Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Third Edition, Revised and Expanded

by Emanuel Tov (Translator)

Since its initial publication, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible has established itself as the indispensable authoritative textbook and reference on the subject. In this thoroughly revised third edition, Emanuel Tov has incorporated the insights of the last ten years of scholarship, including new perspectives on the biblical texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls, all of which have now been published. Here are expanded discussions of the contribution of textual criticism to biblical exegesis and of the role of scribes in the transmission of the text. The introduction and references throughout the book have been thoroughly revised with the beginning student of textual criticism in mind.

Genres: Biblical Studies, Religion, Old Testament, Theology, History, Nonfiction, Language

512 pages, Hardcover

First published August 1, 1993

Reviews

[Koen Crolla · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've previously lamented the fact that even though proto- and early philology did concern itself with the Bible (from Erasmus's Novum Instrumentum omne to Schleiermacher), there's no serious philology of the Hebrew Bible now and it's all just "exegesis" and theologian bullshit, with maybe some recent interesting input by a handful of dilettantes mostly coming from ANE studies. With this work Tov, one of those dilettantes known for his work on the Dead Sea scrolls, takes the first genuine steps towards what the rest of the world understands textual criticism to be.

Tov provides an overview of the texts available and the significant differences between, mainly, the Masoretic text 𝔐, the Hebrew Vorlage of the Septuagint 𝔖, and the Samaritan Pentateuch ⅏ (did you know Unicode has a codepoint just for the siglum of the Samaritan Pentateuch? I guess it's a faux-blackletter ש for שֹׁמְרוֹן), a transmission history that is still, to be fair, mostly evidence-free wishful thinking (𝔐 "probably" continues the Torah scroll of the Temple Court &c.), and an introduction to textual criticism that is pretty decent and accessible if kind of haphazard and inadvertently a serious condemnation of the current state of Biblical criticism.
Tov does do the "actually the special and unique character of my text actually means that a lot of the normal rules and principles of textual criticism like lectio difficilior don't actually apply and we should just use common sense instead" routine that almost every would-be textual critic who's only ever worked with a single text goes through, but as an attempt to drag the field kicking and screaming into the 21st (or actually late 19th) century it certainly serves.

And there's so much low-hanging fruit still! Tov includes a wealth of illustrative examples of really obvious emendations that can and should be made, but for the most part haven't been. It's all deeply embarrassing for anyone who's thought of himself as a "Bible expert" in the past couple hundred years, but at least it means there's a lot of fun work yet to be done.

This is not a gentle introduction to the textual history of the Hebrew Bible for a philologist who doesn't already have a decent background in it, and it's not a complete course in textual criticism for a Bible toucher who doesn't know a critical apparatus from a masorah magna. It is, however, a heartening effort well worth the time of anyone who's been frustrated by how little of value the staggeringly enormous amount of attention this text has received over the centuries has produced, and a treasure trove of trivia besides.

[Fred · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pedantic. It sits on my shelf next to Rejoice O Youth, which is a gas.

[Bob Hayton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reading "Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible" by Emanuel Tov was both a joy and a challenge. I thoroughly enjoyed immersing myself in the world of the Hebrew Bible. Ancient manuscripts, Dead Sea Scroll finds, ancient versions, textual variants — all of these things stir the Bible-geek in me. At the same time, the state of current scholarship with regard to the Old Testament text can be a bit troubling to an evangelical Christian. While the New Testament stands affirmed by numerous manuscript discoveries to the extent that almost all textual critics can agree on the vast majority of the minute details of the text, the same cannot be said for the Hebrew Old Testament.

Emanuel Tov takes readers of all scholastic levels by the hand as he surveys the field of Old Testament textual criticism. This third edition of his classic textbook, explains things for the novice and scholar alike. Careful footnotes and innumerable bibliographic entries will impress the scholar, while charts, graphs and numerous glossaries keep the would-be scholar feeling like he is getting somewhere. I have no problem admitting that I am one of the would-be scholars, with barely a year of Hebrew under my belt. Yet I was able to work my way through this book, becoming sharper in my Hebrew and awakening to the many facets of the intriguing study of OT textual criticism.

