not for making the covenant but for its disloyalty.
Covenants of different kinds, along with their pertinent terminology and
rituals, have been known in Israel for a long time (see the above-mentioned
examples of the covenant ritual involving cutting animals in half, which is
referenced in Jer 34). Not only Deut 13 and 28 are reminiscent of covenant
formulations, but also other texts, especially the curses and threats in Hos 4:1–
4 or 5:10–13, and some announcements in Amos 1 and 2. Christoph Koch aptly
summarizes the situation:
Before and alongside the use of bĕrît as a religious metaphor describing the relationship
between God and his people, the HB / OT testifies to a use of the concept that is profane in
the broadest sense, a use which belongs to the realm of ANE treaty law. Even though not a
single treaty has been preserved, a number of references to treaties and treaty conclusions
reveal the existence of Israelite or Judean treaty practice. In the HB / OT, private, state, and
international states of affairs are described with bĕrît, the form of which, in each case, is a
question of power relations. On the international level, there are, alongside treaties between
more or less equally-ranked treaty partners (1 Kgs 5:26b; 1 Kgs 20:34; cf. Gen 31:44), those
that indicate a clear power differential (1 Kgs 15:19; Hos 12:2; Ezek 17:13–14). For
domestic treaty practice as well, there are examples (cf. 2 Kgs 11; Jer 34) that have, however,
been reworked according to covenant-theology (cf. only Jer 34:13). As in the rest of the
ANE, treaty conclusions were frequently accompanied by symbolic actions (a handshake
[Ezek 17:18], an exchange of gifts [Gen 21:30], a shared meal [Gen 26:30], stepping between
the halves of divided animals [Jer 34:18]). According to a pan-ANE viewpoint, the gods
were not only witnesses and guarantors of the treaties but also treaty partners (in
correspondence to their earthly representatives, the kings). The breach of a political treaty
was thus also regarded as a betrayal of YHWH (cf. Ezek 17:19; Hos 6:7).69

However, in spite of the close involvement of the gods/god, their role is still
limited to that of witnesses and guardians over the covenant, not yet as a treaty
party. Therefore, conceptualizing God as one of the treaty partners is a new
step. How did it come about? To answer this question, we take up the
observation that the relation between Yhwh and Israel had once been natural
and immediate.70 This relation was practiced at sacred sites, in feasts and
celebrations, and in visits of individuals and groups. Over time, this natural
relation became more and more reflected, mainly in periods of challenge, be it
by contrast with other religions or reflections about the course of special events
in history.
Different means informed this process of reflection. One important tool was
the justifications of events through prophetic judgement oracles. The prophets
not only criticized specific social and cultic problems, but they questioned the
relation between Yhwh and the people as such. Isaiah, for example, compared

69
KOCH, “Covenant”, 901.
70
See above, fn. 29.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 33

it to basic relations in everyday life: to the relation of parents and child, or the
relation of animals to their owners:
2
Listen, O heavens, and hear, O earth; For the LORD speaks, “Sons I have reared and
brought up, but they have revolted against me.
3
An ox knows its owner, and a donkey its master’s manger, but Israel does not know, my
people do not understand” (Isa 1:2–3).

Isaiah may even use the example of a piece of land that was carefully tended
and should bring its fruit, like in the song about the vineyard:
My well-beloved had a vineyard on a fertile hill.
2
He dug it all around, removed its stones, and planted it with the choicest vine. He built a
tower in the middle of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; then he expected it to produce good
grapes, but it only produced worthless ones.
3
And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard
(Isa 5:1–3).

Hosea also used the relation of father and son:

When Israel was a youth, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.
2
The more they called them, the more they went from them.
They kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning incense to idols.
3
Yet it is I who taught Ephraim to walk (Hos 11:1–3).

Hosea referred to mutual obligations in a marriage to criticize Israel’s

unfaithfulness; the consequences are presented in the form of a lawsuit (Hos
1–3).
All of these images and comparisons are meant to express that the basic
relation between Yhwh and his people was disturbed and that calamity and
disaster was either pending or had already struck. This happened in the time of
the expansion of the Assyrian Empire, first as an impending threat and later as
a past experience of devastation and deportation.71 Of course, other
catastrophes (like the earthquake in Amos) may have been in view as well.72
Most of these accusations and the debates are stylized as a lawsuit.
Evidently, this was the appropriate means to express and justify God’s decision
to punish his people. While the pictures mentioned above served to explain and
to justify God’s actions, they belong to the individual realm; by contrast, the
prophetic announcements and explanations concern the community. Is there
also a category that might directly apply to larger social groups and to the
community as a whole? A category that expresses a positive relation and, at the
same time, includes the explanation of impending doom or catastrophes that
had already arrived? The covenant relation is such a relation. Covenants were

71
In the debate about catastrophic historical experiences that were a challenge to
theological reflections about God’s acting, the fall of the northern kingdom and the Assyrian
exile should not be forgotten.
72
Cf. the catastrophes mentioned in Isa 9:7–20.
34 Siegfried Kreuzer

familiar as conveying both relations and agreements that would assist a

community and protect it, but they were, on the reverse side, also about
obligations that came with threats in case the covenant was broken.
The covenantal relation was one with a whole people, and it gradually
became a more fitting conceptual category as the prophets increasingly
addressed their message to the entire nation. At the same time, the treaty and
covenant terminology with its threats and curses also offered the possibility of
expressing the woes that would be brought about by God and to explain what
had already happened. Hence, covenant terminology became an important
means for explaining and justifying Gods dealing with his people in history. It
was a step in the development of the prophecy of doom and in understanding
and interpreting it. It may have originated in circles that transmitted and
interpreted the prophetic message. The category of covenant transcended the
emotional message of the comparisons with family relations (like husband and
wife or father and son) or ownership (of animals and vineyard). It also allowed
for the inclusion of the social and religious categories that had been addressed
in the prophetic criticism. In this way, the dark side of covenantal punishment
opened up the doorway for envisioning the positive side: God not only
punished according to covenant-rules; to the contrary, the very punishment
implied that originally there was a positive relation to Israel.
It seems probable that this development took place in the 7th century BCE
in circles that not only passed on the message of the prophets of the 8th century,
but reflected on it and wanted to draw consequences for the future life in Israel.
Most probably, this happened in scribal circles in Jerusalem who preserved the
prophetic message, who knew the categories and the language of treaties, and
covenant and who were interested in social and religious reforms.73
It is no surprise that covenant theology surfaced in the book of Deute-
ronomy. One may say that Deuteronomy tries – by its means of law and
education – to (re)create and to establish what the prophets had missed: a
society that would love and honor Yhwh exclusively and that would conse-
quently practice social justice. One of the means and expressions towards this
goal was covenant theology.

73
KOCH, Vertrag, 43, mentions that Assyrian officials used covenant terminology also in
letters, and he concludes that these persons were well acquainted with covenant texts and,
therefore, used the vocabulary in other contexts as well. He assumes a similar situation in
Jerusalem so that scribes and administrative personnel were the Trägergruppe for the ideas
and the terminology of covenant; cf. the title of his ch. V. 3.2 “Die judäische Funktionselite
als Trägerschicht der Bundestheologie”, 310–312. However, as he develops the idea that all
of this is possible in exilic times only, he tries to argue that a number of persons of this group
had been spared from deportation. While this is certainly possible (also the Babylonian
administration relied on locals), there were more such specialists while the Jerusalem court
was functioning on its own, and they were likewise thinking about the past and the future,
as is manifest in the Shafan-family (mentioned by KOCH, Vertrag, 307).
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 35

This basic idea was being developed in different directions and into different
concepts. Covenant theology became the means of expressing the basic
relationship between God and Israel, based on an emotional relation like the
one between husband and wife or parents and children. It provided the
terminological and conceptual background for articulating a relation based on
obedience and threats. Ultimately it developed into the novel idea of a
unilateral covenant guaranteed by God alone. But this is beyond the question
of the background and origin of covenant theology and will be taken up in other
contributions.

