Vêtus

Testamentum
BRILL Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 brill.nl/vt

A Fresh Look at Amos 4:1-3 and Its Imagery

Emmanuel O. Nwaoru
Catholic Institute of West Africa, Port Harcourt

Abstract
For a couple of decades, if not centuries, the textual, syntactical, and semantic problems of
Amos 4:1-3 have so engaged the attention of commentators to the detriment of a straightfor-
ward interpretation of the oracle. This article sets out to examine afresh some of those thorny
literary issues. Its findings show that the apparent illogical grammar and imagery of the oracle
serve prophetic needs. For it is on such a figurative language that the prophet sets the polarity
between YHWH s indictment and judgment of the upper rich class of Israelite society and,
consequendy, his message.

Keywords
Amos, metaphor, oppression, judgment

The overall message of the oracle of Amos 4:1-3 in its tripartite structure is
relatively clear. It has to do with accusations (v. 1), threat (v. 2), and punish-
ment (v. 3) for social injustice. The interpretation of the text, on the other
hand, has not been as easily graspable. For a couple of decades or even centu-
ries it has defiled any straightforward interpretation because of its textual,
syntactical and semantic difficulties. Nonetheless, the oracle recaps the issues
which led to the indictment of Israel among the nations (Amos 2:6-8) and
finds its way to the central position among the three summonses of YHWH,
in Amos characterized by the formula ΐ\)Τ\ *VH^ IPDUJ "hear this word"
(3:1; 4:1; 5:1). Another important aspect of the uniqueness of the text lies in
the prophet s avoiding a direct naming of his addressees (the culprits of the
social crimes) contrary to what one finds in 2:6—Israel, 3:1—people of
Israel, and 5:1—house of Israel. Rather, Amos depicts them in animal meta­
phor as ΙψΙΠ ΠΠ3 "the cows of Bashan" who are in Mount Samaria. The
mention of Samaria very much situates the summons in the northern king­
dom and, therefore, in the same region as the other summonses directed to
Israel, people of Israel or house of Israel.
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 DOI: 10.1163/156853309X435477
 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 461

The text is properly delimited in its immediate context by the theme of

oppression and its peculiar threat and punishment, which is sealed by the
oracular formula, Π1ΓΡ "DRÏ, "says the Lord" (v. 3). Moreover, emphasis shifts
in verse 4 to new localities (Bethel and Gilgal) and themes, multiplication of
transgression and cult (w. 4-5), thus signalling the beginning of a new oracle.
This essay will look afresh at the text of Amos 4:1-3 in some of its peculiar
textual and literary features, bearing in mind that these features have concrete
meaning for the hearers/ readers in their proper contexts.

Amos 4:1-3 in Its Historical Context

The first half of the 8th century was an era of relative peace in the northern
kingdom. Since there was no threat from within or without, it gave rise to
national ascendancy. A summary account of Jeroboams success in 2 Kgs 14:15
is a veritable synthesis. He "restored the borders of Israel from the entrance of
Hamath in the north to the sea of the Arabah." According to Merrill, it was a
period comparable only to that of Solomon (1 Kgs 4:20-25; 2 Chr. 9:2o).1
Similarly, it was not only an era of unusual material and physical prosperity
for the privileged few in Israelite society,2 but also of general moral, religious
and spiritual decay. The imagery of Amos 4:1 indicates that the good fortune
of Samaria went hand in hand with this decay, especially as seen in the
wanton fraudulent accumulation of wealth by the rich at the expense of
the poor.3
The verbs pO)V and γίΠ used in this verse reflect a context of social oppres­
sion and exploitation of the poor.4 The ruling class, which were supposedly
the guarantor of social justice and promoter of human dignity, abused their
power and exploited the socially weak. The despoliation is intensified by the
insatiable desire of certain women in society who attached themselves to the
rulers to satisfy their appetite for luxury. Those women, like their lords from
whom they make incessant demands, would have the needy poor crushed to

1)
E. H. Merrill, "Jeroboam", in W. A. Van Gemeren, et al. (eds.), New International Dictionary
of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDDOTTE) 4 (Carlisle, 1997), p. 771; also Kingdom
of Priests (1987), pp. 374-375.
2)
Cf. R. B. Coote, Amos Among the Prophets: Composition and Theohgy (Philadelphia, 1981),
pp. 24-32; also Hos. 8:14; 10:1; 12:7,8; 13:15; Amos 3:12, 15; 4:1; 5:11; 6:1, 4-6.
3)
This is visible in relation to social injustice (Amos 3:9-10; 4:1-7; 6:4-8) and oppression of
the poor (1:6; 4:2; 5:11-12; 8:4-6).
4)
Cf. Lev. 5:23; 19:13; Deut. 24:14; Jer. 22:17; Mie. 2:2; Mal. 3:5; Eccl. 4:1; also 1 Sam.
12:3-4; Job 22:19.
462 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

acquire wealth and make themselves chic and sleek. This attitude of the men
and women of Samaria is comparable with what goes on today in many state
capitals of the world, especially the African states.5 The context of this oracle
makes it easily comprehensible, particularly among the developing nations. It
is also against the background of the charges made against these groups in
Israelite society that the figurative language of the oracle would be meaning-
fully interpreted.

