THE TARGUM TO CANTICLES ACCORDING TO SIX YEMEN MSS. COMPARED WITH THE 'TEXTUS RECEPTUS' (ED. DE LAGARDE) By RAPHAEL HAI MELAMED, New York. INTRODUCTION. i. THE Targum, in its stage of oral transmission antedates the destruction of the second Temple,1 but it was not until the third or fourth century that some of the books were committed to writing,2 and certain versions received the sanction of the Synagogue. The time and place of the final redaction of the various versions in the several parts or books of the Scriptures, and their relation to one another, are still mooted questions. This much is certain, that the texts as we have them to-day, bear in 1 Cf. Meg. 3 a, where tradition ascribes the origin of the institution of oral translation of the Scriptures into Aramaic, to Ezra. Cf. also Ned. 37 b, Jer. Meg. 74 d, Gen. R. 36, Sanhed. 2I b. 2 The earliest official written Targum may probably be traced to Babylon, where the Onkelos T. was the first to receive the authority of the Rabbis. This Targum must have been written about the third century, since its Masorah dates from about this time. Cf. Bacher, JE., XI, 58; A. Berliner, Die Masorah zum Targum Onkelos, Leipzig, 1877; S. Landauer, Die Massorah zumn Onkelos, Amsterdam, I896. There are, however, traces of a written Targum earlier than that, although not officially sanctioned. In the time of Gamaliel I, a Targum to the book of Job was brought to him, which he ordered withdrawn from circulation. This same Targum made its reappearance in the time of Gamaliel II. Cf. Shabbat I15 a, Tosephta Shabbat XIV, Jer. Shabbat 15 c, Maseket Soferim V, I5; see also Gratz, MGWJ., 1877, 87, who maintains this to have been a Greek translation. Further, the statement made in the Mishnah, Yad. IV, 5 refers no doubt also to a written Targum. VOL. X. 377 C c 378 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW their content the impress of successive ages and traces of varying linguistic influences. 2. The official Targum on the Torah, called by the name of Onkelos,3 is Palestinian in origin and dialect,4 but its final redaction and authorization took place in Babylon about the third century,5 where, as some believe, its vocabulary and grammar were slightly influenced.6 3. Parallel to the Onkelos, is the unofficial Jerusalem Targum I,7 of a mixed Palestinian and Babylonian 3 This name, which is based on the passage in Meg. 3 a, arose in the post-Talmudic period, through confusion of the Aramaic translation of Scriptures with the Greek version of Aquila. Cf. PRE.3, III, Io6; JE., XII, 58; Buhl, Kanon und Text, 189r, p. I73. 4 Cf. Noldeke, Manddische Grammatik, p. io8; F. Rosenthal, Beth Talmud, II and III; Berliner, Targum Onkelos, p. I07. See also F. Hommel, Theol. Littbl., 1902, col. 206, who maintains it to be a product of Babylon. 5 According to Berliner, Onkelos was compiled by the second century; Volck, however, places it in the fourth century, at the earliest. Cf. Berliner, Targum Onkelos,p assim; PRE.3, III, Io6. 6 NOldeke, Die semitischen Sprachen, I887, p. 32; Die alttest. Lit., 1868, p. 257; Manddische Grammatik, p. xxvii; Dalman, Aram. Gram., p. 13; Bacher, JE., XII, p. 59. 7 This Targum is now known generally as Jerusalem Targum I. It also bears the name of ' Pseudo-Jonathan '. It was not universally known during the early Middle Ages, the following apparently being the only ones who knew of its existence: Sar Shalom Gaon (Sefer Sha'are Teshubah, 1858, 29 c), Hai Gaon (Harkavy, Teshuboth ageonimn1, 24 f., 6 f., Berliner, Targum Onkelos, II, I73 if.; RA~J., XLII, 235). Citations from it are to be found in the Aruch (cf. Dalman, Gram., 29 and 30), while Judah ben Barzillai and R. Meir of Rothenberg also speak of it (cf Dalman, ibid., and Bacher, JE., XII, 60). After the fourteenth century, this Targum was erroneously called Targum Jonathan, Menahem Recanati being the first to ascribe it to Jonathan ben Uzziel (cf. JE., XII, 60). This mistake arose no doubt from a wrong analysis of the abbreviation "n' (=D?'wI' Dlnl). Cf. also the Zohar (I, 89 a) which contains the statement that 'Onkelos translated the Torah, and Jonathan the Mikera'; it is most probable that 'Mikra' here means the Prophets (Bacher, I.. ; REJ., XXII, 46), but that it was misinterpreted to mean the entire Bible, and hence the Pentateuch also (cf. Ginsburger ' Pseudo-Jonathan ', p. vii). Cf. also Zunz, Gott. Vor., 80 ff.; TARGUM TO CANTICLES-MELAMED 379 dialect,8 the nucleus of which originated in Palestine, probably earlier than the Christian era,9 but whose final redaction did not occur before the seventh century.10 4. Linguistically very similar to Jerusalem Targum I, are two other Targumin on the Torah, the fragmentary Jerusalem Targum II,11 and the Jerusalem Targum III in glosses.'2 Dalman, 1. c. We have the evidence of Azariah dei Rossi (Meor Enayim, ed. Wilna, p. I27) that he saw two manuscripts of a Targum on the Pentateuch that agreed in every detail, named respectively 'Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel' and 'Targum Jerushalmi'. The editio princeps (Venice, I59I) of this Targum was printed from the first mentioned manuscript, which bore the wrong title and perpetuated the wrong name. 8 Cf Dalman, Gramm., p. 32. There is evidence, likewise, that the Targum Onkelos exercised some influence over it. 9 Diverse opinions prevail among scholars as to the age of this nucleus. On the one hand it is claimed that there are elements antedating the Christian era and representing a Palestinian recension independent of the original of Onkelos. Cf. NOldeke, Die alt. Lit., p. 256; F. Buhl, Kanon und Text, p. I8r; M. Ginsburger, Jud. Monatsschrift, XLI, p. 349, note 2; Schuirer, Geschichted es jad. Volkes, I, p. 150; Bacher, JE., XII, 6i; E. KOnig, Einleitung in das AT., I893, p. Ioo; Bacher, ZDMG., XXVIII, 59 f. On the other hand, it is maintained that these elements are to be traced back to the original source of Onkelos, which was the parent of both, and further- more, that the redactor of the Jerusalem Targum, while he used a recension of Onkelos current in Palestine, did not have access to a version of this Targum specific to Palestine. Cf. Dalman, 1.c ., and Worte Jesu, I, 68 f.; Bassfreund, Jid. Monatsschrtft, XLIV, 481 ff.; ibid., Das Fragmenten- Targum zum Pentateuch, Breslau, 1896; Lerner, Anlage und Quellen des Ber. R., 64. 10 The Christian and Muhammedanr eligions are mentioned several times, and also the names of a wife and daughter of Muhammed. An African manuscript mentions the fall of Constantinople, 1453, but this must be an addition by a later scribe. Cf. Dalman, Bacher, &c. 11 Dalman, Gramm., p. 33; cf. Bassfreund, Das Fragmenten-Targum zun Pentateuch, sein Ursprung und Charakter und seini Verhiiltniss zu den anderen pentateuchischen Targumim, Breslau, 1896; Ginsburger, Pseudo- Jonathan, I903. 12 Dalman, Gramm., p. 29. These glosses bear tne superscriptions, C C 2 38o THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW 5. Corresponding closely in vocabulary and grammar to the Onkelos Targum,l3 is the Targum to the Prophets, which received official sanction only in Babylon, where its final redaction occured in the fifth century.14 6. An official Targum to the Hagiographa never existed, but there are Targumic versions to most of the books,l5 which are independent in origin and character. In content, ' 'nDiln, 'lnm nDl:, and 2IF 'In. These have been published in early editions of the Pentateuch (Lisbon, I49I; Salonica, 1520; Constantinople, 1546; Venice, 159I. Passages parallel to Exod. 13. I7 and 14. 2i are also found in the Mahzor Viiry, I67, 305 ff.) and more recently by Ginsburger from manuscript sources (M. Ginsburger, Das Fragmenten-Targum, 1899, pp. 71-74; J. Bassfreuld, Das Fragmenten-Targum zum Pentateuch, 1896, pp. 40-44 (reprints from the earlier editions); cf. further, H. Seligsohn, De duabus Hierosolymitanis Pentateuchi Paraphrasibus, I, i858, p. 37 ff.; Perles, Jud. Monatsschrift, 1876, p. 368 f.; A. Epstein, REJ, XXX, pp. 44-51). 13 Dalman, Gram,n., p. I6. This Targum was traced back by tradition to be the work of Jonathan ben Uzziel (Megillah 3 a). Luzzatto identifies this Jonathan with Theodotion, as Onkelos is identified with Aquila. As early as the time of the Babylonian Amora, Joseph bar R. Hiyya, it was generally accepted, and quoted with great frequency in the Academies (cf. Bacher, Ag. Bab. Amor., p. 103). Hai Gaon apparently considered R. Joseph to be its author, but he was probably its earliest redactor (cf. Aruch, II, 293 a, 308 a). Cornill views this Targum as of greater antiquity than that of Onkelos, since it is more paraphrastic in character and free from anti-Christian polemics (Cornill, Einleitung in das AT., 1893, p. 308). But this view is untenable since these qualities issue from the nature of the prophetic books which are more didactic than the Pentateuch, and from the total absence of anti-Christian polemics in the Babylonian schools (cf. Dalman, 1.c .). 