Prof. Emanuel Tov: The (Proto-)Masoretic Text: A Ten-Part Series /Το (Πρωτο-)Μασοριτικό Κείμενο: Δεκαμερής Σειρά

The (Proto-)Masoretic Text:
A Ten-Part Series
by Prof. Emanuel Tov

11QpaleoLev

A composite image of  Psalms scroll from Masada, a specimen of the proto-Masoretic Text  (Courtesy Israel Antiquities Authority)  and the Aleppo Codex.

— Part 1—

The Bible and the Masoretic Text

The Masoretic Text (MT), whether in its consonantal form (Proto-MT) or its full form, is the commonly used version of the Hebrew Bible, considered authoritative by Jews for almost two millenia.^[1] From the invention of the printing press, all Hebrew editions of the Hebrew Bible have been based on a text form of MT, with the exception of publications of the Samaritan Pentateuch or eclectic editions.^[2]

The roots of MT and its popularity go back to the first century of the Common Era. Before that period, only the proto-rabbinic (Pharisaic) movement made use of MT, while other streams in Judaism used other Hebrew textual traditions.
In other words, before the first century of the Common Era, we witness a textual plurality among Jews, with multiple text forms conceived of as “the Bible,” or Scripture, including the Hebrew source upon which the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint (LXX), was built.

The First Century C.E.
Around the turn of the era, the consonantal (proto-)MT text was accepted as an authoritative form of Hebrew Scripture by the proto-rabbinic movement, whereas other forms were accepted as authoritative by other groups.

With the advent of Christianity in the first century C.E., the LXX, which began as the biblical text for Greek speaking Hellenistic Jews, was accepted as holy writ by this new group of early Christians, and was concomitantly dropped by other Greek-speaking Jews and ceased to be considered authoritative scripture by them. Around the same time, the Samaritans adopted the version of the Torah known as the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Qumran community that had assembled texts of different types ceased to exist.

Thus, since the first century C.E., the consonantal (proto-)MT, and subsequently full MT, version of scripture, including all the books that are contained in it, was accepted as authoritative by all streams of the Jewish people. This text is the only text quoted in rabbinic literature (the small deviations are negligible) and Karaite works, and it is the only text used by organized Judaism for the past two millennia.

The Medieval Masoretic Text  

The Masoretes and the Codices
In the latter half of the first millennium C.E., groups of Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes, created a system of signs to ensure proper pronunciation and recitation of the biblical text. They also attempted to standardize paragraph divisions and maintain proper reproduction of the text by future scribes by compiling lists of the Bible’s key orthographic and linguistic features. Two main schools (or families) of Masoretes, ben Naftali and ben Asher, created slightly different “Masoretic Texts.” The ben Asher version prevailed and forms the basis of modern biblical texts.

The oldest source of the MT Bible is the Aleppo Codex (Keter Aram Tzova) from approximately 925 C.E. Although it is the closest text to the Ben Asher school of Masoretes, it survived in an incomplete form, as it lacks almost all of the Torah. The oldest complete source for MT is Codex Leningrad B 19^A (codex L) from 1009 C.E.

The Contents of MT
MT includes five elements. Two of these were transmitted from previous generations (the proto-MT).

1. The consonantal framework, i.e., the letters of the text without any additions.

2. Para-textual elements, i.e., elements added to the written text, such as Ketiv-Qere readings and the division of the text into paragraphs.

Three further elements were added by the Masoretes:

Deuteronomy 32 -Aleppo Codex c. 925 C.E.

3. Vocalization, i.e., the vowels that were added to the written text based on oral traditions. Written vocalization signs only started to appear in the eighth century, with the work of the Masoretes, though according to tradition they were already there in a metaphysical sense, as an oral tradition accompanying the written Torah.

4. Accentuation (te’amim or trope), the musical signs that added a musical dimension to the consonants and vowels. At the same time, the accents also indicated the syntactic relation between the words.

5. The Masorah, an apparatus of instructions for the writing and reading of the biblical text written in the margins of the text as notes to scribes, ostensibly to help avoid copying errors. The Masorah is divided into two parts: The Masorah Parva (מָסוֹרָה קְטַנָּה, “Small Masorah”), which appears in the vertical margins of the codices, contains notes on orthography and statistics on word frequency. The Masorah Magna (מָסוֹרָה גְּדוֹלָה, “Large Masorah”), which appears in the horizontal margins, explicates the Small Masorah with references to some of its notes.^[3]

The consonantal framework (1), i.e., the letters themselves, are the focus of this article.

