THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO INTERPRETATION IN THE SEPTUAGINT OF SAMUEL A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVINITY SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY SARAH SHAW YARDNEY CHICAGO, ILLINOIS JUNE 2017 © 2017 by Sarah Shaw Yardney All Rights Reserved For my family, and for my teachers “I would like to start out with this supposition: in cases where the translator had an intention of his own this usually comes across through his rendering. The intended meaning is the meaning that can be read from the translation. As a matter of fact, it is only through the translated text that we know anything about the intentions of the translator.” Anneli Aejmelaeus “Translation Technique and the Intention of the Translator” Contents List of Figures vi List of Tables vii Acknowledgements viii Abstract xi Septuagint Manuscripts and Groupings xii Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 2 1 Sam 1:6: Reading Hannah and Peninnah in Light of Gen 29–30 50 in Light of the Narrative Context 129 תמים Chapter 3 1 Sam 14:41: Reading in Light of 1 Kgs 11 202 נצח ישראל Chapter 4 1 Sam 15:29: Reading Chapter 5 Conclusion 276 Bibliography 290 v List of Figures Figure 1: The relations between function, product, and process in translation 32 Figure 2: Comparison of LXXA and LXXB 151 Figure 3: The textual development of 1 Sam 14:41 197 Figure 4: 4Q51 frgs. 8–10 a–b, 11 250 Figure 5: 4Q51 f.8 263 Figure 6: 4Q51 f.10a 265 Figure 7: 4Q51 f.11 267 vi List of Tables Table 1: Examples of scholarly categorizations of translations 19 60 אף and גם Table 2: LXX translations of emphatic constructions with Table 3: LXX pluses in 1 Samuel also attested in 4Q51 69 Table 4: Correspondences between ambiguous items in v. 6 76 Table 5: Correspondences between MT and LXX 1 Sam 1:6 76 Table 6: Textual analysis of 1 Sam 1:6 78 Table 7: Comparison of 1 Sam 1:4–7 in MT and retroverted LXX 87 Table 8: Kahneman’s target and heuristic questions 106 Table 9: The exegetical influence of LXX Pentateuch on LXX Isa 19:6 111 Table 10: Examples of technical terms from LXX Pentateuch in LXX Samuel 145 Table 11: Examples of ὁσιο- 149 Table 12: The major Greek versions of 1 Sam 14:41 190 Table 13: Summary of correspondences between 1 Sam 15 and 1 Kgs 11 211 Table 14: Results for 1QIsaa, 20mm section 254 Table 15: Critical deviations for general use 256 Table 16: Examples of deviation greater than 1% or 5% significance level 258 Table 17: Values for 4Q51 frgs. 8–10 a–b, 11 260 Table 18: Values for proposed reconstruction of 4Q51 for 1 Sam 15:24–32 271 vii Acknowledgements It has been my great good fortune to have three extraordinary biblical scholars on my dissertation committee. Jeffrey Stackert taught me never to settle for half-answers, but to read ancient texts patiently, with unwavering attention to detail and with respect for the authors’ desire to communicate. I hope that despite the considerable remove of my topic from his own research, he can see those values reflected in my work. I could not have asked for an advisor more gracious, more conscientious, or more exacting, and I am proud to call myself his student. Simeon Chavel first introduced me to the text-critical study of Samuel, and his unwavering enthusiasm for this project, from its inception as a twenty-page term paper on Hannah and Peninnah to the final revisions, has been an energizing force. I have benefited greatly from his ability to articulate the implications of my argument, often with greater clarity than I could have myself. It has been a privilege to have Jan Joosten bring his critical eye and considerable expertise to bear on my research. If he finds portions of my argument convincing, I have done my work well. Several scholars generously shared their work with me prior to publication. Anneli Aejmelaeus provided me with the preliminary text and critical apparatus for 1 Sam 14:41 prepared for the Göttingen Septuagint edition of Samuel, as well as with her article on the theological concerns of the kaige revisors. Pablo Torijano Morales provided me with the preliminary text and critical apparatus for 2 Kgs 22:20, also prepared for the Göttingen series. John Screnock shared several chapters of his monograph, which otherwise would not have been available to me in time to include them in the dissertation. viii Thanks are due also to the institutions and colleagues who were instrumental in the completion of this project. The Chicago Center for Jewish Studies supported my final year of research and writing. The Israel Antiquities Authority gave permission to reprint photographs of 4Q51. James Covington’s probing questions helped me clarify several points in my argument