Skip to main content

Full text of "An introduction to the Old Testament in Greek"

See other formats

Swete^ Henry Barclay^ 1835 

An introduction to the Old 
Testament in Greek 

IDrllwIrn f 




Return on 
or before 



AR2 2 


EonDon : C J. CLAY and SONS, 



©lasgoto: 50, WELLINGTON STREET. 


ip-eto gorfe : THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 















All rights reserved 

eierepoo τλ τεκνλ coy, ΣειωΝ, εττΊ τλ τεκνλ τωΝ ΈλλΗΝωΝ. 



Ph. et Th.D. 




THIS book is an endeavour to supply a want which 
has been felt by many readers of the Greek Old 
Testament. The literature of the subject is enormous, 
and its chief points have been compendiously treated 
in Biblical Dictionaries and similar publications. But 
hitherto 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. 

A first attempt is necessarily beset with uncertain- 
ties. Experience only can shew whether the help here 
provided is precisely such as the student needs, and 
whether the right proportion has been preserved in 
dealing with the successive divisions of the subject. 
But it is hoped that the present work may at least meet 
the immediate wants of those who use The Old Testa- 
ment 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 
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 
Septuagint ; Mr Forbes Robinson, and Dr W. E. Barnes. 
But my acknowledgements are principally due to Pro- 
fessor Eberhard Nestle, of Maulbronn, who has added 


to the obligations under which he had previously laid 
me by reading the whole of this Introduction in proof, 
and suggesting many corrections and additions. While 
Dr Nestle is not to be held responsible for the final 
form in which the book appears, the reader will owe 
to him in great measure such freedom from error 
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 
dealing with the various branches of learning \vhich fall 
within the range of the subject. While direct quotations 
have been acknowledged where they occur, it has not 
been thought desirable to load the margin with refer- 
ences to all the sources from which information has 
been obtained. But the student will generally be able 
to discover these for himself from the bibliography which 
is appended to almost every chapter. 

In dismissing my work I desire to tender my sincere 
thanks to the readers and workmen of the Cambridge 
University Press, whose unremitting attention has 
brought the production of the book to a successful 

H. B. S. 


Sepiember i, 1900. 






The Alexandrian Greek Version i — 28 


Later Greek Versions 29 — 58 


The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions 

of the Septuagint 59 — 86 


Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint . . 87 — 121 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint 122 — 170 


Printed Texts of the Septuagint .... 171 — 194 






Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of the Books . 197 — 230 


Books of the Hebrew Canon 231 — 264 


Books not included in the Hebrew Canon . . 265 — 288 


The Greek of the Septuagint 289 — 314 


The Septuagint as a Version 315 — 341 


Text divisions : Sfichi, Chapters, Lections, Catenae, &c. 342 — 366 




Literary use of the Septuagint by non-Christian Hel- 
lenists 369 — 380 


Quotations from the Septuagint in the New Testament 381 — 405 

Contents. xi 



Quotations from the Septuagint in early Christian 

writings 406 — 432 


The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study . . 433 — 461 


Influence of the Septuagint on Christian Literature . 462 — 477 


Textual condition of the Septuagint, and problems 

arising out of it 478 — 497 



The Letter of Pseudo-Aristeas. 

Introduction 501 — 518 

Text 519—574 


i. Index of Biblical references 577 — 584 

ii. Index of Subject-matter 585 — 592 




The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

I. A Greek version of any portion of the Old Testament 
presupposes intercourse between Israel and a Greek-speaking 
people. So long as the Hebrew race maintained its isolation, 
no occasion arose for the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures 
into a foreign tongue. As far as 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 of their teaching to a source of this kind". 
Thus Aristobulus {ap. Clem. Al. stro7n. i. 22; cf Eus. praep. 
ev. xiii. 12) Avrites : κατηκολονθηκε δέ καΐ 6 Πλάτων rrj καθ^ 

^ Individual cases, such as that of the Jew mentioned by Clearchus 
{ap. Jos. c. Ap. I, 22), Avho was ΈλληΐΊΚ05 ου ry διαλεκτά} μόνον άλλα και ttj 
ψνχτι, are exceptions to a general rule. How numerous and prosperous 
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 Λvas 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. 
u ί 

S. S. I 

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

ημαζ νομ^οθΐσία, και φαν€ρό<ζ έστί 7Γ€/3ΐ€ργασα/χ€νος Ικαστα των 
iv avT-fj λίγο/χενων. ^ίηρμην^νταί δε ττρό Αημητρίον υφ' ίτψον\ 
ττρο της 'Αλέξανδρου και Πε/οσών εττικραττ^σεως, τά τε κατά. την 
i^ Αιγύπτου ζζαγωγήν των ^Εβραίων των ημ^τψων ττολίτων και 
η των γεγονότων ατταντων αυτοις εττιφανεια και κράτησις της 
χωράς καΐ της όλης νομοθεσίας Ιττε^η-γησις — words which seem 
to imply the existence before B.C. 400 of a translation which 
included at least the Books of Exodus, Deuteronomy, and 
Joshua. A similar claim has been found in the statement attri- 
buted by Pseudo-Aristeas to Demetrius of Phalerum : τον νόμον 
των Ίουδαι'ων βίβΧία,.,ονχ ως νττάρχεί σεσημανται, καθώς νττο των 
ειδότων ττροσαναφερεται^ But ηο fragments of these early 
translations have been produced, and it is more than probable 
that the story arose out of a desire on the part of the 
Hellenistic Jews to find a Hebrew origin for the best products 
of Greek thought I 

2. The earliest and most important of the extant Greek 
versions of the Old Testament was an offspring of. the 'Greek 
Dispersion' {η διασπορά των Ελλήνων, Jo. νϋ. 35)j which began 
with the conquests of Alexander the Great. 

The Hebrew Prophets foresaw that it was the destiny 
of their race to be scattered over the face of the world 
(Deut. xxviii. 25, xxx. 4, Jer. xv. 4, xxxiv. 17). The word 
διαστΓορά (O.L. dispersio) employed by the Greek translators in 
these and similar passages (cf. 2 Esdr. xi. 9, Ps. cxxxviii. 
(cxxxix.) tit. (codd. A^ T), cxlvi. (cxlvii.) 2, Judith v. 19, Isa. 
xlix. 6, Jer. xiii. 14 (cod. δ<*), Dan. xii. 2 (lxx.), 2 Mace. i. 27) 
became the technical Greek term for Jewish communities in 
foreign lands, whether planted there by forcible deportation, or 

' tC έτερων, Eus. 

2 See Tischendorf, V. T. Gr. {i 8 "jg) pro/egg: p. xiii. n. 
^ Cf. Walton (ed. Wrangham), p. i8; Frankel, Vorsimiien, p. 14 f.; 
Buhl, Knnon u. Text, p. 108 f. 

The Alexandrian Greek Version, 

by their own free agency (Jo. vii. 35, Jas. i. i, i Pet. i. i)'. Such 
settlements were at first compulsory, and limited to countries 
east of Palestine. Between the eighth and sixth centuries 
B.C. the bulk of the population of both the Northern and 
Southern Kingdoms was swept away by Assyrian and Baby- 
lonian conquerors (2 Kings xvii. 6, xxiv. 14 if., xxv. 11 f., 
2 1 f ). A part of the Babylonian captivity returned (Ezra i. ii.), 
but Babylonia and Mesopotamia continued to be the home of 
a large body of Jewish settlers (Tob. i. 14 if., 4 Esdr. xiii. 39 ff., 
Philo ad Cai. 36, Acts ii. 9, Joseph. Ant. xi. 5. 2, xv. 3. i, xviii. 
9. iff.). This 'Eastern' Dispersion need not detain us here. 
No Biblical version in the stricter sense" had its origin in 
Babylonia; there, as in Palestine, the services of the synagogue 
interpreter (1)0|"1•1ί^Ρ) sufficed for the rendering of the lections 
into Aramaic, and no desire was manifested on the part of the 
Gentile population to make themselves acquainted with the 
Hebrew scriptures. It was among the Jews who were brought 
into relation with Hellenic culture that the necessity arose for 
a written translation of the books of the canon. Egypt was 
the earliest home of the Hellenistic Jew, and it was on 
Egyptian soil that the earliest Greek version of the Old Testa- 
ment was begun. 

3. Long before the time of Alexander Egypt possessed the 
nucleus of a Jewish colony. Shashanq, the Shishak of i K. xiv. 
25 f., 2 Chr. xii. 2 f , who invaded Palestine^ in the tenth 
century B.C., may have carried into Egypt captives or hostages 
from the conquered cities whose names still appear upon the 

1 The later Hebrew term was Π?15^ 'exile' ; see Dr Hort on i Pet. /. c. 

2 The 'Babylonian' Targum is of Palestinian origin (Buhl, p. 173). 
On early Aramaic translations arising out of the synagogue interpretations, 
see ib., p. 168 f. ; and for the traditional account of the origin of the Syriac 
O. T. see Nestle, Urtext u. Ubersetzimgen der Bibel (Leipzig, 1897), 
p. 229. 

3 Authority and Archaeology ^ p. 87 f. 

I — 2 

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 itself felt on the banks of the Nile, while he endeavoured 
to check the policy which led Judah to seek refuge from 
Assyrian aggression in an Egyptian alliance (xxx. i flf.). Jewish 
mercenaries are said to have fought in the expedition of 
Psammetichus I. against Ethiopia c. b.c. 650 (cf. Ps.-Arist. : 
erepwv ένμμ,αχ^ίων έζαττζσταλμίνων ττρος τον των Αίθωττων /βασιλέα 
μάχ€σθαί συν Ψαμμίτιχω). The panic which followed the 
murder of Gedaliah drove a host of Jewish fugitives to Egypt, 
where they settled at Migdol (Μάγδωλο?), Tahpanhes (Ύαφνάς 
= Αάφνη)'\ Noph (Memphis), and Pathros (Τίαθονρη)^, i.e. 
throughout the Delta, and even in Upper Egypt; and the 
descendants of those who survived were replenished, if we may 
believe Pseudo-Aristeas, by others who entered Egypt during 
the Persian period (η^η μίν καΐ ττρότζρον ικανών €ΐσ€ληλνθ6των 
συν τω Uiparj). These earlier settlers were probably among 
the first to benefit by Alexander's policy, and may have been 
partly hellenised before his birth. 

4. Alexander's victory at Issos in b.c. 333 opened the 
gate of Syria to the conqueror. In the next year he received 
the submission of Tyre and Gaza and, according to Josephus, 
was on the point of marching upon Jerusalem when the 
statesmanship of the High Priest turned him from his purpose ^ 
Whether the main features of this story be accepted or not, 
it is certain that the subsequent policy of Alexander was 
favourable to the Jews. His genius discovered in the Jewish 

1 The passage is thought by some scholars to belong to the Ptolemaean 
age; see Cheyne, Itttr. to Isaiah, p. 105. 

^ Q.{. Authority and Archaeology, ■^. 107. 

^ Jer. li. = xliv. i fif. αττασιν roh 'Ιουδαίοι? tols κατοίκονσιν έν yy Alyvwrov 
kt\. Many 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 
details are doubtless unhistorical : cf. Droysen, Phistoire de PHellenisnie, 
\. p. 300. 

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

people an instrument well fitted to assist him in carrying out 
his purpose of drawing East and West together. Jews served 
in his army (Hecataeus ap. Joseph, c. Ap. i. 22 In ye μΎ]ν on 
και Αλεξάνδρα) τω βασιλζΐ σνν€στρατ€νσαντο και μ€τα ταντα τοις 
ΒίαΒόχοίζ αυτοί) μ€μαρτνρηκ€ν); and was his sense of their 
loyalty and courage that when Alexandria was founde^J 
(b.c. 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 full citizenship. 

Joseph, ant. xix. 5. 2 emyvovs άνίκαθίν τους iv \W€^av8p€ia 
Ίου 8αίουζ... ίσης noXireias παρά των βασιλέων Τ€Τ€υχότας : C. Ap. 
\\. 4 ου yap απορία ye των οίκησόντων την μ^τά σπουδής υπ αυτού 
κτίζομένην ^ AXi^avbpos των ημΐτέρων τινας €κύ συνηθροισ^ν, αλλά 
πάντας δοκιμάζων βττι/χβλω? apeTrjs κα\ πίστεως τοΰτο τοΙς ημ€τβροις 
το yepas ζ^ωκίν. Β. J. ϋ. 1 8. 7 χρησάμ^νος προθυμότατοι^ κατά 
των λlyυπτίωv Ιουδαιοΐί ^ΑΧβζανδρος yepas της συμμαχίας ί^ωκ^ν το 
μ€τοικ€ΐν κατά την ποΚίν i^ 'ίσου μοίρας προς τους "ΈΧληνας. 

Mommsen indeed {Provinces, Ε. Τ., ρ. 162 η.) 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 it originated with Alexander^. 

5. The premature death of Alexander (b.c. 323) wrecked 
his larger scheme, but the Jewish colony at Alexandria con- 
tinued to flourish under the Ptolemies, who succeeded to the 
government of Egypt. 

It may be convenient to place here for reference the names 
and dates of the earlier Ptolemies. I. Lagi, or Soter (B.C. 322 
— 285). II. Philadelphus (B.C. 285 — 247). III. Euergetes 1. 
(B.C. 247 — 222). IV. Philopator I. (B.C. 222 — 205). V. Epiphanes 

^ Plutarch Alex. •26 έβούλετο ττολιν μeyά\ηv καΐ πόλνάνθρωτΓον'ΈίΧΚηνίζα 
συνοίκισαν έττώνυμον βαυτοΰ κατα\ιπ€Ϊν. 

" See Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies^ p. 86. 

^ On the relations in which the Jews stood to Alexander and his succes- 
sors see Wellhausen, Isr. ii.jud. Geschichte, c. xvi. 

The Alexa7idrian Greek Version. 

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

The first Ptolemy added considerably to the Jewish 
population of Alexandria. 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 
Alexandria, where many of them acquired civic rights. The 
report of the King's liberality towards his captives, and of their 
prosperity in Egypt, attracted other Palestinians to Alexandria, 
and many came thither as voluntary settlers. 

Joseph, ant. xii. I. I ό 5e nroXe/iaios• noWovs αίχμαλώτονζ 
λα(^ών από re τψ opeLvrjs ^Ιουδαίας καϊ των ττζρΐ Ίΐροσόλνμα τόπων 
και της Έαμαρ^ίτώος και των iv Ταριζίίν, κατωκίσίν άπαντος etV 
Α'ίγυπτον ayayoov ξπξγνωκως Se tovs άπο των Ιεροσολύμων π(ρ\ 
την των όρκων φνλακην κα\ τάς πίστας βεβαιότατους υπάρχοντας . . 
πολλούς αυτών τοΊς Μακεδόσιν ev ^Αλεξάνδρεια ποιησας ισοπολίτας• 
ουκ ολίγοι 8ε ούδε των άλλων ^Ιουδαίων εΙς την ΑΊγυπτον παρε- 
γίγνοντο, της τε αρετής των τόπων αυτούς κα\ της του ΐΐτολεμαιου 
φιλοτιμίας προκαλούμενης. 

Α separate quarter of the city was assigned to the colony 
(Strabo ap. Joseph, ant. xiv. 7. 2 rrjs 'AXe^avSpctas πόλεως 
άψωρισταί μέγα μέρος τω εθν€ί τοΰτω'); it lay in the north-east 
of Alexandria, along the shore, near the royal palace ^ Here 
the Jews lived under their own ethnarch^, who exercised judi- 
cial authority in all cases between Jew and Jew. They were 
permitted to follow their own religion and observe their national 
customs without molestation. Synagogues sprang up not only in 
the Jewish quarter, but at a later time in every part of the city 

1 In Philo's time the Jews occupied two districts out of five (/;/ 
F/acc. 8). 

^ Droysen, iii. 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 άλα/ίίάρχτ?? 
άραβάρχηή who is sometimes identified with the ethnarch see Schiirer iii. 88. 

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

(Philo ad Cai. 20, ifi Flacc. 6^). In the time of Philometor the 
Jews stood so high in the royal favour that they were suffered 
to convert a disused Egyptian temple at Leontopolis into 
a replica of the Temple at Jerusalem, and the Jewish rite was 
celebrated there until after the fall of the Holy City, when the 
Romans put a stop to it (Joseph, afit. xii. 9. 7, xiii. 3. \^ B, J. 
vii. 10. 4)^ Under these circumstances it is not surprising 
that shortly after the Christian era the Jewish colony in Egypt 
exceeded a million, constituting an eighth part of the popu- 
lation (Philo 171 Flacc. 6, Joseph, c. Ap. ii. 4). In the Fayum 
villages were founded by Jews, and they lived on equal terms 
with the Greeks '\ Nor were the Jewish settlers on the African 
coast limited to the Delta or to Egypt. A daughter colony 
was planted in Cyrenaica by the first Ptolemy, and at Cyrene 
as at Alexandria the Jews formed an important section of the 
community. The Jew of Cyrene meets us already in the days 
of the Maccabees (i Mace. xv. 23, 2 Mace. ii. 23), and he was 
a familiar figure at Jerusalem in the Apostolic age (Mt. xxvii. 
32, Acts ii. 10, vi. 9\ xi. 20, xiii. i; cf. Strabo ap. Joseph, aiit. 
xiv. 7. 2). 

6. The Jews of the Dispersion everywhere retained their 
religion and their loyalty to national institutions. In each of 
these settlements among Gentile peoples the Holy City 
possessed a daughter, whose attachment to her was not less 
strong than that of her children at home. "Jerusalem," in 
the words of Agrippa^, " was the mother city, not of a single 
country, but of most of the countries of the world, through the 

1 On the magnificence of the principal synagogue see Edersheim, 
History of the Jeimsh Nation (ed. White), p. 67. 

2 A temporary check seems to have been sustained by the Alexandrian 
Jews under Philopator ; see 3 Mace. ii. 31, and cf. Mahaffy, p. 270. 

^ See Mahaffy, Empire, &^i:., p. 86 n. ; cf. Philo de sept. 6. 
^ Where Blass {Philology of the Gospels, p. 69 f.) proposes to read 
Αιβυστίνων for Χιβζρτίνων. 
5 Philo ad Cai. 36. 

8 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

colonies which she sent forth at various times." No colony 
was more dutiful than the Alexandrian. The possession of a 
local sanctuary at Leontopolis did not weaken its devotion to 
the temple at Jerusalem ^ ; pilgrimages were still made to 
Jerusalem at the great festivals (Philo ap. Eus. praep. ev. viii. 
14. 64; cf. Acts ii. 10) j the Temple tribute was collected in 
Egypt with no less punctuality than in Palestine (Philo de 
7no7iarch. ii. 3). But it was impossible for Jews who for 
generations spent their lives and carried on their business in 
Greek towns to retain their Semitic speech. In Palestine 
after the Return, Aramaic gradually took the place of Hebrew 
in ordinary intercourse, and after the time of Alexander Greek 
became to some extent a rival of Aramaic. In Alexandria a 
knowledge of Greek was not a mere luxury but a necesssity 
of common life". If it was not required by the State as a 
condition of citizenship^, yet self-interest compelled the in- 
habitants of a Greek capital to acquire the language of the 
markets and the Court. A generation or two may have 
sufficed to accustom the Alexandrian Jews to the use of the 
Greek tongue. The Jewish settlers in Lower Egypt who were 
there at the coming of Alexander had probably gained some 
knowledge of Greek before the founding of his new city*; 
and the children of Alexander's mercenaries, as well as many 
of the immigrants from Palestine in the days of Soter, may 
well have been practically bilingual. Every year of residence 
in Alexandria would increase their familiarity with Greek and 
weaken their hold upon the sacred tongue^ Any prejudice 

1 See Schiirer^, iii. 97 ff. 

- Droysen, iii. p. 35. 

'^ Mommsen, Provinces, ii. p. 163 f. On the whole question see Hody, 
de Bibl. tcxtibus, p. 224 f.; Caspari, Qitcllen ziir Gesch. d. Tatifsymbols, 
iii. p. 268 if. ; "Deissmann, Bibe/studien, p. 61 fif. ; Kennedy, Sources of 
N. T. Gk., p. 2 iff. 

■* There was a large Greek settlement on the Pelusiac arm of the Nile 
at an early period ; see Herod, ii. 163. 

^ Cf. Streane, Double Text of Jeremiah, p. 1 1 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 

But the Greek which the Jews of Alexandria learnt to 
speak was neither the literary language employed by the 
scholars of the Museum, nor the artificial imitation of it 
affected by Hellenistic writers of the second and first centuries 
B.C.' It was based on \}α^ patois of the Alexandrian streets 
and markets — a mixture, as we may suppose, of the ancient 
spoken tongue of Hellas with elements gathered from Mace- 
donia, Asia Minor, Egypt, and Libya. Into this hybrid speech 
the Jewish colony would infuse, when it became their usual 
organ of communication, a strong colouring of Semitic thought, 
and not a few reminiscences of Hebrew or Aramaic lexico- 
graphy and grammar. Such at any rate is the monument of 
Jewish-Egyptian Greek which survives in the earlier books of 
the so-called Septuagint. 

7. The 'Septuagint^,' or the Greek version of the Old 
Testament which was on the whole the work of Alexandrian 
Jews, is, written in full, the Interpretatio septiiagi^ita virorimi or 
sefiiorum, i.e. the translation of which the first instalment was 
attributed by Alexandrian tradition to seventy or seventy-two 
Jewish elders. In the most ancient Greek MSS. of the Old 

^ Cf. Thiersch de Pent. vers. Alex.., p. 65 ff. ; MahafFy, Greek life and 
thought'^., p. 196 f.; Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek., p. 18 ff. The 
remarks of Hatch {Essays., p. 10 ff.) are less satisfactory. 

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

ΙΟ The Alexandrian Greek Versio7i. 

Testament it is described as the version 'according to the 
LXX.' (κα.Ία Tovs ίβ^ομηκοντα, τταρα ίβ^ομη κοντά, Ο. Τ. ΐη Greek, 
1. ρ. 1 03, iii. ρ• 479)' ^^^ quoted by the formula οι ο or ot οβ . 
All forms of the name point back to a common source, the 
story of the origin of the version which is told in the 
pseudonymous letter entitled Άριστεας Φιλοκρατει. 

