Epic Substratum in the Prose of Job*
\nI. INTRODUCTION
\nThe relationship of the prologue to the epilogue of the Book of Job and of both to the poem has long been a subject of scholarly debate. Wellhausen maintained that the poet borrowed directly from a folk saga both the material and form for his own work. Duhm even went so far as to suggest that the entire prose parts were excerpted from a \u201cVolksbuch\u201d and that these antedate the poem. On the other hand, Kautzsch held that nothing more than the name of a righteous man called Job was borrowed from tradition. Most recently, Tur-Sinai has upheld the view that the present narrative framework of Job is much later than the poem and has supplanted an earlier story lost by the time the poem was put into its final form.
\nWhether or not the prose and poetry of the book originally constituted a unity is outside the scope of this study. But it is certain that the prologue and epilogue belong to each other and are the work of a single author. The points of contact are too numerous and too basic to be fortuitous. In both God refers to Job as \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 (1:8, 2:3 || 42:7, 8); Job acts the role of intercessor (1:5 || 42:8\u201310); he offers \u05e2\u05d5\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea to assuage God\u2019s anger (1:5 || 42:8); the order of enumeration of his material possessions is the same in both instances (1:3 || 42:12); the precise figures of Job\u2019s restored and doubled possessions given in the epilogue (42:12) presuppose a knowledge of the prologue (1:3); the three friends are mentioned in exactly the same order (2:11 || 42:9) and without any reference to Elihu.
\nIf the narrative framework is the product of a single hand, is it late or early? The patriarchal background of the story is detailed and consistent. Wealth is measured in terms of cattle and slaves (1:3, 42:12, cf. Gen. 12:16, 32:5). Religion is primitive, expressing itself in private sacrifice without central shrine or priesthood and with the early concept that the anger of God can be assuaged by sacrifice (1:5, 42:8). Sabeans and Chaldeans are still marauding bands of nomads (1:15, 17). The \u05e7\u05e9\u05d9\u05d8\u05d4 is still current (42:11), being mentioned elsewhere only in connection with Jacob (Gen. 33:19; Josh. 24:32). Job\u2019s longevity (42:16) is paralleled only in the patriarchal and pre-patriarchal periods and the closing description \u05d6\u05e7\u05df \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2 \u05d9\u05de\u05d9\u05dd (42:17) is the same as that used of Abraham (Gen. 25:8) and Isaac (Gen. 25:29).
\nNotwithstanding the detailed consistency in the patriarchal setting and the fact that there is no satisfactory reason why the author should have invented it since it adds nothing to the understanding of the narrative, scholars were inclined neither to accept it as genuine nor to regard it as of any real value in determining the antiquity of the prologue and epilogue. This skepticism was in no way dissipated by reference to Ezekiel\u2019s mention of Job (Ezek. 14:14, 20) for, it was maintained, this implied only the existence of a personality named Job but not necessarily any knowledge of our particular story. Yet the discovery of the Ugaritic epics has greatly enhanced the significance of the Ezekiel passage which has had to be freshly evaluated. Spiegel, in an important and masterly study, has demonstrated beyond all doubt not only that Ezekiel refers to an epic of Job well known to his contemporaries, but that this tale underlies our own narrative in the prologue and epilogue. As a matter of fact, Cassuto had earlier postulated the existence of a poetic version of the story of Job upon which our prose section was based and, most recently, Gordon has drawn attention to some points of contact between the Job narrative and the East Mediterranean epic.
\nThe time would seem to be ripe for a thorough investigation of the stylistic, linguistic, and literary characteristics of the narrative framework in comparison with the available literary material from the East Mediterranean littoral. The results, it is believed, will effectively demonstrate that our prologue and epilogue contain a considerable amount of epic substratum and that our prose version would seem to be directly derived from an ancient epic of Job.
\nII. STYLE AND LANGUAGE
\nThe prose style of the story conforms generally to that of the narrative portions of the Pentateuch. Yet this statement requires modification, for there has been increasing recognition of late that the supposed rigid differentiation between Biblical Hebrew prose and poetry is largely artificial and that much of what has hitherto been considered to be \u201cpure prose\u201d is, in fact, saturated with poeticisms. This is true in particular of our prologue and epilogue, for within the compass of three short chapters are to be found numerous instances of assonance and alliteration, some cases of parallelism, a relatively large number of words and phrases peculiar to poetry, some unique expressions and some forms morphologically and syntactically unique or rare.
