Full text of "Outlines of introduction to the Hebrew Bible"

PRINCIPAL

.. TAYLOR
COLLECTION

1951

OUTLINES OF INTRODUCTION
TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

OUTLINES

INTRODUCTION TO
THE HEBREW BIBLE

ALFRED S; GEDEN, M.A., D.D.

TUTOR IN HEBREW AND BIBLICAL LITERATURE

AT THE
WESLEVAN COLLEGE, RICHMOND

is. s.si

EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET

909

Printed by
MORRISON & GIBB LIMITED

FOR
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.

LONDON : SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED.
NEW YORK : CHARLES SCRIBNER's SONS.

tljOSE

nig JFtlloin-

Utlj0 toitlj me ftunnrj suctcssibt ircars
Ijairc founir icligljt anti instrurtion

in tljc stu&5 of
Ur SestantEnt ^aip
3 tfE&icatE ifris ook

PREFACE

THE following chapters have formed substantially the
groundwork or basis of a series of lectures introductory
to the study of the Old Testament, which for several
years past have been delivered at the Wesleyan College,
Bichmond. I have ventured to dedicate them accord-
ingly to niy fellow-students, past and present, to some
of whom, I would fain trust, the memory of studies
pursued in common may prove as pleasant as it has
often been to me. It has been my aim throughout
rather to stimulate and suggest, than ex cathedrd
to instruct ; and I have been led to publish in the
hope that others also, students in a broader field, may
find herein interest and aid. That the lectures make
no pretension to exhaustiveness, on a theme amongst
the most enravelled that the human mind can essay
to resolve, will be patent to all. In every instance,
however, I have sought to indicate lines of profitable or
necessary research, and of set purpose have refrained from
attempting to discuss details or to present and criticise
the varying conclusions and results of many minds. In

viii PREFACE

a study at once so many-sided,, and so absorbing, that
demands exceptionally well-balanced qualities of mind
and heart, no help or guidance which those who have
trodden the way beforehand may be able to place
at the disposal of those who come after may justifiably
be withheld.

It is not every type of mind that finds attraction
in the teaching and thought of the Old Testament ;
while to some its form is difficult or even repellent.
By others, again, the importance of the New Testament
is so vividly realised, that the tendency to depreciate
by comparison the Old is almost welcomed, and its
present interest and significance is made of little account.
If, however, half a century ago it was upon the New
Testament that attention was concentrated, and upon
its genuineness and authority attack was directed by
those who desired the overthrow of Christian doctrine
and influence, the position is altogether altered to-day.
It is the dignity and authority, the credibility and
claims of the Old Testament that are debated most
keenly, and most confidently called in question. And
it is vain for the Christian Church to suppose that
she can surrender her heritage in the Old, and yet
maintain unimpaired the validity of the doctrines, and
the power of the truth which she finds in the New.
Upon the former the latter is founded and established ;
from the New to the Old there lies a constant appeal,
as to its Master and authoritative source. And if the
New is the crown and completion of the Old, the
Old is no less the basis and underwork of the New.

PREFACE ix

The weakening or destruction of the one involves the
ultimate downfall of the other. The two, indeed, are
not two ; but indissolubly one. The New Testament
will share in any discredit cast upon the Old, and will
follow it to a fall ; while the strength of the Old will
be a fresh bulwark and permanent support of the New.
There are signs as I cannot but think that the return
of the tide has already set in, and that the next quarter
of a century will witness a significant rehabilitation
of the rights and authority of the books of the Old
Testament, as religious and historical records second
to none.

It will be seen that the writer holds a conservative
position with regard to modern controversies on the
authorship of the Pentateuch, and the books of the
Old Testament in general. My aim, however, through-
out has been to the best of my ability to state facts,
not to formulate or discuss theories ; and to furnish
references to the best and most accessible literature
where the various branches of a complex subject may
be further studied under the most competent guidance.
Only in the last chapter, as the necessities of the
case seemed to demand, have I departed from this
rule, and have endeavoured to set forth the hypothesis
which appears to me best calculated to satisfy the
conditions, as far as the limitations of our present
knowledge allow. To maintain " Mosaic authorship "
of the entire Pentateuch literatim et formatim is as
impracticable, and betrays as much lack of appreciation
of the true place and value of the Law, as to deny

x PREFACE

the presence of the spirit of Israel's great Lawgiver, and
the majesty and permanent worth of his teaching and
thought. On the other hand, the arguments for the
late origin of many of its parts have, I believe, been
overstated, and will be corrected by further study. In
particular, sufficient consideration has not been given to
the difference in character between literature handed
down in the first instance at least by an oral and Eastern
tradition, and what might be expected to be produced
by a Western student or scholar sitting at his desk in
the nineteenth or twentieth century. The spirit and
methods of the two are incommensurable. And the
failure of so much modern criticism has its origin,
in part at least, in inability or unwillingness to dis-
criminate, and to make allowance for a difference of
standpoint as widely separated from our own as the
era at which the author lived. The breath of the
East is over the whole of the Old Testament ; and
sympathy and imagination are as indispensable for
a right interpretation thereof as exact scholarship
or a knowledge of the rules of grammar.

I am indebted to the courtesy of W. L. Nash, Esq.,
F.S.A., for permission to reproduce the facsimile of the
pre-Massoretic Hebrew papyrus, which was published
originally in vol. xxv. (1903) of the Proceedings of
the Society of Biblical Archaeology ; and more especially
to the generosity and kindness of the Officers and
Committee of the British and Foreign Bible Society,
who have allowed me freely to avail myself of the
rich stores of their Library. The greater number of the

PREFACE xi

illustrations are from the latter source ; for the photo-
graphs of the Eabbinic Bible, Complutensian Polyglott,
Copenhagen MS. (p. 90), and all thenceforward to the
end of the book, I am under obligation to them. The
originals of the Pentateuch Roll and the London
Polyglott are in the possession of the Library of the
Wesleyan College, Richmond.

A. S. GEDEN.

RICHMOND, January 1909.

CONTENTS

PAGE

PREFACE vii

CHAP.

I. LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

Origin and Meaning of the term " Hebrew " . . 4
Characteristics of the Language . ... . . 8

Classification of Semitic Languages . . . .10

II. THE TEXT OP THE OLD TESTAMENT

1. The Hebrew Character and Alphabet ; Inscriptions 29

2. Sources and History of the Text ; Manuscripts ;

Editions 46

3. The Massorah and the Massoretes ; Form and

Contents of the Massorah ; Qeri and Kethibh ;
Clausulcr, 85

4. Vowel - Points and Accents ; Babylonian and

Palestinian Systems .105

III. THE HEBREW AND GREEK CANONS OF THE OLD TESTA-

MENT ; CLASSIFICATION AND ARRANGEMENT OF
THE SACRED BOOKS 116

IV. LATER HEBREW LITERATURE ; MIDRASH, MISHNA AND

GEMARA, TALMUD 138

xiii

XIV

CONTENTS

CHAP.

V. THE VERSIONS

PAOK

1. The Targums and Syriac Versions . . 153

2. The Septuagint and other Greek Versions ; Greek

Manuscripts of the Old Testament ; Editions . 165

3. Latin Versions . .217

4. Egyptian Versions . 235

5. Ethiopic Version . 243

6. Arabic Versions . 247

7. Armenian Version . 249

8. Georgian Version . 251

9. Gothic Version 251

VI. THE PENTATEUCH

Literary Criticism 254

Authorship . . 275

History of Criticism . . . 279

" Documents " or Authors . . 284

Analysis of Documentary Sources . . 289

Characteristics of Documents . . . 303

External History of Critical Theories . . 309

Chronology of the Documents . .315

Analogies of Literary Growth . . . 343

Early Environment and Life of Israel . 348

Summary and Conclusions ... , 350

ILLUSTRATIONS

HEBREW ROLL OF THE PENTATEUCH, Ex. XL. 18-

LEV. in. 2 Facing p. 48

PRE-MASSORETIC HEBREW PAPYRUS, Ex. xx. 2-

17, DEUT. vi. 4 f ,,57

ST. PETERSBURG MANUSCRIPT, WITH SUPERLINEAR

VOCALISATION AND MASSORAH, Hos. i. 2-n. 5 62

RABBINIC BIBLE (BASLE), Ex. xx. 8-18 . . ,,73
COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOTT, DEUT. VI. 3-13 . 78
LONDON POLYGLOTT, TITLE-PAGE . . . . 80
LONDON POLYGLOTT, Ex. ix. 9-19 . Between pp. 82 and 83

HEBREW MANUSCRIPT (COPENHAGEN), WITH MAS-
SORAH, 1 KINGS vin. 3-11, LEV. i. 1, 2 . Facing p. 90

CHISIAN DANIEL, TITLE-PAGE . 193

CHISIAN DANIEL, CH. xn. 7-13 . . Facing pp. 193 and 194
SIXTINE SEPTUAGINT, TITLE-PAGE .... Facing p. 210

SIXTINE SEPTUAGINT, Pss. xvn. (xvm.) 22-xix. 6

(xx. 5) 212

HOLMES AND PARSON'S SEPTUAGINT, Ex. xix. 19-

xx. 4 ... . 214

ILLUMINATED TITLE-PAGE OP ARMENIAN GOS-
PELS ...... Between pp. 250 and 251

OUTLINES OF INTRODUCTION
TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

CHAPTER I.

LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES.

Hebrew language, in which the books of the
Old Testament are written, is of great antiquity,
and takes a place among the oldest known languages.
It is true that the literary documents themselves are
comparatively late in the history of its growth and
progress ; but the form under which it there presents
itself presupposes a long period of grammatical and
linguistic development, which would carry back its
origin, as separate from, other branches of Semitic
speech, to a remote past. Eelatively to these it occupies
both in grammar and vocabulary a distinct and indi-
vidual position ; and whilst it finds its nearest allies
in North Arabia and on the banks of the Tigris and
Euphrates, it is not derived directly from any one of
these, but has pursued a parallel course of development,
the ripe fruits of which lie before us in the writings of
i

2 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the Old Testament. There the Hebrew language pre-
sents itself as adult, full-grown ; and is to be regarded
not as a daughter, but as a sister tongue of the Assyrian
and Arabic, and perhaps other forms of Semitic speech.
It cannot therefore be controlled entirely or interpreted
by the usage of any of these related languages. To a
considerable extent it stands by itself, and during a long
history has not improbably given as much to other
languages as it has received from them. Some know-
ledge, therefore, of these languages, and of their relation
to the Hebrew, is essential to a right understanding of
the latter. Their practice, however, while it is richly
illustrative of the Hebrew, does not rule or determine
its meaning. More perhaps than is the case in most
other languages, Hebrew, owing to its peculiar and
almost isolated position, claims to be interpreted and
illustrated by itself ; and only where such interpretation
fails may a casting vote be allowed to witnesses or
expositions from other tongues. The student of Hebrew
and Hebrew literature will do well to question in the
first instance, though not exclusively, the Hebrew itself
with regard to its own meaning and history.

There exist, however, no literary documents, outside
of the Old Testament Scriptures themselves, which
would enable us to trace this history, and the course of
the development of the language. These books are
themselves the earliest literary examples of the language
in which they are written. Their composition extends,
roughly speaking, over a thousand years ; and even in
the earliest of them the language reveals itself as having

LANGUAGE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT -i

attained, if not overpassed, what might be called its
prime, as far at least as richness and diversity of
grammatical form are concerned. Its past, therefore, is
matter of inference from its present. And if sketched
at all, can only be sketched on the basis of indications
afforded by the existing structure of the language, and
the known history and relations of the people who
spoke it. Such a sketch belongs rather to the domain
of the history of language and grammar than to that of
Introduction. The fullest information available will be
found in articles on Hebrew or on the Semitic lan-
guages generally in the dictionaries, or in the introduc-
tion to Gesenius' or other Hebrew Grammar. 1

All the Old Testament books are written in Hebrew,
with the exception of parts of Daniel and Ezra, namely,
Dan. ii. 4-vii. 28; Ezra iv. S-vi. 18, vii. 12-26,
which are in Aramaic, a language closely allied to the
Hebrew and at least as old. There is also a single

Aramaic verse in the Book of Jeremiah, where it appears
suddenly and perplexingly in the midst of a Hebrew
paragraph; 2 and two Aramaic words in Gen. xxxi. 47

1 The latest edition of Gesenius only should be consulted : revised
translation by Collins and Cowley from the 26th German edition,
Oxford, 1898, with the literature there cited.

2 Jer. x. 11. The verse occupies a peculiar position, and there is no
apparent reason for the introduction without any explanation or warn-
ing of a few words in a language different from all the rest of the book.
It interrupts the connection, and is perhaps best explained as a mar-
ginal comment or gloss on the preceding verse or verses, written by an
early Aramaic-speaking student of the Scriptures on his manuscript
copy of the prophet, whence it found its way by an oversight into the
text. The verse is present, however, in the Greek version, though vv.
6, 7, 8, and 10 are there omitted, and ver. 9 is transposed to a place

4 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

on the occasion when Laban the Aramaean gives to the

pile of stones set up for a testimony between himself
and Jacob the name of Nnnnb "i^, which is merely the
Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew "W?3, " heap of
witness."' Isolated words or forms also borrowed
from the Aramaic are found elsewhere, e.g. Vppn, Josh.
xiv. 8 ; nwn, Isa. xxx. 28 ; nmn, Esth. ii. 18, etc. ; cp.
n"Un in the Aram, of Dan. v. 20 ; and from other lan-
guages, as Persian, Egyptian, Greek, etc.

ORIGIN AND MEANING OF THE TERM " HEBREW." The
term " Hebrew," ^V, 1 has been variously explained, and
both its derivation and original connotation are in dis-
pute. As a patronymic it has been assumed to denote
a descendant of Heber iny, the father of Peleg J^Q, and
Joktan |DpS and the son of Shelah rw } and grandson of
Arpakshad IB^N, Gen. x. 24 f., xi. 12-17. More
probably it is to be explained from the root "QJf, to
cross or pass over, and therefore originally signified one
who came from across the river, ">nan "tajjp, i.e. the
Euphrates, Josh. xxiv. 3, 15 Qeri; 2 Sam. x. 16; cp.
Josh. xxii. 7. The word would therefore be applied to
strangers who entered Syria or Palestine from the
east, the land between or beyond the two rivers ; thus
in Gen. xiv. 13 Abram the Hebrew, nni'n Dins, is in

before ver. 5. The Syriac also preserves it, and the Coptic. The ex-
pression, moreover, "from under these heavens," so the Aram, text,
suggests perhaps a later and more contemplative style of thought than
is characteristic of the rest of the book or of the times of the prophet.

1 The word occurs both with and without the article ; the former, e.g. ,
Gen. xiv. 13, xxxix. 17 ; Deut. xv. 12 ; Jer. xxxiv. 9, 14 ; the latter,
e.g., Gen. xxxix. 14, xli. 12 ; Ex. ii. 11, xxi. 2 ; Jon. i. 9. The plural
is usually D'-iiiy, bnt once D'H?y, Ex. iii. 18.

ORIGIN OF THE TERM "HEBREW 5

the Greek of the Seventy 'A. 6 Trepan']?, the man from
the other side. The view that the river referred to
should be the Jordan or the Nile appears to be quite
untenable on geographical no less than on historical
and chronological grounds. Others have supposed
that the term "nny was originally used from the stand-
point of a writer whose home lay east of the Euphrates,
and that it therefore denoted a Syrian, or one living
west of the river. 1 An inscription of circa 1100 B.C.
is quoted in which the Assyrian ebir ndri = -ay
"i run seems to refer to the land west of the Euphrates.
Such an expression, however, proves no more than the
same or a similar use in the Old Testament itself, when
the writer employs the word "^y of the west of the
Jordan, he himself being on the east side, e.g. Deut. iii.
20, 25, xi. 30 ; Josh. v. 1. In all these passages the
context, or a special word inserted, as ni Josh. I.e.,
determines the meaning. Such additions would seem
rather to imply a consciousness that the true and
original significance of the word pointed to the east.

'"PV, " Hebrew," was originally, therefore, an indivi-
dual or national appellation, and was only later applied
to the language which the Hebrew people employed.
Parallel instances are numerous, for example that of
Arabic from the Arabs, or of English itself from the
Angles. Nor as long as the Hebrew was a living-
tongue does the name seem ever to have come into
general use by the Jews themselves. This later
linguistic sense of the term is never found in the Old

1 Sec Hornmel, Ancicnf- Hebrew Tradition.

6 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Testament ; and in its application to the people the
use of the word is restricted to cases in which the
speaker or narrator finds himself in contact with
foreigners, or is brought in any way into contrast
with these. Thus the term " Hebrew " is employed

(1) when an Israelite speaks of himself to men of
another race, e.g. Joseph to the butler and baker of
Pharaoh in Gen. xl. 15, Moses to Pharaoh himself
in Ex. x. 3, Jonah to the Phoenician sailors, Jonah i. 9 ;

(2) when foreigners speak of them, e.g. the daughter
of Pharaoh of the child Moses, Ex. ii. 6, cp. ib. i. 15 ;
or (3) when Israelites are distinguished from other
nations, as for example from the Egyptians, Gen. xliii.
32, Ex. ii. 11, or the Philistines, 1 Sam. xiii. 3,
xiv. 21.

The national name which the Jews apply to them-
selves is " Israel," ^")"f!, or " sons of Israel," '' ^3, a
name which, by a play upon the sound, suggests to
the historian in Gen. xxxii. 29 the thought of victorious
contention or strife with God ; cp. Hos. xii. 4 where
the same word-play is found. 1 In neither instance
is any etymological explanation or derivation in our
sense of the term intended. If the word is really
connected with the root mt?, it would perhaps be
better, with Driver, al, to take the latter in the sense
of the Arabic shariya, to persist, persevere ; the word
would therefore signify "may God persist," maintain

1 D'nSx nx ,T# 1:1x5, R.V. " In his manhood he had power with God,"
with marginal variants "strength" and "strove." These last fairly
i r] .resent in English the assonance which the writer's ear finds pleasing
and expressive.

MEANING OF "HEBREW 7

His purpose or will, rather than " God contendeth,"
or " may God contend." Possibly it should rather be
connected with the root IE" 1 , to be straight, upright.
The meaning would then be " God is just, upright."
The feminine form rVWOb* occurs Lev. xxiv. 1 f . So
also Palestine is the "land of Israel," ^^ H?,
1 Sam. xiii. 19, al. ; compare the phrases "tribes of
Israel," s 'B3B>, Ex. xxiv. 4 al., "elders of Israel,"
'' W, Ex. iii. 16, etc.

Words or phrases in the Old Testament which
refer to the language spoken by the Israelite people
are, in fact, rare. The ordinary expression seems to
have been nnin^ Jewish, Isa. xxxvi. 11, 13, and the
parallel passages 2 Kings xviii. 26, 28, 2 Chron.
xxxii. 18, as distinguished from JT'O'iN, in Aramaic, or
" Syrian language " as the E.V. translates, II. cc. Else-
where, however, the word in question is found only
in Neb., xiii. 24, where it is used with reference to
the children of intermarriages between the Jews and
the people of Ashdod ; by some authorities, however,
the reference here is supposed to be not to pure
Hebrew, but to Aramaic, or a mixed dialect. Isa. xix.
1 8 presents the unique expression JlWp net?, the " lip
of Canaan," B.V. language of Canaan, " in that day
there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt speaking
'3 nQK'/' apparently of Hebrew as distinguished from
Egyptian, but by some understood to mean a Palestinian
or Canaanitish form of speech ; so the Assyrian inscrip-
tions speak of the " tongue of the West country." An
alternative explanation supposes that the phrase is

8 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

employed in an ideal sense of a sacred or priestly
language, as opposed to the common dialect ; compare
the " pure lip " or language of Zeph. iii. 9. The
Jewish Eahbis themselves made use of the expression
tnpn pt}6, the holy tongue ; and it is only in the
Greek writings of the later Jews, and in the early
Christian Fathers that we find the term " Hebrew "
applied to the language. The earliest instances are
i in the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, 7Xwcrcra
'Epaiwv in Josephus. The precise time, however,
of the change cannot be indicated. Thus it was
under Greek influences superseding the national
Hebrew that the terms 'Eftpaios in a linguistic sense
and 'EftpalaTi won their way to general acceptance.

The usage of the New Testament writers in some
respects stands by itself. There 'Eftpcuos is distin-
guished from 'EXkrjvicmjs in Acts vi. 1 as a Hebrew-
or Aramaic-speaking Jew from one whose ordinary
language was Greek. The adjective efipa'k is there
only found in the book of the Acts, and always in
the dative with Sia\eKTa), and apparently denotes
pure Hebrew (Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2, xxvi. 14 only).
'Eppaiart (John v. 2, xix. 13, 17, 20, xx. 16, Eev. ix.
11, xvi. 16 only) signifies at least in the Gospel
Aramaic, the ordinary colloquial language of the country,
not the classical Hebrew of the Old Testament.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LANGUAGE. Since, then,
the composition of the books of the Old Testament
extended over so considerable a period of time, it
would naturally be anticipated that differences in the

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LANGUAGE 9

structure and habit of the language would reveal
themselves, due to internal growth or decay and the
external influences brought to bear upon it. Such
differences, however, are slight, and the difficulty of
their detection is enhanced by the uncertainty of the
precise date of so many of the documents. In its
character the language is remarkably uniform, and
free from archaisms and variations of dialect. The
most important feature in this respect is a certain
deterioration in the purity of the language in some
of the later books, and an approximation to the
usages and forms of the Aramaic. The last criterion,
however, is of uncertain application ; it is impossible
to determine at what period mutual influence and
borrowing between the Aramaic and Hebrew first
began to take place. The presence of so - called
Aramaisrns must not be taken as necessarily implying
a late date. Within these broad limits, however, it is
usual to distinguish a classical golden and a silver age
of Hebrew literature. The first includes, generally
speaking, all writings from the earliest times to the
close of the Babylonian exile, and finds its best and
purest exponents in Amos, Deuteronomy, and the book
of Isaiah. The silver age begins with the Eeturn of the
Jews to Palestine, and includes the latest documents
which have found a place in the Old Testament Canon.
The Hebrew language, moreover, did not cease to
be used as a medium of literary composition with
the destruction of the Jewish kingdom. It has pre-
served its vitality in this respect to the present day.

INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

As a spoken language, however, it was comparatively
early superseded by Aramaic and then by Greek.
At what period the former change at least took place
does not admit of precise determination, but it was
probably before the closing of the Canon. The over-
throw of Jerusalem by the Eomans, and the final
dispersal of the Jewish people, put an end to all
historic growth and development in the Hebrew
language; 1 but it maintained its ground in the
services for the synagogue, and for all purposes of
inter-communication between Jews of different nation-
alities ; and was cultivated with success in various
countries for the expression of a scholarly and many-
sided literary culture.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES. The name
Semitic, or more properly Sliemitic, has been given to
a group of languages, ancient and modern, spoken
originally in parts of Western Asia. The term was
introduced by Dr. J. G. Eichhoru; 2 and is derived

1 On the characteristics of the later Hebrew see S. R. Driver,
/,1/rodnction to the Literatim of the O.T. S p. 473 f. "The change"
from the purest and best prose style "is visible in both vocabu-
lary and syntax. In vocabulary many new words appear, often
of Aramaic origin, occasionally Persian, and frequently such as con-
tinued in use afterwards in the ' New Hebrew ' of the Mislmah
(200 A.I>.), etc. ; old words also are sometimes used with new meanings
or applications. In syntax the ease and grace and fluency of the earlier
writers (down to at least Zech. xii.-xiv. ) has passed away; the style
is often laboured and inelegant . . . new and uncouth constructions
m.-ikc their appearance." Compare also D. S. Margoliouth in Hastings,
Dictionary of the Bible, vol. iii. p. 31 b ff.

- Born at Doreuzimmern in 17f>2, and died in 1827 at Gottingen.
He published books on the Old Testament of great learning and
research, and was one of the pioneers of modern critical knowledge.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES n

from the fact that all or most of the nations who
spoke these languages are descended, according to
Gen. x. 21-31, from Shem, DP, the son of Noah. The
classification of the languages adopted is founded upon
resemblances both in vocabulary and syntax, which
are much closer than in the corresponding Indo-
European group ; and which distinguish a Semitic
tongue very clearly from the Indo-European family
of speech on the one hand, and the so-called Turanian
on the other. These generic peculiarities are seen
both in the forms of the words and the structure of
the sentences. Linguistic relationship, moreover, in
the case of the Semitic races, coincides more nearly
with their geographical distribution, and in this respect
the agreement is most marked in or about the latter
half of the second millennium before Christ. The
representation, therefore, of the book of Genesis of
their descent from a common ancestor may be accepted,
broadly speaking, as true ; and on all sides they stand
in a more definite and precise inter-relation than any
other group of peoples of equal importance and range.

The original home and birthplace of the Semitic
races is probably to be sought in Arabia, where to
this day in the various Bedawy tribes the primitive
stock seems to have preserved itself most pure from

His most important works were Einleitung in das Alte Testament,
3 vols., Leipz. 1780-83, of which a revised and enlarged edition
appeared at Gottingen in 5 vols., in 1820-24 ; Die Hebra'isclie Proplieten,
3 vols., Gottingen, 1816-20 ; and Allgcmcinc Bibliothek dcr BibliscJtfn
Literatur, 10 vols., Leipz. 1787-1S01. To the New Testament also
he wrote a valuable Einleitung in das N.T., 5 vols., Leipz. 1820-27.

INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

foreign admixture. If this view is correct, it would
follow that the Arabic language in its earliest form
is the nearest representative of the original Semitic
tongue. Others have regarded as the first home of
the Semites the great tableland or plateau of Central
Asia, whence they are supposed to have migrated
westward, and settled in Mesopotamia and Syria, dis-
possessing a non-Semitic aboriginal population, repre-
sented perhaps by the Erniin (^n, Gen. xiv. 5),
Nephilim (Q^aan, ib. vi. 4), Anakirn (&%$}, Deut. i.
28), and others of the Bible, and establishing their
own civilisation in its place. A source in Eastern
Africa again has been suggested, whence the ancestors
of the Semites of historical times moved first into
Arabia, and then into the regions of South-Western
and Western Asia, which they are found occupying
at the earliest period concerning which historical
records are available. This region of Semitic settle-
ment and possession may be roughly described as a
parallelogram of comparatively small extent, bounded
on the north by the Taurus range and the mountains
of Armenia, on the east by Kurdistan and the Persian
Gulf, on the south by the Indian Ocean, and on the
west by the Eed Sea and the Mediterranean.

Tlic precise relation of this Semitic group of languages to the
Indo-uEropean is still uncertain. That they are not originally
independent, but may be traced back to a common origin, appears
indisputable ; the details, however, and lines of connection cannot
be fixed. The main peculiarities of the former group, by which
it is distinguished from thu latter, may be summarised as follows ;
details must be sought in the grammar.

CHARACTERISTICS OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 13

(1) Every Semitic root, with few exceptions, is triliteral, that
is, consists of three and only three letters, which are always
consonants. This root is in itself, therefore, unpronounceable,
and according to the vowels with which it is furnished, will
take on different shades or relations of meaning. It is, in fact,
of the nature of an ideogram, which may be variously rendered
according to the thought of the speaker and the rules of the
language. The Indo-European root, on the other hand, is un-
restricted in the number or class of letters of which it consists,
and is denned and complete in itself. It is probable that these
triliteral roots are derived from original and primitive biliterals ;
but the derivation does not admit of proof.

(2) Verbs have only two tenses, which are primarily concerned
not with time, but solely with relation or state.

(3) Substantives follow a different mode of declension. A
" construct state " is employed, under which the genitival relation
is expressed by a modification of the governing noun, not by
inflection of the governed, as in the Indo-European group.

(4) Semitic languages do not allow of the formation of com-
pound nouns or verbs.

(5) Substantives have only two genders.

(6) The oblique cases of the personal pronoun are invariably
expressed, not by separate words, but by suffixes. These are
fragmentary or abbreviated forms of the independent pronouns,
and are added to the stem of the noun, or the inflected form of
the verb.

The following classification, therefore, is necessarily
geographical and linguistic, rather than historical or
political. Very little is really known of the early
movements of the Semitic peoples. As far back as
the records carry us, an active and effective intercourse
seems to have been the rule, not the exception. In
the valley of the Euphrates is found existing for
many centuries a chief centre of wealth and civilisa-
tion, the meeting-point of nations, a source and home
of culture to which immigrants contributed many

14 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

elements of virile strength, of refinement, of religious
observance and faith, and of the arts. Babylonian
civilisation is also that with which we are best
acquainted. An early and probably independent form
of civilisation existed, however, in Arabia. In accord-
ance, then, with this order of classification two great
groups of languages are to be distinguished, a Northern
and a Southern, each with sub-divisions. 1

I. NORTHERN.

(a) EASTERN. These are the languages of the Tigris
and Euphrates valleys, the earliest of which we have
definite historical knowledge from extant documents
and inscriptions.

(1) Babylonian, the language of lower Mesopotamia
and the country around the junction of the tw r o rivers.
The inscriptions are on clay tablets in a cuneiform
character supposed to have been derived from a non-
Semitic race who were dispossessed by the ancestors
of the Babylonians, who succeeded them in their
home in Mesopotamia. The inscriptions date from
the earliest period, about the middle of the fifth
millennium B.C., to as late as the fourth century before
Christ ; letters and cursive tablets carry on the history
of the language to within about a century of our era.

1 On the Semitic languages in general and their inter-relations, see
art. " Semites," by J. F. McCurdy in HDB, vol. v. p. 83 ff. ; W. Wright,
Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages, Cambridge, 1890 ;
F. Max M tiller, Lectures on the Science of Language, 9 Lect. vm., with
genealogical table in Appendix. The classification adopted follows
mainly Dr. Wright.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 15

A considerable number of the inscriptions refer to the
time of the Babylonian king Hammurabi, who reigned
over Babylon and Northern Babylonia, according to
the native chronologists, for more than half a century,
2356-2301 B.C., and who is identified with Amraphel,
" king of Shinar," the contemporary of Abraham,
Gen. xiv. I, 9. 1

(2) Assyrian, written in the same character and
with the same materials as the Babylonian. Of all
the Semitic languages, with the exception of Aramaic
and Arabic, Assyrian is the most closely related to
Hebrew, and throws most light on its vocabulary and
interpretation. Assyrian literature is much less varied
in scope and subject-matter than the Babylonian, and
for the most part consists of historical records, and of

1 On Hammurabi, the sixth monarch of the so-called first Dynasty
of Babylon, see especially L. W. King, Letters and Inscriptions of
Hammurabi, London, 1900, pp. Ixixf., 229 ff., and passim; Records of
the Past, New Series, vol. i. p. 10 ff. ; A. H. Sayce, Higher Criticism
and the Monuments, London, 1894 ; F. Hommel in Recent Research in
Bible Lands, Philadelphia, 1896, p. 136 f., who holds the view that
the dynasty was derived originally from Arabia, and that Hammurabi
could not rightfully have been termed " King of Shinar " (~\yw = Sumer)
until after the expulsion of the Elamites ; C. H. W. Johns, art. " Code
of Hammurabi " in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible, vol. v. p. 584 ff.,
and Expositor, 1903, p. 283 ff. The identification of H. with Amraphel
is not undisputed ; Hommel, for example, with whom F. C. Boscawen
agrees, regards the latter as really the same as Sinnuballit, the father
of Hammurabi, see Athen., Feb. 1904, p. 280. It has been generally
recognised that the native date for this king was too early by at least
a century or more. All previous researches and discussions, however,
have been superseded by L. W. King, Chronicles concerning Early
Babylonian Kings, 2 vols. , London, 1907, where it is shown on the
basis of new historical texts that his reign cannot be placed earlier
than the nineteenth century before Christ, and more probably in the
latter than the former half of the century.

16 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

translations from Babylonian documents. The latest
example of Assyrian writing in the British Museum
is dated in the year 80 B.C. Both the race and the
language appear to have been preserved more pure
from foreign elements than the Babylonian.

(J) CENTRAL, OR ARAMAEAN. The original meaning
of the term "Arainsean" is uncertain. In the Old
Testament Aram (CHN, Assyr. Ararnu, Arumu, etc.) is
the fifth son of Shem, brother of Elam, Asshur, and
others, Gen. x. 22 f. ; 1 Chron. i. 17. In Gen. xxii. 21
the name appears as that of a grandson of Nahor,
and in 1 Chron. vii. 34 of a descendant of Asher, and
apparently (ib. ii. 23) of a descendant of Manasseh.
Elsewhere Aram is always used either collectively of
the people or of the land which they occupied, cp. '^
3h-i rva, 2 Sam. x. 6 ; $ws>[ ', 2 Sam. viii. 5 ; 'N ft 3,
Gen. xxv. 20, xxxi. 18, al., and especially &y}LP- X
Gen. xxiv. 10 ; Deut. xxiii. 5 ; Judg. iii. 8, i.e. "Aram
of the two rivers," or Mesopotamia, probably denoting
the region of the upper Tigris and Euphrates as the
original home of the Aramaean race. 1 The Jews
adopted the term in the sense of " outsiders,"
" heathen " ; and in the Syriac New Testament it is
used as the equivalent of "E\\r)v, r 'E\\r)ves, e.g. Acts
xvi. 1, 3, xx. 21 ; 1 Cor. i. 22, 24. In its national
or geutilic meaning the old name was then replaced
by " Assyrian," which came to be differentiated into
Syrians, 2vpioi or %vpoi for the Western, 'Aacrvpioi
for the Eastern inhabitants of the ancient Assyrian

1 See A. H. Sayce, art, " Aram " in H DB, vol. i.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 17

Empire. " Syrian," therefore, is a mere abbreviation
of " Assyrian " ; and the term was finally accepted by
the Aramaeans themselves, who, as Christians, called
themselves " Syrians," | . .'-in m l According to Hero-
dotus (i. 72), the Cappadocians were termed "Syrians"
by the Greeks.

The commercial and enterprising spirit of the race
seems in very early times to have carried their influence
and language far and wide. Aramaic became the lingua
franca of intercourse and trade in Western Asia. It was,
however, broken up into many dialects, some of which
were confined within narrow local boundaries and usage.

(1) Syriac. The most important of these dialects,
almost the only one that attained to the dignity of a
cultivated or written tongue, was Syriac, the language
of the ancient city of Edessa and the surrounding
district. The extensive Syriac literature is entirely
Biblical and Christian, and beginning with the version
of the Scriptures covers a period of nearly twelve
centuries, from the second to the thirteenth or
fourteenth century. As a spoken language it yielded
place gradually to Greek, and later to the Arabic in the
seventh century ; but survived until recently, and perhaps
still survives, in the secluded village of Ma'lula, among
the hills about twenty-five miles N.N.E. of Damascus. 2

1 So Noldeke, al. Sayce, however, thinks the ' ' Syrian " may be derived
directly from the Babylonian Suri, or Sum, a name found in the inscrip-
tions for a part of ancient Mesopotamia ; see PSBA, vol. xviii. p. 171.

2 See PEFQ, 1890, pp. 74 ff., 186. On the literature in general, W.
Wright, Syriac Literature, London, 1894 ; C. Brockelmann, DieSyrische
Litteratur, Leipzig, 1907. The best grammar is that of Th. Noldeke,

i8 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

(2) Biblical Aramaic, the oldest extant literary
documents of which are the Aramaic portions of the
book of Ezra. The narrative in Isa. xxxvi. 1 1 certifies
to the still earlier employment of Aramaic as a medium
of international intercourse. The Aramaic of Daniel is
a later form, approaching more nearly to the Targums.
Closely akin to these in dialect is the Samaritan
Targum of the Pentateuch.

The Palestinian Aramaic, represented in manuscripts
of parts of the Old and New Testaments and of
Lectionaries as late as the tenth and eleventh centuries,
is of interest as representing closely that form of the
language spoken by Christ and His apostles. This
Christian Aramaic differs considerably from the Jewish
Aramaic of the Targums, etc. As a spoken language it
is doubtful if it survived to any extent, at least on the
west of the Jordan, the ravages and depopulation of the
wars with the Eomans, and the destruction of Jerusalem.
The earliest collection of the documents is in Land,
Anecdota Syriaca, vol. iv., Lugd. Bat. 1875 ; fragments
that have more recently come to light are edited by
G. H. Gwilliam and others in Anecdota Oxoniensia,
Semitic Series, pts. v. and ix., Oxford, 1893 and 1896.

A considerable number of subordinate or local
varieties of the Aramaic are recognised, some of which
are known in older forms than are represented in the
Bible itself. The more ancient documents are derived
from Egypt, whither the Aramaic tongue must have

Comjinu/ioiis Syriac Grammar, trans, by ,1. A. Crichton, London,
1904.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 19

found its way in comparatively early times. The most
important inscriptions are the so-called Carpentras
stele, now at Carpentras in the south of France, the
date of which is placed in the fourth century B.C. ; l and
the stele of Sakhara, dated in the fourth year of Xerxes,
482 B.C., now at Berlin. 2

Other dialects of the Aramaic are the Palmyrene,
represented in inscriptions found at Palmyra, dating
from the first three centuries of our era, in a style or
idiom closely akin to that of the book of Daniel ; and
the so-called Nabatrean, the language of the country on
the east of the Jordan, from the Hainan southwards to
the district around Petra, and as far as the Siuaitic
Peninsula. The most complete collection of the
inscriptions of the latter is by J. Euting, Ncibattiischc
Inscriften aus Arabien, Berlin, 1885. He assigns to
them dates from 9 B.C. to 75 A.D. By some the
Nabatrean kingdom of Arabia Petnea is supposed to be
referred to under the name of Nodab (^U, possibly a
mistaken transposition for 1313, or D33, but the Seventy
have NaBapaiwv) in 1 Chron. v. 19. 3

(3) In the northern parts of the plain of
Mesopotamia and in the range of mountains from

1 A facsimile and account of the inscription will be found in S. E.
Driver, Notes on Samuel, p. xviii ; compare G. A. Cooke, North Semitic
Inscriptions, p. 205.

2 Driver, ib. p. xx. Recent discoveries in Egypt of Aram, documents
on papyrus are well known ; see A. H. Sayce, Aramaic Papyri
discovered at Assuan, London, 1906 ; E. Sachau, Drei Aramalsche
Urkunden aus Elephantine, Berlin, 1908.

3 See A. E. Suffrin, s.v. Nodab, in HDB, vol. iii. ; and on the
Nabatcean, compare D. S. Margoliouth, ib, vol. i. p. 135.

INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

which the rivers spring, a third division of the great
Aramaean group of languages had its home. Of the
hill dialects little or nothing is known. But in the
lowlands a widely-extended form of speech, most nearly
related to the idiom of the Babylonian Talmud, was
the immediate ancestor of the Mandaitic, the dialect of
the Mandeans, a Gnostic sect whose descendants still
exist and practise rites which are a strange combina-
tion of star- worship and Christian ceremonies. They are
otherwise known as Sabians, or St. John's Christians.
The priests are said still to read the ancient language,
but to understand little of it. There is a very com-
plete grammar of the language by Th. Noldeke. 1

A somewhat striking difference in the method of
forming the 3rd pers. sing, imperf. distinguishes the
eastern from the western dialects of Aramaic. In the
latter, including the Palmyrene, the imperfect is
formed with prefixed yodh (>), as in the Hebrew. In
the former, of which the Syriac may be taken as the
type, with nun (3). And in the Babylonian Talmud and
in Mandaitic, which occupy a kind of central position,
with nun (j) or lamedh (3). Compare in the Old
Testament 8v, Dan. ii. 20 ; Ezra iv. 13 ; fc$, Dan. ii.
43; rv"b,H>. v. 17. 2

1 Compare also M. Lidzbarski, Das Johanuesbuch der Mandaer, Giessen.

- See H. L. Strack, Graininatik des Biblischen Aramiiisch, 2 Leipzig,
1897, p. 33, who says that in the Jerusalem Targum the impf. of run is
sometimes formed with *? when wish or purpose is expressed ; S. R.
Driver, Hebrew Lexicon, s.v. xiq, rnq, and the references there given.
Interchange ofl and n is, of course, found elsewhere in related languages,
as, for instance, in Eastern and Western forms of Hindi ; see S. H.
Kellogg, Grammar of the Hindi Languages,* London, 1893, p. 73.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 21

(c) WESTERN GROUP. (1) Canaanitic, the generic
name for the languages spoken in Palestine at the
time of the Hebrew invasion ; cp. the expression
" lip of Canaan," fyja nst?, in Isa. xix. 1 8. The
Canaanites were not the oldest inhabitants of the
land, having been preceded by the Aniorites, the
" Amurru " of the Assyrian inscriptions. These last,
however, were apparently not of Semitic race ; and
when, being dispossessed by the invading Canaanites,
they retreated to the hills, they held their own there
in the more inaccessible districts, the richer plain
country falling to the lot of the new-comers. 1 The
Canaanites themselves were divided into clans, with
perhaps originally little intercommunication, and
admitting many varieties of dialect. These are repre-
sented probably by the Hivites, Jebusites, etc., of the
Old Testament, Gen. x. 16 If., xv. 19 ff., Deut. vii. 1,

1 This appears to be the most probable account of the facts ; see arts.
" Amorite," " Canaanite," by A. H. Sayce in HDB, vol. i. Others, how-
ever, regard the two terms as practically identical, each denoting in
general the primitive population of Palestine. The difference of name
would then be a question of usage, Amos and the Elohist employing
the term " Amorite, " while J writes of "Canaanite"; so Wellhausen,
W. R. Smith, al. ; see J. F. McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the
Monuments, p. 159 ff., and note 4, p. 406 ; Sayce in PSBA, vol. xviii.
p. 171 f. The origin and derivation of the name Canaan is uncertain.
The ancient Phoenician writer Sanchuniathon, whose works were
translated into Greek by Philon of Byblus, flor. c. 70-140 A.D., and
quoted by Eusebius, Prceparatio Evangelica, i. vi. f., says that Xva
(yj?) was the name of a god or heroic ancestor. In the Old Testament,
Canaan, |ju?, is the son of Ham (an, Gen. ix. 18, 22, x. 6), and brother
of Gush, Mizraim, and Put. The people gave to the country in which
they settled their own name, first applied apparently to the coast
districts and the valley of the Jordan (Num. xiii. 29), and later to the
whole land of Palestine.

22 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

etc. ; the King of Jerusalem, however, is an Amorite
in Josh. x. 5, cp. Ezek. xvi. 3. The only certainly
non-Semitic peoples mentioned in these passages are
the Hittites and the Philistines, the former from
Western Asia Minor and the highlands of Armenia,
the latter sea-rovers from " Caphtor " ("toM, Deut. ii.
23, Amos ix. 7, cp. Gen. x. 14), i.e. probably
Crete. 1

Of the Canaanite peoples the Phoenicians alone won
a place and name in the wider world of the West.
From their great cities of Tyre and Sidon and the
surrounding district, they carried their commerce and
language throughout Syria and the Mediterranean, with
settlements on the north coast of Africa and in distant
Spain and Gaul ; and in the East by way of the Eed
Sea and the Persian Gulf maintained trade relations
with South Arabia and India, probably also with the
east coast of Africa. Their language is known from
numerous inscriptions dating from the eighth or
seventh centuries B.C. to the beginning of our era, and
is closely allied to Hebrew. In the modified or
corrupted form of " Punic," the Phoenician continued
to be known and spoken in the West as late as the

1 On the Hittites, their monuments and language, see P. Jensen,
Hittiter und Armenia; Strassburg, 1898, and Explorations in Bible
Lands in the 19th Century, Ediu. 1903, pp. 753-93 ; W. Wright,
Empire of the Hittites, 2 London, 1895 ; A. H. Sayce, Races of the Old
Testament, London, 1891, ch. vii., The Hittites? London, 1903, and
arts, in PSBA, vols. xxv. ff. The Philistines (D'!??' 1 ??, Gen. x. 14,
1 Sam. iv. Iff. etc.) gave their name to the country of Palestine,
but nothing seems to be known of their language ; see HDB,
vol. iii. s.v.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 23

seventh century A.D. ; and a Punic translation of the
whole or parts of the Bible existed. 1

(2) Hebrew, the language which the Israelite invaders
brought with them into Palestine. Its literature
extends from the earliest of the Old Testament
documents to the date of the completion of the Mishna,
towards the end of the second century A.D. The later
form of the language is sometimes described as New
Hebrew. It thus remained in use for literary pur-
poses long after it had ceased to be generally spoken ;
and throughout the Middle Ages, commentaries and
other Biblical works, elegies and poems almost entirely
of a religious character, continued to be composed in
Hebrew. 2 There are few traces of dialectic difference
within the Hebrew itself. The Ephrairnites seem to
have been unable to pronounce the aspirated sibilant,
they said r6ao for ni>2tJ>, Judg. xii. 6. An indication of
variety in speech of later date is afforded by the
passage Neh. ^j 1 ^ 24, which refers to the children
of the mixed marriages of Jews with the people of
Ashdod. That in earlier times the Moabites, and
probably also the Edomites, Ammonites, and other

1 On the Canaanites and Phoenicians in general, see especially
F. Jeremias in Ch. de la Saussaye's Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte,*
Tubingen, 1905, i. p. 348 ff. ; G. Rawliuson, Phoenicia, in "Story of
the Nation" series; HDB, vol. iii., art. by G. W. Thatcher. The
latest and most accessible edition of the inscriptions is in M.
Lidzbarski, Ephemeris fur Semitischc Epigraphik, Giessen, 1900 ff.

" A convenient selection of the latter, confined, however, to a
particular epoch, will be found in Brody and Albrecht, VBTI ~\]}v, New
Hebrew School of Poets, London, 1906, where references are given to
the principal works on Jewish literature ; add D. S. Margoliouth on
" Language of the Old Testament" in HDB, vol. iii.

24 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

neighbouring peoples, spoke dialects closely akin to
the Hebrew, may be inferred from extant documents. 1

II. SOUTHERN, OR ARABIAN.

(a) Arabic. The terms " Arab " :n? and " Arabia "
originally denoted the northern part of the peninsula
alone, the district lying between Palestine on the west
and the head of the Persian Gulf on the east. This
is the usage of the Assyrian and local inscriptions, and
of the Old Testament itself (Isa. xxi. 13, Jer. xxv. 24,
1 Kings x. 1 5 ; in the last passage RV. strangely renders
" all the things of the mingled people," Heb. ^nyn ; Ezek.
xxvii. 2 1 , xxx. 5 " mingled people " 2 ^'7 C P- ^ ne doublet
in Jer. I.e.). At some period before or about the beginning
of the Christian era the term was extended to include
what is now known as Arabia. It was not, however, until
the rise and spread of Muhammadanism in the seventh
and following centuries, that the language became of
historical importance. The Arabic was thus placed
under conditions exceptionally favourable to the pre-
servation of its purity and historical continuity. Until
the time of Muhammad it remained in comparative
seclusion among the tribes of the peninsula, shut off
from the influences of the wider world around. And
when with the Muhammadan conquests it entered
upon a world-wide career, and was carried within a
century as far as India on the east and Spain on the
west, it was at once determined and controlled as a
literary medium by the Quran, which effected for

1 Infra, p. 38 f.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 25

Arabic precisely what Shakespeare and the Authorised
Version of the Bible did for the English tongue, and fixed
for all time the standard of classical and correct speech.
Thus not only is Arabic the richest and most flexible of
all Semitic languages, but it also represents probably
most nearly the primitive and original form from which
these various Semitic languages have been derived.

Arabic literature is of very great extent and variety.
Except, however, in the two fields of theology and
religion on the one hand and of geography and travel
on the other, Arabic writers showed little originality,
and for the most part they were dependent upon
Greek sources. In philosophy and science the best
Greek authors were translated into Arabic, and became
the guides of Arabic thought ; while native scholars
and thinkers confined themselves almost entirely to
expositions of the Quran, discussions of its principles
and rules, and the collection and codifying of illustrative
material from the lives and sayings of Muhammad
himself and his immediate followers. The purest
Arabic is still to be heard among the Bedawy tribes of
the Arabian peninsula. The most debased and corrupt
is said to be the confused and hybrid dialect of the
inhabitants of Malta. 1

(b) Sabcean. The tribes of southern Arabia spoke

1 The standard work on Arabic literature is C. Brockelmann's
Geschichte der Arabischen Literatur, 2 vols., Weimar, 1897-99. A
briefer work by the same author with the same title was published at
Leipzig in 1901, as part of the sixth volume of a series on the literatures
of the East. A readily accessible handbook in English is C. Huart,
History of Arabic Literature, London. The best grammar is that of the
late Dr. W. Wright, 3rd ed., Cambridge, 1890-98.

26 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

dialects of one tongue, which has received the name
Sabsean (E^ap, Isa. xlv. 14) from the greatest and most
powerful kingdom of old times which held sway in that
region. It corresponded roughly to the modern province
of al- Yemen, the ancient capital being Marib, seventy
or eighty miles east of San'a. " Seba," N3D, is sou of
Gush (B>13) in Gen. x. 7. On the south coast of Arabia
eastwards lay the province of Hadramut, the Biblical
mcnvn, Gen. x. 26, probably included for a time at least
in the Sabrean kingdom. The language is also known
as Himyaritic, and is represented in numerous inscrip-
tions almost exclusively from the south-west of the
peninsula. 1 The dates are uncertain, but a few of the
inscriptions are placed as early as 700 B.C., the greater
part belonging to the early centuries of our era. Still
more ancient was the kingdom of the Minseans on the
west coast, north of al-Yemen, who spoke a language
closely allied to the Sabsean, and whose inscriptions,
circa 1400-700 B.C., are found as far north as the
borders of Edoni. Ma'an or Ma'm, their capital, lay
north-west of Marib, and an allusion has been traced
to the people in the Meunim (o^iyon, 1 Chron. iv. 41,
where Keth. D^JttD, 2 Chron. xxvi. 7, cp. xx. 1 niarg. ;
Sept. in all three passages Meivaiot) of the Old
Testament. 2

1 Two only are known from Hadramut ; see Hommel, Explorations in
Bible Lands, p. 729.

8 See F. Hommel in Explorations in Bible Lands during the 19th
Century, Edin. 1903, p. 727 ff. ; A. H. Sayce, Higher Criticism
and the Monuments* p. 122 ; J. F. McCurdy in HDB, vol. v. p. 85 a ;
D. S. Margoliouth, ib. vol. iv., art. " Sheba " ; W. Wright, Comparative
Grammar, p. 28 f.

CLASSIFICATION OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES 27

(c) Ethiopic, the language of ancient Abyssinia.
The mountainous district of Africa lying immediately
opposite the south-west corner of the African peninsula
seems to have been colonised thence at a very early
date. The capital of the African kingdom was Aksum,
and in the fourth and following centuries of our era the
now Christian power of Abyssinia recrossed the strait,
and established its authority over the neighbouring
parts of Arabia, until driven out by the Arabs
immediately before the time of Muhammad. The
Ge'ez or ancient ^Ethiopic existed in three main dialects,
of which the first-named represented most nearly the
primitive tongue : Tigre", in the north ; Tigrina, in the
centre ; and Amharic, the form of the language which
has prevailed in modern Abyssinia, in the south. A
few inscriptions are known, dating from the early
centuries of our era ; and the ^Ethiopic version of the
Bible, though not made altogether at one date, is
ascribed to the period from the fourth to the sixth
centuries. Later Ethiopic literature consists almost
entirely of translations made from Arabic or Coptic
works. 1

The relation of Egyptian to the Semitic group of
languages is uncertain and disputed. That it is not
independent of them in its origin is clear, but the
kinship is by no me,ans so close or defined as that of

1 R. H. Charles, art. "Ethiopic Versions" in HDB, vol. i. ; W.
Wright, Comparative Grammar, p. 29 f. ; E. Littmann, Gesch. der
fithiop. Litteratur, Leipzig, 1907. The best grammar is that of A.
Dillmann, translated from the second German edition by J. A. Crichton,
London, 1907.

28 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Semitic languages in general inter se. Its alphabet is
consonantal, many of its words are identical in sound
and meaning with the Semitic, and there is a similarity
often striking in the verbal and other forms, and
especially in the pronouns, both separate and suffixed.
On the other hand, roots are not triliteral. Probably
the Egyptian should be regarded as a branch of the
Semitic family, which parted from the parent stem at
a period long antecedent to that at which the remain-
ing languages of the group began their independent
existence ; but which in the course of its long history
has come under diverse foreign linguistic influences
by which it has been profoundly modified. Of these
external forces probably the most important and power-
ful has been the Libyan or Berber from the west. 1

1 German scholars, with whom the American authorities for the most
part associate themselves, are the strongest supporters of the Semitic
origin of the ancient Egyptian language. The modern Coptic is its
lineal descendant. See A. Erman, Egyptian Grammar, translated by
J. H. Breasted, London, 1894 ; J. Leiblein in PSBA xx. p. 202 ff. ;
F. LI. Griffith, ib. xxi. p. 269 ff. ; and many other arts, in the volumes
of the same Proceedings ; W. E. Crum in HDB, vol. i. p. 655 f. ;
J. H. Breasted, History of Egypt, London, 1906, p. 25 f.

CHAPTER II.
THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

1. THE HEBREW CHARACTER AND ALPHABET ;
INSCRIPTIONS.

origin of alphabetic writing in general is an
obscure and difficult subject ; and Hebrew shares
to the full the uncertainties which surround its early
history. The field has been largely occupied by specu-
lation. Brilliant generalisations have sometimes been
based on insufficient and imperfectly assimilated data.
On the other hand, older theories, apparently well
founded, have been compelled to give place to newer
and wider knowledge. In particular, the relationship
and derivation of the various ancient and modern
scripts in use among the nations of the world is a
subject about which comparatively little is certainly
or precisely known. To trace on broad lines the
growth and development of the alphabetic signs of
a given language is not difficult, provided a sufficient
number of documents are available of various periods,
the dates of which may be assigned with a fair
measure of certainty. To collate, however, the

30 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

alphabets of distinct languages that bear no close
relation to one another, so as to construct a genea-
logical table of descent of their written character, is
a task of great intricacy, demanding minute accuracy
and care as well as a capacity for broad survey, and
is beset with many possibilities of error. Such a task,
with its problems of the deepest interest, belongs to
the specialist^ alone. Here it must suffice to indicate
the broad lines on which the development of the
Hebrew alphabet has proceeded, from the earliest
forms of which we have any knowledge to the
" square " character which the printed text of the
Old Testament has made familiar at the present
day.

At how early a date the art of writing began to
be practised it is impossible to determine. Men
doubtless knew how to communicate their thoughts
by word of mouth before they learnt to express them
in written form on stone, wood, clay, or other con-
venient material. But judging from what is known
of primitive conditions of human life, the latter art,
in imperfect inchoate shape at least, did not lag so
very far behind the former as we have been ac-
customed to think. Certainly the beginnings of
writing go back to a very early period, long ante-
cedent to that at which the familiar systems of chron-
ology of half a century ago placed the creation of the
world. The initial stages of the art, moreover, were
not in the direction of the invention of more or less
artiiicial alphabetic signs, consonants or vowels, upon

ORIGIN OF WRITING 31

the basis of which names and words were then con-
structed. Words come first, and only at a later period
do the component parts or elements of which they
are constituted appear. Thus the individual letters
are themselves the products of a long evolution, which
may have^been and probably was carried on independ-
ently in different countries and by different peoples,
and extended over a very considerable period of time.
In this progress or evolution three or four general
stages may be distinguished without difficulty, and
are found to be exemplified more or less fully in the
most ancient known scripts. It is not to be supposed,
of course, that all alphabets have been developed on
these lines from the very beginning. The majority
of alphabetic signs have been taken over, like our own
and more or less modified from previously existing
forms.

(1) The earliest attempts in the graphic art were
pictorial, hardly to be termed writing, but rather
painting or portraiture ; when primitive man sought
to make lineal representation on the stone or bark or
other substance of the natural objects with which he
was familiar. Of such sort are the cave drawings of
the early Bushmen of South Africa, and many others.
With more or less skill and accuracy he drew a picture,
and that picture conveyed to others the conception of
the material object which he had in his own mind.

(2) The picture or drawing was then conven-
tionalised, or in technical language became an
" ideogram," Instead of being the free and hide-

12 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

pendent creation of each individual, executed at his
own will and fancy, the picture took on a fixed and
definite form. It was no longer drawn as it were
de novo on each occasion, no two pictures therefore
being necessarily alike in scale or complexity, but a
distinct and recognised type was developed, resembling
with sufficient accuracy for practical purposes the object
intended to be depicted ; and this was then regularly
and always employed as the formal and accepted
equivalent of the object, other delineations falling into
disuse.

(3) This type or ideogram, usually greatly simplified
with a view to ease and rapidity of construction by
the hand of the writer, a mere group or aggregate of
strokes often no longer recognisable as a picture of
the object intended, came to stand for the uttered
sound as distinct from the meaning ; and the name
or word as pronounced was now associated with the
sign, whether the latter were employed to indicate
the object itself or not. The sign was indissolubly
wedded to a sound and no longer to a thought. For
example, the conventional sign which denoted the sea
might be used in the sense of the verb to see, or in
any other winch the sound " see " should chance to
express.

(4) Lastly, the syllabic sound, now represented
always by one and the same sign, was broken up into
the elemental parts which we call letters, to one of
which, usually but not of necessity always the first,
the sign was appropriated. The latter, therefore, now

ORIGIN OF THE ALPHABET 33

came to denote not a word or syllable, but a single
letter, which might be associated to an indefinite extent
with other letters, but which under ordinary circum-
stances was an elemental sound, not a combination of
sounds. To this principle of the adoption of the
original sign for the syllable to express the letter
with which the syllable commences has been given
the name " acrophonic " ; and it represents, without
doubt, the greatest forward step ever taken in the
development of easy written speech. The separate
and distinct letters are thus not the beginnings of
writing, but as it were its end. They stand at the
close of a prolonged period or progress of evolution, and
themselves bear witness to historical maturity, and to a
great and notable advance in civilisation and the arts.

In this development, or perhaps rather at and after
its close, it is not to be denied that conscious inven-
tion played a part. It is hardly possible, however,
that the part was ever leading or prominent, and
there was no scope or opportunity for it at the
beginning, when writing itself first began to be.
With wider and more general practice of the art,
and with the growth of conscious knowledge and
skill, original invention of artificial and wholly arbitrary
signs may well have assumed a more important place.
Desiring to give expression, for instance, to sounds in
their own tongue for which the symbols current and
recognised made no provision, men may well have
allowed free play to their fancy in new and original
device, rather than borrow from extraneous sources,
3

34 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

The really inventive faculty, however, has never been
common or wide-spread. And in most instances a
preference for adaptation rather than creation seems
to have ruled.

This general course of development of the graphic
art is most conveniently illustrated in the Egyptian,
where the hieroglyphic inscriptions, followed by the
hieratic and demotic, represent an early pictorial style
passing over into later abbreviated and cursive forms.
In the written language of Egypt, moreover, the use of
ideograms received perhaps its widest extension, and
already in the oldest known inscription true alphabetic
signs are found by the side of the hieroglyphs them-
selves. It is evident that the last-named fact implies
a preceding history and use of the art of writing, which
must have been of very considerable duration.

This inscription, according to the generally accepted view the
most ancient in existence if we except a few isolated words, royal
titles, etc., found in the very earliest tombs, is a monument in
the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford dedicated to a priest who
lived in the time of the second Egyptian dynasty, dated by
various authorities to the second half of the fifth, or the middle
or end of the fourth millennium B.C. Professor Flinders Petrie,
for example, gives for the second Dynasty circa 4500-4200 E.G.,
Dr. Breasted for the first two Dynasties B.C. 3400-2980. Since in
this inscription three true alphabetic signs or letters are already
in use, even the lower date assumed for the monument would
carry back the invention and employment of writing to a very
early period. Mortuary tablets of King Menes of the first
Dynasty and other early monarchs have been discovered, which
reveal the hieroglyphs themselves in archaic forms. 1

1 Cp. J. H. Breasted, History of Egypt, London, 1906, pp. 35, 43, 45,
"the hieroglyphs for the Northern Kingdom, for its king, and for its

ORIGIN OF THE ALPHABET 35

The view that the primitive Semitic characters were
derived from the ancient Egyptian by a more or less
direct descent has been generally accepted since the
researches of De Eouge in the middle of the nineteenth
century. It cannot be said, however, that recent dis-
coveries have placed the theory upon a firmer basis,
or brought it nearer to certainty. Influential voices
have been raised in favour of alternative schemes, which
themselves involve much that is hypothetical and un-
proven. Attempts to trace the Semitic alphabet to
an origin in the Babylonian cuneiform, or to connect
it with an ancient Cypriote syllabary or with Cretan
pictographs, although the discovery especially of ancient
systems of writing current in the Mediterranean basin
has greatly widened the field of inquiry and possibility,
cannot be pronounced successful. While the Egyptian
origin appears on the whole to be most probable, final
judgement must be suspended. It seems unlikely, how-
ever, in any case that the derivation was made direct
from the older hieroglyphic or pictorial symbols. The
model for the Semitic letters is to be found rather in
the hieratic character and the more cursive forms of
a later period, especially in the papyri of the most
flourishing era of Egyptian civilisation in the latter
half of the second millennium B.C. The most important

treasury, cannot have arisen at one stroke with the first king of the
dynastic age ; but must have been in use long before the rise of the
First Dynasty ; while the presence of a cursive linear hand at the
beginning of the dynasties is conclusive evidence that the system was
not then a recent innovation." See also Ad. Ermau, Egyptian Grammar,
Eng. trans., London, 1894, p. 12 ff. ; E. Maunde Thompson, Greek and
Latin Palaeography. London, 1893, ch. i.

36 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of these models is the so-called Papyrus Prisse, from
Thebes, " the most ancient book in the world," now in
the National Library in Paris, containing the moral
" Precepts of Ptah-Hotep," who lived during the fifth
Dynasty of Egypt, circa 2600 B.C. The existing
papyrus is, of course, of later date, being a copy of
the original. 1 Thus through the Semitic the ancient
Egyptian became the parent of the Greek and Eoman
alphabetic systems, whence in turn have been derived
those of modern Europe. 2

The precise geographical or ethnic limits within
which this ancient Semitic character was employed
cannot be laid down ; but it was in use over practically
the whole of hither Asia, and in the service of trade
and commerce was carried far and wide over Egypt
and the countries bordering on the Mediterranean. 3

1 P. Virey, "Precepts of Ptah-Hotep" in Records of the Past, New
Series, vol. iii. p. 1 ff. ; Breasted, I.e. p. 107 f. ; "W. M. Flinders Petrie,
History of Egypt, vol. i. p. 81.

2 The literature of the general subject is of very great extent. See
especially Isaac Taylor, The Alphabet, 2 vols., London, 1883; W.
Wright, Comparative Grammar, ch. iii. ; and arts, in Encyclopedias,
esp. Th. Noldeke, "Semitic Languages" in Encycl. Brit. 9 The
Babylonian origin of Semitic writing is advocated by C. J. Ball in
an article on the "Origin of the Phoenician Alphabet" in PSBA, vol.
xv. p. 392 ff. A possible Hittite derivation was suggested in a paper
read before the Oxford Philological Society by W. Scott in the spring
of 1904 (Class. Rev. xviii. p. 415). De Rouge's work, L'Origine
Erjyptienne de V Alphabet Phdnicien, was published in 1874.

3 The theory of the late Dr. Georg Biihler, who derives the Sanskrit
Devauagarl characters ultimately from an ancient alphabet of Northern
Semitic type, is well known, and has been widely accepted. See Indian
Studies, iii., 2nd ed., Strassburg, 1898; " Indische Palaeographie " in
Grundriss d. Indo-Arischen PMlologic, Strassburg, 1896. If this view
should be established, all the modern Indian scripts which are descended

ORIGIN OF THE ALPHABET 37

It was the common original script of peoples of
Aramaic birth, of Phoenicians, Israelites, Moabites, and
others, and the earlier documents of the Old Testament
Canon must have been written down at first in this
character. The letter sent by the Syrian king to
Jehoram the king of Israel (2 Kings v. 5 ff.) would
be thus written, and probably also the letter sent
to Hezekiah from Sennacherib, king of Assyria
(Isa. xxxvii. 14). At how early a date the people
of Israel were acquainted with and used a script of
this kind it is impossible to determine. With a written
character, however, they must have been familiar by
sight at least during their sojourn in the land of Egypt ;
and there is no reason to doubt that their leaders and
chief men would be competent to make practical use
of the art. As far as written records, therefore, are
concerned, the history seems to show that there would
be no inherent impossibility in their composition and
preservation at and after a date as early as the period
of the Israelite residence in Egypt.

The Hebrew verb 2H3 is of frequent occurrence in
the Old Testament, and could hardly have found a
place there so often had the art of writing itself been
unknown, or confined to a few leaders or professional
men. It occurs more than two hundred and twenty
times. Inferences from the use of the word are con-

from the Devanagarl would owe their origin to a Semitic source.
Attempts have been made, on the other hand, to show that the ancient
Indian alphabet in question is of indigenous origin. The most recent,
as far as my knowledge goes, is by R. Shamasastry in the Indian
Antiquary, vol. xxxv. (1906) pp. 253 ff., 270 ff., 311 ff.

18 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

fessedly precarious, and must not be too closely pressed.
The ancient book of Jashar, however O^n "IB?, Josh.
x. 13; 2 Sam. i. 18), and the book of the Wars of
the Lord (njni nionta 'D, Num. xxi. 14) were both
written documents. The passage Judg. viii. 14 also,
where the E.V. " described " is literally " wrote " (nna 11 ),
seems to show that facility with the pen was not
confined to a professional or learned class ; compare

Isa. x. 19, 1 Sam. x. 25, and the difficult expression
Hos. viii. 12, K.V., " though I write for him my law
in ten thousand precepts." l Whatever the precise
meaning of the last quoted phrase may be, it at least
contemplates the possibility of a written Torah. The
root 3.D3 signified originally perhaps to " cut " or
" engrave," and is apparently used with that meaning in
the phrase by 3H3, as in Q'33K by '2, Deut. xxvii. 3 ; YV. by. ' 3 ,
Ezek. xxxvii. 1 G ; n^o by '3, Jer. xxxvi. 2, 28 ; nrvb by '3,
Ex. xxxiv. 1, and especially ">s? by '3, Deut. xvii. 18,
1 Kings xiv. 19 al., a phrase that occurs more than
fifty times, and which apparently refers to engraving
with a style upon a tablet or other prepared surface.
Writing with a pen in the ordinary sense is "iSDa DTI 3,
Josh. viii. 31, Jer. xxxii. 12 al. The lexicons also
draw attention to the fact that the phrase with by is
not used with IDD in the sense of " letter " ; nor is
'a 3H3 followed by words like J3K, TV, etc. 2

INSCRIPTIONS. - - The oldest existing inscription of

1 vnin 'an i 1 ? an:N, Keth. ian and 3in:x; cp. Sept. Karaypaif/u
w\TJ0os Kal ra v6jj.ifj.a. fj.ov els a\\6rpia t\oyio-()r)ffav, i.e. 'nnini 3T or 'n

2 See Brown and Driver, Oxf. Hcb. Lex. , s. v. nnD.

INSCRIPTIONS 39

any length or importance written in this ancient
character was discovered at Dibon (Dhlban) in the
land of Moab, twenty-five miles east of the Dead
Sea. The existence of the inscription first became
known in the summer of the year 1868 to the Rev.
F. A. Klein, a missionary of the Church of England,
who reported his discovery both in Germany and to
the authorities of the English Palestine Exploration
Fund. Unfortunately, however, the jealousy of the
Bedawin was. aroused by the efforts made to obtain
possession of the stone, which proved its value in the
eyes of Europeans, and the stone was broken to pieces
for the sake of its supposed magical efficacy. The
fragments were eventually secured for the Museum
of the Louvre, in Paris, and the monument, restored
and completed as far as possible, was set up again, and
may there be seen. It was fortunate that before the
destruction of the stone copies of the inscription had
been taken and squeezes made. The monument is
known as the Moabite Stone ; it is of black basalt,
and stands rather under four feet high by two feet in
breadth. The inscription is in thirty-four lines, the last
four of which are incomplete and partly unintelligible,
and commemorates the victory of Mesha, the Moabite
king, over his Israelite adversary ; cp. 2 Kings i. 1 ,
iii. 427 ; the date is circa 850 B.C. 1

1 See for a transcription of the inscription in ordinary Hebrew
characters with translation and discussion, S. R. Driver, Notes on the
Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, Oxford, 1890, p. Ixxxvff. ; also
Records of the Past, New Series, vol. ii. p. 194ff. ; M. Lidzbarski,
Ephemeris fur Scmitische Epigraphik, i. 1, pp. 1-10, ii. 2, p. 150 ff. ;

40 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

To find an inscription in the ancient character
comparable in interest to that of the Moabite Stone
it is necessary to come down in time to the age of
Hezekiah, king of Judah, 727-699 B.C. 1 In the Old
Testament brief reference is made to a conduit or
watercourse constructed by the king, apparently with
the object of securing a permanent and regular supply
of water within the city walls, which should not be
liable to be cut off in a siege. 2 Such a rock-cut
tunnel runs southwards in a circuitous course from
the so - called Virgin's Well, south of the Haram
enclosure, the only natural spring and reliable water-
supply in the immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem,
to the Pool of Siloam ; and this tunnel, which is in
part natural, has been supposed to have been enlarged
or completed by Hezekiah for the purpose named. In
the midsummer of 1880 a Hebrew inscription was
accidentally found by a pupil of the late architect,
Dr. Schick, on the wall of the tunnel, on the right-
hand side, some 19 or 20 feet from the point where
the conduit enters into the Siloam Pool. The dis-
covery excited the greatest possible interest among
scholars. The inscription was carefully copied, and

G. A. Cooke, North-Semitic Inscriptions, Oxford, 1903, pp. 1-14 ;
W. H. Bennett in HDB, vol. iii. pp. 404-408. References to other
literature and commentaries will be found in these works. An account
of the original discovery is given in Walter Besant, Twenty-one Years'
Work in the Holy Land, London, 1889, and often elsewhere.

1 The date is that given by E. Kautzsch, Literature of the 0. T. ,
1898, p. 187, and is practically the same as that of S. R. Driver,
al. ; others place Hezekiah's reign earlier by a decade.

3 2 Kings xx. 20 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 30, cp. ver. 4 ; Isa. viii. 6.

INSCRIPTIONS 41

has been many times published, translated, and com-
mented on. It is generally believed to refer to this
work of Hezekiah, and to commemorate its successful
completion. Hence its date will be the end of the
eighth or the beginning of the seventh century B.C.,
a century and a half or more later than the Moabite
Stone. 1 The inscription itself, however, bears no
internal evidence of date ; and the conclusion which
ascribes it to the time of Hezekiah, though generally
accepted, has not passed without question. 2

The later history of the monument has been as
unfortunate as that of its predecessor. Cut out from
the rock and stolen in the latter part of the year
1890, it was with difficulty recovered in a broken
condition, and is now preserved in the Museum at
Constantinople. 3

The same ancient character is found on coins as
late as the Jewish revolt under Simon Bar-Kokhba,
132-35 A.D., long after its use had been abandoned

1 See Records of the Past, New Series, vol. i. p. 168 ff. ; S. R. Driver,
Notes on Samuel, p. xiv ff. ; A. H. Sayce, Fresh Light from the Ancient
Monuments, 5 1890, p. 80 ff. ; M. Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, i. 1, p. 53 f. ,
3, p. 310 f., ii. 2, p. 190 f. ; G. A. Cooke, North-Semitic Inscription*,
p. 15 ff.; C. R. Conder, art. "Jerusalem" in HDB ii. p. 597 ; and the
literature cited. A cast of the inscription, and a facsimile in con-
venient form, are published by the Palestine Exploration Fund.

2 E. J. Pilcher, for example, in an article in PSBA, vol. xix. (1897)
p. 165 ff., maintains on palaeographical grounds a post-exilic date, and
places it in the reign of Herod the Great ; see also S. A. Cook in
JQR xvi. p. 286 f. The ordinary view is strongly defended by
Lidzbarski, I.e. , who compares the writing to that on seals of early pre-
exilic date, and emphasises the free and natural character of the script,
which becomes more constrained in the later centuries.

3 See PEFQuSt., 1891, pp. 2, 88 f.

42 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

for literary purposes, and seems to have been associated
in particular with revivals of the national spirit ; as
in the Maccabsean age, when Judas and his successors,
in the second half of the second century B.C., struck
coins bearing legends in the old Hebrew script, and
in the years 6670 A.D. of the great revolt against
the Eoman dominion. 1 It was also employed for the
stamps on seals, weights, etc., as on an ancient
hsematite weight brought from Samaria, or an inscribed
bead from Jerusalem, 2 and on numerous jar-handles
discovered during the course of the excavations at
Tell Zakariya, Tell es-Safi, and elsewhere in the south
of Palestine. 3 The same alphabet is met with in the
inscription on the Carpentras stele referred to above, 4
and in Aramaic papyri brought from Egypt. 5 It was
further retained by the Samaritans in their Biblical
manuscripts of the Pentateuch.

At a date which it is not possible to determine
with precision, this ancient character or script was
superseded by the so-called " square " or " Aramaean "
type now in use. Transition forms of letters are
recognisable on inscriptions of the fourth and later
centuries B.C., and on many of the papyri. Jewish
tradition ascribes the change to Ezra, who brought
the new characters with him on his return to Palestine

1 See A. R. S. Kennedy in HDB, art. "Money," vol. iii. p. 424 ff.
- PEFQu.SL, 1890, p. 267 f., 1893, p. 32 f.

3 Ib. 1899, 1900, passim.

4 Supra, p. 19 ; S. R. Driver, Notes mi Samuel, p. xvii ff.

5 See now especially, Sayce and Cowley, Aramaic Papyri discovered
at Assuan, London, 1906, with plates of facsimiles ; Driver, I.e.
p. xxi f.

"HEBREW" AND "SQUARE" CHARACTER 43

in the fifth century (B.C. 458). The square type of
character, therefore, was said to be termed ''"W!* because
of its derivation from Assyria. More probably, how-
ever, the name was given on account of the shape
of the letters, "i$N, " squared " ; while the ancient form
retained the older name ^V, " Hebrew." Direct
evidence, however, of the time at which the alteration
took place is wanting. It would certainly be made
gradually, and for a time at least the two scripts were
probably in use side by side, the '"WN or VfiD nrn,
" squared writing," by degrees supplanting its rival.
It has been suggested that the completion of the
change was hastened by the destruction of manu-
scripts during the Maccabaean wars ; new codices, to
replace those lost or destroyed, would be brought
from Babylonia, and, being written in the square
character, served to familiarise the people with the
new forms. It is evident that the transition was
complete before the beginning of our era. The
reference to yodli as a small or the smallest letter
of the Hebrew alphabet 1 would have no significance
in the older form, where yodh is by no means of
diminutive size. The earlier documents at least of the
Old Testament would originally therefore have been
written in the "nsy character. At a later period
this antecedent relation of the two types of character
came to be forgotten, and the """l^V was pronounced
unholy or profane, and an interdict was laid on the
writing of the Scriptures in " Hebrew " letters. The

1 Matt. v. 18.

44 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

direction of the Talmud, that the sacred writings should
be communicated only in the 'niK'N, was perhaps not
unconnected with the Samaritan retention of the
more ancient script for their own Torah. The real
origin of the 'niPN being forgotten, an extreme antiquity
was claimed for it, and, like other institutions and
practices of the Jews, its invention was ascribed even
to Moses himself. 1

This later square character was little used apparently
for inscriptions, perhaps owing to the form of the
letters being less suitable for engraving. Such in-
scriptions as are known are brief and unimportant,
being mostly of the nature of epitaphs consisting of a
few words. The earliest and most interesting are
described and figured by Dr. Neubauer in the article
referred to, by Dr. Driver in the Introduction to

1 The classical passage from the Babylonian Talmud is Sanhedrin
2lb : "The law was given to Israel at first in naj; writing and in the
holy tongue ; in the days of Ezra it was given to them again in
Assyrian writing and in the Aramaic tongue. Israel then chose the
Assyrian writing and the holy tongue, and left to the Idiotes the nay
writing and the Aramaic tongue. Who are the Idiotes ? Rabbi Chasda
says, The Kuthim (,nn, n, 2 Kings xvii. 24, 30, i.e. Samaritans).
What is the nay writing? R. Chasda says, The Libiinah (fiwn'V,
probably meaning suitable for engraving on stone or brick, cp. ma^,
Gen. xi. 3, Isa. ix. 9 ; but according to others from n:u^, the modern
Lubban, near Shiloh, Judg. xxi. 19, or nph, Libnah, in the south of
Judah, Josh. x. 29 ff.). . . . Although the law was not given through
him, the writing was changed by him, as it is said, 'The writing of the
letter was written in the Syrian character (rrcnx, Aramaic), and set
forth in the Syrian tongue' (Ezra ^v. 7)." The same tradition is
recorded by Origen and Jerome ; Orig. on Ps. ii. 2, ed. Lomm. xi.
p. 396 f. ; Jerome, Prol. Galcalus. See Ad. Neubauer, "Introduction of
the Square Characters in Biblical MSS " in Stadia Biblica et Ecclesi-
astics, iii. p. 1 il'. ; Driver, I.e. p. ix IV.

