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

CHARLESWORTH AND MCSPADDEN 323
Hosea, two on Micah, two on Zephaniah, and one each on Nahum and
Habakkuk) and the Psalms (three). 17 Between the two parts, the pesharim
insert formulae as a distinguishing marker and a transitional device. Most
often these formulae use a form of r#p, hence the name “pesharim,” but
other transitions can and do appear. 18 Notably, in Psalm Pesher 1, the introductory
formula always includes a form of r#p (pesher). 19
Psalm Pesher 1 has the main features of the pesharim. As a Qumran
commentary it displays the hermeneutics of fulfillment. It also is shaped
by the pneumatic, eschatological, and idiosyncratic interpretation that is
self-serving to the Qumranites, as they look for an interior meaning to
their own history and suffering. 20
But, despite its shared form, several characteristics combine to make
Psalm Pesher 1 a unique document among the pesharim. First, its script is
late Herodian. A close examination of the plates confirms Horgan’s
judgment that the “manuscript is written in a rustic semi-formal hand and
dates to the Herodian period.” 21 This paleographical clue allows us to
date reliably the text to the late first century B.C.E. or more likely to the
early first century C.E. 22
Second, Psalm Pesher 1 does not have the appearance of an autograph. 23
One interesting piece of evidence leads to this hypothesis and contravenes
17. See in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek Texts with English Translations,
Vol. 6B, Pesharim, Other Commentaries, and Related Documents (ed. J. H. Charlesworth et
al.; PTSDSSP 6B; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Louisville: Westminster John Knox,
2002).
18. For a clear presentation of the commentary formulae see, Casey D. Elledge,
“Appendix: A Graphic Index of Citation and Commentary Formulae in the Dead Sea
Scrolls,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek Texts with English Translations,
Vol. 6B, Pesharim, Other Commentaries, and Related Documents (ed. J. H. Charlesworth et
al.; PTSDSSP 6B; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Louisville: Westminster John Knox,
2002), 367–77; see esp. 372–76.
19. It is conceivable that r#p at Qumran is influenced by the use of this noun, in
Aramaic, in relation to interpreting dreams (Dan 4:3 and 5:12). See the recent comments
by Shani L. Berrin, “Qumran Pesharim,” in Biblical Interpretation at Qumran (ed.
M. Henze; SDSSRL; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 110–33, esp. 123–24.
20. See Charlesworth, The Pesharim and Qumran History, 6, 16, 68.
21. Horgan, “Pesharim,” in Pesharim, Other Commentaries, and Related Documents (PTS-
DSSP 6B), 6. Horgan also connects 4QpIsa a (= 4Q161) and 4QpHos a (= 4Q166) with
the same hand as 4QpPs a (= 4Q171).
22. See note 9.
23. This claim is not merely an argument from silence. The script is rather late and it
looks like the text has been corrected by a later scribe from another copy, which cannot
be the text of Psalm 37 because the pesher formula is restored. For discussions regarding
the nature of this text, some in defense of 4QpPs a (= 4Q171) as an autograph see,
James H. Charlesworth, The Pesharim and Qumran History, 77–80; and Frank M. Cross, Jr.,
The Ancient Library of Qumran (3d ed.; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 91–92.