Manuscripts, Hebrew

Manuscripts, Hebrew That Hebrew MSS. existed at a very early time may be seen from the following passage in the Mishna (Sopherim, 6:4): "R. Simon ben-Lakish says, three codices (of the Pentateuch) were found in the court of the temple, one of which had the reading מעוֹן, the other ז - עִטוּטֵי, and the third differed in the number of passages wherein היא is read with a yod. Thus in the one codex it was written מעוֹן, dwelling (De 33:27), while the other two codices had מעוֹנָה; the reading of the two was therefore declared valid, whereas that of the one was invalid. In the second codex, ז - עִטוּטֵי was found (Ex 24:11), while the other two codices had אֵתאּנ - עִרֵי; the reading in which the two codices agreed was declared valid, and that of the one invalid. In the third codex there were only nine passages which had היא written with a yod (as it is generally written הוא with a vav), whereas the other two had eleven passages; the readings of the two were declared valid, and those of the one invalid." The minute prescriptions contained in the Talmud concerning the material, color, letters, writing instruments, etc., for the manuscripts, only prove the fact that such manuscripts existed, otherwise St. Jerome could not have written "Veterum librorum fides de Hebraicis voluminibus examinanda est" (Epist. ad Luciniun). The greatest care was exhibited in writing of MSS., and three mistakes were sufficient to make a copy worthless (Menachoth, fol. 29, col. 2).

When the study of the Talmud was no longer attractive amid the disorder and frequent closing, of the Babylonian academies, and ulterior development of the traditions became exhausted, attention was more directed to Scripture. The number of MSS. increased, and to them the various systems of vowel-points and accents, together with the first elements of grammar, were appended. But not all of these MSS. are now extant, some are only known from the quotations made from them by different writers. In treating, therefore, of the different MSS., we shall have to speak of two kinds of such as are lost, and of such as are extant.

I. LOST MANUSCRIPTS.

1. The Codex Hillel (q.v.).

2. The Codex Sanbuki (q.v.).

3. The Jericho Pentateuch. Concerning this יריחי חומש Elias Levita writes thus: "The Pentateuch of Jericho is doubtless a correct codex of the Pentateuch derived from Jericho. It discusses the plene and defectives as הִתּוֹעֵבוֹת, 'the abominations' (Le 18:27), which is in this Pentateuch without the second vav. So also ילַידֵי, which occurs twice in the same chapter (Nu 13:13,22), of which the first is plene (written in the Jericho codex), and the second defective."

4. The Codex Sinai (q.v.).

5. The Codex Ben-Naphtali. Moses ben-David Naphtali, a contemporary of Ben-Asher, flourished about A.D. 900-960. He distinguished himself by his edition of a revised text of the Hebrew Scriptures in opposition to Ben- Asher, in which he had no great success, inasmuch as the different readings he collated and. proposed are very insignificant, and are almost entirely confined to the vowel-points and accents. The codex itself is lost, but many of its readings are preserved, e.g. by Kimchi in his Grammar and Lexicon, while a complete list of these different readings is appended to Bomberg's and Buxtorfs Rabbinic, and to Walton's Polyglot Bible. First, in his Concordance, page 137, sec. 48, has also given the variations between these two scholars.

The most important difference between Ben-Naphtali and Ben-Asher is the reading of שלהבת יה, Song of Songs, 8:6, as two words, while Ben- Asher reads it as one word, שלהבתיה, both readings having the same meaning. In a very convenient form these variations are given by Bar and Delitzsch in their edition of the different parts of the Old Test., on Genesis, page 81, Job, page 59, Psalms, page 136, Proverbs, page 55, Isaiah, page 90, Minor Prophets, page 90, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, pages 91, 126, Ezekiel, page 112.

Our printed editions have for the most part the rending of Ben-Asher; very seldom, however, that of Ben Naphtali is found, with the exception of such codices as have the Babylonian system of punctuation, and which always follow Ben-Naphtali. The editions in which the reading שלהבת יה (i.e., Ben-Naphtali's) is found are: Bomberg's Rabbinic (1517) and his quarto edition (1518), Stephen's (1543), Munster's (15461, Hutter (1587), Antwerp Polyglot (1571), Bragadin's Hebrew Bible (1614), Simoni's (1767-1828), Jahn's (1806), Bagster's (1839), Basle edition (1827), Hahn- Rosenmiiller's (1868).

