Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Poetic Structure in Genesis Ix 7

1971; Brill; Volume: 21; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1163/156853371x00461

1568-5330

Bezalel Porten, Uriel Rappaport,

Botanical Research and Chemistry

In an address delivered over ten years ago, Prof. H. M. ORLINSKY lamented the poor state of lower textual criticism and the too facile reliance upon R. KITTEL'S Biblia Hebraica 1). Illustrative of this state is the generally accepted emendation in Gen. ix 7. The Masoretic text reads :n I:l rN 111 1W;V i'i m rn 1. Comparing the similar command in Gen. i 28--trn nr'irn Itnv=l 'riKn nX Rt1w Irnl 1r 1'I-C. J. BALL emended 1XlI at the end of ix 7 to It'i 2). In so doing, BALL based himself upon the reading in the TISCHENDORFNESTLE edition of the Septuagint where the penultimate Hebrew word in ix 7 is rendered by x0-rotxupLeuoarXs rather than by TrXe0vso0a 3). The emendation of BALL based upon the reading of NESTLE quickly gained wide acceptance and is to be found in leading commentaries, some translations, and in the lower critical apparatus of the Biblia Hebraica4). Interestingly, almost none of the early commentators attempted to ground the emendation in any of the Versions. In fact, BALL, SKINNER, and CLAMER all indicated that the Versions favored the Masoretic reading. EHRLICH, however, conjectured that the emended text lay behind (vorlag) the Septuagint reading, while SPEISER commented, So LXX (manuscripts), reading uredg, cf. i 28;