Aleppo Codex Research Articles

Constructed Rivalry

The majority of contemporary critical editions of the text of Hebrew Bible are based on one of two mediaeval manuscripts: the Aleppo Codex and the Leningrad Codex. Various claims have been made on the relative merits of each of these two codices. While these claims are often grounded in the language of textual criticism, there is a good deal more at play. The two codices have come to be constructed by some as oppositional artefacts. This article seeks to better understand this constructed rivalry by utilizing Watts’ conception of the relic text. It is proposed that the status of the Aleppo Codex as just such as relic text has been enhanced by diminishing the status of the Leningrad Codex. This oppositional relationship has been utilized by the state of Israel which currently houses the Aleppo Codex in the Israel Museum to enhance its status as the custodian of Jewish material culture.

A Torah Manuscript from Iran from the End of the Fifteenth Century with Haftarot and Psalms

Abstract This article analyzes a paper manuscript, containing the Pentateuch, Haftarot and Psalms. Only five medieval Persian Pentateuch manuscripts have survived, four from the fifteenth century and one from the sixteenth century. The selected manuscript is one of the four surviving manuscripts from the fifteenth century (1483–1484). It is the earliest surviving manuscript from Iran from the Middle Ages that includes the Pentateuch, the Haftarot, and the Psalms with vowel points, accents, Masorah magna and parva. A comparison of the manuscript with the Aleppo Codex and with five traditions from different regions (accurate Oriental Masoretic codices, Yemenite manuscripts, Sefardi manuscripts, Ashkenazi manuscripts, and Italian manuscripts) shows that this fifteenth-century manuscript written in Central Asia preserves and represents an ancient tradition with respect to the text, sections, and the Songs that is similar to the accurate Oriental Masoretic Pentateuchs. Our manuscript is witness to an ancient tradition that preserves a very accurate text in the Iranian region, and is close to the Aleppo Codex, and similar to Oriental manuscripts of the tenth and eleventh centuries written in the East, without alternate traditions that corrupted the text.

Rediscovered Fragments Shed New Light on a Proto-Masoretic Torah Scroll

After Edna Engel and Mordechay Mishor had discovered that two fragments with excerpts from the book of Exodus belonged to a single Torah scroll dating from the seventh or eighth century CE, Mordechai Veintrob identified thirteen additional fragments of the same scroll, most of them coming from the Cairo Genizah. This article shows that in the preserved fragments no orthographic differences occur with the (partially reconstructed) text of the more recent Aleppo Codex, while there are such orthographic differences with the other ancient Bible codices. The relationship between the ancient scroll and the Aleppo Codex is looser as far as the sectional division by means of petuḥot and setumot is concerned. However, the tradition according to which five specific lines must be written above the text of the Song of the Sea (Exod 15:1–19) seems to have this very scroll as its source. This tradition was followed in the Aleppo Codex and other ancient codices.

The Textual Problem of Proverbs 30:19

A textual problem in Proverbs 30:19 provides difficulty to both ancient and contemporary texts. The ancient translators understand the last word of Proverbs 30:19 differently: b’lmh or b’lmyw. Symmachus in Greek, and the Aleppo codex, Leningrad codex, Babylonian tradition, Targum Aramaic, and Latin Codex 650 translate the term as “maiden” (woman). Other translations comprehend the last word of Proverbs 30:19 as in (his) “youth:” The LXX, Syro-Hexapla, Syriac Peshitta, Latin Vulgate, manuscript 31, Amiatinus manuscript, Salzburg manuscript, Cavensis manuscript, Greek Manuscript 333, 562, 329, 571, 636, 352, 485, 464, 447, and most Latin manuscripts. Modern English Bible translators are also perplexed by the textual problem of Proverbs 30:19. Although most modern Bible English translations prefer the reading with a maid (woman), certain English translations favor the reading “in his youth”. For example, the American Standard Version (ASV), New Heart English Bible (NHEB), New International Version (NIV), Amplified Bible (AB), World English Bible (WEB), English Standard Version (ESV), Berean Study Bible (BSB), King James Version (KJV), International Standard Version (ISV), and NET Bible favor the reading with a maid (woman). The Good News Translation (GNB) and Contemporary English Version (CEV) even interpret the last word of Proverbs 30:19 as the love between a man and a woman. On the other hand, the Brenton Septuagint Translation (Douay-Rheims Bible [DRB], Literal Standard Version [LST], and Aramaic Bible in Plain English Young’s Literal Translation [YLT] have the translation of in his youth. This article undertakes a syntactical analysis of the Prov. 30:19 in an attempt to resolve this textual ambiguity.

