This document summarizes a presentation given by Samuel Aldridge and Shaun Short at the 2014 Annual Society of Biblical Literature Meeting in San Diego. The presentation aimed to show that the textual traditions of the Ethiopic Psalter and Song of Habakkuk display two different scribal approaches, resulting in two different stories of textual transmission that are highly independent of one another. Some of the key differences discussed include the Psalter tradition exhibiting a lower level of textual variation compared to the Biblical tradition, different patterns of textual clustering between the traditions, and differences in the types of textual variants present.

1. Annual Society of Biblical Literature Meeting,
2014, San Diego
Samuel Aldridge and Shaun Short,
Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT

2. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
It is our aim today to show that, within the Ethiopic
canon, the Psalter and Biblical traditions of the Song of
Habakkuk display two different scribal agendas, creating
two different stories of textual transmission that are
highly, but not entirely, independent of one another.

3. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
It is our aim today to show that, within the Ethiopic
canon, the Psalter and Biblical traditions of the Song of
Habakkuk display two different scribal agendas, creating
two different stories of textual transmission that are
highly, but not entirely, independent of one another.
 Different in level of alteration

4. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
It is our aim today to show that, within the Ethiopic
canon, the Psalter and Biblical traditions of the Song of
Habakkuk display two different scribal agendas, creating
two different stories of textual transmission that are
highly, but not entirely, independent of one another.
 Different in level of alteration
 Different patterns of textual clustering

5. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
It is our aim today to show that, within the Ethiopic
canon, the Psalter and Biblical traditions of the Song of
Habakkuk display two different scribal agendas, creating
two different stories of textual transmission that are
highly, but not entirely, independent of one another.
 Different in level of alteration
 Different patterns of textual clustering
 Different in types of textual variants (TVUs) present

6. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
It is our aim today to show that, within the Ethiopic
canon, the Psalter and Biblical traditions of the Song of
Habakkuk display two different scribal agendas, creating
two different stories of textual transmission that are
highly, but not entirely, independent of one another.
 Different in level of alteration
 Different patterns of textual clustering
 Different in types of textual variants (TVUs) present
 Discussion of any interaction between the traditions

7. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter BaseText
 Ludolf, Hiob. Psalterium Davidis
Aethiopice et latine. Francfort sur le
Main, 1701.

8. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter BaseText
 Ludolf, Hiob. Psalterium Davidis
Aethiopice et latine. Francfort sur le
Main, 1701.
 Biblical BaseText
 Löfgren, Oscar. Jona, Nahum,
Habakuk, Zephanja, Haggai, Sacharja
und Maleachi Äthiopisch unter
Zugrundelegung des Oxforder Ms.
Huntington 625 nach mehreren
Handschriften. Paris, Uppsala and
Leipzig, 1930.

9. Witness Manuscript Date
W1 EMML 2064 C 14th
W2 Bibliotheque National 10 C 14th
W3 Codex Barbarini Or. 2 C 14th
W4 EMML 2010 C 14th/15th
W5 Abbadie 105 1468-1478
W6 EMML 4415 C 15th
W7 EMDL 0290 C 15th
W8 IES 837 C 15th
W9 Vatican Etiopico 7 C 15th
W10 Davies Dabra Libanos C 16th
W11 EMML 2496 C 15th/16th
W12 EMML 2497 C 16th
W13 EMML 2602 C 16th
W14 EMML 3112 Late C 16th
W15 EMIP 1 Herron Codex C 17th
W16 EMIP 0099 C 17th
W17 EMIP 1911 C 17th
Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
Witness Manuscript Date
W18 TanaseeCollection 103 C 17th
W19 UNESCO Collection 10.06 C 17th
W20 EMIP 0009 C 18th
W21 EMIP 342 C 18th
W22 EMIP 1084 C 18th
W23 Yale Ethiopic C 18th
W24 EMDL 274 Late C 18th
W25 Green Collection Ms 120 C 19th
W26 EMIP 0110 C 19th
W27 EMIP 0161 1865-1913
W28 EMIP 0486 Ṭəqəmt 2,1897 EC
W29 EMIP 0925 EarlyC 20th
W30 EMIP 1043 EarlyC 20th
W31 Green Collection Ms 310 C 19th / C 20th
W32 Green Collection Ms 313 C 20th
W33 Green Collection Ms 317 C 19th / C 20th

