It could be that the LXX understood שׁם are ‘there’ rather than ‘name’,
making the translator refer back to the cities mentioned. The apparent
omission, therefore, might not be an accidental omission, but rather an
intentional one.
Fred, the proto-MT is probably the oldest textual tradition of the Hebrew
Bible we have. The close similarities (for the most part) between the MT and
the LXX demonstrate that the proto-MT is older than the LXX. In any case, age
is not always the most reliable factor in determining a ‘correct’ text (if
that term is appropriate to use). I highly recommend that you read a book or
two on the production of the Hebrew Bible and textual criticism. It will
really illuminate your perspective.
GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au
(currently in Cairo, Egypt)