You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
The End of the Book of Joshua According to the Septuagint / סיומו של ספר יהושע לפי תרגום השבעים
אלכסנדר רופא and A. Rofé
Shnaton: An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies / שנתון לחקר המקרא והמזרח הקדום
כרך ב (תשל"ז), pp. 217-227
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23413847
Page Count: 11
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
In Joshua 24:28ff. the LXX differs significantly from the MT. The variance is mainly due to a different Hebrew Vorlage, whose existence is proved by inner evidence and by its impact on two other Hebrew texts: vss. 28-31 are quoted in Jg 2:6-9, and vss. 29-30; 33-33b are referred to in the Damascus Document V: 1-5. Consideration of the divergences leads to the distinction in the LXX of three sections. In the first section, vss. 28-32aα, the LXX reflects a Hebrew Vorlage superior to the MT. Vs. 28 LXX fits better into the context of the Assembly of Shechem than its counterpart in the MT. The notice about Israel's worship of the Lord (vs. 29 LXX = vs. 31 MT) is better placed as a conclusion to the assembly (LXX) than in the middle of the graves' traditions (MT). Vs. 31a (LXX) is a tradition of reliquiae erased from the MT by orthodox scribes, in the same way that previous Biblical authors obliterated the tradition about Moses' tomb. Besides, the authenticity of vs. 31a is proved by its peculiar notion that Joshua brought out Israel from Egypt. Vs. 32aα LXX preserves the original notice about the bringing of Jospeh's bones from Egypt, without any relation to Moses. This notice was later quoted in Ex 13:19, to which in turn MT of our passage was adapted. In the second section, vs. 32aβΔb, MT is to be prèferred to the LXX. The mention of the Amorite dweller of Shechem in the LXX crept in by a corruption in its Hebrew Vorlage. In 32b it is the LXX which presents traces of orthodox censorship, which opposed the memory of Joseph's hero-cult. In the third section, vss. 33-33b, LXX reflects a totally divergent Hebrew text, attested also by the Damascus Document (V: 1-5). Here the death of Phineas is followed by apostasy and servitude to Eglon the Moabite. The text skips over the stories of Judges 1:1-3:11, namely the appendix to Joshua (Jg 1:1-2:5), the introduction to Judges (2:6-3:6) and the story of Othniel (3:7-11). It appears that these three passages are secondary even if the first of them contains ancient material. Here LXX witnesses to a different, more ancient redaction of Joshua-Judges. The redaction is characterized by its priestly interests. Apparently it connected ביום ההוא the Aaronides with Bethel (cf. Jg 20:26-28 and restore in Jos 24:33a: Allusions in the.(לקחו אנשי בית אל את ארון ברית האלהים ויסבו אליהם ויכהן פינחס וגו Priestly Document such as Gn 35:9-15; 48:1-7 and Aaron's legendary role in the making of the calf (Ex 32) confirm the provenance of the Aaronides of that sanctuary. In the 'Appendix' the secondary character of Jos 21:42a-d (LXX), even if based on a Hebrew Vorlage, is maintained. This passage was interpolated on the basis of Jos 5:2-9; 19:49-50; 24:31a (LXX). Its function was to provide a conclusion to the account of the division of the land after the passages about the Cities of Refuge (Jos 20) and the Levitical Cities (Jos 21:1-42LXX) had been appended to the original account.
Shnaton: An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies / שנתון לחקר המקרא והמזרח הקדום © 1977 Mandel Institute for Jewish Studies / המכון למדעי היהדות ע"ש מנדל