Literature. The text of the letter of Aristeas is printed 
in the Appendix to this volume. It will be found also in Hody 
de Bib!, text. orig. (Oxon. 1705), and in Constantinus Oeconomus 
TTfpi των ο €ρμην(ντών βιβλία δ' (Athens, 1 849) ; the best edition 
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. Ex 
Licdovici Mendelssohnii schedis ed. Paulus Wendla?id. For the 
earlier editions see Fabricius-Harles, iii. 660 ff.; the editio prin- 
ceps 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- 
gius, Uber den Aristeasbrief; Lumbroso, Recherches sur Veco- 
nomie politique de PEgypte, p. 351 f. and in Atti di R. Accadeinia 
delta Scienza di Torino, iv. (1868—9). Fuller lists will be found 
in Schiirer^, iii. 472 f. (and in Nestle s.v. Ai'isteas, in Real- 
encyklopddie f. p. Th. u. K.^), and Van Ess, Epilegg. p. 29 f. 

8. The writer professes to be a courtier in the service of 
Philadelphus, a Greek who is interested in the antiquities 
of the Jewish people'. Addressing his brother Philocrates, he 
relates the issue of a journey which he had recently made 
to Jerusalem. It appears that Demetrius Phalereus-, who is 

1 From the mention of Cyprus as ' the island ' (§ 3) it has been inferred 
that Aristeas was a Cypriot. The name occurs freely in inscriptions from 
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 
irepl Ίουδαίω»/ (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. 
Litt. in d. Alcxandrinerzcit, i. p. 135 ff. On the royal library at Alexandria 

The A lexandrian Greek Version. 1 1 

described as librarian of the royal library at Alexandria, had in 
conversation with the King represented the importance of 
procuring for the Hbrary a translation of the Jewish laws (τα 
των 'Ιουδαίων νόμιμα μ^ταγραφηζ α^ια και τηζ τταρα σοΙ βιβλιο- 
θήκης είναι). Philadelphus fell in with the suggestion, and 
despatched an embassy to Jerusalem with a letter to the 
High Priest Eleazar, in which the latter was desired to send to 
Alexandria six elders learned in the law from each of the 
tribes of Israel to execute the work of translation. In due 
course the seventy-two elders, whose names are given, arrived 
in Egypt, bringing with them a copy of the Hebrew Law 
written in letters of gold on a roll composed of skins (σνν.,.ταΐς 

8ιαφόροι<; Βιφθ€ραΐζ ev ats η νομοθεσία Ύΐ-γραμμένη χρνσογραφία 

τοίζ ΊουδαικοΓς γράμμασι). Α banquet followed, at which the 
King tested the attainments of the Jewish elders with hard 
questions. Three days afterwards the work of translation 
began. The 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 
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 ; and 

see Susemihl, i. p. 335 fif., and the art. Bibliothcken in Pauly-Wissowa, 
Real-Encyclopiidie, v. 409 f. 

^ The mole λυΗΙοΙι connected the Pharos Avith the city : see art. 
Alexandria in Smith's Diet, of Gr. and Rom. Geography, pp. 96 f. 

12 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

a curse was solemnly pronounced 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 rever- 
ence (τΓροσκννησας), and desired that it should be preserved 
with scrupulous care (εκελευσε μ^-γάλην εττι/χελειαν ποίζΐσθαί των 
βιβλίων καΐ σνντηρίΐν άγνως). 

9- The story of Aristeas is repeated more or less fully 
by the Alexandrian writers Aristobulus and Philo, and by 

Aristobulus a/>. Y.ViS. praep. ev. xiii. 12. 2 : η be. ολη ίρμην^ία 
των δια τον νόμου πάντων eVi του π ροσαγορίυθ^ντος Φιλαδβλφου 
βασιλβως σου Se προγόνου [he is addressing Philometor] προσ€ν€γ- 
καμβνου μείζονα φΐΚοτιμΊαν, Δημητρίου του Φα\ηρ€ως πραγματ€υ- 
σαμ4νου τα π(ρ\ τούτων^. Philo, νΐ'έ. Afoys. ϋ. 5 ^• '• ϋτολβμαίος 6 
Φίλάδβλφο? €πικ\ηθ€\ς . . ,ζηΧον και πόιθον λαβών της νομοθεσίας ημών 
€ΐς Ελλάδα γλώτταν την Χαλδαικην μεθαρμόζεσθαι bievoelTO, και 
πρβσββις (ύθυς €^4π(μπ€ προς τον της ^Ιουδαίας αρχιερέα., ό δε, ως 
(Ικός, ησθζΐς κα\ νομίσας ουκ άνευ θείας επιφροσύνης περίτό τοιούτον 
epyov €σπου8ακ€ναι τον βασιλέα... ασμένως αποστέλλει... καθ ίσαντες 
δ' εν άποκρνφω και μη8εν6ς παρόντος... καθάπερ ενθουσιωντες επρο- 
φητευον, ουκ άλλα αΧλοι, τα 8ε αυτά πάντες ονόματα κα\ ρήματα 
ωσπερ υποβολεως εκάστοις άοράτως ενηχουντος κτλ. Josephus, 
ant. i. prooe?n. 3 : Πτολεμαίων μεν ό 8εύτερος μάλιστα 8η βασιλεύς 
περ\ παι8είαν καί βιβλίων σνναγωγην σπου8άσας εςαιρετως εφιλοτι- 
μηθη τον ημετερον νόμον καΐ την κατ αυτόν 8ιάταζιν της πολιτείας 
εΙς την Ελλάδα φωνην μεταλαβείν κτλ. Ι Π ant. χϋ. 2. Ι — 15 

Josephus gives a full account obviously based on Aristeas (whom 
he calls \\ρισταΊος), and to a great extent verbally identical with 
the letter. 

The testimony of Josephus establishes only the fact that 
the letter of Aristeas was current in Palestine during the first 
century a.d. Philo, on the other hand, represents an Alex- 
andrian tradition which was perhaps originally independent of 
the letter, and is certainly not entirely consistent with it. He 

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

TJie Alexandrian Greek Version. 13 

states (/. c.) that the completion of the work of the lxx. was 
celebrated at Alexandria down to his own time by a yearly 
festival at the Pharos {μ^'χρί- vvv ανά τταν ΐτο^ Ιορτ-η και ττανηγνρίς 
ayerac κατά την Φάρον νησον, ets rjv ονκ 'Ιουδαίοι μόνον άλλα και 
τταμΊτληθ^ΐς eTepoL διαττλεουσι, τό re χωρίον σ€μνννοντ€<; iv ώ ττρωτον 
το της ερμηνείας ίξίλαμψζ κτλ.). Α popular anniversary of this 
kind can scarcely have grown out of a literary Λyork so artificial 
and so wanting in the elements which ensure popularity as the 
letter of Aristeas. The fragment of Aristobulus carries us 
much further back than the witness of Philo and Josephus. 
It was addressed to a Ptolemy who was a descendant of Phila- 
delphus, and who is identified both by Eusebius (/.c.) and by 
Clement^ {strom. i. 22) with Philometor. Whether Aristobulus 
derived his information from Aristeas is uncertain, but his 
words, if 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 the second century a.d. the letter of Aristeas is 
quoted or its 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. 
§§ 3, 6 ; Philastrius de haer. 138 ; Jerome, /r^^ ifi Gen.., praef. 
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- 

^ Clement of Alexandria identifies this Aristobulus with the person 
named in 2 Mace. i. 10 Άριστοβούλφ διδασκάλφ ΙΙτολβμαίον του βασιλέων. 
See Valckenaer diatribe de Aristolmlo (printed at the end of Gaisford's 
edition of Eus. praep. ev. iv.). 

14 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

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

Most of these Christian writers, in distinct contradiction 
to the statement of Aristeas, represent the Seventy as having 
worked separately, adding that when the results were com- 
pared at the end of the task they were found to be identical 
(so Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, 
Augustine, &c.). The author of the Cohortatio ad Graecos^ 
declares that at Alexandria he had been shewn the vestiges of 
the cells in which the translators had worked (αντοί iv r^ 'Αλεξ- 
άνδρεια γζΐ'όμζνοί καί τα Ίχνη των οικίσκων Ιν Trj Φάρω €ωρακότ€<; 
eTL σωζόμενα, και τταρα των Ικεί ώς τα πάτρια τταρζίληφότων ακηκο- 
6τ€ς ταντα ατταγγελλο/χεν). This story of the cells therefore 
was probably of Alexandrian origin, and had grown out of 
the local belief in the inspiration of the Seventy which appears 
already in the words of Philo quoted above ^ The Fathers 
generally accept both the belief and the legend which it 
generated, though the latter sometimes undergoes slight modi- 
fication, as when Epiphanius groups the lxxii. in pairs {ζνγη 
ζνγη κατ οικίσκον). 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 lxx cel- 
lulas Alexandriae mendacio suo exstruxerit, quibus divisi eadem 
scriptitarint, quum Aristeas... et Josephus nihil tale retulerint "), 
and rightly protests against the doctrine which was at the root of 
the absurdity ("aliud est enim vatem, aliud est esse inter- 

^ On the date of this treatise, which is commonly ascribed to Justin, 
see Kriiger, Hist, of Chr. Literature {^. T.), p. 112 f., and cf. Harnack- 
Preuschen, p. 107. 

^ Cf. ib. ούχ έρμηνίΐί eKiiuovs αλλ' ί€ροφάρτα$ καΐ ιτροφητα^ προσα^ο- 

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

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 15 

II. 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 Apology for the LXX., and 
Constantinus Oeconomus, op. cit.); but the great majority of 
modern scholars, and perhaps all living experts, recognise the 
unhistorical character of much of the story of Aristeas. 

Indeed it scarcely needed the massive learning of Hody to 
convict the letter 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 
of Philadelphus and Eleazar are of the same stamp as the con- 
fessedly 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; 
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 
'Aristeas' tells it is doubtless a romance, it must not be hastily 
inferred that it has no historical basis. That the writer was 
a Jew who lived in Egypt under the Ptolemies seems to be 

^ In his Contra hisioriam LXX. inteypretiim Aristeae nomine inscrip- 
tam dissertatio, originally published 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.). 

1 6 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

demonstrated by the knowledge which he displays of life 
at the Alexandrian Courts There is also reason to suppose 
that he wrote within fifty 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 of truth. Detailed criticism is impossible in this 
place, but it is necessary to examine the credibility of the 
chief features of the romance so far as they affect questions 
relating to the date and origin of the lxx. There are certain 
points in the letter 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 and the Hebrew rolls which they used 
were brought from Jerusalem ; and (4) that their translation 
when completed was welcomed both by Jews and Greeks. 

12. There is no improbability in the first of these state- 
ments. The personal tastes of Philadelphus, if by no means 
purely literary, included a fancy for the society of scholars and 
the accumulation of books ^ He founded a second library at 
the Serapeion to receive the overflow of that which Soter had 
established near the Museum and the Palace^. His syncre- 
tistic temperament disposed him to listen to the representatives 
of various creeds. A Buddhist mission from the Ganges found 
a welcome at his court ^; and the reign which produced 

1 See the remarks of Wilcken in Philologjis liii. (1894), p. 1 1 1 f•, and cf. 
Lumbroso, p. xiii. 

2 See Schurer=^ iii. p. 468 f. 

'^ Tertullian exaggerates his literary merits {apol. 18 Ptolemaeonim eru- omnis htteraturae sagacissimus). 

■* Cf. Mahaffy, Ei>ipi7'e of the Ptolemies, \>. 164 ff. On the character of 
Philadelphus see also Droysen, iii., p. 254 f. 

■' Mahaffy, pp. 163 f., 170. 

TJie Alexandrian Greek Version. 17 

Manetho's Greek history of Egyptian institutions may well 
have yielded also a translation into Greek of the Hebrew 
sacred books. The presence of a large Jewish colony at 
Alexandria could hardly have failed to awaken in the King 
and his scholars of the Museum an interest in the ancient laws 
and literature of the Jewish race. For these reasons modern 
scholars have for the most part shewn no desire to disturb the 
tradition 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 
Philometor, partly on internal grounds. Under the latter head 
he insisted on the translation in Lev. xxiii. 1 1 of the phrase ΠΊΠφρ 
nSL'^n by r^ eVai'ptoi/ τψ πρώτης. The Pharisees understood the 
word Γ\2ψ 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 αττό της βπανρων τον 
σαββάτον, and as it is not likely that a translator who had of set 
purpose Avritten της πρώτης in ζ/. 1 1 would have let τον σαββάτον 
escape him a little further down, we must suppose that τον σ. 
stood originally in both verses and that της πρ. 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 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 
Hellenist Demetrius, fragments of whose treatise Ilept τών Iv 

^ Gesch. Judeii^, iii. p. 615 ff. 

^ See Expository Times, ii. pp. 209, 277 f. 

S. S. 

1 8 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

rfi 'Ιουδαία ^ασιλ€ΐα are preserved by Clement {strom. i. 21) 
and Eusebius {praep. ev. ix. 21, 29). The following specimens 
may suffice to prove this assertion. 

Demetrius. Genesis (lxx.). 

αντί. των /ΛΤ7λων του /ααι/δρα- cSpev μήλα /χανδραγόρου. . . 

yopov. αντί. των ρ.ανδραγορών (χχχ. 


αγγελον του θζον τταλαισαι εττάλαιεν. . .και ηψατο του 

και αψασθαι τον ττλάτονς τον ττλάτους τον μηρον Ίακωβ 

μηροί) τον ^Ιακωβ. (χχχϋ. 25). 

λ€γ€ΐν κτηνοτρόφονζ αυτούς IptiTe "AvSpes κτηνοτρόφοι 

ilvai. Ισμίν (xlvi. 34)• 

As Demetrius carries his chronology no further than the 
reign of Philopator, it may be assumed that he lived under the 
fourth Ptolemy \ He is thus the earliest of the Alexandrian 
Hellenistic writers; yet equally with the latest he draws his 
quotations of the Book of Genesis from the lxx. It may 
fairly 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. 

13. Both 'Aristeas' and Aristobulus associate with the 
inception of the lxx. the name of Demetrius Phalereus-. 
Aristobulus merely represents Demetrius as having 'negociated 
the matter ' {ιτρα-γματ^νσαμίνον τα ττίρΧ τούτων), but Aristeas 
states that he did so (i) in the capacity of head of the royal 
library (κατασταθείς ΙπΧ της τον ^ασιλί'ως βιβλιοθήκης), and (2) 
in the days of Philadelphus, with whom he appears to be on 
intimate terms. Both these particulars are certainly unhis- 
torical. Busch^ has shewn that the office of librarian was 

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

- The Dialogue of Tbnothy and Aqiiila strangely says : t]v 3e oJtos ό 
Αημητριοί τψ -yuvei Εβραίοι. 

^ j)e bihliothecariis AlexandrtJiis (1884), p. i ff. ; cf. Droysen, iii. 
p. 256; Mahaffy, p. 115. 

The Alexmidrian Greek Version, 19 

filled under Philadelphus by Zenodotus of Ephesus, and on the 
decease of Zenodotus by Eratosthenes. Moreover Demetrius, 
so far from being intimate with Philadelphus, was sent into 
exile soon after the accession of that monarch, and died a 
little later on from the bite of an asp, probably administered 
at the King's instigation {c. B.C. 283) \ Thus, if Demetrius took 
part in the inception of the lxx., he must have done so during 
the reign of Soter. This is not in itself improbable. He 
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 
it is not unlikely that the project of translating the Jewish 
Law was discussed between him and the royal founder of the 
Alexandrian library, and that the work was really due to his 
suggestion ^ though his words did not bear fruit until after his 
death. The point is of importance to the student of the lxx. 
only in so far as it has to do with the question whether the 
version was made under official guidance. The breakdown of 
the chronology of this part of the story of Aristeas leaves us 
free to abandon the hypothesis of direct intervention on the 
part of the King, and internal evidence certainly justifies us 
in doing so. An official version would assuredly have avoided 
such barbarisms as yuwpa^, elV, σάββατα^, when such Greek 
equivalents as ττροσηλντος^ διχουν, άνάτταυσις, were available. 
The whole style of the version is alien from the purpose of a 
book intended for literary use, nor is it conceivable that under 
such circumstances Jewish translators, Palestinian or Alex- 
andrian, would have been left 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. Plutarch, Apophthegm, viii. Αημητρωί 6 Φαληρβύί ΤΙτόλεμαίω τφ 
βασίΧβΐ τταρψβί τα irepl βασιΧύα^ καΐ η'^€μονία$ βιβλία κτάσθαι και άνα- 

^ Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 8 f. 

20 The Alexmidrian Greek Version. 

arose out of the needs of the Alexandrian Jews. Whilst in 
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 ver- 
sion, when he represents the Jews as having heard and 
welcomed the Greek Pentateuch before it was presented to 
the King-. But it is 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 own curiosity. 

14. The Greek of the Alexandrian Pentateuch is Egyptian, 
and, as far as we can judge, not such as Palestinian translators 
would have written. Instances are not indeed wanting of 
translations executed in Egypt by Palestinians ; the most note- 
worthy"* is the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, which, as the 
prologue tells us, was turned into Greek by the grandson of 
the writer after a prolonged visit to the banks of the Nile {τταρα- 
γ^νηθίΐς €ts ΑΙ'γυτττον και συγχρόνισα?) ; but the clumsy Greek 
of the prologue, and the stiff artificiality of the book, offer a 

1 Cf. Philo i7/. Eus. pi-aep. ev. viii. 7 των ιερέων δέ tis παρών, -η των 
•γερόντων eh, άνα^ίνώσκει τού$ iepous νόμους avTois καΐ καθ' 'έκαστον έξη-γεΐται. 
13ut έξη•γ€Ϊται is ambiguous. 

2 The hope of winning converts may have been among the motives 
which inspired the translators and gained a ready welcome for their work ; 
cf. the prol. to Sirach: ού μόνον avTovs τού$ άναΎίνώσκοντα^ δέον έστΙν 
€τηστήμονα^ "γίνεσθαί, άλλα και rois e/cros δύνασθαι toi)s φιλομαθοΰντα^ 
χρησίμους elvat καΐ XeyovTas καΐ "/ράφοντα^ — 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 {^φασαν.,.έρμηνευκέναί Ανσίμαχον 
ΐΙτοΧβμαίου των ev Ιερουσαλήμ). 

The Alexaridriaii Greek Version. 21 

marked contrast to the simple style of the Pentateuch. That 
the latter is 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 in 
the Pentateuch, of such words of Egyptian origin as αχ€ΐ (Gen. 
xli. 2 ff.), κόι/δυ (Gen. xliv. 2 ff.), Τ^6ς (Lev. xi. 17 ; Deut. xiv. 16), 
βνσσο^ (Exod. xxv. — xxxix. passim) and such characteristically 
Egyptian terms as ΒίΒραχμον, άληθαα {= ^"^ΙΡΪ^}, άρχψάγ€ίρος, 

άρχιοίνοχόος and the Hke. The argument is not conclusive, 
since after the time of Alexander the kolvtj contained elements 
drawn from various localities'. But recent discoveries in Egypt 
have yielded a criterion of Egyptian Greek which has been 
applied to the lxx. with definite results. In 1892 Prof. Mahaffy 
was able to write : " in the vocabulary of the papyri we find a 
closer likeness to the Greek of the lxx. than to any other book 
I could name^." 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 words and forms of the lxx. are shewn to 
have been in common use among Egyptian Greeks of the third 
and second centuries b.c.^ The vocabulary and style of the lxx. 
will be treated in a later chapter ; for the present it is enough 
to say that they are such as to discredit the attribution of the 
Greek Pentateuch to a company consisting exclusively or chiefly 
of Palestinian Jews. The lxx. as a whole, or at any rate 
the earlier part of the collection, is a monument of Alexandrian 
Greek as it was spoken by the Jewish colony in the Delta 
under the rule of the Ptolemies ^ 

^ See Hody, ii. 4; Eichhorn, p. 472; H. H. A. Kennedy, Sources of 
N. T. Greek, p. 24 f. ; 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. 

22 TJie Alexandrian Greek Version. 

The story of the rolls being written in letters of gold and 
sent to the King by the High Priest may be dismissed at once ; 
it belongs to the picturesque setting of the romance. But 
there is nothing improbable in the statement that the Hebrew 
rolls were freshly brought from Jerusalem', for 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 μητρόπολις, 
and the conviction of the Alexandrian Jews that in their Greek 
version they possessed the same sacred texts which their 
brethren in Judaea read in Hebrew. Nothing was further 
from their intention than to create an Alexandrian canon, 
or an Alexandrian type of text. The point is one which it 
is 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 present- 
ing the history of their country in more attractive forms. As 
to the preservation of the original in the Alexandrian libraries, 
we have no evidence beyond Tertullian's scarcely trustworthy 
statement, " Hodie usque Serapeum Ptolemaei bibliothecae cum 
ipsis Hebraicis litteris exhibentur^" 

^ According to Epiphanius {de mens, et pond. lof.) the rolls only were 
sent in the first instance, and the interpreters followed in consequence of a 
second application from Philadelphus. This form of the story suggests 
that the desire for a translation may have been stimulated by the arrival of 
MSS. from Jerusalem. 

- See, however, Mahaffy, Hist, of Gk. class, literature, i. ii. p. 195. 

^ Apol. 18; cf. Justin, apol. i. 31, Chrys. or. i adv. Jiid., and Epiph. 

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 23 

15. It 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. This was evident to Josephus : 
ant. i. prooe?n. 3 ουδέ yap ττάσαν cKCtvos (sc. Πτολβ/χ,αιος d hevrt- 
ρος) ΐφθη λαβζΐν την αναγραφην, άλλα μόνα τά τον νόμου τταρεδο- 
σαν οΐ τΓζμφθίντες irrl την ζ^η-γησιν eh Άλ€^άνδρ€ίαν. Christian 
writers, however, failed to notice this limitation ; the whole 
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 ; Aristeas has nothing to say about the 
translation of any books beyond the first five. His silence as 
to the Prophets and the Hagiographa is entirely consistent with 
the conditions of the period in which he fixes his story. The 
canon of the Prophets seems to have scarcely reached comple- 
tion before the High-Priesthood of Simon Π. (219 — 199 B.C.) ^ 
If this was so in Palestine, at 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 set of rendering 
sacred books into Greek, it would assuredly be followed as 
often as fresh rolls 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., ΐ7ΐ Mich. ii. See the Talmudical 
passages cited by Hody, p. 269. - de inejis et pond. 3 sq. 