\nA. Assonance and Alliteration:
\n\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05e2\u05d5\u05e5<\/p>\n
1:1
\n\u05e2\u05e9\u05d5 \u05de\u05e9\u05ea\u05d4 \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u2026 \u05d5\u05e9\u05dc\u05d7\u05d5 \u05dc\u05e9\u05dc\u05e9\u05ea \u05d0\u05d7\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd \u2026 \u05d5\u05dc\u05e9\u05ea\u05d5\u05ea<\/p>\n
1:4
\n\u2026 \u05d4\u05de\u05e9\u05ea\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05dc\u05d7 \u2026 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e7\u05d3\u05e9\u05dd \u05d5\u05d4\u05e9\u05db\u05d9\u05dd \u2026 \u05d5\u05d4\u05e2\u05dc\u05d4 \u05e2\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea \u2026 \u05d5\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d1\u05dc\u05d1\u05d1\u05dd<\/p>\n
1:5
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05dd<\/p>\n
1:6, 2:1
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05dc\u05d4\u05ea\u05d9\u05e6\u05d1 \u2026 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05d0 \u2026<\/p>\n
\u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u2026 \u05de\u05e9\u05d5\u05d8<\/p>\n
1:7, 2:2
\n\u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05ea<\/p>\n
1:8, 2:3
\n\u05e4\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5<\/p>\n
1:10
\n\u05d0\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dc \u05ea\u05e9\u05dc\u05d7<\/p>\n
1:12
\n\u05db\u05e9\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd \u05e9\u05de\u05d5 \u05e9\u05dc\u05e9\u05d4 \u05e8\u05d0\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05e4\u05e9\u05d8\u05d5<\/p>\n
1:17
\n\u05d1\u05d0\u05d4 \u05de\u05e2\u05d1\u05e8 \u05d4\u05de\u05d3\u05d1\u05e8<\/p>\n
1:19
\n\u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05d1\u05e2 \u05e4\u05e0\u05d5 \u05ea\u05d4\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05d9\u05e7\u05dd \u2026 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e7\u05e8\u05e2<\/p>\n
1:20
\n\u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05dc\u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u2026 \u05e0\u05e4\u05e9\u05d5<\/p>\n
2:4
\n\u05e0\u05e4\u05e9\u05d5 \u05e9\u05de\u05e8<\/p>\n
2:6
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05de\u05e2\u05d5 \u05e9\u05dc\u05e9\u05ea \u05e8\u05e2\u05d9 \u2026 \u05db\u05dc \u05d4\u05e8\u05e2\u05d4<\/p>\n
2:11
\n\u05dc\u05d1\u05d5\u05d0 \u05dc\u05e0\u05d5\u05d3 \u05dc\u05d5 \u05d5\u05dc\u05e0\u05d4\u05de\u05d5<\/p>\n
\u05de\u05e8\u05d7\u05d5\u05e7 \u2026 \u05e7\u05d5\u05dc\u05dd \u2026 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e7\u05e8\u05e2\u05d5 \u2026 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d6\u05e8\u05e7\u05d5 \u05e8\u05d0\u05e9\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05d9\u05de\u05d4<\/p>\n
2:12
\n\u05d0\u05e9\u05d0 \u2026 \u05e2\u05e9\u05d5\u05ea<\/p>\n
42:8
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05e2\u05e9\u05d5 \u05db\u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u2026 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05d0<\/p>\n
42:9
\n\u05e9\u05d1 \u2026 \u05e9\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea<\/p>\n
42:10
\nB. Parallelism:<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05de\u05e7\u05e0\u05d4\u05d5 \u05e4\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05de\u05e2\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d9\u05d3\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05ea<\/p>\n
1:10
\n\u05de\u05e9\u05d5\u05d8 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d5\u05de\u05ea\u05d4\u05dc\u05da \u05d1\u05d4<\/p>\n
1:7, 2:2
\n\u05dc\u05d0 \u05d7\u05d8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0 \u05e0\u05ea\u05df \u05ea\u05e4\u05dc\u05d4 \u05dc\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd<\/p>\n
1:22
\n6\u05d5\u05d9\u05e0\u05d3\u05d5 \u05dc\u05d5 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e0\u05d7\u05de\u05d5 \u05d0\u05ea\u05d5<\/p>\n
42:11
\nC. Poetic Words and Phrases:
\n1:21 is pure poetry. The phrase \u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05de\u05d1\u05d8\u05df occurs, outside of Job, only in Eccles. 5:14.
\n1:22 \u05ea\u05e4\u05dc\u05d4, outside of Job, occurs only in Jer. 23:13.
\n2:3 \u05dc\u05d1\u05dc\u05e2\u05d5; this figurative usage in the sense of \u201cdestroying, annihilating,\u201d is infrequent in prose texts. It is worth considering whether the specialized meaning is not a reflex of Canaanite mythology. The reference may well be to the particular method by which the god Mot disposes of his prey. In the Ugaritic texts we find repeated mention of Mot swallowing his victims:
\nlyrt bnp\u0161 bn ilm mt
\nThou shalt indeed go down into the throat of the god Mot
\nbmh\/mrt ydd il \u01f5zr
\nYea into the gullet of l\u2019s Beloved, the Hero!
\nal tqrb lbn ilm mt
\nDo not draw near the god Mot
\nal y\u02bfdbkm kimr bph
\nLest he make you like a lamb in his mouth,
\nklli b\u1e6fbrnqnh t\u1e2btan
\nLike a kid in his jaws ye be crushed.
\ny\u02bfrb b\u02bfl bkbdh bph yrd
\nSo that Baal may enter his inwards, yea descend into his mouth.
\n2:4 seems to be some ancient proverb.
\n2:7 \u05e7\u05d3\u05e7\u05d3 occurs elsewhere in prose only Deut. 28:35, 2 Sam. 14:25.
\nYet a closer look will show that in reality both these passages are poetic; qdqd is common in Ugaritic.