Tov has departed from a more traditional stance in his earlier versions, opting instead to follow the evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls and contemporary studies. He manages to keep away from a fatal skepticism, however, arguing that textual evaluation still has merit. The aim is still to recover the earliest possible text, but the recognition that there are often two or three competing literary editions of the text complicate the matter. An example would be the different editions of Jeremiah, with the Septuagint (LXX) Greek version differing drastically from the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT). 1 Samuel provides another example with a Dead Sea Scroll offering perhaps a third different competing literary edition. Tov points out the two very different versions of the story of David and Goliath and Hannah’s prayer as he expounds on the problem.

Rather than trying to solve each exegetical or specific textual problem, Tov aims to illustrate the challenges facing the would-be textual critic. He surveys the textual data, and reconstructs the history of the text – giving more attention to the accidents of history, such as the destruction of the Jewish state in A.D. 70, as weighing into the nature of the textual evidence we have. Rather than the Masoretic Text gradually gaining dominance, it was the de facto winner of the “text wars”. The LXX-style Hebrew texts (which the Dead Sea Scrolls and other finds have confirmed existed), were ignored by the Jews as Christianity had owned the LXX as its own. The Samaritans had their version of the Pentateuch, and the existence of a variety of other text forms, such as those found at Qumran (the DSS) were forgotten with the cessation of a normal state of existence for Jewish people. The Masoretic text found itself with little real competition and over the years came to be further refined and stable. I should clarify here, that this is not to downplay the Masoretic text, as it manifestly preserves very ancient readings, and Tov repeatedly affirms the remarkable tenacity of the MT. Instead, Tov is saying that the majority position the MT holds among the textual evidence and in the minds of the Jewish communities in the last 1800 years should not prejudice the scholar to consistently prefer MT readings. Tov in fact claims that text types, such as are commonly discussed in NT textual criticism, are largely irrelevant in dealing with the OT text. Internal considerations are key in textual evaluation. I will let Tov explain further:

"Therefore, it is the choice of the most contextually appropriate reading that is the main task of the textual critic…. This procedure is as subjective as can be. Common sense, rather than textual theories, is the main guide, although abstract rules are sometimes also helpful."(pg. 280)

Tov’s textbook goes into glorious detail concerning all the orthographic features that make up paleo-Hebraic script, and the square Hebrew script we are familiar with. His knowledge is encyclopedic, to say the least. The numerous images of manuscripts that are included in the back of the book are invaluable. His discussion on the orthographic details of the text should convince even the most diehard traditionalists, that the vowel points and many of the accents were later additions to the text, inserted by the Masoretes. Some still defend the inspiration of the vowel points, but Tov’s explanation of numerous textual variants that flow from both a lack of vowel points and from the originality of paleo-Hebraic script (and the long development of the language and gradual changes in the alphabet, and etc.) close the door against such stick-in-the-mud thinking.

Tov’s book details the pros and cons of different Hebrew texts, as well as discussing electronic resources and new developments in the study of textual criticism. His work is immensely valuable to anyone interested in learning about textual criticism, and of course is required for any textual scholars seeking to do work in this field.

Tov doesn’t add a theology to his textual manual, however. And this is what is needed to navigate OT textual criticism. After having read Tov, I’m interested in seeing some of the better evangelical treatments of the textual problems of the Hebrew Bible. I believe we have nothing to fear in facing textual problems head on. Seeing different literary editions of the text can fill out our understanding of the underlying theology of the Bible as we have it. Some of the work of John H. Sailhamer illustrates this judicious use of contemporary scholarship concerning the literary strata of the text.

Tov’s book is not law, and he sufficiently qualifies his judgments. He stresses that textual criticism, especially for the Old Testament, is inherently subjective. It is an art. And those who don’t recognize that, are especially prone to error in this field. This book equips the student to exercise this art in the best possible way. Tov walks the reader through evaluating competing textual variants, and his study will furnish the careful reader with all the tools to develop their own approach to the text. Tov’s findings won’t erode the foundations of orthodox theology. I contend that they will strengthen it. As with NT textual criticism, paying attention to the textual details has unlooked-for and happy consequences. It strengthens exegesis, and allows for a greater insight into the meaning of the text. And it can build one’s faith.

