Search book by multi-Inventory points

Skip to navigation | Skip to main content | Skip to footer

Search by multiple inventory points or book comparison

Full Inventory point list:

44 books found

Genesis Apocryphon Overall [Fragment] (24/03/13) (Researcher: Rocco Bernasconi):

Selected Inventory point(s):

Full profile (Bibliography at the bottom):

1.1 [The text refers to itself as verbal entity (with implied or explicit boundaries). There is no evidence of the absence or presence of the feature 1.1. and those of the sub-points 1.1.1-4, as the text is incomplete.]

1.6 The approximate word count or other indication of comparative size is: 8400 words. Word count based on the text in the Daniel Machiela edition.

1.7 The text’s Inventory profile should be seen in the light of the following further information on completeness, thematic progression, aesthetic effects, etc: the Genesis Apocryphon was discovered in Cave 1 at Qumran and its first edition, published by Avigad and Yadin in 1956, only contained five fairly well preserved columns, i.e. col. II and cols. XIX to XXII. In the 1990’s, new columns were made available and fragments have been incorporated. Today the text consists of cols. 0 to XVII and XIX to XXII (while col. XVIII is entirely missing) corresponding to four sheets of parchment. The Genesis Apocryphon was originally much longer than the extant text but its original physical shape is unknown to us. In 1996, after discovering small letters in the top right-hand margin and interpreting them as a numbering system, Matthew Morgenstern argued that the original scroll may have contained 70 to 105 more columns; if that is correct, the Genesis Apocryphon would have been an enormous scroll, roughly as big as the Temple and the Isaiah scrolls. It is therefore reasonable to imagine that the original scroll contained a fair amount of material about creation, Adam and Eve, Enoch, Methuselah and Lamech. The present analysis is based on the recently published edition by Daniel Machiela, which provides a new transcription of the scroll. The edition has an excellent critical apparatus, which marks damaged letters diacritically, signals letters that have an uncertain reading, and reflects the spacing and the relative line length of the manuscript. Besides, parts that have been left blank by the scribe are indicated by the word vacat, which signals the only physical evidence of narrative divisions. (See 9.13.) Both the beginning and the end of the manuscript are missing and in most of the extant columns, the reading of many words is uncertain. Because of that incompleteness, the literary profile presented here is deficient and tentative. The fragmentary status of the manuscript severely affects the structural analysis of the Genesis Apocryphon, and in particular, any attempt to analyse the interplay of voices within the text and to assess its internal literary unity. Yet, on the basis of the extant evidence, three hypotheses about the overall structure of the text may be advanced. (See 10.1.)

Top of the Page

2.1 The information conveyed in the text defines the perspective of the governing voice in the following way:

2.1.1 [The text does not thematize how the governing voice comes to know the text’s contents (or its right to command obedience from the addressee), but suggests that its knowledge (or authority) is unlimited: This category does not apply to the Genesis Apocryphon as a whole but only to those sections of the three part-texts where the governing voice is third person singular (i.e. from at least XVI:12 and from XXI:22 for the Noah and Abram part texts). In those sections the text does not thematize how this third person voice comes to know the text's contents, but suggests its knowledge is unlimited. See 2.3 in the Profiles of the Noah and Abram part-texts.]

2.1.2 [The governing voice thematizes how it comes to know the text’s contents or its right to command obedience from the text’s addressee: This category does not apply to the Genesis Apocryphon as a whole but only to the three individual part-texts insofar as their governing voice is in the first person. Therefore their perspective is presented as limited by human mediation of knowledge: i.e. Lamech (0-V:27), Noah (VI:1 to at least XV:24), and Abram (XIX:14 to XXI:22).]

2.1.3 [Knowledge or authority of the text is presented as exceeding what the persona projected by the governing voice would ordinarily be able to achieve (e.g., supernatural or non-human mediators and informants): There are a few passages where God reveals Himself to Noah and Abram in visions (e.g. VI:11-15; XI:15-19; XXI:8-10 and XXII:27-34) or in dreams (e.g. XV:19-21; XIX:8).]

2.1.7 [The governing voice (whether first or third person) is anonymous, that is, is not presented as tied to a specific personal identity (or to personhood in general): This category only applies to some sections of both the Noah and Abram part-texts, after the shifts from first to third person narrator. See 2.1.1 and 2.2.]

2.2 [A first-person voice imposes its perspective on all (or almost all) knowledge or norms conveyed in the text: the Genesis Apocryphon as a whole has no separate governing voice in the extant text, therefore this category does not apply to it, but only to its individual part-texts. These part-texts each have an I-narrator as governing voice: i.e. Lamech, Noah and Abram. The fragmentation of the text precludes stating with absolute certainty the identity of the governing voices in cols. 0-I. In these two columns both the first person singular and plural are used but the extant text does not identify those voices explicitly. It is likely that the first person singular is Lamech's voice, whereas the first person plural may be part of a long reported dialogue, rather than the voice of a first-person collective narrator. The first and last explicit identifications of Lamech as governing voice occur in II:3 and V:27. The first and last explicit identification of Noah as governing voice occur at VI:1 and XV:21. However, the Noah part-text probably starts at V:30 (after the phrase "copy of the book of the words of Noah") and concludes at the end of col. XVII. The first explicit identification of Abram as governing voice occurs at XIX:14, and the last is at XXI:22. Col. XVIII has not been preserved, but it has been argued that it "must have dealt with the second part of Genesis 11, Abram in Ur and Haran" (Fitzmyer p. 178). Hence, the third part-text (Abram) probably started at col. XVIII and continued at least to the end of the existing text in XXII:34.]

2.2.2 The first person voice identifies itself by name or uniquely identifying expression (once or repeatedly): This category applies only to the individual part-texts, where the three I-narrators repeatedly identify themselves (e.g. "I, Lamech").

2.2.4 The number and gender of the first-person governing voice are as follows:

2.2.4.1 The first person singular is used: All the part-text governing voices in first person are masculine singular.

2.2.4.4 The first person forms are marked for gender: All the governing voices in first person singular are masculine.

2.4 The governing voice defines a horizon of knowledge as shared with the projected addressee by taking for granted the following linguistic usages or references (in selection):

2.4.1 Persons or unique objects referred to by proper name or technical expression:

2.4.1.1 for persons mentioned or presented in narrative usage; as characters; or topics, for example: Herqanos (XX:8:21), a person not mentioned in Gen. 12 as one of the courtiers of Pharaoh.

2.4.1.3 for Gods/mythical figures/supernatural beings, etc.: In the whole text, there are about eighteen different circumlocutions of God (used in more than a hundred occurrences), which are based on seven basic epithets: 1) קדישׁא (e.g. קדישׁא רבא in 0:18), 2) מר (e.g. מרה רבותה in XV:11), 3) מלך (e.g. מלך שמיא in II:14), 4) בריא (i.e. in X:8), 5) אל (e.g. אל עלמא in XV:22 and אלהא in XXII:27), 6) רחמנא (i.e. in XV:7) and 7) עליא (e.g. II:4). מלך and מר are present in all three part-texts, קדישׁא is only found in the Lamech and Noah sections, whereas epithets based on אל are only found in the Noah and Abram sections. בריא and רחמנא are only found in the Noah section. See Bernstein, “Divine Titles”.

2.4.1.4 for locations, for example: Ramat-Hazor (XXI:8); Lebanon, Senir, Hauran, Gebal, Kadesh, Great Desert (XXI:11); Helbon (XXII:10) probably corresponds to Hobah in Gen. 14:15 (see Alexander, "Retelling"). These are locations not found in Genesis.

2.4.1.5 for times or calendar dates (specific to a language or culture), for example: ten jubilees in VI:10.

2.4.1.6 for documents, texts, books, etc. (identified through being referred to or quoted), for example: The “copy of the book of the words of Noah” is mentioned in V:29 and the existence of such a text is thus presented as taken for granted. The "[book] of the words of Enoch" is mentioned by Abram in direct speech in XIX:25. This reference may indicate a polemical intent in relation to the origin of science. B. Z. Wacholder, quoted by Fitzmyer (p. 118), formulates this as: "Abram lived in Heliopolis and taught the Egyptians the discoveries made by himself and Enoch".

2.4.3 The text as a whole routinely employs the following language(s), knowledge of which is taken for granted: the language that is taken for granted is a very high-literary level Aramaic.

2.4.4 Special linguistic usages occur pervasively or prominently:

2.4.4.3 Technical expressions for the meta-linguistic presentation of another text: the quotation formula "ketiv" is used once in XV:20, but the actual text of the quotation or of the reference has not been preserved. It is found within a direct speech by God to Noah. Scripture might have been used as a reference text. However, since the actual content of the quotation is lost, no inference, such as evidence of the acknowledgment of the existence of a book of Genesis, can be drawn from this.

2.4.4.5 Other special linguistic usages: occasional loan words are found: e.g. the word "met" in II:23 is an Akkadian loan word that means "land", and "parshegen" in V:29 is a Persian loan word meaning "copy". (See 9.12.)

2.4.5 The meaning of some linguistic usage or reference is addressed explicitly, marking it as not being part of the shared horizon of knowledge: family relations are usually made explicit (e.g. "Batenosh, my wife" in II:3 or "Enoch, his father" in II:22. In VI:7, Emzera is introduced as Noah's wife and Bakiel's daughter. The name Emzera is not mentioned in Gen. 5:32 but is found in Jub. 4:33). All the kings of the list in XXI:23 ff. are identified as kings of a given territory but these do not always correspond with the territories attributed to them in Gen. 14 (e.g. Amraphel is presented as king of Shinar in Genesis and as king of Babylon in the Apocryphon; Arioch is presented as king of Cappadocia in the Apocryphon and as king of Ellasar in the Book of Genesis). On this see Alexander, "Retelling". Names of places are also at times localized: for example, “Mamre, at Hebron, to the north-east of Hebron” in XXI: 19-20; emphasis is placed here on the fact that Mamre appears to be a place and not a person.

Top of the Page

4.2 The event sequence is projected as related to the sequence of text parts as follows:

4.2.1 The report sequence mirrors the projected chronological sequence of events mostly or wholly, not precluding 4.2.2–5.

4.2.2 There is use of prolepsis or analepsis: There is (at least) one case of analepsis in the possible point of transition between Abram as I-narrator and the shift to the third person perspective in XXI:23.

4.3 The text presents several sets of internally complex episodes with no explicit or manifest causal or motivation nexus between them. Where characters are identical, or linked, they do not figure in one continuous set of events.

4.3.1 The episodes have a common main character, or several characters of approximately equal narrative prominence, who is the subject of the action: The text moves from one character to another, starting with Lamech, then Noah and Abram, but without discernible or extant narrative linkage (or other linkage). Noah is the main character in both the Lamech section (which mainly deals with the birth of Noah) and of course in the Noah section. This means that in the Lamech section there is no correspondence between the I-narrator and the main character.

4.9 There is prominent or sustained characterization of key figures in the narrative. In cols. 0-V, this applies to both Noah and Methuselah: In XIV:9 ff., Noah is characterised as a cedar tree but due to the fragmentary nature of the text is not easy to determine who the speaking voice is: "Now listen and hear! You are the great cedar tree that was standing before you on a mountain top in your dream". In XIV:13, the text predicts that Noah's first son will be a righteous man. In XIX:24 there is a self-characterization by Abram. See 4.9.3 In XX:19-20 there is a first-person characterization of other characters when Abram reports that Pharaoh "sent a message to all the wise men of Egypt".

