from the latter half of the first centuryb.c.e., also exhibits agreement with
the additions in the SP beyond the traditional text as in the MT and LXX.
But like 4QpaleoExodm, it does not have the specifically Samaritan read-
ings. It thus confirms the pattern seen in Exodus, that Palestinian Judaism
knew at least two editions of the book of Numbers, and that the Samari-
tans used the secondary, already expanded Jewish tradition exemplified in
4QNumb. Again, both editions of Numbers were apparently in use by Jews
in the late Second Temple period.Joshua
The oldest manuscript of Joshua also provided a surprise, but in a differ-
ent direction. 4QJosha, from the latter half of the second or the first half
of the first centuryb.c.e., presented a sequence of important episodes
that was strikingly at variance with the order of events in the traditional
MT. In the scroll, Joshua evidently builds the first altar in the newly en-
tered land at Gilgal, immediately after he has traversed the River Jordan
and led all the people safely across. That is, the episode occurs at the end
of chapter 4, thus prior to the circumcision and Passover and then the en-
suing conquest. The scroll’s sequence seems natural and logical, and one
might expect that the sanctification of the land by the building of the first
altar, the recitation of the Torah, the rite of circumcision, and the celebra-
tion of Passover would be the inaugural episodes of the occupation of the
Promised Land. In contrast, the MT locates the building of the first altar
at the end of chapter 8, placing it on Mt. Ebal, which causes numerous
problems. Commentators have had to struggle with that odd location, for
it requires a march (including the women and children, 8:35) of twenty
miles from Ai up to Ebal, the construction of the altar, then a return
march south, back to Gilgal. Meanwhile, Joshua would have left that im-
portant altar abandoned in enemy territory, and, whereas Gilgal remained
an important shrine (1 Sam. 11:14-15; 2 Kings 2:1), Mt. Ebal is otherwise in-
significant. The problem is worsened since Josh. 9:1 logically and syntacti-
cally follows 8:29, not 8:35, suggesting that the insertion of vv. 30-35 at the
end of chapter 8 is in a secondary position. Moreover, the LXX presents
yet a slightly different order, though it is in basic agreement with the MT
regarding the location of the altar. But perhaps the strongest confirma-
tion of the sequence in 4QJoshais provided by Josephus (Ant.5.20) and
Pseudo-Philo (L.A.B.21:7), who also place the altar at Gilgal and who132eugene ulrichEERDMANS -- Early Judaism (Collins and Harlow) final text
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:03:57 PM