Some Critical Problems in the Text

The problems with the text of Amos 4:1-3 as we have already remarked are
textual, syntactical and semantical. There is apparent confusion in the lan-
guage which has generated a lot of discussions, most of which have taken the
oracle far beyond the pericope of the original hearers. However, one must
admit that the prophet apparently defies almost every rule of grammar. We
shall now examine some of the problems in detail.
Looking at some of the textual critical issues, verse 2 comes readily in
mind. Here the Septuagint (LXX) omits MT s *ÍTK. In fact, its inconsistency
in rendering Π1ΓΓ TTN in Amos is suggestive. Out of the 20 occurrences of
the phrase in Amos, the LXX omits *ΤΤΝ in nine occasions (1:8; 6:8; 7:1,
4 (2x), 6; 8:1, 3, 11). Based on the frequency of this expression in the pro­
phetic literature, some of the references in the MT could be regarded as
intrusive cliché. Its occurrence here could be a typical example. However, the
use of the cliché in prophetic corpus is not without purpose. "ΤΤΚ like •»rfrtf is
a term which expresses the prophet s feeling of rapport and intimacy with
YHWH, the God whom he serves.6 By ignoring the term the LXX fails to
7
bring out this sense of affinity, in spite of the glossy position it accorded the
term at the end of v. 3.

5)
Some home videos have brought this to light. For instance, it is said of one of the leading
female characters, "Lady B" in the movie "Sharon Stone in Abuja" (Louis Merchandise Ltd),
"You have all the connections" and "Nobody just goes to the Big Boys except through you." In
fact, this top Lady uses young girls as collateral for the senators. In "Abuja Connection" (OJ
Productions) young ladies are enjoined to "break the rank of men and take over from them."
Other home-video movies of the Nigeria Nollywood describe similar situations.
β
See Hos. 9:8, 17; Isa. 7:13; Mie. 7:7; also Jer. 31:6; Ps. 31:15; 2 Chr. 18:13; also Mk. 15:34;
Jn. 20:17.
7)
Francis I. Andersen and David Noel Freedman capture the sense by rendering the word as
"My Lord" [italics mine]. Amos (AB 24A: New York, London, 1989), p. 419. But many transla­
tors have failed to do so.
 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 463

Perhaps the most difficult textual problems of the oracle are found in verse
3. In v. 3a, the LXX changed exclusively MT D ^ ? , "breaches (in the wall)",
to an adjective γυμναί (ΠίΕΠΙϊ), "naked". Graphic confusion could hardly
explain this change except that the LXX was already imagining the fate of
"the cows of Bashan" in the hands of the agents who would execute YHWH s
judgment in fulfilment of his oath (v. 2a). This is corroborated by its reading
8
the two MT active verbs î"tf N&F1 (v. 3a) and Π^ΓΟ^ψΠ (v. 3b) as passive. Thus
we have: καί έξενεχθήσεσθε γυμναί... και άπορριφήσεσθε, "And you shall be
9
brought out naked.. .and you shall be cast out "
According to the LXX the destination of the exiled "cows of Bashan" is το
όρος το Ρεμμαν, "mount Remman", as distinct from MT s ΓφΟΊΠΠ. This
reading may have resulted from a wrong division of the letters of the Hebrew
10
ΓφΟΊΠΠ into two words, ΊΪ}Γ\ and ρΟΊ (the mountain Rimmon) and the
doubling of Ί. Similarly, some commentators have suggested a slight emenda­
tion of the Hebrew ΠΛΟΊΠΠ either to Π^ΟΊΠ, "towards Hermon",11 or
τ : - - τ : ν '

ΓΰζΠΟΠ* " t 0 t n e refuse heap",12 as alternative reading. Other versions like

Aquila and Western LXX read όρος ερμωνα, "mount Ermona," while Symm,
Peshitta and the Tg identified the location as 'Αρμενία "Armenia," and the
Vg as Armon. A few authors like Andersen and Freedman have preferred to
remain closest to the MT ΓφΟΊΠΠ by identifying it with "Harmon," which
according to them is a "region beyond Damascus in Aram".13 But this is only
a conjecture since it is not certain whether or not it is a geographical loca­
tion. In fact, some of the variant readings point to the contrary and thus
bring out the enigmatic nature of the MT ΓφΟΊΠΠ. All we can say is that the
uncertainty about this word agrees with Amos' style of not disclosing fully

