OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 273

What Tekoa did to Amos!

P D F Strijdom (Fort Hare)

ABSTRACT
This paper investigates the connection between the prophet Amos and the place
Tekoa in Judea and the mutual influence that they might have had on each other.
The significance of Tekoa's location, its apiculture, and horticulture are discussed in
connection with the socio-political traditions surrounding it. It seems Tekoa had
been a refuge for the oppressed and a hideaway for insurgents. The conclusion is
reached that Tekoa has played an important role throughout history as a place of
non-conformation to what was perceived as injustice and untruth.

When speaking about Amos and Tekoa, I refer to the eighth century BCE Judaean
prophet and the town in the Judaean hill-country. My concern is with the connec-
tion between this person and this place and the mutual influence that person and
place might have had on each other. The aim of this paper is to investigate such
possible influence at the two broadly defined levels of the physical material and the
ideology.
Not everyone is convinced, however, that there is indeed a connection between
the prophet Amos and Tekoa in Judah. But there are strong traditions that support
this connection. In the Bible two passages in the book of Amos, both most probably
Deuteronomistic in origin, state and imply that Amos was indeed from among the
‫ נ ק ד י ם‬of Tekoa in Judah (1:1; 7:12). The name Amos also lingers today in desig-
nations in the region of Tekoa. About seven kilometres south of Tekoa, on the way
to En-Gedi, a settlement next to the road carries the name, 010y ‫מעלה‬, ('ascent of
Amos'; Brown, Driver & Briggs 1974:751). Immediately east of this settlement runs
a wadi towards the Dead Sea, carrying the name, ‫עמוס‬, where it forms a canyon
(both examples from Atlas of Israel 1985: map 3). There is also a long oral tradition
that supports this Tekoa-Amos connection. Already in the first century CE the Vitae
274 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

Prophetarum claimed that Amos was killed and buried at Tekoa. Since that time his
grave was honoured there in one of the caves and was still shown in the fourteenth
century CE. One of the traditions that centred in this place, was that prophets met
there at Amos' tomb to discuss divine things. In the Byzantine period a church was
built in his honour, remains of which are still visible today. Taken together, these
Biblical, geographical and popular historical data, are most probably indications of
the tenacity of the tradition that has connected the prophet Amos to the area of
Tekoa in Judah.
In spite of these traditions, the connection is not readily accepted by all
scholars. Attempts to argue for a northern origin of Amos in a yet to be discovered
Galilean Tekoa, have won little support, however,2 and this idea is quite powerfully
refuted by the admission of one of its proponents that 'we do not presently know of
a Northern Kingdom Tekoa during Amos' time' (Rosenbaum 1990).
I shall subsequently attempt to trace and describe the location of Tekoa and its
immediate environment, and thereafter try and work out some more particular
significance of this location.

A THE LOCALITY OF TEKOA3

The name Tekoa lingers today at two different places about two and a half
kilometres apart and on the main route between Bethlehem and En‫־‬Gedi (Atlas of
Israel 1985: map 3). Geo-morphologically both these places are situated between
the two north-south escarpments that run almost parallel, with the erosive escarp-
ment to the west of Tekoa and the escarpment of flexure to the east (Atlas of Israel
1985: map 11). At the same time the two Tekoa's lie between the upper parts of two
almost parallel valleys or wadis (wudyan), cutting deeply down from north-west to
south-east towards the Dead Sea and through the wilderness of Judea.
The modern Taqu'a, a Muslim-Arab village, lies on the route between Beth-
lehem and Hebron (Miller 1987:89; Keel & Kiichler OLB 2:662-663). The Ancient
Tekoa of Amos, known today as Khirbet Taqu'a (chirbet tequ'a), is about two and a
half kilometres further north and just to the eastern side of the same road. It is a
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 275

ruined village of some four or five acres. In 1138 the place was pillaged by a party
of Turks from the east of the Jordan, and since that time the site appears to have
lain desolate and ruined (Eissfeldt RGG2 5:1034; Masterman ISBE 5:2924; Gribble
ZPEB 5:614). The ruins of this last occupation lie scattered on top of a hill which is
not steep (Harper 1979:3) and which forms a small north-south lying plateau of
approximately 500 by 250 metres at the top (Gold IDB 4:527-528; Keel & Kuchler
OLB 2:663). The ruins, once described as 'extensive, but uninteresting' (quoted in
Harper 1979:3), have not been excavated thoroughly. However, a little excavation
has been done.4 Keel & Kuchler pointed out that 'bis heute haben in Tekoa nur
illegale Grabungen stattgefunden, deren einziges Ziel Profit war' (OLB 2:666).
Ancient Tekoa lies high in the Judaean Mountains (Ballai?GG2 1:306), 756
metres above sea level (Atlas of Israel: map 1), eight kilometres (5 miles) south to
south-east of Bethlehem, and sixteen kilometres (10 miles) south of Jerusalem,
within distant sight (Mays 1969:19). Its height is above Bethlehem and Herodium to
the north, which makes for a panoramic view.5 From its prominent elevation, the
Mount of Olives, as well as Mount Nebo beyond the Dead Sea, is visible (Gribble
ZPEB 5). It looks down on a mass of desert hills (cf Rogerson & Davies 1989, cover
pic). Jerome observed that the people of Tekoa lived on a mountain and that from
Bethlehem he could see the village (Gold IDB 4:527-528; Masterman SBE 5:2924).
The surrounding country, though sterile and rocky, is rich in pasturage (Harper
1979:3) and dominated by limestone. Because water drains away quickly in it or runs
away along the steep wadis/wudyan, the whole area has a dry and stony appearance,
especially during the hot summer months. This appearance can be misleading since
the open fields around Tekoa are particularly well suited for olive trees, while they
are attractive during the rainy winter months with extensive grazing-lands. Present-
day pictures show white sheep and black goats grazing in the ruins of Ancient Tekoa
(cf Harrison ZPEB 1:145). The neighbourhood, even the ,wilderness' to the east, is
full of the flocks of wandering Bedouin (Masterman ISBE 5:2924).
Today the ancient village of Tekoa is surrounded by an area under cultivation
and there are a couple of springs in the vicinity (Gold IDB 4:527-8), the most signi-
ficant being the two yielding more than ten litre per second, and lying west-north-
276 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

west from Tekoa at approximate distances of four and eight kilometres (Atlas of
Israel 1985: map 36). In the entire area to the east of the Jerusalem-Hebron road
only one other water source of similar strength is found, almost halfway between
Tekoa and Hebron (Atlas of Israel 1985: map 36). A seasonal watercourse/wad(
emerging from a number of branches that spring in the vicinity just to the west of
Tekoa, runs around the ancient village and further eastwards to the Dead Sea.
There are many cisterns in the region, which are commented upon as follows:
Die . . . Zisternen sind so zahireich, das . . . T Daifi 1873 uberzeugt war, es gabe in
Tekoa ebenso vide Zisternen, wie das Jahr Tage habe
(Keel & KiicbJer OLB 2:667).

