Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Sam, Chr & Josephus

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Ian Hutchesson" <mc2499 AT mclink.it>
  • To: "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Sam, Chr & Josephus
  • Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 17:56:58 +0100



Dear all,

Some time ago I mentioned the possibility that both Sam/Kgs and Chr used an
earlier work, and that this Vorlage was also used by Josephus. This matter
came up in a private conversation I was having and I thought the people on
this list might be interested and perhaps have some thoughts.

If we compare 2 Sam 8:3-14, 1 Cr 8:3-13 and Josephus AJ 7,5,1-4:


Sam Chr Josephus
3 3 1
Hadadezer son Hadadezer Hadadezer (Artazaros) son
of Rehob --- of Rehob (Araos)
Monument at the Monumento all' ---
Euphrates Euphrates Euphrates

4 4 2
1700 horsemen 1000 chariots 1000 chariots
7000 horsemen 7000 horsemen
8 8 3
Betah Tibhath Betah (Battaiai)
Berothai Cun Machon (Makwni)
--- sea of bronze sea of bronze
of Solomon of Solomon
9 9 4
King Toi King Tou King Toi (Qainos) Q = theta
(in LXX Qoou and Qwa)
10 10
Joram Hadoram Joram (damned Whiston. Adoramos)

13 12
David defeats Abishai defeats Abishai defeats
the Edomites the Edomites the Edomites

Some of the things in Chr we can explain:

1) Tibhath (+bxt) has a metathesis b/t (Sam: b+x),
2) There is some connection between Cun (kwn), e Machon (makwn),
(presupposing there's an omega in the Greek of Josephus),
3) Tou shows the equivocation between waw e yod noted from Qumran,
4) Hadoram is probabloy an editorial change from a Ja- (at least
yw-, from yhw-) name for a goy to a Had- name.

The choice of David instead of Abishai in Samuel is also programmatic. 1700
horsemen is a relatively transparent error.

The LXX doesn't have any of the toponyms Betah, Berothai, Tibhath or Cun
(though LXX 2Sam has a place called Masbak)! Obviously, Josephus didn't use
LXX tradition here.

Hopefully though, in comparing the above-mentioned passages one can see that
neither Samuel nor Chronicles can be the original source. And how I am more
trustful of Josephus in these matters now. He seems closer to my
hypothetical Vorlage than the others, not withstanding his epitomizing
tendencies.

If I am right, and at least in the chosen passage it seems to me I am, this
should indicate quite a late emergence of these separate "history"
traditions, given Josephus's apparently more faithful approach to his
source. (This follows another earlier post which places the esdras/Ezra
tradition of the high priestly lineage earlier than Chr and Ezra -- but not
1 Esdras -- after Josephus.)

What do ye make of the data?


Ian






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page