SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov

Recommendations

Info

152 Chapter 5: Writing Practices At a later stage, probably under the influence of Greek tradition, a single dot (pasoqah) was also employed. According to Brock, “Text History,” 67 there is a certain degree of agreement in detail between the ancient traditions (MT, 1QIsa a , and S), but that agreement should not be over-emphasized in view of the differences between these sources. The relations between the three sources are tabulated in Korpel–de Moor, Structure, 649–55 for Isaiah 40–55. A more recent study by Jenner illustrates the different paragraphing markers used in Syriac manuscripts and describes the systems used in greater detail than earlier studies. 205 During the course of the transmission of S, the manuscripts drifted away in different directions, and the transmission of the section divisions became imprecise (de Moor, “Unit Division” [n. 204] 246–7). Because of the late date of the witnesses of S, this source is not examined in detail for the present monograph. 11QtgJob has several open sections, e.g. after Job 40:5 (XXXIV 1), before 42:1 (XXXVII 2), but no closed sections at all. It also has completely empty lines (e.g. III 2 before 20:1; X 7 before 27:1). The system of SP differs again from the practices mentioned above, but the exact nature of the evidence of that version still needs to be examined on the basis of manuscripts and it is unclear which manuscript(s) better reflect(s) the earliest text forms. As with the systems used in the manuscripts of the ancient translations, the SP practice ultimately derived from that used in the Hebrew manuscripts described above. 206 The external form of the system used for sense division resembles system c of the Hebrew manuscripts, but the pause is equivalent with both the open and closed sections of the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. In SP, this sense division takes the form of a completely empty line following a line ending with a graphic sign, a dicolon ( : ) in Sefer Abisa> and more elaborate forms in other manuscripts, such as —: , — . : . and —: . . This sign always occurs at the end of the inscribed text, even if the text is very short, in which case the words are evenly spread out over the line in order to create a straight left margin. While most Samaritan manuscripts did not distinguish between open and closed sections, some did. Thus, the fragment described by A. D. Crown, “An Unpublished Fragment of a Samaritan Torah Scroll,” BJRL 64 (1982) 386–406 (especially 401) distinguished between a qis≥s≥ah representing an open section (leaving a completely empty line after the sign) and a qis≥s≥ah representing a closed section (leaving a half-line after the sign). With regard to details, there are noticeable differences between SP on the one hand and the proto-Masoretic and medieval Masoretic manuscripts, as well as the non-Masoretic Qumran manuscripts on the other. SP has 20–25 percent more sense divisions than the medieval Masoretic manuscripts according to the statistics of Perrot, “Petuhot et setumot,” 76–8, while in some individual books the differences are more pervasive (according to Oesch, Petucha und Setuma, 313, SP has 20–33 percent more sense divisions). For further details, see J. Bowman, “Samaritan Studies,” BJRL 40 (1958) 298–327, especially 318–27. Because of the late date of the SP witnesses, this source also is not studied in detail for the present monograph although its proximity to the paragraph system of certain Qumran manuscripts (especially 4QpaleoGen-Exod l ) has been noticed by Crown, “Samaritan Scribal Habits,” 165–6. (k) A common tradition of the sense divisions of the biblical manuscripts? The systems used for the division of the text into meaningful section units are similar in all ancient and medieval witnesses of Scripture, in Hebrew/Aramaic and in translation. There is also a large degree of agreement in matters of detail. At the same time, there are many differences among the Hebrew manuscripts, as described above, and also between these manuscripts and the versional evidence. Since the translations were made from Hebrew manuscripts, the assumption of some form of common tradition is possible, but that common tradition would have to be defined with constant reference to the internal differences between the ancient Hebrew manuscripts. The fact 1988) 65–78; K. D. Jenner, “A Review of the Methods by Which Syriac Biblical and Related Manuscripts Have Been Described and Analysed: Some Preliminary Remarks,” Aram 5 (1993) 255–66; Korpel–de Moor, Structure, 6–9; J. C. de Moor, “Unit Division in the Peshitta of Micah,” Journal for the Aramaic Bible 1 (1999) 225–47. 205 K. D. Jenner, “The Unit Delimitation in the Syriac Text of Daniel and its Consequences for the Interpretation,” in Korpel–Oesch, Delimitation Criticism, 105–29. 206 M. Gaster, “The Biblical Lessons: A Chapter on Biblical Archaeology,” Studies and Texts I (London 1925–28; reprint: New York 1973) 503–600, especially 515–24, first drew attention to the similarity between the Masoretic and Samaritan traditions. The detailed study by Crown, “Samaritan Scribal Habits” likewise suggests that the system of SP ‘arises from the same scribal traditions as produced the MT. 207 Indirect evidence for the joining of books is further available for Mur 1, probably containing Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers (see DJD III, 75–8 and pls. XIX–XXI), 4QExod-Lev f , and 4QLev-Num a . However, in none of these texts has the actual join between the books been preserved.
Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts from the Judean Desert 153 that many manuscripts derive from the Middle Ages prevents a sound analysis, but nevertheless Korpel–de Moor, Structure, 646–53 assume a ‘very ancient common tradition’ (p. 646) for all the sources analyzed by them for Isaiah 40–55. Likewise, Oesch, Petucha und Setuma, 313 assumes a common tradition for the MT and SP. (4) Division between poetical units (Psalms) In the analysis of the different types of spacing between poetical units, individual Psalms comprise special entities in that they are smaller than books and larger than verses. Each Psalm forms a separate section-like unit, the beginning and end of which are usually clearly denoted at the content level, not only in biblical Psalms, but also in other poetical units from Qumran, namely 4QNon-Canonical Psalms A–B (4Q380–381), 1–4QHoda-yot, and 4QBarkhi Nafshi. In the analysis of the layout of the biblical Psalms from Qumran, four different methods for indicating the beginnings are recognized, described as five systems by G. H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS 76; Chico, Calif. 1985) 93–138. The indication of the Psalms and of the individual Hodayot basically corresponds with the systems of open and closed sections described in section 3 (for the various manuscripts of 4QBarkhi Nafshi insufficient data are available). Several manuscripts are inconsistent in their indication of new psalms (see below). It is unclear why different systems for the indication of new Psalms are used in the same manuscript by the same scribal hand. Content considerations, stichographic systems, or headers do not seem to have played a part, and in any event it appears that the scribal traditions had not yet been stabilized. It is noteworthy that the two late Psalm scrolls, MasPs a and 5/6H≥evPs, are consistently written in system g. a. An open section at the end of a Psalm, while the following text starts at the beginning of a new line. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx This system is used in many Qumran manuscripts of the book of Psalms and of other hymnic collections: 4QPs a (before Psalms 35, 36, 67); 4QPs c (before Psalms 51 and 53); 4QPs d (before Psalm 104); 4QPs e (before Psalms 77, 104, 116, 130, 146); most of the Psalms in 11QPs a (before Psalms 103 [frg. C II 11–12], 148 (II 5–6], 123 [III 14–15], 125 [IV 2–3], 127 [IV 15–16], 129 [V 3–4], 119 [VI 10–11], 136 [XV 5–6], 137 [XX 16–17], in this sequence; Psalm 105 (E iii 8); 11QPs c (before Psalms 13, 14 [frg. 4–7 6, 11], 18 [frg. 8 8]). See further: 1QH a II (Suk. = Puech X) 32; VIII (XVI) 4; 4QH a (4Q427) 3 3; 8 ii 10; 4QNon-Canonical Psalms B (4Q381) 24 3; 31 4. b. An indentation indicates the new Psalm, while the previous one ended either at the end of the previous line or toward the end of that line. or xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx This system is employed in 4QPs c (before Psalm 28 [6 4]); 4QPs d (before Psalm 147 [reconstructed]); 4QPs q (before Psalm 33); 4QPs s (before Psalm 6 [reconstructed]); 11QPs a (before Psalms 122 [III 7]; 126 [IV 9]; 145 [XVI 7]; 143 [XXV 6]; 150 [XXVI 4]; 140 [XXVII 12]); 11QPs b (before Psalm 144 [7 6]); 11QPs d (before Psalm 37 [5 2]). See further: 1QH a II (Suk. = Puech X) 20; III (XI) 19; VII (XV) 6; 4QH b (4Q428) 10 11.
Page 1:
SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S R
Page 5 and 6:
DEDICATED TO THE SCRIBES WHO WROTE
Page 7 and 8:
Contents vii CONTENTS Text Editions
Page 9:
Contents ix Chapter 8: Scribal Trad
Page 12 and 13:
xii Text Editions Sam. Pent (SP) A.
Page 14 and 15:
xiv Periodicals, Reference Works, a
Page 16 and 17:
REFERENCES AND SUNDRY ABBREVIATIONS
Page 18 and 19:
xviii List of Tables 21. Scrolls wi
Page 20 and 21:
xx Preface This book contains thous
Page 23 and 24:
1 INTRODUCTION a. Purpose and natur
Page 25 and 26:
Scribal Practices and Approaches Re
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Copyists, scribes, and soferim 2 SC
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
3 WRITING AND WRITING MATERIALS The
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
4 TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF SCROLL WRITI
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124: Scribal Practices and Approaches Re
Page 133 and 134: (4) No indication Scribal Practices
Page 145 and 146: 5 WRITING PRACTICES The writing pra
Page 173: Scribal Practices and Approaches Re
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
6 SCRIPTS 293 a. Square (Jewish) sc
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
7 SPECIAL SCRIBAL CHARACTERISTICS O
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267:
Page 270 and 271:
248 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions s
Page 272 and 273:
250 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions s
Page 274 and 275:
252 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions L
Page 276 and 277:
254 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions T
Page 278 and 279:
256 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions T
Page 280 and 281:
258 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions h
Page 282 and 283:
260 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions r
Page 284 and 285:
262 Chapter 8: Scribal Traditions
Page 286 and 287:
264 Appendix 1 3. Scribal markings
Page 288 and 289:
266 Appendix 1 4QJer d gd — n b 1
Page 290 and 291:
268 Appendix 1 4Q256 4QSb y y 3 20
Page 292 and 293:
270 Appendix 1 4Q496 4QpapMf y y y
Page 294 and 295:
272 Appendix 1 Doc/Mish B 4Q322 4QM
Page 297 and 298:
APPENDIX 2 PAPYRUS TEXTS FROM THE J
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
APPENDIX 3 OPISTHOGRAPHS FROM THE J
Page 305 and 306:
APPENDIX 4 THE GREEK TEXTS FROM THE
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
APPENDIX 5 SCRIBAL FEATURES OF EARL
Page 311 and 312:
CE) P.Oxy. 65.4443 of Esther E and
Page 313 and 314:
P.Antinoopolis 8 of Proverbs 5-20 (
Page 315 and 316:
P.Rylands 1 of Deut 23 (4 CE) P.Oxy
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
APPENDIX 6 THE HEBREW TEXTS FROM MA
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325:
show all

SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?