Search
1000 results for “OT_TC_Amateur”
-
Actually it turns out that he vs. heth is the most common letter confusion in #Samaritan #Genesis. That surprises me, but I've found twenty such confusions among proper names. I suspect the lack of pronunciation difference helps.
3/2
#HebrewBible #TextualCriticism #SamaritanPentateuch -
I wonder if especially the yods are in the right place, or have moved, & if they represent vowels different from the #MasoreticText.
The final letter being he or heth is also a very easy confusion in Hebrew square script, but much harder in Samaritan or Paleo-Hebrew. I don't have an idea what that difference might indicate.
2/2
#HebrewBiible #TextualCriticism -
Is it a bad sign when Baden's very first example of a contradiction that requires a document source difference (the name of Moses's father-in-law) I think is more probably resolved by challenging a few Masoretic dots? I'm not opposed to a documentary hypothesis! But the text is ancient, so first establish the text with #TextualCriticism.
-
Pesh nearly agrees, only rounding up Lamech's age at procreation to a round 200 (why?). But SamP and LXX are more interesting. Until Lamech they are always 100 years apart, with the LXX having more years. MT(=Pesh=Vulg) agrees with SamP except for Jared, when it agrees with LXX, and Methuselah, where it disagrees with both. Because LXX and SamP are exacty 100 years apart on Methuselah, that suggests MT is secondary.
2/
#HebrewBible #TextualCriticism -
I think it is very odd that in Psalm 51:14b (MT) = OG Psalm 50:14b = English Psalm 51:12b, the spirit is described as:
MT נְדִיבָ֣ה ("willing")
OG ἡγεμονικῷ ("masterly")
Pesh ܡܫܒܚܬܐ ("glorified")
Vulg potenti ("powerful")No idea why...
-
And in the Samaritan Pentateuch, it isn't an anachronism for God to have already chosen Mt. Gerizim, because in SamP's Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:17b), the tenth commandment is worship on Mt. Gerizim, in an addition not preserved in any other witness.
So I think we can explain the perfect tense verbs in "the place which God chose" to reflect Samaritan ideological revision to emphasize Mt. Gerizim, rather than SamP's textual priority here.
-
What does this mean?
We might be tempted to regard SamP as original (reflecting a composition date after "the choice" of Jerusalem) and MT as a correction to remedy the anachronism of Moses saying that God choosing Jerusalem was already a done deal.
But anachronism seems to have weighed much less heavily on ancient readers than modern ones.
And in the Samaritan understanding of the text, Jerusalem was not the place which God chose, but Mt. Gerizim!
-
#Deuteronomy 12 famously refers to a place YHWH will choose for his cult, which scholars often take as referring to Josiah's reforms (2 Kings 23). But in Deuteronomy the verbs are future tense (יבחר).
Or are they? SamP thinks otherwise.
All 21 times where the text refers to the place which God will choose (Deut 12:5, 11, 14, 18, 21, 26; 14:23-25; 15:20; 16:2, 6-7, 11, 15-16; 17:8, 10; 18:6; 26:2; 31:11), MT imperfect יבחר corresponds to SamP perfect בחר.
-
Okay, a rabbit trail may have revealed a funny point about the NRSV's textual history.
#Genesis 10:14 = #1Chronicles 1:12 lists the peoples of Pathros, Kasluh, & Kaphtor, mentioning in passing that the Philistines came from Kasluhites.
Oddly, #Jeremiah 47:4 and #Amos 9:7 identify the Philistines as coming from Kaphtor, not Kasluh.
What's going on here? Dunno. Perhaps a marginal addition was incorporated into the main text in the wrong spot in Genesis.
1/?
-
I know that the presence or absence of matres lectionis (vocalic waw or yod) isn't meaningful, semantically or textually.
Yet often a verse differs in SamP and MT in that SamP has a mater lectionis in one word where MT lacks it, and MT has one where SamP lacks it.
