targumofonkelost00bern.pdf

October 16, 2017 | Author: Arte Para Cristo | Category: Perfect (Grammar), Hebrew Language, Jews, Bible, Jews And Judaism
Share Embed Donate


Short Description

Download targumofonkelost00bern.pdf...

Description

709.H-

3261: A A

6 2 1

5 7

:

i

\

!

THE TARGUM OF

ONKELOS TO GENESIS A CRITICAL ENQUIRY INTO THE VALUE OF THE TEXT EXHIBITED BY YEMEN MS?.

COMPARED WITH THAT OF THE EUROPEAN RECENSION TOGETHER WITH

SOME SPECIMEN CHAPTERS OF THE ORIENTAL TEXT BY

HENRY BARNSTEIN.



LONDON

1S96

DAVID NUTT 270-271 STRAND.

Ph. D.

W.

DRUGULIN LEIPZIG.

DEDICATED TO

MY REVERED TEACHER AND FRIEND THE Rev. Dr. M. Gaster to

whom

I

owe an

everlasting

debt of gratitude for the

instruction received at his hands interest

he has shown

in

1187410

and the constant

my

welfare.

PREFACE. HE purpose

i

of this enquiry

the recension of the

Yemen

Targum

is

to critically investigate

of Onkelos preserved in the

Mss. and to establish a comparison between these

Mss. and the Western or European texts, present

represented

best

by

which are at

recent

edition.

Berliner did not avail himself, however, of these

Eastern

and

Mss.

his

edition

is

Berliner's

to a certain

therefore,

inadequate and can hardly be accepted as

final.

extent,

In order

to establish a critical edition this enquiry goes into minute details of

grammar,

differences of vocalization

graphy, additions and omissions,

and ortho-

interchange of particles

and variant readings. Part I contains the general outlines of this research and the results arrived at. Part II shows the

more

detailed

comparison

following the text of the Bible, investigation

the Targum Yemen Mss.

concludes text, It will

Table of Contents. effort

may

lists

of

examples,

according to the version given by the

probably

reflect the original Palestinian

It is

my

fervent

I

have given a detailed

hope

that this

humble

be appreciated by students of the Bible and

give an incentive to the true appreciation of the

of Onkelos.

The

with a few specimen chapters of

Instead of making an index

form.

may

and

chapter and verse.

work



CONTENTS.

PART CHAPTER

History of the Text

I.

Importance of the Translation

l)

I.

(l).



i— 3-

PP2)

Where

it

originated

(2).

Travels (2).— 3) Effects of travels upon text (2).— Present texts

CHAPTER

and

Ofikelos

II.

Translation

his

.

.

pp. 3

(2),



5.

Approximate date of work (3). —2) Character of his Targum (4).— 3) Halachic and Haggadic elements (4).— 4) Public recital l)

Targum

of

CHAPTER

(5).

Importance of the Yemen Mss.

III.

6— 11.

pp.



Hitherto their linguistic character alone studied (6). 2) Origin of Superlinear vocalization (6).— 3) Targum never neglected in 1)

Palestine (8).— 4)

Yemen

of

version

(lo).

CHAPTER CHAPTER Signs

l)

maic 45)-^

(14).

— 5)



IV.

V.

The Babylonian Redaction 6) They represent the

7)

Object of Investigation

Description of Mss. Superiifiear

employed



3)

in this

system

— — 4)

(13).

114).



5)

Differences

.

.

2)

.

— 13 —

.pp. .

11

pp.

13.

17.

Appropriate to Ara-

Absence of Segol

(15; 45

— — 46).

6)

No

(15;

sign

7) No sign for Dages or Rafe (16).— Aramaic and Syriac (17). 9) Agreement

(16).

to Biblical

.

Vocalization

Origin of system



original Palestinian

(10). .

Absence of Sewa Compositum

Approach

(9).

(10),

Sewa Quiescens

for 8)

Mss.



with Biblical Aramaic (17).

CHAPTER l)

VI.

Differences of Vocalization

Less frequent use of vowel letters

(iS).

.

.

pp.

18

— 25.

— 2) Superlinear system

ety-

mologicallymore correct(i8).-3)Interchange of vowels. Western texts

Patah=YemenQames(i8— {a)

Second number

responding portion

in

1

9; 46);

(7.

brackets

in Part II.

Monosyllabic words and particles.

refers to

the pages of the cor-

——

CONTENTS

VIII

b.

Per. Sin. Fret. Peal of ^"v.

3rcl

Mediae Geminatae. f. Suffix of 2nd

Per.

Sin.

e.

3rd Sin. Pret. Feminine.

Miscellaneous

g.

Pret. Peal of

3rd. Per, Sin.

c.

Present Participle,

«'.

Western

words.

= Yemen

Qames b.

Patah (19; 47). a. Suffix of 3rd Per. Sin. Fem. Vowel of 2nd Radical of Verb. c. Little change in Pause.

d.

Vowel before

Sere

=

— 5)

47}.

b.

and

"3

= Yemen

(20; 48).

= Yem.

Patah ==Yem. Sere.

=

Yem. Sere. Yem. Hireq. Yem. Qames.

Hireq.

c.

Sere (19;

Western Holem

(20; 47).

of the Imperfect (20; 4S).

=Yem.

=

Yemen

= Yem.

Holem.

West.

Holem

West. Sureq

=

West. Sureq

=

h. j.

Patah.

d.

ITolem. f. West.

West. Holem = Yem. Qames.

i.

— 4) Western

Yemen

West. Sere= Yem. Patah.

West. Patah

e.

=

West. Hireq

a.

48).

;

West. Sere

g.

Holem

— 6; The vowel

Various interchanges (21

West. Patah

Other instances.

e.

sj.

Western Hireq

(19; 47),

Western Sureq

= Yemen Sureq 7)

Suffixes

Yemen Hireq

=Yem.

Sere. /. West. Patah == Yem. Sewa (22; 48 — 49). a. West. Patah = Yem. Sewa. b. West. Qames = Yem. Sewa. c. West. Sere = Yem. Sewa. d. West. .Sewa = Yem. Sere. e. West. Hireq = Yem. Sewa. 10) General 9) The Yemenite Pronunciation (22).

Sureq.

West. Patah

k.

— 8) Interchange

of Vowels and





results (25).

CHAPTER

Variations in orthography.

VII.

25

pp.

— 28

49—53 a. Dialectical Variations,

similar words. letters,

e.

1)

Pael.

tafal. c. 7.

0.

/2.

State,

and Construct,



and

Afel.

and Imperfect.

Other

IX.

How

j.

Etpeel and ^i.

28

pp.

.

Number,

c.

2)

Additions (36—37;

4j

Contractions

— 35 Em

Gender.

— 39;

c.

60

— 62). — 3)

5)

The Tenses

/'.

Present

(Participle)

Other Differences. pp.

may be accounted

— Interchange 62 — 65) [Hebraisms

(38).

Etpaal.

and

Perfect

Variations

additions and omissions

Particles (38

b.

.

Absolute and

a.



i)

fix

a.

Imperfect and (Participle) Present,

CHAPTER

•z'-VTi-,

a. The Conjugations. «. Pea 60). 35; 57 Peal and Afel. 7. Peal and Etpeel, Etpaal or Et

[t^T)

Pael

Perfect

Interchange o

d.

1.

g.

Grammatical Variations

Absolute

The Verb

and

in

s"!5

to distinguish

Nhp. h. Mar Agreement of Mss. with Nehardean Tradition

i.

VIII.

/?.

of

f. nt;^n jra?.

The Noun (28—33; 53 — 57).

phatic. 2)

Use of vowel change

3rd Pers. Plu.

c.

Other changes,

ginal readings,

CHAPTER

b.

— 36).

— 38;

62).

Omissions (37

of Prepositions 65].



6)

35—39.

for (35

and other

Variations in Suf-

(39).

CHAPTER

X.

Exegetical Variations

pp. 39

— 42;

66

— 77.

.

CONTENTS

PART CHAPTER

I.

Remarks Upon n^; bs;

CHAPTER

II.

CHAPTER

III

Onp;

Examples of

IX

II.

words

the

i)^3p;

n^i.-^H^X

.

pp. 43

.

the rules contained in

pp.

Introductory

XXXI

(85)

Specimen Chapters remarks

XLI

(92).

(78).

Genesis

.... XVII

pp.

(79}.

— 45.

Part

J.

45—777S

— end.

XXVI

(81).

LIST A

OF ABBREVIATIONS.

•= Ms. Codex Montefiore.

= C= Z? = B. =

B

Bbl.







No. 502. „

508.

Museum. Or. No. 2363. Codex Gaster. No. 2. „ Berliner's Targum Onkelos (Berlin „

=

Brit.

1S84).

Babylonian.

= Aramaic. = Dagges. = Haggadic. Hal. = Halachic. H. = Hireq. Ht. = Hatef. Ho. = Holem. L. = Levy's Chaldaisches Worterbuch Luz. = Luzzatto's Philoxenos (Vienna O. = Onkelos. = = Q. = Qames. R. = Rafe. = Segol. = Sureq. = Sere. Se. = Sewa. = Superlinear. SbL = Sublinear. Trg. = Targum. Bib. Aram.

