Special Issue IOSOT 2013 - Books and Journals

S. Japhet / Vetus Testamentum IOSOT (2013) 36-76 69
of exaggeration to every aspect mentioned. The special style of the Chr. is
achieved, among other things, through the abundant use and repetition of
fixed pregnant literary formulas.
השחית .I
The root ‏,שחת mainly in Hifʿil, is quite frequent in the O.T. Nevertheless, it can
be regarded as a favourite of the Chr., as it frequently occurs in his account.
In two places he depends on his sources: 1 Chr. xxi 15 (2 Sam. xxiv 16);168
2 Chr. xxi 7 // 2 Ki. viii 19.
In several places שחת displaces another root of the sources or is added to
the original text. For example: To 2 Sam. xxiv 3: “Or shall there be three days
pestilence in your land”, the Chr. adds (in 1 Chr. xxi 12): “and the angel of the
Lord destroying” ‏.(משחית)‏ In 2 Kings viii 27: “and he did what was evil in the
sight of the Lord for he was son-in-law to the house of Ahab”, here, again,
‏)למשחית לו)‏ undoing” the Chr. adds: “for . . . they were his counselors to his
(2 Chr. xxiv 4).
A similar procedure is followed in 2 Chr. xxvii 2 (2 Ki. xv 35); 2 Chr. xxxiv 11
(2 Ki. xxii 5-6).
Apart from these, the verb is used in the Chr.’s own narrative.169 In Ezr.-Neh.
it is totally absent, although the opportunities to use it are many.
אמץ .K
From earlier literature the Chr. derives the phrase ואמץ“‏ Be‏“—”חזק strong and
of good courage” as well as the verb אמץ itself, and weaves it into his composition.
1 Chr. xxii 13 ואמץ אל תירא ואל תחת“‏ ‏”חזק is taken literally from Jos. × 25,
Deut. xxxi 6 and other verses;170 2 Chr. xxxvi 13: “He stiffened his neck and
hardened ‏(ויאמץ)‏ his heart” is clearly dependent on Deut. ii 30.171
168) There are some differences between these texts. The parallel in 2 Sam. xxiv 16 is somewhat
different. The main linguistic difference is between לשחתה in Piʿel and להשחיתה in Hif ʿil. The
Hif ʿil in this root is generally more frequent than the Piᶜel. It should be asked, however, whether
it is additional proof of the strengthening of Hifᶜil. Cf. above p. 348 n. 2.
169) 2 Chr. xii 7, 12, xx 23; xxiv 23; xxv 16; xxvi 16; xxxv 21; xxxvi 19.
אל תירא ואל 170) The same phrase occurs also in 2 Chr. xxviii 20 and 2 Chr. xxxii 7. The phrase
in itself occurs twice more in Chr., in 2 Chr. xx 15, 17. This phrase as well is absent from תחת
Ezr.-Neh.
171) The dependence on Deut. is not felt in the RSV which translates differently in those places. In
‏“כי הקשה ה׳ 30: Deut. v ‏”ויקש את ערפו ויאמץ את לבבו”‏ 13: Hebrew it runs as follows: 2 Chr. xxxvi
‏.אלהיך את רוחו ואמץ את לבבו”‏