In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Hebrew Studies 46 (2005) 433 Reviews While 11Q10 and P-Job undoubtedly share some similarities, other studies which have shown the subtlety of 11Q10’s translation, and the presence in both of features which foreshadow or reflect rabbinic approaches and methods, suggest that the picture is complex and open to further analysis. Such features need to be taken into full account before any firm conclusions can be reached about the natures of these texts as translations of the Hebrew. A diachronic approach, which acknowledges the likelihood of evolution in the development of the methods and characteristics of Targum, too, requires further consideration. Shepherd rejects any link between 11Q10, P-Job, and a “proto-Targum” (a hypothetical forerunner of the later rabbinic Targumim), though the possible existence of such a construct is not ruled out. He asserts, however, that “it would by definition bear more resemblance to these later Targums in terms of translation approach than to the more linguisticallystylistically oriented versions such as are found in the Qumran and Syriac traditions” (p. 284). This is uncertain territory. How are we to define “translation approach” and what is known of its development prior to the model of the later Targumim? And in what exactly does “resemblance” in translation approach consist? Shepherd’s study provides some valuable insights, but 11Q10 is a text about which there is much more to be said. Sally L. Gold Wolfson College Oxford, England sally.gold@wolfson.ox.ac.uk THE END OF THE ALPHA TEXT OF ESTHER: TRANSLATION AND NARRATIVE TECHNIQUE IN MT 8:1–17, LXX 8:1–17 AND AT 7:14–41. By Kristen De Troyer. SBLSCS 48. Pp. x + 460. Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000. Cloth, $59.95. This monograph is a revised and updated version of the author’s doctoral dissertation (“Het einde van de Alpha-tekst van Ester. Vertaal- en verhaaltechniek van MT 8,1–17, LXX 8,1–17 en AT 7,14–41”) completed under the direction of Arie van der Kooij from the University of Leiden. It consists of five chapters followed by conclusions. Chapter 1 deals with the Status Quaestionis; chapters 2–4 with the MT, LXX, and AT (Alpha Text), respectively, and in chapter 5, addition E in the LXX and AT is addressed. The book of Esther has been the subject of numerous studies over the past centuries. In a section entitled “The History of Research” (pp. 15–37), the author discusses practically everything that has been published on this book since the eighteenth century. Of special interest is her interpretation of Hebrew Studies 46 (2005) 434 Reviews publications that have appeared since 1942 and, more specifically, since the appearance of the work of Torrey. In this regard, the monographs by Clines (D. J. A. Clines, The Esther Scroll: The Story of the Story [JSOTSup 30; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1984]), Fox (M. V. Fox, The Redaction of the Books of Esther: On Reading Composite Texts [SBLMS; Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1991]), and recently Jobes (K. H. Jobes, The Alpha-Text of Esther: Its Character and Relationship to the Massoretic Text [SBLDS 153; Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1996]) are of special significance. The author is exceptionally clear as to the position of the various important hypotheses on the origin of, and the relationship between, the different versions. She offers an extensive and fair evaluation of the diverse points of view, which in turn acts as a necessary backdrop against which her analyses are made. The question she intends to address is directed at the Alpha Text and is twofold: is the Alpha Text a translation of a lost Semitic Vorlage, or is it the result of a creative reworking of the LXX? De Troyer devotes two paragraphs to issues of methodology and the demarcation of the research (pp. 71–87). As far as the second goes, she decided to restrict the research to one chapter of Esther, chapter 8 and its parallels, focusing on the mutual interdependence of the texts. The motivation for actually choosing this chapter is that it displays more significant differences than the other chapters. Her chosen methodology is also appropriate. It entails determining the...

pdf

Share