E.g. #Numbers 22:1:
SamP: ויסעו בני ישראל ויחנו בערבת מואב מעבר לירדן יריחוMT: וַיִּסְע֖וּ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַֽיַּחֲנוּ֙ בְּעַֽרְב֣וֹת מוֹאָ֔ב מֵעֵ֖בֶר לְיַרְדֵּ֥ן יְרֵחֽוֹ׃
1/?
-
We must use critical editions critically. I noticed that Von Gall's edition of #Exodus 27:9 reads באתה where MT reads בָֽאַמָּה֙, despite the fact that Kennicott's edition (which favors readings where SamP≠MT) does not note it. Is this a real variant, or just a typo?
In this case Von Gall's textual apparatus keys a variant to באמה, which occurs nowhere else in this verse, so the main text reading is presumably erroneous, merely a typographical error.
-
In #1Samuel 20:2, there's an interesting ketiv/qere:
K: לו־עשה
Q: לֹֽא־יַעֲשֶׂ֨הHyphens & vowels were added later & word spacing is unreliable in ancient Hebrew manuscripts, so I wonder if there has been a w/y interchange here, and earlier it read ליעשה with negative L-.
-
In #Psalms 11:1 (10:1 in OG numbering), the verse ends:
MT: הַרְכֶ֥ם צִפּֽוֹר
your mountain, birdOG: ἐπὶ τὰ ὄρη ὡς στρουθίον
to the mountains like a bird
= Pesh: ܥܠ ܛܘܪ̈ܐ ܐܝܟ ܨܦܪܐ
~ Vulg: in montem ut avisTg: לטורא/לטוריכון/ היך צפורא
to (the/your) mountains like a birdThree strange features of MT strike me:
1. no "to"
2. no "like" a bird
3. "your" mountainAll 3 are unique to MT except that *part* of Tg tradition agrees with 3.
#HebrewBible #TextualCriticism
1/?
-
Comparing the SamP with MT systematically, I think I am seeing a nearly consistently different use of waw in lists, and in Exodus, several places where SamP's דבר corresponds to MT's אמר, oddly.
Anyone know of scholarship on these?
-
I'm amused by a textual variation in #Genesis 45:24, when Joseph sent his brothers back to Jacob to invite him to Egypt:
MT: וַיְשַׁלַּ֥ח אֶת־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֵּלֵ֑כוּ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אַֽל־תִּרְגְּז֖וּ בַּדָּֽרֶךְ
SamP: וישלח את אחיו וילכו ויאמר אלהים אל תתרגזו בדרךThe addition of a yod changes things!
MT: "He sent his brothers away and they went, and *he* said *to them,* 'Do not get angry on the journey.'"
1/
-
העדרים vs. הרעים
This is a transposition of ע and either r->dr (near dittography) or dr->r (near haplography). Hebrew r and d are so similar that they are often confused, but this is a particularly clear case of that confusion extending to haplography or dittography.
-
Here's a fun one: near synonyms due to near #haplography or #dittography in #Genesis 28:8
When Jacob goes to Harran, to his uncle Laban, there's a well with a big stone, so the shepherds gather the flocks to water there during the day.
The shepherds explain:
They cannot leave
MT: עַ֣ד אֲשֶׁ֤ר יֵאָֽסְפוּ֙ כָּל־הָ֣עֲדָרִ֔ים
(until all the flocks are gathered)
SamP: עד אשר יאספו כל הרעים
(until all the shepherds are gathered)Only the last word is different
1/? -
In #Nehemiah 10:30 (=10:29 English), where MT reads ʾaddîrēyhem, LXX reads καὶ κατηράσαντο αὐτοὺς. Might this represent Hebrew ʾaddîrûhem, interpreted as an (Aramaic) Aphʿel of ndr? Apparently the verb ndr does not have a hiphʿil form in use in Biblical Hebrew.
-
Obviously the precise numbers will shift around a bit depending on what divisions one picks for the columns, but it is hoped that this shows that there is more variation in which name refers to God in chapters 2-8 of Genesis than in the Abraham and Isaac stories, at least.
I wonder if these sorts of differences in agreement may be a faint echo of compositional processes.
