Some scholars rejected Mowinckel's identification of the personal enemies with sorcerers,22 but the perspectives from which a solution might be sought (for any problem in the Psalms) had shifted decisively. Although he might be disputed on such points of detail the disputes were determined by a new agenda.23 The most important of the suggestions con- cerning the identifications of the enemies have remained firmly anchored to institutional and temple activities.
Hans Schmidt24 proposed an alternative to Mowinckel's identification of the enemies. While Mowinckel dealt with
"Zwei Beobachtung zum Deutung der N ,v Ax-y el Ef oP," ZAW 43
22 Cf. L. Aubert, "Les psaumes dans le culte d'Israel," Revue de Theologie et de Philosophie NS 15 (1927), 224-230; Gunkel, Einleitung, pp. 196-211; Birkeland, The Evildoers in the Book of Psalms (Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad, 1955), pp. 40-46, henceforth, Evildoers.
23 For example, Mowinckel's hypothetical New Year Festi- val may be rejected only to be replaced by an equally com- prehensive Covenant Festival (A. Weiser, The Psalms: A Com- mentary, trans. by H. Hartwell [London: SCM Press, 19621.) or a Royal Zion Festival (H. J. Kraus, Worship in Israel: A Cultic History of the Old Testament, trans. by G. Buswell Richmond: John Knox Press, 1966]; and Psalmen [5 Aufl., Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1978]). Scholars seem exceptionally ready to name festivals which the Old Testament never mentions and to disregard those that it does, at least for the purposes of nomenclature. Are the modern names better than those given by the Israelites themselves?
24 H. Schmidt, Das Gebet der Angeklagten im Alten Testament (Giessen: Alfred Topelmann, 1928); and Die Psalmen (J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 754).