I. EXTANT MANUSCRIPTS.

I. In order to have a correct opinion of the codices extant, the following points must be observed:

1. Whether the MS. was written for public or private use. Those written for public use, commonly called "synagogue rolls" or "sacred copies," were prepared with that care and minuteness of which prescriptions are given in the Talmud, while the others were less carefully made. They are written sometimes in the square, at others in the rabbinical character. Their size is entirely arbitrary. They are in folio, quarto, octavo, and duodecimo. Of those written in the square character, the greater number are on parchment, some on paper. As to the square character employed in the MSS., it has varieties. The Jews themselves distinguish in the synagogue roll (1) the Tam letter, with sharp corners and perpendicular coronulse, used among the German and Polish Jews: (2) the Velshe letter, more modern than the Tam, and rounder, with coronulse, particularly found in the sacred copies of the Spanish and Oriental Jews.

2. Whether the copyist, in writing and correcting the MS., had regard to some version or not. That such was sometimes the case may be seen from a MS. containing the Psalms, and belonging to the 15th century, known as Scaliger 8 (because Scaliger once had it), and preserved at the.Academy of Leyden (comp. Heidenheim, in his Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift, 2:466- 468).

3. What its date is. The Jews employed different dates in their MSS. Some used the "Seleucidic" or "Greek" era (חשבון היונים), called also AEra Contractuum (מנין שטרות), which was employed until the 11th century, and ceased entirely in the year A.D. 1511. Another computation was the reckoning from the destruction of Jerusalem (A.M. 3828, A.D. 68). A third computation was the sera of the creation (לבריאת עולם, לבריאה), and was introduced by European transcribers. When it became more general, after the year of the world 4000, the 4000 years were gradually omitted. This system of mentioning only the hundreds and lower numbers was called "the small aera" (לפרט קטן, abbreviated לפ8 8ק), in contradistinction from the full numbering (פרט גדול).

In order to find out to which year A.D. one of the years of the Seleucidic or Greek sera, or of the Jewish computation, either from the creation or from the destruction, corresponds, it must be borne in mind that the Jewish civil calendar commences with the month of Tishri, תשרי, corresponding to our September or October, and the Seleucidic sera with the first of October, 312 B.C. Thus, e.g. the year 283 of the Seleucidic erae would be the year 329 B.C., i.e., 312-283 = 29, allowing, however, some months because of the difference in the calendar 30-29. In Jewish MSS. we frequently find the small sera, or לפרט קטן. Thus cod. 2 of Kennicott has an epigraph which states that it was written in the year 64, that is 5064. By adding to this number the number 240 (i.e., the difference between the Jewish and Christian computation), we get 5304; deducting from this 4000 (i.e. the time from the creation to the birth of Christ), we get the year A.D. 1304; or the same date may be had by adding to the year 64 the number 240=304, combined with the fifth thousand=1304. The date according to the era of the destruction of Jerusalem is found by adding 68 to the given date: thus the year 900 after the destruction would be 900+68=968, or A.I). 1885 would be the year 1817 after the destruction (i.e., 1885- 68=1817).

4. Where the codices were written, as there is a difference between the Spanish and the German, the Eastern and Western codices.

(a) As to the Spanish and German codices, there is a great diversity of opinion. Kennicott and De' Rossi speak of the German very highly, while Jewish authorities prefer the Spanish codices. Thus Elias Levita tells us," Most of the correct codices I found to be Spanish, and it is upon these that I relied, and it is their method which I followed.... The Spanish codices are more correct than all other exemplars."

(b) As to the Eastern and Western codices. At the beginning of the Christian era there were two rival academies, one in Palestine and the other in Babylonia. Both had their Talmud (q.v.), respectively known as the Palestinian and Babylonian Talmud, but also their codices, in which they differed from each other. And thus we find in Rabbinical as well as in Biblical codices marginal notes, giving the passages where the Eastern and Western differ from each other. Thus, e.g. cod. Kennic. 516 (Florent. 13, Laur. 3, 3, scr. an. 1291), "The Westerns or Palestinians read עשריה, the Easterns or Babylonians עשיריה.'" These variations were first collected by Jacob ben-Chayim in the Rabbinic Bible (Venice, 1526), under the title, המקרא שבין בניארוֹ ישראל ובן בני בבל חלוŠ. Chayim does not give the source from which he took these variations, but Morinus (Exercitt. Biblic. page 409, Paris, 1669 fol.) testifies that he saw a list of these variations in some MSS.