INSCRIPTIONS 45

his Notes on Samuel, and reported in the Quarterly
Statements of the Palestine Exploration Fund. A
complete list to date with translations and comments
will be found in the successive numbers of the
Ephemeris fur Semitische Epigraphik, edited by M.
Lidzbarski, Giessen, 1900ff. A few only need here
be named.

(1) A single word cut on a rock-surface at 'Araq-el-
Emir, near Heshbon, read as rrinjJ or possibly ^l*-.
The date is supposed to be the third or late fourth
century B.C., the form of the letters exhibiting a transi-
tional character. Driver, p. xxii f. ; Neubauer, p. 1 6 f.

(2) A brief inscription on the so-called porta triplex
at Jerusalem, which is read, " Caleb the son of Joseph
the son of Jochanan." " Of doubtful date, but certainly
not earlier than the first century B.C.," Neubauer, I.e.

(3) The epitaph of the children of Chazlr ("nn), at
the entrance of the Tomb of St. James on the Mt. of
Olives. The inscription is attributed to the beginning
of the Christian era, and the forms of the letters
approximate closely to the well-known square type.
" This tomb and resting-place is for Eleazar, Channiah,
. . . sons of Channiah of the children of Chazlr."
Driver, p. xxiii f. ; Neubauer, I.e. ; Cooke, North-Semitic
Inscriptions, p. 341.

(4) The bilingual title or inscription on a royal
sarcophagus found in the tombs of the Kings, ascribed
to the first century A.D. The name and title are
in Syriac and square Hebrew letters, nnabo my.
Neubauer, I.e.

46 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

(5) An inscription in mosaic discovered in the year
1900 at Kefr Kenna, near Nazareth in Galilee. The
mosaic is supposed to have formed part of a synagogue,
or possibly of an early Christian church. The in-
scription is dedicatory, apparently of the mosaic itself,
or perhaps some part of the building in which it stood ;
and the writing is ascribed to the early centuries of
our era. PEFQuSt., 1901, pp. 251, 374 ff., 1902, p.
132 ff. ; Lidzbarski, Ephemeris, i. p. 31 3 ff.

(6) At Fik, five miles east of the Sea of Galilee,
a brief inscription of twelve or thirteen letters was
discovered, engraved upon a small column of basalt.
The inscription is of doubtful interpretation, but the
forms of the letters seem to indicate a similar date to
that of No. (3) above. PEFQuSt., 1902, p. 26, 1903,
p. 185f.

(7) On the door of an old synagogue at Kefr
Birlm in Galilee. " Peace be upon this place and upon
all the places of Israel. Yoseh the Levite, son of Levi,
made this lintel. May blessing come upon his works."
The date is probably the second or third century A.D.
Cooke, NSJ, p. 342.

2. SOURCES AND HISTORY OF THE TEXT; MANU-
SCRIPTS; EDITIONS.

For the critical restoration of the Hebrew text of
the Old Testament the available materials are far less
abundant, and their treatment involves more formidable
difficulties than is the case with the Greek of the New.

SOURCES OF THE TEXT 47

In the discussion of the latter text, scholars avail
themselves of three sources of information and evidence
Manuscripts, Versions, and Patristic quotations ; and
each of these provides a wealth of material to aid in
arriving at a knowledge of the true and exact words
of the sacred writers. In regard to the Old Testament,
however, the last-named of these sources of critical
material is altogether wanting. There are no Hebrew
" Fathers," whose works have been guarded and handed
down, replete with quotation from the original text of
the Old Testament. It is true that there exists a larsre

and varied later Hebrew literature, much of it of the
nature of exegesis and commentary ; but for more
reasons, perhaps, than one it is of little or no value for
the establishment of a critical text. 1 Hebrew manuscripts
moreover, instead of presenting the almost bewildering
variety of readings which meets the critical student of
the Greek New Testament, are all of one type or family,
and vary from one another almost without exception
in only the most insignificant and unimportant details
of arrangement and punctuation. In regard to date
also, the earliest extant manuscripts are comparatively
late, later by five or six centuries than the great
uncials of the New Testament ; and are all derived
from a common archetype, which they faithfully
and accurately reproduce. A fragment of papyrus
from Egypt stands at present alone as the representative
of a different and independent line of tradition ; 2 and
its variations, slight as they are, provide additional
1 Infra, p. 138 ff. 2 Infra, p. 57 ff.

48 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

evidence that this archetype, itself removed by some
centuries from the date of the authors of the documents
concerned, did not and could not faultlessly reproduce
the original words of the writers. It had itself been
subject to accidents of transmission through a consider-
able period of time, marked by distress, revolution, and
exile. And the existing manuscripts do not provide
the means of correcting its errors, or restoring the true
and original text that lies behind it.

The worth of the early versions, therefore, of the Old
Testament in Greek, Latin, Syriac, etc., is proportion-
ately great, and their importance for critital purposes
can hardly be overestimated. They furnish us with
our only witness to a text independent of and
antecedent to that of the manuscripts. If it were
possible to recover with absolute certainty the Hebrew
original from which they were translated, there would
lie before us a text widely divergent in many respects
from the traditional type, not necessarily or probably
superior to it on the whole, but with an indisput-
able claim to consideration in determining the actual
words which the sacred writers penned. In the Old
Testament, even more than in the New, the importance
and value of the testimony of the Versions has been
increasingly recognised. 1

MANUSCRIPTS. Hebrew tradition has preserved the
names of a number of ancient codices of the sacred
text, which were regarded as models of faithfulness and
accuracy, to whose standard later copies were required

< Cp. infra, p. 197 ff,

ftawBi'wisws^T urftratrt-flTST)'!'
**W^W!?KiT.WJl' 1 *W' "^srnvp'jip

tfv

"*8"i

ftrx

s-iwo-sitTW* -r-" W SH '-77
Kiqt9ran^|Wibit'vt > i -"no

ny?
?**<.

-r=

HEBREW ROLL OF THE PENTATEUCH. EX. XL. 18-LEV. III. 2,

MANUSCRIPTS 49

to conform. These are known to IKS for the most part
only by report. Headings from some of them have
been preserved, or extant manuscripts possess a more
or less well-founded claim to represent their text. The
writings of the Eabbis make frequent reference to these
codices and to their authors, whose decisions and
judgements they quote.

The most celebrated of these manuscripts to whose
authority appeal is most frequently made were the
following :

(1) Codex Hilleli (fyr\ nso). This codex is believed
to have been written about 600 A.D., and there were
added to its text Massoretic notes, as well as vowels
and accents. David Kimchi (1160-1235), the gram-
marian, is authority for the statement that in his
time the manuscript was at Toledo, though it is doubtful
whether he himself saw it there. A later writer,
Abraham Zakuto (c. 1500), himself an exile from
Spain, says that the codex was carried from Leon in
Spain during a severe persecution at the end of the
twelfth century ; and that he saw the parts of the
manuscript containing the earlier and later prophets in
Africa, whither they had been brought from Portugal.
It is not easy to reconcile the different accounts and
references. Possibly, however, the manuscript was
broken up at the time of the persecution. The
Pentateuch portion passed into the keeping of the
Jews of Toledo, and became known to Kimchi. The
remainder of the codex found its way to Portugal, and
thence by purchase or otherwise to Africa at some time
4

50 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

before the beginning of the sixteenth century. Nothing
more is known of its history, but readings from it are
found recorded by Norzi and others, and in various
manuscripts. The name ^n is supposed to be that of
the author or transcriber of the MS, possibly merely of
an early owner. There were, however, two celebrated
Eabbis of that name. The first or great Hillel flourished
immediately before the beginning of the Christian era.
Hillel II. lived in the fourth century. And to each the
codex has been ascribed. Unless the usually accepted
date above given is in error, neither form of the
tradition can be accepted as true. Others, therefore,
suppose the Hillel in question to be an otherwise
unknown writer of the name who lived in the sixth
century, or that it is a mere nom de plume. Elias
Levita records that in some books he found the form
'^61% and he inferred, therefore, that the name was
derived from the town of Hilla or Hillah near Babylon.
This last explanation is not perhaps very probable. 1

(2) A second celebrated codex, of the history of
which, however, nothing is known, is the so-called
Codex Zaribuqi ('pm nao). Its readings are frequently
noted on the margins of the manuscripts. The name
71331 is usually supposed to mark the place of origin of
the codex in the Jewish community at Zanbuk on the
Tigris. Others have conjectured that Zanbuqi is the

1 See Elias Levita, Massoreth-ha-Massoreth, translated by C. D.
Ginsburg, London, 1867, p. 260; Neubauer, I.e. p. 23 f. ; H. L.
Strack, Prolegomena Critica in Vetus Testament um, Leipzig, 1867,
pp. 15 ff., 112ft'. ; C. D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Hebrew Bille,
London, 1897, p. 431 f.

MANUSCRIPTS 51

writer's name, or even an error for Zadduki, and
equivalent to Sadducee. 1

(3) Jericho Codex, or Jericho Pentateuch (inn 11 twin).
Apparently the manuscript contained no more than the
five books of Moses, for it is always referred to as
inn 11 B>in. It is only known from the quotations in
the Massorah. 2

(-4) Jerusalem Codex (ychffrt ~IQD). Beyond frequent
citations by David Kimchi (supra, p. 49), who states that
it was preserved at Saragossa (Zaragoza) on the Ebro, and
in the Massorah, nothing is known of this manuscript.
According to Dr. Ginsburg, the quotations show consider-
able divergence in orthography from the Codex Hilleli. 3

(5) Sinai Codex (^D nso). That the codex took its
name from Mount Sinai, being produced or copied in
the district, seems most probable on the analogy of the
Jericho and Jerusalem manuscripts. Others, however,
have held the view that ^D is the name of the author
or scribe. Elias Levita believed the codex, which he
had not personally examined, to be a copy of the
Pentateuch alone. Dr. Ginsburg, however, from
quotations in the Massorah, has proved that it con-
tained at least the earlier and later prophets; and
a further reference is given by Dr. Baer to a passage
in the book of Job. In all probability, therefore, the
codex was complete. 4

1 Strack, pp. 23, 117 f. ; Neubauer, p. 24; Ginsburg, p. 4321'.;
S. Baer, Libri Josuce et Judicum, Leipzig, 1891, p. vi and note.

2 Strack, pp. 23, 117 f. ; Ginsburg, p. 433.

3 Ginsburg, Introduction, p. 433 ; Elias Levita. p. 260.

4 Strack, pp. 23 f., 118 ; Ginsburg, p. 433 ii.

52 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

(6) A famous Codex of the Law, from which
readings have been preserved, is that which, according
to Josephus, was carried to Eouie by Titus with the
rest of the spoils of the Temple and laid up in the
royal palace. Later, at the beginning of the third
century, it was transferred, apparently by Imperial gift,
to a synagogue in the city, and finally perished at
some unknown period in the troubles and overthrow
of Eome herself. 1

Eeferences to other standard copies, the readings of
which are quoted in the Massorah as authoritative, will
be found in Dr. Ginsburg's Introduction and elsewhere.
Their variations rarely extend beyond minute details of
accentuation and vocalisation, and afford little or no
help in the interpretation of the text. The most
numerous and important differences were between
the two schools of the East and the West, the former
with its headquarters at Babylon, where for seven or
eight centuries Jewish learning greatly flourished, the
latter Palestinian, its chief centre and home after the
destruction of Jerusalem being the city of Tiberias on
the Lake of Galilee, long famous for its synagogues and
its succession of learned Eabbis. The divergences
between these schools in the two respects named were
more extensive and fundamental, and a few instances
are quoted in which their differences extend to
questions concerning the consonantal text and the
division of words. Both schools had their representa-
tive masters and teachers, of whom the most famous
1 Josephus, Jeiuish War, vii. 5. 5ff. ; Neubauer, pp. 19-22.

MANUSCRIPTS 53

were Eabbi Moses ben Napbtali, or, as the name is
sometimes given, Jacob b. NapMaJi, and Aaron beji
Asher. respectively, who were almost contemporaries in
the East and the West in the tenth century of our era.
Each of these scholars produced a model codex,
illustrating and embodying the principles which in
his judgement should control the form of the text, and
exemplifying the rules according to which a correct
text should be written. These codices became and for
long remained the standard copies of the rival schools.
Unfortunately, neither of them, as far as is known,
has-been preserved. 1 Lists, however, of the variations
between Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali were compiled
and are found in many manuscripts. The authority
of the former is usually followed both in Hebrew
manuscripts and in the printed editions. The prin-
ciples of the latter are said, doubtfully, to be
exemplified in manuscripts with the so-called Baby-
lonian pointing. 2

(7) Moses ben Naphtali was born in Babylonia
about the year 900 A.D. Nothing, however, seems
to be known of him, or of the codex which he
wrote. Dr. Neubauer quotes the undoubtedly spurious
colophon to a St. Petersburg MS, which ascribes
the "arrangement" of the codex to him, and
gives the date 922 A.D. Nor does any extant
manuscript appear to embody throughout his charac-
teristic or peculiar readings. The lists, therefore,
of the differences between his text and that of Ben

1 See infra, No. 8. * Infra, p. 109 ff.

54 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Asher form the only record of his practice in textual
matters. 1

(8) The model Codex of Aaron ben Asher was
long believed to be in existence, and to be preserved
in the Jewish synagogue at Aleppo in Syria (fa?n,
Ezek. xxvii. 18); and by some authorities it is still
maintained that the Aleppo manuscript, though not
the autograph of the great Eabbi himself, is a faithful
and practically contemporary transcript of his copy.
It seems, however, to have been conclusively proved
that this cannot be the case. As the result of a
careful examination, Dr. Wickes 2 points out that the
character of the writing indicates a later date than
that of Ben Asher, and that " the punctuation is, in
many instances, at variance with Ben Asher s known
practice and the rules laid down by the Palestinian
Massoretes." This last fact is decisive, and it follows
that the epilogue attached to the manuscript, on the
strength of which it has been assigned to Ben Asher,

1 Lists compiled from the Massorah will be found, for example, in the
editions of the separate books of the Old Testament published by Dr.
Ijaer, Leipzig, 1869-95. Select readings are given by Strack, Pro-
leyomcna, pp. 24 ff., 118, or Ginsburg, Introduction, p. 245 ff., and
in the notes to his edition of the Hebrew Bible, London, 1894.
Instances of the more important dillerences quoted are Jer. xxvii. 19,
where Ben Naphtali is said to have read \~!^, in the land, for Tya, in
the city, the reading of Ben Asher ; so in Cant. viii. 6 the former writes
n JW5^> R- v - marg. "a most vehement flame," as two words a^nyrffV,
R.V. text "a very flame of the Lord." See also Neubauer, I.e. p. 24 ;
Levita, p. 113f.

" Treatise on the Accentuation of the Prose Zlooks of the Old Testament,
Oxford, 1887, Pref. p. 7 if., where a facsimile of a page of the MS will
be found.

MANUSCRIPTS 55

cannot be regarded as trustworthy. 1 Both this manu-
script and a similar codex of the earlier and later
prophets at Cairo, which bears the name of Moses ben
Asher, the father of Aaron, and is dated 895 A.D., ,
probably belong to the eleventh or twelfth century/
The original Codex of Ben Asher is said to have
passed after his death into the possession of the Qaraite
Jews of Jerusalem, and thence at an early date to have
been transferred to Cairo, where the celebrated Jewish
scholar and writer Moses Maimonides (1135-1204 A.D.)
saw and used it. Of the history of the Aleppo manu-
script nothing is really known. 2

It follows, therefore, that with the exception of the
fragment of papyrus noted and described below, no
Hebrew manuscript of really early date is known to
exist ; and all extant copies reproduce with fidelity
and accuracy one and the same type or recension of
text. Nor is it at all likely that manuscripts differing

1 The same is apparently true of the celebrated codex in the Imperial
Library at St. Petersburg, numbered B. 19 a , which, according to the
colophon, was copied from Ben Asher's original manuscript in the
year 1009 A.D. The form and character of the writing point to a later
date. Such evidence is not, of course, conclusive, if it stood alone ;
and the editors of the Imperial Catalogue adopt a view favourable to
the genuineness of the signature. Dr. Ginsburg also takes this for
granted. Unfortunately the colophons to Hebrew MSS appear often,
where not actually inserted for the purpose of giving an air of antiquity,
to have been taken over verbally from an earlier exemplar. Dr.
Ginsburg, in his discussion, seems to have made too little allowance
for this tendency on the part of scribes. See Wickes, I.e. p. 9 and
note 12 ; Ginsburg, Introduction, p. 243 ff.

- See Strack, Prolegomena, p. 44 if., and HDBiv. p. 728 a ; El. Levita,
p. 113 f. ; Ginsburg, p. 241 ff. ; Neubauer, p. 24 ff. ; H. Gratz, History
of the Jews, iii. p. 21 If.

56 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

in character will ever come to light. Such manuscripts
must have existed at one time in very considerable
numbers. The colonies of Jews throughout the civilised
world would be in possession of copies of their sacred
Scriptures ; and every synagogue would have at least
one Eoll of the Law, and could hardly have been
without manuscript texts of the Books of the Prophets
and of the Writings. It is difficult to believe that
the total destruction and disappearance of all these
could be the result of mere accident. The misfortunes
of the Jews as a nation, their revolts and wars, their
wide dispersal and the persecutions to which they
were subjected, would doubtless account for much in
the way of loss of manuscripts. In view, however,
of the tenacity with which the Jews have always
clung to and treasured their Scriptures, more weight
should probably be attached to intentional removal
or putting out of the way of old copies as they became
worn out and unfit for service, from fear lest they
should fall into profane hands. Sucli copies were
buried, or consigned to the Genizah (N^f) of the
synagogue, the storehouse or hiding-place, whence has
been recovered in recent times so much that is valuable
of Hebrew and Arabic literature. The same treatment
also was doubtless meted out to codices that were
in any way faulty, imperfect, or incorrect. It would
seem, further, to be incontestable that at the time
of the determination of the Massoretic or authorised
text, orders were given that copies not in harmony
with it should be destroyed. After all allowance,

4
5

8
10

22
23

^*H? f

- 1 "'

' ^-W^jir^k/

t * " fc . '.*'"' *^ -UV^lQ

F.C.B. del

PRE-MASSORETIC HEBREW PAPYRUS, EX. XX. 2-17, DEUT. VI. 4 f .

MANUSCRIPTS 57

however, has been made, it appears strange that no
early Hebrew manuscripts of the books of the Old
Testament should have survived.

The sole representative of a pre-Massoretic Hebrew
text that is known to exist consists of four small
fragments of papyrus brought from Egypt a few years
ago, and preserved in a private library. The date of
the writing is believed to be not later than the second
century of our era, and it would thus be the oldest
Biblical manuscript of any kind in existence. The
text is brief and fragmentary, consisting of no more
than twenty-four lines of Hebrew writing ; the lines,
moreover, are broken at the beginning and the end.
Twenty-one lines, as will be seen from the facsimile,
give the Decalogue in a form that differs from the
text both of Exodus and of Deuteronomy; lines 22-24
with a few slight traces of a 25th, contain the
Shema', Deut. vi. 4 ff. It is hardly probable that the
fragments formed part of a complete papyrus text
of the Old Testament, or even the Pentateuch ; they
are more naturally regarded as derived from a Jewish
prayer-book or lectionary. A full discussion of the
text of the fragment from a palseographical point of
view, and of its relations to the accepted Massoretic
text and the readings of the Versions, will be found
in a paper by Mr. S. A. Cook in PSBA xxv. p. 34 ff.
In the judgement of the writer of the article the text
of the Decalogue holds a midway position between the
forms given in Exodus and Deuteronomy, but is nearer
to the latter ; and with regard to the script " the writing

58 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

is an early form of the Hebrew in the transitional
stage from the ancestral Aramaic to the settled ' square
character.' . . . The closest Hebrew analogies are the
Palestinian ossuaries and the Bene Hezir inscription.
In view of the presence of the final letters, we can
scarcely date the papyrus before the end of the first
century, and on other grounds it can hardly be brought
down later than the third. . . . The palseography safely
allows us to ascribe it to the second century of our era,
and . . . the first quarter of that century would be the
most probable date in view of the characteristic features
of the text." The unique character of the fragment gives
to it an especial interest. The text is as follows :

6 pK "pn . . .-. -i^K -pr6x nin
si!? ^ . . y

nni> mnnt?n &{? PN!> nnno b
pa Kwp ta Trtas* mrr -^DN
f>jn D^^tr hy D
n tfff?
np: 1 -

nv nx iiar NI^ rub
[53 n^jn niuyn b

nom

psn nxi n
nin 11 1-13 p ^y
nsi I^N nx 133

1 S. A. Cook reads DM HN, but the facsimile looks more like mnm.

MANUSCRIPTS 59

nnn sjtun NI jru TN mrr
si!? SIB> ny "jjm n3(y)n NI^ n:
'iB' lyi n( <i )ii HK iionn xi
-|ir6 IB>K bi viorn ni

nix

onvo PKO cnssa 12103
sin nnx nin s irnSs nin- 1 i?

Between the Egyptian papyrus, thus fortunately
preserved, and the earliest existing Hebrew manu-
script the date of which rnay be regarded as certain,
there is a long interval. That interval, moreover, was
of decisive importance for the determination of the
character and form of the text of the Old Testament.
At some period during the early centuries of our era
an authoritative recension of the Hebrew text was
carried out, under circumstances the details of which
are obscure or unknown ; and all extant manuscripts
conform to this revised or established type. Variations
of reading, therefore, as they present themselves in the
text of the Greek Testament or of classical Greek and
Latin authors, do not exist for the Hebrew. But, as
has often been pointed out, 1 previous to this settlement

1 "Since the seventh and eighth centuries, and probably for pails
of the Old Testament, especially the Law, from a considerably earlier
date, the Jews displayed a scrupulous fidelity in the preservation and
correct transmission of their sacred books ; but nothing is more certain
than that the period during which this care was exercised was preceded
by one of no small laxity, in the course of which corruptions of different
kinds found their way into the text of the Old Testament." S. R.
Driver, Notes on Samuel, p. xxxvii.

60 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of the text the differences must have been considerable,
and perhaps exceeded, as the witness of the ancient
versions suggests, anything experienced in the New
Testament.

The extant Hebrew manuscripts belong to one or
other of two classes, either rolls for synagogue use,
which are invariably written without points, the
material employed being leather or parchment, or
codices in book form, on parchment or paper, carefully
pointed throughout, and usually furnished with an
apparatus of textual notes, the so-called Massorah. 1
Most of the manuscripts of the latter class have a
note or colophon at the close, which gives the date
and name of the copyist. Unfortunately these dates
appear to have been in many cases merely copied
together with the text itself from earlier codices, and
their unsupported testimony to the age of the manu-
scripts in which they are found cannot be accepted.
The dates are usually reckoned either by the common
Seleucid era, or from the first Temple at Jerusalem* 2

The most ancient known manuscript, if the recorded
date were trustworthy, would be the Cairo Codex of
the Prophets, referred to above. 3 The colophon gives
a date S2_^jrears~after- -the destruction of the second
Temple, equivalent to _ 89 5 A.D. Internal evidence
seems decisive against its genuineness, and the MS
belongs more probably to the eleventh or twelfth
century. The correctness of the earlier date is

1 Infra, p. 85 ff. 2 See Neubauer, I.e. p. 34.

3 Supra, p. 55.

MANUSCRIPTS 61

assumed by Dr. Ginsburg and Dr. Strack, 1 and is
maintained also by Dr. M. Gaster on the ground of
the arrangement of the columns on the page.' 2 The
last-named author attributes also to the same century
a Codex of the Prophets from Karasubazar, and a folio
codex in his own possession of parts of the Pentateuch,
together with fragments of MSS of the Hagiographa.
Concerning these and perhaps other Biblical manuscripts,
more or less complete, it is hardly possible to do other
than suspend judgement until more is known of the
history and changes of ancient Hebrew writing.

The same verdict of not proven must be passed with
regard to the well-known Codex No. 1 2 in t.bp University
Library, Cambridge, the date of which is given in the
colophon as~T56~Ilx The style of the writing and
the rules observed in the punctuation seem to render

so early a period for the manuscript impossible. Dr.
Ginsburg concurs with other authorities in ascribing
it to the thirteenth century. 3

The oldest Hebrew manuscript, therefore, with a date
attached, which is known to exist, of which the date
may be accepted with confidence, is the Codex of the
later Prophets, known as the Codex Bcibylonicus, now
in the Eoyal Library at St. Petersburg. The volume
contains the text complete from Isaiah to the end of
the twelve Minor Prophets, and has been published

1 Introduction, p. 241 f. ; Prolegomena, p. 46 f.

2 See M. Gaster, Hebreio Illuminated Bibles of the 9th and 10th
Centuries, London, 1901, p. 13 ff. ; PSBA xxii. p. 230.

3 See especially Dr. Neubauer's examination of the testimony of the
MS in Studia Biblica, iii. p. 27 ff.

62 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

in facsimile by Dr. H. L. Strack at St. Petersburg in
1876 ; a separate edition of the books of Hosea and
Joel in 1875 preceded the final publication. The text
is furnished with the supralinear or Babylonian system
of vowel-points and accents, 1 and is the oldest dated
example of this method of punctuation. The text
itself, however, does not follow the Babylonian rule,
nor does it range itself distinctively with either the
Eastern or Western School, but contains readings
characteristic of each. Probably the manuscript is
of Palestinian origin, and the mixed character of the
text is to be explained by the fact that the two schools
were not yet definitely separated at the time at which
it was transcribed. Dr. Gaster is of opinion that the
codex was written among the Jews of Yemen, in
south-west Arabia, whence in his view are derived most
of the manuscripts with a supralinear vocalisation ;
the Jewish schools of that district being closely con-
nected with Tiberias and not with Babylon, as hitherto
believed. 2

The earliest dated Hebrew manuscript in the
Oriental Department of the British Museum is num-
bered Or. 5550, and bears the date and place, Cairo,
980 A.D. An imperfect folio of the Pentateuch, with-
out date, Or. 4445, in the same Museum, is ascribed

1 See infra, p. 109 ff.

" See Ginsburg, p. 475 f. ; Strack, p. 52 f. and references ; Gaster,
Illuminated Bibles, p. 18 f. ; Wickes, p. 142 f. Other manuscripts
will be found enumerated and described in Ginsburg's Introduction,
ch. xii., in Strack, Prolegomena, sec. 7, p. 42 ff., and in the prefaces
to the separate books of the Old Testament published by Baer and
Delitzsuh, at Leipzig, etc.

179 a. ^tfos.1.2 -25

ITTi^r ^ * ^^npftto

I^WPpnfct^ t ^tifi-feitw

Wfe** t ^^o%iitj

^*1* i Ir* . . * ' 1

vn
K>

MTt^

I "

ST. PETERSBURG MANUSCRIPT, WITH SUPERLINEAR VOCALISATION AND
MASSORAH, HOS. I. 2-II. 5.

MANUSCRIPTS 63

to the ninth century ; and similar fragments of the
books of the Law, Or. 2540-42, and of Judges and
Isaiah, Or. 2547, to the tenth. 1

The value and authority of the Samaritan text of
the Pentateuch has been variously estimated. By
De Eossi it was regarded as an independent witness
to the original, and therefore of equal weight with the
Hebrew ; others have estimated it even higher. These
views are now generally abandoned, and it is conceded
that for critical purposes no great value can be attached
to the Samaritan form of the text. Until recently
no copy of a Eoll of the Samaritan Pentateuch was
known to exist in Europe or elsewhere than in the
synagogue at Nablus. The text of the version printed
in the Polyglots was derived entirely from codices,
or manuscripts in book form. Since the year 1870,
however, Samaritan rolls in a more or less imperfect
condition have reached Europe, and are to be found in
the Library of the British Museum and the Koyal
Library at St. Petersburg. The most important and
valuable copy in the former Library was acquired a
few years ago by the trustees from the high priest of
the Samaritan community at Shechem during his stay
in London. It bears the date 740 A.H., equivalent
to 1339-40 A.D. 2

In many of the early Hebrew manuscripts abbrevia-

1 G. Margoliouth, Hebrew and Samaritan MSS in the British
Museum, London, 1893 ; Ginsburg, pp. 423, 469 ff. ; PSBA, vol. xxii.
p. 238.

2 G. Margoliouth in JQR xv. p. 632 ff. ; Hebrew and Samaritan MSS
in the British Museum, p. 89 ff. ; M. Gaster, I.e. p. 23 fl'.

64 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

tions were employed for the sake of economising space.
These, however, were not, as a rule, permitted in texts
written after and according to the Massoretic recension.
A word abbreviated in the text for want of space was
completed on the margin, or repeated at the beginning
of the next line. There can be little doubt, therefore,
that mistakes made in the course of writing out in full
manuscript abbreviations of words represented by an
initial letter or letters, as, for instance, "> for nw, misread
as the pronominal suffix of the first person, or vice
versa, V 1 amplified into tanB" or $>KyDB, etc., are
responsible for some, perhaps many erroneous readings
in our present Hebrew text. In a Geniza at Cairo
there was even found some years ago a manuscript
written entirely in abbreviations, each word being
represented by the letter of the accented syllable,
whether initial or otherwise. Such a text could, of
course, only have been prepared and used as an aid
to the memory in oral recitation. 1

There are also two schools or styles of writing in
Hebrew manuscripts, of the history and development
of which little is certainly ascertained. They are
known respectively as the Ashkenazic and Sephardic,
or German and Spanish schools. 2 The former script

1 PSBA xxi. p. 261 f. ; for a full account of the abbreviations in
Hebrew manuscripts, see Ginsburg, Introduction, ch. v.

2 tj?if>N in Gen. x. 3 is a grandson, or at least a descendant of n?;,
Japheth. Elsewhere the name is found together with 'is, Minni,
perhaps Minseaus, as that of one of the kingdoms of eym, Armenia.
nap, Obad. 20 only in the Old Testament, is a district where the sons
of Jerusalem are held in captivity, according to Dr. G. A. Smith on
Obacl. I.e., in south-west Media, but, as others believe, in Bithynia or

SCHOOLS OF WRITING 65

employs a more cursive or rounded form of the
letters (litteras rotundas), the latter a square, more
angular shape (quadratas). The text of our printed
editions usually follows the German or Ashkenazi
readings.

The date at which the two schools began to be
distinguished cannot be determined with any certainty
from the available materials. Dr. Lowe places it as
early as the beginning of the ninth century of our era,
on the ground that sufficient time must be allowed
for the development of the characteristic style of each,
and that distinct local modifications are found in
France and Italy before 1250 A.D. 1 Whether, again,
these distinctions of the schools correspond to earlier
differences between East and West, between Babylonia
and Palestine, differences which are said to become
manifest as early as the third century of our era, or
whether there exists any relation at all between them,
must remain for the present at least an open question.
In the judgement of Dr. A. Neubauer, Ashkenazic
forms are derived probably from MSS written in Greek-
speaking countries, the Sephardic or square characters
from Syrian exemplars. 2 An intermediate position
between the two schools is held by manuscripts
originating in Italy ; and minor subdivisions have been

Galatia. The Jews themselves identified Sephardic with Spanish ; see
Brown and Driver, Heb. Lexicon, s.v., and the references there
given.

1 W. H. Lowe, Fragment of Talmud, Babli Pesachim, Cambridge
and London, 1879, p. xv, note 2 ; cp. also p. xiv and notes.

" Studio, Biblica et Ecdesiastica, iii. p. 33, note 2

66 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

formed or suggested, as Franco-Italian, Franco-German,
etc. 1

EDITIONS. The first printed editions of the Old
Testament in the original were due to the initiative
and interest of the Jews themselves, and were usually
accompanied by a Hebrew commentary. The earliest
of these was a copy of the Psalms issued in 1477 A.D.
with the commentary of David Kimchi, of Narbonne,
in the form of a small folio of 153 leaves. The
comments, printed in smaller Rabbinic type, are inter-
spersed within the text itself, each verse or double
verse being followed by the appropriate portion of the
commentary. The place of printing is not given.
According to Dr. Ginsburg, however, it was in all
probability from a Bologna press, since the type used
for Kimchi's commentary " is the same " 2 as that
exhibited by the text of Eashi in the editio princeps
of the Pentateuch, which was printed there within a
few years of the Psalter.

This first edition of the Pentateuch appeared at
Bologna in_j : 4_8_2. It was printed with vowel-points
and accents by the celebrated printer Abraham b,
Qhayvhii, together with the Targuni of Onkelos and the
commentary of Eashi. The edition is a folio of 219
leaves, with two columns to the page, and an average
of twenty lines of Hebrew text in each. The inner
column is broader than the outer, and contains the

1 Ginsburg, p. 477 al., and the list of MSS, p. 1029 ; Neubauer, I.e. ;
Strack, Prolegomena, p. 35 ff.

2 Elsewhere Dr. Ginsburg's verdict is less confident, the type
" greatly resembles" (p. 797).

EDITIONS 67

sacred text itself ; in the outer is printed the Targum of
Onkelos in the smaller Eabbinic type ; Rashi's commen-
tary occupies the upper and lower margins of the page.
The text is divided into sections, and a brief Massoretic
clausula is given at the end of each of the five books.

The second part of the Hebrew Bible, the Prophets
earlier and later, was first printed at Soncino in North
Italy, between Cremona and Milan, in two volumes,
148586 A.D. The second volume, containing Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve Minor Prophets, is
undated, but was apparently completed in the latter
year. The folio volumes are of 168 and 290 pages
respectively, and are printed in double columns without
vowels or accents, the second column containing the
commentary of Kimchi, a part of which is printed also
on the lower margin of the page. The second volume
is without the ornamental initial letters found in the
first at the beginning of each book.

The e<itip_ jwinceps of _ the_JHagiographa appeared at
Naples in three parts, in the years 14.86- J37, the first
part containing the Psalter with Kimchi's commentary :
the second, Proverbs, with the commentary of Immanuel
b. Solomon ; the third, the remainder of the books, all
with Rashi's commentary, except Job and Lamentations,
which have the commentaries of Levi b. Gershom and
Joseph Karo respectively. The text is vocalised, but
not accentuated; and the parts consist of 118, 103,
and 150 pages respectively. The edition is said to be
less carefully printed than the others, and to be
characterised by several mistakes and omissions.

68 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

The complete Bible in one volume was not printed
until the year 148.8. This editio princeps was issued
at Soncino from the same press as the editio princeps
of the Prophets, and is printed in double columns of
thirty lines each, containing the Hebrew text alone
with vowels and accents, but without commentary or
Massoretic note at the end of the books. The volume
is a small folio of 381 leaves. The five Megilloth are
printed immediately after the Pentateuch, as is the
case in other early editions of the Hebrew Bible, in
the usual order, namely Canticles, Euth, Lamentations,
Ecclesiastes, Esther.

A second edition of the entire Old Testament in a
small folio of 433 pages was issued, probably at Naples,
about the year 1491. No date or place of printing is
given, but it is inferred from the character of the type
that the work was done at the Soncino press. The
books of the Pentateuch only are provided with the
Massoretic clausulce, and this is wanting in the book
of Numbers. The third complete Bible appeared at
Brescia in two volumes in 1494. Both volumes were
small octavos, the first containing the Pentateuch only,
being a reprint of an edition of the Pentateuch with
the Megilloth and Haphtaroth issued by the same press
two years earlier. The volumes consist of 217 and
385 leaves respectively, the Psalter alone being printed
in double columns. This is the edition that Luther
used in translating the Old Testament into German ;
and his copy is still preserved in the Koyal Library at
Berlin.

EDITIONS 69

The first^ manual edition of the Hebrew Bible was
printed at Venice in the year 1517 A.D. at the press
of Daniel Bornberg. This quarto volume contains
530 leaves, and seems to have been issued with the
direct design of providing a convenient and cheap
edition for those to whom the price of the costly folios
was prohibitive. The text is based ultimately upon
the editio princeps, the Soncino edition of 1488 ; and
is provided with vowel-points and accents, the margins
of the pages being occupied with textual notes and
various readings. The Eabbinic commentaries also,
which had formed so large a part of the folio editions,
were necessarily omitted.

A reprint of the Bomberg Bible, also in quarto,
appeared in 1520 A.D., but under different editorship.
The editor of the former edition, Felix Prateiisis, by
birth a Jew, had become a convert to Christianity, and
won the patronage of the Pope. This was little likely
to make his work as editor acceptable to the Jews
themselves, and the reprint bears the names of " the
brothers, the sons of Baruch Adelkind," who add, in
order to commend themselves to their Jewish kinsmen,
a prayer that they may be enabled to complete the
printing of the Talmud, upon which they are engaged,
and a part of which is already finished. In size and
form the volume is like its predecessor, but the
arrangement of the books follows the precedent of the
earlier folios in placing the five Megilloth immediately
after the Pentateuch. A further interest attaches to
this edition in that it was the first Hebrew Bible to

70 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

adopt the Greek or Alexandrian division of the four
books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah,
each into two parts, a practice which became general
in all subsequent editions of the Hebrew text, as well
as in the later versions.

The Bomberg Bibles, therefore, marked a distinct
step forward in the provision of a more convenient and
less expensive text of the Hebrew Scriptures. The
omission also of the traditional Eabbinical commentaries
affected a large saving of space, and greatly simplified
the printing of the various copies. These commentaries
were of much value, as embodying the judgements of
earlier teachers of the Law with regard to the correct
reading, punctuation, and accentuation of the sacred
text. As presented in the folio editions, they consisted
of reprints, more or less complete, of the works of early
masters, with added comments, rubrics, or opinions
gathered from various sources. The most important
and celebrated of these collections of critical and
exegetical notes, bearing the names of famous Rabbis
as their authors, were three in number. They have
been issued also in separate printed form.

(1) The first is rnin!> rp rntop lap, scapes Legis, the
author of which was Eabbi Meir ha-Levi, a scholar of
strong conservative views, who was born about the year
1180 A.D., spent his life at Toledo in Spain, and died
in 1244. To guard the Law with critical rules and
directions had engaged a large part of the time and
care of the Kabbis from a very early date. And Mei'r
did little more than codify the judgements and pru-

EDITIONS 71

scriptions of many of his predecessors. In the Pirqe
Aboth to " make a hedge to the Law " is one of the
three sayings or commands of the men of the Great
Synagogue ; l and the duty was well fulfilled by a
succession of learned Kabbis. The minb J"D is a critical
commentary on the text of the Pentateuch, the words
of which it discusses in order. This work of E. Meir
was printed first at Florence in 1750 in a small folio
volume, and again in 1761 at Berlin. By the Jews
themselves it was held in very high esteem. 2

(2) rnin nix, the Light of the Law," is a critical
commentary and collection of various readings dealing
with the five books of the Law, frequently quoted in
later Jewish writings. Its author was Eabbi Menaheui
ben Jehudah, a native of Palestine, and an older con-
temporary of Norzi (see below), with whom he is
said to have been associated in literary work. The
mm nis was first printed in a collected edition of
six of the author's works at Venice in quarto in
1618, under the title niT TIK\ Later editions were
published at Amsterdam (1659), Berlin (1745), and
elsewhere. 3

(3) The most important and celebrated work of
this character, due to the learning and industry of
early Jewish scholars, was the w nn:o, Minchath Shai,
of Yedidiah Salomo Minnorzi, ^IUD nio^ rVTT, who

1 P. A. i. 1, cp. Aboth R. Nathan i. " Adam was the first to make a
hedge about his words."

2 Strack, Prolegomena, p. 2 f . ; Griitz, History of the Jews, iii, p.
541 f. ; de Rossi, Farice Lcctiones Vet. Test. i. p. xxxix f.

3 Strack, I.e. p. 3, and the references there given ; de Rossi, p. xl f.

72 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

is usually known as Norzi. His name is derived
from Nursia, now Norcia, in Central Italy, about
seventy miles north-east of Rome, whence his family
came. He himself was born at Mantua about the
year 1560, and devoted his life to critical and
Massoretic studies. His commentary, unlike those of
his predecessors, extended over the whole of the Old
Testament, and he apparently planned its publication
during his own lifetime. The intention, if formed,
was never carried out, and his annotations and
criticisms were first published in an edition of the
Hebrew Bible, issued in two volumes quarto at
Mantua in 1742 (or 1743, as F. Delitzsch in Baer's
Ezekiel, Leipzig, 1884, p. vii) by Eaphael Chayyim
Basila, who is said to have given to them the title
"t? nrno, " gift of Yedidiah Salomo." A separate edition
was printed at Vienna in 1813. 1

Later editions of the Hebrew Bible made use of
the critical investigations of these earlier scholars, and
the results of their labours were embodied in the texts
published with notes and critical apparatus. The
most important of these were the so-called Eabbinic
or "Great" Bibles, nibina niaopB, in which the Hebrew
text was accompanied by the Targums or Aramaic
paraphrases, and furnished with elaborate comments
by eminent Jewish Rabbis. They are as follows :

(1) The first Rabbinic Bible, the cditio princeps,
was printed at Venice, at the press of Daniel Bomberg,

1 Strack, p. 4 ; de Rossi, p. xli if. ; Kitto, Cyclopaedia of Biblical
Literature, Edinburgh, 1870, art. "Norzi."

3 TIJT

p rmm* .kUi-hinjn-i-i'i'nlimTl'iM'J'iaJ f> !>'t> fij 1 TT 1"* n "TO p) li PCCP O'VlJ t;ras

Li' 'I. ,-f, B (i)Z | rto3*itirrasi'jf fwpbwB> Nmwwto rrvr-pfushirojaTipoBP D '" J nooai>f*p
' ' " '(,. VJ -3 M 'i*" 3'-" S3B5 rb S3O- rh ?rs r3D 'TO Ion TO to tes pDiiiji - TWO r o-ro tTO 13? rr* ^i*.-a
f ,. T- .., rf ,, p, ihD'3 r,.o rt lirfii ,-TO pi cri h*i TOCTri mnp- pn -ji f>o BPD PJOP op ,-.f> TTO TO* * sr> mm p TO> -|.is

^, 'j-p.^ du r;s fr^!rt ' nsrn or PN -raK- ' rcm 01* nN iw pfJ'n'ci pj '"in p nwjTp f fnnra fjn j p -n
rW- -:-"": :;?> unr.iK 1 ! BnoB'MnViaiMft 'Iran'

voij-3oKWDr''!"f' n'jsn iw (tn=> i n-rmrip 1 ? .'^'J^ -^cTritWT T3^t CPD"

(fljljBTg urur nx;"3? .L, j _,,.. _,._,,

13E 10131

3 T"^I "l^jl UT^rCIl ^T^t^HI I" 1 ~'3'.> ^jt [

""'3 3T2 fa? 70^3 "^305 ^

i ( ._ ......-.-- , D'3&'n-r rnn 1 te

. . : irRnp'i rs-ri ^JWP^T-D.

iS^Swfe^' ")!^ ^^Tm 1 * ^-nw T3X-W i?? ' o i-si'^T-

^?4 :^Hn*n o jnannnS D g 'Tmp^h- -^
iWPnO B !33jJixS K oh pin- 73:-" ju r ! f ':

Tv 3 " 1 J ~ l ? now sS D : TW? iy Tna "^^ l" : f ** "'.!j''

n*ni- Ssi nan) inwi wan nsjn ^ :pi(A!>i:i>i

IS ' : a ' " : 4? ^ ^^ rh ' ^ :n

17S3 'imonc 'Tu'T^"W 7Wwp3>''i3frK)

T-t''^* 7""^ P K T? ^T I*T3J3 *8I,SW r."n-ci?'3n-OTimi' preS nby^n CT3 nrt 'VncTro7

' 1 ?^,^! 6 ,i?_*. ' D7 " Ot%? I> '" :1 'nDSon^isKi 'prarj 'i7 1;i ' 3r; *-''- fl ^'I>n^5rxiar!ni( I ?n:3 -p-D-: '-rnr

? R>i" Mo o^nci) T-n p

r3J p fe 0>C3P 0J! P3W POftW POP-

j WK nftq: o!r'3 nr^n oipCT5 AT ft!) ^ofo WD? -SBoS Sfrjir yo* ch JTnro ritorr !o mu r-"o ^9 !>p qft && "win r^o ^n^j

! .'T7

'jvj'iftpstjjh pfc?>3TOH^ f3J*P7O53 m^ ro^n??
ipa ifr ^n ir?>o -pr? PD^ ftb jft ras PSTO rjn^ p

A TT J ny?r Ms r -wo* COD T-yj^n iw -jnh nb)J3 ?r>*D3irw> p*3 p ?T33 p DJ nri ^=?
M^pfcf&^&wfoflfrfl^piW&
BWWic '

j WK nftq: o!r'3 nr^n oipCT5 AT ft!) ^ofo WD? -SBoS Sfrjir yo* ch JTnro ritorr !o mu r-"o ^9 !>p qft && "win

C^>pp47pWtOOPP* p^ < 3f>3)'!CT3p?"?h'r i !P3 'fpVlD t 3ClIOOirD??3ft^<Dh?fEr'37PDn3'3'r^D'P733 '-J'jfjr

^'"i'^,T'' i> "-''^S^r P '"^ ' r "^'P^ 11 n!>T:' ll ' - "' f >3'i'''3i tttos^bafejiifi BnorortjfiS^SSf^BWa

KAI3HI.NIC BIBLE (BASLE), EX. XX. 8-18.

RABBINIC BIBLES 73

in the years 1516-17. It was edited in four volumes
folio by Felix Pratensis, a Jewish convert to Chris-
tianity, the volumes containing the Pentateuch, the
Earlier and Later Prophets, and the Hagiographa re-
spectively. The Targums and the commentaries of
Rashi and other Jewish scholars were added, with the
Massoretic clausulce at the end of the books. Samuel
and Kings were divided each into two parts, with a
note that the practice of thus dividing the text is
due to " non-Jews." l

(2) The second Rabbinic Bible was published at
Venice from the same press in 1 52425, under^ the
editorship of Jacob ben Chayyini, and its text, in
great part owing to the zeal and renown for scholar-
ship of its editor, became the accepted standard for
future editions. The four folio volumes contained the
Pentateuch, the Earlier and Later Prophets, and the
Hagiographa, as in the edition of Felix Pratensis ; and
in addition to the usual commentaries the Massorah
Magna was here printed in full for the first time. 2
Three later editions appeared at Venice, reprints of
the text of Chayyim in the years 1546-48, 1568,
1617-19, the last two under different editorship.

(6) The sixth Eabbinic Bible was edited by Joh.
Buxtorf, and printed at Basle, at the press of L. Konig,
in 1618 19. It was therefore completed in the same
year as the latest of the Venice editions. The text,

1 Ginsburg, Introduction, p. 925 ff.

2 Ginsburg, ib., p. 956 ff., and Jacob b. Chayyim's Introduction to the
Hebrew Bible, edited and translated by C. D. Giusburg, London, 1865.

74 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

however, was subjected to a careful revision, and
many errors of the press removed. J. Buxtorf the
elder was professor of Hebrew at the University of
Basle, and with his son did much to promote a
knowledge of Hebrew among his contemporaries.

(7) The Biblia Magna Rabbinica, the latest and in
some respects the most important and convenient
edition of the Rabbinic Bibles, was edited and printed
at Amsterdam by Moses of Frankfort, himself a
celebrated scholar. This work also, like its pre-
decessors, is in four folio volumes, and bears the date
17^24-^27. It is furnished with the most complete
apparatus of Massoretic notes, commentaries, and
Targums. The name by which it is also known,
n^D r6np, " the Assembly of Moses," is taken from
the initial words of the Hebrew title of the book.
Copies of this Great Rabbinic Bible are more gener-
ally accessible than the earlier editions, and for
practical purposes it furnishes the most convenient
text. Moses of Frankfort was the author of com-
mentaries also on the Old Testament books. The
Rabbinic Bible, however, was his great work, to
which he gave his life, and by which he is remem-
bered.

In more definitely critical editions of the Hebrew
Scriptures the way was led by Dr. Benjamin Kenni-
cott, 1718-83, Canon of Christ Church, Oxford, and
Professor of Hebrew, who devoted a long and laborious
life to the study of the text and subject-matter of the
Old Testament. For his great edition of the Hebrew

EDITIONS 75

text many manuscripts were collated, and also the
chief printed editions. It was published by subscrip-
tion at Oxford in two volumes folio, the latter of
which appeared after an interval of four years, with
the title Veins Testamentum Hebraicum cum Variis
Ledionibus, Oxonii, 1776, 1780. The various readings
were recorded at the foot of the page ; and were in
themselves of little account, owing to the care and
fidelity with which the Massoretic recension had been
preserved in all the manuscripts consulted. The in-
experience also of the collators whom Dr. Kennicott
employed was responsible for a considerable number
of errors. The chief and permanent value of the
edition consisted in the rich store of materials gathered
together from many sources.

(2) Within a few years of the publication of Dr.
Kennicott's Bible, an edition appeared on the Continent,
projected and carried out on similar principles. This
was the work of John Bernhard de Eossi, Professor
of Oriental Languages in the Eoyal Academy at
Parma, where it was published in four volumes quarto
in the years 178488, with the title Varice Lcctioncs
Vetcris Testamenti ex immensa MSS editorumq.
Codicum Congerie haustce, ct ad Samar. Textum, ad
Vetustiss. Vcrsioncs, ad accuratiores Sacrce Criticce
Fonies ac Leges examinatce, Opere ac Studio Johannis
Bern, de Eossi, S.T.D. The work is dedicated to
Victor Amedeus, king of Sardinia. The first volume
contains Prolegomena, a description of the manuscripts
and editions used, followed by critical notes and various

76 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

readings on the first three books of the Pentateuch ;
the second, third, and fourth volumes contain respect-
ively Numbers to Kings, Isaiah to Esther, the five
Megilloth being thus placed in their usual order
immediately after the twelve Minor Prophets, and
Psalms to Chronicles with a Preliminary Dissertation,
and an Appendix of additional notes and readings.
To the second volume there is prefixed also a separate
Preface. Some years later, in 1798, a Supplement
was issued, Scholia Critica in V.T. Libros sen Supplc-
menta ad varias Sacri Textus Lectiones, which, as its
title denotes, gives a number of additional readings
drawn from collations of new manuscripts. There
has been considerable discussion on the question of
the respective merits of the works of Kennicott and
de Kossi. The judgement of Dr. Strack is in favour
of the latter, who he states used older and more
carefully collated manuscripts, and was the superior
of the Oxford professor in learning and knowledge
of the Scriptures. 1 It would be natural that the
later editor should profit by the experience and
example of the earlier. De Rossi did not print the
Hebrew text. His work is, therefore, essentially a
storehouse of critical materials, and as such is of
great and permanent value.

Two editions of the Pentateuch, undertaken and
published by Jewish scholars at the close of the
eighteenth century, deserve especial mention. (3) The
earlier was a critical commentary on the first two

1 Prolegomena, p. 0.

EDITIONS 77

books of the Law by Solomon Dubno, a Eussian Jew,
who derived his name from his birthplace, Dubno,
close to the Galician border. His commentary on
Genesis and Exodus, rnnt?i rWN-Q "ISD ^y TIKE, was
printed in Mendelssohn's edition of the Pentateuch
at Berlin in 178 08 3 ; and later editions appeared
at Vienna in 1791 al. A Massoretic treatise on the
same two books, known under the title nnaiD ppn il^p,
brief textual and grammatical annotations or emenda-
tions, was also composed by him, and published in a
later edition of Mendelssohn's work. He died at
Amsterdam in the summer of 1813 A.D. 1

(4) The D^r6xn min of Wolf ben Simson Heidenheim
is a critical edition of the book of Genesis, accom-
panied by the Targum of Onkelos, *& nn3D, the com-
mentary of Eashi, etc., of which a part only was
published in a quarto volume at Offenbach, near
Frankfort, in 1798. Heidenheim was a learned and
able Jewish scholar and printer, whose more important
works issued from his own press at Eodelheim, in
Germany, seven or eight miles west of the same
town. The chief of these were two : &npn roun, the
" understanding of the Scripture," an edition of the
text of the Pentateuch with his own and other
comments in Hebrew in 5 vols., 181821 ; and
during the same years a Massoretic commentary on
the Pentateuch, critical and grammatical notes on the
text, with extracts from earlier writers. Other works
were composed by Heidenheim on the Hebrew accents,
1 Strack, p. 6 ; Kitto, Encyclopedia, s.v.

78 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

and on philological subjects. His death took place
at Eodelheim iu the year 1832. 1

The Hebrew text is also contained in all the great
Polyglott editions of the Bible.

(1) The Complutensian Polyglott, edited by Cardinal
Ximenez at Alcala, in six volumes folio, 1514-17
A.D., was the earliest edition of the Hebrew text issued
under Christian auspices. As is well known, sanction
for the publication of the work was withheld by the
Pope, Leo x., until March of the year 1520. It did
not therefore actually appear until this latter date, and
only six hundred copies were printed, of which four
are preserved in the British Museum. The first four
volumes containing the text of the Old Testament were
printed subsequently to the other two, the fifth with
the New Testament texts bearing the date Jan. 10th,
1514, and the sixth with a vocabulary, explanation of
proper names, etc., the date of the following year.
Vol. iv. is dated July 10th, 1517. In the first
volume is printed the Pentateuch in Hebrew, Greek,
and " Chaldee," each with a Latin translation. Vols.
ii.-iv. contain the remaining books of the Old Testament
in Hebrew and Greek with Latin translations.

(2) The Antwerp Polyglott of 1569-73, referred to
also as the Biblia Reyia, or Plantiniana, the latter from
the name of the printer, C. Plantin, was published in
eight volumes at Antwerp at the cost of Philip II. of
Spain. The arrangement is similar to that of the
Complutensian, the first four volumes containing the

1 Strack, p. 6 f. ; Kitto, s,v, Heidenheim.

EDITIONS 79

Old Testament in Hebrew, Chaklee, Greek, and Latin,
Latin versions of the Chaldee and Greek being added.
No Chaldee text is given of the books of Daniel, Ezra,
Nehemiah, or Chronicles.

(3) The Paris edition, issued in nine large folio
volumes bearing dates from 1629 to 1645, was the
first of the great Polyglotts in which the Oriental
texts appeared. The Old Testament is printed in
Hebrew in vols. i.-iv. with the Latin Vulgate, the Greek
Septuagint, and the Chaldee, the two last accompanied
by Latin translations. Vol. vi. contains the Pentateuch
in Syriac, Arabic, and Samaritan, each with a Latin
rendering ; vols. vii. ix. the remaining books of the
Old Testament in Syriac and Arabic, accompanied by
the Latin. The New Testament was published as
vol. v., divided into two parts, and contained the Greek
text with the Vulgate, and the Syriac and Arabic
versions with Latin translations.

(4) The London or Walton's Polyglott, published in
six vols. folio in 1657 by Brian Walton, Bishop of
Chester from 1660 to his death in the following year,
made a further advance in its use of the Oriental
languages. In addition to the Syriac and Arabic,
versions were printed in ^Ethiopia and Persian, in every
case furnished with translations in Latin. Two sup-
plementary volumes, sometimes published as one, con-
tain a lexicon, notes, and various readings, indices, etc.
The Hebrew text is in the first three volumes.
Bishop Walton's is the most important of the Polyglotts,
partly in consequence of the larger textual material

8o INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

which it affords, partly also because of its more
accurate and scholarly editing. There are six copies
of the work in the British Museum.

Many smaller or manual editions of the Hebrew
Old Testament have been published since the earliest
of Bomberg in 1517. 1 They reproduce with more
or less fidelity and exactness the Massoretic text of
Ben Chayyirn. The most noteworthy, for which the
scholarship and reputation of the editor, or their
convenient form, have secured the widest currency, are
those of JOH. BUXTOKF, Basle, 1611, whose text is
based partly upon Chayyim's Rabbinical Bible and
partly on the Coniplutensian Polyglott ; JOSEPH ATHIAS,
a Jewish Eabbi and printer at Amsterdam, which was
issued in two volumes, 165961, with a preface
stating that the text had been carefully revised in
accordance with the best manuscripts, and the editions
of Bomberg, Plantin, and others ; this was the first
Hebrew Bible in which the numbering of the verses
was given; J. LEUSDEN, Amsterdam, 1661-67, who
added a collation of several new manuscripts, with
Latin and Hebrew titles and notes ; D. E. JABLONSKI,
Berlin, 1699, dedicated to the Elector of Brandenburg,
with a Latin introduction treating of manuscripts,
various readings, accents, etc., Latin headings to the
books and marginal summaries of the contents of
chapters or paragraphs, tables of lessons for Sabbath
and festival days, etc., at the end ; E. VAN DER HOOGHT,
Amsterdam and Utrecht, 1705, a reprint of Athias,

1 Supra, p. 69,

BIBIJA

Polva lot t,t

LONDON POLYGLOTT, TITLE-l'AGE.

EDITIONS 81

which until recent years has been perhaps the most
frequently reproduced and widely used Hebrew text ;
and of J. H. MICHAELIS, Halle, 1720, who followed both
in form and text the edition of Jablonski, but exercised
a careful and independent judgement, collating new
manuscripts and comparing the various printed editions,
and adding a Latin introduction and marginal notes and
summaries.

Eecent years have seen a great advance in the
preparation and editing of an exact and critical text
of the Old Testament in convenient form.

(1) Separate editions of all the books of the Hebrew
Bible, with the exception of the last four books of the
Pentateuch, namely, Exodus to Deuteronomy, were pub-
lished at Leipzig between the years 1869 and 1895,
under the editorship of Dr. S. Baer, with a revised
Massoretic text, critical notes, and collations of manu-
scripts. To the earlier volumes also Dr. Fr. Delitzsch
contributed a preface. The book of Genesis appeared
in 1869; Isaiah, 1872; Job, 1875; Twelve Minor
Prophets, 1878; Psalms, 1880; Proverbs, .1880; Daniel
Ezra and Nehemiah, 1882; Ezekiel, 1884; the Five
Eolls, Canticles to Esther, 1886; Chronicles, 1888;
Jeremiah, 1890 ; Joshua and Judges, 1891; 1, 2 Samuel,
1892 ; 1, 2 Kings, 1895. Dr. Baer's death prevented
the completion of the text of the remaining books for
the press. The principles on which he worked were
strongly contested by Dr. C. D. Ginsburg, who claimed
that in some instances Dr. Baer had misinterpreted, and
in others had ignored the testimony of the manuscripts
6

82 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

which he had himself consulted as witnesses to the exact
form of the text. Minor errors of the kind referred to,
even if established, do not essentially impair the very
great value of the work which Dr. Baer accomplished.

(2) Critical editions of many of the books of the
Old Testament have also been issued at Leipzig under
the general editorship of Dr. Paul Haupt, Professor of
Hebrew in the Johns Hopkins University of Baltimore.
In these the text is printed without points, and
colours are employed to indicate the various documents
or strata which are supposed to have contributed to its
present form. A considerable licence of conjecture
and alteration has been permitted to the several
editors ; and the Hebrew text of each book as printed
is therefore the expression of the personal opinion or
judgement of its editor, but carries of necessity no
further weight. Critical and comparative notes are
appended, and these constitute the most useful and
permanently valuable feature of the edition. The book
of Job was the first to appear, edited by C. Siegfried
in 1893. There followed Leviticus by S. E. Driver
and H. A. White, and Samuel by K. Budde, in 1894 ;
Jeremiah by C. H. Cornill, Joshua by W. H. Bennett,
Chronicles by K. Kittel, and Psalms by J. Wellhausen,
in 1895 ; Genesis by C. J. Ball, and Daniel by
A. Kamphausen, 1896 ; Isaiah by T. K. Cheyne, and
Ezekiel by C. H. Toy, 1899; Numbers by J. A.
Paterson, and Judges by G. F. Moore, 1900 ; Ezra and
Nehemiah by H. Guthe, and Proverbs by A. Miiller
and E. Kautzsch, 1901 ; Kings by B. Stade, 1904.

# M S.
Verlio VULG.
LAT.

&TO&teftee

cum Intcrprctuionc

I9&.1MO* *)^m^ ji;*o kl^ljf^oj; ^ .^ijsSa lif J^oiJJy ^gS
. ) uJkjJl |^3^ IJL^ ^> .lii^La ^L ^?t /j^io .y^o ^x

fcihtt

'.!-!! 400d

Wnt

&twl fopcrc4* srairfo, i'

u nnon, & ^*^ri *
.paUba te* 6 I*
tnn 6ierittoife,E

SOT ;n JSES.

LONDON POLYGLOTT, EX. IX. 9-19.

hjf^rwni^

ciinct pcpdi
lAdii

Bitcergodcf,.

',Yflf _ _

ss ^.^R3^^3^^5iiSfeSS

n2 -fTa?:v"ra-TvT-.v"">A-A's-f.a2'3,n.virAja

^~H^*f???:* M :?i'''-*<ir*w

irj;

*n"afii^ii

jpl^&

ijlSi

fnA",vpi/ir"
cumlntciprtutionc

; *-^^ ^uS^.iL/$: ^^jll ^^4. ^^i *r .

.<..<. .tv ..1, 3., ; ,r - I**A^ Of; *m.airn, a *i,M*, t<

.Lii^ i^^u, *^ii^.;e* a fete f- :?

^V w v i, tafa^ afyj, A ^

tMirar,r*mfim, g, Omba &

LOXDON POLYGLOTT, EX. IX. 9-19.

EDITIONS 83

(3) In the year 1894, Dr. Christian I). Ginsburg
edited the Hebrew text of the Old Testament on the
basis of his great edition of the Massorah, with critical
notes and various readings derived from manuscripts,
editions, and the Targums. The work was beautifully
printed in Vienna, and published in London by the
Trinitarian Bible Society. A second edition, cheaper
and altogether inferior, appeared in 1907. 1

(4) The latest, and at present for the student most
useful edition, is that published at Leipzig in two parts,
in the years 1905 and 1906, under the general editorship
of Dr. E. Kittel, with the co-operation of G. Dalman,
S. E. Driver, W. Nowack, and other well-known scholars.
The first part contains Genesis to 2 Kings, and the re-
maining books appeared in the second part under date
of the following year. The preparation for the press
and editing of the several books was undertaken by the
scholars named, and notes and a critical apparatus are
provided at the foot of each page. Of this edition the
new and most valuable feature is the citation of the read-
ings of the Versions, Greek, Latin, Syriac, and Coptic,
while in addition to manuscript variations reference is
made to the editions, including the most recent of S. Baer
and C. D. Ginsburg. The Hebrew text printed is the
traditional Massoretic text, carefully edited and revised ;

1 Dr. Ginsburg is now (1908) engaged in carrying through the press a
new edition of the Hebrew text for the British and Foreign Bible Society,
which will be equipped ^Yith a yet more complete apparatus of notes and
various readings. Genesis has already been issued separately, with a
title-page in Hebrew, English , German , and French, London, 1908 ; and
the Pentateuch is shortly to be published.

84 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

but the notes record suggestions and conjectures with
regard to the true or probable reading, with which in
each instance the editors express their more or less
complete agreement.

To the Jewish scholars and Rabbis for the anxious
and unremitting care with which they have watched
over the accuracy and preservation of their sacred
Scriptures a great debt of obligation is due. At what
precise period they first began to devote their attention
to this subject is uncertain. But from the early
centuries of our era at least we may be confident that
the text of the Old Testament has come down to us
untarnpered with and unchanged. References to the
careful preservation of copies of parts at least of the
sacred books are found in the Bible itself; cp. Deut.
xvii. 18, xxxi. 9, 26 ; Josh. i. 8 ; 2 Kings xi. 12, xxii. 8 ;
Ps. i. 2 ; 2 Chron. xvii. 9. Provision was made for the
consecutive reading of the Law in the synagogues on
the Sabbath day, and of select lessons from the
Prophetical books (cp. Luke iv. 17; Acts xiii. 15, 27,
xv. 21 ; 2 Cor. iii. 14). The several books were taught
and discussed in the Rabbinical schools, and their texts
committed to memory. While to a learned and
leisured class, the D^sb or scribes, was entrusted the
duty of watching over the preservation of the sacred
rolls, of studying every detail of the sacred text that
nothing might be lost, and of providing for the accurate
copying and multiplication of manuscripts. Part of
their duty also was to count and record the number of
letters, verses, etc., in each book of the Old Testament,

MASSORAH 85

and especially in the books of the Law. 1 Proofs of
their zealous and minute care abound in the Talmud,
e.g. Menachoth, 295 ; cp. Josephus, c. Apion, i. 8 ; Euseb.
Prcep. Evang. vm. vi. 9.

3. THE MASSOKAH AND THE MASSORETES ; FORM
AND CONTENTS OF THE MASSORAH ; QERI AND
KETHIBH; CLAUSULJS.

By the term Massorah is meant the collection of
notes and discussions, critical and explanatory, on the
Hebrew text of the Old Testament, which the learning
and diligent care of Jewish scholars accumulated during
the centuries immediately before and the early centuries
after the beginning of our era. Assuming at first the
form of the briefest possible notes, written upon the
margins of the manuscripts themselves, and calling atten-
tion to peculiarities in the text, deviations from ordinary
usage, readings which were demanded by established
rule or custom although at variance with the written
text, etc., these were later expanded into independent
treatises dealing with points of orthography, textual
criticism, and other matters affecting the correct reading
of the Hebrew Scriptures. The task, therefore, which
the authors of the Massorah proposed to themselves was
to guard the text from degeneration, and by placing
on record an exhaustive and minute account of all
details concerning it, to ensure its accurate preservation
in integrity for all time. They therefore compiled
lists of variations, noted and tabulated all singularities,

1 Infra, p. 91 ff.

86 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

counted the letters and words in each book ; thus
forming a " fence," " hedge," J"p, as it was termed,
about the Law.

The name is derived from a late Hebrew and
Aramaic root ">DD ( "ipp, signifying to " hand over " or
" down," " communicate." The corresponding Syriac
term is used in the Peschitta of Heb. xii. 2 to re-
present the Greek alcr^vvr)^ tcaTa<j)povi](ras, lit. " gave
himself over to insult." miDO or rniDD would therefore
signify " tradition." There has been some uncertainty
as to the original vocalisation of the word. . The current
spelling " Massorah " represents nniDE> ; a strengthened
or sharpened form. The true pronunciation, however,
is said to be n^iop, Mesoreth. 1

The Hebrew verb "IDD occurs twice in the Hebrew
text of the Old Testament, Num. xxxi. 5, 16, but in
both cases the correctness of the reading has been
suspected. In the former instance, as the text stands,
nBi?6 p|5?K ho. 'EiS>K &], the word would seem to
mean to " separate," " divide," R.V. " were delivered " ;
but the Sept. e^pid/jujaav suggests 'HSEW, the error-
being due to simple transposition of the radical letters,
and interchange of o and a. In ver. 16 for
should perhaps be read ?Vp~?yp;' ; cp. Sept. rov a'
Kal virepiSeiv, a dittography. The noun JTibo is also
found as a airat; \e<y6/j,evov in Ezek. xx. 37. There,
however, it is a contraction of rn'DKD, from the root
1DN, to bind, E.V. the " bond " of the covenant, and

1 See especially L. Blau, "Massoretic Studies" in JQR ix. pp. 122-
144, 471-490 and note ib. xii. p. 241.

MASSORAH 87

has nothing to do with the altogether distinct root

IDE.

- T

Usage, moreover, has limited the word Massorah,
" tradition," to denote in the narrower sense whatever
of rule or construction has been handed down tradition-
ally bearing on the Hebrew text of the books of the
Old Testament, and especially the iTjin, or Law. It is
not, therefore, equivalent to " Textual Criticism " in the
ordinary acceptation of the term. Its aim is preserva-
tion, not restoration: The consonantal text as it stands
is sacred, inviolable ; and the Massorah knows nothing
of evidence or principles which might tend to supplant
it by a better or purer form. Its merit and success
lay in assuring to future generations the exact text,
unaltered and uncorrupted, which then lay before the
writers. That aim has been perfectly achieved. There
is no doubt that we read the Hebrew text to-day pre-
cisely in the form in which the authors of the Massorah
found and left it. Their success has been complete.
And if a wider criticism is becoming possible in our
day, a critical work which they could not have
attempted for lack of materials even if they had
conceived of its possibility, this is due in the first
instance to the conscientiousness and fidelity with
which they laboured.

The correlative term is n ?|5, " Qabbalah," from the
root /?i5, ??i?, which properly signifies, therefore, what-
ever has been " received " by way of tradition, and
describes the reception of knowledge handed down
from former times, as " Massorah " its deliverance. In

88 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

practice, however, the former term is confined to matters
of esoteric doctrine and speculative theology, and deals
with the light and fanciful side of human belief, folk-
lore, magic, and Jewish conjurations in general; while
the Massorah is severely literary and critical. 1

The authors of the Massorah are known hy the
name of Massorites, or Massoretes, miDion ^jn ; but their
work, in its beginnings at least, was for the most part
anonymous. The later treatises, composed on Massoretic
lines, were by well-known writers and scholars ; but
the Massorah itself is built up in general out of in-
numerable notes and rules on grammar, orthography,
and exegesis, the source of which for the most part
is entirely unknown. The Massoretic rules and
formulae derive whatever authority they possess from
their consonance with tradition, the laws of the
language, and the unanimous assent of the Jews
themselves. Some of these notes it is probable are
of considerable antiquity, perhaps even antedating the
Christian era. But the foundation work of Massoretic
studies, and the development of the Massorah itself
as a comprehensive and orderly system, appear to
have been accomplished during the first six or seven
centuries of our era, and probably in the schools of
Tiberias. Later Jewish scholars, true Massoretes in spirit
and aim, as Jacob ben Chayyim aodlSlias Levita, codi-
fied and expounded laws and principraPilfceady defined.

1 See C. D. Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, its Doctrines, Development, and
Literature, London, 1865 ; and I. Abrahams, Short History of Jewish
Literature, London, 1906, p. 103 ff. ; Jewish Encyclopedia, s.v.

MASSORAH 89

By the Jews themselves the beginning of the work
is ascribed to Moses, from whom in unbroken succession
the Law was handed down to Ezra and the men of
the Great Synagogue ; cp. Pirqe Aboth i. 1 , " Moses
received the Law from Sinai, and handed it on (fl'} 1 ?'?)
to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to
the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the great
synagogue ('"^i"^ n ??.?)." According to tradition, the
Great Synagogue was an assembly of wise men, said
to have numbered one hundred and twenty, constituted
by Ezra after the return from Babylon for the express
purpose of maintaining the integrity of scriptural teach-
ing and the preservation of the letter of the Law. 1
There is, however, no direct evidence that such a
Synagogue or assembly ever really existed ; and most
scholars are disposed to regard the traditions con-
cerning it as having little or no foundation in fact. *
The efforts of the Jews themselves for the preservation
of their Scriptures cannot be traced directly back
further than the date indicated above for the prosecu-
tion of Massoretic studies. That various readings,
which, however, with scarcely an exception, concerned
the vowels and accents only, not the consonants of
the Hebrew text, existed from an early date is proved
by references in the Talmud.

FORM AND CONTENTS OF THE MASSORAH. The
Massorah, therefore, as it is found in the manuscripts is

1 See Chas. Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, Cambridge, 1877,
p. 124 ff. ; C. D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Rallinic Bible, 1865,
p. 1, note.

9 o INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of very varied content, the rules and annotations being
copied and re-copied from one transcript to another,
with additional explanations and amplifications. The
earliest form was that of the so-called Massora Parva,
consisting of the briefest possible notes, so condensed
and abbreviated as often to be unintelligible apart from
the key, written on the outer and inner margins of
the page, and in the case of a diglot text in the
narrow space between the Hebrew and the Targum
or Aramaic paraphrase. One instance at least is
known in which such Massoretic notes find a place
even between the lines of the Hebrew text. 1 Chrono-
logically later, on the whole, comes the Massorah Magna,
a more extensive commentary, dealing in general on
a broader scale with the same critical subjects, written
on the upper and lower margins, above and below
the text, and often fancifully shaped into outlines of
birds, beasts, plants, etc. The later origin of the
Great Massorah is shown not only by its wider range
and more complete and artificial form, but also by
the fact that it occasionally quotes and elucidates the
M. Parva. These two combined formed the Massorah
Marginalis. The Massora Finalis was essentially the
same in theme and treatment as the M. Magna. Its
name and place at the end of the manuscripts were
due merely to the impossibility of finding room on
the margins of the pages for all the material which
had accumulated, and the additions which the writer

1 In a manuscript in the possession of M. Gaster. sec Illustrated Bibles,
p. 12.

fcfiiS!!

ojg

f 3sB^

"^** ' ; ' % " i ; .'- -75 '(*'* \ ' 'Hp'"" ' r -r*< ' L__^[ ' " ' '"t

.^. ^___ , ^_ -* - - ' ' - -^ w " '

v f pS^"f* W^^BFpHw^ft'W
r ' *i~' _1H' J^J",! X

vr*i '* "** 1 ^* 1 * V3 ' ' ^ -ij - m^^tf \' jt& v^ T''^ vV*3^* '*^ ^*^ iSS 'S^ w^i kjrf'.^y
ISfc "": V- "'-'" v*,.. . v- : -.^-^-^. >--. - , . ^

HEBREW MANUSCRIPT (COPENHAGEN), WITH MASSORAII, 1 KINGS VIII. 3-11, LEV.

I. 1, '_'

MASSORAH 91

or owner of the manuscript wished to make. Inde-
pendent treatises also were composed on Massoretic
lines. These also were written or copied on the blank
pages at the end of the Biblical codex, and were then
included under the same name of " final Massorah."

The subject-matter with which the Massorah deals
may be most simply arranged in six classes, as
follows :

(1) The consonants of the Hebrew text. Of these,
in particular, the authors of the Massorah noted and
recorded every peculiarity or anomaly, in order, by
drawing attention to them, to secure that the text,
as it stood, should be preserved and perpetuated with
minute and absolute accuracy. In no case did they
sanction or propose any alteration of the consonantal
text before them. For this purpose they make use
of certain marks or symbols, as points, etc., the origin
and significance of which, however, is generally obscure
at the present day. In some instances these may have
found their way into the text not designedly, but merely
from accidents in the course of copying.

(a) Some thirty letters are written larger, and the
same number smaller than is usual ; e.cj. the letter l>eth
with which the Hebrew Bible begins is larger than the
following letters, and has attached to it the Massoretic
note T 1 ?"^ '3 } " great beth," to ensure that the copyist
shall note and reproduce the abnormal size with
exactness. Not improbably the enlargement of the
consonant here is intended to serve the same purpose
as an ornamental initial letter. Elsewhere it has been

92 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

conjectured that a larger or smaller letter marked the
middle point of a book, or division of the Jewish
Scriptures. Aleph is written small in Lev. i. 1, with
the note tfVgr ', " small aleph." These so-called literce
majusculce and minuscules are referred to, if not actually
tabulated and described, in the Talmud. 1

(&) In four instances a letter is " suspended," n^n, i.e.
written above the line, nun in Judg. xviii. 30, 'ayin
in Ps. Ixxx. 14; Job xxxviii. 13, 15.

(c) The letter nun is nine times " inverted " or
"reversed," nrnan, Num. x. 35, 36 ; Ps. cvii. 23 if., 40.
Various conjectures have been made as to the signi-
ficance of the " reversed nun." Some scholars have
regarded them as equivalent to our brackets or paren-
theses, or as indicating a dislocation or corruption of the
text. 2 No certainty seems to be attainable.

(d) Mem is written in its final form in the middle of
a word in Isa. ix. 6.

(e) Vciv is " cut short," *OTi?, in Num. xxv. 1 2.

