John Makujina, «The Interpretation of Ps 144,14: Applying a Pluralistic Approach to a Manifold Difficulty», Vol. 92 (2011) 481-502
The interpretation of Ps 144,14 remains unsettled, due primarily to the difficulty of identifying an overall context for the colon. Of the two major positions dominating the debate, one contends that the topic of the entire verse is bovine fecundity, whereas the other considers part of the colon (v. 14b-c) to be about national security. The author finds both views to be problematic and proposes another solution, which retains attractive elements from each position: Ps 144,14 promises the prosperity of livestock, by assuring that they will not become the spoils of war.
Biblica_1_Layout 1 20/01/12 11:44 Pagina 498
498 JOHN MAKUJINA
took out 200,150 people, young and old, male and female, horses,
mules, donkeys, camels, cattle, and sheep, without number, and coun-
ted them as spoil 67. (emphasis added)
An example from the Persian period, the likely milieu of this
psalm, is also available. In the Behistun inscription, Darius the
Great states that an interloper, Gaumata, plundered cattle, among
other valuables, from his enemies: “I restored to the peoples, pas-
tures and herds and slaves and houses, which Gaumata the Magian
took from them†(DB 1.64-66).
In light of this background, I propose that wnytbxrb hxwc, tacwy,
and #rp collectively invoke the broader imagery of captivity and, by
implication, its catastrophic repercussions for a pastoralist society —
repercussions that, happily, will never materialize in a state of divine
blessing (!ya). Moreover, because the martial-urban element is merely
co-opted in the service of the pastoral theme, this formulation does
not require the regular presence of cattle within the city walls, al-
though many undoubtedly entered cities, especially during times of
siege 68. In fact, according to my analysis, none of the terms in v. 14:b-
c, individually or corporately, make direct reference to cattle.
1. Hab 3,17
Additional backing for a dual orientation (pastoral-martial) can
be obtained from Hab 3,17, if it depicts the depredations of the
Babylonian armies rather than a drought: “Though the fig tree
should not blossom, nor fruit be on the vines, the produce of the
olive fail and the fields yield no food, the flock be cut off from the
fold and there be no herd in the stalls … †(ESV).
67
COS 2.119B:303. See also LXXXVII Tiglath-pileser I, XCVIII Ashur-
dan II, and XCIX Adad-nerari II, in ARI 2:13, 16, 75, 77, 82-83, 90, and The
Annals of Thutmose III, in COS 2.2A:12.
68
Note that Jericho was “tightly shut because of the children of Israel; no
one went out or came in†(Josh 6,1). Yet later we read that “they devoted all
that was in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, and
oxen and sheep and donkeys, by the edge of the sword†(Josh 6,21). It stands
to reason that livestock, many if not all, were also housed within the city prior
to the siege.