Table of Contents

  Part 1   –   The Bible and the Masoretic Text
  Part 2   –   Judean Desert Texts Outside Qumran
  Part 3   –   Socio-Religious Background and Stabilization
  Part 4   –   The Scribes of Proto-MT and their Practices
  Part 5   –   Precise Transmission of Inconsistent Spelling
  Part 6   –   Scribal Marks
  Part 7   –   Key Characteristics of the (Proto-)MT
  Part 8   –   Other Biblical Text Traditions
  Part 9   –   Evaluating (Proto-)MT
  Part 10 –   Editions and Translations of (Proto-)MT 

___________________

Professor Emanuel Tov is J. L. Magnes Professor of Bible (emeritus) in the Dept. of Bible at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Born in Amsterdam, Emanuel Tov emigrated to Israel in 1961 and obtained his Ph.D. in biblical studies at the Hebrew University in 1973. Tov specializes in various aspects of the textual criticism of Hebrew and Greek Scripture as well as in the Qumran Scrolls. Under his editorship, thirty-three volumes of the Dead Sea Scrolls series, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, appeared (1992-2008). Among his many publications are, Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts Found in the Judean Desert, STDJ 54 (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2004); Textual Criticism of the Bible, 3rd ed., revised and expanded; (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012); ביקורת נוסח המקרא, פרקי מבוא, The Biblical Encyclopaedia Library 31 (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2013); and The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research, 3rd ed., completely rev. and enl. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2015). For more  of  Tov’s work see his page on Academia.  

08-Dec-2017

[1] When using the words “Bible” or “Scripture,” we refer to the group of authoritative writings that was accepted by some or all Jews and Christians as authoritative, whether in the form of the Masoretic Text or non-Masoretic forms.  Actually, many scholars prefer to speak about Scripture or Scriptures, which is less specific than Bible, because different religions understand different things when referring to the “Bible.”

[2] Eclectic editions are modern Bible editions that reconstruct a scholar’s vision of the original text of the Hebrew Bible, such as the series The Sacred Books of the Old Testament, A Critical Edition of the Hebrew Text, Printed in Colors, with Notes; ed. Paul Haupt (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrich, 1893–1904).

[3] Editor’s note: For a brief description of the Masorah as it appears in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS), see the the BHS section in “Tools for Studying the Hebrew Bible.” It should be noted that whereas in BHS the Masorah Magna appears only in abbreviated form, in the newer, not yet complete, BHQ (Biblia Hebraica Quinta), the Masorah Magna appears in its entirety and each volume even has a section with notes on the Masorah Magna.

Copyright 2017 TheTorah.com - A Historical and Contextual Approach

The invention of the term "qere perpetuum" so as probably to be disregarded the masoretic vocalization of the sacred Tetragrammaton in early 19th cent. / Η επινόηση του όρου "συνεχές κερέ (αναγνωστέο)" για να υποβιβαστεί πιθανότατα ο μασοριτικός φωνηεντισμός του ιερού Τετραγράμματου στις αρχές του 19ου αιώνα

יְהוָֹה

Theodor Friedrich Stange,
"Hebreische sprachfunde" (1820),
in Kritisches Journal der neuesten theologischen Literatur,
vol./τόμ. 15, J. E. Seidel, 1822,
p./σ. 382

2 Βασιλέων / 4 Βασιλειών 2:14, Ο': Απόπειρες απόδοσης & ερμηνείας του αμετάφραστου εβραϊκού όρου αφφω / 2 Kings / 4 Kingdoms 2:14, LXX: Attempts to render and interpret the untranslated Hebrew term αφφω (aphpho)

Καὶ ἔλαβεν τὴν μηλωτὴν Ηλιου,
ἣ ἔπεσεν ἐπάνωθεν αὐτοῦ,
καὶ ἐπάταξεν τὸ ὕδωρ, καὶ οὐ διέστη·
καὶ εἶπεν: Ποῦ ὁ θεὸς Ηλιου αφφω;
καὶ ἐπάταξεν τὰ ὕδατα,
καὶ διερράγησαν ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα, καὶ διέβη Ελισαιε.
(LXX / Ο')

וַיִּקַּח֩ אֶת־אַדֶּ֨רֶת אֵלִיָּ֜הוּ
אֲשֶׁר־נָפְלָ֤ה מֵֽעָלָיו֙
וַיַּכֶּ֣ה אֶת־הַמַּ֔יִם
וַיֹּאמַ֕ר אַיֵּ֕ה יְהוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֵלִיָּ֑הוּ אַף־ה֣וּא׀
וַיַּכֶּ֣ה אֶת־הַמַּ֗יִם
וַיֵּֽחָצוּ֙ הֵ֣נָּה וָהֵ֔נָּה וַֽיַּעֲבֹ֖ר אֱלִישָֽׁע׃
(MT / ΜΚ)

 

Πήρε το μανδύα του Ηλία, χτύπησε μ’ αυτόν τα νερά και είπε: «Πού είναι ο Κύριος, ο Θεός του Ηλία;» Όταν χτύπησε τα νερά, αυτά άνοιξαν στα δύο και πέρασε ο Ελισαίος.
(ΜΠΚ)

