Q11 MT Deut 13:4 (m#t SV(1) – Difference in number.^770
1QDeuta 7-8 3 w(m[#t
Q12 MT Deut 13:4 )whh OV(l) – Possible difference in
1QDeuta 7-8 3 h)whh pronunciation.^771
Q13 MT Deut 13:5 Mkyhl) OV(l) – Possible difference in
1QDeuta 9 2 hmkyhwl) pronunciation.
770
The verb is plural in 1QDeuta against the singular in MT. 1QDeuta agrees with LXX here and perhaps
reflects a consistency of addressee in this section of the text. The phenomenon of Numeruswechsel is well
known in Deuteronomy so an exhaustive taxonomy of the relevant literature is impractical in the present
context. In general see N. Lohfink, Das Hauptgebot: Eine Untersuchung literarische Einleitungsfragen zu
Dtn 5-11 (Analecta Biblica 20; Rome: E Pontifico Instituto Biblico, 1963) 239-58. A worthwhile review of
the literature until 1962 is found in G. Minette de Tillesse, "Sections 'tu' et sections 'vous' dans le Deu-
téronome," VT 12, 1 (1962) 29-34, and see also C. Begg, "The Significance of the Numeruswechsel in Deu-
teronomy: The 'Pre-History' of the Question," Ephemerides Theologicae Louvianenses 55 (1979). Several
dissertations on the topic are also worth mentioning, namely C. Begg, Contributions to the Elucidation of
the Composition of Deuteronomy with Special Attention to the Significance of Numeruswechsel (Louvian
University Ph.D. Dissertation: 1978); W.R. Higgs, A Stylistic Analysis of the Numeruswechsel Sections of
Deuteronomy (Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Ph.D. Dissertation: 1982); and Y. Suzuki, The 'Nu-
meruswechsel' Sections of Deuteronomy 771 (Claremont Graduate School Ph.D. Dissertation: 1982).
See the discussion in note above. The long form in 1QDeuta is typical of Qumran Hebrew, perhaps re-
flecting a preserved archaic ending from Proto-Semitic which is attested in Ugaritic. See D. Sivan, "The
Contribution of the Akkadian Texts From Ugarit to Ugaritic and to Biblical Hebrew Grammar," Leshonenu
47 (1983) 182 [Hebrew], for the reading of the Ugaritic pronoun “ú-PI” as “huwa.” See also E. Qimron,
Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 57 n. 56, and S. Morag, "Qumran Hebrew," 156-57, for the same sugges-
tion. E.Y. Kutscher, Language and Linguistic Background, 436-40, raises four possibilities and finally set-
tles for one of two explanations: either the long forms of the 3ms and 3fs independent pronouns in Qumran
Hebrew represent the preserved archaic ending with /a/, evident in Akkadian as /u/ and in Ugaritic and
Phoenician as /t/; or these pronouns represent a long vowel that is appended on analogy with the 3mpl and
3fpl independent pronouns. According to Kutscher both arguments have their own merits and pitfalls that
make deciding between the two options a matter of opinion. According to W.R. Garr, Dialect Geography of
Syria-Palestine, 1000-586 B.C.E. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985) 80-81, among
first millennium Palestinian dialects only Old Byblian preserves a final vowel on the 3ms independent pro-
noun, and this dialect also shows a form of the same pronoun with final /t/ as found in Phoenician. 3ms and
3fs independent pronouns with final /a/ and /t/ also appear in Ugaritic, for which see S. Segert, A Basic
Grammar of the Ugaritic Language: With Selected Texts and Glossary (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1985) 47. This may support Kutscher’s first possibility that the ending in Qumran Hebrew is related
to an archaic form of the pronoun.