Biblical

D. Hag.

P.

Plst.

S.

S. S.

Spl.

Patali.

Palestinian.

(Leipzig 1S66). 1830).

I.

It

I.

is

HISTORY OF THE TEXT.

universally

acknowledged

the greatest veneration

upon

rests

to

the Exegesis

that of all the Trans-

name of Onkelos enjoyed

lations of the Bible that bearing the

from very ancient times; because

and

of the Tanaim,

is

it

considered

represent the original traditional Interpretation. Its

sanctity

was enhanced when the Amoraim invested

with great authority by making

an

it

official

decree that

it it

should be publicly read in the Synagogue side by side with

Hebrew original. The neglect of this Rabbinical decree was in later times This neglect of greatly blamed by some of the Geonim. the Targum was most noticeable among the Jews living in the

arabic-speaking

countries

supplanted the Aramaic

in

the Jewish

who have blamed

other authorities

carrying out the

arabic

the

after

,

as

principle

language

had

Among

vernacular.

the Jews for their laxity

of ai^ir nnsi

x^.p^

^'i'si

the

Hanagid and the GeoHai stand out most prominently. and nim Natronai had a salutary effect for throughout Their admonitions at the time present this precept is the middle ages and strictly adhered to, and this accounts for the veneration in

names of Jehuda

which

it

is

be added,

b.

Qoreis, Samuel

held by the Jews is

shared by

of the light which

all

—a

veneration

this translation

passages in the Bible, as well as for '

Cf. Delitzsch

1836, pp. 27

and

which,

it

may

Holy Writ, on account throws upon many obscure

students of

,,Zur Geschichte

its

intrinsic

merits

der jiidischen Poesie".

135.

A

'.

Leipzig

The Targum

2.

originated

where

coming, as

esteem,

we

Palestinian

clearly presently,

a

subgreat

Similarly

both of which are products of

great zest in Babylon,

In Babylon

learning.

enjoyed

Calendar and the Ritual pursued

find the study of the

with

it

from the Holy Land.

did

it

was

but

Palestine,

in

sequently transplanted to Babylon

we

as

,

redaction

fresh

more

see

shall

of the text was made,

in many respects, from the original Plst. From Babylon the Trg. travelled to Europe, first and then to Germany and Northern France, and

which differed

Version. to Italy

also

to

Spain and Provence. In

3.

the

course

of

became more and more in Europe the original the Sbl. system which

a change

which

its

Spl.

the

travels,

Some

corrupt.

for

^

of the Trg.

after

its

arrival

was exchanged for

vocalization

was used

text

time

the

Hebrew language, effect upon the

had the most pernicious

The evil was aggravated by the ignorance of the European scribes who inserted marginal glosses in the text and heaped errors upon errors until the text of the Trg. text.

became 4.

common the

text

result of this

use to-day.

expedients

all

an all-but-hopeless condition.

in

The

have been

with

is

seen in the texts which are in

These are tried

far

from

from time

perfect.

Various

time to improve

to

but indifferent success, the reason being that

the would-be amenders started from

an incorrect stand-

They all assumed that the European copies were based upon the original text, whereas they originate from point.

the

Bbl.

according

Redaction. to Bibl.

Buxtorf wished

to

remodel

the

text

Aram., quite ignoring the fact that a long

time had elapsed between the Aramaic of the Bible and that of the Trg. and that the Trg. was different circumstances,

Lagarde thought he

and

for

composed under

an entirely

entirely

different purpose.

would be serving the

interests

of

I At the beginning of the 12th century by Nathan B. Machir of Ancona, according to an epigraph of the Codex I2 of de Rossi

(v.

Berliner

„Targum Onkelos".

Berlin

1884, Vol.

II,

p.

134).

— science

way by omitting

best

the

in

his attention

confining

consonantal

but,

text,



3

and

vowel-signs

the

establishing a correct and critical

to

must be remarked, he did not even

it

attain this ideal.

Targum

Berliner's edition of the

*,

(B.)

which

is

a reprint

of the Sabionetta edition of 1554 suffers for the same reason

His sources are

European Editions.

as all other

Euro-

all

pean MSS. none of which exhibit the original text but the subsequent Babyl. redaction. It is undoubtedly superior to any of

and embodying the vestigation how our to MSS. unknown

which

serve

will

necessary

to

in-

is

predecessors in

B.'s

all

Before proceeding to the

may be improved by

Trg. texts

as

of

results

learning.

to B.

edition

does the products of a life-study

it

ripe

same branch of

the

which the

besides

predecessors,

its

valuable containing as

in-

reference

and hitherto all-but-neglected and

basis

for our

own

know something about

investigations his

O.,

it

is

and the

time

general character of his translation of the Pentateuch.

ONKELOS AND

ir.

As

I.

to

date

the

of

translation

this

much

difference

Frankel- and Geiger^ place

of opinion has existed. in

HIS TRANSLATION.

the time of the later Talmudists, but

its

date

by observing certain

of the translation B. has fixed the time as

characteristics

contemporaneous with or immediately following the time of second half of the second century. He bases opinion upon the Targumist's consistent avoidance of

R. 'Aqiba; this

anthropomorphisms

LXX),

the

words

'Aqiba's

time

I

9.

1857, p. 164.

Frankfort 1S92,

a

characteristic

of the

for aramaicising Greek words

in the original Greek in Targumic embodiment of 'Aqiba's

the

principles*.

„Zu dem Targum der Propheten".

Breslau

Urschrift und die Ubersetzungen der Bibel.

Breslau

2

Berlin: 1884.

1872, p.

also

being au conrant

— and

and hag.

hal.

is

necessity felt

little

— these

(which

3

4

1.

c.

p. 132.

pp.

102— loS.

Cf.

also

Zunz "Gottesd. Vort."

As

2.

regards

character of this Translation,

the

described with great clearness and minuteness by B.

Trg.

neither too literal nor too free;

is

agreement with the Massoretic Text^;

this

is

Our

^

it

shows a remarkable

it

always follows the

Qere leaving the Ketib unnoticed^ a characteristic which is also noticeable in a MS. of Daniel with Spl. vocalization

my

which came under be considered

will

original

the

which

are

to

occasionally endeavours

he

texf*;

The Targumist omits be found in the Hebrew

chapter VIII.

in

pleonasms

certain

and the importance of which

notice,

text

to imitate the sound of employs a rich store of synonyms, oc-

5,

makes use of circumlocution and simplifies figuraBoth the Tetragrammaton and u^nbn are

casionally

tive expressions.

rendered

which was written

"'"'^,

"i^"'

(until

this

was taken as

a sign for the Trinity), of which various modifications, such as

2"'"',

"^T,

"'Z'^

word

are found.

word c-nsx

like of the

is

The reason of

the Targumist's dis-

found

employment of

When

for strange gods''.

in the d%"i^n

this

occur together, the

"^^

Targumist must naturally reproduce them as they occur

Hebrew

the

According

3.

which applies mist renders affects

thus

are

to

is

be found,

that

— Whenever have

people pp.

p. 210,

206—224 5

the case

not

1.

c.

yet

1.

c.

p. 211.

must be

it

for

Targumist has

the

This

it.

(Prague: 1861)

runs

rule

to

meet

the

those

cases

wherein the

attained

a

complete

2

6

1.

1.

c.

c.

p.

207.

p. 223.

3 7

1.

c.

That

p. 11.

9

contra-

knowledge p.

209.

4

this is not

may be seen from Exodus 12, 12 where a'jU'^ "rfTS ^ In Kerem Eemed V, 223 and VI, 220

Wilna: 1874.

to

and

rejected,

in

r-yj.

n)3Ki tithv

tra-

or

dictory views of Sectarians,

"K'^U'D

occurs which

But so many exceptions

given.

by Adler^ substituted

given

1

law

a

each individual member of the community, the

rule

that

command

but where a

literally,

have

of justice the Targu-

administration

the

we

where

Rapoport^,

to

to

ditional explanation this

in

text.

is

of

1.

c.

always

rendered

also in i-iai

In the Introduction to his

15"?

nm

point

the

in

the

Tanaim themselves

the

Targumist gives the better of

the two traditions,

he

down no

general

the

rule,

a

unassailable

is

we can

lay

Halacha

the

rendering

literal

differ

says

employs

O.

but

tradition

however,

Singer,

where

translation

his

where

but

literally \

renders

upon

when

question,

or

the tradition,

would

in

remain

obscure-.

Great care was taken

4.

ensure

to

the

correct

recital

of the Trg., this being especially the case with the Trg. of the Pentateuch ^

was given out by the Reader in immediately followed by its Aramaic

A

verse

Hebrew, which was allowed

the

were

verses their

with

recital

the

before the

of the

solemn

however, a standard

official

demeanour,

which they held 5.

