Professional Documents
Culture Documents
m
iilii
m\mM'
iill'
iiwi
Ml'
'I^T
PRINCETON,
N.
J.
%-
H
Shelfi
^'^^^^;^.
Sectfbn
,
The
2a. (or
more
at the
same
ratio)
Bleok
Introduction to the
Now
Testament.
Two
(278.)
Vols.
(2l8.)
-Modern Doubt and Christian Belief. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Delitzsch Commentary on Job. Two Vols. (21s.) A'e-w Edition shortly. Commentary on the Psalms. Three Vols. (3l8. 6d.) Commentary on the Proverbs of Solomon. Two Vols. (2l8.) Commentary on Song of Solomon and Ecclesiastes. One \'ol. (lOs. Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on Epistle to the Hebrews. Two Vols. (2l8.)
Christlieb
:
6d.)
A System of Biblical Psychology. One Vol. (128.) DSlllnger Hippolytus and Callistus; or, The Church of Rome A D. 200-250. One Vol. (78. 6d.) Domer A System of Christian Doctrine. Four Vols. (42s.) History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, rive Vols. (528. 6d.) Ebrard Commentary on the Epistles of St. John. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) The Gospel History. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Apologetics. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Ewald Revelation Its Nature and Record, One Vol. (lOs. 6d.)
:
Frank System of Christian Certainty. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Gebhardt Doctrine oi the Apocalypse. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Gerlach Commentary on the Pentateuch. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Gieseler Compendium of Ecclesiastical History. F^our Vols. (42s.) GodetCommentary on St. Luke's GospeL Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Two Vols. (218.) Commentary on 1st Corinthians. Two Vols. (21s.) Goebel On the Parables. One Vol. (lOs. 6d.) Hagenbach History of the Reformation. Two Vols. (21s.)
History of Christian Doctrines.
Three Vols.
(31s. 6d.)
Harless A System of Christian Ethics. One Vol. (lOs. 6d.) Haupt Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John. One Vol. (lOs. 6d.) Havemlck General Introduction to the Old Testament. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Hengstenberg -Christology of the Old Testament. Four Vols. (42s.)
Commentary on the Psalms. Three Vols. (338.) On the Book of Ecclesiastes. Etc. etc. One Vol. Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Two Vols. Commentary on Ezekiel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
(9s.)
(21s.)
Dissertations on the Genuineness of Daniel, etc. One Vol. (12s.) The Kingdom of God under the Old Covenant. Two Vols. (2l8.) Kell Introduction to the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on the Pentateuch. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Commentary on Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on the Books of SamueL One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on the Books of Kings. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on the Books of Chronicles. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Jeremiah and Lamentations. Two Vols. EzekieL Two Vols. (21s.) the Book of DanieL One Vol. (10s. 6d.) the Minor Prophets. Two Vols. (21s.)
;
(2l8.)
Biblical Archaeology. Two Vols. (21s.) Kurtz History of the Old Covenant or. Old Testament Dispensation. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Lange Commentary on the Gospels of St. Matthew and St Mark. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. Two Vols. (18s.) Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Two Vols. (21s.) Luthardt Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Three Vol>. (3l3. 6d.) Macdonald Introduction to the Pentateuch. Two Vols. (21s.) Martensen Christian Dogmatics. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Christian Ethics. General-Social Individual. Three Vols. (3l8. 6d.) Miiller The Christian Doctrine of Sin. Two Vols. (21s.) Murphy-Commentary on the Psalms. 7'o count as Tivo l/'oluwrs. One Vol. (12s.) Neander General History of the Christian Religion and Church. Nine Vols. (67s. 6d.) Oehler Biblical Theology of the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) Olshatisen Commentary on the Gospels and Acts. Four Vols. (42s.) Commentary on Epistle to the Romans. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on Epistles to the Corinthians. One Vol. (9s.) Commentai-y on Philippians, Titus, and 1st Timothy. One Vol. (lOs. 6d.) OrelU Prophecy regarding Consummation of God's Kingdom. One V'ol. (10s. 6d.) Philippl Commentary on Epistle to Romans. Two Vols. (21s.) RSbiger EncyclopcBdla ot Theology. Two Vols. (2l8.) Ritter Comnaratlve Geography of Palestine. Four Vols. (263.) Sartorius The Doctrine of Divine Love. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) SchBrer The Jewish People In the Time of Christ. Division II. Three Vols. (lOs. 6d. each.) Shedd History of Christian Doctrine. Two Vols. (21s.) Stelnmeyer History of the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) The Miracles of our Lord In relation to Modem Criticism. One Vol. (7s. 6d.) Stler The Words of the Lord Jesus. Eicht Vols. (10s. 6d. per vol.) The Words of the Risen Saviour, and Commentary on Epistle of St. James. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) The Words of the Apostles Expounded. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Tholuck Commentary on the Gospel of St. John One Vol. (9s.) Ullmann Reformers before the Reformation. Two Vols. (2l3.) Weiss Biblical Theology of the New Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) The Life of Christ. Three Vols. (^Is. 6d.) Winer- Collection of the Confessions of Clulstendom- One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
FOR
T.
&
T.
CLARK, EDINBURGH.
LONDON,
DUBLIN,
.... ....
.
GEORGE HERBERT.
CHARLES SCRIBNER's SONS.
NEW YORK,
<!^lti
Cestamcnt
BY
Dr.
FRAIJTS BUHL,
LEIPZIG.
2Erau3lateti
bg
Rev.
JOHN MACPHEESOX,
FINDHORN.
M.A.,
T.
&
T.
PREFACE.
The Author
city
of
Copenhagen
and
also
at
Leipzig,
was
appointed
University of
Copenhagen,
of
in
1890,
place
on the death
is
described by
Author
as to
translation of a
1885.
as
to
In
the
its
original
form
it
aimed
of
at imparting information
ascertained
results
modern
researches
with
reference to the
As
expanded and
in
the
it
German
the
Author
may
of this work.
THE TRANSLATOR.
FiNDHORN, Z>ecw6cr
1891.
CONTENTS,
Tjie History of
( 1-22)
.
. .
General Sketch
I.
.1
.
( 2-13), ( 2-11),
4
4
50
23-99)
79
( 24-73),
( 23),
Aids
to the
82
82
82 85
.
2.
3.
4. 5.
Manuscripts
( 26-29),
90
94
( 31-35),
( 36),
106 108
B.
2.
....
( 56-58),
( 37-50),
108
Quinta, and
Sexta
149
159 167
3.
4.
5.
( 59-67),
185
194
\^')
C.
II.
Aidsfroni
Text
itself (% 73),
lic^ults
( 74-99),
'Text ( 74-87),
195
195 198 207
Writing Materials
( 74),
2.
3.
4.
The Divisions
219
Vlll
CONTENTS.
PA&g
( 88-99),
.
228 228
The
2.
The Transmission
Contents
(
89-99)
232
236
( 92-99),
239
ABBEEVIATIONS.
GGA JPT
.
protestantische Theologie.
fiir
MGWJ
Monatsschrift
des Juden
thums.
NGGW
REJ TA
. .
Juives.
TM
TSK ZA
.
Assyriologie.
ZAW
Zeitschrift
Zeitschrift
fiir
Kunde
des Morgenlandes.
fiir
kirchliche Wissenschaft
und
kirchliches Leben.
ZWT
THE
HISTORY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON.
TXTRODUCTIOX.
1.
The term
"
ti]^
was
first
name had
Seeing that
it is
we have
may
Xew
this
point.
in
the
men have
what the
with the
make
This,
subject.
has
oftentimes
been
somewhat
Never-
we
have, even in
this,
an acknowledgment of the
questions, which,
Jews on those
Hence the
Canon has generally been given the style and manner in which
of the
sacred
2
writings,
1.
INTRODUCTION.
of
while a
summary sketch
upon
this
the
attitude
of
the
Christian Church
now
quite evident
of
distinguished from
revelation
;
among
Christians,
and
for themselves of
of
"
Testament," in which also the collection of the Old Testament Surveys of this literature will be found writings is treated.
in the
following
among
;
other
treatises
Scholz (Catholic),
Einleitung in die heiligen Schriftcn des Alte7i und Neuen TestaKeil, LelirhucJi der historisch-kritisclien mentcs,\. 1845, p. 3 ff. Einleitung in die kanonische7i
und
ed.
1873,
if.
[Eng. trans, of
2nd
1869 by
&
T. Clark, Edin.
1869]; De Wette, Lehrhuch d. hist.-krit. Eial. in die kanon. und apokr. Bilcher dcs A. T. 8th ed. by Schrader, 1869, 4 [Eng. trans, of early ed. by Theodore Parker, 2 vols., ff.
Boston
Strack, Eiideitung in A. T. in Zbcklers 1843] Also deserving to be Handluch der Theol. Wissenscha/ten, Bibelen, dens Forvaring, Oversmttelse named Belsheim, Om
;
i.
og
Udbredelse,
til
3rd
ed.
Christiania
skrift,
is
et
Eosenius,
Indlednings
vetenskaben
den heliga
Lund 1872.
dealt with in the following
vindic. Canonis, Leipsic
:
The
C.
;
1775
Halle
1771-1775;
;
collectus,
1797; Movers, Loci quidam historice canonis Astier, Etude sur la cloture du canon de illustrata, 1842
1.
INTKODUCTIOX.
Test. SLras.sburg
1859;
'J
Dillmaiiii
iii
Thcologic,
iii.
41
iX.
FUrst,
X'c'/-
Kanuii
A. T. nark
dm
UcbcrlicfcriuKjoi
son,
im Taluiud
vii.
inul Midrasck,
ed.
;
18G8;
S.
David-
The
3rd
1880; Strack
in Ilerzo'^'s
Rcal-Encijclop(cdie,
412-451
Sammliuuj des a. t. Literatur, 187G Wildeboer, Hrt oitstaaii van den kanon des ouden verhonds, 1889, 2nd ed. 1891. Compare also Sclilirer, " Gcschichte des jiid. Volkes," im Zcltcdter Jvsit Christi, ii. 1886, pp. 248-253 [Eng. trans., History of Jcivish People in the Times of Christ, Edin., T. & T.
der
:
Clark, Div.
ii.
vol.
i.
of
On
des
the use of
tlie
word
"
Zar
GeschicJUe
Kanons, 1847.
I.
A.
2.
The
The
collection
by the
Palestinian,
and subsequently by
the holiest of
three
all,
the holy
and
the
outer
court.
These
together
:
were
They embraced
;
respectiA^ely
The
books of the
parts of
also
r]'\Snr}
''t^^^ np'pri,
''the five
(Q''^?P)
;
and
or Hagiographa, as
we
usually call
into
them.
two
D''iV^'N1
"'^^??,
Proiohetcc Prior cs
(Joshua,
in
all,
eight books.
The Hagiographa
Canticles,
Chronicles, Psalms,
Job, Proverbs,
Ptuth,
Ecclesiastes,
Lamentations,
books.
to
In one passage
Talmud
{Beracliotli 57h),
Psalms, Proverbs,
Job
" the
great
D^niriD "
Canticles, Ecclesiastes,
D''ain3."
of
it,
2.
general use
as
number
is
of the
often
mentioned
8rt.
e.g.,
h.
Taanith
xii,
Exodus
par.
KoJukth
rh.
{on
11), fob
llGrt, etc.
is
of
the
twenty-four books
(a tradition derived
to be
Baha Bathra
14Z>,
15r^
Compare on
read
")
this matter
10.
The whole
name
t^^i^P
By
was
or
way
sidered
in
itself
sufficient,
of
Scripture
" tradition,"
"^^Ji?,
Compare
3.
The Jews
expressed
the
"
idea
"
canonical
"
or
"
non-
Whoever
116rt.
receives
more than
said in B.
Kohcldh
rb.
fol.
Scriptures
should
;
one save
this
from
on
tlie
Sabbath day
and
applies
also
;
to
translations
of the
it is
h.
Sahh.
lloa)iiud
(J/.
Jadaim
o.
The
latter
phrase
is
an
extremely
for, in
remarkable
order to protect
men were
forbidden to touch on
it
From ]IL Jadaim 4. G, to have been the Pharisees who issued the peculiar On while the Sadducees vigorously opposed it.
account of their impurity.
hand,
the
idea
appears
ordinance,
the other
all
that
acknowledged books,
un-
Sirach,
2.
*'
strange,"
D^Ji^'^n^
reading
world,
is
of
them
in
involving
exclusion
textual
referred
allusion
from
error.
the
It
future
is
certainly
due
to
quite
evident
1,
that
the passage
to
{31.
SanJiedrin
10.
to
was
and
originally
only
particular
;
and
but
Sirach
similar
writings
were considered
On
Sanli.
100&).
On
Zunz,
the
names
of the
canon and
Vorto^cige
its
Gottesdienstliclie
it
der Juden,
44.
In conthat
CiSD may
{e.g.
but also
all
Schiffer,
p.
Das Buch
im Tcdmud
inspiratione
83
p.
T
:
f.
On
f.
see
Joh.
7
is
Delitzsch,
De
of
scripturce sacrce,
1872,
Among
Law
;
the mediieval
Jews
i^^PO
sometimes used
also
the sacred
Among
we
also
piDS,
Bacher,
BEJ,
xv.
p.
113
is
xvi.
p.
277
f.).
Not
by
quite
is
synonymous with
N"ipD,
although
also derived
from Nip,
correctly rendered
" religious
discourse" {Biterahtrhlatt fur orient. BMlol. iii. 104:r). That only Canticles, Ecclesiastes, and Lamentations are
mentioned in Beraclioth 57& as "short Hagiographa," is to be explained by the fact that Euth was prefixed to the Psalms as an introduction, while Esther was assigned its place
among
Kanon
83, compared
the
with 60).
M. Jadaim
3.
all
2.
7
D'xr^LD."
Hagiograplia, sec
8) defile
the
liands
nn^n'nx
Compare on
this subject:
Delitzscli,
L.
ZcitscliriJ't
fur Luther'
.
Low, Graphischc Rcqidsitcn unci Erzcngnisse bei iJcn Judcn, i. 1870, p. 134 f Weber, Lehren des Talmud, p. 8G and below at 8. Fiirst {Kanou,
ischc Thco/or/ic,
1854,
p.
280;
;
83) translates it quite wroni^ly "They declare the hands, without having been previously washed, to be unclean."
p.
:
The
correct
explanation
of
this
special
ordinance,
the
is pointed out by Johanan ben Sakkai {Toscjyhta Jadaim, ii. 19 f. p. OS 4, 2), when he says that according to this we would be prevented from
using
the
sacred
for
animals
Of small importance
14r^,
is
the
commonly
under discussion is the Torah rolls, forbidden that they should be set down beside consecrated grain, lest the mice should gnaw them (see Schiffer, Das Buck Kohcleth, pp. 78 ff., 85 ff., 90 f.) this Halacha one of the eic^hteen Halachoth included in " The Garret of Chananiah," 8 is not sufficient to afford an explanation of the whole affair. Still more far - fetched indeed is the explanation given by Geiger (Urschrift und Uchcrsctzunfjcn dcr Bibcl, p. 135 JUd. Zcitschrift, ii. 21 ff.), which is no less untenable than the remarks of the same scholar on the
;
on VA, and on the passage in Sahh. 16. 1, where the books p3 piip pXw' are said to be non-canonical, but yet such as may be read {Nachgclasscnc
phrase
"
holy
Scripture,"
The word
TJ33
(from
t::,
" to
conceal,"
which is met with in the earlier Jewish writings, is no mere equivalent of the Greek word " apocryphal." It is not used of the writings that were not
with the abstract
nr33)
which were received, the canonicity of which, however, was contested ( 8), while it was also applied
sacred writings into the
What
the
is,
"A
Torah
roll
seen from a passage like Meg. that has become rotten must be hidden,
may be
8
pjlJ, in
3.
THE LAW.
Compare also 2G. Thus originally it implies no judgment on the character of the books, but a particular mode of procedure with existing copies (copies used in the synagogues), and only secondarily does it mean destruction generally. Jerome, therefore, in his Comm. on Eccles. xii. 14, correctly translates it by oUiterare.
the vault of a scholar."
Sanh.
ff.)
1005,
yc/\
285
bination
with
Jadaim,
:
ii.
683, 10,
"
he
constructs the
text
as follows
(D^jiv^n),
E.
Akiba
said,
Whoever
i.e.
Jewish-Christian writings
(compare Iiabbinovicz, DUcditke Soph^rwi), has no part in the Books, on the other hand, like that of Sirach world to come. and other such, which were composed after the age of the
prophets had been closed
just as one reads a letter."
Eeligionsgeschichte,
i.
9),
may
be read
In
p.
1880,
i.e.
the conjecture
writings of
"
Whoever
p,
i<"itDD
Christian writings,
on the other
hand,
3.
Ben As
the
beg;inninG[
of the
construction
of
the
canon
properly so called
of
among
which
is
we
take
when
Jews
"
Ezra, at
whose
side j^ehemiah
stood during the latter half of the fifth century before Christ,
introduced
among
and
the
the
Book
it
of the Law,"
min
1D,
and made
life.
social
The
solution of the
much
con-
Pentateuch
We
confine
ourselves
here
to
the
Law had
put
obtained
among
under
it
Jerusalem, and
the
people
had
themselves
4.
THE rROrilETS.
9
in
obligation to
fulfil
all
the
commands contained
oath.
is
the
Law
(Xeb.
viii.-x.),
a solemn
Of
other writings
Book
of the
Law
there
on this occasion no
It
is
indeed
One may
Jeremiah
and Ezekiel,
Isaiah
Zechariah
i.
4,
and
to
xl.-lxvi.
exercised upon
the contemporary
and the
post-exilian literature.
But a complete
exist
collection of prophetic
writings
could
not
so
long
as
the
prophetic
spirit
was
still
active and
called
forth
new
writings.
Even the
full
though indeed
this
The
priority of the
Law
seen finally in
this, that
Law," "because
parts
John
x.
34,
xii.
o4, xv.
25
1 Cor. xiv.
21
Sanh. 916
Mocd
shown to the Law, and its pre-eminence over the Prophets and the Hagiographa, see Weber, Lchrcn dcs Sirach xxiv. 22-27; 1 Mace. i. 59 f. Talmud, p. 79 Wildebocr, Het ontstaan, 2nd ed. p. 00 ff.
to the high regard
;
;
With regard
4.
of
the
proved
by
such
of the
Mace.
v.
iv.
46,
(Ps.
ix.
27, xiv. 41
?),
The Song
Three Children,
Sanh. 11a
14
Ixxiv. 9
may
be compared.
this
fact,
And
after the
the
impelled to
10
4.
THE PROPHETS.
transmitted to them, the historical books, comprising utterances of the old prophets, as well as the properly prophetical
books, and to attach this collection, as a
second group of
From
of
the prologue
Book
of Sirach
we
was generally
the second
the
beginning
itself
we
further
as
it
same contents
xliv.
now
paragraph
16 xlix.
of of
13,
the
first
two parts
canon,
in order thereby
of
to
set
forth
picture
Israel's
corresponds
with
the
us.
the
prophetical
books
acknowledged by
How
long
and just
as
can
we
tell
by
was
ii.
carried out.
whom and in what way the canonisation The much discussed story given in 2 Mace,
by Xehemiah contains
13
of
by no means a history
Greek
/cal
transla/jueyaXcov
of
Ben
Sirach runs
iroWcov
tmv
o TraTrvro?
Irjaov'i
ifXelov eavrov Bov^ el? re ttjv tov vo/ulov kol tcov TrpoiprjTwv
avyypd-^ai tl
[Whereas many and great things have been delivered to us by the Law and the Prophets, and by others that have followed their steps, my grandfather Jesus, when he had much given himself to the reading of the Law and the Prophets and other books of our fathers, and had gotten therein good judgment, was drawn
.
4.
THE PROPHETS.
to learning
1 1
on also himself
to write
something pertaining
and
wisdom,
etc.].
For the determining of the time during wliicli Ben Sirach lived important data are aflorded by his grandson's preface.
The
eret,
e/?
AlyvTrrov.
[Coming
Egypt
in tlie
eight
and
thirtieth
year,
Seeing that an allusion to his when he came to reside in Kgypt would have been altogether purposeless, he must mean the thirty-eighth year of the reign
Compare, on the position of the words, the LXX. Now Euergetes I. reigned P..C. 247renderincr of Ha^gai i. 1. 222, and consequently we have to think of Euergetes II. who reigned B.C. ITO-IIG, although his uncontested supremacy
of the king.
The year in question would then began only in B.C. 145. be B.C. 132, and accordingly the grandfather must have
flourished about
B.C.
170.
Historisch-hritiscli
v.
d.
Bodrn
d.
Ouden Verhonds,
iii.
42G
c.
;
.
114; XitYmg^, De
iioncs sacra\ lib. vi.
MalacUiam {Obscrva-
full
prophetic canon, as
known
may
genuineness of Sirach
is
twelve prophets, affirmed in earlier times by Bretschneider, and more recently repeated by Bohme (ZAW, vii. 280), has
been
It
rightly
viii.
156) by
felt
the
can
be
understood
how men
themselves
impelled to collect together the wonderful treasures of the prophetic literature, the inexhaustible springs of the Messianic
hopes, and to
writings.
mark them
off
as
God's
words
from other
The conjecture
is
of Griitz (Kohclcth, p.
156
f.),
tliat,
by the canonisation
of the Prophets, a
more
were operative in that That the reception of the historical works, Joshua-
12
4.
THE PKOPHETS.
prophets properly
so called, is
by no means
certain.
It
indeed very probable that these books were reckoned among " the Prophets " merely because they contained occasional
such as Samuel, Xathan, which the entire historical narrative Ahijah, etc., by means of This view is favoured especially was, so to speak, sanctioned. by the style and manner in which the author of Chronicles
utterances
of
the
old
prophets,
quotes the
passages,
several
historical
;
authorities
lying
xii.
before
etc.
him.
2 Chron. ix. 29, 15, See 1 Chron. xxix. 29 since 2 Chron. xxvi. 22 puts the matter
differently,
These
quite
do not certainly express the idea that that period of the history has been described by a contemporary prophet. For the opposite opinion see Wellhausen, who makes the last-
mentioned conjecture {Prolegomena, 1883, p. 235). also especially, Kuenen, Onderzoek^, i. 488.
Compare
As
200.
But
if
these writings
112) conjectures the period about B.C. were not only recognised as
B.C.
canonical by
Ben
circulated in a
this
140
( 38),
In be regarded as decidedly too late. the view^s of the grandfather regard to the difference between
date must
But how and grandson, see Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p. 29. far one will have to go back, it is impossible with the means We might ask whether the at our disposal to determine. allusions of the chronicler, living about B.C. 300, to a prophetico-historical work different from our books of Samuel
do not imply the assumption, that " the Prophets " were not then as yet regarded as canonical, in which case we would obtain the year B.C. 300 as the
and Kings
(see above),
terminus a quo.
w^e are too little
But
this
conclusion
is still
uncertain, since
As
to the
way
which
this canonisation
information.
actors
Undoubtedly
it
in this matter.
On
C>.
THE HAGIOGRAPHA.
tliat
is
not
altofijether
impossible
ii.
lo,
subsequent canonisation of the Tropliets and It is related in a spurious epistle, the Hagiographa ( o).
the
for the
way
[undoubtedly iu the temple], which contained the following' books ra Trept rwv jSacnXecDp kol 7rpo(f)T]TCi)u koi ra rov /lav\S Kai iiriaroXa^i ^aaiXecov irepl avaOeiidrwv. That the Jvpislles
:
is
On
among
others, the
Books
of
Samuel
and Kings (perhaps also the Judges), and some sort of collection of Psalms (that mentioned in Ps. Ixxii. 20, or those Psalms
may possibly have been meant. and even at the best this contribution would be of very slight importance for the history of the canon. Compare on this point the various discussions of Kuenen, Onderzoek, iii. 403 ff., 427; Reuss, Geschichtc d. heil.
bearing the superscription ^vh),
this certainly is not all,
But
Sckriften, A. T. 1
2Jccdie-,
vii.
from the
to the
Law
of writings,
which are
called " the other writinf^s," or " the other writinc^s of the
fathers," where, according to the context, the
term "writings"
That
this
the
later so-called
2)
is
quite plain
but
still
as to
to
known
of
as the
Hagiographa.
answering
Book
of
xlix. 11).
14
5.
THE HAGIOGRAPIIA.
tlie
rest of the
Hagiographa
and by
itself
and their recognition in the beginning of the second century before Christ, it must be openly confessed that the history
of the
canon
is
tive veto
belongs
exclusively
to
the
come
to
any
For the
rest it
cannot escape a
careful observer of the quotation referred to, that not only the
indefinite expression
" the other writings,"
but
still
more the
way
to
in
make
moral improvement of
men by
composing a
make
it
tlie
of a canonical ordinance.
And
that
which he
divine
treatise (xxiv.
28
ff.)
to the inspiring
wisdom
as the source
if
doctrine.
Even
of the
still
wisdom proceeding
fruitful
"
from
the
mouth
and inspiring
itself all
whom
it.
it still
always drew to
who
"What has been now brought out fully explains why the Hagiographa, in the estimation even of later ages, were regarded as writings of a subordinate rank, as compared with
the
Law and
the Prophets.
This
is
fact, that they were not used, like those others, for the read-
its
origin
expressed,
e.g.,
in jcr. Sabb.
to
16
fol.
128, according
C.
15
Law and
is
thoroughly in
Compare G and Tusejyhfa Baha 409, ol: "The guardian should purchase for
;
;
ward D'S'^Ji min" jcr. Mey. 3. 1 Soph^rim, p. v., passages which are quite correctly explained in the Babylonian Talmud (Baba hathra lob), while Griitz (Kohelcth, p. 150 f.) completely
misunderstands their meaning.
tion in
the
case
of the
Even
in the
LXX. we meet
fi.xed for
xciii., xciv.,
xxiv., xlviii.,
Hebrew.
That
the five Megilloth were read on the five feasts has been already
mentioned
the
High
Priest,
ment, to read in
Ezra, and Daniel.
It
and in later days it became customary for on the night before the great day of atonepublic from the Books of Chronicles, Job,
mi"ht be asked whether the original document used in the Book of Chronicles, the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judali, which was in existence as early as B.C. oOO,
belonged to
Chronicles.
G. "
Book
of Sirach "
but
already supplanted
by
of
followincr
find
only
for the
solution
(vii.
of our problem.
is
17) a quotation
made from
Ps. Ix.xix.
2,
with the
Similarly, too,
first
in the
half of the
said to have
quoted Eccles.
vii.
8).
On
and references
still
of Ezekiel, Daniel,
and the
five Megilloth.
16
This
6.
nevertheless of
some
in
compare with
The
New
them
Sirach ( 4,
"
Moses
of old times
hath
gogue every Sabbath day," Acts xv. 21, and from Luke
17 and Acts
xiii.
15
it
same was
also true
of
seen in
this,
Law and
the Pro;
phets" (Matt.
xiii.
V.
17,
:
vii.
12
Luke
5),
31
Acts
15, xxviii. 23
compare
the
to
Law
is
As concerns the Hagiographa, quotations are made from a larger number than in the work of Ben Sirach, for (at least if we adopt the prevailing view) references are wantabove in
ing only to Ezra, Ecclesiastes, The Song, and Esther.
Evidence
by the expression,
Psalms
"
"
the
Law
and the
or
the
prophetic and
which connection the Psalms occupy a pre-eminent position among the Hagiographa. But more important than all this
are
to.
is
referred
ypacj^al,
and especially
ypa(j)r),
sort of literature,
and
ground
Ben
0.
On
it is
wrong
to seek in
tlie
passage. Matt,
xxiii.
the canon as
we now have
it.
in 1 Mace. vii. 17, seeing that the author 105, but before B.C. 70, does not exclude a Maccabean authorship of Ps. Ixxix., but, in consequence of
The quotation
B.C.
wrote after
is
it.
to be
found in Bcreshith
5. 3,
fol.
c.
91
jer. BcracJiotk
r.
llh] Nazir
c.
7.
12.
To
this
may
Ecclesiastes
Christ,
h.
from the
first
half of
Sahh.
the
first
century after
iL
Baha hathra
4:a;
24,
p. 5.
On
ad illustrationcm doctrincc de canone Vet. Test, ex Philoiu (Copenhagen 1775), by C. F. Hornemann (scholar of J. D. Michaelis, died as professor in Copenhagen A.D. 1830). In this treatise, however, this fact is overlooked, that Philo once (Mangey 525) makes use of a passage from Chronicles Compare also Siegfried, Philo cds Auskfjer (1 Chron. vii. 14). d. A. T. 1875, p. 161. The testimony given in the treatise
Ohservationes
i.
De
left
canon
is
may
best be
of doubtful as also
authenticity.
1880;
Massebieau, Ze Traite de la
des TMrajKutcs,
It
contcmjjlcttivc ct
la question
1888.
must evidently be regarded as purely accidental that Ezra-Nehemiah, as also the minor prophets, Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah, have not been quoted in the New Testament. On the other hand, one might associate the absence of quotations from the three books of The Song, Ecclesiastes, and Esther with the partly contemporary discussions over those referred to in 8. Compare Wildeboer, Hd ontstaan, 44. 128. Nevertheless, this may, on closer examination, be found to be a mere fortuitous coincidence, since Christ and
the
first
Christians,
for
practical
reasons
arising
from the
18
7.
circumstances in whicli tliey were placed, did not feel themselves called
upon
to
make use
8 were of
xxiii.
When
Christ, in
Matthew
35, speaks of the righteous blood shed from the time of Abel
to that of Zacharias (2 Chron. xxiv.
20
f.),
probable conclusion
may
be drawn from
it
be
treated
as
made
7.
The
result
won
in the preceding
section
receives an
extremely important
obtains
whole question
of
a provisional
conclusion
by means
two almost
first
century
much
Emperor
of
Domitian,
81-96, mention
viz.
is
made
(xiv.
44-46)
twenty-four
writings,
94
70,
after
we
are familiar
from the
sum
total of the
many
must have been written about a.d. 100. In this work (i. 8) it is said that to the sacred and genuine books of the Jews,
besides the five books of Moses, there belong also " thirteen
"
hymns and
preis
practical
life."
This
statement of
first
Josephus
In the
number
for
twenty-two (5
-f
13
-f-
4),
we
shall frequently
7.
JOSEPIIUS
AND
ORIGEN.
19
its
hypotheses.
this
scholar
liooks of
last
the
list
Psalms, Lamentations,
Proverbs,
and
Job.
right
way
here
is
to
assume that Josephus treated the Looks of Iluth and Lamentations as parts of the Books of Judges and Jeremiah.
to
Among
the
thirteen
therefore
been reckoned the eight books of the prophets (2), Daniel, Job, Chronicles, Ezra, and Esther, while the four books of
hymns and
practical precepts
Ecclesiastes.
particularly to be
of canonicity ( 2)
even
if
not genuine, he yet says that only those books can lay claim
to our confidence,
to
so bold as either
add anything
them
or
take anything
And
thus, at the
a clear
collection of
it is
writings,
canon as
now
known amoncj ourselves. By way of Appendix, before we pass to the consideration of the contributions made by the Pharisees to the discussions about the canon ( 8), we may here enumerate some later
witnesses to the Jewish Canon, becanse, althou^jh beloncrinr in
8,
they
particulars.
We
total
meet
number twenty-two
he has taken his
as the
sum
of the
25),
who
20
In
it
7.
Book
is
hardly to be
number
of
books as twenty-two.
{I.e.
which he translated) he
into
mentions
divisions.
to each
:
of these
Of the Book
"
Et
in
eundem
his-
to Jeremiah.
But
"
after
Quanquam
Hagiographa scriptitent et
numero
Jerome therefore
is
to
Daniel he keeps
"Illud
admoneo non
qui
Hagiographa
conscripserunt.
eis dividitur, in
Legem, in Prophetas
Hagiographa,
list of
i. e.
in quinque, in octo et
undecim
is
libros."
expressly
described
as
having
been
borrowed
from
the
list
Jews,
but
diverges in important
particulars
from that
which has
Sardis,
to, is
communicated by Melito of
somewhat
giving
to
altogether twenty-two,
but this
number he makes up by
place
in his
Euth an independent
is
enumeration,
whereas Esther
altogether wanting.
is
number
7.
JOSErilUS-ORIGEN.
21
left
of transcription
it
must be remem-
bered
that not
many
of
tlie
we
its
knew
definitely that
book,
which held
of Ezra
given,
e.g.,
321,
376, 433.
uncertain,
is
at
this
rests
passage
Nevertheless it is scarcely reasonable to conclude from Epiphanius {De pond, et mens. 10) with Bertheau, Bach d. liichtcr and Ruth, 1883, p. 290 ff., that the text had originally read twenty-two instead of twenty-four books. Ov yap fivpla'^e^ ^i/SXlcov Josephus, Contra Apian, i. 8
exclusively on the text of
L(tI
Bug Bk
fjLOva Trpo?
SiKaLox;
[deta,
unauthentic, according to
irevre
fjuiu
tvj^;
J.
G. Miiller]
TreTTLO-jevfieva.
Kal tovtcdv
/Ltera
eari
to,
Moovaecofi,
ruv'i
re
v6fjL0v<; irepie-yeL
^
.... ^Atto
Mwvar^v
7rpo(f>i]Tai to-
Kar
al Be XolttoI reaaape^
tol<;
dv6pa)7roL<; viro6i'}Ka<;
rov fiiov
TrepiexpvcTLv.
i)fia<;
XP^^^^ yeypairrat
eKaara'
to
fxr]
TrtcrTecD?
Be
ovx
6fjL0ia<;
i^^loiraL
tow
irpo avrcov,
BiaBo)(^7Ji>.
yeveaOat
ttjv
tu)V
7rpo(j)r]T(bv
uKpifitj
....
Tt?
auroU ovre
7rpo(pi]T7]^
fieradelvai
jejoXpLrjKev
this, Antiqicities, x. 2. 2,
where
Kat
it is
(Isaiah),
aWa
aWoL
eiroLrja-av
A.
T.^
i.
105
42
f.
;
ff.
412
Strack
in Herzog's Ecal-Encyclopccdie
p.
vii.
428;
J. G. Miiller,
Dcs Flavins
22
7.
THE NUMBERS
22
AND
24.
p.
99
ff.
Wright,
Book of Koheleth, p. 461; Griitz, Koheleth, p. 169; MGWJ, 1886, p. 83; also Tachauer, Das Verhdltnis von Flavius Joseflius zur Bibel tend Tradition, Erlangen 1871. On Oi'igen, compare his Opera, ii. 528, and Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. vi. 25 ela\ he at clkoo-c Svo ^i/SXloc Kad^ ^E^paiov^ aiSe The five books of Moses (among them ^Afx/jLeacpefccoBel/jb for iSTumbers, i.e. DH^PS t^in Num. i. 21 Yoma vii. 1), Joshua, Judges, and Ruth, Trap* avToU ev evl Xax^erLfJu, Samuel, Kings,
: :
The
Chronicles,
Ezra,
Psalms, Proverbs,
ttj
Ecclesiastes,
Canticles,
the Twelve
Minor Prophets
is
an
is
error of
would mentioned
On
to
Baruch containing the Epistle, is be explained most simply as an inaccuracy on the part of
the
;
Book
Origen
v.
for the
Aioostolicce,
in public
Book of Baruch were read by the Jews on the Day of Atonement, is, when we take into account the silence of the Jewish writing's on the o subject, too insecure a support on which to build without any other evidence (Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p. 76 f.). Melito tells in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iv. 26 ave\6cDv ovv
20, that Lamentations and the
:
Kal eirpa'^Orj
following
ra
r?}?
7ra\aid<; hLaOrjKTj^
/Si^Xca virord^a'^
:
Then
are
enumerated the
five
Books
of Moses, Joshua,
Books of Kings, Chronicles, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah (probably along with Lamentations), the Twelve, Daniel, Ezekiel, and Ezra. Compare Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p. 73 f. The origiual relation between the numbers twenty-two and twenty-four is still obscure. The latter numbering, indeed, may be regarded as the older, because it can be more easily explained how Euth was reckoned to Judges and Lamentations (on the presupposition of its authorship by Jeremiah) to
8.
23
how they should have been removed from It is quite uncertain, their original place among the prophets. whether in fixing this number they may have been liowever, influenced by the idea of making the number of tlie books Origen and equal to the number of the Hebrew letters.
Jeremiah, than
22 letters of the alphabet and the 5 final letters), in making out which the Alexandrine double reckoning of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, and Ezra was used, while Although the Lamentations was counted as a separate book. combininfr of Ruth and Lamentations with Judcres and Jeremiah in the LXX. and by the Alexandrians was prevalent, yet the number can scarcely have been determined by them, because they generally did not respect the Palestinian Canon Bleek, Compare Kuenen, Ondcrzock, iii. 447 f. ( 12). Einleitung, iv. 204. 552 Bertheau, liicJiicr nnd Ruth, 1883, Strack in Herzog's liCal-Encydopcvdic^, vii. 434; p. 290 ff.
seven books
the
;
;
(=
Wildeboer,
8.
Ilet ontstaan,
108. 134
f.
The witnesses
referred to in
the
preceding sections
concerned.
means
Jewish
which,
however,
suffer
from
the
usual
As
already stated in
6,
solemnly
first
But
of
even
in
Wisdom
1-9)
in
way
in
which one
against
to
perceive
an
unconcealed
polemic
first
Ecclesiastes.
And
century
24
after Christ
8.
against
the canonicity
that
con-
Thus
it is
differed
with
the
canonicity
it
of
the
Shammai Book of
as canonical, while
it.
Further,
we
learn that
book apocryphal.
by means
of a laborious inter-
to this prophet
was
for ever
see,
On
we can
Book
of Ecclesiastes
also the case
may name
at
Canticles.
It
was not
city not
was brought up
which
that
Synod
Jabne (Jamnia, a
far
from the
II.
coast, south
Gamaliel
\J
was deprived
At
was
upon the
affirma-
which
an
too,
opposition
against
that
book.
In
similar
manner,
Talmud show that there must have been ascribed to the Books of Euth and Esther and (whether in the same way ?) Proverbs, what necessitates the
adoption of the same conclusions with reference
writings.
to
these
for
we opportunely
8.
25
recollec-
lialf
tion of
at Janinia
was not
gave
effect
rise to several
more important
was produced
and edited
all
collected
among
specially
named.
But even
after this
time the criticism of the canon was not wholly silenced, for
we
Talmud
Book
of Esther.
In the
disjecta
membra here
collected together,
final
some now
closing of
according
to
which
the
full
canonising of
the
Hagiographa
light of history.
more exact
we
was
know
as little
this
closing
accomplished as
Prophets
( 4).
these Talmudical
and
7, especially
with the
indeed,
in the
Apology of Josephus.
that
Now,
Synod
we cannot
possibly assume
the
representation which
of Jamnia,
Josephus, residing in
gives of the contents
Rome
and idea
But seeing
tliat
A.D.
is
whom
he attached himself in
a.d.
56.
Therefore
there
26
8.
itself,
a result
which
of the twenty-four
Old Testament writings may have been wanting in the ScripSee above,
p. 18.
The
state-
In the
first place,
that such attacks upon biblical books do not exclude the idea
of an earlier established
Synod
of
when more
There
is
the con-
troverted
but
called
only
about
doubts
and
objections
which
had
been
forth
by a
it
definitely
developed,
was
felt
precisely defined
and marked
from
all
ments
of
Scripture.
boasts
Pip\[a.
And
to,
them
which were
approved by
it
all
Jews,
the most
felt to
to,
be
which
It
also deserves
T3J
is
and
read,
of
Ben
( 12),
8.
27
Ben
scarcely be accounted
erj.,
Ecclesiastes as well as
Finally, in spite
is
fact
Prophets, that
4),
was
canon
for
the
recent
failed
stand examination.
describes
all
For the
rest,
Geiger
is
quite right
when he
versies
which
On
is
no ground
for
entertaining any
;
doubt as
there
much
verisimilitude
to
admit of
by the
The
had
its
canon
finally
closed even
although
we know
nothing as to
how
or
by
whom
this
was accomplished
enoui^h that the canon and the clear idea of the canon were
there,
But
just this
dogmatic
This revision
in the
made a revision of the canon was made at Jamnia, and was afterIts result
wards confirmed
Mishna.
was the
establish-
ment
That
revision
end of the
first
certainly no accidental
circumstance, but
altered
closely
circumstances of Jewish
The
state
of
"
28
8.
Holy
City.
Then the
and
its life
" the
who had
lost
their material
;
on
it
they spent
all
care
and
it
their
misfortunes
conflict
(Derenbourg).
with
demanded the
and
The Old
in
this
demanded,
itself
we
shall
subsequently see
Jewish
Compare npon these questions: Delitzsch in ZLT, 1854, Kuenen, OnderzoeJc, iii. 415, 421 Bleek, Miileip. 280 ff. Cheyne, tung, iv. 551 f.; Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p. 82 ff. Job and Solomon, p. 280 f Geiger, Urschrift, p. 398 f Jild. Zeifsch. 1862, p. 151, 1870, p. 135 ff.; Gratz, KoheUtli, pp. 159-173; and MGWJ, 1871, p. 502 ff., 1882, p. 117,
; ; ;
. ;
.
1886, p. 597. M. Jadaim 3.5: " All sacred writings defile the hands [This even The Song and Ecclesiastes defile them " ( 2) Eabbi Judah [Ben Ilai, the decision, now the discussion.] Judenihums, ii. 86] said: "The Song see Jost, Geschichte des
;
!
but this
is
E. Jose [Jost,
ii.
"
8.
29
and this is disputed with regard to the Song." H. Simeon [Ben Jochai, Jost, ii. 90] said: "The treatment of Ecclesiastes is one of those points in which the school of Shammai was milder than the school of Hillel " [which declared that the book defiled the hands, i.e. was canonical], li. Simeon ben Azai [Jost, ii. 97] said: "I have heard from the seventy-two elders on the day when they gave to H. Eleazar the presidency of the academy [i.e. at the Synod of
hands,
sui- rhistoire et
;
la g^ographie de
1867, p. 273 Jost, ii. 28 ff. Griitz, Geschichte dcr Juden, iv. 38 ff.], that The Song and Ecclesiastes defile the hands. E. Akiba [Griitz, MGWJ, 1870, p. 484, reads E. Jacob instead of Akiba] said " God forbid that any one in Israel should doubt that The Song defiles the hands the whole world does not outweigh the day in which Israel All the Hagiographa are holy, but The received The Song. If they have been contested [.'] it Song is the holiest of all. was with reference to Ecclesiastes." But R. Johanan ben
: ;
Jeshua,
11.
"As
Judah ben Ilai, To E. Simeon's report about the Hillelites and are named. Shammaites this addition is made " On the other hand, Euth, The Song, and Esther defile the hands." Einally, there is then communicated a Baraitha of E. Simeon ben Menasja " Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands, because it was done in Solomon's own wisdom " but this affirmation is contradicted by the fact that Solomon, who was the author of other
:
given in
inspired writings, could not in that case have said (Pro v. xxx.
6)
:
"
Add
He
reprove thee."
On
on
in
i.
Ecclesiastes
ii.
3 and
compare further h. Sahh. SOah ; Koheldh r. and Jerome on Eccles. xii. 14: "Ajunt Hebra^i, 8;
quum
memoria duraverunt, et hie liber obliterandus videretur, eo quod vanas assereret Dei creaturas et totum putaret esse pro nihilo, et cibum et potum et delicias transeuntes prreferret omnibus, ex hoc uno capitulo meruisse autoritatem, ut in divinorum
30
8.
volurainum numero poneretur, quod totam disputationera suam et omnem catalogum hae quasi avaKe^aXaiojaei coarctaverit et dixerit finem sermonem suorum auditu esse promtissimum nee aliquid in se habere difficile ut soil. Deum timeamus et
:
Sabb.
