SCRIBAL PRACTICES AND APPROACHE S ... - Emanuel Tov

Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts from the Judean Desert 221
11QSefer ha-Milh≥amah (11Q14) 1 ii 8 hµkxra
11QT a (11Q19) II 6 hµhyt[wjbzm; XLI 13 hµynplw; LIX 10 hµbbl; LVI 13 h µyça
MasLev b V 10 (Lev 11:28) hµh (MT hmh, SP µh)
MasEzek III 12 (Ezek 37:7) twµx‚[‚[h]
Traditions concerning a lack of consistency in the writing of the final forms of letters are also reflected in the
Talmud.
In the case of the double letters of the alphabet, one writes the first ones at the beginning and middle of
a word, and the second at the end. If one did otherwise, the scroll is invalid. 290 In the
name of R. Mattiah b. Heresh they have said, ‘ m, n, s≥, p, k
were revealed to Moses at Sinai.’ . . . The men of Jerusalem would write ‘Jerusalem’ as ‘to Jerusalem’ and did not scruple in this regard. Along the
same lines, ˆwpx, ‘north,’ was written ‘to the north’ and ˆmyt, ‘south,’ was written ‘to
the south’ (y. Meg. 1.71d; cf. also b. Meg. 2b).
A similar use of nonfinal letters in final position is reflected in the tradition of the three scrolls of the Law found in
the temple court (y. Ta>an. 4.68a), since one of the books was called the ‘ma>on scroll’ after one of its prominent
characteristics, namely, the absence of a final nun in ma>on and apparently also in other words.
h. Notation of variant readings and glosses?
It has been suggested by some scholars that some marginal notations in the Qumran scrolls reflect
variant readings copied from parallel scrolls of the same composition. Thus Stegemann, KURIOS,
A 94, n. 512 believed that the cancellation dots to the right and left of the supralinear word in
1QIsa a XLIX 14 (Isa 49:14) mark this word as a variant. According to him, some scribal signs in
that scroll (§ c3 above) also indicate such variants. Other scholars suggested that some marginal
notations functioned as glosses. However, with one exception, the words written between the
lines or in the margins of the scrolls should be viewed as corrections of the linear text. 291 For
example, we suggested in ch. 2g that several corrections in 1QH a may have been based on 4QH c
(4Q429) and 4QpapH f (4Q432). There seems to be only one instance of a gloss explaining a word
in the text:
Isa 7:25 MT tyçw rymç (= LXX T S V)
thornbush and thistle
1QIsa a tyçw rymç lzrb
iron thornbush and thistle (the addition is written above rymç) 292
An example of a possible (grammatical) interpolation is the following instance:
Isa 44:3 MT ˚[rz l[ yjwr qxa hçby l[ µylznw amx l[ µym qxa yk
Even as I pour water on thirsty soil, and rain upon dry ground,
will I will pour my spirit on your offspring.
1QIsa a hk[rz l[ yjwr qxa ˆk hçby l[ µylzwnw amx l[ µym qxa ayk
Even as I pour water on thirsty soil, and rain upon dry ground,
so will I pour my spirit on your offspring.
At the same time, the absence or rarity of physically recognizable interpolations does not
exclude the possibility that some plus elements of a scroll vis-à-vis parallel manuscripts of that
composition are in the nature of interpolations inserted in the body of the text. These assumed
290 The non-distinction between the two types of letters was not allowed either in b. Shabb. 103b, Sifre Deuteronomy § 36
on Deut 6:9, Sof. 2.20.
291 For details, see my study “Glosses, Interpolations, and Other Types of Scribal Additions in the Text of the Hebrew
Bible,” in Greek and Hebrew Bible, 53–74.
292 In the spoken language of the Second Temple period, rymç had a secondary meaning of ‘iron,’ to which the gloss
probably referred. See the material collected by S. Lieberman, “Forgotten Meanings,” Leshonenu 32 (1967–68) 99–102
(Heb.); E. Qimron, “Textual Remarks on 1QIs a ,” Textus 12 (1985) s-fn (Heb. with Eng. summ.).