An Introduction To The Old Testament in Greek

AN INTRODUCTION TO
THE OLD TESTAMENT
IN
GREEK
EonDon
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
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
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.
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
519574
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.
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.
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
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.
The Alexandrian Greek Version,

by
their
own
free
agency
first
(Jo.
vii.
35, Jas.
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|"11^) 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
K.
xiv.
Chr.
B.C.,
xii.
who invaded
carried into
the
tenth
century
may have
from the conquered

1
cities
Egypt captives or hostages whose names still appear upon the

;
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.
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.
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

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
\\.
lyv
Mommsen
yepas
^. /? .
^
xix. 5. 2 noXireias ye
AXiâvbpos
J.
i^
^^ ^ ".
emyvovs
:
iv \Wâv8pia
C.
apeTrjs
1
\
.
8.
'
^,
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).
182146).
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.
rrjs
it
'AXeâvSpctas
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
(/;/
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.
^
/??

(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.
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, &î:., 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.
.
;
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)
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
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.
;
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
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 septiiagiîta 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.

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. (18689).
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,
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
The
A lexandrian
the
Greek Version.
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

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 ^
'
bievoelTO,
...
8
Josephus,
i.
prooe?n. 3
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
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
Psalmos ; Cyril of Alexandria, adv. Juliaî. 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
' ,/).
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
' $
^ ît
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.).

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
'^ ;
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
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
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
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.
rfi
' ^
suffice to

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.
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

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.

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
; ;
24

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.
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
Dâ-in? or
Hagiographa.
Jew, we
Since the author of the prologue was
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,

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
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.

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,

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
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
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
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).
35
student will find below specimens of these discoveries, placed

for the
purpose of comparison in parallel columns with the
version of the lxx.
Regn.
xxi. (i
Kings
xx.) lo
13.
?
/xot
el
Tats
' '^^/ % , ,' ^^' ." ^ . ^ / ^ ^ /?.

LXX. (Cod. B').
'
6
'/ /
6
Aquila.
' dTreVreiAer
70
/
d
êot
;7^
^...%
/. ''
)
' / '. /? /?'
/
6
iyevero ore
:7^
' ^ / / ^ /- / '
/'
,
;
'"
,/
iyivixo ')
'
'.
'
'^^^^^
[3q{,
;
:
'"
'3
/'/ /' . , 3 ]
^
/ ,' ,
|
^'^^'^
'/
,'
Cod.
;/
13
ot
iêot
/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
|
^'^^'^.
1077-? . A ? .
(
ot
^.
see Burkitt,
i?/. cit.
p. 2.
36
^' /'
^ / ^ / , -, , ,
Lxx. (Cod. B').
6
4 Regn.
(2
Kings)
xxiii.
21
24.
Aquila.
^'
everctXaro 6
Xcyctv
^ôtl
(.
'ÔTt
'
*
eye-
^"1^"^
^,
^^ 'le-
/ .
'
^7
''''^
^ /' *
^ôtl
^^
""^ -
'^^'^
^*
*1,
^/
.
A >The
1
-, tTTt
. < [
:
/?-
^
] '.
22
following variants in Cod. 23 +
MS.
>
agree with Aquila
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
^^^^,
^ÔTL
^"7
^;
^ ^ ]
.
'
, evT-
'
. )
,
,
V
. ,
rats
^ "
^^ []^
"
, ]
^
^^'
[ ]
.
2
,
*
11 rats oSots] pr
A(R)T
MS.
oTt
,
Lxx (Cod.
epyoLs
Ps. xci. (xcii.) 5
lo.
B^).
iv
, ,
^[
[cv
^
"^
iv
, . -, . ^;. '? .
,
^[ /^/]
^[-^]
/,. ,
/>;
) ],
/xe,
Aquila.
'^'^]'^^,
iv
/.
[)8^'^]7
^
'"
, ,, " ., " , ,^^ ]. .

^
-,
*
iv
X^^V
ipya-
'
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
10 pr
KA^RT
B-'^'^N'^-^RT

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
Kings
xxiii.
= î^y. "^^.
is
is
(lxx.
) 8 , )
;
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^â = 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

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. eâp-
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).

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
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,
See
Mr
Burkitt's article Aquila in the

ff.
Jewish Quarterly
RevieîV,
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
TratSeuêif,
18
^.
Aiigiistm.: "hominis Judaei atque blasphemi";

vii.
Dr
Taylor, pref. to Fragments of Aqtiila, p.

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$e8wKv).
pond.
%'
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

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^.
^ / ^
Xcyet
, , . ,^ -^ ' ^/
''*
' ,
Jeremiah
xl. (xxxiii.)
14
26.
Kvpios,
olkov
'^
iv
cKttVat?
iv
V Trj yfj.
^^
iv Tats
cKitVats
,
1
'^
KaXeVet
Aikaiocy'nh
^. '
^
^'
''
'^
^77^
Orig. ep.
? ' ,
/,
"'
.'7
^.^
'^
See
art.
ad Afric. 3. Theodotion in
iii.
D.
C. B. iv. 978.
0. T. in Greek,
pp.
vii. ff.,
320
f.
5/3
^,^ , , . ' ^ * .^'^ ' , ' , -' ^ ^ /? /?/ /, /' , ^ , \

45
ctvat
viov
.
-^
,
"
^^
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.
40

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
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.
:
Op.
cit.
p. xl. sq.
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).

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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
50
^
;
^<'
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,

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/
^ .
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

But
it
must not be supposed that Symmachus
is
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.
peWpov
yap KepSos
It
cannot be said that these renderings approach to excel-
* ^/ , , . /^ ^^ .
ivvoijau
07,
,
iv.
Ps.
6
xliii.
,
xviii.
, 70)
16
Sl
25
shew
from
Job
Ps. Ixviii. 3
ets
/.
Eccl.
Isa. xxix.
^"^^
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.
he
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, p7ô 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;
Nestle,
Margmahen,
p. 40 n.
"^
See D. C. B.
iii.
p. 20.
54
\ ' ^ 8^ .,..'. 8, \ , \
re iv TeTa...iv
ly' '
^. ., ^
7rporiyayv...Tivos ap' (Uv evpoi iv ttj

etScoy
iv
^^
^.,.
iv
(/e Diciis. et
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
iaXv\\iav^po...
pond.
iv iv
i.\ivo
8 /xera iv
ttj
\\.
iv
Pseudo-Ath.
']']
ipva i\v
iv
ttj
.
iv
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 Trtôs {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

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
ttê
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

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);
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
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 Vênetae codice nunc primum uno vohimine co??iprehensa7n atqiie apparatu critico et philologico instructam edidii O. G. Praefatus est Fr.
Delitzsch.

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.
'î'^:).
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,
f.
>
viii.
22
at
.
.
ot,
^.
^
, , ^ ^/, ^ ^ - . - ^, .
7} . '
^ ^
"'*
Prov.
oip)(r]v
oSov
^^
/,7,
yrjv,
KOV0iV
Daniel
13.
^3
Gebhardt,
ff.
2
^
Id. p. Ixii.
'OvTur-qs, ovTovpyos,
are his usual renderings of
1\
09
?^ ^ ^ , ( ^ ^ , .
58
'*
,
cos

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
iêraais,
^ .
(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 teît 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
Tots
exjpopev
yap
,
iv
/Lter'
...
fKfiVois,
^^
iv Tols
to7s
eKcivois, ei
:
hi Matt.
XV. 14
pkv
6-
(,
^
'
fj
(.
].
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."
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
Ps. xlv. (xlvi.)
Hebrew.
HEB. TRANSLITERATED.
' ] ^
I
3 ^
Aquila.
\K\a{ivr\KO\>
7\
\ \avov'*'
tyi
.
\
eVi
,
(?)]
nnty
nnv3
*.
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.)
3.
Symmachus.
6
LXX.
els
Theodotion.
11/ 1
loy
TO TeXos'
. ^ , (9 , ^. . (6
virep
Kope
vwep
**.
Kope
vnep
VTrep
8.
6 Oeos
Oeos
iv
iv
iv
iv
*
iv
, ^ ^
1
rats
, .
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

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.
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
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.
/;? --
^;)
,
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.
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.
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.
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

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'oOevêva
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'
\ ÂnvXav
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
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
vVVKvlav
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-.
Prolegg. p.
lix. sq.
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
(
^
^ ^ ^^ \\ . \ ( \ \ (^ \^^(^ \
1014 (Cod.
\
Sarravianus).
i^
|
-^
\ |
is
ev
'>^
><
ev
'><
ev
ev
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\
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
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.
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

evpoêv,
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. interp7êtujn 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 eâ7rAot5...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.

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
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 wâs 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.%
/).
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).
7//
ev
eiwOev
. .
),
;.
.
a distinguished scholar
aîoi/...;
.
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 howeAêr 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 AouKiaiôs-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).
The Hexapla, and

Koi
XpiCTTLavois
8 ^
iv
iv
tL Hexaplaric
oI<lois
and other Recensions.
^ ^^
eVi
iv
(cf.
3 4...
eh
eT pa
Lucian,
who was born
the Acts of Lucian in Bolland.

iv
,' ^ ^
\
i.
eêdoro
<\
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.
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.
82 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions,

Syrian
revision
of the
Old Testament, which

Lucian,
called
for
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
(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
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
Xoyos ov
elrrev
'HXias
eva,
iv
^^
7 (-
^^
iyevcTO
ive
2^]
|
22
. ]
6
|
iv
iovaov
i\
iv
om
8-
^^
iov
i'
|
\ iaXovvo
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
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.

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
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 êt delictum maximum? catum magnum dixit Aron ad dixit Aron ad Moysen --et dixit Aron ad ^êt 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 ^êt scimus quid accident ei. sit -êt factum factum sit ei. dixi eis Quicunque dixi illis Quicunque ei. ^êt 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, ^êt
cognitum
ei
et neglexerit, ^êt
cognitum
fuerit
fuerit
delictum in quo deliquit* in eo, et adferett primitivum de ovibus feminum immaculatum
quod
deliquit
^êt
imponet ma-
eius quod peccavit in ipso, et adferet hedillam de capris feminam sine vitio propter delictum quod deliquit; ^êt 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...'êt 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
Cf. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate^ p 6;

ff.
Kennedy,
in Hastings'
D. B.
p.
58
^ ^
Introduction, p. 83.
Pôr
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)
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.
^
LXX
94

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.
vii.
i.
13,
xl.
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).
1617,
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.
13, 613,
xi.
79, 1215, 2225, 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. 1132,
14, xi. 7
I
10, xvi. 16
I
18, XXV.
yjy xxvi.
36, xxvii.
27,
14, xli.
i
xvii.
i
5.
1.
10, xxiii.
14 25 Exod. 12 30, xxiv.

i
;
4,
x.
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.

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
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,
Maccabees.
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.
Isa. xxix.
XXX.
xl.
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. 820, 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, 2835; 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. 39, Mic. ii. 3
iii.
3.
97
Fragmenta Weingartensia,
;
Vienna, 1868
teiier
v. (E. Ranke, Fragrn. v. ante-H.^ Corssen, Zwei neue Fragmeiite d. WeitigarProphetenhajidscJuift^ Berlin, 1899).
P.
Containing Hos.
ix.
I, 5
iv.
13
i.
f.,
v.
10
ii.
6,
3 19
17, xii. 3, 7, 9, 12, xiii.

5, iv.
X.
9; Mic.
15
4,
xxviii.
2, xlvi.
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,
5,
7, vii. 16, viii. xiv. 2; v.
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,
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;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.).
\âllicellanus 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.

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.

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
()
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
'âscendisti
:
sancto.
'âscendisti
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
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.
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

;
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.
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 iâd 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
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
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. 4762.
(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 av5pvs...^s Blass {/Icta app. p. 201) remarks: "itaque iam tum (id quod sine testi-
$
f.
new system
of
,D
monio suspicandum
2
Acts
ii.
ot
.
erat) in Aegyptum quoque nova a.oôv'i...h:iyôv. lb. vi.

.
religio
permanaverat."
9 TLvh
$ --
yrji
3
\eyovs
Cf what
is
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.
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

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,
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 î-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
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.
E. Nestle, Urtext, p. I44ff.
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,
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.).
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.

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), Sâmuel), 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
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.
note in one of the
rolls
of
this version assigns
it
to the year
616
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.
,
A ncicnt
Versions based tipon the Septuagint.
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
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.
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
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

,
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.).
A ncient
it is

ix.
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% 912; 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
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.,
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.
xxii.
ix.
X.
ix.
;
viii.
v.
ii.
iii.
ix.
15, vii.
I
16, viii.
I
xi. 16, xii.
15, xi. 6, xiv. 10,
5,
10, xl.
liii.
21, xliv. 2
I
7,
1.
9,
Iii.
I 17, 12, Ix. i
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.
82
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.
Lee, V. T. 5yrz^^^ (London, 1823); complete Syriac Bible has recently been
((1)1887
pubhshed by the Dominicans of Mosul
91
(-)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.
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
{Ûlfilas: die heiligen Schrifie7i alien

^/^-rîT/^^... 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
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.
A ncient
is
Versions based upon

It fits
tJie
Septuagint.
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.
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,
Regn.,
i
Paralipp.,
and
Esdr., Esther, Judith,
Tobit,
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.
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,
.'*
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
MS.
Old and
New
beginning and
31 leaves, the
words 2 Regn.
^ -
ii.
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.
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.
:
/^
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
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.
30
5 eis Tr]v
, ' , ,
25
27
8,
,
13
2
41
ayios
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.
7,
xix.
cabees.
The
Esdras
forty-three leaves containing end, Esther, Tobit i. ix. 9

i.
and Lam.
1844,
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
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
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-\âticanus.
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
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
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 \âtican 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.
(B)
Octateuch
and
Histo7'ical Books.
D
A
(I).
Codex Cottonianus.
vi.
British
Museum, Cotton
MSB., Otho B.
56.
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
^
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:
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
opL
xxxii. 6
xxxvii.
xii.
ol
I4 xxx. 29
Exod.
xxxii. 13
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.
18, ,
vii.
ix.
27
^ ],
iv
Num.
(without
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.
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)
(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. 3349 \\ *.<^''' , 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.
*xviii.
xi.
-,
[/capjSi'as
:
, [],
i.
IQ, xl.
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^.
^
.[\ , ^.
,
e/cel
i.
xviii.
3>
^]. ,
6,
.
1
,
e/cet
8,
iv.
xiv.
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
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.
31, xxviii. 5, xxviii.

10, 19.
2,
22,
31.
xviii.
xix.
i,
xix.
xxi.
12,
19, ix. x.
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
(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
14.
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. 2734, 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.
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. 3842, 4649; xxiii. 25, 810; 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
46,
17).
8 II,
The upper
1317, 2023, xvi. 3133, xvii. 15, 912, 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.
XV.
ii.
21, Deut. Hab.

I
xxxii.
10,
iii.
Regn. 44, Magnificat., Dan.

i i ii.
10, Isa. v.
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^
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
Ix.
I,
Ixiv.
12
Ixxi. 4,
xcii.
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
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
;
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. 814, 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^
Printed in 0. T. in Greek, mr, p. 8 f. In Eichhom's Repertoriuni, viii. p. 202
f.
S.
S.
10
146
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 ).
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), ^^ô 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 ).
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,
58,
3
cxiv.
cxv.
cv.
3443,
2.
cvi.
1734,
cviii.
cit..,
1521,
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),
numbered MS.
(12)
Gr. bibl. (Oxford, 1896), pp. I2f.
g.
(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^-: sêGenesis 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...,^;).
Afîst., 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

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;

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)

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,
\ât. Gr. 2058 (formerly Basil. 97)
93. Ruth... (xiii)
London, B. M. Reg.
i.
i. pp. 78, 397 ("praestantissimi codicis") Lucianic (Lagarde's
D.
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-
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.
Hesychian
(.?)
152
135. Gen.,

Ex.
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.

5

7 Paris, Arsenal 8415 Coisl. Gr.
comjn.
schol.
(xii)
Octateuch
Hexaplaric readings
Lucianic
{!)
Heptateuch {im- Paris, Nat.

per/.)
Lev.
Ruth,
(xiii)
184
cat.
(xiii)
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)

'Ex.{ijnperf.),cat.
53
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
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...
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.
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).
Maimscripts of the Septnagint.

46...1
5 5
Regn.-2Esdr.,
Esth.,
Judith,
4 Tob....
I
Mace,
Florence, Laur. Acq.
52...iRegn.-2Esdr.,
Esth.,
I
Judith,
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.,
12
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
Mace,
(x)
68...iRegn.-2Esdr., Venice,
Esth.,
St
Mark's,
Judith,
Gr.
Tob.,
13
(xv)
Mace...
70..
I
>
-4 Regn., parts of Chron., Tob.

(xi)
Munich, Gr. 372 (formerlyat Augsburg)

I
71. ..2
Esdr.,
Mace,
Judith,
(xiii)
I 3 Esth.,
Tob.
I
74.. .12 Esdr.,
Mace,
Judith,
(xiv)
76... Esth.,
Florence, St Mark's
Esth.,
Tob.
Judith,
Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4
Tob.
82...
I
(xiii)
4 Regn. xiii)
(xii

3 Paris, Nat. Gr. 8
92.
14 Regn.
(x)
Field,
i.
p.
486
2 2
2
56

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...
Regn.-2Esdr., Ferrara, Bibl.

Judith,
I 2 Mace. Regn.-2 Esdr., Ferrara,
Comm.
Comm.
Esth.,
Gr. 187
Bibl.
107.
13
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
\ênice,
St
Mark's,
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.
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
14
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

243*.
157
i.
I4Regn.(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
14
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)
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.,
14
Esth.,
Mace,
Judith,
(xiv)
609
Tob.
158
...I
4 Regn.
Judith,
(xii)

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
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.
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)
Graeco- Latin MS.
6
154.
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.

249. Job, Sap.,
Sir.,
163
/.
Rome, Vat. Pius
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
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.

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.
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
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

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.âL
(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.
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.,
Lam.,
Ezek.,
Ep. Dan.,
Pro(xii)
Minor
48.
phets... (xiv)
Prophets
Rome,
\ât.
Gr. 1794
Lucianic (Field), Cornill's

77.
Kloster-
49.
Prophets
(xi)
Florence, Laur.
xi.
pp. 1 1, 14 Hesychius, Cornill's
mann,
66
51.

Prophets
(xi)
Florence, Laur.
x.
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)
termann, Hesychian.
/3.
p.
Klos50
Cornill's
88.
Isa., Jer.,
Ezek.,
Rome, Chigi
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)
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

"î
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
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.Ôzxi.^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
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
68

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, .^î?/.
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.

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^
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
; ;

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
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
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
;

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 Vâticanae 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
;

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
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 \ôlumus 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

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 \âtican for
MSS.
of the lxx.,
but the result of these enquiries satisfied the editors of the
Codex (B = cod. \ât. 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. \ât.
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.
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.

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,
p.
152).
184
risk before

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.
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

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.,
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
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.
86

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'êrsions 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),
(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.
88
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).
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
''ân 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 Testameît in Greek

i.,
according to the Septuagint^ vol.

vol.
ii.,
Genesis
iii.,
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

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'."
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).
^
N.
V. T. Libr. can. praef. p. xvi. Cf. E. Nestle, Zur Rckonstriiktion der Septiiaginta, in F/iiiologus, F. xii. {1899), p. 121 ff.

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
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).
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.).

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 êget 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 franâise 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.
PART
II
THE CONTENTS OF THE ALEXANDRIAN OLD TESTAMENT.
132
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
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).
'
,
'
' '
,
'
',
' '
Ilapotât'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
Ilpaêis
'
{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
,
"?
'
'
'
^^
,, -/^,'^^ [, ^, , ,''', ,
(, )
(,
At
' '
"
, ',
(?)
Toi^Tois
2o6
9.
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).
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, "EôSos,
'Savri,
, ,
13.
' 3 ,), , ^^ ,
14-
Damascus (defide
iv. 17).
07-thod.
'L^Qi\.\x%{de SectisVi.').
{')
',
Aeviri-
[^,
,
"EôSos,
'-
, "$)
', /37/.-
VouO, Aoyoi
(/?
Nay?? Kptrai
2o8
Titles,
{$, ,
(/3,
'lepe/itas,
$, ,
) )
(e')
Grouping, Number, ajid Order of Books.
^, ^/^-
(')
\$, '^ ?/ -
,, ,) ,, ",) ( $
',
y',
$ ", , {$, "-$, /3, " ' ( ^,

', ', '}
at
Hapoi-
'
.
.
', ',
')
6. Ebedjesu
"
15
{catal. libr. Eccl.
Assemani,
Or.
iii.
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
'.
^'
Michaeas
;y'
ahum
Habacuc
Sophonias
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.
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
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-
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,
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.
Titles,
ludit ver
Grouping, Number,
and Order of Books.

leremias ver IIIICCCCL Daniel ver MCCCL
Ezechiel ver
MC
cli
Psalmi Davitici
ver
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.
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.
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'/xciâ^), 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
kôôv
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
kiô.'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,
Samuel, and
3,
4 Kingdoms,
i,
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
(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
f.
14
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
(^312)
or
). -is
transferred to this group.
Titles
phetical
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
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.
oh
ela\
eVrt
followed by Origen ap. Eus.
Ocias
", /
^. 4 '/3 /,
de
reaaapes
els
He
I.e.
'
elvai
ras
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.
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. \îctorinus 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,
XeyoêVas 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

^
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,

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.
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
Aêteris
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.
;
Maccabees are added
in
X,
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,

Apocrypha, and has no certain
that Philo does not quote the
allusion to it\
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
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.
:
152
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. BÂ,
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.
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
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. 912, 17, 1314,
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.

Greek.
233
234

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.
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.
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.
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.
Table
(xxxviii.
Laver Court
(xxxviii. 8).
(xxxviii.
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
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
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
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).
2023). 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.
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. 15). Dimensions of the Temple (vi.
6f.).
1
Dimensions of the Temple (vi,

Details of the building
7, 36)
(vi.
6).
2,
Driver,
/;//;-.
p.
lOO.
Cf.
7-,
p. 244.

238
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.
137). Building of the royal palaces (vii. 3850).
1251) 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;
F. Burney, in Hastings'
D. B.
p.
862
2
Intr. p. 181.

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.
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 ^")
;
comparison of
the latter
"j
the former presents the
facts-^
and
in a logical sequence.
Here
as elsewhere in this
book Cod.
Cc.
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^î.
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
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
Rest of the Words

(xxiv.
of
Agur
xxix. 21).
68).
Words
of
Agur
(xxx.
33).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."
full
examinajustly
finds
tion
of
the
it
context
as
may
be
seen
in
Cornill",
Stelle,"
who
4, 7
describes
" eine stark
verderbte
and
solution in the hypothesis of a doublet (cf vv. 3
8).
(B)
I.
Differences of Subject- Matter.

comparison of the lxx. with the Massoretic
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.
'
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
:^ ê
Ezechiel, p. 212.
Pt.
I.
c. iii.
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.
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
iv
,.,
iv
xfj
eXeo?
. \^ 8..6
iyoo
eiftt
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. Saiuelis, p. 42; Driver, op. 17, 18, 21; H. P. Smith, Samuel, p. 13. Or'iver, Inlr., p. 170; Savmel, p. ii6f.
^
pp.
246
removed

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
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. 2223, 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.,
(iH),
d = ix.
9.
2ff.,
i k = x.
2930.
viii.
53a
an addition of quite another character and
of the highest interest.
The
true lxx. {(&^) omits
which
2/
is
in cod.
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
is
(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
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.
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
consists of another recension of the sumin

c. xxii.
mary of Jehoshaphat's reign which occurs

47
41
44,
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

Â,
with
Luc.
Elijah's ascension, whilst in

(iii,
^^
it
finds a
place only at the end

agrees
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
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,
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,

^
3235
i.
46,
1521,
38, 40, 41.
Lagarde, V.T. Gr.
ad
loc.
rences
Israel,
between
ii.
and
fH
in
For a careful treatment of the diffeRegn. see Herzfeld, Gesch. d. Volkes
250
Psalms.
In
many
of the Psalms receive

in
titles,
or additions to
is
their titles,
which are wanting
JH.
The
following
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;âpiOv (cod. A.)
+ eV
+ (cxliv.) + 7rpos
Cxlv. (cxlvi.).
'
11).
.
m
cxlvi. (cxlvii.
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.
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.

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.
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
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; ê 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
:
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.
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.
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.
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
(Î'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.
I This arrangement is due to 4 24 =e). 19 = D, xvi. Jerome, who relegated the Greek interpolations to the end of
xii.
= A,
= b,
xiii.
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.
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.

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 iÂBN 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.
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.).
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. 15^ 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 î.). 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),
2934 (3237).
V.
1323,
vi.
25
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

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.,
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
Exegetical Co mm.
07i
Judges
(1895).
Ruth.
Fritzsche,
'^
'
(1867).

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).
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
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.
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.
Esdr.
iv.
i.
=2
Chron. xxxv.
iii.
ends abruptly, been lost cf.

;
ii.
i
15
iv.
vi., vii.
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.
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
Esdr.
v.
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
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
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
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
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.
'^,
;
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.
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.

'ûiTO'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

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\!Ô)
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,
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*
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
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
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.
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.
in Speaker's Conim. Apocr. Porter in Hastings' B. D. ii. p. 822^.
i.
pp. 243,
ff.
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.
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. -^î '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,
2 Origen, while omitting Baruch, includes the Epistle in a formal of the Hebrew canon (Eus. H. E. vi. 25
evi).
( ^ )
The
Epistle
\).
tJie
Hebrew Canon.
.'..%\
/275
9
less
'lepe^ta?
(cf.
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
=^^î<,
original;
held"* to rest
^>)^; the third has been on an Aramaic document, whilst the fourth is
(for
^^'^ / ^
first
iv.
4,
exhortation;
iv.
iii.
8,
confession
v. 9,
encourage-
two shew traces of a
e.g.
i.
10
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,
4^
-
In the the second

=^
first
it
is
section the Divine either [d] êos or
Name
is Kiiptos
or K.
êos,
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.
,
182
2/6

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-
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. aâros, 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/caâios 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
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
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
:

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
^
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
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
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,
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.
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 Franâise
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.
êta
vi.
eTrtyeypa/xjutei/a
in loann.
25
et
ill.
Hieron. de virr.
"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.

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.
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

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 Ôriginal 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.
;
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.
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
; ;
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;
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 dÊ7ioch...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 Aêue 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.
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
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.
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.
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,
napaSelâi,
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
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).
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^'
'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.
eôXeOpevetv, iôv6evovv, 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

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
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 vlv),
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,
ypaavs,
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
'
'
^^
iv
, )
We
^', \ iyivTO
Josephus
is
( 8 ,, . ' . ,
eVei yap
be
yeyovevai
, , ' ',
^^
De
the gulf which
'
yevoiTO,
^-
migr. Ab7'ahami
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.
4.
^- ^ , '. "" " .' , . .

Regn.
.
.
" ... ...' .9. 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
rjêt...
,
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
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,
^ , (, ), , , ,); . , , ,, ^, , ^, 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
for a, as
, , ^^.
eta, e.g.
i.
long, e.g. Semitic
daviov, eldcuXcov.
Especially in cod.
{. .
in Greek,
p, xiii.).
302
TJie
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 -VLv
:
the Septtiagint.
303
, , -, , , 8, , \, /,^, ^,
dvvaaTVLv,
iSfouns.
diodeveiv,
iepareveiu,
arparoTredeveiv,
:
vdpeveLU.
In
-/, from verbs
eVi'ê/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
77,
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
,, ,
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, têv 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'êij/,
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
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.
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
aSÔj
^
Regn.
x.
cKokeaev (cf V. 8
^, .
when
;
pre;
also the
en
iSeir,
^^, ^^
el
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.
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)
question Standing
,
.
ind.
(Jud.
vi.
18
1/
...
Num.
XXXV.
2,
6...
...74,
^^
;
.
e.g.
Gen. xv.
;
...
", \
;
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
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
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 Chr.) Ko\aKevLv (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.)
^
7Wisdom.
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
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
'
Maccabees.
avveKKfVTelv
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 Provêrbs. 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^/zî- (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.
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.
single
specimen
xxiii.
may be
given from Ps.
xvii.
compared
2
with 2 Regn.
^^ \ ^<\4 , , 8, \ , ^ , ^ ^ (^. ^^ ? ^ ^\ ( ^ , ^ ,\ , . ,\ ^] , , , \ [^.

Ps. xvii. 3
6.
^
,
Regn.
xxii.
67'
'^
ev
. . - ^
' ^
e/c
^Kvpie
6.
earai
eV
....
âlverov
ôtl
Trepiiaôv
/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

&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,

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.
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.
.
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.
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
KCLL
(^
for
Regn.
lo
JNl, for 'Oli^n ').
(D2''t^'"''l,
(^^
;
'^ 7)
for
Dll'îi'''))
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-
Except perhaps those which lay before the translators

;
teuch
'
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
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.
20 Deut. xxvi. Regn. i. i
?. //... = 1^
5
ci7reâXfv
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.
{^^^ 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,
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.
ava.
eycVero
iyevcTO
' ,
;
V.
20
, ^
^
in the Prophets
and Hagiographa
rtvo?,
e^ê?
, ),
/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
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)\
doublet
is
occasionally created by adding a
TO
iv
^, .
Hebrew,
^.
iii.
; ",
e.g.
in
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.
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
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
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
'
'
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.
7;
yij
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
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
;
Aq.
,
Kuptos.
-
\ ^;
I
^])
}
')^.
Lev. xxiv.
xix. 7
^40
yrj
) }
tyJ
} ],
there
yfj
(Heb.
an abomination
xii.
Haggada also
'HAct
"*;
are clear traces, as in Exod.
Regn.
i.
14
aiTYJ
v.
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\%
^-
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-mî^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;).
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
^
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
^'ÎTJ'^
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.
16.
...
,
"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.).
utkvos
an
/=
"^^.
''"3
\2 pL^ p:
cf.
Hieron. quacst.
Philo has
(see below).

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
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^.
"ÎpD.
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->
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.'
êtva,
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.
19.
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

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.
28302.
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
'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
;
'.
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.

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*?51,
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
lÎpP"'?
(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^Â Luc.
answering
14.
<9fuy,
\.
x.
transliteration
to
Sin
(iB.);
in
10 the
,
16.
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
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 "ÎpV 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.
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 KBêtc. 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.
2225, 3031.
The Septuagiiit as a
^ÎD"
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.\vcv
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^^'îiA
'
'
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
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
reêrai,
^
;
^?* 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 reêrai. 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.
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.'
'.,.,
3537. In
J.' (at
....'?;
...
precede
35.
;
ll 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'îpnn
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 "ÔV 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 -ôverlooked 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]
yeypavos.
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.
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)
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
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.

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
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
/êvue 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^

;
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.

Stichometry of Nicephorus.
\
etc.
347
Stichometry of
Book.
1
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
^
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.
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
It is printed
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
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.
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
etc.
Judges
Ruth
Kingdoms Kingdoms 3 Kingdoms 4 Kingdoms

1
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
(încluding 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, \ên.
;
gr.
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.

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
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.
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
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,
{)
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
do not proceed
beyond
origin".
xxiv.,
a circumstance which suggests a Hexaplaric

exhibits two systems of capitulation^,
Cod.
^
'^
Hke cod.
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
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
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
232
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
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
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
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
^... (... .
...
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
>.
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.
.,
-..-
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.
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)
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,
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
{-),
(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'
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.
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<ôpojv
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. 3642
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
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
machus,
Theodotion.
i.
=
\
TraVres.
mo =
=
Hexapla,
ip
^. ^. , , ^^. '= " -. .'^=. 6'=.

Ixxxv.).
01
oi XolttoL
or (S
(B
.
far'),
.^ =
mark
. . ^
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'îu.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.
;
, 77
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), 3034, 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
few extracts
iâ)
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
, .^. '^
nalâs
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
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
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."
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
Caini
15).
f.).
Qiiod deterius poiiori
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,
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
Karabeiâs
"^
(LXX.
els
,
.).
. )^.
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,
/,
On
$,
Use of the
LXX.
who
is
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.
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.
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 \êrsion was

the xûthorised 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.
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.
[sc.
yXuaarj]
Use of the
LXX.
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
apâLoXoylav
'^-
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.
...
...
clttol
as they are interpreted
by the
iii.
(Gen.
iv.
narrative frequently follows a
^.
2.
I.
(Gen.
i);
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.
'
'%
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
) ?
;
^(^^^
Tirou...
Titus granted him from
75
37^
(c)
Use of the
LXX,
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.
(Gen.
[.
2.
(Gen.
. //'
xxvii.
,
f.)
/-
30)
23
f.)
(Gen. xxxix.
6.
(Gen.
xli.
45)
7poy6pvv
'ovovvov...ayaL
^.. .'/^ /.
^'
i
yap
(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.
f.)
^',
'^ 2/
(
Esdr.
2
21,
cf.
Esdr.
iv.
17)
8 =
8
1
fif.
Esdr.
iii.
2/
iv.
. /? , ^'/
xi.
^
i.
2.
//?79
xi.
'.
3
xi.
Esthei'.
f.
Ant.
xi.
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.
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).
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.
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 1
Quotations from
tlie
LXX.
in the
New
Testament.
389
(4)
Quotations in the Catholic Epistles.

Lev.
xix. 18
James
ii.
8
II
23 iv. 6 Peter i. 24 f, ii. 6 ill. 10

iv.
Exod. Gen.
Prov.
Isa.
XX.
iii.
f.
XV. 6
xl.
34 6
17
12
xxviii. 16
Ps.
xxxiii. 12
xi.
liv.
18
Prov.
Ps.
31
V. 7
23
1
Peter
ii.
22
Jude
Prov. Zech.
xxvi.
iii.
(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.
viii.
36
ix.
9
12 13
15 17
26
27 29
?>?>
X.
15
16 18
19
20 f.
390
Rom.
Quotations from the

xi.
I
f.
LXX. m
Ps.
the
New
Testament.
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

Îc.
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.
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.
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,
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
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.
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.
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
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.'*;
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.
ttcus
Idov
6
,
'
'
. .
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.
yrj
^lov8a,
ei
iv
rois
^,, , (,
ei
Mic.
V. 2,
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^'ÂQ
e|e-
ei
and
^^,^ , , ,, ,
Mt.
iv.
Isa. ix.
I f.
odov
',
6
^-
OL
om
t<^-ÂQ(Aq. Th.)
>*]
X^-ÂQr
>*' .
,
| |
]-\-
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.
'-
ovtos
tcis
rrepl
68.
Mt.'s version
based upon Heb., from which the LXX. departs.
Cf.
Symm.
Mt.
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.
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.
,
Îc.
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
type.
Quotations from the

2i+lxxi.
LXX.
xiii.
in the
Isa.
New
xliv.
Testament.
2%.
which
of free citation
separate study.
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
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.
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
Mc.
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.
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;
Tim.
tou
A
Gal.
16
for
$l
for evKv
'
27
LXX.;
V.
, , ^-<
.,
iirl
I
^" ^,
rfj
(Rom.
iii.
20=
ix.
for
;
LXX.
ix.
17
and
Trj<;
/
15
yfj's;
^^'^'-
.,.
for
1 1
$
^
iii.
xiv.
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 evKv .,
7
f,
;
f.,
Mc.
X.
vi.
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
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
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
eVt
Cor. XV. 54
Isa.
XXV.
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
\
...
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.^"
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,
13;
5
f.,
ff.,
viii.
5, xi. 5,
18, 21;
xii.
xiii.
6).
usually follows
the
Heb.
(viii.
8ff.^ x. 5
1
xi.
lxx. even when they
ff.,
/ ^).
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
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.
.
But
QiLoiations from the

try]
',
tÂRT;
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,
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,
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.
^
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
f.
ov,
i<*BA
(ag.
î''*
);
xxxiii.
14
i^^-ÂR;
i^*'
;
xxxvi.
22
Ixxxviii. 21 eXeci,
. *;
21
36
,
ii.
(. P.
R;
1.
^, ^,
The
99,
following
tÂR;
i^'^-ÂR:
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.
as a doublet
(...
B;
A;
v.
without the additions of the

17
text,
and nearly
Isa.
Qciem^^
iÂQ;
;
9
(A,
10
^ On Clement's quotations from the Psalms and Isaiah, see Hatch, ssays,pp. 175 9.
,
Ezech.
; ,
.,
B"^,
liii.
...
for
ag.
^'^,
Set-re
tr.,
i^'^^'AQ
. .);
1. ij
xxxiii. 11
Th. (lXX.
] ,
(see
Q"'^,
62,
Lightfoot's
note)
j
(,
, ); t^
;
-. (^^. AQ
as in
90
al.,
;
Syrohex.^;
707]
Dan.
vii.
êp(X7rei;ov)\
408
{a)
Qiiotatio7is in early Christian
Writings.
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.
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)
large proportion of Clement's quotations are
.
(A)
in
who has
not verified his quotations by referring
:
5
,.
^
(lxX.
memory
iii.
Mai.
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.
(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
:
= 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^cAê (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)
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.
iv
rf]
iv
iv
iv
ev
TJj
iv
iv
iv
iv
iv
iyoa
8-
eXeos
^
245.
eVi
yrjs.
iv
* Cf.
-.
.
Cor. i. 3^5 2 Cor. see Lightfoot's

loc.
.
iv
fo
note ad
(4)
Ps.
xxi.
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^^'".
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.
i2=Clem.
17,
xvi.
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.
^.
>
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),
(xvi.
(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;
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.
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

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
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,
36
(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.
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.

(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
eVi
(ag.
=^
RU
6/3,
(ag.
|
iâyayuv
xlix.
AQ , ;R . , ^^^
6
;
AR), * . ). *). ^^, . -. 8, 26.

(ag.
e.
BS
01
xV'ii.
45
,
9
*^^
xxi. 17
'] ^, NAQ*
21
\
/Ltfz/os)
liii.
AQ
Iviii.
rreLvoh,
*;
^ yf
Ixvi.
^ , , , \,.
;
(ag.
Mc.
cix.
iii.
36,
BD).
xxviii.
16 7 '' (as Justin, Dial. 26, 65, 122).

(for
Isa.
(ag.
BQ^), 7
y
Kuptos-,
6 Ibov
|
Ixi.
8e
-,
NAQ
7/
(for
2),
The leaning in Isaiah towards when found in company with A or

is
the text of Q, especially

^Â, is
xiii.
noteworthy, and
7,
it
worth mentioning that in

agrees with
of Barnabas does not seem to have been influenced by the
Gospels,
it
the text used by Barnabas seems to have been revised from

the Heb.
;
e.g.
in Jer.
ii.
in
accordance with M.T.

iu rrj
ttj
with M.T.
. , , ]
Zech.
where the
text
in
adding
<;
Occasionally
12
become
2
in
Gen.
ii.
Barnabas has
e.
where the LXX. read
r.
TYj
5.
The
Asiatic Christian writers of the second
century,
Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp of Smyrna, afford a striking

contrast to
Clement of
Rome
and Barnabas of Alexandria,

{a)
2.
in
the rarity of their appeals to the Old Testament,
The
i)
genuine Epistles of Ignatius quote

cita?idi (Prov.
^
it
only twice with

xviii.
formula
xii.
iii.
34 = Eph.
details see
v.
3,
i7
= Magn.
ff.
For further
Hatch,
op. cit. p.
180
414

(Ps. xxxii.
viii.
Writings.
xv.
i,
two or three allusions

Smyrn.
alludes,
i.
= Eph.
Isa.
v.
26
2,
lii.
Trail,
2)
complete the instances of a
direct use
of the lxx. by this writer.

is
V/hen he quotes or
he
fairly close to
the lxx., unless
we may except
the
last
instance,
iv
where
' /?
changed into
eOveatv appears to be
Sl
ov cVi
in
Pseudo-Clement
(2 Cor. xiii. 2)
form which occurs also

Polycarp
(Phil. x. 3) \
and
less
(?)
The Bishop
the
lii.
of
Smyrna
Tob.
iv.
is
no
sparing in his references
to
O. T. than the
Bishop of
io
Antioch.
(x.
He
iv.
quotes only Isa.

(xii.
2),
Ps.
i)
rectly,
from Eph.
is
iv.
the last-named passage 26 and Prov. 4

iii.
there
an allusion to Ezech. xxxiv.
gathered that Polycarp read there

6.
Irenaeus
may be
,
4,
5^ (x. 3),
xii.
perhaps indi-
(vi. i).
In
Phil. vi.
it
from which
may be
with cod. A.
taken next, for though he belonged

his literary activity
to the next generation
and
was connected
with the West, his copies of the Old Testament writings were
doubtless of Asiatic provenajice.
His method of quotation
however
is
differs
widely from that of the earlier writers.
He
theologian
and a
controversialist,
and he quotes the

with
Scriptures to refute an antagonist or to support the traditional

faith.
Accordingly his citations

extracts,
are,
few exceptions,
either exact
or but slightly abridged
and adapted,
and he
phrase.
iii.
is
almost wholly free from the habit of loose paracopiously he

cites,
How
will
i.
especially in Adv. haereses

list-.
iv.,
appear from the following

3
(iv.
Gen.
ii.
I
32.
i), 5 (v.
23. 2),
26
(iii.
23. 2, iv. 20.

i,
i,
v.
i,
i.
3);
15.
f.
2), (v.
(v. 28. 3), 5 (iii. 21. 10), (iv. 5. i), 16 f. (v. 23. I),
(ii.
23
34. 4, iv. 20. (iii. 22. 4); iii.
v.
7.
v.
i ff.
(v. 23.
i),
17. i),
9
19
(v.
v.
21.
I),
15. 4), (v. 16. i);
13
iv.
(iii.
23. 5),
14
(iii.
(iv.
18. 3),
23. 3), 15 (iv. 40. 3, (iii. 23. 4), 10 (v. 14. i);
Ti?nes, ix., p. 14
f.
On
The
this quotation,
however, see Nestle in Exp.
chapters and sections are those of Stieren.
Qiwtatio7is in
ix. 5f. (v.
emdy
f.,
Ch^'istiaii
Writings.
(iv. 5.
415
14. i); xiii.
14
27
(v. 32.
2); xiv. 22
(iii.
(v. 32.
2); xvii.
9.
(iv.
16. i); xix.
34
6.
i),
31
ff.
(iv.
5); xv. 18 31. i);
Exod. 3); xlix. 10 ff. (iv. 10. 2), i8 (iii. 10. 3). 2); iii. 7f. (iv. 7. 4), 8, 14 (iii. 6. 2), 19 (iv. 29. 2); xiii. 2 (i. 3. 4); XX. 3, 5 (i. 29. 4), 12 (iv. 9. 3); xxiii. 20 (iv. 20. 5): XXV. 40 (iv. 14. 3); xxvi. 16 (ii. 24. 3); xxxi. 13 (iv. 16. i); xxxiii. 2 f. (iv. 15. i), 20 (i. 19. i), 21 ff. (iv. 20. 9); xxxiv. 6f. (iv. 20. 8).
xxvii.
i.
27
ff.
(v. 33.
13
f.
(iv. 30.
Num.
Deut. 22 (iv.
12
(iv.
I
xvi.
iv.
xviii.
15 (iv. 26. 4); xviii. 20 (iv. 8. 3); xxiv. 17 (iii. 9. 2). 14 (iv. 16. 5), 19 (iii. 6. 5); v. 2 f. (iv. 16. 2), 8 (iii. 6. 5), 15. I, 4); vi. 4ff. (iv. 2. 2, V. 22. i); viii. 3 (iv. 16. 3); x. 16. 4), 16 (iv. 16. i); xvi. 5 f (iv. 10. i), 16 (iv. 18. i); (iv. 8. 3); xxviii. 66 (iv. 10. 2, v. 18. 3); xxx. 19 f. (iv. 16.
.
4); xxxii. I (iv. 2. i), 4 9); xxxiii. 9 (iv. 8. 3).
(iii.
i
18. 7),
(iv. 10.
2; 31.
2),
8f.
(iii.
12.
Regn.
xii.
2f. (iv. 26. 4); xv.
22
(iv. 17.
i).
2
ii.
Regn.
xi. iff. (iv. 27.
Ps.
27, xii. i ff. (iv. 27. i). 3 Regn. viii. 27 (iv. 27. i); i); xviii. 21, 24, 36 (iii. 6. 3); xix. iif. (iv. 20. 10). 8 (iv. 21. 3); iii. 6 (iv. 31. i); vii. 11 (iii. 10. 4); viii. 3 (i.
xi.
14. 8); xiii. 3 (i. 19. i); xviii. 2 (i. 14. 8), 7 (iv. 2>2>' I3); xx 5 ( 34. 3); xxii. 4f. (v. 31. 2); xxiii. i (iv. 36. 6); xxxi. if. (v. 17. 3); xxxii. 6 (i. 22. I; iii. 8. 2), 9 (ii. 2. 5, iii. 8. 2); xxxiii. I3ff. (iv.
17 3 36. 2), 17 (iv. 28. i); xxxiv. 9 (iv. 11. 3); xxxix. 7 (iv. 17. i); xliv. 3ff. (iv. 33. 11), 7 (iii. 6. i); xlviii. 13 (iv. 4. 3), 21 (iv.
41
1.
3X 23
(iii.
(v. 7.
2); xlix.
(iii.
6. i),
f.
14
17.
(iii.
2),
18
i
ff.
(iv.
17.
i); Ivii.
9.
2),
4
i,
(v. 18. 3), 9ff. (iv. 17. 1); (iii. 10. i, iv. 41. 3); f.
(iv.
Ixviii.
(iii.
27
22. 2); Ixxv. 2

(iii.
(iii.
33. 11); Ixxvii. 5

(iii.
ff.
16.
3);
Ixxix.
5.
11.
8);
Ixxxi.
f.
6. i,
iii.
19. i);
Ixxxiv. 12
4ff.
(iii.
I
(iii.
i); Ixxxv. 13 (v.
31. i); xc. 13
(iii.
23. 7); xciv.
xcviii.
(ii.
10. 4); xcv. I (iv. 9. i), 5 (iii. 6. 3); xcvii. 2 (iii. 10. 3); (iv. 33. 13); ci. 26 ff. (iv. 3. i) ; ciii. 30 (v. 33. i); cix. i
iii.
28. 7,
(iii.
6. i); ex.
10
(iii.
lof.
9.
2); cxlv. 6
(i.
10.
23. 5); cxiii. i); cxlviii. 5 f.
11
(ii.
(iii.
8.
34. 2,
iv.
3); cxxxi. 41. i).
i. 20 f. (v. 20. i); iii. 19 f. (iv. 20. 3); v. 22 (iii. 9. 3); viii. 15 (v. 24. i), 22 ff., 27 (iv. 20. 3); xix. 17 (iv. 18. 6); xxi. i (v. Sap. vi. 19 (iv. 38. 3). Hos. iv. i (1. 19. i); xii. 10 (iii. 24. i). Mic. i. 2 (iii. 20. 4); viii. 9f. (iv. 33. 12). 12, 13, iv. 20. 6).
Prov.
Amos
vii.
(iii.
19
(iii.
20. 4).
20. I).
Hab.
iii.
Joel iii. 16 (iv. 33. 11). Jon. i. 9, ii. 3, 2 (iii. 16. 7), 3ff. (iii. 20. 4, iv. 33. 11).
iii.
f.
Zech.
vii. gff. (iv.
10
(iv.
4. 3).
Mai. 33. 11). Isa. i. 2 (iv. 2.