30b
"
Some
also
wish
is
to
contains contradictory
;
quoted as an example]
:
but
We were not accomplished, it was because people said have thoroughly examined the Book of Ecclesiastes, and have found a solution for its contradictions, and we shall also examine this book more carefully." Against the attempt of
"
Das
Biicli Kohcleth, p.
95
f.
The Aboth of Rabbi Nathan (a post-Talmudic Schtirer, Geschichte, i. 106 f., Eng. trans. Div. i. vol.
c.
tract,
i.
see
p.
143),
1,
according to the
common
Vienna 1887 compare Book of Koheleth in relation to Modern Criticism, Wright, The 1883, p. 466): "At first Proverbs, Canticles, and Ecclesiastes were pronounced apocryphal, because they contaiued symbolical this lasted until the men of the great synagogue expressions As examples of offenarose ( 9) and discovered a solution." sive passages, Prov. vii. 7-20, Cant. vii. 12 f., and Eccles. xi. 9
;
are referred
b
to.
Sabb.
lob;
Char/.
13a
Hezekiah Gamaliel the elder, Griitz, Geschichte clcs Juden, iii. 499] is of blessed memory, for but for him Ezekiel would have been declared apocryphal, because his words contradicted the words of the Law three hundred jars of lamp oil were brought to him, and he sat in his garret and solved the contradictions." The grounds upon which some would make out the inconsistency of this criticism of the canon with that set forth in other
[see about this
;
Menachoth 4:oa
"
Gratz {Kolicleth,
p.
161)
calls
the
The
tradition is
iv.
met
551),
And
naturally just a
little is
proved
8.
ol
unnamed (Wildeboer,
also to Proverbs
;
Hd
ontstaan,
p.
^Q>),
for this
applies
by the fact that the canonicity of Ezekiel had been conserved even before the Synod of Jamnia (Wildeor
boer, p. 60).
Finally, on Esther
compare
ii.
h.
Meg. 7a
:
"
According
to
1\.
135 ff.] Esther does not defile the hands Could Samuel have meant by this that the Book was not the work of tlie Holy Spirit? No; he of Esther meant it was produced indeed by the Holy Spirit, but only for reading, not as Holy Scripture." As proof of the inspiraJudah, Samuel said [Jost,
!
vi.
is
quoted
"
Haman
thought in his
heart," which no man without divine revelation could know. That the theory of Samuel did not affect the accepted inter-
pretation (Wildeboer,
Hd
ontstaan, p.
lOOa, according to which certain teachers declared that wrappings for the Esther rolls were unnecessary. On the other hand,
Sanli.
possible,
but
jcr Megilla
70.
is
uncertain; see
Bertheau-Eyssel, Esra,
to, of
p.
368.
The hypothesis
Jerusalem in
a.d.
of Grixtz,
above referred
65 and
at
is
Jamnia
said to
in a.d.
canon
of
the Hagiographa
have been
''
upon two altogether untenable presuppositions. In the first place, it is false that by the " sacred writings of M. Jadaivi 3. 5 are meant only the Hagiographa. See particularly Schiffer, Das Buck Xohcleth, p. 80 ff. And, in the second
place, there is
no vestige of proof that the question of the canon had engaged attention just before the overthrow of Jerusalem in " The Garret of Chananiah ben Hezekiah." Only the prohibition against laying the Torah rolls beside the grain devoted and received for the heave-offering ( 2), belongs to
the
eighteenth
;
Chananiah all Those modern writers are certainly wrong who seek to maintain that other writings were also the subject of attack.
in "
The
Garret
of
Thus Kohler,
ger's
in reference to the
p.
Eor when
it
is
said,
"
32
for example, in Lev.
icles
9.
LATER THEORIES.
(fol.
r.
Book
of Chron-
was given only to be expounded in Midrashim, this means nothing more than what is true of all the Hagiographa Fiirst (Kanon, p. 54) regards Num. r. 18, fol. 2lld, as ( 5). proving that the Book of Jonah had sometimes been called in But evidently it is merely a play upon numbers, question. when Jonah is here characterised as a " writing by itself
(which his prophecy, moreover, in many respects actually is, compare Wildeboer, Hei ontstaan,^^. 60-62), in order thereby
to bring out the required
too, is the position
1).
number
eleven.
Precisely similar,
sometimes taken up by the Eabbinists (as, Sahh. 116 a, etc.), where they classify Num. x. 35 f. as a e.g. book by itself, and so reckon seven books of the Law.
9.
The actual
facts of history to
made use
men had
theories,
an early
the Jews,
period.
originated
among
to the
Christians,
by
whom
by
their origin.
We
meet
end of the
first
7.
21.
Tertullian,
De
cultu
feminarum,
3),
we
often
meet with a description of the origin of the Old Testament Canon, which rests upont he passage quoted in 7 from the
Apocalypse of Ezra, according to which Ezra, by means of
divine inspiration, wrote out
all
Testament
the theory
Canon.
Not
'.).
r.ATKK THEORIES.
33
i.
proposed
liy
Joseplius, Contra
Ainoncm,
8.
According to
the time
writin^s
him
tlie
which had
tlieir
own
lives.
That
is
Old Testament
some have
of
souglit
wrongly to ascribe
( 4),
to the author
the
Book
Chronicles
Longimanus, but
Bca TO
fjLT}
lij^icoTai rots"
jeveaOaL
hLaho')(r)v
tlie
[They
former,
Xaturally
nil
this
hymns
as indisputably still
is
also
after the
indicated
by the phrase
'^^\^'\
;S2D
them
is still
third theory
which the
and was
set forth
by men
an
like
often mention
made
Of
assembly called
is
'^^'^t^
^?^-,
" the
great assembly or
synagogue," which
some
refer to the
Thus,
it is
said in
of the
a well-known passage
34
great synagogue
"
9.
LATER THEOEIES.
the Twelve
According to Tanchuma
(a Midrasliic
of the Pentateuch)
on Exod.
was they
8),
who saved the canonicity of Ecclesiastes and The Song ( Some hints which are found in the works of rabbis etc.
given expression to by Elias Levita,
the third preface to the
of
who
whom
it
retained
was just
synagogue
of the
It
was
Kuenen's
masterly
On
the
Men
at
last
shed
upon
question
all to set
in
which
seeing a
led
by Kuenen, nothing more than an idealisation of the great popular assembly which Ezra and Xehemiah called tDgether
9.
LATER THEORIES.
35
in
(Xeh.
the
viii.-x.),
way
of introducing the
lite
the national
of
the
Jews (3).
whicli
of the legislative
"
period
has
been assigned
synagogue
to
" in
down
Talmudical
Hence
it
cannot be supposed
is
canon
by a single
it
the
most
ot"
artificial
Even
the
mediiieval
tion,
Jews sought
it
the abolition of
the
way
in
Scripture
was brought
present state
is
to
be regarded as a
veritable benefit.
Tertullian,
Be
cultu
feminarum,
i.
"
Quemadmodum
et
Ilierosolymis Babylonia expugnatione deletis omne instrunientum Judaicai literatune per Esdram constat restauratum." Compare Strack in llerzo^'s Ecal-Encyclopccdie'^, vii. 415. Josephus was led to fix upon the reign of Artaxerxes I. as the limit of the age of the prophets, not by the Book of Malachi (Keil, Einlcitung, 154, Eng. trans, ii. 137 ff.), but by the Book of Esther, which he considered the last book of the Bible, and whose chivj'nx he falsely identified with
36
9.
LATER THEORIES.
Artaxerxes Longimanus.
JevjSy
With
this
John Hyrcanus
>
Wars of
the
J
^
281 ff., Gratz has called attention view set forth in Seder Olam. to the closely-related It is said there (p. 90 in Meyer's edition of 1706), with reference to the age of Alexander the Great, described prophetically in the Book of Daniel " Down to this time, |XD "ry, the prophets have prophesied by the Holy Spirit from that time lij^t^i p''D have wrought only the wise." With this agrees also Toseylita " All books, which "j^'^si |N3D, i.e. after Jadaim, ii. 13, p. 683 the silencing of prophecy, do not defile the hands," and the passage ye?\ Sanh. 28, which has been quoted above at 2. Kimchi speaks, in the introduction to his Commentary on
in
p.
:
certainly not
in
accord.
In a treatise
iv. fol.
him
in the first
(^The
ZDMG,
206
ff.)
says
p.
120):
men
Hettinger,
p.
2,
qusest,
(ed.
1696,
([uibus
fuit
Ill): "In concussum hactenus et tam apud Christianos, non pro cerebro fungus est, quam Judreos ava/KJyLo-^rjrov
principium, simul
Similarly
et
seniel
Canonem
i.
V. T. autoritate
Magnte.
Q?iri)zo\Y, Introductio,
c.
2,
l,and Keil,
Einleitung,
On
" the
154, Eng. trans, ii. 137 ff. Great Synagogue," see Morinus, Exercitationcs
;
279 f.; Eau, Diatribe de sijnagoge magna, 1726 and especially Kuenen in Verslagen en medadeelingen dcr KoninJclijke Akademie van Wet. (Aht. Letterhunde), 2nd series, 6th part, 1877, p. 207 ff. Wildeboer, Het onstaan, p. 121 ff. Pvobertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, pp. 156 f., 408 f., against Gratz {Koheleth, p. 155 f.), Geiger {Urschrift,
JjiUicce,^.
;
0.
LATER
TIIEOIIIES.
37
]).
124), and Wright {Kohcldh, 188o, pp. C (f., 47.", ff.). Kueneii proves that all the cliaracteristic features which the
Talnnulical writings attribute to the great
synagogue have
been drawn from the narrative of Neh. viii.-x. Of special importance in connection with the earlier theory was the passage in Pirkc Ahoth, i. 2, according to which Simon the Just, whom
the
Great, but
one of the
last
members
Ahoda zara
9a, Seder
Olam,
p.
Jews
it
famous scribes of Alexander's time should also have been a member of the great assembly of Ezra. How the Jews came to fix upon this period of thirty-four
thing that one of the
years
Gratz,
is
not quite
clear.
MGirj, 188G,
Compare the various reckonings in 293 ff., and Loeb, Hi:J, xix. p.
202
ff.
of the
The mediieval Jews sought to explain the threefold divisiuii canon by the hypothesis of three different degrees of
So, for example,
inspiration.
ii.
45
Old Testament. Herm Witsius {Miscel. Saer. libri iv. 173G, i. 12), whom Hengstenberg {Bcitrdg czitr Einleitung in d. A. T. i. 23 ff. follows, distinguishes between Munus propheticiun and Dannni
is
nn
one altogether
foreign
to
tlie
to be placed
is
But
vii.
distinction
shattered
Amos
14, where
Amos
repudiates the
idea that he
is
Compare
Einleitung,
foreign
all
such
notions are to
of
antiquity
is
of the
38
10.
10. In opposition to the Alexandrines ( 12) the Palestinians from the beginning held firmly
of the
by the
tripartite division
liistory of
Law and
of the
to
be
But
the
this first
(b.
From
Talmud
Baba hathra
Vol))
we
first
and second
it
centuries there
still
were
custom came
to be generally
it
had obtained
in later times
we meet with
re-
fixed.
At the most, an alteration was made there only when the Book of Euth had a place given it after the Book of
Judges
of
( 7).
On
Baba hathra 14, we find Isaiah placed meet with the same order again in
French manuscripts, in the
pilation Yallcut shimoni,
first
and we
com-
several
German and
which
said to have
been composed
list
of the
vjcoclila
The motive
of this trans-
10.
IJOOKS.
39
position
is
no longer apparent.
it
24
f.,
where
is
wlien
we
consider,
writings
volume
and
to tliink
to
make
altogether too
is,
great an
points
assumption.
of contact
that the
many
Looks
of
Kings led
Isaiah
while
was
placed
in
front of the
twelve prophets,
Isa.
i.
with
Hosea
i.).
With Jerome
first
37), as
chrono-
and
this
known
It
is
Codex
under
32.
Minor Prophets,
LXX.
in
an order
Amos, Micah,
Obadiah,
Jonah,
Nahum, Habakkuk,
h.
The order
1.
of the
Hagiographa
is,
according to
B^Jja hathra
1:
we cannot
who would
Book
of
Chronicles a
proof that this book had been received into the canon at a
later date than the
Book
of Ezra.
Certainly in this
we have
40
assumptions
10.
made
have
little
to
do
with
criticism.
./
gives the
first
place to Job
Ecclesiastes,
among
the
Prophets.
The arrangement given in Baha hathra, wliich, according to a Massoretic work of A.D. 1207 (in the Tchufutkale collection),
seems to have been that of the Babylonian Jews,
in part adopted in several manuscripts.
is
at least
also the
Compare
Ill,
order
of
succession
in
Ochla weochla
Nr.
112, 127.
The Song,
Ecclesiastes,
Lamentations, Esther,
Daniel, Ezra.
Massoretes, and
therefore to be
met with
in a variety of
a.d.
1009.
In
this
placed together, while the five Megillotli are, but not in the
order of the parts to which they belong (Passover
Weeks
in
or Pentecost
Jerusalem
tlie
Feast
of
Tabernacles
Month
Ecclesiastes
The Song
;
the Destructhe
Esther).
to the statements of
by
the succession of the parts, for they placed the five Megilloth
together
in
the
midst
of
the
and
this
arrangement has
finally
and thorough work of Marx (Dalman), Traditio o^ahhinorum vderrima de librorum V. T. ordine atquc Elias Levita, Massordh liammasoreth, origme, Leipsic 1844. ed. Ginsburg, p. 120 f., compare Bacher in ZDMG, xliii. H. Hody, De Bihliorum textihus originpp. 208, 236 f
Compare the
solid
11.
Till-:
.SAMAKITAX CANON.
41
(dibits
G04
f,,
Strack in ZLT, 1875, p. 1705, i)p. G44-GG4 and in Herzog's Ileal- Eiicyclopccdic, vii. 441 f. Joel
; ;
!Miiller,
MasscJceth iSojdt^riin, p.
44
f.
On
unsupported
is
Isaiah
i.,
Jeremiah,
Baha hathra 136: Our teachers declared it permissible to have the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa bound together in one volume. So taught P. Meir (in the second the Law century), whereas IL Judah (ben Ilai) maintained by itself, the Prophets by themselves, the Hagiographa by themselves. Some have even given the opinion that each " Boethus ben writing should be by itself. P. Judah reported Zonia had the eight books of the Prophets in one volume, which Eleazar ben Azariah (in the end of the first century) Pabbi approved yet others said that this was wrong." " There was (P. Judah, the editor of the Mishna) said brought us one volume containing the Torah, the Prophets, and
:
:
xy
Compare jcr. Meg. Only separate rolls 3. 1, fol. 73<r^, and Massehcth Soph'^rim, p. v. were used for reading in the synagogues. Compare Esther, h. Meg. 19a. The rolls were wrapped up in cloths and placed in a case (xpTi, Oi^Krf), and so were preserved in the book chest of the Synagogue. Compare the remark of Tertullian {De cultu fcminarum, 3) about the book of Enoch, nee in armarium judaicum admittitur,
the Hagiographa, and
we
sanctioned
it.''
i.
11.
The community
of
the
Samaritans,
who
otherwise
imitated the
Jews
in all matters,
had a canon
differing
of
from
the
wanting
all
fortunes of
in post-Mosaic
times.
On
tlie
other
outside
of
of
the
canon an inde-
down
to the period
42
of the
11.
Roman
empire.
that the
Law
at the
time of
its
adoption by the
Samaritans was, even among the Jews, the only sacred writing,
of
an indissoluble whole.
Had
the
owed
its
origin to a
sudden single
on the
can scarcely
Unfortunately we
who assume no
Law had
already
and
of the worship of
this
on Gerizim.
account
occurrence
(Antiqicities,
is
8.
2-4),
at fault.
Partly on internal
xiii.
28,
it
can be
of
fixed
shortly after
Church
fathers,
such as
to
do
upon a misunderstanding.
The erroneousness
of this
made evident by
the
12.
43
tlie
The relation of
458), they
ii.
not so clear.
Notwithstanding^ their
in
Mangey,
still
had,
according to Josephns
special writings,
{Wars of
the Jetrs,
8.
7), their
own
All
little care.
among
the apocry-
phal books
known
to us have,
up
proved
unsuccessful.
Canon compare Kuenen, Oiiderzoek, iii. MGIVJ, 1886, 430; Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p. 106 f
the Samaritan
;
.
On
p,
294
f.
Ileal- Encyclo-
2)ccdie, xiii.
340
ff.
Juynboll,
Chronicon
to
Samaritamim
arahicc
conscriptum,
Samaritani edited by Yilmar, 1865. Compare Heidenheim's Dmtschc Vierteljahrsrhrift, ii. 1863, pp. 304 ff., 432 iX). On the Sadducees compare "Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p.
122
Div.
f
.
Geiger, Urschrift, p.
Gesehichte des jiid.
ii.
113
f.
On
ii.
Schiirer,
ii.
Volkes,
467
ff.,
Eng. trans.
vol.
188-218.
Collection of Scriptures among the
B.
The
is
Alexandrine Jews.
12.
It
position
Hellenistic
of the canon.
as
if
are
at our
and
(compare
6),
Jew
writing in Greek
44
12.
But, nevertheless,
is
found, upon
more
careful
examination, that
Philo's
we
are
here in an entirely
in
different
world.
quotations
are
almost
every
instance from
the
afford
;
no certain
yet more
evidence upon
decisive
is
and
the
Palestinian Canon.
to
According to Philo,
In his view, not only the Greek translators of the Law, but,
still
more,
all
wise
inspired
Spirit of
(i)(j
God
for expressing
what
is
common gaze
7, p.
Cherub.
9, p.
112 D; Be
migrcUione AhraJi,
393
C).
( 5),
have
contributed
"
to
smooth
down
the
sharp
boundaries between
canonical "
and
he
" non-canonical."
is
With
not so
As a
historical
writer,
emphasises
particularly
7),
but this
of other
these an
It
is
apocryphal
"
book, the
Book
of
Maccabees.
tions to the
in the
LXX.
is
15 and
to
6).
And
that
the
canon continues
theory
down
I.
the Jewish
(seep. 35),
12.
45
narrative
now
upon
than before
of the ages between the creation and the twelfth year of Nero,
the
relationsliip
between
them and
the
all
other
this
iiuthoritative
writings.
With
a genuine
Palestinian
possible.
strict
it
among
intercourse
with them.
it
may
the
have
enlarged
Jewish
by
The Greek
In the
among
place, the
threefold
division
is
\y
distinction
abolished
and secondly, wo
find
among
according to the
This
is
.i
which evidently resulted from the influence of the Alexandrine theory of inspiration, and absolutely prevented
practice
Canon
was determined.
From
Palestinian
46
12.
For proof of
this
we may
point,
to
;
the
and,
to the statements of
On
Hornemann
referred to in
6,
and
W.
the Society
of Biblical
1884, pp. 126-143. On Josephus compare AYildeboer, ZTc^^ ontstaan, ^. 41 ff. Bloch, Die Quellen clcs Flavins Josejjhus, 1879, pp. 69-79;
Literature
and
Schiirer,
Volkes,
ii.
713-715, Eng.
et
trans.
Div.
ii.
voL
179, 182.
:
On
;
Scharfenberg, De JosejyJii and of the LXX. Alexandrinm consensu, 1870 Bloch, Die Quellen Siegfried in ZAW, iii. 32 f. Josephus, pp. 8-22
;
des Flavins
How
still
permitted the reading of certain post-biblical works, such Quotations from as the Book of Ben Sirach, is told in 2. of a remarkable kind, are given in the Ben Sirach, sometimes
Babylonian Talmud with the solemn introductory formulae, e.g. Erubin 65ft (Eab. c. 165-247 a.d., compare Sirach vii. 10),
Bcd)a
compare Sirach xiii. c. 91, where Simon ben Shetach ( 6) quoted a passage from Ben Sirach with That in Piabba's time Ben Sirach should actually have n^DD.
(Piabba
c.
Kamma
270-330
A.D.,
r.
been regarded by some as canonical is very improbable, since We should no controversies on this point are reported. rather suppose that here we have simply errors of memory, which might easily have resulted from the Hebrew language
Compare
Wright,
Encyclopoidie
^,
vii.
430;
other side,
Wildeboer, Het ontstaan, p. 85; and on the In the Cheyne, Job and Solomon, p. 282 f.
47
f.;
Babylonian Talmud (Sank 1006), on the contrary, E. Joseph plainly forbids the reading of Ben Sirach (np''^b i^Dx). Jerome, in his preface to his translation of Daniel, shows, in an interesting way, how the Jews of his time abused and criticised the apocryphal works used by the Christians.
13.
47
On
among
Apocryplia
Jews
of
ii.
modern
338.
in
times,
gclasscnc Schriftcn,
13.
this
way
Jews
secured an entrance
afford
It is
into the
us a glimpse
not easy to
into an extensiv^e
and varied
literature.
by the
be found in a
(see
" of
further
IG).
We
cannot
It
must
was
who
in
many
or
men
the
like
drama
The Exodus,"
among
modern
of.
What
in
remains,
partly
of
after
Palestinian translations
c.f/.
books written
the
Hebrew
language,
the First
Book
of Maccabees,
Ben
Sirach,
Wisdom
of Solomon.
48
the
13.
titles.
:
are of a philosophical
character
poetical
Ben
Sirach, the
:
Wisdom
of
Solomon
;
others of a
character
the
Psalms of Solomon
others
contain
the three
Books
of
others are of a
prophetical character
the
of
Book
of Enocli, the
Ezra, the
Book
of Baruch, the
Apocalypse of Baruch.
revelation
of
On
account of
special form,
Angel of the
has
XeTrrr] Teveai<^),
it is
literature,
although
properly
In addition to
to
such
which, however,
we no
Book
of
im A.
i.
;
.
T. in
Zockler's Handhucli
Wissenscliaften,
xii.
Recd-Encydopcedie^,
575-830,
ii. voL iii. 1-270. In regard to the additions made to the biblical books, it is most particularly to be observed that there is no ground for supposing that the additions to Ezra, Esther, and Daniel are Schiirer, Geschichte des jild. translations from Hebrew originals
Volkes,
179,
715, 717, Eng. trans. Div. ii. vol. iii. This circumstance makes the hypothesis
13.
49
1883, 237), that the Prayer of Manasseli is derived from the Hebrew "History of the Kings of Israel" (2 Chron. xxxiii. 18 fT.), extremely insecure. A free development of the liint thrown out by the Chronicler was what would very
readily occur to writers of a later age.
besides the twenty-four canonical books ( 7) but among these are included only mystical apocalypses, like that book
itself.
II.
The use
is,
of the
New
Testament
a
further
writings
considered,
development of the
Christ
Himself
tw
vo/icp iVfojucrew?
Kat
irpocprjTat'i
Kai
yjraXfjLOL^;
nrepl i/jiov.
And
is
only
to the proper
also the
New
Him was
considers
how
free
little
the
New
life
of
which the
transla-
conspicuous example,
he
New
Testament
is
must necessarily
New
it
to
one side as an
this
insignificant
argumentum
silentio."
But
naturally
does not at
New
Testament more or
less
imin
were
14.
IN
51
Palestiuians (2).
Book
of
Enoch introduced
Jude
(v.
Alongside of
is
conies the
not to be found
of
indeed
among
is
known
the Assumptio
Mosis, but
upon the
distinct testimony of
Origen
(De Principiis,
2. 1), to
of that work.
xi.
f.
There
is
no reason
for
35
f.
is
On
xi.
the
we cannot
iii.
37
and 2 Tim.
ct
Jamhrcs
liber
upon
oral traditions.
Of the remin-
New
some
Sirach
Compare,
are
c/j.,
James
i.
19
witli
11.
But others
No On
met with
91G)
;
here.
if
the
quotation
9, as
Origen (de la
affirms,
but our
any
definite
conclusion.
388)
reports, and, in
tlie
It still
we
are to
think of Luke
49
Jas. iv. 5
John
9
vii.
38.
On
nuper
the
Jerome on Matt,
volumine,
xxvii.
(" legi
in
quodam
Hebraico
quod
NazariL*na3
sectic
mihi
lirec
ad verbum
quotation
ascribed to
Jeremiah from
this
Apocalypse.
52
15.
referred to
may
The actually
we never
the
find in the
New
books,
Messianic proofs,
in
in
succeeding age,
inevitably
Hellenistic
resulted
leading
to
culture
prevailed,
unreservedly
the
When
the Palestinian
the
Jews
In connection
divergent
to
with
this,
even
among
to
Christians
themselves,
the
this
or
How
Compare among the writings mentioned in 21, especially Also Werner in the Theol Bleek in TSK, 1853, p. 325 ff. Boon, De Jacobi epistola cum Quartalsclirift, 1872, p. 265 fp. Grimm, Das Buck der Siracidce lihro convenientia, 1860
;
;
Weisheit,
xxxviii.
;
p.
35
f.
Fritzsche,
Die
WeisJieit
Jesus Siraclis
ii.
Schllrer,
Geschichte
des jud.
Volkes,
596, 628,
636, 676, 685, 690, 741, 758, Eng. trans. Div. ii. vol. iii. 23, 55, 69, 109, 144, 150, 214, 234; Wildeboer, Wright, The Book of Koheleth, p. 49. Het ontstaan p. 45 On Eph. v. 14 compare also JPT, 1880, p. 192.
f,
;
674
15.
Among
we
the
Palestinians,
is
with
some very
this, that
The agreement
seen in
In the Syrian
15.
53
earliest
cloister,
Apliraates,
abbot-bishop
of
St.
^lutthew's
who
single exception,
The Song,
Apocryplia, although he
knew
them
On
Canon by
some
of
In the Syrian
Book
of Chronicles
was
originally
Targum on
( Vl), did
general
acceptance.
It
is
indeed
quoted
it.
by
comment upon
omitted
In later
Theodore
of
Mopsuestia
not
only
the
;
Book
and
of
in tlin
aiid
canon
Esther
of
are
tlie
Nestorians,
Chronicles,
is
Ezra-Xehemiah,
received.
On
the other
of
the
Book
of
Esther.
Even
is
wanting
in
tliose
lists,
we
among
the Jews,
On
the other
we
the
of
tlie
If,
Book
of the
Chronicles, least
recognition
Book
of
54
16.
to
who in this particular must have gone their own way hut it is much more probable that they were Syrian Christians, who acted on their own
be sought only among Syrian Jews,
;
these
indeed
Mopsuestia.
Those
Syrians
received,
who
as
attached
to
themselves
to
the
Greek
Church
they
(
was
be
met with in
larger
or smaller
numbers
16).
Compare
;
v.
1831 ^ichhorn, I!inleitu7ig, mentliclie Littemtur, p. 263 xxxii. p. 587 xxxv. p. 496
;
p.
255
G^. 6^.
;
ZDMG,
p.
196.
758 The
;
Apocrypha in Aphraates are found in the Compare on Homilies edited by Wright, pp. 66, 252, 438.
other points, Bert, Aphrahats des persischen Weisen Homilicn.
Alts
dem
Syrisclien ilhersetzt,
1888 (and
fif.).
a review of
it
in
1889,
p.
77
16.
upon
such as the
(
Ethiopians, the
w^ere
Syrians
15),
etc.,
Jews
in reference to Scripture.
We
Tertullian,
Clement
of Alexandria, etc.,
allusions
to
writin^^s
which
had
been
excluded
from
the
Palestinian
quotations
from
many
of the
literary
works mentioned in
all
13.
How
far these
belong-
among
as \YQ
IG.
IN
55
Book
of
Book
was
first
made by
Jewish Alex-
come
arose
to
At any
rate,
there
way
they had not been received by the Jews, and that, in the
Christian
Churches,
as, e.g.
they
had
not
obtained
of
such
general
etc.
acceptance
Wisdom
Solomon,
among
the
Greek Jews.
In this
way among
writings
result of
Church
and the
On
all,
afforded
illus-
by two examples.
The
Vatican
:
Scptuagint
Codex
Book
of
Wisdom, Ben
Book
all
of Esther,
Manasseh
the
list
show that
it
contained
New
Testament.
On
given in
56
16.
howare
ever, the
Manasseh
wanting)
extant,
among
Greek
were attached
to the
practice.
But
it is
in a very special
any influence
of
works are
Enoch, the
To the Ethiopian
and the Book
Book
of
Martyrdom
edited.
of Isaiah,
of .lubilees,
from which
during the present century the texts have been recovered and
for
the
were
arroKpvc^o^,
kolv6<;,
sccrctus,
non
maiiifestus,
in
opposition to
(j)avp6<;,
manifestus, vidgatus.
Without
different
tij
2) the term
was
(synagogical) use
" apocryphal,"
among
books.
Out
of
this
idea
there
was readily
which
is
often the
is
On
17.
IN
5*
Einldtiing
hciligni
Schriften
dcs jild.
A. und N.
ii.
T.
i.
232
Eng.
f.
Schiirer,
iJiv.
Gcschichte
ii.
Volkcs,
Scliolz
trans.
vol.
iii.
9-219.
Apocrypha.
the Ethiopians, compare Dillmann,
"
On
Bibelkanous der
Wisscnscliaft, v.
pccdie,
i.
1853,
p.
144
f.,
and Herzog's
see
llccd- Encyclo-
205.
On
the range of
etc.,
among
,
the
Armenians,
the
Georgians,
Scholz, K^lnlcitunfj
i.
259.
On
use
of
d.
is
the
word
"
apocryphal,"
see
i.
especially
1
Zahn, Gcschichte
Nciitestamcntlichen
Kanons,
in
20-150,
instance
where attention
heretical,
pernicious,
are
the
first
secondary.
who
at
Thus it is quite simply explained how Origen, onetime writes {Contra Cels.v. 54): eV rat? iKK\r)aiaL<;
cf)pTaL &)? Oela
ov Trdvv
ra
iTriyeypafi/jLeva
and at another time (de he Iiue, ii. 384), " libelli isti non videntur apud Hebroeos in auctoritate haberi," yet also himself quotes the Book of Enoch, e.g. De Frincipiis, iv. 35
(dc la Rue,
i.
153):
suo Enoch
designated
Various
lists
of the
writings
apocryphal are
;
given by Credner, Zur Gcschichte dcs Kanons, pp. 117 ff., 145 Schiirer, Gcschichte dcs jild. Volkcs, ii. G70 f., Eng. trans.
Div
ii.
vol.
iii.
125.
first
one among
all
when
all
among
In order to overcome
this
difficulty,
among
their fellow-
58
17.
THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON IN THE GREEK CHUKCIL more exact information about the extent of the
believers
Jewish Canon.
Such
service
mentioned above in
7.
Yet
that
had in view
submit
a purely practical end, and they had not indeed the least
thought
of
su^i::^estinf
the
Christians
should
the use in
their
Hence Origen himself not only used such books in his works, but expressly vindicates them in his letter to Africanus,
he urges that the practice of the Church in regard to
Scripture had been developed under the providence of God,
for
of the
Jews
of
to
these writings
had
might
be strengthened.
The Greek
fathers
of the fourth
century unhesitatingly
at
that
are
accordimr
to
the
Jewish
practice.
of
the
Jews
as
their
authorities,
give
lists
of
the
canonical
writings,
two
first-named
the
Book
of
Esther, while
Amphilochius refers
as received only
by some (compare
59th
at
7).
On
of
Canon
Synod
a.d.
of Phrygian
Laodicea, between
343
and
to
the
purity
of
doctrine.
17.
IN
59
tlie
practice
churclies
includetl.
class
the apocryphal writings as books, the use of which for reading the
To
this
Esther
the
Wisdom
fathers
to,
quotations
from those
books
allowed
be read
and a
that
consequence of this
way
of viewing the
"
matter
is,
we
have
those
"
reading
books
in
the
oldest
Greek
Bible
manuscripts
( 16).
365
{Opera, cd.
'EireiS/jTrep Tive<; iTre-^eiprjaav Colin, ii. 1G86, p. 38 ff.) avard^aoOai eavTol^ rd Xeyofieva uTroKpvcpa kol iiri/jLi^at ravra rjj OeoTrvevarrj ypa^rj, irepl r)<^ i7r\7jpo(f>opi]0r]fjLi', KaOco^
oi djr
dp-^y}';
iKOeaOai rd fcavoiu^ofieva
Oela
elpai
Kal
TrapahoOevra,
ei
/jlV
TnarevOevra
re
jSt^Xia,
,
iva
6
CKaaro^,
Ka6apo<^
rjiraTijOrj,
hk
.
.
X^^PV 'ttuXlu v7rofit/j,vr]crK6fjLvo<; (There follows an enumeration of the twenty - two books, without Esther, but with Euth separately named.) 'AXX'
BLa/jLiva<i
.
veKd
ye
TrXet'oi'o?
uKpi/Seiaf;
TrpocrrLOrjfiL
Kal tovto
<ypd(f)(i)i>
dvayKaiw^,
VdidKeaQai
X'^laOaL
ao(f>ia
&)?
on
fiev,
earl
Kai>oi'i^u/j,eva
reTvircofieva
tol<;
dpn
irpoaepxpfievoL's
TOV
T?;?
f^al
evcre^eta^;
Xoyov'
XoXofiojvro^
Kal
^ipd^,
KaXovfj.ei'1]
Tcov
AttogtoXcdv,
Kal
ttoi/xjJv.
Kal
op-w^
eirivoia,
ypa^ov-
60
18.
')((ocnv
dirarav
e'/c
coll. ii. 574), XeyeaOat iv tJ ore ov 8et lSL(oriKov<; ylraXfiGv^; Canon 59 ovSe aKavoviara /Si^Xia, aXka jiova tcl KavoviKa tt)? KK\r}ala
nov.
Kaivrj^
Kol TToXaia^i
Soa6r]fC7]<;.
1690,
98.
Amphilocliius,
Canonis,
p.
Jamhi ad Sdcucum,
(Opei^a,
194.
Cyril of
p.
Jerusalem
ed.
Benedict.
Paris,
1720,
same books as Origen (7), Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah, and ^vith the addition of He has probably borrowed his list from this predecessor. makes no mention of an intermediate order between the canonical and the apocryphal books yet, e.r/. in his Catech. The 60th ix. 2, he quotes from Wisdom xiii. 5 as canonical. Canon of the Council of Laodicea has the same list. Compare,
57
if.)
names
precisely the
however, on the doubtful genuineness of this canon, Credner, [Hefele, Geschichte d. Neidestamcntliclien Kanc^s, p. 217 ff.
History of the Councils of the Church,
p.
vol.
ii.
Edinburgh 1876,
323
18.
f.]
The Latin Church took a course somewhat different from that of the Greek Church, a course by which, unfortunately, the results of study w^on among the Greeks, and used
with wise
consideration for the
lost,
customary
is
practice of the
which
all
when we
happy solution
In the Prologus
galeatus, referred to in 7,
twentybriefly
and well
dum."
"
apocrypha ponen-
He
18.
IN
C 1
standpoint, while he
uses the
word
much wider
( 2).
signification
Even
to
be read
were,
according to this
mode
of representation,
included
among
the uTroKpvcpa.
entirely
consequence of the
demands
and the
but in
they held
and
of
among the Greeks, while he remarks of Jesus Sirach " HcX^c duo volumina lecrit the Book of Wisdom
:
(ecclesia)
ad
cedificationem
plebis,
non
"
;
ad
auctoritatem
ecclesiasticorum
self
dogmatum confirmandam
quotes
Sirach,
and so he himworks,
his
not
infrequently
especially
Jesus
various
apocryphal
once
iii.
expressly
introducing
quotation
((?o??i7?zc?i^.
on Isaiah,
12)
tura sancta."
after
allowed to be read
Instead of
now
solving
simply be read.
to
much
i.e.
as
among
embraced the
the
Wisdom
62
of
18.
Daniel, Esther,
and Jeremiah.
decisive,
The
those
and
all
writings
were
pronounced
without
paying
any
remarks of
Jerome.
It
came
to this practical,
first
but
time at the
A.D.
Church Assemblies
to
at Hippo, a.d.
fell
397,
whose
lot
it
thus
to give to
it
had not
" Feci
satis
desiderio vestro
Arguunt enim nos Hebraeorum non tamen meo studio. studia: et imputant nobis contra suum canonem Latinis
Sed melius esse judicans Pharisa?orum displicere judicio, et episcoporum jussionibus deservire,
auribus ista transferre.
iustiti
ut potui."
:
Judith
cujus
"
Apud
apocrypha legitur
in
auctoritas
ad
roboranda
ilia
quse
contentionem
librura
legitur
veniunt,
Sed quia hunc minus idonea judicatur. synodus Nicsena in numero sanctarum scripturarum
acquievi
postulationi
:
computasse,
vestras,
immo
exactioni."
"
quando ea non ad dogmatum veritatem, sed ad signorum reverentiam legere voluerit, sciat non eorum esse, quorum titulis prsenotatur, multaque his admixta vitiosa, et grandis
esse prudentia3
aurum
in luto quserere."
A
c.
list
of the books in
is
given by Cassiodorus,
14.
De
Alongside of this
we should take
notice of a list of
Mommsen at
Cheltenham, which
Compare with reference to it Mommsen in Hermes, xxi. 142 ff. Zahn Harnack, Tlieolog. Litt. Zeitung, 1886, in ZKWL, 1886, iii. Augustine Nr. 8; and J. Weiss in ZWT, xxx. 157 ff.
; ;
18.
IN
THE LATIN
CIIUIICII.
C3
Dc dodrina
11.
Christiana,
ii.
De
i.
^7?'rt;r/cs^.
sand.
i.
On
the Councils
apostolorinn
tables
at
Carthage
see
Bruns,
Canoncs
conciliuraia,
The following
may
help to an under-
They all have in the same order the five these lists. Books of Moses, only the Cheltenham list puts Numbers before Leviticus (compare on that point Zahn, Geschichte d.
:
Ncutestamcntl. Kanons,
63); then follow Joshua, Judges, Books of Kings, and two Books of l*arai.
Thereafter the
list
runs as follows
Cassiodorus.
64
vol.
iii.
19.
Writings
by
W.
The
Canon between
Jerome on the
other, although
Many
"
books allowed
be read"
( 18), also
one,
answering of
But when
at
^the fundamental position of Jerome, the matter was so far as the Eomish Church was concerned, yer viam
tionis,
settled,
ojyposiits
to take
under
also to
proclaim
as a condition of salvation
suis partibus, prout
et et
cum
omnibus
sueverunt,
in veteri vulgata
Latina
editione
habentur,
pra3-
pro
sacris
canonicis
non
susceperit,
et traditiones
sit "
anathema
(Concil.
Trident,
I
iv. c. 1).
referred
to,
which
'
in this
way were
Jeremiah,
On
New
Testament.
This solu-
and
eriiphatic declarations of
Jerome, must be
regarded
as a
rather
brutal
one,
20.
CARLSTADT, LUTHER.
G5
practice,
and
after
1672,
to
The
literature of the
development sketched
in
the above
62-68
rank
Wette-Schrader, Elnlcitiuig, pp. see also Bleek, TSK, 1853, pp. 271. 274. On the
" deutero-canonical,"
De
by
Sixtus of
Siena {BiUioth.
Biblia,
sancta,
1687), compare Welte in the Theol. Quartalschrift, 1839, p. 230 ff., and Scholz, Einhitung, i. 262 f. On the Greek Church, compare Bleek, TSK, 1853,
156G), Bernard
i.
Lamy
ff.),
{Apparat. ad
etc.,
Jahn
{Einleitung,
141
p.
276
20.
ff.
Herzog's rical-Eiicylopccdie,
vii.
445
f.
first
directed
its
attention to the
Holy Scripture
in
as the
the
direction of
was
of necessity obliged to
as to
come
might be
The
first
who
in a thoroughgoing
mation,
Andrew Cadstadt,
1520.
tract,
Dc
canonicis
scripturis,
of Augustine
IS),
while, without
all
any reference
to
Church, he styles
66
20.
CAELSTADT, LUTHER.
left out,
among
among the
Hebrews."
Among
Books
of
it
was
only at a later period that the Song of the Three Children, the
Luther also translated the non-canonical writings which were read in the Church.
Even
in a.d.
1519 he published
:
Eine
Unterwcisung,
wie
man
heicldeii
soil.
In
A.D.
1529
a.d.
and Daniel
of
we
which was
directed not merely against these writings but also against particular books
of
the
old
Jewish decisions
Alongside of
Hebrew
and Chronicles.
Book
excluded
deserved
from
to
the
canon,
the
First
in
Book
it.
Maccabees
is
have
been included
the
as
old
we
is
compare
15),
which
20.
CAKLSTADT, LUTHEII.
67
liere
made on
not
to
whose task
it
was
examine into
their
historical
significance
and their
consequent right to a place in the canon, but to give expression to the fundamental ideas of revelation in their purity
to estimate
everything accord-
canonical books
practice of the
liimself, 18),
Greek fathers
even Jerome
canonical Old
when he
places
them
"
Holy
Scripture,
for
reading."
Through a very
who
In
to
times
the
term
"
Fsciideingraphic
"
was introduced
however,
is
denominate
suitable,
of books, which,
less
also found
among
by the Church,
Solomon a
so that indeed
Solomon,
named
The
the
Book
:
of
Wisdom
of
ylrevBeiriypacpoi:.
treatise
Be
is
Andrea^-
Bodcnstcin-Carhtadt
see especially
Kanons (1847, p. 291 ff.) 364): "Nunc autem, ut de nieo quid (p. dam additiam, constat incertitudinem autoris uon facere apocrypha scripta, nee certum autorem reddere canonicas
in Credner's Ziir Gcschichtc dcs
81
68
scripturas, seel
20.
LUTHER.
libros,
phos
from
facit, sive
On
habeant autores et nomina sive non." the Zurich Bible and the " Combined Bibles " made up
and from Luther's translations, compare Herzog s Bealiii. 550, 554 f. The above-mentioned prefaces to the translations of the Apocrypha are found in Luther's Sdmiliclien Werken, Erlangcn, Of the First Book of Maccabees it is said Ixiii. 91108. "This book is also one which is not to be met (p. 104): with in the Hebrew Bibles. It is, however, almost equal in its discourses and language to the other books of Holy Scripture, and would not have been unworthy of a place among them, for it certainly is a necessary and useful book
it,
Encydopcedie'^,
On
:
it is
Book
of
Maccabees
In short, just as
be received into
are willing that
we were willing that the First Book should the number of the Sacred Scriptures, so we the Second Book should be rejected, though
it."
there
is
something good in
to
he,
ing statements
be compared:
" I
Eiiang.
And when
the doctor,
:
corrected
so
Maccabees, he said
Judaise too
am
opposed
to this
De
servo arhitrio
"
Liber Esther
me
Erlang. Ansg.
Ixii. p.
132
hundred thousand steps beyond him who has written the Chronicles, for he has only indicated the sum and pointed out the most remarkable points in the history, and has passed over what is bad and small therefore the Books of IviuGjs are more to be believed than the Books of Chronicles." The same, p. 128: Of the book of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, he says " This book ought to be more complete, it is too fragmentary,
;
it
it
rides
myself,
when
was
still
in the cloister.
that
frighten
Solomon has been damned, but this was written to kings, princes, and lords. So he did not himself
21.
THE REFORMED
it
CIIUKCII.
69
^^Tite the
was composed by Siracli in the lime of the Maccabees." We must, however, compare with tliese the divergent statements of vol. Ixiii. p. 40, and
Ecclesiastes, but
i\\
Book
into the
Lutheran translation of
canonised by the
of
Manasseh has
also
Apocalypse of Ezra {ix. the Fourth Book of Ezra) also finds place among the Apocrypha. Compare Gildemeister, Esdroc
liber
p.
42.
its
it
the consequence
Lutheran
confession
and,
the
other
hand,
repeated
Even
at the
others, insisted
upon
At a somewhat
pronounced
Wcstmonastcricnsis,
1648
(the
Confession,
i.
