{"id":501,"date":"2026-10-19T00:36:38","date_gmt":"2026-10-19T00:36:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/biblia-hebraica-quinta-the-fifth-edition-of-the-hebrew-bible\/"},"modified":"2026-10-19T00:36:38","modified_gmt":"2026-10-19T00:36:38","slug":"biblia-hebraica-quinta-the-fifth-edition-of-the-hebrew-bible","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/biblia-hebraica-quinta-the-fifth-edition-of-the-hebrew-bible\/","title":{"rendered":"Biblia Hebraica Quinta: The Fifth Edition of the Hebrew Bible"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Open almost any scholarly commentary on the Old Testament written in the last century and the Hebrew it discusses comes, directly or indirectly, from one family of books: the <em><a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Biblia_Hebraica_%28Kittel%29\">Biblia Hebraica<\/a><\/em> published in <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Leipzig\">Leipzig<\/a> and then <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Stuttgart\">Stuttgart<\/a>. The family has had five members. The fifth, <em>Biblia Hebraica Quinta<\/em> (BHQ), has been appearing book by book since 2004 and is still unfinished. It keeps the manuscript its two predecessors printed, the Leningrad Codex, but it changes almost everything about how the evidence around that text is gathered, judged and explained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group at-a-glance\"><div class=\"wp-block-group__inner-container is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"at-a-glance\">At a glance<\/h3>\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n\n<li><strong>1905\u201306:<\/strong> Rudolf Kittel\u2019s first <em>Biblia Hebraica<\/em> (Leipzig) reprints the text of Jacob ben Hayyim\u2019s Second Rabbinic Bible with a short apparatus. A corrected second edition follows in 1913.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>1929\u201337:<\/strong> the third edition, edited by Kittel and Paul Kahle, switches to the Leningrad Codex as its base text.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>1951:<\/strong> a further printing adds readings from the newly found Qumran scrolls in a third apparatus.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>1967\u201377:<\/strong> <em>Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia<\/em> (BHS), edited by Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph, merges the apparatuses into one and adds the Masorah.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>1969\u201380:<\/strong> the United Bible Societies\u2019 Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (HOTTP) reviews thousands of textual problems for translators.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>2004:<\/strong> the first BHQ fascicle, <em>General Introduction and Megilloth<\/em>, appears in Stuttgart.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>2006\u201324:<\/strong> Ezra\u2013Nehemiah, Deuteronomy, Proverbs, the Twelve Prophets, Judges, Genesis, Leviticus and Job follow.<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>2026:<\/strong> nine of the planned twenty volumes are in print. Adrian Schenker hands the editorial committee to Martin R\u00f6sel and receives the Canstein Medal.<\/li>\n\n<\/ul>\n\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"why-a-fifth-edition\">Why a Fifth Edition?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-family-tree\">The Family Tree<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The name is literal. <em>Quinta<\/em> is Latin for \u201cfifth\u201d, and the full Latin title, <em>Biblia Hebraica quinta editione cum apparatu critico novis curis elaborato<\/em>, means \u201cthe Hebrew Bible in a fifth edition, with a critical apparatus prepared with new care\u201d.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-1\"><a href=\"#note-1\">1<\/a><\/sup> Counting from Kittel, the editions run as follows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The first edition appeared at Leipzig in 1905\u201306, edited by Rudolf Kittel. Its Hebrew text was not a manuscript but the standard printed text of the day, the Second Rabbinic Bible issued at Venice in 1524\u201325 by <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Daniel_Bomberg\">Daniel Bomberg<\/a> and edited by <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/jacob-ben-hayyim-second-rabbinic-bible-venice-1525\/\">Jacob ben Hayyim<\/a>. A corrected second edition followed in 1913.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-2\"><a href=\"#note-2\">2<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The third edition (Stuttgart, 1929\u201337) was the decisive break. Kittel and <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/paul-kahle.html\">Paul Kahle<\/a> replaced the Venice text with that of a single medieval manuscript, the <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/the-leningrad-codex\/\">Leningrad Codex<\/a>, now in the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/National_Library_of_Russia\">National Library of Russia<\/a> in St Petersburg and dated 1008\/9. It also printed the marginal notes of the Masorah parva and gave a much fuller apparatus. Albrecht Alt and Otto Eissfeldt were closely involved, but the book was still universally called \u201cKittel\u201d, abbreviated BHK.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-3\"><a href=\"#note-3\">3<\/a><\/sup> A printing of 1951, sometimes counted as the seventh edition, added a third apparatus with readings from the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Dead_Sea_Scrolls\">Qumran scrolls<\/a>.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-4\"><a href=\"#note-4\">4<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The fourth edition dropped the editors\u2019 names from the title and took that of its city: <em><a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Biblia_Hebraica_Stuttgartensia\">Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia<\/a><\/em>, edited by Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph, issued in parts between 1967 and 1977 and reprinted with corrections several times, most recently in 1997.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-5\"><a href=\"#note-5\">5<\/a><\/sup> BHS has been the working Bible of Hebrew students for half a century. BHQ is its replacement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"what-was-wrong-with-bhs\">What Was Wrong with BHS?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">BHS improved on its predecessor. It merged the three apparatuses into one, recorded far more of the Masorah, was more cautious about conjecture, and listed more evidence from the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Cairo_Geniza\">Cairo Genizah<\/a> and Qumran. Even so, Emanuel Tov summed up a long line of criticism: reviewers objected to \u201cits inappropriate selection of variants, its lack of accuracy and consistency, and the insufficient attention given to the Qumran scrolls\u201d.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-6\"><a href=\"#note-6\">6<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">There were also problems of method. The BH series marked its preferred text with Latin imperatives such as <em>l(ege)<\/em> (\u201cread!