The very change in the style — there is а sudden transition to the first person singular — betrays that a fresh start had been made. In addition, v. 19a makes а poor transition: Shebna has already been rejected, and talk about his dismissal is out of place. The centre of interest is now Shebna’s successor, Eliakim, and his installation in office (the few verses are a veritable gold-mine for information about the ceremonial language in use at the court). But there was something else to be said about Eliakim, and it was something which was quite unknown at the time of his appointment. This brings us to the third phase in the development of the Shebna texts.

 

'And the whole weight of his father's house will hang upon him, the offspring and the issue, every small vessel, every cup and flagon. In that day, says Yahweh of hosts, the peg fastened in a sure place will give way, it will break off and fall down, and the burden that is upon it will be destroyed, for Yahweh has said so' (Isa. 22.24-5).

 

This expansion hinges on the 'peg' of v. 23, but understands the metaphor in a completely different way. Eliakim is certainly to be a peg, for all his kinsmen are to hang upon him. Therefore, what happens to a peg on which too many pots and pieces of kitchen-ware are hung will also happen to him. He will give way, and the whole collection will be smashed to pieces on the floor. A delightful satire on the nepotism of highly placed officials!

This way of dealing with traditions brings us up against a hermeneutic problem which can only be noticed briefly here. If a prophet's words thus accompanied Israel on her journey through history, and if they retained their character as addresses to her even long after the time of their original delivery, later ages must have felt themselves at liberty to reinterpret them freely, for the only way in which the word reaches those to whom it was later addressed was by 'adaptation' of its content. Present-day exegesis is concerned above all else to discover the content of each specific oracle as it was understood by the prophet himself. But, while not abandoning this effort, ought it not perhaps to be more aware that this is only one possible way among many of understanding an oracle? By being referred to subsequent generations and the situations confronting them, fresh possible ways of taking the prophet's oracles were opened up, and this process continued right down to the time when, in the New Testament, the prophets' preaching was for the last time reinterpreted in the light of present events. Ought we not also to remember that when a prophecy came into the hands of those who transmitted the traditions, this itself meant that the time when the prophecy could be taken in the strict sense which it had when it was originally delivered was already a thing of the past?