Aleppo vs. Leningrad Codex vs. BHS

Maurice A. O'Sullivan mauros at iol.ie
Mon Jun 24 13:37:16 EDT 2002


At 13:28 24/06/02, Madden, Shawn wrote:

>Most good theological libraries will have reproduction copies of both 
>Aleppo & Leningrad.

A caveat: the CBQ review I quoted in my previous posting has this to say on 
the use of the Leningrad facsimile edition.

 >>> The improved readings of the Dotan edition reflect the judgement of 
the editor. The naive user may find the facsimile of the Leningrad 
adequate, but in fact the manuscript itself is sometimes " insufficiently 
clear on account of defacement, spots, lacunae, and fading that have 
affected it over time, as a result of much handling, or on account of 
mistakes of the scribe and slips of the pen " (page xi). Further, the 
photographs are not entirely trustworthy: the Zuckerman photographs, which 
" penetrate deep under the surface of the parchment and catch the embedded 
ink " (page xii) sometimes makes a correction to the text recede behind a 
reading that the scribe rejected. D. provides variant readings in Appendix 
A; the presence of a variant is  signaled in the margin of the text with a 
small-cap A. <<<





Maurice A. O'Sullivan  [ Bray, Ireland ]
mauros at iol.ie






More information about the b-hebrew mailing list