Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>]

Dear Jonathan,

>>[1 Sam 1:5]
>>sides, i.e. only half a portion." But that seems illogical, since the
>>reason given is that he loved her. One LXX has "except that" as if they
>>read )PS instead of )PYM. The Targum had "choice," according to P. Kyle

>Only one LXX, or the majority of extant LXX?  Have any Hebrew
>manuscripts of the scriptures (besides the Qumran) been found yet that
>predate the earliest copies of LXX?

HH: Mccarter lists it as LXXB that has PLHN hOTI. But you're right; Rahlfs
gives that as the main reading. That is also what I have in Accordance as
LXX1. And it is what Lancelot Brenton has. They all add the words "because
she did not have a child"  before PLHN hOTI, for the Hebrew does not have
those words. LXXL adds KATA PROSWPON, which could support the MT text.

McCarter does not mention any earlier Hebrew texts. There may be some irony
in the word "one." Penninah, says verse 4, required portions for "all her
sons and daughters" as well as herself, whereas Hannah needed only "one"
portion. It would be nice to see )PYM means honorable somewhere else.
Somebody asked why portion was used instead of gift. It seems like a
translational issue, since it is a matter between husband and wife, and in
verse 4 between a father and his children.

                                Yours,
                                Harold Holmyard

>Jonathan
>
>--
>Address: 13685 Hilton Road, Surrey, BC V3R5J8 (Canada)
>Contact: 604-951-4142 (between 7am and 10pm, PST)
>Website: http://reactor-core.org
>
>Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
>Content-Description: Digital signature
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>Attachment converted: TestHD_80:signature.asc (????/----) (0001976F)