3 Ryle, Cayton of the O. T., p. 113. Cf. Buhl, p. 12. 

24 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

of Palestinian recognition, if a bilingual Jew was found ready 
to undertake the task. A happy accident enables us to estimate 
roughly the extent to which this process had gone by the sixth 
or seventh decade of the second century. The writer of the 
prologue to Sirach, who arrived in Egypt in the 38th year of 
Euergetes — i.e. in the year 132 B.C. if, 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 books " were already current in a translation (ου 
γαρ ισοδυνα/αεΓ αυτά Ιν ίαντοίζ ^ΕβραιστΙ λ€γομ€να, και όταν 
μζτα)^θΎΐ €19 kripav γλώσσαν* ου μόνον δέ ταΰτα, άλλα και αντο^ 
6 νόμοζ καΐ αί προφητΐΐαί καΐ τά λοιττά των βιβλίων ου μικράν 
την διαφοραν €χ€ί iv ΙαυτοΓς λεγό/χενα). This sentence reveals 
the progress which had been made in the work of translation 
between the second Ptolemy and the ninth. Under Euergetes II. 
the Alexandrian Jews possessed, in addition to the original 
Greek Pentateuch, a collection of prophetic books, and a 
number of other writings belonging to their national literature^ 
which had not as yet formed themselves into a complete 
group. The latter are doubtless the books which are known as 
D^a-in? or Hagiographa. Since the author of the prologue was 
a Palestinian Jew, we may perhaps assume that under at 
•προφητάαι and τά λοιττά των βιβλίων he includes such books of 
both classes as were already in circulation in Palestine. If this 
inference is a safe one, it will follow that all the ' Prophets ' of 
the Hebrew canon, ^ former ' and ' latter,' had been translated 
before B.C. 132. 

With regard to the Hagiographa, in some cases we have 
data which lead to a more definite conclusion. Eupolemus, 
who, if identical with the person of that name mentioned in 
I Mace. viii. 17, wrote about the middle of the second century, 
makes use of the Greek Chronicles, as Freudenthal has 

^ Cf. prol, supra : του νόμου και των προφητών καΐ των άλλων πατρίων 

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 25 

clearly shewn ^ Ezra-Nehemiah, originally continuous with 
Chronicles, was probably translated at the same time as that 
book. Aristeas (not the pseudonymous author of the letter, but 
the writer of a treatise Trcpt Ιουδαίων) quotes the book of Job 
according to the lxx., and has been suspected" of being the 
author of the remarkable codicil attached to it (Job xlii. 17 b — e). 
The footnote to the Greek Esther, which states that that book 
was brought to Egypt in the 4th year of '' Ptolemy and Cleo- 
patra " (probably i.e. of Ptolemy Philometor), may have been 
written with the purpose of giving Palestinian sanction to the 
Greek version of that book ; but it vouches for the fact that 
the version was in circulation before the end of the second 
century b.c.^ The Psalter of the lxx. appears to be quoted in 
I Mace. vii. 17 (Ps. Ixxviii. =lxxix. 2), and the Greek version of 
I 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 
Greek Psalter may be assigned to the second half of the second 

17. On the whole, though the direct evidence is frag- 
mentary, it is probable that before the Christian era Alexandria 
possessed the whole, or nearly the whole, of the Hebrew 
Scriptures in a Greek translation. For the first century a.d. 
we have the very important evidence of Philo, who uses the 
LXX. and quotes largely from many of the books. There are 
indeed some books of the Hebrew canon to which he does not 
seem to refer, i.e. Ruth, Ecciesiastes, Canticles, Esther, Lamen- 
tations, Ezekiel, Daniel ^ But, as Professor Ryle points out, 

1 Pp. 108, 119; cf. p. 185. " lb. p. 138 f. 

2 Cf. Cheyne, Origin of the Psalter, pp. 12, 83. 
* Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture, p. xxxi. f. 

20 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

" it may be safely assumed that Ruth and Lamentations were, 
in Philo's time, already united to 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. But it would be precarious 
to 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 other 
Jewish, but not Alexandrian, authorities assist us to ascertain the 
contents of the Greek Bible in the first century a.d. {a) The 
New 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 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 Greek translations of these books were not yet in circula- 
tion among Palestinian Jews, {b) Josephus, who knew and used 
the LXX., unfortunately has no explicit statement as to the 
extent of the Greek version ; but his list of the Hebrew books 
is practically identical with our own, and, as it occurs in a 
treatise intended for Gentile readers, it is perhaps safe to 
assume that he speaks of books accessible in a translation ; 
'*in other words, that he writes with the lxx. version 
before him^" 

Thus while the testimony of the first century a.d. does not 
absolutely require us to believe that all the books of the 

^ Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture, p. xxxiii. 

- Ryle, Canou, p. 151. '^ lb. p. 163. 

The Alexandrian Greek Version. 2 J 

Hebrew canon had been translated and were circulated in a 
Greek version during the Apostolic age, such a view is not im- 
probable ; 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 all of Alexandrian origin, 
or the only Greek translations which claimed to represent 
the corresponding Hebrew books. In a few cases there were 
certainly rival interpretations or recensions of the same book 
(e.g. in Judges, Daniel, Tobit). But as a whole the work of 
translation was doubtless carried out at Alexandria, where it 
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'ae- 
netica^ 1655; Ussher, Syntagma^ 1655; \^2λ\.οη^ 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 τώι/ ο €ρμην€ντών, 1 849; Churton, The I7iflue7ice 
of the LXX. up07i the p7Ogress of Christia7nty, 1861 ; Ewald, 
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 The Alexandrian Greek Version. 

Buhl, Kanon u. Text der A. Zl, 1891 ; A. Loisy, histoire critique 
du texte et des versions de ία Bible, 1892; Hatch, Essays on 
Biblical Greek, 1892; W. Robertson Smith, O. T. in the Jewish 
Church"^, 1892; E. Klostermann, Analecta zur LXX^., 1895; 
Nestle, Urtext u. Ubersetzungen der Bibel, 1897. Monographs 
on special books or particular aspects of the subject will be 
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 Ency- 
clopedias 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. Theo- 
logie u. Kirche^ (Nestle; also published in a separate form, 
under the title Urtext u. Ubersetzungen, &^c.). 

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 
the Bible of the Egyptian Jews, even of those who belonged to 
the educated and literary class. This feeling was shared by 
the rest of the Hellenistic world. In Palestine indeed the 
version seems to have been received with less enthusiasm, and 
whether it was used in the synagogues is still uncertain. But 
elsewhere its acceptance by Greek-speaking Jews was universal 
during the ApostoHc age and in the next generation. 

On the question of the use of the LXX. in the synagogues see 
Hody iii. i. i, Frankel, Vorstudten, p. 56 if., Konig, Ei?ileitung^ 
p. 105 ff. ; the negative is stoutly maintained by J. Lightfoot, 
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 
ξ'μαναν αί βίβλοι [the translated books] καΙ παρ* Αίγντττίοις μ€χρι 
τοΐι δίνρο καί πανταχού πάρα πασίν elaiv ^lovdatois : dial. 72 avrt] 
η περικοπή η €κ των Χό-γων τοΰ 'lepeplov eTt €στ\ν βγγβγραμμξνη 
€v τισιν άντιγράφοις των €v συναγωγαΐς Ιουδαίων), Tertullian 
{apol. 18 "Judaei palam lectitant"), Pseudo-Justin {cohort, ad 
Gr. 13 TO de παρ* 'louSatoty ert και νυν Tas ttj ημζτέρα θζοσ^βζία 

30 Later Greek Versio7is. 

διαφίροναας σωζ^σθαί βίβΧονς, deias προνοίας '4pyov vnep ημών 
yiyovev ...άπο της των Ιουδαίων συναγωγής ταύτας άζιοΰρ.€ν ττροκο- 

2. When the lxx. passed into the hands of the Church 
and was used in controversy with Jewish antagonists, the Jews 
not unnaturally began to doubt the accuracy of the Alexandrian 

version (Justin, dial. 68 τολμωσι Xiyeiv την Ι^γησίν ην ζξηγη- 
σαντο οί ξβΒομηκοντα νμων ττρίσβντζροι τταρά ΐΐτολζμαίω τω των 
AiyvTTTLOiv βασιΚύ γ€νόμξ.νοι μη Λναι tv τισιν άΧηθη), The 
crucial instance was the rendering of ^ψ?^ by παρθίνος in Isa. 
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 
the Jewish leaders of the second century was perhaps not 
altogether due to polemical causes. The lxx. "did not suit 
the newer school of [Jewish] interpretation, it did not correspond 
with the received text\" An official text differing con- 
siderably from the text accepted in earlier times had received 
the approval of the Rabbis, and the Alexandrian version, 
which represented the older text, began to be suspected 
and to pass into disuse. Attempts were made to provide 
something better for Greek-speaking Israelites (Justin, dial 71 
αυτοί Ι^γ^ίσθαι ττειρώνται). Of two such fresh translations 
Irenaeus speaks in terms of reprehension (/. c. ονχ^ ως Ινιοί φασιν 
των ννν μ€θ€.ρμηνΐν€.ιν τολμωντων την γραφην ...ως @€θΒοτίων...6 
Έφεσιος και Άκιίλας ο Ποντικός, αμφότεροι 'Ιουδαίοι ττροσηλντοι). 
Origen, who realised the importance of these translations, 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 ; cf. ib. p. 87 f. ; 
Kirkpatrick. Divine Library, p. 63 ff. ; cf. Buhl, p. 118 f. 

2 Eus. H. E. vi. 16. 

Later Greek Versions, 31 

3. Aquila. The name had been borne in the ApostoHc 
age by a native of Pontus who was of Jewish birth (Acts xviii. 2 
ΊουδαΓον oVo/xart Άκυλαν, ΥΙοντικον τω yeVet). Aquila the trans- 
lator 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 
(a.d. 117 — 138), and was a connexion of the Emperor {ττενθ^ρί- 
Βης, Epiph., Dia/. of Timothy and Aquila ; irevOepo^, Ps.-Ath., 
Chron. Fasch.). Hadrian employed his relative to superintend 
the building of AeHa Capitolina on the site of Jerusalem, and 
while there Aquila was converted to Christianity by Christians 
who had returned from Pella. Refusing, however, to abandon 
the pagan practice of astrology, he was excommunicated ; upon 
which he shewed his resentment by submitting to circumcision 
and attaching himself to the teaching of the Jewish Rabbis. 
The purpose of his translation was to set aside the interpreta- 
tion of the Lxx., in so far as it appeared to support the views 
of the Christian Church.• 

This is the story of Epiphanius {de mejis. ct pond. 14 sq. : 
λαβών [sc. ό Άδρίανόί•] τον Άκύλαν τούτον... "Έλληνα οντά και αυτόν 
π€νθ€ρί8ην, άπο "Σινώπης 8e της Τΐόντου όρμώμ^νον, καθίστησιν 
αυτόν €κύσ€ βπίστατάν toIs epyots κτλ — πικρανθ^Ις δ€...προσηλυ- 
Tcvei κα\ π^ριτίμνζταί ΊουδαΓο? ' κα\ €πίπόνως φιλοτιμησάμ€νος 
β^έ^ωκ€ν ίαυτον μαθύν την Εβραίων 8ιάλ€κ.τον κα\ τα αυτών στοιχεία, 
ταύτην δβ ακρότατα naidevOels ηρμην^υσ^ν ουκ όρθω λογισμώ χρησά- 
μ€νος, αλλ όπως διαστρε'-ψ-τ; τίνα τών ρητών, (νσκηψας ττ} τών οβ' 
ίρμην^ία ινα τα π€ρ\ Χρίστου iv ταΐς γραψαΊς μ^μαρτυρημίνα άλλως 
€κδώσ(ΐ). The same tale is told in substance by the Pseudo- 
Athanasian 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, 

^ Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor, p. 27 f. ; cf. Hort, Commentary 
on I Peter, p. 1 7 2 fF. 

32 Later Greek Versions, 

which he believes to have been ultimately the history of Ariston 
of Pella {op. cit. p. xxvi. ff.). An Aquila figures in the Clement- 
ine 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. 

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 Ι,^Π^ ό προσηλντο<;\ 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 
'Αδριανό? ίτη κα, ονηνος τω δωδβκάτω cret Άκυλα? €γνωρι'^€Τ0...ω9 
cTi/at άπο του χρόνου της kpfx-qveia^ των 6β' ίρμην^υτών έ'ω? Άκΰλα 
του €ρμ,ην€υτοΰ, -ήγουν εω? δωδεκάτου €τους 'Αδριανού, €τη υλ' και 
μήνας δ'. The 1 2th year of Hadrian was a.d. 128 — 9, the year 
in which the Emperor began to rebuild Aelia. This date is 
doubtless approximately correct, if Aquila was a pupil of R. 
Akiba, who taught from a.d. 95 to a.d. 135 ^ or even of R. 
Eliezer and R. Joshua, who immediately preceded Akiba. It 
must have taken the Greek proselyte many years to acquire an 
adequate knowledge of Hebrew and of the Rabbinical methods 
of interpretation, and under these circumstances his great work 
could hardly have been completed before the third decade of 
the second century. When Irenaeus wrote his third book, in 

1 The name is written oS^py, D7''pX, Ο^ψ. or O7WV, and in the 
Bab. Talmud, D1?p3K. On 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. 

Later Greek Versions. 33 

the eighth decade, Aquila's translation might still be regarded 
as comparatively recent (τών vvv μ.ίΒίρμ-ηννίΐζ.ιν τοΧιιώντων την 
γραφήν. . .ώ?. . .'Ακύλας). 

4• It was natural that the version of Aquila should be 
received with acclamation by his co-religionists. His teachers 
congratulated him in the words of Ps. xlv. 2, Dli< '?.?P n^S^SJ'. 
The Talmud quotes or refers to his translation of not a few 
passages (Gen. xvii. i ; Lev. xix. 20, 23, 40; Esth. i. 6; Prov. 
xviii. 21, XXV. 11; Isa. iii. 20; Ezek. xvi. 10, xxiii. 43; Dan. 
V. 5, viii. 13). In Origen's time he was trusted implicitly in 
Jewish circles, and used by all Jews who did not understand 
Hebrew (ep. ad Africaii. 2 φίλοτιμότζρον ττί-πιστίνμ.Ινοζ τταρα 
Ίουδαιοΐ9. .ω μάλιστα ζΐωθασιν οΐ dyvoovvrcs την 'Εβραίων οίά- 
λζκτον ^ζ^ρησθαί, ως ττάντων μάλλον €7ΓΐΤ€Τ€υγ/Α€νω) ', 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, 
for even Justinian, when regulating the public reading of the 
Scriptures in the synagogues, thought it expedient to permit 
the use of Aquila (novell. 146 : "at vero ii qui Graeca lingua 
legun t Lxx. interpretum utentur translatione . . . verum . . . licentiam 
concedimus etiam Aquilae versione utendi"). It was equally 
natural that the proselyte's version should be regarded with 
distrust by Christians, who saw in it the work of a champion 
of Rabbinism as well as a bold attempt to displace the 
Septuagint'. Yet the few Christian writers who were students 
of the Hebrew Bible learnt to recognise the fidelity of Aquila's 
work. He was 'a slave to the letter' (δουλ€υωι/ rrj ΈβραικΎ] 
Xe^ct) ; whatever was wanting in the Hebrew text was not to be 

^ Megilla i. 9: in n"'S"'Q'' there is a play upon nD*• (cf. Gen. ix. 27). 

- See Dr C. Taylor in the preface to Mr ^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." 

S. S. X 

34 Later Greek Versions. 

found in Aquila (ου KCtrat τταρα TOts ^Εβραίοις, διοττερ ουδέ τταρα 
τω Άκνλα). So Origen confesses'; and Jerome, though when 
in a censorious mood he does not spare the proselyte (e.g. 
praef. in Job ^ ep. ad. Far?wiach.)^ elsewhere admits his honesty 
and diligence { Damas. 12 ''non contentiosius, ut quidam 
putant, sed studiosius verbum interpretatur ad verbum " ; ep. 
ad Mar cell. " iamdudum cum voluminibus Hebraeorum editio- 
nem 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 summer of 1897 Aquila's version was known 
to students only 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) 
to illustrate the purpose and style of Aquila's work. But an 
unexpected discovery has now placed at our disposal several 
larger fragments of the version, emanating from a Jewish 
source. Among the debris of the Genizah of the Cairo syna- 
gogue lately brought to Cambridge through the efforts of Dr 
Taylor and Dr Schechter, Mr F. C. Burkitt has been so fortunate 
as to discover some palimpsest scraps which under later Hebrew 
writing contain in a good uncial hand of the sixth century 
Aquila's translation of i Kings xx. 9 — 17 and 2 Kings xxiii. 
12 — 2γ, From the same treasure Dr Taylor has recovered 
Pss. xc. 6 — 13, xci. 4 — 10^, and a portion of Ps. xxii. The 

1 Ep. ad Afric. 3. Cf. Aug. /. c. ^ See p. 31. 

^ 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 
Fathers (ed. 2, 1897). 

Later Greek Versions. 


student will find below specimens of these discoveries, placed 

for the purpose of comparison in parallel columns with the 
version of the lxx. 

3 Regn. xxi. (i Kings xx.) lo — 13. 

LXX. (Cod. B'). Aquila. 

'°και άττε'στίΐλει/ ττρός αΰτόι/ '°καΙ dTreVreiAer τΐρο^ αυτόν 

υιό? Άδίρ λέγων Τάδε -πονησαι υίός'Αδαδ και εΤττεν Τάδε ττοιτ^σαι- 

/xot 6 Βίο% καΧ τάδε ττροσθζίη, σαν /λοι ^eot και τα'δε ττροσθύψ 

el €Κ7Γ0ίησ€ί 6 χους ^αμ.αρξ.ία.% σαν, d επαρκέσει χους ^α/χαριας 

Tats άλο;7Γε^ιν τταντι τω λαω τοις λιχάσιν' του τταντόςτοΟλαοί) 

τοις ττε^οις /χου. ''και αττίκρίθη ος εν ττοσιν μον. "και άττζκρίθη 

βασιλεύς 'Ισραήλ και εΤττεν βασιλεύς Ίσρατ/λ και εΤττεν 

Ίκανουσ^ω• /χή καυχάσ^ω 6 Ααλησατζ Μη κανχάσθω ζωννν- 

κνρτος ως 6 ορθός. '"και μ^νος ως 6 ττεριλυό/χενο?. '"και 

iyevero ore άττίκρίθη αντω τον λό- iyivixo ο')ς ηκονσ^ν συν το ρήμα 

γον τούτον, ττίνων ην αυτός και τοντο, καΐ αντος εττιννεν αυτός 

ττάντες βασιλείς /χετ' αΰτου εν και οΐ /βασιλείς ε'ν σνακιασμοΐς- 

σκηναΐς• καΐ είττεν τοις τταισίν και εΤττεν ττρός Βονλονς αύτου 

αΰτοΰ ΟΙκοΒομησατζ χάρακα' καΐ Θε'τε• και ίθηκαν ε'πι ττ/ν ττο'λιν. 

ίθ^ντο χάρακα εττι ττ/ν ττόλιΐ'. '^^^^^ [3q{, ττροφητης εις ττροσ- 

'3 και ιδού προφήτης εις ττροσ- τ/γγισεν ττρός Άα/? /?ασιλε'α 

:7λ^εν τω ^ασιλει Ίσρατ/λ και Ίσρατ/λ και εΤττεν Τάδε λέγει 

εΤττεν Τάδε λε'γει Κύριος Ει ^'^^'^ ΕΤδες συν ττάντα τόν 

εόρακας τόι^ οχλον τόν ρ,ε'γαν οχλον τόν ρ,ε'γαν τούτον ; ιδού 

τούτον ; ιδού εγώ διδω/Λΐ αυτόν εγώ δι'δω/χι αυτόν εις γεΓρά σου 

στ/'/χερον εις χείρας σάς, και σήμερον, και γνω'στ/ οτι εγώ 

γνώστ/ ό'τι εγώ Κύριος. ^'^^Ι'^. 

^ Cod. Α is nearer to Aquila, as the following variants shew : 10ποΐ77σαι- 
σα;/ μοι ot i^eot /cai raoe ττροσθει,ησαν A 12 ore] ω? A ( τταΐ-τί? ot ^. A 

13 τω /3ασ, ] pr τω Αχαα3 A | rot' οχλον] pr iravra A | eis χ. σα? σήμερον Α. 

- MS. xe[iAi]ac[iN] ; see Burkitt, i?/. cit. p. 2. 


Later Greek Versions, 

4 Regn. (2 Kings) xxiii. 21 — 24. 
Lxx. (Cod. B'). Aquila. 

^'καΐ €Τ/€Τ€ΐ'λατο 6 βασιλ^νς ^'καΐ everctXaro 6 /βασιλεύς 

τταντί τω λαώ λέγων Ποίϊ^σατε συν τταντι τω λαω τω Xcyctv 

ττάσχατω κνρίω θζωημων, καθώς ΤΙοίησατε φεσα τω ^"1^"^ θεω 

γεγρατΓται εττι βιβλίου της δια- ΰ/χών κατά, το -γζ-γραμμίνον ζττΐ 

θήκης ταύτης, ^^otl ουκ €γ€νηθη βιβλίου της συνθήκης ταύτης, 

το ττάσχα τούτο αφ' ήμερων των ^^otl ουκ Ιπονηθη κατά το φ4σα 

κριτών οΐ (.κρίνον τον Ίσρατ^λ, τοΰτο άττό ημερών των κριτών οΐ 

και ττασας τας ημέρας βασιλέων έκριναν τον ^Ισραήλ καΐ ττασών 

Ίσραηλ καΐ βασιλέων *Ιουδα• ημερών βασιλέων Ίσραηλ και 

'^OTt αλλ' ^7 ''''^ οκτωκαώεκάτω /ϊασιλε'ων Ίοΰδα* ^^οτι άλλα εν 

ετει του /βασιλέως Ίωσεια eye- οκτωκαιδεκατω ετει του /?ασι- 

νηθη το ττάσχα τω κυρίω εν 'le- λβως Ίωσιαου Ιττονηθη το φέσα 

ρουσαλημ. ""^καί -γε τους ^ελτ^τας τούτο τω '^Τ^'^ εν Ιερουσαλήμ. 