16
6);
ii.
17. 3, iv. 36. 2); viii. i6f. (iv. 17. 3), 17 (iv. 36. 2); xii. i. 10 f. (iv. 17. 5), ii. 10 (iv. 20. 2); iv. i (iv.
I,
iv. 41. 2),
(i.
19.
i),
f.
(iv. 4. 2, iv.
îli-
13), II (iv. 17. i),
(iv.
17. I, iv. 36.
2, iv. 41.
3),
22
(iv.
12.
i),
13); v. 6 (iii. 17. 3)5 12 (ii. 22. 2, iv. 2. 4); vi. 5 (iv. 20. 8), 11 f. (v. 34. 2, v. 35. i); vii. 10 ff. (iii. 21. 4); viii. 3 f. (iii. 16.4, iv. 33. 11); ix. 6 (iii. 16. 3, iv. 33. 11); xi. I ff. (iii. 9. 3), 6ff. (v. 33. 4); xii. 2 (iii. 10. 3); xiii. 9 (v 35 i); XXV. 8 (v. 12. i), 9 (iv. 9. 2); xxvi. 10 (v. 35. i), 19 (iv.
23
(iv. 2.
f. (iv.
34. 4),
17
(iv.
^y
33.
II, V.
15.
I,
V. 34. i); xxvii.
(iv. 4.
i); xxviii. 16
(iii.
21. 7);
41 6
Writings.
xxix. 13 (iv. 12. 4); XXX. I (iv. 18. 3), 25 f. (v. 34. 2); xxxi. 9 (v. xxxv. 3 f. (iii. 20. xxxii. I (v. 34. 4) xxxiii. 20 (iii. 20. 4) 34. 4) 3, iv. ^2> II); xl 15 17 (v. 29. i); xli. 4 (iv. 5. i); xlii. 5 (iv. 2. i,
;
:
V.
12.
(iv.
2),
lofif. (iv. 9.
18
33. 14), 23 (iv.
i); xliii. 5 fif. (iv. 14. i), 10 (iii. 6. 2, iv. 5. i), 17. 3), xlv. 7 (iv. 40. i); xlvi. 9 (i. 5. 4),
16. 3); xlix. 16 (v. 35. 2); li. 6 (iv. 3. i), liii. 4 (iv. 33. 28. 5); liv. II fif. (v. 34. 4); Ivii. (iv. 34. 4), 16 (v. 12. 2); Iviii. 6 ff. (iv. 17. 3), 14 (v. 34. 2) Ixi. i ff. (iii. 9. 3) ; Ixiii. 9 Ix. 17 (iii. 20. 4); Ixv. I (iii. 6. i), I7ff. (iv. 26. 4, v. 35. 2, 34. 4), 21 (v.
xlviii.
22
(i.
II), 8
(ii.
35.
(iv.
I),
22
3),
(v.
15. I),
(v.
25
(v. 33. 4), Ixvi.
(iv.
2.
5),
(iv.
17. 3),
18.
22
36.
i).
22
2);
(iv. 2. I);
vii.
f.
V.
(iv. 41.
5 (v. 15. 3); ii. 29 (iv. 37. 7); iv. 3, v. 7. 2); vi. 17 ff. (iv. 36. 2), 20 (iv. 17.
Jer.
i.
2f.
(iv. 17.
2),
(iv.
36. 2), 21 (iv.
17.
3),
25
(iv.
36. 5),
29
x.
(iv. 36.
(iii. 6.
2);
viii.
16
(v. 30.
2);
ix.
(iv. 25. 3),
24
f.
f.
(iv. 17.
3);
18.
3); xi. 15 (iv. 17. 3); xiv. 9 (iv. 3, iv. 33. 11); xxii. 17 (iv. 18. 3, iii. 21. 9); (iv. 26. i), 23 (iv. 19. 2), 29 (v. 17. 4); xxxi. 31. i); xxxv. 15 (iv. 36. 5); xxxvi. 30 f. (iii.
II
8.
33. 12), xvii.

xxiii.
(iii.
(v. 34. i),
20
(iv.
(iii.
10
fif.
(v. 34. 3),
26
21. 9); xxxviii. 11
21).
Lam.
ii.
iv.
20
(iii.
20.
3).
Bar.
iv.
Ezech.
25
25
f.
(iv.
(v.
34. i); xxxvi.
20. 10); xx. 12 (iv. 16. i), 26 (iv. 23. 4); xxxvii.
36 23 f.
i
fif.
fif.
v.
fin.
(v.
i),
(iv.
15. 15.
;
35. i). xxviii.
(v.
i),
12 (v.
34. i).
Dan.
ii.
23
f.,
41
;
ff.
(v.
26. i);
iii.
24
(v. 5. 2)
vii.
(v.
33X 10 (ii 7 4), 14 (iv. 20. viii. II f., 23 ff. (v. 25. 4) ix. 7
(i.
11), 2ofif. (v. 25. 3), 27 (v. 34. 2); (v. 25. 4); xii. 3 f., 7 (iv. 26. i), 9 f.
f.,
19. 2), xii. 13 (v. 34. 2).
Sus. 52
56
(iv.
26. 3).
Bel
3f.,
24
(iv. 5. 2).
The
tested
xii.
Latin version,
in
which the greater part of these

it
quotations are clothed, appears to be exact where

(cf.
(i.
can be
e.g.
Isa. xlvi.
2)).
(i.
5.
4),
xlviii.
22
(i.
16. 3),
Dan.
19.
obvious that in
Assuming that it is so throughout, it is Irenaeus we have an important witness to the
Lxx. text of the second century.
The
following variants taken

his
from Books
text:
iii.,
iv.,
will
shew the general tendencies of
Gen.
salute?)!
xlix.
10 cui repositiun
siistiiiui te,
est (M""^
(cf.
F'""''''
tuam
Domine
Luc.) secimduin typum XXV. i\o fades oimiia (F eorupi quae vidisti. Num. xxiv. 17 siirget dux in Israel (cf Heb. Deut. V. 22 (19) SCripLXX. . e^ .). B'^Â Luc); xxxii. 6 sit ea in duabus tabulis lapideis
^^)\
""^
8 in
ap. Field).
Exod.
^,
{-\-
Cf. Justin, Dial. 120.

et fecit te et creavit te ( Luc.) Regn. xv. 22 aicditiis I
Writings.
AF, enXaaev ae bonus super sacrificium
+
;
417
,
ciet
Ps. xxxix. 7 mires autein perfecisti mihi (possibly a correction from the Gallican Psalter, but a few cursives read after
Luc).
{
.
the Heb.
>
or
3>)\
;
xliv.
\ facti sunt tibifilii {^^ KKY eyevr](^/^?

;
ag. B*i< iyevv.) xlix. lo bestiae terrae {aypov N'^-Â, N'^-ÂR) BN*), 15 171 die tribidationis tuae ci. 27 inutabis eos (aWc'iêts N* eXi'lety B(i<'--^)AR(T)) cix. i siippeda-
ncwn pedum tuorum

A(0),
pedes eitis viduavi
terrae
(with i<AO*, a hexaplaric addition, cf. Field, ad toe.); xxix. 13 popitliis hie labiis me honorat iv); xliii. 23 7ion servisti (om. with eV ^* mihi in sacrificiis^=ov\hV\ iv fecisti in (cf. A* enoiHC<\eeN) Ixv. i qzii 7ne 7io?i quae7'ic7it NAQ, ag. ). Jer. xliii. 31 i7ife7'a77i super eos XAO*, ag. aiWov BQ^''''), locutus SU771 super eos (eV Bar. v. 2 laetitiae (LXX. AQ, BX).
(, );( {-^ ? ? . { ^-^

not
(with N'^-ÂT).
cxiii. 11
om. eV
Mic.
vii.
19 ipse
AQ)...proi-
{... 8
ag.
{p\
AQ,
), om. ). Isa.
;
B*0*)
'^'^'', ag.
Hab. iii. 3 17 iustificate xi. 4 argiiet gloriosos BAQ*) xxv^ 9

i.
;
{ (
(),
;
XAO
^
10
is
[]
).
A special interest attaches to Irenaeus' extracts from Daniel

For the most part they follow the version of Theodotion quite
closely,
even
in
the Greek
vii.
additions.
Two
worth noting: Dan.
Clement of Rome, nor Th. Dan. xii.

ovTOL yap oi
ol
in a
it is by form which agrees with neither lxx.
quoted by Irenaeus as
i^payvoL
Th.).
^,
is
is
cited in the form

etcrtv,
k^.pay.voi
where
9
is
ol
,
of
the
exceptions are
/-
avvteVre?
a LXX. reading, whilst
from Th. and
the
rest
(cf.
sentence
seems to be suggested by
Valentinian source, which
7.
his version
is
<;...,
freedom.
This quotation however
professedly taken from a

for its
may account
Like Irenaeus, Justin quotes profusely, and his aim as

to cite his
an apologist and a controversialist compels him
documents
Avith
some regard
to
verbal
accuracy.
For the
criticism of the lxx. his writings afford

^
even richer materials
See above,
p. 47.
S.
s.
27
41
Writijigs.
than those of Irenaeus, since his subject leads him, especially

in the Dialogue with
Trypho the Jew,

matter;
to quote long extracts
without break or interpolated

entire
more than once an

it
Psalm, or a passage exceeding in length one of our

chapters,
is
modern
copied into his pages, presumably as
stood in his text of the Greek Old Testament.

In the following list of Justin's quotations from the LXX. account has been taken only of his undoubted writings. yi. = the First Apology, Z^. = the Dialogue; the Second Apology contains nothing to our purpose.
Gen. i. i ff. {A. 59, 64), 26 ff. {D. 62); iii. 15 {D. 102), 22 {D. 62); ix. 24 27 {D. 139); xi. 6 {D. 102); XV. 6 {D. 92); xvii. 14 {D. 23); xviii. 2ff. {D. 126), I3ff. {D. 56); xix. iff. {D. 56), 23 xxvi. 4 {D. 120); xxviii. 10 25 {D. 56), 27 f. {D. 56) 19 {D. 58, 30 (Z^ 58, 126); xxxv. 6 120); xxxi. 10 13 {D. 58); xxxii. 22 12 {A. 32, 54; D. 52, 120). Exod. ii. 23 {D. 10 {D. 58); xlix. 8 4 {D. 126); xvii. 16 \D. 59); iii, 24 {D. 60), 3ff. {A. 63); vi. 2 Lev. 49); XX. 22 {D. 75); xxiii. 20 f. {D. 75); xxxii. 6 (A 20). Num. xi. 23 (Z>. 126); xxi. 8 f. {A. 60); xxiv. xxvi. 40 f. {D. 16). 17 {A. 32, B. 106). Deut. x. 16 f. (Z>. 16); xxi. 23 {D. 96); xxvii. 26 {D. 95); xxxi. 2f. {D. 126), 1618 [D. 74); xxxii. 7 9 (Z>. 131), 15 {D. 20), 1623 {D. 119), 20 (Z). 27, 123), 22 {A. 60), 43 vi. 2 (Z>. 130); xxxiii. 13 Jos. v. 2 (Z?. 24); v. 13 17 (Z?. 91). 2 Regn. vii. 1416 (Z>. 118). (Z). 62). 3 Regn. xix. 10, 18 {D. Ps. i. {A. 40); ii. {A. 40); ii. 7 f {D. 122); iii. 5 f (^. 38, 39). Z). 97); viii. 3 {D. 114); xiv. 2ff. {D. 27); xvii. 44 f. {D. 28); xviii. 3ff. (^. 40, D. 64); xxi. 124 {D. 18), 8 f. (^. 38), 17 ff. (^. 35, 38, Z>. 97); xxiii. {D. 36); xxiii. 7 (î. 51, Z>. 85); xxxi. 2 (Z). 141); xliv. {D. 38); xliv. 7ff. (Z?. 56, 63); xlvi. 69 {D. Z7); xlix. {D. 22); Ixvii. 19 {D. 39); Ixxi. i 34, 64, 121); Ixxi. 19 1719 (Z>. 64); Ixxxi. (Z?. 124); xcv. I ff. {A. 41), 5 {D. 79), 10 {D. 72); xcviii. (Z). 37); xcviii. i 7 (Z). 64); cix. (Z>. 32); cix. ii8); cxxvii. 3 (Z>. no); iff. {A. 45, Z?. 56), 3ff. (I). 63), 4 Prov. viii. 21 cxlviii. I f. (D. 85). 29 (D. 129), 24 36 (B. 61). Job i. 6 (Z>. 79). Hos. X. 6 (Z>. 103). Amos v. 18 vi. 7 (Z). 22;. Mic. iv. I 7 (Z?. 109); V. 2 (^. 34). Joel ii. 28 f. (Z>. 87). Jon. iv. 4ff. {D. 107). Zech. ii. 6 (^. 52), 11 (Z). 119), 10 iii. 2 (Z?. 115); iii. iff. {D. 79); vi. 12 {B. 121); ix. 9 {A. 35, Z?. 53); xii. 10 Mai. i. 1012 (B. 12 {A. 52), 12 (B. 121); xiii. 7 {B. 53). f. Isa. i. 3 {A. 63), 7 (^ 47), 9 (^ 53, ^ Mo), 28, 41). M37), i6ff {A. 44, 61), 23ff (Z?. 27, 82); ii. 3f (^ 39), 5 ff- (^ (^ i?), 24, 135); iii.9(^ 136), 15 i^- i33), i6(Z?. 27); V. 1825 {B. 17, 133), 20 (^. 49); vi. 10 {B. 12); vii. 1016
9 n

(Z>. 42, 66),
;
Writings.
;
419
14 {A. ^l) ; viii. 4 {D. 77) ix. 6 {A. 35) xi. 13 {D. {D. 123); xvi. I {D. 114); xix. 24 f. (Z?. 123); xxvi. 2ff. (Z>. 24); xxix. 13 f. {D. 27, 32, 78, 123); XXX. I 5 {D. 79); xxxiii. 13 7 {D. 69), 4 ff. (yi. 48); xxxix. 3 19 {D. 70); XXXV. i {D. 50); xl. I 17 (/^. 50); xlii. 14 {D. 123, 135), 513 {D. 65), 6f. (Z). 26), i6{D. 122), I9f. (Z>. 123); xliii. 10 {D. 122), 15 {D. 135); xlv. 23 (^. 52); xlix. 6 (Z>. 121), 8 {D. 122); 1. 4 {D. 102), 6ff. (^. 38); li. 4f. (Z?. II); lii. lof. {D. 13), 13liii. 8 {A. 50), lii. 15 liii. i {D. 118); liii. iff. (Z?. 42); liii. 812 {A. 51), 9 (Z:>. 97); liv. I {A. 53); Iv. 3f. (Z>. 12), 313 {D. 14); Ivii. i ff. {A. 48), 1-4 {D. 16), I (Z?. no), 2 (Z?. 97, 118), 5f. {D. 27); Iviii. i-ii (Z). 15), 2 (^. 35), 6f. {A. 37), i3ff. (/^. 27); Ixii. 10 Ixiii. 6 {D. 26); Ixii. 12 (Z7. 119); Ixiii. 15 Ixiv. 12 {D. 25); Ixiii. 17 {A. 52); Ixiv. 10 ff. {A. 47, 52); Ixv. iff. (^. 49, D. 24), I (Z). 119), 2 (^. 35, 38, D. 97), 8ff (Z). 136), 9-12 {D. 135), 1725 (Z. 8i); Ixvi. I {A, yj , D. 22), 511 (Z>. 85), 23 f. (/?. Jer. ii. 12 {D. 114), 13 (Z>. 19); iv. 3 44), 24 (^. 52, Z>. 140). {D. 28); vii. 21 ff. {D. i-z); ix. 25 ff. (Z). 28), 26 (^. 53); xxxviii. Thren. iv. 20 (^. 55). 15 (Z>. 78), 27 {D. 123), 31 f. (Z?. II). Ezech. iii. 17 19 (Z). 82); xiv. 20 {D. 44, 140); xvi. 3 (Z). 77); XX. 19 26 \D. 21); xxxvi. 12 {D. 123); xxxvii. 7 ff. (^. 53). Dan. vii. 9 28 (Z>. 31), 13 (.^. 51).
87); xiv.
I
From
the circumstances of Justin's
life
we
are prepared to
find in his writings an eclectic text of the lxx.

birth but of
Of
Palestinian
Greek parentage, he seems to have divided his maturer life between Ephesus and Rome; and each of these associations may have supplied textual peculiarities. The general result may be gathered from a few specimens of the
readings exhibited by Justin's longer extracts from the O.T.
Gen.
xxviii.
6 he einev
DE
26
eVt
I
I] els
DE*
xxxiii.
] ,
I
evXoyT](rr]s,
30 1 6
,,
eataBri]
,
pr
'AF , Om
(but
17
. ., ]
10
|
19.
11
(,
)^''
D^'^K
\
8
I
Seas I] pr Kvfuos om eVi 2, 3, 4 (eV)
om
I
]
om
|
13 Oeos 2
D^'^^R
22 3*^ 24 ayyeXos 28 om eTi, eaTai
19
eKeivov
eV//,
>^'
1
infr.
D.
26).
Deut.
|
Beco, Beols
20
om
rjpepoiv,
AF
|
|
22 KavurjaeTat] pr
17'
13
13
14
<'
f'^']
"^
(cf.
'
om
AF)
15
.] ,
29
^detaav] 21
e
\
( ^
1
.'
om
1
,, ,
1
,
23-
eV*
eV
D D
\
Deut.
pr
, AF
2
27
420

1
Writings.
ttj
|
('\ pr \
eV,
AF
17
eVarn'oi/]
I
-, AF
\
^ '\
J OS. v.
I
eVj
2
\
tSev]
d(] 14 (so A, but
om
yrj
(^ (^
N^-Û
j^tc.aR*
J
15
adding
)
2
ayios]
om
II
eyco
7 aI/^/J7rr,
NRU
17
N'^-^RT 3 evavTiov] pr roO, i<<=-aART oo'êdy, 10 ay N'^-Â 1 6 5<c.ajâ 21 +rar

I
, ' , ] ]( , ^ { ^^]] ] , ]' ] , ] ] /] , ] ^ * ] ^, ^.

29
|
,
+ 61?,
2^
], ]] , , yu
4
^
16
NARU
/^^/] om
om
3] + ,
6,
(^, ?, NAR RU
Ps. xxi.
N'^^
I
j
... ' ] -. .
3
vi. 2.
1
Om
\ |
vCi'
|
vi.
e^
om
24.
4 roC
2,
23
^^.
,' eVr;
,/'
'^-^.
iK(^{)yi],
|
(but in D. (but >. 129 omits art.)

KCti ?] Amos .
(}, . ^<=^ . ( ^?)

t<*^-ÂT
NRT
,
viii.
8 /cal (XU) 12 /37^^/] + N^-^R 15 X=-ÂRU Ps. xlix.
(^,
4
1
/,
RT
9 22
7 oia/xaprvpoi/iat, N'^-^T
/^;,
,
24
25
']
K<:-^RT
Prov.
21^
36.
29
/
()"
26
1
8 .
|
35
28 3^
23
^^]
;] 7^/] +
20
|
,
.
ig
22
( y^] 25
AQ*"^
opyavov
om
om
76;/]
| I
+Aeyet Kvptos, pr
20
om
eVi Toiy
pyo
AQ*.
vi.
(a doublet for
|
the Greek which follows, ascribed to
,
I
Q^
.]
Symmachus by SH)
\
om
22, 36, 42
Heb.
ey.,
Symm.
\
']
|
2 4-eiy
"20, 36, 5^ ^")
pr
om.
'^^'
AQ
(a
aoyv
(a doublet)] eV
(Heb.)
iii.
^']
doublet of /cat (cf. Eus. d.e.,

\ |
(. .).,
|
Zach.
2.
p.
252)
I I
iLyv^]]
yvova
om
i.
'^-^, and, without
in textu ex alio videlicet interprete" (Field).

I
JO
AQ
D. 41)
^^
' poya]
(
)..
\
.
Om
|
,
|
12 /}
iii.
i
] \
\
" 86
]+,
ig
^
, om
/3] om
II
(Heb.).
eya]
Isa.
i.
,
eav
Mai.
|
om
12.
1,
6
|
i'peov] epeov,
{.
NAQr
omits
p. 407
(^ , , ],,..)
{
7
|
Om
1
/xeya
20.
See above,

Isa.
lii.
Writings.
\\
iv.
421
13
A.D.
^., 9
6 $ / /^] ? ^^ ^?, *) ^? ^^ ' . ] < \>\ + ) ., ]

D.
\
A.D.
II
Ixiii. 6.
AQ*
om
X
I
,^ / '] ^], ] . . , 6\, , ^ . .) , ,

liii.
15 .
3
liii.
12.
lii.
13
]
|
om eV
2 eVaj/ri'or]
. .
\
^.
(cf.
.,
. ?
1
eVt
om Om
3 -^
KUpiOf ^.
8 Toi
A.D., + A.D., Q^
B^-^NAQ
12
|
A.D.
pr
II
^. i<AQ
Isa.
om
1,
12 /3'] pr
().
/'/]
|
(cf.
Svmm.
Heb.)
3 +^771/01'
Svmm., Heb.
yrjr,
(a doublet of
5
NAQ
+eif
om
om
B^'-^SAQ,
i<AQ
di/rfXu/Sero,
To shew
it
Justin's relation to the
two recensions of Daniel,
is
necessary to place some verses side by side with the
corresponding contexts of the lxx. and Theodotion\

Justin, Diat. 31.
(
6
Dan.
6
epiov
, , , - ,. ^ ^^ , ^ . ^ - ^ ^^ - ' ' ( , ^^^ - ( ' ^. ^. ^

(\
) ^\,
'
('),
epiov
^ ^ ^,
. LXX. ' ,
9
14>
Ibid.,
Th.
,
;
wcrei
epiov
^^
tbcei
eXi-
<aiopevov.
^\('
<.
cIXkcv
0(03-
Words common
those
small uncials; thick cursives. three texts.
and LXX. but not in Th. are printed in to Justin and Th. but not to LXX., in Most of the remaining words are to be found in the
to Justin
common
42:
Writings.
Ibid.,
, - )^ , ^ ,\- , \( ', ^ , , \ ,, ( , . ^ < \ 4 \ ( ,

Justin, Dial. 31.
Kepas
\
J
Dan.
vii.
14?
LXX.
Th.
eXuXei,
iXoKa
(Is
'
--
[-
, \ \
(. [, , ( ' ' ^ . ,
XpONOC
XpONOC
iv
j/e0e-
5,
- . , .
B<\ClAlKH,
^
HTIC
'
ev
VOS,
'
6-
. 3
-\.
reNH
,
7]
, -,Xfia,
THC THC
.-' 5<\
\
^-
^'}, . -
The
(a)
Student will notice that Justin's O.T. text

it
is
a mixed one.
In Genesis
contains
many
readings of
(l?)
or
DE
where
those later uncials depart from A;

casionally supports
in
or
AF
against B,
Deuteronomy it ocand in the Psalms
the group
ART,
with the concurrence sometimes of *, some-
times of
i^^^;
(d) in the
Prophets
it
not seldom agrees with
(AQ, AQ). In the Minor Prophets it is startling to find in Justin more than one rendering which is attributed to Symmachus and as it is in the highest degree improbable that
;
Quotations in early CJu'istian

his text has
Writings.
423
been altered from the

that
text of
a later time from a Hexaplaric copy of the lxx.,

to
Symmachus, or at we are led

an older
the
conclusion
these
readings
belong to
version or recension from which both Justin
and Symmachus
drew.
It
is
at
least
possible that
many
of the readings in
which Justin appears to stand alone may be attributable to the
same
origin.
Justin's Daniel text requires separate
notice.
It
will
be
seen to be in fundamental agreement with the lxx., but not

without a
fair
number
in
of Theodotion's readings.
meets us here, as
the other hand
as clearly belong to the Chigi text.
,
to
Theodotion, or rather to the version on which he worked.
,
to
,
same
read
Clement of Rome, and the phrases
.)<;,
,. , ,
are
fickle
in the
(D"7i<?)
;(/,
undoubtedly due tO
and the whole of V. 1 That this mixture is not

is
,On
clear
due
an eclectic taste or a
text
memory
from the
fact that the
meets us
Latin version of the
passage as given by Tertullian\
In a few instances Justin shews a disposition to

the LXX. reading.
E.g. in Ps. Ixxxi. (Ixxxii.)
for
7,
criticise
he probably
proposed
stituted
Similarly in Deut. xxxii. 8 he realises that the LXX. has subOeov for
?i<"i":^p:?l
is
Gen.
xlix.
10 the reading of the lxx.
He '?
maintains
-]
though according to the Jewish interpreters of words should rather be rendered I.
His
tions
text
;
of the lxx. contained
some remarkable
, /.
that
his
^.
in
time the
interpola-
thus he quotes Ps. xcv. (xcvi.) 10^ in the form 6

Old Latin and
1
-
Burkitt,
Itala, p. 2 3ff.
Dial. 114. In the editions occurs twice, but the context appears to shew that the singular should stand in the quotation. Dial. i3f.
'^
424
Writings.
Jeremiah the words
-
Sc
vi.
yrjv
which appear to have found a place

21:
eiTrev
KapStav otl
^
8.
' ^ ^. " 8 , / ^, / ) ,
', and ascribes to
^^/,
He
6
cites also
SOme words
in his
copy
after 2 Esdr.
(?
/^
Wveat^.
7
is
eav
?!
iv
,
iav
These passages appear
to
be of
Christian origin, yet Justin
so sure of their genuineness that

their copies.
he accuses the Jews of having removed them from

Hippolytus
of
Portus,
his
we learn from the inand from other ancient sources, was the author of a large number of Biblical commentaries^ These included works on the Hexaemeron on Exodus, and and its sequel portions of Numbers and Samuel; on the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs; on Zechariah, Isaiah, JereOf these miah, parts of Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel. exegetical works there remains only the commentary on Daniel
as
scription
on the chair of
statue
/^
^)
Ap. i. 41, Dial. 73. Cf. Tert. c. Marc. iii. 19, adv. Jtid. 10. No Greek MS. of the Psalter is known to contain the words except ^\(^. cod. 156 (see p. 160), which gives them in the suspicious form A ligno is found in the Latin of R and in some other O.L. texts. Cf. the hymn Vexilla regis: "impleta sunt quae concinit David fideli carmine
^
existing
dicendo nationibus Regnavit a ligno Deus" (for the literature see Julian, Did. of Hymnology, p. 1220). 2 Dial. 72. The same Apocryphon is quoted by Irenaeus (iii. 20. 4, iv. 22. I, 33. I, 12, V. 31. i) and attributed by him to Jeremiah (iv. ,. i) or Cf. Lightfoot, Clement, ii. p. 40, and the writer's to Isaiah (iii. 20. 4).
|
Apostles' Creed'^, p. ^8
3
4
5
f.
Dial.
ib.
fif.
his works see Lightfoot, Clement of Rome, ii. pp. 388 if., 419 Edited by G. W. Bonwetsch and H. Achelis in the new Berlin Corpus {Hippolytus'' Werke, i., Leipzig, 1897).
On
Qiwtations in early Christian

with fragments of most of the
rest.
WiHtings.
425
omnes haereses yields but

tations \ but the
Httle in the
The great treatise Adversus way of Scriptural quo-
supply a considerable number of

Lxx. which
minor theological works collected by Lagarde" fairly long extracts from the
Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Prophets.

is
exhibited in these passages
interest, as a
, 8]
vi.
, (
:
iii.
/^
^\-\-, AO
1
. -'^-^
II
, ' ^^ . , , ] ' , ^ ]\\ ) , ] '\ ' . , ] , ?]

KXe-yj/ecs.
' ^+ ', ,
xlix.
Gen.
8
i.
']
5
i^w specimens
(l),
ff.
(Lag.
\D.
I
will
28 102 (2))
12
<(^
8
(cf.
9 eK
(2)
vie (2)
()
\. ^^
is
The
text of the
often
of
much
shew.
(l)
(2)
(),
Field,
'ô.p^
cf.
Exod. XX. Deut. xxxii. 34 f

xxxiii.
pr eV
AF.
v8pvovTai,
14 ev (R) (B^-^XR)
*^^
8 eKokvyj/av ivTponrj
xxiii.
, , .^ -] 34
35
22
^^.
27
a-rrodeapeveL.
B^
30 ^^
TrXavTjTts, X'^-Â.
12 8 KoreVarrt]
V.
Am.
.
Ps. Ixviii.
I
13 ff
, ^/]
j
ad loc.)
Ruth
\
ii.
ff.
Prov.
ii.
29 f
29
XA
Job
AO*.
\
Mic.
ii.
7 f
/^
^^.
Q'^^.
(cf.
7rpiV]-|-7;
?7/Lipai/]
Isa.
1
]. , .
pr
12
ff.
v. 5
'4
5
(sic).
Mai.
iv.
eVi
om.
iv bis,
NAQr
4
14
tjJ
6 Kupioy
12
(cf.
Svmm.).
xiv.
ff.
II els
1
(h
7rpc)$] ety,
XAQF
\
(ag.
ii.
I
,
ff
).
14
I
'\-\-, Q
The
] '^,
^
;^^]
+
^/^/]
21
.
(cf.
Ezech.
xxviii. 5
) ., ]
6<*
?}/]
13
Ixvi.
24
,
om +
20
5 ^.'\
, AO
Dan.
text of Hippolytus,
it
will
be seen, like most of the

in the Pentateuch,
in the Prophets.
patristic texts, leans slightly to

i^^^
AF
^* or
in the poetical books,
and
AQ
At the
^ The references in the Index locorum of Duncker and SchneideAvin's edition (Gottingen, 1859) direct the reader for the most part to mere allusions, or citations of only a few consecutive words. ^ In Hippolyti Rotnani quae feruntur omnia Graece (Leipzig, 1858).
426
Quotations in early C/wistian

it
IVrittJigs.
same time
is full
of surprises, and often stands quite alone
among
existing witnesses.
Our last witness is Clement of Alexandria. Clement 9. had learnt the Christian faith during his early travels in Asia Minor and Magna Graecia, and he may have received copies
of O.T. writings from his
first
Christian masters.
that
Hence
hand
it
it
must not be too

quotations
is
hastily
assumed
the text of his O.T. the other

is
purely Alexandrian.
On
reasonable to suppose that during the period of his literary

activity
he was familiar with the Alexandrian text and used

his
it
when he quoted from
MS.
On
the whole therefore
we
may
expect his quotations to be fairly representative of the

text
Biblical
current
at
Alexandria
during
the
generation
preceding the compilation of the Hexapla.
tures profusely, but his extracts
Clement quotes both the Jewish and the Christian scripseldom extend beyond two or
three verses,
and
are often broken by
with considerable freedom.
His purpose was didactic and

he aims to
not
polemical
even in the
^;
comments
or copied
persuade rather than to compel assent, whilst the Paedagogus
and the Stromateis are addressed exclusively to persons under instruction, to w^hom the Scriptures were a familiar text-book. Hence he is exact only when verbal precision is necessary; often it is sufficient for his purpose to work into his argument a few words from a Scriptural context, giving the sense of the
rest in his
own
words.
Still it is
possible even in these broken
references to catch glimpses of the text which lay before him,
and
in the dearth of early Christian literature

little
emanating from
Alexandria, these are of no
value to the student of the
Greek
Bible'.
generally
full
and accurate index of Clement's
1 Clement's text of the Gospels has been examined by Mr P. M. Barnard {Biblical texts of Clemoit of Alexandria in the Four Gospels and the Acts^ Cambridge, 1899) with some interesting and important results. His text
Writings.
;
427
here
Biblical quotations will be found in the edition of Potter

it
must
suffice
to
give
some specimens of the
text
which
they exhibit in the Pentateuch, the poetical books, and the

Prophets.
(rt) Gen. i. 26 {sirom, (elsewhere CI. reads 6. 24 {stro?n. V. 54) 6 Se
trept. 108, strojn.
4 68)
8, ] )
, $ ^,
v.
29)
UKOva
or omits the pronoun).
, ^
(eV
23
ii.
33)
9
Lev.
DE.
I
. {. (\
*, eV
^
|
AF.
xviii.
B^ÂF)
AF,
-,
ray 12 TratSfufi,
' ^ ',
{)
14
Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff. {strotn. iv. iii). N'^-ÂR. xcv. 5 {protrept. 62) cii. 14 {paed. i. 62) (ci. Iren.). /xe (ypaed. i. 79)
BNRT.
NAC
LXX.)
68)
'
ii.
{paed.
, , ] { . ,\ ]
+
yap
O.L. in
ix.
31)
\ , \ /, ', ^^, , {, ? (, {^, (8 2 -, /] ^^. ?? \

13
Idelu,
(F) 4^ ^ Kpia
Prov,
i.
25 {paed.
iii.
i.
]-{-
).
ff.
85) [strom.
e ttoUs
).
. ]
ii.
,,' ,
Deut.
{ ^,
ff.
^ ...
Exod.
xx. 13
46).
xxxvii.
-^^
ff.
{pro3 eV
i.
{strom.
ii.
*)
+
xxxii.
23
ff
AF
{paed.
24
4-
AF NAR
BN* Th.
j
cxl. 5
cl.
ov
4).
6 eV
(cf. '^-^
SH
pr --)
i.
xxiii.
(;
).
Sir. i. 18 {paed. (so far 248),
9 {paed. ii. 54) ^*? xxxiv. 25 {paed. O.L.

i.
xxxvi. 6 {paed.
42)
/^,]
ii.
(cf.
ii.
68) om.
6,
55? 254)
xxxviii.
NAC)]
, Heb. B^-ÂQ (om *).

Mai.
i.
xxxix. 13 {paed. 296, O.L. 1 8 {paed. ii. 44) (^) Am. iv. 13 {protrept. 79)
76)
Nah.
,
I ff.
iii.
4 {paed.
11
10
i.
24) Uios
BSOr,
{paed.
. ,+^?
ff.
{stj'oin. v. 137).
(cf.
i.
61).
,
A)
|
om
('^-^).
|
Th.
opior]
xi.
xxix. 13 {paed.
i.
76)
'
, \
J
,
om.
Justin).
i.
81)
B^-^Q.
I,
AO
Isa. ix.
('^-^)
Th.,
Symm.
{, ^+
|
6 {paed.
xi.
(cf.
Iren.).
, -
of the LXX. is not likely to be equally instructive, but a patient investigator.
it
ought to reward
428
Kovres
i.
88\
i.
Ixvi. 13 (ypaed.
iv.
21)
)
24
37): V. 24 abbreviated as in 165 f.). 24

I
anarthr.,
).
ft
^](
Bar. iii. 13 (paed. i. 92) om ;^//, {paed. i. 80) eh {strom. i. 125) as in Th. (B*), with the addition
8 ^
.
8, BXO
i
( ^
.
Cor.
i.
Writings.
Alt. XV.,
(cf.
Mc.
vii.).
Jer. ix.
xiii.
|
2 5 aTretêtr
anarthr.,
(el
was
. ,
31.
? ,
A)
e'/xoi
23 f. {paed. 24 ff. {strom.
NAQ
(,
i.
xxiii.
ris,
23
f.
27 {protrcpt. j8).
ei
.Thren.
ix.
\
it
(cf.
^^^).
It
Dan.
24
ff.
This examination has been but

limited.
partial,
even within
the narrow field to which
has dealt only
case of Hippolytus and Clement of Alexandria, only with a few of these. Moreover, the student who wishes to examine the whole of the evidence must not limit himself to the few great writers who have been
with direct quotations, and in the
named.
Epistle
Even
to
if
he adds the writings of Aristides, Tatian,

Teaching and
there
will
Athenagoras, Theophilus, and the anonymous

Diognetus,
still
remain the fragments
and by the researches of and the Pseudo-Clementine, apocryphal, and Gnostic Still more important help literature of the second century. may be obtained from Latin Christian writers who quote the O.T. in the Old Latin version, e.g. Cyprian, Lucifer, îgilius of Thapsus, the Donatist Tyconius, and the author of the
collected in the Relliquiae Sacrae
Pitra,
Speculum''.
This
part
of
the
evidence
was
collected
for
Holmes and
nent form,
if
Parsons, and will be presented in a more perma-
not at so
much
length, in the apparatus of the
larger Septuagint.
Much
useful
and
interesting
ing the lines of
Dr Hatch's attempt
the early evidence in

^
work might be done by followto collect and compare reference to particular texts and conart.
iii.
See above, p. 97, and the (already mentioned, p. 88).
Old Latin Versions
in Hastings'
D. B.
Quotations in early Cki'istian

stantly recurring extracts from the lxx.^
Writings.
429
it
Perhaps however
would be expedient
apostolic
to
limit
such an investigation to postto
Christian writers,
and
carry
it
beyond
Justin.
Moreover, Dr Hatch's proposal to estimate the value of MSS., "according as they do or do not agree with such early quo-
seems to be at least precarious. It is conceivable and even probable that the peculiarities of early patristic quotations may be partly due to corruption incident upon the
tations,"
process of citing, whether from
memory
or from a
MS.; and
for various other reasons the text oi a fourth century
MS. may
on the whole present a purer text than that which appears in This point, however, must be rea second century writing.
served for fuller consideration
1 1.
in a later
chapter ^
Biblical criticism
With Origen the science of Christian
and hermeneutics may be said to have begun. In the Old Testament his interest was peculiarly strong it supplied him
;
with the amplest opportunities of exercising his

interpretation
;
skill in allegorical
knowledge both of the original and of the Greek versions prepared him to deal with the difficulties Unhappily there is no class of his writings which of his text.
his
and
Of his great commentaries on the Old Testament, only fragments have survived and the Homilies, with the exception of one on the Witch of Endor, and nineteen on the book of Jeremiah, have reached us only in the Latin translations of Rufinus and Jerome. But even fragments and versions of Origen are precious, and the followhas suffered so severely.
;
ing
list
of his O.T. remains^
may be
of service to the student
of the Lxx.
Genesis. Fragments of Commentary (t. i., iii.), and notes from catenae. HomiUes (17) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Exodiis. Fragments of Commentary, and notes. Homilies (13) in Latin,
1
2
2
Essays, i. p. 129 ff. ("On Early Quotations from the Septuagint.") See Part iii. c. vi. They are collected in Migne, F. G. xi. xvii.
430
tr.
Writings
by Rufinus. Leviticus. Fragments and notes from catenae. Homilies (i6) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Numbers. Notes from Homilies (28) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Deuteronojuy. catenae. Notes from catenae, <S:c. Joshua. Fragments and notes from Homilies (26) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Judges. catenae, &c. Notes from catenae. Homilies (9) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Homily virkp i 4 Kingdoms. Ruth. A note on Ruth i. 4. Fragments. Homily in Latin on i Regn. Psalms. Fragments of the Commentaries and Homilies; i. ff. Homilies (9) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus [on notes from catenae.
)/.
Proverbs. Fragments and notes, Greek xxxviii.]. Canticles. FragEcclesiasics. Notes from catenae. ments and notes. Homilies (2) in Latin, tr. by Jerome. Commentary (prol., tt. i. iv.) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Job. Notes The xii. Fragment of a Homily, in Latin. from catenae. Isaiah. Prophets. Fragment on Hosea xii. (in Philocal. 8). Fragments (2) of the Commentaries, in Latin. Homilies (9)
Pss. xxxvi. and Latin.
in
Latin,
tr.
by Jerome.
Jeremiah.
Homilies (19)
in
Greek,
and notes from catenae. Homilies (2) in Latin, tr. by Jerome. Notes from catenae. Ezekiel. Fragments, and Lameniatio7is. Homilies (14) in Latin, tr. by Jerome. notes from catenae.
12.
It is
impossible within the limits of an Intioduction

all
to
enumerate
the
ecclesiastical
writers
who during
is
the
golden age of
patristic literature
quoted or commented upon

not
a
the Greek Old Testament.

specialist in this field
But the student who
may be
glad to have before him the
names and dates

O.T. exegesis.
to
of the principal
Greek Fathers, with some

in brackets direct
notice of such of their extant works as are concerned with
The Roman numerals

;
him
the volumes of Migne's Patrologia Graeca., in which the

in the case
authors are to be found
of a few writings which

others, references
are not included in the Patrologia
and some
are given to other editions.
Acacius of Caesarea, 1366.
Ammonius
Daniel.
of Alexandria,
(Ixxxv.)
c.
Fragments in catenae. Fragments on Genesis and 460.
Anastasius of Antioch, t598. (Ixxxix.) Anastasius of Sinai, cent. vi. vii. (Ixxxix.) Apollinarius of Laodicea (the younger), +c. 393. Draseke's edition in Texte u. Unters. vii.)
(xxxiii.,
cf.
Writings.
431
iv. (ed. Lagarde). Apostolical Constitutions, cent. iii. Asterius of Amasea, c. 400. (xl.) Athanasius of Alexandria, t373. On the Psalms; Titles of the Psalms, fragments in the catenae, (xxv. xxviii.) Basil of Caesarea, t379. Homilies on the Hexaemeron, the Psalms and Isaiah i. xvi. (xxix. xxxii.) Basil of Seleucia, c. 450. Homilies on the O.T. (Ixxxv.) Cosmas Indicopleustes, c. 550. (Ixxxviii.) Cyril of Alexandria, t444. Works on the Pentateuch ^?
eV
the xii. Prophets fragments on Kingdoms, Psalms, Proverbs, Canticles, and the minor Prophets. (Ixviii.
Isaiah,
;
^ ^ ,
comm. on
;
and
( "), comm.
iv.)
on
Ixxvii.)
Cyril of Jerusalem, 1386. (xxxiii.) Didymus of Alexandria, +395. Fragments on the Psalms and in the catenae, (xxxix.) Diodorus of Tarsus, tc. 390. Fragments from the catenae.
(xxxiii.)
Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, cent. Dorotheus the Archimandrite, cent. vi.
v.
vii.
(iii.
(Ixxxviii.)
the Syrian, f372) Fragments of Commentaries on the Pentateuch, the historical and the poetical books. (Rome, 1732 ff.) Epiphanius of Salamis, 1403. (xli. xliii.) Eusebius of Caesarea, 1339. Commentary on the Psalms; notes on Isaiah fragments of other O.T. commentaries; books
Ephraem
Eusebius of Emesa, +359 Fragments in the catenae of a comm on Genesis. (Ixxxvi.) Eustathius of Antioch, +337. On the Witch of Endor, ag.
Origen.
(xviii.)
.
iv
ttj
and
\
.
Evagrius of Pontus, +398. Fragments in catenae. Gennadius of Constantinople, +471. Fragments on Genesis, Exodus, the Psalms &c. (Ixxxv.) Gregory of Nazianzus, +389. (xxxv. xxxviii.) Gregory of Neocaesarea, +c. 270. (x.) Gregory of Nyssa, +395. (xliv. xlvi.) Hesychius of Jerusalem, +c. 438. (xciii.) Isidore of Pelusium, +c. 450. (Ixxviii.) John Chrysostom, +407. Homilies on i Regn., Psalms (iii. xii., xlviii. xlix., cviii. cxl.); a commentary on Isa. i. viii.
various hands, (xlvii. Ixiv.) John of Damascus, +c. 760. (xciv. xcvi.) Julianus of Halicarnassus, +536. Fragments in catenae. Macarius Magnes, cent. iv. (ed. Blondel). Maximus Confessor, +662. (xc. xci.)
1 1
;
432
Quotations in
eaj'ly
CJiristian
Writings.
Methodius of Olympus,
cent.
iii.
iv,
(xviii.)
Nilus of Sinai, tc. 430. (Ixxix.) Olympiodorus of Alexandria, tcent. vi. (xciii.) Peter of Alexandria, +311. (xviii. Commentary on Canticles, (xl.) Philo of Carpasia, c. 380. Photius of Constantinople, tc. 891. (ci. civ.) Polychronius of Apamea, t430. Fragments on the Pentateuch, Job, Proverbs, Canticles, and Daniel; comm. on Ezekiel. Procopius of Gaza, cent. vi. Commentaries on Genesis Judges,
Regn. 4 Chr., Prov., Cant., Isaiah. (Ixxxvii.) I Severianus of Gabala, +c. 420. Fragments of commentaries in
the catenae.
(Ixv.)
Severus of Antioch, tc. 539. Fragments in the catenae. Theodore of Heraclea, tc. 355. Fragments of comm. on Isaiah.
(xviii.)
Theodore of Mopsuestia, t428. Fragments of commentaries on Genesis (Syriac and Latin), the rest of the Pentateuch and comm. on the Psalms in Syriac and the historical books large fragments in Greek a commentary on the xii. Prophets.
: :
nrropa Theodoret of Cyrrhus, tc. 458. Et? Commenquestions on the Pentateuch and historical books. taries on the Psalms, Canticles, the xii. Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah (including Baruch and Lam.), Ezekiel, Daniel. (Ixxx.
Ixxxiv.)
^ -,
Titus of Bostra, tc. 370. Victor of Antioch, cent. v.
(xviii.)
vi.
(.?).
Literature. T. Ittig, De bibliothecis et catenis pati'uin (Leipzig, 1707). J. G. Walch, Bibliotheca patristica, ed. J. T. L. Danz (Jena, 1834). J, G. Dowling, Notitia Scriptoriim ss. Patrmn (Oxford, 1839). J Nirschl, Lehrbiich der Pat?Ologia ii. Patristik (Mainz, 1881). O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie (Freiburg Fessler-Jungmann, Institiitiones Patrologiaf (1890). i. B., 894). H. Hody, De textibus Biblioj-um, p. 277 ff. Schleusner, Opiisciila critica ad versionem Graecam V.T. perti7ie7itia (Leipzig, 1812). Credner, Beitrdge zur Einleitiing in die biblischen Schriften, R. Gregory, Prolegomena {de scriptoribus vol. ii. (Halle, 1834). ecclesiasticis, p. Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 167 ff. Hatch,
3.).
p.
1
Biblical Essays,
ff.
CHAPTER
The Greek Versions
I.
IV.
as aids to Biblical Study.
No
question can arise as to the greatness of the place

in the religious life of
occupied by the Alexandrian Version

the
first six
centuries of
its
history.
The Septuagint was

Europe.
It
the
Bible of the Hellenistic Jew, not only in Egypt and Palestine,
but
throughout Western
Asia and
created
language of religion which lent

Christianity
itself readily to
the service of
and became one of the most important allies of It provided the Greek-speaking Church with an authorised translation of the Old Testament, and when Christian missions advanced beyond the limits of Hellenism, it served
the Gospel.
as a basis for fresh translations into the vernacular ^
The
Septuagint has long ceased
to
fulfil
these
or
any
its
similar functions.
In the West, after the fourth century,

;
influence receded before the spread of the Latin Vulgate the East, where
it
in
in
is
still
recited by the
it
Orthodox Church
of
its
the ecclesiastical
the thought and
offices,
life
lost
much
influence
over
of the people.
On
the other hand, this
most ancient of
Biblical versions possesses a
new and
It
is
increas-
ing importance in the field of Biblical study.
seen to
be valuable
alike to the textual
critic
and
to the expositor,
and its services are welcomed by students both of the Old Testament and of the New.
1
See Part
r.,
c. iv.
S. S.
28
434
A.
TJie
Greek Versions as aids
to
Biblical Study.
Bible, the Sep-
As
the oldest version of the
Hebrew
tuagint claims especial attention from

It
Old Testament
extent, an
scholars.
represents
a text
and, to some
interpretation
earlier than
any which can be obtained from other sources.
I.
(a)
The
printed
i.e.
Hebrew
Bibles give on the whole
the Massoretic text,
a text which has passed through the
hands of the Massorets, a succession of Jewish scholars who endeavoured to give permanence to the traditional type.
Massora (niiDD^ riTlDD,
saying of R.
traditio)
is
already mentioned in the
miDO, Akiba, Pirqe Aboth, iii. 20 min'? 'tradition is a fence to the Law'i; but the word is used there in reference to halachic rather than to textual tradition. It is probable, however, that Akiba and his contemporaries were concerned with the settling of the text which later generations protected by the 'Massora' technically so called. The work of the Massorets
(mDDn"''':'yil), who flourished from the sixth century to the tenth, consisted chiefly in reducing to a system of rules the pronunciation of the text which had been fixed by their predecessors. The Massora"^ embodies the readings which tradition substituted for
the written text
(^
^''>?), the corrections
known
as the
\^s>7\
DHDID^, and observations on the text tending to stereotype its To the Massorets we also owe interpretation in minute points. The the perfecting of the system of vowel-points and accents. labours of the Massorets culminated in the Western text of R. Ben Asher (cent, x.), and that which appeared about the same time in the East under the auspices of R. Ben Naphtali. The former has been repeated with minor variations in all Western
MSS.
The
attitude
of
Christian
scholars
towards the Jewish
traditional text has varied with the progress of Biblical learning.

