Kidron and Hebron: Performative Space and Performative

Speech in 2 Baruch and 1 Enoch

Jeff S. Anderson

Performative speech acts derive their potency from being uttered in exacting social

contexts. Spatial demarcations in 2 Baruch and 1 Enoch combine performative speech

and imagined space to construct illocutionary force for their messages. In 2 Baruch, the

author presents the respected scribe receiving revelations and making proclamations from

several diverse geographical contexts, particularly two notoriously ambivalent burial and

cultic places: Kidron and Hebron. Revelatory trees figure prominently in these oracles at

both locations. Unlike 1 Enoch, which graphically depicts Kidron and the surrounding

topography as cursed (1 Enoch 26:1–27:5), 2 Baruch constructs imagined space for the

righteous at Kidron, the consummate “exit threshold” demarking the boundary outside

Zion. Like Kidron, Hebron is also an ambivalent site in the Second Temple period,

known for the revered tombs of Israel’s ancestors but also as a site of pagan practices.

Hebron marks the consummate “entry threshold” in the Hebrew Bible, a metaphor for a

new era of restoration.

In apocalyptic literature, the seer typically receives revelations and recounts the content

of those revelations in ways that often transcend space and time. While spatial transcendence

often dominates apocalypses that emphasize a heavenly journey and temporal transcendence

crosses historical boundaries, many apocalypses place the seer’s revelations in specific

geographic locations.1 The proper person receives and imparts revelations from precise places at

specific times. In speech act theory, the bringing together of the appropriate person, time, and

space provides proper force to the illocutionary speech act.2 In a word, performative speech and

1 Leonard L. Thompson, “Mapping an Apocalyptic World,” Sacred Places and Profane Spaces: Essays in the

Geographics of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Jamie Scott and Paul Simpson-Housley, eds. (New York:

Greenwood, 1991), pp. 115–117. 2 J. L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962). Austin’s distinction

between words that describe things and words that do something proved insufficient and the theory was modified by

John Searle, Speech Acts: An Essay on the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1970). Anthony Thiselton, “The Supposed Power of Words in Biblical Writings,” Journal of Theological Studies 25

(1974), pp. 283–299; Delbert R. Hillers, “Some Performative Utterances in the Bible,” in Pomegranates Golden

Bells: Studies in Biblical, Jewish, and Near Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literature in Honor of Jacob Milgrom, (ed, D.

P. Wight, D. N. Freedman, A. Hurvitz; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1995), pp. 757–766. Christopher Wright

Mitchell. The Meaning of BRK “to Bless” in the Old Testament (SBLDS 95; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987); Jeff S.

Anderson, “The Social Function of Curses in the Hebrew Bible,” ZAW 110 (1998), pp. 11–15. Anthony Thiselton

has applied speech-act theory to the study of hermeneutics in New Horizons in Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 1992), pp. 283–307, as has Dale Patrick, The Rhetoric of Revelation in the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis:

Fortress Press, 1999).

performative space elicit illocutionary force. Consequently, spatial demarcations construct

legitimacy for the message. Social practices are mediated through spatial frameworks and social

boundaries are associated with spatial distinctions.3 Henri Lefebvre’s notorious warning against

applying spatial analysis to texts might just as well be said about the application of speech-act

theory to texts as well.4 Yet, the Hebrew Bible is obsessed with space and speech. The Second

Temple Jewish texts considered in this essay redraft geography and present speech acts from

fresh geographical contexts.

Such is the case in the historical apocalypse of 2 Baruch. Baruch, no longer merely the

Hebrew Bible’s companion of Jeremiah, has evolved from scribe to prophet to apocalyptic seer.5

He receives revelations and proclaims his apocalyptic message in imagined space and time. This

merging of geography and message is common in the Bible and in Second Temple Jewish

literature. Balaam, for example, is shuttled from mountain to mountain to find that exact spot

which would give the curse more illocutionary force. In Deuteronomy the priests utter blessings

and curses from strategic rhetorical locations of Mount Gerizim and Ebal. In the book of Judges,

Jotham pronounces his own malediction from Mount Gerizim (Judg 9). Moses and Jesus both

ascend mountains to receive or reinterpret the law of God, and in 4 Ezra, Ezra travels back and

forth to a field to receive his revelations (4 Ezra 9:24, 10:4, 32; 10: 51–55, 13:57, 14:37).6

In 2 Baruch, the scribe is constantly on the move. During the course of the book there are

over 20 different geographical changes to the seer’s location. Geographic changes, in

combination with ritual fasts and calendric references also provide possible markers to the

3 Daniel Gurtner cites 2 Baruch as having “strong characteristics of boundary-maintaining Jewish authorship.

Second Baruch: A Critical Edition of the Syriac Text (New York: T & T Clark, 2009), p. 13. 4 Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, Donald Nicholson-Smith, trans., (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1991), p. 15. 5 J. Edward Wright, “Baruch: His Evolution from Scribe to Apocalyptic Seer,” In Biblical Figures Outside the Bible,

(Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998), pp. 264–289. 6 Robert L. Cohn, "Mountains and Mount Zion." Judaism 26 (1977), pp. 97–115. In 4 Ezra the seer clearly contrasts

field and city, “I will not return to the city but stay here (10:4).” The fourth, fifth, and sixth visions take place in the

field and the seventh vision takes place under an oak. 4 Ezra 9:26 calls the field Ardat but its location is unclear.