Και πήρε το επίσημο ένδυμα του Ηλία, το οποίο είχε πέσει από αυτόν, και χτύπησε τα νερά και είπε: «Πού είναι ο Ιεχωβά, ο Θεός του Ηλία, ναι, Αυτός;» Και όταν χτύπησε τα νερά, τότε αυτά σιγά σιγά χωρίστηκαν από εδώ και από εκεί, ώστε ο Ελισαιέ πέρασε απέναντι.
(ΜΝΚ)

Επήρε την μηλωτήν του Ηλιού, η οποία έπεσεν επάνω εις αυτόν, εκτύπησε το ύδωρ, αλλ' εκείνο δεν διηρέθη, όπως προηγουμένως. Ο Ελισαίος είπε τότε· “που είναι ο Θεός του Ηλιού, που είναι;” Κατόπιν όμως εκτύπησε πάλιν τα ύδατα και εκείνα εχωρίσθησαν εις δύο, από εδώ και από εκεί, και ο Ελισαίος διέβη τον Ιορδάνην ποταμόν.
(Κολιτσάρας)

Καὶ λαβὼν τὴν μηλωτήν τοῦ Ἠλία, ἥτις ἔπεσεν ἐπάνωθεν ἐκείνου, ἐκτύπησε τὰ ὕδατα καὶ εἶπε, Ποῦ εἶναι Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ Ἠλία; Καὶ ὡς ἐκτύπησε καὶ αὐτὸς τὰ ὕδατα, διηρέθησαν ἔνθεν καὶ ἔνθεν· καὶ διέβη ὁ Ἐλισσαιέ.
(Βάμβας)

Έπειτα, λαβών την μηλωτήν του Ηλιού, η οποία έπεσεν από αυτόν, εκτύπησε τα ύδατα και είπε· «πού είναι τώρα Κύριος, ο Θεός του Ηλιού»; Και όταν εκτύπησε τα ύδατα, ταύτα διηρέθησαν ένθεν και ένθεν και ο Ελισαιέ διέβη.
(Χαστούπης)

And he took the sheepskin of Eliou that fell from upon him and struck the water, and it did not part, and he said, "Where is the God of Eliou—aphpho?" And he struck the waters, and they burst here and there, and Elisaie went over.
(NETS)

And he taketh the robe of Elijah that fell from off him, and smiteth the waters, and saith, 'Where is Jehovah, God of Elijah—even He?' and he smiteth the waters, and they are halved, hither and thither, and Elisha passeth over.
(Young's Literal Translation)

And he took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said: ‘Where is the LORD, the God of Elijah?’ and when he also had smitten the waters, they were divided hither and thither; and Elisha went over.
(Tanak)

And he took the mantle of Elijah that had fallen from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the Lord the God of Elijah? and when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither; and Elisha' passed over.
(Leeser)

And took the mantle of Elijah which had fallen from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is Yahweh, the God of Elijah? And when he also smote the waters they were divided, hither and thither, and Elisha passed over.
(Rotherham)

Then he took the official garment of E·li′jah that had fallen off him and struck the waters and said: “Where is Jehovah the God of E·li′jah, even He?” When he struck the waters, then they were gradually divided this way and that way, so that E·li′sha went across.
(NWT)

Et percussit aquas, et non sunt divisae; et dixu, Ubi est Deus Eliae etiam nunc? Percussitque aquas, et divisae sunt huc et illuc.
"And he smote the waters, but they did not divide; and he said, Where is the God of Elijah even now? And he struck the waters and they were divided hither and thither." 
(Vulgate / Βουλγάτα)

o o o - - - O O - - - o o o

Ἄρα οὖν ὁ Θεὸς, τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμά ἐστι. Καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ, ὅτε ἀνελαμβάνετο ὁ Ἡλίας, ᾔτει ὁ Ἐλισσαῖος παρ’ αὐτοῦ ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὸ Πνεῦμα γενέσθαι διπλοῦν. Ἐπηγγέλλετο οὖν ὁ Ἡλίας, ἐὰν ἴδῃ αὐτὸν ἀναλαμβανόμενον. Ἰδὼν οὖν, καὶ λαβὼν τὴν μηλωτὴν, ἦλθεν ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰορδάνην· καὶ πατάξαντος αὐτοῦ τῇ μηλωτῇ τὸν ποταμὸν, οὐχ ὑπήκουσε τὸ ὕδωρ. Λέγει οὖν· Ποῦ ὁ Θεὸς ἀφφώ; Ἀφφὼ δὲ ἑρμηνεύεται ἄμφω, τουτέστι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ διπλοῦν. Ποῦ οὖν ὁ Θεὸς ἀμφὼ, ἀντὶ τοῦ, τὸ Πνεῦμα διπλοῦν.
(Athanasius Alex., Testimonia e scriptura [Sp.] (de communi essentia patris et filii et spiritus sancti) /
Αθανάσιος Αλεξανδρείας, Μαρτυρίαι ἐκ τῆς Γραφῆς [Νόθο] (τῆς κατὰ φύσιν κοινωνίας, ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίως εἶναι τὸν Πατέρα, καὶ τὸν Υἱὸν, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα πρὸς θεωρίαν δυσέφικτον, καὶ μίαν ἔχειν ἐνέργειαν) [MPG 28:37.9])

