ANIMADVERSIONES

Metamorphosis of a Ferocious Pharaoh

The account of the plagues opens with a fantastic claim: YHWH has given Moses (as) a God for Pharaoh and Aaron is his prophet (Exod 7,1). Ps account of the ensuing contest is a theomachy mounting an extremely harsh onslaught against Egypt in sharp contrast with the Priestly writers overall non-violent stance (1). YHWH hardens Pharaohs heart and Pharaoh increases oppression. Aarons rod is thrown at Pharaohs face (ynpl) (2), the rod changes into a dragon-gobbling dragon (ynt Exod 7,8-12), a feat that only hardens the kings heart (Exod 7,13). Most translators have resisted the straightforward rendering of tannin as dragon (3) because dictionaries insist that in Biblical Hebrew tannin also means serpent or crocodile in spite of the fact that in cognate languages and in modern Arabic tannin only refers to a fabulous sea-monster, dragon(4). The meaning serpent is adduced from Deut 32,33 and Ps 91,13 where tannin is used in parallel with the earthly peten horned viper, although the peten itself is not entirely devoid of mythological connotations in cognate languages (5). But the main cluster of support for serpent is Exod 7,9.10.12 discussed below. The meaning crocodile is inferred from Ezek 29,3; 32,2. However, these naturalistic translations greatly weaken the potential of the text of Exodus and Ezekiel. 1. No Mundane Crocodile in Ezekiel Ezek 29,3-5; 32,2-6 envision Pharaoh as a huge reptile wallowing in the Nile (6). Commentators on these passages regularly embark on tame-thetannim missions. Daniel Block affirms that Ezekiels tannin has been thoroughly historicized, being compared with the king of Egypt although he admits in a footnote that it is still tempting to see here an allusion to the
(1) A. DE PURY, Der priesterschriftliche Umgang mit der Jakobsgeschichte, Schriftauslegung in der Schrift (Hrsg. R.G. KRATZ T. KRGER K. SCHMID) (Berlin 2000) 39, uses the negative depiction of Pharaoh to date Pg just before Cambyses conquest of Egypt. (2) Rather than thrown down in front of Pharaoh as in 4,3. (3) A quick look at about 70 European translations provided by BibleWorks 5 reveals that only a few render tannin as a mythological figure: Bblia Catalana Interconfessional, Cesky Ekumeniky Preklad, Leidse Vertaling, NVB San Paulo Edizione, Youngs Literal Translation (monster). (4) The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (eds. M.E.J. RICHARDSON et al.) (Leiden 1999) IV 1764-1765. (5) See Akk. bamu and Ugaritic btn put in parallel with tannin as in Deut 32,33 and Ps 91,13 and rendered Indeed I muzzled Tannin, I silenced him; I smote the windy serpent: M. DAHOOD, Psalms 51-100 (AB; Garden City, NY 1968) 333; Sir 39,30. (6) W.H.C. PROPP, Exodus 118 (AB; New York 1998) 324.