Bibliography
ASSELT, WILLEM J. VAN, The Federal Theology of Johannes Cocceius (1603–1669), Leiden:
Brill, 2001.
BALTZER, KLAUS, Das Bundesformular (WMANT 4), Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1960;
engl. translation: The Covenant Formulary: In Old Testament, Jewish, and Early Chris-
tian Writings, Oxford: Blackwell / Minneapolis: Fortress, 1971.
BARRÉ, MICHAEL L., “Treaties in the ANE”, ABD VI (1992): 653–656.
BARTON, JOHN, “Covenant in Old Testament Theology”, in Covenant as Context, edited by
A.D.H. Mayes / R.B. Salters, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, 23–38.
BEGRICH, JOACHIM, “Berit: Ein Beitrag zur Erfassung einer alttestamentlichen Denkform”,
ZAW 60 (1944): 1–11; repr. in IDEM, Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament (TB 21),
München: Chr. Kaiser, 1964, 55–66.
DOHMEN, CHRISTOPH, “Der Sinaibund als Neuer Bund nach Ex 19–34”, in Der neue Bund
im alten (QD 146), edited by Erich Zenger, Freiburg: Herder, 1993, 51–83.
DOHMEN, CHRISTOPH / FREVEL, CHRISTIAN (eds.), Für immer verbündet: Studien zur
Bundestheologie der Bibel (SBS 211), Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2007.
EDEL, ELMAR, “Der Vertrag zwischen Pharao Ramses II. und Hattusili III. von Hatti”, TUAT
I/2 (1983): 135–153.
EICHRODT, WALTHER, Theologie des Alten Testaments, vol. 1: Gott und Volk, Leipzig: Hin-
richs, 1933; Stuttgart: Klotz, 81968; vol. 2: Gott und Welt, Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1935; vol.
3: Gott und Mensch, Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1935.
–, Theology of the Old Testament (OTL), London: SCM Press / Philadelphia: Westminster /
John Knox Press, vol. 1, 1961; vol. 2, 1967 (engl. translation of the 4th ed. 1957).
FITZMYER, JOSEPH A., The Aramaic Inscriptions of Sefire (BibOr 19), Rome: Editrice Pon-
tificio Istituto Biblico, 1967 (2nd ed. 1995).
FRIEDRICH, JOHANNES, Staatsverträge des Ḫatti-Reiches in hethitischer Sprache: 1: Teil:
Die Verträge Muršiliš’ II: mit Duppi-Tešup von Amurru, Targašnalliš von Ḫapalla
(MVAeg 31), Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1926; 2. Teil: Die Verträge Muršiliš’ II. mit Manapa-
Dattaš vom Lande des Flusses Šeḫa, des Muwattalliš mit Alakšanduš von Wiluša und des
Šuppiluliumaš mit Ḫukkanāš und den Leuten von Ḫajaša (mit Indices zum 1. und 2. Teil) /
(MVAeg 34), Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1930.
GERTZ, JAN CHRISTIAN, “Bund II. Altes Testament”, RGG4 I (1998): 1862–1865.
GUNKEL, HERMANN, Genesis (HK.AT I), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 91979.
36 Siegfried Kreuzer

HEINTZ, JEAN-GEORGES, “Alliance humaine – Alliance divine: documents d’époque baby-

lonienne ancienne & Bible hébraïque”, in IDEM, Prophétisme et Alliance: Des Archives
royales de Mari à la Bible hébraïque (OBO 271), Fribourg: Academic Press / Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015, 309–322.
–, “Nouveaux traités d’époque babylonienne ancienne et formules d’alliance de la bible
hébraïque: Remarques préliminaires”, in IDEM, Prophétisme et Alliance: Des Archives
royales de Mari à la Bible hébraïque (OBO 271), Fribourg: Academic Press / Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015, 285–308.
HALLO, WILLIAM W. / YOUNGER, K. LAWSON, The Context of Scripture, vol. 2, Leiden:
Brill, 2003.
HERRMANN, SIEGFRIED, “‘Bund’ eine Fehlübersetzung von ‘berit’? Zur Auseinandersetzung
mit Ernst Kutsch”, in IDEM, Gesammelte Studien zur Geschichte und Theologie des Alten
Testaments (TB 75), München: Kaiser, 1986, 210–220.
HORTON, MICHAEL SCOTT, “Covenant Theology”, EBR 5 (2012): 933–935.
–, God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology, Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006.
JANOWSKI, BERND / WILHELM, GERNOT (eds.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments:
Neue Folge, vol. 2: Staatsverträge, Herrscherinschriften und andere Dokumente zur poli-
tischen Geschichte, Gütersloh: Güterloher Verlagshaus, 2005.
JEPSEN, ALFRED, “Berith: Ein Beitrag zur Theologie der Exilszeit”, in Verbannung und
Heimkehr: Beiträge zur Geschichte und Theologie Israels im 6. und 5. Jahrhundert
v.Chr., Wilhelm Rudolph dargebracht, edited by Arnulf Kuschke, Tübingen: Mohr, 1961,
161–179.
KAISER, OTTO (ed.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments, vol. 1/2: Staatsverträge,
Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1983.
KOCH, CHRISTOPH, “Covenant”, EBR 5 (2012): 897–908.
–, Vertrag, Treueid und Bund: Studien zur Rezeption des altorientalischen Vertragsrechts
im Deuteronomium und zur Ausbildung der Bundestheologie im Alten Testament (BZAW
383), Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008.
KOROŠEC, VIKTOR, Hethitische Staatsverträge: Ein Beitrag zu ihrer juristischen Wertung
(Leipziger rechtswissenschaftliche Studien 60), Leipzig: Weicher, 1931.
KRAUS, HANS-JOACHIM, Geschichte der historisch-kritischen Erforschung des Alten Testa-
ments, Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 21969.
KRAUS, WOLFGANG / KARRER, MARTIN, Septuaginta Deutsch: Das griechische Alte Testa-
ment in deutscher Übersetzung, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 22010.
KRAUSE, JOACHIM J., Die Bedingungen des Bundes: Studien zur konditionalen Struktur alt-
testamentlicher Bundeskonzeptionen (FAT 140), Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020.
KREUZER, SIEGFRIED, “Die Sache auf das Wort gebracht. – Sprache und Wirkung des Bu-
ches Deuteronomium von der joschijanischen Reform bis zu den Reformatoren”, in Am
Anfang war das Wort (Veröffentlichungen der Kirchlichen Hochschule Wuppertal NF 1),
edited by Albrecht Grözinger / Johannes von Lüpke, Neukirchen: Neukirchener /
Wuppertal: foedus, 1998, 56–80.
KUTSCH, ERNST, “Bund I: Altes Testament”, TRE 7 (1981): 397–403.
–, Neues Testament – Neuer Bund? Eine Fehlübersetzung wird korrigiert, Neukirchen-
Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1978.
–, Verheißung und Gesetz: Untersuchungen zum sogenannten ‘Bund’ im Alten Testament
(BZAW 131), Berlin: de Gruyter, 1973.
LAUINGER, JACOB, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty at Tell Tayinat: Text and Commen-
tary”, JCS 64 (2012): 87–123.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 37

LEVIN, CHRISTOPH, “Die Entstehung der Bundestheologie im Alten Testament” (2004) now
in IDEM, Verheißung und Rechtfertigung: Gesammelte Studien II (BZAW 431), Berlin:
de Gruyter, 2013, 242–259.
–, Die Verheißung des neuen Bundes in ihrem theologiegeschichtlichen Zusammenhang
ausgelegt (FRLANT 137), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985.
LOADER, JAMES A., “The Exilic Period in Abraham Kuenen’s Account of Israelite Reli-
gion”, ZAW 96 (1984): 3–23.
MCCARTHY, DENNIS J., Treaty and Covenant: A Study in Form in the Ancient Oriental Do-
cuments and in the Old Testament (AnBibl 21), Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963;
(AnBibl 21a), Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 21978.
MENDENHALL, GEORGE E., “Ancient Oriental and Biblical Law”, BA 17 (1954): 26–46.
–, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East, Pittsburgh: The Biblical
Colloquium, 1955; updated and expanded German translation: Recht und Bund in Israel
und dem Alten Vordern Orient (ThSt 64), Zürich: TVZ, 1960.
MENDENHALL, GEORGE E. / GATY A. HERION, “Covenant”, ABD I (1992): 1179–1202.
NEEF, HEINZ-DIETER, “Aspekte alttestamentlicher Bundestheologie”, in Bund und Tora: Zur
theologischen Begriffsgeschichte in alttestamentlicher, frühjüdischer und urchristlicher
Tradition (WUNT 92), edited by Friedrich Avemarie / Hermann Lichtenberger, Tü-
bingen: Mohr, 1996, 1–23.
NICHOLSON, ERNEST W., God and His People: Covenant and Theology in the Old Testa-
ment, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.
NÖTSCHER, FRIEDRICH, “Bundesformular und Amtsschimmel”, BZ.NF 9 (1965): 181–214.
OEMING, MANFRED, “‘Siehe, deine Zeit war gekommen, die Zeit der Liebe’ (Ez 16,8): Die
‘Psychologie’ der Liebe als sachlicher Kern der Bundestheologie im Alten Testament”,
in Für immer verbündet: Studien zur Bundestheologie der Bibel: Festgabe für Frank-
Lothar Hossfeld zum 65. Geburtstag (SBS 211), edited by Christoph Dohmen and Chris-
tian Frevel, Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2007, 151–160.
OTTE, MARIANNE, Der Begriff berit in der jüngeren alttestamentlichen Forschung: Aspekte
der Forschungsgeschichte unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der semantischen Frage-
stellung bei Ernst Kutsch (EHS XXIII/803), Frankfurt: Lang, 2005.
OTTO, ECKART, Das Deuteronomium: Politische Theologie und Rechtsreform in Juda und
Assyrien (BZAW 284), Berlin: de Gruyter, 1999.
–, “Die Ursprünge der Bundestheologie im Alten Testament und im Alten Orient”, ZABR 4
(1998): 1–84.
–, Deuteronomium 12–34: Erster Teilband: 12,1–23,15, Freiburg: Herder, 2016; Zweiter
Teilband: 23,16–34,12, Freiburg: Herder, 2017.
–, “Völkerrecht in der hebräischen Bibel und seine altorientalischen Wurzeln”, ZABR 12
(2006): 29–51.
PARPOLA, SIMO(N), “Neo-Assyrian Treaties from the Royal Archives of Niniveh”, JCS 39
(1987): 161–189.
PARPOLA, SIMO(N) / WATANABE, KAZUKO, Neo-Assyrian treaties and Loyalty Oaths (SAA
II), Helsinki: University Press, 1988.
PEDERSEN, JOHANNES, Der Eid bei den Semiten in seinem Verhältnis zu verwandten Er-
scheinungen sowie die Stellung des Eides im Islam, Straßburg: Trübner, 1914.
PERLITT, LOTHAR, Bundestheologie im Alten Testament (WMANT 36), Neukirchen: Neu-
kirchener, 1969.
REVENTLOW, HENNING GRAF, History of Biblical Interpretation IV: From the Enlighten-
ment to the Twentieth Century (SBLRBS 63), Atlanta, GA: SBL Press, 2010.
38 Siegfried Kreuzer

RÜTERSWÖRDEN, UDO, “Bundestheologie ohne ‫”ברית‬, ZABR 4 (1998): 85–99.

