THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
M. Sebok (.Schonberger), Die syrische Uebersetzung der zu-olf Propheten, Breslau, 1SS7; V. Ryssel, Vntersuchungen fiber die Textgestalt . des Buches Micha, Leipsic
1SS7; J. J. Kneucker, Das Buck Baruch, pp. 190-198, Leipsic, 1S69; T. Noldeke, Die Texte des Buches Tobit, in Monatsberichte der Berliner Akademie, 1879, pp. 45-69.
On the New Testament: The Peshito Versions of the Gospels, ed. G. W. Gwilliam, London, 1901. On the Curetonian: C. Hermansen, De codice evangeliorum Syriaco, Copenhagen, 1869; Le Hir, Etude sur une ancienne version syriaque des evangiles, Paris, 1S59; G. Wildeboer, De waarde der syrische evangelien, door Cureton ontdekt. Leyden, 1880; Fr. Bathgen, Evangelienfragmente, Leipsic, 1885; H. Harman, Cureton Fragments, in JBL, 1885, June-Dec, pp. 28-48.
On the Mepharreshe, J. R. Crowfoot, Fragmenta Evangelical, London, 1S70; idem, Collation in Greek of Cureton's Syriac Fragments, ib. 1S72. On the Sinai Palimpsest: M. D. Gibson, How the Codex was found, Cambridge, 1893; Mrs. R. L. Bensly, Our Journey to Sinai . with
a Chapter on the Sinai Palimpsest, London, 1896; K. Holzhey, Der neuentdeckte Codex Syrus Sinaiticus, Munich, 1896; A. Bonus, Collatio codicis Lewisiani cum co-
dice Curetoniano, Oxford, 1896. For further accounts of the Lewis codex consult the files of the Athenaeum, Academy, Contemporary Review, Expository Times, Guardian, Church Quarterly Review, TLZ, and similar journals for the years 1893-96.
On the Peshito in textual criticism consult: The Oxford Debate on The Textual Criticism of the New Testament, London, 1897; T. W. Etheridge, Horae Aramaicas. With a Transl. of . St. Matthew and Hebrews from
the . Peshito, London, 1843; idem, The Apostolical
Acts; Transl. from the Peshito and a later Text, London, 1849; W. Norton, A Transl. of the Seventeen Letters
. of the Peshito Syriac, London, 1890; J. Gwynn, Older Syriac Version of the four Minor Catholic Epistles, in Hermathena, 1890. On Tatian: A. Hjelt, in T. Zahn, Forschungen, vii, 1 (1903); Mrs. Lewis, in Expositor, Aug., 1897, June, 1890.
IV. The Samaritan Pentateuch: This must not be confounded with the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch in Samaritan characters or with the Arabic version used by the Samaritans. All three are contained in the famous triglot manuscript in the Barberini Library at Rome of the year 1227 (for facsimile cf. G. M. Bianchini's Evangeliari urn quadruplex, Rome, 1749, or, on a reduced scale, F G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, London, 1896, pi. v). The question of the age of this targum depends on the decision of the question whence the readings are taken which are found under the rubric to Samaraitikon in some fifty marginal notes of Origen's Hexapla (to the passages collected by Field add Lev. xv, 8; Deut. viii, 22, xxxiv, 1-3, from the margins of Lagarde's Bibliotheca Syriaca). The most probable view seems to be that not Origen but Eusebius took these notes from the Hebrew Pentateuch as used among the Samaritans. On a Samaritan inscription found at Amwas (Emmaus) cf. Revue Biblique, 1890, p. 433. E. Nestle.