complex outline of the book.7 Two explicit calendar references form an inclusio which delineates

the temporal setting of 2 Baruch (1:1, 77:18), along with five temporal statements, “after these

things,” which denote important transitions in the apocalypse (7:1, 13:1, 22:1, 31:1, 37:1). After

a prologue with a setting in Jerusalem (1:1–5:4), Baruch travels to the Kidron Valley (5:5–9:2),

treks back to Zion and its temple (10:1– 20:6), off again to the Kidron (21:1), back to Zion

(21:2–30:5), returns to Kidron (31:1–34:1), back to Zion and the ruins of the temple (35:1–43:2),

to Kidron again at the midpoint of the composition (44:1–46:7), to Hebron, where he receives his

ultimate revelation, the vision of the dark and bright waters (41:7–75:8), then finally back once

again to the Kidron (76:1–87:1).8 Primarily, Baruch’s revelations and messages come to light in

three prominent locations: the temple compound in Zion, the Kidron Valley, and Hebron.

Consequently, the theme of the apocalypse is a function of time and geography.9 Yet

geographical space is not the only consideration for Baruch’s revelations. Speeches are

prominent in the book as Baruch addresses the remnant on three occasions. Additionally, all of

Baruch’s addresses to the people, including the letter, take place outside the city.10

Sacred Trees and Baruch’s Revelations

In addition to the revelatory sites of Zion, Kidron, and Hebron, many of Baruch’s

pronouncements and revelations are received while sitting under a sacred oak or other sacred

7 These ritual fasts include four seven-day fasts (9:1, 12:5, 21:1, 47:2) plus four additional references relating to a

command or the participation in a fast (5:5–7, 20:5–6, 43:3, 86:1). 8 Following Charles, I argue that the setting here is Kidron, not Hebron for several reasons. First, the dual

mentioning of an oak in 6:1 and 77:18 form an inclusio to the apocalypse. Second, 77:1 clearly states that Baruch

left Hebron to the place where the people were assembled. Third, the first two addresses are to the people also take

place at Kidron, not Hebron. Fourth the statement in 77:5, “you are here with me” is awkward demanding that his

audience followed him to Hebron. R.H. Charles, The Apocalypse of Baruch, (London: Black, 1896), p. 10. For an

alternative perspective, see P. M. Bogaert, Apocalypse de Baruch I, (Paris: Les editions du cerf, 1969), pp. 323–324. 9 Mark F. Whitters, The Epistle of 2 Baruch: A Study in Form and Message (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,

(2003), 35. The author of 2 Baruch does not distinguish between the temple and Jerusalem, (Frederick Murphy,

"The Temple in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch." Journal of Biblical Literature 106, (1987), pp. 671–683. 10 See the observations of Whitters, p. 40.

tree. Every revelatory episode also takes place in spatial isolation.11 The tradition in 2 Baruch of

receiving revelations among a sacred grove is firmly placed among similar traditions of the

Hebrew Bible and the ancient Near East. Shechem (Josh 24:21-26, Gen 33:19-20, 35:4, Deut

11:30), Hebron (Gen 13:18, 14:13, 18:1), Bethel (Gen 35:8), Beersheba, (Gen 21:33), Ophrah

(Judg 6:11), the large tree at Zaanannim (Josh 19:3,19, Judg 4:11), and Tabor (1 Sam 3:10) all

share traditions of sacred trees associated with these holy places. Archaeological surveys have

demonstrated that many of the revered sites in Israel are associated with some kind of sacred

grove or oak.12 The seepage of supernatural powers through sacred groves and trees is well

documented in the ancient world as these trees were often the source of omens and oracles

alike.13 In Judges 9:6, 37, for example, the “soothsayer’s tree” served as a link between heaven

and earth.14 In the Ugaritic Baal cycle, revelation by means of a sacred tree and high places is

also evident. Baal says,

For I have a word to tell you,

a message to recount to you:

the word of the tree and whisper of the stone,

the murmur of the heavens to the earth,

of the seas to the stars.15

In the book of Genesis, sacred trees seem to be an unordinary part of Israelite worship, but in the

Deuteronomic literature and its related prophets, these sacred objects are often subject to blasting

11 John Markley observes this in 6:1b, 10: 4–5, 20:5, 32:7–8 a, 44:2, 47:1, 77:18, “’Seer Isolation’ and Apocalyptic

Revelation in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch,” Conversations with the Biblical World 31 (2011), pp. 115–128. Noted by Liv

Ingeborg Lied, The Other Lands of Israel: Imaginations of the Land in 2 Baruch (Supplements to the Journal for the

Study of Judaism 129; Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008), pp. 127–129. 12 Amihai Mazar, “A Sacred Tree in the Chalcolithic Shrine at En Gedi: a Suggestion,” Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel

Archaeological Society (2010), pp. 31–32. 13 Amots Dafni, “The Supernatural Characters and Powers of Sacred Trees in the Holy Land,” Journal of

Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine (2007), pp. 1–16. 14 Joan Taylor argues that new evidence indicates that asherim were in fact living trees, not dead totems. “The

Asherah, the Menorah, and the Sacred Tree,” JSOT 66 (1995), pp. 29–54. 15 Michael D. Coogan and Mark S. Smith, Stories from Ancient Canaan, 2nd edition (Louisville: Westminster John

Knox, 2012), pp. 119, 121.

ridicule and denunciation.16 The prophets chastised Israel and Judah for idol worship amidst such

shrines. Gideon transformed the oak of Ophrah into a place of false worship by placing an ephod

there (Judg 6:11). Oaks also served as landmarks and grave markers (Gen 35:8). Oaks connected

with various holy sites were often locations where the visionary received supernatural revelation.