As,

virtue

in

had not then yet appeared, opportunity was given

translation to

which three

in

Meturgeman recited Both Reader and Meturgeman had to

translation'*.

the

of the Prophets,

together

taken

preserve a reverential office

]More laxity was

by the Meturgeman.

rendered

translation

Meturgemanim

to

insert

interpretation of

own

their

Meturgemanim blamed by

find

some of

this

account.

The

of the Misna

— was

the

writing

down of

only applied to the writing

down

the Rabbis^

the Trg.

at first prohibited",

and we

abused

This privilege was occasionally

text.

but



this

just

on

as that

prohibition

for the purpose of public

reading, but private copies could be held by the scribes for their

I

own E.

1.

niss seines 4

Cf.

use.

c.

pp. 224

Targums

Misna.

— 225.

2

Singer: „Onkelos und das Verhalt-

zur Halacha".

Halle 1881.

3

Megillah IV, 4 and Talmud. Bab.

Hayyim

Tr.

B.

1.

c.

p. 84.

Megillah 24 a.

and Maimonides rhsr r'ihr: XII, il. R. Nissim quotes a Jerusalemi^ Cf. Talmud of Babytan Talmud as the origin of this custom. Megillah 7 Cf. Talm. Jer. Tr. lon Tr. Megillah 23 b and 24 a. 5

Cf. Tur, Oral}

In Tal. Bab. Tr. Megillah

IV,

I

ch. 145

Cap.

III.

and Talmud Bab. Sabbath 115

a.

v.

Zunz.

1.

c.

p. 65.



IMPORTANCE OF THE YEMEN MSS.

III.

only European MSS. have

strange that hitherto

It is

1.

6

been studied

Since then how-

connection with the Trg.

in

ever a number of Targum MSS. have come to Europe from

South Arabia but have received having regarded them

scholars

attention;

of linguistic importance only.

one of them (which

way,

little

I

shall subsequently

In this

call

C) has

been employed by B. \ Merx^ and Margoliouth 2. At the outset of our investigation into the importance of these MSS. we must ask ourselves two questions. j.

Is

correct to call the Spl. system of vocalization the

it

Does

Babyl. system? the

redaction

of

the study of the Trg. in Babylon, or

version

a

necessarily imply that

Now

country, Palestine?

of the

Trg.

in

country

that

study was neglected in

its

mother-

its

the Spl. punctuation has been fre-

quently described as the Babyl. system'^, a nomenclature which

I

pp. 68

1.

c.



pp. 159

— 160.

103.

3

On

2

"Chrestomathia Targumica", Berlin 18SS,

the Supeilinear

vocalization (Transactions of

London 1893), pp. 46—56. Thus Neubauer connects the Yemen Jews with Babylon in his article on "The Literature of the Jews in Yemen" (Jewish Quarterly Review III, pp. 604 Speaking of the epitaphs which have been dis622). "These epitaphs, dated covered in Yemen, Neubauer says (p. 608)

the

Congress

9th

of

II,

Orientalists

4



:

according to the era of the contracts point to an acquaintance with the Babylonian schools, for the Italian era

of

the

addition,

destruction

of

the

early epitaphs date

2nd Temple

The Jews

the era of the creation.

and of

later

Yemen

from the

on bear,

in

continue up

day to date from the era of the contracts, using Aramaic Morepoint more to Babylonia than to Palestine. over, the use of superlinear vowel-points (usually called Assyrian Punctuation) in the pointed Hebrew Texts written in Yemen would argue

to the present

formulae, which

their connection with the Eastern Massoretic Schools rather than with

the Palestinian one at Tiberias".

But Margoliouth

of the Bbl. origin of the Spl. vocalization. the

originators

Schools of the

of the "sn:-;'^

superlinear

or "Easterns"

punctuation rests

is

not at

all

"The theory which partly

with

the

cert.ain

identifies

Masoretic

on an epigraph

he Parmese Codex de Rossi 12 of A. D. 1311, and partly

— or

in

rather

employed by

also

is

says:

but,

B.,

proofs have yet been

can be observed, no

far as

as

given

show

to

its

Bbl. origin

doubtful when the vowel-signs were

"it is

B.

'.

^

added

first

but probably they were added in Babylon, in which country peculiar

the

punctuation was

Spl.

advanced why we should make

assume

were added

that they

in

Babylon?

Is

reason

is

Then why

assumption.

were originally written

likely that they

No

use".

in

this

not just as

it

and came

in Palestine

over to Babylon with the Trg. text?

This seems the more probable after Noldeke's assertion ^

Targum although redacted

that "the authoritative

chiefly

— on

point vSpl.

the internal evidence afforded

of the

rubrics

out

that

Codex Babylonians" this is a

How

system.

subject.

how

out

p. 51).

But he proceeds to

very flimsy foundation

for the origin of the

can we

trust

a single

of the 14th century

scribe

system are

silent

Margoliouth especially singles out Saadia and points

inexplicable his silence would be were the superlinear system

of Bbl. origin. lonicus

Babylon

by the readings and marginal

c.

(I.

whilst the contemporaries of the originators of this

on the

in

it

As

for

the internal evidence

must be remembered that

from the Codex Baby-

MS. does not

this

the

exhibit

primitive Spl. system, but shows the Spl. punctuation in a highly

com-

posite and developed form which would naturally approach the Eastern or Bbl. forms of that jSIasoretic School.

argue refutes

from

MS.

this

various

to

prove

other theories

origin of this system,

but his

the

Hence

Bbl.

which have been

own theory

it

origin. set

is

hardly

fair

Margoliouth up

to

to

also

prove the

that this system represents

a mixed nestorian-jacobite punctuation appears to be very forced, and is

more than improbable

if

we

are

to

admit

this

system to be of

Cf. Seligsohn pp. 12, 19, 32.

Palestinian origin.

1 Likewise Dalman: „Zwar ist die superlineare Vokalisation der von dort neuerlich nach Europa gekonimenen Targumhandschriften keineswegs als aramaisclie \Viedergabe palastinischer Aussprache des Aramiiischen anzusehen. Vjelmehr wird sie einer in Babylonien gelehrten schulmassigen Behandhing des Onkelostargums entstammen, der gegeniiber der Konsonantentext der sog. jerusalemischen Targume ofters eine iiltere und urwiichsigere Form des Onkelostextes reprasentiert" (Grammatik des jiidisch-palastinischen Aramaisch, Leipzig 1894,

I,

p.

V — VI).

matik.

2

1.

Halle 1S75.

c.

p. 131.

Introduction

j

Th. Noldeke, Mandaische Gram-

p.

V.

— — a

exhibits

whose

dialect



8

fundamental

are

characteristics

Palestinian.

For the present

system should

the

then,

Superlinear (Spl.) system, without defining

we shall see further on more appropriate this system is to

Bbl. or Plst.

now

than the Sbl. system B.

3.

states

'

that

country and

we

V how much

chapter

the

Aramaic language

in use.

various

for

through the decay of the

in

be called the

further as either

it

reasons

Plst. schools, the

but

Trg.

principally

But are

study was transferred to Babylon.

its

sure that the Trg. ever

left

Palestine

native

left its

or that

study

its

was neglected by the Jews of the Holy Land? May it not have travelled to Babylon just as the Calendar and Ritual did



— and

It is

were greatly harassed

of Palestine

Jews

the

that

yet have been continued in Palestine?

true their

in

by political troubles which interfered with their liberty and yet we know that they were always the great leaders of the study of the Bible, a fact which the Massora that

studies



invaluable guide to the correct Text of our

Hebrew

and the various Midrasim bear witness to. Now we know that both the Massora and from Palestine.

hail

come down

to us^

Midrasim

the

the Jerusalem Trg.

Again,

Bible

which has

although differing in character from the

Trg. of O., shows at least that the study of the Trg. was

pursued hagadic

Now

in Palestine. in

character,

this

may we

Jerusalem Trg.

is

entirely

not then assume that side by

side with this hag. Trg. there existed a literal Trg., the

version, in fact, which

Palestine produced

by

side it

will

— the

original Plst.

I

1.

c.

p. 108.

Babylon?

same

Just as

probable that the two Recensions

and the hag.

will

be shown that text.

is

it

literal

This

side.

to

two such varied studies as those of the

Massora and Midras, of the Trg.

was transferred

— existed

in this

country

perhaps be seen more clearly after

Yemen MSS.

appear

to

contain the

— The

4-

natural

of the attention bestowed upon

result

the Trg. in Babylon

seen

is



9

redaction

that

in

which

of the text

version

although adhering to the original

a great

to

extent must have inevitably become somewhat corrupted in its language in course of time, in spite of the efforts of the

Rabbis of the time the

stamp

preserve the

to

text

intact

it.