\u201d) and <em>dl<\/em> (\u201cdelete!\u201d), and its stated aim was to restore the presumed original wording of each book.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-7\"><a href=\"#note-7\">7<\/a><\/sup> In practice, an entry often appeared because a modern editor found a verse difficult, not because any manuscript or ancient translation actually read differently. Richard Weis, a member of the BHQ editorial committee, gives a clean example. At Jeremiah 23:3 both BH3 and BHS note that the verse has been added. No textual witness lacks the verse. The note rests entirely on an argument about literary consistency in Rudolph\u2019s commentary on Jeremiah. BHQ has no entry at that point at all.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-8\"><a href=\"#note-8\">8<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A second example comes from David Baker\u2019s review. At Exodus 23:3 every manuscript and every version reads <span lang=\"he\" dir=\"rtl\">\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05dc<\/span> (<em>dal<\/em>, \u201cpoor\u201d), and the sense is clear: do not favour a poor man in his lawsuit. BHS nonetheless suggests emending to <span lang=\"he\" dir=\"rtl\">\u05d2\u05b8\u05bc\u05d3\u05b9\u05dc<\/span> (<em>gadol<\/em>, \u201cgreat\u201d), on the strength of the parallel in Leviticus 19:15.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-9\"><a href=\"#note-9\">9<\/a><\/sup> An apparatus built like that is a list of possible solutions to exegetical puzzles, not a report of evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-shape-of-the-new-edition\">The Shape of the New Edition<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"a-manual-edition-for-non-specialists\">A Manual Edition for Non-Specialists<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">BHQ was designed for a particular readership. Its General Introduction describes it as a <em>Handausgabe<\/em>, a manual edition, for \u201cscholars, clergy, translators, and students who are not necessarily specialists in <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Textual_criticism\">textual criticism<\/a>\u201d.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-10\"><a href=\"#note-10\">10<\/a><\/sup> Weis explains why this mattered. Much of that readership works far from well-funded libraries, so the edition had to be portable and affordable. That meant one volume of text, with a second volume of commentary, and therefore hard choices about what to include.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-11\"><a href=\"#note-11\">11<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.die-bibel.de\/en\/\">German Bible Society<\/a>\u2019s description of the finished work matches that plan. The text will be issued in about twenty fascicles and then gathered into a one-volume edition, accompanied by a one-volume textual commentary that discusses the cases in more depth than the apparatus can.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-12\"><a href=\"#note-12\">12<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-base-text-still-leningrad\">The Base Text: Still Leningrad<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Like BH3 and BHS, BHQ prints the text of the Leningrad Codex, catalogued in St Petersburg as EBP. I B 19a. The German Bible Society describes it as \u201ca diplomatic presentation of the text and Masorah (magna and parva)\u201d of that manuscript, checked against new colour photographs made by the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center in <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Claremont,_California\">Claremont, California<\/a>.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-13\"><a href=\"#note-13\">13<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u201cDiplomatic\u201d here means that the edition reproduces the manuscript rather than a text reconstructed by the editors. The General Introduction gives three reasons for not attempting an eclectic text. The history of the Hebrew text is not yet well enough understood to support one. There is no agreement on which stage of that history such a text should aim at. And an eclectic text ought to rest on a much fuller presentation of variants than a one-volume edition can hold.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-14\"><a href=\"#note-14\">14<\/a><\/sup> There were practical reasons too. The Bible Society already had a fully proofed text of the Leningrad Codex, first in type and then in electronic form. Two other diplomatic editions of different codices were in progress, the Hebrew University Bible on the <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/aleppo-codex.html\">Aleppo Codex<\/a> and the Madrid edition of the <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/the-cairo-prophets-codex\/\">Cairo Codex of the Prophets<\/a>, so it was useful to keep the Leningrad text in print. And as the oldest complete manuscript of the Hebrew Bible, it gives a single consistent point of comparison from Genesis to Chronicles.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-15\"><a href=\"#note-15\">15<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The policy has its critics. Baker points out that BHQ reproduces Leningrad \u201ceven when this shows obvious errors\u201d, which sends readers back and forth between text and apparatus, and he questions whether such purism serves a non-specialist readership. He also notes that the edition already departs from the manuscript in small ways. Where Leningrad is damaged it supplies the text from other manuscripts. Where the scribe corrected himself it prints one reading. It does not copy the manuscript\u2019s columns. And it marks section breaks with the letters <span lang=\"he\" dir=\"rtl\">\u05e1<\/span> and <span lang=\"he\" dir=\"rtl\">\u05e4<\/span>, where the manuscript simply leaves spaces.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-16\"><a href=\"#note-16\">16<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-masorah-in-full\">The Masorah in Full<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The most visible change on the page is the Masorah. BHS printed the <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/the-masorah-parva-and-masorah-magna\/\">Masorah parva<\/a> in its margins, but placed the Masorah magna in a separate volume and filled the page with cross-references to it. BHQ prints both as they stand in the Leningrad Codex. The Masorah parva sits in the side margins, and the Masorah magna is set between the biblical text and the apparatus.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-17\"><a href=\"#note-17\">17<\/a><\/sup> The notes at the end of each book, the <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/the-masorah-finalis-and-the-closing-apparatus-of-the-hebrew-bible\/\">Masorah finalis<\/a>, are included as well.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-18\"><a href=\"#note-18\">18<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Masorah is also reproduced diplomatically, with the scribe\u2019s own inconsistencies left in place, whereas BHS tidied them up. Weis draws the consequence: because the Masorah is part of the text of a Masoretic codex, BHQ is in effect the first complete edition of the Leningrad manuscript.