και τους γνωριστας και τα θερα- ^*καΙ καί -γε συν τονς μάγους καΐ 

φείν και τα είδωλα καΐ ττάντα τα συν τους γνωριστας και σί<ν τα 

ττροσοχθίσματα τα γεγονότα εν μορφώματα και συν τα καθάρ- 

γη Ίουδα και εν Ίερουσαλτ^/χ ματα και συν ττάντα ττροσοχθί- 

εζηρεν *1ωσείας, ϊνα στηση τους σματα α ωραθησαν εν γη Ιουδα 

λογούς του νόμου τους γεγραμ- και εν Ιερουσαλήμ εττέλε^εν Ίω- 

μένους επί τω βιβλίω ου ευρεν σιαοΰ, οττως άναστηση τα ρη- 

Χελκείας 6 ιερεύς εν οίκω Κυ- ματα του νόμου τα γεγραμμένα 

ρίου. tTTt του βιβλίου [ου ευρεν] 

Έλκιαου ό ιερεύς οίκω Κουρίου'. 

1 The following variants in Cod. A agree with Aquila : 22 ττασων 
ημ€ρωι> A 23 το ττασχα] + τοντο A 

^ MS. κγ> at the end of a line: see Burkitt, p. i6. 

Later Greek Versioiis. 


Ps. xc. (xci.) db — 13 
Lxx. (Cod. B). 

άττό συμπτώματος και δαι- 
μονίον μζσημβρινον. 
^TTcactrat €Κ τον κλιτονζ σον 
και μνριας €κ δεξιών σον, 
■προζ σ€ δε ουκ cyytct• 
^ττλην τοις οφθαλμοΐς σον κατα- 
και άντατΓοδοσιν αμαρτωλών 
^οτ6 σν, Kvpte, 77 ελπις μον 
τον νψιστον ίθον καταφνγην 
^°ον προσ€λΐνσ€ται προς σ€ κακά, 
και μάστίζ ονκ eyyuL τω σκη- 
νώματί σον' 
^^OTL τοις άγγελοις αντον evT€- 
λεΐται πςρΐ σον, 
τον διαφυλά^αι σε €V rats 
οδοΓς^ σον. 
^"€7Γΐ χειρών αρονσίν σε, 

^τ; τΓοτε προσκόψΎ]ς προς λίθον 
τον τΓοδα σου• 
^^εττ' άστΓίδα και βασιΧίσκον 

άττδ 8ηyμov 8αίμ[ονίζοντος με- 
^ττεσεΓται από πλάγιου σ[ου 
καΐ μνρίας από δ«^ι[ών σου]* 
προς σε ου προσεγγ[«Γει]• 
^ εκτός ει/ οφθαλμοΐς [σου επι- 
και άπότισιν άσεβων oij/rj. 

'οτι συ, ^^^^, ελπις μον 

νφιστον ΐθηκας οίκητηρων 
'°οΰ μίταγθησ €ται π ρος σ\ κακία, 
και άφτ) ουκ εγγισει εν σκέτη] 
"οτι άγγελοις αΰτου εντελεΐται 
του φνλά^αι σε εν πάσαις 
όδοις σον 
"επι ταρσών άρουσίν σε, 

μηποτ€ προσκόψη εν λι^ω 
[πους σου] * 
^^επι λεαινα[ν]^ και ασπίδα πατή- 

11 rats oSots] pr ττασαι? A(R)T 

2 MS. λεβΝΛ. 

Later Greek Versions. 

Ps. xci. (xcii.) 5 — lo. 
Lxx (Cod. B^). Aquila. 

oTt €νφρανάς με, Κυρΐ€, iv τω ^[οτι ηνφρανάζ /xe, '^'^]'^^, iv 

κάτεργα) σου, 
[cv ΤΓουημασί] χάρων σου 

ΤΓΟιηματί σον, 
και Ιν τοις epyoLs των χειρών 
σον αγαλλιασο/χ,αι. 
^ώς ζμεγαλννθη τα «ργα σου, 
σφόδρα Ιβαρννθησαν οΐ δια- 
Χογισμοί σου. 
"^άνηρ άφρων ον -γνωσίται, 

και άσυρ'ετο? ου συι/>;σ€ΐ ταύτα. 

^[ώς «/χεγαλυν^τ/] ττονηματά σον, 


σφόδρα [€)8α^ΰρ'^]τ7σαν λογι- 
σμοί σον. 
^[αιζ-^ρ] ασύνετος ον -γνωσεται, 
και ανόητο^; ον σννησει σνν 
iv τω ανατεΐλαι τους άρ,αρτωλους ^ iv τω βλαστησαι ασεβείς ομοίως 
ως χορτον X^^V 

και Βύκνψαν πάντες οΐ ipya- και ηνθησαν ττάντες κατεργα- 

ζόμενοί την ανομίαν, 

όττως αν εζολεθρενθωσιν εΙς 

τον αιώνα τον αιώνος. 

^συ δέ "Υψιστος εΙς τον αιώνα, 

'"ότι ιδού οι εχθροί σον αττο- 
και διασκορτΓίσ^τ^σονται πάν- 
τες οι ερ-γαζόμενου την 

ζόμενοί ανωφελές, 
εκτριβηναι αυτούς «ως Ιτι* 

9 και σύ "Υφίστος εΙς αιώνα, 

'°ίδού οι ixOpoi σον, 'W^'W^, ιδού 

οι εχθροί σον αττολουν- 


[σκορ7Γΐ]σ^?7σονται τταντβςκατ- 

€ργα^ό[ρ,ίνοι ανωφελές]. 

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

1 The following variants deserve attention : 6 ββαθννθ. B-'^'^N'^-^RT 
10 pr OTt ιδού οι εχθροί σον κε KA^RT 

Later Greek Versions. 39 

striking peculiarities will at once be apparent. He will notice 
especially the following, (i) There are frequent instances of 
an absolutely literal rendering of the original, e.g. i Kings xx. 10 
09 €v ΤΓοσίν μον= V?"^? "^Ψ^. (lxx. rots ττζζοΐς μον) ; 1 2 ^cVe• και 
εθηκαν = •1ί3''ί<'*1 )Ώ'>ψ (lxx. οΙκο8ομησατ€ χάρακα, καΐ cOevro 
χάρακα) ; 2 Kings xxiii. 21 τω λέγειν = Ι?^^^? (lxx. λέγων) ; 24 
α ωράθησαν = ^i^y. "^ψ^. (lxx. τα γεγονότα). (2) Under certain 
circumstances^ συν is employed to represent the Hebrew i^^, 
when it is the sign of the accusative^; e.g. i Kings xx. 12 σύν 
TO p^^a = 12*=1ΠΤ1Χ, i^ a-yy ττάντα τον οχλον = pi3nn"?3"ni<j 
2 Kings xxiii. 21 συν παντι τω λαω (where the dat. is governed 
by the preceding verb), 24 συν τους μάγους κτλ. (3) The same 
Hebrew words are scrupulously rendered by the same Greek, 
e.g. /cat καίγε = D31 occurs thrice in one context (2 Kings xxiii. 
15, 19, 24); and in Ps. xcii. 8, 10 κατεργα^ό/^ενοι ανωφελές twice 
represents \]^ yy.S. (4) The transliterations adhere with 
greater closeness to the Hebrew than in the lxx.^; thus HpS 
becomes φεσα, •1Π»ί^'N^ Ίωσιαοΰ, •1Π»ϊ?7Π Έλκιαοΰ. (5) The Tetra- 
grammaton is not transliterated, but written in Hebrew letters, 
and the characters are of the archaic type (^T^l, not Π1Π"•) • cf. 
Orig. zn Ps. ii., και εν τοις ακριβέστατο ις δε των αντιγράφων 
Έ^ραιοις χαρακτηρσίν κείται το όνομα, Έ/?ραικοις δε ου τοις νυν 
άλλα τοις άρχαιοτάτοις — where the ' most exact copies ' are 
doubtless those of Aquila's version, for there is no reason to 
suppose that any copyists of the Alexandrian version hesitated 
to write ο κς or κε for ΐ^'ίΐ^'''^. (6) That the crudities of Aquila's 

1 For these see Burkitt, Aqiiila^ p. 12. 

" This singular use of σύν appears also in the LXX., but only in Eccle- 
siastes 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 Ν Π FIV (see Burkitt, p. 14). 

■* In a few Hexaplaric mss. (e.g. Q, 86, 88, 243™», 264) the Greek letters 
ΠΙΠΙ are written for Π1Π\ but the Greek mss. use it solely in their 
excerpts from the non-Septuagintal columns of the Hexapla, and only the 
Hexaplaric Syriac admits ΠΙΠΙ into the text of the lxx., using it freely 

for κύριοι, even with a preposition (as «^«^\ ). Ceriani expresses the 

40 Later Greek Versions. 

style are not due to an insufficient vocabulary^ is clear from 
his ready use of words belonging to the classical or the literary 
type when they appear to him to correspond to the Hebrew 
more closely than the colloquialisms of the lxx. The follow- 
ing are specimens; i Kings xx. lo lxx. c/cTrotr/Vci, Aq. e^ap- 
KcVei ; LXX. άλω7Γ€^ιν, Aq. \v)^ά.σiv^ \ 12 LXX. σκηνοίς, Aq. 
συσκιασ/χοις ; 2 Kings xxiii. 2 1 LXX. ^ιαθηκη%, Aq. συνθήκης; ; 
24 LXX. θίραφίίν, Aq. μορφώματα ; LXX. ίίδωλα, Aq. καθάρ- 
ματα ; Ps. xc. 8 LXX. άντατΓοδοσιν, Aq. άττότισιν ; ίδ. ίο LXX. 
7Γροσ€λ€υσ€ται, Aq. μ^ταχθήσ^ταί ; LXX. μάστίξ, Aq. άφτ; ; xci. 
5 LXX. ποίηματι, Aq. κατεργω. 

From the fragments which survive in the margins of 
hexaplaric MSS. it is possible to illustrate certain other 
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 Hebrew words (ad I*am?nac/i. 11 " non solum verba 
sed etymologias quoque verborum transferre conatus est)," 
and by way of example he cites the rendering of Deut. vii. 
13, where Aquila substituted χεΰρ,α, οττωρισμόν, στιλπνότητα 

for σΐτον, oTvov, ίλαων in order to reflect more exactly the 
Hebrew 1^"^, S^"i"'J?, inV! — as though, adds Jerome humorously, 
we were to use in hsLUn /iisio, pomatio, splendentia. Similarly, 

opinion that the use of ΠΙΠΙ is due either to Origen or Eusebius, i.e. 
one of those fathers substituted ΠΙΠΙ 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 prof ana, ii. p. 106 ff.; Schleusner s. v. iriirt, Field, 
Hexapla ad Esa. i. 2; Hatch and Redpath, Concordance, p. 1135; 
Z. D. M. G. (1878), 501, 506. Mr Burkitt acutely points out (p. 16) that 
'^^'^'^ (and doubtless also ΠΙΠΙ) was read as KiJpios, since in one place in 
the Aquila fragments where there was no room to write the Hebrew cha- 
racters " instead of οίκι^ '^^'^"^ we find ot/f^ /cU." 

^ Even Jerome speaks of Aquila as " eruditissimus linguae Graecae " 
(in Isa. xlix. 5). 

2 See Mr Burkitt's note (p. 26). 

Later Greek Versions. 41 

Aquila represented D:VV by οστ^ονν, and /'^S^n by Ιτηστημο- 
νίζίίν or €ΤΓίστημονονν, and even coined the impossible form 
αφημένος to correspond Avith 5?•")^^. (2) An attempt is made 
to represent Hebrew particles, even such as defy translation ; 
thus Π local becomes the enclitic δε (e. g. vorovSi - '^^^'^, 
Gen. xii. 9, Κνρηνην^ί = ΠΤι"?, 2 Kings xvi. 9) ; and similarly 
prepositions are accumulated in a manner quite alien from 
Greek usage (e.g. ek άττό /αακρό^€ΐ/ = ΡΊΠΊΌ?, 2 Kings xix. 25). 
(3) Other devices are adopted for the purpose of bringing 
the version into close conformity with the original ; a word 
of complex meaning or form is represented by two Greek 
words (e.g. ^t^^^ is converted into rpdyos αττολνόμζνος and 
/"VTV into σκιά σκίά; a Hebrew word is replaced by a Greek 
word somewhat similar in sound, e.g. for f\y^ (Deut. xi. 30) 
Aquila gives αυλών, and for ^''P'}^ (i Sam. xv. 2^) θζραττΐία^. 

Enough has been said to shew the absurdity of Aquila's 
method when it is regarded from the standpoint of the modern 
translator. Even in ancient times such a translation could 
never have attained to the popularity which belonged to the 
Lxx. ; that it was widely accepted by the Greek synagogues of 
the Empire can only have been due to the prejudice created in 
its favour by its known adherence to the standard text and the 
traditional exegesis^ The version of Aquila emanated from 
a famous school of Jewish teachers ; it was issued with the full 
approval of the Synagogue, and its affectation of preserving at 
all 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 wishes to pursue the subject may refer to Field, 
Prolegg. p. xxi. sqq., and Dr Taylor's article Hexapla in D. C B. iii. 
p. lyff. Jerome speaks more than once of a second edition of Aquila 
"quam Hebraei κατ άκρίβ^ιαν nominant." The question is discussed by 
{prolegg. xxiv. ff.). 

- See Mr Burkitt's article Aquila in the Jewish Quarterly Revie^iV, Jan. 
1898, p. 211 ff. 

42 Later Greek Versio?ts. 

Aquila possesses a value which arises from another consideration. 
His " high standard of exactitude and rigid consistency give 
his translation, with all its imperfections, unique worth for the 
critic ^" Its importance for the criticism of the Old Testament 
was fully recognised by the two greatest scholars of ancient 
Christendom, and there are few things more to be desired by 
the modern student of Scripture than the complete recovery of 
this monument of the text and methods of interpretation ap- 
proved by the chief Jewish teachers of the generation which 
followed the close of the Apostolic age. 

7. Theodotion. AVith Aquila Irenaeus couples Theo- 
dotion of Ephesus, as another Jewish proselyte who translated 
the Old Testament into Greek (©coSortW ηρμην€νσ€ν 6 
Εφεσιος και Ακύλας. ..α/χφότ€ροι ΊουδαΓοι ττροσηλντοί). Him- 
self of Asiatic origin, and probably a junior contemporary of 
Theodotion, Irenaeus 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 
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 Emperor Commodus, so 
called to distinguish him from L. Crionius Commodus, better 
known as L. Aurelius Verus. 

Epiph. de 7nens. et po7id. 17 π^ρι την τον bevr^pov Κομόδου βασι- 
Xe'iav του βασιλίυσαντος μ€τα τον προαρημίνον Κύμο8ον Aovklov 
ΑύρηΧιον (τη ly', θ^οΒοτίων τίς ΤΙοντίκος άπο της δία8οχης Μαρκίωνος 
τον αίρ^σίάρχον τον Σιι/ωτΓίΤου, μηνίων κα\ αυτός τη αυτοΰ aipiaei 
κα\ (Ις Ιουδαισμον άττοκΧίνας κα\ ττίριτμηθ^Χς και την των Εβραίων 
φωνην και τα αυτών στοιχ^'ια TratSeu^eif, 18ίως κα\ αυτός β^βδωκί. 
Hieron. £p. ad Aiigiistm.: "hominis Judaei atque blasphemi"; 

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

Later Greek Versions, 43 

praef. in 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 

The date assigned to Theodotion by Epiphanius is obviously 
too late, in view of the statement of Irenaeus, and the whole 
account suspiciously resembles the story of Aquila. That 
within the same century two natives of Pontus learnt Hebrew 
as adults, and used their knowledge to produce independent 
translations of the Hebrew Bible, is scarcely credible. But it 
is 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 considera- 
tion, 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 
justified by what we know of Theodotion's work. " Inter veteres 
medius incedit" (Hieron. praef. ad evang.); "simplicitate 
sermonis a lxx. interpretibus non discordat" (/riz^/! in Fss.)-, 
"Septuaginta et Theodotio... in plurimis locis concordant" {iji 
Ecd. ii.) — such is Jerome's judgement ; and Epiphanius agrees 
with this estimate {de mens, et pond. 1 7 : τά ττλεΓστα τοι% οβ' 
συνοιδόντως i$e8wK€v). Theodotion seems to have produced a 
free revision of the lxx. rather than an independent version. 
The revision was made on the whole upon the basis of the 
standard Hebrew 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 

^ Marcion flourished c. A.D. 150; Commodus was Emperor from 180 — 
192. The Paschal Chronicle, following Epiphanius, dates the work of 
Theodotion a. d. 184. 

- See Field, Hexapla, p. xxxix. ; Hatch, Essays, p. 215 ; Margoliouth, 
art. ' Job ' in Smith's Bible Diet. (ed. 2). 

44 Later Greek Versions. 

the Lxx. version disappear in Theodotion. His practice 
with regard to apocryphal books or additional matter appears 
not to have been uniform ; he followed the lxx. in accepting 
the additions to Daniel and the supplementary verses in JobS 
and that the book of Baruch found place in his version appears 
from certain notes in the margin of the Syro-Hexaplar- ; but 
there is no evidence that he admitted the non-canonical books 
in general. 

8. Specimens of Theodotion's style and manner may be 
obtained from the large and important fragments of his work 
which were used by Origen to fill up the lacunae in Jeremiah 
(lxx.). The following passage, preserved in the margin of 
Codex Marchalianus, will serve as a specimen of his style and 

Jeremiah xl. (xxxiii.) 14 — 26. 

''* 'Ιδού ημ€ραί Ιρχονται, φησί Kvpios, και αναστήσω τον 
λόγον μ,ον τον αγαθόν ον ΐλάλησα εττι τον olkov Ισραήλ καΐ 
€7Γΐ τον οίκον Ίουδα. '^ iv ταΐς ημ,ζραίς cKttVat? και iv τω 
καιρώ ζΚ€ΐνω ανατ€λώ τω Δαυίδ άνατολην Βίκαίαν, ττοιων κρίμα 
καΐ Βίκαωσννην €V Trj yfj. ^^ iv Tats ηρ-ίραι^ cKitVats σωθησ^ται 
η 'Ιουδαία και Ίερουσαλτ^/χ κατασκηνώσει πεττοίθνΐα• καΐ τοντο 
το όνομα ο KaXeVet αυτϊίν Κγριοΰ Aikaiocy'nh ΗΜωΝ. '7 ζ^.^ 
τάδ€ Xcyet Κύριος, Ουκ ΙζοΧοθρενθησεται τω Δαυίδ α'ντ^ρ καθή- 
μενος €7Γΐ θρόνον οίκον ^Ισραήλ' '^ και τοΓς Ιερενσι τοις Λίυιταις 
ουκ Ι^οΧοθρενθησεται άνηρ Ικ πρόσωπον /χου, αναφερών ολοκαν- 
τω/Αατα καΐ ^υων θνσίαν. '' και εγενετο λόγο? Κυρίου ττρδς 
^Ιερεμίαν λέγων ^° Τα'δ€ λέγει Κύριος Εί διασκ€δασ€Τ€ την 
Βιαθηκην μον την ημεραν και την Βιαθηκην μον την ννκτα, τον 
μη €ΐναι ημεραν και νύκτα εν καιρώ αντών' "' καιγ€ η διαθήκη 
μου διασκ€δασ^77^€ται μετά Δαυίδ του Βονλον μον, τον μη 

1 Orig. ep. ad Afric. 3. 

'^ See art. Theodotion in D. C. B. iv. 978. 

3 0. T. in Greek, iii. pp. vii. ff., 320 f. 

Later Greek Versions. 45 

ctvat αυτω viov βασιΚνόοντα. ΙττΧ τον θρόνον αύτον, και η προς 
τους Λ^ϋίτας τονς ιερείς τονς λζίτονργοννταζ μοι. " ώς ουκ 
ΐέαρίθμηθησΐται η ^νναμις τον ονρανον, ουδέ Ικμ,ίτρηθησξται η 
άμμος της θαλάσσης, όντως ττληθννω το σπέρμα Δαυίδ τον 
δοι'λου μον και τονς Λευιτας τους λζίτονργονντάς μοί. ^^ και 
ΐ-γίνετο λόγος Κυρίου ττρός ^Ιζρεμίαν λέγων ^* *Αρά γε ουκ ιδες 
Tt' ο λαός ούτος Ιλάλησαν λζ-γοντες At δυο πάτρια t ας ε^ελε'^ατο 
Κυ'ριος εν αυταΓς, και ιδού α'πώσατο αυτούς ; και τον λαόν μον 
παρώίυναν του /χϊ/ είναι ετι ίθνος ενωπιο'ν /αου. ^^ χ^δε λέγει 
Κύριος Ει /λτ; τ•^ν ^ιαθηκην μον ημίρας και νυκτός, ακριβάσματα 
ονρανον και γτ^ς, ονκ ετα^α, ^^ καίγε το σττίρμα Ίακώ/? και 
Ααυιδ του δούλου /χου άποδοκι/χώ, του ρ.•)^ λα/?ειν εκ του σπέρ- 
ματος αυτοΰ άρχοντα ττρος το σπερρ,α ^Αβραάμ και Ίσαακ και 
Ίακο5/3• ΟΤΙ επιστρει/'ω τ-^ν ετηστροφήν αυτών, και οίκτειρησω 

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 
reached us. But the student will probably agree with Field 
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 and again we meet with a word un- 
known to the LXX. (e.g. άκριβάσματα^^'ψϋγ,οτ a reminiscence 
of Aquila ; on the other hand Theodotion agrees with the lxx. 
against Aquila in translating πη^ by διαθήκη. If in one place 

^ Another considerable fragment of Theodotion may be found in jer. 
xlvi. (xxxix.) 4 — 13, see O. T. in Greek, p. 534 f. 

