Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Liz Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>]

Dear Brian,
Thank you for reading the article and plowing through it.
There are some typos in it, which I beg you to  forgive.
What I considered the A-text was actually supposed to
have been included with my article -- both the Greek and
in translation. I was very disappointed that it was accidentally
omitted.  The so-called A text is none of the items you mention
below. It is not the LXX or the MT. It is a separate text, a
third version of Esther. I argue it is not Lucianic, but all that
means is that I don't think it is a revision of the LXX toward
the MT. I think it is a separate text. The complete version
of the A-text in Greek and in translation is in an earlier
volume of JSOT by David Clines. My reference to Clines
in the article you have is the article with the complete A-text
in it. If I'd have known they weren't going to   include the
A-text in my article, I would have mentioned that.

Thanks for your interest.
I saw that a new book is out on the relationship of all
these Esther texts at by Scholars Press (I forget the author
now).

Liz

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Tucker [mailto:jbtucker AT metroshores.net]
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 5:04 PM
> To: Biblical Hebrew
> Subject: Ur-Text of Esther
>
>
> Shalom
>
> I have finished "Towards the Ur-Text of Esther" by Liz Fried, the question
> I have is what is the identity of the A-text?
>
> I take it that Emanual Tov says it is "Lucianic."
>
> I am curious as to which LXX version Liz considers her "A-text"? That is,
> is it one of the MSS listed in BHS, if so which one?
>
> Fried, Liz. "Towards the Ur-Text of Esther" JSOT 88 (2000) 49-57.
>
> Thanks
> Brian Tucker
> Riverview, MI
> jbtucker AT metroshores.net
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [lizfried AT umich.edu]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>