New Picture of Leviticus Scroll Fragments

As promised, below is a new — previously unpublished — picture of the recently discovered scroll fragments of the book of Leviticus. This picture was taken by Hanan Eshel on the night of 23 August 2004 at the abandoned Jordanian police station where he first met the Bedouin wanting an estimate of the fragments’ worth.

The Leviticus scroll fragmentsClick for Larger Image

The four fragments are clearly discernible in the picture:

  • Top left: The small fragment containing portions of Leviticus 23:38 and 39.
  • Top right: The decomposed fragment; even with infrared photographs this fragment was indecipherable save for a few scattered letters.
  • Bottom: The two pieces which had already been joined together. The fragment on the right contains Leviticus 23:40-44, while the left fragment contains remnants of Leviticus 24:16-18.

My story on the discovery of the scroll will appear in ChristianWeek next week; after that I will post a more complete accounting of my 20 July 2005 interview with Hanan Eshel.

See here for additional posts on the Leviticus Scroll.

Conflation and Confusion in Report on Leviticus Scroll Discovery

A post on the biblical studies email list by Elmer D. Escoto brought my attention to a Spanish news story on the Leviticus scroll discovery that interestingly conflates what I believe is its original English source — with very confusing results.

Here is the Spanish story from Noticia Cristiana.com:

Decifran tres pergaminos encontrados en el desierto de Judea

Martes 26 de Julio de 2005

Tel Aviv, Israel, (El Pais / NoticiaCristiana.com) Tres antiguos rollos —un pergamino y dos de plata—con dos mil años de antigüedad y encontrados en el Desierto de Judea en 1979, contienen versos conocidos del Levítico, libro del Viejo testamento, de acuerdo con el arqueólogo Chanan Eshel, de la Universidad Bar Ilan de Tel Aviv.

El utilizó cámaras electrónicas, sistemas infrarrojos y scanner de alta resolución para leerlos, los rollos de plata son más antiguos que los rollos del Mar Muerto, y eran usados como amuletos, que los convierte en los más antiguos conocidos y el uso más antiguo de fragmentos de la Biblia como protección.

Los fragmentos del Levítico, el tercer libro de la Biblia Hebrea, son atribuidos a la tribu de Levi, de la cual descienden los pueblos israelíes, y contiene regulaciones para sacerdotes y sus seguidores.

El arqueólogo Gabriel Barkay encontró los rollos en una cueva en Ketef Hinnom, cerca de Jerusalén, en 1979, y gracias a la tecnología hoy podemos conocer su contenido.

Los amuletos de plata son más antiguos que los Rollos del Mar Muerto, que contenían 800 documentos y fueron datados alrededor del 200 o 300 años después de Cristo.

De acuerdo con Bruce Zuckerman, líder del proyecto y profesor de Religión en la Universidad del Sur de California, es probable que los sacerdotes hubieran utilizado un sistema de graffiti para enseñar sus oraciones.

“Puede él ser bendecido por Yahweh, el guerrero, y el destructor del mal” es una de las inscripciones en los amuletos, pertenece al Libro de Zacarías y fue usado mucho después en rituales de exorcismo.

Here is the (incomplete) translation by Elmer D. Escoto along with my additions underlined:

Three 2,000-year-old scrolls (one parchment and two silver scrolls) that were found in the Desert of Judea in 1979 have scriptures from the book of Leviticus, says archaeologist Chanan Eshel of Bar-Ilan University in Tel-Aviv.

He used electronic cameras, infrared systems and a high resolution scanner to read them. The silver scrolls are older than the Dead Sea scrolls and were used as amulets, the oldest know ones, and also the oldest use of Biblical texts as protection.

The fragments of Leviticus, the third book of the Hebrew Bible, are attributed to the tribe of Levi, from which the Israeli priests descend, and contains regulations for priests and their followers.

Archaeologist Gabriel Barkai found these scrolls in a cave in Ketef Hinom, not far from Jerusalem in 1979, and thanks to technology we can now know their contents.

The silver amulets are older than the Dead Sea Scrolls which had 800 documents and have been dated from 200 – 300 a.C.