8)
MT has them as qalzxia hiphil respectively.
9)
The reading of άπορίπτω as passive is also followed by Symmachus and the Vulgate.
10)
Cf. J. A. Sanders, "Harmon", in G. A. Buttrick, et al. (eds.), The Interpreters Dictionary of
the Bible (IDB) 2 (Nashville, 1962), p. 525. S. M. Paul translates the phrase as "the mountain
Remman". Cf. Amos (OTL; Minneapolis, 1991), p. 136.
H)
H. W. Wolff, Joel and Amos (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, 1977), p. 204. Based on his accept­
ing emendation to Mt. Hermon, E. H. Dyck presumes like many commentators that the direc­
tion from where the enemies would strike was the north. See "Harmon", in D. N. Freedman,
et al. (eds.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary (ABD) 3 (New York, 1992), p. 61.
12)
W R. Harper, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Amos and Hosea (ICC; Edinburgh,
1905), p. 85; K. J. Cathcart, R. P. Gordon, The Targum of the Minor Prophets (The Aramaic
Bible 14; Wilmington, 1989), p. 83 n. 5; NEB; etc.
13)
Andersen, Freedman, Amos, p. 425. They have earlier identified the Harmon with Hernial
in north Syria. Cf. "Harmon in Amos 4:3", BASOR 198 (1970), p. 41; Paul, Amos, p. 136.
Some translators simply have "Mount Harmon".
464 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

the final destination of those cast out in the context of punishment.14 This is
why we read the MT as directional, "towards Harmon"; and since Harmon is
yet unidentified, towards an unknown destination.
As for the grammatical confusion the stage is set right in the opening verse
of the oracle as \Φ2Τ\ ΠΠ3 (fem. pi.), the vehicle of the leading metaphor. It
fails to agree in gender with the imperative ΙΡΟψ (mase, pi.), which actually
addresses it. There is also lack of proper distinction in the application of gen­
der form of the pronominal suffixes supposedly referring to it. Out of the
four plural pronominal suffixes, only one, φΓΡΊΠΝ (v. 2b) agrees in gender with
the addressees. The rest—ΟΓΡΠΝ (v. 1), DD^y (v. 2a) and DDH« (v. 2b)—are
masculine plural in form. The most disturbing is the discord between the two
suffixes in v. 2b, which likely refer to the same subject. The cause of the discord
has been attributed to the fact that Hebrew masculine gender serves as "com­
mon gender, when the group referred to consists of both males and females".15
Although the syntactical relationship between Ιψ3Π ΓΠΊ3 and the three key
participles in v. 1 is different, because they agree in gender and form, the
mixture of feminine participial forms with masculine suffix in the same verse
leaves the actual subjects ironically undefined. The Targum gives credence to
this when it replaces the vehicle of the metaphor Π1Ί3 in the MT with the
phrase "you who are rich in possessions".16 The "you" is interpretive, imply­
ing that both male and female are subject to the summons at the beginning
of the oracle. Consequently, the mixed forms may serve as an indicator to
joint responsibility of male and female. K. Elliger, on the contrary, adopts a
different approach altogether; he preserves in the BHS the earlier suggestion
of Kittel to have all the suffixes rendered in the feminine, thus harmonizing
the divergent forms. The fact that the three participles share the same forms
in gender and number with ΤΫΠΒ does not necessarily imply infigurativelan­
guage that they refer to a single group of people. It is rather more likely that
the feminine form of the participles is designed to make it agree with the
form of the vehicle of the principal metaphor.
Lack of proper distinction of gender of the suffixes17 as well as giving the
first position to masculine verb could be more of practices that passed on

14)
Cf. Amos 5:27; also Paul, Amos, p. 136 n. 96.
15)
This is unlike the feminine gender that refers specifically and exclusively to females. See
Andersen and Freedman, Amos, p. 421.
16)
Cf. Cathcart and Gordon, Targum, p. 82.
17)
GKC, §l45p&u give several examples of masculine suffixes used for feminine substantives,
and GKC, §144 a of masculine form of verbs for the feminine. Cf. Isa. 23:1; Mie. 1:13, also
Ezek. 23:49; Ruth 1:8; Joel 2:22; Cant. 2:7.
 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 465

through colloquial language or a general negligence18 of the rule of syntax in

spoken language than of any ideological motif. Nevertheless, colloquialism
and general negligence to the rule may not sufficiently account for the over-
whelming syntactical problems of the oracle, especially when one realizes that
the style is not a common one in Amos. That means there could be other rea-
sons for the unusual style. Those reasons could be detected within the proph-
et s maximizing his poetic licence to communicate in a form which may
irritate the present day reader and, probably, not his initial audience who
captured the very purpose of the style. All said, illogical and irregular use of
languagefitswell into the world of metaphor.
The semantic problem of the oracle centres more on the interpretation of
Ιψ2Π ΠΠ3, "the cows of Bashan," the vehicle of the principal metaphor in
v. la, and the three nouns—nlüV, ΓήΤΟ, and T\XH—used in v. 2b. So far,
identifying the tenor of ΙψΞΙΠ ΠΠά has been contentious. Many commenta­
tors interpret the "cows of Bashan" as the wealthy women of the upper classes
of Samaria,19 or women who have usurped mens position in society and
order their husbands to engage in acts of oppression of the low class. If the
metaphor pertains to women, then it will be the only instance in the Bible
where cows stand figuratively for women.20 Others suppose the "cows"
describe males who are addressed insultingly as females. In our view, ΠΐΊά,
the vehicle of the metaphor, depicts males and females irrespective of its atyp­
ical female form. Both are involved in plundering the poor, propelled how­
ever by the insatiable demands of the high class women of Samaria. As earlier
remarked, this is also the way the Targum understands the metaphor in 4:1a.
The female form also portrays more radically the greed associated with female
cows at grazing and the general attitude of cows to trample down their pas­
tures when sated. By nature cows are beloved animals by those who have them.
The irony of the metaphor is that this beloved creature which has special

