Q239 MT Exod 40:22 hnpc SV(1) – 4QExod-Levf lacks the
4QExod-Levf 2 ii 20 Nwpc locative h.
Q240 MT Exod 40:27 omits SV(2) – 4QExod-Levf has an ex-
4QExod-Levf 2 ii 25 wynpl plicating plus.^919
Q241 MT Exod 14:24 Nn(w Not Counted –4QExodg is too
damaged to allow a certain read-
ing.^920
4QExodg 5 M○(
Q242 MT Exod 1:1 hl)w SV(1) – 4QpaleoGen-Exodl lacks
4QpaleoGen-Exodl 1 the conjunction.
5
hl)Q243 MT Exod 2:23 wq(zyw SV(l) – Interchange of syno-
4QpaleoGen-Exodl nyms.^921
3-4 4
wq(cywQ244 MT Exod 10:3 ym( SV(1) – The MT lacks the object
4QpaleoGen-Exodl 7 marker.
i, 8 11
ym( t)Q245 MT Exod 12:3 omits SV(2) – The MT lacks the plural
4QpaleoGen-Exodl 7 construct noun √Nb, “son.”^922
ii 16
ynb919
The occurrence of the prepositional phrase wynpl, “before him,” is considered secondary in E. Ulrich and
F.M. Cross, 920 Qumran Cave 4. VII, 143. The MT lacks the addition in agreement with the other witnesses.
Based on the photo we are in agreement with E. Ulrich and F.M. Cross, Qumran Cave 4. VII, 146, that
the traces of ink left below the line following the lacuna immediately after the ‘ayin are most likely to be
the remains of mem. The reading M○( therefore seems most appropriate, though it must be admitted that the
extremely poor preservation of the fragment precludes any certain reading. One may point to the phrase
Myc(w #) in Isa 30:33 for a possible parallel to the phrase in 4QExodg, but in the context that wording is
quite unlikely. 921
The form in 4QpaleoGen-Exodl is more common in the Pentateuch. HALOT, 277, lists √q(z as a by-
form of √q(c (see also HALOT, 1042). The variant is treated as an interchange of synonyms rather than a
difference in pronunciation of the same lexeme. 922
The phrase in 4QpaleoGen-Exodl is restored: l)#ry ynb td( lk, “the whole congregation of the sons of
Israel,” in agreement with the SP and the LXX.