-wind and clouds without rain." There is also a Chaldee version of the apocryphal passages of Esther, published in the Roman edition" of a version of Daniel by the Seventy.

3. The Targum on the Hagiographa is commonly ascribed to Joseph, the blind, (or the one-eyed,) who presided over the academy at Sora, in Babylonia, about 322 A. C. But writers of the thirteenth century show it was not his. But it is evident, from the unequal structure of this version, that it is the work of many hands. The Targum on the Psalms follows a Syriac original. The translation of each book has its own peculiar character. Thus, in Job, two versions have been united together in many places. The author, however, had a pure text before him, which rarely differed from the masoretic. The Targum on the Proverbs is closely related to the Syriac version; the Psalms were translated by different writers; sometimes the text is carefully translated, but sometimes it is paraphrased at great length. It is full of Talmudic stories."

It is, perhaps, the youngest of all the Chaldee paraphrases; for it bears marks of the use of Pseudo-Jonathan and the Targum of Jerusalem. It has the faults of most of the other Targums.]

[1772, republished with title Specimen variarum Lectionum sac. Textus et Chaldaicæ Estheris; Tubing. 1783, 8vo.]

⚫ Zunz, p. 65.

[See the first five verses of ch. i. compared with the Syriac version, in Eichhorn, § 239.]

[See some of these stories translated by Prof. Stuart, in the N. A. Review, for April, 1838, p. 515, sqq. Some of them parallel the wonderful tales in the Arabian Nights' Entertainment.]

§ 63.

II. THE SAMARITAN VERSION OF THE PENTATEUCH.“

There is a version of the Pentateuch extant in the Samaritan language. It was made from the Samaritan recension of the text; but its author and age are both unknown. [The Samaritan account states, that it is not clear whether it is to be ascribed to one Nathaniel, or whether it was given the Samaritans by God. There was a pontiff, by name Nathaniel, a little before Christ, who possessed great authority among the Samaritans. Gesenius thinks it possible he was the author.] Walton places its date too high. It is older than the Greek Samaritan version, for that was made from it. This is cited by the Fathers of the third and fourth

centuries.

With some exceptions, it follows the text with sufficient accuracy. The author, however, uses great freedom in regard to the words Jehovah () and Elohim, () for example, in Gen. v. 24. xvii. 22. xviii. 33. Num. xxiii. 4, 5. [These words are often exchanged for "Angel of God." Thus, in Gen. iii. 5, it is said, “You shall be like the angels," where Gods () occurs in the original. Man is made in the likeness of the angels, and Enoch is carried to the angels.] He treats,

[It is to be remembered, the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Samaritan version are not the same. The former is simply the Hebrew Pentateuch in Samaritan letters. It differs but little from the Hebrew text. But the latter is a translation into the Samaritan dialect. See § 86, infra.]

See De Sacy, On the Present State of the Samaritans, in Tzschirner's Archiv. vol. i. pt. 3. Gesenius, Com. de Pent. Sam. p. 18, note 66. Winer, De Versionis Sam. Indole; Lips. 1817, 8vo.

• Prol. xi. 20.

also, with great freedom all passages which ascribe human passions to God."

It agrees with the Targum of Onkelos, and from this circumstance it has been erroneously concluded the author made use of that Targum. But it differs from the latter in important passages, and is, besides, more literal. The agreement may be explained from the affinity of the two languages, and on the supposition that both followed the traditional exegesis. In the manuscripts still unprinted, it seems, this version was sometimes interpolated from the work of Onkelos. Besides, the double readings and variations of the manuscripts prove that interpolations have been made."

[On the whole, the version is of little value, on account of the present imperfection of our knowledge of the Samaritan language. It bears marks of several hands, and of several recensions. It must make one evidence with the Samaritan Pentateuch, and can furnish new readings only where it differs designedly from the latter.]

On its critical value, see Gesenius, l. c. p. 19, and Winer, l. c. p. 18.
Winer, 1. c. p. 64.

Blanchini's Specimens of the Barberine Triglot in Evang. quadruplex, pt. i., in the table after p. dciv. Compare Adler, Bib. krit. Reise, p. 138. Eichhorn, § 304, 325.