18)
GKC, §135o.
19)
Harper, Amos and Hosea, p. 86; Paul (Amos, p. 128) identifies them as "uppity upper-class
women", while Andersen and Freedman (Amos, p. 417) describe them as "lordly women of
Samaria, whose husbands dominate the government, as the oppressors and crushers of the
poor". See also Hughell E.W. Fosbroke, "The Book of Amos", in G. A. Buttrick, et al. (eds.),
The Interpreter s BibleVl (New York, Nashville, 1956), p. 801;T. Kleven, "The Cows of Bashan:
A Single Metaphor at Amos 4:1-3", CBQ 58 (1996), pp. 215-227; especially, p. 217. J. W.
Ritenbaugh compares the women in the oracle to "the selfish, power-hungry, ruthless women
we often see portrayed on television and in movies", <http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/
Topical.show/RTD/CGG/ID/1229/Cows-of-Bashan.htm>. Accessed on 9/7/07.
20)
Vsaû,Amas, p. 128. Cf. Hos. 4:16; Jer. 21:17; Cant. 1:9.
466 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

place in the social life of catde-rearers the world over as their indispensable
source of livelihood21 is turned to afigureof oppression and exploitation.
The possibility that the three substantives nfa?, Π1Τ0, and ΆΧΠ in v. 2b
have variant interpretations / meanings constitutes another obstacle to under­
standing the oracle. The language of this verse highly suggests that the
prophet introduces a new literary image other than the main metaphor, the
"cows of Bashan" (v. la). But the variant interpretations of these words make
it difficult to establish the facts about and nature of the additional metaphor.
Discovering the appropriate vehicle of such imagery will be crucial for the
understanding of the verse and the entire oracle.
Thefirstof these three nouns, ΠΪ3? (fern, pi.), with H|V as its fern, singular
form, is likely derived from the root snn. Lexical evidence shows that there
are also other nouns derived from snn. They include: fê (thorn, barb), pJ¥.
(thorn, prick), Γϋ3^¥ Ο2"*» u r n > v a s e > basket), etc.22 Our concern here is with
Π3£ (nfay) which has three possible connotations, namely 1) (fish) hook,
barb, 2) coolness, refreshing (Prov. 25:13), and 3) (large) shield. The third
option "shield" is not only widely attested in the OT both in plural and sin­
gular forms (1 Sam. 17:7; 1 Kgs 20:16 = 2 Chr. 9:15; 2 Chr. 11:12; cf. 1 Kgs
10:17), but also supported by the LXXs reading εν δπλοις, "with weapons".23
Moreover, it can be said to be the favourite reading of many commentators.24
Incidentally, "shield" is used figuratively in the OT as simile (Ps. 5:13) and
metaphor (Ps. 91:4) for YHWH s favour and faithfulness respectively. These
hardly fit well into the context of YHWH s threat in v. 2a and, indeed, the
overall context of the oracle. The same applies to the second sense of Π|¥ as
coolness or freshness and, even other cognates of the root snn listed above (cf.
Prov. 22:5, Num. 33:55; Josh. 23:13).
Other interpretations of nfa? which may not easily be discarded are
"baskets,25 boats and ropes". However, it needs to be pointed out that baskets /
boats are not used in the text as direct instruments of fishing. The use of the
preposition 3, with r t o and its parallel and synonymous term ΓΠΤΟ points

21)
For the importance of cattle among the tribes of East Africa, see B. Lincoln, Priests, Warriors,
and Cattle. A Study in the Ecology of Religions (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1981), pp. 14-15.
22)
Cf. BDB, pp. 856b, 857a; B. Davidson, The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon (Grand
Rapids, 1850), p. 647a. For detailed discussion on the different interpretations of the nouns
derived from the root snn, see Paul, Amos, pp. 130-135.
23)
Although the reading of this verse in the LXX is obscure, incomprehensible and, therefore
conjectural, shields can no doubt qualify as weapons.
24)
Cf. Vz\A,Amos, pp. 130-131.
25)
Paul, Amos, p. 133; also "Fishing Imagery in Amos 4:2" JBL 97 (1978), pp. 183-190.
 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 467