As to the Eastern and Western readings, which were published by Chayim, we must observe

(1) that none occur in the Pentateuch;

(2) that these readings only refer to letters and words (with two exceptions, viz. Jer 6:6, where the Eastern write עצהּ מפיק, i.e., עצה with a mappik, and Am 3:6, where they note עשהּ מפיק, i.e., עשה with a mappik);

(3) they seldom change the sense, as for the most part they concern the omission or addition, or permutation or transposition, of quiescent letters (La 5:21, יהוה is read by the Occidentals, while the Orientals have אדני);

(4) there are two hundred and sixteen various readings in Chayim's Bible (and in all Rabbinic Bibles which followed that of Chayim), viz. Joshua 11: Judges 8; Samuel 10; Kings 21; Isa 18; Jer 34; Eze 22; Minor Prophets, 13; Chronicles 11; Psalm 8; Job, 12; Proverbs 8; Ruth, 7; Song of Songs, 2; Eccles. 6; Lamen. 6; Es 4; Da 8; Ezra, 7.

(5) The European or Western Jews follow the reading of the Western (מערבאי), and thus it happens that in the one or the other codex we find another reading from that of the Eastern codices. Thus, in 2Ki 18:29, Norzi (q.v.) remarks on the reading להציל אתכם מידו, that those codices which read מידי follow the Babylonian (כבני בבל), but the Palestinian codices, which we follow, give in the list of variations מידו.

II. After these preliminaries, we will speak of the extant codices.

1. The Codex of Asher. 'See Asher Manuscript.

2. The Codex of Cahira. This codex contains the prophets, and is preserved at Cahira, in the synagogue of the Karaites. It was written in the year 827 after the destruction of the temple, or in the year 4656 of the creation = A.D. 895.

3. Codex Kennic. 126. This codex contains the later prophets, and is preserved in the British Museum (Sloane, 4708). See Sloane Codex.

4. The Codices of Damascus and Guber. The former codex the late Dr.Moses Margoliouth saw at Damascus, belonging to the family Farrhi. It is regarded as very sacred, and the Jews themselves are only allowed to look at it once a year, that is on the feast of שמחת תורה, i.e., "the Joy of the Law," which takes place at the termination of the Feast of Tabernacles. Dr. Margoliouth, who saw it, says that this codex "deserves the palm for beauty and execution." According to a notice added later on the title-page, it should belong to the 3d century. Another codex, Dr. Margoliouth states, is at Guber or Juber, near Damascus. "There is a synagogue at that small place which is considered the most ancient in the world; and, moreover, Hebrew writers affirm that it is built over the cave of Elijah. The MS. there is by no means so fine a masterpiece as the Damascus one, but is certainly much older. A most awful anathema is written on the cover, against any one selling or stealing it" (Pilgrimage to the Land of my Fathers, 1:257).

5. Codices Kennicottiani. Of these we enumerate the following:

(1) Cod. 590 — containing the Prophets and Hagiographa, written about 1018 or 1019, now in the Imperial Library at Vienna.

(2) Cod. 536 — containing the Pentateuch, Haphtaroth, and Megilloth [i.e., Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther] (Cesense Bibl. Malatest. Patrum D. Franc. Convent. plut. 29: cod. 2), of the end of the 11th century. It commences with Ge 2:13.

(3) Cod. 162 — Joshua, Judges, Samuel (Florentiae Biblioth. Laurent. part. 1, pars 2, cod. 45), of the beginning of the 12th century.

(4) Cod. 154 — Prophets, with both Targums (Carlsruhe, Biblioth. publ.), A.D. 1106. This is the famous Code Reuchlinianus, which has the epigraph: "In the year 4866 A.M. and 1038 since the destruction of the temple." The Targum, according to this codex, has been published by Lagarde, Leipsic, 1872.

Besides these we may mention:

(5) Cod. 193 — Pentateuch, without points (Mediolani Bibl. Ambros. G. 2), A.D. 1287, or somewhat earlier. Of various readings, the following are marked by De' Rossi: Ex 12:31, ויקרא פרעה, so also Sept., Vulg., Syr. Le 12:7, עליה הכהן, Samuel, Sept., Syr. 25:35, ָוחי אחי, Samuel, Sept.

(6) Cod. 201 — Prophets and Hagiographa, of the 12th century (Norimb. Biblioth. Ebner). Jeremiah follows the book of Samuel, and 1 Kings, Ezekiel, and Isaiah follows Jeremiah.

(7) Cod. 210 — Bible of the 12th century (Parisiis Biblioth. Reg. 10).

(8) Cod. 224 — Prophets and Hagiographa, of the 12th century (Regiomonti Biblioth. Reg.).