As

upon

authority

of their

by placing

became

texts

more mistakes must have gradually crept in. As the words were also, in all probability, differently pronounced in Babylon, their orthography became changed, and the orimultiplied

must

vocalization

ginal

stitution literal

have

been

considerably

least

at

Another tendency became noticeable

modified.

of hag.

explanations

In time a reaction set in in favour of the

rendering.

and

Version;

original Plst.

in the sub-

of the original

place

the

in

movement

this

represented

is

by the so-called Nehardean tradition, in contradistinction to the tradition of Sura, which is substantially represented

by the

When

text

which we find to-day

the Trg.

came

to

was then punctuated

it

the original Spl. vocalization which in

Some

Palestine.

zation

was altered

Hebrew

time after

in

our European editions.

in

Europe its

it

in

had probably received this Spl.

arrival',

favour of the Sbl. system

vocali-

in use

with

for the Trg. text

This inevitably led to great confusion ^ had already undergone considerable modi-

fications after

arrival in

the

text.

its

Babylon, and

ration taking place w^hich practically

of the text in

its

now

involved

entirety the result can easily

As copies were increased in Europe fied and was greatly aggravated by the scribes, of the

another the

alte-

rewriting

be imagined.

became magniignorance shown by

the evil

the

Aramaic language; the

result of all this

we have already seen in the various devices made by scholars to amend the corrupt text. These were all unsuccesful because the scholars depended upon the Babyl. recension I

whilst

V.

B.

old

1.

c.

p.

editions

134.

2

««Our

editions

are

greatly

and MvSS. have superior readings".

Nachgelassene Schriften, Vol.

4,

Berlin 1876, p. 104.)

neglected, (A.

Geiger:





lO

which must have been a considerable modification of the original.

PIst.

Of

5.

to

late years

a rich store of treasure has been brought

most of which are punctuated with the which

fact

from a

more

examining these MSS.

These variations occur not only

in the vocali-

pronunciation and orthography but also in the exe-

of

the

text

itself,

several important hag.

usual

lation.

On

most far-reaching and profound differences are

to be found.

zation,

the

Spl. vocalization, a

the student to their study if only

in itself invites

linguistic point of view.

closely

gesis

Yemen

by the discovery of MSS. of the Trg. from

light

especially

interpretation

the

in

and poetical passages,

hag. interpretation

replaced by a

is

of

which cases

in

literal

trans-

point to?

It is

'

What then do the

all

that

of their

own although

thern Arabia

a

at

communities

in

facts

Yemen had a peculiar we know that they settled

very early

Mohammed

before

centuries

these peculiar

Jews of

unlikely

period. there

North Arabia

"Certain

were

tradition in Sou-

it

powerful

as well as in

is

that

Jewish

South Arabia or

Yemen" ^ 6. The various differences which are noticeable in these Trg. MSS. induce one to believe that they represent the The changes in vocalization, pronunoriginal Plst. text. and orthography remind us

ciation

chapters

V

to VIII

— of

the Bib.



as will be shown in Aram, and Syriac grammatical

forms and approximate more closely to the Nehardean

tra-

we may perhaps call it the Nehardean recension. The preference shown for a literal translation may be acdition,

or

counted

7. I

by observing

for

Trg. which

The

entirely hag.

is

that in

the

Plst.

Jews had another

tendency.

object, then, of this investigation

is

Geiger although ascribing a Babylonian origin

of Onkelos points out that

its

as a later protest

the fanciful

exegetists.

1.

c.

against

vol. 4,p. 104.

character

2

v.

is

literality,

1.

endeavour the

to

Targum

which he regards

interpretations

Neubauer

to

c.

of p.

the

605.

earlier

— to

way

so pave the

now

of the original Trg. of O.

the true character

show

for a

how

of that Trg.

edition

critical

of the

each

with

separately

deal

above, and show in



II

I

and will

enumerated

points

far these characteristics strengthen

our views as to the original and

Plst.

character of the Trg.

But before entering into the examination of these MSS., a short description of those I have made use of these MSS.

of,

may be now

given.

THE YEMEN

IV.

MSS.

Codex Montefiore, No. 502; which

I.

I

call

A

is

peculiar

in having a Sublinear vocalization for the Aramaic as well as for the Hebrew text, which may perhaps be regarded

as an unsuccesful attempt

the

two

other.

of

differs

from the

systems also

It

Hebrew

text

on the part of the scribe

vocalization

large

in

to bring

harmony with each other MSS. in having the into

square characters

the

in

middle of

Arabic translation are placed

and and the commentary of Rasi below. It conThe sists of 133 folios and extends till the end of Exodus. writing is bold, square and pointed; and the paper stout and dark. It is probably of the i8th century and is written whilst the Trg.

the page,

on the

sides

throughout quires

custos

both

in

consist

the

translations

length

number lations

Hebrew at

every

but nearly

leaves,

7

The number of

the bottom.

at in

The

one hand (except the marginal notes). of

and

text,

the sides,

in

the

lines in

has the

each p^ge,

Aramaic and Arabic

varies

naturally

leaf

according

to

the

of the commentary of Rasi below, but the average is

19 lines

and about 8

for

the

for the

Hebrew

has an average of 8 word.s to the soretic directions except that at the

number of mnemonic.

text,

commentary. line.

30

is

text

There are no mas-

end of every Parasa the

verses contained in that portion It

for the trans-

The Hebrew

is

given with a

one of the characteristics of Eastern MSS.

— have

that they

little

no

or



12

illuminations^

and

all

these

MSS.

(except C) have only an ornamental figure on the margin at

end of every Parasa.

the

2. is

Codex Montefiore, No. 508. I call and clear MS. and

a remarkably fine

found

be valuable

to

It

of 159

consists

custos,

being

24 Hnes

to

MS. B.

This

be frequently

in retaining the original literal render-

an haggadic interpretation

ing, whilst

this

will

folios,

inserted on the margin.

is

making a quire;

leaves

4

given at irregular intervals

a page and 10 words to a line.

the

average

an

^

paper and the oldest part in bold and round hand. unfortunately in a very imperfect condition and in

no

less

extends from

f.

3

to

be quite modern.

— 87,

98

— 102

and 104

both Hebrew and Aramaic,

throughout,

The

— 155),

103 and III Spl.

— 159)

is

78

(f.

It

— 79,

round and bold; and

less

is

dates

Hebrew

has the Sbl. vocalization for the

for the Trg.

Spl.

is

probably

it

perhaps of the 17th or i8th centuries, the third

156

is

hand

oldest

— no and

from the i6th or 17th century; the second hand

is

It

written

is

than four distinct handwritings, of which the third

and fourth appear

and the

of

Thick, oriental

(f.

i



2,

much more minute and is or 19th century. The fourth hand

Sbl. throughout;

has added probably i8th numerous marginal readings as well as Genesis 44, 10 15. Many verses in the second hand are left entirely unpunctuated. Again the only Massoretic note is the number of verses contained in each Parasa. The MS. extends till Exodus 24, 2. Each Hebrew verse is followed first by its Targum. and then by its Arabic translation.



C

3.

fully

is

the British

Z> was placed at

4.

(Codex Heb. Gaster No. of

Museum MS.

Or. 2363 and has been

described by Dr. Berliner^.

all;

scribes'

my 2)

disposal

and

is

the

errors being few

and

sign being used either for Dag. or R.

I

1.

c.

pp. 132, 134 (Note

4),

137,

by the Rev. Dr. Gaster

most perfect and far

between;

The paper

159 and 160.

is

reliable

and no thinner

— than that of

A



13

and the

or B,

writing

clear

beautifully

is

and round; probably 17th century. It consists of 159 folios, written throughout in one hand and extends till the end of Exodus. There are about 27 lines to each page and about 14 words to each it

The MS. has been rebound, hence

line.

impossible to

is

but every

quires,

the

tell

page has the

There are frequent marginal notes by a

custos.

hand;

later

number of verses at the number of mmra and n'-awo

the only Massoretic notes being the

end of every Farasa and the A note at the end of each Book. that the scribe's

notice inside the original cover

was

seems

somebody's possession

in

(ri)x^i

•p-iirri

(mnt:)ujb

"f

pir

sbx "pnn raa

This

"im.

at the

nnn-^ -p xiirc

name was

-(rrxi

It

adorned with a

Menorah,

the

the

year 21 21

V. I.

its

Each verse

Arabic translation.

will first

is

figure

having

of

an

followed by

All

the

MSS.

consider the system of vocalization used

MSS.

we have

are written above the consonants. (P.), Sere" (S.),

Besides

large

page

and have been very much used.

In the Spl. vocalization

Fatah"

a

of the

last

THE SUPERLINEAR VOCALIZATION \

We

in these

with

The

branch of the candlestick

Trg. and then by

are Folios

MS.

mm

runs vhn

to

cabalistic devise

each

whilst a

(? u:"nrt) iu:inb -paii -las

points

appropriate scriptural quotation. its

nao;

"nx

Seleucidan era, corresponding to 1809 C. E. is

end informs us

to point that the

1809.

in

-

these

signs

Hireq' (H.), a

six

Holem

horizontal

vowel- signs

These are Qames" line

which (Q.),

'(Ho.) and Sureq'^(S).

represents

the

Sewa

This system has only been lately discovered, being brought to by the Karaite Rabbi Firkowitsh about 50 years ago. It represents the older system, since it is more simple and primitive than the sublinear system (cf. also the expression hy -ijjj) and it is unusual to regress from a well developed to a primitive vocalisation. I

light

and

Mobile

B

A,

C

in

C

and



14

indicates the

a slanting line

make

also

Rafe

sign.

use of the Dag. point

occasional

within the letter.

must

The

Aramaic language.

the

to

of punctuation

This system

2.

peculiarly appropriate

is

inevitable

Hebraisms which

occur in a text punctuated with vowel-signs which were

Hebrew language are As an example, we may

taken direct from those in use in the

not noticeable in the Spl. system.

absence

the

take,

and

of any particuliar sign to represent the

This semi-vowel

Hatef.

in Biblical

Hebrew.