–, “Die Liebe zu Gott im Deuteronomium”, in Die deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerke:
Redaktions- und religionsgeschichtliche Perspektiven zur ‘Deuteronomismus’-
Diskussion in Tora und Vorderen Propheten (BZAW 365), edited by Markus Witte et al.,
Berlin / New York: de Gruyter, 2006, 229–238.
SCHMIDT, WERNER H., “Der ‘neue Bund’ als Antwort auf Jeremias kritische Einsichten”, in
Für immer verbündet: Studien zur Bundestheologie der Bibel: Festgabe für Frank-Lothar
Hossfeld zum 65. Geburtstag (SBS 211), edited by Christoph Dohmen / Christian Frevel,
Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2007, 187–193.
SEEBASS, HORST, “Berit im Buch Numeri”, in Für immer verbündet: Studien zur Bundes-
theologie der Bibel: Festgabe für Frank-Lothar Hossfeld zum 65. Geburtstag (SBS 211),
edited by Christoph Dohmen / Christian Frevel, Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2007,
219–230.
STEYMANS, HANS ULRICH, Deuteronomium 28 und die Adê zur Thronfolgeregelung Asar-
haddons: Segen und Fluch im Alten Orient und in Israel (OBO 145), Fribourg: Academic
Press / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996.
–, “DtrB und die adê zur Thronfolgeregelung Asarhaddons. Bundestheologie und
Bundesformular im Blick auf Deuteronomium 11”, in Deuteronomium – Tora für eine
neue Generation (BZABR 17), edited by Georg Fischer / Dominik Markl, Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz, 2011, 161–192.
STOLZ, FRITZ, “Bund I. Religionsgeschichtlich”, RGG4 I: 1861–1862.
THOMPSON, RICHARD JUDE, Terror of Radiance: Aššur Covenant to YHWH Covenant (OBO
258), Fribourg: Academic Press / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013.
VON RAD, GERHARD, Das fünfte Buch Mose: Deuteronomium (ATD 8), Göttingen:
Vandenhock & Ruprecht, 21968.
–, “Das theologische Problem des alttestamentlichen Schöpfungsglaubens”, 1936; IDEM,
Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament (TB 8), München: Kaiser 21961, 136–147.
–, Old Testament Theology, 2 vols. (transl. by D.M.G. Stalker; OTL), Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1962 / 1965.
WATANABE, KAZUKO, Die adȇ-Vereidigung anläßlich der Thronfolgeregelung Asarhad-
dons (BaM. Beiheft 3), Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1987.
–, “Esarhaddon’s Succession Oath Documents Reconsidered in Light of the Tayinat
Version”, Orient 49 (2014): 145–170.
WEBER, MAX, Das antike Judentum, originally in several parts in: Archiv für Sozialwissen-
schaft und Sozialpolitik, 1917–1919, then in: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssozio-
logie III, 1921 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr 1921).
–, Ancient Judaism, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1952.
WEINFELD, MOSHE, “‫”ברית‬, ThWAT I (1973): 781–808.
–, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, Oxford: Clarendon, 1972.
WELLHAUSEN, JULIUS, Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels, Berlin: de Gruyter, 61927.
WENHAM, GORDON J., Genesis 1–15 (WBC 1 / 1), Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987.
–, Genesis 16–50 (WBC 1 / 2), Waco, TX: Word Books, 1994.
WESTERMANN, CLAUS, Genesis 1–11 (BK.AT 1 / 1), Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1974.
–, Genesis 12–36 (BK.AT 1 / 2), Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1981.
WISEMAN, DONALD J., “The Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon”, Iraq 20 (1958): 1–99 (with
plates 1–53).
ZENGER, ERICH (ed.), Der Neue Bund im Alten: Studien zur Bundestheologie der beiden
Testamente (QD 146), Freiburg: Herder, 1993.
 Background and Origin of Covenant Theology in the HB / OT 39

–, “Die Bundestheologie – ein derzeit vernachlässigtes Thema der Bibelwissenschaft und ein
wichtiges Thema für das Verhältnis Israel – Kirche”, in Der Neue Bund im Alten (QD
146), edited by Erich Zenger, Freiburg: Herder 1993, 13–49.
ZIMMERLI, WALTHER, 1960, “Sinaibund und Abrahambund: Ein Beitrag zum Verständnis
der Priesterschrift”, ThZ 16, 268–280; also in: IDEM, Gottes Offenbarung, Gesammelte
Aufsätze zum Alten Testament (TB 19), München: Kaiser, 1963, 205–216.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
endurance. But Johnny shut his teeth together like the bars of a steel
trap, and pushing the tottering Filipino roughly into the water, waded
slowly after him, retracing the same route he had traversed in crossing
the river. In their exhausted condition it was not easy for the men to
maintain their footing. Agramonte’s feet slipped from under him several
times, bringing him face downward on the sand and rocks of the river
bed. The soldier, although himself in little better form than his prisoner,
by a supreme effort raised the latter to his feet and relentlessly urged
him on. The island reached, the two fell exhausted.
As the soldier and his prisoner lay panting upon the ground it
seemed to Johnny that rest was the only thing worth living for. He did
not dare gratify his inclination in that direction, however. The body of
the dead Filipino was likely to be found at any moment, for it was
probable that he had been on picket duty, and if so, a relief would
probably be sent to that point before long. Pursuit once begun, escape
would be well nigh impossible. Should he be captured the soldier knew
only too well what would happen. Another ghastly token of
Agramonte’s affection would be sent to the American camp.
Staggering to his feet, Johnny fairly dragged his prisoner to a
standing posture. He compelled the Filipino to take several swallows of
the whiskey, drank a stiff one himself, and driving Agramonte before
him continued on his way around the edge of the island. When they
arrived at the opposite side, the Filipino, gazing terror stricken at the
swift current in mid-stream, stopped short and shook his head in feeble
protest against entering the water.
“It does look middlin’ dubious, that’s a fact, an’ it’s goin’ to be a
close call, but we’ve got to make it,” said Johnny. “I promised the
Captain that I’d land you at the door of his tent, and land you I will.
He’d be glad to have your head to even up for poor Jack Kennedy’s, but
it’ll please him better if I deliver your ugly carcass to him whole. In
with you, d—n you, and no monkey business or I’ll”—and Johnny
cocked his revolver, which clicked suggestively.
The Filipino slipped into the water and would have gone down post
haste, had not the soldier supported him by his tangle of coarse hair.
And then began the supreme struggle. Many times as he battled with
the current did Johnny regret that he had not decapitated Agramonte
and taken his head into camp. But once in the swift running water he
would not weaken, nor would he let go of his prisoner. He resolved that
if Agramonte went down, he would drown with him, rather than return
to the captain empty handed. Twice the two struggling men were
swept under, but thanks to Johnny’s bull dog grit rose again. They were
swimming diagonally against the current, and it was almost miraculous
that both men were not drowned. Had the middle channel been a few
yards wider, they certainly would never have lived to reach the next
island.
But reach the island they did, and with a desperate effort Johnny
pulled himself upon dry land, dragging his half dead charge after him.
After a somewhat longer rest than before, the two again entered the
water, and with great difficulty waded to shore on the opposite side of
the Batolan. Once the awful strain of crossing the river was over, there
was no longer any choice in the matter of resting; both men fell
exhausted; Johnny had barely strength enough left to crawl into the
brake out of the range of vision of possible stray Filipinos and pull his
half dead captive after him.
The sun was well up in the heavens and beating mercilessly down
upon captor and captive before Johnny was able to move. He finally
managed to get upon his feet again and decided to take a fresh start
toward the camp. It seemed safer to take the chance of meeting hostile
natives in the jungle in broad daylight, than to remain until nightfall
and then run the risk of being found by a searching party of the enemy.
The Filipino, however, was unable to rise. He was wounded no more
severely than his captor, and surely should have been no worse
affected by the fatigue of his journey, but he was a prisoner, and lacked
the spirit of a victor, and, like most children of the tropics, he had not
the physical nor moral fibre of which strenuous heroes are made. He
was certainly “all in,” much to our soldier’s dismay. Urging and threats
alike were without avail, and when dragged to his feet the renegade
fell to the ground again as limp as a rag. Knowing that camp was but a
few hours distant, Johnny’s disgust at the situation was most violent,
and he swore in salvos.
 “You d—d cut-throat, you’re more trouble than your miserable neck
is worth! You might have been game enough to stick to the finish. But
you wasn’t, so there you are, an’ I reckon it’s up to me to get you to
camp the best way I can. Come, Aggie, old boy, an’ rest on this
bosom;” saying which, the soldier helped the Filipino to his feet once
more, and half carrying, half dragging the almost helpless man, struck
out through the brake.
The will is a wonderful thing;—it conquers worlds,—but no man’s
will is so strong that extreme physical weakness will not defeat it.
Johnny’s nerve was impregnable, but wounded and fatigued as he was,
his physical strength could not withstand the additional strain put upon
it by the endeavor to assist the Filipino through the jungle. Then too,
his wounds had become inflamed and very painful. He felt alternately
hot and cold, and finally had a chill that fairly made his teeth rattle.
This was followed by a tremendous fever. The poor fellow felt as
though he were on fire. Things began to look queer. From time to time
he fancied he saw fantastic shapes amid the brake. Sometimes huge,
fiercely snarling animals seemed to brush by him. Again, a Filipino,
twice as large as life, leered at him from behind every bush and tree.
Once he fancied he saw the huge serpent that had flailed his chest the
night he spent in traversing the jungle. Its horrid mouth yawned widely,
and he heard it calling in a hoarse roaring voice the multitudinous folk
of the jungle. And the soldier knew that the delirium of wound fever
was upon him, and feared lest he should lose his senses altogether.
Bad as was his captor’s condition, the Filipino’s was much worse.
When nature could stand no more, and Johnny was finally compelled to
drop the renegade, it was evident that the latter’s end was in sight. A
few drops of whiskey poured down his throat revived him for a brief
period, but it was hate’s labor lost, for within the hour Agramonte gave
a faint expiring sigh and joined the shades of his brown skinned
ancestors.
Johnny had fallen exhausted beside the body of his captive and
supporting himself on his elbow had watched, in his lucid intervals, the
passing of his chances of delivering the living Agramonte to Captain
Benning. The Filipino dead, there was but one thing to be done. The
gathering of evidence was as simple as it was gruesome; he drew his
knife and decapitated the body, making in his weakened condition, it
must be confessed, rather a “hacky,” tearing job of it. The head
removed and tied by its long hair to his belt, Johnny rose to his feet
and totteringly resumed his journey toward camp.
As our soldier uncertainly blundered on through the brake, his fever
rose higher and higher and his delirium increased. There were no
longer any lucid intervals, and the direction of his steps was largely a
matter of chance. Good luck, rather than volition guided him, but while
his course was the proper one, luck was not always with him. Several
times his feet became entangled in the undergrowth and he fell heavily.
Again, as he struggled to his feet and stumbled blindly on, he crashed
against a tree so violently that only the fictitious strength of delirium
prevented his being incapacitated from further effort. But every step
was bring him nearer his comrades, and nearer the fulfillment of the
promise which no longer meant anything to him, poor boy.