4.9.1 There is editorial comment on the qualities of a character from a third-person narrator.

4.9.1.1 There is self-characterization of a first-person governing voice, or first-person characterization of other characters: At the beginning of col. VI there is a moral self-characterisation by Noah: "Through the uterus of she who bore me I burst forth for uprightness, and when I emerged from my mother's womb I was planted for righteousness. All of my days I conducted myself uprightly, continually walking in the paths of everlasting truth...".

4.9.3 A figure is characterized by her or his moral or religious traits: Noah is described by Enoch as a light/flame (V:13).

4.9.3.1 Moral/religious traits are manifestly linked to the ethnicity and/or gender of the figure. This only happens once in XIV:13 where it is said that "the first son [Shem] shall come forth as a righteous planting for all" and this is implicitly linked to him being Noah's son.

4.9.3.2 Moral/religious traits are not manifestly linked to the ethnicity and/or gender of the figure.

4.9.5 A figure is characterized by physical prowess or beauty, or their opposites: In col. II Lamech is concerned about Noah's conception. The reason for this concern has not been preserved but, Fitzmyer (p. 123) remarks, "it was undoubtedly something like the details recorded in the account of the birth of Noah in 1 Enoch 106:2-3", where Noah is described as a beautiful child. In XX:2-9 Sarai's beauty is described by Pharaoh's assistants. While in XX:9 is Abram himself that speaks about Sarai's beauty in the report of Pharaoh's reaction when he first saw Sarai.

4.11 Supernatural characters appear in the narrative, whether introduced casually, or accounted for elaborately. The Noah and Abram part-texts contain several passages where supernatural persons (e.g. God and angelic figures) either appear in a vision or dream (e.g. VI:11, VI:14, XI:15-19, XXI:8, XXII:27) or enter into dialogue with the characters (e.g. VI:14, VI:21, VII:7, XI:15-19, XIX:8, XXI:8-14, XXII:27-34), or else are credited as having an impact on their actions (e.g. VI:2-3) or on the narrated events (e.g. XV:11-18, XX:16). In the Lamech section, Lamech expresses concern about the possible supernatural origin of his son and thus mentions the Watchers, the Holy Ones and the Nephilin.

4.12 The narrative pace is slowed down or changed by the occasional or regular occurrence of extended descriptions.

4.12.1 There is extended description of one or more static objects. For example in col. XIII Noah describes a tree and other objects that appear to him in a vision.

4.12.2 There is extended description of the outward appearance of persons or other animated beings: There is extended description of the outward appearance of Sarai in col. XX.

4.13 The narrative pace is slowed down or changed by frequent or prominent quotation of speech, thought or text.

4.13.1 The quotation constitutes a plot-driving event in its own right.

4.13.1.2 The narrative action largely or partly consists of a report on (long) speeches exchanged between characters: In the Lamech part-text, most narrative information is provided by characters quoted in direct speech. Specifically, Lamech's dialogue with his wife Batenosh in II:3-18 and Enoch's long dialogue with Methuselah in cols. III-V provide most of the narrative information in this part-text. In XIX:27 ff. there seems to be a dialogue between Abram and Pharaoh and his court but because of the extreme fragmentation, most content is lost and it is not clear how long the dialogue is. In XX:23-28 there are three short dialogues in succession between Lot and Hyrcanus, between the latter and Pharaoh and between Pharaoh and Abram. A short dialogue occurs between Abram and the king of Sodom in XXII:18-24. This category does not apply to the Noah section.

4.13.2 Quoted speech/thought provides a comment on the events (4.13.1 does not apply): For example, in XIX:19-21, in Abram's dialogue with Sarai, he comments upon the dream that was reported in XIX:14-17. The text concludes with a dialogue between Abram and God, who appeared to him in a vision. God comments on the events which had taken place since Abram left Haran, and renews his favour and protection to Abram.

4.14 [The identity or perspective of the governing voice changes between adjacent parts of what is manifestly the same narrative: This point only applies to the Noah and Abram part-texts. See the 4.14 entries in GenApocNoah and GenApocAbram profiles.]

Top of the Page

7.1 Narrative or thematic correspondences, or overlap of specific wording, occur between a non-biblical text and one or more biblical texts in a manner that is prominent or pervasive: There are correspondences or passages of wording-specific overlap which are pervasive (or prominent but sporadic) between Genesis Apocryphon and parts of the book of Genesis, from the birth of Noah in 5:28 to God's promise to Abram in 15:5. However, due to the fragmentary nature of the manuscript, we do not know if the original text covered the whole of Genesis or if it covered even more biblical books. The first part of the text (cols. 0-XVII) follows the rough narrative sequence of the book of Genesis but also contains material with little or no connection to the biblical account. By contrast, cols. XIX-XXII are much closer to the book of Genesis and contain parts which translate it literally into Aramaic - though some extra material is also found (e.g., XXI:23-XXII:26).

7.1.1 Characters correspond between the non-biblical narrative and the narrative of a biblical text or texts (Genesis).

7.1.1.1 Some or all main characters of the text (Enoch, Lamech, Noah, Abram) correspond to main characters in a biblical partner text (Genesis).

7.1.1.1.1 A main character shared with a biblical partner text (Genesis) is also the first-person narrator of the text: Three main characters of the Genesis Apocryphon (Lamech, Noah and Abram) correspond to major figures in the biblical narrative and are also the three I-narrators of the text.

7.1.2 Chronology, physical setting or emplotment correspond between the non-biblical narrative and the narrative of a biblical text or texts:

7.1.2.1 The narrative’s chronological and spatial framework, as well as certain events, are co-extensive with that of a biblical partner text, or with some extended part of it: The level of detail of the accounts in the two texts varies from section to section although there is a general tendency to expansion. (For overlap with non-biblical texts such as Jubilee and 1Enoch see 7.2.)

7.1.2.1.1 The text tends to narrate the story through events described in approximately the same amount of detail as a biblical partner text: Cols. VI-XII deal with Noah, his sons and wife, the ark and the flood at a level of detail which, insofar as one can make an assessment on the basis of the fragments, seems more or less the same as that of the biblical account in Gen. 6-9 and Gen. 10-11. From XXI:23 to XXII:26 the Apocryphon is parallel with Gen. 14 and provides a largely literal translation of it, with an overall level of detail which, despite local imbalances, roughly corresponds to that of Genesis.

7.1.2.1.2 The narrative is told in more detail than that of a biblical partner text, or contains more components that slow down the narrative pace (4.6, 4.12 or 4.13): This applies only to some sections. Cols. 0-I describe the condition of wickedness which characterized humanity before the flood more in detail than in the parallel account of Gen. 6:1-8. Cols. II-V provide an account of the birth of Noah much more detailed than Gen. 5:28-29. In cols. XVI and XVII, the account of the subdivision of the earth between the sons of Noah is treated in more detail than in the corresponding biblical account of Gen. 10. The events narrated in Gen. 13:14-18 are expanded in Genesis Apocryphon XXI:8-20.

7.1.2.1.3 The text tends to narrate the story through events described in less detail or through fewer events than a biblical partner text: This applies only to some sections. Overall, the account about the parting of Abram and Lot in XX:33-XXI:7 is less detailed than in the parallel account in Gen. 13:1-13. However, within this account, the invocation of the name of the Lord in XXI:2-4 is fuller than in Gen. 13:4. In the Apocryphon Abram not only calls on the name of the Lord but also offers burnt and meal offerings, and blesses and thanks God for all the good things that he was given. By contrast, the other parts of the account are presented in less detail (e.g., XXI:5 and Gen. 13:5-12).

7.1.4 The text shares features of language with the Hebrew Bible, or exhibits tacit overlap with specific biblical wording, whether narrative or not.

7.1.4.2 The text contains prominently, but not necessarily frequently, the wording of specific biblical passages such as whole sentences or unique biblical phrases, used in a tacit manner. See also 8.1.4.1.

7.1.4.2.1 The tacit overlap of specific wording extends regularly to whole sentences or to extensive sentence groupings, found alongside sentences or sentence parts not found in that biblical partner text.

7.1.4.3 The tacit overlap of wording takes place across language boundaries, with respect to the current language of the text (this point does not apply to 6.13 cases). There are several cases of literal Aramaic translations of material of the book of Genesis (e.g. XXII:20-23). These overlaps occur more frequently in the last part of the Abram section (cols. XIX-XXII).

7.1.5 [Only for the part-texts, not for the whole of the Genesis Apocryphon: The projected persona of the governing voice of the text, whether a narrative or not, is also known from a biblical text, or the governing voice assumes an epistemic stance similar to that of a biblical text.]

7.1.5.1 [The projected first-person persona of the governing voice is also a character in a biblical text: i.e. Lamech, Noah and Abram, as the I-narrators of the three part-texts.]

7.1.5.1.1 [The persona appears to be linked to a character as it specifically appears in the biblical text, not merely as it might be known from diffuse cultural knowledge. This is especially true for the Noah and Abram part-texts where the narrative is often closely parallel to the biblical account. The last part of the Abram part-text is also very close to the biblical wording (although in Aramaic). The Lamech part-text is less closely related to the biblical account.]

7.2 Narrative or thematic correspondences, or overlap of specific wording, occur between the non-biblical text under discussion and other non-biblical texts in a manner that is prominent or pervasive: Genesis Apocryphon overlaps with both 1Enoch (60, 85-60 and 106-7) and Jubilees (chapters 4-9; 13-14).

7.2.1 There is a correspondence of characters (which may include the persona projected as the governing voice of the current text): Enoch, Lamech and Noah are found in both 1Enoch and Jubilees and Abram is found in Jubilees. For links to Jubilees, see Alexander, "Notes on the 'Imago Mundi"", and parallels to the War Scroll from Qumran, see Schultz, pp. 183–204

7.2.1.1 This also constitutes a correspondence with a biblical text (7.1.1).

7.2.7 The projected first-person persona of the governing voice of the text, whether narrative or not, is also known from another non-biblical text.

7.2.7.1 The projected first-person persona is identical with a character in another non-biblical text: The three governing voices of Genesis Apocryphon (i.e. Lamech, Noah and Abram) are identical with characters also found in Jubilees, Pseudo-Philo and 1 Enoch (as well as many other texts).

7.2.7.3 The 7.2.7. overlap also constitutes an overlap with a biblical text.

Top of the Page

8.1 Standard forms or contents formulated in set phrases, set sentence formats, or clauses in a standard syntactic connection.

8.1.4 Unit of a biblical quotation together with a hermeneutically dependent formulation; midrashic unit: a quotation formula (ketiv) is found in XV:20-21: "and thus it is written concerning you [Noah]". However, the actual content of the quotation (which is within a passage of direct speech by God) is missing. We therefore do not know what quoted text was introduced here. It is not possible to assume with certainty that "ketiv" refers to the Bible.

8.1.6 Speech report: frequent, and particularly long in the Lamech part-text (e.g. the Enoch speech).

8.1.14 Prayer, doxology, valediction, blessing: occasional blessings and prayers by the I-narrators (e.g., col. VII:20).

8.1.15 Wish sentence: occasional.

8.1.16 Descriptive sentence of a static (ocular) structure or "scientific" descriptive sentence: in XX:2-9, Sarai's beauty is described in detail and in patterned language by Pharaoh's assistants.

