Q589 MT Deut 4:14 omits SV(2) – 4QDeutc has an expan-
4QDeutc 2-3 i 3 Ndry[ sive plus.^1140
Q590 MT Deut 7:4 omits SV(2) – 4QDeutc has an expan-
4QDeutc 4 2 ]yhl) sive plus.^1141
Q591 MT Deut 8:2 Ktsnl SV(1) – 4QDeutc lacks the prepo-
4QDeutc 5 3 Ktwsn sition l.
Q592 MT Deut 8:2 t(dl SV(1) – The MT lacks the con-
4QDeutc 5 3 t(dlw junction.
Q593 MT Deut 8:4 Ktlm# SV(1) – Lexical interchange.^1142
4QDeutc 5 6 Ktml#
Q594 MT Deut 10:1 Myn#)rk SV(1) – 4QDeutc lacks the prepo-
4QDeutc 9 2 ]w#)rh sition k.^1143
Q595 MT Deut 10:2 omits SV(2) – 4QDeutc has an expan-
4QDeutc 9 3 hwhy sive plus.^1144
Q596 MT Deut 11:10 )wh SV(1) – Difference in gender.^1145
4QDeutc 12-15 3 )yh
Q597 MT Deut 12:19 Ktmd) SV(2) – The MT has an explicat-
incompatible with the earlier remark concerning the last letter before the break: “If it is lamed, then only
the hook remains. It may be that the upper portion is not seen due to the surface damage in this spot.” 1140
1141 The name of the river is supplied in 4QDeutc against all other witnesses.
The phrase in 4QDeutc is restored Mkyhl) hwhy, “Yahweh your god,” against the other witnesses that
have only the Tetragrammaton. 1142
See also Q178 above, and the comments in note. The lexemes hml# and hlm# (with sin) are synony-
mous, both meaning “cloak, mantle.” Scribal error through metathesis of the second and third radical is also
possible, but in light of Rule 1 lexical interchange is preferred. 1143
In the Massoretic pointing the MT lacks the definite article, but this is not evident in the consonantal
text. 1144
The placement of the Tetragrammaton is uncertain, but it is clearly not present in the MT. See the dis-
cussion in E. Ulrich and F.M. Cross, 1145 Qumran Cave 4. IX, 20, for the possible readings of this variant.
The pronoun refers to Cr)h, “the land,” a feminine singular noun. The MT qere has the correct form of
the pronoun.