[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: yahad ostracon (fwd)

David W. Suter
Saint Martin's College
Lacey, WA 98503

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 17:36:51 GMT +100
From: Greg Doudna <GD@teol.ku.dk>
To: orion@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il
Subject: Re: yahad ostracon 

Talmon 1953 ("The Sectarian YXD--A Biblical Noun", 
_Vetus Testamentum_ 3:133-140, at 138) interpreted
LYXD of 1QS 5.5 as an infinitive verb "to join",
a contraction of LHYXD (which Talmon [as Martinez]
took as a verb) at 1QS 5.20.  Whether or not one
agrees with Talmon in this specific case, there is
a point to be considered.

The reading of the ostracon, LYXD (assuming
the reading is correct), without a sentence context, 
and with no knowledge of what followed this reading, 
perhaps should not be assumed to be a noun.  I
hate to argue from memory, but I seem to remember
that earlier in the ostracon both the "giver" and
the "receiver" of the NTN "gift" (conveyance? sale?)
are already accounted for.  If so, then an additional
second recipient (the putative "Qumran Yachad") is
unexpected.  The broken context and lack of any
analogous economic texts with YXD will probably forever
forbid any real solution, unfortunately (unless new
economic text finds turn up with LYXD in a context), 
but if one is going to talk probabilities, on what
basis is a noun to be preferred to a verb?

Greg Doudna