(9) Cod. 366 — Prophets, in large 4to, of the 12th century (Parisiis San- German. 2). Jer 29:19 to 38:2 and Ho 4:4 to Am 6:12 is wanting.

(10) Cod. 293 — Pentateuch, with the Megilloth and Masorah in fol., A.D. 1144 (Toleti ap. Bayerum). The epigraph reads, "Written כֹוֹֹדֹ, i.e., 4904 A.M." De 7:13, יהוה נשבע for נשבע, confirming the reading of the Samuel and Sept.

(11) Cod. 531 — Prophets and Hagiographa, with the Masorah and Targum, fol., 2 volumes, A.D. 1193 (Boonoisa, Biblioth. S. Salvatoris Canon. Reg. 646, 647). The epigraph bears the date 953 (+240) =1193.

(12) Cod. 326 — Hagiographa, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, 4to, A.D. 1198 (Parisiis Bibl. Regian. 48).

6. De' Rossi's Codices. Of these we particularize the following:

(1) Cod. 634 — fragments of Leviticus and Numbers, 4to, 8th century, Containing Le 21:24 to Nu 1:50. Le 22:4, ואיש, so Sept.

(2) Cod. 503 — Pentateuch, in 4to, 9th or 10th century, commencing with Ge 42:14 to De 15:12; Ex 21:20, בשבט is omitted, as in Samuel 22:9, אוכל הבהמה, Samuel, Sept., Syr., Arab. 23:23, והחתי והגרגשי, Samuel, Sept. 24:12, האבנים, Samuel 13, ויעל משה ויהושע, Sept. ἀνέβησαν. 37:5, לשאת את הארן בהם, Samuel, Arab. 39:33, ובריחו, Syr., Arab. Le 1:2, מן הצאן, Samuel 7:6, יאכל omitted, Vulg.

(3) Cod. 262 — Pentateuch, Megilloth, Haphtaroth, in fol. 11th or 12th century. Le 4:14, אלפתח אהל, Sept., Vulg. 5:8, והקריב הכהן, Compe, Sept. sx,40, יכבס בגדיו ורחוֹ במים, Sept. (but not the Complut. and Aldine). 19:27, ולא, Samuel, Vulg., Arab. De 1:40, פנו וסעו לכם, Samuel 3:14, ויאיר, Samuel, Sept., Syro, Arab., Targ., Jonathan. הארגב, Samuel 6:2, ָובני, Sept., Vulg. 34:2, כלארוֹ נפתלי, Sept., Syr.

(4) Cod. 274 — Pentateuch, with points, 4to, 11th or 12th century: it ends with De 32:51, and has the Masorah finalis.

Ge 31:35, ותאמר רחל אל אביה, Syr. Nu 29:11, ונסכה, Sept. 27, כמשפטם, Sept., Syr.

7. The Odessa MSS. In the year 1845 E. M. Primer published his Prospectus der der Odessaer Gesellschaft fur Geschichte und Alterthumer gehorenden altesten tund rabbinischen Manuscripte, whereby a number of MSS. became known to the literary world. They were bought in 1863, and are now in the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg. A very accurate catalogue of them was published by Harkavy and Strack (Leipsic and St. Petersburg, 1875). Of these codices only two are of great importance, viz,, one containing the later prophets, dated A.D. 916, and another containing a complete Old Test. with both Masorahs, on 491 leaves, said to be a copy of Asher's codex (?). It is dated A.D. 1009. Of the latter, Bar and Delitzsch availed themselves in their Hebrew-Latin edition of the Psalms and in the edition of Job, where a facsimile of that codex is also given. The former has been-published by H.L. Strack (Prophetarum Posteriorum Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus, Lipsiae, 1876) in facsimile, by means of photo-lithography, at the expense of the emperor Alexander II of Russia. The whole work was done in three years, and is a monument to the editor and his imperial patron. The text, surrounded with Masoretic notes, and furnished with the so-called Babylonian system of vocalization, occupies 449 folio pages. The Latin preface gives the history of the codex, and the critical annotations, which follow the text, are intended to help the student in the perusal of the same. The following list of various "readings does not affect the vowel points, but merely the consonants. The reading of Van der Hooght is given first:

