4QDeutb I 18 Kdybw tional text in 4QDeutb.^1135
Q584 MT Deut 31:11 )rqt SV(1) – Difference in number.^1136
4QDeutb II 10 w)rqt
Q585 MT Deut 31:15 l( SV(1) – 4QDeutb lacks the prepo-
4QDeutb II 15 omits sition.
Q586 MT Deut 31:26 hzh hrwth SV(1) – Difference in gender.^1137
4QDeutb III 2 t)zh hrwth
Q587 MT Deut 32:3 omits SV(2) – 4QDeutb has an expan-
4QDeutb III 5 Mky+p#w[ sive plus.^1138
Q588 MT Deut 32:3 ldg Not Counted – The fragment is
too damaged to allow a certain
reading.^1139
4QDeutb III 13 ]lwdg
1135
4QDeutb has an additional prepositional phrase that is also reflected in the LXX, but is lacking from the
other witnesses. According to J.A. Duncan, Deuteronomy Manuscripts, 22, the variant is significant as
“there is no parallel reading which would have prompted it, suggesting that it may in fact have been origi-
nal.” 1136
The subject is grammatically plural l)r#y ynqz lk, “all the elders of Israel.” The pronominal object suf-
fix in Deut 31:10 that describes the subject of the verb in verse 11is also plural (Mtw)). It should be noted
that Numeruswechsel is particularly prevalent in this passage (cf. the singular and plural pronominal suf-
fixes referring to the l)r#y ynb in Deut 31:3-6, esp. verse 6 which uses both grammatical forms in the same
clause). 4QDeutb may have harmonised the forms in this pericope to correct obvious grammatical inconsis-
tencies. On 1137 Numeruswechsel in Deuteronomy in general see note above.
Cf. the comments in note above. The form of the demonstrative pronoun in 4QDeutb is grammatically
correct. 1138
4QDeutb clearly has Mky+b#w, though the peh is somewhat damaged. Based on the LXX the text can be
restored: Mkyr+#w Mky+p#w Mkynqzw Mky+b# ynqz lk t) yl) wlyhqh, “gather together to me all the elders of
your tribes and your elders and your judges and your officials.” The LXX includes the phrase και τους
πρεσβυτερους υμων και τους κριτας υμων, which would support the reconstruction in 4QDeutb that includes
the form 1139 Mkynqzw, however only the second term Mky+p#w (και τους κριτας υμων) is preserved.
If waw is read between dalet and lamed the form in 4QDeutb appears to be adjectival against the nomi-
nal form in the MT. Against this reading we note that the form is read without waw in J.A. Duncan, Deu-
teronomy Manuscripts, 28, and although the most recent reading in E. Ulrich and F.M. Cross, Qumran
Cave 4. IX: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Kings (DJD 14; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995) 13, contains
the waw, the doubtful nature of the text is evident from this disagreement. J.A. Duncan does not note her
correction in the later publication, only providing a comment that “the head of waw is just visible on the
edge of the leather, as is the top of lamed” (E. Ulrich and F.M. Cross, Qumran Cave 4. IX, 14. This seems