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-19\"><a href=\"#note-19\">19<\/a><\/sup> Every note of the Masorah magna is translated into English in the commentary section of each fascicle. The Masorah parva can be read with a glossary of its standard terms, and its rarer notes are translated as well.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-20\"><a href=\"#note-20\">20<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"english-not-latin\">English, Not Latin<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The apparatus of BHQ is written in English. The Latin abbreviations and Gothic sigla of BHK and BHS are gone.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-21\"><a href=\"#note-21\">21<\/a><\/sup> The readings of the ancient translations, however, are given in their own languages and scripts. Weis records that the editors first tried to translate everything for readers who know only Hebrew and Greek, and abandoned the attempt. Readings in Latin, <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Peshitta\">Syriac<\/a> and Aramaic now appear as they stand in the witnesses. That makes the apparatus a more honest report of the evidence, though it shuts some readers out of parts of it.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-22\"><a href=\"#note-22\">22<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"how-the-apparatus-works\">How the Apparatus Works<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"two-tests-for-inclusion\">Two Tests for Inclusion<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The apparatus of BHQ is organised on what Weis calls \u201cradically different principles\u201d from BHS.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-23\"><a href=\"#note-23\">23<\/a><\/sup> Because space is limited, a case is normally included only if it passes two tests. The variation must matter for translation or exegesis. And at least arguably, a different Hebrew or Aramaic text must lie behind it.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-24\"><a href=\"#note-24\">24<\/a><\/sup> An exegetical difficulty alone is not enough. In Weis\u2019s words, \u201conly variation among the surviving witnesses is a reliable marker\u201d of a case that needs a text-critical decision.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-25\"><a href=\"#note-25\">25<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Some evidence passes automatically. All non-orthographic variants in the oldest Hebrew witnesses, the biblical scrolls from Qumran and the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Samaritan_Pentateuch\">Samaritan Pentateuch<\/a>, are reported whether or not an editor thinks they matter for translation, because such witnesses are old and scarce.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-26\"><a href=\"#note-26\">26<\/a><\/sup> The German Bible Society\u2019s summary adds that fragments from Qumran and the other Judaean Desert sites are fully collated, that every pre-Tiberian witness is noted for each case, and that at least two further Tiberian codices are collated for every book.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-27\"><a href=\"#note-27\">27<\/a><\/sup> Cases of <em>ketiv<\/em> and <em>qere<\/em>, where the <a href=\"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/ketiv-and-qere-what-is-written-and-what-is-read\/\">written text and the reading tradition differ<\/a>, are recorded wherever they affect the meaning.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-28\"><a href=\"#note-28\">28<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The apparatus also differs from BHS in what it reports for each case. BHS usually cited only the witnesses that disagreed with the base text, so a reader could not tell whether an unmentioned version agreed with Leningrad or simply had nothing to say. BHQ gives the evidence of all its regularly cited witnesses, including those that support the base text.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-29\"><a href=\"#note-29\">29<\/a><\/sup> There are no reference marks in the running text, which keeps the page clean but means readers must check the apparatus to learn whether a verse has a textual problem.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-30\"><a href=\"#note-30\">30<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"preferred-readings-and-the-reasons-for-them\">Preferred Readings and the Reasons for Them<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">BHQ does not leave the reader alone with the evidence. In each case the editor indicates which reading he or she prefers, though in practice this only has to be marked when the preferred reading is not the one printed in the text.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-31\"><a href=\"#note-31\">31<\/a><\/sup> Weis is candid that this brings in an unavoidable subjectivity, and he describes how the edition tries to make it visible. Readings that are not preferred receive a short characterisation of how they probably arose, using a controlled vocabulary of abbreviations. Some describe mechanical slips, such as <em>homarc<\/em> (<em>homoioarcton<\/em>, an eye-skip between two similar word beginnings). Others describe the scribe or translator as a reader: <em>assim-usu<\/em> (assimilation to the usual biblical expression), <em>assim<\/em> with a reference to a parallel passage, or <em>lit<\/em> for a reading that belongs to a different literary edition of the book.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-32\"><a href=\"#note-32\">32<\/a><\/sup> Where a case needs more than a label, the commentary discusses it in full.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Behind the vocabulary lies a view of how the text was transmitted. Earlier editions in the series, Weis argues, treated scribes as mechanics whose errors left \u201crough\u201d spots in the text, so that difficulty was a reasonable signal of corruption. The BHQ editors also see scribes as readers who sometimes changed a text to make it smoother or more fitting, so that transmission can polish a text as easily as damage it.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-33\"><a href=\"#note-33\">33<\/a><\/sup> The typology owes much to the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, whose final report, Dominique Barth\u00e9lemy\u2019s <em>Critique textuelle de l\u2019Ancien Testament<\/em>, developed a detailed set of terms for changes made by scribes in their capacity as interpreters.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-34\"><a href=\"#note-34\">34<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The label <em>lit<\/em> points to one of the field\u2019s main discoveries since BHS. Some books circulated in antiquity in more than one literary form, as <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Book_of_Jeremiah\">Jeremiah<\/a> did in a longer Hebrew form behind the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Masoretic_Text\">Masoretic text<\/a> and a shorter one behind the Greek. A one-volume edition cannot print two Jeremiahs, so BHQ marks readings that derive from the other edition as \u201cliterary\u201d and treats them as irrelevant to establishing the text at hand.