ΕΡΩΤ. Θʹ.
Πῶς νοητέον· «Ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ Θεὸς Ἠλιοῦ ἀφφῶ;»
Διαβῆναι βουληθεὶς τὸν Ἰορδάνην ὁ προφήτης ἐμιμήσατο τὸν διδάσκαλον, καὶ τῇ μηλωτῇ τὸ ὕδωρ ἐπάταξεν οὐδὲν εἰρηκὼς, ἀλλ’ ἀποχρῆν νομίσας εἰς θαυματουργίαν τὴν μηλωτήν. Ἐπειδὴ δὲ οὐχ ὑπήκουσε τῶν ὑδάτων ἡ φύσις, ἐκάλεσε τὸν τοῦ διδασκάλου Θεὸν, τὸν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἀόρατον καὶ ἀνέφικτον. Ἀφφὼ γὰρ ὁ κρύφιος ἑρμηνεύεται, κατὰ τὴν ἔκδοσιν τῶν ἄλλων ἑρμηνευτῶν.
(Theodoret of Cyrus, Quaestiones in libros Regnorum et Paralipomenon /
Θεοδώρητος ο Κύρου, Εις τα ζητούμενα των Βασιλειών και Παραλειπομένων [MPG 80:749.32])


Τί ἐστιν τὸ ἀπὸ Ἐλισσαίου, ἀναλαμβανομένου τοῦ Ἡλίου, ῥηθὲν «ποῦ ὁ θεὸς ἀφφώ;»
Κατὰ τρεῖς ἐπιβολὰς ἑρμηνεύεται· ἢ «ποῦ ὁ θεὸς τοῦ πατρός μου;» ἢ «ποῦ ὁ θεὸς τοῦ μεγάλου μου;» ἢ «ποῦ ὁ θεὸς τοῦ κρυβέντος;»
(Maximus Confessor, Quaestiones et dubia
/ Μάξιμος ο Ομολογητής, Πεύσεις και αποκρίσεις και ερωτήσεις 1.7)

o o o - - - O O - - - o o o

"Where ..." - Some prefer, "Where is the Lord God of Elijah, even he? And when he had smitten, etc." Or, according to others, "now when he, etc." Elisha's smiting of the waters seems to have been tentative. He was not sure of its result. Hence, the form of his invocation - "Where is the Lord God of Elijah? Is He here - i. e. - with me, or is He not?" Answered by the event, he appears never subsequently to have doubted.
(Barnes' Notes on the Bible)


And when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither; as when Elijah smote them. The words "aph-hu", rendered "he also", is left untranslated by the Septuagint, and is interpreted by Theodoret (n) "hidden". They stand immediately after "the God of Elijah", and may be rendered, "yea he", even he himself; meaning not Elijah, as if he was inquired after, or was present and smote the waters; but rather, as we and others, Elisha, even he also smote the waters; though some take it to be the name of God, as "Hu" was, and is with the Arabs to this day; see Gill on Isaiah 43:13. Athanasius (o) interprets it of God, "Appho"; and so Elisha calls him by his title and attribute, "Aph-hu": but the words may be an answer to the prophet's question, "where is the Lord God of Elijah?" here he is, even he himself, in the faith of which the water, being smitten, parted; and with this agrees Abarbinel's note on the text; the meaning is, though we are deprived of Elijah, yet not of the providence of God; and though the servant is wanting, the Lord or master is not; for even he, the blessed God, is in his room, and his excellency is as it was before; which sense is approved of by Frischmuth (p).
(Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible)


Return of Elisha to Jericho and Bethel, and his First Miracles. - 2 Kings 2:14, 2 Kings 2:15. Having returned to the banks of the Jordan, Elisha smote the water with Elijah's mantle, saying, "Where is Jehovah the God of Elijah, yea He?" and the water divided hither and thither, so that he was able to go through. אף־הוּא, which the lxx did not understand, and have simply reproduced in Greek characters, ἀφφώ, is an emphatic apposition, "yea He," such as we find after suffixes, e.g., Proverbs 22:19; and אף is only a strengthened גּם, which is more usual when emphatic prominence is given to the suffix (vid., Ges. 121, 3). The Masoretic accentuation, which separates it from the preceding words, rests upon a false interpretation. There is no need either for the alteration proposed by Ewald, 362, a., of אף into אך, "he had scarcely smitten the water," especially as not a single analogous example can be adduced of the use of הוּא אך followed by a Vav consec.; or for the conjecture that the original reading in the text was אפוא (Houb., Bttch., Then.), "where is now the God of Elijah?" which derives no critical support from the ἀφφώ of the lxx, and is quite at variance with Hebrew usage, since אפוא generally stands immediately after איּה, when it serves to strengthen the interrogation (vid., Judges 9:38; Job 17:15; Isaiah 19:12; Hosea 13:10). This miracle was intended partly to confirm Elisha's conviction that his petition had been fulfilled, and partly to accredit him in the eyes of the disciples of the prophets and the people generally as the divinely appointed successor of Elijah. All the disciples of the prophets from Jericho saw also from this that the spirit of Elijah rested upon Elisha, and came to meet him to do homage to him as being now their spiritual father and lord.
(Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament)