According to Bruce Zuckerman, project leader and teacher of Religion at South California University, it is probable that priests had used a graffiti system to teach their prayers.

One of the inscriptions on the amulets reads “He may be blessed by Yahweh, the Warrior and Destroyer of evil”; it belongs to the book of Zechariah and was later much used in exorcism rituals.

What is interesting is confusion of the discovery (the silver scrolls were discovered in 1979, the Leviticus fragments in 2004 and just announced in July 2005), the jump between the third and fourth paragraphs which leads you to believe Gabriel Barkai found the Leviticus fragments, the dating of the Dead Sea scrolls, and the introduction of Zuckerman as “project leader,” and finally the identification of the quote in the last paragraph to the book of Zechariah.

This is one confusing piece of reporting! It all becomes clear, however, when one examines the source article, which in itself is a bit confusing to begin with!

The original article was written by Jennifer Viegas and appeared in Discovery News on discoverychannel.com. In the original article, Viegas was reporting on the recent discovery of the Leviticus fragments as well as the silver scrolls from Ketef Hinnom. While I am not sure why someone would want to wed these two stories, her story at least keeps the two discoveries separate. Here is her story; the Vorlage of the Spanish story:

Rare Scrolls Reveal Early Biblical Writing

By Jennifer Viegas, Discovery News

July 22, 2005— Three ancient scrolls — one parchment and two silver — recently have been identified as containing some of the world’s earliest known verses from the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament.

The discovery of two fragments of a 2,000-year-old parchment scroll in the Judean Desert was announced last week by Israeli archaeologist Chanan Eshel of Tel Aviv’s Bar Ilan University.

The fragments contain verses from Leviticus, the third book of the Hebrew Bible, attributed to the tribe of Levi from which Israeli priests are said to be descended. The book consists of regulations for both the priests and their followers.

The two silver scrolls were found by Bar Ilan archaeologist Gabriel Barkay in 1979 in a cave at Ketef Hinnom near Jerusalem. It was only until recently, however, that technology made it possible for scientists to read the scrolls, which date to the 7th century B.C. and likely were worn around the neck as protective amulets.

Project leader Bruce Zuckerman told Discovery News that the scrolls not only are the oldest known Hebrew amulets, but they also are the earliest known artifacts to quote Biblical verses.

“The silver amulets are even older than the Dead Sea Scrolls,” said Zuckerman, who is associate professor of religion at the University of Southern California.

The more than 800 documents that comprise the Dead Sea Scrolls have been dated to about 300-200 B.C., meaning they were created as much as four centuries after the amulets.

Zuckerman and his team utilized electronic cameras, specialized imaging software, and infrared systems from NASA to peer into the etched surfaces of the once-rolled silver scroll amulets.

The scrolls contain only consonants, and one is etched with the Priestly Benediction from Numbers 6:24-26.

It reads, “May the Lord bless you and keep you; may the Lord cause his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; may the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and grant you peace.”

Zuckerman said, “We don’t yet know if the Book of Numbers existed then, or if this verse preceded it.”

He added, “We do, however, know that the same prayer also pops up in early graffiti (wall writings), which at least suggests that it would have been a familiar prayer at the time.”

The other scroll reads, “May he/she be blessed by Yahweh, the warrior/helper, and the rebuker of Evil.”

Zuckerman believes the word “rebuker” is significant, because it echoes language used in earlier Canaanite literature describing the pagan god Baal.

It also appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Book of Zachariah and was used much later in exorcism rituals.

Zuckerman, who is compiling images of early Biblical texts for a USC Web site, thinks that together, the scrolls and other early documents support the theory that the Bible represents a collection of sacred materials gathered over hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of years.

“The precedent established by the editors was not to gather the most clear and consistent materials, but those that were believed to be the most sacred,” he said. “For example, two ideas are given for the origin of the universe. Both are included because to leave one out would have violated the sacredness of the tradition.”

Note that the original story is also confusing on some parts, such as the attribution of the book of Leviticus to the tribe of Levi. The confusion of attributing the second silver scroll’s blessing with the book of Zechariah also becomes clear when you look at the source. It’s the word “rebuke” (‏גער) that links the amulet with Zechariah; not that the blessing is from Zechariah.