on 1 Sam 14:41. Oren Ableman at the Israel Antiquities Authority assisted me in locating 4Q51 f.10a in the Leon Levy Digital Library. Jessica Andruss transliterated and translated the Arabic in the footnote on p. 63. Meghan Brodie, Cathy Higgins, and Emmy Miller found the word I could not think of on more than one occasion. There are a few people whose contributions to this dissertation are foundational albeit indirect. Tony Morinelli modeled intellectual curiosity early and often, and encouraged me to think beyond the boundaries of the assigned curriculum. David Rich taught me how to learn a language and how to reap the rewards of meticulous philological analysis. Without the five years I spent in his Latin class, I would not have written this dissertation. David Howlett gave me my first glimpse of what original research looks like and what it is good for; it was an extraordinary gift that I will never forget. John Alston taught me to be brave, and years later I am still trying to find the words to express how much that meant to me. My father, Jon Yardney, and my in-laws, Sue and Jim Carr, have been unstinting in their love and support throughout this very long process. My father was the intellectual giant of my childhood and the yardstick by which I measured my own acquisition of knowledge, so I am very proud to finally share the title of Dr. Yardney. My mother, Linda Yardney, began training me to be a clear and economical writer when I was in elementary school. I hope she would feel that ix her efforts were not wasted. Special thanks to Sue for helping to hold down the fort during my last week of writing while our children were home on spring break. My children Nora and Morgan inspire me with the joy they find in struggling to acquire a new skill. I am humbled by their determination to take on new challenges, and I will never tire of watching their faces light up when they do something independently for the first time. They also keep my priorities in line and my head screwed on straight, and for that I am very grateful. Finally, I hold gratitude beyond measure for my husband, Jamie Carr, who has never lost faith in me. I could not have completed this project without the many forms of support he provided on a daily basis, from taking the kids to the playground every afternoon so I could write, to kindly but firmly pointing out sloppy topic sentences. Author Ann Patchett recounts that a friend once asked her, “Does your husband make you a better person? Are you smarter, kinder, more generous, more compassionate, a better writer?” The answer for me is, and always has been, yes. x Abstract This study argues that while the Septuagint of Samuel is widely considered a mechanical rendering of its Vorlage, the translator was capable of making creative choices informed by his sensitivity to the coherence of his narrative and his knowledge of other texts. This thesis is based on scrutiny of three examples: 1 Sam 1:6, 14:41, and 15:29. In each of these three verses, the analysis demonstrates that the translator has provided a creative solution to a perceived problem in the Vorlage. Early Jewish sources—including non-biblical Dead Sea Scrolls, Targumim, Josephus, Pseudo-Philo, and a range of rabbinic texts—contextualize the translator’s decisions and support the argument that these examples represent interpretation rather than error. The dissertation offers a fuller and more flexible conception of the Greek translator’s working methods in Samuel than has previously been proposed. The translator’s isomorphic style is shown to be a choice rather than a limitation of his ability to understand Hebrew. He can be both literal and free at the same time: he deviates very little from the textual form of the Vorlage even when making extensive changes to its meaning. This expanded characterization of the translator yields more reliable reconstructions of the fragmentary Samuel scrolls from Qumran, and sheds new light on the textual relationships between the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. By making the case for the translator’s creative interactions with his Vorlage, this study also reveals LXX Samuel’s previously unrecognized contributions to the history of Jewish biblical interpretation. xi Septuagint Manuscripts and Groupings I have endeavored throughout the dissertation to use the sigla and manuscript groupings that will appear in the critical edition of 1 Samuel currently being prepared by Anneli Aejmelaeus for the Göttingen Septuagint series. She kindly shared the following list with me; see also the published version in Tuukka Kauhanen, The Proto-Lucianic Problem in 1 Samuel (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012).