709.

H-

3261:
A A

6 2
1

5 7

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.

Ph. D.

LONDON

1S96

DAVID NUTT
270-271 STRAND.

W.

DRUGULIN
LEIPZIG.

DEDICATED
TO

MY REVERED TEACHER AND FRIEND

THE Rev. Dr. M. Gaster
to

whom

owe an

everlasting

debt of gratitude for the

instruction received at his hands

interest

and the constant

welfare.

he has shown

in

my

1187410

PREFACE.
i

HE purpose

of this enquiry

is

to critically investigate

the recension of the

Targum

of Onkelos preserved in the

Yemen
present

Mss. and to establish a comparison between these

Mss. and the Western or European texts,

best

which are at
edition.

represented

by

Berliner's

recent

Berliner did not avail himself, however, of these

Eastern
extent,

Mss.

and

his

edition

is

therefore,

to a certain
final.

inadequate and can hardly be accepted as

details of

In order

to establish a critical edition this enquiry goes into minute

grammar,

differences of vocalization

and ortho-

graphy, additions and omissions,

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

and

lists

of

examples,

following the text of the Bible,

investigation

chapter and verse.

The

concludes
text,
It will

with a few specimen chapters of

the Targum Yemen Mss.

form.

according to the version given by the

probably

reflect the original Palestinian

I

Instead of making an index

It is

have given a detailed

Table of Contents.
effort

my

fervent

hope

that this

humble

may

be appreciated by students of the Bible and

may

give an incentive to the true appreciation of the

work

of Onkelos.

CONTENTS.

PART
CHAPTER
l)
I.

I.

History of the Text

(l).

Importance of the Translation

PP2)

i 3(2).
(2),

Where

it

originated

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

CHAPTER
l)

II.

Ofikelos

and

his

Translation

pp. 3

5.

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

Targum

(5).

CHAPTER
1)

III.

Importance of the Yemen Mss.

pp.

6 11.

Hitherto their linguistic character alone studied (6). 2) Origin of Superlinear vocalization (6). 3) Targum never neglected in
Palestine (8). 4)

of

Yemen

Mss.

(10),

The Babylonian Redaction 6) They represent the

(10).
.

(9).

5)

Differences

original Palestinian

version

(lo).

7)

Object of Investigation

CHAPTER CHAPTER
l)

IV.

Description of Mss.
Superiifiear
in this

.pp.
.

V.

Vocalization
system
(13).

pp.

13
11
6)

13.

17.

Signs
(14).

employed

maic
45)-^

3)

Origin of system

114).

4)

2)

Appropriate to Ara(15;

Absence of Segol

5)

Absence of Sewa Compositum

(16).

for
8)

Sewa Quiescens
Approach

to Biblical

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

(15; 45

46).

No

sign

with Biblical Aramaic (17).

CHAPTER
l)

VI.

Differences of Vocalization
(iS).

pp.

18

25.
ety-

Less frequent use of vowel letters

2) Superlinear system

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

Patah=YemenQames(i8
{a)

9; 46);

(7.

Monosyllabic words and particles.

Second number

in

brackets

refers to

the pages of the cor-

responding portion

in Part II.

VIII

CONTENTS
b.

3rcl

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

'.

c.

3rd. Per, Sin.

e.

Pret. Peal of

Mediae Geminatae. f. Suffix of 2nd

Present Participle,
Sin.
g.

3rd Sin. Pret. Feminine.

Per.

Miscellaneous

words.

Western

Qames
b.

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

= Yemen

d.

Vowel before

Suffixes

"3

and

sj.

e.

Other instances.

Sere
47}.

Yemen Hireq

(19; 47),

Western Hireq

4) Western
Sere (19;

Yemen

= Yemen Sureq
7)
b.

5)

Western Sureq

= Yemen
;

Holem
a.

(20; 47).

Western Holem

(20; 48).

6; The vowel
48).
c.

of the Imperfect (20; 4S).

Various interchanges (21

West. Hireq

Yemen
d.

Patah.

West. Patah

= Yem.
e.

Hireq.

West. Sere= Yem. Patah.

West.

Patah ==Yem. Sere.

West. Patah

=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).
k.

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

g.
i.

West. Sere
West. Patah

= Yem.
=Yem.

ITolem. f. West.
h. j.

Holem

Holem.

West. Sureq West. Sureq

West. Holem = Yem. Qames.

of Vowels and

Sureq.

8) Interchange

results (25).

CHAPTER

VII.

Variations in orthography.

pp.

25

28

4953
a. Dialectical Variations,
b.

Use of vowel change

of
s"!5

to distinguish

similar words.
letters,
e.

c.

3rd Pers. Plu.

in

1.

d.
z'-VTi-,

Interchange o

Other changes,
i.

ginal readings,

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

f. nt;^n jra?. g.
. .

CHAPTER
1)

VIII.

Grammatical Variations
a.

pp.

28

The Noun (2833; 53 57).

/?.

35
Em

State,
b.

a.

Absolute and
c.

phatic.
2)

Absolute
[t^T)

and Construct,

Number,

Gender.

The Verb
Pael.
0.
/2.

and
tafal.
c.
7.

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

Pael

and

Afel.

j.

Etpeel and
^i.

Etpaal.

/'.

The Tenses
Present

Perfect

and Imperfect.

Perfect
c.

and

(Participle)

Imperfect and (Participle) Present,

Other Differences.
pp.

CHAPTER
i)

IX.

Other

Variations

3539.

How

additions and omissions

may be accounted

for (35

2)

Additions (3637;
Contractions
(38).

60
5)

4j

Particles (38
fix

39;

Interchange 62 65) [Hebraisms

62). 3)

36).
62).

Omissions (37
65].

38;

of Prepositions

and other

6)

Variations in Suf-

(39).

CHAPTER

X.

Exegetical Variations

pp. 39

42;

66

77.

CONTENTS

IX

PART
CHAPTER
I.

II.

Remarks Upon
n^; bs;

the

words
n^i.-^H^X
.
.

Onp;

i)^3p;

pp. 43

45.
J.

CHAPTER
CHAPTER
XXXI

II.

Examples of

the rules contained in

Part

pp.
III

45777S

Specimen Chapters
remarks
(78).

....
XVII

pp.

end.
(81).

Introductory
(85)

Genesis

(79}.

XXVI

XLI

(92).

LIST
A

OF ABBREVIATIONS.
No. 502.

508.

= Ms. Codex Montefiore.

= C= Z? = B. =
Bbl.

Brit.

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

1S84).

D. Hag.

= 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
P.
Patali.
Plst.

Babylonian.

(Leipzig 1S66).
1830).

Palestinian.

S.

S.
S.

Spl.

I.

HISTORY OF THE TEXT.

acknowledged
that of all the Trans-

I.

It

is

universally

lations of the Bible that bearing the

name of Onkelos enjoyed

it

the greatest veneration

rests

from very ancient times; because

of the Tanaim,

upon

the Exegesis

and

is

considered

to

represent the original traditional Interpretation.

Its

sanctity

was enhanced when the Amoraim invested

it

it it

with great authority by making

an

official

decree that

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

after

the

arabic

language

had

supplanted the Aramaic

other authorities
in

as

the Jewish

vernacular.

Among
^'i'si

who have blamed

principle
b.

the Jews for their laxity

x^.p^

carrying out the

of ai^ir nnsi

the

names of Jehuda

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

which

it

is

held by the Jews

is

veneration

which,

it

may

be added,

shared by

all

students of

of the light which

this translation

Holy Writ, on account throws upon many obscure

its

passages in the Bible, as well as for

'

intrinsic

merits

'.

Cf. Delitzsch

,,Zur Geschichte

der jiidischen Poesie".

Leipzig

1836, pp. 27

and

135.

2.

The Targum
coming, as

originated

in

Palestine,

but

was

subgreat

sequently transplanted to Babylon

esteem,
it

where

it

enjoyed

did

from the Holy Land.

Similarly

we

find the study of the

Calendar and the Ritual pursued

both of which are products of
,

with

great zest in Babylon,

learning.

Palestinian

In Babylon
fresh

as

we

shall

see

more

clearly presently,

redaction

of the text was made,

Version.
to Italy

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

also

to

Spain and Provence.

3.

In

the

course

of

its

travels,

the

text
^

of the Trg.
its

became more and more in Europe the original

the Sbl. system which

corrupt.
Spl.

Some
for

time

after

arrival

vocalization
the

was exchanged for

was used

a change
text.

which

had the most pernicious

Hebrew language, effect upon the

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.
became
4.

in

an all-but-hopeless condition.
result of this
is

The

seen in the texts which are in

far

common
the
all

use to-day.

These are
tried

from
to

perfect.

Various

expedients
text

have been

from time

time to improve

with

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.

Redaction.
to Bibl.

Buxtorf wished

to

remodel

the

text

according

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,

composed under

entirely

and

for

an entirely

different purpose. interests

Lagarde thought he

would be serving the

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
confining
in

the

the

best

way by omitting
to
it

vowel-signs

and

his attention
text,

establishing a correct and critical

consonantal

but,

must be remarked, he did not even

attain this ideal.

Berliner's edition of the

Targum

*,

(B.)

which

is

a reprint

of the Sabionetta edition of 1554 suffers for the same reason

as all other

European Editions.

His sources are

all

Euro-

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

predecessors,
it

besides

which the
of

edition

is

in-

valuable containing as

does the products of a life-study

results
all

and embodying the

the

ripe

B.'s

predecessors in
in-

same branch of

learning.

Before proceeding to the

vestigation how our to MSS. unknown

Trg. texts
to B.

may be improved by
own
O.,

reference

and hitherto all-but-neglected and

for our

which

will

serve
to

as

basis

investigations
his

it

is

necessary

know something about

time

and the

general character of his translation of the Pentateuch.

ir.

ONKELOS AND
to

HIS TRANSLATION.
translation

I.

As

the

date

of

this

much

difference
its

of opinion has existed.

in

Frankel- and Geiger^ place

date

the time of the later Talmudists, but

by observing certain

characteristics

of the translation B. has fixed the time as

contemporaneous with or immediately following the time of

R. 'Aqiba;
this

second half of the second century. He bases opinion upon the Targumist's consistent avoidance of
(which
is

anthropomorphisms

also

characteristic

of the

LXX),

the

little

necessity felt

for aramaicising Greek words

these
'Aqiba's
hal.
I

words
time

being au conrant
the

and
3

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

and hag.
9.

principles*.
2

Berlin: 1884.

Zu dem Targum der Propheten".

Breslau
Breslau

1872, p.

Urschrift und die Ubersetzungen der Bibel.

4
1.

1857, p. 164.

c.

pp.

102 loS.

Cf.

also

Zunz "Gottesd. Vort."

Frankfort 1S92,

p. 132.

2.

As
is

regards

the

character of this Translation,

this
^

is

described with great clearness and minuteness by B.

Our

Trg.

neither too literal nor too free;

it it

shows a remarkable
always follows the

agreement with the Massoretic Text^;

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

my
in

notice,

and the importance of which

to

be considered

chapter VIII.
are

certain
texf*;

pleonasms
he

which

The Targumist omits be found in the Hebrew

occasionally endeavours
text
5,

the

original

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

casionally

tive expressions.

makes use of circumlocution and simplifies figuraBoth the Tetragrammaton and u^nbn are
which was written
are found.
is
"i^"'

rendered

"'"'^,

(until

this

was taken as

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

as
"^T,
2"'"',

"'Z'^

The reason of
found
in the
d%"i^n
"^^

the Targumist's dis-

like of the

word c-nsx

employment of

this

word
the

for strange gods''.

When

occur together, the

in

Targumist must naturally reproduce them as they occur

Hebrew
3.

text.

According
to

to

Rapoport^,
but where a

where

we

have

law

which applies
mist renders
affects

the

administration

of justice the Targuoccurs which

tra-

literally,

command

each individual member of the community, the

is

ditional explanation
this

given.

But so many exceptions

it

to

rule

are

to

be found,

that

must be
for
it.

rejected,

and
runs

that

given

by Adler^ substituted
the

This

rule

thus

Whenever
have
not

Targumist has
or
in

to

meet
cases

the

contra-

dictory views of Sectarians,

those

wherein the
of

people
1

yet

attained

complete
3 7

knowledge
p.

pp.

206224
5
1.

1.

c.

1.

c.

p.

207.

1.

c.

209.

1.

c.

p. 210,

c.

p. 211.

1.

c.

p. 223.

That

this is not
is

always

the case
"K'^U'D

r-yj.

may be seen from Exodus 12, 12 where a'jU'^ "rfTS ^ In Kerem Eemed V, 223 and VI, 220
(Prague: 1861)
p. 11.

rendered
15"?

also in i-iai

n)3Ki tithv

In the Introduction to his

nm

Wilna: 1874.

the tradition,

or

when
but

the
the

Tanaim themselves
the
tradition
is

differ

upon

the

point

in

question,

Targumist gives the better of

unassailable

the two traditions,

where
Singer,

he

renders

literally \

however,
O.

says
the

we can
Halacha

lay
in

down no
his

general

rule,

but
a

employs
rendering

translation

where

literal

would
correct

remain

obscure-.
4.

Great care was taken

to

ensure

the

recital

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

verse

Hebrew, which was

translation

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

]More laxity was
in

rendered
the

by the Meturgeman.
of the Prophets,
before the
together

allowed
verses
their

with

recital

which three

were

taken

translation'*.

Meturgeman recited Both Reader and Meturgeman had to

demeanour,
As,
in

preserve a reverential
office

virtue

of the

solemn
official

which they held 5.

however, a standard

translation
to

had not then yet appeared, opportunity was given

to
insert
their

the

Meturgemanim
the

own

interpretation of

the
find
this

text.

This privilege was occasionally

abused

and we

some of
account.

Meturgemanim blamed by
writing

the Rabbis^

on

The

down of

the Trg.

of the Misna

was

just

as that

at first prohibited",

but

this

prohibition

only applied to the writing

down

for the purpose of public

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

their

own
E.

use.

1.

c.

pp. 224

225.
ch. 145

Singer: Onkelos und das Verhalt-

niss seines
4
5

Targums

zur Halacha".

Halle 1881.
Tr.

B.

1.

c.

p. 84.

Cf.

Misna.

Megillah IV, 4 and Talmud. Bab.

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.
Cf. Tur, Oral}

Hayyim

In Tal. Bab. Tr. Megillah

Cap.

III.

IV,

and Talmud Bab. Sabbath 115

a.

v.

Zunz.

1.

c.

p. 65.


III.

IMPORTANCE OF THE YEMEN MSS.

strange that hitherto
in

1.

It is

only European MSS. have

Since then how-

been studied

connection with the Trg.

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

South Arabia but have received

having regarded them
way,

little

attention;

scholars

of linguistic importance only.

I

In this

one of them (which

shall subsequently

call
j.

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.
Is
it

correct to call the Spl. system of vocalization the

Babyl. system?
the

Does
of
a

the study of the Trg. in Babylon, or

redaction

version
its

of the

Trg.

in

that
its

country

necessarily imply that

study was neglected in

mother-

country, Palestine?

Now

the Spl. punctuation has been fre-

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

1.

c.

pp. 68

pp. 159

160.
3

"Chrestomathia Targumica", Berlin 18SS,

vocalization (Transactions of
II,

103.

On
of

the Supeilinear
Orientalists

the
4

London 1893), pp. 4656. 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)
9th

Congress

according to the era of the contracts point to an acquaintance with

the Babylonian schools, for the Italian era
of
the
early epitaphs date

from the
in

destruction

of

the

2nd Temple

and
of

later

on bear,

addition,

the era of the creation.

The Jews

Yemen

continue up

to the present

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
formulae, which
their connection with the Eastern Massoretic Schools rather than with

the Palestinian one at Tiberias".

But Margoliouth
punctuation
rests

is

not at

all

cert.ain

of the Bbl. origin of the Spl. vocalization.

the
originators

"The theory which

with
the
partly

identifies

of the
"sn:-;'^

superlinear

Masoretic
in

Schools of the

or "Easterns"

on an epigraph

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

or

rather

is

also

employed by

B.,

but,

as to

far as

can be observed, no
its

proofs have yet been

says:
"it is

given

show

Bbl. origin
first

'.

B.

doubtful when the vowel-signs were

added

but probably they were added in Babylon, in which country

the

peculiar

Spl.

punctuation was
this

in

use".

No
Is
it

reason

is

advanced why we should make

assumption.

Then why
not just as

assume

that they

were added

in

Babylon?

likely that they

were originally written

in Palestine

and came

over to Babylon with the Trg. text?

This seems the more probable after Noldeke's assertion ^

that "the authoritative

Targum although redacted

in

Babylon

chiefly

on
out

the internal evidence afforded

by the readings and marginal

p. 51).

rubrics

of the
that

Codex Babylonians"
this is a

(I.

c.

But he proceeds to
for the origin of the

point
vSpl.

very flimsy foundation

trust

system.

How

can we

a single

scribe

of the 14th century

whilst the contemporaries of the originators of this

system are

silent

on the
out

subject.

Margoliouth especially singles out Saadia and points

how

inexplicable his silence would be were the superlinear system

of Bbl. origin.
lonicus
it

As

for

the internal evidence

this

from the Codex Babyexhibit

must be remembered that

MS. does not

the

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

comto

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

Hence

it

is

hardly

fair

argue
refutes

from

this

MS.

to

prove

the

Bbl.

origin.
set

Margoliouth
up
to

also

various

other theories

which have been

prove the

origin of this system,

but his

own theory

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

Palestinian origin.

Cf. Seligsohn pp. 12, 19, 32.

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).

1.

c.

p. 131.

Th. Noldeke, Mandaische GramV.

matik.

Halle 1S75.

Introduction

p.

exhibits

characteristics

dialect

whose
then,

fundamental

are

Palestinian.

For the present

Bbl. or Plst.

the

system should
it

be called the

Superlinear (Spl.) system, without defining

further as either

we shall see further on more appropriate this system is to

than the Sbl. system
3.

in

chapter

V how much

the

Aramaic language
but
principally

now
for

in use.

B.

'

states

that

various

reasons

through the decay of the

country and
its

Plst. schools, the

Trg.

left its

native

study was transferred to Babylon.

left

But are
its

we

sure that the Trg. ever

Palestine

or that

study

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

and
the

yet have been continued in Palestine?

It is

true
their

that

Jews

of Palestine

were greatly harassed

in

studies

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

invaluable guide to the correct Text of our

Hebrew
the

Bible

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

Midrasim
which has

from Palestine.
to us^

Again,

the Jerusalem Trg.

come down
pursued
hagadic

although differing in character from the

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

Now

this

Jerusalem Trg.

is

entirely

character,

may we

not then assume that side by

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

same

version, in fact, which

was transferred

to

Babylon?

Just as

Palestine produced

two such varied studies as those of the

it

Massora and Midras,

of the Trg.
side
it

is

probable that the two Recensions

the

literal

and the hag.

existed
appear

in this

country

by

side.

This

will

perhaps be seen more clearly after

to

will

be shown that
text.

Yemen MSS.

contain the

original Plst.

1.

c.

p. 108.


4-

that

The

natural

result
is

of the attention bestowed upon

in

the Trg. in Babylon

seen

redaction
version

of the text
to

which

although adhering to the original

a great

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

to

preserve the

text
it.

intact

by placing

stamp

of their

authority

upon

As

texts

became

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
ginal

vocalization

must

have

been

at

least

considerably
in the sub-

modified.
stitution
literal

Another tendency became noticeable

of hag.
explanations
in

the

place

of the original

rendering.

In time a reaction set in in favour of the

original Plst.

Version;

and

this

movement

is

represented

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

by the

text

which we find to-day

in
it

our European editions.

When
in

the Trg.

came

to

Europe
its

was then punctuated

it

in

the original Spl. vocalization which

Palestine.

had probably received

this Spl.

Some
in
text.

time after

arrival',

vocali-

zation

was altered

favour of the Sbl. system

in use

with

the

Hebrew

for the Trg. text

fications after
its

This inevitably led to great confusion ^ had already undergone considerable modiarrival in

Babylon, and

now

another
the

alte-

ration taking place w^hich practically

involved

rewriting

of the text in

its

entirety the result can easily

be imagined.

As copies were increased in Europe fied and was greatly aggravated by

the scribes, of the

the evil

the

became magniignorance shown by

result of all this

Aramaic language; the

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

V.

B.

1.

c.

p.

134.

Our

editions

are

greatly

neglected,
(A.

whilst

old

editions

and MvSS. have superior readings".

4,

Geiger:

Nachgelassene Schriften, Vol.

Berlin 1876, p. 104.)


PIst.
5.

lO

which must have been a considerable modification of the

original.

Of

late years

a rich store of treasure has been brought

to

light

by the discovery of MSS. of the Trg. from

in itself invites

Yemen

most of which are punctuated with the

fact

Spl. vocalization, a

which

the student to their study if only

from a

linguistic point of view.

On

examining these MSS.

more

closely

most far-reaching and profound differences are

to be found.

These variations occur not only

text
itself,

in the vocali-

zation,

pronunciation and orthography but also in the exethe

especially
in

gesis

of

the

interpretation
in

of

several important hag.

and poetical passages,

is

which cases
literal

the

usual
'

hag. interpretation

replaced by a

trans-

lation.

What then do
unlikely
that

all

these peculiar

facts

point to?

It is

the

Jews of
a

of their

own although
at

Yemen had a peculiar we know that they settled

period.
there

tradition
in Souis

thern Arabia
centuries

very early

"Certain

it

that

before
in

Mohammed
North Arabia

were

powerful

Jewish

communities

as well as in

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.
ciation

and orthography remind us

chapters

to VIII

of

the Bib.

as will be shown in Aram, and Syriac grammatical

tra-

forms and approximate more closely to the Nehardean

dition,

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

counted

for
is

by observing
entirely hag.

that
in

the

Plst.

Jews had another

to
to

Trg. which
7.
I

tendency.
is

The

object, then, of this investigation

endeavour
the

Geiger although ascribing a Babylonian origin

its

Targum
earlier

of Onkelos points out that

as a later protest
exegetists.
1.

character

is

literality,

which he regards
of
p.

against

the fanciful
2

interpretations

the

c.

vol. 4,p. 104.

v.

Neubauer

1.

c.

605.


to

II

and
will

show

the true character

of the original Trg. of O.

edition

so pave the

way

for a

critical

of that Trg.
points

now

deal

separately

with

each

of the

enumerated

above, and show in

of these MSS.

how

far these characteristics strengthen

Plst.

our views as to the original and

character of the Trg.

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

may be now

given.

IV.

THE YEMEN

MSS.
I

I.

Codex Montefiore, No. 502; which

call

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

on the part of the scribe

into

to bring

the

two
It

systems
also
in

of

vocalization

other.

differs

from the

harmony with each other MSS. in having the

in

Hebrew
the page,

text

large

square characters

the

middle of

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.

Arabic translation are placed

on the

sides

throughout
quires

in

one hand (except the marginal notes).

of
7

The

consist
at
in

leaves,

but nearly

every

leaf

has the

custos

the bottom.
the

The number of
text,

lines in

each p^ge,

both

Hebrew
at

and

in

the

Aramaic and Arabic

according
to

translations

the sides,

naturally

varies

the

length

of the commentary of Rasi below, but the average

is

number
lations

19 lines

for

the

Hebrew

text,

30

for the trans-

and about 8

for the

commentary.
line.

The Hebrew

text

has an average of 8 word.s to the

soretic directions except that at the

There are no masgiven with a

end of every Parasa the

is

number of
mnemonic.

verses contained in that portion

It
is

one of the characteristics of Eastern MSS.


that they

12

and
all

have

little

or

no

illuminations^

these

MSS.

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

the

end of every Parasa.

2.

is

a remarkably fine
to

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

be valuable
an haggadic interpretation
of 159
folios,
is

this

MS. B.

This

will

be frequently

found

in retaining the original literal render-

ing, whilst
It

inserted on the margin.

consists

leaves

making a quire;
^

the

custos,

being
to

given at irregular intervals

an

average

of

24 Hnes

a page and 10 words to a line.

Thick, oriental
It
is

paper and the oldest part in bold and round hand.

unfortunately in a very imperfect condition and
in
is

written

no

less

than four distinct handwritings, of which the third

to

and fourth appear

extends from
f.

be quite modern. 98

The
it

oldest
is

hand
Spl.

87,

102

and 104

no and
probably
(f.

throughout,

both Hebrew and Aramaic,

dates

from the i6th or 17th century; the second hand

103 and III

78

155),
is

79,
i

has the Sbl. vocalization for the

It
is

Hebrew
(f.

and the
is

Spl.

for the Trg.

less

round and bold; and

perhaps of the 17th or i8th centuries, the third

2,

156

159)

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.

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

Sbl. throughout;

3.

is

the British

Museum MS.

Or. 2363 and has been

fully
4.

described by Dr. Berliner^.

Z> was placed at

my
2)

disposal
is

by the Rev. Dr. Gaster

reliable
far

(Codex Heb. Gaster No.

of
all;

and

the

most perfect and

between;
is

scribes'

errors being few

and

and no
thinner

sign being used either for Dag. or R.

The paper

1.

c.

pp. 132, 134 (Note

4),

137,

159 and 160.


than that of

13

writing
is

or B,

and the

beautifully

clear

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

line.
tell

The MS. has been rebound, hence

the
quires,

is

impossible to

but every

page has the

later

custos.

There are frequent marginal notes by a

hand;

the only Massoretic notes being the

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

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

at the

end informs us

name was

nnn-^ -p xiirc

It

nao;

whilst a

notice inside the original cover

seems
in

to point that the

MS.

was
p-iirri

in

somebody's possession
"f

1809.

runs vhn

mm
page
of

(ri)x^i

sbx "pnn raa

-(rrxi

"nx
to

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

(mnt:)ujb

pir

"im.

This

points

the

year 21 21

of the

Seleucidan era, corresponding to 1809 C. E.

is

The
large

last

adorned with a

cabalistic devise

with

figure

the

Menorah,

each

branch of the candlestick

having

an

appropriate scriptural quotation.

its

Each verse

is

followed by
the

Trg. and then by

its

Arabic translation.

All

MSS.

are Folios

and have been very much used.

V.
I.

THE SUPERLINEAR VOCALIZATION \

will first

We

consider the system of vocalization used

in these

MSS.

In the Spl. vocalization

we have

six

vowel- signs

which
(Q.),

are written above the consonants.

These are Qames"

line

Fatah"

(P.), Sere" (S.),

Hireq' (H.),
a

Holem

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

Besides

these

signs

horizontal

represents

the

Sewa

light

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

Mobile
A,

14

indicates the

and and

in

a slanting line

Rafe

sign.

B
2.

also

make

occasional

use of the Dag. point

within the letter.

This system

of punctuation

is

peculiarly appropriate

to

the

Aramaic language.

The

inevitable

Hebraisms which

must

occur in a text punctuated with vowel-signs which were

taken direct from those in use in the

not noticeable in the Spl. system.

take,

Hebrew language are As an example, we may

in the

the

absence

of any particuliar sign to represent the

is
it

Hatef.

This semi-vowel

unknown

Aramaic language

and

in Biblical
It
is

Aramaic

must have been taken from the

in a Bible

Hebrew.

remarkable that

MS. which
a

con-

sulted in the British

Museum

(Or. 2374), the only

to

words in
sign

Daniel and Ezra which seemed

for the

have

particular

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.
Gaster in the course of his lectures at Montefiore College;

and
Spl.

that

it

is,

consequently, just as incorrect to apply the

system to the Hebrew language

as

some of

the

Yemen

MSS. do
3.

as

it

is

to

apply the Sbl. system to the Aramaic

language.

Various suggestions have been

but
this
is

made
still

with respect to

the origin of this system,

jecture.

a matter of con-

Strack^ remarks

"The

so-called Babylonian or the

more
of
"^

accurately

the Superlinear

punctuation

vowel-signs
x,
1

which are simplified forms of the matres lectionis

of the letters with which their
the

and

and the detached accents of which usually have the shape

name begins was

have
already
is

in

use

among
for this

non- Palestinian Jews of Asia".

is

But no proof

statement

forthcoming.
tries

We

noticed

that

Margoliouth^

to

prove that the system

of a mixed

Nestorian-Jacobite character.
I

"Einleitung in
p. 47.

das alte Testament".

NSrdlingen 1888,

p.

74.

1.

c.


4-

15

at

In

tlie

first
is

place

vowel-sign Segol

we must unknown in the

it.

once notice

that

the

Spl. system, other vowel-

signs being substituted for

In the Yemenite
his

MSS. which

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

in

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

.,

replaced by

P., S.

and even by

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
in

preserving

the correct original orthography

and
the

is

another argument in favour of the greater antiquity

as

and authenticity of the Trg.

exhibited
are

in

the

texts

of but

Yemen MSS.^
lists

few

Instances
in Part 11.

given here^,

detailed
S. is

will

be found

replaced by P. in
"ix-iy

'ns'3 2, 8,

rrs

11, 7.

S. is

replaced

by

S.

in

e. g.

in

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

by

Pi.;

5.

Besides having no

the Spl. system of vocalization

has no sign for Sewa Compositum.

previously

This sign

as
it

has been

remarked

is

characteristic

of the

Hebrew and
is

not of the Aramaic language'*.

replaced by Se. Mobile,
or a Full Vowel.
It

In

the

MSS.
by

usually

or

more

rarely

Se.
in

Quiescens
r-n
i, 2.

