Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sbl.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Biblical Literature.
http://www.jstor.org
JBL 106/3 (1987) 385-399
FRAMING REPETITIONS IN
BIBLICAL HISTORIOGRAPHY
BURKE O. LONG
Bowdoin College, Brunswick, ME 04011
I For a brief history of this line of investigation, see S. Talmon, "The Presentation of Syn-
chroneity and Simultaneity in Biblical Narrative,"in Studies in Hebrew Narrative Art throughout
the Ages (ed. J. Heinemann and S. Werses; Scripta hierosolymitana 27; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1978)
9-26. This principle of "resumptive repetition" is much used by J. Trebolle-Barerraas a tech-
nique for identifying stages of recensional and redactional history; see, e.g., his "Redaction,
Recension, and Midrash in the Books of Kings"'Bulletin of the International Organizationfor
Septuagint and Cognate Studies 15 (1982) 12-35.
2 H. Van
Dyke Parunak, "Oral Typesetting: Some Uses of Biblical Structure,"Bib 62 (1981)
160; see also A. Berlin, Poetics and Interpretationof Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond, 1983)
126.
3 See H. Wiener,
Composition of Judges 2:11 to 1 Kings 2:46 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1929); C.
Kuhl, "Die 'Wiederaufnahme- ein literarkritisches Prinzip?"ZAW 64 (1952) 1-11; I. L. Seelig-
mann, "Hebraische Erzahlung und biblische Geschichtsschreibung" TZ 18 (1962) 314-24;
Parunak, "Typesetting."
4 Talmon, "Synchroneity' 14.
385
386 Journal of Biblical Literature
5
A. Hill, "PatchworkPoetry or Reasoned Verse? Connective Structure in 1 Chronicles xvi,'
VT 33 (1983) 97-101.
6
Talmon, "Synchroneity"17-25.
7
Berlin, Poetics, 126-28. See also F I. Andersen, The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew (The
Hague: Mouton, 1974) 121.
8 Note recent studies which
suggest that Assyrian scribes periodically authored, not simply
edited or revised, royal inscriptions by abbreviating, paraphrasing, deleting, interpolating, or
harmonizing their sources-all in the interest of updating the accomplishments of their king
(see H. Tadmor,"Observations on Assyrian Historiography,"in Ancient Near Eastern Studies in
Memory of . J. Finkelstein [ed. Maria de Jonge Ellis; Hamden, CT: Archon, 1977] 209-10; M.
Cogan and H. Tadmor,"Gygesand Ashurbanipal:A Study in Literary Transmission,"Or 46 [1977]
65-85; L. D. Levine, "The Second Campaign of Sennacherib"JNES32 [1973]312-17). Note also
that some classicists now view Herodotus as an author and explain the Histories, despite the oc-
currence of long digressions and inattention to dramatic plot, as the product of a singular act
of composing-not clumsy editing or numerous revisions by later hands. See, above all, H. R.
Immerwahr,Formand Thoughtin Herodotus(Cleveland, OH: Western Reserve University Press,
1966); and H. Wood, The Histories of Herodotus:An Analysis of Formal Structure(Paris:Mouton,
1972).
9 G. Genette, Narrative Discourse:An
Essay in Method (Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press,
1980) 211-62. The notions of implied author and reader used by Wayne Booth (The Rhetoric of
Fiction [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961]) have been the subject of much discussion
during the past twenty-five years. Note Booth's comments in the second edition of his book
(1983), pp. 421-25.
Long: Framing Repetitions 387
I
Structuralist literary theory emphasizes that the study of narrative is
essentially the study of relationships between narrative and narrating."l
Takinga metaphor from the grammar of verbs, one may say that the task of
analysis has to do with three interrelated aspects of narrative:tense, mood,
and voice.
Tense refers to the varied relationships between time in the story and
the temporal aspects of the narrative discourse. One artificial time (the
sequentiality of events in the story) is thrown constantly against another arti-
ficial time (sequentiality in the narrating or reading). Simultaneity of occur-
rence is a simple example: story events, if completely simultaneous, must
12
Genette, Narrative Discourse, 33-112.
13 See Berlin, Poetics, 43-82, for a discussion of point of view in biblical narrative.
14 Genette, Narrative Discourse, 161-211. Cf. R. Alter's treatment of the narrator's"reticence"
16
See W. Martin, "'Dischronologized' Narrative in the Old Testament,' in Congress Volume:
Rome, 1968 (VTSup 17; Leiden: Brill, 1969) 179-86.