Isa 1:7, עריכם — ועריכם, and so many codd., Syr., Arab. 22, לסגים — לסיגים, thus some older and modern editions, as Miinaster, Hutter, Michaelis, Hahn-Rosenmuller, Letteris, Bar-Delitzsch. 3:23, הגלינים — והגלינים, so great many codd., all versions, Rashi, Kimchi, Ibn-Ezr 4:1, ושמלתנו — ושמלתינו, so some codd., Sept., Syr., Arab., Vulg. 7:14, עמנואל — עמנו אל, thus many codd. and editions, as Munster, Hutter, Clodius-Birkelin, Michaelis, Reineccius, Simonis, Hahn- Rosenmiller, Stier and Theile's Polyglot, the Warsaw Rabbinic Bible. 10:16, אדני — יהוה, so many codd. and editions. 15:2, כל — גדועה וכל — גרועה, so many codd., and editions of Athias, Clodius, Opitz, Michaelis, Reineccius, Simonis, Letteris, Bar-Delitzsch.

4, נפשו — ונפשו. 16:7, חרשֹת — חרשׁת. 10, לא ירעע — ולא ירעע, the ולא is found in many codd., Sept., Syr., Targ., Vulg., Arab. six, 13, והתעו — התעו, many codd., Vulg., Targ., Norzi, and a great many editions. 20:2, ָרגל — ָרגלי, codd, Sept., Syr., Vulg., Arab. 21:12, אתא— אתה, so many codd. 18:2, לאדני — ליהוה, so many codd. 29:19, ואביוני — ואביני. 23, ימעשה — מעשה. 30:6, עורים, Kethib, עירים, Keri — עירים, Kethib and Keri. 33:1, ָבגדו ב — בגדו בו. 34:13, קמושׁ— קמושֹ. 35:9, לא יהיה — ולא יהיה. 36:2, רבשקה — רב שקה. 15, לא — ולא. 37:9, על — אל. 17, ָעינ — ָעיני, Sept., Syr., Vulg. 3S, אסר הדן — אסרהדן. 38:11, חדל — חלד. 14, יהוה — — אדני. 18, לא ישברו—ולא ישברו 39:6, לא יותר — — ולא יותר. 43:19, עתה— ועתה. 44:24, מיאתי — מי אתי. 45:21, יועצו — נועצו, but by a later hand יועצו. 49:9, לאשר — ולאשר, many coddo, Sept., Vulg., Syr., Targ. 51:9, רננו — ורננו. 54:9, כי מי — כימי. 56:1, אל יהוה — — על יהוה. 63:11, רעה — רעי, so many codd.,Vulg., D. Kimchi, Abarbanel, Solomon ben-Melech. 64:3, לא האזינו — ולא האזינו, so many codd, 65:20, לא יהיה — ולא יהיה. 22, לא יטעו — ולא יטעו. 66:2, על דברי — אל דברי. 17, אחד, Kethib, אחת, Keri — אחת, Kethib and Keri. This very incomplete list from the prophet Isaiah (space prohibits our giving readings from the other prophets) is sufficient to show the great importance of this codex.

8. The Firkowitsch MSS. This famous collection of the Karaite Abraham Firkowitsch (q.v.) was bought for the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg in the year 1862, and is also described by Harkavy and Strack in their Catalogue. Altogether this collection contains 146 MSS., of which 47 are synagogue rolls (1-5 on leather, 6-47 on parchment), three of which contain only the entire Pentateuch (No. 10, dated A.D. 940, 19, dated A.D. 920, and No. 47), and the rest manuscripts in book form (viz., No. 48-146; of which 48123 are without translation, 124-146 with translation, the translations being either Arabic, Tartar, or Persian). In the several parts of the Old Test. edited by Bar and Delitzsch, the prelaces also contain notices concerning manuscripts used by the editors.

Literature. — Tychsen, Tentfamen de Variis Codicum Hebraicorum . . . Generibus (Rostock, 1772); Befreytes Tentamen, etc. (Leipsic, 1774); Eichhorn, Einleitungy in das Alte Testament, 2:456-584 (4th ed. Gottingen, 1823); De' Rossi, Proleg. 1:19-21, § 19; De Wette, Einleitung, § 140-146, 8th ed.; § 108-114, 7th ed.; Strack, Prolegomena Critica, page 9-58. For a description of manuscripts, see Le Long, Biblioth. Sacra, I, ch. 2, page 4961 (ed. Paris, 1723 fo.); Wolf, Bibl. Hebraea, 2:293-324; 4:79- 98; Kennicott, Dissert. Generalis (Oxford, 1780 fol.; ed. Bruns, Brunswick, 1783); De' Rossi, I, 59-94; 97-125; 126-135; IV, 22-28; Manuscripti Codices Hebraici Bibliotheca (Parma, 1803, 3 volumes); G.B. De' Rossi, Libri Stampati di Letteratura Sacra Ebraica ed Orientale della Bibliotheca del Dott. pages 79-82 (ibid. 1812); Kocher, Nova Bibliotheca Hebraica, 2:42-46; Rosenmuller, Handbuch fur die Literatur der bibl. Kritik, etc., 2:17 sq.; Winer, Handbuch der theol. Lit. 1:96; Catalogus Universitatis Lipsiensis, tom. 83 (exeg. appar.), fol. 203-205. Besides these works, compare the different catalogues of public librarie's, viz.,

