Subject: RE: Joshua 20:3

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 10 May 96 14:00 +0200

> Received: from sunvax.sun.ac.za by maties4.sun.ac.za with smtp; Fri, 10 May 
> 96 13:18:27 +0200
> Received: from gabriel.cc.emory.edu by SUNVAX.SUN.AC.ZA with SMTP;
>           Fri, 10 May 1996 13:15:47 +0100 (WET-DST)
> Received: from scholar.cc.emory.edu (scholar.cc.emory.edu [170.140.38.9]) by 
> gabriel.cc.emory.edu (8.7.3/8.6.9-950630.01osg-itd.null) with SMTP id 
> HAA10514; Fri, 10 May 1996 07:12:10 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
>         id AA04752; Fri, 10 May 1996 07:11:40 +0500
> Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 07:08:24 -0400 (EDT)
> Date-Warning: Date header was inserted by InfoAve.Net
> From: [email-masked] (Jim West)
> Subject: Joshua 20:3
> X-Sender: [email-masked] (Unverified)
> To: [email-masked]
> Message-Id: <[email-masked]>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
> Sender: [email-masked]
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> 
> The MT seems to reflect a Vorlage which is shorter than LXX.  of Josh 20:3
> (referring to the end of the verse, BHS note c).
> Is this an example of the LXX tendency to harmonize (cf Nu 35:12); or does
> the LXX reflect a genuinely "different" Vorlage?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jim West

I suggest you read the article by A. Rofe "Joshua 20: Historico-Literary 
Criticism Illustrated" in JH Tigay (ed.), Empirical Methods of Biblical 
Criticism, Philadelphia 1985, pp. 131-147. 

Johann Cook
Acting head of the Dept of Ancient Near Eastern Studies
University of Stellenbosch
SOUTH AFRICA