8.1.18 Sentence making a prediction of a future event: e.g. XIV:12 and XXII:34.

8.1.19 Prediction of reward or punishment of behaviour in a “wisdom” or similar formulation: occasional.

8.1.20 Recommendation of a particular behaviour or statement of an ideal type of person in a “wisdom” or similar formulation: occasional

8.4 Small poetic form:

8.4.1 Occurrence of a song, poetic piece, rhythmic unit: once, in XX:1-8.

Top of the Page

9.11 A part-text in the sense of section 10 is structured by an extra-thematic principle of order, as follows:

9.11.1 The implied chronology of speaker characters. The order of I-narrators in the Genesis Apocryphon mirrors the chronological order of the Patriarchs as they appear in the book of Genesis.

9.12 Important manuscripts divide the text explicitly into parts by the use of single words or incomplete sentences which constitute sub-headings: In V:29, the phrase “copy of the book of the words of Noah” (כתב מלי נוח) is readable on the infrared photographs, whereas the surrounding words are not easily readable. However, on the basis of some ink traces, Machiela reads the preceding word as “a [c]o[p]y” (פרשגן). Of the word "parshegen", only the shin and the final nun are partly visible whereas all other letters are not. Line 28 is blank serving as a section divider, if the vacat may be so integrated. The expression "copy of the book of the words of Noah" comes at the end of the first part-text, i.e. of the section having Lamech as the I-narrator (the last explicit sign of this is in V:26: "And when I, Lamech...") and seems to mark the transition to the Noah section (in the extant text, the first explicit mention of Noah being the I-narrator occurs in VI:6: "T[h]e[n] I, Noah"). On this basis, it may be argued that the phrase "copy of the book of the words of Noah" works as the (text-integral) heading of the Noah part-text, and that it is therefore situated at a higher level than the speech of any of the I-narrators. In this way, it can be seen as a self-acknowledgement of the part-text (and perhaps also of the Genesis Apocryphon as a text). Some scholars have seen a close connection between this expression and the two expressions “the words of Enoch” (nagara enok) and “the words of Noah” (nagara nox) in Jub. 21:10. Though unlikely, the incompleteness of the text does not allow excluding the possibility that the expression “copy of the book of the words of Noah” occurs within direct speech.

9.13 Physical evidence from antiquity potentially shows non-verbal signals indicating (an interpretation of) the text’s thematic division. 35 vacats of the Genesis Apocryphon indicate subunits and larger units and they also signal shifts from narrative to dialogue or monologue, switches of voice, and the beginning of prayers or visions. It should, however, be mentioned that a vacat may also be due to imperfections in the parchment forcing the scribe to leave a space.

Top of the Page

10.1 The text consists of the juxtaposition of large constituent part-texts, each of which has its own thematic, lemmatic or narrative structure: In the light of the available evidence three alternative text shapes appear to be possible for the overall Genesis Apocryphon. The first of these assumes either three headings like that in V:29 for each of the individual part-texts, but without any further verbal material that would connect them to each other; or it assumes that only the Noah part-text had the heading we can still see, and the other I-narratives had neither a heading nor any verbal matter that connected them to each other. This is the possibility described in the current overall profile of the Genesis Apocryphon. This hypothesis makes the weakest possible historical assumptions, in that it accounts for all text pieces that are extant, while assuming that no verbal matter is missing that would be entirely different in nature and literary structure from the extant fragments. The resulting text shape is the pure juxtaposition of at least three I-narrations (within which there are some perspective shifts, see 2.3 and 4.14 for the individual part-texts), forming a compilation or higher-order aggregate constituted by three independent part-texts each forming a textual unity in their own right, a Lamech narrative, a Noah narrative and an Abram narrative. This is what the current point 10.1 expresses and what defines the overall Profile for Genesis Apocryphon here chosen. It would put the Genesis Apocryphon into structural parallel to other texts which are larger scale compilations, such as the Mishnah as a juxtaposition of Tractates. No verbal matter actually connecting the part-texts has to be postulated for the original composition for this kind of overall text shape (10.1) to apply. At the same time, this juxtaposition of part-texts still allows for the possibility that the selection and sequencing of part-texts are meant to have a tacit relationship of functional mutual complementation, as well as chronological sequence (see 9.11.1 and 10.1.1.4), and this is indeed the case for the Genesis Apocryphon. The second hypothetical reconstruction of the text of the Genesis Apocryphon, not represented by the current Profile, would assume that connective material was present in the original composition. This brings into play two further hypothetical text shapes. In the first possibility, the connective matter was thematic or scholarly in nature, somewhat like the Prologue to the Sibylline Oracles. In that case, the overall Genesis Apocryphon would constitute part of a thematic discourse presenting for example “sources” (the three I-narratives), which are “quoted” one by one, as independent from each other, but presented on the level of the overall text as constituting evidence of something, or making a historical case, etc. This would require verbal matter of a nature that has left no trace in the extant fragments, either only at the beginning or also between the I-narratives. Such a text shape would result in a section 5 Profile for the Genesis Apocryphon, rather than the section 10 Profile here presented. The third possibility would be a narrative which, by verbal matter not now extant, would incorporate at least three extended direct speeches each constituting a subordinate narrative in their own right, the three I-narratives. This makes the most far-reaching demands on the evidence, in that it would require the transitions from one I-narration to the next to consist of a narrative setting of that speech. It also appears to be difficult to reconcile with the heading “copy of the book of the words of Noah” actually present at V:29, in particular given that any elaborate narrative structure which were to make these words seem natural in a narrative would appear to have required more space than is available from the lacunae at this point in the column V. However, if these obstacles could be overcome in some manner, the resulting text would be a continuous story within which characters in turn tell their own story, like little narrative bubbles inside a larger narrative framework. If that were the case, the text overall would be analysed according to section 4 of the Inventory, but without being combined with an entry under 10 at all.

10.1.1 The part-texts are of the same kind, i.e., all narrative.

10.1.1.4 The part-texts juxtaposed are all narrative and the larger units are distinguished against each other by the appearance of a new speaking voice, in this case, of a new I-narrator.

10.1.1.5 [There are significant ambiguities as to where one part-text ends and the next begins (in their textual sequence): this is the case, but not as a characterization of the literary surface; indeed, it may be entirely due to the manuscript's incompleteness.]

Top of the Page

11.2 The text is dominated by the reporting of emplotted events, whether or not in an overarching narrative format (4).

11.2.1 The reported events are those of a biblical past, or of a biblically foretold future.

Top of the Page

12.1 Sampling of genre labels applied to the text in secondary literature: "Midrash", "rewritten Bible", "parabiblical text", "Targum", "apocalyptic text", "multigeneric text".

Top of the Page

Bibliography:

Editions and Translations:

D. Barthélemy and J. T. Milik, Qumran Cave 1 (DJD I; Oxford: Clarendon, 1955); N. Avigad, Y. Yadin, A Genesis Apocryphon: A Scroll from the Wilderness of Judaea: Description and Contents of the Scroll, Facsimiles, Transcription and Translation of Columns II, XIX-XXII (Jerusalem: Magnes Press/Heikhal ha-sefer, 1956); J. A. Fitzmyer, The Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave 1 (1Q20). A Commentary, (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2004); D. A. Machiela, The Genesis Apocryphon (1Q20): A Reevaluation of its Text, Interpretative Character, and Relationship to the Book of Jubilees, (PhD thesis, University of Notre Dame, 2007, http://etd.nd.edu/ETD-db/theses/available/etd-07022007-205251/unrestricted/MachielaD072007.pdf; D. A. Machiela, The Dead Sea Genesis Apocryphon. A New Text and Translation with Introduction and Special Treatment of Columns 13-17, (Leiden: Brill, 2009); F. G. Martinez and E. J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, vol. 1, (Leiden: Brill, 2000); M. J. Morgenstern and M. Segal, "The Genesis Apocryphon", in L. H. Feldman, J. L. Kugel and L. H. Schiffman (eds.), Outside the Bible. Ancient Jewish Writings Related to Scripture (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 2013), pp. 237–62.

Translations:

G. Vermes, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, (London: Penguin Books, 1997).

Studies:

P. S. Alexander, "Notes on the 'Imago Mundi' of the Book of Jubilees", Journal of Jewish Studies 33 (1982), pp. 197-231; P. S. Alexander, "Retelling the Old Testament", H. G. M. Williamson and D. A. Carson (eds.), It Is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture. Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 99-121; W. Baxter, "Noachic Traditions and the Book of Noah", Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 15 (2006), pp. 179-94; S. White Crawford, Rewriting Scripture in Second Temple Times (Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 2008); M. J. Bernstein, "Re-Arrangement, Anticipation and Harmonization as Exegetical Features in the Genesis Apocryphon", Dead Sea Discoveries 3 (1996), pp. 37-57; M. J. Bernstein, "Noah and the Flood at Qumran", D. W. Parry and E. Ulrich (eds.), The Provo International Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Technological Innovations, New Texts, and Reformulated Issues (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 199-231; M. J. Bernstein, "From the Watchers to the Flood: Story and Exegesis in the Early Columns of the Genesis Apocryphon", D. Dimant et al. (eds.), Reworking the Bible: Apocryphal and Related Texts at Qumran. Proceedings of a Joint Symposium by the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature and the Hebrew University Institute for Advanced Studies Research Group on Qumran, 15-17 January, 2002 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), pp. 39-64; M. J. Bernstein, "Divine Titles and Epithets and the Sources of the Genesis Apocryphon", Journal of Biblical Literature 128, (2009), pp. 291-310; M. J. Bernstein, "The Genre(s) of the Genesis Apocryphon", D. Stökl Ben Ezra and K. Berthelot (eds.), Aramaica Qumranica: The Aix-En-Provence Colloquium on the Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls (Leiden: Brill, 2010), pp. 317-43; E. Eshel, "The Imago Mundi of the Genesis Apocryphon", L. Lidonnici and A. Lieber (eds.), Heavenly Tablets: Interpretation, Identity and Tradition in Ancient Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 2007), pp. 111-31; E. Eshel, "The Dream Visions in the Noah Story of the Genesis Apocryphon and Related Texts", A. K. Petersen et al. (eds.), From Bible to Midrash: Approaches to Biblical Interpretation in the Dead Sea Scrolls by Modern Interpreters (Leiden: Brill, 2009), pp. 41-62; A. Lange, “1QGenAp XIX10-XX32 as Paradigm of the Wisdom Didactive Narrative”, H. J. Fabry et al. (eds.), Qumranstudien. Vorträge und Beiträge der Teilnehmer des Qumranseminars auf dem internationalen Treffen der Society of Biblical Literature, Münster, 25.-26. Juli 1993, (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1996), pp. 191-204; E. Y. Kutscher, "Dating the Language of the Genesis Apocryphon", Journal of Biblical Literature 76 (1957), pp. 288-92; D. A. Machiela, "'Each to His Own Inheritance'. Geography as an Evaluative Tool in the Genesis Apocryphon", Dead Sea Discoveries 15 (2008), pp. 50-66; D. A. Machiela, "Genesis Revealed: The Apocalyptic Apocryphon from Qumran Cave 1", S. Metso et al. (eds.), Qumran Cave 1 Revisited. Texts from Cave 1 Sixty Years after Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the IOQS in Ljubljana (Leiden: Brill, 2010), pp. 205-22; J. E. Miller, "The Redaction of Tobit and the Genesis Apocryphon", Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 8 (1991), pp. 53-61; M. Morgenstern, "A New Clue to the Original Length of the Genesis Apocryphon", Journal of Jewish Studies 47, (1996), pp. 345-47; R. C. Steiner, "The Heading of the Book of the Words of Noah on a Fragment of the Genesis Apocryphon: New Light on A 'Lost' Work", Dead Sea Discoveries 2 (1995), pp. 66-71; M. E. Stone, "The Book(s) Attributed to Noah", Dead Sea Discoveries 13 (2006), pp. 4-23; J. C. Vanderkam, "The Textual Affinities of the Biblical Citations in the Genesis Apocryphon", Journal of Biblical Literature 97 (1978), pp. 45-55; C. Werman, "Qumran and the Book of Noah", E. Chazon and M. Stone (eds.), Pseudepigraphic Perspectives: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 4-23; B. Schultz, Conquering the World. The War Scroll (1QM) Reconsidered (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009).

