The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

DlEZ MERINO Targum Manuscripts and Critical Editions 75
opinion. This MS Neofiti contains NO genuine Targum at all, but it is a
clumsy attempt to imitate Targum-style and create a Targum text. And,
please, do not come with statements to the contrary by so-called
'authorities'. Even Kahle! I am second to none in my admiration of
Kahle's brilliant mind. But Kahle is easily carried away by his excitement.
.. The other 'authorities' you mention do not count at all! But why
quote 'authorities', when I have evidence from the MS? What I did with
the Genesis of Neophyti 1, was to make a careful analysis of it, and take
notes. This has to be extended to the entire MS. The conclusions are quite
interesting! I, thus suggest to you that you complete the investigation on
these lines and publish results yourself. On such a manner, no blame will
be attached to your name. Think over, and let me know what you wish me
to do. 59
This was Sperber's position on Neophyti 1, but he reveals his ignorance—as
Kahle said—of the Palestinian Targums. Sperber remained
isolated in his refusal to accept Neofiti as a Palestinian Targum.
The Tiberian Tradition
As we have seen, one of Barthelemy's criticisms of the work of
Sperber is that he does not offer a Tiberian tradition of the Targum.
If we admit Kahle's thesis on the Babylonian origin of the Onqelos
Targum, then it is difficult to find the Tiberian tradition. Although the
Targum (confirming Targum Onqelos and Targum Jonathan) received
an official edition in Babylon, the Aramaic translation came from
Palestine. Although it left Palestine without vowel signs, when it came
back to Palestine (Kahle thinks that it was about the year 1000 CE), the
Targum Onqelos (Kahle says, but Jonathan also came) had a supralinear
Babylonian pointing.
We can point out three ways for recovering the Tiberian tradition
of the Aramaic Bible (and the same could be said for all the traditions
within the Aramaic Bible). One is to look for a good MS of the entire
Aramaic Bible, and afterwards to collate this with the most important
families in a 'stemma codicum'. At the moment we do not know of an
ideal MS with these characteristics; but if I had to offer an example, it
could be MS Urbinati 1 (I will speak about it below).
A second is to choose a chief MS for each of the three parts of the
Aramaic Bible (Pentateuch, Prophets, Hagiographa) and afterwards
collate the most important families of MSS. An example for the whole
59. Diez Macho, Neophyti 1, I, p. 41*.