60 Albert L.A. Hogeterp signify that the eschatological dimension to Ezekiel 37 already played a part in the compositional history of the book of Ezekiel. The Qumran Pseudo-Ezekiel composition, known to a broader circle of scholars since the late 1980s and officially published in 2001 (6), has added important early Jewish evidence for a reading of Ezekiel 37 in eschatological terms of resurrection. The question of how reading and interpretation interact merits further study with regard to Pseudo-Ezekiel. Much attention has hitherto focused on manuscript 385, Pseudo-Ezekiela, from Qumran cave 4 (7). Fragment 2 of this manuscript provides the most extensively preserved intro-ductory setting for an eschatological reading of Ezekiel 37. Other much-discussed fragments 3 and 4 of Pseudo-Ezekiela are unparalleled in the other manuscripts, numbered b through e (4Q386 (4QpsEzekb), 4Q385b (4QpsEzekc), 4Q388 (4QpsEzekd), 4Q391 (4QpsEzeke). These fragments of Pseudo-Ezekiela concern resurrection (frg. 2), the eschatological shortening and hastening of days (frg. 3), and the Ezekielian chariot vision (frg. 4); themes which are of interest to a broader spectrum of apocalyptic tradition. The composition has therefore rightly been associated with apocalypticism and apocalyptic interpretation (8). Nevertheless, the parabiblical character of Pseudo-Ezekiel should also be given further attention, in view of manuscript evidence which is less frequently and less intensively brought to the attention, that of Pseudo- Ezekielb (9). This manuscript, like Pseudo-Ezekield, partly overlaps with fragment 2 of Pseudo-Ezekiela. Yet Pseudo-Ezekielb is unique among the Qumran Pseudo-Ezekiel manuscripts in that it comprises a fragment with —————— and Vulgate with plusses on the one hand and the original Septuagint text with minuses on the other as ‘two literary strata’. (6) J. STRUGNELL – D. DIMANT, “4Q Second Ezekiel”, RevQ 13 (1988) 45-58; ed.pr. by D. DIMANT, Qumran Cave 4. XXI: Parabiblical Texts, Part 4: Pseudo-Prophetic Texts Partially Based on Earlier Transcriptions by John Strugnell (DJD 30; Oxford 2001) 7-90 (‘Pseudo-Ezekiel’). (7) M. Kister and E. QIMRON, “Observations on 4QSecond Ezekiel (4Q385 2-3)”, RevQ 15 (1992) 595-602; É. PUECH, La croyance des Esséniens en la vie future: immortalité, resurrection, vie éternelle? Histoire d’une croyance dans le judaïsme ancien. 2 Les données qumraniennes et classiques (EB n.s. 21-22; Paris 1993), 605-16; J. Alison, “An Arboreal Sign of the End-Time (4Q385 2)”, JJS 47 (1996) 337-344; É. PUECH, “Apports des textes apocalyptiques et sapientiels de Qumrân à l’eschatologie du judaïsme ancien”, Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition (ed. F. GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ) (BETL 168; Leuven 2003) 133-170 at 144-147 (‘Le Pseudo-Ezéchiel (4Q385 2- 4 et //)’); GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, “The Apocalyptic Interpretation of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls”, Interpreting Translation (eds. GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ – VERVENNE) 163-176. (8) This point about Pseudo-Ezekiel was made by way of epilogue by D. DIMANT, “The Apocalyptic Interpretation of Ezekiel at Qumran”, Messiah and Christos. Studies in the Jewish Origins of Christianity. FS D. Flusser (eds. I. GRUENWALD – S. SHAKED – G.G. STROUMSA) (TSAJ 32; Tübingen 1992), 31-51 at 49-50 after a survey of sectarian Qumran passages and New Jerusalem. See further J.J. COLLINS, Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls (The Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls; London and New York 1997), 10, 126-128 and 138 and the detailed argument by GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, “The Apocalyptic Interpretation of Ezekiel in the Dead Sea Scrolls”, 163-176. (9) D. DIMANT, “Resurrection, Restoration, and Time-Curtailing in Qumran, Early Judaism, and Christianity”, RevQ 19 (2000) 527-548 at 534 gives some attention to 4Q386 as columns III-IV of the composite text of Pseudo-Ezekiel, but deems “the vision recorded in 4Q386 1 ii-iii (..) non-biblical”. I disagree with this qualification of a manuscript that is part of a composition labelled parabiblical; see discussion below.