SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov
SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov
SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
1<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
a. Purpose and nature of the description<br />
The documents from the Judean Desert (often named the ‘Dead Sea Scrolls’) constitute the largest<br />
corpus of texts in non-lapidary scripts providing information regarding scribal habits in early<br />
Israel relating to biblical and nonbiblical texts. These practices may be compared with other texts<br />
in Hebrew and Aramaic in nonlapidary texts, both those contemporary and earlier, especially the<br />
large corpora of Elephantine papyri and other Aramaic texts from the fifth and fourth centuries<br />
BCE. These two groups of texts are very significant as comparative material for the present<br />
analysis; among other things, the analysis in ch. 8b shows that the texts from the Judean Desert<br />
continue the writing tradition of the Aramaic documents from the fifth century BCE in several<br />
practices (see SUBJECT INDEX, ‘parallels’).<br />
The Egyptian Aramaic corpus is significant, as it is extensive and derives from an early period,<br />
and provides various relevant parallels. However, the corpus of documents from the Judean<br />
Desert is much larger and its scribal habits were far more developed. As such, it constitutes the<br />
largest source of information on scribal habits for Hebrew and Aramaic texts from Israel prior to<br />
the early Middle Ages, from which time the first documents from the Cairo Genizah derive.<br />
Comparison of these practices with scribal habits of Greek texts from the seventh century BCE<br />
onwards is mandatory, and is therefore often invoked in this monograph (see SUBJECT INDEX,<br />
‘parallels’). Furthermore, the analysis leads us often to the writing practices of even older cultures<br />
such as ancient Egypt, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia. Obviously, one needs to be careful with such<br />
comparisons since the texts produced in these areas were written in different languages and often<br />
on different materials. Equal care needs to be taken in the comparison with the rabbinic<br />
prescriptions, since they are later than the texts from the Judean Desert and pertain only to the<br />
writing of Scripture and sacred documents (see SUBJECT INDEX, ‘rabbinic literature’).<br />
The analysis of scribal practices refers to the following aspects: the copyists and their<br />
background (ch. 2 below), writing materials (ch. 3) such as scrolls (3c–d), technical aspects of the<br />
writing of scrolls such as ruling, the length of scrolls, sheets, and columns (ch. 4). It also refers to<br />
writing practices (ch. 5), such as divisions between words, small sense units (stichs and verses),<br />
and larger sense units (sections; 5a), the special layout of poetical units (5b), scribal marks (5c),<br />
correction procedures (5e–f), the scripts (ch. 6), special scribal characteristics reflected in certain<br />
types of texts (ch. 7), and various scribal traditions (ch. 8).<br />
The topics covered in this monograph thus pertain to most aspects of scribal activity, and go a<br />
little further, as the production of scrolls is covered as well. Skilled scribes may have been<br />
involved in some aspects of this activity, but most probably made use of ready-made writing<br />
materials. This study pertains mainly to the technical aspects of scribal activity, while the<br />
differing scribal approaches are discussed only briefly, for example in ch. 2g and as background<br />
material to the description of most aspects of scribal activity. The analysis covers only some<br />
aspects of the textual transmission of compositions (e.g. ch. 2g), while exegetical approaches and<br />
liberties taken by scribes in changing the biblical text are not analyzed at all.<br />
Our description of scribal practices reflected in the documents from the Judean Desert is as<br />
complete as possible with the publication of these texts almost completed. Yet, the present