B I B 



369 



B I B 



Old; Both Testaments were publicly read ; the Old Testa- 

 ment was read in the Septuagint translation or the Alex- 

 andrine version of the Hebrew into Jewish Greek. Hence 

 it has arisen that Christian writers frequently cite as Scrip- 

 ture the Apocrypha which were mixed up in the Septua- 

 gint with the canonical books ; but as soon as the atten- 

 tion of the learned was directed to the canon, the later 

 products of Jewish literature subsequent to the extinction 

 of the Hebrew language were again separated from the 

 canon. The canonical books were therefore called Libri 

 Resulares, or Regular Books, and the Apocryphal books 

 Libri Secreti, or Secret Books. But the reading of the 

 Libri Secreti continued during the third century. In the 

 fourth century several lists of Biblical books were promul- 

 gated by the orthodox Greek church in order to prevent the 

 use of Apocryphal or uncanonical books (cucavovurra /3i/3\fa). 



These lists generally adhere, in the Old Testament, to 

 the Jewish canon, but fluctuate in the New Testament 

 concerning the Apocalypse. The name Apocrypha signifies 

 In these lists fictitious and heretical writings ; but between 

 the canonical and Apocryphal is placed a third class of 

 writings, the reading of which is permitted to the church. 

 The Latin church adopted, with reference to the Old Testa- 

 ment, laxer principles, and admitted several Apocryphal 

 writings into the canon; although the learned, like Hiero- 

 nymus, adhered to the twenty-two books, according to the 

 lelters in the Hebrew alphabet. Hilarius also mentions 

 that the law of the Old Testament was divided into twenty- 

 two bo >ks, corresponding in number to the letters of the 

 Hebrew alphabet, but adds that, according to the opinion of 

 others, Tobit and Judith should be added in order to com- 

 plete the number of the Greek alphabet, which contains 

 twenty-four letters. The Protestants, returning to the Jew- 

 i-h ranon, separated the Apocryphal additions of the Alex- 

 andrine version, which were for the first time decidedly 

 made canonical by the council of Trent in opposition to the 

 reformers. The council of Trent decrees, in its fourth ses- 

 sion, that if anybody will not admit as holy and canonical 

 all the entire books and all their parts extant in the Latin 

 Vulgate, he shall be anathema. 



After these general remarks concerning the formation of 

 the canon, we shall briefly survey the history of the text. 



Before the Babylonian exile the Biblical books were 

 written in the characters still extant in the legends of the 

 Asmonsean coins, of which we have given specimens in the 

 article ALEXANDER JANN.EUS and in ALPHABET. Instead 

 Of the antique Hebrew character which is nearly allied 

 to the Samaritan, there was employed after the Babylonian 

 captivity a sort of Aramaic alphabet, which was gradually 

 changed by transcribers into the present square cha- 

 racter, of which the Spanish, the German, and the inter- 

 mediate or Italian are three modificalions found in Hebrew 

 manuscripts. The characters printed in modern editions 

 of the Hebrew Old Testament are formed according to 

 the Spanish manuscripts, which are the most beautiful. 

 The characters employed in the publications of Sehastianus 

 Miinster at Basel about A.D. 1530, are imitations of German 

 manuscripts. 



The Italian and French Jews wrote in a middle style, 

 between the Spanish and German. The Rashi, Rabbinical, 

 and cursive Hebrew characters represent the gradual 

 changes of the square characters to a Hebrew running 

 hand, which are also occasionally employed in manuscripts 

 written for private use, and are therefore less accurately 

 revised, and consequently of less authority than those written 

 for public use in synagogues. The most antient manu- 

 scripts had neither vowels nor diacritical marks, nor were 

 the words always divided. (See Hupfeld, Beleiirhtung 

 dunkler Stfllen in der alt-testamenllichen Textgeschichte, 

 In den Studien und Kritiken 1830.) 



Verses and punctuation, which are already mentioned in 

 the Talmud, are marked in Hebrew by accents, which served 

 also as rhythmical marks to be observed in the Oriental 

 style of reading, which approaches to singing. Hieronymus 

 followed probably the D'plD3. sections, mentioned in the 

 Talmud, in dividing the prophetical and poetical books into 

 cola et mmmala, and the historical books into cola only. 



In old Hebrew manuscripts, as well as in those of tho 

 Septuagint and Italian version, the poetical books are written 

 in hemistichs or half verses, thus : 



Sepulchrum patens est guttur eorum. 

 Liriguis suis dolose agebant. 

 Venenum aspidum sub labiis eorum. 



