up in the Temple.’^715 Likewise, sections of the Talmudic literature point to official scrolls
that were kept in the Temple, the integrity of which was ensured by scribes in the employ
of the Temple itself.^716 This authoritative version was accepted as the most correct text,
even though its exemplars were apparently not absolutely uniform throughout. The Tal-
mudic literature makes reference to at least one occasion when even these model texts
attested variant readings that had to be decided between by the Temple authorities.^717 It
715
See, for example, J.W. 7.161-162, Ant. 3.38 and Ant. 5.61. For a discussion on these references, see M.
Greenberg, "The Stabilization of the Text of the Hebrew Bible, Reviewed in the Light of the Biblical Mate-
rials from the Judean Desert," JAOS 76, 3 (1956). As to the integrity of the biblical text itself at the turn of
the Common Era, see the often cited remarks in Ag. Ap. 1.42. It is worth mentioning, though, that
Josephus’s allusions to the letter-perfect integrity of the biblical text should in all likelihood be seen as a
reference to a faithfulness to the text that he is paraphrasing in the late first century CE, and not as an indi-
cation that the scriptural texts of the last centuries B.C.E. were absolutely fixed. On this last point see S.
Leiman, "Josephus and the Canon of the Bible," Josephus, the Bible, and History (eds L.H. Feldman and G.
Hata; Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989) 52. For an alternative position, see M. Segal, "The
Promulgation of the Authoritative Text of the Hebrew Bible," JBL 72, 1 (1953) 38, who states that “these
words refer to the Hebrew text of the biblical books, and they prove beyond a doubt that in the days of
Josephus the Hebrew text had been consecrated by the veneration of generations, and was regarded as fixed
unalterably.” 716 Cf. I. Young, "The Stabilization of the Biblical Text," 386.
For example, Bab. Ketuboth 106a makes reference to scribes in Jerusalem, paid from the Temple treas-
ury, who corrected biblical scrolls. There is also reference made in Bab. Qiddushin 30a to particular letters
that mark halfway points in various biblical scrolls. For discussions on each of these points see M. Segal,
"The Promulgation of the Authoritative Text," 38. It is clear that using given letters and words to demarcate
specific points in the text demands the utmost exactitude in copying practices, even though the age of such
a tradition cannot be absolutely ascertained from the Talmudic sources. On this last matter, see E. Tov,
"The Biblical Text in Ancient Synagogues in Light of Judean Desert Finds," Meghillot 1 (2003) 195 [He-
brew]. See also S. Safrai, "The Temple," The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography,
Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions (eds S. Safrai and M. Stern; Assen:
Van Gorcum, 1976) 905, esp. n. 5, for further references in the ancient literature supporting the view that
activities relating to the copying and correction of scriptural texts were undertaken in the Temple. 717
References to three ‘Scrolls of the Law’ found in the Temple Court occur four times in the Tannaitic
literature (Sifre II, 356; P.T. Ta’anith IV, 2.68a; Aboth d’Rabbi Nathan, Version B, ch. 46; and Sopherim
vi, 4). For the issues surrounding the interpretation of the literature see, for example, J.Z. Lauterbach, "The
Three Books Found in the Temple at Jerusalem," JQR 8 (1917), S. Talmon, "The Three Scrolls of the Law
That Were Found in the Temple Court," Textus 2 (1962) and S. Zeitlin, "Were There Three Torah-Scrolls
in the Azarah?," JQR 56 (1966). See also M. Greenberg, "The Stabilization of the Text of the Hebrew Bi-
ble," 160-161.