- Hexapla, prolegg. p. xxxix. " Theodotionis stylus simplex et gravis 

3 Cod. A employs άκρφασμόί 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 Later Greek Versions. 

Theodotion is more obscure than Aquila (τήν Βιαθηκην την 

ημεραν.-.την ννκτα, Aq. της ημέρας. ..της νυκτός), yet the passage 

as a whole is a singularly clear and unaffected rendering. His 
chief defect does not reveal itself in this context ; it is a habit 
of transliterating Hebrew words which could have presented no 
difficulty to a person moderately acquainted with both lan- 
guages. Field gives a list of 90 words which are treated by 
Theodotion in this way without any apparent caused When 
among these we find such a word as ^^ (which is represented 
by -^λ in Mai. ii. 11), we are compelled to absolve him from 
the charge of incompetence, for, as has been pertinently asked, 
how could a man who was unacquainted with so ordinary a 
word or with its Greek equivalent have produced a version at 
all ? Probably an explanation should be sought in the cautious 
and conservative temperament of this translator ^ Field's judge- 
ment is here sounder than Montfaucon's; Theodotion is not to 
be pronounced indoctior, or indiligentior, but only "scrupulosior 
quam operis sui institute fortasse conveniret^" 

9. The relation of the two extant Greek versions of Daniel 
is a perplexing problem which calls for further consideration. 
In his lost Stromata Origen, it appears ^ announced his intention 
of using Theodotion's version of Daniel ; and an examination 
of Origen's extant works shews that his citations of Daniel 
"agree almost verbatim with the text of Theodotion now 
current^" The action of Origen in this matter was generally 
endorsed by the Church, as we learn from Jerome {praef. i?t 
Daft. : " Danielem prophetam iuxta lxx. interpretes ecclesiae 

1 Op. cit. p. xl. sq. 

2 D. C. B. art. Hexapla (iii. p. 22). Cf. ib. iv. p. 978. 

3 Thus in Mai. /. c. he was perhaps unwilling to use θώ% in connexion 

with the phrase IDA 7N. 

■* Jerome on Dan. iv. : " Origenes in nono Stromattim volumine asserit 
se quae sequuntur ab hoc loco in propheta Daniele non iuxta LXX. inter- 
pretes... sed iuxta Theodotionis editionem disserere." 

5 Dr Gwynn in D. C. B. (iv. p. 974). 

Later Greek Versions. 47 

non legunt, utentes Theodotionis editione"; cf. c. Riifin. ii. 
2i2i)' Jerome did not know how this happened, but his 
own words supply a sufficient explanation : " hoc unum 
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 it a 
place in his Hexapla, only one Greek copy has survived'. 
Theodotion's version having been substituted in all other 
extant Greek MSS. of Daniel. 

But the use of Theodotion's Daniel in preference to the 
version which was attributed to the lxx. did not begin with 
Origen. Clement of Alexandria (as edited) uses Theodotion, 
with a sprinkling of lxx. readings, in the few places where 
he quotes Daniel {paed. ii. 8, iii. 3, sirovi. i. 4, 21). In North 
Africa both versions seem to have influenced the Latin text 
of Daniel. The subject has been carefully investigated by Mr 
F. C. Burkitt", who shews that TertuUian used "a form of the 
LXX. differing slightly from Origen's edition," whilst Cyprian 
quotes from a mixed text, in which Theodotion sometimes pre- 
dominates. Irenaeus, notwithstanding his reverence for the lxx. 
and distrust of the later versions, cites Daniel after Theodotion's 
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 Theo- 
dotion's rendering of Dan. vi. 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 Rome (i Cor. 34) cites a part of the same context, 

1 The Chigi MS. known as Cod. 87 (H. P. 88) ; see 0. T. in Greek, 
iii. pp. vi., xii., and cf. the subscription printed //'. p. 574.. 

- Old Latiji and Itala, p. 18 ίΤ. 

3 An exception in i. 19. 3 (Dan. xii. 9 f.) is due to a Marcosian source. 

^ See Salmon, Intr. to ihe N. Τ J p. 639. 

^ On the trustworthiness of Justin's text here see Burkitt, op. cit. p. 25 n. 
(against Hatch, Essays, p. 190). 

48 Later Greek Versions. 

with a Theodotionic reading (eXctroupyow, lxx. c^cpctTrcvov). 
Barnabas {ep. iv. 5) also refers to Dan. vii., and, though his 
citation is too loose to be pressed, the words Ι^αναστησονται 
οτησθζν αίτών are more likely to be a reminiscence of οττίσω 
αυτών άναστησίται (Th,) than of μ,ίτα τούτους στησίται (lxX.). 
The Greek version of Baruch (i. 15 — 18, ii. 11 — 19) un- 
doubtedly supports Theodotion against the lxx. Still more 
remarkable is the appearance of Theodotionic renderings in the 
New Testament. A writer so faithful to the lxx. as the author 
of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in his only reference to Daniel 
(Heb, xi. 33 = Dan. vi. 23) agrees with Theodotion against the 
Chigi version'. The Apocalypse, which makes frequent use of 
Daniel, supports Theodotion on the whole ; cf. Apoc. ix. 20 
(Dan. V. 23), X. 6 (Dan. xii. 7), xii. 7 (Dan. x. 2c), xiii. 7 (Dan. 
vii. 21), xix. 6 (Dan. x. 6), xx. 4 (Dan. vii. 9), xx. 11 (Dan. ii. 
35)^^. Even in the Synoptic Gospels Theodotion's rendering 
in Dan. vii. 13 (/χετα των ν€ψ€λών) occurs as well as the lxx. 
έπΙ των v.; comp. Mc. xiv. 62 with Mt. xxiv. 30, xxvi. 64". 

From these premisses the inference has been drawn that 
there were two pre-Christian versions of Daniel, both passing 
as 'lxx.', one of which is preserved in the Chigi MS., whilst 
the other formed the basis of Theodotion's revision\ It has 
been urged by Dr Gwynn with much acuteness that the two 
Septuagintal Books of Esdras offer an analogy to the two 
versions of Daniel, and the appearance of the phrase α-πηρίί.σατο 
αντα Iv τω ειδωλειω αυτοί; in I Esdr. ii. 9 and Dan. i. 2 (lxx.) 

^ Heb. Λ c. έφραξαν στόματα λ€6ντων (Dan. Th., ένέφρα^^ν τα στόματα 
των λβόντων : LXX., σέσωκέ μ€ άττό των λ€Οντων). 

- 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." 

•* Z). C. B. art. Theodotion iv. p. 970 lif. Dr Salmon {Intr. p. 547) is 
disposed to accept this view. 

Later Greek Versions. 49 

has been regarded as an indication that the Greek Esdras and 
the Chigi Daniel were the work of the same translator \ An 
obvious objection to the hypothesis of two Septuagintal or 
Alexandrian versions is the entire disappearance of the version 
Λvhich 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 
revision of Daniel may have differed so little from the stricter 
Alexandrian version as to have taken its place without remark^. 

10. Symmachus. Of 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 less probable tradition in Epiphanius 
represents him as a Samaritan who had become a convert to 

EuS. H. E. vi. 17 των ye μην ίρμην^ντων αντων 8η τούτων Ιστίον 
Έ/^ιωναίοι/ τον Έ,νμμαχον yeyovivaL...KaL υπομνήματα de τον Σνμμά- 
χ^ον ΐΐσίτι ννν φ€ρ€ταί iv ois δοκβι προς το κατά Ματθαϊον άποτ^ινό- 
μίνος evayyiXiov την δβδηΧωμ^νην alpeaiv κρατύν€ΐν. ταντα Se ό 
ΏpLyevηs μ€τα. και. αΧλων els τας γραφάς €ρμην€ίών τον Συμμάχου 
σημαΐνβί πάρα ^ΙονΧίανης τίνος ^ΐΚηφέναι, ην και φησι παρ' αντου 
Συμμάχου τάς βίβλους δία8€ξασθαί. Hieron. de virr. ill. 54 
"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 τοις τον 
Σίυηρου χρόνοις Σύμμαχος η$• Σαμαρείτης των παρ αύτοΐς σοφών μη 
τιμηθε\ς υπο του οΙκείου έθνους... π ροσηΧυτβύζί κάΙ περιτέμνεται 
δευτεραν περιτομην... ούτος τοίνυν ό Σύμμαχος προς διαστροφήν των 

^ Ό. C. Β. iv. ρ. 977 ^•; cf. Hastings' I). Β., i. p. 761. 

^ On the Avhole question of the date of Theodotion, see Schiirer, 
G.J. V.^ iii. 323 f., Avhere the literature of the subject is given. 

^ 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 Sym- 
machus; see Field, prolegg. ad Hex. p. xxix. 

S. S. 4 

50 Later Greek Versions. 

παρά Σαμαμ€ίταίζ ίρμηνζίων ίρμην^ΰσας την τρίτην ξξξ^ω<€ΐ' 

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 
still extant in the fourth century' ; the Symmachians, an Ebionite 
sect probably named after him, are mentioned by Ambrosiaster 
(comm.iti GaL^pfvlegg.) and Augustine {c. Faust. x\x. 4, c. Crescon. 
\. 36)-. Y^vs, floruit is open to some question. Dr Gwynn has 
shewn'^ that Epiphanius, who makes Theodotion follow Sym- 
machus, probably placed Symmachus in the reign of Verus, 
i.e. Marcus Aurelius. Now in the Historia Laiisiaca, c. 147, 
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. whether Theodotion ought not to be placed under M. 
Aurelius and Symmachus under Commodus (a.d. 180 — 192)•*. 
The version of Symmachus was in the hands of Origen when 
he wrote his earliest commentaries, i.e. about a.d. 228^; but 
the interval is long enough to admit of its having reached 

II. The aim of Symmachus, as Jerome perceived, was 
to express the sense of his Hebrew text rather than to attempt 

1 Euseb. /. c: 

2 Philastrius, 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 
hypothesis a corruption of Ούήρον. Cf. Lagarde's Syitnnicta, ii. p. 168. 

^ 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 
decisive. ^ Cf. D. C. B. iv. p. 103. 

Later Greek Versions. 51 

a verbal rendering: "non solet vcrborum κακοζηλίαν sad intel- 
legentiae ordinem sequi" (in Am. iii. 11). While Aquila 
endeavoured "verbum de verbo exprimere," Symmachus made 
it his business "sensum potius sequi" {praef. in Chron. Eus.^ cf. 
praef. in Job). Epiphanius, who believed Symmachus to have 
been a Samaritan proselyte to Judaism, jumped to the con- 
clusion that his purpose was polemical (ττρός Βιαστροφην των 
τταρα ^αμαρζίταις ίρμηνείων Ιρμψ€νσας). 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 
MSS., he wrote with Aquila's version before him, and in his 
efforts to recast it made free use of both the lxx. and Theo- 
dotion. The following extracts will serve to illustrate this view 
of his relation to his predecessors. 

LXX. Aq. 

και ταντα α ζμίσονν και τοντο Sevrepov 

eVoielre• €καλνπτ€Τ€ eTTOielre' ξκαλνπτ€Τ€ 

δάκρνσιν το θυσία- δακρνω το θνσια- 

στηριον Κυρίου και στηρων 

κΧαυθμω κα\ στ€ναγμω κΧαυθμω καΐ οίμωγΐ}, 

€κ κόπων. CTL ci^cov άπο του μη eivat €tl 

€πιβ\€ψαι els θυσ'ιαν veiaai προς το δώρον 

η λαβξϊν dcKTov €κ και Xa/3fti/ ^ύδοκίαν 

των χίΐρών υμών; άπο χ€φ6ς υμών. 

Τη. Symm. 

κα\ τούτο δ^ύτ^ρον κα\ ταντα devTcpov 

€ποιησατ€• €καλύπτ€Τ€ €ποΐ€Ϊτ€, κα\ύπτοντ€ί 

δάκρυσιν το θυσία- ev δάκρυσιν το θυσια- 

στηριον, στηριον, 

κλαίοντ€ς και στ€νοντ€ί, κλαίοντας κα\ οΐμώσσοντες, 

άπο τον μη eivai en άπο του μη eivai eVt 
προσεγγίζοντα το ολοκαύτωμα vevovTa προς το δώρον 

κα\ λαβεϊν TeXeiov και Μξασθαι το €υδοκημ4νον 

€κ χειρών υμών. άπο χειρός υμών. 

^ The Hexaplaric renderings are from Cod. 86 (Cod. Barberinus) : 
Field, Hexapla, ii. p. 1033. 

52 Later Greek Versions. 

But it must not be supposed that Symmachus is a mere 
reviser of earlier versions, or that he follows the lead of Aquila 
as Theodotion follows the lxx. Again and again he goes his 
own way in absolute independence of earlier versions, and 
sometimes at least, it must be confessed, of the original. This 
is due partly to his desire to produce a good Greek rendering, 
more or less after the current literary style ; partly, as it seems, 
to dogmatic reasons. The following may serve as specimens 
of the Greek style of Symmachus when he breaks loose from 
the influence of his predecessors: Gen. xviii. 25 6 -πάντα 
άνθρωτΓον άτταιτών δικαΐ07Γραγ€Ϊν, άκρίτως μ,η 7Γ0ίησΎ)ς τοντο ; Job 
xxvi. 1 4 τί δε ψίθνρίσμα των λόγων αύτου άκονσομζν, οττου βροντην 
δυναστείας αΰτοΰ ουδείς ivvoijau ; Ps. xliii. 16 Sl όλης ήμ€ρας 
η ασχημόνησίς μον αντικρΰς μον, και 6 καταίσχνμμος τον ττροσωπου 
μον καλύπτει μ€. Ps. Ixviii. 3 ^βαπτίσθην ets αττεράντονς καταδύσεις, 
και ουκ εστίν στάσις* ίίσηλθον εις τα βάθη των υδάτων, και 
peWpov επεκλυσεν /χε. Eccl. iv. 9 εισιν ά/χεινους δυο ενός• εχονσίν 
yap KepSos αγαθόν. Isa. xxix. 4 ^"^^ yV^ εδαφισ^τ^σεται η λαλιά 
σου, και εσται οίς εγγαστρί/χυ^ος η φωνή σου και άττό της γης 
η λαλιά σου ροισεται. 

It cannot be said that these renderings approach to excel- 
lence, but a comparison with the corresponding lxx. will shew 
that Symmachus has at least attempted to set himself free from 
the trammels of the Hebrew idiom and to clothe the thoughts 
of the Old Testament in the richer drapery of the Greek 
tongue. It is his custom to use compounds to represent ideas 
which in Hebrew can be expressed only by two or more words 

(e.g. V^^'Vrl, Symm. άναιτιως, V.V^ V.V, Symm. οφθαλμοφανως, 

Π3Ώ ^^y, Symm. ακρογωνιαίος); he converts into a participle 
the first of two finite verbs connected by a copula (Exod. v. 7 
άτΓίργόμενοι καλαμάσθωσαν, 4 Regn. i. 2 σφαλεντες εττεσον) ; he 
has at his command a large supply of Greek particles (e.g. 
he renders "=1^ by άρα, όντως, ίσως, δι' όλου, ρ,όΐ'ον, ούτως, αλλ' 

Later Greek Versions, 53 

ο/χως)'. More interesting and important is the tendency which 
Symmachus manifests to soften the anthropomorphic expres- 
sions of the Old Testament; e.g. Gen. i. 27, Ικτισ^ν 6 Oeo^ 
τον ανθροίΤΓον iv ctKovt δια φορώ'* ορθίον ο θ€ος (.κτισίν αυτόν. 
Exod. xxiv. 10, εΤδοι/ οράματί τον θ^όν ^Ισραήλ. Jud. ix. 
13 τον οϊνον...την ίνφροσννην των άνθ ρωττων. Ps. χΗϋ. 24 
Ινα τι ως νττνΟίν α, AeWora; In these and Other instances 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 Sym- 
machus, C. H. Thieme, p7^o puritate Sy7nmachi dissert.^ 17555 
art. in D. C. B. (J. Gwynn) ; Giov. Mercati, Γ 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 — 253) brought to light three anonymous 
versions besides those of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus ; 
from their relative position in the columns of his great col- 
lection (see c. iii.) they are known as the Quinta («'), Sexta (r'), 
and Septinia (^') respectively. The following are the chief 
authorities : 

Eus. H. E. vi. 16 τοσαντη δε (Ισηγξτο τω ^QpLyevet των θ^ίων 
λόγων άπηκριβωμένη (ξβτασι? ως... και Tivas ίτέρας πάρα τάς καθη- 
μαξ(νμ€νας βρμηνΐίας ξναλΧαττονσας..., (φίνρίΊν, ας ουκ οιδ' oSev €κ 
τίνων μνχών τον ττάλαι Χανθανουσας χ^ρόνον et? φως ανιχ^νίυσας 

^ For other examples see Field, prolegg, p. xxvi. f. ; D. C. B. iv. 
p. 19 f. L L L 

- Reading, perhaps, D^n?X DPVQl DT'VH; cf. Nestle, Margmahen, 
p. 40 n. 

"^ See D. C. B. iii. p. 20. 

54 Later Greek Versions. 

7rporiyay€v...Tivos ap' (Uv ουκ etScoy αντο τοντο μόνον €π€σημηνατο 
ως αρα την μ^ν evpoi iv ttj προς Άκτίω Νικοττολ^ι.,.εττι μιας αύθις 
σζσημ^ίωται ως iv ^Ι^ριχοΙ ζυρημίνης iv πίθω κατά τους χρόνους 
Άντωνίνου του υΙου Σεβήρου. Epiph. (/e Diciis. et pond. 1 8 /xera 

τον ^ιωγμόν του βασιλέως Έ,ζυηρου ηυρίθη ή πέμπτη iv πίθοις iv 
Ίβριγώ κ.€κρυμμίνη iv χρόνοις του υιού Σζυηρου του iπικ.\ηθivτoς 
ΚαρακάΧλου re και TeTa...iv δε τω έβδόμω αυτού eVet ηύρέθησαν κα\ 
βίβλοι της πέμπτης iκ8όσeως iv π'ιθοις iv Ί^ριχω κ€κρυμμένης μ€τά 
άλλων βιβλίων Εβραϊκών κα\ 'Ελληνικών. τον δε Καράκαλλον 
8ιαΒ€χ€ται^Αντωνϊνος βτξρος.,.μζτα. τούτον iβaσίX€υσ€v\\λiζav^poς... 
€τη ly' ' iv μέσω τών χρόνων τούτων ηύρέθη έκτη €κ8οσις, κα\ αυτή 
iv πίθοις κ€κρυμμένη, iv Νικοπόλει ttj προς \\κτίω. Pseudo-Ath. 
syn. scr. sacr. ']'] πέμπτη ερμηνεία έστΙν η iv πίθοις ευρεθείσα κε- 
κρυμμένη επ\ ^Αντωνίνου βασιλέως τού Καρακάλλα iv Ιεριχώ παρά 
τίνος τών iv ^Ιεροσολύμοις σπουδαίων. έκτη ipμηvείa iστ\v η iv 
πίθοις ευρεθείσα, κα\ αύτη κεκρυμμένη, έπ\ Αλεξάνδρου τού Μαμαίας 
παώος iv Νικοπόλει ttj προς "Κκτιον ύπο Ωριγένους γνωρίμων. 
Hieron. de vz'rr. ill. 54 "quintam et sextam et septimam edi- 
tionem, quas etiam nos de eius bibliotheca habemus, miro labore 
repperit et cum ceteris editionibus conparavit": ΐ7ΐ ep. ad Tit. 
"nonnulli vero libri, et maxime hi qui apud Hebraeos versu 
compositi sunt, tres alias editiones additas habent quam 'quin- 
tam' et 'sextam' et 'septimam' translationem vocant, auctori- 
tatem sine nominibus interpretum consecutas." Cf. iii Hab, ii. 11, 
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 this order, 
says that the Quinta was found at Jericho c. a.d. 217, and the 
Sexta 2X Nicopolis under Severus Alexander (a.d. 222 — 235)^ 
According to Epiphanius both the Qtiinta and the Sexta, 
according to Eusebius the Sexta only, lay buried in a Trt^os 
{doHuin), one of the earthenware jars, pitched internally, and 
partly sunk in the ground, in which the mustum was usually 
stored while it underwent the process of fermentation ^ Since 

1 Jerome (/;-(?/. in Ονίζ. exp. Cant.) confirms Eusebius. 

- The Dialogue of Timothy and Aqnila identifies Nicopolis with 
Emmaus Nicopolis in Palestine. 

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


Later Greek Versions, 55 

Origen was in Palestine a.d. 217, and in Greece a.d. 231, it is 
natural to connect his discoveries with those years. How long 
the versions had been buried cannot be determined, for it is 
impossible to attach any importance to tt^e vague statements 
of Eusebius {τον τταλαι λανθάνουσας -^φόνον). The version found 
at or near Nicopolis may have been a relic of the early Chris- 
tianity of Epirus, to which there is 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 
the Synagogue and the Church". Of Scptima nothing is 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 

There is no conclusive evidence to shew that any of these 
versions covered the whole of the 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 
observed in the Pentateuch. Sexta is well represented in the 
Psalms and in Canticles, and has left indications of its exist- 
ence in Exodus, i Kings, and the Minor Prophets. 

With regard to the literary character of Qumta and Sexia, 
the style of Quiiita is 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. 

- Cf. Eus. H. E. vi. 7 ; Spartian. in Sev. 17. 

3 Prolegg. ad Hexapla, p. xlvi. Ps.-Athanasius strangely calls Lucian the 
seventh version : εβδόμη πάΧιν και τελευταία, ερμηνεία ή του α^ίου Χουκιανου. 

•* According to Harnack-Preuschen (i. p. 340) the opposite is implied 
by Eusebius' use of εναΧΚαττούσα% in reference to these versions : *'d. h. 
die eine war nur fiir diese, die andere nur ftir jene Biicher vorhanden." 

