By naming Micah and citing Mi 3:12 the book of Jeremiah (Jer 26:18) provides an explicit example of the reception of older prophetic texts and traditions in later compositions. In addition, Jer 26:18f. also offer a historical setting for Micah’s activity—the time of Hezekiah and most probably the events of 701 BCE. The paper argues that the literary history of the book of Micah substantiates the assumption of an early Micah composition originating from the late 8th century BCE and discusses the extent, structure, and pragmatics of the composition which comprises Mi *1:5-3:12. Focussing on the situation of the eminent Assyrian threat, Micah uses the the fate of Samaria as a rhetorical device in order to persuade his Judean addressees of his message. In doing so, Micah not only displays a familiarity with North Israelite prophetic traditions, the composition also adopts compositional elements and rhetorical strategies found in Hosea and Amos.
As the product of a textual community imbedded in an oral culture, the War Scroll can be rewardingly approached as a composition intended for a community of hearers. Indeed, this article demonstrates that 1QM retained an orally fluid textuality and preserves a variety of textual indicators of performativity: hints of oral engagement, accumulation of imitable practices, and reliance on rhetorical techniques suited to the ear. In examining the performative potentials in the War Scroll’s prescriptive (cols. 1–9), prayer (cols. 10–14), and dramatic (cols. 15–19) material, I argue that 1QM can be understood as a spoken text, one which lends itself to performance and embodiment.
A consideration of both the palaeographic and material features of a scroll provides scholars the opportunity to investigate the scribal culture in which a particular manuscript emerged. This article examines the papyrus opisthograph from Qumran containing 4QpapHodayot-like Text B, 4Q433a, and 4QpapSerekh ha-Yaḥada, 4Q255, on either side. There has been scholarly disagreement about this opisthograph with regard to a number of questions: (1) which of the two compositions was inscribed on the recto, (2) how the two compositions should be dated, and (3) which of the two texts was written first. This article looks at both compositions by means of palaeography and codicology. From this combined approach I deduce that 4Q433a was written first, on the recto of this papyrus manuscript. 4Q255 was added later, on the verso. Both compositions can be dated to the early first century BCE. This reconstruction makes it plausible that 4Q255 was a personal copy.