strongly to this.26 This is further supported by the verb Ntol ("lift up", "carry
away") which governs both the two substantives and the preposition. To be
observed is that "ropes" unaccompanied with "hooks" will not catch fish.27
Thus, by extending the meaning of niüV "hooks" to "ropes"28 Wolff was per-
haps not thinking of fishing imagery in this text, but that the prophet main-
tained the initial metaphor in which ropes would serve as proper means of
leading the cows away.29 Moreover, if such imagery was intended, the prophet
would use the more appropriate term ΠΠ, "hook, ring" (Ezek. 19:4, 9; 29:4;
cf. 38:4; also Isa. 37:29 = 2 Kgs 19:29; also 2 Chr. 33:11, etc.).30 From the
cultural context of the present writer, fish baskets,31 boats and fish pots would
presuppose that the fish were already caught (cf. Ezek. 19:4, 9) and destined
for exportation. But that is not the focus of the piel verb Nto used in this
metaphor. Its emphasis is rather on the fisherman's act of fishing as punish­
ment on the culprits and not on the caught fish. Interestingly, a good number
of commentators opt for hook or fishhooks, the sense of nìuV that is less fre-
quently employed, because the figurative language of v. 2b borders more on
act of fishing than any other.
This is corroborated by the parallel term nVVD, "hooks" or "(fish)hooks",
especially when read together with its nomen rectum njn, "fishing, fishery",32
which defines the context more specifically (cf. Jer. 16:16; Hab. 1:14). Lexi-
cally, the root TO occurs both in masculine and feminine forms. Hence D^VO
and niTO are employed in the OT, with the fern. pi. form occurring only
here. Outside its sense in this text as "hook", two other possible meanings are

26)
BDB, p. 672a.
27)
Without hooks ropes might not even be used to drag captives away in the manner of the
Assyrians. Cf. W. A. Elmslie, How Came Our Faith: A Study of the Religion ofIsrael and Its Sig-
nificance for the Modern World (Cambridge, 1948), p. 257; also T. Kleven, "The Cows of
Bashan", p. 225.
28)
H. W. Wolff, Joel and Amos, pp. 203-204, 207-208. It must be remarked that it was S. J.
Schwantes who initiated this interpretation when from Akkadian root he proposed "nose-rope,
halter, or reins". Cf. "Notes on Amos 4:2b", ZAW79 (1967), pp. 82-83.
29)
Andersen and Freedman, Amos, p. 423; See also, T. Kleven, "The Cows of Bashan", p. 221.
30)
BDB, p. 296 a; see also Paul, Amos, p. 131.
31)
We acknowledge that there are also some fish baskets that are used for catching fish. But
they are used as traps that are laid in water for a day or two before they are lifted to ascertain
whether or not any fish is caught. In this case, the idea of "wriggling" and "writhing" in a fish-
erman's basket, which Paul (Amos, p. 134, esp. n. 81) rightly pointed out from the Mari Letters,
would not aptly apply here. See also T. Kleven, "The Cows of Bashan", p. 221.
32)
BDB, p. 186a.
468 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

associated with TD, namely "pot" or "vessel" and "thorn".33 Based again on
the association of the verb Νψ} with hooks or fishing hooks for that matter, it
is more likely that the fresh metaphor is that of fishing. Although the fisher­
man is not named, the prophet presents YHWH, 34 the one who swore an
oath (v. 2a), as also the subject of the verb Nfett and, consequently, the fisher­
man. "He [YHWH] will lift you up with hooks and your offspring with fish­
ing hooks" (v. 2b). The threat is YHWH s; he too will execute the judgment
(Amos 6:8).
In several other contexts YHWH has shown himself to be responsible for
similar punishment (Isa. 37:29) . 35 As husband, he threatens and disciplines a
wayward wife (Hos. 2:5, 12; cf. Jer. 13:26; Ezek. 16:37-39; 23:26-29), and as
herdsman he disciplines the stubborn flock (Jer. 16:16). It is therefore not
exigent to read tW} in the plural with indefinite personal subject36 in order to
posit foreign powers as agents of divine punishment as many commentators
have done. 37 Where agents are needed, it is clearly stated that YHWH
arranges for the fishermen who catch the "fish" and sends for hunters "to
hunt them from every mountain and hill and clefts" (cf. Ezek. 39:4, 5; also
Hab. 1:15, 16). It must be reiterated that the focus of the fishing metaphor is
not primarily on those to be fished out, or on their reaction, but on YHWH s
action—punishment. The prophet is also not concerned here with the pack­
aging or transporting the victims to another location, even though this could
necessitate the use of baskets and pots. Rather he underscores YHWH s
determined will to remove the plunderers from their accustomed habitat. It is
verse 3 that will definitively define the final destiny of the culprits.

Identifying the Protagonists

In Amos 4:1, the prophet identifies two classes of people, 1) the very rich,
consisting of the ruling class called tPÏW "lords / nobles" and their concu-
bines, their top class ladies who urge them to exploit the socially weak, and

33)
See BDB, p. 696b; B. Davidson, The Analytical Hebrew, p. 576a; also ?z\n,Amos, pp. 132-135.
34)
A. B. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax (Edinburgh, 1894), § 109.
35)
Isa. 5:26; 9:12; Mal. 2:3 are some other instances where YHWH is the subject of ni; con-
trast Ezek. 29:19.
36
> See GKC, § I44d, esp. § l44g.
37)
Even the Targum missed out the metaphor when it read the subject of ni' as "the nations".
James K. Hoffmeier identifies the fisherman as "an agent of divine punishment". He was short
of associating the Babylonians with the agent as he did in Jer. 16:16. Cf. "dyg", in W. A. Van
Gemeren, et al. (eds.), NIDDOTTE1 (Carlisle, 1996), pp. 936-938.
 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 469

