Language

I. Targums on the Pentateuch.

(1) The so-called Targum of Onkelos admittedly owes its name to a mistaken reference in the Babylonian Talmud. In its original context, that of the Jerusalem Talmud, the passage refers to the Greek translation of Aquila. With the exception of this one reference, the Targum is always introduced in the Babylonian Talmud by the phrase "as we translate" or "our Targum": it is probable, therefore, that the name of the author, or authors, was unknown to the Babylonian Jews. It is first quoted under the title of the Targum of Onkelos by Gaon Sar Shalom (d. A.D. 859). On the linguistic side we may regard Onkelos "as a faithful representative of a Targum which had its rise in Judaea, the old seat of Palestinian literary activity." (Grammatik des jiidisch-palastinischen Aramaisch, p. 12 f.) It is to be regarded as an official translation of the Law, in the Judaean dialect, which was carried out in Babylon, probably about the 4th century A.D.: in its final form it cannot be earlier than the 5th century. The translation, as a whole, is good, and adheres very closely to the Hebrew text, which has not been without its influence on the Aramaic idiom.

Of all the extant Targums that of Onkelos affords perhaps the most characteristic and consistent example of the exegetical meth ods employed in these works. Two principles may be said to have guided the translators. On the one hand, they had, as their primary object, to produce a faithful rendering of the original which at the same time would be intelligible to the people : for this purpose a purely literal translation would be insufficient. On the other hand, they regarded it as necessary to present the sacred text in such a manner as best to convey the particular form of interpretation then current. But later Jewish exegesis was espe cially concerned to eliminate everything in the sacred writings that might give rise to misconception with respect to God on the part of the unlearned. Hence we find various expedients adopted in the Targums for avoiding any reference to the Deity which might be misunderstood by the people, or which involved appa rent irreverence. Examples of this peculiarly Targumic method are : (I) the insertion of "word," "glory," "presence" before the divine name, when God is referred to in his dealings with men; (2) the insertion of the preposition "before" when God is the object of any action; (3) the use of the passive for the active voice; (4) the use of periphrasis for the more pronounced an thropomorphisms, such as "to smell," "to taste"; (5) the use of different expressions, or the insertion of a preposition before the divine name, when God is compared to man, or the same action is predicated of God and man; (6) the use oi for rnn? and c'th and the rendering 1.6n-i or tcyco when on-r9N denotes heathen gods. Instances of this endeavour to maintain, as it were, a

respectful distance in speaking of God occur on every page of the Targums, but cases also occur, by no means infrequently, where human actions and passions are ascribed to God.

(2) In addition to the Targum of Onkelos two other Targums to the Pentateuch are cited by Jewish authorities, under the titles of the Targum Jerushalmi and the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel. Of these the former contains only portions of the Penta teuch and is therefore usually designated the Fragmentary ( Jerusalem) Targum. Its fragmentary character arises from the fact that it is simply a collection of variae lectiones and additions to the version of Onkelos, intended possibly for use at public services.

The second Jerusalem Targum admittedly owes its ascription to Jonathan ben Uzziel to the incorrect solution of the abbreviated form by which it was frequently cited, viz., ' "n or Targum Jerushalmi. This Targum represents a later and more successful attempt to correct and supplement the Targum of Onkelos by the aid of variants derived from another source. It is not, how ever, a revision of the Fragmentary Targum—f or it is clearly independent of that version—but is rather a parallel, if some what later, production, in which the text of Onkelos is already combined with a number of variants and additions. It exhibits, to a marked degree, that tendency to expand the text by addi tions of every kind, which has been already noted as character istic of the later stages of Targumic composition. Homilies, legends, traditional sayings and explanations, in fact every form of Haggadic expansion are utilized by the Targumist, so that at times his works convey the impression more of a late Midrash than of a translation.

In regard to the source of the two Palestinian Targums to the Pentateuch, we must accept the conclusion of Bassfreund (M.G.W.J. xl.) that they both derived their variants from a com plete Targum Jerushalmi. But though the existence of an older Targum Jerushalmi cannot be denied it cannot be of an early date, for many of the latest elements in the Fragmentary and pseudo-Jonathan Targums were undoubtedly derived from their common source. Moreover, the existence of a written Palestinian Targum at an early date is expressly excluded by the evidence at our disposal. In the middle of the 2nd century A.D. R. Simon ben Gamaliel forbade the translation of the in any lan guage but Greek; and this command was upheld by R. Johanan in the 3rd century. Even in the time of the later Amoraim there is no mention of a written Palestinian Targum, though the offi cial Babylonian Targum is repeatedly referred to in the Baby lonian Talmud, in the Midrashim, and at times also by Pales tinian Amoraim.