Subject: RE: tc-list sam. pent.

From: Curt Niccum <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 07:40:16 -0600

The text referred to which "was earlier and longer than the MT tradition"
must certainly be 1 Sam. 10:27 found in 4QSam-a. That text, of course, is
not Samaritan. It still holds, however, that the Samaritan-type of text
attested at Qumran could preserve some "original" readings in comparison
with the MT. That must be judged on a comparison in each reading with the MT
and all of the other extant witnesses. By the way, the concept of "original"
text is even more problematic within Old Testament criticism than in NTTC.
It is a shame that the NTTC Section at SBL last year did not coordinate with
the Qumran Section which had a much better discussion of the problem. Both
groups could have benefited from the other's incites.

Curt

> Is some of this material possibly original and been lost in the MT?  I
> remember from Qumran at least one example of a text discovered that was
> earlier and longer than the MT tradition, which  made its context more
> understandable.
> 
>

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 08:25:38 -0600

>groups could have benefited from the other's incites.

Just as a footnote, the original question asked about "a [Qumran] text...
that was earlier and longer than the MT tradition, which  made its context
more understandable."

This description, I think, applies to 4QSam-a as a whole. It has a text
of Samuel which is generally fuller than the MT, and which agrees
frequently (though by no means universally) with LXX. Since the MT
of Samuel is in bad shape, 4QSam-a (and LXX) are very important
witnesses here -- and not just in 10:27.

I've always found McCarter's Anchor Bible edition of 1 Samuel fascinating,
as one of the few non-specialized books to make textual problems clear
to the reader. I don't always agree with his reconstructions -- but
it's very instructive.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)