THE BEGINNING OF THE REIGN OF GOD — PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY

Author(s): Simon B. Parker

Source: Revue Biblique (1946-) , OCTOBRE 1995, Vol. 102, No. 4 (OCTOBRE 1995), pp. 532-
559
Published by: Peeters Publishers

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44089256

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Peeters Publishers is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Revue
Biblique (1946-)

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
RB. 1995 - T. 102-4 (pp. 532-559).

THE BEGINNING OF THE REIGN OF GOD -

PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY

Summary

In the first seven verses of psalm 82, Yahweh is not presiding over the
divine assembly, as is usually maintained, but rather is a member of the
assembly who charges the rest of the gods with abuse of their office (misrule
of the world) and announces their downfall. Those verses are the "myth", to
which the call for God to assume rule of the world (v. 8) is the liturgical
response.

Sommaire

Dans les sept premiers versets du Ps. 82, Yahweh ne préside pas l'assem-
blée divine, comme on le soutient ordinairement. Il est plutôt un membre de
l'assemblée, qui accuse les autres dieux d'abus de leur charge (incurie dans le
gouvernement du monde) et annonce leur chute. Ces versets sont le «mythe»,
dont l'appel à Dieu pour qu'il assume le gouvernement du monde (v. 8) est la
réponse liturgique.

"Although its text is in almost perfect condition..., scarcely any psalm

seems to have troubled interpreters more or to have experienced a wider
range of interpretation and a more disturbing uncertainty and lack of fina-
lity therein than Psalm 82. This is due to a number of inherent difficulties
and problems, problems not so much of translation, for even this, in a
mechanical sense, is simple enough, but problems rather of determination
of the precise meaning of the Ps., resulting entirely from doubt as to the
exact connotation of a number of words and expressions, which seemingly
permit of more than one interpretation..."

These are the opening words of Julius Morgenstern's 100-page

article on Psalm 82 published in 1939. 1 While some progress in the

1 J. Morgenstern, "The Mythological Background of Ps 82," HUCA (1939) 29-

126. Since first writing this, I discovered that M. Dietrich and O. Loretz had also
quoted this passage for a similar reason: "Jahwe und seine Aschera": Anthropomorphes
Kultbild in Mesopotamien, Ugarit und Israel (UBL 9; Münster: UGARIT-Verlag, 1992)
135, n. 3.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 533

understanding, explanation, and evaluation of the psa

made since that date, Morgenstern's statement is as val
was fifty years ago, to judge by the writings on and refe
psalm during the last few decades. 2
J. S. Ackerman gives an additional reason for continuing
and disagreement: "Psalm 82 is a unique piece of literat
no exact parallels in the Old Testament, nor in any o
Near Eastern literature." 3 While no "exact parallels"
forthcoming since Ackerman wrote, Jüngling has iden
for a significant portion of the psalm (see section IV b
paper, I shall argue that a model exists for the sequence o
the psalm as a whole.
Through most of its history, the interpretation of P
hung significantly on the meaning of the word ' Ihym "g
7), 4 which has been taken to refer to Israelite rulers/jud
nations, to angels, or to the other gods, members of the
cil.5 The last view has, since the decipherment of the U
become dominant, and arguments in its favor so much str
those for the alternatives that the question may be co
tled.6 The terms "divine assembly" (v. 1), * Ihym (
bny ' lywn "descendants of Elyon" (v. 6) all refer to me
divine assembly.
Significant disagreement remains, however, concern
tionship between God and the gods. Most scholars assu

2 See the similar opening words of Jüngling, Der Tod der Götter. Ein
zu Psalm 82 (SBS 38; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1969) 9 (thou
the difficulties to the brevity of the psalm). Cf. also H. W. Schmidt, Kö
Ugarit und Israel (BZAW 80; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1966) 32 ("der sch
H.-J. Fabry, "Ihr seid alle Söhne des Allerhöchsten (Ps 82, 6)," Bib
135-47, esp. 135 ("Bei wenigen Psalmen des Alten Testaments ist d
Deutung so umstritten").
8 J. S. Ackerman, "An Exegetical study of Psalm 82 (Th. D. Diss.
nity School, 1966) 180. Cf. A. W. Gonzalez, "Le Psaume LXXXII,"
293-309: it is "bizarrement construit" with ambiguous terms and mu
tible themes; hence what needs to be discovered is its coherence and
4 There is no question that the occurrences of ' Ihym in vv la, 8 ref
the Elohistic psalter) to Yahweh, the God of Israel.
6 For a review of these different interpretations from the early
present century see J. S. Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study of Psa
H.-W. Jüngling, Der Tod der Götter , 11-22.
6 The reference to the gods was already judged to be "indiskutabel" by
H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen. 2. Teilband (BK 15/2; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1960)
571. However, it has been discussed recently, in an article that argues that the word
refers to both gods and human judges - H. Niehr, "Götter oder Menschen - eine
falsche Alternative. Bemerkungen zu Ps 82," ZAW 99 (1987) 94-98. The case for the
reference to gods has been made most extensively by Ackerman and Jüngling.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 534 S. B. PARKER

that is, Yahweh, is presiding ov

view, by contrast, seems to asc
ordinary within the Hebrew Bib
gods under a presiding El or Elyo
which I believe to be the better o
ded or justified. What follows is
sition and justification.9
For those involved in the final s
compilers of the Elohistic psalte
who collected the psalms of As
Israel was already understood to
That is the understanding press
Indeed, in the last line of the fol
of Asaph - Elyon is explicitly
As long as we read the psalms
pretation is appropriate. But th
other biblical book, and more obv
consists in large part of quite ind
one of which was originally desig
liturgical use of the psalms con
principles of organization are d

7 So, generally, Ackerman, "An Exeget

also, e.g., Kraus, Psalmen , 570-71; Gonzalez, "Le Psaume LXXXII", 301;
H. D. Preuss, Verspottung fremder Religionen im Alten Testament (BWANT 92; Stutt-
gart: Kohlhammer, 1971) 112-3; O. Loretz, "Aspekte der kanaanäischen Gottes-
So(/ö)hn(e)-Tradition im Alten Testament," UF 7 (1975) 586-9; C. H. Gordon, "His-
tory of Religion in Psalm 82," in Biblical and Near Eastern Studies (ed. G. A. Tuttle;
Grand Rapids: Erdmans, 1978) 129-31 ; E. T. Mullen, The Divine Council in Canaa-
nite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Chico: Scholars, 1980) 230, 232; R. J. Tour-
nay, Seeing and Hearing God with the Psalms (JSOTSup 118; Sheffield: JSOT, 1991) 184
= Voir et entendre dieu avec les Psaumes (CahRB 24; Paris: Gabalda, 1988) 143-5;
M. S. Smith, The Earlu Historu of God (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1990) 9, 101.
8 Eissfeldt, "El and Yahweh," JSS 1 (1956) 25-37 = Kleine Schriften III , 386-97;
W. ScHLissKE, Gottessöhne und Gottessohn im Alten Testament: Phasen der Entmythisie-
rung im Alten Testament (BWANT 97; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1973) 33-34, with reser-
vations; T. Machado Siqueira, "O Salmo 82," Caminho da Libertação (Estudos Bíbli-
cos 2; Petrópolis: Vozes, 1984); J. D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil
(New York: Harper, 1988) 6-7; H.-J. Zobel, "Ijwn," TWAT 6 (1989) 131-51,
esp. 189-90. G. von Rad, once wrote strikingly of "the gods of the Canaanite pantheon,
into whose company the stranger Yahweh... made his entrance (Ps. LXXXII),"
though elsewhere he seems to refer to the psalm as illustrating God's presiding over the
divine council - Old Testament Theology I (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1962) 211, 23.
Recently H. Niehr has acknowledged that Yahweh has in this psalm not yet reached
the status of supreme god, presiding over the divine assembly - Der Höchste Gott
(BZAW 190; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990) 80, 81.
9 I am grateful to Professors B. W. Anderson and P. D. Miller for critical reading of
an earlier draft of this paper. This acknowledgement does not imply their agreement
either with my general thesis or with the particulars of this paper in its final form.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 535

units, the present literary context of each psalm is, for th

no more relevant to its individual interpretation than is
context of a hymn in a modern hymn book or a poem in a
The first principle of interpretation of virtually any ps
that it be understood and explained as an independent li
Accordingly, Psalm 82 in its pristine integrity is the ob
following study.
My argument builds on three kinds of evidence: linguisti
ning and connotations of two key words in the first ve
psalm); structural (the psalm's internal structure and coh
comparative (the recurrence of a similar situation, plot,
in other texts both within and beyond the Bible). Follow
lysis of its structure, a brief excursus considers the charac
psalm in relation to recent discussions of the category "my
Old Testament. Presentation of the comparative evidence
by a review of other biblical texts that present Yahweh
with the other gods in ways comparable with those ex
Psalm 82. This review leads to an attempt to define the aut
tegy and to place the psalm in a broad cultural and historic
I conclude with a discussion of the liturgical character o

