THE PENTATEUCH OP THE SAMARITANS. 



175 



It is to be observed that Mr. Wiener does not combat my initial 

 assumption that the Samaritan Pentateuch is in all essentials the 

 same as that of the Jews. Interpolations are no evidence that the 

 document which has suffered from them is recent, as Mr. Wiener 

 seems to imply ; rather the reverse. I respect what I have 

 read of Mr. Wiener's work so much that I am sorry to differ from 

 him so sharply. I can only sympathize with him in the blunders 

 he has fallen into as to the scope of my paper, and regard them 

 as due to illness and haste.* 



To Professor Geden, Professor Orchard, and the Rev. Chancellor 

 Lias my sincere thanks are due for their kind words of appreciation. 

 In regard to Lex Mosaica, it is many years since I read it first, but 

 Mr. Lias will no doubt have observed that I rest no opinion either 

 in my Lecture or in my book on the Samaritans on authorities, 

 but on proof, hence I have not noticed the able arguments of the 

 writers of the book mentioned. 



I am sorry that Mr. Finn feels himself obliged to difier from me 

 in so many points. His able work on The Unity of the Pentateuch 

 I read with great interest when it appeared. In answer to his 

 first objection, I would observe that I do not maintain that " the 

 present Samaritans are descendants " of the remnant of the Israelites 

 " without admixture." Even the Jews cannot claim absolute 

 purity. There seems to have been a considerable admixture in 

 the time of David, e.g., Obed-edom the Gittite, in whose house 

 the Ark abode three months. There is also mention of Uriah 

 the Hittite, Ittai the Gittite, besides the Cherethites and Pelethites. 

 I refer to the message of the colonists elsewhere (Samaritans, p. 23). 

 As to his second objection, in regard to " Ibri " and " Ashurith," 



* At the same time Mr. Wiener is not always meticulously accurate in 

 regard to opponents. In his valuable book, Essays in Pentateuchal 

 Criticism, p. 13, he accuses Mr. Carpenter of error when he says that in 

 Gen. vii, 9, the Targum of Onkelos has Lord for God, as he, Onkelos, 

 habitually paraphrases. This is misleading unless Mr. Wiener regards 

 the English versions as paraphrasing when they print "Lord" instead 

 of " Jehovah." In the passage in question Onkelos has ^'^ which Levy 

 (Chaldaische Worterbuch) says is used in Talmudic instead of the Tetra- 

 grammaton. Jastrow (Targum Dictionary) regards it as an abbreviation. 

 Therefore in the case in point it is Mr. Wiener not Mr. Carpenter 

 who has blundered. 



N 