3),
the
apocryphal
writings,
human
But
it
was only
in
serious dimensions.
On
the ground
protested
especially
the
resolution
of
in
the
Society to
Bible
translations
foreign
languages,
the
70
21.
The two
in
writings.
The
Pastor
ISr.
Blicher.
period,
At a subsequent
1850,
for
prize
offered
by the Baden
the Apocrypha,
of
in
some
to
cases,
no practical
but afforded
are to be
1840, with an Appendix, Halle 1840 Gallicana, p. 329 f.; Confessio Scotica, i. 350;
Confessio Belgica, p.
362
468
The English
ensis, p.
XXXIX
f.;
i.
Articles,
602
:
Declaratio
Thoruni-
670
Confessio Boliemica, p.
3,
it
787.
In the West-
minster
Confession,
is
said
"
Church of God, nor to be otherwise approved, or made use of, than any other human writings." On the Synod of Dort, see Actcc synocli nat. Dordrecti Jiahitm, Hanover 1620, p. 30. [The Edinburgh controversy over the circulation of the Apocrypha by the Bible Society, in which Dr. Andrew Thomson, Dr. Patrick Macfarlane, Ptobert and Alexander Haldane, Marcus Dods of Belford, Charles Simeon, Henry Venn, and others opposed that circulation, may be studied in detail in a collection of PampJdets on the Apocrypha Coritroversy, in 4 vols., 1825-1827.]
22.
CONCLUDING REMARKS.
fiir
71
Oct.
1827
Jens
Die
Apocriiphen,
Evaiuj. KirchenzcitiUKj,
1853; Hen^^stenberg in the 1853; Bleek in TSK, 1853, p. 2G7in lUeek, Einlcitung, p.
354.
Further
ii.
trans, vol.
37G
and
GG5,Eng. 281 f.
22.
As
>/
are represented
It
less hesitatingly,
Jerome without
had done
in re^ardincc the
on
Jews
The people
of Israel, to
whom
the Old
life
task
was
to preserve
it
and
free
from
all
foreign
and
modifying elements.
in
a position
fully to trace out the principles wliich led the scribes in their
which can
peculiar,
still
be understood arc in
many
cases extremely
importance.
For
do,
it is
we have
to
but
only
among
The
spread
had
to
work up
in their
own way
but
how
they succeeded
72
in this
is
22.
COXCLUDING REMARKS.
of the writings
among
the
members
of the
community
affords
the
special guarantee
them a true
of learning
must be accepted by us
that
life.
as the canonical
means
to
know
Our task
was
But
in order to do this,
we must above
Such a mode
of considering
them
will, in
we meet
with in Luther.
of a
religion
which
which
to
and
dissolve
away
its
in order that
it
may
thereby
itself
become
conscious of
way
before the
new and
tion, in
which some
Israelites
because the
ideal claims
the
community recognised a genuine picture of the moral and Too much stress spiritual currents by which it was moved.
cannot be laid upon the fact that such writings, not only were
received into the canon, but even maintained their place there
in
spite
of
the
attacks
of
later
times
8).
However
22.
CONCLUDING KEMAllKS.
l)y
73
ment
of these
writings
may
liave
tliat
by every
It
is
therefore the
distinguishing
against the
its
excellence
of
the
I'rotestant
it
Church,
over
admixture.
\/
and
actions,
whose fulfilment
too,
and completion
is
Jesus Christ.
is
And
14).
so,
in the
Xew
At
a greater or less
distance from this circle stand, on the other hand, the non-
canonical writiuLjs.
were wrong
to
a richer
and
of
Wisdom than
in
the
Book
Apocrypha gives
so
much
application as Ecclesiastes.
to them, a thoroughgoing
ment
and lead
all,
to the conclusion
must
retreat into
the background,
if
we
life
On
how
74
had done
;
22.
CONCLUDING REMARKS.
one
is
and so
far
able to approve of
But however much one may from this standpoint recognise the style and manner in which the Churches named above
have solved the question of the canon, there
point in which Luther and those
is
yet another
who
followed
Apocrypha led
of the canon
played so important
35),
part
among the
Now,
Jews
and has so
althouf]jh
after the
the
tripartite
division.
And
yet
it
is
obvious
we can only be
justified in adopting
if
Jewish authority on
we
Indeed,
we
to
New
and range
mistake to
students,
It is a Old Testament Canon ( 7, 14). confine the knowledge of this division to theological
of the
and
if
it
in
advance
order and
were done,
it
to
commending
The above
exposition,
2-j.
CONCLUDING
t:kmai:k.s.
75
bci'ii
Thus
it
has
already told
12) that I'en Sirach had obtained a pretty wide circulaIn such a case then it was tion amouLr the Palestinians.
exclusively the scribes who, according,' to some settled princi])l(\
aave the decision as to whether tlie book was to be received AVhat sort of principle this was into the collection or not.
(the lateness of the period during
or
cannot
degree of certainty.
The ground
on which the First Book of Maccabees was not received is more distinct. It cannot be denied that the description of the happy reign of Simon, c. 14, is given with so many unmistakably Messianic expressions, that the readers must have received the impression that the author had seen in the Maccabean rule the fulfilment of the hope of Israel, which therefore must place the book outside of the (,)ld Testament
circle.
Among
Song
"
The
" causes
any considerable
difficulty.
That
it
is
was only
not only
the collection
8),
but
is
in
a wiioDy unhistorical statement. !More than for any other single writing must we for this very book presuppose an
early currency and general favour
;
otherwise
it
would
cerit
tainly
as
canonical. That it could maintain its place was undoubtedly owing to the allegorical interpretation, whether suggested by Pi. Akiba or by some one else. But, on the other side, the attacks upon its canonicity seem plainly to show that this allegorical interpretation was not generally accepted, and so
there
it
had secured
in the
THE
77
PRELIMIXARY REMARKS.
Whoever makes a study of the history of the Old Testament text must put up with very defective information in many directions. Not only are we without the simplest and surest means of discoverini:^ the fortunes of the text,
23.
now
lie
before us,
derived.
And
so,
must
first of all
and that
degrees of certainty
by us and the
where
all
now
lies
a dark space,
objective
means
would enable us
text.
In order
be able to perform
must presuppose
of
results
specialists.
it
Where such
also
are
must remain
On
it
and
command
first
for the
and an
Owing
to the fact
80
23.
PRELIMINARY REMARKS.
that in tracinsj back the Old Testament text the direct witnesses
for the text, after a relatively short time, leave us
without the
At the same
them,
to
come
into
all trans-
lations wdiich
originated
at
times
when we
possess
direct
must be
left
unmentioned.
On
;
the
of the origination
and character
of the
other translations
for
only in this
way
many
somewhat
by outside
influences,
its
must be taken
of readings that
may have
may
no real but
may
Compare, in addition
1,
Morinus,
texhis
Excrcitationum
libri
hihlicarum
de
;
Hebrmi Gra^cique
Cappellus,
Critica
sinceritatc
duo, Paris
1669
new edition, with notes by Vogel and ScharHalle 1775-86; Humfredi Hodii De hibliorum textict
1705; Hupfeld in TSK, 1830 and 1837; the second volume of Home's Introduction to the Critical Study cuid
Oxf.
23.
rKKLLMIXAKV l:KMAI;KS.
8L
Knowlcdyc of the Holy Scripture, London 18 GO, by ])r. Sam. Davidson Dillmann, " lUbeltext d. A. T." in Herzog's licalEncyclopccdic, ii. o81 ff. Strack, rrolcgomcna critita in V.
;
;
T.
187o
AVeissmann, Kanonisicrimj
kciligen ScJiriftcn
;
und
Feststclhing
dcs
Tixtes dcr
(Jlebr.),
I.
The
1.
Appaeatus Proper.
Frinted Editions.
24.
The
first
furnished by Jews.
1477
there appeared
Commentary
Gerson ben
Kimchi; next,
Soncino.
in
of the
Old Testament
Pi.
at
The Brescia
edited
by
Moses in 1494, dependent upon the Soncino edition, was the The copy used by one used by Luther for his translation.
him
to
is
It
was not
until A.D.
1514-1517
edition of the
It
original
Hebrew
New
Testament.
The
often
manual
edition of
afterwards) was
still
Soncino edition,
Bom-
The Athias To
edition of J. Leuseditions,
but with
attached
several manuscripts.
this
again
is
Hahn and
Theile.
Of a
24.
PRINTED EDITIONS.
SH
of the text issued
H. Michaelis
(llalle
1720).
In more
the editing of a series of very serviceable separate editions of the several books, corrected according to the Massoretic text.
we
also
meet
witli
Hebrew
text
in
the
so-called
Polyglot
liibles,
which,
number
is
of
these
the
hailed
as
of a
new
is
era in
linguistic studies.
defective,
The
revision of the
Hebrew
text
indeed
but
rests
The
great
of this edition.
also to be
is
Ptabbinical Bibles,
where
it
Among
these
the
first
work
of Jacob
text
corrected
from
Massora which
given below.
contains.
An
is
The
at
Mantua 1742-44,
1277,
is
nY)on a Toledo
year
incor-
porated
(Nurzia),
the
celebrated
commentary
(^*^
of
is
Solomon
di
Norzi
Minhath Sai
nn:?3),
which
of special import-
Massoretic text.
The
sauK^
Compare De
Halle
Rossi,
p.
cxxxix
ff.
Le
ff.
1778-00; De Wette-Schrader,
Einleitung, p.
217
84:
24.
rPJNTED EDITIONS.
Eosenm tiller, Hanclhuch der Litt. d. hibl. Kritik und Exegese, iii. 279 ff. Of the Five Megilloth the old Maci. 189 ff., Baer, see upon these hazor editions ought to be referred to To the works named in De WetteQuinque volnmina, p. iv. Schrader, Einhitung, p. 217, on the oldest printed Hebrew
;
:
editions,
should be added
F. Sacchi,
tipograijlii
Ehrei di
Soncino,
Cremona 1877.
On Luther's manual
edition of the
KZ, 1883,
51.
On
appeared:
Ezekiel,
Genesis,
;
1869;
Isaiah,
1884
1882
Chronicles,
1888
see Euringer,
Eer
1890.
Bible,
Polyglots:
The Complutensian
1514-1517; The
Antwerp Polyglot (" Eegia " or " Plantiniana," after the Antwerp printer Christian Plantin, who died in A.D. 1589), 1569-1572. Upon the Antwerp text of the Old Testament,
as Delitzsch in
has shown,
is
sacrcij
Hebraice, Greece
Latine, ex officina
and 1616 ex officina Coinmeliana). Finally the Parisian Polyglot, 1629--1645, and the London Polyglot, 1654-1657 (1817-1828, 1831). Franz Delitzsch has dealt with the Complutensian Polyglot in detail in three Leipsic Disserta-
tions
Kardiiials
which he gives, p. 19 ff., a biographical sketch of Ximenes, and at p. 24 ff. a sketch of his fellow-workers on the Polyglot) Complutcnsisclie Variantcn
Ximenes,
(in
;
1871
zmn
Alttestam.
Texte,
1878
der
Fortgcsetztc
Studien zur
complutensisclien
p.
Polyglotte,
1886.
134.
Felix Pratensis,
The first Bomberg Bible, edited by Vienna 15171518; Second Bomberg Bible, Buxtorf's Bible, Basel, edited by Jacob ben Chajim, 1525 1618-1619 the BiUia magna nc'b n^np (rich in materials),
Bibles:
; ;
lV).
85
Amsterdam 1724-1727;
1877.
Warsaw 1875the
dcr
in
Commentary and edition, see Flirst, Bihliographischcs Handhuch jildischcn Littcraticr, iii. 39 f. Of importance
di
On Solomon
Xorzi's
Mantuan
(jcsnmten
connection
is
1818.
of the Pentateuch text used
by the
Samaritans
Polyglots,
and
was
published
separately
by
B.
Blayney
Compare Kautzsch
353.
in Herzog's liCcd-EncyclojJccdie-,
xiii.
2.
Manuscripts.
remarkably recent.
Between the
oldest manuscript
whose
The reason
which
is all
the
more remark-
we
much
earlier date, is
found in
this,
when
age,
gogue PlVp), to accelerate their destruction, because they feared lest the manuscripts no longer in use might be in any
way
profaned.
old,
and
of
is
to
86
27.
CLASSIFICATION OF MANUSCEIPTS.
The catalogues of the manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible are given in Strack's Prolegomena, pp. 29-33, 119-121. To this
konigl.
Bibliothck
Milnchen,
1875
Harkavy and Strack, Katcdog d. liehr. Handschriften in St. Petersburg, 1875; Schiller-Szinessy, Catalogue of the Hebreio Manuscripts in Camhridge, 1876 Steinschneider, Katalog der hehr. Handschriften in der Stadthihliothek zio Hainhurg, 1878
;
Hie Handschriftenverzeichnisse der konigl. Bibl. zu Berlin, ii. 1878 Landauer, Katalog der Bihliothek in Strasshurg.
;
Orient. Handsclirifter ,
i.
1881
aSTeubauer,
Erfurt manuscripts compare Lagarde, Sijnimicta, 1877, p. 133 ff., and Baer, Liber XIL. Proph. p. vi. Merx, Chrestomathia
targurrdca xv. gives a
list
system of points.
Baer's
manuand
described.
On
the
Machazor manuscripts,
compare Baer,
v.
Quinque volumina,
iv. seq.
On
M.
Sab.
ix.
Soph^rim
14,
p.
xi
2.
27.
The age
when they have come down with a dated subscription, and even then we must be prepared for the possibility of falsifications
only
editors
had recourse
to in order to
afforded
by
introduced at jDarticular
On
28.
OLDKST MANUSCIiU'TS.
rrolcgomaut,
p.
:-o
11".;
87
Com[)are
p.
Strack,
ZLT, 1875,
1845, pp. 207,
GOl
f.
Ziinz,
Zur
214230;
(jcncrihus,
Tintamai de variis codiaun Hchraicoruni Idem, BciLrtcilung dcr Jahrzahhv liostock 1872
Tyclisen,
;
in
den
hchrdisch-hihlischcn
Jlcuidschriftcii,
liostock
1780;
Schnurrer,
Dc
^,
codd.
V. T. cvtatc difficidtcr
1772.
On
the formuliu of
p.
Einleitunfj
turzcitung,
On
in
see
Harkavy
;
vii.
24, Xr. 1
Strack, A. Firkcnvitzsch
und
ff.
seine Entdccln.ngcn,
1870
and
very
ZDGM,
learned
xxxiv.
Corincs
p.
103
On
Chwolson's otherwise
St.
inscriptionum
Hehraicaricin,
Petersburg
1882, wherein an attempt is made partially to vindicate Sec Firkowitzsch, compare Strack in LCB, 1883, p. 878.
also 70.
On some
scripts (" for
manu-
Qamcs
Jiatiiph
Icne in all letters ") see Baer, Liher Jcrcmicv, p. viii seq.
given in Euting's
Schrifttafcl in Chwolson's
Compare
28.
The
Xotwithstandiug the
many
forgeries of Firkowitzsch
we owe
the
to
his collections of
Crimea
oldest Codex,
whose
age
can
be
given
with
certainty, namely, a
in
They
88
of the date,
is
28.
OLDEST MANUSCEIPTS.
On
origin.
Hosea
fidem Cod. Bahj/lonici Petroj^olitani, ed. H. L. Strack, Leipsic 1875. Hoerning, Descriptions and Collations of Six Karaite Manuof portions of the Hebrew Bible in Arabic Character's, London 1889. Of the whole number of these manuscripts
scripts
Joel prophetce.
Ad
now
to
Museum
described,
and one
i.viii. 5, is
comprises
Exodus
tind
i.
On Aaron
exegt.
ben Asher
x.
Jewish traveller Jacob Sappir's Account of his Travels tsd pN, Lyck, 1866, p. 12 ff.; and especially, W. Wickes, A Treatise on the Accentuation of the so-ccdled Prose Books of the Old Testament, 1887, wherein a sheet of manuscript is reproduced in facsimile by photography, and where (pp. vii ix) the incorrectness of the date is proved. According to Lagarde (A''6^6^ PT, 1890, p. 16) it belongs to the
Bibliotheh,
63
the
German manuscripts
On
Neubauer
p.
p.
Wickes denies the correctness of the date of the Bible of A.D. 1010 or 1009. In his Treatise on the Accentuation, etc., p. ix,
he says: " I have myself no doubt, from personal inspection, that Codex B, 19, in the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg, dated 1009, is much younger, although the editors of the Catalogue [Harkavy and Strack, pp. 263-274; compare also Baer and Strack, Dikduke Hateamim. xxiv. seq.] accept the date."
20.
SAMAKITAX MANUSCKIPTS.
p.
80
On
otlier old
598
f!'.,
f.
Delitzsch,
Complutcndsche
Reuchlin
Vamanten,
-
1878,
dates
p.
and
The
year
celebrated
Prophet
Codav
it
from
the
1106.
p. vi sq.
Compare the
description of
we
also
meet with
Oriental Series iii. sheets 40, 41, iv. Neubauer's Catalogue of the Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, p. 8G. In his Gcschichte des Volkes Israel, p. 32, Stade gives representations of Reucldins Propliet-Codex, the Erfurt Bible Manuscript No. o, and the
Society,
also in
graphical
sheet
54
above referred
to
St.
Petersburg
Prophet-Codex.
Further
1887,
pp.
155-165.
A
old,
which caused some excitement in the year 1883, is by Guthe in Fragvunte einer Lederhandschrift, mitgetcilt \Lnd gepruft, Leipsic 1883. In the Memoires de V Academic imp. de St. Petersbourg, series vii. tome xxxii. 1884, Nr. 8, Harkavv describes some manuscript fragments from lihodes with a peculiar alphabet, which, however, are decidedly spurious. Compare Derenbourg in REJj X. 311, and Baer, Quinine volumina, vi. sq.
described
29. To the
Hebrew manuscripts
(
of the
Law
Samaritan
Codices
11,
25).
Since
these
manuscripts
text, it is not to
and that
taken
it
has
an
of
important
the
text
step
of
might
be
in
the
the
Pentateuch.
But the
import-
its
critical
90
ance
is
30.
COLLECTIONS OF VAEIATIONS.
restricted.
very
much
of
them
and
their
want
vowels,
confirm
the results
the
external
Compare Eichhorn, Emleitung^, 378-389; Eosen in Strack, Prolegomena, p. 56 f the ZDMG, xviii. 582 ff Herzog's Recd-Eiicyclopmclie^, i. 283, xiii. 349, 334; and
;
.
Harkavy's Katalog der Samaritan. Pentateuch- Codices, PetersCompare also burg 1874 (in the Eussian language). Heidenheim's Bibliotlieca Samaritana, i. p. xiv sqq., and in
review of
it,
ZDMG,
xxxix.
p.
167.
3.
Collections of Variations.
30.
By means
of the
made
by means
we have
manuscripts which
into possession of
We
come
from manuscripts
text
is
no
longer
extant,
(
which the
Jewish
traditional
has
preserved
31).
We may
what
Eome and
On
of
cele-
presents
series
drawn up by
Malizoroth) are
the
unknown
also
E. Hillel),
We must
made known
in recent
30.
COLLECTIONS OF VAKIATlUNS.
times
Ijy
means
and
finally,
11.
]\Ioses
II.
Tlie
latter
has
become
most
distinguished
rest,
For the
of
these
most part
varieties
vocalisation, are of
more importance
sometimes agrees
for philological
as representative
of the
text
Babylonian text in
On
known which
in
as
named
text,
the
that
made
evident
how
As
Talmuds
( 61),
Targums
and
( 10),
their system
The
earliest
known
it
list
of these variations,
communicated
in
his
Babbinical I>ible
24).
shown
that these
also
(28).
The
variations extend
over
all
cities,
Nehardea and
92
30.
COLLECTIONS OF VARIATIONS.
to
liovv
The question
as
far
Q'rc
to
be
33.
mwi
variis lectioni;
Oxford
1776-1780
;
edited by Bruns,
Brunswick 1783 De Eossi, Varice lectiones Veteris Testamenti, Parma, 1784-1788 and Scholia critica in V. T. Lihr. supplementa ad varias lectiones sacri textus, Parma 1798; s. The critical Delitzsch, Comjjhctensische Varianten, 1878. apparatus in Baer's editions ( 24); Strack in ZLT, 1877, The collations in Hoerning's Karaite p. 17P. (on Isaiah). manuscripts mentioned in 28. The reported readings of E. Meir (see in regard to him,
;
Judenthums,
ii.
86
ff.)
are given
;
Bereshith
9 (Gen.
nij^
i.
Idem,
c.
20 (Gen.
pi
21,
instead of
j^"^^;
Idem,
1, fol.
instead of
"'jni)
Taan.
xlvi. 23,
is
^'0T\
[Edom being
on the passage).
the
readings
of
With
a
Torah
catalogued in
manuscript
community at Prague), which was brought to Eome, and there " laid up in the m^lDNT t^DtJ^^^D." This roll is mentioned by Kimchi on Gen. i. 31, who writes " the Synagogue of Severus." Epstein, who in the MGWJ, 1885, pp. 337351, quotes
these passages, conjectures that
the
Law
brought
5.
Jews,
vii.
5).
may have been the roll of by Titus to Eome (see Josephus, Wai^s of the Compare further, Hochmuth in the same
it
journal,
For the
rest, at
i.
nxD in Gen.
31, might be
common
On
14-29, 112-118, and ZLT, 1875, p. 613 f. Academy, 1888, p. 321. On Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali, compare
On
the Codex
Strack, Prolego-
30.
COLLECTIONS OF VARIATIONS.
93
24 11"; ZLT, 1875, p. GIG; Ilerzog's Ecal-Enrydop(iUe\ ix. 390 ff. Berliner, Targum Oiikcios, 1884, ii. 139; and especially Baer and Strack, Die Dikdiike hateamim des Akron h. M. h. Ascher, 1879, pp. x ff., 78 ff. 84. These various
mena,
p.
;
readings are given in a manuscript of the Tschufutkale-Collection, Nr. 13, D'"}^^^ r\iV (see Dihlulcc, xxxii.
;
morum,
p. vi
Lihcr
Ezccliiclis, p. vi
Quinque volumina, p
and in the
as the
nip:n ^^'bn of
the
sq.).
(see
They
Of
where the divergences between Ben Naphtali and Ben Asher are said to have referred also to the consonants, Jer. xi. 7, xxix. 22 1 Kings iii. 20 (see ZLT, 611 Dikdukc, xiii.), the two first are not established 1875, p. by Baer's edition. On the. Eastern and Western schools, compare Strack, Prolegomena, 36-41, 121; ZLT, 1875, p. 608 ff., 1877, p. 22; Geiger, Kachgclasscnc Schriftcn, iv. 32 ff. Lists of their divergent readings are to be found in the Codex hen Asher
the
three
passages
(see
p. viii), in
1010, and
ISa (Baer,
Quinqiie volumina, p. v; Jjiher Johi, p. v). It is to be observed that the South Arabian manuscripts with " Babylonian " vocalisation contain the readings of the Western
school.
I*rose
Books,
p.
150.
The schools at Nehardea and Sora (compare on these cities, Neubauer, G^ograpJiic du Talmud, 350 f., 343) diverged from one another in their Halacha as well as in their Tari2:um
criticism.
An example
of their different
Bible readings
is
found in Neh. iii. 37, where, according to the Massora magna, those of Xehardea read ^s, those of Sora hi<\ Compare on them, Strack, Prolegomena, p. 40 Berliner, Die Massora zum Targum Onkelos, ii. G 1 ff. According to Berliner
to be
;
the
members
of
the
school
of
Nehardea were
they
followed
the
emigrant
western
Palestinians,
readinffs. o
and
consequently
94
31.
THE MASSOKA.
4.
31.
to
The want
of
some extent supplied by the so-called Massora or text tradition of the Jews, which makes it possible for us to trace back the text to the times earlier than those to which the
earliest
of the
of the Bible
manuscripts against
way
transmitted
valued.
of view
were compiled,
all
singularities
easily be
obliterated
the
hands
of
and
in this
way
was
built
up around
Scripture,
this,
that
we meet
with the text in essentially only one form from the time in
which the
the
scribes
to
various centres
of
of
memory
(
which
is
preserved by means
the
lists
of
made up
alis)
of marginal
of independent works.
stand
either
above or
called Massora
The independent Massoretic works They were often are the expansion of the Massora magna. added at the end of the Bible text in manuscripts and
called Massora 'parva.
editions,
finalis.
The
form in
31.
THE MASSORA.
is
95
tliat of
wliicli
an alphabetical
or
of statements
as to
how
often
the
gatherini,'
together
may be
used
still
by Elias
of the Jews,
met with among the Indians see Max Mliller, 18G1, p. 107. We also
I'ersians
d.
;
see Sitz-
Akadeviic
Wissensch,
1872, p. 9G. The pronunciation of the word miDO or miD^ is uncertain, for we find ri'jiDp as well as rinion (nniDD). Both forms, wliich occur in Ezekiel xx. 27, are remarkable, since the word is derived from "^P^^ ^?'f^^''^'We should have expected irj^DD, niic'3 (Barth, Nominalhildung 42, 2). like We prefer the form Massora, which may have originated through sharpening the accentuation, compare nnp3 (Barth, 93r6 yS), whereas
,
^T^?, since
ing
"T^^^t^
as
an intransitive
is
is
not parallel,
is
more
difficult to explain.
Aramaic
in
xniDD
hypotheses
Lagarde,
NGGW,
1889,
291.
Der
Gottesname
Adonaj.
p.
8;
and
Strack,
Theol.
Litter aturhlatt,
1889,
Elias Le vita's ( 9) miDon nilDO iD was published in Venice in 1536. A German translation was prepared by Semler (Halle 1772); a new edition of the text, with English translation by Ginsburg (The Book of the Massorah, with translation and critical and explanatory notes, ed. C. D.
in
Compare especially Bacher, ^7)J/6^, 231 ff. Ginsburg has edited Jacob ben Chajim's preface Hebrew and Eniijlish, 2nd ed., London 1867.
96
32.
fragment of
it
as a
specimen
chapter of
Bleek, Einleitung^,
the
first
Hansen, Interpretatio
1733-1737.
32.
The beginnings
that "
13),
is
of the
back
How
far indeed E.
Akiba, with
his saying
the
mOD
is
Law "
is
{Pirke
Aboth,
ful
;
iii.
doubt-
we meet with
the
Gemara and
in the old
Midrashic works,
all
that
system of pointing.
in
There
is
a further
increase
of material
the
sepher torah
and Massekct
soph'' rim,
the
of the
With
Massoretes
received
new
in
impetus,
because
now many
delicate points
orally
could be
30),
who
sorts
of
purely
a series
of
Massoretic
many
the
name Horajath ha
kore,
pointing.
literature
In the following
these works
when
a purely philological
separated from
arose
and, at the
same
time, there
purely Massoretic
literature
32.
THE MASSORA.
07
by the
latter
of
which
tlie
marginal notes of an
first
almost
enigmatical
intelligible.
character
Lime
made
its
i.
OMa
Sam.
1)
That
it
was already
is
in
existence in
half
of
beyond question,
whereas
relation to the
very doubtful.
it
Its
great
circulated in at
still
extant in
Elias Levita end of his liabbinical Bible ( 24, 31). also ( 31), who was almost contemporary with Jacob, used
the book Ochla, which he praises as " small in size but without
In the following
named,
and
di
to
accessible
fruitful
Menahem
named critical commentary Godcr iiercs ( 24) did not appear In tlie eighteenth century Massoretic till somewhat later. studies found little favour, either among Christians or among Jews. Only in our own century has new life been imparted
to
them and
essentially furthered
at
by the works of
W.
Heiden-
Eodelheim
in 1832), L.
Dukes,
I).
Frensdorll",
Ginsburg,
many
of
them very
by them.
are
to light
The
fruits of these
investigations
presented
in
Baer's
of the
text
many monographs
98
32.
THE MASSORA.
On
ix.
Zeitschrift,
78
ff.
S track in Herzog's
Real-Encyclo'pcedie'^,
388
ff.;
in
7394, 122
libri
f.,
Scphcr tora
published in Kirchheim's
VIL
Talmudici
Masseket jmrvi Hierosolyiiiitani, Yr^nkhwt IS ol, pp. 1-11. Compare also soprim, edited by J. Muller, Leipsic 1878.
Judceorum codicis sacri rite scribendi leges, a lihello Thalmudico D"'"iDlD riDDD in lat. conversce et annoL explicatce, Hamburg 1779. On Aaron ben Asher, compare further 80. Of his massoretico-grammatical lessons a part was printed in the first Eabbinical Bible ( 24); afterwards L. Dukes gave quotations Finally, Baer and Strack, in his Koiitres liamasoret, 1846. building with materials supplied by many contributors, have Die dikduke edited the entire collection in a critical text Ahron h. M. h. Ascher, Leipsic 1879. ha-teamim des A similar treatise, accompanied by valuable notes, has been published by Derenbourg, according to a South Arabian manuscript written in a.d. 1390, under the title "Manuel du The Lecteur, " in the Journal Asiatique, 1870, xvi. 309 ff. Jews in Yemen called such a compendium which frequently preceded their Bible manuscripts, jxrnn nianjo, " Treatise on
Adler,
:
the
Crown,
the
i.e.
the
for it
Bible."
Among
the
other
Jews the
commoner name
was
D"iLDi"ip.
On
grammatico-massoretic
writers
quoted by Elias
Especially on
ZDMG,
xliii.
208.
sq.
p.
MGWJ,
1028. See, iSTeubauer and Backer in the same journal, pp. 299309. The one form of the text of the book is to be found in a Halle manuscript, which Hupfield {ZDMG, xxi. 202 ff.) describes; the other in a Parisian Codex, which Frensdorff
3;>.
K'rin
and
g'i:i:.
99
Das Bach Ochla WocltUt, Hanover 1SG4. That Jacob ben Chajini used a third form of text of this work as the basis of liis Massora finalis, has been conjectured by
has edited
:
Cihitz
among
others.
Frensdorff
has
issued
in
a separate
edition
^'i^iH
o~it
ntani (by Moses the Punctuator), Hanover 1847, and tlie first vohinie of a Massora magna (Massorclischcs Wbrtcrhuch), Hanover 187G. Unfortunately this Massoretic ])ictionary
is
not to be continued.
Ginsburg's laborious edition of the Massora {Tltc Massorah
Guardian, 1886,
fi'.,
published at Wilna.
Compare
3.'j.
82.
of the
in
numbers of
of rare
and
remarkable forms or
made mention
it
of
the
following
sections,
we
sliall,
iu
so far as
has not
text.
To
or
this
class
wrongly written
text.
C/rt),
between
tlie
to the
Massora
1314
according
the
Jews read a
different
that which
from the
text,
or,
finally,
letters
100
differently.
33.
K^TIB
AND
Q'^KE.
A
"'^'it?
back
of
nin'
(compare
76).
At
in
later
period
we
find
the
tora,
practice
growing
sopJi^rim,
in
extent
the
Talmud, Sepher
Masseket
of
The utterances
of the Palestinian
in varying statements of
Qarjan.
ii.
11)
when we
take into
In
the Bible
accounts,
we meet with
people
could
their
Law and
When
had
Thus
''j'"^^
was read in
^5:1^, ^^<1^?
instead
The same
of
sponding passages
the
tiagiographa,
which
received
system
of
mode
is
of the reading
easily understood
Law and
mode
of reading that
had become
crystallised
by repeated use
33.
K^TIB
AND
it
<.>''l'S:.
101
in tlie synagogues,
even where
And
so, too,
In so far
it
may
and upon
most
equal in value,
V.
e.g.
Isa.
xxiii.
ic*:n.
12,
KHih
a
t.'\T\3,
C/rv
c^n?
Ps.
9,
KHlb,
"ir'in,
(frc
Of
more
has
doubtful nature
a
are
the
cases
where
the
distinction
purely
gram-
Possibly, in
the traditional
to all
mode
was given
sorts of
may
the artichi
taken away.
It
is
scarcely possible to
a definite
must
also be admitted
to
be a
mode
may
also
it
sacred and inspired with the JCtib itself; while the almost
all
recorded variations of
are
given
by Strack,
Prolegoriicna,
p.
123, who quotes also the cases of Qrc and ICtih, giwQii in the Talmudical writings. Compare the partially-divergent
80
ff.,
iii.
c.
1-1 G
p.
Morinus,
ff.
;
p.
533
ff.;
Geiger,
p.
Noldeke, in
ZWT,
1873,
102
Dilraann, in
Einleitung,
iv.
33.
K'^TIB
AND
Q^RE.
ii.
387; Bleek,
f.
G18.
The records
of
Ben
above referred
and 82
lists.
in his editions of
KHih and
'':^hD
T]p^2),
Q'rc
"nx
ci.
for
for "J^ibo,
Ps.
8.
:
for Xin ( 92), ni;?3 for "^V^ 5; i^3 for n^D, Jer. ii. 21 ; nypL-'^l for
r])r\\
i^>r\
Amos
viii.
t^^r^^ for IV' 1">^\ i'^, Jer. Ii. 3. 2'i<3 ^n for D^XD^^n Ps. is read as two
:
:
x.
10
29.
Two
Lara.
w^ords
which
are
read
as
one
C3^:y^3
for
D''^y
""^^
iv. 3.
Words whose
wwd
Job.
n^D'f^n
nnnpi for
nnnnoi, Ezek.
2 Sam. v. 2,
XXX viii. 12. Words whose initial letter word: 'bby^ t^n^iC' instead of
xxi. 12.
'
is
lfe*C\s nvj',
Ezra
iv.
12
2 Sam.
The omission
letter
final
of
the
preceding
word:
^Vpn
r^nST
Jer. iv. 5.
h.
228
all
way
as to
On
pp.
As marginal
D-'m'-n see
notes,
these
sometimes
called
DiMuke,^. 2, line 8; OY'AizJIGWJ, 1885, p. 108 On the so-called pUD, compare Buxtorf, Tiherias, ii. c. 10 Cappellus, Critica sacra, iii. 15. 18; Geiger, Ursclirift,^. 233. Passas^es in the older Jewish literature should not be but confounded with QWe, where it is said " Bead not ." By this is meant not other readings but conscious plays upon letters. See Hupfeld, TSK, 1830, p. 554 f. {e.g. against Morinus, Exercitat. hihi. p. 581 ff.).
: .
.
31.
TIQQUNE
SOPIl^'ltlM.
lO."'
34. While
the
(Jarjaii
spoken of
in
o'.\
leiives
undistells
text,
the IMassora
is
of
Q^rc
said
to
have been
adopted into the consonantal text so as to lead tp the complete withdrawal of the original reading.
called Tiqqunc soph'rim, the
(compare
0).
In the
Exodus, Mechilta.
are
number
given at eighteen.
we can
taken
theory
with the
that
text,
ingenious
the
readers, in
order
to
express
spicuously.
the
How
have recorded
all
the
phenomena belonging
thereto,
we
shall
Even
in
the
Talmud
i.e.
have omitted a
occurs in the
from the
(e.g.
text.
Qrc
and
it
is
not possible to
to, this
chapter
is
Friedmann's edition.
Compare the older literature in Strack, Prolcyomcna, and also: p. 86 f. (particularly Geiger, Urschrift, p. 308 ff.) Nyholra, Dc DnsiD ppn XVIII. vocum Scn'pturcc sacrcc, Copenhagen 1734; Noldeke in GGA, 1869, p. 2001; Crane in Frensdorfl', Das Ilchraica, iii. 233-248; Dikduke, p. 44 f Bucli Ochla Wochla, Nr. 168, 217
;
;
.
104
35.
PUNCTA EXTEAOEDINAPJA.
The modern Jewish exposition is given among others by Norzi ( 24) on Zech. ii. 12 (translated in Delitzsch, Kommentar zu Hahakuk, 1843, p. 206 f.). The Tiqqune sop/i'^rim are according to the Massora: Gen.
xviii.
i:*Tiy
mn^l
Num.
xi.
15, originally
inynn;
iii.
Num.
2
xii.
''b
12,
originally
;
ij''OX
13, originally
instead of Dnb
1
irya;
Sam.
vnb^^i?
^25s*
;
xx.
;
(1 Kings
ii.
xii.
16; 2 Chron.
x.
viii.
;
16),
originally
originally
i. i.
Jer.
11, originally
7,
nuD
Ezek.
17,
Hos.
iv.
;
originally n)2^
ii.
and
li^on
"^ry
Hab.
Mai.
20,
20,
12,
originally
niDD
;
Zech.
12,
originally
;
13, originally
'niN
nu^ Job
;
vii.
iii.
originally
ybv
',
Job
xxxii.
3,
originally ipnv'")
Lam.
55
originally "jc^ai
The
Gen.
xviii. 5, xxiv.
jSTum.
35. Finally,
there
is
still
series
to
of
passages
to
be
doubt
of
diacritical
down by
tradition.
The value
marks
is
to
which have
for
To
\
particular words.
ix. 2),
We
the
Mishna {Pesachim,
ix.
known
Xum.
Talmud and
Jerome,
Midrashim several
alle-
are mentioned
incredibile et
non
quemquam
in
nescientem."
cases
difficult
decide
particular
So,
PUNCTA EXTRAOKDINAIMA.
textual-ciiticiil
j
105
iiiilicatcd
character.
b.
The
are of a
or
ol"
a historical-critical
so-called
to
Sahh.
115h) seems
be
purely
textual-critical.
It
is
introduced in
Xum.
x. 3")
in Ps. cvii.,
Compare,
Sahh. lli>a
and above
in the
notes to
0.
The passages
the
to be of
where, according to
tradition,
p"iD2
yvc^<n NpDD,
it
seem
someof
;
what greater
interest.
Probably
in
in
Gen.
iv. 8,
may
;
possibly rest on
it
Compare Strack, Frolegomciia, pp. 88-91 Dikduhc, p. 45 f. The two words distinguished by pnncta cxtraordinaria in Ezek. xli. 20 and xlvi. 22, have not been translated in the So too the \np^^ of Targum (Cornill, Ezcchid, p. 127). Gen. xxxiii. 4 is wanting in several manu.^cripts of the LXX.
;
On
and on
invcrsiim,
p.
231,
On
"
Tiberias,
11
DiMuke,
;
p.
MGWJ,
1878, p. 481 ff. 1887, p. 193-200. has shown the Konig in ZKWL, 1889, p. 225 ff., 281 untenableness of the attempt of von Ortenberg (Ueher die Bedeutuny des Faseq fitr die Qucllenseheidung in den Bilelicrn des A. T. 1887, and in the ZAW, 1887, pp. 301-312), to find in Paseq a sign of a collection of various documentary
fi'.
authorities.
106
36.
5.
Quotations
and
Ti^anscriiotions.
36.
Among
smaller parts of the text into the earlier Jewish and Christian
literature, in so far as
literal original
form
of the text.
there
is to
glance
the
text.
may
may
of the
Only in
words in the
can
we
we have
the
a true quotation.
Among
these are
be
reckoned
in the
still
extant
column
original
Hexapla of Origen
text
( 43), whicli
Hebrew
for this
The same
is
true of the
tolerably
in his version
has
left
Hebrew word
untranslated ( 53).
In Josephus
for the
most part
So too
Hebrew
language.
Hebrew names on
sometimes
of
Hebrew.
On
Talmud
3G.
lOT
Struck,
infidum, Taris
1GG7
rrolcgomena,^^. 50-72,
jild. Geschichic
iv.
94-111,122;
iv.
V>v\x\\,Jahrhuchcr
fur
und Zittcratur, 1G5 Nachgdassene Schriftcn, iv. 27 fr.; Deutscli, p. Sprilchc Salomos, 1885, G3-78. The Toseplita quotations The quotations are given by B. Pick, ZAIF, vi. 2:3-29. 101-121. But see from Mechilta and Sifre in ZAW,\y.
;
IGG
18SG,
i.
91-93, where, with good reason, he warns aGfainst sucli a hunt after variations. On the transcriptions in Jerome compare Siegfried, ZA W, On the transcribed Hebrew text in the 1884, pp. 34-83. On Hexapla, compare Field, Orirjcnis hcxapla, i. l.xxi sqq. xi sq. He rendeis the Dnpj of Theodotion compare Field, Amos i. 1, e.g. vcoKeBeifi the i^m of Ps. xxvii 2 by Sa/Seip, etc. We sometimes meet with the same sort of thing in the LXX. see Cornill, Das Buck dcs Froph. Ezcchicl, p. 9G. The proper names in Josephus are treated of by Siegfried u\ ZAW, 1883, pp. 38-41. On the names in the LXX. compare Frankel, Vorstudien zii dcr Scptuaginta, p. 90
collections
in
ZAW,
vii.
i.
11'.
der
hchrdischcn
Namen
in
der
1885;
im Ara-
Bildung der Nomina, 1889. Also the Onomastica sacra of Easebius and Jerome, as edited by Lagarde (2nd ed. 1887), should be taken
Arahischen und
Hchrdischcn
uhlichc
On
und das Altes Testament, 1883 [Fng. trans, in 2 vols., The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, London 1885, 1888]. On the Egyptian and other transcriptions see !Merx, Archiv filr wisscnschaftl. Forschung d. A. T. i. 350 ff. Bulletin de la soci4td de g^ograpthie, 1879, pp. 209 ff., 327 ff. Compare also Steindorff, i)ic keilinschriftliche Wiedergabe dgyptischer Eigennameii in the Beitrdgen zur Assyriologie, i. 1889, pp. 330-3G1, where repeatedly mention is made of Egyptian names occurrinir in the Old Testament. On the names of places in the letters found in the Tcl-il-Amama, see Halovy
;
108
in
37.
REJ,
XX.
tinavercins,
Dcutscli.
Palds-
B.
The
Old Translations.
1.
Tlie Septuagint.
3 7.
The
What
is
Law
B.C.
is
devoid of
indeed,
Philometor,
180145,
that
there
was
much
older
Law from
if
Persian sovereignty
but even
the
fragments ascribed to
sufficient
we have no
ground
less
32) of
an
to
Law by
any claim
On
of his
work preserved by Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius, compare Hody, i)e Bihlioruni textibus originalihus,\\h. i. cap. ix. Yalckenaer, Diatribe de Aristobido, Leyden 1806, and p. 49 ff.
;
ii.
ii.
lists
given.
67.
109
Among
is
specially to be
named
1880, p. 79 ff. In the fragment communicated by Clement of Alexandria {Stromata, i. 22, ed. Potter, i. 410) and Eusebius {Prfcpdratio fvangcUca, xiii. 12), Aristobulus writes to King Thilometor KarrjKoXovQjjfce Be kol o UXdrcov rrj KaO^ tj/jlu^; vofioOecrLa Kal
zu
Avfang
^avepo^ iart
hiepixrjvevTaL
Trepiei pyaad/ivo<=;
^AXe^dvdirdv'
0X77?
rd re Kara
i)
ttoXltcov, Kal
rcou yeyovorcov
^copa'^
t?}?
Kal
r/}?
irpoipr]/j,i^ov
)]<=;,
(f)LXoao(f)6u elXijtpevac
KaOw^ Kal
eavrov
End rov
pLeTeveyKa<^
5' oXtj
eh
t^iv
'H
epfjLTjpeia to)v
vopov irdvrcDV
iirl
/3aaiXe(j}<;,
For
Jewish religion need not be regarded as absolutely impossible. In some not very clear words ascribed to Demetrius Phalereus by the author of the Epistle of Aristeas (ITaverkamp, Joscjyhus,
ii.
2.
xii. 2.
3) there
is
certainly no
why we
earlier attempts
p.
translation
Vorstudien,
24).
^[assclcct
sopWrim,
i.
p.
ii
"
Five
elders wrote
for
King
and this day was for the Israelites dark as the day on which the golden calf was made,
in Greek,
Law
And
at a
In
some manuscripts,
use which Joel,
and the older tract, Sepher tora same passage D^3pT D'^yx**. Therefore the Bliclcc in die Bcglionsgcschichte, p. 1 ff., makes
Com-
Urschrift,
p.