* * * * *
The evening relief of sentries had just been made by Company K.
The sun had dropped his huge glowing ball of molten copper behind
the hills to the west of Masillo. The waning light was playing hide and
seek with the flickering, erratic shadows of wood and brake. At the
edge of the little clearing just outside the town stood a khaki clad
sentry. He was leaning upon his rifle and gazing abstractedly into the
jungle, thinking, perhaps, of that rancher’s daughter in far-away
Montana. As he stood there musing, his attention was suddenly
attracted by a rustling sound amid the undergrowth some distance
away. He instantly brought his gun to a ready, and peered excitedly
into the jungle. The sound grew plainer.
“Halt! Who goes there?”
A shape as of a man creeping stealthily along through the brake
upon his hands and knees became dimly discernible. Again the sentry’s
voice rang out.
“Halt, or I fire!”
The shape, now plainly that of a man, crept nearer and still nearer.
 The Krag cracked like a huge whip, a thin, filmy cloud of smoke
arose from the nitro, and the creeping form in the brake fell forward
upon its face without a sound.
“Corporal of the guard, post seven!” shouted the sentry.
The regulation call was unnecessary for, immediately the rifle
cracked, a squad of the sentry’s comrades with the corporal at their
head rushed to the spot.
“I’ve bagged a brown belly, I think,” said the sentry, waving his
hand in the direction of the spot where his quarry had fallen.
The corporal, followed by his men, cautiously approached the spot
indicated by the sentry. A few minutes search in the cane and they
came upon a body clothed in tattered khaki. Hanging from the belt at
the dead man’s side, was the recently decapitated head of a Filipino.
The startled corporal turned the body over upon its back. He gave
one horrified glance of recognition at the dead man’s face and
exclaimed, “My God! It’s Johnny!”
Tenderly the men in khaki raised the limp form of their fallen
comrade and silently bore it past the horror stricken sentry into the
camp. Halting before the captain’s tent, they laid the body down and
covered it reverently with a blanket.
The corporal approached the door of the tent and addressing his
commander, said sorrowfully, his eyes wet with tears, “Sir, Johnny has
returned.”
Captain Benning sprang to his feet and exclaimed, “Where is he;
why does he not report?”
“He is here, sir,” replied the corporal. The captain went to the door
of the tent, and not seeing Johnny, looked at the corporal inquiringly.
The corporal pointed to the body lying almost at the officer’s feet
and said, “That’s him, sir.”
The captain raised the blanket, and gazed long and silently at the
dead soldier and the gory testimonial of duty performed that lay beside
him.
 The silence was finally broken by the corporal, who said, as his
hand rose slowly in salute—
“Sir, Johnny has made good.”
And the captain replied, huskily:
“Yes, boys, too good.”
 MY FRIEND THE UNDERTAKER
I have become quite convinced that the most entertaining man in
the world is the undertaker. Now, I do not pretend to say that there is
anything original about my observations. Others have in all probability
frequently commented on his peculiarities—but I nevertheless feel that
it is my duty to give him a little attention in order to repay him, at least
in part, for the many favors received at his hands.
Let it be understood that I am no more indebted to the “post-
medical profession” than are many other physicians, but I am peculiar
in that I always like to express my gratitude to those who have
befriended me—and if there is any office that friendship can perform
for us, equal to concealing one’s mistakes and hiding one’s failures
from the gaze of a carping and cruel world, I don’t know what it is.
 “CUSTOM-MADE SORROW”