17
E. Auerbach, Mimesis, 481. See Genette, Narrative Discourse, 48-85.
18 Genette, Narrative Discourse, 47-67, 113-60.
390 Journal of Biblical Literature
(iterative narration, e.g., 1 Sam 1:7). A third possibility, often found in tradi-
tional narratives, is to narrate two or more times what happened only once
in the story (e.g., 2 Sam 13:34, 37, 38 "andAbsalom fled").
The importance of achieving some clarity about these theoretical
concepts is that it will help us to see more completely how a biblical writer's
use of framing repetitions relates to the varied structural relationships set up
in a narrative.'9We shall explain certain examples of such repetition as a
device by which a narrator manipulated time and altered the structural
relationships associated with tense, mood, and voice. In becoming more
attentive to these matters, it is to be hoped that the imaginative and fictive
dimensions of biblical historiography will stand out all the more clearly.
II
19 We exclude cases of "ring"or chiastic composition, the use of repetitions to intensify and
extend meanings, set up contrasts and analogies, state leitmotifs, create rounded high style, or
otherwise to mark out sections of discourse. See S. Talmon and M. Fishbane, "Aspects of the
Literary Structure of the Book of Ezekiel," Tarbiz42 (1972) 27-41 (Hebrew); H. V. D. Parunak,
Structural Studies in the Book of Ezekiel (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, 1979; Y. Radday,
"Chiasm in Kings,' Linguistica Biblica 31 (1974) 52-67.
Long: Framing Repetitions 391
privileged information aimed only at the reader. Thus, the device disrupts
chronology in the interest of narrative voice. It persuades the reader of the
grope and stagger by which both the Israelite king and the lepers make their
way, and it dramatizes the hidden causality that matters most: Yahweh's
power to thwart the Arameans, mystify the lepers, and mock the king's
perception of reality (6:31, 33; 7:12).
4. 1 Kgs 1:1,4 and 1:15b(wehammelekddwfd zdqen ... wattehi lammelek
sokenet wattesaretehu / wehammelek zaqen me'od wa'abisag ... mgesrat 'et
hammelek). This framing repetition marks out analepsis (vv 5-14) which
conveys background information relevant to two ongoing series of contempo-
raneous events: Adonijah'sfeasting at En Rogel (vv 9, 41ff.) and the palace
intrigue in Jerusalem (vv 15-40). The frame itself conveys additional
background by suggesting that David's infirmity is a precondition for all other
events. Further complications in temporality arise owing to the report of
Adonijah'skinglike feast, v 9, which is both antecedent to some events (e.g.,
Nathan's proposal, w 11-14) and-we learn from v 41-contemporaneous
with others (e.g., the representations made to David [w 15-31]). Further-
more, mention of Adonijah'sfeast nests with another anachronywhich locates
antecedents of his celebration in earlier, continuing acts of self-glorification
(w 5-8).21 Adonijah (had been) exalting himself (Hebrew durative participial
phrase, mitnasse).... He (had) prepared chariots (v 5) ... (had) conferred
with Joab, and his supporters (had) followed after him (v 7). Moreover, the
narratorembeds still another anachrony within this iterative past. Stepping
out of narrativesequentiality altogether, he remarks in v 6 on the problematic
of the whole affair.Adonijah'sself-promoting actions-going on while David
is doting within the palace and while Nathan and Bathsheba are plotting-
have a certain justification even if they force divisions of loyalty and challenge
the hidden favor of Yahwehtoward Solomon (2 Sam 12:25). David had never
protested his son's overreach, and Adonijah, after all, was handsome-a
prerequisite for royal leadership (cf. 2 Sam 14:25-26; 1 Sam 10:23; 16:12).
Adonijah is also the legitimate crown prince, since Absalom is dead.
This intricately structured analepsis provides a sense of ambiguity to
events and complicates the reader's attitudes toward them. What might have
been presented ideologically as simply a question of morality or of Yahweh's
design is instead explored amid the realistic tensions of human life where
choices must be made, but not so assuredly. At the point where palace
intrigue begins to run its course, when the main narrativesequence resumes,
the reader reserves judgment, withholds sympathy, and possibly defers
commitment to one faction or another.
In this story, one of the best crafted in the books of Kings, framing
repetition marks a rather complex moment of narration. It seems calculated
21See J. Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel: King David I (Assen:
VanGorcum, 1981)348, for useful observations on the temporal relationships depicted in w 5-8.
Long: Framing Repetitions 395
22
Hebrew, mistakenly gib'a? Cf. v 5b.
396 Journal of Biblical Literature
friend, and the object of Saul's murderous plot (17:57-18:4 + 19:1ff.).It also
is similar to the type of repetition that gives special thematic emphasis, as,
for example, in 1 Sam 5:6, llb-12; 2 Sam 8:6b, 14b. Within the frame, the text
offers a pastiche of singulative narrative moments, each related somewhat
differently to each other and to the main story (w 6-9, 10-11, 12-16, 17-29).