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-35\"><a href=\"#note-35\">35<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Weis proposes a typology to place the result among other editions. The Hebrew University Bible is a <em>descriptive<\/em> critical edition: it lays out the evidence but does not say which reading is best. BHQ and the eclectic Oxford Hebrew Bible project, now published as <em>The Hebrew Bible: A Critical Edition<\/em>, are <em>prescriptive<\/em>, because they state preferences. They differ in where they put those preferences. The Oxford edition prints its reconstructed readings in the text, while BHQ keeps the manuscript as a reference point and puts its recommendations in the apparatus. Weis calls BHQ\u2019s type \u201ccollative\u201d and argues that it keeps the subjective nature of reconstruction in plain view: the reader must combine base text and apparatus, and the resulting text exists only on paper.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-36\"><a href=\"#note-36\">36<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-debt-to-hottp\">The Debt to HOTTP<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Hebrew Old Testament Text Project was set up by the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/United_Bible_Societies\">United Bible Societies<\/a> in 1969. A committee of six scholars reviewed the textual problems most likely to affect translation. Its <em>Preliminary and Interim Report<\/em> appeared in five volumes between 1973 and 1980, and Barth\u00e9lemy\u2019s <em>Critique textuelle<\/em> followed from 1982.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-37\"><a href=\"#note-37\">37<\/a><\/sup> BHQ took over the results. Baker lists the use of HOTTP as the first of its improvements on BHS.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-38\"><a href=\"#note-38\">38<\/a><\/sup> The link is personal as well as institutional. Adrian Schenker\u2019s involvement with the Biblia Hebraica began, the German Bible Society notes, in the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, and he directed the Institut Dominique Barth\u00e9lemy at the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/University_of_Fribourg\">University of Fribourg<\/a> until 2005.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-39\"><a href=\"#note-39\">39<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"a-worked-example-jeremiah-23-1-9\">A Worked Example: Jeremiah 23:1\u20139<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When Weis set out the principles of BHQ in 2002, he illustrated them with a sample page and commentary for Jeremiah 23:1\u20139, the oracle against the shepherds who scatter the flock and the promise of a righteous branch for David.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-40\"><a href=\"#note-40\">40<\/a><\/sup> The sample is still the clearest published demonstration of how the new apparatus behaves, and Weis compares it point by point with the older editions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"what-drops-out\">What Drops Out<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The first effect of the new criteria is subtraction. BH3 had two notes on verse 2 that recorded nothing more than fuller spellings of words in the text, with an extra vowel letter. Spellings like these make no difference to translation or exegesis, so BHQ leaves them out.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-41\"><a href=\"#note-41\">41<\/a><\/sup> The note in BH3 and BHS that verse 3 is a later addition disappears as well, for the reason given above: no witness lacks the verse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"what-comes-in\">What Comes In<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The second effect is addition. In verses 1\u20135 alone, Weis counts seven potentially substantive cases that BHS does not mention at all, one of them a case where the editor prefers a reading other than that of the Leningrad Codex.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-42\"><a href=\"#note-42\">42<\/a><\/sup> The selection that results, he notes, comes very close to the core of substantive cases in the first two apparatuses of the Hebrew University Bible for the same passage. What the HUB adds beyond that core is mostly variation within the Greek tradition, readings from rabbinic literature and medieval manuscripts, and differences in the versions that do not affect the meaning. That material is essential for specialists but rarely matters to translators.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-43\"><a href=\"#note-43\">43<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The sample also shows the languages of the evidence. Readings are cited in Latin at verses 1 and 6, in Syriac at verses 4, 5 and 8, and in the Aramaic of the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Targum\">Targum<\/a> at verses 4 and 5.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-44\"><a href=\"#note-44\">44<\/a><\/sup> The difference in reporting is visible too. At one point in verse 8, BH3 cited only the Greek and passed over a Syriac variant, a plural passive verb without a suffix. BHQ gives the testimony of every regularly cited witness.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-45\"><a href=\"#note-45\">45<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"my-flock-or-my-people\">\u201cMy Flock\u201d or \u201cMy People\u201d?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In verse 3 the Lord promises to gather \u201cthe remnant of my flock\u201d, <span lang=\"he\" dir=\"rtl\">\u05e6\u05b9\u05d0\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9<\/span> (<em>tsoni<\/em>). The <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Septuagint\">Old Greek<\/a> has \u201cof my people\u201d. The Hebrew University Bible, which in principle offers no verdicts, comments that the Greek \u201chardly\u201d reflects a Hebrew <span lang=\"he\" dir=\"rtl\">\u05e2\u05b7\u05de\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9<\/span> (<em>\u02bfammi<\/em>, \u201cmy people\u201d). BHQ characterises the Greek reading as <em>assim-usu<\/em>, an assimilation to the usual biblical expression. Weis points out that the two judgements come to the same thing. Both prefer the Masoretic reading, and both explain the Greek as a move towards a familiar phrase.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-46\"><a href=\"#note-46\">46<\/a><\/sup> The example shows how thin the line between a descriptive and a prescriptive edition can be. It also shows the purpose of the BHQ labels, which put the editor\u2019s reasoning on the page.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"preferred-readings-that-must-be-reconstructed\">Preferred Readings That Must Be Reconstructed<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The sample marks preferred readings that differ from the Leningrad Codex in verses 3, 6 and 7. In verses 3 and 7 (a different case in verse 3 from the one just described), the preferred reading survives only in a translation, so the editor has to give it as a Hebrew form retroverted from the version.