In 4 Ezra, for example, Ezra receives the climactic seventh vision while under an oak. Kidron

and Hebron integrate sacred oaks in 2 Baruch.17

At three crucial junctures, revelatory trees provide the impetus for Baruch’s message.

First, at Kidron, as Baruch was grieving over the ruin of Jerusalem, he sat down by and oak and a

strong spirit lifted him up above the wall of Jerusalem to see four angels standing at four corners

of the city. Another angel came from heaven, descended into the Holy of Holies and took the

essential temple vessels and proclaimed the message that Jerusalem’s humiliation will only be

temporary. These sacred vessels will one day be restored to their intended use forever (6:1–9).

Second, at Hebron, Baruch receives, by means of angelus interpres, the explanation of perhaps

the most crucial vision of the book, the Apocalypse of the Clouds while sitting under a tree to

rest (55:1-75:8). Finally, presumably back at Kidron, Baruch receives the impetus to write the

two letters to the nine and a half tribes while sitting alone under the shadow of the branches of a

sacred oak.

Kidron as Performative Space

As already noted, in 2 Baruch the seer’s revelations take place at three important

locations: the temple compound in Zion, the Kidron Valley and Hebron.18 The importance of Mt.

16 Ronald Hendel, Remembering Abraham: Culture, Memory, and History in the Hebrew Bible (New York: Oxford,

2005), pp. 16–17, 24–25. 17 2 Baruch 6:1, 55:1, 77:18 18 On the changing and uncertain location of Zion, see Walter Zanger, "The Elusive Mount Zion." Jewish Bible

Quarterly 30 (2002), pp. 179–182.

Zion is obvious, but why Kidron and Hebron?19 These two locations, both places of ambiguity,

depict boundary language that imbues geography and topography with all sorts of positive and

negative metaphorical images. In the Hebrew Bible, Kidron epitomizes the stereotypical exit

boundary from Jerusalem while Hebron signifies the consummate entry point into the land of

promise, not only in light of Genesis’ ancestral narratives concerning Abraham, but also as a

political entry point for David’s nascent monarchy and Absalom’s failed coup against his father

(2 Sam 5:1–5, 15:10). Such geographic boundary language is potent, both politically and

theologically.20

Kidron is an unequivocal geographical marker, but it is also a place of ambiguity.

Baruch’s revelations at Kidron are explicitly present in 5:5–9:2, 21:1, 31:1–34:1, possibly in

44:1–46:7 and, as I suggested above, possibly at 76:1–87:1. It is from Kidron that Baruch is

transported above the temple to observe angels who remove the temple vessels to be hidden in

the earth until the restoration. From Kidron he proclaims each of his three messages to the

people.21 Consequently, Kidron has a performative function as a place of both revelation and

instruction. Yet, on the other hand, it is also a place of death, idolatry and apostasy, as the word

Kidron, means “dark” or “unclear.”22

In ordinary speech, to cross the Kidron simply meant to leave the City of David. David,

for example, crossed over the Kidron to escape Absalom (2 Sam 15:23) and Solomon warned

Shimei not to cross the Kidron, confining him to Jerusalem (1 Kgs 2:37). The expression, “from

the temple to the Kidron” in 2 Kings 23:6 connotes spatial frameworks in and outside the city.

19 On the geographical centrality and ultimate sanctity of Jerusalem in 1 Enoch, see George W. E. Nickelsburg,

“Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee,” Journal of Biblical Literature 100 (1981), pp.

585–586. 20 Lied calls Kidron a prototype of “outside space.” Other Lands, p. 104. 21 Again, the location of the final address is contested. 22 Paul Haupt, “Hinnom and Kidron,” Journal of Biblical Literature 38 (1919), pp. 46–48.

The Kidron Valley and the Mount of Olives directly east of the Kidron were also infamous burial

places with a long history of association with ancient tombs.23 The Hebrew Bible states that

foreign cult worship on the eastern slope of the Kidron was established by Solomon, associating

the site with idolatry and apostasy. The Hebrew Bible conveys the tradition that Judah’s three

finest kings, Asa, Hezekiah and Josiah, carried the unclean vessels from the temple to the

Kidron, burned the Asherah there, and cast the dust of these idols on the graves of the common

people (1 Kgs 15:13, 2 Kgs 23:4-12, 2 Chron 29:16, 2 Chron 30:14, Jer 31:40). Josephus further

indicates that Athaliah, Judah’s usurper queen, was executed in the Kidron Valley in order to not

desecrate the temple.24 Similarly, the two good kings mentioned in 2 Baruch’s interpretation of

the vision of the black and bright waters are none other than Judah’s Hezekiah and Josiah (63:1–

4, 66: 1–7). Later in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim tradition, the northern end of the Kidron

came to be known as with the Valley of Jehoshaphat, the place of the final judgment.25 It is no

stretch to say that Kidron was more than a place of revelation, it was as Lied contends, a spiritual

wilderness, “a dump of illicit cult objects,” . . . a veritable graveyard.26

The book of 1 Enoch is much less ambivalent about Kidron than 2 Baruch. The Book of

the Watchers graphically depicts the Kidron Valley and surrounding area as a cursed valley (1