The “crown” in Fustat: the Aleppo Codex in Cairo Genizah documents

The biblical manuscript known as the Aleppo Codex (Keter Aram Tzova), which became famous for its reliability and accuracy as well as for its colorful history as an object, is at the center of Neria Klein’s article. The author discusses the period of the codex’s presence in Egypt and tries to find out whether it was already then considered an exemplary version of the Bible, who used it, which audiences had access to it and whether it already had a permanent and usual name. His research is based on ten Genizah documents that he grouped together to answer these questions.

Intermediate Biblical Hebrew: An Illustrated Grammar

Intermediate Biblical Hebrew: An Illustrated Grammar

CODEX B 19A: STAGES OF LEGITIMATION OF THE MASORET BIBLE ANCIENT EXAMPLE

This article examines the cultural and historical circumstances of the appearance and introduction into the scientific circulation of the oldest manuscript code of the Hebrew Bible — the Leningrad Code B 19A. The authors of the article make an attempt to restore the contextual connections of the Code with Jewish philosophy and biblical textology. The concept of the research is built on the basis of genealogical analysis, which opened up the opportunity to first analyze the stages of legitimation of Codex B 19A that are closest to the present, and then move into the depth of chronology, right up to the moment of creation of the studied text. The result of the study was the identification and explication of internal links between the Codex B 19A, Masoretic schools, Rabbanites, Karaites and, finally, medieval critics of the biblical text. The research methodology is based on the principles of philosophical hermeneutics, the comparative historical approach of the genealogical method as applied to textual criticism. Revealing the cause-and-effect relationship in the legitimization of the Masoretic Bible showed that the need to create a single standard for the sacred text arose already by the middle of the 8th century, the time of the emergence of the Karaite movement. The refusal of the Karaites to submit to the authority of classical rabbinical literature led to a rethinking of the biblical text. Together with the status of the main sacred book, the Bible turned out to be a text around which philological, philosophical and theological discussions became possible. Awareness of the fact that the biblical text has different interpretations led the Rabbanites and Karaites to the conclusion that it was necessary to create a philological standard for the Bible. For this reason, the authority of the Masoretes as specialists in the vocalization of the text, the direct creators of the vocalization system, has sharply increased. The Ben Asher family of Tiberias emerged as the main Masoretic school, and its last representative, Aaron Ben Asher, became the most authoritative Masoretic. Aaron Ben Asher owns the Masorah system introduced in the Aleppo Codex and copied in the Leningrad Codex B 19A. Maimonides was the first among Jewish philosophers to appreciate the textual achievements of Aaron Ben Asher, which significantly raised the authority of the Masoret in rabbinic and Karaite intellectual circles.

The Masora on Scripture and Its Methods by Yosef Ofer (review)

Reviewed by: The Masora on Scripture and Its Methods by Yosef Ofer David Marcus Yosef Ofer. The Masora on Scripture and Its Methods. Translated by Michael Glatzer. Fontes et Subsidia ad Bibliam pertinentes (FoSub) 7. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2019. ix + 286 pp. doi:10.1017/S036400942000015X Yosef Ofer is one of the preeminent scholars today in masorah studies. He stands in the footsteps of his renowned late teachers Mordechai Breuer and Israel Yeivin, and in line with other modern masoretic masters such as the emeriti Aron Dotan and Menachem Cohen. He has been engaged in masoretic topics for years. His Babylonian Masora of the Pentateuch, Its Principles and Methods (Magnes, 2001) was a pioneering and voluminous work (over 600 pages!), and he is the author of scores of articles on all aspects of masorah and the Aleppo Codex. In this volume Ofer presents us with fifteen essays on the masorah and Hebrew manuscripts and printed editions under three main headings: "The Biblical Masora and Its Methods"; "The Masoretic Text in Time and Space"; and "The Masora in Interaction with Other Disciplines." Most of the essays are based on articles previously written in Hebrew, and they are presented here for the first time to an English-reading public. All the essays are copiously illustrated and each is accompanied by suggestions for further reading. With such a rich volume one can only make a few brief observations on some of the chapters. In his essay on the masorah as an "error correcting code," Ofer discusses why the masorah has double notations, namely the abbreviated masorah parva notes written on the vertical sides of manuscripts, and the masorah magna notes, which are written on the horizontal sides of manuscripts. Ofer rejects the prevailing theory that the masorah parva notes are original and that the masorah magna notes are a later development. Rather, he suggests that the masorah parva may be regarded as a mechanism for detecting errors, whereas the [End Page 416] masorah magna as the apparatus for correcting errors, since it indicates exactly where the words or phrases are written. On the question of the presence of ketiv and qere in the text, Ofer follows the lead of Mordechai Breuer and suggests that they result from two different ways of transmitting the text: a written tradition and an oral one. The written tradition was maintained by scribes, and the oral tradition was that transmitted from father to son or from teacher to disciple. Both were necessary for the correct transmission of the text, and neither could function independently of the other. However, in the course of time, this double transmission inevitably caused some differences to emerge between the two channels, and these differences are called the ketiv and qere. Ofer's chapter on the Aleppo Codex, which was damaged during the riots in Aleppo in 1947, and his recounting of attempts to restore its missing sections, is made all the more vivid by the fact that he was personally involved in this enterprise. He tells the astonishing story of how he was responsible for rescuing the important Tanakh of Rabbi Shalom Shachna Yellin that contained notations in its margins on various missing sections of the codex. This Tanakh had been given to a bookseller, who was about to send it to be buried with other worn-out sacred books when, at the last minute, Ofer discovered and saved it. Subsequently, Yellin's Tanakh was donated to Ben-Zvi Institute by the Yellin family and is displayed in the Shrine of the Book together with the Aleppo Codex. In his discussion of the differences between different Hebrew printed editions, Ofer relates how Mordechai Breuer was able to establish the text of his various Bible editions both on the basis of early manuscripts and of the masorah. Breuer had established his text before the Aleppo Codex became available for study in 1976, and when the codex did become available, and was compared to his reconstructed text, he found that both were practically the same: the eclectic text that he had produced was virtually identical to that of the codex. As far as the masorah and exegesis is concerned, Ofer acknowledges that there may...