I. The Implications of the Verbs of v. 1

The two actions predicated of God in v. 1 are nsb and spl. Ar

the actions of a presiding officer, or of a member of a court?
At the first sight of the root špt (v. 1) many have leapt
conclusion that the speaker is acting as judge. 11 But the root š
wide range of meanings;12 indeed, each of its four occurrences

10 Some make a further distinction here between the president of the assem
- and the judge - Yahweh: Schmidt, Königtum , 33, cf. 41; Schlisske, "G
und Gottessohn," 32-34 (recognizing a lack here - but interpreting this as r
stage in the history of Israel's religion); F. M. Cross, Canaaniie Myth and He
(Cambridge: Harvard, 1973) 72, 186 - although elsewhere in the same
doubted that Yahweh stood in El's council: "El is clearly regarded as a prope
Yahweh" ( ibid ., p. 44); so now TDOT I 254; Niehr, Der Höchste Gott , 81.
11 In addition to those in the preceding note, see Ackerman, "An Exe
Study," 306; Preuss, Verspottung fremder Religionen, 112; H. Niehr, Herrs
Richten. Die Wurzel špt im Allen Orient und im Alten Testament (FB 54; W
Echter Verlag, 1986) 98, 373, 379-80; P. D. Miller, Interpreting the Psalms
phia: Fortress, 1986) 121.
12 For a general treatment of this verb see G. Liedke, Gestalt und Bezeichnu
tamentl icher Rechtssätze (WMANT 39; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 19
Herrschen und Richten .

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 536 S. B. PARKER

psalm bears a different meaning.

the speech which the word introd
form of a reproachful question
ments, and show favor to wrong
give justice to the disadvantaged
(vv. 3-4). 14 Simply put, it calls u
to pervert justice by favoring ma
saving their victims. (The whol
judicial or governing roles, not in
context, in which the gods have
and classes of disadvantaged peo
charge, rebuke or accusation, we
in v. 1 the specific meaning: "to
put positively, "to call for justice
the speaker is presiding over th
gods. Indeed, one might think t
the foundations of the earth ar
might be guilty of some negligen
world unjustly, does not the chie
ponsibility?16
The first verb predicated of God in v. 1 is nsb. Boecker has observed
that, in legal contexts, the judge sits while the parties to a dispute -
and specifically the plaintiff - stand.16 This is particularly clear in

13 In this verse the verb špt means "to pronounce judgment," or, more generally,
"to administer, to govern."
Note that such questions are not characteristic of a formal trial (H. J. Boecker,
Redeformen des Rechtslebens im Alien Testament [WMANT 14; Neukirchen: Neukirche-
ner Verlag, 1964] 336). The question beginning *ad mãtay does not even expect an
answer. It is purely rhetorical, in effect demanding an end to the activity referred to,
and usually followed by an imperative calling for the contrary activity. So Ackerman,
"An Exegetical Study," 337, 342.
14 In v. 3 špt means "to grant justice to, to uphold the rights of."
In Ps 82:2-4 and Isa 3:14-5 the accused are addressed directly - contrary to normal
legal practice accoording to Boecker ( Redeformen , 71-84). Boecker moots that this may
reflect a pre-trial exchange, but also observes that Yahweh is here both prosecutor and
judge (. Redeformen , 86; so Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study," 334). However, Yahweh
cannot but use the second person, since in both contexts the body that constitutes the
forum addressed by the plaintiff is also the accused (p. 86)! Clearly, however, this is not
a formal trial (see below).
16 Kraus claims that injustice on earth is ascribed to the powers between Yahweh
and the world, Psalmen II, 573. Many see the gods of the nations as satraps appointed
by the divine emperor over his satrapies.
bqrb cannot be forced to mean, literally, "in the middle of" (assuming that the high
god would be centrally placed - so apparently Mullen, 231). It means generally
"inside" and, with a plural object, "among."
16 One apparent exception to this pattern - not mentioned by Boecker - is Ezek
44:24, in which the levitical priests y'mdw Išpl (K; Q:lmšpt), literally, "stand to give

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 537

Exod 18:13-14. The practice of sitting for judgment is wid

(witness Judg 4:5; Joel 4:12; Ps 122:5; Prov 20:8; Da
plaintiff, Yahweh stands in Isa 3:13-14. 17
Boecker also discusses 1 Sam 22:6-19, in which Saul as
the roles of both plaintiff and judge. As judge, Saul si
though he is also the plaintiff. 18 If God were filling the r
well as plaintiff in Psalm 82, we would expect him also
Have we a specifically legal situation in Psalm 82? 19
probably reflects our own differentiated institutions a
thinking more than the institutions and mental world
Israel, where such sharp distinctions between judicial
governance in general appear not to have existed. In a
association of verbs of sitting with presiding, and of verb
with speaking in a court or assembly, seems to hold for b
cally judicial and more generally administrative settings b
ven and on earth.

In the divine assembly in particular, the language used of the mem-

bers who attend - as distinct from the presiding deity - refers to
standing: htysb in Job 1:6; 2:1; %md in 1 Kgs 22:19, 21 (where Yahweh
in yšb "sitting"). In Zechariah's vision of the divine assembly, Joshua
the high priest and the prosecuting angel "stand" Çmd) before Yah
weh (or his representative mFk), along with all others present (Kmdym
Ipnyw "those standing before him"; Kmdym tflh "these standing
around" [Zech 3:1, 3, 4, 7]). 20 In the Aramaic of Daniel, vast numbers
of the divine council "stand" ( yqwmwn ) before the presiding judg

judgment/for judgment." But G. A. Cooke already noted that while litigants stand,
judges sit, and so renders: "officiate" or "preside" - The Book of Ezekiel (ICC; Edin
burg: T. & T.Clark, 1936) 486; similarly W.Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2 (Hermeneia; Philadel-
phia: Fortress, 1983) 450 (= Ezechiel 2[BKAT 13/2; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener-
Verlag, 1969] 1121). JPSV and NRSV translate: "act as judges."
17 Boecker, Bedeformen , 85-6. Boecker notes in particular the use of the question in
v. 15a as characteristic of a charge or accusation. We have noted above the questio
with which Yahweh's charge begins in Psalm 82. Both passages use imperfect ver
forms to refer to ongoing patterns of behavior.
In Isa 3:13-14 Yahweh as plaintiff nsb Irybl/ufmd Idyn and bmšpl ybw' with which w
may compare the simpler nsb/lyšpl of Ps 82:1.
18 Boecker, Bedeformen , 87-88.
19 The "judicial setting" of the psalm was "obvious" to Ackerman ("An Exegetical
Study," 306), although he also acknowledged that the gods are here envisaged as
having general executive roles (348-9). Jüngling sees here a union of the concepts an
language of the divine assembly and the judicial court, and of the roles of plaintiff and
judge - Der Tod der Göller , 84-5.
20 The reference to the representative of Yahweh standing (in v. 5) is generall
deleted as a scribal error. The present discussion would support that decision. Or is i
appropriate for the presiding officer to stand to announce a solemn promise such a
that of the following verse?

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 538 S. B. PARKER

who "sits" (ytb) (Dan 7:9-10). Ev

"sits" (Dan 7:10), the others pr
Not surprisingly the same disti
both of those coming to the r
1 Kgs 3:16 Çmd); Prov 22:29 ( hiy
court: Gen 45:1; 2 Sam 13:31 (b
ťmd) 21
The weight of this evidence leads to the conclusion that the lan-
guage of verse 1, together with the context of vv. 2-4, indicates that
God is not here presiding over the divine assembly as judge, but
rather stands among the gods to pronounce a charge of injustice.
There is - tactfully - no direct reference to the president of the
assembly. (On the other hand, all modern historians of West Semitic
religion recognize within the designation of the divine assembly [cd/-7
v. 1] and the pantheon [ bny c lywn v. 6] two terms for old high gods [El
and Elyon).)