Further, the narrator gives each moment an iterative nuance as though to
suggest a rising swell of habitual bad feeling between Saul and David (vv 9,
lib, 16b, 29b). In addition to marking this anachrony,the repeated motifs in
the frame provide a sort of thematic distillation-David, with ease, succeeds
at every turn (vv 5, 30; ya&kil/ skal).
The first narrative moment, vv 6-8, is analepsis. At a time when David
had already apparently entered Saul's court, fresh from his victory over
Goliath (17:57), the narratortakes the reader back to an incident on the way
home from that battle (v 6; note the reference to "the Philistine,' obviously
meaning Goliath). However, a closing remark turns this single occasion into
a condition that extends into the indefinite future: "andSaul kept an eye on
David from that day on" (mehayyOmhahu' wdhali'd). The next day (after
David had come to Saul's court?), the king tries to kill him (vv 10-11). The
narratorgeneralizes this moment too. A quick remark doubles the frequency:
"andDavid escaped him two times" The third section, vv 12-16, reports less
an event than a summary of Saul's growing fear and David's increasing
success. The key motifs of the framework appear again, and the narrator
summarizes ongoing effects: "(David) went out and came in before them"
(v 16b; note the use of participles to convey repeated action). A fourth event,
Saul's desperate plan to engineer David's death (vv 17-27), also ends with
iteration and, moreover, binds itself to vv 12 and 16 with key words: Saul is
still more afraid in the light of David's success and the love the people show
him; the king became his enemy "everafter" (kol hayydmtm, v 29). Finally,
the narratorbrings us back to the outer ring of repetition (v 30). He provides
an iterative summary, picking up the framework motif of military "success"
(sdkal;cf. v 5) and mentioning again the "servantsof Saul,' who since v 5 had
dropped from sight. The whole composition seems calculated to suppress
ordinary chronological sequence. There is a kind of atemporality about
events within the framework (vv 5 and 30), or rather a feeling that Saul's
brooding madness has no clear beginning and no foreseeable end. Note the
intensity of emotion expressed in v 29: wayyo'sef sd'au2l ler' mippene ddwid
'od, "Saul was still more afraid of In
David"' brief, this extensive anachrony
fills a pause in the primary narrative and evokes background and motivation
for Saul'scommand in 19:1where action moves forwardagain. All subsequent
events now fall within the penumbra of Saul's insatiable, violent eclipse of
reason.
Long: Framing Repetitions 397
25
For an ancient parallel to such far-reaching digression in a historiographical work, see J.
Cobet, HerodotsExkurseund die Fragenach der Einheit seines Werke(Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1971).
26
Synchronic analysis converges with diachronic explanation in M. Noth's hypothesis of a
single exilic historian who produced a sweeping history of Israel and, incidentally, most of the
chapter under discussion, from a vantage point in the Judean exile; see Uberlieferungs-
geschichtliche Studien (Tiibingen: Niemeyer, 1957) 85-86, 108 (Eng. trans. The Deuteronomistic
History [Sheffield: University of Sheffield Press, 1981] 73, 97).
Long: Framing Repetitions 399
III
To summarize the results: A common historical or diachronic theory
explains resumptive or framing repetitions in biblical historiography as
marking points at which a second author or editor inserted material into a
previously existing text; in other cases such a device allowed an author to
present two or more synchronous events in different locales. Using an alter-
native model, a synchronic theory of explanation, we propose to view the
latter cases and a number of other examples within a broader theory of narra-
tive poetics. A number of resumptive repetitions may be understood relative
to various structural relationships set up in narrativesby a narrator'sexercise
of freedom from the spatiotemporal constraints of his story world. They
demark anachronies in the act of narrating,that is, points at which violations
of story time (or primary sequentiality) were exploited to various effect. One
may distinguish three types: (1) narration of synchronous events [Talmon];
(2) marking analepsis or retrospective narrative of varying complexity; and
(3) surrounding commentarial excursus in which didacticism is served by the
final convergence of story time and narrating time.
With the analytical power gained from the notions of narrative tense,
mood, and voice, one may appreciate that not all examples of resumptive
repetition need be explained diachronically with theories of redaction. In
quite a few instances one may plausibly speak of a writer, as demanded by
and inferred from the text, who manipulates the chronology of events and the
reader's experience (a reader is also inferred from the text). With control of
information, including the use of framing repetitions, the narrator could
sharpen characterization, provide ironic perspective, or comment on the
story with didactic intent-all in the rhetorical interest of shaping sympa-
thies, attitudes, and perceptions.