Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Re[2]: Samaritan Pentateuch and Documentary Hypothesis

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Polycarp66 AT aol.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: Re[2]: Samaritan Pentateuch and Documentary Hypothesis
  • Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:32:53 EST


In a message dated 12/20/99 5:12:24 AM Central Daylight Time,
peter_kirk AT sil.org writes:

<< The extract below puzzles me. Can anyone explain its relevance to the
Samaritan Pentateuch? What evidence does the SP provide for the
existence of separate documents, or how the Pentateuch might be
assigned to different documents? (Point taken about Gilgamesh and the
Diatessaron - but what are the other examples in the middle of the
from...through range?) >>

A good question. Perhaps he is referring back to a preceding section of the
article.

d. Sam. Pent. and the Book of Jubilees. The book of Jubilees was dated by R.
H. Charles between 135 and 105 b.c.e. (1917:xxix–xxx), but by Zeitlin
(1939:3–8), with Albright’s approval (FSAC, 346–47), “in the early time of
the Second Jewish Commonwealth in the pre-Hellenistic period.” According to
Charles’ statistics (1917:xxxiii–xxxix) it has affinities with the Sam.
Pent. and even more striking affinity with the LXX against the MT. In sum,
its affinities are similar to those of 4QNum, suggesting once again that the
earlier proto-Samaritan text-type had more affinity with the LXX and less
with the MT than the Sam. Pent.

e. Sam. Pent. and The Book of Chronicles. The similarities between
Chronicles and the LXX, and QL of Samuel in contrast to MT of Samuel put
beyond reasonable doubt that the Chronicler did not revise his sources but
relied on sources already differing from the MT (cf. Gerleman 1948:34; Cross
1964:293). Gerleman (1948:9) found that the genealogies and lists of names in
1 Chronicles 1–9 “show greater resemblance to the Samaritan Pentateuch than
to the Massoretic.” Elsewhere he wrote: “It is . . . not only in
morphological and syntactical details that the textual tradition of the
Chronicler shows affinity with the Samaritan Pentateuch. The resemblance
extends also to the actual composition, the arrangement of the material, the
form of the narrative” (1948:21). Finally, he observed that the
correspondence pertains to the LXX as well: “We have seen that the texts from
which the lists of names in 1 Chronicles 1–9 have been taken show remarkable
correspondence not only with Samaritanus, but also with the Septuagint” (28).
If Gerleman’s analysis is valid, one finds in the light of QL and other
Jewish literature strong evidence for positing a very early, though already
modernized, recension from which the LXX and proto–Sam. Pent. independently
developed.

Freedman, David Noel, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary, (New York: Doubleday)
1997, 1992.

Possibly also more. I haven't analyzed it too carefully.

gfsomsel




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page