259 SELF-ABASEMENT EXPRESSION THANKS AS AN OF thanks to God. Key texts are discussed for both situations. This approach allows for similarities in the two contexts to be shown as well as differences. II. Self-abasement as an expression of thanks to humans The first text to be discussed, 2 Sam 9,8, presents some diffi- culties. Here, Mephibosheth, grandson of Saul and son of Jonathan, responds to David’s offer of a royal pension (2 Sam 9, especially v. 7). On the surface, Mephibosheth appears to be giving gratitude. But other texts in 2 Samuel suggest Mephibosheth may deny being a threat to David. This possibility shows that cate- gorising self-abasement into categories such as “thanks”, “to deny being a threat”, etc., can be subjective. Mephibosheth’s statement of self-abasement is: “ What is your servant, that you should look upon a dead dog such as I?” The self-abasement is carried by the phrase, “dead dog” (tm blk) 13. “Dead dog” is a metaphor that refers to his status as a descendent of Saul’s family, and, in line with common ancient Near Eastern practice when dynasties change, at risk of death by David. Mephibosheth uses the term to convey unworthiness. He evokes an association that dogs are unclean and contemptible 14. That is, he reduces his face to highlight David’s generosity in of- fering him a royal pension, and thus increases David’s face. Note that he expresses no obligation to David. This becomes a factor in the wider narrative when his servant/slave Ziba accuses him of treason in 16,1-4 during Absalom’s rebellion, which requires him to defend his loyalty to David in 19,26-29. As the story stands, Mephibosheth’s language should be interpreted as genuine thanks, and his lack of expressed obligation to David a typical component of this, as will be shown below to be the case for other biblical The exact form is tmh blkh, since “dead dog” is the object of the verb, 13 “ you looked upon”. The Amarna and Lachish letters use blk in the same way. See THOMAS, 14 “ Kelebh ”, 410-427; HUTTON, “‘Abdi-Asirta’ ”, 2-18; and BRIDGE, “Polite ˇ Language ”, 527-525.