preview

Chapter 4 Psalmse

Better Essays

6.1 Basic Profile of Witnesses Cited
As stated in chapter 1.2, this chapter will empirically demonstrate the validity of the the identification of variant scribal practices and the utility of the proposed schema for explaining the variation found among Qumran “biblical” witnesses with three case studies from the psalms. Based on the ranking system described in chapter 4, the following is a basic profile of the witnesses cited for use in the case studies.1 Note that each witness is given with its corresponding ranking between parentheses ( ). “Translator” witnesses:
11QPsalmsc (0.53), 11QPsalmsb (0.62), and 11QPsalmsa (1.00) 11QPsalmsc and 11QPsalmsb are “biblical” mss written in prose format and dated to the first half of the first century …show more content…

Now, in contrast to the “mirror” witnesses referenced below, it is significant that the “translator” and “mixer” psalms witnesses are not stichometrically arranged, whereas the “mirror” psalms witnesses are.6 This observation further supports the validity of the groupings identified in chapter 4. “Mirror” witnesses: 
8QPsalms (0.00), 5/6HevPsalms (0.02), 4QPsalmsc (.10), and 4QPsalmsb …show more content…

Psalm 139 was selected first in order to furnish a stark comparison of textual transmission from a “translator” scribe (namely, that of the Great Psalms Scroll) and MT. Psalm 118 was selected second in order to contrast, as much as possible, how scribes from all three scribal groups transmitted the same psalm. And Psalm 18 was selected last to show how the “mirror” scribal practice, which is admittedly by far the most common group among the witnesses, corresponds virtually exactly to the MT scribal practice, at least linguistically speaking. 
 The purpose of these case studies is to answer the question: “Does the recognition of variant scribal practices best serve to explain sufficiently the variation? And does the proposed schema serve well as a tool to evaluate such variation?” To be clear, the evaluations contained herein are therefore not meant to provide final text-critical decisions as to what may or may not be archetypal or preferred readings. Instead they are meant to show that recognizing variant scribal

Get Access