DSS.950413 Class Minutes #24, Dead Sea Scrolls, 13 April 1995 University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft Glen Aduana and Clare Bayard [[There are two ways: the dull and the lively. And it is a mystery as to which works best for whom. In what follows, you first have the straightforward, unimaginative record of class #24. After that, you have the same material as the recorders wanted to communicate it to their classmates. But you had to have been there. And even then, who knows??! RAK]] Cleanup Matters: If possible, include author info in book review revisions. Lawrence Schiffman will visit on Monday 24 April, 6:30, Room TBA. Clemson class, currently in discussion stage, may have to be conducted in MMETS, for technical reasons. Leonard Greenspoon to discuss DSS biblical material. The "Pesharim" or Commentaries Discussed: five ways of referring to "scriptural" texts -- Explicit quotes (formulaic -- "it says") Implicit quotes (verbatim text without introductory formula) "Targumic" treatments (two degrees removed from complete explicitness; "targum" means "translation/interpretation" and becomes a technical term for translations of Hebrew texts to Aramaic; here it refers to a close interpretative rendering) Paraphrases (obviously related though not on a word by word basis) Allusions Fragments are sometimes classified by supposed content, as they lack an appropriately comprehensive context. The genre of the commentary involves a conscious attempt to explain a given text. The DSS provided the first concrete evidence of pre-Christian Semitic Judaic antecedents to the early Christian practice of Commentary writing. Many types of commentaries were discovered and received various designations, including: 4QFlorilegium (Lat: bouquet, a flower-culling) provides a collection of excerpts from presumably authoritative literature, each followed by explicit interpretations in commentary format. 4QTestimonia, a collection of explicit quotations without intervening comments, presumably chosen to "testify" to a particular matter. 4QCatena (Lat: chain, fetter; see GM 209ff), a "chain" of quotes with extensive interpretation, similar to 4QFlorilegium. The "pesharim" (from pesher, "it means") ---(Reminder about GM coding; see p. xxvi)--- [...] indicates a lacuna (gap, hole) in the MS ]...[ indicates the MS is preserved but illegible (text)...(text) indicates an illegible portion in the preserved materials Also, GM's convention regarding the various attempts to avoid using the tetragrammaton: Paleo Hebrew form is rendered as YHWH, dotted form as **** Normal Hebrew text is rendered as LORD The Hebrew word EL is translated as God --- The Habbakuk Commentary, discovered in Cave 1, is the best preserved commentary. It is especially useful since it gives us an idea of the continuity of text. The genre of commentary can be subdivided into those that deal with consecutive text and those that are selective (as with the Isaiah commentary). Commentary indicators can also be formulaic: the word pesher is used sometimes by itself, sometimes in combination with other constructions to introduce the interpretation -- e.g. 1) "Interpretation of the Word," 2) "It's interpretation," 3) "The interpretation concerns." We also find simply "It says." It is conceivable that these formulaic statements may be characteristic of particular commentators, although the evidence is too fragmentary at present to decide. Supporting evidence might be the prevalence of phrases such as "easy interpretations" in the commentary on Nahum. Dr. Kraft notes that it is important to attempt to determine the intent of the author, as indicated by the commentary's explicit references, which can sometimes be tied into our hitorical knowledge. He then went on to point out various examples of allusions to persons or events from the history of Israel, such as the reference to David's son Absalom. Final Comments Dr. Kraft informed us of the news report from Arizona that 18 more scroll fragments have been analyzed there with C14 dating methods, and that the Habbakkuk Commentary was written on leather from an animal that died between 150 to 5 BCE. The next assignment: 18 April -- "para-biblical" materials (GM 219-237, 260-296) //end dss.950413 #1// ----- [[Version #2; hold your hats!]] DSS.950413 Class Minutes #24, Dead Sea Scrolls, 13 April 1995 University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft Glen "Lovecraft" Aduana and Clare "Summoned into the Beyond" Bayard, scribas Minutes after the style of H.P. Lovecraft. * A series of unexplained disappearances -- my partner Clare, for one...vanished. Unexplained noises (was that really a fire engine outside today, or was it... ...Belial?) An evil that defies description... and only B*B and his faithful Religious Studies 255 class of the University of Pennsylvania stands between it and WORLD DOMINATION! B*B versus CHTHULU! * It was just