Se.

Mobile replaces Ht.-P.

4,

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

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

in
is

Se.
in

Quiescens
"'in^b

replaces

Ht.-P.

|"'~n3

2,

10
the

and

Ht.-S.

17,

7.

full

vowel

found

in

MSS. where

B.

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
writes a Se.
I

Journal Asiatique.
2

Sixieme S^rie.
3

Tome XVI.

No. 61.
will

Paris

1870.

Cf. VI, 2.

In

all

examples which

be quoted,

Berliner's edition of the

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
Dialecte.

ZDMG.

XXII,

p.

507.


text;

i6

were found
in the

error^ or, are exactly taken as they

Hebrew

the

majority

of these

instances
1

being Proper Names.

A
C,

and
6.

D
A

both write b-ipb^ 33,

b"-pi^"')^.
is

(the other 2

MSS.

and

more consistently
third
is

sign which
Se.

not represented in the Spl. vo-

calization

the

Quiescens;

which

is

also

wantmg

in

Syriac.
7.

The

Spl. punctuation as originally written

had no sign
or

either for D.

or R. and there

is

no doubt
to

that originally the

Aramaic language had no signs

softer

indicate

the harder

pronunciation

of

the

letters

rSDnsa.

Margoliouth
in

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

the

Hebrew, but not

that

in

the Trg.,

a fact which

seems

the D.
it

is

not a part of the Spl. system as

into the text

show such% but

to

that

was adopted
Or. 2363

from the other system of

fitly call

Hebrew
system.
letters

punctuation, which one

may

the Sbl. vowel"^"1

has

special

sign

for the

over the
is

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

in

largely

adopted

the Trg. this sign of the R.

j.

is

dropped
D.

as being

no more very necessary"

dicated by the

He
this

adds

further"^
is

'Tn the more

not only
in-

composite developement of

system,

form of the preceding vowel-sign but also

the letter.

by the point within

and can only be
our MSS.
in fitfully

This

is

really not necessary,

explained by
to

the adoption into the Spl.

system of a feature belonging

the Sbl. punctuation".

Of

and

unfortunately

show a

slight corruption

employing the D. point and

has remarked.

regularly uses the

R. sign

as Margoliouth

But

has

neither

the one nor the other.

Many
the

instances of the D. are to be

found

in

A.

This MS.
transcribes

although apparently
Spl.

using the Sbl.

vocalization

into

the Sbl.
in this
^^'^'"7"

This

may
Here
"i?'n

account for the frequency of the D. point

are a few exemples ""i^^i
i, 7,
'rr!r\_

MS.
i,

P'^kI i, 24,

26,

1,26, xrn- 2,11,

I

b^ir^r.

2,16,
Cf.

2,18,
1.

N^-Cirn
p.

2,19,

x^a-is 2,
3
1.

23.

Cf. VI, 8.
p. 49.

Dalman

c.

46.

c.

p. 46.

1.

c.


By
it

17

in

the existence of so

many examples
MS.;
but
the

two chapters
breaks

might perhaps be thought that the sign was very frequently

the

employed throughout
contain a solitary D.

scribe

off

suddenly and we find whole series of chapters which do not

The
rn'nf2
i,

following are
i\,

a few examples from B.

28,
h~r\ \,

"i3^ i, ii,

x-rr^

i,

29,

-1:^'^

i,

31.

has none

of these!
In the specimen
I

chapter appended to this

investigation

have followed

which

is

the

most perfect MS. and has

neither D. nor R. sign.

8)

maic of the
editions

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

Bb. Aram, and Syriac than

the

case with our European

of the Trg.,

and
is

may be

seen

how

appropriate

the Spl. vocalization

9)

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

points.
a. 2,

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

Daniel

II
b.

nrn^.
ist Pers.
Sin.

and

PI.

Suffixa

of Verb

are

resp.

"^33

and
Dan.

its 3

with P.

Cf.

Dan.

2, 9

''rsyi'inn.

c.

3rd. Pers. Plu. Fern.

5, 5

Perf.

of Verb

ends

in

n.

Cf.

nj^3

\
is

d. 4,

2nd. Pers. Sin. Suffix

-yhyi.

punctuated with Q.

Cf.

Dan.

22
e.

Our MSS. punctuate many words with

Aram, form with xabn p~b5 xitn rn-a.
S. whilst B.

P.

corresponding

to

the Bb.

punctuates with H.

e. g.
f.

Miscellaneous words such as

x:;?'>r

x^sb^ ist

'I'nsrxi

agree

in

the two dialects.

Or.

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

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


VI.
1.

i8

VOCALIZATION.
the

Before

considering

changes

which
that the

the

pronunthe

ciation

underwent on being transferred from the

it

Spl. to

Sbl. punctuation^

may be remarked
As
B.

Yemen MSS.
is

do not show
in

that superfluity of vowel-letters

editions'.

which

found

our

Targum

remarks "this redundancy

of vowel-letters points back to a time when no vowels were

yet written and
these
letters

when

the vowel-signs were subsequently

added
notice
"'xVj'iS'

should

have been

struck out,

their retention

giving rise to

much
"'37

confusion"^.

As

instances

we may
and
the

such words as
In

and

"'bli'n^J

which

B. writes iX3t

where the x merely points out the a sound.

2.

considering

the

differences
texts
it

shown by

MSS.

and the European-Babylonian

words
to their

will

be seen by tracing

etymologies that the former present a more

accurate pronunciation.

Now

as

it

is

extremely improbable

that the scribes were acquainted with the etymologies of the

words which they wrote,

been conscientious
graphy.
3.

this

shows
the

that

they must have

in preserving

correct original ortho-

B.'s

edition

of the Trg. has

many words punctuated

a.

with P. which appear in the

MSS. with Q.
>a^')

Monosyllabic
(Syriac
loi>-)

words and Particles: na (Syriac

2, 19.
bi5

(Syriac

^)
I'r.

3, 8.

2, 9.

nib'

b.

3rd Person Singular Preterite

Peal of the Verbs

to the Syriac

n!
c.

2, 3,

nnT

6, 6.

This corresponds

Form.
in

On

the other hand, the

MSS.

differ

from the Syriac

of the

the

3rd Person Singular Preterite Peal

b^i

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

'J

16, 4.
cf.

Syriac
p'l

But

Dan.

2j

3S.^d. In
I

the

case

of the Present Participle the

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

e.g. 'ir^T
4, 20,
"^sn^T

19

corresponding Syriac
17,

again show agreement with the

form,

4, 21, 'puVbT

the 3rd Person Singular Feminine of.

K"b
f.

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

3,

is

difficult

to

explain \
is

Cf.

n-ri

20

r~,--

4,

25.

The

Spl.

System

undoubtedly more correct

in

punctuat-

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

Cf- ~\^i 45, 9,

~\m

17, 5,

-j-BsJ

19, 15.

So also B. Aram.

cf. "(i^

Dan.

6, 13.

in

g.

Miscellaneous words, the majority of which agree with

the

corresponding Syriac forms.

8, 9

iV^x

i,

11

(Syriac iJ^i),

n:^

(Syriac IZIm).

On

the

other hand B.

has
a.

the Q.

many

instances in which the

MSS.

write P.:

Suffix of

the 3rd Person

Singular Feminine M^'^n 4, 12.

This agrees

with the B. Aram. form.

2,

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

Dan.
fre-

11^

i?

b.

The vowel of
just

the

2nd radical of a verb

is

quently
nian^
clearly

p.
29,

as

in
3,

the

corresponding
Since,
little

words
be
in

in

Syriac

isn^i

7.-0.

as

will

seen
the

more
Spl.

below,

the

pause

has

influence

punctuation herein showing the small influence of the Massorah of the

cases
d.

Hebrew
B.

text,

our MSS. retain the P. in

Q.
"in

many
22.

where

has

pausal

i, 5,
*: is

-"^i^sV

i,

The vowel before

1,

the suffixes x:
4, 14.

and
as

P. in the

s<:^5^5

26,

''ii'Siip^i

e.

The absence

of Se.

MSS. CompoxSnIx

situm
13,
8-

may account

for such instances

m5

3^ 13,

4.

We

have

now
S.

arrived at the second

pair of kindred

vowels H. and
given

Only a
which are

couple
written
vice

of instances

are
S.
it

here
are

of words
in

by B. with
versa,

but

found

the

MSS. with H. and

but

may be

But Biblical Aramaic likewise

r-j^s

Dan.

7,

19

and

r""2 ib. 7, 22.

Philippi tells us that the original

Aramaic, ".Scribitur

form was probably Qames in Biblical autem n-^ pro rr quia, ut Masora Targumo On-

kelosiani ostendit, sermo posterior a et a uti pronuntiatione sic etiam

scriptione comniiscere consuevit.

Vocalem
Ezrae
et

luiius terminationis origine

longum esse ex s~
ah successit".
p.
(v.
3

apparet,

quod targumice

in

locum antiquioris
ed. Baer,
7,
1.

Libri

Danielis,
in B.

Nehemiae

c.

LVIII.)

So also

Aram.

Cf. v/?~5^. Daniel

16.

B2


added
the
that in the majority

20

of examples which

have noted
to

reading of the MSS.

may be

verified

by reference
2, ig,

the etymologies of the, words or to their corresponding Syriac

forms.

B. has S. with such

3, 22,

words as
8,

in"'i<'i

C|Vn

13, 2.

But H. with 3^6n

5.

x^ipi

22.

The 3rd

pair of kindred vowels are Ho.

and
tiiw

S.

These

interchanges appear to depend greatly upon the pronunciation

of these sounds.
jf,

Thus

B. writes
latter

the

words

3, 20,

Ci'is

21

with Sureq;

and the
but,
it

punctuation seems, at
in

first

sight,

more

correct,

must be borne
"^o-^oaj

mind

that S.

and Ho. are represented by one sign only

in Jacobite Syriac.
if
it

The Nestorians pronounced

vq\

as

were written

with a Holem'; whilst, on the other hand, they pronounced

fti

as the ordinary u sound".

Perhaps the Yemenite Jews

pronounced the words ms and

/Jj:v

fiiTi)

which
som,

are written with

in

Jacobite

Syriac
for

as
Ho,,
v.

pom and
they
Part
II.

but
it

having
with

distinct

vowel-sign

punctuated

Ho.

For

B.
6.

Ho. and MSS.

in the

S.

Before noticing the other numerous interchanges

among
vowel
In

vowels

two systems,
not
trace

it

must be noticed
.

that the

of the Imperfect seems to

vary between I
the
P. to Arabic

and

P. in the

MSS.

May we

influence?
is

that language the

vowel of the Servile Prefix

that

Fatha.

We
in

might naturally

expect

MSS.

hailing

from Yemen

South Arabia would present some Arabic characteristics and

that this
14, 23
is

the case

may be
15, 8 rnit

seen by the following examples

r^N (Cnrx),

but Cs.nx

In these instances,

Cf.

Duval, Grammaire Syriaque, Paris

in

88 1, pp. 47
Palestinian

48.
Aramaic

2
1.

So
c.

also
p.

Noldeke

his

article

on

Christian

456 "The

\p (On) in

>^qa451 "you laugh" disagrees with the pro-

nunciation in East Syriac.

(p. 63)

We

should expect

vj (un)".

Dalman

1.

c.

remarks "The superlinear vocalization

B';s

of the Targums,

and

usually also the Tiberian, has in the form of the Masculine a long
as in

avj which

however becomes u

in the derived forms.

in

The

Tiberian vocalization clearly stands here

old Palestinian usage".

closer relation with the


we
see that

21

which we find
in

inclines
a fact

more

to the forms

our Trg. editions,

which may be often noticed

in the

instances which will be quoted later on.

7.

Variations in punctuation:
a)

b)
9, 5

B.H.=MSS. B.P.=MSS.

P. n'^Vin'

i,

27, i^'crr 6, 20.

H.;

rnni
I
.

4,

20

(but

rri5n),

"j'=-an

(but
c)

and

'iDrn).

justifiable in
3,

both instances ^

d)
e)

B.S.=MSS. P. ^n\xn 4, B.P.=MSS. S. sb'-E 15, B.P.=MSS. Ho. -jiVi-^

B.Ho.==MSS.
S.

nbV-.nni 14^ 18.

10.
3, 16,

np:-2n

16, 4.

Both

these are given by Levy.

f)

qTr^ {A
C)ipr
is

^^-pt:) 4, 6.

S.

is

more correct since

g)

On

the

other hand,
2,

the
is

Here again the Noun; Levy also C)"')?~. MSS. have Ho. where B.
P?T3

reads

S.

in p'lm^'^

24 which

as incorrect as B.'s

the correct form being plir.

h)

A
in

has the modified

ii

sounds which

is

certainly a
dia-

vulgarism and which,

lectically

according to Wright,
is

was heard

Old Arabic and

found occasionally
in

in the

vulgar

dialects'*.

For instance,

the

word

i"'i'i:='^i-=c

i)

B.

snisa

where the MSS. give xn;=

B.
"-iniiii

4, 21.

j)

k)
rrh-^^p).
1)

MSS. MSS.
B.

"pnx.
n^b-^bp

4, 25.

{C and

more

correctly

the

Pael

r-^yq^^.

Finally,

the

Yemen MSS.

punctuate

with

Sureq

Cf. S'lVsV

Dan.
3

3, 15.

2 v.

Levy, Chaldaisches Worterbuch,

is

s.

v.

Leipzig 1866.

Strangely enough the reverse process

mentioned

by Noldeke as taking place in Christian Palestinian Aramaic. "We find u where we should expect i as in ^joxa* (^Hebrew S";;;^)" p. 456.

Dalman mentions
4

that

Franz Delitzsch asserted that

in

the time of
1.

the Punctatores in Palestine u

was pronounced

ii

(Dalman,

c.

p. 63).

Wright, "Comparative
p. 77.
5

Grammar

of the Semitic Languages",

Cam-

bridge 1890,

Cf. also the writing of the

Arabic sound Plural

Nominative
Arabic

in Ina for iina

V.

texts.

also

which is common Duval 1. c. p. 47.

,

in the

Yemenite Jewish-


where B. has
instance
P.
^

22
i,

SHinis 4,
is
i.

in

n-.TU'^Js

lo,

In the latter
the

Bevan says

the

change
Patah.

due

to

following

labial^; bfjbru-a 4, 12, X:e6 14, 17, &<;730 41, 40.

last

For the two

seen
at

examples Levy prefers

It

can be
frequently

glance that the MSS. readings are superior.

8.

The Se.Mobile
system than

is is

much more

employed
it

in the Spl.

the case in the Sbl., since

is

also used with the Gutturals^ in which case the Sbl. system

replaces
that

It must now be noticed by Se.Compositum. interchanges between Se. and the full vowels are freit

quently met with: a) B. P.: MSS. Se. ^^t:xi

3, 8, inS^b"

u,

6.

The

first

instance

is

Etpeel

whilst B.

reads,

perhaps more

correctly Etpaal; this will be fully considered

when
^aS
V

treating

of the has
5, I.

conjugations.
correctly.

The word
B.

"iSS'^b"

being Afel
Se.

of inr
"laS"

Se.

b)

Q.

MSS.

3, 17,

These being
find
in

Preterites

of
:

Verba,

have

Se.

just

as

we

Syriac.

c)

B.

S.

MSS.
in
B.'s

Se.; "'ids
CJS*

3, 15,
2,

i<"3:x

3, 20.

For the
shows
examples.
either
2, 2,

latter cf.

B.

Aram.
of
the
S.

Dan.

10.

The
in
v.

Sbl. vocalization

as

exhibited
influence
Se.:

edition

of the Trg.,

clearly

the

Hebrew language
"iso 5,
i.

these

d) B.
in

MSS.

allows

form
rn=i

this instance.

Levy,

s.

e)

B. H.:

MSS.
in

Se.

nipT^nS
g.

4, I.

That the Yemenite Jews were most careful

the

preis

serving

correct traditional pronunciation

clearly

of the Trg.

shown

most

by

Derenbourg

in

Lecteur".

"They have

still

preserved the

"Manuel du old-fashioned and

his
little

good custom of
the

translating each verse in public; a

boy

nine or ten years of age stands on the platform and recites

Targum

of

each

verse

after

the

Reader has

cited the

Hebrew".

"Further", says M. Derenbourg, they have preof the Targum,

served a more exact tradition

whereas we

know of

other

countries

where the Chaldean Version was

iith century"
-5.

already neglected in the

I

Cf. Chr. Pal.

2

{kvzv), p. 455.

Book

Aram, "u sometimes stands for a as of Daniel. Cambridge 1892, p. 81.

in

aqI
3
1.

J-S-aiut

c.

p-Sog.

23
for

The use of
this

Se. Mobile

the

semi-vowels shows that

Se.

than

we

must have had a much more distinct pronunciation are accustomed to give it, and it is a fact that

Jews sound the Sewa just as the occidental Jews pronounce Segol even at the present day\
oriental

Se.Compositum is represented in the MSS. by Se.Quiescens we may assume that the pronunciation was a more hurried one, whilst the full vowel would indicate a

When

the

longer or fuller pronunciation.

nunciation of
is

In connection with the pro-

Hebrew

in use

among

the Jews

of

Yemen

it

instructive to notice Derenbourg's

description

of the ac-

count given by Jacob Sappir^ of the present pronunciation "\s regards their vowels of Hebrew by the Yemenite Jews.
they pronounce Q. and P. like the Germans, contracting the
lips

for

the

former
they

and opening the mouth wide

like a

for

the
S.

latter,

the

Ho.

pronounce as the Polish Jews, the

S.

like the

Spaniards and the

it

very short

P.,

so as to
is

distinguish

from

its

original P.

The Se.Mobile
a
guttural
it it

pro-

nounced

in

different

ways;

before

takes the

vowel which that

everywhere else
people
S.

letter has,
it

before a
a

Yod
a.

has that of H.,

resembles

weak

There
a

are

also

at

Yemen who speak

less correctly,

who confound
full

and

P.

and pronounce Se.Mobile with

vowel and

ignorant or neglectful scribes

their copies

make

these

errors current in
j.

of the Pentateuch or the Prayers"

segoleted
it

In

the

forms we

know

the

2nd

P.

is

only a

help-vowel and
the S.^
I

was probably pronounced as we pronounce

That

P.

was sometimes read

146, a

as

an e sound

may

Cf.

The Codd. Gaster No.

14th

century Karaite MS.

from Nisibis; Is'os. 155, 159, 160 Maliazor Byzant. Rite (XVII and XVIII cent.) and Codd. Montefiore 444, 445 and 446 Mahazor Corfu, which write e. where we would expect S. and vice versa; employing S. and Se. indiscriminately. Thus we read n";-: "vv ~~""?3 "?.?? and -'p-j immediately followed by t;-:0. 2 In his "jss 4 So 511. I'EC (Lyck 1866). 3 Manuel du Lecteur, 1. c, pp. 510 (II^a) also in Christian Palestinian Aramaic in such words as Wjjl "Year" >iif. {yi>>.) "with" (Noldeke 1. c. p. 4541
.'^.,


Pesitta
ri'2-bit.

24

ri^^-'bx

perhaps be seen from Proverbs 12, 28 where the Septuagint,

and Targura
Cf.
T^'iTiisi.

all

render

as

if

it

were written

also

Jeremiah 13, 21

Ti'iins*'^

where

we should
almost

expect

Dr. Gaster has pointed out that Prayer-Books

to the Se. the full vowel-sign e or e

from Corfu give

invariably ^
Se. usually

He

also points

out that the

is

pronunciation of

heard at the present day

opinion
of
till

undoubtedly incorrect,

according to the
the

all

the old grammarians from

Dikduke
to

ha-te'amim

Kimhi.

transcriptions of

nbPa and
Spl.
it

tr^i^? as

The ancient LXX Solomon and Gomorrah

also
the

point

similar

conclusion^.

Cf.

remarks

of

Margoliouth

on the

vocalization 3.

b)

In

connection

with the pronunciation

scribes

may be
in

noticed that the

vocalization
is

Yemen
indicate

made no

alteration

the

to

the

Pause.

This pausal influence

the

a characteristic of the

Hebrew and not of

is

Aramaic language.
fact.

The
in

rarity of

any vocalic alteration under the pausal influence

a sufficient proof of this

Bb. Aram,

Even
is

examples are to be found where H.

pause
Cf.
b2-i

in Bb. Aram, many employed where no

S.

occurs Daniel

and where we might consequently expect

6, 21,

b^i^a
4, 11.

Dan.

7, 8,

lbr:3

Ezra

4, 23,
its

"(SiU

Ezra

6,

12, ^aair
to

Dan.

We may

compare

use in

our MSS.

that

of the Aramaic portions

of the Bible t.

We

there

notice only
P.
in
is

a few instances with Silluq and Sof

into

Pasuq where
Berliner

changed

says

his

Massorah^:

Q. "Both

and

S.

becomes H.
(/. e.

schools

the

Babylonian

and Palestinian) have the use of the Pause with Athnach and Sof-Pasuq, whilst with the Bureaus the
Pause
is

also used with Sakef.

In the case of Genesis 18,30

the
this
is

there

seems no
refers

difference between

two

schools,

both

schools reading
Berliner
I

pausal form at

Sakef".

The word
all

to in this passage

^"'^pt*';

and yet

the

M. Gaster "Die Unterschiedlosigkeit zvvischen Pathah und Segol"

2

in Stade's Zeitschrift, Giessen 1894, p. 62.

4

p. 61.

1.

c.

p. 47.

V.

Kautzsch,
5

p. 39.

"Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramaischen", Leipzig Leipzig 1877, Introduction, p. XX.

1884,


four

25

our MSS.
read bbr

MSS. read here

b-^V^n

bV^xi,

Similarly

24, 33,

44,

we

notice

the

So 2. 21, 7. Athnah causing a change of vowel

='"p"

But here and there

e. g.

bin

4, 2.

C
at

lengthens

more

frequently

e. g. pr'i

12, 5,

-"sr"-

8, 7,

a Sakef;

an Athnah, the
in his

MSS. having S. A has -.^^7 at remaining MSS. again showing a S. Berliner

the

other

Massorah says the form

with H.,

n-^o

is

only

used

in
in

Pause
24,
i,

when punctuated
27,
I

but our MSS. read n^c

and 35, 29, where there is no pause. On the other hand they have ^h^k 36, 11 at Athnah where B. has a P.

We

also notice the influence

of the Pause in

nl'arb''

38, 13,
the

c^^Bx
cases

41, 52

(but

A
a

n-^tiEX)

and
see

'^.-"^

46,
in

6.

Yet

where

we

find

pausal influence
that

our MSS. are

influence

extremely
the

rare,

and hence we

the

of

Hebrew
It

original

upon

the

text of the Trg.

is

punctuated
insignifi-

according to the Spl. vocalization

cant.

comparatively

may be noted that most of the examples I have quoted are Proper Names which were probably punctuated in these cases exactly as they occur in the Hebrew text. 10. From all these examples it may be seen what great
differences

are noticeable

in

the

two systems.

In general,

the Spl. system approaches the Bb. Aram, and Syriac forms, which we should naturally expect in an Aramaic language,
whilst the Sbl. system

shows considerable Hebrew influences.

in

Further,

the

forms

given

the
in

MSS.

are

etymologically
In a few

more correct than those found

our editions.

instances the surroundings influence the pronunciation.

VII.

ORTHOGRAPHY.
shown by the MSS. are
here only indicate a few.

1.

The

ortliographical variations
I

numerous and important.

Lists will

shall

be found

in

Part II and also an attempt to justify

a)

the readings of the

MSS.
to

The

following variations
exercised

may

be regarded as due

the

influence

by

dialect.


B. reads
N'-^S3.
"pifiit" 3,

26

'piox'^.
.'^'i-J'^p^.

iS; the rest have

B. has

L. confirms^.
B.

A.

B,

C,

XTj-^ci 6, 16.

and

C-i-^'-jQ'n

45, 22,

and

'^VmOn,

vb"'-j:iN.

L.

^,

although noticing
the best Reading.

the form given by B., gives that of

D as
use

b)

The MSS.
the

occasionally
different

make

of vowel-change to
a
"13

distinguish

meanings
up;

of

word.

=upon, l3y=he went

thou,

"i3==son,

= besides;

Thus b n5<=
of
is

rx
s'b

a sign.

c)
''

has

the

3rd Person Plural

This peculiarity
(p.

Verba
It
is

ending

in

and not

in ix.

pointed out by Berliner in his Massorah

also

92) as a Syriasm.

occasionally found in B, but A and never As an instance we may take the word T'Ennx'i 7, 20. Some variations are also found in Verba i"r. A, B and read 1"'-ri?:i 19, 14, but B. and C "j^xri'ai. Landauer^ very

show

it.

appropriately refers us here to the Present Participle of the

Verba
ka-yem.
written

l":'

in Syriac

in

which language
reading

>>JL

is

pronounced
as if
it

Similarly ""Nri'2^^'^<^^xa

would be pronounced
latter

were

and
a

this

may

accordingly be

regarded
D

as

popular spelling of ~'xn^2 3.

d)

We
io.

some-

times find interchanges of letters consistently occurring; thus

is

used by the MSS.

not an Aramaic

in

cases where B. writes

The
UJ

latter is

letter at all,

but

is

imported from

the
is

Hebrew.
to

has

it

incorrectly in two places where a

9,

be read

viz.

voj?
42.

13

and

X";&'^p

19, 17.

a and
I'lS

:.

and

D have Dpi 31,

in

The Rest

ip-i.

All have

31, 27.

B. tis

which the author of the Pathsegen'* has already pointed

his

out as standing for the

s. V.

Massorah.

All

more usual "fs, MSS. read

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,

'-;vr^

(Qere

^;;-^)

Daniel
25.

4, 23, "'os|?

(Qere

]"?".5)

Daniel
p.

3, 3,

-j-js-!

iQere
den,

;-r'^)

Ezra

7,

Cf.
fiir

also

Dalman's
als

Schreibungen wie
dass k

r:''-5;>3

rsV;'^, D'-p fiir

45 '*Aus c-sp darf geschlossen wer-

Grammar

zwischen zwei Vokalen

4

stimmhafte Gaumenspirans

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

Published in Adler's edition of the Targum

give

27

A,

xn-

i6,

12.
is

nrhf\
has
it.

The n
e)

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

writes n^isbms

14,

i.

Cand

divide the

word
3, 16 fj

"i^aii'b

-n:

and

this,

at a later

time, was looked upon

as the correct traditional writing ^

The MSS.

give ^z-ii if-in^i

"'z'^-^nr^

and z^^rsr

12, 13 in all of

which B. writes

&c.
',r:::>

The Yemen MSS. do not know of

the so-called EiJ-n

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

these words as they are found in the
niaini

Hebrew

Text.

g)

By The
all

xip the Massorah meant that several passages should

ignore
34,

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

MSS. however appear

read
*rix

to

this

Rule.
27,

Thus they
46.

(and

not
x-s'-^

^n-x)
27,
2

19,

riNrn

and
the

D
C

read ni^aSi

but here

and

follow

Hebrew Vin
"^V:^

n-"'.

^
A,

and
14.

have

wS:nbs

n^iir in the Text 3 26,

23,
6.

and
x^=-i

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

n^'i

and Z)

39,

i.

^
18

and

B
By

read

=--:i-2-

x-nl-i,

and Z>
be
at

cni-i

^nj-i

15,

and
9^
6.

finally

writes the

Tetragrammaton instead of n-n5X4

it

these examples

may

once seen that the scribes

or,

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

at

any

rate,

they

were only

slightly

acquainted

with

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

to us

by
the

the

has

"^"^crXT

on the margin,

text

Yemenite Jews. 3, 23 of which has been

Cf.

Ezra

4,

16

where

r;:r::s

stands for the

more usual s:r:s

so

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

2,

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

2

Siyn (Dan.
IluUin 65a.
estenus
(v.

6,

13)
3

where Baer has r-yr.

is

Cf.

Talmud Babli

Tr.

The reading sinVe

II,
J).

quoted by Theodorus MopsuB.

1.

Part II, Ch.

cf.

c.

p.

216.


corrected by a later hand to
is

28

but as the word

'^'lair'iti

"'Osnx'i;

given by Berliner

in

bis
it is

Massorah^ under the heading of

undoubtedly the correct reading,
'ODn^<'^.
"^"i

P"'5<1

which means that

reject the
to

we must
see
this

correction

7,

i6

has

iTi'n5"'in

on the margin

be placed between

and
that 25,

'^nibs'.

We

shall

when speaking of the Additions word already inserted in the text.

to

and

D
has
"^"i^

have
'p^i'^

8 Z)

on the margin
in
its

be read after "non.

22

has the same word

cor-

text,

27,

has

"^nii^

on the margin but

rectly in the text.

This has been noticed above under niS'im x^p.

Many more examples of marginal readings will be noticed when we shall treat of the Variant Readings. i) The Yemen MSS. almost invariably follow the reading given in the

Massorah of Berliner under the head of

presents a School
in Babyl.

"^siSTnfisVi

which

re-

in

favour of the original

for

Plst.

Text and
text

is is

great argument
in

the authenticity

of the

which
reads

found

these
17,

MSS.

To

give one instance;

B.

n]5

and and

>inn

26

and 27
whilst

the

MSS. have
the Peal

the

Itpeel nisnx
in

i"i1:ni<.

Berliner^
'^5<"nDb

places
the

reading

the

column headed

Etpeel

is

under ixriinsb.

