book reviews 331

Eugene Ulrich The and the Developmental Composition of the . VTSup 169. Leiden: Brill, 2015. Hardback. Pp. xxii + 346. €115/$149. ISBN: 9789004270381.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Developmental Composition of the Bible presents a synthesis of the lessons learned by one of the most influential editors of the biblical scrolls from . In a single volume, Ulrich masterfully and clearly stakes out his positions on the most noteworthy text-critical issues arising from the Dead Sea Scrolls and related textual traditions and draws far-­ reaching conclusions about a “post-Qumran” paradigm of textual and canoni- cal development. In chapters 1 and 2, Ulrich lays out the theoretical foundations for his over- arching theory of textual development. For him the biblical texts began as adaptable compilations of diverse oral and written traditions, gradually as- sembled into larger literary works. Many of these works would have functioned initially as important national and religious literature, and only later (mostly in the late Persian or early Hellenistic periods) would they have come to be considered “Scripture.” Early manuscript witnesses evidence primarily the ac- curate reproduction of earlier texts, but occasionally also the creative revision of new editions of some texts, yielding a pluriformity of “text types” without an identifiable standard or clearly defined literary boundaries. All versions of a book were genetically related to each other and descended from a common ancestral text (44–45). The apparent uniformity of textual traditions after the Jewish revolts against Rome is the result of the chance survival of a limited variety of texts and a cessation in their editorial development, rather than any intentional programs of standardization. In chapter 3 on the Pentateuch, Ulrich discusses three “pre-Samaritan” har- monistic expansions, a possible isolated insertion in Leviticus, and his catego- ries for classifying textual differences. In chapter 4, Ulrich argues extensively that Deuteronomy 27:4 originally did not name the designated site for the altar, and that the “logical” account of the building of Joshua’s first altar in Gilgal im- mediately after crossing the Jordan in 4QJosha is the earliest preserved reading. Later scribes explicitly identified the site in Deuteronomy as Mt. Gerizim, and others counter-identified the site as Mt. Ebal, which led scribes to harmonize the Joshua text with the new Deuteronomy text by relocating the altar epi- sode in Joshua. In chapter 5, Ulrich argues that the shorter 4QJudga preserves an earlier text without the later insertion of MT Judges 6:7–10 and that the MT of 1 Kings 8:16 has accidentally omitted a short passage found in 4QKings. Chapter 6 deals extensively with many noteworthy discrepancies in the texts of 1–2 Samuel, but despite the significant differences, Ulrich supposes that the

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi 10.1163/15685179-12341439 332 book reviews changes were made sporadically, rather than in a thoroughgoing revision of the entire book into a new edition. In chapter 7, Ulrich suggests that numerous shorter readings in 1QIsaa dem- onstrate a process of later isolated insertions in this prophetic book, preserved in the MT. In an article in DSD 20 I suggested that most of these readings were due to a pattern of physical damage in a defective exemplar of 1QIsaa, but unfortunately Ulrich does not interact with this argument. In chapter 8, he groups 1QIsab with the single edition common to all known texts of the book, but with some differences from the MT. In chapter 9, Ulrich argues that the lack of Jeremiah 7:30–8:3 in the main hand of 4QJera suggests that it was a later insertion into the book, though I found his explanation of its problematic presence in the Greek texts uncon- vincing. He also defends the value of the Old Greek version of the book based on comparison with the similar 4QJerb. Chapter 10 continues this defense of the by discussing both Greek scrolls from Qumran that better preserve the Old Greek than later Greek manuscripts and Hebrew manuscripts from Qumran that align with readings known from the Greek tradition. Ulrich favors de Lagarde’s principle of an Urtext of the Septuagint and supports Barthélemy’s theory of early recensional activity. I would suggest that this chapter is one of the most important chapters in the entire book for text-critical practice. Chapters 11–16 reflect on key lessons Ulrich has learned from the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls. He sees virtually no evidence of partisan “sectarian” changes in the scriptural manuscripts; even when ideological changes were made to the texts, they were usually of the kind that would be in line with “gen- eral Jewish views or impulses” (185). He also notes that a greater appreciation for the variation that occurred in the documented development of the scrip- tural texts has made scholars today more willing to accept texts widely diver- gent from prior expectations as variant versions of the known biblical books (e.g., the 4Q[Reworked]Pentateuch manuscripts and 11QPsa). Other chapters promote a renewed appreciation for the Samaritan Pentateuch and Septuagint as important witnesses to the textual pluriformity of the Second Temple pe- riod. Chapter 16 makes the noteworthy argument that many of the Masada scriptural scrolls do not actually agree as closely with the MT as has been previously argued or do not agree with it distinctively against other known traditions, so they too are consistent with a theory of general textual plurifor- mity throughout late Second Temple Judaism. I suspect, however, that greater emphasis on small details would have demonstrated greater alignment of the Masada scrolls with the MT and related texts than Ulrich cares to admit.

Dead Sea Discoveries 24 (2017) 307–337