language itself still maintained its existence.  It is a great mistake

to call Hebrew a dead language.  It has never died.  It never will die'

Modern Hebrew manuscripts are written in what are called square

characters, but these are not the characters of the original.  The Samaritan

Pentateuch is written in the earlier Hebrew letters, similar to those used on

the Moabite Stone and the Siloam inscription.  The Moabite Stone dates from

890 b.c., and the Siloam inscription about 700 b.c.  The modern square

characters are supposed to have been brought back from Babylon by Ezra, but

this explanation is merely a traditional attempt to account for the fact that

a change actually occurred about Ezra's time.

One of the peculiar features of ancient Hebrew is that it contains no

vowels, only the consonants being written.  It may help to make this point

clear if we give an example in English by way of illustration.  If the reader

had before him the letters Bll, he would not know whether the word was Ball,

Bill, Bell or Bull.  But if the sentence containing the word declared that

the Bll had been paid, it would not require much learning to realize that Bll

stood for Bill.  Similarly, the Bll might be tolled, or led out to grass.

Some momentary hesitation might occur if the manuscript stated that the Bll

was Rng.  A bell may be rung, and also a bull, the latter by the insertion of

a ring in the nose, but the context would immediately settle the matter.  We

have resorted to these homespun illustrations in order to avoid using Hebrew

type and loading our pages with matter requiring considerable translation to

make the point clear.  In the Variorum Bible will be found several instances

of the way in which vowels were at times wrongly supplied, and cases where a

division of opinion still exists.  For example, in Deuteronomy 28:22, either

'sword' or 'drought' may be intended; the same consonants occur in both

words, sword being chereb and drought choreb, and the context leaves the

question undecided.

The fact that no manuscripts exist of a date earlier than the eighth

century, compels us to seek light upon the sacred text from other sources,

and the furthest point we can reach as to the state of the text is that

provided by the Targums.  The latter are paraphrases written in Aramaic, or,

as it is called in the A.V. Chaldee, and the scene described in Nehemiah 8:1-

8 shows how these paraphrases became necessary.  Dr. Kitto's Cyclopaedia

mentions eleven Targums, of which the most important are those of Onkelos, of

Jonathan Ben Uzziel and the Jerusalem Targum.

The Targum of Onkelos is described by Kenyon as 'a very simple and

literal translation of the Pentateuch, and ... for that reason the more

useful as evidence for the Hebrew text from which it was taken'.  Onkelos was

a disciple of Hillel.  Hillel was the grandfather of Gamaliel, at whose feet

Paul was brought up as a Pharisee.  The style of this Targum approaches to

that of Daniel or Ezra.  It follows the original, word for word, except where

it deals with figures of speech, and where the Deity is spoken of under the

figure of a man (anthropomorphism).  Wherever Onkelos departs from what is

called the Massoretic text (a term to be explained later), he is almost

invariably supported by ancient versions.  The reader will readily appreciate

the value of such a paraphrase to a scholar seeking the text of the Hebrew

The Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel is of value in deciding the text of

the Prophets.  The Jerusalem Targum agrees generally with the Pseudo