56 Later Greek Versions, 

but is said to be disposed to paraphrase ; Field, while he 
regards that charge as on the whole 'not proven,' cites a 
remarkable example of the tendency from Ps. xxxvi. 35, which 
r' renders, ΕΓδον άσεβη καί dvaLS-fj αντίττοιουμενον ev σκληρότητί 
καί λέγοντα Et/xt ως αυτόχθων ττεριττατών εν δικαιοσύνη. Jerome' 
attributes both versions to ' Jewish translators,' but the Chris- 
tian origin of Sex fa betrays itself' at Hab. iii. 13 εξήλθες τον 
σώσαι τον λαόν σον δια Ίησονν τον χριστον σον". 

The Greek fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries quotes 
non-Septuagintal renderings from an interpreter who is styled 
ο Εβραίος. Ό '^νρος is also cited, frequently as agreeing with 
ο 'Εβραίος. Nothing is known of these translators (if such they 
Avere), but an elaborate discussion of all the facts may be seen 
in Fields 

13. The 'Graecus Venetus.' This is a version of the 
Pentateuch, together with the books of Ruth, Proverbs, Can- 
ticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, and Daniel, preserved in 
St Mark's Library at Venice in a single MS. of cent. xiv. — xv. 
{cod. Gr. ν\\.γ. It was first given to the world by de Villoison 
(Strassburg, 1784) and C. F. Ammon (Erlangen, 1790 — i); 
a new edition with valuable prolegomena by O. von Gebhardt 
appeared at Leipzig in 1875*^. This translation has been 
made directly from the M. T., but the author appears to have 
occasionally availed himself of earlier Greek versions (lxx., 

1 adv. Rufin. 

2 "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. 

^ leg. fors. Ίησοΰ του χριστού σου. 

* Prolegg. pp. Ixxv. — Ixxxii. See also Lagarde, Uebei- den Heh-der 
Ephraitns von Edessa. On τό 'Σαμαρ€ΐ.τικ6ν see Field, p. Ixxii. ff., and 
Nestle, Urtext, p. 206. 

5 See Eichhorn, p. 421 ff. ; De Wette-Schrader, p. 122 f. 

'^ Graecus Ven'etiis Pentateuchi &^c. versio Graeca. Ex itnico biblioth. 
S. Marci V^enetae codice nunc primum uno vohimine co??iprehensa7n atqiie 
apparatu critico et philologico instructam edidii O. G. Praefatus est Fr. 

Later Greek Versions. 57 

Aq., Symm., Theod.)^ His chief guide however appears to 
have been David Kimchi, whose interpretations are closely 
followed". That he was a Jew is clear from incidental render- 
ings (e.g. in Exod. xxiii. 20 he translates Qip^D τον οντωττ/ν"'', 
sc. '^i'^:). From the fact of his having undertaken a Greek 
version Gebhardt infers that he was a proselyte to Christianity, 
but the argument may be used to support an opposite con- 
clusion ; as a Jew he may have been moved by a desire to 
place before the dominant Orthodox Church a better render- 
ing of the Old Testament than the lxx. Delitzsch wishes 
to identify him with Elissaeus, a Jewish scholar at the court 
of Murad I., who flourished in the second half of the 14th 

The style of this remarkable version will be best illustrated 
by a few specimens : 

Gen. vi. 2 f. 

~ re^cavrat γουι/ ot vtetg τον θξ,ον τας θυγατέρας τον άνθρω- 
ΤΓον ΟΤΙ καλαι iriXovv, καΙ ΐΚαβον «αυτοΓς γυναίκας άττό ττασων 
ων «Γλοντο. ^ Ιφτη τοίννν 6 οντωτης Ου Kpivei, ττνζνμα τονμον 
iv τω ανθρωττω ες αιώνα, Ιή> οις €τι ττίρ Ιστι σάρ$• τελεσουσι 
δ' at ημζραί αντον εκατόν και εικοσιν ίτη. 

Prov. viii. 22 ίϊ. 
^ ο οντωτ7}ς ίκτησατό /χε oip)(r]v oSov ot, προ των έργων αυτόν 
εκ τότ€. ^ άττ' αιώνος κίχνμαι, απ ο κράτος, άττό προλημματος 
γ^ς. "'* εν ουκ αβνσσοις π€πλασμαί, εν ου τττ^γαΓς δεδο^ασ/χε- 
νων υδάτων ^^ ττριν ορη ε/χ,παγτ7ναι, ττρο των βοννων ω^ίνημαι• 
^ ο-χρις ονκ ίποίησ€ yrjv, ΒωΒονς και κεφαλτ^ν KOV€0iV της 

Daniel νϋ. 13. 
^3 οράων Ικνρ-ησα εν οράσ^σιν εΰφρόνας, αντίκα τε ζνν ταΓς 

1 Gebhardt, ρ. Ινϋ. ff. 

2 Id. p. Ixii. 

^ 'OvTur-qs, ovTovpyos, ούσιωτ-ήί are his usual renderings of Π1Π\ 

58 Later Greek Versions. 

νεφελαι? των ττόλων cos vters άν^ρωττω άφικνον(λ€νοζ €ην, fJ-^XpL 
Τ€ τώ τταλαιώ rats a/xepais ίφθασζ κανωπων τηνω προσηγαγόν 
€. '•* ττ^νω τ ί^όθη αρχα τιμά re και βασιλζία, πάντες τε λαοί 
€θν€α και γλώτται ττ^νω λατρευσειοντι• ά ο.ργά. ev ο,ρχα αιώνος 
09 ου τταρελευσειεται, α τε ^δασιλεια ευ αττερ ουκ οΐχησεύταυ. 

The Student will not fail to notice the translator's desire to 
render his text faithfully, and, on the other hand, his curiously 
infelicitous attempt to reproduce it in Attic Greek ; and lastly 
his use of the Doric dialect in Daniel to distinguish the 
Aramaic passages from the rest of the book. The result 
reminds us of a schoolboy's exercise, and the reader turns 
from it with pleasure to the less ambitious diction of the lxx., 
which, with its 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 {κατά την νυν 
KOLvrjv των Γραικών φωνην). Α version of the Pentateuch into 
modern Greek in Hebrew characters was printed at Constanti- 
nople 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 intro- 
duction and glossary by D. C. Hesseling (Leide, 1897). 


The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other 


I. The century which produced the versions of Aquila, 
Theodotion, and Symmachus saw also the birth of the great 
Christian scholar who conceived the idea of using them for 
the revision of the Alexandrian Greek Bible. 

Origen was in his 17 th year when his father suffered 
martyrdom (a.d. 202)' ; at eighteen he was already head of 
the catechetical school of Alexandria ^ The Old Testament 
from the first engaged his attention, and, rightly judging that it 
could not be fruitfully studied without a knowledge of the 
original, he applied himself at once to the study of Hebrew. 

Ens. H. E. vi. 16 τοσαντη Se elarjyero τω ^Q-pLyivei των θζ'ιων 
\όyωv άπηκριβωμίνη i^eraais, ως και την ^Έβραίδα γλωτταν βκμα- 
Beiv τάε re πάρα τοϊς Ιουδαίου ζμφζρομένας πρωτοτύπους αντόΐς 
Εβραίων στοιχ^ίοις γραφας κτήμα Ίδων ποιησασθαί. Hieron. de 
virr. ill. 54 " quis autem ignorat quod tantum in scripturis 
divinis habuerit studii ut etiam Hebraeam linguam contra 
aetatis gentisque suae naturam edisceret^?" 

The feat was perhaps without precedent, in the third century, 
among Christian scholars not of Jewish origin^; in one so 

1 Eus. H. E. vi. 2. 

2 Hieron. de virr. ill. 54. 
^ Cf. ep. ad Patilam. 

■* See D. C. B. art. Hebrew Learning (ii. p. 351 ff.). 

6ο The Hexapla, and tL• Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

young it seemed prodigious to a veteran like Jerome. These 
studies, begun in Egypt, 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 
notes on nearly all the books of the Old Testament ^ In the 
course of these labours, perhaps from the moment that he 
began to read the Old Testament in the original, he was 
impressed with the importance of providing the Church with 
materials for ascertaining the true te^it and meaning of the 
original. The method which he adopted is described by him- 
self in his famous letter to Africanus (c. a.d. 240), and more 
fully in his commentary on St Matthew (c. a.d. 245) ^ 

Grig, ad Afric. 5 : και ταντα 84 φημι ονχ\ οκνω τον ipcvvav και 
ras κατά Ιουδαίου? γραφάς κα\ πάσας ras ημετέρας ταϊς €Κ€ΐνων 
(τνγκρίναν και όράν τας ev ανταΐς Βιαφοράς, (Ι μη φορτικον yovv 
ΐΐπίΐν, €π\ τΓολύ τοντο (οση δυναμις) π€ποίηκαμ€ν, γνμνάζοντ€9 
αυτών τον νουν iv ndaats rats ^κδόσ^σί και rais διαφοράΐς αυτών 
μ€τα του πόσωί μαΧλον άσκ^Ίν την ίρμηνίίαν τών €βδομη κοντά... 
άσκουμίν δβ μη ayvoclv κα\ τάς παρ' fKfiVois, Ινα προς ^Ιουδαίους 
διαΧ^γόμ^νοί μη προσφάρωμ^ν αύτοΊς τα μη κ^ίμ^να iv Tols αντιγρα- 
φοίί αυτών, και ίνα συγχρησ-ώμ^θα to7s φζρομίνοίς παρ eKcivois, ei 
και ev Tols ημζτ4ροις ον κείται βιβλίοις. hi Matt. XV. 14 : την pkv 
ουν €V Tots άντιγράφοίς της παλαιάς διαθήκης διαφωνίαν, θίον 
δίδοντος, exjpopev ιάσασθαι, κριτηρίω χρησάμ^νοι ταΐς ΧοιπαΙς 6Κ- 
δόσίσιν • τών yap άμφιβαΚ\ομένων παρά τοΊς ο διά την τών 
αντιγράφων διαφωνίαν, την κρίσιν ποιησάμ^νοι άπο τών Χοιπών 
€κδόσ€ων, το συναδον €Κ€ίναις ξφυΧάξαμξν και τίνα μ^ν ώββΧίσαμ^ν 
iv τώ 'Έβραικω μη κξίμ^να, ου τοΧμώντ^ς αυτά πάντη πβρκΧ^Ιν, τίνα 
δβ /Lter' αστερίσκων προσεθηκαμεν • Ίνα δηΧον fj οτι μη κείμξνα παρά 
τοϊς ο' €κ τών Χοιπών ίκδόσίων συμφώνως τω 'Έβραικω προσεθη- 
καμ(ν, και 6 μ(.ν βουΧόμενος προηται αυτά• ω δβ προσκόπτει το 
τοιούτον, ο βούΧίται περΧ της παραδοχής αυτών η μη ποιηστ]. 

^ See D. C. Β. art. Origenes, iv. p. 129 ff. 

2 Cf. 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 
Greek versions." 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and otJter Recensions. 6 1 

2. To attempt a new version was impracticable. It may 
be doubted whether Origen possessed the requisite knowledge 
of Hebrew ; it is certain that he would have regarded the task 
as almost impious. Writing to Africanus he defends the 
apocryphal additions to Daniel and other Septuagintal 
departures from the Hebrew text 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 τα ev ταΓ? Ικκ\ησίαι<ζ φ€ρόμ€να 
αντίγραφα καΐ νομοθ^τ-ησαι τύ) αΒζΧφοτητί αττοβίσθαι /xev τας τταρ 
αντοίς έτΓΐφζρομζναζ βίβλους, κολακ€ν€ίν δε 'Ιουδαίοι? και ττύθ^ιν 
Ινα /χεταδώσιν ημίν των καθαρών). In this matter it was well, he 
urged, to bear in 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 in place of the Septuagint. On the other hand, 
Origen held that Christians must be taught fcankly to recognise 
the divergences between the lxx. and the current Hebrew 
text, 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 
Church herself to withhold from her anything in the Hebrew 
Bible which the lxx. did not represent. Acting under these 
convictions Origen's first step was to collect all existing Greek 
versions of the Old Testament. He then proceeded to 
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 Hebrew text. 

3. The following specimen, taken from a fragment lately 
discovered at Milan, will assist the reader to understand the 
arrangement of the columns, and to realise the general appear- 
ance of the Hexapla. 

62 TJu Hexapla, and tJie Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 


tyi ΠΟΠΌ 


Ps. xlv. (xlvi.) I — 3 ^ 

αλ • αλμωθ 
€\ω€ίμ •\avov'*' 
μασζ • ονοζ 

ν€μσα μω8 

αλ • χβν 
Χω • vipa 





* In the MS S. Xauov 
appears in the third 
column, where it has dis- 
placed Aquila's render- 


τώ νίκοποίώ' 

των υίων Κόρε 

€7γ\ ν^ανιοτητων 


[ό θ€ος ημίν (?)] 

ζΚπις κα\ κράτος, 


iv θ\ίψ€σιν 

ζνρίθη* σφόδρα. 

eVi τούτω 

ον φοβηθησόμίθα 

iv τώ άνταΧΧάσσ^σθαι 


κα\ iv τώ σφάΧΧβσθαι 


iv Kapbia 


* MS. €ύρέθψ. 

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

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 63 


6 7Γ 11/ 1 κ loy 

των νιων Kope 

virep των αιωνίων 


6 Oeos ημίν 

π€ποΙθη(τΐ9 και ισχύς, 


iv ΘΧίψ^σιν 
€νρΐ(Χκ6μ€νοί σφόδρα. 

8ια τοντο 

ον φοβηθησόμ,ζθα 

iv τω* avyxeiaOai 


και κΚΊν^σθαι 


iv καρδία 


* MS. rats. 

Ps. xlv. (xlvi.) I — 3. 


els TO TeXos' 

j vwep των υίων* Kope 

vnep των κρύφιων 


ό Oeos ημών^ 

καταφυγή κα\ δνναμις, 


iv ΘΧίψξσι 

1 rats €νρονσαις ημάςΐ 
j σφόδρα. 

Ι δια τοΰτο 


Ι ον φοβηθησόμξθα 

iv τω ταράσσ^σθαι 

την γην 

κα\ μζτατΊθζσθαι 


iv καρδία 


* With interlinear 
variant toTs viois. 

t MS. i'^ manu ημΐν. 

X With interlinear 
variant ^ύρ^θήσΐται ημΐν. 


τω νικοποιώ*- 

τοΐς νΙοΊς Κόρε 

VTrep των κρύφιων 


6 θεός ημών 

καταφυγή καΐ δνναμις, 


iv ΘΧίψεσιν 

είιρεθηί σφόδρα. 

ου φοβηθησόμεθα 

iv τω ταράσσεσθαι 

την γη ν 

και σαΧεύεσθαιΙ 


iv καρδία 


* With marginal 

variants, ets το reXos, 

t With interlinear 
variant rats evpouaais 

X With interlinear 
variant μετατίθεσθαι. 

04 The Hexapla, and tlie Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

The process as a whole is minutely described by Eusebius 
and Jerome, who had seen the work, and by Epiphanius, 
whose account is still more expHcit but less trustworthy. 

Eus. H. E. vi. l6 : ταύτας Se άπάσας [sc. ras εκδόσ^ΐί] eVi 
ταντον συναγαγων δ^βλών re npos κωΧον και άντίπαραθίϊς αΧληΧαις 
μξτά κα\ αντης της 'Εβραίων σημ^ιώσ^ως το. των Χξγομβνων 'ΈζαπΧών 
ημίν αντίγραφα KaTaXeXoLnev, 18ίως την ΆκνΧον κα\ Συμμάχου <α\ 
θίοΒοτίωνος βκδοσιι/ αμα τη των ξβδομηκ,οντα ev τοΙς ΎίτραπΧοΙς βττι- 

κατασκβυάσας. Hieron. ζ?ι ep. ad Tit. : "omnes veteris legis libros 
quos vir doctus Adamantius in Hexapla digesserat de Caesariensi 
bibliotheca descriptos ex ipsis authenticis emendare, in quibus 
at ipsa Hebraea propriis sunt characteribus verba descripta et 
Graecis Uteris tramite expressa vicino ; Aquila etiam et Sym- 
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 
p07ld. 7 : τας yap 1^ ίρμην^ίας καΐ την Έβραικην γραφην Έβραικοϊς 
στοιχίίοίς κα\ ρημασιν αύτοΊς ev σελίδι^ μια συντ€θ€ί<ως, ίίΧΧην σβλχ'δα 
άντιπαράθξτον δι' ^ΈΧΧηνικων μ^ν -γραμμάτων Εβραϊκών de Χί^ίων 
προς κατάΧηψίν των μη βΐ^ότων Έβραίκά στοίχ€ΐ.α...καΙ ούτως τοΙς 
Χ€γομ4νοίς ύττ' αντον €ξαπΧοΊς η όκταπΧοΊ,ς τας μεν 8υο Εβραικας 
σεΧίδας κα\ τάς e^ των ερμηνευτών εκ τταραΧΧηΧου άντιπαραθείς 
μεγάΧην ώφεΧειαν γνώσεως ε3ωκε τοΙς φιΧοκάΧοις. lb. Ι9 τα? δυο 
Έβραικάς πρώτας κειμένας, μετά ταύτας 8ε την τοΐι ΆκύΧα τεταγμενην, 
μεθ' ην κα\ την του Συμμάχου, έπειτα την τών οβ' , μεθ ας η του 
θεοδοτίωνος συντετακται, καΐ εζης η πέμπτη τε κα\ έκτη'". 

It will be seen that the specimen corroborates ancient 
testimony in reference to the relative order of the four Greek 
versions (Aq., Symm., lxx., Theod.), and illustrates the method 
of division into corresponding κώλα^ which made comparison 
easy. With regard to the order, it is clear that Origen did not 
mean it to be chronological. Epiphanius seeks to account for 
the position of the lxx. in the fifth column by the not less 

^ On aeXis, cf. Sir E. Maunde Thompson, Handbook of Greek aiid Latin 
Palaeography, p. 58. 

- See also ib. 18 sq.; Hieron. Praef. in Paral., and in ep. ad Tit., c. iii. 

2 Used here loosely as = κόμματα, the κωΚον being properly a line con- 
sisting of a complete clause, and of 8 — 17 syllables : cf. E. M. Thompson, 
Gk and Lat. Palaeography, p. 81 f . ; J. R. Harris, Stiehotnetry, p. 23 f. 

The Hexapia, and the Hexaplaric and otJiei' Recensions. 65 

untenable hypothesis that Origen regarded the lxx. as the 
standard of accuracy {de inens. et p07id. 1 9 : Ώριγει/τ;? -κνΟό- 
μ,ΐνος την των οβ' ΐκ^οσιν ακριβή etvat μίσην ταντην σνν€θηκζν, 
οττω? τας ivrevOev και hnivOev ίρμηνζία^ διελεγ^ϊ;)• -^S we have 
learned from Origen himself, the fact was the reverse; the 
other Greek versions were intended to check and correct 
the LXX. But the remark, though futile in itself, suggests a 
probable explanation. Aquila is placed next to the Hebrew 
text because his translation is the most verbally exact, and 
Symmachus and Theodotion follow Aquila and the lxx. 
respectively, because Symmachus on the whole is a revision of 
Aquila, and Theodotion of the lxx. As to the κώλα, it was of 
course necessary that the lines should be as short as possible 
when six or more columns had to be presented on each open- 
ing ; and it will be seen that in the Psalms at least not more 
than two Hebrew words were included in a line, the corre- 
sponding Greek words being at the most three or four. But 
the claims of the sense are not neglected ; indeed it will appear 
upon inspection that the method adopted serves in a remark- 
able degree to accentuate the successive steps in the movement 
of the thought. 

4. Besides the Hexapia, Origen compiled a Tetrapla, i.e. a 
minor edition from which he omitted the first two columns con- 
taining the Hebrew text in Hebrew and Greek characters ; cf 
Eus. /.C. ΐΒίω<ς την Ακνλον και ^νμμ,άγρν καΐ Θ€θδοτιωνο9 Ικδοσιν α/χα 
TTJ των ο iv τοΐς τετραττλοις ζπίκατασκενάσα<ζ^. Epiph. de mens, et 
pO?id. 19 τ€τρα7Γλα γαρ €ΐσι τα Έλλτ^νικα, όταν αί τον ^ ΑκνΧον και 
'^νμμάχον καΐ των οβ' καΐ ΘζοΒοτίωνος ίρμηνίΐαι σνντίταγμζναι ωσι. 
The Tetrapla is occasionally mentioned along with the Hexa- 
pia in scholia attached to MSS. of the lxx. Thus in the 

^ Έπίκατασκ€νάξ'€ΐν is insuper vel postea concinnarc {¥\q\u., prolcgg. p. 
xii.); cf. Dio Cass. 1. 23 τά σκάφη κατ€σκ€ύασ€...καΙ eV αυτά Trupyovs eire- 
κατεσκεύασε. Oeconomus (iv. 873), who regards the Tetrapla as the earlier 
work, understands Eusebius to mean only that Origen added to the i.xx. 
the three columns containing Α'Σ'Θ'. 

S. S. ς 

66 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

Syro-Hexaplaric version at the end of Joshua it is stated that 
the Greek codex on which the version was based had the note : 

ί-γράφη €K τον ζζαττλον, i$ ου και τταρετεθη' άντ€βληθη δέ και 

7Γρ05 τον τίτραττλονν. Cod. Q Still contains two similar 
references to the Tetrapla {O. T. in Greeks iii., p. viii., notes). 
Mention is also made in the MSS. of an Octapla (cf. the Syro- 
Hexaplar in Job v. 23, vi. 28, and the Hexaplaric MSS. of the 
Psalter in Ps. Ixxv. i, 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 Hexapla of the Psalms as including the 
Quinta and Sexta (H. E. vi. 16 cv ye μην τοΐς ίξαπλοΐς των 
Ψαλμών μ€τα τάς ίτησημονς τίσσαρας βκδοσει? ου μόνον ττίμτττην 
αλλά. και Ικτην και Ιβ^όμην τταραβάζ Ιρμηνζ,ίαν). Epiphanius, 
on the other hand, seems to limit the Hexapla to the six 
columns (/. C. τών τ€σσάρων δέ τούτων σελίδων ταΐς δυσι ταΐς 
Έιβραίκαΐς σνναφθ^ισών ε^αττλα καλείται• εάν δε και η ττίμιττη 
και ή €κτη Ιρμηνίία συναφθώσιν. ..οκταπλά καλείται. But it 
has been observed that when the scholia in Hexaplaric MSS. 
mention the Octapla they are silent as to the Hexapla, 
although the Octapla and the Tetrapla are mentioned together; 
e.g. in Ps. Ixxxvi. 5 we find the following note: mhthp ΰΐωΝ' 
TO ρ κατά προσθηκην εκείτο ει? την τών ο' εν τω τετρασέλιδα) (the 
Tetrapla), εν δέτω οκτασελιδω (the Octapla), μη τη ciwn, ηγονν 
δι'χα του ρ. The inference is that the name * Octapla ' some- 
times superseded that of ' Hexapla ' 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^. 

