July 1, 2026 Journal article Open Access

Efrati, Shlomi

MARC21 XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<record xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
  <leader>00000nam##2200000uu#4500</leader>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Efrati, Shlomi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="909" ind1="C" ind2="O">
    <subfield code="o">oai:fdr.uni-hamburg.de:19356</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">user-uhh</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="909" ind1="C" ind2="4">
    <subfield code="n">1</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">59-77</subfield>
    <subfield code="v">12</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">Comparative Oriental Manuscript Studies Bulletin</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="u">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">10.25592/uhhfdm.19355</subfield>
    <subfield code="i">isVersionOf</subfield>
    <subfield code="n">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">&lt;p&gt;Targum Onqelos, the &amp;lsquo;standard&amp;rsquo; Targum (Jewish Aramaic translation) of the Pentateuch, is preserved in hundreds of manuscripts and multiple printed editions. These witnesses, and in particular the medieval European ones, are replete with numerous variants which are usually described as secondary and corrupt, the result of lack of knowledge of Aramaic and careless handling of Onqelos&amp;rsquo; text. In this paper I would like to challenge this view concerning the negligence of Onqelos in Europe. I will offer a close study of select textual variants, which are both widely spread and&amp;mdash;seemingly&amp;mdash;obviously incorrect. However, these supposedly erroneous readings were not only carefully preserved but even actually preferred over against the &amp;lsquo;correct&amp;rsquo; version. Thus, I argue, they reflect not only ignorance or carelessness but also, in some cases, textual sensitivity and critical awareness. Moreover, glosses to and revisions of Onqelos&amp;rsquo; text allow us to understand how it was understood and evaluated by those who copied and studied it, long after it could no longer serve as a proper &amp;lsquo;translation&amp;rsquo; of any sort.&amp;nbsp;&lt;br&gt;
&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20260828150000.0</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Rectifying an Obvious Error – Hints of Text-critical Sensitivity in Late Medieval Targum Manuscripts</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="s">495752</subfield>
    <subfield code="u">https://www.fdr.uni-hamburg.de/record/19356/files/comst-bulletin-12-1-2026-59-77.pdf</subfield>
    <subfield code="z">md5:750ad34905cb6ebdb09ab527eda94c98</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <controlfield tag="001">19356</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">2026-07-01</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
    <subfield code="a">cc-by</subfield>
    <subfield code="2">opendefinition.org</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">publication</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">article</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">user-uhh</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="542" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="l">open</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Manuscript studies</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Hebrew studies</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">10.25592/uhhfdm.19356</subfield>
    <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>