(/) The letters also of each book were counted, and
the totals placed on record, with mnemonic words to
facilitate the recollection of the numbers. The middle
letter of each was found and noted, also of a marked
division of the Scriptures, as of the Pentateuch and
Psalter. To assist in maintaining the right division of

1 See Massoretic and other Notes contained in the Edition of the Hebrew
Scriptures published by the British and Foreign Bible Society, trans-
lated and explained, 2nd ed., London, 1906 ; H. L. Strack,
Prolegomena, p. 92 ; F. Buhl, Canon and Text of the O.T., Edinburgh,
1892, p. 94 ff.

- Strack, I.e. p. 92; Buhl, p. 105.

MASSORAH 93

the words of the text, the number of times that each of
the five final letters occurred in each of its forms was
ascertained ; and so forth. Everything was done that
could ensure accuracy and guard against error.

These details were summarised and placed on record
with regard to each book of the Old Testament in a
clausula or final epitome, which is usually printed at
the close of the book. Two of these may suffice as
examples. They are given in the editions of Baer and
Delitzsch and others ; and will be found translated and
explained in Massoretic and other Notes, published by
the British and Foreign Bible Society.

GENESIS.

nNip trom ?x rr&a iscn DS DIDD
"HJ .l"" 1 vni'Ensfi : rrnn ^nrr^jn vvm : jo'p
n"rv wna-DH .^"tt vmm rjo^D

T TT; ' T

nimnan : iri wan

:JO II D

BE STKONG!

The number of the verses of the book of Genesis is a
thousand and five hundred and thirty and four. The
sign is Y 1 ^ -]"& (8=1000, 1 = 500, $> = 30, 1 =-- 4).
And its middle point is, And by thy sword shalt thou

94 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

live (xxvii. 40). And its parashahs are twelve ('=10,
2=2); the sign is, THIS is my name for ever (r = 7,
n=5; Ex. iii. 15). And its sections are forty-three;
the sign is, YEA he shall be blessed (J = 3, ID = 40 ;
Gen. xxvii. 33). And its chapters are fifty; the sign
is, Lord be gracious unto us, we have waited FOR
THEE (? = 30, 3 - 20 ; Isa. xxxiii. 2). The number of
the open parashahs is forty-three, and of the closed
forty-eight. The total is ninety-one parashahs ; the
sign is, GO thou and all the people that is after thee
(* = 90, x = one : Ex. xi. 8).

ISAIAH.

K'lh i^n rpni

p * n rm p m

' - : : ' T -:i

msm cpyc'rn o^nsioi * wyw D^DSH nisp
K "3

And it shall come to pass that from one new moon
(Isa. Ixvi. 23). The sign is pprr, i.e. the initial letters
of the four books in which the words of the last verse
but one are repeated in order to avoid ending the
book with a threatening or curse. ' = rpyK*, Isaiah ;
n=--~\vy nn, the twelve Minor Prophets; p=nirp,
Lamentations ; P = r6np ; Ecclesiastes.

MASSORAH 95

BE STEONG AND WE WILL BE STEONG !

The number of the verses of Isaiah is a thousand and
two hundred and ninety and five ; the sign is, As a
sweet savour WILL I ACCEPT you (K = 1000, 1 =
200, x=90, n=5; Ezek. xx. 41). And its middle
point is, But there the Lord will be with us in
majesty (Isa. xxxiii. 21). And its sections are twenty-
six ; the sign is, AND the Lord SHALL BE king
over all the earth (i = G, n=5, > == 10, n = 5; Zech.
xiv. 9).

(2) The vowel-points and accents were similarly
treated, and the various conventional signs, such as
daghesh and mapplq, which had to do with the right
reading of the text. The vowel-points were never
regarded with the same reverence, or placed on a
footing of equal authority with the consonants. It is
clear, however, that the Massoretes themselves were
not the inventors of the signs for the Hebrew vowels
and accents, since they accepted them and tabulated as
already existing their laws and variations.

(3) A large part of the Massorah is occupied with
the words of the Hebrew text, the correct method of
writing them, the number of times certain words are
found at the beginning or end of a verse, etc. The
so-called scriptio plena or defectiva in particular took
account of the long vowels, of which a semi-consonant,
1 or % formed a part, and noted in each instance
whether a word was to be written with the vowel " full,"
i.e. together with the consonant, or " defective," the

9 6 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

consonant being omitted ; e.g. '' "ion, yodh is wanting,
Isa. iii. 8, 'l N?0, vav is written in full, Gen. xlviii. 20.
Over ten words in the Pentateuch a series of dots is
placed ; l four in the earlier and later Prophets are
similarly indicated ; 2 and in the case of one word in
Ps. xxvii. 13, 3 the Massorah directs that points are to
be placed both above and below. The Jewish Eabbis
refer to these points, but do not explain their meaning.
There is, perhaps, some probability in the view that
they were designed to indicate an erroneous or corrupt
reading, on the ground that similar signs are said to be
used for that purpose in Samaritan manuscripts. The
word also in Gen. xxxiii. 4 which bears these so-called
puncta extraordinaria is omitted from some manuscripts
of the Septuagint ; and the Targum or Aramaic para-
phrase passes over in silence the two words that are
thus indicated in Ezekiel. 4

(4) The Massorah also records a considerable number
of various readings, both the official and recognised
Qeri and Kethibh, and others known as TTr 3 ?, " con-
jectures," " opinions." Of the origin of these last
nothing is known. They are perhaps, in some instances
at least, merely individual views or guesses with regard

1 ?]U'3?, Gen. xvi. 5 ; V^N, xviii. 9 ; ropzii, xix. 33 ; in$yn, xxxiii. 4 ;
nx, xxxvii. 12 ; pqN], Num. iii. 39 ; n^rn, ix. 10; )&$, xxi. 30; jnb'VI,
xxix. 15 ; ny u'i^ J>, Deut. xxix. 28.

2 xy;, 2 Sam. xix. 20 ; nsn, Isa. xliv. 9 ; Srnn, Ezek. xli. 20 ; niyypns,
xlvi. 22.

3 N 1 ?? 1 ?, the Massorah notes that the letters of the word are pointed
both above and below, with the exception of the vav, which has no
point above.

4 Strack, p. 88 fi'. : Buhl, p. 104 f., and references.

QERI AND KETHIBH 97

to a particular word or passage ; others may rest on
a foundation of tradition. 1 The number of the former,
the Qeri and Kethibh variations, is differently stated.
The total is given by Dr. Ginsburg, from a careful
computation of the notes in Jacob ben Chayyim's
Kabbinic Bible of 1524-25, as 1353. 2 In all such
instances the reader in the synagogue was directed to
follow the Qeri and ignore the Kethibh, although the
latter was never removed from the text ; and for his
guidance or as a reminder, the vowels of the Qeri were
written in the codices attached to the consonants of
the Kethibh, while the consonants of the Qeri were
noted in the margin. The result was the presentation
in the text of a hybrid and meaningless form. In the
Hebrew Bible as ordinarily printed the practice has
been perpetuated, and has led to much confusion and
difficulty. It would be simpler and more intelligible
in every instance to follow the course adopted by Dr.
Ginsburg in his edition of 1894, and leave the Kethibh
text unvocalised, inserting both the alternative readings
complete in the margin.

A special case of these various readings, which is of

1 On the meaning of the word j'vao see Buxtorf, Clavis Masorce,
eh. x. The readings in question are often interesting, but rarely of
much importance, e.g. ni^n for n^j?; in Ex. xxv. 39, where the Syriac
version concurs ; D3 for na, Hos. ix. 2, Sept. 6 oTcos ^evcraro avrotis,
and similiarly the Syriac and Targum. Possibly, therefore, the pvao
represent readings derived from the versions.

2 I.e. pp. 10, 11, note ; cp. on the Qeri and Kethibh, ib. p. 5 ff . ;
Strack, Prolegomena, pp. 80-86, 123 ; Buhl, Canon, pp. 99 ff., 237 ff. ;
C. D. Ginsburg, Levita's Exposition of the Massorah, London, 1867, pp.
106-19, where by Levita himself the total number is underestimated.

9 8 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

much interest, is found in the so-called Qeri perpetuum.
In a few instances, for one reason or another, it was
inadmissible to pronounce a word as it was written in
any passage in which it occurred. The Qeri was then
taken for granted, and not marginally inserted or
written, it was to be read perpetually, without ex-
ception, wherever the word in question was found in
the text. The vowels of the Qeri, however, were still
attached to the Kethibh, although the consonants of
the former did not appear. The best known example
of these perpetual Qeris is that of the Divine name,
the Tetragmmmaton, mrr. This is uniformly vocalised
njrv, i.e. with the vowels of ^iix, except when the word
oils itself immediately precedes or follows, when, in
order to avoid the repetition of the word, run 11 receives
the vowels of B*fw, and is written nirp. In the former
case the Jews uniformly read and pronounced ^iix, in
the latter &$$. The true vocalisation of mrp is
probably ty?!, Yahveh, or as sometimes written Jahveh.
In the nature of the case, however, this can never be
absolutely determined. 1 Other examples of the Qeri
perpetuum are Q^T, i.e. D^BTi?, for Kethibh a^T,

1 See S. R. Driver, " Recent Theories on the Origin and Nature of the
Tetragrammaton " in Studio, Biblica, vol. i., Oxford, 1885; A. B.
Davidson in HDB, vol. ii. p. 199 b f. ; Oxford Hebrew Lexicon, s.v.
nin, p. 217 ff. ; G. Margoliouth, "On the Divine Name nin'" in PSBA
xvii. p. 57 if. ; C. H. W. Johns in Expositor, 1903, p. 282 ff. The
English pronunciation Jehovah therefore rests ultimately upon a
mistake, the written form nin; being understood to be a complete
Hebrew word ; and is in itself neither Hebrew nor in any sense what-
ever the name of Israel's God. Whether it would be wise in English
to attempt to discard the title Jehovah, around which the reverence

QERI AND KETHIBH 99

.g. Judg. i. 21, etc. ; but Dv" is found occasionally in the
later books, 1, 2 Chron., and Esth. ii. 6, Jer. xxvi. 18.
Kin is read as N 1| n j wherever in the Pentateuch Kin is
found for the feminine, a peculiarity which in Palestinian
texts is confined to the five books of the Law, but
which the Babylonians write elsewhere, Isa. xxx. 33,
Ezek. i. 13, etc. 5 1 i^'f, for 13^, Gen. xxx. 18, etc.,
Sept. 'lWa%ap ; "W3, in the Pentateuch, Gen. xxiv.
14 al., Kethibh iJH, for Qerl n^? ; and to these must
probably be added DriP, DW, for D^f , &RV, the Qeri
intended being W, W- 2

From whatever source these variations of reading
were derived, they did not apparently owe their origin
to differences between the manuscripts themselves.
They were not, therefore, various readings in the
technical sense. In their comments and interpretations,
moreover, the Rabbis seem to adopt either the Qeri or
Kethibh, as is most in accord with the subject in hand,
or the purpose of the discussion. In late codices the
Qeri is even found written in the text.

(5) The eighteen DnsiD rnpn, corrections of the
scribes," are emendations or restorations of passages,

of centuries has gathered, for a novel and uncertain Yahveh or Jahveh,
is altogether another question. In the judgement of the writer such an
attempt is uncalled for, and would be justly regarded by very many as
irreverent and pedantic.

1 S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel,
Oxford, 1890, p. xxxiii ; Buhl, I.e. p. 239 ff. Whatever the origin,
therefore, of the textual Kin in relation to a feminine noun, it is evident
that it is not an archaism.

2 See also Buhl, I.e. p. 102; OHL, ss.vv. ; Gesenius, Hebrew
Grammar, 1898, p. 65.

ioo INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

in which it seems to have, been believed that a reading,
not original, had been introduced into the text from
motives of reverence, or to avoid anthropomorphic
suggestions. They therefore registered the fact, or
what was supposed to be the fact, of an alteration
already made in the text ; but did not themselves
invent or adopt any new reading which might be
assumed to be preferable to the old. The eighteen
" emendations " are enumerated in a note on Num.
ad init., and are as follows :

(1) Gen. xviii. 22, nirv *x ntfy luniy DrroN. This

it is said originally read 0?7?^ n }'T>
" Jehovah was yet standing before Abraham,"
and was altered to avoid seeming to repre-
sent Jehovah as waiting upon a man.

(2) Num. xi. 15, 'flina n*OK fo], originally ^njna,

altered because it might be understood to
impute evil-doing ( n Jf)) to God.

(3) Num. xii. 12, Vifea . . . toK, an emendation

for nfe>a . . . WBK.

(4) 1 Sam. iii. 13, wa Dr6 D^bpjp 'a, originally >b;

compare Sept. KatcoXoyovvres Qebv viol
avrov.

(5) 2 Sam. xvi. 12, ^ij?a njrp nsv <W, Qeri "rya,

an emendation of the scribes for an original
irjn, to escape the anthropomorphism of
ascribing an eye to Jehovah.

(6) 2 Sam. xx. 1, VjtP. ^.^? ^, read Vn^sb,

which carried with it the implication of

TIQQUNE SOPHERIM 101

polytheism and idolatry ; so also (7) and
(8), 1 Kings xii. 16 and 2 Chron. x.
16.

(9) Jer. ii. 11, i"ii33 inpn nsy_, originally Htaa,
which seemed to suggest that man was able
to dim or injure the Divine glory.

(10) Ezek. viii. 17, DBN^K rnio-rrnx' tvrkv, origin-

ally H SK ; cp. sup. No. 5.

(11) Hos. iv. 7, TOK pi?2 07122, "their glory I turn

to shame," was read as " my glory they
turn to shame," *vn . . . ntas.

(12) Hab. i. 12, rnD3 t K$, originally nn t6.

(13) Zech. ii. 12, iry nana yJb DM jSn, for ^y ; C p.

Nos. 5 and 8.

(14) Mai. i. 13, inis Drinsn, originally T.te.

(15) Ps. cvi. 20, D7i23-nN n>n, originally i1i33; C p.

sw^. No. 7, and Sept. r^y 86i;av avrwv ; but
N c ' a A a!., avrov.

(16) Job vii. 20, K^ ^ n;n, read T^; Sept.

(17) Job xxxii. 3, ni^'nx UPETV, originally D*nn.

(18) Lam. iii. 20, V'?? ^ "T, Qeri n^m, origin-

ally Tf S3.

The Talmud seems to know nothing of these emenda-
tions, but they are referred to in an old Midrash on
Ex. xv. 7. Apparent alterations of a similar character
are found elsewhere in the Hebrew text, e.g. the sub-
stitution of ntP3, " shame," for ^a in the name of Saul's
son (1 Chron. viii. 33 compared with 2 Sam. ii. 8 ff.).

102 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

These eighteen alone, however, were as it were officially
recognised. 1

(6) Finally, there are D'HBte nray, abstractions " or
" removals of the scribes," five passages in which it was
noted that the letter 1 had been erroneously prefixed,
and ought to be omitted. The tradition was even
ascribed to Moses. 2 The passages are Gen. xviii. 5,
xxiv. 55, Num. xii. 14 (but Chayyim, I.e., gives
Ex. xxiii. 13), Ps. xxxvi. 7, Ixviii. 26.

To the minute and laborious care of the Massoretes,
therefore, it is due that the Hebrew text of the Old
Testament has been preserved unchanged during the
centuries that elapsed between their day and the date
of the invention of printing, which once and for all
set free the text from the dangers to which oral and
manuscript tradition is exposed. There can be no
reasonable doubt that we read the Hebrew Scriptures
to-day, in all but the most unimportant details,
precisely in the form in which these scholars determined
their text. With regard to the principles or methods
on which they worked we have no information.
Precedent and authority certainly carried great weight
with them. And that before their time, in the long
interval between the original composition of the books
and their day, many errors and corruptions, dislocations

1 Buhl, pp. 103 f., 249 ff., and the references there given; Strack,
Prolegomena, p. 86 ff. ; Levy, NeuJiebralsches u. Chaldaischcs Worter-
buch, s.v. pjjfi ; Chayyim's Introd. to liabb. Bible, p. 27 ff.

- TOO riB-a 1 ? nabn . . . nnsio TiB'y, Nedarim 37 b " the removal of the
scribes . . . is a Halakhah due to Moses from Sinai, " quoted in Levy,
s.v. -nay ; see also Introd. to Rail. Bible, p. 27 ; Buhl and Strack,
ut supra ; Buxtorf, Clavis Masoruc, eh. xi.

MASSORAH 103

and glosses had found their way into the text is
incontestable. Of this the versions supply abundant
evidence. It would have been strange if it had not
been so ; and would have set the Old Testament apart,
in a manner wholly inconceivable, from all other
literature, ancient and modern, including the New
Testament itself. That the patience and skill of the
Jewish scholars could not perform the impossible and
restore the text to the form in which it left the authors'
hands does not diminish the obligation under which we
lie to them for their zeal and care. 1

While, however, the Eabbis were thus faithful, even
to an extreme, in their adherence to the letter of the
Hebrew text, in their interpretation they allowed
themselves much more freedom, especially in the
direction of metaphor and allegory. It was in this
sense that two formulae of frequent occurrence were
employed when the reader or writer wished to suggest
or recall an allegorical interpretation of a Scripture
passage different from the prima facie literal meaning.
These formulae did not actually imply a variation in the
text, or any suspicion of its correctness, but that in his
quotation of the Scripture the writer or speaker wished
to lay emphasis on a supposed allegorical significance

1 A parallel instance of minute and laborious care bestowed on the
preservation of a sacred text is found in the work of the early Sanskrit
commentators and grammarians on the Rig-Veda. To them also it is
in large part due that an accurate and on the whole uncorrupted and
unaltered text of the Hymns is in our hands to-day. Compare also the
recension of the Quran by order of the Khalif Othman ('Uthmau), in the
middle of the seventh century, which established once for all a fixed
and authoritative Arabic text for the Muhainmadau world.

104 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

which he found underlying it. There was no question
of true or false reading ; only of a metaphorical, as
against a literal interpretation, when the former was
germane to the matter in hand, or the fancy of the
writer. Often the comment or explanation was little
more than a play upon words or meanings, of which the
Hebrew text itself affords many examples. The formulae
were as follows, and were ordinarily prefixed to the
passage of Scripture quoted :

(1) 13 ; 13 snpn i>, " do not read thus, but
thus."

(2) rniDo!' DX W J0p$> OK B*, i.e. the text implies
one meaning, the Massorah another, a formula used
when both literal and allegorical interpretations were
to be kept in view, and it was not intended to ignore
either. 1

Massoretic studies were revived in our own day, first
by John Buxtorf, at the beginning of the seventeenth
century, who in his great lexical and grammatical works
laid the foundations of a scientific knowledge of the
Hebrew language. More recently the work has been
carried on by L. Dukes, S. Baer, H. L. Strack,
W. Wickes, C. D. Ginsburg, and others. To the
last-named especially all students of the works and
writings of the Jews on the Old Testament owe a great
debt. The corpus of Massoretic notes, lists, etc., which
Dr. Ginsburg has edited, has been the laborious task
of a lifetime, and is an invaluable storehouse of material,

1 See Struck, Prolegomena, ]>p. 06 ff., 691'.; Taylor, Saying* of the
Jewish Fathers, 1877, p. 114, n. 2.

VOCALISATION AND ACCENTUATION 105

collected and arranged, to which all future students will
have recourse. 1

4. VOWEL-POINTS AND ACCENTS ; BABYLONIAN AND
PALESTINIAN SYSTEMS.

The Jewish scholars whom we know as Massoretes,
the authors of the Massorah, were not the originators
of the signs for vowels and accents with which the
Hebrew text is provided. They were acquainted with
these, noted their power and functions, and read and
commented on a text already vocalised and accentuated.
The Hebrew vowel system, therefore, as a whole
antedates the Massoretic era ; although it does not,
of course, follow that it underwent no subsequent
development. The scope of their labours proves that
before their time the necessity had been felt of securing
by artificial means the flawless transmission of a text,
traditional and sacred, but no longer living on the lips
and in the language of the people. These labours
extended to accents and vowels as well as to
consonants.

It was out of this felt necessity that the Hebrew
system of accentuation arose. When Hebrew as a
spoken tongue, as the vehicle of daily communication
and intercourse, began to die out, it was necessary to

1 C. D. Ginsburg, Massorah, 3 vols., London, 1880-97 ; a fourth
volume, containing translation and explanation of the notes is not yet
(1908) completely published. Other literature has been cited above ;
add articles on the Massorah in Jewish Encyclopaedia, and by the late
Dr. W. L. Alexander iu Kitto's Encyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, etc.

106 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

devise some means by which the true pronunciation
might be recorded and transmitted to future generations.
At what period this process of decay and oblivion
commenced it is impossible to determine with precision.
Probably the seeds of it were sown during the hardships
and disorders of the Exile ; and after the Eeturn the
sacred tongue was never found in universal or
vigorous currency. In any case, however, the decay
was gradual, and in view of the tenacity and con-
servatism of the Jewish people in all probability only
slowly progressive. And similarly the perfecting of the
written system of vocalisation was not accomplished in
a day. That system as it exists and is applied to the
consonantal text of the Hebrew Old Testament more
nearly approaches the ideal of vocalisation a vowel
sign for every vowel sound, and no sign employed to
denote more than one sound than is perhaps to be
found in any other language, ancient or modern. It is,
however, the result of a growth, a development ; the
stages of which probably corresponded in inverse order
to the growing consciousness of inability to hold in
remembrance the spoken sounds of the language
without the concurrent aid of the eye. The detailed
history of this development belongs rather to Grammar
than to Introduction. It must be sufficient to point
out that the first step would be a freer and more
extensive use of the half-vowels snv, the so-called
matres lectionis, snpD^ DX, and monb DN, 1 to indicate the
diphthongs or the long vowels. This stage, which

1 Cp. supra, p. 104.

VOCALISATION AND ACCENTUATION 107

coincided with a more careful differentiation between
scriptio plena and scriptio defectiva, is represented to a
considerable extent in the Septuagint ; although the
Greek more often presupposes a Hebrew text entirely
unvocalised, or at least with a pointing at variance with
that of the Massoretes. The scriptio plena also is
practically unknown to the Moabite inscription, and on
the Siloam stone is employed only for diphthongs. The
final and perfected form of the system cannot have
been reached until some centuries after the beginning
of the Christian era ; and reasons have been suggested
for believing that it may even have come under the
influence of the Syriac method of notation, the existence
of which can be traced back to the fifth century, and
which may have originated at a considerably earlier
date.

In the application of the system a distinction is
made between ordinary manuscripts and rolls intended
for use in the synagogue. The latter are always left
unpointed. And in manuscripts that are vocalised and
accentuated, the signs for vowels and accents are
frequently added later by a i^pa or " punctuator," who
is distinct from the "'SiD proper, the original copyist
or scribe.

The signs denoting the vowels, therefore, originated
at a late date in the history of the Hebrew language,
which for a period lasting over many centuries was
written and read without any such aid ; and the
recollection of this fact was never entirely lost. For
a time, however, the opposite view prevailed, at first

io8 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

apparently among the Jews themselves of the Qaraite
sect, who in their eagerness to maintain the rights of
the written Scripture against the oral and traditional
supplement, the " tradition of the elders," regarded
the whole letter of the Law with equal reverence,
and claimed for it equal inspiration. 1

To enhance also the supposed value and authority
of the vowel- points, the invention of them was ascribed
to Ezra. This view was adopted and taught even by
Christian writers, who learned it from the Qaraites,
with whose opposition to the orthodox legalism they
had much sympathy. The most renowned scholars
on the Christian side who upheld the doctrine of the
antiquity of the written vowel system were the two
Joh. Buxtorf, father and son, who in succession held
the professorship of Hebrew at Basel at the end of
the sixteenth and during the first half of the seven-
teenth centuries. The younger Buxtorf in particular
wrote treatises in which inspiration and authority was
claimed for vowels as well as consonants. His great
opponent was Louis Cappel (Ludovicus Cappellus),
professor at Saumur in France, who published in 1624

1 The Qaraites (NIJ;, tops Scripture) were the Protestants of Judaism,
who in the eighth and following centuries maintained a polemic against
tradition, rejecting the authority of the oral law, and asserting the
sole and undivided authority of the written Scripture. They wielded
considerable influence mainly by their writings as late at least as the
twelfth century ; but have declined altogether since that time in
numbers and influence. Their stronghold is among the Jews of the
Crimea. See W. H. Rule, History of the Karaite Jews, London, 1870 ;
I. Abrahams, Short History of Jewish Literature, London, 1906, ch. vi.,
and references.

VOCALISATION AND ACCENTUATION 109

his Arcanum Punctuationis Rcvelatum, proving that
the vowel-points were a comparatively recent inven-
tion. Other writers who followed on the same side,
maintained the true view with curiously infelicitous
arguments, as when J. M. Morinus, in his Exercitationes
on the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible, published
in 1669, ten years after the author's death, asserted
that the Hebrew was written without vowel signs,
in order that the judgement and authority of the
Church might prevail over the private interpretations
of individuals. The final and decisive word, however,
was spoken by the great Jewish scholar Elias Levita,
1474-1549 A.D., who in his treatise written in Hebrew,
Massoreth Jia-Massoreth, conclusively established the late
origin of these current symbols for the vowels. This
view was accepted by the Eeforrners in Germany, and
by Christian scholars generally ; and has never since
been seriously questioned. 1

About the middle of the nineteenth century a
number of Hebrew manuscripts were brought to light
from the Jewish synagogues in the Crimea by a Qaraite
Jew, Abraham Firkowibsch, with a system of punctua-
tion altogether different from that hitherto known and
in customary use. In these manuscripts the vowel
signs were for the most part written above the con-
sonants, and were found to be both simpler and less

1 Elias "the Levite," born at Neustadt in Germany, was one of the
greatest of Jewish students of the Massorah. Most of his life was spent
in Italy, where he taught Hebrew and wrote commentaries and a
Talmudic dictionary, as well as the standard treatise above named.
He died at Venice in the year 1549.

no INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

numerous than on the ordinary plan. This new
system therefore came to be known as " supeiiinear,"
the old receiving the name " sublinear," " Palestinian,"
or " Western." It was also termed " Babylonian,"
because all or most of the manuscripts in which
it was embodied were derived from Babylonia. It
is not, however, the Babylonian system technically
so called, and does not conform to its rules. As a
matter of fact, both systems seem to have originated
in the schools of Palestine. Perhaps the best known
manuscript with the superlinear punctuation is the
St. Petersburg Codex of the Prophets, published in
facsimile by H. L. Strack. 1 A third system has been
traced in some fragments in the Bodleian Library at
Oxford ; 2 while Dr. M. Gaster describes a manuscript
in his possession in which both systems are found side
by side in the margin. 3 The precise connection between
the two systems is as yet undetermined. They are not
unrelated, but it is uncertain on which side the priority
lies. The older view was that the Babylonian, as the
ruder and rougher, was the original, and the Palestinian
a modification of it, designed to secure greater accuracy
and refinement. Possibly that is true ; but it seems
more probable that each was in its origin independent,
or perhaps derived in common from some older system,

1 Sup. p. 61 f. For a list of MSS with the Babylonian pointing, see
Ad. Merx, Chrestomathia Targumica, Berlin, 1888, p. 15 f. ; S. Baer's
Job. Leipzig, 1875, p. 4 f. ; and on the whole subject, G. Margoliouth
in PSBA, vol. xv. p. 164 ff.

2 M. Friedlander, PSBA, vol. xviii. p. 86 ff., with examples, p. 96.
2 Illustrated Bibles, p. 20 ; PSBA, vol. xxii. p. 237.

VOCALISATION AND ACCENTUATION in

although at a later date they have exercised to an
undefined extent a real mutual influence. Others hold,
but on inadequate grounds, that the Babylonian is a
modification of the older Palestinian, devised in order
to secure greater simplicity. The Jewish schools of
Palestine seem never to have officially recognised or
employed the superlinear system ; but in Babylon and
the East, for a time at least, the two methods of
pointing existed side by side, the Palestinian gradually
winning its way by its superior precision and com-
pleteness. In the Babylonian system of vocalisation,
Dr. Wickes l sees evidence of the influence of Arabic,
and doubtfully also in the accentuation.

ACCENTUATION. That the signs for the Hebrew
accents originated at or about the same period, and
were due to the same authors as the signs for the
vowels, is generally admitted. They were designed
for the same end, to secure the accurate reading of
a Hebrew text hitherto unpointed in an age when
the knowledge of the spoken language was beginning
to pass away.

The accents served three purposes : They indicated
(1) the tone-syllable in the word ; (2) the place of
the word in the sentence, i.e. they were marks of
punctuation ; (3) they served as a scheme of musical
notation, for purposes of cantillation, to guide and
control the chanting of the text.

(1) An accent was placed on or beneath that
syllable in each word which carried the tone or
1 Prose Accents, Appendix II.

ii2 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

stress of the voice, whether it were the ultimate or
penultimate. The secondary stress on the syllable
but one before the accented was indicated by methegh.
In the case of a prepositive or postpositive accent,
the position of which was confined to the first or
last syllable of the word, the accent was repeated if
necessary on the syllable which carried the tone.
Otherwise every word received one and only one
accent, unless it were united by maqqeph to the
following word, with which it then became an
accentual whole, and being pronounced, as it were,
rapidly and without stress, lost its own proper tone.
In this their function as tone indicators, all accents
are of equal value.

(2) The accents served also the purpose of a com-
plete scheme or system of punctuation, regulating the
relation of each word to the rest of the sentence, and
determining the relative length of the pause by which
it was separated from the adjoining words. 1 They
therefore corresponded to our stops, but on a much
more comprehensive and elaborate scale, the author

1 The standard treatises in English on the Hebrew accents are the
works of Dr. "W. Wickes, Accentuation of the three Poetical Books of the
Old Testament, Oxford, 1881 ; and Accentuation of the Twenty-one Prose
Books of the Old Testament, Oxford, 1887. The accounts given in the
older grammars are vitiated by the adoption of the fanciful classification
by the Jewish Rabbis into emperors, kings, etc. (imperatores, reges,
domini, servi). The division suggests a fixed and determinate power
belonging to each accent, and equality of power within each division,
which is contrary to the facts. The relative order of the accents is
fixed, but not their absolute value. See also A. B. Davidson, Outlines
nf Hebrew Accentuation, London, 1861 ; Gesenius-Kautzsch, Hebrew
Grammar, trans. Collins and Cowley, Oxford, 1898, p. 56 ff.

ACCENTUATION 113

attempting to render with the utmost precision the
length or brevity of the pause which is to intervene
in the reading between each word and that which
follows. The accents were therefore classified as
disjunctives, which separated a word more or less
decisively from its successor, and conjunctives, which
united the two. The latter are the so-called servi of
the Eabbinical writers. In form the disjunctives as
a rule are directed away from the following word,
the conjunctives turn towards it. Modern signs of
punctuation, colon, semicolon, etc., are evidently all
disjunctives. Moreover, even less than in our modern
systems was the absolute force of a disjunctive accent
defined or fixed. It depended entirely upon the
character of the sentence, and its place therein. So
that, for example, the most powerful accent might
indicate a prolonged pause, or, on the other hand, one as
short or shorter than a comma. Their relative force,
however, did not vary, and an accent lower in the scale
never took precedence of a higher ; there existed a
fixed gradation of rank, but not equality of influence.

The principle upon which the system depended
was that of dichotomy. Each Hebrew verse formed
an accentual whole, the close of which was marked
by silluq (Pv"?) 3 followed by sopk-pdsuq (piDS fjio),
" end of the verse." The latter (:) was not an accent,
but merely a conventional sign to denote the close
of the section or whole, termed a verse (pioa). This
whole was then divided into two parts at the point
where the principal pause in the sense occurred, and
8

ii4 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the place so determined was indicated by athnach,

Sometimes, but rarely, segholta (NflpJD) took the
place of athnach ; and if the verse was short, neither
appeared. Each accent was described as " governing "
the clause preceding it, as far back as the next accent
of equal or greater authority. Silluq, therefore,
dominated the whole verse, athnach when present, or
segholta the earlier half-division. Each of the two
parts was then further divided into two on the same
principle, and the point of division indicated by a
disjunctive accent ; and the process was continued
until each word had been furnished with an accent,
and its relation to the following word thus denned.
The order of importance was roughly Zaqeph, Tiphcha,
Kevia', Pashta Zarqa and Tebhlr, Geresh Pazer and
Great Tellsha, Legarmeh ; Silluq's clause being usually
defined by Tiphcha, Athnach, Zaqeph, if the length
of the verse permitted.

The scrvi or conjunctives " waited upon " the dis-
junctives, and indicated a close connection between
the word on which the conjunctive accent stood and
that which immediately followed. All conjunctives are
of equal value.

(3) To each accent, further, was attached a kind
of melody or sing-song, a musical phrase of a few
notes, to which the word bearing the accent was

1 In the prose books. A different accent was employed for the
purpose in the poetical books of Psalms, Proverbs, and Job ; see for
details the authorities quoted, or the preface to Dr. Baer's edition of
the Psalms.

ACCENTUATION 115

sung, or rather chanted. Thus the Hebrew text
in the synagogue was not so much read in the
ordinary modern sense of the term, as chanted to a
tune or melody denoted by the accents. Unfortu-
nately all knowledge of the original melodies has
been lost. And although the Jews to-day employ
a kind of cantillation in reading the Scriptures, and
the accents have a well - defined and understood
musical connotation, it is generally acknowledged that
this is of comparatively modern origin, and that all
certain knowledge of the notes or phrases that the
accents formerly expressed has passed away.

In the case of the accents as of the vowels, there
is found a " superlinear " or " Babylonian " system,
which accompanies the Babylonian vocalisation ; and
a third system in the Bodleian fragments, to which
reference has already been made. 1 The accents are
denoted by their initial letters, written on a smaller
scale above the letter or syllable to which they are
applied. The whole system was evidently regarded
as of inferior worth and authority to the Palestinian,
upon which it seems to depend ; and it was never
employed for the sacred name mrr. Its most remark-
able internal feature is the prominence accorded to the
accent revia', and the frequent use made of the latter.
No distinction, moreover, was observed in the accentua-
tion of the poetical as compared with the prose books. 2

1 Supra, p. 110.

2 See especially, Wickes, Prose Accents, Appendix II., and the
other authorities cited, su^t. p. 112.

CHAPTER III.

HEBREW AND GREEK CANONS OF THE
OLD TESTAMENT; CLASSIFICATION AND
ARRANGEMENT OF THE SACRED BOOKS.

Hebrew Bible, as usually printed, consists,
according to the reckoning and tradition of the
Jews, of twenty-four books, divided into three classes,
as follows : nnin, Law, of five books ; E^itf, Prophets,
eight books ; and D^na, Writings, eleven books.
There seems to be no real authority for the state-
ment that the original number was twenty - two.
Native Jewish literature contains no reference to this,
but uniformly gives the total of the books as twenty-
four. And the first to mention the former number
is Josephus, who adds details that bear plainly an
unhistorical character. 1 It is not difficult to under-
stand how the number twenty-two, in whatever way
once suggested, should be taken up and perpetuated,

1 Josephus, contr. Ap. i. 8 : ov yap fj.vpia.des ftifiXiuv eiffi Trap TJ/

/cat na.'xpij.tvtav Stio o /J.bva Trpbs ro?s ei'/cocrt jii^\ia . . .
tvTe fj.4v Am TO, Muv<r4<as & TOI/S -re VO/JLOVS TTfpitx ei . . . ol
irpo(j>fjTai TO. /car' avrotis TrpaxBfVTa. ffvv^ypa^a.i' v rpiffl Kal 5tica.
at 5^ XotTrat recrcrapes V/J.VQVS ets TOV 0edi> /cat rots
TOV plov trepi.(xov<fiv. Compare Buhl, p. 18 ft'.

116

CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 117

because of its correspondence with the number of
the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Later Christian
writers, as Epiphanius, 1 give not only twenty-two, but
twenty-seven, the latter number also artificial, obtained
by adding the five final letters to the twenty-two of
the alphabet, and in the books themselves by dividing
the four double books, Samuel Kings Chronicles
and Ezra-Nehemiah, and reckoning Lamentations to
Jeremiah ; the total of twenty-two, instead of twenty-
four, was similarly reached by joining also Ruth to
Judges in one book.

Both these reckonings would appear to have been
derived from Alexandria, and to have arisen among
Greek-speaking Jews. It would hardly have occurred
to one accustomed only to the Hebrew Canon to
divide the so-called double books, which were not
double in Hebrew, or to dissociate Ruth and Lamenta-
tions from the rest of the Writings, and place them
with books of the Prophets.

The complete Hebrew Canon was arranged as
follows, the names of the several books of the Law
being derived from the initial words ; that of Numbers
is an exception, being descriptive of the chief or a chief
topic of the book, although here also the initial word

1 Adv. Hcer. viii. 6 ; the names of the books are given, concluding
with Esther, and then the total, aSrat elcriv at eiKOffiewTa, /3t'/3\ot at e/c Qeov
doOe'icrai. rots 'lovdaiois. De Mensuris et Ponderibus, 4 et/cocrt yap Kal duo
?X ovffi <fTOij(eitay coi^uara, irevre 6 elffiv e avr&v 5nr\ov/j.eva . . . 816 Kal
at j3t'/3\ot Kara TOVTOV rbv rp6irov eiKOcnSuo fjL^v apidfj-ovvrai, elKOffitiTTa Se
evpicrKovTai, 5td r6 irevre e avruiv diir\ov<rdai. Cp. ib. 22 ad fin. ; and
Jerome, Prcf. Sam. and Kings, who says that many count five double
books, as above.

n8 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

was sometimes used. The English titles are, of course,
transliterations or renderings of the Greek, except in the
case of Samuel, Kings, Ezra, Nehemiah, and the Prophets.

I. rnin

II.

, Genesis.
iDB' (nbitt), "EoS 09 , Exodus.

V?-> Aeveiri/cov, Leviticus.

"13*1133, or "13*1''!, 'ApiQ/wi, Numbers.
D'linn npx, AevrepovofjiLov, Deuteronomy.

Navrj, Joshua.
'-psalfy, Kpirai, Judges.

o-tXetw^ a', ff , Samuel
I. II.

ppp, Ba(ri\6L(t)v <y' , 8', Kings
I. II.

ia?, Isaiah.
s, Jeremiah.
yX, Ezekiel.

-i76, Hosea;
N*.', 'IwT^X, Joel ; Dioy,
'-4ytt&)9, Amos ; n ^?^> 'O/3-
(5ta9, Obadiah ; n3i', 'Iowa?,
Jonah; n3*p,Mt^ata
, Naovfju, Nahum;

Habakkuk;
ias, Zephaniah ;
, Haggai; n p.2T
iaf, Zechariah ; '?N?*? ;
t'a?, Malachi.

CANON

119

III.

f D^nn, Wa\fjioi, Psalms.
-| vB'p, IlapoLfAlai, Proverbs.
1 3lN, 'Icti/3, Job.

P, M<r/ia, Canticles, or
Song of Solomon.
nn, 'Pou0, Euth.
ro^, or rrirp, Qpijvoi, Lamenta-
tions.

KK^rja-iaa-Tijs, Ecclesi-
astes.
I nriDK, 'Eo-%, Esther.

iK, Daniel.
^Tj;, 'Eo-8/ja9 /S', Ezra.
jOPia, Nee/j,las, Nehemiah.

n;i l n j napaXefjro/Aevwv a,
(3', Chronicles I. II.

The five books of the Law were by the Jews
termed nninn ^on HEton, the five-fifths of the Law."
Tradition, which ascribes the whole to Moses as the
author, is silent as to the reason or circumstances of
this five-fold division. The Greek name of the last
book, which has passed through the Latin into the
English Bible, appears to be due to a misunderstanding
of the words of Deut. xvii. 18, rninn m^o-ns ii> ana
ntftn, lit. a repetition or recapitulation of this law,
where the Sept. translates " ypd-^rei avra) TO Sevrepovo/juov
TOVTO," as though a second or new law were meant.

120 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

The Hebrew expression precisely describes the cha-
racter of the book ; it is in the main a recapitulation
of the laws found in the preceding books, with
additions and some variations. The Greek title con-
veys a wrong impression.

The terms "earlier" and "later" prophets, or
" former " and " latter " (D^N") and D^inx), were perhaps
intended in a historical or chronological sense, the twelve
Minor Prophets being gathered together into one, and
placed at the end, as carrying on the history to a
date subsequently to the latest of the preceding seven.
The books which we regard as historical, Judges to
2 Kings, were accounted among the " prophets," either
because of their contents, recounting the Divinely-
guided history of the chosen people, with its moral
lessons, and containing the actual words of prophets
such as Elijah or Elisha, or perhaps because they were
believed to have been composed by prophets, as Samuel.
The order in which the Minor Prophets are arranged
appears to have been intended to be roughly chrono-
logical, the element of length perhaps also being taken
into consideration. In the Greek Canon, which places
the " Minor " before the " Major " Prophets, the order
of the first six of the former differs from that of the
Hebrew. The Vatican manuscript has for the first six
the order Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah ;
the rest as in the Hebrew, but the order varies in
different manuscripts. 1

1 H. B. Swete, Old Testament in Greek, vol. iii. ; see Introduction to
the Old Testament in Greek, p. 201 ff.

CANON 121

Within the Kethubhlm also varieties of arrangement
are found. In manuscripts of Spanish origin, Chronicles
was placed before the Psalms, on the ground, without
doubt, of its historical nature. The ordinary printed
texts follow the usage of German manuscripts, in which
Chronicles stands last, closing the Canon. The Greek
title IIapa\ei7rofji,eva, " remnants," " remainders," seems
to indicate that the book was regarded as supplementing,
and supplying the omissions of Kings. The first three
of the Kethubhlm, the poetical books, were collectively
entitled riOK, " truth," from the initial letters of their
names, x=:n s N, o^bt/'E, n^Q^nn. The Psalter seems
always to have occupied the first place of the three ;
but the order of Proverbs and Job was sometimes
reversed in the lists. The sequence of the rri?3p again
presented great differences. 1 The books were so called,
because being short each was usually written on a
separate roll of parchment. The last three works in
the Canon, Daniel Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles, had
no recognised collective name.

This arrangement of the Hebrew gives the explanation of a
saying of Christ recorded in the New Testament by two of the
Evangelists (Matt, xxiii. 35 ; Luke xi. 51). Upon the Jews shall
come the guilt of all the righteous blood shed upon the earth from
the blood of Abel the just to that of Zacharias son of Barachias,
" whom ye slew between the temple and the altar " (Luke, " who
perished between the altar and the house," i.e. the temple). The
reference no doubt is to 2 Chron. xxiv. 20 f ., where it is recorded

1 S. Baer, Quinque Volumina, p. iii ; H. E. Ryle, Canon of the Old
Testament, London, 1892, p. 223 ff. and Excursus 3 ; H. B. Swete,
ut sup.

122 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

that Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest condemned the
people for their impiety and desertion of Jehovah, and was stoned
to death by the command of Joash the king. From a chronological
standpoint this was not the last of the arbitrary murders of which
the Jews were guilty. It was the last, however, narrated in the
order of their Scriptures. And within these two examples, the
first and the last in their own sacred books, terminus a qito and
ad quern, Christ evidently intended to include all the unjust deeds
of wrong and murder with which their history had been stained
throughout its entire course.

The final determination of the order of the Canonical
Books has been sometimes referred to the Massoretes.
In essentials, however, the arrangement must have
been carried out at a considerably earlier date. Jewish
tradition ascribes the formation of the Canon, with
so much besides, to Ezra and the men of the Great
Synagogue, 1 a suggestion first made apparently by
Elias Levita. 2 The tripartite classification, however,
into Law, Prophets, and Writings, was certainly not
arbitrary or the invention of any one man, but cor-
responds to a real historical development, in which
the five books of the Law were the first to obtain
general recognition and acceptance, then the books of
the Prophets, Earlier and Later, and finally, perhaps not
until a comparatively late date, the Canon was com-
pleted and closed by the inclusion of the Kethubhim,
or Hagiographa. It does not follow, of course, that
the individual books contained in the three collections
were actually composed in this order, or that a member
of the second group, that of the Prophets, necessarily

1 Cp. sup. p. 89.

- Massoreth-ha-Massoreth, ed. C. D. Ginslwrg, p. 119 if.

CANON 123

postdates each and every book of the Law in the form
in which these now exist. But broadly and generally
speaking, there underlies the three-fold division a
historical and chronological growth, which determines
an early rank in the Canon as corresponding to an
early place in time, in origin, and in the knowledge of
the Jews. The application of the principle in particular
cases may be difficult and uncertain. Its essential
correctness, however, can hardly be called in question.
It suggests among many others two conclusions of
considerable interest in view of modern controversies
as to authorship and date (1) that the Law, in its
main elements, not necessarily in its final or completed
form, existed and was recognised as authoritative "before
the work of the Prophets ; and (2) that the position
of the book of Daniel, almost at the close of the
Hagiographa, agrees better with a late date of com-
position than with an earlier period which would bring
him, as in our Bibles, into association with the greater
Prophets, or even into chronological proximity with the
work and time of Ezekiel.

With regard to the method of the Canonisation
of the several books or collections of books we have
no definite information. Within the Old Testament
itself there are slight references to the preservation
and use of sacred books before the Exile, e.g. Deut.
xxxi. 24 ff, 2 Kings xxii. 8 ff., the " book of the Lord "
in Isa. xxxiv. 16, cp. xxix. 18; it is clear that none
of these suggest or imply a recognised Canon of any
kind. In Neh. viii. 1 ff. again it is recorded how Ezra

i2 4 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the scribe read " the book of the law " to the people
in the seventh month ; and in obedience to the words
of the book they formally renewed their covenant with
Jehovah. Nehemiah himself is said in 2 Mace. ii. 13
to have formed a collection of books. 1 The narrative
concerning Ezra may very possibly have preserved the
account of the formation or recognition of the nucleus
of a Canon, a legal code believed to have the sanction
of Divine authority, around which gathered by subse-
quent and gradual accretion the several books of an
acknowledged and completed Scripture. The later use
of the term " Law " to include the whole Old Testament
would be in entire harmony with this supposition.
The schools of the prophets also formed from very
early times centres in which particular books would
be studied and taught ; and all analogy is in favour of
the conception of these as faithful custodians of an oral
tradition, or even of written documents. There is no
proof, however, of the existence of anything of the
nature of a Canon before the time of the Exile. The
reception by the Samaritans of the Pentateuch alone,
and rejection of the remaining sacred books of the
Jews, points in the same direction of the priority of
a canonised Law. Even if more has been made than
is altogether just of the mutual antipathy of Jews and

1 The passage is curious, but neither there nor in the context is any
suggestion conveyed of a sacred or authoritative character attaching to
the collection : /cara/SaXXd/xecos /3t|3\io0V 1 7*' tTncvvrnayev TO, Trepl rCiv
jSaa-iX^wv (cat Trpo<pr]Tuv /3t/3Xt'a, /ecu ra rov Aaveid, /cat ^TrtOToXds /Sao-tXewj'
irepl dpatfe/mrwc, Nehemiah "formed a library, and gathered together
the books concerning the kings and prophets, and the books of David,
and the kings' letters concerning offerings."

CANON 125

Samaritans, the latter would not have been likely to
discriminate against Prophets or Writings if the
authority of these collections were generally recognised
at the time of the separation of the two peoples ; or to
admit them subsequently, when the sympathy and
close intercourse of a common life and worship had
been replaced by estrangement.

The earliest evidence for a collection of Prophetical
writings, recognised and circulated among the Jews,
is to be found in the Preface to the book of Ecclesi-
asticus, translated from the Hebrew 132 B.C., but
referring to the time of the writer's grandfather, the
author of the book, and therefore some half century
earlier. 1 The expression "the law itself and the
prophecies and the rest of the books " certainly im-
plies some kind of collections or volumes recognised
and regarded as in some sort authoritative ; in which
the vagueness of the last phrase, " the rest of the
books," perhaps suggests that the limits of the third
division were not so clearly defined or settled as those
of the other two. But if the books of the Prophets
were thus received by Jesus the son of Sirach (2tpd%,
s^p) early in the second century before our era, the
latest date possible for their general acceptance and
" canonisation " will be the close of the third century.

6 TraTTTros /J.QV 'If]crous eirl Tr\e'iov eavrbv dovs eis re rrjv rov v6fj,ov Kal
raii> TrpoipTjTuv Kal r&v aXXwf varpltav j3t/3Xiwp avdyvucnv . . . Trpo-fix^ 1 !
ical avrbs arvyypd\f/ai n TUIV eh iraidelav Kal fforplav avr/Koi'Tui' . . . ov
yap l<roSwafj.ei aura v eaurots ' E/3/3ai'crr2 \ey6peva Kal &TO.V /j.eraxOrj
efj %Tepav y\>ff(rai>' ov povov d ravra, dXXa Kal atfrds 6 vop.os Kal
at 7T/3o0ijTetat /cat ra XotTra TUI> (3ifi\iui> ov
ev eaurots

126 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

A similar inference is hardly admissible with regard
to the Writings (o'Q'ina) in view of the apparently
intentional vagueness of the language used. 1 Compare
also the expression in 2 Mace., cited above, p. 124,
which again is too indefinite for any certain conclusion
to be drawn from it. The words are found in a letter
professedly written by the Sanhedriu and Jews in
Judsea to Aristobulus the tutor of King Ptolemy in
Egypt and to the Jews resident in that country in the
year 144 B.C. Later evidence is hardly worth citing.
The tradition with regard to Ezra's part in the forma-
tion of the Canon is found, for example, in the 4th
book of Esdras, about the end of the first century of
our era, where it is stated that Ezra restored the
twenty-four sacred books which had been lost, together
with a number of apocryphal works. The New Testa-
ment and Jerome also 2 and the Fathers, together with
the Jewish Talmud, bear abundant witness to the same
effect.

Although precision of dates, therefore, and method
is unattainable, sufficient proof seems to be forthcoming
that the Hebrew Canon was gradually formed, in at
least three stages, of which the first was practically
completed by the time of Ezra, if not actually deter-
mined by him. Some time within the next century
and a half a Prophetic Canon came into existence,
and was asssociated with the Law. Finally, and

1 Of the Writings reference is actually made in the book only to
Psalms, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles.

2 Sup. p. 117 ; he adds, "quidquid extra hos est inter Apocrypha
esse poneudum," v.l. inter Ap. seponendum ; infra, p. 127.

CANON 127

possibly only by slow degrees, the three-fold Canon
was completed by the inclusion of the Writings. The
process was thus prolonged over some three or four
centuries ; but it certainly reached its conclusion
during, if not before, the first century B.C. Even in
the Mishna, however, we find doubts expressed as to
the canonicity of certain minor books, Ecclesiastes
and Canticles ; but they were perhaps only half in
earnest, scholastic exercises, not intended to be too
seriously understood. 1

The Greek Bible seems from the first to have
admitted into its Canon, and placed on an equality
with the older books, a number of " Apocrypha,"
which never found a place in the Hebrew list. In
most instances, no doubt, the Hebrew Canon rejected
them, or refused to entertain their claims, either
because they were written in Greek, or because of
the lateness of the date of their composition. Neither
of these reasons, however, would hold good as against
such a work as Ecclesiasticus, originally composed in
Hebrew, and of which the Greek Bible, therefore,
canonised a translation equally with the other books
rendered from the Hebrew. But Ecclesiasticus never

1 The discussion assumed the curious form of an argument as to
whether these writings "defiled the hands," crvn owpcp (Yadaim
iii. 5 at.), -i.e. were sacred or tabu, and so incapacitated the hand
touching them for the time being from ordinary work, as an actual
defilement would hare done. It was only these sacred writings which
might be rescued from fire on the Sabbath day. The Sadducees, how-
ever, had no such scruples. See Schiirer, Jewish People in the Time of
Christ, ii. l v p. 309, u. 9; Buhl, p. 28 ff., and the references there
given.

128 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

found a place within the strictly Jewish Canon. Nor
do we know on what principles of selection the so-
called Apocrypha were admitted into or excluded
from the Greek.

The term Canon, KO.VUV, from nawa, KUWTJ, a reed, in the literal
sense of a rule or standard, derived from the use of the reed as a
measure, is common enough in classical as well as patristic authors.
In the Septuagint also it is found three times, Mic. vii. 4, Judith
xiii. 6, and 4 Mace. vii. 21, and is twice used by Aquila in his
translation, Job xxxviii. 5, Ps. xviii. (xix.) 5, in both instances
for the Hebrew 15, where the Seventy have in Job, I.e., a-irapriov,
and in Ps. xix. 5, 6 <pd6yyos. In the passage in Micah it is un-
certain what Hebrew original the Greek is intended to represent.
St. Paul also uses it, 2 Cor. x. 13, 15 f., Gal. vi. 16 ; not elsewhere
in the New Testament. In the technical sense, however, of a
rule or standard of the faith, and of the collection of recognised
and inspired books which contain that standard, the word is not
found until a much later date ; by the Greek Fathers also, Origen
and others, derivatives of <av<av are employed technically with
reference to the Scriptures at an earlier period than the simple
term itself ; and similarly KOVOVIKO. and duavovio-ra /3t/3At'a are
distinguished, for instance, in the 59th canon of the Council of
Laodicea, A.D. 363. The first writer to make use of the word
KO.VWV with a technical connotation is Amphilochius, archbishop
of Iconium, c. 380 A.D. Cp. Schiirer, JPTC ii. 1, pp. 306-12,
where other references will be found ; H. L. Strack in Schaff-
Hcrzog Encyclopedia, s.v. Canon.

Lists of the Canon are found in the writings of the
early Fathers ; almost unanimously they reckon twenty-
two books. So Melito of Sardis, c. 180 A.D., quoted
in Eusebius, HE iv. 26 ; the Synod of Laodicea,
cp. supra ; Origen in Euseb. I.e. vi. 25; the Festal
Epistle of Athanasius, 39, A.D. 367 ; Jerome, Prol.
Galeatus ; and many others. Origen's list may serve as
an example ; it is of interest for its transliteration of

CANON 129

the Hebrew names l : el<rl Se at eifcoo-t, 8vo /3//3Xot
'E(3patov<; ai'Se' ?} Trap' fi/niv Teveas e
irap 'E/Spaiois Be airo T??<? />%%
"Bprja-lS" (i.e. WW*1*), Strep evriv, "ev apxfj-" "E^oSo?,
" Ove\e<rfjub0 " (i.e. T\toV rtao) ; 8-n-ep ea-rl, " ravra
ra ovofAara'" AeveiTiicov, " Oviicpd " (i.e. N"!)?*!), " teal

ifji " (i.e. D" 1 *}^^^) t^'phy
'E\eaS$e0apein " (i.e. Q^^n n^K),
" ovroi ol \6<yoi,' " 'J^croO? y/o? Navrj, " 'Icacrove {3ev
Novv" Kpnal, Povd,irap avrots ev evi, " Sa(f)aTelfju-"
Bacri\itov TrptoTij, Sevrepa, Trap 1 aurot? ev, " %a/jiovr)\,"
" 6 ^eo/cX^ro? 1 " Baa-iXet&v Tpvrij, TerdpTT), ev evi,
" Ovappe\x AafiiV (i.e. I^H ^W), faep eW "/3a<ri\eia

irpwrr), Sevrepa, ev evt,
iv " (i.e. D'pjn nM), 6Vep ecrrt, "\070i
"EcrSpas TT^WTO?, Bevrepos, ev evi, " *E%pa," o
ecrn, "Pmi06r" Bifi\os Wa\[*MV, " 2<j>ap6e\\eip " (i.e.
D^nn nap)- ^oXo/iwyro? napoipiai, " Me\(*0" (i.e.
rivO)- 'E/cX^crtao-T^9, " KcoeXO 1 " ^Aa^a ' Aa^aTwv (ou
jap Co? v7ro\afjb^dvov(Ti rtre?, "AcrpaTa 'Acr JJUCLTWV},
" Sip 'Acraipifji'" 'Ha-a'ias, " 'leaaia'" 'lepe/jiias avv
pijvois Kal rfj 'ETTio-roX^, eV ez^t, "'lepefiia'" Aavir)\,

/3, "lap" 'Etr0jp,

tfp'" "E%a> Se rovrcov eVrl ra MaKKa/3a'i/cd, airep

e\ " (i.e.

A curious feature of this list is its omission of the

1 Cp. supra, p. 117 ff.

- The meaning is quite uncertain, and the form Sa/3accuA probably
corrupt. Perhaps the word stands for a plur. constr. of K^=^j '(3)!<5s,
"prince of the house of the hosts of God" ; or *?x ^22*, "which God
built." See Ryle, Canon of the O.T. p. 185.

130 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets. The omission
is, of course, accidental, probably on the part of the
historian who quotes, rather than of the author of
the list himself. By a similar oversight the Letter
of Jeremiah is included, which never had a place in
the Hebrew Canon. Its inclusion is to be attributed
to the writer's familiarity with the Canon of Alexandria,
in which the Greek Letter that passed under the name
of Jeremiah was always associated with the Book of
his prophecies, and with Lamentations. The Greek
Canon was at all times more uncertain and fluctuating
than the Hebrew.

Later Jewish lists, however, vary both in the number
and arrangement of the books, though not to the extent
of the Greek. And similar differences are found both
in Biblical manuscripts and in early printed editions.
The collection as a whole was known as fc^i?E (N")i?, N"}i?,
to recite, read ; cp. Qur'an), the term npzij? l being some-
times used for the Prophets and Writings together, as
distinct from the Law, nnin.

The Jewish Ptabbis and commentators usually refer
to a passage of Scripture merely by its initial word
or words, and do not quote in full, relying for the
rest upon the memory of the reader. They do not
therefore furnish material for the reconstitution of a
text, as in the case of the Patristic writers on the
New Testament. Greek authors, however, present
abundant citations from most of the books, which
certify their position of recognised authority at or

1 Cp. supra, p. 87 f.

CANON i 3I

about the beginning of our era. Philo (c. 20 B.C.-
45 A.D.) quotes from all the canonical books of the
Old Testament except Ezekiel, Daniel, and the five
Megilloth. Since the position of most of the last-
named was well assured, the reason can only be that
he found nothing in them to serve his purpose. There
are citations in Josephus also from all the books, with
the exception of Proverbs, Job, Canticles, and Ecclesi-
astes ; and from his standpoint as a Jew he regards
their inspiration and authority as an ascertained and
incontrovertible fact. Finally, in the New Testament
the only books which are not cited are the brief
prophecies of Obadiah, Nahura, and Zephaniah, the
historical work of Ezra-Nehemiah, and the three
Megilloth of Canticles, Ecclesiastes, and Esther.

There is but one passage in the New Testament
where the books of the Old are referred to collectively
according to the threefold classification of the Jews
themselves : Luke xxiv. 44, all that is written " in the
law of Moses and in the Prophets and Psalms," where
apparently " the Psalms," WaX^oi, are intended as an
equivalent of D^ns. Elsewhere the sacred books are
referred to simply as the Law and the Prophets, where
the question might fairly be raised whether the purpose
is to connote the whole of the Old Testament, or only
two parts: Matt. v. 17, vii. 12, xi. 13 with parallel
Luke xvi. 16 ; Matt. xxii. 40 ; Acts xiii. 15, xxiv. 14,
xxviii. 23; Eom. iii. 21. Similarly, "Moses and all
the prophets," Luke xxiv. 27 ; " Moses in the Law
and the Prophets," John i. 45.

132 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

With regard to the internal disposition of the Old
Testament books, the Jews divided the Torah into
669 Parashahs ( n ^!?)> 290 of which were described
as nrnns or "open," and the remainder, 379, as ncinp
or " closed." The former came to an end on a line
the rest of which was then left blank ; the Parashah
was therefore " open." In the case of a " closed "
Parashah, the writing of the new section began on the
same line on which the previous section had concluded.
The distinction, however, is not observed in the printed
editions of the Bible, and no doubt was dictated at
first, primarily if not solely, by considerations of space.
The open parashahs are indicated in later codices and in
the printed editions, but not in rolls for synagogue use,
by the letter Q ( = nnina) written in the line with a blank
space on either side ; the closed parashahs similarly
by the letter D ( = ninD). In the Mishna reference is
made to these paragraphs ; but the distinction into
open and closed was made later, and the parashahs
are there separated merely by a " break " or interval
(i-^rl 1 )- O n the origin and purpose of the division into
parashahs various opinions were held by the Piabbis
themselves. Similar sections are found in the books of
the Prophets and the Hagiographa, but there was ap-
parently no recognised classification into open and closed.
The manuscripts vary, and perhaps represent, as Dr.
Ginsburg seems to think, different Massoretic schools. 1

The larger sections, or Pericopce, were arranged for

1 See Ginsburg, Introduction, ch. ii., and Appendix I. p. 977 ff. ;
M. Gaster, Illuminated Bibles, p. 32 f. ; Strack, Prolegomena, p. 74 ff.

DIVISIONS OF THE TEXT 133

the consecutive reading of the Torah on the Sabbath
days during the year, in order that the whole Law
might be annually read through; ep. Acts xiii. 14 f.,
xv. 21. They were in all fifty-four in number, the last
section, consisting of Deut. xxxiii., xxxiv., being specially
appointed for the lesson on the 23rd of Tisri, at the
close of the T?eas~t of Tabernacles. Each pericope
named from its initial word, and with one exception
(Gen. xlvii. 28) tb^y__alL contain^ a complete number of
open and closed parashahs. In the printed editions
usually and in most codices the beginnings of the
sections are marked by a break in the text, and the
letter a or D thrice repeated. In Genesis, for example,
there are twelve divisions : rVK>x-n, i. 1 to vi. 8 ; m,
vi. 9 to xi. 32 ; 1^ *^>, xii. 1 to xvii. 27 ; KTi, xviii. 1 to
xxii. 24; mi? "n, xxiii. 1 to xxv. 18 ; rnhn, xxv. 19 to
xxviii. 9 ; awi, xxviii. 1 to xxxii. 3 ; p(?&"\, xxxii. 4
to xxxvi. 43 ; n^i, xxxvii. 1 to xl. 23 ; ppio, xli. 1 to
xliv. 17 ; swi, xliv. 18 to xlvii. 27; TVi, xlvii. 28 to
1. 26. In some manuscripts, however, the commence-
ment of a section is indicated by a marginal 'a, 'is, or
'ens, for n^na. 1 This sectional arrangement was not
carried through beyond the Pentateuch into the
remaining books of the Old Testament.

A further and independent division of the books of
the Law was made by the Palestinian Jews into
154 or 155 Lesser Sections, or Sedarim ( D '~n?) ; but
this arrangement was never adopted in Babylon. It
has been generally supposed that the division was

1 Giiisburg, Introduction, ch. v. ; Strack, p. 76 f. ; Buhl, i>. 22o.

i 3 4 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

intended for a triennial cycle of reading, that the Law
might be gone through in three years instead of one.
Of this, however, there seems to be no real proof
beyond the unsupported statement of a grammarian ;
and doubt has been thrown on its accuracy. 1 The
number of the Sedarim would perhaps be sufficient
to suggest the idea, and an annual cycle appears more
probable. Dr. Ginsburg also quotes a Massoretic
treatise, which enumerates 167 Sedarim. Others have
attempted to connect the division with the arrangement
of the Psalter, that the sections or chapters of the Law
might correspond with the number of the Psalms, as
the five-fold division into books corresponded. The
real purpose and design of the sections, however, is
unknown. The arrangement was extended to the other
books of the Old Testament, the entire Bible being
divided into 446 Sedarim. 2

Into the second and third parts of the Hebrew
Bibles, the Prophets and the Writings, no system of
continuous reading in the synagogues appears ever to
have been introduced. Selected portions only from the
Prophets were arranged to correspond with the greater
Parashahs, for the Sabbath services and for festivals ;
cp. Acts xiii. 15, 27, Luke iv. 16f. These were
termed Haphtdrdhs P9?, it?Q, to divide, 1 Kings
vi. 18 al., Prov. xvii. 14), and in the printed editions
are sometimes indicated by a or D, as the parashahs

1 M. Gaster, PSBA xxii. p. 249, and Illustrated Bibles, p. 32.

2 See E. G. King in JQR, vol. xvi. p. 579 ; and on the Sedarim in
general an article by A. Bitchier, ib. vol. v. p. 420 ff. ; Ginsburg,
Introduction, ch. iv. ; Buhl, p. 225 f.

DIVISIONS OF THE TEXT 135

of the Pentateuch. No distinction, however, of open
or closed was ever made in their case. Lists of the
Haphtarahs are given in the Massorah and other Jewish
writings. The existing selection or division is said
not to be original, but to have superseded an earlier
arrangement made at or about the beginning of our
era. Both would probably be determined in large part
at least by earlier usage. In annotated editions of the
Hebrew text the parashah, corresponding to a given
haphtarah, is usually indicated in the margin at the
commencement of the latter. The readings of the
prophets corresponding to the twelve parashahs of
Genesis were as follows : l

PARASHAH. HAPHTARAH.

Gen. i. 1-vi. 8, JTEJ>N~Q. Isa. xlii. 5-xliii. 10.

,, vi. 9-xi. 32, ni3. Isa. liv. 1-lv. 5.

xii. 1-xvii. 27, ^ ^. Isa. xl. 27-xli. 16.

xviii. 1-xxii. 24, jo" 1 !- 2 Kings iv. 1-37.

xxiii. 1-xxv. 18, mtJ> "/"! 1 Kings i. 1-31.

xxv. 19-xxviii. 9, rnhfl. Mai. i. 1-ii. 7.

,, xxviii. 10-xxxii. 3, fr^ 1 ). Hos. xi. 7-xii. 12.

,, xxxii. 4-xxxvi. 43, rbwi- Hos. xii. 13-xiv. 10.

xxxvii. 1-xl. 23, a^v Amos ii. 6-iii. 8.

xii. 1-xliv. 17, f>po. 1 Kings iii. 15-iv. 1.

xliv. 18-xlvii. 27, SJTV Ezek. xxxvii. 15-28.

xlvii. 28-1. 26, TV1. 1 Kings ii. 1-12.

The above are the lessons as read by the German
Jews (n33^N) ; the appointed portion of the Spanish
rite (mso) is sometimes different.

1 A complete list will be found in Massoretic and other Notes 2 , p. 21 ff. ;
Kitto's Biblical Encycl. s.v. Haphtarah ; and elsewhere. On the
Haphtarahs in general, cp. Strack, p. 77 f. ; Kitto, I.e.

136 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

The arrangement of the Hebrew text in chapters is
not the work of the Jews themselves, but was borrowed
from the Christians for the purpose of convenience, and
to facilitate reference. The chapter numbering was
introduced into the Cornplutensian Polyglott (1514-17),
and was added in the margins of the early Eabbinic
Bibles. Dr. Ginsburg states that it is found on the
margin of Hebrew manuscripts as early as 1330 A.D.
From about the middle of the sixteenth century it is
employed in all printed texts. 1

A verse numeration, on the contrary, existed from very
early times in the Hebrew text ; but it differed from that
which was later and generally adopted. There were
variations also between the schools of Palestine and of
Babylon ; and the totals arrived at for the separate
books, and for each of the three parts of the Bible as
a whole, were not always consistent with one another.
Sometimes also the Kabbis discussed the question to
which of two verses a given word should be assigned,
e.g. riNb in Gen. iv. 7. The divisions were termed
Pesuqim (CTjp 10 ?), and the end of each Pasuq was indi-
cated by the accent silluq, a perpendicular stroke placed
beneath the last accented syllable in the final word.
The custom of indicating the close of the verse by two
dots placed upright in the line of the text (: pica *pD,
" end of the verse ") is of later introduction, and is not
found in the rolls for use in the synagogues. 2

1 Ginsburg, Introduction, ch. iii.

2 Ibid., ch. vi., where numerical and other details will be found :
Strack, p. 78 IT.; cp. supra, p. 113.

DIVISIONS OF THE TEXT 137

Portions of the text were also written crri^pw?, in
verse-form or stichometrically, in the times of the
Talmudists. The parts so written were the three
poetical books, Psalms Proverbs and Job (n'otf,
supra, p. 121), together with the songs in Ex. xv.,
Deut. xxxii., Judg. v., 2 Sam. xxii.

CHAPTER IV.

LATER HEBREW LITERATURE; MIDRASH,
MISHNA AND GEMARA, TALMUD.

OUTSIDE of the sacred books of Scripture, and the
few Apocrypha originally composed in the sacred
tongue, Hebrew literature does not begin to exist until
the language itself has ceased to be employed as a
medium of ordinary communication. There may be
and probably are fragments of ancient traditional lore
handed down, and embedded in later compositions.
The old, however, hardly admits of being disentangled
now from the new. Broadly speaking, it was in a dead
language, used only in the public worship of the
synagogues and in private intercourse amongst the
Jews themselves, that the earliest Hebrew writings
other than the Old Testament books were composed.
These writings, moreover, were completely informed
by the spirit, and devoted to the one theme of the
Scripture itself. The Jewish scholars of the early
centuries, in all their study and composition, were
more entirely, perhaps, than is the case with any other
single school of writers, men of one book. They neither

133

LATER HEBREW 139

composed, nor, as far as our knowledge extends, ever
cared to compose, works on any other subject. To the
elucidation, exposition, and jealous guardianship of the
ipsissima verba of the Old Testament, the inspired
writings given to them by God, their whole energies
and time were devoted ; the sacred charge of the
Scriptures entrusted to them demanded and obtained
their single undivided care. Hence the marvellous
amount of erudition, diligence, and patient research
which they displayed was yet in a sense confined
within one narrow groove ; and tended therefore to
exaggerate the importance of trifles, to lay undue stress
upon minutiae, and to lose sight of the greater matters
and of the proportions of the whole in their anxiety to
secure full consideration for every, even the least detail,
that nothing should be lost.

In regard to the language also, as far as these works
were composed in Hebrew, the Old Testament books
were the model. The " New Hebrew," as it is called,
of the Mishna and later Jewish writings, differs from
the Hebrew of the more recent books of the Old
Testament almost solely in a greatly enlarged vocabu-
lary, including the use of old words in new or altered
meanings, and in a wider freedom of grammatical con-
struction, which moves with less constraint on the
old lines, corresponding to the freer, more colloquial
diction which the writers were wont to employ.
The usage and idiom of the language varied little
through all its long history ; and seemed as though it
were modified only just as far as the absolute necessities

140 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of the case demanded. While flexible and capable of
meeting every requirement, the language thus remained
always conservative, and kept as close as was possible
to its permanent standard of purity and correctness in
the Scriptures. 1

The history of Hebrew written composition begins,
therefore, where the Canon closes. If the two periods
overlap at all, it is in one or other of the Hebrew
apocryphal works, as noted above ; practically the
only one of these that enters into consideration is the
Hebrew original of the book of Ecclesiasticus, brought
to light within the last few years. Otherwise a gap
of at least two or three centuries separates the latest
canonical writing from the beginnings of new Hebrew
literature, a gap bridged over by oral teaching and the
preservation of traditional lore in the memories and on
the lips of the Eabbis. How far such fragments of
tradition, exposition, commentary, opinion, and so forth
have been embodied in later written compositions, it
is impossible to determine. Not improbably the
retentiveness of trained Eastern minds has preserved
for us more in this respect than we have sometimes
been disposed to allow.

Apparently the practice of commenting upon and
explaining the meaning of the Scriptures took its
rise in the synagogues, in the necessity for an

1 The parallel instances naturally suggest themselves of the classical
English determined once and for all by the language and style of the
Authorised Version and of Shakespeare ; and of the literary Arahic
conformed to the "speech of the Quraish," with its authoritative model
iu the sacred tongue of the Qur'an.

MIDRASH 141

exposition of the Law to a congregation many of
whom did not or might not understand the sacred
language in which it was read. Thus the Lesson
for the day was recited in Hebrew ; but the reader
himself, or another, accompanied it with a translation
or running commentary in the vernacular Aramaic,
for the benefit of those of his hearers who could
not follow the text as read, or followed it only im-
perfectly. These commentaries, at first oral and ex-
tempore, tended to crystallise into a definite form ;
gathered up into themselves the floating oral judge-
ments and traditional sayings which had been handed
down, attached to the names of well-known teachers,
or even anonymous ; were amplified, completed, , and
extended to the remaining books of the Scripture ;
and, finally, were committed to writing, becoming them-
selves in their turn the foundation for renewed and
wider studies into the meaning of the sacred word.

MIDKASH. To these more or less formal expositions
of Scripture, originating in extempore deliverances or
explanations given in the synagogue, then assuming
definite and written shape, was given the name of
Miclrash, BH.1P, " investigation," " interpretation." In
form the word is an Infinitive Peal of the Aramaic &"T},
to seek or search out, explain. 1 The corresponding
Hebrew verb is common in the Old Testament, with a
similar meaning and wider usage, e.g. Gen. xxv. 22,
Isa. xxxiv. 16 ; and the noun *"n*? itself occurs twice,
in the second book of Chronicles, where the Eevised

1 For examples, see Levy, s.v.; cp. |?'~n, an expounder, preacher.

142 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Version translates " commentary." l From this fact
some have drawn the inference that such Midrashim
were recognised and extant before the time of the
Chronicler. More probably the word itself had not
yet gained its later technical meaning. More or less
formal commentaries, however, of the nature of a
Midrash would undoubtedly arise as soon as the need
for them was felt. Such commentaries, the judgements
and decisions of various teachers, transmitted from
generation to generation and gaining authority with
lapse of time, formed the TrapdSoa-is rwv Trpea-fivrepow,
the " tradition of the elders," of the New Testament,
wherewith the Pharisees and scribes overlaid and
nullified the genuine word of God, Matt. xv. 2, 3, 6 ;
Mark vii. 3, 5, 8, 9, 13. 2

The Midrash in general consisted of two parts or
divisions, which were described respectively as Halakhah
( n ??i?, from "npn, go, proceed, thus signifying the further
development, advance, or expansion of the Law) and
Haggaddli ( n 7?^> from *U3, to tell, declare, expand). The

1 2 Cliron. xiii. 22, ny arajn emon D'ama . . . rrax "in in', "the rest
of the acts of Abijah . . . are written in the Midrash of the prophet
Iddo"; ib. xxiv. 27, D'aten ~\so enio hy D'inna nan, "behold they are
written in the Midrash of the book of kings." The word is not found
elsewhere in the Old Testament. The Septuagint has in the first
passage pifiXiov, and in the second the equally colourless .rendering
tiri Tty ypa.<pr)i>.

2 Compare the plural in Gal. i. 14, the ira.TpiKa.1 Tra.pad6<rfis, for which
Paul was " more exceedingly zealous" ; and the traditions delivered by
him to his converts, with the charge to diligently keep them, 1 Cor.
xi. 2, 2 Thess. ii. 15. These last two passages need not imply more
than the histories and moral and spiritual teachings of the Old
Testament.

MIDRASH 143

former was confined to the Pentateuch, and consists
of legal prescriptions and judgements, the purpose of
which was to supplement the Torah, and to provide
for cases which the written ordinances did not cover.
Hence it was composed largely of current usage
formulated into definite rule, and of the decisions of
the Eabbis on controverted points, where Scripture gave
no definite and final pronouncement. The Haggadah,
on the contrary, extended over the whole of Scripture,
and was of the nature of a free or paraphrastic
interpretation, with comments, illustrations, etc., all
controlled and guided by a didactic purpose. It was
therefore essentially hoiniletic in character, but ranged
over a very wide field, including theology, philosophy,
history, folk-lore, parable, apologetics, and so forth ;
and in the miscellany of Haggadic literature, together
with much that appears strained and fanciful, there is
much that is of great and abiding interest. Examples
of Haggadic exegesis are given, e.g., by Dr. Grinsburg
in Kitto's Encyclopedia of Biblical Literature ; x and

1 A remarkable instance is 2 Kings xx. 9, in which Haggadic inter-
pretation is said to be responsible for the present reading of the
Hebrew text. "The shadow (on the dial) has gone down (^n) ten
degrees; shall it return (311?; DN) ten degrees?" (The R.V. is im-
possible as a representation of the original text.) The form of the
Hebrew', however, and the answer of Hezekiah both suggest that an
alternative was offered him between the advance and retreat of the
shadow ; he chose the latter as more difficult, and a more decisive
sign. In the parallel passage Isa. xxxviii. 8 the sign of the recovery
in the return of the shadow ten degrees is given without any reference
to Hezekiah's wish or choice ; and the comment of the Rabbis upon
the latter passage is to the effect that ten degrees upon the dial plate
had been lost at the time of the death of Ahaz, the father of
Hezekiah, in order that the day being shortened to two hours instead

144 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

there also will be found quoted the thirty-two rules
by which, according to the scribes, the interpretation
of the Scriptures was to be governed. Comparison,
analogy, and deductive inference all contributed their
share to the final result.

