ted for the corresponding
portion in the text technically named C'thib (_written_), and was
regarded by the Massoretes themselves as the true reading. The _Massora
magna_ contained the above, and other matter deemed to be of importance
in reference to the interpretation of the text.

The Revisers inform us that they have generally, though not uniformly,
rendered the C'thib in the text, and left the K'ri in the margin, with
the introductory note, "Or, according to another reading," or, "Another
reading is." When they adopted the K'ri in the text of their rendering,
they placed the C'thib in the margin if it represented a variation of
importance.

These things, and others specified in the preface, should be carefully
attended to by the reader as enabling him to distinguish between the
different characters of the alternative renderings as specified in the
margin. Those due to the Massoretes, or, in other words, the K'ris, will
naturally deserve attention from their antiquity. They are not, however,
when estimated with reference to the whole of the sacred volume, very
numerous. In the earliest printed bible they were 1,171 in number, but
this is generally considered erroneous in excess, 900 being probably much
nearer the true estimate.

We cannot leave the subject of the Hebrew text without some reference to
the emendation of it suggested by the Ancient Versions. But little, I
believe, of a systematic character has, as yet, been accomplished. The
Revisers mention that they have been obliged, in some few cases of
extreme difficulty, to depart from the Massoretic text and adopt a
reading from the Ancient Versions. I regret to observe that it is stated
by one of those connected with the forthcoming American revision of the
Old Testament version that in nearly one hundred cases the marginal
references to the Ancient Versions will be omitted. Reasons are given,
but these could hardly have escaped the knowledge and observation of the
learned men by whom the references were inserted. The Revisers also
mention that where the Versions appeared to supply a very probable,
though not so absolutely necessary, correction as displacement of the
Massoretic text, they have still felt it proper to place the reading in
the margin.

This recognition of the critical importance of the Ancient Versions by
the Revisers, though obviously in only a limited number of cases, seems
to indicate the great good that may be expected from a mo