Metamorphosis of a Ferocious Pharaoh

233

Egyptian crocodile god Sobek (7). Because Ezek 29,3-5 link the fate of the Niles fish with Pharaohs, Block insists that the tannim refers concretely to a marine creature, in this instance a crocodile (8). In this case, one should note that Crocodilus nilotus is not known to share with Crocodilus porosus the habit of swimming out to sea (9). In the same demythologising vein, Moshe Greenberg appeals to Exodus 7 to support the view that although the Ugaritic and Hebrew tannim is a mythical primeval sea monster (Isa 51:9; Job 7,12) (10), Ezekiels tannim also denotes a mundane creature found in Egypt. Greenberg thus accuses John Day of ignoring the mundane tnyn of priestly literature, although a few lines below Greenberg admits to be sure, in ch. 32 Ezekiel does draw on a richer mythical vocabulary, including terms associated with the mythical tnyn (11). So why insist that the great tannim (lwdgh ynth) of Ezek 29 is also a mere crocodile (12)? In fact, there is no need to wait until chapter 32 to find mythological imagery. In Ezek 29, the tannim is fished out of his Nile with all the fishes of the river stuck to his scales, a miraculous catch indeed. Instead of eating the daring fisherman and walking back to the Nile, Ezekiels tannim rots away in the desert. And Greenberg, who has just insisted that Ezekiels tannim is a mundane crocodile, now accuses Ezekiel of inconsistency: Ezekiel may not have been familiar with the amphibious nature of the crocodile (13)! No, Ezekiels understanding of the tannim is thoroughly mythological (14) and his tannim cannot be reduced to a mere crocodile, however fierce crocodiles may be. Now the second question is whether the tannin of Exodus 7 is a mere snake. 2. Exodus 7: Dragons and Snakes, but Mythical Ones References to tannin in Exod 7,1-13 are attributed to Pg (15); while the next section (Exod 7,14-18) belongs to another literary stratum. There is no need here to decide to whom belongs the non-P material (16). What matters is to note that verse 15 refers to Aarons rod as the rod that was turned into a snake (jn) while in verses 8-12 P consistently mentions tannin. Does this avoidance of the term tannin reflect a tame-the-dragon process, an attempt at demythologizing Ps text? Rather than turning Ps dragon into a mundane adder, verses 14-18 take Ps mythological imagery to surprising lengths:
(7) D.I. BLOCK, The Book of Ezekiel (Grand Rapids Cambridge 1998) 137 and n. 44; quoting E. BROVARSKI, Sobek, L V, 999-1000. (8) BLOCK, Ezekiel, 137. (9) Encyclopaedia Britannica. Macropaedia (Chicago 1992) XXVI, 721. (10) L.I.J. STADELMANN, The Hebrew Conception of the World (AnBib 39; Rome 1970) 20-27; quoted by J.I. DURHAM, Exodus (WBC, 3; Waco 1987) 91; and PROPP, Exodus, 322. (11) M. GREENBERG, Ezekiel 2137 (AB 22A; New York 1997) 601-602. (12) BLOCK, Ezekiel, 137. (13) GREENBERG, Ezekiel, 603. (14) Pace GREENBERG, Ezekiel, 601. (15) According to N. LOHFINK, Theology of the Pentateuch (Edinburgh 1994) 145 n. 29, and PROPP, Exodus, 262, 286, only Exod 7,1-13.19.20*.21b.22 belong to Pg. (16) See discussion by PROPP, Exodus, 310-317.

234

Ph. Guillaume
rayh tpAl[ wtarql tbxnw hmymh axy hnh rqbb h[rpAla l dyb jqt jnl phnAra hfmhw

Go to Pharaoh in the morning, behold he is coming out to the water, stand by to meet him at the river bank, and the staff that was turned into a snake take in your hand (Exod 7,15).
YHWH orders Moses to intercept Pharaoh in the morning as he is going to the water. Why in the morning and why to the waters? Is Pharaoh going for his morning bath? Or are these hints at theomachy rather than at hygiene? In Egypt, the Repulsing of the Dragon motif is found in various temple and private rituals and is included in Coffin texts where the enemy dragon is identified as Sobek the crocodile god or as Apophis the snake god threatening to devour the solar boat (17). Seths standard posture is thus at the prow of the solar bark, lancing a huge reptile (18). As a god for Pharaoh (Exod 7,1), Moses mimics Baal/Seth striking the Apophis serpent, rod in hand ready to mete out YHWHs punishment on Egypt (19). The dragon is obviously most dangerous during the night or as evening draws close (v. 5), as the sun is waning. Conversely, morning is Ras moment of mounting glory, when the dragon has to lie low (Ps 104,22), waiting for more propitious times to attack the divine vessel. A pharaoh hurrying to the waters in the morning is thus a transmutation of the king into the enemy dragon. Egyptian theology had already worked out a Pharaoh-friendly link between Pharaoh and the Dragon, with the Sobek-Re liaison whereby Sobek assumed solar features (20). In Exod 7, the process is simply reversed and Pharaoh, the son of Ra in Egyptian royal ideology (21), turns into Ras main enemy. From a Hebraic vantage point, pharaohs and other heads of empire do behave like dragons, gobbling up people and kingdoms (22). Rather than demythologizing Ps dragon, Exod 7,14-18 is an exact reflex