''Perhaps"

adds
is

placed

Berliner

"whether

we

should take the Peal or Itpeel form depends upon the old

grammatical question whether the root of the Hebrew word

is

5T0

or

^"23".

Baer3,

however,

of a different opinion.

He

says, speaking of certain

forms which occur in B. Aram,

and which he
Daniel
28.

treats as Etpeel ''Praeteritum huius conjugationis

abjicit

interdum syllabam praeformativam

5,

velut 0"]Q

= onQr!i<

VIII.

GRAMMATICAL VARIATIONS.
I.

THE NOUN.
in the different states

a)

State.

There are a few changes

of the Substantives.

1.

c.

p.

116.

Massorah

p.

62.

Daniel

etc.

p.

LIX.


a) In

29

States,

the Absolute
to be

and Emphatic

which

in

the

MSS. appear
gether
in

used ahnost indiscriminately'.

entirely

Noldeke
to-

informs us that
the

these two states were

dialect
in

confused

Mandaic
will
is

of Aramaic^, and from the

Part
II,
it

examples which
a similar laxness
in

be given A, B,
21,

will

be seen that

noticeable in the

Targum
4,

as represented

the

Yemen MSS.
is

snxa

16, B.

and

i<ins5.

The

text

y'xs;

6,

ponding word
P)

in the

MSS. x^r-^-i, Hebrew Text is

B. b=-p.
3=^?.

The
in

corres-

Absolute and Construct. 15, 19

"'S'^bt'

21,

the

Patro-

nymics

"^xijp

&c, B. believes we have either a shortened

inis

form of the absolute Plural or the Construct State used

stead of the Absolute
3.

The

first-mentioned
final

explanation

supported by Wright who says

fall

Mim

or

Nun

are apt to

away

in

the Absolute

Plural of nouns in the Assyrian,

languages'*.

Talmudic and Modern Syriac

that these

Dalman^ assumes

are

shortened

forms of the Absolute "Statt der

The same anomaly

p.

is

also

found in Syriac

(cf.

Duval's Gram-

mar, Paris 1881,

249): "L'etat emphatique s'est alors generalise

au

point de devenir la

forme usuelle,
-

et

l'etat

absolu,

que

I'on

ne rendiffi-

contre plus que dans quelques tournures de phrase, est souvent

cile

k constater".

IMandaische Grammatik,

p.

300.

Also

in

the Christian Aramaic dialect of Palestine

text

"We

frequently find in the

lying before us the Emphatic State

where we should expect the

as

Absolute".
corruption.
p.

He, however, explains these examples

(Vide

due

to

later
1.

ZDMG.
remarks

XXII,

p.

507).
this

Cf.

also

Berliner

c.

204.

But Uhlemann when noticing

ubi Hebraeus habet

apparent confusion in the

sine articulo; quae diver-

Samaritan dialect

"In haud paucis locis utitur Samaritanus

Nomine emph.,
sitas in

Nomen

eo est querenda, quod Samaritanus forte

nita cogitaret".

He

gives

as

the

Targum

is

s-^-STi r-zyr'r"

ibi de re magis defiexample 25, 23 "I'yu -21;* a*, of which sail and the Samaritan also writes the
viz.

Emphatic
situtiones

state

with both words

^^tV^
British

-""^-^nt
Leipzig

^S^
p.

("In196).

Linguae

Samaritanae" Uhlemann,

1837,

Even

in the Biblical

Aramaic Text, the

page 205.
4

Museum MS.
"-z

Or. 2374

disagrees with Baer's

Edition in reading sV
Cf.

(Daniel
1.

2,

42)

Baer has Vne.

147.
5
1.

1.

c.

Wright:

c.

pp. 67, 146

where and

c.

p.

151.

indeterm. Pluralendung in
e
(!)".

30
tritt

zuvveilen ein

die Verkiirzung

In connection
"'d^

with these Patronymics

"^^^in
"p'^ri

compare
"i6s

i,

lo

and
the
s.

14,

i.

we may also The MSS. have "^"in

corresponds
Tir-a'^rr
is

17,

20

whilst B. lia?

which, perhaps,
original

more
is

closely with

Hebrew
v.;

and which
probably a

also given

by L.
A,

40, 16

";6 which

Hebraism.
b)

B.,

C,

D,

correctly, 756,

Number.
in

Turning from the

to those

consideration of the
in

dif-

ferences

States

observable

once noticeable that these variations are

Number, it is at both more numerous

and more important.

be explained as due
the
to

The

differences

may

very frequently

the Targumist's desire to give rather a

sense

of the

Hebrew than

mere

slavish

rendering;

whilst

some
II.

are due to an uncertainty whether a Collective

treated as Singular or as Plural.
B.

Noun should be
'ST

and

4,

and

n^-in,

D
B

x^n.

The

first

reading ap-

pears to be the best,

and

is

given by L.^, since

we expect

here the Plural Construct.

and

C may

be true to the
to

Aramaic idiom; but

D
is

appears, at

first sight,

be incorrect.

Nevertheless this reading cannot be condemned, since the

sense of the passage
iU5n"iKT I, 21.

certainly singular.
is

B.

d"'n'^iX"i

MSS.

The

Subject

N'^^,

which, being a Collective

L.,

Noun may
the

possibly justify either reading.

however, gives

same

as that

of the

MSS.

C '^

B.,

A,

and

^n^'

14, 22.

Luzz. in his Thiloxenos'^ asserts that the Plural

since
the

is

necessary here,

Targumist

refers

the

passage to

Prayer in which both hands are held up, whilst the Hebrew
text refers
c)

to an

oath,

for

which only one hand

in

is

raised.

The

peculiar

use

of the Genders

the MSS.,

and
Did

the apparent confusion which exists in the use of Masculine

for

Feminine presents us with a grammatical problem.

primitive

the

Aramaic language have

Feminine Genders
later

distinct

forms for the

distinction

Masculine

and

or

was

this

merely the result of a

development and

differentiation

s.

V.

Vienna: 1830,

p. 35.


fixed

31

The
written text
to

by the Massorites and Grammarians?

liible

of the Aramaic of the

the

seems

point to one form for

the
suffix

two

Genders;
object
it

when, however,

refers

to

feminine
sorites.

was

differently
this
is

punctuated by the Masin

Bevan, referring to
that

phenomenon

Bb. Aram,

remarks

the

written

text

grammatically inaccurate:

"Sometimes grammatical inaccuracies which probably were found already in the primitive text have been corrected by
the later vocalizers
;

thus "pn

the

suffix

of the 3rd Person

Plural was used indifferently for the Masculine or Feminine,

but has

been marked with the vowel

whenever

it

refers

to a feminine

Noun.

Similarly in the 3rd

i

Person Plural of
is

the Perfect

of the Verb the termination

used for both

genders,

but has been treated as a by the vocalizers, when

is

the Subject

Feminine" ^
"(ID

So also the Yemen MSS. use the

both
for

termination

fn and

Masculine and Feminine

and likewise the

expect Mas.
exceptions
these.
'i

suffix

'fl

is

used as

Common

Suffix of the

3rd Person Plural of the Imperfect of Verbs where we should

and Fem. '| ^.

this

have only noticed a few

shall
later

to

rule in

and

In

my

opinion these examples are not due

on enumerate as Bevan

thinks

to

grammatical inaccuracies but are really of Common

Gender^.

We may

perhaps find analogous instances

in

the

Bevan:

1.

c.

p.

39.

mostly used in Christian Palestinian Aramaic

Although the regular fem. forms were still we find examples in

which the Masc. endings are used for the Fem. as in ^a-ta) (ZDMG. 3 The text of Daniel in the British Museum MS. Or. XXII. p. 474). 2374; appeares to confirm this assumption. As I have already remarked
this

MS. pays no attention

this

to

the

sts

but
y.r,n

inserts

the

in

its

text.

In

MS. then the

is

scribe writes

editions of the Bible say

we must

read

"i"":*?

33 when our on account of the Gender,

Dan.

2,

although the z'n

yr.z^.

Xow had

the scribe read

thus.

yr.z'i

he would
in

have undoubtedly written the word

written

This proves that

the

time and place of the scribe this word was

as
it

is

and that the reading

i-rs*?

pronounced 'r:': just was unknown to the

scribe.


Hebrew language
both 'boy' and
in the Pentateuch.
in
'girl'

32

"ii"3 ^

which the word

originally
it

meant
occurs

being spelt without n when

But a much
is

more

striking
in

instance of

the

same phenomenon

to

be found

the

Hebrew
X^iti

x^!i
tK'^n

which in the Pentateuch

(the latter

is

the Ketib both for

1 1

and

form occurring but

to

times in the whole Penta^.

teuch,

according

the

Massorites)
is

Whether then
but

this

peculiarity of the
characteristic

Yemen MSS.
the

a vulgarism or a classical
after

of

language remains doubtful,

observing that a similar phenomenon existed in the primitive

Hebrew language,
assume
that
it

there

is

no reason why we should not

characteristic

is

likewise
I

of the

primitive

Aramaic
which
I

language.

now enumerate
in
C.

the

few

exceptions
2il,

have noticed
payn'O'ii

This MS. reads "pniix 19;

27, 29 l^ii-S 31, 5 (although in the 35 and -7^% very same verse we find C giving 'iinb" and referring the
Suffix to the

same feminine Subject!) and

l^ipiiJ 41^ ^o.

Gesenius points out

this

peculiarity:

"The Pentateuch

certainly

contains

some

peculiarities

of language which have

the appearance

of archaisms.

and
'she'

->:

When these books were composed the words Nnn 'he' "young man" were still of common Gender and used also for and 'young woman'. Vide Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, Translated
2. 3.
2

by Conant. London 1839.

In Verse 47 the

We
3

find an apparent inconto

sistency in Ezekiel 23, 45 where

a"Hs

refers

a Feminine Subject.
(as A,

word

is

written ^nn^s.

Samaritan

and

D) jlBlp'^n. In the following pages some readings from the Samaritan Targum which agree with one or another of the Variant Readings
consideration have been inserted. .Since Samaritan has no vowel signs these instances are only of value in confirming the ^ConUpon the much-vexed question whether the Samasonantal Text.

under

Targumist was influenced by the Targum of Onkelos ment between the two is due to later interpolations into of the Samaritan Targum I refrain to enter; but bearing
ritan

or agree-

the Text
in

mind

that the language of Onkelos and Samaritan are two kindred dialects

of Aramaic and that they both represent very ancient Translations of

the

Hebrew

Text, the examples given

may be

of

some value
Briill

in help-

ing to confirm a reading.

1879) has been, in
all

The

edition of Dr. Adolf

(Frankfort:

cases, the text of the Samaritan

Targum

referred

to.


ance.

33

Other variations
in

These are evidently mere anomalies, and of no importIt is unnecessary to give examples here as they occur
all

throughout

the

MSS.
in

invariably.

Gender

will

be found

Part

II.

2.

THE VERB.
Very numerous interchanges are
D^=1n.
justifies

a)

The Conjugations.
in

to

be observed
a)

the Conjugations.

Peal and Pael.

B.

A,

C,

D
C33

0:21' 31,

54.

Landauer^ explains
Massorah.

and

the

latter

reading in his
is

He

says that here only

is

xrw:

mentioned,

and hence the Peal

is

the

correct

Conjugation.

The case
is

different in

Numbers

22, 40 in which

example the Pael

necessary, since Balaq offered

(',51

up a

large
B.
it

number of animals

j-'nin).

A,

and

Trh^t"^^.

and

n-'^x-ii 37, 15.

L. gives no Pael of this root, but

in

may be observed

that

the Syriac

language the Pael has the same

signification

as the Peal.
P)

Peal and Afel.

B.

and

"'nix',

A, B,
is

'p^k^^

4, 3.

Similarly throughout Genesis.

Now,

there

no doubt

that

A,

and

have the only correct reading of the Afel of

is

xrx
B.

cf.

Syriac -V'i- B.'s form

really ist Per. Sin. Imperf. Peal.

14.
this

"'?rf7?^'!'7

MSS. have

i:1-'n5iy'^T 4,

The

Afel,

is

the

more

convenient form, according to L.;

to avoid the confusion

form being preferred

in the

which might arise

riDUJ

employment
root

of the Aramaic root

to

find

and the

Hebrew

nrd

= to
7)

forget.

Peal and Etpaal, Etpeel or Ettafal.

19.

MSS. a'nf n
-::Tr

(Peal)

B. arnn'n (Ettafal) 3,
finitive

The Hebrew

being an Init

may be

either Active or Passive.

Here

seems

to

bear an active signification, which would confirm the reading

of the MSS.
L.* also gives
B.'s

the

Peal form here, but Pathit

segen^ supports

reading

and explains

reflectively.

Samaritan D33\
s.

Massorah

s.

v.

Samaritan

niNS"!.

V.

To

this verse.


B,C2ind
ing.

34

2 6,

B, p'^bo^^
Isy^i

and Z> p;"r&xi (Etpaal)

to

23

The Hebrew

text being

appears
nn^b'^'i^
^h"^.

confirm

the first-mentioned read-

and Z>
is

B.

and

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

The Hebrew
construction.
6)

The

first-mentioned reading,
is

giving the sense of the original,

less literal

than the passive

Pael and Afel.

B. in-^x

MSS.
the

^li^x 34, 19.

Both these
Massorah^,

forms have the same meaning, but Berliner,

places the reading '^n^x

in his

among

list

of instances included

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

MSS. appear
"in'^x

to take

no notice of
fairly

this

Massoretic rule.

L. gives

as Pael of irix, but as the Pael of "inx occurs

is

very rarely whilst the Afel

the

common,
B.
r^^^yj-^.

the reading of

MSS. appears
to

to

be preferable.

MSS.

nNi'iS'i<i

38, 14.
p.X''"isx
is

In Berliner's Massorah*

we read

"^NS'TniiD^ nxi'iSJ '^itniob

which the author of the Pathsegen adds "There

some difficulty in understanding what difference the Suraans make between nxil^*"! when used as the Trg. of ^om and when it is the Trg. of "ifini as in 4, i". This implies that
he preferred or expected the reading nx^irxi.
the Afel which the Pael
s)

L.s also prefers

means
'to

to Mepart*,

'go away', 'take off', whilst

means

conceive'.^

Etpeel and Etpaal.

in his

MSS.
saepe

ni'n^-jxi,

B.

r^'^ri^'^x'i

3, 10.

Merx
Etpe.

"Chrestomathia Targumica"^ pleads for the Etpeel

Itpaal
se,

reading

"Editiones

praebent,
est;

at

observa
vero

syr.
in-

esse
est.

abscondit

absconditus
s.

Etpa.

huraatus

Payne-Smith

v."

Similarly in 4, 14.
L.*^

A, B,

D
the

"i6i<n%

B. and

C
to

loxn- 42, 19.

here gives the Etpaal,

but

according
is

Brockelmann's

Lexicon

Syriacum9

the

Etpeel

the conjugation in use in the Syriac language.

in

By
is

examples given

Part II

it

will

be found that

this

very frequently the case.

I

Samaritan pVc\
s.

Samaritan
1.

inn^'^n.

p. 58.

4 p. 63.

V.

But Dalman

c.

p.

39

gives
7

the
207.

meaning of
^
s.

both Pael and Afel "schwanger werden".

9

p.

v.

Berlin 1895, P- 21

a.


b)
a)

35

The Tenses.
Perfect and Imperfect.

and

-;rnb'uji, 31, 27; B.^ C and '\vrHv^^ but Berliner ^ Landauer^ and Adler^ all

support the former reading.

49, 22.
p)

C
is

"^Jon,

B.,

A,

and

''so-t

The
are

latter

reading

correct.

Perfect and (Participle) Present.

More numerous

vari-

ations

here noticeable.

due

says
B. 4

These differences are mainly

to the fact that the

Hebrew language has no

has no Imperfect with
1

Present Tense, whilst the Aramaic

B and D B. and C p-sr. The Hebrew is ksc.-': 8, 7. L.s supports the former reading which may be taken as correct. MSS. t\TOipr' B. <'^r-':;n-. The Hebrew is n"^?!!": 23, 11. The Hebrew is thus Perfect in
conversivum. A,
pE3i,
,

form but Present

in

signification;

hence, B.'s reading gives

literal

the correct sense but the

7)

MSS. have a more

Present.

rendering.

Imperfect and (Participle)

ips^,

'ps:,

D
it

"ipsa,

and

B.

ips::

24, 13.

Pathsegen"^ reads as
exactly to the

but

may be observed

that

D corresponds
B.,

Hebrew
latter

n\ssi\

V.bf^-'

43, 25,

A,

and

D
is

-fbiA

the

receiving the support

lation of the
c)

of Pathsegen^.
^ibrxi.

literal

trans-

Hebrew

Other Differences.
to

There are one or two other

slight
,">->"'n''

variations

be noticed with the Verb.

and

D
B.,

(Passive), B.,

and

"rSn (Active) 34, 22.

is

The Hebrew

being

D"'5a2

the passive construction

superior.
latter
is

and

"^3^^%

B
have

and

'D?3'2b'9

13^

16.

The
read

the literal
i,

translation of the

Hebrew
whilst

r^"^3^?.

Similarly in 31,

B.,

and

'p'^^ST

and

n^'ab'

this

being a

translation of the

Hebrew

"tax;.

IX.
i)

OTHER VARIATIONS,
in

We

find a large

words or prepositions
I

number of additions, mostly of small our MSS. Many of these additions

Massorah
^
s.

Massorah,
1.

p.

98.
5
s.

v.

3 ~;';
7

rrr:

to this verse.
"j-Vs-i

4 8

c.

p.

203.

V.

To

this verse.
9

Samaritan has

Samaritan likewise

]"'i''75.

Samaritan

":"3:5.

make
a few are mistakes.

36

is

the text clearer; others

have Halachic reasons, whilst

to say

We

likewise find omissions, that

there are less words given in the

in B.'s Edition.

MSS. than

are to be found

Some

are

omitted to

save the scribe the

trouble of rewriting a string of Proper

Names:
its

the verse, as

Berliner points out, being read thrice in Hebrew, instead of

being followed by
lation.

its

Targum and

then by

Arabic trans-

Occasionally these omissions are due to the scribe's

the MSS. insert nin t<in before "pra'n commentary "isb iii'^na regards this as

carelessness.
2) Additions.
4, 22.

All
his

Adler,

in

an instance of Homoioteleuton, the preceding verse having

rr^n

xin in

the text.

A
6,

adds

rro-qh

after

'nin

4,

23.

This

may perhaps be
~ib
to
this
""a

a Halachic addition.
11

Vide Adler
this

in MJinD

verse.

and Z> simplify

in the

verse by

adding

before

tD'ip.

Some
the

irregularity
state

is

observable
similar

use of

'i

to express

construct

and a

laxity
is

occurs
the

in

Syriac.
classical

Generally, the construction

without 1

more

one and the use of i is the more popular construction. This employment of being a much freer and looser construction preferred by the Aramaic language and is much more is
"1

frequently used than the other construction.

The MSS. add

it

in

CiT^n

2,

11

(Hebrew

nnion)

A, B,

D
the

naiyn^
1
is

C
is

t2D'^

n,

18.

According
18

to Berliner's

Massorah^

incorrect

in verse

but necessary in verse 19;

since

18

given as an instance of

msin

i<"ip.

The
is

little

word T^

is

sometimes added by

and

C, mostly,

however,
copied

incorrectly.

has ni before nibp 21, 17.

text;

This n^

from the rx of the Hebrew

employs a
correct.
is

but inasmuch as the Trg.

here,

Passive

construction

ni

is

evidently

in-

added by

in "i"'^^^'^

13, 10,

a reading which
1

is

rejected
I

by the author of the Pathsegen"*.

ava.
2

is

added by the
"ij's^.

Samaritan

p. ^g.

Likewise Samaritan

to this verse.

MSS.
pn^-i
it

37

the

in
"

N~"'r3i"

which

is

asiainst

Hebrew

text

and

in

in

33, 13 which follows the ~r.'. 10, i not as Hebr. ~ is

42, 24
this

original.

added

A and B add by A and Z> in

)inn5
is

and since the corresponding Hebrew word

reading
is

Bii'^bi;"?

the correct one.

n
rpr).

is

added by A,

and

in

rp^* 42, 21

(B.

and
it

The reading
Omissions.
I

with 1 appears preferable, since

suits

the context so admirably.

3.

have noticed some scores of omissions,

but shall only mention a few which are not due to any oversight
in

on the part of the

scribe.

Sometimes verses are omitted

is

their entirety to

save space and the scribe's time; this

in genealogies.

particularly noticeable

For instance

10,

22

and

23,
18,

27

29.

19

omits

any word
his

in the

i:pn which does not correspond Hebrew text but is explained by Adler
vr-iTr
x-i-i;
1-23

to
in

"^sb ns-^rj

"!:"T"-i

sin",
in

18,

30

B
C

omits
text.

which again has no equivalent

Pathsegen

the

Hebrew
19,
7
is

omits

1"=

and

also

remarks

that

there
i--

no occasion
and
in

for this

word

in the

Targum
again

text since

n:.
--/

43, 15

omit i-fn- which

text,

is

represented

by no word

the

Hebrew
in

but Rasi explains the word

in

as necessary, since,

Aramaic, different Verbs are

things

use

to indicate the seizure of

and the seizure of human

beings,
serts

203 T

being used of things

the the

and

~"

of men.
I

B.

in-

before
in

following

words
3,

which
7^n3
7,

write

as

they
18,

appear
6; n'^rnx3

MSS.
b-J

~\prr.

9;

22;

xrVo
"ir-Ti-s

19,

16;

23,

19

{A and

only);

4I; 39-

An

initial

is

omitted by

and

before ir^rrNf
to the

3, 21.

Also before

bs'i 6,

20 which corresponds

Hebrew. The

Samaritan
but,

";r'!<3".

Samaritan
-.'j-.

rpj-;.

Samaritan also -,

and rrrs

on the other hand,

MSS. omit
h
is

38
21, 8.
is

In several other passages

to the scribe's carelessness.

H" before pn:i"

the omission of this

word

due

omitted before tTiOa 35, 27 by A, connection with which we must notice that

and
it

D
it

in

does

not

occur in the Hebrew

it

text.

Also before

"prisS 43, 27

where
does

likewise does not appear in the original^ although

in the following verse.

?

Pathsegen says we must insert the

the usage

in

both verses, according to

of the Aramaic
in 48, 22

language.

The word xn The

is

omitted by

and by
certain

in 32, 18;

both passages are however faulty in these MSS.

scribes

4) Contractions,

regularly contract

familiar

words which constantly recur, especially those in

X"2.

combination with xn and

A
C
16,

has
5<n

-i"!--?

4,

II.

B,
&c.

C,

D
and

-fr

-p.

A,

x:x
2;

6,

and
24, 5

9, 9.

18, 24;

A A
i.

D
B

cx^.
ni<n,

B and Z> xixri B and C nx x^

and

C and

ni<

xn

20, 3,
"p-ra

and

N3-3r-2,

and

K3^3o 'p 31^ 39.

All have

40, 7

and -prxni 47,

5) Interchange

of Prepositions and
variations

other Particles.

In

noting these numerous

the fact that the

we
B.'s

are again

struck with

manuscript readings are usually superior.

reading
in
is

MSS. MSS.
xsiDbi

xn5-i^ hv, B. xn5i^5 8, 20.

XE^iOni.

a Hebraism.

B. xsio;^ 49,

9.

Berliner

places the manuscript reading in the

is

Massorah^ column ixfinnib whilst

his

under

"^xi'iD?.

Besides the examples already quoted of

interchanges which take place between different Prepositions,

I

have

to

add a number
or

of instances
are

in

which

different

Particles

Prepositions
alter

employed

which
I

sometimes
consider
it

completely

the

sense

of the passage,

necessary to give these somewhat dry details at length,

in-

asmuch
use
of,

as

it

is

my

object to demonstrate the superiority of

I

the Trg. text as exhibited by the AISS. which

have made

over the editions which are in current circulation

us at the present day.

among
p.

6z.


B. n:
n""

39

is

MSS. ni

26, 8.

The reading cv

preferable since

is

only used as the sign

of the accusative in Aramaic,

and not otherwise.

nx

Gesenius' treats the two Hebrew words

= sign

of the accusative, and nx

and
')'^i5

of different
29, 26,

etymology.
is

B.,

= with, as entirely A C and D

'p,

distinct

and

Hebrew

l?.

L.

reads
1?

Bernstein-Kirsch's Chrestomathy^

T'"'

p +
C

but according to
=

and hence
missing.

either
2)Z

reading

may be
text
is

justified;
^;
"^n.

and

this is

again the case in 30,

is

where B. reads

and A, B,

-ov,

The
In

Hebrew
Berliner's

The Aramaic verb thd may be conbi".

strued either with a or

B. -rsDi

MSS.
as

p'^Eoi 49, 13.

Massorah

'irson is

given as the Suraan and "irsca

L.

as

the

Nehardean

reading.

reads

the

MSS. which

gives the better sense.

6)
suffix.

We
B.

occasionally find variations in the addition of the

and

ni<-jn,

and Z>

-\k:n,

-s-jn 4,

7.

Ber-

liner,

in his

Massorah*, says the

suffix is incorrect,

but L.

reads as the point

L.
19,

MSS.

Likewise, in the variation of the vowel-

permits
12.

both

forms.
is

B.
irn.

"jj^r!.

A,

C,

D
in

xlrn,
his

xjnn

The Hebrew

Berliner,
to

Mas-

sorah,5 says the Targumist

in

wished

make

this

word agree

form with the following words "["^^^^ "J^l both of which have the suffix of the 2nd Person. Pathsegen remarks the
same.
literal
ior.

But

this

hardly appears

to

be necessary

and the
be super-

translation of the

MSS.

therefore seems to

has the word incorrectly punctuated.

X.

EXEGETICAL VARIATIONS.

Most of
to are

the variations which have been considered hither-

of importance, showing, as they do, the greater purity

of the Aramaic language which the

Yemen

Trg. Mss. exhibit.

London: 1885
4

Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon 2 v. s. v. ^^

.<=.

translated

by

S.

P.

Tregelles
3

(Leipzig 1836).

p.

i>l.

p.

74.

p.

75.

40

These Variations give an incentive to the study of these MSS. if for no other reason than their more accurate retention of pure Aramaic forms and expressions.

The

exegetical

variations,

however,

are
for

of far greater

importance.

They cannot be accounted

on the ground

of difference of dialect, nor do they point to any linguistic

peculiarities, but give a clear reason for

assuming that they

chief characteristic

represent another distinct recension.

The

of these differences
literal translation

is

the preference frequently

shown

for a

of passages which are in our texts rendered acIt

cording to traditional Hagadic translations.

pointed out
^

has already been

that the preference for literal translations

shown
by the
Jerudesire
text

by the

Plst.

recension

may perhaps be accounted

is

for

existence in Palestine of the other Trg. which

certainly of

Hagadic character;
shalmij or
to
it

refer,

of course, to the
for as the

Targum

may be accounted
faithful

outcome of a
is

have a translation which should render the Hebrew

in the

most
of

and accurate manner, which and

all

also the

tendency
severely
will

i\.quilas

the

old

translators,

who
the

are
rest

literal.

few instances are given here,

be found
26,
22

in Part II.
5<;3''^a'^'i,

B.

and

x"D2"imE3^%

and

la'isir.

The Hebrew is S3i"is>i of which A and B give a literal rendering "God will magnify us and we will multiply ourselves in
the land".

That
it

this is the

valid

reading

is

further

proved
that
us".

by the support

receives

from Rasi and L.

gives a reading
will

The author

of the Pathsegen, however,

similar to

of B. as the correct text

30, 15 B.,
in his ^5
pn6"'r^

"God

magnify and increase

^:iX?oh^,

and

D 'pno'^rV, A

Cis missing.

Luzz.

anxj points out that those who corrected the original

to -6ri?i

made

a great mistake,

and did not

this

realise

the spirit of the Trg. rendering. Onkelos

says Luzz. undoubtreading was

edly wrote

'|"^i6"rii

but later revisers thought

rinj^^"!

incorrect since the Infinitive

should require the Infinitive

Chap. IV

S 4.

Samaritan

i-acni.

p.

25.


3DT2b'i

41

2nd
is

whilst

pao-'ri

would be the Targum of Pn~y

Feminine

Preterite.

This, however, Luzz. goes on to say,

not the case;

clear

since

0. wished to amplify the brevity and

up the obscurity of the Hebrew passage and accord"fio-'r-.

ingly paraphrases

Vet

in

spite of Luzz.'s
literal
B.,

arguments,

one

is

again inclined to favour the

translation 26-:b-.
C,

30, 22

reads
is

bn- n^

'^

n-=i-,

A,

x:-=-t :ri

1 cip

bn-T which

evidently a Hagadic rendering (v. Rasi

to this verse).

gives the literal translation of the

n-isr;!

Hebrew
be the

text viz bn"!

ns

D^ribs

and therefore appears

(text)
nT-n-^iS' isr^b'',
p^a:b'.

to

best rendering.

39, 11

(margin),

A,

C,

D
^

and B.

n^:5-r-n

^i:r=5
in

Here we have a
is

good instance of
which
B.
is

the

manner

which marginal glosses crept

original
ypcyivz nib^b of
this

into the Trg. text.

The Hebrew
translation.

literal

42, 36.