w:LsdException Locked=Genesis Apocryphonfalsew:LsdException Locked=false Priority= UnhideWhenUsed= Name=Colorful Grid Accent 5false60 UnhideWhenUsed=quot;;

Top of the Page

_1.1. The text refers to itself as verbal entity (with implied or explicit boundaries).
__1.1.1. The text refers to itself using a genre term, speech act term, verb or other term implying verbal constitution:
__1.1.2. The text speaks of itself as dealing with an overall theme (subject matter) or purpose, or as consisting of coordinated parts making a whole
__1.1.3. The text uses expressions for characterizing itself as a bounded entity. (PROMPT: "all", "beginning", "some" referring to subject-matter in
__1.1.4. The text introduces the governing voice, thereby indirectly marking its own boundedness.
___1.1.4.1. The text has a superscription concerning “to whom” it is addressed or for whose use it is.
__1.1.5. Important text witnesses attest to a heading which is not integrated with the body of the text or with any introductory frame, implying one
_1.2. The text presents its internal sequence of sentences (or larger parts) as mirroring the objective relationships of components in the project
_1.3. The text overall is shaped by a poetic or rhetorical-communicative pattern that is self-bounding (see further section 3).
_1.4. The text signals its parts or boundaries only by implicit contrast or by some other implicit signal (1.1./2 do not apply):
__1.4.1. A contrasting theme appears at the beginning or at what turns out to be a boundary/end point in the text.
__1.4.2. A sentence/small unit with a contrasting form from those used in the co-text appears at the beginning or at what turns out to be a boundary/
__1.4.3. A lemmatic commentary which otherwise exhibits gaps in its coverage of the base text begins and ends by treating the first and last segment
_1.5. The text presents a certain homogeneousness of form and/or contents, without claiming or projecting boundedness, and without being unified b
__1.5.1. There is a limited inventory of small forms which recur in a linear juxtaposition of units (e.g. 5.8).
__1.5.2. The ways in which smaller units hang together or follow on from each other (section 9) are repeated again and again.
__1.5.3. The themes which are verbalized together within the text are projected as interrelated objectively, albeit not in their textual sequence.
_1.6. The approximate word count or other indication of comparative size is:
_1.7. The text’s Inventory profile should be seen in the light of the following further information on completeness, thematic progression, aesthet
_2.1. The information conveyed in the text defines the perspective of the governing voice in the following way:
__2.1.1. The text does not thematize how the governing voice comes to know the text’s contents (or its right to command obedience from the addressee)
___2.1.1.1. In narrative, the governing voice’s perspective tacitly is that of someone “present” at all events equally, regardless of their time, place,
___2.1.1.2. The text is not narrative but the governing voice refers to utterances on the basis of unexplained knowledge of speech events of diverse per
___2.1.1.3. The text’s governing voice speaks from the perspective of unmediated access to all levels and parts of some projected reality.
___2.1.1.4. The text’s governing voice speaks from the perspective of unlimited authority in commanding the addressee’s obedience.
__2.1.2. The governing voice thematizes how it comes to know the text’s contents or its right to command obedience from the text’s addressee. Its per
___2.1.2.1. The governing voice presents or discusses norms whose commanding force is unlimited, but speaks from a perspective clearly distinguished fro
___2.1.2.2. The governing voice appeals to the projected addressee for a particular action, projecting limited knowledge or authority.
___2.1.2.3. The governing voice suggests its information or advice is based on his or her own experiences, or on other knowledge filtered by reflections
__2.1.3. Knowledge or authority of the text is presented as exceeding what the persona projected by the governing voice would ordinarily be able to a
__2.1.4. The governing voice explicitly acknowledges that something mentioned in the text cannot be adequately expressed or conveyed.
__2.1.5. The information in the text is characterized as secret or as (made) known exclusively to the persona projected by the governing voice.
__2.1.6. The governing voice explicitly claims unlimited knowledge or authority.
__2.1.7. The governing voice (whether first or third person) is anonymous, that is, is not presented as tied to a specific personal identity (or to p
__2.1.8. The governing voice speaks at no point in the first person (except for any 2.2.4.3) and all persons/objects are mentioned from a third-perso
__2.1.9. An anonymous voice repeatedly reports the direct speech of a character whose speeches account for the bulk of the text (but not continuously
_2.2. A first-person voice imposes its perspective on all (or almost all) knowledge or norms conveyed in the text.
__2.2.1. The first-person governing voice is identified by an anonymous voice through a proper name or unique description. Points 2.2.1.1–3 are devot
___2.2.1.1. The anonymous voice presents the first-person utterance as a situation-unspecific “text”, not as uttered in a unique situation of the past.
___2.2.1.2. The text is introduced as the first-person voice’s extended direct speech, having taken place on a unique narrative occasion.
___2.2.1.3. The introduction of the first-person governing voice of the text has the following characteristics (also applies to self-identification 2.2.
____2.2.1.3.1. It contextualizes the person, or the person together with a unique occasion of speaking.
____2.2.1.3.2. It consists of minimal or merely formal information (e.g. name and genre/generic contents).
____2.2.1.3.3. It is found at the beginning of the text only.
____2.2.1.3.4. It is found at the end of the text only.
____2.2.1.3.5. It is found both at the beginning and at the end of the text.
__2.2.2. The first person voice identifies itself by name or uniquely identifying expression (once or repeatedly).
___2.2.2.1. The voice identifies itself by way of a “signature”, as at the beginning or end of a text projecting itself as letter, or other text with a
__2.2.3. The first-person governing voice is not identified by name or unique identifier, but speaks of himself/herself in the first person at least
__2.2.4. The number and gender of the first-person governing voice are as follows:
___2.2.4.1. The first person singular is used.
___2.2.4.2. The first person plural is used.
___2.2.4.3. The first person is used but represents a generic “I” (“we”) of discourse and discussion, not the projection of a specific persona.
___2.2.4.4. The first person forms are marked for gender. [SPECIFY WHICH GENDER]
__2.2.5. The first-person governing voice refers to herself/himself also in third person grammatical constructions.
_2.3. There is an unexplained switch of the grammatical person of the governing voice within the main body of the text, [from third to first perso
_2.4. The governing voice defines a horizon of knowledge as shared with the projected addressee by taking for granted the following linguistic usa
__2.4.1. Persons or unique objects referred to by proper name or by technical expression:
___2.4.1.1. for persons mentioned or presented in narrative usage; as characters; or topics, for example:
___2.4.1.2. for persons quoted with direct speech in a non-narrative co-text, for example:
___2.4.1.3. for Gods/mythical figures/supernatural beings, etc., for example:
___2.4.1.4. for locations, for example:
___2.4.1.5. for times or calendar dates (specific to a language or culture), for example:
___2.4.1.6. for documents, texts, books, etc. (identified through being referred to or quoted), for example:
__2.4.2. circumlocutions, names or descriptions employed as “code” names.
__2.4.3. The text as a whole routinely employs the following language(s), knowledge of which is taken for granted:
___2.4.3.1. Additional language(s) taken for granted in quoted speech or certain parts of the text are:
__2.4.4. Special linguistic usages occur pervasively or prominently:
___2.4.4.1. Technical expressions for a particular subject matter.
___2.4.4.2. Technical expressions for presenting disputes/dialectic exchanges.
___2.4.4.3. Technical expressions for the meta-linguistic presentation of another text (see 6.9.4).
___2.4.4.4. Biblicizing language, such that the text may be assumed to project itself as having a link to texts today known as biblical (see 7.1.4.1).
___2.4.4.5. Other special linguistic usages: [FOR ORIENTATION: normative force through use of the indicative in the Mishnah; repeated or prominent use o
__2.4.5. The meaning of some linguistic usage or reference is addressed explicitly, marking it as not being part of the shared horizon of knowledge:
_2.5. The text contains deictic or other expressions referring to the governing voice’s time or place, or placing it after/before some key event:
__2.5.1. as part of the words of the governing voice.
__2.5.2. as part of the words of a quoted character, but with probable implications also for the governing voice.
_2.6. The text presents itself as speaking to certain persons, groups or entities, explicitly projecting a certain image of its addressee.
__2.6.1. The governing voice uses apostrophe, second-person grammatical forms or first-person exclusive or inclusive “we”.
___2.6.1.1. An audience is identified as the intended receiver of a text projecting itself as a letter.
__2.6.2. The projected addressee is characterized as having a certain moral or epistemic stance, or as standing in contrast to another group’s moral
__2.6.3. The governing voice uses verbs of epistemic or moral exhortation or employs focus markers.
__2.6.4. The governing voice directs questions at the projected addressee which are marked as rhetorical or as suggesting the audience assume a parti
__2.6.5. The governing voice employs exclamatory or declamatory modes of speech (cf. 8.1.13).
_2.7. The epistemic stance, knowledge horizon, moral stance and identity of the governing voice, and of the projected addressee, do not become the
_3.1. The text’s functional parts are sequenced as communicative stages for engaging the projected addressee's attention or goodwill.
__3.1.1. The text as a whole is a prayer of petition with the communicative sequence: praise of God/confession of sins/appeal for forgiveness[+/- ant
__3.1.2. The text as a whole treats a biblical passage and/or theme by (1) an approach to that passage/theme from an unrelated verse (Petichah) – (2)
__3.1.3. The text as a whole treats a biblical passage/theme by sequencing units of Bible interpretation in such a way as to create (and resolve or l
__3.1.4. Some functional parts occur more than once with different contents, and are merely juxtaposed to each other. See also 9.8.
_3.2. The text is bounded by a formal, communicative or poetic (poetic-thematic) formation, constituting a single piece.
_3.3. The text bears resemblance in length and theme to a biblical prayer, song, lament or psalm, and is thereby recognizable as constituting a si
_3.4. The text constitutes one piece in a sequence of pieces that only show themselves as separate from each other by their contrast in adjacency
_3.5. The language of a text whose boundaries are determined by poetic formation or by contrast in adjacency (3.3–4 applies) exhibits poetic forma
__3.5.1. There is pervasive use of rhyme and/or metre.
__3.5.2. There is pervasive use of parallelism.
__3.5.3. There is pervasive use of other features that can be interpreted as defining poetic formation, such as heightened or figurative language, re
_3.6. The language of a text whose boundaries are not determined by poetic formation or by contrast in adjacency (3.2–4 does not apply) exhibits p
__3.6.1. There is pervasive use of rhyme and/or metre.
__3.6.2. There is pervasive use of parallelism.
__3.6.3. There is pervasive use of other features that can be interpreted as defining poetic formation, such as heightened or figurative language, re
_4.1. The text narrates events which are strongly emplotted, making reference to interlocking happenings, characters, motivations, causes, times o
__4.1.1. The text narrates a complex series of events not presented as leading towards only one crisis and solution, nor as contributing to only one
__4.1.2. All subordinate events are presented as preparing one crisis and its solution, or as addressing one unified timespan/location, or as telling
___4.1.2.1. The narrative builds up one central narrative tension as having special intrinsic interest, or unites in some other way a number of narrativ
___4.1.2.2. The action pivots around one character or a small set of inter-connected characters.
___4.1.2.3. The narrative emphasizes personal, private or domestic aspects of lives.
__4.1.3. The narrative provides a clear closure, or dwells on the closure.
__4.1.4. The narrative foregrounds apparently exact information on the absolute and relative timing of events.
__4.1.5. The narrative foregrounds quantifiable non-temporal information.
_4.2. The event sequence is projected as related to the sequence of text parts as follows:
__4.2.1. The report sequence mirrors the projected chronological sequence of events mostly or wholly, not precluding 4.2.2–5.
__4.2.2. There is use of prolepsis or analepsis.
__4.2.3. There are chronological gaps which are explicitly managed or signposted.
__4.2.4. There are chronological gaps which are merely implied, or indicated but left vague.
__4.2.5. There are descriptions of repeated or habitual actions which have no unique point in the chronology.
_4.3. The text presents several sets of internally complex episodes with no explicit or manifest causal or motivational nexus between them. Where
__4.3.1. The episodes have a common main character, or several characters of approximately equal narrative prominence, who is the subject of the acti
__4.3.2. The episodes are linked by a common witness character who is peripheral to some or much of the action told, but through whose perceptions al
_4.4. The narrative tells the story of the creation or reception of a separate text which is presented verbatim within the narrative framework, or
_4.5. The narrative progression is schematic and not mediated through the interlinking of specific events, while the events are not described in d
__4.5.1. The schematic telling of events is presented as conforming to an explicit overarching schema of chronology/periodization.
_4.6. There are meta-narrative explanations occurring in the narrative (editorial comments by narrator).
_4.7. Within a thematic (non-narrative) framework the text contains extensive telling of continuous and detailed events.
__4.7.1. This narrative material is explicitly subservient to and integrated into a thematic discourse or thematic description (see under 5).
__4.7.2. This narrative material is explicitly subservient to and integrated into the lemmatic treatment of another text (see under 6).
_4.8. The text provides scene-setting information, other than the introduction of an I-narration.
__4.8.1. There is an explicit introduction of the chronological and/or spatial setting of the action.
__4.8.2. There is an explicit introduction of the main character(s).
_4.9. There is prominent or sustained characterization of key figures in the narrative.
__4.9.1. There is editorial comment on the qualities of a character from a third-person narrator.
___4.9.1.1. There is self-characterization of a first-person governing voice, or first-person characterization of other characters.
__4.9.2. All characterization is achieved only through reporting the actions, speech or thoughts of the characters ("dramatic").
__4.9.3. A figure is characterized by her or his moral or religious traits.
___4.9.3.1. Moral/religious traits are manifestly linked to the ethnicity and/or gender of the figure.
___4.9.3.2. Moral/religious traits are not manifestly linked to the ethnicity and/or gender of the figure.
__4.9.4. A figure is characterized by her or his intellectual gifts or understanding.
__4.9.5. A figure is characterized by physical prowess or beauty, or their opposites.
_4.10. A character’s relations to her/his community are foregrounded, including any two-fold social environment (e.g. a diaspora setting).
__4.10.1. A main character is portrayed as being integrated in one societal environment but as in conflict with a second environment.
__4.10.2. A main character is portrayed as being integrated in two different societal environments.
__4.10.3. A main character is portrayed as being integrated in her/his single societal environment.
__4.10.4. A main character is portrayed as in conflict with his/her environment (or as being an “Other”), whether the environment is single or doubled
_4.11. Supernatural characters appear in the narrative, whether introduced casually, or accounted for elaborately.
_4.12. The narrative pace is slowed down or changed by the occasional or regular occurrence of extended descriptions.
__4.12.1. There is extended description of one or more static objects.
___4.12.1.1. There is extended description is of a heavenly object, e.g. God’s throne, chariot, etc.
__4.12.2. There is extended description of the outward appearance of persons or other animated beings.
__4.12.3. There is extended description of the physical or architectural setting/landscape.
_4.13. The narrative pace is slowed down or changed by frequent or prominent quotation of speech, thought or text.
__4.13.1. The quotation constitutes a plot-driving event in its own right.
___4.13.1.1. The quotation divulges earlier events which the governing voice had left out of its own account of the earlier period.
___4.13.1.2. The narrative action largely or partly consists of a report on (long) speeches exchanged between characters.
__4.13.2. Quoted speech/thought provides a comment on the events (4.13.1 does not apply).
__4.13.3. Quoted wording is presented as a message (written or oral) sent from one character to another.
__4.13.4. The quotation differs from the surrounding text in its form (e.g. poetry), style or language.
_4.14. The identity or perspective of the governing voice changes between adjacent parts of what is manifestly the same narrative.
__4.14.1. A first-person narrator is followed by a third-person narrator.
__4.14.2. A third-person narrator is followed by a first-person narrator.
__4.14.3. The change coincides with other features which could be seen as motivating (or diachronically accounting for) it.
___4.14.3.1. A shift in the setting of the action which modifies the epistemic perspective but does not disrupt the effective narrative continuity (nor n
___4.14.3.2. a prominent change of (literary) form, style or language.
___4.14.3.3. a narrative and/or formal discontinuity which is disruptive of text unity.
_4.15. There are imbalances in the level of detail provided between adjacent parts of a continuous narrative, in the absence of narrative developme
__4.15.1. This coincides with the occurrence of unique literary forms, more detail for narrative contents absent from a biblical partner text (see 7.1
_5.1. The bulk of the text is constituted by thematic discourse/description, albeit presented as speech/wording quoted from a narrative setting:
__5.1.1. The discursive or descriptive treatment of themes is presented as one character’s continuous speech or wording in a unique narrative situati
___5.1.1.1. The quotation forms a substantial continuous part of the overall text, but not its bulk, as there is also extended narration concerning its
__5.1.2. The discursive or descriptive treatment of themes is presented as constituted by speeches uttered on separate but mutually emplotted occasio
___5.1.2.1. The separate speeches in sequence constitute a juxtaposition of themes/propositions (see further 5.7).
___5.1.2.2. The separate speeches in sequence constitute the overall treatment of one theme by a constant principle of differentiation (see further 5.2-
_5.2. The sequence of themes in the discursive or descriptive text suggests an objective order constituted by dividing a larger topic by a constan
__5.2.1. This suggestion includes all substantive parts of the text (other than any frames), or deviations are made explicit.
___5.2.1.1. Later passages refer to preceding themes in order to add detail.
__5.2.2. This suggestion includes only a continuous substantial part of the text, not the whole.
_5.3. The text’s discursive/descriptive treatment of its subject matter can be understood as assembling precisely those sub-topics of an overall t
__5.3.1. The sub-topics, if seen in this manner, represent a unifying theme for the whole text.
__5.3.2. The sub-topics, if seen in this manner, only account for a continuous substantial part of the text.
_5.4. The text’s sequence of sub-topics suggests a progression from the more general to the more specific, or vice versa if accompanied by explana
__5.4.1. The progression embraces all substantive parts of the text; or, any extra themes are explained.
__5.4.2. The progression occurs only in a continuous substantial part of the text.
_5.5. The text’s sequence of sub-topics (discursive or narrative) mirrors a temporal or spatial order, but without narrative emplotment between th
__5.5.1. This order includes all parts of the text (excepting any frames), as follows:
___5.5.1.1. A temporal order provides the sequence for norms or normative information.
____5.5.1.1.1. Additionally, the temporal order corresponds to a sequence of actions which is in itself, as a sequence, normative.
___5.5.1.2. A temporal order provides the sequence for non-normative (and non-narrative) information.
___5.5.1.3. A spatial or geographical order provides the sequence for the text’s themes (including any normative themes).
____5.5.1.3.1. Additionally, the themes so ordered are distinguished from one another by spatial or geographic expressions.
___5.5.1.4. An order of units of meaning in another text (from words to whole books) provides the sequence for the text’s themes (including any normativ
__5.5.2. This order defines only a continuous substantial part of the text, as follows:
___5.5.2.1. A temporal order provides the sequence for a continuous text part thematizing norms or normative information.
____5.5.2.1.1. Additionally, the temporal order corresponds to a sequence of actions which is in itself, as a sequence, normative.
___5.5.2.2. A temporal order provides the sequence for continuous non-normative (and non-narrative) information in part of the text.
___5.5.2.3. A spatial or geographical order provides the sequence for the text’s themes (including any normative themes) in a continuous part of the tex
____5.5.2.3.1. Additionally, the themes so ordered are distinguished from one another by spatial or geographic expressions.
___5.5.2.4. An order of units of meaning in another text (from words to whole books) provides the sequence for a continuous substantial part of the text
_5.6. The text pervasively provides explicit links between successive sub-topics, without at the same time mirroring an objective order as in 5.2–
__5.6.1. The text constitutes a conceptual inquiry into the accuracy or validity of universal claims regarding facts or norms.
___5.6.1.1. The inquiry pervasively or prominently proceeds by juxtaposing and discussing mutually exclusive claims, or alternative (or hypothetical) wo
____5.6.1.1.1. Some or most of the units so opposed to each other are ascribed (whether verbatim or not) to real, imaginary or hypostasized speakers.
_5.7. Adjacent text parts constituting themes are merely juxtaposed or weakly conjoined, while there is no indication of an overall objective rela
__5.7.1. Some measure of objective interrelatedness of all/almost all themes in the text is capable of expression by way of a summarizing term or phr
__5.7.2. Some measure of objective interrelatedness of all/almost all themes in the text is capable of expression, but only through use of a summariz
__5.7.3. The text’s thematic profile emerges from juxtaposed larger blocks of text which are all (or almost all) defined by an internal structuring s
__5.7.4. There is an enumeration of topics at the beginning of the text which relates to the thematic units constituting the bulk of the text as foll
___5.7.4.1. One of the enumerated topics corresponds to a possible summary theme of the bulk of the text (cp. 5.7.1/2), so that there is a single step “
___5.7.4.2. The enumerated topics distinguish themes that could work as sub-divisions of the contents of the bulk of the text (cp. 5.7/2), but no struct
__5.7.5. There is no objective interrelatedness of all/almost all themes in the text capable of expression in such a way that the summarizing term or
__5.7.6. The juxtaposed thematic units are concerned with universal claims to accuracy/validity and thereby tacitly project an objective interrelated
_5.8. The bulk of the text consists of small forms and patterns drawn from a limited set of formats for thematic articulation or for discussion (f
_5.9. The text’s governing voice projects the accuracy or validity of its statements as:
__5.9.1. Being taken for granted or being self-evident.
__5.9.2. Admitting discussion or disagreement, or the need for argument and evidence in principle.
__5.9.3. Pervasively in need of support by arguments, or open to discussion.
__5.9.4. The following argument types occur:
___5.9.4.1. Conceptual arguments as well as arguments from the quoted wording of another text (not necessarily in equal measure).
___5.9.4.2. Predominantly or exclusively conceptual arguments (e.g. inferences, analogies, or references to evidence).
___5.9.4.3. Predominantly or exclusively arguments from the quoted wording of another text (e.g. paraphrases, interpretation units, proof-texts).
_5.10. The governing voice ascribes statements about the text’s thematic substance pervasively or prominently to speaker characters as utterances.