II. The structure and coherence of the psalm.

The defining genre of the first seven verses is narrative

third person of vv. 1 and 5). The bulk of the narrative consis

21 Ackerman presents most of the evidence above, maintaining the clear

between the roles of those standing and those sitting ("An Exegetical Stu
His own arguments (based on questionable interpretations of four texts
Amos 9:1; Isa 3:13-15; Ps 76:9-10; see "An Exegetical Study," 310-15)
obvious conclusion concerning the significance of nissdb in Ps 82:1 ar
suggested by his own language (the recurrence of the word "possibly" an
Jüngling similarly recognizes the distinction between the roles of sitting an
but prefers to interpret this verse in the light of the general Israelite view
place in the divine assembly, even though elsewhere he emphasizes the cr
individuality of the author of this psalm. - Der Tod der Götter , 81-5. Mullen
some of the above evidence, but fails to distinguish between sitting and stan
concludes that "Yahweh here has assumed his position as judge and lead
The Assembly of the Gods , 231).
Tsevat allows that a judge is normally seated, but that Yahweh, whi
seated, stands to give judgment in Isa 3:13; Ps 76:10 and Ps 82:1, 8. (Ho
bothered by Dan 7:9, where Yahweh is seated for judgment.) He conclude
weh's standing indicates an extraordinary event, suggesting suddenness an
(comparing further Isa 33:10 and Ps 12:6). We must exclude from this list
not to argue in a circle. None of the remaining examples envisages Ya
divine assembly. Isa 3:13, as we have seen, is not a judgment, but an ac
the remaining texts use the verb qwm (which is never used in the He
mention above), and lead not into a pronouncement of judgment or any kind
but to Yahweh's rising to do something, specifically to act on behalf of the
as in Ps 82:8. Cf. B. Batto, "The Sleeping God: An Ancient Near Eastern
Divine Sovereignty," Bib 68 (1987) 253-77, esp. 170-71 and n. 48.
The variety of verbs used for "standing" is sufficient evidence that none
technical term for participation in the council - pace Cooke, Cross and M

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 539

speeches by the protagonist (note the second person plur

and the first singular and second plural of vv. 6-7). The
calls upon the protagonist, God, to act in light of the outco
preceding narrative (note the second person singular o
cultic cry of this verse - qwmh ' Ihym (Yhwh) - is freq
Psalter, and discloses the setting in which the narrative
cult - and expresses the narrative's cultic significance a
V. 1 introduces the protagonist (God), his location (in
assembly), his initial action (standing), his first speech (yšp
addressees of that speech (the gods). In his first speech
charges the divine governors of the world with favoring w
and calls on them to give justice to the weak. The narr
recounts the gods' response (or lack of response) to this
(v. 5) - they continue in their benighted activity - and
quences - the very foundations of the world give way. 2
At this point and without introduction, God's second speech
begins.23 Çny) ' mrly ... ' kn ... form a standard syntactic framework for
a past assumption which is countered and corrected by a following
clause: "I thought... but..." (see Isa 49:4; Zeph 3:7; Ps 31:23;
Job 32:7-8). 24 Having thought that the members of the council were
all gods (and therefore just - and immortal), Yahweh now recognizes

22 For the quaking of the foundations of the earth as a consequence of injustice see
Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study," 377-8, and for a discussion of the larger Weltans-
chauung H. H. Schmid, Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung (BHT 40; Tübingen: Mohr, 1968).
V. 5b is a byproduct of God's coming in v. 1, according to those who delete vv.2-5a as
an intrusion (e.g. Morgenstern, "The Mythological Background," 72; Schmidt,
Königtum Gottes , 33). Schlisske, who claims that v. 5a is part of God's speech in
vv. 2-5 (because it belongs with the same theme of justice and oppression), sees v. 5b as
an intimation of God's coming in v. 8 (Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 38-39, 41). Dietrich
and Loretz can see no continuity between v. 5 and vv. 2-4 or 6-7 ("Jahwe und seine
Ascher a" 140).
28 Many take vv. 2-7 as a single divine speech,, e.g. S.Mowinckel, Psalmenstu-
dien II (1922; reprint, Amsterdam: Schippers, 1961) 68; G. E. Wright, The Old Testa-
ment Against its Environment (SBT; Chicago: Regnery, 1950) 30; Eissfeldt, "El and
Yahweh," 29-30; Tsevat, "God and the Gods," 125-6; Ackerman, "An Exegetical
Study", 380-83 (claiming that Yahweh was condemning one group of gods but speaking
of them to another group in v 5). Later, Eissfeldt apparently saw God's speech as
limited to vv. 2-4, and vv. 6-7 as the words of the poet ("Yahweh's Königsprädizierung
als Verklärung National-Politischer Ansprüche Israels." Wort, Lied und Gottesspruch
für Joseph Ziegler I. [Wůrzburg: 1972] 51-55, esp. 53-4 = Kleine Schriften F, 220). So
already H. Gunkel, Ausgewählte Psalmen (2d ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und
Ruprecht, 1905) 145; but cf. 150. Höffken sees 2-4 and 5-7 as two distinct speeches:
P. Höffken, "Werden und Vergehen der Götter. Ein Beitrag zur Auslegung von
Psalm 82." TZ 39 (1983) 129-37, esp. 133-4.
24 BDB 28b; K. Budde, "Ps, 82 6f.," JBL 40 (1921) 39-42. For the most recent
discussion of ' ākēn see B. M. Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical
Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 670-71. Contrast the claims of Höff-
ken, "Werden und Vergehen," 131 and n. 8.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 540 S. B. PARKER

that, being incorrigibly unjust, t

some human potentate.26 The co
speech to the king of Tyre: "Y
mortal and not God., you will
(Ezek 28:2). In the latter the ki
contrasted with his real mortality. In Ps 82:6-7, God's former
assumption ("you are gods") is contrasted with his present realization
(of the gods' mortality).
With vv. 6-7, the gods' fate is clear and their demise anticipated,
though not yet accomplished. The narrative ends and a liturgical
response begins, the latter calling upon God to assume governance of
the world.

An understanding of v. 8 and appreciation of its relationship to the

preceding narrative is crucial for the correct interpretation of the
psalm.26 If God is high god from the beginning (v. 1), v. 8 loses much
of its significance. Or should it be taken to imply that God has pre-
viously been negligent in disciplining the gods?27 If the latter were
the case, it would seem that discipline should suffice: if God has been
ultimately responsible for the governance of the world all along, why
should the (subordinate) gods be condemned to death, while he him-
self is acclaimed world ruler?
There is no suggestion that God has been negligent - asleep,
absent, or uncaring - as in some laments or complaints. He is not

26 That is, it is an announcement that thy will become mortal, like the affirmation
in Ezek 28:1-10 - Gonzalez, "Le Psaume LXXXII," 307. Some claim this is a legal
sentence, e.g. Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study," 397-8; Cross, Canaanile Myth, 187
(Yahweh "condemns the gods of the council to death"). But see Jüngling on the pro-
phetic form of these speeches (see below).
On the meaning of k'hd hsrym see Waltke and O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax ,
251-2.
26 Cf. Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study," 440: v. 8 "provides the key and the
cornerstone of the entire exegetical study!" Jüngling, Der Tod der Götter, 105: "Der
Schlussvers deckt erst gänzlich die Zusammenhänge auf." Tsevat rightly observes that
it is the last verse that makes this a psalm - "God and the Gods," 131.
27 Some have attributed to tinhal the meaning "be in possession of." Ackerman
apparently understands tnhl as "you allot inheritances" with the clear implication that
Yahweh had done so originally. For Ackerman this is Yahweh's justification for now
taking over direct rule from his worthless administrators - "An Exegetical Study,"
432-4.
But the verb nhl rather means "to receive or take as a possession" - G. Wanke,
"nahalâ," THAT II, 55-9; HALAT 648. (BDB allows "have or get as a possession"
in six texts: Jer 16:19; Ps 119:111; Prov 3:35; 11:29; 14:18; 28:10. But in none of these
is the former necessary, and in most it seems less appropriate.) On the root nhl
see especially F. Horst, "Zwei Begriffe für Eigentum (Besitz): und njnK," in
Verbannung und ^Heimkehr: W. Rudolph zum 70. Geburlstag (ed. A. Kuschke; Tübingen:
Mohr, 1961) 135-56. Horst distinguishes between the use of the perfect for being in
possession and of the imperfect for acquiring possession (ibid., 150).

