THE BLESSING OF JUDAH IN 4Q252 1

CURT NICCUM

In 1956 John Allegro published a preliminary edition of Dead Sea Scroll fragments containing texts related to messianic expectations.2 Included among these was an exposition of Genesis 49. It spoke of a Messiah and contained the phrase 1n'i1 'tvJl'\, which, according to Al• legro, indicated a sectarian origin. Shortly thereafter, Yigael Yadin provided minor corrections to Allegro's work. In commenting on this text, he too assumed and attempted to further a connection with other sectarian compositions. 3 Subsequently, the relationship between 4Q252 and Qumranic mes• sianic expectation became entrenched. As a result, some began read• ing into the text a fuller concept of the Davidic Messiah. In this way, 'El['?l'\ (line 3, reconstructed and translated "families" by Allegro) be• came the "military commanders" of the conquering "Shoot of David."4 When other fragments of the manuscript came to light, these preconceived notions unduly controlled evaluation and interpretation even though only a small portion of the entire work contained any ref• erence to a Messiah or terminology unique to Qumran. 5

1 I am deeply indebted to Eugene Ulrich for allowing a New Testament text critic to poach in the field of Old Testament textual criticism. It was an honor and, perhaps more importantly, a pleasure to work under his tutelage. With this article I now wander even further afield. May he be honored by the attempt, but not blamed for my shortcomings. 2 John Allegro, "Further Messianic References in Qumran Literature," JBL 15 (1956) 174-87, esp. 174-77. 3 Yigael Yadin, "Some Notes on Commentaries on Genesis xlix and Isaiah, from Qumran Cave IV," IEJ 7 (1957) 66-68, esp. 66-67. 4 Yadin hints at this in "Notes," 67, and The Scroll of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness (Oxford: University Press, 1962) 46-53. R. H. Eisenmann and M. Wise make the identification explicit in The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered (Shaftesbury, UK: Element, 1992) 84. They are not alone, as most interpreters after Yadin presume a militaristic context. 5 See Hartmut Stegemann, "Weitere Stiicke von 4QpPsalm37, von 4Q Patriar• chal Blessings und Hinweis auf eine unedierte Handschrift aus Hohle 4Q mit Exzerpten aus dem Deuteronomium," RevQ 6 (1967-69) 193-227, esp. 214; George Brooke, "The Thematic Content of 4Q252," JQR 85 (1994) 33-59, esp. THE BLESSING OF JUDAH IN 4Q252 251

Had all the portions of the manuscript been published simultane• ously, would scholars have argued for a connection with the Qumran community or specific messianic hopes in the Second Temple period? Probably not, as Moshe Bernstein convincingly argues. 6 He posits in• stead that the commentary, rather than being shaped by sectarian or doctrinal concerns, addresses perceived exegetical difficulties within the book of Genesis.7 This best explains the lack of any thematic unity. 8 Still, he finds the commentary on Gen 49: 10 "indubitably sectarian" and considers the interpretation "messianic/eschatological," even where not overtly Qumranic.9 Thus, having successfully challenged the scholarly consensus for the bulk of the commentary, he reverts in the end to the position he attempted to destroy, concluding that this passage "is the most 'typically Qurnranic' and, unlike almost anything else in the manuscript, must be read against the background of a vari• ety of other passages in Qumran."10 Is this necessary? On the con• trary, within the larger document (now comprising six fragments and identified as 4QCommentary on Genesis A), the commentary on the Blessing of Judah solves an exegetical difficulty, just as with the other pericopae, and has no necessary connection with Qumran or its messi• anic expectations.

53-54; Eisenmann and Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, 83-86; T. H. Lim, "The Chronology of the Flood Story in a Qumran Text (4Q252)," JJS 43 (1992) 288-98; and F. Garcia Martinez, "Messianische Erwartungen in den Qum• ranschriften," Jahrbuchfor biblische Theologie 8 (1993) 171-208, esp. 174-77. 6 Moshe Bernstein, "4Q252: From Re-Written Bible to Biblical Commentary," JJS 45 (1994) 1-27. See also his "4Q252: Method and Context, Genre and Sources," JQR 85 (1994) 61-79. 7 Brooke's view that the commentary focuses on "unfulfilled or unresolved blessings and curses" is true to an extent: "Thematic Content," 54. These fall within a subset of the larger category of exegetical difficulties. 8 It does not explain, though, why the work begins with Genesis 6. Did no exe• getical difficulties exist in the previous chapters? Whatever reasons underlie the current shape of the work, whether stemming from the original author, a compiler, an editor, or the commentary's transmission history, perceived exegetical diffi• culties seem to have been the catalyst for its composition. 9 Bernstein, "Re-Written Bible," 18-19. 10 Bernstein, "Re-Written Bible," 20 n.61. Brooke thinks this passage brings Bernstein's theory into question, "4Q252 as Early Jewish Commentary," RevQ 17 (1996) 385-401, esp. 387-88.