The oldest of the extant Midrashim, or that which
contains the most ancient material, for most of these
works are of composite authorship and various date,
is the so-called Midrash Eabbali (n;n Bn.'ip) O r Great
Midrash, a commentary on the Pentateuch and the
five Megilloth. It is said to have been composed by
the Eabbi Oshaja ben Nachrnam, in the second half
of the third century of our era, circa 275 A.D., but
it betrays its real character by the changing nature
of the style in which it is written. The oldest portion
is the commentary on Genesis, nin n^saa. A similar
collection is the b'lan 'D, the "Great Midrash," upon
the same ten books. Commentaries upon the Penta-
teuch alone are the Midrash Tancliuina (NOinjn 'D) ;
named after its reputed author, R. Tanchurna ben
Abba, who lived in the middle of the fourth century ;
it is of later date than many of the others, and
contains quotations or extracts from them; also the
tracts entitled Mechiltcl (sn^no), Sifra (NIQD), Sifre

of twelve, the burial of the idolatrous king might be hasty and
without due ceremonial; cp. 2 Kings xvi. 10 ff., 2 Chron. xxviii. 22ft'.
These ten lost or omitted degrees were now to be restored. And it is
this fact which the present text of Kings is made to record, by
reading 7|Sn, "went down," i.e. on the day of Ahaz' death, instead
of the original ^M!, "shall it go down ... or return?" The latter
is the reading of the Septuagint, Tropevcrerai r? ffKia. 5<f/ca /3a0/*ot5s, eat>
iwurrpt<f>ri 5e/ca pa6/j.ovs, and also of the Syriac and Vulgate,

MIDRASH 145

(nso) on the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers
and Deuteronomy, respectively. The Midrash Pesikta
(xnppa '), ascribed to Kahana ben Tachlifa, who
flourished in the latter half of the fourth century,
comments on extracts or sections (ninppa), taken from
the entire range of Scripture, the Haphtaroth for the
various festivals. The Midrash Yalkut (Blp^ ') is a
late compilation attributed to the eleventh century,
which extends over the whole Old Testament. There
are also extant separate Midrashim on the Psalms,
Proverbs, etc. 1

After the fall of Jerusalem the city of Jamnia on
the Nahr Eubin, the modern village of Yebnah, some
five miles from the sea, became the headquarters of
the Sanhedrin and the centre of Jewish learning,
until it was eclipsed by the rise of the schools of
Tiberias. Here was carried on the preliminary work
of codifying and committing to writing the legal
prescriptions, rules, and usages embodied in the
Halakhah, and certified by Rabbinical authority. The
foundations had been laid at an earlier date, in the
time of the great teachers Hillel I. and Shammai,
about the beginning of our era ; and the name of the
former especially was traditionally associated with the
first attempt at the compilation of a written code
of law supplementary to the Torah. The work, how-
ever, was accomplished only gradually under the

1 See Abrahams, Jewish Literature, ch. iv. ; Ginsburg, ubi cit.,
s.v. Midrash ; Schechter in HDB v. pp. 58 a , 63 a ; special articles
on the Haggadic literature and sources will be found in the Jewish
Quarterly Reviev:, vols. iv. p. 406 ff., v. p. 399 ff., vii. p. 581 ft".

146 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

guidance of a succession of scholars, known in general
as Tannaim ( Q1> N3Fi), " repeaters," " reciters," l of whom
more than a hundred names are recorded within the
first two centuries. Of these Hillel and Shamniai, the
founders of rival schools of learning and interpretation,
are recognised as the first ; and to the school of the
former belonged the great Gamaliel I. (Acts v. 34),
a direct descendant, son or grandson, of Hillel himself,
and Jochanan hen Zakkai ( S 3T p pnv), the founder of
the College at Jamnia.

The best-known name in the second generation of
Tannaim (circa 100130 A.D.) was that of Eabbi
Akiba ben Joseph, who was followed by many disciples,
and whose fame rests mainly upon two particulars, his
ability as a codifier of tradition, and his quickness
and insight in tracing the connection between the
oral and the written Law. He is said to have pre-
pared and committed to writing a legal code on the
lines of the later Mishna. His intense patriotism and
sympathy led him to take part in the rising of the
Jews under Bar Kokhba, 131-35 A.D., and he was
slain during the war.

The work of Akiba was carried on in the third
generation by his disciple Eabbi Meir and others,
who brought a step nearer completion the work of
determining and arranging the supplementary law.
But the final codifier of the law, who gave to it its
present form, was Eabbi Jehudah Hannasi (T^n (< ) >
Judah the Prince, or, as he was also called, Eabbi
1 xjp, n;y, to repeat, Job xxix. 22, Gen. xli. 32. nl.

MISHNA AND GEMARA 147

Jehudah the Holy (B^i??), 160-210 A.D. Judah
Hannasi was by far the most renowned of the
Tannaim, and during his presidency the centre of
Jewish learning was transferred to Tiberias. He is
said to have been a man of great wealth and influence,
who commanded respect by the purity of his life as
well as the width and profundity of his scholarship.
To the directions and precepts of the oral law, as
already in large part fixed and arranged, he gave the
stamp of his master mind.

MISHNA AND GEMAKA. This great legal code of
civil and ritual observance is known as the Mishna,
from the root wn, Heb. n3B> } to repeat. It was, there-
fore, in origin and intention an exhaustive supplement
to the Torah or written law, in which were embodied
all the traditional rules and obligations, civil and
religious, of Jewish life, the binding character of
which was recognised by its authors. It was, there-
fore, essentially inferior in authority and weight to
the original Law of Moses, but in course of time an
equal or even superior dignity came to be attached to
it ; and in cases of doubt or conflict the final appeal
lay to the Mishna, not to the Pentateuch.

Various traditions and usages which have been
preserved from ancient times, but which found no
place in the canonical collection of laws of Eabbi
Judah, are termed baraitha (KH'^2, " external "), or
tosephta (Nrtaoin, additional "). The former is only
known from quotations in the writings of the Eabbis ;
but of the latter a definite work exists which passes

148 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

under the name of Tosephtd. It is similar in character
to the Mishna, but borrows from it, and is therefore,
in its present form at least, of later date.

The Mishna is written in Hebrew, for the most
part pure and practically identical with the Hebrew
of the later books of the Old Testament. It consists
of six Seddrim or Books (D^p), subdivided into sixty-
three Massikhtoth or Tractates (niroDO) ; and these
are further divided into chapters, Perdqim (Q^ns).
The nature of the subjects of which the Mishna treats
will be manifest from the headings of the six books,
which are entitled respectively, Seder Zeralm (^Vy,
"seeds"), Seder Mo'ed (itfo, "season" or "festival"),
Seder Ndshlm (D^a, " women "), Seder Nezlgin (Pi?^,
"damages"), Seder QoddsUm (D'Bni?, "holy things,"
"tabus"), Seder Tohdroth (rfnno, "purifications"). 1
The Peraqim, or Chapters, numbered in all five
hundred and twenty-five.

The school of Jewish thinkers and scholars who
succeeded the Tannaim is known as the Amordim
(D'&ntoK, "speakers," "expounders"). They undertook
the task of supplementing and expounding the Mishna,
much in the same way as the Tannaim professed to
" repeat " the written law. Their work, however, to
which was given the name of Gemara, from the verb
"ica, to supplement, complete, 2 covered a much wider

1 A complete list of the titles and subjects of all the tractates in order
will be found in HDB v. p. 60 f. See also the literature there cited.

2 va?, Ezra vii. 12, R.V. "perfect," the only passage in which the
Aramaic verb occurs in the Old Testament ; Heb. IDJ Ps. vii. 10,
Ivii. 3, al.

MISHNA AND GEMARA 149

range of subjects than the Mishna, and was composed,
not in Hebrew, but in Aramaic. The Mishna consisted,
or was supposed to consist, entirely of Halakhah,
although much that is of the nature of Haggadah is
found in it ; the Gemara is entirely Haggadic, and its
authors allowed themselves the same freedom in the
topics discussed as is implied in its Haggadic character.
Following the Mishna step by step, taking it as a kind
of text, the Gemara explains, interprets, and illustrates
with historical, mythological, and other matter often
most loosely connected with the original theme. The
flourishing era of the Amoraim was during the third
and two following centuries, but the foundations of
their work were laid by three contemporary scholars
and teachers: Abba Arikha (175-247 A.D.), surnamed
Rab, or the Master, and usually known by the latter
name, the founder of the College of learning at Sura
on the Euphrates; Samuel (180-257 A.D.), said to
have been a great mathematician and astronomer, and
to have set in order the Jewish Calendar ; he was
president of the Nehardea school ; and Jochanau
(199-279), a liberal-minded scholar, the last of the
great Palestinian teachers, who is recorded to have
taken much pleasure in the study of Greek.

All the later Amoraim belonged to the schools of
Babylonia, and it was there that in the course of the
fourth and fifth centuries the Gemara was finally
completed and written down. At what precise period
this final redaction took place is not known. In all
probability the process of writing out and arranging

150 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the contents in order was gradual, as in the case of
the Mishna. And supplementary work to an incon-
siderable extent is said to have been carried out by
the leading scholars of the sixth century, the SabJioraim
(D'KntaD), " thinkers " or " explainers." Though later
in date, the Gemara contains some older material,
which perhaps antedates the greater part of the Mishna.
The Mishna and Gemara taken together are known as
the Talmud p&n, "teaching" "doctrine"); but the
latter term is sometimes applied to the Gemara alone,
the written commentary as distinguished from the
Mishna, the text upon which the comment is made.
It is usually, however, and most conveniently, employed
to include both.

TALMUD. The existing Talmud is known in two
forms or recensions, a Jerusalem or Palestinian Talmud
("p^BTP 'n) } the final redaction of which must have
taken place before the closing of the Palestinian schools
of learning in the fourth century ; and a Babylonian
(*!aa 'n), which for the most part had its origin in
Babylonia not later than the sixth. Both Talmuds
have the same Mishna, but differ in their Gemara, that
of Babylon being greatly amplified. Neither Gemara,
however, was complete in the sense that it commented
upon the whole of the Mishna in order ; in each case
certain tractates were omitted, although not the same
in the two Gemaras. 1

1 See S. Schechter in HDB, uli cit., with the literature there cited ;
Abrahams, Jewish Literature, ch. iii. ; H. L. Strack, Einleitung in den
Thalmtid 2 , Leipzig, 1894 ; Schiirer, Jcivish People in the Time of Christ, i.
1, pp. 119-130, 134-153, ii. 1, p. 330 if. ; and the relevant articles in JE.

TALMUD 151

The Gemara shared to the full the high esteem in
which the oral or traditional law was held by the Jews.
Neither there, however, nor in the Mishna itself has
much been preserved that is of service for strictly
literary or textual criticism. The authors frequently
offer an interpretation of a passage or passages of
Scripture which differs from that of later authorities ;
but it does not seem as though the actual text that
lay before them was in many instances at variance
with the current form. Where, moreover, they quote
the sacred text they quote freely, and in most instances
from memory. Elsewhere, when the quotation is
precise, it is found to be exact in the minutest details,
either because the manuscript was referred to and the
passage written out, or because a later copyist has
corrected the quotation to bring it into harmony with
the Massoretic form of text. No safe critical inference
can be drawn in either case, unless it is warranted by
the context or the clear purpose of the argument.

There are, however, a few passages in which the
authors of the Talmud appear to have preserved a
reading distinct from that of our present Massoretic
text. Whether it were a reading widely spread and
accepted in their day, or merely a peculiarity of one
or more manuscripts, it is impossible to determine.
In two passages, both in the tractate Sotah (^) of
the third book of the Mishna on Women, the comment
of the writer implies a different vocalisation of the
text: Lev. xi. 33, "Every earthen vessel whereinto
any of them falleth, whatsoever is in it shall be

152 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

unclean" (o^.), where the Piel KfcB' : is to be read,
and interpreted in a transitive sense, of defilement
communicated to other objects {Sotah v. 2) ; and
2 Sam. xv. 6, "So Absalom stole (33J) the hearts of
the men of Israel," read Qal sur, with no alteration
of the meaning, cp. Gen. xxxi. 20, 26 (Sotah i. 8).
Elsewhere and more often the Hebrew consonants are
affected, e.g. Mai. iii. 23, ni?B> '3:s nan, re ad nj?fe? ^n,
(Ecluyyotli viii. 7) : perhaps an instance of quotation
from memory. Or even a word is added, Amos ix. 14,
" I will bring again the captivity of My people Israel,"
read " Israel and Judah " ( Yddayim iv. 4). The
Gemara, as would naturally be expected, has a larger
number of variations, and the explanations which the
writers offer of their text are often fanciful enough,
e.g. Ex. xii. 6, mn crir6, read tiP'ton vhrf? ('Arakhln
13 b ), an interpretative gloss; Judg. xv. 20, "Samson
judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty
years " ; Sotah xvii. quotes a reading " forty " (D^jn-is)
for " twenty " (anpy), and explains it to mean that the
Philistines feared him for twenty years after his death
as they had feared him for twenty years during his
lifetime ; in Isa. xlii. 5, " Thus saith the Lord, He
that created the heavens, and stretched them forth "
C ?' 1 ??^'!), a reading crvBvm is quoted, perhaps a mere
accidental duplication of the consonant in writing, but
most extraordinarily interpreted as nautas, " sailors." l

1 See for further examples Strack, Prolegomena, p. 94 ff. Fourteen
instances are given from the Mishna, 97 from the Gemara.

CHAPTER V.

THE VERSIONS. TARGUMS AND SYRIAC VER-
SIONS; SEPTUAGINT AND OTHER GREEK
VERSIONS; LATIN; EGYPTIAN; ETHIOPIC;
ARABIC; ARMENIAN; GOTHIC.

THE Targums, D^irin^ are Aramaic translations,
often rather paraphrases of the Old Testament,
into the vernacular language of Syria, which began to
reassert itself throughout Palestine as the language of

1 The origin and derivation of the name are uncertain. It is most
usually connected with Assyr. ragdmu, to cry, call, rigmu, a cry.
The Heb. on is to "stone," "kill by stoning," Num. xiv. 10,
Ezek. xvi. 40, al. ; and Wellhausen and others have therefore
endeavoured to find in the word the idea of divination, the ascertain-
ing of the divine will by means of the casting of stones, and then
" interpretation," communication of the unknown in general. But the
practice of stone-throwing seems usually to partake of the nature of
an imprecation not an inquisition, expelling or keeping at a distance
demoniac or evil influences ; compare the well-known stone-throwing
at Mecca by the Muhammadan pilgrims. The Arab, word rajama
together with the Hebrew signification has the meaning to "denounce,"
"curse." Heb. Djnn. Aram, onn, to "interpret," "translate," are
perhaps to be associated with the Arabic root in the sense of guess,
conjecture, rrp-ix QJ1C9 * n Ezra i y - ? * s "translated into Aramaic,"
furnished with an Aram, rendering. See OHL, s.v. DJin ; Buhl,

p. 171.

153

154 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

common intercourse and trade, as soon as a familiar
knowledge of the sacred Hebrew tongue came to be
lost. At how early a date this process was initiated,
and the need for a translation of the Scriptures began
to be felt, it is not possible to determine. There are
indications that even before the Exile decay and disuse
had set in. On the other hand, the incident described in
Isa. xxxvi. 1 1 ff. and the parallel passage 2 Kings xviii.
26 ff. seem to show that at that time to the lower
classes of the inhabitants of Jerusalem Aramaic was
unknown. They understood only Hebrew, while men
of position and education were bilingual, familiar with
both tongues. The passage is not without its
difficulties ; but as it stands a knowledge of Hebrew
and Aramaic alike (mins IVO-IN) is presumed on the
part of the ambassadors of the king of Babylon no
less than on the side of the Jewish envoys.

The language existed with many slight dialectic diffe-
rences, broadly distinguished as Eastern or Babylonian,
and Western or Palestinian. 1 In the latter form Aramaic
was the ordinary vernacular speech of Palestine in the
time of Christ, while Greek was the literary language,
the language of the courts and schools ; and into this
dialect parts if not the whole of the New Testament
were early translated. Hence in its later somewhat
modified form it is sometimes known as " Christian "
Aramaic. 2

In the gradual evolution and transmission of Aramaic
renderings or paraphrases of the sacred books a more or

1 Cp. supra, p. 20. 2 Infra, p. 165.

TARGUMS 155

less prolonged period of oral repetition would naturally
precede the stereotyping and actual committal of them
to writing. The precise date at which this last took
place is unknown ; but it is evident that such transla-
tions were long regarded with suspicion if not with
actual hostility. A passage is quoted from the Tosephtd
Sabb. xvi. 128, where mention is made of a written
Targum on the book of Job in the days of Gamaliel,
in the first century ; he gave orders that it should be
destroyed by being built into a wall. There seems no
evidence, however, that such translations were forbidden,
although they were disliked by the Kabbis. The trac-
tate Yddaim iv. 5 makes reference to Aramaic transla-
tions of the Old Testament; and in Megillotli iv. 2,
rules are given for the guidance of the methurgcmdn
(fOjninp), the interpreter, in the public reading of the
synagogue ; three verses at a time may be recited
from the Prophets, but only one from the Torah.
The office, therefore, was recognised as a practical
necessity ; but how early it came into existence is
not known. 1

It would seem, further, that although these Targums
originated in Palestine, and were composed in a Pales-
tinian dialect, 2 in the land of their birth they were
never regarded as authoritative, or available for syna-
gogue use ; while in the synagogues of Babylonia,
the reading of Aramaic translations of the Scriptures,

1 Buhl, p. 170 f., where further illustrations will be found.

- The language of the Targums "agrees with the Old Palestinian
forms as against the dialect of the Babylonian Talmud," i.e. the Geruiira,
sup. p. 148 ff. T. Walker in HDB, vol. iv. p. 678.

156 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

ultimately derived from Palestine, was permitted and
customary.

Taryums or Aramaic versions are extant in a more
or less complete form on all the bocks of the Old
Testament with the exception of Daniel and Ezra-
Nehemiah, i.e. the two books portions of which are
written in Aramaic. Whatever the reason may be, it
can hardly be an accident that these alone should not
be furnished with a vernacular paraphrase ; nor, as far
as our knowledge goes, were they ever so furnished.
None of the existing Targums dates farther back than
the fourth or fifth century after Christ ; and for the
most part they assumed their present form at a con-
siderably later period. They contain, however, older
material, often of a Midrashic character.

(1) The oldest and most important Targum is an
Aramaic version of the five books of the Law, known
as the Targum of Onkelos (Dl!?p31N) 3 or the Babylonian
Targum, because authorised and read in the synagogues
of Babylonia. Neither the author nor the date, how-
ever, of the translation can be determined with certainty.
It is probably the work of more hands than one, and
has undergone perhaps more than one revision, of which
the aim was to bring the several parts into harmony
with one another. Of the reputed author Onkelos
nothing is known, nor is the Targum referred to under
his name until as late as the ninth century. As a name
Di^JiN is the same as D^pj?, Aquila, the Greek trans-
lator of the Old Testament ; 1 and by some writers the

1 Infra,\p. 187ff.

TARGUMS 157

identity of the two men has been assumed. 1 For this
there seems to be no real ground. It has been sug-
gested also that the name of Aquila or Onkelos came
to be attached to the Targum, because the translation
was characterised by the same features of extreme and
even pedantic literality as the Greek of Aquila. True,
however, as this may be of some parts of the version,
it is hardly applicable to it as a whole ; the translation
is "good and faithful to the original," but does not
follow the Hebrew so minutely and rigidly as to merit
comparison with the style or qualities of Aquila's
rendering. The problem of the origin of the name
must remain, it would appear, unsolved. The version
itself is Palestinian, and the dialect in which it is
written belongs to the Western Aramaic ; but it was
never authorised in Palestine, and must have been
carried at a comparatively early date to Babylonia,
where it was adopted and submitted to a final revision.
In the Babylonian Talmud it is known as " our Targum."
The editio princeps appeared at Bologna in 1482 A. P.,
and it has since been several times reprinted. 2

(2) A similar account as regards the country in
which it was originally composed, and its final revision
and circulation in Babylonia, must be given of the
second great Targum, the so-called Targum of Jonathan,

1 Abrahams, Jewish Literature, p. 6.

- Buhl, p. 172 ff. ; T. Walker, HDB, vol. iv. p. 679 f. ; Schiirer,
i. 1, pp. 154-63 ; Ad. Merx, Chrestomathia Targumica, Berlin, 1888 ;
C. Cornill, Introduction to the Canonical Books of the Old Testament,
Eng. trans., London, 1907, p. 529 f. The most complete citation of
the literature is in the article in HDB,

158 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

an Aramaic translation of the Prophets, which derives
its name from Jonathan ben Uzziel, a follower and
disciple of Hillel, who nourished towards the close of
the first century B.C. The tradition which associates
the translation with his name seems to have no founda-
tion in fact ; and although older materials have been
incorporated, in its present form the Targum is not
earlier than the fifth century of our era. The Baby-
lonian Talmud refers to a Targum on the Prophets
under the name not of Jonathan, but of Joseph ben
Chija, the President of the Eabbinical school of learning
at Pumbeditha, who died in the year 333 A.D. That
he took part, therefore, in the redaction or completion
of the Targum as we possess it is sufficiently probable,
but hardly admits of definite proof. The rendering
of the later Prophets (oTinx ':) is freer and more
paraphrastic than that of the earlier (D'OSMO ':), as
would be expected in view of their greater difficulty.
Throughout the translation is less literal than that of
Onkelos, and in various passages has been thought to
betray his influence. The first printed edition of
Jonathan's Targum appeared at Leiria in 1494 ; and it
has since been reprinted in the Polyglotts, etc. 1

(3) (4) Two Palestinian versions also of the
Pentateuch in Aramaic are extant, known as the
first and second Jerusalem Targums. The first is
also referred to as the Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan,
because on the strength of an ascription in a late

1 Buhl, ut sup., and Walker, p. 681 ; Lagarde, Prophcta- Chaldaice,
1872. Extracts will be found also in Merx, Chrestomathia Ta/rgumiea.

TARGUMS 159

manuscript the authorship of the translation has been
credited to the same Jonathan b. Uzziel as the
Babylonian Targum on the Prophets. The real author
is unknown, and the tradition with regard to Jonathan
appears not to be earlier than the fourteenth century ;
before that time, at least occasionally, it is referred to
as the Targum of the Land of Israel (taiK* 11 pK 'n). 1
The dialect is Palestinian, and the text is intermingled
with much that is of the nature of haggadic comments
and explanations. As a whole the work belongs to the
latter part of the seventh century, or later. There is
a unique manuscript of the Targurn in the British
Museum. The text was first printed at Vienna in
1591.

The second Jerusalem Targum is ascribed to the
same period in general as that of the Pseudo-Jonathan,
i.e. the end of the seventh or beginning of the eighth
century of our era, but in parts it would seem to be
older than the latter. It is, however, incomplete,
containing only about 850 verses, mainly historical,
on the narrative portions of the Pentateuch ; and the
translation is characterised more than the others by
looseness and a free use of paraphrase. Two manu-
scripts only of the Targum are known, of which the
one that was used for the editio princeps in the Bomberg
Bible at Venice in the year 1517, has since dis-
appeared. The other is in the Vatican Library at
Korne. 2

1 See J. Barnstein in JQR, vol. xi. p. 167 ff.
- Buhl, p. 179 ff.; Walker, p. 680 f.

160 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

No Palestinian Targum on the Prophets is known
to exist. But fragmentary notices and extracts are
to be found in later Eabbinical works, and in the
form of marginal glosses to the Hebrew text in various
manuscripts.

The Targums on the D'OIDS or Hagiographa are of
much less importance and interest. Of some books, as
Esther, more than one version in Aramaic is in exist-
ence. Such translations were peculiar to Palestine,
and seem never to have obtained currency in Babylonia.
As stated above (p. 156), Targums are extant on all
the Writings, with the exception of the two books
of Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah. The circumstances
of their origin and the dates at which they were
composed are uncertain. The version of the books
of Chronicles printed in the Syriac Bible has all the
characteristics of a Jewish Targum, and is usually
regarded as such. 1

There is also extant a Samaritan Targum on the
Pentateuch, in the Samaritan dialect, which reproduces
the peculiarities of the Samaritan form of text. Nothing
is known of its origin. It has been printed more than
once, in the ordinary Hebrew character by A. Brull,
1873-75 A.D. 2

SYRIAC VERSIONS. A translation of the Sacred
Scriptures, both Old and New, into the Syriac language
was made at an early date for the use of the Syriac-

1 See Buhl, I.e., and p. 191 ; T. Walker, p. 681 ff.; Cornill, pp. 261,
466, 532.
- Buhl, p. 183 if. ; Cornill, p. 512.

SYRIAC VERSIONS 161

speaking peoples of Syria and Mesopotamia. With
regard to the circumstances and details of the work,
however, we have little information. Jewish tradition
carries back its origin even beyond the age of Ezra to
the time and court of king Solomon ; and the tradition
of pre-Christian initiation and part accomplishment of
the task of translation is so far founded on fact that in
the case of some books at least the version in its
final form appears to have adopted or largely incorpor-
ated an earlier Jewish Targurn. The greater part of
the work, however, was due to Christian interest and
effort, and was perhaps accomplished at the same time
and under the same direction as the Syriac translation
of the New Testament. It cannot, therefore, have been
carried to a successful issue at an earlier date than the
establishment of the Christian Church in Syria in the
second century. Native Christian tradition connects
with it the names of the apostle Addai and king Abgar
of Edessa. 1 All certain knowledge of the author or
authors was, however, soon lost, for in the fourth
century a Christian writer makes reference to the
general ignorance in the matter of the origin of the
Syriac version. 2 It is, however, well established by the
time of the Syrian bishop Aphraates in the middle of
the fourth century, who quotes in his writings from

1 See the story of Addai and his mission in F. C. Burkitt, Early
Eastern Christianity, pp. 11 ft'., 34 f. ; Dr. Burkitt calls him a Jew from
Palestine, belonging to the second century ; but tradition describes him
as one of the seveuty-(two) disciples (Luke x. 1, 17), or even the apostle
Thaddseus himself.

2 Theodore of Mopsuestia in his commentary on Zeph. i. 6, cited in
Wright, p. 4.

162 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

all the canonical books with the exception of Esther. 1
To have won so recognised a position the translation
could hardly have been made much less than a century
earlier. And this reduces the time of its composition
within comparatively narrow limits.

The version is known as the Peschittd, or " simple."
The origin of the designation and the reason for its
introduction have been much discussed. The word
occurs, for instance, in the New Testament as a
rendering for air\.ov<?, Matt. vi. 22, Luke xi. 34 ; and for
, Col. iii. 22 ; for a/ca/coi, Eom. xvi. 18 ; and for
, Heb. i. 8. The most probable explanation
seems to be that the version was termed Peshitta,
" simple," arr\d, in contradistinction from the Syro-
Hexaplar, 2 which was " impure," " mixed," being
derived indirectly from the original through the Greek
of Origen. Others have been of opinion that the
title referred to the character and style of the trans-
lation, a title well-deserved in the case of the version
of the New Testament, but perhaps hardly equally
applicable to the Old. In the latter the rendering
of the several books is of unequal merit, and is clearly
the work of different scholars, variously equipped for
their task, and carried out in all probability at different
periods. The Pentateuch is the best translated, and
this and the book of Job keep fairly close to the
original Hebrew. The Megilloth and the later Writings

1 Buhl, p. 52 f. ; see also on Aphraates and his relation to the Syrian
Canon, W. Wright, Syriac Literature, London, 1894, p. 32 f.; Burkitt,
p. 81 if.

2 Infra, p. 164 f.

SYRIAC VERSIONS 163

generally are to a large extent paraphrastic. The
version of the Psalms and Prophets has been influenced
by the Septuagint. The same is apparently true of
other books of the Old Testament ; and the whole may
not improbably have been revised or corrected to bring
it into conformity with the Greek text.

Of this Syriac version there existed two main
recensions, belonging to the two schools of the
Nestorians or East Syrians, and the Jacobites or
West Syrians, respectively. The Canon of the Syriac
text of both schools is deficient as compared with the
Hebrew in the books of Chronicles and of Ezra-
Nehemiah, and the Nestorian manuscripts lack also
the book of Esther. Chronicles was supplied from
a pre-existing Jewish Targum ; l and possibly the
absence of the others from the existing manuscripts
is a mere accident, for all three books are quoted by
Aphraates.

The earliest printed editions of the Peshitta Old
Testament are in the great Polyglotts, Paris, 1629
45 A.D., and London, 1657 A.D. The late Dr. S. Lee,
Professor of Arabic at Cambridge, published in 1823
a manual edition for the British and Foreign Bible
Society, which has long been out of print ; and the
American Mission Press at Urumiah reproduced the
same text in an edition published in 1852. A Pales-
tinian Syriac Lectionary, with lessons from the Penta-
teuch, Job, Proverbs, and the Prophets, was edited
in the Cambridge Studio, Sinaitica, by Mrs. A. S. Lewis

1 Supra, p. 160.

1 64 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

iii 1897. The Apocryphal books have been edited
by P. de Lagarde, Veteris Testamenti Apocryphi Syriace,
Leipzig, 1861. A convenient and critical edition of
the Old Testament in Syriac is greatly needed. 1

The Syro-Hexaplar text, referred to above, is a
translation of the books of the Old Testament into
Syriac made at Alexandria in the years 616-617 A.D.
by Paul, bishop of Telia in Mesopotamia, from the
Hexaplar Greek of Origen, as extracted and re-issued
by Eusebius and Pamphilus (infra, p. 203). The
value of the version for critical purposes, even though
not derived immediately from the Hebrew, is enhanced
by its extreme literality ; and in the use and preference
of the Church it largely superseded the Peshitta. More-
over the diacritical marks of Origen were preserved,
with notes and variations from other Greek translations.
No manuscript is known of the entire Old Testament
in this version ; the most complete is preserved in
the Ambrosiau library at Milan, and contains the later
Prophets together with the three poetical books, and
Daniel, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Wisdom of Solomon,
and Ecclesiasticus. The greater part of the historical
books are to be found elsewhere in other manuscripts.
Jeremiah and Ezekiel were published by M. Norberg in
1787 ; Jeremiah and the Poetical books by H. Middle-
dorf in 1835 ; Judges and Ruth by T. S. Eordam, 1859-
61 ; the extant portions of the historical books by P. de

1 Buhl, p. 185 ff. ; E. Nestle in HDB, vol. iv. p. 650 ff., with the
literature there cited ; Cornill, Introduction, p. 531 if. ; Wright, Syriac
Literature, p. 3 ff . ; Burkitt, ch. ii. ; W. E. Barnes, Peshitta Psalter
according to the West Syrian Text, Cambridge, 1904.

SYRIAC VERSIONS 165

Lagarde iii a posthumous volume at Gottingen in
1892. No complete edition, however, of the version,
as far as it is extant, has appeared. 1

Parts also of the Septuagint were rendered into
Syriac by Polycarp the chorepiscopus at the close
of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century, at the
instance of Philoxeuus, the Monophysite bishop of
Mabug. In the opening years also of the eighth
century, Jacob of Edessa worked at a revision of the
Syriac text. Some parts of both versions have been
preserved and edited. 2 Considerable fragments also are
known of a Syriac translation of the Old Testament
in a Palestinian dialect. Portions are extant from
the five books of the Law except Leviticus, the three
poetical books, Isaiah, a few verses of Jeremiah, and
several of the Minor Prophets ; but there is no
evidence to show whether the version was ever
complete. 3

2. SEPTUAGINT AND OTHER GREEK VERSIONS; GREEK
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT ; EDITIONS.

Of all ancient renderings of the Old Testament into
other tongues, the Greek are pre-eminent in interest

1 Wright, p. 14 ff. ; E. Nestle, I.e., and ib. p. 446 f. ; H. B. Swete,
Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, Cambridge, 1900, p. 112 f.,
where a complete list of editions will be found ; the literature in Nestle,
II. cc.

2 See Swete, I.e. Buhl, p. 145 f.

3 A complete list of the known fragments will be found in Swete,
p. 115 ; see G. H. Gwilliam, Anccdota Oxoniensia, Semitic Series, vol. i.
pt. v., Oxford, 1893 ; pt. ix., Oxford, 1896 ; A. S. Lewis, ut supra.

1 66 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

and importance, both for the interpretation and
criticism of the Hebrew text, and for the part they
have played in the broad dissemination of a knowledge
of the sacred Scriptures. As far as can be judged,
had the books and teaching of the Old Testament
remained locked up in a comparatively unknown
Semitic speech, they could never have become linked
with the New Testament in a world-wide propaganda,
or formed the basis of a universal religion. Transla-
tion into Greek meant that the treasures of their
doctrine were thrown open to the Western civilised
world, that the sacred literature of a numerically
feeble and uninfiuential race emerged from its obscurity
into the full light of day, and equipped itself to
compete for the regard and allegiance of all educated,
thoughtful men. The teaching and knowledge which
in Hebrew dress were necessarily restricted to a com-
paratively few readers, in Greek form laid claim to
the attention of the Western world, and of the nations
far and wide, who, whether Greek or not by origin
and race, spoke Greek as a lingua franca, and as the
language of literature, science, commerce, and art.
Even Latin, the only possible alternative, the language
of jurisprudence, law, government, and military science,
would have been at the beginning of the Christian era
immeasurably inferior to Greek as a medium of far-
reaching communication and instruction, and fell far
behind it in flexibility and the power of expressing
new religious thought and conveying the emotions
and aspirations of a strange creed. In the largest

GREEK VERSIONS 167

and best sense translation into Greek was "epoch-
making" for the Old Testament writings themselves
on the one hand, and on the other for the outside
world.

A few centuries earlier a similar, although never so
considerable or effective a part, might have been played
by an Aramaic version had the times been ripe for
it, and had a version been available which for simplicity
and adaptation to the current speech could compare
with the Greek of later date. For a long period
among the older nations Aramaic had been the inter-
national speech in which the intercourse of trade
and civilisation was carried on. And evidence has
accumulated, especially in recent years, of its wide-
spread use and influence, in one or other of its many
forms and dialects, from the confines of Egypt on the
south to the mountains of Armenia on the north,
and from Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf on the
east to Spain in the west, to the gates of the
Mediterranean and even beyond. Aramaic, however,
as a vehicle for profound religious thought was poor
and inexpressive and halting compared with the rich-
ness and variety of the Greek. Though capable, no
doubt, of development, it did not develop, unless to
a very slight extent. Greek had ready a wealth of
religious and philosophic terminology, equal to the
expression of the most exalted and far-reaching con-
ceptions, and had already carried speculation to its
furthest bounds. No other existing language could
oiler equal facilities to a doctrine that desired to be

1 68 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

known, and a literature that claimed to have a message
for all mankind. Aramaic yielded place to Greek, and
for the world at large, for just and liberal thought, the
change was fraught with inestimable gain.

With regard to the origin and date of the earliest
rendering of the Old Testament Scriptures in whole
or in part into Greek there is much need of further
light. Prima facie the requirements of the Hellenistic
or Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria and Egypt, and
perhaps of the West generally, might be expected to
give rise at a comparatively early date to a demand
for a version of the Law at least into the familiar
language of their daily life. Such a demand would
be likely to arise at no long period after the founda-
tion of Alexandria by Alexander the Great in the
year 330 B.C., and the settlement in the city of
numerous and prosperous colonies of Jews. The
motive suggested is sufficient, and no real necessity
exists to look for any further or more remote cause.
The debt of Christendom to the Jews in this respect
is very great, a debt inadequately recognised and never
repaid. The traditional account of the matter, however,
ascribes the first impulse in the direction of a Greek
translation of the Hebrew sacred writings to a Greek
king of Egypt, or rather to his official Librarian, who
desired to enrich the Eoyal Library of the city with
copies in Greek of learned and important works from
every accessible source.

Ptolemy n. of Egypt, so the story runs, surnamed
Philadelphia, who reigned B.C. 285-247, at the instance

LETTER OF ARISTEAS 169

of his librarian Demetrius Phalereus, who urged that
a translation of the Jewish Law should be made to
be placed in the Eoyal Library at Alexandria, sent
ambassadors with gifts to Jerusalem to the high priest
Eleazar with a request for the appointment of com-
petent men to produce a version of the Law for him
in the Greek tongue. Seventy-two men accordingly
were deputed, some from every tribe, to proceed to
Egypt, and there undertake the translation for the
king ; and they bore with them a copy of the Law
written in golden characters. On presenting them-
selves before Ptolemy, difficult questions were proposed
to them in philosophy, law, etc., in order to test their
knowledge and capacity. These having all in turn
been satisfactorily answered, the Jewish ambassadors
were assigned a place and temporary home in the
small island of Pharos, 1 lying to the north off the coast
of the Delta, and in seventy-two days accomplished
their task, together producing a version of the Law
in the Greek language. Their work was approved by
the Jews of Alexandria, and even excited admiration.
And the translators were sent back to Jerusalem, laden
with gifts.

The story, thus narrated, is contained in the so-called
Letter of Aristeas, the author of which professes himself
a military officer of king Ptolemy, and a member of
the embassy deputed to Jerusalem. He writes to his

1 Now, and for many centuries, part of the mainland, being connected
with it by a mole, seven stadia or about a mile in length, known as
the Heptastadium, the building of which is ascribed to Alexander the
Great.

170 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

brother Philokrates, detailing the circumstances of his
mission, its success, the reception of the Jewish legates
in Alexandria, and their translation of the Law. It
is generally agreed, however, that the letter is really
the work of a Jew, who adopted the character and
name of a Greek officer, for what purpose is unknown.
The author's date also is uncertain, and the opinions of
scholars vary within wide limits. Dr. Schiirer and
others ascribe his work to the beginning of the second
century before Christ, or even somewhat earlier. Wend-
land, the most recent editor of the Epistle, favours a
date a century later. While others bring it down
approximately to the middle of the first century A.D.
If the last view were shown to be correct, the probability
of an underlying basis of fact in the traditionary account
would be considerably lessened. The better authorities,
however, accept an earlier date, but the question cannot
be regarded as certainly determined.

The Epistle, as printed by H. St. J. Thackeray, 1 from some twenty
manuscripts, which fall into two main groups or families, is of con-
siderable length, occupying fifty-five pages in the Cambridge edition.
After a brief introduction, the writer refers to the efforts of Deme-
trius to furnish the royal library with copies of all the books known
to the civilised world, and details the steps taken to secure a copy
of the Jewish LaAV from Jerusalem, together with an efficient body
of translators. The king makes provision, in the first instance,
for the ransom and liberation of all Jewish prisoners detained in
his dominions ; and Demetrius then supplies an estimate of the
cost of the journey, and recommends that a letter be written to the
high priest at Jerusalem, requesting the appointment of experi-

1 As au Appendix to Swete's Introduction to the Old Testament in
; Cambridge, 1900.

LETTER OF ARISTEAS 171

enced aiid pious men, six from each tribe, for the purpose of a
faithful translation. The letter is accordingly sent, and is pre-
faced by a reference to the magnanimity of the king in setting
free the Jewish prisoners. Its text is given, and also that of the
reply of Eleazar, and the latter is followed by the list of the names
of the Jewish delegates. The elaborate and costly gifts are then
detailed, which are to be carried to Jerusalem. There follows the
journey itself, and a lengthy description of the holy city and the
temple, the splendid vestments of the high priest, which excite
their admiration, and the beauty and fertility of the land of
Palestine ; and the Jordan with its overflow in the days of
harvest is compared to the Nile. The writer then passes to the
immediate object of his journey, and the mission of the Jewish
translators ; their qualifications and character are set forth, and
the affectionate relations subsisting between them and Eleazar :
the regulations and significance of the Law, especially with
regard to forbidden foods and drinks, are explained at some
length ; and Eleazar, after duly sacrificing, dismisses them with
many gifts for the king. At Alexandria they are cordially wel-
comed by Ptolemy, who insists on seeing the Jewish ambassadors
at once ; and they enter his presence with their gifts and manu-
scripts, the latter inscribed in gold, in " Jewish " letters, and are
received and treated with all honour. For a whole week of seven
days feasting is kept up, and questions are proposed by the king
to the Jewish delegates successively, of which the following are
examples : How may the kingdom be maintained in perpetuity.
What is the end and aim of courage. How may riches be pre-
served. Can wisdom be taught. What is philosophy. Why do
most men fail to practise virtue, and so forth. The close of the
interrogation is marked by a loud outburst of applause and
rejoicing ; the king congratulates the Jews, and commands presents
to be distributed to them ; and the writer himself pauses in his
narration to express his admiration for the readiness and wisdom
of their answers, of which he says a complete record was kept.
After three days they are taken to the island, to a house made
ready for them, and provided with all that is necessary for their
task. When the work was finished, Demetrius conducted a
number of Alexandrian Jews to the place, who heard the transla-
tion read, and certified to its fidelity and excellence. Ptolemy
also, when he hears the Law, marvels at the wisdom of the Law-
giver. Demetrius explains its divine character, which has been

172 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

shown, by visitations of calamity upon some who have treated it
with disrespect, and the king gives orders that the books shall
be preserved with the utmost care and honour. Finally, the
ambassadors are dismissed with gifts for themselves and for
the high priest.

Such is a brief outline of the much discussed Epistle
of Aristeas. It is obvious that it lays itself open to
criticism in many respects. The acquaintance of the
author with Jewish usages and beliefs, in which he
moves as one familiar and at home, betrays his nation-
ality. No cultivated Greek officer could have written
of Judaism as it were from within and almost as an
advocate, with the strong sympathy which is stamped
upon every page of the Epistle. On the other hand,
this very fact would appear to make it the more un-
likely that the whole story should be pure invention,
without any basis or foundation in fact. That a Jew
or Jews should ascribe the earliest rendering of their
sacred law into another language to the initiative of
a heathen monarch, and should represent their fellow-
countrymen as applauding his act, is altogether so
improbable, so contrary to what is known of Jewish
habit and sentiment, that it appears simpler and more
natural to believe that there underlies the narrative of
Aristeas some real basis of truth which, in detail perhaps
distorted and misconceived, overlaid and supplemented
by tradition and fancy, has preserved the memory of
a great boon conferred by an Egyptian king on a class,
and usually an unpopular class, of his subjects. To an
intelligent and thoughtful Greek it would appear an
altogether legitimate and praiseworthy aim, to secure

LETTER OF ARISTEAS 173

the completeness of the library at Alexandria by placing
on its shelves copies of the remarkable books of all
peoples. If, however, the account given by Aristeas of
the origin of the Greek Bible be entirely rejected, no
further cause need be sought for the translation of the
Law than the requirements of the Greek-speaking Jews
of Alexandria and the West. It is more probable that
both causes co-operated to produce the desired result, and
that an element of truth underlies the traditional story,
although at this distance of time it cannot absolutely
be determined in what form the demand for a Greek
version first expressed itself, or under whose auspices
the work was executed.

The Greek Epistle of Aristeas was first printed at
Basle in the year 1561, from an Italian manuscript,
apparently unidentified ; a Latin version, however, by
Matthew Palmer (Matthias Palmerius), had appeared
earlier at Eome in 1471. The Basle text was re-
printed in the Oxford work of Humphrey Hody, De
Bibliorum Textibus Originalibus (1705), and elsewhere.
The two latest, and the only satisfactory and critical
editions, were both published in the year 1900,
M. Wendland, Aristece ad Pliilocratem Epistula, Leipzig,
and H. St. J. Thackeray in Swete's Introduction to the
Old Testament in Greek, Cambridge, p. 500 ff. In the
introduction to the latter edition will be found full
information on the literary history of the Epistle, and
the available manuscript evidence for the text. 1

1 See also Schurer, Jewish People in the Time of Christ, ii. 3,
pp. 306-312; Buhl, p. 110 ff.

174 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

A tradition of a still older rendering is preserved in
a passage of the Talmud, the value of which, however,
is not great. " Five elders wrote for King Ptolemy
the Law in Greek, and this day was for the Israelites
as dark as the day on which the golden calf was made,"
and there follows a reference to the version of the
Seventy ; Massekhct Sopherim i. 2. A similar passage
with a reference to a pre-Ptolemaic translation of the
Law is quoted from the Mechilta on Ex. xii. 40. 1
Aristobulus, the Jewish philosopher, who flourished
about the middle of the second century before Christ,
reports a similar tradition. 2 But the vagueness and
uncertain character of all these references makes it
impossible to draw from them any reliable inference.
The later form of the story, as given by Aristeas, is
reproduced by Philo and Josephus in the first century,
and its correctness is generally assumed by the Christian
Fathers of the following centuries, who add to it details
some of which have passed into the current tradition of
the Church. The translators, for example, instead of
producing their translation in concert, are said to have
been confined in separate cells, where each worked inde-
pendently, and the several versions, when compared, were
found to be in verbal and exact agreement. The year of
Ptolemy's reign in which the translation was completed
is given, and even the day of the month, and so forth.

The tradition thus preserved, whatever its precise value
may be, has reference solely to a rendering into Greek

1 Buhl, p. 108 ff.

- Eusebius, Pr(ep. Evang. xiii. 12,

GREEK VERSIONS 175

of the five books of the Law. Independent evidence,
however, of the existence of a Greek version or versions
of parts of the Old Testament other than the Pentateuch,
is to be found in the Prologue to the book of Ecclesias-
ticus ; and it has been suggested that the language of
the writer implies that the translation was made in the
interests of Jewish propagandism. 1 This statement
makes it clear that the earlier and later Prophets and
some of the Hagiographa as well as the Law were known
by the middle of the second century B.C. in a Greek
version practically identical with the present Septuagint.
The rest of the books of the Hagiographa, those probably
of later date and composition, may not have been trans-
lated into Greek until nearly the beginning of the
Christian era. No detailed evidence, however, with
regard to particular books is forthcoming, and no more
than the general limits of time above stated can with
confidence be asserted.

That the Greek Bible was complete by the date
indicated, as far at least as the canonical' books trans-
lated from the Hebrew were concerned, is made evident

1 Ed. Nestle in HDB, vol. iv. p. 439 b . The relevant words of the
Prologue are as follows : u>s ov /JLOVOV avrovs roi)s a.vayiv&VK.ovTa.'s 8tov
effrlv TTi(TTrifj,ovas yevtadai., dXXd. /cat TCHS e/cros dwatrdai TOI)S (piXofj.affovi'Ta.s
XpTl&ifJ-ovs elvai /cat \fyovras /cat ypd(povras . . . ov yap iffodvva/Jifi avra
iv eavTois'EjSpaiffTl \ey6/jLeva Kal OTO.V /jLeraxOrj els er^pav yXuicraav' ov
p-bvov Se TO.VTO,, d\Xa /cat aJros 6 v6(J.os /cat at Trpo^T/retat /cat ra XotTra TUIV
/3t/3XtW 01) yctt/cpa? % T V Siafiopav iv eairrots \ey6pei>a. The writer
gives the date of his arrival in Egypt as the thirty-eighth year of
Ptolemy Euergetes, i.e. 132 B.C., and his language would seem to assert
a not very recent origin of the versions in question. Dr. Nestle's
argument turns upon the interpretation of the words rols e/cros, and
the context in which they are found.

176 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

by the numerous quotations in Philo and other writers.
The former author (20 B.C. to c. 40 A.D.) reproduces the
story of Aristeas ( Vita Moysis ii. 5 ff.), and quotes in
his works from most of the Old Testament books, with
the exception of Ezekiel and some of the Minor
Prophets, Ecclesiastes and the rest of the Megilloth, the
later Hagiographa, and some of the earlier historical
books. His Greek, though differing in not a few
instances from the existing text of the Septuagint, is
generally regarded as supporting it substantially and
on the whole. The same is true of the Jewish
historian Josephus, who twice refers to the translation
under Ptolemy (Antiquities, i. prsef. 3, xii. 2. 115);
and although his references to the Old Testament lack
the definiteness of those of Philo, as would naturally be
the result of the difference of subject, they indicate
sufficient acquaintance with the Greek as well as the
Hebrew text ; the only books omitted are Proverbs,
Job, Canticles, and Ecclesiastes. Finally, in the New
Testament, whose authors normally quote from the
Septuagint, references are found to all the Old
Testament books except the three Minor Prophets,
Obadiah Nahum and Zephaniah, three of the Megilloth,
Canticles Ecclesiastes and Esther, and Ezra-Nehemiah.
The subject-matter, or even the brevity of these books,
may well have been the reason which led to their
being passed over. The silence of the writers obviously
does not imply either ignorance of the books themselves
or their non-existence in a Greek form. 1

1 Swete, p. 372 ff., and the literature there given ; Buhl, I.e.

SEPTUAGINT 177

Apart from the external evidence, the character of
the version itself in the case of the several books would
suffice to show that these were not all translated by
one author or at one and the same period. The
ability of the translator, and the quality of his work,
varied greatly. The Pentateuch is usually adjudged to
present the best and most faithful rendering of the
Hebrew original. The Psalms and earlier Prophets,
where the difficulties of interpretation and expression
are not so great as in the later Prophets and other
poetical books, are on the whole well done. Several of
the Prophets and the Hagiographa run through the
whole scale from the freest paraphrase to the most
rigid imitation of the very order of word and phrase
in the Hebrew. 1 The versions of Ezekiel, Canticles,
Ecclesiastes, and the two books of Chronicles are cited
as instances of extreme literality. At the other end
of the " scale," perhaps, are Isaiah and Job, the
difficulties of which books, text and interpretation
alike, have baffled the translators, and resulted in a
rendering which in many instances is hardly Greek,
and iu others would convey to a Greek reader but a
dim conception of the meaning of the original. The
Septuagint version of the book of Daniel was for a long
time entirely lost. Its place was taken by that of
Theodotiou ; and the true Septuagint text has been
preserved in only one manuscript, from which it was
printed for the first time in the year 1772. 2

1 Cp. Buhl, p. 123.

2 See infra, p. 193 f. ; Swete, Introd. p. 46 ff., Old Testament in Greek,

178 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

It is easy to criticise the performance of the Greek
translators, and to find fault with the inadequacy of
their work and its frequent ill-success. On the other
hand, it is only just to remember that they were
pioneers. They had no predecessors, whose experi-
ence might be a guide to them, in the task and
art of translating out of the Hebrew tongue into
Greek. There was no well-ordered and recognised
corpus of rules for translators, nor any principles which
would serve to keep them in the right path ; no
standard to which, if they were true, it was impossible
for them to go far astray. They had to grope and
explore. Bearing the circumstances in mind, and the
age in which they lived, it will perhaps be matter of
surprise not that they sometimes or even often failed,
but that their success was so great as the long-continued
popularity and wide-spread influence that their version
enjoyed, linguistic as well as doctrinal and theological,
prove it to have been.

Something might be gained for a nearer determination of the
relative date of translation of the several books, by an examination
of the style and usage of the writers as compared with the Hebrew
original. An essay in this direction was recently made by the late
Dr. H. A. Redpath in the Journal of Theological Studies, July 1906,
p. 606 ff. The field, however, is almost unworked. Dr. Redpath
examines the various Greek renderings of the Divine name, and
lays down the principle that where Qeos is found constantly or
frequently as the Greek representative of the Tetragrammaton,
nirV, there the version is antecedent to the existing and accepted
Massoretic text ; where, on the contrary, mri 1 is always, or nearly

vol. iii. pp. vf., xiif. Dr. Swete prints the two versions conveniently
on opposite pages of his edition.

/, 4VUUt /

S - ft

SEPTUAGINT V

*S K

always, represented by Kvpios, the translators had before them the
established Hebrew text, and consistently followed it. On this
criterion the books of the Old Testament, exclusive of the
Pentateuch, would fall into two on the whole well-marked groups,
the earlier consisting of Isaiah, Joshua, 1 Kingdoms, 1, 2 Chro-
nicles, 1 Esdras, Psalms, and Proverbs : the second of Judges,
2-4 Kingdoms, 2 Esdras, Ezekiel, Daniel, Minor Prophets, etc.
Jeremiah seems to occupy an intermediate place between the two
groups ; and Job is peculiar, and stands almost alone in its use of
Kvpios for ^ and fl^tf. Both premisses and conclusion are, it is
obvious, open to objection ; and the principle if consistently and
strictly carried out would bring the translations of some of the
books down to an impossibly late date. The essay, however, is a
good illustration of the kind of work that is urgently needed upon
the text of the Septuagint. Cp. H. St. J. Thackeray on Bender-
ings of the Infinitive Absolute, ib., July 1908 f., 597 ff.

Besides the books translated from the Hebrew, the
Greek Canon comprised a number of Apocryphal works
the majority of which were of Greek origin and written
in Greek. The dates of some of these are uncertain ;
but, broadly speaking, they range from circa 200 B.C.,
when Ecclesiasticus was composed in Hebrew, being
rendered into Greek half a century later by the
grandson of the author, to the middle or end of the
first century of our era, and perhaps later. The order
of the books also was changed, in some instances with
the object of bringing together works of like character
or subject, as when the historical Chronicles was made
to follow Kings, or Daniel removed from among the
Writings to find a place with the major Prophets.
Elsewhere an estimate of chronological precedence or
supposed common authorship may have influenced
those who arranged the Canon. And the Hebrew
titles, when derived from the initial words of the book,

i8o INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

were replaced by titles descriptive of their contents. 1
The English version follows, generally speaking, the
order of the Greek ; but in common with all later
versions except those founded directly upon the
Septuagint, rejects the Apocryphal additions ; and the
Greek titles also were adopted with the exception of
the books of Samuel and Kings, Ezra and Nehemiah,
and Chronicles, where a return was made to the
Hebrew, probably under the influence of the Latin
Father and Hebrew scholar Jerome. The manuscripts
of the Septuagint themselves are not always consistent
with one another in the order which they present.
The lists also of the canonical books found in the early
Christian Fathers vary considerably. The following
is the arrangement of the books as printed in the
Cambridge manual edition :

Pentateuch, in the usual order, Joshua, Judges,
Faith, four books of Kingdoms; 1, 2 Chronicles,
1, 2 Esdras, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of
Solomon, Job, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach,
Esther, Judith, Tobit ; Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel,
Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai,
Zechariah, Malachi, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Barucli, Lamenta-
tions, Letter of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Susanna,
Bel and the Dragon, four books of Maccabees. In
an appendix are printed the apocryphal Psalms of
Solomon, and Hymns and Prayers attributed to various
authors. 2

Thus the Greek Bible or Septuagint is larger than

1 Supra, p. 117 ff. " Swete, fntrod. pt. ii. oh. i.

SEPTUAGINT 181

the Hebrew or English by some fifteen or sixteen
apocryphal works or parts of works. For convenience
sake the names of these are printed above in italics.

With regard to the Greek titles themselves, there is
not much that need be said. The name " Deuteronomy,"
Aevrepovofjiiov, has already been referred to as probably
due to a misapprehension of the Hebrew text. 1 The
origin of the title " Kingdoms," BavtXeLwv, for the
four books known to the Hebrew and English texts
as 1 , 2 Samuel and 1 , 2 Kings is obscure ; presum-
ably the name is intended to apply to the divided
monarchy as distinguished from the united sway of
Saul, David, and Solomon in succession ; a ' kingdom '
is established in Israel in 1 Sam. xii., so that the
title is descriptive even of the greater part of the first
of the four books. " Chronicles," napaX-eiiro^eva is a
representation, it can hardly be called a rendering of
the Hebrew D'pjn >n:n. The second book of Esdras
("EcrSpa?, "Eo-pa?, "Epa<? = fcOTj?) is the Hebrew Ezra-
Nehemiah (2 Esdr. i. x. = Ezra, xi. xxiii. = Nehemiah).

1 Esdras appears to be a compilation of parts of

2 Chron. and Neh. with the whole of Ezra, so that
the last book is practically contained twice in the
Greek Canon ; there is also an entirely new and
original section, chs. iii. 1 v. 6, containing the story of
the three youths at the court of Darius, the immediate
bodyguard (<Ta>pa.To*fyv\aice<s} of the king, who compete
for his favour and rewards, together with three philo-
sophical essays on the comparative merits respectively

1 Supra, p. 119f.

i8 2 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of wiiie, the king, and truth. The real nature and
source of the book has been much discussed. It is
generally accepted that the portions parallel to the
Hebrew text are translated from the original, and they
form as they stand a fairly complete narrative of the
rebuilding of the temple ; but the interpolated chapters
bear rather the marks of having been written and
composed in Greek. 1

The Greek version contains also a considerable
addition to the book of Daniel in ch. iii. vv. 24-90,
the Prayer of Azarias and the Song of the Three
Children in the Fire ; also the two brief Apocrypha
that follow, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon, which
are separate works in the Septuagint, are in the Latin
Vulgate regarded as parts of the same book of Daniel.
Of all three Theodotion's version has been preserved,
and is printed in the Cambridge edition together with
the true Septuagint translation.

Two of the canonical books, moreover, bear appended
to them in some of the Greek manuscripts notes which
have reference to the circumstances and time of the
translation. Unfortunately the precise meaning is not
quite clear, nor what weight if any should be attached

1 See Schiirer, Jewish People, in the Time of Christ, ii. 3, pp. 177-81 ;
H. St. J. Thackeray in HDB, vol. i. p. 758. Sir H. H. Howarth in
articles in PSBA, vol. xxiii. pp. 147, 305, cp. ib. xxiv. 147, 332, xxv.
15, 90, xxvi. 25, 63, 94, has recently elaborated with much learning
and skill the theory that 1 Esdras is the real and original Septuagint
translation, 2 Esdras being the version of Theodotion. Compare the
two parallel versions extant of the book of Daniel. On the relation of
Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Sirach to the canonical Ecclesiastes, see
a recent art. by Prof. D. S. Margolioutli in Expositor, Feb. 1908, p. 118 ft'.

SEPTUAGINT 183

to the statements made. At the end of the book of
Job is inserted a conflate note or gloss, the greater
part of which records the native place and kingdom
of Thairnan (Qatpdv) the son of Eliphaz. Into the
middle of the genealogical record a marginal gloss or
comment has found its way, which apparently intends
to state that the Greek book of Job is a rendering of a
" Syriac," i.e. an Aramaic original (OUTO<? ep^veverac e'/c
rrjs Zvpia/crjs /3i(3\ov, where ovros may of course have
reference only to the note). The second chronological
statement is at the close of Esther, and quotes the
date of the fourth year of Ptolemy and Cleopatra. It
is not certain, however, that the date given is intended
to record the time when the translation of Esther was
made, nor is it clear which Ptolemy is intended. 1

The internal arrangement of the chapters and verses
of the several books in the Greek version is not
infrequently at variance with that of the Hebrew.
The difference is most apparent in the Psalter. The
total number of Psalms is the same, apart from an
additional Psalm (etfcadev rov apiO/iov) at the end,
which is ascribed to David, in commemoration of his

1 See on the note Swete, Introd. p. 258, and for the appended glosses
to Job, ib. p. 256 f. The note on Esther is as follows : "Erous Terdprov
fiacriXevovTOs ILroXe/jLaiov Kal KXeoTrdrpas eltrrjveyKfv AocriOeos, 5s 2<pT] flvai
iepevs K. AeveiTTjs, /cat IlToAeyU,cuos 6 vios avrov rr)i> TrpoKei/JLvr]i> eiricrTO\7]v
TUV Qpovpai, rjv H<j>a.<ra.v di>ai' Kal epfAiivevKtvai Ai'<rt',ua%oj/ Hro\e/J.aiov TUV
v 'lepowraA-^u. "In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and
Cleopatra, Dositheus who claimed to be a priest and Levite, and
Ptolemy his son brought the above Letter of Purim, as they asserted
it to be ; and they further declared that the translation had been
executed by Lysimachus, son of Ptolemy, who belonged to Jerusalem."

1 84 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

victory over Goliath. Pss. ix. and x.. however, of the
Hebrew are joined together in the Greek, resulting in
a long Psalm of thirty-nine verses ; and also Pss. cxiy.
and cxv. On the other hand, each of the Psalms cxvi.
and cxlvii. is divided into two parts, thus restoring the
full number of Psalms to 150. The reasons for the
arrangement are in every case obscure. Possibly it
represents a divergent tradition of the schools. The
verse numeration also is different wherever a heading
or rubric has been prefixed to the Hebrew text, and
numbered independently among the verses of the
Psalms. The Greek translators, rightly of course,
placed these rubrics, and others which they found
attached by tradition to given Psalms, outside of the
Psalms themselves, as is done in nearly all other ver-
sions, ancient and modern. And thus the number of
verses in the Greek in these instances is less by one
than the total number in the Hebrew. Further, in
some Greek manuscripts the Psalms are found written
stichometrically, the arijfpf corresponding to the
parallel members of the Hebrew verses ; and the same
arrangement is adopted for the other poetical books,
for the Wisdom literature, and for Canticles.

The Septuagint became the treasured Bible of the
Greek-speaking Church, and played a large and very
important part in the diffusion of Christianity. To
what extent, however, it met with a welcome and
acceptance among the Jews themselves outside of
Alexandria and Egypt must, in the absence of detailed
historical evidence, remain uncertain. The synagogues

SEPTUAGINT 185

and schools of Palestine, as was to be expected,
remained faithful on the whole to the Hebrew, the
sacred language of their forefathers. The Greek
translation was in the hands of the people, circulated
and read in city and country alike ; but it appears
always to have been regarded with suspicion and
dislike by the more strictly orthodox Jews, and never
to have been accorded any kind of official recognition
by them. Where Greek influence was stronger, as in
Asia Minor, and the liberality and independence of
Greek thought more powerful even within the synagogue
itself, the Hebrew inevitably gave way to its more
adaptable and widely understood rival. Later still
the Greek text practically supplanted the Hebrew,
always with the exception of the schools of learning,
and the public services of the synagogues ; and within
the Christian Church, and by the early Christian
Fathers was regarded as authoritative and inspired.

It is thus easily intelligible that in Jewish circles
and by the leaders of Jewish thought the Septuagint
version should come to be regarded with a deepening
antipathy. Not because it was Greek, but because it
had become associated more or less closely with the
Christian propaganda. They were keenly alive also
to its imperfections ; the dignity and precision of their
sacred Scriptures seemed to suffer at its hands. The
Greek Canon, moreover, differed from the Hebrew ; and
the additional books, the Apocrypha, which the former
sanctioned and circulated, had no shadow of justification,
or any right to a place in the Canon in Jewish eyes.

1 86 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

From this opposition and from the sense of an injustice
done to the true text of Scripture there grew up the
natural desire to provide a new or revised translation,
which should be more faithful to the original, and
more accurately reflect Jewish teaching and the liter a
scripta of the Hebrew books. The new versions which
were provided in obedience to this tendency and
prejudice did not, in every case at least, refuse to make
use of the old ; but they endeavoured to improve it,
to recast it in a Jewish sense, and to bring it into
closer conformity with that Hebrew text which it
claimed to represent to the outside world. Thus there
came into existence three new translations or revisions
of the Old Testament Scriptures in Greek, which are
known under the names of Aquila, Theodotion, and
Syrnrnachus. There is no reason, however, to suppose
that these represent the only attempts made to clothe
the thoughts and words of the Hebrew writers, in
whole or in part, in Greek dress. There were prob-
ably not a few others, echoes or fragments of some
of which have been preserved. These, however, were
the chief, perhaps the only complete translations,
which alone circulated widely, and in practice became
rivals of the older Septuagint. The precise order in
which they appeared is disputed ; in all probability it
was as given above. They were all, moreover, the
work of the second century, or at latest the beginning
of the third century of our era. 1

1 Cp. Justin, Dial. c. Tr. 68 : on-tyes (scil. oi diSd<TKa\oi vp&v) To\/j.&ffi
rrp> <iriy>]cnv f/v ^i)yri(rai>TO oi e/SSo/mjKOJ'Ta vjJiCiv TrpecrjUijTepoi Trapa

AQUILA 187

That the version of AQUILA was the earliest of the
three there seems little doubt. It also represents
most fully the reaction of Jewish sentiment against
the freedom with which the Seventy had treated the
Hebrew text, and an attempt to present a rendering
of the Hebrew which should be faithful to the exact
letter of the original. The first mention of his name
is by Irenseus, wherj, finding fault with the interpreta-
tion ri veavw in Isa. vii. 14, he states that the passage
is so rendered by Theodotiou of Ephesus, and Aquila
of Pontus, both of whom were Jewish proselytes. 1 The
tradition as to birthplace and relation to Judaism may,
however, be a mere confusion with the Aquila of
Acts xviii. 2. 2 Epiphanius calls him a Greek, and
a connection by marriage (n-evQepiSr)?) of the Emperor
Hadrian (117-38 A.D.), who gave himself diligently
to the study of Hebrew, and when proficient produced
a translation from which everything that might seem
to favour Christian teaching was carefully removed; 3
and he assigns his work to the twelfth year of the
reign of the emperor, i.e. 128-29 A.D. Jewish tradition,

Aiyvirrluv /3acrtXet yev6fj.evoL /XT? elvat ev rttnv d\r)0TJ-
There are teachers of yours (i.e. of the Jews) who venture to maintain
that the translation of the Seventy elders is in some points incorrect.
Cp. ib. 71, ou%i TOIS diSaaxaXois vjj.Ccv Treido/j.a.1 /J.TJ crw/retfet/xecots KO\WS
(krjyelffdat. ra inrb TUIV irapa HroXe/xaty rui AiywrrTiui' yevo^vLf /SatrtXec
f /SSo/zij/covra Trpefffivrepuv ' d\X' avrol d%-r]ye'iffdai ireipuvro.!.. Migne, Just.
Opera, pp. 636, 641 ; Swete, Introd. p. 30.

1 Adv. Hccr. iii. 21, ws QeoSor'uav T)pfj.7]vev(rev 6 'E<e'ertos /cai 'A/ci/Xcts
6 HovTiKh, d/j.<t>oTfpoi 'lovdaloi. Trpoa-ij\vToi, adding that the interpretation
of the passage in Isaiah which they give is adopted by the Ebionites.

- 'lovoalov 6i>6/j.a.Ti 'A/c^Xav HOVTIK&V rui ytvei.

3 De Mem. et Pond. 14 f., quoted in Swete, p. 31.

1 88 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

which is repeated and adopted by Jerome, confirms
this account, and gives the names of his Jewish
teachers, Akiba circa 100 A.D., or according to another
passage Eliezer, and Joshua at a somewhat earlier
date. The former tradition, that he was a disciple
of Eabbi Akiba, is repeated by Jerome in his com-
mentary on Isa. vii. 14. The name Aquila, in Hebrew
form D^py, D^pK, is identical with Dl^pjix, Onkelos, the
traditional name of the author of the Targum on the
Pentateuch ; l and the identity of the writers has been
frequently suggested or affirmed with more or less
confidence. Beyond the name, however, and a certain
similarity in principles and methods of translation,
there does not seem to be anything to confirm the
theory. 2

The broad and striking characteristic of the version
of Aquila is its extreme literality. His aim appears
to have been to reproduce the original with absolute
verbal exactness, providing a Greek equivalent for
every Hebrew word, and following in every respect
the precise order and construction of the Semitic text.
In the execution of this task he most fully vindicates
his right to the honourable title given him by Jerome,
eruditissimus linyuce grccccc, a Greek scholar of the
highest ability ; but his version must have appeared
strange and barbarous to one familiar with the master-
pieces of Greek literature, or even to one accustomed

1 Supra, p. 166 f.

a Swete, Introduction, p. 32, and note ; Buhl, p. 172 f. ; Abrahams
unhesitatingly asserts their identity, Jewish Literature, p. 6.

AQUILA 189

to hear aud to speak Greek in ordinary life. Every
usage and idiom of Greek grammar and syntax are
violated, and the laws and practices of Hebrew corn-
position are set forth as it were in Greek words and
letters. All this, moreover, is done with a skill and
consistency which proves the author to be no mean
master of both languages. While at the same time
this method gives to his translation an additional and
indeed unique value for textual criticism, as a witness
to the original text which lay before him as he worked.
Thus, for instance, the sign of the accusative, or
object of the verb in Hebrew, being identical in form
and spelling with the preposition nx, " with," is rendered
by <rvv, the Greek word being treated as a particle
without effect on the case of the succeeding noun.
When, however, the following substantive is anar-
throus, nx is represented by the Hebrew article. 1

is ra> \eyeiv, and derivatives from a Hebrew
root are represented by derivatives from a root of
corresponding meaning in Greek. Aquila further
transliterates the sacred name mrp, employing the
older forms of the Hebrew letters, where the Sept.

1 e.g. Gen. i. 1, ev Ke<t>a\aiu> eKTicrev o 0e6s avv TOV ovpavbv /cat aiiv
yrjv, Hcb. pxn nxi D-OB-H nx D'H^N x-u rra'x-n (Field, Hexapla, in loc.) ;
2 Kings xxiii. 15, /cat Kaiye <rvv TO dvcria.cfrripi.ov . . . 5 fTroiijcrev 'lepo-
/3od/x vi6s Ne/3ar os f?';/ttapTej' TOV 'Icrpai7\, Jfeb. r\Z']i ~\vx . . . naicn nx DJI
^xnc" nx N-enn ic'x an: p ojnv. The rendering of n'^xna in Gen. I.e. hy
iv Kf<f>a\atuj where the Sept. has the natural translation ev apxv> illus-
trates Aquila's practice of preserving uniformly the equivalence between
Hebrew and Greek roots; BW, "head," is in Greek Ke(f>a\7), so also
Kf(f>a.\a,iov stands for rrtfxi, and is used again similarly in 1 Sam. xv. 21,
Job viii. 9, where the Sept. has TO.

INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

translates by 6 Kvpios. This last fact was asserted
by Origen and Jerome, but was unsupported by any
direct evidence until the recent discovery of portions
of the books of Kings in Aquila's version in the Geniza
at Cairo. In these the Tetragrammaton is uniformly
represented by ^^, and the correctness of the state-
ment of the two Fathers is therefore fully demon-
strated.

Compare F. C. Burkitt, Fragment* of the Books of Kings accord-
ing to the Translation of Aquila, Cambridge, 1897, with facsimiles.
The manuscript is a palimpsest from the Geniza of the Old
Synagogue at Cairo, the text being ascribed on the ground of
the style of the writing to the end of the fifth or beginning of
the sixth century of our era (Burkitt, p. 10). It contains
3 Ki. xxi. (1 Kings xx.) 7-17, 4 Ki. (2 Kings) xxiii. 11-27.
There is, of course, no author's name attached, but the style and
character of the translation leave no room for doubt. The upper
writing of the palimpsest is a Hebrew liturgical work of the
eleventh century (I.e. p. 3). It is not unimportant to notice that
in transliteration Aquila ' makes no attempt to represent the
Hebrew gutturals.

The earlier known portions of Aquila's version are given in
F. Field, Oriyenis Hexaplorum qucK Supersunt, 2 vols., Oxford,
1875, cp. Prolegomena, pp. xvi-xxvii. See Buhl, p. 150 ff. ; Swete,
p. 31 ff., and the references there given. Fragments of three of
the Psalms, xxii., xc., and xci., have also been recovered from the
same Geuiza, and have been published by Dr. C. Taylor, Sayings
of the Jewish Fathers -, Cambridge, 1897. See also Schiirer, ii. 3,
p. 168 ff. ; E. Nestle in HDB iv. p. 452 f.

The rendering of Aquila which aroused most opposi-
tion in Christian circles was apparently his substitution
of vedvis for the TrapOtvos of the Septuagint in Isa.
vii. 14. Hebrew scholars would, of course, agree now
that the former is a more accurate representation than
the latter of the Hebrew word n^yn, and of the

AOUILA 191

meaning of the prophet. The change, however, ap-
peared to deprive Christian apologetics of one of its
strongest arguments, and to weaken the Christian proof
of the Messiahship of Jesus in controversy with the
Jews. There is no reason, however, to suppose that
the translator was actuated by any other motive than
the desire to he absolutely faithful to his text, or that
he worked with conscious or unconscious bias against
Christianity. 1 His version seems to have been
welcomed by the Jews, who found in it what they
required, a Greek Bible free from Christian associations,
and conformed to the Hebrew Canon and style ; and
it has been supposed to have been more or less
formally authorised in Palestine, and to have remained
in use there by Greek-speaking Jews until the time
of the Muhammadan Conquest in the seventh century.
Jerome states that there existed two recensions or
editions of his work, the earlier of which was more
free, the latter, " tear aicpiftdav" more literal and
closer to the Hebrew text ; and that it was this last
which Origeu adopted by preference in his great work.
No other writer, however, makes mention of a two-
fold edition of Aquila's text ; and it seems probable
that all that is really implied is a correction or revision
by the author himself, which may not have extended
to more than a few of the books of the Old Testament. 2

represents nchy in the Septuagint text of Ex. ii. 8, Ps. Ixvii.
(Ixviii. ) 25, and elsewhere. The only passage other than that in Isaiah
where the word is known in the extant text of Aquila is Deut. xxii. 28,
where the Sept. has rty wa.p6vov, Heb.
2 Field, I.e. p. xxivfl'.

i 9 2 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

THEODOTION, it is generally agreed, was later than
Aquila, probably a younger contemporary. Schiirer,
however, regards him hesitatingly as not more recent,
and " perhaps a predecessor." 1 Irenseus (I.e.) makes of
him also a Jewish proselyte, a native of Ephesus, and
states that he was at one with Aquila in the rendering
r) veavis in Isa. vii. 14. The same tradition that he
became a proselyte to Judaism is recorded by Epiphanius
(I.e. 17), according to whose statement he was a native
of Pontus and an adherent of Marcion (flor. c. 150 A.D.),
who lived in the reign of Commodus (" TOV Bevrepov
Ko/ji/jLoSov," A.D. 180-92), apostatised to Judaism, and
became a Hebrew scholar. Jerome's references to him
are hardly consistent with one another. Where, how-
ever, he is most precise, he reports, without endorsing
it, the assertion of " some " (quidam), that he was an
Ebionite (Prcef. in Dan.). Elsewhere he makes the
same statement without reserve, or terms him a Judaiz-
iug heretic (De Vir. lllustr. 54, Prcef. in Job; see the
passages quoted in Schiirer, I.e., or Swete, p. 42 it).
His Hebrew scholarship appears to have been hardly
equal to that of Aquila, for he sometimes transliterates
Hebrew words where the latter translates, apparently
for no other reason than that he was in doubt or ignor-
ance as to the meaning. 2 As the basis of his work

1 Schiirer, JPTC 'ii. p. 172 ff.

- It seems hardly possible to reject this inference, or to suggest any
other cause. It has been disputed, however, on the ground that some
of the words thus transliterated are neither obscure nor uncommon. In
some instances the context may conceivably have given rise to hesitation.
See Swete, Introd. p, 46 ; Field, Hexapfa, p. xl ff.

AANIHA

KATA TOYS

EBAOMHKONTA

EK TON TETPAFA&N fiPirENOY2

DANIEL

SECVNDVM

SEPT VAGINTA

EX TETRAPLIS ORIGENIS

NVNC PRIMVM EDITVS

E SINGVLARI CHISIANO CODICE ANNORVM SVPRA 13CCC.
CETERA ANTE PRAEFATIONEM INDICANTVR.

R O M A E

TYPIS PROPAGANDAE FIDEI

I3CC LXXlI

CHISIAN DANIEL, TITLE-PAGE.

DANIEL JUXTA

confummatiomanuurn di-

ww*

9. K&enniiM,'&n*W$uun*.

<t , 19 fiX()p<t7Kr-

8aJrt ^ (*'

10. Kcu ttfJiapiufH ol afj&pmi-
As) , x) pi hcuwSwri mints ol a.-
ftpmtet, oi fnuwpSfJot wf tmfcww .

1 1. Acp iv ^7o^z3iJ' )J 3uoi*
e/l<Mteraf , x<t) 5ij

f*fu*rws

to< <ft<tic!ja< m

1 2.

rv-

mabuncur omnia hzc.

8 " Etegoaudivi,&nonintel.

lexi drca J 'P fum tC r mpU - ' r

Domine ; qu^nam foiutio lermonis

hujus ? & cujus parabola iftz ?

9. Et dixitmihi: Revertere Da-
niel, quia obteda, & obfignata funt
mandata, quoadufque tentencur, &c
fandlificentur multi.

10. EC pcccent peccatores , &
non intelligant omnes peccatorcs,
& intelligences accendcnc.

11. Ex quo cenipore defeccrit
facn'ficium jiige, & paracum fueric,
ut decur abominado defolacionis ,
dies mille ducenti nonaginca.