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 541

called upon in v. 8 to exercise responsibilities he has be

or to discipline members of his own administration;
replace those who have held responsiblity for the nati
to exercise it appropriately. V. 8 is significant because
hitherto been ruler of the world. Now, however, he h
injustice and misrule of the governing gods and announce
(vv. 1-7), at the same time demonstrating his fitness to a
their place. As the one who is no take possession of the n
he is called upon to assume the governance of the wo
understood, everything in the psalm leads up to the a
v. 8. 28

The verbal patterns of the psalm are completely con

this interpretation and confirm the psalm's unity.29 1
the gods is sharply contrasted with the counterbalan
God in the contiguous words at the end of v. 7 and th
v. 8. 30 2) The "dying" of v. 7 anticipates the transfer
and responsibility expressed in the "taking possession"
God's assumption of the governance of the world frs)

28 While I disagree with Jüngling's interpretation of the psalm,

with his characterization of it as "eine Komposition ... von zwingende
in part "aus dem folgerichtigen Geschehnisverlauf" - Jüngling, Der
77.
29 A fuller presentation of the verbal patterns of Psalm 82 m
W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to its Techniq
Sheffield: JSOT, 1984) 290-93; and L. K. Handy, "Sounds, Words
Psalm 82," JSOT 47 (1990) 51-66. That patterns do not of themselves
is well illustrated in these studies, in which the meaning attributed
presupposes the currently dominant understanding of the psalm. Cf.
tly "structuralist" study of P. Auffret, "Dieu Juge: étude structurelle du
Psaume 82," Biblische Notizen 58 (1991) 7-12.
80 The contrast is noted by Preuss, who however interprets the fall more mate-
rially, comparing it with the falling down of divine images (in 1 Sam 5:3-4), which in
turn has connotations of worship ( Verspottung , 113, 76). He also understands the "rise"
to refer to Yahweh's becoming lord of the gods and their peoples, though this is not
consistent with his own claim that Yahweh is already the president of the former
(= El), nor with the text's claim that they are doomed to die.
Tsevat hits the mark when he writes that the "fall" of the gods means that they will
"be deposed from office" (Tsevat, "God and the Gods," 130). The "fall" of the gods is
"like some prince" and their death like that of "human kind." The human analogy is
determinative of the precise denotation in both cola, even though there may also be
connotations of the mythical fall from heaven cited in Isa 14:12, 15; Ezek 28:17b-19.
The mythical connotations are taken to be primary by Schlisske, Gottessöhne und
Gottessohn , 34-36; and Mullen, The Assembly of the Gods , 238-44 (reinforcing this claim
by interpreting ' ādām and sārīm in v. 7 as "Adam" and "Shining Ones"). They are
admitted as a possibility by Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study," 401-17, 423. But, as
Tsevat notes, these are all "beset with difficulties" - "God and the Gods," 130-31.
81 It is noteworthy that the same root is used in Deut 32:8 for Elyon's pristine
assignment of their territories to the nations and in the prayer of Ps 82:8 for God's
anticipated assumption of possession of the nations.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
542 S. B. PARKER

(v. 8) is the only hope for the coll

in v. 5. 4) The independent pers
contrast between speaker and do
tiveness of the protagonist is re-e
sonal pronoun referring to him in
occurrences of the simple conjug
Psalms (i.e. 20%) appear in this p
jects. This underlines the sign
world.32 God "calls for justice"
their "misrule, injustice" (v. 2) a
then is called upon to "rule, adm
6) Use of the word ' Ihym height
is/are the true god(s)? Verse 1 fir
his proper name) against the god
the illusion that the latter were in
by the realization that they are
acclaims God as true inheritor of the world.

III. Excursus - Psalm 82 and Myth

I have claimed that vv. 1-7 constitute a narrative abou

and that v. 8, though shifting to a different genre, indirec
the outcome of the narrative plot. Because one definition
is a narrative about the gods, it is remarkable that Psal
cited in various recent studies of myth in the Bible.33
contains as good an example as we have in the Bible of s
- a story about the gods that takes place entirely in th
realm.34 In this respect vv. 1-7 are congeneric with the Ug
myth, just as Krt and Aqht are congeneric with the ma
narratives in which God guides, supports, or punishes the h
tagonists. One cannot claim that the divine conflict in
"historicized" simply because the human consequences o

82 šp( is recognized as a Stichwort by Jüngling, Der Tod der Götter ,

Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 41.
88 J. W. Rogerson, Myth in Old Testament Interpretation (BZAW 13
Gruyter, 1974); C. Petersen, Mythos im Alten Testament (BZAW 157; B
ter, 1982) (even though this work explicitly concentrates on the Ps
H. Gottlieb and K. Jeppersen, Muths in the Old Testament (London: SC
84 Cf. similarly, Schlisske, Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 33, 39.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 543

actions are mentioned.35 The Ugaritic Baal myth also r

human consequences of events in the divine sphere (KT
24 = 1.6 I 6-7; 1.6 II 17-19; V 24-25), but no-one propos
been "historicized." No human actors appear in either n
the timing of God's assumption of universal rule in Psalm
only in liturgical time (in the cultic call of v. 8 - see b
The myth of Psalm 82 also corresponds to some other de
the word, e.g. a story that attempts to explain the pre
institutions or things in the present order; a story tha
cultic event. 36 Every myth has consequences for human
they are spelled out in the myth or not. Psalm 82 sp
grounds for Israel's present faith in God's universal ru
world in which bad gods sometimes seem in control,
other nations claim their gods rule. The myth's bearing o
or history (in this case God's displacement of the gods
nance of the world) is realized in the cult (here in the litu
the last verse).
Our myth also meets the requirements of Petersen's
myth: "ein Geschehnis bzw. die Erzählung von einem G
an dem eine Gottheit oder mehrere Götter beteiligt sin
einmaliges Ergebnis ausserhalb der geschichtlichen Zei
den hat," at least of his "mythical element," a shorter
the more developed narrative of a myth.37 Petersen n
cular that myths do not themselves suggest that the ev
are repeated; rather, the events occur once for all, eve
myth may be used repeatedly for their current realizatio
I conclude that Ps 82:1-7, brief as it is, may be term
and thoroughly Israelite myth.

IV. External evidence for the literary form of the psalm

A central underlying problem in the history of the interpre

this psalm has been the lack of clear congeners, i.e., analog
structure or flow of thought of the psalm as a whole.39 Most

36 So Preuss, Verspottung , 114, 287.

86 See Rogerson, Muth , 176-78.
87 Petersen, Muthos. 31, 32-33.
88 Petersen, Mythos, 30. It may be added that, as a myth, the psalm is deadly
serious. There is no trace of mockery here - pace Preuss, Verspottung , 287, who
incorporates the psalm into the list of texts he uses to illustrate his theme.
89 But see on Jüngling's contribution below.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 544 S. B. PARKER

have proposed some kind of leg

the picture, and fails to give due
usually referred to as the judge's
any legal sentence pronounced
Jüngling has identified the f
speeches as based on the prophe
tion (as in v. 2), followed by an
accusation may, as in Psalm 82,
Exod 10:3); and the announcem
what the speaker had previously
distinguishes Psalm 82 from, th
tive statement placed between t
be explained by further compa
ends with an announcement of pu
see's response to the admonition
unconditional in form because
admonition has already been rec
Jüngling readily admits that a
ther in a single scene.41 And of c
among them. Thus while it is clea
ing on elements found in prophe
for the speeches of the protagon
not suffice to explain the structu
model accounts for the sequenc
and confirms the narrative sett
In one Ugaritic and one biblica
of speeches and thoughts are reco
those in Psalm 82. In both, the
than a divine, world. These com
poet has transposed to the divi
logy/theology a situation and ev
ted in a human, political setting

40 Jüngling. Der Tod der Götter, 73-76.

41 Ibid., 77. There remains a significant residue in the psalm, even when all these
formal analogues have been established - ibid., 107.
42 Ackerman proposes the model of "a king addressing the administrative governors
of his realm" ("An Exegetical Study," 362-3). Most students of the psalm have had
direct recourse to other literature treating of disputes on the divine plane. Thus Preuss
compares it with other biblical passages in which Yahweh contends with other gods -
Judg 6:25-31; 1 Sam 5:1-5; 1 Kgs 18:19-40 - H. D. Preuss, Verspottung Fremder Reli-
gionen, 113.
I have discussed the following comparative literary evidence in another context

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 545

In the last column of the last known tablet of the U

tive poem Krt , Kirta's son, Yassub, goes to his father,
with neglect of his duties and failure to give justice
vantaged. He concludes his speech by calling on the k
down and yield his throne to Yassub (KTU 1.16 VI 39
As in Psalm 82, the bulk of the situation and narrative
through a speech. In both texts the protagonist confront
administration, citing maladministration of justice a
protect the needy. In both texts the protagonist's final w
the déposai of the present administration. God hims
expressly propose to take over, as Yassub does, but t
conclusion of the psalm provides, in another form, th
sequel. The liturgical conclusion to the psalm introdu
topic and performs the same narrative function (ant
accuser's displacement of the accused) as the conclusio
speech.44
In 2 Samuel 15, Absalom lays the groundwork for his displacement
of David. The distinctive development of this story has Absalom pur-
suing his course indirectly, deceptively, and without the king's know-
ledge (vv. 7-^9). Thus there is no direct confrontation or accusation of
the present ruler. Recognizing this particular political - and narra-
tive - strategy, we can see nevertheless the same larger situation and
plot as in Krt. Absalom charges that people with just and legitimate
complaints will get no hearing from the king (vv. 2-3), and announces
that if he were made ruler in the land, he would ensure that everyone