Because of lack of excavation, the age of the cisterns can unfortunately not yet be
determined, but it can be stated that there are many cisterns in the neighbourhood
of a much earlier period than the last occupation of the ancient village (Masterman
ISBE 5:2924). If the many ancient cisterns around Tekoa were to point in the direc-
tion of any large scale crown enterprise in the davs of Uzziah (cf 2 Chr 26:10), one
would hardly find a better context from where to reconstruct a substantial part of
the stinging criticisms of Amos.6
Tekoa is not situated in the Judaean desert, as is often surmised (cf Harper
1979:ci), but lies 'exactly' (Axelsson ABD 6:343-344) on the border between the hill
country/arable land and the wilderness (Aharoni & Avi-Yonah 1977: maps 6 and 7;
Finkelstein 1988:52; Mittmaiui 1985; Avi-Yonah EI 15:916; cf also Hopkins 1985).
Although its proximity to the desert has led to the name ‫( מרבד ת ק ו ע‬wilderness of
Tekoa) for a large section of the Judaean desert (Gold IDB 4:527-528), the village
of Tekoa was never regarded as part of the wilderness. While to Tekoa's east the
wilderness lies on its front door, its western side is dominated by a huge fertile plain
(Keel & Kiichler OLB 2:663), once known for its olive trees (Axelsson ABD 6:343-
344).

B SIGNIFICANCE OF TEKOA'S LOCATION

In at least a threefold way Tekoa's location seems to have been strategically advan-
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 277

tageous for human existence in ancient times, namely with respect to security, land
use possibilities and accessibility.
1 Strategic position with respect to access and security
Tekoa was very close to important routes in Palestine. The main route of the
central ridge, from Jerusalem via Bethlehem to Hebron, of which the latter part
known as 'the way to Ephrath' (Aharoni & Avi-Yonah 1977: map 10), ran not only
close to Tekoa (about 7 km according to Keel & Kuchler OLB 2:663), but was also
connected to two international routes, the Via Maris and the King's Highway. The
important route between Bethlehem and En-Gedi on the Dead Sea, which was the
main connection between Jerusalem/Judah and the neighbouring states of Edom
and Moab, runs almost right next to Tekoa (cf 2 Chr 20:20). These caravan routes
close at hand could have provided a stimulating effect (cf Is 21:18). Some Biblical
texts to which we shall return shortly, indicate 'that Tekoa was not as isolated from
the mainstream of Judaean life as its size and location might suggest' (Hayes 1988:
43). Tekoa was thus not only in close proximity to places of political, religious and
economic importance, such as Jerusalem and Hebron, but it also had easy access to
routes which opened up the whole world of that time. It is worth mentioning in this
respect that the geographical horizon of the Amos text 7 displays a remarkable
variety of place-names throughout the world of his time. Amos of Tekoa must have
had a very good knowledge of important places and significant events in the macro
world of his time. That would surely not have been possible without good lines of
communication, which, in their turn, was made possible by accessible routes.
In spite of these good possibilities of contact with the wider world, the village of
Tekoa was at the same time also characterised by its relative isolation from foreign-
ers and its distance from the main routes. It is precisely because of the refuge and
protection provided by the highlands from the vulnerability of the lowlands during
times of political upheaval that the focus of settlement often returned to these areas,
even if the pick-up in trade was slower to reach the highland enclaves (Coote &
Whitelam 1987:83). This strange combination of geographical isolation and the
278 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

accessibility to main lines of communication, has led to the apt description,

4
insulated, but not isolated". In this sense Tekoa represents a strategic microcosm of
the position of Israel at large, which was described by Keel as having an 'einzigartig
zentrale und gleichzeitig marginale . . . Lage' (Keel 1992:465). Tekoa's relative
isolation, together with its multi-faceted strategic significance as a defensive (and
offensive?) military post on the one hand, and a refuge for political insurgents and
fugitives on the other hand, must have contributed greatly to its uncommon social
texture of security and insecurity, with respect to external as well as to internal
threats, and the development of a distinct community identity. As we shall see later,
there was an explanation for Tekoa's prominence as a military post, other than the
obvious defence against external threats, which had much less to do with the local
community's interests and more with that of the state. However, safety was obvious-
ly a major factor in the development of human communities, hence their location, as
was the case with Tekoa, on hill-tops. Tekoa's strategic significance as a military
post is even today easily understood when the following is considered: While the
land falls only approximately 125 metres over the 10 kilometres from the watershed
in the west to Tekoa, it falls 425 metres within a distance of merely 5 kilometres
further towards the east (Keel & Kiichler OLB 2:663). With its resultant extra-
ordinary panoramic views and hill-top position it was thus uniquely situated, not
only to watch over the main access from Moab and Edom via En-Gedi to Jerusalem
and the Judaean hinterland, but also over the wilderness of Tekoa, which served as
a refuge for dissident fugitives and insurgents who operated from there against the
centres of power (see Tekoa's socio-political traditions below).