Another reason for my determination to devote a little personal

attention to the undertaker is that he is a much maligned and
misunderstood person. He is supposed to be heartless and unfeeling,
and is usually considered austere and unapproachable; some say he
has no generosity.
It shall be my pleasure, as well as my duty, to correct these
erroneous impressions regarding a noble craft that has always taken a
lively interest in its patrons—an interest that has never been
reciprocated by those most benefited by the undertaker’s labors.
 There may be captious critics who will differ with my belief that the
undertaker is the most entertaining man in the world, on the ground
that those whom he entertains never give him any encores. This is very
easily explained. There are no gallery gods at his entertainments, and
the people in the boxes are never demonstrative. They are people of
taste and discretion, and rather reserved and sedate than otherwise;—
knowing when they have had enough of a good thing, they do not
attempt to recall the artist. Unquestionably, the chief patrons of the
undertaker are people of refined susceptibilities and not given to
demonstration. Even when a clod is rung in upon the boards, they give
no sign of anything but courteous and silent attention—although the
nerves of others in the audience may be fairly set on edge. It is hardly
necessary to expatiate further on my first proposition.
The austerity of the undertaker is more apparent than real, and is
the result of association rather than innate acerbity of feeling. Even
when he is iciest and most frigid in his ways it is for the benefit of
others. By such a demeanor he enables his patrons to maintain their
composure even under circumstances the most trying and in all kinds
of weather. What though he does shroud his real feelings in an
atmosphere of chilling reserve, so long as his heart is warm and true!
Were he less calm and philosophic, he might err on the side of
sympathy and ere long some of his friends would find that they had
unconsciously been placed in a very bad box.
As to his being unapproachable, I believe that the undertaker is
misunderstood. It is true that he does not thrust himself forward in a
pretentious manner—as do some people of inferior breeding—nor has
he ever been known to meet a patron half way, but just let one of your
friends hint that you need his services and see how quickly he will put
in an appearance. And he will not pay you unnecessarily prolonged
visits either, and should you be compelled to entertain him for a time,
he is a quite inexpensive guest—he always furnishes his own board. He
is even likely to be offended if you force your hospitality upon him. One
of my friends once made this mistake, and the undertaker gave him a
great laying out, I assure you.
We mustn’t be too hard upon the undertaker, then, even though he
is a trifle stiff and conventional in his ways. His work furnishes him with
subjects for contemplation which are so serious, and of such
monumental importance, that it is small wonder he should acquire a
somewhat funereal and solemn demeanor.
I have often marveled at the equability of temper displayed by the
undertaker. I never heard of his swearing at, or using rough language
to his patrons. He has such a soothing way with him, too; whenever he
notices that his patron is inclined to get a little hotheaded he does
everything in his power to allay his warmth, knowing full well that the
man will get cooled down after a while. And his judgment is rarely at
fault—the other fellow always does cool down. You see, it’s a poor
quarrel that won’t keep—and the undertaker’s differences with his
patrons are no exception to the rule.
It has always been a source of wonderment to me, that any one
could accuse the undertaker of being heartless and unfeeling. Why, I
have known undertakers who were the acme of tender susceptibility
and delicacy of feeling. One mortuary gentleman whom I knew, had
such a sympathetic vein in his composition that he used to mix lamp
black with his embalming fluid. So considerate and thoughtful of him,
was it not? And shall we say of such men, “They are heartless and
unfeeling?” Never!
And what shall we say of the “funeral director” who had buried six
husbands for a lady, and who, knowing how sensitive she was upon the
subject, upholstered her own mortuary receptacle with white satin
marked with six delicate bands of heliotrope? Could any human being
display a finer intuitive perception of the eternal fitness of things?
No, the undertaker is not unsympathetic, and he is delicacy
personified.
Let us cultivate the undertaker—he does all he can to cultivate us.
And he is an unselfish cultivator too—he knoweth full well that what he
soweth he cannot reap. Let us cultivate him, therefore, and do our best
to repay him for his kindness to humanity. And we may possibly profit
thereby, for pleasant associations retard the decay of these mortal
frames of ours—the remorseless scythe of time blunts upon those
fortunate mortals who are favored by the kindly offices of the skillful
undertaker. To them we may not inappropriately say, “How well
preserved you are!”
How well, indeed!
It would seem unnecessary to say that the popular notion
regarding the undertaker’s lack of generosity is wrong—the fact should
be self-evident. I feel, however, that my whole duty would not be done,
did I not say that in my opinion the undertaker is one of the most
generous of men. What merchant would ever dismiss a patron without
an endeavor to secure his future patronage? None, I fancy. But not so
your undertaker—he is willing, aye, even anxious, to let somebody else
have his patrons after he has filled their first order. He is often,
apparently, very glad to get his customers off his hands—not caring a
whit if some professional rival gets their custom. And the social position
of his patron seems to make no material difference—indeed, the
“higher” the person, the more anxious the undertaker is to see the case
fall into some rival’s hands. Some might say that this is due to a
disposition to make game of the customer, but I don’t believe it.
There is one characteristic that distinguishes the undertaker from
the common herd of men with mercantile instincts; he is scrupulously
honest. He always gives full measure. This is very comforting to his
patrons—especially those who like a comfortable fit. There is not a
tailoring establishment in this blessed town that can show such a
record as my friend Blank, the undertaker. Why, he has been making
underclothing most all his life and never yet had a misfit turned back
on his hands.
I tell you what, my good friends, the undertaker is the last man in
the world with whom we have occasion to find fault.
I shall always entertain a high personal regard for some of the
members of the undertaking profession.
If there is any attribute of man especially to be admired, it is a
keen sense of humor. One of my undertaker friends—long since dead
and gone to a just reward—one Nathaniel Black, had this faculty
developed to a preternatural degree.
 There was something very impressive in the skillful manner in
which Nathaniel used to conceal his humorous impulses while in the
presence of death. His air of subdued merriment was, it is true, painful
at times,—especially to himself—but this made it all the more
impressive, as showing how some spirits can, by exercising will power,
rise superior to their immediate surroundings.
When my friend Black was away from the actual presence of a
corpse, he would unbend and show the true inward cussedness of the
born humorist—with the evident self-sacrificing purpose of making life
pleasant for his many friends. I happened to be one of the fortunate
individuals who luxuriated in his friendship, and will cheerfully bear
testimony to his devotion to the occupation of increasing the happiness
of those about him. I feel that I could do no less, without stamping
myself an ingrate.
One of the first things I did on entering practice, many years ago,
was to invest in a typic doctor’s buggy. This was done in self-defense—
my face was as smooth as a pippin, my mustache was a caricature of
the real article and, taken all in all, there was nothing about me to
inspire confidence. There was consequently but one thing to do, and
that was to look and act as professional and prosperous as possible. It
was with this end in view that I bought a buggy which looked
unmistakably professional. As I had many friends and acquaintances,
the moral effect of my turn-out was excellent. Had I been able to live
on moral effect life would have been one vast smile of peaceful, well-
fed joy and contentment, but I could not dine on any sort of effect,
least of all upon the moral variety—which is a delusion and a snare.
Observing the marked attention that was paid to my equipage—and
incidentally to the prosperous young doctor—I was well pleased; there
were times when even my stomach was forgotten. It seemed to me
that it was better to ride on an empty stomach than to walk upon a full
one, provided I attracted sufficient attention to warrant my remaining
in practice—or the hope of practice.
On some occasions the people I met appeared especially delighted
with my appearance. Being self-satisfied with the notion that I was at
last beginning to be appreciated, I made no investigations to determine
why so much more attention should be paid to me on some occasions
than upon others. Such is the blinding power of self-conceit!
The advisability of hiring a colored driver suggested itself to me as
an additional bait for popular applause. The idea so impressed me that
I consulted one of my friends, Jack T—— about it. He advised me to
wait a while, and seemed much entertained by my story of increasing
popularity.
“Well, my boy,” said he, smilingly, “you are indeed getting on in the
world. Let me see—you lecture at a medical college, are surgeon to a
free dispensary, physician to the order of Sons of the Blue Hen,
physician to the hospital of the Big Sisters of the Rich, medical
examiner for the Knights of the Empty Cupboard, and have the swellest
turn-out in town. You certainly are to be congratulated.”
“Yes, Jack,” I said, “I feel that my career is full of promise. By the
way, old man, lend me a dollar, will you? This is my day for dining—
every third day, you know. I’ll pay you back next week.”
“Certainly, doctor, I am happy to contribute to the comfort of one
whose future is so brightly illumined by—promise. But, nevertheless, I
still maintain that it is too early in the action for you to think of a
colored coachman—every third day is—”
“Well, Jack,” I interrupted, “I must be going. Much obliged for your
contribution to the free silver question. And, by the way, I’m just on my
way to a meeting of the county commissioners. I’m slated for the
County Hospital Staff.”
“Oh—h—h!” groaned Jack. “Has your ambition for wealth no
bounds?”
A day or two later I was driving at a “sent for” gait, down Michigan
Avenue, enjoying the evident admiring approbation of the people
whom I met, when I saw my friend Jack a short distance ahead of me.
He caught sight of me, stopped short and walked out to the curb,
where he awaited me with a decidedly pleased expression on his
handsome face.
 “Hello, doctor!” he cried, as I drove up to him and reined in my
horse. “You seem to have a bad case on hand.”
I winked and said, “Never mind the case. Come along with me for a
ride. You have nothing else to do at this hour of the day.”
“Don’t care if I do,” replied my friend, stepping into my buggy
forthwith.
My rig continued to attract considerable attention, much to Jack’s
edification, apparently. He finally said, “Well, doctor, your turn-out does
excite the interest of the public, doesn’t it?”
“So I have already informed you,” I replied.
“Now, see here, doctor,” said Jack, “you know that I am your friend.
As a friend it is my duty to prevent you from acquiring that fatal pride
which ever precedes a fall. I have hesitated to explain your popularity
to you, but for your own sake and to preserve my own health, I must
do so.”
“Why, what the deuce do you mean?” I asked, in astonishment.
“Look behind you, doctor.”
I looked through the rear window of my phæton, and saw, about
fifty yards behind me, a long, black, undertaker’s wagon. On the seat,
driving the sorry-looking steeds that were drawing the horribly
suggestive vehicle, was—my friend, Nathaniel Black!
My undertaking friend was by no means quietly pursuing his
gloomy way, but was gesticulating and winking suggestively to the
people on the side walk. He would first flirt his knobby thumb in my
direction with a “D’ye see him?” gesture, and then, with a “That’s what
I’m here for” wink at everybody in sight, would grin all over his ugly
face.
“A horrible coincidence!” I said faintly.
“Coincidence nothing!” howled Jack. “He’s been doing that ever
since you got your new buggy!”
And I bought wine for Nathaniel, and for Jack, and for sundry of
their friends—yea, and for all who were within the sound of their voices
in their daily walks.
But, I borrowed the wherewithal to settle from Jack. And, by and
by, when practice came, I gave my patronage to Nathaniel’s rivals.
Was the joke on me?
I wonder.