Bible-geeks, aspiring scholars, teachers and students alike will benefit from this book. Understanding the current state of OT textual criticism puts many of the NT textual debates into perspective. Christians don’t know their Old Testaments well enough, and studying the text to this level is rare indeed. I encourage you to consider adding this book to your shelf, and making it a priority to think through the challenges surrounding the text of the Hebrew Bible.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Fortress Press. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

[Nathaniel McVay · Rating 5 out of 5]

A resource of substantial importance. I can’t say I enjoyed it, but then again it wasn’t really written to be enjoyed. I value it, and it will forever be a first go-to when curious about a TC issue. Thank you Tov!

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Emanuel Tov – Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible

There are spoilers in this review. You have been warned.

Textual criticism in biblical studies is the scholarly practice of analyzing and comparing different manuscripts, versions, and translations of the Bible in order to reconstruct its original text as accurately as possible. This field is important because the biblical texts have been transmitted over centuries through handwritten copies, leading to variations and errors. By identifying and evaluating these variants, textual critics aim to establish a more accurate version of the original text, aiding in the interpretation, understanding, and translation of the Bible. This process helps ensure the fidelity of the message and historical context of the biblical texts, at least for some critics. I do not believe that it will ever be possible to get to the root of the urtext, as most of these biblical texts experienced many versions that were orally transmitted before they were ever put down on writing material.

Tov begins his book explaining what textual criticism is:

Textual criticism deals with the origin and nature of all forms of a text, in our case the biblical text. This involves a discussion of its putative original form(s) and an analysis of the various representatives of the changing biblical text… Scholars involved in textual criticism not only collect data on differences between the textual witnesses, but they also try to evaluate them. Textual criticism deals only with data deriving from the textual transmission—in other words, readings included in textual witnesses which have been created at an earlier stage, that of the literary growth of the biblical books, are not subjected to textual evaluation (p. 1).

The main versions of the Hebrew Bible (HB) that Tov analyzes are the Greek translation of the HB (The Septuagint, or LXX), the Masoretic Text (MT), the texts found in Qumran (The Dead Sea Scrolls, containing all the books of the HB except Esther), and the Samaritan Pentateuch. In the first chapter Tov explores ideas relating to textual transmission errors, the fact that MT does not reflect the original books of the HB, as well as the history of biblical criticism, going back to Origen’s Hexapla. (Origen produced his Hexapla Ἑξαπλᾶ, "sixfold", a critical edition of the Hebrew Bible with parallel translations in different versions, during the early 3rd century, specifically around 220-240 AD. The Hexapla was a significant scholarly work that aimed to provide a comprehensive comparison of various versions of the Old Testament scriptures, including the Hebrew text, Greek translations, and other Greek versions.)

Tov delves briefly into the differences between lower and higher criticism in the first chapter as well, but in my opinion, does not explain it well enough (see page 17). In biblical studies, lower criticism and higher criticism are two distinct approaches used to analyze and interpret the biblical texts. They focus on different aspects of the texts and serve different purposes:
1. Lower Criticism (Textual Criticism): Lower criticism, also known as textual criticism, is concerned with the analysis of the manuscript evidence and textual variants of the biblical texts. Scholars engaged in lower criticism work to establish the most accurate and original version of the biblical texts by comparing different manuscripts, versions, and textual witnesses. The goal is to reconstruct the original wording of the texts as closely as possible, given the variations that have occurred over time due to copying errors, additions, and omissions. This form of criticism forms the bulk of Tov’s analysis, hence the title of the book.
2. Higher Criticism (Historical Criticism): Higher criticism, also referred to as historical criticism, focuses on understanding the historical context, authorship, sources, and literary characteristics of the biblical texts. Scholars engaged in higher criticism examine issues such as the authorship of various books, the historical circumstances in which they were written, the cultural influences that shaped them, and the sources that may have been used in their composition. This approach aims to uncover the human elements behind the texts and explore questions related to their origin, development, and purpose. This form of criticism, to me, is much more interesting than analyzing the variances between the changes between the LXX and MT of Jeremiah, for example. I will say that I appreciate the differences in Isaiah between the LXX and the MT, and find some of them to be provocative. But still, to me, it is more interesting to think about the context that helped to create the world of the bible rather than examining the difference between a yod and a vav or a resh and a dalet in Hebrew texts like the DSS and MT.

