Abstract
The book of Joshua is more flexible (and better known in the Gospels) than often supposed. The debate between the majority west of the Jordan and the minority to the east over which biblical texts supply a relevant precedent leads to compromise, but is differently reported in the Hebrew and Greek Bibles: MT more sympathetic to the nine-and-a-half tribes, and LXX to the two-and-a-half (who may represent the diaspora). Even the built structure at issue is differently introduced: ‘altar’ in MT and ‘high place’ in LXX — but both sides of the river finally accept whatever-it-is as a ‘witness’.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.