441
ii.
Nachgclassenc Scliriftcn,
71
Berliner,
Targum
Onkclos,
78
f.
110
38.
38.
From
(
Book
of
Ben Sirach
also of the
130
in a
Greek translation
from the use made
and that
known
to us, follows
by the somewhat
earlier
Jewish historical
Christ.
But when
this
has been
we have
before us
certainly
known
There
the
way
in
and
influential work.
The
oldest writing
which speaks
is
Law
into the
Greek language
teas, a
least be
108, as we have
belongs to an age
when
the Jews had not yet exchanged the Ptolemaic sovereignty for
that of the Seleucidean dynasty.
Its date
little
B.C.
198.
The
an
book represents
which
(B.C.
Philadelphus
it
related
how
the
king's
librarian,
Demetrius
of the
Phalereus,
Law
Jews translated
to
this
it
might
the
library of Alexandria.
his
had carried
to
Egypt
as prisoners of war.
He
then sent
38.
THE
EI'ISTLK OF AKISTKAS.
Ill
rich presents
and a
letter, in
Eleazar to supply
liini
with
men
work.
of the noble
and rea-
The high
from
every
tribe, are
a copy of the
Law
audiences of
the
During seven days they have daily the king, and excite the admiration of all by
wisdom with which they answer the seventy-two questions proposed to them in philosophy, politics, and ethics. Thereafter
they are transported to the island of Pharos, where, in a beautiful residence,
tion.
translate, each
one by himself, a
common
text.
In seventy-two days
the work
is
completed.
admiration of
The Alexandrine Jews express their the work, and beseech that they may be supplied
it,
with a copy of
Finally,
who was greatly astonished that this noble law should have been unknown to the Greeks, sends the seventytwo interpreters home laden with rich presents.
This story, though anything but niggardly in
admiration,
gifts,
its
supply of
sufficient
had
to
be
directions.
In Philo we meet
had
all
is
still
wrought
in his
own
cell
colleagues.
In
this
form
112
Talmud, where
to
38.
it
elsewhere referred to
At
was made
to
apply to
all
the books of
who views
(
the whole
with
rather
sceptical
eye
51),
decidedly
The Epistle of Aristeas, which has been often published (as, e.rf. in Havercamp's Joseplius, ii. 2. pp. 103-132), has recently been issued with a critically improved text by Moritz Schmidt in Merx's Archio fur Wissensch. Erforschung 241 ff. Compare generally in regard to this d. A. T. Hody, De Bibliorum textihus originalibus, lib. subject Griitz, Xoldeke, Alttestamentliche Littcratitr, p. 109 ff. MGJVJ, 1876, p. 289 ff.; Bleek, Einleitung, p. 5 71 ff.
i.
:
i.
Munich 1880
Lumles
1870,
p.
351
ff.
819-824, Eng.
trans. Div.
vol.
iii.
306-312,
where further
Philo, ed.
lists of literature
are given.
Mangey, ii. 139. The passages of the fathers are enumerated by Gallandi, Bibliotheca vetericm pa^rzd?;^,, ii. 805824, and by Schiirer, Geschiclite des jild. Volkes, ii. 823,
Ens. trans. Div.
ii.
vol.
iii.
311.
On
Xestle, Septicaginta-Studien,
i.
p.
ii.
On
xii.
40
(p.
the time of
see
Yilmar, Annalcs
et
eis
Samaritance, 1865,
95
vi.
ff.
"
Josefus
libros
30.
1 1
30.
As
to the historical
prevails at
day general
details.
As the
clearly
Jew
writing under a
is
is
also
much
in his
book which
invention
in
On
the
tion,
is
whether a
form.
the
legendary
This
of culture, fur
of the
first
of
knowledge or by the
there are certainly
Now
when
it
has
modest dimensions.
On
called to
Law
or, as
Of expressions
like ^eLwpa<;
"li'^),
iXuaKeaOaL
sort,
a Greek could
make
over simply in
Hebrew
form.
And
it
is
certainly not
easy to understand
why
translation
if
the
make
themselves acquainted by
Eurther,
it
its
help
with
the
Jewish Law.
is
also
in
a high
degree
Law
114
heathen.
39.
Had
of the Septuagint
handed down by
to
tradition,
its
then certainly
account for
need of the Egyptian Jews, who were growing ever more and
their
Hebrew mother
24).
so as
make
itself
(compare Nehem.
And
as the
development.
But, notwithstanding
all
this,
we can
find
be really
so, as
cannot well be
denied (compare
was written
its
The same
is
quoted in
37, whether
be supposed that he
know
justified in
to be accounted for
by
us,
Book
of
Aristeas of the
history of culture,
character to be
look the fact that the second of the reasons which have been
now
by
is
very
much weakened
Book
of
this,
39.
115
liis-
to
distinct
statement
of
Ilermippus
III.,
who
lived
liad
Demetrius Phalereus
tlie deatli
Ptolemy Lagus,
it
detail in the
story,
of the
main point
has been
of the question.
made
of all reasons,
we
still
hold by
the position that the king had a share in the originating of the Septuagint,
role
it
is,
won among the Alexandrian and all Hellenistic Jews, and through them, among the members of the Christian Church, an importance of which the men who first
subsequently translated,
conceived this bold idea could certainly never have dreamed.
in the fathers
of
The Translation
applied
Law
authority,
But
there-
narrative,
and
is,
still
quite
obscure.
The question that concerns us here is dealt with in the works of llody and Valckenaer referred to in ,*>7, and in many more recent treatises. The following admit partiall}' tlie credibility of the story told by Aristeas Valckenaer Kwald, Gcschichie du Volkes Israel^, iv. 322 ff., Eng. trans. V. 244 Wellhausen-Bleek, Einleitung, p. 571 ff. Mommsen, Romisclie Gcschichie, v. 490. The whole story is rejected
:
116
as
40.
by Hody, De BiUiorum Textihus Eichhorn, Bepcrtorium i. 266 ff. Eeuss, GescMchte der heiligen
a pure fabrication
;
SchriftendesA.
T.
436
^6\(\q\q,
;
ZDMG,
xxxii.
588,xxxix.
Kuenen, Godsdienst, ii. 392 Frankel, Vorstudien zu der Septuaginta, p. 6 ff. Schuurmans Stekhoven, Dc cdexandrijnsche Oort, Theol. Vertaling van het BodekaprGpheton, p. 1 ff. 287 ff. Tijdsclirift, 1882, p. The report of Hermippus Callimachius is given ia Mliller, Fragmenta hist. Grcec. iii. 47.
342
In explanation of the name " Septuaginta " various conSpecial attention has been called jectures have been made. to this that seventy (seventy-one or seventy-two) constituted
the normal
Justice.
iclite
number of members in a Jewish High Court of Compare Num. xi. 16, and further Schurer, GeschVolkes,
ii.
ii.
der
ff.
174
vol.
i.
th,e
name
referred to
the
by a high
court of justice.
iv.
Compare Ewald, Geschichte der Volkes Israel, 327, Eng. trans, v. 249; Schuurmans Stekhoven, Be
p.
alexandrijnsche Vertcding,
f.,
quoted.
But nothing
Still less with Alexandria in the times of the Ptolemies. satisfactory as accounting for the name is the hypothesis that a larger number had actually been engaged in the work
(Wellhausen-Bleek, Einleitung,
treatise of
p.
576).
Compare
also the
Steinsclmeiders on the
"Number Seventy"
in the
ZBMG,
iv.
145
ff.
Even the
is still
lations
qualified translators.
The most
This
of
them
are certainly to be
the
Book
of Ezra, of
40.
i;Y
THE JEWS.
llie
117
way
in
varying extent
An
instructive picture of
is
Book
of
Ben Sirach
of
( 4),
which
at the
same time
is
interest-
ing on account of
translations
its
Book
origin, the
whole trans-
came
to
was used
in the synagogue
service wherever
was
at the
civilised
The
has in
Greek
ear,
with
Xew whom
and through the translations of following generations, which were all more or less dependent upon it, it has exercised an
influence on the religious phraseology of the Christian
com-
traced
even
in
the
most modern
Among
its
it
position.
We
have
very
incomplete
at
as
to
the
feelings
which
prevailed
to
the
among
the
Palestinian
this
new
attempt.
No
was used
in
show that the LXX. the Palestinian synagogues are rather weak, and The proofs which go
to
118
40.
preters, a story
character of the
LXX.,
enumeration of
On
the
Christianity
largely
to
make
by the
the
Jews,
considerably
influenced
in
Church.
Also,
apart
from
the
divergence
to the
their adherence
to
and
titfles.
We
possess
several
witnesses
of
to
the
existence
of this
antipathy.
Even the
writings
Justin
difference
8, declares
that
for
Law was
made
Taanith,
said
"On
Law was
The
in the
('"ohr\)
best proof
among
the
occasioned so
found in the
many difficulties to the Church fathers, is to be new Greek translations of the Old Testament
of
which a
( 51).
work
On
der paldstinischen
atif
die
Hermencutih,
"
1851, p. 228 ff*.; Egli in the ZWT, 1862, p. 76 ff: In the Prologfue to Ben Sirach the translator writes
Ye
40.
Till-:
liV
THE JEWS.
119
are
besought to make allowance where we seem in some words to have failed, although the translation has been made
care, for
with
said
in
Hebrew and
its
trans;
also
The subscription
of the
:
of
In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, Dositheus, who is said to have been a
Esther runs as follows
priest or a Levite,
"
and
his son
letter
now
before
this statement,
Compare
88
Handhuch zn
mentliclic
die
Apokryiihen,
;
72
Littcratui\ p.
ed. p. 33.
Kanon, 2nd
On
249.
On
LXX.
2,
in the Palestinian
i.
IGG; Fritzsche
ii.
56
ff.
7oa: "The foreignspeaking Jews did not observe the custom prevailing amongst us to divide the reading of the Torah among several persons, Also, je7\ Sota for one individual reads the whole Feirasha." vii. 1, fob 216, on the Sh^ina ; and Justinian, Novell. 146. The passages where the LXX., according to the Jewish
The
Hebrew
best
text, are
to be
found in
p.
h.
i.
9
i.
Mechilta on Exodus
xii.
20,
i.
The
known
is
Gen.
1,
where the LXX., according to the Talmudical statement, this pretranslate, as though it liad been t^-ii n^n^x n-L^sna supposes that the native Jews themselves interpreted " In the
;
beginning when
God
created."
p.
zu der Septuaginta,
25
iv,
ff.
Nachgelassenc Schriftcn,
50
f.
120
41.
ijSSo/jL'^fcovTa
irpecr^vrepoL
fiy)
irapa
rSiu
elvai ev
naiv
dXrjOfj.
Compare
same work
at p.
Ad AfriccDium
we
w^as
5.
sliould
not for a
moment
lose
that
it
first
attempt to perform a
from
the
first,
and
in
which
expressions
were
numerous ideas
of the
Old Testament.
from what
made
of
What was
all,
required that
It avoids
particular
And
while
it is
true of every
at a time
when
in a thoroughly naive
interpretation
was treated
Hence the
LXX.
in
many
passages, as
Halachic as in a
of a
Haggadic
direction,
Midrash, which
is
mirrors the
Testament exegesis.
That in
this
way
41.
121
allowed to
expected.
movements of the Egyptian Jews are shine through, is what might very naturally he
in
Yet even
this connection
very
find
much
overstated,
That
in sections
which
treat of
Egypt
it
natural enough
well-known rendering of
n2J"iS
by
out of
consideration
the Lngidie.
this is
not, in
any
case, of
much
any
importance.
And
specially
we
of the text.
At
the most
the
LXX.
is
If
we keep
in
view
all
here mentioned,
we
shall
must rather
as
our admiration
that
way have
of criticism
actually accomplished
is
its
justifiable
which makes
LXX.
have been
less successful.
among
the several
books,
it
which, however,
is
of
The
first
rank
although even there the various parts are dealt with somewhat
variously (compare
p.
116).
much
122
41.
made
it
On
most
in
the Hebrew.
Nactus
indignum,"
of
that
to
book
is
more cause
admire
readers than
is
its
author.
One
of the
most wilfully
translated books
to pose as
the
Book
lecto7^ ;
of Job,
a 'poctarum
while
among
:
Ezekiel, Chronicles,
Ecclesiastes.
The two
of
last
(
of the
method
Aquila
Compare on the
Septuaginta, pp.
Nachgelassenc Schi^iften,
73
ff.
163-203.
Exegese
On
Einjluss
auf
with
die
alexandrini'sche
Hermeneutih,
1857
(dealing
iv.
only
ff.
the
Pentateuch);
99
Examples of the treatment of the text affected by the times, Isaiah ix. 11: ^vplav a<^' rjKiav avaroXcov koL tou?
"EXkT]va^
dvdpo)7ro<;
d(j)
rjXiou
Bvcr/jLcov
Num.
avrov,
xxiv.
i^eXevarerai
eOvoiv
ck
tou
o-irepfMaro';
rj
koX
Kvpievaeb
TToWcbv'
xiii.
Koi
:
{jy^ooOrjaerai
Fcoy ^aaikeia
avrov
Josh.
Balaam did they slay 2"ina," the LXX. iv rrj poTrrj, Jewish Haggada, that Balaam, who by his magical arts had fled into the air, was brought down by
22 compare
"
the
Phinehas.
On
LXX.
all,
41.
On
den
2. p.
JEinfluss, pp.
34-42
Zeller, Philosopliic
dcr Griechcn,
7\
iii.
217
A.
1875,
]>.
and
ii.
especially Freudentlial, in
in the three
passages
Book
of
Ben
tlie
Sirach,
to
tlie
Book
Law
of
Book
Palestine to
most cases the Palestinians would have understood Greek better than the Jews born in Egypt would know Hebrew, so that certainly the translators would mostly be recruited from the recently immigrant Palestinians.
salem.
As a matter
of fact, in
LXX.,
in so far as
:
it
is
regarded
Translating is a phenomenon, is too severe special grace and gift of God. The seventy Greek tran.slators have so translated the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language as to show themselves inexperienced in and unacquainted with the Hebrew, their translation is very trilling and absurd, " for they have disdained to speak the letters, words, and style
{Erlangcn. Avsgabe,
Ixii.
"
112).
Among
to
books of the
the
older
LXX.
the following
may
be named
(in
addition
'^,
literature given
by Eichhorn,
Einleitiing
i.
181): Topler, De Pentateuchi interprctationis Alex, indole, 1830 Thiersch, De Pentateuchi versione Alexandrina lihri
;
iii.
1841
Frankel,
Ilollenberg,
Der Charalder der alexandrinischc Uehcrsetzung des Buches Jos2ia, 1876. Schulte, De rcstiiutione atque indole genuincc Wellhausen, Der versionis grcecx in lihro Judicum, 1889.
Text der Biieher Samnelis, 1871.
[Stiidia Biblica, 1st series,
1885, The Light thrown hy the Septiiagint Version on the Scholz, Die alcxBooks of Samuel, by F. H. Woods.] Movers, De andrinische Uehersetzuug des Buches Jesaias, 1880.
124
42.
lUriusq^ue recensionis
;
Jeremice indole
et
origine,
et
1834 Wichelhaus, De
auctoritate,
1846;
Scholz,
die
LXX.
Text
1875
Workman, The
of Jeremiah ; a Critical Investigation of the Greek and Hehreio, with the Variations in the LXX. retranslated into the Original,
and
Ex'plained,
1889.
Cornill,
1886, pp. 13103. der Alexandriner, 1880 (Nahum-Malachi), and in ZAW, 1883, p. 219 ff., 1884, p. 1 ff. (Hosea-Micah) Schuurmans Stekhoven, Be alexandrijnsche Vertaling van het Dodekaprophetoii, 1887; Treitch, Die alexandrinische Uebersetziing des
Ezechiel,
;
Bitches
Rosea,
des
i.
1888;
Eyssel,
Untersuchnngen
Baethgen,
ilher
die
text-
Textgcstalt
kritische
Bitches
Micha,
1887.
Der
Werth der
alt en Uehersetzungen
1882,
sctzu7ig
p.
407
ff.
Lagarcle,
De
indole ac ratione
1862, and
p.
1886,
557
ff.;
Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, Oxford 1889, pp. 215-246, On Origens Revision of the LXX. Text of Job ; Dilhnann,
"
Textkritisches
zum
Buche
Job
"
in
Sitzungsberichte
der
Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1890. Dillmann on the Text of Job " in Expositor for August 1891, pp. 142-145.] Compare also on the traces of the Greek poets in this translation, Egli in the Rhein. Museum; xii. 414448. Jacob, " Das Buch Esther bei den LXX. in ZA W, 1890, p. 241 ff. On the Greek translation of Ecclesiastes, compare Freudenthal, Hellenistische Stitdien, 1875, p. 65; Gratz, Koheleth, p. 175 f.; Kenan, EEccUsiaste, 1882, Wright, The Book of Koheleth, 1883, p. 50 f.; p. 55f. Klostermann, TSK, 1885, p. 153 ff. Bludau, De alexandrince iiiterprctationis libri Danielis iiidole, 1891. See also the Prefaces of Jerome to his Commentary, and below at 52.
[Cheyne,
"
i.
42. Besides
the
LXX.
Old
42.
TIIK
125
Testament.
to
work back
a form
to the
Hebrew
which
way
to gain acquaintance
with
of
text
is
Hebrew
The com-
parison of the
te.\t
tlius
and converts an
LXX.
by
of
in textual
criticism
should
of
be
its
so
seriously prejudiced
text,
the defective
condition
called
"
own
the restoration
the
circle."
which
Stroth
the
squaring
of
The
is
shown by the
which
tlie
curse.s, certainly
Epistle of
Jews
as
pro-
pro-
and awkwardness
transcribers,
aggravated no
of
doubt
by the
occasionally
;
meaningless
character
the
Alexandrine translation
Justin Martyr,
alterations
who
many
conscious
of Christians,
well-known example of
elements
they
had
original
of
the
text
which had been erased by the Jewish hatred of Christ, are the words diro rov Pv\ov in Psalm xcvi. 10, which lon^'
played a
part
in
patristic
literature.
The
first
Origen,
who undertook to perform this task was the great who died a.d. 254. The magnificent conception of
126
his
43.
work
in
textual criticism
is
still
to
an
not
to
admiration, which
difficult
is
to
criticise his
But
it
is
a fact that
his
LXX.
The
more
difficult.
between
not only
Hebrew
text,
contemporaneously with
text,
Septuagint
text.
Although
the
LXX.
in
several
means
the
LXX.
Otto,
this
ii.
p.
242
ff.
Also
frequent disputations between the Christians and the Jews, which moved him to make his fellow-believers acquainted
with the Jewish Bible in order to protect them against the criticism of the Jews (compare Ad Africanum, 5).
43.
As
then,
to
Origen,
notwithstanding
the
prominence
which he gave
by no means
the
only
to be in
cases
conformed.
passage
where he expresses
4.S.
UlilGEN's
127
says, in
lincl
liis
textual
criticism
(Comni. on
xv.
14),
lie
{ov
ToXfirjaavrefi)
in
removing
from
Hebrew
aim
text.
Jjut
seeing that
it
was
at the
same time
his
between
tlie
Hebrew and
the
of
grammarians in
their
treatises
of
on textual
a
-:-),
their
commencement by means
(
prefixed
or
-f-
or
while a
metobelus (Y) indicated the close of the words referred to. Par more dangerous was his procedure when, in tlie passages
53).
marks (placing an
asterisk before,
>><^
or
^,
a metobelus at
the end), the danger here was too great of some later transcriber ignoring the marks, as in course
of time to a great
of all
was that
used
the
to
he
liimself
declares
of
distinctly,
diflerent representatives
Hebrew
Tcxtus
lieccptus
to find
\\\s
way amid
It is at
Hebrew TcxUis
tin?
Septuagint manulike
scripts,
that
which
own days
that
is
" of the
lioman Catholics
much
characteristic
and
oricrinal in the
LXX.
128
43.
The Septuagint
Palestinian seaport
of
way,
town
which was
to
relation
between
Hebrew
the
text.
two forms
alongside of
one
Hebrew
Greek
letters ( 36),
it
and and
of Aquila
Symmachus
which was a
( 52,
54)
LXX. (
53).
In some books
there were added a fifth and a sixth Greek translation, so that the
also the
at
name Odapla.
55.
On
a seventh
compare below
tion resting
passages where
Hebrew
text.
of
somewhere about
must be considered
in Csesarea
satisfied
The
used, or students
it.
tempted
edition,
make
it
more
first
new
columns
;
left out,
and
at the
same time
the other
with some
critical alterations
On
with
tlie diacritical
all
43.
'III
i:
TEXT.
129
this
form
tlie
wide circulation
revi.sed
kolvyj or
among
the Latins.
text,
the
pre-Origenistic form of
text
was
called
vulfjatu.
The Hcxapla
( 37),
itself,
in Coesarea
was
still
to
afterwards, in
disappeared.
Wellhausen
ZAW,
1887,
p.
p.
when
lie
writes (Bleek,
Einleitunrj,
586): "Proceeding from the belief that the translation must have agreed with tlie original as he knew it, Origen corrected the LXX., not according to its own
standard, but according to the
Hebrew
trutli."
In principle
Qomm, on Matth.
rT]<:
xv.
14:
rr^v
fiev
ovv
iv
roh
dvTi'ypd(f)oi<^
7ra\aid<i
hia6}']fcr}<i
htacfiwvLav, Oeov
ral'^
hthovro^
XotTrat? eKhoaeaLv
fll)
Koi
TM
'EjSpaLKOi
lUit
KeLjjLeva
ov
ToX/x?/'crat'Te?
avrd iravra
TrepieKelv, k.tX.
once he conthe
fesses to to
did stand
in
Hebrew
(compare Cornill,
gcnis Hcxaploriun
Ezechiel, p. 386).
to
i.
Field's Ori-
snpersunt, 1875.
Chap.
deals with
the
names
vii.
xi.,
of the
work
(besides the
we meet
chap.
chap,
also
sometimes with those of Pentop)la and Heptapla) 2-3, the diacritical signs and their significance the later fortunes of the Hcxapla. On the latest
form
107.
of the Hcxapla,
compare
tlie
Birt,
p.
On
the alterations in
Septuagint text
made by Origen
without remark, compare Field, Froler/omena, chap. vii. 4. Many a time the collection of tlie representatives of the
Hebrew
jis,
text
where he read wcpeiXTjaa instead of but oCtener the original was thereby obliterated. u}(f)e\T]cra The Book of Job has suflered more than all the rest from
e.g.,
in Jer.
;
130
44.
Bibl.
had 1600
2200
(Field,
But possibly
beginning had been made, even before Origen, of filling up the gaps of the LXX. by means of the renderings of TheoThe question is connected with the question of the dotion. relation of the Codex Vaiicaniis, in which Job is already very much augmented, to the Hexaplar text (compare 46). That the translation of Theodotion was widely circulated at an early date among Christians, is shown by the fact that even See Zahn in Herzog's Irenaeus used Theodotion for Daniel. Real-Encydopcedie, vii. p. 131. That the edition of the text by Eusebius and Pamphilus was furnished with notes from the other translations is declared by the Syro-Hexa^plaris, compare Field, Prolegomenciy On the circulation of this recension, compare chap. xi. Jerome {Prcef. in Paralipom.): " Med ice inter has (i.e. Antioch and Egypt) provincit^ Palestinse (so Lagarde instead of Palestinos) codices legunt, quos ab Origene elaborates Eusebius et His own preference for this recenPamphilus vulgaverunt." which afforded him admirable help in his contention for sion,
" the
Hebrew
"
Hebrew
Textas Receptus,
is
given
:
(106) to Sunnias and Fretela KOivr) pro locis et temporibus et pro voluntate scriptorum vetus corrupta editio est, ea autem quae habetur in efaTrXoZ? et quam nos vertimus, ipsa est quae in eruditorum libris incorexpression to by
in a letter
him
rupta et immaculata
LXX.
quin
ita et
auctoritate discordet."
44 from
Ad
Prcefatio
T. grcece
in Quatuor Evangg.
;
Jets over
grieksche Vertaling
and Hooykaas,
;
f.
44.
jected
Some time after Origen, the Septuagint text was subThe one was undertaken by to two new revisions.
44.
131
of Samosata,
the founder
of the
school, Lucian
who
^laximus.
sostom aided
its
circulation.
is
The second
revision
was made
hy Hesychius, who
the year 311.
usually identified
who
also suffered
in
was circulated
Jerome
43): "Alex-
andria et ^^gyptus in
LXX.
suis
Constantinopolis
plaria probat."
On
sacrcc ascribed
Athanasius,
77:
rals
Trpoyeypa/jbfjLevat^
/cat
to,
eKSuaeac
TTovra
u
(d. h.
Symmachus)
roU
Xei-
'E^pa'cKoU ivTV-^oyv
1]
Kai TvepiTTa
t(a)l>
kol hLopOcoadfievo'^
Tot? 0LK6L0C<;
TOTTOt?
aBe\(f>ol<;.
which Nestle in
it is
ZDMG,
xxxii. p.
481
ff.
has communicated,
said (pp. 489 and 498): "Therefore as the holy martyr Lucian has taken pains about the text of the Sacred Scriptures, and in many places improved, or even changed particular expressions used by the preceding translators, as, e//., when he saw the word ^jns in the text, and the word Lord on tlie
'
'
we
find
it
written therein in
many
passages
"
Thus
^ith '':nx the Lord," where we have given both the Hebrew word adonai in Greek letters, and then alongside of it also the word Lord [therefore ^AhcDvau KvpLos:]!' Compare what
is
46.
niarn
Frdelam
" Sciatis
communem,
aliam
LXX.
interpretum.
qme
in
e^airXoh cudicibus
repei'itur, et
a nobis in
Latinum
132
sermonem
45.
fideliter
ecclesiis decantatur."
tantum
scripturarum
studio
elaboravit,
ut usque
nunc
qu^dam
exemplaria
Scripturarum
Lucian^e
nuncupentur."
His remarks in the Preface to the Four GosjmIs contrasts " Pr&etermitto eos codices quos a Luciano strikingly with this et Hesychio nuncupatur, paucorum hominum asserit perversa
:
contentio
Septuaginta interpretes
profuit emendasse
:
emendare quid licuit, nee iu novo quum multarum gentium linguis Scripof
extremely scanty.
in the Prefaces of
Jerome
to the Chronicles,
and
to the
Four
Commentary
te erit
in Isa.
11:" Quod
et
adhuc
in
laus
mea
in
LXX. quidem
is
are to
inasmuch as the words et ossa tua quasi hcrha orientur be found in the original text as well as in the LXX.
the course of
45. In
several Eecensions
become corrupted by
follow
that the
one
particular
Piccension,
but
A
in
imbounded confusion
of
is
presented
the great
collections
variations
which the
end of
last
of
this century.
They
have, at least,
made
45.
133
in future
and
so
have
al'lbrdetl
who
to find their
way
in
In so
far
textual
criticism.
In
the
following sketch
we
made in the most recent times in this difficult undertaking. The great editions of the LXX. hitherto had been the four
following: The Complutensian IMble,
a.I).
IT*
14-1 51 7
( 24),
Roman
edition,
a.d.
1707-1720.
For the
330 (in Holmes 108 in Lagarde d) and This text was repeated in the 346 (in Holmes 248). The Aldine Antwerp Tolyglot of A.D. 1569-1572 ( 24).
Codeo: Vaticanus
;
edition
his
death in
a.d.
1515
by
it
his
father-in-law,
Andreas Asulanus.
What
V.. is
manuscripts
followed cannot
now be
work
certainly determined.
of
The Eoman
based upon
(B, in
;
Pope Sixtus
1209
Holmes
but from
it
Sixtine
edition
numerous
particulars.
in
Holmes
iii.),
yet
it is
manuscripts have
editions.
now become
of
available through
all
more
reliable
At the head
edition
them
facsimile
the great
Roman
Codex
134
Vatica7ucs
45.
To these
manuscripts
Cozza, &c,
Codex
Sinaiticiis),
Vaticamts and
careful
given in
last
the
very
of
collations
E.
Nestle
in
the
editions
Tischendorf's
LXX., which
are based
upon the
Sixtine.
Also
first
manuCodex
Frederico-Angustaniis, and
EphrmwA.
Finally,
some separate
and
be
editions,
by Fritzsche (Esther,
and
the
first
Ruth, Judges)
deserve
to
Lagarde
(Genesis
Psalms),
mentioned.
p.
in
De
Wette-Schrader, Eiiileitung,
in 5 vols.
17981827,
i.
Lagarde
the
Librorum
V. T. canon,
:
p. xv., characterises
work
"
neque
tarum
farragine
probaverunt,
reddendis
eis
quge acceperant
summam
pr?estiterunt."
Compare
vertaling
also the
d. g.
van
liet
Eichhorn's Refcrtorinm,
v.
viii.
and
xi.
Tischendorf,
;
LXX.
xxiv.
Lagarde,
Cornill, Das Bitch dcs Projpheten Ezecliiel, ff. 13-24. pp. The Complutensian Bible. On the Greek text of this Polyglot compare Yercellone, Dissertazioni Accademiche di
45.
135
FurigesetzU
18G4,
p.
407
fV.
\){i\'itzs{:h,
188G (compare above, 24). l>esides tlie two named Codices Vaticani, 330 and 346, Delitzsch makes special mention of a
copy of a Venetian Codex, the original the Codex Marc. v. (Holmes G8).
of wliicli
lie
seeks in
The Aldine. Bihlia grcvce Venet. in cvdihus Aldi et Asulani, 1518. Compare Lagarde, Genesis grccce, p. G GGA, 1882, p. 450; Mittheihmgen, 57; DQlitzsch, For tgesetzte Studien
;
i'l.
zur Entstehungsgcschichte der Com2:)lutensischen Polyglotte, pp. 24, 25; Cornill, Ezechiel, pp. 24, 79; Schuurmans Stekhoven,
Der Ale rand rijnsche Vertaling, p. 50 ff. The Sixtine Edition and the Coder. Vatieanus.
ment, juxta
Vet. Testa-
LXX.
Eome 1587.
Polyglot
exemplar.
Compare on
stMien,
Xcstle, Septuaginta-
U-lni
188G.
After
it
(1)
the
London
sec.
1657
Vatic.
LXX.
interpr.
;
Bom.
Fss.
Gr. jiLvta
L.
LXX.
Lamb. Bos, 1709 (3) Vet. Testament interpr. ex auct. SUti V. ed. 1587, recus.
;
1824, new edition 1887 (4) Tischendorfs editions Vercellone, Cozza, since 1850 (compare fnrther at p. 136). Melander, Bihliorum sacrorum graicus Codex Vatieanus, Rome
van
1868-1881.
Codex
manuscripto
Compare
Codice
Alexandrinus.
Fred.
Septuaginta
ed.
interpr.
ex
antiquis.^.
Alexandrino,
Vetue
Grahe,
Oxford 1707-
Testamentum grccce, 1859; Facsimile of the Codex Alexandrinus Old Testament, London
1720;
Field,
1881-1883,
in 3 vols.
In 1846 Tischendorf published a part of the Codex Sinaiticns under the name: Codex
Friderico-Augustanus
the rest of
it
St. Petersburg (the Old Testament forming the 3rd and 4th of the four folio volumes). Afterwards Brugsch discovered some fragments of Leviticus xxii.-xxiii.,
and published them Neue Bruchstiicke dcs Cod. Sinaiticus, Leipsic 1875. Tischendorf, Codex Ei)hra:mi Syri resanptus Fragmenta Vet. Texfament, 1845 (passages from Job, sire Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and The Son<?). A series of fragments
:
136
45.
them of very great importance, is published in Tischendorf's Monumenta sacra incdita, Nova Collectio i V. The following deserve specially to be named Codex Sarravianus (Holmes iv. v.), with passages from the Odatcucli (namely, the fragments preserved in Leyden and St. Petersburg; the Parisian fragments were published by Lagarde in the Ahhandlungcn d. Gott. Ges. d. Wissensch. 1879); Codex Marchalianus (or Claramontanus, now in Vatican, Holmes xii.) with
:
Psalterium Turicense
Psalmomm
fragm. pa-pyracea Londinensia ; the parts of the Codex Cottonianus saved from the fire (Holmes i., containing many fragments from Genesis). Psalterium Veovnense in Blanchinns,
Psalterium
p.
dujjlex,
Die Psalmen,
431
f.
from the Prophets), ed. Cozza, Eome 18671877 Pro2:)hetaTum Codex grcBcus Vaticanus, 2125 curante Cozzi-Lugi, Eome 1890. From Codex Chisianus P. vii. 45 (Holmes 88) have appeared Vincenti ide regibus, Jezeciel sec. LXX. ex. Tetrapl. Orig., by Coster, 1840, and Daniel in Cozza's edition of the Codex Cryptoferratensis, iii. 1877. This manuscript
:
alone
gives
the correct
contain
Septuagint
translation
of
Daniel,
of
while
the others
Theodotion's
translation
that
book (compare 43). Tischendorf published the text, after an earlier edition by Simon de Magistris, Eome 1772, as an appendix to his edition of the LXX. Abbot, Pars jpalinipsestoriim Puhlinensium (Isa. xxx. 2 xxxi. 7; xxxvi. 17xxxviii. 1), 1880. In the two last editions of Tischendorf's Veteris Testamenti grceci juxta LXX. interpretes (vi. 1880 and vii. 1887) Nestle's
collations
will
:
be
found.
They may
grceci
also
be
referred
to
et
separately
Veteris
et
testamenti
codices
Vaticanus
Alexandriniis
Sinaiticus
cum
pared Cozza's edition of the Chisianus above referred to. Swete, The Old Testament in Greek, i. and ii. (Gen.-Tobit),
Cambridge 1887-1891.
4G.
137
being pre-
1848
R^Uh
sec.
LXX. 1864
Lihcr judicum
sec.
LXX. 18G7.
Com-
1868; Novcc
psaltcrii Grcccicditionis
1887 (from
the
first
j)are also
chapter of Genesis in
gricch.
AnkilndigiLng einer
T.
iicucn
Ausgahe dor
Uehcrsctzung
d.
A.
1882, pp.5-16.
made
])lace
us
among
first
The
the
among
these
lonc'
unquestionably
as one
belongs
to
Codex
Vaticanus.
text of the
this
So
is satisfied
LXX. by means
will
it,
of
Codex
common
But
in
this
way we do
not
reach
beyond a mere
])rovisional apparatus.
advantage that
of
may
use
the Alexandrine
His
demand
is,
that
we should
secure a
LXX.
in
signalised
this
by Jerome ( 43,
44).
We
are
therefore
it
way
how
far
may
be possible to
So
far
as
is
to be found
more or
less
and fragments
of manuscripts,
which
in
part have
been published.
138
Vaticanus
46.
is
and
at
scholar
himself.
On
the
other hand,
revision of the
to
below in
48.
LXX.
in
the
Hexccplar
Recension.
of
special
liturgies.
The merit
to Frederick Field
and Paul
La^^arde.
It is to
be found in a
same
as
was used
in
the Complutensian
Bible,
is
one of
Of the secondary
itself to
it.
translations, at least
The
biblical quotations of
The
this
any
critical
apparatus.
us, that
It
when we have
it
completely before
we
shall be able to
about
his
sometimes
affirmed,
sometimes
denied,
The
difficulty in regard
to the
Eecension of Hesychius
is
Most
scholars
are
very
inexactly
; ,
4G.
RESTORATION OF RECENSIONS OF
tliat
tlie
lA'X.
139
found in
others
Miinter, conjectured
]iecension migliL bo
(
40), wliile
in the P^thiopic
SO
fl*.
Au^gahe
i\\Q
d.
gricch
Uihersdzung
d.
Lagarde's programme Canonicorum graxe ixirs prior, 1883. lias been acknowledged, among others by Wellhausen (Bleek, Einleitung, p. 573) and Corn ill {Ezecliicl, p. 63), while Compare others regard it as too finical and impracticable.
Theolog. Tijdschrift
1882,
p.
285
ff.
1888,
p.
HI
Swete,
Certainly this task The Old Testament in Greek, i. p. x. sq. hands and much time, but demands not only many and sure also that others should busy themselves with the needs of the present. Compare also Hooykaas, Jets over d. g. Vertaling Schuurmans Stekhoven, De Ale.vvan het 0. T. p. 8
fl".
;
The Recension
of the
Hexajala.
Of
tlie
manuscripts
common hypo;
The Codex Marchalianus and the Chisianiis, R. vii, 45 (compare above, 45 here also see about the editions of the Codex Sarraviamos, of which, however, Lngarde, in Ahhandlungen d. G'Ott. Ges. d. IT. 1879, p. 3, remarks " Whether the text actually goes back to Origen
there are partially printed
: :
remains to be investigated
tliis
").
Prophets,
group the Codex Barherinus (Holmes 86, containing the with the exception of Daniel), and the Codex
x.,
with pieces from the Octateuch), and some others of which Pitra speaks (Analecta sacra, iii. 552 ff.). Compare on these manuscripts generally. Field, i.
Coislinianus (Holmes
p.
C. sq.
ii.
428; Wellhausen-Bleek,
Einleitung, p.
Lagarde speaks of 15, 16 If., 19. in the possession of a private individual which almost
Ezecliicl,
CormW,
588 f a Codex
.
cer-
tainly produces
ii.
the
Pcccension
of
Palestine,
Mitthcilungen
56.
On
52,
55
f.
The conjecture
140
the
4G.
Codex
pp.
8095.
iii.
Eendal
1884) had
hypothesis
meanwhile refuted by Hort in The Academy (1887, ii. 424), and was afterwards abandoned by Cornill himself (NGGW, 1888, pp. 194-196), since he was
This
was
convinced
of the
is
fact
that
in
B
of
names,
( 43),
which
is
characteristic
It
the
wanting.
should also
Jeremiah,
has
have been a copy of a manuscript largely and preferentially used by Origen for his
Septuagint text.
B may rather
p. 55.
Compare also Lagarde, Mittheilunyen The dependence on the Hexapla text spoken of
ii.
in
Book
of Esther
referred
sinaiticum,
Compare Field, Proleyomena, Ixxxiv. sqq. Bickell in the Zeitschrift fur katholischen Theologie, Cornill, 1879, p. 407f. Lagarde, Ankilndiyicng, p. 26 f Rzechiel, p. 65 f Eeckendorf, ZAW, 1887, pp. 63-66; Schuurmans Stekhoven, De Alexandrijnsche Vertaling, pp. 28-46. [Westcott, History of the Canon of the New Testament
2.
The Lucian
;
4th
ed.
1875,
p.
388.]
When
adduces as a criterion of the manuscripts belonging to this Recension the remark of Jacob of Edessa, quoted above in
which Lucian restored the ir^n'', he has to be reminded of this that ahwvat, Kvpio^ is found also in the Codex Alexandrinits, in Cyril of Alexandria, and in the
in
Ethiopic translation (Cornill, Ezechiel, pp. 73, 76, 172 f. Konig in ZKWL, 1887, p. 288 f.). About the manuscripts
does not prevail. the
For the
historical books,
Field points to
Chisianus, R.
vi.
82, 93,
108
{i.e.,
iii.,
38
the
Arundelianus, or
Brit.
Mus.
d.
2,
Vaticanus
330).
4(3.
]:estokation of kkcensions of
i.xx.
141
them by tlie signs h, f, m, d, adds the Parisian Codex G (Holmes 118, Lagarde p), and some others. For the Prophets, Field names the Codices Holmes^ 22, 3G, 48, Of these, Cornill (and 51, 62, 90, 93, 144, 147, 233, 308. with him Lagarde, Mitthcilunrjen, ii. 52, agrees) strikes out the numbers (32, 90, 147, 233, while he adds 23 {Codex Venetus, i.). Schuurmans Stekhoven names for the Minor I'rophets, 22, 36, 42, 51, 62, 86, 95, 147, 153, 185, 238, Yet it may be remarked that (according to the 240, 231. Theolog. Litcraturzcitunfj, 1890, 5) in the Book of liutli Theodoret agrees with the Codices 54 and 75, which often diverge from Codex 108. Lagarde, Lihronim Veteris testamcnti canonicorum grccce pars j^rior, 1883. A critical apparatus is to be found only in the two texts of Esther. "We have now the prospect of seeing this long-interrupted work lesumed se^ Uthersicht ilber d. in Aram ilhliclie Nominal hildanrj, p. 180. On the quotations of Chrysostom, compare Lagarde, i. p. vii. sq. on those of the Emperor Julian, comdesignates
;
.
p.
27.
On
Adrian's use of
iho,
Lucian
Leipsic
compare
Goessling,
Adrian's
etcraywYT;,
1887.
New
Testament, Cambridge, 3rd ed. 1883, pp. 315-318.] 3. The Hesychian Recension. Fr. Miinter, Specimen ver-
sionum Daniclis coptiarum, Rome 1786, p. 20 f.: " Liceat tamen conjecturam exponere cui ipsa S. Hieronymi verba Alexandria et ^Egyptus Hesychium laudant auctorem, favere
videntur
in
:
recensionem
alterave
nimirum
sacri
codicis
Hesychianam
superesse."
xv.
una
nobis
i.
p.
Cornill
{Ezcchiel,
67
ff.),
finds a
andrinus.
With
this
manuscript
are
related
the
Codices
Holmes, 4.^, 68, 87, 90, 91, 228, 238, which often agree with the quotations of Cyril. In this group, which may be
said almost precisely to correspond with the Aldine edition,
Hesychius may therefore be looked for. Peckendorf, however, in Z.4 JF, 1887, p. 68, denies that there is any agreement between the Ethiopic translation and the Aldine edition. The
142
47.
Compare
60.
also
Schuurmans Stekespecially
hoven,
Be
47 5 6, and
Lagarde, Mittheilungen,
grajphy,yo\.
ill.
1882,
p.
8,
47.
The quotations
in the fathers
LXX.,
as has already
of
last paragraphs.
them
may
in dealing with
them,
it
when they lay special stress upon the form of the passage cited, or when it is certain that they have had But if occasional deviations from the the text before them.
demonstrative only
common
made
text
their
common
text
is
not
rest
upon
later
revisions
ways
The
of
translations
place
among
Old
these
daughter
Bible,
if
versions
it
it
should
be
assigned
to
of
the
Latin
the investigations
contested.
It
regarding
is
so insecure
of
and
so
much
controversy whether
we can
speak of a
The utterances
if
they
had been
clearer
and more
than they
are,
could not
evidently
47.
QUOTATIONS
IN FATIIKRS
143
reflections,
traditions.
In particular,
(De dodrina
to cast light
christiajia,
ii.
forth a
new and
An
be reached only
when we have
constantly-accumulating
regard
it
text
material.
But even
now we may
as an
circumstances of
of a single trans-
now
in
that
we must assume
text.
Alexandrine
On
in
certainly
it
did
exist
in
Generally, indeed,
would be
the
provinces
keenly
felt,
especially
among
among whom
language,
is
Christianity at
"
first
collection
of
Sabatier.
On
Ezrcliiely
58
ii.
f.
Lagarde,
f.
Fsaltcrium
Jlieroni/mi,
viii,,
Mitthcilungcn,
53
From an
earlier period,
ii.
the colleciii.
74
ff.,
213
fl'.,
124
ff.,
xiii.
158
ff.
144
47.
Eichborn,
Einhitung^,
i.
Einleitung, p. 595.