14 It seems probably certain that the redactor of this Targum had before him the Targum Onkelos (cf. the translations in Judges 5. 26 with Deut. 22. 5; 2 Kings 14. 6 with Deut. 14. 6; Jer. 48. 45, 46 with Num. 21. 25, 29); but opinion is divided as to whether the redaction is the product of one hand. There are numerous parallel translations and obviously later inter- polations to be found (cf. Eichhorn, Einleitung, I, sec. 217; Berthold, Einleitung, II, p. 580). 15 There is naturally no Targum to Ezra, Daniel, and Nehemiah. TARGUM TO CANTICLES-MELAMED 38I they vary from strict literalness to amplified Mid rash, manifested on the one hand in the Targum to Proverbs,'6 and on the other, in the Targum to the Five Scrolls.17 Linguistically, they are composite in character 18 and their sources likewise are a mixture of very ancient material combined with later matter drawn from Palestinian and Babylonian literary compilations.19 Their redaction took place sometime between the fifth and eighth centuries. The Targum to Canticles, which is here published, was probably written in the latter period, there being traces of Arabic influences. 7. Finally, a Jerusalem Targum to the Prophets and Hiagiographa also seems to have existed at some time, 16 This Targum agrees in major part with the Peshitta version, with which it probably shares a common source, cf. NOldeke, in Merx's Archiv, II, 246 ff.; Baumgartner, lCtude critique sur l'Itat du texte du livre des Proverbes, Leipzig, I890, 267 ff. ; Geiger, Nachgelassene Schriften, IV, I I2. 17 It is interesting to note that there are three Targumim (cf. Catal. Codd. MSS. Bibl. Bodl., I, p. 432; Eichhorn, p. 437) on the Book of Esther and that the Targum to this book is the only one of the Hagiographa books which is recognized by the Halakah, cf. Masek, Soferim, XII, 6. Some believe that Targum II on Esther is a Palestinian parallel to the first. Cf. Merx, Chrest. Targ., ix; Bacher, JE., XII; Dalman, I.c. 18 Psalms, Job, and Chronicles are linguistically similar to the Jerusalem Targum to the Pentateuch, that is, they are of a mixed character and were produced about the same time Cf. Bacher, Jiid. Monatsschrift, XX, 208; XXI, 408, who seeks to make these Palestinian in origin and of about the fourth or fifth century; see also Baethgen, Jahrb.f. Prot. Theol., VIII, 447, 455 ff. Rosenberg and Kohler show that the ground-work of the Targum on Chronicles is as early as the fourth century, although its redaction did not take place until the eighth century'; cf Geiger's Zeitsch., VIII, 72 f., I35 f., 263 f. It is interesting to note that Jerusalem Targum I and II are quoted in this Targum; cf. PRE.3, III, p. no. 19 Dalman, p. 35. Cf. 5. I4, where the names of the precious stones in the breast-plate of the High Priest are mostly Arabic. Cf. also below, ? 36. See further, S. Landauer. OrientalischeS tudien, pp. 50o ff. 382 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW of which at present only fragments and glosses are known.20 8. With the invention of systems of vocalization,21 the consonantal text of the Targum, as in the Hebrew original, was provided with symbols fixing the pronunciation in accordance with the tradition locally prevalent. Three distinct types of vocalization are now known to have existed; (i) the so-called Tiberian 22 system, or the sublinear, the only one known prior to 1839; (2) the Babylonian23 system, or the superlinear, discovered in I839; and (3) the Palestinian 24 system, also superlinear, which was discovered in 1894. 