Targum and Translation: A Reconsideration of the Qumran Aramaic Version of Job (review)

Hebrew Studies 46 (2005) 430 Reviews In response to Eliphaz’s assertion that the children of fools wander off and are crushed (5:3–4), Job insists that what is under consideration is Job himself—his own life in relation to God. God has not dealt with him fairly (7:20–21). Bildad agrees with Job that his case should be dealt with apart from his children’s. “If his sons committed sins,” Pyeon paraphrases, “they will be punished based on their iniquities (8:4), but Job has to appeal for help to God himself (8:5–7)” (p. 146). I don’t quite see this in Bildad’s riposte, but this kind of probing of the give-and-take is of value and points to rhetorical and interpersonal features of the dialogue that have indeed been neglected. Second, Pyeon examines the way the speakers cite or allude to texts outside of Job. For example, Job 3 deconstructs the creation of Genesis 1. “[T]he community who clearly experienced Joban problems could not accept the God who was presented in the Priestly tradition of Gen 12 as is.... The author of Job 3 let the experience of the righteous Job sitting on an ash heap check and balance the tradition of Gen 1 in an attempt to claim that one vision cannot stand to the exclusion of the other” (p. 93). As far as I know, no one in the postexilic community (or in any of the postexilic communities) had a problem with Genesis 1. Job’s rage is hardly exemplary, and is not affirmed by Yahweh or the author as an alternative worldview. Pyeon’s book is of value for placing the spotlight on these two levels of “intertextuality.” He gathers materials that could form the basis of a more subtle interpretation. Michael V. Fox University of Wisconsin Madison, WI 53706 mvfox@wisc.edu TARGUM AND TRANSLATION: A RECONSIDERATION OF THE QUMRAN ARAMAIC VERSION OF JOB. By David Shepherd. SSN 45. Pp. ix + 317. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2004. Cloth, ¤ 79,50. $100.77. This reconsideration of the Aramaic version of the Book of Job found in Qumran Cave 11 (11Q10) is conducted as a synoptic (“tri-lateral”) comparison with the versions of Job in the Peshitta and the rabbinic Targum tradition. It expands on previous comparative work. For example, Fitzmyer’s brief appraisal of 11Q10 and the rabbinic version (J. Fitzmyer, “The Firstcentury Targum of Job from Qumran Cave XI,” in A Wandering Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays, by J. Fitzmyer [Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979], pp. 161–182) had sign-posted the way for such a study. In addition, Szpek’s more detailed work on Peshitta Job in the 1990s prepared and Hebrew Studies 46 (2005) 431 Reviews examined some of the ground (H. M. Szpek, Translation Technique in the Peshitta to Job [SBLDS 137; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1992]; “On the Influence of the Targum on the Peshitta to Job,” in Targum Studies, vol 2: Targum and Peshitta [Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1998], pp. 141–158). Both Fitzmyer and Szpek had also emphasized the desideratum of a more comprehensive three-way synopsis. Additional interest in 11Q10 has been generated by recent discussion of the acceptability of its classification as “Targum.” The doubts about this expressed by Brock (S. Brock, “Translating the Old Testament,” in It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture. Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars, ed. D. A. Carson and H. G. M. Williamson [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988], pp. 87–98, particularly p. 95), Samely (A. Samely, The Interpretation of Speech in the Pentateuch Targums: A Study of Method and Presentation in Targumic Exegesis [Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1992], p. 159) and Weitzman (M. Weitzman, “Is the Peshitta of Chronicles a Targum?” in Targum Studies, vol. 2: Targum and Peshitta [Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1998], pp. 159–193, particularly p. 192) beg evidence rooted in textual analysis. Shepherd sets out to “advance the discussion of 11Q10’s classification” (p. 23) by providing textual substantiation for a reassessment. He chooses to assess the translators’ representation of, and attitude toward, their Hebrew source text by looking at three indices: 1) their willingness to omit elements in...