another ordinary class...or was it? B*B, the ever vigilant scholar, reminded us that if we should find some information about the author (such as research interests, or previously published work), to include it in our revisions of the book reviews. To prepare us for the climactic final battle, B*B reminded us that: The pesher concerning the arrival of Belial's arch lieutenant Dagon was that Lawrence Schiffman will visit on Monday 24 April, 6:30, Room TBA. and that the union between the Elder ones across the Mountains of Madness is to be interpreted as our Clemson co-class, although not yet fully planned, would possibly be conducted in MMETS via satellite transmission; Leonard Greenspoon will discuss the Qumran biblical material. And as the skies grew black, and the air chilled with the force of the Old One's arrival, B*B drew out that mystic text, The Necronomicon, written by the mad Manichaean, Abdul al-Hazred shortly before he was torn limb from limb by invisible forces beyond his control. But B*B was clever, and disguised his copy as Garcia Martinez' translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. With the book in hand, he began reciting the mystic spells to banish Chthulu from this world forever. The mystic phrases fell into five categories: Explicit quotes, which are definitely formulaic; implicit quotes; so called "Targumic" quotes which are still definitely quotes, although two degrees removed from complete explicitness, and not a paraphrase (targum is actually a technical term for translations of Hebrew texts to Aramaic; it means "interpret" or "translate"); paraphrases, which are obviously connected, though not on a word by word basis; and allusions (illusions crafted by the Prince of Darkness? No -- *a*llusions. oh.) It is sometimes the case that fragments are classified by convention, as they lack an appropriate comprehensive context. The phrases seemed to have little effect upon the evil force present (well, perhaps it was just an allusion to an evil force, but present nonetheless, I assure you) and to ease his students' worries, B*B instructed us about the proper interpretation of the phrases. Indeed, his discourse fell into the genre of the Commentary, being a conscious inquiry into a given text. Examples of these would be: The Florilegium (Lat: bouquet, a flower-culling) which are collections and excerpts of previously known literature. It was this which was the first concrete evidence of a Judaic precedent to the early Christian practice of Commentary writing. However, many many more commentaries were discovered in time. The 4QTestimonia, really a mishmash (Lat: farrago) of quotes. and the 4QCatena (Lat: chain, fetter), a "chain" of quotes. The Habbakkuk Commentary, discovered in Cave 1, was the first of the Pesharim discoveries at Qumran, and is the best preserved commentary. It aids us by giving us an idea of the continuity of text. Pesher by the way, is not a euphemism for His Followers from Beyond. It literally means "interpretation". The genre of Commentary can be subdivided into Consecutive and Selective (as with the Isaiah commentary) genres. Commentaries are also formulaic: the word Pesher is used sometimes by itself, other times there are three or four ways in which Pesher is used to introduce interpretation. 1) "Interpretation of the Word", 2) "It is interpreted", 3) "This interpretation concerns", 4) "Interpretation:" It is conceivable that these formulaic statements may be characteristic of particular commentators, although the evidence is too fragmentary to decide yet. An example of this would be the prevalence of "easy interpretations" in the commentary on Nahum. Before we can examine these texts, B*B said, we must determine the intent of the author, and the closest method of determination lies in the Commentary's explicit references, which can then be tied into our historical knowledge. And as he said this, Chthulu, whose maw is the font of orphan's tears; Chthulu the Old One pent on a throne of ice; Chthulu, pulled out his copy of Wimsatt and Beardsley's article "The Intentional Fallacy," hoping to dissuade B*B's students from the stance of a determinable authorial intent. Unfazed, for it is rumored that the blood of the Elder Ones flows in his veins, B*B informed us that there is a newsline from Arizona that the 18 scroll fragments to be analyzed there with C14 dating have been so analyzed, and that the Habbakkuk Commentary was written on leather from a goat which died from 150 to 105 BCE. He then went on to point out various examples of allusions on pages 198-9. The allusion to Absalom, for example. And he drew out his ultimate weapon, that fiery brand which both student and demonic-forces-from-Beyond fear -- the next assignment: 18 April -- "para-biblical" materials (GM 219-237, 260-296) With that, Chthulu, his power spent, withdrew into the abyss from whence he came. THE END? //end dss.950413(2)//