20 Lagarde published marginal glosses of the Prophets from the Reuchlin Codex. Cf. Prophetae Chald., 1872, pp. vi-xlli; fragments from Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Jonah, and Zechar., are found in this Codex. Some corrections from a manuscript are to be found in Baer-Delitzsch, Liber Jerem., p. vi, note i ; cf. further, Bacher, ZDMG., XXVIII, iff.; Dalman, Aram. Dialektproben, p. 12. According to Kohut, the Aruk quotes from a Targum Jerushalmi to the Prophets and Hagiogr. Cf. Zunz, Gott. Vort., p. 8o ff. But these are not always dependable and they may be only variants of the current Targumim. See Dalman, p. 29 f. 21 Cf. C. Levias, JE., XII, 446 ff. 22 It is by no means settled that the names used for the vowel systems are accurate. They indicate at most the place of their usage rather than of their origin. Cf. Neubauer, JQR., III, pp. 604-22; Margoliouth, Transactions of the Ninth Congress of Orient., II, London, I893; NOldeke, Mand. Gramm., Introd., p. 5; Barnstein, Targum Onkelos, pp. 6-7; Kahle, Massoret. des Ostens, Leipzig, 19I3, pp. 204, I57 if. 23 Three distinct types have been distinguished in the development of this system: (I) the simple type as shown in Targum MSS. and Neo- Hebrew texts; cf. Merx, Chrestomath.T argum, p. xv; MIargoliouthP, roceed. Society Bibl. Arch., XV, p. I65 ff.; Praetorius, ' Uber das Babylon. Punkt. des Hebr.', ZDMG., LIII, 181-96; Friedlander, Monatsschr., I894, 215. (2) The complex or composite type found in Codex Petropolitanus dated 916, Berliner, Festschrift,p p. i8, 30. (3) The type exemplified by the Berlin MS. Or. qu. 680; Friedlander, JQR., VII, 564 ff.; Proceed. Soc. Bibl. Arch., i896, pp. 86 ff.; Kahle, 'Beitraige zur Geschichte der Hebr. Punkt.', in Stade's Zeitschr., XXI, 273 ff. 24 Until all material shall be made available, the varying stages of TARGUM TO CANTICLES-MELAMED 383 9. It is probable that these various systems of vocaliza- tion influenced one another to some extent, and that in the form we now know them, do not represent the original character of their respective types.25 o1. The Tiberian system of punctuation, it seems, was not originally adaptable for Aramaic texts.26 Hence it is quite probable that in the earliest texts of the Targum supplied with vowels, the superlinear system was used, and that with the more universal usage of the sublinear system the former was transposed into the latter.27 II. Some internal evidence as well as external testimony points to this fact. A comparison of the text of the Targum, as contained in the Sabbioneta edition,28 with the genuinely Babylonian MS. Or. qu. 680, strikingly reveals their common source of origin. Notwithstanding the many corrupt forms it contains, the Sabbioneta text shows all the ear-marks of a Babylonian or superlinear punctuation.29 The same may be said of the Parma MS. de Rossi, No. 7.30 12. Furthermore, an explicit statement is found in the Codex de Rossi, No. I2, of the Parma Library, that it was transcribed into the sublinear system from a copy pointed with superlinear vowels.31 development in this system cannot be definitely fixed. It may be assumed, however, that the still unpublished Genizah Fragments are of the oldest type. Kahle, Der MasoretischeT ext, p. 29, note I. An intermediate stage was published in C. Levias's article in the AJSL., XV, and in the text of Neubauer, JQR., VII, 36I and Kahle, Stade's Zeitschrift, XXI, 273. the third stage is presented. 25 Kahle, pp. 157, 158. 26 Ibid., p. 204. 27 Ibid. 28 Berliner, Targum Onkelos, I. 29 Kahle, p. 205 ff., Berliner, Targum Onkelos, II. 30 Ibid., Berliner, p. 132 f. 31 Cf. Kahle, 205, H. L. Strack, Zeitschriftf. d. Luth. Theol u. Kirche, XXXVI, 1875, p. 622. Berliner, Targum Onkelos, 134. 384 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW 13. Thus it appears that the superlinear vocalization is probably the oldest known in the Targum texts, and that this system, due to its gradual disuise, was changed into the one common now.32 I4. This transposition of the Targum vowels led naturally to inaccuracies and mistakes, which multiplied in pro- portion to the number of new manuscripts written and new editions published. Elias Levita, in his Introduction to the Meturgeman, laments the confused state of the Targum texts, and the multitudinous variations in vocalization which then existed. He, as well as Buxtorf and others, proposed to bring some order into the chaos by correcting these texts on the basis of Biblical Aramaic.33 This was done to some extent,34 but the method possesses no scientific value.35 15. Such was the state of Targumic texts until the discovery of the Yemen MSS. threw a flood of light upon this department of Semitic learning, and stimulated active research therein. These MSS. have proved of invaluable 32 It is at present impossible, with the evidence available, to come to a final judgement in this matter. It may be that the Tiberian system of punctuation was originally employed for Targum texts in those localities where it prevailed for Hebrew, and that we have to-day an independent Tiberian tradition in these texts. But this cannot be settled, as Lagarde has pointed out, until all the pure Tiberian manuscripts shall have been carefully studied and compared. Cf. Lagarde, Mitteilungen, II, I74. And even if this should be conclusively established, which seems dubious (cf. Kahle, 204), nevertheless, the worthlessness of the current Tiberian Aramaic texts is established beyond doubt. 