12. Beacus qui expeftac , & con-
gregabic ad dies milie trecencos cri-
gincaquinque.

' 3 " Tu autem va ^e , requiefce
^. adj]uc enj "I

r pletionem 52 si

cesaucen,, krcfurgcs fu P
lonam tuam in confummacionc

DANIEL JUXTA LXX-

DCRIPTUS EST AB ExBMPtARI HABENI*

DESCRIprvs EST E

^SEHAMCOUATUSEST.

i. S.

CJIISIAN DANIEL, CH. XII. 7-13.

THEODOTION 193

also he took the Septuagint text and Canon, not that
of the Massoretes, as is evident from the presence in
his version of Apocryphal additions not recognised by
the Hebrew original. There can be little doubt, there-
fore, that what Theodotion really undertook and accom-
plished was a broad revision of the accepted Greek text
in the light of the Hebrew. His work in no sense
implied or resulted in a new translation, which went
back, like that of Aquila, to the original. It is in
harmony with this view also that his version was
welcomed and largely adopted by the Christians, includ-
ing so great a scholar and competent judge as Origen,
while there is no trace of its use in Jewish circles.
The New Testament quotations also give evidence of
acquaintance with the readings of Theodotiou, and
in some instances prefer them to the true Septuagint.
Whether his work of revision extended to the whole of
the Old Testament we have no means of deciding.

In the case of the book of Daniel the translation of
Theodotion entirely superseded that of the Septuagint,
and the latter version remained unknown until the
second half of the eighteenth century, when its text
was published from a unique manuscript in the Vatican
Library at Borne. 1 The two versions are printed con-
veniently side by side in the third volume of the
Cambridge Septuagint. That portions, possibly the

1 The so-called Chigi MS, Codex Chisianus, see Swete, Old Testament
in Greek, vol. iii. p. xii f. The editio princess bears the date, Rome,
1772. The manuscript itself is doubtfully assigned to the ninth century,
and contains besides both versions of Daniel, the books of Isaiah, Ezekiel,
and of Jeremiah, with Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle.

194 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

whole of other books also which are usually printed as
parts of the Septuagint were really derived from Theo-
dotion, seems to have been conclusively established by
recent investigations. 1

That SYMMACHUS was the latest of the three rival
interpreters and translators of the Hebrew Old Testa-
ment into Greek who immediately succeeded the Seventy,
is perhaps indicated by the fact that Irenseus makes no
mention of him in his extant works. It does not, of
course, follow necessarily that he was unknown to the
Christian Father, or that his version did not appear till
after the latter's death. The silence of Irenseus is only
presumptive evidence ; which is, however, supported by
the internal character of Synimachus' translation, as
far as it is known. Dr. Swete's verdict is to the same
effect : " So far as we can judge from the fragments of
his version which survive in Hexaplaric MSS, he wrote
with Aquila's version before him, and in his efforts to
recast it made free use of both the LXX and Theodotion." 2
Jerome in the passages referred to above classes him
with Theodotion as an Ebionite and " Judaising heretic " ;
and makes the same report concerning him as of Aquila,
that bis version was issued in a second revised edi-
tion. 3 Epiphanius, 4 on what grounds is unknown, calls
him a Samaritan who lived under Severus (ez> rot?

1 The older literature is cited in Schiirer, I.e. ; see also Nestle, HDB,
vol. iv. p. 453 ; J. Gwynn in DCB iv. s.v. Theodotion ; Buhl,
p. 154 ff. ; Field, Prolegomena, ch. iv. ; Swete, p. 42 ff. ; M. Gaster,
PSBA xvi. pp. 280-90, 312-17, xvii. 75-94. The last is an attempt
to show that the additions to Daniel, both in Theodotion and the
Septuagint, are derived from an Aramaic original.

2 Introd. p. 51. 3 Supra, p. 191. 4 De Mens. ct Pond. 15,

CAP
S. Ambrof.inPlalm.i.Tom.i.col.--6:.

U T XII.

S.Epiphan. Adv.Hir.l. i. i g.Tom *

/,' . Hieronym. in Ecclel. Intelligtntes ferments
raw* futgtku** at Inminaria. Cali . Tom. III.
col.440. /Egypt-us nonnihl Thcodotioni adJi, :
mt

010*

n OHI

n
ttl

n ni cio-.

t-Tl -V r inttlligtntts falgebunt /tcut lux,
6- Jfltndor in fragment* , 6- e mulct's jujl-
rum vtlutfider inftculum, <!y ultra .

5. Ad oram Codicis . 'O O,<P( cc?imif.
if* O- Frofhett .

6. ^-Kai <jt3ii&w/tps -r- TK'I i In Cod.
Vat. vacat, vcluti in Hcbr. & Vulg. ; fed iiu
Cod. Chif. Q adhuc fupercft.

7. H irutWAM %att aflmtt . Confum-
waf/a minuum dimiffimis . Cum Vulgiii con-
vcniunt hie, quoad femcntiam: cum complfta

nx U5 paritc-r: f .. .

S. Cypnanus cumfict tijferjio . Ejufmodj A-
4"* lummo ftudio collegit, ac venniculato c-

-triufque teftimonia hoc & vcrfia.lo 4. fi,pcrio
ri cxhibet . LXX ( j^^o^ nieminlranT v. .

PH t T$ E; Of o, iqcup* JU$H
*T Dn c5 3* tnt^-v ;t u}. O f
CHOf .- HIM ^ n CHOT : iu '-r

<*AO1\ n n-t i-un^

=3 *f CHOf .- ^^H ussut//

^uX n-TE Of-x,.^

*** n^st o*c

*T ctnAtJUi ^ nil

* ,/ f - ,

**Jf!ttLf -i a/?ttf ^ /f "'"*

rmnfak /' dlmtdlum temper,, , quum-,

nificvi "'7 diff " f ' mar "" w* >-

".'"/iwWMtM,^ *wM.

*;+ ***'*** *-'

(rj/'r^T. - ^^^'^C^^*"^ 6 ' *V/y , 8fl)j cj*

"' """-", w

. S . Eph ri . m in Commcnr. I*
Jsa

JJ> - / ,^ __ ^j^.
^^ ^^

Sermmei clau/i,figuati<}tu,alii ptrtinebant ad
return Jlttuto ttmpore ctfurum, quodqut^

^""/ZT * ^ <ver ' c '" ium ' "'"'
.);/ 7./w Gbriflttm ejuJJem eoerferem :

lo . Ko( - ^^^^ ^^^ . S ym-
Inachi j ncc rprct.uio .ilicui digna , quo: ad lit us
Codicis nocarctur vi'.'a ell s. K<v oi i<ww
nutirmn . S. Et fciaites intelligent . In Hcbr.
uo D'SafDm ; iatelligentet intelligent.

i J- -4- J) ^) x. A. H.cc obeli's comprc-
henfa, in Hcbrso , adcoque & Vulgata dtlidc-
rantur . Extant autem in Mfs. Vat., & Chif. .
cxccptis aair . . <5 vfot , quorum primum iaj
Varicano , iitrumquc in Chifuno deed . Arabs .

l-'j r U ^^

-MJL*
^^ ^ ^
*- r UVI 7 a;fJ varfc 6- quitfct; hi enim

""' ' ? "" / "' '" '

Alcxandnnus

Tu auttm v*dc , & quitjct,

qumiam adbuc dies ufquc ad conjummAtimem
prtfinitam . Et qui'efces ,& rejurges ia forte
tua in fne diermn .

ti fit ejufmodi notatio, ii no-
dcm zflimare folent j
autem intelligitur Excm-
plaria eo magis slbmanda efie, quo propius ab
Autographo abfunt . Quamobrem Chifianunu
Codicem , qui uno tamum Exemplar! ab ipio
Terraplari fbntc diftat , co majoris faciendunu
efie quivis fatcbitur . Hinc Origcnis notx >p& >
haud /ine mcndis quidem , in codcm Ccdice
fcrvara; funt, qua; a librariis paulatim negl<Sz
aiibi evanucrunt . Singularis propterea eft bibi-
K * ms

CHISIAN DANIEL, CH. XII. 7-13.

SYMMACHUS 195

rov Sevijpou %povois), 193211 A.D., and being dissatis-
fied with his position among his own people, became a
proselyte to Judaism, and conceived his translation in
a polemical spirit against the Samaritan form of text.
" Severus " in this passage has been supposed to be
an error for " Verus " (Ovijpos), i.e. the time referred
to would then be the joint rule of Marcus Aurelius
and his brother Lucius Verus, 161-180 A.D. ; but the
conjecture appears to be unnecessary. His work was
known to Origen, and used by him together with that
of his predecessors early in the third century. In
scholarship, and in knowledge of the Hebrew and
Greek languages, he would seem to have been at least
the equal of any of those who had gone before him. 1

Besides the Septuagint and the three versions of
Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, there were at
least two others known to Origen, and a third of which
Eusebius and Jerome make mention. They are all
anonymous, and are usually referred to as Quintet, Sextet,
and Septima, 5th, 6th, and 7th. For the existence of
the last named Jerome is the sole but sufficient witness.
There is no evidence to show whether all or any of them
were ever complete. For two of them, Quintet and Sextet,
Origen found a place in the additional columns of his
Octapla ; 2 and Eusebius and Epiphanius give circumstan-
tial accounts, which do not in all respects agree with one
another, of their re-discovery, after they had remained
lost and hidden for a considerable period. According

1 Swete, p. 49 ff. ; Buhl, p. 156 ff. ; Field, Proleg. ch. iii.
- Infra, p. 202.

196 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

to a comment of Jerome on Hab. iii. 13, the Sexta was
of Christian origin and tendency. The known frag-
ments of all three versions are collected and printed in
the two volumes of Field's Hexapla. 1

It is sufficiently probable that other scholars, more
or less adequately equipped for the task, would essay
to present a book or books of the Hebrew Old Testa-
ment in a Greek form. An example of these appears
to be furnished by a unique manuscript in the library of
St. Mark's Church at Venice, the so-called Codex Venetus,
the editio princeps of which was published at Strassburg
in 1784 A.D. The manuscript itself is attributed to
the fourteenth or fifteenth century, and contains the
Greek text of the Pentateuch, together with Proverbs,
Daniel, and the five Megilloth excepting Esther. Its
latest editor, 0. Gebhart (Leipzig, 1875), holds that the
author was by birth a Jew, but a proselyte to Christi-
anity, and that he translated direct from the Hebrew
text with occasional reference to, and guidance from
earlier Greek versions. In some respects his work
recalls that of Aquila, in its literality and the attempt
to render Hebrew terms by Greek words of similar
origin and derivation. It is, however, entirely indepen-
dent of the earlier version. 2

An anonymous rendering of the third chapter of
Habakkuk is found in a single manuscript, the " Codex
Barberinus," together with the ordinary Septuagint text ;
and is quoted by Field, in loc., under the title "A\\o<;.

1 Swete, p. 53 ff. ; Buhl, p. 158 f. ; Field, Proleg. ch. v.

2 Swete, p. 56 ff.

SEPTUAGINT 197

The knowledge which the author shows of the Hebrew
text is supposed to prove that he was a Jew, or at least
of Jewish origin. His work, however, cannot apparently
be identified with any of the known versions, and is
therefore another instance of independent study and
translation from the original. Field refers to two other
cursives which agree in their renderings in this chapter
with the Cod. Barber., and quotes a note from the latter
to the effect that the translation given does not agree
with Aquila, Symmachus, or Theodotion, but may be
derived from Quinta or Sexta. It seems clear that it is
not. Possibly it is extracted from the Septirna, of which
so little is known that its very existence has been
doubted. 1

The peculiar and indeed unique value of the
Septuagint, therefore, consists in the fact that it is the
earliest witness in our possession to the original text
of the Old Testament. As an ancient text, and a
translation, it has suffered from all the accidents inci-
dental to a long period of transmission ; and to recover
with certainty the original form of the Greek, and so to
render it back into Hebrew as to be confident that we
have ascertained the precise words which lay before
the Greek translator, may frequently be a task beyond
the power of the best and most patient scholarship.
Nevertheless the Greek version which we owe to
nameless translators in Egypt antedates, roughly speak -

1 Field, Hexapla, on Hab. iii. ; M. L. Margolis in AJSL, 1907,
p. 76 ff. ; E. Klostermann, Analecta zur Septuaginta, 1895, pp. 50-60.
The last reference I owe to Margolis.

1 98 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

ing by a thousand years, the earliest extant Hebrew
manuscript, and by half that period at least the final
and authoritative settlement of the Hebrew text at the
hands of the Massoretic revisers. Upon the exact
preservation of the Hebrew text infinitely more pains
and labour have been bestowed than upon the Greek.
The former was to the Jew inspired, immutable and
sacred in the least minutite of its writing ; and he had
learnt to regard its text with a deep reverence and love,
not unmixed with superstitious awe. There can be no
doubt, however, that previous to the work of the
Massoretic scholars in recension and determination, the
Hebrew text had passed through a period of compara-
tive neglect, due largely if not entirely to the confusion
and vicissitudes of Jewish history ; and had suffered
much from the intrusion of errors, and from the
manifold risks to which all early literature was
exposed in the absence of the security afforded by the
printing-press. The Greek text, however, has on the
whole suffered much more, partly because as a trans-
lation it never carried with it the authority or prestige
of the original. From and after the age of the
Massoretes the Hebrew text has been handed down
unchanged and witli absolute fidelity. No such exact
and scrupulous care has accompanied the Greek. But
when all allowance has been made for difficulties and
uncertainties of transmission and reading, the value of
the Septuagint version is inestimable. It is the only
substitute we have to supply the lack of early Hebrew
manuscripts. Without it and all that owes to it its

SEPTUAGINT 199

origin and inspiration, it is not too much to say that
textual criticism of the Old Testament in any fruitful
sense of the term would be impracticable, or would be
reduced to irresponsible conjecture. Moreover, in the
elucidation and support of the text of the Old Testament
Scriptures the Septuagint holds a similar place also to
that which is occupied by Patristic Quotations in regard
to the New. It is the best, as it is the most ancient
commentary, needing the utmost caution in its use,
and itself presenting problems of the most difficult and
perplexing kind ; and as in authority, so in general
probability and exactness entirely inferior to the
Hebrew form of text. But it is and will ever remain an
indispensable auxiliary, to which the student of the Old
Testament will continually resort for suggestive guidance
and interpretation, and will not often resort in vain.

The first attempt to remedy the corruption which
thus early began to find its way into the text of the
Septuagint, and to supply a critical edition, was made
by the Greek Father, Origen, 1 in the first half of the
third century of our era. By a careful comparison of
all existing versions with one another and with the
original Hebrew, he sought to determine the true
primitive form of the Greek, and by an elaborate
system of obelisks and other artificial marks inserted
in the text to guard it from the possibility of further

1 The date of Origen's birth is c. 185-86 A.D.; and he died after a
troubled life at Tyre in his sixty-ninth year, in the reign of Gallus,
251-54 A.D. The best account on the whole of Origen's life and work is
contained in the article by the late Dr. Westcott in vol. iv. of the
Diet, of Christian Biography.

200 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

corruption. Unfortunately this system, owing to its
detailed and highly elaborate character, lent itself most
easily to the cause of error. Copyists transposed Origen's
asterisks, obelisks, etc., omitted them altogether, or
inserted at wrong points, thus defeating the object
which their author had in view, and introducing new
variations and confusion. In this respect, and in this
respect only, Origen's great work failed to achieve its
purpose. His zeal and industry were unwearied, and
His learning unrivalled in his own day, or for many
centuries before and afterwards. He has been justly
regarded as the first true critic of the text of the Old
Testament, the first to apply correct principles which
he himself formulated and laid down, to the determina-
tion of the form of words in which the Greek translators
had sought to convey the meaning of their original.
In one respect only do his principles appear to have
been at fault. He seems to have regarded conformity
with the Hebrew as a test of the correctness of a given
reading in the Greek ; and of two conflicting readings
to have selected by preference that which adhered to
the Massoretic text, rather than that which was at
variance with it. Modern criticism would reverse
Origen's judgement, no doubt in most instances rightly ;
and, having in view the probability that the Greek text
had been made to conform later to a perhaps recon-
structed Hebrew, would pronounce in favour of the
dissident reading as witnessing to a non-Massoretic and
earlier, although not therefore necessarily more authentic
form of the Hebrew itself.

HEXAPLA 201

Origen's work is known by the name of the Hexapla
(ra 'E%a7r\a, TO 'Egcnr^ovv) " six-fold," because it com-
prised six texts, or forms of text of the Old Testament.
In parallel columns were arranged (1) the Hebrew text,

(2) the same transliterated, i.e. written in Greek letters,

(3) Aquila's version, (4) Symmachus, (5) the Septuagint
itself in the revised and corrected form which was the
fruit of Origen's own labours, (6) Theodotion. An open
page, therefore, of the Hexapla would present three
columns of text on either side, the fifth or Septuagint
column bearing interspersed in the text those symbolic
marks which Origen himself had devised or had
borrowed from Aristarchus and the Alexandrian
grammarians to indicate his judgement upon, or the
authority for the Greek readings adopted. It seems to
have been no part of his plan to revise in a similar
manner the other Greek versions. These were adduced
merely for the sake of comparison with the Septuagint,
and as aids to its study and elucidation. Nor is it
apparent for what reason the four Greek texts were
placed in his edition in the above order. An obvious
conjecture is that Aquila's version stood next to the
Hebrew because of its close literality. Nothing,
however, is really known on the subject.

The mere manual labour of writing out the Hexapla
must have been very great, and it must have been
necessary for Origeu himself to exercise constant and
close supervision over his copyists. It has been
estimated that the work when complete would extend
to at least fifty large folio volumes ; and its size and

202 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

elaborate character would forbid all attempts at
reproduction. The original manuscript was preserved
in the library at Csesarea, where it was seen and
consulted by the Latin Father Jerome, 1 and where
it seems to have remained in safety until at least the
sixth century. Afterwards it disappeared, perhaps
destroyed wittingly or unwittingly in some one of the
Muhammadan or Persian invasions that swept over
Palestine. Christian scholarship and faith have suffered
no greater loss than the destruction of Origen's splendid
life-work, with the fruits of his unremitting devotion
and zeal. 2

In addition to the Hexapla, mention is made by the
Greek authorities of two other forms or editions of
Origen's work, an Octapla and a Tetrapla. Of these the
first-named at least was not in any sense a new edition
or different work, but the term seems to have been
used of the Hexapla itself when it was supplemented
by the collation of two more Greek versions, the Quinta
and Sexta. The Tetrapla " four-fold " was an edition of
the four Greek columns, omitting the Hebrew and the
Hebrew transcript. In the judgement of some scholars

1 "'Ea.7rXoOs Origenis in Caesariensi bibliotheca relegens"; " cum
vetustum Origenis exemplum Psalterium revolverem." Jerome on
Pss. i. 4, iv. 8.

3 The fragments of the Hexapla, as far as known, are collected in
Field's two volumes, Origenis Hexaptorum qua* Supersunt Fragmcnta,
Oxford, 1876. Little has come to light, or been ascertained since. See
Swete, ch. iii., where references are given in full, and a page from a
Milan palimpsest containing a few verses from the Hexapla is trans-
cribed ; E. Nestle in HDB, vol. iv. p. 442 ff.; art. "Hexapla" in
Diet. Christian Biography, vol. iii. , by Dr. Chas. Taylor ; Buhl,
p. 125 if.

HEXAPLA 203

the Tetrapla was the earlier of the two works, the
Hexapla being a revised and amplified edition, in which
the Hebrew authority was cited for the first time.
There seems, however, to be no real reason for departing
from the ordinary view of the priority of the Hexapla.
At a later date, towards the close of the third century,
the Septuagint column, with its apparatus of critical
marks, was copied out and issued in a separate form by
Eusebius of Csesarea and Pamphilus his friend and the
founder of the library at Cresarea where Origen's works
were preserved.

Subsequently to the time of Origen two attempts at
least were made to produce corrected and revised
editions of the Septuagint, one of which according to
Jerome originated in Antiocb, and was accepted there
and by the Christian Churches as far west as Constan-
tinople ; the authority of the second was recognised
in Alexandria and Egypt ; while Palestine adhered to
the Septuagint text as issued by Pamphilus and
Eusebius. 1 There were therefore three versions or
recensions of the Old Testament in Greek, which
in Jerome's day commanded the allegiance of the
Christian world. Of these he writes that the Septua-
gint was known as the Kotvrj, " common " or " vulgate " ;
and expressly distinguishes it from the Hexaplar version

1 Jerome, Prcef. in Paralipamtena : "Alexandria et ^gyptus in
Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudant auctorem, Constantinopolis usque
Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat, mediae inter has
provinciae Palsestinse codices legunt, quos ab Origcne elaborates
Eusebius et Pamphilus vulgaverunt ; totusque orbis hac inter se trifari^
varietate coiapuguat."

204 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of Origeu, which was incorrupta et immaculata, and on
which his own Latin translation was founded. 1 Infor-
mation to the same effect is conveyed elsewhere in his
works.

LUCIAN, " ascetic and martyr," was a native of
Samosata, studied at Edessa, and founded or gave
strength and reputation to the school of Christian
learning at Antioch, where he spent the greater part
of his life. According to the account given in Pseudo-
Athanasius 2 he suffered martyrdom under Diokletiau
and Maximian, 311 A.D., and the autograph of his
translation was found at Nicomedia in the time of
Constantine. Jerome seems to identify his version
with the KOivrj, indicating, perhaps, that in his view
Lucian's work was a revision of the vulgate text, not
a direct rendering from the Hebrew. The first attempt
at a restoration of Lucian's text from the manuscripts
which were believed to contain it in a more or less
corrupted and " mixed " condition, was made by P.
Lagarde, who published in 1883 his Librorum Veteris
Testamenti Greece Pars Prior, Gottingen, Pars i., con-
taining the historical books Genesis to Esther. The
second part, however, never appeared, owing to the
death of the author ; and no successor has been found

1 Epist. 106, Ad. tiiiiin.iaiii el FrelAnm, c. 403 A.D. Simula and
Fretela were Gothic Christians, who sought from Jerome an expla-
nation of certain differences between his Latin rendering and the
Greek original to which they were accustomed. Jerome replied that
their Greek text was the corrupt KOIV-/J, whereas he had used the
Hexapla.

Synopsis Scripturcc Sacra 1 , 77; cp. Euseb. HE vii. 32, ix. 6.

HESYCHIUS 205

to carry on the work, at least on the lines laid down
by Dr. Lagarde. 1

With regard to HESYCHIUS nothing certain seems
to be known. The conjecture that the Eeviser of the
Greek text of the Old Testament was identical with
the Egyptian bishop of the same name who suffered
martyrdom in the year 311 A.D., commends itself as
probable, and has been generally accepted. A ready
explanation would thus be afforded of the acceptance
of Hesychius' revision in Alexandria and Egypt, to
which Jerome refers ; 2 and of its relation, more or
less close, to the Sahidic and Bohairic versions, especi-
ally the latter, and the Biblical quotations found in
Cyril of Alexandria. 3

Thus there arose and circulated widely within the
Christian Church three rival versions of the Old
Testament in Greek, those, namely, of Origen, Lucian,
and Hesychius. That the Hexaplaric edition of the
first-named differed considerably from the original
Septuagint, the KQIV-T] or Vulgate, seems clear. And
the primary aim of Biblical criticism on this point is
to isolate and reconstruct these several texts, in order
by their means, by comparison with one another and
with the Hebrew, to work back to an earlier and
truer form of the Septuagint itself than is afforded
by any of the extant manuscripts. This re-constitu-

1 Swete, Introd. p. 80 ff., and references; Buhl, p. 131ff. ; Nestle,
HDB iv. p. 445 f. ; Field, Proleg. ch. ix. ; S. R. Driver, Notes on
the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel, p. 1 ff.

2 Supra, p. 203.

3 Swete, p. 78 ff. ; Buhl, pp. 132, 138 f., 141.

206 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

tion would be an easy task, if the manuscripts
themselves presented a text that was pure, and free
in any given instance from elements derived from
foreign sources, and ultimately traceable to one or
other of the competing versions. Unfortunately this
is not the case. Into the text of every known manu-
script, as it now exists, external readings have made
their way; the text has become in course of time
more or less corrupt, and possessed of a relatively
" mixed " character. It is only by careful, patient
criticism that the original form of each version can
be disentangled from the largely confused and disguised
mass of evidence which the manuscripts afford. In
the accomplishment of this task versions derived from
the Septuagint render assistance of the utmost value,
and to a not less extent the writings of those Greek
Fathers, as Cyril of Alexandria, who belonged to the
countries in which the several versions took their rise
or were accepted.

Considerable progress has been made in the work
of classifying the manuscript and other evidence ac-
cording to the form or type of text which each of
them predominantly exhibits. The version of Hesychius,
for example, is recognised more or less definitely in
the great Vatican manuscript B, believed to have
originated in Egypt, in the quotations of the above-
mentioned Father, and in the Coptic versions. A
small group of MSS, one of which, perhaps the most im-
portant, Cod. Vat. 330, was used by Cardinal Ximenes
for the Complutensian Polyglott, has preserved the

GREEK MANUSCRIPTS 207

Lucian recension ; and of the Versions the Gothic is
supposed to be derived from the same form of text.
The great majority of Greek manuscripts present the
Hexaplar text, combined with elements and readings
from the other versions and from the vulgate or
primitive Septuagint, which underlies all three. Of
this text, the re-establishnient of which is the ultimate
aim of criticism, Lucian is believed to be on the whole
the nearest representative. Jerome's latest revision is
based upon the Hexapla, which he regarded as more
true to the original Hebrew.

GEEEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. Any
description of the chief uncial or other manuscripts of
the Greek Old Testament is unnecessary here, for a
complete and accessible account with full details will
be found in Dr. Swete's Introduction to the O.T.
in Greek, ch. v., or in the Introductions prefixed to
the several volumes of the same writer's edition of
the Greek text printed at the Cambridge University
Press. None of the great uncials in its present state
contains the entire text of the Old Testament without
diminution or loss. From all of them leaves have
perished in greater or less number, and the text is
marred by lacunae. The Alexandrian (5th cent.),
Sinaitic (4th cent.), and Vatican (4th cent.) approach
most nearly to a perfect condition. The majority of
manuscripts, as would be expected, were never more
than partial, containing portions only of the text,
copies of a single book, or of a group of books such
as the Pentateuch or the Prophets. These would be

208 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

both less unwieldy in size than copies of the entire
Bible, and more easily multiplied and transmitted or
carried from place to place.

The most recent additions to the store of manuscript
material for the text of the Old Testament have been
derived from Egypt, whence have been obtained a few
papyrus fragments of equal or greater age than any
of the Greek uncials, and older by many centuries than
the oldest Hebrew manuscript, 1 Their interest and
importance, therefore, are exceptionally great. Nor is
there any reason to doubt of the possibility, perhaps
even the probability, that the sands of Egypt yet hold
in store further treasures of the same or similar
character. Most of the manuscripts hitherto recovered
consist unfortunately of little more than a few verses.
The following are the most noticeable and important :

(1) A few leaves of a papyrus codex are preserved
at Strassburg, containing 2 Kings xv. 36-xvi. 3. The
date of the manuscript is believed to be the fourth
century. To the following century is ascribed a vellum
fragment in the same collection, with the text of
Gen. xxv. 19-22, xxvi. 3-4. 2

(2) From the collection of papyrus manuscripts at
Heidelberg, Dr. Deissniann published, in 1905, Die
Septuaginta- Papyri und andere altchristliche Texte,
containing of the Greek Old Testament Zech. iv. 6-
Mal. iv. 5, in a form of text which the editor regards
as Hesychian. Small fragments of vellum manuscripts

1 Except the fragmentary Hebrew papyrus, supra, p. 57 ff.

2 Egypt. Arch. Report, 1902-3, p. 40.

GREEK MANUSCRIPTS 209

are given in the same publication, with a few words
from Ex. xv. and 1 Sam. ii. 1

(3) A Greek papyrus codex at Berlin, ascribed to
the fourth century, contains " about two-thirds of the
book of Genesis," but the text is as yet (1908) un-
published. " This, which must be the longest Greek
Biblical papyrus known, should be of great value for
textual purposes, on account of the almost total absence
of this book from the Vatican and Sinaitic codices." 2
The former has lost the whole of Genesis as far as
ch. xlvi. 28; the latter contains only chs. xxiii. 19
xxiv. 46, and is defective even in these. The British
Museum manuscript also, the Codex Alexandrinus, is
imperfect in its text of the same book.

Portions also of the Greek text, consisting in most
instances of a few words or verses merely, have been
published within the last few years in the numerous
volumes of papyri texts from Egypt. See, for example,
for the Psalms, A. Eahlfs, Septuaginta-Studien, 2 Heft,
Gottingen, 1907, p. 14ff. ; also G. A. Deissmann, art.
" Papyri " in Encycl. Biblica, vol. iii. ; F. G. Kenyon,
Palceography of Greek Papyri, Oxford, 1899, p. 131 f.;
and the annual Archaeological Reports of the Egypt Ex-
ploration Fund, which chronicle the literary discoveries
and publications of the year.

(4) A papyrus Psalter at Leipzig contains Pss.
xxx. lv., defective at the beginning ; the manuscript is

1 Egypt. Arch. Report, 1904-5, p. 60 f., 1906-7, p. 67; A. S. Hunt
in Report of the Year's Work in Classical Studies, 1906, p. 120.
* F. G. Kenyon in Egypt. Arch. Report, 1906-7, p. 57.

210 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

assigned to the fourth century. A leaf of another
papyrus roll with the text, fragmentary and mutilated,
of Ps. cxviii. 17-63, in the same collection, is believed
to date from the third century. 1

(5) Un texte de la Gentse, published in 1904 by
Prof. Nicole, consists of a leaf of vellum of the fifth
century with the text of Gen. xxxvii. 3 f., 9, and is of
interest for the various readings which it has preserved,
which are said to differ from the known texts of Aquila,
Synmiachus, and the LXX ; Theodotion's translation of
these verses is not extant. 2

(6) Portions of Gen. xiv.-xxvii. were published by
Messrs. Grenfell & Hunt in Oxyrliynclius Papyri,
vol. iv., London, 1904, from a papyrus codex, the
text being assigned by the editors on palteographical
grounds to " the earlier rather than the later part of
the (third) century." The verses preserved are chs.
xiv. 21-23, xv. 5-9, xix. 32-xx. 11, xxiv. 28-47,
xxvii. 32-33, 40, 41. The manuscript is thus very
fragmentary, but possesses great value, not only on
account of its age, but because of the deficient character
of the extant witnesses to the text of Genesis. Cp. the
Berlin papyrus, noted above, No. 3.

Further, Old Testament manuscripts are reported
as recovered from Akhniim, which are as yet un-
published, but they are attributed by their discoverer
to the 4th- 6th centuries. No details are yet (1908)
available ; one manuscript, however, contains Deut.
and Joshua, and a second the Psalter. " The MSS

1 Egypt. Arch. Report, 1903-4, p. 64. - 11. p. 72.

HHAAAIA AIA0HKH

KATA TOYS EBAOMHKONTA

A I AY0ENTIA25*
HYSTOY F AKPOY A P X I E> E n S

EKAQ0EISA

VETVS TESTAME;:TVM

I V X T A S E P T V A G I N i A .

I- X A V C T O R I T A T E
S I X T I V. T O N T. MAX-

E D I T V M

R O M A E.

ogi apiualraccilci Zauaetu, M. D- 3L X X X V.U-

"*-

SIXTINE SEPTUAGINT, TITLE-PAGE.

EDITIONS OF THE GREEK TEXT 211

are somewhat larger than the famous Alexandrine
texts in the British Museum, but . . . collation . . .
shows that many words and even passages wanting
in the latter are still preserved in the new texts." l

Editions of the Septuagint. The Greek text of the
Old Testament appeared first in a printed form in four
great primary editions, two of which represented with
varying fidelity the two chief uncial manuscripts then
known, while two by a curious and wholly undesigned
coincidence seern to reflect in general the text re-
spectively of Lucian and Hesychius. In chronological
order the editions are as follows :

(1) The Compluteiisian Polyglott, 6 vols. folio, printed
under the direction of Cardinal Xinienes at the
University of Alcala in Spain, and bearing dates
1514-1517. As is well known the work was not
actually published until 1520, three years after the
death of the Cardinal, owing to the delay in obtaining
the necessary sanction of the Pope, Leo x. The first
four volumes contain the text of the Old Testament
printed in three columns, Hebrew, Latin, and Greek ;
to the Latin is assigned the place of honour in the
centre, and the other two texts are each provided with
a Latin translation. Among the Greek manuscripts
used by the Cardinal were two minuscules from the
Vatican Library, which he obtained on loan, Nos. 330

1 Times, February 18th, 1908. The recently published volume of
the Oxyrk. Papyri, pt. vi., 1908, contains the text, much broken and
mutilated, of Pss. Ixviii. 30-37, Ixx. 3-8, and of Amos ii. 6-12; the
former manuscript is ascribed by the editors to the late fourth or fifth
century, the latter to the sixth.

212 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

and 346. The former of these presents a text which
has been recognised as predominantly Lucianic in
type ; and it was this which the Cardinal followed in
the main in the Greek column of his Polyglott. The
text of this edition was reprinted in the Antwerp
Polyglott, and other later editions.

Separate books of the Old Testament had been
issued in Greek before the date of the Complutensian.
The earliest was a diglot Psalter, Greek and Latin,
printed at Milan in the autumn of 1481 A.D. ; and
this was followed by other editions of the Psalms at
Venice, Genoa, and elsewhere. Editions also of Isaiah and
Jeremiah appeared in separate form in the first half of
the sixteenth century. But of the rest of the Old Testa-
ment nothing apparently was printed in Greek anterior
to the publication of Cardinal Ximenes' Polyglott. 1

(2) The Aldine edition of the Old Testament in
Greek, in one volume, folio, Venice, 1518, was the first
complete edition published of the Greek text, although
the actual printing of the Complutensian had been finished
more than six months previously. There seems to be no
clear indication of the manuscripts used by the editor,
although three in St. Mark's Library at Venice are
pointed out by Dr. Swete as containing traces of his
text.

(3) The third great edition of the Greek text is the
Roman or Sixtine of the year 1587 A.D., which was
based upon the Vatican manuscript B, and claimed to
reproduce its text. The volume bore upon its title-

1 See Swete, ch. vi. ; E. Nestle, HDB, vol. iii. p. 439 f.

A A M O 1

y, A HJcronymusa/feueratjOranesIntcrp^eres tranftulilte,
$w. 8 [J&T TV t/4A- JA. j^&in-rav^

_ JitiO' \JaSoawffffiff * OTF38tT8j7,
lijlibrinonlu bent ;, quod tamcoab

\ I ' 'iwt/nrsv ffirveitfmv *'?* !>)* % t ArtflW. II [It, &ST TO Li ifl/'.A'lAi 4 *1 "^ I/ VA'|W*tW f" Djofrf

voy ntJ dlXQ ''it i(&'f&' ftttfo Ot/X *SSfn' Ct *w tit at/, Ki -yw* L^ w " '" "^^r-* J - " JJ -/ \ /

^^1 **^"^i' l 7 ^Vr^ / v 'V i \ ^T Ait. & r\joiPat'Zl3'Wtil?.lVI.cdl tIO "OsS 5 <MBIlrVf& 'TtP H&Ttiftt fitit

i&^p&Wt^TtUtti,l&t ! P v '&frp&* ^ ?*C , [TOrWf/stf^UE.JA 11 ) 1 '^ 1100 ^^"^^ 1 !" ^" 1 ^ 02 ^

wsawptV'X&G* 71 ** ^^?* 01 *^^ jytm r&w omnibus interpreribuspofirum effe fcribitS. Hierony-

^^aW^pao* Wt7 T^^^-tf^s-wTa ^f B ^/^i^'*lT'i?^^^^11^ 1 ^

i ' "** *%Q. v Vf ? tJ ' -- A<* auTMiA^Jw.QiotfisT/acofS^r. a* n TX*H, u *>*""* <***

yftgpr p* i c*&7no* T G^^aAjCiy) cu^y.^ OtflOW > WV^^f f -nMf ' 'wTn7( c ^ rffirtOT</waf atzr-

OtfjtfSTMrff j^/^47act*^/3oc a^ot/a3i^$ ir? , ^3^ TO*. J Affirms t S.HicronymuJ txx. Inter pretes no a^fcri-

>
fffff^ti Vsro srfi

on OT) (f WJIBJ Av^ovftau
OXO^C ^ou . 3n c*0w pv-
',^ c TT/ Staf ftou Xa^'- B
t< cuW> *
K & Ttwr-

uiJ 1 . IH'.
I tvgptoi ifnyniZrtu (Kfcat Sou , SOTTW <

| ttiu "nt^f$ . o -Jic; ] ti? 1 , 1 . au,''i r ttO( n 0dC{ CU/TB > _^ J flfg^tirOi atn^wurttt c/o^of Stou > Tis-'if^^ of

T10 W!^wTOH'l*rrOT. oTiTif 3fos7jXii/Ttw ^ 7 jj x^^a- iq&ytT&t px<5 i^"^ yuJCTiD^a^-

ow i <st/ TIC -5*05 TthJw ^D^ioy Bjtt^J ; o 7io o y&h<j jfct>7i9. A ot/ffi^t>/a) o^J^ ^sy>t 3 Sf ovy

fi&yvtf&lf JUt <$JJJtLfA4f > Jfpty f 3lTD CtfjU&flQf TuMJ gitSltOVTcLt tit ff-tetfyW'?!, ( 7^-Tgff T<^(^ ^^W C-^ffA

U'j'J. tfJf.TttPTlCOf'lyJOf TVtt "ffDotZt ^WW C &'0'^ ^1^ Q *5c^TCH OJUTf) ) f(tfj $ 75f /TtPje{5 TJ? S**Wf-

f Ct 1 ) w J0f ^^7 TCt t/^BAfit '5^*1' f4A.alo&&&&* X^*" l^>fi^ TSC DB/^pt^ O&Tfi .PC* Ttfllhtfi) i3n^} TO OTIM-

fltu

-xtuJitia ffova^^Ottf'e A-6 ; TtAff^j * *W H "fSf" I* j^ra/7?f^^ etoTV ?5 i'xgpi/TK o-J^aw&i/, ^54 3i/x <*

R^ _.. _! -' ... -ftJV.'t- ^~ -'... MnJj*/*. */".. A v oyjSflTtTfOT^^Wi^ad'ri?. OyOjU.4$7^

-af/u*

{ afawt a/awj, T
tfla. V)n 70 !U/
A-5o nfuam)w ,
isf . w >& o cfi>
u/7a , c* raf (puA^OTMx aunt af

P a'A-

KVft

Tiq 5 /

<) tra'ifi* > o p u-

^^^i^^^w'^ijiKwI/p^/^ E ryruT^l'l^notatumTrtc'llad, e "^^" 1 j i i a

V/\ ~rr .v / -a ' \ Pliitcno Arabico.&m Aerhicpico.^tat>eir aoaiijs 11-

'^ / ( j> ^ / ^^ bris Grjrci*. L^t^ **.**"'" ' * 'J t ' , ,

TZ^ QfO/i(QrT^ OOU "\lAAw. -<W4 ^t fajULt&}f TCt? J7WTMidE 'T* *>ji.a-wiap IS Kfli 1* ^^ y'^gaag^itf? ffiu^ftifKff'V T^pJWAsy OW

EJ TT/ -n'Ag? -v|aA/wt TO JiewV. I'.

*^w-' iww-] Aquila. in svfamt avt*
. Sfmnuchus. ani/^-nt iuii stra^im
'

inuS'Cum iiiflo iuftificaberis. Alij
f Jip. S. Be?f

[veu itJif u-3 *ic O rxci Ubri hib :n t, S. amen

SIXTINE SEPTUAGINT, PSS. XVII. (XVIII.) 22-XIX. 6 (XX. 5).

EDITIONS OF THE GREEK TEXT 21-?

page, printed in Greek and Latin, the authorisation of
Pope Sixtus v. ; but its representation of B was
insufficient and has been found to be inaccurate in
many respects. It has been superseded, moreover, by
the authorised and faithful reprint of B's text issued
at Borne in six volumes, 1869-81. The text of B is
related, how closely it is perhaps as yet hardly possible to
determine, to that of Hesychius, and the manuscript itself
seems to have originated in Egypt. The Sixtine edition
represents, therefore, in part at least and imperfectly, the
Hesychian type, as the Complutensian the Lucian. The
Boman text also has been more frequently reprinted
than any other, and the majority of later editors have
accepted it with more or less of closeness and fidelity.

(4) The latest of the four is the Oxford edition of
J. E. Grabe, published in four folio volumes at Oxford
during the years 1707-20. The text was based upon
A, the Codex Alexandrinus of the British Museum ;
but other manuscripts were collated, use was made of
" ancient writers, and especially of the Hexaplar edition
of Origen," and deficiencies in A were supplied from
these sources, the inserted passages being obelised or
otherwise marked as in the original edition of Onsen.

Thus the Oxford edition reproduces in general the text
of A, as the Ptomau that of B ; and the type of text
which it presents reflects the "mixed" character of
the manuscript upon which it is based, although
inclining more to the Hexaplar and Origen than to
either of his two great rivals. The text was edited
with great care, and furnished with valuable and

214 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

learned prolegomena ; but although reproduced not
infrequently in England, it has never rivalled in
popularity or circulation the Sixtine. 1

A century passed before any further great advance
was made in the editing of the Greek text, or the
provision of the necessary critical apparatus. In the
years 1798 to 1827, however, there was published at
the University Press, Oxford, in five volumes, the great
edition of R. Holmes and J. Parson? 3 , bearing the title,
Vetus Testamentum Grcecum cum Variis Lectionibus,
containing a reprint of the Sixtine text, and a rich
store of critical material in the form of textual notes
and collations of manuscripts. Not only were very
many manuscripts examined and collated, but the
readings of the three chief editions other than the
Sixtine were cited, the Latin, Egyptian, Arabic, and
other versions were compared, and reference was made
to the quotations of patristic writers. The initiation
of the work was due to E. Holmes, Dean of Winchester,
who, however, died in 1805, and the task was then
taken up and carried to completion by James Parsons.
The value of the edition lies in its wealth of notes
and manuscript readings. And although much has
been revised, and more careful collations made since
the publication of Holmes and Parsons' work, there is
much in it that is of permanent worth, not likely to
be soon superseded.

Comparatively early in the nineteenth century Dr.
A. F. Constantine Tischendorf, the great New Testament

1 Swete, I.e., p. 182 ff. ; Nestle, I.e.

E H O A O S.
* * K,> f W * * ???! ?T ^

" "' Efc W K, /Mft&, "*&' * ; "**' ffU ** Ax & f*i

TTLft ^ '> f> i^^ 17 *' wtb ^*' *^ "' e " v> ^^ ' sr ' !T ""^ 4V
**** ' K;i " o ''' ! * Mavric ^^ T " 3UB>> rar ' r!rw a:; " rc "

, .. e-, 84,8;, :o, 108, ti8,nS, i!9, 130,
j": ''".' AH. Cc. Me. l* 5 . i. j!J. Cbyf- .
<t L)T. Al. i, pnt prim, >:h < , Mi i>'.=A
V. 1 f, e<] i i e! Vb*> i. 47i- AS.
. Am. i. Sqt. Am. EJ. a'mxj.Wrt.]
i, 1!,1M. itaq. m. fa.] Jtiit iBi win.
JW. >. iQpt. Am. Ed. oirlKi?,!?. 9K>ll>f
P>aio ; i- prwciiTit jnicDiDtn Anb. v

XK v. A -:,; -ara'^so * Cvr. A). I. pate piinu, 514.

.- \ _ O?:TU%. .Anr i. diiqne. Aim. Ed. ti /-

l^v ,:'- t r.n>n; K-ftoI ) a ) 5 K^. o, 56, 118. Coolf L Cyr.

AUc. !*>!',:, ;"i wrtunt,qC3fi twos w iu Cfco, Arm. i.

Ei*tAn,.M ti ]!- , 5 . - A ri , 4 , ,6, ,;, m

. -.1 Aia. fu.AI.1 .,. UK*.] > M. Jl. i*

.--.J.ri. . |-]TI,. m,tf. !. ff,; i-; ?, s')

.^-, ,-.,

'-" '
->

'^ K. M.]. 5J .
>. AII-I... ,VW.)

oyiifaO yaro 19- f*a&mt Arab. j. /i,v,,vrt boat C
d "l^'- A. EJ. _ _ iWJ .GT* .o, icS. Cv, A!. ; :

XXIV. Em fl m Kv.] ;i. , j,r. Ara-i>. rA,
aliqui. Ami, Ed. ., si c.Vorj. KI I.T'V a r. K - v:i, V:i,
r,M6, i9, 5;, S9, 50, ;j, 5;, <;, (o, 64, ;i, 74, -;, : -,, ^ t.^
106, 116, 1:0, i;i, 1J4- Aid. Alex. Cut. NV. ,< ,U. Sc.
A. I. alliji:. .Im.EA jWA^l marjo sc^ ;8. .Afilkj.
xarii9i] x*i XJIT. VII, ag, 74, 84, io/j, 134. KSSJ'H'W?,)
Af,7S- A ** Cvr. AI. i, paitf Iccuiija, J : F t foi ut Vii. E'ita.
eii] ^ Armeni Ctxlkcs aiiquL Ami. E!. wai 'Aapi.*; j BJ! tj.

+ J(A$K fffl'J loS. -f- Tlw o^[> ^w fou 1 1) . ci >". >!Cl^ j ui

w.sp. lift, /tj <Ufl*H Arab. 3. fjja^HC. ww^a.] !?jC

<r^rf. ,3,. (W.^TW.x. ;. t.;. 3iJ.w .'';:,
56. Compl. Cyr. Al. !. c. ,te( tj ,ti.l.,J,,* Anl.. r. :.
^rajfa Copt. /tlW Anb. J. ra Sm J K-.p r 8.

15. j,,',] .cutnfqq . in curanuw 14. V s )j>.] n.

tag, i s> 19, 58, -i. V Jri] ,J u a M, ;a -1 r,i.
Ann. i. aliiqnt. Axm. EJ. St mareo X. rt lie in leita, U

5iasstft.-*ss j

?5?2sSsav ^n-jf
2T-^s:^?5S

r5 S.tS,^tf2

I. ,:,.

SUZnTi.'^!* i-- wT,^

*n..A n,'* ^ '^,; ! - "*''."..

g^-**--^ % ?i^ ^ Kfc

"II. ^.i^^jj;,...

5 . . . ~ TC. fl

^ W BCTM) ^ i ^<fl!) ^^ ;;._,

Sl^^i^^

" s " - * ,*"*) **rs ! '"'-* *" '

Ai .-. ''. o. tt , T"""' !. IM. i

I. K! i>*X. Kii.] , .; ;6. Ann. .. aKiqu-. Ami- " > '
e ' '!,,!. ?5- Kjfi >t Sn; i).. 10. 1 - M-">!
Ate. sJ . jo. rcvrtii) + 3r;i fcnll-*
s t'. Xi'ywv] rf J^;f Gcoru. ,v a'^-j'/ Ann. i. a^'J 11 ' ^^
Bd.

P^ 6, W laba ph, fanel alibi. Ki!fil ' >. ;
75- S".i ij>: r ^y] A ,V,t III. S,. MTCjfef)"
Cvr. Al. lv, 4jj, fed Vat. abbi plui ferasl. i> : *'*' .
L ?r. Al. i, JM, ; KaM ^ , s _ ttt v ,i. T, MP

HOLMES AND PARSONS' SEPTUAGINT, EX. XIX. 19-XX. 1.

EDITIONS OF THE GREEK TEXT 215

scholar and editor, had turned his attention to the
Old Testament; and had issued in 1820 an edition
of the Old Testament in Greek, which together with
a revised Sixtine text contained various readings
derived from the three chief uncial manuscripts then
known, the Alexandrian, Ephrsemi, and Frederico-
Augustauus, or the part then accessible of the manu-
script later known as the Codex Sinaiticus. Of
Tischendorf's text seven editions in all were published,
each of them furnished with additional critical
apparatus, as materials became more accessible. The
fifth edition appeared in 1875, after his death; the
sixth and seventh in 1880 and 1887 under the
editorship of Dr. E. Nestle, who contributed a supple-
mentary and more exact collation of N* and B, together
with a comparison of select readings of A and C.
These last two editions alone may be considered to
retain their value and importance at the present time. 1
For ordinary convenience as well as for general
critical purposes all these have been superseded by the
Cambridge manual edition of Dr. H. B. Swete, of which
the first volume appeared in 1887, the second in 1891,
the third and last in 1894. All three have been
reprinted. The full title is The Old Testament in
Greek according to the Septuagint, ed. by H. B. Swete,
D.D. The text follows the Vatican manuscript, where
this is extant. Its deficiencies and lacunce are supplied

1 Swete, p. 182 ff. ; Buhl, p. 134 ff. Complete lists of the various
editions of the Greek text will be found in the art. "Septuagint" in
HDB.

216 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

from one or another manuscript which is regarded as
furnishing the best available text in the passage
concerned. In every instance, however, the letter
denoting the manuscript is placed in the margin to
indicate the source from which the printed text is
derived. A select list of readings from the chief
uncial manuscripts is given at the foot of the page.
The Cambridge University Press has also initiated the
preparation of a larger edition of the Septuagint, which
is to contain the readings of all known uncials, of the
principal cursives, and of the chief Versions and
Fathers. The first part was published in 1906, with
the title, The Old Testament in Gh*eek, according to the
text of Codex Vaticanus, supplemented from other Uncial
Manuscripts, with a Critical Apparatus containing the
Variants of the chief Ancient Authorities for the Text
of the Septuagint, ed. by A. E. Brooke and N. M'Lean,
Cambridge, 1906; vol. i. the Octateuch ; Part i.
Genesis. The text, therefore, is the same as in the
smaller edition. But the critical notes will bring
together for comparison and study a mass of material
such as has never before been accumulated.

The remaining necessity for the study of the Septua-
gint has been supplied by the Oxford University Press
in the form of a complete Concordance to the Greek
versions of the books of the Old Testament, including
the Apocrypha. A large part of the material was
gathered together by the late Dr. Edwin Hatch, and
the work was carried to completion after his death
by Dr. H. A. Redpath, and finally published early in

LATIN VERSIONS 217

1897. The title is, A Concordance to the Septuagint
and the other Greek Versions of the Old Testament,
including the Apocryphal Books, by the late E. Hatch,
and H. A. Eedpath, Oxford, 1897.

In the printing of texts, therefore, and the provision
of the needful aids to the study of the Greek text, the
last quarter of a century has made great advance. In
hardly any department of Old Testament research and
criticism are the materials more abundant and accessible.
The problems involved, however, are of great difficulty
and complexity, and stable conclusions will not be
reached for many years to come.

3. LATIN VERSIONS.

The origin and early history of the Latin version
or versions of the Scriptures are involved in much
obscurity. That a Latin translation of the New
Testament, and of parts if not of the whole of the Old,
was in existence before the middle of the third century,
seems evident, and is hardly disputed. By whom,
however, the work of rendering the Greek text into
Latin was first undertaken, and in what part of the
Christian world it was carried to completion, are
subjects upon which a definite and final pronouncement
is not yet possible. It is generally agreed that the
Biblical quotations in the Latin writings of Cyprian,
the great African bishop (ilor. 250 A.D.), presuppose
on the whole a definite text or version, and are not in
general his own private or independent renderings of

2i8 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the Greek. This Latin text, therefore, was known and
circulated in the Christian Church of North Africa at
a date anterior to that of the oldest extant Greek
manuscript. It cannot, of course, be inferred either
that Africa was its original home, or that the text
which it assumes is earlier than that represented in the
Greek. The tradition of the great Greek uncials
carries us back to a time long before the date at which
they were actually written. And the text of the
Latin manuscripts themselves, even the earliest, has
become " mixed " with readings derived from the
Vulgate or other late Latin forms, and has been revised
in the light of the various Greek versions. In deter-
mining the primitive form of the Latin text, therefore,
the quotations of the Fathers are of paramount import-
ance. Much has been already done in the direction
of grouping and classifying the manuscripts, and
determining their relation to one another and to the
underlying Greek texts. The greater part of the work,
however, has reference to the translation and text of
the New Testament, and comparatively little progress
has been made in the elucidation of the problems that
concern the Old.

It is usual to apply the term Old Latin to all Latin
texts, from whatever source derived, which antedate the
time and labours of the Church Father Jerome (346-
420 A.D.). His work upon the revision and retrans-
lation of the Latin Bible was so comprehensive and
all-important, that it constitutes a real dividing line,
and a new character, which on the whole exerted a

LATIN VERSIONS 219

unifying influence, was impressed upon the Latin
versions. The readings of Jerome, moreover, being
accepted and " authorised," found their way into all
Old Latin manuscripts, and by their presence there
have greatly complicated the task of classification
and arrangement. In his Introduction to the New
Testament in Gh'eeJc, Cambridge and London, 1881, Dr.
Hort investigated anew the mutual relations of the
Old Latin authorities, and postulated three groups
or families of manuscripts, to which he gave the names
of Afncau, European, and Italian respectively ; and
this distribution has been generally accepted. It is
not, however, implied that there existed three separate
and independent versions, made at different times and
under different auspices. The relation of the texts
underlying the several families is a difficult and
complicated question, still siib judice. It is hardly
likely that in any circumstances there were more
than two independent translations. And it is becoming
increasingly probable that the view is correct which
assumes the existence of only one, from which as
a basis the others were derived with more or less
extensive alterations and revisions. Whether this
assumed original was produced at Eome, or within
the circle of the influence of the North African Church,
or at some other centre of early Christian life and
activity, is altogether uncertain. The argument in
favour of an African origin, drawn from supposed
" Africanisms," by which term are in the Latin text
understood words or forms believed to be characteristic

220 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of the idiom of North Africa, has been weakened if not
altogether destroyed by the proof that many of these
forms are met with also in other parts of the Latin-
speaking world. The possibility, moreover, must not
be overlooked of separate books or groups of books
having been translated for the first time under different
circumstances, and in different districts. This is more
likely to have been true of the Old than of the New
Testament. The rendering of the whole was not
necessarily contemporaneous.

The passages from the Church Fathers which have
the most intimate bearing on the question of the
origin of the Old Latin version or versions, and the
variety of the texts, are the oft-quoted words of Jerome
and Augustine. The former is apparently thinking
rather of corruptions in the Latin manuscripts, than of
distinct and separate translations ; these variations he
insists are most numerous, and can only be remedied
by a return to the Greek original. Epist. ad
Damasum : " Me cogis . . . ut post exemplaria
scripturarum toto orbe dispersa quasi quidani arbiter
sedeam, et quia inter se variant qua sint ilia qua?
cum graeca consentiant veritate decernam. ... Si
enim latinis exemplaribus fides est adhibenda re-
spondeant quibus ; tot sunt enim paene quot codices.
Sin autem veritas est qurerenda de pluribus, cur non
ad G-rsecain originem revertentes ea quse . . . aut
addita suut aut rnutata corrigimus ? " Prcef. in Lib.
Paralip. : " Cum pro varietate regionum diversa ferantur
exemplaria, et germana ilia autiquaque translatio corrupta

LATIN VERSIONS 221

sit atque violata, nostri arbitrii putas e pluribus judicare
quid verum sit." He is referring, of course, more
immediately to the New Testament; but his words
would hold good, mutatis mutandis, of the Old. His
exemplaria are not independent versions of the Greek,
but Latin copies or manuscripts, greatly corrupted in
different parts of the world.

The language of Augustine is undoubtedly more
definite, and is generally interpreted as expressing his
own view of the position of the Scriptures in the
Christian Churches of his day ; the view that there did
in fact exist among them many Latin translations of
independent origin and varying worth. It may be
doubted, however, whether he really intended to pro-
nounce any judgement on the origin or independence
of the Latin texts, of the existence and variety of
which he was aware. 1 De Doct. Christ, ii. 11: " Qui
Scripturas ex Hebnea lingua in Groecam verterunt
numerari possunt, Latini autem interpretes nullo rnodo.
Ut enim cuiquam primis fidei temporibus in manus
venit codex Graecus, et aliquantulum facultatis sibi
utriusque linguae habere videbatur, ausus est inter-
pretari." In the same chapter he refers to the great
variety of Latin interpreters, " Latinorum interpretum
infinita varietas " ; and ib. ii. 22: "In ipsis autem
iuterpretationibus Itala ceteris proeferatur, nam est
verborum teuacior cum perspicuitate sentential." The
meaning and implication of the words of the last

1 Cp. Th. Zahn, Gesch. d. NT. Kanons, i. p. 33, quoted m HDB
vol. iii. p. 48 b .

222 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

quotation have been widely discussed ; and doubt has
been thrown, although without sufficient reason, on the
reading Itala. Bentley, for example, proposed ilia, 1
others itsitata, etc. The expression suggested to
Dr. Hort his " Italian " family or group of manuscripts ;
but a distinct Italian school or version seems highly
improbable. In an essay published in 1896, 2
F. C. Burkitt, following a suggestion of E. Eeuss, 3
argues strongly that by " Itala " Augustine refers
simply to the Vulgate text, or Jerome's translation
made direct from the original Hebrew or Greek, of
which at the time of the writing of the De Doctrind
Christiand (397 A.D.) there had been published besides
the whole of the New Testament, the books of the
Prophets Major and Minor, Samuel and Kings, Ezra
and Nehemiah ; and that by " interpretations " here ho
intends to contrast Jerome's rendering with that of the
earlier version made in the case of the Old Testament
from the Septuagint text, and to express his preference
for the former. It is pointed out that Augustine
never in any other passage uses the expression " Itala,"
or suggests a separate Italian translation ; while he does
elsewhere refer in terms of praise to Jerome's work,
and employs the very word " interpretari " with respect
to his rendering of " the Gospel." * The phrase was at

1 Bentleii Critica Sacra, ed. A. A. Ellis, Camb. 1862, p. 158 ; cp.
the late Dr. Alexander in Kitto's Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature,
vol. ii. p. 785 f.

2 "Old Latin and the Itala " in Texts and Studies, vol. iv., Cambridge.

3 Gesch. d. Schr. d. NT., Eng. trans., Edin. 1884, p. 469.

4 De Civ. Dei, xviii. 43 : "Non defucrit temporibus nostris presbyter

LATIN VERSIONS 223

least so understood by Isidore, bishop of Seville at the
beginning of the seventh century, who adapts and
combines the very words of Augustine. Etym. vi. 4 :
" Presbyter quoque Hieronynius triurn Hnguarum peritus
ex Hebrseo in Latinum eloquium Scripturas convertit
eloquenterque confudit, cujus interpretatio rnerito ceteris
antefertur ; nam est et verborum tenacior et perspi-
cuitate sententiae clarior, atque utpote a Christiano
interprete verior." l

The determination of the precise meaning of Augus-
tine's language is perhaps more important for the
criticism of the New than of the Old Testament. It
is clear that he regarded Jerome's translation from the
Hebrew as preferable to the Old Latin renderings of
the Septuagint ; and his words offer no real support to
a theory of several original and independent versions.
The whole subject needs and will receive further eluci-
dation from more exact and comprehensive study.' 2

Hiei'onymus, homo doctissimus, et omnium trium Hnguarum peritus,
qui non ex Gneco sed ex Hebiveo in Latinum eloquium easdem
Scripturas converterit. " Epist. civ. 6 ad Hieronymum : " Proinde
lion parvas Deo gratias agimus de opere tuo quod Evangelium ex Grneco
interpretatus es, quia pane in omnibus nulla offensio sit."

1 Cp. the passages quoted in the preceding note, and De Doct.
Christ, ii. 22, sup. p. 221.

- In an article on the origin of the Old Latin text in the Journal of
Theological Studies, vol. vii. (1906), the Rev. E. S. Buchanan expressed
the view that Augustine's language (supra, p. 221) referred merely to
interpolation, on a large scale, of the original version: "variations in
the Old Latin MSS are due to the fact that the African text soon became
more or less assimilated to the prevailing Greek text, especially in the
case of those MSS which reached Italy," p. 250. In other words, the
varieties of texts or groups of manuscripts do not represent original
differences of rendering, but successive attempts at revision, designed to

224 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

This ancient Latin translation has been preserved
only in part. The extant manuscripts and authorities
are fairly numerous : nearly all, however, are incom-
plete, consisting of a few chapters or portions of books.
A complete list is given in the article in HDB, to
which reference has already been made (vol. iii. pp. 49 ff.,
58 ff.). Of the Hexateuch considerable fragments
exist, in four chief manuscripts, which probably repre-
sent recensions of one and the same original translation.
Of the historical books, Kuth and Esther have been
preserved entire, the latter being a free representation
and condensation of the canonical Esther, rather than
a translation ; from Judges, Samuel, and Kings, only
portions are known. The Psalter is complete in manu-
scripts at Verona and Paris, and portions or extracts
are found elsewhere. Of the other poetical books, Job
and Proverbs, little more than a few verses have been
preserved ; and the same is true of Ecclesiastes and
The Song of Solomon. Fragments exist of the Prophets,
in all cases inconsiderable, the book of Obadiah alone,
apparently, being unrepresented, though several others
are extant only in the quotations of the Speculum (c. 8th
cent.). It may be doubted whether complete transla-
tions of all the prophetical books in the Old Latin were
ever made. The Old Latin text of several of the
Apocryphal books also has been conserved entire.

The Old Latin Bible was derived from the Septua-

bring the current Latin text into closer conformity with the accepted
model of the Greek. It is probable that, historically, this represents in
general terms the course of development and differentiation of the 01J
Latin types.

LATIN VERSIONS 225

gint, and represented the text and canon known to and
accepted by the Greek-speaking world. The labours of
Jerome, therefore (346420 A.D.), who recalled to the
Christian Church the true position and authority of
the original Hebrew, were even more decisive and im-
portant for the Old Testament than for the New. His
earliest efforts, however, were confined to a simple
revision of the existing Latin version, the aim of which
was to restore the text to its original form, and to free
it from the corruptions which had been introduced in
the course of time. The work was undertaken at the
request of Damasus, Pope of Home, and the revised
edition of the Psalter was issued at Kome in 383 A.D.
This Psalterium Romanum or Roman Psalter was by
the command of the Pope introduced into the Roman
liturgy ; and when it was superseded for ordinary use,
in the sixteenth century, under Pius V., by the Vulgate
text, it was retained in the Church of St. Peter's, where
it is still read. Elsewhere also, in the Doge's Chapel
at Venice, this first revision of Jerome is said to have
maintained its ground until the beginning of the nine-
teenth century ; and even to the present day it is used
in the services of the cathedral church of Milan.
Pope Damasus died towards the close of the following
year, and in 385 Jerome left Rome, and after some
years' wandering in Palestine and Egypt, settled at
Bethlehem in the year 389.

The Roman Psalter was the first Old Latin text to
appear in print. This was in the edition of the Psalms
published, in five parallel columns, by J. Faber in 1509,

226 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

three of the columns containing the three Hieronymian
versions, the fourth a text of Augustine derived from
his commentary on the Psalms, and the fifth the Galli-
can text revised and corrected by Faber himself after
the Hebrew. Fifty years later the Koman text was
printed in Milan, and was afterwards there edited or
revised, and furnished with critical marks to indicate
agreement or otherwise with the Greek original and
the Gallicau version. The text itself, however, was
unaltered. 1

During his stay at Ciesarea Jerome had become
acquainted with Origen's great work, the Hexapla, and
had made use of it there to revise the Psalter in
the light of the other Greek versions, and with the
help of the diacritical marks in Origen's text. This
revision work had become necessary in consequence of
the corruptions that had found their way into the
Roman Psalter. The new edition became known as
Psalterium Gallicanum owing to the popularity which
it enjoyed in Gaul. The date of its completion was
in or about the year 387. This Gallican Psalter
became finally the accepted and authorised version of
the Psalms for Eoman Catholic use, and was printed in
all editions of the Vulgate Bible, to the exclusion on the
one hand of the Roman edition, and on the other of
Jerome's later rendering from the Hebrew. 2 Other books

1 A. Ralilfs, Der Text des Septuaginta-Psalters, Gottingen, 1907,
pp. 25 ff., 91 if.

2 For the Gallican Psalter see also especially A. Rahlfs, op. cit.
pp. 33 f., Ill ff. Dr. Rahlfs' conclusion is that the Gallican is not an
absolutely faithful reproduction of Origen's Hexaplaric text, the earlier

LATIN VERSIONS 227

of the Old Testament were revised or retranslated from
the Greek by Jerome about the same time ; but whether
his work covered the whole of the Old Testament is un-
certain. Besides the Psalter, only the book of Job is
extant, and prefaces to the books of Chronicles, Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes and Canticles, from which it would seem that
these four at least underwent revision. Expressions also
which Jerome himself uses in his writings suggest that
he completed all the canonical books of the Old Testa-
ment. 1 If so, the survey and correction can have been
little more than cursory and incomplete.

With the year 390 A.D. Jerome's great life-work
began with the translation of the entire Old Testament
from the original Hebrew. For such a task he was pre-
eminently well equipped. At Bethlehem he had been
perfecting his knowledge of Hebrew, the study of which
he had commenced in Syria fifteen years before, under
the instruction of a Jew who, it is said, used to come
to him by night for fear of his own compatriots. The
work was undertaken at the request of friends, as his
earliest revision had been carried out for Pope Damasus.
Samuel and Kings were the first books to be translated,
and with them was issued a preface to the whole, the
so-called Prologus Galeatus, the "helmeted" prologue,
in which Jerome expounded and defended his method

phraseology of the Roman Psalter having been sometimes allowed by
Jerome to stand where no difference of meaning was involved, and
changes having been introduced also from the Hebrew and the other
columns of the Hexaplar edition: "variations from the Roman text
maybe more confidently regarded as hexaplaric than agreements."
1 See H. J. White in HDB iv. p. 875 a .

228 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

and aims. Within the next two or three years there
followed Job, Psalms, and the Prophets ; then Esdras
and Chronicles; in A.D. 398, Proverbs, Eeclesiastes, and
Canticles, and some years later the Pentateuch ; and
the translation of the canonical books of the Old Testa-
ment was completed, 404-5 A.D., with Joshua, Judges,
Euth, and Esther. The apocryphal parts of Daniel and
Esther, and the books of Tobit and Judith were issued
at a later date. 1

It was only gradually that the new version won its
way to general acceptance. In the outlying and more
remote parts of Christendom the older version long
maintained its ground by the side of the new, and
everywhere there was more or less intermingling of
the texts, as the " mixed " condition of the manuscripts
testifies. Moreover, Jerome's rendering would seem
to have circulated at first to a great extent in separate
books or groups of books ; and thus a church or district
might find itself reading the new translation in a part
of the Old or New Testament, while in another its text
was the unrevised Old Latin, as indeed seems to have
been the case in Africa in Augustine's day. 2 Only in
the reading of the familiar Psalter were the forces of
conservatism altogether too strong ; and the Gallican
version never yielded place in the authorised Latin text
of the Bible to the later rendering from the Hebrew.

1 For details aud the relevant extracts from Jerome's Prefaces aud
Epistles, see the article of H. J. White referred to above. Jerome him-
self wrote a letter to Augustine, which is extant, vindicating his own
action.

1 F. C. Burkitt, Old Latin mid Itula, p. 57 f.

EDITIONS OF THE LATIN TEXT 229

With the exception named, the process of change
or supersession was complete about the end of the
sixth or beginning of the seventh century ; and the
Latin Bible of the Church came to be known, quite
naturally, as Editio Vulgata, the " common " or
" vulgate " edition. The term itself was not new,
but its connotation had become changed. In and
before Jerome's time it had been employed to denote
the Greek text of the Seventy, and this is the meaning
which the name always conveys in his writings. The
older usage lingered long, and did not finally die out
in ecclesiastical literature until the Middle Ages.

The extent to which the manuscript texts became
corrupted varied greatly in different parts of the
Christian world. Variation and corruption were at
their worst apparently in Spain and the south-west
of Europe ; while the British Church, in a compara-
tively isolated and independent position, preserved a
type of text more pure and faithful to its standard.
Hence the Codex Amiatinus, of British origin, is justly
regarded both in the Old and New Testaments as one
of the best representatives of the primitive Vulgate
text. The manuscript, now preserved in the Mediceau
Library at Florence, was copied in one of the monas-
teries of Northumberland from an Italian examplar ;
and was carried as a gift to the Pope at Rome by
Ceolfric, abbot of Jarrow and Wearrnouth, at the
beginning of the eighth century. The original codex
from which the Amiatinus was derived seems to have
been one of those brought originally from Rome by

2 3 o INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Benedict, founder of the monasteries named, who died
in 684, and was succeeded by Ceolfric his disciple and
companion on his journeyings. Thus the date of the
manuscript is fixed within very narrow limits. Ceolfric
himself died before he reached Italy on his last journey ;
but his intentions with regard to the codex were carried
out by his followers, who deposited it in the Church
of St. Peter's at the capital. 1

Many attempts were made, by expurgation and
revision, to restore the Latin text to its original
condition. The most important and influential was
that undertaken in 797 A.D., under the authority of
Charlemagne, by Alcuin (Ealhwine), a native of York,
where he was born in 735 A.D. Alcuin had become
tutor to the Emperor, and at this time was abbot of
St. Martin at Tours. The aim of his work was by
collation of the best Latin manuscripts to regain the
earliest form of the text, and thus to remove the
errors due to time and the process of transcription.
The revision was completed in 801 A.D., and by the
close of that year a copy of the Bible thus restored
was placed in the hands of the Emperor. A similar,
but private and unauthorised attempt at revision was
made a few years subsequently by Theowulf, bishop of
Orleans, but his efforts met with even less success than
Alcuin's had done ; and the confusion of the texts
was increased by the numerous Correctoria, collections

1 See Tischendorf, Codex Amiatimis, Leipzig, 1854 ; and especially
H. J. White, "The Codex Amiatinus and its Birthplace" in Studia
Biblica, ii. p. 273 ff., and HDB iv. p. 878, with the references there
given.

EDITIONS OF THE LATIN TEXT 2-51

of errors and variations, which were compiled and
circulated in different districts, and misapplied by
uncritical writers and copyists.

With the invention of printing a great impulse was
given to the production of copies of the Latin Bible.
The Vulgate was naturally one of the earliest books
to which the new process was applied. Two Latin
Psalters were issued at Mainz in 1457 and 1459,
and the great Mazarin Bible of Gutenberg was com-
pleted in 1456. Before the century closed more than
a hundred editions of the Latin text had been published,
and the need for a generally accepted type or standard
became a matter of still greater urgency than before.
As far as the Koman Catholic Church was concerned
this was supplied by the decree of the Council of
Trent (1546), which declared the vulgata editio to
be the accepted and authorised text for the Church's
use, and anathematised those who rejected even the
apocryphal works contained therein. 1 Among the
Protestant communities, however, the decree naturally
carried no weight ; and the action of the Council in
seeking to impose a definite and obligatory form of

1 " Hsec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio quse longo tot sseculorum usu
in ipsa ecclesia probata est, in publicis lectionibus disputationibus
prsedicationibus et expositionibus pro authentica habeatur . . . posthac
Scriptura Sacra potissimum vero hcec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio
quam emendatissime imprimatur." Sess. iv. Can. 2. The Council
seems, therefore, to have contemplated the preparation of an official
and standard edition, to which the term "authentic" was to apply.
No steps, however, appear ever to have been taken by the Council
in its collective capacity to carry the implied intention into effect.
The term "authentica" is explained to mean "accurate," as well as
authorised or official.

232 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

text, intensified the opposition between the two
divisions of the Christian Church. 1

Official action was taken by Pope Sixtus v. (1585
90), himself a man of considerable ability and learning,
who summoned and appointed a number of scholars
to prepare a revised Latin text by comparison of
existing manuscripts and editions, corrected and guided
by reference to the original languages. The result
appeared in the so-called Sixtine edition, published at
Koine early in the year 1590, and declared by an
accompanying Papal Bull to be the true Vulgate text
intended by the Council of Trent ; which, therefore,
was to be received by the entire Christian Church,
and regarded as the final and absolute standard of
revealed truth, Divine and apostolic wrath being
invoked upon those who ventured to make any
alteration in it without the authority of the Pope
himself. The Sixtiue text was thus issued as the
" authorised version " (apostolica nobis a Domino
tradita auctoritate) of the Roman Catholic world,
" pro vera legitima authentica et indubitata, in
omnibus publicis privatisque disputationibus lectioni-
bus prtedicationibus et explanationibus." It was un-
fortunately soon found to be defective and full of
errors ; and two years only after the death of Sixtus,
in 1592, Pope Clement vin. recalled the original
Sixtine, and issued a new and revised edition, which
is said to differ from its predecessor in more than
three thousand passages. This, the first of several

1 See Buhl, Canon, pp. 64, 1(34 ; HDB \v. p. 880.

EDITIONS OF THE LATIN TEXT 233

Clementine editions, retained the name of Sixtus on
the title-page. 1 A second edition was put forth in
the following year, with corrections ; a third, with lists
of errata, etc., indices correctorii, in 1598, and this
last is said doubtfully to present the best and most
reliable text. All three editions, however, differ from
one another. In its final form the Clementine is the
text received and used in the Eoman Catholic Church.
A convenient critical edition was published in the year
1873 by Heyse and Tischendorf with a collation of
the Codex Amiatinus. 2 More recently the text has
been edited by Dr. Hetzenauer, with the variant read-
ings of the Sixtine and three Clementine editions. 3

The late Pope Leo xm. appointed a " Commission
for Biblical Studies " to consider the question of the
need and possibility of issuing a revised edition of the
Vulgate under the auspices of Borne itself. After his
death in 1903 the appointment of the Commission
was confirmed by his successor Pius x., and a formal
decree has been issued, authorising the revision, and
entrusting the work to chosen scholars and members of

1 Biblia Sacra /'/'/<//<< Edition-is Kixti Quinti . . . jussu recognila
alquc cdita. The name of Clement did not appear until twelve years
later, in 1604 A.r>.

2 Biblia Sacra Latino, Veteris Teslamcnti Hieronymo Interprets ex
anliquissima Auctoritate in Stichos Descripta, ed. Th. Heyse and
Const, de Tischendorf, Leipzig, 1873. The most faithful reprint of
the Clementine Vulgate is the edition of C. Vercellone, Biblia Sacra
Vulgatce Editionis, Rome, 1861, See Buhl, p. 165ff., and the literature
in HDB iv.. p. 889 f.

3 Biblia Sacra Vulgatce Editionis : ex ipsis Exemplaribus Vatican-is
inter se atijttccum Indice Errorurn corrigendorum collatis critics edidit P.
Michael Hetzenautr . . . cumapfirobationcecclcsia-stica. . . Oemponte,lQQQ.

234 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the Benedictine Order. This will be the first occasion
since the time of Pope Clement vin. on which a
revision of the standard text has been sanctioned and
carried out by Roman Catholic authority. 1

The order of the books in the Latin Bible is in
general the same as that of the Septuagint, but the
manuscripts and lists vary considerably. The books
of Samuel and Kings are four books of Kings (Regum),
not Kingdoms (Sept. Baa-iXetwv) ; in the Poetical
Books, Job precedes Psalms, the Vulgate order
departing in this respect both from the Greek and the
Hebrew ; and in the Prophets, Jerome restored the
order of the Jewish Canon, placing the Major Prophets
first and inserting Daniel, followed by the twelve Minor
in the order of the Hebrew. The position and succes-
sion of the apocryphal books differ also from the Greek.
Omitting these, the order of the Latin is the same as
that adopted in our English Bibles. Full details and
lists will be found in Berger, op. cit., App. I. p. 331 ff.

A very large number of manuscripts of the Vulgate
have been preserved in a more or less complete state,
the text often interpolated and confused with elements
derived from the Old Latin. The majority are
naturally of the New Testament. A selected list,
" mainly of the New Testament," with brief descriptions,
is given by H. J. White in HDB iv. p. 886 ff.; more
fully by S. Berger, op. cit., App. VI. p. 374 ff.

1 For the later history of the Vulgate text in the various countries
of Europe, see especially S. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate pendant les
premiers Siecles du moyen Age, Paris, 1893.

EGYPTIAN VERSIONS 235

4. EGYPTIAN VERSIONS.

The importance of the Egyptian translations of the
Bible has been increasingly recognised within recent
years. Their age and independence give them a place
among the foremost witnesses to the sacred text ; their
value for critical and comparative purposes can hardly
be exaggerated, and further knowledge is likely to lead
to results of the highest significance and interest. Un-
fortunately, no complete edition of the parts of the Old
Testament that are extant has been published, and the
texts must be sought, scattered in various periodicals
and monographs. It is greatly to be desired that some
competent scholar would undertake the collection and
publication of the texts of all the books and fragments
of books that are known to exist in the various dialects.
Much has been done in the New Testament, but
comparatively little in the Old.