2 Material life possibilities in Tekoa with respect to agriculture

a Water supply
The most basic requirement for the two dominant modes of existence or subsistence
that were possible in Ancient Israel, namely animal husbandry and horticulture,8
was the availability of water. We have already hinted at the significance of springs
and cisterns around Tekoa. The vicinity of Tekoa was suited to different agri-
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 279

cultural economic activities, mainly because of the higher rainfall on these high-
lying Judaean hills. An area to the south-west of Bethlehem, and including Ephrata,
counted among the most coveted spots in the Promised Land with a mean annual
rainfall in excess of 700-800 millimetres (Atlas of Israel 1985: map 12; Rogerson &
Davies 1989:25). Tekoa is right on the border of this area and records a mean
annual rainfall of approximately 600 millimetres (Atlas of Israel 1985: map 12).
In modern times, the only area between Jerusalem and Hebron and east of this
line, where irrigation was to be found, was a circle of land in close proximity to the
spring nearest to Tekoa (Atlas of Israel 1985: map 35). This could be an indication
of irrigation possibility, or at least a significant water-supply in this area, in ancient
times as well.
But Tekoa was also conducive to settlement because of the broad marginal area
to the south and east, with its extensive areas available for pasturage and the
growing of cereals.
b Pastureland
Most famous for its sheep, the vicinity of Tekoa, including substantial parts of the
Judaean wilderness, is sheep-farming area (Aharoni & Avi-Yonah 1977:19,140-141).
The region in which Amos lived has often been characterised as 'particularly suited
to the rearing of sheep and goats' (Harrison 1970:883). In winter when it rained, the
Judaean wilderness contained good pastures, so that sheep and goats usually found
adequate grazing on the series of terraces descending from west to east (Rogerson
& Davies 1989:22), that were otherwise mostly unsuitable for agriculture. 'Wilder-
ness' thus actually means land which supports sheep and goats for the five or six
months of the rainy winter season from October to March (Rogerson & Davies
1989:14). The eastward movement with the flocks in winter was at the same time a
vertical migration, exploiting the warmer conditions of the lower altitude (Hopkins
1985).
The vicinity of Tekoa most probably enabled the sheep farmers to utilise the
wilderness in this manner during winter, and to 'graze their flocks on fallow land
280 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

during the summer' (Negenman 1986:19), in this way getting the best from both the
worlds of 'Kulturland und Steppe' (Markert TRE 'Amos':471).
The quality of available grazing-land is determined not only by the amount of
rainfall, but also by both elevation and underlying rock formations, which affect the
catchment of the run-off water and its accessibility' (Finkelstein 1988:309). This
explains why the wilderness of Tekoa, with its annual precipitation of between 100
and 500 millimetres (Atlas of Israel 1985: map 12), most probably made up a signi-
ficant part of very valuable sheep-faxming area. This probably also explains why
settlements in both the Ephraimitic and Judaean hill-countries demonstrated a
marked preference for the desert edge or fringe, enabling the settlers to get the best
of both pastoral and horticultural worlds. For this very reason many settlements had
already been founded on the edge of the desert as early as the Chalcolithic period
(Aharoni & Avi-Yonah 1977:22).
Reflections in the language of the Amos text suggest that sheep farming must
have featured quite prominently in the world from which it has come forth. Among
the references to stock-farming or animal husbandry, are the following: Amos was
one of the ‫( נ ק ר י ם‬sheep-farmers) of Tekoa (1:1); the ‫( נ א ו ת‬pastures) of the ‫ר ע י ם‬
(shepherds) dry up when the Lord roars from Zion (1:2); Israel will be saved as a
‫( ר ע ה‬shepherd) saves from a lion's mouth only two bones and a piece of an ear
(3:12); the complacent in Zion and Samaria dine on choice lambs from the ‫צ א ן‬
(flock) and fattened ‫( ע ג ל י ם‬bull calves) from the midst of the ‫( מרבק‬stall, 6:4);
Amos is reported to have said to Amaziah: I am not a prophet, but I am a ‫ב ו ק ר‬
(herdsman, 7:14); Yahweh took me from behind the ‫( צ א ן‬flock, 7:15). The fact
that at least the references in 1:1, 714 ‫ ׳‬and 7:15 are most probably attributable to
Deuteronomistic editorial activity, aoes not weaken the argument, but could even be
seen to strengthen it, since later generations obviously still strongly connected Amos
to a scenario of stock-farming.

c Arable soil and horticulture

The extensive use of terracing in the hill-country was introduced by the Israelites...
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 281

as a means for creating agricultural land (Borowski 1987:28). The terraces in the
desert were constructed in wadis rather than on hill-sides. The most trustworthy
indication of terrace age, yielded by the excavation at Mevasseret Yerushalayim,
pointed to Iron II as the earliest level of occupation, with much eighth century BCE
pottery, but without earlier specimens having been found.
Some form of cultivation of the soil was most probably also practised around
Tekoa. In these limiting circumstances, cultivation of the soil practically meant
horticulture (garden cultivation), as represented by the metaphors 1wine' or 'honey'.
To the east of Tekoa some valleys were 'fertile enough to yield grain and the
usual fruits' (Andersen & Freedman 1989:188), while the area to its western side
was dominated by a huge, fertile flat area (Keel & Kuchler OLB 2:663). It could
have been here that the olive trees stood for which Tekoa, according to Jewish
sources, were famous.
The top soil was fertile, but partly because of deforestation; much of the fertile
top layer had been carried down the slopes by the rain. This led to the formation of
a number of fertile valleys and shallow glens where good crops could be produced.
Olives and vineyards in particular, thrived in the mountains (Aharoni & Avi-
Yonah 1977:140). Near Tekoa to its south and south-east, and a few miles north of
Hebron, lies the valley or wadi of Eschol (cf map, 'Egypt, Sinai Peninsula and
Promised Land', London Geographical Institute). According to tradition it was here
that the spies sent forth by Moses gathered a huge cluster (Hebrew ‫ ) א ^ כ י ל‬of
grapes, pomegranates and figs, typical of the fruitfulness of the land (Nm 13:22-24;
32:9; Dt 1:24). The vineyards in this region are still famous for the quality of their
grapes (Manley NBD 1:391). In 1978/79 the only winery south of Jerusalem that
processed more than 1000 tons of grapes, with the exception of those in the coastal
plain, was less than a handful of kilometres west of Tekoa, around Ephrata (Atlas of
Israel 1985: map 36).
All these considerations, taken together, make for a credible picture of horti-
cultural possibility in the area of Tekoa.
There also seems to be at least some indication in the language of the Amos
282 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

text of a background that included horticulture, and viticulture in particular. One