A very rare case of vocalized Tetragrammaton יהוה with the vowel points of Adonai אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) #2 /Μια πολύ σπάνια περίπτωσηφωνηεντισμένου Τετραγράμματου יהוהμε τα φωνηεντικά σημείατου Αδονάι אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) # 2

MS Cambridge University Library, T-S A39.11 Β

[Thankful to the Syndics of Cambridge University Library
for granting permission to publish.]

* See also: / Βλέπε επίσης:

A very rare case of vocalized Tetragrammaton יהוה
with the vowel points of Adonai אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) #1 /
Μια πολύ σπάνια περίπτωση φωνηεντισμένου Τετραγράμματου יהוה
με τα φωνηεντικά σημεία του Αδονάι אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) # 1

A very rare case of vocalized Tetragrammaton יהוה with the vowel points of Adonai אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) #1 /Μια πολύ σπάνια περίπτωσηφωνηεντισμένου Τετραγράμματου יהוהμε τα φωνηεντικά σημείατου Αδονάι אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) # 1

MS Cambridge B 15₁ No 27

* Paul Kahle,
Masoreten des Ostens:
Die Altesten Punktierten Handschriften des Alten Testaments und der Targume
[Μασορίτες της Ανατολής:
Τα αρχαιότερα επισημειωμένα χειρόγραφα της Παλαιάς Διαθήκης και των Ταργκούμ]
1913/1966,
p./σ. 37.

* See also: / Βλέπε επίσης:

A very rare case of vocalized Tetragrammaton יהוה
with the vowel points of Adonai אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) #2 /
Μια πολύ σπάνια περίπτωση φωνηεντισμένου Τετραγράμματου יהוה
με τα φωνηεντικά σημεία του Αδονάι אדני (/a/-/o/-/a/) # 2

Aleppo Codex / Κώδικας Aleppo (Χαλεπίου) by/υπό David Marcus in Encyclopedia of the Bible and its Reception

aleppocodex.org

Aleppo Codex. The Aleppo Codex is the oldest extant manuscript of the entire Hebrew Bible and is dated to 930 CE. For hundreds of years the Codex had been in the possession of the Jewish community in the Mustaribah synagogue of Aleppo, Syria, where it was brought from Cairo in the 15th century. In 1947, during the riots against the Jews of Aleppo following the United Nations decision to partition Palestine, the synagogue was torched and the manuscript was thought to have perished in the fire. Most of it, however, was saved, and the remaining parts were brought to Jerusalem where they reside today in the Shrine of the Book at the Israel Museum. Of the estimated 480 folios of the original manuscript, 294, or about three-fifths of the original contents, have survived. Most of the Torah and portions of the Writings are missing. The parts that remain are Deut 28 : 17 to the end of the book, Joshua, Judges, and most of Kings, Isaiah, Ezekiel and most of Jeremiah and the Twelve, Chronicles, Job, Proverbs, Ruth and parts of Psalms and Canticles. No copies of the Codex are extant because the Aleppo community, being very protective of the Codex, seldom allowed scholars access and forbade photographs for scholarly purposes. Nevertheless, photographs do exist of two pages of the missing parts, one of Gen 26 : 34–27 : 30, and the other of Deut 4 : 38–6 : 3 containing the Ten Commandments (Goshen-Gottstein 1966). A hitherto missing page from Chronicles (Beit-Arié) and a fragment of Exodus (Ofer 1989), which were picked up by rescuers searching among the charred ruins of the synagogue, have emerged, leading to speculation that other missing parts might have survived.

The manuscript is written on parchment in square script in dark brown ink. Each page measures 25.4 by 33 cm, and the text is arranged in three columns per page. In the poetic sections of Job, Proverbs and Psalms, the text is written in two columns per page. As is customary for Tiberian manuscripts, the Masorah parva is written on the sides and between the columns, and the Masorah magna is written in the top and bottom margins. The brown coloring and deterioration of many pages of the Codex are due to a fungus rather than, as was previously thought, to the fire. In 1986, the Codex underwent extensive restoration efforts, and over the course of ten years in the conservation laboratory of the Israel Museum, pieces of tape and spots of dirt were removed, and the ink was reinforced in the places where it had begun to disintegrate (Ofer 2002).

