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

SV: orion-list CD "B" text

Thank you for the reference in DJD XVIII.  But while there is no 
dispute with Baumgarten's description in DJD XVIII, the matter 
of attestation of a distinctive "B" text at Qumran still remains 
ambiguous to me.  The reason is both of those cases, in 4Q266 
and 4Q267, correspond to elements of the "B" text which occur
after the "A" text is cut off, mid-text, in the CD copy.  

As is well known, the "A" and "B" text (where they overlap) mostly 
agree with each other except for much-discussed points at which 
they diverge, which may be of much interest concerning 
the content of and reasons for the differences.  Many articles 
have been written concerning these divergences.  Some think 
the differences represent intentional variants in composition,
others think the differences are explicable as scribal copying 
errors stemming from a single original text which was not
intentionally changed.  (I don't think a scribal error explanation
is viable in accounting for the differences.)

If "A" and "B" of CD are simply corrupt scribal copies of only one
composition, then the question is irrelevant.  But if "A" and "B"
of CD represent distinct editions, either two redactions or one original
composition and one later redaction--however it worked--then the 
question is relevant: is there evidence from Qumran that "B" exists
among the Qumran fragments? 

It is clear "A" exists in the Qumran finds because of a huge
quantity of lines and fragments which correspond to "A" in CD.  (In
the several places at which "A" and "B" overlap where there are
correspondences in Qumran fragments, in 4Q266 and 4Q269,
according to the description in DJD XVIII, the Qumran fragments
agree with "A", and not with "B".)

But is there evidence for "B" at Qumran in the points of "B" at
which "B" _differs from_ "A"?  None appears claimed in DJD XVIII.
And if not, then what appears to be the two attestations of "B" 
at Qumran may be illusory.  They may simply
be attestations of only the single full text of "A", at two points
at which "B" happens to agree with "A" (which is most of the time).

Then--I think this reasoning is sound--one ends up with attestation
in CD of two variant editions of the Damascus text, but there is 
still no positive evidence of more than a single edition (i.e. "A")
in all of the Qumran finds.  

Naturally, I would love to hear an opposing argument or a 
different view on this.

Greg Doudna

> According to Joseph Baumgarten (DJD XVIII, p.6 n.5), "Text B of CD is only
> represented among the cave 4 manuscripts by two small fragments of col.
> XX"
> which he specifies (p. 3) as 4Q266 [D(a)] 4 i: XX 33-34 and 4Q267 [D(b)]
> 3:
> XX 25-28.
> Stephen Goranson
For private reply, e-mail to Greg Doudna <gd@teol.ku.dk>
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to majordomo@panda.mscc.huji.ac.il with
the message: "unsubscribe Orion." For more information on the Orion Center
or for Orion archives, visit our web site http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.