In

verse

we
by

see another example of the retention of the original text

The Hebrew is and the other MSS.

the original but
is
^

15.^^

which

B
xb''

renders

''h-r.^b"

whilst B.

give x= x^n
literal.

which gives the sense of

also

not

B.'s translation is

given

by L.
(text)

43, 2 B. and
erased.
"^^Jr

ip^EO A,
is

(margin)

and

x-^:J-'i-,

Hebrew
to

lbs.

Now
here.

the two

Aramaic roots

p2C and
differ

have the same

prefer

signification.

The
remarks

authorities
that
^:'J

which word

L.
'^'^'z'^

usually corresponds to the

Hebrew
to
is

and Rasi likewise

is

reads

"'sc.

He

goes

on

say

that ip'so

an incorrect
whilst

reading since the root pso

to satisfaction
is

only used

when one has eaten

be
left,

although some food

may

still

"X-ii-"

used for a
is

man

remaining unsatisfied although his supply

of food
pleads

already exhausted.
the
in

But Luzz.
saying
text

in

his

Philoxenos*
is

for

reading

ip'^EO

that

this

the

verb

employed

Aramaic when the

refers

to

a 'finishing'

with eating, drinking or any other bodily requirement.

The

Samaritan

r.-r-rzs -I5<:b.
4

s.

v.

Cf. also

Ezra

6, 15

-^-r.

"And was

finished".

p. 45.


fact that to
iX'^^'^ir

42

must be noticed, however,

sometimes preferable
is

is

given by j5 as a marginal reading seems

opinion.
It

support Luzz.'s
the

that

marginal

readings

are

and
the

appear to correct a faulty reading which

text.

found
"^^j^r-iiJn

in

Thus

in

45,

11

B.,

C,

(text)

read

whilst
text
is

A,

(margin)

and

give |fD^rn.

The Hebrew
the

'd"}^.

A,

(margin)

and

give

best

reading since

"pD^rr

= be

impoverished whilst
'be

i^rTniJn

has rather the sig'die'.

nification

of 'be annihilated',
"po^Dnn
for
i.

undone',

Rasi and

Qimhi both read

must read
But be
with the
'^:i"'ndn

but Pathsegen and Luzz.^ say

they

we
all

say
one's

how

can we speak of

one's possessions
this

e.

cattle

&c. coming to poverty?

as

it

may

the reading "ro^onn corresponds exactly

Hebrew

"r^ir,

word which

is

correctly

rendered
it

"come
their

to poverty" in the Revised Version, although

may
in

be noted that some of the Jewish commentators

translation
b.

differ

of this word,

thus

Ibn Ezra "to perish",

R. Samuel

Meir "to be dispossessed", Mendelssohn "to

-nx^,
first

be ruined".
45,
1.7

(text)

(margin), A, C,

D
is

and B. Wi^,.
of
the

Hebrew
it

^ixs.

The
literal.

mentioned reading
(says

preferable since

is

quite

The reason
ib'^mx is to

Pathsegen)

Targumic rendering

avoid the redundancy of the

auvsjtv.
,

Hebrew
46,
fra-i

text
I

and thus render zaxa

(text)

B
is

xro^i 0:21,
Q-'niT
ri2T*i.

B
B.

(margin)

and

the

others
is

nan,
it

Hebrew
strange

Although

(text)

in-

correct
is

that the Trg. of Q^raT

nmii

in 31,

54
the

as

he gives here.
B.'s

47,
is

20

'^ii,

MSS.

xsp^i,

Hebrew

'^:^.

reading

"pti

also quoted
5<;p'i

by Pathsegen.
verse

On

other hand Landauer gives

in his Massorah.3

Perhaps

B.'s

reason

is

that

in

this

Joseph really

bought the land, whilst in verse 23 he acquired the people.

I

"5

sns.

P. 46.

Samaritan T-xi.

s.

v.

PART
CHAPTER
Before commencing the
the
lists

II.

I.

of examples which illustrate

preceding

rules,

certain

words
I

which

call

for

some
in the

comment may
words
will

here be treated.
to

believe that

most of these

be found
in

be more correctly punctuated

MSS. than
fixed.

our editions of the Trg.

As

these words are

of constant recurrence their correct vocalization should be

First

we have

the

little
is

word
of

ni.

This word, although

etymology.

so

exceedingly

common
this

obscure
P.

Our

editions
writes

punctuate

word with
P.,

and

B.

invariably

r\
the

L. also writes

word with

although he compares

of which V; is construct state. The the syriac P. is also supported by Nestle ^ Bernstein-Kirsch and Ge-

f^

= nature,
der

senius in their dictionaries.

die

Vocalisation

Merx in his "Bemerkungen Targume" ^ mentions a curious

to establish.

iiber

rule

which Mercier wished

Trg.
text

Mercier wrote n^ in the

is nit,

when
has

the corresponding rx.

Hebrew

but r^ when the

that

Merx
is

declares

most decisively^

we

are
r:,

assured that r^

the
is

correct

punctuation by Bar-Ali;

on the other hand,

invariably incorrect.
n^"*,

Bevan
greatest
talist,

also

writes

also

Duval s.
is

Undoubtedlj- the
the great Orienfirst

authority

who

supports the Q.,

W.

Wright.

He

remarks :
18S9.

"We
2

get in the
Contained

place
"Ver-

Syriac

Grammar,
145.

Berlin:

in the

handlungen des
lin
p.

fiinften internationalen Orientalisten-Congresses" Ber3

1881.
38.
5

p.

p.

185.
p.

Grammaire Syriaque

277.

Bevan: The Book of Daniel 6 Wright: Comparative

Grammar

of the Semitic languages p.

112.


rT'X

44

in

which was doubtless pronounced

for

the earlier stages of

"^

the language lyath or lyath;

otherwise the
as
is

would not
of later

have been inserted

case in the
older
date, however,

in

writing,

almost invariably the

inscriptions

inscriptions.

In the

nounced

yth.

we find rx and Plautus heard the word proThe Aramaic foim seems to be shortened from
n;;',

the Phoenician viz Syriac K>, Chaldee

less correctly n^".

After the opinion of such an authority the punctuation with

P.

may

fairly

be assumed to be incorrect, and that with Q.,

for
it.

which
hj

is

invariably used in the MSS., substituted

According to Merx^ both the absolute and construct of

is

hb or br, the use of which

original,

depends upon the

with our
2,

text of

the

Hebrew

which
this
is

is

to be attributed to the

Masas

soretic schools.

But

not the case

MSS.
bsa,

may
B.
rest

be seen from the following examples.

text
is

ba^,

where
the

and the Hebrew

have
bBi.
^Bia.

both
h'^i-o.

read bb%
2,

2,

16

Hebrew
17

19 B. and

MSS.
6, 2

3,

53.

B.,

A,

C,

Hebrew hb\ and the Hebrew bb.

fice

These instances sufshow that no rule can be fixed to indicate the employment of the two forms. I have, however, noticed that C has Ho. throughout except in the following instances
Vsp.
to

br^ A, C,

D and

Hebrew

^2"

35, 6 bS-T

20, 8

and 45, 8 and

and bss 47,

this
I

17.

Our MSS. always punctuate Q^P and

correct punctuation

consider the

Jjo^ TP>.
is

since the corresponding Syriac word is Aram, also supports this reading, since it Dip and not Q^ip. Berliner, in his Massorah^ has dip as t't: t r'r

The

Bib.

'

'

the reading of the Nehardeans whilst the

and
6,

di|5
5

that of the Suraans,

''T^,.
is

Massorah

to

Exodus

says that

not
In

the language of the

Targum but

that of the

"Chasdim".

But Schroder

justifies either

punctuation "Sie wurde urspriinglich

ijjath,

mit lautbarem Jod njx gesprochen, spater wurde

arab.
ijja

woraus sowohl
ith,

als zx2M\zl\%c\i jath, joth

hervorgegangen

sind, wie iath, ieth ge-

sprochen und schliesslich mit Unterdriickung auch des a-Lautes, zu

yth.

Schroder "Die Phonizische Sprache".

2

Halle 1869

p.

213.
3

Page

31,

Note 3 of "Chrestomathia Targumica".

p. 64.


spite of this,

45

is

however, we may safely reject the reading with

t:n~.

full

vowel and read

which
a

of course onp

in

the

MSS.
exists
its

As

to

the

word
and

b"^ap

difference

of punctuation
to

which can be best understood by tracing the word

B.

etymology.
B.

bp?3 21,

16,
b-^npV

A,
!

b-^np^.

and

b^3)3;i,

and

B and D have B b^ipH 33, 18,

"'i'dpS

The ^Ajb and ^^u^ which may

All

have

^T^z.'p'i

41, 3.

Syriac

forms are ^^J,

explain the forms

in

and

b'^ip^.

Cf. also the Bib.

Aram, forms
and

Daniel

2, 8.

5"^ip b'^iip

and

b"^2p

are the usual forms

we meet

with in the Trg. but

the readings of A,
Finally,

D
B

appear preferable.

how

are

we

to read the

word

'T'b"irr'i<

which oc-

curs so
B. reads

frequently?
"'"'rn'^x,

We may
I'^b'^nx

take 4, 26 as a type.

Here
T'^n'^x.

and

D
is

T'b'=>rx

and

C
Cf.

The

readings of A,

B
ib"^

and

are the usual

Targumic forms
tV^i-

of the

Etpeel

of

whilst

Syriasm.

invariably has this form.

CHAPTER
Examples of
i)

II.

the rules contaified in the preceding Chapters.

Substitution
(a)

of other vowels for

S.
5,

(Cf.
16.

Chapter
'ros-

4).
^ir^i

P. bn 4, 2.
"i'^xn

y^

4,

19.

-rr^

6, 3,

"i^ii

10, 2.
y

baS

10, 10.

(b)

S.

'r^i

23, 9.
S 5)-

2) Substituiions for Se. a) Se. mobile.

a.
I,
7.
p.

Compositum (Cp. V,
i, 2.

For Hatef
x-n-,T
i^

P.

xBVoJn-

xin-

i, 4.

n^x'^ i, 6.

"i25"

28.
'^^t\

For

I;

atef S.

24, 60.

b) Se. Quiescens:
xinb* 4, 5
8, 22.

xrnS

i,

25.

ninn
4, 9.

2,

11.

nVsn^
8, 13.
n"'ni)

2,

23.

[^

incorrectly xnnV]
9, 2.

x:rV
(^i

^nri**

x^^ni

'jirnb'nn-

nin"!

10, 10.

and

]3"'Tni<n

12, I.

(C

-jl-^Tnxn)

x^n5 13,

6, ^-inn 18, 3,

{D

T'^n-).

ism

18, 8.
-\^vrr\

p^i'-ib"

19, 20.

(C

pn-^r-'ib').

"^thx

21, 16.

-pH^ 30, 36.

24, 35.

31, 32.

xr-^inii

49, 4.

alone

has

"P'^'^n'

'I'-nriNn

46
Nnn"^

42,
i.

24, 56.

alone has
42, 27.

r^^tr\ 45, 26.

^
He

and

D
In
c)

have
all

n^n-BriV

and

have 'Tnx 44, 34.

with Hatef P.

these instances B. punctuates

"^"n^

punctuates

18, 18

with latef S.

Full vowel:

C
8

has "pnx 4, 25

{A,

B,

write "pni<!),

has

xlnls
19, 2
12.

13,

{A,

C,

ibn-iiNb'

iC

'psri-i'xb')

more has pin

consistently
43, 29,
op'r

xanlx)

48, 4.

mirypn 49^ V
d) Se.

Compositum
A^

is

retained in the following

4, 25,

solitary
6, 16.

examples.
d"'-p.
!

B and D
n^an^^riij

have 'pnx

has

"1"^^?^

28, 20.

36, 2

(^ and

Z>

trc^-i^nit,

n^nisnx).

X2S 36, 2 and

3)

a.

"pinnx 41, 3 and 19. Vowel changes. a) B. P.: MSS. Q.^ Monosyllabic Words and Particles

(Cf.

Cp. VI, 3a)

15,
2

^=

2, 4.

^"^1,-^1 (Syriac \^).

(Syr.

^5 13,

3.

^n

(Syriac

^). n=^n 15, 16

j^^nN).
18, 9

U?^).

1^'5

15, i6. nxH" 17,

n^^

17, 7 (Syriac
(Syr.
19,

-jnnn

17, 7
-s).

(Syr. yji^).
'In

\\\^).
8.

|i<

(Hebrew

19, 8

(Syr. 4=).

tD^^r:

x^p

19, 26.

Concerning those words to which the corresponding

or Syriac forms are not given
s.

Hebrew
(time)
it

1=

and

n5:n"a

are in-

correct, according to L.

v. "^"5

is

a contraction of 5

and
or,

')>

and

this '5 is

really a shortened

form of

5tr;s

as

is

also written Nroi5>

^

which

latter

form may perhaps aci;!

count for the Q.

with "1^;
the

in

the

MSS.
22, 5).

L. allows

side

by side

whilst to
frap

justify the

Q. of x^p

we may compare
2, 18.
'pn-JN'^

Hebrew
[i.

(Exodus
3, 21

Miscellaneous words (VI, 3g) "^t

tjn).
'ipi-i

3,

18

(Hebrew
Jv>Ns).
'f:n"D
TX^"P.-

(Syr.:
^isf).

'^0'X'ir\

^^^''

9;

12
(Syr.

(Syr.:
yi.sj).

-;

10,

(Hebrew
13
is

18,

27, ^'"'"''

23 where,
42,

however, L. says we must punctuate

and 36 &c. where, according

"^riin^?,

to

L.,

the correct reading

but when

it is

noticed that the

write the words

as they appear in the

MSS.

Cf. Syriac

'what'

which

is

also written v**-

word
T\'h

47

this fact

is

merely a contraction of r^x x; may

not

justify the Q.

which the MSS. read?

b)
a.

B.

Q.

MSS.
rnrsi

P.

Vowel of
ly^'i^'-i

the

2nd Radical of a Verb (VI, 3b) unrzrn'4,

3,

7.

3, 8.

11

nVnrnx"

6,

11.

^~t: 8, 19.

l^rsn-ip.

14,

15.

Absence of Pausal Influence (VI,

4, 13.
'''^fn

3 c)

b=i^3'

i,

29.

p5uj73b?3

2,

7.

ns
x:

3, 9.

7.

Before
5,

the

suffixes

and

^:

(VI,

3d) x:3

n,

4.

x:tirinr
0.

29.
r-ofx''

3, 12.

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

C'p5
'r.'z-:

9,

9.
7.

'ic'

9,

20.
18,

'I'nb-j-'Tii

II, 18,

2.

=-;

15,

16.

17,

njiip

20.

"'r-'JDN
first

27.

In
I

each

of these

examples (taken from the

the
it

20 Chapters)
with
that

have compared
which
S.
-;-Vn-

punctuation

of the

MSS.
S.

of L. with

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

d) B.

H.
6,

=
14.

MSS.
c-'D-x

T'i"!^"

2,

6.
9,

b-^nr 3, 14.

5, 22.

^tnr^.

8, 21.

'Tir-

13.
7.

n1-Tnx= 9, 16.

nl^bsrx
T^b'^nn

10, 15,
(y^
4.

25.

xr;-zV
'ppi^T

u,
6.

3.

-ssr:

n,
17.

-iix
16,

12,
10.

13.

16,

x:-r

16, 7.

"'iox

iVx

18, 13

and

here T'b^x).
19,

n^zr 18,

xr^-s^s

19, 24.

'nr^ 19, 25.

ns-^zir'-i

33.

n^rp^r:

19, 34.

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

and

rr^rpuj:

which L. punctuates with H.

xns-'sb

He

admits either
ibx
is

vowel with

and

xn'^nsia

but prefers H.

as inis

correct as B.'s

I'^b'^x

since the Imperfect Peal of

is

"ib-

t^'sx

and the Imperfect Afel

^^5x which

and

read.

has

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)

instead
18, 19.

2-nr
8,

3,

19.

nn^'in 5,

i.

i-inp

8,

4.

xz--" 8,

7.

rso'^'

'

17.

Likewise Nestorian Syriac has the

sound with \'erba

e.

g.

vJai.

jt'i'ipT

48

i^-u;'''^'!

8,

22.

x^''n"i

8,

2 2.

9,

5.

n'lxn'

15,

17.

3'nirii

19, 32.

Of
xn-iiS"

these L. admits either vowel in the case

of x^in rnbin
f)

siip but prefers S. with ii^p

miri'^'i

sirn.

B.

Ho.
H.

MSS.

S. -nil:?

4,

7.

xri^T

8,

22.

n"J

10,

30.
g) B.

"TSD^.

=
^

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

has
>i:^

"p^rJ with
12.

Ho.
8, 9.

n?5n

",iBay

15, 9.

'pi^^?

7,

13.

For

the

latter

we may

compare Syriac
tiba-i

= with.
(Dan.
P.

Of

the others L. justifies only

and x^bsa.

h) B. P.

= =

MSS. H.

(VI, 7b)
4,

x52U5b-

4,

15.

ns:^^

is

the Bib.
i)

Aram. form.

13).

B. S.
6.

MSS.

(VI, 7c)

n^in

6,

7.

d5^5

9,

6.

nn^a 12,

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

tive

Verbs usually have S.^

j)

B. P.
18, 19

=
^

MSS.

S.

(VI, 7d).

has r?3

16,

and

"ih"!;)"!

both of which are wrong.

k) B.

Ho.

= MSS.
has

S.

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

47^

(C

I'lSO'-.n).

''"iT

17

instead of

"^^'n.

-jn^i'^sn

is

confirmed by L. ; and
they

all

of the examples

may

tend to conviz.

firm Derenbourg's statement^

that

about the Yemenite Jews

in

pronounce the Ho.

the

same

manner

as the

Polish Jews.
4)
iriax

The Vowel of
6,
7.

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

15.

r=rix
"^'inrx).

14,

23

(C
17,

"nx).

nl^-rx 13,
"^nnx^).
initial

15.

--frx
19,

16,

(C

-''n&'.

(C

alrirx

20

(B

aitrirs).

In

those

examples with
V

x the P. stands

for S.

which would be the Sbl. punctuation.

full

5) Interchange of Se. and

a)
rr^-in^^

Vowel.
I^nx 13, 8.

MSS.
MSS.
-pbi-i'^

Se.

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

7.

14, 22.

'p^xar 19,
Se.

b)
4, 10.
I

B.
iTfi

Q.

-iv5

4,

7.

-^rx

4,

9.

^:2np

6, 20.

9, 23.

'xanis'

10, 13.

"ixninx 10, 18.

3';p

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.
This
is

sed etiam transitiva velut


n'^px

49

7.

14,

16.

wsn5

15,
V

17.

xrxb^ 16,
iTn

t<p=r 16,

.s.

n^pS

17, 21.

(Z>

C!Ti<).

Of

these

and
In

N"!2>

being Preterites
-^-anp soxb'a and compositum with

Peal of Verbs have

Se. correctly.

ttv
in

T^nx the Se. mobile corresponds to the Se.

which these words may be punctuated

but the Afel
V

the Sbl. system;

to

forms

2*inft<

and

Q'^px

seem
"^x^'i^S

be

incorrect

with Se.
c)

B.

= S.;MSS. =
-Jibs

Se. (VI, 8 c)
15,
4.

18,

16.

|-nli23^BV

10,

20.

12, 3.

Tniv,

b-^irS

18, 31.

All these

are truer to
B.'s
ful,

the

character

of the Aramaic language whilst

""^ribN

forms are Hebraisms.

but, according to

alone appears rather doubtV

Merx^

the Se.

is

justified

by Buxtorf
n"iS'5

in his Dictionary.
6)

Orthographical Variations (VII, le)

n)
19, 24.
to

Chas
Thus

(with-

out

final

Occasionally the punctuation of the

MSS. seems
has
3'^n'^.

be

in

an unsettled

state.

in

13, 12 -5

y^TT'

and

3"^n^

in the

same verse;
is
2"^:^=.

whilst > has ^''n'

and

The
in

correct reading

Elsewhere,

appearing
writes

to

be

doubt which

is

the

correct

punctuation

)i3'>ba^!

L.* admits either vowel but prefers H.

"prrin in

The same MS. has Tr^ immediately followed by

30, 31, but the P.
is

here correct since

v/ith

it

stands for S. in the Sbl.

system.

We

occasionally meet

forms which remind us of the

bii'^N^

Sbl. vocalization.

Thus

has a^rxn 24, 50 and

28, 15

27, 25.

J,

and

write
3,

-[Biiinx^

(but

-jD'^ivx'i)

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^.
have xryin
19 which

].

c.

s.

V.

1.

c.

s.

V.

So

also in Christian Palestinian

is

Person Singular
(cf.

wanting

in the

word
1.

Aramaic the \^\ which

c.

suffix of the First

*ai

"my

father'

Noldeke's Article in the

ZDMG.

p.

5i4\

the

so

as

Hebrew

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

B. viz I'^T?

and

this

is

also L.'s reading.

The word being

of

common Gender may

ending
is

perhaps assume either the Masculine

A, B,

or Feminine

in its plural.

read

Nsos but

D D

has ~ED3 which

closer to the

Hebrew
latter

original.

B,
is

C,

read xn'x 18, 6 but

""Nnix

which

reading

pre-

ferred
prefers

by Berliner', Landauer^,
xn'N as B,

Levy^^, Pathsegen'' but Adler^

and

have.

In the same verse

has VXG,
says L.
^

B
is

and

yxD,

"1x6

whilst B. writes T'Xp which,

18, 15

the correct form.

has

TO'-'Ti,

B,

Cand
is

TQ^'f.

A's reading, says the author

J^pnrj.

of the Pathsegen

the Trg. of
V'-nx^.

TT^^, B, A and Z> Both forms T'nx and I'nx are allowed by L. but the latter
18, 21,

-pnNl, B.

corresponds to the Syriac form.

19, g

A, B,

3^p, B. and

3i"ip.

L.

gives

the latter form,

Bib.

but Merx^ the former.

3, 26.

(V. Pt.

II, II, 3i,

note).

Aram. 3^p Dan.

All the

19, 13.

In this

verse
is

B. gives

the better reading,

having "linrb^np
"iinns'^ip

which
here.

likewise

given by L.

MSS. read

B. and
I'raiin.

read

I'-nn-'tcn

50,

20 whilst A,

have

L. has the former reading.

w*<a. *

We may
wa.

and compare

the Arabic in which

ippn'"

= to

number and

= to thmk.
is

19, 15 which

is

the reading given

^ip'^nnii

by the MSS.

more

correct than B.'s text

jxi;

when compared with

the Syriac

although L,

s.

v.

mentions both forms.

whilst

In 42, 23 A,

and

write

^"^siiS

and B. give "^o.

We may
is

perhaps
t*-*-

compare

the

former
in the

reading with the Arabic verb

Likewise the P.

word

aTrffix

19,

20

a better

reading than B.'s

^Tnirix

although L. gives

this

form.

We

may compare
here

the Syriac ojo^jtl although I

am

informed that

we have

a word borrowed from the Assyrian which has

ustizib or u.^tezib.

MSS.

^rsfiT:?'

19, 21

which both Landauer

1.

c.

p. 7.
a.

2
1.

Massorah
6 s.
v.

s. 7

v.
s.

3 v.

s.

v.

To

this verse.

"tjV

naTs
v.

"Chrestomathia Targu-

mica".

s.

 Bland Berliner give as a Nehardean reading and

which
is

in their

Massorahs,

evidently

intended

to

imitate
9,

the

Hebrew
""'";?,

original

which has "r^^-

B. reads "5(1*32-

22 B.

A,

B
to
is

and
L.

D
is

stn^if:^

C
B.

Nr"i~S'.

The
final
'5t.

correct reading, according

i!<r'^"]^',

adds the

x in his notes.

20, 4, B.

^XST.
"^st.

B.

"X=t,

A,

and

Perhaps the best reading

B.
~r"''r

Cf.

Syriac
i<b!

uJ) \

20, 7
v^.'s

A,
is

and

"r'V"

and
"jr"ip

has

"jn^

of course

reading

absurd.

Of

the

others A,
is

and

retain the

more
Cf.

classical

form of which

merely a contraction.
reading
the
n-i^r
in

Syriac

^^.

On

the other
to

hand
x^
in

B.'s

20,

10

appears

preferable

xrnir which
(s. v.).

MSS.

give,

although L. also gives a

is

final

But the reading of the MSS.

24,
2

again preferable

n"'r"inn

and not as
24, 60

B.

reads

fr^n'is'iJ

and again

in

''iii-ix

24, 14 and in "^rpiax 24, 43; B.'s readings being

"'SS'ix

and
and
is

"^sirdx.

In

B.
is

has
the

"^s^ri,

^^n,

"^Iri^

is<nn

'x^n of which

most
form

correct, although the x

'4-<*-

superfluous.

Cf. the Syriac

^5' ^5

^-

P'^"^"'^-

A,

and

D
is

P'^a^,

p'-'S'^D.

L.

confirms the first-mentioned

arpif" 26, 3.

reading.

B.

again more correct in reading

read

c"^ps<1.

correctly,

C invariably reads x^r-;i:^'. The K-nm Cf, the Bib. Aram. X'RiJ^
A^'^**^.

other MSS.,

MSS. more

Daniel

5,

10 and

the

corresponding Syriac forms

A
M^.

has the unconB.

"^nri

tracted

form

rsx

27, 32.

Cf.

Syriac

27, 40.

MSS. 'H^r which L. gives as the correct Imperfect of \ "'"'n. The MSS. are again preferable in the same verse, giving
1*1135^

whilst B. has

"|l"'2i"'],

although the

latter

form

is

given
in

by L.

The MSS.
And
also

again

have

the

more correct form

^

Biblical

Aramaic

-2T
cf.

Ezra
Daniel forms
4

2, 9.
5,

justifiable

according to Uib. .Aram.

of Biblical
(1.

22 rs^-.

But the Q, 3 But Baer

is

in

his

Paradigms
I'.erliner

.\ramaic

gives

a similar
that

form
short

to

that of

c;

p.

XXII.

occasionally occurs where

we

\. should expect Se. and he instances the

of ="-s
to

Dalman

asserts

word
(p.

n-p

and

compares Hieronymus' transcription

biom

62 of his Grammar). Cf. also C's readings of p"?"aV and 8'% reading '"n 24, 60. iVtrxn 12,
1

19,

20 and


"'n-D-

52

which
is

30, 27 and not as B.

\n">D:

a Hebraism.

and

and C "Vpi-. The Hebrew B. have xV?ii 30, 39 but A, A, and have iVrrV; 31, 2 whilst B. and C is /il"?F?:.

give

"i^sn'i^.

The

correct

form, according to T.,

x'^^^ija,

is

"'ini?.

B,

C,

rn25 31, 26,

^
is

B. x^^tts.

The
state.

first

mentthe

ioned

reading

appears
it

preferable
in

since

L.

punctuates

word with H. and ni'in 31, 27, C and and B are correct
is

the
B.

construct
xn"^.in.

and

B
B.
]0"'

D
in

n^^ri.

L. writes n'^n^

reading
L.,

"O-i

31, 49

which

reading

also

supported by

although

Pathsegen
.^4

prefers
is

which
fault

C
in

reads.

and
the

(incorrectly) "i6i\

again at

'P^ 32, 14,

fuller

form

"(nXD

being preferable.

Cf. the Syriac rr'^J^-

33,

12 A,

bVj, B.,

and

bbij.

Pathsegen also
to

brji3.

Our Editions of

Rasi's
this

Commentary
V,::^

the

Pentateuch give his reading of

passage as

but according to Luz. "^Oheb Ger' and L. Rasi also gave the
correct reading
copyists
Rasi's
bli:"i3

which was
to

only altered

by ignorant
with

who

strove

bring

the Trg. into

!^^"C>:.

harmony
it

interpretation
'^T-r-'zb .

of the word

2)Z}

14 B. xnnn'-s,

MSS.
is

Pathbegen and L. read as B. but

may be
literal

remarked

that the

words are synonyms, and hence

"^^it

either reading

allowable.

C's reading

'my grief 35, 18

than
is

is

more
A,

rendering of the

Hebrew

"'lis*

that of B.

and

who write v'l %rief'. 35, 17. The MSS. reading "pBnin is more correct than that of B. who has l"'^)j'!ifl. L. gives the same form as that of the MSS. 37, 23 B. n'^rssin'^s, MSS. rr^i'-ni. The Hebrew text is "insna. B. seems to be a HebL. gives a similar reading to that of the MSS. raism. The latter reading is again 39, 23 B. "^^r;, MSS. "Tn. preferable and is given by L. We may compare the Syriac ivs. form -U. 41, 25 A (incorrectly) T^n?, B, C and I'n? which is a Hebraism. Cf. Syriac J-.^^. 43, MSS. B.

nin'iin'na

which Berliner,

in his

Massorah^, following Luz. Lan-

We may

also

occurs in Biblical Aramaic.

compare the form with final n which occasionally Cf. nr-Trt Dan. 2, 41. 2 p. 117.


dauer and the
nvflans. 45, ^ A,
is

53

declare a false reading.

ii"^-p,

nmnn nio^^ all B, C li'.-ip, D

and
is

B.

B. nu-p.

Z>'s

reading
to

here

the

best,

confirmed

by reference
46,
29.

the

Chrestomathies

of

Merx and Levy^

'^nis'^rin

give the curious reading

but since the

The MSS. Hebrew has

gives
rr^^'-'r:'

the Singular form inss-;-? the reading of B.

who

appears preferable.