A novel tool for assessing microbiomes in cultural heritage documents

This mini-review reports a novel way for exploring the world Cultural Heritage, in the absence of damage or contamination of the items under investigation, called the EVA technique. It is based on films of ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) impregnated with strong anion and cation exchangers and hydrophobic resins, C8 and C18. When in contact with any surface these films can harvest nano-moles of macromolecules as well as metabolites, which can then be identified by standard instrumentation (e.g. mass spectrometry). Some applications related to microbial contaminations are reported, such as the findings of Koch bacterium in Chekhov’s shirt and in a letter by Orwell to a Russian journal editor as well as the Y. pestis and anthrax bacteria in the death registries of Milan’s lazaretto in the 1630 plague bout. Novel findings are offered too, such as the identifications of three different strains of Aspergillus in the Aleppo Codex and the detection of melanin (produced by A. niger) in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is hoped that the present methodology could open the doors of museums, state archives and private collections for detecting biological traces left by artists, literates and men of culture in their masterpieces.

Surface analysis of ancient parchments via the EVA film: The Aleppo Codex.

The margins of several pages of the Aleppo codex have been found to be corroded and contaminated by diffuse maculae. In order to understand the origin of this decay these margins have been analysed by applying EVA (ethylene vinyl acetate plastic embedded with strong cation and anion exchangers and mixed with C8 and C18 hydrophobic resins) diskettes for harvesting surface material. The captured compounds have been eluted, digested with trypsin and analysed by nano-HPLC-MS. Three major strains of Aspergillus have been identified, namely Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus pseudoglaucus, Aspergillus amstelodami, together with a lactobacillus strain and human keratins. The novelty of this investigation is that for the first time the EVA technology has been applied to ancient parchments in the absence of mechanical deformation or distortion that could be induced if there had been water exchange between the EVA diskettes and the parchment. These findings should help curators to find suitable restoration protocols for these precious documents belonging to the world Cultural Heritage.

Blotting Out the Name

Abstract Part 1 of this study considered how the rabbinic prohibition against erasing the Tetragrammaton led to scribes performing diverse procedures to resolve scribal errors. In part 2 it will be shown that special procedures were performed in Torah scrolls, namely, skiving, excision, and removing sheets. Washing off the divine name was not found in the corpus examined. Despite the rabbinic prohibition, medieval Jewish scribes occasionally marked the Tetragrammaton with a strikethrough or erased it through abrasion. This may have been the handiwork of Karaite scribes who did not see themselves bound by the midrashic interpretation of Deut 12:4. The scribes who wrote the Aleppo Codex may have abraded erroneous instances of the Tetragrammaton in order to create a model codex. Scribes in the isolated Jewish community of Kaifeng, who erased erroneous instances of the Tetragrammaton, may not have been familiar with rabbinic strictures.