It

is

unknown

is

Aramaic

it

remarkable that

sulted in the British

in the

Aramaic language

must have been taken from the

Museum

in a Bible

MS. which

Daniel and Ezra which seemed

have

to

I

con-

words in

(Or. 2374), the only

particular

a

sign

Sewa compositum are mp and 3"-P which are written This appropriateness of the Spl. system thus 2"ip and 5"rp. to Aramaic leads us to think that it was invented for the Aramaic language in Palestine as was suggested by Dr. for the

Gaster in the course of his lectures at Montefiore College;

and

that

Spl.

system to the Hebrew language

MSS. do

consequently, just as incorrect to apply the

is,

it

— as

it

is

to

— as

some of

Yemen

the

apply the Sbl. system to the Aramaic

language. 3.

made

Various suggestions have been but

the origin of this system, jecture.

Strack^ remarks

accurately

this

"The

the Superlinear

is

still

with respect to

a matter of con-

so-called Babylonian or

punctuation

the

more

vowel-signs

which are simplified forms of the matres lectionis

x,

1

of

and

"^

and the detached accents of which usually have the shape of the letters with which their

name begins was

non- Palestinian Jews of Asia".

the

statement

is

Margoliouth^

forthcoming. tries

to

We

have

in

already

prove that the system

is

among

use

But no proof

for this

noticed

that

of a mixed

Nestorian-Jacobite character. I

2

1.

c.

"Einleitung in p. 47.

das alte Testament".

NSrdlingen 1888,

p.

74.

— — In

4-

we must unknown in the

place

first

tlie

vowel-sign Segol

-

15

is

signs being substituted for

S. is

his

in

and even by

P., S.

the

that

Spl. system, other vowel-

MSS. which

In the Yemenite

it.

Derenbourg saw and described in P. was invariably used for S.; but replaced by

once notice

at

B

"Manuel du Lecteur" ' the MSS. which I used the particular vowel

.,

being in most cases justifiable by reference to the word's etymology or by comparing the word in the cognate Semitic This shows that the scribes must have been languages. very careful

and

the correct original orthography

preserving

in

another argument in favour of the greater antiquity

is

and authenticity of the Trg. detailed S. is

by

A

Yemen MSS.^

the

in

5.

will

few

Instances

be found

replaced by P. in

rrs

'ns'3 2, 8,

Besides having no

remarked



is

S.,

or a Full Vowel.

in

Se.

Quiescens 17,

7.

or

— In

more

— as

full

4,

Pi.;

the

MSS.

rarely

by

has been

Hebrew and

of the

is

it

in

usually

Quiescens

Se.

Mobile replaces Ht.-P.

replaces

A

This sign

characteristic

replaces Ht.-Q. in "^a^p

"•'in^b

by

the Spl. system of vocalization

not of the Aramaic language'*. replaced by Se. Mobile,

but

replaced

S. is

11, 7.

Very rarely 14,2, xfb-'ED 25,9. the word ai^nn 28, 17 (Greek iSicoxt];).

previously

Se.

given here^,

are

of

texts

in Part 11.

has no sign for Sewa Compositum.

It

the

in

"i£x-iy

in

S.

e. g.

lists

exhibited

as

r-n

i, 2.

10 and Ht.-S. in ts^JX 36,11.

Ht.-P.

vowel

in is

|"'~n3

found

2,

in

10 the

and

Ht.-S.

MSS. where

Compositum in such words as x^n 29, 34. Strange to say, Se. Compositum is found m a few isolated examples which have either crept into the MSS. by

B.

writes a Se.

I

Journal Asiatique.

1870.

2

Sixieme S^rie.

Cf. VI, 2.

3

In

all

Tome XVI.

examples which

No. 61. will

Paris

be quoted,

Targum is the one referred to for the European readings, but the readings quoted are those given by the MSS 4 Cf. also the absence of any sign in Christian Palestinian Aramaic for Se. Compositum, Noldeke, Beitrage zur Kenntniss der aramaiscenh

Berliner's edition of the

Dialecte.

ZDMG.

XXII,

p.

507.





i6

were found

error^ or, are exactly taken as they

A

D

and

of these

majority

the

text;

both write b-ipb^ 33,

more consistently

C,

A

6.

the

is

B

MSS.

(the other 2

8

and

b"-pi^"')^.

sign which

third

calization

1

Hebrew

in the

being Proper Names.

instances

not represented in the Spl. vo-

is

which

Quiescens;

Se.

wantmg

also

is

in

Syriac.

The

7.

or R. and there

no doubt

is

Aramaic language had no signs pronunciation

softer

had no sign

Spl. punctuation as originally written

either for D.

of

the

that originally the

the harder

indicate

to

rSDnsa.

letters

remarks ''The oldest-known MSS. only use the D.

Hebrew, but not that

the D.

that

it

the Trg.,

a fact which

system.

has

Or. 2363

may

fitly call

the Trg. this sign of the R.

in

no more very necessary"

He

j.

composite developement of dicated by the

adds

and can only be

£

This

the letter.

explained by

system of a feature belonging

is

in fitfully

employing the D. point and

and

as Margoliouth

Many

transcribes

C

has remarked.

This MS.

A.

are a few exemples ""i^^i

4

1.

c.

Cf. VI, 8. p. 49.

b^ir^r.

2

regularly uses the

D

Cf.

neither

in this

P'^kI i, 24,

'rr!r\_

Dalman

2,18, 1.

c.

using the Sbl.

N^-Cirn p.

46.

MS.

^^'^'"7"

2,19,

may

This

the Sbl.

into

Spl.

i, 7,

2,16,

has

instances of the D. are to be

although apparently the

Of

slight corruption

But

account for the frequency of the D. point 1,26, xrn- 2,11,

in-

really not necessary,

show a

unfortunately

the one nor the other. in

not only

the adoption into the Spl.

A

vocalization

is

the Sbl. punctuation".

to

our MSS.

R. sign

D.

largely

as being

'Tn the more

further"^

system,

this

dropped

is

over the is

form of the preceding vowel-sign but also

by the point within

I

"^£"1

rs:n;2 but in later MSS. in which the Dg.

adopted

found

the Sbl. vowel-

for the

sign

special

a

to

from the other system of

into the text

punctuation, which one

the

in

show such% but

seems

not a part of the Spl. system as

is

was adopted

Hebrew letters

in

or

Margoliouth

i,

Here

26,

x^a-is 2, 3

1.

c.

"i?'n

23.

p. 46.

— By it



17

many examples

the existence of so

two chapters

in

might perhaps be thought that the sign was very frequently

employed throughout

MS.;

the

but

the

breaks

scribe

off

suddenly and we find whole series of chapters which do not contain a solitary D.

The rn'nf2

a few examples from B.

following are i\,

i,

x-rr^

i,

28,

h~r\

-1:^'^

29,

\,

i,

"i3^ i, ii,

^

31.

has none

of these! chapter appended to this

In the specimen I

D

have followed

which

investigation

most perfect MS. and has

the

is

neither D. nor R. sign.

The absence of all these signs, shows that the AraYemen MSS. is much more closely akin to the

8)

maic of the

Bb. Aram, and Syriac than editions

of the Trg.,

and

the

is

case with our European

may be

it

seen

how

appropriate

Aramaic language. Our MSS. agree with Bb. Aram, in many grammatical

the Spl. vocalization 9)

is

to the

points. a. 2,

b.

and

3rd. Pers. Sin. Fern. Suffix ends in n^-,

ist Pers.

its 3

5, 5

d.

Cf.

and

nj^£3

22

to

the Bb.

2, 9

Daniel

f.

of Verb

are

resp.

"^33

''rsyi'inn.

Perf.

of Verb

ends

in

n.

Cf.

Cf.

Dan.

\ is

punctuated with Q.

-yhyi.

Our MSS. punctuate many words with Aram, form with xabn p~b5 xitn rn-a.

e. g.

Suffixa

PI.

Dan.

2nd. Pers. Sin. Suffix

4,

e.

Sin.

with P.

3rd. Pers. Plu. Fern.

c.

Dan.

in

Cf.

nrn^.

II

S. whilst B.

Miscellaneous words such as

x:;?'>r

P.

corresponding

punctuates with H.

x^sb^ ist

'I'nsrxi

agree

the two dialects.

I

Or.