\n2:11; 42:11 \u05e0\u05d5\u05d3; in the sense of \u201cto show grief, sympathy\u201d it is used only in poetry.
\n2:13 \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1 \u05dc\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5. This is an entirely poetic usage; cf. Ugaritic yt\u1e07 lk\u1e25\u1e6f \u201csits on a throne.\u201d
\n2:13 \u05db\u05d0\u05d1; the nominal form is restricted to poetry.
\n42:12 \u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea \u05e8\u05d0\u05e9\u05d9\u05ea. This combination, with one exception, is never used in narrative prose. \u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea corresponds to Ugaritic u\u1e2bryt \u201clatter end, destiny, lot.\u201d
\nD. Words and Expressions Unique to Job:
\n1:5 \u05d4\u05e7\u05d9\u05e4\u05d5; the hiphil of \u05e0\u05e7\u05e3 in connection with time, occurs only here. The qal form is found only in Isa. 29:1 \u05d7\u05d2\u05d9\u05dd \u05d9\u05e0\u05e7\u05e4\u05d5, cf. Ugaritic nqpt || \u0161nt = yearly cycle.
\n1:10 \u05e9\u05db\u05ea \u05d1\u05e2\u05d3\u05d5; in the sense of \u201cgiving protection\u201d the phrase is unique.
\n2:8 \u05dc\u05d4\u05ea\u05d2\u05e8\u05d3 is a hapax legomenon.
\n42:10 \u05e9\u05d1 \u05e9\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea (kethib \u05e9\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea) occurs only here with reference to individuals. As such it probably reflects a very ancient, rather than late extended, usage in view of the Ugaritic personal names \u1e6fb\u02bfm, \u1e6fb\u02bfnt, which Gordon takes to mean, \u201cthe god N. has returned, i.e., pitied and favored.\u201d
\nE. Morphology:
\n42:13 \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4. The versions, commentators, and grammarians have varied in their explanation of this hapax legomenon. All the versions except the Targum take it as a variant of \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05d4 \u201cseven.\u201d This tradition is reflected in the pre-Christian Testament of Job and is followed by Ibn Ezra, Kim\u1e25i, and RaMBaN. Among the moderns, Ewald explains the form as an old feminine collective meaning a heptad, while Gesenius dismisses it as \u201cprobably a scribal error\u201d for \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05d4. On the other hand, there is evidence for a talmudic interpretation as a dual form, so the Targum and Rashi. Dhorme, in particular, defends \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 as an old Semitic dual in -\u00e2n and claims that the number of daughters remained constant in contrast to the doubling of the sons because girls in the Orient were not considered important. This explanation fails to take account of the different social milieu which the story of Job implies and of the epic treatment which tends to exalt the female. We are thus left without any convincing reason for the disparity between sons and daughters if \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 be taken as a dual. Accordingly, we must reject this rendering and otherwise explain the form.
\nAs a matter of fact \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd has its counterpart in a Ugaritic form in a context similar to ours and in which there is no doubt of the meaning as seven: wld \u0161b\u02bfny a\u1e6ft itr\u1e2b \u201cThe wives I have wed have borne seven.\u201d \u0160b\u02bfny is here explained as \u0161b\u02bf \u201cseven\u201d +adverbial -ny. Thus the unique form \u05e9\u05d1\u05e2\u05e0\u05d4 is a poetic archaism which in all probability belonged to the original language of the epic of Job.
\nF. Syntax:
\n1:4 \u05e9\u05dc\u05e9\u05ea \u05d0\u05d7\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9\u05d4\u05dd. This unusual construction of the -t form of the numeral with a feminine noun may well represent an archaic usage in which \u05e9\u05dc\u05e9\u05ea was still a collective and abstract term meaning \u201cgroup of three, triad,\u201d and could be used with either gender.
\nIII. LITERARY STRUCTURE
\nThe element of repetition is one of the most inherently characteristic features of the epic style, intended as it is for an audience rather than a reading public. This \u201cepic law of iteration\u201d is fully operative in the prologue. A close examination reveals a consistent pattern of repetition of precisely the land associated with the epic. Moreover, there is a skilfully constructed symmetrical scheme of the kind that could only come from an epic archetype.
