Micah: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary

Trinity Journal, Fall 2004 by VanGemeren, Willem A

Francis I. Andersen and David Noel Freedman. Micah: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible 24E. New York: Doubleday, 2000. 637 pp. $42.50.

F. I. Anderson and D. N. Freedman have joined to write a masterful commentary. Anderson is retired from the Department of Classics and Archaeology (Melbourne, Australia), and his co-writer, Freedman, has taught at prestigious U.S. institutions. Regrettably, the commentary was completed in the early nineties but published more than five years later. The lag time between completion of the manuscript and the publication means that the authors' interaction with research in the 1990s is limited to the early years.

The introduction to the commentary is surprising. The expected topics (authorship, date, etc.) are dispensed with under a lengthy comment on the superscription (see 1:1, pp. 105-28). Instead, the introduction calls the reader's attention to the authors' distinct contribution and approach to the study of Micah. Their goal in writing a commentary with a distinct literary concern is refreshing. Their commentary makes a contribution in three areas: (T) text and translation; (2) the structure of the book; and (3) methodological issues.

First, Andersen and Freedman represent a growing trend in reevaluating the relationship between the MT and the LXX. They place the translations of the MT and the LXX side by side, arguing, "We need to study the LXX along similar lines if we are interested in the history of the interpretation of the book of Micah" (p. 4). They look at the MT as a recension whose text is a part of a larger story to which the LXX and ancient versions must contribute. They integrate text-critical issues with all aspects of interpretation by more fully discussing relevant text-critical issues of both the MT and LXX (Göttingen edition) under Notes and Comments. Any critical variants between the Greek manuscripts are likewise noted. Moreover, the selection of text-critical issues is raised to the level of interpretation of the text. This is an advance beyond the cryptic and obligatory notes usually placed below the translation of the text. In their translation, they admit to a literalness "in the interests of exactitude" (p. 5), even the distinction of the singular and plural forms of "thou, thyself" and "you, yourself" in the translation of the MT and LXX.

Second, they make a major contribution by their careful study of the structure of the book. Andersen and Freedman reject the traditional approaches that divide the book into ever smaller units and that confidently date these units. They advance a literary approach that is sensitive to the structure, the argument, and the thematic development of the book. They write, "We restrict our efforts almost entirely to purely literary analysis and interpretation" (p. 26). The authors give a stellar argument for the literary integrity of Micah, while honestly admitting that they cannot clearly distinguish between the intentionality of the editor(s) and their own artistic interpretation (p. 23). They propose a threefold structure: the Book of Doom (1:2-3:12) with nine parts; the Book of Visions (4:1-5:14) with 10 parts; and the Book of Contention and Conciliation (6:1-7:20) with six parts. They outline the structure of the argument in the introduction (pp. 7-14) and develop the justification for their structural and thematic cohesiveness in the commentary proper. The strength of their work is the literary analysis and its usefulness to pastors and teachers. The authors justify their approach of a holistic reading of Micah by carefully placed notes at the beginning and end of each Book and by comments throughout the commentary.

Third, in their study of the literary aspects of the book of Micah, the authors define their method in relation to the history of the modern approaches to Micah (witness the nearly seventy pages of bibliography). But they free themselves from the shackles of the scholarly tendencies of analyzing the book into smaller units or of studying the redactional layers in the book. Instead, they commit themselves to argue for the cohesiveness of the message of Micah.

The commentary lives up to the expectations raised by the introduction. The structure of the commentary varies section by section. In general the authors treat each text under three headings: Translation (MT, LXX); Notes and Comments (a verse-by-verse analysis of words and phrases); and Comment (synthetic understanding of the place of the unit within the larger whole). They pleasantly surprise the reader by additional introductory notes, comments, and excurses. Each Book opens with an introduction and concludes with a comment in which the authors engage the reader with a synthetic perspective on the Book within Micah. This helpful bird's eye view of the themes, structural unity, and integrity of the Book encourages reading the parts within the larger whole. There are many such introductory notes to verses, units, and chapters. Comments expand on literary issues: "the poetry of ... "; "the theme(s) of ... "; the "structure of ... "; "the literary constituents of ... "; "the literary genre (form) of ... "; "the drama of ... "; "the composition of ... "; and "the wordplay of ... ." Intermittently the commentary has a comment on grammar (pp. 190, 545), textual problems (p. 297), and critical issues (pp. 252, 298, 332, 398). The occasional excursus reveals a mastery of the issues: "the places in Micah 1:10-16" (pp. 207-12); the relationship between Mic 4:1-5 and Isa 2:1-5 (pp. 413-27); and human sacrifice in the Hebrew Bible (pp. 532-38).