^ Field, Hexapla^ ii. ad loc. ; cf. Hieron. zn Psaltnos (ed. Morin.), p. 66. 
^ It occurs (e.g.) in the Hexaplaric Syriac at 2 Kings xvi. 2. 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 6y 

' Pentapla ' is cited by J. Curterius from cod. Q at Isa. iii. 24, 
but Field's suspicion that Curterius had read his λΙ8. incorrectly 
is confirmed by a reference to the photograph, which exhibits 
iv τω τ€τρασ€λιδω. Origen's work, then, existed (as Eusebius 
implies) in two forms : (i) the Hexapla, which contained, as a 
rule, six columns, but sometimes seven or eight, when it 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 Greek- 
Hebrew 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 = χ, 
p = κ, and D, V, v:' = σ, and that y Π Π i< are without equivalent \ 
The divergences of the vocalisation from that which is repre- 
sented by the pointing of the M. T. are more important; see 
Dr Taylor's remarks in D. C. B. ii. p. 1 5 f. 

In regard to Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, and the 
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 this was impracticable. Let us suppose 
that there lay before him an Alexandrian or Palestinian 
MS., containing the 'common' text of the lxx. (17 Kotv?;, or 
vulgata ediito, as 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 
limited to a clause or a verse or two, but occasionally extend- 
ing to several chapters. Lastly, in innumerable places the 
LXX. would be seen to yield a sense more or less at variance 
with the current Hebrew, either through misapprehension on 
the part of the translators or through a difference in the 
underlying text. These causes combined to render the co- 
ordination 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 in- 
spiration {θ(.ον ^ί^όντο<ζ €υρο/χ€ν). 

Origen began by assuming (i) the purity of the Hebrew 
text, and (2) the corruption of the Kotrr; where it departed from 
the Hebrew^. The problem before him was to restore the 
LXX. to its original purity, i.e. to the Hebraica Veritas as he 
understood it, and thus to put the Church in possession of an 
adequate Greek version of the Old Testament without disturb- 
ing its general allegiance to the time-honoured work of the 
Alexandrian translators. Some of the elements in this complex 
process were comparatively simple, (i) Differences of order 
were met by transposition, the Greek order making way for the 

^ Ep, ad Sunn, et Fret. 

- See Driver, Sa/iiucl, p. xlvi. : " he assumed that the original Septua- 
gint was that which agreed most closely with the Hebrew text as he knew 
it. ..a step in the wrong direction." 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 69 

Hebrew. In this manner whole sections changed places in the 
Lxx. text of Exodus, i Kings, and Jeremiah ; in Proverbs 
only, for some reason not easy to determine, the two texts 
were allowed to follow their respective courses, and the diver- 
gence of the Greek order from the Hebrew was indicated by 
certain marks ^ prefixed to the stichi of the lxx. column. 

(2) Corruptions in the κοιν-η^ 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 to that which was found in the current Hebrew". 

(3) The additions and omissions in the lxx. presented greater 
difficulty. Origen was unwilling to remove the former, for 
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 ; but 
the new matter interpolated into the lxx, needed to be carefully 
distinguished from the genuine work of the Alexandrian trans- 
lators ^ 

6. Here the genius of Origen found an ally in the system 
of critical signs which had its origin among the older scholars 
of Alexandria, dating almost from the century which produced 
the earlier books of the lxx. The Άρισταρχεια σήματα took 
their name from the prince of Alexandrian grammarians, 
Aristarchus, who flourished in the reign of Philopator (a.d. 

^ A combination of the asterisk and obehis ; see below, p• 7 1 . 

- E.g. at Exod. vi. 16, Τηρσών was substituted by Origen for Υζδσών. 
Whether his practice in this respect was uniform has not been definitely 

■' Hieron. Praef. ad Chron. : "quod maioris audaciae est, in editione 
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 
says, Ίωβ στίχοι ^αχ' χωρΙ$ αστερίσκων, μ€τά δέ των αστερίσκων ,βΓ' . 

/ο The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

22 2 — 205), and they appear to 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 wished to censure, while the asterisk 
was affixed to those which seemed to him to be worthy of 
special attention ; cf. the anecdoton printed by Gardthausen : 6 
δε οβίλοζ ττροζ τα άθίτονμζνα iwl τον ττονητον rjyovv vei'oOev^eva 7/ 
νποβ€βλημ€να' 6 Sk αστερίσκος... ως καλών €φημ€νο)ν τών ζττών. 
Similarly, in connexion with Platonic dicta, Diogenes Laertius 
{platon. iii. 657) used the obelus ττρός τ-ην αβ^τ-ησιν and the 
asterisk ττρος τ-ην σνμφωνίαν των δογμάτων. As employed by 
Origen in the fifth column of the Hexapla, the obelus was 
prefixed to words or lines which were wanting in the Hebrew, 
and therefore, from Origen's point of view, of doubtful 
authority", whilst the asterisk called attention to words or lines 
wanting in the lxx., but present in the Hebrew. The close of 
the context to which the obelus or asterisk was intended to 
apply was marked by another sign known as the vietobelus. 
When the passage exceeded the length of a single line, the 
asterisk or obelus was repeated at the beginning of each subse- 
quent line until the metobelus was reached. 

Epiph. dc mens, et pond. 2, 3 6 αστερίσκος... σημαίνε το 
(μφξρόμΐΐ'ον βήμα iv τω ^Έβραικω κΐ'Ισθαι...οί δε ο/3' €ρμην€νται 
παρηκαν κα\ ονχ ηρμην€νκαν...οβ€\6ς δ€...παρ(τίθη...τα'ϊς της θείας 
γραφής Χεζεσιν ταϊς πάρα τοΙς οβ ίρμηνεντάις κειμέναις, πάρα δε 
τοΙς π€ρ\ ^AnvXav και Συμμαχον μη εμφερομεναις. Schol. ap. Tisch. 
not. ed. cod. Sill. p. 76 οσοις οί όβεΧοΙ πρόσκεινται ρητοίς, οντοι ουκ 
εκειντο οϋτε παρά τοΙς Χοιπο'ις ερμηνευταϊς οντε εν τώ Έβραικώ, 
άΧΧά παρά μόνοις τοΙς ο'• κα\ οσοις οί αστερίσκοι πρόσκεινται ρητοίς, 
οντηι εν μεν τω Κβραικώ και τοΙς ΧοιποΙς ερμηνενταις εφεροντο, εν 
δε τοΊς ο' ονκετι. 

^ See a complete list of these in Gardthausen, Griech. Paldographie, 
p. 288 f. 

- 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. Gardthausen : 6 Se αστερίσκος μ.ζ.τ}ί όβελον, 
ως οντά μίν τα ίττ-η τον ττοιητον, μη καλώς δε κύμζ,να : schol. ap. 
Tisch. not. ed. Si?i. 1. C. φέρονται μίν παρά τοις ο", φέρονται Se er 
τω Έ/5ραικω και τταρα τοΐζ λοιττοις ίρμηνζνταΐς, την θίσιν δε μόνην 
τταραλΧάσσονσιν οΐ ΧοιττοΧ καΧ το ^Έιβραικον τταρά τους ο'• οθ€ν 
ωβζλισται iv ταντω καΐ ηστίρίσται, ως τταρα ττασι μίν φζρόμ^να, 
ουκ iv τοις αΰτοΓς δε το'ττοις : also ap. mon. sacr. ined. iii. 
p. xvii. τα δε τ/στερισ/χενα εν ταυτω καΧ ώ^ελισ/χε'να ρητα.,.ώς 
τταρά. ττασι /χέν φερόμενα, ονκ εν τοις αΰτοις δε τοττοις). The 
Aristarchian (or 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 (-^-, the χΐ ττεριεστιγ/Λε'νον); the form ^ occurs but 
seldom, and only, as it seems, in the Syro-Hexaplar. The 
Οφελος, 'spit' or 'spear,' is represented in Epiphanius by n>^, but 
in the MSS. of the lxx. a horizontal straight line ( — y has 
taken the place of the original form, with or without occupying 
dot or dots (— — -^) ; the form H- was known as a /emniscus, and 
the form τ- as a hypoleiimiscus. Epiphanius indeed {pp. cit., c. 8) 
fancies that each dot represents a pair of translators, so that the 
iejfinisais means that the word or clause which the lxx. adds 
to the Hebrew had the support of two out of the thirty-six 
pairs which composed the whole body, whilst the hypolemniscus 

^ This sometimes becomes a hook (c-?). 

72 TJie Hexapla, and tlie Hexaplaric and other Receiisions-. 

claims for it the support of only one pair. This explanation, it 
is scarcely necessary to say, is as baseless as the fiction of the 
cells on which, in the later Epiphanian form, it rests. Other 
attempts to assign distinct values to the various forms of the 
obelus have been shewn by Field to be untenable \ The 
meiobelus is usually represented by two dots arranged per- 
pendicularly (:), like a colon ; other forms are a sloping line 
with a dot before it or on either side (/., •/.), and in the Syro- 
Hexaplar and other Syriac versions a mallet (V). The latter 
form, as the least ambiguous, is used in Field's great edition of 
the Hexapla, and in the apparatus which is printed under the 
text of the lxx. version of Daniel in the Cambridge manual 

Certain other signs found in Hexaplaric MSS. are mentioned 
in the following scholion {Evaypiov σχ., one of the σχόλια et? τάς 
παροιμίας printed in the Notitia ed. cod. Sin., p. 76, from a 
Patmos MS.; see Robinson, Philocalia, pp. xiii., xvii. ff.): ζΙσ\ν 
οσα προτ^ταγμίνον βχουσι τον αριθμόν ώδβ• οση Ώρι-γίνην €πι- 
ycy ραμμίνον €χ(ΐ τούτω τω μονοσυΧλάβω, φ... οσα δβ ττβρι διαφωνίας 
ρητών τινών τών iv τω €8αφίω η €κδόσ€ών €στιν σχόΧια, άπ^ρ καΐ 
κάτω v€V€VKvlav π€ρΐ€στιγμ€νην €χ(ΐ προτΐταγμίνην, τών άντιβ^βλη- 
κότων το βιβΧίον βστίν οσα he άμφιβόλως βζω κ^ίμζνα ρητά (ζω 
veviVKvlav π(ρΐ(στιγμ€νην €χ€ΐ ττροτίταγμίνην, δια τα σχόλια προσε- 
τέθησαν κατ* αυτά τον μεγάλου (Ιρηκότος διδασκάλου, ίνα μη δόζη κατά 
κ€νοΰ τό σχόλιον φίρίσθαι, ev πολλοίς piv τών αντιγράφων τών 
ρητών όντως ξχόϊντων, iv τοντω Se μη όντως κειμένων η μηδ* όλως 
φερομένων, και δια τοντο προστεθέντων. 

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

1 Prolegg. p. lix. sq. 

2 The vertical bars denote, of course, the length of the lines of Cod. G. 
The lines of the lxx. column of the Hexapla, if we may judge by the 
specimen (p. 62 f.), varied in length according to the sense. 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 73 

Joshua xi. 10—14 (Cod. Sarravianus). 

και €π€στρ€-ψ^€ν is ev \ τω καιρώ €Κ€ΐνω i^ | κατ^Χαβ^το ■'>^• την 
: ασωρ \ και τον βασιΚ^α αυτής | ■^• απίκταν^ν €v ρομ\ ■><■ φαιά : 
ην δ€ ασωρ το προίτβρον άρχουσα πασώ \ των βασιλείων του\των και 
απ€κτ€ΐνα. | παν (νττνβον '><■ ο : ev \ αυτή ev στοματι ζιφουί | και 
€ξω\€θρ€υσαν : | — παντας : και ου κατ€Κι\φθη €v αυτή €vnve\ov και 
την ασωρ (ν^Ιπρησίν ev ττυρι και πα\σαζ τας TroXets των \ βασιλείων ■^• 
τουτώ : [ και ■%■ παντας : τους βασι\Κζΐς αυτών (λαβ^ν ΐς \ και 
aveiXev αυτούς \ ev στοματι ξίφους κ; \ ^ξωΧίθρίυσ^ν αυτούς | ον 
τρόπον συνίταξί \ Μωσης ο παις "κϋ• αΧΧα \ πάσας τας ποΧ€ΐς τας || 
κ( χρωματισμών ας \ •^• αυτών : ουκ €ν€πρη\σ€ν ϊηΧ πΧην ><■■ την : α\σωρ 
μονην γ αυτήν : €ν€πρησ€ν ϊς και πα τα τα σκυΧα αυτής •^• ι^ \ •^• τα 
κτήνη : €προνημ€υ\σαν €αυτοις οι ϋϊοι ϊηΧ | •^• κατά το ρήμα Έϋ ο eve 
■^ ΤζίΧατο τω ϊΰ : αυτούς \ δβ παντας €ζωΧ€θρ€υ\σ€ν ev στοματι ξίφους \ 
€ως απωΧζσ^ν αυτούς \ ου κατιΧιπον τ αυτώ : \ ουδβ ev evπveov * * "^ 

7- The Hexapla was completed, as we have seen, by 
A.D. 240 or 245 ; the Tetrapla, which was a copy of four 
columns of the Hexapla, followed, perhaps during Origen's 
last years at Tyre\ A large part of the labour of tran- 
scription may have been borne by the copyists who were in 
constant attendance on the great scholar, but he was doubtless 
his own Βίορθωτης, and the two Hebrew columns and the lxx. 
column of the Hexapla were probably written by his own 

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 ταχυγράφοι yap αύτω ττλβ/ου? 
η 4πτά τον αριθμόν παρήσαν υπayopeύovτι, χρόνοις τeτayμevoις άΧΧη- 
Χους άμeίβovτeς^ βιβΧιογράφοι re ούχ ηττους άμα καΐ κόραις 4π\ το 
κaXXιypaφeΐv ησκημίναις• ων απάντων την δ€θυσαν των €πιτη8€ίων 
αφθονον πepιoυσίav ό Αμβρόσιος πapeστησaτo. Two of these 
classes of workers, the βιβXιoypάφoι and κaXXιypάφoι (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, et 
pond. 1 8. 

74 The Hexapla, afid the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

material on which literary works were written" (Kenyon, Palaeo- 
graphy of Gk papyri, p. 113 f. ; on the size of existing papyrus 
rolls, see p. 16 ff.)• This view receives some confirmation from 
Jerome's statement iep. 141) that Acacius and Evagrius endea- 
voured to replace with copies on parchment some of the books 
in the library at Caesarea which were in a damaged condition 
("bibliothecam...ex parte 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 
copied in so costly a way, ΛνουΜ have taxed the resources even of 
Origen's generous ζργοδιώκτης. 

It is difficult to conceive of a codex or series of codices so 
gigantic as the Hexapla. Like the great Vatican MS., it would 
have exhibited at each opening at least six columns, and in 
certain books, like the Sinaitic MS., eight. Its bulk, even when 
allowance has been made for the absence in it of the un- 
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 or less. From these data it may be 
roughly calculated that the Hexapla, if 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 
would have exceeded 2000 leaves. So immense a work 
must have been the despair of copyists, and it is improba- 
ble that any attempt was made to reproduce either of the 
editions as a whole. The originals, however, were long 
preserved at Caesarea in Palestine, where they were de- 
posited, perhaps by Origen himself, in the library of Pam- 
philus. There they were studied by Jerome in the fourth 
century {ΐ7ΐ Psahnos coimn. ed. Morin., p. 5 : "ε^αττλοΰς Origenis 
in Caesariensi bibliotheca relegens"; ib. p. 12 : "cum vetustum 
Origenis hexaplum psalterium revolverem, quod ipsius manu 
1 See Birt, das antikc Buchivesen, pp. 100, 107 ff. 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 75 

fuerat emendatum " ; hi ep. ad Tit. : " nobis curae fuit omnes 
veteris legis libros quos v. d. Adamantius in Hexapla diges- 
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 
Esther in cod. χ : αντφληθη ττρος τταλαωτατον λίαν άντίγραφον 
8€^ίορθωμ€νον χ^φΐ τον άγίον μάρτυρος ΤΙαμφίλον ττρό? δε τω 
reXet του αντον τταλαιοτατου βιβ\ί.ον...ντΓθσημ€.ίωσι<; τον αντον 
μάρτνρος νττεκΐίτο ίχονσα όντως' ΜετελΗΜφθΗ ΚΛΙ λίορθώθΗ 
πρόα ΤΛ είΛπλΛ 'npireNoyc γπ Λγτογ λιορθωΜεΜΛ (Ο. Τ. ifi 
Greek, ii. p. 780) ; and the notes prefixed to Isaiah and Ezekiel 
in Cod. Marchalianus (Q) ; the second of these notes claims 
that the copy from which Ezekiel was transcribed bore the 
subscription ΤλγτΛ ΜετελΗφθΗ λπο τώΝ κλτλ tag eKAoceic 
ε^ΛπλώΝ, ΚΛΙ λιορθώθΗ λπό τωΝ 'ΠριτεΝογΰ λγτογ τετρλπλώΝ 
ΛτίΝΛ κΛί Λγτογ χειρί λιο'ρθωτο κλι έακολιΟΓρΛφΗτο {ib. iii. p. 
viii.)\ The library of Pamphilus was in existence in the 6th 
century, for Montfaucon {biblioth. Coisl. p. 262) quotes from 
Coisl. 202"^, a MS. of that century, a colophon which runs: 
οίντ€βληθη δ€ η βίβλος ττρος το iv Καισαρια άντίγραφον της 
βιβλιοθήκης τον άγιΌυ ΤΙαμφίλον χ^φΐ γίγραμμίνον αντον. But 

in 638 Caesarea fell into the hands of the Saracens, and from 
that time the Library was heard of no more. Even if not 
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 in her sands ; it can scarcely be hoped that the sea-washed 
and storm-beaten ruins of Kaisariyeh cover a single leaf. 

^ See also the note at the end of the Scholia on Proverbs printed in the 
Notitia I. c. : μ^τίΚ-ήφθ-ησαν αφ" ών evpo^ev, και πάλιν αύτα χ^φΐ ΙΙάμφίλο$ 
καΐ Έΐύσββω^ διορθώσαντο. 

- =Ηΐ'*"', Gregoiy, ρ. 449» Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 183 f. 

■^ See G. A. Smith, //i'sf. 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 Septua- 
gint (1587). Separate collections have since been published by 
J. Drusius {Vet. interp7^etujn Graccorui)i...frag7neiita coUccta...a 
Jo. D)'usio, Arnheim, 1622), Bernard Montfaucon (Origenis 
Hexap/onnn quae sKpersuni, Paris, 1713), and F. Field (Oxford, 
1875), whose work has superseded all earlier attempts to recover 
the Hexapla. A fuller list may be seen in Fabricius-Harles, 
iii. 701 ff. Materials for an enlarged edition of Field are 
already beginning to accumulate ; such may be found in Pitra, 
Analecta sacra., iii. (Venice, 1883), p. 551 ff. ; E. Klostermann, 
Atialecta sur,.. Hexapla (Leipzig, 1895), G. Alorin, Ajiccdota 
Maredsolana iii. i (Mareds., 1895; cf Expositor^ June 1895, 
p. 424 ff.). Among helps to the study of the Hexapla, besides 
the introductions already specified, the following may be men- 
tioned : the Prolegomena in Field's Hexapla, the art. Hexapla 
in D. C. B. by Dr C. Taylor ; the introduction to Dr Drivers 
Notes on Samuel {^^, xliii. ff.), and Harnack-Preuschen, Gesch. d. 
altchristt. Litt. i. p. 339 ff. For the literature of the Syro- 
Hexaplaric version see c. iv. 

8. If the Hexapla as a whole was too vast to be copied', 
and copies even of particular books were rarely if ever at- 
tempted, yet there was nothing to forbid the separate publi- 
cation 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 addi- 
tions adopted by Origen with the accompanying Hexaplaric 
signs. *' 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 et 
Caesariensis Eusebius omnesque Graeciae tractatores κοιν-ην 
(id est communem) appellant atque vulgatam..., aliam lxx. 
interpretum quae in «^αττλοΓς codicibus reperitur . . et lerosoly- 

^ Hieron. /;-ας/". in Jos.: " et sumptu et labore niaximo indigent." 
- Ep. ad Sunn, et Fret. 2. 

The Hexapia, and the Hexaplai'ic and other Recensions, yj 

mae atque in orientis ecclesia decantatur." The Hexaplaric 
text receives his unhesitating support : " ea autem quae 
habetur in e^a7rAot5...ipsa est quae in eruditorum Hbris incor- 
rupta et immaculata lxx. interpretum translatio reservatur^" 
'I'his edition, sometimes described as το Ένσεβίον or το Παλαι- 
σηναΐον, or simply Ώρ[ίγ€νης], is 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 pro- 
duction of the book. Thus a note quoted by an early hand in 
cod. Ν at the end of 2 Esdras says, Άντωνΐνος άντ^βαλ^ν, 
ΐΐάμφίλος Βίόρθωσα. The subscription to Esther ends Άι/τω- 
χανοζ ομολο-γητης άντέβαλεν, Πα/χφιλος Βωρθωσατο [το] τ€νχο<ς iv 
ττ] φυλακ-ρ. The scholion prefixed to Ezekiel in Q introduces 
the name of Eusebius, assigning him another function : Evae- 
βίος εγώ τα σχόλια τταρζθηκα' Πα/χφιλος και Έινσ^βως Βιορθω- 
σαντο. In its subscription to ι Kings the Syro-Hexaplar quotes 
a note which runs : Ένσ^βίος Βίορθθ)σάμην ώ? ακριβώς η^ννάμην. 
It would seem as though the work of comparing the copy with 
the original was committed to the otherwise unknown Anto- 
ninus, whilst the more responsible task of making corrections 
was reserved for 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 com- 
pleted by Eusebius after the martyr's death. 

