Skip to navigation | Skip to main content | Skip to footer
Search by multiple inventory points or book comparison
Full Inventory point list:
 
45 books found
 
     
Genesis Apocryphon Overall [Fragment] (24/03/13) (Researcher: Rocco Bernasconi):
Selected Inventory point(s):
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.]

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