could mention the following references as possible traces: The Israelites drink ‫י י ן‬
(wine) taken as fines (2:8) while they made the Nazirites drink 2:12) ‫ ; ) י י ן‬the
women of Samaria say to their husbands to bring to them 'that we may ‫צתה‬/‫( נ‬drink,
4:1); many times Yahweh struck the ‫נ ו ח י נ ם ו כ ר מ י כ ם‬1 ‫( ר ב ו ת‬multitude of their
gardens and vineyards) with blight and mildew, while locusts devoured their
‫( ת א נ י כ ם ו ז י ת י כ ם‬fig and olive trees, 4:9); though 4you have planted ‫כ ר מ י ־ ח מ ר‬
(lush vineyards), you will not ‫( ת^יחו א ת ־ י י נם‬drink their wine, 5:11); there will be
wailing in all the ‫( כ ר מ י ם‬vineyards, 5:17); those who are complacent in Zion and
Samaria drink ‫( ב מ ז ר ק י י י ן‬wine by the bowlful, 6:6); in his reply to Amaziah
Amos is reported to have said that he was taking care of ‫( מוקמים‬sycamore-fig trees,
7:14); in his first vision Amos was shown a ‫( כ ל ו ב ק י ץ‬basket of summer/ripe
fruit, 8:1-2); days are expected when ‫( במשך ה ז ר ע‬the planter/sower of the seed)
will be overtaken by the ‫( לרף ע נ ב י ם‬one treading grapes), and when ‫( ע ס י ס‬new
wine/must) will drip from the mountains and flow from all the hills (9:13).
Although animal husbandry and horticulture were more important, grain was
also produced. A mere five miles north of Tekoa, the significance of the name
Bethlehem ('house of bread/food'), indicates favourable possibilities for grain
production (Mittmann TRE 'Bethlehem'). When this is seen in conjunction with the
setting of the book of Ruth at the time of the barley festival in Bethlehem
(Rt 1:22b),9 it appears that grain production was not only quite possible, but was in
fact practised in the area.
It is generally accepted that 500 millimetres rainfall per year is the minimum
precipitation for successful dryland crop-farming. Grain can even be cultivated in
areas with 200-250 millimetres rainfall, provided that good rains fall from autumn
through to the beginning of winter, as exemplified on the Kerak plateau (Olivier
1994).
Carmel Mountain to the south of Hebron (approximately 400 mm rainfall per
year) was the area where, according to the Deuteronomistic History, the very
wealthy Nabal, a Calebite, kept a thousand goats and three thousand sheep, which
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 283

he was shearing. His wife gave two hundred loaves of bread, two skins of wine, five
prepared sheep, five seahs (5 times 37 litres) of roasted grain, a hundred cakes of
raisins and two hundred cakes of pressed figs to David and his men (1 Sm 25). Are
these all indications of the agricultural possibilities of the region?
In modern times (1974/75) significant wheat and barley production was
achieved a few kilometres east of Tekoa, in the wilderness (Atlas of Israel: map 35).
A little further south, Hebron (400-500 mm rainfall) and Beersheba, with a mean
annual rainfall of only 200 millimetres, were the centres with the biggest barley and
wheat production in the entire land (1974/75 figures, Atlas of Israel 1985: map 35).
The language of the Amos text also breathes a world in which grain production
could have featured quite prominently. Among the references that seem to refer to
grain production, are the following: I will crush you as a cart crushes when loaded
with ‫( ע מ י ר‬cut grain, Am 2:13); Burn ‫( חמץ‬leavened bread) as a thank offering
(4:5); I gave you lack of ‫( לחם‬bread) in every town (4:6); I withheld rain from you
when the ‫( ק צ י ר‬harvest) was still three months away (4:7); You trample on the
poor and force him to give you ‫( בר‬grain, 5:11); Even though you bring me . . .
‫( מ נ ח ו ת‬grain offerings), I will not accept them (5:22); The Lord was preparing
swarms of locusts after the king's share had been harvested (T ‫ג‬: mowing) and just as
the ‫( לקעו‬second crop, after-growth, spring-crop) was coming up (7:1); Go back to
the land of Judah. Earn your ‫( לחם‬bread) there . . . . (7:12); When will the New
Moon be over that we may sell ‫( שבר‬grain), and the Sabbath be ended that we may
market ‫( ?בר‬wheat, 8:5) . . . selling even the ‫( מפל בר‬sweepings with the wheat,
8:6); I will shake Israel as one shakes with a ‫( בברה‬sieve), yet not a ‫( צ ר ו ר‬grain
pebble) shall fall (Am 9:9); The ‫( קצר‬reaper) will be overtaken by the ploughman
(Am 9:13). Although the last mentioned example is quite clearly part of a post-
exilic addition to the book of Amos, and overwhelmingly considered as such by Old
Testament scholars, and even if some of the other examples may be regarded as
coming from a later hand than that of Amos, it does not change the gist of the argu-
ment that the possibility of grain production in the familiar territory known to
Amos, is clearly reflected in the language of the Amos text.
284 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

d The description of Uzziah's large scale involvement in agriculture

The Judaean hill-country was an area of extensive agricultural activity during the
reign of king Uzziah, the contemporary of Amos. 2 Chronicles 26:10 records the
following:
Uzziah built towers in the desert and dug many cisterns, because he had much
livestock, in the foothills and in the plain. He had people working his fields and
vineyards in the hills and in the fertile lands (and in Carmel), for he loved the soil.
(NIV)

Whereas Solomon could be named the trade king, Uzziah was the agricultural
monarch (A van Selms quoted in Roubos 1972:237). It may be quite possible that
the gist of Amos' socio-economic criticism was rooted precisely in this large scale
involvement of the crown in the agricultural economy. It is not impossible that the
Chronicler's reference to Uzziah's cisterns could have included some of the many
cisterns around Tekoa. Neither can the possibility be ruled out that a substantial
part of Uzziah's fields and vineyards could have been in the greater area around
Tekoa.
Is this the place where Amos grew up to manhood? This high and relatively
isolated hill-top village within a few hours walking distance from Jerusalem and
Hebron, with its strange double character of insulation yet being in close contact?
This place with its strange double character of looking down eastwardly on masses
of desert hills with scattered flocks of sheep, while its fertile western side had some
water, fruit trees and vineyards? This place with its strange double character of
fortifications and a royal military presence on the look-out for external and internal
threats, while the majority of the inhabitants often found their sympathies not to be
with these protectors of the 'national' interest? Was this distinct geographical iden-
tity accompanied by a community identity that contributed decisively to the forma-
tion of Amos?
3 Socio-political traditions about Tekoa in and outside the Bible
Were there intellectual and other traditions which made Tekoa and nearby Hebron
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 285