& Morinus, Opusc. Heb. Sam. p. 99. Pent., in the London Polyglot, vol. vi. Eichhorn, 1. c.

Castell, Animadvers. Sam. in totum Eichhorn, § 305. [Lee, 1. c. Prol. ii.]

EDITIONS. It is contained in the Paris and London Polyglots, accompanied with Morinus's defective translation, though it is somewhat amended in the latter. [This version is still not trustworthy, for attempts have been made to make it accord with the Vulgate.] The first eighteen chapters of Genesis, in this version, were published at Haleb, 1750, 4to. Some passages are published in Ch. Cellarius, Horæ Samarit., i. e. Excerpta, Pentateucho Samaritanæ Versionis; Ciz. 1782, 4to. See Carpzov, Crit. sac. p. 617.

§ 64.

III. THE SYRIAC PESHITO.

The version called PESHITO-that is, the simple, true seems to be one of the oldest translations of the Bible."

[The history of the Peshito, among the Syrians, is lost in wretched fables the surest proof that all authentic accounts of its origin are wanting. Some refer it to the age of Solomon, and say it was made at the request and for the use of Hiram. And to give a show of probability to this story, they add that only the five books of Moses, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, and Job, were translated at that time, and that the rest of the Old Testament was rendered into Syriac, shortly after the commencement of the Christian era, at the instance of the apostle Thaddeus. But, unluckily, the framers of this theory forgot to tell us why a Phoenician, who spoke Hebrew, needed a Syriac version of a Hebrew book, and to account for the existence of Greek words in the Syriac language at so early a date.

Others maintain that Asa caused this version to be made, when he first came among the Samaritans. But

a

Bertholdt, p. 593, thinks the word Peshito (i) means extended, in common use. But Gesenius, Com. in Jes. vol. i. p. 81, has shown the incorrectness of this opinion. See the tradition of James of Edessa, respecting this version, in Barhebræus, ad Ps. x., and Wiseman, Hor. Syr. p. 103, sq. Hävernik, p. 92. Abulfarag, Hist. Dynast. p. 101. Gabr. Sionita, Præf. in Psalt. Syr. in Hottinger, Thes. phil. p. 262. See Bertholdt's arguments for its origin in the second century, p. 594. Ephraim the Syrian, who died 378, is the oldest witness. See Von Lengerke, Com. crit. de Ephr. Syr. p. 10, sqq. Wiseman, l. c. p. 107; some expressions seem obscure to him. Von Lengerke, De Eph. Syr. Arte hermeneut. p. 25.

they never spoke the pure Syriac language, and only considered the Pentateuch and the false book of Joshua as canonical.

Some think this version was made before the time of Christ, and rely upon the Syrian tradition, and some passages in the New Testament." Some of the Syrians, and some modern critics, ascribe this version to the pretended apostle Addeus, or Thaddeus; others refer it to his time, without giving him any share in the version. There are some considerations which render the supposition probable. The Syrians state it as a fact; a version of the Old Testament was needed as soon as Christianity was proclaimed among them, and it is often cited by the Fathers. But the Syrians refer so many things to Addeus, that their testimony deserves. little attention; the Greek language was well understood in most of the Syrian cities, and the demands of the new Christians would be answered by the Septuagint; and, finally, it is not cited by the Greek and Latin Fathers before the fifth century.

The age of this version, then, cannot be determined with accuracy. We find no trace of it before the middle of the fourth century, when Ephraim Syrus commented upon it. "Before his time, it may have been long in existence. But how long? a half, or a whole century? or still longer? Who will venture to determine this, in the silence of authentic history? Most voices place it in the second century. But if it is com

[Eph. iv. 8, Paul cites Ps. lxviii. 19, as saying, edoɛ dóuara toïs årOgóлos, which is not found in the Hebrew text, (where he is made to receive gifts,) but agrees with the Syriac reading, "and hast sent gifts." But this similarity is easily explained on a different hypothesis; and Wallon justly calls the explanation some writers have made of this agreement between the apostle and the Syriac, a most foolish comment vanissimum commentum.] 31

VOL. I.