2) the exploited group described as D^? (poor) and tïflfrlijt (needy). This
affluent group is further depicted in two special ways. First, they are por-
trayed in animal metaphor as {ψ|Π ΠΠ3, "the cows of Bashan/' This meta­
phor cuts across all genders (male and female) as we have earlier observed,
notwithstanding the gender confusion. Second, they are identified by their
38
actions, which the three active participles describe so clearly. They are well-
known for their actions, as the definite article ha indicates. They are the ones
who oppress (pWV) the poor, crush (Y¡T\) the needy, and whose ladies say, "Bring
that we may drink", thus luring their "lords" to carry out their social crimes.
The three actions described here often came under prophetic criticisms;
thefirsttwo parallel actions (oppressing and crushing) are possibly performed
by the influential men of the city (the rulers and their nobles), while the third
refers to the behaviour of the high class but licentious ladies of the capital
city.39 The women who make the demands are not necessarily part of the rul-
ing class40 but parasitic concubines of the nobles in power (Judg. 19:26-27).
The men of the ruling class deprive the poor of their lawful possessions and
their concubines share in the booty and feed on what their lords have
"robbed". Consequent on these women's insatiable demands, the act of plun-
dering the lower class gets on unabated. These women are in direct contrast
with the woman of Proverb 31, depicted as V*rrTltt>N, a "woman of sub-
stance", who looks after her household, including people of low class like her
maids. Rather than depend solely on her husband, she would engage herself
in a meaningful business and earn money for her needs.41
The group of the rich is evidently distinguished from that of the socially
weak peasantry. The relation between them is pictured as that of replete catde
wilfully trampling down their pastures,42 after grazing to satisfaction. Thus
the oppressors are economically prosperous (thick and fattened cows) not
only because they dwell in the land of plenty but more because they graze
freely upon the property of the poor and needy. They do so because they

38)
The participles are in apposition with the "cows of Bashan" and by virtue of their being defi-
nite are to be regarded each as a relative clause. Cf. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax, § 99.
39)
Engaging in drinking orgies, which the demands of these promiscuous women from their
lords very much suggest, has been theme of prophetic criticism (Amos 2:8; Joel 3:3).
40)
In fact, they may not even belong to the elite group; their licence is their beauty, their
plump shape, their sexuality, etc.
41)
Cf. E.O. Nwaoru, "Image of the Woman of Substance in Proverbs 31:10-31 and African
Context", BNNF127 (2005), pp. 41-66.
42)
K. Koch, The Prophets. The Assyrian Period (tr. by Margaret Kohl; Philadelphia, 1983),
p. 46.
470 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

consider themselves immuned by virtue of their being rulers and nobles and
therefore YHWH s vicegerents. From the present writers own setting, this is
quite understandable. Animals dedicated to the gods, especially cows roam
freely without molestation and feed wherever they wanted without hin-
drances. They are regarded as "untouchables". This idea may have been envi-
sioned in Amos' characterising the rulers and nobles of Samaria with their
"Ladies" as "cows of Bashan". The false understanding of their status and
powers as YHWHs vicegerent could have given them undue licence to
oppress and plunder the poor without qualms.
But on the other side is YHWH, the main protagonist in the oracle. He is
the only one whose personal name is given, not once but two times. The
name occurs at the middle of the text where he swears by his holiness (v. 2a),
and at the end, in an oracular formula (v. 3). He stands in judgment against
the oppressors and exploiters in defence of the oppressed and crushed (Deut.
28:37; Judg. 10:8; Hos. 5:11; 2 Chr. 16:10).
Place names are also given; they include: Bashan, Samaria and Harmon(?).
Samaria is mentioned in connection with injustice and oppression and, there-
fore, notorious. While Harmon is given as the final destination of the oppres-
sors, Bashan is the nomen regens of the vehicle of the main metaphor. The use
of a definite article for Bashan in a genitive relation to ΠΠ3 is curious.43 It
does not occur elsewhere in reference to the characteristic animals that popu­
late Bashan—its choice rams and goats (Deut. 32:14); its lions (Deut. 33:22);
its sated cattle (Ezk. 39:8), and its strong bulls (Ps. 22:13. Such a construc­
tion is seen again about 15 times in relation to Og the King of Bashan,44 and
once in reference to the land (1 Chr. 5:11) and oaks of Bashan (Isa. 2:13)
respectively. This raises questions whether or not Bashan should be under­
stood here as a place name or an extension of the metaphor. Whatever, all
that Bashan denotes—luxuriant plain, fertility, rich rainfall, economic pros­
perity, etc.—makes the Bashan a {known place), and standsfigurativelyin this
oracle for plenty and comfort (Mie. 7:14). This justifies its use as nomen
regens for nh£) in two senses, the one a proper place-name and the other a
metaphorical location.

