07_Biblica_AN_Meek_280-291 24/07/14 09:40 Pagina 289 INTERTEXTUALITY 289 intentionally using a previous text for a particular purpose. However, there are cases in which scholars argue that a receptor text alludes to a source text for reasons other than exegesis. Perhaps an author is making a simple allusion or attempting to bring an earlier text to the reader’s mind. In such cases, inner-biblical exegesis is insufficient, for the scholar is not arguing that the receptor text modifies a previous text. IV. Inner-Biblical Allusion Inner-biblical allusion and inner-biblical exegesis are often used in- terchangeably because their methodologies are similar; however, the dis- tinctions between their theses require that they be employed in different contexts. In distinction from inner-biblical exegesis, inner-biblical allusion sets out to determine whether a receptor text has in some way referred to a source text, but the goal is not to demonstrate that the receptor text has modi- fied the source text. Rather, with inner-biblical allusion the goal is simply to demonstrate that a later text in some way references an earlier text 46. Methodologically, inner-biblical allusion employs many of the same techniques as inner-biblical exegesis. Thus, shared language is of utmost importance for determining the presence of an allusion in a source text 47. As with inner-biblical exegesis, the likelihood of allusion increases in re- lation to the amount of shared vocabulary as well as the nature of said vocabulary. That is, common vocabulary is less helpful in determining allusions than is unique or rare vocabulary 48. Additionally, Benjamin Sommer points out that a source text may insert an intervening word be- tween two words that appear together in a source text or use various rhyming techniques such as assonance and dissonance to cause the reader to think of a similar sounding word in a previous context 49. Thematic and contextual elements also play an important role in de- termining influence. Thus, if a word or group of words appear in a similar 46 D.L. Petersen argues that allusion is not necessarily intentional: “the presence of echo in the derivative text does not constitute a consequential reuse of the earlier text. It is more of a literary fossil than a living entity in the new text”; see D.L. PETERSEN, “Zechariah 9–14: Methodological Reflections”, Bringing out the Treasure. Inner Biblical Allusion in Zechariah 9–14 (eds. M.J. BODA – M.H. FLOYD) (JSOTSS 370; London 2003) 210-224, here 212. 47 See LEONARD, “Identifying Inner-Biblical Allusions”, 241-265. How- ever, Noble has pointed out some of the difficulties with over-reliance on shared vocabulary (NOBLE, “Esau, Tamar, and Joseph”). 48 LEONARD, “Identifying Inner-Biblical Allusions”, 251. 49 LEONARD, “Identifying Inner-Biblical Allusions”, 159-160.