On
:
of several translations
58 ff. Corbey [In Studia Biblica, 1st series, Oxf. 1885, in Paper on James and its relation to other Old Latin Versions," p. 23G, St. Sanday says " There were originally two main versions, two parent stocks from which all the texts that we now have were
Lagarde, Mittlieilungen,
"
:
1879
The remarks
translations
and commented on by Ziegler, Die The passage quoted from Augusaltlat. BiheliXbersetz. p. 4 ff. " In ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala tine runs as follows ceteris prseferatur, nam est verborum tenacior cum perspicuir)Ut when tate sententite " {De dodrina Christiana, ii. 15). " Sed tamen, ut superius dixi, horuni further on he says quoque interpretum, qui verbis tenacius inhseserunt, collatio non est inutilis ad explanandum ssepe sententiam," it is
are quoted
: :
507
ff.)
emendations
of considera-
and
qicce
for
nam
are at least
worthy
tion.
See, however,
Zeigler,
Die
of
altlat. Bibelubersetz. p.
19
ff.
On
the
Bible
quotations
Tertullian,
i.
p.
the other side, Lagarde, Mittheilungen, ii. p. 59. On the dialectic peculiarities of the Old Latin translations,
Eonsch,
Itala
Bibelubersetz. p.
und 22 f.
Vidgata,
;
1869
Zeigler,
Die
altlat.
Cornill, Ezechiel, p.
25
f.
Sabatarii,
Bibliorum
sacrorum
latince
xersionis
is
antiquce
A
codice
list of
later editions to
given by
102
;
ff.
To these
e
are
be
added:
lat.
Ulysse
antiqua,
Robert, Pentateuchi
Paris
Lugdunensi
verslo
1881
Uebersetzung d.
limpsestus
Pentateuchs,
Vindobonensis,
diana
versionis
sacrarum scripturariim
latino: antehieronymiance
48.
145
fragmenta, 1888
latcinischoi Uehcrsdzangen d.
A.
T.,
1885.
abandon
their old
independent Bible
into Syriac.
68) the
LXX. was
705, which
which
Bishop
make
in a.d. 508,
But more
of
important than
all
rest
is
the
Syrian
reissue
(
the
43), of
It
was executed
Paul
of Telia,
in the years
017-618
in Alexandria
diacritical
by Bishop
marks of
manuscript
still
was subsequently
lost.
On
Book
of
Wisdom,
Sirach,
tlie
To
editors.
On
De
Sacy,
ft'.
;
Notices
extraits
de
MSS. dc Syrorum
:
la
lihl.
ii.
nation,
liter,
of
Museum
(addit.
14,441) have
et
Monumenta
sacra
|;?'o/(nia,
v.
Frasjments of
:
the translation of
Daniel
are to
be
found in
LXX.
inter-
prctum desumpium
1788.
146
49.
On
British
83
Syrormn
17,106)
liter, p. 9.
fragment in the
p. xcii. sq.
Museum
{addit.
is
translator.
Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. iv. 1887, Scrivener {Plain p. 392, Article " Philoxenus," by Venables. Introduction, p. 328) says: " The characteristic feature of the
[Smith's
Philoxenian
is
its
it
is
probably the most servile version of Scripture ever made."] On the Syro-Hcxaplaris, compare Field, Hexapla, i. p. Ixvii.
sqq.
The
in
De
of
Wette-Schrader,
the Milan Codex
et
EinUitung,
117.
Ceriani's
edition
profana,
1874.
the same
collection are to
Further
Skat
Eordam, Lihri Judicuni ct Ruth sec. vers. Syro-Hexapl. Copenhagen 1859, 1861; Lagarde, Veteris tcstainenti ah Origene recensiti fragment a ap. Syros servata, v. (Ex. Num. Jos. 1 and 2 The best manuscripts, among them the Codex Kings) 1880. Amhrosiamis, have, under the influence of Jacob of Edessa, Compare, ZDMG, xxxii. jhjh for the older 2^W'^ = ^'^^^ ( '^^)In the year 1486 the Syro-Hcxaplar version Of this was translated into Arabic by Hareth ben Senan. translation there are two manuscripts in the Bodleian library.
507
f.,
736.
i.
p. Ixx. sq.
ZDMG,
xxxii. p.
468
f.
With
is
the
LXX.
been already
the text.
How
far the
is
not
The Coptic
the Sahidic, the Bohiric, and the Fayumic, will perhaps play
an important
Besides these
we must name
and
finally,
the
40.
147
into the
LXX.
of ralcstine.
Luebe, Uljilas V.
ct
N.
T. vers, gothiav T.
18G3;
Ohrloff,
Blhdilhcrsctzung,
i.
der
Vcteria
p.
xiv
Mitthcilnngcn,
ii.
52
f.;
NGGW,
1890,
p.
20
f.
On
in the
"
the
Slavic
Y>-
translation,
Einleitung,
121.
Copenhagen University Library has the following title The Bible, i.e., the Books of the Old and the New Testament
Hebrew
Egyptian king I'tolemy Philadelphus in the year 350 before the incarnation of our God and liedeemer," etc. The passages
compared by
my
colleague,
Boman
edition.
1880
are
1880,
pp. 4414-46.
see
among
l*s.
others,
;
Lagarde,
jEgyptiaea,
1883 (Wisdom,
Sirach,
Bome 1885-1889.
;
Compare
p.
also
Bickell, Zeii-
1886,
ii.
Book
of Job
and on the
general
Fritzsche
in
Herzog's Real-Encyclopa'die",
443
Dillniann, Te.efk/itisches
zum Buche
On
61
ff;
Herzog's Beal-Fncglopa'dic\
3
in
p.
und
Gcschichte d. Penta-
teuchs,
LXX.); Ankundiguiig,
p.
28:
i.-ii.
p.
37.
1853, 1861.
Of the Arabic
translations
the
Parisian
:
LXX.
tlie
Poetical
148
50.
Compare Gesenius, Jcsaja, 98-106, and (on Micah) Eyssel ZAW, 1885, pp. 102-138.
to
According
attaches itself to
the
On
ii.
De
De
Wette-Schrader,
Wette-Schradei-,
Einleitung,
120
121
f.;
443
444.
f.
On
Einleitiing, p.
ii.
The fragments
tenth
by the Palestinian
The Anecdota syriaca, iv. 1875, pp. 103 ff., 165 ff., 222 ff. Greek text which had served as its original was, as might be Where this community, expected, influenced by the Hexapla.
whose translation of the Gospels had been known even earlier, dwelt, whether in Jerusalem or on the other side of the
Jordan,
is
quite uncertain.
Its
Palestino-
Aramaic
[A good
with reference
New
Testament,
is
given in Scrivener,
Flain Introduction, 3rd ed. 1883, pp. 365-412; Lightfoot contributing the account of the Coptic versions].
50. After
of the
we have succeeded
LXX.,
must be
of their help
common
to all the
Where
met
Hebrew
51.
140
mainly intended
text.
to
For
genuine
LXX.
the genuine
in tlie
quotations
of Philo,
New
we may
must be
isolated
facts, it
remembered that
passages one
the
this plan
LXX.
In
many
may
means
at his disposal,
make use
cannot
be used.
gricchischcii
p.
Uehcr-
Ankundigung,
29
f.;
Lihroruvi
Vet.
15 f. On Philo, compare
Tcstam.
i.
C. F.
criticarum
in
vers.
LXX.
;
Philone,
i.-iii.
Siegfried, Philo
LXX.
in the
ii.
ZWT,
1873,
p.
Mittheilungen,
52-54.
2.
ing Jews,
made
new Greek
Jn
two
different
ways
mediating
the
Greek translations
proceeded
circles.
of the
set
Common
was a
closer attach-
150
ment
to the
51.
Hebrew
the Jews,
facts about
we
Origen,
into his
great
Polyglot ( 43).
Tetrajpla
translations
Hexapla text (43-48), and in the commentaries of the Church Whether Lucian, whose text fathers, especially of Jerome.
often contains interpolations from the later Greek translations,
had used
this independently, or
Morinus began
which
still
remain.
others,
especially
by Montfaucon, and
now
provisionally concluded
by
above
all,
estimated in a
way
that
of
the
Greek language.
Montfaucon, Ilexa'plaroriim Origenes quce siipcrsunt iindtis partibus auctiora quam a Flaminio Nobilio et J. Dinisio edita
fnerint, Paris 1713.
Fr. Field,
Origenis
Hexcqolorum
quce
supcrsunt,
vols.,
Oxford
1875.
Analeda sacra sp)ecilegio Solesmensi parata, iii. 1883, pp. 555 Compare also Cornill, Ezechicl, p. 104 ff. 109. 578. The signs are 'A for Aquila, X for Symmachus, O for Compare Theodotion, E' for Quinta, and S' for Sexta.
further. Field, Prolegomena, cap. x.
It
is,
worthy
La
Bihliotheque
d'Antoine
du
Lyons 1685, Sup2)Iement, p. 60), there are said to have been in that collection of books manuscripts with
S
o-J.
AQUILA.
the
I'salms and
hibl. tent,
')
Syininachus' tran.^laLion of
Scripture.
other
books of
Compare Hody, De
orvjin. p.
588.
in
is
52.
Tlie
many
respects
that of Aquila.
perfectly to reproduce
Hebrew
text,
and
to
make
the
Greek translation
basis
of a discussion as
down
which
to
In this
way
the Greek
translated.
Thus the
and
C^vy (from
(from
i^p
Ovpeov), etc.
him
displays
such
skill
in
his
handling
of
Greek language,
such
fidelity
in
dealing
with
Hebrew word,
the
means
to be regarded as
only as
conto
was impossible
he was an old
man when
first
the treatise
a.d.
175 and
But even
189, where he
is
time.
tell
Even should
152
was a proselyte
"
52.
AQUILA.
from Pontus
"
have
to
be given up, as
and should
all
also
the more
With
59a)
Talmud (Kidd,
i.
fol.
about a proselyte
passage
jer.
D^^pv,
Meg.
fol.
7lc,
him
and
at least as
time.
Now
it
was
on the Judaism
of his
day, in this
method that
on
all sorts
which
of
particles DJ,
T\^, etc.,
of the
Greek language.
In
way
of
is
tion
Aquila,
which
probably
enjoyed
fall
Palestinian
It
is
authorisation,
was used
by the Jews.
had
the
shown, as
is
fol.
Law
to
a very
name
told
to
ob'py
and
is
that one
praised Aquila
from
koKcos:),
:
and applied
(Thou
him the
thou
n''D^S^
art fair, or
of
men.
is
How
of
witnessed
by Origen
as well as
52.
AQUILA.
^3
e.g.
from Isaiah
vii.
14, where
it
irapdevo<^ of the
its
endeavour
"With what
to render n^-j'D
diligence
lie
he
of
Jerome that
produced
speci-
Of the
mens
Talmud some
at least
Dc Onhclo Chaldaico, qnciii fcrunt Field, Hcxapla, Pentcdcuclii ^^rn-rr^^/iras^e, Leipsic 1843 Geiger, Wellhausen-Bleek, Einlcitui^g, p. 580 f p. xvi. ir.
Compare
;
E.
Anger,
i.
Nachgelasscne
jiid.
Schriftcn,
ii.
iv.
83
Schiirer,
Geschichte
dcs
704 ff., Eng. trans. Div. ii. vol. iii. 1G8; CorniW, Uzcchiel, IX 104 ff.; Piyssel, Untcrsnchungen iihcr die
Volkcs,
Iremeus, Adv.
Hcr.res.
iii.
Hist.
Ecclcst. v. 8.
10):
TTjv
ov')(^
&)?
evLoi cpaac
t)
tojv
fieOepjjLTjvevetv
roXficovrcov
ypacp/jv ISou
veavL<; iv
yaarpl
e^ei
0oBoTL(i)V
a/i(l)6T6poL
7]pfjL7]Vvau
6 'E(f)6aio<;
'lovSaioL
e'f
'7rpocr7]\vTOL,
oU
KaTaKoXov6i]cravT<;
oi
'E/3iovaiOL
'Iwarjcj)
Jerome
"Scribe et Pharisa^i, quorum scholam suscepit Acibas, quem magistrum Aquil?e proselyti autumant." Further, Epistle 57, Ad. Pcunm. ; Epiphanius, X^c mens, ct 2Jond. c. 1317. On the hermeneutical methods of R. Akiba, see Bcrcsldth
on Isaiah
viii,
14:
146, according to the latter of which passages one of the scholars of Akiba was instructed by
r.
andyer. Berachoth,
9,
fol.
his master in
ns,
n:,
ii.
"JS,
and
p"i.
Compare
Origen,
Schiirer,
ii.
des jiid.
Volkcs,
311, Eng.
trans. Uiv.
vol.
376.
(i.
Ad
Africanum
14,
De
la
Rue): 'AKv\a<;
rijv
<f)L\oTL/jL6T6pov
Tf]v ypa(f)^u' (o
TTeTTto-Teu/ieVo?
TTapcL
^IovBaioL<;
i)pixip>evKevaL
E^paLcov
In
BcaXeKTov y^prjadai
ttuptcov /laXXov
it is
iTTiTerexr/fievai.
No. 146
of the Novdlcc
"
At vero
ii,
qui gneca
lingua legunt,
LXX.
interpretum
154
53.
THEODOTIOX.
omnium accuratissima et ceteris prrestantior judicata est Verum ne illos a reliquis interpretationibus secludere videamur,
.
.
si ille
extraneus
sit,
et in lectionibus
quibusdam
inter
ipsam
et
LXX.
interpretes
non modica sit dissonantia." Justin Martyr (ed. Otto ii. 240) betrays indeed
indirect
vii.
at least
of
an
acquaintance
with
Aquila's
translation
Isaiah
14.
On
The Song
41.
In reference
to
f.),
104
about an Oxford Codex for Ezekiel (Holmes 62), which has in the highest degree been influenced by Aquila, is of importance.
worthy of note that the Syrian translation has the sign of the accusative rT" only in these two books (elsewhere only in Gen. i. 1 and 1 Chron. iv. 41). [See article on " Aquila " by Professor Dickson in Smitlts
It is also
"Versions" in
1622.]
supposed, was younger
53.
If
Theodotion, as
is
usually
of his translation
many were
is
unwilling wholly
familiar.
The work
of Theodotion
indeed to be regarded
it
as a sort of also
attaches
to
by
this, that
it
additions
Daniel
of
his
and the
postscript
Job.
It
is
characteristic
method
that
not
rarely
Theodotion
wholly with-
He
is,
the
treatise
of
Irenaeus,
Adv.
Hcereseos.
This, however,
53. THEODOTIOX.
155
by Jerome, who
to
is
not
in
apjreement
describes
witli
wliat
in
is
said
repeatedly
him,
contrast
tliis
Aquila,
father
as
an
Ebionite
Church
names
of
liim a Jew,
others.
and mentions
his
said,
as a
companion
Septuagint column.
Among
the
Jews
probably
is
to
among
the
who used him greatly LXX., partly also in room of that made use of his translation of
Christians,
for
translation.
Even
Irenieus
Daniel,
which
afterwards
of
completely supplanted
prophet.
the Alexandrine
translation
of
that
older custom
interpolating
Jer.
xxxiii.
14-26), and
it
thereby contributed
more
to the
mixing up of
with the
Alexandrine translation.
Compare
lies jild.
Field, Prolegomena,
ii.
cap. iv.
Schiirer,
ii.
Geschichte
iii.
Volkes,
708
ff
Eng.
trans. Div.
vol.
172
187.
Irenreus, Adv. Hccres. 52; Jerome on Habakkuk iii. 11-13: "Theodotion autem vere quasi pauper et Ebionita sed et Symmachus ejusdem dogmatis pauperem sensum secuti
Judaice transtulerunt."
of Job.
On
Avgudinvm 112
comment, in Daniel: " Illud quoque lectorem admoneo, Danielem non juxta LXX. interpretes sed juxta Theodotionem ecclesias legere, qui utique post adventum Christi incredulus fuit, licet eum quidam
hominis Juda:i atque hlasphemi
Praef.
The qui altero genere Juda?us est." method pursued by the author is very well mediating characterised by Jerome in his Comment, on John ii. 2. According to Epiphanius he lived under Commodus, a.d. 180-192, btit this author's stories about him (De mcnsuris ct
dicant
Ebionitam,
156
;ponder%bus,
54.
SYMMACHUS.
17-18), like those about the other translators, are quite worthless. The words quoted from Iren?eus about the importance of his translation among the Ebionites rather show that it must have been written some considerable time
previously.
Schurer
If,
is
therefore inclined to
is
make him
of
older
than Aquila.
however, he
that
Theodotion's
after Aquila's
we can without difficulty of his translation in the way described That Irengeus names him before Aquila
this, that
may
simply have
its
ground in
made use
The
himis
John
are, as Schiirer
Of
greater importance
the
Hermes
vi.
{Vis.
iv.
2. 4), of
rendering of Daniel
Liter aturzeitung,
xxviii.
384.
Whether Theodotion
23 (compare Theolog. But see also ZWT, Aquila was the elder
8,
On
where
some think they find traces of a Christian mode of thought, compare Field on the passage, and Kautzsch, De vet. Testam. [See a particularly locis ci Paulo apost. allcgatis, 1869, p. 104. " Theodotion," by Dr. Gwynn of good and adequate Article, Dublin, in Smith's Diet, of Chr. Biograjjhy, vol. iv. 1887, pp. 970-979. On the apparent use of Theodotion's Daniel in the Shepherd of Hermes, see Hort in the Johns Hopkins' University Circulars, iv. 23, and in opposition to the attempt
to bring
Hermes down from the beginning to the middle of Gwynn, Salmon, Introd, to the
Symmachus,
of
whom
speak,
was
According to a story of
to
who seems
54.
SYMxMACHUS.
157
also to liave
and
composed
other
works whose
contents
also calls
to
were
of
Jewish -Christian
character.
Jerome
him an
a
Ebionite.
Xow
if
it is
thoiiMit remarkal)le
find
IMble translation
among
tlie
Together with Hebrew and with the Creek languages. Jerome, who has made great use of him, he stands among ancient translators nearest to tlie modern ideal of what a
translator
locutions,
should
be.
Only
in
his
paraphrastic
circum-
in the case of
to
Jerome on
Jer.
and Nah.
iii.
1,
Compare
iii.
AVellhausen-Bleek,
p.
Einleiiuiuj^,^.
582
ff
QoxmW,
vi.
Ezeehiel,
108
fiijv
f.
liyssel,
17
rchv
ye
epfnjvevrcou
8rj
to Kara
MarOalov
Kparvveiv.
ypa(^a<^
tu>o<;
aiTOTeLvo^evo<s
euayyeXiov,
o
Slpiyevr}<;,
ravra Be
fiera
Kal
aXkwv eU ra?
irapa ^Iov\iavrj<^
epfMrjveicov
rov ^vfi/iaxov,
Kai
(j^riat
i.
arjfjLaivei
eL\rj(f)Ci>ai, rjv
Trap
5.'.).
avTov
^v/jLfjid'^ov
Jerome,
Whether the
determined.
ii.
a Samaritan, rests on
any
strikingly {Mittheilungen,
51): "In connection with this it should not be forgotten that if Symmachus was a Samaritan, then at least Symmachus
does not unconditionally witness for the text of the Jews of
he would have had On very no text of the Prophets and the Hagiographa. weak grounds, Geiger {Jild. Zcitschrift, 1862, pp. 62-04
his time."
"
158
55.
Nachgelasscne Schriften, p.
88
f.
ff.),
Judaism.
Nestle,
communicated by
i.
TSK, 1879,
6
733
Examples
27:
iv elKovi
Zia^opa^ opdiov
etcTiaev
25
fjur]
nToirjarj'^
:
TovTo
Ps.
xliv.
24:
Ivarc
co?
virvcov
el;
Eicht, 9, 13
rrjv
anonymous Greek
and the
Sexta,
which Origen,
as Eusebius says,
drew out
of
latter
Habakk.
iii.
13),
was of Christian
Field's investiga-
number
of the
know nothing
ii.
precisely
also of a
about them.
11, speaks
duas alias
found elsewhere.
Whether the
which often
'Eppam
cited
fathers,
now be
definitely determined.
Compare
ep/jbTjveLa^;
16: Kal Tiva<i erepag irapa ra? evaWaTTOvaa^, Tr)v 'AkvXou /cat
6W
oSev
e/c
tlvcov
fiv^MV TOP
'Trpor)ya'yev'
</)co?
dvi')(yeo(Ta<i
o)v
hid
dSrjXoTTjTa
tIvo<^
dp
Trjv
elev fxev
ouk
etSco?,
Trj
eTrearjfjLtjvaTO, co?
dpa
eTepcp
evpoi iv
^AktIco
N ncoTroXet,
twv
Trjv
he
ev
Toirw Toiwhe' ev
ye
TOt? e^a7r\oL<i
'\jrd\/jLCt)v,
OG.
JEUOM?:.
159
kuI
'
e/cSocr6i9,
ov
jiovov
rrrefiTrrTji/,
aWa
tKrrjv
Koi
iv
t/SSo/iT/i/
Jcpi^ol
Kara tov<^ "^porov^ Avtojvlvov tov viov According to this then the Quinla was ^efii'jpov [211-217]. found at Nicopolis, on the west coast of Greece, and either the The passages from Jerome Sexta or the Septima at Jericho. According to his are given by Field, Prolcgonuna, xliii. commentary on Titus iii. 9, tlie Quinta, Scxta, and Sejjtima were mainly composed of the poetical books (versii compositi).
iv
iriOcp
Jerome on Hab. iii, 13: "Sexta editio, prodens manifestisegressus es, ut sime sacramentum, ita vertit ex Hehnx^o quod salvares populum tuum per Jesum Christum tuum Graece dicitur i^ijXde^ tov acoaat, top \acv aov Bed leaovv The same on Hab. ii. 11 " Eeperi, exrov XpLo-Tov aov." ceptis quinque editionibus, id est, Aquilce, Symmachi, Septua: : :
alias
:
est
quia
lapis, in
altera
On
6 'ElBpalo^,
sq.
3.
Jerome and
the Vulgate,
56.
to
take the
place of the
ficance as
LXX., no one has obtained such historical signiIn the Greek Church indeed the that of Jerome.
its place,
a turn
On
owed
it
to
Jerome
that
learnt to
know the Old Testament in a furm which, was much purer and clearer than the Septua-
a.d.
34G, died
a.d.
420, was,
if
a fair view
is
160
work which he ventured
in
56.
JEROME.
to undertake.
And
even although
Quod Hicronymiis
ncscivit,
may
be justifiable only
when
knowledge
is
to
make
it
Hebrew
language, difficult as
was
by reason
parvis
conditions of
nummis paid he for his instruction under various Jewish teachers, who sometimes, for fear of their countrymen, came to him secretly by night, "like Nicodemus," among
them Baranina, he whom the
a^es
bitter Rufinus, as a
reward
for
would have
to
thank
him
for,
nicknamed by the
In addition to this
of
especially
that
of
Symmachus
54).
That the
particulars
was nevertheless
in
many
of
imperfect,
in
is
defective
is
scientific
no more
those
;
around
him, his
marks an extraordinary
advance
him
Compare Morinus,
Excrcitationcs
hihliccc, p.
156;
Clericus,
1700; L. Engelstoft, Hieronymus Zockler, Hieronymus, Strid. interpres, etc., Copenhagen 1797 342 ff., 465 f. DeWettesein Leben und Wirken, 1865, pp. Nowack, Die Bedeutung des Schrader, Einleitung, p. 136 ff.
Qumstiones Rieronymiance,
;
57.
lUeronymus
fiir
Tc.dkritik,
187'~>, p. 5
fl".
189
fl*.
On
mus,
i.
1861, and
MGWJ,
Siegfried,
JPT,
57.
ix.
346
ff.
Jerome
widely
at
latina, whicli
was
circulated,
had
then
assumed
call
many
a.d.
divergent
forms.
After he
had, at the
of
Damasus,
and
This
revised the
New
383
at
Rome
customary form.
Damasus introduced into the Roman liturgy, so obtained the name of Psallerium Romanum. It was
in use in
Rome down
to the sixteenth
St. Peter.
century, and
in
is
is
still
It
was used
1808, and
Milan.
Venice in
down
to a.d.
employed
ritual in
Some time
after this
Jerome
and
left
Rome,
in the East,
to
While staying
of Origen,
in Ca?sarea he
came
to
know
of the
Hcxapht
to the
was
at
later
date
Roman
Psalms
for
Catholics.
ment
text
;
Book
of Job, this
work
has
all
been
lost.
Undoubtedly the
fact that
Jerome himself,
162
57.
By means
of his
the
text
Hebrew
of
text.
And
even
if
Hebrew
the
his
Hebrew
so
truth" be not
yet
this
text
stood
Alexandrine Bible that the new undertaking marked an important step in advance, while
attacks on the part
of
his
it
exposed him to
many
bitter
unscientific
contemporaries.
He
dogma
38).
this
On
the
powerful
opposition
which
man, with
generally, wherever
was
at
all
possible to do
so,
to
the
customary translation.
He
he translated
finally, in the
393405,
contem-
books, and
to
please his
additions
to
An
epistolary
who
the
old
translation,
did
not
wish,
without
vindicating his
work
112,
Ad
Augustinum).
great triumph
when
58.
THE VULGATE.
relation
163
the
the
liitlierto
prevailing
between
Greeks and
Latins.
van Ess, rragmatisch-kritische Gesddchle der Vuhjatd, Tub. 1824; Kaulen, Gcschichtc dcr Vidf/a (a, Mainz 1868;
Fritzsche in Ilerzog's Rcal-Encydopccdic',
On
the
,
use
\k
of
t'.,
the
Fsalterium
Eiideitwinj
486
In the tenth volume of Vallarsi's Opera Hicronyrai are to be found the Pscdtcrium Romamtm, Psaltcrium GaUicanum, and
the translation of the
text.
Book
of
Job according
to the
Ilcxaplar
Lagarde has published a translation of Job based upon manuscript in Tours and a Codex Bodkianus (2420);
ii.
.}fittheihc7ige7i,
193-237.
Caspari
is
preparing to edit a
third manuscript.
58. After the older Latin translation and that of Jerome had
for a
Churches or
tlieir
of
Jerome came
thirteenth
In
the
the
century
it
became customary
which
in earlier times,
by
to designate the
LXX.,
especi-
Latin rendering.
The Vulgate
of the
translations
had
side, the
their
itself.
In addition to
came
in errors of transcription
The endeavours
its
of
corrupt
or
unsuccessful, and
the
so-called
Correetoria,
of prein
view and
con-
164
58.
THE VULGATE.
After
the
invention
before
of
the
art
of
printing
the
Vulgate
printed
the
Greek
'New Testament
other
for
was
Catholics and
Protestants
production of
and led
work
the
of the old
Church father
Council, which
elevated
the recognition
19),
of
so
much energy
translation a quite
unmeasured
prmdicationihus
expositionihus
(Sess.
iv.).
more
which
to be the Vulgate.
The
Protestants, for
The
edition of
for
nobis
a domino tradita
et
and declared
be vera,
legitima, authentica
indubitata, so that
it,
without
FauH
of the
LXX.
notice of
the
The
style
while the
5S.
THE VULGATE.
text,
IGo
they
editors
were not
])robleni of the
And
even in recent
times,
skilled
when
we
still
ourselves
very far
off
end.
of Variations
by
Vercellone affords a valuable contribution to a future reconstruction of the Vulgate text, especially in this way, that these
variations
of the
lations, therefore,
LXX.
Vulc^ate.
Kaulen,
Berger,
GcscJiichtc
dcr Vulr/ata,
de la
-p-p.
150-494.
See also:
Dc
Vhistoire
Vuhjata en France,
p.
1888;
De
Wette-Schrader, Einleitung,
144
f.
On
ance
between French and Spanish manuscripts of the Hebrew text, with the Targums, the Eabbinists, etc., compare Vercellone, Dissertazione accachyniclw, liome 1864, p. 53 Kaulen, Gci^chichtc der Vulgata, p. 255 f. Under Clement VIII. there first appeared Biblia Saera
with
the
distinction
;
:
Rome
1592.
"
issued in
1503, which
indeed corrected some of the printer's errors, but left a still larger number uncorrected, and added new mistakes of its
own"
of
(Kaulen, Gesehichte,
of the
p.
470).
edition
1598, by reason
appended
be refjarded as conclusive.
of Sixtus V. of
still
1590
in almost three
thousand
on their
title-page.
is
How
e.g.,
the
proceedings
shown,
V.
mianam
editicnem,
London 1600.
1G6
The
edition of
58.
THE VULGATE.
Heyse and Tischendorf, Bihlia sacra latina V.T. Hieronymo interprete, 1873, is in point of textual criticism very unsatisfactory. Compare ZWT, p. 591 ff.; Lagarde, Psaltcrium jiu:ta hehrwos Hieronymi, Leipsic 1874. On a manuscript not used by Lagarde, see Baethgen, ZA W, 1881, p. 105 ff.
Among
now
is
the celebrated
Mount Amiata,
was supposed by Tischendorf and others to belong to the sixth century. This view was opposed by Lagarde, Mittheilungen, i. 1885, p. 191 f. He maintained that it was a manuscript of the ninth century, artificially written in an antique style after a cursive manuscript. Such also was the opinion of Cornill, EzecJiiel, p. 158 f. More
recently,
however,
series
of
interesting
discussions
has
ff.,
1888, xxxiii. pp. 239 f., 307 f.). Light has been shed upon this question especially by Hort's contribr.tions, Tlie name on the first page must be read Ccolfrie.cl Anglorum ; the Codex was written in Jarrow under the Abbot whose rule extended from a.d. 690 to A.D. 716, after the pattern of older Codices, and was sent from England to Eome as a present to Gregory XL The first sheet, however, with its three lists of the canon and pictorial illustrations (compare Corssen, JPT, ix. p. 619 ff.), was borrowed from a Codex of Cassiodorus (of the Vctus latina) brought to England.
f.,
165
309
f.,
414
f.;
From
this manuscript,
Lagarde {Mittheilungen,
of
i.
pp.
241378)
[For an
Wisdom
et
Solomon and
second
its
Sirach.
Oxford 1890
(7)
Birthplace,"
byH.
J.
White.
Appendix On the Italian Origin of the Codex Amiatinus and the Localising of Italian MSS.," by W. Sanday, pp. 273The Codex Toetanus, which is supposed to belong to 324.] the eighth century, was collated for the Sixtine edition. This collation is preserved in the Vatican, and was printed in Mi^xi^'^ Patrologia Latina, xxix. 879-1096. Other manuscripts are enumerated by De Wette-Schrader, Einleitung,
5!).
TIIK JEWS.
lOT
Scrivener's
p.
143
f.
[See
of
MSS.
,
of
the Vulgate in
.
S83
pp. 3 4 8 - 3 6 5
hit.
Bihliorum
hooks).
cditionis,
riome
also:
(only
de
the
historical
Compare
luce,
1710;
Prograwm
On
De
Wette-Schrader, Einlcitinig,
147.
4.
59.
was
was
the international tongue of the north Semitic peoples, not understood by the
the
exile
common Jews
the
place
the
(Isn.
gradually
took
in
of
tlie
language,
vulf^ar
and
was,
of
times
of
Christ,
the
proper
of
lauG^uajre
ii.
the Jews.
This
remarkable
8-vi. 18,
in a great
chanf]fe,
vii.
which Dan.
are the
first
4^^-vii.
iv.
12, 26,
witnesses,
and sweej)-
ing movement.
it
which
of that Jordan.
Naturally
first
dialect of this
Onlv
in a
there
now
a poor, struggling
remnant of
this once
dominant speech.
28-34
Kautzsch,
Gramatih
dcs
Bihlisch-aramdischcn, Leipsic
1884.
xx.
On
the
ff.
ZBMG,
443
On
Noldeke,
ZBMG,
xxxix.
313
ff.
168
60.
Oxford 1885, pp. 39-74, Article by Neubauer " lects spoken in Palestine in the time of Christ."]
60. In the
of the
On
the Dia-
same proportion
in
easily understood
Only the
scribes kept
alive
among them
still
of the
pronunciation
and
we indebted
The Law,
the
our ability
to read
of
it
;
Law and
the Prophets
made
it
necessary that
satisfy
In order to
who
of
the age.
itself
in
the
leaving untranslated of some of the passages that were offensive to the taste
and
On
account
Aramaic
to another
basis,
new
ideas of
kinds, called
forth
by the changing
That
still
demonstration from
distinguish
this,
that
in
several
of
them we can
orally,
and were
still
in a
GO.
THE ORIGIN
01-
THE TARGUMS.
IGO
fluid state.
Tliis,
an
earlier
attempt
to
maic renderings
tures
this
may have been made by written Aramake the contents of tlie Holy ScripIndeed,
it is
quite evident
tliat
must have been the case with the Hagiographa, which was
is
mention
Thus there
mention of a
makes evident
There
5) of
is also,
seems, mention in
of the
the
Mishna {Jadaim
iv.
Aramaic translations
Old
Testament.
Upon
was forbidden
to
maic translations
proved.
it
not
{jer.
1)
what
that
stood,
is
only
this,
really said,
itself,
not
itself forbidden.
On
it
may
days regarded with disfavour such written interpretaHagiographa, which can be easily
by the Pharisees,
sorts of
of
spreading
all
heretical
may
makes
it
was
essentially in the
170
in a limited
60.
degree.
works
and even
if it
were possible
would
much
earlier
periods,
especially
the
oldest layers
we have
to
shown, as Cornill
all
complete absence of
Compare Zunz,
untranslated
Gottesdienstliche
Vortrdgc,
p.
1832,
ff.
p.
ff.
255
p.
On
;
the
Geiger,
Urschrift,
;
368
Berliner,
ZDMG, xxix. 320. p. 59 M. Jaclaim iv. 5, " n^"i3y, which is written as D1J"in," can Tosejilita Sctbh. xvi. 128 only refer to Aramaic translations. " When the elder Gamaliel sat on one of the temple steps one brought him a book with a Targum of the Book of Job but he ordered a builder working near by to build the book into Compare l. Sabb. 115 the wall which he was then building." Nevertheless, the jcr. Sahh. 16, fol. 15c; Sojjh^rivi, -p. xi.
Massora zum Targum Onkelos,
:
to this story,
subsequently read
The notion of Gratz, 3IG WJ, in a copy of this same book. 1877, p. 87, that this Targum was a Greek translation, is
absolutely
without
foundation.
it
On
the
other hand,
it
is
XvpiaKif) (Bl^Xo^
mentioned in the
is
LXX.
Book
of Job.
It
Old Testament quotations in the New Testament may in some cases have been taken from Compare, e.g. on Matt. ii. 5, Delitzsch, such a Targum. Messianische Weissagungen, 1890, p. 114, Eng. trans, by
also not impossible that the
Prof.
Curtiss,
Edinburgh
p.
1891.
Compare
also
Lagarde,
NGGiV, 1890,
104.
Gl.
THE TARGUMS
;
IN
171
Jonathan ben Uzziel ( 63), who liad translated tlie Prophets into Aramaic, wished also to produce a Tar;iun on but he told how he had heard a Buth-qol, the IIafM0'rap]ia " What thou hast translated is enougli.'" Compare which said Bacher, MGWJ, 1882, p. 120. " li. Ilaggai said, R. Samuel, son of IJ. Isaac, Jer. Meg. iv. 1 visited a synagogue, and found therein a Sopher reading his
h.
Meg.
3rt
is
not
permitted.
]]erliner,
The
by writing."
Compare
Targum
p.
88
If.
On
Targum very
diverse opinions
The Assyriologists (Fred. Delitzsch, The Ifehrew Language, 1883, p. 50; Haupt in Schrader, Die Keilinschriften u. d. A. Tr p. 517) [see Eng. trans, vol. ii. 207] refer it to
prevail.
Wellhausen,
Vorarheiten,
110,
153,
combines
*^^J'
" to conjecture,"
with some sort of IMantic custom of stonethrowing, and adds " Perhaps it also has some connection On the other hand, Lagarde (Armen. with the Aramaic Dm."
:
Stuelien,
847; MiUheilungcn,
ii.
177
f.)
treats |CJ-in
as
an
Indo-European loan word, and the verb as denominative. Halevy, finally, according to Devie's Appendix to the Supplementary
volume
of Littre's
Dictionary,
p.
32, note
8,
would derive
is
it
Tpiy/j.6^.
The Arabic
^U^r/
in favour of
the word.
mdischc Frenidwortcr,
280.
Targums
They continued
to
When
Talmud,
jer. "
this
So
x.xii.
Beraclwth,
4, fol.
9c,
to Lev.
28,
to
As
I in
heaven
am
merciful,
to us as the
172
62.
contains a parallel,
rejected.
It is
also
significant that
Jerome, who lived a long time in Palestine, and was dependent on his Jewish teachers, never
made mention
of a
Jewish
Babylon. The Babylonian Jews produced no independent Targum, but took over from the Palestinian Jews their Aramaic translations of the Law and the Prophets, which naturally must have made their way
It
Targum.
was otherwise
in
to
them
in a written form.
Witness
is
dialect in
the Palestino-
Aramaic, with an
essentially
But
in
Babylon
this
way were
this,
In consequence of
Babylonians
had
Law and
l.
Meg. oa).
On
the
language
of
the
Targums,
compare
p.
Noldeke,
Alttestainentliche Littemtur, p.
257
GGA, 1872,
S28
Lit.
CentralUatt,
1877,
26.)
p.
305.
ZDMG,
62.
xliii.
The authorised
Torah Targum
of
the Babylonians,
Onkelos.
name Targum
h.
The
been
denominating of
it
said to have
composed by Onkelos
of
Eliezer and
ob'^PV
Joshua."
But
this "
Onkelos "
is
only a
variation of
1. 9, fol.
(Aquilas),
and the
7lc,
52), out of
whom
translator.
In keeping with
this is
the
obvv occurs
(compare,
e.g.,
G2.
JllE
173
There
is
10,
fol.
25(1,
p.
57, IG).
now no
Targum
art,
longer any
ground
for
in
Aquila
" in
order thereby to
show
of!"
his hermeneutical
is
an
to
"
Aquila
among
"
the Targumists.
Undoubtedly we have
by the word
to
Targum."
passage
is
From
tliis
it
follows, in the
first
been unknown
to the
Babylonians, which
further confirm
Where
names
it
the Babylonian
Targum
itself, it
"our Targum"
Kidd. G9a), or
says, " as
we
translate."
The question
so
agreed
it,
with
as they
received
or whether
in
remarkably
literal,
originated in a thorough
are so abbreviated
the
Targums,
it is
rests for
the
most part on an
it
exaggeration
yet
has been
formed by a reduction
in
many
places
Targums.
in
The
met with
the Babylonian
later,
Targums
is
the
more
original,
of the case.
This Targum
rather a
174
learned,
62.
many
Babylonian Targum.
tion
is
But
had been
first
no ground.
seems to
amount
of
of the
Baby-
Targum
distinctly
it
work.
One would be
Targum
it
had
In so
a
far,
Targum
point
is
after
Onkelos-Aquila has
certain
meaning, but
by
its
originator.
that this
work
of reduction
in Palestine
itself,
When
this
happened we do
the
itself that
Targum
brought to Babylon
i.e.
when
the
Babylonian
in
question
is
Targum
represents an older,
all
In common w4th
it
shows a careful
anthropomorphisms.
And
lated
is
to
be found
also in
the
Theodotion.
Now
by
G2.
TAK(^.UM.
175
lerliner's
tlie
excellent editio
Sahhioncta
the year
various
1557.
fragments
British
from
Babylonian
the
Museum.
system of pointing
was
were
still
preserved.
is
An
afforded
the Massoras on
Onkelos, which at the same time show with what care this
translation
Compare Luzzato, Ohcb Gcr. 18.30 Geiger, Jiul Zcitsckrift, 1871, pp. 85-104, 1875, p. 290; Nachgelassenc Schriftcn, iv. 104, 106 ff. Bacher, ZDMG, xxviii. 59 ff.; Frankel.
;
Zeitschrift-filr
die
relig.
110
ff.
AVellhausen-Bleek, Einlcitvnfj,
ii.
i.
607;
i.
Berliner,
GeschicJite
i.
Targiim Onkelos,
des jiid.
Volkcs,
100
ff.,
114-128;
trans.
Schlirer,
117, Eng.
Div.
vol.
1:)4.
Further literature in Berliner, Targum Onkelos, pp. 175-200. On the beginnings of the Babylonian school, compare Jost,
GeschicJite
]).
des Judenthums,
:
ii.
134
ff.
Yet
it
is
said there,
132
f.
""We
find
even in Babylon,
in the
time of Akiba,
individual Palestinian teachers of the Law, especially descendants of the family Bcthera!'
On
the
character
ii.
of
the translation,
;
compare Berliner,
in
'Targum
seines
Onkelos,
200-245
ff
;
Volck
Onkelos
;
llerzog's
Real-
Encyclopccdic'^ , xv.
306
^'lUi^er,
pomorphien iind Anthropopathien hei Onkelos und den spdteren Targumim. 1870. The substitution of " Salamites "for ^rp in Gen. xv. 19, and elsewhere, as also in tlie Targum on
the
Prophets,
is
interesting,
since
that
people
was
con-
28
f.)
the text.
iii.
Examples
of
Gen.
man
unique
in
176
of his
63.
own
self
:
know
Compare
Symniachus cBe, 6 'ASa/M yejovev ofxov a<f>' eavrov jivcoa-Keiv KoXov Kal TTovTjpov, and E. Akiba. Also Mcchilta on Exod. xiv. 29 (p. 33a). The prohibition against seething a kid in its mother's milk (Ex. xxiii. 19) is in agreement with M.
Chullin 8 on the prohibition against eating flesh prepared in
milk.
are given
by
Berliner, Massora
zum Targum
First
Bologna 1482 (Pentateuch edition). On the following editions, among which those of Lisbon 1491, the Eabbinical Bible 1517, the Antwerp Polyglot (Regia) 1569, and the Sahhioneta edition 1 557, are deserving of special remark,
edition:
compare Targiim
Berlin
De
Wette-Schrader, Einleitung,
Onkelos, p.
(I.
1884
p.
Noldeke's review in
ally
163-182, 386. Eroni the Babylonian manuscripts in the British Museum, ]\Ierx (ChrestomatJiia Targumica, 1888) has edited after the Codex de Rossi, 12, Lev. ix. 1-11, 47; Num. xx. 12-25, 9; Deut. Gen. c. 1-4, c. 24-25, xxvi. 1-10, xix. 27-29, 8, c. 32-34. Ex. c. 15, c. 20-24 and Deut. xxxii. 16-26. Com6, c. 49. pare the favourable remarks of Landauer, ZA, iii. 263 ff. On manuscripts see Berliner, ii. 245 ff. Merx, ChrestoLagarde, Mittlieilungen,
;
mathia,
p. x. sq.,
xv. sq.
:
For
exposition
Onhelos,
Schefftel,
Biiire
Onkelos,
Sclwlieii
zum
Targum Compare
herausgeg.
von
Perles,
1888
(in
Hebrew).
also
commentar Babylonia,
Berliner, Massorali
zum Targum
Onkelos,
1877; Landauer,
Tsraelitische
Masord zum Onkelos nacli neuen Zetterhode, Amsterdam, Jahrg. viii. xi.
Die
Mittheilungen,
ii.
Qicellen,
Compare Lagarde,
167
ff.
Of the Babylonian Targum on the Prophets practically It also the same may be said as of the Targum on the Law. usually bears a name which is derived from the same passage
63.
of the
it
has just as
little
(;3.
177
transla-
name Onkelos.
is
The Aramaic
tion of the
IVopliets
there
Targum
is
commonly
cited as the
tlie
Targum
of Jonatlian.
But
a.d.
Jonathan, nor
But seeing
Talmud
scarcely possible.
is
The conjecture
another
;
name
is
for
Theodotion
( 53), as
Onkelos was
for
Aquila
but this
nothing more
perhaps,
On
we might
"
the
this
Targum, which
therefore
would belong
With
this also
of time conjectured (
62) as marking
that
commonly assumed,
Targum on the Law prove the dependence of the former upon the latter. But these similarities may just as well have
the
oral lectures
little.
of very
been already
undoubtedly
much
older.