Enoch 26:1–27:5), a place where the cursed would gather at the last times.27 Enoch learns that

23 David Ussishkin, The Village of Silwan: The Necropolis from the Period of the Judean Kings (Jerusalem: Israel

Exploration Society, 1993). 24 Ant. IX.vii.3. 2 Kgs 11:16 does not mention the place of execution. 25 Paul Haupt, "Hinnom and Kidron." 45–48; Richard Raiswell. "Geography is better than Divinity: the Bible and

Medieval Geographical Thought." Canadian Journal of History 2 (2010), pp. 221–222. This tradition is very late. It

is first associated with the Pilgrim of Bordeaux in 333 CE. 26 Lied, Other Lands, p. 122. 27 George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), pp. 317–319. N. Wyatt "The Concept

and Purpose of Hell: Its Nature and Development in West Semitic Thought." Numen: International Review for the

History of Religions 56 (2009), p. 179.

this cursed valley has been reserved for those who are forever condemned.28 1 Enoch describes

the physical topography of the area in some detail. Part of a larger journey narrative in the Book of the

Watchers, Enoch first travels west (1 Enoch 17–19), then east (1 Enoch 20–36), ultimately

circumnavigating the earth’s entire disk.29 Taken together, these two journeys link God’s paradise, present

in both east and west, with the middle axis of the earth. Not surprisingly, Jerusalem resides at the very

center of this imagined geography.30 The Tree of Life, which has been revealed to Enoch in the west, is

transplanted east of the earth’s revelatory center.31 Blessings for the righteous (24:2–25:7) are juxtaposed

with curses in the present vision of 1 Enoch 26:1–27:5.

Enoch the seer proceeds from Jerusalem (though the city itself is not actually mentioned

by name), the center of the earth; a blessed place full of healthy trees.32 Here the author describes

the topography in detail, yet textual difficulties somewhat obscure the interpretation of this

topography. At that lush place is a holy mountain, the Ophel. Beneath this holy mountain the

Gihon flows south. Enoch describes another mountain, higher than the first, east of the first

mountain, the Mount of Olives.33 From this point in the vision, textual issues complicate the

seer’s description. Between these mountains lies the deep, narrow Kidron Valley flowing with

water. West of the previously mentioned mountain (Mt. of Olives) is another mountain, lower

28 The Ethiopic renders this valley as a place of judgment while the Greek reads it as the place of the cursed ones’

final habitation. 29 Kelly Coblentz Bautch argues that 1 Enoch 17–19 corresponds to other geographical traditions in many

apocalypses and other Second Temple works, A Study of the Geography of 1 Enoch 17-19: “No One Has Seen What

/ Have Seen”, Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplements 81. Leiden: Brill, 2003, pp. 265–272. See also Richard

H. Feen, "Nekyia as Apocalypse: a Study of Cicero's "Dream of Scipio." Journal of Religious Studies 9 (1981),

pp.28–34; and Pieter Venter, “Spatiality in Enoch’s Journeys [1 Enoch 12-36]”, in Wisdom and Apocalypticism in

the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Biblical Tradition. Ed. F. García Martínez. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum

Lovaniensium 168. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2003), pp. 211–230. 30 James VanderKam discusses Jerusalem as the center of the earth, “Putting them in their Place,” In Pursuing the

Text: Studies in Honor of Ben Zion Wacholder on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday. John Reeves and John

Kampen eds.( Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), pp. 46-69. 31 In the previous vision (1 Enoch 24:1–25:7), long life is promised to the righteous here in Jerusalem. 32 This is similar to Jub 8:12, 19. 33 Following the Greek and 4Q205. The Ethiopic text reads “of the same height.” For 4Q205 see Florientino García

Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), pp.

422–423.

than it (perhaps either the Hill of Evil counsel or more likely, Mt. Zion), with deep and possibly

dry valley between (either the Hinnom or Tyropean valleys).34 Another deep and dry valley lies

at the apex of the three mountains (probably the Hinnom Valley). In spite of textual

uncertainties, the imagery is stark. The Valley of Hinnom is well known in the Hebrew Bible as

a site where the wicked passed children through fire as offerings to pagan deities (2 Kgs 23:10, 2

Chr 28:3, 33:6, Jer 7:31, 32:35).35 The specific sin of these cursed individuals in the Book of the

Watchers is clearly a sin of performative speech, uttering words against God. Here, in this

suggestive geographical location, the godless who perhaps once cursed God will ultimately bless

the Lord of Glory, King of eternity.

Enoch’s vision unites tree imagery with imagined geography, a theme that unites chapters

24–25, 26–27, and 28–32. Why is Enoch’s perception of the blessed and verdant center of the

land contrasted with the deep, dry barren valley(s)? The vision draws heavily on prophetic

imagery from the Hebrew Bible. Jeremiah and Isaiah both anticipated that this valley would

become a place of judgment (Jer 7:30-34, Isa 66:24). Joel likewise refers to the Valley of

Jehoshaphat, a valley of decision where the masses would be judged (Joel 3:2, 12, 14). In these

prophetic texts, God’s verdict is particularly directed against foreign invaders who had once

humiliated Jerusalem. Their own time of devastation will come. Nevertheless, this imagery of a

cursed valley is reversed in 2 Chronicles 20:26 by means of Jehoshaphat’s victory over Ammon,

Moab, and Edom in what the Chronicler calls the “Valley of Blessing.”36

34 In the Ethiopic text of 1 Enoch the western mountain refers to the Hill of Evil Counsel (er-Ras) directly west of

the Mount of Offense, the southern lobe of the Mt. of Olives, and the last of the valleys is slopes of Silwan. The

Greek Akhmim Papyrus omits the words “beneath it” so the western hill would be the Ophel, the valley in 4b is the

Tyropean and the last valley Hinnom. See Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1, p. 318. 35 Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna : The Topography of Hell." Biblical Archaeologist 49 (1986), p. 188. Furthermore, In

1 Enoch 90:26 wicked are cast into the Valley of Hinnom. 36 Nickelsburg says this draws on Isaiah 65 and in particular, 66:24, 1 Enoch 1, 320. Note there are 2 textual

traditions, p. 318.