^ See Schiirer, E. T. ii. i. p. 329 n. Jewish Fathers, p. 54 f. - For the text see the great work of
Dr
C. Taylor, Sayings of the
D. Ginsburg, The Massorahy compiledfrom MSS., alphabetically and lexically aj-ranged, 3 vols. (London, or the Bible of S. Baer; and for the Massorets and their work, 1880-5), Tiberias, Ginsburg's Itttrodiiction (London, 1897), and his cf. Buxtorf,
edition of the Massoreth ha-fnassoreth of Elias Levita, or the brief statements in Buhl, Kanon u. Text (p. 96 ff.), and in Urtext (p. 20 ff.). On these see Dr W. E. Barnes in J. Th. St., April 1900.
*
to
Biblical Study.
435
The
question of
its
relation to the
Septuagint was
scarcely
present
to the
writers before the time of
forced
itself
course
seen^, a middle between the alternatives of rejecting the lxx. and
Origen\ upon him, adopted, as we have
presupposed by the minds of Christian Origen, when the problem

text
refusing to accept the testimony of his Jewish teachers.
Jerome
took a bolder line

'
his
new Latin
version was based on the
original
Hebrew,' and on textual questions he appealed with

the verdict of contemporary Jewish opinion
:
confidence to
prol. gal. "
quanquam mihi omnino

de
conscius non sim mutasse

.
me quidpiam
Hebraeorum
repudiated
Hebraica
veritate
interroga
quemlibet
cui magis
accommodare debeas
was
laid
fidem."
Like
Origen he indignantly, and on the whole doubtless with

the
justice,
charge which
by some Christians
against the Jews of having falsified their
MSS.^
But neither
Origen nor Jerome entertained a suspicion that the Jewish official text had, whether by accident or design, departed from
the archetype.
Mediaeval Europe knew the Old Testament almost exclusively through Jerome's Latin, as the Ancient
Church had
forces of the
known
it
through the lxx.*
When
at length the long reign of
the Vulgate in Western
Europe was broken by the
Renaissance and the Reformation, the attention of scholars was once more drawn to that which purported to be the original
text
text
of the
Old Testament.
The
printing
of the
Hebrew
the Jews with the Psalter of 1477; the editio princeps of the Hebrew Bible as a whole appeared in
^
commenced among
See C.
summary on
2
J. Elliott's art. p. 872 b.

fif.
Hebrew Learnings
in
D.
C.
B.
ii.,
esp. the
vi. 9 (Migne, P. L. xxiv. 99). few mediaeval scholars had access to the Hebrew, e.g. the Englishmen Stephen Harding (tii34), Robert Grosseteste (ti253), Roger Bacon (to. 1292), the Spaniard Raymundus Martini (fc. 1286), and especially the Norman Jew, Nicolaus de Lyra (11340). On Lyra see Siegfried in Merx, Archiv, i. p. 428, ii. p. 28.
^
Above, p. 60 See his comm. on Isaiah
282
43 6
to Biblical
Study.
1488, and three editions followed before the end of the fifteenth
century'.
to learn the
Meanwhile Christian scholars had once more begun Hebrew language from Jewish teachers, and in 1506 the publication of John Reuchlin's Rudiments placed the
of
elements of Hebrew learning within the reach of the theologians
Europe.
Under
the
circumstances
it
was not
strange that the earlier Reformers,
who owed
their
Hebrew
Bible and their knowledge of the language to the Rabbis,
should have,
faithful
like
Jerome, regarded the traditional text as a

In
the
reproduction of the inspired original.
next
century a beginning was

text
made
in the criticism of the
Hebrew
by the Protestant divine Louis Cappelle

(J.
(L. Cappellus,
11658), and the Oratorian Jean Morin
who
the
Morinus, 11659), pressed the claims of the lxx. and the Samaritan Penta-
teuch.
furious controversy ensued, in the course of which
Swiss Reformed Churches committed themselves to
an
absolute acceptance not only of the consonantal text, but of the
vowel points.
This extreme position was occupied not only

as the
by theologians, but by experts such

Basle (111629, 1664),
in
its
two Buxtorfs of
present state
'
who maintained that the Massoretic text had come down unchanged from the days
of Ezra and the
Great Synagogue.'
The views of Louis Cappelle were set forth 'v!\ Arcanum pimciuationis revelatuin., Amsterdam, 1624; Critica sacra^ Paris, 1650; those of J. Morin in Exercitationes ecclesiasticae in iitnimque Samarita)i07'um Pentateuchiim (Paris, 1631), and Exe?-dtaThe tiones de hebraici graeciqiie tcxtns sinceritate (Paris, 1633).
younger Buxtorf answered Cappelle in his treatises De punctorinn origine {\6,) 2lX\^ Anticritica (1653): see Schnedemann, Die Contj'overse desL. Cappellus mit den Bicxtoi'fen (Leipzig, 1879),
Loisy, Histoij'e critiqtte^
p.
167
ff.
ThQ foi'mii Ia consensus

{can.
ii.,
eccle-
siarum Helvcticarum (1675) declared
iii.)
"
Hebraicus
Veteris Testamenti codex quem ex traditione ecclesiae ludaicae, cui olim oracula Dei com?nissa sunt, accepimus hodieque retinemus, tum quoad consonas tum quoad vocalia, sive puncta ipsa sive punctorum saltern potestatem, et tum c[uoad res tum quoad
^
See
De
Wette-Schrader, Lehrbiich,
p.
217
f.
to
Biblical Study.
437
verba ê07n/euaroy...ad cuius normam...universae quae extant versiones...exigendae et. sicubi deflectunt, revocandae sunt. Eorum proinde sententiam probare neutiquam possumus, qui lectionem quam Hebraicus codex exhibet humano tantum arbitrio constitutam esse definiunt, quique lectionem Hebraicam quam minus commodam iudicant contigere eamque ex LXX. seniorum aliorumque \'ersionibus Graecis...emendare religioni neutiquam
ducunt^"
Reference has been made to the place occupied by the

Samaritan
Pentateuch
in
this
controversy.
to Origen,
e/c
Samaritan
recension of the
the Hexapla
Law was known

xiii.
I
:
cojum.
ifi
,
(Num.
iii.
who quoted it in 'âapeLv
xxi.
iv
f.),
^
(/>rol. gal.,
see Field, Ifex. . p. Ixxxii.
and Jerome
to
it
Gal.
I.
{Chron.
xvi.
Syncellus (cent,
viii.),
^'l
cti/at
^ ,
iyChronOgr.
p.
century, after a long oblivion, this recension was recovered
^ " ^ ).
10); reference
is
made
late
also by Eusebius
ff.),
and by so
writer
as
Georgius
who
attaches a high value to
/?
its
testimony
^;
by
by
In the seventeenth
a traveller in the East
and published
its
in the Paris Polyglott of
1645.
The
at
rising school of textual criticism represented
Morin
once recognised
its
importance as concurring with

the originality of the
the Septuagint in
witness against
Massoretic
text.
Few^ questions, however, have been more

the
relation
hotly discussed than
of the Samaritan
to
the
Alexandrian Pentateuch.
Scholars such as Selden, Hottinger,
and Eichhorn contended that the Greek Pentateuch was based upon Samaritan MSS. Samaritans were undoubtedly to be
found among the early Palestinian
first
<
Ptolemy JosephuS writes
'
(.
settlers in
Egypt.
Of
the
iv FapiêiV,
It is significant that
^,
els
occurs
among
Niemeyer, Colledio Confessionum (Leipzig, 1840),
p. 731.
43
the
The
Gi'eek Vet'siojis as aids to Biblical Study.

villages in the
names of
Fayum, and a
letter ascribed to
Hadrian, and certainly not earlier than his reign, mentions

Samaritans as resident at Alexandria.
traditional
tradicts
On
the other hand the
account of the origin of the

hypothesis, nor
is
it
lxx.
directly con-
this
probable that the Jews of

the Samaritans for
Alexandria would have had recourse to
MSS.
of the Law, or that they would have accepted a version

in this
which had originated

of the Greek and
manner.
Moreover the agreement

is
Samaritan Pentateuchs
very far
from
being complete.
careful analysis of the Samaritan text led

is
Gesenius to the conclusion, which

cause against the printed
now
generally accepted,
that the fact of the two Pentateuchs often
making common
Hebrew
Bibles indicates a
common
more
origin earlier than the fixing of the Massoretic text, whilst their
dissensions shew that the text of the
Law
existed in
than one recension before

formity.
it
had been reduced
to a rigid uni-
On
the Samaritan Pentateuch the reader

;
may
consult
;
J.
Mo-
utnungiie Sainaritanoriun Pentateuchiim L. Cappellus, Ci'itica sacra, iii. c. 20 Walton, proleg^. (ed. Wrangham, Camb. 1828), ii. p. 280 ff.; R. Simon, Histoire critique du Vieiix Testament, i. c. 12; Eichhorn, Einleitu7ig, ii. 383 ff. Gesenius, De Pentatctichi Satnaritani origine indole et auctoritate coinm. (Halle, 181 5); S. Kohn, De Pentateiicho Saviaritano eiusqiie cum versio7iibus antiquis nexu (Leipzig, 1865); Samareitikon u. Septuagi?ita, in MGIVS., 1893; E. Deutsch, Samaritan Pentateuch, in Smith's D. B. iii. iiootf. to Fragments of a Sam. Targum J. W. Nutt, Introduction (London, 1872).
rinus, Exei'citatioiies ecchsiasticae in
;
The
prevalent belief in the originality of the Massoretic
text appeared to receive confirmation from the researches of
Kennicott^ and
De
Rossi', which revealed an extraordinary

Bible.
to us
MSS. of the Hebrew no MS. of the Hebrew Bible has come down
agreement
in all existing
^
But as
which
is
Vetus T. Hebraiciivi cum variis lectionibus (Oxford, 1776 80). Variae lectiones V. T. (Parma 1784 8) : Supplementum (1798).

earlier
to Biblical
Study.
439
than the beginning of the tenth century \ this evidence
merely shews the complete success of the Massorets and the
Sopherim who preceded them in preserving the traditional text, and the question remains to be answered at what period the tradition was created. It may be traced in the fourth century, when Jerome received substantially the same text from his
Jewish teachers in Palestine
;
and
in
the third, for Origen's
Hebrew
text did not differ materially
of the Massorets.
We
from that of Jerome or can go yet another step further back

in
the version of Aquila, of which considerable fragments have
now been
recovered, reveals very few points
which the
consonantal text of the second century differed from that of

our printed Bibles ^
that,
Other witnesses can be produced to shew

of a
even
if
Hebrew MSS.
much
earlier date
little
had been
on textual
preserved, they would have thrown but
light
questions I
for
On
the whole,
doubting that
the
printed
modern research has Hebrew Bible
left
no room
a
represents
textus receptus
which was already practically fixed before the middle of the second century. But it is equally clear that no
official text
held undisputed possession in the
first
century, or
was recognised by the writers of the
New
Testament.
Thus
ve
are driven
to
the conclusion that the transition from a
to a relatively fixed text took effect during the between the Fall of Jerusalem and the completion of The time was one of great activity in Aquila's version.
fluctuating
interval
Palestinian Jewish circles.
In the
at
last
days of Jerusalem a
school
had been founded
the Philistine
Jamnia (Jabneh, YebnaY, near seaboard, by R. Jochanan ben Zaccai. To this

MS.
of which the age R.V. of the O.T.
:
"The
916"
earliest
(Pref.
is
certainly
known
bears date
A.D.
2
to the
p. ix. 2).
Cf. F. C. Burkitt, Aquila, p. r6 f. Cf. S. R. Driver, Sa>miel, p. xxxix. "Quotations in the Mishnah and Gemara exhibit no material variants... the Targums also pre-suppose a text which deviates from (the M.T.) but slightly."
2
*
Neubauer, Geographie
dii
Talmud,
p. 73
f.
440
to
Biblical Study.
centre the representatives of Judaism flocked after the destruction of the city,
and
here, until the fresh troubles of the
war of
Bar-Cochba
with
(a.d.
132
5),
Biblical
studies were prosecuted
new ardour under

a.d.
a succession of eminent Rabbis.
At
At
Jamnia about
Jamnia
90 a synod was held which discussed various

zenith under the teaching
questions connected with the settlement of the Canon.

also traditionalism reached
its
of R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, R. Joshua ben Chananya, and their
more famous pupil R. Akiba ben Joseph,
the author of the
dogma
that
every word, particle and letter in
Bible has a meaning, and serves
the Hebrew some purpose which can be
expressed
by hermeneutical methods.
From
this
canon of
is
interpretation to the establishment of an official text

single step
;
but a
a book of which the very letters possess a divine

left to
authority cannot be
the unauthorised revision of scribes
was reached by a selection of approved readings, or by the suppression of MSS. which were not in agreement with an official copy, or whether it was due
or editors.
result
Whether the
to
an individual Rabbi or the work of a generation,

But
it
is
matter
of conjecture.
seems
to
be clear that in one way or

the
fall
another the age which followed
of Jerusalem wit-
nessed the creation of a standard text not materially different
from that which the Massorets stereotyped and which
all
MSS.
and editions have reproduced \

{b)
It is
the business of the textual critic to get behind
this official text,
and
it
to recover so far as
he can the various

is
recensions \vhich
has displaced.
In this work he
aided
by the Ancient Versions, but especially by the Septuagint.
Of
the Versions the Septuagint alone
is
actually earlier than

it
the fixing of the
Hebrew
text.
In point of age, indeed,
must
yield
to
the
Samaritan
Pentateuch, the
archetype of
A. F. Kirk-
1 See W. Robertson-Smith, O.T. in Jewish Ch., p. 62 patrick, Divine Libfary of the O.T., p. 63 ff.
f.
fie

in the
B.C.
to Biblical
Study.
441
in the
which may have been

days of Nehemiah
that people,
(c.
hands of the Samaritans
432)^; but the polemical bias of
and
the relatively late date of the
MSS. on which
its
the printed text depends, detract largely from the value of

evidence, which
is
moreover limited to the Torah. Some of the difficulties which beset the use of the lxx. as a guide to the criticism of the text have been stated already when its character as a version was discussed'; others, arising out of the present condition of the version, will be
noticed in the last chapter of this book.
"The
use of the
Ancient Versions
Version
(as Prof.
Driver writes^)
is
not... always such a
simple matter as might be inferred.... In the use of an Ancient

for the
purposes of textual criticism, there are three

:
precautions which must always be observed

ably assure ourselves that
original integrity
:
we must
reasonits
we
possess the Aversion itself in
we must eliminate such
variants as have the
appearance of originating merely with the translator;

text in the
the
remainder, which will be those that are due to a difference of
MS.
(or
MSS.) used by the

text, in
translator,
we must then
compare
carefully, in the light of the considerations just stated,
with the existing
Hebrew
order to determine on which
side the superiority lies."
" In dealing with the lxx. (Prof. to remember... that the lxx.
Kirkpatrick reminds us)

is
we have
not a homogeneous work, but differs very considerably in

character in different books,
if
its
not in parts of books-'."
Moreover
is
in the case of the lxx. the task of the textual critic
complicated by the existence of more than one distinct
recension of the Greek.
He
has before him in
many
contexts
a choice of readings which represent a plurality of

archetypes ^
^
Hebrew
See Ryle, Canon,

Pt.
II., c. v.,
p.
91
ff.
f.
2
^
p.
315
^ ^
Samuel, p. xxxix. f. Expository, iii., p. 273. See H. P. Smith, Samuel, p. 397
f.,
and the remarks that follow.
442
to
Biblical Study.
The following list of passages in which the LXX. reflects a Hebrew text different from fH will enable the student to practise
himself in the critical use of the Version.

iv.
Gen.
/-H
does not give the words of Cain, though ipN*l
leads the reader to expect them.
supplies
{^}
Pesh.jVulg.
);
ffi
eh to
Jer.,
nD*?3),
and
this is
supported by Sam., Targ.
XXXi.29
56
^^.^'?^,
G "l^^X
TJ\S
SO Sam.,
cf
V.
30.
Xli.
23
">3
"lu'N'baTli^,
, ... ).
]
03
n'-lV'i<S
cf Sam.,
^'^:
but see Ball in Haupt, Sacred BooL,
Greek variant
.
Lev.
b ).
xlix. 10
foi"
perhaps reading w'^ (='^ "^'^)
ad
Exod.
v. 9 ^y^'^..VEi'y, <&
(iyii'\..'iyi^"*1).
xiv. 25
"1D*1,
Cr
XXX. 6
...22
^J?'?...n3'l2n
xiii.
clause:
so
Sam.
31
(3
i.e.
.\;2>.
iG omits the second
lyb,
<ai
'b).
Num.
xxiv. 23
^ \
loc,
and
cf.
the
prefixes
"Qy (7.1
iy^T^l, i.e.
J'lrriN); cf vv. 20, 21.
Deut.
iv. 37 V"?qN
posterity (Driver,
ad
Josh. XV. 59 (G v8eKa al The omission of these names in itt is doubtless due to homoioteleuton. Jud. xiv. 15 ^y*?*/*n )*2,
an,
DDnnX DynT2;
.
i.
loc); Gr ro
so Sam.
, -.,.^
Abraham's
as
the
;
context seems to
require, ev
ttj
(^^2)
)
{(V
Haupt, Sacred BooL, ad loc. xvi. supplies a long lacuna in iH 13 f. caused by homoioteleuton on the two Greek renderings of the passage see Moore in Haupt, ad loc. xix. 18
but see
in
Moore
{ ]...
7V\n\
letter of
"!
1
{ '?
^]
to
*JS.
^^-).
eV
has probably been taken by iB for an abbreviation
)
of nin\
^
Sam.
which
24
DnD?,
123.
ii.
dividing and pronouncing
33
deov
clause in iH is irrelevant in this place, and must either be conIn place of it iG has nected with iii. 21 or struck out altogether.
,
j-B.
supplies
iir
seems
have
lost.
iii.
13
reading
0**?
, The
final
33
first
for UTO.
the appropriate introduction,
\ -^.,.
iv. 1.
The
(D'*D^3
Lagarde {Sy77imicta
i.,
p. 57) suggests a
form
Sll3Ei^''N.

'pKT^^
"py
133
has
^
.
21
to
Biblical Study.
v. 6.
443
D^nEJ''?s ivnpî
ann).
For nî
^<-
Cf. vi. 4f.)
^.
"=1*1.
and see Driver and Budde (in Haupt's Sacred Books) adloc. H. P. Smith would strike out the reference to mice in both contexts.
vi.
19
^^'"!
where the first six words represent an avbpaaiv Restoration is original of which i-tt preserves only three letters. is Xey. in the LXX. complicated by the fact that
iv
Klostermann suggests
1?32L*'n.
,
"'5r*^??
<
^^
in>JD>
>:2
N*?!.
ix.
25
f.
^ri'bV
'p-IXy.
<, more
in
harmony with
eVt
,
C^
)2]}
(7)^*
tfr
^")"''!)
(23D*f 1).
\
Am.
where
ii.
a clause necessary to the sense,

(cf.
Gen.
xiv. 23,
6, viii. 6)
...
Hebrew has
teleuton.
D'''?yJ1).
With Ui compare
Sir. xlvi.
',
Dpy: 'a secret gift,' leg. fort. Q vy3 'a pair of sandals' xii. 8 i& supplies see, however, IVisdoin of Be?i Sira, p. Ixvii. omitted by iM through homoio-
"The Ephod, not the ark, was the organ of (ijLuc^ supplying xiv. 41 f. iB Cpn 7127).
preserves the words ov av iH has lost through homoioteleuton.
, ; ^, ' ; .,.
djt
xiv. 18
^'^
,
\
^^. (
j-B,
for
.
xii.
8, \
'^y'O
the context,
MaTTapel
. \
els
3 13
;
C^yi^l.
e/xoO
19 the newly recovered
fnX ;''',
.
Field,
divination" (Driver).
the lacuna, Ti
ev
^,
ei
ev
(D''"i"li^)
<
el
(^),
?^*'7
Similarly in v. 42
in
which
See the note
Hexapla,
/=?
^^ '=
i.
p.
510.
XX. 19
^t^^Ct
^^,
iv. 6.
^
Similarly v. 41
/>,
'beside yonder cairn.'

2
incoherent sentence in
explain the incident that follows,
,
3|"}
iB
Sam.
substitutes
For the somewhat
xvii. 3
^ ov
words which
In the archetype of
to n*J"'N,
the eye of the scribe has passed from
ti^\'<
and the sentence thus mutilated has been re-arranged.
xxiv. 6
'^ D^JRnn ^''??

iGr'-"*^
No
'land of
text,
Tahtim Hodshi'
known.
here preserves the true
is
444
The Greek Versmis as aids
to Biblical
Study.
D^nnn pX '?X, 'to the land of the Hittites, even to For the last word Ewald, followed by H, P. Smith, preferred njb")n, 'to Hermon.' 1 Kings xvii. 1 ''Ily'np ''^^'
^p
Kadesh.'
^^7>.
6^77? U
'tin
""ll"^
XXXiii. 19
^V
^
^
eV
TaXaad
('J
^^'!???).
2 Chron.
(^).
(Dnvon).
is
Neh.
ix.
sc.
17
Q^^Pf
VP^..
(
(so
^^)
\(.
iB)
is
Ps. xvi. (XV.) 2
manifestly right, and has been
admitted into the text (XXi. 17) '>;!>, Aq.

(xxvi.) 13
N'p-l'p
by the
i^
English
Revisers.
(TlD
xxii.
16
= nN3).
i?,
XXVU.
and then
apparently read by <& as
connected with the previous verse. See Cheyne, Book of Psalms^ VVellhausen (Haupt, ad loc.) p. 379, and Abbott, Essays, p. 25. would retain iil without the pii?tcia extraordinaria. xlii. 5
(xli. 6)
^ +[1]
î^y\
(9foy
Dp^J?^ "'^"'^'^ D2")[p.
^
<ai
as
iB
in V. 12.
xlix. 11 (xlviii. 12)
oi
(-ID^pr).
(I'lN*'"'!)
Ixix. 26 (Ixviii. 27) -lisp^
tiW
pp-IX
^
(:i
X^
is
in'N.
(^DN
v. ^^
n'?
. ).
which
if^
Ixxii. (Ixxi.) 5
ci. (C.)
PrOV. X. 10^
in
iB
repeated from
<Ct
which has displaced the true ending

to
lo**
oi V.
),
ii'J'P
10.
restores the latter (o be
and thus supplies the contrast
p.
is
to
complete the couplet.
[^
see
Jer. vi. 29 1?\^ N^ ^^V^l

^'' Qy"l1).
<G
[]
(...;
xxiii.
required
(PP^
Xi.
15
D"?!!!,
(0''")"^);
however Streane, Double

(5
text.,
133.
33
;;.
(dividing
and pronouncing DJ^X
mVn).
= yh-jn.
{c)
Ezek. Xlv. 20 'CnnZ ^V^'^^. ^'^^'). Mai.
(^^
^ eV . 3yirn.
(^ ,
ii^
In dealing with such differences between the Greek
version and the traditional

start
Hebrew text the student will not with the assumption that the version has preserved the
reading.
It
true
may have been

and
:
preserved
in
by the
official
Hebrew
Nor
will
or
its
archetype,
lost
it
the AISS. which were

lost
followed by the translators
or
may have been

it
by both.
he assume that the Greek, when
differs
from the
to
Biblical Study.
445
Hebrew, represents in all cases another Hebrew text for the may be due to the failure of the translators to understand their Hebrew, or to interpret it aright. His first business is to decide whether the Greek variant involves a different
;
ditference
Hebrew
which
text,
or
is
simply another expression

in the printed
is
for
the
text
lies
before
him
Hebrew
is
Bible.
If the
former of these alternatives
accepted, he has
still
to consider
whether the text represented by the lxx.

of
the
preferable to that
Hebrew
we have
since
Bible
and probably
original.
There
presumption
but, as
correct,
in favour of readings in
said,
which (& and
is
agree,
not an absolute certainty that they are
they
may both
be aftected by a
to
deep-seated
Ptolemies.
corruption
which goes back

differ,
the
age
of the
When
it
they
fills
(& will usually deserve to be preferred
when
ia)
in
{c)
up a lacuna which can be traced to homoioteleuton the Hebrew, or {b) removes an apparent interpolation, or
appears to represent a bo7ia fide variant in the original,
text.
which makes better sense than the existing

these cases are strengthened
early
if it
Its claims in
has the support of other

as the Samari-
tan Pentateuch
and probably independent witnesses such and the Targum, or of Hebrew
variants which
survive in existing
MSS. of
the Massoretic text, or in the Q'ri'.
For guidance as to the principles on which the LXX. may be employed in the criticism of the Hebrew Text the student may
consult Lagarde, Aninerkujigeii sicr griech. Ubersetzuiig der ProWellhausen, Der Text der Biicher Sai>iuelis, verbien, p. i ff. p. iff.; Robertson Smith, O. T. in the Jewish Chia'ch'^., p. 76 ff.; Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel., H. P. Smith, Comm. on Samuel., pp. xxix. ff., 395 ff. p. xlviii. f. Toy, Comm. o?i Proverbs., p. xxxii. f See also below, c. vi.
;
2.
In the
field
of O.T. interpretation the witness of the

It
is
LXX. must be received with even greater caution.
evi-
dent that Greek-speaking Jews, whose knowledge of

^
Hebrew
On
ff.
the relation of the LXX. to the QVi, see Frankel,
Vorstiidien,
p. 219
446
to
Biblical Study.
was probably acquired at Alexandria from teachers of very moderate attainments, possess no prescriptive right to act as guides to the meaning of obscure Hebrew words or sentences.
Transliterations,
doublets, confused
and scarcely
intelligible
renderings, reveal the fact that in difficult passages they were

often reduced to
times be right
and
mere conjecture. But their guesses may at in much that seems to be guesswork they
may have been

contexts
it
led by gleams of a true tradition.
Thus
it
is
never safe to neglect their interpretation,

is
even
if
in the
harder
seldom
to
be trusted.
;
Indirectly at least
much
may be
to
learned from them
and
their wildest exegesis
belongs
the history of hermeneutics, and

to a
has influenced thought
and language
remarkable degree.
( ,. . ^ ^ ( ^ . ,
Gen.
iv.
I
The following specimens will serve to illustrate the exe{a) gesis of the LXX. in the historical books.
npoaeveyKijs
<
18).
ev
elvai
II
xxxvii. 3
xli.
^, 7 ^;/(. ( ]' \ '

ueov.
iv.
iav
vi.
etVer
(cf.
Regn.
xiii.
43
xlvii.
xlviii.
31 14
( 76
ayia
xxi . 24
. ,. . . \ ,'.
Lev.
[ /^] 8. Exod.\ .
19
i.
eVt
^^ '^^8 . . (^ .
3
xlix.
16
tlktiv.
iii.
;
xvi. 15 inav
.
pev "^
xxi.
/?, . . ), ^ ^
tJ]
Num.
\
iv
<\
iv
ivv
., ^...5^.
(
Jud.
i.
yivoiTO
.
2>~
'^"'i
'7?
xxiii.
^^^
Deut. XX.
1
Jos. V. 2
35
^^
. . ;^ ^
''
8
iK iv
'
14
15
opei
viii.
.(
13
ip^|/fv
br]
).
\ ( .. . iv(v
iv
iv
'
iv
iv
om.
iv
"Apes).
xii.
XV. 14
ff.
(\
. .
iv
' (
...
.),
dpcv

aiayova
the
I
. ?, . ). . . < ( . ).^ . ^^,\ ' . i^pa \\ ). . . ^' ;. ' , ^ ,>^ (

Seos
iv
ttj
.,. \
xviii.
30
suspensum see Moore Regn. X. 5 iaTLV

xiii.
21
ets
XX.
< /.,. 7\, ) \ 7 /3 , ^, . , .

to
Biblical SUidy.
447
iv
("|3
e/cfi
on
in
comm. on Sacred Books, ad
loc).
21
vie
(Luc,+
\\(.
12
ave-
iv iXaico. 3 1 dir/yayev (Luc. nepirjyayev iv
Regn.
i.
aTrrjyayev)
...
xxiv.
[]
Regn. 4 Regn. i. 2
3
xiii.
f.
iLa
f.
iv
(Luc.
Oeov Beov
viii.
13
iLv
iyv
22
iyev \^\
(cf.
[roCro]
2 Chr. xxxv.
8).
The translated titles of the Psalms form a special and (3) interesting study. The details are collected below, and can be studied with the help of the commentaries, or of Neubauer's article in Stiidia Biblica \\. p. i ff.^
passim
in Ps.
vii., T-iT
in Ps. xlv. (xlvi.)).
')7,
, ,
',
xxxv.
^
, ^
passiiti
in Ps. iv., :'\\ in Ps. ix. 17).
^^
Pss. xxix., xlvii.,

;
Ixxxvi., xci., xciii. (A)

Ixxxii., Ixxxvii., cvii.).
,
cl.).
Ixvii.,
1^1^'
'
or
"
lix.).
Ixxiv.,
Ixxxii.,
'^*
(Ixv.,
,, \ , ,
n?njjl (Ps. cxliv.).
cxxxv., cxlv., cxlvi., cxlviii.
,
^'^'']
(Pss. civ.
?1
(Pss. xvi., Ixxxv., Ixxxix.,
ci., cxli.).
cvi., ex.
cxiv., cxvi., cxvii., cxxxiv.,
Di^^D (Pss.
Th.
xiii.,
>*^?7 (Pss.
Ixiii.
iv.
XV., Iv.
xxi.^
Aq.
xvii.,
xviii.,
xxix., xxx.,
Ixxxiii.,
Ixi.,
Ixix.,
Ixxiv. Ixxvi.,
Ixxix.,
Ixxx.,
in
The titles which are given in the LXX. but are wanting been enumerated in Pt. ii. c. ii. (p. 250 ff.).
fH, have
44
to
Biblical Study.
'Ynep
, , ,
Ixxxiv.,
Ixxxvii.,
cii.,
i/tKOTTOtQ),
Symm.
(,
iv.).
cviii.,
cxxxviii.,
els
Th.
1'1''333 (Pss. vi.,
\2';:2 (Ps.
'Yirep
, .'
Aq.,
'
'Ynep
(?)
Symm. vuep
\^2;[-7
.
(Pss.
cxxxix.).
Cf.
Aq.
liii,, liv., Ix.,
Ixvi., Ixxv.).
?'3"7
(Ps. v.).
Aq.
xlv.).
vi., xi.).
Symm., Th.
,
vV
'if/xei/ei,
^^^*"3
E^-13"n2'1"*?y (Ps. vii.).
'YTvep
.
Aq.
(Ps. VTrep
'Ynep
Ely
. ),) ,, . (, ? , (,
Symm.
Th.
.
.
, ,
\
^1/
rots
. ,
fTTi
Iv.).
^ ^ .^ ( ,
(Pss.
viii.,
Ixxx., Ixxxiii.).
Aq., Th.
,] , ).
DIO'bV (Ps.
ix.;
cf.
Th.
Aq.
Symm.
Aq.
7^"7 (Ps.
xxi.).
Symm. inep
xliv., lix., Ixviii., Ixxix.).
Wl\y^~7V (Pss.
v-n-ep
(),
( . , .,
Aq. VTrep
,. , (
Symm.
Th.
^. ()
(
(Ps.
xliv.).
Aq.
^' D^N D^V^J^

Symm.
l-in-n.wy
i^Pss.
Ixi., Ixxvi.).
(n'lSy?)
^'^^ (PsS.
Hi., Ixxxvii.).
Aq.
eVi
(Symm.
1^3
.
xliv.,
(Pss. xxxvii.,
Ixix.).
(Ps. xcix.).
Aq.
. ,.
Ixxiv.) nepl
TSbO (Pss. xxxi.,

Aq.
xli.
li. liii.,
Ixxiii.,
Ixxxvii., Ixxxviii., cxli.).
DnC^R-'PS (Pss. Ivi. Iviii.,
Ixxiv.).
Symm.
(Ps.
It
is
uniformly in the LXX. Aq. renders it aei, Symm. and Th. agree with the LXX. except that in Ps. ix. 17 aei is attributed to Th. In the Psalm of Habakkuk (Hab. iii. 3) Symm. renders els Th. els WXos, and in ?7. 13 els TeXos has found
;
, ^. , 8
The Greek
Versiojis as aids to Biblical Study.
449
',
els
"_21"3
(Ps. xxix.).
cxxxiii.).
^^^
(Pss. cxix.
Aq.,
Symm., Th.
&c., &c.)
may
be added that
(Pss.
iii.
3, 5, iv. 3, 5, vii. 6,
way into copies of the LXX. (cf. <=% and Jerome " ipsi LXX. rerum necessitate compulsi...nunc transtulerunt in fijieui'').
its
:
,
2
{c)
Exegetical help
is
sometimes
to
be obtained from a
guarded use of the interpretation affixed by the lxx. (i) to obscure words, especially aVa^ Xcyo/xcra, and (2) to certain
proper names.
(1)
iii.
Some examples
i.
of both are given below.
Gen.
aopaTOs
ayyeXovs.
yav
(cf.
xiii.
Num.
iii.
<. . /, . ,,, ' ). eXe . ... " , . ?, ,

i.
8 TO SeiXivov. 15 6eov (cf. Deut. xxxii. 8, Job
pe... prjaeis.
KevaaTos.
vi.
6 (TTe
2 oi
ayyeXoi
.
21
biav
eis.
xxii.
yav.
21
xxviii. 15
6,
ii.
i).
oi
ylyavTes.
lO xii. 22
viii.
xlix.
yovevo.
Exod. vi. 12 aXoyos. XXV. 29 apTOL

I Regn. Exod. xxxiv. 13
viii.
(cf. a.
xxxix. 18
= 36, .
v7os.
xxi. 6).
Vulg. Inci^ A.V. proves.

Oexit.
alos, 22 viol renderings, which

xix.
6
I
(cf.
viol
Vulg. 7-atiojiale. Lev. xvi. 8 ff. Jud. Regn. ii. 12, and other
3
employ
18 TO
ii.
Regn.
9
i.
evOovs.
Regn.
Ps.
5,
6
1.
II
(cf.
2 Chr.
8, ix.
lof.
. evLva).
xvi. 8
viii.
XV.
veva yeovv.
Job
CXXXviii. 15
ii.
vas
abrj
Prov.
18
peTo.
yyevv
xxii. 14).
(a doublet).
ix.
xxxviii. 31). Zeph. i. 10 Isa. xxxviii. 8 (4 Regn. xxii.)
18
(2)
Aoarwi, mountains
12
(cf.
xxvii.
I,
17
(xii.
xxi. 11, xxxiii. 44). Agagite, (xvi.) 10. Ararat., 6);
I^'l'Ji^T?.^?,
'Appevla, Isa. xxxvii. 38.
,
of,
ttjs devTepas tovs 8eKa
(cf.
vaaovs.
opos
iv
4 Regn.
Ezech.
'''71",
Esth.
of,
land
Ashtoreth JTIFl^y,
^ On this word see an article by C. A. Briggs, in the fourna/ 0/ Biblical Literature, 1899, p. 132 ff.
S.
S.
29
450
TJie

ii.
, '
valley
of^
(the Phoenician 'Ashtart), Jud.
^5?^^
2
i^^^'
v.
'7
liotkas
i
Jud.
ii.
5,
Regn.
5,
Zeph.
ii.
24,
Chr. xiv.
^
to
13,
14).
Biblical Study.
xxiii.
4 Regn.
13.
Baca^
(cf.
Ps. Ixxxiii. 7
Capktor, Caphtorim,
ix.
D^nnS,
KpT)res,
5,
Deut. ii. 23, Am. Ezech. xxv. 16.

4.
7.
Cherethites,
Q''J"11,
Dodanim,
ovai
, -) ,
(?
(D*J1"l),
Gen.
Jud.
x.
1
Enhakkore
Ichabod^
iv.
i<"lipn"py,
'^^
rov
XV.
9.
"li^Dîi,
Wellh.),
iii.
Regn.
21.
âvan,
KvpLos
',
Ixvi.
19
(cf,
Joel
15.
6).
Jehovah-7iissi,
Exod.
xlii. 14.
xvii.
Keren-happiich,
"^-
Kiriath-sepher, "ISD ^"}?,
Macpelah,
,
xxi.
H^SD^n,
30,
xxii.
14,
1.
-, 8,
p;^,
.,
f.,
Isa.
Job
Jos. XV. 15
xxiii.
Gen.
17,
19
(xxv. 9, xlix.
13).
2.
Moriah, land
Tyiû^^,
(cf.
of^
20,
plaijl of, D''(3)3rVZl ji/N,
(), Jud.
n.jyp,
sut'
a en pa-an^).
,
Gen.
xxiii.
iv.
Pisgah^
Deut.
?
is
iii.
II
(cf.
Moore, ad
Gen.
xli.
//
27
loc).
^^^,
iv.
nnbn |>,
49).
Num.
Deut.
Zaanaun,
(), Zaphnath-paaneah, ri3SV
45 (Ball,
Pharaoh-Hophra,
^
ad
loc.
'2,
ii.
compares Egypt,
b
(xliv.)
30
(cf.
W.
E.
Crum
in Hastings,
D. B.
,
Old.
Jer.
Ii.
p. 413).
B.
The Septuagint
not less indispensable to the study

to
that
of the
New Testament
in the
than
of the
But
its
importance
its
former
field is
is
more
often overlooked, since
connexion with the N.T.

the case
of
less direct
and obvious, except

the
in
express
quotations
from
Alexandrian
in
version \
These, as we have seen, are so numerous that
the Synoptic Gospels and in some of the Pauline Epistles they
form a considerable part of the
text.
But the
New
Testament
has been yet more widely and more deeply influenced by the
version through the subtler forces which shew themselves in
countless allusions, lying oftentimes below the surface of the
words, and in the use of a vocabulary derived from
it,
and
in
many
cases prepared by
1
it
for the higher service of the Gospel.

ff.
On
the quotations see above p. 392
1;

I.
to
Biblical Study.
45
The
influence of the lxx. over the writings of the N.T.
is
continually
shewn
in
combinations of words or in trains of
thought which point to the presence of the version in the
background of the
writer's
it.
mind, even when he
may
not
consciously allude to
if
This occurs frequently [a) in the sayings of our Lord, where, spoke in Aramaic, the reference to the LXX. is due to the translator: e.g. Mt. v. 3 fF. ,.
He
Trpaels (Isa.
Ixi.
iff.,
en
...\ yap \. \
els
(Isa. xxvi. 2o).
(Mic.
. 8. ,
Ps. xxxvi. II).
X.
.
...
vi.
6 eXaeXOe els
21,
35 in 33
Lc.
vii.
6).
xxi.
nepLeev
(Isa. Ixvi. 24)
.
Jo.
(Isa. V. 2).
iîvTevaev Mc.
TeXevTO.
oylreaOe
ix.
\ 48
6
yeevvav onov
i.
aveioyoTa
avovas
record:
(Gen.
8 . pevevoL
Mc.
vii.
xxiii.
35
-"
xxi. 8, Isa.
li. 23, Lam. ii. 15); {c) in the original Greek writings of the N.T., where allusions of this kind are even more abundant I Pet. ii. 9 vpels Se yivos e KXe le edvos ayiov, Xaos els eayyeXe (Exod. xix. 5 f xxiii. 22 f, Isa. xliii. 20). iii. 14 de
4
ayyeXovs
xxviii.
12);
()
in
deov the translated evangelical
32
(Isa. XXXV. 5
ayiaaaTe
xii.
viii.
oe ,
J
5 . pe ,, aXeov ,
f,
?)
XV. 29
.,.
:
KivoiivTes
\
cf.
eêpv
(Ps.
de
ev
(Isa. viii.
12
f.).
:
Rom.
2 Cor.
pev yap ev (Prov. iii. 4; in Rom. /. c. this allusion is preceded by another to Prov. iii. 7). 2 Cor. iii. 3ff Exod. xxxi., xxxiv. (lxx.) are in view throughout this context. Eph. ii. 17
17 21
povooevo
cf.
oea
(Isa. Ivii. 19,
...
iii.
eyyeXao elpvv
cf
Iii.
7, Ixi.
l).
Phil.
i.
19
16).
...
eyy
yap
el
(Job
xiii.
Heb. vi. 8 y.' eyyus (Gen.
17).
These are but a few illustrations of a mental habit everywhere to be observed in the writers of the N.T., which shews them to have been not only familiar with the lxx., but
saturated with
its
language.
They used
it
as
Englishmen use
29
452
lie
to
Biblical Study.
it
the Authorised Version of the Bible, working

of their
into the texture

to
thoughts
and utterances.
It
is
is
impossible
i.e.,
do
justice to their writings unless this fact
recognised,
unless
the reader is on the watch for unsuspected references to the Greek O.T., and able to appreciate its influence upon his
author's mind.
2.
To what
extent the vocabulary of the N.T. has been

is
influenced by the lxx.
matter of keen controversy.
In
a weighty essay
On
the
Value a?id Use of the Septuagint
Dr
Hatch has maintained

and
to
that " the great majority of
N.T. words
to Biblical
are words which, though for the most part
common
contemporary secular Greek, express
in their Biblical
use the conceptions of a Semitic race, and which must consequently be examined by the light of the cognate documents
which form the Lxx.^"

contested,
This statement, which has been hotly
may
conveniently form the basis of our discussion
of the subject.
[a)
"The
great majority of N.T. words are... common to
and contemporary secular Greek." This is certainly Thus Dr H. A. A. Kennedy- enumerates about 150 true. strictly words out of over 4800 in the N.T. \vhich are The list is as follows peculiar to the lxx. and N.T."
Biblical
,^, ,,, , , ,,, ,, ', , , , ,(,, ,,,, , , ,, , ., , (, , (, , ,(, (,, ', ,, , ,, , , , ^, , , ,, , ^, , ^ , ,

a-yaQoTTOLUv,
aiveais,
", \1/, ^(, 8,

Vfveiv,
, ,,
yeevva,
eXey^ty,
'
''
, (-
Essays,
34
Sotares
0/1V.T. Greek,
p. 88.
ii.
,, , , ^, , , ,<,,, ,, , ,, , -, ^ , ,,,, ^, ,, ,, ,, , , ,, , ,,, , , , ,, , ^, , , , , , , 8, ,,,,,, ,,.

UpaTViv,
\, 6,
6\eepeviv,
have been detected in earlypapyri, and as fresh documents are discovered and examined, the number of 'Biblical' Greek Avords Avill doubtless be still further diminished. Indeed the existence of such a class of words may be almost entirely due to accidental causes, such as the loss of contemporary Hellenistic literature.
words
, , , ,, ,,
to
Biblical Study.
453
\^
-
TraytSeuetv,
Since the publication of

(e.g.
'^)
Dr Kennedy's book some
of these
On the other hand it must not be forgotten that the {3) Greek vocabulary of Palestinian Greek-speaking Jews in the first century a.d. was probably derived in great part from their
use
of the
writers
such as
Epistle to
lated
Even in the case of Greek Old Testament. St Luke, St Paul, and the author of the the Hebrews, the lxx. has no doubt largely regu-
the words of the N.T. seem to have been suggested by that

version, or in
, , ,, ,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, , , , ,, ,, ,, ,, , ,,,, , ,,, , ,,,, , ,', , ,, ,,,

the choice of words.
very considerable
number of
any case may be elucidated from
it.
E.g.:
', ,
(),
Deissmann, Bibelstudien, pp.
06, 138.
454
, , , ^., , 8, , , , , , ,
lie
these may be added a considerable class of words which are based on LXX. words though they do not occur in the LXX. e.g. (-),
;
:
the N.T. employment of religious words and phrases which
occur in the lxx. at an earlier stage
The
, ,,,. ,,, ,, , ,, , , , ,, ,,,,,,, , ,,, , , , , , ,,,, ,,, , , ,,,,, , , ,,,, ,,, ,,,, ,,, ,,, , ,, ,, , ,, , , ,,,, , ', ,, , , , , ,, , ,,, , , ,. , , , , ,
(>^,
TrayiêiiCLV,
^
^, ^, , ,, ^, , , ,,-, , ,, , ^,
to Biblical
,
The
Study.
nepi-
7ro\vXoyia,
'^^,
<,
Ta/x(i)eioi/,
(c)
influence of the lxx.
is still
more
clearly seen in
in the history of their use.

:
following
list
will
supply illustrations of these
"-,
21),
,.
6
2),
of the characteristic phrases of the N.T. also have their roots in the LXX., e.g.
(Gen.
i.
26),
6
ix.
Many
,Chron.
(viii.
(xxiii.
4)5
(Exod.
xix. 5)
(.
30),
(1. 29),
(.
(xix.
5),
(Lev. (Deut. xxx. 4)?

29),
5)?
(Jos.
(2
Regn.
),
. ^^
(
^^1
XX. 20),
xxi.
(xxvi, 20), (Ps. xcvii. 3),

Ixii. 2,
(Mai.
i.
[]
7),
and the (Am.
like (Ps. cxliii. 9, Isa.

5),
&c.),
9),
(Jon.
i.
(Isa.
(xli. 8,
3),
(xliii.
(xiii.
&C.),
), '
6, 9)
TJie
(xlix. l),
to
Biblical Study.
6),
455
(Ezech. xxxi.
Tcoy
.\
(xxxviii. 2).
The non-canonical books have their full share in the contribution which the Septuagint makes to the vocabulary of the N.T. Many Biblical words occur for the first time in the O.T. 'Apocrypha,' or reach there a further stage in the history of their use, or appear in new combinations. The following examples will repay examination
'Lhios,
,/3 ( \, , ,, , -^, , /', <, ^, , , , ,,, \, , ( ),, \ ,, , . ,

:
aavveros, dtanovelaeai,
,
()
,, , , ,, ,, ,
Oeov),
enXcKTos,
eVi-
koivos,
"The
great
majority
of
N.T.
words and phrases

and... must con-
express... the conceptions of a Semitic race,
sequently be examined by the light
of...
the lxx."
But the
which
connotation
will
usually be
found to have undergone con-
siderable changes, both in ordinary words are used in a religious sense.
and
in those
In order to trace the process
by which the transition has been effected the N.T. student must begin with an investigation into the practice of the LXX. Such an enquiry may be of service in determining the
meaning which is to be given to the word in the it will more frequently illustrate the growth of religious thought or of social life which has led to a change of signification. Dr Hatch indeed laid down as "almost self-evident" canons the two propositions (i) that "a word which is used uniformly, or with few and intelligible exceptions, as the translation of the same Hebrew word, must be held to have in Biblical Greek the same meaning as that Hebrew word"; and (2) that "words which are used interchangeably as translations of the same Hebrew word, or group of cognate words, must be held to have in Biblical Greek an allied or virtually identical meaning'." These principles led him to
precise
N.T., but
Essays, p. 35.
456
to
Biblical Study.
some remarkable departures from

of
the traditional interpretation

or
, ,/
=
=
N.T.
^=
.
words
'
enemy'
?
;
('e.g.
apTr;
;
*lin
^^^^, .<^\
'
= '^!, "^ =
'fellahin
;
cious,
mischievous
the
equivalent
,-,
'
together
'
mali-
of
and the
like).
searching examination of these
views
will
be found
in
Lexicography^
in
The
Dr T. K. Abbott's essay On N.T. of Dr Hatch's canons lies

Biblical
his use
of the term
'
Greek
'
as inclusive
of the
pre-Christian
Greek of the Alexandrian translators, and the Palestinian Greek of the Apostolic age. While it is evident
the writers
that
of the
for
N.T. were largely indebted

their
to
the
Greek vocabulary, we cannot safely assume that they attached to the Greek words and phrases which they borrowed from it the precise significance that belonged to them in the older book. Allowance must be
Alexandrian version
made
for
altered
circumstances,
and
in
particular
for
the
influence of the Gospel, which threw
new meaning
into the
speech as well as the
life
of men.
One
or two instances will
shew the truth of this remark. in the lxx. rarely rises above the lower sense of the sexual passion, or at best the
affection of
human
of
friendship
the exceptions are limited to
the Greek
Book
Wisdom
is
(Sap.
N.T., where the word

the love of
far
more
God
for
men, or of men
as such.
;
the children of
God
congregation of Israel
xviii.
in
the N.T., except perhaps in
'
iii.
9, vi.
18").
it
But
in
the
frequent,
for
is
used only of
lxx.
the
God
or Christ, or for
is
in the
17,
it
is
the
in different aspects
new community founded by Christ^, viewed and with many shades of meaning.
iii.
Mt.
yeXtov in the lxx. occurs only in the plural,
and perhaps only
'7777$
Essays, p. 65 if. occurs in the sense of Divine love (Hos.
xi. 4,
Zeph.
17, Jer. xxxi. 3).

^
See Hort, The Christian Ecclesia,
p. 9
f.

in the classical sense of 'a
to
Biblical Study.
(2
457
iv.
reward for good tidings'

from
i.
Regn.
10);
in
the
N.T.
it
is
the
i,
first
appropriated to the
this
Messianic good tidings (Mc.
new meaning from

7, Ix. 6, Ixi.
I.
the use of
^^
to
14),
probably deriving
in Isa. xl. 9, Hi.
Thus on
tion of
the whole
it is
clear that caution
must be used
in
employing the practice of the lxx.
determine the connotainterpreter ought

'
N.T. words.
On
the one
hand the
not to be led astray by visions of the solidarity of

rived from the
Biblical
Greek,' for the Greek of the N.T., though in fact largely de-
Greek of the lxx., has in not a few instances its source under the inspiration of another age. On the other hand, the student of the N.T. will make the lxx. his starting-point in examining the sense of all words and phrases which, though they may have been used in classical Greek or by the passed into Palestinian use through the Greek Old Testament, and in their passage received the impress of Semitic thought and life. Bishop Pearson's judgement on this point is still fully justified: "Lxxviralis versio...ad Novum Instrumentum recte intelHgendum et accurate explicandum perquam necessaria est... in illam enim omnes idiotismi veteris Hnguae Hebraicae erant transfusi...multa itaque Graeca sunt in Novo Foedere vocabula quae ex usu Graecae linguae intelligi non possunt, ex collatione autem Hebraea et ex usu lxx. interpretum facile intelliguntur^"
cast off the traditions of
-,
II.
The Greek
versions of the second century a.d. are in
many
turies,
respects of less importance to the BibHcal student than
the Septuagint.
Not only
are they later by
two
to four cen-
but they exist only in a fragmentary state, and the text of

is
the fragments
often insecure.
But there are services which
they can render
when
rightly
employed, and which the careful
student will not forget to demand.

^
Praef. paraen., ed. E. Churton, p. 22
f.
45
I.

Each of
Aquila
to
Biblical Study.
its
these versions has characteristics of
own,
which must be taken into account

{a)
in estimating its value.

official
earliest stage,
lating
/^
and
represents
his
the
Hebrew
text
in
its
extreme
it
literalness
and habit of
trans-
render
easy to recover the text which
lay before him.
lished by
Mr
In the large fragments of 3 and 4 Regn. pubBurkitt, Aquila's Hebrew text differs from that of
the printed Bibles only in thirteen readings-, an average of one

variant in every second verse.
Still
more important
is
Aquila's
reflexion of the exegetical tradition of the school of Jamnia.
Here as in his and serves as
text he
is
often in direct opposition to the lxx.,
a useful
makeweight against the influence of

Especially
is
the Alexandrian interpretation.
this the case in
regard to the meaning of obscure words, which Aquila translates with
full
knowledge of both languages and of other
Semitic tongues", whilst the lxx. too often depended

guess-work.
upon
This merit of Aquila was recognised by Jerome,

use of his interpretations in the Vulgate \
who makes
Moreover
the influence which his
work has exercised over
the text of the
LXX. renders
it
important to the textual

{b)
critic
of the older
Greek version ^
The paraphrasing manner

But
it
of
Symmachus
hinders the free use of his version either for textual or hermeneutical purposes.
is
often interesting as revealing the
exegetical tendencies of his school,
and
its
fulness serves to
it
correct the extreme literalness of Aquila.

his
Jerome used
;
for
Vulgate even more freely than he used Aquila

i.,
cf.
Field,
Hexapla
ille
p.
xxxiv. " quern tarn presse secutus est
magnus
interpres Latinus...ut aliqpando nobis successerit ex Hie-
ronymi Latinis Symmachi Graeca... satis probabiliter extricare."

{c)
Theodotion, besides contributing a whole book to the textus

1
'^
See above, p. 40. Cf. Aq2iila, p. 16

Field, Hexapla,
i.
f.
^
**
p. xxiv.
Ibidem.
See Burkitt, Aquila,
p.
18
ff.

receptus of the
to
Biblical Study.
459
Greek Old Testament, preserves
in his text of
the other books traces of a recension of the lxx. which seems

at
one time
to
have had a wide circulation, since Theodotionic
readings occur in the lxx. quotations of the N.T. and in those

of other Christian writers before a.d. 150^
2.
All the post-Christian translators of the O.T., but espe-
cially Aquila,
to
Symmachus, and the author of the Quintal appear have been not only competent Hebraists, but possessed of a
or less extensive knowledge of
more
Greek
allies
literature.
These
In the
qualifications
render them valuable
to
the interpreter
{a)
whether of the
New
or of the Old Testament,
case of the O.T.
they serve to confirm or correct the lxx.
, .. ^ , ^^ } , ^ , ,. . . ^ , ,
More
which do not materially
O'
differ in signification,
. .
'
renderings, or to illustrate their meaning.
the earlier version are not infrequently retained, e.g. Gen. i. 2 narn_p O' .2.. 6 ^'?"}, 0".2..
-^,
Q^^'l'i^.lk'P,
'^..
. {)
The
^.
renderings of
often they are set aside in favour of other words
but seem to have
been preferred as more

"l-njl
$
Ixxxviii.
. .
exact, or as better Greek, e.g.
^,
Gen. xlix.
13
Exod.
V.
V.
''*'?3
Jud.
2.?"Oi?D
'
.,
^.
Ps.
8 ^V^\^ "liD^ Xy;,
6<
6
e.g.
%'
iv
cv
.,
2.
See
iv
At Other times
Gen.
their rendering lies far
apart from that of the lxx., manifesting complete dissent from
the
Alexandrian version,
^, .
20
1
xlvii.
31
^\
Num.
xxiii.
21 {'yO)
' T\V^1J^ '

Regn.
12, 1?'"^*
^^ ' '
See pp. 47
ff
5.
^/^^, . (..
etc.
xiii.
9, .
2. vulv)
Ps.
395
f.
43' 4i7
On
the excellence of his Greek scholarship see Field, op.
cit. p. xliv.
46
2.
others where the later translators substitute a

for a paraphrase or a gloss; for the
e.g. in
^.
.2..
(b)
to Biblical
Study.
these instances
may be added
literal
rendering
has
Deut.
x.
i6
euphemistic
in Ps. XV. 9
restore
of the LXX.
for the interpretative
.
;
instances
points out* that "in a large number of word which one or other of the translators substitutes for the lxx. word is itself used in other passages of the LXX. as the translation of the same Heljrew word " and he draws the conclusion that " the words which are so interchanged are practically synonymous." But his inference must
Dr Hatch
the
be received with reserve,

as appears at
first
for the interchange
may
not be so free
sight
so careful a translator as Aquila (e.g.)
has probably regulated his use of words which are generally
synonymous with a view

context.
to the requirements of the particular
(
found
them.
Many
in the
of the words of the N.T. which are not to be

in the
lxx. occur
fragments of the later Greek
versions, and receive important illustration from their use of
Indeed, in not a few instances these versions supply
the only or the best explanation of rarer words or connotations.
The
of.
following
Ix. 3,
are
2. Ps.
.
2.
cxv. 3, Eccl.
7
Ps. xxxvi.
'
/,
12,
to faint,' 2.
xvii.
Isa.
xi.
ix.
Ezech.
Prov.
21;
18,
xxi.
asleep,'
Ps. Ixxv. 7;
^ , ,, ,
examples.
vii.
,, () ^,
.
15
Job
xviii.
20,
17, Ezech.
;
iii.
Ps.
XC.
6.
Gen.
xxvii.
46
Ps.
vii.
13;
16,
the unusual word

^
and meaning occur
,
'
'thought,'
2.
Job
xxi.
27,
2.
patch,' 2. Jos.
xxvi.
ix.
Job
5;
'to
drop
Isa. xliv. 13".
Even where
it
in the lxx.,
will often
Essays, p. 28. These instances are chiefly from Hatch {Essays, p. 25). They might easily be multiplied by an inspection of the Oxford Concordance or of the Lexicon and Hexapla at the end of Trom.
2

be found that the
later
to
Biblical Study.
461
or
versions supply
more abundant
the
more appropriate
tions
illustrations.
Thus
after
Septuagint
these fragments, which are happily receiving continual addi-
from Hexaplaric MSS.,
for the investigation of
which has been
little
offer the most promising field N.T. lexicography and one, moreover, worked.
no sounder advice could be given keep continually at hand the Septuagint, the remains of the Hexapla as edited by Field, and the Oxford Concordance which forms a complete index to both. It is only when he has made some way with the evidence of the Greek versions of the Old Testament that he will be in a position to extend his rethe whole, perhaps,
to a student of the language of the N.T.^ than to
On
searches
to
non-Bibhcal
literature,
such as the papyri, the
remains of the Hellenistic writers, and the great monuments of

the later Greek.
Literature (on the general subject of the chapter). J. Pearson, Praefaiio Parae?ieiica (ed. E. Churton), p. 16 sqq. H. Hody, de Bibl. textibus orig., ill. c. ii., p. 293 J. F, Fischer, Proliisioiies de ve7'sio7iib24s Gfaecis libroi'U7n V. T. (Leipzig, 1772) ; Z. Frankel, Vorstudieii 2icr Septnacrijtta (Leipzig, 1841), p. 263 fif. ; E. W. Grinfield, N. T. Gr., editio Hellenistica (London, 1843); Scholia Hellenistica in N. T. (London, 1848); Apology for the
;
;
An
Sepl7/ogint {London, 1850); W. R. Churton, The Ififliience of the LXX. Version of the O. T. upon the progress of Christianity (Cambridge, 1861); W. Selwyn, art. Septtiagint, in Smith's D.B.^ iii. (London, 1863); W. H. Guillemard, The Greek Testament^ Hebraistic edition [St Matthew] (Cambridge, 1875); F. Hatch, Essays Biblical G^'eek, i. iii. (Oxford, 1889); S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of Samuel^ Intr., p. xxxvi. if. (Oxford, 1890); A. F. Kirkpatrick, The Divine Library of the O. Z"., The Septuagint Version, in Expositor., p. 63 ff. (London, 1891); V. iii., p. 263 ff. (London, 1896); T. K. Abbott, Essays chiefly on the original texts of the O. and N. Testaments (London, 1891); A. Loisy, Histoire critiqtie du texte et des versions de la Bible (Amiens, 1892); H. A. A. Kennedy, Sources of N. Greek, or the Influence of the LXX. on the vocabidary of the
N.
(Edinburgh, 1895).
CHAPTER
V.
Influence of the lxx. on Christian

Literature.
Synagogue work of the Alexandrian translators. It was a treasure common to Jew and Christian, the When authorised Greek Bible to which at first both appealed. after the beginning of the second century a distrust of the
I.
The Church
inherited from the Hellenistic

in the
an entire confidence
LXX.
sprang up
among
the
Jews^ Christian teachers and

venerable age and
its
writers not unnaturally clung to the old version with a growing
devotion.
They pleaded
;
its
use by the
Evangelists and Apostles

the legend of
its birth-,
they accepted and often embellished
and, following in the steps of Philo,

inferior to that of the original.
claimed
for
it
an inspiration not
of the
When
the
divergences
Septuagint from the current

it
Hebrew
that
text
became apparent,
text
was argued
that
the errors
of the Greek
were due to accidents of transmission, or

of
they were not actual errors, but Divine adaptations
the original to the use of the future Church.

Iran. iii. 21. 3 'quum...Deus...servavit nobis simplices scripturas in Aegypto...in qua et Dominus noster servatus est... et haec earum scripturarum interpretatio priusquam Dominus noster descenderet facta sit et antequam Christian! ostenderentur interpretata sit... vera impudorati et audaces ostanduntur qui nunc volunt aliter intarpretationes facere, quando ex ipsis
See above, See above,
p. 30 f. p. i3.f.
Influence of the
scripturis
LXX.
on Christian Literature.
463
arguantur a nobis. .-etenim apostoli quum sint his vetustiores, consonant praedictae interpretationi. et etenim Petrus et interpretatio consonat apostolicae traditioni. loannes et Alatthaeus et Paulus et reliqui deinceps et horum
omnibus
sectatores prophetica omnia ita annuntiaverunt quemadmodum Seniorum interpretatio continet. unus enim et idem Spiritus Dei qui in prophetis quidem praeconavit,..in Senioribus autem interCyril. Hieros. pretatus est bene quae bene prophetata fuerant. ras ras cat. iv. 33 f.
:
ifl
^, ^ , \ ^ . , (, ^
...
v.
8<9
yap evpeaiXoyia yivopevov,
38 8âyiov
Matt. Jiom.
" iure {ad Painniach.) LXX. editio obtinuit in ecclesiis vel quia prima fuit et ante Christi facta adventum, vel quia ab Apostolis.-.usurpata" \praef. in Paralip. " si LXX. interpretum pura et ut ab eis in Graecum versa est editio permaneret, superflue mc.impelleres ut Hebraea volumina Latino sermone transferrem." Aug. de doctr. " qui (lxx. interpretes) iam per omnes peritiores ecclesias Chr. 22 tanta praesentia Sancti Spiritus interpretati esse dicuntur ut os unum tot hominum fuisse...quamobrem, etiamsi aliquid aliter in Hebraeis exemplaribus invenitur quam isti posuerunt, cedendum esse arbitror divinae dispositioni quae per eos facta est...itaque fieri potest ut sic illi interpretati sint quemadmodum congruere Gentibus ille qui eos agebat... Spiritus S. indicavit." (Cf qiiaest. in Hept. i. 169, vi. 19; in Ps. cxxxv. de civ. Deivnx. 44.)
\.
8. yap ^^, \ ^^
\
Hieron.
ep.
xxxiii.
ypav
ayia Chrys.
elev
\ -- XXayevo.
:
2.
Under
these circumstances the Septuagint Version of
the Old Testament necessarily influenced the literature and
thought of the Ancient Church in no ordinary degree.

largely
it
How
quoted by Greek Christian writers of the first four centuries has already been shewn ^ But they were not
is
content to cite
it
as the best
^
available version
p.
of the
Old
See above,
Part
219
ff,
III. c. 3.
464
Inflnejice
of the
LXX.
on Christian Literatiwe.
Testament
its
they adopted without suspicion and with tenacity

renderings,
least
defensible
and pressed them
into
the
service of controversy,
dogma, and devotion.
This remark
applies also in effect to the Latin Christian writers before Jerome,

generally dependent on a literal translation based upon the Greek Bible ^ To TertuUian and Cyprian, as well as to Clement and Barnabas, Justin- and Irenaeus, the Septuagint was the Old Testament authorised by the Church, and no Nor appeal lay either to any other version or to the original. was this tradition readily abandoned by the few who attained Origen, while recognising the to some knowledge of Hebrew. divergence of the lxx. from the Hebrew, and endeavouring to reconcile the two by means of the Hexapla^, was accustomed He to preach and comment upon the ordinary Greek texf*. even builds his system of interpretation on the lxx. rendering of Prov. xxii. 20^ Jerome was long in reaching his resolve to adopt the Hebrew text as the basis of his new Latin version, and when at length he did so, his decision exposed him to
who were
obloquy^
pose,
Augustine, while sympathising with Jerome's purit
thought
a doubtful poHcy to
unsettle
the laity by
lowering the authority of the lxx.^
the
1 -
The following examples lxx. will shew how

p.
of Christian interpretation based upon largely that version influenced the
See above,
87
ff.
Justin occasionally adopts a rendering preferred by his Jewish anBut he makes this tagonists, or does not press the rendering of the lxx. concession only where the alternative does not affect his argument; see
Dial. 124, 131. 2 See above, p. 60 fif. * Comm. in Cant. i. 344, " tamen nos LXX. interpretum scripta per omnia custodimus, certi quod Spiritus Sanctus mysteriorum forrnas obtectas
inesse voluit in scripturis divinis." 5 See below, p. 468. ^ See his Preface to the Gospels, addressed to Damasus. ^ Aug. Ep. ii. 82, He deprecates the change of cuctirbita into 35. hedera in Jon. iii. 6 fif. on the ground that the LXX. doubtless had good "non enim frustra reasons for translating the Hebrew word by hoc puto LXX. posuisse, nisi quia et huic simile sciebant."
:
htfliience
of the
LXX.
on Christia?i Literature.
465
hermeneutics of the Ancient Church. The exegesis is often obviously wrong, and sometimes it is even grotesque but it illustrates the extent to which the authority of the LXX. became a factor in the thought and life of the Church both in anteNicene and early post-Nicene times. A careful study of these passages will place in the hands of the young student of patristic literature a key which may unlock many of his difticulties.
;
Gen.
i.
2
be
j;
Se
y^
^.
et
Iren.
i.
elnelv
de
Ten.
terra
28. 3 iav
vectaculum
consilium a Deo uti quiesceret in eo quod non recte divisisset erga fratrem erat communicationem...non solum non acquievit, sed adiecit peccatum super peccatum" cf. iv. 18. 3. Xiv. 14 (cod. D). Barn.
. (]
autem
OTL
bapt. 3
"(aqua) plurima suppetit,
erat invisibilis et incomposita... solus liquor dignum Deo subiciebat." ii. 2 r^ ?) ]. Iren. v.
avvTeXeia
Iren.
iii.
23
4 "Cain
^.
"
;
quidem a primordio...
.
8.
I
quum
7 accepisset
rjpeWev st7Om. vi.

6
^
eam quae
9. 8
...^ \
II.
(^
6
Xeyei Hil. syn. 86. Ambr. de fide

iv
, '
\
()
Xeyei
iv
().
\.
Cf Clem.
xxxi. 13
Xlviii. 14 iTTiiâXev...ivaXka^
tempus in quo defecit princeps et dux ex luda et qui est gentium spes...GX. invenient non alium nisi Dominum nostrum lesum Christum annuntiatum." Cypr. test. i. 21. Eus. dem. ev. 1. 4. Cyril. H. xii. 17
id
ei et
,
Clem.
Iren.
s.
. ^ ' , ' , , .
Justin Dial. 52
hoc quoque de vetere sacramento quo nepotes suos...intermutatis manibus benedixerit et quidem ita transversim obliquatis in se, ut Christum deformantes iam tunc portenderent benedictionem in Christum futuram." iKXelêi xlix. 10 i^
(^.
Iren.
i
.
e-yco
prol.
(^^').
Just. Dial. 58 (cf. 60). Tert. dapt. 8 "sed est
yeyove
(^
(cf
ib.
... 2).
iv
yivei
2 "inquirant enim...
pev
e/c
yivo
XVI. 36
Se
stroin.
ii.
1 1
iv
yopop yap
a'i...Xyo...
16.
eVt
yVv
.(
^
XVU. 16
-yei/eay.
iv
Just. Dial.
yeyove
iii.
quoniam
XXXiii. 19
s.
4 " occulte quidem sed potenter manifestans, absconsa manu expugnabat Dominus Amalech."
. , ^^ ^ .
49
(AF).
i\
ivavTiov
Amb.
30
466 Influence of the

de Sp.
s.\. 13 "
;
LXX.
Dominum
Lev. iv. unctus est, unde Christus dicitur a chrismate, quod est unctio, quae Domino nomen accommodavit." $ ovde Ofos Num. XXiii. 19 Cypr. Ust. . 20 [under the heading " Quod cruci ilium fixuri essent ludaei "]. xxiv. 17 ava-eXel Eus. </<?;;/. e^ Cypr. tesL ii. 10 [under the heading, " Quod et homo ev. i. 3? 6.
/3,
et
Deus
Christus,'^ &c.].
Deut. XXViii. 66
pe7idens in hgno ajite oculos tuosj *' signi et nofi credes vitae tuae^^'' explaining the words of the sacramentum...in quo vita hominibus praestruebatur, in quo Judaei non essent credituri." Cf. Cyril H. xiii. 19 cirt eVi Justin XXXii. 8 {did/. 131) cites the last three words as .
quotes this as
adding
ayy. Xoyos,
Iren. iii. 12. 9, quoting the LXX., comments: "populum autem qui credit Deo iam non esse sub angelorum potestate." Jos. V. 3 Tert. /lid. 9 " circumcisis nobis petrina acie, id est, Christi praeceptis (petra enim Christus multis modis et figuris praedicatus est)." evri TO 3 Regll. XXii. 38 iv Amb. de Sp. S. I. l6 " hdelis ad puteum (Gen. xxiv. 62), infidelis ad lacum (Jer. ii. I3)...meretrices in lacu Jezabel se cruore laverunt." Cyp. test. iii. 66 ^^ adprehendite Ps. ii. 12 disciplinam''^ [under the heading "Disciplinam Dei in ecclesiasiv. 7 ticis praceptis observandam "]. Amb. de Sp. I. 14 "quod est ergo lumen
'
. / , ^
^
?
Dominus ergo dixit quia in nomine suo vocabit Dominus ergo et Patris est nomen et Filii." Tert. bapt. 7 "Aaron a Moyse tepeii 5
^.
.,.
^''
'
Tjj
^. ].
Tert.
{Jiid.
Erit vita
tiia
eVel
6"
. .
.
(.
.
.^
:
ovdev
...
^
.
(
'
signatum nisi illius signaculi spiritaHs in quo credentes sigftati vi. 6 eV be (inquit) estis Spiritu promissio?iis sancto^.'''
ooXoya
"
Dum
in
Cypr. test. iii. 114 [under the carne est quis, exhomologesin (cf. Stud. Bibl.
headmg
iv.
282,
Hil. ad loc. "intelix. tit. 290 .) tacere debere"]. legendum quotiens qui titulos habent in fine, non praesentia in Orig. lb. his sed ultima contineri."
ad
loc.
yv ^
1
,. -
i.
13.
Influence of the
Oeov
.. .
.
LXX.
467
Athan. ad loc, Xe'yei 7. See under Hab.

Iren.
ii.
II.
30
sub-
stantia eius existente.
Cypr.
test.
Tert. 7 Deo genitus, proprie de vulva cordis ipsius secundum quod et Pater ipse testatur Eructavit cor sermonem optimum." Marc. ii. 4 " adhibet operi bono optimum etiam
Xliv. 1 " solus ex
ii.
3,
Ambr. de Sp.
.
'
. ,
s.
"
tamquam immortali
iii.
XXXii. 6
See Iren.
ministrum, sermonem suum."
\
ad
loc.
'/3.
transliterated
iv
et hominem expositum, 27 " invenimus ilium directo et ipso hoc psalmo suggerente quoniam Deus homo natus est in ilia, aedificavit earn voluntate Patris'' cf. Marc. iv. 13 "'Mater Sion' dicet homo, et 'homo factus est in ilia' (quoniam Deus homo natus est)...aedihcaturus ecclesiam ex voluntate patris." Hieron. comin. in Pss. (ed. G. Morin) ad loc: "pro 'mater Sion' LXX. interpretes transtulerunt 'numquid Sion .) dicat htera graeca addita fecit errorem." Jerome homo.'*'...sed vitiose however retains the interpretation 'homo Christus,' which depends on the LXX. reading IxXXVii. 6 eV
;
2\
lb. 5
^
Cyril.
/.
8.
iii.
.. . ^3
Tert.
tfin.
xii.
rax. 7,
39.
11,
Hil.
?'.
Cf.
ii.
iv
and
3m
alike).
ipei
^^^Deum
:
" ,
Cypr.
Cf.
Hieron. com;n. in Ps.
."
meum
ii.
test.
3.
Ixxxvi. 4
(the
LXX. having
eyeTert. Prax.
Cyril.
res.
iv
cam. 13 "id est de morte, de funere, quoque substantiam corporis exigi posse"
Lightfoot, p. 85
Just. diat.
(cf. ib.
iii.
^
.
4
55
o^*^
.
XCV. 5
iii.
iv
iXepo.
,
o'l
Xci. 13
n.).
ivv...e'a
Iren.
6. 3.
uti
(cf.
credas de ignibus Clem. R. i Cor. 25, '^/./
^. , .
{
iv
59.
i.
79? 83). Ib. 10
ia
Tert. idololatr. 20.
apot.
nunc,
ligjio,
si
Tert. Marc. iii. 19; Jud. 10 "age 41, Oiat. ^^ f.^ legisti penes prophetam in psalmis Deus regnavit a
:
,'
^.
Cypr.
.
Tert.
test.
Just.
expecto quid intelligas, ne forte lignarium aliquem regem significari putetis et non Christum." ib. 13 "unde et ipse David regnaturum ex ligno dominum dicebat." Auctor de inontibus Sina et Sion 9 " Christus autem in montem sanctum ascendit lignum regni sui." Cf. Barn. 8 i\ XCViii. 5 Ambr. de Sp. s. iii. 1 1 " per scabellum terra intelligitur, per terram autem caro Christi quam hodieque in mysteriis adoramus, et quam Apostoli in Domino Jesu...adorarunt." Cf Aug. ad loc. cvi. 20 uTreVret-
. .
(\().
See above,
p. 424, n.
and
cf.
Deut.
xxviii.
30
468
Xei/
Influence of the
LXX.
\oyov avTovs. Cypr. test. ii. 3 [under the heading "Quod Christus idem sit sermo Dei"], cix. 3''
Tert. Marc. v. 9 "nos edimus evangeIia...nocturna nativitate declarantia Dominum ut hoc sit ante lt(ciferu)n...x\e.c gciieravi te edixisset Deus nisi filio vero...cur autem adiecit ex iitero... nisi quia curiosius voluit intellegi in Christum ex utero getieravi te, id est, ex solo utero sine viri semine.?" Cypr. test. \. 17.
(
'
on C/irisiian Literatwe.
ae.
Just. apol.
i.
45, dial. 32.
.
Cyril.
H.
vii.
XI.
viii.
iv.
^^
eVi
(Ps.
. "',
7)
Cf.
27f
PrOV.
61.
22 Kvpios
[under the heading onmia facta su7it\ Hil. ti'in. xii. 45 " quaerendum est quid sit natum ante saecula Deum rursum in initium viarum Dei et in opera creari," Cf. Athan. or. in Ar. ii. 16 ff. de xxii. 20
Iren.
i
20. 3. Tert. Prax. 7. Cypr. test. ii. Christii7n...esse sapientiain Dei., per qua?n
8.
Athan.
I.
or.
C.
Ar.
iv.
Just, dial.
Job
. 14
Applied to the Devil by Cyr. H, cat. viii. 4. HOS. xii. 4 (A) V pe. Tert. Marc. iv. 39 "per diem in templo docebat ut qui per Osee praedixerat," &c. (For the reading of B, cf. Orig. Philoc. viii. i.)
. . '^ '
del els
Orig. Philoc. eavTod
iv
'-- .
in
II {depil.7lC. iv.)
Amos
Marc.
iv.
( .
Ha.b.
ii.
ix. 6 6 34 "aedificantem
is
illis
11
ascensum suum
caelum."
Tert.
Ambr. in Luc. xxiii. " bonus vermis qui haesit in ligno (Ps. xxi. 7), bonus scarabaeus qui clamavit e ligno... clamavit quasi scarabaeus Dens Deus mens''' or. de obitu Theo;
dosii 46 "[Helena] adoravit ilium qui pependit in ligno. ..ilium (inquam) qui sicut scarabaeus clamavit ut persecutohbus suis Pater peccata donaret." Hieron. /;/ Abac, ad loc. "quidam e nostris vermem in ligno loquentem ilium esse aiunt qui dicit in Psalmo (xxi. 7) Ego natus su?n vei'inis et non homo:'' iii. 2 eV Tert. Marc. iv. 22 " in medio duo animalium cognosceris, Moysi et Eliae." Eus. dein. ev. vi. 15
^
^
12.
-].
3
(reading
^',
Zach.
121.
vi.
12
Tert. Valent. Christi figuram." Isa. i. 22 01

I
(,
in
"amat
^ ^ .
text)
be
figura Spiritus
ostendens quod austero Dei praecepto miscerent seniores aquatam traditionem." iii. 9 f.
"
. . ],
sancti
JuSt. dial.
06,
orientem,
Iren.
iv.
Influence of the
\ivvTai
Justin.,
vii.
al.
vi. 7, Just. dzat. 17,
14
Eus. don. ev. vii. i. Cypr. test. ii. 9. Tert. Marc. iii. 13, iv. 10. Hil. trtn. iv. 23 (iyy eXos. iX. 6 Cyr. H. xii. 21. " qui Angelus Dei dictus est, idem Dominus et Deus est est autem secundum prophetam Filius Dei inagni consilii atigeltisP Tert. Marc. iv. 4 X. 23 \oyov " compendiatum est enim novum testamentum et a legis laciniosis
;
) .
LXX.
* 8,
otl
iii.
Iren.
iv
469
1.
(.(. Barn,
iii.
ap.
133, 136 f. Tert. Marc. Just. dial. 43, 67, 7
oneribus expeditum
ayyiKoL
6
KQTOLKelv XiyeL
Tert. Prax. 28, Jtid.
Barn. xii. II, [read aS iv Cypr. test. i. 21. lb. 14 Ambr. de Sp. s. ii. 8 " in Christo orare nos debere Tert. de cartte ev Deus Pater dicit." liii. 3 Eus. k. e. \. 2. yeveav Chr. 15. lb. 8 Ambr. de Sp. s. ii. 9 St' ipov. liv. 15 " Deus Pater ad Filium dicit Ecce proselyti veuient ad te per ev elpr]vr] tne." Ix. 17
. \ ^ . . ?
" (cf. iv. 16).
:
79
:
22.
Cyril H.
xiii. 12.
1,
84.
21.
i if.
XXX. 4
.
.
Just. dial. /et, eV
yyKov
].
xlv. 1
7,
Cor. 42. Ixiii. 1 Cf. Clem. R. Hieron. comm. iji Isa. ad loc. "quod multi pro errore lapsi putant ayyeo^ lb. 9 oh de carne ("^'^) Domini intellegi." Iren. iii. 20. 4 "quoniam neque homo tantum erit qui salvat nos neque sine carne (sine carne enim Tert. jV/arc. iv. 22 ";/^;/ legates, inquit Esaias, angeli sunt)." nee nuncius, sed ipse Deus salvos eos faciei., ipse iam praedicans et implens legem et prophetas." et? Tert. Jer. Xi. 19 eve Marc. iii. 19 "utique 'in corpus '...sic enim Deus in evangelio... Cypr. test. ii. 20. revelavit, panem corpus suum appellans." Iren. iii. 1 8. j, 1 9. XVii. 9 2, iv. 33. 11; Tert. earn. Chr. 15, Jud. 14. ev 67 Bar. iii. 38 /xera
, .
ev
^'
\y . ^;
26.
5
Iren.
iv,
'
'.
,
Cyril.
4
;
.
Lam.
iv.
ev
^
.
20
eakev
xi.
;
veva
6 "Christum, spiritum scilicet creatoris, sicut propheta testatur" &c. Pt'ax. 14 "ergo si Christus personae paternae spiritus est, merito spiritus cuius persona erat (id est Patris) eum faciem suam ex unitate scilicet pronuntiavit." Cyril. H. xiii. 7. Ambr. de Sp. s. i. 9 "et Christus spiritus dicitur quia leremias dixit," &;c.
Marc.
ee
y
1
.
II.
eebv
ea
iii.
Just. apol.\. 55
Iren.
? ve
Tert.
iii.
470 Influence of the
LXX.
From these specimens it is clear that the Ancient Church was profoundly influenced by the Greek Old Testament in Two may be mentioned here, (i) The a variety of ways.
Alexandrian Greek with
its
daughter-version, the Old Latin,
supplied the basis of a practical interpretation which, notwithstanding numerous errors of text and of treatment, ministered
to the religious
life
of the Christian Society.

official
It
was from the
LXX. version and not from the

that the pre-Hieronymian
Hebrew
of the Synagogue
the
Old Testament,
as
it is
Hebrew
Psalters.
Bible which
still
Church derived her devotional use of on the whole the Greek and not the supplies the Roman Breviary and the
the substance of their liturgical
its
Anglican Prayer-book
with
The Alexandrian School based

and the
errors
exegetical
work
upon
and obscurities of the version often yielded materials peculiarly adapted to the requirements of the allegorists whilst the School of Antioch was no less
the lxx.,
;
whole-hearted in
its
devotion to the old Alexandrian version

lxx. continued to the age of the
is
This
later
spirit of loyalty to the
Greek expositors
it
reflected
in
the catenae^ and
it
fundamentally aflects the traditional interpretation of the Old
Testament throughout the orthodox East.
Even
it
in the
West,
through the spread of the Greek exegesis, and the use of the
Old Latin version by the

predominant influence.
interpretation
earlier Latin fathers,
has acquired a
Thus, for good or
for evil, the
popular
of the O. T. has
been moulded
(2)
by the lxx.
supplied the
crises
rather than by the
Hebrew
text.
The lxx.
at
Ancient Church with controversial weapons

in her history
two great
during
the early struggle with the rival forces
of Monotheism, Judaism, Marcionism, and the various schools

of Gnosticism, and in the long conflict with Arianism.
Arians
^ For Chrysostom's use of the LXX. see F. H. Chase, Chrysostofu : a study in the history of Biblical Interpretation, p. 28 ff. (Cambridge, 1887); and for Theodore of Mopsuestia, cf. H. Kihn, Th. v. Mops., p. 87 if. (Frei-
burg
i.
B., 1880).
Influence of the
as
LXX.
on Christian Literattire.
471
well as
Catholics
Thus Arius did not

{\
is
hesitate to argue from Joel
1...
the
no higher sense than any other agency by which great effects are wrought upon the face of nature Both parties had recourse to Prov. viii. 22, where the lxx.
Power of God
in
seemed to Arius to justify the statement that the Logos Himself had a beginning of existence, Unconvincing as such arguments like the created universe^. are now, they had an overwhelming weight in the fourth century, and Hilary speaks as if the cause of orthodoxy might be saved by wresting this crucial passage out of the hands of the Arians (de Trin. xii. "hie hiemis eorum maximus fluctus
rendering of
''^^?
by
^. '
appealed to the Alexandrian version. ii. 25, lxx.
-)
that the
Son
est,
haec tortuosa turbinis gravis
unda
est,
quae excepta a
tutis-
nobis et securo
navigio infracta, usque ad ipsum nos
simum portum
be
fully
optati litoris prosequetur").
Neither the con-
troversies of the
second nor those of the fourth century can understood without an appreciation of the place which
the Greek Old Testament occupied in the thought
and
lan-
guage of the Ancient Church.

3.
Familiarity with the lxx.

life
is
not less essential to the
student of the devotional
of the Early Church.
The Greek
Liturgies, especially perhaps in the oldest parts, are steeped

in the language of the
Greek Old Testament, (a) The prayers worked into their text, often with little or of the Psalter are
no change;
^
id.
(.
8)
^7'))
e.g.
St Clement (B. 5)^

iv rots
avrols
<;
1.
^
(Ps.
1.
12);
avroLS
/cat
(Ps.
14)
St fames
(.
37)
Fragment of the Thalia,

lb.
in
Athan.
of
$.
or.
c.
Ar.
i.
6.
3 The references are to the pages and Western, i. (Oxford, 1896).
Mr
Brightman's Liturgies, Eastern
ib.
^ , ,
472
(Ps.
lufluence of the
9)';
ib.
xxvii.
1^..
8).
^ LXX.
55)
(B,
ot
on Christian Literature,
(Ps. xxxiv. 2);
St
Mark (.
xlii.
Iiy)
3)'^^^
(Ps.
)(
Ixxviii.
(?)
Many
of their magnificent addresses to

the
iv
(Isa.
and
to
Christ
K.vpL
(B. 24)
, ,
to
are
from
lxx.
e.g.
//,
6
Ivii.
,
15
(Ps.
St C/eme/it
(B.
ayie iv
?
12)
2);
(Ps.
(Ps.
God
Macc.
;
ii.
(Jer. xxxix. 19)
St fames
(B.
Cxii.
44)
5
^)
'
iv
'^^
Mark (.
Sarapiotl
137)
(J.
(Ps. Ixxix.
2);
Th.
Iviii.
St.
i.)
;
\
aid,
e.g.
'/^
St
XXX.
6)
(Ps.
(c)
xvi. 22).
Passing allusions are

explain
times
(B.
^ ...
difficult
without
6)
(cf.
Job
xl.
14)
^
made
its
;
6)
(Num.
someClement
to the lxx.,
ib.
(.
ix.
15)
6)
;
/
St James
j
(Isa.
55) (Ps. XXV. 6)
(.
ib.
(.
57) ^^
Ps.
(.
120)
?
(i
^îb.
(Ps. cxiv. 9)
-St
Mark
Regn.
xxix. 6:
cxx. 8);
;
(.
133) e^
viii.
:
:
(Exod. XV. ij
(B. 335) 6
3 Regn.
39
ix.
if.);
St Basil
of the
e.g.
^/
(Lev. xxii.
2),
(Judith
ii); Sarapion
Regn.
ii.
6).
(d)
Much
(Gen.
technical phraseology of the Liturgies
is
from the lxx.
^
iv.
(Num.
18),
iv. 19),
(Gen.
iv.
3),
(Exod. xxxvii.
19),
^
ie)
iv.
4),
(Gen.
3),
(Exod. xxxix.
(3
(Lev. xxiv. 7),
Regn.
vii. 34),
(Exod. xxix.
9).
The
same
is
true with regard to

e.g.
some of
the oldest
Eucharistic
formulae,
1 2
the Preface
and Sandus"^ which are based on

in
Q{. St Basil {^. 311). The composite quotation
Clem. R.
Cor. xxxiv. (Dan.
vii.
io
Influence of the
Isa. vi.
2
LXX.
on Christian Literature,
473
3,
the Kyrie eleison (Psalms, passijn), the Gusiate

v.
(Cyril
4.
H.
Jiiyst.
20) \
The Greek terminology
of Christian Doctrine
It is true
is
largely
in
indebted to the Alexandrian translators.

this case
that
most of the technical language of theology has passed
through the
New Testament and

Church
received there a fuller prepa:
ration for the use of the
and the influence of Greek

But
it
philosophy and of Gnostic speculation must also be borne

in
is
mind by the student

its
of the language of dogma.
it
perhaps even more important that he should trace
back
to
source in the Greek Old Testament, which was far more

first
,,,, ^, , , , ,, , , , , ,,
familiar to Christian teachers of the
three centuries than
the writings
of Plato
or
of the
schools
Valentinus.
The
patristic use of
such terms as
',
/, ,,,
of Basileides
and
;?,
fJLOvoyevtj^,
,,
can best be understood by the student who begins

their use in the Septuagint.
less
by investigating
Indirectly,
but not
extensively,
the
earliest
Latin
theology drew a store of theological language from the lxx.
Such words
verfi,
iustitia,
as aeternalis, altare^
eleemosyiia,
benedictio,
congregatio,
con-
daemoniiwi,
exomologesis, glorificare, hostia,

sacerdos, sacrificium,
inisericordia,
ablatio, propitiaiio,
salvare,
testamentu7n,
unicus,
viaticum,
are
examples which
might easily be multiplied.

terms
(e. g.
In the case of some of these

sacrificium
sacerdos
episcopus,
eucharistid)
the
choice contributed largely to the development of doctrine, and

it
is
reasonable to suppose that they entered the vocabulary
Isa. vi. 3) is probably an echo of an early Preface. Dan. I.e. in the same connexion is not uncommon; cf. St
Roman
reference to
18),
Clement (B.
(cf.
St
Mark (B. 131), Sarapion [J. Th. St. i, p. 105). ^ To these may perhaps be added the "A R. /.(.). On Kyrie eleison see a paper by Mr Edm. Bishop,
i.
66%
Clem.
Revieiv, 1899
1900 (published
in the Downside separately by Walters, Weston-super-mare).
474
Influence of the
LXX.
on Christiaii Literature,
of the
Western
Church through the Latin version of the

It is
Septuagint, and not directly from Pagan use.

that Cyprian,
noteworthy
" small
whose own
style has
been said
to
shew
respect for the language of the Latin Bible \" persistently used
these O. T. words in reference to the Christian ministry and
the Eucharistic offering.

5.
still
One
great
a
monument
one time
It
of ancient Christianity, which the

vast
exercises
direct
at
influence over
Latin com-
munion, seemed
force
to the
likely to serve as a counteracting
Septuagint.
was the deliberate purpose of
West the authority of a daughterversion of the LXX., and to establish in its place, by means
Jerome
of his
to set aside in the
new Latin
Bible,
that
of
the
official
Hebrew
text.
it
Nevertheless, through a variety of causes, the Vulgate, as

is
now
read by the Latin Church, perpetuates

{a)
many
of the
characteristic features of the lxx.

gate, as
The
Psalter of the Vul-
we have
seen,
is
taken from Jerome's second revision of
the Old Latin, and not from his Psalterium Hebraicum, or translation of the
Hebrew
i,
text
and
the
the books of are
Baruch, and
Maccabees,
rest
given
forms^
ings
iii.
{b)
The
of
Old
Wisdom, Sirach, the Old Latin Testament retains, in

in
the Clementine Vulgate, numerous traces of Septuagint read-
and renderings.
insidiaberis
15 "tu
{)
*'
few examples
may be
given
iv.
calcaneo eius";
que Cain ad Abel fratrem eius Egrediamus

Spiritus
()
^)
foras "
vi.
'^
permanebit
xlix.
(
erit
{ ))
:
Gen.
8 "dixit-
meus
Isa.
in
homine";
10
"ipse
expectatio
gentium";
vii.
Num.
Christus
xxiv.
24
" vastabuntque
He20
braeos";
14 " ecce virgo

"
concipiet";
"
;
Lam.
iii.
iv.
"Spiritus oris
nostri
dominus
ducam servum meum Orientem

1
().
p.
Zech.
It
8 "ad-
must indeed
E. W. Watson, in Studia Biblica, See above, pp. 98 f., 103.
194
f.
Influence of the
LXX.
on Christian
Litei'atiire.
475
be remembered that loans from the lxx. are not always of

Jerome's borrowing; some of them have
Vercellone, Variae
u. p. viii sqq.).
made
its
their
way
into the
text of the Vulgate during the course of

lectio?ies
transmission (see
vidgatae Latinae bibliorum editioniim^
But they hold their place in the authorised

West, and represent there to this day
Latin
the
Bible
of the
influence of the Alexandrian
of the words of the Vulgate are

literations of the
Greek more or
version,
less
{c)
Many
same
complete transin the
Greek words used by the lxx.

themselves
ii.
contexts, survivals in great part from the O. L.,
had
xii.
familiarised
to Latin
ears'.
where they Thus we have

xix.
3,
arceuthinus (2 Chr.
8),
8), azyina,
azymi (Gen.
Exod.
2),
blasphemare (Lev. xxiv. 11), cartallus (Deut. xxvi.

(Isa.
xi.
cataplas7?iare
xxxviii.
21),
(i
cauma (Job
Regn.
ii.
xxx. 30), choero-
gryllus (Lev.
xi.
5),
duistus
xvi.
10), chytropus (Lev.

iv.
35), cidaris
(Lev.
4),
creagra (2 Chr.
xvii.
11),
donia
(Jer. xix. 13), ecclesia (i

xl.
Regn.
i.
17),
holocaustum (Lev.
v.
3),
latojuus (3 Regn.
15),
hitei' (3
^)^ gazophylacium (Ezech. lagaimm (Exod. xxix. 23), Regn. vii. 17 = 30), naulum
(Jon.
i.
3),
synagoga
thy??iiama
(Num.
If
nydicoi'ax (Deut. xiv. 17), sabbatu7)i (Exod. xvi. 23), xxvii. xxxviii. 14), 21), theristrum (Gen.
(Exod.
xxx.
i),
zelotes
(Exod.
xx.
5),
zelotypia
(Num.
it
V. 15).
we turn
to the
books which are
directly derived
from the O. L,, such forms are of course even more numerous is enough to specify acedia?'i (Sir. vi. 26), acharis (Sir. xx.
19
21),
4),
allophyli (Ps.
Iv.
i),
artaba (Bel
elee??iosy7ia
2),
decadiordus (Ps.
xi.
xci.
diplois (Ps.
(2
5),
cviii.
viii.
29),
i),
(Tob.
14
22),
ludaismus
(Judith
X.
Mace.
xxi.
neomenia (Ps. Ixxx.

x.
4),
palatha
24),
pentapolis (Sap.
4),
6),
poderis (Sap.
(Ps.
Ixvii.
xviii.
rhoniphaea
(Sir.
tyDipanistria
26),
zelare
(Ps. Ixxii. 3).
Several of these words belong to ordinary posttheir use in the
Augustan Latin, but

^
Vulgate
may
fairly
ff.,
be
f.,
Cf.
Kaulen, Handbuch zur Vulgata (Mainz, 1870), pp. 83
130
476
Influence of the
LXX.
on Christiaii Literature.
ascribed to the influence of the lxx., usually through the O. L.
The same may Hebrew names,

lerusaleju^
be said of
e.g.
many Vulgate
Moyses,
??,
reproductions of
Gomorrha,
Gabaon,
Pharao^ where the lxx. spelling or pronunciation

its
has been retained, no doubt because of
familiarity.
Greek versions over Jerome's great work, if less subtle and \videly diffused, has been more direct, and in the matter of interpretation more important. Thus it was from Aquila that Jerome borrowed the following
The
influence of the other
readings^: Exod.
ii.
5 in
papyreofie
(.
kv
Deut.
Job
)
trum
Trarrvpewvo^)
xxxiii.
12 ûasi in thalamo morabitur
(.
a.v
xiv.
;
12
donee atteratur caelum

ii.
Amos
('A.
still
13 ego stridebo subter vos, sicut stridet plausJer. xlix. (xxix.) 19
(. '](....)\
are
robustain
machus
here^
;
more numerous, and only a few can be given
^
vi.
(.
) -}
;
',
arepeav).
His debts
adpulcritiidinetn to SymJos.
Num.
xxv. 8 in lupanar (2.
uno
cepit
impetu (2.
mo/arem
servatum
ubi est
in
dentein (2. rr]v

est tibi {%. otl
Dominus
deus Eliae etiam nunc
) /
;
. ])
ix. ?
^)
;
42
19
Jud.
XV.
Regn.
);
(2.
24 ûia de industria 4 Regn. ii. 14

/cat
moinento indignationis (2. kv
It may be added that per totum (2. not a few of the Greek wôrds retained in the Vulgate are from e.g. grabatus (Amos the later versions and not from the lxx. 2. .), lecythus (3 Regn. iii. 12, .), laicus (i Regn. xxi. 4,
in circuitu
).
.
-)
;
vvv)
;
Isa. liv. 8
viii,
i
Ezek.
xvii.
12
if.),
tristegmn (Gen.
is
16, %.).
The
subject
too large to be adequately handled in a single
chapter. But enough has been said to indicate the nature and extent of the influence which the Greek versions and
the
Septuagint
in
particular
have exercised over Christian

East and West, and the consecit., p.
thought and
^
letters,
both
in
For other exx.
Field, Hexapla, i., p. xxiv. see Field, op.
xxxiv.
Influe7tce
of the
LXX.
on Christiafi Literature.
477
quent importance of these translations

siastical history
for the student of eccle-
and
literature.
Bishop Pearson's judgement
as to the serviceableness of the lxx. to patristic students will
always remain true
"
si
Graecos patres consulueris, quis eos

intelliget,
de
rebus
divinis
disserentes
qui
normam quam
semper in animo dum scriberent habuere non ante cognitam atque perspectam habeat?...sed ad Latinos patres non minus
quam Graecos
utihs
est,
recte intelligendos lxx. viralis versio frequens
imo necessarian"
not extinct
He
might have added that in

ren-
the Latin Christendom of to-day the influence of the Greek

versions
derings,
is
;
the echoes of their text, their

still
and
their interpretations are
to
be heard
in the
Bible, the worship,
and the theology of the Western Church.
Literature (on the general subject of the chapter). J. Pearson, Praefatio parae?ietica ad V. T. Graeciun (ed. E. Churton, Cambridge, 1855), H. Hody, de Bibliortcin texiibus, III, Rosenmiiller, Historia iiiterpretationis librorum iii. sqq. J. G. W. R. Churton, The sacr. in ecclesia Christiana (1795 1814). influence of the Septnagint version upon the progi'ess of Christianity (Cambridge, 1861). F. W. Farrar, Histoiy of Interpt-etaA. F. Kirkpatrick, The Septuagint Version tio7is (London, 1886). (in Expositor^ v. vi. 1896).
2nf.
CHAPTER
VI.
Textual Condition of the lxx., and Problems arising out of it.

I.
When
the work of the Seventy-two had been accomof Alexandria (so

after their
plished,
the Jews
bidden to invoke curses,

in other
should dare to add to the version or take from
ways (Aristeas ad fin.
, ?
et
yey
cation,
it
rj
has been acutely observed,
^ ^, '
it,
\
the legend goes)
were
manner, upon any who

or alter
it
.).
may
it
The impre-
point to an early
deterioration of the text of the
Greek Pentateuch, which the

This inference
is
Pseudo-Aristeas desired to check.

for the story
is
insecure,
to
sufficiently explained
iv.
by a reference
is
such
passages as
Deut
2, xii.
32^; but
certain that textual
corruption began before the Christian era.

of
it
There are traces
in the writings of Philo,
which cannot be due to blunders
in Philo's
own
text.
E.g. in guts rcr. div. he?'. 56 Philo quotes Gen. xv. 15 in the form now universal in MSS. of the LXX. r els adding the comment: iv yr)p(i yevos... (XevOepia ivr This is perhaps the most convincing example, but we may add Gen. (Luc); xxi. 6 ov xvi. 14 Bap(iS = eV {defug. 38), i.e. {de viut. tiovi. 24, where however, as in legg. all. xapclrai
]
21,
),
78,
( ^^
{^ ,., .
})}).,
ii.
iii.
qiwd
read
eVi
vy.
with cod.
(
^
det. pot. insid. sol.
Cohn and Wendland

6
cf.
Exod. {de somn. ii.

A'''"');
xvii.
ae
32,
f.
^.,.
Cf.
Apoc.
xxii.
18
, ^. .,. '^
AF
(re
to
Textual condition of the
LXX.
479
28
^\^
.); Num.
(/(?^.
els
Similar corruptions probably exist in

in
some
(17)).
of the N. T. citations, e.g.
xl.
7),
and
evo-xXrj^ for ev
)^
in
.
15
V.
\\\.
i^BAF
Heb.
xii.
x. 5
(Ps. xxxix.
Heb.
(Deut. xxix. 18
Justin, as
we have seen^ charges
his
Jewish contemporaries
with the deliberate excision of numerous passages in the lxx.
which were favourable to
their Christian antagonists

eSriyqaeoiv
(itiat.
71
rekeov irepielXov
// '.4 ^)''.
(xi.
yeyevrj-
But
of the four passages produced in proof of his assertion three

are
mere
glosses, probably of Christian origin; while the fourth,

19), is
a genuine part of the book of Jeremiah

in all
faith,
MSS. of the lxx.

seems
The
charge, though
now found made in good
have rested on no better foundation than a
natural distrust of the Jews,
who
in Justin's It is
time were active
and
bitter
opponents of the Church.

attempted
this,
equally improbable
that the
Greek O.T. was
wilfully interpolated
by Christians, or
that, if they
the existing text has been affected
by
it
to
any appreciable extent.
few traces
may be found
e.g.
of the accidental influence of N. T. citations,
the interin
polation in Ps.
Ps. xxxix.;
first
xiii.
3,
and perhaps
also the reading
but apart from these, the Septuagint, during the
two centuries after Christ, suffered little from Christian hands beyond errors of transcription. What Dr Hort has written in reference to the N.T. is doubtless true also of the
LXX.:
"accusations of wilful tampering with the text are...
^ Ets occurs in H. P. 71, which, as Dr Nestle informs me, shews other signs of affinity to the LXX. text of Philo. 2 It may be added that double renderings already appear in Philo. E.g. in citing Deut. xix. 14 his MSS. give oi warepes () in de post. Caini 25, (A) in de jiistitia 3. but ol Trporepoi ^ As in all our MSS. of Ps. xxxix. 4 See codd. B*AF* in Deut. I.e.
Above,
p. 424. Cf. dial. 120; Iren.
iii.
21. i, 5
Eus. dcni. ev.
vi. p.
257
c,
d.
48
ception,
LXX.
they prove
to
not unfrequent in Christian antiquity... but with a single ex-
wherever they can
be
verified,
be
groundless, being in fact hasty
and unjust inferences from
mere
ing
diversities of inherited
text\"
Accidental corruptions', however, and variations of read-
and rendering grew apace, and

XV. 14
in the third century

in
Origen
its
' , *).
where
complains of the uncertainty of the Biblical text

parts ^ {comm. in Matt.
t.
both
itc
^;
in
i
yiyovev
etre
rj
latet.-.quod in aliquibus exemplaribus habetur erat vir quidam
quae emendatiora probavimus

eyfvcTo
(
^
Besides intentional changes he notices elseRegn.,

i.
(i)
double renderings: /wm.
4 "non
me
codd.
44, &LC.), sed in his exemplaribus
)";
'
(2) transpositions:
in Jer. xv. 10,
,,
Inir. to
in
has the note
' '^ /'

on
;
ita
habetur, erat vir unus (A,

Jer. xlvii.
4 he
(3) errors of transcription
where most of
his copies read, as ours

this
he maintains that
reading
is
do now,
N. T. in Greek, p. 283. The one exception which Dr Hort connexion with the N.T., the excision practised by Marcion, finds no parallel in the Christian history of the Greek O.T. ^ A good example of corruption in the Greek is to be found in. Num. iii. 24, where all Greek MSS. and the O.L. (Lyons Pentateuch) read
mentions
of Joshua's father in the LXX. is Xai/77 (O. L. Nave), probably in the first instance an error for Naw (NATH for text of Jud. v. 8 NATN) = |"1J. Another well-known instance is the
Dael
iox
iav
(?N7).
The name
pointed out, conceals

(2)
^
Though he
that the
$, ^ -.
the
\vhich,
doublet
(i)
iav
is
referring especially to
is
shew
remark
TraXaids
p. 60).
* The gravest instance of above, p. 255.
$ $
meant
,
as
;
Ewald
MSS.
of the N.T. his next words
to include the
LXX.
(see,
ev rois
for the rest, above,
was found
in the
book of Job
see
Textual condition of
common
^,
for TOt?
In these criticisms Origen makes no attempt to distinguish
The
^.
tJie
LXX.
faults
iji
481
Such
:
in the case
of proper names
IheZv,
^ .
Joann.
textual,
were specially
t.
vi.
41
^,
between supposed errors which are properly
and those
which belong to the translation

error
itself.
His
sole criterion of
was divergence from the

originally exact.
official
Hebrew, and he assumed

little
that all divergences were textual only, the translation having
been
Nevertheless there can be
doubt
that in the course of four centuries
many
actual corruptions
such as he describes must have accumulated in the MSS. of

the LXX.
called,
^,
its
as
the uncorrected
MSS. were
needed revision, and the century endeavoured to supply it.

at
literary activity of the third
At Caesarea
in Palestine,
Antioch, in Egypt, independent attempts were

primitive purity.
made
to
restore the Septuagint to
But the remedies
" The which were adopted unhappily increased the disease. Hexapla, from its very nature, encouraged the formation of
mixed texts^"; the Hexaplaric recension, divorced from the of the work, accentuated this tendency, and the other recensions had a similar effect, although they aimed at the
rest
simpler task of correcting the errors of the
kolvtJ.
2. Of the Hexaplaric, Lucianic, and Hesychian recensions some account has been given already ^ In this place we have only to consider how far it is possible to employ them in
the criticism of the text.
Their importance to the
critic
of the
LXX.
KOivrj,
lies in
the fact that they were based

in Palestine, Syria,
as
it
was read
upon copies of the and Egypt during the

and
^ In the context Origen refers to the apparent confusion of Tepyeaa in the Gospels. ^ Driver, Samuel, p. xlvii. ^ See above, Part I. c. iii.
S. S.
31
482
third century.

But
in
LXX.
order to recover from them this un-
revised
text,
two preHminary tasks have to be undertaken.

first,
The
recensions themselves must
as
far
as
possible,
be
restored from existing materials,

to eliminate from
and we must then proceed

as are recensional, or
them such elements

of these
are due to the reviser's hand.
As
which
to
it
the
is
first
processes, the
materials
from
fairly
proposed to recover the recensions are

varied, but there
is
abundant and
attribution of
much
uncertainty as to the
some
of them, whilst others present a particular
recension only in certain books or portions of books, or with
more
or less of mixture.
The
principal
authorities
it
for
each
well
recension have already been mentioned, but

to collect
may be
them here
in a
compact form.
Hexaplaric^. Codd. G, M, Q; 15, 22, 38, 58, 72, 86, 88, 135, 137, 138, 139, 161, 248, 249, 250, 252, 255, 256, 258, 259, 264, 268, 273 Paris Nat. Reg. gr. 129, 131, 132, Ars. 8415, Escurial i. 16,
Leipzig gr. 361, Zurich c. 11, Athos Vatop. 516, Pantocr. 24, Protaton. 53, Laur. y. 112. Versions: Sahidic (in part), Armenian (in part), Syro-hexaplar.
Luciaiiic''-. Codd. 19, 22, 36, 48, 51, 62, 82, 90, 93, 95, 108, 1 18, 144, 147, 153, 185, 231, 233, 308 Paris Coisl. gr. 184, Athens bibl. nat. 44. Versions Old'Latin, Philoxenian Syriac, Gothic, Armenian (in part ), Slavonic. Fathers Chrysostom, and other writers
;
:
:
of the School of Antioch^. Hesychiaii^. Codd. Q, 26, 44, 49, 68, 74, 84, 87, 90, 91, 106, Paris suppl. gr. 609. Versions: 107, 134, 198, 228, 238, 306. Bohairic, Armenian (in part). Cyril of Alexandria other Egyptian writers.
;
The fragments
of the Hexapla have been collected by the
labours of a succession of scholars such as P. Morinus, Drusius,
Montfaucon, and especially Field,

jplorum quae supersunt
1
in
whose Origenis Hexaall

fif.,
may be found
the
remains
of
For fuller information see pp. 78, 112 fif., 118 137 f., 140, 148 if. See pp. 82 ff., 93, 116 ff., 148 ff. Lagarde would add {Ankiindigung, p. -27) the writings of the Emcf.
peror Julian. See pp. 80, 107 fif., 145, 148 fif., and on the recensions generally Ceriani in Rendiconti d. K. 1st. Lomb. (18 Feb. 1886).
*
Textual conditioji of the
LXX.
483
These editions Origen's works which were available in 1875. do not aim at restoring the text of the Hexaplaric lxx. in Such a restoration, however, has been a connected form. attempted in the case of Lucian's recension by Lagarde^ who
desired to see a similar work accomplished for the recension
of Hesychius, and an edition in which the two texts should
appear facing one another on opposite pages.
When
this
had
been done, he proposed (1) to eliminate from these any Hexaplaric matter, by comparing them with the fragments of Aquila,
Symmachus, and Theodotion

he hoped
and
(2) to collect the readings
which departed most widely from the M. T.

that a point of departure
By this process would be reached from

it,
which the reconstruction of the lxx. might begin'.

This scheme
is
worthy of the great scholar who initiated
and
tific
it
was the
first
serious effort to grasp the problem of scien-
reconstruction.
finally
But
its
progress has been checked and

author's premature death,
perhaps
its
stopped by
its
and
successful accomplishment under any circumstances was at
least problematical.
So long as no MS. or version presents
an unmixed
uncertainty
text
of either Lucian or Hesychius, and

as to
much
which
remains be
the
exact
sources
from
they are
to
recovered, restorations of this kind cannot
be regarded as more than tentative or provisional.

while,
Mean-
such
attempts are not free
from
danger.
Since the
publication of Lagarde's edition, there has been a tendency
on the part of
reserve.
his
Biblical students to cite

is
it
as 'Lucian,' without
Lagarde himself
careful not to claim finality for
work; he describes it as " editionem...in gravioribus omnibus satis fidam," and looks forward to a more exact
^
See above,
p.
83
f.
scheme is set forth in Ge?iesis Graece, p. 21: "primum molior librum e codicum uncialium qui hexaplares non sunt... consensu coniectura emendando edendum...deinceps propositum est haud raro certa ...editionem hexaplarem curare... tertio loco...adparatum criticum integrum
2
An
earlier
adiungere cogito."
312
484
LXX.
ea
utentibus excussis
representation of Lucian's text: "conlatis codicibus versioni-
busque earn praebentibus

efficiendum
dici
erit
et
patrum
ut
etiam
in
this
minutioribus
adcurate
edita
hope has not been fulfilled, and an edition of Lucian which falls short of exactness in
merito possit'."
But
smaller details cannot be directly used for the critical editing

of the LXX.
It
has rendered valuable services in other departsufficiently the
ments of
istics
Biblical study, exhibiting
character-
and repeatedly offering, especially in the four books of Kingdoms, renderings of a Hebrew text
of this recension,
distinct
from i^'^.
But
in the delicate task of reconstructing
the Greek text, recourse must be had to the actual evidence
which
lies
behind Lagarde's work.
For
this
purpose
it
would
seem
to
be more important to provide texts based upon groups
of 188.,
somewhat
after the
manner of
the Collection of four
important
SS. (the Ferrar-group) published
byDrT. K. Abbott.
would
not
Doubtless such groups would mainly follow the lines of the

ancient
recensions,
but
the
identification
be
complete, and the student would have before him not only the
general result, but the whole of the evidence upon which
it
was based.
3.
Perhaps a more lasting service was rendered
to
the
textual criticism of the Septuagint by the
axioms and principles
which Lagarde's long study of the problem enabled him to lay
down
His
the
for the
guidance of the student and the future
editors.
early
book Amnerkungcn zur

of the lxx. are
all
griechischen Ubersetzung der
Proverbieti (1863) starts with the following axioms: (i) Since
MSS.
directly or indirectly the result of
an eclectic process, any attempt to restore the original text
must
also proceed
chiefly
^
on eclectic principles and the critic nûst depend upon (a) his acquaintance with the style of the
;
Praef. xv. See Driver, Samuel, pp. lii. verialing van het 0. T., p. i^ff.
-
f.,
Iviii.: I.
Hooykas,
lets
over de griekshe

several translators
LXX.
485
and
or,
{b) his faculty
of referring readings to a
Semitic
original
when
they
are
not of Semitic origin,

the
recognising
(2)
them
as
corruptions
of
Greek archetype.
one which
is
Where
will
the critic has to
make
choice between two readings,
he
do
well to prefer {a) a free translation to

exact,
slavishly
Hebrew
text to
and {b) a translation based upon another one which represents the M. T. In the preface
(i)
to his Lucianic Septuagint, published twenty years later, three
principles are asserted
critical text
of the Greek O. T.
cannot be based on the authority of any one MS. or without

regard to the grouping of
text
MSS.
(2)
the restoration of the

as
common
to
any one family must not be regarded

;
more
than a step forward in the right direction

text,
(3)
even a
critical
when reached by
these or other means, will not be free
from the element of uncertainty.

Lagarde's own words are as follows: A7tmerkitngen^ p. 3: "nurdrei axiome schicke ich voraus I. die manuscripte der
:
griechischen iibersetzung des alten testaments sind alle entweder unmittelbar oder mittelbar das resultat eines eklektischen verfahrens darum muss, wer den echten text wiederfinden will, Sein maasstab kann nur die kenntniss ebenfalls eklektiker sein. des styles der einzelnen iibersetzer, sein haupthilfsmittel muss die fahigkeit sein, die ihm vorkommenden lesarten auf ihr semitisches original zuriickzufiihren oder aber als originalII. wenn ein vers oder griechische verderbnisse zu erkennen. verstheil in einer freien und in einer sklavisch treuen iibertra:
gung
vorliegt, gilt die
erstere als
die echte.
III.
wenn
sich
nebeneinander finden, von denen die eine den masoretischen text ausdriickt, die andre nur aus einer von ihm abweichenden urschrift erklart werden kann, so ist die letztere Libr. V. T. can. i. p. xvi. "tenenda f iir urspriinglich zu halten." tria esse aio: [i] editionem veteris testament! graeci curari non posse ad unius alicuius codicis auctoritatem, sed conlatis intenam familiis non accedere gris codicum familiis esse curandam
zwei lesarten
: :
auctoritatem a codicibus, sed codicibus a familiis [2] unius alicuius familiae editionem nihil esse nisi procedendi ulterius
:
adminiculum [3] errare qui si quando ipsa manus veterum interpretum inventa sit, in ea legenda adquiesci debere perhibeant, quum conlatis vetera emendandi periculis omnibus indagandum sit quae explicationis veteris testament! per quatuor saecula fata
:
486
fuerint, ut
Textual coJidition of the
LXX.
incerta in hoc literanulla alia re nisi coniectura nitantur sciolorum, superstitiosorum, desperantium."
tandem aliquando pateat quam

sint, et
rum genere omnia

4.
quam multa
These principles have been stated

fruitful in
at length,
because
they are
themselves, and they
mark an important step

But
it is
in the progress of lxx. textual criticism.
obvious that
critical
they do not form a complete and coherent code of

canons.
Indeed, Lagarde's later axioms to some extent limit

earlier, for the
and correct the

evidently
recognition of the principle of
grouping the MSS. and taking their evidence according to families

serves as
a check
upon
the
extreme eclecticism
Nevertheless the
recommended
series forms
in the first
axiom of 1863.
an excellent starting-point
lie
for a brief discussion of
the problems which
before the future critical editor of the
LXX. and the principles by which he must be guided.
By
of
the
singular
accident
the
first
two printed
editions
Greek Old Testament exhibit on the whole the Lucianic and Hesychian texts respectively', whilst the Roman
of
edition
1587
and the Oxford edition of 1707
20
are
and A. Thus the earlier editors anticipated, though imperfectly and (in the case of the Complutensian and Aldine Septuagints) unwittingly, the two methods of editing the Greek O. T. which are still in use. Of the advantages and disadvantages
roughly representative of the two great uncial codices,
of the recensional method, enough has been said. The other, which consists of printing the text of a single MS., with or
without an appai-atns
criticus,
is
clearly desirable only in the
case of a MS. which sufficiently represents an important type

of text, and
parison.
may
thus be profitably used as a standard of com-
Such are the two great uncials already mentioned.
Cod. B, as was pointed out by Dr Hort^ "on the whole

1 Cornill, Ezechiel, p. "ein wunderbar gliicklicher Zufall hatte uns 79 somit in der Aldine im Grossen und Ganzen den Hesych gegeben, wie die
:
Complutensis im Grossen und Ganzen den Lucian darstellt." 2 See O.T. in Greek, p. xi. f.
LXX.
its
487
presents the version of the Septuagint in
relatively oldest
form."
Taken
as a whole,
it
is
neutral in
its
;
relation to the
its
recensions of the third and fourth centuries

ther predominantly Lucianic
Cornill, indeed,
text
is
nei-
nor Hesychian nor Hexaplaric.

in
was
at
one time led by certain appearances

his text
the
text of Ezekiel to believe that in that
prophet at least the

fifth
scribe of
had extracted
from the
column of the
difficulties
Hexapla, or rather, from the edition of Eusebius and Pamphilus^
Lagarde, however, at once pointed out the

in
which beset Cornill's theory-, and Hort,
a letter to the
the
is
Academy (Dec.
24,
1887),
dismissed
to
it
with
remark,
that in
"What
Ezekiel
in
Cornill does
seem
me
to
have proved
and the lxx.
text of the
Hexapla have an element

texts"; adding,
common
MSS.
at variance with
in the
most other
"The
facts suggest that
Septuagint was copied from a
or
partially akin in text to the
MS.
the
or
Origen took the fundamental text
for.
MS. MSS. from which lxx. column of his

his
Hexaplal"
sign of having
If
Eventually
Cornill
withdrew
suggestion,
observing that the forms of the proper names in
shew no
been influenced by Origen's corrections^.
we accept Dr Hort's view, which at present holds the field, MS. in the O. T. as a whole carries us back to the third century text known to Origen, and possibly to one much In other words, not only is the Vatican MS. our earlier. oldest MS. of the Greek Bible, but it contains, speaking quite
the \âtican
generally, the oldest text. that this
is
But
it
would be an
error to
suppose
true in regard to every context or even every book,
^ See his Ezechiel, The theory was suggested by an eady pp. 84, 95. hypothesis of Lagarde {Anvierktingen, p. 3) that the text of was extracted from a glossed codex. - In G'ott. gelehrte Anzeigeti, 1886 (reprinted in Mittheiliingen^ ii.
p. 49ff.).
and S see Hort, IntrP, p. 264 ff., Harris, On the provenance of Stichometry, p. 71 fif. , Robinson, Eiithaliana, p. 42 ff., and the summary in Kenyon, Otir Bible and the Ancient MSS., p. 128. ^ Gott. gelehrte achrichten, xxx. (18S8, p. 194 ff.).
'^
488
and a
still
LXX.
as necessarily-
graver error to treat the text of

the
original
representing everywhere
Burkitt has pointed out\ "the O. L.
As and the Hexaplar

Septuagint.
Mr
text
convict
here and there of interpolation, especially in Isaiah."
"Certainly (he writes in another place ^) in the books of Kings

it
is
free
from some of the gross interpolations which have
befallen
most other MSS.
But
it
cannot claim to transmit
to
us an unrevised text of the
^%.
Many
of
its
readings
shew marks of irregular revision and the hand of an editor. As a result of this critical process. sometimes tends to agree with the Massoretic text where other lxx. authorities represent also contains a a widely different underlying Hebrew. certain number of widely spread corruptions that are of purely Greek origin, which are absent from earlier forms of the lxx. such as the Old Latino" In certain books the general
character of
in those
breaks
down
altogether,
i.e.
the archetype of
in
books was of another kind.
Thus
it
Judges
was
formerly suspected of representing the Hesychian recension^

whilst a living scholar has hinted that
may
give the text of a
translation not earlier than the fourth century a.d.^
The Cambook] the

in the
bridge editors of the
A text
of Judges wisely content themselves
with " the surmise that [as regards

true text of the Septuagint
is
and
in this
probably contained neither
one nor
in the
in
other exclusively, but must be sought for by
comparing
detail, verse
by verse, and word by word, the

all
two recensions,
^
in
the light of
other available evidence,
Tyconitis, p. cxvii. Aqiiila, p. 19.
^ An interesting and plausible specimen of this class of errors occurs in The process of (A, with jii, 4 Regn. iii. 21 B, In Sirach instances einONCo). corruption is evident (A, are especially abundant, e.g. xliii. 17 23 ecpurevaev ev avry rAos (248 P. 248 20 ;
ayyeXos).
*
" (,
(.
, )
); (
).
Grabe, ep. ad Millium (1705). Moore, Judges, p. xlvi.
Textual co7idition of the
LXX.
489
and especially of the extant remains of the Hexapla^"

remark which
is
capable of a
much
wider application".
Cod. A. the great

with the
rival of cod.
B, "exhibits a text Avhich
has been systematically corrected so as to agree more closely
Hebrew^"
"In
all
four books of Kings
and
in
some
other parts
fact
has been conformed to the Hexaplar text... In
A is often little more than a transcript of the fourth column of the Hexapla, but without the critical signs by which Origen's additions were marked off from the rest^" In other words, adaptation to the Hebrew has been effected not by
direct use of the official
Hebrew
if
text,
but through the
medium
of Origen's
work.
Thus,
represents in part the text

task, A, at least
which
lay before
Origen when he began his
in the historical books, answers roughly to the result at
which
he arrived.
Yet
is
very far from being, even in the earlier books, a

It
mere reproduction of the Eusebian recension.

extensively hexaplarised,
has been
but
it
possesses a large element of

it
ancient readings which are not Hexaplaric, and which

to a great extent, with the Lucianic family.
shares,
Moreover, as we
in the
have already seen, the citations of the lxx. by Christian writers of the
the readings of
first
N. T. and
three centuries, often support
with a remarkable unanimity^. These pheno-
mena
It
point to the presence in
of an underlying text of great
antiquity, possibly a
pre-Christian recension
made
this
in Syria".
must be observed, however, that the text of

^
MS.
is
not
A. E. Brooke and N. McLean, The Book of Judges in Greek the text of Cod. Alexandriniis (Cambridge, 1897), p. v. 2 On the text of Sirach and Tobit see above, pp. 271, 274.
^ ^
ace. to
Driver, Safnuel, p.
1.
Burkitt, Aqiiila, p. 19;

u.
sprii7ig der ini cod. Alex.

ferte7i Textgestalt (Giessen,
^
cf. p. 53 f. Cf. Silberstein, Uber den UrVaticanus des dritten Konigsbtiches...iibei-lie-
1893).
Above, pp. 395 f., 403, 413, 422. It is, however, possible that the readings in B, which have no such support and are indeed almost unique, belong to a still earlier text of the LXX., which had not received Palestinian revision. Cf. p. 429.
^
490
LXX.
are evidently copied
homogeneous throughout.
from a Psalter written
to notice
The Psalms
for ecclesiastical use,
and
it is
interesting
how
constantly
here appears in company with the
and T, and with the seventh century In the Prophets ><AQ are in frequent coalition against B, and in agreement with the group which is believed to be representative of the Hesychian
later liturgical Psalters
corrector of
known
as t^^^
recension.
i^ it is more difficult to form a judgement. We dependent for its text on Tischendorf's facsimiles. Moreover, with the exception of a few fragments of Genesis and Numbers, larger portions of i Chronicles and 2 Esdras, and the
As
to cod.
are
still
Books of Esther, Judith and Tobit, i and 4 Maccabees, this MS. is known to us only in the poetical and prophetical books. Notes at the end of 2 Esdras and Esther claim for the MS. that in those books it was corrected by the aid of a copy of the Hexaplaric text written under the supervision of Pamphilus\ But the first hand of i< often agrees with A against B, and the
combinations ^ÂRT
Tobit, as
in the
Psalms,
AC
in the other poetical
books, and tÂQ in the Prophets,
are not
uncommon.
to
In
we have
seen,
i^
follows a recension which differs

it
widely from B.
On
the whole, however,
comes nearer
its
than any of the other uncials, often confirming

or otherwise unique readings.
characteristic
Cod.
is
yet
more fragmentary
and
its
fragments are limited to the poetical books which
follow the Psalter.
Thus
if
a single uncial
it is
MS.
to
is
to be
of comparison,
obvious that either

is
adopted as a standard or must be chosen

freer
for the purpose,
and
be preferred as being
from
Hexaplaric interpolations and offering generally a more neutral

text.
The
latter
MS. has
course
therefore been
is
employed by recent
be
editors,
and
this
probably the best that can
See above,
p. 75.

followed.
leaves
single
LXX.
491
But the method of editing the text of a single MS.

desired, for, as
much to be MS. and no
Lagarde rightly
insists,
no
as
single family of
MSS. can be regarded
a trustworthy or sufficient representative of the original lxx.

5.
There remains the alternative of constructing a

This can only be done by the
critical
text.
scientific use of all exist-
ing materials \
The
task which lies before the critical editor
of the LXX.
partly
is
partly similar to that of the N. T. editor,
and
sui generis.
The
general principles which will guide
him
are
those which have been
the second part of Intt'oduction to the
documents moreover
(2)
fall
into
expounded by Dr Hort in N. T. in Greek'. The the same three classes (i) MSS.,
:
versions,
(3) literary citations

'
although in the case of

'
the LXX., the versions are
daughter-versions
and not based
upon an
apostolic
original text,
and the
citations are not limited to post-
Christian writers,
but
may
be gathered also from
Philo, Josephus,
and the
New
Testament.
to
But
in the appli-
cation of the principles of criticism

critic
these documents the
of the lxx. must strike out a path for himself.
Here
dealing
his course will partly
be shaped by the
fact that
he
is
with a version and not with an

history of the transmission
original
text^ and
is
by the
only to
of the version, which
a limited extent identical with that of the transmission of the
Greek
(a)
New
The
Testament.
first
business of the
critic
is
of the lxx.
is
to review
the documentary evidence which
available for his use.
This
has been already described at
some length (MSS.,

Citations, pp.
170; Versions, pp. 87

progress.
^
121;
pp. 122
369
432).
is
The
still
preliminary work of preparing these materials for use
in
We now
Zur
have access to photographic reproductions

(in Philologus, 1899).
Cf. Nestle,
Rekonstrnction der Septuaginta
^ ^
Ed.
The
1 (1896), pp. 19 original text
may
72.
be regarded as the primary document
for the
text of the version.
492
of codd.
LXX.
of
ABGLQ, facsimiles or printed texts RTUZrn, and collations of the remaining

number of
careful
t^CDEFHKO
and of a
uncials,
large
the cursives.
But the facsimiles are more or

collations of unpublished
to
less inadequate,
and the older
MSS.
the
need
verification.
fragments of the Old Latin

in carefully edited
To turn are now for
the
versions,
the most part accessible
but scattered texts, and the more important
of
the
Egyptian
;
and
Syriac versions have received
much
is
attention
but the Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Georgian and

still
Slavonic are
but partially explored.
Good
progress
being
made
in the editing
of Philo, Josephus, and the Christian
fathers,
both Greek and Latin.

there
Thus, while
much remains
criticus
to
be done in the way of perfecting the apparatus
of the
for
Greek O.
T.,
is
an abundance of materials ready

in
immediate use, and every prospect that

store will be largely increased.
{b)
a few years the
When
an editor has been found who he

will
is
competent
to undertake reconstruction,
probably desire to limit
himself to that one task, after the example of the editors of

the
New
Testanwit in
Greek^,
and
his
resources,
if
not as
abundant as those of the N. T. editors, will be both sufficient and trustworthy. But with the materials thus ready to his
hand,
how
is
he to proceed?
will
As
in the
case of
the
New
Testament, he
text.
begin by interrogating the history of his
ing.
Here there are certain landmarks to guide him at startAs we have seen, the three recensions which in the
had a well-defined
local distribution,
fourth century
have been
of
connected with groups of extant

quite definitely, the third with
documents
families
two
yields
them
some
probability.
Other groups
representing less
clearly
recognised
have emerged
the
57,
text
73,
from recent enquiries,
such as that which

14,
characteristic of the catenae (H. P.
16,
28,
52,
Textual
77,
cojiditioii
of the
LXX,
493
75, with which 59
and many others), the pair H. P. 54, some extent be classed, and the codices which correspond more or less closely with cod. A and It is probable that as the collation and respectively. cod.
Paris Reg. Gr. 128,
may
also to
examination
will
of MSS.,
versions,
and
fathers proceed,
other
groups, or other
members
of the groups already mentioned,
come
to
light,
leaving an ever diminishing

text either too
number of
documents which present a

to be classified.
{c)
mixed
or too peculiar
In operating upon the groups thus obtained the
critical
editor will possess
two chief aids towards the discrimination of ancient elements from those which are later or recensional. (i) While the East in Jerome's time was divided between the
Lucianic, Hesychian, and Hexaplaric texts, the great Western
dioceses, Carthage, Milan,
and Rome, read the lxx. under

Hexapla
itself
the guise of a Latin version, beneath which originally lay a
Greek
text anterior to the
Consequently, the
Old Latin, in its purest types, carries us behind all our existing MSS., and is sometimes nearer to the Septuagint, as the
Church received
that version from
the Synagogue, than the
MSS. Readings which have disappeared from every known Greek MS. are here and there preserved by the daughter-version, and in such cases the O. L. becomes a
oldest of our uncial
primary authority for the Greek

occasional contributions
of a
text \
But besides these

this
direct
nature,
version
is
of the highest value as enabling the critical editor to detect
pre-Origenic readings and to distinguish

are later
test is
them from those which

latter
or recensional.
In regard to the
it is
point the
not an absolute one, because
always possible that

is
the reading on which an O.L. rendering
two or more that were both current

time.
(2)
in the
f.
based was one of

before Origen's
But the O. L.
^
is
not our only witness to the read-
Burkitt, Tyconins, p. cxvii.
494
ings of the

kolvji.
LXX.
and
Its
evidence
may
often be checked
confirmed by that of the Syro-Hexaplar and the fragments

of the
Hexaplaric
Greek,
where
the
obeli
and
asterisks
distinguish readings which existed in Origen's
MSS. from those
which were interpolated from other sources, or rewritten with

their aid'. {d)
By such means
MSS. of
the critic
may
often
satisfy himself
it
that
he has reached the text of the Septuagint as

It is
was found
in Christian
the third, perhaps even of the second
century.
another question
how
far
the
^%
of
the Christian Church was identical with the pre-Christian text

or texts of Alexandria
and Jerusalem.
Early citations from
the LXX.
suggest a
diversity
of readings
existence of two or
more recensions
in the first century,
and possibly the and
lead us to believe that
many
of the variations of our ÎSS. have
come down from
sources older than the Christian era.
Here our documentary evidence fails us, and we have to fall back upon the 'internal evidence of readings.' The variants which remain after eliminating Hexaplaric matter, and recensional changes
later
than
the
Hexapla,
resolve
themselves
into two classes;

text,
viz. (i)
readings which affect merely the Greek

{b) doublets,
such as {a) corruptions obvious or possible, or

in a conflate
text,
whether brought together

different
or existing in
MSS.; and
(2) readings
which presuppose a difference
in the original.
In deahng with both classes
much
help
may
be obtained from Lagarde's earlier axioms ^ In detecting corruptions the student must chiefly depend on his faculty
of recognising a Semitic original under Greek which does not
directly suggest
it
;
will set aside that
in deciding between double renderings, he which bears marks of correction or of assimi-
lation to the official
Hebrew
or to later
Greek versions based

f.
1
'^
On
this point see Burkitt, Aquila, p. 33

p.
Above,
484
f.
LXX.
495
and perhaps
the work
upon
less
it,
choosing that which
is
freer, less exact,
grammatical, as being probably nearer to

original
translator.
texts,
of
the
Lastly,
when
prefer,
the
variants
imply
that
divergent
Hebrew
he
will
ceteris
paribus^
which departs from

of no ordinary kind\
6.
the
Massoretic text
The
application
of these rules, however, calls for knowledge and judgement
It
cannot be doubted that the future

that a
will
produce a
edition
its
school of critics competent to deal with the whole question
of Septuagint reconstruction, and

the
critical
of
Old Testament
in
Greek
will
hereafter
take
place
on the shelves of the scholar's library by the side of the present N'ew Testament in Greek or its successor. Meanwhile some immediate wants may be mentioned here, (i) Several important uncial MSS. still need to be reproduced by photography, particularly codd.
F, R, V,
and the process
might well be extended to some of the weightier cursives. (2) Texts of which photographs have been pubhshed, or of
which
verified transcripts or collations exist, deserve
in
some
cases detailed examination, with the view of determining their

precise character in the several
books or groups of books,

to a
and
their relation to
one another and

(3)
common
the
standard,
such as the text of B.

matter which
The
of
stores of fresh Hexaplaric
have
the
accumulated
publication
during
quarter
of
century since
Field's great book^,
will
sufficient to form a supplementary volume, which might also contain the corrections suppUed by photography and
soon be
by the more exact collation of Hexaplaric MSS.
(4)
Is
it
too
much
^
to
hope
that the University

its
which has the honour of hav-
ing issued from
Press the Septuagint of
Holmes and Parsons
where evidence fails, see Hatch, Essays^ On the scope p. 281, where some other remarks are to be found which deserve attention but need sifting and safeguarding. ^ These will be digested in the second fasciculus of Mr Redpath's Supplement to the Oxford Concordance.
for conjecture
496
Textual condition of tL
see
fit
LXX.
monumental
it
may
to reprint at least the apparatus of that
work with such emendations and abbreviations
as
may be
possible to adopt without seriously interfering with the scope
and method of the edition ? It is improbable that a collection all the evidence on so vast a scale will ever be attempted again, and until this has been done, Holmes and Parsons
of
cannot be superseded as a storehouse of

posal was
facts.
(5)
pro-
made by Dr
Nestle at the
London
Oriental Con-
gress of 1892 to compile a ^Variorum Septuagint,' giving the

text of
with marginal variants sufficient to correct the errors
There can be Httle doubt that such an edition would be serviceable, especially if the scheme could be so far extended as to include a selection from all the variants, after
of that
the
MS.
manner of
is
the English
'
Variorum
Bible.'
(6)
Every
stu-
dent of the Old Testament will wish success to the undertaking
which
now
in
progress at the Cambridge Press.
Although
apparatus
essen-
the text of the Larger Septuagint will be simply that of the
standard MS. employed in the manual edition,

will for the first
tial
its
time present to the
critical scholar the
documentary evidence, verified with scrupulous care, and arranged in a form at once compendious and helpful to
research.
W. Selwyn, art. Septuagint, in Smith's D.B. P. de Lagarde, An?nerktingefi ziir gr. (London, 1863). Genesis Graece Ubersetzung der Pi'overbien (Leipzig, 1863) Ankiindigung einer neuen Ausgade der gr. (Leipzig, 1868) Ubersetzung des A. T. (Gottingen, 1882) Librorum V. T. canonicorum pars ^r/<?r (Gottingen, 1883); review of Cornill's Ezechiel in Gott. gelehrte Anzeigen, June i, 1886 (reprinted in Mittheilungen, ii. 49 ff., Gottingen, 1887). J. Wellhausen, Der Text der Biicher Samnelis (Gottingen, 1871); art. Septuagint in C. H. Cornill, Das Buck des Encycl. Brit'^ (London, 1886). Propheten Ezechiei {h^^zig, 1886); in Gott. gelehrte Nachrichten
Literature.
iii.
;
A. Ceriani, Le recensioni dci LXX. e la XXX. (1888, 8, p. 194 ff.). versione latina delta Ilata in Re?idiconti del R. Istituto Lombardo II. xix., xxi. (1883 4); review of the O.T. in Greek in Rendiconti

II.
LXX.
497
W. (1888); De codice Marchaliano (Rome, 1890). F. J. A. Hort, letters in Academy^ Dec. 10 and 24, V. Ryssel, Untersttchimgen iiber die Textgestalt...des 1887. Buches Micha,T^. 175 ff. (Leipzig, 1887). I. Hooykas, leis over de grieksche vertaling van het Oude Testament (Rotterdam, H. Oort, De Lagarde' s pla7i van eene vitgaaf der Septua1888). ginta (? 1882). E. Hatch, Essays on Biblicat Greeks iv. vii. (Oxford, 1889). S. Driver, Notes on the Hebj-ew Text of the Books of Samuel^ Intr. p. xlvii. ff. (Oxford, 1890). A. Dillmann, Texik?iiisches zuvi Buche Ijob (in Sitziingsberichte d. k. P. Akadeinie d. Wiss. su Bertin, 1890, liii.). E. Nestle, The Va?-iorum Septuagint, in Proceedijigs of Oriental Congress held at London, 1892 Urtext p. T] i. (1897) Ziir Rekonstruktion der Septuaginta, in Philologtis, N. F., xii. i (1899) p. 121 ff. E. Klostermann, De libro Coheleth versione Alexandrina (Kiel, 1892); review of The O. T. in Greek in G'ott. gelehrte Anzeigen
xxi.,
xii.
Sanday and
S. Silberstein, Uber den Ursprung der ini Cod. Alex. 4) erten Textgestalt {Giessen, Vat.des d7-itte7i Konigsbiiches iiberlief Bleek-Wellhausen, Einleitu7tg i7i das A. T, p. 549 ff. 1893). (Berlin, 1893). F. C. Burkitt, The Rules of Tyco7iiiis, p. cxlii. ff. (Cambridge, 1894); The Old Lati7i and Itala {Cambnoge, 1896); Frag77ients of the Books of Ki/igs accordi7ig to the t7-anslatio}i of Aquila (Cambridge, 1897). G. Moore, Co7n77ie7itary on the Book of Judges, p. xliv. ff. H. P. Smith, Co77i77ie7ita7y 071 the Books of Sa77mel, pp. xxx. ff., 402 ff. (Edinburgh, 1899).
(1895.
M.
s.
s.
32
ADDENDA AND CORRIGENDA.

Page
,,
3,
note
i,
read
7,
the Ptolemies consult, in addition to books cited,
6,
line 4.
J.
On
P. Mahaffy, Hisfojy of
Egypt under
the Ptolemaic dynasty
(1900).
,,
17.
See also Willrich, Jiiden u. Grierhen, vor der makkabaischen

r/iedimo- {G'otUOgen, 1895).
19,
,,
27, line
read Z, CappcUiis.
,,
105, note 6.
1
See also Brightman, in^. Th.

f.,
St.
i.
ii.,
p. -254.
,, ,, ,,
40, line 18
I.
for
a complete
collation, read
an
edition.
150, line
169,
line
10.
Add Hexaplaric. Add M. Faulhaber, Die

i.
Propheten-catenen nach r'om.

C. H. Turner in y. Th. St.
Avill
Hart dschriften (Freiburg

,,
B., 1899).
214.
Add
I.
the Latin
list
printed by
Mr
iv.
,,
271. note 282, note

286.
An edition of Sirach as given by cod. 248 3. be published by the Cambridge University Press.
3, for
shortly
,,
Babr. read Bals.
,,
the literature on Sirach latinae Ecclesiastici capitibtis i.
To
i.
add H. Herkenne, P>e

xliii. (Leipzig, 1899).
veteris
314.
To
the literature on Biblical
sprachl.
ErforscJmng der
griech.
Greek add G. A. Deissmann, Die Bibel, and Die Sprache der

p.
griech. Bibel {Th. Riindschati,

,,
319, note 3, for Has. dele II
,,
380.
To
I.
,
pp.
/. Dan.
i.
y]\.
read Has.
Also for
Isa. vii. 6
vii.
22 {lxx.)
ociivres
the literature on Philo add L. Massebieau, Le classement des de Philoji (in Bibliotheque de Vecole des hautes etudes,
I 91).
,, ,,
449j
litie
29, read
472, line 29, add
. ---, . .
463
if.).
ii.
23 (25)
and
7
read
Ixxxiii.
[Lev.
vii. 3/".,
Ps. xlix. 14, 23).
APPENDIX,
THE LETTER OF ARISTEAS
322
ADDENDA
edition of
The following are noteworthy emendations and readings adopted in the Wendland and Mendelssohn, which appeared too late for any use to be made of it in constructing the present text.
519. 3
conj Diels
/3aatXews
523. 6
auTOS
>
eiri
- '/
cum
Jos
$]
\
-^
|
527. 24
ttoWovs Tpowovs (cf bene conj Mend, (cf 537. 20)

533. 14
534. 2
|
,,
|
lo
5lolkl.
\
exoures
24 iravTL
conj
Mend.
536.
\
recte ut vid
Xeias
537. 28
irpos
538.
539. 23
5*1
I
|
24
avTos
(sine
(Mahaffy, Class. Rev.

punct)
|
< $ 6 .
7\5
| \
524. 8
|
']
\
Jos)
529. 18
531. 3
532. 2
24
1 1
349)
2
ei;
/fctt
4
|
Mend.
|
542. 3
\
]
545. 10
548.
4
552. 2
550. 14
hab
|
'/)
>
\ \
(conj
1
\
Letronne
7.^
1
557. 25
conj
Mend.
6
(cf
"] <> . ]
Mend.
.
|
<
556. 12
15
560. 14
|
']
|
dv
563. 2 2
ei'
566. 3
568. 17
^''"'^
]]]
:
''"
Jos
562.
oe
569. 2
570. 3
bene conj
conj
Mend.
|
\
Wendland
573.
565 fin: Mahaffy, Class. Rev. VIII. 349).
CORRIGENDA
532. 16 text, et a pp. crit.
Pro
lege êos
lege
542. 25 app.
crit.
|
Pro
i?eos
corr
Wendland]
Pro
ex conj]
lege
conj
561. 2 app. crit.
conj
Wendland
conj
Wendland Mend.
INTRODUCTION.
The so-called letter of Aristeas to Philocrates appeared first in print in a Latin translation by Matthias Palmerius of Pisa (Rome, The editio princeps of the Greek text was not published 1471). until 1 561, when Simon Schard brought out at Basle a text based apparently on an Italian MS., with a few readings taken from a second (Vatican) MS. The particular MS. which was followed in this earliest edition the present writer has not been able to discover. But there exists in the Library at Basle (MS. O. IV. 10, no. 21 in Omont's Catalogue of Swiss MSS.) a MS. presented to it by
Schard, which is beyond a doubt a copy of the Vatican MS. denoted by in the present text and a list of readings appended to Schard's edition under the heading 'castigationes in Aristeam juxta exemplar Vaticanae' appears to be a scanty selection of the readings of K. Schard's edition was followed by others in the seventeenth century based upon his work but it does not appear that any fresh collation of MSS. was undertaken^. Until 1870 the latest edition of the text was that which Hody prefixed to his work ^' Bibliorum Textibus^ published at Oxford in 1705. This was merely a reprint of the text of Schard, Hody naively confessing in his preface that he did not consider the work of collating MSS. of a work of such doubtful authenticity to be worth the trouble. Non me fugit servari in Bibliotheca Regia Parisina, aliisque quibusdam, exemplaria istius MSS. Sed de tali opusculo, quod tanquam foetum supposititium penitus rejicio, Amicos solicitare, et in Partes longinquas mittere, vix operae pretium existimavi. Eas curas relinquo illis, quibus tanti esse res videbitur.' The first step towards a critical edition of the text was taken by Moriz Schmidt, who in 1870 brought out in Merx's Archiv (Band i.) a text based on a complete collation of two Paris MSS., which he denoted by and C, and a partial collation of a third, A, which was used to supply the opening of the letter which was missing in and C. Schmidt's edition, though a valuable beginning, is far from satisfactory. A full use was not made of the evidence for the text afforded by the paraphrase of Josephus and Moreover a large number of MSS. of the extracts of Eusebius. the letter is now known to exist and fresh light has been thrown on the language by the papyri of the Ptolemaic period which have at various times been discovered in Egypt. The valuable help which these papyri offer as an illustration of the letter, shewing that the writer possessed an accurate knowledge
; ;
' ;
'
The
earlier editions are

I.
enumerated by Schmidt in
his preface to the
text (Merx, Archiv, Bd.
1870).
52
Introduction to the letter of Aristeas.
of the official titles and phraseology of the Ptolemaic court, was He says^, Depuis quarante first pointed out by Prof. Lumbroso. ans, un rayon de lumiere inattendu a jailli des inscriptions et des chose frappante papyrus, qui jette sur elle un jour nouveau il n'est pas un titre de cour, une institution, une loi, une magistrature, une charge, un terme technique, une formule, un tour
' ;
:
de langue remarquable dans cette
lettre,
il
n'est
pas un temoignage
^ ^)
ActenstiUke Pap. viii.), the position assigned to the as a major dome (cf Peyron, 7unn Papyri I. 2. 25, the position of the phrase eai' at the the correct use of close of a petition from a subordinate to a higher official, the words tottovs. TOVTapovpos and irapeupeaii, the phrase irapayaveadai els 2 Cf especially 28 3 Maccabees ill. 25 with Ar. p. 5'2 3 ^3 f
,
^
d'Aristee concernant I'histoire civile de I'epoque, qui ne se trouve enregistre dans les papyrus ou les inscriptions et confirme par close examination of the larger evidence from the papyri eux'^. now available will probably corroborate the opinion, to vhich other evidence seems to point, that the letter was written under some one of the later Ptolemies. In any case the evidence of the papyri is an important factor to be taken into account in establishing a text. Another illustration of the text is afforded by a kindred work, also dealing with the history of the Jews of Egypt under the Ptolemaic rule, the third Book of Maccabees^. Prof Lumbroso further supplemented Schmidt's work upon throughout, and also a the text by collating the Paris MS. MS. in the British Museum (F), and one at Venice (G) he also indicated the existence of five MSS. in the Vatican, but it does not appear that he has published any collations of these Roman MSS. In 1893 the want of an edition of the letter was represented to the present Avriter, and in a journey to Italy in the autumn of that year he collated the five Vatican MSS. mentioned by Lumbroso (HKLIM), and one in the library of the Barberini palace (P), and revised the collations which had already been made of the MSS. at Venice (G) and Paris (ABC) at Paris he also and the MS. D, so far as was necessary collated the fragment He has since colto establish the fact that it was a copy of A. On his lated a MS. at Florence (T) and another at Zurich (Z). learning subsequently that Prof Mendelssohn of Dorpat had for many years been preparing an edition of the letter, which was Prof nearly ready, the vvork which he had begun was put aside. Mendelssohn's death postponed the appearance of the expected German edition a fragment only, consisting of the text of about
Recherches
stir
Vkonomie
politique de
G. Lumbroso (Turin, 1870),

^
p. xiii.
Some
instances are the titles

oi
'/
),
,$ ,
Egypte sons
les
(cf.
Lagides, par
xpeiQv,
TrpoaayyeXXeiv).
{ {
$
'^/ $
oi
tiri
Wilcken, Nicanor
Introduction
to the letter
of
r isteas.
503
a fifth of the letter with commentary but without introduction, was published soon after his death 1. The remainder of his work, it is understood, has been put into the hands of Prof. Wendland, whose edition has been expected for some time past. Wendland has already brought out a German translation of the letter in Kautzsch's Apokryphen iind Pseiidepigrapheii des Alien Testaments, which has been used in constructing the present text. The German edition not however having appeared-, the present writer was entrusted by Dr Swete with the preparation of a text of the letter, to form an Appendix to his Introduction to the Septuagint. Although there are doubtless more MSS. in existence than those which have been used, and although the text in several passages still remains uncertain, it is hoped that the work which has been done may be of some service in grouping the MSS. and preparing
the
way
for a final edition.
the
The following genealogical MSS. are related to each
table will other.
show approximately how
504
Introduction
to
the letter of Aristeas.

above
The MSS. denoted
in the

K,
505
Codex Vatican us.

foil.
Rome.
Vat. Gr. 383, saec. xii. xiii.
membr. 319
fol. 1.
Aristeas.
29.
i9vo.
187.
Theodoret to Hypatius. Catena on Genesis. Catena on Exodus.
Size of page i2f xg in., of writing 105 in.: 38 lines in a page. leaves at the beginning are soiled and worm-eaten. The words hang from ruled lines the right-hand margin is irregular, the writing going beyond the perpendicular line in places. The writing is upright with very thick strokes, clear, but rather untidy.
The
Codex Basileensis. Basle. Codd. Gr. O. iv. 10 (Omonti This MS., written in the sixteenth century, apparently for Schard's edition, but only very sparingly used by him in an appendix of readings, is clearly a direct transcript of the preceding MS. This may be shown by the following instances out of many
R,
21).
ov
p.
KR
cett.) p. 519. 4, diaUeais
om.
{.
KOL
519. 8,
KR
{.
KR
ol
avbps cett.)
cett.) p. 543. 23, ept
{ ^
p.
KR
cett.)
(.
528.
KR
KR
548. l6 f
inscription at the end,
'
donum Simonis
Paris.
Bibl.
The MS. has the Schardii Magdiburgiensis.'

Nat.
Gr.
128,
{^
lO,
p.
519.
9,
ol
cett.)
avdp^s
KR
cett.) p.
544. lO,
A,
Codex Regius.
I.
saec.
xii.
membr. 610 pagg.

p.
Aristeas.
26.
"27.
28.
Theodoret to Hypatius. Preface to Genesis from Gregory of Nyssa,

irpbs deoyvwaiav...
inc.
-etc.
:
:
Catena on the Octateuch.
608.
On
the versions of
:
Holy
Scripture, the
names of God,
Single column words hang from ruled lines, 47 lines in a page a neat writing in brown ink, initial letters in crimson size of page hand of the fourteenth century 14^ X lof in., of writing 11 7 in. (Lumbroso-) has added some marginal notes (on Theopompus and Theodectes, a saying of Alexander the Great, etc.), many of which are rubbed and almost illegible, but they may be read in which has copied them. Montfaucon (Bibl. Bibliothecarum, 11. 725) mentions this MS., and describes it as written manu Xii. circiter saeculi.' On p. 610 is written a note, ^v (?) as ttjs ayias [? {?) f -y + y
\\
1
+'
'
Catalogue des Manusci'its Grecs des Bibliotheqiies de Suisse (Leipzig,
1886).
'^
Atti della R. Accad. di Torino, vol.
I v.
i86q.
5o6
hitrodtiction to the letter
of Arts teas.
Descendants of A(DFL). D, Codex Regius. Paris.

288
foil.
fol.
I.
Bibl. Nat. Gr. 130, saec. xv. chart.
Aristeas.
i6\o.
27. 28.
Theodoret to Hypatius. Gregory of Nyssa's Preface. Catena on Genesis and Exodus,

rest of the
12.
Catena and the remaining matter contained in A are to be found in MS. Paris 132, written by the same hand as D. Omont's Catalogue describes the MS. as 'copied by George Gregoropoulus'; Omont takes this apparently from the 1740 catalogue which says videtur a Gregoropulo exaratus the name of the scribe does not seem to occur in the MS. A clearly written MS. in a hand similar to that of (of the same century). Page 135 x 9^ in. writing 9 x 55 in. Another hand has underlined in red ink passages where there are clerical errors and has corrected the text to that of A. This MS. was not collated throughout, as it appeared certain from an examination of a few passages that it Avas a copy of A (see below).
The
'
'
F, CODEX BURNEIENSIS. saec. XV. chart. 645 pagg.
British
Museum.
Burney MS.
34,
Same
p. 1. 21.
contents as A,
Aristeas.
viz.
22.
Theodoret to Hypatius. Passages from Gregory of Nyssa's book on the

irapadoaeLS
TToaaKis
six
days of
creation.
25.
643. 644. 044 645. 645.
...
oi
^.
days.
Fvagrius Scitensis on the ten names of God. Three chronological notes.
On
the works of
God
in the
six
L,
Codex Vaticanus.
xi.
(partim saec.
fol.
r.
xu.?)
Rome. Vat. membr. 251 foil.
Gr. 746,
pt.
i.,
saec. xv.
Aristeas.
12.
13.
Theodoret to Hypatius. Catena on Genesis and Exodus.
The portion of the MS. containing the Catena is certainly old (eleventh or twelfth century) and possibly a copy of or of an ancestor There are the same illustrations of O.T. history as in H, better of H. preserved but not so beautifully painted. The writing too is rougher, The Aristeas (together with not so neat as in H, but in the same style. the letter to Hypatius and the first page of the Catena) is supplied by a much later hand on white shiny unruled parchment, the Catena being on a browner parchment, and the letters there hanging from The Aristeas is written in a single column size of page ruled lines.
:
Introduction
13x11111., of writing varying from 21 to 43.
pp.
(p.
I
to
the letter of Aristeas.
507
It is
iifxSjin., the number of lines in a page written apparently in two different hands;
diffusely
;
becomes more compact and neat, Avith more tois 0tXois (p with the words 565. 14) lines in a page The beginning of the Aristeas is the diffuse writing comes in again.
528.
10) the writing
:
are
written rather
from
eiai
Be
\$
It ends with lost ; the MS. begins with (p. 521. 24). This ending marks a peculiarity of the MS. ; (sic). piareas the rubricator has omitted to fill in the initial capital letters, hence we
find at
for
pos for irpos,
for
,
it
;
etc.
HKA.
that
It
is
clear from their general
these
MSS. form one
group.
agreement in readings Notice the omissions which

(50 letters)
(53 letters)
(5
1
they have in
(1)
p.
common
TovT
HKA(DFL)
(2)
p.
(3)
564. I. ins
GIM
and and
HKA(DFL)
P
566. 10. ins 559
eaTLv
GIM
ins
group. group.
om
om
om
19
letters)
HKA(DFL)GIM
From
the
first
group.
two of these omissions
appears that
HKA
must be derived from an original () which omitted these lines, having probably had lines of the length oi 50 an ancestor of letters from the evidence of GIM we deduce that this group, while and A connected with the HKA group, is not derived from . notice 551. 18 and are more closely connected than
;
{
e.g.
sup
lin)
A*
562.
20
(r
suprascr
")
HKA group
cett.),
ADFL.
is
That these MSS. form a united group within the shown by their almost universal agreement. Notice
i
the readings 536.
ADFL
which they have
539 27. 550 21.
554
8.
569. 21 in
{
:
ADFL
Cett.),
common
yap
(^
547. 3
(sic)
{)
cett.), 537.
ADFL
4 -
ADFL, and
the omissions
is proved by That D is a direct transcript of exactly a line of A, so that on p. 558. 9 it reads are divided thus where the lines in
Aloreover, certain marginal notes in A, which are there almost illegible, have been copied by D, where they are all clear e.g. on 553. 25
:
, .
\ \
Om ADFL.
its
)
omitting
(sic)
5o8
At 54 1
faint)
being very D. That F is a direct tranits repeating a Hne of A twice over, yap yap ... The lines in A are arranged thus yap yap ... Lastly, that L is a direct transcript of A appears from 529. 21, where L omits the words which form exactly a line in A. Just below (530. i) L negligently inserts in the text (where a gloss which occurs in the it is quite unsuitable) after margin of A, and which is quoted in the apparatus criticus. These cases appear to put the parentage of these three MSS. beyond a doubt, and their evidence has therefore not been recorded The few deviations from their parent MS. which in the apparatus. they exhibit may be neglected.
has become script of A is proved by reading at 550. 16
, , , ( 3
^
(the Stroke over the

in
8
i
' '
\
8
6
:
''
\ (\.
The group GIM(Q).

This group presents few substantial variants from the text. It differs chiefly from that text in matters of orthography, Its retention of two lines which the frequent use of itacisms, etc. (see above) proves that it is not derived are omitted by from the immediate parent of those MSS., while its omission of another line in common with is proof that both groups go back to a common ancestor rather higher up in the line.
HKA
HKA
HKA
G,
Codex Venetus.
I.
Venice.
Bibl.
Marciana, Or. 534, saec.

foil,
xi. (circa,
fol.
Zanetti's catalogue)
Aristeas.
membr. 296
6vo.
7.
Theodoret to Hypatius. Catena on the Octateuch.

Trjs
206.
.
9f x
7 in.
It
is
Size
of page
12^x9^
in.,
of writing
written
in
minuscules hanging from ruled lines in one column containing 67 closely packed and closely written lines, the whole of the Aristeas heing comThe Aristeas with the Theodoret seems to pressed into 5^ leaves. have been tacked on to the MS. later, as there is a second numbering (a, beginning on fol. 7, but it is by the same hand of pages y, etc.) as that which wrote, at any rate, the first few lines of the Catena text of the Septuagint appears to have been the work of several the The Aristeas is very much stained and blotted, especially the hands. first leaf, which has been in parts rewritten, but in places the writing In the Venice Catalogue it is placed first in an is utterly illegible. Appendix Graecorum Codicum ex legato Jacobi Contareni, fo. Bapt.
'
Introduction to the letter of Arts teas.

Recanati Aliorumque
' ; '
509
a note in the catalogue adds catenam hanc Bibliotheca Julii Justiniani D. M. Procuratoris vidit Montfauconius et descripsit in Diario Italico^.'
in
I,
xi,
Codex Palatinus. membr. 304 foil.

Aristeas.
22.
Rome.
Bibl. Vatic. Pal. Gr. 203, saec.
fol. I.
Theodoret to Hypatius. 23V0. Catena on Genesis and Exodus. 304 vo. ends in the middle of Exodus. At the end
is
written
'
deest
unum
et
alteram folium.'
It is Avritten in double columns, the words hanging from ruled lines ; the size of page being 14^x101 in., of writing 11 J The 3^ in. Aristeas and the Catena are by the same hand. The bookplate (apparently common to all the Palatine collection) has the words Sum de bibliotheca, quam Heidelberga capta spolium fecit et P. M. Gregorio trophaeum misit Maximilianus utriusque Bavariae Dux etc. S. R I. Archidapifer et Princeps Elector, anno Christi MDCXXIII.'
'
XV
M, Codex Ottobonianus.
32, saec, XV. chart,
fol.
I
Rome.
Bibl. Vatic. Ottobon. Gr.
70
foil. Trept
4.
'li'dias
^pay
ttjs
15,
6.
27
blank.
eis
$.
29
.
17
28.
. $-
blank.
"^^^
44
7^
45
Apioreas
].
;
'
:
Size of page 14^x92 ^^-^ ^^ writing 9+^5 ^^ > the writing is in single column, bounded by two vertical lines, but no horizontal lines are visible. The contents are all written by the same neat hand in which the tall r is the chief characteristic the Aristeas sheets are rather broader than the rest. On the first leaf is written a list of the contents and the name of a former owner of the MS. Anonymi Geographia, Philosophia anonym,, Palladius de rebus et moribus Indicis, Aristeas. Ex codicibus loannis Angeli Ducis ab Altaemps^,'
Ital. (Paris, 1702), 433 ff,, where a list of Justinian's library is given, including a Catena on the Octateuch of the eleventh century. This is apparently the MS. referred to in the Venice Catalogue ; but Montfaucon does not appear to mention that it contained Aristeas. 2 The library of Colonna was bought by Jean Ange due d'AItemps in
1
See Montfaucon, Dtar.

in
the
MSS.
161 1 ; in 1689 part of the collection palace. See Batififol, La Vaticane de
was transferred to Paul III. Paul
the Ottobonian
V. (Paris, 1890),
pp
5759
510
Introduction
agree in almost
cett.),
to
the letter
of Aristeas.
GIM
528. lO
for
^ ,,
GIM
vocalization.
\^
consonants, write iota adscript, interchange

[
appears that G and I are copied from one and the same their contemporary date and a few cases where they are Traideia G, naideias at variance (e.g. 520. 12 I) make it improbable that either is a transcript of the other. With the exception of is undoubtedly a direct copy of I. some slight corrections or blunders on the part of M, they are in Notice e.g. 531. 5 entire agreement.
It
{. 8( {8 )(\ , ?;,
GIM
atpeiv for epLv.
;
cm
cases, including omissions such as mistakes such as 529. 14 GIAI cett.), 552. 26 534. I
all
GIM,
cett.),
They almost always
( (
and
peculiarities of spelling and insert before
= -/])
and and and
and use itacisms such as
{, {,
^
MS.
541-3
{.
1
cett), 57
^
24
this
. (
the words
double-column MS. I. recorded in the apparatus.
At 573 21 cett.). omits which form exactly a line in the have therefore not been The readings of
,
Paris.
(
cett.),
;
540 7
-^
^5
cett.), 543
^{{
Cett.),
To
O,
group appears also to belong

Bibl.
Codex Regius.
Nat. Gr. 950, saec. xiv.
bombycinus, 576 pagg. This MS. contains a very miscellaneous collection of fragments beginning with (p. i) an anonymous fragment on the resurrection, (p. 2)
a fragment of Athanasius on the heresy of Paul of Samosata, and including (p. Ill) a fragment on the ten feasts of the Jews, and (p. 217) On p. 341 occur an anonymous work on the measurement of the earth. the letters of Abgarus and Christ, on p. 343 a fragment of Photius, de termino vitae et de Spiritus Sancti processione,' on pp. 351 371 the fragments of Aristeas, followed on p. 371 by the treatise already (here given at greater length), and other included
'
introduced by the heading
%$ '$
$
fragments which need not be enumerated. they are are not a sixth part of the letter
^2. g
'
5.57
-^
at\vs
the folio cataDe Ptolemaeo rege et lege mosaica calls the fragments logue of 1740 more correctly describes them as 'fragmenta ex Aristea.' There are 24 lines in a page the writing is rough and untidy with Its readings and thick strokes, and very rough red initial capitals. spellings connect it with the GIM group, e.g. 532. 28 Xiav (for (for (for 535. 4 534. 8
'
$ $ . $. '.
$, $
(p.
;
Aristeas fragments 351) 520. 15 inc. and (. 353) 5'^9 '^4 inc. They are
ets
The
Omont's catalogue merely
),
). ),
Introduction
to
the letter
of
A r is teas.
51
The group TBCPSZ.
now come to a group which presents considerable variaThe readings of this tions from those which we havê considered. group are at first sight attractive and have the appearance of reprecloser examination will however, show senting a purer text. that a certain amount of revision must have gone on here, not only in some common ancestor of the group, but also in the infind that various members of the dividual members of it. group have sometimes corrected the text in different ways, that even where they are consistent in their readings, they seldom have the support of Eusebius, who has introduced other slight alterations of his own into the text, and again we find that in text has places the reading of the PIKA and GI groups, which the rejected, is corroborated by the usage of Alexandrian papyri which are contemporary or nearly contemporary with the pseudo-Aristeas. text has While, then, in some places it is possible that the retained or has successfully restored the right reading, the text of this group is usually to be regarded with suspicion, as an ingenious attempt to remove the obscurities of a Greek which had become unintelligible. The group is here spoken of as the is that on which Schmidt's text was group, because the MS. based, and it is also the MS. which exhibits the greatest number but a far older member of the group and one which of variants exhibits the Aristeas text entire has now come to light, namely
We
We
the Florence
MS.
T, which
we
describe
Florence.
first.
T, Codex Acquisti 44.
Laurentianus.
Bibl.
Mediceo- Laurent.
According to the Catalogue of Rostagno the date of the Aristeas, Pentateuch and Catena is the tenth century, of Joshua and the remaining books about the thirteenth. It seems doubtful whether the former part The material is parchment number is earlier than the eleventh century. There are quires of 8 leaves of leaves 384: size of page 145 x 12 in. with signatures of the (?) thirteenth century. To the end of the Pentateuch the writing is in single column with 46 lines in a page in the latter part there are two columns with 65 lines to -^ page. The writing hangs from ruled lines.
:
fol.
I.
''/ '...
iivo. 14VO.
15-
Aristeas to Philocrates. Introduction to O.T. books:
Theodoret, et's Betas Pentateuch with Catena. 311. Joshua Chronicles, Esdras 13, Esther, Judith, Maccabees 14, Tobit (to 3. 15).
' $ .
ttj
512
It
Introdiictio7i to the letter

contains
of Arts teas.
nente A.
et
Codicem e Liguria advectum propothe inscription, M. Bandinio comparavit Ferdinandus III magnus dux Etruriae
'
Bibl. Laurent, donavit die 3
Aug. mdccxcviii.'
Bibl.
B, Codex Regius. bombycinus, 539 foil.

fol. 2.
Paris.
15.
Aristeas inc. (522. 12) Catena on the Octateuch.

:
^
Nat.
Gr.
129,
saec.
xiii.
\oyov.
double columns size of page 134 x 94 in., of writing the Avriting is enclosed by vertical lines, but there are no The Aristeas horizontal lines except at the top and bottom of the page. There are a few plain red is in bad condition, being torn and stained. initial letters. The Avriting is rather sloping, and fairly large and clear. Schmidt says, 'This MS. has been subsequently collated most carefully with its original by the rubricator, when the writer himself had already performed this duty quite conscientiously. Hence all corrections of the rubricator and of the first hand are equivalent to the authority of the original MS.' later hand has added a few headings in the margin The Catena is apparently by the same hand etc.). In some as the Aristeas, but has more ornamentation and red initials. places part of a leaf has been cut or torn away.
It is written in
in.
;
io| X 35
(
C,
,
A
ovv
Codex Regius.
bombyc, 402
I.
Paris.
foil.
Bibl.
Nat. Gr.
5,
saec. xiii. xiv.
chart, et
fol.
14.
Aristeas fragments. Anonymous introduction to the books of the O.T. (inc. ro
45.

:
).
The Aristeas is written in a single column the size of page being i2i X 9 in., of writing varying from 9 7 in. to 7I ^f in. The Aristeas and the introduction to O.T. are by the same hand, a large square upright writing with thick strokes and red initials in the margin the page is unruled. In the latter part of the MS., foil. 45 60 are written in double columns in a rougher hand at fol. 61 the first hand begins again, and the remainder is sometimes in single, sometimes in double columns, text and commentary coming alternately and the order of books being confused (Judges, Joshua, Deuteronomy, Numbers). The fragments of Aristeas contained are less than half the letter they are 528. 17 532. 17 553 1 " ^^ eLirev VOS 8e end. 5^3567. 7 -''^
$ ,
^
inc.
-,
(frag.).
iv. 56,
,
saec.
Codex Barberinus.
xiii.
Rome.
Bibl.
Barberina Gr.
membr., 229
foil.
fol. I.
Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis
end
XetTret.
at
Introduction
2.
to the letter
of Aristeas.
Fragment of Aristeas
.
S,
expl. (568. i)
10.
224.
Catena on the Octateuch. Catena on the Apocalypse
\$
fol.
i
inc. (538. 10)
ws (note
inc.
^'
(sic)
513
yap
XetTret).
brfKeL
$
filii
It is written in double columns in a very minute upright and neat hand, with about 60 lines packed into a column, the words hanging from ruled lines ; the size of page is 9! 7 in., of writing 8:^ 3| in. At
the bottom of
is
written
'
Caroli Strozzae
Thomae
Gr.
1635.'
? xiii.
Codex Vaticanus.
foil.
Rome.
Vat.
1668, saec.
membr., 358
It is written in single column, with 29 lines in a page, the size of page being 12^x85 in., and the writing hanging from ruled lines; there are quires of 8 leaves.
fol.
I
37VO. 37V0. 358.
Aristeas (complete). Catena on Genesis.

first
On
the recto of the
Ruini ep' Balneoregien.
leaf 1622.'
is
the note
'
Emptus ex
libris ill' Lelii
This MS. escaped notice when the other Roman MSS. were examined and has consequently not been collated in full; but some collations of selected passages kindly made by Mr N. McLean,, Fellow of Christ's College, are sufficient to show that it belongs
to this group.
Z,
Codex
p.
p.
I.
I
(
Tljricensis.
saec.
xiii.
Zurich.
Omont's catalogue),
Aristeas.
bombyc, 736
Stadtbibliothek C. pagg. ^
11
(169
= 21).

irpos
('
p.
669.
ets
a Sophronio graece versus,' Omont). It is written in single column, the size of page being 13^x9 in., and the writing hangs from ruled lines. The Aristeas portion is badly preserved a hole passes through the twenty pages which contain it, causing lacunae. There are several marginal readings, some of which are obviously conjectural (e.g. The Jerome is not by the hand which has written the remainder of the MS.
;
,
^
S.
Hieronymi
liber
de
viris illustribus
? ).
That the above MSS. form a single group appears primarily from their omissions. The following lines are omitted by alP the
The
collation
which
2
greater part of this MS. was collated from the original. The of the last few pages has been made from photographs, for the writer is indebted to the courtesy of the Librarian, Dr Hermann
(i), (3),
Escher.
S omits
and
(7).
It
has not been tested for the other
passages.
s. s.
33
(I)
Introduction
569. 5
to the letter
of Aristeas.
BT (rives . cett.). Where however the of the group unite as against the and GI groups, the reading gains in probabihty, and more especially is this the case where the group has the support of either Eusebius or the GI group. Thus in 526. 2 BTZGI Eus' B"TZ Eus. HKA), 526. 6 Cett.), 547- 7 ins Kac PZGI Eus' (om cett.), the reading is right. But in some places the whole group has been affected by correction. Thus in 519. II TSZ (the only extant members at this point) read eavTovs is avdpa but the reading ... of the Other MSS. is corroborated by the favTovs usage of the papyri of the second century B.C. (Paris Pap. 49 Par. Pap. 63 col. 6 Grenfell, Erotic Fragment^ etc. XLII. 6 ety re avTovs few instances where correction is seen at work may be read quoted. At 550. 10
members
515
(...
A
^ (
^
=
At
527.
:
(
is
HKA
(
\
further corrected by and to to corrections which give a grammatical but hardly an intelligible sentence. The slight alteration (a correction which Wendland also appears of ' for to have adopted) restores sense to the passage, and the text Similarly at 555. i is seen to be due to conjecture. and have corrected in different ways the characteristic word ('answer'), reading eirre and a little before (553. 21) vhere the remaining MSS. have reads
which is by to
,()
BT
I
).
(, (,
^BTZ
to
HKAGI (-^),
is
;
clearly wrong,
corrected by
^^] ,
^,
BTZ
read
cett.),
wrote thus removing an

first
( at
idiomatic use of the genitive, frequently attested by the papyri. instances will afford sufficient proof that a good deal of recension has gone on in this group. At the same time it is clear that in other places it has escaped the corruptions which the other groups have undergone, though it is sometimes difficult to say whether a reading of this group is primitive or due to correction. The agreement of the group with Eusebius (where his evidence exists) is, as was said, sometimes a test but in the majority of cases the text is not corroborated by Eusebius, and in a few instances where one or two members only of the group agree with Eusebius, this appears to be due to a fortuitous coincidence in emendation. Such passages are 548. 4 Eus. cett. incl. PTZ) BT Eus. cett.). 527. 4 In the latter instance Eusebius altered the form of the sentence by reading and inserting yap after in BT the change to was due to having become
The above
^6
(;
332
5i6
Introduction
to
the letter
of
A ris teas.
is
).
The
letter,
corrupted to rated by Josephus
( {^
the participle nepl OeXrjs
corrobonf
extracts of Eusebius, consisting of about a quarter of the are contained in the eighth and ninth books of the Praepa-
The Eusebian MSS. which ratio Evangelica (viii. 2 5, 9, IX. 38). are to be followed in these books are, as HeikeU has shown, I
(Codex Bononiensis 3643). (Codex Venetus Marcianus 341) and The extracts from Aristeas in these two MSS. have been collated for the present text, and their evidence is quoted as Eus' and Eus". For the other Eusebian AISS. the text of Gaisford (Oxford, 1843) was unknown to Gaisford, and his collation of has been used was incomplete. The Venice MS. by its general agreement I with the Aristeas MSS. shows itself to be far the best text of Eusebius the Bologna MS. or one of its ancestors has been very carelessly copied, and there are numerous omissions which did not always appear worthy of record in the apparatus to the present With regard to the value of the Eusebian text, it may be text. well to quote the verdict of Freudenthal- on the general character He says, Eusebius shows of his extracts from earlier writers. himself more reliable in the text (Wortlaute) of his originals than in the names and writings of the excerpted authors. It is true that he occasionally allows himself small alterations in the text, most frequently in the opening words of the extracts. He often abbreviates his originals, drops repetitions (beseitigt Doppelglieder), omits individual words and whole sentences, and no small number of inaccuracies of other kinds are also to be met with. On the other hand it is only in extremely rare cases that he inserts additions of his own, and the cases in which we meet with fundamental alterations of the text are still more uncommon.' This estimate is quite borne out by the Eusebian extracts from Aristeas, where there are frequent instances of slighter alterations and omissions, which the paraphrase of Josephus often helps us to Among omissions we have 520. 16 ei om Eus. (ins detect.
;
'
Eus. (ins Ar. codd. Jos. Ar. codd.), 525. 10 Jos. however omits the words in his paraphrase, and they may be a gloss). Of alterations we may note out of numerous instances is altered to 525. 24 where the strange word iv ais Tvy(J OS. paraphrases rovs
:
om
ol
),
526. 17
(a
bad
p. 7
correction, because
ratione
De
Praeparationis
Evangdicae Eusehii edendae
(Helsingf.
forsiae,
1888). ^ Hellenistische Studien, Alexander Polyhistor (Breslau, 1875) See also the note on p. -203 on Eusebius and Pseudo-Aristeas.
hitrodnction
to the letter
of
A risteas.
517
the royal plural used throughout the rest of the letter of Ptolemy noWovs Ar. codd. ttoWovs is dropped), 527. 24 Ar. 'in many individual instances'), 572. 9
codd.), 573. 2
Se at 544. 22 before In a few cases a rather longer addition is made and at 54^ 14 the words are the words em probably the insertions of Eusebius just before the last passage
;
;
( {^
(546. 11) unintelligible
Among
of the correct reading passages where Eusebius is certainly right

alteration
tioned 526. 2
Eus' GIPZ, and lastly 541. 21.

instructive
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
{
^
:
Eus'
GIBTZ
Ar. Codd.), 547. 7 the insertion of
The readings
. {
\
may
IS
JoS. Ar. Codd.).
an
be menlO
cett.), 542.
in this
passage are
Eus.
GIMZ"^.
HKADFL.
;
"".
and while
then dropped out, Eusebius preserves the true text the in the group the reading was still further corrupted, in the group sense was restored to the passage by a conjectural emendation. Passages where Eusebius and Josephus
HKA
unite as against the Aristeas

Ar.), 525. 5 negative, ? 528. 7 the
omission of the perfect (Jos. has the perfect Ar.), 572. 20 Jos. Eus. in such cases the patristic reading or Ar. cett.) should generally be followed. On the whole the Eusebian evidence is of the greatest importance it tends to show that the GI group, group, is nearest especially if supported by any member of the
{
; ;
MSS.
are 524. 18 Ar.), 526. 8
{-
{-
to the primitive text. Lastly, with regard to the evidence of Josephus, he gives in the twelfth book of the Jewish Antiquities a paraphrase of about twofifths of the letter, omitting the central portion, namely the visit to Palestine, the discourse with Eleazar and the seventy-two questions and answers. He has taken the trouble to reshape nearly every sentence, while retaining many of the characteristic words of Aristeas. Under the circumstances it is not always possible to reconstruct his text, and at some of the most difficult passages his evidence is uncertain in some cases the text was certainly unintelligible to him. He is however often useful in enabling us to detect the alterations which have been introduced into the text by Eusebius or the group. It is needless to add that Niese's
;
text of
Josephus has been followed. Beside the MSS. of Aristeas above mentioned the following
Introduction
to the letter
of
risteas.
are known to the present writer, which he has not had the opportunity of collating Codex Monacensis 9 (saec. xi.), quoted in Mendelssohn's fragment of the text, Codex Atheniensis 389 (circa saec. XV., chart., foil. 328, Aristeas and Catena)^, Codex Scorialensis I. 6 (dated 1586, and written
:
-^,
Aristeas and Catena on Genesis and
/)
Exodus)^.
The collations here given are not absolutely complete. Itacisms and other orthographical details have not been generally recorded, neither have all the slight omissions of the Codex of Aristeas but apart from these of Eusebius or of the fragment no substantial variants have, it is hoped, been omitted. The dates of the various correctors' hands have not been accurately ascertained the symbol B^, T^ has been used to denote a correction probably by the first hand or a hand nearly contemporary with and T. Words are enclosed within the date of the MSS. daggers t t where the MS. reading is left in the text, although denote emendations of, probably corrupt angular brackets square or insertions introduced into, the reading of the MSS. brackets [ ] signify that words found in the MSS. are probably to
;
; ;
be omitted.
^
75 6\$ .
-
(Athens, 1892). Miller, Catalogue des Manuscrits Grecs de la Bibl. de
\.
< >
$.
rrjs
Escurial
(Paris,
1848).
15
^'^,'' , 7 -, ' , , ' ^. -^ ,. ^ , ^ ^ , , ,^ . , ' , .' , ,^ ^ -] . . .

^^',
Trept
'
dpûpea
[<,
LV
fvoL.vv'\',
irepl
e;>(t?
^',
OTrep /xe-
dei.
yap
^,
vevevKvIa,
61
êia
]?
yeypa-
^,
"^
3
/.
9
yap,
<^,
om
13
>
';5 GZ
4
omn)
(sed
codd
HKAGITZ
.
codd
HKAGI
G
txt
HKGIT
12
11
16
19
om
21
23 oryXofires
/acj/
codd, txt ex conj Schmidt
",
^ , . / /, /,/ , . , / ^' ^, . <; /^ .

.
/U.OVOV
^ , ' ;
^
520
7 .
yap
-, ,
dyy
<;
^**
irepl
Trepl
' . ^. '
*/ ;( ^ ,/.
'
voyw
, ^, , ^' / . ,
yap
,^
Try
ic
;^
ry
yniy
7>/,
;>( 7
\<;
15
',
-,
^, ^ '
/
.
/?^
/' ^
,,
yap
;>(/,
3
ypav
/;
16
^!(.
14
19
,'
}/
. '7
ytta-
, '
25
]. ] 7
G
0W
ins
)('
G
Ar
'^^
G^''*
|
G G
'/'
28
/^'']
|
Eus Eus
cm Ar
/]
codd 21 pr Eus
/
6
crot]
conj Schmidt
12
Eus
24
ai^rot
?7
22
Eus
Eus
-|-
Eus
15
25
,, , '^ , ,^ , , / - ,, '
/ 7 . ',
//"
Try
', ' ^ / , ' ^ /^-, ^ ^', ' /? '^

^^)
^^
,^ ^ ? ^' , % , -^ ^/ /, , ' ', '^^ ^ ' , ^, / ^ ] /, ^

-
itTre
TT^S
,
/??/.^'
, '
ytuoKetv
. . /
)79
,^ ',
7)
521
6
TrpocipT^/xeva
ttvat Trcpt
"
Eus
Trepi
/ /^,
/,^, , '
Tiy?
^Q
'^,
TrapiyevyjOrjaav,
-,
4
12 15
(U.ei']
GI
^' - ' /. .. /
-/,
-^^^
^.
ti^S
^^
^,
/'^?
/ /3
oi;s]
//, ^
?;!/,
;
^
|
.
I
I
roi/s
?'
Tap.
e/c]
HKAGIQ
G"'^
11
^. cm
26
+ ow
i/cai'ws
18
'^
cm
14 Ai^.] AiyvTTTLwv
21
/cat
5e]
t/ceretats
28
29
, ^, .
522
ovTOL
Si
yap
, ),
^, ^, ^ ,' ' ^
yap
,-, . , ^ , ^ (^ ^
API2TEAS
^, *
'
TTJ
< <;
Kvpieveiv.
)^
'
^,
KvpuvovTa
)^
^ /'/
pyv
^ , ^^//^/ ,.^/' ^, . '

6
^,
^ -^ ^ ' ^. ^ ." ^7 , ^
yap
6
;
;.
',
yap
;^'*
^yao{f/vâ,
^poyovov,
70
/ , ,'
/,
'/'
|
/,^^
oypaa
,
( om
/] ;/
, '-
25
HKAGIBT
^ J^
/
5 15
ei/
2
(al
6/)5 Ar
a) /cai
codd]
/^? hie hab Jos sed fort pro

codd
8
avoi/cetws
^771/
701.]
\$
* \.
|
{.
16
6
'^^^)
|
13
.]
G
60?;
Jos
19
^G
24
]
3
12
om yap
G
pr
18
25
'$
yeueaOaL
09
. ,.)
VTrep
Ttvcs
,
'
^ p-eyaXopoLpta
.^ ^
^
-^
Tryv
etg
elj/at.
^. '/
7;
,
15
25
^, , ', <> /,
.
2
3
^, , '
. ' ' . ,
,
|
' ,', /^ ,
.<;
9
ci9
^. .
523
.^^
]
10
I
Fort deperiit aliquid ante hoc verbum

BT*^''*
,
'
17
^
TB
|
()
HKAGIBT
-^^^
{-)]
12
13
cett
9 eyKpareis
cm BTZ cm
|
payas BTZ
BTZ
-yue WIS
BTZ
ex conj] 28
21
ZTô""^'^ txt ex corr Schmidt
23
+ HKAGIT*^"^ 24 +
HAGI
GI
HKAITZ
] ]
,
524
' -, ^. - ^? . , -)
API2TEA2
/.
ivo\ov
cietv
oe
Eus
^ ,^ < / ^ , .^ ' / . ^. / , ^' ./,

et
-^ '
iv
ct?
5
^,^
.< -
elai
^^^
iKeXevaev 6
' . , ^^, /' ,

^
6<
8,
is
HKAGIBT
Jos Eus
' ' . \.^ , ^,,.^,.^ , ] . . ^. 3 (/
' ^.
ti^S
2$
3 0
ex conj (cf 3
7
ei
Mace
;]
et
3^8)]
^^; codd
10
^.
GIZ
/] +
^''^
I^'d
11
12
17
e|i7'f
'fCi'
Jos
13
15
.
20
^?] ;/
/3.
Eus' et
Eus] Ar codd 21
Ar codd omn
Eus<='^'i
|
19
0.]
Eus
Jos'='^'*
18
Jos et
txt
Eus
BTZ
Eus)
i] ins
Eus Eus om Ar
|
Eus]
Ar
24
{- )
Ti/sj
oi/rws
Eus
26
+ Sta Eus
' ^ , , ' 84, , /' , ,, ' 8.

ct
. '^ ',
-^, . ]
;^.
Troiryrai
525
/et
^'
15
25
,' , - ^ ^ ^^ ." ^ . , , . ,^ . ^ , .^
^,
tt^S
^
]
10 auras
^, , ,, -^
^/
bia
Oeiav.
^3,
;^
'
^. ^'
^
conj
, , ,
5
^,-
\ .
1 ev]
I
cum seqq
Ar Eus
Eus'
Eus'
.
Jos
HKAGIBT
Jos Eus
Eus
en Eus
Ar
et Eus'.
Fort
supra legendum
12
Eus]
15
txt
Jos Eus] e0
Eus
et Jos^''i
Eus'
24
25
.
txt
cm Eus
et Jos^'^
Ar codd
|
HAGIBT
Eus
cett
|
(//?)
codd
11
cm
18
%
|
14
20
23
om om
?
ovv
I
Eus Eus
|
GB^'^TZ
om
rots Eus'
om
ai/
BTZ
'
Ar
Eus Jos
^ ' 526
, /^ , ,^ ,, . ] -^^ , ., ,, .
"
eV
. " , ,, ^ ,8 -, , , ,
API2TEA2
dpvLcpei vatpciv
19
-, \
yevyjO^vTa^
/-
\povoVj
(.
8e
'
Uepauiv,
eU
Si
tovs
\_'\
So^y
15
'
'
4 avueiaeX. G^''*! Eus'
. ^
1
eirei
|
),
'
Eus]
txt Jos^'^
|
codd
5
cett
Eus
B<^''''TZ Eus] 6 Eus HKAGIB*^'^ 8 /; hab Ar codd omn cm Jos Eus recte ut Eus videtur GI 11 apyvp. 13 txt codd cett Eus Eus 16 om GI 17 14 + pr Eus eiri Ar codd Eus txt emend Schmidt 21 {-^) Eus Eus txt Ar Jos BT 23 25
}
]+
HKA
Eus^^d txt
. \ .-
^ $
2
|
25
'^.
Ar codd
GIBTZ
{- ) . y.
] -
Eus'
15
, ', , ? - / /^^ . ^ /^, .^? ,/. ^ ^/ '/ , , ,, ,' ^,^/ , (^, / ^ , - ,' ^ '^ ' . ,/ ^ .,.
527
7/
et?
)(<
'.
(.ay,
.^
^, ;)( /? ^ ^
OLiprj.
'
;(0/>9
->/
^, .
Tiyv
-^
77V
'/?.
;<^
irevTc,
tojv
Tiy?
?;/>
,'
1
^,
Jos Eus]
Ar
prima manu) TZ Jos txt Ar codd cett Eus^ /) 2 Eus (-eai/ Eus' cum Ar codd) 4 BT Eus ai/ Eus (eaj/ Eus' cum codd cett) cett et Jos^'^ 5 /).] Ar codd Eus 7 ^' .]
| I
Ar codd IG* B* + Ar codd Jos

avdpes
|
$ 5 . $? (- )
(/
Eus'
sup
lin
HKAGIBT
^"^ Jos ^ J^
txt
(/$)
)
Eus
21
txt
' ] -7/)/^]
Jos 18
pr Avdpeas
cett
;' Eus
Eus
12 cvvayovTes 16
Ar codd
|
Eus
^ ^ ?
Eus
txt (cf 2
txt
codd
Eus
Mace
9-'*,
11-^)
13
G*^'^^'''*
Jos irapeyv.
17
Eus
Eus'
(-^
cett)
-^ Jos
20
Av5;oeas]
Jos Eus {-eas 24 pr
codd
] HA
')
(G \$
Jos Eus
^ ,^ , /, -] . / , ' , /^ , ^,^. ,, ^ .' ^ '/ ^ . ^% % ^ ^. ' ^ '' ^"' ^ ^^. . ^^ ' "^ ^. ' " - " " ' ^ ^. '7 ^ / . ' ' ' ^.
528
API2TEA^
iv
ovv
yivYjTaL
Trpoaipfj
8^
^/
.'^
,...
HKAGIBC
IZJosEus
' 7 ^ ", ^. . . ^. () ..
^* ^,^
^2$
<>
cm
om
ev
cm
Eus
(.
10
eias
-g^jj.
Jos]
(sic)
Eus'
cm
14
'$
\eas
post
ins A"^s
18 22
? ^ 17, 18
om
$ ?
cm
^'^
19
Ar codd
GI
nomen
cm
Narrates
. $
excidit
13
/? 1$
11
*^'^
15
$
Eus
|
Eus
\
12 16
Jos^''*
leê/cias
cm
.
|
/
'"'
l77croi)S
24
GZ Marâtos HKA 20 Bavaias BCTZ codd AGICT* {-. ^)

C om C
17
leiaias
|
. ^ ' } 8, --. . / '^ /. ./ , , ^^, .