2374 writes thus, although Merx's edition of Daniel [Leipzig,

1882) has the Ketib *pE3 but Q'rd npE:.



VOCALIZATION.

VI. Before

1.

considering

changes

the

which

Sbl. punctuation^

do not show

that the

As

editions'.

Spl. to

the

Yemen MSS.

which

that superfluity of vowel-letters

Targum

our

may be remarked

it

pronun-

the

underwent on being transferred from the

ciation

in



i8

is

found

remarks "this redundancy

B.

of vowel-letters points back to a time when no vowels were yet written and these

letters

giving rise to

when

the vowel-signs were subsequently

have been

should

much

such words as

struck out,

As

confusion"^.

and

"'37

which

"'bli'n^J

added

their retention

instances

we may

notice

and

"'xVj'iS'

the

MSS.

B. writes iX3t

where the x merely points out the a sound. In

2.

considering

the

differences

and the European-Babylonian words

to

their

texts

it

shown by

will

be seen by tracing

etymologies that the former present a more

Now

accurate pronunciation.

as

it

is

extremely improbable

that the scribes were acquainted with the etymologies of the

words which they wrote, been conscientious

shows

this

in preserving

the

they must have

that

correct original ortho-

graphy. B.'s

3.

edition

of the Trg. has

with P. which appear in the

words and Particles: na (Syriac 2, 19.

bi5

(Syriac

Peal of the Verbs to the Syriac

^)

n!

I'r.

Form.

from the Syriac

3, 8.

in



c.

the



b.

2, 3,

On

many words punctuated

MSS. with Q. >a^')

2, 9.

nnT

6, 6.

'J

I

the

case

loi>-)

This corresponds

the other hand, the

Verba Mediae Geminatae^ e. g. would here punctuate the with Petaha.

3S.^d. In

(Syriac

3rd Person Singular Preterite

MSS.

differ

3rd Person Singular Preterite Peal

of the

2j

Monosyllabic

a.

nib'

b^i

Syriac

16, 4.

But

cf.

p'l

of the Present Participle the

Dan.

MSS.

Likewise in Christian Palestinian Aramaic the matres lectionis

Noldeke I.e. p. 447.) 2) Berliner 1. c. p. 133. For the contrary process we may compare the Hebrew ta Zechar. 4, 10 (Pret. of T-a) as if it were from TT3 and nu (for ntj) Isaiah 44, 18. are less used. (Cf. 3

— —



19

again show agreement with the e.g. 'ir^T

4, 20,

corresponding Syriac 17,

the 3rd Person Singular Feminine of. K"b

difficult

is

The

f.

Spl.

explain \

to

System

n-ri

Cf.

20

3,

r~,--

undoubtedly more correct

is

form,

16.— e. The Q, of the Preterite of Verba

4, 21, 'puVbT

"^sn^T

ing the Suffix of the 2nd Pers. Sin. with Q.

25.

4,

punctuat-

in

Cf- ~\^i 45, 9,

~\m

17, 5,



Miscellaneous words, the majority of which agree with

g.

-j-BsJ

So also B. Aram.

19, 15.

the

corresponding Syriac forms.

n:^

8, 9

many

in

On

(Syriac IZIm).



quently nian^

The vowel of

p.

just

i?

clearly

isn^i

29,

below,

has

write P.:

3,

corresponding

7.-0.

pause

the

This agrees

2nd radical of a verb

the

the

in

the Q.

Suffix of

a.

Dan.

Cf. fr^^s Daniel 4, 14, re-n-^

b.

as

6, 13.

(Syriac iJ^i),

11

i,

Singular Feminine M^'^n 4, 12.

with the B. Aram. form.

11^

iV^x

other hand B.

MSS.

instances in which the

the 3rd Person

2,

the

Dan.

cf. "(i^

Since,

has

as

words

in

be

seen

will

influence

little

is

more

the

in

fre-

Syriac

Spl.

punctuation herein showing the small influence of the Mas-

Hebrew

sorah of the

where

cases

s>JL»

would be pronounced

Similarly ""Nri'2-

as if

it

were

accordingly be

—d)

We

some-

times find interchanges of letters consistently occurring; thus

D

used by the MSS.

is

latter is

is

A

Hebrew.

the

be read

to

and

has

viz.

9,

but

is

The

io.

imported from

13

and

X";&'^p

The Rest

42.

ip-i.

19, 17.

—a and

All have

I'lS

:.

UJ

B

31, 27.

which the author of the Pathsegen'* has already pointed

more usual "fs, MSS. read

out as standing for the s. V.

cases where B. writes

letter at all,

incorrectly in two places where a

it

voj?

D have Dpi 31,

B. tis

in

not an Aramaic

in

his

Massorah.

All

as "^n^

Landauer remarks where B. and L.5

^ s. V. 2 "Massorah zum Onkelos nach neuen Quellen", Letterbode VII &c. always with 3 In Biblical Aramaic the Ketib is s but the Qere with -. Cf. j''-,s- (Qere "^"''^ Daniel 2,38; 3,31;

6,

26,

iQere

'-;vr^

(Qere

;-r'^)

Schreibungen wie den,

dass k

^;;-^)

Ezra

7,

Daniel

r:''-5;>3

4, 23, "'os|?

Cf.

25.

fiir

also

rsV;'^, D'-p fiir

zwischen zwei Vokalen

gesprochen wurde". S s. V. L c.

4

(Qere

Dalman's als

]"?".5)

Daniel

Grammar

3, 3,

-j-js-!

45 '*Aus c-sp darf geschlossen werp.

stimmhafte Gaumenspirans

Published in Adler's edition of the Targum

— — — xn-

give

nrhf\

The n

has

e)

it.

word

B

is

writes n^isbms

and

-n:

"i^aii'b

D

srbV 40, \^. B. B and C and likewise Aram, although Bb. Hebraism, a

A

12.

i6,



27

14,

and z^^rsr

3, 16 fj

give ^z-ii if-in^i

The MSS.

which B. writes

12, 13 in all of

divide the

time, was looked upon

at a later

this,

as the correct traditional writing ^

D

Cand

A,

i.

The Yemen MSS. do not know of

"'z'^-^nr^

&c.

the so-called EiJ-n

',r:::>

which gives us such forms as x;^^- and rrir-j-is but write

Hebrew

these words as they are found in the niaini

Text.



The

stand in the Trg. just as they occur in the Hebrew.

MSS. however appear *rix

read

D

not

(and

read ni^aSi

Hebrew Vin

ignore

^n-x)

34,

27,

x-s'-^

^

n-"'.

to

B

23,

"^V:^

read

C

have

A

14.

C

C

and

and

follow

the

on the margin but have S'1^^ but ij" and

wS:nbs

D

and

and Z)

£

it

may

C

x^=-i

and Z> be

n^'i

c—ni-i

39,

^nj-i

^

i.

15,

any

were only

rate,

and

and

18

9^

6.

once seen that the scribes

at

could not have recognised these rules of ciann x^p, they

all

A

46.

27,

Tetragrammaton instead of n-n5X4

writes the

these examples

By

B

x-nl-i,

=--:i-2-

B

finally

A,

6.

riNrn

19,

Thus they

Rule.

this

but here

2

and

n^iir in the Text 3 26,

C

By

g)

xip the Massorah meant that several passages should

with

acquainted

slightly

or,

at

them.

h) Marginal Readings have already been pointed out occasion-

These glosses are important since they are all added by a later hand and explain the origin of many words which These afterwards became incorporated with the Text itself. ally.

marginal readings also constitute an argument for the greater

age and originality of the texts with Superlinear vocalization

which have been preserved

C

has

I

Cf.

Ezra

16

4,

where

IluUin 65a. estenus

(v.

6,

13) 3

2,

by

the

the



Yemenite Jews. 3, 23 of which has been

text

stands for the

r;:r::s

Or. 2374 has s^;' si'c" (Dan.

Siyn (Dan.

to us

on the margin,

"^"^crXT

where Baer has r-yr.

The reading sinVe

Part II, Ch.

II,

J).

more usual s:r:s

so

47) where Baer reads n^j^ rryy\ and

^

is

cf.

2

Cf.

Talmud Babli

Tr.

quoted by Theodorus MopsuB.

1.

c.

p.

216.

— corrected by a later hand to is

given by Berliner

which means that

P"'5 p;"r&xi (Etpaal)

appears

Isy^i

confirm

to

B.

nn^b'^'i^

B

The

^h"^.

is



34

C

and

23

2 6,

The Hebrew

.

the first-mentioned read-

h-iB-inw (Etpeel) 46, 22.

first-mentioned reading,

giving the sense of the original,

less literal

is

although

than the passive

construction.

Pael and Afel.

6)

MSS.

B. in-^x

among

places the reading '^n^x

Both these

^li^x 34, 19.

forms have the same meaning, but Berliner, the

in his

Massorah^,

of instances included

list

under the head of Qiaim xip and we have already seen that

MSS. appear

the

L. gives

"in'^x

to take

no notice of

very rarely whilst the Afel

MSS. appears

the

fairly

is

B.

the reading of

MSS.

r^^^yj-^.

we read

nNi'iS'i

is

with "1^; the

^

Hebrew

frap

(Hebrew

tjn).