An Eleventh-Century Eastern Masoretic Codex of the Pentateuch

Abstract The Washington Pentateuch consists of an eleventh-century Pentateuch codex, and a small group of 1141 CE replacement folios. The former presents another early witness to the Masoretic Text. The text in the second hand is very close to the Aleppo Codex, but the section division exhibits several variants as compared to the Aleppo codex. The layout of the Song of the Sea and the lines before are like in the Aleppo codex, but not so the lines after the song. The 1141 CE folios are another witness to the Masoretic Text. The text is very close to the Aleppo Codex, but here, too, there are a number of section variants (which later continued in the Ashkenazi codices). The Song of Moses, though differing from the Aleppo codex, follows an alternate standard layout of 70 lines, and 6 lines before and 6 lines after the Song (later found in Sefardi manuscripts).

알레포 사본과 레닌그라드 사본에 대한 비교 연구

알레포 사본과 레닌그라드 사본에 대한 비교 연구

A Fragment of the Aleppo Codex (Exodus 8) that Reached Israel

A Fragment of the Aleppo Codex (Exodus 8) that Reached Israel

Scriptures as Holy Objects: Preliminary Comparative Remarks on the Qurʾān and the Torah in the Medieval Middle East

Jews and Muslims have developed similar perceptions about the divine origins of their respective sacred scriptures, including their aural and graphic forms. How to transcribe the accurate and authentic text was debated and eventually prescribed in detail in each tradition, but ultimately each religion adopted a different strategy. The Jewish tradition—which distinguishes between liturgical reading and study—developed two discrete formats of the Pentateuch. The ancient form of the scroll with the text inscribed in scripta defectiva was reserved for liturgical use, while the newer codex, written in scripta plena with vocalization and cantillation marks, was accepted for all other purposes. Muslim scholars were less concerned with preserving an ‘authentic’ form, and gradually allowed massive embellishment of the basic script, and a wide variety of designs. The two traditions regard a few early copies of their scriptures, notably the ʿUṯmānī Musḥaf(s) of the Qurʾān and the Aleppo Codex of the Torah, as particularly awe inspiring and holy, according them the role of “master copy” on the scholarly level, and bestowing them the veneration due sacred relics, on the popular level.

The Preparation of the Base Text of the Hebrew University Bible Where It Is Missing in the Aleppo Codex

The Preparation of the Base Text of the Hebrew University Bible Where It Is Missing in the Aleppo Codex

Was the Masorete of the Aleppo Codex of Rabbanite or of Karaite Origin?

Was the Masorete of the Aleppo Codex of Rabbanite or of Karaite Origin?

A Riddle and its Resolution in the Song of Moses in the Aleppo Codex

A Riddle and its Resolution in the Song of Moses in the Aleppo Codex

The New Rabbinic Bible: A Quantum Leap

The two volumes reviewed here are latest in series Mikra3ot Gedolot Haketer prepared by Professor Menachem Cohen at Institute for History of Jewish Biblical Research at Bar-Ilan University. The previ ous six volumes covered biblical books of Joshua and Judges (1992), Kings (1995), Isaiah (1996), Genesis 1-25 with Haftaroth (synagogal pro phetic lection) (1997), Genesis 25-51 with Haftaroth (1999), and Ezekiel (2000). The avowed purpose of this series, which, Deo volente, will include all twenty-four books of Hebrew Bible (corresponding to all thirty-nine books of Lutheran canon of Old Testament), is to replace com mon editions of Mikra'ot Gedolot, commonly called in English the Rabbinic Bible. The so-called Rabbinic Bible presents in a few compact volumes Masoretic Text of Hebrew Bible, one or more Aramaic versions of Jewish Bible, Masorah, and several Hebrew commentaries, mostly from High Middle Ages. The reason for replacing common editions of so-called Rabbinic Bible with new editions is that common editions pre sent inaccurate versions of Masoretic Text, Masoretic notes, privi leged (indeed, canonical, for Pentateuch and Prophets) Aramaic translations (Targumim) of Bible, and selected biblical commentaries com posed in Rabbinic Hebrew, primarily in Spain, France, and Italy in High Middle Ages. Moreover, older editions, in which most commentaries are printed in so-called Rashi script, rarely identify quotations and sources, and they lack modern punctuation. Cohen's editions, on other hand, transcribe insofar as is humanly pos sible Hebrew text and Masoretic notes from Aleppo Codex. Where (as in Ps 15:1-25:1, only portion missing from Book of

The Preparation of the Jerusalem Crown Edition of the Bible Text

The new edition of the Bible, Keter Yerushalayim , was prepared under the aegis of the Hebrew University, following the text and the Masora of the Aleppo Codex and related manuscripts according to the Method of Rabbi Mordechai Breuer (supervising editor: Yosef Ofer, Jerusalem 2000). The article reviews the principles according to which the biblical text was determined, comparisons made to other variants, and explicates the decisions taken. Such documentation is an essential part of any modern scientific Bible edition.