centres of excellence and political dissent over a long period of time? The tenacity
and vitality of such a tradition seem to be found repeatedly in the Old Testament.
Traces of wisdom and of dissidence are often associated with Tekoa and Hebron.
Perhaps the evidence of an intellectual or wisdom tradition, accompanied by poli-
tical dissent, should not be surprising at all, since an intellectual tradition pre-
supposes the practice of imagination, which, according to Brueggemann, is a sub-
versive activity, not because it necessarily yields concrete acts of defiance, but
because it keeps the present provisional and refuses to absolutise it (1978:119). The
wilderness of Tekoa had been a refuge for the oppressed and a hide-away for insur-
gents, who operated against the centres of power (such as Jerusalem) since time
immemorial (Aharoni & Avi-Yonah 1977: map 92). 10 In this inhospitable region,
fugitives who fled from the holders of political power, have often found a hiding
place (cf 1 Sm 24:1-2). Such a 'revolutionary' tradition of Tekoa may, therefore, in
addition, not be unrelated to its proximity to the wilderness, on the one hand, and its
military prominence, on the other hand. Was this intellectual tradition and its
accompanying independence of style and approach, in some way connected to
certain historical geographical factors in its development? Heyns aptly remarked
that 'the prevailing attitude in this region may . . . have been a general spirit of
independence and a desire to carry on one's own affairs, free from the central
control of the crown' (1990:312). Did Hebron, the oldest 'Israelite' settlement
(along with Shechem and Beth-El), with a tradition stretching back to the time of
Abraham's settlement there (Gn 13), and with its ancient sanctuary (Miller 1987:
39), play a decisive role in this respect?11
Did the region simply benefit in some way from the accumulated experiential
wisdom emanating from the fact that human beings lived there from prehistoric
times, as evidenced by the prehistoric caves of Umm Qatafa, a mere four kilometres
south of Herodium and thus very close to Tekoa (May 1984:95).

a Biblical considerations
The fact that the Bethlehemite David operates as adversary to Saul from Hebron,
286 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

that Absalom, the conspirator, operates from Hebron and Tekoa (2 Sm 15: 7ff), and
that Amos the adversary, poised against the socio-political, religious and juridical
establishment of Samaria and Jerusalem, also comes from Tekoa, surely creates a
very strong suspicion.
The Deuteronomistic author also preserved a tradition about Hebron and
Tekoa interacting against Jerusalem. Joab fetched a wise woman (‫ חכמה‬iTUlX) from
Tekoa (2 Sm 14:2,4,9) in order to effect an 'honourable rapprochement' (Gold IDB
4:527-529) between David and Absalom (2 Sm 13:37-14:24; 23:26). The conservative
Joab, who, after David's death, positioned himself against the Jerusalemite Solomon
and on the side of the Hebron-born Adonijah, obviously had a very high opinion of
the peasantly rhetorical ability and cunning as it was practised in the Judaean rural
town of Tekoa (Keel & Kuchler OLB 2:664).12 This Tekoahite woman who displays
pro-Absalom, and therefore pro-rebellion sentiments, makes use of a ruse or trick to
point out the needlessness of carrying out the death sentence, a strategy also
employed by the educated court prophet Nathan in his famous parable (2 Sm 12) to
David. 13 To some extent her rhetorical strategy also displays similarities to the lite-
rary craft employed in the opening discourse contained in the book Amos (Am 1-2)
and in the later vision report (Am 7), a strategy sometimes referred to as encirc-
ling.14 The "wise woman from Tekoa' reinforces not only the idea of a certain intel-
lectual tradition in Tekoa, 15 but heightens the suspicion about a centre of dissent.
In the tenth century BCE Rehoboam is reported to have constructed fortifi-
cations in the city of Tekoa as part of a line of fortifications (2 Chr 11:6).16 Tekoa
thus seems to have been a city of strategic military importance (cf also 2 Sm 14:2),
particularly for the protection of Jerusalem. It proved effective later, since
2 Chronicles 20 relates that an allied Moabite and Ammonite force invaded Judah
(c 850 BCE) by way of En-Gedi and climbed one of the difficult but short ascents
directly into the heart of the Judaean hills. Jehoshaphath consulted with people in
the *wilderness of Tekoa' and stopped the invading alliance in the vicinity of Tekoa
(2 Chr 20:20).
Tekoa's defences were maintained even in the seventh century BC, as a station
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 287

for trumpet signalling (Jr 6:1). In addition to the significance of these military
centres with respect to foreign attacks from outside, Lemche (1988:140) has correct
ly pointed to the possibility that the fortresses, or more properly, 'barracks', were
part of a crude but effective propagandistic effort with an unambiguous message: 'it
was a warning to the populace to maintain order'. In view of the dissident or 'revo-
lutionary' tradition surrounding Tekoa, Lemche's suggestion makes much sense.
This village was also the home of , der bedeutendste Sohn Tekoas' (Keel &
Kuchler OLB 2:664), Amos, classical writing prophet, subversive social critic, and
intellectual par excellence, during the time of king Uzziah. The 'wisdom' back-
ground of Amos has long been observed and worked out by various scholars, espe-
dally since the seminating studies of Lindblom (1960) and Terrien (1962), and in
particular by Wolff ([1964] 1973) and Jacob (1973, quoted in Epsztein 1986:94) who
finds the Sitz im Leben of Amos' intellectual style and use of language and forms, in
the clan or tribal wisdom of the region.17
Amos' shocking announcement of God's rejection of Israel and Judah, that
would culminate in the end of the reigning royal houses as well as the exilement of
a crucial number of the upper strata of the people of Israel through the invasion of
an overwhelming external force, was understood as treason, and led to his silencing
and banishment from Israel.18 When the fearless and powerful poetry of Amos, the
establishment's reaction to his prophetic activity (Am 7) and the later efforts of the
censors (who represented a later establishment) to soften his message and influence,
are all taken together, it seems clear that Tekoa has produced the most powerful
subversive prophet of Biblical times.
The Chronicler tells us that during the post-exilic time, under Nehemiah, the
walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt by teams of volunteers, and he goes on to observe
merely that the leading men from Tekoa refused to take part in it (Neh 3:5). This
reinforces the idea that Tekoa often displayed an 'independent spirit' (Heyns 1990:
312) or even an anti-Jerusalem sentiment.
The strategic position of Tekoa on the edge of the wilderness continued to play
an important role in the Hellenistic-Roman period. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes)
288 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