49,

12

B.,

A,

and
C.

"in"',

'("ini.

Both L. and Merx prefer the reading of

7) a)

Grammatical Variations.

A.

The Nominal
a).
is

States.

Absolute and Emphatic (VIII, la,

t, 2,

C,

D
B

and B.

''St ^'^^n'b

and
13,

B
6.

vcz^.

Hebrew
rest

min-j.

reads
in

snx

8,

3;

12, 6;

The

xrix.
in^ri,

The Hebrew

each case has y^xn.

15, 18.

B.,

and

and

x^nl'j

Text
is

is

'iriDia.

18,

14,

MSS. '^i.

B. x:^^':.

The
s^a;.

Hebrew Hebrew
"isia?,

x>bb.

20, 4 B.

and
B.,

C
B,

^aa (ina), A,

B,

r-^xn.

21, 2
B.,

|'2T5.

Cand

19, 26

and

npian,
^i^S.

and

D D

xr^fb'.

xnb^n.

Hebrew Hebrew

n3-2.

28,

17
B.,

B.

x-nrx,

MSS.

B
B.
B.

niini

^, ZP and

xn-^nn-i.

nsi^.

B.,

A,

and Z) xnail

Hebrew ='P"2n. 31, 39 Hebrew ns^J. n, 20 C Hebrew natp. 34, 10 B.

and Cx-inp (Pathsegen Hkewise). and and

A,

and

D xmino.

37, 31 38,
2

C
C

x-,^s^.

y^,

and Z>
'^ar,

"i^s^.

^1515,

and Z>

xnjn.

Hebrew n^r:;. Hebrew "^i^ss.

(For

variant reading, see Part 11;

P)

II,

7J).

Absolute

and

Construct
Z>

(VIII,
B.

a,

3j.

2,

and

17

A
(B)

and

rV-x'i.

and

"'b=XT (L.,

likewise).

missing.

Number

(VIII,

b).

Several
i,

variations

are notice-

able with the verb

mn.
of
as

In
I'fln.

14

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

is

B,

and
the

give pn'^ns

^'s reading

probably based
'n-;

upon

reading

the

Hebrew

text

nrx-2

but
in

it

must be remarked

Luz. has already pointed

out

his

1 2

Contained

in Adler's Edition of the

a-)!.

Targum.

Cf. also Daniel 3, 26


ia

54

the

nnx

that

it

is

contrary to

custom of the Aramaic

is

language to
in

place a verb in the Singular whose subject

the Plural, the

even though the Verb precedes the Subject.

this

In

Hebrew and Arabic languages

is

construction
"^n^

is

permissible and
I,

frequently
24.

employed.
In

MSS.
these
is

B.

'I^Tn

29;

g,
is

15

and 47,

each

of

cases

the

Hebrew
rect one,

fi;^?!'?.

In 47, 24 B.'s

reading

the

only cor-

but the reading given by the MSS.,

in

may perhaps
Sing-

be

justified

the other two examples, through the subjects

being collective;
ular.

indeed
'n'^'':>'

i<^i

9;

B.
is

,"in>

MSS.

9, 26.

15 ^^y be taken as The Hebrew is ib. B.'s

read-

ing

given
is

in Berliner's
literal.

Massorah
or

Parva but the

to

other
exist

reading

more

Some confusion appears

the Plural of a

whether

to use

an adjective

describing

nations.

Thus A, B,
and

"ixS^IS

10,

noun when 18 (B. and

C
B.,

ni<:s1:).

A,

B
30

nN::;l5

24, 3

(B.

and
B.,

D
A,

'XJytS)

A,

and
34,

1x3^35

24, 37
'^.s::'l3:2).

(^ nxbtS).
B.,

and
have
"i^Tr

nxislai

{B
In

A,

and

D
pi''"n:i

i6<^in

30, 21

{B
is

riN^in).

16,
^ir^

12.

A^

D
C

and

(text)

the incorrect reading -''"i

B
and

and
"par

(margin)

which

also
"^T?"].

given by

B.

confirmed by L.
i^b=^.

17,

13,

A
still

"^.?'^2ti

B,

C,

D
is

and B.

Now, although
confirms
21,
is

the sense of the whole passage

the

might
being

justify a plural here,

form of the original

which

Singular

the

latter
'T!)?T'^.,

reading,

likewise

given

by L.
text

12

B,

C,

')n^i5n\

The Hebrew
Verb being
"'nt

xips-

Sin-

gular
Plural

the Subject of the

in the

but

we

require a

Trg. since the Subject

is

'pin.

25, 26

(inis

correctly)
i'l^'i.

in",iii
is

A,

C,

and
in

B.

rt^-r^.

The
26,

original

again
"^nin

incorrect

reading

S^'^n

15

which

should be

as the other

(incorrectly)
firms.

xn'^D'i.

27,

27

B.

"iTH

B, C, MSS.
is

MSS. and B. give. 27, 15 A and B. sn^^n which L. con2-],

'fn.

2>^

A,

"pnn,

C,

and B. xrin.
read "p"- in

The
27,

latter

likewise given both by L.

still it is

and

the author of the Pathsegen; 12

the

strange

why we should

Hebrew of both passages being


nr-^^.

55
is

also

27, 39 B.

laniia
"(5ri^.

which

given by the

Path-

segen.

MSS. have
it.

Hebrew

is TjaiT"*^.

BerHner mentions

the Variant reading in his Massorah, but offers

no comment
iV?^',

upon

30, 39 B.

and
B.

K^-^s^i.

A,

and
is

We

require the
31, 26,

Plur. Fern,

here,

hence

"p"'^"''

43

and 50.
reading

T^a,

MSS.

"irTi.
is

more correct. Hebrew T^;

31, 43
^:x:;,

hence the
B.,

given

by the MSS,

correct.

and

D
is

^rJ.

A
is

and

"^v.

The Hebrew being

34, 5.
B.
"pn'^n-';.

the

first

reading

preferable.

MSS.

iri-nij,

Pathsegen supports the reading given by

in:p::

B.,

but since

the

Hebrew

we should
"j^nrnp

e.xpect

^nwa as the MSS.

to

34, 24
suffix

(incorrectly)
V

which appears

refer

the

Sehem and Hamor. The other MSS. have nTTip which corresponds to the Hebrew in'^r. 37, 4 ^ (incorrectly) "^niinx. The other MSS. 'I'ln'iax which corresponds to the Hebrew nn-^ns. The correct Trg. of rs-z 39, 5 is
both
to

xr5ni which

all

the

MSS. have.

B.

reads

XJ^s"!^

(plural)

which

is

incorrect.

41, 36

'{^STT-'^y^,

A, C,

D and B.
since
rrr^'n.

"^iviy^
is

Either reading
collective

may perhaps

be

justified
is

X'B?

Noun, but the Singular

preferable.

46, 20 B.

and

B B

n'^S'^r-^XT.

T'^'^n-'xn.

and

Hebrew
is

*Tb^ "iiyx.

and

are
B.'s

correct xa-a

a-jvejiv.

C
"^rnix

wrong.
47,

Landauer supports
B.,

reading in his Massorah.

30.
is

and

(incorrectly) ^rnx.

A
text

and
has

which

also given

by L.

The Hebrew
and

^rsisx.

50, 9 B.,

(original reading)

C
is

ipJo'i.
br:;.

A,

and

(corrected

reading) p^Vc^.

Hebrew
ic).
is

(C) Gender (VIII,

I,

and

x6n-n B. and

J^nnn

26.

The

subject

Nrn-^

which being of

common

gender,

perhaps admits of either form; but L. reads as B.

B. "pbrp,

MSS. pzp
to
"'^n

4,

10.

Hebrew
Trg.

is

="P?s which howto

is

ever refers

whilst

the

refers

"rrm

which

is

feminine and hence the reading of the MSS.

more

correct.

Pathsegen notices
that of the
14,
7.

this

variant reading and

seems

to expect

MSS. B. x^n, A, B, D x-ri, C (incorrectly) ir The Hebrew is X"n which agrees with 7? but x^"^

is

56

B.'s

masculine in Aramaic and hence

reading

is

the cor-

rect one.

A,
latter
is

and

nrh%

B.

and

nlsn

15,

9.

L.

has the

reading but points out that the Pesitta of this passage

IJA,ol lii^o.

16,

(incorrectly)

fT^Dp,

the rest have n1^.

l^rin^.

19, 8 B.,

A
135

and

C
is

rJ-^si^,

)i-v-fi,

D
and

The

subject

being
17i?3;

of course a mistake.

20,

(incorrectly)

the rest have 'p^s.

A,

B
is

are
B,

incorrect in having

yh

20, 13

since
in

-[nia'^-j

feminine.
19,

and

read
is

xn.

is

incorrect

reading st^n

13
in

since K^nx

masculine.
ni

Rest have

T^Sn.

The Hebrew

each case

is

and

this

may perhaps account

for the error of ^,

B and D in

20, 13.

21, 30 B. and C Nnn, A, B and "pSn. Since x^^^iii is given by L. as of common gender either reading may be justified; but ^'s reading N^n in 24, 58 and ^'s stin in 25, 30 are both evidently incorrect. The fact of t<^"'n being of common

gender may again

verse

justify

both readings in 26, 20

in

which
42
B.

reads

rr^p^L

whilst B.,
rTiS5,

B,
B.,

A
B.

and

(incorrectly)

D give nm 27, B and D n^n. 29, 3

C
and
1P'>a6^.

I'lpiu^'i^

which L. also reads.

gives
the

MSS.
gender,

Pathisegen also as
subject

who

proper

the

being
"p-'iin.

the

shepherds.
also L.

30, 37

and Z>

')'ii-'6=i,

B,

and B.
of

So
genthe

and Path.^egen, but since

'pio'in is

common
all

der we may take either reading as correct. 30, 40 MSS. have V'Dii^n^- which is the proper reading, B. has

T^^^"'']?

which

is

certainly incorrect.

"jxijo.

^'s reading

31, 10 B.,

and
is

C and more correct, "jsr being masculine. "ppHon, A and B ipSo^ which is a mistake
30,

43

^^'^0, B.,

B,

is

smce Ni^^n
Tl^'?']

masculme.
"p?"'j^

is

again incorrect in reading

Zl^ 7

and

4ij 3ninl,

In both instances
B.,

we

require
is

the

feminine.

39, 5

^
A

A,

C,

nin\

the

correct reading; the other imitates the

B
is

and

read
jirx.

'iirx

but the

Hebrew Idiom. 41, 20 2nd time the word occurs in

have both times
'j'^ii'iN

the verse

B.,

and
one

which

correct since the

first

refers to xn^in

and the second


one
All
to
i!<"3a'J

57

are feminine.
B.

and both these words

I'r^-^snx

48,

the

MSS. read
is

here,

whilst

has
*

,-?'''=''=r'K

which reading
as
it

defended

in Berliner's
"^n'^'^'^r'

Massorah

referring,
to the

does,
effect
1;:

to
in

the feminine
liis

Landauer writes
it

same
that

Massorah ^
'=

But,

is

also sometimes masculine.

13,
7
"'V'P'!'^^'^ x^"?"!

may be remarked, Cf. Targum Jonathan

to Isaiah

(D) The Conjugations of the Verb.

a.

Peal
8,

and Pael
4.

(VlII,

2 a, a). p^\atn

rnJi,

B.,

B,

and
i.

D
A

rnti
niaiii,

B.

p"^w::^,

MSS.
nns^,

27, 27;

29, 13;
B.,

50,

B.,

B,

C,

D
4.

n-i^n-

31,

20.

:Jir^",

A, C,

D
B.

;i;"4t

31, 34.

A, B,
35,

rnti,

B.

n'^n:-

31, 40-

-lT-f^

MSS.

n^-J^

and

Srh-t,

B.

and

'nVr,

D
it

inVu; 42, 16.

Aramaic requires a Pael

43, 4

here.
"pitl^

and

perhaps

a Hebraism.

(incorrectly)

= we

shall sell,
C,

should be

and
text.
b'^X'i;

B.

43, 7

L.

we shall buy, which is MSS. ?"^x". B. bxir just like the Hebrew has the same orthography as the MSS, but I think
"^ir^

given by A,

would be a preferable punctuation, since L. gives no B., B, C Pael of this root. 45, 24 A (incorrectly) n^MJi. Although L. nri;=i. and 50, 21 B. anr, MSS. n-in:\

mentions

both

these

forms

as

Pael of =~?
is
.3).

still

the

only

correct Aramaic form of the Pael

p.

that given

by the MSS.
ni:^^^
is

Peal

and Afel (VIII,

2 a,

(incorrectly)
latter

12,

\i,

A,

and

n-J-'^n,

B.

rj-^:"!.

The

reading

supported by the

authority of L.

B. ""^rx,

B,

D
B

*i5x,
is

A,
ceris

i^-ix

8,

13.

tainly

incorrect.

Of these Of the
the 32,
23.

three
tw^o

readings
other

the

Afel

forms
is
"I'^'l'S.

given

B.'s

preferable, although

correct

form

nir", B.,

A,

C
Y.

and

n:'i<=^

L. as B.
(VIII,
2 a, 7).

Peal and Etpeel,

i-^ts.

Etpaal or Ettafal

B.

-in

and
li).

MSS.
rRr-^n-

"Isnii

and i^nrx
23
(Peal)

17,

26 and 27.
the

(Vide
read

VII,

B.

25,

whilst

MSS.

1.

c.

p.

78.

S.

V.

Ciprrii (Etpaal).

58

--

In

this

instance^

we may perhaps
the Etpaal

take either

reading,

since

both give good sense,

having a

reflective sense.
6)

Pael and Afel (VIII, 2a,

3,

0).

A,

B
is

n^^n.
also

B.,

and

D
B.

ri^sn
''^'^xi^,

18.
C,

The

latter

reading
I'iiiJNi

A,

'''m%

13,

16.

given by L. Both the Pael

and Afel forms give sense

erous,
inferior
e)

here.

Pael^I have made numnumerous.

B. has

Afel

=I

have

made

equally

an

Aramaic form.
a, s).

Etpeel and Etpaal (VIII, 2

7,11 A,
is

itinnsnx,

B.,

and

C
2

Ninnsnx.

L. also reads Etpaal, but in the Syriac

the conjugation
in

language the Etpeel (and not Etpaal)

use\

8,

MSS.

iirfONi, B.

ii^sripNi.

L. again has Etpaal

is

but according to Bernstein-Kirsch,

Syriac conjugation.
10, 9

the Etpeel

the usual

and 27, 13 MSS. ^6i<n^, B. "raKr;i\ Although L. again has the Etpaal here, he gives Etpeel=
Etpaal, so that
a^sp.iO,

MSS. may again be

justified.

14, 15

A,

^i-'Bsnsii,

s^snxi,

B. assnxi..

L. here

reads as

and

but again notices Etpeel= Etpaal.

29, 26 B.,

has an im-

possible form.

and

T^isn-a,

and

T'isn^
that

The Hebrew is ^b^'\ the Hebrew Imperfect

Berliner,
is

in his

Massorah^ says
as

here to be rendered by the Aramaic

Participle, but L. gives the

same reading

and

D which
and
L.
B.

thus appear to give the most correct reading.

31, 24
n^'jox.

29 and 42, 24.

has
the

A,

and
34,

D
7

n^'JDx.

C
and

and B.

Etpaal

form.

A,

B
to

D
of.

nx''D3n-i5<-.

!iK-'C:r.ix'i.

^DiCDn-ixi.

The

latter

reading will be considered

when
this

the Variae Lectiones will be treated

Of

the other

two readings, the Etpaal appears

form
is

be more correct, since

the other

given by L.

45,

i,

On

hand

L. con-

firms the

MSS. reading of Etpeel

the

here.

B. has ST^T^^,

MSS.

(E)

The Tenses of

Verb
B.

(VIII, 2 b, a).
14,

a) Perfect

and Imperfect

''p-'rn^Ty^'i 4,

B,

and

V.

Bernstein-Kirsch

1.

c.

s.

v.

1.

c.

p.

25.


'irrcu.^n,

59

A
is

has ^ppns'r'^.

Of

these

incorrect since the

Hebrew
n^ni, B.,
'

''N^fb

could not be translated by a Perfect.

the Afel
(Cf.

Of
3j.

the

other forms given L. prefers

VIII, 2a,

A
B.

B,

C,

D
4, 9.

"'n'^i

9, 14.

is

here incorrect.
[^).

p) xss''^,

Perfect

and Present

(VIII, 2 b,
is

A,
to

D
B

and

T\'^\^

The Hebrew

^rnrn-^

which

agrees

in

form; but the Massorahs of both Berliner

and Landauer
in

give xssT' as the correct form here.

23, 13.
text,

There

is

MSS. corresponding word no

seems
B.
to

nnr, B. T'ljur-rx
the

Hebrew
B.
is

but the

sense

be

present
this

and hence
variant

perhaps preferable.
27,

Landauer
D"'rinn.

notices

reading.

14 MSS.

a"^n^n,

Text

is

::-x

and therefore the

MSS. give the better text. 29, 5 B. -w^s-^r!, MSS. rn^n-n The Hebrew is EPsn"n which is again Perfect in form but
Present in

meaning.

Pathsegen reads Participle which he

requires.

says the Aramaic

idiom

So L. although he also
in 44, 27.

mentions the reading of the MSS. similarly

see

29, 26
i<"3n;ri<-,

above

under
correct

Etpaal

and Etpeel.

30, 39 B.

and

x-n-nx-,

and

D x-an-n^i.
and
is

B. has the

reading although

The Hebrew is some confusion

In
30, 3
in
1

^^r;-:.

exists

here
41

between

the Perfect
.S

Participle.

and
10
reads

and

in

31,

the

Participle

used;
C,

but
''^^'\

31,

again Perfect.
iiiy^i

30, 41

"'ic^ B.,

A,

L.

according to the Aramaic idiom, although looking at

the

terite.

we might perhaps have expected the PreMSS. )'^rs, B. iT^?"!: Merx, in the Dic31, tionary to his Chrestomathia Targumica regards the manuscript reading as a vulgarism, and Luz. in his Oheb Ger

Hebrew

Dt"i

also

gives

the

participial

form

as

correct.

31, S B. "d'"', 41,

n>ii
i

MSS.
D-^5r,

p-^?-'".

B.,

B
to

The Hebrew is and C =5n. The Hebrew

again
is

Perfect.
text
is

A,

but L. has

the reading D^*n which

also supported

by Pathsegen, ac-

cording
in-'T^-j,

the

A,

Aramaic language. 41, 45 ^ and Z? "p^j-an, C (just as the Hebrew) ntcs

use

of the

niH.

L. reads

as

B.

''a

man who

reveals

secrets".

The

best reading appears to be that of C,

who

does not attempt


to give a rendering of the

6o
name.

Besides
it is

by no means

certain

that

these

two Egyptian words mean "revealer of

PeSitta).

secrets"
title

(as the

Trg. and "saviour

Gesenius* explains the

to

signify

of the age" in the Egyptian lang-

uage ^

44, 15 B.
nrs^'i']

and

C)^V\'^"T,,

A,

and

'\^ryS^.

Here the

Hebrew

has

the

sense
is

of a Perfect

reading of A,

and

D
is

better.

and

V^rx^.
'

The Hebrew

text

and hence the 47, 22 A ^l3?N^, B,, B, is ^ib^xi and the sense T T
:

of the passage appears to require a Past Tense and therefore the reading of
in the instances

preferable.

It

may be

noticed that

quoted above the MSS. follow the Hebrew

us the sense of the
2 b, y)

text literally, but B. gives

T)

Hebrew
and

text.
1=13^

Imperfect and Present (VIII,

B.

^j

(Imperfect),

and

Vi^

(Present)

48,
is

10.
^a^i''.

The

latter

reading

is

perhaps better.

The Hebrew

(F) Additions (IX,

7, 16.

inserts

the

read rr^n^-^rji before "^fi^^s 2). A and same word on the margin. This version

represents

the
11

opinion of those
^'i5G';i

who wish

to

interpret the

words

p^;2

figuratively, to

denote generally that the

14, 12

Divine protection encompassed and preserved him. has bi before

preceding.
18,
riijisp
2t^

probably confusing

this

verse with the

is

A, B,

have

'p^^n

which

pointed out

by

B.

as an incorrect reading
ti'^a

and

so also the insertion of

before

which

has in the same verse.

this

Adler and

Pathsegen also both object to

always
avoids
irreverent

reading since the Targumist

language

when speaking of

the

1.

c.

s.

V.

The

LXX

has

'Lov9oiJ.cpavrj/,

Siegfried

and Stade
(Leipzig,

in

their

"Ilebraisches

ing to

1893) give njye nsE".: G. Steindcrff, Zeitschr.

Testamente "Egyptian title of Joseph. Accorde f. agypt. Sprache u. Altertumskunde

alten

Worterbuch zum

XXVII, 41 f. es spricht der Gott und er lebt". Jerome renders "salvator mundi" but according to Rosellini the name means sustentator
vitae,

support or sustainer of

life.

The Targum
Cf.

version seems to be
II,

the popular Jewish

interpretation.

Josephus Ant.

6.

V. Keil

and Delitzsch, Commentary to the Pentateuch, Vol. I, lated by Martin. (Edinburgh 1874). 3 1. c, p. 221.

p.

35.

Trans-


Deity.

6i

of the original
19,
is

But, since
the

it

is

more
"^Tr-an,

literal translation

Hebrew
B.
mi-o^,

manuscript reading seems

preferable.

34
his

A,
to
^

and

D
for

"vi^nS.
"'^^"1

The Hebrew
but Landauer

r.x.

L.

seems

know

of no reading
readings

in

Massorah
'U;'2"i2

gives

both

and also explains the

of time.

- of

as

standing

an

accusative
I

The

best
suffix

reading would then be

Xii"3"a.
is

do not know why the

word.

of the

St

Person Singular
insert

affixed to this

23, 8.

The MSS.
xirn thus
to the

n^x before
original.

mm

which improves the sense

and follows the

first

24, 67
literal

has ni^-^x n-,6n before

giving the

translation before proceeding

Hag. rendering which follows and which may perhaps

25, 8

with advantage be deleted.

has

T^'i''

after rD'.

Since
take

D
this

has the same word on the margin,

we may perhaps
Tiirinn-s.

word
26 B.,

as

gloss which

has crept into the text of B.

26,

and

''Hrarn,
is

and

L. rejects

the latter reading which

against the spirit of the

Aramaic
which

idiom.

We

must then read,

either "riirnn or "^rii^nn^

"c

have exactly the same

significations, the

being part of the

TTO..

word and not a preposition. 31,13 MSS. r\'^iz.. B. r.i?. Hebrew The sense justifies the reading of the MSS. and although Pathsegen also reads n"'3 he seemed to have expected the reading n^an and hence we may take the reading of the MSS. as
correct.

31,
C!iE2

48

incorrectly inserts
"'Jsrj

n-"?

before

"p"'".

42, 28

A
at

has

before

but the scribe was probably looking

34,
Tr^

the preceding

verse. insert

14

B
5=.

has

n"i

before

S'sar'^B.
n-'

39, 6
fore

and

C
It

before

43, 29

has

be-

"^rTirs.

may be
have
to

noticed

thas

these

insertions, the

majority of which appear to be incorrect are confined to

and

C.

Finally, I

mention a few Prepositions which

are here and there added.

added by C in nsV 17, 5 and il^s' 17, 10, A, C have TcnV 29, 3. A has X2sb and -p^-^ 45, 8 which bxr-iV 49, 8 and reading is rejected by Pathsegen. A,
h is

and

D
1.

c.


which
9,

62
i

added by the MSS, X^WSa*! text and in "nni'or 33, 13

'2

Merx

also
is

reads.

is

lo which

against the

Hebrew

which follows the Hebrew

26, 26 by

original.

is

added
45^ 8

in

iii'ionn^a

and
A,

but this has already been noticed as a

it'ON

faulty reading.

D add

before

iTn'iii

and
is

this is

really the sense of the passage.

in Adler's
in
D'^^ii's-'

edition of
15,

the Trg.

The same reading The MSS. add an

given
1

initial

18 which
24, 22.
xsb^'i

and

read.

has nnNn 20, 5

All

and again inTi

the

B
i.

(incorrectly) 'rrr^i'incn 35, 5.

MSS. read
Q^-^a-inT
b^'n

40,

has

c:"'V>^l

42, 6.

C
i.

and Z>

have

45, 13.
13.

All

give

50,

is

MSS. read "^fiinKn 46, added by A, B and

B
in

and
the

word
before

n^iin

31, 13.
(IX, 3).

(G) Omissions
Xi"

An
alters

initial

is

omitted^ by

8,

21
'^tr^

but
20,

this

the

sense
this
all

of the passage.

By

before

13 which

makes

remarkable Hag.

passage run

much more
of

smoothly.
i

By

MSS. before Qx
Particles.
B.
-pnsiu^bb

44, 27 where again an

initial

hardly seems necessary.

(H)
(IX, 5)
10,
20.

Interchange

Prepositions
-(-n'ra^Bn

and other

B
C

(incorrectly)
(incorrectly)
n:jnx.
T
:

A,

C,

D
1 1.

and
B.,

xrix

hv

44,

A,
this 3,

and

Z> x^iKP".

Hebrew
to

In connection with

instance

and the following we may compare Nehemiah

according
read
20,
is 2
bs*

the

occidentales
to

(Palaestinenses)
orientales^

37 where we should
bs.

br

and according and B>

which
?

the

(Babylonii)
by
3.

B
to

ii'w'f,

A,

and
in

B.

iT=,\

corresponds

Aramaic.

22,

Hebrew 12 MSS.

Or 2374 sometimes omits

3,
1.

where
all

it is

inserted in Baer's Edition

'};_

of the Aramaic portions of the Bible.

Cf.

Daniel

2, 43,

-prirVa-jS^

Daniel
initial

21,

Trt'J'.

Daniel

4,

9 in

of which the
'.

MS. omits the

Daniel
2

The Scribe however

it

inserted this

in

"r.'izV'.

4,

13

in
(].

which case
c),

is

omitted in Baer's Edition.

Vide Baer,

3 "There is a tendency in Hebr. esp. p. 125. K, Je, Ez, to use Vs in the sense of hv (and vice versa) sometimes !;s being used quite exceptionally in a phrase or construction which regularly and in ace. with analogy has h'j, sometimes the 2 preps.

in S,

t<a"'V'i3;5,

63

22, 18

B.

wS-ai's^'yV'.

L. allows either reading here,

is

''S5''ob"

which the MSS. have

a better

reading
to

than that

given by B.

who has

"^I'aipa

which appears
""Vp?-

be a Hebraism,

corresponding to the Hebrew

text

3^, 21. Unlike the

Hebrew
B, give

which simply gives

"ir?,

the Aramaic language requires a

Preposition to point out the direction.

k-'ijV whilst

A, B,

D and

has xn^aa, one reading being as correct as

is

the other.

Either reading
whilst

again allowable in 37, 22 where

B B

has Nrii
-JN,

A,

C,

and

B.

give

xiip".

Hebrew
3,

"lian

41, 55 ^, Z> K^nsb'; B,

and B. xrnV \c which

text
is

appears
'b

more
C,

correct.

The Hebrew
^oi'.

=r;;b.

12
al-

A,
it

and B.
sense.

^'s reading

is

inferior,

though
rectly

gives

3,

17 u5 xn.
"^3.

The

rest,

more

cor-

'Sx.

B
4,

xr-ix

The Hebrew is n\ The text being

Pathsegen
also

3,

23 B., A, C,

D
.

xrnxa,

nT2nsn nx I prefer
to

j9's

reading
reading.

and
8
in

the

seems

expect

^'s

and B. bnf,
justifies

and

bn5,

bn r-i

Adler

"iJb

nJ'^na

the

reading of

and C; he says we
br.

never find the Verb np construed with bx but with 3 or

B.

and

j9's
is

reading would
inferior,

then be a Hebraism;
it

whilst Z>'s

reading

inasmuch as
the
is

indicates a slower
text.
6,

moveB.,

ment than
C,

that

D--,

'1^.

shown by Hebrew

Hebrew

13

A,
-ff's

rx

= with.
1^,

The sense of
this

reading

is

"from

off the face

of the earth" but

idea

is
is

not contained in the

again incorrect.

Hebrew nx and hence ^'s

B.
(as
x^in,

reading
X'^ri.

14, 7

A,

B and D
C
x=n.

C's

reading
V.
is

is

incorrect;
15,

regards the difference of Gender,

Pt. II, II, 7C).

16 B., A, B,
are correct;

D x=bn,
both

nan.

Both readings

are

Hebrew composed of
Cf,

the

words xn and X3 but nsbn has a

liquid b inserted.

interchanging apparently without discrimination

sentences.
is

in the

same or

parallel

It

is

prob. that this interchange, at least in

many
Vk)

cases,

not original but due to

transcribers" i^Heb. and Eng. Lexicon

of

O. Test, by Brown, Briggs

&

Driver,

Oxford 1S92.

s.

v.

cf.

also

Jeremiah

27,

19.

Syriac
"^ri'br

64

ii^hi',

liioi.

i8,

19

(incorrectly)

B.,

A,
is

and Z>

but,

on the other hand, 's reading Hi^r

preferable

to that of the remaining

MSS. and
%Ti^"ip

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

The
the

Hebrew

is

I'^^N.

