B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

I thought I would be everyone out of their misery:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleppo_Co ... anuscripts.

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2024 5:53 am

kwrandolph wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:56 pm

Jason Hare wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2024 9:52 pm
Where does Mechon Mamre state that their site presents the text of the Aleppo Codex specifically? Where do they take their copy of the Torah and other missing sections from?

My understanding is that all sites that provide a digital (not scanned) copy of the Aleppo Codex get the missing parts from Leningradensis.

Karl W. Randolph.

That makes sense, but where does Mechon Mamre say that their base text is Aleppo?

Unless I misread this page, when it says לפי הכתר that refers to the Aleppo text.

Karl W. Randolph.

kwrandolph wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2024 10:21 pm Unless I misread this page, when it says לפי הכתר that refers to the Aleppo text.

There have been several manuscripts that have been designated כתר. The Aleppo Codex is specifically כתר ארם צובא. Chris has linked at least to a Wikipedia statement that it was based on Aleppo.

Regarding the use of meteg (aka gaʿya) to distinguish meaning, for those who are interested, this is briefly covered in section 330 of Yeivin's Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah. My not-too-faithful version of it can be seen here. A very faithful version of it is as follows:

Regarding close-to-Aleppo editions of Tanakh, please be aware of editions of MAM such as the following three:

• MAM at Hebrew Wikisource (lacks per-verse documentation but has many other niceties such as layout)
• MAM with documentation (has per-verse documentation but lacks many other niceties such as layout)
• Phonetic MAM

Also, MAM is Sefaria's default Tanakh. But be aware that although we do occasionally sync Sefaria's edition of MAM with the latest work on MAM, that is only done occasionally.

MAM was (with permission) based in large part on the Mechon Mamre text. But MAM has far surpassed that text in features and quality. And, MAM continues to improve, whereas, AFAIK, the Mechon Mamre text is frozen.

In other words, I mean no offense to the great work that went into the Mechon Mamre text, but at this point I see no reason anyone should use it in favor of MAM. If there is some reason, please let me know, and perhaps I can do something to improve MAM in a way that eliminates that barrier to use.

bdenckla wrote: ↑Fri Sep 27, 2024 1:48 pm Regarding the use of meteg (aka gaʿya) to distinguish meaning, for those who are interested, this is briefly covered in section 330 of Yeivin's Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah. My not-too-faithful version of it can be seen here. A very faithful version of it is as follows:

Thank you Bdenckla for this helpful clarification.

Chris watts