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-47\"><a href=\"#note-47\">47<\/a><\/sup> This was one reason the committee gave for not printing an eclectic text. A retroverted form in the apparatus leaves the reader free to keep the reading of the Leningrad Codex. The same form printed in the text would take that choice away.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-48\"><a href=\"#note-48\">48<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"five-editions-compared\">Five Editions Compared<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The differences between BHQ, its predecessors and its two contemporaries are easiest to see side by side.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-49\"><a href=\"#note-49\">49<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><thead><tr><th><\/th><th>BH3 (BHK)<\/th><th>BHS<\/th><th>BHQ<\/th><th>Hebrew University Bible<\/th><th>HBCE<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Published<\/td><td>1929\u201337<\/td><td>1967\u201377<\/td><td>2004\u2013<\/td><td>Isaiah 1995, Jeremiah 1997, Ezekiel 2004<\/td><td>Proverbs 2015\u2013<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Base text<\/td><td>Leningrad Codex<\/td><td>Leningrad Codex<\/td><td>Leningrad Codex, diplomatic<\/td><td>Aleppo Codex, diplomatic<\/td><td>Eclectic text approximating the archetype<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Masorah<\/td><td>Masorah parva<\/td><td>Parva on the page, magna in a separate volume<\/td><td>Parva, magna and finalis as in the manuscript<\/td><td>Aleppo Masorah in full, magna above the text<\/td><td>Not printed<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Apparatus<\/td><td>Latin; two registers, a third for Qumran from 1951<\/td><td>Latin; one apparatus<\/td><td>English; one apparatus with characterisations<\/td><td>Six registers; comments in English and modern Hebrew<\/td><td>English apparatus and commentary<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Editor\u2019s preference<\/td><td>Imperatives such as \u201cread\u201d and \u201cdelete\u201d<\/td><td>Imperatives<\/td><td>Preferred readings marked in the apparatus<\/td><td>Not stated in principle<\/td><td>Built into the printed text<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Read across the rows, the table shows two shifts. The first, from BH3 to BHQ, is from emendation proposed by modern editors to evidence reported from witnesses. The second, between the three current projects, is about where judgement belongs. The Hebrew University Bible reports the evidence on the Aleppo Codex in full. BHQ reports a selection of it against the Leningrad Codex and gives a verdict. The HBCE prints the verdict as its text. Weis argued that the field needs all three, because they serve different readers.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-50\"><a href=\"#note-50\">50<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"publication-book-by-book\">Publication, Book by Book<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-fascicles-so-far\">The Fascicles So Far<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The first fascicle, numbered 18, appeared in 2004. It contained the General Introduction and the five <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Five_Megillot\">Megilloth<\/a>: Ruth (edited by Jan de Waard), the Song of Songs (Piet B. Dirksen), Qoheleth (Yohanan A. P. Goldman), Lamentations (Rolf Sch\u00e4fer) and <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Book_of_Esther\">Esther<\/a> (Magne S\u00e6b\u00f8).<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-51\"><a href=\"#note-51\">51<\/a><\/sup> Weis had expected it in 2002 and hoped the whole edition would be finished in 2010.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-52\"><a href=\"#note-52\">52<\/a><\/sup> By 2010 Baker could report four fascicles and a projected completion date of 2020.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-53\"><a href=\"#note-53\">53<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The German Bible Society\u2019s current table lists the following volumes as published:<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-54\"><a href=\"#note-54\">54<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n\n<li><strong>General Introduction and Megilloth<\/strong> (2004)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Ezra and Nehemiah<\/strong>, ed. David Marcus (2006)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Deuteronomy<\/strong>, ed. Carmel McCarthy (2007)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Proverbs<\/strong>, ed. Jan de Waard (2008)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>The <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Twelve_Minor_Prophets\">Twelve Prophets<\/a><\/strong>, ed. Anthony Gelston (2010)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Judges<\/strong>, ed. Natalio Fern\u00e1ndez Marcos (2011)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Genesis<\/strong>, ed. Abraham Tal (2016)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Leviticus<\/strong>, ed. Innocent Himbaza (2020)<\/li>\n\n\n<li><strong>Job<\/strong>, ed. Robert Althann (2024)<\/li>\n\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">That is nine of a planned twenty volumes. Numbers (Martin R\u00f6sel) and Ezekiel (Johan Lust, Siegfried Kreuzer and Matthieu Richelle) are listed as in preparation for 2026. Exodus, Joshua, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Psalms, Daniel and Chronicles are in preparation without a date.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-55\"><a href=\"#note-55\">55<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Each fascicle carries more than the text. It contains an introduction to the textual witnesses of the book, notes on the Masorah with a translation of the Masorah magna, a commentary on the cases in the apparatus, and a bibliography. When the series is complete, this material is to be gathered into the separate commentary volume.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-56\"><a href=\"#note-56\">56<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"numbering-and-the-megilloth-fascicle\">Numbering and the Megilloth Fascicle<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The fascicles are numbered in the order of the Hebrew canon, not the order in which they appear: Genesis is 1, Leviticus 3, Deuteronomy 5, Judges 7, the Twelve Prophets 13, Job 16, Proverbs 17, the Megilloth 18 and Ezra\u2013Nehemiah 20.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-57\"><a href=\"#note-57\">57<\/a><\/sup> The series therefore began near its end. Fascicle 18 also served as the manual for the whole edition. Alongside the five Megilloth it carried the General Introduction, in English, German and Spanish, which describes the base text and its Masorah, explains how the witnesses are used, sets out the relationship of BHQ to BHS and earlier editions, and lists all the sigla and abbreviations.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-58\"><a href=\"#note-58\">58<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The five small books show the range of evidence an editor may have. Fragments of every book of the Hebrew Bible except Esther and Nehemiah have been found at Qumran, and Ezra\u2013Nehemiah was counted as one book represented by a fragment of Ezra.