(S. B. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition. Essays on the Ugaritic Poems
Keret and Aqhat [Resources for Biblical Study 24; Atlanta: Scholars, 1989] 197-202,
and so will only briefly review it here from the point of view of the present thesis, which
I there took for granted.
48 The full development of this new initiative in the plot of Krt must have been
recorded on a subsequent tablet that we have not recovered. We have only Kirta's
immediate reaction, which is to curse his son (KTU 1.16 VI 54-58). The reference in
Yassub's speech to Kirta's sickness looks back to the preceding section of the work and
is here a device to connect this new narrative section with what has preceded, and
provide some motivation for Yassub's bid. See the discussion in The Pre-Biblical Narra-
tive Tradition , 198-99, 204-5, 209. For the latest proposed meaning of the difficult
lines 30-31/42-43 see F. Renfroe, "The Foibles of a Feeble Monarch (KTU 1 . 16. VI :41 -
54)". UF 22 (1990) 279-84.
44 Much previous comparison with 1.16 VI (see especially R. T. O'Callaghan, "A
Note on the Canaanite background of Psalm 82," CBQ 15 [1953] 311-4) confuses the
issues raised in 1.16 I-II with those of 1.16 VI. The connection of the latter with Kirta's
sickness is a consequence of the combining of two separate stories (see previous note).
The question of the death of the king, the son of El, is raised by the king's sickness, and
has nothing to do with the later bid for usurpation and the associated charge of injus-
tice. Such previous comparisons have been appropriately dismissed by A. Schoors in
L. R. Fisher, ed. Bas Shamra Parallels I (AnOr 49; Rome: PB I, 1972) 52-3.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 546 S. B. PARKER

with a grievance would get just

in the other two texts - the ch
failing in its responsibilities and
mate grievances, and the proposa
The nature and the timing of th
each text. Kirta waits until Yass
curses him. (We do not know th
here.) David does not wait for
response to the news that the I
giance to Absalom is flight (2
take over the throne without re
from power recalls the fall of of
the fate of the gods in Ps 82).
proposal (2 Sam 17:14) that he p
kill the departed king, in orde
Ps 82:5 the narrator notes the r
initial charge: their incompreh
troy the world. Only at this p
stage, announcing the fate of t
this with an appeal to Yahweh to
in their place.
Despite differences in presentation (or strategy), in each case:

The charge that the present rulers have not fulfilled their judicial responsi-
bilities leads directly into the consequence: the expectation that they will
be replaced by the one who brought the charge. This constant element in
the three otherwise very different texts suggests that we may have to do
with a literary motif, based on the ideal of the just king. Any bid to depose
or replace the present ruler(s) must be based on the claim that he has
neglected and/or abused his judicial powers.46

46 The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition , 201. Cf. the comments of Whitelam on

2 Sam 15:1-6: "The main significance of this episode is that it demonstrates the
potency of the image of the Just King as a practical means of securing the throne. The
fact that Absalom was able to demonstrate that David had failed in his duty to per-
form this fundamental aspect of the king's office, and that he himself was capable of
fulfilling the role of the Just King , was sufficient to rally the necessary support for a
successful coup d'état" - a coup that was "carried out in the name of 'social justice' "
(K. W. Whitelam, The Just King [JSOTSS 12; Sheffield, 1979] 137-8). Conversely,
some monarchs of Byblos cite their justice and fairness as grounds for the granting of
their prayer for a long rule - KAI 4 (Yehimilk):3-7; 10 (Yehawmilk):8-9; cf. Greenfield's
comments on the association of the "durability of the throne and the justness of the
royal scepter" in J. C.Greenfield, "Scripture and Inscription," in Near Eastern Stu-
dies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (ed. H. Goedicke; Baltimore and London/
Johns Hopkins University, 1971) 253-68, esp. 255-6. On the temporal issues of legiti-
macy, propaganda and usurpation see further K. W. Whitelam, "Israelite Kingship.
The royal ideology and its opponents," in The World of Ancient Israel: Sociological,
Anthropological and Political Perspectives (ed. R. E. Clements; Cambridge and New
York: Cambridge University, 1989) 119-39.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 547

Thus in Psalm 82 God's charge that the present rulers of the

(the gods) have abused their power and failed to govern ju
charge immediately confirmed by the report in v. 5 - lea
announcement of their fall,46 and the (liturgical) call for God
the world in their stead.
If we recognize the force of these comparisons, older claims that
vv. 2-5b and 8 are secondary Israelite additions to an earlier Canaa-
nite myth must be abandoned. Rather than excluding the most speci-
fically Israelite elements of the Psalm and then fitting out the remain-
der to conform to an allegedly earlier, Canaanite myth, 47 or seeing the
psalm as composed of selected mythical motifs, 48 we should recognize
that we have an authentic Israelite creation, using the conventional
mythical setting of the divine assembly, but modelling its plot on
(accounts of) crises in human government.49 The force of these compa-
risons also renders untenable the conventional assumption that the
psalm depicts a (shrunken) trial scene. 50 While the prophetic language
of vv. 2-4 has counterparts elsewhere in the Bible, its particular func-
tion here is peculiar to the situation of these three narratives (and the

46 Ackerman's discussion of the divine assembly functioning as a court of law ("An

Exegetical Study," 186-98) is irrelevant, since the assembled gods are, in legal terms,
the accused. Their only role in the narrative is to proceed uncomprehendingly in their
benighted state, following Yahweh's first speech.
47 So Morgenstern, "The Mythological Background."
48 So Schlisske, Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 40.
49 Tsevat raises the question whether it is 4ła free story" like Job 1-2 or a vision
report as in 1 Kings 22 and Isaiah 6 - "God and the Gods," 131-2. He decides for the
latter because there, unlike narrative, a call to God may interrupt the scene (as in
Isa 6:8 Ezek 9:8; Amos .7:2). But in those cases the interruption comes from a character
who is conceived of as present in the assembly, as is clear from the fact that he receives
a response to his speech. That is not the case in Psalm 82. Tsevat also claims that there
is no sign of narrative or narrative style here. (We might counter that there are none of
the typical signs of a vision report here either!) He is of course correct that there are no
imperfect consécutives. But most of the "narrative" consists of speeches (like many
biblical narratives), and v. 5 reports not the next in a series of actions, but ongoing,
regular behavior, so that in none of these is the imperfect consecutive appropriate. I
attribute to the poetic character and liturgical use of the story the lack of any introduc-
tion of the speech in vv. 6-7 and the lack of the imperfect consecutive in v. 1. In all
other respects, vv. 1-7 conform to the conventions of narrative. (Kraus had already
claimed that the psalm presented a prophetic vision, on the grounds that elsewhere
prophets have visions of the divine assembly [e.g. 1 Kings 22] and vv. 2-4 constitute a
prophetic judgement speech.)
60 So Preuss, Verspottung , 113-4. Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study," 363 wants to
combine "two interrelated contexts:" "royal judicial" (assuming that god is speaking
as king to his governors) and "governmental-diplomatic." The latter is based on a
comparison of vv. 2-4 with especially Exod 10:3 in which Moses and Aaron, as Yah-
weh's envoys, say: ' d-mty mint rnt mpny ; šlh 'my wy'bdny "How long will you refuse to
submit to me? Let my people go, that they may serve me." As in Psalm 82, here also is
a question that reproaches the ruler for what he is doing and a call to do the opposite.
See above for a more just use of this speech.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 548 S. B. PARKER

historical experience lying behind

three texts is a crisis in gover
present administrators to rule jus
the court to take the place of t
I conclude that Psalm 82 is de
model attested in Canaan and Israel, which in turn is based on a
typical crisis in government (not unknown in the world today); and
that the myth so created serves perfectly the purposes of the final
verse, justifying Yahweh's assumption of ownership and rule of the
world. While there are many ancient Near Eastern myths about the
replacement of old gods by new, Psalm 82 appears unique in its parti-
cular representation of such a succession.