1. Vatican: Assemani, Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae Codicum Manua Scriptorum Catalogus (Rome, 1756 fol.).

2. Bodleian: Uri, Catalogus (Oxford, 1787), and Steinschneider, Conspectus Codd. MSS. Hebraeorum, etc. (Berlin, 1857).

3. Cambridge: Schiller-Szinessy, Catalogue of the Hebrew MSS. preserved in the University Library (Cambridge, 1875).

4. Paris: Catalogue des Manuscrits Hebreux et Samaritans de la Bibliotheque Imperiale (Paris, 1866).

5. Vienna: Krafft und Deutsch, Die handschriftlichen hebraischen Werke der k. Hofbibliothek zu Wien (Vienna, 1847).

6. St. Petersburg: Catalog der hebraischen Bibelhandschriften der kaiserlichen offentlichen Bibliothek in St. Petersburg, by Harkavy and Strack (1875).

7. Munich: Steinschneider, Die hebrniischen Handschriften der k. Hof-und Staats-Bibliothek in Munchen (1875).

8. Berlin: Steinschneider, Verzeichniss der hebraischen Handschriften der kiniglichen Bibliothek (1878).

9. Leyden: Steinschneider, Catalogus Codicum Hebraeorum Bibl. Acad. Lugd. Batavice (Leyden, 1858).

10. Leipsic: Catalogus Librorum Manui Scr'iptorum ... Codices Linguaruman Orientalium Descripserunt, by Fleischer and Delitzsch (Grimnla, 1838).

11. Hamburg: Steinschneider, Catalog der Handschriften in der Stadtbibliothek zu Hamburg (1877).

12. Turinl: Codices Manuscripti Bibliothecae Regiae Taurinensis Athenaei, edd. Pasinus, Rivantella, Berta (Turin, 1749).

13. Dresden: Fleischer, Catalogus Codicum MSS. Orientalium Biblioth. Reg. Dresdensis (Dresden, 1831).

14. Florence: Bisconius, Bibliothecae Ebraicae Graecae Florentinae. S. Bibliothecae Mediaeo-Laurentianae Catalogus (Florence, 1757).

15. Cesena: Mucciolus, Catalogus Codicumn Manuscriptorum Malatestianae Caesenatis Bibliothecae (1780, 1784, 2 volumes, fol.).

16. Parma. See above, De' Rossi.

17. Spain and Portuqgatl: Neubauer, Notes sur des Manuscrits Rebreux Existant dans Quelques Bibliotheques de l'Espagne et du Portugal, in the Archives des Missions Scientifiques et Litteraires, II, 5:423-435 (Paris, 1868).

The various readings found in the St. Petersburg manuscripts and in such as have of late come.to light, but are enumerated by Bar and Delitzsch in the different parts of their Old-Test. edition, have been made use of by the latter, and are given in a very convenient form in the Appendices Criticae et Masoreticae, viz. Genesis, pages 74 sq.; Job, pages 33-56; Psalms, pages 83-123; Proverbs, pages 30-54; Isaiah, pages 65-82; Ezekiel, pages 73-107; Minor Prophets, pages 59-85; Daniel, pages 62-85; Ezra- Nehemiah, pages 99-119 (these last three books printed together). Of the St. Petersburg manuscripts, professor Delitzsch has also made use in his commentary on Song of Songs (pages 178-184) and Ecclesiastes (pages 425-435), published at Leipsic in 1875. A comparison of the Codex Babylonicus from the year 916, and of the MS. from the year 1009, with Hahn's edition of the Old Test., which in the main is a reprint of Van der Hooght, has been made by Strack with reference to Isaiah, and the result was published in the Zeitschrift fur lith. Theologie, 1877, pages 17-52. All these various readings do not essentially impair the authority of the Masoretic text, nor materially alter the meaning of any important passage. (B.P.)