Browsing by Author "Adair, James Robert"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reconstructing 1 Samuel chapter 3
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 1993-03) Adair, James Robert; Cook, Johann; Deist, F. E.; Van Rooy, H. R.; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Arts & Social Science . Dept. of Ancient Studies.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: My Ph.D. dissertation proposed a four-step procedure for recovering the earliest possible text of the Old Testament: (1) detennining the lexical and grammatical characteristics of the various secondary (non-Hebrew) witnesses; (2) determining the literary and theological characteristics of the same witnesses; (3) retroverting the non-Hebrew witnesses wherever significant variants occur; (4) evaluating the Hebrew and retroverted variants and reconstructing a Hebrew Vorlage presumed to lie behind all of the extant witnesses. The dissertation itselfcompleted the fIrst two of these steps, which a..rnount to a determination of the significant variants (i.e., those that probably point to a Hebrew reading different from M'I) of the secondary wiblesses. It is the goal of this thesis to complete the analysis and produce a critical, eclectic Hebrew text of 1 Samuel 3. Before attempting to retrovert the different secondary witnesses, a number ofproblem areas need to be addressed, including developing a methodology for retroverting versional readings that is as scientific as possible, the Hebrew script used in the Vorlagen of the various versions, and the orthography of the Vorlagen and of the reconstructed archetype. The methodology used for retroverting secondary witnesses is informed by the works of Margolis, Tov, and others, and the translation techniques of the versions as. determined in mydissertation playa large role. The methodology must be modified somewhat when analyzing the partial secondary witnesses (the Lucianic and Hexaplaric recensions of LXX). Once the secondary witnesses have been retrov~their data is combined with that of MT, 4QSama, and a few other Hebrew witnesses and evaluated. The problems of multiple literary editions and conjectural emendations are examined, as are the merits ofexternal and internal evidence in making text-critical decisions. After each of the units ofvariation has been evaluated, the possibility that LXX represents an edition of Samuel different from MT is considered on the basis of the evidence from chapter 3. Finally, a critical edition of the chapter, replete with critical apparatuses containing both the original and retroverted readings of the secondary witnesses, presents the fruits of the study.