SECTION ONE

THE BACKGROUND AND TEXT OF THE GENESIS APOCRYPHON CHAPTER ONE

THE GENESIS APOCRYPHON: ISSUES AND OBJECTIVES

In 1947 a tattered, brittle, parchment scroll was found texts are far from identical (as the scroll’s latest name in a well-hidden cave near the Dead Sea. At first, it suggests). For example, Moshe Bernstein has detailed was unassumingly called the “Fourth Scroll,” since it a number of instances where the author of the scroll was the last scroll to be unrolled of four manuscripts has rearranged, anticipated, and harmonized aspects purchased by Athanasius Yeshue Samuel, the Syrian of the biblical account.5 To this we might also append Metropolitan of Jerusalem.1 As the contents of the a number of additions and subtractions. scroll slowly unfolded, however, it came to be known as the Book (or Apocalypse) of Lamech, and later still 1.1. Objectives “A Genesis Apocryphon” (abbreviated as 1QapGen, 1QapGenar, or 1Q20).2 While this title has some The present study is composed of three main parts: shortcomings, it has become sufficiently entrenched 1) an introduction to previous research on the Gen- to deter further change.3 esis Apocryphon; 2) a new, annotated transcription In its present state, the Aramaic scroll tells the stories and translation of the scroll, accompanied by tex- of the biblical patriarchs Enoch, Lamech, Noah, and tual notes; and 3) a case study of one area in which Abram, mostly from a first person perspective.4 While recently or newly published portions of text improve the narrative is clearly related to Genesis 6–15, the two our understanding of the scroll—namely, geography. This thematic analysis will be followed by some brief, 1 It was originally found along with six others, but three of the concluding observations on the nature and possible scrolls were eventually purchased by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, through the arrangement of Professor Eliezer Lipa purpose of the scroll. Sukenik. The introduction to prior research, put forth in the 2 A more extensive history of the discovery and publication of present chapter, synthesizes a number of issues and the scroll will be recounted in Chapter 2. Also see J. A. Fitzmyer, The Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave 1 (1Q20): A Commentary (3rd proposals surrounding the Apocryphon raised since rev. ed.; Biblica et Orientalia 18/B; Roma: Editrice Pontifico its initial publication in 1956. My aim here is to con- Instituto Biblico [Pontifical Biblical Institute Press], 2004), 13–25. (Subsequent reference to Fitzmyer’s commentary will be to the textualize ensuing parts of the dissertation within the 3rd edition, unless otherwise indicated). From this point forward current stream of research, and to provide a backdrop I will use a definite article when referring to the scroll, a practice against which final conclusions may be proffered. In first adopted by E. Y. Kutscher shortly after its initial publication. See E. Y. Kutscher, “The Language of the ‘Genesis Apocryphon’: order to prevent clutter and repetition, this section is A Preliminary Study,” in Aspects of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Scripta designed to be representative of previous scholarship, Hierosolymitana IV; eds C. Rabin and Y. Yadin; Jerusalem: rather than exhaustive. However, an effort has been מחקרים בעברית ובארמית Magnes Press, 1958), 1–35; repr. in [Hebrew and Aramaic Studies] (eds Z. Ben-Hayyim, A. Dotan and made to provide adequate bibliography for further G. Sarfatti; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1977), 3–36. research on each topic presented. 3 See the opinions of D. Flusser, review of N. Avigad and The text, translation, and notes are preceded by 32:4 (קרית ספר) Y. Yadin, A Genesis Apocryphon, Kiryat Sefer (1956–57): 379 n. 3 [Hebrew]; J. T. Milik, Ten Years of Discovery their own introduction, in which I explain the need in the Wilderness of Judea (Studies in Biblical Theology 26; trans. for a new edition. My goal in the second chapter is J. Strugnell; London: SCM Press, 1959), 14 n. 1; and Fitzmyer, The Genesis Apocryphon, 16. They (and I) prefer the suggestion of to provide those interested in the Apocryphon with a ”.Book of the Patriarchs“ ספר אבות ,B. Mazar 4 Hence, the Genesis Apocryphon is frequently part of discus- sions on ancient pseudepigraphic works. First person narration occurs in most, but not all, of the scroll. A brief but penetrating “The Voice of the Historian in the Ancient Near Eastern and discussion of its mix between pseudepigraphic and third-person Mediterranean World,” Interpretation 57:2 (April 2003): 117–137. narrative is found in the early review of the original publication 5 M. J. Bernstein, “Re-arrangement, Anticipation and Har- by Flusser, review of Avigad and Yadin, 379–83. Also see M. J. monization as Exegetical Features in the Genesis Apocryphon,” Bernstein, “Pseudepigraphy in the Qumran Scrolls: Categories DSD 3:1 (1996): 37–57. This trait has often been compared to the and Functions,” in Pseudepigraphic Perspectives: The Apocrypha and autobiographical perspectives of the first portion of the Book of Pseudepigrapha in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (STDJ 31; eds E. G. Tobit and the various patriarchal Testaments (e.g. the Aramaic Chazon and M. E. Stone; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 1–26 [esp. 15–17]. Levi Document, the Testament of Qahat, or the Jewish portions The widespread phenomenon of first-person pseudepigraphy is of Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs) composed during the helpfully placed in its broader Near Eastern setting by P. Machinist, second temple period.