Tracing the Pre-Massoretic Text of the Book of Habakkuk (original) (raw)
Related papers
2015
In part one of this book Joshua L. Harper is able to demonstrate the following aspects of the Barberini version: when compared with the other Greek versions, it appears that the Barberini version was originally independent of the Septuagint but has been influenced by it in transmission. The Barberini version was probably translated no earlier than the later books of the Septuagint (that is, around the first century BC), and no later than the mid-third century AD. The style, methods of translation, and exegetical affinities suggest that the translator was primarily concerned with producing stylistic, understandable Greek rather than with conforming closely to the Hebrew source text. The translator was probably Jewish, particularly since some readings resonate with Jewish exegetical traditions. The relatively polished Greek suggests that the translator had received some formal Greek education, perhaps in a Hellenistic Jewish community. In the second part of this work Harper provides text, translation, and notes for the major Greek versions. The Barberini version has been analysed in particular detail, with regard to lexical and syntactical translation technique, as well as matters of style. - See more at: http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/responding-to-a-puzzled-scribe-9780567658647/#sthash.Amk7wuAo.dpuf
Journal of Semitic Studies, 2021
The erudition, precision and commitment guiding this study is admirable. Nonetheless, while linguistic analysis may entice the reader with the promise of a higher degree of objectivity, preconceptions regarding the base text, its structuring, the construction of reading, and the interpretation of linguistic data involve a fair amount of subjective and debatable factors that confine Systemic Functional Linguistics within the methods to be tamed by responsible scholarship. See also: https://proteo.hu/hu/publikacio/11502
Commentary on the Book of Habakkuk
2022
This is a draft copy of a commentary I prepared late-2021/early 2022 on the book of Habakkuk. As this is a document still in manuscript form, please do not cite it without my express permission. Any comments, criticisms, or other feedback you may have on the work are always welcome.
Gert T M Prinsloo Reading Habakkuk 3 in the light of ancient unit delimiters
HTS Theological Studies 69/1, 2013
Habakkuk 3 is one of the most controversial texts in the Hebrew Bible. Diverging opinions have been expressed on literally every facet of the text. Quite surprising though, interpreters are virtually unanimous in their opinion about the structure of the pericope. Apart from a superscript (3:1) and subscript (3:19b) four units are normally demarcated: a prayer (3:2), a theophany (3:3–7), a hymn (3:8–15) and a confession of trust (3:16–19a). Unit delimiters in ancient Hebrew manuscripts demarcate two (3:1–13 and 3:14–19) or three (3:1–7; 3:8–13; 3:14–19) units. This study evaluates this evidence and reads Habakkuk 3 in the light of the units demarcated in ancient manuscripts. It raises awareness of interesting structural patterns in the poem, calls for a rethinking of traditional form critical categories, and opens avenues for an alternative understanding of the pericope.
Empirical Models for the Compositional History of Habakkuk
Korean Journal of Old Testament Studies, 2024
Person and Rezetko, "Introduction," 23, 35. For a response to Person and Rezetko's conclusion that working backwards from the final form of a text to its earlier versions is 6 Müller and Pakkala, Editorial Techniques in the Hebrew Bible, 531-35. For critical interaction regarding the viability of using these text-critical observations to trace editorial changes not attested in the manuscript record, see Person and Rezetko, "Introduction," 17, 24-31.
Habakkuk 1 - a dialogue? Ancient unit delimiters in dialogue with modern critical interpretation
Old Testament Essays, 2004
Modern critical sholarship tends to classify Habakkuk 1 as a dialogue between the prophet and Yahweh. Apart from the superscipt (1:1), 1:2-4 is regarded as a lament by the prophet, 1:5-11 as an oracle by Yahweh, and 1:12-17 as a renewed lament by the prophet. However, Habakkuk 1 has been understood quite differently in ancient Hebrew manuscripts. These manuscripts are uninamous in interpreting Habakkuk 1 as a single pericope, with the first major break occurring only after 1:17. This study applies the principles of unit delimitation to Habakkuk 1 and concludes that Habakkuk 1 should be read as a single pericope with only one speaker. It can therefore not be classified as a dialogue.
Late Biblical Hebrew and the Qumran Pesher Habakkuk (2008)
The most widely held scholarly view argues that Early Biblical Hebrew (EBH) developed into Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) during the sixth-fifth centuries BCE. It is claimed that on this basis scholars are able to date the composition of biblical books by analysis of their language. In contrast, we argue that EBH and LBH represent not successive chronological periods, but rather co-existing styles of Hebrew. This is demonstrated by the language of the Qumran Pesher-commentary on the biblical book of Habakkuk. Despite dating to the first century BCE and thus long after the period when LBH is said to dominate, Pesher Habakkuk is in EBH. It does not share the accumulation of LBH forms which characterises the core LBH books like Ezra, and exhibits a large number of cases where it prefers EBH linguistic forms against their LBH equivalents.