Well, I said that I would be posting on some texts in Zechariah for the rest of this semester, and I am writing a paper on Zech 7, so I will be spending some time in this chapter over the next couple of months. This short series on 7:1-3 will attend to three issues over two posts: the textual problem with the reading Regem-melek in 7:2 , an interpretation of the historical details, and finally Zechariah’s use of historical references in his prophecy. This post will examine the first of the three issues.
The Textual Problem in 7:2
The list of witnesses may be found in Textual Witnesses for Zech 7:2. If anyone has any proposals for how the LXX reading arose, I am open to suggestions. At this point, I understand the LXX reading as resulting from unknown transcriptional errors, and not a witness to a different parent text.
The External Evidence
MT (excluding ms 93), Vulg., the Hebrew, Targ., and (LXX?=transcrip. error?) read wregem-melech against the Peshitta’s rab-mag. The MT has a broad base of witnesses in favor of its reading against the narrower base of only the Peshitta. Usually the narrower base contains the secondary reading, but the witnesses must be weighed and not counted. Since the LXX is
not a clear witness to either reading, and the MT usually agrees with Vulg. and Targ the internal evidence will have to decide between the readings.
The Internal Evidence and Intrinsic Probability
In this case, the internal evidence confirms the criterion that the narrower base of witnesses usually contains the secondary reading. The Peshitta’s reading, rab-mag, can be explained as an assimilation to Jer 39:3, 13. These verses are the only other verses in the Hebrew Bible that contain rab-mag. The verses in Jeremiah also have the proper name Sarezer preceeding rab-mag. The Syriac Peshitta assimilated the hapax legomenon, regem-melech, to the more familiar rab-mag. In this case, therefore, the lectio difficilior is regem melech, and, in all probability, this reading accounts for the slightly more familiar rab-mag in the Syriac Peshitta.
Conclusion
The MT has the original reading due to two factors: (1) it has the widest base of witnesses from which only the Peshitta diverges, and (2) the variant reading, rab-mag, may be explained as an assimilation to the more familiar readings of Jer 39:3, 13 in order to smooth over the lectio difficilior of the Hebrew text. The text should be translated as follows:
- And [the people?] sent Sarezer and Regem-melek and his men to Bethel.
- And [the people?] sent Sarezer, spokesman for the king, and his men to Bethel (HALOT, 1187).
The first option should be preferred over the second because waw in Hebrew usually coordinates equal syntactical units and does not usually mark an appositional relationship. Also, the Masoretic accents seem to separate Sarezer from Regem-melech with the use of zaqeph gadol, indicating that they read the waw as coordinating two equal units, not to be read appositionally.
