SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH 298 SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH
has been used : The Samaritans had already brought out for their own use a Greek translation, known under the name of ru SajKaptiriKoj'; the Sept. finding tliis con- venient for their purpose, took it for their basis, altering here and there after the Hebrew original to suit their own ideas (so Kohn, p. 38 sq.). But there is this objec- tion to that theory : the Samaritan-Greek version was not translated before the 3d or 4th century A.D. Be- sides, it is hardly possible that a people like the Samar- itans, who on all other occasions showed themselves powerless to invent, only capable of feeble imitation, should in this one instance have distanced their rivals in producing so great a literary work as a Greek trans- lation of the Pentateuch. For this reason we must give up this explanation of the similarity of the two texts.
(6.) As to the second opinion, that mutual interpola- tions have taken place, or that the Samaritan Penta- teuch was corrected from the Septuagint, it is true to a certain extent : many passages occur in the former which bear all the marks of being interpolations from the Alexandrine version, e. g. Gen. xxiii, 2, n^^p3 p'OV bn 3.'3"iNn = 6v TToXd'Apl^uK, y ioTiv iv tw koi- Xwfiari; Gen. xxvii, 27, xb^ mirn tT^ID^we o<t///) dypod 7r\i)povg; Gen. xliii, 28, XinrTi:ixn -jins W'r'ibiib=tv\oyi]i.tivoQ 6 dv^pioTTog iKHi^oQ Tiji Oti-i; Exod. V, 13, Uzb ^TD "|3rn=rti d-)(vpov tdiSoro vfuv, etc. But how, moreover, on this supposition, are the equally numerous passages to be accounted for in which the Samaritan Pentateuch ditfers from the Sept., some- times in these cases agreeing with the Hebrew, at oth- ers departing from it?
(c.) The third opinion, advocated by Gesenius, that both the Samaritan and the Sept. were formed from Hebrew MSS., has the most probability.
(d.) The fourth opinion, which claims that the Samar- itan has, in the main, been altered from the Sept., will have few, if any, supporters, since, according to Frankel, this should have been accomplished through a Greek translation of a Targum and the Greek version of the Samaritan Pentateuch. See Skptuagint.
VI. Copies. — 1. The following is a list of the MSS. of the Samaritan Pentateuch now in European libraries (Kennicott) :
No. 1. Oxford (Usher), Bodl., fol., No. 3127. Perfect, except the first 20 and last 9 verses.
No. 2. Oxford (Usher), Bodl.,4to, No. 3128, with an Ar- abic version in Samaritan characters. Imperfect. Want- ing the whole of Leviticus and many portions of the oth- er books. See Nhmbkus and Deutkronomv.
No. 3. Oxford (Ushei), Bodl., 4to, No. 3129. Wanting many portions iu each book, especially in Numbers and Deuteronomy.
No. 4. Oxford (Usher, Laud), Bodl., 4to, No. 624. De- fective in parts of Deuteronomy.
No. 5. Oxford (Marsh), Bodl., 12mo, No. 15. Wanting some verses in the besjiuning; 21 chapters obliterated.
No. 6. Oxford (Pocock), Bodl., 24ino, No. 5328. Parts of leaves lost ; otherwise perfect.
No. 7. London (Usher), Br. Mus. Claud. B. 8vo. Vellum. Complete. 254 leaves. Of great value.
No. 8. Paris (Peiresc), Imp. Libr., Sam. No. 1. Recent MS. containing the Hebrew and Samaritan texts, with an Arabic version in the Samaritan character. Wanting the first 34 chapters, and very defective iu many places.
No. 9. Paris (Peiresc), Imp. Libr., Sam. No. 2. Ancient MS., wanting first 17 chapters of Genesis, and all Deu- teronomy from the 7th chai)ter. Iloubigant, however, quotes from Gen. x, U of this codex— a rather puzzling circumstance.
No. 10. Paris (Harl. de Sancy), Oratory, No. 1. The fa- mous MS. of P. dclla Valle.
No. 11. Paris (Dom. Nolin), Oratory, No. 2. Made-up copy.
No. 12. Paris (Libr. St. Genev.). Of little value.
No. 13. Rome (Peiresc and Barber.), Vatican, No. 106. Hebrew and Samaritan texts, with Arabic version in Sa- maritan character. Very defective and recent. Dated the 7th century (?).
No. 14. Rome (Card. Cobellertius), Vatican. Also sup- posed to be of the 7th century, but very doubtful.
No. 15. Milan (Atnbrosian Libr.). Said to be very an- cient ; not collated.
No. 16. Leyden (Golius MS.), fob, No. 1. Said to be complete.
No. 17. Gotha (Ducal Libr.). A fragment only.
No. 18. London (Count of Paris's library). With ver- sion. No. 19. St. Petersburg (Imp. Libr.).
A description of No. 19 is expected from Mr. Harkavy, while the others are described by Kennicott in his Dis- sertutio Generulis, reprinted by Blayney in his edition of the Samaritan Pentateuch.
All these are written on separate leaves; none are in the shape of rolls. At Nabhls, however, as is well known, there is still preserved in the synagogue, and only brought out with much solemnity on certain fes- tivals, an ancient parchment roll, purporting, by its in- scription, to have been written by the hand of the great-grandson of Aaron himself, thirteen years after the original settlement of the Israelites in Canaan. It is written on the hair side of the skins of some twenty rams that served as thank-offerings (so says the priest). They are of unequal size, some containing five, some six, columns of writing. Other old MSS. are also men- tioned as existing there and elsewhere in Palestine ; one has the date of A.H. 35 ( = A.D. 655) inscribed on it,
2, Printed editions are contained in the Paris and Walton Polyglots; and a separate reprint from the lat- ter was made by Blayney (Oxford, 1790). A fac-simile of the 20th chapter of Exodus, from one of the Nablus MSS., has been edited, with portions of the correspond- ing Ma.soretic text, and a Russian translation and in- troduction, by Levysohn (Jerusalem, 1860) ; but the specimen is badly executed.