Yet, 2 Baruch transforms this image somewhat. Liv Lied’s, The Other Lands of Israel,

creatively explores the ambiguities of Kidron with 2 Baruch’s message to his remnant’s death-

like situation.37 In stark contrast with Mt. Zion, Kidron is not only located outside the city but

much lower in elevation than Mt. Zion. Here, Baruch sits in a cave, the lowliest parts of the

topographical continuum. Yet Kidron and its surrounding wilderness is a place of revelation and

instruction. Like Zion, Kidron is uninhabitable, chaotic, and connotes death.38 In the fourth

interpretation of the bright waters, God shows Moses the entrance to Gehenna (2 Baruch 59:10),

the valley that ends at the Kidron. In spite of these negative images, for 2 Baruch, Kidron

remains the geographical context where the past can be repaired and the future recreated. This

positive assessment for Jerusalem’s future aligns with Jeremiah’s prophecy that all the terraces

out to the Kidron will be holy to the Yahweh (Jer 31:40).

Whitters indicates that Kidron may also be a powerful symbol of covenant renewal.

Nehemiah 3:26 appears to indicate that the Water Gate was east of Nehemiah’s wall. H. G. M.

Williamson locates it down the slope in the Kidron Valley, near the Gihon Spring, a startling

claim considering the location of 2 Baruch’s assembly.39 If Williamson’s claim is correct, this

location marks it as the very square of Nehemiah 8:1-8, where all the people assembled for

covenant renewal. 2 Baruch sets up a restorationist agenda for its readers by imitating the

covenant renewal assembly of Ezra-Nehemiah.40 Not only does Second Baruch stage the kind of

ceremony its readers would expect for covenant renewal, but it also expands on many of the

same themes that can be found in Ezra–Nehemiah.

37 Liv Ingeborg Lied, The Other Lands of Israel, pp. 122–146. 38 Lied, p. 130. 39 Hugh Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah. Word Biblical Commentary 16 (Waco: Word, 1985), pp. 209, 287, 374–375. 40 Mark F Whitters. "Baruch as Ezra in 2 Baruch." Journal of Biblical Literature 132 (2013), pp. 569–584.

In the New Testament, Jesus cleverly chose the Mount of Olives for his apocalyptic

discourse in Mark 13 to describe the horrible moments when the temple would be destroyed.

Jesus also descended the Mount of Olives and crossed the Kidron during his triumphal entry into

Jerusalem (Mark 11:1). Mark 13:3 depicts Jesus, positioned just opposite the temple when he

uttered the famous Olivet Discourse to his disciples. In a setting that obviously carried

performative connotations of impending judgment as well as a re-created future, Jesus combined

traditions from Israelite prophecy and tradition to describe a military conflict and destruction of

the temple not unlike the horrible desolation by Antiochus IV in the Maccabean period.41 Mark

13’s “Little Apocalypse” essentially reenacts the Maccabean crisis. The epic battle of Zechariah

7 and 14 is recast in the temple’s downfall. Jesus taught that this horrible event would be

characterized as a time of tribulation that the disciples would barely survive. His believers were

not to remain and fight, but to escape Jerusalem, and thus the great deliverance and vindication

that the prophets predicted would ultimately come to pass. The bowels of the Kidron Valley, a

place of apostasy and death was a most fitting location for the poignant events surrounding

Jesus’ arrest, as one of Jesus’ own disciples procured a highly unlikely coalition of soldiers,

Jewish officers of the chief priests, and Pharisees to seize Jesus, bind him, and lead him off to

Caiaphas for judgment. The Kidron Valley’s history as a place of apostasy and judgment, a place

clearly outside the chosen city, added to the significance of the site of Jesus’ arrest and his final

apocalyptic discourse.

Hebron as Performative Space

Hebron is most likely the imagined geographical location for Baruch’s climactic

revelation of the clouds (53:1–2) along with his subsequent prayer (54:1–22), followed by the

41 Daniel 7 and 9, Ezekiel 46, Zechariah 7 and 14, and 1 Maccabees 1–3.

lengthy interpretation of the vision (55:1–75:8). In my view, Hebron is where the angel informs

Baruch that he will depart this world (76:1–5), but probably not the context for Baruch’s final

address to his people (77:1–26) and his letter (78:1–87:1). Earlier in the book, the text is explicit

that Baruch will go to Hebron (47:1), but not explicit that he actually arrives there. Baruch states

instead, “I arrived at the place where the word was spoken to me” (47:2), language which refers

earlier in the book to Zion (21:2–3), not Hebron.42 Yet, it also seems rather unlikely that Baruch

would say that he is going to Hebron and then not go there; and scholarly consensus largely

places the revelation of the clouds at Hebron. The relationship between the command in 43:3

(“go away”) and the response in 47:2 (“I arrived”) would match the logic earlier with the

command in 20:6 (“come to this place”) and the response in 21:2 (“I came to the place”).