**
-'^,-
yap
iroLOv/xevov
^^.
./ ^ ^,
TrvOeaOaL
529
Jos
15
,^ ^ ., , , , * , , . ,. ' 7, ,,' /, ., , ^
'
<
,/
,^
yap
<>
25
,
1 3
jUTjre
mhkoc,
.
C
2
6
;(. }
HMicoyc Q
]
$]
24
]
s.
$ . $.
24
2 5-2 ff
"] pr
GIC
11
CTZ BCTZ Jos

ins
'^'^'^)
/]
.
12
lin
cm
HKAGIQB
cm /' C
GI
16
cm
cm BCTZ
18
et
12
ei/e/ca
tt;s
* (. yap 5 ] CT*Z
13
|
GI
Schmidt
uXijs
ttjs
|
avrois
{.
14
suprascr pr man)
en
7ap
Fort legendum
22
(ex
Tas
av
om
pr
Jos qui
et
post
-% add
supra
-ri
LXX
vid) eiOs
s.
34
530
AS
oe
TTipiiirrvyîvov
8e
/, .
rjv
/ ^ , |< ^' ^. ,
e
8 7, )
yap
LvaL
- ,
cTTiSeScVât.
)(,
T17S
^'
T'i)l'
7,
^^ .
6$xav
eii/at
'
TTyv
yval
HKAGIQB
CTZ
Jo:
^ ,,, ] '$ $ $? $. \$$ $ . (;
, ', .
^?,
1
.
mg
add
^^. , ;>^ -^ / iv
, , ,
evipveia?
<;
etvat
15
ao
;^9
awe-
ad hoc
A'^*^" in
yuepos
$ ^$
GIBT*]
\5'
^^
Ttts
7;
aos
yap
(-.
L)
\oyov
3,
avayys
Hanc notam L
-77'
HKAC
^^
textui inseruit
Jos)
cett
12
"]
GICQ
17 22
txt cett.
Fort
legendum
16 18
11
BCTZ
GI)
GIQCZ
CQ
Q
'] +
]
|
'0.] +
19
cett
Fort legendum
(conj Schmidt)
GIBC
QCZ
15
25
, , ^ / ' , ' - ^ , ,- . ^ , /,. , , ,^ ^ ' , /, , ,. ^ , ,,., ^ ? . /

StaaKevrjv
^, ^ 8, < 6> ^ ^ ' ^. / yevovs

Trept
.. < ^
,
elvat
531
'
IvUaOai
ets
',
aTepebv
<>
rj'
poSeîov
'
79,
'
)
|7/|
iv
'
CK
,
omn
'
' .
+
1,
]
4
6
codd
C
/cat
CZ
14
codd] Jos hah

conj
|
Lovs
ex quibus 21
] ^]
Lumbroso
] OS
^]
23
^ $.$] $
codd Verborum ordine mutato legit Schmidt 5

|
]
+
KBCTZ KAGIQEC
^^ J^s
om
.
16
KAGIB* BCTZ
.
26
codd
$
$
GI
18
11
ZQ
24
om C
25
342
1 C
KAGIQBC
Jos
, ^ -, .) , , .^ , 6.. , , , < , . 8. , , ,, . , ^ , <> , . ' , . ,, , , ' ,^ , , ) ,. {) ] - ^

532
APISTEA2
fj-^xpi
'
SiaOeaLS
ivcpyws
aipa
/^?
yap
^ /^^^ \ ôy '

7>(
'
is
6'9
'
'
vapy.
25
'
1 ol]
GI
^^
CTZ
16
Jos
.\
. Q
i\\.
t\ ]?,
10
KB]
cett
11
12
GI
GCTZ
13
cm
18
14
17,
BCT
18
28 Xtav
15
TTjs
CQ
26
(om codd) ex Jos supplevi
om
codd
txt
19
25 ? evepyes QGIZT^fo-'
ex Jos conj Schmidt
8, ;(,
iv
5
^^ , , ^. " ^, )
'
. .
veyo
etra
533
Sy yeyovvlav
^/-
^/^^
yap
apyvpov
aXiyêtas
7,
TeOevTOiv
ey
8e
15
, , ., ^^ , .^ , , , , ^ payLav ivpya.
yap
apyvpov
kyivTO
^;^
. ,
yap
etvai
>
vyov
;(
vpyvv
'
25
, ^
6
/3'
vopya,
. .
yap
.),
.
4,
pyv.'
yap
' /^'
GI
, ,
yap
1 Jos
|
.
]
8
, , ,
6
13,
yap
om EC
5 irpos
arrepyaêaOaL
Q
|
Q KAGIQBT
'^
om
'^="^ (ins^)
om Tts om
13
14
14 23
eTrotet] eiri
18
eXaias
evuvres
19 Topeias KA'="']
Tropetas cett
L\\ayvas
24
22
.]
';/)75
KAGI
TZQ
25
BTZ
ttjs
-) ,/
534
yotcveêatv,
API2TEA2
eXarrov
^/
'^. /-^^ , ^ ^ ^ ' . 7^ , , - - ^ ^ . '/ .

etvat
; ;(
}
7\-^ 9 ^
cvepyecav.
/
etvai,
'
Trepteêt
yevofxivrjv
^/
Upov
^.
e;)ôv
^'^
/^^,
"
' ,. ,^'^ ,<> / },^ []/' ^/- ;^ ^ ] '- . ^ $

,
)(^
>7
yeyovvla
|>^
^,
1
7? '
'/\$ GI
GIQ
+
' , ,
'/.
.'
15
yvoiv
>}
^''
Tr)v
+ GIZ
cm Q
ewi
KAGI]
12
/ca/f
18 20
1$ .
o...s
{
et sic cett
sed
cum
|
lacuna post
et
pro
posito,
LD)
tottovs.
|
Txt ex papyris confirmatur
8
evTrpeirws
cett
GIQ
BT
]
]
|
A'=''''
{-. Q)
KABT
17
conj Schmidt
ex exovTos *^'*^
omn omittendum
vid
".
16
19 icaTa codd
codd
21
om
Schmidt
''
(ins
cett
13
KGIQZ
conj
|
')
Schmidt hab
24
Xet-
22
BT
, /
15
^ ? . ,,^, ^ ^
.
BycciNOiC
'
..
kairipav
h'KV,
535
^'
Eus
)(
yap
/9
^^
,.
, ,
1
36=^5
(283'')
' .''
<.>, *
yrjv,
^,
lepov
1 Eus
25
,
10
Eus^') txt
. ,
txt
| ]
/ ,, ,
,, ,,
e7ri0opaj]
]
1
I I I
4 Eus Eus 2 Eus (-7.) KTQ ins Schmidt Eus Eus Schmidt
Tovs TOLxovs Eus<^
Eus' B^
Tt
Eus
KovLai
$ Ar
codd
17
19
{- GI)
^
(Eus*'
j
11
12
|
$ ^
cett
Eus
- KAGIQB
Eus
"^
Eus')
vepyv
{-vus
..
15
ois]
Ar codd
Eus' {-rais
Ar codd
13
'Q
|
txt
cm
A)
et ai-Tots
codd corr Schmidt

26 erepos
cett
25
GIBTZ
^^ ] ^ , ^. - / , , -^ ?. -, ^^. , , ^, , .^^ , ^^ .,,' , ,, / , ^ ^ , .''-,^ ^ ^ ,

536
API2TEA2
/39
6<;,
yap
)('
ttAciov
;^
tl Sk
^)
,
\.
(-^.
iaTLV
?
17
:75
"
/
TirJ
'/ ^,^ ';^', ^,

.
^/
15
'
,'
potcKOi,
'^ -2
25
;!^
79
', ;)( '^ ,'^

20
26
oj
-^
17
ff
Ex
28^-^-3
ib35
21
ff
ib^s-ss
ffib^^^*^
pr 11
ets
BT
^.]
^.')
I
$
2 6
BT
ois Tt
|
\.
(-eaews sup ras in T)
*''' (7/3)3.
conj Schmidt
Tjs
16 ;] 21
BTZ
27
/
A
]
5 8
QB
12 ras
7rpo/3.]
cm
ev] eiri
19
GIQ
(- )
20
^
4
ai/rots
i'i/os]
BT
15
25
^ ^^,^$ , ,, ^ ^ ' ,^ , , ' ,. , ^, ) /? -, ^ ^ ' .' ^ ^ . . ' - /

ets
, , ^ ^, ^ ^ .
8$]
, -.
7
ci9
.^
6
ueov,
a^Los
iv
^-
537
iX-qXyOevat e/cro?
8-
ttj
^^
irepl
yap
..
iv
-,
cav
j^
ct?
^^^
TTcpl
iepov
Trept
7 '
7rpoJv
T>y
;^?
/"^
//,
;^,
yap
/,
'. </>>
-^
1
^'
^Q
>;/
tolovtov
yap
/., ' vyv /,

3
|
'
/]
Q
txt
pr
]
|
2
]
^??
11
TTOtet
0/3']
6
cm
Trpoetp.
ijff"'
Xa/CTjs
12
TIS
SwttTat cett
; 19
'7
'^^'^
/ KAGIQB
]
|
(tis
ets
/xepos
eis
77
'.
13
Z^'"^
B*T*Q
B^T^
cett
25
codd
(^/
21
'"?)
p,V
,. , ^^ . ) , .^., ^, ,. ? , ^,] , . ^, ,, , ,, , , ^,
538
API2TEA2
/ ^,
>)
TOJV
<.
^.
(,
'
e^ci
7' opovs
elal
<;
]1'
'
iv
^yaev
yap
TTJ
, )^ .' , /, '^
, '
ep
/xr^
// ,', ,^ ^ , . /^ ^ ' '^/ ^ 7
>
<c
,'15
//
^?
[
8
Fort
yeupyia
lacuna)
$-.
1
, . /)
vitium aliquid
:
', / ^
,;
^
, '
'
5
25
'/]
2 ovros]
ei^TOj
4
ras
KGIT*^"^Z,
latet
sensus totius loci perobscurus est

|
$
tt/jos
KGITZ
/).
12
(- was edd) codd omn
t7?s]
cett
13, 14 verba ex conj addidi
/ 77;']
19 22
16 fort
20
]
23
legendum
vel
conj Schmidt
BZ
11
15
cm
(sequente
HA*GIT*Z
,
5
iiriraê
^-
., .
y
/xv
^ray,
/
15
yap
^ ,.
/
.,
,'
,^ . ,. ^ . .,
yap
pyov
4'
^, . . ,
'
^ ;^
yap
*
. .^.
539
/
^.,
/3'
20
'
25
^ . .. < ' ( , )^8 ,/ , ^ . ,

^
'loTTTriyv
^,
<^^
opyovva,
/' /
/7
yvo
6
r^
ypo
y^
.
LXX
e;/
>
23
e^7//f.
yufp.
?cf
Ex
39='
.
19
edd edd pr
. [. '$
6
e Xat/cots (sic)
BPTZ
ev \aLK.
GIT
|
HAGIZ
18
. .
10
25 cf Jos
3^^
KAPZ
BPTZ
16
|
om HKAGIBP
TZ
cett
*)
pr
26
17
cm GIPZ
cm
']
ttoXls]
]
2
21 verba inserui
23 27
^.
;;/
GBPZ
.. $
540
14
^, /, , , , / ^ //) . , ^ ?, , ? , ^ '' ^.
540
AP12TEA5
ctvat
.. ^^ ^,
rrpos
en
6.
*'
oV
-;(
Tr)v
;>(
, ,
)
;(
/ /-
'^
;>^,
,
HKAGI
GP
|
, ^, <^, , 8. ' , ^
I
15
, ,', $ .
'
2
I
15
cm
22
18
e/c
?
27
8
^''^
]
16 19
, ^
ex conj Schmidt pr
I
txt
{, ), ^ / $
5
25
11
GIPZ
21
17 yap]
28
*^''^
79 a^LOL
TtVctvf Trept
.^ ^ -, , ' , ,,, , }
541
Trept
^.
'
/^^
>^,
CKetroq
^'
,^.
TreaOaL,
'
/,*
yap
Xevctv, OTt
^
'
^rjv
).
cTcpa
15 KOivr/v
^ ^,
^,
^"^
'
, ^ ^, ^ ^' ,
4'tciv,
'
7)
.
T7y
.
20
ff
|
^^
,
^
^
ci
,
ir,
^^ '
.-
Eus
2
3
?
cm
7
.]
|
Lev
Deut
143-19
+
9
yeypairraL
11
|
e|ei
evanuit)
7' HKA
BPTZ'ô'"''
Eus)]
/3.
txt
Schmidt
irpos
I
Eus
txt
22 TLva
' ^ ' .
4
10
|
'?
12
e/c ea'os]
7;'
'
cm
Eus'
be
aiTovs]
+ osB HKAGIBP
14
;'
]-\et
(in fin lin fort
18
20
codd
Eus
(bis scr
fort recte
21
irpos
GIZ*
Trpos
yap
|
tois
Ar codd (B
Eus
|
excepto) Eus
2]
BPT
Trept]
pr
\y
om
cm Eus
GIBPTZ
txt cett
Eus
23
BPTZ
542
yap
, , ,
?]* ^
3
TTjs
|
. , '],<
^,
'
5 epyaôvrai 8
. , ,^ , , /. ]^ , / ' ^
,
^,
yap
, /3 ^ . ', ^?^? ', , ^ / , -,- , '^ , *

\
'
elaiv iav
^^ , ! /?) , ^, ^
<,
Bk
API2TEA2
(//
f
,
6
?,
(.,
15
>,
Eus'
9
GI
Eus^""^*^
*^^^
Eus] codd
ewi
cm
10
cett
8$
|
.
11
, '
cett
'Eus
Eus
I
25
Eus.]
Eus^^^^^
Eus')
12
Eus
cm cm
|
codd txt Eus Eus

|
-.
|
..
14
Eus*^
Eus^'^^ (717'
.
|
Eus
13
GIZ
TxavTos] pr
{-. )
(7^5 suprascr
^)
|
\$
Eus
Eus"
16
18
^;
codd
22
Eus
]
corr
'/$ \ ]
15 23
17
cett
HKAG^''!
Wendland]
^;
Eus'
Eus
25
codd Eus
7
5
' < , ,
yap
iv rrj
^
OL
7 , ; ^ / ;/
Xcyetv,
15
ay.6v.^
^payv,
2
25
/, ^ , ^ ^ ^,, ^ ^ / ,^ . , ,' , ,, ,. ,/ '^ ^

yap
oei
.. ^ ^ /, ,. ?,/
,
543
^9 ,
79.
oiTives
/-
7^
ueov
^,
l'Liy.a
^,
;)(,
iyv<
/?
^^ ^, ' /? '/^ ^ ''

oBev
6
yap
^^
/^'
,3 9
'7'
4
Eus'
^.
(-/ )
pr 13
.
/XTjêi'
Eus
, {+
|
Eus<^)
/car.
Eus
om HKAGIBP
cett
/.
18
21
eis
-Eus Eus
0. ]
*
cett
']
Eus 5 + /' Eus
11 12
^]
/cat
HKAGI
19
tis] Tt
14
16
HA
/ * .(
| |
roiyapovv Eus*
] ? HAGI om
| |
Eus]
3 sup lin)
(s
postea suprascr H^^'-i A*^'d)

T-qs
BTZ
Eus
22
|
om
Eus
HAGI cm
BP Eus
|
ei/ Eus] Eus" yaoL
ev cett
]
.
ttjj'
^|
24
/.]
'^^'^
Eus'^^'*'^
Eus
15
Eus
kqi
Eus'
23
Eus
Eus
25 a0T7s Eu.s
, ^ ', ' , ,
^
1
r;
, ^ , ^. , , , ^ ,
Tpvyov^
. ,/ / ^, , ^. . , ? ^ ^/ / , , . , , /, , / ^,
544
API2TEA2
yap
)',
'
ct?
yap
\6yov
ev
SevTepov
^,
ort
r^^HC
Trepicpyiav
.<;'
VKV
7'^^^
'^^'^
'''^
,^,
'
vypaL ; ^' /^
79
^ /3(', 6
17 Deut 14^8
2
5 f
Lev
29
11
|
Lev
22
|
G
(e\î7S)
Eus
-/cois
]
Eus'
]
Eus
8
Eus'
'/?] +
7
oi/cojO^t/cws
Eus*^
3 \oyov 6 Trepiep-yias
Trepiepyaaiav
eâiperov
Eus
a
ttjj/
Eus]
|
10
Teivuf
2con-^
cm
13
K
14
Eus
|
11 aTrayoi Eus'
]
Eus
pr ?!/
BPTZ
cett
| |
?? AP ''
|
$
Eus Eus
|
Eus
Eus'
Trept]
;/
19
cett
|
17
]
Eus
I
^/']
IB
21
;/ GI
Eus
|
-ÔTCS
/Sioi;
{-. )
;
Eus
Eus
23
Eus
-^ '/ .]
20
//^' Eus
22
^]'
cm
|
HKBPTZ
*{.
+
12
15
Eus
Eus]
e/c
Eus
Eus
Try
?,
;
,,
KTryviov
'
;(
. ^. /
etvat
545
,
OCA
-^
7 ;(70^ ^,
;)(
//^ ^
r;
15
, , ,^. , ,
/,
pLKu.
/,^ ,^. ^, ,, ^
|
yap
^ . ,^
'
-
, /^
<7> /.
^
18
,
6 1
(corr
^ ^77
Lev
^
Eus]
3
Eus"
. '.
yap
ff)
\
^rjv
, KAIG*'"^
yap
ii^
fif
ff
(Deut 14^
2 avroys
Lev
cm
I
G&)
TTjs
codd
evKa
GI) Ar codd
'
0/U..
Eus
15
Schmidt]
]+
I
BPT
Eus'
^ {'/
13
eavrovs.
-^ ^ . ]. . ^ $ . '^'] .
re
Eus*'^^*^
Eus
BT
01;]
7.
10
+ 5e
) Ar codd
Eus]
txt Eus'
Ar codd] Ar cett 6
Eua
\
Eus
HKAGIBP cm Ar ^^ ^"^ cm Eus
Eus']
(|
cett eKTedeiKe
HKAGIZ
10
7 oTrXas
Eus')
Eus, pro
12 exhibens
ol
Fortasse legendum
12
|
\]
14
/cat
HKA
19
Eus]
TOTTOS cett
20
77
Eus
I
]
|
codd et Eus qui Eus 16
legit
BPT
/cat
BPTZ ..
codd Ar
Eus]
pr t^s
{
.
|
$ BPT
ov]
eivai
Eus
(app.)
Eus
txt
Eus
18
Ar codd Eus
^ ]
cm
conj
|
yap aWoL
17 rpoTros
enras
';/
s. s.
35
546
In CO
<
.,
\'\
. // ^ ,- -^ 8 ' ^ 6$ ^, , ,
6
.
,^
API2TEA2
noiHCANTOC
yap
. ,
2
ff
,
1
(
.
Deut
7^^;
- - 8, < >,, ,
cTvai
^. ,
tl
|-
^^
cm
Eus
Eus
5 ;
+
|
)
yLtepos
7/306.]
$
12
]$
cm
+
Eus'
{ -.
GI
|
apxas
pr
Eus
18 19
(cum seqq
]
Eus]
.] ypa
16
] . $ ' .
Eus
6
77
.
Eus
cm Eus .]
/
|
Eus' ; ^^^
] '.
14
ff
Deut
6^
flf
deov
Eus
Eus'
/.
Eus
2]
<^
Eus
cm
cett Eus'
8 ewe9
txt
HAGI
10
Eus'
êtas
]
13 Eus)
BTÂ"^""^)
codd
cett Eus'
(cm Eus)
11
Eus' (cm
cm
Ar codd
|
14
]
om
.
+
Eus
15
Eus]
??
] .,.
pr
tois
|
' !/y|
(ras 3 litt)
tois
|
conj)
edd pr Eus
20
] ]
codd
cett
Eus'^
Eus
Eus
. , \
(.^,
LK7J
. '.
'
',
yap
.,
'^6''/^
tojv
547
,
';
/^
evpclv.
15
,, . ', , .,' ,^^ . . '' / ?

-^
/ . ,*' < >^- ',

.
'
["aAhC
' , ^.
6
,'^.
TeKvoTroul
^ ^/. ^ ^ ,
// ;
'
Xoyov
/, Jiov
'
T?y<>
)7
'
^'/3
/3,
'
./3
'
*
|
11
Lev
11^^
$
5
Eus
?)/'!'] pr
3
^
|
Eus
7
Eu.s
aXoyias
codcl cett
Eus'
Eus]
12
Eus
Eus
13
ets
|
Eus'
?)
Toirrois (cf
yap Diod 14. 68
.ypvs{. ^.
Eus'
Eus'
* Eus'
tois
^
Eus]
Eus']
cm Ar codcl cm Ar codd
om Ar
Eus'
Eus<=ddcett
.^
2
:ai
GIZ
2 f ;
.
|
4 eêdeadat Eus^
HKAGIBP cm ^^ ^"^
GIPZ
I
Eus']
cm Ar
10
ff.
yiperai
|
19 eTepots
21
Eus'
Eus)
yap Eus
)
j
ai/aipeti'
GI
24
'BPZ
17
aicaâ/acriai']
(13)
]
cm
|
eariv
23
77/3;^?7]
Eus
txt
Eus (om
Ar codd
352
. ^
548
API2TEA2
Kikevet
/.
'
/;^
Eus
^ / ', ^ '/ ? ? . , , / ^-^ , ^ , '. ^ ^ . } , .*

rrepl
6 SI
>
ovSkv
7?
<-, /^/, ^/, '

^.
/^,
iv
Trcpi
dvaretVci
7)^
/u.i/
eXeye
',
yap
, /
^'0
15
'
'17V
;(
Jos
^9
Eus*^
HKAGIBP
Eus Jos
2
''
g^ ov
I
.] /
o(ôJ,_sêyf\op]
3
{- )
^y^-j
Eus'
OTi
]
I
Eus
Xoyeiadai
re Eus'
G
Set
$
14
17
. ^7
(13)
-^
4
^
|
f.
ce\oP
|
Eus
Eus'
9
^, ^
Set/cfi/wj'
Eus
Ar codd
Eus
ti/a]
6
?
3]
Eus
Eus
Ar codd
12
Eus']
/cat
'
\
Ar codd
|
Eus
Eus
Eus] aet Ar codd
BPTZ
Eus]
^]
omissis
] BPTZ
11
10
om
Eus
/cat
HAGTZ
BPTZ
aaas
txt
Eus
Eus /cat to/c/^res

| I
^ . ^^ .']
Ar codd
16
cett
13
/, om Eus
|
18
Eus
20
(-eXei I
HKP
(B
-)
21
BT Eus] Ae^'.] + /ct
codd wpoffayyeWei G
--^ ATZ)
(17)]
om
Euso
om
/^ |/
7
5
^ttcrtXea
15
. ^ ^ / , . /, ^, ^ , / .,/,, ^
/
'AvSpcas
. <> 7/ ) ^. , /^ ?
Trcpi
549
'
eis
<;
'
,^,
"
^;
'
'//^,
.^
-^
''/
, , , ;^" /, . /, '/ , ^. ^, ] \ .{ ] { ] ] $ ^
;^
'
^
5
< 4>, 7 ^'^, /^

/' ^,
/, ^,
yap
ry
;^
,,
'
HGIZ
5e
txt ex conj
|
HKAGIBP
-'^
Schmidt
pr ras
$
9 15
GIF
7
pr
edvos
txt cett
cum
Jos"^**^
(TTepieê^'ef)
(etpy. I)
HKcon-GIBPTco-T
BT<=o"]
$] \$ BP ] BT cm --^ (- *) epyaevs A
Jo?)
BZ
Fort leg
wapa]
PTZ
5 airav-
eOvovs
eBvovs
txt ex Jos
ev
fort
HP
10
rovs
11
12
7rapa7e;/o/AeiOi's
14
cm
tois
|
BTô""
ttjs
t7?s] tois
16 ave|
TLVos cett
'5 ]
Jos]
5
Jos)
21
'' ^
HKAGI
17
GIB*P
23
{-. GIPTZ)
cett
'. .
Ar codd
20 ovtivos
BT]
^ , '" ^^/ (. ,^ ^ ^ ^ /. />, ,^. /. /, ,)< /. ^ * ,

vTrepTcivou
cts
/X6V09
. ^, /, / ^ ^. ,' ' ,^, , '. / -. ^' /, ^ , /,> 6/ , , .' . ^, , ///. ^ , ^S50
API2TEA2
haKpveLv
tcv^^t^,
^,
,'
^*
<'
<^>
15
^- 2
'-
'
/
pr
Ti/UTjs]
KTrep
ins
P^s^
Tiêytiai
I
] cm
|
;/ /]
(6)]
cm
|
^-'''
/fat
TrpoTeti/at]
irpobovvai
hab Bîdx*supiin
cett
cm
|
BZ
10
ex conj]
|
HKGI]
^]$
14
OS ;/] OS (ws
17 at Tois
-^ {- ) )' 5]
codd
ats
cett
11
f.
15 18
ois cett
txt ex
rexi (fort at
praeferendum)
cett
|
/3
23
Jos
ToaonTaiS
21
f.
'^/)705] -^. /
(sed ras
20
21
' $) ( ; ^
12
2]
HKAGI
om
txt cett
tois
cor-
19
;/
litt int e et
75 )
et
om 7
Jos]
w
24
(23)
in
cett
raîv 6
., ,' . / , ^ ' , ^
yap
eKcXevacv
Tovs 8e
-^ ', ^? 69, ?
iavrov
ovokv
ot
^,
^
^^
551
eTrtrcXetv.
//^'-''
/^ ,/ /3,
-.
15
'
)7?
-^ ,
^'
20
^ ^, ^ ) ^ ; ', ^ , ^"
(^
^
^,
.^
^ Jos
/3
|
'.
10
/]
Jos
? .% /
B"^&
|
Jos]
Ar codd
9
6 ots]
f.
' HKAGIBP
"^
Jos
Jos]
cett
etTre]
ad hoc
add t fit
G'"* ei I""^
\$
BTZ
2]
om A
|
11
+
sup
12
lin in
om
18 yap]
)
1
19
'^'^
suprascripto
).
^/? *
mutatum est. lacuna D*)
Hinc
* .
F
19
txt
H*AGI 20 /codd
in
22
habuisse videtur, sed
D^
*^] {
^'^
cum
(^/
552
a^LOL,
6 8e
6
V
. 7^;^ ^; , ,
^0
^. - /, ^, ^ 6< < ^7 -
API2TEA2
19
ct
/ ;
Ei
^ ., ^// ^/^^ 6
7?
^ .
'
^, ;
^ ^< ./
erepov
etrrcv
;
^/ '
euepycTct
rj
iv
.^
e^ô/xevov
^*
^ , ^
^
vyctav
T-rj
rrepl
^'
--'
;)(
'
;>^
^' / /' <>

rj
^,
15
_>^ //
^
|
$<
Oeov
eTpov
<7>
6
tVj
25
1 /ierariêts] -pot?7 '^"'
10
omn
21
]6; ? *(
13
+ re
(-)]
cett
|
cett
eirepurra
12
yevoLO
|
'"'
18
(14)]
^ ^
4
7
3 iravras
/]
23
/
|
I
|
'"&
codcl
cm
altera suprascr)
|
2]
cm
codd
22
cm
rats
I
BPTZ
HAG
G
eiSei;
/55
25
?]
BPTZKôrr
ex conj]
26
et
cett
ottXois
|
'/'] cm
/14
19 avTOis
] /)-
GI
5e
et?? (oiei
B) codd
5 etr;
' '
;^
15
-. .
25
,. . ^ )
),
16 19
' .
6
. . ^ - ., ^ < /, ^/ . , '
553
Kcva
ctTre
]
oTt Oeo^
SevTa Oeos
^C
<7 ..>
^
/^
_)(/
'
-, , ^/.
^
, .] *<;
Trj
'
[
pr
'
;
Jos
cm
pr
|
]
18 28
BCTZ
]/ (
cett
toitoi-j
9 e/cyoiOts
12 e/c7ovois
cm
GI
cett
|
*$
13
|
10
="" HKAGIB
14
yeyovaaiv
21
om
ou
|
^^^^
Js
20
om
BC)]
23
elijs 2]
om
27
CTZ
24
cett
29 0X1701$
Jof.
- , '', , /. ,^ , ., , . '
554
API2TEA2
dpTrj,
avvUvat
otrtves ck
8eov
Epcrptevs
eiTre
^'
^
}
^-/
^ ^ ^/ " , ^ , , .^ ' /5
;
^ ).
.
57
^^'
/.
;
//
51
-'^
cm
(15)
cett
{24
]^ ']
19
cett
cm *"' ^") +
^/ /3, ;^ . /^ ] . //] ];
/ ^, , ,
7;^
6
., ('
-^
15
25
Mfi/eStîos
cm
5e
(10)]
cm
13
ins
&
15
cm
KB
B"'&
16
18
BCT
-/?
cett
22
cm C
|
cett
^" ] *
|
ayei
21
23
KB]
|
25 '
26
cm
êos
27 post
fort
//
vel aliquid simile excidit
7' ^/
5
' / ... ^'

el
eiTre
7/3
^ ^ ^ / ^^ . ' ^ ^ ^, ,. ^ /, ^/, ^, ^ ,
el
. ?, ^,, ^
.
yap
6
elrj ;
555
/act'
ev
tojv
15
//^ ^, \ ^ .
^
eTepov
2 TTpaaaeis
^^ , , ^ , -, ; ^ '^ ]
;
^ ,./5 ^, '.
tXeov
-]
,
;
^' ^ '6
ivepyei
/,/
yap
^.
lartv
^^^
2 f
/^
| ^.
6
oyoLO.
6'
^'.
4 vovdereis
I
9 *''* ins post
14
17
om
pr
23
.] ]
' HKB
/ftats
KBCP KBPT
..
av
6.
jSouXt?
HGCZ
om
tovs viroTTay. 7
om cm
BCTZ HKAGIB
B ^^^^
i]
tovs i
om
Z*
ins Z'="'
(cf
I
Mace
26)
om
e^T/s
K&
]
16
KB
cm
|
11
'
cett
]
\+
|
8
atTtas
BT]
airtats
HKCPZ
12
GIA
GI
pr
T77S
om
13 eavrov
;?
|
om
'
+
(ras
2
evepyet
om
20
CPZ
litt)
|
22
om
24
] '
|
yve
+
19 deos]
]
codd]
fort
evvorjaa-
legendum
556
,
erepov
/. ., , '^ ^
;
-.
^^
, , .^, , .
API2TEA2
evvoei,
KarcTratveVds
erri
ctvar
L7re
'^ | /' , ^|. ^ ,^ /^ '', <> ^, ' ^ , . / ^ )^,, ,^ / ^ |^' ^

v
<>
^cos
yap
/xcv
17
^'
8'
'/3
',
/3,
is
ry
/.
^
3
,
cm
4
et] eis
/
GIP
cett
cm
. , $
|
|
'
' ^ ^.
C
f^r/i'
12
fcai
GICZ I cm i] om
|
77
11
9 toi;s uttjovj
10
excurrit in
mg
sed prima manu)
BCPT]
aL] + as
cm
scurus
?
13
KGIBT]
(15)
HCPZ
cm
''^' ins in
A
mg
01
""*"^
|
^
16
??
GICPZ
]
os
14
KGICPZ
codd
|
Locus perob15 18
tois avTOis
17
21
om
?]
24
19
vel os
codd] Fortasse
^'^' '^"
$
|
20
7^7
TOVTOL<i
^' / ,
>)
15
;
. ^ ',- ^. , '' -, ,' '^ , ^ '' ^, /^ ^

;(
^ . , ^, . , > ^ 55 7
Se
1.
Siavorj,
^^'
rr/i/
6 8e ctTrev
TTcpl
' , '-.. /, ^
yap
<
^^,
,'
^)7
,^, ^?
'-
/
'
20
,. , ; 8 . ,
/
,
^ ^^?
-)
,'^
25
.-,
^
(avros
, /?,
6
\
6'
]
,'^
^ ^
]
|
;^ CZ
(post ras)
3 Xeyeis
5 5et
Schmidt]
povvTes) sup lin
C +
14
5
cm
. .
11
|
codd
) codd
;] + 7 GI
|
Ota cett
/
|
ex conj]
(-.
?!/
21
)]
/
24
BCTZ
(
|
7}^^
10
corr Schmidt] eXele;/ codd

(13)]
cm
15
13
rwl'
'^")
+777^
^>}] +
*^'^
^)
23
25
$ '
auTots conj
(in
HKAGIB
CTZ
18
19
20
cm
|
''
*
^'^"' (-^.)
(corr
et
?] s
';'
HGI
ro]
cm C
558
API2TEAS
navres yap
</9
/ , ^^ . , ^^ ) . ^^; ,. ^ // , , ' ^* , ' ,. // ^ ' ^ ^, ^. ' / ^. . ;

SwavraL'
/3
yap
.
eTepov
^^,
'
cwoiav
;('
.11
SwatveVa?
'
^^'/,
/'
yaop
/7,
ryjaiv
'
6'
%vooXoya
eyLv \
-^
I'CON
=5
eiTTtts
10
TeXeiTat
20
] 2
?] ?
/
9
|
22 Deut 13^
6
cm
|
11
15
5et
18
21
12
]
etvat
]
sup
|
.
GI
lin scr
irpos tous
*"**
]?
cLirev
GIC
13 otovrai]
17 19
et
( omisso) *
CZ
23
22 eyKpLveiv
? -/]
-rrporevovaa
om
GI
24
cm
26
om tis
(corr
^)
15
25
, ,. , , . "^ ' . /,^ ^ , , ^.^* ], ' . ' ^. <> ^ ^ , ,8' , , , . ., ), '^ avTjj
Ttves
' 7 /
ctTre
.
69
8 ; )( 7 ' 9 -,
erepov
;
-.
$ov
'
^
559
el
^^ ^^
evvoiav, ^
'
/-)
êoi)
yivoiTo
ttJ
^',
/-^
>)
>;/
^^^
^
deov
'
^^
,
*
11
1 yap]
.
^
| \
txt cett
$$
3
BCPT]
ots
$
|
cett
]
BC)
+ ei
Ttiês
ayaOov
/37]
ISomraKBCTZ
cm
HKAGI
cett
] $ ? $-"'^^ (fin
CT*Z
ex corr)
14
/^
25
* $
CPZ
5 eairepKas
rubricator)
HA
ewoiav]
(del
10 07;']
|
|
;
cm
om
HKAGIB
CPTZ
07?
; ( )] cm
12 ai/rofs
inserui
15
codd (cum lacuna post
19
22
27
BTH"^"""]
'^
(20)]
|
]
cett
, )^ -^ ,
56
^
8c
,, .?// /
22
<
^,
OS
, ^, / ^ 7 ^' . , ^ ^ / ^ ^ '; ^ '/,' , ^^ , ; ^ ;

'
eiTTc
^/
cIttc
?;,
Tt
8e
; ^ // ^^^
e^s
t
;
-^
fav
. / ,
?(^r7
'
^7
?
; ;
/^
/15
'
^^ ^/ ^ .
/
;
^
2
6 eKeLvo
^
9
, ' ^, /' ,
^*
|
* $ ^
|
tovs] tol^ I
3
|
7
|
^]
G
et
BCPTZ
10
\$ ]
etire
cett
|
12
-^ .)
18
cett
I
cm
;/
C
IB
et?;]
pr
ai/TuiroTiêts
GICZ
15
|
txt (fort recte) cett
16 ;
p(-*j*vid
ins
'
$
om
/ ]$)
pr
19
] pr
(?
* *
^ 7/)'>7
17
(post ras)
22
KAôrr
cett
]^
4
8
70'eufftv
ttjs
'
20
] * $ . .
cm
bis scripsit
13
14
^(;/
A*GITZ
om
eariv ai]
BCPTZ
|
cett
24
GI
'
|
^^" '^'-']
77^'^5
/]
j/OMtfo/xei'
23
/ '^'^]
^^^^"-]
(24)]
cm '"^
avvepyes cett
15
, 7. ^^, ^ ^^ /^ ^. ^ ^,, ;^^ ^. ,^^ ^ ^ ;!^ , , /^, ^ '^, ^' ^ 7><: / , ) ^' , .^ <> , ^, ,. . ^
(us
<,
. ^ ^/ ^^ '
1
56
i$ eavTov dStaXvTOv
/actcl
oe
,
;
<..>
tKercvetv,
TT^s
(.
^75
/^
TL
^,
;>^
Ti75
^
;
|
' / .
Tepov<;
^\
/'-
-^
, . /
1
-^
2-
sup ras
?
/
êoi^
conj
Wendland]
?/
codd
ex ottws T^^^
cm
etTre
13
16
17
Tcorrvid)
Xiacs (-eiats
TLvetv
C
cett
gvid'J'
-]
|
^^ ? /cm ;/ 7$
\oyov
|
CZ
eWeiTret
codd TLva ^""
'']
18
(as
15
^;/
(-etas)
irpos
GICZ)]
e|et
vwepTeivovT
*
|
*
+
sup ras
20
add
'^"')
codd
/ ;{ ^- ]
3
ts
in Kluois
HKAGIB
^^TZ
awavras
8
'^''''
(-tis
)
|
cett
Trpos
19
virep-
'^'''"
22
cum praecedd
conj
edd pr
23
(re C)]
om
s.
s.
36
562
22
] -; ? ^
, ? ^, '. ^ , . ^'/,, ^ ,, . , ' ,^ , <> ,, ,' . " ^, ^ ,

ctry,
,
^)
-.
<7>* ]
Tvepl
^
^'
<>
'
yap
act
naprj
^tJv
'
7^
,/
^, . ^ avoo\oyevo
<6>
,/,,
. , . ^, ^, /3. % ^ { ^ / $ ^] ; $ ('
#cai /-^
^ ,
6
'
. '. ./ / .^,
oveiSo^,
^^
15
yap
]
11
|
,^
:7^
'' ,
, <> 2^ /,, hUôhov
^,
'
G)
Tts ei
GIK
7
cett
conj Schmidt
cm
cett (spat 5
vel 6
litt
hab T)
4 eKjovuu
A cm
| |
cm
13
12
II)]
cm
cm
/ codd
plevi
15
17
[\
I
cett
]
*)]
yevos]
j
7''"^c''f'*'i']
cm
|
yevo^
cett
14
-^ CZ
|
cm
cm
18
/] :
codd
23
I
cett
1
\
; ?
C
1
|
PCZ cm
partim sup ras
20
1*
om
. (
|
/ ^?
GI
|
codd ex conj sup-
^""'^''
16
epi']
|
aipeiv
GI e/j/jti/ PZ BCTZ] ^19
AGICZ
*^""^)
|
]
|
om
(Lpyov.
^
tj/ai.
15
' , , ^6, - ^ ^ ,' 0 , /, . / ', ^, <> ), | ^. ^> /, /?^/, ^ /? '' ^^ *^ ^, ^/ ,

^t,
^'
yivoiro
;
.
';
clTre
et
5^3
,
'
et
Oeos
,
/
hiOLKii
-^
, < , .; ^, ^
;
'
Oeov
, .
^.
2
25
/' ^. ^ ' / '^^ ^, - / ]

'
^// ^ ;^; ^
'
3
|
,, ^ ^
/>/
"
/?-
^-
/, ^. /,
HKAGICZ
|
|
icat
<>
|
''-'
6
^/
7
ctti-
] cm cett
^^^
HKAGIB
^/] +
I
] cm
11 13
;/
<^"
cm
14
10
/] +
codd
cm
cm
''^
HKGICZ
?
17
21
CPZ ' ('
eêi
ex conj] 20
C)
cett
*
25
]
-/
(pro
1
?)
eiTras
HGICZ
txt cett
$
|
7'OAieiOS
23
7;;' GIZ*
26
cm
^
19
{-. *)
]$*
22
15
24
cm
at
codd
362
564
avTOLS
^/, -^ 8<;
yap
^ ^^ ^
yap
;
' ? . , /, -^ ,, ^
API2TEA2
cittcv
/xeVry
;
<;
^.
Tr)v
,
/^
,^ /, , , ,
6
,. , ^ [^^]. < , ^ .
eivre
/3
^"
8.
1/
SLeâyeLV.
/5,
7'
. , ^ .
)-
is
,
|
^ .
6
' .
so
/^ ^' ] ] '
1
.^
cm
4
^,
25
'
16
(TTLTeKoL (2)]
?.
|
|
yu?;-
GI
11
13
7'
|
'7'^6
6 avros] avroLS
cett
15
Fort cf
TTtei;'
etc vel
e^Tjs
pro
)] hab codd omn KBP legendum

|
{-
KAGI
18
|
cett
txt cett
cm
ets
19
77
20
vel
fact in
17 yivo-
23
] cm
22
txt cett
5et
ex
cett
post
ins Z'^"'
24
25
a^tois (1,
pag 565)]
om BPTZ
5 eTTtre/Vet.
(, ^. / , 67 ,;
SI
'/?,
iv
TYj
-]
- , ^^ / /^ .' ^ .) ', ^
^.
. <
ivepyeia
5^5
ay
/',
15
^/ 7;!((> , 3 /' /. ^' / <;'

,
6
;
25
. /. ^ ,. ; ,^ . , , ), ^ ;^
'
;
-, . - ^ ' ^. ^ , ,
'
6
6eo<i
ay..
yap
<,>
)(
6'
8$
^/
'
)7
'-
/)
1 Tts]
/3]
/''' HGIPZ
11
] ' /5 /^/?
j
GI
|
erepov 8
?;/' *''*
j
"^^)
/
13
'^'
?]
cett
QXBvidxfortexcorr
(/
*
'")
21
10
.^] weiaas ^^^ eiwas '"^'
(-?
'='''')
14
19
ayLa
23
$
txt
cett
15
17
f
20
22
GIA
|
]$
//69
GI
25
{ ] ]]?
pr
^Trpos
HKAG1B
HGI
^. ^ .^ ? / . '^ \ - ^ ' ' ( / ^/ ' /^/ ^ ) , ^, /'

KcpSatvetv.
, , ^7/
TrXeovcKTetv
566
APISTEA^
^>y
Mept^va
ct?
^}
-^' 6 . 2 , . ', ? ' ] ;( "

yap
ctti
cittc
erepov
eiTrcv
<;
yap
epyv
eTriTeXcia,
-^
^;
^^.
/' ''
^
/5'/7;
3
, ,^ .
6
/3;
ij
, . ^^. '^ ,
6,
Vpya-
^^
,
0?
cm
|
'
yevov,
(?)
txt
cett
|
$ * ]
biaTTipeLS
8 dpaavvas
?
1
* ( ^")
*
|
KB
5
9
eiravayayovai '^^"" eiravayuv

(ex
fact vid)
iravras
BTJ
(11)]
cett
;/
]
cm
yap
cett
13
tous cett
(]
12 jg
(- ) ?
^^""
5
|
(rat del rubricator)
GIZ
10
KGIBT.
'* "
|
7*^^
Ad
hoc notat yap
"'^
(rubricator)
KPT]
*^"'^
excidit
|
AGI
20
0.
-]
23
(1,
17
GIH (-)
fort
21 post
om
cett
24
^poâpayvovv
^.
]
'/.
/^
)
pag 567)
-), 7 ,
<>
;
.
6
Aeyo/Aej'ov
).
/
^'
,
6
;
?;
ttXclovl
^
6
15
' ., , ," , ^" ' ^.

'
6
;
. /
;
'' ^ . ^,
;
, ,'
' 6$
^ ,
5^7
'
^. ,
6
25
./ ,
, /^),
6
1
| |
^
*
]
|
HKAGI
8
tou]
|
ex corr] 5
codd
omn
cm
C
CZ*
14
11
] ]
codd omn
bis scr
cett
.
(fort
Tives
.
ex
CPZ
edd pr
/)
. .
18
-b
-/
' $ ''
ryp.
{txt
9 ecwev]
sup ras
eiTras
)
GICZ
22
|
']
cm
12
KAGIC
2'^]
QIC
|
21 avTois
26
ABCT
-^
. ,
yctv
;
/ / -,<>^ . ciTrev
, ^ <7> . < - ,
568
api2tea:s
'
,
/.
evepyeret^
^ .
. ^;
Swap^CL,
/?,
;
. )() . ,
et
Se
tcrov
^ ^--^ "
9
^0?
;^ -
Oeov
Tepov
.
}
1
;(
]] ( '
2
/ . ^ ^^ ,'' ,, ^ .
,,
<ei>
?;
<7^>
,,'
';(
/?
codd
'
15
25
conj
Schmidt]
7
*) %
15
CZ cm
HGICTZ*
inserui
24 TOUS
'.
|
^
GI)
'"&]
|
cm
|
12
'\
cett
8 5ei] 5e
oi;/f
13 TeAoi;fTos
GICZ
(corr Schmidt)]
14
^;
'"&
]
os
21
*]
..
. '''
cett
16
cett
^
17
[|
22
cm
tois
27
'^'
15
25
' ?) ^^ , \, . ' ^ 88 . / . .? ?- ) ,] , . ^^^ ^ , ., ^ . ^., ^ 569
, , ^;
rot?
.
<>
)^,
^
i^ lSlwtov
, .ay
Tjj
ian
)(}
)(
,
;
So^y]
ev
;^
^'/
//.
Jos
^^
(1
1
ot
cm
/ -/)]
(ex
]
557
1
BCTZ
|
HKAGI
|
aCKs
cm
6
cett
Tives
KB*
autem
g,
:
14
HI
codd
cett
24
-- -'/
infra
]
17
|
8 9
KB
*"'^
C)
21
11
( $
4
5
pr
HKAGIB
CTZ Jos
cm
*)
cum praecedd
13
conj Schmidt (sic
GICT*]
CB^'^^
HKABT^^''''
C cm
23
] cm
cett
18
22
cum
""?
|
restitui]
roj'
'/']
GI
19
).
Cf
Jos
, '
570
^X^t-v.
Jos
, . ' , -?, ^' >; , . ,) ^ . ,/ ' , ), . // -. ^ , yv^' , /^ , ,, , , , . ^ ^ ^ ,^/ ^^, ,

.
API2TEA2
'
yap
',
:^
yvovov
^^payva
^^payvov.
^ , . ),
', ?
yap
15
dvaypa
yap
vyv
vayypavv,
25
HKAGIB
CTZ
Jos
/7;5
cm
12
yiv.
]
j
cett
IIGICZ
18
weir pay
|
] { 7
as
2"^]
cett
20
21
res (22)]
avayey
22 ekeyxd-q
iroos
CZ
Jos
|
$ ^ \$ 8 5e2] +
wsB
15
cm
|
rat I
cm
19
7'
C
]
16
cm
|
/]
cm
CZ
yeyove
txt
{-^
GI)
iravres
codd
cett
26 5ia/3as
ypav
Jos
-^),
< ,
^,
6
^
15
,
-v
<.\1/> ^',,
., , -^ ,. / , /. ' ,. ,^ ,
571
-^
-^
. ^'
yap
'
25
.
1
^, , ,^
',
^.'^
*, .
2
^; ,
, .
//6
Jos
yap
,
{)
C
|
$
9 avrois
CZ
3
]
7
BCTZ
Jos]
;/
G
cett
primum
cett cett
aliud scripsit
quod postea
14
Jos
15
cett
j
(-/.)]
^corrvid)
0/3
23
24
^(
ras
5 rais
?
cett
|
Jos
H*GICZ
77101'
HKAGIB
-'^
part sup ras

|
HC]
10 Aopodeos
erasit)
13
AIC^"^Z
16
GI
?] ] *eis
BCTZ
(sed
codd
CT]
18
/^/
25
20
21
HKA*GIC
^.
/3
/cat
Jos
Eus
, 8, , ^, ^/ - /,/ '; . ', ///' , 9 , ^^- ( , ] ' \ , ^ ^. ^, , ^ "; -572

19
' -,
tepet?
rj
API2TEA2
yeyovore?.
Sk
tc
^
et
'Ettci
^ ^' , . ^. ^^ , ^. , ^/ . ^ ' ^ / ^ , ^' ' . ^ /, ,

'
Îprj-
^
ly
eLirov
.\.
<.
/ . ( {
aivvaa
/'
;
"-
^'
yap
^,
iSoê
eiTre
^
2]
7?
Eus'
ex Jos confirmatur
Eus^^^]
Jos
fcaô
aovTos
Eus%evovrs
19 22
^ ] ] '/ '/7/3 $
1
/]
/cai
I
*
|
cm
\
Eus
pr
Eus
cm
?
I
om
Eus
10
Eus'
Euso^''^) txt
om
Eus'
yLvqrai Eus'
|
12 eKeXevaav
|
K\vae
(-
Eus)
Ar codd
Eus'
Eus
avTois Eus
13
HKA
txt
codd
^''^
cett
Jos
[.)
GI
om
Eus
Eus
Eus'
\6
AGI
7?]
I
Eus'
Eus''
24
HKGIC
,
Eus
| |
17
KBCT
15 Eus]
Eus
20
KBCT
^"''^
Eus Jos
23
txt
om
Eus^
$
Jos
HK
Ar codd
Eus
^
HAGI
Eus]
txt
14
AGICT
|
AGI
15
, ^ /,
/
^?
2
., '7^ ,,^ / . , ^/ , , ,, . , ,^ , * //
573
Xearepov
^/ //
ay ey
<
ôV,
'
oveipov 81
êia
, ^;
et?
'/
eêi
-'
eiTTC
' '.
^,
]. /3 , ^ . ^ '' . ,
yeyovev,
Trepi
ot//ei5
^^" ,
,
iv Trj
otl
cv
eTTi/xeXeiav
eai'
TpeL<;,
.^ ^ '^
Tr)v
txt
', , ^^ ,'^,
"
4
6
767^7? B*CTZ*
BA"''"'
]
C)
/] '$\
1
? Trepi
irpoLaTopeiv
^
|
HKAGI
aveaiv
BCT
5
Eus
Ar codd
Jos]
/5 C
'/\ Eus (-. B^"-Zg

|
Eus
/3
A<^"']
Eus]
Eus
odtws]
Eus]
cett
om
/
13
7re/3t
^5
Jos 22
- ' ']
.
em
Cobet]
Ar codd
(/
|
CTZ* *
rots
]
eêii'
15
om
"yap
.
16
eêii'
7Xai;/cwêi77 Jos)
Xa/Seii/
cm
BT
?
/
Ar codd HKAGIB
Eus^ ^^^
^"'^
CZ
|
HKA*GI
Eus'
Eus'
|
Eus
11
irpoeLire
.
12
Eus
14
(om
Eus
Jos)
GIC
|
ê^ts eêt]
'="" (au^ts sup ras et
18
/.?
23
ex
efei)
'|^: BCTZ
ABT
Jos]
ê/its eêis
txt cett
19
cett
574
?
1[
, . /?
irX^LOva
Jos
2,
^'
HKAGIB
^'^^
J''
'?
powT-ai
/ ,. , .. , /, ^ ,^ ] ]
/cat
API2TEA2
//,
^
. , ,
+
|
iov
]'
'
^ ^^, //^, ^^/^'
/'
|
^.
Jos]
ets
?
10
Ar codd
9
cm
adnotat laws
bis scr
'"?
HKGICZ
GI
>
rotoi'rots I
] om *
|
]os
3 trpoaiins
KGICZ
11
HA
'
B^
|
cm
CORRIGENDUM
Page 539,
line
i.
For
$ $
read
INDICES.
I.
INDEX OF BIBLICAL REFERENCES.
II.
INDEX OF SUBJECT-MATTER.
INDEX
GENESIS
i.
378; 2, 327, 449, 459, 465; 305, 323; 6, 449, 459; 9, 326; 10, 459; 13 f., 134; 27, 53 ii. 2, 327, 413, 465; 4, 215; 7, 374 iii. 8, 449; 15, 449, 474; 20, 325,
4f.,
Iff.,
377
iv.
7,
1,
377 445; 2, 305; 3f., 472; 446, 465 ; 8, 243, 442, 474; 21,
XXX. 1, 307; 10 ff., 236; 11, 446; 14 f., x8 xxxi. 21, 326; 29, 442; 46 ff., 234 xxxii. 23 f., 378; 25, 18 xxxiv. 10, 325; 14, 326 XXXV. 6, 324; 11, 376; 16 ff., 234; 17, 27, 307 xxxvi. 1, 307; 33 ff., 257 xxxvii. 3, 445
xxxviii.
374; 24, 306

vi.
3, 446; 4, 2, 57, 329, 449; 305, 449; 5, 474; 14, 374 f.; 19,
xxxix.
xl. 17,
307
vii. 19,
viii. 7,
307 306; 21, 449 ix. 25, 374 f. X. 13-18, 2229, 249 xi. 9, 325 xii. 1, 40S; 9, 41, 326 xiv. 13, 32^; 14, 465; 23, 445 XV. 1, 308; 16, 330 f.; 9f., 378; 11, 322; 15,478; 18,374
xvi. 14, 478 xvii. 1, 376 xviii. 12, 374;
3^-7
306 378 ; 325 43, 446 xli. 2 ff., 21; 13, 306; 378; 56, 442 xliii. 16, 134
9, 1,
34,
304; 45,
xliv.
ff.,
21;
10, 442,
449;
19,
322
xlv. 16, 308; 34, 18
xlvi. 28, 378, 391 xlvii. 31, 445, 459
xlviii. 14, 445,
xlix.
466; 17 f., 89 305; 327, 360; 6, 446; 10, 416, 442, 449, 465, 474; 19, 236, 322, 446
3,
2426, 134;
25, 52,
i. ii.
EXODUS
307 f. 16, 446 476; 14, 307, 409; 15, 306 iii. 7, 308; 14, 327, 446 iv. 9, 305; 10, 371, 374; 16, 327; 21, 306 v. 9. 442; 13, 305, 459 vii. 2, 326, 449; 16, '69 viii. 8, 306 21, 449 ix. 3, 371 7, 306; 22, 449 xii. 8, 475; 23, 329; 26, 449; 40, 327; 43,326 xiv. 13, 308 ; 25, 442
;
11, 305; 12,

