The Proximity of the Pre-Samaritan Qumran Scrolls to the Sp*

chapter 27 The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Proximity of the Pre-Samaritan Qumran Scrolls to the sp*

The study of the Samaritans and the scrolls converge at several points, definitely with regard to the biblical scrolls, but also regarding several nonbiblical scrolls. Recognizing the similarities between the sp and several Qumran biblical scrolls, some scholars suggested that these scrolls, found at Qumran, were actu- ally Samaritan. This assumption implies that these scrolls were copied within the Samaritan community, and somehow found their way to Qumran. If cor- rect, this view would have major implications for historical studies, and for the understanding of the Qumran and Samaritan communities. This view could imply that Samaritans lived or visited at Qumran, or that the Qumran community received Samaritan documents, but other scenarios are possible as well. A rather extreme suggestion, proposed by Thord and Maria Thordson, would be that the inhabitants of Qumran were not Jewish, but Samaritan Essenes who fled to Qumran after the destruction of the Samaritan Temple by John Hyrcanus in 128 bce.1 Although this view is not espoused by many scholars, it needs to be taken seriously. The major proponent of the theory that Samaritan scrolls were found at Qumran was M. Baillet in a detailed study of the readings of the sp agreeing with the Qumran texts known until 1971.2 Baillet provided no specific arguments for this view other than the assumption of a close relation between the Essenes and the Samaritans suggested by J. Bowman3 and

* I devote this paper to the two areas that were in the center of Alan Crown’s scholarly interests, the Samaritans and the Scrolls, in that sequence. For Alan the Samaritans were more central, while for me the scrolls are in the center of my interest. For both of us, the other area was also significant, and Alan and I met in the middle. 1 Th. & M. Thordson, Qumran and the Samaritans (Ingaro, Sweden: published privately, 1996), reviewed by I. Hjelm in dsd 6 (1999): 94–99. 2 M. Baillet, “Le texte samaritain de l’Exode dans les manuscrits de Qumrân,” in Hommages à André Dupont-Sommer (ed. A. Caquot and M. Philonenko; Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1971), 363–381. See also idem, “Les divers états du Pentateuque Samaritain,”RevQ 13 (1988): 531–545. On p. 539 of that study, Baillet mentioned scribal phenomena in Qumran that he ascribed to the tradition of the Samaritan scribes. 3 J. Bowman, “Contact between Samaritan Sects and Qumrân?” vt 7 (1957):184–189; idem,

Massingberd Ford (later continued by Dexinger)4 based on theological ideas and institutions considered to be common to both groups. Had this study been written in 1990 or 2011, many additional agreements between sp and the Qum- ran scrolls could have been listed. However, this approach, not accepted by other scholars, is untenable, as it is based on the assumption that every read- ing found in sp is characteristic of that version only.Today, most scholars realize that occasional agreements between sp and a Qumran scroll do not justify the presumption of a close relation between these two witnesses. The proposal of such proximity should have been based on exclusive agreements in significant details. Had Baillet adopted a statistical approach in 1971, he would probably have concluded that only 4QpaleoExodm and 4qrpa (4q158) are close to the sp in Exodus. We now know several additional sources (see below), but the list of sources containing so-called Samaritan readings is much smaller than the one provided by Baillet. When looking for Samaritans in the nonbiblical Qumran texts, we find them in 4q372 frg. 1, usually regarded as reflecting an anti-Samaritan polemic.5

1 sp and the Qumran Scrolls

This paper does not deal with the relation between the Samaritans and the Essenes in general, or between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Samaritan litera- ture, but with the relation between sp and the Qumran scrolls. In this analysis, we disregard occasional agreements between a Qumran scroll and the sp, such as were listed by M. Baillet, because such agreements are not indicative of any special connection between these two sources. Instead, we focus on Qumran biblical scrolls that were close to the sp in central issues in which they disagree with the other sources.

Samaritanische Probleme: Studien zur Verhältnis von Samaritanertum, Judentum und Urchris- tentum (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1967), 77–96. 4 J. Massingberd Ford, “Can we Exclude Samaritan Influence from Qumran?” RevQ 6 (1967): 109–129; F. Dexinger, “Samaritan Origins and the Qumran Texts,” in: Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site (ed. M.O. Wise, N. Golb, J.J. Collins, and D.G. Pardee, Vol. 722 of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1994), 231–249. 5 4q371–373 were published by E. Schuller and M.J. Bernstein as “4QNarrative and Poetic Compositiona–c” in djd xxviii, 151–204. See also E. Schuller, “4q372 1: A Text about Joseph,” RevQ 14 (1990): 349–376 and M. Thiessen, “4q372 1 and the Continuation of Joseph’s Exile,” dsd 15 (2008): 380–395.