refortified the town by building a fortress when Maccabean freedom fighters fled
'into the wilderness of Tekoa' from where they operated (Jos Ant 13:15; 1 Macc
9:50; Aharoni & Avi-Yonah 1977:197; Keel & Kuchler OLB 2:665; Masterman,
SBE 5:2924) against the government. The white, hard limestone surface made it
difficult to track anyone in this desolate region (Gold IDB 4:527-529). Refugee
watchmen could easily spot toy effort at a sneak attack or encirclement, while the
nature of the terrain itself made this sort of manoeuvre difficult. The wilderness
was a good place to go to gain time and reorganise one's forces.
Having been born in a town in the hill-country of Judah (Lk 1:39,56), perhaps
the most outspoken revolutionary New Testament prophet, John the Baptist, grew
to manhood (Lk 1:80) in the district of the wilderness of Tekoa, and was equipped
for his 'austere mission' of radical condemnation of the established order in Israel,
finding in the wilderness-outlook figures of judgment.
In the first Jewish war Tekoa seems to have been in the hands of the Jewish
rebels (Axelsson ABD 6:343-344), using the village as support point while demand-
ing the surrender of the Roman garrison at Herodium! (Gold IDB 4:528). A little
later Josephus inquired whether Tekoa was suitable as a fortified post for the
control of the wilderness lying to its east (Vita 420). In the second Jewish war
Tekoa stood agaijn under the influence of the rebellious insurgents (Keel & Kuchler
OLB 2:665).
These historical examples seem to produce further indication of Tekoa's con-
tinued connection with insurrection and resultant military activily. During the times
of the Crusades, many Christians inhabiting Tekoa aided the Franks during the first
siege of Jerusalem. Tekoa versus Jerusalem once more!
It was not only in the time of Nehemiah that the inhabitants of Tekoa refused to
co-operate with a suggested plan. An American attempt, initiated in 1958, to under-
take regular excavations in Ancient Tekoa, met with stiff opposition from those
domiciled in the region (Keel & Kuchler OLB 2:666). One is tempted to remark:
'What else would you expect from Tekoa?'
One cannot escape the conclusion that the area of Tekoa has played an impor-
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 289

tant role throughout all these centuries as a place of non-conformation to what was
perceived as injustice and untruth. Did an intellectual or wisdom tradition in Tekoa
have anything to do with such a culture of non-conformance? And if so, to what
extent was Amos influenced by this independent way of thinking? Conversely, the
question whether Amos' own legacy could have contributed in the long run to such
a dissident culture in Tekoa, is perhaps not altogether unrealistic either.

NOTES
1 I should like to thank Prof J P J (Hannes) Olivier for the invitation to present this paper at the
Stellenbosch Conference on Historical Geography and Old Testament Studies, and also for the
formulation of the title which he suggested. At the end of my few thoughts on the matter the
reader may wish to add to the title,"... and what Amos did to Tekoa.' I should also like to thank
Prof Stefan Timm for his helpful suggestion with respect to the work of Helga Weippert 1985.
Amos: Seine Bilder und ihr Milieu, in Weippert, H, Seybold, K & M Weippert (eds), BeitrSge zw
prophetischen Bildspmche in Israel undAssyrien, 1-29. Fribourg: Universitatsverlag. Unfortunately
time did not permit me to include it in this article.
2 On average the significant upholders of this view did not count much more than one per century
since its first appearance. Cf Cyrillus of Alexandria (c 400), Kimchi (c 1200), Oort (1880), Hans
Schmidt (1920), Neubauer (1923), Speier (1953) and more recent scholars such as Klaus Koch
(1982) and Ned Rosenbaum (1990). Koch (1982:70) suggests a Galilean Tekoa, which is 'attested‫׳‬
in post-Biblical times. Perhaps such an 'attestation' was yet another attempt of official Judaism to
dissociate traitor/bastard prophet Amos, who proclaimed the end for Jerusalem and its throne in
his original uncensured discourses, from the south!
3 According to Mays (1969:3) a classic description of Tekoa and its environment is given by G A
Smith, The Historical Geography of the Holy Land, 1907:310ff, repr Fontana 1966:212-214. Unfor-
tunately this was not available to me.
4 Thompson (NBD 2:1167) refers to the following: Heicksen, M H 1969. Tekoa: Excavations in
1968. Grace Journal 10, 3-10; Davis, J J 1974. Tekoa Excavations: Tomb 302. Bulletin of the Near
East Archaeological Society 4,27-49.
5 See the impressive photograph of the Judaean wilderness as viewed from Tekoa with the very
prominent Herodium in the centre (Gold IDB 4:528), as well as the cover picture of Rogerson
& Davies (1989).
6 Whether the agricultural enterprise of Uzziah could be, even partly, characterised as 'actual assis-
tance to the farmers' (Olivier 1982:149), is highly questionable in view of the exploitative nature of
'normal' crown enterprise, in the light of Amos' and Micah's criticism and in view of the possible
role that the ‫ עם הארץ‬played in the deposition of several kings in Jerusalem around this time. I
have argued elsewhere that the ‫ עם הארץ‬could have had a hand, together with the Jerusalem
priesthood, in the dethroning of Uzziah, shrewdly calculated and performed under the pretext of
so-called leprosy (Strijdom 1993).
7 Cf in this connection Shea (1965).
290 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

