The exegesis of a text can of necessity only be as good as the text that underlies it. This thesis seeks to evaluate the feasibility of the application of an eclectic text-critical methodology to create eclectic critical editions of the Hebrew Old Testament with a view to reconstructing a more pristine text. It begins by surveying the various publishing methodologies that have been proposed in the history of OT critical editions and the critical editions which implement them. Possible methodologies examined and critiqued are the publication of diplomatic editions, purely eclectic editions, copy-text eclectic editions, multicolumn editions, and textual commentaries. The survey of the history of critical editions includes extensive critique of the three main critical editions of the Hebrew Bible currently in process: Biblia Hebraica Quinta, the Hebrew University Bible, and the Oxford Hebrew Bible. A critique of the method of publishing a diplomatic text then shows both the theoretical weaknesses and the practical inadequacies of the potential manuscripts for a diplomatic text. After detailed analysis of the Leningrad and Aleppo Codices, a listing of other significant manuscripts, illustrations of corruption in the Masoretic tradition, and discussing the danger of imposing doubtful vocalizations upon the text, it becomes clear that no existing manuscript or tradition can adequately serve as the base text for a reliable edition of the text of the OT. A substantial chapter is then devoted to listing and explaining all of the special problems of implementing an eclectic methodology in OT textual criticism, such as the problems of the nature of the evidence, conjectural emendation, comparative philology, publication of accidentals, the nature of the original text, dogmatic considerations, divided evidence, and the scope of the edition. And finally, it is argued that, despite the difficulties inherent in the endeavor, it is preferable and feasible to publish eclectic critical editions of the Hebrew OT in both multi-volume major editions and in single-volume manual editions. Given the increased maturity of the discipline of textual criticism of the OT, the time has come for a new era where the results of decades of text-critical studies are incorporated into eclectic critical editions of the Hebrew Bible to present for general usage. A perfect text is forever an unattainable ideal, but a text which reflects the best possible understanding of the evidence available presents an important step in the right direction. Current efforts to produce eclectic critical editions of the text of the Hebrew OT should be embraced and further studies encouraged for the furtherance of the discipline and purity of the text.

One of the features of the new BHQ is the inclusion on every page of both the Masorah parva and magna of the Leningrad Codex. Only the Masorah parva (Mp) had been published in previous editions of Biblia Hebraica, a diplomatic representation in BHK3, and a revised edition by Gérard E. Weil in BHS. While preparing the fascicle of Ezra-Nehemiah for BHQ, the author noted that some Mp material written in the margins of the Codex had never been published, neither in BHK3 nor in BHS. These are catchwords which are attached to many Mp doublet notes. Most Mp doublet notes are simply marked by the numeral “two,” which indicates that an identical word or phrase occurs somewhere else in the Hebrew Bible. The reader is given no indication as to where that parallel doublet might occur. However, a special group of doublets has catchwords attached to the numeral indicating in what specific verse the parallel doublet occurs. In effect, the catchwords serve as memory aids explicitly reminding the reader where the second form of the parallel doublet is to be found. Examples will be given to show how texts outside of Ezra-Nehemiah were used by the Masoretes to elucidate elements in the text of Ezra-Nehemiah, and examples of the reverse, where the text of Ezra-Nehemiah was used to elucidate parallels in the texts outside of Ezra-Nehemiah. This article will also suggest how these catchwords can be used as a tool for exegesis for the modern biblical scholar.

This volume starts to discuss the so far unstudied period from the apparent stabilization of the Hebrew biblical text until the standardization reflected in the manuscripts of biblical text. What happened from the time of the standardization of the consonantic text until the appearance of the first Masoretic codices? How was the biblical text preserved in the meantime? What about the body of notes that makes up the Masorah formed? How to explain the diversity of the textual traditions contained in the Masorah, and last but not least, is it consistent with the idea of a text established and standardized centuries before? Contributors: Emanuel Tov, John van Seters, Arie van der Kooij, Günter Stemberger, Julio Trebolle, Pablo Torijano, Nathan Jastram, Alexander Samely, Willem F. Smelik, Lea Himmelfarb, Yosef Ofer, David Marcus, Elvira Martín-Contreras, Lorena Miralles-Maciá.

The Book of Leviticus in Hebrew – as all other books of the Pentateuch – is attested in three textual sources: in fragments from Qumran, in the Samaritan Pentateuch, and in medieval Hebrew manuscripts. All of the above feature orthographical, grammatical and lexical peculiarities and variations. A critical edition of the Book of Leviticus needs to evaluate and to present these variations and peculiarities. Since many textual phenomena reoccur in this book and not in this book alone but in all Hebrew biblical and nonbiblical texts, a textual edition and a commentary have to consider all cases of one textual phenomenon in order not to offer ad hoc explanations. One main requirement of a textual edition is that the same textual phenomenon should be treated uniformly in all its attestations, as far as it to the purpose of the edition. This requirement holds for the editions of both the diplomatic and the eclectic type. In the case of the former, a phenomenon should be described uniformly in the apparatus, and in the case of the latter, a phenomenon should be uniformly presented in the main text and uniformly described in the apparatus. If the context demands a treatment different from other cases of the same phenomenon, then all pertinent attestations should be taken into consideration and evaluated, be it in the textual commentary or in a special case study. Ideally, all types of textual variants in all textual witnesses should be first evaluated, and a textual edition should be prepared after the description and evaluation of the variants has been carried out. There are also additional aspects that should be accounted for in an eclectic edition: to what extent could the text be reconstructed and what are the textual elements whose most ancient form cannot (yet) be determined due to the limitations of sources? This paper discusses orthographical, grammatical and lexical peculiarities in the Hebrew texts of the Book of Leviticus and ways of their treatment within textual editions. Even if not every feature discussed below bears on the reconstruction of the earliest inferable text, theoretical considerations about editorial techniques should include all types of textual variants. In the practical application, the hermeneutics of an edition will determine the types and the number of variants referred to. A diplomatic or eclectic edition of any type of the Masoretic text would include some other categories of textual variants than an edition aiming at reconstructing the earliest inferable text. At first, the features of the consonantal text will be examined, and afterwards the peculiarities of the Masoretic texts. Since the medieval manuscripts of the Tiberian Masoretic text type are the only source for the text of the complete Hebrew Bible, the textual variants from other sources are compared with the Masoretic text. As far as the consonantal text is concerned, the different types of Hebrew texts feature the same types of variants, and some of them are shared by ancient Bible translations. Additionally, the Masoretic texts exhibit their own peculiarities within the vocalisation and accentuation.