Perhaps
''in

was
C,

used

to

avoid

anthropomorphism
19, 34 A nx == with.

His presence" and not

rr,

''with

Him".
is

(incorrectly)
24, 7

B.,

B,

dsj.

'^'^3,

A,

C, Z>

and B.
since

^3.

Hebrew Hebrew
is

"h.

B's reading appears to

construed

be

preferable

Dp

usually

with ^r in Aramaic.
"J^i'.

20, 40 A,
is

and

ip^p.

and B.

This

latter

reading

the correct one, the

text being
justified.
justifies

~x,

although the other reading

may perhaps be
still

27, 6

B n^,

A,

C,

D and
is

B.

'p.

Although Landauer

the

latter

reading in his

Massorah,

we must

notice

that the

Hebrew nx
B.

here merely the

sign of the

Accusative, which would justify ^'s reading.

27, 37

N=n

A,
that

C,
is

D
C,

and

'^.

Since
s<"isx,

it

is

rather

time than

place

here indicated by

j5's

reading seems faulty.

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<=n 31, 37. The latter reading corresponds to the Hebrew Ks here. B is again wrong in where he reads "i? exactly as the Hebrew text, but 31, 43
xa,

B,

and B. rh

28, 15.

=
is

the

Aramaic idiom here requires a

of B., A,
in 35,
I

and

viz "iBin
"]^S"

correct,

and hence the reading B is again wrong

is

where he has
other

corresponding to the Hebrew

^"5N.

The
b.

MSS. have

"i^*

and K^J

usually construed

with

The
viz
'^-\

less

emphatic Particles are the correct ones

in 19,
T^-i

38

(and not as

B
C

linii)

and
bx.

in 35, 17

and 20

(and

not "^!^ as

and

have).
is

37, 35

(text) br.

(margin),

A,

C,

n-b'.

Hebrew
justify

Rasi says that here bx

but n^V
the

= b?^
cer-

which would
tainly

^'s original reading,

38, 12 B.

is

more

literal.

has nib;

all

MSS. read

V. Note to 20, 2 above.

hi.

6s

the

The unknown author of

is

the Pathsegen also reads as B.

mb

usually

the

Trg.

for

3X whilst

Preposition

by

is is

identical in both languages.

Hence

the text of the

MSS.
and

superior here.
qoi"^

39,

B.
is

and
bx.

tp^'^z,

B
C

~;0"i"'3',

n-V. The Hebrew may be defended still

Although the MSS. readings

of B. and
is

that

here the best.

2.

So also Pathsegen.
to Deut.

cipt is

usually construed with

Cf. Trg.

32,4.

42, 28

has

X'.n

spit

which

is

not such a

good rendering of the Hebrew nsn 051 as the other MSS. and B. have, these give xn qx". I do not know why B. has jnib as the Trg. of ~\> in 43, 9. All four MSS. read ~^. have xin whilst A and B 43, II B., i^ (te.xt), C and (margin) read N=n. The Hebrew text is xisx to which word

xSn usually corresponds, but

merely
being

in

this

particular verse X'EX

23.

is

an
"^bx

emphatic
the
that

particle.

43,

The Hebrew
"niV

text

reading
of
B.

of the

MSS.
"^5.

appears
the

to

be

superior

to

which has
again

On

other hand
"^r^b

B.'s reading is preferable in

45, 10 where he reads

"^sx.

and
the
B.

the

MSS.

^^.

The Hebrew
special
'from'
is

is

44, 4.

In this verse

we have another
sense of which
(incorrectly)
n;^.

use

of

tlie

and hence
however,

the

Hebrew word nx, MSS. render "li.

cf.

For a similar use of rx

where,
all

"r^rn

rx

"'rxs:
r.^.

(Exodus
47, 10

9,

29)

the

MSS.
B.

have
i-i.

(incorrectly) n-b^,
is
"^^sb-:.

A,

C,

and

aip

The

Hebrew
(I)

text

Hebraisms (VII,
I

ig).

Of

actual Hebraisms

presents
this

the

most instances.
differ

have previously remarked that

MS. does not

the other
'rinn

so greatly from

the Trg. text of B. as

17.

MSS.

do.

Yet

B
QuJ

reads 3?r^ 1"= 27,

21.

has

the

11, 29; 3 27, 34 and 38 and same word in 41, 45. B has p (for -^S) 21, 9. All the MSS. read ^"'^; 27, 9, when we should expect 'is as B. A has ^T^"^"^ 4I; 55 and 47, 15. C and Z> "pb" 4, 15. The
rest read "li.

whilst

reads

has

2-p"^

37, iS.

It

should be s-'T.

All

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

B's Heb6

have

^
already been noticed above,
in the
(J)
1,

66

the variations

when speaking of

use of the Particles.

Variant readings (X).

and

niiinn

(so

also B.)

II.

p"'En.

As a mere

translation of the

Hebrew words

^^^.

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

not only
of
its

to

translate the original but actually goes out

way
8

to

obtain an

identical

form,

the

reading of A,

D
a

and B. seems superior.

2,

"^W^

and B>
"'^itt;'!

"inrx^f.

B.

"^yii^).

Pathsegen ob-

jects to

A's reading

xpI DJin i-i^xi" Nevertheless

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^'^^, name of the Tigris being rts'i. Syriac i^;. the Aramaic

Assyrian Tiglat^

Arabic

Sl^J.

L. says the

Hebrew form
from bs3.
trri

of the word has a prosthetic n just as

2,

rts^n

24 B.,
tri-cx
is

A
n^i

and

D
to

have
n-3.

here

n">aKi

^'^1iN

"^SaTiJa

but

B
iax

"iri-nx

The

latter

reading

being

quite
is

literal

superior
T^ax

the

former.
version

The Hebrew
has

text to

nx'i

mx.

The other
i

reference

traditional translation

of these words by the Rabbis Eliezer

B.
d^n^,

and

Akiba4.

3,

the reading
na"!^::
is

of the

MSS.,

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

in

rendered

irasTinS
is

the

Trg.;

but

according

to the

Pathsegen
is

t]''2n

only applied to men.

^,

The

Syriac

jAaai.

also used for cunning.

22
4,

B
3

(incorrectly) xnDX

The

rest

have

i<^'^n.

Heb.

n^":nri.

B.
is

and Z>

i<3a-inp,

xr^si^pr,

xnnnpn,

C
2

xrnD?D.

Which

correct?

The

vSamaritan

niiBi.

Or Dignat, Tignat, Diqlat

(?).

Cf.

also

4 V. Ber. MasSo Samaritan nax rl n-as rr. S According to sorah p. 117 and Adler "-h nrrj to this verse. Dalman Jewish Aramaic does not emply the root d3n in the simple

LXX. TiYpu.

signification of "to

know",

this

use being confined to Galilean Aramaic.

root
is
:>T'
(1.

The corresponding Jewish Aramaic

c.

p. 38).

if

C-J

both give
this
5<33i"'p,
is

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

^- ^"^ Pathsegen

and
only

here

correct translation.

means 'offering' But it must be borne

^

the

in
-* *

mind

that the

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

^ = to
B
this

give)
is

and
only

wrong.
is

used

snmipn is bad, as when speaking of persons making

word
2

presents
4,
1

to

each

other and never in connection with

God
As

B. IJ'Mn,
al-

133^1,

)1'a^,

lt"cn,

ll^n-i.

if

we have not
"'SSjia'i

ready sufficient variations, Path^egen wishes to read

|">D53t)'i.

or

The Hebrew

is
is

ben.

Pathsegen
I

goes on

to

say

that the reading "p^^i

in B.,

a mistake, and

can find no sense

Berliner p. 128

D,

B or

C, the

readings of the two last-mentioned MSS.

cf.

not being even correct Aramaic forms (but

who

justifies

his reading).

Yet
this

/^'s

reading seems to be the

in

original

one since

had

word

the text, but

its

it

was

afterwards erased and ps^i placed on the margin in

place.

Probably the whole phrase xbns ois br

'iSs^t

should be deleted

from the Trg.

text as superfluous.

For

similar double trans-

lations cf. 3, 21; 4,

21; 24, 21; 30, 8; 40, 10; 49, 4 and

a treble rendering.
-^-iDnn,

49, 8 in the latter

5, 3 B.
n-i?
'i'abss

we have even
A,
C,

f^"'r"7'!,

D
A,

n-^s

B
the

n-^^s-B.

The
literal.

Hebrew is Of course
passage.
tr^n^,

and hence ^'s reading

C,

is

most

the other readings give the sense of the

Hebrew
n^Tax

Path^egen reads
has
n'<n'^

z.%

D.
C.

5,

24 B. has
insert x?

n-^ox sb

whilst

B,

on the
in

margin.

This

great

difference

probably

has

its

origin

some Hag.
is still

point.

Luz. in Philoxenos^ remarks "he (Enoch)

did not
kill

living for
s.

God

him".

In Tosafoth to Yeba-

moth 166

V.

one tradition

we read of a difference among Hagadoth being that Enoch died whilst another recorils that
piDB

It is

different Editions of the

noteworthy that a similar variant reading occurs in the Samaritan Targum, the Editions of Briill and
whilst
p.

Uhlemann both giving rr'Vs

2

that

of Petermann reads

nr:2.

Philoxenos

p.

31.

32.


he entered Paradise whilst

68
still

alive

The Trg.

text

is

there

quoted without
out
it

sbi

different traditions,

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

that i(^

is

of place

but we can understand and

notice
g,

how
2

crept into the text.

B.,

>t^3,

B,

C,

Nsnx which

is

of course the

correct

Trg.

of

y^^iji^.

A
C,

means Vild
i^nnn-itj,

beasts'

which gives

sense
lo,
is

but

is

not

the

correct

translation

of the
ni^!

Hebrew,
reading
''ninSb''.

30

B. Tin^ni^,

B,

Tin-iia

A\

an absurdity ^
in?"!.

11, 3

B.,

A,

C,

rvh'^n'ii,

Hebrew

The
A,
ip"^ is
"i5

readings are here equally good.

C,

11, 3

j\T^t''i'i'',

B.,

iO'i-'"ip^3i.

Hebrew
is

iiE'^ip:';.

B.

is

incorrect since

(according to L.) Intransitive.

rsnx* that
^p"^

Similarly

Luz. says in his

only used for entirely

consuming and not

for

merely drying.
11,

Pathsegen also
B.,

justifies
lii-ifln.

the reading Tirs-iasi.

'ix^nujT

A, B,

has simply confused the end of the verse with the

II,

first

iK-'-im.

31 B., j9 and
is

"il"i%

A,

3">63i.

The

first-

mentioned reading

Verbs corresponding
to take, or with

to the

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

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

ttnrx

= to
B
C,

marry.

But some confusion

is

noticeable
nn*!

in

the use of these two

all

Aramaic
A,
C,

roots.

B. has

14,

21

but
in

the

MSS. here
has

36^.

L. here again reads

"nm.

Again
it

24,

67

"ilin,

and

B.

n-^DsV.

Here
30, 9

means
n3"'63"^,

to
B.,

marry,

hence

is

wrong.

Finally

in

A,

D
C

nnnin in which case

j<3i3"^:iV

is

again

incorrect,

13,

9 B.

and

xrx,

A, B,

(margin)

and

D
i)

-Iscix".

Hebrew

nb'^N^sm'i.

The

Trg. here renders

Cf. Bezold's "Schatzhohle" Leipzig 1888,

II,

p. VI, also

Qoran,

57 and 58 where Edris is identified by Abulfeda with Enoch (Cf. Abulfedae Historia Anteisiamica: Ed. Fleischer, Leipzig 1831, p. 13).

Sura

19,

be

correct.
5

But i^n"3nm (in one word) "their seats" and would therefore 3 Likewise the Samaritan has ""snV. 4 1. c. p. 33.

Although the Samaritan has

Samaritan
ao.
7

rosi,
2D3'..

cf.

also
^

Singer

1.

c.

p.

21.

Samaritan

Samaritan raor.

the

69

Hebrew

nearer to the
the verse

ad sensuni. The manuscript reading comes Hebrew in form, whilst B. and C (text) make run more smoothly in Aramaic. L. appears to read
text

as B. since he gives
15, II
B.,

no verbal
Z?
n^rii',

root

")E3S

in

his

Dictionary.

(text),

avi<^. A,

(margin) nnoii^.

The

difference

in

vocalization
as

has already

been treated of "he drove

above.

L.

reads
the

and

(margin)
^

them

away".

On

other hand Luz.

takes

the

reading n-iexi

as a marginal gloss, which, although incorrect, subsequently

crept into the

a^'nxi

text.

Pathsegen^ says the traditional Trg.

is

and

this

reading appears preferable, although so great

15, 18
B.
is

an authority as L. reads otherwise. A, B^

and Cn''in''3
preferable, but

T^PN.

Hebrew

"'nrj.
is

B.'s

reading

the sense of the passage

Future, and therefore the manuscript

reading, though inferior,

the different
roots

may perhaps be
our
use
C,
"iPJ

justified.

As regards
by
telling

used, L. solves
in

difficulty

us

that

the

only parts of
Infinitive.

in

Aramaic are
''"a"'^

the

Future and

17, 2 B.,

A,

'p^,

x^n^.

Hebrew

"irn.
is

Path>egen supports the former version.

another instance

This

expression

of the Targumist's constant

endeavour to avoid anthropomorphic expressions; whilst

translates literally.

B
is

The

suffix

of the ist Person Singular

L.
5

wanting

xra

SJ^EPX,

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^
in

this

Hence
T^i^n csi
xb"*

ox-

T^i-n

nx

snsnx

xs".

The Hebrew

text

is

simply nrnx xb cx\

All the

commentators have remarks

ficult

to

make on

this

peculiarly dif-

passage.
will

Text "I

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

1.

c.

p.

maritan
suffix in

'J-a.

his

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.

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

under those words in which the diphthong

ai
Sec.

became

weakened

to a.

Thus Nra

= Ta

of.

also 'i-ys

>3"""'y.i


you) forgive you,
you".
if

70

if not,

you repent but

if

shall

punish

The corrected (MS.) reading runs

you do not
I

"I shall (make an

repent, but
are,
if

end with you) destroy you,

repent,
ever,
is

you

shall

not punish you."

Both readings,

how-

very obscure
19,

and
B.,

it

is

very doubtful whether either

correct.
is
s<br);i.

33

and

n^P,

and Z> n^pi.

The

text
Pinpi
is

and

are both wrong, they probably wrote

cpw.

through confusion with verse 35 of which the Hebrew B., A^ 19, 33 and 35 C (margin) n^^pa'i nnDiiS ^
(text)

B,

and

D n^-pan'i
B.,

n^Siurin, C's

marginal (corrected?)

readings merely appear to be Hebraisms.

21,

33
is

^"sV-^N,

A,

and

xa^^j.

The Hebrew
is

original

b^x.

L. reads as B.

The

reading k'jVix
text,

pro-

bably a marginal note which crept into the

and

in
a.

some
later

MSS. supplanted hand has already

(text) xnpnir, B.,

the

inserted xsb-x

more correct reading. In on the margin.

(margin), C,

22,

12
is

B
un-

A,

B ^

xryl^^ which

doubtedly the proper

saken"
Pisiyn

text;

so L. xnpsuj

= "Thou
which the

hast for-

and not
22,
find

"thou
18

hast
is

withheld"

Hebrew
is

means.

again incorrect in this verse in

"jli

which we
5>1a'i3.

"jBi-in

written instead of
23,
6 B.

h-ny which

the

correct Trg. of

^^")!=i.

and

"^Vs^

"^V:^,

A,

D
is

The only

noticeable difference between

(as usual) has

and

the fact that

B. whilst

a form exactly like that of

of the

preserves
distinctly.

the

punctuation
is

Superlinear

system more

The Hebrew

nV=\
this

Both Berliner

and Landauer
stance of

in

their

Massorahs give

word

as an in-

QiJ"ini K-ip.

Similarly, the author of the Pathsegen.

According

to these authorities, the first-mentioned reading is

the correct one.

But

it

has already

been noticed that our

MSS. do not follow these Massoretic rules of Qijnn xnp. At the same time i^:^"^ conveys the sense of the original and
both Rasi4 and Ibn Ezra explain nbD^

~2n\

24,

10

Likewise the Samaritan has

Samaritan
jvo'^.

rr^^pa'.

nas'ija.

Samaritan rsva.

4 a.

1.


lEiy.

71

B.,

A,

and

D
A,

avj which

given in the
24,

Hebrew
21
B.,

text,

is the same word as that and hence, perhaps, a Hebraism.

19

(incorrectly)

"^P^a^b',

A,

(margin),

6',

J) and B.

'ipuj^b"'.

24,

na ^^6,

B
C
is

ni-

-rri,

n 'rr.

Pathsegen accepts the

latter reading,

but L. writes as B- ami

as early as Rami's time the reading of

was already pointed

n? nxn-r^.
Berliner

out as incorrect.
in his

The Hebrew
"^rx^

text

Massorah places nn
falls

as

a Suraan

reading whilst

nm

"irnu

under

the

head of the Nehardean readings.

24, 38

(text)

"'r^ns^b'i

""i-ixb'

(margin) and the remaining

texts "^n'^iilVn
inrB'::^

xrx

nii-T.

Since

the corresponding
is

Hebrew

is

bx'

"^ax n-ia

bs the last-mentioned text

24,
"'b-x,

more

literal

and hence, perhaps, preferable'.

(margin) ^b^x,
is

44 B.

"'b-s-'X,

and

(text)

vrx,

D "'Vrx.

The Hebrew Hebrew

still

ax'iiJx

"I shall draw".

Although none of the readings here

literal

mentioned give us a
V^^x
is

translation of the

undoubtedly incorrect, (for the differences of vocal-

ization see above).

24, 59 B.

and

C
is

^^''-la:,

and

^ri^ai,

A
the

"^n-l-iaj.

.-/

appears

to

have taken

the

Hebrew

"^aisc

in

sense

of

'warriors' but there

nothing

in the context

which admits

of such an interpretation.

been noticed.

24,

1X3 of which the

The vowel-changes have already The Hebrew text runs xizti X2 F^^" ?r pnr>^ Targum is according to B
62.

'v.^'i'i-ii

Knin ns whilst the other versions give

xn-^i-2

"^nT-^i br prs"<i.

We
C

can reject both these versions and follow that given by

inir.i-6^

Nachmanides^
and

xrx which

is

more

literal.

25, 6 B.,

have xn:n^
i':5

rnx'i' x-^in-ipV,

'2t;

r:xb x-sm-^p whilst

text
is

B
is

has x^3^o

snxb" xoiT^pV.

The Hebrew

no-ip

fi'np 7"^!!<"^^.

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

is

the best

B.,

B,

1^23,
all

"pba^,

yizz.

The Hebrew

text

is

r-^x2.

L. explains

these words to be of similar signification and

I
T'Jjv

Cf.

LXX
ij.O'j.

'AX).*
2

ei

Tov oixov toO zaxpo;

this verse q. v.

(jlo-j

TtopeiiaiQ

xai

v.;

<p'jXt^v

To


all

72
B.'s

reading being derived from

mean

'cloak' or 'mantle'.
iff&Tji

/.oxXa^ sc.

that of

from the Persian

Pathsegen
is

of

f^

and

that
"jBiD

from the Greek

/XaTva.

also

reads

and explains

that a s comparationis

omitted because the

26^

word

is

used adjectively and not substantively.

t^inbs,

14
as

(margin)

(text)

and remainder
is

rri'iny

just
in

the

Hebrew.

This

instance
DiJini xnp.

also

mentioned

Berliner's
nTins',
It

Massorah under
is,

Pathsegen also gives

however, remarkable that in the quotation of

this

verse

by Theodorus Mopsuestenus % who

the
5 th

lived at the beginning of

JjUkA-oso,

centuryj

he uses

the

word

although the

Pesitta
is,

which he usually quotes has here H^slXo. Mopsuestenus however, by no means exact in his quotations from the
of Biblical passages
26, 18

PeSitta, his rendering

frequently differs
"npn.

both from Trg. and

Pesitta.

C (text)
is

C (margin),
which we
omitting
"^n^i'^T.

A, B,

and B.
text,

'-Hp

ninn.

Hebrew

s*'^;^

for

might expect the Trg. to be K'ipX

]nU;p in
its

27, 3 -5 after

gives the incorrect marginal reading

27, 31 B. bi^JX^

and

D
C

h'<^^^,
is

V^^^\

^n^xi..

Of

these

readings

Although the Targumic form usually corresponding with the Hiphil of S413 in Hebrew is the Aphel of hh'S, still we also occasionally find the Aphel of inx thus employed. (Cf. 27, 7). 27, 34 ^
incorrect.

only that of

kIx^

The

rest

have

peculiar construction of the

correct Trg.
forget that the
B.
it

Luz.
is

Hebrew is "^sx. B imitates T Hebrew original; but is remarks "Those who would read
"^b.

the the
xlis

"^p

not the object of the Targumist to retain

but rather to clear them up".
^^^Sstr,

Hebrew
and

obscurities,

29, 8
is

l^^^l^S A,

i^-inat^^.

The Hebrew

sibb;-],

L. permits either reading, taking the reading of

n^ij.

and

Z> as a "Gafel" form of

Rasi also reads the word with

30, 6
jff

a prosthetic has ^n-b^

5.

B
Cjx^

has a mistake in the Gender.

"-"^

b^nj$

^nis5b

b^ip.

B.,

A,

and

simply

Edit. Sachau,
1.

Leipzig 1879 (page ).

Samaritan nss.

c.

p.

41.


read
>l?'ip?

73

literally to the
is

'^n'lVa b-^ip

p.v

which corresponds
first

Pebrew

s^u; Da^.

The

part of ^'s rendering

perhaps a

marginal gloss which was afterwards inserted in the text by an ignorant scribe. and (margin) ns, A 30, 15 B.,

and

(text)

niib'.

is

missing.

Since

the

Hebrew
and

text

reads

<^b,

the reading r>^ although

giving the sense of the

passage appears to be incorrect,

'^xfr>->\

31, 2 B.,

(text)

C (margin),

^rhr-^i ,

-(^s-^rVJ,

Z>"orr^;.

is

13.3"'S.

The forms given by

"^sx

B
to

and

D
Cs

are

The Hebrew incorrect. As

the suffix refers to

is

and not

pb

marginal correction

worthless.
31, 13

But

'^dp'^V

would be a more correct Aramaic

-i^nn

form.

(incorrectly)

ead xnn
31,
16.

i^r-iS

which corresponds
given

to the

nVx. The Hebrew

other
r5<.:n

MSS.
y~t<n.

In this verse ^'s reading n'^r^in appears to be preto

ferable
UJ'i'iBx^

the

text

by

B.,

A,

C
text

and

which give

"who

separated".

The Hebrew

is b'liin

nm. 31,21

The rest have nni Tr-. Neither are literal Hebrew is simply ^^'^t.^. Pathsegen similar to B., A, C and D. It is difficult to say which reading is preferable, but perhaps B is, since it preserves the word of the Hebrew text "ina. 31, 29 C (text) b->prr xiSs'i, C (margin) and the others i<5l3':ba3. The Hebrew being "i=f^ the latter
nns'i i^^nl

since the

reading
but
is

is

correct.
literal.

C
34,

(text)
7

gives the sense of the original

not

B.

ix-'pjrw,

A, B,

D
is

i<''6:n"'X%

iCo'dpni.

The meaning of
tried"

the former reading

"And

the

men were
us
the

which gives no sense here.

hand the reading of

correct

which
B
all

On

the other

is

also

given by L.

gives

sense

exactly corresponds to the

I

"And the men were grieved" which Hebrew wssT'^^ In this verse then
given by B. in favour
'nx,

think

we should
by
'ibs*.

reject the reading

C.

of that shown
the rest

34,
1x2.

(text)
is

(margin) and

Hebrew
of this

Which

the
ix::

better

reading?
so
that

In verse 27

chapter

render

by

"br

LXX

also Aeia.
'*5y.

Samaritan pr-V.

Samaritan

V't'si.

Samaritan


perhaps
this

74

But there
are

reading

should

be preferred.

many passages in the Trg. in which the Aramaic Verbal Root which corresponds to the Hebrew K12 is xhn. We may perhaps then accept either of the above-mentioned The rest have ''npsn x^^iS ^ readings. 35, 5 B ""npS 'pii. which is the correct Trg. of the Hebrew '^ri'^s 'aV'ri. It is
true that

gives us the exact sense of the original, but yet

is

the

reading

faulty.

35, 8

n'lnni.

Rest have

'S^h'o^.

As an instance of the close connection between these two Aramaic words compare XSJip'nb 31^73 i, 7 and again i^'^^m mnn^ i, 9. The words are really synonyms
inriF'a.

Hebrew

but Pathsegen

tries

to

make

a distinction between them by

saying that one refers to a greater depth than the other and
that a fine distinction does exist in the use of the

two words

may
I, 7

be

seen

has h

by comparing the Heb. of i, 7 and i, 9. nnna whilst i, 9 has only nnn?3, the Trg. for i, 7

being h
here

S"i^b

and

for

i,

9 ninrra.

As

the

is

also

used
psn.

i^i^^

seems

preferable.
B.

35, 18

(incorrectly)
is

The

other

MSS. and

read ps^ii
;^6,

which

the correct Trg.

of the

Hebrew

nxais.
s'^n^.

Dxa'i xbpria,

B axo

and Z> ax^ "^^pf^^, A The original has ^Na trim of which
35
B.,

gives the most literal Aramaic.

is

decidedly incorrect.

MSS. and B. read linniD. AuthorBerities differ which of these readings we should prefer. liner in his Massorah"* remarks "Many copies have the incorrect reading "pnyi which imitates the word given in the Hebrew text; the Aramaic word a"^!: first bore the meaning of calumniating when joined with XTli'^a". Similarly Luz.s after the Araciting many passages in which the Hebrew na'^i maic a^'u adds that the reading ini'i is nothing more nor
2,T, 2

linai.

The

other

less than a mistake.

On

the other

hand L.^ remarks; "Since

therefore the reading

our root

(ai;::)

hardly ever occurs in the Babylonian Trg. in this

signification (viz. that of calumniation)

I 4

Samaritan
p.

^npy
5

nra.

Samaritan
43.
6

s-hti.
s.

To

this verse.

78.

Philoxenos

p.

v.


I'lnai is

75

',

superior."

We may
(see

therefore accept A's reading as

the correct one.

37, 23 jB (margin) bs

^ (text),
37,35
and

.-^,

C,

and

B. xrx.

Hebrew X3
and

above 34,
B.,

j).

i9 (text)

"P'^in ^2,

(margin)

Nlb-^is i:,

xb-rx nS.

L. although

mentioning the

latter

reading gives as correct

the text given by

and

B (margin).
It

But how

is

the version

of
to
is,

(text)

to

be explained?
doctrine

appears to be an allusion

the Jewish

of the Immortality of the soul, but

of course, an interpolation.
37,
2

The Hebrew
"tsn,

original

is

simply

bnx.

B.

^?3;:^^

A,

D
able

B
give

xnan,

":?:=.

The

Hebresv has
reading as
ing.

"'??;?=.

L. and Pathsegen both give the correct

''x;?^??

although L. also mentions the other render-

But before
is

we

are
it

to

an

opinion

which

reading

preferable,

is

necessary to be quite clear about

original

the signification of the

ities

Hebrew
b.

and here the authorNachmanides, Gerso-

differ.

Rasi, R.

Samuel

Meir,

nides and Mendelssohn render "merchant" whilst the Revised

English Version,

Ibn Ezra, the

LXX
in

and

Pe'sitta

translate

"Canaanite".

Adler aptly remarks

is

his -5?

nrn3 3 that the

rendering "merchant"
also

given to

spare Judah's honour, he

in

quotes

Talmud and Midras

after
all

support of

this

transis

lation.

But

think
is

the

most correct reading

1%,
17 B.
nV:i-<x,
,/,

that

given by L. which

literal.

C
is

and

D
B.

nnirx,

nVinx'*.

Hebrew nbox.
since

The
the

readings given

by

and

are

equally good,

Afel

of r.br

merely a
is

little

stronger than the Peal, but the reading

to

i^rx

wrong according

L.

who quotes
it

Levita

to

prove that
of
ot

the root "nir only occurs in 1%, 20 and 23

to the author of the Pathsegen,
'giving'

where, according
signification

has

the

merely,
/.

and

not

as

here
41, 5

giving

with

the

idea

repayment
although

c.

as a loan.
is

^^?.

The

other

MSS.
to
L.,

have p"'62 which

fp-^

the

correct reading,

according
;"i"''JE.

has precisely the same meaning as

41,

30

Samaritan

Vio'.

Samaritan

-!:;:r.

To

this verse.

Samaritan

rr^BK.

B
his
(text)
fitsiK

7^

D
and B.
i<r-ii<T

"^S^^

B
the

(margin), A^ C,
vh
^

VoA.

One would only expect xr^x

"isb

but as Adler points out in

is

njins

a.

1.

root nba

more applicable
either

to

the

ruin of the inhabitants of a country than to the ruin of the

country

itself.

We

must therefore
that both
ini<.

assume
ihS.

that both

versions are faulty or

are

equally good.

42, 10

A
is
is

(incorrectly) iin, B.
1X3.
I'is;;^.

B, B,

C
C,

and

D
is

42, 38

xriiJiM.

xsi'inn.