Anyhow, this is a great example of conflation and confusion of sources.

“Magisterial,” “Authoritative,” “Weighty,” “Awesome” …

The title of this blog entry reflects some adjectives describing the first volume of Hossfeld and Zenger’s Hermeneia commentary on the book of Psalms. I realize that I have already flogged this volume (see “Noteworthy Commentary on the Psalms Published“), but I just received my review copy and I am very impressed! This volume has set a new standard for critical, historical, and theological commentaries on the Psalms. It includes bibliography, a fresh translation, detailed textual notes, interaction with past scholarly interpretation, verse-by-verse exposition, as well as a section called “Context, Reception, and Significance.” This last section deals with the relationship of the individual psalm to its place in the Psalter, as well as discussions of the reception of the psalm in the LXX, Targum, and New Testament. Very Impressive! You will want to move aside Dahood, Craigie/Allen/Tate, Kraus and put this volume front and centre!

Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger. Psalms 2.
Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Fortress, 2005.
Buy from Amazon.caBuy from Amazon.com

And, no, I’m not getting any kick-back from the authors or the publisher! It’s just that good! (Although if you buy it from Amazon from my site, I will get a percentage that will go towards the cost of maintaining this site!)

The LXX Psalm Superscriptions (Part 3) Liturgical Notices and the Psalms for the Days of the Week

This is the third of a series of entries on the superscriptions in the Greek Psalter. Previous entries include “The Septuagint Psalm Superscriptions (Part 1)” and “The Septuagint Psalm Superscriptions (Part 2): Personal Names and Notions of Authorship.

Liturgical Notices in the Superscriptions

There are a variety of different liturgical notices in the psalm superscriptions. These include the phrase למנצח, “to the leader” (NRSV; “for the director of music,” NIV); and other obscure terms denoting melodies, musical instruments, and/or cultic procedures. Interestingly, there is only one place where the LXX adds εἰς τὸ τέλος (= למנצח): Psalm 30(29). This reading is highly contested within the Greek tradition. While it is difficult to determine whether this addition reflects a different Hebrew Vorlage, it is difficult to understand why it would have been the result of transmission history.

Psalms for the Days of the Week

A more significant group of liturgical notes relate to psalms that were read on certain days of the week. The Mishnah (mTamid 7.3-4), among other places, notes that the Levites recited specific psalms in the Temple on each day of the week. In the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT), only the Sabbath song is so marked (Psalm 92); and where a psalm is extant in the Dead Sea Scrolls, it also supports the MT. On the Greek side, however, all of the daily psalms but Tuesday are marked.

Day Mishnah
(mTamid)
MT Septuagint (LXX) Qumran
Sunday Ps 24 Ps 24 (23): τῆς μιᾶς σαββάτων
“Of [day] one of the week”
Monday Ps 48 Ps 48 (47): δευτέÏ?á¾³ σαββάτου
“[Pertaining to the] second day of the week”
Tuesday Ps 82
Wednesday Ps 94 Ps 94 (93): τετÏ?άδι σαββάτων
“[Pertaining to the] fourth day of the week”
Thursday Ps 81 Ps 81 (80): πέμπτησαββάτου
“[Pertaining to the] fifth day of the week”
Friday Ps 93 Ps 93 (92): εἰς τὴν ἡμέÏ?αν τοῦ Ï€Ï?οσαββάτου
“Regarding the day of preparation” [lit. [“the pre-sabbath”]
Saturday Ps 92 92 Ps 92 (91): εἰς τὴν ἡμέÏ?αν τοῦ σαββάτου
“Regarding the day of the Sabbath”Ps 38 (37): πεÏ?ὶ σαββάτου
“Concerning the Sabbath [day]”

While I will not rehearse the full textual evidence for these psalms, there is some variation among the different Greek texts. Noteworthy is that the Greek tradition has an additional psalm marked for the Sabbath (Psalm 38(37)). In addition, one fifth-century manuscript (1219) marks Psalm 23(22) for the first day of the week (Sunday). While it is not possible to be certain, it is likely a carry over from Ps 24(23).