(17) ANET, 11-12; and Context of Scripture (ed. W.W. HALLO) (Leiden 1997) I, 21. B.F. BATTO, Slaying The Dragon. Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition (Westminster 1992); J.K. HOFFMEIER, The Arm of God versus the Arm of Pharaoh in the Exodus Narratives, Bib 67 (1986) 378-387. Sobek is associated with the Nile and the river banks: D.M. DOXEY, Sobek, Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (ed. D.B. REDFORD) (Oxford 2001) III, 300. (18) ANEP, 669; O. KEEL, The Symbolism of the Biblical World (London 1978) 54-55, 224. (19) O. KEEL Chr. UEHLINGER, Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God (Minneapolis 1998) 76-79; O. KEEL S. SCHROER, Schoepfung (Freiburg Gttingen 2002) 128-130; H. BRUNNER, Seth und Apophis Gegengtter im gyptischen Pantheon?, Das hrende Herz. Kleine Schriften zur Religions- und Geistesgeschichte gyptens (Hrsg. W. RLLIG H. BRUNNER) (OBO 80; Freiburg Gttingen 1983/1988) 121-129. (20) Sobek, the crocodile deity of Crocodilopolis in the Faiyum, became the god of the Pharaohs of the Twelfth Dynasty (XXth XVIIIth centuries) and then experienced a real ascendancy in the Eighteenth Dynasty (XVIth XIVth centuries): S. MORENZ, Egyptian Religion (London 1973) 140-141; V. IONS, Egyptian Mythology (Feltham 1968) 93. (21) J. ASSMANN, Egyptian Solar Religion in the New Kingdom. Re, Amun and the Crisis of Polytheism (London 1995). Letter to Zalaia from Kumidi: the king is well like the sun in heaven, Context of Scripture, III, 243. Most of the Amarna letters address Pharaoh as to the king, my Lord, my Sun: W.L. MORAN, The Amarna Letters (Baltimore London 1992). (22) Nebuchadrezzar in Jer 51,34 and the Babylonians in Lam 2,19. Less directly: the Assyrians (Isa 28,4; 49,19; Hos 8,7); David and Joab (2 Sam 20,19).

Metamorphosis of a Ferocious Pharaoh

235

of Ezek 29,3-5; 32,2-6 (23) that envisions Pharaoh as a huge mythical reptile wallowing in the river (24). The image is not taken any further because the editors are bound to follow Ps narrative which at this point still requires a human pharaoh. So the first strike of the magical rod is not aimed at the king but at the waters that turn into blood (Exod 7,17-23). That editors inserted into Ps narrative a depiction of Pharaoh that draws on Ezekielian imagery confirms Risa Kohns claim that although traditional scholarship generally highlights Ezekiels affinity to P, it is truly the redactor of the Torah (R) he most resembles (25). The dragonization of Pharaoh in Exod 7,15 is one more clue to the editing of P by scribes well-versed in Ezekiel or by an Ezekielan school that was involved in editing the Torah. 3. Ben Sira and the Stinking Tannin
BCE,

If modern Bible translators do not like dragons, in the second century Jesus Ben Sira was not embarrassed by mythical dragons. On the contrary, only a mythical reading makes sense of a cryptic verse in the Hebrew of Sira 3,24 (Greek and English = 3,26) (26):
hb ghny twbwf bhwaw wtyrja abt/dbk bl Hardened heart, his hind part will stink and he who loves goodnesses will be lead away by them.