Compare,
But
this is
178
63.
prophetic passages
phrastic
assumes a
than
and
more parathe
character
elsewhere.
Compared with
Palestinian
Targum on
the
way
afforded
by Lagarde's careful
(
Codex Eeuclilin
28), especially
when taken
pieces
in
Some
by
with Babylonian
been published
Merx.
Compare Frankel, Zitm Targum cler Prophetcn, 1872 Geiger, Ursclirift, p. 164; Nachgelasse^u Schriften, iv. 105 Bacher, ZDMG, xxviii. 1 ft:, see also xxix. 157 ff., 319 ff. Berliner, Targum Onkelos, p. 124; Volck in Herzog's Real Encyclopceclu^ xv. 370 CoimW, Ezechiel, p. 110 ff. Especially
,
;
on Micha: Eyssel, Untersuchungcn uher die Textgestalt des Buches On the date of composition Miclia, 1887, pp. 163-169.
also
Frankel,
rendering of
JPT, 1879, p. 756 ff. [On the paraphrastic the Prophet Targum see Driver and Neubauer,
The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah, according to the Jewish Interpreters, Oxford 1877.] Jonathan ben Uzziel composed the Targum &. Meg. 3<x.
on the Prophets according to the traditions (^sp) of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi then trembled the land of Israel in its whole extent (properly 400 parasangs) and a Bath-kol was
;
heard:
Who
discovers
my
mysteries to
men?
!
remained standing upright, and said, It is I that I have done it neither for my own glorification nor for my family's but for Thine lionour, in order to prevent divisions
The expression here is The same from the mouth of the last prophets." remarkable, story about " Onkelos " in the same "ap appears also in the On the other hand, the passage of the Talmud ( 62). Palestinian parallel passage has ^jai? instead of ^s?o "under
in Israel (compare further
"
60).
04.
TIIK
PALESTINIAN
TOiiAlI
TAKGUM.
p.
l?'.)
their sight."
Wi^llhausoii-Rleek (Binlcllnnrj,
tliat in
aiiah^gy with
"
from
iu
the
last
i)ro[)hets,"
we
might
the
conjecture
of
Joshua and Eleasar " (the followers of Moses), which allbrded a suggestion of names, out of which were afterwards made the Kahbis Kliezer and
passage an
original " i'rom
mouth
Joshua.
I>ut
in
the
Jcruschalmi
(^jsi) !)
Kabbis at least are genuine, so that one at furthest might assume an original Babylonian reading: X. N. has interpreted
the
Law from
the
mouth
of
in
Talmud
are
given by Zunz,
Vortrdf/e, p. 63.
On Joseph
ii.
pare Jost,
Gcschichte
dcs
Jiulcnthums,
Aggada
p.
p.
184 101
f.
f.
Bacher,
De
Wette-Schrader, Elnlcitumj,
1872, without vowels (compare Noldeke, Lit. Ceiitralhlatt, 1872, p. 1157, and especially Klostermann, TSK, 1873, pp. 731-767); Nachtrdge axis ciner Erfurter Hcuidschrift : Sgmmicta, i. 139. Variations from the Antwerp Polyglot and the BombergBuxtorf are given by Cornill, ZAJV, 1887, p. 177 ft'.; Ezechiel,^^. 113-120. From Babylonian manuscripts, Merx (Chrcstomathia targumica) has edited Hab. iii. Judges v. 2 Sam. xxii.-xxiii. 7; Isa. Iii. 13, liii. 12; Jonah; Micah and, from the Codex lleuchlin, Hab. iii. (vocalised). On tlie readings of Elias Levita, compare ZDMCl, xliii. 230.
-Lagarde, Fvophctcc chaldalce,
: ;
64.
( 61).
two
only
different forms
of
one
fragments.
:
The
names
for
these
would
have been
for
the complete
and
ii.
but
While by Jcruschalmi
is
is
Targum Jonathan
180
64.
DiJin).
first
printed in Venice in
to this time
been found.
On
two
in the
Bomberg
Bible,
The
relation
above
( 62).
although
yet,
it
still
unconfracted character,
on the other
secured
the
its
present form at a
much
later period.
If,
indeed,
of
translation of
this
Gen. xxi. 21
alludes
to
the wives
Mohammed,
Targum cannot be
The
is
origin of the
work known
as
Targum Fragments
to
to controversy,
and even up
plained.
this
While some
to
fragments of an originally
it
as a collection of glosses
of the
and supplements
This
Law.
much
is
in
any case
to the fore
Both are
of a free
De ditabns Hierosolymitanis Pentateitchi jparaphrasibus, 1859; Gronemann, Die jonathansche Pentateuchiibersetzung in ihrem Verhdltnisse zur Halacha, 1875; Seligsohn, and Traub in MGWJ, 1857, pp. 96 138 ff. Schiirer,
Seligsohn,
ff'.,
;
G5.
181
Div.
ii.
Gcscliichtc
lies
jCuJ.
ii.
118
I'.,
Eiig.
trans,
vol.
i.
G2.
quoted
Pentateuch
Targuin
of
Paul of Burgos (a.d. 1429). Jonathan (ZDMG, xliii. 220). and Azaria de Rossi (who died a.d. 1578) Petrus Galatinns, were acquainted with this " Jonathan," whose translation,
however,
was
rarissima.
See
Lagarde,
Mittheilunfjcn,
for
tlie
ii.
165
f.
Venice
The one manuedition of 1591 has since disappeared. Comscript of the Targum Fragments is in Vatican 440.
pare
Zunz,
Gottesdicnstliclic
p.
Vortrilgc,
pp.
7077
Lagarde,
ii.
Mittheilunfjcn,
165;
Berliner,
Tarfjuni
Oalcclo^,
123.
On
it
is
based the
Another, the
Xureniberg
manuscript,
described by
Lagarde,
NGGW,
to be
the works
of
tlie
They have
a similar
Sometimes
far back,
e.g.
when
a fragment on
Sam.
xvii.
Dn3"iy
by
" Bill
of Dismissal or Divorcement."
Compare the
notices
by R.
Joseph in
Zunz,
xxviii.
1
h.
Sahb. 56rt.
GottcsdicnstlicJie
ff.
;
Vortmge,Y>V-
^^-^^
109.
The
passim;
]^>aer.
compare
thereon suggested by
the
Liber Jeremicc,
6.
sheet of
members
of the
Vienna Congress
of Orientalists,
1886.
182
QQ.
GO.
Palestinians.
They have
also
make
of the
With
the exception
two
01(1
are found,
the
Book
of
Esther, which
was a
Official
significance they
same kind
It
as the oldest
Targums
referred to above in
GO.
only need
further
be said
that
they
are
distinguished
Whereas some,
like the
Targums on The
Targum on
the
Esther, the
Targum on
xci.
Proverbs, and
tlie
Targum on
on Ps.
The
to be a free rendering of a
The date
of the composition
in a vague, general
it is
way.
As
the
presently stands
later than
it
its
much
later
60.
On
naturally
much
older,
e.g.
which
sometimes can
TarfTum
ii.
when
Soph'rim, 13. 6,
E. Joseph ( 63).
easily accessible
The text
of these
by Lagarde's reprint
binical Bible of
text of the
( 24).
first
Venetian Eab-
1517-1518
Instructive monographs
much
further.
G7.
183
older
specially to be
Coni])are Mer.x.
ziir Berlin,
1882,
the
157.
J. Iliess
criticism
Megilloth
Codex.
Compare the same on Esther in MGWJ, 1881, p. 473 ff. The dream of Mordecai has been edited by Merx in his Ch resto hi ath ia Ta rg n m ica. About the Targums on Proverbs see Noldeke in Merx, Arcliiv filr wiss. Erforscliung d. A. T. ii. 246-249 Geiger, On Job, Bacher in MGWJ, Nachgdassene, Schriftcn, iv. 112 f. On the Psalms, Bacher, MGWJ, 1872. 1871, p. 208 ff. p. 408 ff., and Biethgen in JPT, 1882, pp. 447-455 ff.
;
On
p.
Targum ii. on Esther, Piess in MGWJ, 1S7G, Munk, Targum Seheiii z. Bitch Esther, 1876; p. BertheauP. Cassel, Das Buch Esther, i. 1878, p. 239 ff. Pyssel, Esra, Nechemia und Ester, 1887, p. 3GG. On the Jewish Targum on Chronicles, which has been
72
ff.
IGl
ff.
71.
G7.
as
The Samaritans
be
also possess
miglit
expected, embraces
somewhat more
witli
literal
them
anthropomorphisms.
notliing.
In regard to
origin
and authority
we know
The most
serious difficulties
met
witli
of
tlierefore, in
some
way, related
to
Where
184
ments
is
67.
not certain
Samaritans even in
nothing to render
it
they
a translation of their
as
Targum
into Greek.
we
shows
a
in
in
another
direction,
namely, with
But
this cor-
respondence
later revision
translation.
rests, as
Kohn and
in
this
way
are
He braising
z.
group.
Briill,
;
Pentateiicli,
1873 1875
Varianten
samaritanischen
Targum, 1876; VQiQvii\'?a\n, Pcntateuchus Sa7naritanus, Berlin, i.-ii. 1872, 1882, iii.-iv. (by Vollers), 1883, 1885; Heidenheim, Bibliotlieca Samaritana, i. 1884 (Genesis), with which should be compared the severe criticism in ZDMG, xxxix. 165 ff. Gen. i.-iv., Exod. xx. 717 in Petermann's Brevis lingiice Samaritana^ Grammatica, 1873. The Oxford Fragments (Lev. XXV., XX vi. Num. xxxvi. 9) are edited by ISTutt, 1874. Moore, "On a Fragment of the Samaritan Pentateuch Proceedin the Library of Andover Theological Seminary." A list ings of the American One7itcd Society, 1882, xxxv.
;
of manuscripts is given
ii.
92.
1817; 1868 Zur Sprache, Lit. unci Dogmatik der Samaritaner, 1876; Noldeke, GGA, 1865, St. 53; Jild. Zeitschrift, 1868, p. 213; ZDMG, xxx. 343 ff. Geiger, Nachgelassene Schriften, iv. 121 ff. Kautzsch in Herzog's Real- Ency clop mdie^, xiii. 350. On the Samareitikon Field, Hcxapla, p. Ixxxiii. 329 f
rersionis Pentateuclii Samaritance indole,
; ; ;
Winer, Pe
i.
Gratz,
MGWJ,
ii.
1886,
iii.
p.
60
ff.
On
the Samaritan-Greek
ii.
literature:
trans. Div.
Schurer,
vol.
750, Eng.
211, 225.
G8.
185
:
Of Abu
Gcncseos
sec.
Sa'id's
translation
vers,
Liher
Arab. Pent.
Exodus and Leviticus, 1854. Compare Kuhii, Zur Sprachc, Lit. nnd Dorjm. d. Samarifancr, pp. 134-140.
1851
Kautzsch
in Herzog's Real-Encyclopccdic-,
xiii.
350.
5.
Tlic
68. The
referred to,
name by which
"JA
is
usually
c^
with the
in
to
be met with
first
manu-
the
simple,
or
" usual,"
scarcely correct.
Much more
translation,
probable
Syro-Hexaplar
Syrians ( 48).
at first
The very
fact
Hebrew
labour,
it
text
shows that
is
owed
its
existence
to
Jewish
in
which
sympathy shown
was the
From
it
this,
however,
it
it
result of
Jewish contrivance.
its
had
Jewish character
Jews had
56),
were
Jewish Christians.
The
Jews
residing in the
border
Eoman and
come
to feel
ment
into their
own
felt
And
certainly
it is
186
68.
such
received
among
on the other
mention
side,
make
frequent
LXX. and
Targums.
The Peshito
lation.
has,
Therefore probability
it
is
idea that
owed
and
its
some
of in
it,
for the
made by
Jewish Christians.
of the translation
tian passages
we might
it
which
contains,
we
were sure that they had come immediately from the hand of
the translator, which, upon the whole,
is
be certainly proved.
Compare
Geiger,
tamentliclu
Nacligelassene Literatur,
iv.
96
262;
Nestle,
in
Herzog's
Beat-
Encydopccdic'^, xv.
192
On
126
f
Schonfelder,
ii.
1865;
Sebok,
Die
syrische
Uchersctzung
der
12
f.
Jdeinen
[On the Propheien, 1887, p. 7; 154 -p. Syriac Textus Receptus, see Studia Bihlica, first series, 1885, p. 151 ff, in article "An Account of a Syriac MS. of the 5th Century," by G. H. Gwilliam.] Examples of a decidedly Christian colouring Jer. xxxi. 31 (according to Hebrews viii. 8 as the contrary, Jer. xi. 3); Hosea xiii. 14; Ps. xix. 5, ex. 3.
Cornill, Pzechiel,
:
On
the form
|A
A.
>
m.c^ see
Grammatik,
26
B.
On
its
meaning
Field, Hexapla,
i.
69.
18V
tlie
p.
ix.
Noldeke,
ZDMG,
;
xxxii.
589.
In siipjmrt of
not
192, 199,
who
is
" simple."
69. If
we
we
shall
of the Christian
Church
in that region
150
as the
terminus a quo of
its origin.
is
;
The
first
we have
hundred years
15)
Holy Scriptures
be a necessity.
to
-the
We
Melito
r)
But what
is
to
be underis still
very uncertain.
at
least
If,
as
made
probable,
Xvpo<;
was a translation
shall
of
the
have to
all to
Moreover, the
passage
quoted
all
l)y
^lelito
(Gen.
xxii.
agree with
of
we know only
one thing,
which
it
is
also confirmed
of several translators.
is
was
originally wanting
new
188
70.
of the translation
the
Book
question
the
canon
15).
little
At
reason,
independent
translation
through admiration
the
over-
The
was several times translated into chief leader in this movement was
Theodore
esteemed
d(f)avfj)
of Mopsuestia,
who
an
more
highly
unknown
translator
when
by the Jacobites
into a
as well as
by the Nestorians,
it
until in
modern
new
life.
On
deke,
GGA, 1880,
i.
p.
873
Zahn, Geschichte
d.
Neutestaraentl.
Kanons,
369.
i.
On
p. Ixxvii. sqq.
He
r]v
;
calls
attention
the
<^ap
Kara rov ^vpou Karevo^ov fxevo<; where evidently iTnTvy^^dvwv would suit as well as KarevoSovfievoq to represent the Syriac ^>.kV.^Ld, were it only by means of a Greek translation possible to mark this distinction.
avrjp eTTLTvy^^^dvcov
On
e.g.,
found in
241, 252
f.,
263.
some books, a
the
LXX.,
be
so that a
dependence in this
direction
must
is
necessarily
assumed.
But how
far
agreement
the LXX., or
70.
189
and
the
will probably
The
similarity with
all,
LXX.
is
even
must
is
in
at a
There
On
of
15.
On
those
Ephrrem
Spohn, Dc rationc
ohvii,
iextiis hiblici
in Ephrccmi Sijri
commcntarii
Further, as to how the text-words 178G. from Jacob of Edessa must be distinguished from the quotations of EphrcTm, compare Noldeke, ZDMG, xxxii. 589.
p.
168
f.,
and note by
F.
H.
Wood
in
same
article, p.
173.]
idea of a
revision of the older translation,
Against
text,
the
made on
the
days
after
Aphraates
and
Ephnem, Xoldeke
remarks (ZBMLr, xxxii. 589): "First of all, the text-words in Ephriem have no special relation to the quotations from memory by Aphraates in part very imperfectly remembered,
so that
we could
set
Further a revision of the Syrian Bible on the basis of the Hebrew after the time of Ephrrem is quite
against the later text.
inconceivable.
Knowledge
of the Hebrew^
was
among
Even Jacob
of Edessa,
and men of
ardour like Jerome, had only learned a few scraps And how is it to be explained that the Syrians, of Hebrew.
split
up by
all
civil
and
confessional divisions,
Roman and
Nestorians,
its
Persian subjects.
Catholics,
should yet
to
had owed
ix.
ori^nn
SO late a revision
liahlfs
(ZAIV,
I7l)
has,
on the
other hand, called attention to a late revision of the translation of the Psalms in some manuscripts undertaken upon
the basis of the
commentarv
of Barhebra?us.
190
71.
upon the LXX., comwhere the assertion of pare Eahlfs in ZAW, ix. 161 ff., Gottheil that the Bible manuscript used by Barhebrasus had been modified in accordance with the Syrian Hexapla (48) Sebok, Die Si/rische Uehersetziing der 12 kleinen is refuted. and Cornill, Ezcchiel, p. 153 f. It is worthy Prophetc7i, p. 7
On
of
(
V.
mention
71)
is
of
the
Book
of
Chronicles
LXX. {JPT,
758).
Some Psalm
{Codex Amhrosianus, and Wright, Catcdogue of Syriac Manu169, 179) are scripts in British Museum, i. 1870, Nos.
remarkable, according to which the Psalms are said to have been translated " from Palestinian into Hebrew, and from
finall}"
into Syriac."
The
light
which
is,
seems
to
cast
upon the
origin of the
LXX.
however,
according
p.
to
f.).
B?ethgen's
researches, a
false
light
In particular, Bsethgen has proved 49 can have formed no link midway between the LXX. and the Peshito. Very noticeable is the freedom with which the original superscriptions of the Psalms are left out from the Syrian
{JPT, 1882,
422
translation,
done through the influence of Theodore The superscriptions which we find in the of Mopsuestia. manuscripts and editions are characterised by many variations, and are taken from the commentaries of the Church fathers,
the Syrians, was
especially
from
those
ff
.
of
;
Theodore.
Compare
Sijr.
Btethgen,
ZAW,
Brit.
Wright, Catcdogue of
MSS. in
71.
takes no
mean
rank.
If
it
the
LXX.
e.g.,
in its
best parts,
may
Almost
it
everywhere
71.
CHARACTER OF THE
PESIIITO.
191
or
ha})])y
its
vahie
is
lessened
by con-
Hebrew and
languages.
critics
for
inexperienced
verbal
this,
forms are
is
sometimes interchanged.
circumstance,
there
another
already
adverted
LXX.
text,
we can seldom
whether the original text on wliich the Syriac was based had
actually so read.
is
otherwise thoroughly
literalness
Targums by
its
and
close
is
attachment to the
original,
In this
Peshito
which
originally
did
not
belong
all
to
the
the peculiarities of
such a work,
made use
of.
it
Fninkel,
who
has examined
it
carefully, conjectures
that
Dc
syrlaca
quastioncs
On
quam
Hirzel,
Dc
On
the
Minor Prophets:
Credner,
Dc
quam
Fcschito
vocant indole
-1827
Uchcrsctzuvrf
und
dcm massont.
if.
1887.
Specially on
Micah
Pyssel,
Untersuchungcn
die
:
Tc.vtfjcstalt
169
On
the
Psalms
192
Pescliito
72,
CRITICIS.M OF
1882,
p.
422
ff.
i.,
On Job:
Stenij,
De Syriaca
Johi
interpretcUionc,
Helsingfors 1887.
On
in
Ecclesiastes
and
Syr.
Euth
Janichs,
Animadversiones
lihrorum
criticcc
versionem
Peschitthonianam
Koheleth
d
508
Butli,
ff.
1871.
ff.
On
also,
1879,
p.
Compare
indeed
still
in its infancy,
it is
The two
American missionaries
of the
The
latter,
after
London
then,
Polyglot,
and
according to
One
of the
is
By comparing the West Syrian with the East Syrian group we shall be able to conclude that there had been a common Syriac text in the times before the
division of the Syrian
Church in
A.D.
to
Museum
of
A
text
is
which bears
the
name
the
"
Karkaphensian,"
and
Chaboras in Mesopotamia.
Further
also,
may
be used
72.
103
into
The Apocrypha,
first
received
at a Liter
perioil
the
The unvocalised
Bickell,
ff
Nestle,
The Psalms, vocalised, 1825. Compare on other Conspectus rei Syrorum literaricc, 1871, Brcvis lingucc Syriaccc f/rammatica, 1881,
text,
p.
treatise of
Kahlfs in
ZAIF, 1889,
Lomhardo
di
pp.
lGl-210.
see
e
On
xi.
Ceriani,
Memoire
ser.
del
iii.
F.
vol.
Instituto
Letteratura,
On
Wright, Catalogue of S)/): MSS. in Brit. Mus. i. 3 f. the Codex Usshcr, a copy, as it seems, of an old ^laronite
;
manuscript-
made
Vet.
in the years
see Rahlfs in
ZAW,
ff)
syra Pescitto
(Fzechiel, p.
162G-1628, now in Oxford, Ceriani, Translatio 1889, p. 195 ff. Testamenli, Milan 187G-1883. Cornill
would deny
all
140
which judgment, however, Rahlfs (p. 181 ff.) vigorously [Gwilliam, " Account of a Syriac Biblical ]\IS. of contests.
the
pp.
Fifth
Century,"
in
Studia
see
Biblica,
first
series
1885,
151-174.]
Wiseman, Hurw Syrinca\ 119 ff Martin, Tradition Karkaphicnne, Paris 1870; p. G. Hotfmann, ZAJF, 1881, p. 159 f., ZDMG, xxxii. 745 Weingarten, Die syrische Massora nach Bar Ifebrauts. Der Pentateuch, 1887. [Scrivener, P/am Int7vductio7i, j). 333 f Prof. W. Wright of Cambridge in Eacyclopccdia Brittanica, 1887, vol. xxii. 82G.]
the
On
Syrian Massora,
On the derivative versions (in the Arabic language), compare De Wette-Schrader, Einleitung, 133. In the Polyglots
are: Judges, lluth, Samuel, 1 Kings
i.-xi,,
2 Kings
xii.
17-
194
73.
C.
itself.
73.
foregoing
work
as brought to a close,
must
itself
investigate whether
in the text
Indeed,
itself,
As an example
text,
of the sort of
we may mention
out
of account,
would have a
what
xxv.
xxxvi. xxxix.
Kings
xviii.
30 xx.
xxii.
;
19;
ii.
Jer.
=2
;
Kings
also the
Ps. xviii.
=2
Sam.
Ezra
= Neh.
vii.
Book
of Chronicles in
afford
to
of this
Hebrew
means
By Old Testament we
etc.
are led finally to the last criteria of all textual criticism, the
universally
applicable
laws
of
thought
and
language,
all
the
of
manner
all in
writings like
must be regarded
Lib.
i.
as indispensable.
;
Compare Cappellus,
Einleitung^,
i.
Critica sacra
cap. 3
Eichhorn,
139.
II.
RESULTS OF TEXTUAL
A.
CPiLTICISM.
The
Writing Materials.
little
74. AVe
know very
the
Old
Testament
autographs.
The word
""sp
signifies
originally
indicates
nothing
roll
is
that
4.
it
shown by
times
Isa.
xxxiv.
of the
when
substance, but in
secondary meaning
xlix.
;
is
used of any
true of the
sriD
is
kind of marking
(Isa.
16).
The same
is
synonymous term
uncertain.
at least, tablets of
D"in
That in even
times,
on particular occasions
is
shown by
Perliaps
1,
xxx.
8; Ilab.
ii.
2.
known
iv. 1, !^f?.?).
was desired
to
make
was
used.
But ordinarily
(2
Kings
Since Herodotus
"
Barbarians
" as
making
196
constantly
vi.
74.
WKITING MATERIALS.
this sort
employed material of
(compare
Ezra
f.),
the
Jews likewise
is
This supposition
confirmed by
Numb.
hand,
v.
23, according to
xxxvi. 23 does not favour the use of this material, since the
burning of a leather
roll
(New Hebrew,
in
")^^)
grew
Lake.
some places
at the
Merom
On
(i'''=J,
of a dark fluid
compare ^pp, a
an
inkstand, Ezek.
(Jer.
ix. 2),
xxxvi.
Ps.
xlv. 2).
was a
v.
n^^P (compare
xl.
Jer.
xxxvi.
f.
Zech.
1; Ps.
is
8; and
preserved in an
Jer.
earthen vessel).
signify the several
The
the
nin^'n
mentioned
in
xxxvi.
23
columns
of the roll.
In
later
times
Epistle
of
Aristeas
and Josephus
names
used
several kinds of
more
Eor the copies of the Law only skins of clean beasts were
(jer.
Meg.
i.
fol.
^Id).
The
roll
is
(compare Luke
iv.
form
for
synagogues.
When
this
among
the Jews
we do not know.
Codex form made
With
it
regard to the
inasmuch
as the
possible to have
74.
WKITIXr. MATEUIALS.
197
Llie
to
the
fact
tlmt
canonical
sucli a
way
h.
Baba
hathra,
fol.
136 referred
above at
writings
into
one
manuscript
is
discussed,
and
various
first
authorities from
Codex form.
rolls
and
the correct copying of the text precise rules are prescribed in Sephcr Thora and Masschet Sopli^rim
( 32).
themselves.
leather,
synagogue
scripts,
'rolls
of
parchment or
in
or private
manuBaby-
most frequently
paper.
the
Codex form,
of parchment,
leather, or cotton
The
written on parchment,
page.
L. Low, Wahner, Antiquitatcs Ehra:ornm, sect. cap. 45 Graphische Bcquisiten und Erzeugnissc hci den Judcn, Leipsic 1870, 1871; Schlottmann in liiehm's HamlwOrtcrhuch, pp. 1416-1431; Strack, ZL2\ 1875, pp. 598-601; Herzog's Heal Encyclopxrxlic^ xiii. 689 ff. With reference to similar customs among the Christians, see especially Zahn, Gcschichte des Kanons d. N. T. i. 61 f The Academy, xxxi. 1887,
;
f.
p.
415&.
The hypothesis that the Israelites had used papyrus becomes all the more probable when we remember that the Greeks became acquainted with it through tlieir intercourse with the Phcenicians. This is also shown by the very name /3t^\o9, which is connected with the city of Byblus {Sitzinujsherichte der Wierier Academie, 2^hiloL-hist. Class. 1888, cxvi. Only at a later date was the name ^l^Xo^ exclianged p. 636).
for
the
name
Trdirvpo^.
On
the
signification
of
TruTrupo^
198
75.
compare Lagarde, Mittheihingen, ii. 260 f. Compare generally with regard to papyrus and paper Oestcrr. Monatsblatt fiir d. On the etymology Orient. 1885, p. 162 ff., 1886, p. 159 ff. of Bicjidepa compare Lagarde, Ges. Ahhandl. p. 216, where also Bock, Fergais considered as belonging to the same root.
:
i'''=i
ment, eine
culturgesch.
Stitdie
Oestcrr.
Buchlidndler
Corre-
3-6 (not accessible to me). On the Codex form, compare Birt, Das antike Buchwesen, Birt is wrong in supposing that pp. 62, 93, 100, 107, 113. in the word rev^o^, in the Epistle of Aristeas (Merx, Arcliiv. i. p. 67), he finds a proof of the employment of the Codex form; for that T6i)%09 is used in that passage of a roll is shown by Compare Zahn, an earlier passage in the Epistle (p. 44).
Geschichte des Kayions d.
iV.
T. p. 66.
According to the
referred to
last-
named
Law
was made
of
the skins of
and joined together in a Birt is also wrong when he seeks the miraculous way. reason for the spread of the Codex form in the fact that Compare Marquardt, skins were cheaper than papyrus.
animals
prepared
Privatalterthumcr
d.
Ronier,
ii.
785
Theolog. Literatur-zeitung
Gescliichte, p.
1883,
p.
459
Geschichte des
29
Zahn,
28.
2.
Letters.
75.
of the
Were
it
we have
in
found as the
we would
now known
to us
some
seals
and weights
70.
TJO
of
15ar
found in Xineveli,
coins of the
Maccabees and
is
period of the
writincr
Hebrew
and
3n3, has
first
probably means
" inscription
The new
and
in the
called
by the
later
Jews V^y^
2n3,
"
square-shaped
Talmud,
is
^"]1C'&5
The
latter designation
historically
after the
that
Assyria,
even
common name
throughout an
laniTuajiije.
was just
in
Compare Buxtorf
iv.
antiquis Ebrccorum
terihus,
Dobrowsky, De antiquis Hchra:oru'ni characPrague 1783 Kopp, Bildcr und Schriftcn dcr Vorzcit,
;
289 ff. De Vogu(5, Oust, P. M6langcs d'archt^olor/ic orientale, Paris 1868 Linguistic and Oriental Essays, London 1880, xii. xiii.;
1821,
ii.;
Hupfeld,
TSK, 1830,
p.
Driver, Notes
on
the
Hebrew Text of
[Studia Biblica ct 1890, i xxix. Oxford 1891, Article ii. by Neubauer, " The Introduction of the Square Characters in Biblical MSS., and an Account of the
Earliest
MSS.
of
the
Bible
(with
three
Facsimiles),
pp.
1-36.]
200
75.
The Phoenician
was made use of by the Phoenicians and other Canaanites. The most important memorial of it is the Moabite Stone of Mesha of the ninth century before Christ (Smend and Socin, Die Inschrift des Konigs Mesa von Modb. 1886). The Aramaic style of writing, of which the oldest representatives are some seals and weights found in Assyria and Babylon, and the old Aramaic Taimain style of writing (BericJite der Berliner Acadeniie, 1884, p. 815) are found widely spread among the Palmyrenes and Nabateans, and, during the Persian age, also in Egypt. From this Aramaic writing are derived the Syriac, Cufic, and Arabic alphabets, as well as the Pehlewi alphabet, and also the Avesta writing (Lagarde, Mittheihinfjen, ii. 38 ff.). On the Siloah inscription: ZDMG, xxxvi. p. 725 ff.; ZDPV, iii. 54 f., iv. 102 ff., 250 ff., 260 ff., v. 250 ff. Quarterly Statement of Palestine Exploration Fund, 1881, p. 141 ff.; Acad4mie des inscr. et des belles lettres, 1882, p. 199 ff. On
;
see
also
p.
Quarterly Statement
of
Palestine
35
ff.
On
with
Hebrew writing: Levy, Siegel und Gemmen, 1869; Ganneau in Journal asiatique, 1883, i. 123 ff., ii. 304
ff*
On
the
coins
De
Saulcy,
Reeherches sur
Ice
nu^nismatique
Judaique,
23.
1854; Madden,
^^s^or?/ of Jewish
Volkes,
i.
Coinage,
1864;
i.
jild.
On
the
Jewish names
ii.
for
the
;
Grapthische Ecquisiten,
53
ff.
of
Epiphanius
also
ii.
deession,
iv.
is
which
215).
inter"^^b.
there
referred
to
to,
{Mittlieilungen,
is
257)
mean
"i^^p
Sank. 21b)
there
the city n^n^. Judges xxi. 19 (now El- Zeben), south of Xablus,
where
probably
was
Samaritan
school.
Halevy,
7G.
201
435, conjectures in place of ns^r:, the form ns^ir^ i.e. " from Neapolis " or Shechem. On the name Assyria in later times, compare Lam. v. 6
Mdangcs
dc Crit.
1883,
p.
Ezra
vi.
22; Herodotus,
i.
lOG,
192,
;
iii.
92;
Straho,
xvi.
1.1; Josephiis, Antiquities^, xiii. 6. 7 p. 289 ff.; ZAW, ii. 292 fl., iv. 208.
76.
When
the
Talmud
ascribes
is
the
introduction of the
first
new
in the to
instance an
example
Jewish inclination
assotiiate
lies
the
change
in the tradi-
who walked
On
the
other
and
nation-al
act,
at
that
was not
the
people (Matt.
We
the year
built
170 before
Christ,
which
is
by Hyrcanus
is,
as
it
it
in
which
both
are
combined,
which perhaps
in the Bible
But
manualready
of
new
style of
writing had
long been in
common
use.
development
in detail.
That the
alphabet,
though indeed
the
in
a peculiar
form,
is
Torah
the
rolls
were
still
being
when
Law was
adopted by the
Samaritans
( 11).
On
much
discussed
by the Alexandrine
202
76.
alternative,
It is
at
first,
as
it
read
Ullil by
the
new
Hebrew writing had a quite different appearance. Probably the fact was this, that the new writing had even by that time been long in use in the
in the old
name
That the
style of writing
On
of
11,
fol.
7l&c;
terii
ii.
:
3e rt
lerpaypd^fxafiev
rfj
rov
avTOL<;
Kal \iyeraL
^ABcovat irpoarj'yopLa,
jpa/Jb/jLara),
ov'yl
irapa Be
he
T0i9 aKpL^e<TTkpoL<^
twv
avTL<ypd(f)CJV
e^paLOL<^ '^apaKTrjpaL
ov
tol<;
vvv,
rov "EaSpav
irapa
tov<;
iv
rfj
al'^fiaXcoaia erepov^i
yapaKTiipa^;
irporepov^
:
{nomcn dci) est tetragrammaton, quod ineffabile putaverunt, quod his Uteris scribitur Jod, E, Vau, E. Quod quidam non intelligentes propter elementorum similitudinem, quam in Grsecis libris
repererint.
" Viginti
"
Nonum
Pi Pi
et
legere
esse
consueverunt."
litteras
Prolog,
galeatus
duas
est,
apud
quoque
et
ex parte confinis
nam
et ipsi viginti
eodem sono sed diversis characteribus. Samaritani etiam Pentateuchum Mosi totidem Uteris scriptitant, figuris tantum
70.
20.*]
et
apicibus
legisque
teinpli
scribam doctorem post capta Hierosolyma et iiistaurationem sub Zorobabel alias literas reperisse quibus nunc
est
Certunique
Kzram
utiniur,
cum ad
in
illud
et
Et nomen Domini
tetra-
grammaton
quibusdam groBcis voluminibus usque hodie antiquis expressum literis invenimus." The proper origin of the transcription is even yet a matter of
controversy.
256
f.)
cum
habit-
[psn
Q]}],
immutavit pristinam formam relinquens deessenon, propter quod ea forma a Samaritanis pra30ccupata jam fuerat." But it is less probable that the Samaritans should have transcribed the Law adopted by the Jews in the earlier characters, than that they should have ignored the transcription introduced after their adoption of the Law. If it be therefore improbable that Ezra should have already introduced this change, this makes it all the more likely that the change originated in the school of Scripture expositors imported from Babylon, of whom Ezra was the type (Ezra viii. 16; Neh. viii. 7, 9), and that the members of tliis school were led to take this step for polemical reasons. j\Iuch more hazardous
is
the conjecture
made by G. Hoffmann
upon
Isa.
viii.
in
ZAW,
the
i.
377,
after
Scheppig,
based
1,
that
Aramaic
On
ally
De Vogue, Temple
dc Jerusalem,
pi.
640, which seems still unknown to the authors of the Survey of Eastern Palestine, 1889, pp. 65-87, where the ruins of Arak-el-Emir are fully described. The Jewish inscriptions are now collected in
Noldeke's
xix.
ZBMG,
of different
styles of writing
by Euting).
[See
by Professor Brlinnow,
204
76.
Ecclesiastica,
3rd
series,
1891.]
ques
et
Compare
also
les
grecques sur
Palmyrene synagogue inscription in the Berichte der Berliner Academie, 1884, p. 933 ff. On the forgeries of Firkowitzsch, compare what is said above in 27.
On
licJies
the
importance of the
Septuagint
for
the
question
ZchrhucJi d.
liehr.
Sprache,
ratione
ff
;
.
i.
37
f.;
Bickell,
alex.
Ixiii.
;
ZDMG,
inter;
xviii.
379
p.
De
;
indole ac
p.
versio7iis
in
ff.
Ijretando
lihri
Joli,
Merx, Hioh.
p.
JPT,
1883,
70
167
and especially
Vollers,
ZAW,
1883,
in the of
p.
229
ff.
On nini
the
remarks
Origen
quoted
on
;
p.
202
Euagrius
Lagarde, Onomasticon
205
f,
and
especially
ZDMG,
xxxii.
Noteworthy is the remark of Origen that the in the Greek Bibles (for so the passage is certainly to be understood, see ZDMG, xxxii. 467) was written in "Old Hebrew" characters. Wellhausen-Bleek {Einleitiing, p. 629) is certainly wrong in seeking to vindicate this statement by a reference to the inscription of Hyrcanus (" it is therefore certain that the LXX. had found Jahve, not in the characters III III, for the yod has still an entirely different form on the inscription of Arak-el-Emir ") for the writing in profane literature and that of the Bible manuscripts of the pre-exilian age cannot be assumed without more ado to be parallel. If it be further considered that Origen says nothing of a contrariety between the Septuagint manuscripts in the use of the Old Hebrew and New Hebrew, nin% although the latter must still have been the presupposition of nini, and that Jerome, who expressly speaks of the simply repeats what Origen had said, it is probable that remark of Origen rests on a misunderstanding, which perhaps the arose from this, that the mn'' had been written after a somewhat old-fashioned pattern. On the other hand, its appearance in Old Hebrew is shown on the Mesha tablet, line 18.
ff.
466
of
name
God
mm,
77.
205
was adopted by the Hebrew-speaking Jews, see jcr. Nedarim, Ibl. 42c. Tlie conjecture of (iriitz, MGWJ, 1886, pp. GO-73, tliat the form nini was to be met witli in a Septuagint manuscript interIt is interestinc; also to this Pipi
is
toI<^
Besides,
mill
the
is
also
77.
Among
has continued in
the
tliis
present
is
day.
The
variations,
of
which
occasionally
mention
trifling, as e.g.
Meg.
i.
9),
which, moreover,
Flini
tion
Tarn
"
writing on nno
"
of the
German and
L*6>11
Welsh
"
writing
27).
Sometimes
styles of writing,
e.g.,
cursive hand.
in
The
Talmud
jer. Meg.
h.
Sahb.
Meg. 2h, 3
11,
7).
fol.
p. v.), as also
by
Jerome
From a portion of the numerous instances in which the LXX. divides the words otherwise than is done 12 d^d5^*j cn LXX. in the Massoretic Text e.g. B. Nah. W^h^n; Zech. xi. 11 LXX. "^jy:^ Ps. xvi. 3, LXX. nv-iS3 nnsn^ Zeph. iii. 19, LXX. ^^vnb inx Jer. xxiii. 33, LXX. we might conclude that these letters were foreign Dnj< NC'on, to the Hebrew texts used by the Alexandrine translators.
(
i.
:
""
Yet
this
conclusion, although
probable,
is
not
absolutely
may have
originated in
206
77.
The
last-
besides that
Makkef
is
a sign that
was
The
since their
number
was
With
particular
were
preserved in the
manuscripts, and
so-called
majusculce
{e.g.
iii.
Deut.
13).
13, xxxii. 6
in the
Ixxxiv.
Euth
Even
Talmud some
6.
of these
are referred to
{b.
Kidd. 666:
Num.
ix.
xxv. 12;
9),
Kidd. 30a:
Lev.
xi.
42;
Meg.
XV.
16&:
Esther
SopliS-'iin ix. p.
we
Talmud {Kidd.
1315),
to
Ps. Ixxx.
also
p
14
1036:
Job
xviii.
xxxviii.
which
may
is
be
added Judg.
30
97).
An
irregular final
2.
met
3
Num.
vii.
The
so-called
to in 35.
Compare
further, 99.
The ornamental little strokes (" crowns " DnriD, pJD, piVT) which are to be met with in manuscripts over particular
letters, are
mentioned even by
h.
105.
they were in an
The Talmudical remarks on the form of the letters are collected in Berliner, Beitrdge zur hcbr. Gramm. in Talmud,
p.
15
fP.
On
; ;
78.
ORIGIN OF THE
VOWEL
.SIGXS.
207
TSK, 1830, p. 278 Levy, Gcschichte dcr jiul }funzen, 18G2, Zunz, Zur Gcschichte und Litcratur, 1845, p. 20 G f p. 145 Eiclihorn, Uinlcitunf/, iii. 377 Daer, Liher Jcsaicc, vii. Low, Graph ische licqicisiten, ii. 72 ff. Eating, ZDMG, xlii. 313 ff.
; ;
.
and above
27-28.
On
.1.
TSK, 1830,
25
ff.
p.
25G
ff.
Mailer, Mcissekct
SophWim, 40
Wellhausen-Bleek, Ein-
leitung, p.
637
Berliner, Beitrdgc, p.
of
by Euting in Chwolson's Corpus inscript. hehr. [or the Table by Professor Brlinnow in Studia Biblica, 3rd Series, 1891, frontispiece]. On compare Jerome on Hab. iii. 4 Amos iv. 1 3, viii. 1 2. On Uaghesh, Jerome on Oen. xxxvi. 24 {iamim^^maria). The litcrcc majuscidcc and minusculcc are given by Frenswritten characters
l*^
;
dorff,
82-84 (compare No. IGl). Furtlier, 91-93 Baer and Strack, Dikduke,
;
47
f.
On
Sepher
TSK, 1830,
Journal
p.
276
Barges,
ix.
Paris
1866
p.
asiatiquc,
1867,
242
ii.
ff.
ZLT, 1875,
Fcequisitc7i,
68.
Vocalisation
3.
and Accentuation.
78.
The
composed
vowels,
as
exclusively
of
consonants,
of
while
the
the
left
other
oldest
branches
the
Semitic
visible
languages,
indication.
were
wholly
signs
without
any
written
The vowel
( 74), wliile in
who added
"^^iD.
was another
The
Mar
Xatronai
Gaon
in
Sura 859-869, says expressly, that the pointing was not given
208
78.
ORIGIN OF THE
VOWEL
Sinai,
SIGNS.
Law on
but had
its origin
in
And
in the following
century,
Menahem ben
in similar
in the
Sarug
terms.
and Judah
Chajjug
express
themselves
Eaimund Martin
correct
maintained
the
historically
view,
which
31).
From
in
these
men
the Eeformers
Munster,
Fagius,
Cappellus,
But, meanwhile,
among
the
Jews
among
among
In
Christians, according to
many
to
do battle
made
possible a distinction
between the
of it fixed
by
the
pointing.
As
the
Flacius, Junius,
Gomarus,
J.
Gerhard,
Owing to the dogmatic and especially the two Buxtorfs. significance which the question had come to assume, a concussion
Arcanum pundationis
1648
origine,
name, published in
Not
till
did the
reply
pundorum d
antiquitate
et
accentuum
in
lihris
V.
T.
hebraicis
audoritate, in
which he sought
an
in
to vindicate
against Cappellus
his
father.
This
J. J.
theory
found
also
advocate
in
Denmark
a
treatise
in
Bircherodius,
who
1687 published
Pundorum
78.
ORIGIN OF THE
ct
VOWEL
SIGNS.
209
arguments
Ehvaicorum authenticce
hiUicce vindicicc.
The
some
vain.
of
flaws,
proved so con-
that
all
opposition
was
Equally unavailing
the Swiss in their
of
writings
of
the
authority
the
traditional
pronunciation.
acknowledged by
all,
when new
tlie
discoveries
confirmed
in
time began to
Compare Schnedermann, Die Controverse clcs L. Cappellus mit den Baxlorfern, 1879 Hersmann, Zur Geschichte des
;
Streites iiber
die EntstelLung
d.
hchr.
Punctation.
to me).
Progr.
d.
Eealgymn.
Euhrort.
1885 (unknown
The saying of Mar-Natronai's referred to is quoted by Luzzatto, Kcrem chemcd, iii. 20 0. On other Eabbis, compare Journal
asiatiquc,
1870,
xvi.
468, and
Ginsburg's edition of
Elias
31.
For an
see
opposite statement,
P>aer
we may
refer
to
Aaron ben
Aslier,
and Strack, Bikduke, p. 11. Eaimund Martin (Pugio fidei, Leipsic 1687, p. 697) on Hosea ix. 12, Scribal punctarunt ^y\^2 {i.e. incarnatio mea et
dcrivatur a
rccesso meo.
"IL**3
q.e.
mtra
qiiod est
in
Luther
"
on
Gen.
xlvii.
