The Additions (2008), conference

The Additions (2008) is a conference in the series of International Conference on the Deuterocanonical Books, chaired by Géza G. Xeravits and József Zsengellér.

History

The conference is organised by the Shime'on Centre of the Reformed Theological Academy, Pápa (Hungary), in 15-17 May, 2008. The proceedings of the conference has been published: Deuterocanonical Additions of the Old Testament Books (2010 Xeravits, Zsengellér), edited volume

Official Program

Beate Ego, Mordechai’s Refusal of Proskynesis in front of Haman in the Septuagint and Related Literature -- Ida Fröhlich, Court Stories and Eschatology in Second Temple Literature: The Additions to Esther --Thomas Hieke, Atonement in the Prayer of Azariah (Dan 3:40) -- Armin Lange, What Is in a Name? Daniel in the Daniel-Traditions and Elsewhere -- Friedrich V. Reiterer, Wissen – Verstehen – Weisheit im Buch Baruch -- Karin Schöpflin, Susanna and Literature—a Reception-Historical Perspective -- Stefan Schorch, Genderizing Piety: The Prayers of Mordecai and Esther in Comparison -- Michal Wojciechowski, The Criticism of Religion in Dan 14, Bar 6 and Related Texts -- Benjamin G. Wright, The Epistle of Jeremiah: Translation or Composition? -- Géza G. Xeravits, The Closing Psalm of Baruch (Bar 4:30-5:9) -- József Zsengellér, The Concept of Additions

Abstracts of the Lectures

• Beate Ego (Universität Osnabrück): Mordechai’s Refusal of Proskynesis in front of Haman in the Septuagint and Related Literature

The motif of refusal of the proskynesis as being told in the Masoretic text in Est 3:1-5 raises the question why Mordechai did not make a bow to Haman. This narrative gap was filled in the ancient re-tellings of the Book of Ester with different answers. First of all, my paper will point out to the answer of the Septuagint; secondly, it will explain in which way this interpretation is related to other ancient ones. During this process both the relationship of the Septuagint to pagan traditions as well as its significance for the later Targumic aggada becomes clearly evident.

• Ida Fröhlich (Catholic University, Piliscsaba, Hungary): Court Stories and Eschatology in Second Temple Literature: The Additions to Esther

Esther is unique among biblical books of being represented in three different versions in Second Temple literature: the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, and Josephus. Although the three versions differ among them in many details including the sequence of their narrative elements, there are clear evidences of the use of common literary models in the narratives: the Ahiqar novel, and a harem intrigue from the Persian royal court. Persian names evidence that at least one of the literary sources used by the authors was of Persian origin. Ancient Near Eastern narrative material was Judaized in Esther, and completed in the Septuagint version by additions belonging to various genres. 4Q550 is a fragmentary Aramaic narrative from Qumran, a judaized court story with Persian names reflecting the literary pattern of the Ahiqar novel. The text is closed by a dualistic and eschatological oracle, an addition to the narrative part. The paper aims to examine the Additions to the Septuagint version of Esther, especially A and F (Mordecai’s dream, and its interpretation) in the light of 4Q550.

• Thomas Hieke (Universität Mainz): Atonement in the Prayer of Azariah (Dan 3:40)

The paper focuses on the key verse in the Prayer of Azariah, Daniel 3:40. After some brief introductory remarks, a synopsis compares the existing versions of this verse, i.e., the Aramaic version as reconstructed by Klaus Koch from the text of Jerachmeel (Ar), the Septuagint version (G) and the so-called Theodotion (Th). One can get the basic idea behind this verse from the differing versions. Based on intertextual relations to the books of Exodus and Leviticus, the paper offers new suggestions for the understanding of the problematic terms in the Greek versions. As a kind of cross-check, hypotheses about the origin of the Greek texts are added. The conclusion provides a paraphrase and a summary of the extraordinary idea that the death of righteous men can replace the sacrifice of animals.

• Armin Lange (Universität Wien): What Is in a Name? Daniel in the Daniel-Traditions and Elsewhere

Different from other heroes of the Jewish scriptures, the name Daniel is not prominent in the Jewish onomasticon. Outside the Book of Daniel and other Danielic texts or references to them, the name Daniel occurs only rarely. Pre-Hellenistic references are restricted to its alternate form Dan’el (Ezek 14:14, 20; and 28:3)—the only exception to the rule being 1 En 6:7 where one of chiefs of the fallen watchers is called Daniel (cf. 1 En 69:2) Ezek 14:14, 20; and 28:3 is influenced by the legendary just ruler of Canaanite (Ugaritic) myth, Dan’el. The Canaanite (Ugaritic) Dan’el exerted a similar influence on the onomasticon of other Canaanite successor cultures as attested by an Edomite ostracon from Tel Malhata (Davies # 55.001) and an Aramaic inscription (KAI 259,1). In Hellenstic times, the name Daniel becomes more prominent in literary texts (1 Chron 3:1; Ezra 8:2 par Neh 10:7; Let. Aris. 49). But only from Roman times epigraphic and papyrological evidence for Jews named Daniel is preserved. In a 1st cent. CE ossuary inscription from Jerusalem, a Joseph son of Daniel is mentioned and a signature of a Jewish re-marriage contract dated to the year 124 CE (Mur115) might read Da[?neihl. This paper will ask in how far the history of the name Daniel in the Jewish onomasticon has implications for the understanding of Danielic literature including the so-called additions to the Book of Daniel.