In essence, while lower criticism is concerned with the accuracy of the textual transmission, while higher criticism delves into the broader and more interesting questions of the texts' origins, meanings, and contexts. Both approaches are essential for a comprehensive understanding of the Bible and its significance.

Chapter 2 deals with the textual witnesses of the HB, specifically the MT. Tov explains the value of the MT:
For many centuries (MT) has served as the most commonly used form of the Hebrew Bible, since it came to be accepted as authoritative by all Jewish communities from the second century CE onwards, at first in its consonantal form only, and after some centuries, in conjunction with its vocalization, accentuation, and the apparatus of Masoretic notes. Because of this acceptance, first of the proto-Masoretic text by a central stream in Judaism and later, of (the MT) by all sections of the Jewish people, MT is attested in a very large number of sources. More than six thousand manuscripts belonging to the group of MT are known; in addition, all printed editions of the Hebrew Bible are based on (the MT). (p. 23)
Tov assumes that the MT originated among those that worked in the temple, but also notes that “one can only conjecture on the origin” of the MT, as “there is no evidence which points clearly in any one direction” (p. 28). He discusses the fact that there were individuals who were assigned to correct any errors in copies of the MT, and proposes that there was “one single copy” that would reflect the majority of readings (p. 32). He notes that the Masoretes added vowel points to the consonantal framework which they did not allow themselves to alter (p. 43). Tov also notes that the MT developed from the 6th to the 10th century, with the Tiberian text being the best known (p. 76- as opposed to the Palestinian and the Babylonian texts). This chapter also deals briefly with the Aleppo Codex and the Leningrad text, as well as some discussion of the Medieval texts of the HB. One thing that I found interesting in this chapter is the discussion regarding the division of the HB into chapters (p. 52-53).

Later in the chapter, Tov gets into the Samaritan Pentateuch (p. 80), noting that it “reflects several features which are similar to those of many of the Qumran scrolls and, at a different level, to the Masorah of the Jewish Bible.” (p. 81)… “Because (The Sam. Pent.) was largely based on a textual tradition that was extant in ancient Israel, the descriptive name "Samaritan" is almost irrelevant. The content and typological characteristics of this text were already found in the pre-Samaritan texts found in Qumran, that is, in the ancient nonsectarian texts upon one of which it (the Sam. Pent.) was based. Tov notes that this text focused on the central nature of the shrine at Mount Gerizim instead of Jerusalem (p. 82), and that the Samaritans refer to themselves as the OG Israel.

Tov explains:
According to Samaritan tradition, their community originated at the beginning of the Israelite nation, and in their view they preserve the authentic Israelite tradition. The Samaritans believe that the Jews, rather than they, separated from the central stream of Judaism at the time of the priest Eli in the eleventh century BCE. (p. 82)

After his discussion of the Samaritan text, Tov gets into the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Essene movement, citing that around 900 texts (some created as early as 250 BCE) were discovered there (p. 102), and that some of these texts were produced there at Qumran by the community, but that other texts were produced outside of Qumran and brought into the possession of the Essenes.

Because of this, Tov explains that “the texts found in Qumran thus reflect the textual situation of the Bible not only in Qumran, but also elsewhere in ancient Israel” (p. 103). Because of the differences in many of the DSS texts, even among those produced by the Essene community, Tov posits that the people of Qumran did not hold to any specialness of one particular text, rather, the DSS community “did not pay any special attention” (p. 117) to the types of differences among the texts, and in my opinion, showing that the plurality of different biblical texts was something that these people appreciated, something that I as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can appreciate. I acknowledge the way all texts to all people at one time or another create a sense of the sacred and I appreciate the diversity of these ideas and translations.

Tov discusses the Septuagint in detail. Tov explains:
The (LXX) is important as a source for early exegesis, and this translation also forms the basis for many elements in the NT. (It) is known in various languages as the translation of the seventy (two elders). Its traditional name reflects the tradition that seventy two elders translated the Torah into Greek (see especially the Epistle of Aristeas, an apocryphal composition describing the origin of (the LXX). In the first centuries CE this tradition was expanded to include all of the translated biblical books, and finally it encompassed all of the Jewish-Greek Scriptures, including compositions originally written in Greek (p. 135).