\nA. The Celestial Council:
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05dc\u05d4\u05ea\u05d9\u05e6\u05d1 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05d0 \u05d2\u05dd \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d1\u05ea\u05db\u05dd \u2026
\n2:1
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d9\u05d5\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05d0\u05d5 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05dc\u05d4\u05ea\u05d9\u05e6\u05d1 \u05e2\u05dc \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05d0 \u05d2\u05dd \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d1\u05ea\u05d5\u05db\u05dd
\n1:6
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d0\u05d9 \u05de\u05d6\u05d4 \u05ea\u05d1\u05d0 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e2\u05df \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d0\u05ea \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05de\u05e9\u05d8 \u05db\u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d5\u05de\u05d4\u05ea\u05d4\u05dc\u05da \u05d1\u05d4
\n2
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05de\u05d0\u05d9\u05df \u05ea\u05d1\u05d0 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e2\u05df \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d0\u05ea \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05de\u05e9\u05d5\u05d8 \u05db\u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d5\u05de\u05d4\u05ea\u05d4\u05dc\u05da \u05d1\u05d4
\n7
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05ea \u05dc\u05d1\u05da \u05d0\u05dc \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 \u05db\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d9\u05df \u05db\u05de\u05d4\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u05ea\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05e1\u05e8 \u05de\u05e8\u05e2
\n3
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05ea \u05dc\u05d1\u05da \u05e2\u05dc \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 \u05db\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d9\u05df \u05db\u05de\u05d4\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u05ea\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05e1\u05e8 \u05de\u05e8\u05e2
\n8
\n\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc\u05dd \u05e9\u05dc\u05d7 \u05e0\u05d0 \u05d9\u05d3\u05da \u05d5\u05d2\u05e2 \u05d0\u05dc \u05e2\u05e6\u05de\u05d5 \u05d5\u05d0\u05dc \u05d1\u05e9\u05e8\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dd \u05dc\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05da \u05d9\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05da
\n5
\n\u05d5\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc\u05dd \u05e9\u05dc\u05d7 \u05e0\u05d0 \u05d9\u05d3\u05da \u05d5\u05d2\u05e2 \u05d1\u05db\u05dc \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05dc\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dd \u05dc\u05d0 \u05e2\u05dc \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05da \u05d9\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05da
\n11
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d4\u05e0\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d9\u05d3\u05da \u05d0\u05da \u05d0\u05ea \u05e0\u05e4\u05e9\u05d5 \u05e9\u05de\u05e8
\n6
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05d0\u05de\u05e8 \u05d4\u05f3 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05d4\u05e0\u05d4 \u05db\u05dc \u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05dc\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d9\u05d3\u05da \u05e8\u05e7 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d0\u05dc \u05ea\u05e9\u05dc\u05d7 \u05d9\u05d3\u05da
\n12
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05de\u05d0\u05ea \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d4\u05f3
\n7
\n\u05d5\u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05d4\u05e9\u05d8\u05df \u05de\u05e2\u05dd \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d4\u05f3<\/p>\n
B. The Character of Job:
\n2:3
\n1:8
\n1:1
\n\u05d0\u05d9\u05df \u05db\u05de\u05d4\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u05ea\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05e1\u05e8 \u05de\u05e8\u05e2.
\n\u05d0\u05d9\u05df \u05db\u05de\u05d4\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u05ea\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d9\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05e1\u05e8 \u05de\u05e8\u05e2.
\n\u05d5\u05d4\u05d9\u05d4 \u05d4\u05d0\u05d9\u05e9 \u05d4\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 \u05ea\u05dd \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05e1\u05e8 \u05de\u05e8\u05e2.<\/p>\n
2:10
\n1:22<\/p>\n
\u05d1\u05db\u05dc \u05d6\u05d0\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0 \u05d7\u05d8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 \u05d1\u05e9\u05e4\u05ea\u05d9\u05d5.
\n\u05d1\u05db\u05dc \u05d6\u05d0\u05ea \u05dc\u05d0 \u05d7\u05d8\u05d0 \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0 \u05e0\u05ea\u05df \u05ea\u05e4\u05dc\u05d4 \u05dc\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd.
\nC. The Misfortunes of Job (1:14\u201319):
\nThe swift unfolding of the miseries that beset Job in successive stages is strongly reminiscent of the literary treatment of the series of misfortunes that befell King Keret. But even more important than this for uncovering the epic archetype is the distinct structural pattern very similar to that underlying the Ten Plagues. We have here a symmetrical scheme consisting of three series of two blows each, the first striking animal life, the second humans, followed by the climactic seventh. Furthermore, each series is encased within a framework comprising a formulaic introduction and a concluding refrain. Finally, the cause of each series is alternately human and divine. The following chart illustrates the literary structure of this section:
\nSeries
\nNo.<\/p>\n
Cause<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05de\u05dc\u05d0\u05da \u05d1\u05d0 \u05d0\u05dc \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1 \u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05e8<\/p>\n
1.
\n(i)
\nPlundering of oxen and asses<\/p>\n
human<\/p>\n
(ii)
\nKilling of servants<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05dc\u05d8\u05d4 \u05e8\u05e7 \u05d0\u05e0\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9 \u05dc\u05d4\u05d2\u05d9\u05d3 \u05dc\u05da<\/p>\n
\u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05d6\u05d4 \u05de\u05d3\u05d1\u05e8 \u05d5\u05d6\u05d4 \u05d1\u05d0<\/p>\n
2.
\n(iii)
\nDestruction of sheep<\/p>\n
divine<\/p>\n
(iv)
\nKilling of servants<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05dc\u05d8\u05d4 \u05d5\u05db\u05d5\u05f3<\/p>\n
\u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05d6\u05d4 \u05d5\u05db\u05d5\u05f3<\/p>\n
3.