__5.10.1. Isolated utterances (or dialogues) are presented without a unifying emplotment, but tacitly presuppose a unified grid of story/history.
___5.10.1.1. The persons, groups or generic figures indicated as speakers tend to be only minimally identified or contextualized.
__5.10.2. The text’s governing voice presents the speech of characters mostly in the exclusive function of disagreeing/agreeing with, or providing the
__5.10.3. The governing voice quotes a character with a direct speech of such length that it constitutes a significant proportion of the text overall.
__5.10.4. Hypothetical speech is routinely or prominently put into the mouth of hypostasized or generic characters.
__5.10.5. The reported wording is projected as a text, with the quoted character identified as its “author”.
_5.11. The text mentions no unique individuals as characters, or mentions them only in frame positions.
_5.12. The text thematizes the meaning of historical or narrative events and summarizes, alludes to or refers to events as evidence, but does not c
_6.1. The text’s most basic thematic progression consists of alternations of (a) quotations from a base text in their original sequence, and (b) s
__6.1.1. Most or many statements are dependent reformulations (paraphrases) of the quotations, or meta-linguistic observations on them.
__6.1.2. Some or many statements are presented in such a manner that it is ambiguous whether they reformulate the perceived meaning of the quotation
__6.1.3. Quotation-comment units pervasively or prominently contain meta-linguistic expressions.
__6.1.4. Quotation-comment units tend to be merely juxtaposed, while the units have internal cohesion and formal independence from each other.
__6.1.5. Only base text segments in their lemmatic sequence are quoted and receive a statement.
__6.1.6. The text also contains quotation-comment units which relate: (i) to texts other than the base text, and/or (ii) to the base text but not in
___6.1.6.1. Such units play a prominent part or make up the majority of quotation-statement units in the text.
__6.1.7. The text offers only one statement per quoted base text segment (comment or non-comment), or explains instances of more than one statement.
_6.2. Found alongside comment statements (6.1.1), a considerable proportion of quotation-attached statements are presented as hermeneutically inde
__6.2.1. Non-comment statements regularly or prominently attract their own hermeneutically dependent comment statements or dedicated discussion.
___6.2.1.1. Such discussions of non-comment statements can effectively take the place of, or indirectly constitute, any otherwise lacking direct discuss
__6.2.2. Non-comment statements can occur as multiples, and constitute extended stretches of text with their own order, homogeneousness or thematic c
__6.2.3. Non-comment statements occur prominently towards the end of the text or towards the end of a lemmatic division of the text.
__6.2.4. Most or all non-comment statements are presented as speech by named characters and groups, or from anonymous sources.
__6.2.5. Most or all non-comment statements are presented as quotations from other texts.
_6.3. Comment statements are frequently or prominently supported by another base text-like quotation.
__6.3.1. Such supporting text quotations regularly or prominently attract their own comment statements in turn.
_6.4. The lemmatic progression is constituted simultaneously as a thematic integration or is fused with some other principle of order.
__6.4.1. There is a manifestly unifying thematic focus to the commentary as a whole, or thematic diversity is addressed.
__6.4.2. The text pervasively provides explicit links between successive quotation-comment units, does not formally separate the units from each othe
__6.4.3. The segment size varies so as to mirror the size of literary Gestalts in the base text.
__6.4.4. The commentary text has a division into parts which accentuates a division of the base text into larger parts than the segments receiving le
__6.4.5. The lemmatic progression is fused with a secondary order principle, creating also the integrity of (a) a narrative, (b) a thematic discourse
__6.4.6. A “negative” thematic focus is created by consistent avoidance of a theme suggested (to the modern scholar) by the base text.
_6.5. There is a manifest constancy of the hermeneutic approach, or an explicit account of hermeneutic approaches.
_6.6. The extent of the base text segment is evident as follows:
__6.6.1. There is a regular distance in the base text from the beginning of one quotation to the beginning of the next quotation:
___6.6.1.1. With all base text verbal matter quoted from one to the other.
____6.6.1.1.1. With initial wording given only, while comment statements may target also the unquoted verbal matter in between quotation beginnings.
__6.6.2. There is no regular distance in the base text from the beginning of one quotation to the beginning of the next quotation.
___6.6.2.1. With the extent of the quoted verbal matter coinciding with the limits of the verbal matter targeted by comment statements.
__6.6.3. The size of segments (as under 6.6.1/2) tends to be, or to include:
___6.6.3.1. A sentence.
___6.6.3.2. Less than a sentence.
___6.6.3.3. More than a sentence.
___6.6.3.4. Two different sizes for adjacent interpretations of the same piece of base text.
___6.6.3.5. The size of some unit other than the sentence (Masoretic verse, proverb).
__6.6.4. The segments (as under 6.6.1/2) provide coverage of the base text as follows:
___6.6.4.1. There is no complete coverage of the base text.
____6.6.4.1.1. Base text not covered is contiguous.
____6.6.4.1.2. Base text not covered may have appeared less important or less problematical.
_____6.6.4.1.2.1. The text does not project complete lemmatic coverage as its overarching theme (6.2 or 6.6.2 apply, or there are many smaller “gaps” in the c
____6.6.4.1.3. No manifest pattern accounts for the base text not covered.
____6.6.4.1.4. Incomplete lemmatic coverage is explicitly addressed.
___6.6.4.2. There is complete coverage of the base text.
__6.6.5. There is explanation of the nature and length of base text segments or quotations.
__6.6.6. The quoted base text segment may already have appeared earlier in the text, as part of a copy of a larger section (or the whole) of the base
_6.7. There occur multiple comment statements for the same quoted base text segment:
__6.7.1. Interpreting the same expression within the same base text segment.
__6.7.2. Interpreting different expressions within the same base text segment.
__6.7.3. The multiple comment statements are set off from each other by being:
___6.7.3.1. Separated by a repeated quotation of the base text segment or parts of it.
___6.7.3.2. Introduced by terms of transition.
___6.7.3.3. Assigned to different speaking voices, including the governing voice.
___6.7.3.4. Marked explicitly as constituting disagreement.
___6.7.3.5. Set off only by being linguistically or logically discontinuous with the interpretation immediately preceding.
_6.8. Comment or non-comment statements are prominently or frequently presented as quotations of speech acts by individuals, groups or by anonymou
__6.8.1. Quoted comment or non-comment statements regularly or prominently are themselves treated to explanations or supplementations.
__6.8.2. Comment or non-comment statements are frequently or prominently presented as speech acts outside any connecting narrative framework, but in
___6.8.2.1. This grid tacitly or explicitly links quoted characters to each other as commentators on the base text.
___6.8.2.2. This grid tacitly or explicitly links quoted characters to the origins of the base text.
___6.8.2.3. The presupposed narrative/historical links between speakers, or between speakers and base text, are used to clarify the meaning of their quo
_6.9. The text distinguishes the level of the base text quotations from the level of the statements, whether comments or non-comments, as follows:
__6.9.1. The nature of the statements or of the lemmatic order is verbalized.
__6.9.2. Base text quotations have no quotation formula, but tend to be found at the beginning of a new textual unit, marked by the appearance of an
__6.9.3. The sequence of components within interpretation units is: 1. quotation from base text – 2. comment statement – 3. supporting base-text like
___6.9.3.1. This sequence is changed, or the base text quotation doubled, for any Petichah-like units.
__6.9.4. The text employs terms/formulae, signals of transition, hermeneutic techniques, or separation markers, including the following:
___6.9.4.1. Specialized terminology separating quotation from comment.
___6.9.4.2. Speech reports introducing the statement, used as separator.
___6.9.4.3. Other signals of the transition between quotation and comment: [].
___6.9.4.4. Tacit juxtapositions of components, which cannot be read as being continuous on the same level with each other.
___6.9.4.5. Expressions of a hermeneutic operation.
___6.9.4.6. Intermediary rephrasings of the lemma leading to the comment statement (see also 6.10.3).
___6.9.4.7. Verbal links or overlapping wording between adjacent quotation-comment units, using contiguous base text segments.
_6.10. Comment statements reveal hermeneutic attitudes towards the base text as follows:
__6.10.1. Comment statements tend to speak directly, in object-language, about the base text’s themes.
___6.10.1.1. The perspective of any first-person speaker character of the base text segment may be reproduced in the comment statement.
__6.10.2. Comment statements tend to speak about the quotation only as a verbal entity, i.e. be exclusively meta-linguistic.
__6.10.3. Exclusively meta-linguistic comment statements are found alongside more frequent object language comments, or are used as intermediary rephr
__6.10.4. The text implies or explicates a hermeneutic stance concerning the accuracy of the base text:
___6.10.4.1. The base text wording is tacitly or explicitly treated under the assumption that it may be inaccurate/insincere/invalid.
___6.10.4.2. The base text wording is tacitly or explicitly treated under the assumption that it cannot be inaccurate/insincere/invalid.
_6.11. Within the lemmatic arrangement, extended sections of text have their own principle of progression which suspends the lemmatic progression:
__6.11.1. The base text quotation becomes the starting point of a set of local thematic shifts involving further quotations plus explanation/supplemen
__6.11.2. There is limited but sustained thematic, narrative or lemmatic continuity (with or without further quotations), as follows:
___6.11.2.1. Another text, or a different part of the base text, is treated thematically or lemmatically as relevant to the base text quotation.
___6.11.2.2. A different base text is treated lemmatically and as independent of the base text quotation.
___6.11.2.3. A thematic order, thematic inquiry or reflection is sustained (e.g. of the type 5.6.1).
___6.11.2.4. A narrative order is sustained.
___6.11.2.5. Some extra-thematic principle of order is sustained (see 9.11).
__6.11.3. Non-comment statements (6.2) can occur in the following positions:
___6.11.3.1. After one or more initial quotation-comment unit with manifest or explicit hermeneutic dependency (6.1.1/3).
___6.11.3.2. Immediately succeeding the base text quotation (with later units exhibiting hermeneutic dependency on the quotation).
____6.11.3.2.1. There are cases where a non-comment statement constitutes the only treatment of the base text quotation.
_6.12. There are marked imbalances in the distribution or positioning of base text quotation-statement units at certain strategic points in a 6.1 t
__6.12.1. Higher density is found at the beginning of the base text, or the beginning of the commentary/rendering text.
__6.12.2. Higher density is found at the end of the base text, or the end of the commentary/rendering text.
__6.12.3. Higher density is found at some other defined or strategic text position of the base text, the commentary or the rendering text.
__6.12.4. The imbalance coincides with other changes:
___6.12.4.1. The occurrence of literary forms which are rare or unique for the text.
___6.12.4.2. The recurrence of units from elsewhere in the text.
___6.12.4.3. The absence of the comment component from quotations of other texts (not the base text).
___6.12.4.4. A change in the pattern of coverage of the base text by quoted segments.
_6.13. The text constitutes a complete and sequential representation, in another language and in object-oriented perspective, of the perceived mean