The present division into chapters, which the Jews have 

 adopted, is of Christian origin, and does not occur befbre 

 the thirteenth century. The capituJa of Hieronymus, tho 

 Tituli and Breves in the Latin, the D'mD or VTTD, order.?, 

 and D*J!3D (<")/*) marks, of the Masoreths, were so fluc- 

 tuating that, before the introduction of the present chapters 

 and verses, the quotations were very vague. The Pentateuch 

 alone was in antient times divided into fifty-four ' sections,' 

 /!V!n3. according to the number of the Sabbaths in tlie 

 Jewish leap year. 



On every Sabbath a certain sederah, or parasha or sec- 

 tion, is read, and in the common year, which does not con- 

 tain fifty-four Sabbaths, two sections are to be read on some 

 Sabbaths, so as to complete the reading of the Pentateuch 

 every year. The Parashioth, or ' sections,' are subdivided 

 into seven smaller divisions, according to the number of 

 men who are usually honoured by being called upon on the 

 Sabbath to read publicly the law in tlie synagogue. But 

 in these divisions, and in accounting for them, neither the 

 Jews nor the learned perfectly agree among themselves. 



The Parashioth, which in regularly written manuscripts 

 commenced a line, are called /lini/ID, open, and are marked 

 in printed Hebrew Bibles 333 or 3. Those which commence, 

 in the middle of a line are called JTIOVID closed or shut 

 up, and are marked ODD or D- But in printed Bibles D 

 stands sometimes at the commencement, and 3 in the middle 

 of a line. 



Notwithstanding the great care bestowed by the Jows 

 after the Babylonian exile upon the preservation of the 

 Hebrew text, some transpositions have crept in ; letters, 

 words, and sentences, have been omitted ; and some mis- 

 takes between "11 . 3 3- P" 1 - 3 3 &c., as well as errors in the 

 division of the words and the filling up of abbreviations, &c., 

 have been made; sometimes letters of a similar scund, 

 synonymous words, and those of similar sound and parallel 

 passages were exchanged. Some alterations were also intro- 

 duced by the officiousness of critics in removing expressions 

 which they either deemed offensive, or hard to be under- 

 stood, or not perfectly analogous to parallel passages. A 

 comparison of the parallel passages in the Old Testament 

 shows that these alterations happened most frequently in 

 the most antient times before the ecclesiastical authority 

 of the canon was established. Comp. Ps. xiv. with liii. ; 

 xl. 14th seq. with Ixx. ; xviii. with 2 Sam. xxii.; Ps. cviii. 

 with Ivii. 8 12; Ix. 714 ; Ps. cv. with 1 Chron. xvi. 8 - 

 22; Ps. cxvi.with 1 Chron. xvi. 23 33; Is. xxxvii. xxxviii. 

 with 2 Kings, xviii. xix. ; Jer. lii. with 2 Kings xxiv. Com- 

 pare also the parallel passages in the books of Samuel, 

 Kings, and Chronicles ; Is. xv. xvi. with Jer. xlviii. and 

 other passages cited in Eichhorn's Einleitung, i. pp. 139,6; 

 Bauer, Critica Sacra, p. 236, seq. ; Gesenius, Geschichte der 

 hebriiischen Sprache, p. 38. seq. Although these altera- 

 tions do not materially affect the tenor and scope of biblical 

 doctrine, it has been the business of critics to collect and to 

 compare the various readings of the Hebrew text, and thus- 

 to restore its original purity. 



The oldest recension of the Hebrew text, coming from a 

 quite different quarter, and being independent of the usually 

 received text, is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which 

 seems to be closely related to the copy from which tho 

 Septuagint interpreters translated. The various readings 

 of the Samaritan Pentateuch were for a considerable time 

 overvalued by some and despised by others, and herein 

 both parties frequently showed more zeal than knowledge. 

 But the last examination of the Samaritan text by Gese- 

 nius (De Pentateuchi Samaritani origine, indole et auto- 

 ritate Commentatio Philolol. crit. tcripsit Guil. Gesenius ; 

 Hal. 1815, 4.) has shown that the assertions of the zealots 

 against the Codex Samaritanus, although produced without 

 reason, were not substantially wrong. Its character is un- 

 critical ; most of its characteristic readings have arisen from 

 injudicious grammatical corrections, inserted glosses, ex- 

 planatory conjectures, grammatical and historical additions 

 and alterations according to parallel passages, Samaritanisms 

 in language and doctrine, as for instance the substitution of 



Garizim, D^HJ. for 72^ in Deut - xxvii - 4 - 



The Jews in Babylon and Palestine appear to have 

 been more critical than those in Egypt and the Samaritans, 

 because Aquila, and the other Greek translators after Christ, 

 and Onkelos and Jonathan agree more with the Masorethical 

 text than the Septuagint. About the time of the birth of 

 Christ arose schools of learning, especially in law, grammar, 

 and criticism. After the destruction of Jerusalem these 



NO. 251. 



[THE PENNY CYCLOPEDIA.] 



VOL. IV.-3 B 