\n(v)
\nRaiding of camels<\/p>\n
human<\/p>\n
(vi)
\nKilling of servants<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05dc\u05d8\u05d4 \u05d5\u05db\u05d5\u05f3<\/p>\n
\u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05d6\u05d4 \u05d5\u05db\u05d5\u05f3<\/p>\n
Climax
\n(vii)
\nJob\u2019s sons and daughters killed<\/p>\n
divine<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05d0\u05de\u05dc\u05d8\u05d4 \u05d5\u05db\u05d5\u05f3<\/p>\n
IV. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF NUMBERS
\nThe special status of certain numbers and their peculiar schematized usage is popular in biblical literature. The phenomenon is now recognized to be a typically Near Eastern literary device. Especially frequent and significant is the climactic use of the numeral seven. Something is repeated day after day for six days, the seventh heralding a climax and inaugurating some new event.
\nThe Ugaritic epics attest numerous examples. Thus, for six days a fire rages in the palace of Baal and ceases abruptly on the seventh. King Danel offers oblation to the gods for six days and on the seventh is visited by Baal. The same king celebrates the birth of a son for six days and his guests depart on the seventh. King Keret reaches his goal on the seventh day of his journey and invests Udm for seven days.
\nIn the light of this epic tradition the exploitation of the numeral seven in the three chapters of the narrative framework acquires special significance. The seven day and night silent mourning of Job and friends is suddenly and dramatically interrupted when Job opens his mouth to curse the day of his birth (2:13). His sons and daughters hold seven-day feasts (1:14). A succession of seven blows in all is hurled against Job. The three friends are told to offer seven bulls and seven rams as a propitiatory sacrifice (42:8). Perfectly consistent too, with the classic treatment and of great importance in uncovering the epic substratum underlying the prose narrative, are the seven sons and three daughters of Job (1:2, 42:13). The theme of seven sons is common enough in Ugaritic literature. We may cite the instances of Keret, of the god El, and of the god Mot, all of whom sired seven males. Most striking of all is the fact that Baal, like Job, had seven sons and three daughters.
\nV. MYTHOLOGY
\nThe mythological elements as represented by the two assemblies of celestial beings (1:6; 2:1) are in perfect accord with the epic background. Although Cassuto has made a convincing case for the traditional Jewish interpretation of \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9\u05dd \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd as implying nothing more than angels or heavenly host, the monotheistic twist does not disguise its pagan origins.
\nBoth the terminology employed and the concept of the assembly of the gods are well attested in the Northwest Semitic literary sphere. In the Ugaritic epics we find bn il (2:33), \u201csons of El, i.e., the gods\u201d; dr bn il (2:17, 34; 107:2), \u201cthe coterie of gods\u201d; dr il (128:iii:19); p\u1e2br ilm (17:7), \u201cthe totality of the gods\u201d; p\u1e2br bn ilm (51:iii:14); mp\u1e2brt bn il (2:7, 34; 107:3); \u2018dt ilm (128:ii:7, 11), \u201cassembly of gods.\u201d Similarly, the tenth century Phoenician Y\u1e25mlk inscription from Byblos (line 4) refers to \u05de\u05e4\u05d7\u05e8\u05ea \u05d0\u05dc \u05d2\u05d1\u05dc, \u201cthe totality of the gods of Byblos.\u201d So, too, the magical text from Arslan Tash mentions (l. 11) \u05d5\u05db\u05dc \u05d1\u05df \u05d0\u05dc\u05dd. Without doubt, therefore, we are dealing here in Job with a reflex of early Near Eastern mythology which formed part of the repertoire of the classical epic.
\nThis conclusion is further strengthened by the employment of certain key words and phrases which are common to other accounts of the heavenly council scene found in the Hebrew Bible. The use of \u05d4\u05ea\u05d9\u05e6\u05d1 \u05e2\u05dc (1:6, 2:1) for the convocation of the celestial beings and of the root \u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 (1:12, 2:7) to introduce the action about to result from the termination of their deliberations is highly significant. Zechariah (6:5) employs both terms: \u2026 \u05d0\u05e8\u05d1\u05e2 \u05e8\u05d5\u05d7\u05d5\u05ea \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05d9\u05dd \u05d9\u05d5\u05e6\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea \u05de\u05d4\u05ea\u05d9\u05e6\u05d1 \u05e2\u05dc as does the prophet Micaiah with the variant \u05e2\u05de\u05d3 for \u05d4\u05ea\u05d9\u05e6\u05d1 in a similar context (1 Kings 22:19): \u05d5\u05db\u05dc \u05e6\u05d1\u05d0 \u05d4\u05e9\u05de\u05d9\u05dd \u05e2\u05de\u05d3 \u05e2\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5 followed by (vs. 22) \u05d5\u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 \u05d4\u05e8\u05d5\u05d7, \u05d0\u05e6\u05d0, \u05e6\u05d0. It would thus appear that the choice of phraseology is not fortuitous but is part of an established literary tradition with a stereotyped terminology.
\nThe question now arises as to whether the heavenly scene was indeed part of the original epic of Job. It has been held that 1:13 has an ambiguous subject and hence logically and syntactically follows directly upon 1:5, thus eliminating the Satan episode. It is further maintained that 42:11 implies that God and not Satan is the author of all the evil that befell Job. Accordingly, Spiegel believes that the epilogue preserves the older layers of the Job saga and that the Satan scene belongs to a later version grafted on to a fossilized original.
