184 



REV. J. IVERACH MUKRO, M.A._, ON 



which the Samaritan Pentateuch was written, which is the 

 ancient Hebrew. There is no doubt of that whatever. Nor is 

 it exactly like that of the Moabite stone and the Siloam inscrip- 

 tion ; but v/hat is far better from an evidential point of view, 

 the variations are just those that arise through the copying of 

 many years. Then the insertion of a point between each word, 

 just as is done on the Moabite stone and the Siloam inscription, 

 quite coincides with Hezekiah's time. 



Another striking coincidence between the Samaritan Penta- 

 teuch and the Hebrew of Hezekiah's time is that the suffix 6 of 

 the third singular masculine, which is often in the Pentateuch 

 represented by Tl, as it is still on the Moabite stone, is throughout 

 the Samaritan Pentateuch changed to 1, as it is written on the 

 Siloam inscription. 



This latter point in the evidence, however, brings us to a 

 much larger and most important part of our subject, viz., the 

 fact that the Samaritan Pentateuch as compared with the Mas- 

 soretic Pentateuch has undergone a most drastic revision. ' 



We are greatly indebted to Gesenius for the enormous labour 

 by which he proved this. He gathered out and sorted under 

 various headings the changes that appeared to be inten- 

 tional in the Samaritan Pentateuch. These he grouped under 

 eight heads. His classification may not be quite logical, and 

 he may include doubtful examples, but his first seven classes of 

 variation are, in the main, clearly established. 



His eighth and last class, however, as I have endeavoured to 

 show in my little book on the Samaritan Pentateuch and 

 Modern Criticism, has almost no foundation in fact ; but is pre- 

 sented in such a peculiar way that every scholar who has read 

 the essay has been misled by it into thinking that the Sama- 

 ritans made wholesale changes in their Pentateuch in the interests 

 of their peculiar theology, hermeneutics and worship. 



This is entirely erroneous, as no such change has been made 

 either in their Pentateuch or in their translation of it into the 

 Samaritan dialect. 



Yet this error, baseless as it is, has had the result of 

 discrediting for nearly a hundred years the authority of the 

 Samaritan Pentateuch as a witness for the truth of the Bible 

 record, and as a reliable means of reaching the original text. 



If one may be permitted a refei'ence to one's self : had it not 

 been for the training and encouragement of the late Professor 

 A. B. Davidson, D.D., etc., Professor of Hebrew in the New 

 College, Edinburgh, in thoroughness in investigation and 

 especially in the verification of sources in critical work, I 



