ing and honest can do neither. For, except the bible, no other Hebrew book is pointed, unless some few of late by modern hands. All their rabbinical authors are unpointed, and all their other books, to which the moderus have in some editions added points, were originally published without them, and so they still are in the best editions: and yet this doth not hinder, but that every one who understands the Hebrew language, can rightly read them and rightly understand them. Were

I to make my choice, I would desire to have the bible with points, and all other Hebrew books without them. I would desire the bible with points, because they tell us how the Jews did anciently read the text. And I would have all other Hebrew books without them, because in such they rather hinder and clog the reading, than help it, to any one that thoroughly knows the language. And all that undertake to point such books, may not always do it according to the true and genuine reading, as we have an instance in the pointed edition of the Mishnah published in octavo by Manassch Ben Israel at Amsterdam. And therefore it is much better to be left free to our own apprehensions for the genuine reading, than be confined by another man's to that which may not be the genuine reading. Indeed to read without vowels may look very strange to such, who are conversant only with the modern European languages, in which often several consonants come together without a vowel, and several vowels.without a consonant, and several of both often go to make up one syllable, and therefore if in them the consonants were only written, it would be hard to find out what may be the word ; but it is quite otherwise in the Hebrew. For in that language there is never more than one vowel in one syllable, and in most syllables only one consonant, and in none more than two, and therefore in most words the consonants confine us to the vowels, and determine how the word is to be read, and if not, at least the context doth. It must be acknowledged, that there are several combinations of the same consonants, which as placed in the same order, are susceptible of different punctuations, and thereby make different words and of different significations, and therefore when put alone are of an uncertain reading; but it is quite otherwise when they are joined in context with other words. For where the letters joined in the same word do not determine the reading, there the words joined in the same sentence always do; and this is no more than what we find in all other languages, and very often in our own. For we have many equivocal words, which being put alone are of an uncertain signification, but are always determin'd in the context. As for example, the word Let in English when put alone by itself, hath not only two different, but two quite contrary meanings. For it signifies to permit, and it signifies also to hinder; but it never doth so in the context, but is thereby always so determined either to the one or to the other, that no one is ever led into a mistake hereby. And the same is to be said of all such words in Hebrew, as having the same letters are

susceptible of various punctuations. The letters here cannot determine to the punctuation, because they being in each the same, are indifferent to either. But what the letters cannot do, when the word is put alone by itself, that the other words always do, with which it is joined in the context. And it is want of attention, or want of apprehension, if any one thoroughly skill'd in the Hebrew language makes a mistake herein which may happen in the reading of any other books whatsoever. And therefore though the Hebrew bibles had never been pointed, we need not be sent either to the Church of Rome, or any where else, for the fixing of the readings of it, the letters alone with the context being sufficient, when we thoroughly understand the language, to determine us thereto.

There is in the Church of St Dominic in Bononia a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures, kept with a great deal of care, which they pretend to be the original copy written by Ezra himself; and therefore it is there valued at so high a rate, that great sums of money have been borrowed by the Bononians upon the pawn of it, and again repaid for its redemption. It is written in a very fair character upon a sort of leather, and made up in a roll according to the ancient manner; but it having the vowel points annexed, and the writing being fresh and fair without any decay, both these particulars prove the novelty of that copy.

5. ON THE TARGUMS OR CHALDEE PARAPHRASES.

From the same work, Part II, vol. ii,

page 531.

The Chaldee paraphrases are translations of the scriptures of the Old Testament made directly from the Hebrew text into the language of the Chaldæans, which language was anciently used through all Assyria, Babylonia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine; and is still the language of the churches of the Nestorian and Maronite Christians in those eastern parts, in the same manner as the Latin is the language of the popish churches here in the west. And therefore these paraphrases are

* Fini Adriani Flagellum Judæorum lib. 9. c. 2. Tissardi Ambacei Grammatica Hebræa. Hottingeri Thesaurus Philologicus p. 115 & p. 513.

called Targuns, because they were versions or translations of the Hebrew text into this language. For the word Targum signifieth in Chaldee an interpretation or version of one language into another, and may properly be said of any such version or translation; but it is most commonly by the Jews appropriated to these Chaldee paraphrases. For being among them what were most eminently such, they therefore had this name by way of eminency especially given unto them.

These argums were made for the use and instruction of the vulgar Jews after their return from the Babylonish captivity. For altho' many of the better sort still retained the knowledge of the Hebrew language during that captivity, and taught it their children; and the holy scriptures that were delivered after that time,† excepting only some parts of Daniel and Ezra and one verse in Jeremiah, were all written therein; yet the common people by having so long conversed with the Babylonians learned their language, and forgot their own. It happened indeed otherwise to the children of Israel in Egypt. For altho' they lived there above three times as long as the Babylonish captivity lasted, yet they still preserved the Hebrew language among them, and brought it back entire with them into Canaan. The reason of this was, in Egypt they all lived together in the land of Goshen; but on their being carried captive by the Babylonians, they were dispersed all over Chaldæa and Assyria, and being there intermixed with the people of the land had their main converse with them, and therefore were forced to learn their language, and this soon induced a disuse of their own among them; by which means it came to pass, that after their return the common people, especially those of them who had been bred up in that captivity, understood not the holy scriptures iu the Hebrew language, nor their posterity after them. And therefore when Ezra read the law to the people, he had several persons standing by him well skill'd in both the Chaldee and Hebrew languages, who interpreted to the people in Chaldee what he first read to them in Hebrew. And afterwards when the method was established of dividing the law into 54 sections, and of reading one of them every week in their synagogues (according as hath been already described) the same course of reading to the people the Hebrew text first, and then interpreting it to them in Chaldee, was still continued. For when the reader had read one verse in Hebrew, an interpreter standing by did render it in Chaldee, and then the next verse being read in Hebrew, it was in like manner interpreted in the same

* Buxtorfii Lexicon Rabbinicum Col. 2644.