\nHowever attractive the theory, the evidence would not seem to be conclusive, for the difficulties are more apparent than real. The subject of \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d5\u05d1\u05e0\u05d5\u05ea\u05d9\u05d5 in 1:13 is in fact not in the least ambiguous, the LXX notwithstanding. It is perfectly obvious from vs. 12, \u05dc\u05d5, \u05d0\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5 and from the four preceding verses (11, \u05dc\u05d5, \u05d9\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05da; 10, \u05d1\u05e2\u05d3\u05d5, \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea\u05d5, \u05dc\u05d5, \u05d9\u05d3\u05d9\u05d5, \u05de\u05e7\u05e0\u05d4\u05d5; 9, \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1; 8, \u05d0\u05d9\u05d5\u05d1, etc.) that the subject is and could be none other than Job. Moreover, the second heavenly court scene is absolutely essential to explain and introduce Job\u2019s physical sufferings which, after all, constitute the climax of the story.
\nAs to 42:11, one must agree with Alt and Spiegel that the verse is out of place in its present context and must logically belong to the prologue, probably following 1:22. But it does not really, if properly understood, contradict the Satan story. Satan himself is merely an agent. He has no power of independent action and cannot work without divine permission. In this sense God may correctly be described as the author of Job\u2019s troubles and, as a matter of fact, he actually so describes himself in rebuking Satan (2:3), \u05d5\u05ea\u05e1\u05d9\u05ea\u05e0\u05d9 \u05d1\u05d5 \u05dc\u05d1\u05dc\u05e2\u05d5 \u05d7\u05e0\u05dd. It is God who is recognized to be the architect of Job\u2019s misfortunes, albeit goaded on by Satan.
\nThe assemblies of celestial beings are an integral part of the saga of Job and constitute the mythological element inseparable from the ancient epic.
\nVI. JOB\u2019S DAUGHTERS
\nThe prominence of women in epic literature, particularly in that reflecting East Mediterranean society, is well known. The sociology of the story of Job accurately mirrors the same epic background. The daughters participate in the seven-day feasts of their brothers (1:4, 13) in much the same way as the K\u1e6frt wine and dine with Danel the week long and as Octavia is summoned by her father King Keret ostensibly to share in his banquet.
\nThe naming of Job\u2019s three girls (42:14) is in striking contrast to the anonymity of his sons, a situation exactly paralleled in the case of Baal\u2019s three daughters, Pdry, \u1e6cly, and Ar\u1e63y, and his seven unnamed sons. To be compared also is the general prominence of the role of Octavia and the high esteem in which P\u01f5t, daughter of Danel, is held in the Ugaritic epics.
\nAs to the names themselves, it is possible that two of the three, at least, are now to be re-explained on the basis of Ugaritic. Gordon has pointed out that \u05d9\u05de\u05d9\u05de\u05d4 may well correspond to the epithet of the beautiful Anath\u2014ymmt limm\u2014and \u05e7\u05e6\u05d9\u05e2\u05d4 could well be q\u1e63\u02bft, a bow, referring to its shapeliness.
\nThe emphasis on the outstanding beauty of the girls (42:15) is likewise characteristic of the epic treatment which tends to exalt feminine pulchritude.
\nFinally, we are told, the girls received from their father an inheritance together with their brothers (42:15). According to Mosaic law the daughter inherits only in the absence of sons. It is obvious that we are dealing here with quite a different social milieu and we are at once reminded of the situation in the Ugaritic epic in which Octavia shares her father\u2019s estate with her brothers.
\nVII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
\nThe Hebrew prose, in vocabulary and style, is saturated with poeticisms and employs some unique forms explicable by reference to Ugaritic. The literary structure contains all the classic elements of repetition and schematization associated with that of the epic. The exploitation of numerals with special status conforms exactly to the epic pattern. The mythological motif and the sociological themes find close parallels in the Ugaritic literature. In the light of all this the detailed and consistent patriarchal setting must be regarded as genuine and as belonging to the original saga.82 In brief, the considerable amount of epic substratum indicates that our present narrative framework is directly derived from an ancient Epic of Job.
\nThe Mythological Background of Job 18*
\nIn a recent issue of the JBL, William A. Irwin drew attention to the mythological background of Job 18\u201319. In particular, he tried to demonstrate the familiarity of the great poet with the famous Babylonian composition dealing with the descent of Ishtar to the nether world. On this basis he sought to interpret Job 18:14 as an allusion to the imperious rule of Ereshkigal, queen of the \u201cLand of No Return.\u201d Unfortunately, the precision of the parallel, as he pointed out, is marred by the presence of verbs in the feminine (\u05d5\u05ea\u05e6\u05e2\u05d3\u05d4\u05d5; vs. 15 \u05ea\u05e9\u05db\u05d5\u05df) interrupting a series of masculine forms, and by the phrase \u05de\u05dc\u05da \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d5\u05ea. If Ereshkigal is indeed referred to, we should expect \u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05ea \u05d1\u05f3 instead.
\nProfessor Irwin rightly resisted the temptation to facile emendation in order to strengthen his case. I believe that the present text can be generally satisfactorily explained provided that the mythological horizon be broadened.