The LXX is important to biblical studies because it “reflects a greater variety of important variants than all other translations put together” (p. 142) and it was also used by the early Christians, since their language generally was Greek, and our earliest NT manuscripts are in Greek.
Tov discusses Jerome’s translation of the HB into Latin, commonly called the Vulgate (p. 153), which reflects Jerome’s approach to the text. There was not really much discussion here regarding Jerome.

In chapter 3, “The History of the Biblical Text,” Tov explains how hard it would be to produce an UR-text, or “original” text of the HB:

Those who adhere to an assumption of one original text will try to reconstruct it, partially or fully, from these differences (in the earliest textual witnesses), while those who reject this view rarely resort to reconstructions, sometimes renouncing them altogether. In spite of the importance attached to this issue, the question of the original text of the biblical books cannot be resolved unequivocally, since there is no solid evidence to help us to decide in either direction. Yet each generation has to clarify the issues involved, especially now, in view of the evidence revealed in the Judean Desert (the DSS). (p. 166)

I don’t see any UR-text ever coming to light, as there just seems to be too much evidence that these things were first orally transmitted, after which several versions probably popped up, and through use, time, and tradition, different textual strains rose to the forefront, one of them being the LXX and another the MT. Tov notes the complexity of the issue:

Most of the biblical books were not written by one person nor at one particular time, but rather contain compositional layers written during many generations. This especially applies to the books that underwent literary processes such as the deuteronomistic revisions (that is, revisions made in accordance with the book of Deuteronomy) in the historical books from Joshua to Kings and in Jeremiah (p. 169)… the assumption of a single original text cannot easily be proven or refuted, and its correctness depends primarily on its probability. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the known textual evidence points in the direction of one original text, since most of the known textual variation, in major as well as minor details, should be viewed as genetic, supporting the assumption of textual development in one direction only, that is, linear development. In other words, there is apparently very little evidence which points exclusively to the existence of ancient parallel texts (p. 172).

I realize that this last point goes against my theory that there were multiple texts, however, we cannot possibly avoid the orality of said texts, and I believe an argument can be made for multiple oral versions of many of the stories in the HB. Tov then goes on in the next few pages to state this and other arguments that go against the “one original text” theory.

Tov spends some time explaining how he believes that there were three recensions or families of biblical texts that developed over time – one in Palestine, on in Egypt and one in Babylon. He sees these families of texts developing during the 5th to the 3rd centuries BCE (p. 186). Despite his belief that these developed separately over time, he sees all three family groups of the HB reflected in the collection of the Qumran group in the DSS, stating that “this fact actually contradicts the logic of the theory local families” (p. 187). And so it goes. One group of evidence leads scholars to make judgments, only to have later or other evidence force a rethinking of what we thought we knew.
Asking how the MT became the major player among HB texts, Tov asserts this is simply because it survived:

There probably was no stabilization (this term is mentioned frequently in the professional literature) or standardization bringing about what is often called the "victory of the proto-Masoretic family." The situation was probably an outcome of political and socio-religious factors (thus in particular Albrektson). It is not that (the MT) triumphed over the other texts, but rather, that those who fostered it probably constituted the only organized group which survived the destruction of the Second Temple (p. 195).

The fourth chapter focused on the process of the textual copying in of the HB. A great quote in this chapter that sums it all up reads, “The premise of the textual critic’s work is that whenever a text is transmitted, variation occurs. This is because human beings are careless, fallible, and occasionally perverse” (p. 232, E.J. Kennedy, “History, Textual Criticism,” EncBrit, Macropedia, Vol. 20, 1985, p. 676).