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-59\"><a href=\"#note-59\">59<\/a><\/sup> Ruth, the Song of Songs, Qoheleth and Lamentations therefore all have Qumran witnesses to collate. For Esther, Magne S\u00e6b\u00f8 had to work without any Judaean Desert evidence at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-twelve-prophets\">The Twelve Prophets<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Anthony Gelston\u2019s fascicle 13 (2010) covers Hosea to Malachi in about 320 pages.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-60\"><a href=\"#note-60\">60<\/a><\/sup> The Twelve were treated in antiquity as a single book written on a single scroll, as the Minor Prophets scroll from Wadi Murabba\u02bfat (MurXII) shows.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-61\"><a href=\"#note-61\">61<\/a><\/sup> The Judaean Desert evidence for these books is unusually rich. MurXII was copied before the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Bar_Kokhba_revolt\">Bar Kokhba revolt<\/a> of 132\u2013135 CE and belongs to the proto-Masoretic family.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-62\"><a href=\"#note-62\">62<\/a><\/sup> The Greek Minor Prophets scroll from Na\u1e25al \u1e24ever (8\u1e24evXIIgr), found in 1952 and published by Tov, preserves an early Jewish revision of the Greek translation that Dominique Barth\u00e9lemy named <em>kaige<\/em>.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-63\"><a href=\"#note-63\">63<\/a><\/sup> The edition\u2019s rule that all Qumran and Judaean Desert fragments are collated in full therefore matters more here than in most books.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"the-editors\">The Editors<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">From the start the project set out to be international and interconfessional. Baker contrasts its team with the European Protestant editors of the earlier editions.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-64\"><a href=\"#note-64\">64<\/a><\/sup> The list of book editors bears this out. It includes scholars based in Tel Aviv, Beersheba and Jerusalem, Dublin and Durham, Fribourg, Rome and Madrid, Helsinki, Leiden and Leuven, and Washington, New York and Lexington.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-65\"><a href=\"#note-65\">65<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For most of the project\u2019s life the editorial committee was led by Adrian Schenker, a Dominican born in Zurich in 1939 and professor of Old Testament at Fribourg from 1982. The Society\u2019s table gives his presidency as 1998\u20132025, while its citation for the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.die-bibel.de\/ueber-uns\/canstein-medaille\">Canstein Medal<\/a> speaks of his leading the editorial committee \u201csince 1991\u201d and editing BHS \u201csince 1997\u201d. Schenker handed over the leadership in February 2026, and Martin R\u00f6sel of <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Rostock\">Rostock<\/a> is now listed as president.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-66\"><a href=\"#note-66\">66<\/a><\/sup> In June 2026 the Society awarded Schenker its Canstein Medal at its general assembly in <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Wiesbaden\">Wiesbaden<\/a>. Its general secretary, Christoph R\u00f6sel, praised 35 years of work carried out \u201cwith scholarly precision, great faithfulness and at the same time with complete matter-of-factness and modesty\u201d. Emanuel Tov, in his tribute, singled out Schenker\u2019s leading role in creating \u201ca central working tool for textual research, the Biblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-67\"><a href=\"#note-67\">67<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"how-to-read-a-page-of-bhq\">How to Read a Page of BHQ<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A reader opening a fascicle finds the Hebrew of the Leningrad Codex in the centre of the page, with chapter and verse numbers added and poetry set out line by line. The lineation follows the Masoretic accents and, where helpful, the syntax.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-68\"><a href=\"#note-68\">68<\/a><\/sup> Small Masoretic notes run down the side margins. Beneath the text come the longer notes of the Masorah magna, each headed by a verse reference supplied by the editors. At the foot is the apparatus.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-69\"><a href=\"#note-69\">69<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Weis stresses that this layout changes how the book should be used. The printed text is not offered as the best text. It is a fixed point against which the evidence is arranged. A reader who wants the editor\u2019s recommended text has to build it by combining the base text with the preferred readings marked in the apparatus. A reader who disagrees has the evidence and the editor\u2019s reasons on the same page. Earlier editions told their users what to read. BHQ asks them to weigh an argument.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-70\"><a href=\"#note-70\">70<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Not everyone finds the result easy. Baker would have liked translations of the versional readings and markers in the text pointing to the apparatus, and doubted that most of the intended readers would ever use a full printed Masorah.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-71\"><a href=\"#note-71\">71<\/a><\/sup> Tov, reviewing the first fascicle, judged that BHQ was \u201cmuch richer in data, more mature, judicious and cautious\u201d than its predecessors, but that the more complex notation made it less user-friendly.<sup class=\"fn-ref\" id=\"ref-72\"><a href=\"#note-72\">72<\/a><\/sup> Both points can be true. For the <a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Masoretes\">Masoretic scribes<\/a>, whose notes BHQ prints in full and translates, a text was always something to be read together with its apparatus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"notes\">Notes<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list post-notes\">\n\n<li id=\"note-1\">Latin title as given on the fascicles; see Viktor Golinets\u2019s review of fascicle 18 (2004), <em>Orientalistische Literaturzeitung<\/em> 2007, catalogued at edoc, University of Basel, doi:10.5451\/unibas-ep10864. <a href=\"#ref-1\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-2\">Emanuel Tov, <em>Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible<\/em>, 2nd rev. edn (Minneapolis: Fortress; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2001), p. 375, which dates the first edition to 1905; David L. Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible? Review of Biblia Hebraica Quinta, Hebrew University Bible, Oxford Hebrew Bible, and Other Modern Editions\u201d, <em>Tyndale Bulletin<\/em> 61.2 (2010), at pp. 209\u201310, which gives 1906. The dates differ because the work was issued over both years. <a href=\"#ref-2\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-3\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 210; Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 375. <a href=\"#ref-3\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-4\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 375. <a href=\"#ref-4\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-5\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 210; Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 375. <a href=\"#ref-5\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-6\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, pp. 375\u201376. <a href=\"#ref-6\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-7\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 375. <a href=\"#ref-7\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-8\">Richard D. Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta and the Making of Critical Editions of the Hebrew Bible\u201d, <em>TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism<\/em> 7 (2002), paras 22\u201323 and n. 12, online at <a href=\"http:\/\/rosetta.reltech.org\/TC\/vol07\/Weis2002.html\">rosetta.reltech.org<\/a>. <a href=\"#ref-8\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-9\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 215. Vowels added here for readability. <a href=\"#ref-9\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-10\"><em>Biblia Hebraica Quinta<\/em>, fasc. 18, <em>General Introduction and Megilloth<\/em> (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2004), p. VIII, as quoted in Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 211. <a href=\"#ref-10\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-11\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 4\u20135. <a href=\"#ref-11\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-12\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.die-bibel.de\/en\/bible-society-and-biblical-studies\/current-projects\/biblia-hebraica-quinta-bhq\">Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)<\/a>\u201d (project page, consulted 17 October 2026). <a href=\"#ref-12\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-13\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d. <a href=\"#ref-13\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-14\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 212, summarising the General Introduction. <a href=\"#ref-14\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-15\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 33\u201337. <a href=\"#ref-15\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-16\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, pp. 212\u201313, quoting the General Introduction, p. X. <a href=\"#ref-16\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-17\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 3; Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d. <a href=\"#ref-17\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-18\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 214. <a href=\"#ref-18\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-19\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 214; Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 3. <a href=\"#ref-19\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-20\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d. <a href=\"#ref-20\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-21\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d; Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 216. <a href=\"#ref-21\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-22\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 8. <a href=\"#ref-22\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-23\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 3. <a href=\"#ref-23\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-24\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 18; Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 215. <a href=\"#ref-24\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-25\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 31. <a href=\"#ref-25\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-26\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 21. <a href=\"#ref-26\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-27\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d. <a href=\"#ref-27\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-28\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 215. <a href=\"#ref-28\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-29\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 216; Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 16. <a href=\"#ref-29\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-30\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 216. <a href=\"#ref-30\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-31\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 11. <a href=\"#ref-31\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-32\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 15, 26\u201330, 32, citing the sample apparatus for Jeremiah 23:1\u20139. <a href=\"#ref-32\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-33\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 29\u201331. <a href=\"#ref-33\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-34\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 30, citing D. Barth\u00e9lemy, <em>Critique textuelle de l\u2019Ancien Testament<\/em>, vol. 1 (Fribourg and G\u00f6ttingen, 1982), pp. XVII\u2013XX. <a href=\"#ref-34\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-35\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 32. <a href=\"#ref-35\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-36\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 12\u201314, 41\u201342. On the renaming of the Oxford Hebrew Bible as <em>The Hebrew Bible: A Critical Edition<\/em> and its first volume (Michael V. Fox, <em>Proverbs<\/em>, 2015), see Society of Biblical Literature, \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sbl-site.org\/sbl-press\/browse-books\/the-hebrew-bible-a-critical-edition\/\">The Hebrew Bible: A Critical Edition<\/a>\u201d (series page, consulted 19 October 2026). <a href=\"#ref-36\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-37\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, pp. 214\u201315 and n. 9. <a href=\"#ref-37\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-38\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 214. <a href=\"#ref-38\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-39\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.die-bibel.de\/beitraege\/eine-herausragende-persoenlichkeit-deralttestamentlichen-wissenschaft\">\u2018Eine herausragende wissenschaftliche Pers\u00f6nlichkeit\u2019<\/a>\u201d, press release, 11 June 2026. <a href=\"#ref-39\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-40\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 1 and appendix (figs 3\u20134). <a href=\"#ref-40\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-41\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 19 and n. 9, citing BH3, p. 746. <a href=\"#ref-41\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-42\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 19 and n. 10, comparing BHS, 2nd edn (1983), p. 826. <a href=\"#ref-42\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-43\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 