\nThe first term to be elucidated is \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d5\u05ea (vs. 14). Significantly, every usage of this term in the Hebrew Bible is in connection with a figure of destruction. In Job 24:17 we find it together with \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d5\u05ea, itself a characteristic of Sheol. The latter is described in Job 10:21 f. as \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05d7\u05e9\u05da \u05d5\u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05e2\u05e4\u05ea\u05d4 \u05db\u05de\u05d5 \u05d0\u05e4\u05dc \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0 \u05e1\u05d3\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05ea\u05e4\u05e2 \u05db\u05de\u05d5\u05be\u05d0\u05e4\u05dc. Similarly, in 38:17 \u05e9\u05e2\u05e8\u05d9 \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d5\u05ea parallels \u05e9\u05e2\u05e8\u05d9 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea. These verses are, of course, strongly reminiscent of the description of the nether world in the Babylonian poem as \u201cthe dark house,\u201d \u201cwherein the dwellers are bereft of light,\u201d \u201cwhere they see no light, residing in darkness.\u201d Thus the conjunction of \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d5\u05ea with \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d5\u05ea argues strongly for the former as an epithet of Sheol. Furthermore, in Ezek. 26:21 \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d5\u05ea is used in immediate association with such appellations of the nether world as \u05d1\u05d5\u05e8 and \u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05ea\u05d7\u05ea\u05d9\u05d5\u05ea.
\nIn the light of all this, and in the context of Job 18\u201319 which Irwin has so clearly illuminated, \u05de\u05dc\u05da \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d5\u05ea (18:14) can be none other than the king of the nether world. However, it is just at this point that the Babylonian analogy breaks down, since we should expect a female ruler of the infernal regions, rather than a king.
\nYet, Irwin has himself pointed the way to a solution of this problem by stressing the fact that in Job there is a fusion of both Babylonian and Canaanite mythological motifs. It is precisely to the latter sphere that we can look for further help.
\nLet us now examine the phrase \u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea in vs. 13. This has frequently been interpreted figuratively as \u201cfatal disease,\u201d \u201cthe terrors of death,\u201d \u201cone doomed to death.\u201d The targum understood it as \u201cthe angel of death.\u201d In conformity with the mythological background there is no reason at all why \u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea should not be translated, as Cassuto long ago suggested, \u201cthe first-born of M\u00f4t,\u201d alluding to the Canaanite figure associated with disease, destruction, and aridity. There are several instances in the Hebrew Scriptures in which the term \u05de\u05d5\u05ea has acquired a specialized personified meaning analogous to its usage as a proper name in the Ugaritic epics. Cassuto has pointed to some remarkable verbal correspondences in this respect.
\nNow there is no doubt whatsoever that M\u00f4t was the ruler of the Canaanite nether world. Several Ugaritic passages refer explicitly to M\u00f4t sitting on his throne in the depths of the earth. Similarly, Philo of Byblos observed that the Phoenician M\u00f4t was the counterpart of Pluto, the chthonian deity of the Greeks. Accordingly, one may identify \u05de\u05dc\u05da \u05d1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d5\u05ea, \u201cking of the nether world,\u201d with \u05de\u05d5\u05ea of vs. 13. M\u00f4t\u2019s \u201cfirst-born\u201d (\u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea) would then, indeed, occupy the same position in Canaan as did Namtar, the messenger (m\u0101r \u0161ipri) and son of Ereshkigal in Babylonian mythology. He would be a demon of evil fate, the grim herald of M\u00f4t, assigned the function of driving the souls into Sheol.
\nThis identification of \u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea puts the understanding of vs. 13 in a new light. It, too, may well be a reflex of Canaanite mythology. Characteristic of M\u00f4t is his penchant for devouring his prey. A useful piece of advice is found in Ugaritic text 51:VIII:15\u201320: al\/tqrb. Ibn. ilm\/ mt. al. y\u2018dbkm\/ kimr. bph\/ klli. b\u1e6fbrn\/ qnh. t\u1e2btan\u2014\u201cDraw not nigh unto the divine M\u00f4t, lest he make you like a lamb in his mouth, like a kid in his jaws ye be crushed.\u201d
\nThe picture of the nether world as a voracious monster with a huge gullet and gaping jaws is familiar enough in biblical literature. Isa. 5:14 speaks of Sheol as extending its throat (\u05e0\u05e4\u05e9\u05d4) and opening wide its mouth without limit. The identical phrase is used by Hab. 2:5 with the additional simile, \u201cinsatiable as death\u201d (\u05d5\u05d4\u05d5\u05d0 \u05db\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0 \u05d9\u05e9\u05d1\u05e2).