The Samaritan Pentateuch is essentially the same as the Hebrew The variations, aside from those of a linguistic character, are the following: the narrative of action or declaration by Moses is often preceded by the statement that he acted or spoke by divine direction; Gen. ii, 2a, " seventh " is changed to "sixth"; anthropomorphisms are removed, and in Gen. xx, 13, xxxi, 53, xxxv, 7, Ex. xxii, 8, the plural predicate after Elohim is changed to the singular to avoid a polytheistic implication; " Ebal " (Deut. xxvii, 4) was displaced by Gerizim for national reasons. The
Samaritan Pentateuch is proved by these changes to be a revision of the Jewish, but a revision made in early times (possibly pre-Christian), though the modern tendency is to ascribe the text now extant to the second Christian century.
Bibliography: The text was first printed in the Paris Polyglot, 1643, then in Walton's Polyglot, 1657. Other editions of the whole or of parts are: A. Briill, Das samaritanische Targum zum Pentateuch, Frankfort, 1873-75, with two appendices which appeared 1875-76; H. Petermann and C. Vollers, Pentateuchus Samaritanus . . ., i, Genesis, Berlin, 1872, ii, Exodus, 1382, iii, Leviticus, 1SS3. iv, Numeri, 1885, v, Deuteronomium, 1891; J. W. Nutt, Fragments of a Samaritan Targum, London, 1874; F. Field, Origenis Hexaplorum, i, p. lxxxii-lxxxiv, Oxford, 1875; S. Kohn, in Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums, 1894, pp. 1-7, 49-67.
On various phases of the relation to text-criticism consult: J. Morinus, Exercitationes in utrumque Samaritanorum Pentateuchum, Paris, 1631; idem, in the Preface of his edition of the Septuagint, 1628; W. Gesenius, De Pentateuchi Samaritani indole, . Halle, 1815; G. B. Winer, De versionis Pentateuchi Samaritance indole, Leipsic, 1817; S. Kohn, De Pentateucho Samaritano . , ib. 1865; idem, Samaritanische Studien, Breslau, 1868; idem, Zur Sprache, Literatur und Dogmatik der Samaritaner, Leipsic, 1876; idem, in ZDMG, xxxix (1885), 165-220; A. Cowley, in JQR, viii (1896), 562 sqq., and in JE, x, 667; idem, A Supposed Early Copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch, in PEF, Quarterly Statement, Oct., 1904; P. Kahle, Textkritische und lexikalische Bemerkungen zum samaritanischen Pentateuchtargum, Leipsic, 1898; J. Skinner, Notes on a newly acquired Samaritan MS, in JQR, xiv (1901), 26-36; W. E. Barton, The Samaritan Pentateuch, in Bibliotheca sacra, lx (1903); R. Gottheil, in JBL, xxv, part 1, 1906; J. A. Montgomery, The Samaritans, Philadelphia, 1907.
V. Aramaic Versions (The Targums) : These are Aramaic paraphrases of the Old Testament {targum = "interpretation, translation," from target, "to explain, translate "; cf. Ezraiv, 7) 1. Origin prepared for use in the synagogue, an and took their rise from the custom of
repeating and explaining the Hebrew sacred text in the Aramaic tongue, which after the exile became the vernacular of the Jews in Palestine and elsewhere. At first the targum was a free oral exposition; then it gradually acquired fixed form, and at last was reduced to writing. It is frequently found in manuscripts following trie Hebrew text verse by verse. When the Law was read, the paraphrase was given after every verse; with the Prophets three verses were allowed to be taken together.
The language of the Targums used to be called Chaldee, because Jerome so named the Aramaic portions of the Hebrew Bible, which are written in a dialect very akin to that of the Targums. In reality, these have preserved the Jewish form of the Aramaic, the next cognate dialect being Syriac, the form of the Aramaic used by the Christians of Edessa, while still other cognate dialects are those of the Palmyrene inscriptions and of the Samaritans (see Semitic Languages1- The grammatical and lexicographical use of the Targums is hampered by the fact that no edition has as yet appeared that takes account of all the materials now available. Mercier vocalized the texts after the Syriac, Buxtorf after the Biblical Aramaic; the edition printed by Foa (Sabbionetta, 1557) seems to rest on a