* * * * *
There are some doctors who do not understand the precise relation
that the noble profession of undertaking desires to bear to the medical
man. I freely confess that I myself was ignorant on this point until quite
recently.
In a certain neighborhood of this metropolis dwells an undertaker
of more than local renown whose reputation has been built up largely
by virtue of certain natural attributes that peculiarly fit him for the
practice of his profession;—indeed, I have never met a man more to
the manner born as regards fitness for his—shall I say, life work, or
would “death work” be more appropriate?
Mr. Weeps is one of those mournful-looking persons, who seem to
be constantly on the verge of tears. His expression is of a most
sympathetic nature, and his eyes seem ever ready to exude the saline
fluid that is so essential to the expression of sincere sorrow and regret.
It might be remarked in passing, that there are numerous theories
explanatory of the redness and humidity of those bleary orbs.
Personally, I repudiate the onion theory altogether, and incline to the
view that Mr. Weeps’ ocular peculiarities are dependent upon a
combination of catarrh and polypi obstructing the nasal ducts. The “red
eye” theory, advanced by one of his homeopathic constituents, is
unworthy of consideration—especially as my lugubrious friend has been
superintendent of a Sunday school for ten years and has served two
terms as alderman.
But, whatever, may be the true explanation, Weeps’ eyes appear to
have been especially designed for his vocation. There is no other
business—unless it be selling milk—to which those watery orbs could
possibly be so well adapted as to undertaking.
 I cannot claim to be on terms of intimacy with Mr. Weeps, and
therefore do not feel warranted in attempting a detailed description of
his many physical peculiarities—it would, however, be manifestly unfair
to that most estimable gentleman, did I not dwell upon his eyes.
In the course of my semi-occasional peregrinations into Mr. Weeps’
neighborhood, it transpired that one of my patients, with malice both
prepense and aforethought—and consumption—did leave his little lung
behind and hie him heavenward.
My kindly and well meant offices being no longer necessary, I
naturally supposed that my responsibility had ceased. Not so, however
—I was asked to recommend an undertaker. Having heard of Mr. Weeps
and his phenomenal skill, I suggested that the family consult him as to
the further management of the case. It seems that the family took my
advice and was highly gratified with the pleasant and expeditious
manner in which he performed his important functions. Indeed, the
friends of the party chiefly interested were so well pleased, that they
thanked me a few days later, for recommending a gentleman of so
much talent and such a sympathetic nature. I, of course, appreciated
the family’s gratitude, although the service rendered was quite unusual
in my experience. Some unfeeling persons might say that the large life
insurance policies left by the deceased were an element in the
gratitude the family expressed to me, but, my dear reader, the very
thought would be cruel and ignoble. Without confidence in human
nature life would be miserable for all of us—and especially for doctors.
A few days after the funeral I received a call from Mr. Weeps. There
seemed to be no end to the gratitude which was believed to be due
me. Weeps had called to express his. He appeared to be as well
pleased with the family as its members were with him.
I had never had the honor of meeting Mr. Weeps before, but his
suave and cordial manner of introducing himself put me at my ease at
once. The pleasure of acquaintance was of course mutual; it always is,
you know.
After thanking me most cordially for my courtesy in referring the
case of the late Mr. B—— to him, Mr. Weeps said:
 “Now, doctor, I shall always be glad to have you remember me
whenever you happen to be in my neighborhood.”
I looked at him suspiciously, but saw no murder in his eye; he was
as oily and plausible as ever.
“You see,” he continued, “I have never had the honor of serving
any of your patients before, and am very glad to have the opportunity
of getting at least a small portion of your business.”
The fellow seemed to be getting a little personal, but I made no
remark, and he went on with his little piece.
“I will see you again in a few days, doctor—as soon as I have been
compensated for my labors in this particular case. You, of course,
understand that I will extend to you in this case, as in all future cases,
the same courtesies I usually extend to the medical profession.”
“Ah, indeed!” I exclaimed, “and of what do those courtesies
consist?”
“Well,” he replied, blandly, “they are quite liberal, considering the
hard times—about twenty-five per cent.”
“’Tis strange—but true; for truth is always strange.
Stranger than fiction.”
Among all the undertakers I ever knew my feelings have been
seriously disturbed by but one.
The gentleman in question is fat, jolly—when off duty—and a bon
vivant of the ideal type. He is a ubiquitous sort of chap, and I find
myself stumbling over him quite frequently—in the most unexpected
places and under the most embarrassing circumstances. No social
gathering seems to be complete without him—much to my
discomfiture.
Words cannot express the embarrassment I have suffered at the
hands of my fat friend. The worst of the matter is that the fellow really
likes me—you needn’t smile, gentle reader; his fondness does not
depend upon reasons of a business nature; he likes me for myself
alone. It will be seen, therefore, that I cannot afford to say anything
which might by any possibility offend him. Aside from his affection for
me, there is another motive which impels me to avoid personalities—he
is high-strung and sensitive to a degree, and, if report speaks true, an
expert boxer. To be sure, those whom he has boxed have said nothing
about his proficiency, but where one’s own personal safety is concerned
one is justified in giving due weight even to idle rumor.
Now, it may seem strange that I should find fault with a man who
has so sincere a regard for me as my fat friend, but, you know, even
affection may be over done. When a fellow dresses up on Sunday
preparatory to calling on his best girl, and his pet dog lavishes caresses
with his muddy paws on those eleven dollar lavender trousers, patience
ceases to be a virtue—and the comparison is by no means far-fetched.
Whenever I board a crowded street car, that obese mortuary fiend
is always aboard—and at the end of the car farthest from me. He never
fails to see and recognize me, although I go through as many motions
as a professional contortionist in the vain and frantic effort to avoid
recognition.
And then you should hear him yell, “Hello, Doc! How are all the
folks?”
I assure him that I am greatly obliged for his rather suggestive
solicitude for the welfare of my family, and that the folks are all well.
He next asks me how business is, and when I answer, “First rate,”
with a tone of sorrowing reproof he informs me that it is “very quiet
with him.” As if his business is not supposed to be invariably quiet!
The party sitting next me leaves the car; the undertaker pushes
through the crowd and with a “How d’ye do, old man?” and an
ostentatious pump-handle shake of my hand that almost costs me
several fingers, takes the vacant seat beside me.
And now comes a conversation—his part of which is audible to
everybody on the car—relative to the “last case we had together.” The
brute even mentions the party’s name, which, if it happens to be a well
known one, excites the rapt attention of everybody within earshot.
He next proceeds to ask me to dine with him “to-morrow” and
comments on the “elegant time we had together last week.”
 Finally arriving at his destination, my demon bids me an
affectionate good night and starts for the farther door of the car. I
breathe a sigh of relief—but too soon. Having reached the platform he
re-opens the door and bellows out—
“By the way, Doc! do you think old man Blank is going to pull
through? Old friend of mine, you know—I’ll probably be in on the case
when the thing’s over.”

* * * * *
I went to the opera the other night hoping—aye, determined to
enjoy myself, and feeling that I was entitled to a little enjoyment, for I
had had very little opera in my daily routine for some months. My wife
was looking very well, and my mirror gave positive proof that my new
dress suit was an unexceptionable fit. All things considered I had every
reason to feel well satisfied with myself and the world at large.
But how vain are human hopes. We were hardly comfortably
seated, before I saw in the box directly opposite mine—the fat
undertaker who haunted my dreams!
I endeavored to avoid recognition, but it was no use. He saw me,
and gesticulated so wildly to attract my attention that I was perforce
obliged to respond in self-defense. The house being crowded, this little
episode attracted much attention—especially on the part of numerous
friends of the undertaker and myself, who, as luck would have it,
happened to be present. These people smiled broadly; some even went
so far as to wink significantly at each other.
The fat undertaker is one of those men who succeed in attracting
attention at all times and under all circumstances. On this occasion he
shone with effulgent brilliancy. He enjoyed the play—there was no
doubt about that—and proposed to make me enjoy it also. Whenever
the performance especially pleased him, he applauded vociferously,
quivering all over like a lump of calf’s-foot jelly and gesticulating
furiously in my direction. Having succeeded in attracting my attention,
he would jerk his fat thumb in the direction of the artist who was
favored with his approbation and nod emphatically at me.
 The audience enjoyed my friend’s enthusiasm and seemed quite
anxious to know how I was enjoying it. I couldn’t enlighten it as
intelligently as could have been wished, so I did the next best thing—I
went out between acts to see a man—and found him so highly
interesting that I forgot to go back. Suddenly remembering that my
wife was still in the box, I sent an usher to inform her that I wasn’t
feeling well and was waiting for her at the door. Being a wise woman,
she divined the cause of my indisposition and soon joined me. She
didn’t feel quite comfortable herself, and was glad to escape from—the
opera.
I have forsworn society. I have bought an automobile, and if ever I
go to the theater again—may the fat undertaker seize me!
 A GRIM MEMENTO
My friend, Dr. Fairweather, was engaged when I called, but it so
happened that I was in no hurry and could conveniently wait. I have
since been glad that things happened as they did; had I not been
compelled to wait and amuse myself as best I could, I probably should
not have heard what to me was a most interesting story. The colored
attendant who took my card and announced me to the doctor, returned
and said:
“De doctah is right busy just now, suh. He says fo’ you alls to be
sho to wait, cayse he wants to see you mos’ pow’ful. I reckon you alls
better wait in dis yeh room, suh. De doctah says dat you must mek
yo’sef to home.”
The servant ushered me into a small apartment, evidently the
doctor’s “den,” and handed me the morning paper, which I proceeded
to hungrily devour. The paper was the first I had seen in a month—I
was just returning from my summer outing trip, and had stopped off en
route at P. to see my old friend Fairweather.
The doctor was detained for some time, and having finished
reading my paper, I proceeded to inspect the curios with which the
room was garnished. I had examined with great interest the fine
collection of odd Indian relics and the queer weapons from the four
quarters of the earth, and was returning to my seat by the window
when a grinning human skull upon the mantel caught my eye.
It so happens that the human skull is of especial interest to me
because of a certain hobby that I enjoy riding at odd moments. I am
something of an enthusiast in the subjects of criminology and the
relation of the contour and development of the skull to mental and
moral qualities. It was with some curiosity therefore, that I picked up
the skull and proceeded to critically examine it. I found it well worthy
of study and regretted that I could give it only cursory attention.
The dwarfed frontal development; the great length of the face; the
enormously large, protruding jaw; the huge orbits, with the great
projecting bony prominences—the frontal bosses—above them; the
general lightness of the bones; the unsymmetrical conformation of the
face and the twisted and undeveloped dome of the skull presented a
picture that is very familiar to the student of criminal anthropology.
So absorbed was I in the contemplation of the gruesome relic I
held in my hands, that I was not conscious of the entrance of Dr.
Fairweather until he spoke.
“Hello, old man!—riding your hobby as usual, I see. No time for
your friends, I suppose.”
I grasped the doctor’s welcoming hand and replied, “Well, as you
were busy, I had to kill time as best I might with this gentleman. He is
a poor conversationist, hence I was compelled to utilize him in any way
that I could. I must admit that I have found him very interesting—
inversely to his loquacity, in fact.”
“Ah, indeed; and what do you make of him?”
“Looking for a chance to guy me, eh?” I replied. “Really, old fellow,
time does not mellow you a bit. Well, guy away. I am not prepared to
give you a critical dissertation on this particular skull. This much I will
say, however—it has more of the ear marks of the degenerate than any
I have seen for some time. The party who originally owned the skull
should have been a desperado, or a hold-up man, although he may
have passed the hat in church for aught I know—which may be a
distinction without a difference.”
Dr. Fairweather laughed heartily. “Well, I don’t know but that I
ought to resent your criticisms of the skull. I can forgive your slam at
the church, but it is my duty to inform you that the gentleman of whom
that skull is a relic was a very particular friend of mine.”
“Oh, then you are keeping the skull as a memento of your friend.
There’s no accounting for tastes, you know,” I said, watching the doctor
suspiciously out of the corner of my eye and recalling that he had as
strong a predilection for practical jokes as I had for skulls.
“Yes, that is precisely it,” replied the doctor seriously. “I have two
mementos of my dead friend; one—post mortem—you hold in your
hand; the other—ante mortem—is here,” and he threw back from his
forehead the long, wavy, dark hair in which threads of silver were
beginning to show and pointed to a long, livid, jagged scar that
traversed his left temple.
I looked at the doctor in surprise. Although I had known him for
many years, I had never noticed his disfigurement.
“I don’t think I ever told you the story, did I?” continued the doctor.
I replied in the negative, assuring my friend that nothing could
please me better than to hear him tell it.
“Well, I’m through with patients for to-day, and if you will do me
the honor of dining with me at the club, I shall be most happy to relate
it to you.”