This chapter discusses the various ways copyists made errors: haplography (the omission of one or two adjacent letter), homoioteleuton (this refers to a copying error where a scribe accidentally skips or repeats a section of text due to similar endings or sounds. This can lead to the loss or duplication of content, impacting the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript), homoioarcton (when the same thing happens, only at the beginning of the section), dittography (refers to a copying error where a scribe unintentionally repeats a word, phrase, or sequence of characters in a manuscript), deliberate changes, accidental changes, ligatures (p. 249) (typographic elements where two or more characters are combined into a single glyph, often for aesthetic or space-saving purposes. In this case, a nun and a vav could accidentally combine into a mem, for instance.). The list of ways scribes could change the text in front of them goes on. This is part of the human process of working with texts, even the Bible, which many claim to be infallible. Just being exposed to these ideas can help those with this view see the Bible in a different light, as a human document, even though for many it is considered inspired.

Probably my favorite part of this chapter was when Tov took the scribes to task for removing the polytheistic texts in the HB. My favorite is Deuteronomy 32, and I have written a short bit on this here: https://www.ldsscriptureteachings.org...

He defines what it is textual critics are after in this chapter:
“The aim of the "textual critic" may then be defined as the restoration of the text, as far as possible, to its original form, if by "original form" we understand the form intended by its author” (p. 288).

At the same time, Tov acknowledges the difficulty, and throws his hat in the corner of the proponents of the oral tradition (of which I find myself in agreement):

Adherents of the oral tradition school are necessarily compelled to work with a broader definition of the goals of textual criticism. According to their view the books of the Hebrew Bible never existed in one original written form, but only in several parallel oral formulations (p. 288).
Explaining what text critics do, Tov writes:

The study of the biblical text involves an investigation of its development, its copying and transmission, and of the processes which created readings and texts over the centuries. In the course of this procedure, textual critics collect from Hebrew and translated texts all the details in which these texts differ one from another. Some of these differences were created in the course of the textual transmission, while others derive from an earlier stage, that of the literary growth. Scholars try to isolate and evaluate the readings which were created during the textual transmission by comparing them with other textual data, especially (the MT) (p. 289-290).

I have lots more to write, but Goodreads is limiting what I can say. Suffice it to say that Tov details out his ideas well, he (IMO) is not overly dogmatic, and works to show multiple sides of the issues in textual criticism. The book was mostly easy enough to follow, and Tov kept things moving.

[Guillaume Bourin · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the most authoritative volume in the field, Tov's contribution is a must read for any graduate/advanced OT student as well as (very) serious readers of the Old Testament. “Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible” is technical -although not as much as some would have expected- and assumes that the reader already has some knowledge of the field. Nevertheless, it remains fairly accessible.
Tov follows the mainstream view by affirming a preference for the Massoretic text and the existence of a series of determinative original texts rather than multiple pristine original documents. Consequently, he concludes that Biblical books are the result of several literary growth stage, and that exegetes have to combine textual and literary criticism to accomplish their task.

[Greg · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a fabulous book. I wish I had read it as an undergraduate, however it was published 11 years after I graduated. It is an excellent book covering all aspects of textual criticism - that is the lowest level of criticism - of the Hebrew Bible. It deals with the issue of the selection of the appropriate reading from multiple versions (i.e., prefer the reconstructed Hebrew from the Greek Septuagint or a particular manuscript from the Dead Sea Scrolls, the reconstructed text of another translation like the Targums, Latin Vulgate, etc.).

Anyone who is a believer should read this book to understand that the Bible cannot be infallible, because there are variations among versions, and that none can possibly date back to the time of Moses, nor can they be reconstructed to reflect the "original". That said, it appears that the various versions we have now of the books of the Old Testament do originate in a common ancestor. Recovering that ancestor, is not really possible, barring some miraculous discovery in the Judean Desert in the future. The reason, is that biblical texts were primarily written on skin or papyrus and the documents do not normally survive the moist environment in Israel (as compared to the climatic conditions in Egypt).

I recommend this book for anyone studying upper division Hebrew Bible, taking graduate level courses in Hebrew Bible, or planning on working with the Hebrew text in a detailed way.

[David Smiley · Rating 5 out of 5]

The backbone of my senior thesis in undergrad.

