The Targums: A Critical Introduction

10. Targum Jonathan of the Prophets

169 The books of the Prophets—both Former and Latter—are extant in Aramaic in a single collection known as Targum Jonathan. The date and character of each Targum within the collection needs to be assessed individually . As we will see in this chapter and the next, analysis identifies definite patterns that associate some of these Targumim with definable periods and schools of thought. Although Targum Jonathan is not the work of a single translator, neither is it simply a random anthology of unrelated works. Because the Targumim were composed during the rabbinic period and in conversation with the interpretations found in rabbinic documents, it is natural to suppose that rabbinic tradition might be a reliable guide in investigating the history of targumic development. But when the Babylonian Talmud addresses the rabbinic relationship to the Targums, it does so in a way that is manifestly ahistorical. At Megillah 3a, the Bavli ascribes the entire corpus of Targum Jonathan to Jonathan ben Uzziel, a disciple of Hillel, who was a famous contemporary of Jesus. There are compelling reasons not to accept that attribution at face value, because rabbinic texts tend to identify people as rabbis for ideological reasons. Naming an authority for an opinion might give it weight, or it might suggest that it was a purely individual judgment which should be superseded by others. The principal point of an attribution was that an opinion should be considered, not that it should be accepted; issues of historical accuracy and careful chronology were not in play.1 In this light, the passage in b. Meg. 3a intimates both that Jonathan rendered the Targum for noble reasons and that he exceeded his authority by what he said. The actions attributed to him evoke a sense of the 10 Targum Jonathan of the Prophets Its Development as Revealed by the Targum of Isaiah 1 For a lucid discussion, see Neusner, “Evaluating the Attributions of Sayings.” 170 — The Targums: A Critical Introduction controversy surrounding the formal production of a Targum of the Prophets: A. Rabbi Jeremiah—or some say Rabbi Hiyya b. Abba—also said: B. The Targum of the Pentateuch was composed by Onqelos the Proselyte under the guidance of Rabbi Eleazar and Rabbi Joshua. C. The Targum of the Prophets was composed by Jonathan ben Uzziel under the guidance of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, D. and the land of Israel quaked over an area of four hundred parasangs,2 and a bat qol came forth and cried: Who is this that has revealed my secrets to men? E. Jonathan ben Uzziel arose and said, I have revealed your secrets to mankind. But it is known to you that I have not done this for my own honor or the honor of my father’s house, but for your honor—that divisions might not increase in Israel. F. He also sought to reveal the Writings by a Targum, but a bat qol came forth and said: Enough! For this reason—that the end of the Messiah is told in it.3 Line A intimates that the memory even of the person who attributed the Targum Jonathan was uncertain. Whether it was Jeremiah or Hiyya, the fact remains that it was only in the fourth century CE that it was “remembered” that Jonathan had composed the Targum in the first century. But anachronism is something this haggadah concerning Jonathan delights in. The biblical prophets named cannot have been actual contemporaries of Jonathan, who lived centuries after the prophets named. Indeed, because Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi are taken within rabbinic discussion to have been active near the time of the restoration of the temple (around 515 BCE), the chronology of the statement is as outlandish in moving backward to those prophets as it is in moving forward to the time of Rabbis Jeremiah and Hiyya. 2 It has been suggested on the basis of a traditional calculation that the area was the total size of the land of Israel; see Zlotowitz and Goldwurm, Tractate Megillah. The editors cite Rashi’s comment on Num 13:25 by way of precedent. But Herodotus gives the length of the Persian royal road from Sardis to Susa as 450 parasangs (see Histories 5.52–53), which would make the area described here larger than most estimates of territorial Israel. In any case, a parasang came to nearly 6 km; see Astour, “Overland Trade Routes in Ancient Western Asia,” 1417–20. 3 Our translation. [18.117.183.150] Project MUSE (2024...