The Aleppo Codex is the finest exemplar of the Tiberian Masoretic school. It was produced under the direction of the master Tiberian Masorete Aaron ben Asher, who added the vowels, accents and the Masoretic notes. On the basis of comparison with similar manuscripts it has been demonstrated that the text of the Aleppo Codex is not only superior to any other manuscript of its type, but that it is the only manuscript of the entire Bible in which the correspondence between its text and masoretic notations is nearly perfect. The reputation of the perfection of the Codex led to its gaining the title Ha-Keter, “The Crown,” meaning that it was the authoritative Codex. The Codex served as a model for the writing of other codices, and even the Codex Leningradensis (B19a), the basis for the Biblia Hebraica series (BHK, BHS and now BHQ  ), was corrected to bring it in line with this master codex. The renowned rabbinic authority Maimonides (1138–1204) both consulted this work to write his own Torah and declared it to be a model codex to be emulated, especially with regard to the division of paragraphs and to the layout of the Song of the Sea in Exod 15 and the Song of Moses in Deut 32 (Goshen-Gottstein 1979).

The extant portions of the Codex have been published in facsimile form (Goshen-Gottstein 1976), and are available free of charge in electronic form on the Aleppo Codex Website. The Codex is the basis for the critical Hebrew Bible edition being produced by the Hebrew University Bible Project (Goshen-Gottstein 1995). To date, three volumes have appeared in this series (Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel) and a fourth, the Twelve (minor prophets), is in production. The Codex has also served as the basis for several printed editions (Breuer; Cohen), and it has also been printed in a three-column format, emulating the Codex itself (Ben-Zvi). For these editions, the missing parts have been supplemented on the basis of reports of the privileged few who were permitted to examine the Codex, on the basis of the Masorah of the extant portions, and on the basis of comparison with comparable manuscripts such as Leningrad B19a, British Library Or 4445, Sassoon 507, and Sassoon 1053.

Bibliography

Primary

Aleppo Codex Website at http://aleppocodex.org.

Ben-Zvi, N. (ed.), Keter Yerushalayim: Jerusalem Crown (ed. N. Ben-Zvi; Jerusalem 2002).

Breuer, N., Torah, Nevi’im, Ketuvim (Jerusalem 1977–2004).

Cohen, M. (ed.), Miqraot Gedolot ‘Haketer’ (Ramat Gan 1992 continuing).

Goshen-Gottstein, M. H. (ed.), The Aleppo Codex (Jerusalem 1976).

Goshen-Gottstein, M. H. et al. (eds.), The Hebrew University Bible Project (Jerusalem 1995 continuing).

Secondary

Beit-Arié, M., “A Lost Leaf from the Aleppo Codex,” Tarb. 51 (1982) 171–74. [Heb.]

Goshen-Gottstein, M. H., “A Recovered Part of the Aleppo Codex,” Textus 5 (1966) 53–59.

Goshen-Gottstein, M. H., “The Aleppo Codex and the Rise of the Massoretic Bible Text,” BA 42/3 (1979) 145–63.

Ofer, Y., “A Fragment of Exodus from the Missing Part of the Aleppo Codex,” Pe ʾamim 41 (1989) 41–48. [Heb.]

Ofer, Y., “The History and Authority of the Aleppo Codex,” in Companion Volume to the Keter Yerushalayim: Jerusalem Crown (ed. M. Glatzer; Jerusalem 2002) 25–50.

* David Marcus, "Aleppo Codex"
[Κώδικας Aleppo (Χαλεπίου)],
Encyclopedia of the Bible and its Reception,

Volume 1 (Aaron – Aniconism)

Edited by: Klauck, Hans-Josef; Leppin, Volker; McGinn, Bernard; Seow, Choon-Leong; Spieckermann, Hermann; Walfish, Barry Dov; Ziolkowski, Eric J.

de Gruyter (Berlin, New York) 2009,
pp. 728-730 [DOI: 10.1515/EBR.aleppocodex].

The LXX in connection to the Masoretic Text /Η μετάφραση των Ο' σε σχέση με το Μασοριτικό Κείμενο

«As a translation, the LXX inevitably conveys a different message to the reader than the Hebrew Scriptures would. In some cases there is a great deal of disagreement between these two texts, due in part to ‘actualization’ –an adaptation of the text to events contemporary to the time of the translators.»

«Ως μετάφραση, η Ο' αναπόφευκτα μεταδίδει διαφορετικό μήνυμα στον αναγνώστη απ' ό,τι οι Εβραϊκές Γραφές. Σε κάποιες περιπτώσεις υπάρχει μεγάλος βαθμός ασυμφωνίας μεταξύ των δύο αυτών κειμένων, εν μέρει λόγω της "επικαιροποίησης" –της προσαρμογής του κειμένου στα τρέχοντα γεγονότα της εποχής των μεταφραστών».