Likewise, in 2 Baruch there is no revelatory tree at Zion, while Hebron is notorious for the

tradition of its sacred oaks.43 Immediately after the revelation at Hebron of the dark and bright

clouds, Baruch is commanded to “go up to the top of this mountain” (76:3). The hilly topography

of Hebron is consistent with this command.44

One of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in Palestine, and one of the highest points

in Judah, Hebron (Kiriath Arba) is mentioned over 60 times in the Hebrew Bible. The

significance of Hebron harkens back to the ancestral traditions in Genesis. After Abraham

walked the entire breadth and length of the land, he settled in Hebron. From Hebron he delivered

Lot and received Melchizedek’s blessing. Ishmael was born and the birth of Isaac was promised

at Hebron. Hebron is where Yahweh pledged an eternal covenant with Abraham (Gen 14:11,

42 On the complexities of whether Baruch ends up at Hebron, see Tzvi Nivick, "Between first-century apocalyptic

and seventh-century liturgy: on 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and Qillir." Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian,

Hellenistic and Roman Period 44 (2013), p. 365. Nivick argues that in spite of the plain sense of the passage it is

best to take Baruch at his word and place him at Hebron for the rest of the book. 43 Detlef, Jericke, Abraham in Mamre: Historische und exegetische Studien zur Region von Hebron und zu Genesis

11, 27–19, 38 (Leiden: Brill 2003), pp. 38–42. 44 Judges 16:3, for example, mentions a hill that faces Hebron where Samson carried the door of the gates of Gaza.

Hebron’s cultic function is attested in 2 Sam 15:7.

15:1-21), and where Abraham entertained angels as they deliberated the destruction of Sodom

(Gen 18–19). Abraham purchased the only property he ever owned at Hebron (Gen 23:17–20),

and it was there that Isaac and Ishmael buried their father. Sarah and the ancestors of Israel were

also buried there. Later in the Hebrew Bible, Hebron is the entry point for the spies who searched

out the land prior to the conquest (Josh 13:22), and the first place that David reigned (2 Sam 5:1),

as it is there where the elders anointed him as king (1 Chron 11:3-5).45 During his coup, Absalom

symbolically and strategically chose Hebron as the site where he would establish his kingdom, a

place that signified a new era of beginning. Yet, like Kidron, Hebron was also an infamous

graveyard, a place of ambiguity, known for idolatry, particularly in the Second Temple Period

and at the close of the first century CE, the time of the composition of 2 Baruch.

Historically, three revelatory sites are associated with Hebron: the city itself, the cave of

Machpelah, and the oaks of Mamre near the city. The oaks of Mamre functioned as an oracle

center from the Middle Bronze Age.46 Hebron was also a potent symbol in the Second Temple

Period. The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs and Josephus both confidently assert that all

twelve sons of Jacob were buried there (Test 12P 12:3). In the Testament of Abraham,

Abraham’s last acts: his cosmic journey, his final testament, and his death and burial all take

place at Hebron (T. Ab 1:2, 2:1, 16:7 cf. Jub 13). The book of Jubilees describes Hebron with the

technical term, ha-Birah a word used elsewhere to denote a place with great mystique: the

Temple Mount (Jub 29:17–19, 37:14–17). Josephus discusses the significance of Hebron,

particularly Mamre and the sacred oak (War 4. 532–533, Ant I, 186), but neither Josephus nor

later Jewish sources mention the magnificent Herodian structures, either at Mamre or Machpelah

which may have been some of Herod’s most extensive construction projects after the Temple

45 It was also the site that was associated with the Anakim (Josh 14:15, 15:13); it became a Levitical city (Josh

21:11–13) and a city of refuge (Josh 20:7). 46 Detlef Jericke, Abraham in Mamre, pp. 21–22.

Mount.47 This silence has been attributed to the possibility that Herod’s work at both sites was

undertaken to cater to Edomite religious and national needs, spoiling somewhat this influential

symbol. Neither Hebron nor Mamre are mentioned in the New Testament.48

Aside from Josephus, prior to Eusebius there is hardly any direct evidence of a place

identified with Mamre.49 One archaeologist has quipped, “Hebron is one of the biblically most

important and archaeologically most disappointing sites in Palestine.”50 Julius Africanus, at the

beginning of the third century mentions the tree, the altar, and regular fairs were celebrated in

honor of the patriarchs. The Genesis Rabba 47:10 mentions the fair, but describes it as the most

blatantly pagan of the three major fairs in the country.51 Eusebius and Sozoman both mention the

sacred place at Mamre and its association with Abraham.52 In sum, Josephus, rabbinic and

Christian sources all indicate that Mamre was an ambivalent cultic site in the Second Temple

period with a checkered history. Yet nearly all sources associate the site with Abraham and all

concur that a sacred tree stood at the center of the site.53

2 Baruch captures this celebrated if not ambivalent status of Hebron. The entire

metanarrative of Israel’s history is revealed to Baruch as he sits under a tree in Hebron. This

revelation serves as nothing less than the climax of the book, the Apocalypse of the Clouds