V. Psalm 82 in the Context of Israelite Thought and Life

In the preceding interpretation of the psalm, a narrative ex

God's sole rule of the world posits a prior rule by all the
appropriate at this point to review evidence elsewhere in
literature for the operation of other gods independently o
Given the prevailing ideology of the Bible, and the relatively
ted social and religious circles through which all the preserve
ture has ultimately come, it can scarcely be expected that
dence has been preserved. Yet there is some.
One relatively clear case is the mythological reminiscence o
human marriages in Gen 6:2, 4a,51 in which Yahweh is co
by his absence.52 Even in its present setting, Yahweh's pr
ment in this pericope (6:1-4) concerns humanity, not the
gods (6:3)! It is as if the gods were operating in a realm diffe
Yahweh's. The mythical ' 'event" is of course now fitted into
stage in the history of humankind as developed in Gene
(Gen 6:1), and linked to other traditions. 53 But the awkwardn

61 Contrast Schlisske, Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 21 - but his view ther

fied on pp. 29-30.
62 The gods act "completely independently" - W. Herrmann, "Die Gö
ZfìGG 12 (1960), 242-51; similarly Ohler, Mythologische Elemente , 209.
68 The Nephilim and the Gibborim - 6:4a and 4b (cf. Ezek 32:27) - if
both of these were not already the offspring of the mixed marriages in an e
form of the myth. If they were, that relationship is obscured by the present
substitutes for it the contemporaneity of the different groups (Ohler, M
Elemente , 208-9).

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 549

present connections among the various traditions in Gen 6

gests their original distinctness, which in turn demands that
interpreted individually before the attempt is made to un
their function as now juxtaposed in their present context.54 T
tor of this pericope was certainly familiar with a myth (or m
which the gods mated with human women. Isolated example
divine-human unions are found in the ancient Near East, e.
Ugaritic myth of Shahar and Shalim (KTU 1.23) and in th
mesh Epic's reference to Gilgamesh's parentage. (The
Illuyanka myth reverses the sexes of the parties - a goddess
with a man.) Such myths must have been known around
Israel, as they were certainly familiar around ancient Gr
composer here limits this activity to a specific period of th
past, and subjects it to Yahweh's judgment.55
A more widely attested mythological assumption in earl
was that each nation had its own, god - or rather, that each
its own nation which had been allotted to it as its own pro
some primal time. This is spelled out most clearly and fam
Deut 32:8:

"When Elyon gave the nations their possessions,

divided up humankind,
he established the territories of the peoples
according to the number of the gods"66

Yahweh's allotment was, of course, Jacob/Israel (v. 9). Read as it

stands - that is, without reference to its larger context and the
dominant ideology of the final redaction of the Pentateuch - these
two poetic lines see Yahweh and Israel bound together (as spelled out
in v. 9) in the same way as all other gods and nations, all owing their
present affiliation to primeval distribution by the shadowy figure of
Elyon.57 This implies a universal monolatry, each nation worshipping

54 Schlisske's methodology is thus the right one. Cf. his study of this passage -
Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 20-32. However, a plausible case for the prior association of
the various mythological elements in this pericope and their connection with the flood
has been made by B. S. Hendel, "Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward an Inter-
pretation of Genesis 6:1-4," JBL 106 (1987) 13-26.
56 For a fuller discussion see Schlisske and Hendel (previous note).
66 Beading bny ' Ihym with LXX and now Qumran and most recent commentators.
For the Qumran reading see P. W. Skehan, BASOB , 136 (Dec. 1954) 12 and JBL 78
(1959), 21.
The following account of the history of this text and its interpretation is in general
agreement with that of Dietrich and Loretz, " Jahwe und sein Aschera," 155-56.
57 So K. Budde, Das Lied Moses Deut. 32, erläutert und übersetzt (Tubingen: Mohr,
1920) 17-19; Eissfeldt, "El and Yahweh," 29 = Kleine Schriften III , 390; Zobel,

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 550 S. B. PARKER

one god, like Israel in normativ

the Rabshakeh's speech in 2 Kgs
each deliver its own nation?" Suc
specified in Deut 4:19 and 29:25
That this distribution myth i
theme of the song as a whole is n
tic in his use of traditions, as in
logically incompatible traditions
between Israel and Yahweh are
vv. 6b, 18. 69
Eventually Elyon, was underst
Deut 32:8 was construed as a st
the nations to the charge of the
to nations is implied in Deut 2
avoided by reading the bny ' Ihy
(because of the persistence of t
the bny 9 Ihymt ) the text was m
for bny 9lhym). Yahweh became
territories, and the descendants
number - later still defined as
Gen 46:27b and Exod 1:5a (thou
tradition of the seventy sons of

" Ijwn," 189-90. D. I. Block (The Gods of

National Theology [Evangelical Theologi
Evangelical Theological Society, 1 988])
assignment of territories to the nations
himself.
68 Jüngling lists the differences between 32:8-9 and 4:19-20 and concludes, with
others, that the latter alludes to the former - Der Tod der Götter , 97-8. In support of the
understanding of Elyon as distinct from Yahweh, Cooke notes that if Yahweh were
already the subject of v. 8, the wording of v. 9 would be odd - G. Cooke, "The Sons
of (the) God(s)," ZAW 76 (1964), 22-47, esp. 33.
69 Schlisske, Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 67-68, and n. 35. Consequently one of
Ackerman's arguments against Eissfeldt's interpretation - basically that the norma-
tive view of Yahweh's heritage in the Bible is that Yahweh created it himself and then
gave it to Israel ("An Exegetical Study," 323-9) - is beside the point. There are many
different views of the origins of Yahweh's and Israel's beginnings preserved in the
Bible. Ackerman also believes that Eissfeldt interprets Psalm 82 and Deut 32:8-9 to
support his theory concerning the origin of the relationship between El and Yahweh,
and that Cross has disproved Eissfeldt's theory. But the interpretation of the two texts
imposes itself without reference to a larger thesis concerning Yahweh's origins.
Psalm 82, at least, does not have any implications for the early history of Yahweh (see
below). One may grant that El and Yahweh are identified in most of the preserved
texts, including some alleged to be early (with Ackerman, "An Exegetical Study,"
320-21), without acknowledging that this says anything about the ultimate origin of
Yahweh.
60 As it is interpreted in many commentaries today, e.g. those of von Rad, Mayes,
and Phillips.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 551

Elsewhere the high god is ignored, and it is assumed

gave its own nation its land. In Judg 11:24 Jephthah argu
behalf over the possession of territory in Transjordan
mosh, your god, has given you to possess - that you w
all that Yahweh, our God, has given us to possess - t
possess." Obviously, the narrators have put in their
words calculated to be diplomatically effective. But in
have probably revealed what was a widespread belief
Israel and among its neighbors. No more than in the myt
in Deut 32:7-8 is there any claim, or even implication
was responsible for distributing the nations among th
That each nation had its own god is also taken for
Mie 4:5, which again sets Israel's relationship to Yahw
relationship of other peoples to their gods:

All the peoples pursue their course,

each in the name of its god;
But we pursue our course
in the name of Yahweh our God
for ever.

This verse stands in stark contrast with the vision of the preceding
verses, especially lb-2a, in which all the nations come to Yahweh's
temple in Jerusalem to learn Yahweh's ways. Mie 4:l-4a is rounded off
with the formulaic ky-py yhwh sb'wt dbr "For the mouth of Yahweh of
Hosts has spoken" (v. 4b). Although the other version of Mie 4:1-4 (in
Isa 2:1-5) ends differently (cf. Mie 4:4 and Isa 2:5), both endings are
consistent with, and appropriate conclusions to, what precedes.
Isaiah 2:1-5 has nothing corresponding to Mie 4:5, which clearly
stands out as a separate pronouncement, expressing a more resigned
or assertive realism after the preceding visionary flight. 61
As is well known, the pre-exilic limitation to Israelite soil of an
effective relationship with Yahweh, and the expectation that in other
countries one must worship other gods, is expressed in 1 Sam 26:19;
2 Kgs 5:17. Admission of the effectiveness of other gods acting on
behalf of their people, or at least in response to their royal representa-
tives on earth, is implicit in texts such as 2 Kgs 3:27. In its dealings
with other nations, early Israel certainly had to reckon with the fact
that both it and Yahweh had to deal with the gods of those nations,
and that in those nations anyone had to deal with their gods. In other

61 Note also the contrasting phraseology: hlk b'rhl- in v. 2a; hlk bšm- in v. 5.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 552 S. B. PARKER

words, the gods were not gener

weh's judgement and punishmen
tion that they are powerful opp
Num 33:4; Jer 49:1-3; Isa 24:21.
With the claim that Yahweh is the supreme God, the old theme of
the distribution of the nations to the gods is recast to make Yahweh
responsible. We have already seen how this was effected in Deut 32:8.
In Deut 4:19 Yahweh is said to have apportioned "all the host of
heaven" to "all the peoples under the entire heaven," taking the
Israelites for himself - here defined as bringing them out of the iron
furnace, Egypt (v. 20). Here, Yahweh is unambiguously the supreme
distributor of benefices; and his assumption of Israel for himself is
equated with the exodus. (The distribution is made, here even more
clearly than in Deut 32:8, a matching of peoples and gods.)
In other contexts, of course, the gods are assimilated into Yahweh's
court, becoming his ministers, servants, messengers, or troops -
"angels" that may advise him, represent him, do his bidding, or ulti-
mately - pronounced incomparable with him - worship him. The
old divine assembly is now simply the obedient staff of the monarch
of the universe.62

Psalm 82 harks back to the earliest preserved Israelite view of the

pantheon, as found in Deut 32:8, in which the gods are responsible for
the governance of the nations of the world (and Yahweh, as one of the
gods, is responsible for one of the nations: Israel). Psalm 82 (carefully
omitting any direct reference to the high god) depicts Yahweh as
dramatically stepping forward to accuse the other gods.63 Seeing a
world in which injustice is rampant and the gods are not exercising
their responsibilities, the God of Israel asks them how much longer
they are going to rule unjustly and calls upon them to govern justly.

