93 ‘EYES HEAR’ : NEHEMIAH 1,6 TO 2. Ritual Theory and Nehemiah 1,6 The past twenty years have witnessed a tremendous increase in studies dealing with biblical ritual, making use of ritual theory 10. This development is based on important methodological developments in the larger field of anthropology, sociology, and religious studies where the study of ritual has always played a major role. Scholars like Catherine Bell, Ron Grimes, Jonathan Smith, Mircea Eliade, Victor Turner and others 11 made major contributions to our theoretical understanding of ritual which in turn, also influenced the study of ritual in the area of Biblical Studies. Current biblical research is cognizant of the different elements of ritual (be it performed or in text-form), such as required situation and context (or “ trigger point/s”), structure, form and sequence, space, time, involved objects, action, participants (and their roles) and sound/language. Most biblical ritual texts do not provide sufficient data to deal adequately with all of the mentioned elements of ritual, which is often due to their abbreviated form and text nature 12 though it should be noted that even field work may Compare here G.A. KLINGBEIL, Bridging the Gap. Ritual and Ritual 10 Texts in the Bible (Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplements 1; Winona Lake, IN 2007) 45-52; J.W. WATTS, Ritual and Rhetoric in Leviticus. From Sacrifice to Scripture (Cambridge 2007); W.J. BERGEN, “Studying Ancient Israelite Ritual : Methodological Considerations”, Religion Compass 2 (2007) 18; idem, Reading Ritual. Leviticus in Postmodern Culture (JSOTSS 417; London 2005); and I. GRUENWALD, Rituals and Ritual Theory in Ancient Israel (BRLJ 10) (Leiden 2003). Compare C. BELL, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (New York 1992); 11 idem, Ritual. Perspectives and Dimensions (New York 1997); R.L. GRIMES, Beginnings in Ritual Studies (Lanham 1982); idem, Research in Ritual Studies. A Programmatic Essay and Bibliography (ATLA Bibliography Series 14; Metuchen 1985); idem, Ritual Criticism. Case Studies in Its Practice, Essays on Its Theory (Columbia, SC 1990); J.Z. SMITH, Imagining Religion. From Babylon to Jonestown (Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism; Chicago, IL 1982) ; idem, To Take Place. Toward Theory in Ritual (Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism; Chicago, IL 1987); M. ELIADE, Patterns in Comparative Religion (London 1958); idem, The Sacred and the Profane (New York 1959); idem, The Quest. History and Meaning in Religion (Chicago, IL 1969); V.W. TURNER, The Drums of Affliction. A Study of Religious Processes among the Ndembu of Zambia (Oxford 1968); and idem, The Ritual Process. Structure and Anti-Structure (Harmondsworth 1969). C o m p a r e KLINGBEIL, B r i d g i n g the Gap, 130-131; see also 12 G.A. KLINGBEIL, “Altars, Ritual and Theology — Preliminary Thoughts on the Importance of Cult and Ritual for a Theology of the Hebrew Scriptures”, VT 54 (2004) 495-515.