* Ronald H. Van Der Bergh (ed.),
«Differences Between the MT and LXX Contexts of Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: Isaiah 45:18-25 as a Case Study»
[«Διαφορές μεταξύ των Συγκειμένων του ΜΚ και της Ο' των Παραθέσεων της Παλαιάς Διαθήκης στην Καινή Διαθήκη: Τα εδ. Ησαΐας 45:18-25 ως Μελέτη Περίπτωσης»],
Johann Cook, Septuagint and Reception (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum),
Brill Academic Publishers, 2009,
p./σ. 159.

Gordis:The Biblical text in the making: A study of the kethib-qereΤο Βιβλικό κείμενο εν τω γεννάσθαι: Μελέτη του κεθίβ-κερέ

* Robert Gordis,

The Biblical text in the making: A study of the kethib-qere,
[Το Βιβλικό κείμενο εν τω γεννάσθαι: Μελέτη του κεθίβ-κερέ]

Jewish Publication Society, 1937.

[English/Αγγλικά, PDF]

Ancient Hebrew &the Tiberian Hebrew vowel pointing /Η Αρχαία Εβραϊκή &τα σημεία φωνηεντισμού της Τιβεριανής Εβραϊκής

Tiberian Hebrew vowel pointing, shown with the letter Mem /
Τα σημεία φωνηεντισμού της Τιβεριανής Εβραϊκής, συνδυασμένα με το γράμμα Μεμ
(Rogers, Writing Systems p. 130)

«The Bible is the only large text of ancient Hebrew. It contains material written over several centuries and from different dialect areas. The text as we know it today was fixed around the seventh century NEW [i.e., C.E./A.D.], long after Hebrew was no longer a spoken language. The editors were known as Masoretes, and the text is known as the Masoretic text. Since the editing was done in Tiberias, the dialect of Hebrew used is referred to as Tiberian Hebrew. In the various parts of the Jewish world, different ways of pronouncing Biblical Hebrew arose. None of these is exactly the same as what we now believe ancient Hebrew sounded like, nor the same as the Tiberian Masoretes in the seventh century NEW would have used, nor the same as that which emerged in modern Hebrew in Israel today.»

 «Η Βίβλος είναι το μόνο μεγάλο κείμενο αρχαίας Εβραϊκής. Περιέχει υλικό που γράφτηκε σε διάστημα αρκετών αιώνων και σε περιοχές με διαφορετικές διαλέκτους. Το κείμενο όπως το γνωρίζουμε σήμερα παγιώθηκε γύρω στον έβδομο αιώνα ΝΕΟ [ενν. Κ.Χ./μ.Χ.], πολύ καιρό αφότου έπαψε να είναι ομιλούμενη γλώσσα η Εβραϊκή. Οι εκδότες έγιναν γνωστοί ως Μασορίτες, και το κείμενο είναι γνωστό ως το Μασοριτικό κείμενο.  Εφόσον η έκδοση έγινε στην Τιβεριάδα, η διάλεκτος της Εβραϊκής που χρησιμοποιήθηκε αναφέρεται ως Τιβεριανή Εβραϊκή. Στα διάφορα μέρη του ιουδαϊκού κόσμου, εμφανίστηκαν διαφορετικοί τρόποι προφοράς της Βιβλικής Εβραϊκής. Κανένας από αυτούς δεν είναι ακριβώς ο ίδιος με αυτό που σήμερα πιστεύεται ότι ηχούσε η αρχαία Εβραϊκή, ούτε ο ίδιος  με αυτόν που μπορεί να είχαν χρησιμοποιήσει οι Τιβέριοι Μασορίτες του έβδομου αιώνα ΝΕΟ, ούτε ο ίδιος με αυτόν που έκανε την εμφάνισή του στη σύγχρονη Εβραϊκή του σημερινού Ισραήλ.»

* Henry Rogers,
Writing Systems: A Linguistic Approach
[Συστήματα Γραφής: Μια Γλωσσολογική Προσέγγιση]
Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics, 2004, Wiley-Blackwell,
p./σ. 126.

Οι Ρόλοι της Νεκράς Θαλάσσης & οι τρεις κύριες κειμενικές παραδόσεις της ΠΔ /The Dead Sea Scrolls & the three major textual traditions of the OT

«What do the Dead Sea Scrolls tell us about the three major textual traditions? In the majority of cases (about 60 percent of the biblical scroll manuscripts), the scrolls follow the Masoretic text. About 5 percent of the biblical scrolls follow the Septuagint version; another 5 percent match the Samaritan text; 20 percent belong to a tradition unique to the Dead Sea Scrolls; and 10 percent are “nonaligned.” The key point is that the readings in the scrolls show that many variations in the biblical text are of long standing, and are not simply errors in later transmission.»