92 For a recent review of the functions of the divine council in the Hebrew Bible see
P. D. Miller, "Cosmology and World Order in the Old Testament. The Divine Council
as Cosmic-Political Symbol," Horizons in Biblical Theology 9/2 (December 1987) 53-78.
For the complexity of the divine world in the Bible and the limitations of the term
"monotheism" as a characterization of biblical religion see J. F. A. Sawyer, "Biblical
Alternatives to Monotheism," Theology 87 (1984) 172-80.
63 So Schmidt, Königtum , 70, n. 32. The psalm takes the gods very seriously -
Tsevat speaks of their "actuality": Tsevat, "God and the Gods," 125.
With Yahweh's appearance and accusatory speech cf. the appearance and speech of
one of the other gods in Yahweh's divine court in Job 1-2 and Zech 3:1-2. But in those
texts the accuser, like all the other members of the assembly, is divine only by origin
and by virtue of being a member of the divine court. He has been reduced in fact to a
mere servant, who can accomplish nothing without the agreement of the supreme, and
only real God, Yahweh. Accordingly, accusations in those contexts cannot be directed
at other gods, but only at humans.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 553

Responsibility for the present disorder is thus laid fairly and

at their door. The narrator goes on to report that they con
their benighted behavior, thereby losing their final chance to
the situation and threatening the foundations of the wor
announces to them their true nature and destiny, now man
him.64 The composers thus exploit an old - largely obscur
still discernible - mythological worldview in this mythological
tive.

But while the mythical presuppositions of the first part of t

rative are ancient and were probably shared by many Israe
their neighbors, the concluding verses, which dispose of all oth
and present Yahweh as the sole ruler of the world, take u
beyond the thinking of the various passages cited above. Th
admission here of the various nations having their own leg
gods, even though Yahweh is envisaged as supreme. The pu
the psalm is rather to expose, explain, and justify the overthr
demise of the old pantheon and Yahweh's subsequent assum
universal power. Yahweh is calld upon to reign exclusively and
over the whole world.65

A comparable recasting of old notions to bear new perceptions

appears in Jer 16:19b:
To you (Yahweh) the nations will come,
from the ends of the earth and say:
'Our ancestors inherited a deception,
false things which do nothing for us.' "

Again, behind this lies the old view of the allotment of the various
gods to the various nations. But the nations are now pictured as
recognizing the emptiness and powerlessness of their gods and coming
to Yahweh for effective administration of their realms.
Yahweh's effective displacement of the gods of the nations is seen
already in the recasting of the theme of distribution of the nations to
their lands in the rhetoric of Amos 9:7b. Here Yahweh is made direc-
tly responsible for the assignment of each individual nation to its

64 Many have noted he recurrence of the verb nhl in Deut 32:8 and Ps 82:8. Eissfeldt
inferred from this recurrence that the power of the disposition of the nations, formerl
belonging to Elyon (in Deut 32:8) is now claimed for Yahweh (in Ps 82:8) - Eissfeldt,
"El and Yahweh," 30, n. 1. But according to Ps 82:8 Yahweh has the legal power no
simply of distribution, but of possession of the nations. For those who identify Elyo
with Yahweh in both texts, Yahweh is simply taking back his ownership rights i
Ps 82:8 - e.g. Jüngling, Der Tod der Götter , 98.
65 Nothing in the Bible is more monotheistic than Psalm 82 according to Gonzalfz
"Le Psaume LXXXII," 308.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 554 S. B. PARKER

territory in a manner analogous

not bring Israel up from the land
Caphtor? And Aram from Kir?"
of divine allotments is historici
exodus, and Yahweh's role is ge
gods: as Yahweh brought Israel ou
tines and Aramaeans from their
historical territories. This idea is
Yahweh claims to have given it
(without reference to any other
We need not demonstrate that Yahweh's exclusive role in the
governance of the world is most fully established, and the real
tence of the other gods most scornfully rejected, in Deutero-I
As the sole divine power, Yahweh is even made responsible for
good and bad (Isa 45:7). It is worth noting, however, that
41:21-24, Yahweh challenges the gods to demonstrate their k
ledge and power, even saying: "Declare things that are yet to
that we may acknowledge that you are gods" (v. 23a). This rhet
invitation goes unanswered, of course, so that Yahwehh conc
"See, you are nothing; your activity is nil!" (v. 24 as emended
v. 29). The prophet here uses the rhetorical fiction of an addre
Yahweh to the other gods. Psalm 82 presents Yahweh as addres
the gods in the context of a (mythical) narrative. The rhetor
Isa 41:21-24 envisages a possibility of the gods proving their k
ledge and power. The narrative in Psalm 82 envisages the possib
of the gods proving that they can govern the world justly. Se
Isaiah has Yahweh conclude that the gods are devoid of all sign
life. The narrative form of Psalm 82 has Yahweh announce their

impending death. In the two different genres of the two texts, we

the same address to the gods as conceivably operating as gods -
the same conclusion that they are finally devoid of effectivene
relevance. But in Isaiah the address is prophetic rhetoric, and
total incapacity of the gods is a foregone conclusion. In Psalm 8
address is part of a serious drama, and, though the conclusion
implied, its realization has to be called for in the cult.
Thus we cannot jump from the archaic worldview of the mythol
cal narrative of Psalm 82 to the conclusion that this must be a
early psalm.66 Here Preuss is correct that the content of the p

66 Basically pre- Israelite, except for vv. 2-5b and 8: Schmidt, Königtum , 196
similarly O. Loretz, "Psalmenstudien: III. Eine kanaanäische short story: Psalm

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 555

presupposes other, old texts. 67 It also presupposes prophet

texts (Jüngling). Its conclusion shows it to be envisagin
developed Israelite monotheism of Second Isaiah.68 Its plot i
the creation of the psalmist, who uses the setting of the
certainly, but models his plot on (accounts of) political c
royal sphere, and applies prophetic judgment texts to
realm. Thus it presents us with two extremes: the form
pantheon in assembly with Yahweh as one among many
demonstration and justification of the disposal of all the ol
be replaced by Yahweh as sole ruler of the world. The form
ted here only to establish the latter. 69 There are no groun
ming that the psalm preserves an old myth.70

UF 3 (1971) 113-5 - but his latter more radical dismembering of the

[1975] 587-8 leads him to date its alleged different sources to the post
"Jahwe und seine Aschera," 144-45; pre-monarchic: Ackerman, "An
Study," 455; pre-Davidic: Eissfeldt, "El and Yahweh," 37; from the t
Eissfeldt, "Israels Religion und die Religionen seiner Umwelt," Neue Ze
Systematische Theologie 9 (1967) 8-27, esp. 18-19 = Kleine Schriften V ,
Psalmen als Gerichtsquelle," Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Fox
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1971) 97-112, esp. 103 = Kleine Schriften
exilic and possibly very old": Kraus, Psalmen , 570; except for v. 8 fro
century (the time of prophetic social criticism) - Niehr, Herrschen , 9
67 Preuss, Verspottung , 115.
68 Monotheism was already long victorious in Israel when this psalm
according to Gunkel, Ausgewählte Psalmen, 146. According to Preus
supposes the basic content of Psalm 82. He concludes, following Labusch
psalm must date to shortly before Josiah's reform, for which it in some
( Verspottung , 115; Similarly Niehr, Der Höchste Gott , 80). Gonzalez
Second Isaiah ("Le Psaume LXXXII," 309). Jüngling dates it to the s
the sixth century (Der Tod der Götter , 79-80). It is exilic or post-exil
Höffken, "Werden und Vergehen," 136. G. E. Wright thought it b
period between the seventh and fourth centuries B.C." - The Old Testam
Environment (SBT; Chicago: Regnery, 1950) 37. For older post-exilic da
genstern, "The Mythological Background," 121. Patrick Miller point
colon common only to Isa 44:18a and Ps 82:5a further supports the
II Isaiah and Psalm 82 (personal communication). This is so, even thoug
meaning of the words is slightly different in the two contexts (of th
physical objects - images - in II Isaiah; of the moral incomprehensio
eods in Psalm 82).
69 The use of the former is legitimized becuse it establishes the latter
on the several texts treating of the "sons of God": "Mythisches wird al
den Mythos ins Feld geführt" - Gottessöhne und Gottessohn , 76.
70 Eissfeldt saw the mythological narrative not as a rhetorical strategy for the
claims of the last verse, but as descriptive of current belief (and therefore dating from
around the united monarchy), with the following subtle distinction: the poet recognized
El as the highest god, in accordance with cosmological and mythological tradition, but
his practical religion is concerned only with Yahweh, who, although meanwhile still
considered subordinate to El, is in fact already the authoritative power, and will soon
take El's place also in the theoretical Weltbild of the Israelite or Jewish religion. ("El
and Yahweh," 30.) The picture here as in Deut 32:8-9 is "more cosmological and
mythological than religious and cultic" (ibid., 29).