__6.13.1. The statements of the text are displayed in manuscripts as alternating in mere juxtaposition with segments of verbal matter from the base te
__6.13.2. The text’s governing voice is almost always identical with, or a consistent extension of, the persona projected by the governing voice of th
__6.13.3. The text tends to use the sentence structure of the base text to accommodate any additional or modified object information.
__6.13.4. The text creates new syntactic structures within which the words of the base text can be recognized.
__6.13.5. The text places sentences which have no corresponding wording in the base text at all alongside sentences which do.
__6.13.6. The text also thematizes its base text or some part of it as a verbal entity, e.g. by quoting its wording.
___6.13.6.1. Such meta-linguistic components are verbally integrated into the text’s narrative or thematic continuity, so that no lemmatic structuring of
___6.13.6.2. The positioning of any base text quotations does not disrupt or undermine the text’s narrative or thematic progression.
_7.1. Narrative or thematic correspondences, or overlap of specific wording, occur between a non-biblical text and one or more biblical texts in a
__7.1.1. Characters correspond between the non-biblical narrative and the narrative of a biblical text or texts.
___7.1.1.1. Some or all main characters of the text correspond to main characters in a biblical partner text.
____7.1.1.1.1. A main character shared with a biblical partner text is also the first-person narrator of the text.
___7.1.1.2. The text’s main character is a minor character in Scripture.
____7.1.1.2.1. That character is also the first-person narrator of the text.
___7.1.1.3. Only minor character(s) of the text correspond to character(s) in a biblical text(s), whether minor or major.
___7.1.1.4. The first-person narrator of the text is a non-biblical character.
__7.1.2. Chronology, physical setting or emplotment correspond between the non-biblical narrative and the narrative of a biblical text or texts:
___7.1.2.1. The narrative’s chronological and spatial framework, as well as certain events, are co-extensive with that of a biblical partner text, or wi
____7.1.2.1.1. The text tends to narrate the story through events described in approximately the same amount of detail as a biblical partner text.
____7.1.2.1.2. The narrative is told in more detail than that of a biblical partner text, or contains more components that slow down the narrative pace (4.
____7.1.2.1.3. The text tends to narrate the story through events described in less detail or through fewer events than a biblical partner text.
____7.1.2.1.4. Some of the narrative’s sub-plots or episodes, mostly corresponding to those of a biblical text, differ from each other in the amount of det
_____7.1.2.1.4.1. Among the sub-plots or episodes with more detail are some or all of the ones that have no biblical counterpart.
___7.1.2.2. While the narrative covers the same chronological-spatial ground or plot as a biblical text, it lacks extended speeches found in that biblic
___7.1.2.3. The narrative is located at a particular point (“niche”) in a chronological-spatial framework also known from a biblical text, but there is
__7.1.3. There is prominent use of explicit quotations of biblical wording, whether in non-narrative or in narrative (but not in biblical commentary,
__7.1.4. The text shares features of language with the Hebrew Bible, or exhibits tacit overlap with specific biblical wording, whether narrative or n
___7.1.4.1. There are pervasive biblical linguistic features (vocabulary, morphology or syntax) or a pervasive use of unspecific biblical language, such
___7.1.4.2. The text contains prominently, but not necessarily frequently, the wording of specific biblical passages such as whole sentences or unique b
____7.1.4.2.1. The tacit overlap of specific wording extends regularly to whole sentences or to extensive sentence groupings, found alongside sentences or
___7.1.4.3. The tacit overlap of wording takes place across language boundaries, with respect to the current language of the text (this point does not a
__7.1.5. The projected persona of the governing voice of the text, whether a narrative or not, is also known from a biblical text, or the governing v
___7.1.5.1. The projected first-person persona of the governing voice is also a character in a biblical text.
____7.1.5.1.1. The persona appears to be linked to a character as it specifically appears in the biblical text, not merely as it might be known from diffus
___7.1.5.2. The projected first-person persona of the governing voice is presented as identical with, or as an extension of, the persona of the governin
___7.1.5.3. The epistemic stance of the governing voice (narrative or not, first person or not) can be interpreted as falling into the same generic cate
____7.1.5.3.1. The conveyance of personally received verbal or visual revelation: prophecy model.
____7.1.5.3.2. The omniscient narration, as in Genesis-Joshua; or unrestricted knowledge of a described reality, similar to Genesis 1.
____7.1.5.3.3. The plea to God of human prayer or supplication, as in Psalms.
____7.1.5.3.4. The conveyance of wisdom on the basis of personal experience or learning, as in Proverbs, Qohelet.
__7.1.6. The range of themes in the non-narrative text is wholly or nearly contained within the specific range of themes found also in a biblical tex
__7.1.7. The sequence of themes in (at least) substantial parts of the non-narrative text is tacitly isomorphic with the sequence of themes in a bibl
__7.1.8. The non-narrative text pervasively or prominently presupposes the narrative fabric of biblical events/reported speech, beyond the contents o
___7.1.8.1. The text presupposing biblical narrative fabric has a thematic structure of discourse or description.
___7.1.8.2. The text presupposing biblical narrative fabric is a lemmatic sequential commentary on some part of the Hebrew Bible.
__7.1.9. While sharing the basic narrative-chronological framework of biblical texts, the narrative also mentions characters or events which presuppo
_7.2. Narrative or thematic correspondences, or overlap of specific wording, occur between the non-biblical text under discussion and other non-bi
__7.2.1. There is a correspondence of characters (which may include the persona projected as the governing voice of the current text).
___7.2.1.1. This also constitutes a correspondence with a biblical text (7.1.1).
__7.2.2. The overall chronological and spatial framework of the narrative, as well as certain events, are substantially or prominently co-extensive w
___7.2.2.1. The narrative is located at a particular point (“niche”) in a chronological-spatial framework also known from another non-biblical text, but
___7.2.2.2. This co-extension also constitutes a co-extension with a biblical text; or, this “niche” relationship also constitutes a “niche” relationshi
__7.2.3. There are explicit quotations or instances of explicitly marked expressive use of wording from a non-biblical partner text.
__7.2.4. The wording or specific theme of self-contained thematic units is occasionally identical to those of another non-biblical text (or part-text
___7.2.4.1. Such overlapping units are found in text types which differ from each other in their thematic arrangement.
___7.2.4.2. It is common for such overlapping units to be marked as the speech of a character or as anonymous quoted speech in one or both of the non-bi
___7.2.4.3. Such self-contained overlapping units occur within what is, by other structural signals, manifestly the same text.
__7.2.5. There are prominent single allusions to specific wording found in a non-biblical partner text.
__7.2.6. There is extensive tacit overlap with the wording of a non-biblical partner text, whether in narrative or in non-narrative texts.
___7.2.6.1. The text presents statements as anonymous which are also anonymous in a partner text.
___7.2.6.2. The text assigns to a character statements which are anonymous in a partner text.
____7.2.6.2.1. The character thus quoted is also the person traditionally identified as the redactor or tradent of the anonymous parts of a partner text.
___7.2.6.3. The text presents statements as anonymous which are assigned to a character in a partner text.
___7.2.6.4. The extensive wording overlap takes place across language boundaries.
___7.2.6.5. The extensive wording overlap takes place in a thematic environment or in a cotext different from that of the wording in the partner text.
___7.2.6.6. The 7.2.6. wording overlaps also constitute wording overlaps with a biblical text.
__7.2.7. The projected first-person persona of the governing voice of the text, whether narrative or not, is also known from another non-biblical tex
___7.2.7.1. The projected first-person persona is identical with a character in another non-biblical text.
____7.2.7.1.1. The persona appears to be linked to that character as it specifically appears in the other text, not merely as it might be known from diffus
___7.2.7.2. The projected first-person persona is presented as identical with or as an extension of the persona of the governing voice of another non-bi
___7.2.7.3. The 7.2.7. overlap also constitutes an overlap with a biblical text.
__7.2.8. The range of themes in the non-narrative text is wholly or nearly contained within the specific range of themes found also in another non-bi
__7.2.9. The sequence of themes in (at least) substantial parts of the non-narrative text is tacitly isomorphic with the sequence of themes in anothe
___7.2.9.1. Shared themes occur largely or entirely in the same sequence, albeit separated by other themes. [DELETE OR KEEP: These themes may be support
___7.2.9.2. Characteristic thematic or formal groupings of sentences (e.g. 9.3, 9.4, 9.4.4/5) occur approximately at the “same” point (as defined, for e
_8.1. Standard forms or contents formulated in set phrases, set sentence formats, or clauses in a standard syntactic connection.
__8.1.1. Conditional norm or hypothetical legal case:
__8.1.2. Unconditional norm:
__8.1.3. Sentence with theme anticipated to the beginning and repeated in a pronoun or by ellipsis:
__8.1.4. Unit of a biblical quotation together with a hermeneutically dependent formulation; midrashic unit:
___8.1.4.1. The expressive use of unmarked biblical wording whose function in the text’s discourse is enhanced or achieved by it being recognised as com
__8.1.5. Simile used in hermeneutic function:
__8.1.6. Speech report:
___8.1.6.1. The reported speech is elliptic and depends on surrounding text not marked as reported speech.
__8.1.7. Sentence referring to a behaviour or norm as customary, using the term minhag, its verbal root or a clearly similar term:
__8.1.8. Reason clause:
__8.1.9. The a fortiori argument:
__8.1.10. List sentence enumerating items by words or phrases:
__8.1.11. List enumerating items by whole sentences/interpretation units:
__8.1.12. Explicit claim that in a particular formulation other information in the immediate co-text is being summarized or generalized:
__8.1.13. Declamatory sentence, confession, proclamation or affirmation:
__8.1.14. Prayer, doxology, valediction or blessing:
__8.1.15. Wish sentence:
__8.1.16. Descriptive sentence of a static (ocular) structure or "scientific" descriptive sentence:
__8.1.17. Report sentence of a singular event in the past which is not part of a narrative unit, nor of a mashal:
__8.1.18. Sentence making a prediction of a future event:
__8.1.19. Prediction of reward or punishment of behaviour in a “wisdom” or similar formulation:
__8.1.20. Recommendation of a particular behaviour or statement of an ideal type of person in a “wisdom” or similar formulation:
__8.1.21. Statement describing a reality (nature, creation, human nature) in a “wisdom” or similar formulation:
__8.1.22. Statement praising Torah in a “wisdom” or similar formulation:
_8.2. Non-narrative small literary forms that impose on their components a standard functional relationship to each other, while grammar and synta
__8.2.1. Dispute unit:
__8.2.2. Self-contained question-answer unit in anonymous discourse:
__8.2.3. Self-contained question-answer unit in discourse concerning the meaning of an earlier word/words in the same text.
___8.2.3.1. Self-contained question-answer unit which, since there is tacit overlap with a partner text (7.2), may relate to the meaning of a statement
__8.2.4. A clause or phrase which links two statements/themes explicitly as being similar:
__8.2.5. The summary exposition, in a number of sentences, of theological ideas.
__8.2.6. A Petichah or Petichah-like unit, which uses the wording of a general biblical verse to introduce by way of a hermeneutic link the main them
__8.2.7. A Semikhah or Semikhah-like unit, addressing how the co-text preceding a given biblical verse relates to that verse.
__8.2.8. An “Inyan” part in a rabbinic homily, understood as a limited lemmatic sequence of midrashic units on one or more verses introduced by a pre
__8.2.9. A Chatimah or Chatimah-like unit, which leads from a biblical verse earlier treated as part of the “Inyan” of a rabbinic homily, to another
__8.2.10. A Yelammedenu unit, an initially halakhic question-answer unit usually expanded by further discussion which opens a rabbinic homily or a lit
_8.3. Forms with internal emplotment relationships, or character-centred small literary forms or motifs:
__8.3.1. A ma'aseh or pared-down narrative of a unique event with normative-probative function:
__8.3.2. A mashal or other minimal (two-stage) narrative employed to model the emplotment of a biblical or other event:
__8.3.3. A narrative unit which is not integrated into a larger chronological framework constituted by the co-text:
__8.3.4. A narrative unit which is schematic or presents unspecific characters (other than 8.3.2):
__8.3.5. A narrative unit incorporating direct speech/dialogue devoted to an explicit hermeneutic engagement with quotations from the base text or so
__8.3.6. The narrative motif of humanized animals or animals as agents:
__8.3.7. The narrative motif of the fantastic, grotesque, or gross:
__8.3.8. A narrative motif that can be interpreted as humorous or ironic:
__8.3.9. Use of a gap of knowledge between what a character knows and what the governing voice has already told, including one character telling a li
__8.3.10. Narrative use of humour by way of a character’s speech:
_8.4. Small poetic form:
__8.4.1. Occurrence of a song, poetic piece, rhythmic unit:
_9.1. An extended portion or substantial proportion of the thematic text (or thematic part of a non-thematic text) projects its selection and sequ
__9.1.1. By dividing a larger topic by a constant principle (or set of principles) of subordination/coordination.
__9.1.2. By assembling precisely those sub-topics of an overall theme that would result if that overall theme were to be exhaustively defined or divi
__9.1.3. By progressing from the more general to the more specific, or vice versa if accompanied by explanation.
__9.1.4. By mirroring a temporal or spatial order, or the order of units of meaning in a pre-existing text.
_9.2. In one or more extended passages, making up a substantial portion of the text, a series of situations is created from one hypothetical legal
__9.2.1. Two distinct parameters of the situation are paired with their opposites or negations, to produce a series of four situations.
_9.3. An extended passage consists in the elaboration one by one of the items of an initial list, making each list item the topic of one or more s
_9.4. For an extended passage there is a juxtaposition of thematic units (sentences or groups of sentences) capable of being interpreted in the fo
__9.4.1. As thematic cluster: the sentence themes of an extended passage have a stronger homogeneity/family resemblance with each other than with the
__9.4.2. As contrastive thematic block: the text juxtaposes two extended thematic blocks tacitly projecting a contrast and/or analogy between them.
__9.4.3. Repetitions as markers of architecture: there is a repetition of words marking out as coordinated passages that deal with contrastive sub-to
__9.4.4. In an extended passage, thematic homogeneousness is created by recurrence of the same reason clause appended to norms which are adjacent or
__9.4.5. In an extended passage, thematic homogeneousness is created by recurrence of the same normative predicate or apodosis in hypothetical legal
_9.5. In a number of extended dialectical passages, the governing voice differentiates between the topics/propositions of two or more initial them
__9.5.1. The governing voice performs this differentiation largely by quoting further voices, or by speaking on behalf of the initially quoted voices
__9.5.2. The governing voice of a lemmatic commentary determines the precise themes of quotations from the base text, by progressively adducing furth
__9.5.3. Within a sustained dialectical discourse on the meaning of a quoted segment, the grammatically or thematically complete quotation is only re
_9.6. An extended portion or substantial proportion of the text continuously explicates local thematic transitions, by means of:
__9.6.1. Use of conjunctions.
__9.6.2. Use of announcement of themes for text parts, full-sentence headings or summaries.
__9.6.3. Use of explicit reference to the textual position or sequence of information, articulating the passage as having coordinated parts.
__9.6.4. Use of discourse deixis (e.g., “below”, “following”) which indicate parts, or of cross-references.
__9.6.5. Use of ordinal or cardinal numbers to designate themes in text sequence (e.g., “first generation”).
__9.6.6. Use of questions to articulate parts within a passage or functioning as headings.
_9.7. The text as a whole continuously explicates local thematic transitions, while at the same time also projecting an objective or communicative
_9.8. The text has a tendency to juxtapose immediately thematic units which fulfill the same literary, evidential, hermeneutic or narrative functi
__9.8.1. There is more than one quotation-comment unit or midrashic unit for the same lemma.
__9.8.2. There is more than one biblical quotation supporting the same statement within a single midrashic unit.
__9.8.3. There is more than one Petichah or Petichah-like unit for the same rabbinic homily (3.1. applies).
__9.8.4. There is more than one Petichah or Petichah-like unit in continuous text but outside a rabbinic homily structure (3.1. does not apply).
__9.8.5. There is more than one mashal (parable) for the same thematic or hermeneutic point.
__9.8.6. There is more than one reason clause supporting a statement.
__9.8.7. There is more than one version of a reported dispute.
__9.8.8. There is more than one version of the same ma’aseh (narrative precedent report).
__9.8.9. There is more than one version of events within the same narrative account.
__9.8.10. There is more than one narrative or report presenting (near-) identical events but different characters.
__9.8.11. There is more than one version of a named rabbi’s utterance.
__9.8.12. There is an alternative name attached to a statement quoted as a character's speech.
__9.8.13. There is some acknowledgement of the equivalence/alternative status of adjacent thematic units under 9.8.1-12.
_9.9. There are passages of three or more successive thematic units whose relationship is defined as follows: There is a clear thematic continuity
__9.9.1. The second unit has a formal pattern which may then continue for one or more new, subsequent themes.
__9.9.2. The second unit has a quoted character named also as the speaker for one or more new, subsequent themes.
__9.9.3. The second unit mentions a type of object which is then treated with respect to a new thematic framework (or frameworks) in subsequent sente
__9.9.4. The second unit has a reason clause which is then used for one or more further thematic units(s) concerning a different halakhic topic/diffe
_9.10. The text’s narrative account is occasionally circular in that it leads from an action to its motivation/purpose, then back to reporting the
_9.11. An extended part of the thematic text (or a part-text in the sense of section 10) is structured by an extra-thematic principle of order, as
__9.11.1. The implied chronology of speaker characters.
__9.11.2. An alphabetical or alphanumerical sequence (not if a 3.2 text).
__9.11.3. The sequence of text sections of Scripture.
__9.11.4. The sequence of days of a calendar/festival calendar.
__9.11.5. The implied chronology of the composition of text parts of a text, as seen by the voice governing the whole text.
__9.11.6. The increasing or decreasing size of part-texts.
__9.11.7. A fixed performative sequence of speech acts.
__9.11.8. The ascending or descending quantitative value of numbers provides the sequence for themes in part of the text, with or without any explicit
_9.12. Important manuscripts divide the text explicitly into parts by the use of single words or incomplete sentences which constitute sub-headings
__9.12.1. This division involves the use of meta-textual terms.
__9.12.2. This terminology is supplemented by the use of sequential numbering, or there is numbering of text sections which are not named at all.
_9.13. Physical evidence from antiquity potentially shows non-verbal signals indicating (an interpretation of) the text’s thematic division.
_9.14. There is sporadic use of mnemonic indications of text contents and sequence at the beginning or end of passages, consisting of sequences of
_10.1. The work consists of the juxtaposition of large constituent part-texts, each of which has its own thematic, lemmatic or narrative structure
__10.1.1. The part-texts are of the same kind, i.e., all narrative, all thematic or all lemmatic.
___10.1.1.1. The part-texts juxtaposed are all thematic-discursive or thematic-descriptive, dealing with substantially the same kind of subject matter.
___10.1.1.2. The part-texts juxtaposed are all thematic-discursive or thematic-descriptive, dealing with substantially diverse kinds of subject matter.
____10.1.1.2.1. Their sequential relationship suggests that they complement each other, at least weakly.
___10.1.1.3. The part-texts juxtaposed are all lemmatic.
___10.1.1.4. The part-texts juxtaposed are all narrative.
___10.1.1.5. There are significant ambiguities as to where one part-text ends and the next begins (in their textual sequence).
___10.1.1.6. Any manifest differentiation of adjacent part-texts is partly due to their mirroring of divisions within a base text or a partner text.
__10.1.2. The work juxtaposes one narrative and one thematic part-text. [SPECIFY IF MORE THAN ONE, AND SPECIFY SEQUENCE]
___10.1.2.1. Their sequential relationship suggests that they complement each other, at least weakly (e.g., as “biography –utterances”).
__10.1.3. The work juxtaposes one narrative and one lemmatic part-text. [SPECIFY IF MORE THAN ONE, AND SPECIFY SEQUENCE]
___10.1.3.1. Their sequential relationship suggests that they complement each other, at least weakly.
__10.1.4. The work juxtaposes one lemmatic and one thematic part-text. [SPECIFY IF MORE THAN ONE, AND SPECIFY SEQUENCE]
___10.1.4.1. Their sequential relationship suggests that they complement each other, at least weakly.
__10.1.5. There is important transmission evidence indicating that the sequencing or division of part-texts within the overall aggregate varied.
_10.2. The work consists of the juxtaposition of part-texts which are constituted by poetic or communicative-rhetorical formation, so that one of t
__10.2.1. The work juxtaposes poems, psalms, songs, etc. as part-texts (3.2, 3.3 or 3.4 applies to each part-text).
___10.2.1.1. The boundaries of some or all of the individual pieces are defined by their inherent formal characteristics, i.e., by point 3.2.
___10.2.1.2. Some or all part-texts only show themselves as separate from each other by their contrast in adjacency, i.e. by point 3.4.
___10.2.1.3. There are cases of ambiguity concerning where one part-text ends and the next begins, if read in their textual sequence; but regardless of w
___10.2.1.4. The themes of individual part-texts are predominantly homogeneous across the whole aggregate work.
___10.2.1.5. The themes of individual part-texts are significantly disparate across the whole aggregate work.
___10.2.1.6. A manifest theme or message emerges from the togetherness and/or the sequential order of the part-texts.
___10.2.1.7. The formal characteristics of individual pieces are predominantly homogeneous across the whole aggregate text.
___10.2.1.8. The formal characteristics of individual pieces are significantly diverse across the whole aggregate work.
__10.2.2. The work juxtaposes rabbinic homilies as part-texts, according to an extra-thematic principle of order (see also 9.11). Point 3.1.2 or 3.1.3
__10.2.3. There is important transmission evidence indicating that the sequencing or division of part-texts within the overall aggregate varied.
_11.1. The non-narrative text projects its thematic concern as being mainly one or more of the following:
__11.1.1. Description of a reality, including a physical reality.
__11.1.2. Moral values or value judgments, including practical instructions on proper behaviour or self-preservation.
__11.1.3. Law, commandments or norms of behaviour.
__11.1.4. A discourse on or inquiry into a field of knowledge, with self-referential treatment of the limits, sources or nature of knowledge.
__11.1.5. The meaning of another text.
__11.1.6. Reports of the speech of named characters.
__11.1.7. Future events or future reward and punishment.
_11.2. The text is dominated by the reporting of emplotted events, whether or not in an overarching narrative format (4).
__11.2.1. The reported events are those of a biblical past, or of a biblically foretold future.
__11.2.2. The reported events are not biblical, but are related to a biblical past/future.
__11.2.3. The reported events have no strong links to biblical events.
_11.3. The text is directly or indirectly addressed to God. Its specific contents are self-reflective regarding the governing voice, thematic in a
_12.1. Sampling of genre labels applied to the text in secondary literature: