AN INTRODUCTION TO

THE OLD TESTAMENT

IN

GREEK

EonDon

:

C

J.

CLAY and SONS,

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE.
©lasgoto:
50,

WELLINGTON STREET.

ieipMS:
ip-eto

F. A.

BROCKHAUS.

gorfe

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. Bombag: E. SEYMOUR HALE.
:

AN INTRODUCTION TO

THE OLD TESTAMENT
IN

GREEK

BY

HENRY BARCLAY SWETE

D.D.

HON. LITT.D. DUBLIN FELLOW OF GONVILLE AND CAIUS COLLEGE REGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY

WITH AN APPENDIX CONTAINING THE LETTER OF ARISTEAS EDITED BY
H. St
J.

THACKERAY

M.A.

CAMBRIDGE
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1900
All
rights reserved

eierepoo

coy,

,
(5S

.

EBERHARDO NESTLE
Ph.

et Th.D.

VIRO,

SI

OVIS ALIVS,

DE HIS STVDIIS

OPTIME MERITO
HVIVS OPERIS ADIVTORI HVMANISSIMO

THIS
and
in
its

book

is

an endeavour to supply a want which

has been

felt

by many readers of the Greek Old
is

Testament.

The

literature of the subject

enormous,

chief points have been compendiously treated

and similar publications. But no manual has placed within the student's reach all the information which he requires in the way of general introduction to the Greek versions.
Biblical Dictionaries

hitherto

first attempt is necessarily beset with uncertainExperience only can shew whether the help here provided is precisely such as the student needs, and whether the right proportion has been preserved in

A

ties.

dealing with

the successive

divisions

of the

subject.

hoped that the present work may at least meet the immediate wants of those who use The Old Testament in Greek, and serve as a forerunner to larger and more adequate treatises upon the same subject. Such as it is, this volume owes more than I can say
But
it is

to the kindness of friends,

among whom may

especially

be mentioned Principal Bebb, of St David's College, Lampeter, and Grinfield Lecturer at Oxford; Mr Brooke

and

Mr McLean, editors of the Larger Cambridge Mr Forbes Robinson, and Dr W. E. Barnes. But my acknowledgements are principally due to ProSeptuagint
;

fessor

Eberhard Nestle, of Maulbronn, who has added

VIU
to the obligations

under which he had previously
additions.

laid

me by
Dr
to

reading the whole of this Introduction in proof,

and suggesting many corrections and
Nestle
in
is

While
final

not to be held responsible for the

which the book appears, the reader will owe measure such freedom from error in great or fulness in the minuter details as it may possess. Mr Thackeray's work in the Appendix speaks for itself. Both the prolegomena to Aristeas and the text of the letter are wholly due to his generous labours, and they will form a welcome gift to students of the Septuagint and of Hellenistic Greek. Free use has been made of all published works
form

him

dealing with the various branches of learning \vhich
within the range of the subject.

fall

While

direct quotations

have been acknowledged where they occur, it has not been thought desirable to load the margin with references to all the sources from which information has
been obtained.
is

But the student

will generally

be able

to discover these for himself from the bibliography which

appended

to almost every chapter.

In dismissing

my

work

I

desire to tender

my

sincere

thanks to the readers and workmen of the Cambridge University Press, whose unremitting attention has brought the production of the book to a successful
end.

H.
Cambridge,
Sepiember
i,

B. S.

1900.

CONTENTS.
PART
I.

THE HISTORY OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT AND OF ITS TRANSMISSION,
PAGES

CHAPTER
The Alexandrian Greek Version

I.

i

— 28

CHAPTER
Later Greek Versions

11.

29

— 58

CHAPTER
The Hexapla, and
of the Septuagint

III.

the Hexaplaric and other Recensions 59

— 86

CHAPTER

IV.
.

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint

.

87

— 121
— 170 — 194

CHAPTER
Manuscripts of the Septuagint

V.
122

CHAPTER
Printed Texts of the Septuagint

VI.

....

171

Contents.

PART

II.

THE CONTENTS OF THE ALEXANDRIAN OLD
TESTAMENT.
PAGES

CHAPTER
Titles,

I.

Grouping, Number, and Order of the Books

.

197

— 230 — 264

CHAPTER
Books of the Hebrew Canon

.
231
III.
.
.

CHAPTER
Books not included
in the

Hebrew Canon
IV.

265

— 288 — 314
— 341 — 366

CHAPTER
The Greek
of the Septuagint

289
V.
315 VI.

CHAPTER
The Septuagint
as a Version

CHAPTER
Text divisions
:

Sfichi, Chapters, Lections, Catenae, &c.

342

PART
LITERARY
USE, VALUE,

III.

AND TEXTUAL CONDITION OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT.
CHAPTER
I.

Literary use of the Septuagint by non-Christian Hellenists

369

— 380

CHAPTER
Quotations from the Septuagint
in the

II.

New

Testament

381

— 405

Contents.

xi

CHAPTER
Quotations
writings

III.

PAGES

from the Septuagint

in

early

Christian

406

—432

CHAPTER
The Greek Versions as aids

IV.

to Biblical

Study

.

.

433

—461 — 477

CHAPTER

V.
.

Influence of the Septuagint on Christian Literature

462

CHAPTER
Textual condition
arising out of

VI.

of the
it

Septuagint, and problems

478

—497

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.

APPENDIX.

The Letter of Pseudo-Aristeas.
Introduction
501

— 518

Text

519—574

INDICES.
i.

Index of Biblical references

577
585

ii.

Index of Subject-matter

— 584 — 592

PART
AND OF

I.

THE HISTORY OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT
ITS TRANSMISSION.

;

PART
CHAPTER

I.

I.

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
I.

A

Greek version of any portion of the Old Testament
So long
as the

presupposes intercourse between Israel and a Greek-speaking
people.

Hebrew
As
far as

race maintained

its

isolation,

no occasion arose

for the translation of the

Hebrew

Scriptures

into a foreign tongue.

regards the countries west of

Palestine, this isolation continued until the age of Alexander'
it is

therefore improbable that any

Greek version of the

Scrip-

tures existed there before that era.

Among

the Alexandrian

Jews of the second century before Christ there was a vague belief that Plato and other Greek philosophical writers were
indebted for some Thus Aristobulus
ev.
xiii.

of their teaching to a source of this kind".
{ap.
:

Clem.

Al. stro7n.

i.

22; cf Eus. praep.
6
rrj

12) Avrites

,
u

Individual cases, such as that of the Jew mentioned by Clearchus ry ttj c. Ap. I, 22), Avho was How numerous and prosperous are exceptions to a general rule. were the Jewish colonies in Asia Minor at a later period appears from the Acts of the Apostles; see also Ramsay, Phrygia I. ii. p. 667 ff. - This belief vas inherited by the Christian school of Alexandria see Clem. Strom, v. 29, Orig, c. Cels. iv. 39, vi. 19; and cf. Lact. inst. iv. 2.
^

{ap. Jos.

05

}

^

;

S.

S.

I

iv

avT-fj

^, /.
A

i^

'
story

The Alexandrian Greek

Version.

€< ^^ ^, '. \ /

to

imply the existence before

included at least
Joshua.

buted by Pseudo-Aristeas to Demetrius of Phalerum

' ,.,
the

translations

^
arose
earliest

^ ^ ^— words
B.C.

7€/3€/€

which seem

400 of a translation which the Books of Exodus, Deuteronomy, and

similar claim has

been found

But
a

fragments
it is

,
.
it

in the statement attri:

of

these

early

have been produced, and
out of

that

desire

more than probable on the part of the

Hellenistic Jews to find a

Hebrew

origin for the best products

of Greek thought I
2.

The

versions of the

Dispersion'

{

and most important of the extant Greek Old Testament was an offspring of. the 'Greek Jo. 35)j which began
that

with the conquests of Alexander the Great.

,
xv.
(cf.

The Hebrew Prophets foresaw
of their race to
(Deut.
xxviii.

was the destiny

be scattered over the face of the world
4,

25, xxx. 4, Jer.

xxxiv.

17).

The word
Ps.
v.

(O.L. dispersio) employed by the Greek translators in
these

and

similar passages

2

Esdr.

xi.

9,

cxxxviii.
19, Isa.
i.

(cxxxix.)

tit.

(codd. A^ T), cxlvi. (cxlvii.)

2,

Judith

xlix. 6, Jer. xiii.

14 (cod. <*), Dan.

xii. 2

(lxx.), 2

Mace.

27)
in

became

the technical

Greek term

for

Jewish communities

foreign lands, whether planted there by forcible deportation, or
'

tC
Cf.

2
^

See Tischendorf, V. T. Gr.

,

Eus.
{i

8
"jg)

pro/egg: p.

xiii. n.

Walton

(ed.

Wrangham),
108
f.

p.

i8; Frankel, Vorsimiien,

p.

14 f.;

Buhl,

Knnon

u. Text, p.

2

The Alexandrian Greek Version,
by
their

own

free

agency
first

(Jo.

vii.

35, Jas.

i.

i,

i

Pet.

i.

i)'.

Such

settlements were at
east of Palestine.
B.C.

compulsory, and limited to countries
sixth

Between the eighth and

centuries

the bulk of the

population of both the Northern and

Southern Kingdoms was swept away by Assyrian and Babylonian
2
1

conquerors

(2

Kings

xvii.

6,

xxiv.

14

if.,

xxv.

11
i.

f.,

f ).

A part

of the Babylonian captivity returned (Ezra

ii.),

but Babylonia and Mesopotamia continued to be the

home
39

of
ff.,

a large body of Jewish
Philo

settlers
ii.

(Tob.

i.

14

if.,

4 Esdr.

xiii.

ad

Cai. 36, Acts

9,

Joseph. Ant.

xi. 5. 2,

xv. 3.

i, xviii.

9. iff.).

This 'Eastern' Dispersion need not detain us here.
the stricter sense" had
its

No

Biblical version in

origin in

Babylonia; there, as in Palestine, the services of the synagogue
interpreter (1)0|"1•1^) sufficed for the rendering of the lections
into Aramaic,

and no desire was manifested on the part of the
It

Gentile population to

Hebrew

scriptures.

make themselves acquainted with the was among the Jews who were brought
Egypt was was on

into relation with Hellenic culture that the necessity arose for

a written translation of the books of the canon.
the
earliest

home

of the

Hellenistic

Jew,

and

it

Egyptian

soil that

the earliest

Greek version of the Old Testa-

ment was begun.
3.

Long
2

before the time of Alexander Egypt possessed the

nucleus of a Jewish colony.
25
f.,

Shashanq, the Shishak of
Palestine^ in

i

K.

xiv.

Chr.
B.C.,

xii.

2

f

,

who invaded
carried into

the

tenth

century

may have

from the conquered
1

cities

Egypt captives or hostages whose names still appear upon the
;

2

The later Hebrew term was ?15^ 'exile' see Dr Hort on i The 'Babylonian' Targum is of Palestinian origin (Buhl,
Aramaic

Pet.

/. c.

p. 173).

On
p.

see

translations arising out of the synagogue interpretations, 168 f. ; and for the traditional account of the origin of the Syriac O. T. see Nestle, Urtext u. Ubersetzimgen der Bibel (Leipzig, 1897),

early

ib., p.

229.
3

Authority and Archaeology ^

p.

87

f.

I

^

:

The Alexandrian Greek Version,
walls of the temple at

Karnak.

Isaiah {xix. 19

f.)

foresaw^ that

a time must

come when

the religious influence of Israel would

make
to

itself felt

on the banks of the Nile, while he endeavoured

check the policy which led Judah to seek refuge from Assyrian aggression in an Egyptian alliance (xxx. i flf.). Jewish
mercenaries are


erepwv

said

to

have fought in the expedition of
Ethiopia
c.

Psammetichus

,^).
I.

against

b.c.

650

(cf.

Ps.-Arist.

The panic which

followed

murder of Gedaliah drove a host of Jewish fugitives to Egypt,
where they

=

)'\

settled at

Migdol

Noph (Memphis), and
who

(?), Tahpanhes ()^,
Pathros

/ (
the
i.e.

throughout the Delta, and even in Upper Egypt; and the
descendants of those
the Persian period
Uiparj).

survived were replenished,

believe Pseudo-Aristeas, by others

if we may who entered Egypt during

(^

€€6
to Josephus,

the

first

to

These earlier settlers were probably among benefit by Alexander's policy, and may have been

partly hellenised before his birth.
4.

Alexander's victory at Issos in

gate of Syria to the conqueror.
the submission of Tyre

b.c. 333 opened the In the next year he received

and Gaza and, according

was on the point of marching upon Jerusalem when the statesmanship of the High Priest turned him from his purpose

Whether the main
it

features of this story be accepted or not,

is

certain

that

the

subsequent policy of Alexander was

favourable to the Jews.
1

His genius discovered

in the Jewish

The

passage

is

thought by some scholars to belong to the Ptolemaean

age; see Cheyne, Itttr. to Isaiah, p. 105. ^ Q.{. Authority and Archaeology, ^. 107.
^

Jer.

li.

= xliv.

i

fif.

roh

of these refugees, however, were afterwards taken prisoners by Nebuchadnezzar and transported to Babylon (Joseph, ant. x. 9. 7). ^ Ant. xi, 8. 4 f. The story is rejected by Ewald and Gratz, and the cf. Droysen, Phistoire de PHellenisnie, details are doubtless unhistorical \. p. 300.
kt\.
:

Many

'?

tols

yy Alyvwrov

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
people an instrument well
his

in his

) €€ € )
fitted to assist

him
i.

in carrying out

purpose of drawing East and West together.

Jews served

army (Hecataeus

ap. Joseph,

c.

Ap.

22 In ye

]

on

€€);
that

and

su.ch

was

his sense of their

loyalty
(b.c.

and

courage

when Alexandria was

founde^J

ss2)j although the design of the conqueror was to erect a monument to himself which should be essentially Greek \

he not only assigned a place in his new city to Jewish colonists,
but admitted them to
Joseph, ant.
full citizenship.

8...
yap

\\.

4

lyv €€
Mommsen

yepas

^. /? .
^

xix. 5. 2 noXireias ye

AXi^avbpos

J.

i^

^^ ^ ".
emyvovs
:

^ €€

iv \W€^av8p€ia
C.

apeTrjs
1

.

\
.

8.

'

7

^, €
Ap.

yepas

^^

indeed {Provinces,

., .

162 .) expresses a

doubt whether the grant of citizenship^ was made before the time of Ptolemy I., but in the absence of any direct evidence to
the contrary the repeated statement of Josephus justifies the
belief that
5.
it

originated with Alexander^. of Alexander (b.c. 323) wrecked

The premature death

his larger scheme, but the Jewish colony at Alexandria con-

tinued to flourish under the Ptolemies,

who succeeded

government of Egypt.

— 285).
(B.C.
^

It may be convenient to place here for reference the names and dates of the earlier Ptolemies. I. Lagi, or Soter (B.C. 322

247

— 222).

II.

Philadelphus (B.C. 285 247). III. Euergetes 1. IV. Philopator I. (B.C. 222 205). V. Epiphanes

Plutarch Alex.

•26

\€. ey\v

See Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies^ p. 86. the relations in which the Jews stood to Alexander and sors see Wellhausen, Isr. ii.jud. Geschichte, c. xvi.
" ^

On

'
to the
his succes-

The Alexa7idrian Greek
(B.C.

Version.

VII. Philometor VI. Eupator (B.C. 182). IX. EuerVIII. Philopator II. (B.C. 146). Of the brief 117). getes II., also known as Physkon (B.C. 146 reigns of Eupator and the younger Philopator nothing is known.
205
(B.C.

— 182).

182—146).

Ptolemy added considerably to the Jewish His expeditions to Palestine and capture of Jerusalem placed in his hands a large number of Jewish and Samaritan captives, and these were conveyed to The Alexandria, where many of them acquired civic rights. report of the King's liberality towards his captives, and of their
first

The

population of Alexandria.

prosperity in Egypt, attracted other Palestinians to Alexandria,

and many came

(^

'^ ^ ^ ,
thither as voluntary settlers.
xii.
I.
I

Joseph, ant.
re

opeLvrjs

ayayoov

separate quarter of the city was assigned to the colony

.
8
iii.

\

^,
5e

nroXe/iaios•

noWovs

iv

Se

tovs

ev

\

• (\
.

etV

.

(Strabo ap. Joseph, ant. xiv.

€ ');
7.

2

rrjs
it

'AXe^avSpctas
lay in the north-east

of Alexandria, along the shore, near the royal palace ^
the Jews lived under their
cial authority in all cases

Here

own

ethnarch^,

who

exercised judi-

permitted to follow their

between Jew and Jew. They were religion and observe their national customs without molestation. Synagogues sprang up not only in

own

the Jewish quarter, but at a later time in every part of the city
In Philo's time the Jews occupied two districts out of
five

1

(/;/

F/acc. 8).
^

Droysen,

p. 59.
;

Strabo, ap. Jos. ant. xiv. 7. 2 cf. Schiirer Gesc/i. d.jiid. Volkcs"^, iii. 40; Lunibroso, Recherchcs, p. 218; Droysen, iii. p. 40 n. On the who is sometimes identified with the ethnarch see Schiirer iii. 88.
^

/??

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
(Philo

ad

Cai. 20,

ifi

Flacc. 6^).

In the time of Philometor the

Jews stood so high
to

in the royal favour that they

were suffered
rite

convert

a disused

Egyptian temple
at

at

Leontopolis into

a replica of the

Temple
it

Jerusalem, and the Jewish
fall

was
the

celebrated there until after the

of the
afit. xii.

Holy
it

City,

when
\^

Romans
vii.

put a stop to

(Joseph,

9. 7, xiii. 3. is

B, J.

10.

4)^

Under

these circumstances

not surprising

that shortly after the Christian era the Jewish colony in

Egypt

exceeded a million, constituting an eighth part of the population (Philo
villages
171

Flacc.

6,

Joseph,

c.

Ap.

ii.

4).

In the Fayum

were founded by Jews, and they lived on equal terms

with the Greeks '\

Nor were

the Jewish settlers on the African

coast limited to the Delta or to Egypt.

A

daughter colony

was planted
community.

in

Cyrenaica by the

first

Ptolemy, and at Cyrene

as at Alexandria the Jews formed an important section of the

The Jew
(i

of Cyrene meets us already in the days
23, 2

of the Maccabees

Mace. xv.

Mace.

ii.

23),

and he was
aiit.

a familiar figure at Jerusalem in the Apostolic age (Mt. xxvii.
32, Acts
xiv.
7.
ii.

10, vi.

9\

xi.

20,

xiii.

i;

cf.

Strabo ap. Joseph,

2).

6.

The Jews
and
settlements

of the Dispersion everywhere retained their

religion

their loyalty to national institutions.

In each of

these

among

Gentile

peoples

the

Holy City

possessed a daughter, whose attachment to her was not less
strong than that of her children at home.
the words of Agrippa^, " was the mother

"Jerusalem," in
not of a single

city,

country, but of most of the countries of the world, through the
1 On the magnificence of the principal synagogue see Edersheim, History of the Jeimsh Nation (ed. White), p. 67. 2 A temporary check seems to have been sustained by the Alexandrian Jews under Philopator see 3 Mace. ii. 31, and cf. Mahaffy, p. 270. ^ See Mahaffy, Empire, &^i:., p. 86 n. cf. Philo de sept. 6. ^ Where Blass {Philology of the Gospels, p. 69 f.) proposes to read

for
5

Philo

ad

Cai. 36.

.
;

;

8

The Alexandrian Greek Version.

colonies which she sent forth at various times."

No

colony

was more

dutiful than the Alexandrian.

The
weaken
were

possession of a
its

local sanctuary at Leontopolis did not

devotion to

the temple at Jerusalem
14. 64; cf. Acts Egypt with no
7no7iarch.
ii.

^

;

pilgrimages

still

made

to

Jerusalem at the great festivals (Philo ap. Eus. praep.
ii.

ev. viii.

10)

j

the

Temple

tribute

was collected

in

less

punctuality than in Palestine (Philo de
it

3).

But
retain

generations spent their lives

was impossible for Jews who and carried on their business
Semitic
speech.

for

in

Greek towns

to

their

In

Palestine

after the Return,

in ordinary intercourse,

Aramaic gradually took the place of Hebrew and after the time of Alexander Greek
rival

became

to

some extent a

of Aramaic.

In Alexandria a

knowledge of Greek was not a mere luxury but a necesssity If it was not required by the State as a of common life". condition of citizenship^, yet self-interest compelled the inhabitants of a Greek capital to acquire the language of the

markets and the Court.
sufficed to

A

generation

or

two may have

accustom the Alexandrian Jews

to the use of the

Greek tongue.

The Jewish

settlers in

there at the coming of Alexander had probably gained

knowledge of Greek before the and the children of Alexander's mercenaries, as well as many of the immigrants from Palestine in the days of Soter, may Every year of residence well have been practically bilingual. in Alexandria would increase their familiarity with Greek and weaken their hold upon the sacred tongue^ Any prejudice
1

Lower Egypt who were some founding of his new city*;

'^

See Schiirer^, iii. 97 Droysen, iii. p. 35.

ff.

Mommsen, Provinces, ii. p. 163 f. On the whole question see Hody, de Bibl. tcxtibus, p. 224 f.; Caspari, Qitcllen ziir Gesch. d. Tatifsymbols, "Deissmann, Bibe/studien, p. 61 fif. ; Kennedy, Sources of iii. p. 268 if. N. T. Gk., p. 2 iff. * There was a large Greek settlement on the Pelusiac arm of the Nile see Herod, ii. 163. at an early period ^ Cf. Streane, Double Text of Jeremiah, p. f.
;

;

1

1

TJie

Alexandrian Greek Version.

which might have existed against the use of a foreign language would speedily disappear under a rule which secured full
liberty
in

worship and

faith.

The adoption

of the Greek

tongue was a tribute gladly paid by the Alexandrian Jews to the great Gentile community which sheltered and cherished
them.

But the Greek which the Jews of Alexandria learnt to
speak was neither the literary language employed
scholars
affected
B.C.'

by the
of
it

of the

Museum, nor

the

artificial

imitation

by Hellenistic writers of the second and first centuries It was based on \}^ patois of the Alexandrian streets

and markets

—a

mixture, as

we may suppose, of

the ancient

spoken tongue of Hellas with elements gathered from Macedonia, Asia Minor, Egypt,

and Libya.

Into this hybrid speech
it

the Jewish colony would infuse,

when

became

their

usual

organ of communication, a strong colouring of Semitic thought,

graphy and grammar.

and not a few reminiscences of Hebrew or Aramaic lexicoSuch at any rate is the monument of Jewish-Egyptian Greek which survives in the earlier books of
the so-called Septuagint.
7.

The
is,

'Septuagint^,' or the

Greek version of the Old

Testament which was on the whole the work of Alexandrian
Jews,
written in
i.e.

full,

the Interpretatio septiiagi^ita virorimi or

first instalment was by Alexandrian tradition to seventy or seventy-two Jewish elders. In the most ancient Greek MSS. of the Old

sefiiorum,

the translation of which the

attributed

^

Cf. Thiersch de Pent.
p.

vers. Alex.., p. 65

ff.

;

MahafFy, Greek
Greek.,

life
ff.

thought'^.,

196

f.;

Kennedy, Sources of N.

T.

p.

18

and The

{Essays., p. 10 ff.) are less satisfactory. (iii. 21. 3) speaks of the senioricm interpretatio'., Tertullian of the septuaginta et duo interpretes ; Jerome, of the LXX. 18) interprctes, or translatores [praeff. in Esdr., Isai.), LXX. editio {praef in Augustine Job, ep. ad Panwiach.), editio LXX. [praef. in Paralipp.). (cited by Nestle, Urtext, p. 62) remarks: " interpretatio ista ut Septuaginta vocetur iam obtinuit consuetudo."
-

remarks of Hatch
Irenaeus
{Apol.

The Alexandrian Greek
Testament
LXX.'
1.

Versio7i.

it

is

(.
1

Tovs

or ot ^^^ quoted by the formula name point back to a common source, the story of the origin of the version which is told in the pseudonymous letter entitled
03,
iii.

.

^, ^,
described as the version
;

'according to

the

..

Greek,
.

479)'

All forms of the

Literature. The text of the letter of Aristeas is printed Appendix to this volume. It will be found also in Hody de Bib!, text. orig. (Oxon. 1705), and in Constantinus Oeconomus
in the

.

' (Athens, 1 849) the best edition TTfpi hitherto available is that of M. Schmidt in Merx, Archiv f. 'wisse7isch. Ei-foischtiug d. A. T. i. p. 241 ff. ; a new edition is promised under the title: Afisteae ad Pliilocratem epistula cum ceteris de origine versionis LXX. interpretiim testimoniis. For the Licdovici Mendelssohnii schedis ed. Paulus Wendla?id. earlier editions see Fabricius-Harles, iii. 660 ff.; the editio princeps of the Greek text was published at Basle in 1561. The controversies raised by the letter may be studied in Hody or in Fabricius-Harles cf. Rosenmiiller, Handbuch f. d. Literatiir d. bibl. Ki'itik u. Exegese; Dahne, gesch. Darstelhuig d. jiidisch. Alex. Religions-Philosophie, ii. p. 205 ff. ; Papageor;

€(

Ex

Uber den Aristeasbrief; Lumbroso, Recherches sur Veconomie politique de PEgypte, p. 351 f. and in Atti di R. Accadeinia Fuller lists will be found delta Scienza di Torino, iv. (1868—9).
gius,

in Schiirer^, iii. 472 f. (and in Nestle s.v. Ai'isteas, in Realencyklopddie f. p. Th. u. K.^), and Van Ess, Epilegg. p. 29 f.
8.

The

writer professes to be a courtier in the service of

Philadelphus,

a

Greek who

is

interested in the antiquities
his brother Philocrates,

of the Jewish people'.
relates the

Addressing

he

issue of a journey
It

which he had recently made
is

to Jerusalem.

appears that Demetrius Phalereus-, who
'
'

1 From the mention of Cyprus as the island (§ 3) it has been inferred The name occurs freely in inscriptions from that Aristeas was a Cypriot. the islands of the Aegean and the coast of Caria (C /. G. 2262, 2266, 2349, 2399, 2404, 2655, 2^9.3» 2694, 2723, 2727, 2781, 2892), and was borne by a Cyprian sculptor (see D. G. and R. B., i. 293). The Aristeas who wrote

(Euseb. praep. ev. ix. 25) was doubtless an Alexandrian Jew who, as a Hellenist, assumed a Greek name. 2 See Ostermann, de Dcmetrii Ph. vita (1857) Susemihl, Gcsch. d. ^r.
irepl
;

»/

Litt. in d. Alcxandrinerzcit,

i.

p. 135

ff.

On

the royal library at Alexandria

1

The

A lexandrian
the

Greek Version.

1

described as librarian of the royal library at Alexandria, had in

conversation

procuring for the Hbrary a translation of the Jewish laws

'
).

with

Philadelphus

^
fell

King represented the importance of

^

( to

in with

the

suggestion,
letter

and
the

despatched an embassy to Jerusalem with a

High

Priest Eleazar, in
six

which the

latter

was desired

to

send to
In due

Alexandria

elders learned in

the law from each of the

tribes of Israel to execute

the work of translation.

course the seventy-two elders, whose names are given, arrived
in

Egypt,

written in letters of gold on a roll

8<;
King

€ ).
bringing
ev ats
'

with them a copy of the

composed of

banquet followed,

-

Hebrew Law

skins

(.,.
which the

at

tested the attainments of the Jewish elders with hard

Three days afterwards the work of translation translators were conducted by Demetrius along the Heptastadion to the island of Pharos, where a building conveniently furnished and remote from the distractions of the city was provided for their use. Here Demetrius, in the words
questions.

began.

The

of Aristeas,

'

exhorted them to accomplish the work of transla-

tion, since they

were well supplied with

all

that they could want.

So they set to work, comparing their several results and making them agree and whatever they agreed upon was suitably
;

copied under the direction of Demetrius. ...In this way the
transcription was

completed

in

seventy-two days, as

if

that

period had been pre-arranged.'

The completed work was read by Demetrius to the Jewish community, who received it with enthusiasm and begged that
a copy might be placed in the hands of their leaders
see Susemihl, i. p. 335 fif., Real-Encyclopiidie, v. 409 f.
^
;

and

and the

art.

Bibliothcken in

Pauly-Wissowa,
city
:

The mole

connected the

Pharos

Avith

the

see

art.

Alexandria

in Smith's Diet, of Gr.

and Rom. Geography,

pp. 96

f.

.

12
a
curse

The Alexandrian Greek
was
solemnly pronounced

Version.

upon any who should

presume to add to the version or to take from it. After this the Greek Pentateuch was read to the King, who expressed delight and surprise, greeted the book with a gesture of reverence and desired that it should be preserved

(),
The

with scrupulous care

( ^- /
).
writers
is

9-

story of Aristeas

repeated more or less

by the Alexandrian
Josephus.

Aristobulus

4 , ?( ,
Aristobulus
Se
a/>.

Y.ViS.

praep. ev.

xiii.

eVi [he is addressing Philometor]
Philo,

epyov

^ €8€ 86 ... ... , , 8.88 \8

'

(\

€\€\

^.
.

^^
fully

and

Philo,

and by

12. 2

:

be.

'.

Afoys.

(,
ant.

\

€^4(€

€€\€ €., ,
.
5 ^•
'•

6

bievoelTO,

...
8

\

Josephus,

i.

prooe?n. 3

:

8

.

ant.

.

2.

— 15

Josephus gives a he calls
the
letter.

\\), and
Philo,

full

account obviously based on Aristeas

(whom

to a great extent verbally identical with

The testimony
century a.d.

of Josephus establishes only the fact that
first

the letter of Aristeas was current in Palestine during the

andrian tradition
the
^

on the other hand, represents an Alexwhich was perhaps originally independent of
certainly not entirely consistent with
it.

letter,

and

is

He

iii.

In defence of the genuineness of this testimony see Schiirer, G. /. V.^ 384 392. On the other hand cf. L. Cohn in Neue Jahrbucher f. d. Klass. AUerthtunx. 8 (1895), and Wendland in Byzantinische Zeitschrift For Aristobuhis see Susemihl, p. 630 f. vii. (1898), 447 449.

;

TJie

Alexandrian Greek Version.

13

states

(/. c.)

that the completion of the

, ^,
celebrated at Alexandria
festival at the

down
vvv

to his

Pharos

{^'-

ayerac

ets rjv

'
is

work of the lxx. was
a yearly

^-

own time by

eTepoL

re

€€<;

iv

.).

popular anniversary of
literary

this

kind can scarcely have grown out of a

york so

artificial

and so wanting
letter

in the elements

which ensure popularity as the
of Aristobulus carries us

of Aristeas.
further

The fragment

back than the witness of Philo and Josephus. It was addressed to a Ptolemy who was a descendant of Philadelphus, and who is identified both by Eusebius (/.c.) and by
Clement^ {strom.
words,
i.

much

22) with Philometor.

Whether Aristobulus
uncertain, but
his

derived his information
if

from Aristeas

we admit

their genuineness, estabhsh the fact that the

main

features of the story were believed

by the

literary

Jews of

Alexandria, and even at the Court, more than a century and a
half before the Christian era

and within a century of the date

assigned by Aristeas to the translation of the Law.
10.

From
its

the second century a.d. the letter of Aristeas

is

quoted or

contents are summarised by the fathers of the

Church, who in general receive the story without suspicion, and

add

certain fresh particulars.

Cf Justin, apol. i. 3') ^^^^• 68, 7i, ^cohort, ad Graecos' 13 if. ; Iren. iii. 21. 2 f ; Clem. Alex, stroiii. i, 22, 148 f ; TertuUian, apol. 18 ; Anatolius ap. Eus. H. E. vi-i. 32 Eusebius, pi'aep. ev. viii. I 9, ix. 38 ; Cyril of Jerusalem, catech. iv. 34 ; Hilary, /r*?/. ad Psabnos^ tract, in Pss. ii., cxviii. ; EpiphaniuSj^^- mens, et pond. ifi Gen.., praef. §§ 3, 6 ; Philastrius de haer. 138 ; Jerome, in libr. quaest. Hebr.j Augustine, de civ. Dei xvii. 42 f., de doctr. Chr. ii. 22 ; Theodore of Mopsuestia in Habakk. ii., i7i Zeph. i. Chrysostom, or. i. adv. Jiid.., c. 6, horn. iv. /;/ Gen.., c. 4; Theo.

.

;

/r^^

^

named

Clement of Alexandria in 2 Mace. i. 10
iv.).

identifies this Aristobulus

with the person

See Valckenaer diatribe de Aristolmlo (printed
edition of Eus. praep. ev.

at

the end of Gaisford's

.

;

14

The Alexandrian Greek Version.

Psalmos ; Cyril of Alexandria, adv. Julia^i. or. the anonymous Pseudo-Athanasius, synops. scr. sacr. § dialogue of Timothy and Aquila (ed. Conybeare, Oxford, 1898, p. 90 f.).
aor&t,p7'ae/. in
I
;
;

Most of these
worked
pared
(so

Christian writers, in distinct contradiction

to the statement of Aristeas, represent the Seventy as having

separately, adding that

when

the results were comto

at the

end of the task they were found

be identical

Irenaeus,

Clement

of

Alexandria,

Cyril

of Jerusalem,

Augustine, &c.).

declares that at Alexandria he

the cells in

eTL

6€

' ,/).
accept

of the Cohortatio ad Graecos^ had been shewn the vestiges of iv r^ which the translators had worked

The author

(

Trj

€€<;
therefore

it

'-

This story of the
origin,

cells

was probably of Alexandrian

and had grown out of
Seventy which appears

the local belief in the inspiration of the

already in the words of Philo quoted above ^
generally

The

Fathers

both the belief and the legend which
the lxxii. in pairs

generated, though the latter sometimes undergoes slight modification, as

).
quum

when Epiphanius groups
Jerome
is

{

an honourable exception; he

realises that the tale of the cells is inconsistent with the earlier

tradition {prol. in Gen. "nescio quis primus auctor
lulas Alexandriae
scriptitarint,

mendacio suo
Aristeas... et

exstruxerit, quibus divisi

lxx celeadem

and

rightly protests against the doctrine

Josephus nihil tale retulerint "), which was at the root of
est

the absurdity ("aliud est

enim vatem, aliud

esse

inter-

pretem")^
^ On the date of this treatise, which is commonly ascribed to Justin, see Kriiger, Hist, of Chr. Literature {^. T.), p. 112 f., and cf. HarnackPreuschen, p. 107.
^ Cf. pevovres.

ib.

eKiiuovs

' €$

^ ^it

The story of the cells is not peculiar to Christian writers ; echoed by the Talmud (Bab. Talm. Megillah 9^, Jerus. Talm. Meg.
3

is
i.

c.

cf.

Sopherim,

c. i.).

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
II.

15

Doubts as

to the genuineness of the Aristeas-letter

were

first

expressed by Ludovicus de Vives in his commentary

on Aug. de civ. Dei^ xviii. 4 (pubHshed in 1522), and after him by Joseph Scaliger. Ussher and Voss defended the letter, but its claim to be the work of a contemporary of Philadelphus was finally demoHshed by Humphry Hody, Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford (1698 1706)^ A few later writers have

pleaded

in its favour (e.g. Grinfield
op. cit.);
all

Apology for the LXX., and
but the great majority of

Constantinus Oeconomus,

modern

scholars,

and perhaps

living experts, recognise the

unhistorical character of

much

of the story of Aristeas.

Indeed

it

scarcely

convict the letter

needed the massive learning of Hody to of x\risteas of being pseudonymous, and to a

large extent legendary.

The

selection of the elders from all

the tribes of Israel awakens suspicions; their

names

are clearly

imaginary; the recurrence of the number seventy-two seems
to

have struck even the writer as open

to

remark': the

letters

and Eleazar are of the same stamp as the confessedly fictitious correspondence between Philadelphus and the Palestinian Jews in 2 and 3 Maccabees. Above all, whereas the letter professes to have been written by a Greek and a pagan, its purpose proclaims it to be the work of a Jew;
of Philadelphus

while

it

addresses

itself to

Gentile readers,

its

obvious aim

is

to glorify the

Jewish race, and to diffuse information about

their sacred books.

On

the other hand, though the story as
it

'Aristeas' tells

it is

doubtless a romance,

inferred that

it

has no historical basis.

must not be hastily That the writer was
to

a Jew
^

who

lived in

Egypt under the Ptolemies seems

be

tam

In his Contra hisioriam LXX. inteypretiim Aristeae nomine inscrippublished in 1684, and afterwards included in De Biblio7'tim textUnis originalihiis, versionibiis Graecis, et Latina vnlgata libri iv. (Oxon. 170s). For other writers on both sides cf. Buhl, p. 117 (E. T. p. 115). On the Rabbinical partiality for this number, cf. Ewald, Hist, of Israel^ V. 252 n. (E. T.) Schiirer ii. i. p. 174; Buhl, p. 117 ( = 116, E. T.).
dissertatio, originally
'^ ;

6

;

1

The Alexandrian Greek

Version.
life

demonstrated by the knowledge which he displays of
at the

Alexandrian Courts
fifty

There

is

also reason to

suppose

that he wrote within

years of the death of Philadelphus,

and

his principal facts

are endorsed, as

we have

seen,

by a

writer of the next generation'.

It is difficult to believe that

a document, which within

a century of the events relates

the history of a literary undertaking in which the Court

and

the scholars of Alexandria were concerned, can be altogether
destitute place,

of truth.
it

Detailed criticism

is

impossible in this

but

is

necessary to examine the credibility of the

chief features of the
relating to the date

points in the letter

romance so far as they affect questions and origin of the lxx. There are certain of Aristeas which demand investigation,

especially the statements (i) that the translation of the

Law

was made

in the time of Philadelphus; (2) that

it

was under-

taken at the desire of the King, and for the royal library
(3) that the translators

were brought from Jerusalem

and the Hebrew and (4)
;

rolls

which they used

that their translation

when completed was welcomed both by Jews and Greeks.
12.

There

is

no improbability

in the

first

of these stateif

ments.

The

personal tastes of Philadelphus,

by no means
library at

purely literary, included a fancy for the society of scholars and
the accumulation of books ^

He

founded a second
the Palace^.

the Serapeion to receive the overflow of that which Soter had
established near the
tistic

Museum and

His syncre-

temperament disposed him

to listen to the representatives

of various creeds. a

A

Buddhist mission from the Ganges found

welcome
1

at

his

court ^;

and the reign which produced
in Philologjis
liii.

See the remarks of Wilcken
iii.

(1894), p.

1

1 1

f•,

and

cf.

Lumbroso, p. xiii. 2 See Schurer=^
'^

p.

468

f.

Tertullian exaggerates his literary merits {apol. 18 Ptolemaeonim eruditissimus...et omnis htteraturae sagacissimus). * Cf. Mahaffy, Ei>ipi7'e On the character of of the Ptolemies, \>. 164 ff. Philadelphus see also Droysen, iii., p. 254 f. ' Mahaffy, pp. 163 f., 170.

TJie

Alexandrian Greek Version.

17

Manetho's Greek history of Egyptian institutions may well have yielded also a translation into Greek of the Hebrew
sacred

books.

The presence

of a large Jewish

colony

at

Alexandria could hardly have failed to awaken in the King

and and

his scholars of the

Museum

an interest in the ancient laws

literature of the

Jewish race.

scholars have for the
tradition

For these reasons modern most part shewn no desire to disturb the

which assigns the Alexandrian version of the

Law

to

the days of Philadelphus.

One exception must be noted. The late Professor Gratz maintained with much ingenuity that the Greek Pentateuch was a work of the reign of Philometor, thus transferring the inception of the LXX. from the middle of the third century to the middle of the second ^ His opinion was based partly on the fact that the Jewish colony at Alexandria touched the zenith of its influence under Under the latter head Philometor, partly on internal grounds. he insisted on the translation in Lev. xxiii. 1 1 of the phrase nSL'^n by r^ eVai'ptoi/ The Pharisees understood the word in that context to refer to the day after the Paschal Sabbath i.e. Nisan 15, while the Sadducees adhered to the usual meaning. Gratz argued with much force that, since the rendering of the LXX, shews evident signs of Pharisaic influence, the version itself must have been later than the rise of the Pharisees. But V. 15 renders the same words by

\2

.

purpose Avritten in /. 1 1 would have let escape him a little further down, we must suppose that . stood originally in both verses and that is due to a Pharisaic corrector who left his work incomplete. But a partial correction of the passage in the interests of Pharisaism points to the version being pre-Maccabean, a conclusion quite opposite to that Avhich Dr Gratz desired to draw^.

,
There
S.
S.

and as

it is

not likely that a translator

who had

of set

.

is,

moreover, positive evidence that the Alexandrian

version of Genesis at least was in existence considerably before

the

beginning of Philometor's

reign.

It

was used by the
Iv

Hellenist Demetrius, fragments of
^

whose

treatise Ilept

^

Gesch. Judeii^, iii. p. 615 ff. See Expository Times, ii. pp. 209, 277

f.

8

.

1

rfi

' ^€
suffice to

The Alexandrian Greek
are preserved by
ev. ix. 21, 29).

Version.

Clement

{strom.

i.

21)

and Eusebius {praep.

may

prove this assertion.

. /7
yopov.

Demetrius.

//-

.

cSpev

I4f•)•^

)€€ ^.
ilvai.

(.
carries his
it

/. . .
Genesis (lxx.).
.

The

following specimens

.

(.

.

25).

IptiTe "AvSpes
(xlvi.

34)•

As Demetrius
fourth Ptolemy \

chronology no further than the
that he lived under the

reign of Philopator,

may be assumed
is

He

thus the earliest of the Alexandrian

Hellenistic writers; yet equally with the latest he draws his

quotations of the
fairly

Book

of Genesis from the lxx.

It

may

be argued that a version, which at the beginning of the third century had won its way to acceptance among the literary Jews of Alexandria, probably saw the light not later than the
reign of Philadelphus.

inception

Both 'Aristeas' and Aristobulus associate with the of the lxx. the name of Demetrius Phalereus-. Aristobulus merely represents Demetrius as having 'negociated
13.

the matter
states that

library

in the days of Philadelphus, with

(
'

{-^

he did so

(i) in the capacity of

intimate terms.
torical.
^

whom he appears to be on Both these particulars are certainly unhisBusch^ has shewn that the office of librarian was
-yuvei

^' ),
:

),

but Aristeas

head of the royal and (2)

Cf. Freudenthal, helleii. Sitidien, p. 41.

-

The Dialogue of Tbnothy and
j)e
bihliothecariis

^

.

Aqiiila strangely says
(1884),
p.
i

t]v

3e oJtos

AlexandrtJiis

ff.

;

cf.

Droysen,

iii.

p.

256; Mahaffy,

p. 115.

The Alexmidrian Greek Version,
filled

19

under Philadelphus by Zenodotus of Ephesus, and on the

Moreover Demetrius, decease of Zenodotus by Eratosthenes. so far from being intimate with Philadelphus, was sent into
exile

soon

after

the accession of that monarch,
bite of
{c.

and died a

little later

on from the

an asp, probably administered
Thus, if Demetrius took must have done so during

at the

King's instigation

B.C.

283) \

part in the inception of the lxx., he

He This is not in itself improbable. of Soter. had taken refuge in Egypt as early as B.C. 307, and for many years had been a trusted adviser of the first Ptolemy; and
the reign
it

is

not unlikely that the project of translating the Jewish
discussed between him and the royal founder of the
library,

Law was

Alexandrian

and that the work was

really

due

to his

suggestion ^ though his words did not bear fruit until after his
death.

The

point

is
it

of importance to the student of the lxx.

only in so far as
version was

has to do with the question whether the
official

made under

guidance.

The breakdown

of

the chronology of this part of the story of Aristeas leaves us

abandon the hypothesis of direct intervention on the part of the King, and internal evidence certainly justifies us An official version would assuredly have avoided in doing so. when such Greek such barbarisms as yuwpa^, elV,
free to

equivalents as

The whole
such

style of the version

, ^ ,^,
is

were available.

alien from the purpose of a
is it

book intended

for literary use,

nor

conceivable that under

circumstances Jewish translators, Palestinian or Alexleft

andrian, would have been

without the advice and help of

experts in the Greek tongue.

Thus everything

points to the conclusion that the version

^ Diog. Laert. v. 78. The statement rests on the authority of Hermippus Callimachus {temp. Ptolemy III.). - Cf. 6 Plutarch, Apophthegm, viii.

".
^

irepl

^
f.

'^€$

-

Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 8

20

The Alexmidrian Greek Version.
Whilst in

arose out of the needs of the Alexandrian Jews.

Palestine the Aramaic-speaking Jews were content with the
interpretation of the Methiirgemafi, at Alexandria the

Hebrew

lesson was gladly exchanged for a lesson read from a Greek
translation,

and the work of the

interpreter

was limited to

exegesis \

In the closing paragraphs of the letter of Aristeas

which describe the joy with which the work of the lxxii. was welcomed by the Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria,
the writer unconsciously reveals the true history of the version,

when he
But

represents

the Jews

as

having heard and
it

welcomed
the King-.

the Greek Pentateuch before
it is

was presented to

not improbable that the King encouraged

the work of translation with the view of promoting the use

of the Greek language by the settlers^ as well as for the purpose
of gratifying his
14.

own curiosity. The Greek of the Alexandrian Pentateuch
we can judge, not such
written.

is

Egyptian,

and, as far as

as Palestinian translators

would have
worthy"*
is

Instances are not indeed wanting of
;

translations executed in

prologue

the writer after a prolonged
€ts

^ ' ?) , ' ' -. • ^$ •€
tells

the

Wisdom

us,

Egypt by Palestinians the most noteof the Son of Sirach, which, as the was turned into Greek by the grandson of
visit to

the banks of the Nile
;

{-

but the clumsy Greek
of the book, offer a
tis

of the prologue, and the
1

stiff artificiality

Cf.

Philo

i7/.

Eus. pi-aep. ev.

viii.

7

eh,

iepous

avTois

ambiguous. of winning converts may have been among the motives which inspired the translators and gained a ready welcome for their work ;
13ut
is
2

The hope

cf.

€^ ",
the prol. to
elvat
•»

Sirach:

avTovs

$

Avhere however the influence of the Jewish Scriptures on pagans is regarded as indirect, and not immediate. ^ Cf. Mommsen, Provinces, ii. p. 164• Another example is offered by the Greek Esther, if the note at the end of the book is to be trusted

XeyovTas

"/^—

rois e/cros

^^
toi)s

ev

).

{^.,.

The Alexaridriaii Greek Version.
marked contrast
the latter
is

21

to the simple style of the Pentateuch.

That

mainly the work of Alexandrian Jews appears from more than one consideration. An older generation of BibUcal

scholars pointed to the occurrence in the lxx.,

and especially

the Pentateuch, of such words of Egyptian origin as
xli. 2 ff.),

^
I

/

(Gen.

(Exod. xxv.

Egyptian terms as

and the Hke.
drawn from various

,
b.c.^


in

in

(Gen.

xliv. 2 ff.),

^6 (Lev. xi.

17

;

Deut.

xxxix. passim)

and such
is

characteristically

{= ^"^^},

The argument

€,
we

xiv. 16),

not conclusive,

since after the time of Alexander the kolvtj contained elements
localities'.

But recent discoveries

Egypt

have yielded a criterion of Egyptian Greek which has been
applied to the lxx. with definite results.

In 1892 Prof. Mahaffy
find a

was able to write
could name^."

:

" in the vocabulary of the papyri

closer likeness to the

Greek of the lxx. than to any other book This statement has been abundantly justified

by the publication of Deissmann's Bibelstudien (Marburg, 1895), and Neue Bibelstudien (1897), where a number of the peculiar
or characteristic

have been in
will

common

words and forms of the lxx. are shewn to use among Egyptian Greeks of the third

and second centuries
be treated in a

The vocabulary and
;

style of the lxx.
it is

later chapter

for the present

enough

to say that they are such as to discredit the attribution of the

Greek Pentateuch

to a

of Palestinian Jews.
the earlier part of the

company consisting exclusively or chiefly The lxx. as a whole, or at any rate collection, is a monument of Alexandrian

it was spoken by the Jewish colony in the Delta under the rule of the Ptolemies ^

Greek as

N.

4; Eichhorn, p. 472; H. H. A. Kennedy, Sources of on the other hand, cf. Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 40 ff. ; 2 Exp. Times, iii. p. 291 cf. Mahaffy, Greek life, p. 198 f. ^ Evidence of this kind will doubtless accumulate as new volumes of papyri are issued. The verbal indices which usually accompany such collections offer a rich field for the Biblical student who will be at the pains to explore them. ^ See however Buhl, p. 124.
^

See Hody,

ii.

T. Greek, p. 24

f.

;

;

22

TJie

Alexandrian Greek Version.
and
But

The
it

story of the rolls being written in letters of gold

sent to the

King by

the

High

Priest

may be

dismissed at once

belongs to the picturesque setting of the romance.
is

there
rolls

nothing improbable

in the statement that the
for

were freshly brought from Jerusalem',

communication

between Jerusalem and Alexandria was frequent during the reigns of the earUer Ptolemies. Yet the legend may be intended
to represent the loyalty of the colony towards the

and the conviction of the Alexandrian Jews that in their Greek version they possessed the same sacred texts which their Nothing was further brethren in Judaea read in Hebrew.
from their intention than to create an Alexandrian canon,
or an Alexandrian type of text.
is

,

Hebrew

The

point

is

one which

it

important to remember.

The welcome accorded
;

to the

Greek version by the Jews of

Alexandria was doubtless, as Aristeas represents, both cordial

and permanent nor need we doubt that Philadelphus and his scholars approved what had been done. Insignificant and even intolerable as a literary work, the version promised to supply the Greek scholars of Alexandria with a trustworthy account of Hebrew origins. There is however little or no trace of the use of the Lxx. by pagan writers'; the style was probably enough to deter them from studying it, and the Hellenistic Jews of a somewhat later date rendered the task unnecessary by presenting the history of their country in more attractive forms. As
to the preservation of the original in the Alexandrian libraries,

we have no evidence beyond Tertullian's scarcely trustworthy statement, " Hodie usque Serapeum Ptolemaei bibliothecae cum
ipsis
^

Hebraicis

litteris

exhibentur^"

According to Epiphanius {de mens, et pond. lof.) the rolls only were sent in the first instance, and the interpreters followed in consequence of a second application from Philadelphus. This form of the story suggests that the desire for a translation may have been stimulated by the arrival of MSS. from Jerusalem. - See, however, Mahaffy, Hist, of Gk. class, literature, i. ii. p. 195. ^ Apol. 18; cf. Justin, apol. i. 31, Chrys. or. i adv. Jiid., and Epiph.

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
15.
It

23

has been stated that the letter of Aristeas does not

profess to describe the origin of any part of the Alexandrian

Bible except the Pentateuch.

)

ant.

i.

prooe?n. 3

irrl

,
yap
;

This was evident to Josephus
cKCtvos (sc.

^- €^€.
eh
;

/, :

d hevrt-

Christian the whole

writers,

however, failed to notice this limitation

Greek Bible was familiarly known as the version of the lxx., and no misgivings were felt upon the matter except by Jerome, whose intercourse with the Rabbis had opened his eyes on this and other matters about which the Jews were better informed "tota schola Judaeorum (he writes) quinque tantum libros Moysis a lxx. translatos asserunt^" Epiphanius goes so far as to apportion the books of the Hebrew canon among thirty-six pairs of translators'. Nevertheless the Jews were
:

unquestionably right
translation of
to the Prophets

Aristeas has nothing to say about the

His silence as first five. and the Hagiographa is entirely consistent with The the conditions of the period in which he fixes his story.
any books beyond the

canon of the Prophets seems
If this

to

have scarcely reached comple-

tion before the High-Priesthood of

was so

in Palestine, at

Simon (219 199 B.C.) ^ Alexandria certainly there would

.

be no recognised body of Prophetic writings in the reign of the second Ptolemy. The Torah alone was ready for translation,
for
it

was complete, and

its

position as a collection of sacred

books was absolutely secure.
16.

But when the example had once been
it

set of

rendering

sacred books into Greek,
often as fresh rolls

would assuredly be followed as arrived from Jerusalem which bore the stamp

de mens, et pond. § ii. The library in the Brucheion perished in the time of Julius Caesar that of the Serapeion is said to have been destroyed by Omar, a.d. 640. ^ In Ezech. v. cf. in Geji. xxxi., Mich. ii. See the Talmudical - de inejis et pond. passages cited by Hody, p. 269. 3 sq. 3 Ryle, Cayton the O. T., p. 113. Cf. Buhl, p. 12. of
; ;

7

24

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
if a bilingual Jew was found ready happy accident enables us to estimate which this process had gone by the sixth

of Palestinian recognition,
to undertake the task.

A

roughly the extent to

or seventh decade of the second century.

The
in the

writer of the

prologue to Sirach,
Euergetes

who

arrived in

Egypt
B.C.
if,

38th year of

i.e.

in

the year

132

as

is

probable, the

Euergetes intended was the second of that name incidentally uses words which imply that " the Law, the Prophets, and the
rest of the

)^
6

/ * ^,
books
"
€19

were already current in a translation

€€,

kripav

^
II.

(

€€

iv

/).
made

This sentence reveals

the progress which had been

in the

work of

translation

between the second Ptolemy and

the ninth.

Under Euergetes

the Alexandrian Jews possessed, in addition to the original Greek Pentateuch, a collection of prophetic books, and a

number

of other writings belonging to their national literature^

which had not as yet formed themselves into a complete group. The latter are doubtless the books which are known as


D^a-in? or

Hagiographa.
Jew, we

Since the author of the prologue was

a

Palestinian

may perhaps assume

that

under

at

and
a safe one,
^

he includes such books of
If this
'

both classes as were already in circulation in Palestine.
inference
is
it

will follow that all the
'

'

Prophets

of

the

Hebrew canon, former and
B.C.

'

latter,'

had been translated

before

132.
to the Hagiographa, in

With regard
who,
I

some cases we have
Eupolemus,
in

data which lead to a more definite conclusion.
if

identical with the person of that
viii.

name mentioned
as

Mace.

17, wrote

about the middle of the second century,
Freudenthal
has

.
makes
^

use

of
supra

the
:

Greek Chronicles,

Cf. prol,

The Alexandrian Greek
clearly

Version.

25

shewn ^

Ezra-Nehemiah,

Chronicles, was probably translated at the

book.

Aristeas (not the

the writer of

according to

pseudonymous author of the letter, but a treatise Trcpt quotes the book of Job the lxx., and has been suspected" of being the
it

)
but
it

originally

continuous with
as that

same time

author of the remarkable codicil attached to

(Job

xlii.

17 b

e).

The
patra

footnote to the Greek Esther, which states that that book
to

was brought
"

Egypt
i.e.

in the 4th year of

''

(probably

of Ptolemy Philometor),

Ptolemy and Cleomay have been
fact that

written with the purpose of giving Palestinian sanction to the

Greek version of
century b.c.^
I

that

book

;

vouches for the

the version was in circulation before the end of the second

The

Psalter of the lxx. appears to be quoted in
2),

Mace.

vii.

17 (Ps. Ixxviii. =lxxix.

and the Greek version of

Maccabees probably belongs to the first century B.C. At what time the Greek Psalter assumed its present form there is no evidence to shew, but it is reasonable to suppose that the great Palestinian collections of sacred song did not long remain unknown to the Alexandrian Jews^ and even on the hypothesis of certain Psalms being Maccabean, the later books of the
I
;

Greek Psalter may be assigned
century.
17.

to the

second half of the second
frag-

On
it is

the whole, though the direct evidence

is

mentary,

probable that before the Christian era Alexandria

possessed the whole, or nearly the whole, of the
Scriptures in a

Hebrew
the
are

Greek

translation.

For the

first

century a.d.

we have

the very important evidence of Philo,

LXX. and quotes largely from

indeed some books of the

who uses many of the books. There Hebrew canon to which he does

not

seem

to refer,

i.e.

Ruth, Ecciesiastes, Canticles, Esther, LamenBut, as Professor Ryle points out,
f.

tations, Ezekiel,
1

Daniel ^

2 *

" lb. Pp. 108, 119; cf. p. 185. p. 138 Cf. Cheyne, Origin of the Psalter, pp. 12, 83. Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture, p. xxxi. f.

;

20
"
it

The Alexandrian Greek Version.

may be

safely

in Philo's time, already united to
;

assumed that Ruth and Lamentations were, Judges and Jeremiah in the

Greek Scriptures " and Ezekiel, as one of the greater Prophets, had assuredly found its way to Alexandria before a.d. i. Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Esther, Daniel, which " seem to have
been among the latest books to be received into the Sacred Canon \" may have been purposely neglected by Philo, as not
possessing canonical authority.
to

But

it

would be precarious

conclude that they had not been as yet translated into Greek ; the Book of Esther, as we have seen, was probably

current at Alexandria during the second century B.C.

Two
{a)

other

Jewish, but not Alexandrian, authorities assist us to ascertain the

contents of the Greek Bible in the

first

century a.d.

The

Testament shews a knowledge of the lxx. version in most of the books which it quotes, and it quotes all the books of the Old Testament except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, and certain of the Minor Prophets ^ As
in the case of Philo,
it

New

is

possible, though scarcely probable,

that

Esther,

Ecclesiastes

and the Song were passed by
;

as

not having received the stamp of canonicity

but the silence

of the Apostolic writers about them does not in any case prove
that
tion

Greek translations of these books were not yet

in circula-

among

Palestinian Jews,

{b)

Josephus,

who knew and used
Hebrew books
it

the LXX., unfortunately has no explicit statement as to the

extent of the Greek version
is

;

but his

list

of the

practically identical with

our own, and, as
readers,
it

occurs in a

treatise

intended for

Gentile

is

perhaps safe to

assume that he speaks of books accessible in a translation version that he writes with the lxx. '*in other words, before him^"

Thus while the testimony of the
absolutely require us to believe
^

first

century a.d. does not
all

that

the

books of the

-

Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture, Ryle, Canou, p. 151.

p. xxxiii.
'^

lb. p. 163.

J

The Alexandrian Greek
Hebrew canon had been
;

Version.

2
in a

translated

and were circulated

Greek version during the Apostolic age, such a view is not improbable and it is confirmed by the fact that they are all contained in the canon of the Greek Bible which the Christian Church received from its Jewish predecessors. It is another
question whether the versions were
or the
all

of Alexandrian origin,

only Greek translations which

claimed to represent

the corresponding

Hebrew books.

In a few cases there were

certainly rival interpretations or recensions of the
(e.g.

same book
where
it

in Judges, Daniel, Tobit).

But as a whole the work of
at Alexandria,

translation

was doubtless carried out

was begun; and the Greek Bible of the Hellenistic Jews and the Catholic Church may rightly be styled the Alexandrian

Greek version of the Old Testament.
Literature. The following list embraces a mere fraction of the vast literature of the Alexandrian Version. The selection has been made with the purpose of representing the progress of knowledge since the middle of the seventeenth century. L. Capellus, critica sacra^ 1651 J. Pearson, praefatio pa7'aenetica^ 1655; Ussher, Syntagma^ 1655; \^2\.^ proleg07ne)ia^ 1657; Hottinger, disertatioiium fasciculits^ 1660; I. Voss, de LXX. interpretibus^ 1661 1663; J. Morinus, Exercitatiofics, 1669; R. Simon, histoire critique dii Vieux Testameiit'^^ 1685; H. Hody, de Bibl. textibus originalibus^ 1705 H, Owen, Enquiry itito the text of the LXX., 1769; Brief accoimt of the LXX., 1787; Stroth, in Eichhorn's Reperto7'iu)ii, v. ff., 1779 ff.; White, Letter to the Bp of London^ I779; Fabricius-Harles, iii. 658 ff., 1793; R• Holmes, Episcopo JDujielfn. epistola., ij()^•, praefatio ad Pe7itateuchum^ 1798; Schleusner, opuscula C7-itica^ 18 12; Topler, de Pe7itateuchi i7ite7p7'etat. Alex. i7idole^ 1830; Dahne, jiid.-alexandr. Philosophie, 1834; Grinfield, Apology for the LXX., 1 841; Frankel, Vorstudien zur d. LXX., 1841 iiber deyi Eittfluss d. paldst. Exegese auf die alexa7idr. Her?7iene7Uik, 1 851; do., iiber paldst. u. alexandr. Sch7-iftforschuug, 1854; Thiersch, de Pe7itateuchi ve7's. Alexa7idr.. 1841; Constantinus Oeconomus, Trepl 1 849; Churton, The I7iflue7ice Ewald, of the LXX. up07i the p7Ogress of Christia7nty, 1861 Gesch. des Volkes IsraeP,\i6^•, E. Nestle, Septuagi7ita-Studien, i. 1886, ii. 1896; S. R. Driver, Notes on Sa77iuel {Bitrod. § :^{.), 1890; P. de Lagarde, Septuaginta-Studie7t, i. 1891, ii. 1892;
;

;

;

/ €€,

;

28
Buhl,

The Alexandrian Greek Version.
Kanon
u.

A. Loisy, histoire critique 1892; Hatch, Essays on Biblical Greek, 1892; W. Robertson Smith, O. T. in the Jewish Church"^, 1892; E. Klostermann, Analecta zur LXX^., 1895; Monographs Nestle, Urtext u. Ubersetzungen der Bibel, 1897. on special books or particular aspects of the subject will be
Zl,

Text der A.

1891

;

du

texte et des versions de

Bible,

enumerated elsewhere.

The student should also consult the best Introductions to the O. T., especially those of Eichhorn (1777 ff•)) De Wette-Schrader (1869), Bleek-Wellhausen^ (1893), Konig (1893); and the Encyclopedias and Bible Dictionaries, especially the articles on the Septuagint in Smith's D. B. iii. (Selwyn), the Eficyclopedia Britamiica^ (Wellhausen), and the Real-Encykl. /. prot. Theologie u. Kirche^ (Nestle; also published in a separate form,
under the
title

Urtext

u.

Ubersetzungen,

&^c.).

CHAPTER

II.

Later Greek Versions.
I
.

At

Alexandria and in Egypt generally the Alexandrian

version was regarded, as Philo plainly says, with a reverence
scarcely less than that which belonged to the original.
It

was
to

the Bible of the Egyptian Jews, even of those
the educated and literary class.

who belonged

This feeling was shared by
In Palestine indeed the

the rest of the Hellenistic world.

version seems to have been received with less enthusiasm,

whether

it

was used
its

in the

synagogues

is still

uncertain.

and But

elsewhere

acceptance by Greek-speaking Jews was universal

during the ApostoHc age and in the next generation.
the question of the use of the LXX. in the synagogues see i. i, Frankel, Vorstudten, p. 56 if., Konig, Ei?ileitung^ the negative is stoutly maintained by J. Lightfoot, p. 105 ff. hor. Hebr. (add. to i Cor. xiv.). If the Ep. to the Hebrews was addressed to the Church of Jerusalem, the preponderating use of the LXX. in its quotations from the O. T. is strong evidence, so far as it goes, for the acceptance of the LXX. by Palestinian Hellenists. Its use by St Paul vouches for the practice of the Hellenists of Asia Minor and Europe; no rival version had gained circulation at Antioch, Ephesus, or Rome. In the next century we have the evidence of Justin {apol. i. 31 [the translated books]

On

Hody

iii.

;

'
€v


{apol.

€v Tertullian 18 "Judaei palam lectitant"), Pseudo-Justin {cohort, ad Gr. 13 TO de 'louSatoty ert Tas ttj

-

*

elaiv ^lovdatois

'lepeplov eTt

*

),
€\
:

dial.

^

72


avrt]

30

^, ).
yiyovev

Later Greek

Versio7is.

deias

'4pyov

...

.€

vnep

2.

When

the lxx. passed into the hands of the
in controversy with

Church

and was used

Jewish antagonists, the Jews
Xiyeiv

not unnaturally began to doubt the accuracy of the Alexandrian
version (Justin, dial. 68

AiyvTTTLOiv

€.
was the rendering of

tv

^ ),

The
suit

in Isa. by vii. 14, where vcavt?, it was contended, would have given the true meaning of the Hebrew word (id. 71, 84; Iren. iii. 21. i). But the dissatisfaction with which the lxx. was regarded by

crucial instance

^?^

the Jewish leaders of the

second century was perhaps not

altogether due to polemical causes.

The lxx. "did not
it

the newer school of [Jewish] interpretation,

did not correspond
differing

with

the

received

text\"

An

official

text

con-

siderably from the text accepted in earlier times had received

the

approval of the Rabbis,
represented
pass
into

which

the

older text,

and the Alexandrian version, began to be suspected
to provide

and

to

disuse.

Attempts were made

something better

^^ ).
for

Greek-speaking Israelites (Justin, dial 71 Of two such fresh translations

Irenaeus speaks in terms of reprehension

€€.€.
Origen,

who

realised the importance of these translations,

, ' ).
(/. c.

^

...

@€...6
was

able to add to those of Aquila and Theodotion the version of

Symmachus and three others which were anonymous". Of the anonymous versions little remains, but Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus are represented by numerous and in some cases
important fragments.
1 Robertson Smith, The 0. T. in the J. Ck., p. 64 Kirkpatrick. Divine Library, p. 63 ff. cf. Buhl, p. 118 f. 2 Eus. H. E. vi. 16.
;

;

cf.

ib.

p.

87

f.

;

Later Greek Versions,
3.

31

Aquila.
oVo/xart

age by a native of Pontus

was also of Pontus, from the famous sea-port' Sinope, which had been constituted by Juhus Caesar a Roman colony but he was of Gentile origin. He lived in the reign of Hadrian
lator
(a.d.

,
his

The name had been borne in the ApostoHc who was of Jewish birth (Acts xviii. 2
yeVet).

Aquila the trans-

\

,

117

138),

and was a connexion of the Emperor

{^-

Epiph., Dia/. of Timothy

Chron. Fasch.).
the building of

and Aquila ; irevOepo^, Ps.-Ath., Hadrian employed his relative to superintend AeHa Capitolina on the site of Jerusalem, and
Refusing, however, to abandon
;

while there Aquila was converted to Christianity by Christians

who had

returned from Pella.

the pagan practice of astrology, he was excommunicated

upon

which he shewed

resentment by submitting to circumcision
to the teaching of the Jewish Rabbis.

and attaching himself

The purpose

of his translation was to set aside the interpretait

tion of the Lxx., in so far as

appeared to support the views

of the Christian Church.•

Tcvei

€€ \ ^^€ €,

•] €€8,
This
is

[sc.

The same tale is told in substance by the PseudoAthanasian author of Synopsis script, sacr., c. 77, and in the Dialogue betweeii Timothy and Aquila printed in A?iecdoia Oxon., class, ser. pt viii. According to the writer of the Dialogue Aquila learned Hebrew in his 40th year, and there are other features peculiar to this form of the story which have led the editor, Mr F. C. Conybeare, to conjecture that it is independent of the Epiphanian narrative, though derived from the same source,
^

^
I

€().

"? € ^ ^^, ( , the story of Epiphanius {de mejis. ct pond. 14 sq.
8e
toIs epyots
'

... \—

8€. \

" ^, ^

€\

'--;

naidevOels

iv

€ ^
:

€...}

'

Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor,
Peter, p.
1

p.

27

f.

;

cf.

Hort, Commentary

on

72

fF.

32
which he believes

Later Greek Versions,

to have been ultimately the history of Ariston of Pella {op. cit. p. xxvi. ff.). An Aquila figures in the Clementine romance {}io?7i. ii. sqq., recog?i. ii. sqq.) the name and character were perhaps suggested by some floating memories of the translator. Cf. Lagarde, Clementma, p. I2f.
;

'?
cTi/at

That Aquila was a proselyte to Judaism is attested by the Jewish tradition (Jer. Talm. Meg. i. ii, Kiddush. i. i), in which he appears as ,^^ After his conversion to Judaism, Aquila became a pupil of R. Eliezer and R. Joshua (Meg. f. 71 r) or, according to another authority, of R. Akiba {Kiddush. f. 59 i?). The latter statement seems to have been current among the Jews of Palestine in Jerome's time (Hieron. in Isa. viii. 14 "scribae et Pharisaei quorum suscepit scholam Akybas, quern magistrum Aquilae proselyti autumant"), and it derives some confirmation from the character of the version. According to Epiphanius the floruit of Aquila is to be placed in the 12th year of Hadrian (Epiph. de J7iens. et pond. 13

<;\

,
1

€,€,
'. in

-?

kpfx-qveia^

? ', €^
cret

€'^€0...9

6'

€'
9,

'?

The

2th year of Hadrian was a.d. 128

the year

which the Emperor began to rebuild Aelia. This date is doubtless approximately correct, if Aquila was a pupil of R.
Akiba,

who

Eliezer and R. Joshua,

taught from a.d. 95 to a.d. 135 ^ or even of R. who immediately preceded Akiba. It
to acquire an

must have taken the Greek proselyte many years
of interpretation,

adequate knowledge of Hebrew and of the Rabbinical methods

and under these circumstances

his great

work

could hardly have been completed before the third decade of
the second century.
1

When
oS^py,

Irenaeus wrote his third book, in
D7''pX,

The name

is

written

^.

or

O7WV,

and

in the

the identity of Aquila with Onkelos see Anger de Onkelo Chaldaico (before 1845), Friedmann Onkelos 21. Akylas (Wien, 1896); or the brief statement in Buhl, p. 173. ^ Field, Hexapla, prolegg. p. xviii.

Bab. Talmud, D1?p3K.

On

Later Greek Versions.

33
still

.
4•

the eighth decade, Aquila's translation might

as comparatively recent
.

.?.

.

.').

( .-.
vvv
2,

be regarded

It

received with acclamation by his co-religionists.
congratulated him in the words of Ps. xlv.

was natural that the version of Aquila should be His teachers
Dli< '?.?P n^S^SJ'.

The Talmud quotes
passages (Gen.
xviii.
V.

or refers to his translation of not a few
i
;

xvii.

Lev.
iii.

xix. 20, 23,

40; Esth.

i.

6; Prov.

21, XXV.
13).

11;

Isa.

20; Ezek.

xvi. 10, xxiii.

43; Dan.

5, viii.

In Origen's time he was trusted implicitly in

Jewish

circles,
(ep.

and used by
Africaii.
2

all

Jews who did not understand
dyvoovvrcs

9. . ^^,
Hebrew
for

ad

€7€€/€)

-. '
',

and the same

preference for Aquila seems to have been characteristic of the

Jews in the fourth and fifth centuries (cf. Jerome on Ezek. iii. 5, and Augustine de civ. Dei xv. 23), and at a still later period,
Scriptures in the synagogues, thought

even Justinian, when regulating the public reading of the it expedient to permit
:

the use of Aquila (novell. 146

"at vero

ii

qui Graeca lingua
.
.

legun t Lxx. interpretum utentur translatione

.

concedimus etiam Aquilae versione utendi").
distrust

verum licentiam It was equally
.

. .

natural that the proselyte's version should be regarded with

by Christians, who saw in it the work of a champion Rabbinism as well as a bold attempt to displace the Septuagint'. Yet the few Christian writers who were students
of
of the

Hebrew

Bible learnt to recognise the fidelity of Aquila's
letter'

work.
Xe^ct)
^ ;

He

was 'a slave to the

(€/
text
(cf.

rrj

whatever was wanting
i.

in the
is

Hebrew
upon
nD*•

was not
Gen.

]
to
X

be

Megilla

9: in

n"'S"'Q''

there

a play
to

ix. 27).

^wxWi'C'i Fragments of Aquila, p. vi.: "Aquila in a sense was not the sole or independent author of the version, its uncompromising literalism being the necessary outcome of his Jewish teachers' system of exegesis."
-

See Dr C. Taylor in the preface

Mr

S.

S.


34
found
in

Later Greek Versions.

So Origen confesses'; and Jerome, though when a censorious mood he does not spare the proselyte (e.g.
^

).
in

Aquila

(

KCtrat

TOts

^,
;

praef. in

Job ep. ad. Far?wiach.)^ elsewhere admits his honesty and diligence {ep.ad Damas. 12 ''non contentiosius, ut quidam ep. putant, sed studiosius verbum interpretatur ad verbum " ad Marcell. " iamdudum cum voluminibus Hebraeorum editionem Aquilae confero, ne quid forsitan propter odium Christi synagoga mutaverit, et ut amicae menti fatear quae ad nostram fidem pertineant roborandam plura reperio "). After these testimonies from the two most competent witnesses in the ancient Church, we need not stop to consider the invective

of Epiphanius'-.
5.

Until the

to students only

summer of 1897 Aquila's version was known from the description of ancient writers, chiefly

Christian, and the fragments of the Hexapla (c. iii.), which when complete contained the entire work. These sources were used with admirable skill by Dr Field {^prolegomena in Hexapla^ p. xix. if.) and Dr C. Taylor {D. C. B. art. Hexapla) But an to illustrate the purpose and style of Aquila's work.

unexpected discovery has now placed
larger

at

our disposal several

fragments of the version, emanating from a Jewish

source.

Among
lately

the debris of the Genizah of the Cairo synaefforts of

gogue

brought to Cambridge through the

Dr

Taylor and Dr Schechter,
as to discover

Mr

F. C. Burkitt has

been so fortunate

some palimpsest scraps which under later Hebrew good uncial hand of the sixth century Aquila's translation of i Kings xx. 9 17 and 2 Kings xxiii. 12 From the same treasure Dr Taylor has recovered 2, 10^, and a portion of Ps. xxii. The Pss. xc. 6 13, xci. 4
writing contain in a

^ See p. 31. Aug. /. c. Ep. ad Afric. 3. Fragments of the Books of Kings accordmg to the translation of Aquila (Cambridge, 1897). ^ See the facsimile and letterpress prefixed to Sayings of the Jewish
1

Cf.

^

Fathers (ed.

2,

1897).

Later Greek Versions.

35

student will find below specimens of these discoveries, placed
for the

purpose of comparison in parallel columns with the

version of the lxx.

3

Regn.

xxi. (i

Kings

xx.) lo

13.

?
/xot
el

Tats

' '^^/ % , ,' ^^' ." ^• . ^ / ^ ^ /?.
LXX. (Cod. B').


6

'/ /
6

Aquila.

'° dTreVreiAer

€70€

/
d

^eot

;7^

^...%

/. ''

)
' / '. /? /?'

/
6

6

iyevero ore

:7^

• ' ^ / / ^ /- / '
/'

,
;

'"

-

,/
iyivixo ')

6

'

'.

'•
'^^^^^

[3q{,

;
:

'"

'3

/'/ /' . , 3 ]
^

^

/ ,' ,
|

^'^^'^

'/

,'

Cod.

;/
13

ot

i^eot

-

/3, ] MS. xe[iAi]ac[iN]

nearer to Aquila, as the following variants shew /cai raoe 12 ore] A pr A rot' pr iravra eis
is

,

'/
?A
|

^'^^'^.

A

1077-? . A ? .
(

ot

^.

;

see Burkitt,

i?/. cit.

p. 2.

36

Later Greek Versions,

^' €/€€'

^ / ^ / , -, , ,
Lxx. (Cod. B').
6

4 Regn.

(2

Kings)

xxiii.

21

24.

Aquila.

^'

everctXaro 6

Xcyctv

^^otl

(.
'^OTt

'

€€
*•
eye-

-

^"1^"^

^,
^^ 'le-

/ .
'
^7
''''^

^ /' *
^^otl

4

^^

""^ -

'^^'^

^*

-

*1,

^/

.
A €>The
1

6

-, tTTt

. < [
:

/?-

^
] '.
22

-

following variants in Cod. 23 +

^

MS.

>

]

A

agree with Aquila

A

at the

end of a

line: see Burkitt, p. i6.

Later Greek

Versioiis.

37

^TTcactrat

. ,
Lxx. (Cod. B).

Ps. xc. (xci.) db

— 13
8yov

-

^ €,

^6 ,

,

^
^

?],

8[ ]. [
Aquila.

cyytct•

-

/

[«]•-

«^[ ]*

^8>,

[

oij/rj.

],
Kvpte,
77

',

eyyuL

^^^^,

. €€

^^OTL

^"€7

^;

^ ^ ]
.

'

, evT€-

. € )
,

\

,
€V

. , •

rats

^ "
^^ []^

"

, ]
^

^^'

€[ ]
.
2

,
*

11 rats oSots] pr

?

A(R)T

MS.

.

Later Greek Versions.

oTt

€,
Lxx (Cod.
epyoLs

Ps. xci. (xcii.) 5

lo.

B^).
iv

, €,

^[
[cv

^
"^
iv

, . -, . ^;. '? .
€,
^[ «/^/]
^[-^]

/,. , «
/>;€

) ],
/xe,

Aquila.

'^'^]'^^,

iv

/€.

[€)8^'^]7

^
'"

, ,, " ., " , ,^^ ]. .
^

-,
«*

-

,

iv

X^^V

ipya-

9

€.

-

ixOpoi

,

'W^'W^,

-

[7]^?7 €^[,

,

If the student examines these specimens of Aquila's 6. work and compares them with the Hebrew and lxx., the greater literalness of the later version and several of its most
1

The
OTt

following

variants

deserve

attention

:

6

10 pr

KA^RT

.

B-'^'^N'^-^RT

Later Greek Versions.
striking peculiarities will at

39

once be apparent.

He

will notice

especially the following,

an absolutely

)
09 €v

=

literal

There are frequent instances of rendering of the original, e.g. i Kings xx. 10
(i)

V?"^? "^^. (lxx. rots

=
;

•13''<'*1

)'>

(lxx.
21

2

Kings

xxiii.

= ^i^y. "^^.
is
is

(lxx.

) 8€ , )
;

1

2 ^cVe•

cOevro
;

).
=

?^^^? (lxx.
(2)

24

circumstances^

employed

to represent
e.g. i

Under certain the Hebrew i^^,
xx. 12

when
TO

it

the sign of the accusative^;
i^
a-yy

Kings

p^^a = 12*=11,

= pi3nn"?3"ni<j

2 Kings xxiii. 21 (where the dat. is governed by the preceding verb), 24 The same (3) Hebrew words are scrupulously rendered by the same Greek, = D31 occurs thrice in one context (2 Kings xxiii. e.g. /cat and in Ps. xcii. 8, 10 twice 15, 19, 24);

.

^
Orig.
to write
1 "

The transliterations adhere with \]^ (4) greater closeness to the Hebrew than in the lxx.^; thus HpS •1»^'N^ •1»?7 becomes (5) The Tetragrammaton is not transliterated, but written in Hebrew letters,
represents
yy.S.

,

, .
—where
the
'

^/^

and the characters
zn Ps.
ii.,

are of the archaic type

, /?
That the

(^T^l, not 1"•)

cf.

most exact copies
is

'

are
to

doubtless those of Aquila's version, for there

no reason

suppose that any copyists of the Alexandrian version hesitated
or
for
^'^'''^.

(6)

crudities of Aquila's

For these see Burkitt,

Aqiiila^ p. 12.

This singular use of appears also in the LXX., but only in Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, Avhich Freudenthal is disposed to assign to Aquila (p. 65); cf. Komg, Einleiiung, p. 108 n. ^ Aq. does hot transliterate FIV (see Burkitt, p. 14). * In a few Hexaplaric mss. (e.g. Q, 86, 88, 243™», 264) the Greek letters are written for but the Greek mss. use it solely in their excerpts from the non-Septuagintal columns of the Hexapla, and only the Hexaplaric Syriac admits into the text of the lxx., using it freely

1\

for

,

even with a preposition

(as

«^«^\ ).

Ceriani expresses the

40
style are

Later Greek Versions.
not due to an insufficient vocabulary^
is

clear from

his ready use of words belonging to the classical or the literary

ing are specimens;
KcVei
;

7€€€, Aq.
5

; /, ^^ ,,,,
more
closely than the colloquialisms of the lxx.
i

type

when they appear

to

him

to

correspond to the Hebrew

The

follow-

Kings
xxiii.

xx. lo lxx.
\

c/cTrotr/Vci,

Aq. e^ap-

LXX.

7€^,
2

Aq. \v)^.iv^
21

;

Kings

LXX.
;

^%,

12 LXX.

Aq.

Aq.

;

24 LXX.
;

Ps. xc. 8 LXX.

LXX.

, .
Aq.
the

Aq.

LXX.

Aq.

Aq.

;

.

;

LXX.

Aq.

;

LXX.

;

xci.

From
hexaplaric

fragments
it

which
possible

survive
to

in

the

margins of
other

MSS.

is

illustrate

certain

characteristic features of Aquila

which

arise out of his

extreme

loyalty to the letter of his

Hebrew

text,

(i)

Jerome remarks

upon

his

endeavour

to represent

even the etymological mean-

ing of the

I*am?nac/i. 11 " non solum verba verborum transferre conatus est)," sed etymologias quoque and by way of example he cites the rendering of Deut. vii. 13, where Aquila substituted

Hebrew words (ad

for

,

,,

oTvov,
S^"i"'J?,

in

order to reflect more exactly the
though, adds Jerome humorously,
Similarly,

,

Hebrew we were

1^"^,

inV!

—as
is

to use in hsLUn /iisio, pomatio, splendentia.

due either to Origen or Eusebius, i.e. for '^T^'^ in the non-Septuagintal columns, using the letters to represent the Hebrew characters which were familiar to them. On the whole subject the student may consult Ceriani, Momimcnta sacra ei profana, ii. p. 106 ff.; Schleusner s. v. iriirt, Field, Hexapla ad Esa. i. 2; Hatch and Redpath, Concordance, p. 1135;
opinion that the use of one of those fathers substituted
Z. D. M. G. (1878), 501, 506. '^^'^'^ (and doubtless also
racters " instead of
^

was read as KiJpios, since in one place in the Aquila fragments where there was no room to write the Hebrew cha'^^'^"^ we find ot/f^ /cU." " Even Jerome speaks of Aquila as " eruditissimus linguae Graecae
5).

^

)

Mr

Burkitt acutely points out (p. 16) that

(in

Isa. xlix.
2

See

Mr

Burkitt's note (p. 26).

Later Greek Versions.
Aquila represented D:VV by
or

€,
Hebrew
9,

and /'^S^n by and even coined the impossible form
5?•")^^.

^,
2

41
is

to correspond Avith
to represent
particles,

thus

local
xii.

Gen.

prepositions are accumulated in a

^
,
its

(2)

An
(e. g.

attempt

made
;

even such as defy translation
vorovSi
;

becomes the

enclitic

-

'^^^'^,

= "?,

Kings

xvi.

9)

and
Kings

similarly

manner

Greek usage (e.g. ek (3) Other devices are adopted
of complex meaning or form

/^€/ =
for
is

?,
is

quite alien from
2
xix. 25).

the purpose of bringing
;

the version into close conformity with the original

a word

represented by two Greek

words
/"VTV

(e.g.

^t^^^

into

;
is

converted into rpdyos

and

a

Hebrew word

replaced by a Greek

word somewhat
Aquila gives

similar in sound, e.g. for f\y^ (Deut.

and for ^''P'}^ (i Sam. xv. 2^) Enough has been said to shew the absurdity of Aquila's method when it is regarded from the standpoint of the modern
translator.

^.
xi.

30)

Even
it

in ancient times

such a translation could

never have attained to the popularity which belonged to the

Lxx.

;

that

was widely accepted by the Greek synagogues of

the Empire can only have been due to the prejudice created in
its

favour by

traditional exegesis^

known adherence to the standard text and the The version of Aquila emanated from
;

a famous school of Jewish teachers

it

was issued with the

full

approval of the Synagogue, and
all

its

affectation of preserving at

costs the idiom of the original recommended it to orthodox Jews whose loyalty to their faith was stronger than their sense of the niceties of the Greek tongue. For ourselves the work of

^

The

student

who

Prolegg. p. xxi. sqq.,

and Dr Taylor's article Hexapla in D. B. iii. Jerome speaks more than once of a second edition of Aquila p. lyff. "quam Hebraei nominant." The question is discussed by
{prolegg. xxiv.
-

ff.).

^

wishes to pursue the subject

may

refer to Field,

C

See

Mr

Burkitt's article Aquila in the
ff.

Jewish Quarterly

Revie^iV,

Jan.

1898, p. 211

42

Later Greek

Versio?ts.

Aquila possesses a value which arises from another consideration.

His " high standard of exactitude and
his translation, with all
critic
its

rigid consistency give

imperfections, unique worth for the

^"
fully

Its

importance for the criticism of the Old Testament

was
the

recognised by the two greatest scholars of ancient

Christendom, and there are few things more to be desired by

modern student of Scripture than the complete recovery of monument of the text and methods of interpretation approved by the chief Jewish teachers of the generation which
this

followed the close of the Apostolic age.
7.

Theodotion.
Testament

AVith

Aquila Irenaeus couples Theo-

dotion of Ephesus, as another Jewish proselyte
the

Old

and probably a junior contemporary of may be trusted when he assigns this translator to Ephesus, and describes him as a convert to Judaism. Later writers, however, depart more or less widely from this statement. According to Epiphanius, Theodotion was a native of Pontus, who had been a disciple of Marcion of
self of Asiatic origin,

.

../€

into

Greek

(©coSortW

€€ ).
who

translated
6

Him-

Theodotion, Irenaeus

Sinope before he espoused Judaism. According to Jerome, he was an Ebionite, probably a Jew who had embraced Ebionitic Christianity. 1^\% floruit is fixed by Epiphanius in the reign of
the second

Commodus,

i.e.

of the

called to distinguish

him from

L. Crionius

Emperor Commodus, so Commodus, better
bevr^pov

known

Epiph. de 7nens.
Xe'iav

\(

8/, ^^ ^ 8
as L. Aurelius Verus.
et po7id. 17

(

€^

Aovklov

ly',

Hieron.

£p.

ad

^'\

\

aipiaei

TratSeu^eif,

18

\

^.

Aiigiistm.: "hominis Judaei atque blasphemi";
vii.

^

Dr

Taylor, pref. to Fragments of Aqtiila, p.

:

Later Greek Versions,
praef. in

43

Job: "ludaeus Aquila, et Symmachus et Theodotio Judaizantes haeretici"; de vir7\ ill. 54 "editiones...Aquilae... Pontici proselyti et Theodotionis Hebionaei"; praef ad DairieL "Theodotionem, qui utique post adventum Christi incredulus fuit, licet eum quidam dicant Hebionitam qui altero genere ludaeus
.

esti."

The
too

date assigned to Theodotion by Epiphanius

late, in

is obviously view of the statement of Irenaeus, and the whole

account

suspiciously

within the
as adults,

resembles the story of Aquila. That same century two natives of Pontus learnt Hebrew and used their knowledge to produce independent

translations of the
is

Hebrew

Bible,

is

scarcely credible.

But

it

not unlikely that Theodotion was an Ephesian Jew or Jewish

Ebionite.

The

attitude

of a Hellenist towards the Alexan-

drian version would naturally be one of respectful consideration,

and his view of the ofhce of a translator widely different from that of Aquila, who had been trained by the strictest Rabbis of the Palestinian school. And these expectations are
by what we know of Theodotion's work.
" Inter veteres
"simplicitate

justified

medius incedit" (Hieron. praef.
"Septuaginta
et

ad evang.);

sermonis a lxx. interpretibus non discordat"

(/riz^/! in Fss.)-,
{iji

Theodotio... in plurimis locis concordant"

Ecd.

ii.)

— such

is

Jerome's judgement
et

;

and Epiphanius agrees
7
:

with this estimate {de mens,
i$e8wK€v).

pond.

1

%'

free

have produced a revision of the lxx. rather than an independent version.
to

Theodotion seems

was made on the whole upon the basis of the text; thus the Job of Theodotion was longer than the Job of the lxx. by a sixth part of the whole (Orig. ep. ad Afric. 3 sqq., YW^xon. praef ad JobY, and in Daniel, on the other hand, the Midrashic expansions which characterise

The

revision

standard

Hebrew

.

^

Marcion flourished

192.

The Paschal

c. A.D. 150; Commodus was Emperor from 180 Chronicle, following Epiphanius, dates the work of

Theodotion a. d. 184. - See Field, Hexapla, Hatch, Essays, p. xxxix. art. Job in Smith's Bible Diet. (ed. 2).
;
'

p.

215

;

Margoliouth,

'

44
the

Later Greek Versions.
Lxx.
version

disappear in Theodotion.

His practice

with regard to apocryphal books or additional matter appears

not to have been uniform
the additions to Daniel

;

he followed the lxx. in accepting

and

that

and the supplementary verses in JobS of Baruch found place in his version appears the book
in the

from certain notes
there
is

margin of the Syro-Hexaplar-

;

but

no evidence

that he admitted the non-canonical books

in general.
8.

Specimens of Theodotion's
to

style

and manner may be
in

obtained from the large and important fragments of his work

which were used by Origen
(lxx.).

fill

up the lacunae

Jeremiah

The

following passage,
will serve as

preserved in the margin of
a specimen of his style and

Codex Marchalianus,
manner^.

€7

^ / ^

Xcyet

, , . ,^ €€ -^ ' ^/ •
''*

'€ ,

Jeremiah

xl. (xxxiii.)

14

26.

Kvpios,

olkov

'^

iv

cKttVat?

iv

€V Trj yfj.

^^

iv Tats

cKitVats

€7

,
1
'^

KaXeVet

Aikaiocy'nh

^. '€

^'
''

'^

€ €^77^€
Orig. ep.

? €€€ ' €,
/,
"'

.'7

^.^

'^

,

See

art.

ad Afric. 3. Theodotion in
iii.

D.

C. B. iv. 978.

3

0. T. in Greek,

pp.

vii. ff.,

320

f.

5/3•

^,^ , , . ' ^ * .^'^ ' , ' , -' ^ ^ /? /?/ /, /' , ^ , \
45
ctvat

viov

.
-^

Later Greek Versions.

,
"
^^
t

^*

Tt'

At

;

//

/.

^^

/;

•^

^,

^,

^^

.•)^

Unfortunately there is no other Greek version which can be compared with Theodotion in this passage, for the lxx. is wanting, and only a few shreds of Aquila and Symmachus have But the student will probably agree with Field reached us. that the style is on the whole not wanting in simple dignity, and that it is scarcely to be distinguished from the best manner of the Lxx.^ With his Hebrew Bible open at the place, he will
observe that the rendering
is

faithful to the original,

while

it

escapes the crudities and absurdities which beset the excessive
fidelity of

Aquila.

Now

known

to the LXX. (e.g.
;

^^',
^

and again we meet with a word un-

on the other hand Theodotion agrees with the lxx. against Aquila in translating by If in one place
of Aquila
^

.

a reminiscence

Another considerable fragment of Theodotion may be found

xlvi. (xxxix.) 4
-

in Greek, p. 534 f. Hexapla, prolegg. p. xxxix. " Theodotionis stylus simplex et gravis
13, see O. T.

in jer.

est."
3 Cod. employs in this sense (Jud. v. 15, 3 Regn. xi. 34, 4 Regn. xvii. 15), but under the influence of Theodotion, at least in the last two passages ; see Field ad loc.

A

40

Later Greek Versions.
is

.-. ,
Theodotion
as a

more obscure than Aquila
Aq.

whole

is

a singularly clear and unaffected rendering.
;

.

..

( ),

yet the passage

His

chief defect does not reveal itself in this context

it

is

a habit

of transliterating

Hebrew words which could have presented no
list

difficulty to a person moderately acquainted with both lan-

guages.

Field gives a
in this

of 90 words which are treated by

way without any apparent caused When among these we find such a word as ^^ (which is represented by -^ in Mai. ii. 11), we are compelled to absolve him from
Theodotion
the charge of incompetence,
for, as

has been pertinently asked,
with so ordinary a

how could

a

man who was unacquainted
its

Greek equivalent have produced a version at Probably an explanation should be sought in the cautious all ? and conservative temperament of this translator ^ Field's judgement is here sounder than Montfaucon's; Theodotion is not to

word or with

quam
9. is

be pronounced indoctior, or indiligentior, but only "scrupulosior operis sui institute fortasse conveniret^"

The
lost

relation of the

two extant Greek versions of Daniel
appears ^ announced his intention
;

a perplexing problem which calls for further consideration.

In his

Stromata Origen,

it

of using Theodotion's version of Daniel

and an examination

of Origen's extant works shews that his citations of Daniel

current^"

"agree almost verbatim with the text of Theodotion now The action of Origen in this matter was generally
endorsed by the Church, as we learn from Jerome {praef. i?t " Danielem prophetam iuxta lxx. interpretes ecclesiae Daft.
:

1

Op.

cit.

p. xl. sq.

2

3

D. C. B. art. Hexapla (iii. p. 22). Cf. ib. iv. p. 978. Thus in Mai. /. c. he was perhaps unwilling to use
:

%

in

connexion

with the phrase IDA 7N.
se
* Jerome on Dan. iv. " Origenes in nono Stromattim volumine asserit quae sequuntur ab hoc loco in propheta Daniele non iuxta LXX. interpretes... sed iuxta Theodotionis editionem disserere." 5 Dr Gwynn in D. C. B. (iv. p. 974).

Later Greek Versions.
non
legunt, utentes Theodotionis editione";
cf.
c.

47
Riifin.
ii.

Jerome did not know how this happened, but his 2i2i)' " hoc unum own words supply a sufficient explanation affirmare possum quod multum a veritate discordet et recto iudicio repudiata sit." So universal was the rejection of the
:

Lxx. version of Daniel that, though Origen loyally gave
place
in his

it

a

Hexapla, only one Greek copy has survived'.
having been
Daniel.
in preference to the

Theodotion's version
extant Greek

substituted

in

all

other

MSS. of

But the use of Theodotion's Daniel
Origen.

version which was attributed to the lxx. did not begin with

Clement of Alexandria
ii.

(as edited) uses

Theodotion,
In North

with a sprinkling of lxx. readings, in the few places where

he quotes Daniel {paed.
Africa both versions
of Daniel.

8,

iii.

3, sirovi.

i.

4, 21).

seem

to

have influenced the Latin text

F. C. Burkitt",

The subject has been carefully investigated by Mr who shews that TertuUian used "a form of the
text, in

LXX. differing slightly from Origen's edition," whilst Cyprian
quotes from a mixed

which Theodotion sometimes preDaniel after Theodotion's

dominates.

Irenaeus, notwithstanding his reverence for the lxx.

and

distrust of the later versions, cites

version^.

Further, Theodotion's Daniel appears to be used by

writers anterior to the date usually assigned to this translator.

Thus Hermas

{I'is.

iv.

2,

4) has a clear reference to
vi.

Theo-

dotion's rendering of Dan.

22 ^

Justin {dial. 31) gives a

long extract from Dan.

vii.

in

which characteristic readings

from the two versions occur in almost equal proportions'.

Clement of
1

Rome
and

(i

Cor. 34) cites a part of the

same

context,

iii.

as Cod. 87 (H. P. 88) ; see 0. T. in Greek, the subscription printed //'. p. 574.. p. 18 3 An exception in i. 19. 3 (Dan. xii. 9 f.) is due to a Marcosian source. ^ See Salmon, Intr. to ihe N. J p. 639. ^ On the trustworthiness of Justin's text here see Burkitt, op. cit. p. 25 n. (against Hatch, Essays, p. 190).

The Chigi MS. known
vi., xii.,
cf.

pp.

-

Old

Latiji

and Itala,

.

48

Later Greek Versions.

with a Theodotionic reading (eXctroupyow, lxx.

Barnabas
citation
is

{ep.

iv.

5) also refers to

Dan.

vii.,

and, though his

too loose to be pressed, the words
are

more

likely to

(Th,) than of

,

be a reminiscence of

^
c^cpctTrcvov).

(lxX.).

The Greek version of Baruch (i. 15 18, ii. 11 doubtedly supports Theodotion against the lxx.
remarkable
is

— 19)
Still

un-

more

the appearance of Theodotionic renderings in the

New

Testament.

A

writer so faithful to the lxx. as the author

of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in his only reference to Daniel

(Heb,

xi. 33 = Dan. vi. 23) agrees with Theodotion against the Chigi version'. The Apocalypse, which makes frequent use of

Daniel, supports Theodotion on the whole

;

cf.

Apoc.
xiii. 7

ix.

20

(Dan.
vii.

V.

23), X. 6

(Dan.

xii.

7), xii. 7

(Dan.

x.

2c),

(Dan.

21), xix. 6

(Dan.

x. 6), xx.

35)^^.

Even
vii.

in the Synoptic

in

Dan.

13

(/
xiv.
is

€€)

4 (Dan. vii. 9), xx. 11 (Dan. ii. Gospels Theodotion's rendering
occurs as well as the lxx.

v.;

comp. Mc.

62 with Mt. xxiv. 30, xxvi. 64".

From
as 'lxx.',

these premisses the inference has been

drawn

that

there were two pre-Christian versions of Daniel, both passing

one of which

preserved in the Chigi MS., whilst
It

the other formed the basis of Theodotion's revision\

has

been urged by Dr
Septuagintal Books

Gwynn

with

much
offer

acuteness that the two

of Esdras

an analogy to the two
2

versions of Daniel, and the appearance of the phrase in I Esdr. ii. 9 and Dan. Iv
^

;

-.
i.

Heb.
:

c.

LXX.,

The references are from Dr Salmon's Inir. p. 548 f. He adds " I actually find in the Apocalypse no clear evidence that St John had ever seen the so-called LXX. version." The N. T. occasionally inclines to Theodotion in citations which are not from Daniel; cf. Jo. xix. 37 (Zech. xii. 10), i Cor. xv. 54 (Is. xxv. 8); see Schurei-2, iii. p. 324, "entweder Th. selbst ist alter als die Apostel, oder es hat einen 'Th.' vor Th. gegeben." Dr Salmon {Intr. p. 547) is Z). C. B. art. Theodotion iv. p. 970
:
'•*

€6 €).

(Dan. Th.,

^^

(lxx.)

•*

lif.

disposed to accept this view.

Later Greek Versions.

49

has been regarded as an indication that the Greek Esdras and
the Chigi Daniel were the work of the

same

translator \

An

obvious objection to the hypothesis of two Septuagintal or

Alexandrian versions

is

the entire disappearance of the version

vhich was used ex hypothesi not only by the authors of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse, but by Theodotion

and other

writers

of the second century.

But Theodotion's
from the
stricter

revision of Daniel

may have
Of

differed so
its

little

Alexandrian version as to have taken
10.

place without remark^.

Symmachus.

this translator

Irenaeus says nothing,

and

it

has been inferred, perhaps too hastily, that he was

unknown to the Bishop of Lyons, and of later date. Origen knew and used Symmachus, and had received a copy of his commentary on St Matthew from a wealthy Christian woman named Juliana, to whom it had been given by the author. According to Eusebius, Symmachus was an Ebionite, and this
is

confirmed by Jerome; a

represents

him

as a Samaritan

Judaism^.
EuS. H. E.

/^/ €€ ^
vi.

evayyiXiov

pLyevs

€.

\ ...
^

"Theodotionis Hebionaei et Symmachi eiusdem dogmatis" (of in Hab. iii. 13); praef. in Job : "Symmachus et Theodotion ludaizantes haeretici." Epiph. de mens, et pond. 15 ev

,^^€€ ^€. ^ 8€. ' ^,
less

probable tradition in Epiphanius

who had become a convert

to

17

ye yeyovivaL...KaL

8

de

iv ois

.

alpeaiv

Se

els

Hieron. de

virr.

ill.

54

$•

...

iv. C. 977 ^•; cf. Hastings' I). ., i. p. 761. the Avhole question of the date of Theodotion, see Schiirer, iii. 323 f., Avhere the literature of the subject is given. G.J. ^ The name DIDD^D occurs in the Talmud as that of a disciple of R. Meir, who flourished towards the end of the second or beginning of the third century. Geiger desires to identify our translator with this Symmachus; see Field, prolegg. ad Hex. p. xxix.
^

.

.

.

On

V.^

S.

S.

4

50

€€.

€ ^
;

Later Greek Versions.

^<€'

That Symmachus, even if of Jewish or Samaritan birth, became an Ebionite leader is scarcely doubtful, since an Ebionitic commentary on St Matthew bearing his name was the Symmachians, an Ebionite still extant in the fourth century'
sect probably

named

after him, are

(comm.iti GaL^pfvlegg.)
\.

mentioned by Ambrosiaster and Augustine {c. Faust. x\x. 4, c. Crescon.
to

some question. Dr Gwynn has shewn'^ that Epiphanius, who makes Theodotion follow Symmachus, probably placed Symmachus in the reign of Verus, Now in the Historia Laiisiaca, c. 147, i.e. Marcus Aurelius.
36)-.
Y^vs,

floruit

is

open

Palladius says that Juliana sheltered Origen during a persecution,
i.e.

probably during the persecution of the Emperor Maximius

(a.d.

238

— 241).

If

this

was

so,

the

Uterary

activity

of

Symmachus must have belonged, at the earliest, to the last years of M. Aurelius, and it may be questioned whether
Epiphanius has not inverted the order of the two translators,
i.e.

Aurelius and

whether Theodotion ought not to be placed under M. Symmachus under Commodus (a.d. 180 192)•*.

The

version of

Symmachus was

in the
i.e.

hands of Origen when
about a.d. 228^; but
its

he wrote his
the interval

earliest
is

commentaries,

long enough to admit of

having reached

Alexandria.
II.

The aim

of

Symmachus,

as

Jerome perceived, was

to express the sense of his
1

Hebrew

text rather than to attempt

Euseb.

/.

c:

who represents the Symmachiani as holding other views, says (c. 145): "sunt haeretici alii qui Theodotionis et Symmachi itidem interpretationem diverse modo expositam sequuntur." See Harnack, Gesch. d. altchr. Litt., i. i. p. 212. D. C. B. iv. p. 971 ff. 'Ze\)i\pov in de pond, et vicns. 16 is on this Cf. Lagarde's Syitnnicta, ii. p. 168. hypothesis a corruption of ^ The Gospel of Peter, which cannot be much later than A.D. 170, and may be fifteen or twenty years earlier, shews some verbal coincidences with Symmachus {Akhmim fragment, pp. xxxiv. 18, 20), but they are not ^ Cf. D. C. B. iv. p. 103. decisive.
2

Philastrius,

•^

.

:

Later Greek Versions.
a verbal rendering:
legentiae

51

"non

solet

vcrborum

sad intel-

ordinem sequi" (in Am. iii. 11). While Aquila endeavoured "verbum de verbo exprimere," Symmachus made
his business

it

praef. in Job).

been a Samaritan proselyte to

clusion that his purpose was polemical

But if Symmachus had any antagonist in view, it was probably the literalism and violation of the Greek idiom which made the work of Aquila
unacceptable to non-Jewish readers. So far as we can judge from the fragments of his version which survive in Hexaplaric
efforts to recast

^
The
els

"sensum potius sequi"
Epiphanius,

{praef. in Chron. Eus.^

cf.

who

€). (

Symmachus to have Judaism, jumped to the conbelieved

MSS., he wrote with Aquila's version before him, and in his it made free use of both the lxx. and Theofollowing extracts will serve to illustrate this view

dotion.

of his relation to his predecessors.

MALACHI
LXX.

II.

13I.

.\ € €\€ ' ; . \ ^^ €€• €€€ , € €€,
eVoielre•

€€€
dcKTov

eTTOielre'

€€ Sevrepov

Aq.

CTL ci^cov

veiaai
Xa/3fti/

€6

^ .
Symm.
devTcpov

},

eivat €tl

ev

eivai

en

\ €
^

.
ii.

TeXeiov

\€ ,\.€4
\ €€€,
vevovTa
eivai eVt

,

The Hexaplaric
p.

Field, Hexapla,

renderings are from Cod. 1033.

86 (Cod. Barberinus)

52

Later Greek Versions.
But
it

must not be supposed that Symmachus

is

a

mere
his

reviser of earlier versions, or that he follows the lead of Aquila

as

Theodotion follows the lxx.
in
at least,

Again and again he goes

own way
sometimes
is

absolute independence of earlier versions, and
it

due partly

to his desire to

must be confessed, of the original. This produce a good Greek rendering,
;

more
to

or less after the current literary style

partly, as

it

seems,

dogmatic reasons.
influence

of the Greek style of
the

The following may serve as specimens Symmachus when he breaks loose from
Gen.

of his predecessors:

xxvi.

1

4

peWpov
yap KepSos

,

It

cannot be said that these renderings approach to excel-

* ^/ •, , . /^ ^^ .
ivvoijau

07€,

,
iv.

;

Ps.
6

xliii.

,
xviii.

, 70)
16
Sl

25

6

;


shew
from

Job

€.

Ps. Ixviii. 3

ets

/.

Eccl.

9

Isa. xxix.

4

^"^^

yV^

lence, but a

comparison with the corresponding lxx.
at least

will

that

Symmachus has

attempted to

set himself free

the trammels of the

of the Old Testament in the richer drapery of the Greek

tongue.

which
(e.g.

in

It is his custom to use compounds to represent ideas Hebrew can be expressed only by two or more words

V^^'Vrl,

3 ^^y,
first

Symm.

the

of two finite verbs connected by a copula (Exod.

has at his

command
"=1^

, , )
Hebrew idiom and
to clothe the thoughts

Symm.

, );

V.V^ V.V,

Symm.

he converts into a participle
v. 7

he renders

by

, , , ' , ,', , '
a large supply of Greek particles
(e.g.

4 Regn.

i.

2

;

he

;

Later Greek Versions,

53

/)'.

More interesting and important is the tendency which Symmachus manifests to soften the anthropomorphic expressions of the

Old Testament;
iv
ctKovt

Exod.
13

xxiv.

...
,

10,

/

'*

e.g.

Gen.

€ (. . ^ ^. .
i.

27,

AeWora; In

these and Other instances

.

^
Ps.

6 Oeo^

Jud.

ix.

24

Sym-

machus seems

to shew a knowledge of current Jewish exegesis^ which agrees with the story of his Jewish origin or training.

Literature. On Aquila the student may consult R. Anger de Onkelo Chaldaico, 1845; art. in D. C. B. (W. J. Dickson); M. Friedmann, Onkelos 11. Akylas^ 1896; Lagarde, Clementina^ p. 1 2 if.; Krauss, Akylas der Proselyt (Festschrift), 1896; F. C. Burkitt, Fi-agments of Aqiiila, 1897; C. Taylor, Sayi7igs of the Jewish Fathers'^, 1897 (p. viii.); Schiirer^, iii. p. 317 ff. On Symmachus, C. H. Thieme, p7^o puritate Sy7nmachi dissert.^ 17555 art. in D. C. B. (J. Gwynn) Giov. Mercati, eta di Simmaco ijiterpretL\ 1892. On Theodotion, Credner, Beitrdge, ii. p. 253 ff.; art. in D. C. B. (J. Gwynn) G. Salmon, I?itr. to the N. TJ p. 538 ff.; Schiirer^, iii. p. 323 ff. Works which deal with the ancient non-Septuagintal versions in general will be mentioned in c. iii., under Literatiire of the Hcxapla.\
;
;

,

12.

Other ancient Greek

versions.

The

researches

of Origen (a.d. 185
versions besides

anonymous those of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus
brought to
light three

— 253)

from their relative position in the columns of his great collection (see
c. iii.)

they are

and Septinia
authorities
:

(^')

respectively.

known as the Quinta («'), Sexta (r'), The following are the chief

(€
^

Eus. H. E.

vi.

16

(? ..., (,
...
Tivas

(
L

^
p.
cf.

^QpLyevet

'
et?
f.
;

^
oSev

^ €
iv.

For other examples see Field, prolegg,
f.

xxvi.

D.

C. B.

p. 19
-

Reading, perhaps,

D^n?X DPVQl DT'VH;

L

L

Nestle,

Margmahen,

p. 40 n.
"^

See D. C. B.

iii.

p. 20.

54

\ ' ^ € 8€€^ .,..'. €8, \ € €, \
re iv TeTa...iv
ly' '

^.€ ., ^
7rporiyay€v...Tivos ap' (Uv evpoi iv ttj

Later Greek Versions.
etScoy

^

iv

^^

^.,.
iv
(/e Diciis. et

€€
1

Epiph.

iv

syn. scr. sacr.
iv

Hieron. de vz'rr. ill. 54 "quintam et sextam et septimam editionem, quas etiam nos de eius bibliotheca habemus, miro labore ep. ad Tit. repperit et cum ceteris editionibus conparavit": "nonnulli vero libri, et maxime hi qui apud Hebraeos versu compositi sunt, tres alias editiones additas habent quam 'quintam' et 'sextam' et 'septimam' translationem vocant, auctoritatem sine nominibus interpretum consecutas." Cf. iii Hab, ii. 11,

^, ,^ . "
iv

i8e\
iv

eVet

iv

iv

iaX€€v\\iav^po...


pond.
iv iv

i.\ivo

8 /xera iv

ttj

\\.
iv

Pseudo-Ath.

']']

\

\

ipva i\v

iv

ttj

.
iv

7

iii.

13.

It

appears from the statement of Eusebius' that Origen found

the Qtiinta at NicopoHs near Actium, and that either the Sexta
or the Septi?na was discovered in the reign of Caracalla (a.d.

211

— 217)

at Jericho; while

Epiphanius, reversing
c.

this order,

says that the Quinta was found at Jericho

a.d. 217,

and the

Sexta 2X Nicopolis under Severus Alexander (a.d. 222 According to Epiphanius both the Qtiinta and the

— 235)^
Sexta,

according to Eusebius the Sexta only, lay buried in a Trt^os {doHuin), one of the earthenware jars, pitched internally, and
partly sunk in the ground, in which the

mustum was

usually

stored while
1 -

it

underwent the process of fermentation ^
in

Jerome

(/;-(?/.

identifies Nicopolis with Nicopolis in Palestine. are said to have been ^ D. of Gk and Lat. Ant. p. 1202. These sometimes used instead of cistae or capsae for preserving books.

The Dialogue of Timothy and Aqnila

.

Since

exp. Cant.) confirms Eusebius.

Emmaus

J

Later Greek Versions,
Origen was in Palestine a.d. 217, and in Greece a.d. 231,
natural to connect his discoveries with those years.
it

55
is

How

long
it

the versions had been buried cannot be determined, for

is

impossible to attach any importance to
of Eusebius

{

tt^e

vague statements

-^).
may have been
is

The version found

at or near Nicopolis

a relic of the early Chris-

tianity of Epirus, to

which there

an indirect allusion in the

Pastoral Epistles ^

The

Jericho find, on the other hand, was

very possibly a Palestinian work, deposited in the wine jar for
the sake of safety during the persecution of Septimius Severus,

who was

in Palestine a.d. 202,

and issued

edicts against both
is

the Synagogue

and the Church".

Of Scptima nothing
;

known,

beyond what Eusebius tells us, and the very sparing use of it in the Psalter of some Hexaplaric MSS. the few instances are so dubious that Field was disposed to conclude either that this version never existed, or that all traces of it have been
lost I

versions covered the whole of the

no conclusive evidence to shew that any of these Old Testament"*. Renderings from Qiiiiita are more or less abundant in 2 Kings, Job, Psalms, Canticles, and the Minor Prophets, and a few traces have been
There
is

observed in the Pentateuch.

Sexta

is

well represented in the

Psalms and

in Canticles,
i

ence in Exodus,

With regard
the style of

to

and has left indications of its existKings, and the Minor Prophets. the literary character of Qumta and Sexia,
is

Quiiita

characterised by Field as

"

omnium

elegantissimus...cum optimis Graecis suae aetatis scriptoribus

comparandus."
^

Sexta also shews some

command

of Greek,

Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p. 432. H. E. vi. 7 Spartian. in Sev. 17. 3 Prolegg. ad Hexapla, p. xlvi. Ps.-Athanasius strangely calls Lucian the seventh version According to Harnack-Preuschen (i. p. 340) the opposite is implied by Eusebius' use of *'d. h. in reference to these versions die eine war nur fiir diese, die andere nur ftir jene Biicher vorhanden."
-

Cf. Eus.

:

•*

, %
;

^

.
:

56
but
is

Later Greek Versions,
said
to

be disposed to paraphrase
as

;

Field, while he

on the whole 'not proven,' cites a remarkable example of the tendency from Ps. xxxvi. 35, which
regards that charge
r' renders,
Et/xt
dvaLS-fj

attributes both versions to
tian origin of

'

Jewish translators,' but the Chrisitself' at

.
ev
iii.

Jerome'

Sex fa betrays

Hab.

non-Septuagintal renderings from an interpreter

. '.
Fields
13.

".
and
fifth

13

The Greek

fathers of the fourth

centuries quotes

'^

who
(if

is

styled

is is

also cited, frequently as agreeing with

Nothing

known

of these translators
all

such they
seen

Avere),

but an elaborate discussion of

the facts

may be

in

The 'Graecus Venetus.'
Ecclesiastes,

This

is

a version of the

Pentateuch, together with the books of Ruth, Proverbs, Canticles,

Lamentations, and Daniel, preserved in

St Mark's Library at Venice in a single
{cod.

MS. of

cent. xiv.

xv.

Gr. \\..

It

was

first

given to the world by de Villoison

(Strassburg,

1784) and C. F.
Leipzig
in

Ammon

(Erlangen, 1790

i);

a

new

edition with valuable prolegomena by O. von Gebhardt
at
1875*^.

appeared

This translation has been

made

directly

from the M. T., but the author appears to have

occasionally availed himself of earlier Greek versions (lxx.,
adv. Rufin. "Prodens manifestissime sac ramen turn," as Jerome himself remarks. No doubt the primary reference is to Joshua (Field), but the purport of the gloss is unmistakable.
1

2

^

leg.

fors.

Prolegg. pp. Ixxv. Ephraitns von Edessa. Nestle, Urtext, p. 206.
5
'^

*

.

Ixxxii.

On
;

'€.6

See also Lagarde,

Uebei- den Heh-der see Field, p. Ixxii. ff., and

See Eichhorn, p. 421 ff. De Wette-Schrader, p. 122 f. Graecus Ven'etiis Pentateuchi &^c. versio Graeca. Ex itnico biblioth. S. Marci V^enetae codice nunc primum uno vohimine co??iprehensa7n atqiie apparatu critico et philologico instructam edidii O. G. Praefatus est Fr.
Delitzsch.

Later Greek Versions.
Aq.,

57

Symm., Theod.)^

His chief guide however appears to

have been David Kimchi, whose interpretations are closely That he was a Jew is clear from incidental renderfollowed". /"'', ings (e.g. in Exod. xxiii. 20 he translates Qip^D
sc.
'^i'^:).

From

the fact of his having undertaken a Greek

version Gebhardt infers that he was a proselyte to Christianity,

but the argument
clusion
;

may be used

to support an opposite con-

Jew he may have been moved by a desire to place before the dominant Orthodox Church a better renderDelitzsch wishes ing of the Old Testament than the lxx. to identify him with Elissaeus, a Jewish scholar at the court of Murad I., who flourished in the second half of the 14th
as a

century.

The

style of this
:

remarkable version

will

be best

illustrated

by a few specimens

~

re^cavrat

/

Gen.
ot vtetg

vi.

,

«.
iv

iriXovv,
^

'

,

«
Kpivei,

2

f.

$•

6

>
viii.


22

at

.
.
ot,

^.
^

, , ^ ^/€, ^ ^• - € . - ^, .
7} €. '
^ ^
"'*

Prov.

/

oip)(r]v

oSov

^^

/,7,

yrjv,

KOV€0iV

Daniel

.

13.

^3

1

Gebhardt,

.

ff.

2
^

Id. p. Ixii.

'OvTur-qs, ovTovpyos,

-

are his usual renderings of

1\


€.

€€
09

?^ ^ ^ , (€ ^ ^ , .
58
'•*

,•
cos

Later Greek Versions.
vters

€,

fJ-^XpL

rats

a/xepais

re

..

ev

The

Student will not
faithfully,

fail

to notice the translator's desire to

render his text
infelicitous

and, on the other hand, his curiously
it

attempt to reproduce

in Attic

Greek

;

and

lastly

his

use of the

Doric dialect in Daniel to distinguish the
rest

Aramaic passages from the
from
it

of the book.

The

result

reminds us of a schoolboy's exercise, and the reader turns
with pleasure to the less ambitious diction of the lxx.,
its

which, with

many

imperfections,

is

at

least

the natural

outgrowth of historical surroundings.
Klostermann {Analecta p. 30) mentions a MS. Psalter (Vat. Gr. 343), bearing the date 22 April, 1450, which professes to be a translation into the Greek of the fifteenth century KOLvrjv version of the Pentateuch into modern Greek in Hebrew characters was printed at Constantinople in 1547, forming the left-hand column of a Polyglott (Hebrew, Chaldee, Spanish, Greek). It is described in Wolf, Bibliotheca Hebraea, ii. p. 355, and more fully in La vei'sion Neo-gi'ecqiie du Pentateuche Polyglotte. ..re7narq2ies du D?' Las are Belleli (Paris, 1897). This Greek version has recently been transliterated and published in a separate form with an introduction and glossary by D. C. Hesseling (Leide, 1897).

).

{

CHAPTER

.

.

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other
RECENSIOIiS OF THE SePTUAGINT.
I.

The

century which produced the versions of Aquila,

Theodotion, and Symmachus saw also the birth of the great
Christian scholar

who conceived
his
;

the idea of using

them

for

the revision of the Alexandrian Greek Bible.

Origen was in

17 th

year

when

his

father

suffered

martyrdom
from the
original,

(a.d.

202)'

at eighteen

he was already head of

the catechetical school of Alexandria ^
first

The Old Testament
it

engaged

his attention, and, rightly judging that

could not be

fruitfully

studied without a knowledge of the
at

he applied himself

once to the study of Hebrew.
Se elarjyero
^Q-pLyivei

Ens. H. E.

\yv
Beiv

re

virr. ill. 54 " quis autem ignorat quod tantum in scripturis divinis habuerit studii ut etiam Hebraeam linguam contra aetatis gentisque suae naturam edisceret^?"

^
vi.

16
i^eraais,

^ .
(ii.

' -

Hieron. de

The feat was perhaps without precedent, among Christian scholars not of Jewish
1

in the third century,

origin^; in one so

2
^ *

Eus. H. E. vi. 2. Hieron. de virr. ill. 54. Cf. ep. ad Patilam.

See D. C. B.

art.

Hebrew Learning

p.

351

ff.).

6 The Hexapla, and
young
it

tL•

Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
to a veteran like Jerome.

seemed prodigious
in Egypt,

These

studies,

begun

were continued

in Palestine at Caesarea,

where Origen sought shelter during the storm of persecution which burst upon Alexandria in the reign of Caracalla (a.d. 216 219). On his return to Egypt Origen's period of literary productivity began, and between the years 220 and 250 he

gave to the world a succession of commentaries, homiHes, or In the notes on nearly all the books of the Old Testament ^
course of these labours, perhaps from the moment that he began to read the Old Testament in the original, he was impressed with the importance of providing the Church with materials for ascertaining the true te^it and meaning of the
original.
self in his

The method which he adopted
famous
letter to

is

described by him-

fully in his

ras

? ( ) \ €9 ( ^ ^^€€,€ , , € ^^4 -^' ^ .^ ,^ , ,, ^ , ' ^, ^• '^ ^, ,
commentary on
5
:

Africanus

(c.

a.d. 240),

and more

St

Matthew
84

(c.

a.d. 245) ^

Grig,

ad Afric.

\

ipcvvav

ras

€€
yovv

ev

(

€\

iv

ndaats rats

rais

ayvoclv

ev Tols

€V

Tots

exjpopev

yap

€€,
iv
/Lter'

\
€€

\

...

fKfiVois,

^^

iv Tols

to7s

eKcivois, ei
:

hi Matt.

XV. 14

pkv

6-

^

(,
^

'

fj

6

(.

].

art. Origenes, iv. p. 129 ff. See D. C. Bp Westcott in D. C. B. iv. p. 99 " it was during this period (i.e. before a.d. 215) in all probability that he formed and partly executed his plan of a comparative view of the LXX. in connexion with the other
2

.

Cf.

:

Greek versions."

1

The Hexapla, and
2.

the Hexaplaric

and otJter

Recensions. 6
It

To

attempt a

new

version was impracticable.

may

be doubted whether Origen possessed the requisite knowledge of Hebrew ; it is certain that he would have regarded the task
as

almost impious.
additions

Writing to Africanus he defends the
to

apocryphal

Daniel
text

departures from the

Hebrew

and other Septuagintal on the ground that the

Alexandrian Bible had received the sanction of the Church,

and that to reject its testimony would be to revolutionise her canon of the Old Testament, and to play into the hands of
her Jewish adversaries {aBixCiv

urged, to bear in

/
in

\< ^- €€? '? €€ ^ ,
ev

)

/xev

).

In

this

matter

it

was

well,

he

mind the precept of Prov.

xxii. 28,

''Remove

not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set."

The

same reasons prevented him from adopting any of the other
versions

place

of the

Septuagint.

On

the

other hand,

Origen held that Christians must be taught fcankly to recognise

and the current Hebrew and the superiority of Aquila and the other later versions, in so far as they were more faithful to the original; it was unfair to the Jew to quote against him passages from the lxx. which were wanting in his own Bible, and injurious to the
the divergences between the lxx.
text,

Church herself to withhold from her anything in the Hebrew Acting under these Bible which the lxx. did not represent. Origen's first step was to collect all existing Greek convictions He then proceeded to versions of the Old Testament. transcribe the versions in parallel columns, and to indicate in the column devoted to the Septuagint the relation in which
the old Alexandrian version stood to the current
3.

Hebrew

text.

The

following specimen, taken from a fragment lately

discovered at Milan, will assist the reader to understand the

arrangement of the columns, and to
ance of the Hexapla.

realise the general appear-

62 TJu Hexapla, and

tJie

Hexaplaric and other Recensions.

Ps. xlv. (xlvi.)

Hebrew.

HEB. TRANSLITERATED.

' ] ^
I

—3 ^

Aquila.

\K\a{ivr\KO\>

€7\

€\€ •\avov'*'
tyi

[

. €
\
eVi

,
(?)]

nnty

nnv3

€8

*.
iv
iv

\€

vipa

n^cnn
aaps

^
,

\
Dnn

iv

.
iv Kapbia
* In the MS S. Xauov appears in the third column, where it has displaced Aquila's rendering.

*

MS.

€.

17 palivipsesto Antbrosiano dei Salmi Esapli (Gior. Mercati) in A\ Accademia d. Scienze di Torino, lo Apr. 1896; and E. Klostermann, die Maildnder Fragmente der Hcxapla. The MS. does not supply the Hebrew column.
1

Cf.

Atti

d.

The Hexapla, and

the Hexaplaric

and

other Recensions. 63

Ps. xlv. (xlvi.)

I

3.

Symmachus.
6

LXX.
els

Theodotion.

7

11/ 1

loy

TO TeXos'

. ^ , €(9 , ^. . € €(6€
virep

Kope

j

vwep

*

**.

Kope

vnep

VTrep

8.

6 Oeos

Oeos

6

\

iv

iv

iv

iv

*
iv

, ^ ^
1

rats

, .

j

8

avyxeiaOai

iv

iv

^

\

. . .
iv iv

*

MS.

rats.

*

With

variant toTs

t MS.
variant

X With

.. ^^ . .
interlinear

*

With
ets

marginal
reXos,

viois.

variants,

i'^

manu

interlinear

t With

variant

X With

variant

.
rats

interlinear evpouaais
interlinear

04 The Hexapla, and

tlie

Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
is

The

process as a whole

minutely described by Eusebius

and Jerome, who had seen the work, and by Epiphanius, whose account is still more expHcit but less trustworthy.

"omnes veteris legis libros Hieron. ep. ad Tit. doctus Adamantius in Hexapla digesserat de Caesariensi bibliotheca descriptos ex ipsis authenticis emendare, in quibus at ipsa Hebraea propriis sunt characteribus verba descripta et Aquila etiam et SymGraecis Uteris tramite expressa vicino machus, LXX. quoque et Theodotio suam ordinem tenent nonnulli vero libri et maxime hi qui apud Hebraeos versu compositi sunt tres ahas editiones additas habuit." Cf. his letter to Sunnias and Fretela {ep. io6) and to Augustine {ep. 112) and the preface to the Book of Chronicles. Epiph. de mens, et yap 1^ p07ld. 7
:

quos

. ,
Eus. H. E.
vi.

\

/
'

KaTaXeXoLnev,

^ ' ^^
l6
:

Se re npos

[sc.

ras

^]

18

.

\
ev

?

' eVi
de

<\

vir

;

;

:

\

€4\'
'
It

\
will

be seen that the specimen corroborates ancient

€3 , , . ,,
ev

^ ^^ ^
^
8

€€<,

€....
lb.

8

e^

\ '".
,

'

,
9

' ^

?

testimony in reference to the relative order of the four Greek
versions (Aq., Symm., lxx., Theod.),

of division into corresponding
easy.

^

and illustrates the method which made comparison

With regard to the order, it is clear that Origen did not to be chronological. Epiphanius seeks to account for the position of the lxx. in the fifth column by the not less

mean

it

^

On

aeXis, cf. Sir

E.

Maunde Thompson, Handbook of Greek

Palaeography, p. 58.
-

ib. 18 sq.; Hieron. Praef. in Paral., and in ep. ad Tit., c. iii. loosely as = the being properly a line conof a complete clause, and of 8 cf. E. M. Thompson, sisting 17 syllables and Lat. Palaeography, p. 81 f J. R. Harris, Stiehotnetry, p. 23 f. Gk

See also

2

Used here

,
.

aiid Latin

:

;

The Hexapia, and the Hexaplaric and

otJiei'

Recensions. 65

untenable hypothesis that Origen regarded the lxx. as the

, ?
the
text

standard of accuracy {de

'

^

inens.

ivrevOev

hnivOev

learned from Origen himself, the fact was the reverse; the
other

^
etvat
is

et p07id.

1

9

:

/;? --

^;)•

€,
the

-^S

we have

LXX.

Greek versions were intended to check and correct But the remark, though futile in itself, suggests a
Aquila
is

probable explanation.

placed next to the

Hebrew
lxx.

because his translation

the most verbally exact, and

respectively, because

Symmachus and Theodotion follow Aquila and Symmachus on the whole is a Aquila, and Theodotion of the lxx. As to the

,
it

revision of
it

was of

course necessary that the lines should be as short as possible
six or more columns had to be presented on each openand it will be seen that in the Psalms at least not more than two Hebrew words were included in a line, the corresponding Greek words being at the most three or four. But

when
;

ing

the claims of the sense are not neglected

;

indeed

will

appear

upon inspection
of the thought.

that the

method adopted

serves in a remark-

able degree to accentuate the successive steps in the

movement

Besides the Hexapia, Origen compiled a Tetrapla, i.e. a 4. minor edition from which he omitted the first two columns containing the Hebrew text in Hebrew and Greek characters cf

TTJ

pO?id.

< '^ €7'
Eus.
/.C.

iv

19

^, €9 <^. € ^,
MSS.
of the lxx.
873),

;

/
the
p.

Epiph. de mens,
^

et

.
in

The
^

.
pia in
xii.);
cf.

Tetrapla

is

occasionally mentioned along with the Hexa-

€'€
Dio Cass.
1.

scholia attached to
is

Thus

insuper vel postea concinnarc
(iv.

23

Oeconomus

€€€... eV who

{¥\q\u., prolcgg.

work, understands Eusebius to mean
the three columns
S.

containing '''.

Trupyovs eireregards the Tetrapla as the earlier only that Origen added to the i.xx.

S.

66 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.

705

- ,
€K

Syro-Hexaplaric version at the end of Joshua
i$

the Greek codex on which the version was based

references to the Tetrapla {O. T. in Greeks

.
i,

Cod.

Q

Still

'€
it is

stated that
:

had the note
two

contains
iii.,

similar

p. viii., notes).

Mention is also made in the MSS. of an Octapla (cf. the SyroHexaplar in Job v. 23, vi. 28, and the Hexaplaric MSS. of the
Psalter in Ps. Ixxv.
Ixxxvi. 5, Ixxxviii. 43, cxxxi. 4, cxxxvi.
i)'.

The

question arises whether the Octapla was a distinct work,

or merely another name for the Hexapla in books where the columns were increased to eight by the addition of the Qjcinta and Sexta. Eusebius appears to support the latter view, for

he speaks of the

. €

TO

Quinta and Sexta (H. E.

on the other hand, seems columns (/. C.

^
The
ii.

has been observed that

^ ? ,). € •. ^ ...
Hexapla of the Psalms
vi.

as

including the

16 cv ye

Epiphanius,
to

to limit the

Hexapla

the six

But

it

when

the scholia in Hexaplaric
silent

mention the Octapla they are
e.g. in Ps. Ixxxvi. 5

as

to

although the Octapla and the Tetrapla are mentioned together;

we

find the following note:

?
.
inference
'
'

'
(the Octapla),

Tetrapla),

'
*

)'
the

MSS.

Hexapla,

mhthp

(the

ciwn,
'

is that the name Octapla someHexapla in the Psalms, because in the Psalter of the Hexapla there were two additional columns which received the Quinta and Sexta. Similarly the term Heptapla' was occasionally used in reference to portions T)f the Hexapla where a seventh column appeared, but not an eighth^.
*

times superseded that of

^

Field, Hexapla^

ad

^

It occurs (e.g.) in the

loc. ; cf. Hieron. zn Psaltnos (ed. Morin.), p. 66. Hexaplaric Syriac at 2 Kings xvi. 2.

The Hexapla, and
'

the

Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 6y
Curterius from cod.

Pentapla

'

is

cited by

J.

Q

at Isa.

iii.

24,

but Field's suspicion that Curterius had read his
is

8. incorrectly

confirmed by a reference to the photograph, which exhibits
Origen's work, then, existed (as Eusebius
:

iv

€€.

implies) in two forms
rule, six

(i) the

Hexapla, which contained, as a
it

columns, but sometimes seven or eight, when

was

more accurately denominated the Heptapla or Octapla; and (2) the Tetrapla, which contained only four columns answering to the four great Greek versions, excluding the Hebrew and GreekHebrew texts on the one hand, and the Qiiiiita and Sexta on
the other.
5.

The Hebrew

text of the

Hexapla was of course that

which was current among Origen's Jewish teachers in the third century, and which he took to be truly representative of the original. Portions of the second column, which have been
preserved, are of interest as shewing the pronunciation of the

Hebrew consonants and the vocalisation which was then in use. From the specimen already given it will be seen that 3 = , = , and that y i< are without equivalent \ p = , and D, V, The divergences of the vocalisation from that which is represented by the pointing of the M. T. are more important; see Dr Taylor's remarks in D. C. B. ii. p. 1 5 In regard to Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, and the
v:'

f.

minor Greek versions, Origen's task was limited to transcription under the conditions imposed by the plan of his work. But the fifth column, which contained the Hexaplaric lxx., called for the full exercise of his critical powers. If his first idea had
been, as his

own words almost

suggest, merely to transcribe the

LXX. in

its

proper place, without making material alterations in

the text, a closer comparison of the lxx. Avith the current

Hebrew
^

text

and the versions based upon

it

must soon have

Cf. the practice of Aquila (Burkitt,

Fragments of the Books of Kings

ace. to

Aquila, p. 14).

68 The Hexapla^ and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
convinced him that
that
this

was impracticable.

Let us suppose
or
Palestinian
(17

there

lay

before

him an Alexandrian

MS., containing the 'common' text of the lxx.
vulgata
ediito,

Kotv?;,

or

Jerome calls it^), i.e. the text of the Greek Bible as it was read by the Church of the third century. As the transcription proceeded, it would be seen that every column of the Greek contained clauses which were not in the Hebrew, and omitted clauses which the Hebrew contained. Further, in many places the order of the Greek would be found to depart from that of the Hebrew, the divergence being sometimes
as

limited to a clause or a verse or two, but occasionally extend-

ing to several chapters.

Lastly,

in

innumerable places the
less at variance

LXX. would be seen to yield a sense more or
or through

with the current Hebrew, either through misapprehension on
the
part

of the translators
text.

a

difference in the

These causes combined to render the coordination of the Alexandrian Greek with the existing Hebrew text a task of no ordinary difficulty, and the solution to which Origen was led appeared to him to be little short of an inunderlying
spiration

{(.

^^< €/€).
(i) the purity of the

Origen began by assuming
text,

Hebrew
the

and

(2) the corruption of the Kotrr;

where

it

departed from
to restore

the Hebrew^.

The problem
and thus

before

him was

LXX. to

its

original purity,
it,

i.e.

to the

Hebraica Veritas as he
in possession of

understood
ing

to put the

Church

an

adequate Greek version of the Old Testament without disturbits

general allegiance to the time-honoured work of the

Alexandrian translators.

Some

of the elements in this complex
(i)

process were comparatively simple,

Differences of order
for the

were met by transposition, the Greek order making way

Ep, ad Sunn, et Fret. " he assumed that the original SeptuaSee Driver, Sa/iiucl, p. xlvi. gint was that which agreed most closely with the Hebrew text as he knew
^

-

:

it.

..a

step in the

wrong direction."

.

The Hexapla, and
Hebrew.
only, for

the Hexaplaric

and other

Recensions. 69

In this manner whole sections changed places in the
i

Lxx. text of Exodus,

Kings, and Jeremiah
to

;

in

Proverbs

some reason not easy

determine, the two texts

were allowed to follow
certain
(2)

their respective courses,

and the

diver-

gence of the Greek order from the Hebrew was indicated by

marks ^ prefixed

Corruptions in the

-^

to

the stichi of the

lxx. column.

real or supposed,

were

tacitly

corrected in the Hexapla, whether from better

MSS.

of the

LXX., or from the renderings of other translators, or, in the

case of proper names, by a simple adaptation of the Alexandrian

Greek form
(3)

to that

which was found

in the current

Hebrew".
for

The

additions and omissions in the lxx. presented greater

difficulty.

Origen was unwilling to remove the former,

they belonged to the version which the Church had sanctioned,

and which many Christians regarded as inspired Scripture but he was equally unwilling to leave them without some mark of
;

editorial disapprobation.

Omissions were readily supplied from
;

one of the other versions, namely Aquila or Theodotion
the

but

new matter

interpolated into the lxx, needed to be carefully

distinguished from the genuine work of the Alexandrian translators ^
6.

Here the genius of Origen found an
its

ally in the

system

of critical signs which had

origin

among

the older scholars

of Alexandria, dating almost from the century which produced
the earlier books of the lxx.
their

The
of

took

name from Aristarchus, who
^

the

prince

Alexandrian

grammarians,

flourished in the reign of Philopator (a.d.

obehis ; see below, p• 7 1 E.g. at Exod. vi. 16, was substituted by Origen for his practice in this respect was uniform has not been definitely ascertained. ' Hieron. "quod maioris audaciae est, in editione Praef. ad Chron. LXX. Theodotionis editionem miscuit, asteriscis designans quae minus ante fuerant, et virgulis quae ex superfluo videbantur apposita." The Book of Job offered the largest field for interpolation a scholion in cod. i6i
-

A combination of the asterisk and

Whether

.
.

says,

^'

$

,
:

:

,'

/
22 2

The Hexapla, and

the

Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
to

— 205),

and they appear

have been

first

employed

in

connexion with

his great edition of

Homer \

Origen selected

two of these signs known as the obelus and the asterisk, and adapted them to the use of his edition of the Septuagint. In the Homeric poems, as edited by Aristarchus, the obelus marked
passages which the
critic

was

affixed

to those
;

special attention

cf.

wished to censure, while the asterisk which seemed to him to be worthy of the anecdoton printed by Gardthausen 6
:

€€' ...
iwl
6 Sk

Similarly, in

connexion with Platonic
657) used the obelus

{platon.
asterisk

iii.

-

Origen in the

fifth

prefixed to words or lines which were wanting in the

column of the Hexapla, the obelus was Hebrew,
Origen's

.
dicta,

€€) - ^view,

rjyovv vei'oOev^eva

.

7/

Diogenes Laertius

and the

As employed by

and

therefore,

from

point

of

of

doubtful
lines

authority", whilst the asterisk called attention to

words or

wanting in the lxx., but present in the Hebrew.
apply was marked by another sign

The

close of

the context to which the obelus or asterisk was intended to

known

as

the vietobelus.

When
quent

the passage exceeded the length of a single line, the

asterisk or obelus

was repeated
pond.

(' \
'
^

line until the

metobelus was reached.
et
2,

Epiph. dc mens,

'... €...€\6 €...(...'
iv
/3'

€\ ^AnvXav
not. ed. cod. Sill. p.

76

.
list

'•

... ^. ,€€ ,, ' , ,
3
6

at the beginning of

each subse-

Schol. ap. Tisch.

\

See a complete
f.

of these in Gardthausen, Griech. Paldographie,

p.

288
-

On an exceptional case in which he oljelised words which stood in the Hebrew text, see Cornill, Ezekiel, p. 386.


The Hexapla^ and
the Hexaplaric

and

other Recensions. 7 r

Occasionally Origen used asterisk and obelus together, as
Aristarchus had done, to denote that the order of the Greek was
at fault {anecd. ap.

Tisch. not. ed.

/5
iv
xvii.

Si?i.

iv

.
p.

/

Aristarchian

(or

,^ ' // ,
1.

-

Gardthausen

C.

, ,, ,
:

6 Se

..}
:

schol. ap.

",

Se er

€ ^,
'•
ined.
iii.

:

also

ap.

^/' .,. ).
sacr.

mon.

The

as

they

are

usually called by

students of

the Old Testament, the Hexaplaric) signs are also used by

Origen when he attempts to place before the reader of

his

lxx.

column an exact version of the Hebrew without displacing the LXX. rendering. Where the lxx. and the current Hebrew are hopelessly at issue, he occasionally gives two versions, that of one of the later translators distinguished by an asterisk, and that of the lxx. under an obelus. The form of the asterisk, obelus, and metobelus varies
slightly.

The

first

consists of the letter x, usually surrounded

by four dots seldom, and

,
to the
pairs

(-^-,

the
as

/');
seems, in
H-

the form

^

occurs but

only,

it

the Syro-Hexaplar.
n>^,

The
but
has

'spit' or 'spear,' is

represented in Epiphanius by
(

in the

MSS.

of the lxx. a horizontal straight line

y

taken the place of the original form, with or without occupying
dot or dots (—
the form

-^)

;

the form

was known

as a /emniscus,
{pp.

and
8)

-

as a hypoleiimiscus.

Epiphanius indeed

cit., c.

fancies that each dot represents a pair of translators, so that the
iejfinisais

means

that the

word or clause which the lxx. adds

Hebrew

had the support of two out of the thirty-six

which composed the whole body, whilst the hypolemniscus
^

This sometimes becomes a hook

(c-?).

72

TJie

Hexapla, and
it

tlie

Hexaplaric and other

Receiisions-.

claims for
is

the support of only one pair.
is

This explanation,

it

scarcely necessary to say,

as baseless as the fiction of the
it

cells

on which,

in the later

Epiphanian form,
to

rests.

Other

attempts to assign distinct values to the various forms of the
obelus

have been shewn by Field
is

be untenable \

The

meiobelus

usually represented
(:),

by two dots arranged perin the Syro-

pendicularly

like a colon
it

;

other forms are a sloping line

with a dot before

(/., •/.), and Hexaplar and other Syriac versions a mallet (V).

or

on

either side

The

latter

form, as the least ambiguous,

is

used in Field's great edition of
is

the Hexapla, and in the apparatus which
text of the lxx. version of Daniel in the

printed under the

Cambridge manual

Septuagint.

^ ,,^-, , (, ,,. ,
Certain other signs found in Hexaplaric

MSS.

are mentioned
76,

one of the in the following scholion {Evaypiov printed in the Notitia ed. cod. Sin., p.

.,

Patmos MS.; see Robinson,

Philocalia, pp.

ycy

€(

v€V€VKvlav


G

veviVKvlav

*((€
iv

€8 €€€ €(€€ €
...
iv
he

xiii.,

xvii. ff.):

\ €^ ^(

et?

from a

€€

ev

piv

Se

*

The following extract from the great Hexaplaric MS. known enable the student, to whom the subject may be new, to as practise himself in the interpretation of the signs. He will find it instructive to compare the extract with his Hebrew Bible on the (printed in the Cambridge LXX.) one hand and the text of Cod. on the other-.

1

Prolegg. p.

lix. sq.

2

The

vertical bars denote, of course, the length of the lines of

Cod. G.
the

The

lines of the
(p.

lxx. column of the Hexapla,

if

we may judge by

specimen

62

f.),

varied in length according to the sense.

The Hexapla, and
Joshua

the Hexaplaric
xi.

and

aveiXev

(
^

^ ^ ^^ \\ €€. €\€€ ( \ €\ (^ \^^(^ \ € €€€
10—14 (Cod.
\

other Recensions. 73

Sarravianus).
i^
|

€€€-^€
\ |

is

ev

€€
\

'>^•

:

^•

|

€v

><

:

:

|


ev

'><

:

ev

\

ev

|

:

€v

€vnve\ov

ev

TroXets

^•

:

[

%
\

\

:

\


7-

^
:

€€\ €
•^•
\

\

:

€€\€
|

"•

;

\

|

\

||

><

:

:

•^•

^

•^•

\

:

\

€€€\€
:
\

•^•

eve
ev
\

\

ev

evveov * *
seen,

"^

The Hexapla was completed,
240 or 245
;

as

we have

by

A.D.

the Tetrapla, which was a copy of four

columns of the Hexapla, followed, perhaps during Origen's
last

scription

constant attendance on the great scholar, but he was doubtless

own and the two Hebrew columns and the lxx. column of the Hexapla were probably written by his own
his

hand.

Eusebius in a well-known passage describes the costly and laborious process by which Origen's commentaries on Scripture were given to the world H. E. vi. 23 yap
:

aXXypaev

, 4 •
at

years

Tyre\

A

large

part

of the

labour

of tranin

may have been borne by

the copyists

who were

eove^ epoav

ayopeov,
re

classes of workers, the

Xoypo and aXXypo

apeao.

eayevo

4\ €8€ Two
of these (cf Gardt-

/? -

hausen, Gr. Palaeographies p. 297), must have found ample employment in the preparation of the Hexapla. The material used was possibly papyrus. Although there are extant fragments of writing on vellum which may be attributed to the second century, " there is every reason to suppose that to the end of the third century papyrus held its own, at any rate in Egypt, as the
^

See the confused and inexact statement of Epiphanius, de mens,
1

et

pond.

8.

74 The Hexapla, afid the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
graphy of Gk papyri,
material on which literary works were written" (Kenyon, Palaeoon the size of existing papyrus p. 113 f. This view receives some confirmation from rolls, see p. 16 ff.)• Jerome's statement iep. 141) that Acacius and Evagrius endeavoured to replace with copies on parchment some of the books in the library at Caesarea which were in a damaged condition ("bibliothecam...ex parte corruptam...in membranis instaurare conati sunt")^• According to Tischendorf {prolegg. i?i cod. Frid. Aug. § i) cod. t< was written on skins of antelopes, each of which supplied only two leaves of the MS. The Hexapla, if have taxed the resources even of copied in so costly a way, Origen's generous
;

It is difficult to

conceive of a codex or series of codices so

.
made
or
less.

gigantic as the Hexapla.

Like the great Vatican MS.,
Its bulk,
it

it

would

have exhibited

at

each opening at least six columns, and in

certain books, like the Sinaitic MS., eight.

even when
of the un-

allowance has been

for the

absence in

canonical books, would have been nearly five times as great
as that of the Vatican or the Sinaitic

Old Testament.

The

Vatican MS. contains 759 leaves, of which 617 belong to the Old Testament when complete, the O. T. must have occupied
;

650

leaves,

more

From

these
if

data

it

may be

roughly calculated that the Hexapla,

written in the form

of a codex, would have filled 3250 leaves or 6500 pages; and
these figures are exclusive of the Quinta and Sexta^ which may have swelled the total considerably. Even the Tetrapla

So immense a work would have exceeded 2000 leaves. of copyists, and it is improbamust have been the despair ble that any attempt was made to reproduce either of the
editions
as
at

a

whole.

The

originals,

however, were

long
de-

preserved

Caesarea in Palestine,

where

they were

by Origen himself, in the library of PamThere they were studied by Jerome in the fourth philus. Origenis century {7 Psahnos coimn. ed. Morin., p. 5
posited, perhaps
:

"^
:

in Caesariensi bibliotheca relegens";

ib.

p. 12

"cum
ff.

vetustum

Origenis hexaplum psalterium revolverem, quod ipsius
1

manu

See

Birt,

das antikc Buchivesen, pp. 100, 107

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 75
fuerat

emendatum

"
;

hi ep.

ad

Tit.

:

" nobis curae fuit
in

omnes
diges-

veteris legis libros

quos

v. d.

Adamantius

Hexapla

serat

de Caesariensi bibliotheca descriptos ex

ipsis authenti-

cis emendare." There also they were consulted by the writers and owners of Biblical MSS.; compare the interesting note attached by a hand of the seventh century to the book of

8€^€ ^
Esther in cod.
:

reXet

'
;

\....€.<;
to Isaiah

?
(.

'npireNoyc
Greek,
in
ii.

.

ifi

p.

780)

;

and the notes prefixed

that the

Cod. Marchalianus (Q) the second of these notes claims copy from which Ezekiel was transcribed bore the
tag eKAoceic

^,
viii.)\

subscription


Coisl.

The

century, for
202"^,

Pamphilus was in existence in the 6th Montfaucon {biblioth. Coisl. p. 262) quotes from
library of

''
that century, a

and Ezekiel

{ib.

iii.

p.

a

MS. of

colophon which runs:


fell

^
iv

.

But

hands of the Saracens, and from that time the Library was heard of no more. Even if not
in

638 Caesarea

into the

destroyed at the moment,

it

is

probable that every vestige of

the collection perished during the vicissitudes through which
the town passed between the 7th century

and the T2th^

Had

the Hexapla been buried in Egypt, she might have preserved
it can scarcely be hoped that the sea-washed in her sands and storm-beaten ruins of Kaisariyeh cover a single leaf. it
;

^

Notitia
-

^.
See also the note
I. c.
:

^-- "
at the

end of the Scholia on Proverbs printed
evpo^ev,
f.

^

$

in the

^

='*"', Gregoiy, See G. A. Smith,

.

//i'sf.

449» Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 183 Geogr. of Palestine, p. 143 f.

"76

The Hexapla,

a?id the

Hexaplaric and other Recensions,

Literature. Fragments of the Hexapla were printed by Peter Morinus in his notes to the Roman edition of the Septuagint (1587). Separate collections have since been published by
Drusius {Vet. interp7^etujn Graccorui)i...frag7neiita coUccta...a Jo. D)'usio, Arnheim, 1622), Bernard Montfaucon (Origenis Hexap/onnn quae sKpersuni, Paris, 1713), and F. Field (Oxford, 1875), whose work has superseded all earlier attempts to recover the Hexapla. A fuller list may be seen in Fabricius-Harles, iii. 701 ff. Materials for an enlarged edition of Field are already beginning to accumulate such may be found in Pitra, Analecta sacra., iii. (Venice, 1883), p. 551 ff. E. Klostermann, Atialecta sur,.. Hexapla (Leipzig, 1895), G. Alorin, Ajiccdota Maredsolana iii. i (Mareds., 1895; cf Expositor^ June 1895, Among helps to the study of the Hexapla, besides p. 424 ff.). the introductions already specified, the following may be mentioned the Prolegomena in Field's Hexapla, the art. Hexapla in D. C. B. by Dr C. Taylor the introduction to Dr Drivers
J.
; ;
:

;

Notes on Samuel
altchristt.

{^^, xliii. ff.),

Litt. i. p. 339 ff. Hexaplaric version see c. iv.

and Harnack-Preuschen, Gesch. d. For the literature of the Syro-

8. If the Hexapla as a whole was too vast to be copied', and copies even of particular books were rarely if ever attempted, yet there was nothing to forbid the separate publication of the fifth column, which contained the revised

Septuagint.

This idea presented

itself to

Pamphilus and

his

friend Eusebius,

and the

result

was the wide circulation

in

Palestine during the fourth century of the Hexaplaric lxx.,

detached from the Hebrew text and the other Greek versions,
but retaining, more or less exactly, the corrections and additions adopted by Origen with the
signs.
*'

accompanying Hexaplaric

Provinciae Palestinae," writes Jerome in his preface to Chronicles, " codices legunt quos ab Origene elaboratos

Eusebius

et

Pamphilus vulgaverunt."

Elsewhere'- he warns

his correspondents

"aliam esse editionem quam Origenes Caesariensis Eusebius omnesque Graeciae tractatores

et

(id est

communem)

interpretum quae in
^

«^
et

appellant atque vulgatam..., aliam lxx.

codicibus reperitur
et

.

.

et lerosoly-

Hieron. /;-/". in Jos.: "

sumptu

labore niaximo indigent."

-

Ep. ad Sunn,

et Fret. 2.

The Hexapia, and

the Hexaplai'ic

and other

Recensions, yj

mae atque
text

in

orientis ecclesia decantatur."

The Hexaplaric
" ea

receives

his

unhesitating

support

:

autem

quae

mentioned with great respect in the schoHa of MSS. which do not on the whole follow its text. Specimens of such notes have already been given they usually quote the words in which Pamphilus describes the part borne by himself and his friends respectively in the prois

,
'I'his

habetur in e^a7rAot5...ipsa est quae in eruditorum Hbris incorrupta et immaculata lxx. interpretum translatio reservatur^"
edition,

sometimes described as

or simply

[€],

or

in

duction of the book.
cod.
at

]
the

-.
name

.
It

. -,/ '/
Thus
the end of 2

a note quoted

by an

early

Esdras says,

The

subscription to Esther ends

^^, /€<
:

hand

The

scholion prefixed to Ezekiel in

of Eusebius, assigning

In

its

subscription to
:

a note which runs

would seem as though the work of comparing the copy with the original was committed to the otherwise unknown Antoninus, whilst the

^)
of

him another function

Kings the Syro-Hexaplar quotes

?

^^. its

iv [] Q introduces

Evae-

more responsible

task of

making corrections

Pamphilus and Eusebius'. Part of the work at least was done while Pamphilus lay in prison, i.e. between A.D. 307 and 309, but it was probably continued and completed by Eusebius after the martyr's death.
was reserved
for

The

separate

publication

the

undertaken

in absolute

good

faith;

Hexaplaric lxx. was Pamphilus and Eusebius

believed (as did even Jerome nearly a century afterwards) that

Origen had succeeded in restoring the old Greek version to
primitive purity,

municate
^

this

and they were moved by the desire to comtreasure to the whole Church. It was impos27.

Adv.

-

On

R \\€. and
II fin. ii.

,

see Scrivener-Miller,

i.

p. 55.

;

78 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
sible for

them
to

to foresee that the actual result of their labours

would be

create a recension of the lxx.

which was a
with

mischievous mixture of
versions of Aquila

the

Alexandrian

version

the

and Theodotion.

The Hexaplaric
lost

signs,

intended for the use of scholars,

their

meaning when
and there was a

copied into a text which was no longer confronted with the

Hebrew
their

or the later versions based

upon

it

;

natural tendency on the part of scribes to omit them,

when

purpose was no longer manifest.
consider that the Hexaplaric Septuagint claimed

When we
to

be the work of Origen, and was issued under the authority of

the martyr Pamphilus

and the yet greater Bishop of Caesarea,

we can but wonder that its circulation was generally limited to Palestine'. Not one of our uncial Bibles gives the Hexaplaric
text as a whole,

and it is presented in a relatively pure form by very few MSS., the uncials G and M, which contain only the
Pentateuch and some of the historical books, and the cursives

86 and 88 (Holmes and Parsons), which contain the Prophets. But a considerable number of so-called Hexaplaric
codices exist, from which
not only of the
the
;

it

is

possible to collect fragments

all the Greek columns of Hexapla and a still larger number of our ]\ISS. offer a mixed text in which the influence of the Hexaplaric lxx., or

fifth

column, but of

of the edition published by Pamphilus and Eusebius, has been

more
this

or less extensively at work-.

and other causes of mixture

will

The problems presented by come under consideration
at

in the later chapters of this book.
9-

While the Hexaplaric Septuagint was being copied

Caesarea for the use of Palestine, Hesychius was engaged in
correcting the
^

common

Egyptian
ad Aug.

text.
ii.):

Jerome says indeed

{ep.

"quod

si

feceris (i.e. if

you

refuse Origen's recension) omnino ecclesiae bibliothecas damnare cogeris vix enim unus vel alter inveniatur liber qui ista non habeat." But he is drawing a hasty inference from experiences gathered in Palestine.
-

See

c. V.

The Hexapla, and

the Hexaplaric

and

other Recensions. 79

Hieron. in pracf. ad Paralipp. "Alexandria et Aegyptus in Septuaginta suis Hesychium laudat auctorem"; cf. adv. Rufin. ii. where tiie statement is repeated ^, 2ina pnief. in Evangelia^ where the revision of Hesychius is represented as having included both Testaments, and his O. T. work is condemned as infelicitous ("nee in V.T. post LXX. interpretes emendare quod licuit"); the Hesychian revision of the Gospels is censured by the Decretuni Gelasii^ which even denounces them as apocryphal ("evangelia quae falsavit Hesychius, apocrypha").
:

It is

not easy to ascertain

who

this

Hesychius was.

The

most conspicuous person of that name is the lexicographer, and he has been identified with the reviser of the Greek Bible'. But later researches shew that Hesychius the lexicographer was

who lived in the second half of the fourth century. The author of the Egyptian revision w^as more probably^ the martyr Bishop who is mentioned by Eusebius in connexion
a pagan

with Phileas Bishop of Thmuis, Pachymius, and Theodorus

/

{H.E.

viii.

13

appear together again in a
red. sacr.
iv.

'
<t?ikka.%

T€

/).

The

four

names

letter

addressed to Meletius (Routh,
pastoral

p.

91

ff.);

and Eusebius has preserved a
Phileas was
. .

written by Phileas in prison in view of his approaching martyr-

dom (. E.
(H. E.
viii.

viii.

10).

9

7€//

ev

.

eiwOev
. .

),

;.
.

a distinguished scholar

a^ioi/...;

,

.
with

and the association of

his

name

that of Hesychius suggests that he

may have

shared in the

work of

Biblical revision.

It is

pleasant to think of the two

episcopal confessors employing their enforced leisure in their

Egyptian prison by revising the Scriptures
flocks, nearly at the
^

for the use of their

same time

that
Iviii.

Pamphilus and Eusebius
11) of

Jerome speaks elsewhere (m £sa.

" exemplaria Alexan-

drina."

Fabricius-Harles, vii. p. 547 (cf. vi. p. 205). ^ This is howeA^er mere conjecture see Harnack-Preuschen, i. p. 442 " dass dieser Hesychius... identisch ist mit dem etwa gleichzeitigen Bibelkritiker gleichen Namens, ist nicht zu ervveisen."
;
:

8
rea.

TJie

Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.

and Antoninus were working under similar conditions at CaesaIt is easy to account for the acceptance of the Hesychian revision at Alexandria and in Egypt generally, if it was pro-

duced under such circumstances. To what extent the Hesychian recension of the Old Testament is still accessible in MSS. and versions of the lxx. is As far back as 1786 Miinter threw out the very uncertain.
natural suggestion that the Egyptian recension might be found
in

the

Egyptian versions.

In his great monograph on the
that in the Prophets,

Codex Marchalianus Ceriani takes note
great Egyptian

with the exception perhaps of Ezekiel, the original text of that

MS. agrees

closely with the text

presupposed by

the Egyptian versions and in the works of Cyril of Alexandria,

and

that

it is

supported by the cursive MSS. 26, 106, 198, 306;

other cursives of the same type are mentioned by Cornill' as
yielding an

Hesychian text in Ezekiel. For the remaining books of the lxx. we have as yet no published list of MSS. containing a probably Hesychian text, but the investigations now being pursued by the editors of the larger Cambridge lxx.

may be expected
10.

to yield important help in this direction.
rising

Meanwhile the
in

school of
revision.

Antioch was

not

inactive

the

field

of

Biblical

An

Antiochian

recension of the

by the name of

its

had in Jerome's time come to be known supposed author, the martyr Lucian".

Hieron. ^rrt^yi in Paralipp. "Constantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat."' Cf ad Sunn, et Fret. 2 "[17 Koii/7)]...aplerisque nunc AouKiai^os-dicitur." Ps.-Athan.
syn. sacr. script,

( €•€ €^€
/xer'

^ Das Buck lies Propheten Ezechiel, p. 66 ff. ; the Hesychian group in i.e. cocld. 49, 68, 87, 90, 91, -228, 238 (Parsons). See Ezekiel is also Ceriani in Reiidiconti (Feb. i8, 1886). - Cf. the scholion in cod. at 3 Regn. iii. 46 The Lucianic text was also known as the

^.

~,

,€ ^'
reXevTaia

:

\

€-

(Oeconomus,

6 -

iv.

548).

1

The Hexapla, and
Koi

,

XpiCTTLavois

8€ ^•
iv
iv

tL• Hexaplaric
oI<€lois

and other Recensions.

8

^€ € ^^
eVi
iv
(cf.

€€3 €4€...
eh
eT€ pa

Lucian,

who was born

.

the Acts of Lucian in Bolland.
iv

,' ^ ^
\


i.

e^edoro

<\

p. 363).

^, ' '
eZy

Suidas s.v.

eic

at

Samosata, began his studies at

Edessa, whence he passed to Antioch at a time

when Malchion

was master of the Greek School (Eus. H. E. vii, 29, Hieron. de virr. ill. 71). At Antioch Lucian acquired a great reputation
for Biblical learning (Eus.

,).
Suid. S.V.

H. E.
[sc.

ix.

6 rots Upots

From some

cause not clearly explained

]$
e/xetve

€07
32

Lucian was under a cloud and 299 (Theodoret\ -.

for several years

to communion he was associated with Dorotheus, who was a Hebrew
his

-).
ircpi

.

between a.d. 270

i.

3

On

restoration

scholar, as well as a student of

, .• "^/? ). '
Greek

literature (Eus. If.

'

assisted

by Eusebius,

as

Phileas

As Pamphilus was and others were probably

,E.
vii.

associated with Hesychius, so (the conjecture

may be

hazarded)

Dorotheus and Lucian worked together
revision of the Greek Bible.
If,

at

the Antiochian

as

Dr Hort

thought, " of

known

names Lucian's has a

better claim than any other to be associated

with the early Syrian revision of the
^

New

Testament^," the
and
saint

Oeconomus
498
n.).

refuses to identify this person with the martyr
cf.

(iv. p.
2

hitrodiidion to the N. T. in Greek, p. 138 the Textual Criticism of the N. T., p. 29.
S.

;

the Oxford Debate on

S.

6

82 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions,
Syrian
revision

of the

Old Testament, which
Lucian,

called

for

a

knowledge of Hebrew, may have been due more especially
to

the Hebraist

Dorotheas.

however, has the ex-

clusive credit of the latter,

and possibly was the originator of
believe certain later writers, his

the entire work.

If

we may

revision of the lxx. was on a great scale,

and equivalent
it

to a

new

version of the
it

Hebrew

far as to call

the

^,
Bible
;

Pseudo-Athanasius goes so
placing

on a

level with

the Greek versions of the Hexapla. of
'

Lucian

'

with the

kolvtj
is

But Jerome's identification presents quite another view of its
probably nearer to the truth.
to revise the
in
It

character and one which

was doubtless an attempt
In the

accordance

with the principles of criticism which were accepted at Antioch,

New

Testament
to impress

(to use the

words of Dr Hort') "the

quaUties which the authors of the Syrian text seem to have

most desired
a
full text."

on

it

are lucidity

and completeness...
is

both in matter and in diction the Syrian text
If the

conspicuously

Lucianic revision of the lxx. was

made

under the influences which guided the Antiochian revision of
the

New

Testament, we

may

expect to find the same general

principles at work", modified to

of the LXX. to a
that the

Hebrew

original,

some extent by the relation and by the circumstance

Hebrew

text current in Syria in the third century

A.D. differed considerably

from the text which lay before the

Alexandrian translators.

We

are not

left

entirely to conjectures.

During

his

work

upon the Hexapla^ Field noticed
to the Arabic

that in an epistle prefixed
letter

Syro-Hexaplar^ the marginal

i

(L) was said

Introdtidion, p. 134 f. Cf. F. C. Burkitt, Old Latin and Itala, p. 91, " Lucian's recension Both in fact corresponds in a way to the Antiochian text of the N. T. are texts composed out of ancient elements \velded together and polished
1

2

down."
2 ^

Prolegg. p. Ixxxiv.

f.

See

c. V.

The Hexapla, and

the Hexaplaric a7id other Recensions. 83

to indicate Lucianic readings.
itself,

he found
ix.

this letter in the

Turning to the Syro-Hexaplar margin of 2 Kings (= 4 Regn.)
35.

at cc.

9, 28, X.

24, 25,

xi.

i, xxiii. 2,1,

But the readings

thus
19,

marked
82,
93,

as Lucianic occur also in the cursive

Greek MSS.

108; and further examination shewed that these

Books of Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah agree with the text of the lxx. offered by the Antiochian fathers Chrysostom and Theodoret, who might have been
four MSS. in the

expected to

cite

from

'

Lucian.'

Similar reasoning led Field to

regard codd. 22, 36, 48, 51, 62, 90, 93, 144, 147, 233, 308 as presenting a more or less Lucianic text in the Prophets.

Meanwhile, Lagarde had independently^ reached nearly

t*he

same
a

result, so far as

regards the historical books.
82,
93,

He

satisfied

himself that codd.

19,

108,

118^,

had sprung from
with the

common

archetype, the text of which was practically identical
i.e.,

with that of the lxx. as quoted by Chrysostom,

Antiochian text of the fourth century, which presumably was
Lucianic.

Lagarde proceeded

to construct

from these

and
his

other sources a provisional text of Lucian, but his lamented

death intercepted the work, and only the
Lucianic lxx. has appeared (Genesis

first

volume of

2 Esdr., Esther).

The following specimen will serve to shew the character of Lucian's revision, as edited by Lagarde an apparatus is added which exhibits the readings of codd. and A.
;

,, ^^
^^

"^^^[

-

^^ \ \ , \ . ,
3 Regn. xviii. 22

, ,,

— 28.

,

^^\

^ Cf. his Prolego77iena to Librornjn V, (Gotting. 1883), p. xiv. 2 Or, as he denotes them, h,f, in, d, p.

.

Canon.

Pars prior graece

84 The Hexapla^ and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions,
Oeov

'^

)€ , (. , €^^ , ^ ^4€( ^ ,, . , ( ^.€,€€ '€€ , (^ , . ^. €, € € , €€
,
eVrai
ueos os av
iv

can

BeOS.

Koi

Xaos

einev

6

Xoyos ov

elrrev

'HXias
eva,

\

iv

€€.

^^

\

€7 (-

^^

iyevcTO

€ ive
2^]
|

22

. ]
6
|

iv

iovaov
i\
iv

\

€om

8-

^^

iov
i'
|

\ i€aXovvo
iv
|

iv

iv

om /] +
23

om om

om

^
|

|

].
^] +
|

/

. € ]] (
| \

pr

om

2^
|

2^
|

24

\

eav

|

om
\

|

|

25

|

'\
|

°]
28
|

om

] ]]]
20
\
|

'\
|

|

om

]
BA +
oj/

2J

-

+

3*^

comparison of 'Lucian' in this passage with the two great uncials of the LXX. reveals two classes of variants in the former, (i) Some of the changes appear to be due to a desire to render the repetifor the version smoother or fuller, e.g. the substitution of before tion of and of 6 for of for and the addition of for (2) Others seem to indicate an attempt to get nearer to the Hebrew, e.g. (-IJiil^l), (2) or an adherence to an older reading which

)

,,
and

, .,- ? ,
'?

the Hexaplaric LXX. had set aside,

^

;

'

Lucian follows the current Hebrew in which though he substitutes the easier for Aquila's cod. A has taken over from the Hexapla. Professor Driver, as the result of a wider examination, points out'^ that the Lucianic recension is distinguished by (i) the sub^

'. i
e.g.

the omission of 6v On the Other

i6v

,,
hand

A

^

Hexaplaric reading due to Aquila ; see Field aci loc. Notes on the Heb. text of the Books of Sa?nuel, p. li. f.

The Hexapla, and
stitution

the Hexaplaric

and

other Recensions, 85

of synonyms for the words employed by the Lxx. the occurrence of double renderings (3) the occurrence of renderings "which presuppose a Hebrew original self-evidently superior in the passages concerned to the existing Massoretic The last of these peculiarities renders it of great imtext." portance for the criticism of the Hebrew Bible.
;

(2)

;

in the year

martyrdom at Nicomedia under Maximin 312^ According to the Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis, his recension of the lxx. was subsequently discovered at Nicomedia, bricked up in a wall. The story may have
Lucian
sufifered

311 or

arisen from a desire to invest the

(as Lucian is called by the author of the Synopsis) with the same air of romance that belonged to the Quinta and Sexta, both of which were found, as he asserts, Iv It is more probable that copies were
' '

^.

.

circulated from Antioch in the ordinary way,

and

that

some of

these after the persecution reached Nicomedia and Constantinople.

The name

of Lucian would be enough to guarantee the

general acceptance of the work.

He

died in the peace of the
his

high repute with the Arian leaders,

^.
naturally

Church, and a martyr

;

on the other hand
a
revision

name was
of being

who boasted

in
all

Moreover,

which emanated from
In

Antioch, the "ecclesiastical parent of Constantinople^" would

take root in the

soil

of the Greek East.

dioceses

which

felt

the influences of those two great sees,

the Lucianic lxx. doubtless furnished during the fourth and
fifth

centuries the prevalent text of the
1 1.

Greek Old Testament.
satisfactory.

The

result of these multiplied labours of Christian scho-

lars

upon the

text of the lxx.

was not altogether

Before the time of Jerome

much

of the original text of the

Alexandrian Bible had disappeared.

Men

read their Old Testhey belonged

tament

in the recension of Lucian,
;

if

they lived in North Syria,
if

Asia Minor, or Greece
^

in that of

Hesychius,

^
^

Newman,

Mason, Persecution of Diocletian, p. 324. Avians, p. 6 f. Gwatkin, Studies of Ariatiism,
;

p. 31 n.

Hort, Introd. p. 143.

;

86 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions.
to the Delta or the valley of the Nile
edition,
if
;

in Origen's

Hexaplaric
Caesarea.

they were

residents

at

Jerusalem

or

Thus, as the scholar of Bethlehem complains, the Christian world was divided between three opposing texts (" totus...orbis

hac inter

se trifaria varietate

compugnat^").
text,

To

Jerome, as a
the

Palestinian

and an admirer of Origen's
;

critical principles,

remedy was simple
the place of the

the

Hexaplaric

which had been

assimilated to the Hebraica Veritas^ ought everywhere to take

-

represented by Hesychius or Lucian.

Fortunately the task was beyond his strength, and
versions
still

MSS.

afid

survive which represent

more

or less fully the

three

recensions

of the

fourth

century.

varietas did not continue to perplex the
texts

But the trifaria Church a fusion of
;

arose which affected the greater part of the copies in

varying proportions.

No

one of the

rival

recensions

became

dominant and

traditional, as in the case of the

New Testament^

among
more
to

the later

MSS. groups may be discerned which answer
of the cursives present a text which appears

or less certainly to this recension or to that, but the

greater

number

be the result of mixture rather than of any conscious

attempt to decide between the contending types.
1 -

Praef. in Paralipp. Cf. Hort, Introd. p. 142.

;

CHAPTER

IV.

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
The
Christian

Churches

of

Greek-speaking

countries

throughout the Empire read the Old Testament in the Alexandrian Version.

Few

of the provinces were wholly non-Hellenic
in

;

Greek

Avas

spoken not only in Egypt and Cyrenaica,

Westof

ern Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Achaia, but to a great
extent in the West, in Italy

and

at

Rome.

Roman

satirists

the

first

century complained

that

the capital had

become a

Greek city; the upper classes acquired Greek; the freedmen and slaves in many cases spoke it as their mother tongue \ Official letters addressed to the Roman Church or proceeding
from her during the
Latin names \
valley of the
first

two centuries were written

in

Greek

only four of the Bishops of

Rome

during the same period bear

In Gaul the Greek tongue had spread up the

the Greek colony at Marseilles to Vienne and Lyons; the Viennese confessors of a.d. 177 used it in their correspondence both with the Roman Bishops and with their brethren in Asia Minor the Bishop of Lyons wrote in the same language his great work against the false gnosis of the age. The Old Testament as known to Clement of Rome and Irenaeus of Lyons is substantially the Greek version of
;

Rhone from

^

The evidence
iii.

symbols^
lii.
fif.

26/5.,

is collected by Caspari, Qudlen zur Gesch. d. Tatifand summarised by Sanday and Headlam, Ro7nans, p.

;

88

Ancient Versions based upon the Septtiagint.

the Seventy.

To

the Church of North Africa, on the other

hand, the Greek
colonised from

Bible was
before

a sealed book; the
capital

for

Carthage,

Rome

had been flooded

by Greek residents, retained the Latin tongue as the language of common life. It was at Carthage, probably, that the earliest
daughter-version of the Septuagint, the Old Latin Bible,
first

saw the

light

^;

certainly
first

it is

there that the oldest form of the
in

Old "Latin Bible

meets us

the writings of Cyprian.

Other versions followed as the result of missionary enterprise

and to this latter source we owe the translations of the Old Testament which were made between the second century and the ninth into Egyptian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Gothic, Armenian,
Georgian, and Slavonic.
or in part
All these versions rest either wholly

upon

the Septuagint, and therefore possess a special

interest for the student of the

Greek
is

Bible.

One

other group

has a claim upon his consideration.
versions of the

The

earliest of the Syriac

Old Testament
it

on the whole a translation
belong to post-Nicene

from the Hebrew, but
in

shews the influence of the Septuagint
rest,

certain

books.

The

which

times, are based directly

upon the Alexandrian Greek, and one of them forms the most important of extant witnesses to

the text of the Hexaplaric recension.

I.

Latin Versions from the Septuagint.
Latin Bible before Jerome.

(i)

The

With the exception of Jerome himself, our earliest authority upon the origin of the Old Latin Bible is Augustine of Hippo, and it may be well to begin by collecting his statements upon
the subject.
^ On the other hand reasons have been produced for suspecting that the Latin version had its origin at Antioch ; see Guardian, May 25, 1892, p. [This 786 ff., and Dr H. A. A. Kennedy in Hastings' D. B. iii p. 54 ff. chapter was already in type when Dr Kennedy's article came into my hands. I regret that for this reason I have been unable to make full use of his exhaustive treatment of the Latin versions.]

Ancient Versio7ts based upon the Septiiagmt.

89

in

Aug. de civ. Dei xviii. 43 ex hac LXX. interpretatione etiam Latinam linguam interpretatum est quod ecclesiae Latinae

tenent.

De

doctr.

Christ,

ii.

16

[after

a

reference

to

the

"Latinorum interpretum infinita varietas"] "qui enim scripturas ex Hebraea lingua in Graecam verterunt, numerari possunt, ut enim cuique primis fidei Latini interpretes nullo modo temporibus in manus venit codex Graecus et aliquantulum
;

facultatis sibi utriusque linguae habere videbatur ausus est interpretari." lb. 22: "in ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala " ideo autem ceteris praeferatur." Ep. ii. 82 {ad Hiero7iymuin) desidero interpretationem tuam de LXX. ut...tanta Latinorum
:

interpretum qui qualescunque hoc ausi sunt quantum possumus imperitia careamus."

This

is

African testimony, but

it

belongs to the end of the
it

fourth century,

and needs

to

be verified before

can be

unhesitatingly received.

Many

of the discrepancies to which

Augustine refers
ness

may be due
or

to the carelessness or officious;

of correctors

transcribers

if,

as

Jerome

tells

us,

there were towards the end of the fourth century as

many
to

types of text as there were
plaria

MSS.
is

of the Latin Bible (" tot exem-

quot codices"),

it

clearly out of the question

ascribe each of these to a separate translator.

A few specimens,

taken from Cyprian and extant
the student to form

MSS.

of the O. L., will enable

some

idea of the extent to which these

differences are found in extant texts ^

Genesis

xlviii.

17

f.

Cyprian, testimonia i. 212. ^7ubi vidit autem loseph quoniam superposuit pater suus manum dexteram super caput Effraim, grave illi visum est, et
patris sui auferre earn a capite Effraim ad caput anasse. '^ dixit

Lyons Pentateuch.
'^yidens autem Joseph quod misisset pater ipsius dexteram

suam super caput Ephrem, grave
ei

visum

est, et

adprehendit loseph

manum

seph

manum

adprehendit lopatris sui ut aufer-

autem loseph ad patrem suum

Ephrem super caput Manassis. '^dixit autem loseph patri suo Non sicut,
ret earn a capite

Non
tivus

sic,

pater;
;

hie est primi-

pater; hie

meus superpone dexteram

impone

enim primitivus est; dextram tuam super

tuam super caput suum. ^ To facilitate comparison
peculiarities
^

caput huius.
obvious errors of the
cf.

MSS. and orthographical
ii.

have been removed.

On

the

MSS.

of the Testimonia

O.L. Texts,

p.

123

ff.

;

90

Ancieiit

Versions based tipon the Septuagmt.

Exod.

xxxii. 21

24.

Lyons Pentateuch.
""'et

wurzburg
Fragments.
'''et

Munich
FRAGxMENTS.
^'

dixit

Moyses

dixit

Moyses
fecit

et

dixit

Moyses

ad Aron

niam immisisti eis ^et delictum maximum? catum magnum dixit Aron ad dixit Aron ad Moysen --et dixit Aron ad ^^et Moysen Noli irasci, Noli irasci, domine: Moysen Ne irascaris, domine tu enim scis tu enim scis impetum domine tu enim scis
peccatum

(2uid fecit tibi populus hie quia super cos induxisti

ad Aron Quid

populus hie quia induxisti super eos peci

ad Aron Quid fecit tibi populus hie quo-

magnum

?

;

;

impetumpopulihuius. ^3dixerunt enim mihi Fac nobis deos qui praeeant nos nam
;

populi huius. -^^lixerunt enim mihi Fae nobis deos qui praece-

dant nos;
ses hie

Moyses
to,

hie

homo

qui

nam Moyhomo qui e-

duxit nos ex terra Aenescimus quid gypti, nescimus quid ^^et scimus quid accident ei. sit -^et factum factum sit ei. dixi eis Quicunque dixi illis Quicunque ei. ^^et dixi eis Si qui habet aurum t habet aurum demat habet aurum, demat dempserunt* et tollat ad me et dedesibi. et dederunt mihi, et et misi illud in ignem, dederunt mihi, et misi runt mihi, et proieci illud in ignem, et exiit in ignem, et exivit et exiit vitulus.

eduxit nos de Aegyp-

populi huius impetum. ^^dixerunt enim mihi Fac nobis deos qui praecedant nos; enim hie Moyses homo qui nos eiecit de terra Aegypti, ne-

;

vitulus.
* cod. demiserunt

vitulus.

t hiat cod.

Leviticus

iv.

27

29.

Lyons MS.
^7 si

WURZBURG Fragments.
in-

autem animadeliquerit

prudenter de populo terrae in faciendo vel unum ex omnibus praeeeptis Dei quod non faciet,
et

autem animaunadeliquerit quod fecit unum ab omnibus praeeeptis Domini, quod fieri non debet,
^7 si

invita de populo in terra eo

neglexerit, ^^et

cognitum

ei

et neglexerit, ^^et

cognitum

fuerit

fuerit

delictum in quo deliquit* in eo, et adferett primitivum de ovibus feminum immaculatum

quod

deliquit

;

^^et

imponet ma-

eius quod peccavit in ipso, et adferet hedillam de capris feminam sine vitio propter delictum quod deliquit; ^^et su-

peccatum

supra caput eius et Occident primitivum delicti in loco in quo occidunt holoeausta.
* cod. delinquii

num

perponet

manum

licti sui et

super caput devictimabunt hedillam
vic-

quae est delicti in loco ubi timabunt holoeausta.

f cod. adfert

Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint.
Micah
Cyprian, testhnonia
ii.

91

V.

2.

12.

Weingarten Fragments.
et tu, Be[thleem,] domus [habita]tioni[si Efrajta, nu[mquid

et tu, Bethleem, domus illius Ephratha, num exigua es ut constituaris in milibus luda? ex te mihi procedet ut sit princeps

mini[ma

es] ut

sis

[in

milibus

luda? [ex

te mi]hi pro[diet qui_

apud

Israel, et processiones eius

a principio, a diebus saeculi.

sit prin[ceps in] Istra[hel, et eg]ressus ip[sius ab] initi[o, ex diebus] saec[uli].

Isaiah xxix. 11,

18.

Cyprian, testimonia 4. "et erunt vobis hi omnes sermones sicut sermones libri qui
i.

WuRZBURG

Palimpsest.

signatus

est,

quern

si

dederis

homini

scienti litteras

ad legen-

"et erunt verba haec omnia sicut verba libri huius signati, quern si dederint homini scienti Htteras dicentes ex lege haec, et
dicet on possum legere, signaturn est enim...'^et audient in die ilia surdi verba libri, et qui in tenebris et qui in nebula; oculi caecorum videbunt.

dicet Non possum legere, signatus est enim...'^sed in ilia die audient surdi sermones libri, et qui in tenebris et qui in nebula sunt; oculi caecorum videbunt.
It is clearly

dum

unsafe to generalise from a few specimens, but
fail

the student will not
extracts

to observe that the variations in these

may, perhaps without exception, be attributed either
original
text.

to the ordinary accidents of transcription or to the recensions

of the

In the case of the

New

Testament
for

Dr Hort^

held that there was

"some

justification

the

had an indigenous version of her own, not less original than the African," and where both types of text existed, he distinguished them by the designations African Latin and European Latin,' applying the term 'Italian'^ to later revisions of the European text. The classification of the Old Latin authorities for the O. T. is less advanced, and owing to the fragmentary character of most of
alternative view that Italy
' '
'

Burkitt {0. L. attd liala, p. 93) proposes refectionis. Introduction, p. 78 ff. Cf. Westcott, Canon, p. 252 fF.; Wordsworth, 0. L. Biblical Texts, i., p. xxx. ff. On Augustine's use of this term see F. C. Burkitt, O. L. and Itala,
^ •^

p. 55

ff.

92
the

Ancient Versions based upon the Septnagint.

MSS.

it

is

more
text in

difficult

;

but

we may assume
as in the

that

it

will

proceed on the same general

mian types of
found
this

and the Old Testament
lines,
i.e.

that the pre-Hierony-

New

will

be

to

be mainly two,

the African, and the European,

with a possible sub-division of the latter class'.

In pursuing

enquiry use

must be made

not only of the surviving frag-

ments of O. L. MSS., but of the numerous quotations of the Latin versions which occur in writings anterior to the final triumph of the Vulgate. As Dr Hort has pointed out^ certain
of the Latin fathers "constitute a not less important province of Old Latin evidence than the extant MSS., not only furnishing

landmarks

for the investigation of the history of the version,

but preserving numerous verses and passages in texts belonging
to various ages

and

in various stages of modification."

These

patristic materials

were collected with great care and fulness
S. B.,

by Sabatier {Biblioruui sacrorum Latinae versiones antiquae...
opera
et studio
;

D. Petri Sabatier O.
i.

Reims, 1743,

'49,

Paris, 1751

vols.

ii.

contain the O. T.); but after the lapse

of a century

and a half his quotations can no longer be accepted

without being compared with more recent editions of the Latin
fathers^ and they often need to be supplemented from sources

which were not

at his

commando
to

These researches are important
Septuagint in so
the
far as

the

student

of

the

they throw light on the condition of

Greek

text

in

the

second and

third

centuries

after
is

Christ.

The
and

Latin translation of the Old Testament which

largely quoted by Cyprian

was probably made

in the

second
than

century,

certainly represents the text of

MSS.

earlier

1

Cf. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate^ p• 6;
ff.

Kennedy,

in Hastings'

D. B.

p.

58
^ ^

Introduction, p. 83.
P^or
this
is
;

Latinorum
*

2,

purpose the Vienna Corpus Scriptortun Ecclesiasticorum but it is still far from complete. the best collection available revised Sabatier is promised by the Munich Academy {Arckiv, viii. p. 3"ff•)•

A

;

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint,
the time of Origen.

93

What Mr

Burkitt has pointed out' in
is

reference to the prophetic books
^'

doubtless true in general
is

no... passage [to
is

which the asterisk

prefixed in Hexaplaric

Thus, as he remarks, ''the Old Latin brings us the best independent proof we have that the Hexaplar signs introduced by Origen
in

MSS.]

found

any form of the African Latin."

can be

relied

on

for the reconstruction of the

lxx."

Again,

M. Berger^ has
readings
in

called attention to the prominence of Lucianic

certain
is

Old Latin
been
is

texts;

and the

fact

that a

Lucianic element
quotations
Ceriani^.
its

widely distributed in Old Latin MSS. and
recognised

has

also

by Vercellone

'

This element

found even

in the African text^,

and and

occurrence there suggests that the Antiochian recension,
it

though

was made

at the

beginning of the fourth century, has

preserved ancient readings which existed also in the African
copies of the lxx., though they found no place in our oldest
codices.

We

proceed to give a

list

of the extant remains of the Old

Latin Version of the lxx., and the editions in which they are
accessible.

Old Latin Fragments of the Old Testament.
i.

Pentateuch.

Cod. Lugdunensis, vi. (Ulysse Robert, Pe7itateuchi e Codice Lugdicnensi versio Latma antiquissima, Paris, 1881; Libro7'inn Levitici et JSl uineroruni versio ajitiqua Itala e cod. perantiquo i?t bibliotheca A shbiirfihamiensi conservator London, 1868; Delisle, Decouverte d'line tres ancieime version latine de deux livres de la Bible in \.h.Q Journal des Savants, Nov. 1895, p. 702 ff.).
Rides of Tyconius, p. cxvi. f. Histoire de la Vidgate, p. 6. Cf. Driver, Samuel, p. Ixxvii. if. ^ Variae leciiones, ii., p. 426. * Monumenta sacra et prof ana, I. i., p. xvi. ; Le recensioni del e la versione latma della Itala {Kendiconte, Feb. 18, 1886). See also Driver, Notes on Samuel, p. Ixxviii. f.; Kennedy, in Hastings' D.B., I. c.\ Nestle, Einfuhrimg'^, pp. 148 note, 280; Wordsworth- White, p. 654. ^ Burkitt, Rules of Tyconius, p. cxvii.
^

2

LXX

94

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
Containing Gen.
xvi.
xvii. i8, xix. 5
1.

9— — 29, xxvi. 33 — — —xxxviii. 22, 36 — 26; Exod. xxvii. 6 — Leviticus^ 9 — 36, XXV. 25 — xxvi. — 32 Deuteronomy^. 30, XXV. 16 — xxvii. 34; Numbers^
15, xxxvii. 7
xlii.
i.

xxxiii.

i

vii.
i.

13,

xl.

;

i

19, xxi. xviii.

;

Fragmenta Wirceburgensia palimpsesta, palimpsestorum Wircebu7'gensiuin'^^ Vienna,
Containing Gen. xxxvi. Exod. xxii. 7 28, XXV. 30
XXXV. 13
II,

? vi.

(E.

Ranke, Par

1871).

16—17,

47, xvii.

— xxxvi, 22— 27, 14—

I,

2 20, xli. 4 7, 14 24, xl. 12 5; xxvi. 12, xxxii. 15 33, xxxiii. 13 27, xl. 30; xxxix. 2 Lev. iv. 23 vi. i, vii. 2,

— —

— —

— —

viii.

1—3, 6—13,

xi.

7—9, 12—15, 22—25, 27—
20
xxi. 2, xxii. 19

xviii. 21, xix.

31— xx.
v.

29; Deut. xxviii. 42

53, xxxi. 11

3,

xx. 12, 26.

Fragmenta Monacensia,
vorhiero7iy7nianischen
1883).

vi.

(L. Ziegler, Bruchstiicke eiiier

JJbersetzung des
15

PeJitateuchs^

Munich,

Containing Exod.
xxxi. 15

xl. 32; Lev. xxxiii. 7, xxxvi. 13 xv. 10, xviii. 18 xx. 3; xiii. 6, xiv. 17

ix.

V. 8, vii. 2>1

6, xxxvi.

31, xxx.

— 16 —
4

Num. iii. 34 iv. 8, iv. 31 20 xii. 14, xxix. 6 xxx. 3, xxxi. 14 xxxv. 13; Deut. viii. 19 x. 12, xxii. 7 xxiii. 4, xxviii. i
73» xi•

— —

— —

x. 24, xii.

28

xiv. 4, xvi. 10

— —

iii.

17

— xx.
xi.

5,

iv.

25,

12

xxxii. 29.
viii.

Lectiones ap. Cod. Ottobonian.,
lectiones^

(C. Vercellone, variae

Rome,

i860,

i.

p.

183

ff.).

20, xlvi. 15

13

Containing Gen. xxxvii. 27 35, xxxviii. 6 20, xlviii. 13, 20 22, xlix. 11—32,

14, xi. 7
I

10, xvi. 16
I

18, XXV.

yjy xxvi.

36, — — xxvii.
27,

14, xli.
i

xvii.
i

i


5.

1.

10, xxiii.

— 14 — 25 Exod. 12 — 30, xxiv. —
i
;

4,

x.

i

Fragmenta Philonea
p.63ff.).

(F. C. Conybeare, in

Expositor

iv.

iv.

Consisting of Gen. xxv. 20
Philo, quaest.

xxviii. 8 in

a Latin version of

Fragmenta Vindobonensia (J. ^€[^\\€va\,Palimpsestus
1885).

Vindob.,

Containing Gen.

xii.

17

xiii. 14,

xv. 2

12.

1 Leviticus and Numbers formed until recently a separate codex, see Robert, p. vi. f. 2 Deut. xi. 4 xxxiv. 12 belongs to the fragment announced by Delisle but not yet published. Belonging to the Library of the University of Wiirzburg.

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
ii.

95

Historical Books.

Joshua, Judges. Cod. Lugdunensis (including the Dehsle, Decouverte &c.).

new

portion announced by

Ruth.

Cod. Complutensis, ix., Madrid, Univ. Libr. (S. Berger in Notices et Exiraits^ xxxiv. 2, p. 119 ff.).
I

—4

Regn.

Fragments of Corbie and St Germain MSS. (Sabatier); fragments from a Verona MS. and a Vatican MS. in Bianchini {Vindiciae, p. cccxli. ff.), from a Vienna MS. in Haupt's vet. ajitehieron. vers, fragjnenta Vmdobone?isia, 1877, from an Einsiedeln MS. in Notices et Extraits xxxiv, 2, p. 127 ff., and from leaves found at Magdeburg and Quedlinburg^ printed by W. Schum, 1876, and A. Diining, 1888. A Vienna palimpsest containing considerable fragments of i 2 Regn. (J. Belsheim, Paliinpsestiis Viiid., 1885). Readings from the margin of Cod. Goth. Legionensis^ printed by C. Vercellone, ii. p. 179 ff.; cf.

Archiv,
I

viii. 2.

Esdras.

An

O. L. text

is

to

be found
8,

in the Paris

MS.
in a

Bibl. Nat. lat.

Ill, the

Madrid MS. E. R.

and another

Lucca MS. ap.

Lagarde, Septuagintastiidieii^ 1892.
Judith, Tobit.

Cod. Complutensis. Cod. Goth. Legionensis. Cod. Vatic, regin. (Bianchini,
only).

Vijidiciae, p.

cccl.

f.

;

Tobit

O. L. texts are also to be found in the Paris
lat. 6,

MS. MS.
p.

MSS. Bibl. Nat. 93, 161 (Tobit), 11 505, 11 549 (Judith), 11 5 53, in the Munich 26 infr. (Tobit), and the Oxford 6239, the Milan MS. Amb. Bodl. auct. E. infr. 2 (Judith). See Notices et Extraits.,

Of these texts some were prmted by Sabatier, and 142 ff. Munich 6239 is in Belsheim's Libr. Tobiae, &c. (1893).
Cod. Pechianus (Sabatier). Cod. Vallicellanus (Bianchini,

Esther.
Vifidiciae., p. ccxciv.

ff.).

^ See V. Schultze, die Quedlinbicrger Italo-Miniaturen der k. Bibliothek in Berlin (Munich, 1898). 2 On these see Berger, Hist, de la Vulgate, p. 18 f., and the caution in O. L. and Itala, p. 9 f.

96

Ancient Versions based upon

tJie

Septuagint.

Cod. Complutensis (see above under Ruth). O. L. text of Esther is found also in the Paris MS. Bibl. Nat. lat. 1 1 549 ( = Corb. 7), the Lyons MS. 356, the Munich MSS. 6225, 6239, the Monte Casino MS. 35 {Biblioth. Casin. i., 1873), the Milan MS. Amb. E. 26 infr. (see S. Berger op. cit.).

An

I,

2

Maccabees.

1

O. L. texts are to be found in the Paris MS. Bibl. Nat. lat. 1553 (Sabatier) and the Milan MS. Amb. E. 26 inf. (A. Peyron, Cic. fragnwi. i. 70 ff. (1824). (See Berger, op. cit.)
iii.

Poetical Books.

Psalms.

Cod. Veronensis (in Bianchini). Cod. Sangermanensis (in Sabatier). A Reichenau palimpsest described by Mone,
p. 40.

/. jc.

gr. Messen^

edited by Fragments of the and L. F. Hamann (Jena, 1874).
Job.

F. F. Fleck (Leipzig, 1837),

Fragment. Floriacense (Sabatier). Containing c. xl. 3 9. Readings from the margin of Cod. Goth. Legionensis {Notices
et Extraits., p. iii
ff.).

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles.

Readings
137
ff.

in a St Gallen

MS., see Notices

et Extraits., p.

Wisdom,

Sirach.
i.

See Lagarde, Mittheilungen
iv.

(Gottingen, 1884).

Prophets.
vi.
(.?)

Fragmenta Wirceburgensia,
Wirceb.

(E.

Ranke, Par palimp.
;

49 sqq.). Containing Hos.
p.
I

i.

i

Isa. xxix.

— XXX.
xl.


i

ii.

13, iv. 13

vii. i

Jon.

6, xlv.

xvii. 10, xviii.

xxxviii.

4 21, xxvi. 10 xxvii. 4, xxxiv. 5, xlvi. 9, xlviii. xlii. 18, xlv. i xxxviii. 8—20, xl. 3 xi. 4, ix. 10, x. 3 ii. 9, iii. 15 (26), viii. 5 i. 2

23

16

20— xlvi.

11

;

Jer. xii. 12

xxiii. 39,

5,

xli.

— 17;

xxxv. 15

— 19,

iii.

10— iv.

11;
11,

Lam.

16 16— xxxv.
ii.

xxxvi. 2
iii.

— xxxvii. xxxvii. 19 — 28, 28—35; Dan. 20— 42, and Bel.
40; Ezek. xxiv.
ante-

xiii.

12, xiv. 15

Fragmenta Fuldensia, v. (E. Ranke, Fragtn. versioiiis Hierojiyiniafiae^ Marburg, 1856). Containing Hos. vii. 6 ix. i, Amos ix. 3—9, Mic. ii. 3

iii.

3.

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.

97

Fragmenta Weingartensia,
;

Vienna, 1868
teiier

v. (E. Ranke, Fragrn. v. ante-H.^ Corssen, Zwei neue Fragmeiite d. WeitigarProphetenhajidscJuift^ Berlin, 1899).

P.

I

Containing Hos.
ix.
I, 5

iv.

13
i.

f.,

v.

10
ii.

6,

— 3— 19 —

17, xii. 3, 7, 9, 12, xiii.
5, iv.

— 2—

X.

9; Mic.
15

4,

xxviii.
2, xlvi.

I

— 9—

xviii.

9,

17, xxxiii. 23, xlvii.

X. II, xi.

18

3— — — 20; Joel — 17; Jon. 14 — 8; Ezek. 52 — xxvi. 10— 17 — xxiv. 25 — xxv. 22 — 7— 19 — 2— 22 — 30; Dan. 18 — 33, 25
5
iii.
i.

i,

3

5,

7, vii. 16, viii. xiv. 2; v.

i

Amos
vii.

24

— —

6,

13
i.

f.,

ix.

vi. 8, viii.
i

3, iv.

iv.

xvi.

14, xvii.

14, 11, xlii. 5, 6, 14, xliii. I5,xlviii.

xxvii.

7,

xliv. 5,

19, xlv.

ii.

ix.

23.

Fragmenta Stutgardiana (E. Ranke, Aiitiquissiina versionis Latinae fragmenta^ Marburg, 1888).
Containing
21, xxvii. 7

V.

T.

Amos

vii. i

17, xxxiii.

26

— —
5,

viii.

30, xxxiv, 6

10; Ezek. xviii. 9 12; Dan.

17, xx.

18

xi.

35

39.

Fragmenta monast.
2iir Hef^stelhmg der

S.

Pauli Carinthiaci (A. Vogel, Beitrdge
1868).
xlvi.
6,

A. L. Bibeliibersetzimg^ Vienna,
xlii.

Containing Ezek.
xlvii. 2

14, xliv.

19

xlv. 2,

9

23,

15.

Fragmenta palimpsesta Vaticana
fors,
1

(F. Gustafsson,

Fragmenta

V. T. in Latiniini co7iversi a paliinpsesto

Vaticaiw eruta^ Helsing-

881).

Containing Hosea
vii. 2

13

— 20;

7,

ix. 5

— 8;
vii.

iv.

Jon.
11

Zech.

7; Joel ii. 5 iv. 2; Hab. 21. 14, viii. 16
6,
iii.

7

— 7;16 Amos — 3;
i.

v.

16

18,
iii.

ii.

Zeph.

Fragmenta palimpsesta Sangallensia

(F.

C. Burkitt, O. L.

and Itala^ Camb.
Codex

1896).
xvii.

Containing Jer.

10

17, xxix. 13

19.
ccxiii.).

\^allicellanus B.

vii.

(Bianchini, Vindiciae, p.

Containing Baruch. O. L. texts of Baruch are also to be found in the Paris MSS. Bibl. Nat. lat. 11, 161, 11951, and Arsenal. 65, 70; and in the Monte Casino MS. 35, and the Reims MS. i.

Copious extracts from most of the books of the O. L. Bible are given in the anonymous Liber de divinis scripturis sive Speculu7n, wrongly attributed to St Augustine (ed. F. Weihrich in the Vienna Corpus, vol. xii.). Two other patristic collections of O. L. excerpts may also be mentioned here the Testimonia of St Cyprian (ed. Hartel, Corpus, vol. iii. i), and the liber regularum Tyconii (ed. F. C. Burkitt, in Texts a?id Studies, iii. i). See also the Collatio Ca7'thaginiensis printed in Dupin's Optattis

(Paris, 1700), p. 379
S.

ff.

S.

7


98
(2)

Ancient Versions based npon the Septiiagint.
Latin versions of the lxx. revised or taken over by

Jerome.

The

great

Pannonian scholar, Eusebius Hieronymus

(a.d.

329 420), began his "useful labours'" upon the Old Testament at Rome about the year 383, probably (as in the case of
his revision of the Gospels) at the suggestion of the

Romaa

His first attempt was limited to a revision of the Latin Psalter and conducted on lines which A few years later but afterwards seemed to him inadequate. before 390 i, when he began to translate from the Hebrew
Bishop Damasus (t 384).

a fresh revision of the Psalter from the lxx. was undertaken

Paula and Eustochium its immediate purpose was to remove errors which had already found their way inta the copies of the earlier work, but the opportunity was seized
at the desire of
;

of remodelling

the Latin Psalter

after

the example of the

Hexapla.
Praef. in
libr.

Psahnorum: "psalterium Romae dudum
et iuxta

posi-

tum emendaram

LXX. interpretes, licet cursim, magna quod quia rursum videtis, Paula illud ex parte correxeram^ et Eustochium, scriptorum vitio depravatum, plusque antiquum errorem quam novam emendationem valere, cogitis ut...renasnotet sibi unusquisque vel iacentem centes spinas eradicem lineam vel signa radiantia, id est vel obelos ( -^ ) vel asteriscos ( % ) et ubicunque viderit virgulam praecedentem (-=-), ab ea usque ad duo puncta (:) quae impressimus, sciat in LXX. translatoribus
plus haberi
;

;;

ubi

autem

stellae

(JjC•)

similitudinem perspexerit,.

de Hebraeis voluminibus additum noverit aeque usque ad duo puncta, iuxta Theodotionis dumtaxat editionem qui simplicitate sermonis a LXX. interpretibus non discordat."

Psalteriuin

These two revised Latin Psalters were afterwards known asRoviaimm and Psalterium Gallica7iuin respectively.
in the use of the Latin
latter in

Both recensions established themselves

Church^, the former in the cursus psallendi^ the
:

the

" hi qui me invidere putant utilibus ^ Aug. ep. 82 {ad Hierony)7tu7ti) laboribus tuis." 2 Cf. adv. Rufin. ii. 30 " psalterium... certe emendatissimum iuxta lxx. interpretes nostro labore dudum Roma suscepii;"; where, as Westcott says (Smith's D. B. iii. 1698 «.), he seems to include both revisions.

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.
bibliotheca

99
1572)

or

Church

Bible.

At length Pius V.
Peter's
at

(f

ordered the Gallican Psalter to be sung in the daily
exception being

offices,

an
St

made

in favour of St

Rome,
MSS.

Mark's at Venice, and the churches of the Archdiocese of
Milan, which retained the

'Roman'

Psalter \

In

of

the Vulgate a triple Psalter not infrequently appears, shewing

Jerome's two Septuagintal revisions side by side with the Psalteriui?i

Hebraicum, his
'

later translation

from the Hebrew

;

but

the

'

Hebrew

Psalter never succeeded in displacing the Hiero-

nymian revisions of the Old Latin, and the Latin Church still and reads a version of the Psalms which is based on the Septuagint. The liturgical Psalter of the Anglican Church
sings

"followeth...the Translation of the Great
forth

English Bible, set

and used

in the time of

King Henry the Eighth, and

Edward
'

the Sixth";
'

Gallican

Psalter

i.e. it is on the whole a version of the which had passed through Tindale and

Coverdale into Cranmer's Bible (1540).

The
will

following specimen (Ps.

lxvii.=lxviii.

12

14,

18

— 22)

enable the reader to form an idea of the relation between Jerome's two revisions of the Old Latm and his 'Hebrew'
Psalter.

Roman.
"Dominusdabitvervirtute

Gallican.
"Dominusdabitvervirtute

Hebrew.
'^Domine,dabis
ser-

bum evangelizantibus bum evangelizantibus monem
multa
;

'Srex

multa;
5iC•

'^j-ex
:

virtutumdilecti,etspe- virtutum dilecti et ciei domus dividere speciei domus divispolia. ^-^si dormiatis dere spolia. ^-^ si dorin medios cleros, pen- miatis inter medios nae columbae dear- cleros pennae columgentatae,etposteriora bae deargentatae et dorsi eius in specie posterioraijc-dorsieius auri. \diapsabna\ in paliore auri. dia^*^currusDeidecemmi- psabna '^currus lium multiplex, milia Dei decem milibus laetantium. Dominus multiplex, milia lae^

adnuntiatricibus fortitudinis plurimae, '^reges exerci-

tuum foederabuntur, foederabuntur et pulcritudo
spolia.

inter nos, pennae

dividet dormieritis medios termi'"^si

domus

columbae
et pos-

deargentatae

teriora eius in virore auri ^^currus Dei

innumerabiles,
f.

milia

Martene, de ant.

rit.

i.

p. 18

;

I

()

Ancieiit

Versioits based iipoji the Septiiagiiit.

Roman.
in illis in Sina sancto. ''ascendens in altum captivam duxit dedit captivitatem,
eis

Gallican.
in tantium
:

Hebrew.
in
in

Dominus
:

abundantium; Dominus
in eis in Sina, in

%

in

3ina

sancto.
in

'^ascendisti
:

sancto.

'^ascendisti

altum

cepisti cap-

in excelsum,

captivam

accepisti duxisti captivitatem, dona hominibus. et- tivitatem, enim non credunt in- dona in hominibus. accepisti dona in hohabitare. ^^Dominus etenim non credentes minibus; insuper et Deus benedictus be- inhabitare Dominum non credentes habi-° benedictus tare Dominum Deum. nedictus Dominus de Deum. Domidie in diem, prospe- Dominus die quoti- ^^ benedictus rum iter faciei nobis die prosperum iter nus per singulos dies Deus salutaris noster. faciei nobis Deus sa- portabit nos Deus ^' diapsalma. Deus lutarium nostrorum. salutis nostrae. se7n^' Deus per. ^'Deus noster noster deus salvos fa- diapsalma. ciendi, et Domini exi- noster, Deus salvos -^ deus salutis, et Domini et Domini Dei mortis egressus. tus mortis, "verum- faciendi verumtamen Deus exitus tamen Deus conquas- % Domini sabit capita inimico- mortis, ^^verumtamen confringet capita inirum suorum, verticem Deus confringet capi- micorum suorum, verperambulan- ta inimicorum suo- ticem crinis ambulancapilli
;

;

:

"^^

:

tium

in delictis suis.

rum, verticem capilli -i-perambulantium in
delictis suis.

tis

in delictis suis.

The book
known
it

of Job offered a

still

more promising

field for

the

labours of the Hexaplarising reviser, for the Greek text as
to

Origen

fell

greatly short of the current

Hebrew, and

was

this defective text

which formed the basis of the Latin
to

versions used by Cyprian

Jerome, who had access

and Lucifer and in the Speculu7n\ the Hexapla at Caesarea, took advantage of Origen's revision, in which the lacunae of the Greek Job were filled up from Theodotion, and sent his friends, Paula and Eustochium, a Latin version of Job at once corrected and supplemented from the Hexaplaric lxx. The result gave him for the time profound satisfaction he had lifted up Job from the dunghill^, and restored him to his pristine state^;
;

Burkitt, 0. L. and Itala, pp. 8, 32 f. Praef. in libr. Job: "qui adhuc apud Latinos iacebat in stercore et verniibus scatebat errorum."
1

2

ibid,

"integrum immaculatumque gaudete."

"

Ancieitt

Versions based upon the Septuagmt.
the

loi

the difference between

Old Latin version and the new

seemed
800

be nothing short of that which separates The asterisks shewed that from 700 to falsehood from truth'.
to

him

to

lines

had been restored

to this long mutilated

book^
will

few brief specimens from Lagarde's text^ shew the character of the Avork.
X.

A

suffice to

4 aut sicut

homo, videbis?

"< aut

homo perspicit, perspicis ? humana est vita tua?
?

ijc•

aut sicut videt aut anni tui sunt

tanquam %
xix. 17 et
filios
ijc•

dies "^ hominis

rogabam uxorem
mei
;

meam

uteri

at

illi

in

invocabam -^ blandiens perpetuum despexerunt me cum
;

V

surrexero, locuntur ad me.
-^ scriptum xlii. 7 et defunctus est Job senex plenus dierum. est aiitem resurrecturum cum his quos Dominus suscitabit.

Jerome
(Proverbs,
after the

also revised from the Hexaplaric Septuagint,

for

the benefit of Paula and Eustochium, the 'books of Solomon'
Ecclesiastes,

Canticles),
\

treating

the

Greek

text

manner of Origen

but his work has perished, the

preface alone surviving.

A

like fate has overtaken a transla-

tion of Chronicles, undertaken at the desire of

Domnio and

Rogatianus. This version of Chronicles appears from the preface
to have been influenced

now

sufficiently

judgement in he still clung
Septuagint.

by Jerome's Hebrew studies, which were matured to enable him to form an independent reference to the merits of his Greek text, though

to his old belief in the inspiration of the original

Praef. in libros Saloinonis: "tres libros Salomonis, id est, Proverbia, Ecclesiasten, Canticum canticorum, veteri LXX. auctoritati reddidi, vel antepositis lineis (-f•) superflua quaeque

"veterem editionem nostrae translation! compara, et quantum distet inter veritatem et mendacium. Jerome's satisfaction with his original revision of Job was continued even after he had produced a new version from the Hebrew in the preface to the latter he leaves the student free to choose between the two (" eligat unusquisque quod vult "). See below, pt II., c. ii. Praef. in Job ed. Heb.
^

Ad Pammach.:

liquido

providebitis

;

'^

^

In Mittheihingen,

ii.

I02

Ancient Versions based upon

the Septuagint.

designans, vel stellis (^•) titulo(?) praenotatis ea quae minus habebantur interserens...et ubi praepostero ordine atque perverse sententiarum fuerat lumen ereptum suis locis restituens Praef. in libr. Paralipome7ion: feci intellegi quod latebat." "cum a me nuper litteris flagitassetis ut vobis librum Paralipomenon Latino sermone transferrem, de Tiberiade legis quondam doctorem qui apud Hebraeos admirationi habebatur assumpsi... libere enim et sic confirmatus ausus sum facere quod iubebatis.

vobis loquor,

ita et in

Graecis et Latinis codicibus hie

nominum

liber vitiosus est ut

arbitrandum

sit.

non tam Hebraea quam barbara quaedam... nee hoc LXX. interpretibus qui Spiritu sancto

pleni ea quae vera fuerant transtulerunt, sed scriptorum culpae adscribendum....ubicunque ergo asteriscos...videritis ibi sciatis de Hebraeo additum...ubi vero obelus, transversa scilicet virga, praeposita est, illic signatur quid LXX. interpretes addiderint."

of the

Whether Jerome dealt with the rest of the canonical books Old Latin in the same manner must remain an open

question.

No

trace remains either of such revised versions or

of prefaces which once belonged to them, nor does he refer to

them

in the prefaces of his translations

from the Hebrew.

On

the other

hand
in

his letters occasionally

speak of his revision of
it

the Old Latin in terms which seem to imply that
plete,

was com-

and

one of them there
is

is

a passage which suggests that

the disappearance of the other books was
of

due

to the dishonesty

some person whose name
Adv. Rufin.
ii.

not given.

24:

"egone contra LXX. interpretes aliquid

sum locutus quos ante annos plurimos diligentissime emendatos meae linguae studiosis dedi ? " Ep. 71 {ad Luciniiwi): "LXX.
editionem et te habere non dubito." Ep. 106 i^ad Siinn. et Fret.): codicibus repe"editionem LXX. interpretum quae et in Cf. ritur et a nobis in Latinum sermonem tideliter versa est." Ep. Augustini ad Hieron. (116), (c. 405): "mittas obsecro interpretationem tuam de LXX. quam te edidisse nesciebam." At a later time (c. 416) Jerome excuses himself from doing as Augustine had desired, since "pleraque prioris laboris fraude cuiusdam amisimus" {Ep. 134).

In any case Jerome's Hexaplarised version had

little

or

no influence on the
Psalter.

text

of the Latin Bible, except

in

the

Even

his translations

from the Hebrew did not easily
familiar version died hard and,

supersede the Old Latin.

The

Ancierit
as the
as
late
list

Versions based upon the Septuagint.
will

103

of

MSS.

have shewn, parts of
century.

it

were copied
the

as

the

seventh
its

Even

at

Rome

old

version long held

last years of the sixth

ground by the side of the new; in the century, Gregory the Great, while basing

his great

right to cite the

commentary on Job upon the Vulgate, claimed a Old Latin when it served his purpose, " quia
naturally produced

sedes apostolica utrique nititur\"

The

coexistence of the two versions

mixture in the MSS. ^ which was not altogether removed by the
revisions of the sixth

and ninth

centuries.
its

Moreover, the Old

Latin version continued to hold

place in those books of

the Church Bible which had no Semitic original, or of which
the Semitic original was no longer current.

In the preface to
:

the Salomonic Books Jerome says explicitly
libro

" porro in eo
et

qui

a

plerisque

Sapientia

Saloinotiis

inscribitur

in

Ecclesiastico...calamo temperavi,
turas vobis

tantummodo canonicas

scrip-

emendare desiderans."

The books

of Tobit and

Judith^ were afterwards translated by him from the Aramaic
{praeff. in iibru??i Tobiae^ in librum Judith),

and these versions
but
the

have

been incorporated

in

the
i,

Vulgate,
2

Vulgate

Wisdom,

Ecclesiasticus, Baruch,

Maccabees
to this

are supplied

from ante-Hieronymian sources.
able part of the Latin Bible
is

Thus

day a consider-

in greater or less degree

an

echo of the Septuagint.
Besides the editions already mentioned the consult with advantage Eichhorn, Einleitimg, i. Wiseman, Essays^ i. (London, 1853) a reprint of his Two lettei's on some parts of the controversy co?icerni7ig i Jok. v. 7 B. F. Westcott, art. Vutgate in Smith's D. B. iii. H. Ronsch, Itata u. Viilgata (Marburg, 1869) F. Kaulen, Handbnch ziir Vulgata (Mainz, 1870); Ziegler, Die tat. Bibeliibersetzungen vor
student N. 321
;

Literature.

may

;

;

;

Praef. ad Moralia in Job. " les textes des anciennes versions et Cf. e.g. Berger, op. cit. p. xi. de la nouvelle sont constamment meles et enchevetres dans les manuscrits.'' ^ On the relation of Jerome's Latin Judith to the Septuagint see C. J. Ball in Speaker's Commentary, Apocrypha, p. 257 ff.
^

-

:

104

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.

Hierony?nus {Mnrnch., iSyg) ; Lagarde, Prooe einer Jieue?t Ausgabe der lat. Ubersetzu7igen des A. T. (1870); A. Ceriani, Le recensioni
dei

LXX
;

Une page

e la versione latina delta Itala^ 1886; L. Salembier, iiiedite de Fhistoire de la Vulgate, Amiens, 1890
;

Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. F. C. Burkitt, The Old Lati7t and Gregory, p. 949 ff. 191 fif. E. Nestle, the Itala, in Texts a?td Studies (Cambridge, 1896) Urtext, pp. 84 ff. [specially valuable for the bibliography of the H. A. A. Kennedy, The Old LatiJi Ve7'sions, Latin versions] in Hastings' D. B. iii. pp. 47—62.
(1893),
p.

Bleek-Wellhausen

553

ff.

;

;

;

;

2.

The Egyptian

Versions.

The

tradition of St Mark's episcopate at Alexandria'

may

be taken as evidence, so far as it goes, of the early planting of The first converts were doubtless, as the Church in that city. at Rome, Greek-speaking Jews, descendants of the old Jewish

and the first extension of the Greek population As it of the towns on the sea-coast of the Mediterranean. spread to the interior, to the villages of the Delta, to Memphis, Oxyrhynchus, Panopolis, and eventually to Thebes, it encountered native Egyptians who spoke dialects of the Egyptian How soon they were evangelised there is no direct tongue ^
settlers-,

and

their

Greek proselytes

;

the

movement was probably amongst

evidence to shew, but the process
after

the Gospel reached Alexandria.
its

may have begun shortly The native Church
fifth

retained

own
still

tongue, and in the fourth and

centuries
eccle-

Greek was
siastics of

unknown

to

many

of the
is

monks and

Egypt.

Christianity

however

probably responsible

for either introducing or spreading the use of a

1 See Gospel ace. to St Mark, p. xiv. f. The Clementine Homilies (i. 8 fif.) attribute the foundation of the Alexandrian Church to Barnabas. But reads In Acts xviii. 24 cod. a yet earlier beginning is possible. on which \6yov eu rrj av5p€vs...^s Blass {/Icta app. p. 201) remarks: "itaque iam tum (id quod sine testi-

$
f.

new system

of

,D

monio suspicandum
2

Acts

ii.

9

ot
.

erat) in Aegyptum quoque nova a.o^ov'i...h:iy^ov. lb. vi.
.

religio

permanaverat."

9 TLvh

$ --

yrji
3

\eyovs
Cf what
is

.

I

said of St

Anthony

in the

Fita Antonii (Migne, P. G.

xxvi. 944 sq.).

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint
writing with characters which are
chiefly

105

of Greek

origin \

This writing,

known

as Coptic

—a
in

corruption of
all

is

found with some variations

MS. fragments of the
Testaments.

Egyptian versions of the Old and

New

Old Latin would lead us to suppose (as Bp Lightfoot remarks') that no long interval passed between the acceptance of Christianity by any large number of native Egyptians, and the first attempts to translate the Scriptures " We should probably not be into the Egyptian tongue. exaggerating if we placed one or both of the principal Egyptian versions, the Bohairic and the Sahidic, or at least parts of
of the

The analogy

them, before the close of the second century."

The Bishop

is

Testament in view, but his argument appHes equally to the Old. His view is on the whole supported by Dr Hort^ Ciasca^ and Mr A. C. Headlam^: but Mr Forbes Robinson, following Guidi, produces reasons for regarding it as 'not proven,' and prefers to say that "historical
wridng with only the
evidence... on the whole, points to
the third century as the
"

New

period

when

the

first

Coptic translation was made."

But

this view,"

the light

he adds, "can only be regarded as tentative. In of future discoveries it may have to be modified^"
Egyptian versions
is

The

plurality of the

well ascertained.

Perhaps the geographical form of Egypt gave special opportunities for the

growth of popular dialects

;

certain

it

is

that

increased knowledge of the language has added to the dialectic

complications with which the Coptic scholar has to struggle'.
1 Of the 31 letters of the Coptic alphabet 7 only (ig, q, ^5, g^ -x, <3', \) are not from the Greek. On the pre-Christian systems see Clem, strom.

V.

4

oi

Trap' AiyvTTTLOLS

^
(the

^
=*

^
^

^
'

TeXevraiav Scrivener- Miller, ii. p. 97. Inir. to N. T. in Greek, p. 85. Sacr. bihl. fragmenta Copto-Sahidica, i, p. viii. Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 105 f. Hastings, D. B. i. p. 672. The Demotic, as it is known to us, appears to present no dialectic

'/.

Demotic), bevripav

... ...

io6
It

Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint.
in these

was

popular dialects that the translations of the
" Christianity... was in Egypt a great popular
literary

Bible were made.

movement... the Scriptures were translated, not into the
language, but into that of the people
;

and the copies of these

translations in each locality reflected the local peculiarities of

speech."

Fragments of Biblical versions have been found in Middle Egyptian dialects. The Bohairic dialect was spoken in Lower, the Sahidic in Upper, Egypt, and the Middle Egyptian in the intermediate province
the Bohairic\ Sahidic, and

of Memphis.

Some

authorities speak of two other dialects,

the Fayumic and Akhmimic, assigning to

them

certain Biblical

fragments which are regarded by others as belonging to the

Middle Egyptian.
Translations of books of the Old Testament into
these

Egyptian dialects were naturally made from the Alexandrian

Greek version, and, if we may judge from the extensive use of the Old Testament in early Christian teaching, there is no reason to doubt that they were translated at as early a date as Portions the Gospels and Epistles, if not indeed before them. of the Old Testament exist in each of the Egyptian dialects. Hyvernat mentions fragments of Isaiah, Lamentations and Ep. of Jeremiah in Fayumic and Middle Egyptian, and of Exodus, Sirach, 2 Mace, and each of the Minor Prophets in Akhmimic"; in Bohairic he enumerates 6 MSS. of the Pentateuch,

14 of the Psalms,

5

of Proverbs, 3 of Job, 4 of the

Minor Prophets,

5 of Isaiah, 3 of Jeremiah, 4 of Daniel,

and

variation, perhaps because the specimens which have reached us were all the Avork of the single class the scribes: see Hyvernat, Etude sur les versions Copies in Revue Biblique, v. 3, p. 429 ; A. C. Headlam in

Scrivener-Miller, p. 105. ^ Formerly known as the Memphitic, a name which might be more appropriately applied to the form of Middle Egyptian current at Memphis. 'Bohairic' is derived from el-Bohairah, a district S. of Alexandria. 'Sahidic,' also called Thebaic, is from ^i-j-rt'/i/= Upper Egypt. On some characteristics of the several dialects see Hyvernat, p. 431. - Cf. Steindorfif, Die Apokalypse des Elias, p. 2.

Ancient Versions based npon the Septnagint.
;

107

one MS. of Ezekiel in Sahidic, though few complete MSS. of any BibUcal book have survived, there is a large number of extant fragments representing most of the canonical books and certain of the non-canonical (the two Wisdoms, the Ep. of Jeremiah, and the Greek additions to Daniel).

The following list gives the more important pubHcations which contain portions of the Old Testament in the Egyptian
versions.

BOHAIRIC.
garde,

Der

D. Wilkins, Qidnque Pe7itateuch koptisch^ 1 867

libj'i
;

Moysis, 1731 LaBruchstiicke der kopt.
;

Ubersetzungen des A. T. in Orie7italia i. 1879. The Psalter has been edited by R. Tuki, 1744, J. L. Ideler, 1837, Schwartze, 1848, Lagarde, Psalterii versio Memphitica^ Gottingen, 1875, F. Rossi, Cmque 7naiioscritti &c., 1894; Job by H. Tattam, 1846 the Prophets by Tattam {Prophetae ininores, 1836, Proph.
;

maiores, 1852).

f7'ag77i.

Lagarde, Aegyptiaca, 1883; Ciasca, Sac7'. bibl. Coptosahidica Micsei Borgia7ii, 1885 9; Amelineau, Frag}7ie7its coptes in Recueil v. (1884), and Frag7/ie7iis de la versio7i thebai7ie, ib. vii. x. (1886 9); the same scholar has edited Job in Proceedi7igs of the Soc. of Bibl. Arch.., 1887; O. v. Lemm, Bruchstiicke, 1885, Sahidische Bibelfrag77ie7ite, 1890 Krall, Mittheihi7tge7i, 1887; F. Rossi, Papiri Copti, 1889, Uji 7iuovo codice, 1893; MdiS'^QYO, Frag77ie7its ^de VA7icie7i Testa77ie7it in Me77ioires piiblies par les 77ie77ibres de la 77iissio7i arch, frangaise an Caire, vi., 1892; E. A. Budge, The earliest k7io'W7i Coptic Psalter, 1898; N. Peters, Die sahidisch-koptische Ubersetzimg d. Bitches Eccle-

Sahidic.

;

siasticus...Ji7itersucht, 1898.

Middle Egyptian, &c. Tuki, Rudi77ie7ita li7tgiiae Coptae, 1778; Ouatremere, Rechejxhes stir la la7zgue et la litteratiire de PEgypte, 1808; Zoega, Catal. codd. Copt., 18 10; Engelbreth, Fi'agjfieiita Bas77iurico-Coptica V. et N. T., 1811 Von Lemm, Mitteldgyptische F7'ag7)ie7ite, 1885; ^.., Mittheihi7tge7i, 1887; Bouriant in Me77ioires de rhistitut egyptie7i ii., 1889, and in Me77ioires public's par &c. vi. i Steindorff, die Apokalypse des
; ;

Elias, p. 2
It

ff.

(Leipzig, 1899).

may

reasonably be expected that the Egyptian versions

Old Testament, when they have been more fully recovered and submitted to examination by experts, will prove
of the

io8
to

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.

be of

much importance

for

the criticism
that the

of the text of

the Lxx.

Ceriani^ has shewn

Marchahanus agrees

generally

with

Greek text of Cod. that which underlies
both are
in har-

the Bohairic version of the Prophets,

vai\\%\.

mony with
German
their text

the text which

is

quoted by Cyril of Alexandria.

A
the

scholar^, starting with the Bohairic Prophets, finds that
is

similar to that of the

Codex Alexandrinus,

Codex Marchahanus, a series of cursive Greek MSS., some of which had been recognised by CornilPas Hesychian (22, 23, 26,
36, 40, 42, 49, 51, 62, 86, 91, 95, 97, 106, 114, 130, 147, 153,

185, 228, 233, 238, 240, 310, 311),

and the Greek columns of
yield a pre-Origenic text^

the Complutensian Polyglott.

Of

the Sahidic fragments, those

which belong

to the

book of Job
is

whilst the Sahidic Isaiah

distinctly Hexaplaric,

and

traces of

the influence of the Hexapla are also to be found in Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes

and Ezekiel, although

in varying degrees.

On

the

whole

it

is

natural to expect the Hesychian recension to be

specially reflected in

Egyptian versions.

But other influences
to

may have been

at

work^ and much remains

be done before

these versions can be securely used in the work of reconstructing the text of the

Greek Old Testament ^.
;
;

Quatremere, Recherches Zoega, Catalogus Koptische Grainmatik^ 1880; Kopten, Koptische Sprache u. Litteratur^ 1886; Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 91 ff. B. Lightfoot and A. C. Headlam); Gregory, prolegg.^ (J. p. 859 ff.; J. P. P. Martin, Intr.^ partie thdor., p. 310 tf.; H. Hyvernat, Etude sur les versions copies de la Bible in Revue
L.

Literature.
Stern,

biblique^ v. 3, 4, vi.

i

;

E. Nestle, Urtext, p. I44ff.

1

2
^

*

Ijob,
^ ^

See O. T. in Greek, iii. p. ix. A. Schulte in Theol. Quartalschrift, 1894-5; see Hyvernat, p. 69. Ezechiel, p. 66 ff. Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 215 ff. ; Dillmann, Textkritisches zum Buche p. 4; Burkitt, 0. L. and Itala, p. 8; Kenyon, Our Bible and the

ancient MSS., p. 751.

i.

Hyvernat, p. 71. See the remarks of F. Robinson 673 a.

in

Hastings' Diet, of the Bible,

;

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.

109

3.

The Ethiopic Version.
The Tyrian

been evangelised in the fourth missionaries were probably of Greek speech \ and brought with them the Greek Bible. But apart from this, the contiguity of Ethiopia to Egypt, and the
Ethiopia
is

said to have

century from Tyre.

circumstance that the

first

Bishop of

Auxume

received conse-

cration at Alexandria, create an a priori probability that

any

early translations from the

Old Testament

into Ethiopic were

based upon the Septuagint, whether immediately or through
the Coptic versions.

This conclusion
of the version.

is

on the whole supported by the character
Bible
presents

The Ethiopic

phenomena
Greek

which are not
origin.

easily reconciled with the hypothesis of a

These appear, however,

to

be Umited to a certain

Dillmann, who at one time had explained the numerous transHterations and other approaches to the Hebrew by assuming that the translators worked upon a Hexaplaric text, ultimately found cause to classify the MSS. under three heads, (i) those which on the whole represent the text of the Lxx. on which he supposed the version to have been based corthe most numerous class (2) those of a later recension those in which the rected by other MSS. of the lxx. (3) Lagarde original version has been revised from the Hebrew ^ suggested that the existing Ethiopic version was translated from the Arabic, as late as the fourteenth century, and maintained that in any case the printed texts of the Ethiopic Old Testament depend upon MSS. which are too late and too bad

group of MSS.

;

to furnish a secure basis for the

employment of

this version in

^ Charles (art. Ethiopic Version, in Hastings' D. B. i. p. 792) states that " the Abyssinians first received Christianity through Aramaean missionaries." But Tyre in the fourth century was as Greek as Alexandria

and Antioch.
2

Nestle, Urtext, p. 148.

Loisy, Histoire critique^

I. ii.

p. 231.

no

AncieJit

Versions based upon the Septiiagint.

the reconstruction of the Septuagint \

The

latter

statement

is

possibly not far from the truth, but there appears to be no
sufficient

reason for doubting the influence of the Greek Bible-.
all

The

Ethiopic version of the Old Testament contains

the

books of the Alexandrian canon except i 4 Maccabees, together with certain apocrypha which are not found in MSS.
of the Lxx. (Enoch, the

Book

of Jubilees, 4 Esdras,

&:c.).

A

considerable part of

it

has appeared in print.

Dillmann edited

the Octateuch and the four books of Kingdoms (1853-71), and the deuterocanonical books (1894); the book of Joel appeared in Merx, Die Prophetie des Joels, the book of Jonah in W. Wright's Jonah in four Se?nitic versions (London, 1857).

The Psalms were

printed by Ludolf (1701), Rodiger (181 5),

Dorn (1825), and Jeremiah, Lamentations and Malachi by Bachmann (1893); Bachmann also edited the Dodecapropheton, and part of Isaiah.
Lists of the MSS. may be seen in Wright, Ethiopic MSS. of the British Museum (London, 1878); Zotenberg, Catalogue des MSS. ethiopie?ts de la Bibliotheque Nationale (Paris, 1877); D'Abbadie, Catalogue raisonne de MSS. ethiopiens (Paris, 1859) Dillmann, Catalogus MSS. Aethiop. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana (Oxford, 1848), and Abessinische Handschr. d. k. Biblioth. zu Berlin; Miiller, Aethiop. Haridschr. der k. Hofbiblioth. i?i Wiefi {ZDMG. xvi. p. 554). For fuller information as to this Version see F. Pratorius, Urtext, p. 147 ff.
5

4.

The Arabic

Version.
printed in
the
Paris

The Arabic Old Testament London Polyglotts is a composite work,

and

the Hexateuch being

a translation from the Hebrew, and the books of Judges, ix. 27, and Job 2 Regn. xii. 17, Nehemiah i. Ruth, I Regn. i.

from the Peshitta

;

the Septuagint has suppHed the basis for

^ Ankiindigting einenmim Ausgabe der gr. Ubersetzung d. A. 71, p. 28; Materialen, i. p. iii. - Charles, I. c: "it is unquestionable that our version was made in the main from the Greek."

cf.

Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint.
the other poetical books and for the Prophets'.

iii
of the

Some

MSS.

exhibit in certain

books a translation which has come
;

the book of Job in this from the lxx. through the Coptic version has been published by Lagarde {Psalterium Job Proverbia arabice, Gottingen, 1876)-.

The Arabic
to

version directly derived from the lxx.

is

said

exhibit

in

the Prophets a text akin to that of Cod.
p.

A
i.

(Ryssel, in

ZAIV. 1885,

102

fif.,

158).

It

shews traces

of Hexaplaric influence (H. Hyvernat, in Vigouroux,
p. 846).

D. B.

of Arabic versions of the Septuagint. Besides Polyglotts (Paris, 1645 London, 1652), mention may be made of the Psalters published at Genoa, 15 16; Rome, 1614 and In W. Wright's 1619; Aleppo, 1706; London (S.P.C.K.), 1725. Book of Jonah the Arabic is from a MS. in the Bodleian (see

Editions

the

;

p. vii.).

Cf H. Hyvernat,
Lists

op.

cit.

of the Arabic versions of the Old Testament will be found in the Preface to Holmes and Parsons, vol. i. Slane's Catalogue des MSS. Arabes de la Bibl. nat. Airs of

MSS.
;

MSS.

. D. Gibson's Studio
MSS.

;

Sifiailica,
i

Arabic
Paulus,

at Sinai (codd.

iii.

(London, 1894), Catalogue of Cf. Hyvernat, op. cit. 67).
;

Arabica., 1780 H. E. G. Bodleiana speciinina versionu7)i Pent. Arab.^ 1789; Eichhorn, Einleitung^ § 275 if.; R. Holmes, Praef. ad Pcjit.\ Rodiger, De origi7ie et indole Arab. libr. V. T. interpretationis (Halle, 1829). Among more recent works reference may be made to Cornill, Ezechiel, p. 49 f.; Loisy, Hist. crit. l. ii. p. 238;

Literature. Schnurrer, Bibliotheca

Fritzsche-Nestle in Urtext, ^. 150 Versio?is^ in Hastings' D.B. i. p.

..
ff.;
;

F. C. Burkitt, art. ^rrt<^zV

Hyvernat,

op. cit.

5.

The

Svriac Versions.

According to Moses bar-Cephas
Syriac versions of the
^

Old Testament

— the

(t 913),

there are

two

Peshitta, translated

Loisy, Hist, crit., I. ii. p. 239. Mri Burkitt in Hastings' D. B. 137) writes "J(udges), S^amuel), K(ings), and Ch(iOnicles), are all from the Peshitta." - Lagarde gives for the Psalter four texts, viz. those published at Rome (1614), Paris (1645), Ruzhayya (1612), Aleppo (1706); for Job, besides the versions mentioned in the text, that of the Paris Polyglott.
(i.

p.

112

A?icie7tt

Versions based upon the Septiiagint.

from the Hebrew in the time of King Abgar, and the version made from the Septuagint by Paul, Bishop of Telia. This
statement
is

neither complete nor altogether to be trusted,

may serve as a convenient summary of the subject.
but
it

point of departure for a

(i)

Theodore of Mopsuestia wrote
nap*

made from

2 \
7€
the

The

origin of the Peshitta
:

is

8€,
That the

translation

/
still

as obscure as
Se

eU

^-

^

when

was that of

Hebrew is the verdict Moses bar-Cephas. Yet
lxx.

of

on the whole was modern scholars as it
books display the

certain

influence of the

While "the Pentateuch follows the

text and the Jewish exegesis, Isaiah and the twelve Minor Prophets contain much which is from the lxx., and the influence of the Greek version appears to have been felt

Hebrew

also in the

Psalter^"

From

the

first

the Peshitta seems to

have included the non-canonical books of the Alexandrian
Bible except
i

Esdras and Tobit, "and their diction agrees
canonical

with

that

of the

books

among which

they

are

inserted ^"
(2)

The

Syriac version ascribed to Paul, Bishop of Tellain

dhe-Mauzelath (Constantine)

Mesopotamia, was a

literal

translation of the lxx. of the Hexapla, in which the Origenic

signs were scrupulously retained.

A

note in one of the

rolls

of

this version assigns

it

to the year

616

7

;

the

work

is

said

to have been produced at Alexandria under the auspices of

Athanasius, Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch,

who

with five

of his suffragans had gone thither to
Patriarch.

visit

the Alexandrian

Paul of Telia and
party,

Thomas

of Harkel appear to

have been of the
^

and

their visit in Alexandria led to

2
2

C, Ixvi. 241 ; cf. ih. 252 f. 263, 466 fF., 492 ff. Nestle in Urtext, p. 230; cf. Bleek-Wellhausen, pp. 558 560. Gwynn, D. B., iv. p. 434.
Migne, P.
,

C

3

A ncicnt

Versions based tipon the Septuagint.

1

1

the translation of the entire Greek Bible into Syriac, the NewTestament having been undertaken by Thomas, while Paul

worked upon the 01d\

The

version

of Paul of Telia,

usually called

the

Syro-

Europe by Andreas Masius (Andrew Du Maes, t 1573). In editing the Greek text of Joshua he used a Syriac MS. which contained part of Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Esther, The codex Judith, and part of Tobit, in this translation. which he employed has disappeared, but the Ambrosian library at Milan possesses another, possibly a second volume of the lost MS., which contains the poetical and prophetic books, in the order Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song
Hexaplar, was
first

made known

to

of

(with Baruch, Lamentations,

Solomon, the two Wisdoms, the twelve Prophets, Jeremiah and the Epistle), Daniel (with
Bel), Ezekiel, Isaiah.

Susanna and
Nitrian

Portions of the historical

books of the Syro-Hexaplar- have been discovered among the

MSS. of the British Museum, and a catena, also at the Museum, contains fragments of Chronicles and the books of
Esdras,

while

the

Paris

Library

contributes

4

Kingdoms.

Norberg edited Jeremiah and Ezekiel in 1787; Daniel was published by Bugati in 1788 and the Psalms in 1820;
Middeldorpf completed the prophetical and poetical books
his
in

edition

of

1835,

and

in

1861

Ceriani

added Baruch,
the historical

Lamentations, and the Ep. of Jeremiah.

Of

books Judges and Ruth were published by Skat Rordam in i86t, and Genesis and Exodus (i. xxxiii. 2) by Ceriani {Mon.

sacr. et prof,

ii.),

who has
vol. vii.

also given to the world the Milan

fragments in Man.

The Hexapla,
'

Tetrapla, and occasionally the Heptapla, are
and Thomas Harklensis,

Gwynn, Paulus
ff.,

Tellensis

in

D.

C. B., iv.

pp. 266

1014

ff.

^ Viz., parts of Genesis and Joshua, half of Numbers, nearly the whole of Judges, Ruth, and 3 Kingdoms, and Exodus complete.

S. S.

8

114

Ancient Versions based upon tJu Septiiagint.
in

mentioned as the sources of the text
the books of the Syro-Hexaplar.

the subscriptions to

These subscriptions were doubtless translated with the rest of the Greek archetypes, but they shew the character of the copies employed by the translators. The version is servile to such an extent as sometimes
It is obvious that this extreme must have hindered the use of the version in the Monophysite churches of Syria, is of vast advantage to the Biblical critic. It places in his hands an exact reflexion of the Hexaplaric lxx. as it was read at

to violate the Syriac

idiom \

fidelity to the

Greek, while

it

Alexandria at the beginning
ultimately from the

of

the

7th

century,

derived
re-

Hexapla and Tetrapla through the

cension of Eusebius.
of

Thus

it

supplements our scanty stock
our
chief

Greek

Hexaplaric

MSS., and indeed forms

authority for the text of Origen's revision.

In the case of one

of the canonical books the version of Paul of Telia renders

even greater service.
survived

One

of the Greek texts of Daniel

— that
— has
The

which Origen regarded as the true Septuagintal
only in

text

a

single

and

relatively

late

MS.

Syro-Hexaplar here supplies another and earlier authority,

which enables us
(3) {a)

to

check the testimony of the Chigi Greek.

Other Syriac versions made from the Greek.

Fragments of a Syriac version
1875), J. R.

in

the

Palestinian
iv.

dialect

have been printed by Land, Anecdota Syriaca,
Harris, Biblical Fragments

(Leyden,

from

Mt

Sinai (London, 1890), G. H. Gwilliam, Anecdota Oxoniensia,
Semitic Series,
I. v., ix.

(Oxford, 1893

6),

D.

S.

Margoliouth,

Liturgy of the Nile (London, 1897), and Mrs Lewis, Studia
Sinaitica^
vi.

(London, I897)^
in

This version has been made
text appears to

from the lxx.;
^

the

Books of Kings the
,

2

the

Field, Prolegg. in Hex., p. Ixix. where many instances are produced. The fragments in Studia Sinaitica are accompanied by critical notes, work of Dr Nestle, in which they are carefully compared with the
text (pp. xl.

Greek

Ixxiv.).


5

A ncient
it is

Versions based upon the Septiiagint.
ix.

1

1

be Lucianic (Anecd. Oxon.
in part at least

p. 32); in the Greater Prophets,
xvi., Ixiii.);

Origenic {Studia Sinaiiica, pp.

Job seems

to

have contained the interpolations from Theodotion
in the extant

which are found

Greek

texts of that

book\

The following is a complete list of the Palestinian fragments included in the publications mentioned above Gen. i. i iii. 24, vi. 9 ix. 19, xviii. i xix. 30, xxii. i 19; Ex. viii. 22^^ 5, 18 xi. 10, xxviii. i v. 2 f., 4, 6, 8 12*; Num. iv. 46 f 49 Deut. vi. 4 16, vii. 25 26% x. 12 xi. 28, xii. 28 xiv. 3 2 Regn. ii. 19 22 ; 3 Regn. ii. 10^ 15% ix. 4 5^; Pss. viii. 2 f., xxi. 2, 19, xxii. i, 5,

— —

,

— —


;

:

;

xxiv.
xliii.

I f.,

12
I

Ivi.

— 27,
7,
I

xxix.
Ixiv.

2, 4,

xliv.

Ixxxi., Ixxxii.
18,

3 — 12; Sap. — 34, — 14% — 9—12; Mic. 2 — 5; — 2; Amos 11^— 14; — 27, 9 — 21 Jonah; Zech. 9 — 8— 28 32, 10 — — — XV. — XXV. — 3% XXXV. — — xhi. — 17 —— — 22, — 13 — — 4— — 7; Jer. 18 — 20^.
I

Ixxxix.

14 Joel i. 14 Isa. iii. 9^
II,
I

8

— II;

i 9, liv. 2, 22, Iv. 7 ff., 22, Ixxvi. 2, 21, Ixxvii. 52 65, i 10, Ixxxiv. 2, 8, Ixxxv. i, 15 f., Ixxxvii. 2, 5 7, Prov. i. i xc. 12, xcvii. i, 8 f., ci. 2 f. 19, ix.
ff.,


i

XXX.

2, 6,

xxxiv.
3,

i,

11, xxxvii. 2, 18, xl. 2, 5, 7,

xlvi., xlviii. 15
Ixviii.
2,

xlix.


;

2,

6,

— —

Job

xvi.

xvii.

16,

xxi.

i

xxii.

ix.

X.

ix.
;

5

viii.

v.

ii.

iii.

ix.

15, vii.
I

16, viii.
I

xi. 16, xii.

i

15, xi. 6, xiv. 10,

5,

10, xl.
liii.

21, xliv. 2
I

7,

1.

9,

Iii.

I 17, 12, Ix. i

5

xhii.

Ixi. i

11, Ixiii.

xi.

Mention is made^ of a version of the Greek Old Testament attempted by the Nestorian Patriarch Mar Abbas (a.d. 552). But notwithstanding the declared preference of Theodore for the lxx., the Nestorians have always used the Peshitta, and there is no extant Nestorian version from the
{b)

Greek.
{c)

Of

Jacobite versions from the lxx. there were several.

(i)

Polycarp the chorepiscopus,
translation of the

who

in the fifth century

laboured

Testament under the auspices of Philoxenus, the Monophysite Bishop of Mabug, is know^n to have rendered the Greek Psalter into Syriac. The margin of
the Syro-Hexaplar^ mentions a Philoxenian 'edition' of Isaiah,
Cf. Burkitt in Anecd. Oxon., Semitic ser., notes to Studia Sinaitica, vi.
^
^
•*

upon a

New

I. ix.

p. 44,

and

cf.

Nestle's

See Studia Sin., vi. p. xiv. f. Bickell, Conspectus rei Syr. lit., p. 9; Field, Hexapla, ii. p. 448.

cf.

Ebedjesu in Assemani,

iii.

71.

8—2

1

6

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint.

to

Museum MS. Add. 17106
MSS. of the Prophets.

which two fragments printed by Ceriani^ from the British are beUeved to belong. The text

of these fragments agrees on the whole with that of the Lucianic
(2)

Another Monophysite, Jacob of

Edessa, applied himself in 704

5 to the revision of the

Syriac

Old Testament, using for the purpose the Hexaplaric lxx.", and the fragments of the other Greek translations. Some books of this revised version exist in MS. at London and Paris ^, and a few specimens have been printed"^. From Melito downwards the Greek fathers refer {d) occasionally to the Greek renderings of an interpreter who is
called 6
full

2.

The

student

\vill

find in Field's prolegomena a

and learned discussion
Syrian, of

of the question

who

this Syrian

interpreter was.
bilingual

Field inclines to the opinion that he was a

Greek

origin,

who

translated into

Greek

from the Peshitta^
Editions.
O.

Peshitta.

and N.

T., 1826.

A

Lee, V. T. 5yrz^^^ (London, 1823); complete Syriac Bible has recently been
((1)1887

pubhshed by the Dominicans of Mosul

— 91

j

(-)i888

92).

Syro-Hexaplar. a. Masius, Josuae-historia illustrata (1574); M. Norberg, Codex Syriaco-Hexaplaris (1787); C.
Daniel (1788), Psabni (1820); H. Middledorpf, cod. SyrohexapL, lib. iv. Reg, e cod. Paris. lesaias &c. e cod. Mediol. (1835): Skat Rordam, libri ludicum et Ruth sec. Syrohexapl. (1861); P. de Lagarde, V. T. ab Origene recejisiti fragvie7ita ap. Syros seivata v. (1880), and V. T. Graeci in serino7ie7n Syroriim versi fragm. viii. (in his last work Bibliothccae Syriacae ...quae ad philologiain sacrain pertitient., 1892). Ceriani has published the contents of the London MS. in Monuinetita sacra
Bugati,
1

2 '

Mon. sacr. etprof. v.; Gwynn, D. C. B. iii.
I

cf.

Gwynn

in

D.

C.

B.

iv. p.

433.

Regn.

i.

i

—3

Regn.

ii.

(Wright, Catalogue, p. preserved at Paris. ^ See Ladvocat, Journal des savants, for 1765; Eichhom, Bibliothek, Ceriani, Mon. sacr. ; ii. p. 270; De Sacy, Notices et extraits, iv. p. 648
Ixi.
fiF.

11, and Isaiah are in the London MSS. Ix., 37 fiF.), and the Pentateuch and Daniel are

etprof. v. i. I. 5 On the other

hand see Scrivener- Miller,
p. 560.

ii.

p. 7, note;

and Bleek-

Wellhausen (1893),


Ancient Versions based npon
et pj'ofaiia,
ii.,

the Septiiagint.

117

and those of the Milan MS.

in vol. vn. (1874) of

the

same

series ^,

Literature.

G. Bickell, Conspectus rei Syroriun literariae

(1871); Field, Hexapla, i. p. Ixvii. sqq. (1875); W. Wright, Syriac literatiire in Encycl. Britannica, xxii. (1887); E. Nestle, LitteraScriveneriiira Syriaca (1888), and Urtext (1897), p. 227 ff.
;

Miller,

ii.

p. off.

;

tion

(p. theor.), p.

Gregory, p. 807 ff J. P. P. Martin, Introduc97 ff! Loisy, Histoire critique I. ii. p. 234 f.
.

;

;

6.

The Gothic

Version.
of the Bible into the

About the year 350 a
of a

translation

Gothic tongue was made by Ulfilas (Wulfila)-, the descendant

Cappadocian captive who had been brought up among the in Dacia, and was in 341 consecrated Bishop of the Gothic nation, which was then beginning to embrace Arian Christianity. According to Philostorgius he translated the whole of the Old Testament except the books of Kingdoms, which he omitted as likely to inflame the military temper of the Gothic race by
Goths
their records of
ets

wars and conquests (Philostorg.

ments of the Gothic Old Testament have been preserved, i.e., some words from Gen. v. 3 30, Ps. Hi. 2 3, 2 Esdr. xv. 13 With the exception of the xvii. 3, xvii. 13 45. 16, xvi. 14

€ ).

^^
— —

Unfortunately only a few scanty frag-

,

loc. cit.\

,^-

^.

•^

scrap from Genesis, they are derived from palimpsest fragments

belonging to the Ambrosian Library which were discovered by

and subsequently published at Milan by Mai and and they are printed in the great collection of Gabelentz and Loebe {Ulfilas: V. et N. Testamentu.firag7nenta, Lipsiae, 1843) ^^^d in Migne P.L. xviii.; a more recent

Mai

in 181 7
;

Castiglione

edition
u.

is

that of

Massmann

{^Ulfilas: die heiligen Schrifie7i alien
^/^-r^iT/^^... Stuttgart,

neuen Bundes in gothischer
^

1895

7).

For the Apocryphal books see Lagarde, Libri V. T. apocr. Syriace, and Bensly-Barnes, The fourth book of Maccabees ifi Syriac (Camb., 1895). ^ Socr. ii. II, iv. 33, Theodoret iv. 37, Philostorg. ii. 5.

1 1

8

A ncieiit

Versions based

tipoji

the Septuagmt,

Lagarde {Librorum

V. T. canonicormji

pars

i.,

p. xiv.,

1883)
Ulfilas

shews by an examination of the Esdras fragments that
view
held by A. Kisch,
Gesch.
u.

probably used MSS. of the Lucianic recension, and the same
is

Der
W.

Septuaginia- Codex des
des Judefithwns^
d.

Ulfilas

{Monatschrift f.
F.

1873),

^.nd

Kauifmann, Beitrdge zur Quellenkritik
Ulfilas
his

gothischen Bibdin

iibersefzufig {Z. f. d. Phil. 1896).

was

Constantinople
the lxx.

for

some time about 340, and
city,

MSS. of

were

which according to Jerome was one of the headquarters of the Lucianic lxx. ("Condoubtless obtained in that
stantinopolis usque

Antiochiam Luciani martyris exemplaria

probat

").

7.

The Armenian

Version.

Armenian

writers of the fifth century ascribe the inception

of the Armenian Bible to Mesrop (354 441) and his associates. The book of Proverbs was the first translated, whether because
it

stood

first

in the

volume' on which the translators worked, or

because
but

its

their eyes.

gnomic character gave it a special importance in The work is said to have been begun at Edessa,

MSS. were afterwards obtained from Constantinople; and Moses of Khoren, a nephew and pupil of Mesrop, was
in order to secure

despatched to Alexandria to study Greek

"a

more accurate

articulation

and division"

*

of the

text.

Moses

indeed affirms that the earliest translations of the O.T. into Armenian were from the Syriac, and his statement receives

some confirmation from the mention of Edessa
origin,

as the place of

and from the circumstance that Syriac was the Churchlanguage of Armenia before the introduction of the Armenian
alphabet ^

On

the other

hand the

existing

Armenian version
ii.

1 So F. C. Conybeare (Hastings, i. p. 152). In Scrivener-Miller, p. 151, he suggests that the earlier books had been rendered previously. ^ this see Conybeare, Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 153.

On

'

See Dr Salmon

in

D.

C. B.,

iii.

p. 908.

9

A ncient
is

Versions based upon
It fits

tJie

Septuagint.

1

1

clearly Septuagintal,

the Greek of the Lxx. "as a

glove the hand that wears it"; keeping so close to the Greek
that
itself
it

"has almost the same value

for us as the

Greek

text

from which (the translator) worked would possess\" But,

as Lagarde has pointed out^, the printed text is untrustworthy, and the collation made for Holmes and Parsons cannot be

regarded as satisfactory.

A

fresh collation will be

made

for

the larger edition of the Cambridge Septuagint^

The
I

order of the books of the O.T. in Armenian MSS., as
i

given by Conybeare'' (Octateuch,

—4

Regn.,
i

i

2

Paralipp.,

and

2

Esdr., Esther, Judith,

Tobit,

3

Mace, Psalms,

Proverbs,

Wisdom, Job', Isaiah, the Minor Prophets, Jeremiah, with Baruch and Lamentations, Daniel, Ezekiel) is on the whole consistent with the grouping found in the oldest Greek authorities^, and seems to point to the use by the translators of good early codices.
Ecclesiastes,

Canticles,

MSS. Few codices of the entire Bible are earlier than the 13th century; one at Edschmiatzin belongs to the year 1151. Holmes assigns his Arm. 3 to A.D. 1063, hut according to Conybeare it is a MS. of the last century.
Editions. Venice (Psalter), 1565; Amsterdam, 1666; ConVenice, 1805 (the first edition which is of any stantinople, 1705 60 (by the Mechitarcritical value, by J. Zohrab); Venice, 1859 ist fathers of San Lazzaro).
;

Literature
in
^

R. Holmes, Praef. ad Petit. F. C. Conybeare Scrivener-Miller, ii. 148 ff. and in Hastings' D. B.^ I.e.;
\

Conybeare,

op, cit., p.

151

f.

He

of the
^
"^

text (of Genesis Gr., p. 18.

Armenian

which he gives instances)

attributes the composite character to Hexaplaric influences.

in Genesis and Exodus, agreeing closely vith the Syriaco-hexaplar version, and in varying degrees with the MSS. that compose the hexaplar group." " The

informs

Mr McLean, who has collated the greater part of the me that " the Armenian shews a typical hexaplar text

Octateuch,

hexaplar element (he adds) is much less in evidence in Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, but again appears strongly in Joshua, Judges, and

Ruth."
4

^ ^

Op. cit., p. 152 f. In some MSS. Job precedes the Psalter. See Part II. c. i.

I20

Aiicient

Versions based

iip07i

the Septnagint.

H. Hyvernat, in Vigouroux' D. B. C. R. Gregory, Prolegg. p. 912 ff. J. P. P. Alartin, Introd. (p. theor.), p. 323 ff. E. Nestle in Urtext^ p. 155, where fuller bibliographical information will be
; ;

;

found.

8.

The Georgian
is

Version.
According to Moses Armenian version was
to

The
the

origin of this version

obscure.

of Khoren, the Georgian as well as the

work of Mesrop.

Iberia

seems
if

have received the
it

Gospel early in the fourth century,

not before; but
until the

may

have possessed no translation of the Scriptures

move-

Armenia by Mesrop had communicated itself That the Georgian Old Testament was based upon the Greek is said to be manifest from the transliteration of Greek words which it contains.

ment

initiated in

to the neighbouring region.

viii. is preserved at the monasPsalter of cent. vii. MSS. tery of St Catherine's, Mt Sinai, and at Athos there is a MS., dated 978, which originally contained the whole Bible, but has Joshua. Both the Sinai library and the Patriarchal lost Lev. xii. library at Jerusalem are rich in Georgian MSS.

A

Editions. The Georgian Bible was printed at Moscow in 1743 and at St Petersburg in 1816 and 1818 the Moscow edition
;

is

said to have been adapted to the Russian

Church

Bible.

Literature. F. C. Alter, iiber Georgiaiiische Litteratur (Vienna, 1798); A. A. Tsagarelli, Afi account of the monuniejits of Georgia?i Literature \\n Russian], St Petersburg, 1886 94; A. Khakhanow, Les MSS. Georgiens de la Bibliotheque Nationale a Paris (without place or date,

.'*

9•

The Slavonic

Version.
by the
century

The Greek
the
Slavs

Bible

was translated into Slavonic

brothers Cyril and Methodius, from

whom

in the ninth

received

Psalter

alone

the faith. Of the Old Testament the was finished before the death of Cyril, but

according to contemporary testimony Methodius brought the

work

to

completion.

As a whole

this

original

version

no

1

Ancient Versions based upon the Septnagint.

12

longer exists, the codices having perished in the Tartar invasion
of the
thirteenth

century;

and the fragments of the Old
in the

Testament of Cyril and Methodius which are embedded
present Slavonic Bible are "so mixed
to

up with

later versions as

be indistinguishable \"

The

existing version has not

been

made uniformly from

the Greek.

Esther was translated from

the Hebrew, while Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, and certain

other books, were rendered from the Latin Vulgate in the
fifteenth

century.

On

the

other

hand the Octateuch, the

books of Kingdoms, and the poetical books are from the
Greek, and some of them, especially the Octateuch, contain
old materials probably due, at least in part, to the work of Cyril

and Methodius.

A

Psalter in the Glagolitic script, preserved at Sinai, has

been edited by Geitler (Agram, 1883); and there is a critical edition of the Slavonic Psalter by Amphilochius (Moscow,
1879).

So
its

far as the
is

Slavonic Old Testament
cf.

is

based on the lxx.,
V. T.

text
i.

doubtless Lucianic;
xv.
*'ni

Lagarde, Fraef. in Libr.

can.

p.

omnia

fallunt Slavus nihil aliud vertit nisi
p.

Luciani recensionem," and Leskien in Uriext,

215, "dass

im

allgemeinen der Kirchenslavischen

Ubersetzung der griech.
sicher."

Text

der

Lucianischen

(Antiochenisch-Konstantinopolitaliegt
ist

nischen)

Rezension zu Grunde

Literature. The Russian authorities are given by Mr Bebb in Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 158. See also Gregory, Prolegg. Professor Leskien of Leipzig in Urtext, p. 211 ff., and p. iii2ff. the article in Ch. Quarterly Review cited above.
;

^

The Russian Bible,

in Ch. Quart.

Review,

xli.

81 (Oct. 1895), p. 219.

CHAPTER

V.

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
The
great edition of the Septuagint published by

Holmes

and Parsons ends with a complete list of the MSS. employed (vol. V. ad fin., addenda). It enumerates 311 codices (i, xiii.,

14— 311),

of which

I.— XIII.,

23, 27, 39, 43, 156, 188, 190, 258,

262, are written in uncial letters, or partly so, while the rest
are in minuscule or cursive hands.

Since 1827, the date of the

pubhcation of the

volume of the Oxford edition, the list of available codices or fragments has been largely increased, owing partly to the researches and publications of Tischendorf, partly to the progress which has recently been made in the examination and cataloguing of Eastern libraries, and the discovery in Egypt of fragments of papyrus bearing BibHcal
last
texts.

In

this

chapter an effort
list

has been
of
all

the student with a complete

the

made to present MSS. which have
to us.
It is,

been or are being used by editors of the lxx., and of the
important fragments so
far as

they are

known

however, impossible to guarantee either the exhaustiveness or
the correctness in regard to minor details of information which

has been brought together from

many

sources and

cannot

be

verified

by enquiry

at first

hand.

Systems of Notation. Two systems have been used to denote the uncial MSS. Holmes employed Roman numerals; Lagarde, the capitals of the Roman alphabet ^ For the cursive MSS. Holmes used Arabic numerals, beginning with 14; but, as we have seen, several uncials were allowed to take rank among them. Later scholars have for the most part retained

CEHKRSUYZ were unknown to the Oxford editors. have been used in the Cambridge manual LXX. for a few uncials not mentioned by Lagarde.
^

Lagarde's
capitals

Greek

.

Manuscripts of the Septtcagint.
this

123

method of notation for the cursives, excepting in the case of a few groups which are supposed to represent a particular recension; thus Lagarde adopted the symbols p for the Lucianic MSS. 82, 93, 118, 44^, whilst Cornill with a similar object substituted the small letters of the Greek alphabet for the Arabic numerals ^, Uniformity in this matter can scarcely be expected until the cursive codices have been thoroughly examined and catalogued meanwhile it is sufficient to call attention to the variety of practice which exists.

/m

;

Manuscripts of the lxx., whether uncial or cursive, rarely
contain the whole of the Greek Old Testament.

There are

some notable exceptions to the general rule (e.g. A, B, C, S = N, 64, 6Z^ 106, 122, 131), and the number of these exceptions may be increased by adding MSS. which have been broken up into two or more separate codices (e.g. G, N + V). But the majority of the copies seem never to have included more than a particular book (as Genesis, or the Psalms, with or without the
liturgical

),

or a particular group of books such as the Pen-

tateuch

(tJ

7€(£^) or

the Octateuch (;
(i

— Ruth), the Historical Books
Tobit), the three or five

Prophets {ro

or the Prophets complete

^), ^). (
Genesis
;

Regn.

2 Esdr., Esth., Judith,

?
the

= Gen

books ascribed to Solomon, the Minor the Major Prophets (ot rcWapes),
Larger comPoetical

binations are also found, e.g.

— Tobit,

Books

as a whole, or the Poetical

Books with the Prophets. and the
distri-

In reference to the date of their execution, the uncial MSS.
of the LXX. range from the third century to the tenth,
cursives from the ninth to the sixteenth.

Their present

bution
the
list

may be seen from the descriptions an analysis of of Holmes and Parsons gives the following general
Italy,

results:

Austria, 26; Russia, 23;

129; Great Britain and Ireland, 54; France, :^6; Germany, 13; Spain, 7; Holland, 6:

Switzerland, 6
^

;

Denmark,

4.

This summary conveys a general

Lidr. V. T. can. pars t., p. v. sq. ' Ezechiel, p. 19 fif. 2 Cf. Orig. 171 loatrn. t. xiii. 26, Epiph. de teuchus occurs in Tertullian adv. Marc. i. 10.

t?ieits.

et

pond.

4.

Penta-

24

Manuscripts of the

Septiiagiiit.

idea of the proportion in which the
tributed among European

MSS.

of the lxx. were dis-

countries, Greece excepted, at the

beginning of the nineteenth century.

But the balance
acquisitions

will

be

considerably

disturbed

if

we add the

of

Tischendorf and other discoverers, and the treasures of the
libraries

at

Athens, Athos, Patmos, Smyrna, Jerusalem, and

Mount
student.

Sinai,

which are now within the reach of the

critical

I.

Uncial MSS.
MSS. may be found

The

following table of the Uncial

convenient.
Symbol

A

detailed account of each will follow.

Manuscripts of the Septnagint.

125

(A)

Complete Bibles.
British

A
I.

(III).
V.

Codex Alexandrinus.

Museum, Royal,

D.


is

viii.

The AIS. of the O. and N. Testaments, with lacunae. defective in the following places: Gen. xiv. 14 17, xv. I 5, 16 19, xvi. 6 9 (leaf torn across and the lower portion Ixxix. xiv. 9 (leaf missing); Ps. xlix. 19 lost); I Regn. xii. 20 Slighter defects, due to the tearing of 10 (nine leaves missing). ii. leaves, occur in Gen. i. 20 3; Lev. viii. 6, 7, 16; 25, 29
O. T.

A

— —


;

Sirach

1.

21, 22,

li.

5.

The codex now consists of four volumes, of which the first three contain the O.T. in 639 leaves. The books are thus distributed vol. ii. Hosea 4 Maccabees vol. 2 Chronicles vol. i. Genesis Sirach ^ The first volume begins with a table of iii. Psalms the Books, in a hand somewhat later than the body of the MS. (cli.) and the The Psalter, which contains the liturgical canticles, is preceded by the Epistle of Athanasius to of Eusebius, a table, and the canons Marcellinus, the of the Morning and Evening Psalms. The books of vol. iii. are
:

;

written

The covers of the volumes bear the arms of Charles I. codex had been sent to James I. by Cyril Lucar, patriarch successively of Alexandria and Constantinople, but did not reach The
England
till

.

after the succession of Charles.

It

had previously

belonged to the Patriarchate of Alexandria, as we learn from an Arabic note at the beginning. Another but later Arabic note states that the MS. was the work of 'the martyr Thecla,' and " Liber iste Cyril Lucar has written on a leaf prefixed to vol. i. ...prout ego traditione habebam, est scriptus manu Theclae nobilis faeminae Aegyptiae ante MCCC annos circiter, paulo post concilium Nicaenum." But, apart from palaeographical considerations^, this date is discredited by tfie occurrence in the MS. of excerpts from the works of Athanasius and Eusebius, and It has been the liturgical matter connected Avith the Psalter. proposed to identify Thecla with a correspondent of Gregory of Nazianzus (see THECLA (10), D. C. B. iv., p. 897); but this later Thecla seems to have belonged to Cappadocia, not to Egypt. Portions of the text of cod. A were printed by Patrick Young, 1637 (Job), Ussher, 1655 (Judges vi., xviii.), Walton in the poly:

glott

of

the
1

MS. was used by Grabe

1657 (facsimile of Ps. i.), Gale, 1678 (Psalter); and as the basis of his great edition

2

As

For the order of the books see Part II. c. i. to these see Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient A7SS,,

p. 129.

126

Mmmscripts of

the Septiiagint.

of the LXX. (1707 Baber in 1812 published the Psalter 1720^). and in 1816 1821 the whole of the O. T. in facsimile type. Finally, an autotype facsimile, which, as Gregory well says, leaves nothing to be desired, was issued in 1881 3 by order of the Trustees of the British Museum under the editorship of Mr (now Sir) E, Maunde Thompson, who has added brief but valuable prolegomena. The codex is written on leaves of fine vellum, arranged in quires usually of eight. The writing "varies in different parts of the MS., though sufficient uniformity is maintained to make it difficult to decide the exact place where a new hand begins... the style of writing in vol. iii. is for the most part different from that of the other volumes 2." In a few of the superscriptions and colophons the occurrence of Egyptian forms of the Greek letters has been noted, "proving that the MS., if not absolutely written in Egypt, must have been immediately afterwards removed thither^." The leaves measure about 32 centimetres by 26.3; each leaf contains two columns of 49 51 lines, the lines usually consisting of 23 25 letters. Except in the third volume, the commencement of a new section or paragraph is marked by a large initial letter in the margin as well as by paragraph-marks. There are no breathings or accents by the first hand ; an apostrophe occasionally separates words or consonants here and there an asterisk is placed in the margin (e.g. Gen. xli. 19). Punctuation is limited to a single point, generally high. The

;

abbreviations which occur are

i<c, fnTp, mhp, yc, anoc, and c, ,, , -vai, -rat). There are numerous and lengthy erasures, over which a corrector has written the text which he preferred. The earliest corrector (A^) was contemporary with the scribe or nearly so the second corrector (A^) may have lived a century later a third and still later hand (A^) has also been at work. But the question of the 'hands' in this MS. remains to be worked out, and calls for the knowledge of an expert in palaeography.

oyNOC,

,,,,

,

15,

,

,

{^
;

,,
;

(II).

Codex Vaticanus
of the
in

(Vatican Library, Or. 1209).
Testaments, defective at the

A

MS.

Old and

New

beginning and
31 leaves, the

words 2 Regn.
^ -

ii.

5

( —

some other places. The O. T. has lost its first original hand beginning at Gen. xlvi. 28 (with the '¥'€). Through the tearing of fol. 178 7, 10 13, has also disappeared, and the loss of

See

c. vi.

2

Prolegg. i. p. 358. E. Maunde Thompson, Cod. Alex.

i.

p. 8

ff.

Ibid.

Maimscripts of the Septiiagint,
10 leaves after

127

fol. 348 involves a lacuna which extends from Ps. 27 to Ps. cxxxvii. (cxxxviii.) 6^ The longer gaps have been filled by a recent hand. The present codex is a quarto volume containing 759 leaves, of which 617 belong to the O. T. Every book of the Greek O. T. is included, except i 4 Maccabees, which never found a place in the MS. The order of the books differs from that which is followed in cod. A, the poetical books being placed between the canonical histories and the Prophets and there are variations also in the internal arrangement of the groups. Of the history of this MS. before the sixteenth century nothing is certainly known. A Vatican collection of Greek MSS. was already in existence in the middle of the fifteenth century, and the greatest treasure in the present library was among its earliest acquisitions. It finds a place in the early catalogues of the Vatican! reference is made to this MS. in letters addressed by the librarian of the Vatican to Erasmus in 1521 and 1533^, and it formed the chief authority for the Roman edition of the LXX. in 1587. By this time its importance was already recognised, and it is amazing that an interval of nearly 300 years should have been allowed to pass before the actual text of the MS. was given to the world. A collation of with the Aldine text was made by Bartolocci in 1669, and is still preserved at Paris in the Bibliotheque Nationale {MS. gr. supplem. 53). With other treasures of the Vatican the codex was carried to Paris by Napoleon, and there it was inspected in 1809 by Hug, whose book De aniiquitate codicis Vaticani (Freiburg, aroused fresh interest in its text. On the restoration of the MS. to the Vatican it was guarded with a natural but unfortunate jealousy which for more than half a century baffled the efforts of Biblical scholars. Neither Tischendorf in 1843 and 1866 nor Tregelles in 1845 was permitted to make a full examination of the codex. Meanwhile the Roman authorities were not unmindful of the duty of publishing these treasures, but the process was slow, and the first results were disappointing. An edition printed by Mai in 1828 38 did not see the fight till 1857. It was followed in 1881 by Cozza's more accurate but far from satisfactory volumes in facsimile type. At length in 1890 under the auspices of Leo XIII. the Vatican Press issued a photographic reproduction worthy of this most important of Biblical MSS.^

cv. (cvi.)

;

;

)

This has been proved by Nestle {Academy, May 30, 1891) against {La Vaticane de Paul III. a Paul V., Paris, 1890, p. 82. Cf. Nestle, Septuagintastudien^ ii. p. 11, note i. - La Vaticane de Paul III. a Paul V. (Paris, 1890). Gregory, Prolego-.
!

Batiffol

p. 361.
3

On

this

work

see Nestle, Septuagintast.

iii.

p. 13

if.

128

Mamtscripts of the Septtiagint.
The codex

is written on the finest vellum in a singularly hand^ which "may be attributed to the fourth century," and probably to the middle of the century ^, and bears a resemblance to the hand which is found in papyri of the best Roman

beautiful

The leaves are arranged in quinions (gatherings of ten 18 pages); each page exhibits three columns of 42 lines with 16 There are no breathings or accents in the letters in each line. first hand a point occurs but rarely initial letters do not proThe text is written in two contemporary ject into the margin. hands, the transition being made at p. 335. The MS. has been corrected more than once besides the scribe or contemporary dio7'thotes (B^), we may mention an early corrector denoted as B% and a late i7istaurator, who has gone over the whole text, spoiling its original beauty, and preserving oftentimes the corrections of B'^ rather than the original text.
period^.

;

;

;

C.

Codex

Ephraemi

Syri

rescriptus

Parisiensis.

Bibliotheque Nationale, Gr. 9 (formerly Reg. 1905, Colbert.
3769)•
folio consisting at present of 209 leaves, of which 64 conThe fragments are as follows Prov. tain portions of the O. T. xvii. I, xviii. ii ii. 8, XV. 29 b€ xix. i. 2 yi], xxiii. 25, xxiv. 22 e 56 8e 23, xxii. 17 xxviii. 2, xxix. 48 Xeto end of book; Eccl. i. 2 xxvi. 23 ryXtoy end of book Cant. i. 3 iii. 9 14, ii. 18 iv. 12 iv \6yoLs V. 27 Job ii. 12 xii. 2 xiii. 18 xviii. 9 vii. 7, . 9 xxii. 14 xxiv. 7 yvpvovs xix. 2y a xxxi. 6 xxxv. 1 5 6pyr]v xxxvii. 5 XXX. I ev xl. 20 end of book; Sap. viii. 5 xxxviii. 17 Xvii. 1 8 xii. ID xiv. 1 9 xviii. 24 eVI end of book Sir. prol. I vii. 14 /j xii. 16 iav xvi. I xi. IJ viii. 15 aiiTos yap xxi. 12 xxii. 19, xxvii. 19 xvii. 12 XX. 5 xxviii. 25 xxxxiv. 22 xxx. 25 xxxi. 6, xxxii. 22 xxx. 8 xxxvii. 1 1 xxxiii. 1 3 xxxviii. 15, xxxix. 7 xliv. 27 6 xlvii. 23 xlviii. II xlix. 12 xlv. 24 The distribution of the leaves is Proverbs 6, Ecclesiastes 8, Cant, i, Job 19, Wisdom 7, Sirach 23.
:

A

/^—

epyaevo —

^ , , ,, , , ^
;

, ,

^,
— —
;

€€,

, ' €€\,
;

,

.

— — — —

^,

— ,—

\

,
— —

(,

-

',

1 Specimens are given in Sir E. Maunde Thompson's Gree^ and Latin PaUwgraphy, p. 150; and F. G. Kenyon's Our Bible <^c., p. 136; E.

Nestle, Einfiihrimg'^, Tafel 4.
Sir E. M. Thompson, op. cit. p. 159; WH., Intr. p. 75. See A. Rahlf, F. G. Kenyon, Paleography of Greek papyri, p. 120. Altera. Heimath dcr Vat. Bibelhandschrift, in N. G. IV., 1899, i. p. 72 ff.
2 2

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.

129

The copy of the Greek Bible of which these fragments have survived unfortunately fell during the middle ages into the hands of a scribe in want of writing materials. Originally, as it seems, a complete Bible, written probably in the fifth century and, as Tischendorf believed, in Egypt, in the twelfth century it was taken to pieces, sponged, and used for other writings 1. What became of the missing leaves we do not know; those of the Paris volume are covered with the Greek text of certain
works of Ephrem the Syrian'-. The book was probably brought to Florence early in the i6th century by Andreas Lascaris, the agent of Lorenzo de' Aledici, and passing into the possession of Catharine de' Medici, accompanied her to France, where it found its way into the Royal Library. Here the value of the underlying text was recognised by Montfaucon, who called attention to it in his PalaeograpJiia Graeca, and gave a specimen from the fragments of the N. T. (p. 213 f.). The O. T. fragments were partly examined by Wetstein and Thilo^, but were not given to the world until in 1845 Tischendorf, who had published the N.T. portion in 1843, completed his task by printing the LXX. text. This once noble MS. was written in single columns from 40 to 46 lines in length, each line containing about 40 letters'*. The writing of the O. T. differs, according to Tischendorf, from that of the N. T. it is more delicate, some of the letters (A, , B, K, S, X, assume different forms in the two portions of the codex, and there are other palaeographical indications that the hand Avhich wrote the earlier books did not write the later. Nevertheless Tischendorf regarded the two hands as contemporary, and believed the codex to have been originally one. A seventh cen;

)

tury corrector has

left traces of his work, but his corrections are not numerous except in Sirach. As to the order of the books nothing can be ascertained, the scribe who converted the MS. into a palimpsest having used the leaves for his new text without regard to their original arrangement^

S=

ti.

Codex

Sinaiticus.

Leipzig and St Petersburg.

of this great uncial Bible contain the following portions of the O. T. Gen. xxiii. 19 xxiv. 4 nopevaj], xxiv.
:

The remains

^ On palimpsest MSS. see Sir E. M. Thompson, Gree^ and Latin Palceography, p. 75 ff. ^ For a list of these see Omont, Inventaire sonifnaire des manuscrits

grecs, p. 2.

Tischendorf, Cod. Ephraemi rescriptus, prolegg. p. 9. See a photographic facsimile in Facsimiles des phis anciens manuscrits grecs de la Bibl. Nat. (H. Omont, Paris, 1892). ^ See Tischendorf, op. cit.., prolegg. p. 5.
^ ^

S.

S.

1

30
5 eis Tr]v

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.

,— ' — , — €€€,
25

— — 27

8,

,
13
2

41

ayios

6

22, 23, 27

book; Esther; Tobit Judith; Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechaii. 20; i and 4 Macriah, Malachi; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lam. i. i
;

20 15 ^^^ (2°) end of 2 Esdr. ix. 9 Kupios•
"',

, / ,^, ^ ^ / ,,
9 30 ^6
II

— 33 Num. . 20 — 12 .4 —
;

14

17

eineu

— 3^

^6

— {°) — ,
19
^(os

4^

^'^

(2°), 17

5 Aevetraiy,
ix.

Par.

27

— 18 12 — —

vi.

5


7,

xix.

1

cabees.

The

Esdras

forty-three leaves containing end, Esther, Tobit i. ix. 9
i.

and Lam.
1844,

i

— —

i i

Par.
ii.

xi.

22
x.

xix.

2, Jer.

25

— end,

17,

ii.

20 were found by Tischendorf in a waste-

Convent of St Catharine's, Mount Sinai, in and published by him in a lithographed facsimile under the name of Codex Friderico-Augiistaiius^ (Leipzig, 1846); to these in Mo7i. sacr. ined., nov. coll. (1855) he was able to add Jer. i. 7 from a copy made during the same visit to Isa. Ixvi. 12 A second visit in 1853 enabled him to print in the next Sinai. volume of the Moniuneiita (1857) two short fragments of Genesis (xxiv. 9, 10, 41 43). During a third visit to the Convent in 1859, he was permitted to see the rest of the codex, including 156 leaves of the Old Testament, and ultimately succeeded in carrying the whole to St Petersburg for presentation to the Czar Alexander IL
paper basket
at the
i.

This

final success led to the publication in 1862 of the Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitaiius, containing a facsimile of the

Lastly in 1867 TischSt Petersburg portion of the Sinaitic MS. endorf completed his task by printing in his Appendix Codicutn certain fragments of Genesis and Numbers which had been discovered by the Archimandrite Porfirius in the bindings of other
Sinai

MSS.2

This great Bible was written on leaves which originally measured 15 I3| inches, and were gathered, with two excep-

Each column contains 48 lines, with tions, into quires of four. 12 14 letters in a line; and in all but the poetical books each page exhibits four columns, so that eight lie open at a time^; in

the poetical books, where the lines are longer, two columns appear on each page, or four at an opening. The characters are assigned to the fourth century they are well-formed and somewhat square, written without break, except when an apostrophe or a single point mtervenes a breathing prima manic has been
;

;

honour of Frederick Augustus, King of Saxony. Tischendorfs remarks in Liti. C.-Blait, 1867 (27). 2 " They have much of the appearance of the successive columns in a papyrus roll, and it is not at all impossible that it [the MS.] was actually copied from such a roll." Kenyon, p. 124; cf. Scrivener-Miller, p. 95.
1

So

called in

2

Cf.

;

Manuscripts of the Septttagint.

131

noticed at Tobit vi. 9, but with this exception neither breathings nor accents occur. Tischendorf distinguished four hands in the codex (A, B, C, D), and assigned to the fragments of Chronicles, I Mace, and the last 4^ leaves of 4 Mace, as well as the whole of the N. T.; the fragments of Numbers and the Prophets are ascribed to the poetical books to C Tobit and Judith and the rest of 4 Mace, to D, who is identified with the scribe to whom we owe the N. T. of Codex Vaticanus. He also detected traces of five stages in the correction of the MS., which he represented by the symbols ^% ^*^•% ^'^•^ ^'-^•^ ^•^. The first symbol covers the work of the diorthotes and other nearly contemporary correctors Xca, c.b, c.c ai-g three seventh century hands, of which the last appears chiefly in the Book of Job, whilst the later i^*^ has occupied itself with retracing faded writing in the Prophets. After I Chron. xix. cod. b< (FA) passes without break to 2 Esdr. ix. 9, but the place is marked by the corrector '^'^^ with three crosses and the note /xe'xpt

A

;

;

iaTtv

Five of these leaves remain, and the two which preceded them probably contained i Chron. vi. 50 ix. 27^ (H. St J. Thackeray in Hastings' D.B., i. p. 762). Westcott in the Ctiurc/i, p. 307) supposes that the insertion of this fragment of I Chron. in the heart of 2 Esdras is due to a mistake in the binding of the copy from which the MS. was transcribed; comp. the similar error in the archetype of all our Greek copies of Sirach^. Whether i Esdras formed a part of cod. i^ is uncertain, the heading "EcrBpas /3' does not prove this, since cod. i< con' although it tains 4 Maccabees under the heading certainly did not give the second and third books (Thackeray,

\ "8.

\\

{'^

t.c).

No

uniform edition or photographic reproduction of this

most important MS. has yet appeared'•^. The student is still under the necessity of extracting the text of i< from the five works of Tischendorf mentioned above. A homogeneous edition of the remains of the codex or a photographic reproduction of the text is one of our most urgent needs in the field of Biblical
palaeography.
(XI).

Codex Basiliano-\^aticanus.

Vatican Library,

Gr. 2106, formerly Basil. 145^.
1 Another explanation (suggested by Lupton in Wace's Apocrypha, i., p. 2.

Dr Gwynn)
15

is

given

by

Dr

-

A

facsimile of 2 Esdr. xviii.
ii.

15— xix.

may be

seen in Stade,

Gc'sc/i.

d. Volkes Israel,
2

p. 192.

Cf. Wetstein,

N.

T.

i.

p.

133; Lagarde, Septuagintastudien,

p. 48.

132

Manuscripts of the Septuaghit.
(23).
I

V

Codex Venetus.

St

Mark's

Library,

Venice,

cod. Gr.

\

Dr E. Klostermann {Analecfa, pp. 9 f., -^2) f•) ^^^ produced good reasons for believing that these two codices originally formed portions of a complete copy of the Greek Old Testament.
34,

The Vatican portion now contains Lev. xiii. 59 Num. xxi. Num. xxii. 19 Deut. xxviii. 40, Deut. xxx. 16 Jud. xiv. 16,

I Regn. xvii. 12, i Regn. xvii. viii. 8, Jud. xviii. 2 end of 2 Paralip., 2 Esdr. v. xvii. 3, 3 Regn, xi. 17 The Venice MS. yields Job xxx. 8 to end, Prov., Eccl., Cant., Sap., Sirach, the Minor Prophets (in the order Hos., Am., Joel, Ob., Jon., Mic, Nah., Hab., Zeph., Hag., Zech., Mai), Isa., Jer., 4 Mace. Bar., Lam., Ezek., Daniel, Tobit, Judith, i The Venice folio measures 16^ ii§ inches, the Vatican at present a little less, but the breadth and length of the columns is identical in the two codices in both there are two columns of 60 lines. The Venice MS. contains 164 leaves, the \^atican 132. The first leaf of the Venice book begins the 27th quire of the original MS., and on computation it appears that, if to the Vatican leaves were added those which would be required to fill the lacunae of the earlier books and of Job, the entire number would make up 26 quires of the same size*. As regards the history of the separated portions, it appears that the Vatican MS. was originally brought to Rome from Calabria by a Basihan monk^; the Venice book was once the property of Cardinal Bessarion, by whom it was presented to St Mark's•*. is in the sloping uncials of cent, and The handwriting of in the Roman edition of ix. Some use was made of viii. 1587, where it seems to have supplied the text of Maccabees; both codices were collated for Holmes and Parsons.

— — 31 — 3 Regn. 10— Esther.

;

V

V

(B)

Octateuch

and

Histo7'ical Books.

D
A

(I).

Codex Cottonianus.
vi.

British

Museum, Cotton

MSB., Otho B.

5—6.

more than 7x5^
style.
1 -

collection of fragments, the largest of which measures no inches, containing portions of the Book of Genesis with vestiges. of pictures executed in a semi-classical

^ *

Deutsche Lit.-Zeit. 1897, p. 1475 Klostermann, p. 9. Holmes, Praef. ad Pentatetich.
Cf.
It
viii.

f.

was the eighth of Bessarion's MSS.
181.

;

see Schott in Eichhorn's

Repert.,

Manusci'ipts of the Septnagint.

133

No other uncial codex of the LXX., of which any portion remains, has suffered so lamentable a fate. Brought to England from Philippic in the reign of Henry VIII. by two Orthodox Bishops^, and presented to the English monarch, it remained in the Royal Library till the reign of Elizabeth, who gave it to her Greek tutor Sir John Fortescue, and from his hands after several vicissitudes it found its way into the Cotton collection. In 1731, while the codex was at Ashburnham House with the rest of that collection, it was reduced by fire to a heap of charred and shrivelled leaves. Even before the fire it had been imperfect^; the beginning and end of the book had disappeared, and other leaves were defective here and there; yet 165 or 166 leaves remained and 250 miniatures. The existing remains at the British Museum, though collected with the most scrupulous care, consist only of 150 mutilated fragments; to these must be added a smaller series preserved at the Baptist College, Bristol, to which institution they were bequeathed by Dr A. Gifford, formerly an Assistant Librarian at the Museum. Most of the London fragments were deciphered and published by Tischendorf in 1857 {Mon. sacr. ined., nov. coll. ii.) the rest, together with the Bristol fragments, are now accessible in Dr F. W. Gotch's Siipple7ne7it to Tischendorf s Reliquiae cod. Cotton.
;

(London, 1881). Happily we have means of ascertaining with some approach to completeness the text of this codex as it existed before the fire. Although no transcript had been made, the MS. was more than once collated by Patrick Young and Ussher for Walton's

Polyglott, and afterwards Grabe's collation, which

is

by Gale, Crusius, and Grabe; and preserved in the Bodleian, was

published by Dr H. Owen {Collatio cod. Cotton. Geneseos cum. Editione Romafia..., Londini, 1778). Some assistance can also be obtained from the Vetusta Mofiinnenta published by the London Society of Antiquaries (vol. i, 1747), where two plates are given depicting some of the miniatures, together with portions of the text of fragments which have since disappeared. Lastly, among the Peiresc papers in the Bibliotheque Nationale, transcripts have been found of Gen. i. 13, 14, xviii. 24

They are 26, xliii. 16, which were made from the MS. in 1606. printed in MSmoires de la Societe Natiofiale des Antiquaires de France, liii. pp. 163 172^. As this discovery was overlooked

•^

Still

an episcopal see
it

in the time of

Le Quien

;

see Lightfoot, Philip-

pians, p. 64, note. ^ They stated that
' is

had once been the property of Origan.

Walton's statement that Cod. D at one time contained the Pentateuch in the Cotton catalogue of 162 1 it is described as "Genesis only."

however groundless
^

;

I

owe

the reference to

Dr

Nestle {Urtext, p. 71).

.

134

Manuscripts of

the Septuagint.

when the second edition of The Old Testa7nent in Greek, vol. i., passed through the press in 1895, it may be convenient to the student to have the new fragments placed before him in extenso.
Gen,
einev
els
i.

13, ,...^^

Oeos

[€]...
II.

^

; ,, •.
xviii.


", <\
24

eyevero
iv

, . 4€€
iv
^^

^^

26.

^^

6.

xhii. 16..

['\

. ...

;

, []. ,
;
.

,
;

8-

\
ya\_p'\

-

The vellum of the MS. is fine, but not so thin as in some other early uncials. The leaves were arranged in quires of four. Each page, where the writing was not broken by an illustration, contained from 26 to 28 lines of 27 to 30 letters. The uncials are well formed, but vary to some extent in thickness and size. Initial letters are used, and the point is sometimes high, sometimes middle or low. On the whole the codex may probably be assigned to cent. v. vi. The hands of three scribes have been traced in the fragments, and there appear to have been two correctors after the diorthotes the earlier of the two, who seems to have lived in the eighth century, has retraced the faded letters.
E.

Codex Bodleianus.
ii.

Bodleian Library, Oxford.

T.

infr.

i.

contains the following fragments of xxiv. xx. 14 24 xlii. 1 8 Another leaf, now at the Cambridge University Library, contains xlii. 18 [oL-JroTy xliv. 13 but the verso, to which xlii. 31 xliv. 13 It is now belongs, is written in Q) contemporary minuscules. known that this text is carried on by more than one cursive MS. The St Petersburg cod. Ixii. begins where the Cambridge

The Bodleian volume
i.

Genesis:

I

4 —

xiv. 6, xviii.

].—

,

Auct.

,

fragment leaves
proceeds, with

as far as 3 Regn. xvi. 28 The largest of the lacunae (Jos. xxiv. 27 Ruth, inclusive) is supplied by the British Museum MS. Add. 20002, which once belonged to the same codex as E, the Cambridge fragment, and St Petersburg cod. Ixii.

).

off (at

Gen.

xliv. 13

yap),

some lacunae,

{

and

Manitscripts of the Septiiagint.

135

tive.

The recent history of The portions now

from the East by Tischendorf pubthe St Petersburg portion followed in 1859. lished the contents of the Bodleian volume in Moniimenta sacra i/iedita, n. c. ii. (1857); the Cambridge leaf remained in his possession till his death in 1874, when it was purchased by the Syndics of the University Library. In 1891 it was recognised by the present writer and Mr H. A. Redpath as a continuation of the Bodleian Genesis^; and its contents were at once communicated to the Academy (June 6, 1891), and were afterwards incorporated in the apparatus of the Cambridge manual LXX. (vol. i., ed. 2, 1895). Finally, in 1898, Dr A. Rahlfs of Gottingen ^ proved that the Petersburg and London volumes originally formed a part of the codex to which the Oxford Genesis and the Cambridge leaf belonged. The entire MS. will be used for the apparatus of the larger Cambridge LXX. a description by the Editors (Messrs Brooke and M'^Lean) may be found in the Classical Review for May, 1899 (vol. xiii., pp. 209 11). The Bodleian Genesis is written in large sloping uncials of a each page carries two late form on 29 leaves of stout vellum columns of 37 44 lines; in the earlier pages the letters are closely packed and there are sometimes as many as 28 in a line, but as the book advances the number seldom exceeds and sometimes fall below 20. Tischendorf was disposed to assign the writing to the 9th, or at the earliest the 8th century; but the debased character of the uncials, as well as the readiness of the scribe to pass from the uncial to the cursive script, point to a still later date^. According to the same authority the uncial leaves of the codex have passed through the hands of a nearly contemporary corrector, and also of another whose writing is more recent.
;

this MS. is both curious and instrucat Oxford and London were brought Tischendorf in 1853; the Cambridge leaf and

;

F
Milan.

(VII).

Codex
infr.

Ambrosianus.
Codex

Ambrosian

Library,

A. 147

The remains

of this important

consist of the following

1 Mr Bradshaw, I now learn, had previously noticed this, but he does not appear to have published the fact, or to have left any written statement

about it. 2 In his paper iiber eine von Tischendorf atts dem Orient mit-gebrachte, in Oxford, Cambridge, London, n. Petersburg liegende Handsckrift der Septiiaginta, reprinted from Nachrichten der K. Gesellschaft der IVissenSee also schaften zu Gdttingen, 1898; cf. Th, L.-Z., Feb. 4, 1899, p. 74. E. Klostermann, G. G. ., 1895, p. 257. ^ "The date of the whole MS., including the uncial part, may ver\• well be the tenth century" {Class. Review, I.e.).

136

fragments of the Octateuch

yrjs

— — —
.

X. 14 18 Deut. i. i lacuna). end of book. Jos.
'

, ,, , ., . [], [] [], [€€], [€] , \ ]\\ ' \]
:

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint,

xlii.

4 on xlvi. 6 xlviii. 21
1

xlvii.

— 21 16 —
1

Gen.

xxxi. 15 [aXXorp/Jat
et

— 37

€k\4\olwcv

28 erapai.

xlviii. 3

6 Bcos

li.

viii.

19

18 €V

op€L

—xxxii. 6
xxxvii.

xii.

3

ol

I4 xxx. 29

Exod.

xxxii. 13

I

iv. 5

^vi.

23

12 ^^ inscription on a blank page states that the fragments "ex Macedonia Corcyram advecta, ibique III. Card. Fed. Borromaei Bibliothecae Ambrosianae Fundatoris iussu empta eidemque Bibliothecae transmissa sunt." They attracted the notice of

27

^

An

^,, '^.—— 8€ . . —
i.

— end

— end

of book.

Lev.

— xxxvi. 3 —
i. i

xxxi.
ix.

of book.
ii.

xxviii.
I

ii.

63 9

xxix. 14

[],

15

iv.

[au^vcTeXeaev
I

v.

I

18, ,

vii.

ix.

27

^ € ],
iv

Num.

(without

J

Montfaucon {Diar. Ital, p. 11, Pal. sacr. pp. 27, 186), and were Ceriani's collated for Holmes, but in an unsatisfactory manner. transcript (^Mo7i. sacr. et prof, iii., Mediol. 1864) supplies the text, for the accuracy of which the name of the Editor is a sufficient guarantee, and a learned preface, but the full prolegomena
which were reserved for another volume have not appeared. A photograph is needed not only for palaeographical purposes, but to shew the marginal readings, many of which are Hexaplaric. The MS. is written on the finest and whitest vellum, the leaves of which are gathered in fours 2; three columns of writing stand on each page, and 35 lines in each column. The chainitial letters are used, which racters are those of cent. iv. v. project to half their breadth into the margin. Punctuation is frequent, and there is much variety in the use of the points accents prima inanu, a feature in which and breathings are freely

;

;

3.&

MS. stands alone amongst early Uncials^. The colour of the ink changes after Deuteronomy, and the rest of the fragments seem to have been written by another scribe but the work is contemporary, for the quire numbers have been added by the The MS. has passed through the hands first scribe throughout. of two early correctors, and the margins are crowded with various readings, notes, and scholia.
this
;

1 The fragments of Malachi and Isaiah, attributed to F in Holmes, followed by Tischendorf V. T.^, and Kenyon (p. 62), belong to a MS. of

cent, xi.; see Ceriani, See Sir E. Maunde
'^

.

sacr. et prof., praef. p. ix.

3

Cf.

Thompson,

op.

Thompson, Greek and Latiti Pal., p. 62. cit. p. 72, "they were not systematically applied

to

Greek

texts before the 7th century."

Manuscripts of the Scptiiagint.

137
(i)

G

(IV, V).

Codex Colberto-Sarravianus.
8.

Leyden,

University Library, Voss. Gr. Q.

(2)

Paris,

Bibliotheque
(3) St Peters-

Nationale, cod. Gr. 17, formerly Colbert. 3084.
burg, Imperial Library, v.
5.

xxviii.

— — — 29, *xxxvii. 3 *xxxix. — []€•— II,*l6 26 €{€)€2 *xxxviii. 27 — to end of book, *Lev. — 6 — 7 49 , *xiv. 33—49 \\€ — *.<^'''— — , xxiv. 9 «24 28 [^],— 6 . 36Num. — 85 —• 22 — 18 2 30 irapcyivovTo , *. —xxvi. *xxix. 12 €€€ — {^)^{)^^ — ^nd of book. Deut. 34 33 — 20 3 — 14 \\^}'], \\^\, 777[/'], 8— 4 12 — xxxi. \\4'] — 23 Jos. \33 —. 6 fjud. 48 \ . 3 [/]\//•/ — 6 € 25 — 12
:

Of this codex Leyden possesses 130 leaves and Paris 22, while one leaf has strayed to St Petersburg. When brought together the surviving leaves yield the following portions of the Octateuch xxxvi. i8-)!C-^vyarpos• Gen. xxxi. 53
^*Exod. xxxvi. 8
I

xiii.

1

*xviii.

xi.

-,
[/capjSi'as•
:

. €

, [],
i.

IQ, xl.

i

iv.

*xiii.

xix.

xviii.

1 1

•)«{

xxi.

The Leyden leaves of this MS. are known to have been in the possession of Claude Sarrave, of Paris, who died in 165 1. After his death they passed into the hands successively of Jacques Mentel, a Paris physician, who has left his name on the first page, and of Isaac Voss (t 1681), from whose heirs they were purchased by the University of Leyden. The Paris leaves had been separated from the rest of the MS. before the end of the 1 6th century, for they were once in the library of Henri Memme, who died in 1596. With a large part of that collection they were presented to J. B. Colbert in 1732, and thus found their way into the Royal Library at Paris. Among earlier owners of the St Petersburg leaf were F. Pithaeus, Desmarez, Montfaucon-, and Dubrovvsky. The text of the Leyden leaves and the St Petersburg leaf was printed in facsimile type by Tischendorf in the third volume of his Mojminenia sacra (Leipzig, i860); a splendid photographic reproduction of all the known leaves of the codex appeared at Leyden in 1897^.
^

.[\ , ^.

,

2

,
e/cel

i.

xviii.
3>

^]. ,
6,

.
1

,
e/cet

I

8,

iv.

xiv.

I

vii.

^^'-^

'^«'

xviii.
ix.

xix.

11.

ix.

xviii.

,^
vii.
1

iv.

xix.

xix.

}

^
\\\.

Fragments marked * are at Paris Montfaucon, Pal. sac?•, p. 186 f
.

;

that

;

Tischendorf,

marked f is at St Petersburg. Mon. sacr. iiied. n. c.

prolegg. p. xviii. ^ V. T. gr. cod. Sarraviani-Colhertini quae supersunt in bibliothecis Leiden si Parisiensi Petropolitana phototypice edita. Fraefatus est //. Omont.

138

Manuscripts of the Septnagint,

The leaves measure 9§ x 8| inches; the writing is in two columns of 27 lines, each Hne being made up of 13 15 letters. In Tischendorf 's judgement the hand belongs to the end of the fourth or the first years of the fifth century. There are no initial letters the writing is continuous excepting where it is broken by a point or sign; points, single or double, occur but rarely; a breathing is occasionally added by the first hand, more frequently by an early corrector. Of the seven correctors noticed by Tischendorf three only need be mentioned here, (A) a contemporary hand, (B) another fifth century hand which has revised Deuteronomy and Judges, and (C) a hand of the sixth century which has been busy in the text of Numbers, In one respect this codex holds an unique position among

;

uncial

MSS.

of the Octateuch.

It

exhibits an

Origenic text

which retains many of the Hexaplaric signs. Besides the asterisk (ijc• ) and various forms of the obelus (— —•, -^-, ^-, and in the margin, */')• The •/> /') ), the metobelus frequently occurs (:, importance of Cod. Sarravianus as a guide in the recovery of the Hexaplaric text has been recognised from the time of Montfaucon (comp. Field, Hexapia^ i., p. 5) and it is a matter for no little congratulation that we now possess a complete and admirable photograph of the remains of this great MS.
?

;

H.

Codex Petropolitanus.

In the Imperial Library

at St Petersburg.

This palimpsest consists at present of 88 leaves in octavo; in original form there were 44, arranged in quaternions. Under the patristic matter which is now in possession of the vellum, Tischendorf detected a large part of the Septuagint text of Numbers. The fragments recovered contain chh. i. i 30, 40 ii. 14, ii. 30 iii. 26, v. 13 vii. 7, vii. 41 78, viii. 2 23, vi. 6 xiii. II, xiii. 28 xiv. 34, xv. 3 xvi. 31, 16, xi. 3 20, 22 28, 32 xvi. 44 xviii. 4, xviii. 15 22, xxii. 30 26, xxi. 15 41, xxiii. 12
its


7

— —

27, xxvi. 54

—xxxiv.
;

— — —
i.

xxvii. 15, xxviii. 7

menta

end 17, xxxvi. I sacr. ined.^ nov. coll.
;

—xxix.

— — —
36,

— — — — — xxx. 9 — xxxi. 48,

xxxii.

of book.

They

are printed in Motiu-

(Leipzig, 1855).

In Tischendorf's judgement the upper writing is not later than the ninth century the lower writing he ascribes to the for though the characters are generally such as are found sixth in fifth century MSS., yet there are several indications of a later date, e.g. the numerous compendia scribendi and superscribed letters, and the occasional use of oblong forms. Chapters and arguments are noted in the margin the chapters of Numbers and at the end of the book the number of stichi is are 207

Mamiscripts of the Septiiagint.
specified
(,y(/)Xe'

.

.
= 3535)
II

139

;

the scribe appends his

name

'-

Fragmenta
ii.).

Lipsiensia.

Leipzig, University Library

(cod. Tisch.

18 — (Num. 17 — 24 — 25; 30— 35 36, 37 — 40, 42 10— —43, 46 — 47; XV. — 19 — 24; — — 8— — 28 — xxix. xxxv. 19 — Deut. 15 — 8— 21 — 6 — 9; 17 — Jos. 39 — 2— 2— 10 — 23; Jud. 7— 24 — The Greek writing not later than cent.
V.

Twenty-two leaves discovered by Tischendorf in 1844, of which seventeen contain under Arabic writing of the ninth century fragments of Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, and Judges
18,
vii.

19,

17,

xxvii.
ii.

i

31, xxviii. 5, xxviii.
10, 19.

2,

22,

31.

xviii.

xix.

i,

xix.

xxi.

12,

19, ix. x.

i

10,
xi.

16, xii.

15, xxii.

9,

xi.

34, xviii.

20^).

is

vii.

The fragments
inedita^ n.
c.

are printed in the

first

volume of Monunienta sacra

L

(VI),

Codex Purpureus Vindobonensis.

Vienna,

Imperial Library.

bound up two leaves
Gospels-.

This MS. consists of 24 leaves of Genesis, with which are of St Luke belonging to Codex of the

— — — — — — — — 1—4. —
33,
1•

iii. 4 viii. 20, 24, vii. 19 17 20, XV. I 26, 29 5, xix. 12 35; II, 15 xxii. 15 20; xxiv. 22 31, xxv. 27—34, xxvi. 19, xxiv. I 6 II, XXX. 30 32; xxxv. i 18, 22 37; xxxi. 25 34; xxxii. i xli. 2, 20, 28 18, xl. 14 4, 8, 16 19, xxxix. 9 29, xxxvii. I xli. 21 xlix. 3, xlix. 28 21, xlviii. 16 32, xlii. 21 38, xliii. 2

The Genesis
8

ix.

— 15,

20

— 27;

leaves contain Gen.
xiv.

— — —— —

— — — — — —

Like the great Cotton MS. the Vienna purple Genesis is an illustrated text, each page exhibiting a miniature painted in water-colours. The writing belongs to the fifth or sixth century; the provenance of the MS. is uncertain, but there are notes in the codex which shew that it was at one time in North Italy. Engravings of the miniatures with a description of the contents may be found in P. Lambecii Conwi. de bibliotheca Vindobonensi,
lib.
iii.

(ed.

Kollar.,
to

1776),

and a

transcript of the text in R.

Shute Barrington, Bishop of Durham (Oxford, 1795) but both these earlier authorities have been superseded by the splendid photographic edition lately published at Vienna {die Wietier Genesis herausgegeben von Wilhelm Ritter v. Hartel u.

Holmes's Letter
'>

Franz
^

Wickhoff^ Wien, 1895).

^

On On

the fragments of Judges see Isloox^, Judges, p. xlv. the latter see H. S. Cronin, Codex Ficrpurens Petropolitamis,

p. xxiii.

3

140
(X).

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.

Codex Coislinianus.
i.

Paris, Bibliotheque Natio-

nale, Coisl. Gr.

A MS. of the Octateuch and the Historical Books, with lacunae; the 227 remaining leaves contain Gen. i. i xxxiv. 2, xxxviii. 24 Num. xxix. 23, xxxi. 4 Jos. x. 6, Jos. xxii. 34 Ruth iv. 19, I Regn. i. i iv. 19, x. 19 xiv. 26, xxv. 33 3 Regn. viii. 40. This great codex was purchased in the East for M. Seguier, and brought to Paris about the middle of the seventeenth century. It was first described by Montfaucon, who devotes the first 31^ pages of his Bibliotheca Coisliniana to a careful description of the contents, dealing specially with the capitulation and the letters prefixed to the sentences. Facsimiles were given by Montfaucon, Bianchini {Evangelium quadricplex), Tischendorf {Monumenta sacr. ined., 1846), and Silvester, and a photograph off. 125 r., containing Num. xxxv. 33 xxxvi. 13, may be seen in H. Omont's FacsUniles, planche vi. Montfaucon gives a partial collation of the codex with the Roman edition of the LXX., and a collation of the whole was made for Holmes a complete collation is now being prepared by H. S. Cronin. The leaves, which measure 13x9 inches, exhibit on each page two columns of 49 or 50 lines, each line containing 18 23 letters.

——

;

According

to

Montfaucon, the codex was written

in the sixth or

at latest in the seventh century ("sexto vel cum tardissime septimo saeculo exaratus "), but the later date is now usually accepted. The margins contain a large number of notes prwia 7?ta?iu'^, among which are the excerpts from the N. T. printed by Tischendorf in the Motiujnenta and now quoted as cod. F^ of the Gospels^. The MS. is said by Montfaucon to agree frequently with the text of cod. A, and this is confirmed by Holmes as far as regards the Pentateuch. Lagarde {Genesis graece^ p. 12) styles it Hexaplaric hexaplaric signs and matter abound in the margins, and of these use has been made by Field so far as he was able to collect them from Montfaucon and from Griesbach's excerpts printed in Eichhorn's Repertorium.
;

Z^'

^.

Fragmenta Tischendorfiana.
first
i.

Two

of a series of

fragments of various MSB. discovered
printed in the
inedita, nov. coll.

by Tischendorf and

and second volumes of Monumenta sacra
ii.

(1855, 1857).

Three paHmpsest leaves containing fragments of 2 Regn. (2 Regn. xxii. 38—42, 46—49; xxiii. 2—5, 8—10; 3 Regn.
^

Z^

Other notes occur
Gregory,
i.

in a

hand of the ninth century and
i.

in a late cursive

hand.
-

p.

375

;

Scrivener-Miller,

p.

134.

Maimscripts of the Septiiagint.
xiii.

14

4—6,
17).

8— II,

The upper

13—17, 20—23, xvi. 31—33, xvii. 1—5, 9—12, writing is Armenian, the lower an Egyptian(v.

Greek hand of the 7th century, resemking that of cod. ^
i7ifra).

Z^. PaHmpsest fragment containing 3 Regn. viii. 58 ix. i, also from the Nitrian MSS. There are two texts over the Greek of which the lower is Coptic, the upper Syriac ; the Greek hand

belongs to cent.

v.

.

Fragmenta Tischendorfiana.

Four leaves taken from the binding of Cod. Porhrianus Chiovensis (P of the Acts and Catholic Epistles^), and published by Tischendorf in Mo7i. sacr. ined.^ nov. coll. vi. p. 339 ff. They yield an interesting text of portions of 4 Maccabees (viii. 6,
12, 15,

29;
ix.

ix.

28

— 30,

31

32).

The

writing appears to belong

to cent.

(C)
I (13).

Poetical Books.

Codex Bodleianus.
I.

Oxford, Bodleian Library,

Auct. D.

4.

A
catena.

Psalter, including

the Old
in

Testament Canticles and a
Eichhorn's Repertoriu7n.,
xiii.

Described by Bruns

p. 177; cf. Lagarde's edit. Specijnen, p. 3.

Gr. Parsons, who reckons it among the cursives, is content to say "de saeculo quo exaratus fuerit nihil dicitur"; according to Coxe {Catalogus codd. Biblioth. Bodl. \. 621), it belongs to the 9th century.
salt.

Ge?iesis graece, p. 11,

and Nov.

R.

Codex Veronensis.
MS.

Verona, Chapter Library.

of the Psalter in Greek and Latin, both texts written in Roman characters. few lacuTiae (Ps. i. i ii. 7, Ixv. 20 Ixviii. 3, Ixviii. 26 cvi. 2) have been supplied by a 33, cxv. 43 later hand, which has also added the (Ps. cli.). The Psalms are followed pri?/! a manu by eight canticles (Exod.

A

A


i

XV.
ii.

3

— 21, Deut. — Hab.
I

xxxii.

10,

iii.

Regn. — 44, — — Magnificat., Dan.
i i ii.

i

10, Isa. v.

i

9,

Jon.

10,

iii.

23

ff.).

Printed by Bianchini in his Vindiciae cano7iicarH7n scripturai. (Rome, 1740), and used by Lagarde in the apparatus of his Specinie7i and Psalterii Gr. quinqiiage7ia pri77ia., and in the Cambridge manual Septuagint (1891). new collation was made in 1892 by H. A. Redpath, which has been employed in
ru77t^

A

1

See Gregory,

i.

p. 447, Scrivener-Miller,

i.

p. 172

f.


142

Manuscripts of the Scpttiagmt,

the second edition of The O. T. in Greek (1896); but it is much to be wished that the Verona Chapter may find it possible to have this important Psalter photographed. The codex consists of 405 leaves, measuring inches; each page contains 26 lines. The Greek text appears at each opening on the left-hand page, and the Latin on the right,

\^.\

(262).

Codex Turicensis.

Zurich, Municipal Library.

purple MS. which contained originally 288 leaves; of these 223 remain. The text now begins at xxvi. (xxvii.) i, and there are lacunae in the body of the MS. which involve the loss of Pss. XXX. 2 xxxvi. 20, xli. 6 xliii. 3, Iviii, 24 lix. 3, lix. 9 10, 13

A

Ix.

I,

Ixiv.

12

Ixxi. 4,

xcii.

3

xciii.

7, xcvi.

12

xcvii. 8.

The

Canticles and a part of the sixth have also disappeared; those which remain are i Regn. ii. 6 10 (the rest of the sixth), the Mag)iificat^ Isa. xxxviii. 10 20, the Prayer of Manasses^, Dan. iii. 23 ff., Benedictiis^ Nunc Dimittis. Like Cod. this MS. is of Western origin. It was intended for Western use, as appears from the renderings of the Latin (Gallican) version which have been copied into the margins by a contemporary hand, and also from the liturgical divisions of the Psalter. The archetype, however, was a Psalter written for use in the East a fact which is revealed by the survival in the copy of occasional traces of the Greek The characters are written in silver, gold, or vermilion, according as they belong to the body of the text, the headings and initial letters of the Psalms, or the marginal Latin readings. Tischendorf, who published the text in the tourth volume of his 7iova collectio (1869), ascribes the handwriting to the seventh century. The text of agrees generally with that of cod. A, and still more closely with the hand in cod. t< known as i?•'^
first five

R

.

U.

Fragmenta Londinensia.

London,

British

pap. xxxvii.
Thirty leaves of papyrus which contain

Ps. x. (xi.) 2 [e]i?

xviii.

xxxiv. (xxxv.) 6

8[].
(xix.)
6,

xx. (xxi.)

14 ev

^
ff.

Museum,

These fragments of a papyrus Psalter were purchased in 1836 from a traveller who had bought them at Thebes in Egypt, where they had been found, it was said, among the ruins of a convent. Tischendorf assigned to them a high antiquity {Fro^

Cf. Nestle, Septiiagintastudien^

iii.

p. 17

;

ManiLscripts of the Septuagint.
legg.

143

"quo nullus codicum sacrorum antiquior and he was followed by Lagarde, who as late as 1887 described the London codex as "bibliorum omnium quos noverim antiquissimus" {Specimen^ p. 4). But a wider acquaintance with the palaeography of papyri has corrected their estimate, and the fragments are now ascribed by experts to cent. vi. vii.^ The writing slopes, and the characters are irregularly formed the scribe uses breathings and accents freely on the other hand he writes continuously, not even breaking off at the end of a Psalm or distmguishing the title from the rest of the text. The hand is not that of a learned scribe or of the literary type^.
V. T. Gr., p. ix.,

ad

videtur"),

;

X
A

(258).

Codex
749.

Vaticanus

Iobi.

Rome,

Vatican

Library, Gr.

occasional lacunae; the remaining porxxx. 9, xxx. 23 xxxi. 5, xxxi. 24 There are miniatures, and a catena in an uncial hand surrounding the text. At the beginning of the book Hexaplaric scholia are frequent^. The text is written in a hand of the ninth century. It was used by Parsons, and its Hexaplaric materials are borrowed by

MS. of tions are i. i xxxiv. 35.

Job

Avith

xvii. 13, xvii. 17

Fields

W
A

(43).

Codex

Parisiensis.

Paris,

Bibliotheque

Na-

tionale, Gr. 20.

portion of an uncial Psalter containing in 40 leaves Ps. cxxxvi. I, with laamae extending from Ps. ex. 7 to cxii. cxxvi. 4. So Omont {Invejitaire 10, and from Ps. cxvii. 16 soiiwiaire des inss. grecs, p. 4) according to Parsons {Praef. ad lib}'. Pss.), followed generally by Lagarde {Genesis gr. 15), the omissions are Ps. c. 4 ci. 7, ex. 6 cxi. 10, cxvii. 16 cxviii. 4, cxviii. 176 cxxvi. 4. The codex was written by a hand of the ninth or tenth century, and contains paintings which, as Parsons had been informed, are of some merit.
xci. 14

;

^ See Catalogue of Ancient MSS. in the British Museum, i. (1881), where there is a photograph of Ps. xxiii. 10 ff. and Dr Kenyon's Palaeography ofpapyri, p. 1 16 f. - Kenyon, loc. cit. ^ See £. Klostermann, Analecta zur Septuaginta, ^^c, p. 68, ^ Hexapla, ii. p. 2.
,

144
Z'^.

Mamiscripts of the Septtiagint.
See above under (B),
p.

140.

Fragments of the fourth or
cxli. (cxlii.) 7

fifth cent. (Tisch.),
i

8, cxlii. (cxliii.)

3,

containing Pss. cxUv. (cxlv.) 7 13.

(D)
(VIII).

Prophets.

Fragmenta Dublinensia.
3. 4.

Dublin,

Trinity

College Ivibrary, K.

which are now bound up with Codex
Isa.
7,

— in the original MS. folded as four of the Gospels and yield xxxvi. 19 — XXX. 2 — xxxi. The original leaves of the Codex measured about 12x9 inches, The writing, which and each contained 36 lines of 14 — 17
Eight palimpsest leaves
^

xxxviii. 2.

letters.

belongs to the early part of the sixth century, appears to be that of an Egyptian scribe, and Ceriani is disposed to connect the text of the fragments with the Hesychian recension^. They have been printed in facsimile type by Professor T. K. Abbott {Par palijnpsestoru7n Dublinensiuin., Dublin, 1880), and are used in the apparatus of the Cambridge manual Septuagint.

Q (XII).
Gr. 2125.

Codex Marchalianus. Rome,

Vatican Library,

A magnificent codex of the Prophets, complete, and in the (Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, order of cod. Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi Isaiah, Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, Epistle, Ezekiel, Daniel (Theod.) with Susanna and Bel). This MS. was written in Egypt not later than the sixth century. It seems to have remained there till the ninth, since the uncial corrections and annotations as well as the text exhibit letters of From Egypt it was carried characteristically Egyptian form. before the 12th century to, South Italy, and thence into France, where it became the property of the Abbey of St Denys near Paris, and afterwards of Rene Marchal, from whom it has acquired From the library of R. Alarchal it passed into the its name. hands of Cardinal F. Rochefoucauld, who in turn presented it to the Jesuits of Clermont. Finally, in 1785 it was purchased for the Vatican, where it now reposes. The codex was used by J. Morinus, Wetstein and Montfaucon, the collated for Parsons, and printed in part by Tischendorf
;

m

1

^

See Gregory, i. p. 399 f.; Scrivener-Miller, Recensioni dei LXX.y p. 6.

i.

p. 153.

Mamtscripts of the Septuagint.
ninth

145

Field followed volume of his Nova Collectio (1870). Montfaucon in making large use of the Hexaplaric matter Avith Avhich the margins of the MS. abound, but was compelled to The depend on earlier collations and a partial transcript.

Vatican has now placed within the reach of all O.T. students a magnificent heliotype of the entire MS., accompanied (in a separate volume) by a commentary from the pen of Ceriani (1890). This gift is only second in importance to that of the photograph of Codex B, completed in the same year. Codex Marchalianus at present consists of 416 leaves, but the first twelve contain patristic matter, and did not form a part of the original MS. The leaves measure i if x 7 inches the Avriting is in single columns of 29 lines, each line containing 24 30 letters. The text of the Prophets belongs, according to Ceriani, to the Hesychian recension but Hexaplaric signs have been freely added, and the margins supply copious extracts from Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and the LXX. of the Hexapla. These marginal annotations were added by a hand not much later than that which Avrote the text, and to the same hand are due the patristic texts already mentioned, and two important notes ^ from which we learn the sources of the Hexaplaric matter in the margins. The result of its labours has been to render this codex a principal authority for the Hexapla in the Prophetic Books.
liberality of the
;

;

Y.

Codex Taurinensis.
The MS.

Turin, Royal Library, cod.
in quarto, to

lacunae. century,

8€.
The
is

9.

This codex consists of 135 leaves
is difficult

and contains the read, and there are many

text,

written according to Stroth- in the ninth

surrounded by scholia, to the various books.

and prefaced by Theodoret's

to have been used hitherto any edition of the LXX., nor has any transcript or collation been published.
for

The Turin MS. does not appear

Z^'^

See above, under

(B), p. 140.

Palimpsest fragments of Isaiah (iii. 8—14, v. 2 14, xxix. 1 1 xlv. 5). As in Z% the upper writing is Armenian ; 23, xliv. 26 the Greek hand belongs apparently to cent. viii. ix. Z=. Palimpsest fragment of Ezekiel (iv. 16 v. 4) found among the Nitrian leaves at the British Museum. The Greek hand resembles that of Z% and is probably contemporary with it.

Z^

1

^

Printed in 0. T. in Greek, mr, p. 8 f. In Eichhom's Repertoriuni, viii. p. 202

f.

S.

S.

10

146

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.

.

Codex Cryptoferratensis.

Basilian

Monastery of

Grotta Ferrata, cod. E.

.

vii.

This volume consists partly of palimpsest leaves which once belonged to a great codex of the Prophets. A scribe of the 13th century has written over the Biblical text liturgical matter accompanied by musical notation. Some portions of the book are doubly palimpsest, having been used by an earlier scribe for a

work of St John of Damascus.
liturgical

About 130 leaves

in the present

codex were taken from the Biblical MS., and the Biblical text of 85 of these leaves has been transcribed and published (with many lacunae where the lower writing could not be deciphered) in Cozza-Luzi's Sac7'orum biblioriun vetustissima fragmeiita^ vol.
i.

to have contained 432 leaves and the leaves appear to have gathered in quires of eight measured about lof 8} mches. The writing, which is in sloping uncials of the eighth or ninth century, was arranged in double columns, and each column contained 25 28 lines of 13 20
;

(Rome 1867). The original codex seems

letters.
It cannot be said that Cozza's transcript, much as Biblical students are indebted to him for it, satisfies our needs. Uncial codices of the Prophets are so few that we desiderate a photographic edition, or at least a fresh examination and more complete collation of this interesting palimpsest.

.
MS.

Fragmentum Bodleianum.

Oxford, Bodleian Library,

Gr. bibl. d. 2 (P).

fragment of Bel in the version of Theodotion (21 ywaiKUtv vellum leaf brought from Egypt and purchased for 41 the Bodleian in 1888. Written in an uncial hand of the fifth (?) century, partly over a portion of a homily in a hand perhaps a century earlier.

A ).

A

The

following uncial fragments have not been used for
for the present

any edition of the lxx., and remain
a symbolical
letter or

without

number.

(i) scrap of papyrus (B. Vi.^pap. ccxii.) yielding the text See Catalogue of Additions to the MSS., of Gen. xiv. 17. 1888 93, p. 410. Cent. iii. (?). The vellum fragment containing Lev. xxii. 3 xxiii. 22, (2) originally published by Brugsch {Neue Bruchstiidie des Cod. SUi.^ Leipzig, 1875), ^^^o believed it to be a portion of Codex a more accurate transcription is given by J. R. Sinaiticus Harris, Biblical Fraginents^ no. 1$ (cf. Mrs Lewis's Studia Sin. Cent. iv. i. p. 97 f ).

A

;

I

2

Manuscripts of the Septtiagint.
(3)

147
xxxii. 29,

Another Sinaitic fragment, containing Num.
R. Harris, op.
cit..,

Cent. vii. Another Sinaitic fragment, containing a few words of (4) Cent. iv. Jud. XX. 24 28 (J. R. Harris, op. cit., no. 2). Another Sinaitic fragment, containing Ruth ii. 19 iii. i, (5) Cent. iv. iii. 4 7 (J. R. Harris, op. cit.., no. 3). Part of a Psalter on papyrus (B. M., pap. ccxxx.), con(6) taining Ps. xii. 7 XV. 4; see Athenaeicm^ Sept. 8, 1894, and Kenyon, Palaeography of Greek Papyri., pp. 109, 131. Cent. iii. Part of a Psalter on a Berlin papyrus, containing Ps. xl. (7) 26 xli. 4; see Blass in Z. f. cigypt. Sprache., 1881 (Kenyon, op.

30

(J.

no.

i).

^zV., p.

131).

25
Ps.

Nine (8) lines, one
ci.

fragments of a MS. Avritten in columns of about on each page. The fragments give the text of
cii.

3,

cxiii.

18

— 26,

4,

5—8,
3

cxiv.

— cxv.

cv.

34—43,
2.

cvi.

17—34,

cviii.
cit..,

15—21,
no.
4.

J.

R.

Harris,

op.

Cent.
(9)

iv.

oct.

vellum MS. in the Royal Library at Berlin (MS. Gr. containing Ps. cxi. cl., followed by the first four canticles and parts of Ps. cv. and cant. v. See E. Klostermann, Z.f. A. T. IV., 1897, p. 339 ff. Fragments discovered by H. A. Redpath at St Mark's, (10) Venice, in the binding of cod. gr. 23, containing the text of Prov. xxiii. 21 xxiv. 35. Published in the Academy, Oct. 22, A fuller transcript is given by E. Klostermann, Analecta, 1892. pp. 34 ff. Portion of a leaf of a papyrus book, written in large (11) uncials of cent. vii. This scrap viii., exhibiting Cant. i. 6 9. came from the Fayum and is now in the Bodleian, where it is
2),

A

numbered MS.
(12)

Gr. bibl. (Oxford, 1896), pp. I2f.

g.

i

(P); see Grenfell, Greek

papyri

vii.),

Palimpsest fragments of Wisdom and Sirach (cent. vi. carried by Tischendorf to St Petersburg and intended for publication in the 8th volume of his Mofiinnenta, which never appeared. See Nestle, Urtext, p. 74. Two palimpsest leaves of Sirach belonging to cod. 2 in (13) the Patriarchal Library at Jerusalem cf. Papadopulos, 2"/ /3., i. p. 14: 56 elai

co(^
i.

The leaves contain Sir. prol. i i. 14, Printed by J. R. Harris, op. cit., no. 5. Part of a Papyrus book which seems to have contained (14) the Minor Prophets. The discovery of this fragment was announced in 1892 by W. H. Heckler, who gave a facsimile of Zach. xii. 2, 3 ('Times,' Sept. 7, 1892; Transactions of the Congress of Orientalists, 1892, ii., p. 331 f). Mr Heckler
29

€ 6 €€ € 8(\, \ . .,. ^.
:

els

^. -^
de

e'

iv

iii.

II.

10

;

AS
claimed for

Manttscripts of the Septuagint.
this

hand appears

papyrus an extravagantly early date, but the belong to the seventh century see Kenyon, of papyri, p. ii8. When last seen, it was in the
to
;

shop of Th. Graf, a dealer
(15)

at

Vienna
;

[ib., p.

24).

leaves of a small vellum book, from the Fayum, now Bodl. MS. Gr. bibl. e. 4 (P) the handwriting, "in small, fine uncials," yields the text of Zach. xii. 10 5. 12, xiii. 3 "About the fifth century " (Grenfell, Greek papyri, p. 11 f). Rainer papyrus, assigned to the third century and (16) containing Isa. xxxviii. 3 5, 13 16; see Nestle, TJfiexi, p. 74. portion of a leaf of a papyrus book, bearing the (17) Greek text of Ezech. v. 12— vi. 3 (Bodl/iMS. Gr. bibl. d. 4 (P)) The text shews Hexaplaric see Grenfell, Greek papyri, pp. 9 ff. signs the writing is said to belong to the third century (Kenyon,

Two

A
A

;

Palaeography of papyri, p. 107). A fragment of a lead roll on w^hich is engraved Ps. (18) Ixxix (Ixxx). I 16, found at Rhodes in 1898. See Sitzimgsberichte d. kmigl. Preicss. Akad. d. Wissenschaften stt Berlin^ 1898

(xxxvii.).

II.

Cursive MSS.
list

We

proceed to give a

of cursive

MSS. of
it,

the Greek

Old

Testament, or of books belonging to
the codices used by
in the

limiting ourselves to

Holmes and

Parsons, with the addition

Octateuch of others which have been recently examined

or collated

by the editors of the
(A)

larger

Cambridge Septuagint'.

The Octateuch.
Vat. Palat. Gr.

14.

Gen.,

Ex., ep. Arist., cat. (xi)
(ix

Rome,
203

Klostermann,
p.
1 1

Anal.
early

n.

15.
16.

Octateuch
X)

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.

Hexaplaric books

in

Octateuch

(xi)

17. 18.

Genesis, cat. (x)

Octateuch
xi)

(x

Florence, Laur. v. 38 Moscow, Syn. 5,Vlad. 28 Florence, Laur. Med. Pal. 242 (formerly
at Fiesole)

Batiffol, Vat., p. 91

1 The arable numerals are For the symbols employed by H. and P. descriptions of the unnumbered MSS., the writer is indebted to Messrs Brooke and M'^Lean, and Mr Brooke has also assisted him in verifying and correcting the earlier lists.

Mamtscripts of
19.

the Septuagint.
R.
vi.

149
Vind.,
p.

Octateuch
(?x)

^

Rome, Chigi

38

Bianchini,

279
(ix)

ff.

Lucianic, Lagarde's h
20.

Genesis
Gen.,

[Cod. Dorothei

i.]

25.

Ex., ep. Arist.^ cat. (xi)

Munich,
Gr. 9

Stadtbibl.

Field,

ii.

Auct. p. 3

28.

Num.,
Jos.,
(xi)

Deut., imperf.

Rome, Vat.

Gr. 2122 (formerly Basil. 161)

29.

Octateuch (inc. Venice, Gr. 2 Gen. xliii. 15)
...

St

Mark's,

Cf.

Lagarde Genesis^
6,

.
i.

Septuagi?itast.
II

(x)

30.

Octateuch (inc. Gen. xxiv. 13)
(xi)

Rome, Casan. 1444
Vienna, Theol. Gr. 4 [Cod. Eugenii i.]

31. 32.

Genesis,

Pentateuch

()
(xii)

Scrivener-Miller,

i.

p.

224
2,7.

Lectionary (a.d.
III 6)

Moscow,
Vlad. 8

Syn.

31,

38.

Octateuch... (xv)

Escurial, Y. 11. 5
Zittau, A.
i.
i

Hexaplaric,
i.

cf.

Field,

p.

398

44. Octateuch.. .(xv)

Lagarde's^-: s^eGenesis gr., p. 7 ff. and Libr. V. T. can. i.
p.
vi.
;

Miller,

i.

Scrivenerp. 261
;

Redpath, Exp.

T.,

May
45. Num. {lect.), (xi) 46. Octateuch.. .(xiv)
47.
50.

1897

Fragment of leetionary

Lectionary

(xiii)

52.

Octateuch...,^;).
Af^ist., cat. (x)

Escurial Paris,Nat. Coisl. Gr.4 Oxford, Bodl. Baron. 201 Oxford, Bodl. Seld. 30 Florence, Laur. Acq.

O.T. exc. Psalter

44
17'

53.
54. 55.

Octateuch (a.d. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
1439)

Octateuch, <?/.yirist. (xiii

— xiv)

Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
5

Octateuch... (xi)

Rome,
I

Vat. Reg. Gr.

i. p. La223. garde's k Part of a complete Bible, cf. Kloster-

Field,

mann,
56. Octateuch.. .(a.d.

p. 12

Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
3

Lagarde's k
Field,
i.

1093)
57.

Octateuch,

ep.

Rome, Vat. Gr. 747
shew
that the

pp.

5,

78

Arist., cat. (xi)
^

Dots

in this position

MS.

extends beyond the Octateucli.

150
58.

Maimscripts of the Septiiagint.
Pentateuch
(xiii)

Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr,
10

Field,

i.

p.

78

59.

Octateuch (xv)

61.

Lectionary

(xi)

Glasgow, Univ. BE. 7^ 10 (formerly at C.C.C., Oxford) Oxford, Bodl. Laud.
36

Scrivener-Miller,

i.

p.

63. Jos., Jud., Ruth {iuiperf.) (x) 64. Octateuch ... (x

Rome, Vat. 1252
Paris, Nat. Reg. 2

329 Klostermann,
Gr.
Field,
i.

p. 12


...

p. 5

xi)

O.andN.T.
O. and N.T.
ner-Miller,

68. Octateuch... (xv)
70. Jos., Jud.,
(xi)

Venice,
Gr. 5

St

Mark's,

Scrivei.

p.

219

Ruth Munich, Gr. 372 (formerly at Augsburg;
Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
i

Octateuch.. .(xiii) 72. Octateuch.. .(xiii)
71.

Oxford, Bodl. Canon. Gr. 35 (formerly at

73.

Octateuch,
Arist.
cat. (xiii)

ep.

Rome,

\'enice; see H. P.) Vat. Gr. 746

Hexaplaric. Tischendorf in L. C.-BL^ 1867 (27) Field, i. p. 78

(part),

74. 75.

Octateuch. ..(xiv)

Florence, Laur. Acq.
Hi.

Hesychian
Lagarde's

(?)

700 (49) Octateuch (a.d. Oxford, Univ. Coll.
1126)

i».

Horne;

mann,

p.

41
p.

Owen,
90

Enquiry^
76.

.
78.

Octateuch. ..(xiii) Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4 Octateuch, cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 748
(xiii)

Gen.,
(xiii)

Ex.,

cat.

Rome, Vat.

Gr. 383

Field,

i.

p.

78

79.

Gen., ep.

Arist..,

Rome,

Vat. Gr. 1668

cat. (xiii)

82.
83.

Octateuch.. .(xii)

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
3

Lagarde's/

Pentateuch,
(xvi)

cat.

Lisbon, Archivio da

Torre

da

Tombo
Hesychian
Field,

84. 85.

Heptateuch (zwperf.) (x)

540 &c. (formerly at Evora) Rome, Vat. Gr. 190 1

(?)

Heptateuch
pc7'f.) (xi)

{ivi-

Rome,

\^at. Gr. 2058 (formerly Basil. 97)

93. Ruth... (xiii)

London, B. M. Reg.
i.

i. pp. 78, 397 ("praestantissimi codicis") Lucianic (Lagarde's

D.

2

VI)

Mamiscripts of the Septiiagint.
94=131
105.

151

xiv. 6 26 &c. (xiii xiv) 106. Octateuch...(xv)

Exod.

London, B. M. Burney
Ferrara, Bibl. Gr. 187

Comm. Hesychian (?).
Ank.
p.

O. T.,

N. T. (582 Greg., 451 Scr.). Lagarde,
27

107. Octateuch...(A.D.
108.

1334) Octateuch...(xiv)

Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. Gr. 188 Rome, Vat. Gr. 330

Lagarde,
Field,

ib.

Lucii. p. 5. anic text (Lagarde's

118.

Octateuch
perf.)
(xiii)

{im-

Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.

d) Lucianic

(Lagarde's

120. 121.

Octateuch... (xi)

Octateuch

(x)

122. Octateuch... (xv)

6 Venice, Gr. 4 Venice, Gr. 3 Venice, Gr. 6

P)
St St

Mark's,

Mark's,
Mark's,
O.

St

and N. T. (Ev. 206) in Latin order. Copy of 68

125.

Octateuch... (xv)

Moscow,
Vlad. 3

Syn.

30,
19,

126.

Heptateuch
in
Gen.,

Moscow,
Ex.
Vlad. 38

Syn.

cat.

(A.D. 1475)
127.
128.

Octateuch... (x)

Moscow,

Octateuch

(xii)

Syn. 31 a, Vlad. I Rome, Vat. Gr. 1657, formerly Grotta ferrata

Field, Field,

i. Lap. 5. garde, Ank. p. 3

i.

pp. 168, 224

129.
130.

Octateuch Octateuch

(xiii)

(?xi)

Gr. 1252 Vienna, Th. Gr. 57

Rome, Vat.

See note to 63
Field,
i.

p.

6.

La-

garde, Ank. p. 26. See note to 131
131.

Octateuch

Vienna, Th. Gr. 23

Field,

(x— xi)

i. p. 5: "in enumeratione Holmesiana [cod. 130]

perverse designatur
131, et vice versa."

O. and N. T.
132.

Lectionary (palimpsest,
xii)

Oxford, Bodl. Selden.
9

xi

133.

Excerpts

from Leyden, Univ. MSS.byl.Voss
(xi)

134.

Octateuch...

Florence, Laur.

v.

i

Hesychian

(.?)

,

5

152
135. Gen.,

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.
Ex.
i.

i

Basle, A. N.

iii.

13

xii. 4, cat. (xi)

LaField, i. p. 6. garde's r {Genesis.,
p. 6).

Hexaplaric

136.

Excerpts from Oxford, Bodl. Barocc. Pentateuch 196
(A.D. 1043)

209. Jos., Jud., Ruth,
cat. (xii)

[Cod. Dorothei

iv]

236. Jos., Jud.,
...

Ruth Rome, Vat. Gr. 331 Ruth London,
7522

Klostermann,

p.

78

(xii)

241. Jos., Jud.,
...

B.

M. Harl.
Gr. 1238

P.

(xvii)

Young's Cod. A
poi'tant Septante^
letiit

copy of
(Cun im-

246.

Octateuch
(xiii)

Rome, Vat.

Cf. Batiffol,

MS.
in

des

B7clCritique., 1

March, 1889

Josh.

— Ruth
xiii)

(x
cat.

London, B.M. Add.
20002 London, 35123

Continuation of
134)

(p.

xi)

— Lev. — Ruth, (A.D. 104) Lev. — Ruth, (A.D. 1264) Jos. — Ruth
(xii
1

Octateuch,

B.M. Add.
12 14

cat.

Lambeth,

cat.

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
5

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
7 Paris, Arsenal 8415 Coisl. Gr.

comjn.
schol.

(xii)

Octateuch

Hexaplaric readings
Lucianic
{!)

Heptateuch {im- Paris, Nat.
per/.)

Lev.

— Ruth,

(xiii)

184
cat.

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.

(xiii)

6

Octateuch...(xiv)

Octateuch,
Ex.

ep.

Arist., cat. (xii)

— Ruth,

cat.

(xv)

Octateuch, ep. Anst.,caL{xu\) Gen. Ex. {imper/. \ep.A rist.

Nat. Suppl. Gr. 609 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 128 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 132 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 129 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
Paris,
1

Hesychian

(?)

Hexaplaric readings

Hexaplaric readings

30

cat. (xv)

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.
'Ex.{ijnperf.),cat.

1

53

Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.

Hexaplaric

readings

(xvi)

Gen.
(xiii)

i.

iii. (.?),

conwi. (palim.)
Ex., ep. cat. Arist.^ (A.D. 1586) Octateuch...(z;/z-

131 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 161

(interlinear)

Gen.,

Escurial

.
i2.

i.

16

Hexaplaric readings

Escurial

i.

13

pcrf) (xi) Octateuch,
(xiii)

cat.

Exod.

Deut.

Leyden, 13 (belongs to Voss collection) Leipzig, Univ. Libr.
Gr. 361

{imperf.){'n)...

Hexaplaric readings. Published by Fischer in 1767 = Lips. (H. P.)

Gen.,

Ex.,

ep.

Munich, Gr. 82
(for-

A7'isf.^cat.{yM\)

Jos.— Ruth... (x) Munich, Gr. 454
merly
Octateuch,
ep.

at

Zurich,
Basle, O.

Augsburg) Bibl. de la Hexaplaric matter
^

Arist..,cat.{xui)

Gen.
xii.

iv.

ville, c. 11
ii.

v.,

Ex.

17

xxviii.,
(xi)

comm.
(?xii)

Octateuch,

cat.

Rome, Barb.
56

Gr.

iv.

Gen., cat. (xvi)

Num.
(xiv

Hexateuch... (x) Grotta FerrataY. . i Gen. Jos. {ivi- St Petersburg, Imp.
perf.)...{x

— xv) —

— Ruth

...

Rome, Barb. Gr. vi. Rome, Vat. Gr. 332

8

Continuation of
134)

(p.

xi)

Libr. Ixii

Gen., Chrys.

comm. Moscow, Syn. Vlad.
35 Athos, Iver. 15

Joshua

— Ruth...
(x)

cat. (xii)

Octateuch

Octateuch...

(x

Athos, Pantocr. 24 Athos, Vatop. 5 it Athos, Vatop. 513

Hexaplaric readings

-xi)
Octateuch

— — Ex. — Ruth
Lev.
(xi
xii)

(A.D.

021) Ruth,
1

cat.

Athos, Vatop. 515
Athos, Vatop. 516

(xiv)

Hexaplaric readings, much faded

154

Mamiscripts of
Pentateuch
per/.\ 1327)
(zV;z-

the Septicagint.

Athos, Protat. 53

Hexaplaric readings

(A.D.

Octateuch (a.d. Athos, Laur.
1013) Genesis, i:rt:/.(?xi)

.

112

Hexaplaric
(a few)

readings

Octateuch...
(xi)

az/.

Constantinople, 224 (formerly 372) Athens, Bibl. Nat. 43

Octateuch.. .(xiii) Athens, Bibl. Nat. 44 evayy. Octateuch, cat. Smyrna, Niceph. (xii) i Pentateuch, cat. Patmos, 216
(xi)

Lucianic

(?)

Num.

— Ruth,
(z;;z-

Patmos, 217

cat. (xi)

Heptateuch
perf.) (xiii)

Patmos, 410
Patmos, 411
Sinai,
i

Pentateuch, /t'j•/. xii. pair, (xv) Octateuch... (x

-xi)
Pentateuch,
(?x)
cat.

Sinai, 2

Octateuch...

(ix

med.)
Genesis, cat.

(xii

xiii)

Jerusalem, H. Sepulchre 2 Jerusalem, H. Sepulchre 3

(B)

Historical Books.
vi.

i9i...iRegn.,2Esdr.,
Judith,
I

Rome, Chigi R.

38

Esth.,

(x)

29...

I

— 3Macc.,&c. —4 Regn., —
I

Venice,
Gr. 2

St

Marks,

3
38...
I

Mace,

(im-

perf.),

— 18 (xv) 44...iRegn.,2 Esdr., — 4 Mace,
i.

&c. (x) Regn., 2 Regn.
I

Escurial, Y.
Zittau, A.

11. 5

XX.

.

i

I

Esth.,

Judith,

Tob., (N. T.) &c. (xv)
1 Dots before the name of the first book quoted indicate that the MS. has already appeared under (A), where fuller information may be sought. This note applies mutatis imitandis to (C) and (D).

4

Maimscripts of the Septnagint.
46...1

1

5 5

Regn.-2Esdr.,
Esth.,

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.

Judith,

—4 Tob....
I

4

Mace,
Florence, Laur. Acq.

52...iRegn.-2Esdr.,
Esth.,
I

Judith,

—4

44

Mace,
Rome,
Gr.
i

Tob., schoL (x) 55...iRegn.-2Esdr.,
Judith,
Esth.,
I

Vat.

Regin.

Tob.,
56...
I

— —4 Regn., —
Mace,
(xi)
I

2
58...
I

Chron.,

1—2
I

Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 3

— 4 Regn., — 2 Chron., — 2
i

Mace,

(xii)

Rome,
Gr. 10

Vat.

Regin.

Esdr.,

Jud.,

Tob., Esth., &c. (xiii) 60. 1-2 Chron. (.?xii)

Cambridge,
Libr. Ff.
1.

Univ. Walton, PoIys;l. vi. 24 i2iff.; J. R. Harris, Origin of Leicester
Cod., p. 21

64...iRegn.-2Esdr., Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 2 Esth., Tob.,
I

2

Mace,

(x)

68...iRegn.-2Esdr., Venice,
Esth.,

St

Mark's,

Judith,

Gr.

5

Tob.,

1—3
(xv)

Mace...
70..
I
>

-4 Regn., parts of Chron., Tob.
(xi)

Munich, Gr. 372 (formerlyat Augsburg)
Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr.
I

71. ..2

Esdr.,

Mace,
Judith,
(xiii)

I 3 Esth.,

Tob.
I

74.. .1—2 Esdr.,

Mace,
Judith,
(xiv)
76... Esth.,

—4

Florence, St Mark's

Esth.,

Tob.
Judith,
Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4

Tob.
82...
I

(xiii)

4 Regn. —xiii)

(xii

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
3 Paris, Nat. Gr. 8

92.

1—4 Regn.

(x)

Field,

i.

p.

486

— 2 2
2

1

56

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
London, B. M. Reg. i. D. 2
Escurial,

93...i-2Esdr.,Esth., 1-3 Mace. (xiii)
98.
I

—4Regn., —
I

.

2.

19

Chron.,
1

cat.

06...

I

Regn.-2Esdr., Ferrara, Bibl.
Judith,
I 2 Mace. Regn.-2 Esdr., Ferrara,

Comm.
Comm.

Esth.,

Gr. 187
Bibl.

107.

I

1—3

Mace,

Gr. 188

Esth., ludith, Tob.(A.f).i334)

io8...iRegn.-2Esdr., Tob., Judith, Esth. (xiv)
119.
I

Rome, Vat.

Gr. 330

Cf. Field,

i.

p.

702

— 4Regn.,i — Chron., —
i

Paris, Nat. Gr. 7

Esdr. (x)
120. ..iRegn.-2 Esdr.,
I

\^enice,

St

Mark's,

—4

Mace,
(xi)

Gr. 4

Esth.
121...1
(x)

Regn.-2 Esdr. Venice,
Gr. 3

St

Mark's,

Venice, St Mark's, Gr. 6 4 Regn. (xi) [Cod. Dorothei v.] 123. I Syn. 1 30, 2 5... Historical Bks., Moscow, Vlad. 3 ... (xv) Syn. i26...Judith,Tob.(xv) Moscow, 19, Vlad. 38 Moscow, Syn. 31a, 127... I 4 Regn., I Vlad. I 2 Chron. xxxvi.
122. ..Historical Bks., ... (xv)

(x)

131. ..Historical
(exc.
(?xii)

Bks.

Vienna, Th. Gr. 23

4 Mace.)
Florence, Laur.
Basle, B.
6.

134...1
158.
I

Regn.-2Esdr.,
I

v.

i

— 4 Regn., — 2
I

Jiiacc. (x)

22
Gr. 331

Chron. 236... I Regn.-2Esdr.,
Esth.,

Wetstein, '. T. 132

i.

p.

Rome, Vat.

Judith,

Tob.,
241...
I

1—4
2

242.
243.

I I

— — Chron. — 4 Regn. — 4 Regn.

Mace, (xii) 4Regn.,i

London, B. AL Harl. 7522 Vienna, Th. Gr. 5
Paris, Nat. Coisl. 8

Field,

i.

p.

486

)

4

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
243*.

157
i.

I—4Regn.(i-rt/.),
I

—2 Esdr., Esth., Tob.Jud.,1 — Mace.
Chron.

Venice,
cod. 16

St

Mark's,

Field,

p.

486

Regn. (x) Regn. (ix— x) 246... I Regn. (xiii) 247. I Regn. (x) 248...1— 2Esdr.,Tob.,
244. 245.
I

1—4

Rome, Vat. Gr. ^^^ Rome, Vat. Gr. 334 Lucianic (Field) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1238 Rome, Vat. Gr. Urb. i Rome, Vat. Gr. 346 Nestle, Marg. p.
Moscow, Syn. 341

58

Judith,

Esth.,

&c. (xiv)
31
1.

..Historical Bks.
(xi)

...iRegn.-2Esdr.,
Esth., Tob.
...Judith,
I

Mace.

—3
M.

Escurial,

.

i.

13

(3

imperf.) (xi)

...iRegn.-2Chron.
(x)
...I

Munich, Gr. 454(?formerly at Augsburg) Regn. -3 Regn. St Petersburg, Imp.
28 (x or
xi)

xvi.

Libr.

Ixii.

...Tob.,

Judith,

GrottaFerrata,A.
(catal., 29)

.

I

Esth.,
...I

Ruth

(x)

...Tobit(xivorxv) Esdr., Tobit (fragments) (x
or xi)
Judith,

Rome, Vat. Gr. 332 Leipzig, Univ. Libr. Gr. 361
Athos, Vatop. 511

Hexaplaric readings

...Esth.,

Tob.,i-4Regn.
(x or xi)
...Esth.,

Tob.,
(A.D.

Athos, Vatop. 513

Judith
102
...1-2
...I
1

Chron. (xiv) Athos, Vatop. 516 4 Regn., :</. Athens, Bibl. Nat. 43

(xi)

...iRegn.-2Esdr., Athens, Bibl. Nat. 44
Esth.,

Judith,
I

...I

—4 Regn., —
2

Tob.

(xiii)

Paris, Arsenal 8415
Paris, Nat. Suppl. Gr.

...I

Chron. (xiv) Regn.-2Esdr.,

1—4
Esth.,

Mace,
Judith,
(xiv)

609

Tob.

158
...I

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.

— 4 Regn.
Judith,

(xii)

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.
7
i

... I

Regn. -2 Esdr., Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr.
Esth.,

Tob.,i-4Macc.

(C)
13.

Poetical Books.

21.

27.

—xiv) Psalms — Ixx
(xiii
i

(see under Uncial MSS.) schol. [Cod. Eugenii Psalms,

=1

iv.]

Gotha, formerly Lothringen
[Cod. Dorothei
ii.]

An

39.

Psalms
(ix)

(/;;i/^r/;)

uncial MS., Lagarde's M(p«) {Specimen^ P• 27) An uncial MS., Lagarde's E(p«) {Spe-

43.

=W

(see

under
Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.

Uncial MSS.)
Eccl., 46...Prov., Cant., Job, Sap., Sir.,
(xiv)
55

cimen, p. 2) Lagarde's F^p^) {Specimen, p. 2)
4

.

-.Job,
(?xi)

Psalms Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr.
I

ca7it., 65. Psalms, Lat. (xii) cant. 66. Psalms, (xiv)

Leipzig

Eton

Coll.

67.

Psalms,
(xvi)

ca7it.

Oxford, C.C.C. 19
St

Harris, Leicester Codex, p. 20

68. ..Poetical (XV)
69.
80.

Books Venice,
Gr.
ca7it.
5

Mark's,

Psalms,
(?x)

Oxford, Magd. Coll. 9
Oxford, Christ Ch.

Psalms,
(xiii

—xiv)
(xi)

cant.

A

81. 99.
100.
loi.

Psalms
Psalms,

schol.,
xiii)

Oxford, Christ Ch. 2 Oxford, Trin. Coll. jZ

cant, (xii

Psalms,

ca?it.

Oxford, Christ Ch. 3 Oxford, Christ Ch. 20

(xi— xii)
Psalms,
(xiii)

cant.

Manuscripts of
102, 103.

tJie

SepUtagmt.
i

159

Psalms,
(xiii)

cant.

Oxford, Christ Ch.

Prov.
(XV)

i.

xix.

Vienna, Th. Gr. 25
Vienna, Th. Gr. 27
Ferrara, Bibl. Gr. 188

Klostermann, pp.
18

6,

104.

Psalms

i.-x. (xvi)

107, .Job,Prov.,Eccl.,

Comm.

Cant, Sap.,

Sir.

...Psalms (xv)
109. Proverbs... (xiii) no. Job, schol. (ix) III. Psalms (ix)
112.

Psalms, i:^/.(A.D.
961)

Vienna, Th. Gr. 26 Vienna, Th. Gr. 9 Milan, Ambr. P. 65 Milan, Ambr. F. 12
Milan, Ambr. B. 106

Klostermann,

p.

18

comni. 113. Psalms, (A.D. 967)
114. ..Psalms, comvi. 115. Psalms, comm. 122. ..Poetical Books (xv)
124.

Psalms, cant.

125. ..Proverbs {co7mn.

Chrys.)^ EccL, Cant., Sap. (xv) 131. ..Poetical Books,

Evora, Carthus. 2 Evora, Carthus. 3 Venice, St Mark's, Gr. 6 Vienna, Th. Gr. 21 Moscow, Syn. 30, Vlad. 3

Vienna, Th. Gr. 23
Milan, Ambr. D. 73 Milan, Ambr. M. 65 Milan, Ambr. A. 148
Basle, B. Turin, B.
10. 2)3
2.

&c. (?xii) 137. Job, cat. (xi
138.

xii)

Field,

ii.

p.

2,

and

Job
(x)

(x)

p. 5 Field, ii. p. 2

Auct.

139.
140.
141. 142.

Proverbs

—Job
(A.D.

Field,

ii.

p. 2

Psalms Psalms
1344)

42

143• Psalms, 144: = 131
145. 146.

Psalms, comm. prooem.
Psalms, cant,
(x)

Vienna, Th. Gr. 10 Vienna, Th. Gr. 19

Velletri, Borg. [Cod. Fr. Xavier] Job, cat. Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 147. Prov. ... (xiii) 30 149. Job, Prov., EccL, Vienna, Th. Gr. 7

Psalms

(x)

Klostermann,

p. 51

= 3o8*H.P.

SeeGeb-

Cant.,
(xi)

Sap.,

Vss.Sa\.^coj?i7n.

hardt. Die Psabnen Salomo's., p. 15

150.
151.
152.

Psalms Psalms Psalms

(?xiv)

{impeff.)
(xi)

Ferrara, Carmelit. 3 Venice, Bibl. Zen. (Cod. Nani)

A

Graeco- Latin MS.

6
154.

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.

Mamtscripts of the Septuagint.
{imperf.) cani. (xiii) cant. 178. Psalms, (A.D. 1059)
177.

i6i

Psalms

Paris, Nat. Gr. 27 Paris, Nat. Gr. 40

179.
180.

Psalms,
(xii)

catit.

Paris, Nat. Gr. 41
Paris, Nat. Gr. 42

Psalms,
(xii)

emit.

181. Psalms, cat.{yl\\) 182. Psalms, i"«;z/.(xi)
183.

Cod.DucisSaxo-Goth.

Psalms,
(xii)

cant.

Rome, Chigi Rome, Chigi

4
5

184. Psalms,

couim.
co7}ini.

Vienna, Th. Gr. 17 Vienna, Th. Gr. 18

(ix— x)
185. 186. 187.

Psalms,
(xi)

Psalms,
(xi)

coimn.
{i7nperf.)
{i7nperf.)

Vienna, Th. Gr. 13
St St

VszXms

V S3\rs\s

Germain 10 Germain 186

An

uncial MS. Lagarde's H(P«) {Speci-

men^
Psalms, cant.
190. Vs3\t[\s {imperf.) cant.

Often p. 3). agrees with 156
St St

Germain 13 Germain 187
Germain 188

An

uncial MS. Lagarde's YS"^"^) {Speci-

men,
191.

p. 3)

Psalms, cant.

St

192.

Psalms

(/?;z/6'^)

Paris, Nat. Gr. 13

cant, (xiii) cant. 193• Psalms,
(xii)

Paris, Nat. Gr. 21
Paris, Nat. Gr. 22
Paris, Nat. Gr. 23

194. 195.
196. 197.
199.

Psalms,
(xii)

cant.

Psalms,
(xii)

cant.
(inc.
ii.

Psalms
3),

Paris, Nat. Gr. 25 Paris, Nat. Gr. 29

cant, (xii)

Psalms,
(xiv)

cant.
(xi)

Psalms

200. Psalms, cajit.
201. Psalms, cant. 202. Psalms,
ca?it.,

Modena, Est. 37 Oxford, Bodl. Barocc.
15

Cf.

Nestle, gintastud.

Septnaiii.

p.

14

Oxford, Bodl. Barocc. 107 Oxford, Bodl. Cromw.

comm.
S. S.

no
II

102
203.

Manuscripts of

tJie

Septuagint.

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
249. Job, Sap.,
Sir.,

163
/.

Rome, Vat. Pius

i

Field,

c.

&c.
250. Job 251. Job,
(frt/..

(xiv) Munich, Elect. 148 Psalms Florence, Laur. v. 27

Field, I.e.

(xiv)

252. Job, Prov.,Eccl.,

Cant, (ix 253. Job, Prov.
xiv)

— x) —
(xi

Florence, Laur. viii. 27 Rome, Vat. Gr. 336

Field, I.e.;

cf.

p.

309

and Auct.

p. 2

Klostermann, p. 17 ff. Gebhardt, Die Psabncn Salomo's
p. 25
ff.

254. Job, Prov. (xiii)
255.

Job

(ix)

Rome, Vat. Rome, Vat.

Gr. 337 Gr. 338 Gr. 697 Gr. 743 Gr. 749 Gr. 230
Roj-al
vii.

Field,ii.p,2.

Kloster-

mann,
256. Job, schol. (xii) 257. Job, coDwi. (x) 258. Job,(:i7/.,/zV/.(ix)
259. Job, sehol. (x) 260. Job,
eat..,

p.

69

ff.

Rome, Vat. Rome, Vat. Rome, Vat.

Field,
Field, Field,

I.e.

I.e.

Kloster-

mann,

p.
e.

68
KlosterI I

Rome, Vat.

/.

mann,
Prov.

p.

Copenhagen,
Libr.

261. Job, Prov., Eccl.,

Florence, Laur.

30

Sap. (xiv)
263.

Psalms

Copenhagen,
Lib.

Royal
Cf.

264. Psalms, cat.
265. Psalms,
piet. (xiv)
cant..,

Rome, Vat. Rome,

Gr. 398

Field,

ii.

p.

84

f.,

and Auct.
Vat. Gr. 381 Gr. 2101
Gr. 294
Cf. Field,
ii.

p. 11

266.

Psalms
(xiii)

(imperf.)
cant.

Rome, Vat.
Rome, Vat.

267. Psalms,
(xiv)

268. Psalms,
eajit.

cofmn.,

Rome,

Vat. Gr. 2057
Gr. Pal.

p.

84

269. Psalms, then.

comin.
(a.d.

Rome, Vat.
44

A

897)
270.

Psalms,
(xii)

cant.

Rome,

Vat. Gr. 1864

271. Psalms,
(xi)

comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1747
(imperf.)

272.

Psalms

Rome,

Vat. Gr. 247
Vat., Reg. Gr.
Cf. Field,
ii.

cat. (xiii)

273. Psalms,

/. (xiv)

Rome,
40

p.

84
2

II

104
274.

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
Psalms
{ijnpe?'/.)

Rome,

Vat. Gr. 343 Gr. 1874

C07)ijn. (xiii)

275. Psalms,i-«;//.(xii)

Rome, Vat.

276:

=

221

277. Psalms, ca7it. (xii 278. Psalms
xiii)

Vienna, Th. Gr. 24
Florence, Laur.
Florence, Laur.
v.

23
35

279.

Psalms,
(xiii

—xiv)
(xi)
(xi)

cant.

v.

280. 281. 282.

Psalms Psalms Psalms 283. Psalms
284. Psalms,
(xiv)

(xv)
(xii)

ca7it.

Florence, Florence, Florence, Florence, Florence,

Laur. Laur. Laur. Laur. Laur.

v. 5
v.

18

v.
vi.

25

36
17

v.

285. Psalms,
(xiii)

cant.

Florence, Laur. Florence, Laur.

v.

34
30
14

286. Psalms,
(xii)

comvi.

v.

287.

Psalms {ufiperf.) Florence, Laur. comm. (xii)
coniin.

v.

288. Psalms,

Florence, Laur.
Florence, Laur.

xi. 5

That, (xii) conwi. 289. Psalms, Euth.-Zig.
(xiii)

ix.

2

290. Psalms, cant. xii) 291. Psalms (xi 292. Psalms, cat. (xi)

293• Psalms,

metr.

Florence, Florence, Florence, Florence,

Laur. Laur. Laur. Laur.

v.
vi.

39
3

v.

37

paraphr. (xv) 294. Psalms, Ixxi. 14,
-Ixxxi. 7,cxxvii.

Cambridge,

Emma-

Lagarde

calls

it

in

3

— cxxix.

nuel College

cxxxv. cxxxvi.
21 (?xiii)

1 1


I,

6,

cxxxvii. 4-cxli.

Genesis gj-aece, but N(P^) in the Specimen. Apparently a copy in a Western hand of an early cursive Psalter; see M. R. James in Proceedings of the

Ca nibridg e
qiia7-ian

An ti-

Society^
'

1892— 3,
1

p. i68iif.i

= G^P">;
MS.

Other Psalters used by Lagarde {Specimen, p. 3f.) are St Gall 17 (ix). Munich 251= Up"; a Bamberg Graeco-Latin MS. and a Cologne and respectively. closely related to it, which he calls

W


Majiuscripts of the Septnagint.
coinui. 295. Prov., Pi'ocop. (xiv)

65

Rome,

296.

Prov.

Sir. (xiii)

Vat. Ottob. Gr. 56 Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr.

297. Prov.,6i?/;/;;z.(xii) 298. Eccl.,<f(5';/z;;/.(xii) Comm. 299. Eccl.,

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1802 [Cod. Eugenii 3] Rome, Vat. Gr. 1694
[Cod. Eugenii 3]

Klostermann,

p.

29

f.

Gre^. Nyss.^aL
(xiii)

300. Cant.,
(xii)

cojnni.

302.

Prov....(ix)= 109

(D)
22.

Prophetical Books.

Prophets
xii;

(xi

London, B. M. Res
i.

B. 2

Field, ii. p. 428f. CornilPs I

24.

Isaiah, cat.

(xii)

26.

Prophets (?xi)

[Cod. Demetrii i.] Rome, Vat. Gr. 556

Hesychian
Ceriani)
:

fCornill,
cp. Klosp.

termann,
})'}).

10

f.

Dan..
(x)

Jer..

cat.

Rome,

Vat. Gr.

1

154

Originally

belonged to same codex as
Vat.
gr.
1

153

:

see

34.
35. 36.

Dan. Dan.

(xii)
(xii)

Prophets

(xiii)

Rome, Vat. Rome, Vat. Rome, Vat.

Gr. 803 Gr. 866 Gr. 347
iii.]

Klostermann, p. 1 1. Cp. notes on 97, 238 Klostermann, p. 11 n.
Lucianic
Cornill's

(Field).

40. 41.
42.

Dodecapropheton
(xii)

[Cod. Dorothei
[Cod. Demetrii [Cod. Demetrii

Isa., Jer. (ix

— x)
(xi

ii.]

Ezek., Dan.

iii.]

Lucianic (Field)

xii)

46. ..Isa., Jer.,

Bar.,

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr.

Lam.,
Ezek.,

Ep. Dan.,
Pro(xii)

4

Minor
48.

phets... (xiv)

Prophets

Rome,

\^at.

Gr. 1794

Lucianic (Field), Cornill's
77.

Kloster-

49.

Prophets

(xi)

Florence, Laur.

xi.

4

pp. 1 1, 14 Hesychius, Cornill's

mann,

;

1

66
51.

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.
Prophets
(xi)

Florence, Laur.

x.

8

Lucianic
Cornill's

(Field).

58... Prophets (xiii)

Rome,
10

\'at.

Reg. Gr.

On

62.

Prophets

(xiii)

Oxford,

New

Coll.

the text of Daniel inthisMS.seeKlostermann, p. 12 (Field). Lucianic Field, ii. p. 907
Burkitt,
p. cviii
;

Tyconius^ KlosterCornill's

mann,
68...Ezek.,Dodecapr.
(xv)
70... Prophets (x

p. 51

Venice, St Mark's, Gr.
5

Hesychian.

^
v.

xi)

Munich, Gr. 372 (formerly at Augsburg)

86.

Isa., Jer.,

Ezek., Dodecapr.(.?ix)
(.^

Rome, Barber,
Rome, Chigi

45

Field, ton,

ii.

p. 939.

Wal-

vi.

131

f.;

87.

Prophets

ix)

2

termann, Hesychian.
/3.

p.

Klos50

Cornill's

88.

Isa., Jer.,

Ezek.,

Rome, Chigi

3

relation of 87 to 91 and 96 see Faulhaber Die Prophete7i - catenen (Freiburg, 1899) 87 in Field (ii. p. 766).
p. xiii.).

For the

Dan. (LXX.)
(?xi)
89.

O.T. in Greek (iii. Cf. Klostermann, p. 31
;

Daniel
Dan.,

(xi)

= 239
Florence, Laur.
v.

90.

Isa., Jer., Ezek.,
cat. (xi)

9

Lucianic (Field)

in

Ezekiel, Hesychian Cornill ace. to
Cornill's

:

91.

Prophets,
(xi)

cat.

Rome, Vat.
452

Ottob. Gr.

Hesychian
Cornill's

(Cornill).

.

See

93... Isa. (xiv)

London, B. M. Reg.
i. D. 2 Vienna, Th. Gr. 163

note on 87 Lucianic (Field)

95.

Dodecaproph.,
co7nin.

Lucianic (Cornill)

Theod.

Mops.
96.
Isa., Jer., Ezek.,

Copenhagen

See note on See note on
"^i

Dan.
97.
1

Dodecapr.,
cat. (x)

Isa.,

Rome, Vat.

Gr. 1153

05,.. Fragments

Prophets,
(xiii

— xiv)

of &c.

London, B. M. Burney

Manuscripts of
io7...Isa., Jer.j Ezek.,

the Septuagint.

167

Ferrara, Gr. 187

Dan.,

Minor
to
(xv)
2

Prophets

Micah
109. 114.
. .

I saiahjiTrt/. = 302 Dodecaproph., Erora, Carthus.

CO mm.

Theod.

Mops...
122. ..Prophets (xv)
1 3 1... Prophets (.''xii) 147. ..Dan, (imperf.),

148.
153.

Dodecaproph. Daniel (xii) Prophets (exc.
Zech.),
(x)

Venice, St Mark's, Gr. 6 Vienna, Th. Gr. 23 Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 30 Rome, Vat. Gr. 2025 Rome, Vat. Gr. 273

Lucianic
p.

(cf.

Field,

ii.

907)

Lucianic (Cornill)

comm.
Vienna, Th. Gr. 18
Paris, Nat. Gr. 14

1

85... Dodecaproph.
(xi)

Lucianic (Cornill)

198.

Prophets
perf.) (ix)

(im-

=Ev.
but

33.

Burkitt,
p. cviii

Tyconius^

228... Prophets (xiii)

Rome,

Vat. Gr. 1764

Hesychian
cf.

(Cornill,

Kloster-

mann,
nill's

p. I3f.

Cor-

229. ]^x.^Ozxi.^co7nm.
(xiv)

Rome,

)

Vat. Gr. 673
Gr. 1641 Gr. 1670

230. Daniel (xiii) 231. Jer. with Baruch

Rome, Vat. Rome, Vat,

From

&c.

(xi)

232. Daniel (xii) 233. Prophets (xiii) 234. Susanna 235. Susanna 238. Ezekiel, i:<2/. (x)

Rome,

Vat. Gr, 2000

A

Grotta Ferrata. Lucianic,Corniirs t. Cp. Klostermann, p. 14 Basilian MS., cp.

Klostermann,

p. 15

Rome, Vat. Gr. 2067 Moscow, Syn. 341 Rome, Vat. Gr. 2048 Rome, Vat. Gr. 153
1

Lucianic (Field)

Hesychian
Cornill's

(Cornill).
5".

See

notes on 33, 97
239. Prophets
(A.D.
cat.

1046)

= 89
Florence, Laur.
vi,

240. Dodecapr.,
(A.D. 1286)

22

301. Isaiah (ix) 302,..Isaiah,i:a/.(xiii)

Vienna, Th. Gr. 158

= 109

1

68

Manuscripts of the Septuagint.
covim.
i.

303. Isaiah, Cyril.

Vienna, Th. Gr. 100
Florence, Laur.
iv. 2

30^. Isaiah

— xxv.
Basil.

comtn.
(xi)

305. Isaiah (imperf.),
cat.

Copenhagen, Reg.

Paris, Nat. Gr. 16 306. Isa., Ezek. (xi) comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 430 307. Isaiah, Basil, (xi) comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1509 308. Isaiah, a?id Basil.

Lucianic (Field)

Thdt.
309.

(xiii)

Isaiah, cat. (x)

Rome, Vat.

Gr. 755

Cf.
II

Klostermann,

p.

310. Dodecapr.,Jir//i?/.
(xi)

Moscow, Syn. 209

3 II... Prophets (xi)

=
Jerusalem, H. Sepulchre 2

234
...Prophets
(ix,

med.)

III.

Lectionaries.

From

the

second century the Greek-speaking Churches,
in their public assemblies.

following the example of the Hellenistic Synagogue, read the

Greek Old Testament
Justin, .^^i?/.
Cofist.

consecutively for ecclesiastical use.

€, , .
.
i.

67

.

'? \ ...
57
/^fO"oy

Ibid.

viii. 5

^'""

"^

ChryS. in

Rom.

xxiv. 3

eiVe TLS

^. € , \ € €,
'
tlvos

€€.

At a

later

time the

or

were copied

The

lectionaries or frag-

ments of lectionaries which survive, although frequently written in large and showy uncials', are rarely earlier than the tenth or
eleventh century
;

but a thorough investigation of their coninterest,

tents would doubtless be of

not only from a liturgical

^ Specimens are given by H. Omont, Facsimiles des plus anciens Jl/SS. xxii. Grecs (Paris, 1892), nos. xx.

;

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint.
point of view, but for the light which
it

169

would throw on the
Little has

ecclesiastical distribution of various types of text.

been done as yet in
it is,

this direction,

and our information, such

as

relates chiefly to the
A^.

N.T.
fin.
;

vol. i. Neale, Hoty Eastern Burgon, Last twelve verses of St Mark, p. 191 ff.; Scudamore, art. Lectionary, D. C. A. ii. Nitzsch, art. Leetioiiarium, Herzog-Plitt, viii. Gregory, pro legg. i. p. 161 ff., 687 ff. Scrivener- Miller, i. p. 74 ff E. Nestle, Urtext,

See Matthaei, Ckurch, General

T. Gr., ad

Intr., p.

369

ff.;

;

;

;

p. 76.

The following list of MSS.^ containing lections from the Old Testament has been drawn up from materials previously
supplied by

Dr

E. Nestle.

It will

be seen that with few excep-

which are bound up with N.T. lections and have been catalogued under the head of N.T.
tions they are limited to those
lectionaries by

Dr

C. F. Gregory
i.

and Scrivener-Miller.
vii)

Gr. p. Gr. p. (xi) Gr. p. (xiii) Gr. p. Burdett-Coutts, iii. 42 (xiv) Gr. p. „ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 44 (xv) Gr. p. „ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 46 (xiii) Gr. p. „ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 53 (xv) Gr. p. „ Oxford, Christ Church, Wake 14 (xii) Gr. p. Christ Church, Wake 1 5 (a.d. 1068) Gr. p. „ Cambridge, Univ. Libr. Add. 1879 (? ^') (Gen.
i

London, Sion College, Arc. B. M. Add. 1 1841 B. M. Add. 18212 „ B. M. Add. 22744 „

(vi

or

(? xi)

720 (234, Scr. 227) 783 (79, Scr. 75) 715 (191, Scr. 263)

19

730 (315, 749 (476, 734 (84) 719 (226, 717 (207, 717(208, xi. 4 9,

731 (324, Scr. 272) Scr. 253) Scr. 290)
Scr. 249)
Scr. 214)

Scr. 215)

Prov.
:

xiii.

xiv. 6,

Sir. xxxvii.

13— XXX viii.

6)

a frag-

ment purchased from
the executors of Tisch„

Christ's College, F.
(xii)

i.

8 (xi)

Gr.

Ashburnham, 205

Paris, Nat. Gr. 308 (xiii) Nat. Gr. 243 (a.d. „

= 59 Gr. p. 720(237, Scr. 237-8) Gr. p. 779 (24)
133)

endorf p. 714 (185, Scr. 222)

Z% WH.

Omont.MSS.
no. xlvi.

Grecs dates^

^

A

few lectionaries have already been mentioned among the H.P.

MSS.

(37. 61, 132).

170

Mamiscripts of the

Septiiagiftt.

Paris, Nat. suppl. Gr. 32 (xiii)

CHAPTER

VI.

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
The
printed texts of the Septuagint
fall

naturally into two
to exhibit

classes, viz. (i) those

which contain or were intended

the whole of the Greek
limited to a single

Old Testament;

(2) those

which are

book
I.

or to a group of books.

Complete Editions.
is

I.

The

first

printed text of the whole Septuagint
in the

that

which forms the third column
great Complutensian Polyglott.
at Alcalk {Coniplutuni) in

Old Testament of the

This great Bible was printed

Spain under the auspices of Francisco

Ximenes de Cisneros, Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo. Ximenes, in addition to his ecclesiastical offices, was Regent of Castile, began this undertaking in 1502 in honour of the birth of Charles V. (1500 1558), and lived to see the whole of the He died Nov. 8, 15 17, and the sheets pass through the press. fourth volume, which completes the Old Testament and was
who,

the last to be printed, bears the date July 10, 15 17.

But the

more than four years the papal sanction attached to the N.T. volume is dated May 22, 1520, and the copy which was intended for the Pope seems not to have found its way into the Vatican Library until Dec. 5, 1 52 1. The title of the complete work (6 vols, folio)
publication of the Polyglott was delayed for
:

is

as follows:

"Biblia sacra Polyglotta complectentia V.T.

"

172

Printed Texts of the

Septiiagiiit.

Hebraico Graeco et Latino idiomate, N.T. Graecum et Latinum, et vocabularium Hebraicum et Chaldaicum V.T. cum grammatica Hebraica necnon Dictionario Graeco. Studio opera et impensis Cardinalis Fr. Ximenes de Cisneros. Industria Arnoldi Gulielmi de Brocario artis impressorie magistri.

i5i4[— 15,— 17]." The O.T. volumes of the Complutensian Bible contain in three columns (i) the Hebrew text with the Targum of Onkelos,
Compluti,
(2) the Latin Vulgate, (3) the Septuagint, with

an interlinear

Latin version

— an

order which

is

explained by the editors as

intended to give the place of honour to the authorised version
of the Western Church \

The

prejudice which their wprds

reveal does not augur well for the character of the

tensian Lxx.

Nevertheless

we have

the assurance of

was taken in the selection of on which his texts were based". Of his own MSS. few remain, and among those which are preserved at Madrid there are
that the greatest care

CompluXimenes the MSS.

only two which contain portions of the Greek Old Testament

Mace, and a Psalter). But he speaks of Greek (Judges MSS. of both Testaments which had been sent to him by the Pope from the Vatican Library^, and it has been shewn that at least two MSS. now in that Library (cod. Vat. gr. 330 = H.P. 108, and cod. Vat. gr. 346 = H.P. 248) were used in the construction

of the

Complutensian

text of the

lxx.''

There

is

^ Their words are: "mediam autem inter has Latinam B. Hieronymi translationem velut inter Synagogam et orientalem ecclesiam posuimus, tanquam duos hinc et inde latrones, medium autem lesum, hoc est Romanam sive Latinam ecclesiam, collocantes. ^ In the dedication to Leo X. he says: "testari possunius...maximi laboris nostri partum in eo praecipue fuisse versatum ut...castigatissima omni ex parte vetustissimaque exemplaria pro archetypis haberemus." ^ " Ex ista apostolica bibliotheca antiquissimos turn V. turn N. Testamenti codices perquam humane ad nos misisti." * Var. lectt. ii. p. See Vercellone, in V. ei N.T. ed. Mai, i. p. v. n. 436; Dissertaziotii Accademicke, 1864, p. 407 ff.; Tregelles, An account of the printed text of the Greek N.T. (London, 1854), p. 2 ff. Delitzsch, Studien ztir Entstehungsgeschichte der Polyglotten Bibcl des Cardinals Ximenes
; ;

:

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
reason to suppose that a Venice

173
5

was also employed

;

a copy of this

MS. MS.

(S.
still

Marc.

^ H.P. 68)
Madrid.
\vere

exists at

The
and

editors

of

the

Complutensian

Polygott

the

Spaniard Antonio de Nebrija, Professor of Rhetoric at Alcala,
his pupil

Ferdinando Nunez de Guzman (Pincianus)
;

I.opez de Zuniga (Stunica)

Philosophy

at Alcala

;

Diego Juan de Vergara, Professor of a Greek from Crete, by name Demetrius;
;

and three converts from Judaism, to whom the Hebrew text and the Targum were entrusted. The editing of the Greek Lxx. text seems to have been left chiefly in the hands of Pincianus, Stunica and Demetrius.

The Complutensian text is followed on the vhole in the Septuagint columns of the four great Polyglotts edited by Arias Montanus, Antwerp, 1569 72 Vatablus, Geneva, 1586 7, 1599, 1616 D. Wolder, Hamburg, 1596 Michael Le Jay, Paris, 1645.

;

;

;

2.

In February \^\%, after the printing of the Compluits

tensian Polyglott but before

publication, Andreas Asolanus\

father-in-law of the elder Aldus, issued from the Aldine press

a complete edition of the Greek Bible bearing the

1^\
veas.

/xeva

.,

^^

title

:

.

re

Sacrae scripturae veteris novaeque omnia.

Colophon:

Venetiis in aedib[us] Aldi et Andreae soceri.

mdxviii.,

mense

Februario.

Like Ximenes, Andreas made
best

it

his business to

examine the

MSS.

within his reach.

In the dedication he writes

"ego multis

vetustissimis exemplaribus collatis biblia (ut vulgo

appellant) graece cuncta descripsi."

His words, however, do

not suggest an extended search for MSS., such as was instituted

by the Spanish Cardinal and it is probable enough that he was content to use Bessarion's collection of codices, which is
;

still

preserved in St Mark's Library at Venice ^

Traces have

(Leipzig, 1871); Lagarde, Libr. V. T. can. i., p. iii. ; E. l^Q?,Ue, Septuagintastudien, i. pp. 2, 13 ; E. Klostermann, Analccta, p. 15 f. ^ On the orthography see Nestle, Septuagintastudien,\\., p. 11, note b. - Cf. Lagarde, Genesis graece, p. 6; Cornill, Ezechiel, p. 79; Nestle,
,

174

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
ii

been found in his text of three at least of those MSS. (cod. H.P. 29; cod. iii = H.P. 121; cod. v = H.P. 68).

=

The Aldine text of the LXX. was followed on the whole in (2).? with the editions of (i) Joh. Lonicerus, Strassburg, 1526 8 a preface by PhiHp Melanchthon, Basle, 1545 (3) H. Guntius, Basle, 1550, 1582 (4) Draconites, in Biblia Pcntapla^ Wittenburg 1562 5; (5) Francis du Jon (Fr. Junius) or(?)Fr. Sylburg, Frankfort, 1597 (6) Nic. Glycas, Venice, 1687.

;

;

;

;

In 1587 a third great edition of the Greek Old Testa3. ment was published at Rome under the auspices of Sixtus V. It bears the title: {editio Sixiina^ Romano).
T0Y2
|

VETVS TESTAMENTVM IVXTA SEPTVAGINTA EDITVM ROMAE MAX. AVCTORITATE SIXTI V. M.D.LXXXVl(l) CVxM TYPOGRAPHIA FRANCISCI PRIVILEGIO GEORGIO FERRARIO CONCESSO. The volume consists of 783 pages of text, followed by two of addenda and corrigenda, and preceded by three (unnumbered) leaves which contain (i) a dedicatory letter addressed to Sixtus V. by Cardinal Antonio Carafa, (2) a preface to the These reader^ and (3) the papal authorisation of the book.
| | | | |
|

2 .

.

|

20 '

|

^

|

documents are so important for the history of the printed that they must be given in full.

text

SixTO QuiNTO PoNTiF. MAX. Antonius Carafa (i) Cardinalis sanctae sedis apostolicae Bibliothecarius

Annus agitur iam fere octavus ex quo Sanctitas vestra pro singulari suo de sacris litteris benemerendi studio auctor fuit beatae memoriae Gregorio XIII. Pont. Max. ut sacrosancta Sep-

On the source of the Psalms in this edition see Nestle, Urtext, p. ,. Septuagintastiidien, iii., p. 32. 1 The second i has been added in many copies with the pen. The impression was worked off in 1586, but the M'ork \V2S not published until May
2

1587.

Orsini.

La

sait qu'elle fut redigee par Fulvio Elle est d'ailleurs tres inferieure a la lettre de Carafa." (P. Batiffol, Vaiicane de Paul III. a Paul F., p. 89).

"Elle n'est point signee, mais on

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.

175

tuaginta Interpretum Biblia, quibus Ecclesia turn Graeca turn Latina iam inde ab Apostolorum temporibus usa est, ad fidem probatissimorum codicum emendarentur. Quod enim Sanctitas V. pro accurata sua in perlegendis divinis scripturis diligentia animadvertisset, infinitos pene locos ex iis non eodem modo ab antiquis sacris scriptoribus afferri quo in vulgatis Bibliorum Graecis editionibus circumferrentur, existimassetque non aliunde

eamlectionumvarietatem quam
interpretatione
fluxisse;

e multiplici

eaque confusaveterum

rectissime censuit ad optimae notae exemplaria provocandum esse, ex quibus, quoad fieri posset, ea quae vera et sincera esset Septuaginta Interpretum scriptura eliceretur. Ex quo fit ut vestram non' solum pietatem sed etiam cum videam S. V. de Graecis sapientiam magnopere admirer Bibliis expoliendis idem multos post annos in mentem venisse quod sanctos illos Patres Tridenti congregatos auctoritate ac reverentia ductos verae ac purae Septuaginta interpretationis olim cogitasse cognovi ex actis eius Concilii nondum pervulgatis. Huius autem expolitionis constituendae munus cum mihi demandatum esset a Gregorio XIII., cuius cogitationes eo maxima spectabant ut Christiana Religio quam latissime propagaretur, operam dedi ut in celebrioribus Italiae bibliothecis optima quaeque exemplaria perquirerentur atque ex iis lectionum varietates descriptae ad me mitterentur^. Ouibus sane doctorum hominum quos ad id delegeram industria et iudicio clarae memoriae Gulielmi Cardinalis Sirleti (quem propter excellentem doctrinam et multiplicem linguarum peritiam in locis obscurioribus
;

mihi consulendum proposueram) persaepe examinatis et cum vestro Vaticanae bibliothecae (cui me benignitas vestra nuper intelleximus cum ex ipsa praefecit) exemplari diligenter collatis collatione tum e sacrorum veterum scriptorum consensione, Vaticanum codicem non solum vetustate verum etiam bonitate quodque caput est, ad ipsam quam quaerecaeteris anteire bamus Septuaginta interpretationem, si non toto libro, maiori certe ex parte, quam proxime accedere. Quod mihi cum multis aliis argumentis constaret, vel ipso etiam libri titulo, qui est curavi do consilio et sententia eorum quos supra Toiis nominavi, huius libri editionem ad Vaticanum exemplar emendandam vel potius exemplar ipsum, quod eius valde probaretur auctoritas, de verbo ad verbum repraesentandum, accurate prius sicubi opus fuit recognitum et notationibus etiam auctum. Factum est autem providentia sane divina, ut quod Sanctitate vestra suadente sui Cardinalatus tempore inchoatum est, id varus de causis aliquoties intermissum per ipsa fere initia Pontificatus sui
; ;

€8,
;

1 On the genesis of the Sixtine edition the curious reader may consult Nestle, Septiiagintashidien, i., ii., where the particulars are collected with the utmost care and fulness.

; :

176
fuerit

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.

absolutum; scilicet ut hoc praeclarum opus, vestro Sanctissimo nomini dicatum, quasi monumentum quoddam perpetuum esset futurum apud omnes bonos et vestrae erga Rempublicam Christianam voluntatis et meae erga Sanctitatem vestram observantiae.

(2)

Praefatio ad Lectorem

Qui sunt

in sacrosanctis scripturis accuratius versati, fatentur
aliis

omnes Graecam Septuaginta Interpretum editionem longe

omnibus quibus Graeci usi sunt et antiquiorem esse et probatiorem. Constat enim eos Interpretes, natione quidem ludaeos, doctos vero Graece, trecentis uno plus annis ante Christi adventum, cum in Aegypto regnaret Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, Spiritu sancto
plenos sacra Biblia interpretatos esse, eamque interpretationem a primis Ecclesiae nascentis temporibus turn publice in Ecclesiis ad legendum propositam fuisse, turn privatim receptam et explanatam ab Ecclesiasticis scriptoribus qui vixerunt ante B. Hieronymum, Latinae vulgatae editionis auctorem. Nam Aquila quidem Sinopensis, qui secundus post Septuaginta eosdem libros ex Hebraeo in Graecum convertit et multo post tempore sub Hadriano principe floruit, et eius interpretatio, (quod ea quae de Christo in scripturis praedicta fuerant, ut a ludaeis gratiam iniret aliter quam Septuaginta vertendo, subdola obscuritate involverit) iamdiu est cum a recte sentientibus, licet in hexaplis haberetur, Hunc vero qui subsequuti sunt, aliquibus locis non est probata. Symmachus et Theodotio, alter Samaritanus sub L. Vero, alter Ephesius sub Imp. Commodo, uterque (quamvis et ipsi in hexaplis circumferrentur) parum fidus interpres habitus est Symmachus, quod Samaritanis offensus, ut placeret ludaeis, non unum sanctae scripturae locum perturbato sensu corruperit Theodotio, quod Marcionis haeretici sectator nonnullis locis Fuerunt perverterit potius quam converterit sacros libros. praeter has apud Graecos aliae duae editiones incertae auctoaltera Antonio Caracalla Imp. apud Hierichuntem, altera ritatis apud Nicopolim sub Alexandro Severo in dolus repertae. quae
:

quod in octaplis inter Graecas editiones quintum et sextum locum jobtinerent, quintae et sextae editionis nomen retinuerunt. Sed nee hae satis fidae interpretationes habitae sunt. His additur alia quaedam editio sancti Luciani martyris, qui vixit sub Diocletiano et Maximiano Impp., valde ilia quidem probata, sed quae cum Septuaginta Interpretibus comparari
nullo tibus

Psalmorum

(^ ^^ ,
modo
et
:

possit, vel ipsis etiam Graecis scriptoribus testanNiceta confirmante his plane verbis in commentario

]\^

hk

'4^

^, ^

€. €<.
biakiKTov
;

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
iv

177

evvoLav

\

Xe^Lv

Adeo Septuaginta Interpretum editio magni nominis apud omnes fuit nimirum quae instinctu quodam divinitatis elaboSed haec etiam rata bono generis humani prodierit in lucem. ita primum ab Origene collocata in hexaplis ipsa, quod
fuerit ut eius e regione aliae editiones

quo

commodius possent ad legendum propositae
vero varietates tantum ex

iis ad illam sub notari essent coeptae, factum est ut vetustate notis obliteratis quippe insincera nimis et valde sui dissimilis ad nos pervenerit quae insertis ubique aliorum interpretationibus, aliquibus autem locis duplici atque etiam tnplici eiusdem sententiae interpretatione intrusa, male praeterea a librariis accepta, suum ob id nitorem integritatemque amiserit. Hinc illae lectionum penitus inter se dissidentes varietates et, quod doctissimorum hominum ingenia mentesque diu torsit, ipsae exemplarium non solum inter Quod malum se sed a veteribus etiam scriptoribus dissensiones. primo a multis ignoratum, ab aliis postea neglectum, quotidie longius serpens, principem librum, et a quo tota lex divina et Christiana pendent instituta, non levibus maculis inquinavit. Quo nomine dici non potest quantum omnes boni debeant Sixto V. Pont. Max. Is enim quod in sacris litteris, unde sanctissimam hausit doctrinam, aetatem fere totam contriverit, quodque in hoc libro cum veterum scriptis conferendo singularem quandam diligentiam adhibuerit, vidit primus qua ratione huic malo medendum esset nee vidit solum, sed auctoritate etiam sua effecit ut summus Pontifex Gregorius XIII. Graeca Septuaginta Interpretum Biblia, adhibita diligenti castigatione, in pristinum splendorem restituenda curaret. Ouam rem exequendam cum ille demandasset Antonio Carafae Cardinali, viro veteris sanctitatis et omnium honestarum artium cultori, nulla is interposita mora delectum habuit doctissimorum hominum
: ;

inter se comparari essent, deinde obelis et asteriscis

qui

domi suae statis diebus exemplaria manuscripta, quae permulta undique conquisierat, conferrent et ex iis optimas quasque lectiones elicerent quibus deinde cum codice V^aticanae bibliothecae saepe ac diligenter comparatis intellectum est, eum codicem omnium qui extant longe optimum esse, ac operae pretium fore si ad eius fidem nova haec editio para;

retur.

Sed emendationis consilio iam explicato, ipsa quoque ratio quae in emendando adhibita est nunc erit aperienda, in primisque Vaticanus hber describendus, ad cuius praescriptum haec editio expolita est. Codex is, quantum ex forma characterum coniici potest, cum sit maioribus litteris quas vere antiquas vocant exaratus, ante millesimum ducentesimum annum, hoc est ante tempora B. Hieronymi et non infra, scriptus videtur. Ex
S.

S.

12

178

Printed Texts of the Septuagini.

libris qui in manibus fuerunt unus hie prae aliis, quia ex edilione Septuaginta si non toto libro certe maiorem partem constare visus est, mirum in modum institutam emendationem adiuvit; post eum vero alii duo qui ad eius vetustatem proximi quidem sed longo proximi intervallo accedunt, unus Venetus ex bibliotheca Bessarionis Cardinalis, et is quoque grandioribus litteris scriptus alter qui ex Magna Graecia advectus nunc est Carafae Cardinalis qui liber cum Vatican© codice ita in omnibus consentit ut credi possit ex eodem archetypo descriptus esse. Praeter hos magno etiam usui fuerunt libri ex Medicea bibliotheca Florentiae collati, qui Vaticanas lectiones multis locis aut confirmarunt aut illustrarunt. Sed libri Vaticani bonitas non tarn ex horum codicum miro consensu perspecta est, quam ex iis locis qui parcim adducuntur partim explicantur ab antiquis sacris scriptoribus qui fere nusquam huius exemplaris lectiones non exhibent ac reponunt, nisi ubi aliorum Interpretum locum aliquem afferunt, non Septuaginta. quorum editio cum esset nova emendatione perpolienda, recte ad huius libri normam, qui longe omnium antiquissimus, solus iuxta Septuaginta inscribitur, perpolita est vel potius rectissime liber ipse ad litteram, quoad fieri potuit per antiquam orthographiam aut per librarii lapsus, est expressus. Nam vetus ilia et iam obsoleta eius aetatis scriptura aliquibus locis repraesentata non est; cum tamen in aliis omnibus, nisi ubi manifestus apparebat librarii lapsus, ne latum quidem unguem, ut aiunt, ab huius libri auctoritate discessum sit, ne in iis quidem quae si minus mendo, certe suspicione mendi videbantur non carere. satius enim visum est locos vel aliquo modo suspectos (nee enim fieri potest ut in quantumvis expurgato exemplari non aliqua supersit macula) quemadmodum habentur in archetypo relinqui quam eos ex alicuius ingenio aut coniectura emendari quod multa quae primo vel mendosa vel mutilata in hoc codice videbantur, ea postea cum aliis libris collata vera et sincera reperirentur. Nam in libris Prophetarum, qui maxime in hoc exemplari (uno excepto Daniele) puram Septuaginta editionem resipiunt, mirum quam multa non habeantur quae tamen recte abesse et eorum Interpretum non esse, intellectum est tum ex commentariis veterum scriptorum Graecis et Latinis, tum ex libris manuscriptis in quibus ilia addita sunt sub aste-

omnibus autem

;

:

;

;

:

;

riscis.

Atque haec ratio in notationibus quoque servata est, in quibus cum multa sint ex commentariis Graecis petita quae in codicibus manuscriptis partim mutilata partim varie scripta aliquibus locis circumferuntur, ea non aliter atque in archetypis exemplaribus reperiuntur descripta sunt, quo uniuscuiusque arbitratu adiuvantibus libris restitui possint. Nee vero illud omittendum, quod item pertinet ad notationes non omnia
;

2

;

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
in

179

lis repraesentata esse quae aut ad confirmandas lectiones Vaticanas e scriptoribus vulgatis, aut ad explenda quae in Septuaginta non habentur, ex aliorum editionibus afferri potuissent, quod in communibus libris cum legantur, inde sibi unusquisque Quae vero in libris manuscriptis nullo negotio ea parare possit. reperta, vel ad indicandas antiquarum turn lectionum turn interpretationum varietates (sub scholii illas nomine, quod ipsarum incerta esset auctoritas, nonnunquam relatas) vel ad stabiliendam scripturam Vaticanam et eius obscuriores locos illustrandos pertinere visa sunt, ea certe non sunt praetermissa. Ordo autem librorum in Vaticano exemplari cum idem fere sit cum eo qui apud Graecos circumfertur, a vulgatis tamen editionibus variat in hoc quod primo habet duodecim deinde reliquos quatPropbetas et hos ipsos aliter dispositos tuor, quemadraodum vulgo editi sunt. Atque hunc ordinem verum esse intelligimus ex eo quod ilium agnoscunt et probant veteres Ecclesiastici scriptores. Et cum toto exemplari nulla capitum divisio sit, (nam in nova editione consultum est legentium commoditati) in libro tamen quattuor Proplietarum distinctio quaedam apparet subobscura, illi paene similis quam describit sanctus Dorotheus martyr, qui vixit sub Magno Con;

stantino.

absunt ab hoc exemplari, atque item longo aevo consumptis membranis mutilatus est ab initio libri usque ad caput XLVII. et liber item Psalmorum, qui a Psalmo CV. usque ad CXXXVIII. nimia vetustate mancus est. Sed haec ex aliorum codicum collatione
libri

Maccabaeorum

liber Genesis fere totus

;

nam

emendata

sunt.
si

aliqua videbuntur in hac editione, ut ait B. Hieronymus, vel lacerata vel inversa, quod ea sub obelis et asteriscis ab Origene suppleta et distincta non sint vel obscura et perturbata, quod cum Latina vulgata non consentiant, et in aliquibus aliis editionibus apertius et expressius habeantur; eris lector admonendus, non eo spectasse huius expolitionis industriam ut haec editio ex permixtis eorum qui supra nominati
;

Quod

sunt interpretationibus (instar eius quam scribit B. Hieronymus a Graecis kocvtjv, a nostris appellatam Communem) concinnata, Latinae vulgatae editioni, hoc est Hebraeo, ad verbum respondeat sed ut ad eam quam Septuaginta Interpretes Spiritus sancti auctoritatem sequuti ediderunt, quantum per veteres libros fieri potest, quam proxime accedat. Quam nunc novis emendationibus illustratam et aliorum Interpretum reliquiis quae supersuntauctam, non parum profuturam ad Latinae vulgatae intelligentiam, dubitabit nemo qui banc cum ilia accurate comparaverit. Quae si doctis viris et pie sentientibus, ut aecjuum est, probabuntur, reliquum erit ut Sixto V. Pont. Max. huius boni auctori gratias agant, et ab omnipotenti Deo publicis votis poscant,
12

1

80

r lilted Texts of the Septuagint,

optimum Principem nobis florentem quam diutissime servet. qui cum omnes curas cogitationesque suas in amplificandam ornandamque Ecclesiae dignitatem contuleiit, dubitandum non
Rep. Christiana optimis legibus et sanctissimis institutis reformata, religione ac pietate, revocatis antiquis ritibus, in suum splendorem restituta, in hoc quoque publicam causam sit adiuturus ut sacri veteres libri, hominum incuria vel improbitate corrupti, pro sua eximia benignitate ab omni labe vindicati, quam emendatissimi pervulgentur.
per
est quin

eum

(3)

SixTUS Papa V.
Cupientes,

Ad perpetuam
est,

rei

memoriam.

quantum

in

nobis

commissi nobis gregis saluti quacunque ratione ac via prospicere, ad pastoralem nostram curam pertinere vehementer arbitramur Sacrae Scripturae libros, quibus salutaris doctrina continetur, ab omnibus maculis expurgatos integros purosque pervulgari. Id nos in inferiori gradu constituti, quantum potuimus, studio et diligentia nostra praestitimus, et in hac altissima specula a Deo collocati assidue mentis nostrae oculis spectare non desistimus. Cum itaque superioribus annis piae recordationis Gregorius

Papa XIII. praedecessor noster, nobis suggeGraecum Vetus Testamentum iuxta Septuaginta Interpretum editionem, qua ipsi etiam Apostoli nonnunquam usi
rentibus,

ad emendatissimorum codicum fidem expoliendum mandaverit; eius rei cura dilecto filio nostro Antonio Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Presb^'tero Cardinal! Carafae, et ad id per eum delectis eruditis aliquot viris demandata, et iam expolitio huiusmodi, permultis exemplaribus ex diversis Italiae bibliothecis et praecipue ex nostra Vaticana diligenter coUatis matureque examinatis, absoluta sit \^olumus et sancimus ad Dei gloriam et Ecclesiae utilitatem, ut Vetus Graecum Testamentum iuxta Septuaginta ita recognitum et expolitum ab omnibus recipiatur ac retineatur, quo potissimum ad Latinae vulgatae editionis et veterum Sanctorum Patrum intelligentiam utantur. Prohibentes ne quis de hac nova Graeca editione audeat in posterum vel Si quis autem addendo vel demendo quicquam immutare. aliter fecerit quam hac nostra sanctione comprehensum est, noverit se m Dei Omnipotentis beatorumque Apostolorum Petri et Pauli indignationem incursurum. Datum Romae apud Sanctum Marcum sub Anulo Piscatoris. Die viii Octobris M.D.LXXXVI, Pontificatus nostri anno secundo.
fuerunt,
:

Tho. T/io/n. Giialterutius.

The

reader will not

fail

to

note the intelligent appreciation

of the Lxx., and the wide outlook over the history of the Greek

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
versions which are implied by these documents ^
that

i8i

They shew

had already learnt the true value of the Alexandrian Old Testament and, as a consequence, had resolved to place in the hands of the scholars of Europe as pure a text as could be obtained of the version which was used by
the Vatican

the ancient Church,

and was now

felt

to

be essential

to a right

understanding of the Fathers and of the Latin Vulgate.
inception of the work was due to

Pope

Sixtus himself,
in

The who

had suggested

it

to his predecessor

Gregory XIII.

1578;

but the execution was entrusted to Cardinal Antonio Carafa

and a

little

Antonio

Agelli,

band of Roman scholars including Cardinal Sirleto, and Petrus Morinus. Search was made in the

libraries of Italy as well as in the \^atican for

MSS.

of the lxx.,

but the result of these enquiries satisfied the editors of the

Codex (B = cod. \^at. gr. 1209) known codices, and it was accordingly taken as the basis of the new edition. Use was made, however, of other MSS., among which were a Venice MS. which has been identified with S. Marc. cod. gr. 1 (H. P. 23, Lag. V); a MS. belongsuperiority of the great Vatican

over

all

other

ing to Carafa, possibly cod. \^at.

gr.

1252 (H. P. 63

-i-

129,

cf.

Klostermann,
1889),
still

p.

12

f.,

and

Batiffol, Bulletin critique^

15

Mars

and certain Laurentian MSS. of which
Batiffol,

collations are

preserved in the Vatican Library (Vat.

gr.

124 1, 1242,
these

1244; see

La

Vaticane, p.

90

f.).

From

and

other sources the editors supplied the large lacunae of Cod. B".

But they did not limit themselves to the

filling

up of gaps or

from a comparison of the Sixtine text with the photographic represenof
errors,

even to the correction
of the Vatican

as

will

appear
1587

tation

MS.
it is

The

edition of

is

not an

exact reproduction of a single codex, even where the selected

MS. was
^

available

;

but

based as a whole on a great uncial
text,
i.

Cf. Tregelles,

An

accotint

of the printed

ore, p. 185.
p. 9,
i.

-

I

According

to Nestle {Scptitagintastiidien,
vi.

xlvi.

28 are supplied from cod. Chis. R.

ii. p. 12) Genesis 38 (H. P. 19, Lag. h).

:

82
MS., and
character.

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
it is

the

first

edition of the lxx. which possesses this

Moreover, criticism has confirmed the judgement
editors in regard to the selection of their basal

of the

Roman
It is

MS.

a fortunate circumstance that the authority of the

Vatican was given before the end of the sixteenth century to a
text of the lxx.

which

is

approximately pure.
edition contained considerable

Besides the text the

Roman

materials for the criticism of the Greek

Old Testament, collected

by the labours of Morinus, Agelli, and others. These include readings and scholia from MSS. of the lxx., renderings from
Aquila and the other non-Septuagintal Greek versions, and
a large assortment of patristic citations.
Editions based upon the Sixtine are very numerous. The following list is abridged from Nestle's Urtext (p. 65 ff.) I. 2. R. Daniel, London, Jo. Morinus, Paris, 1628, 1641. 4to and 8vo, 1653 Cambridge, 1653. B. Walton, London, 3. 1657 (the third column of his Polyglott). 4. Cambridge, 1665 (with the pj'ciefatio paraciietica of J. Pearson^, Lady >Iargaret Professor of Divinity, afterwards Bp of Chester). 5. J. Leusden, Leipzig, 1697 (with prolegomena by Amsterdam, 1683. 6. D. Mill, Amsterdam, 8. L. Bos, Frankfort, 1709. 7. J. Frick). 10. Halle, 1759 62 C. Reineccius, Leipzig, 1730. 9. 1725. 11. Holmes and Parsons, ^with a preface by J. G. Kirchner). Oxford, 1798 12. Oxford, 181 7 (with introduction by 1827. 14, London, 13. F. Valpy, London, 1819. J. [G.]^ Carpzow). 1 82 1, 26, 31, 51, 69, 78 (the LXX. column of Bagster's Polyglott). 16. Glasgow and London, 1827, 31. 17. L. 15. Venice, 1822. Van Ess, Leipzig, 1824, 35, 55, 68, 79, 87 (prolegomena and epilegomena separately in 1887). 18. London, 1837. 19. Didot, Paris, 1839,40,48,55, 78, 82. 20. Oxford, 1848, 75. 21. C. F. von Tischendorf, Leipzig, 1850, 56, 60, 69, 75, 80. Of the above some are derived from the Sixtine indirectly, whilst others present a Sixtine text more or less modified, or accompanied by variants from other MSS.
;

The example of Rome was followed in the iSth century 4. by England, which had meanwhile acquired an uncial Bible
^ The praefatio was reprinted with Archd. Churton's notes by Selwyn (Cambridge, 1855). - See Nestle, ScptuagintasUidicn iii., p. 32, note/.
,

Prof,

W.


Printed Texts of
only
tJie

SeptimgiJit.

183

less ancient, and in the view of some scholars textually more important than the great Vatican MS. The variants of Codex Alexandrinus had been given in Walton's Polyglott under the Sixtine texti, but the honour of producing an edition on the

basis of the

English

codex belongs to a Prussian scholar,
of the University of Oxford.

John Ernest Grabe, an adopted son
20),

folio volumes (1707 and fourth had been published when Grabe died (17 12); the second and third were undertaken after his decease by Francis Lee, M.D., and William Wigan, D.D.

This edition appeared ultimately in four
but only the
first

respectively.

Vol.

i.

(17 19)

the

Historical Books, Vol.

(1707) contains the Octateuch, Vol. ii. iii. (1720) the Prophets,

Vol.

iv.
:

(1709) the Poetical Books. Septuaginta
|

The
|

title I

to the
|

first

volume
accu-

runs

''

interpretum

tomus

continens Octa|

teuchum
|

quem
|

|

ex antiquissimo codice Alexandrino
et

rate descriptum

ope aliorum exemplarium, ac priscorum
|

scriptorum
|

praesertim vero Hexaplaris editionis Origenianae
|

emendatum atque suppletum
obelorum
S.T.P.
I

additis
|

saepe asteriscoram et

signis

|

summa

cura edidit

Joannes Ernestus Grabe
|

Oxonii, e theatro Sheldoniano
title sufficiently

...mdccvii."

This

indicates the general principles

upon
text

which

this

great undertaking
is

was based.

Like the Sixtine
a

edition,

Grabe's

in

the

main a presentation of the
;

exhibited in a single uncial codex
greater extent,
its

like the Sixtine, but to

text

is

in fact eclectic

and mixed.

On

the

other hand the mixture in Grabe's Alexandrian text is overt and can be checked at every point. He deals with his codex marking with an obelus the as Origen dealt with the words, clauses, or paragraphs in the MS. for which he found

,

no equivalent

in the

Massoretic Hebrew, and placing an aste-

^ Patrick Young had projected a complete edition of cod. (Walton's His transcript of the MS. is still Prolego?nena, ed. Wrangham, ii. p. 124). preserved at the British Museum (Harl. 7522 = Hohiies 241; see above,

A

p.

152).

184
risk before

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
such as he believed to have been derived from
If

Theodotion or some other non-Septuagintal source.
constantly adds to his

he

MS.

or relegates

its

readings to the

margin, such additions and substituted words are distinguished

from the text of cod.

A

by being printed

in

a smaller type.

So

far as
is

it

professes to reproduce the text of the MS., his

edition

substantially accurate.
is

The prolegomena by which
full
;

and serviceable and the work as a whole, whatever may be thought of the method
each volume
introduced are

adopted by the
of the age.

editors,

is

creditable to the Biblical scholarship

Grabe's text was reproduced by Breitinger (Zurich, 1730 2), (in his Biblia sacra guadrilmguia, Leipzig, 1750 i); also in a Greek Bible issued at Moscow in 1821 under the authority of the Holy Synod. A more important work based upon this edition is the Septuagint published by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge under the care of Dr Field ReceitVeties Testameniuui Graece hixta LXX. hiterpretes. ( sionein Grabiatiam ad fideni codicis Alexaiidrini aliorinnque deniio recognovit...F. Field^ Oxonii, 1859). But the purpose which the Society had in view forbade a critical treatment of the materials, and whilst the learned editor has removed many of the imperfections of Grabe's work, the text remains arbitrary and mixed, and the arrangement is alien from that of all LXX. MSS. the non-canonical books being relegated to an appendix as

and Reineccius

>.
5.

Each of the

four great editions of the Septuagint already

described (the Complutensian, Aldine, Sixtine, and Grabian)

endeavoured

to supply a text approximately representing either

a group of MSS., or a single uncial of high antiquity.

No

attempt had been

made

as yet to offer an exact reproduction
full

of a codex, or to provide a

apparatus

criticus,

the purpose
critical.

of the editors in each case being practical rather than

This want was met in some degree
editions;

in certain of the

secondary

thus the Basle reprint of the Aldine text (1545)
list

gave a short
the

of variants

London

Polyglott

the

readings of

and conjectural emendations; in Codex Alexandrinus

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
were printed underneath the Sixtine But the
text,

185

and those of Codex
was made by

Sarravianus were exhibited in the Septuagint of Lambert Bos.
first

comprehensive

effort in this direction

Robert Holmes (1748 1805), Professor of Poetry at Oxford, and Canon of Christ Church, and, from 1804, Dean of Winchester. The preparations for his great work were begun in An appeal was made to the liberality of pubhc bodies 1788.

and private patrons of
was committed

learning,

and the task of
of scholars at

collating

MSS.

to a large

number

home and on

the continent, whose names are honourably mentioned in the

opening pages of the first volume. From 1789 to 1805 an annual account was printed of the progress of the work\ and
the Bodleian Library contains 164 volumes of

MS.

collations

16617)^ which 16455 were deposited there during those seventeen years. In 1795 a specimen of the forthcoming work was published together with
a.d.

(Holmes MSS.

1789

— 1805,

nos.

a transcript of the Vienna Genesis in a letter to the Bishop of

Durham
title
:

(Shute Barrington).

Genesis appeared separately in
first

1798, followed in the

same year by the Vetus Testainentiun Graeciun cum
S.T.P.,i?.,5'.6'.,
e

volume bearing the

variis lectionibus, Edidit

Roherius Holmes^

Aedis Christi Cano?iicus. To7?ius
ClarendoJiiano.

primus.

Oxofiii :

typographeo

mdccxcviii.

This volume, which contains the Pentateuch, with a preface

and appendix, was the only one which Holmes lived to complete. He died Nov. 12, 1805, and two years later the editorship was entrusted to James Parsons^ under whose care the remaining volumes Avere issued (Vol. ii., Joshua 2 Chronicles, 1810;

Vol.

iii.,

2

Esdras

— Canticles,
v.

1823; Vol.
i

iv.,

Prophets, 1827

;

Vol.

v.,

the non-canonical books,

Esdras

3 Maccabees, 1827).

At the end of Vol.
1

there

is

a

list

of the Greek

MSS.

collated

-

Cf.

Cf. Ch. Q. R., April 1899, p. 102. Madan's Sumjuary catalogue of MSS. in the Bodleian: Eighteenth

century collections, pp. 614
'^

641. distinguished coadjutor Parsons died in 1847 at the age of 85.

On

Holmes'

less

see

Ch. Q. R. p.

104.


1

86

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.
Three hundred and eleven are enumerated
(i.

for the work.
xiii.,

14

311); a corrected estimate gives a total of 297 separate

codices, of which 20 are uncial.

Besides the readings of this

large

number

of

Greek MSS., the apparatus of Holmes and
far

Parsons exhibits the evidence of the Old Latin versions so
as
it

had been collected by Sabatier, and of the Coptic (Memphitic and Sahidic), Arabic, Slavonic, Armenian and Georgian versions, obtained partly from MSS., partly from printed texts. Use was also made of patristic citations and of the four great
editions of the Septuagint, the Sixtine supplying the text, while

the Aldine, Complutensian and Alexandrine (Grabian) are cited
in the

notes.

In addition to these,

Holmes employed

the
3),

printed text of the catena of Nicephorus (Leipzig, 1772

and

J.

F. Fischer's edition of cod. Lips. 361 (Leipzig, 1767

— —

8)'.

The

great

criticised

by

later scholars, especially

work of Holmes and Parsons has been severely by Hatch ^ and Lagarde^.

A
It

vigorous defence of the Oxford editors will be found in a

recent article in the Church Qiiarte?'ly Review (already quoted).

appears to be certain that every

effort

was made by Holmes

to secure the services of the best scholars
for the

who were

available

work of

collation.

Among the collators of Greek MSS. employed by the Oxford editors were Bandini (Florence), C. F. Matthai (Moscow), F. C. Alter (Vienna), Schnurrer (Tubingen), Moldenhawer (^Copenhagen). "The Armenian Version was chiefly collated by Hermannus Breden-Kemp (1793) and F. C. Alter (1795— 1804), the Coptic and the Slavonic latter also taking the Georgian
. .
. .

.

.

Bohemian Versions. The Arabic X'^ersions were undertaken by Paulus and Prof Ford, and the Syriac quotations in the Horby Dr Holmes" reuin mystcrioriDH of Gregorius Bar-Hebraeus (F. C. Madan, Summary catalogue, p. 640).
.

.

But
workers

in
it

so vast an accumulation of the labours of

many

was impossible

to maintain

an uniform standard of
his con-

merit; nor are the
1

methods adopted by Holmes and

See above,

p. 153.
^

- Essays in Biblical Greeks p. 132. Libr. V. T. Canon, p. i. p. xv.

;

Printed Texts of the Septtiagint.
tinuator altogether such as

187

would commend themselves at the an almost unequalled monument of industry and learning, and will perhaps never be superseded
present day.

The

work,

is

but it left abundant room for on other Hnes and among materials which were not accessible to Holmes and his associates. The next step was taken by A. F. C. von Tischendorf 6.
as a storehouse of materials
;

investigations conducted

(1815

— 1874),
and

who
his

in the

midst of his researches in Eastern

work upon the text of the New Testament found leisure to project and carry through four editions (1850, 1856, i860, 1869) a manual text of the Septuagint. Its plan was simple, but suggestive. His text was a revised Sixtine
libraries

underneath

it

he placed an apparatus limited to the variants
:

of a few great uncials

"eam viam

ingressus

sum

(he writes^)

ut textum per tria fere secula probatissimum repeterem, mutatis

tantummodo quibus mutatione maxime opus
fere

esset, addita

vero

plena lectionis varietate ex tribus codicibus antiquissimis quos
solos

utpote editos confidenter adhibere licebat."

The

three

MSS. employed by Tischendorf in

his first edition (1850)

were

A
;

(from Baber's facsimile),

C

(from his

own

facsimile),

and FA, the portion of Cod. Sinaiticus which was published in 1846 in the third and fourth editions he was able to make further use of Cod. Sinaiticus, and to take into account Mai's
edition of Cod. B.

Since Tischendorf's death three more editions of his Septuagint a fifth in 1875, a sixth and a seventh in 1880 and 1887 respectively, the last two under the supervision of Dr Eberhard Nestle. Nestle added a Siipplevieittiim editionuin quae Sixti7iam seqiui?itur 07}iiiiHin i7iprimis Tischendorfiaiiaruni^ consisting of a collation of the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS. with the Sixtine text, the Vatican text being obtained from Vercellone and Cozza's facsimile, and the Sinaitic from Tischendorf's edition of <; an appendix contained a collation of Daniel (lxx.) from Cozza's edition of the Chigi MS. The Supplemetitum was reissued in 1887 with various enrichments, of which the most important

have appeared

^

Prolegg. §

viii.

1

88

Printed Texts of the Septuagint.

was a collation of cod. A from the London photograph which appeared in 18S2 3. With these helps the reader of Tischendorf's Septuagint is able to correct and supplement the appara-

and to compare the text with that of cod. so far as could be ascertained before the publication of the photograph.
tus,
7.

it

Another of the great

Biblical scholars of the nineteenth

century, Paul de Lagarde,

commenced an
to
text.

edition of the

Greek

Old Testament, which was intended
towards the reconstruction of the
plan was announced
in Sym/fiicta
ii.

be a definite step
Lagarde's
ff.,

general

and in a modified and simpler form by a pamphlet published two years
(1880), p. 137
later {Aiikuiidigung einer ?ieuen Aiisgabe der griechische?i iiberset-

zung

des A.T.^ Gottingen,

1882).

A

beginning was

made by

the appearance of the

first

half of the text

of the Lucianic

recension {Librortcni V.T. ca?ionicorum pars prior Graece Pauli
de Lagarde studio et su?npiibus edita, Gottingen, 1883).
garde's untimely death in 1891
left

La-

this

work incomplete, and
it

though
that

his papers are preserved at Gottingen,

is

understood

no steps will be taken to carry out the scheme, at least on the same lines. The published volume contains the Octateuch and the Historical Books as far as Esther. Of the last named

book two
that
six
it

texts are given, with

an apparatus, but vith

this

exception the text stands alone, and the reader knows only
is

an attempted reconstruction of Lucian, based upon
are denoted
is

MSS. which
This

af h

in

pz

(H. P. 108, 82, 19, 93,
critical

118, 44).

not the place to discuss Lagarde's

principles, but

it

may be mentioned

here that his attempt to

reconstruct the text of Lucian's recension was but one of a
series

of projected reconstructions through which he

hoped

ultimately to arrive at a pure text of the Alexandrian version.

The

conception was a magnificent one, worthy of the great

scholar

who

originated

it

;

but

it

was beset with practical

difficulties,

and there is reason to hope that the desired end may be attained by means less complicated and more direct. In the spring of 1883 the Syndics of the Cambridge 8.

Printed Texts of the Septtmgint.
University Press issued a notice
''^an edition of the Septuagint

189

that they had undertaken and Apocrypha with an ample
critical

apparatus

criticus

intended to provide material for a
it

determination of the text," in which
the variations of
all

was "proposed

to give

Greek more important versions, and of the quotations made by Philo and the earlier and more important As a preliminary step they announced ecclesiastical writers." the preparation of "a portable text... taken from the Vatican MS., where this MS. is not defective, with the variations of two or three other early uncial MSS." The suggestion was originally due to Dr Scrivener, who submitted it to the Syndics of the
the Greek uncial MSS., of select
cursive

MSS.,

of the

Press in the year 1875, but was ultimately prevented by After undergoing various modifications

many

preoccupations and failing health from carrying his project into
execution.
it

was com-

mitted in 1883 to

Dr

Swete, instructed by a committee con-

sisting of Professors Westcott, Hort, Kirkpatrick,

and Bensly

;

to

Dr Hort
was

in

particular the editor
detail.

was largely indebted

for

counsel in matters of
text

The

first

edition of the portable

completed
Esdr.

in

1894 {The Old Testame^it in Greek
i.,

according to the Septuagint^ vol.
vol.
ii.,

Genesis
iii.,

I

—Tobit,

—4
;

Regn., 1887;

1890

;

vol.

1894); a second and revised edition^ through the press (vol. i., 1895 vol. ii., 1896 vol. iii., 1899). The larger Cambridge Septuagint has been entrusted to the
;

Hosea 4 Mace, has now been carried

joint editorship of the Rev. A.

E. Brooke, Fellow

of King's
;

College,

and Mr N. McLean, Fellow of
will

Christ's College
first

and

the Octateuch, which

form the

volume,

may be
embrace,
evi-

expected in the course of a few years.
text of the

It will

reproduce the
will

manual Septuagint, but the apparatus

according to the original
^

purpose of the Syndics, the

Cambridge Ujtiversiiy Reporter, March 13, 1883. ^ Much of the labour of revision was generously undertaken by Dr Nestle, and valuable assistance was also rendered by several English
scholars
;

see

i.

p. xxxiii.,

ii.

p. xiv.,

iii.

p. xviii.

f.

190
dence of
all

Printed Texts of the Septtiagint.
the uncial MSS., and of a considerable

number

of cursives "selected after careful investigation vith the view
of representing the diiferent types of text
"
;

the

Old Latin,

Egyptian, Syro-Hexaplar, and Armenian versions will also be
represented,
whilst

use will be
in

made

of the quotations in

Josephus as well as those
Christian fathers.

Philo and the more important
will fall far short of that

Such an apparatus

presented by

Holmes and

Parsons, in regard to the quantity

of evidence amassed; but efforts are being
relatively high degree of accuracy,

made

to secure a
will

and the materials

be

selected and arranged

in

such a manner as to enable the

reader to study the grouping of the

Thus
tegris

the Avork will proceed
:

MSS. and other authorities. upon the principle formulated by

Lagarde

"editionem Veteris Testamenti Graeci...collatis incodicum familiis esse curandam, nam familiis non acce-

dere auctoritatem e codicibus, sed codicibus e familiis'."

A

common
its

word may be added with regard to the text w^hich will be to the manual and the larger edition of the CamIt is that of the great

bridge Septuagint.

Vatican MS., with

lacunae supplied from the uncial MS. which occupies the

next place in point of age or importance.
in this

For a text formed
that
it

way no more can be claimed than
But
it

represents on

the whole the oldest form of the Septuagint to be found in any

one of our extant MSS.
produced-,

supphes

at least

an excellent
has been

standard of comparison, and until a
it

critical

text

may

fairly

be regarded as the most trustworthy

presentation of the Septuagint version regarded as a whole.
II.

Editions of particular Books, or of Groups or Portions of Books.

The Pentateuch.
G. A. Schumann, 1829; Pentatetichus hebraice et graece, (Genesis only published).
^

I

2

N.

V. T. Libr. can. praef. p. xvi. Cf. E. Nestle, Zur Rckonstriiktion der Septiiaginta, in F/iiiologus, F. xii. {1899), p. 121 ff.

Printed Texts of the Septtiagint.
Genesis.

191

P. A. de Lagarde, Leipzig, 1868: Genesis graece e fide editionis Sixtinae addita scriphirae discrepantia e libris maim scj'iptis a se collatis et edd. Compliitensi et Aldina adciiratisshne enotata. The MSS. employed are 29, 31, 44, 122, 130, 135. The text is preceded by useful lists of the available uncial MSS. and VSS. of the LXX.

ADEFGS,

Deuteronomy.
C. L. F. Hamann, Jena, 1874: Canticzim Moysi ex Psalterio quadruplici .maim scripto quod Bambergae asservatitr.
. .

Joshua.
losicae impei'atoris historiae. A. Masius, Antwerp, 1574 Readings are given from the Codex Syro-hexaplaris Ambrosi:

anus.

Judges.
J.

Ussher, 1655

(in his
(i)

texts in parallel

columns

Syntagma., Works, vol. vii.). Two "ex codice Romano," (2) "ex codice
:

Alexandrino." liber ludiciim secundum Ixx. O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1867 interpretes. A specimen had previously appeared (in 1866). P. A. de Lagarde, 1891 (in his Septuaginta-studien., I. c. i. v.).

Two

texts.
:

A. E. Brooke and N. IVPLean, Cambridge, 1891 The Book of Judges in Greek., ace. to the text of Codex Alexandrinus. [G. F. Moore, Andover, Mass. (in his Critical and exegetical Commentary on fudges, p. xlv.), promises an edition of the recension of the book exhibited by K, 54, 59, 75, 82, and Theodoret.]

Ruth.
Drusius, 1586, 1632. Rtcth ex versione Ixx. interpretiim secunL. Bos, Jena, 1788
:

dum

exemplar Vaticanum.
'-

O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1867

'

tovs '.

Psalms.
Separate editions of the Greek Psalter were published at Milan, 1481 (Bonacursius) Venice, i486; Venice, before 1498 (Aldus Manutius); Basle, 15 16 (in Hieronymi Opera., t. viii., ed. Pellicanus); Genoa, iz,i6{0ctaplum Psalteriiim fustiniani); Cologne, 15 18 {Psalterium in iv. Unguis cura lohannis Potkeii). Other known editions bear the dates 1524, 1530 {^Ps. sextuplex\
;

192

Printed Texts of the Septtiagint.

1533, 1541, 1543, 1549, 1557, 1559, 1571, 1584, 1602, 1618, 1627, 1632, 1643, 1678 (the Psalter of cod. A), 1737, 1757, 1825, 1852, 1857, 1879 {Ps. tetraglotton, ed. Nestle), 1880, 1887 (Lagarde, Novae psalterii gr. editioiiis specimeji), 1889 (Swete, The Psalms in Greek ace. to the LXX., with the Canticles \ 2nd ed. 1896),

1892 (Lagarde, Ps.gr. quinquagena prima).

Job.
Patrick Young, 1657 Franeker, 1663.
(in the

Catena of Nicetas).

Esther.
J.

texts,

Ussher, 1655 (in his Syntagma^ Works, one Hexaplaric from an Arundel MS. (H.

vol.

vii.).

Two
second

P. 93).

A

edition, Leipzig, 1695. Duplicem libri textum O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1848: ad opt. Codd. emendavit et cum selecta lectionis varietate edidit. The Greek additions appear also in his Libri apocryphi V. T.

^.

(see below).

HosEA.
J.

Hos. i. iv., after Cod. Q. Philippeaux, Paris, 1636 Hoseas commentariis D. Parens, Heidelberg, 1605
;
:

illus-

trates.

Amos.
Vater, Halle, 18 10.

Jonah.
S. Miinster, 1524, 1543.

Isaiah.
S. Miinster,
J.

1540

(in

Hebrew, Greek, and

Latin).

Curter, Paris, 1580 (in Procopii commentarii in lesaiam the text of Cod. Q).

Jeremiah.
S.

Inster,

1540.
:

G. L. Spohn, Leipzig, 1794 feremias vates e vers. Alex, ac reliquorum interpretum Gr.\ 2nd ed., 1824.

Judaeorum

Lamentations.
Kyper, Basle, 1552 Libri tres de re gram m. Hebr.
:

ling. (Hebr.,

Gr., Lat.).

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint.
EZEKIEL.

193

^€77

rovs ',

Rome,

1840.

Daniel (Theod.).
Ph. Melanchthon, 1546. Wells, 1 7 16.

Daniel
S.

(lxx.).
:

de Magistris (?), Rome, 1772 Da7iiel secundum lxx. ex tetraplis Origenis 7iu?ic primuni editus e singulai'i Chlsiaiio Reprinted at Gottingen, 1773, 1774 (Michaelis) codice. at
;

Utrecht, 1775 (Segaar) at Milan, 1788 (Bugati) and at Leipzig, The lxx. text is also given in the editions of 1845 (Hahn). Holmes and Parsons, Tischendorf, and Swete.
; ;

Non-Canonical Books
J.

(in

general).
:

A. Fabricius, Frankfort and Leipzig, 1691 Liber Tobias., Judith, oratio Manasse^ Sapieniia, et Ecclesiastiais, gr. et lat., cum prolegomenis. Other complete editions were published at Frankfort on the Main, 1694, and at Leipzig, 1804 and 1837 the best recent edition is that by Libri apoc?ypki V. T. gr.... O. F. Fritzsche, Leipzig, 1871 accedunt libri V. T. pseudepigraphi selecti [Psalmi Salomonis, 4 5 Esdras, Apocalypse of Baruch, Assumption of Moses]. This edition, besides the usual books, gives 4 Maccabees, and exhibits Esther in two texts, and Tobit in three there is a serviceable preface and an extensive apparatus criticus.
;
:

;

Wisdom of Solomon.
Older editions 1601, 1733, 1827. Rensch, Friburg, 1858 Liber Sapientiae
:

sec.

exe7nplar Vati-

canuin.

W.
text.,

J.

Deane, Oxford, 1881

:

the Latiji Vulgate, and the A. V.j critical apparatics, and commentary.

The Book of Wisdom^ the Greek with an introductioti,

Wisdom of Sirach.
D. Hoeschel, Augsburg, 1604: Sapientia Sirachi
stas ticus, collatis lectioiiibiis
s.

cele-

var

cum

notts.

Linde, Dantzig, 1795: Sente?itiae lesu Sii'acidae
codd. et versionu7n.

ad fidem

Bretschneider, Regensburg, 1806: Liber lesu Siracidae. Cowley-Neubauer, Original Heb7'e'w of a portio7i of Ecclesiasticus, &c. (Oxford, 1897); Schechter-Taylor, lVisdo7n of Be 71 Sira (Cambridge, 1899J.
S. S.

13

;

194
TOBIT.

Printed Texts of the Septuagint,

Reusch, Bonn, 1870

:

Libellus Tobit

e cod. Siiiaitico.

Baruch.
Kneucker, Leipzig, 1879.

Psalms of Solomon.
la Cerda, in an appendix to his Adversai'ia Sacra, J. L. de Lyons, 1626. Fabricius, in Codex pseudepigraphus V. T., Hamburg J. A.

and Leipzig,

171

5.

A. Hilgenfeld, in Zeitschrift fiir wissensch. Th. xi., and in Messias ludaeorimi, Leipzig, 1869. Der Psalter Saloind's heraiisE. E. Geiger, Augsburg, 1871 ^eget en. O. F. Fritzsche in Libri apocryphi V. T. gr. B. Pick, Alleghany, Pens., in the Presbyterian Review., 1883. H. E. Ryle and M. R. James, Cambridge, 1891 Psalms of the Pharisees conunofily called the Psabns of Solomo7ij the Greek text with an apparatus, notes, indices, and an introduc:
:

tion.

H. B. Swete in O. T. in Greek., vol. iii., Cambridge, 1894; 2nd ed. 1899. O. von Gebhardt, Leipzig, 1895 Die Psalmen Salomo's.
:

Enoch

(the

Greek version
[in

of).
;

Ep. Jud. 14, 15 the Chronography of Dindorf, in Co?pics hist. Byzant.., Bonn, 1829); ZDMG. ix. p. 621 ff. (a scrap printed by Gildemeister) the Mhnoires publics par les 7?ie7nbres de la inissio7i archtologiqtie fran^aise an Caire., ix., Paris, 1892] have been collected by Dillmann, iiber den 7ieufufide?ien gr. Text des He7ioch-buches (1893); Lods, Livre d'He7ioch (1893); Charles, Book of E7ioch., (1893), and are printed with an apparatus in the O. T. i/i Greek, vol. lii., 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1899).
G. Syncellus (ed.

The fragments

W.

Literature (upon

the general subject of this chapter).

ff., Le Long-Masch, ii. p. 262 ff., Fabricius-Harles, p. Rosenmiiller, Handbnch, i. p. 47 ff., Frankel, Vorstudie7i zit der Septuagi7ita, p. 242 ff., Tischendorf, V. T. Gr., p7vlego7ne7ia § vii. sqq., Van Ess [Nestle], epileg07)ie7ia § i sqq., Loisy, Histoire critique, \. ii. p. 65 ff.. Nestle, Septuagi7ita-studie7i, i. 1886, ii. 1896, iii. 1899; Urtext, p. 64 ff.

6

PART

II

THE CONTENTS OF THE ALEXANDRIAN OLD TESTAMENT.

13—2

PART

II.

CHAPTER
Titles, Grouping,

I.

Number, and Order of THE Books.
to us

The Greek Old

Testament, as known
it

through the
lists

few codices which contain

as a whole,

and from the

which appear in the Biblical MSS. or in ancient ecclesiastical
writings, differs

from the Hebrew Bible

in regard to the titles

of the books which are

and the principle upon which the books are grouped. The two collections differ yet more materially in the number of the books, the Greek Bible containing several entire writings of which there is no
to both,

common

vestige in the

Hebrew canon,
much

besides large additions to the

contents of more than one
differences are of

of the

Hebrew

books.

These

interest to the Biblical student, since

they express a tradition which, inherited by the Church from
the

Alexandrian synagogue, has widely influenced Christian

opinion upon the extent of the Old Testament Canon, and the
character and purpose of the several books.

;

iqS
I.

Titles,

Grouping, Ntimber,

and Order of Books.

The
titles

following tables shew (A) the Hebrew, Greek, and

Latin

of the canonical books of the

Old Testament
lists

(B) the order and grouping of the books in (i)
origin, (2) the great uncial
tic

of Jewish

MSS.

and synodical

lists

of the {a)

Greek Bible, (3) patrisEastern, {b) Western Church.
of the

A.
Hebrew

Titles of the Books.

Titles,

Groiipmg, Nicmber,

and

Oj^der of Books.

199

Hebrew

200

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

(i).

Order of the Books

in

Jewish Lists'

Talmudic

1

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

20

(2).

Order of the Books

in

Uncial MS. Bibles.

Codex Vaticanus (B)

202

Titles^

Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.

Codex Alexandrinus (A)

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

203

(s)

W• Order of the Books in Patristic and Synodical Lists of the Eastern Church.
H.E.
iv. 26).

" ' $ '
TeveaLs

6'5

I.

Melito {ap. Eus.

"$
'5
''

'€$

2.

Origen («/. Eus. H.E.

vi. 25).

AeviTLKov

AeVLTLKOV

•?7

^
' —'
',

''
/3

^^ ^ $,
iu

\€

'$
'^
/3

' ^ "
3•

^€)
Athanasius {ep.fest. 39> Migne, P.G. xxvi. 1437).

' "
'^
4-

$ ' ' ^
At

'

'

,

'

rg

-

' ' ",/
'

",

"

'^.

Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech.

iv. 35).

'
,

'
' '
,

'
',

' '

Ilapot^at'at

'

Cf.

Eus. H.

.

.
iv.

" {}
',

' —'

'

'

22

Tras

204
'/3

Titles, Grotiping^

Number, and Order of Books.
TUyxavei

\\
Ot

^.,
'^.

'lepe/itas

"

'lei'e/ftTjX

Tois

^

"-

' ' ^ '{^) " ...
erepa

' , - , ),
^€,

{
-

[]

^

Titles,
Epiphanius

Grouping, Number,
i^de jnefis.

S'^.

Veveais

"^'?
AevLTiKOv

'et pofid. 23).

'
TTjs

'?
—'
,
'

''

;
',

,, "€6€, ") , , ) , ? $, , ,) ,
6.

and Order of Books.

205

Gregory of Nazianzus

Bt'/SXot

{€,"$, , ', $, '1$,',
AeOT^pos
Ilpa^eis

'

{fianii.

,

xii. 5

fif.)-

Kpt-

(, '7]$,
(
'1$,

e'

Tpels

''/,

]Iapot-

—€,'$,

e'

$, ^,

'lepe/xtas,

^€,

—^5.

AyyaTos.

"
.
cann.
11.

'Ie^'€Ki7]\

Aavi7]\

'

-^\<^\%{
vii.,

^) ", " ), , - , " , - ' ,) , ,
(, ,
'?
"E^'oSos,

-, )
'— '
',

Seleiic. ap. Greg. Naz. Migne, P.G. xxxvii. 1593).

8.

Pseudo-Chrysostom (ijyw. script, sacr. praef.). Migne, P.G. Ivi. 513 sqq.

^-

To

'

',

'

' ' ^ "
Ot
6

,
"?

\

'

'

'

^

^^

,, -/^,'^^ [, ^, , ,''', ,
(, )

(,

e

At

'— '

"

, ',

-

(?)

Toi^Tois

2o6
9.

2

Titles,
kv

Grouping, Number,
ap.

and Order of Books.

Titles^

Groupings NiLnibe7%
i.

and Order of Books.
12.

207

II.

Junilius de inst. reg. div. legis
(ed. Kihn).

3

fF.

Pseudo-Athanasii syu. scr. sacr. (Migne, /'.G. xxviii. 283 ff.).

Historia (xvii) Genesis

Exodus
Leviticus

"EfoSos AeVlTlKQV

Numeri Deuteronomium lesu Nave
ludicum

' os
Vheoi%

'?

Ruth

Regnn. i iv [Adiungunt plures Paralipomenon ii, lob i, Tobiae i, Esdrae ii, ludith i, Hester i,

"
6

/
',
y',

'
'
',

"$
',,

'

',

'

Macchabaeorum
Prophetia (xvii)

ii]

Psalmorum Osee
Esaiae
loel

cl

Amos
Abdiae
lonae

Michaeae

\-$ " ' , ?, ,$, ^, , ', ?
eh iv

'^laas,

Naum
Habacuc
Sophoniae Hieremiae
Ezechiel Daniel

9$ ''
'Ektos

€$ "-€

'

'Ayyalos,

,

etVt

/3/3 . . .
but adding

Aggaei
Zachariae Malachiae Proverbia (ii)

Salomonis Proverbiorum
lesu
filii

'^ )
John
of

(as

in Athanasius,

'

'

Sirach

[Adiungunt quidam libr. vSapientiae et Cantica Canticorum] Dogmatica (i)
Ecclesiastes

{Teveais, "E^oSos,
'Savri,

, ,
13.

' 3 ,), , ^^ €,
14-

Damascus (defide
iv. 17).

07-thod.

'L•^Qi\.\x%{de SectisVi.').

{')

',

Aeviri-

[^,

€€,
"E^oSos,

,

'-

, "$)

— ', /37/.€-

VouO, Aoyoi

(/?

Nay??» Kptrai

,

2o8

Titles,

{$, ,
(/3,

'lepe/itas,

$, ,

) )
(e')

Grouping, Number, ajid Order of Books.

^, ^/^-

(')

\$, '^ ?/ -

,, ,) ,, ",) ( $
',
y',

$ ", , {€€$, "-$, /3, " ' • ( ^,
', ', '}
at

-

Hapoi-

'
.
.

', ',

')

6. Ebedjesu

.

"
15•

.

{catal. libr. Eccl.

,

Assemani,

Or.

iii.

5

f.).

Nicephorus, Stichometria.

'.

'.
'.
'.

$. ' "$ . ' .

Genesis

Exodus
Liber sacerdotum

'.
7?'-

.

',
ly'.

'. '.
iS".

tr.
477'.

'.
'.

'. '.

" .' , . . y' , . "5 . $ .. ^ .' "^/ .' /3 . '.$ . . . . ^/ . '
'1$

'. '. .
\\
'
y' ,

^'

Numeri
Deuteronomii Josue filii Nun
,yp'

/'

ludicum Samuel

Regum
Liber Dabariamin

Ruth
Psalmi David Regis Proverbia Salomonis Cohelet
Sirat Sirin

',

'

^
,'

$
'

'

^'

'

^'

,'

Bar-Sira Sapientia

Magna

lob
Isaias

Hosee
loel

;^'
^'

'

Amos
Abdias
lonas

'.

5

^'

.

Michaeas

;y'

ahum
Habacuc
Sophonias

I

B.

"

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

avTiXeyovraL

-

and Order of Books.

209

-

"

210
'.
te'.

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

tf '.

'. '.

. '.
-'.

'.

^ " €
'$
'1$

\
'.

'.
/3'.

?
"
(s)
Hilary,
/r£>/.

\y''

''
^

'Hcrataj

? 5
^
[

\'.

'.
'.
"'.

'. '.

'$
'
['

y' —'.

— ']

". '.

r. '.
'.

'Ayy alos

W• Order of the Books in Patristic and Synodical Lists of the Western Church.
in
libr.

I.

Psalm.

2.

Ruffinus {CoDim. z« symb. 36).
libri

i— V.
vi.

Moysi[s] libri quinque lesu Naue

Moysi[s] quinque

vii.
viii.

ludicum

et

Ruth
i,

ix.

Regnorum Regnorum

ii

(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, meri, Deuteronomium) lesus Naue

Nu-

iii,

iv

ludicum, simul

cum Ruth
(

X.
xi.
xii.

Paralipomenon i, ii Sermones dierum Esdrae
Liber Psalmorum XV. Salomonis Proverbia, Ec-

Regnorum

iv

xiii

clesiastes,

Canticum Canticorum
Esaias,

Paralipomenon Esdrae ii Hester Prophetarum
xii

= Dierum

liber)

xvi.

xvii

Duodecim Prophetae
xxii.

(Esaias, leremiaSjEzechiel, Daniel,

Jeremias

cum

Prophetarum

liber

i)

Lamentatione

et Epistola, Daniel,

Ezekiel, Job, Hester
[xxiii

—xxiv.

lob Psalmi David Salomon[is] iii
(Proverbia, Ecclesiastes,

Tobias, Judith]

Cantica

Canticorum)
Sapientia Salomonis Sapientia Sirach ( = Ecclesiasticus)

Tobias
ludith

Maccabaeorum
1

libri

The B.M. MS.

counts Ruth as a separate book and after Daniel
libros

places the numeral \e'. 2 " Quibusdam autem

visum est additis Tobia et Judith xxiv secundum numerum Graecarum literarum connumerare.

i

:

:

:

1

Titles,

Grouping,
Chr.
ii.

limber,
13).

and Order of Books.
4.

21

3.

AM'gxi%u.ViQ.{de doctr.
:]

Innocent
libri

I.

(ep.

ad Exsnperiiati).

[Historiae

Moysi[s]
[libri]

quinque

Quinque Moyseos
(Genesis,

Exodus,

Leviticus,

Numeri, Deuteronomium)
lesu

(Genesis, Exodi, Levitici, meri, Deuteronomii) lesu Naue

Nu-

Naue

ludicum

ludicum Ruth

Regnorum
libri iv

libri iv

Regnorum

Ruth Prophetarum
ii

libri

xvi

Paralipomenon lob Tobias Esther
ludith

libri

Salomonis

libri

Psalterium Historiarum

Job Tobias
libri
ii

Machabaeorum
Esdrae
Pi'ophetae
libri
ii

Hester
ludith

David

liber

Psalmorum

Salamonis libri iii (Proverbiorum, Canticum Canticorum, Ecclesiastes) Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus ^

JNIachabaeorum Esdrae libri ii Paralipomenon

libri

ii

libri

ii

Prophetarum
(Osee,
dias,

xii

\

loel,

Amos, Ab-

Michaeas, SoZaV charias, Malachias) Prophetae iv maiorum volulonas,

Nahum,

Habacuc, phonias, Aggaeus,

minum
(Isaias,

leremias, Ezechiel)

Daniel,
/

5.

Pseudo-Gelasius dccret. de
libri

libr.

6.

Cassiodorius {de

ifist.

Div.

litt. 14).

Moysis V
Genesis

Genesis

Exodus
Leviticus

Exodus
Leviticus

Numeri Deuteronomium lesu Naue
ludicum Ruth

Numeri Deuteronomium lesu Nave

Regum

i

iv
i,

Paralipomenon
i

ii

Regum
^

Psalterium
iv

Of

reserve:

the canonicity of these two books Augustine speaks with some "de quadam similitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur...qui tamen
in

quoniam
sunt."

auctoritatem recipi meruerunt inter propheticos numerandi

14-

:

:

2

1

2

Titles, Groupi7ig,

Number, aiid Order of Books.
Salomonis
ticus,
libri

Item

libri

prophetarum numero xvi

(Isaias, Ieremias,Ezechiel, Daniel,

(Proverbia,

Sapientia, Ecclesias-

Osee, Amos, Michas, lohel, Abdias, lonas, Naum, Abacu, Sofonias, Agaeus, Zacharias, Maleachias)

Ecclesiastes,

Canticum

canticorum)

Prophetae
(Isaias,
niel,

Paralipomena

i,

ii

Psalmorum

cl

Hieremias, Ezechiel, DaOsee, Amos, Michaeas, Joel, Abdias, Jonas, Naum,

Salamonis libri iii (Proverbiorum, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Canticorum) Liber Sapientiae tilii Siracis Alius subsequens liber Sapientiae Item historiarum lob Tobias Hester
ludith

Abbacuc,
Zacharias,

Sofonias,

Aggaeus,
qui
et

Malachias,

Angelus)

Job
Tobi[as]

Esther
ludith

Esdrae

[libri]

ii

Machabaeorum

libri

ii

Macchabaeorum

libri

ii

7.

Isidorus {de ord. libr.

s.

scr.).

1.

Quinque

2.
3.

Moyseos lesu Nave, ludicum, Ruth
libri

Regum
ii,

i

iv,

Paralipomenon

i,

Tobiae, Esther, ludith, Esdrae, Machabaeorum libri

Prophetae Psahnorum liber i, Salomonis libri iii (Proverbiorum, Ecclesiastes, Cantica Canticorum), Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, libri xvi Propheta:

duo

rum
List, cited by Zahn, Gesch. d. N. T. Kanons, ii. p. 143 Sttidia Biblica, iii. p. 222 f. Preuschen, Analecta, p. 138'.

Mommsen's
Libri canonici

f.

;

Sanday,

Genesis versus

IIIDCC

Exodus ver III Numeri ver III
Leviticus ver

Regnorum Regnorum Regnorum
Fiunt versus

liber
liber

ii

ver

IICC

iii

ver

liber iv ver

IIDL IICCL
ver

VIIIID
liber liber
i

IICCC

Paralipomenon

TlXL

Deuteronomium ver IIDCC
Hiesu Nave vHr MDCCL ludicum ver MDCCL
Fiunt
libri vii

ii

ver IIC

Machabeorum
lob ver Tobias ver Hester ver

liber
ii

liber

ver

XVIIIC

i ver ver

IICCC

Rut ver

CCL
liber
i

MDCC
DCCCC DCC

MDCCC

_
ver

Regnorum

IICCC

^ The text of Preuschen has been followed it is based on a MS. which appears to be less corrupt than the Cheltenham MS.
;

St Gall used by

Mommsen

and others.

I

.

3

Titles,
ludit ver

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.
leremias ver IIIICCCCL Daniel ver MCCCL
Ezechiel ver

2

1

MC
cli

Psalmi Davitici

ver

V

Salomonis ver

Prophetaemaiores

YID verXVCCCLXX

mCCCXL

numero IIII
Esaias ver

Prophetae xii ver IIIDCCC Erunt omnes versus numero

IIIDLXXX
10.

LXVIIIID
Liber sacramentoruin (Bobbio, cent,
vi, vii).

9.

List in Cod. Claroinontamis

Versus scribturamm sanctarum ita Genesis versus IIIID

Liber Genesis

Exodum
Leviticum

Exodus versus

HIDCC
IIDCCC

Leviticum versus

Numeri Deuteronomium
Josue

Numeri versus IIIDCL Deuteronomium ver. IIICCC lesu Nauve ver. II
ludicum
ver.

Judicum Libri mulierum Ruth
Hester Judith

II

Rud ver. CCL Regnorum ver.
primus liber
secundus
quartus
lib.

Maccabeonim
ver. I ID
ver. II

libri

duo

Job Thobias

tertius lib.
lib.

ver.

HDC
IICCCC

Regum

quattuor
libri

ver.

Psalmi Davitici
Proverbia ver.
Aeclesiastes

vei•.

V

IDC

Prophetarum Daviticum Solomonis iii Esdra i
Fiunt
libri
xliiii

xvi

DC
CCC
ver.

Veteris

numero

Cantica canticorum
Sapientia vers.
Sapientia

IHU
ver.

XII

Profetae ver.

flD iTlCX

Ossee ver.

DXXX

CCCCX CCCX loel ver. XC Abdias ver. LXX lonas ver. CL Naum ver. CXL Ambacum ver. CLX Sophonias ver. CXL Aggeus vers. CX Zacharias ver. DCLX
Amos
Micheas
ver.

Malachiel ver. CC Eseias ver. IIIDC
leremias ver.

IIIILXX

214

Titles,

Grouping, Ntimber, and Order of Books.
II.

Council of Carthage, a.d. 397 (can.
.

47

= 39)-

Ezechiel ver.

I

DC

Genesis

Daniel ver.
lib.

IDC
sic.

Exodus
Leviticus

Maccabeorum
lib. lib.

primus ver.
secundus

IICCC ver. IICCC
I

Numeri Deuteronomium lesu Xaue
ludicum Ruth

quartus ver.

ICCC Hesdra rD_
ludit ver.

Regnorum

libri iv

Ester ver. I

lob

ver.

IDC
I

Tobias

ver.

Paralipomenon libri ii Job Psalterium Davidicum Salomonis libri xii libri Prophetarum
lesaias

leremias Ezechiel Daniel Tobias ludith Hester

Hesdrae

libri

ii

Machabaeorum
2.

libri

ii

We may now

proceed to

consider

the

chief points

which these tables illustrate. The Titles of the Books. (i)

It will

be seen that the
consist of either

Hebrew

titles

fall

into three classes.

They

(i) the first

word or words of the book (Genesis
;

— Deuteronomy,
of the

Proverbs, Lamentations)

or

(2) the

name

hero

or

supposed author (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah and or (3) a the other Prophets, Job, Ruth, Esther, Daniel, Ezra)
;

description of the contents (Psalms,
Titles of the second
in

Song of Songs, Chronicles).

and third class are generally reproduced there are some variations, as when Samuel Greek and Kings become 'Kingdoms,' and 'Diaries' (D^p^n-n^l) is changed into Omissions' (IJapaXciTro'/xci^a^), but the system But titles of the first class of nomenclature is the same.
the
;

disappear in the Greek, and in their place we find descriptive

names, suggested
1

in

almost every case by words
'

in

the verlists.

Or

less correctly uapaXetTro/uei/ac,

omitted books,' as

in

some

Titles^

Groupings Number,

and Order of Books.

215

7 7
sion
xvii.

itself.

Thus

Genesis appears to

k^o^ov
i.

>
i.

Num.
siastes

2
ypdif/ei
I

18

),,, ^^
ovpavov

from Eccl.

The Greek
If.

/ -.
ii

come from Gen. ii. 4 Exodus from Ex. xix. I
Nitmbers from
Kccle-

Deuterono7ny from Deut.
eis

titles

are probably of Alexandrian origin

and
it

pre-Christian use.

Not only were they

familiar to Origen (Eus.
list,

E.

vi.

25),

but they are used in Melito's

although

came from Palestine. Some of them at least appear to have cf Acts been known to the writers of the New Testament SetrripiD, Rom. xiii. 33 iv ii. 30 €v
;

ix.

25 iv

or

€?7
is

practice

€, €, , , /, ,
Aeyei^

Philo^ USes

^?,

Exodus and Judges

^/^

not quite constant;
;

the Mishna^, whether suggested by the Alexandrian Greek, or

^.
e.g.

once or twice he

Deuteronomy

is

sometimes
Similar
titles

,
2

but his
calls

occur in

independently coined by the Palestinian Jews HTV; ISp, Numbers Cjnspp 'D, Proverbs

^
p.
i.

;

thus Genesis

is

'D,

Lamentations
passed into

Through the Old Latin version the Greek
sions of Western Christendom.

titles

the Latin Bible ^ and from the Latin Bible into the later ver-

In three instances, however,
titles;
i,

the influence of
^

Jerome restored the Hebrew

Kingcalls

On
book

this

rendering see Driver, Deuteronomy,

The Massora

the
2 ^

rr\^7\r\

3^.
In the
ki^o.'yw'ii]

See also Acts xiii. 20, 33, Rom. x. 16, xv. 11, Heb. xi. 22. See Prof. Ryle's Philo and Holy Scripture, p. xx. ff. De inigr. Abr. 3, Quis rer. div. heres (ed. Wendland) 4. former of these passages Philo ascribes this title to Moses. Yet does not like ^|o5os occur in the Alexandrian version of the book.
^
5

DO^P to BaatXemt. See Ryle, Cano7i of the 0. T., p. 294. ^ Sometimes in a simple transliteration, as Genesis &c. Tertullian has Arit/imi, but in Cyprian the Latin Nunieri is already used see Burkitt,
Cf. the change from
^
;

O. L.

and

Itala, p. 4.

:

2i6

Titles Grouping,
y

umber and Order of Books.
^

doms have become

i,

2

Samuel, and

3,

4 Kingdoms,

i,

2

Kings, whilst 'Chronicles,' representing the

Hebrew ^*".:5^

has taken the place of Paralipomenon.
Cf.

Hieron. Prol. Gal.
et

:

" tertius sequitur

Samuel^ quem nos

id est Reguin^ qui tertio et o^-axlo Regnorum volumine continetur... Septimus Dabre aianihn, id est 'Verba dierum,' quod significantius Chronicon totius divinae historiae possumus appellare."

Regnorinn primum

secundum dicimus; quartus Malachiin^

, (€ €.
7€
may

The Greek titles vary slightly in different codices and lists. Besides the variations of cod. A which appear in Table (2), the following are mentioned in the apparatus of Holmes and Parsons. Joshua Savr], Judges Kptrai ;?7, 6 rov ai Chronicles
:

^?

^lovda.

Psalms:
is

When Nehemiah

Nee or be gleaned from the patristic lists. As an alternative for the Apostolic Canons give while Ezra is known to Hilary as sermones dierum Esdrae. The Psalter is sometimes liber Psalmoruin, or Psahni David regis, Psalte?'iu?n Davitiwe have occasionally CU7n, For a form rejected by Origen {ap. Eus. vi. 25 ov yap, $• Tives, but used by PseudoChrysostom and John of Damascus, and found in cod. A and in several of the Latin lists i; cf the English Article VI. ''''Cantica, or Songs of Solomo^y The lesser Prophets are 01

1€€ ,

prophetae iv, prophetae iv ?naioru7n volu??ii?iu??i, or simply maiores when the two collections are merged into one they become 01 or 01 prophetae xvi.
;

,
8€
(2)

, , " ), ^

/

.

. .
o\

'.

separated from Ezra its title is few further forms


:

€-

..

or Sficadvo,

prophetae xii

€€,

The Grouping
in

,
widely than
is

the greater,

, ^,
tripartite,

" the

;

^^

grouping adopted
books.

The methods of of the Books. Hebrew and Alexandrian Greek the
the

Bibles differ not less

nomenclature of the

The Hebrew canon
to

uniformly

and

books belonging

one division are never (by the Jews)
Its three

trans-

ferred to another ^"

groups are known as the

Law

^ The official Vulgate had Cantictwi, until the plural was adopted by Sixtus V. ; see Nestle, ein Jubildum der Lat. Bibel, p. 18. ^ Driver, hitrod., p. xxvii.

7;

Titles,

Grouping, Ntimber,
Prophets
(Q'i<?^),

and Order of Books.
and
the the

2

1

(n-jin),

the

Writings

(D^n-in?).

The Massora
the
as

recognised, however, certain subdivisions within

second

and

third

groups

;

Prophets were classed

Former ("'3'"^), i.e. Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings and Latter (D^^nq^*), and among the Latter the Twelve minor Prophets formed a single collection \ Similarly 'the five
' '

Rolls'
tations,

('•?:),
Esther,

i.e.

Ruth,
a

Canticles,

Ecclesiastes,

LamenKethubat

made

subsection
of

among
for

the

im.

The

tripartite

division

the
B.C.,

canon was

known

Alexandria in the second century

the writer of the
(if. rov
:

prologue to Sirach refers to
Koi

6

f.

14

f•

at

also recognised in the

New
'

it

more than once

Prophets are mentioned as authoritative collections, and in one
passage the
xxiv.
'

Writings

44

).
i.

/^
Joseph,
c.

).
iv

:

It

is

Testament, where the

Law and

the

are represented by the Psalter (Lc.

€? ,
:

But the

New Testament

comprehensive name
{e.

for the third group,

has no and even Josephus

Ap.

8) speaks of four poetical

books (probably Psalms,

Job, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes) as forming with the the Prophets the entire series of sacred books
the Hagiographa
the Prophets-.

Law and

the rest of

attached to

,
De
^

seem to have been counted by him among At Alexandria the later books were probably the canon by a looser bond. The writer of the

vita conteinplativa appears to recognise four groups^ (§ 3

Only the

first

of the three Palestinian groups remains undis-

So already

in Sir. xlix. 10

"*

See Ryle, Canon of the O.T., p. 165 Unless we omit the comma after

, ^ , .
'

€€;/).

= the

Hagiographa;

cf.

Ap.

%
f.

and regard

v.

as

as quoted below, p. 220.

2i8

Titles,

Grouping,

timber,

and Order of Books.
it is

turbed' in the Alexandrian Greek Bible, as
in

preserved to us
the

MSS. and described

in Christian
it

lists.

When
in all

Law was

translated into Greek,

was already a complete collection,

hedged round with
Greek Bible
it

special sanctions,
its

and
It is

forms of the

retains

precedence and has resisted any exotherwise with the
of
these

tensive intrusion of foreign matter.

Prophets and

the

Hagiographa.
it

Neither

groups

escaped decomposition when

passed into the Greek Bible.

The Former Prophets
the
poetical
entirely

are usually separated from the Latter,

books coming between.
histories

The Hagiographa
books

are

broken up, the non-poetical

being divided
is

between the
clearly

and the prophets.
characteristically
to

This distribution
literary character

due
the

to

the

Alexandrian desire
Histories were

to

arrange

books according

their

or

contents, or their supposed authorship.
to consort with histories, prophetic

made
Daniel

and

poetical writings with
this

others of their
is

respective kinds.

On

principle

Greek codices and catalogues one of the Greater Prophets, while Ruth attaches itself to Judges, and Canticles
in
all

to Ecclesiastes,

In

many
of
of

of

the

Greek

patristic

Hsts

the

Alexandrian

principle
Cyril

grouping

receives

express

recognition.

Thus

Jerusalem,

Gregory of

Nazianzus,

and

Leontius,

divide

the

12,

including

books of the Old Testament into (i) historical the Mosaic Pentateuch; (2) poetical 5;

(3)

prophetical

5.

Epiphanius,

followed

by John of Da(4) pro-

mascus, endeavours to combine
pentateuchs^

this

grouping with a system of
(3) historical^

— (i)

legal,

(2) poetical,

the

Yet even the Toiah was not always kept apart in the Greek Bible, as names Octateuch and Heptateuch witness. 2 Dr Sanday (in Studia Biblica, iii. p. 240) regards this as Palestinian, But Cyril begins \vith a dodecad identifying it with Cyril's method.
^

(;
^

^"

The term

-

^

(^3•12)

or

). -is

transferred to this group.

I

;

Titles
phetical

y

Grouping, Number, end which he
slightly

and Order of Books.

219

— an

attains

by relegating Ezra and
is

Esther to an appendix.
similar,

Pseudo-Chrysostorn's arrangement
different
in

though

some

of

its

details

according to his view the Bible began with an Octateuch, and
the

Prophets, and the Salomonic books described as 'hortatory^'

(

Junilius^

).
the

are broken up, the Psalter being placed with the

Even

in

the eccentric arrangement
is

of

Greek method of grouping

clearly

domi-

nant.

The
to

relative order of the

groups in the Greek Bible, being
is

of literary

and not

historical origin,
'five
'

variation.

The
the

books of
of the

to some extent liable Moses' always claim
'

precedence, and

rest

histories

follow, but the
is

position of the poetical

and prophetical books
first,

less certain.

Codex

places the poetical books

whilst in

Codd. s and
is

A

the prophets precede.

But the order of cod.

supported

by the great majority of authorities both Eastern and Western (Melito, Origen, Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius (i, 3), Gregory,
Amphilochius,
cephorus,
the

Laodicene

Pseudo-Chrysostom,
this

and 'Apostolic' canons, NiCheltenham list, the the

African canons of 397, and Augustine).

Two
'

reasons

may
and
the

have combined to favour
'

arrangement.

David

'

Solomon

'

were higher up the stream of time than Hosea
Moreover,
it

and

Isaiah.

may have seemed

fitting that

Prophets should immediately precede the Evangelists.

(3)

The Number of the Books.
the

In our printed

Hebrew
;

books of the Old Testament are 39 (Law, 5 Former Prophets (Joshua 2 Kings), 6; Latter Prophets, 15; Hagiographa, 13). But Samuel, Kings, Ezra-Nehemiah, and
Bibles

^ So Leontius them. 2 See Kihn, Theodor

(

),
v.

but he

classed

the
f.

Psalter

among

Mopsuestia u. Juniliiis, p. 356

220

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

Chronicles \ were originally single books^ and the Minor Prophets were also counted as a single book.
is

Thus

the

number

reduced to 24 (Law, 5; Former Prophets, 4; Latter Prophets, 4; Hagiographa, 11), and this answers to the prevalent
Jewish tradition.
pieces, 4).

On

the other

the books to 22 (Law, 5; Prophets, 13;

hand Josephus expressly limits Hymns and moral

He

has probably included the historical Hagio-

grapha among the Prophets, and treated Ruth and Lamentations as appendices to

Judges and Jeremiah respectively.

Both

traditions were inherited by the Church, but the latter

the twenty-two books

in the East. In some lists indeed became twenty-seven, the 'double books' being broken up into their parts (Epiph. )"*; in some a similar treatment of the Dodecapropheton raised the number to 34 (the 'Sixty Books'), and there are other eccentricities of nume-

was predominant, especially

ration which

need not be mentioned
C.

/
is

Josephus,

iv

€8 ' ^^ 8.
col. 1437).

\?

' ^ .,.^,.4... € ( ,., \ '
here.

Ap.

i.

8

:

oh

ela\

eVrt

followed by Origen ap. Eus.

Ocias

ۥ ", /

^. 4 '/3 /,
de

reaaapes

els

He

I.e.

'

elvai

ras

6

and

Cyril. Hier. catech. iv.

33

Similarly Athanasius, ep. /est. 39 (Migne, P.G. xxvi.

When

another numeration was adopted,

efforts

were

1 Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah appears to have been originally a single book. But while Ezra and Nehemiah are still joined in the Greek Bible, Chronicles stands by itself both in and (fflr, and in jtl it follows Nehemiah and forms the last book of the Canon (cf. Mt. xxiii. 35, and see

xiii.). Barnes, Chronicles, in the Caynbridge Bible, pp. x. 2 The division probably began in the LXX. 2 Jerome, '?/. Gal.: "quinque a plerisque libri duplices aestimantur." As the twenty-two books answered to the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew were thought to correspond to the alphabet, so these ' double books
'

'double letters,' i.e. those which had two forms (V, Q, 3, D, D). The 'double books' were not always identical in different lists; see Sanday,
op.
cit.

p. 239.

1

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

Order of Books.

221

made

to shew that it did not involve a real departure from the canon of twenty-two cf. Epiph. haer. i. 1.8,

^
(ed.


Conybeare,

(
;

doOelaaL
els

, On

kS*'

the other hand the numeration in 4 Esdr. xiv. 44 rests, if 7ionge7iti qiiatuor be the true reading, on a tradition which makes the Hebrew books 24. This tradition is supported by the testimony of the Talmud and the Rabbinical literature \ and the Canon is known in Jewish Avritings by the name DHSD T'D, "the Twenty-Four Books." It finds a place in certain Western Christian writers, e.g. \^ictorinus of Petau comm. Apoc. "sunt autem libri V.T. qui accipiuntur viginti quatuor quos in epitome Theodori invenies'^." Victorinus compares the 24 books to the 24 Elders of Apoc. iv., and the same fancy finds a place in the Cheltenham list ("ut in apocalypsi lohannis dictum est Vidi xxiiii seJiiores mittentes coronas stias ante thronum, maiores nostri probant hoc libros esse canonicos"). Jerome knows both traditions, though he favours the former {Prot. Gal. "quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt...ita viginti duo volumina supputantur...quamquam nonnulli Ruth et Cinoth inter Hagio-

,

p. 66),

be

^ ^
al

^lov8aioLs,

Xeyo^eVas•• dial.

... (

^^. \
m

('

.
et

Aq,

evdiaSe-

:

grapha
dos
et

scriptitent et libros hos in suo putent numero supputanper hoc esse priscae legis libros viginti quatuor").

the

now turn to the ecclesiastical lists and Hebrew Canon was maintained. Our earliest Christian list was obtained from
Let us
It is

see

how

far

Palestine '^

and probably represents the contents of the Palestinian Greek
Bible.

an attempt to answer the question, What
of the books of the

is

the

true

number and order

Old Testament?

Both the titles and the grouping are ohviously Greek, but the books are exclusively those of the Hebrew canon. Esther does not appear, but the number of the books is twenty-two, if

we

are intended to count
^

1

— 4 Regn.
222, 292
;

as two,

Sanday, op. cit. p. 236 ff. which Sanday inclines, that the writer refers to the Excerpta ex Theodoto which are partly preserved in the works of Clement of Alexandria.
Cf. Ryle,
f,,

Canon, pp. 157

-

Zahn

'$
2

Melito ap. Eus.

,

offers a suggestion, to

H.E.

iv.

26

'

'

€€...€ ...€ .

e/s

-

222

Titles,

Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
list

The
i.e.

next

comes from Origen.

It

belongs to his comat

mentary on the
said to be the

first

Psalm, which was written

Alexandria \

before a.d. 231.

' /^ ).
;

The books included in it are expressly at twenty-two of the Hebrew canon {\ Yet among them are the first

book of Esdras" and the Epistle of Jeremiah, which the Jews With the addition of Baruch, Origen's list never recognised. is repeated by Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius (i), and in the Amphilochius mentions two books of Laodicean canon
Esdras, and
of Nazianzus
Epistle, or
it

is

at least possible that the

Esdras of Gregory

is

intended to include both books, and that the
Epistle, are to
lists

Baruch and the

be understood as

forming part of Jeremiah in the

both of Gregory and

Amphilochius.

Thus it appears that an expansion of the Hebrew canon, which involved no addition to the number of
during the
fourth

the books, was predominant in the East
century.

The
definitely

Eastern

lists

contain

other

placed outside the Canon.
after

have begun with Origen, who

two books adds,
takes up the

€^

iarl

expression, but

Wisdoms, Esther^,

names other books the two Palestine was perhaps Judith, and Tobitl
;

.
books,
iv
are the

but

they

are

This practice seems to

enumerating the twenty
Athanasius

naturally conservative in this matter

Cyril will not allow his

catechumens to go beyond the Canon, and Epiphanius mentions only, and that with some hesitation, the two books of

Wisdom
1
-

[elal

'

^...

Eus. //.£.

vi.

Already cited freely by Josephus as an authority for the history of the period. Origen, it should be added, regards i, 2 Esdras as a single volume
devripa iv
evi).
3

(" ,
Amphilochius.
*
5

24•

Cf. Melito's omission of Esther,

and the note appended
class

to the list of

The N.T. members
Haer.
i.
i.

of the

same

Teaching and the

Shepherd.
x.

i

;

Titles,

Grouping, Nicmber,
/xeV

)^.
;

And

this

,'

and Order of Books.
etg

223

East even at a later time.

was the prevalent attitude of the PseudoThere are exceptions
;

Chrysostom places Sirach among the Hortatory books of the canon the Apostolic canons, while excluding Sirach, include
three

books of Maccabees.

But John of Damascus

reflects

the general opinion of the Greek fathers when, while reckon-

ing both books of Esdras- as canonical, he repeats the verdict

of Epiphanius

' ''.
On
the other

upon the two Wisdoms,

'Ei/aperot

,

Hebrew canon, and

hand the West, further from the home of the knowing the Old Testament chiefly
Hilary and

through the Latin version of the lxx., did not scruple to
mingle non-canonical books with the canonical.
Ruffinus* were doubtless checked, the one by the influence of

Eastern theologians, the other by the scholarship of Jerome

but

Hilary mentions that there were

those
to

who wished

to

raise the

number of

the canonical books

twenty-four by
the end of

including Tobit and Judith in the canon.

From

the fourth century the inclusion of the non-canonical books in

Western
scruples

lists

is

a matter of course.
;

Even Augustine has no
ii.

on the subject
forty-four
A^eteris

he makes the books of the Old
doctr.

Testament
Testamenti

{de

Chr.

13

"his xliv

libris

terminatur auctoritas^"), and

among them

Tobit, Judith,

the histories; and the two

and two books of Maccabees take rank with Wisdoms, although he confesses that they were not the work of Solomon, are classed with the
^

The non-canonical books from real apocrypha when the
^

{

-

"
De

mens, et pond. 4. Like Origen, he explains that they form together but a single book
at

/

et's

( '^)

).

are

latter are

however carefully distinguished mentioned e.g. in the sticho;

metry of Nicephorus, and in the list of the 'Sixty Books.' ^ In sy?nb. 38 "alii libri sunt qui non canonici sed ecclesiastici a maioribus appellati sunt."
5

Cf. Retract,

ii.

4.

224

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

Prophets.
Carth.
iii.

His judgement was that of his Church (Cone.
can. xlvii. " sunt

canonicae scripturae Salomonis

libri

Machabaeorum libri duo"). The African Church had probably never known any other canon, and its belief prevailed wherever the Latin Bible was read.
quinque... Tobias, Judith...

There can be

little

doubt
lists

that,

notwithstanding the

strict

adherence of the Eastern

to the

number of

the

Hebrew

books, the Old Latin canon truly represents the collection of

Greek sacred books which came into the hands of the early Christian communities at Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome. When Origen and the Greek fathers who follow him fix the

number of

the books at twenty-two or twenty-four, they follow,
esti-

not the earlier tradition of the Church, but the corrected

mate of Christian scholars who had learned
teachers.

it

from Jewish

An

earlier tradition

is

represented by the line of

Christian

writers,

beginning with

Clement

of

Rome, who

quoted the 'Apocryphal' books apparently without suspecting
that

they were not part of the

Canon.

Thus Clement of

Rome'
Esther
the
;

places the story of Judith side by side with that of
the

of Sirach is cited by Barnabas- and Clement of Alexand Tobit by Polycarp* andria^ and Origen appeal to Tobit and both the Wisdoms, Our earliest MSS. of the to which Origen adds Judith''. Greek Bible confirm the impression derived from the quotaTheir canon corretions of the earliest Christian writers.
DidacJie^,
;

Wisdom

sponds not with that of the great writers of the age Avhen they were written, but with that of the Old Latin version of the » A contain the two Wisdoms, Tobit, and Codd. Lxx.
Judith

bees in A; cod.

and i 4 MaccaWisdoms, and when complete may have contained other books of the same class.
;

I

2

Maccabees are added

in

X,

C

still

exhibits the two

^

*

r Cor. 55. Philipp. 10.

2
^

c.

19. 9.
i.

^

c. 4.

Strom,
iv. p.

lo, v. 14.

Cf. Westcott in

D.C.B.

130.

"

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.

225

Moreover, the position of the books shews that the scribes
of these

MSS.

or of their archetypes lacked either the

power
is

or the will to distinguish

them from the books
books

of the
it

Hebrew
clear

canon.

In the light of the facts already produced,
in

that the presence of the non-canonical

cannot be attributed to the skilled writers
fifth centuries.

Greek Bibles of the fourth and
older tradition

They have but perpetuated an
of
the

—a
the

tradition probably inherited

An

explanation

from the Alexandrian Jews. early mixture of non-canonical

books with canonical may be found
In the
first

in the form under which Greek Bible passed into the keeping of the Church.

century the

material used

for literary

purposes

was
that

still

almost
the
roll'.

exclusively

papyrus,

and the form

was

of

But

rolls

of papyrus

seldom contained

more than a

single work,

and
rolls

writings of any length, espe-

cially if divided into books,

,
the

were often transcribed into two or

more separate

rolls ^.

The
sets.

were kept

in

boxes

(,
it

capsae, cistaeY,

which served not only to preserve them,

but to collect them in

Now

while the sanctity of the five

books of Moses would protect the cistae which contained them from the intrusion of foreign rolls, no scruple of this kind

would deter the owner of a

roll

of Esther from placing
;

in

same box with Judith and Tobit the Wisdoms in like manner naturally found their way into a Salomonic collection while in a still larger number of instances the two Greek recensions of Esdras consorted together, and Baruch and the Epistle seemed rightly to claim a place with the roll of Jeremiah. More rarely such a writing as the Psalms of Solomon may have found its way into the company of kindred books of
;

the canon.
1

It is

not a serious objection to
,

this

hypothesis

See Kenyon, Palaeography of Greek papyri pp. 24, 113 ff. 122: "no papyrus roll of Homer hitherto discovered contains more than two books of the Iliad. Three short orations fill the largest roll of Hyperides. ^ E. M. Thompson, Greek and Latin Palaeography, p. 57.
2

lb. p.

S. S.

15

;

220

Titles,

Grouping, Number, and Order of Books.
Apocrypha, and has no certain

that Philo does not quote the

allusion to it\

A

great scholar would not be deceived by the
rolls,

mixture

of

heterogeneous

which

might

nevertheless

seriously mislead ordinary readers,
in

and

start a false tradition

an unlettered community such as the Christian society of
first

the

century.

(4)

The Internal Order
lists

of the Groups.

Even

in

Jewish

of the

Hebrew Canon

there are variations in the

internal order of the

Prophets and the Hagiographa.

The

'Great Prophets' occur in each of the three orders (i) Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel; (2) Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah; (3) JereThe order of the Hagiographa varies miah, Isaiah, Ezekiel".

more

extensively.

In the printed Bibles they are arranged in

three subdivisions: (i) Psalms, Proverbs,

Job;

(2) Canticles,

Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther (the
(3)

five Megilloth)
is

Daniel,
:

Ezra,

Chronicles.

The Talmudic order
Chronicles.
;

as

follows

Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles,
Daniel,

Lamentations,

Esther,

The MSS.

vary,

many

agreeing with the printed Bibles

others, especially those
:

of Spanish provenajice, following the order

Chronicles, Psalms,

Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Canticles,
Esther, Daniel, Ezra^

Ecclesiastes,

Lamentations,

In the

lists

of the Greek
the
'

MSS.
their
is

Law and Hebrew order,
the

Bible and the sequence of its Former Prophets generally retain with the noteworthy exception that Ruth
'

always attached to Judges.

But there are also minor excep-

tions

which are of some

interest.

Even
list

in

the Pentateuch

Melito, Leontius. and the

Cheltenham

reverse the
is

common
in

order of Leviticus and Numbers'*.

The sequence
i),

broken

some

lists
'

after

Ruth (Laod., Epiph.
and Holy

or even after Joshua

Ryle, Philo

Scripture, p. xxxiii.

^ 3 *

See Ryle, Canon, p. 225 ff. Ryle, ib., pp. 229 ff., 281 f. On this see Sanday, Sttidia Biblica,

iii.

p. 241.

Titles,

Grouping, Niimber,
or

and Order of Books.
(Epiph.
2).

227

(Epiph.

3^)

Deuteronomy
is

Occasionally

an intruder from the Hagiographa, precedes I 4 Regn. (Epiph. 2, Dial. Tim. et Aq.), or drops All out altogether (Ps.-Chrys., Junilius, Cod. Clarom.).
Chronicles, which

these disturbances of the normal order
local or

may be

ascribed to

and find no support in the But it is otherwise when we uncial MSS. of the Greek Bible.
individual
influences,

come
regard
(i)

to the to

'

Latter Prophets

'

and the Hagiographa.
questions

With
arise,

the
is

Prophets,

three

of

order

There

the relative order of the

Twelve and the Four.
this
is

In the majority of patristic Hsts the Twelve precede (Ath.,
Cyr., Epiph., Greg.,

Amph.,

&c.),

of Codd. A, B, N-V.
it

But Cod. X begins with the Four, and
Cassiodorius,

is

supported by other authorities, chiefly Western (Ruff.,
Ps.-Gelasius,

Chelt.,

few the subdivisions are mixed (Melito, Junilius, Ebedjesu^).
in most of the (2) The internal order of the MSS. and catalogues^ where it is stated differs from the Hebrew order in regard to the relative positions of the prophets in the first half of the group the Hebrew order being Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, but the Greek, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah. The dominant Greek order may perhaps be due to "an attempt to secure greater accuracy in the chronological arrangement^" (3) The
;

^
and

also the order

Nicephorus)

:

whilst in

a

Ruth is attached to r Regn. in the Cheltenham list, and Augustine arrangement (see Sanday, I.e., p. 242). The result was to create a Heptateuch; for the word cf. J. E. B. Mayor, The Latin Heptateuch, p. xxxvi. R. Peiper's text of the Heptateuchos, to Avhich Prof. Mayor refers (p. xxxiv.), appeared in the Vienna Corpus scr. eccl. lat. vol.
^

inclines to this

xxiii.
2

(1895).

For statements by early Mohammedan writers as to the extent of the Jewish and Christian Canons see Margoliouth in Exp. Times, Nov. 1899,
p. 91.
^ The chief exceptions are Cod. v, Hosea, Amos, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah; Greg. Naz. and Cod. Barocc, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Jonah, Obadiah Junilius, Ebedjesu, Augustine, the Hebrew order. ^ Ryle, Canon, p. 229.
:

;

15—2

228

Titles,

Grouping,

timber,

and Order of Books.

tradition (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel), but

Greek order of the Greater Prophets follows the oldest Hebrew it appends Lamenta-

tions to Jeremiah,

and enlarges the group by placing Daniel
Chelt., Augustine), or,

either before (Melito, Origen, Hilary,

more

usually, after Ezekiel.
relative order of the

The
already

perplexing.

Hagiographa in the lxx. is more For Ruth, Lamentations, and Daniel we have accounted there remain Chronicles, Job, Psalms,
;

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Esther, and Ezra.
cles,

Chroniits

in

accordance with the theory enshrined

in

Greek

name, usually follows Kings.
Canticles, for the

Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
in that order, as a

most part hold together
books
;

group of poetical
'

but

there

are

many

exceptions.

David

lius,

sometimes goes with the Prophets (Ps.-Chrys., JuniAugustine, Isidorus), and the group is then regarded as
'

'Salomonic,' or 'hortatory.'
of

Lists

which admit the two books
Clarom.,
Ps.-Gelasius,

Wisdom

usually join

them

to this subdivision (Ebedjesu,

Carth.,

Augustine,

Innocent,

Cod.

Cassiodorius, Isidorus).

The

internal order of the Salomonic
;

books varies (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles
Canticles,

Ecclesiastes,
;

Proverbs
usually

;

Proverbs, Canticles, Ecclesiastes)

the

Wisdoms

follow,

but sometimes break the sequence

of the three canonical books.

Much

difficulty

seems to have

been felt as to the place of Job; the book normally appears in connexion with the poetical books, either last or first,
but
it

is

sometimes placed among the

histories

(Augustine,
after
less
it

Innocent, Cod. Clarom., Ps.-Gelasius, Cassiodorius), or The position of Esdras is not the Prophets (Origen).
uncertain
also
;

its

normal
or

place
after

is

after

Chronicles,

but

is

found

before

the

Prophets
in

(Mehto,

Epiph.,

John of Damascus, Cod. Barocc), or

connexion with a

group of the apocryphal histories (cod. A, Carth., Augustine, Esther is still more erratic; sometimes it follows &c.). the poetical books, sometimes the Prophets, sometimes the

Titles,

Grouping, Number,
lists

and Order of Books.
it

229

histories

;

not a few
it

place

among

the antilegomena,

or

omit
it

altogether.

When

admitted to a place in the

Canon,

is

usually to be found at or near the

end (Origen,

Epiphanius, Amphilochius, John of Damascus, Hilary, Carth.,

Cod. Clarom., Ps.-Gelasius, Cassiodorius), and in company with
apocryphal books, especially Judith^ and Tobit (codd. B^A,
Chelt., Carth., Augustine,

and the

later Latin lists^).
felt

It

seems

as

if

the doubt which the Jewish authorities

with regard
the other

to this

book was

inherited by

many
the

Christians.

On

hand

Cyril,

who

represents
it

Jerusalem, makes

the twelfth
it

Church of of the canonical books, and in.
tradition of the

the Laodicene

list

stands eighth.

where an old or well-defined tradition fixed the internal order of groups of books, there was clearly room
in cases

Except

for every possible variation so long as the

books were written

on separate
together, but

rolls.
it

The

cista

might serve to keep a group
fixing the relative order
it

offered

no means of

of

its

contents.

In the codex, on the other hand, when

contained more than one writing, the order was necessarily
fixed ^,

and the scribe unconsciously created a tradition which was followed by later copyists. The transition to vellum,'
'

and the consequent transition from the roll to the codex, does not seem to have been general before the fourth century, although in the case of Biblical MSS. it may have begun a century earHer^; and thus we may regard our earliest uncial
codices as prototypes of the variations in order which
the mass of later

mark
It

MSS.

A

single instance
is

may

suffice.

has been stated that Esther

frequently found in

company

^ The proximity of Esther to Judith in many lists is perhaps due to the circumstance that in both books the central figure is a woman; cf. p. 213 (right-hand column). 2 Cf. Ryle, Canon, p. 199 ff. ^ Cf. Sanday, Studia Biblica, iii. p. 233 if. * See Kenyon, Palaeog7'aphy ofpapyri, p. 119 f.; Sanday, I.e. Papyrus was freely used for codices in Egypt during the third century cf. Grenfell and Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii. p. 2.
;

230

Titles,

Grouping, Number,

and Order of Books.
in

with Judith

and Tobit.

But these books occur

varying

order in the oldest MSS.; in
but in
is

we have
;

Esther, Judith, Tobit,

A, Esther, Tobit, Judith

a favourite Western order

Tobit, Esther, Judith (Chelt, Augustine, Innocent, Gelasius,
Isidorus);

Cassiodorius,

another, sanctioned at Carthage
of the Vulgate,

in

397, is apparently more common in MSS. Such variations, resting on no obvious Tobit, Judith, Esther \
principle,

viz.,

are doubtless ultimately due to the judgement or

caprice of a few scribes, whose copies supplied the archetypes

of the

later

Greek MSS. and the daughter-versions of the

Septuagint.

On the general subject of this chapter the consult C. A. Credner, Gesch. d. N. T. Kanoiis (ed. Volkmar, Berlin, i860); Th. Zahn, Gesch. d. N.T. Ka?io?is, ii., p. 143 if. (Erlangen, 1890); B. F. Westcott, Hist, of the Canon of the N.T.^ (Cambridge, 1891); W. Sanday, The Cheltenham List, in Studia Biblica, iii., pp. 226 243 (Oxford, 1891); Buhl, Kanon u. Text des A.T. (Leipzig, 1891); H. E. Ryle, Canon of the O.T. (London, 1892).
Literature.
student

may

^

For the order of the books

in Latin

MS.

Bibles see S. Berger, His-

toire de la Vulgate, pp. 301-6, 331-9•

4

CHAPTER

.

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
The books which
well as in their titles
are
^

common
differ in

to the

Hebrew

Bible and

the Alexandrian Aversion

regard to their contents as

and order.

Differences of contents

may

conveniently be considered under two heads, as they affect the

sequence or the subject-matter.
(A)
I.

Differences of Sequence.

The

following table shews the principal instances in
at variance in

which the Greek and the Hebrew books are
reference to the order of the contents.

verses in the left-hand

chapters and column are those of the Cambridge Septuagint; the right-hand column follows the numeration of

The

the printed

Hebrew
Greek.

Bibles.

Hebrew.
Gen. xxxi.
49, „
12,

Gen.
„ „

xxxi. 46^

— 52
II,

48^, 47, 51,

52% 48^

XXXV. 16
XX. 13

Exod.

— 15 XXXV. 8 —

— 21
15

50% 52^

Exod.
16,

XXXV. 16+21, 17 20, 22^ xx. 14, 15, 13 XXXV. 9—12, 17, 13—14,
16, 19, 15

17, 18, ig'^

^ Following the order of The Old Testament in Greek, these are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, i Kingdoms (vol. i.), i— 2 Paralipomena, 2 Esdras, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Job, Esther (vol. ii.), the Twelve Minor Prophets, the Four Greater Prophets (vol. iii.) 37 in all.

232

Books of

the

Hebrew Canon.

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
Greek.

233

;

234

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
is

particulars the student

referred to the commentaries which

deal with the several books.

= the Greek text, and '^' ^' ^^''• = the In the following pages text as given in cod. A, cod. B, or as the case may be; i$l = the Massoretic text as printed in the Hebrew Bibles.

e

Greek

Gen.

xxxi.

46

fif.

The

passage

is

in

some confusion

"w.
48

54 appear to embody E's account... z'Z'. 46, 50 the account given by J\" i^ is loosely put together,
45, 47, 51
V.

and
52.

50^,

which (& omits,

is

hardly consistent with vv. 48,

In

^

the materials seem to have been re-arranged with

the view of giving greater consistency to the narrative.

Gen. XXXV. 16
due to a desire Bethlehem see ExoD. XX. 13
;

ff.

The
locate

transposition in (& appears to be

to
art.

Eder

()
20,
iii.

between Bethel and
(i.

Eder

in Hastings'

D. B.

p. 644).

15.

^^ and iW
see Lc.
xviii.

represent here two distinct

traditions with regard to the order of the Decalogue.

order followed by
Philo de x. orac.

&

For the
ii.

Rom.
2
;

xiii.

9, Jas.

11,
is

10,

de spec. legg.

that of

^^^^
v.

supported by Mt.,
cod.

Mc, and

Josephus.

In Deut.

17

— 19

wavers between the two, but cod.

A
c.

consistently agrees

with iW.

ExoD. XXXV.
the


of

xl.

is

"the sequel
instructions

to

xxv.

xxxi., relating

execution

the

there

communicated
in the

to

Moses," the correspondence being so close that "
the narrative
is

main,

repeated

verbati77i

— with the single substitution
in c. xxv.
ff.

of past tenses for future^"

But whilst

the lxx.

generally follows the Massoretic order, in the corresponding
sections at the
in

end of the book "extraordinary

variations occur

the Greek,

some

verses being

omitted altogether, while

others are transposed

and knocked about with a freedom

very unlike the usual manner of the translators of the Pentateuch'."
1

2
'^

Driver, Intr. p. 15. Driver, Intr. pp. 37, 38. Robertson Smith, 0. T. in the J. Ch. p. 124

f.

Books of the Hebrew Canon.

235
furniture of the

The passage
rough table
will

deals with the building

and

Tabernacle, and the attire of the Priesthood.
enable the student to see
are arranged in the lxx.

The following how the details

and Heb.

severally.

Oriiaments of the Ministers.

Ephod (xxxvi. 9 12). Onyx stones (xxxvi. 13
Robe

— Linen vestments (xxxvi. 35 — Crown plate (xxxvi. 38 —
40).

Breastplate (xxxvi. 15 29). of Ephod (xxxvi. 30

— —

14).

— — Veils (xxxvi. 35 —
Hangings (xxxvi. 8 Boards (xxxvi. 20
38).

Structure of the Tabernacle.
19).

34).

34).

37).

Furniture of the Tabernacle

and
Ark
(xxxvii.
i

its

Court.
16).

Structure of the Tabernacle

Table

(xxxvii.

and
Hangings
Court
Veils (xxxvii. 3
(xxxvii.

—— 10
9).

Court.
i

(xxxvii.

— 7—

2).

6).

18).

Candlestick (xxxvii. 17 24). Altar of incense (xxxvii. 25 29). Altar of Burnt-oifering (xxxviii. 1-7).

Furniture of the Tabernacle^ &^c.

Ark

(xxxviii.

i

Table

(xxxviii.

— 9—

Laver Court

(xxxviii. 8).

(xxxviii.

9

20).

8).

12).

Candlestick (xxxviii. 13 17). Altar of Burnt-offering (xxxviii. 22 24). Oil and Incense (xxxviii. 25

Ornaments of the

Mifiisters.

Ephod (xxxix. 2 — 5). Onyx stones (xxxix. 6

Breastplate (xxxix. 8 21). Robe of the Ephod (xxxix. 22
26).

— —

7).

26).

Laver

(xxxviii. 27).

Linen vestments

(xxxix. 27

Crown
It is clear

plate (xxxix. 30

29).

31).

from

this

comparison that both (& and
difference

0i
due

follow
to

a system,

i.e.

that the

of sequence

is

a

deliberate rearrangement of the groups.
translator has purposely

Either the Alexandrian
order, giving

changed

their relative

precedence to the ornaments
subordinated in the M. T. of
texts of cc. XXV.

of the

priesthood which
xl.,

are

cc. xxxv.

— XXX.;
text in

as well as in both
c.

or he had before him in

xxxv.

ff.

another

Hebrew

which the present Greek order was
scholars
(e.g.

observed.

Many

O. T.

Kuenen, Wellhausen,

Dillmann) regard

cc. xxxv.

xl.

as belonging to a " secondary

;

236

Books of the Hebrew
Thus
it

CaiioJi.

and posterior stratum of P\"

is

permissible to sup-

pose that the Hebrew text before the original translators of

Exodus did not contain

this section,

and that

it

was supplied

book in which the last six chapters had not yet reached their final form. That the translation of these chapters was not made by the same hand as the rest of Exodus has been gathered
recension
of the

afterwards from a longer

Hebrew

from the

fact that

the
xxx.

Hebrew

technical

terms which are
in

common
differently

to

xxv.


24

rendered in
i.

and xxxv. xl. are the two contexts".
xxvi.

certain

cases

Numbers
tribes
is

ff.,

15

ff.

Each of these passages

contains a census of the tribes, and in each the order of the

and i^. In both lists i^l places and Asher eleventh whereas according to (5 Gad is ninth in the first of the two lists, and sixth in the second, and in the second Asher is seventh. The effect of the
slightly different in <&

Gad

third,

;

sequence presented by (&
to Asher, a position

is

to bring
this tribe

Gad

into close proximity
i.

which

occupies in

5

— 15

{(&

and 0i).
C.
vi.

For
22

this there
ff.,

may have been

genealogical reasons

see Gen. xxx. 10
ff.

xlix. 19.

natural order,

shew that the
result of

Here 0i obviously has the simpler and more and Xiyovn^ at the end oi v. 23 seems to Greek order, though supported by BAN*, is the
in the

?

an early accidental displacement
ix.

Greek

text.

Joshua
at

3

ff.

In the present Hebrew text the ceremony
separated from the latter incident by the
(ix.
i,

Ebal and Gerizim follows immediately upon the taking of
it

Ai, but in (&
hostile

is

gathering of the western kings

2)

immediately before the story of the Gibeonites.

^

and placed
" involves

a geographical difiiculty, for Ebal lies considerably to the north

p.

1 See Driver, Intr. pp. 35, 39 Addis, Documents of the Hexateiuh, 276 f. ^ Robertson Smith, 0. T. in the J. Ch. p. 125.
;

ii.


Books of
the


Hebrew
Cation.

237
is

of Ai, and until the intervening territory was conquered... it
difficult

to

understand

how Joshua could have advanced
however
is

thither \"

The

situation
(&,

scarcely

improved

if

we
is

adopt the order of

unless the gathering of the kings

taken to imply a further victory on the Israelite side which

ix.

opened the way to central Palestine. Dillmann suggests 2 was once followed by the details of a battle. If so,

that
it

is

possible that

^

common

with

C. xix. 47

—48.
17
if.

^

still
it

preserves the original order, though in

has lost this record.

On

these verses, which exchange places
".

in the Greek, see 3

under (B)

Regn.

iv.

The change
the transposition

of order in vv.

17

— 19

needs no discussion;
in
i.,

may be due
or,

to

an accident of transcription

the archetype of Cod. B,
xxvi., to

like the variations in

Num.

some consideration connected with the placing of the

tribes.

nature

The real problem of the passage begins at iv. 20. Its may best be understood from a table of the contents.
details of

These consist of the
public works
as follows
:

Solomon's personal greatness and

;

the facts are arranged by

©^ and

^

respectively

Provision for the royal table

(iv.

Solomon's marriage
2f., 7f.)•

(iii.

i).

20—23). Solomon's power (iv. 24). His wisdom (iv. 25 30). His marriage (iv. 31). His wife's dowry (iv. 32 ff.). His negociations with King

Provision for the royal table

(v.

The King's power His wisdom (v. 9
(v.

Hiram
17).

(v.

i

— His negociations with Hiram 15 —
14).

(v. 4).

King

25).

12).
(v.

His corvee of workmen (w 27
13
32).

His corvee of workmen

Foundations of the Temple laid
(vi. I).

Foundations of the Temple laid (vi. 1—5). Dimensions of the Temple (vi.
6f.).
1

Dimensions of the Temple (vi,
Details of the building
7, 36)•
(vi.

6).
2,

Driver,

/;//;-.

p.

lOO.

2

Cf.

7-,

p. 244.


238

Books of the Hebrew Canon.

Details of the building
34)•

(vi.

8
(vii.

Building of the royal palaces
(vii.
I

12).

Work

of

Hiram

the artist

Work

of

Hiram
wife's

the artist

(vii.

1—37). Building of the royal palaces (vii. 38—50).

12—51)• Solomon's

dowry

(ix.

16

f.).

As

in the disturbed section at the

end
:

of
(i)

Exodus,
Whilst

to see that each order follows a

system

^

it is

easy

places

the marriage of

Solomon

to Pharaoh's daughter,
wife's

and the use

made by

the

king of

historical settings,

&

his

marriage

portion, in their

brings the two incidents together, as the

finishing strokes to the picture of

whilst

^

Solomon's power.

Again,

deals with the whole of Solomon's public \vorks
skill

before

it

describes the

of Hiram, (&^ completes the history
the account of Hiram's

of the building of the

Temple with
the

labours
palaces.

before

it

describes

construction

of

the

royal

The above comparison is necessarily rough it does not shew the minor differences of order, or the omissions and additions of the Greek text. A closer examination leaves little doubt that ffi^ has been translated from a recension of the book earlier than that which is preserved in the Massoretic
;

text'.

C.

x.

23


it

33.

The
(c.

text of ©^'^"<=• here admits

two pas-

sages which

they stand

in

^

had passed over
ix.

in the earlier contexts,

where

15,
it

17

22,

v.

i).

Of

ix.

10

— 28
form

Prof. Driver

remarks that

"consists of a series of notices
its

imperfectly connected together," and that
...is,

"literary

for

some

reason, less complete than that of any other

portion of the Books of Kings^"
it is

Under

these circumstances

not surprising that some of these notices occupied another
Cf. Driver, Intr. p. 182,
ff.

^

and note;

C

F. Burney, in Hastings'

D. B.

p.

862
2

Intr. p. 181.

.

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
place
lator.

239
trans-

in the

text

which was before the Alexandrian
is

C.

V.

1% which in the Greek order

x.

30, belongs in

i^

to another similar collection

of loosely-connected para-

graphs.

The arrangement
it

folloAved

by Gr^

is

perhaps not
earlier stage

materially better, but

probably represents an
^"'=•

in the formation of the book.

C.

xi.

3

8.

Here ©^•

presents a text which differs

from (S^ and itt both in order and in form.
(^'^
is

with

©^

diffuse

and i^ will be found to be instructive and repeats itself unnecessarily (3


in

...^
2.
briefly

€7€
.

...^- at

.

% 6 ^€")
;

A

comparison of
the latter

.

.

.

"j

;

the former presents the

facts-^

and

in a logical sequence.

Here

as elsewhere in this

book Cod.
Cc.

A

represents the Hexaplaric Greek, and not the

original lxx."
XX., xxi.

The

relative order of these chapters

is

reversed

iH, which

justifies the

change by prefacing the story of
\n^^i.

Naboth with the words

^^^\\ Qn?'=in

''The dislocation

may have been due
viously

to the desire to bring the
its

prophecy of
Cod.

Ahab's death nearer to the account of

occurrence I"
is,

,
1

wrong
it,

as the present

Hebrew order

adopted
Lucian

interpolating the inapposite iyeveTo /xera
;

which Origen had borrowed from Aquila and even (if he is here rightly represented by Lagarde) has been led into the same error, though he seems to retain the true
sequence of the chapters.

,
A
has

Ob-

Psalms ix. cxlvii. Throughout the greater part of the Psalter
however omits the important statement o{
v.

©

and

iW

3% which comes "'from

the older nan-ative" (Driver). - See Field ad loc, and cf. Silberstein, iiber den Ursprung der im cod. Alex. u. Vat. des dritten Konigsbuches...iiberlieferten Textgestalt (Giessen,
1893)•
=i

C. F. Burney,

I.e.


240
Books of
tJie


Hebrew Canon.
This
is

follow different systems of numeration.

due

to certain

consecutive Psalms

in the

Hebrew

Psalter being counted as
;

cxiv. - cxv. Greek (ix. + x. Heb. ^ ix. lxx. and certain of the Hebrew Psalms being Heb. vice versa divided in the Greek into two (cxvi. Heb. = cxiv. + cxv. LXX.; cxlvii. Heb. = cxlvi. + cxlvii. lxx.).

one

in

the

=cxiii. lxx.),

In the Heb. Psalms

ix.

and
one\

x.

there

are

traces

of an

acrostic system which have

been taken

to indicate that the

two Psalms were
Psalms
cxvi.

originally

Many Hebrew MSS.
it

join

cxiv., cxv.^, as
cxlvii.
it is

m

the lxx.

For the division of Psalms

and

less

easy to account, but
the

may have been

due

to a desire to

make up

number

of the Psalms to 150^.

Proverbs
In the
first

xxiv.

xxxi.

great section of this

book

(cc.

i.

ix.)

there

is

no important
(x.

difference of order, nor does the second section
or the third (xxii. 17
in the

xxii.

i^)

xxiv. 22) offer

more than
23

an occasional variation

grouping of proverbs, combined

with omissions and additions on either side.

But

at c. xxiv.

we

enter

upon a

series of collections

which seem

at

one time

to have

formed distinct books or cycles of proverbial teaching, and ^H differ widely, as a comparison of the and here

^

contents

will

shew.

©
Words
49).

iH

of Agar (xxiv. 24 37). Sayings of the Wise (xxiv. 38

Sayings of the Wise
34).

(xxiv. 23

Proverbs of Solomon (xxv.
50

i

Rest of the Words
(xxiv.

of

Agur

xxix. 21).

68).

Words

of

Agur

(xxx.

i

33).

1

See Cheyne, Book of Psalms^
1.

Prof. Kirkpatrick {Psalms,
2

See Kennicott,

ii.

p.

p. 228; Bleek-Wellhausen, p. p. 41) speaks with less confidence. It should be added that in the 410.

471.

MSS.

Pss. cxvi., cxvii., cxviii. are also often written continuously. 3 "Both in Palestine and in Alexandria great importance seems to have been attached to this number. In Palestine, however, there were some who counted only 147 Psalms" (Cheyne op. cit. p. xiv.). See also Lagarde,

nov. Ps. gr. spec, p. 8.

——
Books of

/ Hebrew
'j']).
i

Cano7t.

241

Words

of Lemuel (xxiv. 69 Proverbs of Solomon (xxv.
xxix. 27).

Words

of

Lemuel

(xxxi.

i

Praise of the Virtuous (xxxi. 10 31).

Woman

9).

Praise of the Virtuous (xxix. 28 49).

Woman

Evidently the order of this portion of the book had not

been

linally settled

when

the Alexandrian translator did his
failed to

\vork\

Moreover he has

understand the headings of

the two sections attributed to

Agur and Lemuel^, and has
Wise between
in his

broken up Agur's collection, the unity of which he seems not
to have recognised, placing the Sayings of the

the fragments

;

unless, indeed, he

found them divided

Hebrew

archetype.
xxv.

Jeremiah
c.
I

li.

A

glance at the table which stands
will

near the beginning of this chapter
XXV. 15
li.

shew

that the section

xlv. 5

(iil) answers in a general
c.

way
is

to

c.

xxxii.

35 (^), whilst
order,

xlvi.

i

li.

64 (iH)

represented,

though not without considerable interruptions of the present

Hebrew

by

c.

xxv. 14

xxxi.

44 (©),

Speaking roughly

these two sections have exchanged places' in the Greek text^

In (& the prophecies against the nations precede the parable
of the intoxicating cup (xxv. 15
ff.

=

xxxii. i ff.);

in i$l they

form the
the

final section of

the book, coming immediately before
(c.

historical

appendix

Hi.).

If these prophecies
c.

were

circulated in a separate form, the words of
naturally have

xxv. 13
to

might

led an Alexandrian
in the lxx.,

collector

place them

where they stand

whereas in Palestine they were

treated as a postscript to the earlier collections and placed
1

Cf. Robertson Smith, O.T. in J. Ch. p. 11

^

See Lagarde, Anmerkungen zur griech. tlbersetzung

pp. 90, 91.
*

-

€,

.
Cf.
S.

Origen ad Afric. 4

€€

. 5e

1 ;

Toy, Proverbs^
d.

ev

\€$

Proverbien,

p. xxxiii.

S.

6

242
after xlv. 5.

Books of the Hebreiu Canon.

The two

texts differ

however not only

in regard

to the place which they assign to the section as a whole, but
in

the relative order of the prophecies.
is

The
;

order of the
Philistia,

nations denounced

in G•

Elam, Egypt, Babylon,

Edom, Ammon, Kedar, Damascus, Moab but in i^T, Egypt, Philistia, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus, Kedar, Elam, The prophecies had apparently been grouped in Babylon.
the Alexandrian collection after one manner, and after another
in the collection

which was current
3

in Palestine.

EzEKiEL
the

vii.

Hebrew

text

9. Here the divergence of the lxx. from was noticed by Jerome, who writes: "in hoc

capitulo iuxta lxx. interpretes ordo mutatus est et confusus,
ita ut

prima novissima

sint et

novissima vel prima vel media,

ipsaque media nunc ad extrema nunc ad principia transferantur."

The transposition, to whichever may be explained by the genius of the
such as
is

side

it is

to

be ascribed,
is

passage which

in " a

lyric strain

unwonted

in Ezekiel•."

A

full

examinajustly
finds

tion

of

the
it

context
as

may

be

seen

in

Cornill",
Stelle,"

who
4, 7

describes

" eine stark

verderbte

and

a

solution in the hypothesis of a doublet (cf vv. 3

8).

(B)
I.

Differences of Subject- Matter.
comparison of the lxx. with the Massoretic

A

further

Hebrew number
{ep.

reveals the presence in each text of a considerable

of passages which are not to be found in the other.

This fact was known to Origen, and frankly recognised by him

€€ '
;

)
1

ad African.

§

3

'

kv

and the Hexapla, as we have seen^, was the result of a mistaken endeavour to assimilate the lxx. to the current.
Driver, Intr. p. 263.
^

^? /3,\%
h\ aytotg
2

•:^ ^e

Ezechiel, p. 212.

Pt.

I.

c. iii.

:

2

Books of the Hebrew

Canofi.

243
as

Hebrew
centuries

text.

Its

remains are

still

invaluable

bearing

witness to the condition of both texts in the second and third
after

Christ.

The student who would
in this place

grasp the
in

nature and extent
Field's great edition

of the
;

problem must examine them

we

will

content ourselves

with some notice of additions and omissions which extend to
entire verses or paragraphs.

Pentateuch.
exceptions.

changes in either direction.

Cain

Bible. The supplementary chapters of Exodus are on the whole shorter in (& than in i^ ; the former has nothing to answer to c. xxxv. 8, xxxvii. 25 28, xl. 6 8, 11, and exhibits c. xxxvi. 8 34 in an abridged form. In the Song of Moses the last four distichs are expanded in (5 into

Hebrew

(
\^\ \^\
rots•

As a whole,

the

Law

has escaped material

But there are a few impor4;ant In Gen. iv. 8 the lxx. suppHes the Avords of eU TO TTeSiov), which are wanting in the

eight, thus

, ^ [, , € , , (, €<,
eVt

€€] \ [\ €€ [?]
is

,
in

ayyeXoL

yrjv

, .
^.]
with
the

There

nothing

01

which

corresponds

bracketed words of the version.
copies of

Yet they are present in all uncial MSS. of the lxx., and were probably in the earlier

Deuteronomy which passed into the possession of Possibly the Song was circulated in a separate form in more than one translation. The present
the Christian Church.

Greek 2 and

text
4, 6

seems to be the result of conflation, lines i and 3, and 7, being doublets line 2 = 4 appears to be an
;

adaptation of Ps. xcvi. (xcvii.)

7.

16

244
Joshua.

Books of the Hebrew
Besides
that

Cano7t.
in
this

innumerable smaller variations
it

book which shew
last four

was not regarded by the translators

as sharing the peculiar sanctity of the Torah^, there are in the

^

chapters several important contexts in which (& and

differ

by defect or
47

excess-.

C
^,
to

xix.

— 48

(i-K).

The order
words

in

so as to bring the
list

-

of these verses

is

.

reversed
into

juxtaposition with the

and
34
f.,

46); each of the verses which have thus exchanged places

of the Danite towns {vv. 41

the Lxx. attaches a rider, based apparently

and describing the
the Amorites.

relations

upon Judges ii. between the new settlers

and

C. XX. 4
ch. in
its

Omitted in ©. " It is probable that the original form (P) has been enlarged by additions
6.

from the law of homicide
date, so that they

in Dt.

(c.

19) at a comparatively late
in the

were

still

wanting

MSS. used by

the

LXX. translators I"
C.
xxi.

omit
cities

vv.

36

— 37, 42 a— The printed — 37, which contain the names
;^6

d.

Hebrew

Bibles

of the Levitical

in

been obeHsed
ever, in

Reuben, and they seem to have Greek by Origen. They are found, howthe majority of Hebrew MSS.'', and are necessary to
the
territory of
in the

the completeness of the narrative.

Vv.

42 a

c are little

more

than a doublet of
tipon
c. V. 3.

c.

xix. 50,

51 b; 42 d appears to be based

C. xxiv. 30 a
4iint

— 33
7,

b.

V.

knives

(v.

xxi.
ii.

42
7,

d).

30 a continues the story of the omits v. 31, a (&, which
to
iv.

doublet of Judges
ZJ.

adds
i

the
3
if.,

book a
Judges

postscript,
ii.

33 a

b,

based on

v.

33,

Sam.

6,

11

ff.,

iii.

14'.
^

i,

ii. p. 784. in Hastings' D. ^ Driver, Intr. p. 105. 781 ff. ^ See Kennicott, i. p. 474, De Rossi, i. p. 96 ff.; and cf. Field, Hexapla, p. 387, Addis, Documents of the Hexaieuch, ii. p. 472 ff. ^ See Knobel in Kiirzgef. exeg. Handbuch zum A.T., p. 488.

See G. A. Smith
Op.
cit., p.

.

2

.


the

Books of
I

Hebrew Canon.

245

Samuel
ii.

(i

Regn.).

C.

9, 10.

The

closing stanza of this

hymn,
in
CBr,

like that of

Song of Moses, is presented by ffi expanded form. Vv^ 8 c, 9 a are omitted
the
tutes

in

a modified

and

which

substi-

.] .'^
.

("apparently an attempt to acclosely to

commodate
and
24, taken

the

Song more

Hannah's position'"),
from Jerem.
ix.

inserts in the heart oi v. 10 a passage

23,

from the Greek version, but with variations which

form an instructive study
I

Regn.
iv
rfi

ii.

86
6

iv

rrj

8(...6
".

.
:

Jer. ix.
..6

piov,

TTOielv

8i

6

iv

,.,
iv
xfj

eXeo?

. \^ 8..6

iyoo

eiftt

6

iv

It

has been noticed that

Song has been inserted in (5r and 01 at different points in the narrative'; and it seems to be a reasonable inference that it was not in the original draft of the book. Such a hypothesis will account for the freedom with which it has been treated in (&. xviii. This is the most important of the contexts Cc. xvii The in which G^ differs from (5^ 01 in the way of defect.
28 b (njn^^ D*^ -inn^M).
if so,

)

i\
Regn.
the
ii.

"/.

iia

(
I

probably corresponds to

Sam.

i.

omitted verses contain the story of David's
of Israel
(xvii.
(xvii.

visit to

the

camp

12

Jonathan
life (xviii.

55
11,

10

— — 5); Saul's attempts 17 — 19); besides occasional
31);

David's

interview

with

xviii.

and upon David's
Saul

details of less

importance

50; xviii. 30). These omissions have been variously explained.
(xvii. 41,

Accord-

ing to Wellhausen and Kuenen^, the Greek translator, or the
scribe of the archetype followed
^

by Cod. B, has deliberately
cit.,

Driver, Samuel, p. 20. 2 See Wellhausen, der Text d. B. Sa»iuelis, p. 42; Driver, op. 17, 18, 21; H. P. Smith, Samuel, p. 13. Or'iver, Inlr., p. 170; Savmel, p. ii6f.
•^

pp.

^

246
removed

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
the missing verses, from a desire to harmonise.
is

Cer-

tainly the result of their absence

to reduce, if not altogether
i4fr., which represents whose reputation Saul xviii., where on a later

to remove, the conflict

between

c. xvi,

David
is

as an experienced warrior with
xvii.,

already acquainted, and cc.

occasion he appears as a shepherd lad of
as yet heard nothing.
out,
it is

whom

the king has

But, as Robertson Smith has pointed

difficult to believe that

simple omissions

made
(5r.

without

changing a word of what was

left

could produce a complete

and consecutive narrative such

as

we

find in

He

con-

cludes that the verses omitted by (& are "interpolations in the

found

from a lost biography of David... not which lay before the lxx. translators'." Driver^ doubts whether the verses can have been interpolated in a strict sense, "for an interpolation would not insert anytext, extracts

Hebrew

in the

text

thing at variance with the narrative interpolated."
therefore (he adds) shut

"

We

seem

up

to the conclusion that the verses

omitted in the Vat. MS. belong to an independent narrative,

which was in parts incorporated with the older account, but not in all MSS. existing when the lxx. translated the book."

The

omissions are supplied in
;

©^

^"*'•,

but probably from

a non-Septuagintal source
asterisk in the Hexaplaric

C.

xxiii.

Heb. from ^T. [v. 11) to -ll-^P: {v. 12). But it also omits '?;? n^l np^rp {v. 11), and Wellhausen conjectures with probability was wanting in the original form of the that €t
LXX.^
I

II

the passages are

marked with an

MSS.

12.

Here ©^

64, 92 omits by homoeoteleuton the

Kings

(3 Regn.).

In this book

^^

contains a large quantity of additional

matter, of varying character
^

and worth.
ff.

2 3

O.T. in J. Ch., pp. 121, 431 ff.; cf. Kirkpatrick, r Samuel, p. 241 I Samuel, p. 117. * See H. P. Smith, Samuel, Cf. Field ad loc. p. 212.

Books of

tJie

Hebrew Canon.
1,

247

C
follow.

ii.

35

a

n,

46 a

are

summaries of Solomon's

personal history, which have been attached, probably by the
accidents of transcription, to the verses which they severally

On

examination each of these passages proves to be

made up

partly of translations

from verses which are not

represented in the true lxx., partly of fragments of the lxx.

which occur elsewhere in their true order, partly of brief
descriptions gathered from other parts of the book.

Thus
f

ii.

Similarly, ii. 46 a iv. 20 (iB), b = v. 2 (iH), c = iii. 18 (i-B), e v. 5 (iB), h = iv. 22—23, i iv. 24, g

—g =
C.

35 a

ix.

24

—b = — 25 (iH),
=
is

iv.

25

h = v.

26, c
16,

= iv.
i

—k =
=

31,
x.

d = v.
23
ff.,

15, e
1

—o =
i

= vii.
ii.

loff.,

8

(iH),

d = ix.

9.

=

=

2ff.,

i— k = x.

29—30.
viii.

53a

an addition of quite another character and

of the highest interest.

The

true lxx. {(&^) omits

which

2/
is

in cod.

A

are thus supplied from Aquila'
iv

V.

2> which

^ gives the

Tore

^ " " €€
.
iyvaipiaev
€.

, /, < ^€
eiTTcv

-.
iv
|

/.
:

^
viii.
:

.

12, 13,
cTttcv

But

after

substance of these words in a poetical form

expressly attributed to an older source
avvereXeaev

(Luc,

(,

€€)
ev

(,

,
ev

' /^/)
\

-)• 8;

', '.
\ \

(^

Though
ing in

this

occurs in cod.
text

the

Hebrew

A and Lucian, it was wantwhich was before the translators
it

of the second century a.d., for in the Hexapla

appeared

only in the lxx. column^.
a translation of a

But

(as its very errors shew)

Hebrew
is

original,

and the

^
it

is

from which

it

came

doubtless none other than the
I'if^n

Book

of Jashar (T^'^nnsp, read as
1

'D)^

Here

G has preserved
ev

Cf. Field

6$
^

-

See Field ad he,
rots '.

Cf. Driver, /nir., p. 182.

ad

loc.

who

quotes from cod. 243,

.


248

Books of

the

Hebrew Canon.
in

for us a precious relic,

which

^

has been

first

misplaced
the book,

and then
C.
xii.

partly lost'.

24 a

z.

The

longest interpolation
in
c. ii.,

in

partly similar to the

Greek additions

but presenting

greater difficulties.

After rehearsing the facts connected with

the death of Solomon, and summarising the reign of the interpolator
tells

the story of the rise of

Rehoboam, Jeroboam and

the revolt of Israel, going
in cc.
xi

over the ground already covered
c.

xii.,

and anticipating

xiv.

(i^).

The

parallels are

28; c = xi. 40; d f=xi. 43^; (iB); n^ z = xii. 3 24.

— —

xii.

24 a = xi.
xii.

43, xiv. 21

2


is

5

(iB)

;

— 22; b = g — n* =

xi.
i

26

xiv.

— 20

But the passage
elsewhere either in

is
€Br

no mere cento of verses
or

^

to be

found

;

it

a

second and distinct

first upon a and indeed in some respects contradictory are the accounts that they "cannot possibly have stood from the first in the same volume." The same action is ascribed in the one "to Shemaiah, at Shechem, in the days of Rehoboam"; and in the other "to Ahijah, at Jerusalem, in the days of Solomon"." In fact, the present Greek version of i Kings has preserved two ancient accounts of the dismemberment of the Kingdom of David and Solomon, and though one of these survives also in there is no a priori ground for deciding which of the two is the more trustworthy. It .is

recension of the story, resting equally with the

Hebrew

original.

So

different

^

worthy of notice that cod.
residence in Egypt in
xii. 2,

omits the reference to Jeroboam's

and the
i

visit

of Jeroboam's wife to
it gives the two Jeroboam with the

Ahijah as

it

is

told in

c. xiv.

20,

though

irreconcilable accounts of the meeting of

prophet
so far as
^

(xi.
it

29

ff.,

xii.

240).

The whole
is

of the narrative,

exists

only in the Greek,
in

omitted by

A and
C/i.,

See the passage discussed Robertson Smith,

Robertson Smith, O. T. in J.

P•

4.3.^•
'^

op. cii.^ p. 118.


Books of
the
Syro-hexaplar,
tJie

Hebrezv Canon.
to

249

but

it

seems

have been retained by

Luciano
C. xvi. 28 a

—h

consists of another recension of the sumin
c. xxii.

mary of Jehoshaphat's reign which occurs
47

41

— 44,


2

50,

where the

last four verses are

omitted altogether in

(&^.

Lucian,

who
40 b

agrees with

G^

in the interpolation at xvi.

28, omits xxii.

52.

Kings
i.

(4 Regn.).

C.

18 a

d.

An

addition similar in character to that
xvi.

which follows 3 Regn.
reign

28.

The summary

of Joram's

has attached

itself to the

beginning as well as to the

end of the story of
^A,
with
Luc.

Elijah's ascension, whilst in
(iii,

^^

it

finds a

place only at the end
agrees

i

3).

In this instance, however,
the

with

ffi^

in

repeating

some

variations.

The

student will

find a

summary, though comparison

instructive.
1

Chronicles

i.

10

16, 17

b

— 23 are wanting

in

S^, which
of the

thus shortens the genealogy by omitting (i) the posterity of

Ham,
X.

except the Cushites, (2) the longer of two

lists

posterity of

Shem.

13

18,

22

Both passages are supplied (from Gen. 29) by cod. A, in a version which came from
i.

Hexaplaric sources (see Field,
2

p. 704).

Chronicles

xxxv. 19 a
xxiii.

versions of 2 Kings

31b 2>2>i xxiv. i 4, based apparently upon a recension of the Hebrew which differs from 01, and only in part assimilated to (Sr.
24
27,
2

— —

d, xxxvi. 2 a

c,

5

— —
a

d,

are

EsDRAS

xxi, xxii.

(Neh.

xi, xii.).

The
9,

hsts of princes

and
xxi.

Levites are

much shortened

in (K^,
xxii.

which omits altogether

16, 20, 21, 28, 29,
^

32—35
i.

;

4—6,

15—21,

38, 40, 41.

Lagarde, V.T. Gr.

ad

loc.

rences
Israel,

between
ii.

@

and

fH

in

3

For a careful treatment of the diffeRegn. see Herzfeld, Gesch. d. Volkes

250
Psalms.
In

Books of the Hebrew Canon.

G

many

of the Psalms receive
in

titles,

or additions to
is

their titles,

which are wanting

JH.

The

following

a

list

of those which occur in the uncial MSS.
X. (xi.)

(Ixxxi.).

. . . 6. .8 . ., . . . .
+ -v/raX/xos•.
So
xiii. (xiv.),

xxiv. (xxv.),

xliii. (xliv,),

Ixxx.

xxiii. (xxiv.)

xxvi.

(.) + 7
r7;s•

+

^

xxviii.

xxix.

(.) pr.
+

(.) +

XXX. (xxxi.)

€€.
els

6| 6

riXos.

xxxii. (xxxiii.).
xli.

Aaveld.

xxxvii. (xxxviii.)-|-7rfpt

{.) +

Aavei8 (cod. .).
Aaveid.

xlii. (xliii.).

xlvii. (xlviii.)

+ Sevrepa
TO

Ixv. {lxvi.)-\Ixvi.
Ixix. (lxx.)

(1.)+ AaveiS (om. ).
(lxxvi.)

Ixx. (Ixxi.).

Ixxix.

', € '. \\. + (1.) + 76
+ 6t?
7rpos

-

XC. (xci.).

'

xcii. (xciii.).

Aaveid.

xciii. (xciv.).

xciv. (xcv.).

XCV.

(xcvi.).

"Ort

xcvi. (xcvii.).

xcvii. (xcviii.)
xcviii. (xcix.).
ciii.

(civ.).

civ.

(cv.).

cxv.),

cxiv.

(cxvi.)

:
+ r<u
I

,. . .
— of cxvi. these
9,
HI^-Ip^lI

Aaveid, Aaveid.

.
cvii.),
cxiii.

so cv., cvi.
(cxvii.),

(cvi.,

(cxiv.,

cxvii.

(cxviii.),
title

(cxxxvi.),

[but in each

cases the

Greek

cxxxv. is the

equivalent of a final
ex.
(cxi.).

77:

'

in the

M.T. of the preceding Psalm].
cxii.
(cxii.,
cxiii.),

so

cxi.,

(cxxxv.),

[but

in

each of these cases the Greek

title

cxxxiv. is the

equivalent of an opening ^•177 in the M.T. of the Psalm]. So cxviii. (cxix.). cxv. (cxvi. 10 19).

7].

cxxxvi. (cxxxvii.).

.

Books of
Cxxxvii. cxxxviii. (cxxxix.) ore cxlii. (cxliii.)
cxliii.

the

Hebrew Canon.
(-pias T).

(.)++ ;^ A

Za;^apiOv (cod. A.)

+ eV

+ (cxliv.) + 7rpos•

Cxlv. (cxlvi.).

'•
11).

.
m

cxlvi. (cxlvii.

I


10

answers

to the first

6 vlos

ToXiad.

\

(
rfj

251

(A^ T).
A).
H'pnjjl

(Heb.

{where
in

word of the Psalm

(cxi.)).

cxlvii. (cxlvii.

cxlviii.

at the
cxlviii.

end of the preceding Psalm and
In

cxhx.
cl.

beginning of

7;;.

.
As
cxlvi.
cxlix.
'

20).

but

.
fH

As

cxlvi.,

except that

.

JH

as
is

in

ex.

not in

is

here represented in iH both at the beginning of Ps.

at

the

end of

cxlviii.

and the

As

in cxlix.

{ (, ).
Ps.
xiii.

the questions raised by the Greek titles see Neubauer in Studia Bibl. ii. p. i ff., Driver, Intr. p. 348 ff., the commentaries, e.g. those of Perowne, Kirkpatrick, and Cheyne, and the lastnamed author's Origin of the Psalter. Valuable traditions are probably embodied in the liturgical notes which assign certain Psalms to particular days of the week (r?/ (cf. Mc. XV. 42))? ., TeTpadi .^, eh and in those which attribute others to the time of the Return or to the Dispersion (eV r^ On the other hand some of the Greek titles appear to be fanciful whilst Others are obscure

On

{, --)

,
(xiv.) 3
I a,

),

^, ^ ).

For the Christian (mystical) interpretation of the Greek titles see Athan. de titiilis Psalinorum (Migne, P. G. xxvii. 591 sqq.), the varionwi prolego?}iena in Pitra's Analecta sacra ii. p. 41 1 sqq., and Corderii exp. patr. Gi'. in Psalmos., passim.
a
is

c.

This, the only long interpolatiQn in

the Greek Psalter,

found upon examination to be made up
ix.

of Pss.

V.

lob, cxxxix. (cxl.) 4b,
all

(x.)

17a, Isa.

lix.

7, 8,

Ps.

XXXV. (xxxvi.)

taken or abridged from the lxx. version

with slight variations.
1

That

it

never formed a part of the

Cf.

prefixed to Ps. Ixxxi. in the cursive

MS. 156

{Urtext, p. 75)•

252

Books of

tJie

Hebrew Canon.
yet
it

tinuously in

Hebrew Psalm may be safely affirmed, Rom. iii. 13 18, where it

is

quoted con-

follows without break

upon an abridgement of Ps. xiii. (xiv.) i 3. before the The Greek addition had a place in the time of Origen, who marked it with an obelus (Field, ad loc). Whether it was brought into the text of the lxx. from the Epistle ^ or was already in the Greek Psalm as known to
St Paul, cannot perhaps

now be

ascertained.

But

it

doubtless

had

its

origin in the Rabbinical practice of stringing together

passages excerpted from various books of the Old Testament

(Sanday and Headlam on Romans,

I.e.),

and

it

may have

existed under this form in a collection of testimonia used by

the Apostle (on such collections see Hatch, Essays, p. 203,

( ). , ^^ , € ^
Westcott, Hebrews, p. 476
Ps.
cli.
ff.).

The MSS.

of the LXX. con6

tain after Ps.

cl.

a

Psalm which bears the

title

ore

.

L., hie

psalmus

sibi proprie scripUis est
Golia\tJi\.
is

David, extra
of Athana-

numerum,

ciwi pugiiavit

cum

The

letter

sius to Marcellinus,

which
iv

incorporated in cod. A, speaks
as Ps.
cli.

freely of this
01

\

Psalm as the work of David, and
25

',

.,.'

:

§

7€€ ^€ ' € ^/ ')
;

14

of David by the author of the

and it is quoted as a Psalm pseudonymous letter of Mary to
iii.

?

Ignatius (cent.

iv.

,
; ^

Lightfoot, Igftatius,

144,
scribe of

yap

.).

Moreover the
it

regarded

it

from the Psalter proper (subscr.

and the judgement of the Laodicene canon is Upheld by the title which
Cf.

)
<\

as a part of the Psalter, for his subscription runs

.

In cod. A, however,

is

carefully excluded

rn

^ (
in all the

Cod.

fc<

);

MSS.

Hatch, Essays,

p.

209

ff.

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
pronounces
this

'autograph'

€$€ or
20.
Its

€/cT09
is

)^ (?)
i.e.

pv
i

This Psahn
51; 2 Kings
vi.

clearly based
;

on

Kings

.

253
to

work of David

be

xvi. 7, 11, 26, 43,
Ixxviii.

5

2

Chron. xxix. 26; Ps.

70, Ixxxix.
is

resemblance to the lxx. of those passages

not so

close as to suggest a

Greek
it

original,

but on the other hand

there
it

is

no evidence that

ever existed in Hebrew.
original,
it

Whether
book was

had a Hebrew or a Greek

was probably added to
fifth

the Greek Psalter after the translation of the

complete.

For the literature .of Ps. cli. see Fabricius-Harles, and Fabricius, Cod. pseudepigr. v. 7-, p. 905 £f.

iii.

p. 749,

The
sives the
{cantica).

Ecclesiastical Canticles.

In certain uncial

Psalms are followed by a collection of

those which are given by codd. A, R, T.

I.

Exod. XXV.

ART
MSS. and

a large proportion of the curliturgical

The

following table shews the sources

and order of

I

19.

;

254

Books of the Hebrezu

Caii07i.

The nine Odes now sung at Lauds in the Orthodox Church are (following the order of cod. A) nos. i, 2, 3, 6, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11 + 13; ^e Roman Church uses at Lauds on successive days of the week 10, Isa. xii., Isa. xxxviii. 10 20, 3, i, 6, 2, whilst 13, II, 12 are recited daily at Lauds, Vespers, and Compline The Alozarabic Breviary, as printed, provides no respectively. Little has been done as yet fewer than 76 scriptural canticles. to examine either the Greek or the Latin Psalters with the view but the of determining the local distribution of these canticles student may refer to art. Canticles in DCA., and also to Martene, de ant. rit. eccL, p. 25, Neale, Hist, of the H. Eastern Church, ii. p. 834 f., Freeman, Principles of Divine Service, i. p. 124 f.; on the Canticles of the Latin Church he may consult with advantage Thomasius, opp. ii. pp. xv^ sqq., 295 sqq. The text of the O. T. canticles in the Psalter of cod. A differs in places from that which is given by the same MS. where the canticles appear with their context in the books to which they Thus we find the following variants Exod. severally belong. Deut. xxxii. 7 yevecuv yecant, XV. 14 1 8 yevvqaavra, cant, I Regn. veais, cant, yeveas ysveutv

;

ii.

10^

the deviations are not numerous, and the text of the canticles appears on the whole to belong to the same family as that of the body of the MS.

,
20,
ii.

^/,

:

cant,

:
:

:

:

lO^'

yijs,

cant.

-\-

.
to

But

The

division

of the Psalter into books'

seems

have

been already made when it was translated into Greek, for though the Greek codices have nothing to answer to the headings 1t^*<
etc.,

which appear

in the printed
first

Hebrew

Bible,

the Doxologies at the end of the

four books appear in the

in Speaker's Const. Apost.

Comm. (Apocr.

ii.

362

ff.).

The Greek

text

appears in

22 and in the Didascalia, where it follows a reference to Chron. /. c. ; in MSS. of the lxx. it finds a place only among the canSee Fabricius-Harles, iii. 732, Westcott in Smith's D. B. ii. 226, ticles. and for the text with an apparatus, Fritzsche, V. T. Schiirer•^, iii. 337 f. A detailed account of the editions, Or. lihr. Apocr., pp. xiv. sq., 92 sq. MSS., and versions and a discussion of the origin of the Prayer will be found in Dr Nestle's Septuagintastiuiien iii. (Stuttgart, 1899), p. 6ff. see also Rys'sel in Kautzsch's Apokryphen -11. Psetidepigrapheti. 1 pre-Christian arrangement, as Hippolytus already knew {hypoth. ift
:

A

bieVKov els Psahnos, Smith, 0. T. in Jewish Ch., p. 194 n.

^

oi

mention of
in

five

Books
iii.

of Psalms

is

In the lists of the Canon "the peculiar to Codex Amiatinus " (Sanday,

).

Cf.

Robertson

Studia Biblica

p.

242

ff.).

Books of
Greek
18
as well as in the

the

Hebrew Canon.
(Ps.
xl. (xli.)

255
(Ixxii.)

M. T.

14, Ixxi.

20, Ixxxviii. (Ixxxix.) 5, cv. (cvi.) 48).

treated by Lagarde in his early

and i-H in this book are book Anmerkungen zur griech, Ubersetzung der Proverbien. There is a considerable number of Greek verses for which §^ offers no Hebrew equivalent, and there are some Hebrew verses or half-verses for which there is no Greek. Of the Greek verses not in some (e.g. iv. 27a b, vi. 8a c) appear to be of Greek, perhaps early Christian, origin; others have been collected from various contexts (e.g. iii. 16 = Isa. xlv. 23a + Prov. xxxi. 26; xxvi. 11= Sir. iv. 21), or are fragments of the book which have been accidentally inserted twice (iii. 22a = iii. 8, 28c = xxvii. i); others, again, seem to have arisen from the fusion of two renderings (xv. 18 a, xvi. 17); but there remain not a few which probably represent
variations of

Proverbs.

The

^

^

genuine portions of the original collections, though wanting in
the present

Hebrew
II a,

text, e.g. vii.
a,

i a,

viii.

21a.

ix.

12 a

18 a
2

c,

c,
ix.

xii.

13

xvii.

6

a,

xviii.

22

a, xxii.

8 a (cited in

Cor.

7), xxiv.

22 a

e, xxvii.

20

a,

21a.
in Origen's

Job.

The lxx.
to

text of

Job current
the

time

is

known

have been very

much

shorter than the

Greek

text

preserved in extant

MSS. and
re

M.T.
6\ov
beKaevvia

Hieron. praef. i7i Hiob: "cui [sc. libro lob], si ea quae sub asteriscis addita sunt subtraxeris, pars maxima voluminis detruncabitur, et hoc duntaxat apud Graecos. ceterum apud Latinos. ..septingenti ferme aut octingenti versus
leg.

€ • €^
evvea

Ad

African. 4

\

ore Se e^
1).

\. , '^^ 8 \
Cf.

€ €3 '
deKae^ {/or.

desun^"

The
^

asterisks are preserved in certain cursive

MSS. of

the

For

this correction see a note

by Dr Nestle

in

Exp. Times, Aug. 1899

{p• 523)•

.

256

Books of the Hebrew Carton.
in

Greek Job^ and
form
is

MSS.

of Jerome's version, while the shorter

represented by the earUest form of the O.L. and in the

Sahidic version.

Most of the extant Greek MSS., including
which the lacunae are supplied
still
-.

the best uncials, offer a text in

(chiefly from Theodotion), but which

falls

short

of the

fulness of the Hexaplaric lxx. and of

iK

Dr Hatch ^
text of

in his

Essay

On

Origen's revision of the lxx.

fob advocates the theory that the lxx. represents a shorter Hebrew text which was afterwards expanded into the
longer form.

The same view was maintained
1862).

in the earlier

treatise of Bickell de indole ac ratione versionis Alexand?'inae

in

interpretando libro lobi (Marburg,

Recent

critics

incline to an opposite view.
lator to follow classical

The

evident desire of the trans-

models suggests that he was an Alexhis version for general reading,

andrian Hellenist^
stances he

who intended

rather than for use in the synagogue^

Under such circumreduce the length of
it

may have been tempted
his

to

his original, especially in passages

where

did not lend

itself

readily to

treatment.

On

the other hand

he has not

scrupled here and there to add to the original.

Thus

in c.

ii.

9 he seeks to heighten the effect and at the same time to soften the harshness of the words uttered by Job's wife

...

The two notes at the end of the Greek Job (xlii. 17a, b e) The first (yeypanrai 8e scarcely profess to belong to the book. 6 may be avTov either a Pharisaic or a Christian gloss, intended to balance the of the previous hemistich, and arising out of

€(€€
1

^
.

.^

,
^

(/

)
.).
p.
i

Cf. Hatch, Essays^ p. 216; Field, Hexapla,
p.

ii.

f

.

;

E. Klosterff.

mann, Analecta,
2 ^ ^

63

f.

Burkitt, 0. L. and Hala, p. 8. On the translator's date cf. Schlirer•^,
Cf.

iii.

Essays, p. 214 pp. 311, 356 f.

219: "It was made after Judaism had come It may be presumed to have been into contact with Greek philosophy. intended not only for Greek -speaking Jews, but also for aliens." The version shews some knowledge of Homer and Aeschylus (cf. Smith, D. Br,

Hatch,

op. cit., p.

vol.

I.

pt.

ii.

p. 1723)•


Books of the Hebrew
xix.

c

passage yiypanTai seems to refer. The second note, which professes to come from an Aramaic source confuses Job (3Vi<) with the Edomite king

Jobab

44 f.), and bases on according to which he was 'fifth from Abraham,' and a descendant of Esau. Similar statements occur in a fragment of the Hellenistic writer Aristeas quoted by Polyhistor, and from Polyhistor by Eusebius {praep. ev. ix. 25). From a comparison of this extract with the note attached to Job, Freudenthal was led to ascribe the note to
(^I'V) (Gen. xxxvi. 33f.
1

"
26 eVi

yr]^

(v.

I.

€) ^ ,

Canofi.

'^),

{


tO

257

which

=

Chron.

i.

this identification a pedigree of the patriarch,

Aristeas 2.

the geographical description of Uz (eVi rots and the Statements that Job's wife was an Arab woman and that her son's name was Ennon <^ rests or Enon {v. L), the note contains nothing new: ij upon Gen. xxxvi. 32 35 (LXX.), and 17 e on Job ii. 11 (lxx.).

^

Beyond

<

),

Esther.
interpolation.

In the Greek Esther we reach the

maximum

of

Of 270

verses, 107 are

wanting in the present

Hebrew text, and probably at no time formed a part of the Hebrew book^ The Greek additions are distributed through
the book in contexts as long as average chapters ^

In the

Latin Bible they are collected at the end of the canonical

book, where they
5=:F,
xi.

fill

several consecutive chapters
xiii.
i

(x.

4

2

I This arrangement is due to 4 24 =e). 19 = D, xvi. Jerome, who relegated the Greek interpolations to the end of

xii.

6

= A,

7

= b,

xiii.

8


;

xi.

xiv.

19

=

0,

xv.

the canonical book
unintelligible.

but

it

has had the effect of making them

In their Greek sequence they form part of a
a,

consecutive history;
story

which precedes

c.

i.,

introduces the
first

by describing the events which led
at the court of

to the
;

advancee,

ment of Mordecai
^

Artaxerxes

and

which

"'E/c

TTjs

. . weist
iii.

doch auf einen Midrasch oder ein Targum hin"

(Dillmann, Hiob, p. 361).

7]

A — F,

.
^ ^

Schiirer•^,

p. 311.

Cf. Origen,

TTJs
'

^.,.'

ad Afric.

3

e/c

'E/3patOis

' , ' '' ' '€
\%

'$

'

ij

yey

*

In the Cambridge LXX. they are distinguished by the a notation suggested by Dr Hort.
s. s.

Roman

capitals

17

25
follow
iii.

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
13 and
viii.

12, profess to give copies of the letters
;

of Artaxerxes referred to in those verses

c and d, which

come
King;

between
Esther,
F
is

c. iv.

and

c. v.,

contain the prayers of Mordecai and
to the

and a description of Esther's approach

an epilogue, which completes the story by relating the

institution of the feast of Purim.
will

Such Haggadic accretions
its

not create surprise

if it

be remembered that Esther was
canonicity was
years of the

among
first

the latest of the Kethubim, and that

matter of dispute in Jewish circles even in the
century a.d.^

last

A
to

note attached to the

last of the

to relate the circumstances under which the

Greek additions professes book was brought

Egypt
his

:

" in the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy

Cleopatra, Dositheus,

who

said that he was a priest

and and Levite,

and

son Ptolemy, brought the above Letter of Purim", as

they called

it, which had been translated (so they said) by one Lysimachus, son of Ptolemy, a resident at Jerusalem."

As

Fritzsche remarks^,

no fewer than four Ptolemies married a
by the fourth year of Ptolemy and certain, though it is perhaps most

Cleopatra (Epiphanes, Philometor, Physcon, and Lathyrus), so
that the date intended

Cleopatra
naturally

is

by no means
as

interpreted

=

B.C.

179-8,

the

fourth

year
is

of

Philometor^

But the

historical

value of the note

more
of

than doubtfuP.
that of 19, 93 exhibited by Ussher {Syniag7na), Fritzsche
(2)

The Greek text of Esther i^ABN 55, 93^, 108 , 249 al.,

exists in

two recensions
iZ,

(i) that

loS^; both are
1848; libri
1883).
f.

apocryphi, 1871), and Lagarde
^

See Ryle, Canon,
tols

^ ol

(v.

1.

seems to be the book of Esther as a whole; 2 Handbiich zii d. Apocrypha, i. p. 73.

{ €$ ,
p.
i<*,

(^^,
i.,

{libr. ca>io?i.
ff.
;

V. T.

The

139

f.,

203

and
cf.

cf. c.

supra, p. 228

^<'^•''),

ix. 26,

and

Jos. ant. vi. 13

Lat.

conservaiorcs).

wpoaayopeuaavTes auras The 'Letter of Purim'
cf.
c.

ix.

20.

^ Ryssel (in Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 212) inclines to B.C. 114, the fourth year of Soter ii (Lathyrus). ^ See above, p. 25.

2

Books of tL• Hebrew Canon.

259

recensions differ considerably in the Greek additions as well as in the version. On the date of the Greek Esther the student may consult Jacob, Das Buck Esther bei deifi LXX. in IV,, 1890 (p. 241 ff.).

A

Jeremiah.
the

Besides the extensive transpositions already

noticed, the lxx. text of Jeremiah differs widely from

M.T.

in

way of excess and

defect.

The
is

subject has received careful

treatment from
the LXX.

Dr A. W. Streane {Double Text of Jeremiah,
on the whole
its

Cambridge, 1896), whose verdict
text,

in favour of

especially with regard to

omissions.

He

points out that " the tendency to diffuseness, characteristic of
later Judaism... [and] likely specially to affect the

writing of

Jeremiah, as a prophet whose
to the post-exilic

memory was of marked interest Jews... operated much more shghtly among
'

Egyptian Jews than with their brethren elsewhere^"; and concludes that " the

omissions

'

to be observed in the lxx. of
its

Jeremiah, speaking generally, exist only in consequence of
nearer approximation to the original form of the

Hebrew

text."

The Greek additions, in Jeremiah, rarely exceed a few words Omissions are more in a verse (see the list in Streane, p. 19).
numerous, and sometimes extend over several consecutive verses of the following are the most noteworthy: viii. lo'^ 12, x. 6,
8,

On the other hand it is are probably interpolations in the M.T. possible that the omission of xvii. 1—5^ was due to homceoteleuton, the eye of the translator or the scribe of his archetype

— LXX.) 16 — LXX.) — 5% xxix. LXX.) 4 — 28 — Of these pas14^26, xxxix. = 10^ — 12 seems to be based on 12 — sages and xxix. 16 — 20 on xxiv. 8 — 10; 28 — 30 xxxix. 4— 13 and
10, xvii.
I

;

(xxxvi.,

(

xlvi.,

13,

lii.

20, xxxiii. (xl., 30.
15,

viii.

vi.

X. 6,

8,

10,

lii.

having passed from T\'\T\'^ (xvi. 21) to (xvii. 5^). It is more difficult to account for the absence from of the Messianic passage xxxiii. 14 26. Dr Streane thinks that it must have been wanting in the Hebrew text which lay before the translators. Possibly the Messianic hope which it emphasises had less interest for a subject of the Ptolemies than for the Jews of Palestine.

'

ing which connects the
'lepc/xtas
1

^

Lamentations. The Greek translator has prefixed a headcycVcro book with Jeremiah

(

.

. .

-

.),
Cf.

P. 24

f.

A. B. Davidson in Hastings' D.B.

ii.

573

ff.

17

;

26
Daniel.

Books of

the

Hebrew Canon.
its

Like Esther the Book of Daniel in both
in the

Greek

forms' contains large contexts which have no equivalent in

^.

There are three such passages
story of

Susanna

(2/, 2),

Greek Daniel: (i) the which in the version of

Theodotion as given by the great uncials precedes Dan. i. i ^paKiuv) which (2) the story of Bel and the Dragon follows Dan. xii. 13; (3) after Dan. iii. 23 a digression of 67

()

verses

(iii.

24

Azarias (24

— —

90, lxx., Th.), consisting of {a) the prayer of

45), {b) details as to the heating of the furnace

and the preservation of Azarias and his friends (46 51), {c) the Song of the Three (52 In the Greek MSS. no 90).

break or separate
rest

title

divides these Greek additions from the

of the text,

except that
vision
is

"visions," the

first

being thus excluded from the
is

when Daniel is divided into made to begin at i, Susanna number Bel, on the other hand,

treated as the last of the visions

evidence appears to shew that both these stories originally

(
;

i.

' AQ).

Internal

had a separate circulation
prologue to Dan.
hitherto
i.-,

;

Susanna does not form a suitable
Daniel as a person

for v. 6 introduces
;

unknown

epilogue to
appropriate.
earliest

and the position of Bel as an the prophetic portion of the book is still less
to the reader

From

the Fathers, however,

it is

clear that in the

and Bel formed a part of Daniel, to which they are ascribed by Irenaeus and Tertullian, and implicitly by Hippolytus. The remarkable
Christian

copies of the lxx. both Susanna

letter of Julius

Africanus to Origen which throws doubt on the
its

genuineness of Susanna, calling attention to indications of

Greek

origin,

forms a solitary exception to the general view;
audient eas quae sunt a Daniele propheta 2 "quern et Daniel propheta... annunTert. c/e idololatria, 18 {Bel ^i.). Hippol. in

even Origen labours to maintain their canonicity.
Iran.
iv.

26. 3 "et

voces"
^

(^Sus. 56,

52

f.), iv. 5.

tiavit" (Be/

41,

25).

Vide supra, p. 46 - Susanna is perhaps made to precede Daniel because it describes events which belong to his early life; cf. v. 44 and v. 62 in a, b (lxx.).
fif.
flf.

ad

and Origen shew that Susanna and Bel occupied in MSS. of the second and third centuries the same relative positions which they occupy in extant MSS. of the fourth and fifth.
Notwithstanding the objection shrewdly based by Africanus

€ €. ), €.
Books of
p.

the

Hebrew Canon.

261

SyIS.

(Lagarde,
5e

145)

eXaOe African,

'

Africanus,

(lxx. and Theodotion)

(?

\

. 8\ €€
t'p.

'& €,
ad
Ol'ig.

It will

be noticed that the extracts from Hippolytus

^^
Siis.
f.)

iv

.
Ol'ig.

(\

on the

paronomasia

(';,

iySpeaker's Conwi.,

Apocrypha,

)
p.
ff.,

in

54

f.,

Ball

ii.

330

has given reasons
in

both Susanna and Bel once existed Aramaic or a new-Hebrew original^ The lxx. version
for believing that

an

sents Bel as a fragment of

Habakkuk
vlov

^
23
(cod.

repretit.

(cod. 87, Syro-Hex.,

Aevi),

an

attribution evidently

due

to v.

33

but inconsistent with the

place of the story in the Gk.

MSS.
iii.

The
in
it

addition to

Dan.

is

clearly

probably had a Semitic

found a place, as

The two hymns contained we have seen, among the Greek ecclesioriginal".

astical Canticles,

where they appear as the

and the
(cod.

A) or

v.

^'
to

Midrashic and

).
common
vi.

Besides these additions, which are

both texts of
shorter

Daniel, the text of the lxx. contains a large
interpolations, especially
in
c.
iii.

number of

where " the original

thread of the narrative
alterations,

is

often lost in a chaos of accretions,

and displacements^." The student can easily test this statement by comparing the two versions as they stand face to face in the Cambridge lxx., especially in c. iii. i 3,

46,
^

iv.

14 (17), 19 (22),

29—34 (32—37).

V.

13—23,

vi.

2—5

in Encycl. Biblica, i. 1013, and comp. RothApokr., p. 173 ff. On the Aramaic version of the additions from Theodotion's Greek cf. Schiirer^, iii. p. 333. 2 Ball, /. c, p. 308. ^ Bevan, Daniel, p. 46.
stein,

But see Kamphauseii

262
(3

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
6),

12

— 14

(13

15),

22 (23).

But the whole of

this

may be regarded as a paraphrase rather than a translation of a Hebrew text. In Susanna Theodotion has here and there a much shorter text than the
section of the

book

in the lxx.

LXX.

(cf.

Sus. 14

27, 42

50),

and both

in

Susanna and Bel

the two Greek versions sometimes diverge so widely as to
exhibit the story in distinct forms which appear to represent
different traditions.

Literature upon
rately or in groups).

the

canonical books (considered sepa-

Pentateuch. Amersfoordt,

Dissert, philol. de varus lectionibus Holmes. Pentateuchi (18 15). Hug, de Peiitateuchi vers. Alexaiidrina co}n?nentatio (1S18). Topler, de Pentateuchi i?iterpretatio?iis Alexandrinae indole ( 1 830). Thiersch, de Pentateiichi versione lexandi'ina, libri ii i ( 1 84 1 ). Frankel, iiber de?i Einfluss der paldst. Exegese auf die alex. Henneiieiitik (1851). worth, the LXX. and Samaritan v. the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch {Academy.,

A

Genesis. Lagarde, Ge?iesis Graece (1868). Deutsch, exeg. Analecten zur Genesisiibersetzimg der LXX. {\n fiid. Litt.
Blatt, 1879). Spurrell, Gejiesis, ed. 2 (1898).
C7'iticae

Exodus.
Exod.
i

— xxiv (1856).

Selwyn, Notae

in Versionem

LXXviralem,
(1857).

Numbers.

Selwyn, Notae^ &c., Liber

Numerorum
ace.

Howard, Numbers and Deuteronomy
tra?islated zjtto English (1887).

to

the

LXX.

Deuteronomy.
(1858).

Selwyn, Notae, &c., Liber Deuteronomii
critical

Howard, i?/, aV. (1887). Oy'wqy, getical Commentary on Deut. (1895).
Joshua. Hollenberg, Der Charakter der des Buches Josua (1876).
Judges.
(1867).

and

xe-

alex.

Ubersetzung

Fritzsche, Liber ludicum sec. LXX. ititerpretes Schulte, de restitutione atque indole genuitiae versiojiis graece ludicum (1889). Lagarde, Septuagifttast. i. and Bj. Moore, critical and v., texts of (1891), (Jud. i

A

Exegetical Co mm.

07i

Judges

(1895).

Ruth.

Fritzsche,

'^

'

(1867).

1

Books of the Hebrew Canon.
I,

263

Kingdoms. Wellhausen, Der Text der Biicher Samiielis Woods, the light thj'owii by the LXX. on the Books of Samuel (in Stiidia Biblica^ 21, 1885). Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Saimiel Steinthal, zur Geschichte Sanls . Davids (1891). (1890). Kerber, Syrohex. Fragmente zii den beiden Samiielis2

iintersttcht (1871).

i.

biichern (ZA IV., 1898). J. Meritan, la Version Grecque des livres de Samuel, precedee dhuie introduction stir la critique textuelle (1898). H. P. Smith, Critical and exeg. coimn. on the Books of Samuel ( 899).
3,

4 Kingdoms.

Silberstein,
Vat. des

i/ber den

Ursprung der im

Codex Alex.

u.

drittefi

Konigsbuches der Alex,

tjbersetzimg iiberlicferten Textgestalt iya
I,

ZATW.,

1893).

2

Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah.
version

LXX.

of Chr.-Ezra-Neh. Nestle, Marginalien (1893), p. 29 fF.

(in

Howorth, The true Academy, 1893).

Psalms. Sinker, Some remarks on the LXX. version of the Psalms (1879). Baethgen, der text-kritisches Werth des
alien Ubersetz. ztt d. Psalmen (1882). Lagarde, psalteri graeci specimen (1887); psalmorum qjiinqtiagena p7'ima Mercati, iin palimpsesto Amb7Osiano dei Salmi (1892). Esapili (1896). Jacob, Beitrdge zu einer Eiideitung in die Psahnen (I. Exc. v.), (1896).

Proverbs.

Lagarde, Anme?'kungen zur griech. Ubersetz.

der Proverbien (1863).
Pi'overbien,..in

ihrem

den

LXX.

u.

dem

Pinkuss, die syr. Ubersetzung des Verhdltniss zu dein Mass. Text., Targ. untersucht {ZATIV., 1894).

Ecclesiastes.

Koheleth (1884).

The book of Koheleth {i?>Zt,). Gratz, Klostermann (E.), de libri Coheleth verDollmann, iiber die Gr. Ubersione Alexandjnna {\'^^2).
\\ngh.t,

setzung des Koheleth (1892).
et Lat. vet. libri Job (1834).

Kohl, observ.

ad

inteipr. Gr.

Job.

Bickell,
;

De

indole ac ratione versionis Alexa7idrijiae

der urspriingliche Septuaginta-text des Buches Hiob {1ZZ6). Hatch, oil OrigeiUs r,evision of the Book of Job (in Essays, 1889). Dillmann, Text-kritisches zum B. Ijob (1890). Maude, die Peschittha zu Hiob 7iebst ei7te7n A7tha7io iiber ihr Ve7-haltniss zu LXX. u. Ta7'g. (1892). Beer, der Text des B. Hiob (1895).
Jobi (1862)

Esther. Jacob, Esther bei de7n LXX. {ZA TW., 1890). On the Greek additions see Ryssel in Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 193 fF.

264

Books of the Hebrew Canon.

DODECAPROPHETON.

VoUers, Das Doci. der Alexandriner Stekhoven, de alex. (1880), continued in ZATW.., 1883-4. Vertaling va7i het Dod. (1887).
Treitel,

HOSEA.
(1888).

Die

alex.

tlbersetsiing des

Buches Hosea

MiCAH. Ryssel, Untersuchtrngen iiber die Textgestalt des B. Micha (1887). Taylor, the Mass. text and the ancient vei'sions of Micah (1891).

Obadiah.

Seydel,

Vaticinium Obadiaera

tio7ie

habita

transl. Alex. (1869).

Nahum.

Reinke,
(1867).

Zur

Kritik

dei'

alt.

Ve?-s.

d.

Proph.

NaJmm

Habakkuk.
Zechariah.

Sinker,

Psabn of Habakkuk
07i

(1890).

Lowe, Comvi.

Zech. (1882).

Isaiah. Scholz, Die Masor. Text n. alex. Ubersetzung des Weiss, Peschitta zu Deiiterojesaia u. B. fesaias (1880). ihr Verhdltniss zu M.T., LXX. u. Targ. (1893).

Jeremiah.

Movers, De utriusqiie rece7ts. JereTniae i7idole et Wichelhaus, de Jere7niae vers. Alexandr. i7idole (1847). Schulz, de Ie7-e77iiae textus Hebr. et Gr. discrepantia (1861). Scholz, der Masor. Text u. die LXX. Ubersetz. des B. Jere77iias (1875). Kiihl, das Verhdltniss der Massora zur Septuagi7ita i7i Jere77iia (1882). Workman, the text of Jeremiah (1889). Coste, die WeissagungStreane, the double text e7i der Prophete7t Iere7nias (1895). of 'Jere77iiah (1896). The question of the two recensions is dealt with at length in Bleek-Wellhausen, Ei7ileitung^ §i58ff.
origine {\Zyj).

Lamentations.

Goldwitzer, Ube7'setzzmq

77iit

Vergleichung

d LXX.
EZEKIEL.

(1828).

Merx, Der Werth der LXX. fur die Textkritik der A a77i Ezechiel aifgezeigt {fb. pr. Th., 1883). Cornill, das Buch des Proph. Ezechiel {\ZZ(:>)\ cf. Lagarde in G'ott. gelerhte A7izeige7i (i June, 1886).
Bludau,

Daniel.

De

alex.

interprete

lib7'i

Da7iiel indole

(1891); die alex. Ubersetztmgdes B. Da7iiel{iZ()'j). Bevan, Lohr, lextk7'it. Vora7'beite7i zu the Book of Datiiel {\Z<^2). On ei7ier Erkla7-img des Bitches Da/iiel {ZATIV.., 1895). the Greek additions see Rothstein in Kautzsch, Apokr.^ p. 172 ff.

:

CHAPTER

.
of the Greek

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
The MSS. and many
Hebrew Canon.
have seen
I
;

of the

lists

Old Tesin

tament include certain books which find no place

the

The number

of these books varies, as

we

but the fullest collections contain the following

Esdras,

Wisdom

of Solomon,

Wisdom

of Sirach, Judith,
i.

Tobit, Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah,

iv.

Maccabees.
or, in

We may

add the Psalms of Solomon, a book which was
in

sometimes included

MSS.

of the Salomonic books,
;

and the Greek version of Enoch, although by some accident it has been excluded from the Greek Bible, on other grounds claims the attention of every Biblical student. There is also a long list of pseudepigrapha and other apocrypha which lie outside both the Hebrew and the Greek Canons, and of which in many
cases only the
titles

complete Bibles, at the end of the Canon

have survived.

The

present chapter will

be occupied by a brief examination of these non-canonical
writings of the

Greek Old Testament.

I. I Esdras. In MSS. of the lxx. the canonical book Ezra-Nehemiah appears under the title a

being appropriated by another recension of the history of the
Captivity
1

"

','-^

and Return \

The 'Greek
[o] tepei/s
'

Esdras' consists of an

Cod.

A

entitles

both books

the canonical Esdras from the 'Prophet tae" (cf. Clem. M. s/rom. iii. 16

"$

=4

— perhaps in order to distinguish Esdras —
"liber Esrae propheX^yei).

266

Books not inchided in
free

tJie

Hebrew Canon.
of
portions
of
2

independent and somewhat
Chronicles

version

and Ezra-Nehemiah, broken by a long context which has no parallel in the Hebrew Bible.

— 25 = Ezra 7 — 24; — = Ezra = Ezra — 5; — 44; y] — 55 = Neh. 73^—
i.

Thus
ii.

I

Esdr.
iv.

i.

=2

Chron. xxxv.
iii.

ends abruptly, been lost cf.
;

ii.
i

;

15

iv.

vi., vii.

I

X.

ix.

in
ix.

a manner
55

ot

.
iii.

ending of the Second Gospel (Mc.


i i

v., vi.

—xxxvi. 21 — 14 -Ezra 7 — 70 6 original; — 36 = Ezra
;

ii.

i

v.
;

is

v.

viii. i

ix.

vii.

vii.

13^ The Greek book which suggests that something has with 2 Esdr. xviii. 13 The Student may compare the
viii.

xvi.

8).

The

context

i

Esdr.

i

v.

6

is

perhaps the most

in-

teresting of the contributions

made by

the Greek Bible to

the legendary history of the Captivity and Return.
it

We
is*

owe
41

to
^),

the immortal proverb

Magna
in
(iv.

est Veritas et praevalet (iv.

and the story which forms the setting of the proverb
of the occasion.
historical;

worthy

But

its

present form

it

is

certainly un-

Zerubbabel

13) belonged to the age of Cyrus,
(iv.

and
story

it

was Cyrus and not Darius
It

47

f

)

who decreed

the

rebuilding of Jerusalem.
is

has been suggested that "this

perhaps the nucleus of the whole (book), round which
is

the rest

grouped^" (=1 Esdr.

In the grouping chronological order
;

has been to some extent set aside
iv.

the displacement of Ezra

7

— 24

ii.

15

— 25) has

thrown the sequence of
is

events into confusion, and the scene

shifted

from the court

of Artaxerxes to that of Darius, and from Darius back again
to

Cyrus,

with

whose reign the

history

had

started.

Yet

Josephus^, attracted perhaps by the superiority of the Greek
style,

uses

i

Esdras in preference to
of ZerubbabeP.
is

the

Greek version of
the
difficulty

the canonical Ezra-Nehemiah, even embodying in his narrative
^

,
3

the legend

He

evades

The

future {praevalebit)

but in v. 41

is

without authority. In v. 38 Cod. A gives unchallenged. The Latin texts have the
i. p. 76. ant. xi. 3. 2 sqq.

present in both verses. 2 H. St J. Thackeray, in Hastings' D. B.
ant. X. 4. 4

xi.

*

Books not inchided
arising out of the
stituting

in the

Hebrew Canon.

267

Cambyses\
Origen,
ep.

premature reference to Artaxerxes by subIn the early Church the Greek Esdras
;

was accepted without suspicion
i.

cf.

e.g.

Clem. Alex, strom.
Jos.
horn.
ix.

21;

in
9.

Joann.

t.

vi.

i,

in

10;
dis-

Cyprian,

74.

Jerome, however {praef. in Ezr.),

carded
relegate
titles
I

the
it

book,

and
2

modern

editions
it

of

the

Vulgate

to

an appendix where

appears as 3 Esdras, the

Esdras and

Esdras being given to the two parts

of the canonical

book Ezra-Nehemiah".
two Greek recensions
of Ezra
is

The

relation of the
is

to

one another

a problem analogous to that which
'

presented

by the two
It

'

versions

of Daniel, and scarcely less perplexing.
in

has been stated with great care
(i.

Hastings' Dictionary
J.

of the Bible

p.

759

if.),

by
2

Mr H.
i

St

Thackeray.
is

He

distinguishes three views, (i) that

Esdras

a compilation

from the lxx. version of
(2) that
it is

Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah,

based on an
it
;

earlier

Greek version of those books,
earlier

and
final,

(3)

that
text

is

an independent translation of an
refusing to regard

Hebrew

and while
Sir

any solution as
has
recently
to
it

he inclines to the second.
that

The

third

found a champion in
suggestion
i

H. Howorth^, who adds
is

the

Esdras

the true
2

Septuagintal
is

(i.e.

the

Alexandrian) version, whilst
that of Theodotion.

Esdras
is

later,

and probably

Mr Thackeray

disposed to regard this
Esdras] represents the

contention as "so far correct that
first

[i

attempt to present the story of the Return in a Gr[eek]
2 "

dress,"

Esdras being

"a more

accurate rendering of the

Heb[rew]

which was " subsequently... required and... supplied

by what
2.

is

now

called the lxx. version."

2/5 (2/9, ^/9, 2/,/).
^

Wisdom of Solomon.
ant. xi. 2.

The Greek

title

is

%

But the book

I

sqq.
(vi)

2 2

The English Article In the Academy for

follows this numeration.

1893.

268

Books not
r\

ifichided in the

was often cited as
it

2,
and

-

shared with Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus
I

/
Some

Hebrew Canon.

'^,
;

a

name which
is

see Lightfoot on
it

Clem.

Cor. 55.

In the Muratorian fragment

described

as " Sapientia ab amicis Salomonis in

honorem
the

ipsius scripta."

The

Latin

versions

fathers

called

book Sapientia

or Sophia Salomonis (Cyprian, O. Z.),
Sapie7itiae (Lactantius, Vulg.),

but also simply liber

No
andrian

other book in the Greek Bible
in
it

is

so manifestly Alex-

tone and

style.

early

Christian

writers

attributed
nulli

to Philo (Hieron. /riz^/i in libros Salomonis: '*non-

scriptorum veterum hunc esse ludaei Philonis affirmant"),
it

and

has been ingeniously conjectured that this view found a

place in the Greek archetype of the Muratorian fragment \ But

though Wisdom has strong points of likeness to the works of
Philo,
its
it is

free

from the allegorizing
is

spirit

of that writer, and

conception of the Logos
it

less

developed than his^

On

the other hand

clearly belongs to a period

when

the Jewish

scholars of Alexandria were abreast of the philosophic doctrines

and the
author

cardinal
TavrY]<i

"»;

8
is
(c. xi.
(c.

literary

standards of their Greek contemporaries.

acquainted with the Stoic doctrine of the

virtues

^'
ix.

(c.

viii.

7

dvSpeiav), and

17

^ ', ,
The
et

four

9,

OL

yap
i$

Avith

the Platonic sense of
cf.

Philo,

de victim. 13, de inund. of preexistence
the spirit
(vii. (c.
viii.

opif.

12).

His ideas on the subject
of the

20),

of the relation
as

body

to

15),

of

Wisdom
to the

the soul
source.
;

of the

world

24), are doubtless
less distinctly

due

same

His language
"

is

no

shaped upon Greek models

no

existing

work represents perhaps more completely the

style of

compo-

1 Ab amicis suggests and has been thought to be a corruption of See Tregelles can. Mtir., p. 53, and cf. Zahn, Gesch. d. N. T. ICanons., ii. p. 100. 2 See this Avorked out by W. J. Deane, Book of IVisdom, p. 33 f.; C. J. Bigg, Christian Platonisis, p. 14 ff.

$.

\,


Books not included in
sition

the

Hebrew Canon.

269

which would be produced by the sophistic school of
it

rhetoric^," as

Alexandria.

vocabulary of the book.
'^uiTO'i,

,/?, ^, -^, /,
evSpaveia,

, ,,, ,^, , ?, ^, ' €, ^, /,, existed under the conditions of

Greek
e.g.

life

at

This remark

may be

illustrated

by the peculiar

^^.
the age

In some of these we can trace the influence of
thought, in others the

'
in

Unusual words abound,

-^-

7€<;^

evepyeia,

philosophical
writer to use

laboured

eff"ort

of the

words

harmony with the
which he belonged.
is

literary instincts of

and place

to

The

object of the

book

to protect Hellenistic

Jews from

the insidious influences of surrounding ungodliness and idolatry,

but while
of view
readers.

its

tone

is

apologetic and even polemical, the point

is

one which would

commend
it

itself to

non-Jewish

The

philosophical tendencies and the literary style
the view that
is

of

Wisdom favour

earlier

than Philo, but
B.C.

not earUer than the middle of the second century
of the

As

to

the author, the words in which Origen dismissed the question

authorship of the

Epistle

to

the

Hebrews may be

applied to this pre-Christian writing
olSev.

8e 6

//...

^
the

It is the solitary survival

from the wreck of

the earlier works of the philosophical school of Alexandria

which culminated in Philo, the contemporary of our Lord.
3.

Wisdom of
is

Jesus, son of Sirach.

title

of this book

simply

the fuller and
(cf.
1

more accurate form
.

C. L.

27 TTathuav

.

2% \^
iv
ii.

In cod.

Setpa^^, but codd.

AC

give

vlov Seipa^
vlbs
/.

Westcott in Smith's B. D. Graecam eloquentiam redolet." 2 See Deane, p. 27, Westcott,
3

1780.

Cf. Jerome,

c.

"ipse stylus
i.

^'.

p. 178, Ryle, Smith's

B.

D"-.

p. 185.

" In the

Hebrew Josippon (Pseudo-Josephus)

"IT'K^ is

Hebrew

a transliteration from the Latin" (Cowley of a portion of Ecclesiasticus, p. ix. n.).

the form and Neubauer, Original

270

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
Jerome had seen a Hebrew Sirach which shared
title

Sctpa'x').

with the canonical book the
Salo7n.
:

of Proverbs {praef. in libros

"Hebraicum

reperi... Parabolas {u''h\!^O)

praenotatum").

The
book

later

testi??i. ii.

name, Ecdesiasticus^ which appears in Cyprian (e.g. i "apud Salomonem...in Ecclesiastico "), marks the

as the

most important

or the

most popular of the
in the

libri

ecclesiastici

— the books which the Church used for the purpose of
were included
Jewish canon.
ill

instruction, although they
Cf. Rufin.

syinb. 38:

"alii libri sunt qui

ecclesiastici a maioribus appellati sunt, id dicitur Salomonis, et alia Sapientia quae dicitur hlii Sirach, qui liber apud Latinos hoc ipso generali vocabulo Ecclesiasticiis appellatur, quo vocabulo non auctor Hbelli sed scripturae qualitas

non canonici sed est, Sapientia quae

cognominata

est."

The Wisdom
Palestinian
(c. l.

of the

27

/? €.€),
;

Hebrew
II.

grandson of the writer during a
5,

simple as they seem, are involved in a double ambiguity,
since there were two Ptolemies

)
or

Aramaic
This
eVet

Son of Sirach was the work of a and written in the Greek version was made by the
visit to

Alexandria {prolog.^
Iv

18

ff.).

visit

is

said

to

have begun

—WOrds
who bore
the

which,

name

Euergetes,

and it is not clear whether the 38th year is to be reckoned from the commencement of the reign of Euergetes or from some other point of departure. But, assuming that the Euergetes intended is Euergetes 11., i.e. Physcon, and that the translator is counting from the time when Physcon was associated in the government with his brother and predecessor Philometor, we arrive at B.C. 132 as the terminus a quo of the Greek version, and the original may have been composed some fifty years earlier. Fragments of the original are preserved in Rabbinic 1 On 'E\eafa/3 (which follows in the Greek) see Ryssel in
Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 253.

>0 p

1Ti?'?N

yiC^*^

The newly-discovered Hebrew reads jlVDCi' p, on which see Schechter, Wisdom of Ben

/

Sira, p. 65.

Books not inchided
literature.

iii

the

Hebrew
of

Caiion.

271
;

These are

in

the

dialect

the

Talmud

but

recent discoveries have brought to light a large part of the

book

in classical

Hebrew.
text,

A

comparison of the Greek version
it

with the

Hebrew

so far as

has been printed, reveals

considerable differences, especially

when

the Greek text emfor

ployed

is

that of cod. B,

which was unfortunately chosen

Hebrew fragments. It must be remembered that these fragments come from a MS. of the nth or 12th century, which may present a corrupt form of the Hebrew text; and on the other hand, that
the purpose by the Oxford editors of the
there are considerable variations in the

Greek

text of Sirach,

cod.

differing widely

from the majority of the MSS.^

Much

remains to be done before the text of Sirach can be settled
with any confidence.

Meanwhile Professor Margoliouth has

thrown doubt upon the originality of the Hebrew fragments,

which he regards as belonging to an eleventh century version

made from

the Syriac with the help of a Persian translation

from the Greek ^.
In
there

At present few experts accept

this theory,
iudice.

but the question must perhaps be regarded as sub
all

but one^ of the

known MSS.

of the Greek Sirach,

is c.

a remarkable disturbance of the sequence.
xxx.

They pass
have arisen

from

34 to

c.

xxxiii.
a.

13 b, returning to the omitted
error

passage after xxxvi.

16

The

seems

to

from a transposition in the common archetype of the pairs of leaves on which these two nearly equal sections were severally
written•*

—a

fact

which

is

specially instructive in view of the

large divergences in the

Greek MSS. to which reference has

^ Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. = '23 281. group of MSS. headed by contains a considerable number of verses or stichi omitted by the rest of our Greek authorities; see Smith, B'^. i. i. p. 842. 2 Origin of the original Hebrezo See on this a of Ecclesiasticus, 1 899. letter by Prof. Driver in the Guardian, June 28, 1899, and Dr Taylor's

A

V

.

remarks
^

this
^

in Ben Sira, p. Ixx The exception is H-P., 248, a Vatican MS. of the 14th MS. see Fritzsche, p. xxiii; Zenner in Z. K. Th., 1895.
ft".

century.

On

See Fritzsche in exeg. Handbuch,

v. p.

169

f.

;

272

Books not mchided in

the

Hebrew Canon.

been made.
Syriac,
4.

The

true order

is

preserved in the Old Latin^,

and Armenian

versions.
-S>7<9,

Judith

('louSet^, -8t^,

=

•^.,

cf.

Gen.

xxvi. 34,

where the same spellings are found
uncials exhibit 'lo^SetV,

),
is

in the cursives,

though the

an

historical

romance, of which
(c.

the scene

is

laid in the days of

Nebuchadnezzar

^ ^ %)-; -.,.
provided by the fact that Clement of
Cor. 55
(l

date of

its

composition

uncertain.

A ter7ninus ad quevi is Rome knew the story
iv

]

and the name of

Judith's

enemy has suggested
king,
c. B.C.

^
i.

2).

The

a

ter??ii?ius

a quo, for Olophernes^ appears to be a softened form
158,

of Orophernes, the

name of a Cappadocian who may have been regarded as an enemy of
Judith
13,
is

the Jews'*.

The

religious attitude of the author of

that of the devout
7),

Pharisee

(cf.

e.g. viii. 6,

x.

2

if.,

xi.

xii.

and the work

may have been
the

a fruit of the patriotic feeling called forth by
wars.

Maccabean

Origen's Jewish teachers
(cf.

ad African. 13
ovhe yap

lovSrje,

.'€ ).
:

knew nothing
iv

of a Semitic original
ov

'E^patot

)(^

Jerome,
:

not only says expressly {praef. in Judith)
liber ludith inter

the Other hand, " apud Hebraeos
legitur,"

,
259

?
but

apocrypha {.. hagiographa)

he produced a version or paraphrase from an Aramaic source
potui, Latinis expressi")^

("ea quae intellegentia Integra ex verbis Chaldaeis invenire The relation of this Aramaic text

to the original of the

Greek book remains uncertain.

On the O.L. of the Wisdoms see above, pt. i. c. iv (pp. 96, 103). See Lightfoot's note ad be. and his remarks in Clejnent i. p. 313 ff. 2 Not as is presupposed by the Latin. * Cf. art. Holof There were, ernes in Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 402. however, earlier kings of the same name [op. cit. p. 823; cf. Schiirer^, iii.
^

^

\%,
n. 19).

p. 169
5

f.,

See however Ball

and F.

C

in Speaker's Conim. Apocr. Porter in Hastings' B. D. ii. p. 822^.

i.

pp. 243,

ff.

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.

273

The Greek
recensions
cursives,
:

Judith

is

said

(i) that of the Uncials

by Fritzsche' to exist in three and the majority of the
108,

(2)

that

of codd.

19,

and

(3)

that

which

is

by cod. 58, and is in general agreement with the Old Latin and Syriac versions, which are based upon a
represented

Greek
5.

text.

ToBiT

iitriusqiie

Tobiae), a tale of family

(
14 •^

(-, -),

,
life,

Todias, liber Tobiae,
is

the scene of which

Nineveh and Ecbatana, the hero being an Israelite of the tribe of Naphtali, who had been carried into captivity by Shalmanezer. The book appears to have been written for Jewish readers, and in Hebrew or Aramaic. The Jews
laid at

,
,
the
viii.
'

of Origen's time,
(Grig, de or at.

however, refused to recognise

^),
Clem.
ii.

^
iii.

its

authority
e/c

even to include
it

it

among
at

apocrypha (see above, under Judith) ; but

was accepted by
popularity

Church {ep. ad African. I. c. and there is abundant evidence of
(cf.

10. 2,

their

its

among

Christians

Ps.

2 Cor. 16. 4,
vi.

Polyc.

ad Smyrn.
6,

Clem. Alex, strom.
II,
c.

23,

12, Grig, de orat. 11,
tesfi?n.
i,

in Ro?n.

Cels.

v.

19,

Cypr.

62).

Gnostics

shared this feeHng with Catholics; the Gphites placed Tobit

among

their prophetical books (Iren. i. 30. 11). Jerome translated Tobit as he translated Judith, from a
i.e.

Chaldee,'

Aramaic, copy, but with such haste that the
in a single day {praef. in Tob. "exiChaldaeo sermone conscriptum ad latinum
satis

whole was completed
gitis

ut librum

stylum
est

tradam..,feci

desiderio

vestro...et

quia vicina

Chaldaeorum lingua sermoni Hebraico, utriusque linguae peritissimum loquacem reperiens unius diei laborem arripui, et quidquid ille mihi Hebraicis verbis expressit, hoc ego
^

codd. 19, 108,
p. 147).
S.
S.

Fritzsche, libri apocr. p. xviii sq. ; Schiirer^, iii. p. 172. The text in is said to be Lucianic (Max Lohr in Kautzsch, Apokr.,

18


Hebrew Canon.
Thus, as in

;

274
accito

Books not included
notario

in the

sermonibus Latinis exposui^").

the

case

of Judith,

Latin, based

the Old upon the Greek, and Jerome's rough and ready

we have two Latin

versions,

version of the Aramaic.

The Greek
xiii.

text itself exists

in

two principal recensions,

represented by the two great uncials

and

i<.

In

c. vi.

9

18 Fritzsche adds a third text supplied by the cursives

44, 106, 107.

The
J.

relation of the

two principal

texts to

each

other has recently been discussed by Nestle (Septuagintastudien,
iii.)

and by
iii.

of Theology^
that while

p.

Rendel Harris (in the Avierican Journal 541 if.). Both, though on different grounds,
Harris, however, points out

give preference to the text of X.
is

probably nearer to the original Hebrew,

may

exhibit

the

more trustworthy

text

of the

Alexandrian

version of the book.

;
6.

Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah
'Icpe/xtov, \^prophetid\

(, Tert. scorp.
8,

Baruch) were regarded by the Church as adjuncts of Jeremiah, much in the same way as Susanna and Baruch and the Epistle occur Bel were attached to Daniel. in lists which rigorously exclude the non-canonical books
they are cited as 'Jeremiah' (Iren.
v.
ii.

35.

i,

Clem. Alex. paed.
(Athan.

i.

10, Cypr. testim.

6); with Lamentations

they form a kind of trilogy supplementary to the prophecy
ep.

39

'lepc/^tas
iv. -^^i 'lepe/Atov

Cyril. Hier. catech.

/€

;^,

Qprji'OL,

779^).

, //
it

;,
forms
list

In

some Greek MSS. the

Epistle follows Baruch

without break, and in the Latin and English Bibles
the sixth and last chapter of that book.

^
1878).

^ Chaldee text, corresponding in some respects to Jerome's Latin, is preserved in the Bodleian, and has been edited by Neubauer (Oxford,

A

2 Origen, while omitting Baruch, includes the Epistle in a formal of the Hebrew canon (Eus. H. E. vi. 25

evi).

^

( ^ )
The
Epistle
\).

Books not included in

tJie

Hebrew Canon.

.

.'..%\

/275
€9
less

'lepe^ta?

(cf.

2

seems to have been suggested by Jer. xxxvi. (xxix.) i Kings XXV. 20 ff.). It is generally recognised that this
in

little

work was written

perhaps anterior to the writer of
ii.

Greek by a Hellenist who was 2 Maccabees (cf. 2 Mace,
is

iff.)^

The problem presented by Baruch
book
is

simple.

This

evidently a
(i.
i.

sections

subdivided
ment).

(i. i

— —

iii.

complex work consisting of two main v. 9)^, each of which may be 8, iii. 9

14, historical preface;

i.

15

and prayer;

iii.

Of
iii.

these subsections the
cf.

Hebrew
=^^^i<,

original;

4

held"* to rest

^>)^; the third has been on an Aramaic document, whilst the fourth is
(for

^^'^ / ^
first

9

iv.

4,

exhortation;

iv.

5

— —

iii.

8,

confession

v. 9,

encourage-

two shew traces of a

e.g.

i.

10

=

.

3

manifestly Hellenistic.

An

investigation by Professor Ryle

and Dr James ^

into the

relation

between the Greek version of the Psalms of Solomon

and the Greek Baruch, led them to the conclusion that Baruch was reduced to its present form after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus; and the tone of Bar. v. 30 seems certainly to point to that period. On the other hand it is difficult to
understand the unhesitating acceptance of the book by Christian

writers from

Athenagoras

{suppl.

9)

until

the

time of

^ On the first point see J. T. Marshall in Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 579, and on the other hand Schiirer^, iii. p. 344. Cf. Nestle, Marginalien,

P•

4^
-

^•

In the the second
=^

first
it

is

section the Divine either [d] ^eos or

Name

is Kiiptos

or K.

.

^eos,

while in
in

,

.,

.

aiovios, 6 ayioi.

See Dr Gifford

Speaker's Comm., Apoc, ii. f. 253. " On the margin of the Syro-hexaplar text of Baruch there are three notes by a scribe stating that certain words in i. 17 and ii. 3 are 'not found in the Hebrew.' " (A. A. Bevan in Encycl. Biblica, i. 494•) ^ E.g. by J. T. Marshall in Hastings' D. B. i. p. 251. ^ Psalms of the Pharisees, pref, esp. p. Ixxvii.
,

18—2

2/6

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
its

Jerome, and
version in
its

practical inclusion in the canon,

if

the Greek

present form proceeded from a Palestinian Jew,

and was the work of the last quarter of the first century a.d/ As to its use by the Jews there are contradictory statements in
early Christian writers, for while the Apostolical CoJistitutions^

inform us that the Jews read Baruch publicly on the

Day

of

Atonement, Jerome says expressly that they neither read it nor had it in their poisession, and his statement is confirmed

by Epiphanius.

Hieron. p7'ae/. co7mii. in lerem. "vulgo editioni Septuaginta copulatur, nee habetur apud Hebraeos" praef. ve?'s. lerem. "apud Hebraeos nee legitur nee habetur." Epiph. de mens, et

.
5

C07ist.

Ap.

V.

20

\

tovs

pond.

.
Eus.

Books of Maccabees
lihri;
vi.

baeorum

H. E.

25).

,(
[;^
Hippol. in

€€

;
;

...

/] '.
>.
, ", ',
iv.

',
;

Macha-

3

Orig. ap.

The

four books differ widely in origin,

character,

and

literary value; the

bond which

unites

them

is

merely their
family.
I

common connexion

with the events of the age

which produced the heroes of the Hasmonaean or Maccabean''

Maccabees.
{ant. xii.

This book seems to have been used by
6.

i sqq.), but it is doubtful whether he was acquainted with its Greek form. On the other hand, the Greek i Mace, was undoubtedly known to the Christian school of Alexandria; cf. Clem. Alex, stroiti. i. § 123

Josephus

1 Dr Nestle points out that Baruch and Jeremiah seem to have been translated by the same hand, unless the translator of Baruch deliberately copied the translator of Jeremiah. Certain unusual words are common to the two books in similar contexts, e.g. a^aros, irei-

..
2
•^

^,
i.

/^;?,
212

20•

calia (Smith,

But the reference to Baruch D. B.^ i. p. 359).

is

wanting

in the Syriac Didasp.

For the name Ma/c/ca^aios see Schiirer, E. T. belonged primarily to Judas, cf. r Mace. i. 4 xii. 6 'loo8as Joseph,

.

..

.\'\.%

€$
f.

n.;

it

.;

be the meaning of

,^ %
or
is
;

Books not inchided in
Origen ap. Eus.
{vJ.

tJie

Hebrew Canon.

277
iinye-

I.e.

m
eX).

%.
clearly

this title',

it is

Whatever may Semitic, and may be

taken as evidence that the book was circulated in a Semitic
original.

Jerome appears to have seen a copy of this Hebrew Aramaic text {prol. gal. "Maccabaeorum primum hbrum

Hebraicum repperi"), but it has long disappeared, and the book is now extant only in versions. The Latin and Syriac versions are based upon the Greek; the Old Latin exists in two recensions, one of which has taken its place in the Latin
Bible, whilst the other

preserved in a St Germain's and a

Madrid MS. mixed ^.

a Lyons MS. gives a text in which the two are

— 132).
by
at

The

i Mace, covers about 40 years (b.c. 175 There are indications that the writer was removed least a generation from the end of his period (cf c. xiii.

history of

He was doubtless a Palestinian Jew, but his 23 f). work would soon have found its way to Alexandria, and if it had not already been translated into Greek, it doubtless received its Greek dress there shortly after its arrival.
30, xvi.
2
is

Maccabees.
ev rfi
if

implied by

formula

by Origen,
Rom..,
t.

we may
i

)

The

existence of a

book bearing
i

Hippolytus,

who quotes

trust the Latin interpretation {in ep.

,
9
(tJ

this title

Mace, with the

and

ad

the

But the evidence goes further back. Philo shews some knowledge of the book in Qiiod 077i7iis probus liber.,
reminiscence of

).
viii.

"in primo libro

Machabaeorum scriptum
ev.
viii.

title

itself

occurs in Eus. praef.

§13, and the author of the Ep. to the Hebrews has a its Greek (Heb. xi. 31 cf. 2 Mace. vi. 19, 30).

.,

^

est");

clear

1

2

For various attempts to interpret it see Ryle, Canon, p. 185. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, pp. 62, 68.

2/8

Books not included
writer
is

in the

is

. ).
14) as
precisely

The

described by Clement of Alexandria

what he claims

to

do

TreWe

The work

. ,
Hebrew Canon.
(c.
ii.

{strain, v.

This

23

Bl

€vbs

of

the

Cyrenian

has

perished, whilst the Alexandrian epitome survives.

For Alexform of

andrian the epitomist probably was; "the characteristics of the
style

and language are
countryman \"
&c.)

essentially Alexandrian... the

the allusion to Jason shews clearly that the compiler
his fellow

was not
12

''The

style is

extremely uneven; at
v.

times

it

is
vii.

elaborately ornate
;

(iii.

15

23

— 39,

20, vi.

16,

28,

and

again,

it

is

so rude

and broken

as to

seem more
tion "
(xiii.

like notes for

19

— 26)

;

indeed

an epitome than a finished composiit is difficult to believe that such

a passage as the one last cited can have been intended to go
forth in
original
est,
its

present form.

was apparent to Jerome quod ex ipsa quoque
is

That the work never had a Semitic {prol. gal. "secundus Graecus

vocabulary

extraordinarily rich in words of the later literary

^

probari

potest").

The

Greek,

and the book betrays

scarcely

any disposition to

Hebraise^

The second book
to the
first.
it

of Maccabees presents a striking contrast

— 160),
In
I

Covering a part of the same period (b.c. 175 deals with the events in a manner wholly different.

Maccabees we have a plain and usually trustworthy history; in 2 Maccabees a partly independent but rhetorical and inaccurate and to some extent mythical panegyric of the
patriotic revolt^.

3 Maccabees.
1

A

third

book of

finds a place

Westcott in Smith's D. B.^ ii. p. 175. See the list of words given by Westcott, /. c. i. and in Smith's D. B?• i. and Apocrypha. 3 So Luther, in his preface to 1 Mace. "so billig das erste Buch sollte in die Zahl der heiHgen Schrift genommen sein, so billig ist dies andere Buch herausgcAvorfen, obwohl etwas Gutes darinner steht."
2
:

Books not included in
in

the

Hebrew Canon.

279

some Eastern lists {can. Apost.^ Niceph. stichom.). A Greek book under that title is found in codd. AV and a few cursives \ There is a Syriac version, but no Latin, nor is the book mentioned in any Western list, although the stichometry of Cod. Claromontanus implies a knowledge of its existence, for it mentions a fourth book. Similarly cod. < passes from the
first

book
third

to the fourth,
is

whether the omission of the second

and

to his

A
which

due to the deliberate judgement of the scribe or want of an archetype. more exact description of 3 Maccabees would be that
it

seems to have borne

in

some

circles

— the Ptolemaica^.
(b.c.

The

story belongs to the reigns of

Ptolemy Philopator

222

— 205),

and the scene

is

laid at Alexandria.

The

king, in-

furiated by the refusal of the Jerusalem priesthood to admit

him

to the

Holy of Holies,

returns to

of avenging himself on the Alexandrian Jews
interposition

of Providence

his

Egypt with the intention but by the plans are defeated, and he
;

becomes,

like

Darius in Daniel and Artaxerxes in Esther, the

patron of the people he had purposed to destroy.

There are reasons for believing that this romance rests upon some historical basis. "The author... evidently has good knowledge of the king and his history... the feast kept by the
Egyptian Jews at a fixed date
tion... that
[c.
vii.

11] cannot be an inven-

Philopator in some

way injured

the condition of the

Jews, and that they were concerned in the insurrection of the
nation,

seems very probable^."
similar tale

somewhat
^

2

An exCredner proposed to read M. /cat (>>-) planation of the existing reading attempted by Fabricius, cod. pseud, epigj'. Zahn {Gesch. d. V. T. i. p. 1 164, is hardly to be considered satisfactory. NTlichen Kanojis, n. p. 317) suggests iroXe/xi/ca, but this is more ingenious than convincing. 3 Mahaffy, E??ipire 0/ the Ptolemies, p. 267 ff.
',

.

Moreover Josephus has a drawn from another source, and con-

Fritzsche has used codd. 19, 44, 55, 6i, 64, 71, 74, 93. In the Pseudo-Athanasian synopsis where the MSS. give

.

28
is

Books

910 1

included in
{c.

tJie

Hebrew Canon.
5).

nected with another reign'

Ap.

ii.

The

present book
its

doubtless Alexandrian, and of relatively late origin, as

inflated style,
testifies.
it

"loaded with rhetorical ornament^,"
critics

sufficiently

Some
reign
life
first

(Ewald, Hausrath, Reuss^) would place but the knowledge of earHer
displays points to an earlier date,

in

the

of Caligula,

Alexandrian
perhaps the

which
century

it

B.C.

4 Maccabees. According to Eusebius and Jerome book was the work of Josephus^.

this

ill. 13 "alius qui inscribitur Trepi valde elegans habetur, in quo at Maccabeorum digesta martyria" (cf c. Pelag. ii. 5).

quoque

€t

greater part of

^ ?
libro

8 ^
The book

Eus. H. E.f

iii.

(sc.

^)
10

8e

icai

cTreypayj/av

yypav

^. €

nepl tovs ay

as

iv
els

,ayevves

?

TLves

6eiov euae/3etas

Hieron. de virr.

eius

Xoyov

is

a philosophical treatise upon the question,

/

^
the

€€<;

/?.
vi.

But the

it^

is

occupied by a rhetorical panegyric upon
in

the Jewish martyrs, Eleazar, and the seven brothers and their

mother,
portion

who

perished

Maccabean
3 Mace.

troubles.
18,
vii.

This
42,

appears to be based on
it

which and a

amplifies with an extraordinary wealth of language
realistic

terribly

picture

of

the
is

martyrs'

sufferings.

The

rhetoric of the writer, however,

subordinated to his
is

passion for religious philosophy.
of the
Stoics;
fast 8e

In philosophy he

a pupil

like the

author of the

Wisdom

of

Solomon

he holds
(i.

by the doctrine of the four cardinal Virtues
ei8eai

18
1

That of Euergetes
Schurer•^
iii.

II. (Physcon)
£>.

;

cf.

Mahaffy,

p. 381.

2
"^

Westcott in Smith's
p. 365.

B.

ii.

p. 179.
is

in

The same belief is expressed by the fact that the book some MSB. of Josephus. See Fabricius-Harles, v. 26 f.
•*

found

5

Viz. c.

III. 19,

to the end.

Books not incliLded in the Hebrew Canon.
/cat

dvSpLa
shall

),
is

281
that the

and he

Sternly

demands

be kept under restraint by the power of Reason.
a legahst with
(ix.

In religion he

Pharisaic
9,
xiii.

tendencies;

he

beheves in future punishment
life

15), in the eternal
5,

which awaits the righteous

(xv. 3,
is

xvii.

xviii.

23),

and

in the
(vi.

atonement
22).

for sin

which

made by

voluntary sacrifice

29, xxii.

The
laboured

style

of 4

periods.

Mace, abounds in But on the whole

false
it

ornament and
"truly Greek

is

V'

and approaches nearer than that of any other book in the Greek Bible to the models of Hellenic philosophy and rhetoric.
It
is

does not, however, resemble the style of Josephus, and

more probably a product of Alexandrian Judaism during
fall

the century before the

of Jerusalem.

the books of the Hebrew canon and the 'external' books ^), which on the authority of Jerome the reformed Churches of the West have been accustomed to call the Apocrypha, some of the ancient lists add certain apocrypha properly so named. Thus the
8.

^)

To

(

(

,
)

•, ?, / ^'^,,,,, ,^ , , " '^
catalogue of the
'Sixty Books,' after
reciting the
[leg.

canonical

books of the O. and N. Testaments, and
(the two
:

Wisdoms,

i

— 4 Maccabees, Esther, Judith, Tobit),
,;^,

continues

Kat

*1,

^,

Pseudo-Athanasian

Synopsis
the

and the Stichometry of Nice..

phorus count

certain of the above,

'. .;, /".
among
On

Ebed Jesu mentions

,?,
<;

,,
also a

/^,.

The

together with

called Traditions of the Elders^ the History of Asenath,
1

book and

Westcott in Smith's D. B?- ii. p. 181. this list see Zahn, Gesch. d. NTlichcn KanoJts, ii. p. 289 if. and M. R. James, Testametit of Abraham, p. 7 if. (in Texts and Studies, ii. 2).
2

282

Books not mcluded in

the

Hebrew Canon.

even the Fables of Aesop disguised under the title Proverbs Besides these writings the following are cenof Josephiis. sured in the Gelasian notitia librorum apocryphoruvi : Liber de
filiabus

Adae

Lepfogenesis, Poeiiitentia

Adae, Liber de

Vegia

no?ni?ie gigante,

qui post diluviuiti cum dracone...pug?iasse perhiLob, Poenitentia

betur,

Testamentum
i?iterdicfio.

Lambre

et

Mambre,

Solo-

monis

Though

the great majority of these writings at one time

existed in Greek, they were not admitted into collections of

canonical books.

A

partial

exception was

made

in

favour

of the Psalms of Solomon.
the
(xvTtXeyo/xem
in

This book

is

mentioned among

of the

O.T. in the Stichometry of Nice-

phorus and

the Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis.

An

earlier

authority, the compiler of the catalogue at the beginning of

Codex Alexandrinus, allows it a place in his list, although after the final summary of the books of the Old and New Testaments \ If the Codex itself contained these Psalms, they have perished together with a portion of Ps. Clem, ad Cor. ii.,
the

book which
which

in the list

immediately precedes them.
in

It

has

been conjectured^ that they once had a place
ticus,

Cod. Sinai-

the N.T.

like Cod. A has lost some leaves at the end of Their absence from the other great uncials and

from the

earlier cursives
(lix.),

Laodicean canon
Iv TTj

in
^

private

collections,

^ .
may be due
ov Set

on

<;
.
|

to the influence of the

XiyeaOaL

)8/?,

Happily the Psalms Survived
a few relatively

and

find a place in
.

The

catalogue ends
IH.
I

and below,

coAo-

2 By Dr J. R. Harris, who points out {Johns Hopkins Uiiiv. Circular, March 1884) that the six missing leaves in X between Barnabas and Hermas correspond with fair accuracy to the space which would be required for

$ \3 $.
pv'

the Psalms of Solomon, 3 Cf. Babr. ap. Beveregii Synod, p. 480

\^6

\$...
rtves

aaPTes

-

Books not iiiclnded in
late cursives of the poetical

the

Hebrew Canon.

283

and the Sapiential books of the

O.T., where they follow the Davidic Psalter or take their place

among the writings attributed to Solomon \ The Psalms of Solomon are shewn by
spirit

their teaching

and

to be

the work of the Pharisaic school, and internal

evidence connects them with the age of Pompey, whose death

appears to be described in Ps.

ii.

30

if.^

The

question of the

date of the Greek version turns upon the nature of the relation

which
iv.

exists

Baruch.

Professor Ryle and

between the Greek Psalms and the Greek Book of Dr James, who regard Baruch

V. 9 (Greek) as based on the Greek of Ps. Sol. xi., 2>^ are disposed to assign the version of the Psalms to the last

decade of the
work."

first

century

B.C.

^

They observe

that the

Mesat

sianic passages contain

"no

trace

of Christian influence

On

the other

hand there

are interesting coincidences

between the Greek phraseology of the Psalter and that of
the Magnificat

and other Lucan

canticles ^

One
in the

other apocryphon of the Greek Old Testament claims

attention here.

The Book of Enoch
in the

has since 1838 been

hands of scholars

form of an Ethiopic version

based upon the Greek. But until 1892 the Greek version was known only through a few fragments the verse quoted

by St Jude
Vat.
gr.

{cf.

14

f.),

a brief tachygraphic extract in cod.

1809,
ii.),

biblioth.
p.

published in facsimile by Mai {patr. nov. and deciphered by Gildemeister {ZDMG., 1855,

622

ff.),

Syncellus^
1

and the excerpts in the Chrojiographia of Georgius But in 1886 a small vellum book was found in

In the

Ps. Sol., Sir. or (in
2
iii.

they go with the two Wisdoms in the order Sap., one instance) Sap., Sir., Ps. Sol. Ryle and James, Psalms of the Phaj-isees, p. xl ff., xliv fF. Schiirer^,
latter case
f.

p. 152
^

Ryle and James, p. Ixxii ff. On the date see W. Frankenberg, die Datieriing der Psalmen Salomos (Giessen, 1896). Ryle and James, p. xc ff. ^ These may be conveniently consulted in the Corpus historiae Byzantinae, t. i, where they are edited by W. Dindorf.
•*

284
a

Books not included in the Hebreiv Canon.

Christian grave in

Akhmim
alia

(Panopolis), in
first

Upper Egypt,
chapters of
section of the

which contained

ititcr

the

thirty-two
first

Enoch
book.

in

Greek

—nearly

the whole of the

This large fragment was published by M. Bouriant

in the ninth

volume of Memoires

piiblies

par

les

membres de
i^''

la

mission archeologique Fran^aise

au

Caire (Paris,

fasc.

1892; 3« fasc. 1893). The newly recovered Greek belongs to the oldest part of

Enoch, which may be regarded as in the main a Palestinian work of the second century b.c.^ The Greek version is the parent of the Ethiopic, and of pre-Christian date, since it was in the hands of St Jude. Thus it possesses a strong claim upon the attention of the student of Biblical Greek, while the book itself possesses an almost unique value as an
exposition of Jewish eschatology.

The Greek
in the ancient
2
;

version of

Enoch seems
Barn.
4.

to

Church;
i.

cf.

16; Clem. Alex.
(Orig.

have been circulated eel. prop h.
2.

Orig. de princ.

3.

3, iv.

35, ho7n. in Nu?n. 28.

book was not accepted by
ev rats
*Evcu;>^

?
est"),

but opinion was divided, and Tertullian was prepared to
3 " scio scripturam

: .
was

authority

c.

ov
t.

^eta
vi.

eTrtyeypa/xjutei/a

in loann.

25

et
ill.

Hieron. de virr.

4

"apocryphus

^
The
54
Cels.
v.

admit the claims of a writing which had been quoted in a
Catholic Epistle {de
cult.

faem.

i.

Enoch

...non recipi a quibusdam quia nee in armarium ludaicum
admittitur...a nobis

pertineat

quidem nihil omnino reiciendum est quod ad nos...eo accedit quod E. apud ludam apostolum
In the end, however,
it

testimonium possidet)."

appears to
if

have been discredited both in East and West, and,

we

may judge by
version,
it

the almost total
rarely

disappearance of the Greek

copied by Catholics even for private
Schiirer•"^,
iii.

^

See

p.

i96ff.

;

Books not included in
study.

the

Hebrew Canon.

285

A mere

chance has thrown into our hands an excerpt

made
in the

in the eighth or ninth century,

and

it

is

significant that
frag-

Akhmim book Enoch

is

found in company with

ments of a pseudonymous Gospel and Apocalypse \

Literature
I

of the non-canonical Books.

Wette-Schrader, Lehrbuch, §§ 363 4; Konig, ESDRAS. Einleitiing, p. 146; Dahne, Gesch. Darstelhmg^ iii. p. 116 if.; Nestle, Margi?ialie?t, p. 23 f. ; Bissell, Apocrypha of the O. T.^ p. 62 it.; H. St J. Thackeray, art. i Esdras in Hastings' D.B.., i. ; Schiirer^, iii. p. 326 ff. ; Biichler, das apokr. Ezra-Buchs {MGlVy., iSgy). Text and apparatus: Holmes and Parsons, t. v.; Fritzsche, tiorz apocr. V. T. Or., pp. viii. i x., 30; Lagarde, tibr. V. T. canon.., p. i. (Lucianic) ; O. T. in Greek., ii.

De

(text of B, with variants of A); W. J. Moulton, iiber die Uberlieferung des textkrit. Wei'th der drittoi Esra-Bicchs, TW., 1899, 2 (p. 209 ff.). Commentaries: Fritzsche, exeg. Hattdbiich 2. Lupton, in Speaker's Co7n?n., Apocrypha., i. Guthe, d. Apokr.., i. in Kautzsch, Apohypheti, p. i ff.

A

;

;

Wisdom of Solomon.
;

Fabricius-Harles, iii. 727. De WetteSchrader, Lehrbiich., §§ 378 382; Konig, Einteitimg, p. 146; Dahne, Darstelltmg., ii. p. 152 ff. Westcott, in Smith's D. B. iii. Drummond, Philo Judaeiis., \. p. 177 ff. Text and p. 1778 ff. apparatus Holmes and Parsons, v. Fritzsche, libr. apocr. V. T. Gr., pp. xxiv. f, 522 ff. O. T. i7t Greek., ii. p. 604 ff. (text of B, variants of i<AC). Commentaries Bauermeister, co7mn. in Sap.

;

:

;

;

:

exeg. Handbuch, vi. Reusch, obse?vatio7ies Criticae in tibr. Sapie7itiae (Friburg, 1858); Deane, the Book of Wisdo77i (Oxf, 1 881); Farrar, in Speake7^s Co77i77i.., Apocr.., i. Siegfried, in Kautzsch, Apokryphe7i, p. ,,476 ff. On the Latin version see Thielmann, die tateinische Ubersetzu7ig des Buches der Weisheit (Leipzig, 1872).
Sot. (1828);
;

Grimm,

1 A collection of Greek O. T. apocrypha might perhaps include, amongst other remains of this literature, the Rest of the Words of Baruch [ed. J. Rendel Harris), the Apocalypse of BarticJi {ed. M. R. James), the

of Abraham {ed. M. R. James), parts of the Oraaila Sibylli7ta A. Rzach), the Testaments of the XII Patriarchs {ed. Sinker), the Latin Ascension of Isaiah {ed. O. von Gebhardt, vith the new Greek fragments), and perhaps also the Latin versions of certain important books which no longer survive in the Greek, e.g. 4 Esdras {ed. R. L. Bensly), the Assiimptioit of Moses {ed. R. H. Charles), the Book of Jubilees, TeVeats {ed. R. H. Charles).
Testa7}ie7tt
{ed.

; ;

286

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon.
iii.

Wisdom of the Son of Sirach. Fabricius-Harles, 718; De Wette-Schrader, § 383 Konig, p. 145. Westcott and Margoliouth, Ecdesiasticus, in Smith's D. Br 841; Schiirer^,
if.
;

i.

iii..

p.

157

found). Holmes and Parsons, v. Fritzsche O. T. in Greeks ii. (text of B, variants of KAC); cf. J. K. Zenner, Ecclesiasticus iiach cod. Vat. 346 {Z. K. Th.^ 1895). Bretschneider, liber lesii Siracidae Or., Ratisbon, 1806. Cf. Hatch, Essays^ Nestle, Marginalie?i (1893), p. 48 ff. Klostermann, p. 296 ff. Commentaries Bretschneider {ut supra) ; Aiialecta, p. 26 f. Fritzsche, exeg. Handbuch, v. Edersheim in Speaker's Comm.^ Apocr. ii. ; Ryssel, in Kautzsch, Apokryphe?t, p. 230 ff. On the newly discovered Hebrew text with relation to the versions see Cowley and Neubauer, The original Hebrew of a portion of Ecclesiasticus^ Oxford, 1897; Smend, das hebr. Frag:

(where a full Text with apparatus
ff.

list

of recent

monographs
;

will

be

:

;

pa7'tie

ment der Weisheit des fesus Sirach., 1897; Halevy, Etude sur la du texte hebreu de VEcclesiastique (Paris, 1897); Schlatter,

das neu gefundene hebr. Stiick des Sirach (Guterslob, 1897); Ecclesiastique^ Paris, 1898; C. Taylor, in fQR., 1898; l^Qvi, D. S. Margoliouth, the origin of the ^Original Hebrew' of Ecclesiasticus., Oxford, 1899; S. Schechter and C. Taylor, the' IVisdom of Ben Sira, Cambridge, 1899; S. Schechter, in JQR. and Cr. B., Oct. 1899; various articles in Exp. Times, 1899; A. A. Bevan in JThSt., Oct. 1899.

Judith.
§

Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 736; De Wette-Schrader, Konig, p. 145 f. Nestle, Marginalien, p. 43 ff. West373 ff• cott-FuUer in Smith's D. BP- I. ii. p. 1850 ff. F. C. Porter in Schiirer^, iii. p. 167. Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 822 ff. Text and apparatus: Holmes and Parsons, v.; Fritzsche, p. xviii f., 165 if.; Old Testament in Greek, ii. (text of B, variants of i?A). Commentaries Fritzsche, exeg. Handbuch, ii. Wolff, das Buch Judith...erkldrt (Leipzig, 1861); Scholz, Commentar zum B. Judith (1887, 1896); cf. Ball in Speaker's Comm., Apocr. , i. Lohr, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, p. 147 ff.
; ;
;
;

;

:

;

TOBIT. Fabricius-Harles, iii. 738; De Wette-Schrader, § 375 ff. Konig, p. 145 f. Westcott in Smith's D. B. iii. p. 1523; Text and apparatus Holmes and Parsons, Schiirer^, iii. p. 174. v.: Fritzsche, pp. xvi ff., 108 ff.; Old Testament in Greek, ii.
;
:

and <, with variants of A) Reuscli, libellus Tobit e (texts of cod. Sin. editus (Bonn, 1870); Neubauer, the Book of Tobit: a Chaldee text (Oxford, 1878). Commentaries: Fritzsche, exeg. Handbuch, Apokr., ii. ; Reusch, das Buch Tobias iibersetzt u.
;

erkldrt (Friburg, 1857); Sengelmann, das Buch Tobits erkldrt (Hamburg, 1857) Gutberlet, das Buch Tobias iibei'setst 21. erkldrt
;

;

Books not included
(Munster, 1877);

iji

the

Hebrew Canon.

287

Rosenmann,
in
p.
J.

Scholz, Commeiitar s. Biiche Tobias (1889); Stiidien z. Buche Tobit (Berlin, 1894); J. M. Fuller

Speako^s Co/nm., Apoc?'., i. Lohr, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen^ 135 ff. Cf. E. Nestle, Septiiagintastiidien^ iii. (Stuttgart, 1899); R. Harris in American of Theology^ July, 1899.
;

J

7

Baruch and
Schrader,

Epistle. Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 734 f. De Wette389 ff.; Konig, p. 485 f Westcott-Ryle, in Smith's D. ^.2 i. p. 359 ff. J. T. Alarshall, in Hastings' D. B. i. p. 249 ff. ii. p. 579 ff.; Schtirer^, iii. p. 338 ff. A. A. Bevan, in Ejtcycl. BibText and apparatus Holmes and Parsons, v. lica, i. 492 ff. Fritzsche, pp. xv f., 93 ff. Old Testainejit ifi Greek, iii. (text of B, with variants of AOr). Commentaries Fritzsche, exeg. Handbiich, Apokr., i. ; Reusch, E7'kld7'ung des Bucks Bariich
;

§

.

;

;

;

:

;

:

(Freiburg, 1853); Havernick, de libra Baruch (Konigsberg, 1861); Kneucker, das Buck Baruch (Leipzig, 1879); G. H. Gifford in Speaker'' s Coinm.^ Apocr., ii. Rothstein, in Kautzsch,
;

Apokryphen,
I

p.

213

ff.

—4

Maccabees. Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 745 ff. De WetteSchrader, § 365 ff. Konig, p. 482 ff. Westcott in Smith's D. B.^ ii. Rosenthal, p. 170 ff.; Schiirer^, iii. pp. 139 ff., 359 ff., 393 ff. das erste Makkabderbuch (Leipzig, 1867); Willrich, Judeji ti. Griechen vor der makkab. Erhebufig (1895) Freudenthal, die Fl. Josephus beigelegte Schrift. (Breslau, 1869); Wolscht, de Ps. Josephi oralioue... {Marburg, 1881). Text and apparatus Holmes and Parsons, v. (books i. iii.); Fritzsche, pp. xix ff., 203 ff. Old Testament in G^'eek, iii. (text of A with variants of S, in
; ;

;

;

5

:

;

books

i.

and

iv.

and

v.).

Commentaries

:

Keil,

Komvi.

iiber die

Biicher der Makk. (Leipzig, 1875); Bensly-Barnes, 4 Maccabees in Syriac (Cambridge, 1895)^; Grimm in Fritzsche's exeg. Handbuch, Apokr., iii., iv. Bissell, in Lange-Schaff's Comm.\ G. Rawlinson in Speaker's Comm., Apocr., ii. (books i. ii.) Fairweather and Black, i Maccabees (Cambridge, 1897); Kautzsch and Kamphausen, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, p. 24 ff.
;

;

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA.
this subject in

The

Student will find fuller information on

Fabricius, Codex pseicdepigraphus V. T. (Hamburg, 1722): Herzog-Plitt, xii. p. 341 ff. (art. by Dillmann on Pseudepigrapha des A. T.)\ Deane, Pseudepigrapha (Edinburgh, 1891) J. H. Thompson, a critical 7'evicw ofapocalyptical ewisli literature (N. Y., 1891); Smith's and Hastings' Bible Dictionaries; Schurer^, iii. pp. 150 ff., 190 ff. the works of Credner and Zahn; AL R. James, Testament of Abraham in Texts a?id Studies (11. ii. p. 7 ff.); Encyclopaedia Biblica, artt. Apo;

J

;

^

A

by Dr Barnes

collation of the Syriac 4 Mace, with the Greek has to 0. T. in Greek^, vol. iii. (p. 900 ff.).

been contributed

;

288

Books not included in the Hebrew Cajion.

For the literacalyptic Literature and Apocrypha (i. 213-58). ture of the several writings he may refer to Strack, Eiiileitung^ In Kautzsch's Apokr. u. Psetidepigraphen the followp. 230 ff. Martyrdom of Isaiah ing O. T. pseiidepigrapha are included prooe7n. (Blass), Asccnsioii (Beer), Sibylline Oracles^ iii. v.,

:

of Moses (Clemen), Apocalypse of Moses (Fuchs), Apocalypse of Esdras (Gunkel), Testament of Naphtali, Heb. (Kautzsch), Book
of Jubilees (Littmann), Apocalypse of Ba7'uch (Ryssel), TestaOn the eschatology of this 7fie?its of XII Patriarchs (Schnapp). literature see Charles, Eschatology^ Hebrew^ Jewish and Chi'isiian (London, il

Psalms of Solomon.

Fabricius, Cod.pseudepigr. V.T., i. p. 914 ff. Ryle and Fritzsche, tibr. apocr. V. T. gr., pp. xxv ff., 569 ff. James, Psalms of the Pharisees (Cambridge, 1891); O. v. Gebhardt, die PsalmcTi Salo7nds {\^€^\%^ 1895); Old Testa77ie7it iji Greek'^ (Cambridge, 1899^). Ryle and James' edition is specially valuable for its full Introduction, and Gebhardt's for its invesOn tigation into the pedigree and relative value of the MSS. the date see Frankenberg, die Datie7'U7ig der Psal77ie7i Salo77ios (Giessen, 1896). An introduction and German version by Dr R. Kittel will be found in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphe7i^ p. 127 ff.
;

Book of Enoch.
ford, 1838);

Laurence, Libri E7wch ve7-sio aethiopica (OxDillmann, Z/<^<?r He7wch acthiopice (Leipzig, 185 1); Bouriant, F7'ag77ients du texte grec dii livre d^E7ioch...m Me7noires, &c. (see above); Lods, le livre d''E7ioch (Paris, 1892); Dillmann, iiber de7i nei(gefimde7ien gr. Text des He7ioch-Buches (Berlin, 1892); Charles, the Book of E7ioch (Oxford, 1893), and
Hastings' D.B. i. p. 705 ff. Old Testa77ie7it i7i Greeks iii.(Cambridge, 1899). For a fragment of a Latin version see James, Apocr. a7iecdota in Texts and Studies^ ii. 3, p. 146 ff. An introduction and German version by Dr G. Beer will be found in
art. in
;

Kautzsch, Pseiidepigraphen.,

p.

217

ff.

gr. 336,

text in the Cambridge manual LXX., which is that of cod. Vat. and is accompanied by an apparatus and a brief description of the can be had, together with the text of Enoch, in a separate form. MSS.,
1

The

CHAPTER

IV.

The Greek of the Septuagint.
I.

No
is

thorough treatment of the Greek idiom of the
to
exist.

Lxx.

known

Two

ancient treatises

upon the
In modern

dialect

of Alexandria,

by Irenaeus (Minutius Pacatus) and

Demetrius Ixion\ have unhappily disappeared.

times the ground has been broken by Sturz and Thiersch",

and within the
discovered
the form of a

last

few years Deissmann^ has used the recently
connotation or

papyri of Egypt to illustrate the

number of Septuagint nouns and verbs. Much has also been done by Dr H. A. A. Kennedy^ and the Abbe J. Viteau^ in the way of determining the relation of Septuagint Greek to the
classical

and

later usage,

and

to the

Greek of the N.T.

;

and the

N.T. grammars of Winer-Moulton, Winer-Schmiedel, and Blass
contain incidental references to the Hnguistic characteristics of
the Alexandrian version.

But a separate grammar of the Greek
a real want,
it.

Old Testament

is

still

and the time has almost

come

for attempting to supply

Biblical scholars have

now

at

^ See Fabricius-Harles, vi. p. Both writers lived in the time of 193 f. Augustus. - Sturz's treatment of the dialect of Alexandria and Egypt needs to be checked by more recent researches, but it is still the most complete work upon the subject. Thiersch deals directly with the Greek of the LXX. but he limits himself to the Pentateuch.
,

^

4 5

Bibelstudien (1895), and A^eue Bibelstudieii (1897). Sources of N.T. Greek (1895). Etude sur le Grec du N.T. (1896).
S. s.

19

290
their

The Greek of

the Septiiagint.

disposal a store of trustworthy materials in the Oxford
will

Concordance, and the larger Cambridge Septuagint

supply
of

an accurate and
these two works

sufficient
it

textual

guide.

On

the basis

ought to be possible
this

for the

workers of

lexicon \

grammar and more can be attempted than to set before the beginner some of the linguistic problems presented by the Greek of the Septuagint, and to point out the chief features which distinguish it from
the twentieth century to prepare a satisfactory

Meanwhile

in

chapter nothing

other forms of the language.
2.

The

student
of

who

enters

knowledge
reminding

the

Greek

New

upon this subject with some Testament must begin by
conditions

himself of the

different

under which

the two parts of the Greek Bible were produced.

Old Testament was not
general character.

like the
its

New
is

The Greek Testament the work of
in their

a single generation, nor are

books as homogeneous

The Septuagint

a collection of transla-

tions interspersed with original

Greek works, the translations
B.C.,

belonging partly to the third century

partly to the

second

and the original works chiefly to the end of this Even in the case of the Pentateuch we are not at period. liberty to assume that the translators worked at the same time or under the same circumstances. These considerations complicate our enquiry, and lead us to expect in the lxx. great varieties of manner and language. In the earlier work we shall meet with the colloquial Greek which the Jews learnt
and
first,

to speak shortly after their settlement in Egypt. lations will

Later trans-

approximate to the

literary

style

of the second

century, except in cases where this tendency has been kept
in

check by a desire to follow the manner of the older
1

A
is

lexicon

was planned

work
a

suspended

Grammar may

1895 by a Cambridge Committee, but the There is some reason to hope that before long be undertaken by a competent scholar.
in

for the present.

2

The Greek of
books.
Lastly,

the Septiiagint.

291
of which are
free

in the original writings,

many

relatively late,

and

in

which the writers were

from the

limitations that beset the translator, the

identical with that which

was

Avritten

Greek will be nearly by the Jewish-Alexan-

drian historians and philosophers of the time.

3.

We

begin

by investigating

the

literary

conditions
lived
at

under which both the translators and the
Alexandria.

Avriters

In the middle of the second century

e.c.

Polybius' found

Alexandria inhabited by three races, the native

who occupied
cenary class

{

the

with the Jews, and the Greeks of the Brucheion, a mixed

),
site

Egyptians,

of the old seaport Rhacotis, the mer-

multitude claiming Hellenic descent and
traditions
(et

/xtyctScg,

kolvov

"

who may be

roughly identified

€€ , ).
wedded

to Hellenic
e/xe-

This fusion of various

elements in the Greek population of the city must have ex-

was largely made up Macedonian army, volunteers from every part of Greece, and mercenaries from the Greek Even in the colonies of Asia Minor, and from Syria. villages of the Fayum, as we now know, by the side of the Macedonians there were settlers from Libya, Caria, Thrace, Illyria, and even Italy ^, and Alexandria presented without Each class doubt a similar medley of Hellenic types. brought with it a dialect or idiom of its own. The Macedonian dialect, e.g., is said to have been marked by certain
isted

from the

first.

The

original colony

of the veterans of Alexander's

phonetic

changes^ and the use of barbarous terms such as

^

2

ap. Strab. 797. MahaflFy in Flinders Petrie Papyri,

le?nies, p.
3

178

f.

As

the change of
p. 51, n.

into

dial.

Mac,

{,
i.

p. 42.

Cf.

Empire of
&c.),
cf.

the

-

for

Sturz, de

19


292
dSrj

=

in unusual senses, as

, ^ -^, , ,
The Greek of

the Septiiagiiit.

=

Sai'os

=

and of Greek words

'camp,'

.,

street'.

Some

of these passed into the speech of Alexandria, and with them
Avere

echoes

of the

older dialects

— Doric,

Ionic,

Aeolic

and other
patois,

€^€ €5,
less
it

known

local varieties of Greek.

A

mongrel
confusion

as

it

was called

in the title of
this

the

treatise of

Demetrius Ixion, arose out of
of the Alexandrian
dialect

of tongues.

No monument
we may seek
Bible.
is

'

'

remains, unless

in the earlier

books of the Alexandrian Greek
light
earlier

We

have indeed another source from which

thrown on the popular Greek of Egypt under the

Ptolemies.

A

series

of epistolary and

testamentary papyri

has recently been recovered from the Fayum, and given to
the world under the auspices of the Royal Irish

Academy^;
of

a similar collection has been issued at Berlin^
these documents
is

The Greek

singularly free from dialectic forms,

owing
;

perhaps to local circumstances, as Professor Mahaify suggests
but
the

striking

, ,,,,,, ,, , , , ,, , . , , ,,,, , , ,,,.
vocabulary has, in

common

with the lxx.,

many

words and forms, some of which are rare elsewhere.

€8, (, (, €€', -, "^,
:

following list has been formed from the indices to the Flinders Petrie collection avabev^pas,

The

oyj/wviov,

napaSel^ai,

Trepi-

neptodeveiv,

The

Berlin

papyri yield

many

other such words,

e.g.

^

list

of these words, collected from Hesychius and other lexicogravi. 9.

phers,
^

may be seen in Sturz, p. 34 if. From Q. Curtius [Be rebus gestis Alexandri M.,

36)

it

appears

that the
difficulty.
3
•*

Macedonian and the native Greeks understood one another with

In the Cunjiingham Metnoirs for 1891, '93, edited by Prof. Mahaffy.

Gricchische Agyptische U?'kundeii aus den k'onigl. Museen zu Berlin. Further contemporary illustrations of Alexandrian Urk. i. ii. (1895). Greek may Idc found in Wilcken's Griechische Ostraka (1899).

The Greek of
The
to

the Septuagint.

293

following letter of the time of Philadelphus will serve

yiveTai

() () - ,€. \\ 6-. . ,
:

shew the style of these documents, and at the same time the use in them of certain Septuagint words. It is addressed by the foremen of a gang engaged in a stone quarry to the engineer of the works
yap

ipyaevoL
4-

€ €€,

€€

8e

^ ^, ^ ' € ^.
€€\_^
iyiveTo.

adiKOv-

<

eav yap

Simultaneously with the growth of the colloquial mixed

dialect, a deliberate

attempt was

the glories of classical Greek.

made at Alexandria to revive The first Ptolemy, who had
early

been

the

companion
his
life

of

Alexander's
for

days,

retained
learning.

throughout

a

passion

literature

and

at

Prompted, perhaps, by Demetrius of Phalerum, Soter founded Alexandria the famous Museum, wdth its cloisters and

lecture
life

rooms and dining

hall

where scholars lived a

common
Soter
is is

under a warden appointed by the King-.

To

also attributed the establishment of the great library

which

said to have contained 400,000 codices^

Under

his successor

the

Museum and
to

Library became a centre of literary activity,

and the age

which the inception of the Greek Bible

is

usually ascribed produced Aratus, Callimachus, Herondas, Ly-

cophron, and Theocritus.
wath the

There

is

suppose that the Jewish translators were

however no reason to officially connected

Museum,
we

or that the classical revival under Soter
directly.

and Ptolemy affected them
rary style as
find in the

Such traces of a liteGreek Pentateuch are probably
33).

1

Flinders Petrie Papyri,
(5eiv:aTapxos

ii. xiii. (p.

LXX. words

= LXX.

5e/ca5.,

Sometimes these papyri afford illustrations of the LXX. which are not merely verbal; cf. II. xiv. 2 es -rrpos Strabo, 794; cf Mahafify, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 91 ff. 3 Joseph., ant. xii. 2. Seneca, de traiiquiL animae 9. Cf. Susemihl,
'^

-, ^, ).
The reader

.
336•

will notice several

Gesch. d. griech. Litteratiir in d. Alexandrinerzeit

,

i.

294
due not
but
to

'^^^^

Greek of the Septiiagint.
Royal Library,

to the influence of the scholars of the

the

traditions

of Greek
period

writing

which had floated

and were already shaping into a type of Greek which became the common property of the new Hellenism.

down from

the

classical

themselves under altered conditions

5.

The

later

Greek, the

or

^)
origin,
;

the

dialect

in

general

use

among Greek-speaking

^

peoples

from the fourth century onwards^
but embraced
It

— was
from
the

based on Attic Greek,
all

elements

drawn
of

Hellenic

dialects.

was the

literary

language

cosmopolitan

Hellas

created by the genius of Alexander.

indeed before
to

Alexander.

The change had begun Even Xenophon allows himself
and to emand the writings
kolvtj

make

free use of

words of provincial

ploy Attic words with a
of Aristotle

mark

the

new connotation opening of a new

era in the history

of the Greek language".

But the golden age of the
(c.

begins in

the second century with Polybius

B.C. 145),

and

extends a century or two beyond the Christian

era,

producing
language regarded
kolvtj,

such writers as Diodorus Siculus

(b.c. 40),

Strabo (a.d. 10),

Plutarch (a.d. 90), and Pausanias (a.d. 160).

used by the writers of the Greek Diaspora
as belonging to a subsection of an

The may be

early stage of the
it

although, since the time of Scaliger,

has been distinguished

from the
the
tine

latter

by the term

'

Hellenistic^'

A

'Hellenist^*'

is

properly a foreigner

Greek tongue. Hellenistic' was
'

who Thus
in

Greek manners and speaks the Jewish Greek spoken in PalesThe word is the strictest sense.
aftects

often used to describe the
^

Greek of such thoroughly Hellento
j?iociern

See Professor Jebb
Mullach, Gramvi.

in
d.

Vincent and Dickson's Handbook
Vulgarsprache,
11
ff.

Greek., p. 290.
-

p. 48•

H. A. A. Kennedy,

Sources of
"*

N.

T.

Greek,

p.

^

See Winer-Moulton, Acts vi. i, xi. 20.

p. 29.


The
ised writers as

Gi'eek

of the Septuagint.
the

295
post-apostolic

Philo and Josephus, and
;

teachers of the ancient Church

but

it

is

applied with special

appropriateness to the Alexandrian Bible and the writings of
the

New

colloquial
6.

Testament, which approach most nearly Greek of Alexandria and Palestine.
local types of

to

the

Such were the

Greek upon which the
their

Jewish translators of the O.T. would naturally mould their
work.

While the colloquial Greek of Alexandria was
rise

chief resource, they were also influenced, in a less

by the

of the later literary style

known

as the

We

.

degree,

which was afterwards

are

now prepared

to begin

our examination of the

vocabulary and grammar of the Alexandrian Bible, and we

may commence by
books.
of Exodus,
I

testing the vocabulary in the translated
this
2

Let us select for

purpose the

first

three chapters

Kingdoms,
are,

Chronicles, Proverbs, and Jeremiah,
fairly

books which

perhaps,

representative of the trans-

Reading these contexts in the Cambridge manual edition, and underlining words which are not to be found in the Greek prose of the best period, we obtain the
lation as a whole.

following results.
in
I

In Exod. 39
;

i.

Regn.
Jer.

i.

16; in
15

34; making a total of 135 later words chapters, or nine to a chapter. Of these words 52
i.

— —

iii.
i.

iii.,

in 2

Chron.

there are 19 such words;
iii.,

27

;

in Prov.

i.

iii.,

iii.,

in

considerably more than a third

— appear to

Lxx., or to have been used there for the
literature.

'/, €\€7€, 8, ^, €€',€,€€, ', ^, ^, €€, -, , , ('/, ,
above-named passages.
e^oXeOpevetv, i^ov6evovv, evodovv, oXeupeveLv,

, , ,. , , ,^ ,,,,,
The

following are the Septuagintal words observed in the Verbs: devrepovv, diodeveiv,

Nowis :

, ,
first

be peculiar to the

time in extant

296

, , , .,, , , .
TJie

Greek of the Septiiagint.
Foreign ivords (a)
{b)

with Greek terminations

8€,

,
:

re'/SeX,

^'

,

transliterated aepaepeO,

:

similar experiment has been made by Dr H. A. A. Kennedy in reference to one of the books of the Pentateuch. Of no late words and forms observed in Deut. x. he
i.

found that 66 belonged to Biblical Greek, 16 of these being
peculiar to the lxx.
;

of 313 such words in the entire book,

152 proved to be Biblical, and $6 pecuHar to the Old Testafourth

ment; nearly half belonged to the and more than a had been used by the writers of tragedy and comedy.

,
'

of the late words in the lxx. is still a which have been made for the N.T. shew that out of 950 post-Aristotelian words about 314 just under one third occur also in the Greek O.T. But the writers of the N.T. have taken over only a part perhaps a relatively small
list

A

complete

desideratian.

Lists

part

— of

the vocabulary of the lxx.

has pointed out^, the 51st Psalm alone yields four important

words (aya^wetv,

no place
is

have lent themselves readily

,
is
^

€€
Some

The following lxx. words are non-Attic: (in the sense of v€lv),

are Macedonian^. As our knowledge of Alexandrian Greek increases, it may be that the greater part of the words which have been regarded as peculiar to the lxx. will prove to belong to the usage of Egyptian

,, . , , ^ , ,, ,,
in the

^, -., ^)
This
fact
is

As Dr T. K. Abbott
which find

N.T.

suggestive, for the

Psalm

doctrinally important,

and the words are such
to

as

would

\€, ^, ^, ^, , €•, , , condemned by Phrynichus

N.T.

use.

as

of these words are said to be provincialisms; Sicilian, is Ionic, and

,

e.g.

Kennedy,

oJ>.

cit.,

p. 62.

Cf. the lists in the appendix to
(p.

Grimm-

Thayer's Lexicon of N. T. Greek - Essays, p. 69.

691

fif.).

^

See above,

p. 292.

The Greek of

the Septiiagint.

597

Greek. Deissmann has already shewn that many well-known Septuagintal words find a place in the Greek papyri of the Ptolemaic period, and therefore presumably belonged to the language of business and conversation at Alexandria. Thus occurs in a papyrus of 241 239 B.C. forms SUCh as 225 B.C. 255 'B-C: avaarpican be quoted from the papyri passim yeyovav,

-^^^

?,

,
suffice
:

;

,€8,
; ;

and

in

an ethical sense, \eLTovpyelv

in reference

to the service of a deity, Tepos of an official, are shewn to

The forms of many words have undergone a change since few specimens may be given from the age of classical Greek. the pages of Phrynichus

, /, ,,,,. ,
ing

of circumcision,

have been in use in Egypt under the Ptolemies. In many cases however words receive a new connotation, when they pass into Biblical Greek and come As examples the followinto contact with Hebrew associations.

, -

may

ayyeXos,

ypaa€vs,

A

:

Attic Greek.

.

298

The Greek of

the Septuagint.

the earlier books of the lxx., and as he quotes his text verbatim, the student can discern
divides
its

at

a glance

simple manner, half Semitic, half colloquial, from
of idiomatic

the easy

command

Greek manifested by the

Alexandrian exegete.

We will
:


39
'•

' ^€ ., ,
Philo de opif. rmindi 7

yrjv

^

give two brief specimens.

'

? iv

'

6

'

^^

€€
iv

, )
We

€ € ^', \ iyiv€TO
Josephus
is

( 8 €,, . ' . ,
eVei yap
be

yeyovevai

, , ' ', €
^^
De

the gulf which

6

'

yevoiTO,

€€• ^-

migr. Ab7'ahami

.

.

6

8e

,

^, \ ) € -• '.
',
Joseph.
a?it.
ii.

eivai,

{)
words.

not a commentator, but a historian

uses the lxx. as an authority, and states the facts in his
will contrast a

who own

few passages of the Greek Bible

with the corresponding contexts in the Antiquities.

... , \] ^
,,,
i.

Exod.

ii.

2

4.

^- ^ , '. "" " .' , . .
Regn.

.
.

" ... ...' .9. 4.
. . .
.

.

.

4•

Joseph, ant.

v. 10. 2.

'. \
.

ttj

\

\

\

.

.

,

^ . - \( € ' \ 4 '^ ^ . ' .
2 Chron.
iii.

The Greek of
i

the Septuagint.
Joseph.
de
a7it. viii. 3.
i.

299

2.

\

.

.

iv

bfvTepcd iv

€€

Isa. xxxix. 6

y.

Joseph, aut.

•\\ \...€
Josephus,

iv

rj^et...

••,
it

iv

(

.
2. 2.

8 ,'.
eTOS

eh

\

€-

elvaL,

will

be seen, has rewritten each passage, and

in

doing

so,

has not only modified the vocabulary, but revo-

lutionised the style.
right

On

turning from the

left

hand

to the

hand column we pass from a
an imitation of
classical

literal translation

of Semitic
is

texts to

Greek.

But the contrast

not entirely due to the circumstance that the passages taken

is

from the Septuagint are translations, while the Aiitiqiiities an original work. Translations, however faithful, may be

manner of the language into which they render their But the manner of the lxx. is not Greek, and does not even aim at being so. It is that of a book written by men of Semitic descent, who have carried their habits of
in the
original.

thought into their adopted

tongue.

The
it
;

translators

write

Greek

largely

as

they

doubtless
at

spoke

they possess

a

plentiful vocabulary

and are

no

loss for a

word, but they

are almost indifferent to idiom,

and seem

to

have no sense
directly

of rhythm.

Hebrew
by the

constructions and Semitic arrangements

of the words are at times employed, even

when not

suggested

original.

These remarks apply especially
the

to the earlier books,

but they are true to a great extent in
\

regard to the translations of the second century
of the older translations naturally

manner

became

a standard to which

.

300
later translators

The Greek of
thought
it

the Septtiagint.

right to

conform themselves.
writes
his

Thus

the grandson of. Jesus son of Sirach

prologue in

the literary style of the Alexandrian Jews of the time of Euergetes, but in the

body of the work he drops
differs little in

into the Biblical

manner, and his translation

general character

from that of the Greek version of Proverbs.

we proceed to a more characteristic features of the language of the lxx. They fall under three heads orthography, accidence, syntax. Under the second head a
8.

From

the general view of the subject

detailed account of

some of

the

full list

the

of examples from the Pentateuch will be given, with view of familiarising the beginner with the vocabulary

of the earlier books.
I.

Orthography.
lxx. as of the N.T.
a
large

In the best MSS. of the

number

of peculiar spelHngs occur, of Avhich only a part can
clerical error.

be assigned to itacism and other forms of

In

many

of the instances where the great uncial

MSS. of the Greek

Bible persistently depart from the ordinary orthography they

have the support of inscriptions contemporary with the translators, and it is manifest that we have before us specimens of
a system which was prevalent at Alexandria^ and other centres
of Greek
Christ.
life-

during the third and second centuries before

a considerable extent the orthography of the MSS. is same in the lxx. and the N.T. The student may nnd ample information with regard to the N.T. in the Notes on Orthography appended to Westcott and Hort's Introduction, and in the best N. T. grammars (Ph. Buttmann, Winerthe
^

To

Cf. Sturz, de dial. Alaced., p.

1 1 1

ff

K. Meisterhans, Gramfuatik dcr Atiischen Inschriften (Berlin, 1885); Deissmann, A'^^wt' ^zT-t'/j/i/if/Vw, Marburg, 1897. E. Mayser, Grainmatik der gricchischen Papyri aiis der Ptolemaerzeii, I. Teil, Leipzig, 1898 (Progr. des Gymn. Heilbronn).
^

See

(e.g.)

The Greek of

the Septuagint.

301

But even in MSS. which Moulton, Winer-Schmiedel, Blass). hke XBAC originally contained the whole of the Greek Scriptures, the Greek Old Testament possesses an orthography
which
are
is

in part peculiar to itself,

and

certain features which

common

to

both Old and

New

Testaments are found

with greater frequency and with a wider application in the

Lxx. than in the N.T.

The

reader of the Cambridge manual

Lxx.

who

is

interested in this question, can readily

the details from the apparatus criticus,

work out and more especially
spelHngs of the
a

from the appendix, where he
uncial

will find all the

MSS. employed which were not thought worthy of
is

place in the footnotes to the text.

graphy
bably

of

little

interest

For those to whom orthothe specimens given below will pro-

,
Vowels.
I

innumerable instances of
for
et,

eVSt'a,

A

^ , (, ), €, , ,); . , , ,, ^, , ^, 8€, , ,,,
and reduplicated in the augment and for in
{pe

Assimilation where there is no composition ey eft yaarpL Use of before consonants (omission is rare, except in a few cases such as before the art.) use of the final $ in Retention of the pexpis, in fut. and aor. pass, of and in words formed from it, e.g. OvueiS; for ovdeis, dropped in the middle of a word between vowels, as oXlos, (especially in cod. N). 'P not doubled in compounds, e.g.
:

, \€, €6, €€ . , , -,(, (), \€ .
suffice.

Co7isonants.

Assimilation neglected in

forms consonants are doubled, e.g. ureweiv, xvweiv. Rough and smooth consonants are occasionally exchanged, e.g. (i Regn. ii. 14, B) for
E6 for
in syllables

. , . ^
where
t

compounds
ivKaivia,

€^€. ^,
:

ivyaa-

;

for

in

In

some verbal

is

words such as

Aeuei, Aeueir?;?, Aave'ib,

yeLveauat, yeivodaKCiv.
XiTovpyelv,
atyios,

and Greek words as Also (perhaps by itacism) in
Kpeivelv.

2€,

t^: e.g. Keivelv,

e.g.

and

esp. in

nouns in -eia, and those in elov, as

for

e,

as ipavvav

;

e

for a, as

€€,

, , ^^.
eta, e.g.
i.

long, e.g. Semitic

daviov, eldcuXcov.

^

Especially in cod.

{. .

in Greek,

p, xiii.).

302

TJie

Greek of the Septiiagint.

Omission of a syllable consisting of

fixing of a vowel, as in Rough breathing for Breathi7igs.

''
xiv.

',

(Ezech. XX.

,
14).

.

(Jer.

Similarly

we

find

-€
retention

20 (Nestle, Septiiagintasiudie7i i. p. 19, ii. pp. 12, 13, 20 eveKev (2 Regn. vii. 12), Smooth breathing for rough: (Job xxxviii. 26, A).

., , ,^
t,

as in

,
:

Pre-

smooth

,

e.g.

6),

Dt.
f.).

Abnormal
plexity to

spellings such as these occur

on every page of
as

an uncial MS. of the lxx. and sometimes cause great peran editor of the
text.

So

far

they correctly

represent the written or spoken Greek of the period, their
is,

generally speaking, desirable.

In

some

cases the
its

MSS.

are unanimous, or each
;

MS.

is

fairly

persistent in

practice

in others, the spelling fluctuates considerably.

The

persistently given

Cambridge manual lxx. usually adopts a spelling which is by the MS. whose text it prints, and on the same principle follows the fluctuations of its MS. where But the whole question of they are of any special interest.
orthography
II.
is

far

from having reached a settlement.

Accidence.
(ii.)

We

will

deal

with

(i.)

the formation

of words, of verbs.
(i.)

the declension of nouns,

(iii.)

the conjugation

, ,, ,, , ,€,^, , ,,,.,, - €, ^, ^, ^, ,,(,€,,,,(, ,, , , 8, (, , ,,,,,,, ,, , ,, , €€, ^, , , , ,, , , , , ,
Formation of words.
(a)

Words formed by termination
In -ovv from nouns in -ov

Verbs.

-, -,

,
,

,
:

:

:

ini-

epvOpodavovv, evodovv,

In

-,

^

, ,, ^, , , , , 8,, , , , ,,, <,, €, , ,,,, (, ,,,, ,, , ,, ,,,,, ,, , ,,, , ,, ,,,,,,,,. , , ,,, , , ,. , ,, , , , ,, , , , ,, , ,, ,,, , , ,, , , ,, , ,, , , ,,, , ,, . ,, ,, ,, , , ,,. , , ,,, , , , ,, , , , . ,. ,,, ,, ,, ,, , ,,,. , , , ,, , ,, ,. ,, , , ., , , , ,
\€(, ^^, €, 7€, ••€. €, €€, ^', \€, .€\€, \•€€, €€, ^^, €€€, \(€€,

^, ^, , €, €, €,
The Greek of
In -€V€Lv
:

the Septtiagint.

303

€€, €€, -, €, €, 8€, , €\, /,^, ^,
dvvaaT€V€Lv,
iSfouns.

diodeveiv,

iepareveiu,

arparoTredeveiv,
:

vdpeveLU.

In

-/, from verbs

eVi'^e/xa,

€€,

e\|/'e/xo,

-^,

In

,

from verbs

:

-

In

-, from verbs

:

6;^?,

In

-17,

In

,

,
:

from verbs

:

,
:

from verbs (m.)

-

Adjectives.

\-:

In In

-:

In

-

:

{b)

Words formed by composition

:

Verbs

compounded with two prepositions

:

-

304

, , ^ ,^, ,,,^,,, . , , , ., , ^,, , ,, ,, , , ,,,,, , , . ,, ,, , , ,, , , ,, , , .
The Greek of
tlu Septuagint.

€\€€, (7(7€,
Nouns.

,

€€, \8\,
Compounded
Compounded
with

with nouns

:

noXveXeos,

^^, €., ^, -

a prefix

or

preposition

€7€7,
stem,

^,
:

Compounded with a verb
:

and forming a

fresh

noun or

a verb

,

--

,

(.)

Declension of nouns

:

or gen. But in the translated books the indeclinable forms prevail, there is no appearance of the forms
indecl.

,. ,,, ,. , , ,, . , , .', , , , ,, ,, , , ,, -, -. , ", ,
;

as form gen. in Declension . Nouns in -pa, Gen. xxvii. 40, Exod. xv. 9 ("vielfach bei A, bes. in Jerem./' W.I Regn. XXV. 20. Exod. viu. 17, Schm.), end also in -, e.g. Declension 2. Certain nouns in disappears e.g. The Attic form in
are written for
(A).

-,

,

and

and

— the latter however occurs

in 2

Mace.

Nouns
3.

in

declension, e.g. Sap. xiii.

Gen.

xli.

pass occasionally into the Esth. ii. 3, 34,

--

first

Declension
xii.

3.

Job

22,

Uncontracted forms are frequent, as and in the plural nom. and
as

ace. of neuters in

-,

makes

dat. yrjpd.

Metaplasmus occurs

in

some

Avords, e.g.
xxii.

,

gen.

with masc. noun,

(,

(3

Regn.

11, A),

Proper noims.

able, e.g.

receive

On the Other hand some well-known names or Greek terminations and are declined, as
;

/,

Many

are

mere

transliterations

and indeclin-

while some are found in both

forms,

e.g.

we have both

and

{),

and

and

and

The Greek of the Septuagint.
which are famihar
local
to the reader of Josephus. is usual, e.g.

few however have Greek terminations, as or 'lopbavos, and some names of foreign localities are Hellenised, as and the two Egyptian towns (Gen. xlvi. (Exod. i. ii). The declension of the Hellenised 28), names presents some irregularities thus we find -(6,

^, , €. , , €, ', -, , -,
names transhteration

A

,, ,
305

In the case of

-, -,

;

-.

-,

(.)
9,

Conjugation of verbs.
Doubled, as in Gen. xxiii. 1 6,
e.g.
xi.

Augmoits.

Num. Num.
V. 4.

xxii. 6, xxiv.
1

Ps. xlix.
xxi.

3,

21 (A).

Prefixed to prepositions,
35,

(Exod. iv. 9). Second I Regn. x. 14, 2 Regn. X. 14, Esth. v, 4. 2 Regn. xix. 42, Person endings 2nd p. s. pres. pass, or middle in (Ezech. xiii. 18, Ruth ii. 9, 14), 3rd p. pi. imperf. and 3 Regn. xiv. 6. aor. act. in Gen. vi. 4, Exod. xv. 27, Exod. xvi. 24, Exod. xxxiii. 8, Ezech. xxii. 11; cf. the opt. Gen. xlix. 3, Deut. xxii. 16. 3rd p. pi. aor. mid. in Jud. iii. 3rd p. pi. perf. 7 (A), Hos. xiii. 6 (B), Jer. xviii. 15 (B*A), &c. act. in -av. Deut. xi. 7; Judith vii. 10. 2nd p. s. perf. act. in Exod. v. 22 2 Esdr. xix. 10, Ezech. xvi. 21. From we have (2) Verbs in -.
nation in -a:

. , ,< €^ , ,^
Jud.
viii. 3,
I

8, ^,
Lengthened, as
Isa. xl. 13,

Num.

25 f., Sap. xviii. 4, 2 Chr. XX. ^j, Jer.

Deut. ii. 2 Esdr. xix. 30 (B).
i,

Isa.

i.

29, xiii. 9,

Isa. xxxiii. 24,

Omitted, as in Deut. xxxii. 10,

Chr. xxi. 1 5, t^ev Gen. i. 4, Tenses and Persons, (i) Verbs in -.

ix.

2 Chr. XXXV. 10.

New presents, as /^^,
xi.

Futures and aorists with reduplication:

(Num. (Job vi. 5), from 26 A). Contracted futures in Lev. xix. 13, Deut. xxxii. 43,

-

-

2),
:

(Jud.

Gen.
Ps.
lii.

iv. 2,

3,

Jer. xxxviii, (xxxi.)

2>7•

-:

-:
-

,

Irregular futures': aor. forms with termi:

-

,

. .
Ps. III.

;

From ^^/, From
xli.

3 (B), 2

^ ,
Regn.
.

Ps. cix. (cx.)
iii.

, ,, , ,
V.
:

;

I.

From
1

Exod.

3 (A), Jer.

xii.

34;

39 (A).

Syntax.
of the irregularities which
fall

Many
s.

under

this

head are
20

s.

.

3o6
due

The Greek of
to the influence of the

the Septuagint.
text or of Semitic habits

Hebrew

be treated in the next section. In this place we shall hmit ourselves to constructions which appear to be characteristic of the Greek idiom used by the
of thought.

These

will

translators.

Cases
2,

and Numbers.

Nom.

xxi. 2, esp. in

— Ruth ii. the phrase Kvpte 6 Disuse of the Dual. 22, iii. I, &c. Comparison. Use of a preposition with the positive for the
Regn. Numerals.
I

comparative,

',

e.g.

when numbers
Verbs.

that

7€ €,
mood
in

are coupled, e.g. Rarity of the optative

, ' €,
i.

;
for

voc,

e.g.

^,
1 1

Oeos for Bee, Ps.

Exod.
iv.

xviii.

;

8.

=

Gen.

24.

Omission of
e|,

dvo,

irivre,

(Sec.

mood, and disappearance of

dependent clauses. 2 Regn. xxii. 3;
:

Indicative with

imperf.
;

and
;

9;

eiaenopeveTo, Jud. vi. 3 eav of indicative with conjunctive eav Lev. vi. 2

^.,.

,

enrjpev,

Exod.

xvii. II

, €€,
aor.,
:

€vpev...KaL
e.g.
iii.

tive,

ject, or result^;

^, ,
2 Chr.

with or without the
I
;

13; TO

\
:

Connexion of the

,
{a)

€...\ €€
article, to
(b)
viii.
;

, } ] ^^,
Gen.
9;
xxxviii.

' €, €€,
Periphrasis

with dpi, e.g. Prov. iii. 5.
xi.

Num.
vi.
2.

Jud.
viii.
.

Coordination

Exod.

\.

express object, purpose, sub-

aveXelv,

Gen.

{c) 7 Ps. Ixxii. 28;

4 Regn.
e.g.

.

, ,
.

.] .
8
ii.

.\
:

Use

of infini-

Exod.

15 2 Regn. viii. 5

;

Gen.

xli.

{d) 6

J.

sentence.

Use

of gen. abs. in reference to

the subject of the verb:

Anacoluthon
ix. 7•

Use

of the finite
participle.

... verb where

.,., Exod.

the classical language prefers

,

iv. 21.

Exod.

to

employ a

9.

Besides the non-classical forms and constructions which

may

fairly

translated books of the
1

be placed to the credit of Alexandrian Greek, the Greek Bible naturally exhibit a large

follow mainly the classification of C. W. Votau in his excellent on the subject (Chicago, 1896). Votau has shewn that in the translated books of the O. T. there is almost an equal number of cases of the anarthrous and the articular inf., whereas in the N. T. the articular inf. is seldom found except in St Luke.
I

thesis

The Greek of
number
of irregularities

the Septuagint.
origin.

307

which are of Semitic

following are examples.

Hebrew
2.

, €^ , -^.
{a)

Lexical.

1.

Transliterations, and Greek words formed from the or Aramaic. Words coined or adopted to express Semitic ideas, as

Xt'^eij/,

3•
=11

Phrases answering to the Hebrew idiom
eXeos noLelv
^

,
:

The

a<avda-

e.g.

Dnb ^~^

— DP *10 ^'^^
=

=

-

,, ,,, , , , , , , ,,.,, , , , ,
\\\\~'^^
D''Plp^,

=

ivos

= Ei'SJ ^93, U''2p ^\, = ^^ J^^s\
:

= '2~73

^

D''yil'lX"|5.

4.

Words

with a

new connotation
or

ayios,

{)

Granunatical

^
.

Nouns.
xvii. 29.

Repeated

to

express
ix.

distribution,

e.g.
^)^

'•, 4 Regn. (AF), Gen. vi. 19; Exod. xxiii. 30. Emphatic adverbs also are occasionally doubled Exod. i. 12, Ezech. after the Hebrew manner, as Gen. vii. 19 (A). ix. 9; cf, Otiose use, e.g. Gen. xxx. i Pro7ioujis. ("' Exod. xxxvi. 4 "•DiJN); Exod. ii. 14
:=.^'^ t^^X,

Similarly

.
fem.

, ,
1)
;

Num.

.

lo;

=

To Semitic influence is also due the wearisome iteration of the oblique cases of personal pronouns answering to the Hebrew suffixes, e.g. Jer. ii. 26

( ,

\

occasionally used for after the manner of the Heb. nXT, as in Gen. xxxv. 17, 27, xxxvi. i, Ps. cxvii. (cxviii.) 23; see Driver on i Sam. iv. 7. To the circumstance that the Hebrew relative is indeclinable we owe the pleonastic use of the pronoun after the Greek relative. in such passages as Gen. xxviii. Deut. i. 22 .. 13,
is

.
20

The

'

.,.'

(^. .^)
.

;

'.

^ On this head see esp. Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 132 Pentat. vers. Alex., p. iii if.

ff. ;

Thiersch, de

2

3o8

The Greek of

the Septiiagint.

(•^^...^); Prov. iii. 15 occurs with relative adverbs: Deut.
D^'P); 2 Chr.
Verbs.
i.

.,..
ix.

A
28,

3,

.,.

..6
similar
inf.

redundancy
("lt^'^...

The

following

Hebraisms may be specially noted.

Various phrases used to represent the Heb. fixed to a finite verb, e.g. Exod. iii. 7, Deut. xxxi. 18,

^ ) €^ (^" (^ <)
abs.

Heb. idiom
I

?

^\:

e.g.

Exod.

xiv. 13, ov

Regn.

iii.

6

Job

prepositions

einev (IPN*! ...^P*^)• Constructions with contrary to the Greek idiom: eVt, Deut. vii. 16; (•JSP), Exod. i. 12; iv
xxix.
I

{^)1''2

aS^Oj

^
Regn.
x.

cKokeaev (cf V. 8

^, .
when
;

pre;

also the

en

iSeir,

^^, ^^
el

I

22;
i

evdoKelv iv

or eVi (3 ^Sfl).

Hebrew forms

of adjuration as

Regn.
xi.

construction limited in to Judges, Ruth, 2 4 Regn. Periphrases such as ="liDK?, dtdovaL (Tob. v. 1 5, Pleonastic use of A).
2
ii.

.
e.g.
e.g.

, €
1

aerai, ib.

1

7

Oeos, iav...

for the expression of a

... ";
6

wish

:

Num.

;

Ps.
et/xi

Hi. (liii.)

6 tls followed by an
2
/it

Regn.

often soloecistically

Particles. and ', () in an apodosis, Pleonastic use of Num. XV. 14, PrOV. ..., '... ; (2) after a participle: Num. xxi. II, 1. 28, Use of in a coordinated clause, where a dependent clause might have been expected ;

€ .
...
:

)
29

iii.

14

(DN)

\

A

question Standing

8

,
.

ind.

(Jud.

—a

vi.

18

1/

€€...
Num.
XXXV.
2,

6...ۥ

€...74,

^^
;

.
e.g.

Gen. xv.

I

\

;
...

", \
;

Peculiar uses of the Heb. prepositions are often reflected in the Greek e.g. i Regn. i. 24, (0"'3) Lev. xxi. lO, iv
Prepositio)is.

See under Verbs.

tional phrases are used to express the

= '\'\\1, = ''!, ?;

, , , ,,, ,. , , , €
7"|).
number
of

(

new

prepositions or preposi''PP?, e.g.

Hebrew

evavTi,

Similarly

represents

^"
;

(,

;

iv

()

= "^^^
The

dia

(

'

,

=

"^1/}^.

use of

to express the prefix

which

is

characteristic of Aquila, occurs in codex

A

six

times in 3 Regn., once in Esther (where it probably came from the Hexapla), and frequently in Ecclesiastes, where even

The Greek of
cod.

the Septiiagint.
Eccl.
ii.

309

shews this pecuharity, e.g. (D''»nn-nN:)i.

17

10.

Both the vocabulary and the syntax of the

lxx.

exhibit remarkable affinities with the

modern language.
loi
f.)

Mr

Geldart {Modern Greek Language,
of

p.

urges the study

, , ,, , , ,, ,
philosophers."

Biblical students on the ground that Greek of the present day affords a better commentary on the language of the lxx. and of the N.T. than the writings of contemporary historians, rhetoricians, grammarians and
" the

modern Greek upon

He

adds:

"The
is

phraseology of the lxx.
to the lxx.

is

modern
Greek
:

to

an extent which

quite marvellous... let

me men-

tion a few well-known

/,, ^,
similarity

words

common

and modern

/, 9, ...
The Greek

€,

of the

N.T

is

by no means so vulgar, so merely a vernacular, as that of the LXX." This estimate is perhaps overdone ; certainly there
are considerations which suggest caution in the use of

modern
But the

Greek usage as a key
general
less extent, of the

to the

meaning of the lxx.

of the

Alexandrian vocabulary and, to a
the old

Alexandrian syntax to those of the spoken

language indicates a

common

affinity

to

colloquial

Greek, which ultimately triumphed over the classical standards'^.

That the resemblance is less marked in the case of the New Testament is due to the different circumstances under which it was written. Bilingual Palestinian writers of the first century
naturally possessed a

more limited vocabulary and employed
than Alexandrian translators of the

a

more chastened

style

time of Philadelphus and Euergetes,

who had been born

in

the heart of a great Greek city teeming with a cosmopolitan population.
^ 2

See above,
Cf. Prof.

p. 39, n. 2.

in Vincent and Dickson, p. -289: "modern Greek has inherited, not only the ancient literature, but also an oral tradition which preceded that literature, which co-existed with it, and which has survived it."

Jebb

3IO
II.

TJie

Greek of the Septuagtnt.

Some

of the non-canonical books of the Greek Old
{a) loosely translated or para-

Testament, which were either
phrased
in Greek,

from a Hebrew

original,

or

{b)

originally

written

need separate treatment

in regard to their lexical
i

and grammatical character. Such are {a) (lxx.), ip) Wisdom, 2 4 Maccabees. The lexicography of the Apocrypha

Esdras, Daniel

'

'

has
T.

been

sepa-

rately treated by C. A.
philologica^

Wahl

{Clavis

libr.

V.

apocryphorum

Leipzig, 1853),
it

and with the help of the Oxford

Concordance
sake of the

may be studied independently. But, for the student who has not the necessary leisure to
in
detail,
it

examine the subject
the

is

desirable to notice here

more conspicuous words
I

in each of the

books referred to

' ) €, ^ 7€ ^ €€€ \, 8€ ( €€ ( € ^ ,
Esdras.

above.

= <,
=

dat.

(2

Esdr.,

2 Mace.)

(Sap., 2 Mace.) iepodovXos

2 Esdr.

(Dan.) aviepovv (3 Maee.) (Esth., Ep.-Jer.,

I,

2

]€€

(, 2 Chr.) Ko\aKev€Lv (Job^, Sap.^)

Maee.)

(Dan.)

(2

Mace.)

(2 Esdr.)

(Esth., Sap., 2, 4 Macc) (Esth., Dan., 2, 3
(2

-

7€€ (.)
(

(Jen, Dan.) (eod.

)

€/36,

Mace.)

(Dan.,

MaCC.) Maee.)

(.)

(Judith, 2 Maec.)

(

Maee.)

enianevbeiv (Esth.^, Prov.^)
(eod.

)

(, 2 Maee.)

evnpencus (Sap.)

(2

Maee.)

8 89 €\

8( €€ ^^

^
{$
(2

The Greek of

the Septuagint.

311

Daniel.
(3

(Sir.)

Macc.)

(3

Regn.)

(Jos.•^)

--

(

Esdr.^) ( Esdr., Jer.^)

(2

MaCC.)

(Exod.^)

Macc.)
Esdr., Tob.)
(2

(4

Macc.) Regn.)

(Jer.^)

(Jer.)

^
7€Wisdom.

(

Chr.)

(Ps.^)

(4

Macc.)

This book contains an unusually large vocabulary, consisting in great part of

taken from

-

compound

words.

The

following

list,

c.

i.

vi.,

will suffice to

shew

its

lexical character*.

(2, 3

MaCC.)
(4

(4

Macc.)
(Ps.^)

Macc.)

(Isa.^)

(Ps.^)

(

Chr., (Deut.^)

— 3 Macc.)

,
(3

(Jer.^)

(3

Macc.)

(3

Macc.)

MaCC.)
f.,

* Cf. supra, p. 268 of the book.

for

some

interesting examples from other parts

^

312

The Greek of

the Septnagint.


onXoTToielv

(Isa.^)

(4

Macc.)

(Judith, Sir.,

^ €
7€€
writers,

noXvyovos (4 Macc.)

(.^)
Macc.)
(Sir.)

(3

Macc.)

In

2

— 4 Maccabees the reader
B.C.

finds himself at length face

to face with the full richness of the Alexandrian literary style, as
it

was written by cultured Hellenists of the second and
centuries

first

The

especially the

writer of 4

Maccabees, may be said to revel

in the use of

compound words,
coinage.
Speci-

many
mens

of which
follow.

may have been
2

of their

own

Maccabees.

€€€

€)(€

€(
deiXavdpiav dcvTepoXoyelv

XiTaveia

' €€

8


Maccabees.

avveKKfVTelv

4

The Greek of

the Septnag int.
veaviKus

313

In the
to

remind us of the Semitic
of

Solomon follows generally the parallelisms of poetry, and its language is moulded to some extent In 2 by the lxx. of the Psalms and of Prov^erbs. Maccabees the influence of the canonical books appears in the retention of transliterated names such as But and Eleazar has become is usually Of Hebrew constructions or modes of

Wisdom Hebrew

,.

^ €€ , <€ ( (€€ - ^ € ', , ^.
4 Maccabees.

'

€\\. <\ €. €€

^ € "^

-^^

-

•€€
of

styte of the

originally

Greek books there

is

little

origin

the writers.

The

',

thought there

is

only an occasional instance, whilst

it is

obvious

314

TJie

Greek of the Septuagmt.
no opportunity of exhibiting
their skill

that the writers lose

in the literary style of contemporary Alexandrian Greek,

Literature.

F.

W.

Sturz,

De

dialecto Macedo7iica ei

Alex-

ajidrina (1808); H. W. J. Thiersch, De Pentateuchi versione Alexajidrina^ libri iii. (1841); Z. Frankel, Vorstiidien zu der Septuaginta (1841); F. W. A. Mullach, Gra7nm. d. Vulgarsprache in historischer Entwicklung (1856); G. v. Z'dizsch'^niz, 7'ofang7-dcitdt u. hellenist. Sprachgeist (1859); E. Reuss, art. Hellenistisches Idio77i (in Herzog-Plitt, vi., 1880); W. Schmid, Der Atticis7)ins...vo7i Dio7iysms v. Halikar7iass bis auf d. zw. Philoj/r^/z^i- (Stuttgard, 1889 97); K. Meisterhans, Graiii77i. d. Attische7i I7ischrifte7i (1881) R. C.J ebb, App. to Vincent and Dickson's Ha7idbook to i7ioder7t Greek {\ZZ\)\ E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (1889), pp. i 130; H. A. A. Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek (1895); G. A. Deissmann, Bibelstudie7i (1895), ^^^ Neue Bibelstiidien (1897), also his art., Helle7iistisches Griechisch^ in Hauck, vii. p. 627 ff. (Leipzig, 1899), where a full bibliography will be found. Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck(i82o) W. G. Rutherford, The new Phry7iichus (1881); Du Cange, Glossariu77i ad scriptores 77iediae et i7ifi77iae Graecitatis (Lyons, 1688); J. C. Biel, Novus thesaurus philologicus^ sive lexico7i i7i LXX. (The Hague, 1779); J. F. Schleusner, Novus thesaurus philologico-criticus...V. T. (Leipzig, 1820); E. A. Sophocles, Greek Lexico7i for the Ro77ta7i a7id Byza7iti7ie periods'^- (1888); H. Anz, Subsidia...e Pc7itateuchi vers. Alex, repetita (in Diss, philolog. Hal. xii. Halle, 1894);

;

— —

;

J.

Viteau, Etude sur le Grec du N. T. co77ipare avec celui des Septa7ite (Paris, 1896); E. Hatch and H. A. Redpath, CotiC07'dancc to the Septuagi7it (1897); Th. Zahn, Ei7deitii7ig i/i das
A^.
7"., i.,

pp. 24

ff.

(1897); A7'chiv fir Papyrusforschii/ig {hQi-^zig,

1899).

Much may also

information on points of grammar and orthography be gleaned from the N.T. grammars A. Buttmann, Gra77i7)iatik d. NTliche7i Sprachgebrauchs (Berlin, 1859) WinerMoulton, Treatise 07i the Greek of the N.T.^ (1877); WinerSchmiedel, Gra77i77iatik d. NTliche7i Sprachidio77is, Theil i. ii. (1894 8); F. Blass, G7-a77t77iatik d. NTliche7i Griechisch (1896, or the same translated by H. St J. Thackeray, 1898); A. R. and from the Jannaris, Historical Greek Gra7n7nar (1897) Introduction and Appendix to VVestcott and Hort's A^. T. i7t Greek {Bitr., pp. 302 313, App., pp. 148 180). The Gra77i77i. Untersuchu7ige7i iiber die biblische G7'dcitdt of K. H. A. Lipsius is limited to such matters as accentuation, punctuation, and the abbreviations used in Biblical Greek MSS. but within its own scope it is a serviceable book.

;

;


;

CHAPTER
The Septuagint
The
It is

V.

as a Version.
is

purpose of

this

chapter

to prepare the beginner for

grappling with the problems presented by the Septuagint

when
at

regarded as a translation of the Hebrew Bible.

Almost

the outset of his study of the Alexandrian version he will find

himself confronted by difficulties which can only be met by a
study of the general purpose and character of the work, the
limitations
ciples
I.

by which the translators were

beset,

and the
their task.

prin-

which guided them in the performance of

The

reader of the Septuagint must begin by placing

mind the conditions under which it was produced, and the relation of the original work to our present texts, Hebrew and Greek.
before his
I.

{a)

Strictly

speaking the Alexandrian Bible

is

not a

produced at various times and by translators whose ideals were not altogether alike. Internal evidence^ of this fact may be found in the varying standards of excellence which appear in different books or
single version, but a series of versions

groups of books.

The Pentateuch
;

is

and serviceable
1 2

translation

the Psalms"

on the whole a close and more especially

The

external evidence has been briefly stated in Part i. c. i. (p. 23 fif.). Version of the Psalms^ Cf. R. Sinker, So?ne remarks on the

LXX.

p.9ff.

3i6
the

The Septiiagint as a Version.
Book of
Isaiah

translator of

shew obvious signs of incompetence. The Job was perhaps more familiar with Greek pagan
the translator of Daniel

literature' than with Semitic poetry;

indulges at times in a Midrashic paraphrase.

The

version of

Judges which appears in our oldest Greek uncial MS. has been suspected by a recent critic^ of being a work of the 4th century
A.D.
;

the Greek Ecclesiastes savours of the school of Aquila.
to details, the evidence in favour of a plurality

When we come
of translators

is

no

less

decisive.

A

comparison of certain
reader can readily form

passages which occur in separate contexts distinctly reveals
the presence of different hands.

The

a judgement upon this point

if

he

will place side
if.

by side

in the

Hebrew and
3
if.,

the Greek 2 Regn. xxii. 2
xviii.

and

Ps. xvii. (xviii.)

4 Regn.
iv.

17

xx. 19

and

Isa. xxxvi. i

xxxix. 8, or

Mic.

and

Isa.

ii.

A

single

specimen
xxiii.

may be

given from Ps.

xvii.

compared
2

with 2 Regn.

^^ \ €^€<\4 , € , €8€, \ , ^ , ^€ ^€ (^. ^^ €€? ^ ^\ ( ^ , ^ ,\ , €. €€€ €,€\ ^] , , , \ [^.
Ps. xvii. 3
6.

^
€• €,

2

Regn.

xxii.

6

67'

'^

ev

6

. . € - ^
€' ^
e/c

^Kvpie

\

6.

earai

eV

....

^alverov
^otl

Trepiia^ov

ۥ

/xe,

"^

iv

el

ev

S>Ta

1 Cf. e.g. Job ix. 9, xlii. 14; from the latter passage Theodore of Mopsuestia argued the pagan origin of the book {£>. C. B. iv. p. 939).

^

Moore,

"Judges^ p. xlvi.

;

The Septuagint as a Version.

317

One of these versions has doubtless influenced the other, but that they are the work of separate hands seems to be clear from the differences of method which appear e.g. in the renderings of
Vi'D,

-^

in the first verse,
6, 7.
is

and the use of the

aorist

and the

future in vv.

If further proof

needed

renderings of the same

it may be found in Hebrew words in different

the diverse
parts of the
for (as

Canon.

This argument must be used with caution,

we

shall presently see)

such diversities are to be found not only in

the same book but in the same context.

But

after

making

allowance for variations of

this kind,

there remain abundant

instances in which the diversity can only be attributed to a

change of hand.

;
'^
is
it

Hexateuch by
miah^^), but

^, €
Thus
is

Q''J^*f ^?) is

uniformly represented in the

but in Judges and the later books by
or
in Chronicles ('^)

in all other

books;

Cl-I^^ is

in the Pentateuch, but in
is

Ezra-Nehemiah
times, whilst

in

Exodus, but in Ezra

/?^
is

more than 50
is

^ , /

other books

the almost uniform rendering of the
title

,
;

and

Jere-

or 8y}\ol
;

in Isaiah ^^^^^V

which in word when
;

used as a

of Deity,

does not once occur

'

is

in Gen., Exod., Lev.,

phets, but

in

Num., and again in the ProDeuteronomy (with one exception) and

onwards
phrase

to

the end

of the historical books.

The
i

singular

=<
astes;

eiju,t=''?Ji? is

limited to Judges, Ruth, and

4 Regn.

of the object occurs in the true lxx. only in Ecclesiis

peculiar to Chronicles

which contain the Heb. word (Num., Deut.,
Jer.) preferring

a comparison of the forms assumed by the
in different books.

.

and Ezra, other books
i

Regn., Psalms,

Similar results

may be obtained from
same proper names
in the
Sirach.

Chronicles use the
&c.),

,
Kings,

Elijah
in

(-in'tJ^)

is

Books of
lists

but

Malachi and

The

in

names where other books adopt the Greek
of Gentile

Hebrew form

(^,

{®€,

€, ^^
3i8

The Septuagint as a Version.
&C.).

In Ezra

ti'll.lV'n^^

becomes
(ix.

<;,
of Esther,

but

is

substituted

by the

translator

and

"Bcpi^ by the lxx. translator of Daniel
plurality of translators, especially

i)\

It is difficult

to resist the force of this cumulative evidence in support of a

when

it is

confirmed by what

we know qf
()

the external history of the Septuagi-nt
it

Further

is

clear that the purpose of the version in

the later books
the Pentateuch

is

not altogether that which the translators of
in view.

had

The Greek Pentateuch,

as

we

have seen, was intended to supply the wants of the Alexandrian
Synagogue.

The Book

of the Twelve Prophets, and the three

major Prophets, were probably translated with the same general purpose, but under a diminished sense of responsibility, since
the Prophets, even after their admission to the Canon, were

not regarded as sharing the peculiar sanctity of the Law.

But

the Hagiographa, excepting perhaps the Psalter, stood on a

much

lower

level,

and such books

as Job, Esther,

and Daniel

were perhaps viewed by the Alexandrians as national literature^ which was not yet classical and might be treated with the

freedom allowed by custom

in

such cases to the interpreter
of the translator's work must

and the
which he
(c)

scribe.

Our estimate

clearly take account of his attitude
is

towards the book upon

engaged.

It is

important also to bear in mind the peculiar

diffi-

culties

which beset the translators

in their attempts to render

Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. To translate a Semitic book into the language of the West was a new venture when it was undertaken at Alexandria the Greek Pentateuch " was the work of pioneers and necessarily had the defects of such work^" No wonder if even in the later books the Hebrew
the
;

^

Theod. has
Cf. prol. to Sirach

in Daniel.
:

2 ^

F. Kirkpatrick in Expositor, v. elvish Ch., pp. 75 f. 0. T. in

.

iii.

.
p.

268.

Cf.

W.

R. Smith,

J

The Septiiagint as a Version.
idiom refused to lend
itself to

319

the forms even of Hellenistic

some extent its identity, as the translator of Sirach complains'. Moreover the majority of the translators had probably learnt the sacred language in Egypt from imperfectly instructed teachers, and had few opportunities of making themselves acquainted with the traditional interpretation of obscure words and contexts which guided the PalesGreek without losing
to
tinian Jew^.

The want
numerous

of a

sound tradition
it

is

especially
itself

manifest in poetical passages and books, and
felt

makes

in

the

transliterations,
text^.

and

in faulty readings

and renderings of the

Such things may well make the

reader smile at the claim of inspiration which was set up for
the Lxx., but they ought neither to mislead his judgement,

nor to lessen his admiration for the courage and the general
success of the Alexandrian translators.
2.

The

student must also endeavour to realise the con-

dition of the
translators.
{a)

Hebrew
text

text

which lay before the Alexandrian

The

of the

Hebrew

Bible has undergone no

material change since the beginning of the second century a.d.

A

vast store of various readings has

been collected from the

MSS. by the diligence of Kennicott and De Rossi, but few among them appear to be more than the omissions or corruptions
existing

which spring from the accidents of transcription. All MSS. belong to one type of text, and it is, in the main,

the

type which was
is

known

to

Jerome, to Origen, and to

Aquila, and which
^

reflected in the

Targums and the Talmud.

"before the Christian era... the exegetical tradition was still in a rudimentary stage" (Kirkpatrick, Divi>ie Library, p. 69). 2 Dr Nestle points out that the mistakes of the LXX. are sometimes due to Aramaic or Arabic colloquialisms, and gives the following examples: Aramaic Num. xxiv. 7 Ps. cxl. 4 Hos. i. 6
2

vi. 5 Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 13

. . . , ,. , ..
Prol.

yap

.

Even

in Palestine

:

ii

Isa. iv. 2

Arabic:

Isa. vii.

6

.
liii.

10

320
But
it

TJie Septttaghit as

a Version.

is

not that which was possessed by the Alexandrians of
B.C.

the third and second centuries,

At some time between the
official

age of the lxx. and that of Aquila a thorough revision of the

Hebrew
direction

Bible must have taken place, probably under
;

and the evidence seems
its

to point to the Rabbinical

school which had
followed the
fall

centre at

Jamnia

in

the

years

that

of Jerusalem as the source from which this

revision proceeded \
in a later chapter;

The

subject, as a whole, will be treated
it is

meanwhile

sufficient to

that in the lxx. he has before
text

warn the beginner him the version of an early

which often differed materially from the text of the printed
Bible and of
all

Hebrew
{b)

existing

Hebrew MSS.
MSS. employed by be remembered
the
letters

The

palaeographical character of the

the translators requires consideration.
that the newly discovered fragments

It will

of Aquila present

Tetragrammaton

in archaic letters-.

These

belong to

the old Semitic alphabet which was

common

to the

Hebrew,

Moabite, Aramaic, and Phoenician languages, and which appears

on the Moabite stone and in the Siloam inscription and, with some modifications, in MSS. of the Samaritan Pentateuch, and on coins of the Maccabean period. The transition from this
ancient character to the square letters^ which are used in existing

Hebrew MSS. and
complete

in the printed Bibles

must have been pracrefers to
x\\^^

tically

in our Lord's time, since

He

yodh
to

as the smallest letter,

and
v.

to the «cpeat
i8).

which are peculiar

the square alphabet (Mt.

That the change had begun

p. xxxix.

R. Smith, 0. T. in J. Church, pp. 56 f.; Driver, Sarmiel, Among the Kirkpatrick, Divine Library of the 0. T., p. 64. Rabbis of Jamnia were Eleazar, Joshua, and Akiba, the reputed teachers of Aquila; see Edersheim-White, //?>/i?r)' of the Jnoish Nation, pp. 132 ff.,
1

See

W.

;

174/•
2
'^

See pp. 39
ff.

f.

y3"ipnn3, or,astheTahnudcalLsit,

-'

'3; see Driver, Sannicl,

pp.

ix.

The Septitagint as a Version.
in the

321

MSS. employed by
in the

the Alexandrian translators^

may be
letters

gathered from the fact that

they repeatedly confuse

which are similar

square character but not in the archaic.

Professor Driver holds that the alphabet of their
transitional one, in

which
1,

as 2

and

2,

and

MSS. was a and ^ ^ and and D, as well were more or less difficult to distinguish ^
1

A
ii.

few examples

may be

given from Driver's
;

29
1^''^);

(pV, for py)

xii.

3

•2

Ps. xxi. (xxii.) 17

(2)

Regn.

vi.

20

^/
7,

€ (^

DHST
i

€ ,
iv.
;

,

list.

(1)1 Regn.

("

""jy,

for

(11i<3, for ''"1N3);

Isa. xxix.

for

^*

13

^^).
(vi"T, for

O^V*?, for "1?7); Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 25

viov avTTJs
^'Pn), xxi. 7

(3
6
''

for KJO)^;

case of
xii.

Another cause of confusion was the scriptio defectiva in the where they represent long vowels, e.g. i Regn. and
"1

8

KCLL

^

(^
for

Regn.

lo

JNl, for 'Oli^n ').

(D2''t^'"''l,

(^^
;

'^ 7)

for

Dll'^ii''•'))

;

Ps. v.

tit.

vnep
els

Job

xix.

l8

{Ov,

for U'h')]})

Jer. vi.

23

(p^'2, for :^^ND).

Abbre-

viations, also, probably gave rise to misunderstandings; see the instances in Driver, op. cit., pp. Ixiii. f , Ixx. note 2, and others

collected from Jeremiah by Streane, Double Text^ p. 20. In the case of numerals errors appear to have arisen from the use of similar letters as numerical signs e.g. 2 Regn. xxiv.
:

'seven years,' where has been read for J. Here 13 €r has the support of the Chronicler (i Chron. xxi. 12): see Konig in Hastings' D.B., iii. p. 562.

€,

Further, in the MSS. used by the lxx. the words seem not have been separated by any system of punctuation or spacing. On the Moabite stone^ and in the Siloam inscripto

tion^ a point has

been used

for this purpose,

but the Phoeniof the Penta-

1

Except perhaps those which lay before the translators
;

teuch
'

A

see Driver, /.c. specimen of such a script, but of
o/>. cit.,

much

later date,

may be

seen in

Driver,
^

p. Ixv.

*
^

Cf. Streane ad loc. and on Jer. xx. 17. See Driver, op. cit., p. Ixxxvi., or Hastings' Driver, op. cit., p. xv.
S. S.

D.B.

iii.

art.

Moab.

21

;

322

The Septuagint as a Version.

cian inscriptions are without punctuation, and so were probably
the early Biblical
rolls.

The

division adopted by the lxx.

is

frequently at variance with that of the
is

Massoretic

text,

and
but

sometimes preferable
differences

to the latter,

sometimes

inferior;

the

witness to the

absence of divisions in the

Hebrew MSS. and
1 Q
r.

the non-employment of the final letters

Thus Gen.

xlix. 19,

(,
(IB, Ps.

X'NiD :2py);

>);
xliii.

I

20 Deut. xxvi. Regn. i. i

?. //... = 1^•
5

ci7re^aXfv

eV

6'/3 =

(xHv.)

5 6

ueos

eVr6XXo^6i/oy

= niVD

:^'

U2\)V

= "I2S^

DlX
P)
D\n'?S

(IB, ^ri

niV); Jer. xxvi.

(,

:

(,

(xlvi.) 15
xi.

6'A7ri9,-

= D3 yilD
(fE l^S

ynn); Zech.

7 ft?rr)i/ Xaraai/iV7?i.

= ^::yiD'?

Lastly, almost every page of the lxx. yields evidence that

the

Hebrew

text

was as yet unpointed.

Vocalisation was in

fact only traditional until the days of the

Massora, and the
differs,

tradition

which

is

enshrined in the Massoretic points

often very widely, from that which was inherited or originated

by the Alexandrian

translators \

?
A

^

few examples Drii< 2C'M
I

may

suffice

:

Gen.

xv.

1 1

(,

Cn'N 2L*'n);

Num.
;

xvi. 5

€'€€ =
Nah.

^^
'\\?2.

(,

€' \^ = 4€€ ,
\'\^

1|"^3);

Regn.xii. 2

(,

= '^7\:^\ (, ^"^^); Isa. ix. 8 flOi? ^^)
eVl

?'^)

differences of the vocalisation are
rent, e.g.

(*?"!"!?),

/
A

,
still

iii.

8

{^^^ proper names the

more frequent and appa-

(|)

;

(^vh^),

(|),

,^\

(^),
()i^'PP').

XoboX-

{
Greek

One
text.

other

preliminary consideration

remains.

The

student must not leave out of sight the present state of the

homogeneous

text

is

not to be found even in the

1 Jerome vowel points

in the last years of the 4th century see Nowack, Die Bedcutiing dcs ;

knows nothing of a system of Hicronymus fiir die A Tliche

Tcxtkritik (Gottingen, 1875).

The SeptiLagint as a Version.
oldest of our uncial MSS.,

323

and the greater number of Greek

codices are more or less influenced by the Hexapla.

The

Lucianic

text, if free

from

this vice,

is

subject to another, the

Antiochian passion

for fulness,

which encouraged the blending

or the accumulation of various renderings

and thus created

doublets \

Besides these recensional errors there are the mis-

takes, itacistic or other,

which are incident
state
will

to the transmission

of ancient

books.

The

of the

Greek
is

text has

been

touched upon already, and
the

form the subject of a chapter

in the third part of this book.

Here

it

sufficient to notice

presence of mixture and corruption as a factor in the
in view.

problem which the student of the lxx. must keep
II.

We

are

now prepared

to deal with those features of

the version which are not incidental but characteristic of the
translators' principles
T.

and methods.

The

tinually

reader of the Alexandrian Greek Bible is conreminded that he has before him a translation of a

Semitic writing.
[a)

As a whole the version aims

at

fidelity,

and often

pursues this aim to the extent of sacrificing the Greek idiom.

'
The
kpTT^To.
TTOLelv,

first

chapter of Genesis will supply instances of extreme
e.g.

literalness,

.

5

As we proceed, we are still conscious of moving in an atmosphere which is Hebrew and not Greek. Hebrew constructions meet us everywhere such phrases as

.
ev

v.

4

ava.

eycVero

iyevcTO

' , €
;

V.

20

(

, ^
^

in the Prophets

and Hagiographa

,

rtvo?,

e^^e?

, ),
/9,

()
may be found

as well as in the Pentateuch.

Occasionally the translators set the sense at defiance in their
Cf. Driver,
oJ>. cit.,

p.

Iviii.

21

2

324

The Septtiagint as a Version.
what they conceive
i.

desire to be true to

to

be the meaning of

the Hebrew, as

by

kv

.

26 they render ^3 (8co/Aat) when in i Regn. In some books, especially perhaps in the Psalms

and

in Isaiah, entire

sentences are unintelligible from this cause.

Even when
original
I

the Alexandrians

have rightly understood their
it

they have generally been content to render
for

into

Greek with little regard of the Greek tongue.
{b)

rhythm or

style, or

the requirements

To

the

same

spirit

of loyalty

may be

ascribed in part

the disposition to transliterate words which present unusual
difficulty.

The number
is

of transliterations other than those of

proper names
nearly
all

considerable \ and they are to be found in

the translated books.
i.

In some cases they are due
19

to misunderstanding, as in Jud.

where
form

'() seems to have been read as
name
(e.g.
;

sequently treated as a proper
is

purposely maintained

the majority of instances transliteration

,
'^/?
;

",
is

€€
and

23

con-

in others, the

Hebrew
But
in
for a

,).
ii.

may be taken
4 Regn.
14

frank confession of ignorance or doubt

example, in Jud. viii. 7 P|X), Jer. XXX viii.

(

and third of these specimens, the and when a proper name is transliterated, the name is sometimes for this reason not easily recognised; thus Ramathaim (i Regn. i. i) becomes

.

h
(xxxi.)

€,
is

it

clearly such, for

40

As

in

the

first

article

is

often included

;

(D^nO"in)^

Similarly the

local

taken over in the trans-

literation, as in

Gen. xxxv. 6 eU
in

=

•')'?,

Sometimes two

words are rolled into one, as

=

-''

^p^

(Gen.

1 Thus Hatch and Redpath take note of 39 transliterations, exclusive of proper names, under A alone. They are thus distributed: Pentateuch, 4; The principles by which the Histories, 26; Psalms &c., 3; Prophets, 6. LXX. appear to have been guided in these transliterations of Hebrew consonants and vowel-sounds are expounded by Frankel, Forstudien, p. 107 ff. 2 Unless the is here prothetic, which is however less probable.

;

The Septuaghit as a
xxviii.

Version.

325

translation to the transliterated
II,

name, where it is necessary for the reader to be made aware of its meaning, the lxx. sometimes translate without transliterating, e.g.
("^JD)
;


15 13
2.

i9)\

A

doublet

is

occasionally created by adding a

TO
iv

^, .

Hebrew,

^.
iii.

4

; ",
e.g.

in

i

Regn.
14

vi.
ei/

xxiii.

In the case of a significant proper

xi.

^
Gen.
9

20

€€€

^]

) 26
fault,

(''?^)

',

xiv.

^''"jijiyn).

The Alexandrian

translators, however, while

loyal

to

their original,

sometimes even to a
often

manifest nothing like

the slavish adherence to the letter with which Aquila has been

charged.

They

amplify and
;

occasionally omit

;

they

interpret, qualify or refine

they render the same

Hebrew words

by more than one Greek equivalent, even in the same context they introduce metaphors or grammatical constructions which
have no place
in the

Hebrew

text

and probably

at

no time

had a place

there, or they

abandon

figures of

speech where they

exist in the original.
(a)

Slight amplifications,

which are probably not
all

to

be

ascribed to a fuller text, occur frequently in

parts of the

^ '
xxxiv. 10

LXX.

;

e.g.

the insertion of

before a quotation, or of

pronouns which are not expressed in the Hebrew, or of single words added in order to bring out the sense, as in Gen.
yrj

ivavTiov

,

xl.

17
vii.

6

laOUi, Deut.

16

').
:

(Heb.

'

thou shalt eat

all

the nations

The
they
^

translators frequently manifest a desire to

supply what

the original had omitted or to clear

name

the subject or object

up what was ambiguous when the Hebrew leaves it

158. here.

Cf. Hieron. Qtiaest. hebr. p. 44 (ed. Lagarde), De situ et noju. pp. 106, Pearson {Praef. paraen. p. 6) endeavours to defend the LXX. even

320

The Septuagint as a Version,

to be understood (Gen. xxix. 9

'^/

,
Ac

Heb. 'fed them';
or they

xxxiv.

'and they said unto them
to follow as a necessary

'^ ': .
=
'^.r'i^^.

'),

Heb. add a clause which seems
(2

^,
14
xii.

consequence

Regn.

21

('

3)

''D),

or they

make good an apois

).
which

siopesis (Exod. xxxii. 32

'
,
terms
5 otl

Less frequently they insert a whole sentence which
i.

of the nature of a gloss, as in Gen.

a shorter text, as compared with M.T.,

8
'

. ,
is

merely an expansion of

of the preceding

)
i

command ';^6'77

'
9

.;
?'.

or
2

i

Regn.

a reminiscence of

"

in the
i.

On

the other hand the lxx. not

uncommonly present
e.g.

Gen.

xxxi. 21
ib.

(Heb. 'he rose up and passed over'),

.
9

31
I

said...');
after they
(?)

Regn.

i.

/

(Heb.

'Because

I

was

afraid, for

^^^
and
after they

(Heb.
').

had eaten

in Shiloh

The

translators frequently interpret

for explanation.

logy, e.g.

Hebraisms are converted "^.? becomes (Exod.
vii.

word or phrase is exGreek reader; thus changed for one more Urim and Thummim is used for 2^3 (Gen. xii. 9) ?;6' (Exod. xxviii. 26); in the Psalms become for l-l^* (xvii. = xviii. is written for (Ps. iii. 4),
(Exod.
vi.
1 2).

;

(Num.

15);

^
A

had drunk

into
xii.

words which call Greek phraseo43),

and

'"^^^'i?

CJ^nDy* 7"!^

''J^^1

is

rendered by

difficult

intelligible to

a

'

;

'

^

3),

and

for "ti^l (Ps. xv.

= xvi.

9); similarly in Jer.
i.e.

TO

'the cemetery' stands for ."•^?,

Hinnom.

An

effort is

made
;

to represent

Hebrew money by

nearest Greek equivalent

thus for ^"^^

we have

,

ii.

23

the valley of
its

(Gen.

The Septiiagint as a
xxiii.

Versio7i.

for

rather than translated

. -,
3
15,

Deut.

xxii.

29, 2 Esdr. xv. 15) as well as
is

Occasionally a whole clause
;

,
Exod.

327
and

interpreted

e.g.

Exod.

iii.

14

^

Gen.
et/xt

i.

2

7;

yij

6

,

25 16
iv.

Ps.

xl.

(xxxix.) 7

dogmatic interest has been detected in some of these paraphrastic renderings, chiefly where the lxx. have endeavoured to avoid the anthropomorphisms of the original;
examples are most frequent

,.

7€
6

in the

Pentateuch,
far

e.g.
')
;

Gen.

xviii.

(Heb. 'that be

Israel,'

Aq. etSov

elSev;
xiv.

Exod.

230

e/cet; Jos. iv. 24 Such renderings manifest the same

/ ^?
eay

Oeov

'); ; Num. .

^
it

from thee
;

Oeov

(D^H'Pi^T'^

xxiv.

elSov

(Heb. 'they saw the
ib. 11

8

xv. 3

oV

(
or

)(15^^)

God

of

(n^pjjl)
^''^)•^

Deut.

(1^"2).
spirit

of reverence which

led the lxx.

to

write

not infrequently
Palestinian

,
'

or the anarthrous
for the

?,

or

Tetragrammaton, just as

their

brethren read for

""'
iv

0^?^\

In other
(^^'^^^,

places the lxx. appear to be guided
e.g.

by the Jewish Halacha,

Gen.
T-rj

ii.

2
;

6

Aq.

,
Kuptos.
-

\ ^;
I

^])

}
')^.

Lev. xxiv.
xix. 7

7

^40
yrj

.

) €}
tyJ

} ],
there
yfj

(Heb.

an abomination
xii.

Haggada also
'HAct
"*;

are clear traces, as in Exod.

Regn.

i.

14

aiTYJ

v.

6

1 See W. R, Smith, 0. T. in J. Church, p. 77. Aquila, as we gather from Origen and now know from his published fragments (p. 39 f.), wrote the word in archaic Hebrew characters, Avhich however were read as

their period"
^ 4

"Because salt as well as frankincense was used (W. R. Smith, op. cit., p. 77).

in the actual ritual of

On xxiii. 11 see p. 17. "An evident attempt to shield
p. 10).

the priest from the charge of harshness"

(H. P. Smith, Sanmel,

328
/xeVov rr\%

The Septiiagint as a Version.

^-

yjjipa.% avrrj'i

iv

Trj

.
the

/xves,

iyevero

same Hebrew word by more than in the same context. In some cases the change appears to be either arbitrary, or due to the desire of avoiding monotony; e.g. in Ps. xxxvi. (xxxvii.)

(

The Lxx. render

one Greek equivalent, sometimes even

"}

is

translated by

32, 40, but

by

/
;

in vv. 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21,

in vv. 28, 35, 38.

In

many

be ascribed to the circumstance that certain
occur,

others it may common Hebrew
in

words take a special colouring from the contexts

which they

and must be rendered accordingly.
sometimes
it

Thus

i^^,

which belongs

to this class has received in the lxx.
is

'giveV more than
8

,, , ,,, ^, , «, , , ,
phrase, e.g. Jos. xiv. 12

30 different renderings

translated by a para-

C'? '1^^),

Deut.

xxi.

(CT
it

*??<)

;

when

it

is

rendered directly, the following
its

Greek verbs (besides
:

8<.8oVat

and

compounds)
iXcav,

are used to
BeLKvvvaL,

represent

iav,

TiOivaLy

stance,

,,.
TrepiTt^cVat,
Troietv,

-, ^,
aycii/,

eKrtveiv,

,,
is

CLTTOTLveLV,

7€€€',
This
a
fall far

but a glance at Hatch and Redpath

there are

many which do

not

somewhat extreme inAvill shew that behind it, and that in the

, ',
i-m^i^Lv,

€€,

majority of cases the ordinary words of the

Hebrew Bible

have more than one equivalent

in

the Greek of the lxx.

The Alexandrian
endeavour
the

translators

have evidently made an honest

to distinguish

Hebrew

words.

between the several connotations of Thus, to take a few examples "P. is

variously rendered by

, , , ^, , ,
:

1 The example is suggested by Dr Hatch {Essay's, p. 18), who gives many The ini/t'x Hebraeus at the end of Trom will of the passages at length. and its compounds). enable the student to add other instances (besides

XpoVos

and even


the
ix.

,, , , ?;; ?, ,, , ^, ^, ,, ,
;

The Septtiagint as a Version.
the equivalents of
"i?"^

329

among

9,

-,,
;

vovs,

'^

for ^P2,

;

for

same Greek word often serves for several Hebrew words. which is generally the lxx. rendering of Thus
stands also for
13,

,^^,
are
all

/•/;,

,.
for
^/.

are

we have not Only
but

IkSl-

Conversely,

(Exod.

xxvii.

LXX.) and even "^^1 (Deut.

used to represent

''^^;

^
by

contexts for ^^, r\)b% b'h^,

times occurs.
HTJ'j

and

.
D^SlJ;).

2•

in

hn, ^, 2p, ^pp, dSv, Even in the same context or verse this someThus in Gen. i. iii. yrj translates Y"}^, '"^^l^., Exod. xii. 23 "»?V and HDS are both represented

2,

€ ,,
21, xxxi. 5)
;

^

7),

^1^^"^

(Dan.

ix.

appears in different

',


f.

;

in

Num.

xv.
it is

4

^
in

is

used both

for

^^}^

n?T.

In such cases
;

difficult to

acquit the translators

of carelessness

but they are

far less

frequent than instances

of the opposite kind.

On

the whole the lxx. even in the
skill

Pentateuch shews no poverty of words, and considerable
in the handling of
{d)

synonyms.

In reference to metaphors the Alexandrians allow

themselves some discretion.

Thus
6eov; in

Gen.

God' become
{^^^)
X.

ol

ayyeXot
is

shall rise'

16 'the foreskin of your heart'

Heb.

'

both branch and rush.'

indulge in paronoffiasia, without authority from the Heb., e.g.

Gen. XXV. 27

XXX. 13
(e)

€^€

; , ?^ ]

rendered by

'^'
is
^*^*1''
;

Num.

turned euphemistically into
represents

;
vi. 2

'the sons of

xxiv. 17 'a sceptre

in

Deut.

in Isa. ix. 14 /xeyav

Occasionally the translators

—^'^ITJ'^

xxvi. 18
xxvii. 12

.

")^»1

;

Job

kcvols;

Lastly, the reader of the Septuagint

must expect

to

find a large

number

of actual blunders, due in part perhaps to

330

The Septuagint as a

Vei'sion.

a faulty archetype, but chiefly to the misreading or misunder-

standing of the archetype by the translators.

Letters or clauses

have often been transposed
lation has suffered

;

omissions occur which
;

may be

explained by homoioteleuton

more frequently the transthrough an insufficient knowledge of Hebrew
still

or a failure to grasp the sense of the context.

It

follows that

the student must be constantly on his guard against errors

which may

easily result

from too ready an acceptance of the

evidence offered by the Alexandrian version.

Taken

as a whole,

and judged in the light of the circumstances under which it was produced, it is a monument of the piety, the skill, and the
knowledge of the Egyptian Jews who lived under the Ptolemies, and it is an invaluable witness to the pre-Christian text of the Old Testament. But whether for textual or for hermeneutical
purposes
it

experience of the Ancient Church shews.

must be used with caution and reserve, as the With this subject
it

we

shall deal in a future chapter;

is

sufficient to

note the

fact here.

III.

The
Bible,

beginner, for whose use this chapter

is

chiefly

intended, will

now be prepared
and
to

to

open

his Septuagint

and

his

Hebrew
contexts.

compare the two in some famiHar The following notes may assist him in a first effort
problems which present themselves.

to grapple with the

Gen.

XV.
I.

1—6.

...

,
"I.

Heb. '2'...3'1..

= lbi<i?

;

V. 4,

Xiyav. where, as elsewhere, Aq. renders, Heb. '<2W a shield to thee'; cf Deiit. xxxiii. 29, Prov. ii. 7, al. Vulg., A.V., R.V. connect Heb. with the ttoXvs. = "'J^^<, as in v. 8, and not 2. foregoing, supplying

,

cf.

;?

infrequently in Jer.

interpretation rather than a literal rendering of ^y\^.
oi/coyei/oi?

and Dan.

(lxx.).

ut€kvos

— an

/=

"^^.

?

''"•3

\2 pL^ p:

cf.

Hieron. quacst.

^

Philo has

(see below).

The Septuagint as a Version.
in Gen. "ubi nos

331

Hebraeo scriptum

habemus Et filius Masec ve^-fiaailae meae., in est Tl''^ pOO pi, quod Aquila transtulit 6 vl6s
;ioi;...Theodotio vero

."
31, xix. 19;

^^,
DX?

\

eVi

a

literal
3.

rendering of the Heb.,

leaving the difficulty unsolved.

€=^][},

and so

in xviii.

did LXX. read

OlKoyevrjs h.ere

= r\''2r[']2.
4•

€—a
..,eyeVf7-o=

Hebraism,

=
as in
xi.

€.

-

^^^ evSvs

31.
"Os...ovto9,

= ^2"^^,

elsewhere.

•1..."1^.
"^IpD.
5.

,

i,

but apparently not

^^y^p, unless the LXX. read
\^'^)
(cf.

= €7€-...€ ., =
nin^2.

Haupt ad

loc).

, \\,
On
TO

euphemism
Heb. Heb.

for

Heb.

6.

Heb. 'he counted

it... for

righteous-

ness'; possibly the LXX. read as in Ps. cvi. 31 (M.T.), where they have the same rendering. The N.T. follows LXX. here (Jas. ii. 23, Rom. iv. 3, Gal. iii. 6).

EXOD.

xix. 16

24.

16.

'EyeveTO 8e...Kai eyeVoi'ro =
*'!!?.

,
Heb.
as V.

= '\2\
cod.

'

''n*l...''n^'l,

op->

F

with

iH

pr.

€3€, = mn\
cf.

'at the nether part

an idiomatic rendering of 11^
renders

21.

16 where LXX.

1.

9•
Heb.
'

, .
;

('^) of the mountain.'
TJ'i:^"'':^p.
it.'

.

^etva,
1

Heb.

the mountain.'
2.'(om.
18.

7.

.

AF),

6
Heb.

Heb. 'the smoke of

...^',

'*?

the

a softenHeb. with Greek idiom ^ 21. in the next verse cyyiCeiv ing of the Heb. break forth (Din) ye, Aq. = 'C*^2 7ii. 22. Heb. 'and also' (DJT), usually
Kaiy^^

dering of
23.
xi.

euphemism

of S2II ki. ' enclose,' but with the which is latent in

^' : :
,
7.
' ;

,
*?

= ^\
is

after

' /,
? ', . /;
=
20.

.,

"/^•

dropt in accordance

(Burkitt, Aquila, p.
n'jn''.

13).

'

:

a double renanother instance of
ev

,

:

Heb. 'break forth upon them' (Aq. the double compound occurs

xix.

,,
the verb
is

] ).
six times in Jos.
(cf.

here as in

-z/.

12 the equivalent

added thought of consecration
Exod.
xxix.

1 Or, as Dr Nestle suggests, it may have been taken as introducing the ace, as in later Hebrew or in Aramaic.

332

The

Septiiagiiit as

a Version.
in

26, Ezech. XX. 40). V. 22 ; Aq. again,

Num.

xxiii. 7
7.

pafabida.
D"3i:?.

', ^,

(Gen. xxv. 20)
/^

: ,
24.

].],
here for the
i.e.
:

euphemistic, as

10.

^^

first

time =7^^^.

Lyons
lo),

Pent.,

(Gen. xxiv.

or

?
8,

here an interpretation of the simple

Heb.

,

D'lN.
?/.

and
"1*1N,

in

represent DVT, whilst

answers

to

and

{v. 8)

to 3p3, an unusual instance of carelessness or poverty of language on the part of the translator; {v. 9) is equally unfortunate as a rendering of CIV, while on the other hand

,
'^1^'

€, €€, , ). (,
Heb. 'the fourth part of
To
as Heb., whilst the next

fairly represent the Heb. renders 10. (Num.^, Job^, again in Job xx. 9, xxiv. 15. in LXX. and Jos. To Dan. LXX.i), a late form for Heb. 'the dust': did LXX. read ^"IT, or have they glossed "iSy? reading IDD•• '•.

^
is is

Israel' (Aq.

.).
sacrificed to

,

word

a gloss on ''''"}

Heb. 'as he.' Hed. and E7ig. Lex., p. 31); $• This passage illustrates both the greater freedom which the Greek translators allowed themselves in poetical contexts, and their comparative incompetence to deal with them.

,

an

alliteration
(cf.

Brown,

Deut.
I.

vi.

1—9.
ivToXal,

Heb. 'go over'; iv. 14, 4 Regn. iv.
sing.

,
to

Heb.

son's son.'

be prolonged';

xxxii. 27.

added
4.

^^, ^^ ) , ^ "8 ... 8, . ^^ .
",
8.

'this is the commandment.' God.' ^ Heb. the Greek has lost the local reference, as in

Heb.

'

your

2.

"Iva

f^

iH.

Oi

\

"Iva

this or a similar

phrase in

in

The group Exod.\ Jud.\ and

40, v. 30, xi. 9, 21, xxxii. 47; also occur in iv. 40, V. 16, xvii. 20, is not found elsewhere in the LXX. except
iv.

{
.,
3.
;

, €...,
5.

(€€,

Heb. 2nd pers. Heb. 'thy son and thy Heb. 'and that thy days may
represents

in

Sirach.

^

M.T.

;

perhaps

complete the sense of the Greek
to

yet see v. 10 (""

7).
iv.

TadTa...Alyv7rTov

Heb; perhaps repeated from

to

€.
give

form an introduction

The readings vary for is here super 7'asu7'a7n the text of
;

AF

Luc.

... 8read
and
ff.,

45

;

for

some
xii.

texts

The N.T.

citations

(Mt. xxii. 37

=

Mc.

29

The Septiiagint as a Version.
Lc.
X.

333

27)

present

much

diversity, giving
cf.

both renderings of
T. in

,
6.

^*?

and both of "qiXP
iv
TTj

Koi

yj/vxjj

,
^
iv

;

Dittmar,
;

V.

Novo,

p.

50 f.

/^

Heb.

for

'in

"as it were imprinted there (Jer. Heb. 'shalt impress them upon' Aq. = 2. the root were n:*J'. \., Heb.
'upon,'
;

sitting &c.'

the Avay.'

head: Lyons Pent, (reading inobilia. occurs in the same phrase in Exod. xiii. 16, Deut. xi, 18. Aq. seems to have rendered the Heb. here and in Exod. by compressed,' tight,' which Field {Hexapla, i.e. i. 103) explains as the "thecas in quas schedulae membraneae ...inferciebantur." The LXX. rendering may be an Alexandrian name for the but the whole subject is obscure. as in Exod. xii. 7ff. 9.
circlets or tires
^

=],
14.

Jos.

x.

12

12.

^

''59..

be a gloss derived from
'Gibeon.'

said in the eyes of Israel.'

.,
13.

/ ) ), ^ , ,. € , ,,
as
'in
;

thy heart' Heb. has xxxi. 33)^" 7.

^, 'for

if

thy

eV

',

are inexact, Heb. 'in thy house,' 'in

8.

(F,

=

/,

frontlets,'

for the

'

'

^^..

— idiomatic

DVIl.

The words

that follow

{,.)
still.'

rendering of

seem

to

v. 10.

sLTrev

Heb. 'and he

Heb. 'be
;

'Aijalon' ('^^*)

=

the verb represented by

, €.

which

xi. 10 A,. thus distinguished from Oeos, Heb. '', Aq. to eOvos.
cf.

2 Chron.

is

Unless a primary error is to be suspected here, the LXX, has its original, from motives of piety. After the stanza fH inserts a reference to the Book of Jashar, which is wanting in non-Hexaplaric texts of the LXX. cod. G adds, ^ eVt a loose V. rendering of Heb. D'*pri Di••? ND? }* 14.
glossed

€€
(cf.

a good example of a conscientious compromise between idiomatic and literal modes of rendering
Heb.).
t^''S

, ^,

;

€€€ ., €

?1p2.

2€€€
i.

., Heb.

'fought for Israel.'

JUD.

v.

28—302.
here omits the
difficult

28. <&^
^

word 22^\) (^,

\ ^compared

Driver,

ad loc.
489, should be

2 In this passage the text of in O.T. in Greek, with that of A (ed. Brooke and McLean).

;

334
Baviv).
in Ezek.
xl.

The Sephiagint as a Version.
'forth
(5-^

in 4 Regn. i. 2, Ezek. xli. 16). appears to be a supplementary gloss. () confuses ^'\'2 kal; the general sense of the former is given pdiel with by A. For cf. I Mace. v. 53 has it been suggested here by its similarity to the word used in ? nodes A more literally but represents elsewhere, e.g.
lattice' (cf

A

'3

A, again the other hand B's is close and yet idiomatic, while A's iv goes too far afield the latter appears to be a Hexaplaric correction (Field, loc). 8uipepi(ovTa 30. SO (B^-^ Heb. 'are ; they not finding, [are they not] dividing booty?' LXX. seem
Ivi.

Ps.

aiming

^ ( : . ^
'.
2
;

i6 Ovpides

, :
?\

from the loophole';

8, '....
cf.

Symm.

'through the

',

:

(Ivii.) 6,

at a

€€€
literal

Prov. xxix. 5. rendering,

29. At

€]

On

to

20 B, 2 Chron. xix. 2. (A, misses the dual embroidery on both sides' (R. V.), or a couple of " precisely as DTli^m above in A seems pieces,' (Moore). to be an error for which is found in several cursives see = Field, acf loc, and Lagarde's Lucian.
cf.

^
(cf.

have read
;

?\
'

for

both, while labouring to keep up the alliteration of the
its

Heb., miss

point through ignorance of a rare use of

xiv.

,

^ )
;

,

;

for

'

'"'

;

apparently ''-• inNlv'?;
substitutes the usual

..
7),

'for the

necks of the

spoil.'

^
;

for the spirited

of
cf.

Ps. xviii.

= xix.

and literal rendering and appears to have read Vm332

Ps. xix. (xx.) 7.

and
I

This passage is a severe test of the translator's knowledge skill, and shews him perhaps at his worst.
xvii.

Regn.
37.

37

\ . €6 ,,. , . € €, €+, , ,)•€. €4( . \ ^^ "^^ € ., €8, \, () {( '). €begins

—43.

.
16, 2

"1PN*1,

A, Luc.

elnev

/c

(Jud.

iii.

.

adding,

an exact rendering cf. Gen. ix. . LuC, Th., repeated from V. 36 ( with iH. Regn. . 4): LuC. (), with
;
'.

5

David

(cf V. 38) the object of the verb
SC.

;

Luc, A, follow Heb.

(,

'more than once he wearied
true sense" (Moore).

.^
39•

e'/c

3^•

<^-

in

making

^ "Of the versions only [Vulg.] comes near the Jerome renders pulcherriviafetniuarmn.

The Septuagint as a Version.
himself with walking (strove to walk) in them,' reading
in Gen. xix.
11
-"li^/fl,

335
i^^f.l,

H.
xiii.

P. Smith).

as here, there

" ^LXX.
8ls
it

as

(Wellhausen,

Driver,

is

occurs also in Deut. ix. 13 (where, nothing in the Heb. to correspond), and in Neh.
represents
D.''riti^-"1

,
40.

20,

where

DyS.
D"}P!'!l,

reading the verb probably as

is obviously wrong, and A scarcely mends reXeiovs in Correct, with Lucian, matters by omitting the adjective. = here only in (D"*yin) again LXX., and perhaps unknown elsewhere

./
in

Zach.

xi.

0•*?»5•1,

Aq.

\

15.

probably belongs to the same recension of the story which has supplied the great gaps vv. 12 xviii. 5. 42. Heb. 'looked 31, 55 and saw' so A, Luc. cf. xvi. 12, Gen. xxv. 25. added by the translators to soften the opprobrious 43. is prob{, 'in (with) Staves'; ably intended to make the question correspond to the statement oi V. 40. elnev The next words in the LXX.

,

;

^8, , • ,
: :

and omitting

.

'

iv

\€).

apparently
41
is

for

l^IpP"•'?

(HH

wanting

in

^,

and

.

are evidently of the larly vapid reply" (Driver).

€[']

\

same character

— "a

,'
singu-

4 Regn.
II.

an interesting attempt to combine Greek idiom with some reminiscence of the Heb. phrase; Lucian abandons the Heb., and corrects, Heb. horses of fire'; Heb. 'horsemen,' v. 12. cf. (p?), cf. Gen. Heb. 'went up'; the i. 7
'

€€ \ €€ . " , € , €€... \\(, , , ) \. €
ii.

II

.
18.

Greek verb

is apparently repeated from vv. 9, 10, where it = rip1>. passage it has been borrowed by the translator of Sirach (xlviii. 9, 14, xlix. 14, B), and by two writers in the N.T. ('Mc.'xvi. 19, Acts i. 2, 11) on its symbolical use see the writer's Apostles' Cj-eed, p. 70 f. ?, Heb. cf. i Regn. xvii. 43 (above). after 12. Harep Heb. 'my father' dz's. the Heb. Lucian omits the noun, probably because of the harsh-

From

this

;

ness of the assonance.
'

wherever
xix. 13,

,

;

^^...

:

13. Kat sheepskin,' an interpretation of
is

^,,

used of Elijah's characteristic raiment (3 Regn. iv cf. Heb. xi. 37 19, 4 Regn. ii. 8ff.) (Heb., Luc). eVesc. Heb. 'EXeiaaU is Hexaplaric, and wanting in B*, but
it
;

, .
^,
;

=

Luc,

{Vulg. pal/ium)

/^

;

336
supplied by

The

Septiiagiitt as

a Version.
iH
\n>if

B^^A Luc.
answering

14.

<9fuy,

\.
x.

transliteration

to

Sin

(iB.);

in

10 the

,
16.

a

same

form

= <12,
?iu?ic.

which was perhaps the reading before the LXX. in
Kairrep
15.

this place.

Aq.

etiam

'

is

not represented by ©-^^

'EXeiaaU, ^^ Heb., Luc. 1 8. In the verse begins 'And they returned to him';
Ps. cix. (ex.)
I.
I

,
same
is

\

,
;

but

Symm.
<at

ol

ev

^€€:
Luc. adds

A

,
A

whence Jerome
fB..
*C\1

Luc. with
Ylol

elai.

8€,
^/,

^"\321.

Luc. Aq. Th.

IB

cf. v. 13.

4.

[]

Kvpios

,
is

'';ilX?

^]{\.

^yip'h; in
:

V. 5

. €6= mm
Mc.
xii.

the

Gr.

used for

''^''P'!

^V-

the reading of the best authorities in Mt. xxii. 44, keeps its place in Lc.^"• ^*^*-, Hebrews. 2. 36, but "^IpV apparently. 3. Mera ^PV).

seems
xxxii.

to point to a reading

(2
;

8);
for

''1"2)

- ()
ayioLS.

2: ^:
or

,

(,

(cf.

Job xxx.
eV

15, Isa.

= D^t^np ("^); Symm.

/
text

though not quoted

in the

. ., had an

€,

important place
;

in post-

apostolic Christian teaching from Justin onwards (cf. Justin, Cypr. test. 17, ep. Tryph. cc. 63, 76, 83 Tert. adv. Marc. v. 9 63) in the Arian age it was commonly cited on the Catholic side see e.g. Cyril. Hierus., catech. vii. 2, xi. 5; Athan. or. c. Hilar, de trin. vi. 16, xii. 8. Ariaii. iv. 27 sq. de deer. 3, &c. The O.L. seems to have rendered uniformly ex utero ante luciferum geiiui te, with the variant generavi in Tert. I.e. Jerome's quasi de vulva orietur tibi ros Hebrew Psalter reads with
;


'

;

;

;

'

adolescentiae.

as
4.

'^^ril'?'!

"in'^f^P

Kara
ff.,

^. ,,
15

The LXX. appear
hv,

to

have read

their

perhaps dropping 71027 as unintelligible.

6

vii.

II,

had before him the LXX.
unique name plV'DT'O

( ).
Aq.
in the

Symm.
The

.

Heb.

Cf.

Heb.

V.

of Gen. xiv. 18;

translator probably he transliterates the

Prov.

viii.

€. So ©KB^etc. Q.L. {condzdit, ereavit); codd. 23 = V, 252, with Aq. Symm. Th. Vulg. (possedit), give both possible meanings of r\2p. The former rendering supplied the Arians with one of their stock arguments (cf. Athan. or. a loose and partial translation, Els epya e. Arian. ii. 44 sqq.). probably a confession of inability to understand the Heb. Th.
22.

-—

"

same way.

22—25, 30—31.

€-

,

;

;

The Septuagiiit as a

^^ID"»

a poor rendering of Heb., probably adopted to bring this clause into Hne with v. 24 with which the LXX. seem
to

have connected

they intend to convey the general sense by
25-

, ,
epyaaias

rore.

23.
;

where fH has ^1?>3

^,
:

Version.
/xe,

337

reading apparently

cf.

Ps. Ixxvii. (Ixxviii.) 69.

it.

24.

LXX. overlook ''771 and

=

pt^^,

\^

;

similarly

/Me, iB was brought forth.' 30. word being referred by the translator to ^y Symm. Th., implies

6//

the

€€.
is

the reading
clause.

^^\:^ DV DV
;

31. "Ore.,

connected by LXX. with the next Heb. 'rejoicing in the world of

^
and
pnii'D, as

,

.

unless

-

his earth.'

LXX. seem to have read

^^

Lagarde

had ^1T\ stood in their text, been ready at hand as a rendering (cf. 2 Regn.
suggests
&c.).
cf.

vlovs

^, /,
;

would have
xxii. 16, Ps. ix. 9,
;

in Ps. X. (xi.)

= D'^^^ \i3 reading 1''Vii'yL*\ Yio\ Deut. xxxii. 8 DIN '2 is translated by this phrase 4, and repeatedly in the poetical books.
;

Job

xix.

23

— 27.
;

See above p. 308 the phrase is repeated 23. Tif yap av ; in the Hebrew, but the translator contents himself with using it
once.

iSS

is
it

ignored
is

ovv, unless

represent
translates
iv in

?,
it eiy it

supplying

caTLv 6 €K.\v€cv

aevaos in the LXX.
iii.

9, etc.),

yrjs

(D^p"•)

D-1pJ,

, ,
;

its

usual equivalent in the LXX.
Els

is

vvv or
to

transliterated (p. 324).
in

seems
;

which

fH belongs to the next verse Th. reading the word as "I^r. 24. B* omits
to the sense a manifest gloss. 25. 'AeVaos• a paraphrase of Heb. my Goe/ lives
;

which appears to be necessary
prefix

B^^'^iiA

,

'

'

elsewhere = D7y, and
(Ps. xviii.
14,

^NJI

is

(Ruth
25

or or

Ixxvii. 35).

— 26.
12
/oc).
-ISpJ "'liy.

appears to correspond with
deppa
"PS^DP
^"t^V

^

and

6

with l^T

points to

\^

(Siegfried in

Haupt ad

But the translator perhaps interprets doctrine of the Resurrection, which cabean times (cf. Job xlii. 17*^, and vii. as cited by Clem. 14, xii. 43)
;

his text in the light of the

was accepted from Macsee Dan. xii. 2, 2 Mace,
R.
i

Cor. 26

),

{
the words

are brought into
S.

still

nearer agreement with the faith of the

S.

22

'

33^

The Septuagint as a

Version.

yap p. 89 f. corresponds in position with words which £H divides and nb^D-l, but seems to be partly borrowed points as

Churoh; see Apostles' Creeds

.
3

,.^-

17

from the next verse.
fried).

27.
V.

MiCAH
I.

,^
I

/
/
'

@^

€('

suggests rh^
IH,

'h
""D

-ib^:

•?'?•1 (Sieg-

?

•1^|'.

(iv.

14)— 4

(3).

€,
'")'^^.

i.e.

^^
''

".
?

:

LXX. read

Xe6/A oLKos

?

:

did LXX. read

roC
ii.

tii

in Mt.

The passage is quoted art little to be,' as Heb. 6 in a Greek paraphrase^ which substitutes
and
CSpSj?) for

for 'little to be,'
C???^)•
3•

"^(os

re^erai,

^
;

^?* for DSb^. «^^ n^3 0^"'2

2. Br;^-

'thousands'

apparently for

?

the former has so that subject; Heb. 'in the strength of

^,

as in
liv.

7/.

I.

the verb with the previous words
(Iv.)

JEREM.
in

, €. , . , ^, €4 \€ (. ,
20
6

, ^
\
ib.

ore re^erai. 4• were obelised in Hex. and find no place in $1 ; as perhaps originated in a misreading of is in fact a doublet. Kvptoy, oy\r.

or

e.

.

'',

\

nm

•^^'

;

the subject being the same J.,' the LXX. read )2l^\ connecting

.
36).

for

21^'*

=

cf Ps.

xxxviii. 31

S7 (xxxi. 30

Vv. 31

Hebrews and

— 34

are cited in Heb.
cf.

15.

32.

in

Hebrews

' '/
a

viii.

8

12, q.v.

31.

Jer. xli.

(xxxiv.) 8
in

dzs,
:

Hebrews

eVl

6
or

(HID)

the writer appears to dislike

the repeated alliteration in for the more usual

'the covenant.'

Hebrews

Heb. 'in their inward parts.' 34. llV \^ has no Heb. 'his neighbours' equivalent in the Greek; (cf Prov. xi. 9, 12, xxiv. 43 = 28), reminds us that we are dealing
^ The paraphrastic character of the reference appears more distinctly in which blends Mic. v. **, 3*. It will the second stanza reads be observed that cod. with Mt.

? , , , ,
reading
"TlPyJ for ''n^yQ.

,'

iiri-

(fj)

eV...

Heb.

'

which. ..they broke';

^2- h

,

Heb.
;

Hebraism not represented in IH and so AQ in Jer. Els appears without

in

... A

, -

;

TJie

Septiiagmt as a

Version.

339

,^, <

Heb. 'be searched.' a contracted future (cf. p. 305) is inserted, because the drift of the verse has been misunderstood (cf. Streane, p. I56f.). To yivos Heb. 'all the seed of I.'; yei/oy = yiT. again in v. -yj36• fH, 'the
;
[

,
35.
xii.
I.

with an Alexandrian version.
'iniquity,' 'sin.'

'.,.,
35—37. In
J.' (at

....'?;

...
precede
35.
;

l¥l 36, 27

Kupiof,

reading

--

Heb. 'thus saith

.

for •?5^.
is

€],
1?"1.

the beg. of the verse).

ordinances of the reading perhaps

moon
tJ^JIl

'

(but
T3"l

cf. D'^ipnn

in v. 35, Heb.).

or

for

27-

= niN*3V
xii. 5 (6)

'"lin%

onwards, with the exception of Isaiah,
Isa.
i.

niXQV

(KvpLos
i

Dan.

/

Th.
;

,

$•

,, ^,
who
transhterates
(cf.

as almost invariably in the Prophets^ from

Hosea

9, al).

4.

(lxx.), probably a corruption for

p. 48);

?

Th.).

TrapeXevaeTai (LXX.), reading "12^^ for "^OV Th. literally, 6 ayyekos (LXX.), a gloss
;

VLOVS (lxx., Th.),

../Ar^

^y.

^€
;

^.

-Ls ola Th. is again more literal than LXX. Th. repeats the subject xiii. 19). yiyovcv (cf. Mt. xxiv. 21, with the view of preventing ambiguity; in the sequel LXX. (as handed down to us) overlook ""lil, while Th. adds iv rfj yfj or eVt rrjs yfjs. -eTaLLXX.; Bevansuggestsacorruptionfor but //•. may be a gloss or some other compound of upon the tamer word which stood in the original. Th, rightly, *0$• ViDIl -^overlooked by Th., unless we

(, ,.
6^7764

Bevan,

LXX., eVrat

Mc

accept the reading of
rrjs

LXX. ev yrjs dust '(but see Bevan, p. 201 is perhaps a gloss on
y^y,
;

25. 3. Oi (lxx.); cf. Sap.

€ .

€€,

AO,

6 elpeOels [0]

yeypa€vos.

Dn2T

^;

xiii. 2.

,
Oi
'

.
f.).
;

Th.J Heb. 'in the ground of

see Deut. xxviii. LXX., a reminiscence of Gen. i. 14 LXX., reading
;

for the

word

,
2.

/

LXX.;

for D'2in"^P^'=lVP

Th. translates

yo 0^3

D^p'^n-Vrip.

(lxx.), the Ordinary Biblical phrase, used (lxx.), in iii. 36, 63 Heb., Th. have the stars.' 4. Both senses have been found in the Heb. (Th.). yrj cf. Bevan, ad loc. LXX., reading T^]'^ or

\]

ny-i for nyn.
1 Zech. xiii. 2, Jer. xxvi. cases the MSS. are divided.

,

///

(xlvi.)

lo are the only exceptions,

and

in both

2
;

340

TJic

Septnagint as a

Version.

The student who has gone through these extracts, or who is able to dispense with help of this kind, is recommended to begin the careful study of some one book or group
For several reasons the Books of Samuel (i They a promising field for work of this kind. are on the whole the part of the Old Testament in which the value of the Septuagint is most manifest and most generally
of books.

Regn.)

offer

recognised \ and invaluable help in the

study of both

the

and the versions is at hand in the commentaries But whatever book of Wellhausen, Driver, and H. P. Smiths may be selected, the method and the aims of the reader will He will read the Greek in the first place as a be the same. version, and he will use all the means at his disposal for ascerBut he will read taining the original text which lay behind it. it also as a monument of early Hellenistic Greek, and mark with growing interest its use of words and phrases which, originating at Alexandria in connexion with the work of translating the Hebrew Scriptures, eventually became the vehicle
text

Hebrew

of a fuller revelation in the writings of the Apostolic age.
the general subject of this chapter Pearpraefatio paraeiietica (Cambridge, 1665; aim iifltulis E. Bibl. textibus originalibus (Oxford, CJmrto?!^ 1865); Hody, 1705); Thiersch, De Pe?it. vers. Alexa?tdritta (Erlangen, 1841); Frankel, Vorstiidieii zu der SepHiaginta (Leipzig, 1841); Ueberden Einfluss der paldstifiischen Exegese aiif die alex. Hernieneutik., 1857 Geiger, Nachgelassene Schrifteii, iv. 73 ff. (Berlin, 1875 8) Selwyn, art. Septuagint in Smith's D. B. ii. (London, 1863); Wellhausen, do. in Encyclopaedia Brita?7?iica (London, 1886); W. R. Smith, Old Testament in Jewish CJiurch (1881, ed. 2, 1892); Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford, 1889); F)river, Notes on the Books of Samuel, Intr. (Oxford, 1890); Buhl,
:

Literature on

so7ii

;

R. Smith, 0. T. in J. C/iurch, p. 83. If the student prefers to begin with Genesis, he will learn much For more adas to the LXX. version from Spurrell's Notes (ed. 2, 1898). vanced study Proverbs will form a suitable subject, and here he may seek
1

W.

2

help from Lagarde's Anvierkungcn, and Professor Toy's recent tary in the 'International Critical' series.

commen-

TJie

Septnagmt as a

Version.

34]

Kano7i n. Text des O. T. (Leipzig, 1891); Nestle, Marginalicn (Tubingen, 1893); Streane, Double Text of Jcreiniali (Cambridge, 1896); the various Introductions to the Old Testament; Commentaries on particular books, esp. those of Dillmann and Spurrell (Genesis), Driver (Deuteronomy), Moore (Judges), Wellhausen. Driver, and H. P. Smith (Samuel), Toy (Proverbs), A complete commentary on Ryssel (Micah), Cornill (Ezekiel). the LXX., or on any of the groups of books which compose it, is

?]
On

still

a desideratinn. the Semitic style of the LXX. the reader of Adrianus (Migne, P. G. xcviii.).

may

consult the

CHAPTER
Catenae.
The Greek Old
Testament, as
is

VI.

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

it

appears in the editions

of the last three centuries,

divided into chapters and verses
those of the printed

which correspond generally
Bible.

Avith

Hebrew

The traditional text-divisions of the Hebrew and the Greek Besides the more serious Bible are not absolutely identical. differences described in Part II. c. i., it not unfrequently happens that a Greek chapter is longer or shorter than the corresponding chapter of the Hebrew by a verse or more, and that as a consequence there are two systems of verse-numeration throughout the succeeding chapter^

A
{Meg.

system of verse-division^
4.

is

mentioned

in the

4,

Kidd. 30.

i).

The Massorets noted

the

Mishnah number

the end of each book and portion of the Deuteronomy is stated to consist of g^^ pesuki?n, and the entire Torah of 5888. Of chapter-divisions in the Hebrew Bible there are three kinds, {a) There is a preTalmudic division of the canon into sections known as ni^^ns. The parashahs are of two kinds, open and closed, i.e. para-

of verses

(D''i>1D?) at

canon

;

thus

^ In such cases both systems are represented in the Cambridge edition of the LXX. (see O. T. in Greek, i. p. xiv.). 2 For a full account of the divisions of the Hebrew text see Buhl, Kanon 222; Bleek-Wellhausen, p. 574 f•; Ryle, Cation of the O. T, ti. Text, Blau, Massoretic Studies, iii., in J.Q.K., Oct. 1896. p. 235.

.

Text-divisions:
graphs, which begin a
are preceded only

Stichi,

Chapters^ Lections^

etc.

343

new line, and sub-paragraphs \ which by a space. They are still registered in the printed Bibles by the Q (for nmnp, Open') and D (for npinp, closed ') which occur at intervals throughout the
'

Torah^

{b)

A

second system of parashahs breaks up the text

into longer sections for the use of the synagogue.

The Law
Baby-

was divided into 54 Sabbath lessons according
Palestine.

to the

lonian tradition, but into 154 according to the tradition of

With few exceptions^ the beginning

of a lesson
;

coincides with that of an open or closed parashah

the coin-

cidence

The

orah by a thrice repeated s or D. Prophets were similarly divided for synagogue reading,
is

marked

in the

but the prophetic lections were

known

as haphtaroth

(^)

and were

not, like the liturgical parashahs, distinguished
{c)

by

signs inserted in the text,

Lastly, the

printed

Hebrew
relatively

Bibles are divided into chapters nearly identical with those of the English versions.

This system of capitulation
first

is

modern, and was applied
of Canterbury (t 1228)^

to the

Latin Vulgate in the

by Stephen Langton, Archbishop was adapted to the Hebrew Bible in R. Isaac Nathan's Concordance, a work of the fifteenth century, in Avhich use was also made of the older division into
thirteenth century, probably
It

verses ox pesukim.

Of printed
was the
first

editions the

Bomberg Hebrew Bible of

15 21
;

employ the mediaeval system of chapters tlie verse-division found a place in the Latin version of Pagnini (1528), and the Latin Vulgate of Robert Stephen (1555), and
to
finally in the

Hebrew

Bible of Athias (1661).

Both chapters

^ A similar system of paragraphing has been adopted in the English Revised Version, and in the Cambridge LXX. see R.V. Preface, and O.T.
;

ill

Greek, i. p. xv. ^ In Baer's edition they are given throughout the Bible. ^ In the Pentateuch there is only one, the lesson (12) which begins at Gen. xlvii. 28 (Kyle, p. 236). ^ See GvQgoxy, prolegg. p. 167 ff.

;

344

Text-divisions

:

Stichi,

Chapters, Lections,

etc.

and verses were applied

to the text of the Septuagint before

the sixteenth century; the capitulation appeared in the

Com-

plutensian Polyglott and in the Aldine edition of 1518, and the

verse-numeration in the Frankfort edition of the Aldine text^
Neither the verses nor the chapters of the existing textdivision occur in

MSS.

of the Greek

relatively later copies", or in older

Old Testament, except in MSS. where the numerals
But the student who

have been supplied by a recent hand.

examines MSS. of the lxx. or their facsimiles finds himself confronted by other systems which are both interesting and in

some

respects important.

To

these the present chapter will be

devoted.

,
17

I.

We
or

6..

begin with the shorter divisions,

known

as

,
xxviii.
ib.

(a)

',

Lat.

versus,
is

is

properly a series of objects

placed in a row.
in the
ff.),

The word

used in the lxx. of the stones

High

Priest's

the pomegranates wrought

pillars in the

Temple

of cedar-wood shafts

When apphed
literary
cf. e.g.

(, (
iv.

breastplate

(,
upon the
Regn.

Exod.

capitals of the

3

vii. 6),

^,
1 1

and the rows
9)•

to the art of writing, the

tinuous line of letters or syllables.

work was measured by the
Diogenes Laertius

'line' might be measured in various ways, as by the limits imposed upon the scribe by the breadth of his papyrus, or or in the case of poetry by the number of feet in the metre again it might be fixed in each instance by the requirements of

The

/

:

24,

Dionysius Halicarn.
(sc.

^ )
The
stichi
vi.

word

signifies a

extent of an author's

he had written
26

.
tt^vtc
;

con-

^ It prints the verse-numbers in the margin, and begins every verse with a capital letter. 2 E.g. H.-P. 38 (xv.), 122 (xv.), where the modern chapters are marked.

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,
the sense
or
it

etc.

345

;

might depend upon a purely conventional

Evidence has been produced' to shew that the last of these methods was adopted in the copying of Greek prose
standard.
writings,

and

that the length of the prose stichus

was deter-

Homeric hexameter, i.e. it was normally a line of sixteen syllables in some instances the Iambic trimeter seems to have been the standard preferred, and the line consisted of twelve syllables'. The number of letters in
that of the
;

mined by

the stichus was on the average 37

28

— 29

in the other.

38 in the one case, and Such a system served more than one
it

useful purpose.

Besides facilitating reference,

regulated the

and consequently the price of the book. The number of the lines in a book once determined, it might be
pay of the
scribe,

written in any form without affecting the cost^

The compiler

of the Cheltenham

list

explains that dishonest scribes at

Rome

and elsewhere purposely suppressed or mutilated the stichometry\ Thus the careful entry of the in the margins of ancient books, or the computation at the end of the number of contained in them, was not due to mere custom or
sentiment, but served an important practical end.
{b)

Besides this conventional measurement there existed
Sense-divisions were

another system which regulated the length of the line by the
sense.

forms a complete clause
the

.
^

The
is

co/on,

according to
(o

comma

a shorter co/on'\

^
II.
.

commonly known
Suidas,
is

as

a

hvoiav

line

)

or

which
;

but before Jerome's time

This arrangement was originally used in transcribing poetry, it had been applied to the great prose
/^evue de philolog'ie,
(1878), p. 97
ff.

By Ch. Graux,
J.

R. Harris, Stichometry, pp. 8, 15. See E. Maunde-Thompson, Gr.and Lat. Palaeography, i. p. 80; Prof. Sanday, in Sttidia Biblica, iii. p. 263 f J. R. Harris, op. cit. p. 26. "Indiculum versuum in urbe Roma non ad liquidum, sed et alibi avariciae causa non habent integmm." ^ See Wordsworth-White, Epilogus, p. 733, nn. j, 2.
2
:
•*

34^

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,
;

etc.

authors

cf.

Hieron.^r^^/i

ad Isa}\ "nemo cum prophetas versibus
;

viderit esse descriptos, metro eos aestimet apud Hebraeos ligari, et aliquid simile habere de Psalmis vel operibus Salomonis sed quod in Demosthene et TuHio solet fieri, ut per cola scribantur
et non versibus conscripserunt, nos legentium providentes, interpretationem novam scribendi genere distinximus" praef. in EsechP•: "legite igitur et hunc iuxta translationem nostram, quoniam per cola scriptus et commata manifestiorem legentibus sensum tribuit." Cf. Cassiod. de inst. div. Hit., praef. Hesychius of Jerusalem (fc. 433)

et

commata, qui utique prosa
utilitati

quoque,

;

, ., € ^.
treated

the

Greek

text of the

way^: ean

^^ €€
toIs

de

.

Specimens of colometry may be seen

-. ,
Dodecapropheton
in the
toIs

Toiyapovv

' '// .../3 \
in

€ ^', same
oyj/et

iv

Codd.

,

where

the poetical books are written in cota of such length that the
scribe has been compelled to limit himself in this part of his

work
four.

to

two columns instead of dividing

his

page into three or

Among
in

the

lists

of the books of the O.T. canon printed
this

an earlier chapter of

book (Part

11.

c. i.)

there are three

which are accompanied by a stichometry.
their

We

will

now

collect

measurements and exhibit them

in a tabular form.

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,
Stichometry of Nicephorus.
\

etc.

347

Stichometry of

Book.
1

2

3

4
1

Kingdoms Kingdoms Kingdoms Kingdoms
Paralip.

2240

\

2 Paralip. 2

Esdras Esdras Psalms Proverbs
1

Ecclesiastes

Song
Job

Wisdom
Sirach Esther Judith Tobit

Hosea

Amos
Micah
Joel

Obadiah Jonah

ahum Habakkuk
Zephaniah Haggai
Zechariah Malachi

(Dodecapropheton
Isaiah

Jeremiah Baruch
Ezekiel

3000 3800 4000 700 4000
2000'

Daniel

Maccabees 2 Maccabees 3 Maccabees 4 Maccabees
1

7300

34^

Text-divisions

:

Stichi,

CJiaptei's,

Lections,

etc.

The figures given above correspond to those in the lists printed in c, i,, which follow the text of Preuschen {Analecta^ pp. i56f, i42ff., I38f). Some variants and suggested rectifications may be seen i*Zahn, Gesch. d. NTlichcu Kanons, ii., pp. 295 ff., 143 ff., and Sanday, Studia Biblica^ iii., pp. 266 ff.

Many MSS.
Either the total

of

the

Greek Bible contain more or
stichi is registered at the

less

complete stichometries of the several books of the canon.

number of
is

end of the

book, or a record

kept throughout the book by placing a

figure or figures in the
lines.

margin

at the

end of each centenary of
in this

Some

of our oldest

MSS. reproduce
;

form the

stichometry of their archetypes

in other cases, a stichometry
later

which has been copied into the margin by a second or
hand.

Thus

in

Cod. B, the margins of
record
^

i

— 4 Regn. and Isaiah
prima
to

present a
majiu,
scribe
stichi

nearly complete

of stichi written

and doubtless transcribed from the MSS.

which the

owed
is

his

copy of those books.

A

marginal register of

also found in part of Cod. F, beginning with Deuteroit

and Q agree The entries in generally in Isaiah in both MSS. the last entry occurs at Isa. Ixv. 19, where the number of j-Z/r/^/' reaches 3500. But the famous Chigi MS. of the Prophets (Cod. 87) counts 3820 stichi in Isaiah-. This approaches the number given by Nicephorus, whilst the total number of stichi in BQ, 3600, agrees with the computation of the Claromontane list. The addition
;

nomy, and in Cod. Q, where added the Hexaplaric matter.

is

due

to the

hand which has

of 200

stichi

in

Nicephorus and

Cod.

87

is

due,

Ceriani

suggests, to the greater length of the Hexaplaric
texts ^

and Lucianic
Deuteronomy,

There

is

a similar disparity between the stichometry of
in

Nicephorus and the reckoning of Cod. F

1

It is printed

2

,

by Harris, Stichometry^

p.

59

ff.

or as AUatius read the MS.,
iii.

f^H

(3808); see Cozza, Sacr.

bibl.

vet.

fragm.
^

p. xv. p. 23
f.

De

cod.

March.,

;

Text-divisions

:

Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

349

where
to

in

F

the stichi zxt 3000', but in Nicephorus 3100.

On

the other

makes the stichi of Numbers hand the later uncial be 3535, which comes very near to the reckoning of
Stichometrical variation
is

Nicephorus^.
doubtless chiefly or largely due

to divergent types of text.
at

But other causes of disparity were
misread the
letters

work.

It

was easy

for scribes to

which

represented the

number of

the lines, especially

when they were
older signs

mechanically copied from an archetype.

The

may

have been sometimes misunderstood^, or those which were
intelligible

may have been confused by
p.

careless copying.

A

glance at the comparative table on

346

f.

will

shew that

several of the larger discrepancies can only be explained in

some such way.
The following stichometry is derived chiefly from Dr E. Klostermann's Anatecta^, giving the result of his researches among cursive MSS., with some additions supplied by the Editors of the larger LXX.
Genesis

4308° H.-P.

Barb. iii. 36 Vat. gr. 746 30, 52, 85 Pal. gr. 203 Athos, Pantocr. 24, Laur.
;
;

;

.

Exodus

112 Athens, Nat. 44 H.-P. 30, 52, 85; Barb. iii. 36; Athens, Nat. 44 H.-P. 30, 52, 54, 85; Barb. iii. 36; Paris, Reg. gr. 2; 2000, Athens, Nat. 44 H.-P. 30, 52, 85; Barb. iii. 36; Vat.gr. 2122; Athens, Nat. 44; Paris, Reg. gr. 2 H.-P. 30, 52, 54, 85 Barb. iii. 36; Vat. gr. 2122; Paris, Reg. gr. 2 H.-P. 30, 54, 85; Barb. iii. 36; Paris, Reg.
;

;

gr. 2

The symbol used is ^|-, which occurs also in B. On this symbol, see J. Woisin, De GraecoTum notis miuieralibiis, n. 67 (Kiel, 1886). - The numeration of the stichi in the poetical books ascribed to the greater uncials in the Cambridge manual LXX. is derived from Dr Nestle's Supplemenhwr (Leipzig, 1887), '^^^ rests on an actual counting of the lines,
^

and not on statements
^
•*

in the MSS. themselves. Cf. J. R. Harris, Stichometry, p. 31.

^ 6

See p. 44 4400 in H.-P. 54. 3530 in H.-P. 54.
fif.

350

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

Judges

Ruth

Kingdoms Kingdoms 3 Kingdoms 4 Kingdoms
1

2

1 Paralip. 2 Paralip. 1

Esdras

2 Esdras

Psalms Proverbs
Ecclesiastes

Song
Job

2IOO^ Barb. iii. 36; 2156, Paris, Reg. gr. 2 Athos, Pantocr. 24 300 Barb. iii. 36; Paris, Reg. gr. 2 2500 Barb. iii. 36 (500, Ven. Marc. gr. xvi) 2600 Barb. iii. 36 2042, Ven. Alarc. gr. xvi 2400 Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi 2600 Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi 2000 Barb. iii. ^6 j 5000, Ven. Marc. gr. XVI 3000 Barb. iii. 36 ( 1300 Barb. iii. 361 ^^^''- -'' ^^^ i8cx) Barb. iii. 36i >^^°°' ^^"• Barb. iii. 36 ^ 5100 1750 H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36 750 H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 753, H.-P. 253 286 H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 353, H.-P.
; ;

253

2200

(^including asterisked

lines,

1600 without

Wisdom

them) H.-P. i6i(?), 248; Barb. iii. 36 Barb. iii. 36; Ven. gr. i. 13 Barb. iii. 36; Ven. gr. i. 13 Barb. iii. 36 Ven. Marc. gr. xvi, \^en.
;

gr.

i•

13
iii.
iii.

Barb. Barb.
i•

36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi 36 Ven. Marc. gr. xvi, Ven. gr.
;

13

H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P.

86 86 86 86 86
86; 776, H.-P. 231 86; 204, H.-P. 231 s 231 3820, Barb. iii. 36 231 3800, Barb. iii. 36 231 350, Barb. iii. 36 860, Barb. 86; {?) H.-P. 231 iii. 36 231 4000, Barb. iii. 36 231 1720, Barb. iii. 36
; ; ; ; ;
;

H.-P. Barb. H.-P. H.-P. H.-P. 231
^

iii.

36

2
^

2450 in H. P. 54. Ecclesiastical Canticles, 600, Barb.

iii.

36.

Total of Minor Prophets variously calculated at 3750, 3600, 3300 (Barb. iii. 36). ^ Possibly a corruption of ffe (see next page).

Text-divisions:
2.

Stichi, Chapters, Lections,
is

etc.

351

No

complete system of capitulation

found in any

of our existing uncial MSS. of the Greek Old Testament.

Yet even the Vatican MS., which
in the poetical books,

is

written continuously except

bears traces of a system of chapterIt

divisions which

is

older than itself \

begins with Proverbs,
in the

and from that book onwards chapter-numbers appear
there
is

margin of the canonical writings, whilst in some instances
a double capitulation, as the following table will shew.

Proverbs

352

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

Daniel the two sets of numbers are distinctly

visible.

In

Jeremiah the iristaurator here and there breaks away from the
guidance of the
first
is

hand, and the totals are slightly different.

But the difference
slight
;

probably accidental, and

it

is

certainly
is

whereas in the Salomonic books another system

followed, in which

the chapters are three or four times as

long as those of the older capitulation.

Cod.

A

is

broken into paragraphs throughout the prose

books, the beginning of each paragraph being indicated not only by paragraph-marks, but by the use of a capital letter

which projects into the margin.
certain books

Besides the paragraphing

—retain
the
cc.
ix.
i.

— Deuteronomy,
of

Joshua, 3

— 4 Kingdoms, Isaiah
copied

traces

a

capitulation

imperfectly

from
at
at
T^d,

archetype.
I,

In

Deuteronomy chapter-marks
ii.

occur

9,

19,

40;

I,

7,

14;

in
(x.
('>7)

Joshua they begin
i,

I

{)
xi.
I,

and proceed regularly
&c.)

16,

29,

31,

34,

38;

down
at
c.

to xix.
viii.

17

;

in 3

Regn. the
last

first

numeral occurs
(v^)
;

22

[),

and the

at

xxi.

17

4 Regn. returns only one or two numbers (e.g. Q stands opposite to c. iii. 20). In Isaiah, again, the entries are few and
at xxi. i. appears at c. ii. i, and Cod. X seems to have no chapter-marks prima manu, but in Isaiah they have been added by K"'' throughout the book\

irregular;

Jeremiah, the Epistle of Jeremiah, and Ezekiel are capitulated in cod. Q,
tion

and

in the

of

Q
c.

agrees with that of B.
is less

two last-named books the capitulaIn Jeremiah, where the

agreement

complete, the chapters in

Q

do not proceed

beyond
origin".

xxiv.,

a circumstance which suggests a Hexaplaric
exhibits two systems of capitulation^,

Cod.
^
'^

Hke cod.

3

Tischendorf, notes to facsimile, p. v. Ceriani, de cod. March., p. 24 ff. See Montfaucon, Biblioth. Coisliniana, p. 4 sqq.

:

Text-divisions

:

Stichi,

Chapters^ Lections,

etc.

353

one of which
in

is

accompanied by

brief headings corresponding

general character to the rtVAot of the Gospels.

The two
comdiffer

capitulations,

which are represented with more or
the

less of

pleteness

in

Hexateuch and

in

1-3 Kingdoms^,

considerably, as the following table will shew

354

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

It is clear that

which are

at present within

no induction can be drawn from the facts nor can the various our reach
;

systems of capitulation be safely classified until some scholar
has collected and tabulated the chapter-divisions of a large

number

of

MSS.

of varying

ages and provenance \

It

is

probable, however, that the systems, which at present seem to

will

be nearly as numerous as the capitulated copies of the lxx., prove to be reducible to a few types reproduced by the
scribes with

many
'

variations in detail.

The

'

titles

deserve separate consideration.

In the few

instances where

we

are able to institute a comparison these

headings seem to be independent.
following table shews
little

In Numbers,

e.g.,

the
in

correspondence between those

codd. K,

M, even when

the chapters coincide.

:

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections^

etc.

Num.
xii. I.

xiii.

.
23-

Ilepi

.
xvi.

\.
€v
TTj

..
[6/3]
Kope

Cod. K.

-- \.
Cod. M.
Tlepl

355

-.

['le-

xiv. 34•

€4\/•
Ilept

yrjv,

€ €. \

I.

.
XXXV.

.

xxi. 21.

xxxiii.

.

xxxiii. 3•
9•

The
a.

Vienna MS. (Th.
Trepi

.
.
.
6.

. , ^ ". . ^. ^. . 8€. ^ . ...
Hep
^

Ilfpi

.\ . €€ 8. Ilepi

Kope

Eiepi

\

6

\

Tlcpi

following

for

Exod. ii.— viii. are taken from a

76

(^
Trepi
Trepi

".

.

.

.

Examples occur of longer headings, which aim
comprehensive summary or a brief interpretation,
Prophets
followed by a complete set of

. , . , .
ev
ttj

gr. 3)

/ier'
^

(?)

(?)

ei'y

'

.

..
eis

at giving a
(a)

The

preface to Hesychius's colometrical arrangement of the
is

Prophets and Isaiah ^
^

The numbers
The

are as

Minor for the Twelve follows Hosea
:

Migiie, P. G. xciii., 1345 sqq.

titles for

Isaiah with a collection

23—2

356

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters^ Lections,

etc.

17, Obadiah 3, Jonah 4, Micah 13, Nahum Zephaniah 7, Haggai 5, Zechariah 32, Malachi 4, 5, The titles are with scarcely an exception 10, Isaiah ZZ. polemical or dogmatic in character, e.g. Hosea a.

20, Joel 10,

Amos

Habakkuk

/ ^,
,\
iv
(^)

e^

r)<i

6

e/xcti/ev,

^€.
3.

The

Syro-hexaplaric Daniel
full

, ^'
.
is
:

%

divided into ten
its

chapters, each

headed by a

summary
for

of

contents \
treatment.

One
i.

class
v.

of sections

calls

separate

In Part

c.

(p.

168 f ) some account has been given of

MSS. which

consist of lessons taken from the

Old Testament.
But the

Few

of these lectionaries are older than the eleventh century,
to the sixth

and only one goes back
Church must have begun
public

or seventh.

choice of passages for public reading in the services of the
at

a

much

earlier period.

The

reading

of the

O. T.

Scriptures

was an institution

inherited by the

Acts
that

xiii.

15, XV. 21;

Church from the Synagogue (Lc. iv. 16 if., cf i Tim. iv. 13), and there is evidence

it was prevalent in Christian communities of the second and third centuries^ At one great Christian centre provision was made for the liturgical reading of the Bible on certain "At Alexandria (writes week-days as well as on Sunday. Socrates) on Wednesdays and Fridays the Scriptures are read and the clergy expound them... and this is at Alexandria a practice of long standing, for it was on these occasions that Origen appears to have given most of his instructions in the Church^" Turning to Origen's homilies on the Old Testament

of glosses, apparently by the same author, have been edited by M. Faulhaber from cud. Vat. Gr. 347 {Hesychii Hieros. interpretatio Isaiae, Freiburg i. Breisgau, 1899). ^ Bugati, Daniel, p. i. See also the (or ets rovs ascribed to Eusebius of Caesarea, which precede the Psalter in Cod. A (printed in Migne, F. G. xxiii. ojsqq.). ^ See above, p. 168. ^ H.S. W.22 iv rrj rrj

/

^

)

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

357

we

find allusions

which shew that they were usually based on

the lesson for the day, and
selected passages.

we

get light

upon the length of the

In Horn, in Num. xv. Origen apologises to his hearers for not keeping strictly to the lesson for the day "licet non ordo lectionum quae recitantur de illis dicere magis exigat quae lector explicuit, tamen quoniam nonnulli fratrum deposcunt ea potius quae de prophetia Balaam scripta sunt ad sermonem disputationis adduci, non ita ordini lectionum satisfacere aequum credidi This homily probably belongs to Oriut desideriis auditorum." gen's life at Caesarea^ and if so, it is clear that at Caesarea as well as at Alexandria there was a well-defined order of Church lessons before the middle of the third century. In another homily, on the Witch of Endor (z>? i Sam. hom. iii.), Origen complains that the O.T. lesson for the day was too long to be
:

expounded
eVfi
etra

^ .,. €

occasion the O.T. lesson seems to have extended from I Regn. XXV. i to xxviii. 25, including four or shorter sections, which, judging from the description, corresponded in length very nearly to our own chapters'^.
this

... €
lections to

-^ ^^ , € €( ^
at a single sitting
:

nXeiova ian•

elneiv,

nepLKOirais

nep\

vwep

6

^...€ (... €.

...

Trepi

^
.

On

The

which Origen

refers

were doubtless those
In the

which were read in the pre-anaphoral portion of the Liturgy in
the hearing of the catechumens as well as the faithful.
liturgy of Apost. Const,
ii.,

the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, the

Kingdoms, the Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Job, the Salomonic books, and the sixteen Prophe<"'i, are all mentioned as books from which the Old Testament lection might be taken; i.e. all the books of the Hebrew Canon, with the exception of the

\€€ $
re

,
Wos

67

1

>.

C. . . .

as.
04.

yap

'$

.$
.
iu

rats

'$

2 Cf. the identical with

in the Coislin

MS. (), where

cc

xxxi., xxxii., xxxiii. respectively

(Montfaucon,

, ', '

iS'zW.

are nearly CoisL,

p. 28).

358
Psalter
this

Text-divisions

:

Stichi,

CJuxpters^ Lections,

etc.

purpose.

and perhaps the Book of Esther, were employed for The order in Book viii. names only the Law

and the Prophets, but probably the scope is the same. The 'Prophet,' i.e. the Old Testament lesson, preceded the
*

Apostle

'

(the Epistle) in the liturgy of Antioch as
at the

known
it

to
its

St

Chrysostom

end of the fourth century, and
till

held

place in the East generally

the seventh ^

In the West the

'prophecy' was read by the North African Church of St Augustine's

time, and it still holds its ground in the Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites ^ In Egypt, as John Cassian tells us,

the monastic communities read two lessons from

Scripture

both at Nocturns and Vespers, and (Saturdays and Sundays excepted) one of the two lessons was from the Old Testament^;

and the West generally adopted the custom of reading both the Old and the New Testament in the daily offices.
Before the formation of Lectionaries the liturgical lessons

were marked in the margins of Church Bibles by the words written opposite to the beginning and end of the apxrj,

,

Such traces of adaptation to liturgical use are found B, though not prima manu^. Whether any of the larger chapters which appear in certain MSS. (e.g. the later system in cod. B) are of the nature of lections, must remain doubtful until the whole subject has received the fuller treatment which it demands.
TTcptKOTTi;^.

even

in cod.

The
special
1

Psalter obviously

ever read by the

;?

needed no
in

capitulation, nor

was

it

the lessons for the day.
in

Psalms were recited or sung

But the Church, as they had
See Chrys.

Brightman, Eastern Liturgies, pp. 470, 476, 527, 580.

in

Rom.
3

D.

* It is used by Justin, Strom, iii. 38. In Origen (quoted above) the Dial. 78 and Clem. is merely a section; at a later time it was used for the ^ Fabiani and Cozza, pro Icgg., p. xix.

De On

xxiv. 3 (cited above, p. r68). C. ., Prophecy, Liturgical (ii. 173'' ff.). inst. coenoh. ii. 6. this word see Suicer, Thesaurus, ii. 673 sqq.

.,

-..-

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

359
com-

been in the Synagogue \ and
munities arrangements were
the Psalter both in public

in

some

early monastic

made for and private ^
list

a regular recitation of

The

scribe of cod.

A

has copied into his MS. a
three are appointed to
services,

of Psalms for daily use, in which

be said at each of the two public and one is selected for private use at each hour of It is as follows the day and night.
:

KANONec

'^

vf<^MN,

.

<\,

360

Text-divisiotis
(i)

:

Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

few other text-divisions, peculiar to certain contexts be specified here. In Isaiah it was not unusual to mark in the margin the place where each of the books of
or books,

A

may

', cf Eus. H.E. vi. 36). a commentary ended were disand in Daniel certain prophetic opposite to Isa. vii. i, tinguished. Thus cod. 0*"= places opACic and opACic h' at c. xvii. i. In Daniel cod. A marks 12 opauas^
Origen's

Both

in Isaiah

{

which begin respectively

at Sus.

i,

Dan.

i.

i,

ii.

i,

iii.

i, iii.

98,

V. I, V. 30, vii. I, viii. i, ix. i, xi. i,

Bel i, and the same method In Lamentations each stanza is of division is used in codd. Qr. preceded by a representation of the Hebrew letter with which it
begins, e.g.
forth 2. In the analogous case of Psalm cxviii. (cxix.), there are no signs of this treatment, except in the Graeco-Latin Psalters RT. In the Song a marginal enumeration distinguishes the speeches of the interlocutors, and some MSS. (e.g. ti and V) add marginal notes after the manner of stage-directions, such as veavides

, ),
.

(,

'^),

and so

,

yt'/xeX

{-),

8€

(SeXe^,

^ ,
Srnall departures
\vriting of the oldest

,
;

from the continuous or slightly paragraphed MSS. are found in a few contexts which the blessings lend themselves to division. Thus even in cod. of the tribes in Gen. xlix. 3 27 are separated and numbered a similar treatment but without marginal enumeration is TB. accorded to Deut. xiv. 12 18 and i Paral. i. 51 54, Eccl. iii. 8. The ten words of the Decalogue are numbered in the I margins of codd. BA, but not prima juanii and the systems of numeration differ to some extent. Thus according to B% = pro-



^'

5' = iv, 7' = = v, r' = vii, ^' = viii, — + = x, while A^ makes y' = iv, ' = , = vi; the numbers in A are effaced, or were never appended.

logue,

i3'
t'

i

ii,

iii,

€'

= ix,
(2)

e'

=\\^ other

would be interesting, if sufficient materials were availpursue the subject of text-division with reference to the daughter-versions of the LXX. On the stichometry and capitulation of the Latin Bible much information has been brought together by M. Berger {Histoire de la Vulgate, p. 307 ff.) and Wordsworth-White {Epilogtis, p. 733 ff.); for the stichometry see also Dr Sanday in Studia Biblica, iii. p. 264 f. But it remains
It

able, to

^

The

2
•^

variations in the MSS. are interesting and instructive. Greek numerals are sometimes added in the margin see above, In cod. V = 23 these become sometimes lengthy e.g.
;

k^rfKdev

\€%.

?

,'

$

iv

,

p. 351. at v. 7

evpedeiaa

€-

ext- divisions

:

Stichi,

Chapters

^

Lections^

etc.

361

doubtful whether these divisions of the Latin Bible belonged originally to Jerome's version or were transferred to it from the Old Latin 1; or, supposing the latter view to be correct, whether they came from the MSS. of the LXX. which were used by the early African or Italian translators. In referring to the N.T. Tertullian speaks of capittda not seldom {ad uxor. ii. 2, de 7nonog. II, de virg. vel. 4, de praescr. 5, adv. Prax. 20); but it is not clear that he uses the word to connote definitely marked
sections.

On the capitulation of the Coptic versions the student will find something in Wilkins, Pe?ttat. praef., ad fin.., and Lagarde, Orientalia, p. 125 ff; on the Egyptian lectionary, he may consult the list of authorities collected by Brightman, A7tcient Liturgies., p. Ixix. For the Ethiopic version, cf. Dillmann's Ethiopic Pentateuch., I. ii., pp. 163 f., 173. The stichometry of the Syro-Hexaplaric is discussed by Lagarde, Mittheilunge?!., iv. list of Church lessons, taken from the Pales(1891), p. 205 f. tinian-Syriac lectionary recently discovered by Mrs Lewis and Mrs Gibson, is given by Nestle in Studia Sinaitica, vi. p. xxix. ff.

A

4.

In connexion with the subject of text-division

it

will

be

convenient to mention the expositions which accompany and
often break

up the
i.

text in

MSS. of the Greek

Bible.

The

student will have observed that
rated in Part
either
original
c.

many

of the codices

enumeGreek
to con-

v.

(pp.

148

— 168)

contain commentaries,
{cat.).

{comm.), or

compiled

Of
;

the

commentators something
sider the use of the lxx.

will

be said when we come

,^, , ,
we
are based

by the Greek fathers

in this place

will limit ourselves to the relatively late

compilations which

on the exegetical works of earlier writers I Such expositions were formerly described as UXoyai or
or as

€7/

8ta<^opojv

6€<
is

0 €$€.

similar periphrasis.
is

The
of the great

by some

use of the technical term catena

()

of comparatively
title

modern
1 -

date.

Catena aurea
op. cii., p. -272.

a secondary

Cf.

Sanday,
i.

Ch. Q. R.
fifth to

from the

"the process of drawing the fourteenth or fifteenth century."
99, p. 34
:

up Catenae goes on

362

Text-divisio7ts

:

Stichi,

Chapters^ Lections,

etc.

together by
1

compendium of comments on the Four Gospels brought Thomas Aquinas, and a Greek MS. Psalter of the
6th century (Vat. Gr. 2240) adopts the phrase, translating

by
€vos

the Greek catena of Nicephorus, which bears the
els

principle

.

7€
They

.

it

%€Lpa

is

used

in this

sense by the editor of

^^
known
is

title

Seipa

The metaphor so happily expresses on which such commentaries are constructed,

the
that

books of
or aeLpai

this description are

now
'

universally

as catenae

are

'

chains

in

which each link

supplied

by some ancient author, scraps of exegesis threaded together by the ingenuity or industry of a collector who usually elects
to be

anonymous.
catenists

The
as Philo

drew
laid

their materials

from

all

sources within

their reach.

They

under contribution Jewish writers such
heretics like Basileides, Valentinus,

and Josephus,

and

Marcion, suspects like Origen, Eusebius of Caesarea, Apol-

and Theodore of Mopsuestia, as well as the accepted and Saints of the Catholic Church. Their range extended from the first century to the fifth or sixth, and they had access to a number of writers whose works have since
linarius,

teachers

disappeared.
scholars

Hence
editors.

their

value

in

the

eyes

of

patristic for

and

But they are not without importance

the purposes of the biblical student.

commentary may be

late',

but the

embedded in the commentary itself often pretext

The

serves the witness of early writers to an old

and valuable

type.

The catena
surround the

is

usually written in the broad margins which
it

text, or

embodies the
it

text,

which in that case

is

usually distinguished from

by being written

in uncials or

in coloured ink, or enclosed within

marks of quotation.

The
at the

names of

the authors

of the catenist are
^

who have been pressed into the commonly inserted in the margin
i.

service

See, however, the facts collected in C/i. Q. K.

99, p. 46

f.

Text-divisions
place where
cop[ireNOYc],
their

:

Stichi,

contributions

[].

€[],
If a
it

second passage from the same author occurs
is

[] [],[], [],
begin
:

Chaptei's, Lections,

etc.

363

thus

in the

same context
writer
is

introduced as

;

an anony-

mous

aAAgc.

Unfortunately in the copying of catenae

such attributions have often been omitted or misplaced, or even
erroneously inserted,

and as

to

this

particular

the student

must be on
in

his

guard against a too unsuspecting acquiescence

the witness of his

MS.

Nor can he place
as
free,

implicit con-

fidence in the verbal accuracy of the excerpts.
evidently

The

catenists

regarded themselves

while

retaining

the

substance, to abbreviate and otherwise modify the language
of their authors.

The following is a list of the chief Greek catenae of the Old Testament which have appeared in type. Octateuch, Historical books: the Catena of Nicephorus, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1772 3; Psalms : B. Corderii expositio G^'aecormn patrtmi^ 3 vols,, Antwerp, 1643; Proverbs: Commentary of Procopius first printed by Mai, and in Migne, P. G. Ixxxvii. Song : Commentary ascribed to Eusebius and Polychronius (Meursius, Leyden, 1617) Job: Catena of Nicetas of Serrae (P. Junius, i.e. Patrick Young, London, 1636); Isaiah: Commentary of Procopius (J. Curterius, Paris, 1580); Jeremiah, with Lamentations and Baruch: Catena published by M. Ghisler, 3 vols., Leyden, 1623 Daniel: Catena published by A. Mai in Script, vet. nov. coll. i. On these see Ch. Q. R. 99, pp. 36—42•

;

;

;

i.

The

nineteenth century has added

little

to our collection

of printed Greek catenae on the
earlier editions

Old Testament, and the

of the best

MSS.

do not always adequately represent the witness Meanwhile a great store of MS. catenae

awaits the examination of Biblical scholars.
are at Athos, Athens,

Some

of these

Smyrna and Jerusalem, but there is an abundant supply in libraries more accessible to Western Perhaps students, at St Petersburg, Rome, Paris, and London.
no corner of the
field

of BibHcal and patristic research offers so

much

virgin soil, with so

good a prospect of securing

useful

if

not brilliant results.

364

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

etc.

The following Lxx. MSS. amongst others contain catenae on one or more of the books which form their text H.-P. 14, 17, 24,
25. 31. 33, 52, 57, 128, 135, 147, 181,

.

:

77, 78, 79, §3, 87, 90, 91, 97, 9^,99, 109, 112.

209, 238, 240, 243, 264, 272, 292, 302, 309; 35123, Lambeth 1214; Paris, Coisl. gr. 5, 7, Reg. gr. 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 161 Zurich c. 1 1 ; Basle gr. iv. i. 16; Leyden, 13; Munich gr. 82 Athos Vatop. 56, vi. 8; Esc.

London B.M. Add.

;

.

;

Athens, nat. 43; Constantinople 224; Smyrna, Ev. sch. i; Patmos, 216, 217; Sinai 2 Jerusalem H. Sep. 3. Scholia are to be found in H.-P. 14, 16, 38, 52, 56, 64, 70, yy, 79, 93, 128, 130, 131, 135, 159, 256, 310; Paris Ars. 8415, Coisl. gr. 184. On the Paris O. T. catenae see H. Lietzmann, Catenen, Some of the Vatican catenae are handled by Pitra, p. y] ff. analecta sacra 11, Klostermann, analecia, passim; a full and valuable account of Roman MS. catenae on the Prophets is For lists of given by Faulhaber {die Propheteii-Cateneii). the catenae in the great libraries of Europe and the East, the student must consult the published catalogues, e.g. Montfaucon,
15, Iver. 15
;

;

Stephenson (Vatican), Lambeccius (Vienna), The more im(Athos), Papadopulos ("Jerusalem). portant MSS. are enumerated by Harnack-Preuschen, and Heinrici, and in the older work of Fabricius-Harles.
(Paris),

Omont

Lambros

5.

Besides catenae and detached scholia the margins of
Lists of abbreviations
authorities, such as

LXX. MSS. frequently contain notes of various kinds, written
oftentimes in perplexing abbreviations.
are given

by the principal palaeographical

Montfaucon's Falaeographia Graeca, Gardthausen's Griechische
Paldographie, and Sir E.

Maunde Thompson's Hafidbook of
;

Greek and Latin Palaeography
mastered by working upon
facsimiles.
It

but the subject can only be

the

MSS. themselves

or

their

may be

useful, however, to print here a few

of

the abbreviated notes and symbols which occur in the apparatus

of the

Cambridge manual lxx.,

occurrence in the principal codices.

=

?.
'

'

c',

cy'

—^..^. ,
f=

= =

/'

() ^.

=

. ^. € * ^.
or are

of frequent

'=

'

eBp'

0^

'
Sym-

rpct?,

i.e.

Aquila,

: ;

Text-divisions

:

Stichi, Chapters, Lections,

machus,

Theodotion.
i.

=
\

TraVres.

— mo =
=

Hexapla,
ip

^. ^. €, €€, ^^. '= " -. —.'^=. 6'=€.
Ixxxv.).
01

oi XolttoL

or (S
(B

=

.
far'),

.^ =
mark

a

. . ^
For
see above, p. 39 fP
f.

/, .
etc.

365

(Field,

(— "

CTI

cp

=

(i.e.

'corrected

thus

inserted by the

usually at the

end of a

book.

For further particulars see Field,

op. cit., p. xciv. sqq.

Literature.
Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, 2X\.. Verse; HerzogStichometrie; Gregory, i. p. 112 f.; Scrivener- Miller, i., p. 52 ff. Gardthausen, Paldographie, p. 127 E. M. Thompson, Handbook, p. 78 ff. Zahn, Gesch. d. Kanons, ii. p. 295 ff. Sanday in Studia Biblica, iii. p. 261 ff. J. R. Harris, Stichomelry, passim; Wordsworth-White, Epilogiis, p. 733 ff. (Oxford, 1898).
Plitt,
art.
;

¥,

Stichometry, colometry, &c.

fif.

;

;

;

Capitulation.
Schiirer,
11.
ii.

79

ff.

;

Buhl,

Kanon

u.

Text

d.

A.

T., p.

222;

the O.T., p. 235; Morinus, Exerc. Bibl. xvii. 3; O2i\.\n\is, De ordine pe7'icoparu7n {o'^iu.sc. iv,); Zacagni, Collectanea, Montfaucon, Biblioth. CoisL, p. iff.; praef., pp. Ixvii., Ixxxi. the Benedictine Prolegomena in div. S. Hieron. biblioth. iv. (reprinted in Migne, P. L. xxviii. loi sqq.) Suicer, Thes. eccl.

Ryle,

Canon of

;

Herzog-FUtt, a.vt. Perikopen Gregory, i. Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 56 ff.; Thomasii opp. i. p. 120 ff.; Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, p. 323 ff.
s.vv.
;

€, 7€7
Lections.
;

:

Suicer, Thes. eccl. s.vv. Brill, De lectionariis or. et occ. eccl. (Helmstadt, 1703); Neale, Hist, of the H. Eastern Church, i. p. 369; Herzog-Plitt, artt. Lectionen, Perikopen; D.C.A., art. Lections; Burgon, Last twelve verses of St Mark, p. 191 ff. E. Ranke, Das kirchl. Perikopen-systefn der
7''?.

,,

;

',

Liturgie (Berlin, 1847).
Catenae.

J.

T. Ittig, De bibliothecis et catenis patrum (Leipzig, 1707); C. Wolf, De catenis Gr. patrum (Wittenberg, 1742); Fabricius-

^66

Text-divisions:

Stichi,

Chapters, Lections,

etc.

scriptoru7n ss. Harles, viii. p. 637 ff. J. G. Dowling, Notitia patriun (Oxford, 1839); Walch-Danz, Biblioth. patristica (Jena, 1834), p. 247ff.; Harnack-Preuschen, Gesch. d. altchr. Litteratur^ G. Heinrici, in Hauck, Real-Encyklop. iii., art. i. p. 835 ff. P. Batiffol, in Vigouroux' D. B. ii., p. 482 ff., art. Catenen Chai?ies Bibliqiies; Lietzmann, Cateiieii (Freiburg i. B., 1897); M. Faulhaber, Die Propheten- Catenen 7iach rdmische?i Handschriften, in Biblische Siiidien, iv. 2, 3 (Freiburg i. Breisgau, The two last-named works are indispensable to students 1899). who desire to prosecute research in this field. The whole subject is summarised with admirable clearness and precision in the Church Quarterly Review for Apr. 1900, pp. 29 48.
;
;

;

PART
LITERARY

III.

USE, VALUE, AND TEXTUAL CONDITION OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT.

PART

III.

CHAPTER

I.

Literary use of the lxx. by non-Christian
Hellenists.
I.

A HAPPY

accident has preserved fragments of the lost

literature

produced by the Hellenised Jews of Alexandria between the inception of the Alexandrian Version and the

lius

The Greek historiographer, Alexander Cornefrom his known as Polyhistor (o encyclopaedic learning wrote a treatise On the Jews which
Christian era.

— better

),
There

contained extracts from Jewish
writings'.

and Samaritan

Hellenistic

Of

these a few were copied from Polyhistor's book
in

by Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius of Caesarea,
pages they

whose

may

still

be read.

They

consist of fragments of

the historians Demetrius, Eupolemus, Artapanus, and Aristeas,

the

poets

Philo,

Theodotus, and Ezekiel,

the philosopher
is

Aristobulus, and

Cleodemus

or Malchas.
c.

reason to

believe that Demetrius flourished

B.C.

200; for the other

writers the date of Polyhistor (c. B.C. 50) supplies a terminus

to

ad que?n, if we may assume" that he wrote the work him by Clement and Eusebius.
^

attributed

Cf. Joseph., ant.

i.

15,

Clem. Al. strom.
f.

i.

130, Eus. /r. ev.

ix.

17.

^

See Schurer^
S.
S.

iii.

p.

347

24

370

Use of the
The

LXX.

by non-Christian Hellenists.

following references will enable the student to find the Eus./r. ev. (i) Demetrius: Clem. Al. strom. i. 141. Eus. ix. I9(?), 21, 29. (2) Eupolemus: Clem. Al. strom. i. 141. pr. ev. ix. 17, 26 ( = Clem. Al. strom. i. 153), 30—34, 39. (3) Artapanus: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 18, 23, 27. (4) Aristeas: Eus. pr. ev. ix. Eus. pr. ev. ix. 20, 24, -^ (cf. Clem. Al. 25. (5) Philo the poet strom. i. 154). (6) Theodotus Eus. /r. ev. ix. 22. (7) Ezekiel the poet: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 28 ( = Clem. Al. strom. i. 155), 29. Eus. /r. ev. viii. 10; ix. 6 ( = Clem. Al. sti'om. i. (8) Aristobulus Eus. /r. ^•/. ix. 20. 22); xiii. 12. (9) Cleodemus or Malchas

fragments:

:

:

:

:

Several of these fragments bear traces of a knowledge

and

use of the

Greek

Bible,

and

this

evidence

is

not the less

convincing because, with one exception, the purpose of the
writers has kept

them from actual quotation.

represent their national history in a form
to their
;

They wished to more acceptable

phraseology of the
influence.

pagan neighbours but while avoiding the uncouth Greek Bible they frequently betray its

A

few extracts
i^a)

will

make
Se

this plain.

Demetrius:

6/€^ eic
{^)

€( ^. , € € -^- 8
{b)
'

• \
e\C

rov Oeov

// nHfAC

(, .

other coincidences, see above,

€ ,
BevLcipiv'-.
{c)

*, €. . ^ '^
TON
eVi
Se

eic

ev6(v

.

yap

eVt

de

ykvKV

'^/
os

e\C

'

-, ^, \
oc

, .^. '^
nal^as

npoc

'A^pcON

deov

ehpflv eKfl

p. 18.)

^.

(For

Eupolemus:
COI

/,
'

(^

... \

^.
Cf.
Cf.

-

^
* ^

Gen. xxii. ff. Gen. XXXV. 16. Cf. Gen. XXV. 6; Num. Cf. Exod. XV. 2 3fr. Cf. 2 Chron. ii. 12 ff.

xi.

34

xii. i.

:

THC

• , , , •, ^.
Use of
the

LXX.
8e

by non-Christian Hellenists.
eN
'

371

Aristeas

:

eN

-/(

yewrjaat toTc opioic

yap

^

Ezekiel (in his tragedy

, ? , , ^^ . € ^.
€S

,• , ^ '' '; € , , , 4
' '
C

<€ vyp <€€ . <( ' € \
\
Xeyec

ayy)

'

etVe

< cneanevaev
*

'

ayKaXas.

€iuev

yvvai,

aidev.

*

*

*

*

yeviaBai
:

€ '-^.
'

icrr'i

Aristobulus
€v

()

ce el

(^)

*

toTc

coy
2.

toTc

TOTc

Besides these fragments, some complete books have

survived the wreck of the pre-Christian literature of the Jewish

They are included in the Alexandrian may be employed as separate witnesses of the literary use of the canonical translations. And the evidence Thus the writer of Wisdom supplied by them is abundant. knows and uses not only Exodus (Sap. xvi, 22 = Exod. ix. 24,
colony at Alexandria.

Greek

Bible, but

^ Cf. Job xlii. Pseudo- Aristeas ad Philocratem makes 17 b, c, i. iff. abundant use of the Greek Pentateuch, as the reader may see by referring to the Appendix, where LXX. words and phrases are indicated by the use

of small uncials. ^ Cf. Exod. ii. 4
^ *

Exod. Exod.
,

xiii. 9.

ix. 3.

our MSS. may be due to a slip of memory, or expressing what follows in the text {h re to?s

"
if. ;

iv. 10,

where

exfkoyo'i is

A,

.

?
ev

,

read by cod. F.

which
is

is

wanting

in

it

a short

way
2

of

.).
24

3/2

Use of

tJie

LXX.

by no Ji- Christian Helle7iists.

and perhaps also Sap. xii. 8 = Exod. xxiii. 28) and Deuteronomy (Sap. vi. 7=Deut. 17, Sap. xi. 4 = Deut. viii. 15), but Isaiah The (Sap. ii. i2 = Isa. iii. 10, Sap. xv. io = Isa. xliv. 20).
i.

translator of Sirach not only recognises the existence of the

Greek Pentateuch and Prophets and 'the other books,' but shews everywhere the influence of the Greek phraseology of In 2 Maccabees vii. 6 we have a verbatim quotathe Lxx.^ tion from Deut. xxxii. -^^d, and in 4 Maccabees xviii. 14 if. a catena of references to the Greek Bible, including direct citations of Isa.
4,
xliii.

2,

Ps. xxxiii. 19, Prov.

iii.

18,

Ezek. xxxvii.

Deut.

xxxii.

39, xxx.

20

all

from the lxx.

The

picture

which the last-named passage draws of a Jewish father reading and teaching his children out of the Greek Bible (cf.

Tim. iii. 15) is a suggestive one, but the book, it must be remembered, is of uncertain date, possibly as late as the time of Josephus, to whom it was at one time ascribed".
2
3.

The Jewish

portions of the Sibyllines, notwithstanding

the epic form in which they are cast, exhibit clear signs of the
influence of the lxx.

reminiscence of Ps.

^
708
if.

Thus
3,

in

Sibyll.
ib.

iii.

310

Ixxviii.

lxx.;
is

606

€$€ €..
is

a

borrowed from

Isa.

ii.

19

ff.,

LXX.;
off.

ib.

is

probably modelled on the Greek of

Isa. xi.

There remains one Alexandrian Jewish writer, the greatest of the succession, whose extant works happily are
4.

numerous and throw abundant
the Septuagint at Alexandria.
Philo's literary
life

light

on the

literary use

of

probably coincided as nearly as possible

with the
1

first

forty or five

and

forty years of the first century

See Edersheim in Wace's Apocr. ii. p. 26. Cf. A. Deissmann in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphett, Abfassungszeit wird man den Zeitraum von Pompejus
2

"als p. 150: bis Vespasian

annehmen

dlirfen."

I

Use of the
A.D.; in

LXX.

by non- Christian Hellenists.

373

40 A.D. he could speak of himself as already an old

man\
Thus
his

but his literary activity was not yet at an end, as ap-

pears from his account of the embassy to
the evidence

Rome

in that year.

of his writings belongs to a period just

antecedent to the

rise of the earliest Christian literature,

and

numerous quotations enable us
it

to

form a

fair

idea of the

condition of the text of the lxx. in Alexandrian copies shortly
before

passed into the hands of the Church.

The following list of Philo's works may be useful for referCohn and Wendland's order is followed so far as their ence. edition has been published.
A.

Exegetical works.
(ii.
i

allegoriae
sacrificiis

iii.

19).

De opificio mmidi (Gen. i.). Legum De Cherubin etc. (iii. 24 — iv. i). De
(iv.

De posteritate Caini (iv. 16 — 26). De gigantibus (vi. — 4). Quod Dens sit iinmutabilis (vi. 4 — 12). De agrictiltitra (ix. 20). De piantatione Noe (ix. 20). De ebrietate (ix. 21 De sobrietate (ix. 24). De confiisione 23). lingiiariim (xi. —9). De migratione Abrahami (xii. —6). Quis rerum divinarum /teres (xv.), De congressu guaeretidae De fiiga et inventione (xvi. 6 eruditionis gratia (xvi. — 6). De somniis De 7nutatione nominum (xvii. 22). 14). De Abrahamo. De (xxviii. 12 ff., xxxi 11 — 13, xxxvii., xl., xli.). De vita Moysis. De decalogo. De circiuncisione. Joseplio. De monarchia. De praemiis sacerdotum. De victimis. De victimas offerentibits. De 7nercede meretricis. De specialibus De legibus (3rd — loth commandments of the Decalogue). iudice. De iiistitia. De creatioiie priiicipiun. De tribiis virtutibus. De poenitentia. De praemiis et poenis. De execrainsidiari soleat
(iv.
i

Abelis

et

3

Caini
15).

2

f.).

Qiiod deterius poiiori


i

i

i

i

i.,

ii.

Exodn77i'^-.

Qnaestio7ies et soIntio7ies (i) i7i Ge7iesi77i^ (2) in De 7iobilitate. Quod B. Philosophical works. 077i7iis probus liber sit. De vita C07ite77iplativa. De i7icorruptibilitate 77iii7idi. De provide7itia. De ratio7ie a7ii77ialin77i. De /;/ Flaccimi. De legatio7ie ad 77iu7ido. C. Political- works.
tiojiibus.
Caiii77i.

In his exegetical writings Philo quotes the lxx. directly,

announcing each
^

citation
28.

by a formula such as

^,
ff.,

ctTrev,

Leg.

ad

Cai.

i.

these see J. R. Harris, Fragrnents of Phih, p. 11 Conybeare, Expositor, iv. iv. p. 456 ff.
^

On

and F. C.

374

Use of the

Xcyci, XeyeraL,

this

In or some more elaborate phrased way he reproduces a considerable portion of the Greek

,
and

LXX.

by non-CJiristiaii Hellenists.

text of the Pentateuch, as well as a few passages

from Joshua,

Kingdoms, i Chronicles, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, His Greek is, on Jeremiah, and some of the minor Prophets. whole, clearly that of the Alexandrian version, which he the regarded as the work of men divinely qualified for their taskl Nevertheless his quotations often differ from the Greek of the LXX., as it is found in our extant IMSS., or in the oldest and
Judges,
I,

3

best of them.
5.

The

task

of comparing Philo's

quotations with
C. F.

the

LXX. has been undertaken in

Germany by

Hornemann

and C.

Siegfried,

in

England more recently by Professor

Ryle; and from these investigations the student may derive
a general acquaintance with the subject, although even the
latest of

them

Philo's works,

completion.
to

will need revision when the critical edition of now in course of being published, has reached The following specimens will shew the extent

which Philo departs from the lxx.
iv. 21 ovtos earl vi. 14 (LXX., 6 .), {voaaias seniel LXX.). ix. 25 voLas voaaias noL-qaeis earai, and SO Philo, KcCis olKiTr\s hovkos hovkwv eVrai (LXX. tt. XV. 18 €s ii. 225. 20). 2^)*. xviii. 12 yiyove (lxx. om. (LXX. omit evd. and so Philo once, iii. 184. 28). es evXoyos (so Philo, apparently^: LXX. oi< Exod. iv. 10 ovK (LXX. XV. ly (Is LKavos (). (LXX., 6 XX. 23 els Lev. xix. (LXX., xxiii. 2 /xerct avTols). and SO Philo ii. 1 52. 8). (:ipes (LXX., . 23 (LXX. xxi. 16 Deut. viii. 18 AF, and these pohoTTj (lxx., readings are found as variants in Phil. i. 209. 4).
ii.

Gen.
6

7 els

Karabei^as

"^

(LXX.

els

,
.).

. )^.

€5


this

(€^

€€
-

^

, ) 8)
,

^^ € € ).

.).

- Cf. vit. Mays. p. xlv.f. 6, 7. see Nestle, Ztir iieueti Philo- Atisgabe in 1900, Dr Nestle informs me that cod. 75 often agrees with Philo. p. 259. * See Nestle, i?/. cit., p. 270. ^ See above, p. 371. 1

Cf. Ryle,

/,

3

On

$,

Use of the

LXX.
who
is

by non-Christian Hellenists.
at the pains to

375

The

student

examine the readings

some of them may be merely recensional, or even due to slips of memory, the greater part imply a different rendering of the Hebrew, or even in some cases a different Hebrew text from that which is presupposed by the lxx. (Gen. vi. 14, Deut. viii. 18), whilst in others we
given above,
find that while

seem
25),

to

have a conflation of two renderings (Gen.
is

iv.

21,

ix.

one of which

preserved in

all

extant

MSS.

of the lxx.,

while the other agrees
the

more nearly with the Hebrew.
the

When

MSS. of

the lxx. are at variance, Philo inclines on the

whole to Cod.
marked.

B\
in

but

preponderance

is

not strongly

Exodus Deuteronomy, he agrees with against one or more of the other uncials sixty times, while
fifty-two places

Thus

in

he takes sides against B.

It

has been observed

that in several instances where Philo opposes the

witness of the uncials, he goes with Lucian;

;
Tois

Deut.

xii.

8

,

xxxii.

4.

+ iv

.

combined
xviii. 5

e.g.

Lev.

Besides substantial variants, Philo's quotations shew

many
Thus

departures from the lxx. which
defects of
(a)
(^)

may be

ascribed to inaccuracy,
citing.

memory, or the

writer's

method of

he omits certain words with the view of abbreviating; he substitutes for a portion of his text a gloss or other
(c)

explanatory matter of his own;

he exchanges Hebraisms
for others in accord-

and words or phrases which offend him
ance with a correct
literary style; (d)

he forms a fresh sentence

out of two or more different contexts.
E.g. (a) Gen. xxiv. 20 (LXX.,

8.
xxviii. 13

).^ ^
{b)

(LXX.
1.

y^

(v.

yrjv)

€'

)
eVl

Num.

(€ .
V.

eVi
2

vdpevaaro
e/c

(c)

{

+ €'

Gen. LXX.)

^ is wanting, Philo shews on the In Genesis i. xlvi. 27, where whole a similar preference for the text represented by D. The figures, which are Dr Ryle's, are based on Mangey's text, but the new edition, so

far as

examined, gives very similar

results.

37^

Use of the

(
The

. '

LXX.
Gen.

by non-Christian Hellenists.
xvii.

{d)

l+xxxv.
(Phil.

II iyo)
iii.

6.

(
4

Oeos aos- eyco

^•)•

majority

of Philo's

quotations

from the lxx.

are

modified in one or other of these ways.

Philo entertained

the highest veneration for the Jewish canon, especially for the law, which he regarded as a body of Divine oracles^;
his respect for the

and
in

Alexandrian \^ersion was
the x^uthorised Version
in

at least as great
is

as

that

with which

regarded

England, and Luther's Aversion

Germany.

Nevertheless he

did not scruple to quote his text freely, changing words at
pleasure,

and sometimes mingling interpretation with
dealing with
a
source,
to

citation.
its

This method of
authority,

however high

was probably not peculiar
have occasion to observe

Philo, but a literary

habit which he shared with other Jewish writers of his age^

We

shall

it

again

when we consider
Testament.

the use of the lxx. by the writers of the
6.

New

tinian Jew, Flavius Josephus,
istic literature in

The Alexandrian Version was also used by the Paleswho represents Jewish Hellenthe generation which followed Philo.

He

was

born
(a.d.

at

Jerusalem within the lifetime of the great Alexandrian He was descended from a priestly family^; 8). 37

his early education familiarised

Rabbis,
thought;
of
the

him with the learning of the and the opinions of the great schools of Jewish
in

his

nineteenth year he was enrolled a

member
the
to

sect

Jewish War, was written
translate
(c.

it

Ap.

i.

9

ties

of the
^

Jews
Cf.

€/ ). -), ^ /' / ^
of the

Pharisees^
in

His

earliest

work, on

Aramaic ^ and when he desired

into Greek, he was constrained to seek assistance

<

But the Antiqui-

(at

See Ryle,

p. xvi.

fif.

2
3
^

B.

C.

B.

iv. p.

387^
^

Vit. I.

Ih. 2.

B. J. prooeni.

i

?

[sc.

yXuaarj]

.

Use of the

LXX.

by non-Christian Hellenists.
in a.d.

377

which appear to have been completed
original

93

4,

form an

Greek work which, so
In
it

far as

we know, was composed
Ant.
\.

without material help.
the

Hebrew records
I

for the benefit of Hellenic readers:

proem.

ravjiqv

]

Trepte^ctv

.

oXltcv

<

His chief source, therefore, was the Hebrew Bible, with which he was doubtless acquainted from boyhood \ Nevertheless,

"^ ^^, '
'
'

Josephus professes to interpret

€)( ^,
\
Antiquities that the

yap

ap^aLoXoylav

'•^-

there

is

ample evidence
for

in the

writer

knew and,

the

purpose

of his

work,

used the
like Philo,

Alexandrian Greek version.

He

does not, indeed,

quote formally either from the Hebrew or from the Greek,
but he shews a knowledge of both.

iii.

.../ ) ' ' ^.. ''
{a)

His indebtedness to the lxx. appears
interprets proper

in a variety of ways.

He
I.

names
(v.
1.

LXX.
20);

e.g.

Ant.
I

I.

I.

2

...

...
clttol

as they are interpreted

by the
iii.

(Gen.
iv.

3

narrative frequently follows a

^.
2.
I.

(Gen.

i);

6

yap
15);
V.

.'
. .

(Exod.

xvi.

10.

(

Regn.

i.

Heb.
e.g.
ix.

text different

2). () His from the M.T.,
i

but represented by the lxx.;

Ant.
2 2,

vi.

4.

(
^^
"'"'^Di
vi.

Regn.
Aoiqyos
g,

0L
6

73)
(
3•>*^

€8-^

vi.

II.

4
1 3,

("^^3)

12.

.
^

(
2.
I

Regn.

^
Temple:

€€...
FiV.

.

4

'

'%

Regn.

xix.

01

'?-1i<i^-n?rbi;

-^ ^^
iv.

He possessed a copy of the saci-ed books which

the spoils of the
iepuiv

[] '\

^) . .
iypyopvav
(cf 2
;

Regn.
5•

6 LXX.
6

) ?
;

3

^(^^^
Tirou...

Titus granted him from

75

37^
(c)

Use of the

LXX,

by non-Christian Hellenists.

29...€/3€ (2 Regn. viii.7, LXX. ;/\^^).
own words
the story of the

Whilst retailing in his

Hebrew

records, he falls from time to time into the peculiar phrase-

ology of the Alexandrian version.
this evident.
A/it.
i.

A
i ff.),

few examples
cv apxfj

€^€
Xlv

ovpavov

. ' .€ , €
i

(Gen.
.

i.

yrjv.

.yeveaOaL

re

..

'

}€
.
g

/
^-

will

make
6

Oeos

^...

€7€...

.

.

3 (Gen.

/?\
I

^ / / / ' /' ,/
avr;p

^ ....
/
7^
28)

xlvi.

^^ , ^ /. ^
i.

. ^
.
(^/)

'.

18.

7

(Gen.

[.

2.

2

(Gen.

. //'
xxvii.

,
f.)

/-

30)

23

f.)

4•

(Gen. xxxix.

)

.

6.

(Gen.

xli.

45)

7poy6p€v€v

'ovovvov...ay€aL

^.. .'/^ /.
^'
i

yap

.

7•

5

(Gen.

There

is

evidence to shew that Josephus used
in a

Esdras, which

is

known only

Greek form, and the Book
Esdras.

of Esther with the Greek additions,
(i

Ant.

xi.

Esdr.

ii.

3

f.)

^',

,

'^ 2/
(
Esdr.
2

.

21,

cf.

2

Esdr.

iv.

17)

—8 =
8
1
fif.

1

Esdr.

iii.

2/
iv.

. /? , ^'/
xi.

^
i.

i

6

2.

2

//?79
xi.

'.

3•
xi.

Esthei'.
f.

Ant.

xi.

6.

6

= Esth. B;

6.

=

C,

D;

xi.

6.

12

=

E.

The

first

Book of Maccabees
made by

Mr

For some of these instances I am indebted to a collation C. G. Wright for the Editors of the larger LXX.

Use of the

LXX.

by non-CJiristian Hellenists.
in its

379

was also known to Josephus
lies

his account of the

translation

Greek form\ which underwars, just as the Greek of the canonical books is used in the earlier books

Maccabean

of the Antiquities.

A

recent

examination,

by A. Mez, of

Basle',

into
v.

the
vii.

Biblical text

has led to

presupposed by Josephus' history in Ant. the following results, which are important
(i)

for the

criticism of the lxx.

The Josephus

text of the lxx. has
(2)
(3)
i, 2

no
it

affinity

with the characteristic text of cod. B.

In Joshua

generally approximates to the text of

0i.

In Judges

it is
it

frequently, but not constantly, Lucianic; in
fall

agrees with Lucian so closely as to

into the

Kingdoms same omisthan

sions

and misconceptions; only
it

in four instances, other

proper names, does

contravene a

Lucianic reading, and

three of these are numerical differences, whilst in the fourth
'

Lucian

'

appears to have undergone correction, and the read-

ing of Josephus survives in cod. A.
far as

These

investigations, so

they go, point to a probability that in these books the
first

Greek Bible of Palestine during the second half of the

century presented a text not very remote from that of the recension which emanated from Antioch early in the fourth.

While Philo the Alexandrian supports on the whole the
to

text

of our oldest uncial cod. B, Josephus the Palestinian seems

have followed that of an

'

Urlucian.'

before Philo: Text: C. J. Freudenthal, Hellenistische Stiidien i., ii. (Breslau, 1875). Cf. Susemihl, Geschichte der griech. Littei'atur in dej' Alexandrinerzeit^ ii. p. 356 ff. E. Schiirer, Geschichte des jiidischen Volkes^, iii. p. 345 ff. Philo: Text L. Cohn and P. Wendland, Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt (Berlin, vol. i. 1896; vol. ii. ^897; vol. iii. 1898 in progress). Cf. C. F. Hornemann, Specime?i exercitationuin criticarum in versionem LXX. interpretum ex Philone (Gottingen, 1773); C. Siegfried, Philo und der iiberlieferte Text
Hellenistic writers

Literature.

MuUer, Fragfnenta historica Graeca

iii.

;

:

1 ^

Bloch, Die Quellen d. Fl. Josephus, Die Bibel des Josephtis, p. 79 ff.

p. 8

ff.

38
der
522

Use of the

LXX.

by noii- Christian Hellenists.

(in Z. f. wiss. Theologie, 1873, pp. 217 ff., 411 ff., A. Edersheim in D. C. B. iv. p. 357 ff. E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford, 1889), p. 140 ff.; F. C. Conyff.);
;

LXX.

beare, in Expositor., 1891 p. 456 ff., and yewish Q. R., 1893, H. E. Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture p. 246 ff., 1896, p. 88 ff. (London, 1895); P• Wendland, in Philologus 1898, p. 283 ff. Sibyllines. Text: A. Rzach, (9nz<:i//<2 6V<5j////«^, Vienna, 189 1.
;

Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen., p. 177 ff. Josephus. Text: B. Niese, Fl. yosephi opera {^QxWn^ 1887 Cf. E. Schiirer^, E. T. i. i. p. jy^.; A. Edersheim in 1895). D. C. B. iii. p. 441 ff.; C. Siegfried in Stade's Z.f. d. ATliche H. Bloch, Die Quellen des Fl. Wissenschaft, 1883, p. 32 ff. yosephiis in seiner Archdologia (Leipzig, 1879); A. Mez, Die Bibel des yosephus untersucht fiir Buck v. vii. der Archdologia
Cf. F. Blass in
;

(Basle, 1895).

I

CHAPTER

11.

Quotations from the lxx. Testament.
I.

in

the

New

The

writings of the

New Testament

were the work of

some nine

authors, of different nationalities

and antecedents.

Six of them, according to the traditional belief, were Palestinian Jews; a seventh,
tage,'

though 'a Hebrew of Hebrew paren-

belonged by birth to the Dispersion of Asia Minor; of the remaining two, one was possibly a Gentile from Antioch,

and the other a

'

Hellenist

with

Alexandrian

proclivities.'

Some

Greek Old Testament may reasonably be expected in a collection of books having so complex an origin. With few exceptions, the books of the New Testament abound in references to the Old Testament and in quotations from it. An exhaustive list of these may be seen at the end of Westcott and Hort's New Testa7nent in Greek (Text, p. 581 ff.), and in their text the corresponding passages are distinguished by the use of a small uncial type. But this
diversity of practice as to the literary use of the

device,

though otherwise
to

admirable \ does not enable
citations

the

student

distinguish
;

direct

from mere allusions
is

and reminiscences
table of passages

and

as

the distinction

important for

our present purpose, we will begin by placing before him a
in the

Old Testament which are formally
writers.
p.

quoted by

New Testament
^

See below,

403•

382

Quotations from the

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.

(Hebrews); (2) those which, though not announced by a formula, appear from the context to be intended as quotations, or agree verbatim with some context in the O.

] () €
i.

By passages formally cited we understand (i) those which ydyovev tva are cited with an introductory formula, such as yeypaTTTat, or yeypanTac or (Mt.),
simply (Mt.,

Mc, Lc, Paul), yeypappivov (Jo.), ypa(^r] (Jo., Paul), or Xeyei or clnev, Xeyet or etVfr

^
aytov

Tad/e of O. T. passages quoted hi the N. T.
Gen.
27
2 7
(v. 2)

Mt.

ii.

24
V.

24
I

xii.

3^ (xxii. 18)
XV.
5

6
I3f.
xvii. 5 xviii. 10, 14

xxi. 10

12
xxii. i6f.

Exod.

XXV. 23 xlvii. 31 ii. 14
iii.

5

ff.

ix.

16

xii.
.

46 (Num.
12
18

ix.

12, Ps.

xxxiii. 20)

xiii.

xvi. 4, 15 (Ps. Ixxvii, 24)
xix. 13

XX. 12

— i7(Deut.v.

i6ff.)

xxi. 16 (17)

Quotations from the
Exod.

LXX.

in

tJie

Neiu Testament.

383

384
Psalm

Quotations from the

LXX.

in the

New

Testament,

Quotations from the
Hos.

LXX.

in

tJie

New

Testament.

385

386
Isa.

Quotations from the
lii.

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.

15
I

Rom.

liii.

4
5f. 7f.

12
liv.
I

Iv. Ivi.

3 7

Mt.

xxi.

M, Mc.

xi.

17, Lc.

Quotations from the
Mt.

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.

387

Isa.

9

9 1

Quotations from

tlie

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.

389

(4)

Quotations in the Catholic Epistles.
Lev.
xix. 18

James

ii.

8
II

1

23 iv. 6 Peter i. 24 f, ii. 6 ill. 10
iv.

Exod. Gen.
Prov.
Isa.

XX.
iii.

1

3

f.

XV. 6
xl.

34 6


— 17

— 12

xxviii. 16

Ps.

xxxiii. 12
xi.
liv.

18

Prov.
Ps.

31

V. 7

23
1

2

Peter

ii.

22

Jude

9

Prov. Zech.

xxvi.
iii.

2

(5)

Quotations in the Epistles of St Paul.
Hab.

Rom.

i.

17

ii.

24 iii. 4
10


22

Ii

20
iv. 3,

7f.

17 18
vii.

7

viii.

36

ix.

7

9
12 13
15 17

26
27 29
?>?>

X.

6

15

16 18

19

20 f.

1

390
Rom.

Quotations from the
xi.
I
f.

LXX. m
Ps.

the

New

Testament.

8

9 26

f.

34
xii.

f.

2of.

xiii.

9
1

xiv.

XV. 3

9 lO
II

12 21
1

Cor.

i.

19 31

11.9
iii.

19

20
vi.

16

ix.

9
7

X.

26
xiv. 21

XV. 32

45 54
2 Cor.
iv.

f.

vi.

13 2

16
viii.
ix.

ff.

15

9
17 16

X.

Gal.

ii.

iii.

6
8

10
II

12
iv.

13 27

30
V.

Eph.

iv.

14 8

25

Ps.

392

Quotations from the
^Ic.

LXX.
and Lc.

in the
to

New

Testament.

which are shared by
(2)

the exclusion of Mt.

Of the

12 quotations in the Fourth Gospel, 3 only are also

in the Synoptists. (3) The 23 quotations in the Acts occur almost exclusively in the speeches. (4) The Johannine Epistles

do not quote the O. T.
71 are in the four
first

at

all,

and the other Catholic Epistles
(5)

contain few direct citations.

Epistles

Of 78 quotations in St Paul, (Romans 42, i 2 Corinthians

19, Galatians 10); there are

none

in the Epistles of the

Roman
five.

captivity, with
(6)

the

exception of Ephesians, which has

The

Epistle to the

Hebrews quotes 28
its

passages, of which
(7)

21 are not cited in any other N. T. writing^
lypse does not quote, but

The Apoca-

language

is full

of O. T. phrase-

ology to an extent unparalleled in the other books.
3.

Hitherto no account has been taken of the relation
to the

which the N. T. quotations bear

Alexandrian version,

although for the sake of convenience the references to the

O. T. have been given according to the order and numeration
of the Greek Bible.
further question;

We may now
it

address ourselves to this

and

may

at

once be said that every part of

the N. T. affords evidence of a knowledge of the lxx., and
that a great majority of the passages cited from the O. T. are

agreement with the Greek version. It is calculated by one writer on the subject that, while the N. T. differs from the Massoretic text in 212 citations, it departs from the lxx.
in general
in

185^;

and by another
is

that

"not more than

fifty"

of the

citations "materially differ

from the lxx.""'

On

either estimate

the LXX.

the principal source from which the writers of the
their O. T. quotations.

N. T. derived
the evidence.

More may be

learnt by patiently examining the details of
in full, but

This cannot be done here
^

we may

2
3

Westcott, Hebrews, p. 473. Turpie, O.T. in the N., p. 267.
Grinfield, Apology for the

LXX.

^

p. 37.

Quotations from the
point out the

LXX.
to be

in the

New
in

Testament.

393

method

pursued

such an investigation,

and

its

chief results.
writings

Each group of the N. T.
separately.
{a)

must be interrogated
in

Beginning with the Synoptic Gospels, we
quotations
partly
to the

observe

that

the

occur

narratives

or

dialogue which are

common

Synoptists or to two of
writer.

them, and are partly due to the individual
these two classes of quotations there
Citations belonging to the
is

Between
contrast.

a

marked

common
or

narrative, or to sayings

reported

by

all

the

Synoptists,

to

two of them, with
differences

few exceptions adhere closely to

the lxx., the

being only textual or in the way of omission.

Some examples will make this clear, (i) Citations common to Mt., Mc, Lc. Alt. xxi. i3 = Mc. xi. i7 Lc. xix. 46 = LXX., Mc. Mt. xxi. 42 = Mc. xii. 10= Lc. xx. alone completing the verse. Mt. xxii. 37 = Mc. xii. 17 = LXX., Lc. omitting Mt. xxii. 39= Mc. xii. 29f. = Lc. X. 27*^ = LXX., with variants^. 3i = Lc. X. 27^ = LXX. Mt. xxii. 44= Mc. xii. 36 = Lc. xx. 42 f.,:^ in Mt., Mc. LXX. with the variant (2) Citations common to Mt., Mc. Mt. XV. 4=Mc. vii. 10 = LXX., cod. A. Mt. xv. 8f.= Mc. vii. 6 = LXX., with variants^. Mt. xix.5 f = Mc. x. 6if. = LXX., Mt. xxiv. i5 = Mc. xiii. 14 = Mc. omitting = LXX. and Th. Mt. xxvi. 31 = Mc. xiv. 27 (omitting LXX., cod. A, with one important variant not found in any MS. has quite a different text^. (3) Citations of the LXX. cod. common to Mt., Lc. Mt. iv. 4=Lc. iv. 4 = LXX., Lc. omitting Mt. iv. 6=Lc. iv. lof. = lxx., the second half of the quotation. is omitted by Mt. and in except that the clause part by Lc. Mt. iv. 7 = Lc. iv. 12 = LXX. Mt. iv. 10 = Lc. iv. 8 = LXX., cod. A.
;

^8
.
xv. 8
f.,
f.

=

.

)

Thus
LXX.
the

it

appears that of 14 quotations which belong to

this

class only

two (Mt.

xxvi. 31)

depart widely from the

common
On

But when we turn from the quotations which belong to narrative to those which are peculiar to one of

the Synoptists, the results are very different.
1

-

Hatch,

these see Hatch, Essays, p. 104, and the writer's St op. cit., p. 177 f.

Mark,

p. 255.

3

St Mark, p. 318

394

Quotations from the

LXX.
8,

in the

Nczv Testament.

In Mt. there are i6 quotations which are not to be found in

Mc. or Lc. (Mt.
ix.

i.

23,

ii.

6, 15,

iv.

15

f.,

Of 14 f., 35, xxi. 4 f., 16, xxvai. gf.)• these 4 (v. 38, ix. 13, xiii. 14 f., xxi. 16) are in the words of the LXX. with slight variants; 4 exhibit important variants, and the remaining 7 bear little or no resemblance to the Alexandrian Greeks Neither Mc. nor Lc. has any series of independent quotations; Mc. ix. 48, xii. 32 are from the LXX., but shew affinities to the text of cod. Lc. iv. 18 f. difters from the LXX. in important particulars.
I3
7,
xii.

= xii.

v. y^,, 38, 43, viii.

17,

iSfif.,

xiii,

A

;

It

may be asked whether
oldest
type,

the quotations in the Synoptists

which do not agree with our present text of the LXX., or with
its

relatively

imply the use of another Greek
carefully
It

version.
it is

Before an answer to this question can be attempted,

necessary to distinguish
variation.

between the causes
to {a) loose

which have produced
citation,

may be due

or to {b) the substitution of a gloss for the precise
to quote, or to
{c)

words which the writer professes
was thought
of passages
to

a desire to
it

adapt a prophetic context to the circumstances under which

have been

fulfilled,

or to {d) the fusing together

drawn from

different contexts.

Of

the variations

which cannot be ascribed to one or other of these causes,

some

are

{e)

recensional, whilst others are (/) translational,
original,

and imply an independent use of the
Evangelist, or by the author of

whether by the
of excerpts

some

collection

which he employed.

The following may be taken as specimens of these types of variation, {b) Mt. ii. 6, xxvii. gf. {c) Mt. {a) Mt. ii. 18, xxi. 4 f ii. 15 (f) Mt. xii. 18 ff., Mc. xii. 29 f.; (/) Mt. xiii. {d) Lc. iv. 18 f. 35^ But more than one cause of divergence may have been at work in the same quotation, and it is not always easy to decide which is paramount; e.g. in Mt. ii. 15 the substitution of may be due either to the Evangelist's for desire to adapt the prophecy to the event, or to a correction of
.

;

;

;

;

the LXX. from the Heb. (^^?^)•

The

three last-named causes of variation need to be con-

sidered at

some
^

length.

Cf. Sir J. C.

Hawkins, Hor. Syn.,

p.

123

ff.

^

Quotations from the
(i)

LXX.
xxi.

in the

New

Testament.
are

395

A

few of

the

Synoptic
4
f.,

quotations
is

composite.
ix.

E.g. Mt.

which

9,

opens with a clause from

Isa. Ixii.
is

1 1

2touF

.).

Lc.

iv.

18

f.,

which
i

professedly an extract

from a synagogue lesson
that context a clause
iv

'.
2 f,

Isa. Ixi.
Isa.

if.,

inserts in the heart of

from

Iviii.

6

Still

more remarkable
iii.

(7€ manifestly

mainly from Zech.
(eiVare
rrj

is

the fusion in

Mc.

i.

),
(2)

where, under the heading

yiypaiTTai iv
Isa. xl.

we

find Mai.

i

+

3^

Here
using

the parallel

passages in

Mt.,

Lc, quote
xi.

Isaiah
vii.

only,
27).

Malachi in

another context (Mt.

10, Lc.

There

is

a considerable weight of evidence in favour

of the belief that the Evangelists

employed a recension of
of cod.

the LXX. which

came nearer
uncial B.

to the text

A

than to

that of our oldest

This point has been recently

handled

in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschriftf. Wissenschaftliche Theologie^,

by Dr W. Staerk, who shews that the witness of the N. T. almost invariably goes with codd. «AF and Lucian against the Vatican
MS., and that
It
its

agreement with cod.
T.'*;

A

is

especially close

may

of course be argued that the text of these authorities

has been influenced by the N.

but the fact that a similar

tendency
able

is

noticeable in Josephus, and to a less extent in
Still

Philo, goes far to discount this objection.
is

more remarkhave been
i:

the occasional tendency in N. T. quotations to support

Theodotion against the lxx.^
given already; we
Mt.

Some
xii.

instances

, / ^ '^ €8€ 7] (^ , ? (^ .
/3
-

may add

here Mt.

18

=

Isa. xlii.

LXX.

Th.

6

ttcus

Idov
6

,
'

'

6

. .

1

Sf Mark, p.
xxxvi., p. 97 Cf. p. 48.

2.
f.

In
Cf.

iios.

xxxv., xxxvi., xxxviii.,
ii.

xl.
ff.

^
5

^

Zahn, Einkitun^,

p.

314

396

Quotations from the

LXX.

in

tJie

New

Testament.

Such coincidences lend some probability

to the supposition

that Theodotion's version bears a relation to the recension of

the Alexandrian Greek which was in the hands of the early
Palestinian Church.
(3)

Certain

quotations

in

the

First

Gospel are either
slightly influenced

independent of the lxx., or have been but

by

it.

These require

to

be studied separately, and, as they are

but few, they are printed below and confronted with the lxx.

, 4€,
4^(€
'lov8a
'

Mt.

^ ... -€,. ^ ( ^. ]
ii.

6

yrj

^lov8a,

ei

iv

rois

^,, , (€,
ei

Mic.

V. 2,

4

eivai

e/c

yap

iv

e^

..

ety

\

e^

(B*)iiC(D)

On
above
of

p. 338.

the relation of the LXX. in this passage to the M. T. see answer to different vocalisations

''ST'^5,

but

The Evangelist has put into the mouth are paraphrastic. of the Scribes an interpretation rather than a version of the
prophecy.

,(
15
f.

om

i<*

\(€] +

6^

'\

B^'^AQ

|

e|e-

ei

and

.

.

^^,^ , , ,, • ,
Mt.
iv.

-

Isa. ix.

I f.

odov

',
6

^-

6

\

.

OL

om

*

t<^-^AQ(Aq. Th.)

^

>*]
X^-^AQr

>*' .

,
| |

+

]-\-

fc<*^\\Q

]

pr

Quotations from the

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.

397

Here Mt. differs widely both from LXX. and M. T., yet he has points of agreement with both. The influence of LXX. is seen in -y^ Z., . On the other hand ei'Sei/, agree with The writer quotes from memory, or from a collection of loosely cited testUnonia.

/

,
Mt.
Tas
:

(,

[]

viii.

€. \
eXa'fiev

avros

^
17
is

.. .
\

Isa.

liii.

4

'-

ovtos

tcis

rrepl

68.

Mt.'s version

based upon Heb., from which the LXX. departs.

€€€.

Cf.

Symm.
Mt.

4€

V. 35* iri Mt. follows the LXX. 7'erdat2m, while 35^^ is an independent rendering of the Heb. The departure from the LXX. in the second half of the text is not altogether for the sake of exactness if than is nearer to introduces a conception which has no place in [^"''^^ and in this sense the Greek phrase is practically limited to the N. T. (see Hort on i Pet. i. 20).
;

. ^
xiii.

' €€ €iv

35

Ps. Ixxvii. 2

+

N*CD

•. '
iv

--

^ ... ^, € , .
Mt.
xxvii. gf.i

^3
\

,
13

\

aypov

^ ' , \ . \ ...\ Zach.
xi.

etVei/

*""'"^

.
el

(

i<

B*f°^'t<AQ

Mt. has re-arranged this passage, and given its sense, without regard to the order or construction of the original. In doing this he has abandoned the LXX. altogether, and approximates cf. Aq. to the Heb.
^

Mt. ascribes
1.

Zach.

c.

and

.
;

.

this

prophecy

to

The

slip

Jeremiah is probably due to a confusion between
:

Jer. xviii. 2.

39S

Quotations from the
five

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.
Gospel has

In these

passages the compiler of the

first

more

or less distinctly

thrown
it

off the

yoke of the Alexandrian

version and substituted for

a paraphrase, or an independent

rendering from

the

Hebrew.

But our evidence does not

encourage the behef that the Evangelist used or knew another

complete Greek version of the Old Testament, or of any
particular book.
It is to

be observed that he uses
if

this liberty

only in quotations which proceed from himself,
the references to the O. T. in the
V.

we except Sermon on the Mount (Mt.

21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43)

which are hardly of the nature of
distinguishes
that they purport only to

strict citations;

the formula ippWy

them from
(^)

that class,

and suggests

?

give the general sense.

The Fourth Gospel quotes
ii.

the lxx. verbatim^ or with
xii.

slight variants, in cc.

17,

x.

34,

38, xix.

24,

^6

\

and
23,

more
takes

freely in

vi.

31, 45, xv. 25.
less

In other places the author
course:
e.g.


Mt.

a

more
Isa. xl.

or
3

independent
TTOtetre

in

i.

quoting

he writes eu^vrare
Lc.
in

•^
xii.

. . .,
3'

^
40, Isa.
vi.

for crot(cf.,

iii.

paraphrased

M.T.

,
^Ic.

i.

3,

iii.

4);

9,

10

is

which agrees neither with the lxx. nor
eh ov
10,

;

in xix. 37

rendering of Zach.

xii.

Palestine, since ct? oV
(cf.

Aq.,
{c)

Symm., and Apoc.

^
i.

€$€€

Avith

is

a non-Septuagintal
in

which was perhaps current

appears also in Theodotion

7).

The

quotations from the O. T. in the Acts are taken

from the lxx. exclusively. With the exception of the A few points in c. viii. 32 \ they occur only in the speeches.
deserve special notice.

followed against M.T.
larly in
xiii.

LXX.

for
1

" ".

34 (=

Isa. Iv. 3)

{{} ', €
In
vii.

43 (=
or

Amos

v.

26) the lxx.
|•1*3).

is

£H
is

Simi-

read with the

C.

xiii.

22

is

a conflation of Ps. Ixxxviii.

An

exact citation, with one or two variants of the

A

type.

Quotations from the
2i+lxxi.

LXX.
xiii.

in the
Isa.

New
xliv.

Testament.
2%.

which

of free citation

separate study.

3

Acts XV,

, ,
20+1 Regn.
is

399
16
if.,

14 +

C. xv.
ol

introduced by the formula

presents a remarkable instance
conflation,

accompanied by

which

calls

for

i6ff.

(< €,, \

\

Aaveld

^ €.\( € 7•\\
Jer. xii.
...

15+Amos

ix.

11

f

Aaveld

''
Kuptoj

*

]- ]eV
Xe'yet

,

*

*

^.

, .
James

'4

, ,-\
'
eVi-

€71...

-

'

Xe'-yei

ACD

]-{- ']-^|

^*

The combination in this quotation of looseness with close adherence to the LXX. even where it is furthest from the Heb.
(e.g. in

.)

is

significant, especially

when

it is

remembered
(d)

that the speaker

is

St

of Jerusalem.

The

Catholic Epistles use the lxx. when they quote

the O.T. expressly,
to the
I

Alexandrian Greek.
i.

and with some exceptions keep Thus Jas. ii. 8, ii^

fairly close

23,
i

iv.
ii.

6,

Pet.

differs

24 ^ iv. 18, V. 5. are substantially exact, from the lxx. of Isa. xxviii. 16. i Pet.
Ps. xxxiii.

Pet.

6

iii.

10

ff.,

an

unacknowledged extract from

the context by a slight change in the construction, but other-

wise generally follows the lxx.
for
1

:

^

12

ff.,

is

adapted to

ISeiv
is

.,

. .

probably

On
Cf.

this

2

Mc.

2

On

reading see W. H.-, Azotes on select readings, p. 96. X. 19, Lc. xviii. 20. the few variants in this passage see Hort, St Peter, p. 93.

400
a
2
slip,

Quotatio7ts from the

LXX.
Il)

in the

shewing that the writer was quoting from memory.
ii.

Pet.

22

(= Prov.

xxvi.

€^€
iavTov
(e)

is

nearer to the

eyaeroi/,

and appears

to be

inl Heb. than . an independent rendering.

^)
New
4,
iv.

Testament.
In

cVt

More than

half of the direct quotations from the O.T,

in the

Epistles of St Paul are taken from the lxx. without

material change
viii.

(Rom.
13,

i.

17,

ii.

24,

iii.

7

f.,

18,
f.,

vii.

7,
f.,

36,

ix.

7, 12,
f.,

15, 26, X. off., 16,

i8j

19,
i

20
Cor.
15,

xi.

26

34

f.,

xii.

20

xiii. 9,

xv. 3,9, 10, 11, 12, 21;
iv.

iii.

20,

vi.

16, X.
iii.

7,

26, XV. 32; 2 Cor.
12,
iv.

13, vi.
iv.

2,

viii.

ix.
ii.

9; Gal.
19).

smaller proportion shew important variants
ii.

...

ix.

,
6,

II,

27, v. 14;

Eph.
LXX.;

26;

2

Tim.
tou

A
Gal.

16

for

€$€l

for ev€K€v

'

27

LXX.;


V.

, , ^-<€
.,
iirl
I

^" ^,
rfj

(Rom.

iii.

20=

ix.

9

for
;

LXX.

ix.

17

and
Trj<;

/
€15
yfj's;
^^'^'-

.,.
for
1 1

€$€
^
iii.

xiv.


8

LXX.';
for

for

Oeov

Cor.

i.

19

a.€yj

for

for

at

(cf.

)<;
for
1°,

20) for
for

LXX.;

€/3€ .

.

ev
;

om.

2°;

cf.

Mt. xix. 5

for

.

In other passages St Paul departs

.
LXX.

'
yrj<i

LXX.; Gal.
iii.

LXX.;

13
8
iv.

Eph.

iv.

€<; /,
25

LXX.;

^

V.

31

for ev€K€v .,
7
f,
;

f.,

Mc.

X.

vi.

3

eay

yivrj).
still

further from

the

LXX., quoting freely, or paraphrasing, or

fusing two distinct

passages into a single citation, or occasionally deserting the

Alexandrian version altogether.
XV. 45, Gal. iv.

Examples of loose quotations

or of paraphrases will be found in

Rom.
2

ix.

27,

xi.

3, 4, i

Cor.
ix.

33,
^

xi. 8, 9,

B^ reads

3

On

this passage, see

.
26
f.;

30; conflation occurs in
I

Rom.
vi.

iii.

10

ff.^,

Cor. xv. 54f.,

Cor.
^

16

fif.

aPois B'^XR*.

above, p. 251

f.

:

Quotations from the

LXX.

in the

New

Testa^nent.

401

The following instances will carried in cases of conflation.
Rom.

\

eV €^.

•ix.

shew how

far reconstruction is

33 Ihov

(

6

iv

Isa. viii.
oxjbe

14

Rom.

xi.

.
€€
€7
I

€, €
.
9

€€ ^, 8

,( €,..\ ]. €7€ ^' ^. €€
rrerpas
xxviii. 16

"^

^^ ^. €

,
f>^<

els

Isa. xxix. 10

€€ ^
Deut. xxix. 4
6

Cor.

,2 , ^. ' ] .. ^] \ €, ^ . € €, , ,,
.
TXeov.
1

^ ^^
34? 8.
f.
;
;

Clem. R.

i.

^
6
if.

\

.

Isa.

Ixiv.

^ ( € .
3 8

['\

'

epya

7

eVt

Cor. XV. 54

Isa.

XXV.

6

eh

Hos.

xiii.

14

;

vae,

;

In some cases a wide departure from the LXX. is probably to be explained by the supposition that the Apostle quotes from

memory; e.g. Rom.
y


^

,€; ,
...

'€

xi. 2

iv

pie,

eevav,

/4€
Xeyei

\
...

3

Regn.

eev

'.,. aeav \
ff•

xix.

14

e-yo)

,.
Aq.
ets

.

4€ iv

...

o've

On

2 Cf. arepebv this passage see Resch, Agi-apha, p. r54ff.

.

Kare-

... aaee

etVei/

CKapyj/av

.
Pet.
*

,
8 (Hort).

.

So Theodotion.

S. S.

26

402

Quotations fro7n the

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.

The following quotation also is probably from memory^, but the Apostle's knowledge of the original has enabled him to improve upon the faulty rendering of the LXX.
I

Cor. xiv. 21
dia.

ykypaTrrai €Tepoy\a)aaoLS iv Xeatv
eV

,
"

(
,

Isa. xxviii. ii

€€
\

€-

erepas•

Xc'-yfi

?.€-

/, 8 ,.,
f.

Theodoii.

aKoveiv.

Jerome, quoting these words from St Paul, rightly adds, videtur iuxta Hebraicum de praesenti sumptum capitulo." Aquila's rendering is remarkably similar, otl iv iTepo-

Quod mihi

ev xeiXeaLv eTepois tion unfortunately is wanting.

.
f.,

The Ep. to the Hebrews is in great part a catena (/) "The text of the quotations of quotations from the lxx.
agrees in the

Lxx.^"

A

considerable

main with some form of the present text of the number of the passages are cited
(i.

exactly, or with only slight variation

13;

iv.

4, V. 6, vi.

The

writer

,
i.

materially from the

37 eav

he sometimes deserts both version and
free paraphrase, or apparently citing

,
13
f.,

5,

8

13;
5
f.,

6

ff.,

viii.

5, xi. 5,

18, 21;

xii.

xiii.

6).

usually follows

the

Heb.

(viii.

8ff.^ x. 5
1

xi.

2

,

lxx. even when they

.

ff.,

5

/ ^).
Sk
(i.

differ

But
20

original, substituting a

from memory
for

€/€€,
interesting

X.
:

3o^,
i.

xii.

19

f.,

26).

Some

of his readings are

in

7

we have

12
ii.

seems
12 9 iv
iii.

xxi.

),
31
f.)
;

Notice also

iii.

and

10

/ €€
for
for
Ps.
ciii. 4.

to be a doublet of

€ ^-*^;

(perhaps after Ps.

. (
6, ix.

in

for

for

^

As
Cf. p. 338•

seems to indicate.

2
3

Westcott, Hebreivs, p. 476.

^

Yet "he nowhere shews any immediate knowledge of the Hebrew
cit.,

text" (Westcott, op.
^
^

p. 479).

Cf.

Rom.

xii. 19.

A* has

irvpbs

\4•

Apparently a stock quotation, current in
(sic) in

this form.

2

.
But

QiLoiations from the
try]
',

t^ART;

xii.

.
15

LXX.
6
for ev

X.

^-)

€6 -,
A
text

in the

New
for

Testament.

403

^^ , ^^^

a corruption supported

even in the lxx. by B*AF^.
In the Epistles, as in the Gospels, the text of the lxx.

which
its

is

employed

inclines to cod.

A
is

rather than to cod. B.

agreement with the

not without exception;

be overlooked.

and there are other elements in the problem which must not As in the Gospels, again, we notice from time
It

to time a preference for Lucianic readings, or for the readings

of Theodotion.
writers

has been reasonably conjectured that the

of the N.T. used a recension which was current in

Palestine, possibly also in iVsia Minor,

supplied

materials

to

Theodotion,

Antiochian Bible, and in the text

and which afterwards and left traces in the represented by cod. A.
for the

We

shall revert to
it

this

subject in a later chapter;
notice the direction to

present

is

enough

to

which the

evidence of the N.T. seems to point.
4.

We

have dealt so

far

with direct quotations.

But
it

in

estimating the influence of the lxx.

upon the N.T.
in

must

not be forgotten that

it

contains almost innumerable references

of a less formal character.

These are

many

cases likely to

escape notice, and

it

is

not the least of the debts which we

owe to the Westcott and Hort text, that attention is called to them by the use of uncial type. They will be found chiefly (a) in the words of our Lord (e.g. Mt. vii. 23 = Lc. xiii. 27, Mc. X. 21, 35 f. = Lc. xii. 52 f., xi. 5 = Lc. vii. 22, xi. 21, 23 = Lc. x. 15, 28 f., xiii. 32 = Mc. iv. 32=Lc. xiii. 19, xvii. ly^Lc. ix. 41, xviii. 16, xxi. 33 = Mc. xii. i = Lc. xx. 9, xxiv. 29 ff. = Mc. xiii. 24fif. = Lc. xxi. 25 ff., xxiv. 39 = Lc. xvii. 27, xxvi.
64

= Mc.
i.

xiv.
xii.

62

= Lc.
in

xxii.

69; Mc.

iv.

29,

vi.

23,

ix.

48, xvi.

19; Lc.

of Lc.

53, xxi. 22, 24, xxiii. 30, 46); (d) in the canticles
;

ii.

(c)

St Stephen's speech, and,

though more

sparsely, in the other speeches of the Acts; (d) in the Epistle

26

404

Quotations from the
^

LXX.

in the

New

Testament.
{e)

of St James

and the

First Epistle of St Peter;

in the

Epistles of St Paul; where, though not so
citations, the allusions to the lxx. are

numerous

as the

more widely

distributed,

occurring in

i,

2

Thessalonians, Philippians and Colossians,

as well as in the great dogmatic Epistles; (/) in the Epistle
to the
xi.

Hebrews
f.,

(ii.

16,

iii.

12

17 f, 28,

xii.

12

5 f,

vi.

7 f,

19 f,

vii.

i if.,

x.

29

f.,

21,

xiii.

11, 20);

in the

Apocalypse, where references to
in every chapter.

and especially {g) the Greek Old Testa-

ment abound
5.

This summary by no means represents the extent of
exerted

the

influence

upon

the

N.T.

by the Alexandrian

Version.
is

The

careful student of the Gospels

and of

St

Paul
the

met

at

every turn by words and phrases which cannot be
in

fully

understood without reference to their earlier use Greek Old Testament. Books which are not quoted

in the

N.T., e.g. the non-canonical books of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus and Maccabees, find echoes there, and not a few of the great theological words which meet us in the Apostolic writings seem to have been prepared for their Christian connotation by employment in the Alexandrian appendix to the Canon'. Not the Old Testament only, but the Alexandrian version of the Old Testament, has left its mark on every part of the New Testament, even in chapters and books where it is not directly
cited^
It is

not too

much

to

say that in

its

literary

form

and expression the New Testament would have been a widely different book had it been written by authors who knew the Old Testament only in the original, or who knew it in a Greek version other than that of the lxx.
Literature.
(Heidelberg,
^
(i.

F. Junius, Sacrorn77t Pat-allelorum
J.

libi'i iii.

1588);

Drusius,

Parallela

Sacra (Franeker,

vSee

The

Mayor, Stja7nes, pp. Ixviii.ff., cxxxix. facts are collected by Dr Ryle in Smith's D.B.-

art.

Apocrypha

pp. 183, 185). ^ See below,

c

iv.

Qnotatio7ts from the
1594); H. Hody, Surenhusius,
17
1

LXX.

hi the

New
p.

Testament,
ff.

405

W.

of quotation 2ised by the Evangelical writers explained and viftdicated (Lonaon, 1789); H. Gough, N. T. Quotations (London, 1855); A. Tholuck, Das A.T. in N.T.—erste Beilage (Gotha, 1836); D. M'^C. Turpie, The Old Testatnent in the New (London, 1868); The New Testament view of the Old (London, 1872); Kautzsch, De Vetefis Testamenti locis a Paulo ap. allegatis (Leipzig, 1869); C. Taylor, The Gospel in the Law (Cambridge, 1869) H. Monnet, Les citations de VAncien Testament dans les Epitres de Saint Paul (Lausanne, 1874); Bohl, Die ATlichen Citate im N.T. (Vienna, 1878); C. H. Toy, Quotations in the New Testament (New York, 1884); E. Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 131 ff.
3);
;

.

Owen,

De ^^ 20 Modes

Bibl. textibus, sive

243

(Oxford, 1705);

(Amsterdam,

(Oxford, 1889); W. Staerk, in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaftliche Theologie, xxxv, xl. A. Clemens, Der Gebrauch des A.T. in den NTliclum Schriften (Giitersloh, 1895)•; H. Volkmar, Die ATlichen Citate bei Paulus (Freiburg in B., 1895); J• C. Hawkins, Horae Synopticae, pp. 123 ff. (Oxford, 1899); W. Dittmar, Vettis Testamentum in Novo \. (Gottingen, 1899); Th. Zahn, Einleitung in das N.T, ii. p. 313 ff., and elsewhere (see Sachregister s. ATliche Citate) (Leipzig, 1899); E. Hiihn, Die ATlichen Citate und Reminiscenzen im N.T. (Tiibingen, 1900). See also the commentaries on particular books of the N.T., e.g. Bp Westcott, Hebrews, p. 469 ff. J. B. Mayor, St fames., p. Ixviii. ff. H. B. Swete, St Mark^ p. Ixx. ff.

:

;

;

CHAPTER

.
in

Quotations from the lxx.
"The

early

Christian Writings.
quotations from the lxx. in the Greek Fathers are
field'."

an almost unworked the remark is still

So wrote Dr Hatch
Indeed, this
field

in 1889,

and

true.

can hardly be
has gone

worked with
before, or a

satisfactory

results

until

the

editor

competent collator has employed himself upon

the

MSS.

of the author

whose quotations

are to be examined.

The

'Apostolic Fathers' can already be used with confidence

and Gebhardt-Harnack; the minor Greek Apologists have been well edited in Texte imd Untersuchungen^ and it may be hoped that the Berlin edition of the earlier Greek Fathers" will eventually supply the investigator with trustworthy materials for the Ante-Nicene period as a whole. But for the present the evidence of many Ante-Nicene and of nearly all later Greek Church-writers must be employed
in the editions of Lightfoot

with some reserve.
the

In this chapter

we

shall limit ourselves to

more representative Christian
I.

writers before Origen.

The

earliest
c.

of non-canonical Christian writings, the
a.d.

letter

addressed

96 by the Church of

Rome

to
;

the

Church of Corinth, abounds in quotations from the O.T.

more than

half of these are given substantially in

and the words of

the LXX. with or without variants.
Biblical Essays, p. 133. Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei JahrThe volumes already published contain Ininderte (Hinrichs, Leipzig). part of Hippolytus and an instalment of Origen.
^

2

.

Quotations in early Christian

Writings.

407

The following is a list of the exact or nearly exact quotations of the LXX. in Clem. R. ad Cor. Gen. ii. 23 (vi. 3), iv. 3 ff. (iv. (xvii. I ff.), xii. I ff. (x. 3), xiii. 14 ff. (x. 4 f.), xv. 5 (x. 6), xviii. 27 Ps. ii. 7 f. Exod. ii. 14 (iv. 9) Deut. xxxii. 8 f. (xxix. 2) 2)
; ; ;

(xxxvi. 4),
xxi. 7ff,

xi. 5 f.

(xv.
f.),

5),

xvii.
i

26

f.

(xlvi. 2), xviii. 2

ff.

(xxvii. 7),
i f.

(xvi. 15

xxiii.

(xiv. 5), xlix. 16 ff. (xv. 4), ff.), 1. 3 ff. (xviii. 2 ff.), Ixi. 5 (xv. 3), Ixxvii. 36 Ixxxviii. 21 (xviii. i), ciii. 4 (xxxvi. 3), cix. i (xxxvi. 5), cxvii. 18

10 (xxii. (xxxv. 7
(Ivi. 3),
i.

8), xxxiii.

12

— 20
21
f.

(Uv. 3), xxx. 19 (xv. 5), xxxi.
i ff.),

(I.

6),

(xxii.

xxxvi. 35

f.

19

f,

(xlviii. 2), cxxxviii. 7
ii.

23

ff.

(Ivii. 3ff.),

(xiv. 4),

21 (xxi, 2); Job iv. 16 ff. (xxx. 4), xix. 26 (xxvi. 2) Sap. xii. 12 + xi. 22 (xxvii. 3); Mai. iii. i (xxiii. 5); Isa. i. 16 ff. (viii. 4), vi. 3 (xxxiv. 6), xiii. 22 (xxiii. 5), xxix. 13 (xv. 2), liii. i ff. (xvi. 3 ff.), Ix. 17 (xHi. 5), Ixvi. 2 (xiii. 3); Jer. ix. 23 f. (xiii. i); Ezech. xxxiii. 11 (viii. 2); Dan. vii. 10, Th. (xxxiv. 6).
;

(xxviii. 3), cxl. 5 (Ivi. 5) ; Prov. 12 (Ivi. 3f.), 34 (xxx. 2), xx. (xxxix. 3 ff.), v. i7ff. (Ivi. 6 ff.), xi. 2 f
f.

iii.

The
affinities

variants
to

are

often

of

much
text.

interest,

as

shewing
are
xxxi.

certain types
:

of lxx.

specially worthy of notice

Ps. xxi. 7

,
OTL,
is

I

f.

ov,

i<*BA

(ag.

^i''•*

);

xxxiii.

14

i^^-^AR;
i^*'
;

xxxvi.

22

Ixxxviii. 21 eXeci,

. *;
21

36

,
ii.

(. P.
R;
1.

^, ^,
The
99,

following

t^AR;

i^'^-^AR:

16 om.
xlix.

Prov.

8k

ing in

Alexandrian reviser" (Toy,
XX. 21 (27)

); ,
Job
iv.
i.

,

,
21

17
^'^'^'^

... ^;

183);

21

cf.

whose reading "appears
cf.

to

Lagarde);

a reading found in
(for

, ^),
iii.

— a doublet want12

,

shew the hand of an

^;
17
ff.

A

as a doublet

(...
B;

A;

v.

without the additions of the
17

A

text,

and nearly

Isa.

Qciem^^

i^AQ;

;
9

(A,

10

^ On Clement's quotations from the Psalms and Isaiah, see Hatch, £ssays,pp. 175 9.

,
Ezech.

; ,

.,

B"^,

liii.

5

8

...
for

ag.

^'^,

Set-re
tr.,

i^'^^'AQ

. .);

1. ij

xxxiii. 11

Th. (lXX.

] ,
(see

,

Q"'^,

62,

Lightfoot's

note)
j

(,

, ); t^
;

-. (^^. AQ
as in

6

90

al.,
;

Syrohex.™^;

£707]

Dan.

vii.

€^ep(X7rei;ov)\

408
{a)

Qiiotatio7is in early Christian

Writings.

A

few readings imply correction from the Hebrew, or

rather perhaps a

Greek

text with affinities to the translations
e.g.

of the second century;

).
2.
eai'

.

(lxx. eav

);
may be

Ps. cxxxviii.

8

ka.v

Isa. Ixvi. 2

Others seem to be due to the imperfect

of the writer,

to his papyrus, e.g. Ps. Ixxxviii. 21 iv eXeet
for 6

'
(3)

A

large proportion of Clement's quotations are

.
(A)
in

who has

not verified his quotations by referring

:
5

,.

^
(lxX.

memory
iii.

Mai.

i

comof

posite";

sixteen passages

thus described.

Some
(e.g.

these consist of citations accurately given from the lxx. and

strung together, with or without a formula cita7idi
3

Ivi.

V.

— i4 = 17 — 26 (
is
ii.

Ps. cxvii.

i8

+

Prov.

iii.

12

+

Ps. cxl.

(c^77atV)+Job
cita-

Aeyct)).

In Other cases one of the
(e.g.

tions

correctly given,

and another quoted loosely

xiv.

4 = Prov.

21

f.

-h

Ps. xxxvi. 38, confused with 21^).

But
xxvi.

more commonly

Clement's conflate quotations, texts are

fused together without regard to verbal accuracy;

, €'
20
arabesque.
11),
xxviii.
Ix.

fragments of Pss.

xxvii.

^/^ ',
7,
iii.

yue

^/^/ • € /
cf. e.g.
e
ei,

where
not

5, xxii.

4 are blended into an

Except

in this class of quotations

Clement
7

is

often guilty of citing loosely; see
3 (Ps. cxxxviii.
7),

however
3

xx.

(Job
5),

xxxviii.
xlii.

xxxii.

(Gen. xv.

5

(Isa.

17).

(
are the

Special interest attaches to Clement's quotations of

passages which are also quoted in the N.T.

most
X.

instructive instances: (i) Gen.
3
:

3

= Clem.

Clem, reads
hevpo

^
KD
from

The
xii.

following
vii.

1=1 Acts

but rejects

with

and Acts), against Acts and cod. E.
for e^cA^e (lxx.

1 The Latin version supports the MSS. of the Greek text of Clement in both cases, so that with our present knowledge we are not at liberty to

assume a transcriptional
2

error.

On
ff.

'composite'

quotations

the

LXX.

see

Hatch,

op.

cit.

p.

203

,

Quotations
(2)

7

early Christian
vii.

Writings.

409

Exod.
for

ii.

14

— "perhaps
23
xiii.
is

= Acts

27

= Clem. iv. 11: Clem, reads from confusion with Lc. xii. 14"
(i

(Lightfoot).
(2

(3) Jer. ix.

f.

Regn.

ii.

10)

=1

Cor.

i.

31,

Cor.

X.

17)

= Clem.

i; here the relation of

Clement

to

the Biblical texts

best

shewn by juxtaposition:
Regn.
I.e.*

, , 86 , , ;)• ' - , ' • ' - avf, , - ,^, € \ i6

Jer.

/.c.

-

-

Clem.

I.e.

6

iv

rf]

iv

iv

6

8€

)

iv

ev

TJj

iv

iv

6

iv

iv

€v

iv

iyoa

8-

eXeos

^
245.

+

eVi

yrjs.

iv
* Cf.

-.
.

.

1

7

:

Cor. i. 3^5 2 Cor. see Lightfoot's
loc.

.
iv

fo

note ad

(4)

Ps.

xxi.

9

=

Matt,

agrees with lxx.,
for

and d for on. (5) Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff. = i Pet. = Clem. xxii. i if.; Clem, agrees with lxx. against St Peter, who changes the construction (0 .). (6) Ps. cix. I = Mt. xxii. 44 (Mc, Lc), Acts ii. 34 f with Lc, Heb. 13 = Clem, xxxvi. 5: Clem, reads
iii.

/,

xxvii. 43 Mt. substitutes

= Clem.

^

xvi.

for

€,
15;
(7)

Clem,

loff.

...
Prov.
iii.

i.

Acts,

Hebr., against

Mt.,

Mc. (BD).
p.

= Heb. xii. 6= Clem. Ivi. 4: see above, iii. 34 = Jas. iv. 6, i Pet. v. 5= Clem. xxx.
12
Pet.)

against
V.

?
^

402.

(8) Prov.

2: ©eo? (0

.

Jas.,

lxx.;

nini in
XV.
I
:

^^.

(9) Isa. xxix.

M.T. -, but with reference to 13^ = Mt. xv. 8, Mc. vii. 6 = Clem.
full:

again the passages must be printed in

See Hatch,

op. cit., p.

177

f.

4IO

Quotations in early CJiristian
Isa.
I.e.
I

Writings.
Clem.
I.e.

( ,
e'v

Mt.,

Mc.
Mc.)

ll.cc.

Xaos
iv

(-

Xecriv

€,

€€
iv

om

t<AQ.

.

(.

^' '] • ] ^
€-

\€ ,
\a6s

[
Se

,
ipox).

be

' (.
Mc.

\

^^^^

\(]

-

'

C^•^'".

D

L

2?^

C'^^^"^

Through constant
one type
as
cf.
ii.

citation,
is

the context has taken
to

more than
EvangeHsts,

but has not been borrowed from them in their present form,
shews.
(lo)
x.

^
;

Clement's

close

that

of the

Isa.

liii.

i

— i2=Clem.
17,

xvi.

3

— 14;
i

Jo. 22,

xii.

38 (Rom.
XV. 28.

16),

Mt.

viii.

Acts

viii.

32

f.,

Pet.

Mc.

The

general result of this examination

is

to

shew

(a) that

Clement's text of the lxx. inclines in places to that which
appears in the N.T., and yet presents sufficient evidence of

independence

represented by

that as between the texts of the lxx. and A, while often supporting A, it is less constantly opposed to than is the New Testament; and
;

{b)

(c)

that

it

displays

an occasional tendency to agree with

Theodotion and even with Aquila against the lxx. It seems in fact to be a more mixed text than that which was in the hands of the Palestinian writers of the N.T. These conclusions harmonise

on

the whole with what

circumstances under which Clement wrote.

we know of the The early Roman
himself, as Light-

Church was
freedmen of

largely

composed
families;

of

Greek-speaking Jews, the

Roman

and Clement

was probal)ly of Jewish descent and a freedman or the son of a freedman of Flavius Clemens, the cousin of Domitian. Under these circumstances it was natural
foot has suggested \ that the text of Clement's copies of
1 i.

Old Testament books,

€$,

2)

'^Q?,\\^ {Z. f. die NTUche Wissenschafiy Clement of Rome, p. 61. points out the Semitic style which reveals itself in Clement, e.g. v. 6
xii.

5

^.

>

1

Quotatio7is in early Christian
while

Writings.

41

derived from

Palestinian

archetypes,

should contain

readings brought to the capital by Jewish- Greek visitors from
other lands.
2.

Whatever the history of the
to

so-called
it

Second Epistle of
of

Clement

the

Corinthians, whether

is
it

Roman

or of

Corinthian origin, like the genuine Epistle

makes extensive
3);
liv.

use of the Greek Old Testament.

The
iv.
i

following quotations
(xvi.
2),

occur:
13
Iviii.
vii.
(iii.

Gen.
5),

i.

27 (xiv.

2);

Mai.
3),
lii.

Isa.
i

xxix.
(ii.

xxxiv.
3),
i),

4

(xvi.

5

(xiii.
(vii.

i),

9 (xv.
II
(xiv.

Ixvi.

18

(xvii.

4
14,

f,),

Ezech.
is

xiv.

18,

24 20

6,
8).

xvii.

24); Jer.
last

(vi.

these

passages

cited

very

freely

or
r\

although introduced by the words Xcyet

The
xxxiii.

writer follows
(iii.

quotations
5;

5

Clement in the form of several of his = Clem, i Cor. xv. 2, xiv. 2 = Clem, i Cor.
2

}
as
it

The
iv

of

rather

summarised,

*.

in

xiii.

he quotes

Isa.

lii.

5

is

quoted by

Polycarp (see beloAv)).
3.

Another second century document, indisputably Roman,
15 LXX. has supplied the writer with a phrase in

the Shepherd of Hermas, contains no quotation from the lxx.

But Ps.

ciii.

Maud. xii. 3. 4, and Vis. iv. 2. 4 supplies evidence that he knew and read a version of Daniel which was akin to TheodoThe passage runs 6 tion's.

,^
22

,

:

/,

(23) Th., 6

),
4^

The Old Testament
conjecture of

Dr MSS.

.
/^.
is

).
(lxX.

^
/
in

^'^,

/
vi.

Compare Dan.

^
Epistle

of

quoted
in

the

Barnabas even more profusely than
The acute
which appears
in the

the Epistle of Clement,

J• Rendel Harris, who saw that the name, as Qeypi or the hke, must be an attempt to reproduce the verb "DID (Dan. /. c). 2 See above, p. 47, n. 4.

+

:

412
but with

Quotations in early Christian
less precision.

Writifigs.

The

writer

is

fairly

exact in
the

well-

known

contexts

belonging to

the

Psalter

or

Book of

Isaiah S but elsewhere he appears to trust to
to concern

memory, and not

himself greatly about the words of his author.

Even when preceded by
wander
it;
e.g.
:

a forinida citatidi his citations often

far

from the lxx., although they are clearly based upon
xxxiii.
i

Exod.

manner
XiyCL

ri Xcyct 6

,/3109
X.

^ :
—3
i),

even when the writer mentions the book which he
2

79...

/
has

though

it

all

the notes of a strict quotation, proves to
iv.
i

€ // ^
is

quoted

et?

/.

? ^, ^ ^,
in Barn. vi. 8 after this
;

Similar liberties are taken

Iv

—a

,

is

quoting

sentence which,

be a mere summary of Deut.

23.

The
6f),

found useful, (a) Exact or nearly exact 12), Exod. XX. 14 (xix. 4), Deut. x. 16 (ix.
xi.

following analysis of the quotations in Barnabas may be Gen. i. 28 (Barn. vi.
:

5),

Ps.
i

i.

i,

3—6

(x.

i,

xvii.

i. (ii. 5, ix. 3, xv. 8), 6), gi. (vi. 7), v. 21 (iv. 11), xxviii. 16 (vi, 2 f.), xxxiii. 13 (ix. i), 16 (xi. 4f.), xl. 12 (xvi. 2), xlii. 6 ff. (xiv. 7), xlv. 2 f (xi. 4), xlix. 6f.

22

(vi. 4,

45 (ix. Prov.

xxi. 17, 19 (vi. 6), cix. 17 (v. 4), Isa. i. 2, 10 ff.

(xii. 10), cxvii. 12,

iii.

.

7 (v. 2), Ixi. i f. (xiv. 9), Ixvi. i f. (xvi. 2). exact, partly free: Gen. xxv. 21 ff. (xiii. 2), xlviii. 9 (xiii. 4 f.), Isa. xxviii. 16 (vi, 2), Iviii. 4 ff. (iii. i f.), Jer.
liii. 5,

(xiv. 8),


ii.

{d)

11,

Partly 14 ff.
f.

12

(xi.

2).

(c)

Free: Gen.
ix.

i.

26

(vi, 12),

28

(vi.

18),

Lev.

xxiii.

29

(vii. 3),

Deut.
(v.

16 (ix. 5), Ps. xxi. 21, cxviii. 120, xxi. 17 7 (v. 12), xvi. i f. (xi. 3), xl. 3 (ix. 3), Isa. 1. 6ff. (v. 14, vi. i), Ixv. 2 (xii. 4), Jer. iv. 3 (ix. 5), vii. 2 (ix. 2), ix. 26 (ix. 5), Ezech. xi. 19, xxxvi. 26 (vi. 14). (d) Free, with fusion: Gen. xvii. 23 xiv. 14 (ix. 8), Exod. xx. 8-fPs. xxiii. 4 (xv. i), Exod. xxxii. 7 Deut. ix. 12 (iv. 8), xxxiv. 28-}-xxxi. 18 (iv. 7), Ps. xli. 3 xxi. 23 (vi. 15), 1. 19 + apocryphon (ii. 10), Jer. vii. 22 f
12
(iv.

8), x.

13),

Zech.

xiii.

+ +

+

Zech.

vii.

10, viii. 17

(ii.

7

f,).

{e)

xiv. (x. i),

Deut. iv. 10 ff. loose citation: Gen. ii. 2
(xii. 9),

(x.

2),

(xv.

Free summary: Lev. xi., Deut. Ezech. xlvii. (xi. 10). (_/") Very 3), xvii. 5 (xiii. 6), Exod. xvii. 14
i

xxiv. i8-|-xxxi. 18 (xiv. 2), xxxiii.
^

ff.

(vi. 8),

Lev. xvi. 7

ft'.

See Hatch, Essays,

p.

180

ft.

;

Quotations in early Christian
(vii. 6),

Writings.

413
iv.
ix.

Deut

xxvii. 15

(xii,

6), 3),

(xix.

9),

Isa. xlix.

17 (xvi.

Dan,

Ps. xxxiii. 13 (ix. 2), Sir. vii. 7 f., 24 (iv. 4),

31

24

(xvi. 6).

As the Epistle of Barnabas
the
earliest

is

not improbably a
it

relic of

Alexandrian
its

Christianity,

is

important

to

interrogate

witness

to

the

text

of the

lxx.
its

This

can

best be done, as

from the Psalms and Isaiah.
Ps.
i.

, , ^ , ,, , , ;
we have
seen, by

examining

quotations

I

eVi

(ag.

=•^

RU

6/3,

(ag.
|

i^ayayuv
xlix.

AQ , ;R . €, ^^^
6
;

AR), * . ). *). ^^, . -. 8, 26.
(ag.
e.

BS

5

01

xV'ii.

45

|

,
9
*^•^

xxi. 17

'] ^, NAQ*
21
\

/Ltfz/os)

;

liii.

5

AQ

Iviii.

5

rreLvoh,

*;

^ yf

Ixvi.

^ , , , \€,.
;

(ag.

Mc.

.

cix.
iii.

36,

BD).

xxviii.

16 7 '«' (as Justin, Dial. 26, 65, 122).
(for

.

Isa.

(ag.

BQ™^), 7
y

t

Kuptos-,

,

6 Ibov
|

;

Ixi.

8e

-,

NAQ

-

7/

(for

2°),

The leaning in Isaiah towards when found in company with A or
is

t