-
In order to visualize the drop and then upward shift, it is necessary to have units of comparison. Chapters won't work, because different chapters have different numbers of references to God.
Since I've collected just over 280 references to God in Genesis 1:1-28:13, I divided this sample into 8 divisions of 35 references (corresponding to uneven lengths of text), and calculated what percentage of each division is unanimous across witnesses.
See chart:
-
Reviving my analysis of names of God in #Genesis, after the initial chapter (where all witnesses agree in >90%), there is a sharp drop in agreement in the first ten chapters, and then, as we move into the patriarchal narratives, a greater degree of unanimity.
I'm defining unanimity as all witnesses possess the translation equivalents, except Vulg replacing a second "and God did" with "who did" is merely stylistic, so does not break unanimity.
-
I was delighted to come across the suggestion that Sheshbazzar in #Ezra and 5 is Jeconiah's son Shenazzar in 1 #Chronicles 3:18. Collins' Introduction mentions it in passing, but says they are two different names. But are they? Or is one just a scribal error?
The difference is two letters: ששבצר vs. שנאצר.
LXX 1 Esdras has a mixed form Σαναβάσσαρος (=שנבצר) in 2:11, 14; 6:17, 19.
-
I was delighted to come across the suggestion that Sheshbazzar in #Ezra and 5 is Jeconiah's son Shenazzar in 1 #Chronicles 3:18. Collins' Introduction mentions it in passing, but says they are two different names. But are they? Or is one just a scribal error?
The difference is two letters: ששבצר vs. שנאצר.
LXX 1 Esdras has a mixed form Σαναβάσσαρος (=שנבצר) in 2:11, 14; 6:17, 19.
-
Random observation:
The name of the Persian king Artahshasta (Artaxerxes) is spelled
ארתחששתא
in Ezra 4 and 6 (five times) but spelled
ארתחשסתא
in Ezra 7-8 (five times). If sin and samekh were pronounced the same at that point, I would expect interchanging, not perfect division.
#HebrewBible #Ezra -
Random observation:
The name of the Persian king Artahshasta (Artaxerxes) is spelled
ארתחששתא
in Ezra 4 and 6 (five times) but spelled
ארתחשסתא
in Ezra 7-8 (five times). If sin and samekh were pronounced the same at that point, I would expect interchanging, not perfect division.
#HebrewBible #Ezra -
Today I learned:
(1) Cambridge University Library has posted the oldest known #Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript online,
(2) Samaritan manuscript script looks crazy but is really regular, &
(3) with squinting at the Samaritan script Wikipedia page, I can read Samaritan!https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-01846/287
#HebrewBible #SamaritanPentateuch
#manuscript_digitization -
Today I learned:
(1) Cambridge University Library has posted the oldest known #Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript online,
(2) Samaritan manuscript script looks crazy but is really regular, &
(3) with squinting at the Samaritan script Wikipedia page, I can read Samaritan!https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-01846/287
#HebrewBible #SamaritanPentateuch
#manuscript_digitization -
Today I learned:
(1) Cambridge University Library has posted the oldest known #Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript online,
(2) Samaritan manuscript script looks crazy but is really regular, &
(3) with squinting at the Samaritan script Wikipedia page, I can read Samaritan!https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/MS-ADD-01846/287
#HebrewBible #SamaritanPentateuch
#manuscript_digitization -
I'm perhaps a little obsessed with foreign names in the #HebrewBible, and this morning I was looking at Joseph's Egyptian name in #Genesis 41:45: צָֽפְנַ֣ת פַּעְנֵחַ֒ (Zofnath-pa'neah). In #Samaritan Pentateuch the second word is often פענה and the first is צפנתי or צפינתי. (Images: Cambr. Add. 1846 f. 41b)
Adding or subtracting a yod is very easy in Hebrew square script (modern script), but as the images show, the yod is a big letter in Samaritan (and Paleo-Hebrew).
1/? -
I would love to know how De Wette's thesis of 1805 (that #Deuteronomy was composed for the Josianic reforms in the 7th C BCE) went from being a possibility to being academic orthodoxy.
#HebrewBible