The name Coptic, which has been given to the
language in which these Biblical texts and other
Christian literary documents of Egypt are written, is
a corruption of the Greek AlyinrTios, Egyptian, and
was introduced to describe the form which the ancient
demotic assumed when written in Greek characters
and employed for Christian and ecclesiastical purposes.
Coptic is therefore the lineal descendant, through the
demotic, of the ancient hieratic and hieroglyphic
language of Egypt. The supersession of the demotic
alphabet in writing by the simpler and more adaptable
Greek is usually and rightly associated with the

236 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

introduction of Christianity, and the desire to avoid
the suggestion of idolatry and idolatrous worship which
many of the old symbols conveyed. It seems probable
that earlier attempts had in fact been made to secure
the adoption of the Greek alphabetic type before the
influence of Christianity had made itself felt. It was
due to the latter, however, that the change was
completely effected. Six or seven signs were borrowed
or retained from the demotic, to express sounds for
which the Greek alphabet provided no equivalent.
With the Muharninadan conquest of Egypt in the
seventh century, the Coptic began to decay and die
out before the Arabic, the more flexible and expressive
language of the conquerors ; and for many centuries it
has been obsolete, heard only in the ritual and services
of the Church. A brief but admirable history of
Coptic literature has recently been published by Dr. J.
Leipoldt. 1

The translation of the Bible into Coptic seems
certainly to have been completed by the middle of
the fourth century, and the beginnings of the work
must be carried back to a date earlier by at least fifty
or sixty years. Manuscripts-, or parts of manuscripts
exist, which are ascribed on good grounds to this
century. And the early existence of a Coptic national
Church in Upper Egypt is certified by the numerous
Egyptian names which are found in the rolls of the
martyrs in the great persecutions of the third century

1 Geschichte der Koptischen Litlcratur, von Privatdozent Dr. Johannes
Leipoldt, Leipzig, 1907.

EGYPTIAN VERSIONS 237

of our era. Of the origin and early history of the
Church nothing is known. It would seem natural to
suppose that it was established by missionaries from
Alexandria. There is no evidence, however, that such
was the case, and the history of the Biblical translations
does not suggest any direct initial connection with
Lower Egypt. 1

The chief centre of literary interest and work in
Egypt in the second half of the fourth and the
beginning of the fifth centuries of our era was at the
monastery of the " White Cloister " on the border of
the desert near Achmim, of which Shenoute, the
greatest and most influential of Coptic ecclesiastical
writers, was the second president. He is said to have
lived to the age of over a hundred years, and to have
died in or about 450 A.D. It was probably under his
fostering care that the earliest version of the Bible in
Egyptian received its final form. 2 This version was in
Sahidic " upper," the dialect of Upper Egypt, formerly
termed " Thebaic," because spoken in the district of
Thebes, which dialect for some reason, probably con-
nected with its foundation and the native country of
its first inmates, was used in the " White Cloister " near
Achmim in the time of Shenoute. Here also within
the next few years much extra-canonical literature was
translated from the Greek, among the earliest being

1 Cp. Forbes Robiusou, "Egyptian Versions" in HDB i. p. 671.

2 On Shenoute compare the monograph of J. Leipoldt, Schenute und
die Enstehung des national agyptisches Christentums, Leipzig, 1903 ;
W. E. Crum iu Journ. Theol. Studies, 1904, p. 552 If. ; R. T. Smith,
in Diet, Chr. Bioyr., s.v. Senuti.

238 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the Pistis Sophia, the translation of which is supposed
to be contemporary with the later work upon the
Bible itself. 1 The Sahidic text, as might be expected,
is closely related to the Greek of Hesychius, 2 and
frequently takes part with the Vatican and Sinaitic
manuscripts against a majority of the later written
texts and versions. In the Psalms at least, in the
judgement of A. Rahlfs, it presents a type of text
which is earlier than Origen. In the Old Testament
the version is throughout secondary, that is, it is
derived from the Septuagint, not the original Hebrew ;
and its value therefore consists especially in its witness
to the former before the text of the Seventy had
undergone revision at the hands of Origen. In the
book of Job, for example, the text is presented in some
Sahidic MSS in a briefer form, which is doubtfully
supposed to represent the primitive Septuagint, before
Origen supplemented it and brought it into conformity
with the Hebrew by means of additions derived from
the version of Theodotion. The earliest Sahidic manu-
scripts are ascribed to the fourth century.

No complete collection of the extant portions of the
Sahidic Old Testament has been published. New
fragments come to light from time to time in Egypt.
The best collections as yet available are those of G.
Maspero, in vol. vi. of M6moires publics par le
Membres de la Mission Archeologique Frangaise au

1 Kenyon, however (art. "Papyri" in HDB, vol. v. p. 357), claims
an earlier date for the "two books of Jeu," aiid a second Gnostic work,
in the Bruce papyrus at Oxford.

2 Supra, pp. 205, 213.

EGYPTIAN VERSIONS 239

Cairt, Paris, 1892 ; A. Ciasca, 2 vols., Home, 1885-89 ;
and P. de Lagarde at Gottingen, in 1883 ; also by
Amelineau, Erman, al. As far as the text of the
Pentateuch is concerned this was supplemented with
brief fragments deciphered from the Paris collection
by A. E. Brooke, and published in Journ. Theol. Studies,
1907, p. 67 ff. In the year 1898, Dr. E. A. Wallis
Budge published the Sahidic Psalms from a unique
papyrus manuscript in the British Museum, 1 which
had been found concealed in the ground beneath the
ruins of an ancient Coptic monastery in Upper Egypt.
Its text was further examined by E. Brightman in
Journ. Theol. Studies, 1901, p. 275, and shown to have
features in common with the Old Latin and the
Bohairic. Other fragments of the Psalms have been
printed, or reprinted, at Vienna by Wessely ; parts
also of the Prophets, the Wisdom Literature, Apocrypha,
etc., in various publications. Compare F. Eobinson
in HDB i. p. 669, and the annual " Eeports of the
Eg. Explor. Fund," passim. A list of important Coptic
papyri is given by F. G. Kenyon, I.e., the majority of
which are in the Sahidic dialect.

In central Egypt and in the oases on the west of
the Nile the Egyptian language appears to have been
spoken in numerous dialects, probably closely related
to one another, which have sometimes been classed
together under the title of "Middle Egyptian." The
most important from the point of view of literary
survivals were those of the district of Achmim, in
1 The earliest Known Coptic Psalter, London, 1898.

240 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

which the " White Cloister " lay, and of the Fayyuin.
The former was of equal antiquity, although not so
wide-spread or influential as the Sahidic, and ultimately
gave way before it. The extant literature in the
Achmimic dialect is entirely ecclesiastical, consisting,
besides the Biblical fragments of translations, of
apocryphal Acts, Apokalypses, etc. Whether the
version of the Bible in this dialect was ever complete
is uncertain ; probably it was not. Fragments have
been preserved of the Pentateuch, Isaiah, and the
Minor Prophets, and have been published by G.
Maspero, U. Bouriant, al. Of the New Testament
only a few verses are known. 1 A later form of the
Middle Egyptian was that which had its centre in the
Fayyum. Here, on the one hand, it lay more secluded
from the influence of the dialects to the north and
south, in the Delta and the valley of the Nile, and in
some respects therefore seems to have preserved a
purer type than they ; and, on the other, it was nearer
to Alexandria, and exposed to a greater degree than
the southern districts to the invasion of the Greek
spirit and literature. Extant fragments of Lamenta-
tions, Baruch, and the Ep. of Jeremiah, perhaps also
parts of Isaiah, are usually ascribed to this dialect ; of
non-canonical documents, an apocalypse of Moses, etc.
Their date is supposed to be in the fifth or sixth cen-
tury. By some scholars an attempt is made to dis-

1 Forbes Robinson in HDB i. p. 669 f. In the list of papyri, ib.
vol. v. p. 356 f., only two are cited as containing an Achmimic text,
one at St. Petersburg and the other divided between the Libraries of
Paris and Berlin. Neither is Biblical.

EGYPTIAN VERSIONS 241

tinguisli a two-fold form of the Fayyumic, the so-called
Fayyumic proper and the Memphitic. But the dis-
tinctions drawn are very uncertain, and the inferences
precarious. 1 Later the dialect or dialects and speech of
Fayyuni were superseded in their turn by the advance
of the Sahidic.

The latest in time of the Egyptian dialects was the
Bohairic, the speech of the Western Delta, especially of
the city of Alexandria and the surrounding district. It
was, perhaps, owing to the predominance of Alexandria
during the Eoman and Byzantine periods that the
Bohairic became the official language of the Christian
Church, and finally took possession of the whole land,
to the exclusion of earlier forms. At the present day
it is in Bohairic that the lessons of the calendar are
read in the churches. How far, however, it was ever
a popular or spoken tongue throughout the country
may be doubted. Its position in Alexandria and the
neighbourhood would render it peculiarly open to
the rivalry of the Greek ; and by the time that it
made its way south up the valley of the Nile, the
Muslim invasion was nigh at hand, and with it the
Arabic gradually superseded every other language.
Modern Copts speak Arabic. Coptic proper, or Bohairic
literature, consisted almost entirely of translations from
the Greek, or was derived at second-hand from the
Sahidic. The only exceptions that can lay any claim
to originality are a small number of Christian hymns.

The earliest monument of this dialect is the trans-

1 F. Robinson, I.e. ; J. Leipoldt, p. 155 f.
16

242 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

lation of the Bible, which has been preserved practically
entire, dating probably from the beginning or middle of
the seventh century. The extant Bohairic manuscripts,
however, are all comparatively late, none being earlier
than the thirteenth century ; and papyrus texts written
in this dialect are exceedingly rare, the only one re-
corded in Kenyon's list being fragments of a Psalter
of the tenth century, which are preserved partly in the
British Museum and partly at Manchester in the John
Rylands Library.

No complete edition of the Old Testament in
Bohairic has been published. The Pentateuch, Major
and Minor Prophets, Psalms and Job have appeared, but
of the other books only portions. The editio princeps
of the Pentateuch was that of D. Wilkins in a small
quarto volume, Quinque Libri Moysis Prophetce, London,
1731 ; the text was re-edited by P. de Lagarde, with
collation of a fourteenth century manuscript from the
library of Henry Tattarn, Der Pentateuch Kopti&cli,
Leipzig, 1867. The Prophets and Job were published,
the former with Latin translations, by H. Tattam :
Duodecim Prophetarum Minorum Libri, Oxford, 1836 ;
Ancient Coptic Version of the Book of Job the Just,
translated into English, and edited, London, 1846:
Prophetce Majores, Oxford, 1852, vol. i. containing Isa.
Jer. and Lament., vol. ii. Ezek. and Dan. Editions of the
Psalms appeared at Eome in 1744, edited by E. Tuki,
at Berlin in 1837, edited by J. L. Ideler, and later
by M. G. Schwartze, Psalterium in Dialectum Copticce
Meinphiticam translation, Leipzig, 1843, and by

ETHIOPIC VERSION 243

Lagarde, Psalterii Versio Memphitica, Gottingen, 1875.
The edition of Schwartze was based on that of his two
predecessors, with collations of three manuscripts from
the Koyal Library at Berlin. An imperfect manuscript
from the Turin collection has also been edited by Fr.
Eossi (Di Alcuni Manuscritti Copti, Turin, 1893). The
Book of Proverbs was edited by A. Bsciai at Rome in
1886.

5. ETHIOPIC VEKSION.

The origin and derivation of the Ethiopic version of
the Old Testament has been the subject of considerable
discussion. Dating from the fifth or early sixth century
of our era, it would be naturally expected to represent the
Greek text of the Septuagiut, not the Massoretic Hebrew.
It contains, however, readings which agree with the latter
against the LXX ; and in some, at least, of the manu-
scripts there are found transliterations of Hebrew words
which the Greek, on the other hand, renders in the usual
way. These features have led some writers to postulate for
the Ethiopic text in its earliest form an immediate origin
from the Hebrew, later revisions being made to conform
more precisely to the Greek. The balance of evidence,
however, is in favour of translation from the latter text,
the variations on the side of the Hebrew being due to the
use of the Hexapla of Origen. This is the view adopted,
after discussion, by Dr. R. H. Charles, who writes : l

' The Ethiopic version of the Old Testament is generally a very
faithful and verbal translation of the Greek. It frequently repro-

1 HDB, vol. i. p. 792.

244 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

duces the very order of the words. Ou the other hand, it is not
possible to explain many of its readings by any extant Greek text,
and over against the LXX it frequently attests a purer text."

It is possible that further examination may lead to
a modification of this verdict. The general conclusion,
however, as to the primary dependence of the Ethiopia
text upon a Greek original is not likely to be set aside.
If the view is correct which finds the Lucianic form of
the Greek text at the basis of the Ethiopic, it will be
a confirmation of the belief that the evangelisation of
Abyssinia was effected by Syrian monks, who then
probably entered the country from the southern part
of the Arabian peninsula, Hebrew or Aramaic influence
is said to show itself in the version mainly in two
directions, in the forms of proper names, and in the
adoption of foreign loan-words to express theological con-
ceptions, for which the native language was insufficient.

The language in which the version is made, known
as Ge'ez or Ethiopic, is the native tongue of an ancient
Hiniyaritic colony settled in the central mountainous
region of the modern Abyssinia. There were two main
branches of settlement, a northern and a southern.
The former is represented linguistically by the Ge'ez,
the dialect of the province of Tigre, around the ancient
capital Aksum, the modern descendant of which is
known as Tigrina or Tigrai. Older than the latter is
the nearly related Tig-re" dialect on the north, spoken
in the Italian colony of Erythraea. While the language
of the great southern province of Amhara, known as
Amdrind or Aniharic, shows most unlikeness to the

ETHIOPIC VERSION 245

original and primitive Ge'sz. 1 There is a separate ver-
sion of the Bible in Amharic or Abyssinian, of modern
origin, an edition of which was published by the British
and Foreign Bible Society in 1840. The translation
of the Bible is the oldest monument of Ethiopic litera-
ture, with the exception of a few inscriptions dating
from the early centuries of our era. Of the numerous
manuscripts, however, which are preserved in the
British Museum and other public libraries, none are
really ancient, and all seem to have undergone a pro-
cess of revision and correction. The oldest known docu-
ment in Ge'ez is a manuscript of the Octateuch, Gen.
to Euth, dating from the end of the thirteenth century.

That the translation itself, however, can hardly have
been later than the fifth century, is attested by a re-
ference in a homily of John Chrysostom (347407 A.D.),
which seems to imply a knowledge of an Ethiopic
version ; z and more certainly by the facts of the
establishment and spread of Christianity, which was
introduced into Abyssinia as early as the time of Con-
stantine. The version, moreover, was accepted and used
by the Jewish Falashas, who are said by tradition to be
descendants of immigrants in the time of King Solomon.

Following on an attempted revision of the Ethiopic
Gospels early in the fourteenth century, similar essays

1 See E. Littmami, Gfeschichte der Athiopischen Litteratur, Leipzig,
1907, p. 191 f. ; W. Wright, Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Lan-
fjuages, Cambridge, 1890, p. 29.

2 Quoted by Charles, I.e. p. 792 note: 2upoi /ecu Kiyvimoi. /ecu 'IvSol
Ka.1 Tiepcrai Kal AWioTres . . . et's rr\v O.VT&V /xeTa/faXoi/res yXurrav TO, Trapa
TOVTOV doyfj.a.ra

246 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

were made in the direction of a new text of parts, at
least, of the Old Testament. Probably the work was
carried out on the basis of Arabic versions, and especi-
ally of Saadiah's translation made from the Massoretic
Hebrew at the beginning of the eleventh century. 1
Others have supposed that a Falasha Jew resident in
Egypt or Palestine was the agent in the revision. The
manuscript evidence seems to prove that the text was
revised a second time, two or three centuries later, at
a time, it is supposed, of religious revival in the Abys-
sinian Church. The work was executed, however, with
varying degrees of thoroughness in the different books. 2
The Ethiopic Bible follows the order and canon of
the Greek, but adds a number of apocryphal works, the
books of Enoch, Jubilees, etc. The books of Maccabees
alone are derived not from the original Greek, but at
second-hand through a Latin translation. The total
number of the books is forty-six, including those of
apocryphal and pseudepigraphic origin, which vary in
the different lists. 3 The Octateuch, Gen. to Euth in-
clusive, was published by A. Dillmann in 1853, Samuel
and Kings, Chron. Esdras and Esther, in two parts,
1861-71 ; a volume also of eight apocryphal books in
1894 ; and the text of Joel in Merx' edition, Die Pro-
phetic des Joels, 1879. J. Ludolf edited the Psalms with
a Latin translation and notes, critical and explanatory,
at Frankfort in 1701 ; and J. Bachmann has published
the text of Isaiah, Obad., Mai., and Lamentations. The

1 Infra, p. 247 f. 2 See Littmann, ut sup. p. 223 if.

3 Charles, p. 791.

ARABIC VERSIONS 247

best editions of the books of Eiioch and Jubilees are
those of Dr. E. H. Charles, Oxford, 1 8 9 3 and 1 8 9 4. The
Ethiopic text of the Old Testament is also printed in
Bishop Brian Walton's Polyglott Bible, London, 1657.

6. ARABIC VERSIONS.

The Arabic versions are of comparatively little im-
portance for the criticism of the text of the Old
Testament, but they are remarkable for the variety
of the sources from which they have been derived.
The Greek, Syriac, and Coptic have all been laid
under contribution, as well as the original Hebrew
and the Samaritan text of the Pentateuch. Arabic
Biblical manuscripts, in many cases, present, therefore,
a curious mixture of texts, the original basis being
supplemented or overlaid with materials borrowed from
other and independent translations. The intermingling
is perhaps greater in the case of the New Testament
than of the Old. None of the renderings are of great
age. Although Christianity was established in Arabia
at an early date, and Christian communities existed both
in the north and south as early as the third and fourth
centuries, the Scriptures seem to have been read and
all ecclesiastical offices performed in Syriac ; and the
beginnings of a Christian Arabic literature are believed
to be not earlier than the seventh century of our era.
The Biblical texts are still in large part unpublished.

The translation of the books of the Old Testament
direct from the Hebrew was chiefly the work of Rabbi
Saadiah (mjjo), an Egyptian Jew, born in the Fayyum

248 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

in 892 A.D. ; a scholar of great learning and repute,
who became head of the rabbinical school at Sura in
928, and died there fourteen years later. His version
of the Scriptures won the approval of the Jews them-
selves, and was publicly read in the synagogues by the
side of the Hebrew text, in place of the Aramaic
Targurn. The Pentateuch of Saadiah was published at
Constantinople in 1546, and subsequently in the Paris
and London Polyglotts ; editions of Isaiah (1790-91),
Canticles (1882), Proverbs chs. i.-ix. (1888), and
Job (1889) have also been printed. The text of
Joshua in the Paris Polyglott is derived from the
Hebrew, but is supposed not to be the work of Saadiah.
Later renderings from the Hebrew exist in manuscript.
Portions also of an Arabic translation of the Samaritan
Pentateuch were published at Ley den in 1803.

The complete text of the Arabic Bible was first
issued in the great Paris Polyglott, 1628-45 A.D.,
vols. vi. to ix. of which contained an Arabic version of
the whole Old Testament, exclusive of the Apocrypha,
with a Latin translation. The text, which was repro-
duced in the London Polyglott of 1657, was based
upon an Egyptian manuscript ascribed to the sixteenth
century, being ultimately derived from three distinct
sources, the Hexateuch from the Massoretic Hebrew
(see above), the prophetical books with Psalms and
Proverbs from the LXX, Judges to Chronicles and Job
from the Peshitta. The Polyglott text of Job and
Proverbs was reprinted by P. de Lagarde in an edition
of the three poetical books issued at Gottiugen in 1876,

ARMENIAN VERSION 249

which also contained a version of Job from the Coptic,
three versions of the Psalms from the Greek, and
the so-called Psalterium Quzhayyensis, a reprint of a
Carshunl 1 text of the Psalter, published originally
at a Maronite convent in the Wady Qiizhayya in
1C 10. Arabic translations made from the Coptic of
other Old Testament books are known in manuscript, 2

7. ARMENIAN VERSION.

The Armenian Version of the Old Testament also is
derived from the Septuagint, and is attributed to Mesrop,
who invented or introduced the Armenian alphabet of
thirty-six characters at the close of the fourth century of
our era. He is said to have translated the books of the
Old Testament at Edessa into Armenian with the help of
the Patriarch Sahak (Isaac) the Great and others, be-
ginning with Proverbs in or about the year 397, and to
have employed for the purpose manuscripts brought from
Egypt and Constantinople as well as those of his native
town. Although the basis of the translation is the Greek
LXX, the text has been revised and supplemented in
the light both of the Syriac Peschitta and of the
original Hebrew ; and those who thus corrected the
text and supplied omissions worked by preference,
especially in the books of the Prophets, from the latter
rather than the former. 3 It is probable that the varia-

1 i.e. Arabic written in the Syriac character.

2 See F. C. Burkitt, art. " Arabic Versions " in HDB, vol. i. p. 136 ff.

3 F. C. Conybeare in HDB i. p. 152.

250 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

tiorts are to be explained by the use of the Hexapla of
Origen. Instances also have been pointed out of the
influence of renderings of Symmachus and Theodotion.

The Christian Church in Armenia was founded,
according to tradition, by the Apostle Bartholomew
on his wa}^ to India. Christianity was certainly
introduced into the country at an early date, and
was adopted as the official religion of the State, as a
result of the life and preaching of the great Armenian
missionary Gregory, surnarned the Illuminator, the
first bishop of Armenia, in the second half of the third
century. For a time, however, at least it is probable,
that, as was the case in Arabia, 1 Syriac continued to be
in use as the ecclesiastical language, the more so as
Gregory himself had spent his early years in Palestine.
The movement, therefore, which Mesrop initiated was
an attempt to give to his fellow-countrymen a more
faithful rendering of the Scriptures in their native
tongue, and to substitute a native education and culture
for the Syriac. Scholars conversant with Armenian
praise the translation for its faithfulness to the original,
combined with a smoothness and idiomatic character
that give it a high place in the list of competent and
successful versions.

The Canon of the Armenian Old Testament is the
same as that of the LXX ; but the order in which the
books appear in the manuscripts differs, the prophetical
books usually coming last. Additional apocryphal works
also are sometimes inserted, but these are not found

1 Supra, p. 247.

GEORGIAN AND GOTHIC VERSIONS 251

in the printed editions. The best text is that of
Zohrab, Venice, 1805. Later Armenian literature is
almost entirely theological, consisting in large part of
translations from the Greek and Syriac, made chiefly in
the fifth century, the golden age of activity and thought
in the Armenian Church. 1

8. GEOKGIAN VERSION.

Mesrop is also the reputed author of the Georgian
Version, another secondary translation from the Greek.
An edition of the text was published at Moscow in 1743,
but it is said to be defective and uncritical. Three prin-
cipal manuscripts of the Old Testament are known (1)
a papyrus Psalter in the monastery of St. Catherine in
the Sinaitic Peninsula, which is ascribed to the seventh
or eighth century ; (2) a manuscript of the Bible with
the date 974 A.D., complete with the exception of parts of
the Pentateuch, in the Iberian monastery on Mt. Athos ;
(3) a manuscript of the Major and Minor Prophets
at Jerusalem, assigned to the eleventh century. 2

9. GOTHIC VERSION.

The Gothic Version owes its origin to the zeal and
scholarship of Bishop Ulfilas, the first missionary to the

1 F. N. Finch, GescMchtc der ArmeniscJier Litteratur, Leipzig, 1907, p.
82 ff. ; F. C. Conybeare, I.e. The view stated above, that the Armenian
rendering is primarily from the Greek, is that of Conybeare, supported
by the evidence of quoted passages, and appears to be the most probable
and satisfactory, though it is not universal!} 7 accepted ; see his article,
p. 151 b and note, and Finch, pp. 83 ad fin., 84.

HDB, vol. iv. p. 861.

252 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Goths, in the fourth century of our era. He is credited
with the invention of the Gothic alphabet, superseding
the ancient runes ; and is said to have translated all
the hooks of the Old and New Testaments except
Kings, in Moesia, whither he had been driven about
the year 347 from his see of Constantinople by an
outbreak of persecution. According to the tradition,
the books of Kings were omitted from the version
lest the history of Israelite wars should inflame the
fierce passions of the Goths. Ulfilas died in 381, and
his work thus forms the oldest literature extant in a
Germanic language.

A doubt has been expressed as to the correctness
of the tradition which ascribes to Ulfilas himself a
translation of the entire Old Testament, on the ground
that the character and style of the parts preserved
are so diverse that they cannot have proceeded from
one and the same author. The extant fragments,
however, are so small that no sure judgement is
possible. The language also of Jerome's letter to the
Gothic elders Sunnias and Fretela about the year 403
has been supposed to imply that they were engaged
at that time in rendering the Psalms into Gothic.
H. Eahlfs, however, has shown that the difficulty which
they referred to Jerome, and upon which he wrote a
reply, concerned discrepancies which they had found
between the KOLVIJ, the ordinary Greek text with which
they were familiar, and Jerome's Gallican Psalter, which
represented the Hexapla text of Origen ; and that the
I], or pre-Origenistic text thus referred to, was

GOTHIC VERSION 253

practically identical with the recension later known as
that of Lucian. 1 There was therefore no question of
the preparation of a new translation ; but possibly, as
has been suggested, of a revised or critical text of a
version already existing, which they desired to bring
into harmony with the best available standard.

Of the Gothic version of the Old Testament very
little has been preserved. A few verses from Gen. v.
and Ps. lii. are contained in a manuscript of the ninth
century at Vienna ; parts of Nehemiah chs. v. vii. 2 in a
manuscript in the Ambrosian Library at Milan. A
few quotations from the Old Testament are found in the
parts of the New Testament that are extant, verses
from the remaining books of the Pentateuch, from
Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, etc. They are printed in
order, e.g., in Massmarm's edition. The text agrees
with Lucian's recension, though not altogether con-
sistently. Editions have been published by Stamm
and Heyne, Ulfilas? Paderboru, 1896; Bernhardt,
Vulfila oder der Gotiscke JBibel, Halle, 1875; H. F.
Massmanu, Ulfilas die Heiliyen Schriften alien und neuen
Bundes in Gothischer Sprache, Stuttgart, 1857. 3

1 See Ralilfs, Der Text des Scptuaginta- Psalters, pp. 112, 170 f. ; aii'l
cp. J. Miihlow, Zur Frayc nach der Gotischen Psalmen-iJbersetzuny, Kiel,
1904.

" So apparently ; other accounts of the contents of the manuscript
give Ezra ii. 8-42 for Neh. vii. 13-47 ; see LI. J. M. Bebb in HDB,
vol. iv. p. 862 and note, quoting from Kaufmann.

3 See also Dr. G. T. Stokes in Diet. C'hr. Biogr., s.v. Ulfilas ; Bebb
in HDB, vol. iv. p. 861 ff.

CHAPTER VI.

THE PENTATEUCH, AND ITS LITERARY
CRITICISM.

nnHE problems that suggest themselves, and the
questions that arise in connection with a study
of the form and contents of the books of the Old
Testament, and especially of those which occupy the
first place in the order of the Canon, are essentially
literary and historical. That they present other
aspects, and may be criticised from other points of
view, is of course true. They are, none of them,
without value for devotion, for education, for training
of the mind and solace of the heart. Their worth in
these respects may and does greatly vary, even as the
moral teaching they convey, and the lessons of righteous-
ness and fair dealing which they inculcate are of widely
different character, and may seem to imply an ethical
standard that alternates between somewhat broad limits.
Such could hardly fail to be the case with books of
diverse authorship, composed under diverse conditions,
and separated from one another by long intervals of
time. The marvel is not that there should be variety
whether of ethical or of doctrinal standpoint, but that

254

LITERARY CRITICISM 255

so large a measure of unity should have been impressed
upon materials of so original and miscellaneous a char-
acter, that the ordinary reader is seldom if ever conscious
either of incongruity or of anachronism. That this im-
pression is not the result of mere carelessness or inat-
tention, further study amply confirms. The books of the
Old Testament present each their peculiar difficulties,
problems that tax the highest competence and judgement
of the scholar. They are not, however, those of essential
incongruity or opposition due to variety of doctrinal
content, such as would subsist, for instance, between a
pantheistic and a deistic view of the universe.

The literary and historical aspect, however, of these
problems, whether of authorship, of reliability, or of
permanent moral worth, underlies all, and presents
itself first for consideration. The Old Testament is
literature before it is sacred literature. It must there-
fore be judged by literary canons, and subjected to
tests which are based primarily upon literary dis-
tinctions, and the rules which experience has proved
to hold good of the literary output of human intelli-
gence and thought. That it has also been the Bible
of many generations of men, their solace in trouble,
their reliance and guide in times of difficulty, does not
exempt it from the processes of criticism, or place it
above and beyond the control of reasonable question
and test. If it is sacred, inspired, it has nothing to
fear from such examination, but everything to gain.
And the more penetrating and searching the examina-
tion, provided it be well balanced and sober, the

256 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

greater the permanent advantage to the course of
truth. Historical and literary criticism therefore takes
precedence of all other ; and although criticism from
other points of view need not wait to begin its work
until history and the canons of literature have said
their last word on the composition and nature of the
Old Testament books, else would it have long to
wait, yet these will always have to take account first
of the other, to base their conclusions thereupon, and
if they ignore it or set it aside they will be constantly
liable to go astray.

The fact must not be overlooked also that for so
many centuries the writings of the Old Testament were
subject to ordinary human conditions as regards trans-
mission, reproduction, and the accurate preservation of
the text. The minute and watchful care which the Jews
of later ages lavished on their sacred books could not
provide a remedy for the errors and losses of earlier
times. No collection of books has been so anxiously
and jealously guarded against corruption as the Old
Testament from the period when the Jews, its
custodians, awoke to a consciousness of the precious-
ness of the written heritage with which they had been
entrusted. But neither before nor after this time,
whether in the calamities and persecutions and exiles
of their early history or in the more tranquil later
years, was a perpetual miracle wrought to secure the
written word from error, misunderstanding,- corruption,
or the countless liabilities to mistake which beset all
records handed down by word of mouth or the pen

LITERARY CRITICISM 257

of the writer. The accuracy and security of the
printing-press have rendered it less easy to realise the
insecurity of all documents that depended for their
safe transmission upon the fidelity of human hand or
eye. Engraved upon stone, or metal, or clay, they
were comparatively secure. The Old Testament
writings, it must be borne in mind, enjoyed none of
these safeguards. To a certain extent, no doubt,
the sacred character of the texts would lead those
engaged in copying them to exercise greater diligence
and care than would be felt to be necessary for
documents of profane literature. The variety of
readings in the manuscripts of the New Testament
may perhaps be cited as evidence that such care did
not go very far, or effect very much. The eye and
hand of man, however, has never yet succeeded in
transmitting any considerable text with absolute
accuracy for any prolonged period of time ; the most
heedful and anxious copyist sometimes fails ; and the
Old Testament records, during the long time that
elapsed before the art of printing came to their aid,
formed no exception to the general rule.

It is a curious and interesting fact, not without
its bearing on the genuineness of the Old Testament
records, that among early peoples, and especially in
the East, oral transmission appears to have been much
more certain in its action and trustworthy than
written. The faculty of memory is so little cultivated
and so unreliable among ourselves, and in Europe and
the West generally, that its capabilities are hardly

258 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

realised, or credit given to its trained and disciplined
powers. The Vedic Hymns, the most ancient literature
of India, are a standing witness to its ability and faith-
fulness in safeguarding a literary trust. The ancient
poetry of Greece and Arabia, probably of China and
the East generally, might be cited as testimony on the
same side. And the folk-lore and traditions of most
peoples owe their preservation to the fidelity and
accuracy of the memoriter powers. Written documents
may be lost, ruined by old age or neglect, or purposely
destroyed ; but where for any reason, whether of
necessity or choice, absolute reliance has been placed
upon the memory for the security of a literary
tradition, there it would seem that the human faculty
has responded to the call made upon it, and has
assured the safe preservation and transmission, by
word of mouth, even for very extended periods, of
that material in which it was interested. If the
" schools of the prophets " in Israel were, as seems
probable, like the ancient Vedic dahlias, schools for
the conservation and study of the text of the sacred
law, there is no a priori reason why this should not
have been handed down in unimpaired integrity through
a long succession of teachers and students of the ancient
lore. Jewish tradition which asserts this of later times
may well be true also to the facts of its earlier history.
And in any case the claim thus advanced is not lightly
to be set aside.

When every consideration, however, has been taken
into account, it must be recognised that the Hebrew

PRESERVATION OF THE LITERATURE 259

literature preserved to us in the Old Testament is but
a small fragment of that which must once have existed
in oral or written form. Within the Old Testament
itself references are found to chronicles, songs, collec-
tions apparently of tradition and folk-lore, proverbs,
and other utterances and records which must in them-
selves have formed no inconsiderable body of more or
less formal literature. It is not to be supposed that
the few prophets, whose words have been preserved
to our own day, were the only men who spoke to their
fellow-countrymen in the name of the Lord. It is
abundantly evident that there were Hebrew historians,
promulgators also of law, codifiers of usage and rule
and statute, whose work has to a large extent perished.
The passage of time has been little if at all more kindly
or generous with regard to Hebrew writings than to
those of any other people who cultivated and valued
their heritage of wisdom from their fathers. We read
the fragmentary records that time and trouble have
spared. Over how much more oblivion has spread
her veil it is only possible dimly to conjecture.

TITLE OF THE BOOKS. The name Pentateuch for the
five books of Moses is, of course, Greek, and is properly
an adjective, fj TrevraTev^o^, scil. (3i/3\o$, the book of five
parts or volumes. The word rev^o? denoted properly
and originally the vessel or box within which the
writing was preserved, and then came to be employed
for the written document itself. 1 When or by whom

1 See E. M. Thompson, Greek and Latin Palceography, 1893, p. 55 ; cp.
sup. p. 117 ft. In Buddhist and other temples in the East a reOx os r

260 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the name " Pentateuch " was first introduced is un-
certain. Origen uses the word ; but whether it was
his own coinage, or whether he merely adopted and
gave currency to a popular usage, seems to be doubtful.
The first six books of the Old Testament are often
referred to also as the Hexateucli, the work of six parts
or volumes, the justification for the designation being
found in the similarity of form and structure of the
book of Joshua to the narrative portions contained in
the preceding books. The term " Octateuch " has also
come into use as a collective name for the first eight
of the Old Testament books, and is employed, for
instance, as the title of the first volume of the larger
edition of the Septuagint now in course of publication
at the Cambridge University Press. To the Jews
themselves the books of Moses are always " the
Law," rninn, O r "the Book of the Law of Moses,"
ntro rnin "tap ; and the same designation is applied to
them by the writers in the New Testament.

The chief passages are as follows : John i. 17, the law was
given (8ia Mwvtmoy) through Moses ; who in the Law wrote of
Christ, ib. v. 45-47 ; Matt. viii. 4, the gift which Moses enjoined,
referring to Lev. xiv. 2, ||[| Mark i. 44, Luke v. 14; Mark vii. 10,
Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother, and, He that
speaketh evil of father or mother let him utterly perish, Qava.
reAevi-arw, nov nto, Ex. xx. 12, xxi. 17, || Matt. xv. 4, 6 yap Qeos fiirev,
v.l. fverfiXaTo Xe'ycoi/, for God said, or commanded saying ; Luke
xx. 37, Moses testified eVi rtjs /3arov, from Ex. iii. 6, |||| Mark xii. 26,
Did ye not read eV rfj /3/^Xw Mwvo-ewr, Matt. xxii. 31, Did ye not
read TO pr]6ev vp.1v viro TOV Oeov, that which was spoken to you by
God. Cp. Matt. xix. 7 f., and || || Mark x. 3 f ., Luke xx. 28, quoting

retfx7 are ordinarily employed for the keeping of the volumes of the
Scriptures.

ANCIENT ELEMENTS 261

Deut. xxiv. 1 ; Matt. xxii. 24, Mwvcnjs drrev, Gen. xxxviii. 8, Deut.
xxv. 5f., mi Mark xii. 19, Luke xx. 28; Luke xvi. 29, they have
Moses and the prophets ; ib. xxiv. 27, beginning from Moses and
all the prophets. References to the law of Moses, (o) vopos Mcoua-etor,
are Luke ii. 22, xxiv. 44, John i. 46, vii. 19, 23, Acts xiii. 39, xv. 5,
xxviii. 23, 1 Cor. ix. 9, Heb. x. 28. Cp. 2 Cor. iii. 15, fjviKa av
dvayivaMTKrjTai Mcova-fjs ', Rom. ix. 15, rw Mwucret yap Xe'yei, quoting
from Ex. xxxiii. 19 ; Heb. vii. 14, M.mv<Trjs eXaX^o-ev, ib. xii. 21,
Mcova-rjs el-n-fv, the following words from Deut. ix. 19 ; Rev. xv. 3,
adova-iv TTJV <a8r)v Mcowecas, Ex. XV. 1, cp. Deut. xxxi. 30.

It is only later and in the usage of the Rabbis that
the expression " the five-fifths of the Law " is found,
rninn ^bin n$pq ; the five-fold division itself, however,
must have originated at a considerably earlier date.
The Jews denoted each book by its initial word or
words (supra, p. 117 ff.), the only exception being
Numbers, where "^IB^ " in the wilderness," was
employed alternatively to indicate the main theme or
subject of the book.

ANCIENT ELEMENTS. If, then, on the historical and
literary side the parallel is justly drawn between Old
Testament literature as it has come down to our own
times and the early native literature of other peoples,
we should naturally expect that the initial stages, the
beginnings in either case, would be similar. Like
circumstances would reproduce like results. And in the
midst of diverse conditions of environment and character
there would be a broad resemblance in the stages of
the growth and progress through which the human
mind sought and found expression. The elaboration
and refinement and facility of experienced manhood
would not at least precede the simpler forms in which

262 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the thought of man made its first halting essays in
literary production. If, for example, it is found that
in ordinary cases poetry in the form of lyrics, songs,
national traditions, and folk-lore set forth in rhythmic
measure and transmitted on the lips of bards, anticipates
the statelier, more sober prose, and the order of these
in time is never to our knowledge inverted, it is
reasonable to suppose that the same would be true of
the early history of Hebrew literature. The omis
prdbandi is in any case thrown on those who would
deny such beginnings, and would except Israel from the
ordinary laws of human progress and development.
Inspiration, in whatever sense precisely the term be
defined, does not override or reverse the capabilities
of thought or the procession of ideas. Such rules and
harmonies are not of an absolute nature, as though
they were imposed by authority from without ; they
are the orderly expression of what is innate in man's
being and character within, deduced from, not intro-
duced among the facts of his history. Their particular
application and exhibition will be as varied as the
circumstances of the race or individual. The broader
harmony will remain inviolate, but will always be
consonant with, perhaps will always demand infinite
variety in its special expression.

In the particular instance cited above, the general
development of literature from lyric or epic poetry
to prose, and not vice versd, it may be assumed without
fear of error that the development of Hebrew literature
proceeded on the same lines as that of other peoples.

ANCIENT ELEMENTS 263

All the known facts of early Israelite history are in
harmony with this belief. The elements and surround-
ings of a pastoral life in Canaan, the hardships and
painful discipline of the desert, the perpetual clash
and unrest of the early years of the settlement in the
promised land, were conditions as inimical as possible
to the evolution of a literature in prose, the prime
necessity for which is reflection and leisure ; they
constituted, on the other hand, precisely the habit of
life best adapted to give rise to a tribal poetry, stormy
lyrics, pastoral songs, celebrations of national triumphs
or of marked events in the nation's history, apostrophies
to Nature, condemning her waywardness and seeking
to appease her wrath. All these might be expected
to form the library of the people's literature ; and only
later would come the prose history, the philosophical
reflection, and the orderly exposition of doctrine or
legal rule. It is impossible to assign exact dates or
limits to these various stages. They shade off into
one another, and continually overlap. Poetry, for
instance, does not, of course, end where prose begins.
It develops and progresses upon its own lines, giving
to and taking from the prose its handmaid ; so that
perhaps the highest form of literary expression is
poetical prose ; and in this Hebrew, like other Semitic
languages, but in advance of most of them, excelled.

In the lyrics, then, of the books of the Old Testament,
the more or less fragmentary songs, elegies, poetical
outpourings of natural emotion and feeling, will be
found the oldest literary expressions of Hebrew

264 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

thought. With this conclusion the facts of language,
both in regard to grammar and syntax, are in entire
conformity. It is in these pieces that the language
presents itself under its most archaic form ; and they
appear to betray in many instances the effects of a
longer period of transmission, and even of later mis-
understanding and attempts at repair and restoration,
than do the books in general in which they are
embedded. The origin and date of some of these are
determined by the circumstances which they com-
memorate ; of others the source is entirely obscure. All
that can be said of them is that they are certainly
ancient. The text, moreover, is often difficult to
interpret, and probably impaired.

The chief of these songs or poetical extracts,
contained in the first eight books of the Hebrew Bible,
are as follows :

(1) Gen. iv. 23, 24, Song of Lamech.

(2) Gen. ix. 25-27, Noah's Curse on Canaan, and Blessing on
Japhetli.

(3) Gen. xxvii. 27-29, Isaac's Blessing of Jacob.

(4) Gen. xxvii. 39, 40, Isaac's Blessing of Esau.

(5) Gen. xlix. 2-27, Jacob's Prophecy of the Future of his
Sons.

(6) Ex. xv. 1-18, 21, Song at the Red Sea of Moses and the
Children of Israel, and of Miriam.

(7) Ex. xx. 2-17, The Ten Words ; cp. Deut. v. 6-21.

(8) Num. x. 35, 36, Words for the Taking up and Setting
down of the Ark.

(9) Num. xxi. 14, 15, Song of the Valley.

(10) Num. xxi. 17, 18, Song of the Well.'

(11) Num. xxi. 27-30, Satire on the Fall of Heshbon.

(12) Num. xxiii. 7-10, 18-24, xxiv. 3-9, 15-24, Oracles of
Balaam, the Son of Beor.

ANCIENT PASSAGES 265

(13) Deut. xxvii. 15-26, Curses of the Law.

(14) Dent, xxxii. 1-43, Song of Moses. ,

(15) Deut. xxxiii. 2-29, Blessing of Moses.

(16) Josh. x. 12, 13, Adjuration of Sun and Moon at Gibeon
and the Valley of Aijalon.

(17) Judg. v., Song of Deborah and Barak.

(18) Judg. ix. 8-15, Jotham's Fable of the Trees and their King.

(19) Judg. xiv. 14, 18, xv. 16, Samson's Eiddle and Sayings.

(20) 1 Sam. ii. 1-10, Hannah's Prayer.

(21) 1 Sam. xviii. 7, xxi. 11, Celebration by the Women of
David's Prowess.

(22) 2 Sam. i. 19-27, David's Lament over Saul and Jonathan.

(23) 2 Sam. iii. 33, 34, Elegy on the Death of Abner.

(24) 2 Sam. xxii., David's Song of Deliverance : cp. Ps. xviii.

(25) 2 Sam. xxiii. 1-7, Last Words of David.

That these passages are not all of equal or even
great antiquity is written patently upon the face of
them. Some may even be no older than the prose and
narrative setting in which they are found. All of
them, however, deserve careful study at the hands of
those who would understand the nature and growth
of the Hebrew language and literature.

David's Lament over Saul and Jonathan (22), and
Joshua's Adjuration of Sun and Moon (16), are said
in the Hebrew text to be written in the book of
Jashar p^L 1 ">??). They are, therefore, avowedly
extracts from an older collection, which would seem
to have been a miscellany of national ballads or songs,
of which, however, nothing further is known. 1 The
name Jashar, or as punctuated in the Hebrew text "^0,
signifies the Just or Upright one, and has been
supposed to be a title of, or synonym for Israel ;

1 See Driver, Introd. to the Literature of the O.T. 6 p. 114; W. H.
Bennett in ffDB, vol. ii. p. 550 f., s.v. Jashar.

266 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

cp. Jeshurun, rn^, Deut. xxxii. 15, xxxiii. 5, 26, Isa.
xliv. 2. It is unlikely in any case, in view of the fact
that ancient literary work is usually anonymous, that
the title indicates the author or compiler of the
collection. More probably it denotes the theme or
subject of the book, the book concerning Jashar, or
the Upright. The Septuagint renders in 2 Sam. i. 18
/3ifi\iov TOV evdovs, omitting the reference altogether
in the passage in Joshua. The same Greek translation,
however, has been supposed to contain a reference to
the book of Jashar in 1 Kings viii. 53&, where
Solomon's words on the conclusion of the building of
the temple are said to have been written ev (3i/3\iw rrjs
y&fjs, in the Book of the Ode or Song. Ver. 53& of
the Greek is not found in the Hebrew text ; but if it
represents a Hebrew original, rr)<$ w8i)s = wn might
very well be derived by an accidental transposition of
letters from " l ^ 1 *^- The passage in Joshua is to be
referred to E, 1 according to Dr. Driver, I.e. ; and if so,
not improbably other quotations occurring in parts of
the Octateuch usually ascribed to this writer may be
derived from the same source.

The difficult words of Josh. x. 1 2 f. are rendered thus
in the E.V. :-

' ' Sun, stand them still upon Gibeou ;
And them, Moon, in the valley of Aijalon.
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed,
Until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies."

For the words " stand thou still," the marg. gives Heb.

1 See infra, p. 286 f.

ANCIENT PASSAGES 267

be silent, which is the literal meaning of the Hebrew
Dvn, " be dumb." There can be little doubt that the
reference is to an eclipse of the sun, vividly and pic-
turesquely represented as its " dumbness," the occurrence
of which struck terror into the hearts of Israel's enemies,
and contributed mainly to their overthrow. The text
is obscure, and possibly corrupt. There seems, however,
to be a play in ver. 13 upon the similar sounds of the
words for " was dumb " (D'T) and " avenged themselves "
( Q P?), and possibly for the latter should be read Q'T,
"the nation" ('ia, not EV = Israel), their enemies, "became
dumb," i.e. was destroyed. The Septuagint, however,
reads e&>9 r/fj,vvaro 6 eo<? TOI>? e%0povs avrwv, but
Aquila and Symmachus (TO) eOvos (rwv) e^Opwv avrov.
The text of the Seventy looks like an intentional altera-
tion of the Hebrew Ma, mistakenly understood as referring
to Israel, intended to ascribe the honour of the victory
to Jehovah alone.

The age of the second extract from the book of
Jashar, David's Lament over Saul and Jonathan, is
fixed by the circumstances of its composition to a date
about 1000 B.C., and therefore the collection from which
it is taken cannot as a whole be earlier than the reign
of David, and may be later. 1 Other parts of the com-
pilation might clearly be of considerably greater age.

The first of the fragmentary Songs quoted in the
21st chapter of Numbers is quoted from "The Book
of the Wars of the Lord " ; and perhaps we are to under-
stand that the Song of the Well also, and the Ode of

1 Cp. supra, p. 265.

268 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Triumph over Heshbon, are derived from the same
source. The title would seem to indicate that the
book was a treasury of war songs, national epics, cele-
brating the victories of Israel which Israel's God had
given her over her foes. There is no clue to the date
of the collection ; it has been supposed to belong to
the same period as the book of Jashar, but no definite
evidence is available. The first extract, an altogether
enigmatic fragment, which begins abruptly in the
middle of a sentence, apparently preserves the memory
of the demarcation of the border between Judaea and
the land of Moab

" Vaheb in Suphah,
And the valleys of Aruon,
And the slope of the valleys
That inclineth toward the dwelling of Av,
And leaneth upon the border of Moab."

2ni and npo are usually understood to be proper nouns,
the names of places on the border-line ; but the latter
at least may be the ordinary words for a storm, whirl-
wind, as in Isa. xxi. 1, Ps. Ixxxiii. 16, and elsewhere;
see E.V. marg. As the Hebrew text stands, Vaheb (urn,
but Sept. Zaiofi, i.e. f for i, rrjv Z. efaoyiaev) is the
object of an unexpressed verb. The name, however,
is otherwise unknown; and the late Canon Tristram's
identification of HDID with es-Safieh, an oasis south-east

of the Dead Sea, has met with no general acceptance ;
the initial sibilants in the two words are different. 1

1 See G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, London,
1894, p. 559 ; G. B. Gray, Commentary on Numbers, in loc. ; Oxford
Hebrew Lexicon, ss.vv.

ANCIENT PASSAGES 269

The Song of the Well (vv. 17, 18) is the rhythmic
chant with which the people accompany their task
of drawing the water, and perhaps belonged originally
to the period of the sojourn at Kadesh-Barnea. 1

Of the twenty-five passages enumerated above, pro-
bably the oldest of all, at least in the form in which
they appear in the Hebrew text, as is shown both by
their circumstances and the context to which they be-
long, and by the archaic style and character of their ex-
pression, are (1), (8), and (17). That these are absolutely
older than any other part of the Hebrew text as it now
exists, cannot, of course, be definitely established. Their
great antiquity, however, admits of no doubt. The last
especially, the Song of Deborah and Barak, presents
great difficulties of interpretation, some of which at
least are due to the losses and alterations suffered in
the course of a long transmission. The meaning of
parts of the Song is regarded by many of the com-
mentators as beyond recovery. 2

The Song of Lamech, Gen. iv. 23f., is the exultant
utterance of a savage warrior over his fallen foe,
spoken in the proud consciousness of the possession of
arras of offence and defence that render him practically
invulnerable. The words have a rough lilt, which
it is almost, if not quite impossible to reproduce in
English

1 Gray, p. 288 ff. ; and on the Satire on the Fall of Heshbon, vv. 27-
30, ib. p. 299 ff.

2 See G. F. Moore, Commentary on Judges, Edinburgh, 1895, p. 127 ff. ,
who gives references to the principal commentaries ; Ed. Konig in
HDB, vol. ii. p. 813 f,

270 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

" Adah and Zillali, hear my voice ;
Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech :
For I have slain a man for wounding me,
And a young man for bruising me :
If Cain shall be avenged seven-fold,
Truly Lamech seventy and seven-fold " (R.V.),

or in the Hebrew

nhn

virin
pp Dp 1

Which might be more freely rendered, preserving
somewhat of the rhythm of the original

" Adah and Zillah, hear ye my voice ;
Wives twain of Lamech, give ear to my speech :
Oft have I slain a man, seeking my hurt ;
Stout though his valour were, bit he the earth :
If seven times were Cain avenged, prone when he fell ;
Seventy-fold at Lamech 's death, shall blood for blood be paid."

A verb is missing probably in the Hebrew in line four. 1
The brief formulae (Num. x. 3 5 f .) for the beginning of
the day's journey and the evening arrival in camp are
precisely of the character that the tradition of a people
would desire to preserve. The former is repeated as
the opening words of the very early psalm, Ixviii. ; Ps.
cxxxii. 8 is perhaps reminiscent of the latter. 2

1 See S. R. Driver, Commentary on Genesis, 4 London, 1905, p. 70 f. ;
or A. Dillmann, Genesis, Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1897 ; J. A. Selbie in
HDB iii. p. 19 f.

2 G. B. Gray, Comm. on Numbers, p. 96.

ANCIENT PASSAGES 271

The fable of Jotham also concerning the trees and
their king, Judg. ix. 8-15, though written in prose,
is supposed to be of early date. The non-poetical
narrative form would be more liable to alteration,
and would more easily admit of variants at the caprice
of the narrator, than the fixed rhythm of a stanza or
poem. In substance the fable probably belongs to
the national store of tales and folk-lore preserved from
ancient times. The riddle of Samson, Judg. xiv. 14,
may well be derived from the same storehouse of
popular recollection. 1

Two other of these early records claim brief notice
here. They are of special interest and importance, the
one for its witness to contemporary history and the
early experiences of the children of Israel, the other
for its doctrinal teaching as well, and high spiritual
tone. The Triumphal Ode of Miriam, and of Moses
and Israel (No. 6), has preserved, although not in wholly
unmodified form, the memory of the songs of rejoicing
with which the leaders and people celebrated their
deliverance from the pursuing host of the Egyptians at
the Red Sea. The same event, so critical and glorious
in Israelite history, is often present in the thoughts
of the Psalmists and other writers, and apparent
reminiscences of the words of the Song are not
infrequent ; cp. Pss. xviii. 1 5 ff., civ. 7, cvi. 7 ff. The
text itself of Ex. xv. 1-18 is attributed to E, 2 but

1 G. F. Moore, Judges, pp. 244 ff., 335; G. A. Cooke in HDB ii.
p. 789.

- Infra, p. 286 f.

272 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

is derived from an earlier source, possibly as some
have thought from the book of Jashar. 1

In the oracles of Balaam, Num. xxiii., xxiv., have been
recorded some of the most striking utterances that ever
fell from the lips of ancient seer. They are conceived
in a lofty spirit of intense earnestness and devotion,
and bespeak a purity and elevation of faith, which is
the more remarkable in that their author, according to
the accompanying narrative, was from distant Pethor
on the Euphrates, and therefore presumably a non-
Israelite, from Babylonia, a land famous for its
divination and its knowledge of the secrets of the
stars. That a diviner and magician from Mesopotamia
should by the king of Moab be credited with ability
to confound by his curses the plans of the invading
Israelites, and to break their power, is no marvel.
But that the Prophet from the East should be
possessed of a knowledge of the one true God, should
through all faintheartedness and covetousness be
absolutely true to Him, and should give utterance
to his faith in language that holds a place with the
most eloquent and touching that the sacred writings
of any nation or age enshrine, is a notable fact, with a
significance for doctrine and inspiration, as well as for
literature. If the brief and sad account which the
narrative gives of the end of Balaam, Num. xxxi. 8, 16,
Josh. xiii. 22, preserves a true tradition, his was
a striking example of corruptio optimi* pessima, and of
the overmastering power of a besetting sin. Some of

1 Supra, p. 265.

ANCIENT PASSAGES 273

the words of Balaam are amongst the best known and
most frequently quoted of all that are contained in the
Old Testament

" How shall I curse whom God hath not cursed ?
And how shall I defy whom God hath not defied ?
For from the top of the rocks I see him,
And from the hills I behold him :
Lo, it is a people that dwell alone,
And shall not be reckoned among the nations.
Who can count the dust of Jacob,
Or number the fourth part of Israel ?
Let me die the death of the righteous,
And let my last end be like his !

God is not a man, that He should lie ;

Neither the son of man, that He should repent :

Hath He said, and shall He not do it ?

Or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good ?

Behold, I have received commandment to bless :

And He hath blessed, and I cannot reverse it.

Surely there is no enchantment against Jacob, 1
Neither is there any divination against Israel : 1
Now shall it be said of Jacob and of Israel,
What hath God wrought !

Balaam the son of Beor saith,

And the man whose eye was closed 2 saith,

1 R.V. marg. ; Heb. !?mB"3 . . . apjra. The meaning is that no
enchantment or divination is of any avail in the case of Israel, i.e. as
brought against him.

2 Lit. "closed up," "shut in," i.e. so that he could not see the
right ; the reference is apparently to his own folly in persisting in
coming to Moab, contrary to the evident Divine intention and warning.
The Hebrew text, by a not uncommon interchange of sibilants, due
perhaps to oral dictation, reads e> for D. R.V. marg. ( = A.Y.) assumes
that the word is Aramaic and HIT. \ey. Sept. 6 dvdpwwos 6 d\ri-
6u>>s bpCiv, but Jerome " cujus obturatus est oculus." The Syriac
follows the Greek, but more literally. Cp. G. B. Gray, Numbers,
p. 361.

274 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

He saith, who heareth the words of God,
Who seeth the vision of the Almighty,
Falling down, and having his eyes open :
How goodly are thy tents, Jacob,
Thy tabernacles, O Israel !

I see him, but not now :

I behold him, but not nigh :

There shall come forth a star out of Jacob,

And a sceptre shall rise out of Israel,

And shall smite through the corners of Moab,

And break down all the sons of Sheth. 1

And Edom shall be a possession,

Seir also, his enemies, shall be a possession ;

While Israel doeth valiantly.

And out of Jacob shall one have dominion,

And shall destroy the remnant from the city." :

It is not necessary to discuss all the passages which
have been enumerated, or which claim an early date.
In every case account must be taken of the internal
evidence, the harmony of the language, etc., with the
presupposed circumstances and age. Where these are
in accord, the burden of disproof lies with those who
reject the tradition. It is sufficiently probable that in
the course of time much may have been altered, some-
thing lost, apparent deficiencies supplied by the genius
or care of later editors. But that deliberate invention
played a large part, in view of the character of the
Jewish people and their almost reverential regard for
their own past is not probable, and is on no grounds to
be lightly assumed. The "Benedictions" recorded in

1 R. V. marg. ; R.V. text " of tumult." Perhaps nt? is for T\K&, pride ;
but a proper name seems to be required by the parallelism.

" G. B. Gray, I.e. p. 344 ff.; F. H. Woods, art. "Balaam," in HDB,
vol. i. p. 232.

AUTHORSHIP OF PENTATEUCH 275

the Book of Genesis (Nos. 25) contain at least
elements of great antiquity. The words also that are
put into the mouth of David in 2 Sam. (Nos. 23-25),
and the fragmentary " Song of the Women " in praise
of his valour and success (No. 21), it is reasonable to
believe are genuine relics of the age to which they
profess to belong, even though the fallibility of human
memories and hands may have prevented their coming-
down to us in complete integrity. With regard to the
rest, while the circumstances may concur in pointing
to an early date, it seems consistent with probability
to believe that larger modifications in form and language
have taken place, a precise determination or definition
of which is beyond our power.

AUTHORSHIP. The Mosaic authorship of the entire
Pentateuch was an article of faith with the Jewish
Eabbis, the ipsissima verba as they had received them
being derived from the hand and pen of the great
Lawgiver. The only portion the authorship of which
they were willing to concede to another was the last
eight verses of Deuteronomy, recording the death and
burial of Moses, the unique service which he had
rendered to Israel, and the name and qualifications of
his successor. The same tradition passed over into the
Christian Church, and except by a few, more thoughtful
or sceptical than the rest, has been generally accepted
and maintained until the present day. It is to be
noted, however, that the book or books themselves
make no claim to have been written by Moses. His
name is not attached to them in any sense or in any

276 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

passage as their author as a whole. And this is
especially noticeable in the case of the book of Deute-
ronomy, where Moses is habitually referred to in the
third person, his sayings are recorded and his actions
described, as of another whose history the writer desires
to narrate.

In a few instances in the Pentateuch it is recorded that Moses
did actually commit something to writing, or was directed by
Jehovah so to do : Ex. xvii. 14, " Write this for a memorial in
the book " (1535 pi3i nxi 3h?), the sentence of extermination against
Amalek ; ib. xxiv. 4, " Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah," the
directions, namely, " all the judgements," which have immediately
preceded, cp. xxxiv. 27 ; in Num. xxxiii. 2-49 the list of the
Stations in the Wilderness is due, according to ver. 2, to the hand
of Moses himself, nin; 's-^jj Drry.po) nrrxxiD-nx nwo anin ; and the
document, apart from the inevitable corruptions and misunder-
standings to which place-names are subject in transmission, bears
every evidence of first-hand acquaintance with the route ; Deut.
xxxi. 9, " Moses wrote this law," ib. ver. 24, " when Moses had made
an end of writing the words of this law in a book " (iso'hy, " upon "
a tablet or book ; the preposition indicates the use of a style upon
a prepared surface rather than a pen, as ordinarily understood,
for cursive writing ; contrast nsca, sup., Ex. xvii. 14), where the
reference is usually understood to be to the central code or col-
lection of legislative ordinances of Deuteronomy, chs. xii.-xxvi.,
but cannot, it is clear, in any case be supposed to refer compre-
hensively to the five books. Cp. E. Kautzsch, Literature of the Old
Testament, London, 1898, p. 6f. ; R. Kittel, History of the Hebrews,
London, 1895, i. p. 28 f.

This detached form of narration is not, of course,
absolutely inconsistent with Mosaic authorship. It is
frequently and not unnaturally adopted by a writer
who wishes to conceal his personality. But it conveys
an air of strangeness and unreality, if the book is actu-
ally as it stands due to the hand of Moses himself ; and

AUTHORSHIP OF PENTATEUCH 277

is hardly in keeping with the directness and simplicity
of the whole. The same anonymous character, more-
over, is marked in the entire series of the historical
books of the Old Testament ; the writer or writers
efface themselves behind their work. It is only
when the Later Prophets and the Writings are reached
that the name of the author is found recorded in the
text.

No further reference to Moses as the author of the
Torah or Law is met with in the Old Testament
literature until we come to the history which was
written or compiled last of all the books, or the
last with only minor exceptions which contribute
nothing to the subject in hand. The Books of
Chronicles, &W>1 ^l, which are usually assigned to
the end of the fourth, or the beginning of the third
century B.C., contain two references to " the book of
Moses " as the written authority for a commandment
or religious usage : 2 Chron. xxv. __4, " according to
that which is written in the law in the book of
Moses," quoting from Deut. xxiv. 16 ; ib. xxxv. 12
" as it is written in the book of Moses," where an
actual verbal reference to the present Pentateuch
seems hardly traceable. The last of the Prophets
also bids his readers " remember the law of Moses
my servant which I commanded him in Horeb "
(*jDJ2 n^D rriin VIST, Mai. iii. 22, in the Eng., iv. 4).
Nothing is here said of a written book. And the
requirements of the three passages would be entirely
satisfied by the supposition of a traditional kernel

278 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

>
even or summary of legislative enactments ascribed

to Moses. The late date, moreover, of the two books
warns us against reading too wide an implication or
too great prescriptive authority into the incidental
assertions they may contain.

On the other hand, the uncertainty of details, and
the scantiness of direct evidence, must not lead to
an undervaluing of the weight of the general and
universal tradition as to Moses himself. " No nation
ever gratuitously invented the report that it had
been ignominiously enslaved by another ; none ever
forgot the days of its deliverance." l That the history
of Israel's leader and lawgiver should be an invention,
his figure an unsubstantial image projected on the past,
is so utterly improbable as to verge upon the im-
possible ; and that the general consensus that to him
are to be ascribed also the earliest enactments which
gave to Israel the status of a law-possessing and law-
abiding people should be entirely baseless, is hardly
less unlikely. As far as the literary form, however,
is concerned, there is no direct proof that any part of
the Pentateuch as it now exists was shaped by his
hands. Much may be informed by his spirit ; legal
enactments may owe their inspiration, and even
substance and order to him ; historical detail may
ultimately be derived from accounts received from
his lips, or written down by his hands. All this may
be practically certain, though the mathematical proof is
wanting, and can never be supplied. But the form, the
1 Kautzsch, Literature of the 0. T. p. 8.

HISTORY OF CRITICISM 279

outward shape, the litera scripta, cannot in the necessity
of the case be vindicated to him as its author. 1

HISTOKY OF CRITICISM. As soon as the text of the
Pentateuch was subjected to close and critical examina-
tion, with a view to ascertaining what internal evidence,
as distinct from tradition, had to say on the subject
of authorship and date, certain well-defined character-
istics of structure and arrangement made themselves
manifest. These concerned not only the language
of the books, but the order and contents of the
narratives, their internal harmony, and above all the
standpoint of the writer, his outlook upon the world,
and the circumstances and environment of national
and social life which his words appeared to presuppose.
Such features, and especially the last-named, were felt
to require explanation ; and various schemes were
suggested which should combine the observed facts
in a reasonable framework of theory. These facts
appeared at first sight to those who dispassionately
studied them to be inconsistent with Mosaic author-
ship, or indeed with ascription of the whole to any
single writer of whatever date. And in the reaction
against the dominant tradition, extravagant theories
were propounded and loosely-reasoned statements made,
even the very existence of the Hebrew lawgiver and
the good faith of the early histories in the Pentateuch
being called in question. A more reasonable view of
the facts and of the written narratives is taken at the
present day.

1 Cp. Kautzsch, I.e. p. 8 f .

2So INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

The first peculiarity or distinctive feature to attract
attention was an apparent difference of usage with
regard to the Divine name. In certain more or less
well-defined sections or portions of the work consistent
use was made by the author of the Hebrew title or
proper name mrr 1 ; elsewhere " Jehovah " was altogether
or almost altogether absent, and the term D^K, " God,"
was employed in its stead. Moreover, these portions
did not overlap, or overlapped only to a slight and
inappreciable extent, although they appeared at times
to be somewhat closely interwoven. In other words,
when the name m.T was found, DTita was usually
absent, and vice versa. This any one with the Hebrew
text in his hands could verify for himself. The
problem was to give a reasonable account of the facts,
and of so striking a variation in usage in so important
a particular. Moreover, it was immediately noticed
that this difference did not stand alone ; that in many
instances two records, varying in detail from one
another, were given of the same event or series of
events, and that the distinction in the use of the
Divine names coincided generally speaking with the
distinction of the narratives. So that if each account
were taken by itself and read separately, in the one
would be found exclusively, or almost so, the sacred
name mrr, in the other DT6s. These were broad
conclusions, the significance and reliability of which
were not impaired by slight inconsistencies or difficulties
which might make their appearance in details.

Thus there are two parallel and independent accounts

CRITICAL ANALYSIS 281

of the Creation, narrated from different points of view ;
two histories of the Flood, which present minor dis-
crepancies which it is not easy to reconcile, if they
are supposed to emanate as they stand from one and
the same author ; but which, on the other hand, are
an evidence of the good faith and scrupulous accuracy
of the writer, if he derived them from some ancient
authority, whose words he quoted or copied out. The
double narrative of the Creation is contained in
Gen. i. 1-ii. 4, ii. 46-25 ; of the Flood in vi. 9-22,
vii. 6, 11 if. etc., vii. 15, viii. 66-12, etc. These
passages presented themselves at the very beginning
of the Pentateuch, and therefore the more immediately
attracted attention, and the more urgently demanded
explanation. But the same characteristics were found
to exist to a greater or less extent throughout at least
the first four books of the Law, Genesis to Numbers.

The differences of style and language here, over and
above the remarkable variation in the Divine name,
are patent even in a translation ; and hardly less so
is the unlikeness of the standpoint occupied by the
writer, his outlook upon life, and his reading of the
lessons of history. The most striking example, perhaps,
of the former differences is the constant repetition of
phrase, amounting almost to a catch-word or refrain,
in chs. i. ii. 4a : " there was evening and there was

morning" (vv. 5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31); "God saw that
it was good " (w. 4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25,31); "God
said . . . and it was so" (vv. 6 f., 14f., 24, 29f.);
"be fruitful and multiply and fill" (vv. 22, 28; in

282 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the latter verse K.V. " replenish," but the Hebrew word
is the same as in ver. 22, 1KPO1). Nothing of a similar
nature is found in ch. ii. 4&-25. 1 The former account,
moreover, presents an orderly narrative of the stages
of creation, beginning with the inanimate universe and
advancing by a regular and rhythmic progress to man,
the crown of the animate world ; and he employs a
word (" create," ton) to describe the Divine action,
which, whether he conceived it to denote the actual
bringing into existence de nihilo or not, at least ex-
pressed to him the initial and primary work of God,
before which " in the beginning G-od " and no one or
nothing else was. The same word is not employed
at all in the second narrative of the creation, ii. 4Z> 25 ;
but in its place a term (" made," r\vy) which implied
the fashioning or shaping of the rough material, already
in existence, and to hand. To the author of this record
the supremely important object is man, his origin and
position and destiny. He therefore stands in the fore-
front of creation, its beginning not its end ; and around
him everything else is grouped, not in orderly ascending
progress from beneath upwards, but as dependent upon

1 The dividing point is not as in R.V. at the beginning of the fourth
verse, but in the middle at the word "created," where the end of the
paragraph and the full stop should be placed. The following words run
on without pause or break into the fifth verse : "In the day that the
Lord God made earth and heaven, then no plant of the field," etc., the
conjunctive i introducing the apodosis or consequent clause. The writer
describes the condition of things, as he understood it to have been, when
the Lord God began His work of fashioning, putting into shape the
formless material world. So, e.g., E. I. Fripp, Composition of the Bcok
of Genesis, London, 1892, p. 23.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS 283

him, and ministering to his needs. It is a picture in
words wherein man forms the central and leading figure,
not a chronicle of the events of succeeding days.

In the two-fold narrative of the Flood, ch. vi. 9 ff.,
similar differences may be traced. In ch. vi. 1 9 f. two
of every kind of living creature, both beasts and birds,
are to be taken into the ark, cp. vii. 9, 15 ; in vii. 2 L
of clean beasts and birds, seven pairs are to be pre-
served, but of unclean only one. The duration of the
rain is forty days and forty nights in vii. 4, 12, but in
vii. 24, viii. 3 a hundred and fifty days, after which
" the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain
from heaven was restrained," and at the end of the
hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. The
covenant made with Noah after the Flood is twice
recorded, with variations, viii. 20-22, ix. 8-17, etc.

It would not be difficult to carry a similar analysis
through the remaining chapters of Genesis and the
other books of the Hexateuch. Minute and instruc-
tive discussions will be found in the larger Introductions
to the Old Testament ; cp. Driver, 6 ch. i. ; J. E.
Carpenter and G. Harford Battersby, The Hexateuch,
London, 1900, vol. ii. p. 9 ff. ; Fripp, I.e. ; E. C. Bissell,
The Pentateuch, its Origin and Structure, London, 1895;
A. Jeremias, Das Alte Testament im Lichte des Alien
Orient, 2 Leipzig, 1906, p. 239 ff. ; F. H. Woods, art.
" Hexateuch " in HDB, vol. ii. etc. The literature of
the subject is enormous. In Bissell, for example, the
list of authors and their works on the Pentateuch and
its criticism covers sixty-five closely printed octavo

284 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

pages ; and a large number have been published since
the date of his book.

DOCUMENTS or AUTHORS. Hence, although the dif-
ference of usage, as it concerned the Divine name, lay
most prominently on the surface of the sacred history,
and was the first to attract attention, it by no means
stood alone ; and soon proved itself to be by no means
the most significant of the contrasts in style and feel-
ing between the various parts and duplicate, or appa-
rently duplicate narratives of the ancient history. It
served, however, to provide a convenient title and
nomenclature for the discussion of the facts thus
elicited. On the assumption that the varieties of
style, etc., corresponded to a real difference of author-
ship, the writer who employed the name DTita, and to
whom was due the account of the creation contained
in the first chapter of Genesis, was termed the Elohist,
while the name Jehovist or Jahvist a was adopted to
denote the author of the various sections which made
use of the title mrv. Thus the conclusion was drawn
that within the limits of the books of the Law there
were at least two histories, or original documentary
records, intertwined, the unknown author or authors of
which for it by no means followed that each history
was the work of one, and only one hand were, by
common consent, referred to as the Jehovist and the
EloMst writers.

A further step was taken when it was observed that
precisely the same criteria and method, which had

1 Supra, p. 98 f.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS 285

served to distinguish between these two writers or
documents, when applied with greater detail and
minuteness, led to the recognition of differences of a
similar nature within the limits of the Jehovistic
work itself. That work was shown not to be homo-
geneous ; but to be characterised internally by distinc-
tions of manner and usage, precisely parallel to, and
hardly less marked, than those which separated it
from the first-named Elohist. It was at once inferred,
therefore, that the portions of the Pentateuch, hitherto
described under the comprehensive title of Jehovist,
were in reality due to at least two writers or authors,
the work of one of whom was found to be character-
ised by the name mrr, while the other employed DTita.
His composition, however, was in no danger of being
confused with that of the Elohist, already distinguished
and marked out by special features of its own ; there
was a total absence of the characteristic phrases and
repetitions which were so prominent in the work of
the author of Gen. i. Hence, for a time at least, this
writer was known as the second Elohist. The title,
however, might be thought to prejudge the question
of date, which was by no means determined ; and to
assume the priority in time, or even in importance, of
the work of a first Elohist. For the latter, accord-
ingly, a new name was adopted, and the possibly
misleading epithet of " second " was abandoned. It
proved, moreover, to be much more difficult to separate
the work of this last-named writer from that of the
Jehovist himself, than it had been to carry through

286 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the original distinctions between the documents em-
ploying the names of Jehovah and Elohim respective!} 7 ,
from which the contrasted accounts of the Creation
and the Flood were drawn. They were more closely
intertwined ; and this was often the case to such an
extent, that separation was attended with much un-
certainty, or was even impossible. The individual
characteristics of the " Elohist " make themselves
apparent first in Gen. xv. xx., and may thenceforth
be traced with more or less distinctness in various
parts of the Pentateuch. Thus the successive stages
in the process of the formation of the books, as they
had thus far been followed up and outlined, were (1)
the union of the Jehovist and Elohist into a single
work, or, as it became usual to term it, " document,"
which was referred to as JE, in which the fusion was
so close that the exact line of demarcation had often
become obliterated ; and (2) the combination of the
united work with the original Elohist, or " P " as
the latter's chronicle is usually denoted in England.
This final task of combination, it was further assumed,
was carried out by one or more redactors or revisers,
whose function it would be to supply connecting links,
to harmonise, arrange, and in some sort to reduce the
whole to order. This writer may be conveniently
denoted by E. His work resulted in the Pentateuch
as it exists at the present time and has existed for
many centuries.

" P " stands for " Priestly " or " Priests' Code," and has been
adopted because the work of this author, as it lies before us in

CRITICAL ANALYSIS 287

the Pentateuch, includes large parts of the books of Exodus and
Numbers, which have to do with the ceremonial duties and
ritual of the priests. Other letters or signs have been used, and
by some scholars are still employed to denote the same document.
Thus Ewald termed it the " Book of Origins," because it contains
the various sections of the n'nVin, the " genealogies " or " genealogical
records," which form, as it were, the historical basis or frame-
work of the Book of Genesis (cp. infra, p. 290). Wellhausen gave
to it the name "Book of the Four Covenants," or briefly Q =
quatuor : the four covenants referred to being those with Adam,
Gen. i. 28-30 ; with Noah, ib. ix. 1-17 ; with Abraham, ib. xvii. ;
and with Israel, Ex. vi. 2 ff. By others, again, the letter A has
been employed, a notation, however, which is open to the same
objection as has been raised against the terms " first " and "second
Elohist," that it is liable to suggest an order of the documents
not only in place but in time, and to claim priority of date for
" A " over " B," etc. On the whole, it appears most convenient
to adhere to the use of " P," a symbol which is at least as expres-
sive as any other, and does not lend itself to misunderstanding.
Continental scholars have sometimes made use of the full title
"Prophetic Narrator" for the author or document described
above as the Jehovist, J ; and B has been used for the work
of the second Elohist, E.

Concurrently with this investigation into the style
and method of composition of the earlier books of the
Pentateuch, an investigation which resulted in the
belief that they were not the work of a single author,
whether Moses or another, but a combination of several
documents of diverse character and date, only gradu-
ally and in course of time united into one whole, a
similar examination was instituted into the text of
the last of the five books, and led to an entirely dif-
ferent conclusion. In Deuteronomy no trace was
found of the various writers or records, whose peculi-
arities of style had formed so marked a feature of

288 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the books from Genesis to Numbers inclusive, but
on the other hand, it became apparent that here,
broadly speaking, there was disclosed a complete and
self-contained whole with an author whose standpoint
and purpose were as clearly defined as those of any
of the writers previously indicated, who thought and
wrote independently of them, with a manner and
style as distinct and individualistic as any which they
displayed. Like the others, he composed his work
on a definite plan, and with a definite aim in view ;
but it was neither the same aim nor the same plan
as had been discovered before. It was convenient,
therefore, to refer to this writer as the Deuteronomist,
or D ; not intending thereby to assert that every word
of the last book of the Pentateuch was derived, as it
stood, from the hand of one and the same author, but
that the whole was inspired by one spirit, and owed
its impulse and direction to one master-mind.

This, then, is the current and generally accepted
theory with regard to the composition of the books of
the Old Testament usually known as the Pentateuch or
Hexateuch ; a theory which has not been introduced
ready-made and fitted to the writings, but which is
broadly based upon a careful literary and dispassionate
investigation into the books themselves, and has been
naturally developed as a consequence of the evidence
which they offer as to their own origin and history.
The facts are there, and can hardly be disputed or
controverted ; the theory enunciated to account for the
facts stands, of course, in an altogether different position.