• Friedrich V. Reiterer (Universität Salzburg): Wissen – Verstehen – Weisheit im Buch Baruch

Die Beobachtung der inneren Querverbindungen zeigt, dass Bar 3,9-38 innerhalb des Buches isoliert steht. Diesen Text qualifiziert man gewöhnlich mit der Gattungsbezeichnung "Weisheitsgedicht". Aus dem Bereich der "geistig-praktischen" Fertigkeiten nimmt aber der klassische Terminus sophia der Zahl nach die am wenigsten bedeutsame Rolle ein. Denn während sophia zwei Mal vorkommt, werden phronesis und episteme je drei Mal, synesis vier Mal in dieser Passage verwendet. Die Fragestellung geht nun als erstes darauf hin, wie diese aus dem gleichen Wortfeld stammenden Termini unter einander zu ordnen sind. In der wissenschaftlichen Diskussion werden nun auch häufig Bezüge zu nomos in 4:1 hergestellt. Wenn dies berechtigt ist, was noch zu belegen ist, dann ist die Abgrenzung nicht bei 3:38 sondern bei 4:1 vorzunehmen. Darüber hinaus ist in diesem Falle das Verhältnis von phronesis / episteme / synesis / sophia zu nomos bedenken.

• Karin Schöpflin (Universität Göttingen): Susanna and Literature — a Reception-Historical Perspective

The paper will present some selected dramatic and lyric adaptations of the biblical story about Susanna in order to provide examples for a reception history in literature. In addition there will be a few illustration of Susanna’s afterlife in paintings.

• Stefan Scorch (Kirchliche Hochschule Bethel): Genderizing Piety: The Prayers of Mordecai and Esther in Comparison

The Greek versions of the Book of Esther contain two prayers, one of Mordecai and one of Esther. Immediately following one after the other, they were inserted just before the narrative reaches its dramatic peak, after the reader is told that Esther agreed to intervene to the king in order to rescue the Jews and before the narrative continues with what is happening when she actually does so. The two prayers, which belong to the so-called deutero-canocical additions to the book of Esther, are parallel in several ways: They appear in the same narrative context, they focus on the same situation, and they are uttered each by one of the two main protagonists of the book. Thanks to this joint basis the significant differences between the two texts become all the more apparent, relating especially to language, content and stile. Many of them seem to be motivated by the gender of the person who is praying. The comparison of the two texts may thus help to reveal some gender-specific differences which supposedly existed in the personal piety of Jewish women and men of the Hellenistic period.

• Michal Wojciechowski (University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland): The Criticism of Religion in Dan 14, Bar 6 and Related Texts

Sharp criticisms of polytheistic idolatry, which can be found in the Bible, are read in the context of its monotheistic faith. Nevertheless these texts, if taken out of their present context and approached form critically, seem to reflect a polemical attitude to religion in general. They are satiric and attack weak points of the religions. They can be compared to Greek texts as the tradition on Diagoras, some Aesopic fables, Lucian’s story on the false serpent god (Alexander or the false prophet). Dan 14 can be also a reaction to the Asclepios cult. These satires could even be borrowed (with modifications) from Greek sources. Making use of such sources, biblical authors probably disregarded their antireligious stance, considering biblical faith as something else than ‘religion’ in the ancient sense of this term.

• Benjamin G. Wright (Lehigh University): The Epistle of Jeremiah: Translation or Composition?

Scholars who have written on the Epistle of Jeremiah have been somewhat divided about whether it was translated from a Semitic-language original or composed in Greek. As I translated the Epistle for the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) project, this problem stood out among all others as primary for looking at this text. Indeed, several features of the text suggest that it was translated. Other features look more characteristic of original Greek. In this paper, I will consider both of these positions as a way of thinking about the methodological problems inherent in this discussion.

• Géza G. Xeravits (Shime’on Centre, Pápa): The Closing Psalm of Baruch (Bar 4:30-5:9)

The Book of Baruch ends with a complex psalm of prophetic inspiration (4:5-5:9). This passage differs basically from the preceding section of the book—which is a sapiential poem in praise of Wisdom (3:9-4:4)—it is not surprising then, that every scholar agrees that this psalm is a unit which is independent from its actual context. Most scholars also agree on the internal coherence and unity of this psalm. The aim of this paper is to hint at the possibility that the closing part of this psalm (4:30-5:9) is an originally independent poem. In doing this, the present paper intends to contribute the understanding of the complicated emergence of the Book of Baruch.

• József Zsengellér (Shime’on Centre, Pápa): The Concept of Additions

The so called additions do not form a single group of texts like that of the chamesh megillot, having a special common characteristic. They form at least two separate groups. First is the group of additions to Esther and to Daniel. I try to demonstrate that these texts were artificially separated from their original "mother text" in which they form an original edition of the Book of Esther and the Book of Daniel. The second group forms a style of rewritten Bible taking a biblical situation as a starting point to write their own pseudonym story independent of the original books connected to them by their author/title (Baruch, Jeremiah). As a result of our analysis we do not have additions any more, but some independent texts among the deuterocanonical literature.