The Hebrew The Hebrew

incorrect in
in
is

gives the correct sense but

XJiiia.

an inferior reading.

L.

also

has

On

the
for

other hand
the

is

giving

sri^i as the Trg.

Hebrew n^na
xnttJ'^in

44, 29.
correct.

The
X5?'

other

MSS. and
(text)
n^-'ap'

B. here give
x3!3'

which

43, 5

B
A

iinoix,

(margin) and

the
cf.

rest
v.

"iS.

^'s mistake
(incorrectly)

is

one

of homoiteleuton.

3.

43, 18
is

bi^rx'i.

The

others have arnxn which

l^^i^"!, rest xn'^rn.

the correct Trg. of ndn. 44, 2

Hebrew
The

'(VJisin

hence

is

wrong although, of course,

14

the verse refers

'^n'i^^j5,

to

Benjamin.
is is

44,

"j^nisx bs,

rest

have

Hebrew
t:ni.3S

i'':slp

and hence
N^^^rn

(which would be the Trg. of

'I'lpS':

VS)

a mistake. 48, 19 ^^

n-^ii? s<-7:ic?3

X"^^?- V^"^^-

B,

and

D give
ii;;i7".

T^iisizj "(in'^

^'^^D3^.

So

B.

who employs
is

'jia'^bd

instead

of

'piHr.

The Hebrew

original
free
in

isnn,

D'Ssn-xb^

Both renderings are equally

and hence
that in

hardly satisfactory, although

we must bear

mind

some of
the

the poetical

and

prophetical passages of the Pen-

tateuch, O. doubtless allowed himself great freedom in giving

sense

of the original, besides which our texts of the

Trg. are frequently hopelessly corrupt.

here given A'^
kings
is

Of

the two renderings

historically inaccurate, as the great

Hebrew
tribe

who

ruled

over other nations sprang from the tribe

of Judah

and not

from

that

of Ephraim.

But the

of Ephraim was the most powerful of the kingdom of Israel

and hence the other rendering

is

at least historically true.

The Hebrew
I

text

is

very obscure,

but

whatever

it

does

As the Samaritan Trg.

gives.

mean
here
is

71

means "ex"'inni,

not represented by either of the Targumic versions

quoted.

"fullness of nations" j^robably

48, 22 B. and

ceedingly numerous".

(text)
is

"'rrps'

C (margin), A, B
ing.

and
to

D "^rban'
soften

^^V?:i
"la^

which

a Hag. renderverse.

V. Rasi and Adler in his

strives

njT3 on

this

The
of Ja-

Targumist

the
is

apparent
quite

harshness

cob's language.

B.'s reading

literal.

49, 27 B., B,

C
is

wxla-iip,

x;|\a-:p,

xjn-i^p.

Although the Hebrew original

it

amplified in this verse to such an extent that

becomes
still

all

but unrecognisable in
renderings
here

the the

Aramaic
first

translation,
is

of

the

given

mentioned

the only

one that gives the correct Aramaic word and therefore the
only reading we can here adopt.

This

IS

a complete

list

of the Variae lectiones and

it

may be
noticed
text

seen by a perusal of these toget'ner with the vowel

irregularities

changes and grammatical

whjch we have already

critical

how

very far Ave are from having a correct

of the Trg.

Undoubtedly
texts
it

B.'s

edition

is

a vast im-

provement upon the

seen
it

which preceded

his,

but we have
I

how
too

very often

may be improved
scribes
in

upon.

am

afraid

is

much
since

for us to expect the Trg. text to

be perfectly

accurate
text to

many

later

have tampered with the

places
the

such an extent that

the

many
all

we cannot
is

re-

cognise
lation.

Hebrew
until

original

at

in

Targumic

trans-

But what we

may

reasonably hope for

a gradual

improvement
as
critical

as

we shall have obtained a text which is we can possibly expect under the many disfirst

advantageous conditions which surround the editing of such

a text.

As a

step

in

this

direction

now

give a few

specimen chapters of the Trg. of O. with Superlinear vocalizationj

which, besides showing an improvement in language

probably represents the original Palestinian Version.

78

III.

In the

following

chapters

have followed the MS.

to

which has already been noticed

text.

give the best and clearest

Occasionally

have inserted a reading which appears

to be

more

correct in the foot-notes.

My

reasons for doing

so

may be found
I also

explained in the body of this work.

readings which are given by the Editio
the text of which varies very con-

give

the

Bomberg
siderably

(Venice, 15 17)

from

the

text

of B.'s

Edition.

have inserted

every word in regard to which

this

Edition differs from that

of

B.,

although the reading

may

coincide with that of the

invariably write the TetragramMSS. The MSS. C and whilst the Editio Bomberg writes '"'\ A ""'I maton thus and B 'V* \ The dot over the Sin is not written, Sin is written thus 45 but is usually replaced by D. The word Q^p
*>"'''

is

usually

abbreviated in the MSS., which simply write

'p.

In such cases the missing letters have been added in brackets.

Numerous emendations appear

sonantal
text,

to

be necessary

in the

con-

which should be purged from

attained a

its

numerous

superfluous elements, but

such corrections should be post-

poned

until

we have

Different chapters to those given by

more accurate vocalization ^ Merx in his "Chresto-

mathia Targumica" have purposely been chosen.

Cf. Part

I,

Cp.

II,

2.

Merx considers
is

it

necessary to apply

both systems of vocalization

text,

to arrive at a correct

but

it

has been shown that this

(cf.

and critical vocalized possible by means of the

p.

Superlinear vocalization alone

Merx "Bemerkungen",

188).

CHAPTER
DnnxS
''V ib";.ns*=

XVII.
13 z-ns
'^^c bit
rr.rr:

^-^zt

yfrn

'^"^^zr

(i)

D''-5Tr ''im*

''^ip

nSt

s:n rf^ irxi

Kin's '^xinb" "in^

I'a'ir^

^-I'iDsn

i^nn

'inti''^^''ii ^c-p

V~kt (2)
bi:\

-flr

niiir b^5-ci "^niBK bj

nnns

(3)
(4)

^72^7 S'JD
I'is

2s':

^^rinn ^-cr ^'li^^p '^ir: i<n n:s

Dnnns

'irc "^nH onns

i^

n^ niy

"^npn-^ k'^t

(5)

I'^d's^i

"^icd5'5

""iD^rnsn

xinS sin5 v.^

'c^iix^

(6)

innn i:n p5i

i?yns bS

fz'^ni

^i^'^^

]^5

^'o^p

n^ ^a'^psi
o^-'p':

(7)
"j-n-'SiS

"inni iiab'^ 'nSs5 15 ^^'inr': c^jn"^

innnnin yns n^ ^-rn

ni:ri i^-^p it'

T;ib=i ^b^

Y"^^^ (S)
"-irsi

Tnna

^:ni r,K

nsi onnns':

"^V

(9)

f25 ]iai

jiD^i'^ii

"inri^ i^S

'pntirT

'^r^p

^'^^i

(10)

xniDT bS
I'^n

^isb'

'''"ib'c

T^ri

a^^p

nsb

''''in'^i

pDnbn:?! snoa rr

f^nnni (11)

inBom. 'nit'!, C ',rf^'- ^ ^ Bora, omits. ^ xnnV. / C "^^p. I'^n. "JO, B ^it. "g. / Bom. and ^ Bom. "^nr^ // Bom. and Bom. 'vy^EX% w C \.-'h^v^'. Bom. T^'r^s. k Bom. innn^ /

a Edit. Bom.
'^n-Q-'-o

''.'in?.

-^

<'-''=

stead of

<?

.-/

.-1

"The best form would be s Bom. Bom. S-5X5, .5 nHx?. r q Bom. ^^ ""^"^om. cbr. Bom. ri^*?"* C "prx-. t Bom. 'iD>?', W. ",iiar Bom. "!>-'?, ,/a Bom. ^?^^ y Bom. xn. Bom. T^^ C" "^nn-. C "in-is.

Bom.

Tr^'^r"!.

/ Bom.
'^:n';5.

tT^'-

c:"pi<\

^"

:r


^"Si

So

I'^^i'' x^'^D'an

i^D'^nnB

xniDi bS

f]^'5

w
in-in

^ai

(12)
"i-inTi

xin
^"oy
'^inii

isn'a xSi

'j^'atiy

^n

b3T3

xsdd

xnia

"isoS ''iinn

^tS^ nn^ ^b)2 (13)

i^Si iiiiDi bnyn

'Wiu^i

''nin'5-iyT

xnoi

n"'>

(14)

inr '"n'c n^ inpri xS inri< in onnnK^

''V'

n-asi (15)
rraTiJ

nnw
(16)

"^nx

'nsDnnxT

-in

iS "^ns^ ^)^r qx=i

)Srv

nn^ "T^nxi

nla

K^i'a^yn

^'^ti'jiri "I'^Db'a^

')-wi5^

"inni

na5n

rr^nia

"I'asi

'''im

'inisi^

b^

annix
"iSi

bsan
^'^ri^

(17)
I'^iw

""'Tbr
'^''

'j^iw 'jiywri

nan nnr dxi

^Tr

nx^
< <

D^'-ipn^i

"bxy^tj^n

'"'"'"ib

(d^)p oninsc nrixi

(18)
(>p '^^

l^ip

n'^

i^prii

n5 i3

''m^na
nifi^

*innDn5

Tbn ^nni? nnr xnwpa ^Srxi (19) rri^y ''''^'a^p tv ^^o^piji pns^ n^a "nSy a^b
iX"^

iT'S'^na

xn ^nibi

n-iS^ap

bxyiaTB^

bri

(20)

^ T3'!^ c B, C XSDD, y^ i<E03. ^ Bom. "^nr^ A '^T^'?. Bom. f^Tonn, B Vi^^'r^i / Bom. n^"P>. g Bom. obs. n^nW"!. nb;x. /^ B '^u^p. / Bom. ^:m. /; Bom. i Bom. ; Bom. t^a. Bom. Tin^?". o Bom. P^n^ / Bom. Pix, ^ "prsi and omits rS^, q Bom. w^a. The 3rd Sin. Fem.
(^
<f

Suffix

is

always punctuated with Q.

will
riot

in

this

Edition,

so this

Bom. M'^3"inN\ -'nn. s Bom. u Bom. T^Vh- x Bom. "i-fn"!. / Bom. T^t'isV ilH" is a more "'n% "ibi. s Bom. a^z ^ T>^n. y Bom. correct form, cc A, B bj<3)5au3\ ^a^Bom. ^'''!PT'.. Bom. I^'^p.. //^ Bom. -172X^ zV Bom. D^s. hh C "'i'p. _^^ Bom. Q^ps". ^-^ Bom. ^'CX'i. // Bom. ""ipxi. ?;// B's reading 'p"iri appears preferable when compared with the Hebrew t-^rr. nn Bom. fi^ins*;'.
variation

be

noticed

again.

<5(^

<f.f


k:'ot'3

8i

'i^p r*'^

n^c

"^S

^S'irri

pns^ 27 "'cpx

(21)

^^nii'^j-c 'Vi

K^p

p';rcx^ niv;?

^x'';"';r'5r

"^s^r^

''22)

fJr

n^-ar ''b^5'si xtq5 I'l^n x^i'>

-;:

pDi

'iinn'!;^r- x-^ci

x*^,ci

i"t5

r:c

'rfr-

r^'i^r

nn

nn^^x?
n,

(24)

'

X'^ci r^ nr:

"rr i^iir

'^cj nbr
<-<
-A

-in

rr^^n

bxr^r^i (25)
'"n'^rb-i'yn

..

<

n-inn

bxy^r^- cn-^nx "itj-x

'';"ir

""'^n xr*"' '"^rn

(26)

^5

112

XEcS

xr^ii

>^"'b^

rr^r-^n "^ir-x bSi

(27)

nirj

^i-i'Tr-rx x'-c-^r

CHAPTER
'^ah'^i rrf\-,

XXVI.
(0
cn^nx
(2)

'nx^^p

xibz-c ""in xr->xn x:rr rrn'

nn.Vr "^xrrb'E-i xzb-i ib'c''2X

r-b pns^
rpb'

'b'Txi

"'^'c

"c^ns^y

r^n"*:"

xb 'i^x^

"^V

'br.rx^
^'-i-c-'X'^

ii
a B,
/^

xf-'xi

C
T'lr

n^x,
'-\.

^
c

c-px.

The

best

form would be n-px.

,/

Bom.

Bom.

x-n,

^
e

x^xr.

Bom.
'crxn,
"".

xr:-r-x,

xr:-nx,

B
m

xf:-nx,
a

xr:-r-x.

Bom.
//

"'a-'r'.

/B
,/

xrri;':,
-i':x:.

Ber. xVr-:5.
/
.-J

7:r5->-n,

Bom. ^r";r-:. Bom. vnr;nr-i.

Bom.

k Bom. 5"5r

Bom.
"j:

V'tT^.

nir-D-^rn.

"^I^rx (B.

on the other hand has

<?

and

also

'-t:-

for ^"Tjrx in verse 27).

Bom.

"rrx.

/>

?.-prx.

^ -
j-

would be
3*x".
/

better

punctuation.
//

r
.v

nx-cnp.
""ttj.

Bom.

Bom.

"-x".

=~:i":5.

Bom. Bom. Bom.

-r"'Nj(!)


ins

82

xin xns5
"iiT

"TDnnsi ''11^65

in^a^ia ''^nii

(3)

bS

n^

^iz^i

'i^rxi

s-^r ^55iD5
^n^^'ab

""iin ty^

roxi

(4)

N^^s
in^i^ mt:^

'""^rsTGy
-ii::i

b5 i:n b^in )i3^in^i i^bxn 'xrins

nnnax "biip
nnsn pnsj^
'

^ibn

(5)

'^n^nixi ''^a^p ^^iips

n^n^i
(6)

''nns n^si

n-^nnx "pcir by xnnx 'iuj-n ibixtDi

^::ibt:p^
sicb-i

(7)
"inx

sinx

'"ir;s

^nnsi

nr'^'ab ^b'^rin

s-in

xiri

infi nnisir ^ni? ''''npni by

'^"ii?\-D

T^i^iJ "^^rcxi

x^'aT' 'Tcn

n^5

-o

mm
5<"^pT

(8)

^^y
x^n

'^^-j^'^n^

pnsji

xni

XTm

iiSnn

)^

liipirbB-i

xSb-a

nirni? npn-i
-fnrii

stn

nna

^^-i^xi

pn2iV5

Y-^^ix

(9)

nby
jns
-iiyT5
s<:b

^''b-'Dpns

s^bi

""'m5y "in^

I'rti'iiN

"tcsi (10)

xnin N:by
a Bom.
e

'^'^smr^i?T

frns f^m
<;

''x^y5

irnai

""n^iir

Bom. "ins-s::. Bom. -;i"^='ii2Si. d Bom. / Bom. ni-jirxi (correctly). ^ C '^i^p. --Z. /^ Bom. / Bom. "iRX". /^ Bom, l"in3. / Bom. xrr-x. ;;/ Bom. "i^^^;. Bom. b^np ?i Bom. "'i-j-c. ^ Bom. i-iiip-'S. r Bom. "r^l'ix':, B 'ri^n^xi. j Bom. S'^n'^l. q B lii-p. / Bom. 'r:x. po'^". /^ Bom. t Bom. "rnx. y Bom. ^Ti. Bom. 'd;s. aa Bom. np::n (and not npsn as B.). Bom. ^xi;d. ^(T "^iroNwould be a better reading, dd Bom. T'^'^^j C -"'xn-s. ee Bom. c:^' (B. has r,;:). Bom. "ipxi.. gg Bom. r!-;-:x, ^ r^i^x. T'lnisx. "rriN. hh Bom. zV Bom. j5<?w. ^"'Jpr>{< correctly; also C b-^ipnx. //Bom.xn n-?. ;w Bom.n-ins;. ii7i Bom.
'1-1-,.

"nx.

Bom. n~>~n.

>-[.

<^/^

/'/f'

-'=::,

C 3':"i\
^^ Bom.

00 Cf.

LXX

which has ix tou ylvou;

[jioo.

^^ Bom.

=:.

xr-^r-^x-.

The

best reading would be xr^r-ix-.

''x^ni's
''p-^ri'^^t

83

^r^^ix nips^
(i i)
-<-.7\

^^^^'i

xrr

bz r^

''bi'jprp
bt-

xrjpnx

"^

n-rrxb'

XTiri

xrf5 nzcs"

X"^nn s~"ix5

pni- 7^t- (12)

'^

xin5 ''xSi- nr
''io

'^iini

'':c '"t'tx 5tki x-^n: xnii (13)

x:nbET

"i^nn

''r'5=i

x:y '"\^^3 n^5' 'inni (14)

'"XPtr-E rr^d
'S'^:p=i

annnx

'i:ci^5

'>r;inx

^'^nr

'^eht

''^n-^ii

bri

(15)

x^E^
^ns'ipn 'lie
x'l^i'TC ^'b'^rx

"|-':V5^i

ixrrtE

']'<:iT2i;

'n-zx

pris^b

'7"''c''2X

"n-^xi

(16)
x^ri-i

""^xini

pr

"a-^rr

nnr^-r

xSn:3 x^ir^ pns^ ^^'ir-c

rp

b^rx'

(i;)

''Tcrn

"insni

ir^-> ^'^^^'^2

lEm

pnr^ 2ri (18)

^^^r.^nx

inpi cn-inx r^r^ "ir5

"ixrrbi
'''''np

^^j'^iT'c-^T

znnsx
'''''i'nb'

"Tninx

'''jinb

"n^nT pTici "nrr

"V3

]rri

"""nnzrxT xbn;n pr:i' ^^nr "-nsn- (19;

d C

^ Bom. x~-;2. r Bom. r.-rrsr". Bom. "i-. / Bom. "^ninrr? ^ Bom. 2js:. // B has this word added on the margin. B. omits it. /: Bom. xr ^n. / Bom. I'rr C --'. / Bom. / Bom. '^;o. r^?Bom. "r-';i. Bom. xrrrns?.. A has this word
fl!

Bom.

p"'T:-n.

b-^zjpn^.

t>

erased in the text but added on the margin; whilst B has it in the text and nn'^r* on the margin. / L' ^sr-'iz. ^"^-'' ""En -. s Bom. t-is. Bom. Bom. "r-'rj ^ Bom. ": ';-. // / Bom. "r-v and Ra^i quotes the word thus.
(J

z Bom. N~S"pr, C ri'-f. Bom. ":s". y Bom. '"t-s. Bom. ::"r-- r/*/ Bom. n z, aa Bom. sir;. M Bom. 'r-'^^Bom. ^ xn-^a. ^^ Bom. ^I'Er'-^n. // Bom. ttizx. The best reading would be 7:" :::;. /th Bom. ,n3 (B. "n-). // Bom. r^\kk C has "^pi instead of ^~p rirrr,. // Bom. ^^sn\ ////// C 'nzrx-, .-i ?r=rs*. //// Bom. N-sr. co Bom.
.V
<-'c

,'i:'!':::5.

jf^'-

;.

":?"!

PP Bom.

r^a-i:.

^x:':"'! n^'>"i'5 pn'sr-*

84

^xriji
is;i

xr^iJn ay nnr^i

(20)

^n:i:ir
snpT

n^

xnpi nSy qs iSDi ^^nns

^"T^i

insm

(21)

nri? ix: xSi *'''ini? ^n^^n "lEni "i^rna p-roi^i (22)

ynr
n^n':x x:s "rasn

njini

]^n)2 '"p^noxi
'V'

(23)

xinn

x^-'b-^bS

n-ib'

"iS:nxi (24)

1-in^

onnnx b^i5
ssni

f]5 rn

lir rp6ni

'Iri

xrri
nn:\)3

^bsi 'xn5"!-c "irn

(25)

sn-ti

pn2^

'iny ]"an tidt 'n^DDTC'cb

^^ni^nn

''ny^ci

n^r.nb

"xrx

jS^'^aNT
n'^b'-'n

(26)

nn biD^si
(27)

(insi

'>ri5

''^jin^rx

""^j"'!^

pns^ linb

'n-cxi

flri

x^r'i'G '^nin

^ni?

x:">Tn

^'xmia

'^'^in'axi

(28)

"f^^

n^p nn:i

"|d^5t

x:r5

xn':-'-. ^ Bom. xrb-in. Bom. xis'a. d Bom. ~ T Bom. x"-";;. / A, B, C '-rh^, Bom. "^"^nix. The Sewa compositum given by is irregular in the Spl. vocal"-r.'N would be the best reading. ization; g Bom. n^"'^. n'a">nn. ""^nix. k Bom. ipx:. / C h A, B, C --n'x, Bom. riE-;- and ais-'b'i. m Bom. p''^^ i A, B (more correctly) ^ Bom. !!<"';n. j5 ^'^:r5<-. ^, C (more correctly) p-bo'i. / Bom. -nzx. ^ Bom. "7"?:. r Bom. -:""i-:is:. j Bom. ^ix, ^4 irs. wxns^n. .r A r"-c\ ?/ Bom. / Bom. n^Dsd^. y Bom. "^n'.^an-^p, A, B '"'rhz'rrco, and the word is thus quoted in Gen. Rabb. c 64 9 (in Wilna Edition), z Bom. ~rX.". aa Bom. nr. //^Z Bom. ^"i^x.^ ^^ Bom. '\^rrr^. cc Bom. 7=r'b'3. hh Bom. Bom. x^nr. Bom. irn. ^^ Bom. ""J^'c?. ff
rt!

Bom.
e

<;

-;

T T

sippiTN.

-|-.n

^'<f

c'Prr-

Bom.

xrrn^x.

K)2y\ ^iip'^iiii
if.'i'>

85
NTD^3

K:"ci'

i<^b

^-^arr ex (29)

^ns-^rtn ^ibSxi ^s^^ncia ^in'5 '^inrn

(30)
(31)

'prnin ''ninxS

-13^

nis^^pi

xnsin

n^-'-^p^i

n^'5"

is-^in^

pns^ ^^27 'inxT snnn

XT2i-'5

nnnn (32)

y5c

-IS2

xn-ipi ''n^r

)^5

by

Pnymr nr^ xnpn

(33)

n-'inn^ n^

xrrx

n^o:i riir "ivnix nn nry nini

"jibx

ns<rn
'npn-ii pn:^

na r'aon
'friinTaT

r'-'i

(34) nicrn iis5 P2

-i^-i:!:

by

pncia nx^rn (35)

CHAPTER XXXI.
TV npy^ "n^5:
']''n^s<i
x^-'od:

pb
n"-*

'"^-z

^a:rs

r.^^

yrci

(i)

rbxn
T^'^'Hv

bS

:p ^'NsiaNbiiai ""x'lnsbi bS

'jirr-'b"

sni pb"

^iis

nao

n"-'

^pr^

XTm

(2)

"^riiia^pTii

"'brrxrr

d Bom. ^iv. g C "vc'i. //

Bom. "iip-iTrx. c Bom. x:-'::""'!, j5 x:irn. Bom. x^rr-c, C x^rrii. / Bom. VjIwX'. j5 n^5 instead of "^n-nS-r -1I5, Bom. "'ronss. / Bom. -i^rribri, B vrnbr-. i?tx'. k Bom. / Bom. "rs". VI Bom. pD^r. !nsn">n. n-ixi. n Bom. ^ Bom. p Bom. nri'i:
^
e

a Bom. ni^-p.

(and not as B. nrri).

Cf.

This

is

likewise the Bib.

/-

Aram. form.

Bom. "i;?"'';''. s Bom. nprnn-i (and not as B. np^-;'). So also B t A Bom. i^'^'ca. i-a-'-ab' (which is better than D). .v Bom. u Bom. =d;. N2!i:xb-^"!. z Bom. Tiri:rV?, C (text) y Bom. N:i::i<^ ^-yv^. 'i'":r-'5. On the margin ^"^^^;"'. <7<z Bom. ^?'::rs-;:=, C "V-cr.v;:
Daniel
4,

13.

q Bom.

N"2'r.

(which

is

better than D).


'^innS-bi

86

:ipy^^
"^X^

"irnSi?

''^^niiS

nin

^nrsi

(3)

1ij'c5 in^''^ ^^ri^i

^n^'ir nib' ^sSpn5
ns^'bi

bnn5 s^pi
'"^in

npS-"^

nSiri

(4)
(5)

'i^x '')i3inx ^EN nno n^ s:x

''-jin^

-"n^xi

'^"iirinx

r,'^

Pn^ii'^E ^'jifi

b55

iSi?

pnyi^

"]''rxT

(6)
(7)

sn
53

-j^i^T

"nci? inr^s

n^i ''iirsi

^i 'npiij '']iDTn^T

^'p'l'i^i

"jn^x
^n.'^s

^ro

"i'ln^tt:

'''n'cx

nin
'j^id

"j^iS

ns

(8)

bS

p'l'i^i

vp

-j^bir^n

Tci?

nin
''''

est

"ji-ii^:

x:y

V5

inii ^'"(iDiniJi Kn^i?5

n'^Epn
i?:^

jia

"^X"^

"ffi^nssi

(9)

'^''n^mi

'ri"

"i?^n'^ni<i iii-n nini

(10)

N-.xn

"nrxi 3pyi
N^^Tr^r,

'^''i{r5nn

''X'^-

xrsbr

^b

"nrxi (11)

^^pbcT

bS ""^im """'[ir ]r5 qipT ''tgsi (12)

Bom. x"iN^. ^ Bom. "irnix. d Bom. T;-; ITTT^ Bom. "'n-'V / Bom. x^^pn. ^^ Bom. 'rry^. h Bom. ""''""r-t''"1"^ (B. -pn?). z Bom. "^"r. k Bom. -rsi^x, fpinnx. / B xni. lirxi. w Bom. which is the best reading. }i Bom. Bom. "r^ti"- / Bom. "irts. ^ Bom. -z^sx (B. 'i'^='ax). r Bom. =!ax:i (B. "r=x'). s Bom. ^irir, / Bom. '^JTrxi, u B "yt's. (the best reading would be X Bom. T^x. j; Bom. of t<'J^"2 "-s, Bom. reads art: Instead z Bom. C"'-SN\ 'P?"!). Ni" n-^. ^/5 Bom. irnxi. Bom. r^tri\ a B. x-snTxi. ee Bom. X"^'^nr, Bom. x^TiJ"". ^ 1i^?'?1j ^ "P'6^. ^^ yT" ///^ Bom. ""^lis^ Bom. X's'rna. // Bom. a Bom, i^axi. J^''^"!'^?*". mm A, C ":" and yTV. tin Bom. "^Tni. ^t? Bom.
<z

Bom.

"T2N1. --:-

"I'l:"'''",

<?

l"]''^"^'!

afaf'

"pSn bS
n"i

S7

"irnp ^'^y "^ns ""i^niiti loin's: -j^Sijn x:r br

^xrn'^-i bs "n-^ia
Ni-^.s ]-c

-|br ^ ^r.-'br.rsT
D^^-'p

'snbs x:x (13)

'"xr^c^'^pi

'pns Dip

"1^5

irn '^^p

x^p

irr

'irnnb^ yiNb n^ri ''s^n

x:d ]y5 ^iTn r^b' "snrxi nsb'i bnn "'rn%^xi

(14)

^s

'b5i<T

xb-zl

"^^s n-'b'

'xin^rrnx

'-jsn^-:

ifiir\

(15)
bS^-a

n;edd n^
'x;b'i

^srnx

ir

-^V

"r^nDST
-^"o

"s^^.ny

bS

^is (16)
^^x:;i-i=i

-r2y lb
s^-'b^a:

^^n^si bS pT\
bi;:i

xin

b^ ^nhnf: ^S^ ^nn:3 n^

2plr
Tr<

=p

(17)

^nin'^i s<:pi

n^rrp bS
pr\2^

n^=i

"^nin-'ij bS
'''^s-ix

nnT. (18)
alp-i

si^nxb' ^rnni?

mb'

^-^'cb

ps^
b'ri?

n^r:pi

ri^

bnn

^^rn^cDT

'^n-'-y

rp

"n-cb'

pb=i

(19)

vs

rpb ^^lin sbi b^

nsrnx pb

"

)^ np-j=^

-^dSi

(20)

sin bvx

Bom. 1:^'; '". c Bom. 5<~';i<. ^/ Bom. / Bom. s<r;rr^ "-. ^^ B inserts "-inp C reads before x-cp. Bom. nP"2"'"P "'!. / Bom. pis. h "in N-rx instead of s-in x-x. m Bom. / Bom. ~r"n"-:. r='rx\ The correct form is rsTx:, n Bom. Ni";r5<", A srcnx". "i-irn. Bom. j<:^=s. s:-*:x\ ^/ ^ Bom. p Bom. /xrrrrr-s. t Bom. s Bom. Bom. "r^"^:, B 7x^2:2.
<?

Bom.

"rn-:!?!!.

rrb^rrii-}.

r^i:.

/C-

b=x\
y

7/

Bom.
s

x~r5.

.v

-^V-t which

is

preferable,

Bom. aa Bom. x::-;\ /;^ Bom. n:^-"-. "?^ </</ Bom. =-x. ee Bom. w^sr. cc Bom. rr^rv.. ^" Bom. n:;:r. ^a Bom. rvp"- /'^' Bom. x:"X2 17. // Bom. "5:\ -^n. y^>^ Bom.
xi'nx^.
"'"!

