THE PENTATEUCH OF THE SAMARITANS. 



153 



on behalf of Pharaoh with the famine-stricken people of Egypt, 

 after he had bought their cattle and their land (xlvii, 21), it is 

 said, " As for the people, he removed them to cities from one end 

 of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof." The 

 Samaritan is : "As for the people, he enslaved them from one 

 end of Egypt to the other." In this case also the Septuagint 

 is in agreement with the Samaritan, as is also Jerome ; the 

 Peshitta agrees with the Massoretic. This confusion cannot 

 easily be imagined if the copyists had before them a manuscript 

 in the Maccabaeao-Samaritan script. To explain the phenomena 

 here presented, we are led to the position that at some point in 

 the descent of the MSS. of both recensions there was a period 

 in which manuscripts, were copied in a script like that found on 

 the Zidonian sarcophagi, about 400 B.C. At this point the leading 

 Jewish scribes read R while the Samaritan scribes and those who 

 copied the Hebrew rolls in Egypt preferred D in regard to certain 

 words. As there is a consensus of the MSS. on both sides, the 

 one set always retaining the one reading and the other the other, 

 it is evident that from this point there has been no dependence 

 of the Samaritan on the Massoretic recension. 



The next most frequent case in which there occurs a confusion 

 of letters is mem and nun. The most striking example of this 

 is the name of Jacob's youngest son. In the Samaritan he 

 is always called " Benjamim," not as in the Massoretic 



Benjamin." In this case the Samaritan stands alone, 

 not having the support of the Septuagint. Both names are 

 significant, while the Massoretic means the " Son of the right 

 hand " the Samaritan has the yet more suitable significance of 

 " Son of Days," a reference to the old age of Jacob at the time of 

 his birth. The fact that Benjamin is a child of his father's old 

 age, is referred to by Judah in pleading with Joseph not to retain 

 him in Egypt. There are other instances of this confusion, as 

 Pithon for Pithom. It also appears frequently in the Septuagint, 

 indeed more frequently than in the Samaritan. This confusion 

 is practically impossible in the Samaritan script ; in the script 

 on the sarcophagi of the Zidonian kings the difference between 

 these letters is even more marked. When, however, the earlier 

 form of the angular script, found on the Siloam inscription and the 

 stela of Mesha, King of Moab, is looked at, the confusion is quite 

 intelligible. Mesha was a later contemporary of Ahab. This 

 would lead to the conclusion that the independence of the 

 Samaritan recension must be dated at least as far back as the 