The question that remains for the other superscriptions is whether they are based on a Hebrew parent text or are they the product of transmission history. The fact that the MT (and extant DSS) only marks Ps 92(91) for the Sabbath may indicate, as Sarna suggests, that the tradition arose some time after the MT Psalter was finalized, yet before it was translated into Greek in the second century BCE (Nahum Sarna, “The Psalm for the Sabbath Day (Ps 92),” JBL 81 (1962) 155-56). If this is not the case, one would have to explain their omission from the MT Psalter, which is problematic to say the least.

At a purely formal and stylistic level one cannot help but notice a measure of diversity in the Greek of these superscripts. In Ps 24(23) the note begins with an articular genitive. Psalms 48(47), 81(80), and 92(93) have anarthrous datives. In 92(91) and 93(92) we meet εἰς (“regarding”) plus an articular accusative but inarticular (by reason of sense) in 38(37). Furthermore, σάββατον (“Sabbath”) is plural in 38(37) and 94(93) but singular in 48(47) and 81(80), though all refer to the week rather than a specific day (that is found elsewhere, however). Psalms 92(91) and 93(92) render “day” explicit while the rest do not. And finally, the marker of grammatical relationship is a genitive in 24(23), πεÏ?ὶ plus genitive in 38(37), a dative in 48(47), 81(80) and 94(93), and εἰς plus accusative in 92(91) and 93(92). This variety in linguistic expression is considerable and some of it may be rooted in a differing Hebrew parent text, or (less likely) in the translator’s differing treatment of the same Hebrew. The high degree of predictability and formalism found in the other parts of the Septuagint psalm titles is clearly lacking in the psalms for the days of the week. This strongly suggests their secondary origin.

A related question is why did these particular psalms become associated with these days of the week. Most have assumed the superscripts reflect Jewish liturgical practice and were likely added during the transmission process. This appears to be the view of the editor of the Göttingen edition of the Greek Psalter (Rahlfs) as well as others like Sarna. Albert Pietersma, however, has recently argued that the associations may be the result of exegetical rather than liturgical in nature. Starting with Psalm 92(91), Pietersma argues that the translator understood the title to indicate what the psalm “is about, not on what occasion it is used” (“Exegesis and Liturgy in the Superscriptions of the Greek Psalter” in X Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies, Oslo 1998 [Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001] 134).

While this may be the case, it creates a false dichotomy between exegesis and liturgy. Sarna has demonstrated that MT Psalm 92 was chosen to be the temple Sabbath hymn precisely because it reflects a number of Sabbath-themes. Hence exegesis and liturgy are one and the same. The problem with understanding the other Sabbath-day titles in the LXX as arising from a Greek exegetical tradition (rather than reflecting Jewish practice based on the use of the MT Psalter) is it suggests that the associations with various days was either triggered by the translator of the Greek Psalter (and then reflected in the Mishnah, etc.) or the Greek exegetical tradition concerning the days just happened to highlight the same days as Jewish tradition (which is highly unlikely). The best hypothesis is that certain psalms began to be used in Jewish liturgy after the compilation of the MT Psalter (with the exception of Psalm 92). This Jewish tradition of associating certain psalms with days of the week was later reflected in the LXX Psalter. While the additions may be the translator’s doing, it is more likely that they are later accretions from the Greek transmission history of the Psalms.

What’s interesting is that while these superscripts may reflect a Temple (or Synagogue) liturgy, they eventually were given an eschatological interpretation. Such an interpretation of Psalm 92 is facilitated by its Greek translation of the Hebrew prefix verbs as futures in Ps 92:5 and 11, among other things (though it is not clear that the translator intended this eschatological interpretation). The Targum of Psalms is more explicit, expanding Ps 92:9 to read “You are exalted and the Most High in the world to come,” and attributing the psalm to Adam via a superscription. In later Jewish tradition, as preserved in mTamid 7.4, the Sabbath Psalm (Psalm 92) is also described as “a psalm, a song for the future that is coming, for the day that is altogether a Sabbath of rest for eternal life.”

My next blog on this topic will look at the additions and expansions including situational ascriptions in the Septuagint Psalter.