5,
xix. 3, 475 XX. 14 f., 18 xxi. 6, 478

xxii. 2, 449 xxiii. 16, 305
xxiv. 10
XXV.
6,
f., 327; 20, 375 324; 27, 329
xxvi. 18, 329

xxvli. 30, 378; 46, 460 xxviii. 13, 307, 375
xxix.
9,
s.
326
s.
37
578
Index
.
30^;
9,
XV. 121, 253 f.; 3, 327; 17, 374, 472; 27, 305 xvi. 15, 377, 446; 23, 475; 24, 305; 36, 465
XVii. 6, 479; 11, 306; 15, 446; 16,
xi. 2,
306; 25
f.,
305; 29,
308
xii. 8,
327
XV. 14, 329 xvi. 5, 322
465
xviii. 11,
306
ff.,
; 21, 472 xxi. 1, 305 ; 11, 308 xxii. 6, 305
xix. 1, 215; 16
24,
331
f.
xxiii.
710, 332;
9,
19,
XX.
5, 475';
1315, 234;
20, 57; 30,
23,
374
xxiv.
305
17, 329, 416,
466; 21, 459 466; 23,
xxi. 6,
xxiii. 2,
446 374;
f.,
307
xxiv. 10
XXV.
19,
53, 327 253; 29, 449; 40,
443; 24, 474 XXV. 8, 476 xxvL. 15 ff., 236
416
xxvii. 12, 449
xxvii. 21, 329 xxviii. 15, 449 ; 26, 326 xxix. 9, 472; 23, 475
XXXV.
2,
308
DEUTERONOMY
i.
XXX.
1, 475; 6, 442 xxxi. 7, 329 xxxii. 2124, 90; 32, 326, 446 xxxiii. 13, 412; 8, 305; 19, 465 xxxiv. 13, 449
17,
372; 22, 307
35, 305 iv. 1 23,

ii.
V.
vi.
1719, 234;
9,
XXXV. xl., 234 ff. XXXV. 8, 243 xxxvi. 4, 307 8 34, 243 xxxvii. 19, 472; 2528, 243 xxxix. 18, 449, 472 xl. 68, 11, 243
;
332 f. vii. 13, 40; 16, 308, 325 viii. 15, 372; 18, 375 ix. 5, 329
X. 16, 329, 449, 460 xi. 7, 305; 30, 41
xii. 8,
412; 37, 442

22,
416
375
16,
LEVITICUS
i 3,
xiv.
1218, 360;
21
17,
475;
475 466; 2729, 90 vi. 2, 306 xi. 5, 475; 17, 21; 35, 475 xiii. 31, 442 xvi. 4, 475 8 ff., 449 xviii. 5, 375 xix. 7, 327; 13, 305; 23, 374 xxi. 10, 308 xxii. 2, 472 xxiii, 3, 446; 11, 15, 17 xxiv. 7, 327, 472; 11, 475
iv. 5,
;
23, 327 xvii. 18, 215 xix. 4, 479
XX. 19, 446 xxi. 8, 328; 16, 374

xxii. 16,
xxvi.
2,
305; 29, 327 475 5, 322

;
;
xxviii. 35, 2
66,
466
xxix. 18. 479
XXX.
4, 2;
20,
372
f.;
xxxi. 18, 308

xxxii.
I-U3, 253
f.;
4,
375;
6,
NUMBERS
215; 24 ff., 236 lii. 24, 480 iv. 19, 472 V. 2, 375; 15, 475; 28, 479 vi. 22 ff., 236 vii. 15, 326 ix. 10, 307
1. 2,
466; 10, 305; 39, 372; 43, 243, 305 xxxiii. 1 44, 253 f.; 12, 476
416
7,
JOSHUA
iv. 24,
327 V. 2, 446; 3, 466 ix. 3 ff., 236 f. X. 12-14, 333; 42,476 xi. 1014, 73
Index
xiv. 12, 328
I.
579
1112, 246;
14,
xxiii.
325
XV. 59, 442

xix. 47
f.,
xxvii. 10, 447
244
XX.
46, 244
xxxi. 10, 447
xxi. 36 f., 42 a d, 244 xxiv. 30 33 b, 244
2
i.
KINGDOMS
21,
18,
2,
JUDGES
i.
ii.
449 308
447
iii.
19, V. 8,
324; 480;
f.,
35, 15,
446 45; 16, 459; 28 30,
39, 305 iv. 6, 377, 443 vii. 12, 302

viii. 5,
vi. 2
306;
7,
306; 18, 308 viii. 3, 305; 7, 324; 13, 446 ix. 26, 305 ; 42, 53
xii. 6,
378
446
f. ;
X. 14, 305 xii. 21, 446 xvii. 3, 443
xiv. 15, 443
XV. 14 fif., 446 xvi. 13 f., 443

xviii. 30,
19,
476
xix. 42, 405 xxii. 2 6, 316; 3, 306 xxiv. 6, 443 ; 15, 446
447
3
ii.
xix. 18, 443; 22, 449
RUTH
ii. 2,
35 iv. 17
a 0,
fif.,
KINGDOMS 46 a 247
1,
;
237
iii. 1,
306 306
9, 14,
305
22,
306
I
i.
KINGDOMS
1,
245 ii. 1-10, 253 f.; 6, 472; 9 f., 245 f., 409; 12, 449; 29, 321 ; 33, 442 iii. 6, 308 14, 17, 308 13, 442 iv. 1, 442 ; 10, 321 V. 6, 327 f., 443 vi. 11, 15, 325; 19, 443; 20, 321 vii. 4, 325 ix. 22, 377; 24, 476; 25,443 X. 5, 447; 14, 305; 21, 443; 22, 308 xii. 2, 322; 3, 443; 8, 321, 443 xiii. 20, 459 21, 447 xiv. 18, 41 f., 443 XV. 22, 417 23, 41 xvii. xviii., 245 f. xvii. 3743, 33i f. ; 47, 475 xix. 13, 377 XX. 19, 443; 30, 447
;
; ;
327; 442;
322, 324; 5, 326; 8, 306; 14, 20, 377; 24, 26, 308, 324,
28,
475 475 48, 475 f., 237; 39, 472 53 a, 247 X. 2333, 238 f. xi. 38, 239; 34, 451 xii. 24 z, 248 f. xiii. 12, 447 xiv. 6, 305 25, 3 f. xvi. 7, 11, 26, 43, 51, 253 ; 28 h, 249 xvii. 1, 444 xviii. 22 28, 83 f. xix. 14 flF., 401 XX., xxi., 239 XX. 10, 12, 39 f. xxi. 1013, 35
vii. 17,
viii.
v. 13,
17
xxii. 38,
466
4
KINGDOMS
;
i.
f.,
ii.
11 18,
447
18 a
d,
249
335
f.;
14, 324,
476
V. 7,
viii.
vi. 5,
306 253 13, 447
xxi.
7,
321
xxii. 9, 377
xvi. 9, 41 xvii. 6, 3; 15, 45; 29, 307 xviii. 17 XX. 19, 316 xix. 25, 41
372
58
xxiii.
hidex
;
I.
2124, 36, 39 f. 2427, 3133, 249

flf.,
22
f.,
447
xiii.
13,
2,
a c,
9,
251
f.
xiv. 9, 472
xxiv. 14
3
f.,
XV.
3
;
444;
460
XXV. 11, 21
1
20
flf.,
275
xvi. 9, xvii. 3
326
ff.,
i.
1016,
CHRONICLES 17 b 23, 249 44

;
xxi.
f.,
257
xxi. 12, 321

2
15, 305
316 f., 326; 45, 413 306; 7, 407, 467; 9, 409; 17, 321, 413, 444; 30, 467 XXV. 6, 472
2,
CHRONICLES
xxvi. 13, 444 xxvii. 9, 472
308 8, 475 iii. 1, 306 iv. 11, 475

i.
XXX.
6,
3,
472
ii.
xii. 2 f., 3
xxxi. 1, 407 xxxii. 6, 467 xxxiii. 12 flf., 399, 407, 409 xxxiv. 2, 472
XX. 37, 305
xxix. 26, 253 xxxiii. 18, 253 19, 444 XXXV. 10. 305 19 a d, 249 xxxvi. 2 a c, 5 a d, 249
;
ESDRAS
9,
i.
266 ii. 3f., 378; 378

1,
48; 125, 266; 21,
iii.
v. 70,
266
41, ib.
iv.
xi.
724, 266; 28, 378

2
ESDRAS
xi. 9, 2
XV. 15, 327

xix. 30, 305
xxi., xxii.,
249
4
ESDRAS
xiii.
39
ff.,
xiv. 44, 221
PSALMS
i.
XXXV. 1, 251 xxxvi. 7, 460; 10 flf., 328; 35, 56; 36, 407 xxxix. 7, 417, 479 xl. 7, 327; 14, 255 xli. 3, 305; 6, 444 xliii. 3, 472; 5, 322; 16, 52 xliv. 1, 467; 17, 417 xiv. 13, 62 f.; 2, 33 xlviii. 12, 444 xlix. 10, 15, 417; 13, 21, 305; 21 f., 407; 24, 53.305 1., 296; 12, 471 14, 449, 471 ; 17, 407 Iii. 3, 305; 6,308 iv 1, 475 Iviii. 6, 472 Ix. 3, 460 Ixvii. 1214, 1822, 99; 26, 475 Ixviii. 3, 52; 27, 444 Ixxi. 5, 444; 1820, 255 Ixxii. 3, 475; 28, 306 Ixxv. 7, 460 Ixxvii. 2, 397; 3, 372 Ixxviii. 2, 25; 3, 372; 8, 472; 70,
;
25.S
1-5, 413
11
f.,
Ixxix.
2,
472
ii.
iii. 4,
459; 12, 466 326

;
iv. 7,
466
10, 251
Ixxx. 4, 475 Ixxxvi. 4 f., dd^ 467 Ixxxvii. 6, 467 21, 399
;
V. tit., 321 vi. 6, 251,

vii. 12,
viii. 4,
466
Ixxxviii. 5, 255; 8, 459; 21, 407 xc. 6 13, 37, 40, 460
5,
460 449
f.
ix. cxlvii., 239

ix. tit.,
475; 510, 38, 40; 13, 467 467 xcvi. 1, 467; 7, 243
xci. 4,
xcv.
f.;
466
17, 251
c. 5,
444
Index
Ci. 27,
,
ff.,
58i
407 305 449
417
V. 17
vi. 5, ix. 9,
cv. 48, 255

cvi. 20,
cviii. 5,
467 f. 467; 29, 475

305, 336, 409, 413, 417,
cix.
14,
f.,
468
472 417 cxv. 3, 460 cxvii. 25, 307 cxx. 8, 472
cxiii. 11,
X. 4, loi xiv. 12, 476 xviii. 20, 460
cxii. 5
xix.
17,
i",
loi;
18,
321;
2327,
^57
xxvi.
;
337
xxi. 27,
5,
460 460;
14, 52
xxvii. 12, 329

8,
cxxxviii.
tit., 2
408; 15
f.,
449
cxxxix. 4, 251 cli., 252 f.
PROVERBS
i.
ii.
1, 308 XXX. 13, 329; 30, 475 xxxviii. 26, 302 ^ xl. 14, 468, 472 xlii. 7, loi ; 17 a,
xxix.
28,
308 18, 449

5,
b e, WISDOM
25,
256
f.
iii.
15,
308
306; 11, 257; 12, 407, 409; 22 a, 28 e, 255, ; 16, 255

;
ii.
12,
vi. 7,
306
iv,
vi.
27 a
8 a
255 ^ vii. la, 255 viii. 21 a, 25

c,
vii. 24,
372 372 268

268 268
b, 255
viii. 7, 20,
ix. 15,
X. 6,
22 ff., 57, 386 f., 468,471; 30f., 336f. ix. 12 a c, 18 a c, 255 ; 18, 460
475 372; 17, 268 372 XV. 10, 372

xi. 4,
Xii. 8,
X. 10, 444
xvi. 22, 371

xviii. 4,
255 XV. 18 a, 255, 306 xvi. 17, 255, 306 xvii. 6 a, 255 xviii. 22 a, 255 xxi. 16, 460 ; 25, 407 xxii. 8 a, 255; 20, 468; 28, 61 xxiv. xxxi., 240 f. xxiv. 22 a c, 255
xii. 11 a, 13 a,
305
24,
475
SIR AC
prol., 217,
vi. 26,
269 475 XX. 19, 475 xxi. 4, 475 xlix. 10, 217 1. 27, 269
f.
xxvi. 11, 255, 400 xxvii. 20 a, 21 a, 255
ESTHER
B. C, D,
V. 4, 305 E, 378 F,
xxxi. 26, 255
378
ECCLESIASTES
i. 1,
258
ii.
17,
Iii.
^15 309 18, 360
JUDITH
V. 19, 2
vii. 10,
viii. 6,
iv. 9, 52 vli. 19, 460
TOB
ii. 9,
iv.
256 21, 407
305 272 ix. 11, 472 X. 2 flf., 272; xi. 13, 272 xii. 7, 272
5,
475
582
Index
L
1 9,
253; 26, 414 398 474
TOBIT
i.
V.
14
ff.,
Vi. 9 f.,
V. 15, 308 Xi. 14, 475
Vii. 14, 30, 469, viii. 14, 401
ix.
If., 396; 6, 469, 472; 8, 322;
ROSEA
xii. 4,
468
xi. 4,
AMOS
ii.
13,
V. 26,
ix. 6,
476 398
468; 11
f.,
329 469 417 xiii. 9, 305 xvli. 13, 460

14, X. 23,
xix. 19
f.,
XXV.
399
MICAH
iv.,
316
f.
V.
1^,
91, 338,
396
vii. 19,
417
JOEL
ii.
25, 471
9, 417 253 xxviii. 11, 402 16, 399 xxix. 4, 52 ; 10, 401 11, 18, 91 13, 321, 409, 417 XXX. 1 fif., 4; 4, 469 xxxiii. 24, 305 xxxvi. 1 xxxix. 8, 316 xxxviii. 8, 449; 1020, 253; 21,
8,
;
xxvi. 9
20,
4 401
475
JONAH
i 3,
xl. 2,
475
xiii. 1,
ii.
310, 253
NAHUM
iii. 8,
395 ; 3, 395, 398 395; 7, 415 417 xliv. 28, 399 xlv. 1, 14, 469
xliii. 23,
322
xlix. 6, 2
HABAKKUK
11, iii. 1
ii.
Iii. 5,
liii.
414
3,
112, 410;
7,
469;
4,
397;
468
19, 2^3; 2,
468;
3,
417, 449.;
13,56
ZEPHANIAH
i.
413 liv. 8, 476 ; 15, 469 Iv. 3, 398 Ivii. 15, 472 Iviii. 6, 395
5.
10,
449
lix. 7f.,
251
ZECHARIAH
iii. 8,
Ix. 17, 469 Ixi. Iff., 395; 12,

Ixii. 11,
413
vi.
474 12, 468

322; 13, 397
395
Ixiii. 1, 9,
469
xi. 7,
Ixiv, 3,
401
xii. 10, 48, xiii. 7, 413
398
Ixv. 1, 417 Ixvi. 2, 408
MALACin
ii. 3,
iii.
JEREMIAH
ii.
444; 11, 46; 13, 51

395, 408
1,
ISAIAH
i.
17,
ii.,
iii.
417; 22, 468; 29, 305 316; 19,372 9, 468 f.
413; 23, 326; 26, 307 V 4, 305 vi. 23, 321 29, 444 vii. 16, 302 ix. 23 f., 245, 409; 29, 479
12,
;
xi. 15, xii. 15,
444; 19, 469 399
Index
xiii. 14, 2
I.
583
318 48
2, 2 7,
ix. 1,
XV. 4, 2
xviii. 15,
X. 20,
305
xii.
14, 339;
48
9>
417
xix. 13, 47i> xxiii. 33, 444
XXV. li., 241 f. xxvi. 15, 322; 25, 321 xxxiv. 17, 2 xxxvi. 1, 275 xxxviii. 31 37, 338
SUSANNA
54
f..
BEL
f.
;
37,
30
40,
324
i.
MACCABEES
xxxix. 19, 472 xl. 1426, 44 xliii. 31, 417 xlvi. 4 13, 45
4,
276
25 277
vii. 17,
xiii. 30,
xlix. 19, 476 li. 1 fF., 4
XV. 23, 7 xvl. 23 f., 277

2
BARUCH
ii. 3,
iii. 4,
MACCABEES
;
i.
27, 2
1
fif.,
1518, 48 275; 1119, 48 275; 37, 469 iv. 36 V. 9, 283 V. 2, 417; 30, 275
i.
10, 275;
ii.
vl. 19, 30,

vii. 6,
viii. 1,
275 7, 13; 23, 277 372
475
3
MACCABEES
LAMENTATIONS
i.
1,
259
iv. 20, 469,
474
472 vi. 18, 280 vii. 42, 280

ii. 2,
EZEKIEL
iii.
4
i.
MACCABEES
f.
15,
vii. 3
460
9,
18.
280
242
viii. 10,
476
ix. 9,
307
xi. 21,
460
449
281 281 XV. 3, 281 xvii. 5, 281

ix. 9,
xiii. 15,
xiii. 18,
305, xvi. 21, 305 XX. 14, 302 xxii. 11, 305
xviii.
14
fif.,
372; 23, 281
MATTHEW
ii.
6,
396
f.,
xxxiii. 14, 407
iv.
15
396
;
xxxiv.
xl. 17,
4,
414 475
DANIEL
i.
2,
ii.
48 35. 48
26, 4;
451 18, 320 451 viii. 17, 397 X. 21, 35, 451 xii. 18, 395 xiii. 35, 397
V. 3
fif.,
vi. 6,
iii.
5290, 253
XV.
8,
440
;
V. 23,
48
xxi. 4, 395
33,
451
vL. 22, 47, 411 vii. 9, 48 10, 417,
497; 13,48, 57
21,
48
23, 26
f.
xxiv. 30, 48 xxvi. 64, 48 xxvii. 9f., 397; 32,
584
hidex
I.
MARK
i.
f.,
395
vii. 6, ix. 48,
409
f.
32, 451
451 xiv. 62, 48 XV. 29, 451
LUKE
iv.
18
ff.,
356, 395
vii. 27,
xviii. 20,
395 234 xxiv. 44, 217
JOHN
i.
22,
398; 51,451
vii. 35, 2
xu. 40, 398 xix. 37, 398
ACTS
ii. 9,
vi. 9,
viii.
104; 10, 7; 20, 33, 215 7, 104
vii. 43,
398
ff.,
32
398
398; 30,
15, 356; 22, 215; 34, 398 XV. 16 ff., 399; 21, 356 xviii. 24, 104
xi. 20, 7 Xiii. 1, 7;
JAMES
i.
1,3
11,
ii.
234
; ;
INDEX
A, 125 f., 352, 489 f.; ', 3^4 Abbas, Mar, 1 Abbott, T. K., 144, 456 Abbreviations in MSS. of LXX., 126, 364 f. Accidence of O.T. Greek, 302 Acts, quotations in the, 388, 398 f. Africanus, correspondence of Origen Avith, 60 f., 255, 260 f. Akiba ben Joseph, R., 32, 434, 440
1 fif.
II.
1
Armenian Version,
18
ff.
Artapanus, 369 ff. Ashburnham House, fire at, 133 Asterisk, 70 ff. Athanasius, 125, 203 f., 431; see Pseudo-Athanasius
Athias,
Hebrew
Bible
of, 9,
Augustine of Hippo, 223, 464

ayairrf, a'yairiqai.s,
-yuos,
Akhmim codex, the, 283 ff. Alexander, policy of towards the Jews, 4 f. Alexandria, its Church, 104, 413; dialect, 289 f. population, 291
;
libraries
and museums, 10 f., 16

293;
writers,
f.,
22
f.,
293,
312,
f.
369 ff. Alexandrine MS., 125 f., 352, 489 Aldine edition of LXX., 173, 486
, 3, ,,?, -, ,
456
45
343 88 f., 211,
;5
250 f. 362
'j'j
358
ff.
69
Ambrosian Octateuch, 135

Amphilochius, 205 Andreas Asolanus, 173
f.,
348
i26ff, 348ff, 375, 486ff Baber, ., 126

Aquilae,
;
Anonymi
18, 31
dial. Ti7)iothei et
ff.,
206
Babylonian Targum, 3 Barnabas, Ep. of, 48, 411

Barnes, W. E., 287 Baruch, book of, 48, 274
Bel, 260
f.
ff.
Apocalypse, use of LXX. in, 392 Theodotionic readings in, 48 Apocrypha, 224 f., 265 fif., 281 fF. vocabulary of the, 310 ff.; 'apocrypha,' 423 Apostolic canons, the, 219 Aquila, 31 ff., 53, 458, 476 Arabic version, iiof. colloquialisms in LXX., 319 Aramaic, 8, 319 Arian controversy, use of LXX. in the, 470 f. Aristarchus, 69 ff. Aristeas, 25, 369 ff.
;
ff.
Ben Asher, R., 434 Ben Naphtali, R., 434

Bessarion, Cardinal, his
MSS.,
132,
173
'Biblical Greek,' 456 Blunders in the version of LXX., 329 f. Bobbio Sacramentary, 213 Bodleian Genesis, 134 f. Psalter, fragment of Bel, 146 141 of Ezekiel, 148
; ;
371, 478; accepted as genuine in the ancient Church, 13 f.; introduction to, 501 ff.; text of, 519 ff. Aristobulus, i f., 12 f., 369 ff.
ff.,
'Aristeas,' letter of,
2,
10
Bible, 343 Brooke, A. E., 135, 189, 489 Burkitt, F. C, 34, 41, 47, 82, 93, III, 488 f. Buxtorfs, the, 436
Bomberg
586
C, 128 f., 490 Caesarea, 74 f., 357 Caius Psalter, 162
Index
II.
Cotton Genesis, 132

arriving at
ff.,
ff.
Critical text of the LXX.,

a,
method of
491
ff.
Cambridge
edition of LXX., 188
cuctirbita^
464
290, 496 Canticles, the book, 216, 360 Canticles, the Ecclesiastical, 141
f.,
253
in MSS. of LXX., 351 ff. ; in the versions, 360 f. Cappellus, L., 436 capsae, 225 Carafa, Card. Ant., 174 ff. Carthage, 88, 214, 493 Cassiodorius, 211 f. c. Nicephori, catena aiirea, 361 f 362 f.; catenae, 361 ff. Catharine de' Medici, 129 Catholic Epistles, quotations in,
Capitulation
Cursive MSS., 148 ff. Cyprian, 88 ff.. 92, 97, 428 Cyprus, 10 Cyrene, Jewish settlement at, 7 Cyrenian source of 2 Mace, 278 Cyril of Jerusalem, 203 f. of Alexandria, 231 C. and Methodius, 120; C. Lucar, 125
, , , ,
Kavbves
Kepeai,
359
73
125, 359
{),
199
389. 399 f Cells, story of the, 14 Ceriani, ., 39, 8o, 108, 113, 496 Chapter-divisions, 342 ff. Chase, F. H-, 470 Cheyne, T. K., 4, 240
, ,
320 225
Chigi MS., 47 ff., 166, 348 'Chronicles,' 216; the book, 249 Church, use of the lxx. in the Ancient, 27, 87, 433, 462 ff. cistae, 225 Citation, formulae of, 382, 408, 412; citations of LXX. in N.T. see Nezv Testament Claromontane list, 213 f., 279, 346 ff. Clement of Rome, 406 ff. ; of Alex:
, ^,
,
8, 48, 493
04,
$,
344
^
2945
^,
68,
64, 344 ^
D, 132 ff.; 146 Damascus, John of, 207 f, 223 Daniel, book of, 43 f., 46 ff., 113
f.,
andria, 13, 369
f.,
426
ff.
Cleodemus, 370
Coislin Octateuch, 140, 353
f.
Colometry, 346 Commentaries, 361, 429 ff. Complutensian Polyglott, the, 171 ff., 486 Concordance to the LXX., the Oxford, 290, 314 Constantinople, 85 Controversial use of the LXX., 470 f. Conybeare, F. C, 31, 1 18 f.
'Coptic,' 105 Cornill, C. H., 242,
260 ff., 311, 316, 356, 417, 421 ff. Decalogue, the, 234 f. Deissmann, G. ., 2i Demetrius of Phalerum, 2, 11, 18 f., D. the Hellenist, 17 f., 293; D. Ixion, 289 369 f. Desiderata, 289 f., 495 f. Deuteronomy, the book, 215 Dialect of Alexandria, 289 ff. dialects of the Egyptian versions,
;
105 ff
., 109 Dispersion, the Greek, 2 f ; the Eastern, 3 loyalty of the, 7 f. Distribution of LXX. MSS., 123 f. Doctrine, Christian, its terminology partly derived from lxx., 473 f. Dogmatic interest detected in LXX.,
Dillmann,
.
486 f. Corruptions of the text of early, 478 ff.
327 Dorotheus, 81
LXX.,
'Double books,' 220

Doublets, 325
hidex
Driver, S. R., 68, 234 ff., 246, 321, 429, 441, 481, 489 Dublin fragments of Isaiah, 144
. ',
d'ay -^, 456
,
5,
,
,
480
2
,, ,
359
,,
,
77
f.
587
65 36 1
F, 135
77
123,
f.,
348
Fayum.
the, 7, 291 Festival in commemoration of the
26
completion of the LXX., 13 Field, F., 41, 46, 82 f., 458

Foj-mula consensus
eccl. Helv., 436 f. Formulae of citation, 382, 408, 412 Fourth Gospel, quotations in the,
I34f; e'. 53 Ebedjesu, 208 f.
Ecclesiastes, the book, 316 Ecclesiasticus, the book, 269 Editions of Greek O.T., 171
ff. ff.
;
of
in,
particular books, 190 ff. Egypt, early settlements of

3 f
;
.
388, 398 Fragments, uncial, 146 ff
still
unworked,
Jews
evangelisation
versions,
of,
Egyptian
the,
104 f. 104
ff.;
G, 72
ff.
;
f.,
recension of LXX., 78 in LXX., 21 Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, R., 440
words
Emmanuel
Psalter, 164
Enoch, book of, no, 283 f. Ephraemi codex rescriptus, 128 f., 490 Epiphanius, 31 f, 66 ff., 204 f., 431 Esdras, the Greek, 48 f., 265 ff., 310; fourth book of, no, 285 Esther, the Greek, 20, 25, 75, 229,
257 ff. Ethiopic version, the, 109 f. Euergetes II., 24, 270, 280 Eupolemus, 24 f., 369 f. Eusebius, 64, 66, 77, 125
of, 215, 234 ff., 243 Ezekiel, the poet, 569 ff. Ezra-Nehemiah, 25, 220, 265 ff.
146 Genesis, the book, 215, 234, 243 Genizah, the Cairo, 34 Georgian version, the, 120 Ginsburg. C. D., 431 Gothic version, the, 117 f. Grabe, J. E., 125 f., iSsff. Graeco- Latin MSS., 141 f. Graccus Venetus, Graetz, E., 17 Grammar of LXX.. proposed, 290 Greek versions of the O.T. before LXX., 1 f.; the lxx., 9ff.; of cent. mediaeval, ii. A.D., 30 ff., 457 ff.
78,
137
f.;
'
234, 485
ff;
^.
56
ff.
Exodus, book
'paos, ,
, -, , $, '
, ,
3
1
Greek of LXX., 9, 289 ff. Greek, modern, affinity of LXX. Greek to, 309 Gregory of Nazianzus, 205
Grotta Ferrata palimpsest of the Prophets, 146 Grouping of books, 216 ff. ; internal order of groups, 226 ff. Gwynn, J., 48, 50
nVi2,
55, 82, 85
56 281
7'
oya,
,, ,
45^
361
23
8
294
Leos, ,
H,
i38f.
-'/$
55 28
,,
361
28 1
Hadrian, 31 f. Haggada, 327 f. Hagiographa, date of the Greek, 24 f.; distribution in the Greek
; ; ;
588
Bible, 218, 228
f.;
Index
inferior position
II.
Jashar, book
of,
246
assigned
to,
318
Halacha, 327 Haphfaroth, 343

Harris,;. R., 146 f., 274, 282, 345 ff., 411 Hatch, E., 256, 328, 406 ff., 428 f., 452, 455 ff., 460 Headings to chapters, 353 ff. Hebt-aica Veritas, 68, 86, 435 Hebrew MSS. of the Lxx., 22, 319 ff.; H. column of the Hexapla,
6^, 67 mediaeval H. scholars, 435; revival of Hebrew learning, 435 f.
;
Ignatius, 413 f. Jebb, R. C., 294, 309
text,
history of the official

, .
He-
brew, 319 f. diverse 438 ff renderings of the same H. words, departure of LXX. 317, 328 f. from traditional H. text, 440 ff. Hebrews, Ep. to the, quotations in, 391, 402 hedera, 464 'Hellenist,' 'Hellenistic,' 294 f.
;
;
Jeremiah, book of, 241 ff., 259 Ep. of, 274 f. Jerome, 9, 14, 23, 34, 40, 74, 76 f., 89, 98 ff., 273, 277, 435, 464 Jews in Egypt, 3 ff. ; Jewish order of O, T. Canon, 200 Jews wrongly charged with corrupting text of LXX., 424, 479 Infinitive of purpose, 306 Innocent I., 21 r Inspiration claimed for lxx., 14, 462 f. Interpretation of O.T., 326 f.; use of LXX. for the, 445 ff. ; patristic int. based on lxx., 463 ff. Interpolations in text of LXX., 423 f. Job, book of, 43 f., 69, 100 f., 108, 228, 255 ff., 318, 337, 480 Josephus, 12 f., 26, 217, 220, 279 f., 298 f., 376 ff.
; ;
LXX. the Hellenistic Bible, 370 ff.

Heptapla,
the,
29,
John
Joshua ben Chananya, R., of Damascus, 207 f.
32,
440
ff.
66
f.,
113
Heptateiichns^ 227
Hernias, 47, 411 Hesychius, 78 ff. Hesychian text, 80, 107 ff., 144 f., 150 ff., 482,
;
Irenaeus, 9, 30, 42, 49, 414 I. (Minutius Pacatus), 289 Isidorus, 212 Jubilees, book of, no, 285
Judges, book
of,
215
ff.,
316, 333
ff.,
f.,
486 Hexapla, 6r ff., 74 ff., i f., 482 Hexaplaric recension, 67 ff, 76 ff. Hexaplaric texts, 108 481
488
f.
f.
Judith,
book
of,
103,
222
229,
ff.,
ff., ff.,
272
f.
Ill, ii2ff., 1x9, 138, 140,
48
Junilius, 207 Justin, 30, 417
482 Hilary of Poitiers, 210, 471 Hippolytus, 277, 424 ff. Hody, H., 15 Holmes, R., 185 fif. Hort, F. J. ., 8i, 91 f., 189, 257 300, 486 ff., 491 Howorth, H., 267 HypolemniscHs, 71 f. Hyvernat, H., 106, rii
local,
Justinian, 33
,
,
45^
f.
;
ff.,
464, 479
, 205
(),
f
125, 252
f.
f.,
139. 349' 354 Kaisariyeh, 75
Kennedy,
. . .,
88, 289
ff.,
296,
Kenyon, F. G.,
324
I,
141
Jacob of Edessa, i r6 Jamnia, 320, 439 f.
130, 225, 487 Kimchi, D., 57 Kingdoms, books of, 214 ff. i K., 245 f. 3 K., 237 ff., 246 ff.; 4 K. 249 Kirkpatrick, A. F., 318 ff., 44 Klostermann, E., 58, 132, 353
;
Index
L, 139 Lagarde, P. de, 109, 118 f., 121, 188, 206, 255, 442, 483 ff., 494 Lamentations, book of, 226 ff., 259, 360 Langton, Stephen (Archbp), 343 Laodicene canons, 209, 282 Latin versions, 88 ff., 493 Lections, lectionaries, 168 ff., 343,
II.
Masius, Andreas, 113 Massora, Massoretic 322, 434 ff.
Materials
at
589
text,
234
of
ff.,
the
disposal
the
critical editor,
491
f.
McLean, N., 119, 135, 189, 191, 489 Melito, 203, 221 Mercati, G., 62 Mesrop, 118, 120
Metaphors in LXX., 329 Methodius and Cyril, 120
f.
356 ff Lee, F., 183 Leipzig fragments

139
lemniscus, 71 f. Leontius, 207 f., 218 Leontopolis, 8
of
Octateuch,
Lexicography, 290, 302 ff., 310; lexicon of LXX., proposed, 290 Lightfoot, J. B. (Bp), 105 Libraries "of Alexandria, 10 f., 16 ff.,
22 f., 293 Library of Pamphilus, 75
Literature, 10, 27 f., 53, 76, 103, 108, III, 117, 119 f., 121, 170, 194,230, 262ff.,285ff., 314, 340 f.,
Alethtirgeinan, 3 20 metobehis, 71 f. Minutius Pacatus, 289 Moabite stone, the, 320 f. Mommsen, Th., 5, 8, 212 Montfaucon, B. de, 136
f.,
347
Morinus, J., 436; P., 18 r f. Moses bar-Cephas, iii; AL of Khoren, 118, 120 Muratorian Fragment, 268 Museum, the Alexandrian, r6f., 293 MSS. of LXX., uncial, 124 ff.
cursive,
365
f.
379
f'
404
f
f,
432. of
438. the
46], 477, 496 Liturgical notes
notation 148 ff. of, 122 ff. grouping of books in, 123; distribution of, 123 f.; displacements in, 131, 271
; ;
in
titles
Psalms, 250
Liturgies,
f.
the ancient,
use
of the
LXX.
142
f.
/^', , ', , 26
,
131
22 2
in,
471
ff.
London papyrusfragments of Psalter,

Lucian, 81 ff., 395 f., 483 Lucianic texts, 93, 116 ff., 121, ff., 379, 395, 403. 482, 486 148
ff.
Nathan, R. Isaac, 343
New
Ludovicus de Vives, 15
AovKiavbs, 80, 365
Nestle, ., 127, 33> 169, i87f., 274, 319 331. 410 Testament, the: use of LXX., tables of quotations 26, 381 ff.
;
2,
8,
M, 78, 140, 352 ff; iJH, 234 Maccabees, books of, 276 ff., 312 f., 372 Macedonian words, 291 f. Mahaffy, J. P., 5 ff., 21 ff, 279 f., 292 Malchas, 370 Malchion, 81 Manetho, 17 Marchalianus, cod., 77, 80, 108, 144 f
382 ff.; number of quotations, 386, 391 f.; discussion of passages quoted, 392 ff. ; LXX. indispensable to the study of the N.T., 450 ff. vocabulary of N.T.,
from LXX.,
indebted to LXX., 452 Nicephorus, stichometry of, 208 346 ff. catena of, 186, 362 f. Nicomedia, 85
far
;
how
ff.
f.,
Nicopolis, 55
Notation of MSS., 122 f. Notes at end of Job, 256 f.
Number
219
ff.
of books in O.T. canon,
S90
Numerals confused, 321
Index
II.
Peshitta, the, 112,
r6
?7,
480
Pesukim, 342 Peter, Gospel
of, 50 Petersburg, St, palimpsest of
Num17,
144
ff.
obelus, 70
bers, 138 Pharisaic influence
in
lxx.,
OKrarevxos,
,
opa(XLS (in
Octapla, the, 66 f. 'Odes,' the nine, 254 Old Latin version, the, 88 if., 493 Olophernes, 272 Origen, 30, 34, 46 f., 49, 53 f-, 59 ff., 77, 203, 222, 242, 356 f., 429 f. 435' 464 480 Order of books in Jevish lists, 200 in uncial Bibles, 201 f.; in patristic lists, 203 ff. internal order of groups, 226 ff.; order of contents of books, 231 ff.
;
281, 283
Philadelphus, 10 f., 16 f. Phileas of Thmuis, 79 Philo, 12 f., 298, 372 ff., 478 f.; the poet, 369 Philometor, 17 Philopator, 279 Philoxenus of Mabug, 115 Phrynichus, 296 f. Points, the Hebrew, 321 f. the Polycarp of Smyrna, 414 ; chorepiscopus, 115
Polyhistor, 369 ff. Printed editions of LXX,, Prologue to Sirach, the, 24, 300, 319 Proper names, 304, 313, 449 f. Proverbs, book of, 240 ff., 255, 366 f. Psalms, 25, 98 ff., 191 f., 239 f., 250 ff., 316, 336, 358 f., 447 f.; books titles of the, 250 f., 447 f. Psalms of of the Psalter, 354 f.
, 66
,
123
71
'-,
Isaiah
(^,
and Daniel), 360

365
72, 77,
P, 124, 164
Pachymius, 79 Pagnini, S., 343

Palaeography, Hebr., 320 f.; Greek, 364 Palestinian Syriac version, 114 f. Palimpsest MSS., 34ff., i28f., i38f., 145 ff. Palladius, 50 Pamphilus, 76 ff. Papyrus MSS., 142, 146, 225, 229;
'transition to vellum,' effect of,
Solomon, 282
f.
Psalter of the English Prayer-book,
229
f.
Psalterium Romanicm, Galhcaniim, Hebraiciuii, 98 ff. Pseudepigrapha, 265, 281 f. Aristeas see Pseudo- Aristeas, Pseudo-Athanasius, 82, 85, 207, Pseudo-Chrysostom, 205 282 Pseudo-Clement, 411; Pseudo' ' ;
Parashahs, 342
f.
Paris uncial Psalter, 143 Parsons, J., 185 Passages in lxx. discussed, 330 ff. texts, Patristic quotations, 406 ff. commenteditions of, 406, 492
;
aries,
430
ff.
Paul of Telia, 112 f. Pauline Epistles, quotations in, 389 ff., 400 ff. Pearson, J. (Bp), 457, 477 Pentapla, 67 Pentateuch, Greek, the original LXX., 23; Samaritan, 436 ff.
U.apae76ua,
358
if,
TrefTaTevxos,
'', -/, ,, ,
361
2
1
Gelasius, 211 f. Ptolemies, list of the early, 5 f. 'Ptolemy and Cleopatra,' 25, 258
77
28
4
14),
vii.
Trapdivos (in Isa.
30
123, 204
ff.
(^1^1),
', ^,
39
i".
253, 260;
253
; ;
, ,
28
Q, 66,
ture,
TrpoarfKvTQs, 6
, ,
(^2), 32
;
Index
II.
Sequence,
591
Hebrew
231
ff.
and
Greek,
2^8
, 205
tables
of,
ff.;
discussion of,
234
ff.
'Sexta,' the, 53
299
Shashanq (Shishak),
75^ 77, 144 <- 348 Quinta, the, 53ff, 66 f. Quotations from LXX. by Jewish Hellenists, in N.T., 369 ff. 381 ff. ; in early Christian litera;
3 f. Sibyllines, the, 372, 380 Siloam inscription, the, 321 Sinaitic MS., the, 129 ff., 490
406
f.,
ff.
495 Rahlfs, ., 135 Recensions of the LXX., 76 ff., 481 f. Redpath, H. ., 135, 141, 147, 290, 495 Reuchlin, J., 436 Robinson, F., 105 Ryle, H. E., 25 f., 215, 275, 283,
342, 374, 404 Roman edition of LXX., I74ff., 486 Ruffinus, 210, 223
R, 141
Sinker, R., 315 Sirach, 269 ff., 372 ; prologue to, 20, 24, 300, 319 ; the Hebrew, 27off. disturbed order of the Greek, 271 f. literature, 286 Sixtine edition, I74ff. 'Sixty books,' the, 209 ff., 220, 281 Slavonic version, 120 f.
;
Smith, H.
P., 340,
441
W.
R., 30
f.,
246, 440
Solomon,
= ^),
75,
77,
129
ff.,
352, 490;
c, cy', 364; i" 53

Sabatier, P., 92
Psalms of, 282 f., 288; of, 267 ff., 285, 311 f. Soter, 6, 19, 293 Stephen, R., 343 Stichometry, 344 ff. Stoicism of 4 Mace, 280 Streane, A. W., 259 Susanna, 260 f. Symmachus, 49 ff., 476, 483
Wisdom
Synagogue use of LXX., 29
f.
Samaritans in Egypt, 6, 437 ff., Samaritan Pentateuch, 441 f 436 ff. Sanday, W., 218 ff., 360
.
script io defectiva, 321 Scrivener, F. H. ., 189 Semitic words in LXX., 19,

'
Synoptic Gospels, quotations in, 386 ff, 391 ff. Syntax of O. T. Greek, 305 Syriac versions, 1 1 1 ff. Syro-Hexaplar, 77, 112 ff., 356, 493 f
306
ff.
Semitic idioms, 323 ff. Septima,' the, 53ff. 'Septuagint,' the name, 9 f. early history of the version, 9 ff. Origen labours upon it, 59 ff. recensions, 76 ff. ; versions based upon the lxx., 87 ff. ; MSS. of LXX.j 122 ff. ; printed editions, 171 ff. ; books contained in the Greek O.T., 197 ff. language and style, 289 ff. ; merits and defects, 315 f use by pagan writers, 22; by Hellenists, 29 f., 369ff.; in the N.T., 381 ff. in the Fathers, 406 ff. its importance, 433 ff textual problems, 480 ff.
;
; . ; ; ;
, , ,
$ <^$,
, 277
l'ua,
260
,
, $,
= \^<
6,
411 ^6 1 269 aeXis, 64

(in
the Psalter), 359
344
205 ace, 39 3^
,
56,
,
ff
26
201
^, 449
592
Index
495; ',
II.
142,
',
3^4
'
Talmud, Aquila quoted in the, 33 Targum, the Babylonian, 3

Taylor,
Vatican
Variorum' lxx., proposed, 496 MS. (B), 126 ff., 486

do. (N), 131
f.;
ff.;
C, 33, 41, 67, 271, 286 Tertullian, 9, 284, 351 TetragraDimaton, the, 39 f., 320,
do. (X), 143 Venice MS. (V=23), 132 Verona Psalter, 141 f. Versions of the O.T. (Greek) later
327 Tetrapla, the, 65 ff., 73, ii3f. Text-division, systems of, 342 ff. Thackeray, H. St J., 131, 267 Thecla the martyr, 125 Theodoras (Egyptian Bishop), 79; Theodore of Mopsuestia, 112, 115,
316, 432 Theodotion, 42 ff., 260 ff., 339 ff., 395 ff., 403, 417, 421 ff., 458 f, 483 Theodotus, 369 f. Thomas of Harkel, 112 f. Timothy and Aquila, dialogue of, 31 f., 206 Tischendorf, A. F. C. von, 129 ff., 135, 138 f., 140 ff., 187 f. of Titles of Psalms, 250 f., 447 ff. chapters, 354 ff; of books, 198 f., 214 ff. Tobit, book of, 273 f. Transliteration, 46, 324 f.
;
than LXX.,
29ff.; their
importance,
ff.,
457 ff. 476 Versions of the LXX., 87 versus, 344 Vienna Genesis, 139
493
f.
Vives, L. de, 15 Ulfilas, 117 Uncial MSS. of lxx., 124 Votau, C. W., 306
viilgata editio, 68
ff.,
201
f.
Vulgate, Latin, 103, 474
-,
ff.
201
W,
143
Walton's Polyglott, 182

Westcott, B. F. (Bp), 60, 131, 252,
278, 402
Wigan, W., 183 Wisdom of Solomon, 267
ff.,
285,
trifaria varietas, 85 f. Turin uncial Prophets, 145
Wisdom
269
311, 371 f. of Jesus, son

f.,
of Sirach,
-, ,
\$,
358
Qeypt, 41
286
Wulfila, 117
73
123
\,, \,
oi,
6,
26
X, 143 Xenophon, Greek of, 294 Ximenes de Cisneros, F., 171

Y, 145
ff.
6"]
(in Isaiah),
360
Yebna, 439 Young, P., 183

Z, 140
f., 145 f.; Zurich Psalter, 142
Dn^hD ]\, 434

V, 132, 495;
, 53
142
f.
CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY
J.
C. F.
CLAY AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

An Introduction To The Old Testament in Greek

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

An Introduction To The Old Testament in Greek

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

AN INTRODUCTION TO

THE OLD TESTAMENT

CLAY and SONS,

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE.

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. Bombag: E. SEYMOUR HALE.

THE OLD TESTAMENT

HENRY BARCLAY SWETE

WITH AN APPENDIX CONTAINING THE LETTER OF ARISTEAS EDITED BY

an endeavour to supply a want which

by many readers of the Greek Old

literature of the subject

chief points have been compendiously treated

to the kindness of friends,

among whom may

Eberhard Nestle, of Maulbronn, who has added

under which he had previously

reading the whole of this Introduction in proof,

and suggesting many corrections and

not to be held responsible for the

dealing with the various branches of learning \vhich

But the student

to discover these for himself from the bibliography which

to almost every chapter.

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

the Hexaplaric and other Recensions 59

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint

THE CONTENTS OF THE ALEXANDRIAN OLD

Grouping, Number, and Order of the Books

Sfichi, Chapters, Lections, Catenae, &c.

AND TEXTUAL CONDITION OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT.

Literary use of the Septuagint by non-Christian Hellenists

from the Septuagint

Influence of the Septuagint on Christian Literature

Septuagint, and problems

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.

The Letter of Pseudo-Aristeas.

Index of Biblical references

THE HISTORY OF THE GREEK OLD TESTAMENT

The Alexandrian Greek Version.

Greek version of any portion of the Old Testament

presupposes intercourse between Israel and a Greek-speaking

for the translation of the

into a foreign tongue.

regards the countries west of

Palestine, this isolation continued until the age of Alexander'

therefore improbable that any

Greek version of the

tures existed there before that era.

of their teaching to a source of this kind".

22; cf Eus. praep.

The Alexandrian Greek

imply the existence before

buted by Pseudo-Aristeas to Demetrius of Phalerum

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

similar claim has

in the statement attri:

have been produced, and

more than probable on the part of the

Hellenistic Jews to find a

origin for the best products

with the conquests of Alexander the Great.

The Hebrew Prophets foresaw

was the destiny