-£;

Jv>Ns).

(Exodus 3, 21

'ipi-i

10,

9

27, ^'"'"''

TX^"P.-

42,

the correct reading

I

'what'

is

write the words

which

is

are in-

n5:n"a

and

form of

or,

5tr;s

')>

as

form may perhaps ac-

L. allows

Q. of x^p

by side

side

i;!

we may compare

22, 5).

(Syr.:

(Hebrew 13

and

1=

a contraction of 5

latter

MSS.

justify the

23 where,

'f:n"D

I

is

Miscellaneous words (VI, 3g) "^t

[i.

^

which

the

in

whilst to

v. "^"5

really a shortened

this '5 is

count for the Q.

s.

^isf).

'^0-

2, 18.

^^^''

'X'ir\

18,

'pn-JN'^

12

9;

7

(Syr.

3,

18

(Syr.: yi.sj).

however, L. says we must punctuate

and 36 &c. where, according "^riin^?,

but when

it is

as they appear in the

also written v**-

to

L.,

noticed that the

MSS.

2

Cf. Syriac

^

word

T\'h

merely a contraction of r^x x; may

is

b)

Vowel of

l^rsn-i-

rnrsi

'''^fn

4, 13.

Before

7.

x:tirinr

7.

2,

the

ns

3, 9.

x:

and

suffixes

^:

b=i^3'

3 c)

n,

3d) x:3

(VI,

20.

9,

njiip

7.

20.

18,

"'r-'JDN

=-;•£

2.

MSS.

with

15,

I

C'p5

16.

each

In

27.

18,

20 Chapters)

first

of the

punctuation

II,

'I'nb-j-'Tii

'•r.'z-:

of these

have compared which

of L. with

that

always agrees except nb'^np which L, prefers with a

•^tnr^.

nl^bsrx

=

H.

d) B. 5, 22.

4.

r-ofx''

=

•'ic'

9.

29.

i,

29.

5,

examples (taken from the

it

^~t: 8, 19.

11.

6,

Absence of Se. Compositum (VI, 3e) ili'^sb' 2, 3. ^rr-x 3, 13. MSS. H. (VI, 4) rniV 3, 22. c) B. S.:

0.

3, 12.

the

nVnrnx"

11

4,

15.

14,

p5uj73b?3

17,

P.

2nd Radical of a Verb (VI, 3b) unrzrn'-

Absence of Pausal Influence (VI,

p.

9,

MSS.

the

3, 8.

ly^'i^'-i

7.

3,

=

Q.

B.

not

this fact

which the MSS. read?

justify the Q.

a.



47

6,

10,

14.

15,

4.

18, 13

(y^

and

'ppi^T

'nr^ 19, 25.

C

S.

16,

T'i"!^"

8, 21.

c-'D-x

xr;-zV

25.

T^b'^nn

MSS.

u,

3.

6.

x:-r

here T'b^x).

ns-^zir'-i

19,

33.

'Tir-

n,

n^zr 18,

n^rp^r:

7.

"'iox

16, 7.

-;-Vn-

n1-Tnx= 9, 16.

13.

9,

-ssr:

S.

b-^nr 3, 14.

6.

2,

-iix 16,

12,

xr^-s^s

17.

13.

iVx

10.

19, 24.

19, 34.

All these agree with L., with the exception of ";ox ri"^=ai

and

rr^rpuj:

vowel with

which L. punctuates with H.

and

xns-'sb

correct as B.'s

I'^b'^x

xn'^nsia

He

admits either ibx

but prefers H.

since the Imperfect Peal of

and the Imperfect Afel

is

^^5•x which

A

and

C

is

"ib-

as inis

A

read.

some errors, punctuating the following words with S. of H. xrrm 2, 21. Tr\^^ 6, 15. -^rr S, 11 and b-nn B. S. MSS. Ho. (VI, 5) b-r-^r 2, 16. e) 19.

I

e.

g.

nn^'in 5,

i.

i-inp

8,

4.

xz--" 8,

Likewise Nestorian Syriac has the

v«»Jai.

7.

rso'^'

'

has

instead 18, 19.

=

3,

t^'sx

2-nr 17.

8,

sound with \'erba

\



jt'i'ipT

22.

8,

3'nirii

x^''n"i

Of

19, 32.

of x^in rnbin

30.

"TSD^.

g) B.

H.

10,

",iBay

=

=

n'lxn'

5.

9,

siip but prefers S. with ii^p

MSS.

S. -nil:?

has

compare Syriac

17.

15,

>i:^

'pi^^?

For

13.

7,

= with.

Of

sirn.

miri'^'i

xri^T

7.

4,

Of these L. only punctua.tes MSS. P. (VI, 7a) x^on 6,

^

15, 9.

i^-u;'''^'!

these L. admits either vowel in the case

xn-iiS"

Ho.

B.

f)

2 2.

8,

-

48

8,

n"J

22.

Ho.

"p^rJ with

n?5n

12.

the

8,

9.

we may

latter

the others L. justifies only

and x^bsa.

tiba-i

=

h) B. P.

=

B. S.

i)

MSS. H.

Aram. form.

the Bib.

MSS.

(VI, 7b)

(Dan.

4,

ns:^^

15.

is

13).

4,

(VI, 7c)

P.

x52U5b-

n^in

d5^5

7.

6,

9,

6.

nnp 19, 9 (Z> nnp) by"^i5 19, 31. s'-in 21, 6. aip these Of alone appears to be incorrect, since intransi-

nn^a 12,

6.

Verbs usually have S.^

tive

18, 19

"ih"!;)"!

has

S.

instead of

17

47^

of the examples

all

16,

and

2

"^^'n.

may

-jn^i'^sn

pronounce the Ho.

the

in

manner

same

is

tend to con-

about the Yemenite Jews

firm Derenbourg's statement^

they

has r?3

(VI, 7f.) inn^=5 25, 31, iVso^n 44, 23

''"iT

confirmed by L. ; and

that

A

(VI, 7d).

S.

= MSS.

^

I'lSO'-.n).

MSS.

both of which are wrong.

Ho.

k) B.

(C

=

B. P.

j)

viz.

as the

Polish Jews. 4) iriax

16,

(B

The Vowel of 6,

2

r=rix

7.

(C

"^'inrx).

aitrirs).

for S.

(C

"£nx).

-''n&'.

17,

8

those

In

the Imperfect (VI, 6) n^rn5u:^T 4,

23

14,

(C

examples with

nl^-rx 13,

alrirx

"^nnx^). initial

15.

15.

--frx 19,

20

x the P. stands

which would be the Sbl. punctuation. V

5) Interchange of Se. and a) rr^-in^^

b) 4, 10.

MSS.

Se.

14, 22.

MSS. -pbi-i'^

=

'p^xar 19, Se.

full

Vowel.

B. P. (VI, 8 a) in^ir^T 12, 5.

=

6, 20.

iTfi

7.

Q.

B.

I^nx 13, 8.

-iv5

9, 23.

4,

'xanis'

7.

-^rx

10, 13.

4,

9.

^:2np

"ixninx 10, 18.

however not always the case "Non solum intransitiva velut 5St« Dan. 2, lo, uVip Dan. 3, 27 in Zere 2 Manuel du Lecteur p. 511. terminari possunt" Baer: (I. c.) P. LIX. I

3';p

This

is

sed etiam transitiva velut

n'^px

16.

wsn5

(Z>

C!Ti has ^''n'

and

appearing

punctuation

writes

L.* admits either vowel but prefers H.

)i3'>ba^!

The same MS. has Tr^ immediately followed by 30, 31, but the P.

system.

(with-

Occasionally the punctuation of the

19, 24. to

n"iS'5

We

is

occasionally meet

J,

B

D

have xryin

C

B

Thus

Sbl. vocalization.

and

here correct since

"prrin in

stands for S. in the Sbl.

forms which remind us of the

has a^rxn 24, 50 and

-[Biiinx^

write

v/ith

it

28, 15

(but

D

bii'^N^

-jD'^ivx'i)

27, 25.

A

and

we may take as a Hebraism; the others more correctly Nnrnn. The MSS. read xnVnT and xrlna but xrbni and xrisn^ would be more correct forms since in Syriac these words are written with JLil,^o^», MSS. read xs^S. 23, 15. B. has "^rn. L. says that in this word and in xix the suffix of the In 14, 10 the MSS. imitate ist Person Singular is wanting^.

»

].

3

So

c.

s.

V.

19 which

2

1.

c.

s.

V.

also in Christian Palestinian

Person Singular (cf.

3,

is

wanting

in the

Noldeke's Article in the

word

ZDMG.

1.

Aramaic the \^\ which

suffix of the First

=

c.

p.