(53:1–12, 55:1–75:8). The vision and its interpretation depicts twelve alternating periods of

cursing and blessing, beginning with Adam’s transgression and ending with the Messiah’s

summons of all nations to judgment. The twelve successive black and bright waters usher in a

47 Y. Magen, “Mamre: A Cultic Site from the Reign of Herod,” In Bottini, One Land, Many Cultures (2003), p. 254. 48 Acts 7:16 alludes to the burial of Joseph at Shechem but not Abraham’s burial at Hebron. 49 For a discussion of the evidence, see Aryeh, Kofsky, “Mamre: A Case of a Regional Cult?” Sharing the Sacred:

Religious Contacts and Conflicts in the Holy Land, (Jerusalem: Yak Izhak Ben Zvi, 1998), pp. 19–29. 50 Harry Thomas Frank, Bible, Archaeology, and Faith (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1971), p. 127. 51 Magen, p. 254. 52 The Madaba Map depicts Constantine’s church and the tree at the site. 53 Pamela C. Berger "Jewish-Muslim Veneration at Pilgrimage Places in the Holy Land." Religion and the Arts 15

(2011), pp. 1–60.

messianic age of eternal peace, health, and rest (73:1–7).54 The Hebron metaphor captures the

imagination and catapults the faithful remnant to the very center of God’s reconstitution of his

people.

The Spatial Framework in 2 Baruch

The basic theme of 2 Baruch is that Zion has been tragically delivered up to the nations

for a time, but a remnant will soon be triumphantly restored forever. The seer is awarded special

knowledge of what really happened to Jerusalem and its temple when it was destroyed by

Babylon (a cypher for Rome). Baruch’s deconstruction of the historical event asserts that the

angels have protected the temple’s sacred vessels. The destruction of Jerusalem’s earthly temple

has no bearing on the heavenly original.55 The Law, which was already in force with Abraham

(57:2), must be followed judiciously, in spite of great dangers to the faithful (44:3, 59:2, 84:1–7).

The risk of suffering and death is high, but what does it matter if one lives a long physical life

yet violates something far greater, the eternal Torah?56 Baruch is not the only one on the move in

this apocalypse. History itself is moving more and more rapidly toward consummation, when the

Anointed One will be revealed and it will be too late to repent.57

In addition to the apocalypse’s ever pervasive symbolism of Zion, the spatial framework

for Baruch’s message is revealed through two rather ambivalent sites with significant

commonalities as potent symbolic landscapes: Kidron and Hebron. In the case of these two

locales, topography triggers memory. Kidron, a deep valley containing a noted burial ground, is a

54 John Hobbins depicts this future hope as within history, not beyond it, “The Summing Up of History in 2 Baruch,”

The Jewish Quarterly Review 89 (1998), pp. 45–79. 55 Frederick James Murphy, "The Temple in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch." Journal of Biblical Literature 106

(1987), p. 679. 56 All three of Baruch’s public speeches explicitly admonish the people to follow the Torah. Matthias Henze, “Torah

and Eschatology in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch,” in The Significance of Sinai: Traditions about Sinai and

Divine Revelation in Judaism and Christianity, George Brooke, Hindy Najman and Loren Stuckenbruck, eds.

(Leiden: Brill, 2008), pp. 211–214. 57 In spite of the interpretation of the apocalypse of the clouds, there is no mention of Messiah in Baruch’s three

addresses to the people.

place of judgment to be sure; but it is also a place of revelation and promise. Hebron, one of the

highest points in the area, also noted for its burial sites as well as a history of idolatry, represents

the first and last physical stronghold in Canaan. Baruch is at Hebron when he receives the word

that he will leave this physical world (76:15). Consequently, Kidron and Hebron are transitional

locales that have a bearing on the future, perhaps even more than the past. Sayler rightly

contends that the entire narrative demonstrates movement from grief over the destruction of

Jerusalem in AD 70 to consolation and hope.58 Revelatory trees provide Baruch the source of

inspiration for several of the most important oracles of the book: the revelation of how the angels

have protected the temple vessels for future use, the interpretation of the Apocalypse of the

Clouds, and the letters to the two and a half tribes. These trees, located both at Kidron and

Hebron strengthen the performative function of the oracles, their interpretation, and the two

letters.

The Hebrew Bible vividly illustrates the importance of these two sites in a single

narrative: the story of Absalom’s attempted coup against his father in 2 Samuel 15. Here, as it

happens so often in the Hebrew Bible, Kidron represents a geographical border delineating the

boundary adjacent to Israel’s capital. Yet it is also more than that. The narrative painstakingly

reveals in an agonizingly slow pace how David crosses the Kidron, ascends up to the summit of

the Mount of Olives, continues a short distance past the summit, travels on to an insignificant

place called Bahurim, and finally crosses the Jordan into temporary exile. The dramatic effect is

unambiguous. Kidron represents that “exit threshold” leading to exile, separation, and

humiliation. Simultaneously, Absalom cleverly sets himself up as king. But where? Not in

Jerusalem surprisingly, but at Hebron. Kidron, therefore, represents the consummate

58G.B. Sayler, Have the Promises Failed? A Literary Analysis of 2 Baruch (SBLDS; Chico, Ca., Scholars Press,

1984), pp. 85–86.

marginalized space and Hebron an “entry threshold” for a new era. Yet, Kidron evokes more

than negativity in the Hebrew Bible. As David nears the end of his life, he proclaims Solomon as

his successor at the Gihon Spring, the very heart of the Kidron Valley (1 Kgs 1:35). Likewise,

Absalom’s astute political move mimics his father’s establishment of his kingdom at Hebron, the

Hebrew Bible’s ideal entry point into both Promised Land and hereditary kingship.