This verse clearly alludes to Exodus 7, packing into eight words two expressions found in Exod 7: dbk bl in the negative sense as in Exod 710 and ab to stink (Exod 7,18.21). Pharaoh is dubbed as hardened heart that will end up badly due to an inordinate love of goodness, which appears paradoxical, unless goodness here is ironical. The nature of this goodness is not given, but it can be nothing else than the water by which Pharaoh will perish when pursuing the Israelites! Ben Sira has thus seen that Pharaohs going to the water is not motivated by hygienic reasons but by an inordinate love of Nile waters because, as Ezekiel 29 explains, Pharaoh considers the Nile as his own and loves to wallow in it. Because he wrote in Egypt and owed his safety to a Ptolemaic Pharaoh (27), Ben Sira was indeed careful in his depiction of the Exodus Pharaoh, although he did not resist cracking this rude joke by alluding to the kings fate and to his anatomical end part. Ben Siras grandson who came to Egypt to translate the text into Greek
(23) PROPP, Exodus, 310. (24) PROPP, Exodus, 324; R.L. KOHN, A Prophet like Moses? Rethinking Ezekiels Relationship to the Torah, ZAW 114 (2, 2002) 236-254 (236). (25) KOHN, Prophet, 251. See also R.L. KOHN, A New Heart and a New Soul. Ezekiel, the Exile and the Torah (JSOTSS 358; Sheffield 2002); and already J.D. LEVENSON, Theology of the Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 4048 (HSM 10; Missoula 1976); J.L. SKA, La sortie dEgypte (Ex 714) dans le rcit sacerdotal (Pg) et la tradition prophtique, Bib 60 (1979) 203-215; H. MCKEATING, Ezekiel the Prophet Like Moses?, JSOT 61 (1994) 97-100; B. GOSSE, Le livre dEzchiel et Ex 6,2-8 dans le cadre du Pentateuque, BN 104 (2000) 20-25. (26) I. LVY, The Hebrew Text of the Wisdom of Ecclesiasticus (Leiden 1969) 2, considers this verse as unintelligible. (27) P. MCKECHNIE, The Career of Joshua Ben Sira, JThS 51 (2000) 1-26.

236

Ph. Guillaume

demurred at his grandfathers monstrosity and improved the verse to make it more amenable to the Greek-speaking court of Alexandria:
Kardiva sklhra; kakwqhvsetai ejp ejscavtwn kai; oJ ajgapw'n kivndunon ejn aujtw/' ajpolei'tai

A stubborn mind will fare badly at the end, and whoever loves danger will perish in it. The Greek moves away from the Hebrew anatomical description of the beastly Pharaoh by choosing the temporal sense of tyrja and dropping completely the idea of stench conveyed by ab. The Greek also transforms twbwf into kivnduno" danger, war or hazardous enterprise to give the verse a moral bent. The pun is turned into a proverb. However, the critical turn of the whole verse is kept, in contrast to the ambiguous translation offered by Skehan and Di Lella: and he who loves what is good will be brought along by it(28). The beloved goodness here is ironic and refers to Pharaohs love for wallowing in the Nile. To conclude, neither Exodus, nor Ezekiel present the tannin as a mundane reptile. Although they call the tannin snake, the editors of Pg develop a full-scale mythological narrative that Entmythologisierende snakes and bathing pharaohs water down beyond recovery. Near East School of Theology PO Box 13-5780 Chouran Beirut
SUMMARY The common translation of the tannin of Exodus 7 as a mere snake misses the powerful mythological overtones of the whole passage. The editors of Pg are drawing on imagery from Ezekiel to mythologize Moses morning encounter with Pharaoh on the river bank. Ben Sira was well aware of these connotations and turned them into a joke against Pharaoh.

Ph. GUILLAUME

(28) P.W. SKEHAN A.A. DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB 39; Garden City, NY 1987) 163.