»*ai

5i4\

D

"my

father'

Hebrew

the

original reading p"'i ^"'3 but Pathsegen reads

and

B. viz I'^T?

of

perhaps assume either the Masculine

A

C

xn'N as B,

B

has VXG, says L.

^

D

and

and

V'-nx^.

18, 15

18, 21,

J^pnrj.

C

3i"ip.

(V. Pt.

L.

verse

has

Cand

B,

TO'-'Ti,

of the Pathsegen

is

which

is

B. and

have

likewise

C

the Arabic in which 19, 15 which

w*«'s

by reference

confirmed

is

B. nu-p.

ii"^-p,

and

(VIII, B.

i

a,

3j.

"'b=XT (L.,

2,

9

and

likewise).

C

missing.

(B)

Number

(VIII,

able with the verb

C

and

upon

the

B,

D

i

mn.

give pn'^ns

reading

of

must be remarked

as

Several

b).

In I'fln.

the

i,

14

^

variations

^'s reading

Hebrew

text

is

probably based

nrx-2

Luz. has already pointed

in Adler's Edition of the

1

Contained

2

Cf. also Daniel 3, 26

a-)!.

are notice-

has x-in: -n- whilst B.,

Targum.

'n-;

but

out

in

it

his

— ia

nnx

that

in

the Plural,

In

the

Hebrew and Arabic languages

29;

is

justified

ing

,"in>

indeed

MSS.

given

is

is

whether

to use

describing

C

nxislai

1x3^35

A

"^.?'^2ti

given by

also

B,

"^T?"].

C,

D

B

^ir^

latter 'T!)?T'^.,

gular Plural

B,

is

B

A,

in",iii

again

is

"^nin

(incorrectly) 27,

C,

and B. xrin.

in

as the other

xn'^D'i.

27

and

B.

"iTH

The

D

B, C, MSS.

latter

is

read "p"- in

27,

12

the

B.

C

and

D

i6

with ^r in Aramaic.

construed

was

B,

B.,

A,

The

B. viz ^'^^x:^p 18, 29.

%Ti^"ip

'^'^3,

and Z>

preferable

is

His presence" and not

(incorrectly)

C

A,

B.,

ii^hi',

on the other hand, £'s reading Hi^r

but,

"^ri'br

-

64

we must

sign of the

B

27, 37

N=n

place

time than

reading seems faulty.

A

The Hebrew is "im n!!< and A gives the sense of this relative more clearly. B (incorrectly) xni 31, 5, B., A, C, D -IN. Hebrew is ''S. B (incorrectly) '$z. Rest s "pb" 4, 15. The 21.

QuJ

•'rinn

the

rest read "li.

C

has

2-p"^

37, iS.

D

It

should be s-'T.

itSTr 26, nhave nxbn^ 35, 21 &c. B and raism ir 38, I and that of all the MSS. "i-rn 43,

All

B's Heb6

have

^

when speaking of

already been noticed above,

the variations

use of the Particles.

in the

A

Variant readings (X).

(J)

B

II.

1,



66

As a mere

p"'En.

D

and

niiinn

(so

also B.)

Hebrew words

translation of the

'O^'^ ^^1*^ ^^^ version of JS would suffice "Let the But as the Trg., in most cases^ earth bring forth green".

^^^.

not only

way

translate the original but actually goes out

to

tries

obtain an

of

its

D

and B. seems superior.

A

8

2,

to

"^W^

B

A's reading

jects to

form,

identical

and B>

B.

"inrx^f.

the

reading of A,

"^yii^).

Pathsegen ob-

xpI DJin i-i^xi" Nevertheless

"'^itt;'!

A

gives

more literal rendering of the Hebrew diu;;'! than does the which means "And he made to dwell". 2, 14 word "'iiUNi and B. n^an. A is probably a Hebraism, B, A ^i^'^^, of the Tigris being rts'i. name Syriac i^;. the Aramaic a



D

Sl^J.

Arabic

Assyrian Tiglat^

A

24 B.,

2,

B

tri-cx

literal

iax

n^i

and

Akiba4.

rendered

is

to the

Pathsegen

jAaai.

is

The

A

rest

n">aKi

have

B

vSamaritan

LXX. TiYpu.

rts^n

^'^1iN

from bs3.

"^SaTiJa

reading

latter

has

version

but

trri

being

The Hebrew

former.

quite

text

reference

to

is

a

of these words by the Rabbis Eliezer

To understand MSS. n-'iti. we may compare 27, 35 where

d^n^,

B.

MSS.,

irasTinS

t]''2n

is

in

the

iT'

(1.

c.

p. 38).

Hebrew is f^C?^'the word nni^a

-

C-J

^- ^"^ Pathsegen

both give

means 'offering' But it must be borne

here

if

correct translation.

this

^ = to

snmipn is bad, as when speaking of persons making

Luz. says the reading

God

other and never in connection with

A

133^1,

B

C

•)1'a^,

D

lt"cn,

As

ll^n-i.

that the

-* *»

word can also mean a present (Arabic this would justify both A and Cs reading. used

B

this

4,

The Hebrew

that the reading "p^^i

D,

in B.,

B or

ben.

is is

word 2

justifies

original

can find no sense

I

/^'s

A

had

cf.

Berliner p. 128

this

word

the text, but

in

afterwards erased and ps^i placed on the margin in

Probably the whole phrase xbns ois br text as superfluous.

lations cf. 3, 21; 4,

49, 8 in the latter n-i?

5, 3 B.

Hebrew is Of course

A

tr^n^,

It is

n-^ox sb

great

D

a treble rendering.

n-^s

B

-^-iDnn,

is

the

s.

A,

C,

D.

whilst

B,

C.

z.%

difference

5,

D

probably

The

n-^^s-B.

most

literal.

Hebrew

24 B. has insert x?

has

its

n^Tax

on the

origin

in

Luz. in Philoxenos^ remarks "he (Enoch)

point.

living for

one tradition

1

C,

and hence ^'s reading

n't^3,

Trg.

correct

The Trg.

\

alive

still

and without troubling ourselves about the we can see by the original Hebrew text

sbi

different traditions,

that i(^



68

The

3">63i.

first

first-

more correct 5. There are two Aramaic Hebrew root npb (i) "la'i when

is

Verbs corresponding

to the

speaking of to lead from one place to another (2) 303 simply

nn*!

14,

in

21

Again

"nm.

but in

all

it

means

B

n3"'63"^,

D i)

13,

the

MSS. here

67

B

24,

Here

and

But some confusion

marry.

Aramaic

the use of these two

30, 9

incorrect,

= to

ttnrx

to take, or with

noticeable

to B.,

9 B.

hence

marry,

A,

C,

and

Hebrew

-Iscix".

has

36^.

D C

L. here again reads

A,

"ilin,

B

D

C,

and

wrong.

is

jegen supports the former version.

This

Infinitive.

expression

15, 18

reading

Future, and therefore the manuscript

the different the

B.'s

may perhaps be

reading, though inferior,

that

is

reading appears preferable, although so great

this

17, 2 B.,

another instance

A,

C,

''"•a"'^

'p^,

of the Targumist's constant

endeavour to avoid anthropomorphic expressions; whilst translates literally.

=

this

in

D

SJ^EPX,

snsnx

The Hebrew

xs".

text

commentators have remarks passage.

ficult

Text "I

»

of the ist Person Singular

suffix

word and in xnx according to ''ra. 18, 21 B. and C (text) have xV A, B, C (margin) and read T^i^n cx^

wanting

xra

The

will

c.

1.

maritan

p.

'J-a.

suffix in

his

is

to

L.

T^i^n csi

T^i-n

simply nrnx xb cx\

make on

this

is

Hence

5

ox-

B

xb"*

nx

All the

peculiarly dif-

Luz., Pathsegen and Adler all justify B.'s (make an end with you, come to terms with

2 To this verse. 4 Sa3 Samam.iu rzr'. Dalman likewise mentions the avoidance of this grammar p. 162 "Die Form des .SiifT. der Pers. Sing.

35.

5

i

nach vokal. Auslaut soUte wohl T sein. Sie wird aber geflissentlich vermieden und bei as (und ns) durch die det. P'orm ersctzt". But he places

k:"3

weakened

under those words in which the diphthong

to a.

Thus Nra

= Ta

of.

also 'i-ys

=

•>3"""'y.i

ai Sec.

became

— you) forgive you,

you repent but

if

end with you) destroy you, repent,

is

is

33

19,

A

s^ Targum is according to B

of such an interpretation.

been noticed.

24,

1X3 of which the

62.



'•v.^'i'i-ii

Knin ns whilst the other versions give

We

and

B

D

has x^3^o

xrx which

inir.i-6^

have xn:n^

is

rnx'i' x-^in-ipV,

snxb" xoiT^pV.

i':5

more

A

'2t;

literal.

25, 6 B.,

r:xb x-sm-^p whilst

The Hebrew

text

is

no-ip

and most literal translation and 25, 25 supported by the authority of L. and Pathsegen.

A

fi'np 7"^!!
View more...

Comments

Copyright ©2017 KUPDF Inc.
SUPPORT KUPDF