8 See in this connection the significance of the double metaphor in the expression, "a land flowing
with milk and honey", and the wine and milk as a sign of Judah's blessing (Gn 49:11). For a dis-
cussion cf Buhl (1899), Fensham (1966), Aharoni (1979), Olivier (1988), Stern (1992) and the lite-
rature quoted in Stem.
9 Words and expressions indicating grain production in Bethlehem, are found throughout the book,
as evidenced by the following: the beginning of the barley festival ( 0 1 : 2 2 ,‫ערי‬15 ‫ ; ) ק צ י ר‬gleaning
(‫ )לקת‬among the ears of grain (D‫בלי‬#) in the field (illto, 2:2); reapers ( 2 : 3 ,‫ )קצרים‬and a
servant in charge of reapers (2:5); gathering among the sheaves (0‫רי‬13‫ )ע‬of the reapers (2:7);
beating out ( ‫ ) ו ת ח נ ו ת‬a n ephah o f barley ( 2 : 1 7 , ‫ ע ר י ם‬1 ! ‫ ; ) א י פ ה ן‬wheat harvest (D‫י‬D₪ , ‫ק צ י ר‬
2:23); winnowing (‫ )זרה‬on a threshing floor ( ] 3 : 2 ,‫ ;)גר‬heap of grain (TltHy, 3:7).
10 That fugitives from the holders of power fled into the wilderness, is also clear from the account of
Elijah's flight, who, after his killing of the 450 Baal prophets, escaped from Jezebel's wrath by
retreating into the wilderness south of Beersheba (1 Ki 19).
11 On the one hand there could have been a significant connection between religion and the aware-
ness of social justice. On the other hand there has always been a strong relationship between hill
country religion and subsistence, since the farmer relied not only on technology but on the deity to
ensure the essential fertility.
12 Wittenberg has argued strongly that the experiential or popular wisdom of particularly the
Judaean people of the land (‫ הארץ‬Dy), needs to be taken more seriously. With respect to the
relationship between Amos and wisdom, this influence might have been more important than that
of court circles (1991:15).
13 This wise woman from Tekoa understood how to introduce a legal case (2 Sm 14:6f); how, by use
of an analogy from nature, to elevate it to the level of a principle, especially with regard to the
rights of an outcast (v 14); and how at the end to come to the choice between 'good and evil'
(v 17). Cf Wolff 1973:77-78.
14 Apart from the examples mentioned in Amos (1-2; 7), the Deuteronomist's parable of Nathan
(2 Sm 12) and the story of the wise woman from Tekoa (2 Sm 14), the rhetorical trick of encirc-
ling is also clearly found in Isaiah's song of the vineyard (Is 5). In all these examples there is a
clear leading up to a climax, while the overall effect is to produce surprise and horror. The author
ensures, prior to the surprise climax, that his hearers or readers will experience a sense of moral
outrage (Cf Barton 1980:3). In the two examples involving David (2 Sm 12; 14), as well as the
opening discourse of Amos (1-2), the impact of the climax is heightened by the fact that the
hearer of the story/discourse is in such agreement with the moral outrage articulated, that he
logically and ejcistantially concurs with the outstanding surprise 'punch line', by which he declares
himself guilty.
15 It should be clear that our use of the term ,intellectual', here, is not to be understood in a certain
modern sociological sense. One would rather have in mind an unofficial intellectuality that is
characterised by wisdom or sagacity or discernment. The type of wisdom that is perhaps often
characterised by giftedness but uncommunicativeness, deep thinking about things but allergy to
publicity, simplicity of lifestyle and no desire to rise or make ,progress' in life. Being captivated by
the things that are close to the work of the sharpest minds of all times, such an intellectual tradi-
tion may be carried by what Louw calls the 'kluisenaar van die suiwer denke' ([1955] 1986:7). See
also Louw [1961] 1986:387-392.
16 At the same time Rehoboam fortified Bethlehem as the north-eastern bastion of this Judaean
system of fortresses.
17 Wolff postulated that Amos the shepherd moved from Tekoa eastward and southward and that he
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 291

came into contact with Edomites and other 'people of the east', whose clan wisdom was quite well
known (1 Ki 5:11, English 4:31; Jr 49:7; Ob 8; Job 2:11). With these people Amos could exchange
experiences and knowledge, pieces of news, and old proverbial material (Wolff [1964] 1973:37,77).
Crenshaw (1967) traced the influence of the wise upon Amos by comparing the 'doxologies of
Amos' with passages in Job (5:9-16; 9:5-10) and later found such 'hymnic affirmations of divine
justice' in other Old Testament texts (1975). Morgan (1979) devoted an extended study to wisdom
influence in the prophets, while Wittenberg has recently taken a fresh look at Amos and wisdom
(1991).
18 That such silencing in terms of public speaking, did not necessarily mean complete silencing, is
proven later by Jeremiah who writes and rewrites (strictly dictates to his scribe Baruch) his doom
prophecies for public consumption, at the lime when he was barred from the temple, even after
king Jehoiakim destroyed his first writing by fire (Jr 36). In the case of Amos I see no reason
whatsoever to accept unfounded hypotheses about so-called disciples, tradents or a school that
fixed his spoken words in writing. It is much more natural to assume that Amos could have
written down his own oracles and that his banishment from public speaking, as reported by the
Deuteronomist, could have forced him to rely even more on fixing his message in writing. Such an
idea cannot be far-fetched in view of the fact that Elijah was reportedly already writing to a king
(2 Chr 21:12-15; cf Begg 1988) and that Isaiah was in fact a scribe at the royal court (2 Chr 26:22.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aharoni, Y 1979. The land of the Bible. A Historical Geography. Philadelphia: Westminster.
Aharoni, Y & Avi-Yonah, M 1977. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Reved. New York: Macn^an.
Andersen, F 1 & Freedman, D N 1989. Amos. A new translation with introduction and commentary.
New York: Doubleday. (The Anchor Bible, vol 24A.)
Avi-Yonah, M [s a], s v Tekoa'. Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol 15.
Axelsson, L 1992. s v Tekoa'. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol 6.
Balla, D 1927. s v ‫׳‬Amos', RGG. 2. Aufl, Band 1.
Barton, J 1980, Amos's oracles against the nations. A study of Amos 7.5-25. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. (Society for Old Testament Study Monograph Series 6.)
Begg, C 1988. The Chronicler's non-mention of Elisha. BN 45, 7-11.
Borowski, O 1987, Agriculture in Iron Age Israel. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.
Brown, F, Driver, S R & Briggs, C A 1974. A Hebrew and English lexicon of the Old Testament.
Oxford: Clarendon.
Brueggemann, W 1978. The prophetic imagination. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Buhl, F 1899. Die socialen Verhaltnisse der Israelites Berlin: Reuther & Reichard.
Coote, R B & Whitelam, K W 1987. The emergence of early Israel in historical perspective. Sheffield:
The Almond Press. (The Social World of Biblical Antiquity 5.)
Crenshaw, JL 1967. The influence of the wise upon Amos. The 'doxologies of Amos' and Job 5:9-16;
9:5-10. ZAW79, 42-52.
1975. Hymnic affirmation of divine justice: The doxologies of Amos and related texts in the Old
T«stament. Missoula: Scholars Press. (SBL Dissertation Series 24.)
Egypt, Sinai Peninsula and Promised Land (Map), [s a], London: Geographical Institute.
Eissfeldt, 0 1931. sv'Tekoa‫׳‬. RGG. 2. Aufl, Band 5.
292 WHAT TEKOA DID TO AMOS