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 556 S. B. PARKER

Why do the composers of Psal

injustice of other gods, which i
the divine authority, but in the n
their concern is a reflection of th
Israelites resident in other nation
weh as supreme god over variou
model is satisfactory only for
Israel is concerned solely with
other gods have responsibility fo
do when Israelites are in their nations, then Yahweh would have
responsibility for their behavior and hence ultimately for their mis-
treatment of Israelites. Hence the most appropriate way to express
mythologically the full responsibility of the other gods for the suffe-
rings of Israelites in other nations, and Yahweh's effective concern for
those Israelites, is to present Yahweh's rebuke of the gods' behavior
and announcement of their fate, and to envisage Yahweh's displace-
ment of the other gods.
While the psalm addresses what is expressly a mythological/theolo-
gical crisis, the political dimension of the crisis was doubtless impli-
cit. 73 In Psalm 58 the reproach of the gods for governing unjustly
(vv. 2-3) is followed immediately by a description of what human
malefactors are doing (vv. 4-6). The effective administrators on behalf
of the gods of the nations were, of course, the monarchs of the
nations. In Isa 24:21 the heavenly forces are in poetic parallelism
with terrestrial monarchs as objects of God's punishment. The corre-
lation of the actions and fates of national deities with those of the

corresponding nations is a commonplace of the ancient Near Eas

extending into the literature of Jewish apocalyptic.
The demise of the gods and succession of Yahweh would leave th
monarchs no option but to serve Yahweh (cf. Jer 16:19). Yahweh
direct rule of all nations would ensure that Judeans anywhere in the
world would benefit from a just administration, or at least Yahwe

71 Gunkel saw this assault on the injustice of other gods as a reaction to Judaism
sufferings under foreign rule and its oppressive polytheism - Ausgewählte Psalm
151. Similarly E. Kautzsch, Biblische Theologie des Allen Testaments (Tübingen; Mo
1911) 357. For Eissfeldt it was part of Israel's claim to world-rule, promoted by t
propagandists of David's empire - "Yahweh's Königsprädizierung," 53-4 = Klein
Schriften V , 220.
72 Pace Ackerman, "An Exeeetical Study," 353.
78 Cf. Gonzalez, "Le psaume LXXXII," 302, 304; Ackerman, "An Exegetical
Study," 354; Machado Siqueira, "O Salmo 82"; Nasuti, Tradition History and the
Psalms of Asaph , 111.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 557

overthrow of an unjust one. This understanding of

Psalm 82 is reinforced by the early compilers' placement
taposition to Psalm 83, in which the injustice prac
nations against Israel is the main theme, and the univ
tion of Yahweh as *elyon the outcome that is prayed f
Since its ultimate view (in vv. 6-8) of the relations betw
and the other gods is similar to that of Second Isaiah; 74
on several different streams of tradition preserved in th
since its concern with the exercise of (in)justice in o
implies a concern for the fate of Judeans in other nation
unlikely that Psalm 82 should be dated before the sixt

V. Conclusion

I have argued that the language of Psalm 82 compels us to con

of Yahweh in the narrative section not as the president of the
assembly, but as one god among the many, who charges th
rulers of the nations with maladministration and announces their
downfall. This is confirmed by close similarities among this brief piece
of mythological narrative, the Ugaritic poetic narrative of Kri , and
the beginning of the prose narrative of Absalom's rebellion. These
suggest that the composers of Psalm 82 have modelled their myth on
the common way of narrating a bid to displace the present ruler. Such
a construction of the psalm heightens its force as a coherent liturgical
unit. The mythological thinking found here is not unique in the Bible.
Occasional glimpses of such "pre-biblical" thought may be found in
other biblical texts as well. Here such thinking is deliberately and
boldly exploited in order to demonstrate and justify Yahweh's total
displacement of the old pantheon and its assembly.
But our text is not just a mythical narrative. The purpose of the
myth only becomes clear in the last verse, which I have characterized

74 Jüngling speaks of both using Gerichtsreden, but rightly distinguishes the speeches
of Second Isaiah as challenging not the gods' behavior, but their claim to be gods.
Psalm 82 condemns the conduct of the gods and on that basis announces their fall and
death. Second Isaiah exposes their inability to do anything - good or bad (41:23b) -
and on that basis announces that they are nonentities ( Der Tod der Götter , 77-78). More
generally he links the two as sharing a common universalism (ibid., 80).
76 Jüngling, Der Tod der Götter , 80; Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of
Asaph , 108.
79 Jüngling discusses its relationship to theodicy as an index of its relative lateness:
Der Tod der Götter , 80, 106.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 558 S. B. PARKER

as a liturgical response to the nar

possession of all the nations, an
The cultic moment is clear. The c
the world. Responsibility is asc
worship. The narrative recounts
persistence in their destructiv
ment of their downfall. But th
announced, not realized. The m
rule is doomed, but present re
tolerance of injustice continues
explaining how God's announceme
the liturgical response calls upon
and to initiate his just governanc
The liturgical function of this ve
whole, is not to acknowledge th
future," but to realise God's ru
consciousness. 79

There is one other psalm, which, while it does not use a mythologi-
cal narrative, bears comparison with the liturgical function of
Psalm 82. I refer again to Psalm 58 (compared with our psalm by
Tsevat). Psalm 58:2-3 addresses the gods directly, as Yahweh does in
Psalm 82, asking whether they will judge humankind fairly, and
accusing them of doing wrong on the earth. But there is no narrative
context. The address to the gods is in the mouth of the psalmist; and
it seems to be a passing rhetorical figure, because the gods are not
mentioned again. After describing how human malefactors are beha-
ving (vv. 4-6), the psalmist calls upon God to destroy them (vv. 7-10),
and anticipates the joy of the innocent at their destruction and huma-
nity's recognition that the world is after all justly governed (vv. 11-
12). This psalm thus moves from a rebuke of the unjust powers that
rule the world, through an anticipation of the destruction of the

77 The historical experience reflected here contrasts with that of Prov 8:15-16,
which simplv states that all the world's authorities rule bv divine wisdom!
78 I differ here, I think, from Levenson, who writes that the last verse "implies that
God's assumption of mastery is not complete and that the demise of the dark forces in
opposition to him lies in the uncertain future" - Levenson, Creation and the Per-
sistence of Exil , 7. This eschatologial interpretation of the verse is well established,
going back to Gunkel and Kittel, and recently reiterated in Schlisske, Gottessöhne und
Gottessohn , 43.
79 So Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien //, 69. (Levenson's comparison of Psalm 82 with
the Babylonian Enūma eliŠ - both celebrate the assumption of mastery by the
supreme deity of the society - would support this interpretation.)

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PSALM 82 AS MYTH AND LITURGY 559

forces of evil, to a concluding recognition of God's just

world. In this respect it reflects a movement similar t
Psalm 82. It also reflects a similar liturgical moment: re
the powers of wickedness in the world, and anticipation
disposal of them and of a general recognition of a just divi
ment. But where Psalm 58 prays for the destruction of wic
the myth of Psalm 82 asserts that Yahweh has already anno
demise of the corrupt deities who are supposed to be go
universe. Where Psalm 58 can only anticipate that peopl
gnize God's just rule when the wicked are destroyed, Ps
upon God to assume that rule in this moment. Thus Psa
prayer, not unlike many other psalms, specifically lame
Psalm 82 is a myth, the realization of which is expressed in
gical now. Psalm 82 presents us with the critical moment o
the setting to rights of the world.

Boston University Simon B. Parker.

This content downloaded from

93.141.174.112 on Fri, 01 Oct 2021 12:48:23 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms