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

J. J. M. ROBERTS 277
more or less continuous commentary on a single biblical book. They follow
the same basic pattern of citing the biblical book, section by section,
each section of citation being followed by a section, sometimes relatively
short, of interpretation. 18 The interpretation is typically introduced with
one of several formulas using the word pe 4s ]er, “interpretation,” hence the
designation of these texts as pes 6 ]a4rîm, the plural of pe 4s ]er. 19 While other genres
at Qumran also use the same or similar formulas with pe 4s ]\er to introduce
an interpretation of biblical material, it is the combination of the
continuous commentary on a single biblical book with this manner of
introducing the sections of interpretation that Horgan requires to classify
texts as pesharim. 20 Within the pesharim sections of interpretation, however,
short snippets of the previously cited biblical text may be cited
again, sometimes more than once, and the interpretation of these short
snippets are often introduced with other formulas that do not employ the
term pe 4s ]er. 21
By Horgan’s criteria there are five pesharim on Isaiah, all from Cave
4 and all of which are extremely fragmentary. 22 These pesharim are as
follows:
(1) 4QpIsa a (4Q161) consists of a group of ten fragments that preserve parts
of three columns with citation of portions of Isa 10:22–11:5 and accompanying
commentary.
(2) 4QpIsa b (4Q162) is one large fragment that treats portions of Isa 5:5–30.
(3) pap4QpIsa c (4Q163) designates a group of sixty-one fragments, written
on papyrus, of which only a small number provide sufficient material for
a connected reading.
(4) 4QpIsa d (4Q164) consists of three fragments that treat Isa 54:11–12.
(5) 4QpIsa e (4Q165) consists of eleven fragments that preserve portions of
the biblical text of Isaiah 11, 14, 15, 21, 32, and 40, but almost nothing of
the interpretation is preserved.
Others have classed one text from Cave 3 (3QpIsa [3Q4]) among the
pesharim on Isaiah, but Horgan demurs. It is a single fragment that cites
Isa 1:1–2, but no formula of interpretation is actually preserved, and thus
it does not clearly meet her criteria for pesharim. 23
18. Ibid., 237–38.
19. Ibid., 239–43.
20. Ibid., 3.
21. Ibid., 238.
22. Ibid., 70–138.
23. Ibid., 260–61. Horgan includes this text among the Isaiah pesharim in her translation,
“Isaiah Pesher 1 (3Q4 = 3QpIsa)”; see idem, “Pesherim” (PTSDSS 6B), 35–37,
where she plausibly restores the formula, but she still regards it as a different type
from the other Isaiah pesharim.