Biblical Hebrew Forum

["B. M. Rocine" <brocine AT twcny.rr.com>]

Shalom,

Not to forget Matthew 1:1, as well.  Matthew seemed to view the toledot 
formula as a section-starter.

All the best,
Bryan

Martin Shields wrote:
> On 31/10/2007, at 12:29 AM, K Randolph wrote:
>
>   
> > I have heard from lectures that there was an ancient literary style
> > that went out of use about early to mid second millennium BC, the
> > title and author were added to the end of a document, instead of at
> > the front as is modern practice (since at least the first millennium
> > BC to now).
> >     
>
> While it is true that certain Akkadian scribal works included a  
> colophon which noted the identity of the scribe, I believe there are  
> important distinctions between the toledoth clauses in Genesis (and  
> elsewhere, cf. Ruth 4:18) and the Akkadian colophons which make them  
> unlikely to be valid precedents for understanding the function of  
> these verses in Genesis. AFAIK the Akkadian colophons include explicit  
> affirmation that the named scribe wrote the words (Genesis does not  
> identify its author(s)). Furthermore, as George points out, there are  
> some places where it simply makes no sense to read the toledoth as  
> concluding a section (e.g. Gen 25:12, 19; 36:1, 9). The toledoth  
> clauses are better linked to genealogical information, not authorial  
> information, and are best understood to stand at the beginning of a  
> section, not the end.
>
> Martin Shields,
> Sydney, Australia.
>   

--
B.M. Rocine
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13206
W:  (315) 437-6744