43)
Cf. GKC, § 125a.
U)
Num. 21:33; 32:33; Deut. 1:4; 3:1; 3:3, 11; 4:47; 29:7; Josh. 9:10; 12:4; 13:30; 1 Kgs
4:19; Neh. 9:22; Ps. 135:11; 136:20.
 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 471

The Core of the Matter

As the opening summons λΌψύ (4:1a) indicates, the oracle is given to expose
the social crimes going on in the northern kingdom. Shortly before this ora­
cle the prophet has made a charge against the oppression of the poor on the
mountain of Samaria (Amos 3:9). This is only indicative of the various kinds
of oppressive acts against the poor in Israelite society at the period, regardless
of the law that forbade them (Exod. 22:21-25; Deut. 15:9-11). Hence it
became an issue for Amos (3:10; cf. 5:11; 8:4-6). Similarly, "crushing" is one
anti-social act that no citizen is expected to mete out to a kinsfolk or fellow
citizen. It can only be experienced from the hands of foreigners or foreign
rulers (Judg. 10:8; cf. Deut. 28:33; Jer. 51:34; Amos 3:9), or in alliance
with them (2 Chr. 16:10). It is therefore an act associated with wickedness
(Job 20:19). To be crushed is to be humiliated (cf. Ps. 74:14). What makes it
remarkable in this oracle is that it is the ruling class or privileged members of
the society that crush their own poor people. Elsewhere the mountain of
Samaria will be associated with the same plunderous behaviour of the privi­
leged class for which the prophet indicts them (cf. 6:1).
Biblically speaking, oppressive acts have always merited punishment while
YHWH always intervenes on behalf of the oppressed poor.45 This is particu­
larly true in Amos as he envisions in this oracle that the social injustice of the
ruling class and their collaborators will never go unpunished, just as in other
instances (Amos 4:6, 7-8, 9, 10, 11). Thus the threat begins in v. 2a with the
oath which YHWH has sworn by his holiness (cf. Amos 6:8; Ps. 89:35). By
this singular act that is sealed by YHWH s very essence (his holiness), YHWH
guarantees his accomplishing the threat (v. 2a; cf. Deut. 32:40; Jer. 51:14;
also Isa. 62:8). The threat is further heightened, as it were, by the eschatologi-
cal formula D^S DW, "days are coming."46 Its urgency / immediacy is indi­
cated by the particle ΠίΙΠ (v. 2). In all this the prophet presents YHWH as
being determined to carry out the threat. For unlike Hoseas God (11:8-9),
Amos' God does not change his mind, nor does he give a chance for repent­
ance since he knows none will be forthcoming. Coote must have had this

45)
Hos. 5:11; Mai. 3:5; Eccl. 5:7; see also Isa. 1:17-20; 5:8; 58:6; Jer. 6:6; 7:6; Mie. 2:1-3;
Zech. 7:10, 11; Ps. 12:5; 140:12; Prov. 22:23; 23:11; Eccl. 4:1.
46)
This phrase occurs about twenty times in the OT. Outside being used two times in the his­
torical books (1 Sam. 2:31; 2 Kgs 20:17), the rest are found in the prophets, 14 times in Jere­
miah; 3 times in Amos and once in Isaiah. It is used in the context of judgment (1 Sam. 2:31;
2 Kgs 20:17; Isa. 39:6; Jer. 7:32; 9:24; 19:6; 31:27; 48:12; 49:2; 51:47,52; Amos 4:2; 8:11) as
well as of restoration (Amos 9:13; Jer. 16:14; 23:5,7; 30:3; 31:31; 33:14).
472 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

oracle in mind when he supposes that, "Amoss oracles imply no response,

have no future, offer no program, and leave no room for repentance. They
lead directly to an absolute dead end".47
With the two verbs Ntttt48 and ^VuJ,49 which as in many cases are used to
portray YHWH s threat and judgment, the prophet acquaints his audience
with the mode of the looming punishment. Interestingly, the piel verb Κψ} in
v. 2 offers the prophet another opportunity to create a fresh but verbal meta­
phor to portray YHWH, the subject of the verb, as fisherman and the cul­
prits as fish. Like fish the oppressors of the poor and needy will be lifted up
(v. 2b). The threat like many others has future oudook. It is meant to reverse
the fortunes of the noble ruling class and their concubines. The pride of the
thick "cows of Bashan" will be deflected. YHWH will reduce them to mere
fish taken out of water, their natural habitat. In other words, those who once
"grazed" on fertile land and trampled on the lowly poor and needy would be
removed from their comfortable and accustomed environment. The depth of
YHWH s punishment here can only be measured by its lasting consequences
which will go beyond one generation (v. 2b). They will pass from you (M^î?)
to ρΐϊηΠΝ, "your progeny," "the ones coming after you" (Ps. 109:13; cf.
Amos 9:1). The motif of such a reversal of fortune is a common one in bibli­
cal literature.50 Since threats are already aspects of divine judgment, the
reversal becomes the launch pad for a full blown punishment in v. 3.
Verse 3 states the judgment passed on the accused, represented as both the
"cows of Bashan" (v. 1) and fish caught in hooks (v. 2). They are the subjects
of nJNltfl51 and sufferers of the action of the verb ΓϋηΛΦΠ.52 The verse reads:
τ ν ·· τ · . · : - : ·