Epsztein, L 1986. Social justice in the Ancient Near East and the people of the Bible. London: SCM.
(Jerusalem Bible Supplements.)
Fensham, FC 1966. An ancient tradition of the fertility of Palestine. PEQ 98,42-43.
Finkelstein, I 1988. The archaeology of the Israelite settlement. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
Gold, V R 1986. s v 'Tekoa*. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. An illustrated Encyclopedia,
vol 4.
Gribble, R F 1975/76. s v "Tekoa". Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol 5.
Harper, W R [1904] 1979. A critical and exegetkal commentary on Amos and Hosea. Edinburgh:
T & T Clark.
Harrison, R K 1970. Introduction to the Old Testament. London: Tyndale Press.
1975/76. s v 'Amos'. Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol 1.
Hayes, J H 1988. Amos. The eighth century prophet: His times and his preaching. Nashville: Abingdon
Press.
Heyns, M 1990. A social historical perspective on Amos' prophecies against Israel. OTE 3(3), 303-316.
Hopkins, DC 1985. The highlands of Canaan. Sheffield: Almond Press. (The Social World of Bibli-
cal Antiquity 3.)
Keel, O 1992. Review of John Rogerson/Philip Davies 1989, the Old Testament world. Bibliotheca
Orientalis 49(3-4), 464-470.
Keel, O & Kuchler, M 198Z s v 'Tekoa, die Heimat des Propheten Amos'. Orte und Landschaften der
Bibel. Ein Handbuch undStudienreisefiihrerzum Heiligen Land, Band 2. Zurich: Benziger.
Koch, K 1982. The prophets (vol 1). The Assyrian period. Philadelphia: Fortress.
Lemche, N P 1988. Ancient Israel. A new history of Israelite society. Sheffield: JSOT Press. (The Bibli-
cal Seminar.)
Lindblom, J 1960. Wisdom in the Old Testament prophets, in Noth, M & Thomas, D Winton (eds),
Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East. Presented to H H Rowley, 192-204. Leiden: E J
Brill.
Louw, N P van W 1986. Versamelde prosa 2. Kaapstad: Human & Rousseau.
Manley, GT 1967. sv'Eschol'. The New Bible Dictionary.
Markert, L 1976. s v 'Amos/Amosbuch'. Theologische Realeniyklopadie, Band 2.
Masterman, E W G [s a], s v 'Tekoa'. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, vol 5.
May, H G (ed) 1984. Oxford Bible Atlas. 3rded. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mays, J L 1969. Amos. London: SCM. (Old Testament Library.)
Miller, J M 1987. Die heilige land, 'n Handleiding vir besoekers, vertaal en bygewerk deur Hannes
Olivier. Roodepoort: CUM-Boeke.
Mittmann, S 1976. s v'Bethlehem'. Theologische Realeniyklopadie, Band 5.
1985. Interview with P D F Strijdom. Fort Beaufort.
Morgan, D F 1979. Wisdom and the prophets, in Sixth International Congress on Biblical Studies,
Studia Biblica 1,209-244. Sheffield: JSOT Press. (JSOT Supplements Series 11.)
Negenman, J H 1986. Geography of Palestine, in Van der Woude, A S (ed), The World of the Bible,
2-20. Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans.
Olivier, J P J 1982. Israel en Juda as selfstandige kleinstate in die internasionale poiitieke arena (850-
750 v C), in Deist, F E (red), Die Bybel leef, 140-153. Pretoria: J L van Schaik.
1988. A land flowing with milk and honey - Some observations on the modes of existence in
ancient Israel. NGTT 29(1), 2-13.
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 9/2 (1996) 273-293 293

Olivier, J P J 1994. Kantaantekening t.o.v. die Sosio-ekonomiese opset tydens die rcgering van koaing
Manasse van Juda. Paper presented at the Annual Congress of the Old Testament Society of
South Africa (OTSSA), Stellenbosch. Copy supplied by the author.
Rogerson, I W & Davies, P R 1989. The Old Testament world, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Rosenbaum, S 1990 ‫א‬. Amos of Israel: A new interpretation. Macon (Georgia): Mercer University
Press.
Roubos, K 1972. UKmnieken. Nijkerk: GF Callenbach. (De Prediking van het Oude Testament.)
Shea, W 1965. Amos' geographic horizon, in Eybers, I H, Fensham, F C, Gliick, J J, Labuschagne, C J
et al, Studies in the books of Hosea and Amos, 166-169. 7th and 8th congresses of Die Ou-Testa-
mentiese Werkgemeenskap in Suid-Afrika (OTWSA), 1964/65. Potchefstroom: Pro Rege-Pers
Bpk.
Stern, PD 1992. The origin and significance of the land flowing with milk and honey". VTXLII(4),
554-557.
Strijdom, P D F 1993. Removed by Big Brother? A reassessment of Uzziah/Azariah's socalled
leprosy and name change. Paper presented at the Annual Congress of the Southern African
Society for Semitics (SASSEM), Stellenbosch.
Survey of Israel 1985. Atlas of Israel. Cartography. Physical and Human Geography. 3rd ed. New York:
Macmillan.
Terrien, S 1962. Amos and wisdom, in Anderson, B W & Harrelson, W (eds), Israel's prophetic heri-
tage. Essays in honor of James Muilenburg, 11-25. London: SCM.
Thompson, J A [sa], sv'Tekoa'. The New Bible Dictionary. Reved.
Wittenberg, G H 1991. A fresh look at Amos and wisdom. OTE 4(1), 7-18.
Wolff, H W 1973. Amos the prophet. The man and his background. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Petrus D F Strijdom, Department of Old Testament Studies and Hebrew, University

of Fort Hare, Private Bag X1314, Alice, 5700, Republic of South Africa. Telephone:
(27 + ) 0404 32011x2224.