A, The Old Testament. — There are four marked periods in the history of the Hebrew text.
1. That Period in the History of the Unprinted Text which preceded the cUmng of the Canon.^Ot this we know nothing except what is contained in Scripture itself. The Jews bestowed much care on their sacred books. They were accustomed to hold them in great veneration even in the darkest times of national apos- tasy fW)m Jehovah. How often the separate books were transcribed, or with what degree of correctness, it is impossible to tell. Many German critics suppose that the Hebrew text met with very unfiivorable treatment ; that it was early subjected to the careless- ness of transcribers and officious critics. Difl^erences, however, between parallel sections show 'rather the genumeness and Integrity of the books in which they occur. Had such paragraphs exactly harmonized, we might have suspected design or collusion; but their variations discover the artlessness of the writers. We disagree with Eichhom, Bauer, Gesenius, De Wette, and others, who have given lists of parallel passages in some books in order to show that the text was early exposed to extensive alterations.
The most important particular in this part of the history is the Samaritan recension of the Pentateuch. See Pentateuch. This edition Qf so it may be call- ed) of the Pentateuch is indeed uncritical hi its char- acter. While we fireely acquit the Jews of tampering with the text of the Mosaic books, the Samaritans cannot be so readily exonerated from the imputation. Additions, alterations, and transpositions are quite ap- parent in their copy of the Pentateuch. A close alli- ance between the text which lies at the basis of the
Septna^nt version and that of the Sammiitui Peista- teuch has been always noticed* Hence some tiiiiik that they flowed fh)m a common reeesuion, Oae tbmz is certain, that the Seventy agree with the Sunarttsa in about 2000 places in opposition to the Jewish texL In other books, too, of the Old Testament, bendes tbe five books of Moses, the Seventy follow a recenaisi cf the text considerably different from tiiie Jewish. Th^ in Jeremiah and Daniel we find a diflferent amnge> ment of sections, as well as a diversity in sin^ pas- sages. The books of Job and Proverbs preerait a oa- ilar disarrangement and alteration, which most be {^ down to the account of the Alexandrian Jews and Greek translators. Far different was the conduct cf the PalesUmoH Jews in the treatment of the mmi books. They were very scrupulous in hoarding tke text fh>m innovation, although it is impossible that they could have preserved it from all coemption. Bst whatever errors or mistakes had crept into differs^ copies were rendered apparent at the time when the canon was formed. We believe with H&vemick (£is- leitttng in das Alte Testament, p. 49) that '* Ezn^ ii unison with other distinguished men of his time, con- pleted the collection of the sacred writings.'* He re- vised the various books, corrected inaccuracies that had crept into them, and rendered the Old-Testanten: text perfectly f^ee from error. Thus a correct asi genuine copy was frimished under the sanctios of Heaven. Ezra, Nehemiah, and those with whom ht was associated, were in&llibly guided in the work of completing the canon. See Canon.
2. From the Establishment of the Ccmom to fke Om- pUtion qfthe Talmud, L e. the commencement ef t^ sixth centuiy after Christ. — The Tar^uusts Onkeks and Jonathan closely agree with the MoBoretie text The Greek translations of Aquila, Symmacfaoa, aod Theodotion, belonging to the second centory, deviate from the form of the text afterwards called the Ma&v retic much less than the Seventy. The Hebrew cd- umn of Origen's Hexapla presents a text allied to the Masoretic recension. Jerome's Latin version, made in the fourth century, is conformed to the same He- brew original. In the two Gemaras, viz. the Jer»a- lem and the Babylonian, belonging to the Ibnrtfa Mad sixth centuries respectively, we discern many tae» of critical skill applied to the preservation of a pore text. Diflvsrent readings in MSS. are mentioned, pre- cepts are given respecting Biblical caDlgraphy, and true reading^ are restored. By far the most unportast fiict which they present is the adducement of datsm of critical corrections made at an earlier period, and which Morinus (Exerdtationer BUtUca, p. 408) jostly calls the fragments or vestiges of recensions. TheK are-(l) D'^'IBIO n!|I»5, Retrenchment of scribe*. (2) D-^nBiO )^^T\, Correction of scribes. (8) ExtrmorA- nary pmctnati&n. (4) STna «i|) -^nUD, "Xert v^49 keihib,'' read but not written. (6) "^^^'j? Jtil n-^rs, '^Kethib ve-lo heri^'* written but not read. ' (6) The TJ- mud also mentions different readings which the Maso* retes caU ^^nH •^'n|3, " JCcri iwberttJ," readamdtffH^ ten. See Ksai and Kethib.
The writings of Jerome afibrd evidenoe that, in the fourth century, the Hebrew text was without the vow- el-points, or even the diacritical signs.
8. From the sixth Century, in which the Tbbmd «u completed, to the Invention of Printing. — ^The learned Jews, especially those at Tiberias, where there was i fSetmous school till the eleventh oentniy, ccmtiniied to occupy themselves with the Hebrew' langnaf^ and the criticbm of the Old Testament. The obaervations of preceding Rabbis' were enlarged, new remarics were made, and the vowel-system was invented, the ori^ of which can hardly be placed eariior than the sixth century. The name Masora has osually been applied to that grammatico-historical tradition which, having