ANALYSIS OF "SOURCES" 289

It is conceivable that further knowledge might lead to
the essential modification or even overthrow of the latter,
the facts remaining unchallenged and unchallenge-
able. Clearly also many other considerations and cir-
cumstances must be allowed their full weight, before
a final conclusion is reached. The two elements, how-
ever, must be kept entirely distinct whether in thought
or in discussion, the facts and the theory enunciated to
co-ordinate and interpret the facts. On the facts them-
selves there is no serious difference of opinion among
scholars and students of the Old Testament. The theory
is not unanimously accepted, though there is a strong,
almost overwhelming balance of judgement in its favour.

ANALYSIS OF DOCUMENTAKY SOUECES. - - It is con-
venient to take a survey, necessarily brief, of the composi-
tion and structure of the several books of the Pentateuch
on the above outlined theory of various documentary
" sources." Details will be found in Driver's Introduc-
tion, Carpenter and Battersby's Hexateuch, or elsewhere.
Broadly speaking, the analysis which has been carried
through by different scholars who have devoted attention
to this subject, has led to the same results as far as tlie
separation and identification of the sources are concerned.
Differences of judgement with regard to minor points of
detail remain, and are likely to remain. On the main
outline and scheme of division there is general agreement.

The framework or skeleton of the book of Genesis,
constructed on a definite plan, and arranged in accord-
ance with a clearly-marked purpose, is due to P ; and
the several sections of the history, the progressive stages
19

ago INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of the narrative, are indicated by the introduction of
the word nnhn, " generations," or " genealogical records."
The term is characteristic of the document or source
denoted by P, and within the limits of the Hexateuch
is not employed by any other writer ; outside of those
limits it is found in the first book of Chronicles and
in Euth iv. 1 8. With the exception of the first instance
in which it occurs, ch. ii. 4, it is always used in con-
nection with the name of a man, the records of whose
family, the " birth-histories " of whose descendants follow.
By a not unnatural extension of usage, the account
which the writer furnishes of their creation is the
" genealogical records " of the heavens and of the earth.
The articulations of the book of Genesis, thus deter-
mined, will be found to be ten in number, as follows :

ii. 4, generations of the heaven and of the earth
(pNrn own rrtninn) ; v. 1, generations of Adam (D^K 'n) ;
vi. 9, of Noah (QJ 'n) ; x. 1, of the sons of Noah
(ni *?* 'n) ; xi. 10, of Shem (DB> '*) ; xi. 27, of Terah
(rnn 'n) ; X xv. 12, of Ishmael (fo?oe* f n) ; xxv. 19, of
Isaac (pn 'fi) ; xxxvi. 1, of Esau (lEW 'n) ; xxxvii. 2,
of Jacob (3p.V! 'n).

Thus the writer gradually narrows down his atten-
tion, and the attention of his readers, from the initial
stages of the creation of the universe which he sketches
in broad outline to the human race, its crown and
completion, upon which he dwells ; and in ever-
diminishing circles, by a process of exclusion which
leaves out of sight one and another branch of the
human family, concentrates his narrative first on the

ANALYSIS OF "SOURCES" 291

descendants of the " righteous " survivor of the Flood,
then from among these selects Shem of whom the
chosen people are to arise, and goes on to trace down-
wards the line of the patriarchs and tribal divisions until
he reaches Israel (Jacob, npy), the father and eponymous
head of the nation whose fortunes he desires to narrate.
From a literary point of view, therefore, the first book
of the Pentateuch is constructed on a skilfully designed
plan, to relate briefly from the beginning in historical
order the " genealogical " development through which
the chosen people were gradually disengaged from the
wider history of the universe and of mankind at large,
and were fitted for the office and work which it was
intended they should fulfil.

The narrative of JE which begins ch. ii. 4& is con-
tinued through the two following chapters, and P
resumes in ch. v. with the " book of the generations of
Adam " ; where the characteristic features of repetition
of phrase make their appearance again, which were
so noticeable in the account of the Creation, i. 1
ii. 4a. 1 In the first five chapters of Genesis, therefore,
extracts from the respective histories or documents are
simply placed side by side, without any further attempt

1 The regular formula is varied in vv. 28b, 29. The close of ver. 28
would have been expected to run " and begat Noah. And Lamech lived,"
etc. The substance and form of the verse, therefore, are usually believed
to be derived from JE, and to have been inserted into the narrative of P.
The mere fact, of course, of a variation of phrase would not be sufficient,
if it stood alone, to justify this ascription. It must, however, be remem-
bered that in this, and in many similar instances, the deviation from
set or customary formula does not stand in isolation. It is the con-
currence of the characteristic notes of the one " document " or the other,

2 9 2 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

at combination. It is otherwise with the succeeding
narrative of the Flood. Chapters vi. to ix. inclusive
form a sort of mosaic, in which briefer extracts or verses,
now from one author and now from another, are inter-
mingled or woven together to form a continuous history.
Unless all literary instinct is at fault, the joints are not
so cunningly contrived, the parts are not so closely
welded together that the lines of division should be
indistinguishable. It is a testimony to the loyalty of
the writer to the sources of information upon which he
depended that it is so. There has been no attempt to
conceal indebtedness, little or no attempt to gloss over
discrepancies. The respective portions of the chapters
are assigned in general as follows, minor variations
which concern only two or three words being omitted :

.IE : chs. vi. 1-8, vii. 1-5, 10, 12, 22 f., viii. 6-12, 136, 20-22,

ix. 18-27.

P : chs. vi. 9-22, vii. 6-9, 11, 13-21, 24, viii. 1-5, 13, 14-19,
ix. 1-17, 28 f.

Chapter x. introduces the fourth of the Toledoth, to
which is appended in vv. 8-19 the history of Nirnrod
(TIEO) from JE ; and from the same source is derived
the account of the tower of Babel, xi. 1-9. Inter-
consistently present or absent as a whole, which enables a confident
verdict to be pronounced. There will always be passages where the
evidence is insufficient to enable any certain conclusion to be reached.
Mistakes have been, and will be made. And no true scholar, "higher
critic " or other, will hesitate to acknowledge in such cases his inability
to decide. But although the inference drawn may concern, as in this
case, a single verse in the midst of what is maintained to be an alien
context, it rests upon broad grounds, and it is altogether unreasonable
to reject it, unless those grounds are fairly met and controverted.

ANALYSIS OF "SOURCES ' : 293

weaving of the two narratives or sources in a similar
way is observable, generally speaking, throughout the
whole of the first four books of the Pentateuch. The
hand of E is first distinguished in chs. xv., xx.-xxii., the
greater part of which is understood to be taken from
the source or document thus conventionally described ;
the composite source JE, however, does not always
admit of certain analysis into its constituent parts ; l
frequently a determination in general terms is all that
is possible. Considerable portions, however, of chs.
xxvii.-xxxiii., xxxv., xxxvii., xl.-xlii., xlv., xlviii., 1., are
ascribed to E. The language of the historical document
in ch. xiv. bears the characteristic marks neither of P nor
of JE, and seems to lie altogether outside of these writings.
Nor can its origin be determined with any certainty.
There must have been extant in Israel many accounts,
both oral and written, more or less exact and detailed,
of military and other events, the recollection of which
had been preserved. This apparently is one of them,
that has been rescued from the doom of oblivion that
has passed over the rest.

The greater part of chs. xii., xiii. belongs to JE,
and the first fourteen verses of ch. xvi. ; the last two
verses and the whole of ch. xvii. are P. The remainder
of the book, excluding the parts to which reference has
already been made, is assigned as follows :

JE : chs. xviii., xix., xxiv., xxv. 1-6, 21-34, xxvi., xxvii. 1-45,
xxviii. 10-xxxv. 8, 16-22a, xxxvi. 31-39, xxxvii. 2&-

1 Cp. supra, p. 285 L

294 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

xlvi. 5a, 28-34, xlvii. l-5a, 12-26, 29-31, xlviii. If.,
8-22, xlix. 1-27, 1.

P : chs. xxiii., xxv. 7-20, xxvii. 46-xxviii. 9, xxxv. 9-15, 226-29,
xxxvi. 1-30, 40-43, xxxvii. 1, 2, xlvi. 56-27, xlvii. 56-
11, 27 f., xlviii. 3-7, xlix. 28-33.

Of the three following books it is hardly necessary
to trace the composition in similar detail. Their
structure is essentially the same as that of Genesis,
extracts from P and JE of greater or less length
appearing side by side. The major part of the first
five chapters of Exodus is from JE. The announcement
of the name Jehovah (nin 11 ), with the covenant promise
and the commission to Pharaoh, chs. vi. 2 vii. 13, are
P. The history of the plagues, and the events of
Sinai and the wilderness, for the most part are clue
to JE. The details of the tabernacle and its furniture,
chs. xxv. to xxxi., are supplied by P. The account of
the idolatrous worship of the golden calf and its
consequences are from JE, chs. xxxii. 1-xxxiv. 28.
And the remainder of the book containing ordinances
with regard to the tabernacle and offerings is due to
P. The ancient Song after the deliverance at the
Eed Sea, xv. 1-18, bears the marks of E; and the
same is true of the Decalogue, ch. xx. 1-17. The
latter passage presents unusual features of interest
and difficulty because of the parallel representation
of Deut. v. 6-21. Though ascribed to E, the " words"
themselves must have been derived by him from an
earlier source, which it can hardly be doubted was
documentary, and either immediately or ultimately
claimed the authority of the tables themselves as

DECALOGUE 295

preserved in the ark. The writing on both the first
and second tables is attributed to Jehovah Himself,
chs. xxiv. 12, xxxi. 18, xxxii. 16, xxxiv. 1, etc.; but
that the historian did not necessarily conceive of this
as implying more than writing by the hand of Moses
seems to be proved by the language of xxiv. 4, xxxiv.
27, etc. In neither passage is the "writing" explicitly
confined to the Ten Commandments. Some have
accordingly supposed the reference to be to a larger
series of laws, or even the entire " Book of the
Covenant." l The differences between the two recen-
sions or versions of the Decalogue are set forth in the
following table, the variations being marked by italics.
The first three commandments show no difference of
language, and it is not necessary to exhibit them. The
text quoted is that of the Ee vised Version :

IV. Remember the sabbath IV. Observe the sabbath day,
day, to keep it holy. Six days to keep it holy, as the Lord thy
shait thon labour, and do all God commanded thee. Six days
thy work : but the seventh day shalt thou labour, and do all
is a sabbath unto the Lord thy thy work : but the seventh day
God : in it thou shalt not do is a sabbath unto the Lord thy
any work, thou, nor thy son, God : in it thou shalt not do
nor thy daughter, thy man- any work, thou, nor thy son,
servant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy daughter, nor thy man-
nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger servant, nor thy maidservant,
that is within thy gates : for in nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor
six days the Lord made heaven and any of thy cattle, nor thy
earth, the sea, and all that in them stranger that is within thy
is, and rested the seventh day : gates ; that thy manservant and
wherefore the Lord blessed the thy maidservant may rest as well
sabbath day, and hallowed it. as thou. And thou shalt remember

1 Infra, p. 297.

296 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

that thou wast a servant in the
land of Egypt, and the Lord thy
God brought thee out thence by a
mighty hand and by a stretched
out arm: therefore tlie Lord thy
God commanded thee to keep the
sabbath day.

V. Honour thy father and thy V. Honour thy father and thy
mother : that thy clays may be mother, as the Lord thy God
long upon the land which the commanded thee : that thy days
Lord thy God giveth thee. may be long, and that it may go

well with thee, upon the land
which the Lord thy God giveth
thee.

VI. Thou shalt do no murder. VI. Thou shalt do no murder.

VII. Thou shalt not commit VII. Neither shalt thou corn-
adultery, mit adultery.

VIII. Thou shalt not steal. VIII. Neither shalt thou steal.

IX. Thou shalt not bear false IX. Neither shalt thou bear
witness against thy neighbour. false witness against thy neigh-
bour.

X. Thou shalt not covet thy X. Neither shalt thoii covet
neighbour's house, thou shalt thy neighbour's wife ; neither
not covet thy neighbour's wife, shalt thou desire thy neighbour's
nor his manservant, nor his house, his field, or his manservant,
maidservant, nor his ox, nor his or his maidservant, his ox, or his
ass, nor any thing that is thy ass, or any thing that is thy
neighbour's. neighbour's.

If, therefore, it were necessary to conclude that one
or other of these forms was primitive, it would lie
natural to decide in favour of the shorter and simpler,
that in Exodus. It is, however, more probable that
the original statement of each commandment was
brief, couched in as few words as possible like the
sixth, seventh and eighth, five commandments being
engraved on each table. These were subsequent!} 7
amplified and explained, and have been preserved in

BOOK OF THE COVENANT 297

the two-fold shape in which they are now read. For
the most part also the individual commandments recur
elsewhere, in other connections and under slightly
varying forms, e.g., Lev. xxvi. If., 13 ; Ex. xxxiv. 7, 14 ;
Lev. xix. 3, 11-13, 30 ; Ex. xxxi. 13 ff., etc.

The chapters that immediately follow in Exodus,
xx. 20-xxiii. 33, form a distinct and separate code of
Laws, the so-called " Book of the Covenant," derived
from the hand of J, which has been universally
recognised as a series of legislative enactments,
complete and independent, that bear the marks of
great antiquity, and were intended to serve the
purposes of a people at an early period of their
national existence, before the rise of the complicated
requirements of a settled and highly civilised life.
As a witness to the religious history and development
of Israel the " Book of the Covenant " is of the utmost
importance. 1

The most significant part of P from a legislative
point of view is found in the book of Leviticus, which
is entirely derived from this source. It was the
detailed summary of laws and regulations here given,
bearing on the ritual and the priestly office and duties,
that suggested the name Priests' Code (P) for the
document in which they were contained. The hand of

1 Cp. on the Decalogue, Driver, I.e. p. 33 ff. ; Carpenter and Battersby,
p. Ill f. ; A. Dillmann and V. Ryssel, Die Biichcr Exodus und
Leviticus? Leipzig, 1897, p. 219 ff.; A. Jeremias, I.e. p. 422 ff.;
W. P. Paterson in HDB, vol. i. s.v. ; E. Kautzsch, ib. vol. v. p. 633 f.;
and the commentaries. For the Book of the Covenant, add especially
Wellhausen in Ency. Urit., s.v. Pentateuch.

298 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the author or authors of JE is not apparent throughout
the book. Within it, however, there is found a kernel
or central body of legislation with special features of
its own, differing from the rest of P, in which it is
thus as it were embedded. This section is usually
termed the " Law of Holiness," or more briefly H,
because the interest of the writer lies within the
realm of ethics and ceremonial purity, rather than the
forms of national or civil constitution. The " Law of
Holiness " thus deals more closely perhaps than any
other part of the first four books of the Pentateuch with
morality and the moral nature of man. As it exists
in Leviticus the Code is not absolutely continuous,
being interrupted by paragraphs of greater or less
length derived from P or a related source. With
the exception, however, of a few verses, the whole
of chs. xvii. to xxii. inclusive, with parts of xi., xxiii.
xxv., and the entire ch. xxvi., are ascribed to this
author. If read continuously the special tone and
character of these sections becomes markedly apparent ;
and a not inconsiderable degree of similarity will be
noted between the Law of Holiness on the one hand
and the Book of the Covenant in Exodus on the other.
A similar likeness and possible relationship has been
traced in Deut. chs. xii. and xxviii., but the connection
is uncertain.

There can, however, be no doubt as to the close
kinship between H and the prophet Ezekiel, a kinship
that shows itself not only in the standpoint and
sympathies of the two writers, but even in their

LAW OF HOLINESS 299

language. 1 Upon some commentators and scholars
the impression made by the similarities of tone and
style referred to has been so great that they have
attributed the authorship of these portions of Leviticus
to the prophet himself. This conclusion is hardly
probable. In substance the Law of Holiness is older,
probably considerably older than Ezekiel's time. But
that the latter was familiar with the work of H can
hardly be doubted, and he writes with a full knowledge
of the principles and laws which his predecessor had
laid down. 2

The Code thus formed a complete and independent
whole, a manual of the laws of moral and ceremonial
purity, which the author or authors of P adopted, and
incorporated into their own work. The brief passage
Ex. xxxi. 13, 14a has been supposed by some to be
not improbably an extract from H, and perhaps
Num. x. 9, f., xv. 38-41.

The book of Numbers is essentially similar in
character and method of composition to the preceding
parts of the Pentateuch. Extracts from the two main
sources upon which the author relies, P and JE, are

1 See Driver, Introduction, 6 p. 47 ff., and the literature there cited. On
p. 49 f. will he fouud a list of phrases characteristic of H, many of
which appear also in Ezekiel. Cp. the same writer's "Leviticus" in
Haupt's Sacred Books of the Old Testament, Leipzig, 1894 ; Dillmann
and Eyssel, ut sup. p. 582 ff.

- For a further comparison between the language of H and Ezekiel,
see Driver, I.e. p. 146 ff.; Carpenter and Battersby, i. p. 143 ff.;
J. C. Harford-Battersby, art. "Leviticus" in HDB, vol. iii. p. 102 ff.;
A. B. Davidson, Ezekiel, Cambridge, 1892, p. liiiff. ; and the comment-

aries in general.

300 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

placed side by side, in different proportions, and at
times recording the same event with varying details.
Thus chs. i.-x. 28 are from P; x. 29-xii. 16, JE;
xiii. 1-16, xiv. 2630, 3438, with a few other verses,
P, the remainder of the two chapters JE. Chs. xv.,
xvii.-xx. 13, xxv. 6 xxxi. 54, xxxiii. xxxvi., are almost
entirely P ; xvi., xx. 14-xxv. 5, and xxxii., are, with
the exception of a few verses, from JE. And the
entire book is thus composite of sources or authorities
which the writer employs according to a definite plan
to produce a complete and detailed narrative of the
events which he desires to record. 1

In all these respects, however, in character and style
and aim, Deuteronomy, the last of the five, is unlike
the other four. The difference of tone is striking and
at once apparent even in a translation. Apart from
minor details and on a comparatively insignificant
scale there is here no variety of language, suggestive
of a diversity of authorship or " source." Homogeneous
in a broad and general sense from beginning to end,
the book presents well-marked features of intention
and style which differentiate it from the other parts
of the Pentateuch, and convey the impression of a
single master-mind working with a definite purpose in
view. This general conclusion does not, of course,
preclude the insertion or addition of paragraphs of
greater or less length, whether by the author himself,

1 Add to the literature above cited, J. A. Faterson, "Numbers" in
Haupt's SBOT, Leipzig, 1900 ; G. B. Gray, Numbers, Edinburgh, 1903 ;
A. Dillmann, Numcri, Dcuteronomium und Josua," Leipzig, 1886 ;
G. Haribrd-Battersby in HDB, vol. iii. p. 567 ff.

DEUTERONOMY 301

or by a later hand. The impression, however, of a
unity on the whole of spirit and composition is con-
firmed by further and more attentive study. Like the
rest of the Pentateuch, the work as it has come down
to us is anonymous. The general theme or purport of
the book, however, is perhaps intended to be described .
in ch. xvii lELa (the) repetition or recapitulation of //
this law r (nK-tn rriinn rup'p); 1 and the greater part of
the book thus consists of "the farewell injunctions and
discourses which Moses is represented as addressing to
the children of Israel before his death. It was most
natural that the great lawgiver should reiterate and
reinforce his teaching before he handed over the rule to
his successor, and himself was gathered to his fathers.

Deuteronomy, therefore, is not a new or " second "
law, but is based in the main on the legal directions
contained in the earlier books, which it repeats, re-
enforces, and supplements. There is not a little
throughout the book that is really new, as far as our
knowledge extends, and as regards its present position
in the literature ; but consideration must always be
had to the possibility, or even probability, that what
appears as new may have existed previously in oral
or written form, the record of which has been lost in
course of time. The whole is set in a framework of
narrative, which itself appears to presuppose and to
reflect the historical records of Exodus and Numbers.
While, finally, the legislative enactments of the book
group themselves around a central Code or body of

1 Cp. sujrm, p. 119 f.

302 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

laws, which constitutes a distinct and definite whole,
and to which reference is habitually made within the
book of Deuteronomy itself under the name of " this
Law" or "this book of the Law," e.g. i. 5, iv. 8,
xvii. 18, etc.

Thus chs. i.-iii. inclusive form the historical summary
or preface ; and a brief return to history, introduced
for the sake of warning and example, is found also in
the succinct account of the events at Sinai in chs. ix.
7 x. 11. Oh. iv. is in the form of an introductory dis-
course or exhortation,mingled with some further historical
details. With the following chapter begins the main
part of the work, which extends over chs. v. xxvi., xxviii.
inclusive ; nor does there seem any real reason for denying
ch. xxvii. to the same authorship, though it is much broken
up and interpolated, and in its present position seems
to interrupt the connection. Within this book of laws
the central portion or manual is formed by chs. xii.
xxvi., and to this Code, complete in itself, some writers
prefer to restrict the title of Deuteronomic legislation,
regarding the remainder as amplification or repetition.
The last six chapters of the book stand somewhat apart
from the rest. Chs. xxix. (xxix. 2 in E.V.) xxx. are
in form a new discourse attributed to Moses, which
though animated by the same lofty spirit, suggests in
style and arrangement a different and perhaps later
origin ; ch. xxxi. is partly historical, and recounts the
closing scenes and words of the great lawgiver's active
life. The so-called Song of Moses in ch. xxxii., and
the Blessing of Moses, ch. xxxiii., are poems otherwise

CHARACTERISTICS OF "DOCUMENTS" 303

independent of the book in which they are incorporated,
the date and authorship of which it is hardly possible
to determine. The final chapter narrates the circum-
stances of Moses" death and burial. Jewish tradition
ascribes this record to Joshua, who succeeded to the
office and authority of Moses. That the present form
of the narrative is due to him is hardly probable. It
may very well be the case, however, that he gave the
earliest shape and direction to the tradition, which
would linger long among the tribes of Israel, of the
details of the end of their first and greatest leader. 1

CHAKACTEEISTICS OF THE " DOCUMENTS."- The broad
characteristics of the style of these several writers or
" sources " may without difficulty be described. It
would probably be more correct, however, to refer to
them as schools of thought rather than as individual
authors or composers. Each particular school was
animated by a distinctive tendency or spirit, which
gave unity and colouring to all the compositions of the
school, marking them off from the productions of others,
and so far inspiring and harmonising the work of
individual members that what they .wrote or composed
was in a less degree their own than that of the school
to which they belonged ; from which they neither
cared, nor perhaps were able to dissociate themselves.
Hence the attempt made by some scholars to analyse
the work of P or other author into the several con-

1 See Driver, Introd. e p. 69 ff., and Synopsis of Laws, p. 73 ff. ; and
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy, 2 Edin. 1896 ;
Carpenter and Battersby, I.e. vol. ii. p. 246 ff. ; H. E. Ryle in HDB,
vol. i. p. 596 ff.

304 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

tributions of P 1 , P 2 , P 3 , etc., in a descending chronological
order, though it may be justified in principle seems
impossible of realisation. The criteria relied upon are
elusive ; and the successive " strata " of composition
are not regularly superimposed, but merged together
into one consistent and uniform whole. Thus regarded,
the standpoint or characteristics of a given " source "
are not those of an individual merely, but rather of a
company or succession of teachers who guarded and
handed down a particular tradition or body of doctrines.
This rather than a markedly individualistic style in the
narrower sense is the character of P, JE, or other element
that enters into the composition of the Pentateuch.

The conspicuous feature of the style of P, which
differentiates his work from the rest of the five books
of Moses, is its love of repetition of phrase and form,
and a certain methodical straightforwardness which
seeks to convey a plain meaning without artificial aid
of rhetoric or adornment. His writing is that of an
annalist, whose interest lies in historical and chrono-
logical detail ; and whose concern it is in the first

O 3

instance to frame a history of the people of Israel, not
on a broad and comprehensive scale, but only in so far
as is necessary in order to give an account of their
national institutions, civil and religious. His con-
ception of history is that of the constitutional writer ;
it is not external events or happenings that matter,
but law and internal development. And the somewhat
scanty narrative of the general external history of the
nation which he supplies is to him little more than a

CHARACTERISTICS OF "DOCUMENTS" 305

framework in which to set his systematic account of
their religious and civil government and worship. To
this end he eschews all picturesqueness or eloquence of
treatment ; and devotes himself to a plain record of
constitutional facts, in which especial prominence is
given to genealogies, numbers, measurements, and details
in general of arithmetic. 1

JE, on the contrary, is the prophetic narrator, animated
by the spirit of the prophets. It would be more correct
to say that JE represents and is the graphic expression
of the prophetic school, in which the prophetic tradition
was cherished from generation to generation. His
writing is characterised by vividness and picturesque-
ness of description. From his pen come the stories of
the patriarchs, with all their attractive grace and beauty.
His manner is that of a poet, painting word-pictures
that strike the imagination and haunt the memory ;
and his interest lies neither in genealogies nor in
institutions, but in men and women, their human needs,
temptations, frailties, and achievements. Of not a few
of his narratives it may be said that once read they can
never be forgotten. Their tenderness and truth to
nature leave an impression that is not easily erased.
The writer, indeed, has been charged with anthro-
pomorphism. In his representations Jehovah walks
and talks, acts and deliberates like a man. But the
representation is due to his intense human sympathy,

1 Driver, I.e. pp. 10 if., 126 ff. ; Carpenter aiid Battersby, vol. i.
eh. xiii. ; F. H. Woods in HDB, vol. ii. p. 369 ff. ; A. Dillmann,
Genesis, and the commentaries.

3 o6 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

his desire to knit man and God together in a real
fellowship, which shall enhance human dignity without
degrading the Divine. To him, with his lofty conception
of the greatness and beauty of life, thus to bring God
near to human experience was an inevitable and neces-
sary element in his plan, and was not a lowering of
the Divine, but an exaltation of the mortal existence
in which God had a part. The contrast between his
standpoint and mind and that of P is well exhibited
in the parallel narratives of the Creation. The first
account is that of a prose, one might almost venture
to say prosaic historian, setting forth in due chrono-
logical order the events of each day ; on the first day
this was created, on the second that, and so forth ; and
the record of each is brought to its close with the
refrain, varied only in a numerical sense, " And there
came to be evening, and there came to be morning,

day one," etc. (ins DV ipa Tn Tiy Tn). The narrative
of JE on the other part is that of a poet, with a poet's
eye for artistic grouping and effect ; to whom the precise
order in time is immaterial, and the supreme interest is
The Man, the crown and end of Creation, to whom all
points, and upon whom all depends. To exhibit and
enforce this truth, that everything is for man, that he
is the centre and noblest offspring of the Creation, the
representative of Jehovah, is the writer's chief aim ;
and all the details of the picture are subordinated to
the general purpose and conception. 1

1 Driver, p. 119 ft'.; Carpenter aiid Battersby, vol. i. chs. xi., xii. ;
HDB, vol. ii. p. 371 ff.

CHARACTERISTICS OF "DOCUMENTS" 307

With the book of Deuteronomy we seem to find our-
selves in a different atmosphere. The language and style
also are changed ; on the one hand, the striking word-
painting does not appear, and on the other, although
there is a recurrence of phrase and expression which
recalls the habit of P, the mannerisms of the chronicler
are entirely absent, and the words and phrases that
are repeated again and again are in no case like his
characteristic refrains. The expressions so constantly
repeated with which the writer of Deuteronomy enforces
his teaching are in general ethical and didactic, and do
not merely punctuate as it were his work, as often in
P, but add to it a distinct moral and elevating tone.
Many of them are rarely or not at all found elsewhere
in the O.T. His style is simple, clear, and dignified,
rising frequently to a sustained and lofty eloquence,
which gives to his work an impressiveness hardly
equalled elsewhere in the pages of the Old Testament.
And while legal and ritual matters continually engage
his attention, and he lays down rules for the right
observance of external duties, it is clear that his highest
interest is with the character and the life. He exhorts
to right living, reiterates and enforces the obligations of
purity, righteousness, and the fear of God, and with
a strenuous and constant urgency seeks to bind his
readers to a high and noble ideal of service to Jehovah,
a service that shall be rooted and built up in love
(pr6tf mrr ns nanx, Deut. vi. 5, xi. 1 ; mrp JIN mnK,
(l)D3\"6K, xi. 13, 22, xix. 9, xxx. 6, 16, 20 ; cp. vii. 9,
x. 12, xiii. 4. See the list of characteristic phrases

308 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

in Driver, Introd. G p. 99 ff., or Deuteronomy, p. Ixxviii ff.).
If P may be termed the chronicler of the Pentateuch,
and JE the prophet or poet, the Deuteronomist is the
preacher, high-souled and earnest, with a passionate
love for God and for his people, and a longing to main-
tain them in the way of a simple and whole-hearted
devotion to Him.

Finally, there was needed the reviser or redactor, who
should select, combine, and harmonise as far as seemed
necessary or desirable. His work will represent the
last stage in the process of uniting the various docu-
ments or sources to form a continuous and complete
whole. It is a welcome testimony to the faithfulness
with which he has discharged his task, that we are so
readily able to distinguish the characters, and assign
the limits of the various writers whose work he has
utilised. If all had been rediiced to a dull grey uni-
formity, minor incongruities, repetitions, differences of
standpoint or judgement being sedulously removed, his
work would have lost in trustworthiness much more
than it gained in consistency. He has been content to
preserve, without too great anxiety to reduce to agree-
ment. His share in the shaping and final settlement
of the text as now printed and read, if less prominent
and distinctive than that of the others, was hardly less
important. To his loyalt}' and self-suppression in
dealing with his authorities no inconsiderable debt of
gratitude is owing from those who profit by his finished
work. He also, like his precedessors, is content to be
nameless ; and is usually referred to as E. In this

HISTORY OF CRITICAL THEORIES 309

task of harmonising and revision more than one hand
may, of course, have been engaged.

HISTORY OF CRITICAL THEORIES. The history and
gradual development of these views with regard to the
authorship and constitution of the Pentateuch is of
great interest, and the subject has engaged the attention
of a large number of scholars both on the Continent
and in America, as well as in Great Britain. The
earlier investigations were for the most part carried on
by German writers, to whom is due in the main the
elaboration of the theory of the composition of the
books as it is now generally accepted. English and
American scholars, generally speaking, joined later in
the task ; but have taken more recently, and are still
taking their full share in the elaboration and com-
pletion of the historical theory, the broad lines of
which had been already formulated. Only a few of the
more prominent names can here receive mention.

The initial impulse, however, as far as formal
publication was concerned, came from France in an
anonymous work published in the year 1753, entitled,
Conjectures sur les Memoires Originaux dont il est permit
cle croire que Moise s'est servir pour composer le Livre de
la Genese. The author was JEAN ASTRUC, teacher of
medicine at Montpelier and Paris, and Court physician to
Louis xiv., whose medical writings won him a consider-
able reputation. Born in Languedoc in the year 1684,
he spent the greater part of his life in Paris, and died
there in 1766 in his eighty-third year. Scattered
suggestions and hints pointing in the same direction

310 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

had already appeared in print ; but in the " Con-
jectures " for the first time form and coherence were
given to a doctrine of the elaboration of the book of
Genesis out of a number of pre-existing documents,
which were utilised and combined by Moses into the
form in which the work has been preserved to the
present day. These documents were mainly two, the
familiar Jehovistic and Elohistic, but with these
fragments of others had been interwoven ; and the
whole, to which an orderly and systematic arrange-
ment had been given by Moses, had later become
confused by the mistakes and transpositions of the
copyists. The theory became known as the " Frag-
mentary Hypothesis " ; and the book won for its author
a wide and enduring fame.

The theory of Astruc was taken up with learning
and enthusiasm and was introduced into Germany,
where it has ever since found its most convinced
supporters, by JOHANN GOTTFRIED EICHHORN, 1752-
1827, professor of Oriental languages and literature
at the Universities of Jena and Gottingen successively.
His voluminous works, characterised by wide and
extensive learning but also by a certain detachment
and want of sympathy, included elaborate " Introduc-
tions " to the Old and New Testaments, Commentaries
on the Hebrew Prophets, on the Apocrypha, the
Eevelation of John, etc., a History of Literature
planned on a large scale, and man}^ others. He
extended his investigations into the remaining parts
of the Pentateuch, and pointed out that similar

HISTORY OF CRITICAL THEORIES 311

variations of style and usage which his predecessor
had found in Genesis were present there also, together
with others which all lent support in general to his
conclusions. Eichhom's work was hardly of a popular
nature, nor his style attractive, but his influence was
strong and far-reaching upon students and those
accustomed to estimate differences of style and the
value of literary characteristics.

A more notable and perhaps more permanently
significant name was that of WILHELM MARTIN L. DE
WETTE, who was born in 1780 at Ulla, near Weimar,
in Germany. At the early age of twenty-seven he
received the appointment of professor of theology at
Jena ; thence two years later he was transferred to
Heidelberg ; and in 1810 to Berlin. This last position
he held for nine years, when he was dismissed for
having expressed sympathy with the assassination of
Kotzebue, a literary and dramatic author of consider-
able influence in his native town, who had made
himself many enemies by his bitter political satire.
Retiring to Basle, he became professor of theology at
the university in that city in 1822, and died there in
the summer of 1849. His most important writings
were Commentaries, an Introduction to the Books of
the Old and New Testaments, and a Handbook of
Jewish Archaeology, all of which passed through several
editions. In two respects especially De Wette's work
was significant, and marked a considerable advance on
the views and position of his predecessors. He was
the first to examine critically the narrative of the

3 i2 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

discovery of the Book of the Law in the temple,
2 Kings xxii. f., and to indicate its relation to the book
of Deuteronomy, calling attention also to the well-
known passage, Jer. vii. 2126, in its bearing on the
question of authorship and date ; and he rejected
altogether the view that the Pentateuch in its existing
form was of Mosaic origin, with the possible exception
of the Decalogue. The so-called Books of Moses were
in reality the productions of various writers, composed
at different periods, the latest of whom was the author
of Deuteronomy, who lived in the time of King Josiah ;
and the laws contained therein, for which Mosaic
authority was claimed, were as a matter of fact
habitually disregarded, and treated as though non-
existent by the Israelites of later times. Eules and
observances which were in fact of altogether modern
origin were attributed to Moses, partly through a real
belief in their antiquity, and partly in the natural
desire to enhance their credit and ascendancy by support-
ing them with the authority of his name. De Wette's
views and teaching exercised a great influence on
younger students, and his name held and holds a
deservedly high place in the history of Old Testament
scholarship and research.

The task of a literary criticism and analysis, thus
initiated, was carried forward with zeal by many
scholars, most of whom were under the influence of
the prevailing view as to the composition of the books.
Of these in the first half and middle of the nineteenth
century the writer and scholar whose work has been

HISTORY OF CRITICAL THEORIES 313

most enduring was GEORGE HEINRICH AUGUST VON
EWALD, professor of Philology at Gottingen and
Tubingen Universities. He returned to Gottingen,
his birthplace, in 1848, where his death took place
in the year 1875 at the age of seventy-two. Ewald's
strength lay rather on the grammatical and linguistic
than on the constructive side ; and his best work
was done in his numerous commentaries and in his
Grammar and Syntax of the Hebrew Language. An
admirer and disciple of De Wette, as far as theories
of the Pentateuch were concerned, he occupied on the
whole a conservative position, adopting and enforcing
with linguistic arguments what is sometimes known
as the Supplement Hypothesis ; according to which a
primary document of great age (grundschrift), generally
identical with the work of the writer whom others
have termed P, underlies and is traceable throughout
the entire Pentateuch ; later writings, Jehovistic and
other, were added to or combined with the first, and
a final editor revised and completed the whole. The
theory as thus held did not greatly differ from the
more recently accepted Documentary Hypothesis, by
which it was superseded.

The defects of the Supplementary theory seem to
have been felt by Ewald himself, and were pointed
out by succeeding scholars, Hupfeld, Schrader, Eeuss,
A. Kuenen, and others, and especially by K. H. GRAF,
180169, professor of theology at Leipzig; who so
far gave method and form to the currently accepted
hypothesis that on the Continent it has frequently been

314 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

known by his name. It was shown, in particular, that
the various writings or documents within the Pentateuch
are independent of one another, and so far from bearing
the marks of having been used to " supplement," to
complete what w r as imperfect or supply deficiencies,
are found not infrequently to be mutually inconsistent
or even contradictory. Thus a doctrine of independent
documents or sources was gradually elaborated, to
which it was sought in the light of their several
contents to assign dates, and thus to reconstruct not
only the literary history of the five books of Moses,
but even the religious and- political history of the
people of Israel themselves.

This last development is inseparably connected with
the name of JULIUS WELLHAUSEN, who, working on the
lines that Graf had laid down, but in a broader and
more comprehensive sense, endeavbured to elaborate a
complete scheme of Israelite history on the basis of
the newly-established views on the chronology of the
literary documents. Dr. Wellhausen became professor
of Philology at Halle in 1885 at the age of forty,
and later professor of Oriental languages at the
University of Marburg. His chief works on this
subject are a comprehensive history of Israel, Pro-
legomena zur Gesckichte Israels, which first appeared
in 1878, and has passed through several editions;
and Die Composition des Hexateuch, 1889. Of the
former an English translation was published. The
learning and ability of the work were at once
recognised ; but the novelty and revolutionary cha-

HISTORY OF CRITICAL THEORIES 315

racter of the theories propounded excited great
opposition. The author of set purpose disregarded
tradition, and sought to build up a complete historical
account of the development of the institutions of
Israel and their national progress upon the basis of
the new reading of the documentary facts as he
believed himself to find them in the Hebrew Old
Testament. By the defenders of the traditional view
the writer and his work were bitterly assailed. The
real scholarship and worth of the book, however, had
its reward. The opposition died away ; and much of
Dr. Wellhausen's work came to be appreciated at its
true and enduring value. As a whole the book was
never traversed or answered in detail. It was not
difficult to show that some of its conclusions were
built up on insufficient data, and failed to take due
account of all the conditions. There has been a
steady recession from the more extreme positions
of the writer. But the work itself was the notable
contribution of a thoughtful and able scholar to a
problem of exceeding difficulty and complexity; and
all who have attempted to follow in his steps, or
to discuss the early history of Israel and the literary
and historical evolution of their sacred books, would
gratefully acknowledge indebtedness to Dr. Wellhausen.

CHRONOLOGY OF THE DOCUMENTS. The discussion /
and elucidation of Israelite history begins with the
book of Deuteronomy. That work, it is assumed, or at
least the central and essential part of it, chs. xii. xxvi.
inclusive, is identical with the Book of the Law, the

316 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

discovery of which in the Temple at Jerusalem in the
eighteenth year of the reign of King Josiah (B.C. 622
or 620) is recorded in 2 Kings xxii., xxiii. This conclu-
sion rests in a broad and general sense upon two main
arguments, which look, as it were, before and after.
In the first place, the writings of the prophets who
lived in the age preceding Josiah betray no knowledge
of the laws and religious obligations which Deutero-
nomy prescribes ; there is apparently no attempt to
enforce them, and no consciousness in the general
practice of the people that they are acting in defiance
of moral and legal directions so repeatedly emphasised.
Kings and people do, apparently without in the least
realising that they are acting in contravention of the
laws of Jehovah, things they ought not to have done,
and on the other hand leave undone things they were
under bounden obligation to do. This it is urged is
inconceivable and impossible, if the book of Deutero-
nomy, in any shape at all approximating to that in
which it now exists, were known to the Israelite
people, and recognised as sacred and authoritative.
Nor is the force of the argument greatly weakened, if
it be supposed that the laws and the book may them-
selves, in reality, be older than Josiah's day, but had
come to be in abeyance and forgotten ; while new
difficulties of another order are raised by such a
hypothesis. Upon the argument, as a whole, how-
ever, the most obvious criticism is that, assuming the
substantial accuracy of the view of the phenomena,
literary and otherwise, upon which it is based, it is

CHRONOLOGY OF DOCUMENTS 317

still, in large part, an argument a silentio, and that
inferences so drawn are admittedly and notoriously
precarious.

In the second place, however, a much stronger posi-
tion is taken up, and one that for the general identifi-
cation of King Josiah's law-book with our Deuteronomy
is practically irresistible, when it is pointed out that
the writings and work of the prophets of the age
immediately succeeding his time are deeply affected
not only by the spirit and teaching, but even by the
letter and language of Deuteronomy. With its teach-
ing they identify themselves, to its laws and precepts
they make constant reference ; they presuppose, in
a word, the whole legislation and economy which is
there set forth, and make it the basis of their own
warnings and exhortations. To the earlier books of
the Pentateuch, however, in so far as these differ in
spirit or regulation from Deuteronomy, no similarly
precise relation can be traced. Moreover, the history
in I Kings passes on to describe in detail a religious
reformation which the king instituted and carried
through, moved thereto by the denunciations of wrong
and the rules of ritual and conduct which he found
written in the law-book from the Temple. This
scheme of reformation, both in spirit and in letter,
is in close harmony with the injunctions of Deutero-
nomy, and does not present similar features of agree-
ment with any other part of the Pentateuch. It
would seem, therefore, unquestionably to have been
inspired by Deuteronomistic teaching. And if the

318 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

volume discovered in the Temple were not in sub-
stance, at least, our Deuteronomy, it would be neces-
sary to postulate the existence of another book so
entirely like that which we possess, as to be for all
practical purposes for us indistinguishable from it.

If further, and as the next step in the investigation,
the attempt be made to relate to Deuteronomy as
a fixed and definite starting-point the remaining
legislation and "documents" of the Pentateuch, a
detailed comparison seems to show without doubt that
the precepts and regulations of Deuteronomy pre-
suppose, and in many instances reassert the laws of
JE. It would follow, therefore, that these last were
certainly known, and their obligatory character recog-
nised at the period of the composition of the former
book. A not inconsiderable interval of time, moreover,
must be allowed for these ordinances to have gained
currency and authority to such an extent that upon
them could be founded a series of fresh legislative
enactments, which openly base their right to be heard
and obeyed upon the fact that they are a repetition
of a law or laws already promulgated and received
(HN-tn rninn rw, Deut. xvii. IS 1 ). Thus the work of
JE antedates, probably by a considerable period, the
work of the author of Deuteronomy.

The contrary seems to be the case with the compiler
or compilers of the Priests' Code. They depend upon,
and in the succession of time succeed the work of the
Deuteronomist. The latter is apparently unconscious

1 Cp. supra, \>. 119 f.

CHRONOLOGY OF DOCUMENTS 319

of rules and prescriptions to which P attaches great
importance, and ignores principles which in the eyes
of the Priestly writers are fundamental to all national
and religious life. These principles, moreover, are
most naturally explained as a development in the
order of time and progress of the doctrines laid down
in D, which had their origin in the circumstances and
conditions of the age in which Israel found itself.
The Priestly narrator is acquainted with, and presup-
poses Deuteronomy, not vice versd. These propositions
are elaborated and 4 supported by Wellhausen, and also
in the larger Introductions to the Old Testament, with
a wealth of detail carefully wrought out and set in
order. It is evident that their acceptableness will
depend upon the strength of the examples quoted and
the general impression produced ; and that they will
not be invalidated, should a few instances be produced
to the contrary, if the character of the great majority
of the records and laws points in one direction. Few,
if any scholars who have studied the evidence will
be found to dispute their truth.

It is much more difficult to determine the absolute
than the relative date of these documents, the legal
and narrative constituents of the Pentateuch as it
has been handed down to the present day. The
starting-point again will be the book of Deuteronomy,
and much or all . will depend upon the date assigned
to its composition. 1 If the work were composed,
according to the prevailing view, in the early years of

1 See the question more fully discussed infra, p. 324 ff.

320 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

King Josiah, or during the long and disastrous reign
of his grandfather Manasseh, and from a century to
a century and a half were allowed between the promul-
gations of the codes of law contained in JE and D,
during which the former won its way to general recog-
nition and acceptance, an interval which errs on the
side of brevity rather than of excessive length, then
^ the date of the compilation of JE will fall towards the
end of the ninth or beginning of the eighth century B.C.,
or possibly as far back as the middle of the ninth. If
this last were the case, then the work was contem-
porary with the great age of Elijah and Elisha, and
the ferment of religious thought and national life
which the narrative of their experiences reveals.

The Priests' Code will then be due to the period
of the Exile, the end of the sixth century B.C. or later,
and will itself be an expression on the legal side of
the spirit of rigid exterualism and priestly domination
by which it was hoped to supply the lack of prophetic
inspiration and freedom, and to keep the people true
to an observance and faith in which they had hitherto
so lamentably failed. Later still came the work of the
editor or reviser, accomplished not at one time or in
one stage, but probably extending over a considerable
time ; and the whole thus blended together and har-
monised was presented to the people, and acknowledged
and accepted by them, under the influence and with
the authority of Ezra the priest and Nehemiah the
governor and delegate of the Persian king, as is re-
corded in the book of Nehemiah, chs. viii., ix.

CHRONOLOGY OF DOCUMENTS 321

It is evident also that this chronological scheme,
with the provisional dates assigned, does not preclude
the incorporation of even a large element of earlier
work, documents and traditions derived from ancient
times ; 1 nor, on the other hand, does it forbid later
insertions of matter which by its authors might
be deemed necessary to complete a narrative, or to
explain or supplement a

The relative dates of J and E are variously given, but by no
authorities are they brought down to a lower period than the
middle of the century indicated. On good grounds it has been
concluded that E was written or produced in the Northern King-
dom, J being usually assigned to the south. ' Dr. E. Kautzsch
regards J as the earlier, circa 850 B.C., preceded within a century
before the date named by what he terms " Ephraimite," " David,"
and " Saul " Stories, and by the " Book of the Covenant " in its
original form. The " Blessing of Moses " in Deut. xxxiii. is some
fifty years later, E being later still by another thirty to fifty
years, down to about 740 B.C. And the blending of the two into
the form JE, as it is found in the Pentateuch, was accomplished
circa 640 B.C. Deuteronomy is 628 B.C., with possible "written
sources " twenty years earlier ; and a " Deuteronomistic redaction "
of the whole, JE with D, is placed in or about the middle of the
sixth century, the " Song of Moses " in Deut. xxxii. (B.C. 561), and
the nucleus of the Law of Holiness in Lev. xvii.-xxvi., originat-
ing about the same time. The Priests' Code, P, was composed in
Babylonia c. 500 B.C. ; and the whole, i.e. JE, D, P, were united,
and the Pentateuch received its final form about a century later. 2

Pursuing the exposition of the course of Israelite
history, as based upon this detailed separation and
analysis of documents, Dr. Wellhausen sought to show

1 Supra, p. 263 ff.

2 E. Kautzsch, Literature of the Old Testament, London, 1898 ; see
F. H. Woods in HDB, vol. ii. art. " Hexateuch" ; S. K. Driver, LOT, 6
pp. 116-157; R. Kittel, History of the Hebrews, vol. i. pp. 48-134.

322 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

that corresponding to each of the three divisions of
narrative and legislation found within the Pentateuch
there were three well-marked periods, characterised by
differences of religious practices, of ritual observance
and belief, which have succeeded one another chrono-
logically, and have followed a natural and easily
recognisable line of development. During the first
period, represented in JE, and answering to the
experience and faith of the people before the time of
King Josiah, there was no generally accepted or
codified law. Formal and legal worship was not
confined to a central sanctuary, but might be offered
in many places ; and custom sanctioned the existence
and maintenance of numerous altars, upon any of
which sacrifice might be offered without offence, to the
most high God. This worship, moreover, is in its
essence " seasonal," centres around and expresses itself
in the great religious festivals which mark the progress
of the months and years. And, finally, the religious
practice of this period makes no distinction as regards
status or privilege between priest and Levite, and
knows nothing of a select family, the sons of Aaron,
with special rights beyond their brethren, and a more
exalted sphere of duty.

fWith D is initiated the second period, a period of
religious strife and attempted reformation, conducted on
hierarchical lines, when a priestly aristocracy endeavoured
to purify the national worship according to well-defined
rules of observance, and to bring under their own control
the ritual and religious life of the nation. The most

RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT 323

important and striking feature of the reformation was the
substitution for the many sanctuaries scattered through-
out the land, where the rites of religion might easily
tend to become irregular, contaminated by the unworthy
and immoral practices of the surrounding heathen, of a
single central sanctuary, where alone acceptable worship
might be presented " at the place that the Lord your
God shall choose " ; where, therefore, centralised and
controlled, it would be practicable to secure a purity
and continuity of Divine worship, which otherwise
would be in constant danger of being lost. Powerfully
aided in the first instance by Josiah, their reforming
endeavours were crowned with success, and the people
learned to look upon Jerusalem as the one centre of
religious observance, and to the priests as their
instructors and guides in all that the fulfilment of
religious duty involved. In the days of the Exile and
later, this movement of thought, which accentuated the
difference between a learned and priestly caste and the
ordinary people, reached its climax. The laws and
regulations which expressed and perpetuated the new
ideas were elaborated in the Priests' Code. The daily
sacrifices and offerings at the one central sanctuary,
enjoined as a perpetual obligation upon all Israelites,
completely overshadowed and in importance set on one
side the earlier festivals that celebrated the recurrence
of the seasons. Law, detailed minute exacting, had
finally superseded the comparative freedom of earlier
days ; and as it were to emphasize the real character
and finality of the change that had taken place, to the

324 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Levites was assigned a position of distinct inferiority
to the priests, in whose hands was concentrated all
authority and dignity and right. This is the claim
and attitude of P ; and with P, as far as the Old
Testament is concerned, the religious evolution and
development of Israel, at least on its legal and ritual
side, comes to an end.

It is evident, therefore, that it is upon the position
and dating of the book of Deuteronomy that the broad
general scheme of chronology as thus expounded
depends. Assuming its identity in essential matters
with the law-book of Hilkiah discovered in the Temple,
and the relative priority or posteriority of the main
parts or strata of the Pentateuch, as set forth above,
according to which the order in time is first JE, then
~D, and finally P, with a certain interval, not incon-
siderable, between each stage allowed for development
and growth, the absolute dating of the whole in years
B.C. will result from the date of composition which is
assigned to Hilkiah's book. And the circumstances of
its discovery, as narrated in 2 Kings xxii., xxiii., and
the attitude of the king and people towards it, demand,
therefore, careful consideration. And these two points
to which reference has been made, the general relation
of the parts of the Pentateuch to one another and the
identity of the central and most significant portion of
Deuteronomy, not necessarily or entirely in form but
in substance, with the book discovered in the Temple
B.C. 620, may be regarded as the most assured results
of scholarly criticism as applied to the Pentateuch.

DEUTERONOMIC LAW-BOOK 325

They are not seriously contested by any one who has
studied the arguments and conditions involved. It is,
however, by no means so clear that the law-book was
really composed by some unknown author in or about
the time at which it was discovered in the Temple, or
within some few years at least previous to the begin-
ning of the reign of King Josiah.

The charge of bad faith or collusion brought against Hilkiah
and those associated with him by a few modern writers has been
practically abandoned now by all who claim to be seriously
heard. The tone and simplicity of the narrative are entirely
opposed to the idea that Hilkiah himself was the author of the
book which he professed to have found, or that there was any
contrivance or unreality in the actual discovery. Such a con-
ception and the assumption of a " pious fraud " are admitted as
possible by modern thought, but would be almost inconceivable
to an ancient writer, and utterly repugnant to ancient sentiment.
Nor would a deceit, however cunning and successful, suffice to
explain under the circumstances the acknowledged effects upon
the king and people.

The essential points to be noted in the history are
that the work is referred to as " the book," " this
book ";--"! have found the book of the law " pap
rninn, "the law-book"), ch. xxii. 8, cp. vv. 13, 16,
ch. xxiii. 2, 3. The king expresses great grief and
fear, because the precepts of the book have not been
obeyed in times past, " our fathers have not hearkened
unto the words of this book, to do according to all
that which is written concerning us " (^!?y 2in2n) ; and
the prophetess Huldah, to whom appeal is made,
declares in the name of the Lord that it is the penalties
denounced in the book which will come upon the
people for their neglect. The king himself shall be

326 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

spared, and shall be gathered to his fathers in peace. In
the assembly of all the people that was held there was
then read " all the words of the book of the covenant
which was found in the house of the Lord " ("nm ^3
mrr JV33 svcon nmn IBD), ch. xxiii. 2 ; l and the people
pledged themselves to abide by the covenant (iioyi
JVO3 Dyn hi), ver - 3. The very terms in which the
covenant is described recall the language of Deutero-
nomy, chs. xii. 1, xiii. 4, etc. The symbols of idolatry
were then destroyed, its priests deposed, its sacred and
ceremonial places defiled. The vessels employed in the
worship of Baal, the Asherah, and the host of heaven
were brought forth and destroyed, vv. 4, 6, 15, cp.
Deut. xvi. 21 ; the false priests (D'lEa, elsewhere in
Old Testament Hos. x. 5, Zeph. i. 4 only, but perhaps to
be read in Hos. iv. 4) suppressed, vv. 5, 8; the houses of
the sodomites (a^enpn, cp. Deut. xxiii. 18(17)) destroyed,
ver. 8 ; the high places (nto-fi) and Topheth (nsn) defiled,
vv. 810 ; and the chariots of the sun burned with
fire, ver. 11. The altars also devoted to idolatrous
worship were overthrown, vv. 12-15, 19, among which
mention is made especially of those built by Manasseh,
the high places consecrated by Solomon to the service
of Ashtoreth, Chemosh, and Milcom, and the altar and
high place at Bethel of Jeroboam the son of Nebat ;

1 Apparently it was no very long document that was read. If the
reference were to the so-called "original" Deuteronomy, chs. xii.-
xxvi., xxviii. (supra, p. 302), the length would answer fairly well to
the presuppositions of the narrative ; a larger portion is perhaps
improbable. It must be remembered that it was an Eastern, not a
Western crowd that was listening. The difference is considerable.

DEUTERONOMIC LAW-BOOK 327

and the altars were defiled by the burning upon them
of human bones, ver. 20. Finally, the keeping of the
passover was enjoined upon the people by the king,
" as it is written in this book of the covenant "
(nrn man nso *>y ainaa, cp. Deut. xvi. 2-8), an
observance which, the writer goes on to say, had been
intermitted during all the days of the judges and of
the kings of Israel and Judah (wi nm noan n^y: fc6
D>t37i, etc. ; by the latter expression is intended
apparently the period of the divided Monarchy), ver. 22.
All this was done in order to "confirm the words of
the law which were written in the book that Hilkiah
the priest found in the house of the Lord " ; and the
king is especially commended because he turned to
the Lord with all his heart ..." according to all the
law of Moses " (npo rnin Sm), vv. 24, 25.

The emphatic recognition thus accorded to the book
by King Josiah, and the deference and submission of
priests and people to far-reaching religious changes
founded upon its authority, imply at least a general
consciousness of the existence of such laws, and an
acknowledgement of their claim to unquestioning obedi-
ence. Such a belief is entirely inexplicable if the laws
themselves were a novelty, in the sense that they
were of quite recent composition, and had never been
promulgated or made known in Israel before the date
of Hilkiah's discovery. That the laws were in practical
abeyance, subject to an almost universal neglect, the
result of wide-spread ignorance of their bearing and
contents, may be conceded ; and that being so, it might

328 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

seem a matter of comparatively little moment whether
and how long they had previously been in existence.
The king, however, clearly accepts the find in the
Temple as the genuine discovery of an ancient and
authoritative code of Law, with the tradition of the
existence of which he is acquainted, although he knows
nothing of its contents. Unless the traditional belief
were there, the action of the king and the immediate
acquiescence of the people seem alike difficult if not
impossible to explain. And the rise of the tradition
itself would appear to be equally inexplicable, unless
were not behind it a real collection of laws and
regulations for ritual and worship, to which a position
of acknowledged authority was assigned in the general
estimation of the people. This ancient code, if it
existed, can only, from the recorded facts of Josiah's
reformation, have been practically identical with the
Deuteronomy of the Old Testament.

The reference, therefore, of the actual composition
of the Law-Book to the age of Josiah, or to a date
immediately preceding his reign by a few years only,
as the long and troubled period under King Manasseh,
seems altogether improbable. Such a reference fails
to explain the immediate recognition accorded to the
book by the king and his councillors, and the deference
shown to its authority. Even if the interval between
composition and discovery be extended to half a century
(Manasseh, B.C. 699-643), and the writing of the book
be placed in the early part of the reign of the king,
the time allowed is still very far from sufficient for

DEUTERONOMIC LAW-BOOK 329

the promulgation of the law, its general acceptance,
the loss of all knowledge of its tenor, and the rise of
a tradition concerning a lost work in which it was
contained. The difficulty is greatly accentuated if it
is necessary to suppose that the book was consigned,
intentionally or unintentionally, to oblivion almost as
soon as it was written. The age of Manasseh, more-
over, was not one of quiet religious progress and
devotion, during which such a work as Deuteronomy
would be likely to win a hearing, or carry conviction
and assent to the minds of men. King and people
were being swept along in the full tide of bloodshed
and tumult and idolatry (2 Kings xxi. 118). It
would seem almost inevitable that in such a case a
work composed to denounce the prevalent sin and
exhort to righteousness, especially if it were written
by an obscure author, a priest or priests of the temple,
should remain unnoticed and unknown ; and could
not have attained to that position of acknowledged
authority and wide-spread recognition which the facts
of the later history seem to demand.

All analogy, moreover, and the customs and traditions
of other peoples with whom the Jews had close con-
nections, is in favour of the view that the discovery in
the Temple announced by Hilkiah was the real discovery
of an ancient and long-lost code, to which was justly
attached an importance and dignity to which no recent
composition could lay claim. The most probable period
for the deposit or concealment of a work of a religious
character in or about a great building is at the time

330 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

of its foundation, when, if the edifice is raised under
religious auspices or designed for sacred purposes, it
would seem most natural in place of a dynastic record,
with name and title of the king, to place a copy of a
sacred document or inscription, which should witness
to the piety of the builders. The evidence from Egypt
referred to below is proof that under certain circum-
stances this was actually done. And if King Solomon,
when he built and consecrated the Temple, deposited
within its foundation walls a copy of the most sacred
document of his religious faith, the symbol and em-
bodiment of the true worship which his Temple was
to enshrine and perpetuate, he would apparently have
been adopting a well-understood usage, and following
a precedent with which the royal builders of temples
and other edifices designed to last for ages were wont
to comply. In the narrative of 2 Kings xxii. nothing
is recorded of the place or immediate circumstances
under which the law-book was found. The discovery,
however, was made in connection with repairs effected
in the fabric of the Temple. And this is entirely in
harmony with the view that the book had remained
concealed there since its foundation, and was now for
the first time brought to light. This also may fairly
be said to be the primd facie and simplest interpreta-
tion of the terms of the narrative. If, then, the origin
and composition of the work may be placed at some
time during the prosperous period of David and the
United Monarchy, the conditions of the case will most
naturally be met. In the absence of more detailed

DEUTERONOMIC LAW-BOOK 331

evidence a nearer determination or proof of date would
appear to be impracticable. It is reasonable, however,
to accept, at least as a working hypothesis, the theory
which is most in harmony with the facts, as far as
they are known and ascertainable. The early years
of the reign of Solomon, therefore, or perhaps more
probably the reign of his father, would appear to be
the most probable period for the composition of the
book which forms the groundwork of the later Deutero-
nomy.

The two most familiar instances of the finding of documents
concealed beneath the foundations of ancient buildings, which
illustrate the discovery of Hilkiah at Jerusalem, are those of the
foundation-stone of Naram Sin at Sippara, and of early copies
of chapters of the Book of the Dead in Egypt. The former record
is purely historical and dynastic ; and the latter, therefore, where
the texts brought to light are of a religious character, is more
closely parallel to the event recorded in 2 Kings. Nabonidus
(B.C. 555-539), the last king of Babylon, in the course of his
restoration of the temple of Shamash, about thirty miles north
of Babylon, at a great depth below the surface discovered the
foundation-stone of Naram-Sin, son of Sargon. of Agade, who
reigned according to his own calculation more than three
millenniums before his own time. The temple had been re-
paired by Nebuchadrezzar, but apparently the work had been
carelessly and inefficiently accomplished, and renewed and com-
plete restoration of the walls and buildings had been found
necessary. The king records that "Eighteen cubits deep I dug
into the ground, and the foundation-stone of Naram-Sin, the son
of Sargon, which for 3200 years no king who had gone before me
had seen, the Sun-god . . . let me see, even me." Naram-Sin
therefore reigned, according to the scribes of Nabonidus, c.
3750 B.C. It is probable that they have overestimated the
length of the period between Narum-Sin and their own day by
treating dynasties as successive that were really in whole or in
part contemporaneous. In any case, however, the record is of

332 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

great antiquity. 1 A similar discovery is recorded in another
inscription of the same king, narrating further investigations
and excavations: "The writing of the name of Khammurabi
the old king, who 700 years before Burnaburyas had erected
Bitsamas (i.e. the house or temple of the Sun-god), and the tower
over the old foundation, for Samas, I beheld within it." 2

In some of the rubrics attached to chapters of the Egyptian
" Book of the Dead " statements are made concerning original
copies of the chapters, which prove that in some instances at
least they were concealed in the ground in connection with
sacred buildings as a sacred treasure or talisman, and only long
subsequently brought to light. In a papyrus copy of ch. Ixiv.
is the following note : " This chapter was found in the founda-
tions of the shrine of Hennu by the chief mason during the
reign of his majesty, the king of the north and of the south,
Hesepti, triumphant, who carried it away as a mysterious object
which had never (before) been seen or looked upon." The tomb
of Hesepti was found by Flinders Petrie with those of other early
rulers at Abydos, and is by him dated approximately to the
middle of the third millennium before Christ. If the rubric
may be trusted, the chapter was even then so old as to be
mysterious or unintelligible.

A similar note has been preserved from the time of king
Menkaura, the fourth ruler of the fourth Dynasty, whose coffin
was discovered in the third pyramid at Gizeh in A.D. 1837. His
reign is dated in the early centuries of the third millennium
before Christ, c. 2800 B.C., although by some authorities he is
placed much earlier ; and he is credited in the annals with a
long reign of about sixty years. "This chapter (i.e. 30b) was
found in the city of Khemennu (Hermopolis Magna) under the
feet of (the statue of) this god. (It was inscribed) upon a slab of
iron of the south, in the writing of the god himself, in the
time of the majesty of the king of the north and of the south,
Menkaura, triumphant, by the royal son Herutataf, who dis-

1 The text of the cylinder containing the narrative of Nabonidus'
researches and discoveries was published in WAI v. 64. See Records of
the Past, 2nd Ser., i. p. 5f.; H. V. Hilpreclit, Explorations in Bible
Lands, p. 272 f. ; and on the dates, L. W. King, Chronicles concern ing
Early Babylonian Kings, vol. i. pp. 11 f., 15 ff.

- Two Inscriptions of Nabonidus in PSJJA xi. p. 84 ff.

DEUTERONOMIC LAW-BOOK 333

covered it whilst he was on his journey to make an inspection
of the temples and of their estates." The same note, somewhat
elaborated, appears in another manuscript in connection with
ch. Ixiv. ; and there it is added that the inspector "brought it
to the king as a wonderful object when he saw that it was a
thing of great mystery, which had never (before) been seen or
looked upon." The circumstances of the discovery are very
similar to those in the Biblical narrative ; and the expressions
used imply that it was regarded as of sufficient importance to be
recorded in a special note or rubric. 1

In estimating the probabilities of a wide and sufficient
knowledge of such an early code among the people of
Israel as a whole, the difficulties of its promulgation
and circulation must not be overlooked. Written
copies of the code would be exceedingly rare, and
it might well be the case that only two or three, or
even the original alone, were in existence. No facilities
for the multiplication of copies were to hand ; and the
art of writing, though widely known, was difficult in
practice, and always limited by the scarcity of con-
venient writing materials. If the analogy of other
countries and somewhat later centuries may be trusted,
little use was made of it at so early a date in the
duplication and circulation of literary documents of
considerable length such as the Deuteronomic code is
understood to have been. Communication must have
been almost entirely by word of mouth ; and for the
promulgation and enforcement of law the ruler could
only trust to oral delivery and proclamation, and to
the teaching of the recognised spiritual instructors of

1 E. A. Wallis Budge, The Book of the Dead, London, 1898, vol. iii.
pp. 80, 118 f. ; cp. also p. xlviif.

334 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

the people. While, if the code had not behind it the royal
authority and patronage, its chances of becoming widely
known and obeyed would seem to be greatly reduced.

It is therefore less strange than might appear
perhaps at first sight, if the provisions of the
Deuteronomic code were largely inoperative, and its
teaching ignored, during succeeding centuries. Among
the many conceivable reasons for this want of recog-
nition, a chief place must certainly be given to the
difficulty of making its laws known under the circum-
stances of the time, and of securing obedience to its
precepts among the somewhat scattered settlements of
Israel, in close touch always with the strong alien
influence of the lower Canaanitic beliefs. It required
the teaching of adversity, and the centralisation and
strengthening of national feeling brought about by the
destruction of the Northern Kingdom, to render possible
the adoption of a high moral and spiritual rule of life,
and the ultimate permeating of the hearts and lives of
the people with a loftier tone and practice.

In the writings of the prophets, if anywhere, a
knowledge of the laws and teaching of Deuteronomy
might not unnaturally be expected. An examination of
the extant remains of those prophets who wrote and
spoke before the time of Josiah does in fact indicate
that they were at least not so ignorant of Deuteronomic
teaching as has often been assumed. Actual quotation
is, of course, not to be anticipated, and its presence
would justly arouse suspicions of interpolation at a
later date. Even in instances where the prophets

DEUTERONOMIC LAW-BOOK 335

committed to writing their own discourses, it is highly
improbable that a copy of the law would be accessible
to them, or that they would stay to verify the verbal
accuracy of a reference thereto by searching through
its manuscript pages. The likeness and sympathy are
in tone and temper, rather than in language. They
may easily be felt ; but it is scarcely possible to transfer
the evidence to paper, or to marshal convincing
arguments in order. The passages quoted below are in
some instances hardly even parallel, in the strictest
sense of the term. Their cumulative effect, however,
is very considerable. The books of prophecy referred
to, carefully studied as a whole, convey the impression
that the thoughts and leading principles of Deuteronomy
were not unfamiliar to the authors.

The Lord hath spoken : I Ye are the children of the
have nourished and brought Lord your God. Deut. xiv. 1.
up children. Isa. i. 2.

In the place where it was
said unto them, Ye are not my
people, it shall be said unto
them, Ye are the sons of the
living God. Has. i. 10.

They judge not the fatherless, Thou shalt not wrest the
neither doth the cause of the judgement of ... the father-
widow come unto them. Isa. less ; nor take the widow's rai-
i. 23. merit to pledge. Deut. xxiv. 17.

Woe to them that . . . turn Thou shalt not wrest judge-
aside the needy from judgement, ment ; thou shalt not respect
and take away the right of the persons. Deut. xvi. 19, cp.
poor of my people. Isa. x. 1 f. xxiv. 17.

The Hebrew word translated " turn aside " is the same (Piel of
naj) as " wrest " in the two passages from Deuteronomy.

336 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Their land also is full of silver Only he shall not multiply

and gold, neither is there any horses to himself . . . neither

end of their treasures; their shall he greatly multiply to

land also is full of horses, himself silver and gold. Deut.

neither is there any end of their xvii. 16 f.
chariots. Isa. ii. 7.

Say ye of the righteous, that Thou shalt not eat of it ; that
it shall be well with him ; for it may go well with thee. Deut.
they shall eat the fruit of their xii. 25.
doings. Isa. Hi. 10.

I and the children whom the They shall be upon thee for a
Lord hath given me are for signs sign and for a wonder, and upon
and for wonders in Israel from thy seed for ever. Deut. xxviii.
the Lord of Hosts. Isa. viii. 18. 46.

On all their heads is baldness, Ye shall not cut yourself, nor
every beard is cut off. Isa. xv. 2. make any baldness between your

In that day did the Lord . . . eyes for the dead. Deut. xiv. 1.
call to weeping, and to mourning,
and to baldness, and to girding
with sackcloth. Isa. xxii. 12.

I will bring up ... baldness
upon every head. Amos viii.
10.

The Hebrew word for "baldness" (nrnp) is the same in all four
passages ; and is not used elsewhere in Deuteronomy.

Neither shall there be for The Lord shall make thee the

Egypt any work, which head or head, and not the tail. Deut.

tail, palm-branch or rush, may xxviii. 13.
do. Isa. xix. 15, cp. ix. 14 f.

They shall come that were A Syrian (mg., Heb. Aramaean)

ready to perish in the land of ready to perish was my father,

Assyria, and they that were out- and he went down into Egypt,

casts in the land of Egypt. Isa. and sojourned there. Deut. xxvi.

xxvii. 13, 5.

DEUTERONOMY AND THE PROPHETS 337

Jacob fled into the field of
Aram. Has. xii. 12.

The Hebrew (DIN, 'DIN) is alliterative with "ready to perish"
(nan).

Thou shalt not see the fierce The Lord shall bring a nation

people, a people of a deep speech against thee from far ... a na-

that thou canst not perceive ; of tion whose tongue thou shalt not

a strange tongue that thou canst understand ; a nation of fierce

not understand. Isa. xxxiii. 19. countenance. Deut. xxviii. 49 f.

Compare also the following passages : Isa. i. 1 with Deut.
xxviii. 51 f. ; Isa. ii. 20, Deut. xiv. 18; Isa. iii. 11, Deut.
xxviii. 15 ff. ; Isa. v. 26-30, Deut. xxviii. 49 ; Isa. ix. 20,
Deut. xxviii. 53-57 ; Isa. xxi. 4, Deut. xxviii. 67 ; Isa. xxx. 17,
Deut. xxviii. 20, 25 ; Isa. xxxi. 1 with Deut. xvii. 16, xx. 1.

The children of Israel shall Neither shalt thou set thee
abide many days without ... up a pillar, which the Lord thy
pillar. Has. iii. 4, cp. x. 1 f. God hateth. Deut. xvi. 22.

They sacrifice upon the tops Ye shall surely destroy all the

of the mountains, and burn places, wherein the nations that

incense upon the hills, under ye shall possess served their gods,

oaks and poplars and terebinths, upon the high mountains and

because the shadow thereof is upon the hills and under every

good. Has. iv. 13. green tree. Deut. xii. 2.

The princes of Judah are like Thou shalt not remove thy
them that remove the landmark, neighbour's landmark. Deut.
Hos. v. 10. xix. 14.

Ephraim is oppressed, he is Thou shalt be only oppressed
crushed in judgement. Hos. v. and crushed alway. Deut. xxviii.
11. 33.

They are as men that have Man or woman that doeth that

transgressed a covenant (R.V. which is evil in the sight of the

mg.). Hos. vi. 7. Lord thy God, in transgressing

Because they have transgressed his covenant. Deut. xvii. 2, cp.

my covenant, and trespassed xxviii. 49.
against my law. Ib. viii. 1.
22

338 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Now will lie remember their The Lord shall bring thee into

iniquity, and visit their sins ; Egypt again with ships, by the

they shall return to Egypt. Hos. way whereof I said unto thee,

viii. 13. Thou shalt see it no more again.

Ephraim shall return to Egypt. Deut. xxviii. 68.
Ib. ix. 3.

He shall not return into the Only he shall not . . . cause
land of Egypt. Ib. xi. 5, cp. the people to return to Egypt

. . . forasmuch as the Lord hath
said unto you, Ye shall hence-
forth return no more that way.
Deut. xvii. 16.

sup. viii. 13, ix. 3.

Their sacrifices shall be unto I have not eaten thereof in
them as the bread of mourners ; my mourning. Deut. xxvi. 14.
all that eat thereof shall be
polluted. Hos. ix. 4.

By a prophet the Lord brought The Lord thy God will raise
Israel up out of Egypt, and by a up unto thee a prophet from the

Hos. midst of thee, of thy brethren,
like unto me ; unto him shall

Deut. xviii. 15.

prophet was he preserved.
xii. 13.

ye hearken.

Compare further Hos. iv. 4 with Deut. xvii. 12 ; iv. 14,
Deut. xxiii. 17; vii. 12, Deut. xxviii. 15 ff. ; ix. 17, Deut.
xxviii. 64 f. ; x. 11 with Deut. xxv. 4.

Bring your sacrifices every
morning, and your tithes every
three days. Amos iv. 4.

At the end of every three
years thou shalt bring forth all
the tithe of thine increase in the
same year. Deut. xiv. 28, cp.
xxvi. 12.

Ye have built houses of hewn Thou shalt build an house,

stone, but ye shall not dwell in and thou shalt not dwell there-

them ; ye have planted pleasant in ; thou shalt plant a vineyard,

vineyards, but ye shall not drink and shalt not use the fruit there-

the wine thereof. Amos. v. 11. of. Deut. xxviii. 30, cp. vv. 38-

Thou shalt sow, but shalt not 40.

DEUTERONOMY AND THE PROPHETS 339

reap ; thou slialt tread the olives,
but slialt not anoint thee with
oil ; and the vintage, but shalt
not drink the wine. Mic. vi. 15.
They shall build houses, but
shall not inhabit them ; and
they shall plant vineyards, but
shall not drink the wine thereof.
Zeph. i. 13.

Slaking the ephah small and Thou shalt not have in thy

the shekel great, and dealing bag divers weights, a great and

falsely with balances of deceit, a small. Thou shalt not have

Amos viii. 5, cp. Hos. xii. 7. in thine house divers measures,

Shall I be pure with wicked a great and a small. Deut. xxv.

balances, and with a bag of 13, 14.
deceitful weights. Mic. vi. 11.

Compare Amos iv. 6 with Deut. xxviii. 57 ; Amos iv. 9, Deut.
xxviii. 22; Amos iv. 10, Deut. xxviii. 27, 60; Amos v. 12,
Deut. xvi. 19 ; Amos ix. 3, 4 with Deut. xxviii. 65.

Arise ye, and depart ; for this Ye are not as yet come to
is not your rest. Mic. ii. 10. the rest and to the inheritance

which the Lord thy God giveth
thee. Deut. xii. 9.

I will cut off witchcrafts out
of thine hand ; and thou shalt
have no more soothsayers : and
I will cut off thy graven images
and thy pillars out of the midst
of thee ; and thou shalt no more
worship the work of thine hands.
And I will pluck up thine Ashe-
rim out of the midst of thee.
Mic. v. 12 ft'., cp. Isa. xvii. 8.

There .shall not be found with
thee . . . one that useth divina-
tion, one that practiseth augury,
or an enchanter, or a sorcerer,
or a charmer, or a consulter with
a familiar spirit, or a wizard, or
a necromancer. Deut. xviii. 10,
11.

Thou shalt not plant thee an
Asherah of any kind of tree
beside the altar of the Lord thy
God, which thou shalt make
thee. Neither shalt thou set
thee up a pillar ; which the

340 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

Lord thy God hateth. Deut.
xvi. 21, 22.

Trust ye not in a friend, put If ... the wife of thy bosom,
ye not confidence in a guide ; or thy friend, who is as thine
keep the doors of thy mouth own soul, entice thee secretly
from her that lieth in thy bosom. . . . them shalt not consent
Mic. vii. 5. unto him, nor hearken unto

him. Deut. xiii. 6ff.

There is one gone forth out Certain base fellows (mg.,

of thee, that imagineth evil Heb. sons of worthlessness) are

against the Lord, that counselleth gone out from the midst of thee.

wickedness (mg., or worthless- Deut. xiii. 13. Heb. V^ ' OWN.
ness, Heb. Belial). Nah. i. 11.
Heb. V?a KJ>'.

The Lord thy God . . . will It shall come to pass, that as
rejoice over thee with joy, he the Lord rejoiced over you to
will rest in his love, he will joy do you good, and to multiply
over thee with singing. Zepli. you ; so the Lord will rejoice
iii. 17. over you to cause you to perish,

and to destroy you. Deut.

xxviii. 63.

Compare further Zeph. i. 4 with Deut. xii. 13 ; i. 17 with Deut.
xxviii. 29.