33 Berliner, p. 185 f.; Merx, Chrest., viii; idem, 'Bemerkungen uiber die Vocalisation der Targume , Verhandlungen des Fiinften Internationalen Orientalisten-CongressesI, 88i, 1, p. r59 ff Mercier and others corrected the Targum on the basis of Syriac. 34 Idem. 35 Merx, Chrest. T., viii ff. TARGUM TO CANTICLES-MELAMED 385 aid in the reconstruction of the Targumic text and its grammar, which Levita despaired of producing with the material then available. I6. Numerous works have already been published upon the basis of these Yemen MSS. (1) Merx published a goodly number of excerpts from MSS. in the possession of the British Museum, covering sections of the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and the ' Dream of Mordecai'.36 37 (2) Pratorius has published the Targum to ,Joshua and Judges 3 after Berlin codices. (3) Dalman used for his Grammar, Aramaic Dictionary, and Specimens of Aramaic Dialects, Prof. Socin's MSS. and codices in the British Museum.39 (4) Barnstein used for his work on the Onkelos to Genesis a MS. of the British Museum, a Montefiore codex, and a MS. belonging to Dr. M. Gaster.40 (5) The complete Targum to Onkelos was published by the Yemenite Jews, with vowels transposed into the sublinear system.41 (6) Wolfson published from a Berlin MS. the first twelve chapters of the Targum to Jeremiah.42 (7) Silvermann issued the first ten chapters of the Targum to Ezekiel from the same source.43 (8) Alfred Levy published the Targum to Koheleth based upon British Museum MSS. and a Gaster codex.44 36 Porta Linguarum Orientalium, VII, Merx, Chres. Targumica, Berlin, r888. 37 Das Targum zu Josua in Jemenischer Oberlieferung,B erlin, 1899. 38 Das Targum zum Buch der Richter, Berlin, i900. 39 AramSiisch-NeuhebrdischeWs orterbuch,F rankfurt a. M., 1897-1901. 40 The Targum of Onkelos to Genesis, London, I896. 41 The Torah, Jerusalem, 1894-1901. 42 Halle, 1902. 43 Strassburg, 1902. 44 Breslau, 1905. 386 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW (9) Kahle issued numerous extracts of the Targum based upon codices in Cambridge, Oxford, and Petrograd.45 17. The following edition of the Targum to Canticles is based on six manuscripts of Yemen origin, and on the text contained in Paul de Lagarde's Hagiographa Chaldaice. The texts, hitherto current, were reprints of the Editio princeps, issued by Bomberg in Venice in 1517, into which numerous errors and corruptions have naturally crept. While the Lagarde edition re-established the original Bomberg consonantal text, no attempt has yet been made to compare this with the text current in Yemen, nor has any effort been made to establish its vocalization. The following manuscripts have been used in the preparation of this work: A. 18. MS. A is part of Or. 1302, in the possession of the British Museum. The Targum of Canticles covers fols. 154 a-i86 b. A photographic reproduction, three-quarters of the original size, is in the possession of the Dropsie College.46 The writing is in clear square characters, twenty- four lines to a page, and measures, without margins, 5s"x34". The Hebrew,verses are each followed by the Targum, an Arabic translation of the Hebrew verse, and 45 Kahle, Masoretend es Ostens, Leipzig, I913. 46 I take this opportunity of thanking Dr. Cyrus Adler, President of the Dropsie College, for securing and placing at my disposal the photographs of MSS. A, B, E, and F. I also wish to express my indebtedness to the authorities of the British Museum, and of the Bodleian Library for their kindness in permitting these photographs to be made. I am likewise under obligation to the Rev. G. Margoliouth of the British Museum, and to Dr. A. E. Cowley of the Bodleian Library, through whose kindness I secured these reproductions.