110 SHALOM E. HOLTZ elsewhere 10. Like other information of record, the sins in Hos 13,12 and Job 14,17 have been documented in writing, and the pile of records has been tied together. The analogue to the sins, then, is the information pre- served on a written record, with the bundle referring to the package of doc- uments tied together for safekeeping. Both of these suggestions do, indeed, refer to “binding”, which is the dis- tinguishing characteristic of both biblical verses. However, a straightforward reading of the verses highlights a weakness in both proposals. In the verses, sins, and not representations of the sins, are the objects that are bound 11. Both proposed analogies, however, assume that, rather than the sins them- selves, substitutes for sins (tally markers or written records) are the bound ob- jects. Thus, the analogy to accounting fails because the objects bundled are not the objects being counted (the goats and the sheep) but the tally mark- ers. In fact, the administrative language in the Nuzi texts clearly distinguishes between the livestock and the stones representing them in sentences like “these sheep are with PN, the stones have not been deposited”, and “23 sheep … their stones have not been transferred” 12. Similarly, the analogy to the bundles of documents falls short because the bundle is of records, rather than of actions or information 13. Put otherwise, for either of these two analogies to have been successful, one would want language describing the physical analogues to the sins, that is to say the livestock or the information on record, as tied somehow. Instead, both previous proposals require reading the verses at one remove from what the verses actually describe, as if the word “sin” in the texts refers to sin’s representation. Neo-Babylonian trial records from the Eanna temple at Uruk offer an in- structive extra-biblical parallel that avoids this problem. These records show that when the temple authorities were informed of a misdeed, they would tie up (rakāsu) and seal (kanāku) the physical evidence or the corpus delicti for use in the subsequent proceedings against the offender 14. One example 10 R. VUILLEUMIER-BESSARD, “Osée 13:12 et les manuscrits”, RevQ 1 (1958-1959) 281-282 and N.H. TUR-SINAI, The Book of Job. A New Com- mentary (Jerusalem 1967) 240. For further references, see A.A. MACINTOSH, Hosea (ICC; Edinburgh 1997) 542. 11 For a similar critique, see F.I. ANDERSEN – D.N. FREEDMAN, Hosea (AB 24; Garden City, NY 1980) 637. 12 A.L. OPPENHEIM, “On an Operational Device in Mesopotamian Bu- reaucracy”, JNES 18 (1959) 125-126. 13 Certain biblical texts, like Isa 65,6-7, do describe a written record of sins, but this need not be the case in Hos 13,12 or Job 14,17. 14 The four examples below come from among those already observed by M. SAN NICOLÒ, “Eine kleine Gefängnismeuterei in Eanna zur Zeit des Kam- byses”, Festschrift für Leopold Wenger (eds. L. WENGER – M. SAN NICOLÒ) (MBPF 35; Munich 1945) II, 16-17. For additional discussion, see M. SAN NI-