"Through breaches you shall go out, each in front of another. You shall be
cast away to Harmon, says the Lord". There is an irony in the use of the qal
47)
Coote, Amos, p. 43.
<*> Amos 4:2; Isa. 5:26; 11:12; Mal. 2:3.
49)
Amos 4:3; Jer. 7:15; 2 Kgs 17:20; 24:20; 2 Chr. 7:20; Deut. 29:27. See also Neh. 9:11;
Josh. 10:11; Nah. 3:6; Jonah 2:4; Ps. 51:13; 102:11; 71:9; etc.
50)
1 Sam. 2:4-8; Job 5:11-13; 34:24-28; Ps. 107:40-41; 113:7-8; Eccl. 4:14; Ezek. 17:24;
Hos. 2:13-15; Lk. 1:52; 18:14; Jas. 1:9-10.
51)
The unusual plural feminine endings -âh of the two verbs are not only longer alternate end-
ings but also remnants of the archaic form. Cf. Andersen and Freedman, Amos, pp. 424-425.
52)
We shall slighdy emend the hiphil to hophal παΓΟ^ψΠ along the reading of the Septuagint,
Symmachus, and the Vulgate. The internal evidence justifies this emendation, since v. 3 brings
YHWH s action in v. 2 to completion. YHWH in our view is the unnamed agent who will
carry out the expulsion, while the plunderers and their parasitic concubines are the victims. As
we have already pointed out, the root ilk is widely used to describe divine discipline and judg­
ment. For more details, see R.B. Chisholm, Ksü? in NIDDOTTE4, p. 127.
 E O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474 473

and hophalÇf) verbs. The accused who have thought they would flee through
the breaches they made in the walls to escape additional divine punishment
are caught up with YHWH s action to expel them to unknown destination,
Harmon. Many commentators have supposed that the enemies made the
breaches53 as channels through which they deported the people. Such an
interpretation fails to take cognisance of the group under punishment, and
makes the expulsion of the few culprits that of the many, the nation.
In v. 3 YHWH (as unnamed agent) brings the punishment to its height
by casting away the perpetrators of social injustice from his land on which
they have freely roamed and grazed at will at the expense of the poor and
needy (cf. Hos. 9:3; also Deut. 28:63; Josh. 23:15; 1 Kgs 9:7; Hos. 2:2). Here
is another reversal of the fortunes of the nobles and rulers of the city of
Samaria. It must be remarked that just as in v. 2, YHWH does not employ
here any foreign agent(s) to execute the punishment. Rather the final action
is necessitated by the culprits' attempt to evade YHWH s punishment (cf.
Hos. 2:8-9).54 Hence he deemed it fit to bring to completion the action they
themselves initiated. Also we suppose that it is unnecessary to seek in vain the
location of Harmon, the place of expulsion. The prophet intends to indicate
that once they are cast out from their place of comfort, like caught fish, and
dislodged en route to their escape, their final destination is unknown. It is
therefore for good purpose that the oracle fails to specify any place-name,
thus implying that the wrongdoers will not only be expelled from YHWH s
land, but also be left without any remembrance in it (Isa. 14:20-22; Ps. 37:28;
Job 18:19). Hence their progeny is included in the punishment.

Conclusion
The seeming overreaction of commentators to or rather concentration on
literary problems of this oracle has beclouded its interpretation. Actually,
its literary features—summons, accusations, threats, punishment, metaphors,
formulas, etc.—are meant to serve rather than draw attention away from the
message of the prophet. Amos has employed serious and daring metaphors,

53)
It is not only the enemy who makes breaches; in Israel people have made breaches in the
walls as outlet for escape (Ezek. 12:5, 12). The attempt to flee from breaches is also a univer-
sally recognised mode of escape for people under attack (2 Kgs 7:7).
54)
Hosea 7:12 employs a bird-fowler imagery for YHWH to portray a similar situation. Cf.
Ε. O. Nwaoru, "The Role of Images in the Literary Structure of Hosea vii 8-viii 14", VT 54
(2004), p. 219.
474 E. O. Nwaoru I Vêtus Testamentum 59 (2009) 460-474

comparable only to those of his contemporary Hosea, to address the social

injustice of his time. The language of the images may be crude and atypical,
but it heightens the indictment of an oppressive stratum of a corrupt and
insensitive leadership of the northern kingdom and their collaborators and,
in judgment, the final destination of such leadership. The polarity between
indictment and YHWH s judgment is set in metaphors, the one the "cows of
Bashan" and the other the verbal fishing imagery of YHWH. The two areas
of emphasis of this oracle, though separated by many centuries from our own
time and societies, underscore the fact that indictment and judgment accom-
pany any form of social injustice against the poor and needy by the ruling
class and wealthy conglomerates.
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.