+ The Book of Daniel is written in Chaldee from the 4th verse of the second Chapter to the end of the 7th Chapter, and the Book of Ezra from the 8th verse of the 4th Chapter to the 27th verse of the 7th Chapter. In the Book of Jeremiah the 11th verse of the 10th Chapter is only written in that Language, all the rest of it is in Hebrew.

Nehemiah viii. 4—8.

language as before, and so on from verse to verse was every verse alternatively read first in Hebrew, and then interpreted in Chaldee to the end of the section; and this first gave occasion for the making of Chaldee versions for the help of these interpreters. And they thenceforth became necessary not only for their help in the public synagogues, but also for the help of the people at home in their families, that they might there have the scriptures for their private reading in a language which they understood.

For first as synagogues multiplied among the Jews beyond the number of able interpreters, it became necessary that such versions should be made for the help of the less able. This was done at first only for the law, because at first the law only was publicly read in their synagogues till the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, but after that time lessons being read out of the prophets in those religious assemblies, as well as out of the law, the same reason rendered it necessary, that Chaldee versions should be made of these scriptures also. And 2dly, the use of the people (which was the other reason for the composing of those versions) made this necessary for all the scripture, as well as for the law and Prophets. For all scripture being given for our edification, all ought for this end to have them in a language which they understood. For when God gave his law unto Israel, he enjoined, that they should have his commandments, statutes and judgments always in their hearts, that they should meditate on them day and night, teach them their children, and talk of them, when they did sit in their houses, and when they walked by the way, and when they lay down, and when they rose up; and that all might be the better enabled to perform all this, it was strictly enjoined by a constitution of the elders from ancient times, || that every man should have by him at his home a copy of the Holy Scriptures fairly written out either by his own, or if he could not write himself, by some other hand, for his instruction herein. But how could this be done, if they had those Scriptures only in a language, which they did not understand? It was necessary therefore, that as they had the Hebrew text for the sake of the original, so also that they should have the Chaldee version for the sake of helping them to understand it. Indeed the letter of the law which commands what I have here mentioned, extends no further than to the five books of Moses: for no more of the Holy Scriptures were then written, when that law was given; and also the constitution abovementioned, which was superadded by the elders, is by positive words limited thereto. But the reason of the thing reacheth the whole word of God. For since all of it is given for our instruction, we are all

¶ Deuteron. vi. 6-9. & Ch. xi. 18, 19, 20. cap. 7.

|| Maimonides in Tephil.

equally obliged to know each part of it, as well as the other. And therefore this caused, that at length the whole Scriptures were thus translated from the Hebrew into the Chaldean language for the sake of those who could not otherwise anderstand them. For to lock up from the people in an unknown language that word of God, which was given to lead them to everlasting life, was a thing that was not thought agreeable either with reason or piety in those times.

This work having been attempted by diverse persons at different times, and by some of them with different views (for some of them were written as versions for the publick use of the synagogues, and others as paraphrases and commentaries for the private instruction of the people) hence it hath come to pass, that there were anciently many of these Targums, and of different sorts, in the same manner as there anciently were many versions of the same Holy Scriptures into the Greek language, made with like different views; of which we have sufficient proof in the Octapla of Origen. No doubt anciently there were many more of these Targums, than we now know of, which have been lost in the length of time. Whether there were any of them of the same composure on the whole scriptures is not any where said. Those that are now remaining were composed by different persons, and on different parts of Scripture, some on one part, and others on other parts, and are in all of these eight sorts following; 1. That of Onkelos on the five books of Moses. 2. That of Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the prophets, that is on Joshua, Judges, the two books of Samuel, the two books of Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve minor prophets. 3. That on the law which is ascribed to Jonathan Ben Uzziel. 4. The Jerusalem Targum on the law. 5. The Targum on the five lesser books called the Megilloth, i. e. Ruth, Esther, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomon, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah. 6. The second Targum on Esther. 7. The Targum § of Joseph the one-eyed on the book of Job, the Psalms, and the Proverbs, and 8. The Targum on the first and second book of Chronicles. On Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel, there is no Targum at all. The reason given by some for this is, because a great part of those books is written in the Chaldee language, and therefore is no need of a Chaldee paraphrase upon them. This indeed is true for Daniel and Ezra, but not for Nehemiah. For that book is all originally written in the Hebrew language. No doubt anciently there were Chaldee paraphrases on all the Hebrew parts of those books, though now lost. It was long supposed that there were no Targums

He is commonly called Josephus Cæcus, or Josephus the blind. This is not to be understood as if he were blind of both eyes, for then he could not have done this work. The word in Hebrew, by which he is so denominated, signifieth Luscum one that is blind of one eye, as well as Cæcum, one that is blind of both eyes.