Perhaps the passages and combinations of passages
uiost worthy of attention are : Isa. i. 2 Hos. i. 1 ; Isa.
i. 23 x. 1 f. ; iii. 10 ; viii. 18 ; Isa. xxvii. 13 Hos. xii. 12 ;
Isa. xxxiii. 1 9 ; Isa. xv. 2 xxii. 1 2 Amos viii. 1 ; Hos.
iv. 13 ; v. 10, 11 ; Hos. vi. 7 viii. 1 ; ix. 4 ; xii. 13 ; Hos.
xii. 7 Amos viii. 5 Mic. vi. 1 1 ; Amos iv. 4 ; Amos v. II
Mic. vi. 15 Zeph. i. 13 ; Mic. ii. 10 ; v. 12 ff. ; vii. 5 ;
Zeph. iii. 1 7 ; with the corresponding passages of
Deuteronomy. The phrase in Hos. viii. 12 may also
he cited, wta i-n (Q. 'in) ft inn?? (Q. arox), B.V.,

CHRONOLOGY OF DOCUMENTS 341

though I write for him my law in ten thousand pre-
cepts, marc/. I wrote for him the ten thousand things
of my law. The latter rendering is hardly admissible
for the Hebrew text as it stands. Whatever the
precise implication or reference of the words, they
nevertheless do seem to imply a knowledge on the part
of the author of a written law. It is noticeable also,
that in the immediate context (ver. 11) Hosea declares
the multiplication of altars to be evidence of Ephrairn's
guilt ; by which he appears to show his sympathy with
the Deuteronomic spirit. 1

The relative order of the documents or strata of
which the Pentateuch is composed is unaffected by the
question as to the actual date of Deuteronomy. It
is evident, however, that if the composition of the
last-named book, or at least of the central and import-
ant part to which additions were subsequently made,
is to be assigned to the age of Solomon, or of David,
in the first half of the tenth century B.C. ; and if,
further, the Deuteronomic code presupposes the writing
of JE, and assumes familiarity with its regulations on
the part of the people addressed; provision must be
made in any chronological scheme of sufficient interval
between the dates of the two documents to allow for the
growth of this familiarity, and for the spread and general
adoption of practices which JE tacitly, at least, condones,
but which the author of Deuteronomy expressly con-
demns. The period need not be assumed to have
been of very long duration. But the era of the Judges,

1 Cp. supra, p. 322 f.

342 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

with its scattered, apparently more or less isolated
settlements, was not one favourable to literary com-
position, or the promulgation and acceptance of a code
or codes of law amongst the community as a whole.
Different rules and usages, locally recognised and in
part contemporary, might be expected to arise.
Possibly it is in this sense that the original variations
between J and E should be interpreted. A national
code, however, generally accepted and obeyed, would
seem to be more naturally assigned to a date antecedent
to the disunion and unrest of the times of the Judges.

The longer, moreover, the interval between the two
documents, the nearer is the earlier brought to the
Mosaic age, and the greater the probability of the
inference that in JE, or in one or other of the writings
combined under that name, have been preserved genuine
records of the work of Moses, narratives or le^al

* O

directions written or dictated by the great Hebrew
Lawgiver himself. Beyond this tentative conclusion
it is hardly possible with our present sources of infor-
mation to go. It is certainly that which appears best
to reconcile the literary facts with the primd facie
contrary pronouncements of tradition. There are
passages, of course, in the Pentateuch which claim for
themselves direct Mosaic authorship. 1 The greater part
is, as we have seen, anonymous. His spirit, however,
it can hardly be denied, informs the whole, with the ex-
ception perhaps of the clearly later elements, which the
necessities and circumstances of the Exile forced upon

1 Supra, p. 275 ff.

ANALOGIES OF LITERARY GROWTH 343

the people. But to what extent the earlier elements,
and JE in particular, are due to his direct initiative,
and are to be ascribed in form, as well as in substance,
to him as their author, must remain for the present
at least, undetermined. Future and more exact in-
vestigation will perhaps succeed in assigning more
precisely the limits of the debt which the Hebrew Law
owes to the hand of Moses. In any case, it was more
considerable than has often been allowed.

ANALOGIES OF LITERAKY GROWTH. It should further
be noted that a doctrine of composition of the Penta-
teuch, which regards it as of gradual formation, the
work of several even of many hands, whose varied
influence may be traced through the course of the
centuries, who have harmonised, supplemented, and
in many ways built upon the foundations of their pre-
decessors, places the early literature of the Hebrews
entirely in line with the early religious literature of
the more or less cultured peoples of other lands.
No religious or legal document of equal antiquity,
unless engraved upon unchanging stone, as the code of
Khammurabi, has, or apart from a perpetual and un-
precedented miracle could have been preserved through
the ages, the solitary work of a solitary author, unap-
propriated and unaltered. So far as we know, ancient
authors did not thus work. The composition of the
seer, the law-maker, the poet, was not sent forth, unless
in the case of royal proclamations, grants, etc., ticketed
with his own name, a private possession with which no
other hand or brain might intermeddle. Eather it was

344 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

flung forth anonymously, for the enjoyment and advan-
tage of all ; or at the most it was guarded, as in many
instances was the case, within the family, the house,
or the clan, an heirloom with which outsiders had
nothing to do. Private ownership, in the sense of
a prohibition of all modification or change introduced
by others than the original author, or the jealous
warning off of trespassers, was unknown. A law of
copyright is a comparatively late invention. And
especially where reliance was placed mainly upon oral
or memoriter repetition for the preservation and com-
munication of literary works, alteration and revision
were by that very circumstance facilitated and even
invited. If the reciter, by omitting, combining, or
adding to the material of his recitation, could effect
improvement, he was in every way at liberty so to
do. Nor is there any reason to believe, but rather
every reason not to believe, that Divine inspiration,
in whatever sense the phrase is interpreted, did in any
way modify the methods of literary production, or put a
writer out of touch with the spirit and mind of the age
to which he belonged. The real grandeur and unique-
ness of the Books of Moses does not lie in the manner
in which they were composed, but in the spirit which
they breathe and the teaching which they convey.

The records of any country or people that possesses
an early religious literature, using the word in its
broadest sense, will furnish parallels to the manner of
the growth and history of the primitive Hebrew texts.
Thus the sacred books of ancient India which contain

ANALOGIES OF LITERARY GROWTH 345

the philosophical and religious speculations in and
through which the sages groped their way to the Great
Unknown, are in no instance, unless it be the very
shortest, of single or definite authorship. They place
on record with the greatest care the names of the
thinkers, and the genealogical descent through which
their teaching has reached a later age. But it was a
matter of comparative indifference by whom these con-
victions and views were embodied in literary and per-
manent form. Many intellects and hands shared in
the work of ordering and completing, and no one
thought of claiming exclusive credit for himself. None
of the ancient Sanskrit Upanishads, in which this
philosophical and religious teaching finds expression,
can be ascribed to one only thinker or composer.
Each in its present shape enshrines the thoughts of
many minds, and perhaps of many ages ; and the dim
beginnings of the speculation, which found fuller expres-
sion in the language of the existing texts, can hardly be
much if at all later than the age to which, as we have
seen to be probable, the initial stages of the Pentateuch
belong. " All the principal Upanishads contain
earlier and later elements side by side." " The funda-
mental thought . . . attained an ever completer develop-
ment by means of the reflection of individual thinkers. . . .
The oldest Upanishads preserved to us are to be re-
garded as the final result of this mental process." l Dr.
Deussen's knowledge of the ancient religious literature of

1 P. Deussen, Philosophy of the Upanishads, Eng. trans., Edin. 1906,
p. 22 f.

346 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

India is probably unrivalled ; and his judgement is thus
emphatic with regard to the composite nature of the
texts. The simple and brief Vedic hymns in praise
of the gods are, of course, in a somewhat different posi-
tion, and the names of their authors are, as is natural,
recorded in tradition. But in the longer even of
these the influence of more than one hand may with
certainty be traced.

That the " Homer " which we read in our own day
is the final result of a similar process of growth,
carried on probably through many centuries, is recog-
nised on every side. The early Greek poets or rhapso-
dists combined their ancient lays, omitted or inserted
episodes, illustrations, or interludes, disposed their
material according to the best of their judgement, and
added new compositions of their own. The objection
that such a piecemeal and prolonged process could
never issue in a magnificent poem is refuted by the
Iliad and Odyssey, solvitur ambulando. The joints
are there, for any one who will to feel and test. And
the irresistible proofs of differences of date and origin
are drawn from anthropology and archaeology, as well
as from linguistics. The parallel between the ancient
Greek and Hebrew literatures, in their history and
manner of composition, is closer than has perhaps
always been realised ; and on the Greek side has been
recently well illustrated and reinforced by Prof. Gilbert
Murray in his Rise of the Greek Epic. 1 Bearing in

1 Oxford, 1907, pp. 101-115. With Dr. Murray the parallel is only
incidental to an argument of the greatest interest and rich in illustra-

ANALOGIES OF LITERARY GROWTH 347

mind the difference of theme and purpose " Moses "
need not fear comparison even with " Homer " in ease
and dignity and eloquence ; and far surpasses him in
moral elevation and grandeur. And the Pentateuch,
no less than the Greek Epic, is the expression of the
national genius, working naturally and harmoniously
through many generations, and attaining its final
fruition by contributions from many sources adapted
and controlled by more than one master mind.

Many other comparisons of interest might be sug-
gested, all pointing in the same direction of the usually
composite character of early literary products, and that
this gradual process of development and growth does
not detract in any way from the value and excellence
of the finished work. Further illustration may readily
be drawn from English literature. The theory that
the early poem which passes under the name of " Piers
the Plowman " is in fact the work of several writers,
harmonised, combined, and " edited," has been recently
maintained with great ability by Prof. J. M. Manly
in the Cambridge Hist, of Eng. Literature, vol. ii. ch. i.
It is altogether a natural and probable theory. And
the doctrine of joint or successive authorship, as it
might be called, in primitive literary effort, is thus
of wide application, and with increasing and more
exact research will be more generally demonstrated
and acknowledged. The Books of Moses do not stand
isolated and alone, in that they ow r e much to later

tive detail. But he justly expresses his wonder that " the comyiarison
has not been more widely used by Greek scholars."

348 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

hands than those of their first author and contributor.
Eather they are in method and structure akin to the
best early literature of other lands. Moses laid as
it were the foundations of a great temple of wisdom,
into the building of which generations of successors
wrought much ; and the work was finished, and the
topstone laid in its place, by those who laboured long
after he was dead.

EARLY ENVIRONMENT AND LIFE OF ISRAEL. It is
certain also that a rich and flourishing civilisation
existed in Arabia, the Sinaitic Peninsula, and the
so-called Desert of the Wanderings, many centuries
before the time of Moses and the Exodus. If the
culture and life of the inhabitants were in large part
of the rough and nomadic type, it was not so altogether
or universally. There were great and wealthy cities
and kingdoms, whose influence extended far and wide.
And even if the Israelites with their tribal organisation
and life may be conceived to have passed through the
land comparatively unaffected by a settled and civilised
environment, they can hardly have been unaware of it.
Little, it is true, is known even yet of the real condition
of northern Arabia and the neighbouring countries at
the period of the Exodus. Sufficient, however, has
been certainly ascertained from actual exploration and
inscriptions to lead us to pause before assigning much
weight to an argument that denies the possibility for
Israel of legislation implying an orderly and settled
town life at so early a period.

" This region " (i.e. northern Arabia), writes Dr.

EARLY ENVIRONMENT OF ISRAEL 349

McCurdy, " is thus shown to have been then occupied
by a people the very reverse of uncultured. Hence
the broad inference has been drawn that the Israelites,
not only in Egypt, but also during their life in the
desert, had an environment which in any case must
have lifted them above barbarism, even if their
ancestors had not themselves been a cultured people
according to the standards of the East." 1

It is chiefly in this direction, perhaps, that
archaeology has not yet said its last word in modi-
fying the conclusions of a purely literary criticism of
the text.

Clearly there are degrees also within a nomad life
itself, differing in standard of wealth and comfort,
and in the extent to which the wandering habit
exhibits itself in incessant movement, or is imposed
upon a people by the hard conditions under which
they live. There is no trace in the history of Israel
of their having ever adopted by choice or having been
reduced to the lowest stratum or type of a nomadic
life, as it might be called, where a moveable tent and
a few camels form the sum of worldly wealth. In
such an environment the very nadir of nomadism is
reached, a state never far removed from actual starva-
tion. Eaised far above this is the existence of the
pastoral tribes, who possess regular summer and winter

1 J. F. McCurdy in Recent Research in Bible Lands, Philadelphia,
1896, p. 15; cp. A. H. Sayce, ib. p. 116 f., and Archaeology of the
Cuneiform Inscriptions, London, 1907, passim ; F. Hommel in Ex-
plorations in Bible Lands, Edinburgh, 1903, p. 741 ff. "Arabia and
the Old Testament."

350 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

grazing grounds, and shift their habitations regularly
twice a year. But except in the obscure period of the
Desert Wanderings, where evidence fails us, the entire
course of Israelite life before the final Settlement in
Canaan reveals itself as of a higher standard even than
this. The nomad habit is as it were occasional, and
is interrupted by long periods of settled residence.
The chieftains, patriarchs or " sheikhs," are men of
abundant resources and wealth ; and it is a mistake
to suppose that under such circumstances a people is
necessarily lacking either in refinement or literary
culture, although the manifestations of both may and
probably will be of a nature altogether unlike those
seen under the different conditions of a permanent
residential or town life.

SUMMAKY AND CONCLUSIONS. Upon many of the
questions which are raised by a consideration of the
literary relations of the Books of Moses the time for
a final judgement has not yet come ; and the form
which a well-considered theory of authorship will
ultimately take may be regarded as still open to
modification to perhaps a not inconsiderable extent.
That discrepancies and anachronisms exist within the
compass of the books themselves, no attentive reader
can deny. It is the exaggeration of these, the minute
dissection of the text which has claimed to be able to
assign every verse or even portion of a verse to its
particular author and date, as though the modern critic
were looking over the shoulder of the ancient writers
in turn, that has provoked reaction and dissent. No

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 351

composition, early or late, but could be proved com-
posite and inconsistent on similar principles, and by
the application of similar extreme and often fanciful
criteria. Such claims, with the deductions founded
upon them, will have to be abandoned. On the other
hand, the broad and striking distinctions of style,
manner, diction, are there for all to see ; the main
lines of separation between the different " documents "
in the first five books of the Bible seem to be made
out beyond the possibility of serious dispute, and to
be obvious to any careful student of the text, ac-
customed to appreciate literary beauty, eloquence, or
power. To deny them is simply to refuse to the Old]
Testament a place in the treasure-house of the world's
literary masterpieces, to which it is so amply entitled ;
and to place it on a pedestal of its own, cold and
isolated, judged by a different standard, and out of
touch with the common cares and needs, no less than
with the artistic sense of humanity.

It must be remembered also that by the symbols
P, JE, etc., are denoted primarily schools of thought,
not individual writers. Of course, all authorship is
eventually and in the final analysis the work of a
single mind. But in the case of the Pentateuch, as
of practically all ancient literature, we are unable to
go behind the combination of minds, which expresses
the tendency of a group or school. J, P, etc., are not
labels for individuals, shadowy personages, for whom
the critics might equally well have employed the
symbol x. But they denote well-marked types or

352 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

schools of thought, associations, more or less per-
manent, of thinkers or writers, who are dominated
by one leading idea, and share common aims and
sympathies. Such were the schools of the prophets
in Israel. Similar institutions flourished in ancient
India and in China ; prospered greatly, and were richly
productive in the early days of Muhammadanism ; and
have probably never been wanting where men have
been drawn together under common institutions, and
have experienced the compelling power of common
beliefs, longings, and hopes. If it were proposed to
equate the symbolic letters referred to with earlier or
later forms of the " schools of the prophets," probably
no injustice would be done to the latter, or to the
facts which we dimly discern behind the convenient,
if arbitrary sign of the accepted documentary theory.

We must further bear in mind that the Hebrew
sacred books were written in Eastern lands, and bear
the impress of Eastern thought. They do not submit
themselves to the habits and ideals of a Western or
European mind, and are erroneously judged if measured
by a purely European standard. It is hardly too much
to say that no one who is not to a certain extent
familiar with Oriental modes of thinking and ex-
pression, and in full sympathy with Oriental ideals,
is adequately equipped to pass judgement on the
contents or form of the Hebrew Scriptures. It is
true, of course, in a certain sense, that for centuries
the lauds around the Eastern Mediterranean have
been the meeting-place, often for shock and couiiict

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 353

rather than for peaceable intercourse, between Orient
and Occident. But in Syria and Egypt at least the
East has always predominated. And of the Penta-
teuch as much as of the Prophets, the tone and spirit,
the outlook and conception, are of the dreamy, ideal-
loving, timeless East, rather than of the practical and
stern business-like West. It is, however, in large
part because the Jewish and Christian Scriptures had
their origin under conditions such as these, at the
meeting-place of the great tides of human thought,
the centuries-long interchange of experiences and ideas,
that they are cosmopolitan in a sense and to a degree
in which neither the Veda nor the Qur'an, the Confucian
Classics or the Zarathustrian Avesta ever can be. It
remains true, nevertheless, that the books of the Penta-
teuch and of the Old Testament generally, both as to
form and substance, must be interpreted in the light
of the East, and must not be compelled to the Pro-
crustean forms of Western preconceptions or logic.

It is clear, therefore, that on many of the questions
raised in the course of an examination and discussion
of the early documents of the Bible the time has not
yet arrived, and the knowledge has not yet been gained,
for a final and authoritative pronouncement. Mutatis
mutandis the same is true of the whole of the Old
Testament. The decision cannot be given, and if given
would not and ought not to be accepted, on purely
literary grounds. Neither ethnology nor archaeology,
to mention only two of the contributory sciences, have
said their last word. Much has been gained, solid
23

354 INTRODUCTION TO THE HEBREW BIBLE

and permanent results have been achieved, and many
misunderstandings dispersed by the earnest and scholarly
work of the past years. But a wealth of illustration
remains to be garnered, and the bearing of many facts
will have to be appreciated and their due weight and
place assigned, before a final conclusion is reached.
It will only be by the contributions of many minds,
estimating and controlling evidence of the greatest
variety and extent, that a final answer can be given
to many questions whose interest is not historical only,
but also of the highest ethical and religious import.

INDEX I.

SUBJECTS.

Where two or more references
indicated by larger type.

AARON BEN ASHER, 53 ff. ; model

Codex, 54 f.

abbreviations in Heb. MSS, 63 f.
"abstractions of the scribes," 102.
Abyssinia, 27, 244 f.
accents, accentuation, 95, 105 ff.,

lllff.
Achmim, 210, 237, 239 ; Achniimic

version and dialect, 239 f.
acrophonic, 33.
^Ethiopia, 27, 79 ; Mth. version,

243 tf.

Africa, 21 8 IT., 228.
Africanisms, 219.
Akiba ben Joseph, 146, 188.
Alcuin, 230.
Aldine Septuagint, 212.
Aleppo, 54.
Alexandria, 117, 168 ff., 184,203,

237, 240 f.

allegory in the O.T., 103 f.
alphabet, Indian, 36 n. ; Semitic,

29 ff.

altars, idolatrous, 326 f.
Amharic, 27, 244 f.
Amoraim, 148 f.
Amorite, 21 f.
Amraphel, 15.
Amsterdam, 74, 77, 80.
anthropomorphism in JE, 305 f.
Antioch, 203 f.
Antwerp Polyglott, 78 f., 212.

are given, the more important are

Aphraates, 161, 163.

Apocrypha, 127 f., 138, 248;

Greek, 179 ff.; Latin, 224;

Coptic, 239.

Aquila, 157, 187 ff., 210, 267.
Arabia, 11, 14, 27, 62, 247, 250,

348 f.
Arabic, 2, 12, 24 f., 79, 111, 236 ;

Arabic Versions, 246 ff.
Aramaean, 16 f., 42.
Aramaic, 7 ff., 17 ff., 58, 149,

153 ff., 160, 167, 183, 244,

248 ; in Daniel and Ezra, 3, 18 ;

in Genesis, 3 ; in Jeremiah, 3.
Aramaic Papyri from Egypt, 42.
Aramaisms, 9.

'Araq-el-Emir inscription, 45.
Aristeas, Letter of, 169ff.
Armenia, 12, 22, 250 f.
Armenian Version, 249 ff.
Ashdod, 7, 23.

Ashkenazic school of writing, -64 f.
"Assembly" of Moses, 74.
Assyrian, 2, 15 ff.
Astruc, J., 309 f.
Athanasius, 128.
Athias, J., 80.
Augustine, 220 ff., 225.

Babylon, 15, 331.

Babylonia, 43, 53, 65, 149 f., 155 f.

Babylonian accentuation, 62, 115 ;

355

356

INDEX I

language, 14 ; Talmud, 20 ; text,

99, 110 f.

Bachmann, J., 246.
Baer, S., 72, 81 f.
Balaam, Oracles of, 272 ff.
baraitha, 147.
Bartholomew, 250.
Basle, 73f., 80, 108, 173, 311.
Benedictions in Genesis, 274 i.
Berber, 28.
Berger, S., 234.

Berlin, 71, 77, 80, 209, 243, 311.
Bethel, 326.
Bethlehem, 227.
Bible, Hebrew, ed. prima, 68 ; first

manual ed., 69.
Biblia Magna Rabbinica, 74 ; Regia

or Plantiniana, 78.
Biblical Aramaic, 18.
Bissell, E. C., 283 f.
Blessing of Moses, 302 f., 321.
Bodleian, 110, 115.
Bohairic, 205, 241 f.
Bologna, 66, 157.
Bomberg Bibles, 69 f., 159.
Bomberg, D., 69, 72, 80.
Breasted, J. H., 34.
Brescia, 68.
British and Foreign Bible Society,

x 9 245

British Church, 229.
British Museum, 62 f., 78, 80, 242,

245.

Brooke, A. E., 216, 239.
Buchanan, E. S., 223 n.
Budge, E. A. Wallis, 239, 333 n.
Burkitt, F. C., 190, 222.
Buxtorf, J., 73 f., 80, 97 n. : 104,
108.

Csesarea, 203, 226.

Cairo, 55, 62, 64, 190.

Cambridge, 216.

Canaan, "lip of," 7, 21.

Canaanite, 21.

Canon of the O.T., 37, 116 ff.,
128 ff., 191; closing of the
Canon, 10 ; Armenian, 250 ;
Ethiopic, 246; Greek, 180 ff.,
185 ; Latin, 225 ; Syriac, 163.

cantillation, 115.

Caphtor, 22.

Cappel, L., 108.

Carpentras stele, 19, 42.

Carshuni, 249.

Ceolfric, 229 f.

Charles, R. H., 243 ff., 247.

Chayyim, Abraham ben, 66 ; Jacob
ben, 73, 80, 97, 102.

Chfizir, children of, inscription, 45.

Chisian Codex, 193.

Chrysostom, J., 245.

clausulce, Massoretic, 67, 73, 93 ff.

Clement vm., 232, 234.

Clementine Vulgate, 232 ff.

Codex Alexandrinus, 209, 211,
213; Amiatinus, 229 f., 233; of
ben Asher, 54 f. ; Babylonicus,
61 f. ; Barbermus, 196 f. ; Cairo,
55, 60 ; Cambridge, 61 ; Hilleli,
49 f. ; Jericho, 51 ; Jerusalem,
51 ; at Rome, 52 ; Sinai, 51 ;
Sinaiticus, 209 ; Vaticanus, 209,
212 f. ; Zanbuqi, 50 f.

colophon, Hebrew, 60.

Commodus, 192.

Complutensian Polyglott, 78, 80,
136 ; Greek text of, 206, 211 ff.

concordance to the O.T., 216 f.

conjunctive accents, 113f.

Constantinople, 41.

Cook, S. A., 57, 58 n.

Coptic, 27, 235 f., 241, 247, 249 ;
C. Versions, 206, 236 ff.

"corrections " of the scribes, 99 ff.

Correctoria, 230, 233.

Covenant, Book of the, 295.
297 f., 321, 327.

Covenants, Book of the Four, 287.

Creation, narratives of, 280 ff.,
290 f., 306.

Cretan pictographs, 35.

cuneiform, 35.

cursive form of writing, 65.

Cyprian, 217.

Cypriote syllabary, 35.

Cyril of Alexandria, 205 f.

Damascus, 17.
Damasus, Pope, 225, 227.
Dead, Book of the, 331 f.
Deborah and Barak, Song of, 269.
Decalogue, 57 f., 294 ff., 312.
Deissmann, G. A., 208 f.

INDEX I

357

Delitzsch, F., 72, 81.

Demetrius Phalereus, 169 ff.

demotic, 235.

Deuteronomist, 288, 308.

Deuteronomy, authorship, 287 f.,
312 ; character and style,
300 ff., 30 7 f.; date, 315 tf.,
322 ff., 341; Deut. and the
Prophets, 334 ff.

Deussen, P., 345.

Dillmann, A., 246.

disjunctive accents, 113 f.

Divine Name in Pentateuch, 280 ff.

Documentary Hypothesis, 313.

Eastern School, 52, 62, 65.

Ecclesiasticus, 125, 140, 175 ; rela-
tion to the Canon, 127 f., 179.

Edessa, 17, 161, 165, 204, 249.

editions of Hebrew text, 66 ff. ;
of Greek, 211 ff'. ; of Latin,
225 ff. ; of Coptic, 238 ff. ; of
Ethiopic, 246 f. ; of Arabic,
248 f. ; of Armenian, 250 f. ; of
Georgian, 251 ; of Gothic, 253.

Egypt, 7, 18, 168f., 203, 205 f.,
208 f., 235 ff., 246, 331, 349, 353.

Egyptian, 27 f., 34 ff'. ; Egyptian
Versions, 235 ff.

Eichhorn, J. G., 10, 310 f.

Elias Levita, 51, 109, 122.

Elohist, 284 ff., 310.

Ephraimites, 23.

Epiphanius, 117, 187, 192, 194 f.

Erythnea, 244.

Ethiopic Version, 243 ff.

Euphrates, 13 f.

Eusebius, 21 n., 85, 164, 195, 203.

Euting, J., 19.

Ewald, G. H. A., 287, 313.

Ezra, 42, 89, 161, 320 ; supposed in-
vention of vowel-points, 108; re-
lation to the Canon, 122 ff., 126.

Faber, F., 225.

Falashas, 245 f.

Fayyum, 240 f., 247.

Felix Pratensis, 69, 73.

Field, F., 190, 197.

Fik, inscription, 46.

Flood, narrative of, 281, 283, 292.

Florence, 71, 229.

foundation deposit, 330 ff.
Fragmentary Hypothesis, 310.

Gallican Psalter, 226 ff., 252.

Gaster, M., 61 f., 110.

Gebhardt, 0., 196.

Ge'ez, 27, 244 f.

Gemara, 147 ff.

Geniza, 56, 64, 190.

Georgian Version, 251.

German Jews, 135 ; Germ, school,
64 f.

Ginsburg, C. L., 51 f., 61, 66 and
note 2, 81, 97, 104 f., 134, 136;
edition of Hebrew text, 83.

Gothic, 207, 252 ; Gothic Version,
251 ff.

Goths, 252.

Gottingen, 248.

Grabe, J. E., 313 f.

Graf, H. K., 313 f.

Greek, 17, 36, 149, 154; Greek
division of the four double books,
70; spirit and literature, 240 f.,
346 f. ; MSS of the O.T., 207 ff. ;
Greek text, 197 f., 201 ff., 243,
247, 249, 251 ; known as the
"Vulgate," 2O3 ff., 229, 252 ; of
Aquila, 188 f. ; Greek Versions,
165 ff.

Gregory the Illuminator, 250.

Hadramut, 26.
Hadrian, 187.
haggadah, 142 ff., 149.
Hagiographa, editio princeps, 67 ;

Targums on, 160 ; in the Greek

Canon, 175 f.

halakhah, 142 f., 145, 149.
Hammurabi. See Khammurabi.
haphtarah, 134 f.
Hatch, E., 216 f.
Haupt, P., 82.
Hebrew, meaning of term, 4 ff. ;

language, Iff., 8 ff., 23 f.;

manuscripts, 47 ff. ; pre-Mas-

soretic 'papyrus text, 57 ff. ;

earliest dated MS in British

Museum, 62 ; ancient Hebrew

script, 42 f., 45.

Heideuheim, Wolf ben Simson, 77.
Herodotus, 17.

INDEX I

Heshbon, 45.

Hesychius, 205, 211, 213.

Hexapla, 201 ff., 207, 213; used

by Jerome, 202 ff., 226 ; in the

Ethiopia and Armenian Versions,

243, 250.
Hexateuch, 224, 260, 283, 288,

290.

Hezekiah, 40 f.
hieroglyphic, 34, 235.
Hilkiah, 324 f., 327, 329 ff.
Hillel, 50, 145 f., 158.
Hilleli codex, 49 f.
Himyaritic, 26.
Hittite, 22.
Hivite, 21.
Hody, II., 173.
Holiness, Law of, 298 f., 321.
Holmes and Parsons, 214.
Homer, 346 f.
Hooght, E. van der, 80.
Howarth, H. H., 182n.
Huldah, 325.

Ideogram, 31 f., 34.
Indo-European languages, 11 f.
Inscriptions, ancient Semitic,

38 ff. ; Hebrew, 45 f. ; oldest

Egyptian, 34.
Irenaeus, 192, 194.
Isidore of Seville, 223.
Israel, national name, 6 ff.
Itala, 222.
Italian, 219, 222.
Italy, 65.

Jablonski, D. E., 80.

Jacobites, 163.

Jamnia, 145.

jar-handles from Palestine, 42.

Jashar, 38, 245 ff.

Jebusites, 21.

Jehovist, Jahvist, 284 ff., 310.

Jehudah Haimasi, 146 f.

Jeremias, A., 283.

Jericho codex, 51.

Jeroboam, son of Nebat, 326.

Jerome, 126,128, 188, 190ff.,194f.,
218 ff., 234, 252 ; use of the
Hexapla of Origen, 202 ff., 207,
226 ; revision and translation,
225 ff.

Jerusalem, 40, 169, 251 316 ;

Jerusalem codex, 51 ; Targums,

158 f.

Jochanan, 149.
John Rylands Library, 242.
Jonathan, Targum of, 157 ff.
Josephus, 52, 116 and note, 131, 174.
Josiah, 316 ff., 322, 328 f.
Jotharn, fable of, 271.
Judges, era of, 341 f.

Kautzsch, E., 321.

Kefr Bir'im inscription, 46.

Kefr Kenna inscription, 46.

Kennicott, B., 74 ff'.

Kenyon, F. C., 209, 239.

Kethibh, 96 ff.

Kethubhim, 116, 121 f., 127, 134.

Kharamurabi, 15, 332, 343.

Kimchi, D. , 49, 66 ff.

King, L. W., 332 n.

Klein, F. A., 39.

Kuenen, A., 313.

Lagarde, P. de, 164 f. ; edition of
Lucian's text, 204 f. ; of Sahidic
portions, 239, 242 f. ; of Arabic
text of Job and Proverbs, 248.

Lamech, Song of, 269 f.

Latin, 166 ; Latin Versions, 217 ff.

Leipoldt, J., 236 f.

Leipzig, 209, 313.

Leo xiii., 233.

Levite, 322.

Leusden, J., 80.

Libyan, 28.

Lidzbarski, M., 45.

"Light of the Law," 71.

literary criticism of the Pentateuch,
254 tf.

London Polyglott, 79 f.

Louvre, 39.

Lowe, W. H. 65.

Lucian, 204 f., 211, 213, 253.

Lu.lolf, J., 246.

lyric element in O.T., 262 ff.

McCurdy, J. F., 349.

Mainz., 231.

Malta 25

Manassehj 330, 326, 328 f.

Maudaitic, 20.

INDEX I

359

Manly, J. M., 347.

Mautua, 72.

Marib, 26.

Maspero, G., 238, 240.

Massikhtoth, 148.

Massmauu, H. F., 253.

Massorah, 60, 83, 85 ff., 135; M.
marginalis, 90 ; M. magna, 73,
90 ; M. parva, 90 ; subject-
matter, 91 tr.

Massoretes, 54, 88, 102, 107, 122,
198.

Massoretic revision, 198 ; text,
56 f., 75, 83, 151, 243, 248.

matres lectionis, 106.

Mazarin Bible, 231.

Mechilta, 144, 174.

Mediterranean, 12, 35 f., 352.

MegiUoth, 68 f, 119, 121, 131,
162, 176.

Meir ha-Levi, 70 f.

Melito of Sardis, 128.

Memphitic, 241.

Menahem b. Judali, 71.

Menes, 34.

Mesha, 39.

Mesopotamia, 12, 16, 19, 272.

Mesrop, 249 ff.

methurgeman, 155.

Michaelis, J. H., 81.

Middle Egyptian, 239 f.

Midrash, 101, 141 ff. ; M. Pesikta,
145 ; M. Kabbah, 144 ; M. Tau-
chuma, 144 ; M. Yalkut, 145.

Milan, 164, 225 f., 253.

Minchath Shai, 7 If.

Minsean, 26.

Miriam, Triumphal Ode, 271.

Mishna, 10 n., 127, 132, 139,
147 ff.

Moab, 39 ; Moabites, 37.

Moabite Stone, 39 f., 107.

Morinus, J. M., 109.

Moses b. Naphtali, 53; M. of
Frankfort, 74.

Moses, Blessing and Song of, 302 f. ,
321.

Muhammad, 24 f.

Murray, G., 346 f.

Nabatsean, 19.
Nablus, 63.

Nabonidus, 331 f.

Naples, 67 f.

Naram Sin, 331.

Nazareth, 46.

Nehardea, 149.

Nehemiah, Persian governor, 320.

Nestle, E., 215.

Nestorians, 163.

Neubauer, Ad., 53, 61 u.

New Hebrew, 11 n., 23, 139.

New Testament, 131, 176, 235,
247 ; Achmimic, 240 ; Gothic,
253 ; in Latin, 217 ff., 221 ff. ;
Latin manuscripts, 234 ; read-
ings of Theodotion in N.T., 193.

Nimrod, 292.

Noldeke, Th., 20.

nomad life, 348 ff.

Norberg, N., 164.

Norzi, 50, 72.

Octapla, 195, 202.

Octateuch, 260, 266.

Offenbach, 77.

Old Latin, 218 ff., 223, 234;

manuscripts and texts, 224 ff. ,

228.
Onkelos, Targum of, 66 f., 77,

I56f.

oral transmission, 257 f.
Oriental texts, 79.
Origen, 128,164, 190 f., 195,205,

213, 226, 238, 243, 250, 252;

critical edition of the Greek

text, 199 ff.
Oxford, 74 f., 213 f.
Oxyrhynchus Papyri, 210, 211 n.

Palestine, 203, 246, 250.

Palestinian Aramaic, 18 ; Pal.
school, 52, 150, 185; Pal. Tar-
gums, 158 ff; Pal. text, 99,
110 f., 157, 191; Syriac texts,
163, 165.

Palmyra, Palmyrene, 19 f.

Pamphilus, 203.

papyrus, 208 f., 239, 242, 251;
Pap., ancient Egyptian, 57 ff. ;
Pap. Prisse, 36.

parashah, 132 ff.

Paris Polyglott, 79.

Parma, 75.

3 6

INDEX I

Pentateuch, 254ff. ; first edit, of
Hebrew, 66 f. ; of Mendelssohn, 77.

peraqim, 148.

pericopae, 132.

Peschitta, 86, 162ff.,248f.

Petra, 19.

Petrie, W. M. Fl., 34, 332.

Pharos, 169.

Philistines, 22.

Philo, 131, 174, 176.

Philoxenus, 165.

Phoenicians, 22, 37.

pictorial writing, 31.

Piers the Plowman, 347.

Pirqe Aboth, 71, 89.

Pistis Sophia, 238.

Pius x., 233.

Polycarp, 165.

Polyglotts, 78 ff., 163, 248.

porta triplex inscription, 45.

Precepts of Ptah-Hotep, 36.

Pre-Massoretic text, 57.

Priestly Narrator, 319.

Priests' Code, 286 f., 297, 320 f.,
323.

Prophetic Narrator, 305 f.

Prophets, first edition of Hebrew,
67; Major and Minor, earlier and
later, 116, 120, 122, 179, 222 ;
Georgian manuscript, 251 ; Pro-
phetic Canon, 125 f., 130 f., 234 ;
in the Syriac, 163 ; Targums of
the Prophets, 158, 160.

Prologus Galeatus, 227.

Psalms, first edition of Hebrew, 66.

Psalter, 66, 68.

Pseudo-Jonathan, 158 f.

Ptolemy Philadelphus, 168 ff.

Pumbeditha, 158.

puncta extraordinaria, 96.

punctuation, 112ff.

Punic, 22 f.

Qabbalah, 87.

Qaraite Jews, 55, 108 f.

Qeri, 96 ff. ; Q. Perpetuum, 98.

Qur'an, 24 f., 140.

Rab, 149.

Rabbinic Bibles, 72 ff., 136 ; Rabb.

type, 66 f.
Rahlfs, A., 209, 238, 252.

Rashi, 66 f., 77.

Redpath, H. A., 178, 216 f.

reviser, 308 f.

Rodelheim, 77 f.

Roman Psalter, 225 f. ; Rom.

Septuagint, 212.
Rossi, de, 63, 75 f.

Saadiah, 246ff.

Sabssan, 25 f.

Sabhoraini, 150.

Sabians, 20.

saepes legis, 70 f.

Sahidic, 205, 237 f.

Sakhara, stele of, 19.

Samaritan Pentateuch, 63, 195 ;
used for Arabic versions, 247 f. ;
Sam. Targum, 18, 160.

Samaritans, 124 f.

Samson, riddle of, 271.

Sanchuniathon, 21 n.

Schick, C., 40.;

schools of the prophets, 124, 258,
352 ; of thought, in the Pen-
tateuch, 351 f.

Schurer, E., 128, 170, 190, 192.

Schwartze, M. G., 242 f.

Scribes, 84, 107.

scriptio plena, defectiva, 95, 107.

Seba, 26.

sedarim, 133f., 148.

Semitic character, 35 f. ; grammar,
13 ; languages, classification of,
10 ff. ; peoples, 11 ff. ; race, 21 ;
speech, 166.

Sennacherib, 37.

Sephardic school, 64 f.

Septuagint, 119, 163, 165 ff., 238,
243, 248, 250, 267 ; editions of,
21 Iff. ; relation to Jerome's text,
222 f.

Severus, 194 f.

Shammai, 145 f.

Shechem, 63.

Shem, 11.

Shema, 57.

Shenoute, 237.

Sifra, sifre, 144.

Siloam inscription, 40 f., 107.

Simon bar Kokhba, 41.

Sinai, Sinaitic Peninsula, 19, 294,
348 ; Sinai Codex, 51.

INDEX I

361

Sixtine Septnagint, 212 f., 214 f. ;

Sixt. Vulgate, 232 f.
Sixtus v., 232 f.
Solomon, 326, 330 f., 341.
Solomon Dubno, 77.
Soncino, 67 ff.

Spanish school, 64 ; rite, 135.
"square" character, 30, 42 ff.;

form of writing, 65.
Stations in the Wilderness, 276.
stichometry, 137.
Strack, H. L., 61 f., 76, 104, 110,

128, 150 n., 152 n.
Strassburg, 208.
Studia Siuaitica, 163.
sublinear punctuation, 110.
Supplement Hypothesis, 313.
superlinear accentuation, 62, 115 ;

vocalisation, 109 f.
Sura, 149, 248.
Swete, H. B., 173, 183 n., 194,

207 ; edition of the Greek text,

215 f.

Symmachus, 194 f., 250, 267.
Synagogue, the Great. 89, 122.
Syria, 12, 161, 227, 353.
Syriac, 17 f., 20, 107, 183, 250 f. ;

Syr. versions, 16, 97 n., 160 ff. ;

used for Arabic versions, 247.
Syrian, 16 f. ; type of writing, 65.
Syro-Hexaplar, 162, 164 f.

Talmud, 44 and note, 85, 101, 126,
150 ff., 174.

Tannaim, 146, 148.

Targum, 18 ; of Jonathan, 157 f. ;
of Onkelos, 66 f., 77, 156 f. ;
Samaritan, 160.

Targums, 153 ff.; of Jerusalem,
158 f. ; on the Hagiographa, 160.

Tattam, H., 242.

Taylor, C., 190.

Tetragrammaton, 98, 190.

Tetrapla, 202 f.

Thackeray, H. St. J., 170, 173,
179.

Thebaic, 237.

Theodotion, 186 f., 192 f., 238,
250; in quotations in N.T.,
193 ; influenced Armenian ver-
sion, 250 ; text of Daniel, 177,
182, 193 f.

Theowulf, 230.

Tiberias, 52, 147.

Tigre, Tigrina, 244.

Tigris, 14, 16.

Tischendorf, A. F. Const., 214 f.,

233

Toledo, 49, 70.
Toledoth, genealogical records,

290 ff.

tombs of the Kings, inscription, 45.
Topheth, 326.
tosephta, 147f., 155.
tradition of the elders, 142.
Trent, Council of, 231 f.
Turanian, 11.

Ulfilas, 251 f.
Upanishads, 345.
Urumiah, 163.

Vatican Library, 193, 211 ; manu-
script, 212 f., 215, 238.

Venice, 71, 73, 159, 195, 212, 225,
251.

verses, 136.

Versions of the O.T., 48, 153 ff.

Vienna, 72, 77, 159, 239, 253.

Virgin's Well, 40.

vowel points, 95, 105 ff.

Vulgate, 222, 225, 229; earliest
editions, 231 ; Greek text known
as "Vulgate," 203 ff., 229.

Walton, Brian, 79, 247.
Walton's Polyglott, 79 f., 247.
Wars of the Lord, Book of, 38,

267 f.

Well, Song of the, 269.
Wellhausen, J., 287, 314 f., 319,

321.

Wendland, M., 173.
Western school, 52 f., 62, 65.
Wette, W. W., 311 f.
Wickes, W., 54, lllf., 115 n.
Wilkins, D. , 242.
Women, Song of the, 275.
writing, art of, 37 f.

Ximenez, Cardinal, 78.

Yedidiah Sal. Minnorzi, 71.
York, 230.

INDEX II.

TEXTS ILLUSTEATED OE EXPLAINED.

GENESIS.

i. 1

i. 28-30
i., ii. .
ii. 4 .
iv. 7 .
iv. 23 f.
v. 1 .
vi. 9 .
vi., vii.
ix. 1-17
ix. 25-27
x. 1 .
x. 3
x. 7, 26
x. 8-19
x. 14 .
x. 22 f. .
xi. 1-9 .
xi. 10, 27 .
xiv. 1, 9
xiv. 13 .
xvii.
xviii. 5.
xviii. 22
xxii. 21
xxii. 55
xxiv. 10
xxv. 12, 19 .
xxv. 22
xxvii. 27-29
xxvii. 33, 40
xxvii. 39 f. .
xxviii. 20

GENESIS continued.

PAGE

189 n.

xxxi. 47

. 287

xxxii. 29

281 f., 291

xxxiii. 4

. 96

. 290

xxxvi. 1

. 290

. 136

xxxvii. 2

. 290

264, 269 f.

xxxviii. 8

. 261

. 290

xl. 15 .

. 290

xliii. 32

281, 283

xlix. 2-27

. 264, 269 f.

. 287

264, 269 f.
. 290

EXODUS.

. 64 n.

i. 15 .

. 26

ii. 6, 11

. 292

ii. 8 .

191 n.

. 22

iii. 6 .

. 260

iii. 15 .

. 94

. 292

vi. 2 ff.

. 287

. 290

x. 3 .

. 15

xi. 8 .

. 94

xii. 40 .

. 174

. 287

XV. 1 .

. 261

. 102

xv. 1-18, 21

. 264, 271, 294

. 100

xvii. 14

. 276

xx. 2-17

264, 294 if.

. 102

xx. 12 .

. 260

. 16

xx. 20-xxiii.

33 ... 297

. 290

xxi. 17 .

. 260

. 141

xxiii. 13

. 102

264, 269 f.

xxiv. 4

. 276

. 94

xxxi. 13 f.

. 299

264, 269 f.

xxxiii. 19

. 261

. 98

xxxiv. 1

. 38

362

INDEX II

363

LEVITICUS.

DEUTERONOMY continued.

PAGE

PAGB

i. 1 .

xvii. 16 f.

336

xi. 33 .

. 151

xvii. 18 . 38, 84,

119, 301

xiv. 2 .

. 260

xviii. lOf. .

. 339

xvii.-xxii.,

xxvi. . . 298, 321

xviii. 15

. 338

xxiv. 10 f.

7 i xix. 14 .

337

xxii. 28 ...

191 n.

NUMBERS.

xxiii. 18 ...

. 326

xxiv. 1 .

261

x. 9 f. .

. 299

xxiv. 16

. 277

x. 35 f.

92, 264, 270 xxiv. 17 ...

. 335

xi. 15 .

. 100

xxv. 5 f .

. 261

xii. 12 .

. 100

xxv. 13 f.

. 339

xiv. 10.

153 n.

xxvi. 5 ...

. 337

xiv. 1 4 .

. 102

xxvi. 14 ...

. 338

xv. 38-41

. 299

xxvii. 3 ...

. 38

xxi. 14

. 38

xxvii. 15-26

. 265

xxi. 14f.

. 264, 267 f.

xxviii. 13

. 337

xxi. 17 f.

. 264, 269

xxviii. 29

. 340

xxi. 27-30

. 264

xxviii. 30 ...

. 338

xxiii. 7-10

264, 272 ff.

xxviii. 33, 49

. 337

xxiii. 18-24

. 264

xxviii. 46

. 336

xxiv. 3-9, 15-24 . . .264

xxviii. 49 f. .

. 337

xv. 12 .

. 92

xxviii. 63

. 340

xxxi. 5, 16

86 xxviii. 68 ...

. 338

xxxiii. 2-49

. 276 xxxi. 9, 24 .

. 276

xxxii. 1-43 . . 265,

302, 321

DEUTERONOMY.

xxxii. 15 ...
xxxiii. 2-29 . . 265,

. 266
302, 321

ii. 23 .

. 22

xxxiii. 5, 26 .

. 266

v. 6-21

261, 294 ff.

vi. 1 .

. 307

JOSHUA.

vi. 4 ff.

. 57

ix. 19 .

. 261

i. 8

. 84

xi. 13, 22

. 307

v. 1

xii.-xxvi.

. 302, 313

viii. 31 .

. 38

xii. 1 .

. 326

x. 5 .

. 22

xii. 2 .

. 337

x. 12 f. .

265 ff.

xii. 9 .

. 339

x. 13 .

. 38

xii. 13 .

. 340

xiv. 8 .

xii. 25 .

. 336

xxiv. 3, 15 .

xiii. 4 .

. 326

xiii. 6ff., 13

. 340

JUDGES.

xiv. 1 .

335 f.

xiv. 28 .

. 338

i. 21 .

. 99

xvi. 19.

. 335

iii. 8 ....

. 16

xvi. 21 .

. 326

v. ....

265, 269

xvi. 21 f.

. 340

viii. 14 .

. 38

xvi. 22 .

. 337

ix. 8-15

265, 271

xvii. 2 .

. 337

xii. 6 ....

. 23

xvii. 16

. 338

xiv. 14, 18 .

265, 271

364

INDEX II

JUDGES continued.

ISAIAH continued.

PAGE

xv. 16 .

. 265

iii. 10 .

. 336

xv. 20 .

. 152

vii. 14 . . . 187, 190, 192

xviii. 30 ...

viii. 18 .

. 336

xxi. 19 .

. 44 n.

ix. 6 .

. 92

x. 1 f. .

. 335

1 SAMUEL.

xv. 2 .

. 336

xix. 15 .

. 336

ii. 1-10

. 265

xix. 18.

. 7,21

iii. 13 .

. 100

xxi. 12.

. 24

iv. 1 ff. .

. 22 n.

xxii. 12 ...

. 336

xiii. 3 . .

xxvii. 13

. 336

xiv. 21 .

xxx. 28 ...

xv. 21 .

189 n.

xxx. 33

. 99

xviii. 7 ...

. 265

xxxiii. 2 ...

. 94

xxi. 11 .

. 265

xxxiii. 19

. 337

xxxiii. 21 ...

. 95

2 SAMUEL.

xxxiv. 16

123, 141

xxxvi. 11

i. 18 .

38, 266

xxxvi. 11 ff. .

. 154

i. 19-27

. 265

xxxvi. 11, 13

ii. 8 ff. .

. 101

xxivii. 14

. 37

iii. 33).

. 265

xxxviii. 8 . . .

143n.

viii. 5 .

xlii. 5 .

. 152

x. 6 .

. 16

xliv. 2 .

. 266

xv. 6 .

. 152

xlv. 14 .

. 26

xvi. 12. .

. 100

Ixvi. 23 ...

. 94

XX. 1 .

. 100

xxii. ....

. 265

xxiii. 1-7

. 265

JEREMIAH.

1 KINGS.

ii. 11 .

101

vi. 18 .

. 134

x 13

. 3n.

vii. 21-26 .

. 312

viii. 53 ...
x. 15 .

. 266
. 24

xxv. 24
xxxvi. 2, 28 .

. 24
. 38

2 KINGS.

i. 1 .

. 39

EZEKIEL.

v. 5 ff. .

. 37

xvii. 24, 30

. 44 n.

i 13

xx. 9 .'

143n.

viii. 17 .

. 101

xxii., xxiii. . . 312,

316, 324 ff.

xvi. 40 ...

153u.

xxiii. 15 ...

.189n.

xx. 37 .

. 86

xx. 41 .

. 95

ISAIAH.

xvii. 18

. 54

xvii. 21

i. 2, 23

. 335

xxx. 5 .

. 24

ii. 7 .

. 336

xxxiv. 1

. 38

iii. 8 ....

. 96

xxxvii. 16 .

. 38

INDEX II

365

HOSEA.

i. 10 .
iii. 4
iv. 4
iv. 7 .
iv. 13 .
v. 10 f. .
vi. 7 .
viii. 1 ,
viii. 12 ,
viii. 13 ,
ix. 3f. .
x. 5 .
xi. 5
xii. 4 .
xii. 12 ,
xii. 13 .

iv. 4
v. 11
viii. 5
viii. 10
is. 7
ix. 14

i. 9

ii. 10
v. 12 fl 1 .
vi. 11
vi. 15
vii. 4
vii. 5

i. 11

i. 12

AMOS.

OBADIAH.

JONAH.

MlCAH.

NAHUM.

HABAKKUK.

ZEPHANIAH.

TAGE

PAGE

335

i. 4

. 326

337

i. 4, 17.

. 340

326

i. 6 .

161n.

101

i. 13 .

. 339

337

iii. 9 ....

337

iii. 17 .

. 340

337

ZECHARIAH.

338

ii. 12 .

101

338
326

xiv. 9 . .'

. 95

338

MALACHI.

337

338

i. 13 .

. 101

iii. 22 .

. 277

iii. 23 .

. 152

338

PSALMS.

338

339

i. 2

. 84

336

vii. 10 ..

148 n.

xviii. ....

. 265

152

xviii. (xix.) 5

. 128

xxvii. 13

. 96

xxxvi. 7 ...

. 102

liii. 3 .

148 n.

64 n.

Ixviii. ....

. 270

Ixviii. 26

. 102

Ixxx. 14 ...

. 92

cvi. 20 .

. 101

cvii. 23 ff., 40

cxxxii. 8 ...

. 270

339

PROVERBS.

339

xvii. 14

. 134

339

128

Jon.

340

vii. 20 .

. 101

viii. 9 .

189 n.

xxxviii. 5 ...

. 128

340

xxxviii. 13, 15

. 92

CANTICLES.

101

viii. G .

.54n.

366

INDEX II

LAMENTATIONS.

NEW TESTAMENT.

PAGE

iii. 20 .

. 101

MATTHEW.

PAGE

v. 18

ESTHER.

vi. 22

162
260

ii. 6

xv. 2, 3, 6 .

142

ii. 18 .

xv. 4

260

xxii. 24 ....

261

xxii. 31 ....

260

DANIEL.

xxiii. 35 ....

121

ii. 20, 43

. 20

v. 17 .

. 20

MARK.

v. 20 .

vii. 3, 5, 8f., 13 .

142

vii. 10

260

EZRA.

153 n.

LUKE.

iv. 7 .

. 44 n.

iv. 16 f. ....

134

iv. 13 .

. 20

iv. 17 .

vii. 12 .

148 n.

x. 1, 17 . . . 161 n.

xi. 51

121

xvi. 29 .

261

NEHEMIAH.

xx. 37

261

viii. 1 ff.

123

xxiv. 27 ... 131,
xxiv. 44 ....

261
131

xiii. 24 ...

. 7, 23

1 CHRONICLES.

JOHN.

ii. 23 .

i. 17
i. 45

260
131

iv. 41 . . .
v. 19 .

26
19

v. 45-47 ....

260

vii. 34 .

viii. 13 .

101

ACTS.

vi. 1

2 CHRONICLES.

xiii. 14 f.

133

xiii. 22 ...
xxiv. 20 f. .

. 142
. 121

xiii. 15, 27 . . . 84,
xv. 21
xvi. 1, 3

134
133
16

xxiv. 27 ...

. 142

xviii. 2 ....

187

xxv. 4 .

. 277

xxxv. 12 ...

. 277

KOMANS.

2 MACCABEES.

iii. 21

131

ix. 15

261

ii. 13 .

. 124

xvi. 18 ..

162

INDEX II

367

1 CORINTHIANS.

IREN.SUS.

PAGE

xi. 2 .

. 142

Adv. Hter. iii. 21 .

187 n.

Adv. Hser. viii. 6 .

117 n.

2 CORINTHIANS.

De Mens. et Ponder. 4

117 n.

iii. 14 .

. 84

iii. 15 .

. 261

ISIDORE.

x. 13, 15 f. .

. 128

Etym. vi. 4 .

. 223

GALATIANS.

i. 14 .

. 142

JEROME.

vi. 16 . . .

. 128

Comra. on Ps. i. 4, iv.

8 202 n.

COLOSSIANS.

Epist. 106 .
Epist. ad Dam.

204 n.
. 220

iii. 22 .

. 162

Prfef. in Paralip. .

203 n., 220

2 THESSALONIANS.

JOSEPHUS.

ii. 15 .

. 142

Ant. i. preef. 3, xii. 2.
Cont. Apiou. i. 8 .

1-15 . 176
116n.

HEBREWS.

JUSTIN.

i. 8

. 162

vii. 14 .

. 261

Dial. c. Tryph. 68

186 u.

xii. 2 ....

. 86

Dial. c. Tryph. 71

187 n.

xii. 21 .

. 261

MlSHNA.

REVELATION.

'Arakhin, 136

. 152

xv. 3 .

. 261

'Eduyyoth, viii. 7 .

. 152

Megilla, iv. 2

. 155

Sotah, i. 8, v. 2, xvii.

. 152

Yadayim, iii. 5

127 n.

AEOTH R. NATHAN, i.

. 71 n.

Yadayim, iv. 4
Yadayim, iv. 5

. 152

. 155

AUGUSTINE.

OllIGEN.

De Civitate Dei, xviii. 43

222 n.

De Doctr. Christ, ii. 11, 23 . 221

Canon, in Euseb. H.E.

vi. 25

Epist. civ. 6 .

223 n.

128ff.

CHRYSOSTOM.

PIRQE ABOTH, i.

1 . 89

Hom. in Joh. viii. 10 .

245 n.

TALMUD.

ECCLESIASTICUS.

Massekh. Sopherim,

. 174

Menachoth, 296 .

. 85

Praefatio

125, 175

Sanhedrin, 216

. 44 n.

Printed by

MORRISON & GIBB LIMITED
Edinburgh

International Critical (JUmmcntarn

on the t)o In Scriptures of the (8Mb anb
let* ^

UNDER THE EDITORSHIP OF

THE REV. SAMUEL ROLLES DRIVER, D.D.,

Regius Professor of Hebrew, Oxford;

THE REV. ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.,

Late Master of University College, Durham;

THE REV. CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D.,

Edward Robinson Professor of Biblical Theology,
Union Theological Seminary, Neiv York.

The time has come, in the judgment of the projectors of this enterprise, -when
it is practicable to combine British and American scholars in the production
of a critical, comprehensive Commentary that will be abreast of modern biblical
scholarship, and in a measure lead Us van. The Commentaries will be
international and inter-confessional, and "Mill be free from polemical and
ecclesiastical bias. They will be based upon a thorough critical study of the
original texts of the Bible, and upon critical methods of interpretation.

FIFTEEN VOLUMES OF THE SERIES ARE NOW READY. See following pages.

'The publication of this series marks an epoch in English exegesis.' British Weekly.

' We can sincerely congratulate the authors and the publishers upon producing one of the
most epoch-making theological series of the day.' CInirch Bells.

'"The International Critical Commentary" promises to be one of the most successful
enterprises of an enterprising age. . . So far as it has gone it satisfies the highest expecta-
tions and requirements.' Bookman.

' This series seems likely to surpass all previous enterprises of the kind in Great Britain
and America.' Methodist Times.

'"The International Critical Commentary" has vindicated its claim to stand in the
front rank of modern English exegesis. Every volume that has hitherto appeared has
ranked with the foremost on the book expounded.' Methodist Recorder.

EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

LOXDOX AGENTS:
SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, & CO. LTD.

To be had from all Booksellers. [P.T.O.

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY

In post 8vo (pp. 540), price 125.,

NUMBERS

GEORGE BUCHANAN GRAY, M.A., D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS IX
MANSFIELD COLLEGE, OXFORD.

' Dr. Gray's commentary on Numbers will be indispensable to every English
student.' Church Bells.

In post 8vo, Third Edition (pp. 530), price 123.,

DEUTERONOMY

S. R. DRIVER, D.D.,

REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HF.HKEVV, AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH,

OXFORD.

Professor G. A. SMITH (in the Critical Rci'icw) says: 'The series could have had
no better introduction than this volume from its Old Testament editor. . . . Dr.
Driver has achieved a commentary of rare learning and still more rare candour and
sobriety of judgment. ... It is everywhere based on an independent study of the text
and history ... it has a large number of new details : its treatment of the religious
value of the book is beyond praise. We find, in short, all those virtues which are con-
spicuous in the author's previous works, with a warmer and more interesting style of
expression.'

' There is plenty of room for such a comprehensive commentary as that which we are
now promised, and if the subsequent volumes of the series come up to the standard of
excellence set in the work that now lies before us, the series will supply a real want in
our literature. . . . The Introduction is a masterly piece of work, and here the Oxford
Professor of Hebrew is at his best. It gives by far the best and fairest discussion that we
have ever seen of the critical problems connected with the book.' Guardian.

' We have said enough, we hope, to send the student to this commentary. . . . To
the diligent miner there is a wealth of gold and precious stones awaiting his toil and
industry.' Church Dells.

In post 8vo, Second Edition (pp. 526), price 123. ,

JUDGES

GEORGE F. MOORE, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF HEBREW IN ANDOVER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, MASS.

BISHOP H. E. RYLE, D.D., says: 'I think it may safely be averred that so full
and scientific a commentary upon the text and subject-matter of the Book of Judges has
never been produced in the English language.'

' Dr. Moore's "Judges" will conre as a deep surprise to many in this country. It is
not in any respect, so far as we have been able to judge, of lighter weight than the two
great volumes of the series which appeared before it.' Expository Times.

' It is unquestionably the best commentary that has hitherto been published on the
Book of Judges.' London Quarterly .AYrvVri'.

EDINBURGH : T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY

In post 8vo (pp. 460), price 123.,

THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL

BY HENRY P. SMITH, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL HISTORY AXU INTERPRETATION IN AMHERST COLLEGE.

' The commentary is the most complete and minute hitherto published by an English-
speaking scholar.' Literature.

'This latest volume of " The International Critical Commentary" is in nowise behind
its predecessors in thoroughness and scholarship. We have only to compare it with any
earlier English commentary on the same books to see how much our knowledge in every
department of biblical scholarship has advanced during the past few years . . . The
new light gained from Semitic folk-lore and the comparative study of Eastern customs
and traditions is very welcome, and has been employed to illustrate the history, as also
that coming from our modern geographical and archaeological research.' Church Bells.

In Two Vols., post 8vo (noo pp.), price IDS. 6d. each,

THE BOOK OF PSALMS

BY CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D., D.Lirr.,

PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGICAL ENCYCLOPAEDIA AND SYMBOLICS,
UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK.

AXD

EMILIE GRACE BRIGGS, B.D.

CONTENTS. Vol. I. (a) An Introduction to the Book of Psalms ; and (b) the

Commentary on Psalms i to 50.

Vol. II. (a) Commentary on Psalms 51 to 150 ; (b) Index of Hebrew Words ;
(c) Index of Proper Names ; and (d) Index of Subjects.

' The work will be welcomed by all students of the Old Testament, as it offers the
most elaborate work on the Psalms in the English language.' Times.

' Dr. Briggs, with the aid of his accomplished daughter, has completed and issued
the first volume of a Commentary on the Psalter which is likely for some time to hold
its place as at once the fullest and the most authoritative we possess on this book of
Scripture. It enhances the value of " The International Critical Commentary," and it
will also add to the already great reputation of its author.' Prof. MARCUS DODS, D.D. ,
in the Bookman.

In post 8vo (pp. SQO), price 123.,

THE BOOK OF PROVERBS

BY C. H. TOY, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF HEUKEW, HARVARD UXI VEKSITY.

' The commentary is full, though scholarly and business-like, and must at once take
its place as the authority on " Proverbs." ' Bookman.

' It is difficult to speak too highly of this volume. . . . The result is a first-rate
book. It is rich in learning.' Jewish Chronicle.

In post 8vo (pp. 600), price 125.,

AMOS AND HOSEA

BY PRESIDENT W. R. HARPER, PH.D.,
CHICAGO UNIVERSITY.

' Cannot fail to take its place as the English commentary that is indispensable to
those who would understand the rise of written prophecy in Israel." Dr. SELBIE in the
Expository Times.

' For thoroughness and excellence of workmanship, for clearness of arrangement
and exposition, and for comprehensiveness and accuracy in the handling of textual,
grammatical, and exegetical questions, this work should rank among the foremost.'
Afethodist Recorder.

EDINBURGH : T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY

In post 8vo (430 pp.), price las.

ST. MATTHEW'S GOSPEL

By WlLLOUGHBY C. ALLEN, M.A.,

CHAPLAIN-FELLOW, AND LECTURER IN THEOLOGY AND HEBREW,
EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD.

'The commentary is able, scholarly, and full of reverence. . . . It is on the
highest level of Christian scholarship, and is a commentary which every student of the
New Testament must obtain and study if he desires to know what is the present level of
the tide.' Daily frree Press.

' An invaluable introduction to the comparative study of the Synoptic Gospels. The
work is a credit to English New Testament scholarship, and worthy to rank with the
best products of the modern German school.' Scotsman.

1 Of the Commentaries on the New Testament that have been issued in this Series, it
may be safely said that none surpasses in ability, interest, and importance, Mr. Allen's
" St. Matthew." We are at present in the very thick of the discussion of the problems
affecting the origin, authorship, date, and historical value of the Synoptics ; and it is a
most fortunate circumstance that so competent and sane a scholar as Mr. Allen has been
entrusted with the task of pointing out to us what appear to be the conclusions towards
which research is guiding us.' Dr. SELBIE, in the Expository Times.

In post 8vo (pp. 375), price IDS. 6d. ,

ST. MARK'S GOSPEL

BY EZRA P. GOULD, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE,
DIVINITY SCHOOL OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, PHILADELPHIA.

'This commentary is written with ability and judgment ; it contains much valuable
material, and it carries the reader satisfactorily through the Gospel. Great care has
been spent upon the text.' Expositor.

'_Every thing relating to the department of criticism on these points is more thoroughly
explained and illustrated here than has ever been done before in an English commentary.'
Methodist Times.

In post 8vo, Fourth Edition (pp. 678), price 125.,

ST. LUKE'S GOSPEL

BY ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.,

LATE MASTER OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DURHAM,
FORMERLY FELLOW AND SENIOR TUTOR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD.

' The best commentary on St. Luke yet published. Dr. Plummer's gifts for the
work were already well known and appreciated, and he has not disappointed us in this
his latest work.' Church Bells.

' Marked by great learning and extreme common sense. . . . Altogether the book
is far and away the best commentary on Luke we yet have in English.' Biblical World.

In post 8vo, Fifth Edition (pp. 562), price 125.,

ROMANS

BY WILLIAM SANDAY, D.D., LL.D.,

LADY MARGARET PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD,

AND

ARTHUR C. HEADLAM, D.D.,

PRINCIPAL OF KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON.

Principal F. H. CHASE, D.D., Cambridge, says: 'We welcome it as an epoch-
making contribution to the study of St. Paul.'

'This is an excellent commentary, scholarly, clear, doctrinal, reverent, and learned.
... It is a volume which will bring credit to English scholarship, and while it is the
crown of much good work on the part of the elder editor, it gives promise of equally good
work in the future from both.' Guardian.

EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY

In post 8vo (pp. 368), price ics. 6d.,

EPHESIANS AND
COLOSSIANS

T. K. ABBOTT, D.Lu.,

PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, FORMERLY OF BIBLICAL GREEK, TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN.

' There is no work in all the " International" series that is more faithful
or more felicitous." Expository Times.

' All is done in a clear and easy style, and with a point and precision which
will make his commentary one that the student will consult with satisfaction.
. . . A strong book, with a certain marked individuality.' Critical Review.

In post Svo (pp. 240), price 8s. 6d.,

PHIL1PPIANS AND
PHILEMON

MARVIN R. VINCENT, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF SACRED LITERATURE IN UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YOKK. '

' It is in all respects such a commentary as is needed for the profitable study
and right understanding of these two Epistles. . . . Dr. Vincent has produced
a book which may be considered as summing up all that has been previously
done for the elucidation of this Epistle of Paul and the shorter one which
seems to have been written about the same time. ... It is, in short, in every
way worthy of the series which was so well commenced [in the New Testament]
with Dr. Sanday's and Mr. Headlam's admirable commentary on the Romans.'
Scotsman.

' He has given us an addition of " Philippians" that takes its place beside
its fellows in the very front rank of modern theological literature." Expository
Times.

In post 8vo, Second Edition (pp. 369), price IDS. 6d.,

ST. PETER AND ST. JUDE

CHARLES BIGG, D.D.,

CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH, AND REGIUS PROFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL
HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.

' A first-rate critical edition of these Epistles has been for a long time a felt
want in English theological literature . . . this has been at last supplied by
the labours of Dr. Bigg. His notes are full of interest and suggestiveness.'
Guardian.

N.B. For List of other Volumes in preparation, see page 8 of this
Prospectus.

EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

SPECIMEN PAGE

32O DEUTERONOMY

XXIX. -XXX. Moses Third Discourse. Israel
formally called iipon to enter into the Deutero-
nomic Covenant.

The Deuteronomic Code ends with c. 28. C. 29-30 is of
the nature of a supplement, insisting" afresh upon the funda-
mental principle of the Code, viz. devotion to Jehovah, and
calling 1 upon Israel to yield loyal allegiance to it. The
discourse falls naturally into three parts. In the first,
Moses, after referring 1 to what Jehovah has done for Israel
( 2 gi-s(2-9)^ reminds them that the purpose for which they are
now assembled together is that they may enter solemnly into
covenant with Him, and warns them afresh of the disastrous
consequences, including national ruin and exile, which a lapse
into idolatry will inevitably entail (29 9 ' 28(10 ' 2!l) ) ; in the second,
imagining 1 the threatened exile to have taken place, he promises
that even then, if Israel sincerely repents, Jehovah will again
receive it into His favour, and restore it to the land of promise
(3O 1 " 10 ) 5 m the third, he sums up, in brief but forcible words,
the two alternatives placed before Israel, life and happiness
on the one side, death and misfortune on the other, and
adjures the nation to choose wisely between them (3O 11-2 ).

In these chapters, the connection is sometimes imperfect, esp. between
3O 1 " 10 and 3O 11 " 20 (see on 3O 11 ) ; several words and phrases occur, not other-
wise found in Dt. (Dillm. notes ^'3B>n 29 8 ( 9 ', n"?N oath, imprecation, 29 11 - 13 ' 18 '
I9.20(i2.i4.i9.20.2i)2 7, idol-blocks and detestations 29 1B ( 17 >, v ]s 29" P 8 ', nm
stubbornness 29 (\ ;N ]oy and nVn 29 19 ( 20 >, njn 1 ? unto evil 29 20 ( 21 >, ow^nn sick-
nesses 29 21 ( 22 I, forsake the covenant 2g" 4 < 25 >, BTU pluck up 29^ ( 28 >, mn drive
away 3O 1 - 4 ; and the phrases 29 5 ( 6 ) b - 17 < 18 ' b - 18 ( 19 ) b ) ; and the points of contact
with Jeremiah are more numerous than usual. A question thus arises,
whether the text is throughout in its original order, and whether it is
entirely by the same hand as the body of Dt. : see the Introduction, 4.

XXIX. 1-8 (2-9). Moses reminds the Israelites of all that
Jehovah has wrought for them, from the time of their deliver-
ance from Egypt, founding upon it a renewed exhortation to
obey the words of the covenant. The paragraph is a recapitu-
lation of the substance of earlier parts of Dt., stated largely
in the same phraseology. 1 (2). And Moses called unto all
Israel (i 1 ), and said unto them] exactly as 5 1 . Ye (emph.) have

SPECIMEN PAGE

238 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VIII. 54, 55.

This laying hold of her hand and the raised voice (e^wv^crev) are
consonant with waking one out of sleep, and the two may be
regarded as the means of the miracle. Comp. and contrast through-
out Acts ix. 36-42.

C H irals, e'yeipe. " Arise, get up," not " awake." Mt. omits
the command ; Mk. gives the exact words, Talitha cumi. For the
nom. with the art. as voc. see on x. 21, xviii. u, 13. For e^ajfYjcref
comp. ver. 8, xvi. 24.

55. ire'<rrpei|/ei/ TO iryeufia aurfjs. There can be no doubt that
the Evangelist uses the phrase of the spirit returning to a dead
body, which is the accurate use of the phrase. Only the beloved
physician makes this statement. In LXX it is twice used of a
living man's strength reviving; of the fainting Samson (Judg.
xv. 19), and of the starving Egyptian (i Sam. xxx. 12). Note that
Lk. has his favourite Trapaxpypa, where Mk. has his favourite
i>6v<; ; and comp. ver. 44, v. 25, xviii. 43, xxii. 60.

8ieTaei> auTTJ 8o9rji/ai 4>ayeii'. This care of Jesus in command-
ing food after the child's long exhaustion would be of special
interest to Lk. In their joy and excitement the parents might
have forgotten it. The charge is somewhat parallel to e'Sw/cev avrov
rfj /jirjTpi avrov (vii. 15) of the widow's son at Nain. In each case
He intimates that nature is to resume its usual course : the old ties
and the old responsibilities are to begin again.

56. irapr)YYeiXei' aurols (XT)8e/i. eiireic TO yeyocos. The command
has been rejected as an unintelligible addition to the narrative.
No such command was given at Nain or at Bethany. The object
of it cannot have been to keep the miracle a secret. Many were
outside expecting the funeral, and they would have to be told why
no funeral was to take place. It can hardly have been Christ's
intention in this way to prevent the multitude from making a bad
use of the miracle. This command to the parents would not have
attained such an object. It was given more probably for the
parents' sake, to keep them from letting the effect of this great
blessing evaporate in vainglorious gossip. To thank God for it at
home would be far more profitable than talking about it abroad.

IX. 1-50. To the Departure for Jemsalem.

This is the last of the four sections into which the Ministry in
Galilee (iv. i4~ix. 50) was divided. It contains the Mission of the
Twelve (1-9), the Feeding of the Five Thousand (10-17), trie
Transfiguration (28-36), the Healing of the Demoniac Boy (37-43),
and two Predictions of the Passion (18-27, 43~5)-

1-9. The Mission of the Twelve and the Fears of Herod. Mt.
x. 1-15; Mk. vi. 7-11. Mt. is the most full. Lk. gives no note

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY.

FIFTEEN VOLUMES NOW READY, viz. :-

Numbers (Dr. Gray), Deuteronomy (Dr. Driver), Judges (Dr. Moore), I. and II. Samuel (Dr.
H. P. Smith), Psalms, Two Vols. (Dr. Briggs), Proverbs (Dr. Toy),' Amos and Hosea (Dr.
Harper), S. Matthew (Willoughby C. -Allen), 8. Mark (Dr. Gould), S. Luke (Dr. Plummer),
Romans (Dr. Sanday), Ephesians and Colossians (Dr. Abbott), Philipplans and
Philemon (Dr. Vincent), S. Peter and S. Jude (Dr. Bigg).

The

following

Genesis.

Exodus.
Leviticus.

Joshua.

Kings.

Chronicles.

Ezra and Nehemiah.

Esther.
Ecclesiastes.

Ruth, Song of Songs
and Lamentations

Isaiah.
Jeremiah.

Ezekiel.

Daniel.
Micah Malachi.

Synopsis of the

Four Gospels.

John.

Acts.

Corinthians.

Galatians.
Thessalonians.

The Pastoral Epistles.

Hebrews.

James.

The Johannine

Epistles.
Revelation.

other Volumes are in course of preparation :
THE OLD TESTAMENT.

JOHN SKINNER, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis,

Westminster College, Cambridge.

A. R. S. KENNEDY, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, University of Edinburgh.
J. F. STBNNING, M.A., Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford ; and the late

H. A. White, M.A., Fellow of New College, Oxford.
GEORGE ADAM SMITH, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew, United Free

Church College, Glasgow.
FRANCIS BROWN, D.D., Litt.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew and Cognate

Languages, Union Theological Seminary, New York.
EDWARD L. CURTIS, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, Yale University, New

Haven, Conn.
L. W. BATTEN, D.D., late Professor of Hebrew, P. E. Divinity School,

Philadelphia.

L. B. PATON, Ph.D., Professor of Hebrew, Hartford Theological Seminary.
G. A. BARTON, Ph.D., Professor of Biblical Literature, Bryn Mawr

College, Pa., U.S.A.

C. A. BRIGGS, D.D., Professor of Theological Encyclopaedia and Symbolics,
, Union Theological Seminary, New Vork.
S. R. DRIVER, D.D., and G. BUCHANAN GRAY, D.D., Oxford.
A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D., Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, and

Master of Selwyn College, Cambridge.
G. A. COOKE, M.A., late Fellow of Magdalen College, and C. F.

BDRNBY, Litt.D., Fellow and Lecturer in Hebrew, St. John's College,

Oxford.
JOHN P. PETERS, D.D., late Professor of Hebrew, P. E. Divinity

School, Philadelphia, now Rector of St. Michael's Church, New York.
JOHN P. SMITH, Ph.D., University of Chicago; C. P. FAGNANI, D.D.,

Union Theological Seminary, New York; W. HAYES WARD, LL.D.,

Editor of ' The Independent,' New York ; J. A. BEVER, Ph.D., Union

Theological Seminary, New York; H. G. MITCHELL, D.D., Boston

University.

THE NEW TESTAMENT.

W. SANDAY, D.D., LL.D., Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, and

Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ; and W. C. ALLEN, M.A., Exeter

College, Oxford.
JOHN HENRY BERNARD, D.D , Dean of St. Patrick and Lecturer in Divinity,

University of Dublin.
C. H. TDRNEK, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford; and H. N.

BATE, M.A., late Fellow and Dean of Divinity in Magdalen College,

Oxford, now Vicar of St. Stephen's, Hampstead, and Examining

Chaplain to the Bishop of London.
The Right Rev. ARCH. ROBERTSON. D.D., Lord Bishop of Exeter; and

DAWSON WALKER, M.A., D.D., Theological Tutor in the University of

Durham.
ERNEST D. BURTON, A.B., Professor of New Testament Literature,

University of Chicago.

JAMES E. FRAME, M.A., Professor of Biblical Theology, Union Theo-
logical Seminary, New York.

WALTER LOCK, D.D., Dean Ireland's Professor of Exegesis, Oxford.
A. NAIRNE, M.A., Professor of Hebrew, King's College, London.
JAMES H. ROPES, D.D., Bussey Professor of New Testament Criticism in

Harvard University.
A. E. BROOKE, B.D., Fellow of, and Divinity Lecturer in King's College,

Cambridge.
ROBERT H. CHARLES, D.D., Professor of Biblical Greek in the University

of Dublin.
Other engagements will be annwvcert shortly.

EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.
LONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, & CO. LIMITED.

A
p

-p

University of Toronto
Library

DO NOT

REMOVE

THE

CARD

FROM

THIS

POCKET

Acme Library Card Pocket

LOWE-MARTIN CO, LIMITED