31 {Opera
lat.
Erlaiig.
xi.
Sh):
fuisse usus
punc-
Eecentiores
sumunt, qui tamen non amici, sed hostes Scriptural sunt, non recipio. Ideo sa^pe contra puncta pronuntio, nisi con-
cum novo
testamento."
Compare Calvin
12 p. 676), and Zwingli, Pra^fatio in apologiam complanationis Isaia: (Opera ed. Schuler and Schultheis, v. 556). Formida cons. Ilelvei. Can. ii. " In specie autem Hebraicus Veteris Test. Codex, quem ex traditione ecclesiae Judaicae, cui
on Zechariah
xi.
7 {Pra:lectiones in
Prophetas, 1581,
210
79.
SIGNS.
ipsa,
punctorum
79.
at
first,
the
speech,
with
which as a living
language,
together with
the
connection
i.e.
the vowels.
only
when
Hebrew became
a dead language, in
supplied the place of the knowledge that comes from daily use,
the need was felt of devising a system of visible vocalisation.
The
of the
first
in a wider development
In
those
written
indication
of the vow^el
letters
in
any danger
of affixing to the
letters (iM,
own
private interpretation.
That these
less cor-
rect
name maU^cs lectionis, were subsequently used to much greater extent than they w^ere originally, is
proved from a variety of
facts.
a very
clearly
On
Mesha
On
the
D"'Tin"',
alongside
The
LXX.,
translate often in a
impossible had the text already at that time had the scriptio
plena which
it
has now;
xii.
:
example,
Amos
D''-it^
:
ix.
12,
i.
Dl^i^,
LXX.
D'lTD,
Q'^^^
Hosea
12, omc*,
LXX.
Nah.
10,
the
Dno Ezek. xxxii. 29, DHN, LXX. D"iN\ In Babylonian Talmud (Kidd. 30a) it is expressly said " We
Trg. Syr.
:
scriptio
plena and
71).
211
defediva
and
finally,
vowels."
How
ing,
is
shown from
tin?
vowels were
left
and the special tone of the long vowels could not be made
Thus
might be
eitlier
c.
u or
0,
might be
hundred
Proof of this
is
alforded in abundance
by
Fathers of the
Hebrew
text,
Jewish teachers
to
thank
for this,
made about
So,
vocalisa-
whereby
too,
in
the
to
h
pronunciation
Sank
same thing by
since they
forbid the use of the Soph pasiik in the Torah rolls ( 84),
still
use of the vowel signs, had these then really been in existence.
where
all
later
words by means of a
Quicsccntcn
^in
in dcr altJubrdischen
ii.
Verhandl.
Oriental
p.
Congress,
459 490;
the
other
Wellhausen-Pleek,
IJinleitunr/,
G34
ff.
In
212
them
strictly
79.
was
way
in
the
Mandean
ff.).
(Noldeke, Manddisclie
is
Grammatik,
the use of
modern languages, and in the finally, the use of the letters xnn^y in the Greek alphabet. Compare Lagarde, Mittlieilungen, ii. 39 ff., who at the same The time treats of the Avesta writings in this connection. peculiar phonetic style of writing Karaites constructed a most
t<'''iV
Jewish transcription
of
See
of
Hoerning,
Seclis harait.
Mamtscr.
ix.
sqq.
The warning
Noldeke {ZDMG, xxxii. 593) against considering the orthography of the Mesha tablet without further examination as Old Hebrew has recently been justified by the Siloali While the diphthongs on the stone of Mesha inscription. are not indicated by signs, the Siloah inscription has niy, sviD,
etc.
On
-11!^.
it
has
v.
still tJ^s
for ^^^,
too,
b\>
for
h'\p,
")^*
for
Compare ZDPV,
'm"'
206.
So,
i:'j<-i
in
this
is
the question,
whether the final vowels in Hebrew had been originally unCompare Gramm. xxv. p. 33. marked. The Talmudic \iir\\>'ch U^ mater lectionis indicates a proof drawn directly from the traditional reading in opposition to mor^i' DS, which is used if the proof is drawn from the
abstract possibilities of the text.
p.
556
Strack,
p.
i.
Frolegomena,
69
Wellhausen-Bleek,
e.g.
Einlcitung,
616.
92.
And
Levy, Neuheh.
Worterhuch,
wrong in concluding from the words of Origen {De la Rue, iv. 141) TrdXtv T(o lovBa 'Trap r^fjulv fjuev o Svr6po<; ^Avvav elvat Xeyerai, irapa he 'E^paLOL<; ^flvdv 6 iariv irovo'^ avroov, " that our Massora
(LehrhucJi d. hehr. Sprache,
f.) is
:
Ewald
20
80.
SIGNS.
then existed essentially in the one form or in the other. true relationship is seen from the remarks of Jerome.
also
The
He
frequently points
{e.g.
in
Jonah
iii.
4) to the
proper
pronunciation, but this he had from his Jewish teachers, to whom he often refers {e.g. in Amos iii. 11 Zeph. iii. 9).
;
That he knew no system of points is evident from many of " Pro eo quod nos transhis remarks {e.g. on Hab. iii. 5)
:
literal
positai
sunt: Daletli,
*
si le<::;antur
dadar
xiii.
verbum
'
3): "
Apud
si
scril)itur
literis
Aleph,
half
Quod
"
to, e.g.
si
legatur
vocales
arbe 'locusta'
dicitur,
fumarium.'
By
he understands the
*
vowels referred
litera
Yau
si
on Isaiah xxxviii. 14: "Media vocalis pouatur inter duas Samach, legitur sus et
'
appellatur equus,
si
Jod legitur
sis
'
et
hirundo dicitur."
The
word accciitus means with him the pronunciation of the word, " Nee refert utrum Salim aut e.g. Epist. 73, Ad Euagrmm Salem nominatur, cum vocalibus in medio literis perraro utuntur Hebriei, et pro voluntate lectorum atque varietate
:
regionum eodem verba diversis sonis atque accentibus proferantur." Compare Hupfeld, TSK, 1830, p. 571 ff. Nowack, Die Bcdciitung d Hier. filr d. Alttestamcntl. Texthntik, p. 43 ff. In the Talmud mipj means, either the abnormal points
mentioned in
e.g. jer.
ii.
Clmg.
80.
The
insufficiency of the
means described
in
70 led
32) expresses
^)^^,
with
n")^D,
for the
attainment
all
of this end,
owing
to the
view
of Scripture
then prevailing,
there could be
no thought
of to
What had
214
80.
SIGNS.
In
this
way
origin.
It consists, as
we know
now
it,
of
simple points and strokes, and so for the most part reminds
And
seeing
that this
it
fifth
century,
mark within
Thora
proved
of its origin.
While indeed,
of
no system of
signs, it is
Aaron
belonged
to
family
the
which
pointing
occupied
of
itself
through
five
generations
with
the
text,
whose
oldest
as early as
According
to
this
the
origin
of the
The
abbreviated
81.
But
in
many
asiatique,
363, and in the Karaite facsimiles of which probably was the Hoerning), Kametz has the form
1870,
ii.
original.
On
TSK, 1875,
p.
7-45
ZLT, 1875,
612
f.;
Z^^"Mw^^g, x.
In opposi-
366, 1885, p. 102 f. A Syrian Codex of the year 412, written in Edessa (British Museum 12150), has already the vowels marked by
533
ff.
MGWJ,
1881,
p.
means
of points.
Compare
81.
und
les
hibl
p.
Litcratur,
;
1832,
53
flf.;
ZKM,
de
la
1*837, p.
204
ff.,
1839,
Ilistoire
jyujidatioji
chcz
18G9
ff.
;
Journal Asiatique,
18G7,
i.
447
ff.,
1872,
i.
305
of
Nestle, Syr.
ZMDG,
in
xxx.
525
ff.
Wright, Catalogue
the
MSS.
British
Museum, iii. 1168 IT. That the usual system only attained by degrees wonderful nicety is proved by various indications. Dillniann on Gen. xliii. 26. above, 27, 30
;
its
present
Compare
is
now common,
come
it
in
some
respects, has
1840.
usually
called
Babylonian,"
and
is
regarded
as
that
which
The
situation, however,
pointed out.
to us
it
but that
was not the only Babylonian system, and that the Babylonians
in
"
general
did
much
rather
use
the
ordinary,
so-called
who from
a.d.
928 wrought
in
Baby-
Codex of
was written
(see
and
Babylonians"
"
30) are
"
Babylonian
system of pointof
would
have
been
absolutely
incapable
expressing
case,
The
facts of the
this
attracted
any particular
notice
Until future
"
216
81.
accordance
with
its
peculiar
the
" superlinear
1/
system.
of difference
to the conclusions
drawn from
Now
the character-
istic of
above the
ll
consist of a
a,
as
seems, of a small
y.
If,
then,
we should
further consider
\
is
indicated a contracted
i,
and the
double point
we should then have a completed system which reminds us of the West Syrian
:
for d as
a bisected
But
this con-
is
The
and
S (^
and
'^)
same
as
in
the
common
is
This impression
is
further strengthened
by the
fact
the
ordinary sign ^
manuscripts
the
common
i.e.
4 by an Arabic damma,
small
"1,
it is
an
after
system
indicating
the
vowels,
signs.
in
which indeed
i,
and
partially x, appear as
fore,
vowel
According to
this, there-
81.
217
the
received.
of
Perhaps also in this way the position of the signs over the
letters
Targum
only in the Targum, while they use the ordinary system in the
text, is best
Finally,
Wickes
also has
come
same
result
by means of a comparison
The older literature on the " Babylonian " pointing (among which especially see Pinsker, Einfilhrung in die Bahylon Jlchr. Panclation, 1863) is given in Strack's edition of the Bahylonian Propkct-Co'dcx, p. vii, and Strack-Harkavy's Katalog. der hchr. Further, Bibelhandscliriften zu St. Petersburg, 1875, p. 223 f. we may mention: ZLT, 1875, p. 619 ff., 1877, p. 18 ff.; Derenbourg, Revue crit. 1879, p. 453 ff.; M. Schwab, Act. 165-212; Griitz, MGWJ, 1881, dc la soc. phil. vii. p. 348 ff.; Strack in the Wisscsnch. Jahreshericht ulcr d. morgcnl. Studien in Jalire, 1879, p. 124; Merx, Verhandlungen d. and especially Wickes, 188 ff Orient. Congr. i. Berl. Accentuation of the so-called Prose Books, 1887, p. 142 The manuscripts with " Babylonian " pointing are given in
:
fl".
iargumica,
p.
p. iv sq.
In an epigra[)h to a Pentateuch Codex with Targum to be found at Parma, where mention is made of the superlinear See system (nf?vo^ ipi^o), it is ascribed to the iiCK p.
Zunz, Zur Geschichte und Literatur,
der Juden,
Books,
p.
p.
110;
Griitz, Geschichte
v.
556
Wickes, Accentuation of
in
so-called Prose
142.
So, too,
the
Massoretic
notes
in
the
Sometimes the superlinear vowel See Wickes, Accentuasystem is designated Indeed, the Babylonian Prophet Codex is tion, p. 145/1. also a witness to the fact that this system was used in
Tschufutkale manuscript.
the " Oriental."
218
Babylon.
that
if
82.
SIGNS OF ACCENTUATION.
perfect right
But with
in Ex.
xxiii.
5 ^OTi
is
Wickes emphasises the fact handed down as a " Babythe "Western," the superfor Segol,
^^V!?!
would not
Hebrew
system.
vowels, which
few manuscripts with the supeiiinear pointing are known, there are yet to be found in these a considerable diversity in regard to details. In the South Arabian manuscripts the following signs are met with
to
Although up
this time
relatively
i, c, 5^ a and Oy k ^ u, x o, n a and n - X (the horizontal stroke indicates Sheva). In the Job Codex, of which Baer's Lihcr Johi contains a facsimile, and in the Prophet Codex the
ii,
system
with
is
is
also
combined
der
hebr.
the
other
vowels.
See
Stade,
Lelirhuch
Grammatik,
for
37.
;
In
this
it
^ (namely x)
;
but, as
if
an
AVhile the
Prophet Codex represents u by ^, the sheet produced by facsimile from Job has sometimes this sign, sometimes the
superlinear.
On
the
Karaite
p. 1
manuscripts, compare
f.
Hoerning,
Seeks
Karait. Manuscr.
text
rolls
and
known
is,
as are the
vowel
signs.
as already indicated in
by the
initial
letters of their
names.
This
is
found, as
it
83.
SEPARATION OF WOHDS.
seems, in
all
and the
Book
of
There are five words mentioned in h. Joma r>2nr, the connection of which in tlie verse were doubtful (namely, nsL", ins, inD, Ex. xvii. 9 Gen. iv. 7 Dnp:;'^, Ex. xxv. 35
; ; ;
Gen.
xlix.
7;
Dpi,
tlie
existence of
a system
accentuation.
Compare
Berliner,
29 f. On the accents, compare Heidenheim, Scplicr Mischpctc hatcnmim, 1808; Jhuda b. Bal'ams, Ahhandlvvrj vhcr die Baer, Thorath 2)oetischen Acccntc, ed. Polak, Amsterdam, 1858 Emeth, 1852 and on the position of Metheg. in Merx, Arcliiv Griitz, MGWJ, 1882, p. 385 ff. d. A. r. i. 55 fur wiss
Beitrdgc zur hchr. Grammatil\
;
ff'.
Wickes, Treatise on the Accentuation of the Three Poetical Treatise on the Accentuation of Books, London 1881, and
Compare Twmty-one so-called Prose Boohs, Oxford 1887. Baer and Strack, Dikduhe, pp. 1 6-33 and on the Accentuation
the
;
in
Codex
Reuchlin
Baer,
Liher Jeremiad,
p.
]>.
ix.
On
p.
thu
ff
.
Babylonian system:
ZLT, 1875,
606,
1877,
31
Wickes, Accentuation of
142
ff.
4 The Divisions of
83. Several
the Text.
Semitic
peoples,
like
the
South
Arabians,
piece of
mark writing by
The
means
of
point
or
stroke
conjecture
naturally
also
suggests itself
that
at
Hebrews
sacred text in
only the
Mesha
tablet
75) has a
point between the several words, partly because the double point dividing verses {Soj)h pasuk,
220
point.
84.
SEPAEATION OF VERSES.
it is
in
any case has not been regularly used, because we could not
cases in
pare
77),
also in
tradition
itself
certain
passages
which
the
division of words
{h.
was uncertain.
a point for
separating
words
is
unknown.
It
is
rather
required that
left as
and
hair.
letter
Yet
continua had
is
unproved.
How
might be
falsely divided is
shown by the
common
On
Hier.filr
d.
Alttestamentl.
41
f.
On
84.
77.
for
The double
is
point,
Soph pasuk,
of verses,
made mention
of these
at the
originally
it
to the text.
in the
Even
;
are
spoken
of,
p^D^
pi. D^ip^DQ
but
it
evident that
the
Jews much
that
among
others
the
Babylonian Jews
in
this
respect
The same
shows
itself
when we compare
84.
SEPAKATION OF YEKSES.
for
221
have
another
text.
especially
the
LXX.,
these
frequently
also
the poetical
books,
the
Hebrew
poetry.
On
way
into the
duced by
this
father of the
Church into
The
is
is
based
divides
double clause,
is
comes to view
of
first
of all in the
( 32).
above-
(ed. Kircliheim, p. 6)
manuscript in
a point could
iii.
of the
verse
is
marked by
rolls
Masseket Soph^rivi,
of
6.
Crimea disregard this rule while, on the contrary, four Crimean private manuscripts have no Soph pasuJ:. See ZLT, 1875,
synagogue
the
p.
601.
In the Mishna
(Mer/. iv.
4)
it is
said
"
On
ParasJws.
f
.
97
;
Strack, Proler/omcna,
"ii.
373
Jikl.
Compare Wiihner, Antiquitates Ehrcrormn, Geiger, Urschrift, p. 78 ff. Zcitschrift, 140, iv. 113, 265, x. 24; Nach;
gelassene Schriften,
iv.
24.
On
the
various
systems
of
verse
divisions,
compare
222
especially
Griitz,
84.
SEPARATION OF VERSES.
MGWJ,
1885,
p.
97
ff.
It
is
expressly
of
said
in
h.
Kidd. 306
that a full
understanding
verse
division
is
not to be had.
refers to the
Babylonian division
Law
has 5888,
5880
verses.
At
the
same time
for they,
it is
had another
division,
three verses.
divide
Exodus
xviii. 9 into
SojjJi^rim, ix.
3,
where we
Palestinian division,
viii.
according to
Ps. xvii. 3
f.,
xxiii. 5
iv.
f.,
Ixv. 8
f.;
f.,
xc. 2
i.
11
f.,
xcv. 7;
Lam.
iii.
5; Hos.
sacra,
11
Isa.
3.
12
Compare Cappellus,
also be
Critica
lib.
iv.
cap.
It
may
82,
whose relation
On
Strack, Dikduke, p.
55
f.
is
made
which was used in particular but it cannot have been thoroughly carried poetical passages out in ancient times on account of what is referred to in the Compare further, Delitzsch, Psalmcn, 1883, above sections.
p.
187
Levy, Neuliehrdischer
p.
Wd?ierhuch,
i.
163
Strack,
Prolegomena,
80.
On
iv.
De
2^onderibus
:
et
mens.
In the Preface
to Isaiah
T^emo cum prophetas versibus viderit esse descriptos, metro eos ?estimet apud Hebneos ligari et aliquid simile sed quod in habere de psalmis et operibus Salomonis
says
"
;
Demosthene et in Tullio solet fieri, ut per cola scribantur et commata, qui utique prosa et non versibus conscripserunt, nos quoque utilitati legentium providentes interpretationem novam novo scribendi genere distinximus." Compare Morinus, Exercitationes hiblicce, p. 476 ff., and, in general, Birt, Das antike Buchwcse7i, 1882, p. 180. The single lines bear also
85.
SEPARATION OF PARASHAS.
versiculi or versus,
223
which
in
481
f.
the
Jews
of
by means
of
the case
of
the
case
of
the sundering
In the former
case, the
that
way were
to
ninnp.
a
D,
Subsequently
was customary
by a d or
which
class
In the editions
is
and
in
out in his
According to the
closed
Law
contains
in Arabic letters,
As concerns
of
is
made
is
Parasha division in
is
spoken
of,
and
particular
most
part,
agree
3, 7,
{TaaiiUh, 4.
also
Mcnachoth
Parashas
and
often).
of
of
the
Prophets
AVhether
these
seem
to
And
that there
in a
in
instance
distinguished
224
clear
85.
SEPARATION OF PARASHAS.
concluded from the
vacillation
intervals
may be
in
reference to their
for the text,
number and
the
and even in
whole,
later manuscripts.
On
the
received
Parasha
division
is
to
be
vi.
28, Hag.
i.
separated, or Isaiah
9,
rests
on an
Compare Morinus, Exercitationes Biblicce, p. 491 ff. Hupfield, TSK, 1837, p. 837 ff. Sfcrack, Prolegomena, p. 74 ff. Geiger, Jilcl. Zeitsclirift, x. 197 Nachgelasscne Schriften, iv. 22 f. Gratz, MGWJ, 1885, p. 104 f. Originally Parasha only means a section in general, specially one larger than a verse. Compare l. Beraclioth 63a, " a verse " is called " a small Parasha." where The passage from the Mishna {Meg. 4. 3), referred to in 84, proceeds on
;
; ; ;
may
consist only of
lii.
is
ff.
Jerome sometimes correspond exactly with the Parashas, e.g., Micah vi. 9, on which passage he expressly remarks " In Hebraicis alterius hoc capituli exordium est, apud LXX. vero finis superioris." Hence in his text the division was outwardly marked. Compare also on Zeph. iii. 14. But often he used the word quite carelessly in the sense of a passage of the text. Compare Hupfield, TSK, 1837, p. 842. On the division of the Psalms, compare J. Miiller,
of
:
The Capitida
Massehet Soph^rim,
p.
222
f.;
Universitdt Kiel, 1879, p. 9. The division now common, which is met with also in Luther, makes the number of the Psalms 150. This is also the number in the LXX., but it is there reached in another way, namely, by joining Psalms ix. and X., cxiv. and cxv., and by dividing Psalms cxvi. and cxlvii. The Syriac translation, again, joins only Psalms cxiv. and and cxv. and divides only Psalm cxlvii. But elsewhere an entirely different total is given. Thus jer. Sahh. 16. 1, fol. 15c, gives 147 Psalms, while several old manuscripts have also less than 150, for they frequently join Psalms xlii. and
8G.
225
Psalm was Psalm ii. (see
i. i.
xliii.,
and
cxiv.
and cxv.
;
In olden times,
too,
often
b.
not counted, or
else
xiii.
connected
witli
Bcrachoth, 9b
Acts
is
33
Justin Martyr,
{b.
40), so that
once referred to
We
Law
into
This
of the
tlie
practice
of the
tliree
{b.
Law
in
years'
this
296; compare on
1
8G).
Yet
tlie
now
4th century.
They were only externally marked in the Law, and this was done by writing d or D three times in the empty space preceding its beginning. With the exception of the one passage
(Gen.
xlvii.-
Baer, however, in
*]55
of Genesis, gives
etc.
them
n'jnD
ii.
p,
Compare
ff.
;
Jost, Geschichte d.
. ;
Judcnthums,
137;
1870,
Strack,
Prolegomena,
vii.
146
a.d.
Old
Testament
to
it
in
chapters.
Pecently,
however,
originally
show that
is
this division
was
the three
Law
( 85).
The
Law
division.
In any
this
and
to
this others
226
86.
15c,
com-
Sedarim.
On
Law.
This numbering
is
now found
have
Derenbourg
32) has 167 law Sedarim, with which the Bible of the year
1010 is in substantial agreement. The division into chapters which now has secured actual recognition in the Hebrew Bible, was borrowed by the Jews
from the Christians.
text of the Vulgate
might be possible
to prepare practical
Bible
concordances.
there in details,
was used
of all
by Isaac Nathan
in his
Hebrew concordance, prepared 1437-1448, and published in 1523, and subsequently it was adopted in the second Bomberg
Bible in a.d.
1521.
Unfortunately in
many
passages
the
just in a haphazard
it, it is
when
ff.
Isa. ix.
1-6,
X.
1-4,
lii.
13-15.
of
The numbering
the
presupposes the
first
met with
for the
a.d.
time in
( 62),
1557
first
and applied
in the
Athias Bible of
On
p.
the
ff.
;
Sedarim,
compare
Miiller,
p.
Massehct
Sopherim,
Theodor,
220
529
ff.
Geiger, Jild.
Zeitschrift,
1872,
p.
22
p.
92
87.
227
fl'.,
MGUV,
35
pp.
if.
188.".,
p.
351
il,
1S8G,
]k
212
1887.
p.
On
owe
to
biblicoc,
484
487
f.
The determining
of
we
p. GiU). In the following century Nicholas von Lyra (quoted by Merx, Joel, p. 320) complains: " Signatio capitulorum in bibliis
non sequitur
87. Tliere
"
was mention
division
into
Books
"
Book
of the
Twelve
Prophets,
the
Psalms,
and
Ezra-Nehemiah.
This
easily
enough understood,
is
of the
Psalms into
which again
to as
early
as
by the Chronicles
Chron. xvi.
ff.
with
Ps. cvi.).
The Talmud
of four lines
Bdba
empty space
Prophets.
to
of
the Minor
At the same
write
all
or
empty
between each
cff.
In some manuscripts,
28), one
in
1010
empty
to
line is
became customary
make
par
excellence,
even in the
it
was
into
found
necessary
divide
the
great
literary
works
228
88.
separate books.
Thus
it
also
Book
of Samuel, the
Book
of
of the Kings,
the
Book
of Chronicles,
Ezra, were
each
this
was abandoned
still
in
was
retained,
and
1521 (compare
is
86).
five
Mention
h.
made
The
of the
Kidd.
33a.
otherwise
well instructed
Jerome
p.
f.),
to reject this
On
the Alexandrine
p.
practice,
it
compare
Birt,
Das
antike
Buchwesen,
"
479.
Yet
mention is made, though indeed more rarely, of several books " being in one roll, and of one " book " consisting of several rolls (compare Eohde, GGA, 1882, p. 1541 f.).
B.
Text.
1.
The Linguistic
Transmission of Scripture,
was invented
and clear by
of
how
this
made
visible
means,
is
related to the
actual pronunciation
the
Hebrew
the
as a living language.
This question
is
naturally of
Hebrew
tongue, but
if
it
will also
Here now
two
first place,
we never
88.
229
And,
in the
first
second place,
it is
is
in all
This
tu
Origen
Only the
pronunciation of a as
a,
which
is
because
it
to
be considered
in
as a novelty
which
is
to be
met with
in
Jerome merely
so
pronounce
it,
On
not to be
forgotten,
we have
it
expressly stated by
sign
Aaron ben
various
Asher and
sometimes
represents
sometimes
i,
sometimes
d,
by which means
apparent differences between the pointing and the old transcriptions transmitted to us have repeatedly arisen.
But by
this
it is
gives visibility to
now
acces-
LXX.
different
may
awkwardness
of the transcribers,
Jews
it
living
among
foreigners
and there
does retain
According
to
230
Jerome
88,
(Epist.
73,
Ad
Evangelum)
it
in
Hebrew pro
accentihiLs
varietate
were pronounced.
To
this are to be
added further
itself affords in
that
it
is intelligible
That
is
laid
in its infancy,
use
is
a very
The
same
true in a
higher degree
of
the
transcriptions
which are found in the old inscriptions and there can shed
proper names.
light
( 36),
which
also here
Compare
Hebraisclun,
Schreiner,
Ziir
Gcscliichte
der
Aussioraclu
des
ZAW,
vi.
xxxiv.
388, and the writings referred to in 36. On the similarity between the Massoretic pronunciation of
the
of the Phoenician
known
^5
is
pronounced generally as
"^J!
d,
more rarely
xxvi.
(Isa.
14).
Moreover,
in
Jerome are not rarely vacillating, which in many cases must be ascribed to his Jewish teachers, but certainly in
many
to his
own
inaccuracy.
The
word are given thus by ben Asher {Dikduhe, ed. Baer and Strack, pp. 12 f., 31 f.) before yod it is i, e.g. Di''3, bijSm (compare Jerome on Isa. xvii. 11
mobile at the beginning of the
:
88.
2:31
hioju),
(ill
but
it is c, if
itself
has
i,
cfj.
?Ni"*'7,
I'jisrdH
^^^^t:7, wliicli
undoubtedly
;
compare
Haupt,
b.
Bcitrcifjc
zur Assyriologic,
17,
260
the practice of
made
10
;
its
way
Ps. xlv.
it
13
when
has Metlicg,
a
ZA W, ZA W,
p.
iv.
29
f.)
or
finally, before
guttural
it
it
of the
Elsewhere
sounds
Compare
vi.
on the somewhat
237
10,
48.
Greek transcriptions in the Hcxapla and in the LXX., compare Lagarde, Mitthcilungen, ii. " Uebersicht iiber die im Aram. iibliche 3(51 f If the orthography of the Bildung der Nomina," passim. Siloah inscription (in opposition to the tablet of Mesha, 75)
the
. : .
On
)J^5<,
Avarj instead of
all
if
(Num.
8),
the more as
261).
But
one should
bethink him that the Syrians not rarely resolve 6 into au {eg,
ausar instead of
osdr,
mraum
Grammatik, p. 120), it might still be discussed whether a Greek au might not many a time have originated in a similar way. Further, the conclusions drawn by Lagarde from forms like ^oSofia, HoXoficov, etc., in favour of a typal form quhd, ingeniously as they are vindicated, are yet somewhat problematical, since here there must be subsumed a pronunciation coloured by the assimilating of the mobile vowel, as the Massoretes admitted was the case before the gutturals (see above).
Compare
nijilim,
etc.,
in Jerome,
ZAW,
iv.
80.
Finally,
it
most recent
translations
of
how
is
vibrating between
nr, e, i,
o.
Compare
what
is
of pointing.
232
89.
DEVELOPMENT OF TEXTUAL
CRITICISM.
On
tions,
Haupt, Beitrdge zicr Assyriologie, i. 169 f. To the examples there named may be added Rasunu, which corresponds to the Paaaa-cov of the
v. 1 6 8
f
;
.
compare Stade,
ZA ]^,
pV"i
of
finally
by the introduction
of
the
among these also various superfine forms. Thus we would certainly not make the old genuine language responsible for a form like P]""^T, Ps. vii. 6, or D^nufin, Zech. x. 6. The same is true indeed of differentiating forms like ">''?^? and "l'?^5, D*n3 and D"-!!?, "q^b and "^b^, 'pi< and ^J'^x, which probably rest on artificial forms, although these may have been found already in existence by the Massoretes, as certainly was the
case
with
the
sensible
pronunciation
in
J^.ip^V
(LXX.
o-Kia
Oavdrov),
Sometimes
errors
e.g.
Neh.
14;
2.
The Transmission of
Contents.
89. In the
Criticism
is
form
in
presently conducted,
is
a young phenomenon.
(t
in
seventeenth
of
century,
sketched
;
the
outlines
of
criticism
Old
Testament Text
now
made
in earnest to take in
labours.
exclude
all
criticism
of
the
text,
e.g.
it
regarded
all traditional
the Baby-
resting
on independent
89.
233
by
earlier
and
been
declared
indispensable.
And even
who
in
modern
in practice are
where
it is
form of
the text.
Now, although
this conservative
tendency forms a
wholesome drag upon the not infrequent recklessly revolutionary " textual emendations " of some critics, and
it
remains
text
Hebrew
ever
indirectly'
to
we
owe
to
The
insufficient.
was
more
so
ado as authentic.
produced
this
imposing agree-
still
by the oldest recently discovered manuscripts, yet a thoroughgoing examination proves that the text preserved with such
extraordinary care
relation of
is,
after all,
which
remains a question
234
89.
for discussion.
And
that these
identified, a variety of
before ns in a
differ
double form
a
( 73),
details
in such
way
But even
of
one explanation,
if
Even
the state of
could be proved,
as
it
we have
all
it is
and
using
all
make
this
to
clear at
objectively accessible to us
work has
whether the
whether we must
call
to
our
conjectural criticism.
ment
and
two
different periods,
and do
of HirzeVs Job
;
Compare among others, Olshausen's Prefaces to his edition and to his own Commentary on the Psalms, Dillmann in Herzog's Real-Encyclopcedie -, ii. pp. 1 7-2 2 399 f.; Konig, ZKWL, 1887, pp. 273-297. Compare the interesting statements of Saadia about the
variations in the
p.
Dikduke,
"
82
f.
Old Testament text in Baer and Strack, Formida consensus Helvetici, Canon iii.
:
proinde sententiam probare neutiquam possumus, qui lectionem, quam Hebraicus Codex exhibet, humano tantum
Eorum
89.
235
arbitrio
constitutam
judicant, configere,
eamque
Codice
inio
versionibus
vel
Giiucis,
Samaritano, Targuinim
Chaldaicis,
aliunde
etiam,
quandoque ex sola ratione emendare religione neutiquaiii ducunt, neque adeo aliani lectionem authenticam, quam quiu ex collatis inter se editionihus, ipsiusque etiam Ilebraici codicis, quem variis modis corruptuni esse dictitant, adhibita
circa
lectiones
variantes
humani
agnoscunt."
Examples
correct
:
of
parallel texts, of
D^nn, 1 Chron. i. 7, D^nn Gen. xxxvi. 23, \hv, 1 Chron. i. 40, \hv\ Judges vii. 22,m-iv, 1 Kings xi. 26, 2 Sam. m-iv; 2 Sam. xxiii. 27, ^J3D, 1 Chron. xi. 29, ^22D 2 Sam. xxii. 11, sn^i, Ts. xxiii. 13, TVp, 1 Chron. xi. 15, ivn
Gen.
x. 4,
;
xviii.
11, KT'^
etc.
Examples
of passages,
which on
xix.
logical
6,
grounds must be
21, 36
f.,
incorrect: Josh.
xv.
32, 36,
15, xxxviii.
at the
to does not
sum
Jer. xxvii. 1,
and xxxviii.
13, etc.
On
Zedekiah should be read for Jehoiachim. grammatical grounds we cannot accept the n: of Ezek.
1,
xlvii.
Besides
the works
of
Cappellus and
LXX.
and Lagarde's Specimen spoken of in 45, the following may be referred to among the more important modern works as
textual criticism
lihros,
:
Houbigant, Notcc
criticcc
in
iiniv.
Vet. Test,
1777
(in
opposition: Kallius,
Houh. in Cod. Heir., Copenhagen 1763, and Examen criseos Houh. in Cod. Hchr. 1764); Kennicott, Dissertatio generalis
in the second
volumn
e
of
V. T. Hchr.
cum
variis lectionihus;
in-
Spohn, Jcremias
'ccrsione
terprctum grcecorum emcndatus, 1794 1824; Olshausen, Emcndationcn z. A. T., Kiel 1826; Bcitriirjc zur Kritik dcs Wellhausen, Text iibcrlicfcrten Tcxtes im Buchc Genesis, 1870
;
d. Biichcr
Samuelis,
1871
236
90.
of the Books of Samuel, 1890; Taylor, The Massoretic Text and the Ancient Versiojis of Micah, 1891; Bsethgen, Der TextkritiUehersetzungen zu den Psalmen in JPT, 1882, pp. 405 ff., 593 ff.; Merx, Der Werk der Septuaginta fur die Textkritik der Alten Tcstamentes in JPT, 1883, p. 6 5 ff. Cornill, Das Buch des Propheten Bzechiel, 1886; the peculiar works of Krochmal, Haksaio we hamichtow, 1875. Also the various commentaries (e.g. Lowth's Isaiah and Klostermann's Bilcher Samiielis und der Konige), and innumerable articles referring to matters of detail in reviews and in
sche
Werk
der Alten
Lagarde's works.
a.
Vocalisation.
90. If
we
presented
of
by the
manuscripts
and the
Massoretic
collections
Such complete divergences as Hosea x. Judges XX. 48, Dnp and Dhn Ps. Ixxv.
;
JJ^^n and
nson
'^?']'?"?
7, "iJlTpp
and
Eccles.
ii.
7,
njpp and
^}J>P', Jer.
xxvii. 17,
very rare, and even these are without any essential influence
upon the
exposition.
is
Of greater importance
the difference,
when we compare
totalities,
no one will deny that the understanding of the text put before
us in the Massoretic pointing by far transcends in value the
None
of the
old
weakened by
down
before us in
91.
237
which we
lie to
But, nevertheless,
it
by the Massoretes
possibility that
is
historically mediated,
and
is
inseparably
may
As examples of the difference between the vocalisation of the Massoretes and that of the old translations a few wellknown instances may serve: Gen. xlvii. 31, '"i^p LXX. Sijr.
;
n;p^;
nVc';
xlix.
10,
^W; LXX.
^^^^
\
Syr.
ix.'l2, "1^3;
LXX.
;
Theod. nc^a
;
Ps.
ii.
9, cyhri
]
LXX.
3,
Syr.
nhu'ri;
Jerome,
Dn^
x.
17, T?^
4,
LXX.
3ND1;
xi.
Prov. iii.'l2,
(t>ap(f)apo)d.
LXX.
3ND1; Isa.
ii.
Theod.
of
specially interesting
meaning's
to the
i6
^rix,
but
lib. iv.
LXX.
consonants n^ Sm,
is
afforded
by
Ps.
ci.
Compare Cappellus,
;
Critica sacra,
p.
cap. 2,
lib. v.
cap. 2, 4, 8
Cornill,
j!Jzech.
we
relation of
sidered.
which
to
the
KHih has
Although
(see,
many
expositors
rule,
and
not
wrongly
however,
KHih
over the Qrc, where the Massora expressly states the differ-
it
may
also
have
to
where the read word presupposes no other consonants than the traditional word. And, in fact, there are cases where the
factors operating
upon the
traditional Qarjan (
238
91.
actually at
e.g.
work
the nervous dread with which in later times the anthroor otherwise offensive expressions
pomorphisms
were regarded,
the text.
may
may
The case
Massoretes,
is
similar with
marks of the
and with
their
e.g.
77),
way
before
more simple
theories.
Compare Geiger, Ursclirift tmd Uebersetzungen der Bihel, 1857, pp. 157 ff., 337 ff. Examples of a vocalisation probably in favour of preconceived views Eccles. iii. 21," AVho knoweth the spirit of man,
:
which ascendeth heavenwards " instead of the intended, and by the translators presupposed, npiyn^ " whether it rises upwards?" Jer. xxxiv. 18, '}i>, Aq. ^^ph Isa. i. 12, Ex.
ThSV^,
!
11,
nxii?,
instead of
risii?
(to
behold
God);
Ps.
xc.
2, ^^^nn, as
Isa. vii.
3 fem. instead of
^.^inn (for
God
could not
^i?in);
(in order
invoking the dead), etc. Eelated to these are the traditional forms of some proper names, as Isa. vii. 6, bxnn; perhaps p^i, instead of P^'"j, 88; ^bb after the analogy
to avoid the idea of
of riK^i; nnnc^y.
is
(compare
Q^l^;^
perhaps a popular dogmatic allusion. which might be improved are Mai. ii. 3,
:
V^T,
LXX.
better
Aq. Jerome,
8, IV^,
|Zi=pzi.
V^t
Sam.
xviii. 11,
^^%
LXX.
Syr.
Job
Sometimes vowel
read W'^^f from ^\^,
D^QXlr,
Amos
4;
^^,
^f)
\
^ is
Eccles.
iii.
1 7 (read
"
92.
239
Isa. xxxii.
12 (read
t^^h)).
Com-
pare Job
ix.
mined by the desire to favour a particular view is met with in Isa. i. 9, where DyoD is drawn towards what follows. On Isa. xlv. 1, compare Griitz, MGWJ, 1874, p. 45. The view of Delitzsch and others that the accentuation of Isa. ix. 5 was determined by preconceived views of the meaning of the text is denied by Wickes, Accentuation, p. 49. A very free rendering, with a play upon the words of the text, is found in h. Bcrcick. 4:b., according to which in Palestine they read Amos
V.
2, as
follows
"
Fallen
is
she
!
[fall]
raise thee,
daughter of Israel
6
xvii.
Ps.
f.
;
f.,
xxii.
31
Gen. xlix.
24
h.
92.
It has
Hebrew manuscripts,
only one single form of text, for the variations that are met
trilling kind,
text.
One
of the principal
among
the variations
is
in the remarks
made
and
3,
in 79.
and
n,
and \
etc.
Besides,
we have
inter-
changes
of
synonymous
expressions,
especially
under
the
Only one
of
any general
like
interest,
not,
the Pentateuch, but here and there also in the other books.
240
The
a
92.
may
be regarded in
usually only a
certain
sense
as
various
reading, has
hits
historically
explicable
value, but
by
On
compare
94.
Cornill,
Das
Biich
EzccJiiel, p.
ff.,
common
"
most part quite long, chapters, the text of which has been
transmitted in a notoriously faulty condition, the oldest of
known
first
on this account be denied that here and there, by means of collations of manuscripts, we may give an emendation of the
text,
e.g.
Isa.
of
D"!"",
which immediately Examples (apart from the show themselves to be such. innumerable deviations in the use of the vowel letters, the Isa. interchange of b^ and ^V, etc.) Ps. cii. 4, jtJ^ya J^ryD
in inaccuracies of particular manuscripts
:
ii.
6, ni^^n n^^D
xv.
;
2,
nyn:i nynj
Ixiii.
;
Jer.
xviii. 4,
-lonn-loni
Ps. ix. 7,
n^n^nti^DJ
;
43, Dpn^<
Dpnx; xcvii. 11, niTyir; Eccles. ii. 25, ij^D -JOD; Hag. 10,h^-{Codex Hilleli, 30) T3 Ps. cii. 13, i-iDn-l^^D^l ii (compare Lam. v. 19); Ps. ci. 24, ni5>3K>Xib'^C'X (compare
xxxii. 8).
D^ijn-DN*
Zeph.
iii.
18,
B.
D'^oyn-i'D-ni^
Zech. xiv. 4
;
omits in B.
ii.
i^)nn
DV3
Ezek.
ii.
Zeph.
7, etc.
compare Geiger, Urschrift, p. 236. The Massoretic remark that the Babylonians have this reading only in three passages outside of the Pentateuch (1 Kings xvii. 15; Isa. xxx. 33; Job xxxi. 11) is incorrect, as Ezek. 46-48, xviii. 20, xxi. 19, xxvi. 17, i. 13, xi. 7, xiv. 17, xvi.
the
Q^re,
5<1!7,
On
xxx.
13, xxxii.
16
Jer.
xxii.
16, xxviii.
17, show.
The
93.
241
occurs only in the Pentateuch, whicli has been quoted against the correctness of the theory in tlie criticism
idea that
^<1^
of the Pentateuch
thus
falls to
the ground.
of
Examples
HL";
passages in which
Amos
viii.
r\''^\>t''^\
2 Sam.
If
V. 2, t^^arom x^vicn.
93.
we compare
tlie
])y
means of
the manuscripts and the Massora with older witnesses for the
text
from
time
after
Christ,
such as the
Talmudical
we
shall
much
in
exhil)it
more
characteristic
physiognomy.
While the
now
of real
interest.
The quotations
in
in
the
Talmud
now
lies
we keep
by Jerome and
the later Greek translators are very nearly the same as our
The Targums
GO,
may
On
70,
it
certain
whether
the
variations
obtained
from
the
Syriac
text in
translation
condition of the
of
post-Christian
only repetitions
the
pre-
242
94.
Compare Cappellus, Critica sacra, lib. v. cap. 2, 5, 6, 9-11 Nowack, Die Bedeutung des Hieron. fur d. aUtcstamentl. B^etbgen, Der textkritisclie Worth, d. alt. Textkritik, p. 23 ff. Cornill, Ucberstz. d. Ps. in JFT, 1882, pp. 405 ff., 593 fF. A tborougbgoing comparison of jEzecJiiel, pp. 128 ff., 156.
; ;
;
is
Lagarde, Mittlieilungen,
ii.
51).
couple of examples
may
:
xxvi. 2
^^^hv 11^
ff.,
'ij
^*3^i
Dny::^ inns
nin''
n^2
"^2
ny
ny
r]^r\^2
inon
tmon in
ii.
"d
uh^,
tbe
to
473
Lagarde, Mittheilungen,
362)
(\i6oov
ovajSo)
ycot
aahiK
a(o/jLr)p
efifiovveifi.
cecrpo
(mv)
^erov
Oeaap <Ta\o)/jb aa\(o/j. yjb ^aK /Saroov (iriDa). ^aahwvai aha co6 yi j^aia aScovai crcoB (Tiv) coXe/juei/jb. Hab. Targ. Syr. (LXX.), irr-ns Hos. ii. 17, T. M. and Jerome, }n^n% Zepb. iii. 18, V. 11, T. M. Jerome, IV, Syr. Targ. (LXX.), l^ Hos. vi. 5, T. M. Jerome, -ii5< T^i^'?^> vn, Targ. (LXX.), ^in Jer. xxv. 38, jnn, Targ. (LXX.), mn Syr. Targ., iij^3 "ddc^^d
; ; ;
Ezek.
tbe
xxvii.
11;
i^3
'^^.
Gen.
i.
26,
pxn-bni, Syr.
(by
correct
divination
?), yii^T]
n^n-^snv
LXX),
n^^m.
Ezek.
(LXX.),
94.
If, finally,
we
93, tbe
Targums
Tbe
succeeds in setting
not
the text in
its
original
form.
It
only affords
in regard
numerous
Proverbs,
variations,
some
of
Book
of Jeremiah
and in
existence of an
04.
TIIP:
TEXT.