«Τι μας λένε οι Ρόλοι της Νεκράς Θαλάσσης για τις τρεις κύριες κειμενικές παραδόσεις; Στην πλειονότητα των περιπτώσεων (περίπου 60 τοις εκατό των Βιβλικών χειρόγραφων ρόλων), οι ρόλοι ακολουθούν το Μασοριτικό κείμενο. Περίπου 5 τοις εκατό των Βιβλικών ρόλων ακολουθούν τη μετάφραση των Εβδομήκοντα· ένα ακόμη 5 τοις εκατό ταιριάζει με το Σαμαριτικό κείμενο· 2ο τοις εκατό ανήκει σε μια παράδοση μοναδική στους Ρόλους της Νεκράς Θαλάσσης· και 10 τοις εκατό είναι "αναντίστοιχο". Το καθοριστικό σημείο είναι ότι οι αναγνώσεις στους ρόλους φανερώνουν ότι πολλές από τις παραλλαγές του Βιβλικού κειμένου υφίστανται επί μακρόν, και δεν αποτελούν απλώς λάθη κατά τη μεταγενέστερη μετάδοση».

* Harvey Minkoff,
«Searching for the Better Text: How errors crept into the Bible and what can be done to correct them»
[Η Αναζήτηση ενός Καλύτερου Κειμένου: Πώς  παρεισέφρησαν λάθη μέσα στη Βίβλο και τι μπορεί να γίνει ώστε να διορθωθούν],
Biblical Archaeology Review 2010.

Οι Ρόλοι της Νεκράς Θαλάσσης & το Μασοριτικό Κείμενο / The Dead Sea Scrolls & the Masoretic Text

«[The Dead Sea Scrolls] have provided us with a unique snapshot of the literary history of Second Temple Judaism, as they are almost a millennium older than the great medieval codices on which critical editions of the Hebrew Bible were and still are based. In fact, the importance of these (remains of ) ancient Hebrew manuscripts for our reconstruction of the transmission history of the Hebrew Bible is twofold. On the one hand, they have documented the fact that the textus receptus of Rabbinic Judaism, the so-called Masoretic Text (MT), is an extremely faithful and accurately transmitted ancient textual form of the Hebrew Bible, but, on the other hand, they have also demonstrated that MT represents only one of the textual forms of the abstract entity which we commonly though anachronistically refer to as “the biblical text.” Stated somewhat differently, the scrolls have allowed us a glimpse into the variety of textual forms that once circulated among the “Judaisms” of Second Temple Judaism».

[«[Οι Ρόλοι της Νεκράς Θαλάσσης] μας έχουν παράσχει ένα μοναδικό στιγμιότυπο της γραμματειακής ιστορίας του Ιουδαϊσμού του Δεύτερου Ναού, όντας παλιότεροι κατά μία χιλιετία περίπου από τους μεγάλους μεσαιωνικούς κώδικες πάνω στους οποίους στηρίζονταν και ακόμη στηρίζονται οι κριτικές εκδόσεις της Εβραϊκής Βίβλου. Στην πραγματικότητα, η σπουδαιότητα αυτών των (υπολειμμάτων των) αρχαίων εβραϊκών χειρογράφων όσον αφορά την ανακατασκευή της ιστορίας της μετάδοσης της Εβραϊκής Βίβλου είναι διττή. Από τη μία πλευρά, έχουν τεκμηριώσει το γεγονός ότι το παραδεδεγμένο κείμενο του ραβινικού Ιουδαϊσμού, το λεγόμενο Μασοριτικό Κείμενο (ΜΚ), είναι μια εξαιρετικά αξιόπιστη και επακριβώς μεταδοθείσα αρχαία μορφή κειμένου της Εβραϊκής Βίβλου, αλλά, από την άλλη πλευρά, έχουν δείξει ότι το ΜΚ αντιπροσωπεύει μόνο μία από τις μορφές κειμένου της αόριστης οντότητας την οποία συνήθως αν και αναχρονιστικά την αποκαλούμε "το βιβλικό κείμενο". Για να το πούμε με άλλα λόγια, οι ρόλοι μας έχουν δώσει τη δυνατότητα να πάρουμε μια εικόνα από την ποικιλία των μορφών κειμένου οι οποίες κυκλοφορούσαν μεταξύ των "Ιουδαϊσμών" του Ιουδαϊσμού του Δεύτερου Ναού».] 

* Hans Debel,
«Greek 'Variant Literary Editions' to the Hebrew Bible?»
[«Ελληνικές "Εκδόσεις Κειμένων με Παραλλαγές" της Εβραϊκής Βίβλου;»],
Journal for the Study of Judaism 41:1 (2010), pp./σσ. 162, 163.