""i^i

88
^r^'^ii

bSi

'^nns

tv

""-layi

Dpi

sin

'""stsi

(21)

npy^ bis ^ns nsn-ibn s^ii5 pS'i ^ninnsi (22)

^symrT^n^
's^cbnn

iriinnS qini n^'ay ^riins tv nn'ii

(23)

ns^ns pi nib

il"!

(ni)p

]Ta

"raiic

snsi (24)
n-asi
s'-ibibi

ni:^

npi?"^

=y b^brn s^bi ^b ''nrnox

ons npy-i
n^

n'^b'

n^:5TS^

n"-'

npy"^

p5
n"^

'"piiisi

(25)

";yb5i snitjn ""^ninx

'i-im pbi sni-jn

(26)
n'^

^i^

'^sr^oSi

Psriny

"sti

npy^b

pb "i^si
^^fzz

"inn
lb

'iSniijD

'^211

'rriin sbi

"liTi

^snx5i
''lib

br-ab

''srn'a-j

s^b (27)

^^p"i:ini

'i^Einn '^'^jrinTUnni
\'^:nbi

" siinn

^^)\^ '"''^nnbEi

^^snb^sDS

p5

sp':b' ^^^inpiTi: sbi

(28)

^^inyrb"

"snbsi ^''.wi
a Bom.
r-isn
1:1X1.

"jiDry
(^

"iiy^b" ^i^i sb^^ n^s (29)

rr^^ ^1. Bom. Bom. x^aa, C
^r

Bom.
<?

n?^;^,.

xnni r^
I'lnrxp"'?"iJ<".

which

is

better.

xnVoi.
/^

/
/

would be a
?

better
/>
V
:

reading.

B. xrad.

Bom.
rrr.

Bom.

N^ls-ina.
T
:

The

correct text should be "i^nox.

1-rx.

Bom.

'^ninx.

n Bom.

"i^x\

Bom.

Bom. / Bom.

mar.
i-

^ Bom.
"irja

xr-'ori.

r Bom.

5<n-ni!i,

m^^^,

ninn\

(B. TJ^), j5 "^nja. Bom. / Bom. !n:]2ds, ^ ^""^^rThe best reading would be ivi3Ti;5. u Bom. N^nr. x Bom. xm^-j, v4 xm^c-jN. y Bom. Nr,"^o:i, 2 ^,'i? n-iin. The best reading would perhaps be xp-'in. Bom. "^^1^1^^ A, B "]>nb6K\ Bom. adds *|is before Niina. C has the same word here
<7(3:

/^Z"

whilst

and

D
p.

insert

it

on the margin.

Vide Barth

in

ZDMG. XXX,
ee

Bom.

'i-'"r=^%
"i?<':l?.

hh Bom.
xnbxi (B.

dd Bom. ina^ra. ^ 'r"!r==''""'i^T-^"^gg Bom, Xv^?cx. ff /^/& Bom. 'J"3. // Bom. ?V Bom. "i?"?^.
190.
cc

Bom.

x^nnz.

x^J^xi),

^; B,

sri?x\

89

en
17
-rs:
2-jt: np?-'

113X

rr^i^ ''sni-'^n

xiian

"^nx

^xrblx bra

(30)

'nin-as ins 'n-'^ini 'nx

'li'i

^nrxT npj^
^i^i
^

'n\^x-,

(31)

ir:5 n^ ''oirr srbi

^

XDns D-p

Qi^pn^

S5 ""inim n^ 'noirr^ irs (32)

s-rir-ani

nsbi xzzirrni
by=i

np5?''iT

x:5Trrn

nsb'i j<:5ti;^^ ps:i

xlrrrn pS bii (33) nzrx xbi sr^nb )^rnr->

brill

sra'rn S'j^ii'n

'

iirns^ir^

nHib^

r^ "nn^c: bnni
"t"'c^i

(34)

nzTTs

sn
-^b

s;5Tr^ b5 n^

pb

i^n^by 'na^n'^^

S5 ins '^ibi iri?5 '^pn^ N5

sSi

bni

^^r:

^sn^asb "n^iiri (^^) nnis ins i^ip --6 ^^uf.^i "^biD-'s

s^^:^b2 ni

nscs
pbb

"irsi npyi

'^^

n^rsi

pba

si-:t

npr-^r

"qipm
linn

(36)
^^s-2

^'''nrn snsin ins ^^linno

sr

flf

i^ has X"-:-z 13

-.-^n

in

the text, but margin as above.

as above. c Bom. nbix. Bom. "^p"'""^. / Bom. -"^rx:. or Bom. "^rX:. e /> Bom. o^:r. /^ Bom. n-'b^nn. / Bom. "--ex. / Bom. 't rrcn. -;-;nn. ?// Bom. n Bom. c^pr-^. Bom. nr. Bom. n^ic?. / Bom. i'H": (B. v-fi)q Bom. "iirrir-c:. J Bom. "'iST'^'ip':, B ,'"'3''r"'Tr^. Bom. ri^ir"i-. u B "!:. .V Bom. rTzx". (?</ Bom. y Bom. xn^^xb. z Bom. ~'ipr\ b!i:"^x, ^ b':x. ^^^ Bom. =p^-2b, rf Bom. adds xt;?,-! after ri-^pr!!. dd Bom. -T^". ^v Bom. n^wXX ff Bom. n-. ^^ Bom. ^:r:~io (B. ':n-^o). /;// C "i^r^z.

Text

h-oir.

x-^b-i.

Margin

^ Bom.

xrn-:~.

t?

;-

/*

90

b^nx

s9 frin ^I'^nn f^y

s:i<

"j^b

iincr

fiT

(38)

"'i^ "'iiih^'a

'i^'^-^r^Tr

n^ni ^S

''V.^ri^i? s<S

'i^n^Dni

(39)

s-'b^'in

n^n6:i si^r^i "n^ni::

'':'::2^

nS ^y5 rx

''Sy ''ninj

xi-^Srii

''5ni"6

i/i-am iri'in (40)

''nzTr 'ni:i
^5
x-'b'i^i'i

i-'ii?^

^^ci"

rnnx ''nrnSs

"ir-iSn

i-^iir

"-i^ncy

f-i

(41)

zrnnxT

n^ri'rx

S3xi

'"''n^n'is

""^-iTS

xSib^^x

(42)

"^:a ii^:m ''"^nrn sn:n npy^i "ni2XT

pb

'"''n'^rsi

(43)

Bom.

B^^'p.
is

Bom.

'"5

(B. Vr).
e

<:

Bom.

n^.

"r which

preferable here.

"E'r.

Bom. Bom. "n^N

<y

i Bom. x-i-r, ^ niinn, Bom. -'::'^r-^. h Bom. r-b=x. /& Bom. "niri^x. The best punctuation would be ^r^n^ix. / The correct punctuation is x^Jir. w Bom. n:^:'?^ (B. -p x":^), A xs-'S-a 70, ^ ss^D'b 'co. ji Bom. n-m-j:. ^ Bom. ^:b:x. p Bom. N^ni:;: (but xa-^-:: better), q Bom. nin: (B. ht::). ^, / Bom. T3ir. s Bom. m:!i. r Bom, "^v. ^, C rr: rn:. Born. 7"D^' (B. ?"?&"). .v Bom. "r'r'-?. // 7 Bom. TP'iJ]. aa Bom. -('E-bib-x. Z'^ Bom. M"^DbN. Bom. z Bom. xr-ri'Ni. 5-r;-i-% rt"^ Bom. Ir:'??. ^<? ^4 'ir"^"^, C ip-^. _;^ Bom. "?~riVr, C "^rrn^-i; which is better, gg Bom. njfb (B. r:x^b). //// Bom. -T?" but -TXT would lie a better punctuation than that
<:<:

given by the Mss.

//

ii

Bom.

"'CN^

kk Bom. "ri2

(B. TJ^).

Bom.

"-ra.

91

-;^nc'5

''in^i

nsi

s:s '2^p

"Tn:

''sr^x

"iJDi

(44)

iriJT

Sri

s^p ""HEpn s:ns 2pzn

j-'-nx

'n^c:i

(45)

in^cn "i^ins rjip5 ^riinsS

''snn:\T

np^'^
""ibSsi

"nrsi (46)
''sni^i

by irn

Pinsn

ni'5

snp

npi?"^T

srn^iniij

nr

)S

n^5

snpi

(47)

N'ci''

"ir5i

"y:"*!:

Trie

j'^^n

*sni:\T
""Ti'b?

'irsi (48) n^"c snp i"'5 by

pS

"jit

'nis*

fi'^iii

sri

'^'^t

snr'^r: ^"^c^i

"n^si

^'sniDoi (49) ninnnti na: ^''^bBc:

in:3

by

1^;

ncn csi
sjiii
'p->r\

'^''inDn
""Iri

n"-'

"''yn

ss (50)
rr^b'

^3131

T^nc
'sni.-;T

sn'ci'a lin si'ay ''^iris

"sr^p sni
sS

sn

npy'^b

)2^ 'tcst

(51)

T-'iT
'"''nays
s:sc

sri

^^r,'i'j2"'psT

3s "snrp sinoi

;''^n 'sni:\i i^rio

(52)

a Bom. X3r\

A
rrz.

"^Ti-,

-^tr.

^/

Bom. "''Jr, Bom. ^s"'-!, B

<^
/C'

yi
^"i.

"^rr,

"^.t:

<?

Bom.

"":::'-";.

Bom. "^n / Bom.

/i x^^^; is a better vocalg Bom. "i^i"':^? (B. pn'^s::!?). / Bom. c'^p. Bom, "^ni'i. / Bom. n^D:i. ; Bom. nsjrn. ;/ Bom. "irs-.. B "p^x. / Bom. ^^3r^ ^ Bom. X"!t5"i. r Bom. ibrxi. j Bom. I'sx', B has r.i? before ",;. ^' xt'^n. t Bom. x-nsn. /^ x Bom. "lyb:, ^ nrs:. y Bom. Nr!i33";. s Bom. t?x ^/a Bom. "C"; (B. "C"^ which is perhaps the best vocalization), C "p"''', B ~D1^ bb Bom. "rtr"-The best punctuation is 'crn->:. cc B "'iyr. ^V Bom. "r:3 "" -:"'X. (B. T^s). Bom. ff Bom. x~^i^. gg Bom. n^'iT? The vocalization should be r'^-pxn. hh Bom. ~"::'X,

ization.

"^"i.

<-,f

-:J-x.

92

sin "sniBp
trn
I'^in

^tiiib"

^N:r5 ^]iri- Sth-t "n^inSsi onnnsi '^n^nSs (53)

b5"'^5

^riinsS

s^npT

snrjn i^roD:

npi?"^

"oddt

(54)

""T^ai n^rrnbi ^niDnS "^p^irDT snsrn

pS

n^i-piii

(55)

CHAPTER
^'D^iip

XLI.
qio'a

s?ni

"nin

ii'j^i\

i^iir

"i^rnn

nini (i)
Sinn:

by

'""'"inrb

piE"ir

""^pin ^^yar "ipbo sin!

sni

(2)

Jinn"]

"i^a

^^iin^nnS "sp^bo
]inbnpb
"s^^pi

f^sins

pin

ynir 5(ni

(3)
-jir^n

by

s^niini

i65

^"in^om

I'tmab

a Bom. NiJiJ-i. C "i3i-n. ^ Bom. xnrp. d Bom. n%ib!<. " T T Bom. ""^n^x';, C 'n^rii^^. f Bom. "lin:"! (B. ^"in:), A VT^T'..' y4 x:3i:. y^ i Bom. linnsx-. i Bom. ^n?N. g O Bom. 7Dn\ T/ Bom. b-n-i-is. tn Bom. "^n-ax. Bom. 0"^=?^ B D'^ir. Bom. 'n'f^x?. / Bom. ^^N^ q Bom. p"'^23?% ^ Bom. ""'"iri. -r". / Bom. b.Txi. J Bom. 'itir^ ic Bom. .r Bom. c-'lsr, Bom. cix;?. aa Bom. rrr. ^ Bom. (P^o. ^, C cpn, (-^ Bom. "^'.ripb. Z-^ Bom. -p-jir. <f^ Bom, ^^ Bom. xinxa. |-:nr:''x, A "p^'^tjX, -5 -pr^nN, C-r:'nn:x. The punctuation should be i-:'nr;i<. ff Bom. ip^G which is correct, gg Bom. "pni^ns U It should /;/? Bom. l^-'tpn.' (B. ""^cni), (B. has -fn^i-rs).
^J:

T'T

V.

'

v:

..

<?

jj;

be x^pn.

93

^s^2p5 ^p'56

']-'';mr

raw sn^ n^r:P

rpS
n^
]V:53c

"3""3m

i^qt
xni

(5)

'"in^s

n^"ip

'lE^pOT

^^t^

(6)

Nr^-^UD

s^^Smr

yao

xn^pS

s-53Tij

xySni (7)

Pxiabn xni ni^iE n'TN- sr^b^T

b3 n^

xnpi

n^iiji

n^ri^n '^sn6i2T
^xr.'a''in

x-^Ei-n

n-ini

(8)

r^

-lin'"?

ni?-iE

''jrncsT

b5

n^i

D^st: ''iTin

s:x ':n"iD n^

"ra'^r^

nirns

d7

'pis

in

^b-'bri

(9)

(^1
r-^a
'"'n-ii:T23

KriT""

1216
nn

tp

nn-i

miny by

^^T':in

nyns (10)
'p.^

"''cirn: n^ n^T

s^'';ii:p

;ncs5 nn? xini n:x in x^^v^^ p^Tsbn '^'^x-iabm (11)

N-^Sn
s^ti'jp

Pn-iTcbn

nnb Nin^" "iini" "'b'ly

laii

x-^r

""jfrT
n^b' ^^

(12)

nCD

Pn^TcbriD

^""N^^bn n^ s:5 tost

sryrirsi

^ Bom. vr^s-n (B. V-"'-"^). ^ Bom. ari'-sz^ y" Bom. x's^iy. Bom. obnv g Bom. lirbD. >^ Bom. N^:;^2. z Bom. nr. A i-bts. / Bom. E^pii^si (B. jET"'^'^). / Bom. in-:^ (B. |n-::j). n B. rn^-ra. C -.yrx\ / Bom. wX^^n and usually S. C xrbn and

a Bom. Nb:x-,
lynxn.
<r

d A

/C'

always
r

H.
""J~n.

q
J

NE-ii^ sr^^in
is

would

be

better

vocalization.
/

Bom.

the correct punctuation.

Bom

x Bom. nrsn ^ -irsn. y Bom. b-5-:n ^ Bom. -:n-i!iD (B. 'rn-TC). ,7,7 Bom. n-. Bom. r-jr:r. ^f Bom. 'TPns (B. "'^Wp?). xj'^'bn^ ^Vz' Bom. ee Bom. ^ri. (B. "irr"). Bom. Nrrr^x*. /f Bom. ns-r:*, ^ "x-ns;. /^/^ Bom. i<;":bn but is very inconsistent; thus in verse X":bT and i^^'>?^f^ and in verse 12 n'^pbns.
yrrs-.
u

iT^ibn.

/^(^


br ^n\-S
'n^

94
iizi

s?^5

nin

']'>'i

^nt^DT

nini

(13)

n^5

]-Q

'^^ninr.nsi

cioi^

n^

xnpi

nyns

nSioi

(14)

n^'i"

n'lb"

^TCEi

'^n'''a';n

x^bn

t\cS^'5

nins

n^ici

(15)

"'"i^nbic

^ri^Dn

)-q

xb 'i^i'ab nyns n^ poi^ ^n'lnxi (16)

ni^nsi ""N^b^ 'inr,^
"iX"^

(Di)p

by

Qij^p

x:sn

^'abna

jicr

oy

ni?ns

"b^bri

(17)

jn^Eri nc5 "i^^DE

pin

:>3Ty "ipbc

xnn:

'jii

xni (18)
fiJni
I'tnrb

sinsn
"S^cn "i^n^nnd

"^spbo ''pnni?
i?b

pin

s^aia

srn (19)
'i"iii

iyns bSn ]inniDT ^n^'tn

non pioni sinb 'im^b

iTC^nb D^nsiai

snnnn

5>5r

n^ snw^ii

sn5''6n

snnin sbDsi (20) ^smsius 'sn'^'aip

'sbyn (21)

"pn^i-)2b

i?by

"ini?

yi^ni?

sbi

"^jin^y^b

a Bom,

^is-ii.
.

<5

Bom.

n^rN. ^
.

would be
^"rs>i
/^

a'^PN.
n'is!i).

<:

(B.

Bom. / Bom.

"inrjnnxi.
"nrB'2!i,

The best vocalization ^ Bom. rraibn. e Bom.

"lasn'i.

B.

nin;^.

/C'

Bom. -T5<% Bom. "r'"'^. Bom. 2n"in\

of
"J.
v.

should expect / Bom. "i'9''^b. The best vocalization would be 'pn'sx. For an m Bom. x-^b^-n:;. ;^ Bom. b'^b-cii.
niri<i.
<?

We

explanation
s. V.

this

word

cf.

"Aruh.

of Nalan
of

b.

Jehiel".

^ For the correct

verse 3.
s

vocalization
'f^i^n^,

these

two

words
^~^r~R.
<B.
T

"ri^ns,

B
f

-fDnnix.
z/

Bom.

Bom.
.T

Nr-i-i-jB.

Bom.
(B.

5<55!_\

-(-n'-rb).

:'-

Bom.

p^'Hrti

'iin'^m^!)).

Bom. )\]'^".'c)) Bom. n?

_>/


'nn
''x"-':p5

95

< f

"ipc

'']"^'t:3i:"

vzz snn ^rbnn 'nnrn (22)

.

^)rim Dinp

'iD-'pr

''fp':

^li-:

]'^'i2'C

7r sni (23)
sr'raT

'si^at:

vr'i2'c:

rr

xr^p's

ar'i^ij
n'^b'-,

(24)
""

^b ''in'o':
''X'^T

"x-'Trnnb

r'^nTzsi

n^ s^n in niriDi STcbn

ni7"iEb qci'' n:csi

(25)

ni-nsb
x^'':3'ir

11

n ''-inra ^T^rp
r'5r

yncT

'-i-iis

s-iir

yr xnni: xnnin
'I'^is

(26)

xin in s6bn
"iin-i^nn

s^:r rr sr5-3
ySiCT
I'^ix

'spbo-^ srir^DT xr^-'cn xrnin

jE-'piri

(27)

"pni
iny^b

Di-p

xr^pb

x^'bmrj

yniri

'x^^-c
"^it

rnc

x:s5
'Tri' iVi

y5r

^nins
xrzc

ai'

''n^b^b^T

xr^ri xin (28)

xinx

b55

xni

f-rx

x^tr

yniij

xn

(29)

b5

'TTinr

jirT'^rn

x:sr

"iiTr

y^c

'''"

)i)2ip"'i

(30)
'^"^xi:3c

"xy-ixi xry n^ x:23

'^i:'>ii'^

c^'^s^'O'^

x^-ixn

xinn x:e5 Dip

"jii

xynx5 "xirno

yi=^ni

xbn

(31)

xinb xin ^^B^pn 11 X ] :ppn ^ix rS ir in^i

Bom. r'^tn". ^ Bom. Bom. I"'^'^. c Bom. );r^o. e Bom. n". Bom. ",:":":. ^ Bom. y.*?. /i Bom. "rrp?. / /' Bom. ,S"'~w\ z Bom. ir-iu (B. "i""?^). ' Bom. / .^ !^~~'-?N^r-r?. -r:s"i. Bom. Bom. / .-^ -,'^rv. q Bom. ^''"t?-''' Bom. y:"^N so i? and C p^-iss"2'tJ See verse 3. Bom. r'^V'"^ / Bom. V?"^" Bom. 'r.T>'.}' ^ inserts n^ before ^y-. aa Bom. rrx. ^i!^ A ni?-S3 z B n^rr. (omitting n;i). dd Bom. a- Bom. *,n':!ipi'; (]^. T^ip"'"), C '{z-^'-'.
<7
/;

N-:p?3.

-'^

"^"i-

Nvrr.

dv

(text)
^^r

sr-x

"^-'t

but margin as above n:-nt

(B.
ciT^i')-

s-:r.

ff Bom.

NV2-r.

Bom.

r-ipr,

^rpn
'^.N

96

si^bn ^''niJT byi

'ini'ai
'>

T'i^T

^rnn

ni""iE5
'<;i

(32)
its

Vp'^ny^i

(nn)p

siaSns

r^ "^nri xrnx b^ i^zr^nr

^:"c^i

nins

^-r^ar'^

(34)

'"'bs

iVsT snn6

x^-ir

'niny b5

n"^

''jiTC'iD^i

(35)

s:e5

''ir

yfcb'
x>-ni?i

xirisi

x'ci'b

T:: sniny
jibi

'^'^n^i

(36)

N:sf5

xti^" '^iiric^

D^'^i)2'i

xi?nsn '-^iin-^
lEffii

^rii^n^ b5 ^ryai ni-nc ''i^ya xiaBnD

(37)

'^mni nn:

'j'^iS

"nfir-n

Ti^^nyb

r^b^L

n^ci^i

(38)
irj

n^3

iVi

(d"i)p

nxin:

^Ni b5 n^ ^^^ '>

:s>nTni

in
b^

cici'^b

ni-ns nicsT

(39)
n"'b'

Tni5 wifi^ ^"nbDo

bS
iirp
T^Tc^-a

b^i

ini5

'^^s:?:^

inn rs (40)
nrxi (41)

bS

br

iri

ir^D^i

"lin

cici^b

nine

"nr3

nr.1T

n^^i

bt-iz

"niripri' n-

nins

"^'^^iysi

(42)

^ Bom. "r^xn,
'|ipri,

'insn.

It

should be

:nx=i.

Bom.

f ^n'^n
"^.'n;:.

is

the correct punctuation.

d Bom.

.T'nsy'sVi.

/; Bom. Bom. "i^':^, ^ Bom. n-:-;ri-. (i^w-wi-;. /& Bom. / C -^iz-i: / Bom. N:^-2r. "(raa-^i. ;^ Bom. fn Bom. 'pVsn. o Bom. xn". / Bom. ----. nir--j. r A t":. j Bom. t'C!, ""I, <^ ')""n-a ^ Bom. / -I'li-fc-. Bom. i-:=-r:-, A r=r:-. ;c Bom. nn-i-i. Bom. ",-7. 2 Bom. "'^=^0 (B. irtsiion) B, C fiz^ti'^. y aa A X:"2"^dd A I'l"^!. bb Bom. "nx. ^^ Bom. !:. Bom. n-r;rTr. A rT.-T-pvj, B r-rT^":: (?). ff Bom. .--;.

Bom.

n:;: (B. t??!').

<?<?

97

^^^2X1

''n-^b^i
srnis'

'^xri'-ijn

sf^rnn
*'"':^i

7^^^'^

'"n^r-isi
^^t

(43)
^rii'a-^p

n-nrr^

b3 br rr^r^

NSbrb s5n
ny-iD

sb 11^''^^
'x^'^DiD

S31

nr-i2 k;x qc-'^b

n'^b'r^n

nrsi

(44)
"^Di-i^

br aSnrb

n^i

'']it

"in'^rb n'^i^'

r^ nn5

D^nstti Viink b55

"n-'b" '"I'-'bS '"iny-jri

xnni

tp\'^ ''Di nj^iD

'^tf-c

Kipi (45)
rr^b"

rc^"" pE:i

inxb fixi xnn yns

nn

nlci* n^

nn*!!

n^"^2r^

xynx ^by
pDi''n

j-'bc

K5b nrns

(D'i)p

Dp nS

"j^:

r^^bn

in
"j^

{46)
a^-^s^^

z-^S^rri i5nx
s-^7n5"

b55 nnrn ni-iD (Di)p

^'ic

poi^

psr

'xrnc

rSirn

xyns

'^^n^^T

^Idi

(47)
^"i-iir-iXb

'z^^,^'cr^

xynsi nsTni x^:r

Ninb

:?nr nini" bS

n"^

'cdsi

(48)

n'^35

nn^ ^s{n:^ncn'^ "xrnp bpn i^ay

"ly

i<"-'^np5

xn^nr nn^i
(49)
'"^b^srbii

pcE-T

^36

s^^^ xbnr

s^^^sr rci'^ ir^sT

fvc.
n-ib'
">ns5

snw

''\^bj

xb

ny

ii:5

i^nr

""^i^-ib-nN

qDi-ibi

50)
s<:r'='

j^Mi

xnn

y'^.E ""tiis

n5

rTics n^b' "n'^'^b'i-:

Bom. x:-:-c. Bom. ^"'x\ c Bom. N:":r. d Bom. "3^!!. f Bom. / ">" would be a better vocalization. ? A n'^"i\ // Bom. "p-^T. ,^ Should it be c''iJ? i Bom. s-OJit). / Bom, l'^^:?'?" (B. j-^'cii'T). Cf. Winer: De Onkeloso eiusque Paraphrasi Chaldaica: Leipzig 1S20. p. 28. i Bom. "3?.
<7
/;
T

TT

tT5

'"i.

//

Instead of
is

rr^b

'{h'j,

-f-^-j-si

s-::5,

simply has rirs rlss

Bom. ir:sb. p A has b:^ instead of br. r/ Bom. "''"T / Bom. srsr. s Bom. r-:i^5<b. / C -rl:-. u Bom. xr-p 'i. .v Bom. xn:nro2 "^n. v Bom. pes "in. /^^ Bom. rov. <7a C 'n-b-^rx. s Bom. "':'3":b. cc Bom. rri-'b "i.
which
perhaps preferable.
G

lip

98

rr^

^i:^r:N

""nx

nic:^

xnoi di

qoi''

x^pi (51)

^ynxn

"^V

'iTTEx 'Sic '^d^^bs*

xnp

'^XD'^sn

qi

n'^-'i

(52)

n^ni^i Njnxa nsini xrao

qoii ^-i-asi 55^5 ^n^^S
iiztiD

'';iij

yniij x^''5TrT

(s^,)

^:t

y^w

^nx^-iiai

(54)

xrnS nin n^ns^n

ni?iE (ai)p
"ntt'i^n qoi''

^5y^i?

bSni

xn^ns bin k;bd ninn

s^y

(55) nib ib^rs 'isna^ bSb nyns -irsn ''s^nbb

'nnsi n^na^i iyns bS ^rc^sDi

bS

tr>

t\bi^

nnsi x^ns

ids bS by nin s:&di (56)

'^'j-inn

syisn

s':s5

q^^pni 'a^nsrib

xniiy p-jinsi "s^^nsix

jTD

sSiny pT^b D^na^b 'ins K^ns

'^n'^^'i

bSi

(57)

s^ns? bSn 5c:b5 "ci^n "^^x :|6ii

a Bom.

^
/;
?/^

D-'-iEx.

Bom. Bom. / Bom. s Bom.

^ ii^ffl3i<. d Bom. "i^^:?, ^ iB^s'. c A xri-^ar. Bom. xy-xa. / Bom. nsi-nij^ s: Bom. "i^x "n. rrE=\ / Bom. nis'-. i ^, C s-anb" b:-. / ^ D'i-i:i-3. - T T Tc^:^'^-!. ft Bom. "inarn (B. "^"las'ri). Bom. s<:;l:jix. [ina ^-n. ^ Bom. n';n-4^b (B. ^xnu-cb). ^ Bom. 'par.. '^^^!i. >irix. / Bom. // Bom. ;qT^.
i:'i-iJ2X,

ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA,
An
Page
italic

number

signifies

that the

line

is

counted from

the bottom of the page upwards.

3,
6,

line 5.

Cf. Zunz,

1.

c.

p.

132.

ult.

Pro he lege

the.
1.

8,

7.

Cf. Seligsohn.

c.

p.

20.

13; 13,
1

;;

17.
1'.

Pro devise lege device.

Pro
Cf.
S.

lege S.
in

5;

3-

Diwan of Jehudah Hallevi; No. 65

(it
"i";x"')

Luzzatto's Edition where tcsi

should

be
15,

is

rimed with
"''snp.

n-sh.

,,

6. 4.

Pro '5np lege

Cf.

16,

Friedlander.

'^A third system of

sym-

bols for the

Hebrew vowels and

accents".

(Jewish Quarterly Review VII, 27. p. 567),

\6,

2.
2.

Pro exemples lege examples.

19,

Pro "'JPwT lege

Cf.
nT3-ir"^

]'^-3ir^.

21,

6.

bibx

(Jeremiah

14,

14)

and

T;-ri7J

(Jeremiah 15, 11).

26,

2.
7.

Pro XTj-cn lege xtj^d5,

Cf. Cf.

32,

Aboth de R. Nathan.
Rasi
a.
1.

Ch. 34.

37,

12.
9.

46,
47, 47,
48,

c^:P lege D^;p.

^^6' lege
Cf. Earth
-"nci.

,,15.
2.

in

ZDMG. XXX,

p.

193.

,,

2.
4.

Pro
Cf.

'Sy:j

lege -Vr.
7 in

50,

Midras Genesis Rabba ch. 42.

Wilna Edition.

Page 50,

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY

Los Augeles

This book

is

DUE on the last date stamped below.

^
^PR

U)-6K

OCT
1 1^^^

OCT

Porm L9-75ni-7,'61(C1437s4j444

Printed by

W.

Drugulin, Leipzig (Germany).

^006

377 372 5
BS 709. I4

B2^t
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY

AA 000

621 573

Unive
Soi
Lii