The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The ... - josephprestonkirk

122 FORMATION AND RE-FORMATION OF DANIEL
in one of the Daniel manuscripts does not mean that there is no textual evidence
for Daniel 12 since, as Flint has noted, 12:10 is picked up as part of
a quotation of Daniel in 4QFlorilegium (see below). 64 This adds to the likelihood
that before the turn of the Common Era, all twelve chapters of
Daniel were being included in copies of the book. 65
As the preliminary treatments of the Daniel manuscripts show, the
Aramaic and Hebrew portions of the book were being copied in a form that
generally corresponds to the masoretic tradition. However, we should not
dismiss as insignificant the occasional differences between the texts 66 —which
still require a proper investigation. In principle, the departures are at least a
reminder that the text traditions of the book of Daniel had not yet been
standardized into the form that would later be recognized as canonical. 67
D. FORMAL CITATIONS
In 1971, Alfred Mertens stated categorically that “there are no direct
citations of the biblical book of Daniel among the Qumran writings published
thus far.” 68 For all the excellence of Mertens’s careful study, this
statement was misleading, even in the early 1970s. We can say that two
documents, published with photographs in 1968 69 and 1965 70 respectively,
contain formal citations of Daniel: 4Q174 (= 4QFlorilegium 2.3–4) and
64. Flint, “The Daniel Tradition at Qumran,” 43.
65. It is possible, however, that another Hasmonaean copy of Daniel, 4Q116 (4QDan e ),
contained only portions of ch. 9 (vv. 12–14, 15–16? 17?); see Ulrich, “Daniel Manuscripts:
Part 2, ” 18; and Flint, “The Daniel Tradition at Qumran,” 43. If this is the case, then
the MS would be a copy of an excerpt of Daniel rather than a copy of the entire book.
66. For a listing of some of the textual variants, see the publications given in n60
(above) and, further, Mertens, Das Buch Daniel, 30–31.
67. E.g., note the additional “all these” and “all the earth” in Dan 2:39–40 (4Q112
frag. 5 2.9), which against the masoretic tradition and the Theodotionic recension
agrees with the Old Greek recension represented by the Cologne Papyrus (967); for
two further such examples, see Mertens, Das Buch Daniel, 30–31. Moreover, the additional
“sat down” for 7:22 in the very fragmentary 4Q115 suggests that dyn)
(restored) was being understood in the sense of “court”; if the context for the verb
has been correctly identified, then the MS has a text in which 7:22 corresponds more
closely to the scene as described in 7:9–10 (“ancient of days…the court sat down”).
68. Ibid., 51: “Nirgends in den bisher veröffentlichten Schriften von Qumran
finden sich direkte Zitate aus dem biblischen Daniel-Buch.”
69. John M. Allegro, in Qumran Cave 4.I (4Q158–4Q186) (ed. J. M. Allegro and A.
A. Anderson; DJD 5; Oxford: Clarendon, 1968), 53–57 and pls. 19–20.
70. Adam S. van der Woude, “Melchisedek als himmlische Erlösergestalt in den
neugefundenen eschatologischen Midraschim aus Qumran Höhle XI,” OtSt 14
(1965): 354–73 and plate 1.