* * * * *
“You will remember that I was formerly engaged in general practice
in the little town of R—— in Northern Minnesota. My field was an
arduous one and I could not select my patients—on the contrary, I was
mighty glad when they condescended to select me. It’s quite different
now; I can be ‘in’ or ‘out,’ as I may elect, when patients ring my bell.
Better than all, I can ask an old friend to dine with me at the club.
There is a club, thank heaven, and there is also the wherewithal
nowadays.”
“I was fortunate enough, early in my practice, to receive an
appointment as the local surgeon of the St. Paul road for our little
town.
“The position was a sinecure in a way, but I captured an occasional
accident case that paid something, and the position of surgeon to the
railroad gave me a certain amount of prestige among the country folk
around. Then too, I had an annual pass over the road, and that helped
some. It would have helped more if I had had time to ride and money
for meals on the dining cars. Small though my railroad practice was,
however, I had occasion to thank the Lord that I was a railroad surgeon
and that one of my patients had a good memory, before I was done
with the job.
“The winter of ’80 and ’81 was a hard one, and practice was not a
simple, lightsome game. It seemed to me that when I had important
work to do, my patient was always a long way off in some out of the
way farm house, or at a crossing station where the trains ran every
other week.
“The day before Christmas I received a call to attend a gunshot
injury, about fifty miles from my home. The weather was abominable,
being cold and stormy enough to make the hungriest and most
ambitious young surgeon hesitate to face it. They get the blizzards
from that devilish Medicine Hat at first hand up there, you, know—the
raw stuff in the way of weather. But needs must when patients called,
and as there was nothing to do but face the music I took the first and
only available train for X——.
“My patient lived some miles away from the little hen coop of a
station, the several stores and half a dozen houses that constituted the
little town. A couple of young country yokels, eighteen or twenty years
of age, met me at the train with a buck-board. There was just snow
enough drifting to make the roads almost impassable here and there,
but not enough for sleighing, so that the trip was not the pleasantest I
had ever experienced.
“It was supper time before I had finished with the wounded man,
and I was as hungry as a Sioux Indian on a long trail in the Bad Lands.
I was very glad to participate in the humble but abundant meal.
“Supper over, I was informed that there was just time to catch the
south bound train—then to the buckboard and miserable roads again;
the gawky country boys who had met me at the train still doing the
honors. When we arrived at the station, what was my disgust to learn
that my train was fully two hours late.
 “The prospect of spending the entire evening at a little tumble
down way station waiting for a belated train was too uninviting for
adequate description. As the storm was increasing every moment and
the fierce wind was piling up the snow drifts higher and higher across
the railroad tracks, there was no certainty that the expected train
would come at all. My prospects for getting home that night were
certainly dubious—locomotives stalled in snow drifts were sufficiently
familiar to me to make me decidedly uneasy.
“My friends, the country boys, seeing my predicament, offered to
stay with me until the train came, and although I protested feebly
against their discommoding themselves to such an extent, I inwardly
rejoiced when they showed their sincerity by insisting on remaining.
Alas! had I but known the horrible thing that was soon to happen, I
should have returned to their home with them rather than to have
allowed the poor fellows to indulge their whole-souled notions of
courtesy and hospitality.
“A cheery fire was burning in the stuffy little drum stove in the
center of the common waiting room, and being pretty well chilled after
our long, weary ride, I huddled up as close to it as I could without
igniting my clothing. The two young farmers meanwhile inaugurated a
playful wrestling bout which answered well in lieu of the fire in starting
up their circulation.
“In one corner of the room was a curtained recess, containing the
station master’s bed, to which the owner had apparently retired early,
as evidenced by the brassy, nasally whistling snores which from time to
time rent the air of the stuffy apartment, making the environment
rather cheerful and homelike.
“I had been warming myself before the fire for fully an hour—the
country lads had grown tired of their rough play and had seated
themselves on a rough bench in the corner of the room, where they
were nodding and occasionally snoring an intermittent, shrill falsetto
accompaniment to the station master’s ruder and less musical bass. I
had just discovered that I myself was growing sleepy and was about to
seat myself with my back to the wall, yield to the pressure of fatigue
and join the sleeping chorus when I was brought back to earth in a
very unceremonious fashion.
“‘Hands up, there!’
“I turned slowly and gazed sleepily in the direction of the voice.
The two country youths awoke with a start and sat staring, more
stupidly than I if possible, in the same direction.
“‘Hands up, there, and be d—d quick about it!’
“I began to comprehend, and my hands, impelled by a will which
for the time being was more masterly than my own, raised themselves,
almost automatically, straight up in the air in the most orthodox fashion
known to the annals of highway robbery. The country boys rose slowly
to their feet and mechanically followed suit.
“The sleep-fog and the psychic confusion of surprise gradually
cleared away, and I saw the tableau clearly—so clearly that, ‘an’ I
should live a thousand years I’d not forget it’.
“Standing in the open door of the little station were two tough
looking men. The taller of the two, the owner of the voice that had so
unmusically and ruthlessly aroused us, was a man considerably over six
feet in height, raw-boned, broad-shouldered, big-hatted, and roughly
dressed, with a coarse red beard that evidently was much the worse for
wear in regions where barbers are a scarce commodity. His eyes were
of that cold steely grey color which makes one think twice before
running counter to the wishes of the man to whom they belong.
“The ruffian held in either hand a cow boy’s pet, a long barreled
Colt’s 45—the kind our fathers loved; the kind that has made American
history, and especially the ‘bad men’ who adorn its pages.
“Say, old man, did you ever have a healthy, well favored, full
stomached Colt’s 45 pointed at you in real earnest? Well, if you haven’t
you can’t appreciate how I felt. I didn’t have to see that the hammers
of those particular guns were raised to the proper angle and ready for
business; it was also entirely unnecessary to waste any valuable time in
speculating as to whether they were loaded or not. I actually felt that
those guns were at full cock and loaded to the muzzle—‘chock a block’.
The muzzles of the weapons were more capacious than I had believed
it possible for pistols to be, and deep down in each of their yawning
throats I fancied I could see a huge conical ball, ready for flight in my
direction. It was as though I were tied hand and foot and laid upon the
track at the mouth of a railroad tunnel from which an express train was
thundering down upon me at the rate of a mile a minute.
“Not knowing anything of the desperado’s power of self-control my
own self-possession was hard to maintain—I imagined that his fingers
were a little trembly, as though he were tempted to pull the trigger and
have done with it, but was struggling with himself in the effort to
restrain the savage impulse. I mentally resolved that I would neither do
nor say anything which should disturb his poise or ruffle his equanimity.
“Ugh! I could actually hear the rush of the displaced air and
impelling gases as the bullets started from their hiding places in the
breeches of those mighty pistols and, swifter than lightning, flew
toward me. I even fancied I could feel the impact of the cruel missiles
with my flesh, and the moist warmth of the escaping blood as they rent
my skin and muscles.
“Our hands being elevated to an angle which was satisfactory to
the spokesman of the bandits, he turned to his companion and said:
“‘Go through ’em, Bob, and hustle it up. The train’ll be here before
we can say Jack Robinson. Take that feller with the whiskers an’
spectacles first. Easy, now, gents; take your medicine, and don’t you
bat an eye—if you don’t want a hole plugged through ye big enough
for a cat to crawl into without bloodyin’ her whiskers.’
“The fellow who was officiating as lieutenant for the gentleman
with the artillery was a tough-looking proposition for his inches, but
such a little runt that even the moral suasion of the 45’s did not blunt
the edge of my humiliation when he proceeded to ‘go through’ me.
“But the ignominy and shame of my embarrassing position had not
yet reached the climax. I was raging inwardly and wishing that I could
have a fair field and no favor with either or both of the bandits—I used
to be pretty handy myself, you know—but I did not lose my self-control
during the dextrous and speedy search of my person. A pair of
walloping big guns is a great inhibitor of the warlike spirit.
“I had not collected my fee in the gunshot case, hence the process
of ‘going through’ me was not very productive of spoils. My pockets
were as empty of cash as those of a lamb after a busy day on ‘Change.
A Waterbury watch, about two dollars in small change, a not very
