The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research, ed. Thomas B. Dozeman, Konrad Sch... more The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research, ed. Thomas B. Dozeman, Konrad Schmid, and Baruch J. Schwartz (Forschungen zum Alten Testament 78; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011) 507–31. Following recent developments in the study of the LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), this essay questions whether the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP) should be viewed, as it often is, as an offshoot of the proto-Masoretic Pentateuch. That the so-called pre-Samaritan manuscripts found among the DSS share many features with the SP, such as conflationary tendencies, linguistic features, and content, means that some of the specific features that were formerly thought to be distinguishing marks of the SP turn out to be non-exclusive to the Samaritans. Rather, these particular texts and the larger tradition of which they are a part belong to the common patrimony of Judeans and Samarians in the late centuries BCE. That the SP was developed with its distinctive sectarian readings out of one particular family of pentateuchal texts at a relatively late date (second–first centuries BCE) has important implications for our understanding of the editing and transmission of the Pentateuch in the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods. The long-term historical relationship between the Samarians and Judeans – before these groups became somewhat alienated in the second century BCE – should be given, therefore, more attention in elucidating the formation, editing, and early transmission of the Pentateuch.
in Rewriting Biblical History: Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honour of Pancratius C. Beent... more in Rewriting Biblical History: Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honour of Pancratius C. Beentjes, ed. H. W. M. Grol and J. Corley (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies 7; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011) 211–29.
in The Historian and the Bible: Essays in Honour of Lester L. Grabbe, ed. P. R. Davies and D. V. ... more in The Historian and the Bible: Essays in Honour of Lester L. Grabbe, ed. P. R. Davies and D. V. Edelman (LHBOTS 530; London: T. & T. Clark Continuum, 2010), 159–74.
in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (ed.... more in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (ed. R. Rezetko, T. H. Lim, and W. B. Aucker; VTSup 113; Leiden: Brill, 2007) 223–39.
Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies/Le société canadienne des études bibliques 6... more Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies/Le société canadienne des études bibliques 64 (2004–5) 5–32; Manu secunda, Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 34/3-4 (2005) 307–36,
In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed. J. Day (JSOT... more In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed. J. Day (JSOTSup 406; London: T. & T. Clark Continuum, 2004) 150–80.
Catholic Biblical Quartrely 57 (1996) 229–54. Reprinted in Reconsidering Israel and Judah: The ... more Catholic Biblical Quartrely 57 (1996) 229–54. Reprinted in Reconsidering Israel and Judah: The Deuteronomistic History in Recent Thought (ed. G.N. Knoppers and J.G. McConville; SBTS 8; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2000) 370–96.
“Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Histori... more “Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Historical and Geographic Studies: Ephraim Stern Volume (Eretz Israel 29; ed. Joseph Aviram, Ammon Ben Tor, Israel Ephʿal, Seymour Gitin, and Ronny Reich; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2009) 78–87
“Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Histori... more “Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Historical and Geographic Studies: Ephraim Stern Volume (Eretz Israel 29; ed. Joseph Aviram, Ammon Ben Tor, Israel Ephʿal, Seymour Gitin, and Ronny Reich; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2009) 78–87
“Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Histori... more “Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Historical and Geographic Studies: Ephraim Stern Volume (Eretz Israel 29; ed. Joseph Aviram, Ammon Ben Tor, Israel Ephʿal, Seymour Gitin, and Ronny Reich; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2009) 78–87
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 3/4 (2000) http:/www.purl.org/jhs [repr. in Perspectives on Bib... more The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 3/4 (2000) http:/www.purl.org/jhs [repr. in Perspectives on Biblical Hebrew IV, ed. Ehud Ben Zvi (Gorgias Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures 1; Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006) 269–89].
The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research, ed. Thomas B. Dozeman, Konrad Sch... more The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research, ed. Thomas B. Dozeman, Konrad Schmid, and Baruch J. Schwartz (Forschungen zum Alten Testament 78; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011) 507–31. Following recent developments in the study of the LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), this essay questions whether the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP) should be viewed, as it often is, as an offshoot of the proto-Masoretic Pentateuch. That the so-called pre-Samaritan manuscripts found among the DSS share many features with the SP, such as conflationary tendencies, linguistic features, and content, means that some of the specific features that were formerly thought to be distinguishing marks of the SP turn out to be non-exclusive to the Samaritans. Rather, these particular texts and the larger tradition of which they are a part belong to the common patrimony of Judeans and Samarians in the late centuries BCE. That the SP was developed with its distinctive sectarian readings out of one particular family of pentateuchal texts at a relatively late date (second–first centuries BCE) has important implications for our understanding of the editing and transmission of the Pentateuch in the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods. The long-term historical relationship between the Samarians and Judeans – before these groups became somewhat alienated in the second century BCE – should be given, therefore, more attention in elucidating the formation, editing, and early transmission of the Pentateuch.
in Rewriting Biblical History: Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honour of Pancratius C. Beent... more in Rewriting Biblical History: Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honour of Pancratius C. Beentjes, ed. H. W. M. Grol and J. Corley (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies 7; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011) 211–29.
in The Historian and the Bible: Essays in Honour of Lester L. Grabbe, ed. P. R. Davies and D. V. ... more in The Historian and the Bible: Essays in Honour of Lester L. Grabbe, ed. P. R. Davies and D. V. Edelman (LHBOTS 530; London: T. & T. Clark Continuum, 2010), 159–74.
in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (ed.... more in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (ed. R. Rezetko, T. H. Lim, and W. B. Aucker; VTSup 113; Leiden: Brill, 2007) 223–39.
Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies/Le société canadienne des études bibliques 6... more Bulletin of the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies/Le société canadienne des études bibliques 64 (2004–5) 5–32; Manu secunda, Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 34/3-4 (2005) 307–36,
In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed. J. Day (JSOT... more In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed. J. Day (JSOTSup 406; London: T. & T. Clark Continuum, 2004) 150–80.
Catholic Biblical Quartrely 57 (1996) 229–54. Reprinted in Reconsidering Israel and Judah: The ... more Catholic Biblical Quartrely 57 (1996) 229–54. Reprinted in Reconsidering Israel and Judah: The Deuteronomistic History in Recent Thought (ed. G.N. Knoppers and J.G. McConville; SBTS 8; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2000) 370–96.
“Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Histori... more “Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Historical and Geographic Studies: Ephraim Stern Volume (Eretz Israel 29; ed. Joseph Aviram, Ammon Ben Tor, Israel Ephʿal, Seymour Gitin, and Ronny Reich; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2009) 78–87
“Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Histori... more “Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Historical and Geographic Studies: Ephraim Stern Volume (Eretz Israel 29; ed. Joseph Aviram, Ammon Ben Tor, Israel Ephʿal, Seymour Gitin, and Ronny Reich; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2009) 78–87
“Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Histori... more “Beyond Jerusalem and Judah: The Commission of Artaxerxes In Eretz-Israel—Archaeological, Historical and Geographic Studies: Ephraim Stern Volume (Eretz Israel 29; ed. Joseph Aviram, Ammon Ben Tor, Israel Ephʿal, Seymour Gitin, and Ronny Reich; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2009) 78–87
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 3/4 (2000) http:/www.purl.org/jhs [repr. in Perspectives on Bib... more The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 3/4 (2000) http:/www.purl.org/jhs [repr. in Perspectives on Biblical Hebrew IV, ed. Ehud Ben Zvi (Gorgias Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures 1; Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006) 269–89].
During the past decade, the period from the 7th century B.C.E. and later has been a major focus b... more During the past decade, the period from the 7th century B.C.E. and later has been a major focus because it is thought to be the era when much of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament was formed. As a result, there has also been much interest in the historical developments of that time and specifically in the status of Judah and its neighbors. Three conferences dealing roughly with a century each were organized, and the first conference was held in Tel Aviv in 2001; the proceedings of that conference were published as Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period. The second volume was published in early 2006, a report on the conference held in Heidelberg in July 2003: Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period.
Judah and the Judeans in the Fourth Century B.C.E. is the publication of the proceedings of the third conference, which was held in Muenster, Germany, in August 2005; the essays in it focus on the century during which the Persian Empire fell to Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic kingdoms came to the fore.
Participants whose contributions are published here are: R. Achenbach, R. Albertz, B. Becking, E. Ben Zvi, J. Blenkinsopp, E. Eshel, H. Eshel, L. L. Grabbe, A. Kloner, G. N. Knoppers, I. Kottsieper, A. Lemaire, O. Lipschits, Y. Magen, K. Schmid, I. Stern., O. Tal, D. Vanderhooft, J. Wiesehöfer, J. L. Wright, and J. W. Wright.
Uploads
Following recent developments in the study of the LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), this essay questions whether the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP) should be viewed, as it often is, as an offshoot of the proto-Masoretic Pentateuch. That the so-called pre-Samaritan manuscripts found among the DSS share many features with the SP, such as conflationary tendencies, linguistic features, and content, means that some of the specific features that were formerly thought to be distinguishing marks of the SP turn out to be non-exclusive to the Samaritans. Rather, these particular texts and the larger tradition of which they are a part belong to the common patrimony of Judeans and Samarians in the late centuries BCE. That the SP was developed with its distinctive sectarian readings out of one particular family of pentateuchal texts at a relatively late date (second–first centuries BCE) has important implications for our understanding of the editing and transmission of the Pentateuch in the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods. The long-term historical relationship between the Samarians and Judeans – before these groups became somewhat alienated in the second century BCE – should be given, therefore, more attention in elucidating the formation, editing, and early transmission of the Pentateuch.
Following recent developments in the study of the LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), this essay questions whether the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP) should be viewed, as it often is, as an offshoot of the proto-Masoretic Pentateuch. That the so-called pre-Samaritan manuscripts found among the DSS share many features with the SP, such as conflationary tendencies, linguistic features, and content, means that some of the specific features that were formerly thought to be distinguishing marks of the SP turn out to be non-exclusive to the Samaritans. Rather, these particular texts and the larger tradition of which they are a part belong to the common patrimony of Judeans and Samarians in the late centuries BCE. That the SP was developed with its distinctive sectarian readings out of one particular family of pentateuchal texts at a relatively late date (second–first centuries BCE) has important implications for our understanding of the editing and transmission of the Pentateuch in the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods. The long-term historical relationship between the Samarians and Judeans – before these groups became somewhat alienated in the second century BCE – should be given, therefore, more attention in elucidating the formation, editing, and early transmission of the Pentateuch.
Judah and the Judeans in the Fourth Century B.C.E. is the publication of the proceedings of the third conference, which was held in Muenster, Germany, in August 2005; the essays in it focus on the century during which the Persian Empire fell to Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic kingdoms came to the fore.
Participants whose contributions are published here are: R. Achenbach, R. Albertz, B. Becking, E. Ben Zvi, J. Blenkinsopp, E. Eshel, H. Eshel, L. L. Grabbe, A. Kloner, G. N. Knoppers, I. Kottsieper, A. Lemaire, O. Lipschits, Y. Magen, K. Schmid, I. Stern., O. Tal, D. Vanderhooft, J. Wiesehöfer, J. L. Wright, and J. W. Wright.