“He Filled Zion with Justice and Righteousness” 479 debated, and there is a tendency to exclude Isa 32–33 from this collection of ywh-words. But were it not for the strange form and place of Isa 32, chapter 33 would certainly not appear as suspicious alongside Isa 28-31. In various other smaller and larger collections in Isaiah the pronouncements of judgment against Judah are closed by prophecies against its enemy (cf. Isa 10,5–11,9; 29,1-8; 30; 31). This observation makes it at least possible that the series of ywh-prophecies against Israel and Judah (28–32) come to a close in Isa 33 with a text condemning the enemy through whom YHWH had punished his people. If this possible function of Isa 33 is taken into account, it leads to the first significant observation concerning the integrity of this chapter. From a literary critical point of view, the ywh-prophecies in Isa 28–31(32) are usually composite structures. Can this also be the case with the apparently similarly formed Isa 33? A second preliminary observation regards the form of Isa 33 as a ywh-prophecy. If Isa 33 is compared to other ywh-words, it strikes us that in other cases these ywh-prophecies are much shorter in their alleged original form. Isa 33 would be not only the longest composition of its kind, but also the strangest one, with frequently interchanging topics and addressees (including YHWH in 33,2-3, which is unique) (11). Beside these two external factors raising doubts concerning the coherence of Isa 33, the internal structure of this chapter also presents problems, as we shall see below. Regardless of integrity issues, the pericopes inside this chapter are delimited variously, with transitions signalised mostly between vv. 1 and 2, vv. 6 and 7, vv. 12 and 13 or 13 and 14, and vv. 16 and 17. In what follows, I turn to discussing these internal problems, paying special attention to these transitional verses. Isa 33,1 gives the first concern of the prophecy: the subjugation of the enemy called ddwv, ‘destroyer’ and dgwb, ‘unfaithful’, ‘treacherous’. According to v. 1, the enemy is supposed to go down in a way it caused others to go down: the treacherous one will be deceived, the destroyer will be destroyed (ius talionis). Formally speaking, v. 1 is composed as a prediction, so that the fall of the enemy is still a matter of the future. It must bring destruction to completion first. V. 1 uses the 2nd and 3rd (Isaiah Together)”, New Visions of Isaiah (eds. R.F. MELUGIN – M.A. SWEENEY) (JSOTSS 214; Sheffield 1996) 68-103. (11) Cf. VERMEYLEN, Isaïe, I, 430. See also WILDBERGER, Jesaja, 1286: “ein Weheruf hat in einem Klagelied [as he interprets Isa 33,1-6] gewiß keinen Platz”. Nevertheless, he assumes that v. 1 represents the background against which the lament of 33,2-6 should be understood, and considers 33,1-6 one unit.