\nIn one Ugaritic passage (67:1; 19:20) M\u00f4t, apparently boasting of his prowess, says of himself: bklat\/ ydy il\u1e25m. hm.\u2014\u201cWith both my hands I shall eat them.\u201d This phrase is very similar to Job 18:13, \u05d9\u05d0\u05db\u05dc \u05d1\u05d3\u05d9 \u05e2\u05d5\u05e8\u05d5 \u05d9\u05d0\u05db\u05dc \u05d1\u05d3\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea. As a matter of fact, the difficult \u05d1\u05d3\u05d9 most likely means \u201cwith two hands\u201d and \u05d1\u05d3\u05d9\u05d5, \u201cwith his two hands.\u201d It has long been recognized that the uniconsonantal d, \u201chand,\u201d appears fossilized in the combination bd, \u201cwith\/in the hand,\u201d in Ugaritic. In a Canaanite gloss in a letter of Biridiya of Megiddo, found at Tell el-Amrna, ba-di-\u00fa appears for the Accadian, ina q\u00e2ti\u0161u, \u201cin his hand.\u201d The form is well attested in biblical Hebrew and other Semitic languages. Vs. 13, therefore, might well be translated, \u201cThe first-born of M\u00f4t will devour his skin with two hands, yea with his two hands he will devour (him).\u201d
\nAdmittedly, to \u201cdevour skin\u201d is not a natural phrase. But this difficulty remains whatever construction is put on \u05d1\u05d3\u05d9. Most probably the idea is that even the very skin will be greedily devoured, leaving not a trace of the victim behind. The notion would be very similar, mutatis mutandis, to that expressed in Mic. 3:3. It is also not improbable that \u05e2\u05d5\u05e8 here is synecdoche for body, as was indeed understood by ibn \u011eana\u1e25 and Saadia.
\nWe now come to the thorny \u05d5\u05ea\u05e6\u05e2\u05d3\u05d4\u05d5 (vs. 14) and \u05ea\u05e9\u05db\u05d5\u05df (vs. 15). Were the usual masculine forms employed here, none would doubt that the subject of the verbs would be \u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea He, it is, like Namtar, who marches off the designated victim to M\u00f4t in the nether world and who spreads desolation over the earthly habitation of his prey. How are we then, to explain the apparent substitution of the feminine for masculine in these verbs?
\nBefore attempting to answer the question, it should be pointed out that at least one other such example is to be found in the language of Job, namely, in 20:9 \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0\u05be\u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05ea\u05e9\u05d5\u05e8\u05e0\u05d5 \u05de\u05e7\u05d5\u05de\u05d5. The obvious incompatibility of the undoubtedly masculine \u05de\u05e7\u05d5\u05de\u05d5 with a verb in the feminine has either led to the emendation \u05d9\u05e9\u05d5\u05e8\u05e0\u05d5 or been explained by taking \u05e2\u05d9\u05df of vs. 9a to be the subject, and understanding \u05de\u05e7\u05d5\u05de\u05d5 as though \u05d1\u05de\u05e7\u05d5\u05de\u05d5 were intended. Against this, however, is the equivalent phrase in 7:10 and Ps. 103:16 \u05d5\u05dc\u05d0\u05be\u05d9\u05db\u05d9\u05e8\u05e0\u05d5 \u05e2\u05d5\u05d3 \u05de\u05e7\u05d5\u05de\u05d5, so that in 20:9, too, \u05de\u05e7\u05d5\u05de\u05d5 cannot be other than the subject of \u05ea\u05e9\u05d5\u05e8\u05e0\u05d5. The only solution to the problem must be to regard the three verbs \u05d5\u05ea\u05e6\u05e2\u05d3\u05d4\u05d5, \u05ea\u05e9\u05db\u05d5\u05df, and \u05ea\u05e9\u05d5\u05e8\u05e0\u05d5 as rare masculine forms with a t-preformative.
\nNow, as a matter of fact, just such a form is known to us from the language of the Amarna letters. In addition to the Canaanite preterite 3. m. s. form yik\u0161ud and the present 3. m. s. yika\u0161ad appear also tik\u0161ud and tika\u0161ad. Thus, EA Nos. 71:4 f.; 86:3 f.: ilu a-ma-na ilu \u0161a \u0161arri be-li-ka ti-di-nu ba\u0161ta-ka i-na pa-ni \u0161arri (\u201cAman, the god of the king, thy lord, give thee strength in the presence of the king\u201d).
\nEA No. 143:27 f.: a-na-ku ki-ma am\u00eali ta-az-ra-\u1e2bi sis\u0113 \u0161a \u0161arri (\u201cI am like a man who grooms (?) the horses of the king\u201d).
\nEA No. 323:22: m\u00e2r ilu \u0161ama\u0161 \u0161a ti-ra-am ilu \u0161ama\u0161 (\u201cThe son of \u0160ama\u0161 whom \u0160ama\u0161 loves\u201d).
\nIn the light of the existence of this phenomenon within the Canaanite linguistic sphere, we may look upon the three forms in Job as vestigial 3. m. s. t- preformative imperfects. Accordingly, in 18:14\u201315, the subject of \u05d5\u05ea\u05e6\u05e2\u05d3\u05d4\u05d5 and \u05ea\u05e9\u05db\u05d5\u05df is \u05d1\u05db\u05d5\u05e8 \u05de\u05d5\u05ea of vs. 13.
\nIn short, what Bildad is saying is that M\u00f4t, king of the nether world, sends his first-born as his emissary to slay the unrighteous one and to march him off to the infernal regions. The world of the wicked collapses about him and dissolves into oblivion.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Epic Substratum in the Prose of Job* I. INTRODUCTION The relationship of the prologue to the epilogue of the Book of Job and of both to the poem has long been a subject of scholarly debate. Wellhausen maintained that the poet borrowed directly from a folk saga both the material and form for his own … <\/p>\n