But what would 2 Baruch’s first-century CE audience make of these two geographic

symbols?59 They would certainly recognize Kidron as the very site where Judah’s greatest kings

burned sacred vessels used in idol worship and symbolically scattered their ashes over the graves

of the dead. I Enoch makes clear that at least in some respects, Kidron was a cursed place. In 2

Baruch’s message the sacred vessels of the temple had been taken, but not by Roman legions to

be desecrated, but by the very angels of God to be hidden for a precise moment in the future. Yet

the geographic importance of proclaiming Baruch’s message at Kidron was not just because it

was outside the city. It was to provide a stark warning of consequences for violating the Law.

This performative space denoted separation and exile. Performative speech presents three divine

messages of new possibilities for this community. Kidron and Hebron are biblical emblems of

the new era that Baruch witnesses and fashions for the children of Israel.60 Like Hebron of old

where the covenant was first given to Abraham and the spies first glimpsed the land of promise,

Baruch’s Hebron depicts a promise for a new order.

Given the first-century CE context, why the need for these imagined spaces that are

alternatives to Zion/Jerusalem? Wouldn’t the illocutionary force of combined speech and space

59On the discussion of whether 2 Baruch is a Jewish or Christian work, Rivka Nir contends that the internal structure

and central ideas of the work depict a Christian context, “The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption

in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch" Society of Biblical Literature Early Jewish Literature 20 (Atlanta: Society of

Biblical Literature, 2003). James Davila contends that 2 Baruch is a Jewish work based on internal evidence. See

James Davila, “The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha,” Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplement 105. (Leiden:

Brill, 2005), pp. 10–73; and “Old Testament Pseudepigrapha as Background to the New Testament. Expository

Times 117 (2005) pp. 52–57. 60 Whitters, The Epistle of Second Baruch, p. 40.

be more potent if uttered at the very place that would one day be restored? For the marginalized

remnant living in Palestine, the temple in ruins was certainly a devastating reminder of Israel’s

despair. Every time they saw the burnt shell of the formerly-vibrant complex, this desolate

physical space denoted defeat. Similar allusions to such devastation in the Hebrew Bible abound

as psalmists and prophets observed the destruction that surrounded them after the destruction of

the first temple by Babylon (Ps 74:3ff, 89:39, Isa 61:4, Lam 2:2). The revelation of the promise

of restoration at physical locations outside of Zion might fuel imagination for a new era. In a

templeless age the recipients of this book could imagine an alternative to the temple-centered

lands they observed now in ruins. Those dispersed tribes not living in Palestine could also

imagine spaces outside of Zion that welcomed the possibility of restoration. Leid calls such

imagined spaces a spatial counterpart to Jerusalem.61 One can recall Lefebvre’s notion of

perceived space, conceived space, and lived space.62 This conceived or imagined space,

constructed in mental forms, led marginalized communities like the audience of 2 Baruch to

carve out cognitive spaces of resistance to the dominant order.63 Imagination leads to actions,

and actions evolve from mere possibility to concrete change.

One interesting parallel to his respatialization that is oriented outside of Jerusalem might

be the community at Qumran and its use of the toponym, Damascus. Harkening back to Amos’s

oracle (Amos 5:26–27) that Israel will eventually be taken to exile in Damascus, the Damascus

Document’s self-referential language surprisingly places Damascus as the abode of internal

exile. For Qumran, the exile never really ended; it was as though the Babylonian exile was

prolonged into their present day. For the most part, Damascus is a patently negative geographical

61 Leid, Other Lands, 308. 62 Henri Lafebvre, Writings on Cities (Malden, MA Blackwell 1996), p. 10; and Edward Soja, Thirdspace: Journeys

to Los Angeles and other Real-and-Imagined Places (Malden, MA, Blackwell 1996). 63 Edward Soja calls these “counterspaces,” Thirdspace, pp. 67–68.

location in the Hebrew Bible, particularly in the prophets (Isa 8:4, 10:9, 17:1–3 ; Jer 49:23–27;

Amos 1:3–5). But at Qumran, this symbolism is turned on its head. Davies has argued that in the

Qumran community’s radical transformation of this imagined space, the cypher of Damascus

describes a divine law that no longer resides in the Temple, but in the assemblies and cultic

activity of their own community in worship.64 Qumran was a site on the fringes by just about any

means of measurement. One term the community used for itself was “the exiles of the desert”

(1QM 1–2). Their view of themselves as Israel in exile does not negate the importance of the

divinely given land of Israel and its center, the Jerusalem temple. The spatialization of the

community’s Damascus metaphor does not replace the Jerusalem temple, but allows Qumran and

even the various camps of the community to imagine this transformed space as a place of

promise for the yahad. Likewise Baruch uses the geographical locales of Kidron and Hebron to

conceive of a new spatiality for the remnant and the dispersed tribes.

64 Philip Davies, “Space and Sects in the Qumran Scrolls,” In, Imagining Biblical Worlds: Studies in Spatial, Social

and Historical Constructs in Honor of James W. Flanagan. David Gunn and Paula McNutt, eds. JSOT Sup 359

(New York: Sheffield, 2002), pp. 81–98.