20, citing C. Rabin, S. Talmon and E. Tov, <em>The Book of Jeremiah<\/em> (Hebrew University Bible; Jerusalem: Magnes, 1997), pp. 117\u201319. <a href=\"#ref-43\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-44\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 8. <a href=\"#ref-44\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-45\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 16, 24. <a href=\"#ref-45\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-46\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 12, quoting Rabin, Talmon and Tov, <em>Jeremiah<\/em>, p. 118, and M. H. Goshen-Gottstein, <em>The Book of Isaiah: Sample Edition with Introduction<\/em> (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1965), p. 7. <a href=\"#ref-46\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-47\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 11, 35. <a href=\"#ref-47\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-48\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 35. <a href=\"#ref-48\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-49\">Compiled from Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, pp. 374\u201376; Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, pp. 209\u201324; Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 3, 12\u201316 and n. 3; Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d; Society of Biblical Literature, \u201cThe Hebrew Bible: A Critical Edition\u201d. <a href=\"#ref-49\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-50\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 38. <a href=\"#ref-50\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-51\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d; Gerald A. Klingbeil, review of BHQ fasc. 18, <em>Journal of Asia Adventist Seminary<\/em> 10.2 (2007), pp. 216\u201317. <a href=\"#ref-51\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-52\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, n. 5. <a href=\"#ref-52\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-53\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, p. 211. <a href=\"#ref-53\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-54\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d, table of fascicles and editors. <a href=\"#ref-54\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-55\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d; the Society\u2019s press release of 11 June 2026 also gives nine published volumes. <a href=\"#ref-55\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-56\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, pp. 216\u201317; Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d. <a href=\"#ref-56\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-57\">Accordance Bible Software, \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.accordancebible.com\/product\/biblia-hebraica-quinta-fascicle-13-the-twelve-minor-prophets\/\">Biblia Hebraica Quinta: Fascicle 13 (The Twelve Minor Prophets)<\/a>\u201d (product page listing the published fascicles by number, consulted 19 October 2026). <a href=\"#ref-57\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-58\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d. The DBG page and the publisher\u2019s descriptions name English, German and Spanish; Klingbeil\u2019s review gives a different set of languages. <a href=\"#ref-58\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-59\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 103. <a href=\"#ref-59\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-60\">Bibliographic record for <em>Biblia Hebraica Quinta<\/em> 13, <em>The Twelve Minor Prophets<\/em>, ed. Anthony Gelston (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2010), ISBN 978-3-438-05273-5, on <a href=\"https:\/\/books.google.com\/books\/about\/Biblia_Hebraica_Quinta_Bhq.html?id=U1FRzQEACAAJ\">Google Books<\/a>. <a href=\"#ref-60\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-61\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 104. <a href=\"#ref-61\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-62\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, pp. 33, 190 n. 47. <a href=\"#ref-62\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-63\">Tov, <em>Textual Criticism<\/em>, p. 145, citing E. Tov, <em>The Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Na\u1e25al \u1e24ever (8\u1e24evXIIgr)<\/em> (DJD VIII; Oxford, 1990). <a href=\"#ref-63\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-64\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, pp. 211\u201312. <a href=\"#ref-64\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-65\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d, table of fascicles and editors. <a href=\"#ref-65\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-66\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d, list of the editorial committee; Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, press release, 11 June 2026. <a href=\"#ref-66\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-67\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, press release, 11 June 2026 (quotations translated from the German); see also the Society\u2019s page on the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.die-bibel.de\/ueber-uns\/canstein-medaille\">Canstein Medal<\/a>. <a href=\"#ref-67\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-68\">Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ)\u201d; Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, para. 6. <a href=\"#ref-68\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-69\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 3, 6. <a href=\"#ref-69\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-70\">Weis, \u201cBiblia Hebraica Quinta\u201d, paras 14, 17, 42. <a href=\"#ref-70\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-71\">Baker, \u201cWhich Hebrew Bible?\u201d, pp. 214, 216. <a href=\"#ref-71\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n<li id=\"note-72\">Emanuel Tov, \u201cThe Biblia Hebraica Quinta: An Important Step Forward\u201d, <em>Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages<\/em> 31.1 (2005), quoted from the article\u2019s published summary. <a href=\"#ref-72\" aria-label=\"Back to text\">\u21a9<\/a><\/li>\n\n<\/ol>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Open almost any scholarly commentary on the Old Testament written in the last century and the Hebrew it discusses comes, directly or indirectly, from one family of books: the Biblia Hebraica published&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":502,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15,9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-501","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-books-reviews","category-text-transmission"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=501"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/501\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/502"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=501"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/masoretes.online\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}