The remnant of Judah

Miika Tucker in TC raises a study of that infamous LXX/MT dispute over Jeremiah, here what is 40-44 in MT. Mainly this is in dialogue with Hermann-Josef Stipp "Empty Land" (2021), who'd covered MT 37-43 as a Narrative of Judah’s Downfall in Palestine (JDP).

Tucker figures that before we allow higher critics like Stipp to gaily trample the clover, we should be restoring the earliest attainable Hebrew. Everyone but the most cretinous fundamentalist knows that the ancient Jews messed up this particular text. (They did it to 2 Reigns too.) But before we play the drunken Klingon and tout the "original Greek", the Graecophones had their own agendae with the text. This assigns to Tucker some work to do.

The top tier - the very Masoretic - relays a few variants against the Targum, a few more against the Vulgate, and the most against Peshitta. MT appears a "Byzantine" text in 41:10 and 42:2, incorporating a doublet which came from variant readings in the proto-MT(s); probably Hebrew but possibly some ancient Aramaic targum or Hebrew pesher.

MT 42:12 is more deliberate. The proto-MT had Jeremiah (perhaps through Baruch) quote the Lord: And I will grant you mercy, and I will have mercy on you and return you to your land. MT instead has the Lord promise this through Nabuchadrezzar. Tucker thinks the Hebrew behind Peshitta was using infinitive constructions, which are good CBH, but archaic for Qumran-era Hebrew (we see similar loss of infinitive in modern Greek against the remoter dialects, like Pontic). That would make that Hebrew, likewise CBH, to be taken seriously. The MT nod to Nabuchadrezzar would reflect a pro-'Iraq tendency, (I think) for Roman times maybe Trajan's.

Before proto-MT, MT 37-44 would be 44–51. This, Tucker's third chapter, is the strongest in my view. It follows a section to distinguish the synopsis "remnant" from the proto-MT's understanding thereof.

For Jeremiah himself, Nabuchadrezzar wasn't all bad, either; recall that it all went wrong when the Judaeans resisted him in the first place. In the 40/47 synopsis, Gedaliah is a benevolent governor for the imperium, appointing men and women. MT has men and "poor and children(!)"; LXX, men and "their wives". Tucker notes the MT parallels children in MT 43:6 as exiles; "poor" agree with plusses in MT 39:10 and 52:16 also not in Greek. In MT 40 this would simply be a harmony which the (proto-)MT made up. The idea was to paint Gedaliah as a gatherer of all the exiles, beyond being a fair governor for the (home) "remnant". Proto-MT has a theology of remnant-in-exile, which we'll be seeing shared in Leontopolis and Qumran. The remnant for the Jeremiah synopsis is to follow the prophet.

Because Gedaliah's Eden could not last. One Ishmael - who might have been a Davidide - murdered the man, synopsis 41/48, with a general massacre in Mizpah. In Greek, Ishmael butchered "everybody", which he could do in Greek where the relevant population are direct male and female agents of Nabuchadrezzar. Proto-MT here restricts the killing to "soldiers". Tucker argues that this had to happen because proto-MT had earlier stuffed Mizpah with total innocents. Even in Greek, Ishmael orders survivors (including Jeremiah and Baruch, not deemed collaborators) out of Mizpah, toward the Jordan and old Ammon. Then one Johanan chases Ishmael's caravan. In Greek, they "turn to" Johanan; in proto-MT, they rejoice. For Tucker, the MT is "indicting" the people for rebelling against Ishmael. MT is generally pro-David.

Ishmael then leaves his refugees, or hostages, on the west-bank as he slips across the river into Ammon.

Chapter 44/51, which Stipp has dismissed as a Deuteronomic homily, teleports the prophet into Egypt. This centres a Deuteronomic speech from Jeremiah. The prophet here addresses all the Judaeans (now) in Misraym, which indeed includes Manuf / Memphis. The speech indicts the Judaean kingdom for its disobedience, and promises more chastisement in their place of supposed refuge. MT adds the present generation, and extends the smiting to Jews worldwide. Tucker surmises that the proto-MT does not want the remnant to be sojourning in - anywhere.

Tucker thus disagrees with Stipp on the finer meaning of "remnant" for that one's projected JDP. JDP might just be a chapter-section of Baruch's wider compilation of Jeremiah lore. Stipp's "Ishmael file" must await its own poast.