Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 44:2 (Fall 1982)
Article: One Ammonite Invasion Or Two? 1 Sam 10:27-11:2 in the Light of 4QSam
Author: Terry L. Eves

WTJ 44:2 (Fall 1982) p. 308

One Ammonite Invasion Or Two?
1 Sam 10:27-11:2 in the Light of 4QSam^a

Terry L. Eves

“The discovery of manuscripts in the wilderness of Judah has stimulated a period of unparalleled activity and progress in the study of the biblical text.” With these words, F. M. Cross, Jr., and S. Talmon begin their co-edited book Qumran and the History of the Biblical Text.1 It is a statement that none today would question. Qumran has struck the text-critical community like a thunderbolt. Since this article is dealing with a Qumran manuscript, it would be helpful to review what Qumran has done for biblical studies. The traditional approach had been to view the Hebrew medieval MSS as the best evidence for the biblical

WTJ 44:2 (Fall 1982) p. 309

text. Many textual critics before Qumran were biased against the Hebrew text and favored the LXX and the ancient versions. The newer approach was disturbed by the late dates of the available Hebrew MSS and preferred the far earlier MSS of the LXX families. But when the Qumran discoveries of MSS dating from the third century BC to the first century AD began to be published, their evidence began a reevaluation of the textual theories.

Qumran has given us a greater respect for the MT. At the same time, respect for the LXX has increased. What had been perceived in the past as free or idiosyncratic translations of the LXX from the MT, are now seen to be in large part fairly careful Greek translations of a non-Masoretic Hebrew tradition. Now we realize as never before the multiplicity of text types in the pre-Christian era. This demands as an immediate consequence that our practice of textual criticism must be radically different from that of fifty years ago. We need to alter the stress put on the ancient versions in pre-Qumran textual criticism. The versions, with the exception of the LXX, should be seen as giving more information concerning exegesis than textual reconstruction. Text-critical attention should converge on the Dead Sea Scrolls, the MT, and the LXX. These MSS must now be our prominent texts and our deliberate focus. The need for textual criticism is particularly imperative in Samuel, which, perhaps more than any other book in the Hebrew Bible, has suffered great loss in its transmission.

This article will take one of the fragments of Samuel discovered in Qumran cave four, known as 4QSam^a, and demonstrate its value to us in attempting to restore the biblical text as closely as possible to its original reading. In my opinion, this fragment may be the most interesting fragment in the entire 4QSam^a scroll. In presenting the textual material, I will cite all the significant textu...