10. Witness Manuscript Date
W1 IES 77 C 20th
W2 EMIP 1029 C 15th/16th
W3 EMIP 746 1719
W4 EMIP 881 C 17th
W5 UNESCO 10.04 C17th/18th
W6 Davies’ Axum Church of Zion C 15th
W7 EMIP 1063 C 19th/20th
W8 UNESCO 10.34 C 19th
W9 EMIP 2007 C 18th
W10 IES 436 C 15th
W11 EMML 6686 C 17th
W12 EMML 1768 C 15th
W13 EMML 1481 EarlyC 17th
W14 EMML 2080 C 16th
W15 EMML 6930 C 18th
W16 Cerulli 75 1930
W17 EMIP 1095 C 19th
Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
Witness Manuscript Date
W18 UNESCO 10.65 C 18th/19th
W19 EMIP 949 C 20th
W20 Huntington 625 C 14th
W21 GG 152 C 16th
W22 GG 181 C 16th
W23 GG 106 1694
W24 EMML 1842 1662
W25 EMML 2440 1663
W26 EMML 7584 C 16th
W27 Princeton Garret 7 C 16th/17th
W28 Abb 55 C 15th/16th
W29 *Wien 16 C 19th
W30 JE5E C 19th
W31 Abbadai 35 C 17th
W32 EMML 349 1923-1924
W33 EMML 36 C18th/19th

11. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT

12. • By “uniformity” we are referring to the extent the text that is
affected by textual variation. The less of the base text
affected by variation, the more “uniform” the tradition.
Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT

13. • By “uniformity” we are referring to the extent the text that is
affected by textual variation. The less of the base text
affected by variation, the more “uniform” the tradition.
• We have chosen to display this as a percentage of the base
text.
Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT

14. • By “uniformity” we are referring to the extent the text that is
affected by textual variation. The less of the base text
affected by variation, the more “uniform” the tradition.
• We have chosen to display this as a percentage of the base
text.
• Calculated by the following formula:
Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
Words inTVUs
Words in BaseText
x100

15. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
13.14%
PsalterTradition
26TVUs consisting of 36 words
274 word base text
Base text unaffected byTVUs Base text affected byTVUs

16. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
70.00%
13.14%
PsalterTradition
26TVUs consisting of 36 words
274 word base text
BiblicalTradition
108TVUs* consisting of 167 words
240 word base text
Base text unaffected byTVUs Base text affected byTVUs
*19 TVU’s excluded due to ignoring of those textual variations that arise solely in UNESCO 10.34 and EMIP 949. Total 127 TVUs

17. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT

18. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Grouping of similar texts together to form textual clusters

19. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Grouping of similar texts together to form textual clusters
 Used to create a clearer picture of the divergence in a
tradition.

20. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Grouping of similar texts together to form textual clusters
 Used to create a clearer picture of the divergence in a
tradition.
 Achieved by using Hierarchical Clustering using an
Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean
(UPGMA).

21. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Grouping of similar texts together to form textual clusters
 Used to create a clearer picture of the divergence in a
tradition.
 Achieved by using Hierarchical Clustering using an
Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean
(UPGMA).
 Results shown as a dendrogram.

22. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

23. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

24. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

25. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

26. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

27. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

28. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of PsalterTexts

29. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

30. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

31. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

32. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

33. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

34. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

35. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

36. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

37. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

38. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

39. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

40. 14th 15th 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th
Dendrogram of BiblicalTexts

41. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT

42. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter texts
 Vast majority are small changes
▪ Strophe 3c: ሥኖ (W05) / ስኑ (W29) / ስና (W07)
 Most discriminating variant is በመንሱት / እምመንሱት (strophe 2f)

43. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter texts
 Vast majority are small changes
▪ Strophe 3c: ሥኖ (W05) / ስኑ (W29) / ስና (W07)
 Most discriminating variant is በመንሱት / እምመንሱት (strophe 2f)
 The exception: Barbarini Or. 2

44. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter texts
 Vast majority are small changes
▪ Strophe 3c: ሥኖ (W05) / ስኑ (W29) / ስና (W07)
 Most discriminating variant is በመንሱት / እምመንሱት (strophe 2f)
 The exception: Barbarini Or. 2
 Several small additions and minuses

45. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter texts
 Vast majority are small changes
▪ Strophe 3c: ሥኖ (W05) / ስኑ (W29) / ስና (W07)
 Most discriminating variant is በመንሱት / እምመንሱት (strophe 2f)
 The exception: Barbarini Or. 2
 Several small additions and minuses
 One noticeable minus
▪ Probable homeoteleuton on repetition of ወአ…

46. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Psalter texts
 Vast majority are small changes
▪ Strophe 3c: ሥኖ (W05) / ስኑ (W29) / ስና (W07)
 Most discriminating variant is በመንሱት / እምመንሱት (strophe 2f)
 The exception: Barbarini Or. 2
 Several small additions and minuses
 One noticeable minus
▪ Probable homeoteleuton on repetition of ወአ…
 One significant addition in strophe 17b
▪ BaseText: ወኢይከውን ፍሬ ውሰተ ዐጸዳ ወይን
▪ Bar. Or. 2: ወኢይከውን ፍሬ ውሰተ ዐጸዳ ወይን አእጸደተ ኢትዮጵያ ይደነግፃ
▪ Addition matches strophe 7b of Psalter text

47. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Biblical texts
 Amount ofTVU’s is far greater
▪ 108TVUs consisting of 167 words in Biblical texts
▪ 26TVUs consisting of 36 words in Psalter texts

48. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Biblical texts
 Amount ofTVU’s is far greater
▪ 108TVUs consisting of 167 words in Biblical texts
▪ 26TVUs consisting of 36 words in Psalter text
 Diversity ofTVU’s far more expansive
▪ Suffixal changes
▪ Prepositional changes
▪ Word order; syntax
▪ Substitutions
▪ Additions and subtractions

49. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Biblical text, strophe 17d
 ወኃልቁ አባግዕ እምቅማሕ And they were destroyed, the
sheep of the pastures (Fam. 2)
 ወአኅለቀ አባግዕ ሲሳዮ And I will destroy the sheep of
(his) nourishment (Fam. 3)
 ወኅልቀ ሲሣየ አባግዕ And it was destroyed, the
nourishment of sheep (Fam.4&10)
 ወየራልቁ አባግዕ እምቅማኅ And they will be destroyed, the
sheep of the pastures (Family 5)
 ወሐልቁ አባግዕ እመብልዕ And they were destroyed, the
sheep of provision (Family 6)
 ተሐጒሉ አባግዕ እመብልዕ You will lose, the sheep of
provision (Fam. 7, 8 and 9)

50. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Biblical text, strophe 17e
 ወአልህምት እምጎል
And the oxen of the stables (Families 2, 5 and 6)
 ወኢይረክቡ አልህምት ዘይቀምኁ ውስተ ምቅማኆሙ
And they will not be fattened, the oxen that
graze within their pastures (Families 3, 4 and 10)
 ወእልህምትኒ ኢይትረከቡ በውስተ ጎል :
And the oxen will not ever again be fattened
within the stable (Families 7, 8 and 9)

51. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Is there any overlap in variant points between the Psalter
and BiblicalTraditions of the Song of Habakkuk?

52. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Is there any overlap in variant points between the Psalter
and BiblicalTraditions of the Song of Habakkuk?
 Only 3TVUs are found in both traditions
▪ Within the Psalter tradition these 3 belong to the 16 that solely serve to separate
W01 (C14th)andW05 (C15th) from the rest of the Psalter tradition

53. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Is there any overlap in variant points between the Psalter
and BiblicalTraditions of the Song of Habakkuk?
 Only 3TVUs are found in both traditions
▪ Within the Psalter tradition these 3 belong to the 16 that solely serve to separate
W01 (C14th)andW05 (C15th) from the rest of the Psalter tradition
 W05 Strophe 6d ኢድባር (base text: አውግር)
▪ ኢድባር also as an erasure in the singular C16th biblical MS EMML 2080

54. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Is there any overlap in variant points between the Psalter
and BiblicalTraditions of the Song of Habakkuk?
 Only 3TVUs are found in both traditions
▪ Within the Psalter tradition these 3 belong to the 16 that solely serve to separate
W01 (C14th)andW05 (C15th) from the rest of the Psalter tradition
 W05 Strophe 6d ኢድባር (base text: አውግር)
▪ ኢድባር also as an erasure in the singular C16th biblical MS EMML 2080
 W05 Strophe 6b ወሶበሂ (base text: ወሶበ)
▪ Found in 3 biblical MSS, two C19th, one C17th

55. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Is there any overlap in variant points between the Psalter
and BiblicalTraditions of the Song of Habakkuk?
 Only 3TVUs are found in both traditions
▪ Within the Psalter tradition these 3 belong to the 16 that solely serve to separate
W01 (C14th)and W05 (C15th) from the rest of the Psalter tradition
 W05 Strophe 6d ኢድባር (base text: አውግር)
▪ ኢድባር also as an erasure in the singular C16th biblical MS EMML 2080
 W05 Strophe 6b ወሶበሂ (base text: ወሶበ)
▪ Found in 3 biblical MSS, two C19th, one C17th
 W05 Strophe 8a addition of አፍለግ
▪ Found in the majority of the Biblical MSS

56. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Is there any other interaction at all between the Psalter and
BiblicalTraditions of the Song of Habakkuk?
 No family of the BiblicalTradition lines up precisely with
the PsalterTradition
 However three later dated Biblical families do seem to be
influenced by the PsalterTradition in some way
▪ Family 7: Comprised of Witness 14 EMML 2080 C16th; Coincides with a
later branch of theTransitional and Standardized Forms of theText.
▪ Family 8: C19th – C20th; Coincides with theTextus Receptus
▪ Family 9: C17th – C19th, Coincides with the Standardized Form of theText

57. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
You will lose the sheep of provision; and the oxen
will not ever again be fattened within the stable
Biblical Families 7, 8 and
9 Strophes 17d and e
ተሐጒሉ አባግዕ እመብልዕ
ወእልህምትኒ ኢይትረከቡ
በውስተ ጎል
PsalterTradition
Strophes 17d and e
ተኃጒሉ አባግዕ እመብልዕ
ወአልህምትኒ ኢይትረከቡ
በውስተ ጎል

58. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Many such places of obvious similarity
 However, each of the three Biblical families distinguishes
themselves form one another and the PsalterTradition at
many points

59. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 Many such places of obvious similarity
 However, each of the three Biblical families distinguishes
themselves form one another and the PsalterTradition at
many points
 Thus the BiblicalTradition comes into contact with
the PsalterTradition, at some point, and is in some
way influenced by it
 Earliest we can see this happening is during C16th
 Most pronounced after C17th

60. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 One-directional influence only
 Whatever social clime resulted in this interaction remains
of interest to us
 Area of research we wish to explore in the future

61. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 One-directional influence only
 Whatever social clime resulted in this interaction remains
of interest to us
 Area of research we wish to explore in the future
 Does not change our overall conclusion

62. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 They function by two different sets of rules

63. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 They function by two different sets of rules
▪ In the PsalterTradition the rule is one of immutability
▪ Points of variance (TVUs) are few and inconsequential
▪ 5oo+ years of a tradition in stasis

64. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 They function by two different sets of rules
▪ In the PsalterTradition the rule is one of immutability
▪ Points of variance (TVUs) are few and inconsequential
▪ 5oo+ years of a tradition in stasis
▪ In the BiblicalTradition the rule is one of diversity
▪ Points of variance (TVUs) are multiple and assorted
▪ Speaks to the freedom of linguistic license

65. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 They function by two different sets of rules
▪ In the PsalterTradition the rule is one of immutability
▪ Points of variance (TVUs) are few and inconsequential
▪ 5oo+ years of a tradition in stasis
▪ In the BiblicalTradition the rule is one of diversity
▪ Points of variance (TVUs) are multiple and assorted
▪ Speaks to the freedom of linguistic license
▪ They do not vary internally at the same points
▪ Example of Psalter influence on certain Biblical Families is a one
directional phenomenon by which the above rules are not broken

66. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 The two scribal agendas could result from different social
climes

67. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 The two scribal agendas could result from different social
climes
▪ The PsalterTradition is exacted within the liturgical setting
▪ Is hence accessible to the common clergy and laity
▪ Is representative of religious practice in action

68. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 The two scribal agendas could result from different social
climes
▪ The PsalterTradition is exacted within the liturgical setting
▪ Is hence accessible to the common clergy and laity
▪ Is representative of religious practice in action
▪ The BiblicalTradition is perpetuated within the monastic setting
▪ Is accessible to and influenced by the scribal elite
▪ Evolves in a very different way and is given to nuanced inflection

69. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
 We have established that there are two separate
scribal agendas at work here
 The two scribal agendas could result from different
social climes
▪ The PsalterTradition is exacted within the liturgical setting
▪ Is hence accessible to the common clergy and laity
▪ Is representative of religious practice in action
▪ The BiblicalTradition is perpetuated within the monastic
setting
▪ Is accessible to and influenced by the scribal elite
▪ Evolves in a very different way and is given to nuanced inflection
 Whatever original archetype birthed these two
traditions is lost to us now

70. Textual History of the
Ethiopic Old Testament
THEOT
The End