24,':}
is
witnesses for the text before the time of Christ, as in the text
of the
Samaritan Pentateuch
( G4),
the
Targums
and
in pre-Christian works,
its
of Jubilees that
had
even in the translations from the times after Christ the forms
of the text translated to as being
then
still
therefore evident
that the relation between the later and the pre-Christian text
with the
LXX. must
Compare the writings referred to in 41 and 89. While in earlier times it was especially the Catholics who gave preference to the LXX., in the modern scientific treatises
on the history of the Old Testament text, the Massoretic text has won an ever increasing significance. The utterance of
Zwingli
is
" Infiniti
sunt
loci,
LXX.
tum
distinxisse,
quam
555-59).
the
On
LXX. and
Samaritan Pentateuch, compare (besides the literature referred to by De Wette-Schrader, EinlcitiuKj, p. 205 f.) tlie London
Polyglot,
vi.
19
lib.
Morinus,
cap.
Excrcitationcs
ccdcsiasticcc
;
in
ntriunquc
Saiiiaritanorum
iii.
Pcntat.,
Paris
1G31
S.
Cappellus,
Crilica sacra y
taichi Ilcbr.
20
Alexius a
;
Aquilino, Pcnta-
Gesenius,
Dc
Pcntalcachi
Samaritani
indole
et
auctoritatc
comment.,
1815;
Geiger, Ursclirift, pp. 8-19, 99 ff.; Jild. Zcitschrift, iv. 186G, Nachjelassenc Schriftcn, iv. 54 ff. ]). Xdldeke, Alt42
; ;
240
Dillmann
in
in
Herzog's
i.
Pfal-Encijclopadic,
ii.
386;
Fritzsche
;
Herzog,
283;
1877-78
244
ritana,
ii.
95.
That the Alexandrine translators did Law is clear but equally improbable is the supposition that the Samaritans may have altered their Hebrew manuscripts in accordance with the LXX. The agreement between the two rather shows that the reading which they have in common was then widely
xxi.
sqq.
circulated.
Moreover,
it
LXX.
On
in just as
many
Book
Das
ff.,
Dillmann in
p.
324
of
Book
of
Jubilees
agrees
with
that
the
LXX.
95.
As
LXX. from
is it
the
the
Hebrew
that the
Especially in some
Books
of
amended by a thoroughgoing
the
LXX.
We
how one
himself
but nevertheless
less or
is
its
more.
Naturally in using
necessary, and never should the critic of the text lose sight
Hebrew
text, as the
immediate authority
on the
to
text, is
an
indirect
and
of the
that
the
treatment
of
the
upon the
critic of
is
of his task
by no means lowered.
it is
On
95.
245
emenda-
text
is
to be unconditionally preferred.
is
LXX.
( 94).
Thus,
it is
a generally
acknowthe
LXX. and
common
antiquity and the wide circulation of a reading in and by themselves afford no decisive proof of its correctness, but that later
may
here
for
5G,
a similar word for acro^o25 f., Dy "im^l, LXX. ^*^?"^'L and IDDL'n, LXX. a^wh; 2 Sam. xxiii. 8, n3*J'33L"% LXX. (mediately), npp'-; Isa. xvii. 9, Tcsni cnnn, LXX. '?nni ^y^sn Lsa.
nnn
"il*'N"^3,
;
LXX.
\cova<;)
Sam.
ix.
xliv.
12,
::hn,
LXX.
Ps.
t^'in
Tnn
6
'S^dv
Jer.
xxiii.
33,
Ni"o-n?3-nN,
^n>Ki
\:i3;
LXX.
fci-fpn
Dnx;
xlii.
f,
;
>nbs :nD,
LXX.
14,
LXX.
Xeh.
iii.
nD3i,
LXX.
:
npni; Zeph.
xxxi.
vj'y"'
iii.
17, c^nn\
LXX. ^nn\
D3UX
(
;
Ex.
9,
U*p'l,
instead of
"iDS'i,
instead of iD^l
Deut.
xxxii.
37,
Dnnnx Dyin
is
= Onk.
to
Syr.,
Jerome);
Deut.
intDns*.
On
7,
Massoretic text
c.(/.
to be preferred
Ex.
xii.
42,
xiii.
6;
Num.
xxiv.
xxvi.
12 (compare
in textual
94).
of the
LXX.
10;
Ps.
xvii.
246
all,
96.
CONJECTUKAL CRITICISM.
ix.
an interesting example.
96. Although the use of the old translations, especially of the
of
the most
essential
tasks
of
Old
Testament textual
criticism, the
is
critic of
ended.
Even
a very general
translation
teaches this.
The Alexandrine
of
many
of the
Old
The presence
of various
make
much
earlier times.
Hence
conjectural
criticism
we
for those
who
are unfit
it
Yet even
here,
and useless
fancies,
we meet with
happy proposals
which, in spite of the want of objective evidence, are so striking and simple, that the favour which they have found
may
itself,
At
the same
we have
73, affords at
some
a greater security.
witnesses, even
if
serviceable as
unknown x can be
quantities.
more
easily found
And
97.
"tendency" alterations OF
TEXT.
247
fittingly, is a
with circumspection.
Several of the
doubtedly to be regarded as improvements in the writings, and so evidently are they such, that only a blind prejudice Thus. Ps. xxii. 30, V "X can without more ado reject tliem.
For our estimate of tlie character of David, the reading in 2 Sam. xii. 31 of '^''^V\}, Also we have improveinstead of 1^2]!^, is not unimportant. ments in iT^^^5, instead of vns in Gen. xxxi. 25 (Lagarde)
for 11^3 X
;
Jer.
xv.
10,
^iii'i'p
cn^D.
riDVO
moy
G,
etc.
The
parallel passage
;
Sam.
xxii.
recommends ''*5*f ??, and in Job x. ''^y 'in; the prevailing rhythm in Psalm xcii. ff. suggests 15, in Psalm xciii. 4, 'Tl^p'^P 1''^^5 or (p. 253) nnirbo ins, instead of nnCTD. Dnnx. How a glance at the rhythm of the Lamentapoetic parallelisms in Ps. x. 6
"
tions
may
lead to good
shown by Budde on Isaiah teaches that nron of Psalm ix. out of the text, must belong
wdien MS of Isaiah
the
substitution
viii.
iii.
to
On
the contrary,
it
11
is
attached to verse
10,
leads to
of
^it^'S
fur
nns
12 and 13 suggests *O.P, instead of genuine LXX. has in 2 Sam. xxiv. 6 a ;^eTTe</A
Isaiah
of the senseless ^c^ip DTinn
;
The
KaS-q^;, instead
Kadesh was
instead
'ij^ij},
All the docuCommentary.] mentary authorities have in Gen. iv. 8, "iCNM, to which, in order to obtain a meaning, Sam. LXX. Syr., etc., supply n3^3 but certainly it was originally ip'J'M, instead of los'i nit'n
pp. 217,
ff.,
221
or Thenius in
(Olshausen),
etc.
97.
text
to
is
An
be
met with
Testament
in
the
Old Testament.
It
is
specially
the
or
Old
text
has
been
intentionally
altered,
248
whether
97.
"tendency" alterations of
to
text.
we have
do
only with
purely
unintentional
errors of transcription.
The
their text
an old one.
The Church
fathers,
who were
contends for
similar way.
"
the
Hebrew
repeated,
e.g.
were
anti-
violence
and bitterness by
the chronological
of
Genesis
were
falsified
their
On
made on purpose
by a Jewish
Geiger,
to
occasion.
Brlill
text,
well
to
as
in
the old
translations,
numerous
and had
alterations
are
religious solicitude
later times,
That
the thesis
is
not altogether
unfounded
undeniable.
The same
religious dread
which
and in many
Hebrew
modern
by means
of the
word
of
Jews
in ancient
text.
times to
alter
here
and
there
the
consonantal
97.
"
TKNDENCY
"
ALTEUATIONS OF TEXT.
is
249
Jewish
Tiqquric
reminiscence
tradition
of
such attempts
in
preserved
of
in
tlic
itself
the
collection
the
so-called
\\\.
Although
some
otliers evidently
correct,
made
is
incontestcorrect,
e.g.
Job
ii.
LXX. had
viii.
still
it);
Hab.
i.
12
Ezek.
iii.
Lam.
iii.
20
Num.
xi.
15
while in 1 Sam.
13, not
but wrh^
is
to be read
(compare
LXX.).
On
the enumeration
The most
interesting
example
God
of Israel as the
shown by
this that
many
old proper
e.g.
name
of
God
Saul (1 Chron.
xiv. 7),
33),
Ba aliadcC ,i\\Q
name
34).
But
in later times,
when
the
18,
20),
to
change the
names, when they occurred in the books used in the synagogues, in various
ways
and
so, at
v.
10,
for
riC'3,
"
shame
"
(compare
Kings
LXX.).
ii.
Ishhoshdh (2 Sara.
ix.
6).
250
97.
"
TENDENCY
"
ALTEEATIONS OF TEXT.
is
afforded us in
Book
of Chronicles,
still
there are
equal certainty.
But otherwise
upon
on monomania.
And
character,
this,
such
as
we At
the
Talmuds, shows
the fourth
at the latest to
the time
so
when they
immutable
had
a character that
passages.
Jerome on Gal.
Ilebrceorum
libros
iii.
13
"Ex quo
habuisse,
aliter
quam nunc
habent, aut
posuisse,
sestimandum, post passionem Christi et in Hebraeis et in nostris codicibus ab aliquo Dei nomen appositum, ut
infamiam nobis inureret, qui in Christum maledictum a Deo credimus" (compare also on v. 10). Eaimund Martin, Fugio fidei (ed. 1687), p. 695 ff [On " Martin " or " Martini," see article by ISTeubauer in
Expositor,
article
3rd
ser.
1888,
vol.
vii.
pp.
100
ff.
179
ff.;
and
Philology, xvi.
No. 31,
teuchs,
130
i.
ff.]
Morinus, Exercitationes
hiUicce, pp.
7-19.
und
1867,
p.
xii
"The chronology
of the
patriarchs
before
Noah
is
indeed
to
falsified for
made by
which tlie Messiah had appeared in the year of the world Such falsifications, as the fathers so often chari>;ed 6500.
if
back
to
all
1)8.
251
AJcademu,
view, Kiienen,
en Mcdcdclingcn (hr
k.
o, 1873, Amsterdam, p. 20G. Geiger, Urschrift und UdnrsctzaiKjai dcr Bihrl^ 1857. On hosheth for haal, compare Geiger, ZDMG, xvi. 7.''0 Wellhausen, Text des Bitclies Samuel, pp. xii. and 1)0
Ldtcrhindc,
ii.
ff.
f.
iii.
5, ISS.S, p. 170.
A
On
this,
confirmation is found in the exposition of Num. xxxii. *^)8, where D^ n3DlD can only be a parenthesis, whicli recommends
that the reading witli
tlie
names
are
A compare Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarheitcn, iii. 178. play upon this change of names occurs in the passages from the LXX. where Baal has the feminine article (compare Rom. xi. 4), while in reading the word ala')(yvri was used (compare Dillman, MonaUhcrichtc d. k. Acadcmie d. W. zn Berlin, 1881). To th6 same category belong probably also the name Jezebel, which originally indeed can scarcely have been combined with Compare Hoffmann, ZAIV, 1883, p. 105. Further, on nin'' tjib as a euphemism for ?)??, compare Psalm X. 3 Job i. 11, ii. 9 1 Kings xxi. 10, with Isaiah viii. 21; 1 Sam. iii. 13. Perhaps also ^ynn, instead of nynn, Gen. XX. 13. Of another sort is Judges xviii. 30, where Moses was changed into ]\Ianasseh (compare h. Baha hathrn, 109Z/). In this case the added n is written higher up tlian the other letters, and the change therefore was not discovered. Of purposely made changes that have been alleged to exist in other places, some are of a not very convincing character, because the word said to have been changed is frequently to be found close by e.g. Gen. xxxi. 49, where nsvo
is
*^'^TP,
ff.
whereas
tliis
it
word
is
itself
to
To
this
may
be added that,
(verse
21) ought probably to be inserted after the word nn3. Against Geiger, compare especially tlie appropriate remarks
nsrvr^n
of
Wellhausen
98.
in
252
98.
by
number
that are
owe
their existence
causes
met with
is
Here
shall
naturally there
much
much
we
to
be
possibilities of
proposed
in
emendations.
special
In doing
view
characteristics
Hebrew
Moreover,
it
shady side
whereas
text
is
it
in good order,
may
be given.
Old Testament
itself
This will
cases
criticism can
indeed in
many
con-
tribute in an important
manner
and
known
in
any
essential respect.
And
even though
we cannot but
is
yet,
much exposed
intelligible.
and so
interchanged.
and h. Scibb. of n with n, of of T with with v, of 2 with 3, of j with Examples of of T with i, of n with d, of D with D. with 1 referred to above. such interchanges have been occasionally
^;, "),
,
Even the ancients were aware of this danger, 103& expressly warns against the confusion oi ^
1)8.
2o3
and i was particularly common. So, too, the confusion 2 and d. On n and n compare above, 77; and specially on d and D, Isaiah xxx. 4, D^n, LXX. D:n. It should further be remembered here, that the forms of the old Hebrew letters have also to be taken into consideration ( 75), because
here other similarities
The confusion of
may have
led to interchanges.
"ij
iii.
Exmight
LXX.)
^yio
DV3
also Isaiah
where Din might in a similar way originate from pnv and Isaiah xvii. 9, upon which Lagarde, Scmitlra, i. 31, should be
consulted.
In particular, it cannot be doubted that mn^ even in ancient times had been sometimes written only as \ Then the LXX. presupposes in Jer.
XXV. 37,
^^<
for
mn^
f]X,
Jonah
iii.
i.
3,
mn"' nay,
and conversely the LXX. had read in instead of nay, and in Ps. xvi. 3, nin^
no[n].
it
nnxnr^, instead of
nns
19 and
vi.
11.
So, too,
Compare also Hitzig on Jer. would seem that here and there
in
made use
of
contractions for
the grammatical endings, in which cases then the marks of abbreviation might easily have been overlooked. Thus Lowth
in Isaiah v. 1,
cxlvii.
li.
17,
nny
34
;
instead of
"pv.
Isaiah
4,
and in general, J. D. 37; Low, Graphischc Bcquisiten, pp. 44-53 Frankel, Vorstudicn, p. 215. Sometimes errors in the text rest upon wrongly supplied vowel letters ( 79), e.g. 2 Sam. xiii. 18, where Dj'iyp should
1
Klostermann
on
Sam.
be read instead of
to in
D^5)^yo.
02 should be so judged,
false dividing of
would be
written xn.
The
words plays a very considerable rdlc^ may be seen from what is said in
83. Xot infrequently is a letter separated from its own word and added to the next. Even the Jewish tradition was aware of some of these cases, as we have already seen ( 33),
: ;
254
98.
2,
Job xxxviii. 12, Jer. iv. 5, Ezra iv. 12, are quite But we meet with this phenomenon very frequently.
in
right.
Thus
10,
the
already
cited
passages,
Hos.
vi.
5,
i.
Jer.
xv.
xxiii.
33, Ps.
Ps.
xlix.
xlii.
f.,
injy;
Ixii. 4,
read .Tim
nnj
;
19 f., read '^t^x nnpy Eccles. vii. 27, read rhnpn iroi^, Of a somewhat similar kind are the cases where a letter etc. which concludes one word and at the same time begins the e.g. 2 Sam. second, is through an oversight only written once
Gen.
:
V. 2,
read
nt^ i^'i^n
xlii.
Jer.
liii.
Zech.
iv.
7,
;
read
"inn
nn^; Ps.
2,
read
;
nf5\sD
D''"inn
Job
been
14,
Eccles. ii.*24 f,
initial
vi.
And such
Neh.
ii.
cases as those in
which an
e.g.
and
final
letter has
3it:
;
wrongly reduplicated:
read 12S^D
;
Jer.
20, read
sn% etc. have been transposed are found in Ps. Ps. xviii. 46, im*"!, on the contrary, 2 Sam. ii. 22, njn^l Isa. viii. 12,-it^p, which probably is Ixxii. 5, lixi^l, read "jn^;^"!
Passages where
letters
; ;
False repetitions are chp (with n for n). where DV [D^] has arisen out of D^N''33n found in Jer. iv. 25, Jer. viii. 3, where the second by repeating final sound Dnt^D'jn, and Isa. xli. 1, where HD ID^bn^ (compare xl. 31), are to be struck out (compare also Ps. xviii. 14).
to be altered into
;
well-known cause of textual errors is the similar beginning of two clauses, of which then the second came to be An example is found in Josh. xv. 59, where a overlooked. whole series of names of places has disappeared from the Not less was the Massoretic text (compare the LXX.). danger attending the adding of omitted passages of the text in the margin, because the signs of correction might easily be misunderstood. In this way are explained passages where the succession of clauses is evidently in confusion, e.g. 2 Sam. nmi belong to v. 11 xix. 12, where the words ^^b^n (compare the LXX.), and Ps. xxxiv., where v. 16 and v. 17
. . .
must be transposed.
position
is sufficient,
While in these
to the
met with,
have been
09.
KEVIEW.
of
255
marginal
falsi tied
introduced
through
tlie
incorporation
notes.
Thus originated the words standing in a Isa. xxxviii. 21 f., introduced from 2 Kings
existence
xxix.
of
passage,
xx. 7
f.
Many
13
f.,
in
Isa.
vii.
8,
ix.
10, has
ii.
now
at
last
all
doubt.
In Dan.
4, indeed, n"'0"ix
was
ii.
iv.
V).
remains
for
us
now
to
in
the preceding
It
now
in
possess.
As concerns
text cannot
be
text.
So also in regard
to
the
other
LXX.
is
tlie
Already this
dis-
received text
is
to
men who,
shortly
and activity
after the
fall
carried with
also the
demand
must receive a
256
fixed
99.
REVIEW.
consequence
especially
in
form,
wliicli
was
of
con-
the
LXX.
and
If,
therefore,
we were
to refer to
men
such as R. Akiba
who have on
it
this
would
the
How
in this,
Jews
felt
shown in
it,
a striking
manner
it
insight had
been
obtained
by means
of reflection
suitable
Of the
style
was
This
constructed
we
know nothing
much
only
is plain,
In so
far,
all
archetype,
is
decidedly
Such a standard
or less
by means
with
also
Sanhed.
ii.
fol.
20c); and so
we
see
pushing
its
way
in a remarkably
extended.
that
On
this
the
other
hand, the
equally
this
widespread theory
position
99.
REVIEW.
257
if
Bible,
is
by no means
certain.
Even
tliis
Samuel
( 95),
stand
if
the authorised
by means
manuscripts,
it
certainly
all
employed, least of
Jewish
way was an
iv.)
;
text
produced
{jcr.
Taanith
On
e.g.,
it is
was reduced
and that
to a
minimum,
so that,
to
bring about
text,
which lay
at the
foundation of the
But
in
this fidelity
fact to
be con-
through
its
unhistorical principles,
productive of in-
curable
criticism
mischief.
Inadequate
the
method of textual
the passages
certainly
was which
indicated in
namely,
the
matter
be determined by
the
number
of
the
witnesses
if
By means
from which
later
may
finally explain
258
99.
EEYIEW.
down
to
our
own
days
( 77).
is
The
which
mention
to
copyists out
of reverence for
their pattern
litterce
slavishly
imitated
them.
Also
the
so-called
s^isioensce
may
letters.
Simon (Histoire Critique du V. T. liv. i. chap, xviii., Eotterdam 1685, p, 101) points out the importance of
:
Et
ainsi cette
commence
;
qu'apres plusieurs
et ce fut principale-
ment dans
litteral
The derivation
Archetype has
been maintained by Eosenmiiller {Yorredeziir Stereotypmisgahe des A. T. 1834), Olshausen {Die Psalmen, 1853, pp. 17 f., 337 f.), Lagarde (Anmerkungen zur griech. Uehers. d. Pro-
1549 ff.), Noldeke Compare also ZAW, (AUtestament. Literatur, p. 241), etc. ix. 303; and on the other side, ZWKL, 1887, p. 278 ff.
mrUen, 1863,
p.
f.
GGA, 1870,
p.
Lagarde has formulated this theory in a quite peculiar style in but compare Kuenen's reply the Preface referred to in 97
;
there
also
referred
to.
Against
the
hypothesis
that
the
388.
Jer. Taanitli, iv. fol. 68Z): "Three Torah Codices were found in the temple Court, Codex pyo, Codex "'DIDj;?, and Codex In one there was py (Deut. xxxiii. 27), while the two NTi.
others had
r\T\V'0
one had
'DIDVr
i.
(Ex. xxiv. 5
7),
Neuhehrdisclies
Worterbuch
09.
liEVIKW.
259
had nine times s^n, the others eleven times N^n. In nil three two were held to and the one rejected." Compare Fiirst'.s Jinnarks on an Ezra Massel'ct Soph'rim vi. 4, p. xii. Codex {Kanon d. A. T. '^. 111) rest, as Strack has shown, on a wrong reading, h. Mocd Kat 186; compare Kabbinovitz,
cases the
ii.
61.
The
similarity
of
the
post-Christian
is
forms of
the
text
whole, and does not exclude, as follows indeed from the facts
already set forth in 92-93, all sorts of small divergences. An important question, the exhaustive answer to which, however, requires the performance of the task referred to in 93,
is to
In a remarkable way the Hebrew manuscripts, which certainly were derived from the most diverse regions, seem to form a
unity oVer against those translators, because the
variations
one manuscript.
new
MOREISON AND
GIBB. PKINTEDS,
EDINBDROU.
'
T.
&
T. Clark's Publications.
THE
FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL
MESSRS. CLARK beg to invite the attention of
Laymen
to this Series.
LIBRARY.
Forty-five years have now elapsed since the commencement of the Foreign Theological Library, and during that time Four Volumes annually (or 180
in all) have
It is
now, however,
offers,
more
select.
anew
They
series
the
care with which the books have been selected, a healthful influence upon the
may
be
of some
I
service to the reader if I mention the long and valuable series of Commentaries on, believe, every book of the Old Testament, that will be found translated from the German in the
little
comprehensive Foreign Theological Library of Messrs. Clark of Edinburgh. The same Library may be mentioned in reference to the New Testament ; and it may be further mentioned that, by the enterprise of the same Publishers, the whole of the valuable Commentaries of the late Dr. Meyer
are
now
W. R. HARPER, of Chicago University, and Editor of 'The Biblical World,' writes: 'The FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY, published by Messrs. T. & T. Clark of Edinburgh, has exercised a great influence upon the biblical studies in this country and in England. It has introduced to students of the Scriptures some of the best work of German theologians and critics. The Publishers announce that, with the concluding volume of SchUrer's "History of the Jewish People in the Time of Christ," they will bring the series to an end. The forty-five years of publication, at the rate of four volumes yearly, is an achievement to look back upon with pride, and the belief of the Messrs. Clark, that "through the care with which books have been selected, the series has exercised a healthful influence upon the progress of theological science, " Is amply Justified. It is gratifying to learn that they do not propose entirely to give up this special work of publishing such translations, but will discontinue the aerial publication, Issuing books irregularly, as occasion offers.'
Prof.
of
In order to bring the Foreign Theological Library more within the reach all, it has been decided to allow selections of
EIGHT VOLUMES
at the Subscription
Price of
(net)
TWO GUINEAS
N.B. No duplicates can be included in such (or more at the same ratio). A compU-te list of volumes in the Foreign Theological Library selections. will be found on the following page.
T.
&
T. Clark's Publications.
The
same
ratio)
History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ. Five Vols. Ebrard Commentary on the Epistles of St. John. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Apologetics. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) The Gospel History. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Ewald Revelation Its Nature and Record. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Old and New Testament Theology. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
:
(52s. 6d.)
Frank System of Christian Certainty. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Gebhardt Doctrine of the Apocalypse, One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Gerlach Commentary on the Pentateuch. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Gieseler Compendium of Ecclesiastical History A.D. 451-1409. Three Vols. Godet Commentary on St. Luke's Gospel. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on 1st Corinthians. Two Vols. (21s.) Goebel On the Parables. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Hagenbach History of the Reformation. Two Vols. (21s.)
:
(31s. 6d.)
Three Vols.
(31s. 6d.)
Harless A System of Christian Ethics. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Haupt Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Havemick General Introduction to the Old Testament. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Hengstenberg Christology of the Old Testament. Four Vols. (42s.) Commentary on the Psalms. Three Vols. (33s.) On the Book of Ecclesiastes, etc. etc. One Vol. (9s.) Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on Ezekiel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Dissertations on the Genuineness of Daniel, etc. One Vol. (12s.) The Kingdom of God under the Old Covenant. Two Vols. (21s.) Keil Introduction to the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on the Pentateuch. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Commentary on Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on the Books of Samuel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on the Books of Kings. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on the Books of Chronicles. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on Jeremiah and Lamentations. Two Vols. (21s.) Commentary on Ezekiel. Two Vols. (21s.) Book of Daniel. One Vol. Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Two Vols. (21s.)
(10s. 6d.)
Biblical Archaeology. Two Vols. (21s.) Kurtz History of the Old Covenant or. Old Testament Dispensation. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) Lange Commentary on the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) St. John. Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. Two Vols. (18s.) Two Vols. (21s.) Luthardt Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.)
;
One
Two
Vol. (21s.)
(10s. 6d.)
Christian Ethics. General Social Individual. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.) MUller The Christian Doctrine of Sin. Two Vols. (21s.) Murphy Commentary on the Psalms. To cottnt as Two Volumes. One Vol. (12s.) Neander General History of the Christian Religion and Church. Vols. I. to VIII. (60s.) Oehler Biblical Theology of the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.) Olshausen Commentary on the Gospels and Acts. Four Vols. (42s.) Commentary on Epistle to the Romans. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Corinthians. One Vol. Commentary on Philippians, Titus, and 1st Timothy. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Orelli Prophecy regarding Consummation of God's Kingdom. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Commentary on Isaiah. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Jeremiah. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Philippl Commentary on Epistle to Romans. Two Vols. (21s.) RSbiger Encyclopaedia of Theology. Two Vols. (21s.) Ritter Comparative Geography of Palestine. Four Vols. (26s.) Sartorius The Doctrine of Divine Love. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) Schtlrer The Jewish People in the Time of Christ. Five Vols. (10s. 6d. each.)
(9s.)
Shedd History
of Christian Doctrine.
Two
Vols.
(21s.)
Steinmeyer History of the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord. One Vol. (10s. 6d.) The Miracles of our Lord in relation to Modem Criticism. One Vol (7s. 6d.) Stler The Words of the Lord Jesus. Eight Vols. (10s. 6d. per vol.) The Words of the Risen Saviour, and Commentary on Epistle of St. James. One Vol. The Words of the Apostles Expounded. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
(10s. 6d.)
UUmann Reformers
Winer Collection
Two
Vols.
2 Vols.
&
T.
T. Clark's Publications.
Library.
A Collection of
all
the
Church prior to the Council Rev. ProfesRor Roberts, D.T)., and Principal James Donaldson, LL.D., St. Andrews. In Twenty-four
of the Fathers of the Christian
Edited by the
handsome 8vo Volumes, Subscription Price 6, selection of Twelve Volumes for 3, 3s. net.
Any Volume may
be bad separately, price lOs. 6d.
6s.
net;
or
This Series has been received witli marked approval by all sections of the Christian Church in this country and in the United Stat^s, as sujtplyin;,' what has lonf; been felt to be a want, and also on account of the impartiality, learning, and care with which Editors and Translators have executed a very difficult task.
The following Works are included in the Series Apostolic Fathers, comprising Clement's Epistle
;
to the Corinthians Polycarp to the Ephesians; Martyrdom of Polycarp Epistle of Barnabas; Epistles of Ignatius (longer and shorter, and also the Syriac Version) Martyrdom of Ignatius Epistle t<. Diotrnetus Pastor of H.'iiiias; Papias; Spurious Epistles of Ignatius. Oik- Vnlunie. Justin Martyr; Athenagoras. One Volume. Tatian; Theophilus; The Clementine Recognitions. One Volume. Clement of Alexandria, comprising Exhortation to Heathen The Instructor and the Miscellanies. Two Volumes. HippolytUB, Volume First; Refutation of all Heresies, and Fragments from his Commentaries. Irenasus, Volume First. IrensBUS (completion) and Hippolytus (cnniplrtinn); Fragments of Third Century. One Volume. Tertullian against Marcion. One Volume. Cyprian; The Epistles and Treatises; Novatian Minucius Felix. Two Volumes. Origen De Principiis Letters; and portion of Treatise against Celsus. Two Volumes. Tertullian: To the Martyrs; Apology; To the Nations, et''. Tliree Volumes. Methodius; Alexander of Lycopolis Peter of Alexandria Anatolius; Clement on Virginity; and Fragments. One Volume. Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, and Revelations; comprising all the very curious Ai>o(ryphal Writing's of the tirst three Centuries. One Volume. Clementine Homilies; Apostolical Constitutions. One Volume. Arnobius. om Volum. Gregory Thaumaturgus; Dionysius; Archelaus; Syrian Fragments. One Volume, Lactantius; to^'cther with tlie Testaments of the Twelve Patrianhs, and P'ragments of the Second an'l Third Centuries. Two Volumes. Early Liturgies and Remaining Fragments. One Volume.
;
; ; ; ; ;
ST.
AUGUSTINE'S WORKS.
The Works
of Aurelius Augustine, P.ishop of Hippo. Edited by Marcus Duds, D.D. In Fifteen Volumes, demy 8vo,
Subscription Price 3, 19s, net. Any Volume may be had separately, price lOs, 6d. The 'City of God.' Two Volumes. The Harmony of the Evangelists, and the Sermon on the Mount. Writings in connection with the >iir Volume. Oonatist Controversy. )ne Volume. Letters.' Two Volumes, The Anti-Pelagian Works. Three N'oluuii's. On Christian Doctrine. Enchiridion Treatises against Faustus the on Catechising, and on Faith Manichaean. une Vulume. and the Creed, unc Vulume. On the Trinity. One Volume. 'Confessions,' With Copious Notes by Commentary on John. Two Volumes. HeV. J. O. ril.KINfiTON. 'For the reproduction of the "City of God" in an admirable English garb we are greatly
( (
'
indebted to the well-directed enterjirise and energy of .Messrs. Claris, and to the accuracy and scholarship of those who have undertaken the laborious task of translation.' CArus/ta/i Observer.
iVl^.-Messrs, Clark
otFer a Selection of
those Series at the Subscription Price of Three Guineas net (or a larger
number
at
same proportion).
T.
&
T. Clark's Publications.
Critical
Neinr
Testament.
Hannover.
H. A.
W. Meyer,
Oberconsistorialrath,
Under
Professor of Divinity in the University of Glasgow. In Twenty handsome 8vo Volumes, price 5, 5s. net. Or a selection may now be made of any Eight Volumes for Two Guineas net (or a larger number at the same proportion).
MATTHEW'S GOSPEL, Two Volumes MARK AND LUKE, Two Volumes ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL, Two Volumes; ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, Two Volumes; ROMANS, Two Volumes; CORINTHIANS, Two Volumes; GALATIANS, One Volume;
EPHESIANS AND PHILEMON, One Volume PHILIPPIANS AND COLOSSIANS, One Volume; THESSALONIANS, One Volume; TIMOTHY AND TITUS, One Volume; HEBREWS, One Volume; JAMES AND JOHN, One Volume; PETER AND JUDE, One Volume.
;
The series, as written by Meyer himself, is completed by the publication of Ephesians with Philemon in one volume. But to this the Publishers have thought it right to add Thessalonians and Hebrews, by Dr. LUnemann, and the Pastoral and Catholic Epistles,
by Dr. Huther.
need hardly add that the last edition of the accurate, perspicuous, and learned of Dr. Meyer has been most carefully consulted throughout and I must again, as in the pi-eface to the Galatians, avow my great obligations to the acumen and scholarship of the learned editor.' Bishop Ellicott in Preface to his Commentary on
'
commentary
Ephesians.
'
The
Works
of Dr.
John Owen.
D.D., Edinburgh.
Works
of
of
John
Calvin.
Six Volumes (or more at the same proportion) for 21s., with the exception Vols. I. and V.; and CORINTHIANS, 2 Vols. which are now out of j^rint. Any separate Volume (with the above exceptions), 6s. THE LETTERS, Edited by Dr. Boxnet, Two Volumes, 10s. 6d. THE INSTITUTES, Two Volumes, Translated, 14s. THE INSTITUTES, in Latin, Two Volumes, Tholuck's Edition, price 14s. net.
A Selection of
PSALMS,
HABAKKUK
T.
&
T.
Clark's Publications.
Gnomon
IlKNiiKL.
of
the
Newr Testament.
Edited by the Rev.
each,
Ly
John
Alhkut
tory
and
Andrew
and
the
R. Fausset,
M.A.
8vo,
The
demy
averaging
pp.
very great
demand for this Edition has induced the Publishers to issue the FiveYohimes bound in Tliree, at the Subscription Price of 24s. net. They trust by this still further to increase its usefulness.
*^* The Five Volume Edition
may
still
Price, 1,
lis.
Bristol says of Beugel: There is one expositor so uniquely eminent in drawing from Holy Scripture its deeper spiritual meaning, that it may be well for the student always to have at hand, for the New Testament, the Gnomon of Bengcl, and to acquire through the help of this most introspective expositor the aptitude of drawing from the Holy Word its full message to the soul.'
ST/ER'S
The Words
RuDOLrn
and
Stier.
2s. net.
The Words of the Risen Saviour, The Words of the Apostles, 8vo,
Volumes
'
6d.
(Or the
Ten
Its measure of practical and is a treasury of thou-rhtful exposition. spiritual application, with exegetical criticism, commends it to the use of those whose duty it is to preach as well as to understand the Gospel of Christ.' Guardian.
The
Complete Critical Examination of the Origin, Contents, and Connection of the Gospels. Translated from the German of J. P. Lange, D.D.,
Professor of Divinity in the University of Bonn.
Edited, with
in
additional Notes,
Cheap Edition,
Four
it first presents the life of Christ as Stands in the front rank given in the four Gospels together, and then as given by each Gospel separately from Principal \. Cave, D.D. its peculiar standpoint.'
of lives of Christ
P>y the
late
Professor
Eadie, D.D.
18s. net,
They have
T.
&
T. Clark's Publications.
With Illustration Neiff Testament. and Maps. Edited by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D. Complete in Four Volumes, imperial 8vo, price 12s. 6d. each. Contributors: The Very Rev. Dean Howson The Very Rev. Dean Plumptre Principal David Brown, D.D. W. Milligan, D.D. J. Rawson Lumby, D.D. W. F. Moulton, D.D. Rev. Canon Spence Marcus Dods, D.D.; J. Oswald
;
; ; ; ;
; ;
Commentary on the
Gloag, D.D. S. D. F. Salmond, D.D. Philip Schaff, D.D. Matthew B. Riddle, D.D. Maps and Plans Professor Arnold Guyot. Illustrations W. M. Thomson, D.D., Author of 'The Land and the Book.'
Dykes, D.D.
Baton
J.
D.D.
WiUiam
Volume
I.
Volume
St.
II.
Romans
John's Gospel, and The Acts of the Apostles. Vohime IV. Hebrews to Revelation.
' A useful, valuable, and instructive commentary. The interpretation is set forth with clearness and cogency, and in a manner calculated to commend the volumes to the thoughtful reader. The book is beautifully got up, and reflects great credit on the publishers as well as the writers.' The Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. I have looked into this volume, and read several of the notes on crucial passages. They seem to me very well done, with great fairness, and with evident knowledge of The illustrations are very good. I cannot doubt the controversies concerning them. that the book will ^Drove very valuable.' The Bishop of Winchester. have already spoken of this commentary with warm praise, and we can certainly assert that the enterp ise has now been brought to a close with really admirable work.'
'
'
We
English Churchman.
'
congratulate Dr. Schaff on the completion of this useful work, which we are now able to commend, in its complete form, to English readers of the Scriptures, ... It will be seen that we have a high opinion of this commentary, of the present volume, and also In this last respect it is perhaps of more unifonn excellence than of the whole work. any of its rivals, and in beauty of appearance it excels them all.' Church Bells.
We
Studies in the Christian Evidences: Being the Times. By Rev. Alexander Mair, D.D.
Revised and Enlarged, crown 8vo, price
.
Apologetics for
Third Edition,
6s.
. .
'This book ought to become immensely popular. That one chapter on "The Unique Personality of Christ" is a masterpiece of eloquent writing, though it is scarcely fair to mention oue portion where every part is excellent. The beauties of the volume are everywhere apparent, and therefore will again attract the mind that has been once delighted with the literary feast.' T/ie Rock.
Encyclopaedia of Theology.
D.D., Breslau.
Literature,
'
By
Professor
J.
E.
Rabiger,
Translated,
J.
by Rev.
Macpherson, M.A.
Rabiger's Encyclopaedia is a book deserving the attentive penisal of every divine. Athenceum. It is at once instructive and suggestive.'
.
theological work has come to us from Germany since the publication of Dr. Dorner's " Christian Doctrine."' Literary World.
The Gospel
tion
of St. Peter.
Synoptical Tables.
With
Transla-
and
Critical Apparatus.
D.D., Kiel.
*
The most useful thing that has yet been published on this fragment.'
T.
&
T. Clark's Publications.
BY PRINCIPAL
A.
CA\/E, P.P.
:
An
Introduction to Theology
Its
Kcsults,
of
autl
Its Literature.
IJy
College, London. Second Edition, largely Pibliographical Lists carefully revised to date. rewritten, and the In demy 8vo, price 1 2s.
Princi})al
Hackney
The best original work on the subject in the Englisli language.' rim. ii* Schakk. D.D., LL.D. Its arrangement is perfect, its learning accurate and extensive, and its practical hints Christian World. invaluable.' A marvel of industry, and simply invaluable to theologians.' Clergyman's
'
'
'
Magazine.
The
Scriptural Doctrine of Sacrifice and Atonement. By Alfred Cave, D.D., Principal of Hackney Cullege, London. In demy 8vo, New Edition, revised throughout, price 10s. 6d.
. . .
'Every page in this edition has been carefully revised in the light of the latest relative researches. The literary references have also been brought down to date. In the New Testament section there is considerable variation. Upon the Doctrine of the Atonement especially, conclusions upon wliich affect so materially tlie presentation of Christian truth, the author's views have been steadily ripening, as he believes, during the thought of years, Conse<iuently more than half of the Testament portion has been vewviiieu.'' Extract from the Preface. ' Let readers judge is this not now the best systematic study of the Atonement in
New
'
Expository Times.
BY PRINCIPAL
P.
W.
SIMON, P.P.
The Redemption
ment.
of
Man
W.
By
Principal D.
of Theocratic Life.
In crown 8vo, price
By
Prin-
W.
4s. 6d.
' This book will well repay perusal. It contains a great deal of learning as well as ingenuity, and the style is clear,' Guardian. ' Dr. Simon's little book is wortliy of the most careful attention.' J5a/i/w/. ' Dr. John Brown, of Bedford, writes: ' I feel sure that such of your readers as may make acquaintance with it, will be as grateful for its valuable help as I have been myself.'
P.y
of
Divinity and
10s. 6d.
gladly acknowledge the high excellence and the extensive learning which these lectures display. They are able to tlie last degree, and the author has, in an unusual measure, the power of acute and brilliant generalisation.' /.jVerory Churchman. The subject is treated with a comprehensive jrrasp. keen logical power, clear analysis and learning, and in devout spirit.' Evangelical Magazine.
'
We
Handbooks
Edited
'
for Bible Classes and Private Students. by Professor Maecus Dods, D.D., and Alexander
Whyte, D.D.
specially the admirable Handbooks for Bible Classes issued by T. & T. Clark of Edinare very clieap, and among them are some books unsurpassed in their kind.'^Dr. W. in The British Weekly. 'Sound, intelligible, and sometimes brilliantly-written handbooks, packed with wisdom and knowledge.' iHe</iorf( si Recorder. have long desired to meet with a These volumes are models of the multum in parvo style. series of this kind Little Books on Great Subiects.' Literary World.
I
name
burgh.
They
E-OBERTSON NicoLL
'
We
COMMENTARIES
Professor
2s.
Genesis.
2s.
Exodus.
Joshua.
2 Vols.
Is.
St. Luke. 2 Vol. II., Is. 3d.). 2 Vols. St. Jolin. 2s.
Principal
each.
Professor J. G.
Murphy, LL.D.
Chronicles.
Professor T. M. Lindsay, D.D. Acts. Is. 6d. each. Principal Brown, D.D. Romans. 2s.
2 Vols.
Professor Marcus Dods, D.D. Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. 2s. Obadiah to ZephPrincipal Douglas, D.D. anlah. is. fid. Professor T. M. Lindsay, D.D. Mark. 2s. 6d.
Professor A.
2s.
B.
Davidson, D.D.
Hebrews.
6d.
GENERAL SUBJECTS
jAiiES Stalker, D.D. The Life of Christ. The Life of St. Paul.
Rev.
Is. 6d.
is. 6d.
John Macpherson, M.A. The Sum of Saving Knowledge. The Confession of Faith. 2s.
Is. 6d.
Is. 6d.
Presbyterianism.
Professor Bint^ie, D.D.
2s. 6d.
S. Candlish, D.D. Christian Sacraments. Is. 6d. Christian Doctrine of God. Is. 6d. Work of the Holy Spirit. Is. 6d. Biblical Doctrine of Sin. Is. 6d. Norman L. Walker, D.D. Scottish Church History. Is. 6d. Rev. W. D. Thomson, M.A. The Christian Miracles and the Conclu-
The Church.
Is. 6d.
on
Human
Nature, is. 6d. President Hamilton, D.D. History of the Irish Presbyterian Church.
2s.
2s. 6d.
sions of Science.
2s.
2s. 6d.
3s.
Geography.
John
2s.
the
The Reformation.
2s.
Bible-Class Primers.
'A most
In paper
useful series. With such helps as these, to be an inefficient teacher worthy.' Rev. C. H. Spurgeon.
covers, Qd. each ; free hy post. Id.
to be blame-
In cloth, M. each ; free by post, 9d. Testament Morality, by Rev. T. B. KilChristian Character: PATRicK, B.D. The Free Church of Scotland, by Kev. C. G. M'Crie, D.D. The Truth of Christianity, by Professor J. Iverach, D.D. The Making- of Israel, by Rev. 0. A. Scott, B.D. The Sabbath, by the Editor Our Christian Passover, by Rev. C. A. Salmond, M.A. The Kingdom of God, Three Parts {or one vol., cloth, Is. 6d.), by F. Herbert Stead, M. A. The Parables of our Lord, by the Editor Life of St. John, by Paton j. Gloag, D.D.The Story of Jerusalem, by Rev. H. Callan, M. A. Life of Abraham, by Rev. Charles A. Scott, B.D.Historical Connection between the Old and New Testaments, by Professor John Skinner, M.A. Life of Christ, by the EniTOR The Shorter Catechism, Three Farts {or one vol., cloth. Is. 6d.), by the Editor The Period of the Judges, by Professor Paterson, D.D. Outlines of Protestant Missions, by Rev. J. Robson, D.D. The Apostle Peter, by the Editor Outlines of Early Church History, by H. W. Smith, D.D. David, by the late Rev. P. Thomson, M. A. Moses, by Professor J. Iverach, D.D. Paul, by Paton J. Gloag, D.D. Solomon, by Rev. R. Winterbotham, M.A., LL.D. Reformation, by Rev. Professor WitherowKings of Israel, by Rev. W. Walker, M.A. Kings of Judah, by Professor Given, Ph.D. Joshua arid the Conquest, by Professor Croskery. Is.The Extra Vols. Bible Words and Phrases, by Rev. Charles Michie, M.A. Seven Churches of Asia, by Miss Deborah Alcock. Is.
Study
iu Nevv^
BS1135.B934
Canon and text of the Old Testament
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library
li^^i
^jiiil