elaborate set of surgical instruments, a jack-knife, a bunch of keys, my
wife’s photograph, and an annual pass on the St. Paul road constituted
my available assets.
“The robber was simply furious when he took account of stock.
Dashing the stuff upon the floor he ripped out:
“‘D—n you for a no account cuss, anyhow! I’ll just give you one for
luck.’
“With this the ruffian suddenly caught me by the shoulders and,
wheeling me to the right about, kicked me full upon the pride center!
What little weight the fellow had was in that kick and I recollect that
the hurt to my anatomy and the still greater injury to my self-respect
was not unmingled with surprise. I never before knew how hard such a
little chap could kick. It was like a blow from a hydraulic ram. It jarred
me so that a plate with several false upper teeth was dislodged from
my mouth, and fell upon the floor.
“The kick the bandit had given me was alone sufficient to impel me
to do murder—my breed does not placidly submit to blows—but the
betrayal of a secret which I had guarded carefully, even from my wife,
was the last straw in my burden of humiliation. I could take a bite of
crow, but I could not bolt him, beak, claws, feathers and all. So
enraged was I that I completely forgot the man behind the guns.
“In the rear of the stove was a shelf upon which stood numerous
things essential to even a bachelor’s housekeeping. Among these
various properties a brace of old fashioned flat irons caught my eye. I
rushed to the shelf, grabbed an iron and hurled it at my enemy’s head,
just missing him by a hair’s breadth.
“Whether because he was taken by surprise or not, I do not know,
but the bandit made no attempt to draw a weapon. He stood with
mouth agape, stupidly gazing at me until, having missed my aim with
the iron, I rushed at him like an infuriated bull; he then aroused himself
to the emergency and clinched for safety, and we went to the floor
together, the highwayman underneath. As I went down I caught a
glimpse of the station agent with a six shooter in his hand, peering
cautiously out between the curtains of the partition behind which he
had been sleeping, apparently seeking an opportunity for a pot shot.
“With the downfall of the nearer robber the country boys regained
their power of motion—and alas! forgot those awful guns and rushed
awkwardly to my assistance.
“The desperado with the guns came into action simultaneously with
the farmer lads. There were two shots, so close together that there
seemed to be but one report! The two unfortunate youths fell dead
across us two who were struggling upon the floor, their blood spouting
over me in hot gushes. They fell with their full weight crushing me, so
inertly that I was compelled to heave them off with my shoulders and
elbows.
“The murder of those poor boys brought me to my senses, and
then came an acute realization of the imminence of my own danger—I
well knew at whom the next shot would be fired. With the realization of
my danger my furious anger vanished; I regained my usual presence of
mind and my thinking apparatus began to work again.
“Putting in practice a trick well known on the wrestling mat, I threw
one arm around the neck of my foe, choking him into absolute
helplessness. With the other arm I rolled him over like a trussed
Christmas turkey, so that his body was between me and the danger of
a salute from the 45’s. As I turned him over a shot rang out. The ball
narrowly escaped putting an end to the battle. It was a lucky shot for
me in more ways than one—it not only missed me, but struck the
stove, ricocheted and smashed the hanging-lamp with which the room
was dimly lighted. There was now no light save from the open door of
the stove.
“The man with the guns, still bent upon assisting his friend and
incidentally exterminating me, at once came to close quarters. Standing
over our struggling forms, he endeavored to put a shot where it would
do his cause the most good. He shot twice, but fired wide, so great
was his fear of hitting his confederate.
“Never was my mind or muscle more active. I thought of the
station master and his six shooter. ‘My God! Will he never fire?’ I
exclaimed mentally. Meanwhile I twisted my helpless foe about like a
bundle of rags. From side to side I rolled him—always with a view to
keeping his body between me and danger. Suddenly there was a
blinding flash, fairly in my face—and then came oblivion!
“How long I lay insensible I have no means of knowing. When I
recovered consciousness I found myself lying where I had fallen when I
went to the floor with the highwayman. Beside me, so near that I could
touch them with my hand, lay the dead bodies of my late companions.
I could just discern their rigid outlines in the dim light from the stove.
“As my senses grew more acute I became aware of an intense
burning pain in the left side of my head, and felt a stream of warm fluid
which I at once recognized as blood, trickling freely down my face. I
touched the painful spot with my fingers, and knew at once what had
happened—I had been shot through the temple! The serious nature of
the injury would have suggested itself to the merest tyro. You may
imagine how I felt, knowing as you do the extensive experience I had
had with gunshot wounds. There did not seem to be one chance in a
hundred that the ball had failed to penetrate my brain. Realizing this, I
was only too well aware of the probably desperate character of my
wound.
“I tried to rise, and after several painful efforts succeeded in raising
myself on my elbow, only immediately to fall helplessly back to the
floor again. As I lay there half dazed, and fearfully exhausted from the
shock and loss of blood, I realized in a hazy sort of way that there was
nothing to do but await the coming of assistance.
“I recalled in a confused fashion the vision of the station master
and his gun, and wondered what had become of him and why he had
not fired at the bandits during the fight. That he had fled from the
scene of battle did not occur to me. It subsequently transpired,
however, that the gallant fellow was too frightened to fire at the
desperadoes and that, after several attempts to muster up courage
enough to pull the trigger on them, he had dropped his weapon and
fled incontinently through a rear window.
“I finally became apathetic and indifferent as to my fate—an
experience by no means unusual to persons who have suffered from
shock and great loss of blood—and lapsed into almost complete
unconsciousness.
“How long I lay there upon the floor in my half dead condition is a
matter for conjecture. I was finally aroused to full consciousness by the
sound of voices and the noise of many feet at the door of the station. I
heard some one say:
“‘I don’t think they both got away, boys. I only seen one feller run.
Perhaps one o’ them men they was holdin’ up got one of ’em; there
was a hull lot o’ shootin’ goin’ on.’
“‘We’d better go kind o’ careful, then,’ said another. ‘If there’s any
of ’em in there, they may have just one kick left in ’em.’
“In my confused state of mind the significance of what I heard was
entirely lost upon me. I knew only that help was at hand and felt that I
must get to it.
“Struggling to my feet by a mighty effort I tottered to the door
through which the feeble rays of a lantern in the hands of one of the
crowd were gleaming. Reaching the door, I stumbled over the threshold
and fairly fell into the arms of several men who were apparently too
startled to follow the example of the rest of the crowd, which had
scattered the instant my form appeared in the doorway.
“I was immediately thrown to the ground and pinned there by a big
strapping fellow, who in his excitement very nearly finished the bandit’s
work by squeezing what little breath I had remaining completely out of
me.
“‘I’ve got him, boys!’ cried the man, who I afterward learned was
the station master. The crowd recovered its nerve, returned to action
and proceeded to inspect the capture, apparently losing all interest in
further investigation of conditions inside the station.
 “In the crowd were several women, who, with the curiosity and
enterprise characteristic of the “weaker” sex in mobs, succeeded in
pushing themselves in front of the men. As the man with the lantern
turned the light full upon me, there was a cry from one of the women.
“‘That’s him, that’s the big robber! I seen him through the winder
of our house when they passed by. I’d know him anywhere!’
“I began to realize that I was in danger and, fully aroused,
endeavored to make myself heard. My efforts were futile, however, and
I merely received a choking for my pains.
“‘Let’s string him up, boys; it’ll save the county a lot of expense!’
shouted some one.
“‘Hang him! Hang him!’ chorused the crowd.
“‘Somebody get a rope!’ cried the man who was kneeling on my
chest.
“‘Take him to a telegraph pole!’ cried another.
“I was half dragged, half carried to the nearest telegraph pole and
assisted to my feet beneath it. A rope was speedily found and tied
about my neck. A boy was ordered to climb the pole with the other end
of the rope and pass it over the arm that supports the wires.
 “A ROPE WAS SPEEDILY FOUND AND TIED ABOUT MY NECK”

“My situation would not have been so bad if I had lost the power of
thinking and with it the capacity for mental suffering. My mind was
never so acute as at that moment but, with the treatment the bandits
had given me and the mauling and choking I had since received at the
hands of that ignorant mob, I had absolutely lost my power of speech.
But think!—My God! man, of what did I not think, as I stood there in
the shadow of death at the hands of a lot of ignorant farmers and
railroad hands who were about to offer me up on the altar of their own
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com