[Christopher G. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Emmanuel Tov stresses throughout his book that the Bible is not derived from one complete manuscript. All of the textual witnesses including the Masoretic Text, Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch, Qumran Scrolls, and Vulgate provide valuable contextual information for producing the most clear understanding of the Old Testament. The Masoretic Text is most widely accepted as the standard by which the other texts are compared. This is not because the Masoretic Text is more accurate or complete but simply because it was the text that both survived the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. and was widely embraced by the New Testament Jews as authoritative.
Tov not only presents a thorough and clear process for undertaking textual criticism but provides many examples to follow his approach. His examples also reinforce his reoccurring theme that all textual witnesses should have equal weight and consideration. He also provides substantial background information on the various textual sources to better understand their place in the development of scripture and how best to utilize them. The only drawback is that the Hebrew used in this text has no vowel pointing. Although it wouldn’t be expected in the ancient Hebrew texts that are referenced, it would make following the examples easier.
Other resources on textual criticism are not as detailed or comprehensive, so this book will serve as a guide for textual criticism for comparative work between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint. It will also be useful in understanding the many different textual witnesses, especially the Codexes. The many example in this book will be useful in defending the necessity of considering multiple texts beyond the Masoretic Text.

[Parker · Rating 3 out of 5]

The good:
• Tov's expertise in this subject is not subject to doubt. This book is highly informative.
• There are lots of helpful examples of phenomena discussed.
• Tov has the intellectual humility to emphasize the high degree of subjectivity involved in text criticism.
• There are sizable bibliographies for every section, so it's easy to find further reading on very specific topics.

The bad:
• Tov is certainly beholden to the theory that the OT text was in a largely fluid state before the first century, AD. I would like to see a similar book on this subject written from a perspective more like Peter Gentry's.
• I would have organized the information differently. There are certain points where the presentation is redundant, and sometimes information on a single subject is spread between several different sections. I recognize this is difficult to do for a topic so large, though.

The ugly:
• The layout of this book is just atrocious. Without clear justification, the text switches back and forth between two font sizes. Citations occur primarily within the text, preceded by an arrow. The lack of parentheses on these citations means it's often difficult to tell where they end and the body of the text resumes. It would have been much better to move citations down into the footnotes. This book is already a tough read due to its technical nature; these additional issues make reading far more difficult than necessary.

[Felicity Chen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Review for myself to remember the basics:
•Compares a lot between different ancient translations
•discusses how to tell if a variant is strong or not, but also says you can’t really follow rules because it’s an art.
•lots of examples (especially in chapter 7).
Pretty streamlined which I enjoyed! Randomly inserts quotes in other languages haha.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A wealth of information, but the format and presentation style leaves much to be desired in my mind.

[Jared Saltz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A must-read for students of the Tanakh/Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. The data provided is astounding and the newest version is incredibly up-to-date. Truly, anyone attempting to comment on the text should check here first--after all, if you don't know what the text says, there's no way you'll accurately represent it. Those who teach/preach from the last half of Mark 16 should take heed.

The only thing holding this book back from a solid 5 star rating is its horrible layout. While I understand the difficulty in publishing this material that spans multiple languages and non-standard fonts, the layout is just ridiculous. There's no way you should have 4 different font sizes on a single page. Instead of helping, the publish format makes the content more difficult to understand. That should be fixed.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic book both for its being approachable and for the immense scope it manages to cover. Each section of each chapter has an extensive bibliography of major secondary works on that particular topic, enabling further research. The tone is even-handed and cautious, without being afraid to advocate for a position once the field has been laid out. That means that, in addition to being a tremendous introduction to the field (e.g. this works as a textbook), this is also a great work of scholarship. If you have (for any reason) an interest in the diverse manuscript tradition of the Hebrew Bible and how to navigate it, this is the text to purchase.

[Matt Quintana · Rating 5 out of 5]

The standard guide and reference in the field of Hebrew Bible textual criticism. Tov writes with authority and expertise, and this seminal work leaves no stone unturned. The most recent edition of his monumental work is even more informed by advances in the field of textual criticism, especially related to the discoveries in the Judaean Desert. While definitely not the most exciting reading (i.e., don't try and read it while laying in bed), Tov's work is essential for students and scholars alike.

[Kirk Lowery · Rating 5 out of 5]

The standard reference on the subject.

[Anatolikon]

christianity

[Robert Coleman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must read for anyone interested in this field.