The separate publication of the Hexaplaric lxx. was 
undertaken in absolute good faith; Pamphilus and Eusebius 
believed (as did even Jerome nearly a century afterwards) that 
Origen had succeeded in restoring the old Greek version to its 
primitive purity, and they were moved by the desire to com- 
municate this treasure to the whole Church. It was impos- 

^ Adv. R II fin. ii. 27. 

- On άντφά\\€ΐ.ν and δωρθοΰσθαι, see Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 55. 

78 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

sible for them to foresee that the actual result of their labours 
would be to create a recension of the lxx. which was a 
mischievous mixture of the Alexandrian version with the 
versions of Aquila and Theodotion. The Hexaplaric signs, 
intended for the use of scholars, lost their meaning when 
copied into a text which was no longer confronted with the 
Hebrew or the later versions based upon it ; and there was a 
natural tendency on the part of scribes to omit them, when 
their purpose was no longer manifest. 

When we consider that the Hexaplaric Septuagint claimed 
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 Pro- 
phets. But a considerable number of so-called Hexaplaric 
codices exist, from which it is possible to collect fragments 
not only of the fifth column, but of all the Greek columns of 
the Hexapla ; and a still larger number of our ]\ISS. offer a 
mixed text in which the influence of the Hexaplaric lxx., or 
of the edition published by Pamphilus and Eusebius, has been 
more or less extensively at work-. The problems presented by 
this and other causes of mixture will come under consideration 
in the later chapters of this book. 

9- While the Hexaplaric Septuagint was being copied at 
Caesarea for the use of Palestine, Hesychius was engaged in 
correcting the common Egyptian text. 

^ Jerome says indeed {ep. ad Aug. ii.): "quod si feceris (i.e. if you 
refuse Origen's recension) omnino ecclesiae bibliothecas damnare cogeris ; 
vix enim unus vel alter inveniatur liber qui ista non habeat." But he is 
drawing a hasty inference from experiences gathered in Palestine. 

- See c. V. 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 79 

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

It is not easy to ascertain who this Hesychius was. The 
most conspicuous person of that name is the lexicographer, 
and he has been identified with the reviser of the Greek Bible'. 
But later researches shew that Hesychius the lexicographer was 
a pagan who lived in the second half of the fourth century. 
The author of the Egyptian revision w^as more probably^ the 
martyr Bishop who is mentioned by Eusebius in connexion 
with Phileas Bishop of Thmuis, Pachymius, and Theodorus 
{H.E. viii. 13 <t?ikka.% T€ και Ησύχιος και Παχυ/χ-ίος καΧ Θεόδωρος 
τώι/ αμήλ την Α'ίγντττον εκκλησιών ίπίσκοττοί). The four names 
appear together again in a letter addressed to Meletius (Routh, 
red. sacr. iv. p. 91 ff.); and Eusebius has preserved a pastoral 
written by Phileas in prison in view of his approaching martyr- 
dom (ΖΓ. E. viii. 10). Phileas was a distinguished scholar 
(H. E. viii. 9 δια7Γρ€ΐ//ας . . ev . . τοις κατά. φυλοσοφίαν λόγοις, ΐύ. ΙΟ 
των eiwOev μαθημάτων ένεκα πολλοί; λόγου a^ioi /...τοί; ως αληθώς 
φιλοσόφου . . μάρτυρος), and the association of his name with 
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 for the use of their 
flocks, nearly at the same time that Pamphilus and Eusebius 

^ Jerome speaks elsewhere (m £sa. Iviii. 11) of " exemplaria Alexan- 

- Fabricius-Harles, vii. p. 547 (cf. vi. p. 205). 

^ This is howeA^er mere conjecture ; see Harnack-Preuschen, i. p. 442 : 
" dass dieser Hesychius... identisch ist mit dem etwa gleichzeitigen Bibel- 
kritiker gleichen Namens, ist nicht zu ervveisen." 

8ο TJie Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

and Antoninus were working under similar conditions at Caesa- 
rea. It 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 Testa- 
ment is still accessible in MSS. and versions of the lxx. is 
uncertain. As far back as 1786 Miinter threw out the very 
natural suggestion that the Egyptian recension might be found 
in the Egyptian versions. In his great monograph on the 
Codex Marchalianus Ceriani takes note that in the Prophets, 
with the exception perhaps of Ezekiel, the original text of that 
great Egyptian 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. con- 
taining a probably Hesychian text, but the investigations now 
being pursued by the editors of the larger Cambridge lxx. 
may be expected to yield important help in this direction. 

10. Meanwhile the rising school of Antioch was not 

inactive in the field of Biblical revision. An Antiochian 

recension of the κοινή had in Jerome's time come to be known 

by the name of its supposed author, the martyr Lucian". 

Hieron. ^rrt^yi in Paralipp. : "Constantinopolis usque Antio- 
chiam Luciani martyris exemplaria probat."' Cf ad Sunn, et 
Fret. 2 "[17 Koii/7)]...aplerisque nunc AouKiai^os-dicitur." Ps.-Athan. 
syn. sacr. script, (βδόμη πάλιν και reXevTaia έρμηνύα η τον άγίην 
Αονκιανοΰ του μεγάλου ασκητού καί μάρτυρος, όστις και αντος ταϊς 
προΎ€•γραμμ€ναις €κ^όσ€σι και τοΊς 'ΈβραικοΙς €ντυχων καΐ €ποπ- 
τίυσας /xer' άκριββίας τα Χ^ίποντα η κα\ περιττά της αληθείας ρήματα 

^ Das Buck lies Prophet en Ezechiel, p. 66 ff. ; the Hesychian group in 
Ezekiel is βς~κλμφφ, i.e. cocld. 49, 68, 87, 90, 91, -228, 238 (Parsons). See 
also Ceriani in Reiidiconti (Feb. i8, 1886). 

- Cf. the scholion in cod. Μ at 3 Regn. iii. 46 έντβΰθεν διαφόρων Ιχ6ΐ 
τα άνατολίκα βιβλία. The Lucianic text was also known as the εκκλη- 
σιαστική ^κδοσίί (Oeconomus, iv. 548). 

The Hexapla, and tL• Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 8 1 

Koi 8ωρθωσάμ€νοζ iv τοΙς oI<€lois των γραφών τοττοιρ e^edoro τοΙς 
XpiCTTLavois ά^ίΚφοΙς• ήτις δη κα\ βρρηνβία μ€τά την αθΧησιν <α\ 
μαρτυρίαν του αύτοϋ άγιου Αουκιανού την γβγονυίαν βπϊ ΑιοκΧητιανου 
καΐ Μαζίμιανοΰ των τυράννων, ήγουν το Ιδωχβιρον αυτού της βκδόσ^ως 
βιβλίον, ζυρέθη iv Ί^ικομηδ€ία eVi Κωνο'ταντίνου βασίΧζως του μξγάΧου 
τταρά Ίουδαίοις iv τοίχω πυργίσκω π^ρικίχρισμένω κονιάματι eZy 
διαφύΧαξιν (cf. the Acts of Lucian in Bolland. i. p. 363). Suidas s.v. 
ούτος τάς ί€ράς βίβΧους θ^ασάμ^νος ποΧυ το νόθον ίίσδζ^αμένας, του 
γβ χρόνου Χυμηναμάνου ποΧΧά των iv αύταΊς καϊ της συνεχούς αφ' 
ίτίρων eh eT€ pa μ€ταθ4σ€ως... αυτός άπάσας άναΧαβων eic της 'Έβραίδος 
€πανζν€ύ3σατο γΧώσσης. 

Lucian, who was born 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. H. E. ix. 6 rots Upots μαθημασυ σνγ- 
κζκροτη μένος, Suid. S.V. αντην [sc. την ΈβραίΒα γλώσσαν] ω$ τα 
μάλιστα ην ήκριβωκως). From some cause not clearly explained 
Lucian was under a cloud for several years between a.d. 270 
and 299 (Theodoret\ -ίΤ. Ε. i. 3 αποσυναγωγος e/xetve τριών 
€πισκ07Γων ττολνετονς -χρόνου). On his restoration to com- 
munion he was associated with Dorotheus, who was a Hebrew 
scholar, as well as a student of Greek literature (Eus. If. E. vii. 
32 φιλοκαλος δ' ούτος ircpi τα θεία γράμματα καΐ της Εβραίων 
εττεμεληθη γλωττης, ως καΐ αύται? ταις Έιβραικαΐς γραφαΐς επιστη- 
μόνως Ιντνγχάνξ.ίν• ην δε ούτος των μάλιστα ελευθερίων, ιτροτται- 
δαας τε της καθ' "Ελλτ^ι/ας ουκ άμοιρος). As Pamphilus was 
assisted by Eusebius, as Phileas and others were probably 
associated with Hesychius, so (the conjecture may be hazarded) 
Dorotheus and Lucian worked together at the Antiochian 
revision of the Greek Bible. If, 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 

^ Oeconomus refuses to identify this person with the martyr and saint 
(iv. p. 498 n.). 

2 hitrodiidion to the N. T. in Greek, p. 138 ; cf. the Oxford Debate on 
the Textual Criticism of the N. T., p. 29. 

S. S. 6 

82 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions, 

Syrian revision of the Old Testament, which called for a 
knowledge of Hebrew, may have been due more especially 
to the Hebraist Dorotheas. Lucian, however, has the ex- 
clusive credit of the latter, and possibly was the originator of 
the entire work. If we may believe certain later writers, his 
revision of the lxx. was on a great scale, and equivalent to a 
new version of the Hebrew Bible ; Pseudo-Athanasius goes so 
far as to call it the ζβΒόμη ίρμη^ζία, placing it on a level with 
the Greek versions of the Hexapla. But Jerome's identification 
of ' Lucian ' with the kolvtj presents quite another view of its 
character and one which is probably nearer to the truth. It 
was doubtless an attempt to revise the κοινή in accordance 
with the principles of criticism which were accepted at Antioch, 
In the New Testament (to use the words of Dr Hort') "the 
quaUties which the authors of the Syrian text seem to have 
most desired to impress on it are lucidity and completeness... 
both in matter and in diction the Syrian text is conspicuously 
a full text." If the 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 some extent by the relation 
of the LXX. to a Hebrew original, and by the circumstance 
that the 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 that in an epistle prefixed 
to the Arabic Syro-Hexaplar^ the marginal letter i (L) was said 

1 Introdtidion, p. 134 f. 

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

2 Prolegg. p. Ixxxiv. f. 
^ See c. V. 

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric a7id other Recensions. 83 

to indicate Lucianic readings. Turning to the Syro-Hexaplar 
itself, he found this letter in the margin of 2 Kings (= 4 Regn.) 
at cc. ix. 9, 28, X. 24, 25, xi. i, xxiii. 2,1, 35. But the readings 
thus marked as Lucianic occur also in the cursive Greek MSS. 
19, 82, 93, 108; and further examination shewed that these 
four MSS. in the Books of Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehe- 
miah agree with the text of the lxx. offered by the Antiochian 
fathers Chrysostom and Theodoret, who might have been 
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 result, so far as regards the historical books. He satisfied 
himself that codd. 19, 82, 93, 108, 118^, had sprung from 
a common archetype, the text of which was practically identical 
with that of the lxx. as quoted by Chrysostom, i.e., with the 
Antiochian text of the fourth century, which presumably was 
Lucianic. Lagarde proceeded to construct from these and 
other sources a provisional text of Lucian, but his lamented 
death intercepted the work, and only the first volume of his 
Lucianic lxx. has appeared (Genesis — 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. Β and A. 

3 Regn. xviii. 22 — 28. 

^^ και ύττΐ,ν "^^^[ας προς τον Χαον Έγώ ύττολελβί^^αι προφήτης 
κυρίου, προφήτης μονώτατος, και οί προφηται τοΰ Βααλ τετρακόσιοι 
καϊ πεντήκοντα άνδρες, κα\ οι προφηται των αλσών τετρακόσιοι, 
^^δότωσαν ούν ημίν δύο βόας, και εκΧεζάσθωσαν εαυτοΐς τον ενα και 
μεΧισάτωσαν καϊ επιθετωσαν επ\ ξύλα κα\ πυρ μη επιθετωσαν • καΐ 
ε-γω ποιήσω τον βοΰν τον ίίΚλον, καΐ πυρ ου μη επιθώ. ^^κα\ βοάτε 
εν ονόματι θεών υμών, καΐ εγώ επικαΧεσομαι εν ονόματι κυρίου τοΰ 

^ Cf. his Prolego77iena to Librornjn V, Τ. Canon. Pars prior graece 
(Gotting. 1883), p. xiv. 

2 Or, as he denotes them, h,f, in, d, p. 

84 The Hexapla^ and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions, 

Oeov μου, και eVrai ό ueos os av βπακούστ) σήμερον iv πυρί, οντός can 
BeOS. Koi άπ€κρίθη πας ό Xaos και einev ^Αγαθός 6 Xoyos ov (Χαλησας. 
'^και elrrev 'HXias τοΊς προφηταις της αισχύνης ^ΈκΧ4ζασθ€ €αντο7ς 
τον βονν τον eva, οτι υμ^ϊς ττοΧΧοί, κα\ ποίησατ€ πρώτοι, και (πικα- 
Χ^Ισθΐ iv ονόματι θ^ων υμών, και πυρ μη €πιθητ€. ^^ κα\ (Χαβον τον 
βονν και εποίησαν, και €π€καΧουντο iv ονόματι τον Βααλ και (ίπον 
^Έπάκονσον ημών, 6 Βααλ, iπάκovaov ημών. καΐ ονκ ην φωνή και 
ούκ ην άκρόασις. και διίτρίχον iπ\ τον θνσιαστηρίον ον εποίησαν. 
^^ καΐ iyevcTO μ€σημβρια, κα\ (μνκτηρισ^ν αντονς 'ΐίΧίας ό θ€σβίτης 
και προσέθίτο λέγων Έττικαλεισ^β iv φωνή μ€γάΧ-η άμα, μηποτ€ ά8ο- 
Χίσχία τις €στιν αντω, και αμα μηποτ€ χρηματίζει αντος η μηποτ€ 
καβίύδίΐ, και ζζαναστησεται. ^^ κα\ iπ€κaXovvτo iv φωνή μεγάΧη και 
κατ€Τ€μνοντο κατά τον iθισμov αντών iv μαχαίραις και iv σειρομάσ- 
ταις €ως iκχvσeως αίματος iπ' αντονς. 

22 Ηλείου ΒΑ | κυρίου] pr τον ΒΑ | om προφήτης 2^ ΒΑ | οι 
προφηται 2^] om οι Α | τον αΧσονς ΒΑ | om τετρακόσιοι 2^ Α 
23 om ονν ΒΑ Ι om και επιθ. €πι ξνΧα Α \ ξνΧα] των ξνΧων Β | τον 
άλλοι/] + και δώσω επι τα ξνΧα Α 24 θέων] θ(ον Α \ eav ΒΑ | om 
σήμερον ΒΑ | om εστί ΒΑ | απεκριθησαν ΒΑ | ειπον Β είπαν Α \ 
αγαθός ο Χογος ον] καλοί/ το ρήμα ο ΒΑ 25 Ηλείου ΒΑ | βονν'\ 

μοσχον ΒΑ | και ποι. πρώτοι οτι ποΧΧοι νμεις ΒΑ | επικαΧεσασθε 
Β Ι θεων^ θεον ΒΑ 20 εΧαβεν Α \ βονν'\ μοσχον BA + oj/ εδωκεν 

αντοις Α | Βααλ Ι^] + εκ πρωιθεν εως μεσημβρίας ΒΑ 2J Ηλείου 

ΒΑ Ι προσεθετο λέγων] ειττεν ΒΑ | αμα] οτι θεός εστίν ΒΑ | μη- 
ποτε Ι°] οτι ΒΑ | τις εστίν αντω] αντω εστίν ΒΑ | καθενδει] + αντος 
ΒΑ 28 κατά τον εθισμον αντων] om Β κατά το κρίμα αντων 

Α Ι μάχαιρα Β | om εν 3*^ β 

Α 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 version smoother or fuller, e.g. Ήλι'α? for ΉΧειού, the repeti- 
tion of προφήτης before μονώτατος, the substitution of των αΧσών 
for τοΐ) άΧσονς, of άπεκρΊθη for απεκριθησαν, and of ά-γαθος 6 λόγο? 
for καΧον το ρήμα, and the addition of σήμερον. (2) Others seem 
to indicate an attempt to get nearer to the Hebrew, e.g. δότωσαν 
ουν (-IJiil^l), βονν (Ί2) ; or an adherence to an older reading which 
the Hexaplaric LXX. had set aside, e.g. the omission of 6v εδωκεν 
αντοΊς^ and ε'κ πρωίθεν εως μησημβρ'ιας. On the Other hand 
Lucian follows the current Hebrew in κατά τον iθισμ6v αντών, 
though he substitutes the easier iθισμός for Aquila's κρίμα, which 
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- 

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

The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions, 85 

stitution of synonyms for the words employed by the Lxx. ; 
(2) 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 
text." The last of these peculiarities renders it of great im- 
portance for the criticism of the Hebrew Bible. 

Lucian sufifered martyrdom at Nicomedia under Maximin 
in the year 311 or 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 
arisen from a desire to invest the Ιβ^όμ.η (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 ττίθοίς. 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 Constanti- 
nople. The name of Lucian would be enough to guarantee the 
general acceptance of the work. He died in the peace of the 
Church, and a martyr ; on the other hand his name was in 
high repute with the Arian leaders, who boasted of being σνλ- 
Χονκιανισταί^. Moreover, a revision which emanated from 
Antioch, the "ecclesiastical parent of Constantinople^" would 
naturally take root in the soil of the Greek East. In all 
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 Greek Old Testament. 

1 1. The result of these multiplied labours of Christian scho- 
lars upon the text of the lxx. was not altogether satisfactory. 
Before the time of Jerome much of the original text of the 
Alexandrian Bible had disappeared. Men read their Old Tes- 
tament in the recension of Lucian, if they lived in North Syria, 
Asia Minor, or Greece ; in that of Hesychius, if they belonged 

^ Mason, Persecution of Diocletian, p. 324. 

^ Newman, Avians, p. 6 f. ; Gwatkin, Studies of Ariatiism, p. 31 n. 

^ Hort, Introd. p. 143. 

86 The Hexapla, and the Hexaplaric and other Recensions. 

to the Delta or the valley of the Nile ; in Origen's Hexaplaric 
edition, if they were residents at Jerusalem or Caesarea. 
Thus, as the scholar of Bethlehem complains, the Christian 
world was divided between three opposing texts (" totus...orbis 
hac inter se trifaria varietate compugnat^"). To Jerome, as a 
Palestinian and an admirer of Origen's critical principles, the 
remedy was simple ; the Hexaplaric text, which had been 
assimilated to the Hebraica Veritas^ ought everywhere to take 
the place of the κοιν-η represented by Hesychius or Lucian. 
Fortunately the task was beyond his strength, and MSS. afid 
versions still survive which represent more or less fully the 
three recensions of the fourth century. But the trifaria 
varietas did not continue to perplex the Church ; a fusion of 
texts 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 the later MSS. groups may be discerned which answer 
more or less certainly to this recension or to that, but the 
greater number of the cursives present a text which appears 
to 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. 


Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 

The Christian Churches of Greek-speaking countries 
throughout the Empire read the Old Testament in the Alexan- 
drian Version. Few of the provinces were wholly non-Hellenic ; 
Greek Avas spoken not only in Egypt and Cyrenaica, in West- 
ern Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Achaia, but to a great 
extent in the West, in Italy and at Rome. Roman satirists of 
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 first two centuries were written in Greek ; 
only four of the Bishops of Rome during the same period bear 
Latin names \ In Gaul the Greek tongue had spread up the 
valley of the Rhone from 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 

^ The evidence is collected by Caspari, Qudlen zur Gesch. d. Tatif- 
symbols^ iii. 26/5., and summarised by Sanday and Headlam, Ro7nans, p. 
lii. fif. 

88 Ancient Versions based upon the Septtiagint. 

the Seventy. To the Church of North Africa, on the other 
hand, the Greek Bible was a sealed book; for Carthage, 
colonised from Rome before the capital 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 it is there that the oldest form of the 
Old "Latin Bible first meets us in 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. All these versions rest either wholly 
or in part upon the Septuagint, and therefore possess a special 
interest for the student of the Greek Bible. One other group 
has a claim upon his consideration. The earliest of the Syriac 
versions of the Old Testament is on the whole a translation 
from the Hebrew, but it shews the influence of the Septuagint 
in certain books. The rest, which belong to post-Nicene 
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. 

(i) The Latin Bible before Jerome. 

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. 
786 ff., and Dr H. A. A. Kennedy in Hastings' D. B. iii p. 54 ff. [This 
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 

Aug. de civ. Dei xviii. 43 ex hac LXX. interpretatione etiam 
in Latinam linguam interpretatum est quod ecclesiae Latinae 
tenent. De doctr. Christ, ii. 16 [after a reference to the 
"Latinorum interpretum infinita varietas"] "qui enim scripturas 
ex Hebraea lingua in Graecam verterunt, numerari possunt, 
Latini interpretes nullo modo ; ut enim cuique primis fidei 
temporibus in manus venit codex Graecus et aliquantulum 
facultatis sibi utriusque linguae habere videbatur ausus est in- 
terpretari." lb. 22: "in ipsis autem interpretationibus Itala 
ceteris praeferatur." Ep. ii. 82 {ad Hiero7iymuin) : " ideo autem 
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 

fourth century, and needs to be verified before it can be 

unhesitatingly received. Many of the discrepancies to which 

Augustine refers may be due to the carelessness or officious- 

ness of correctors or transcribers ; if, as Jerome tells us, 

there were towards the end of the fourth century as many 

types of text as there were MSS. of the Latin Bible (" tot exem- 

plaria quot codices"), it is clearly out of the question to 

ascribe each of these to a separate translator. A few specimens, 

taken from Cyprian and extant MSS. of the O. L., will enable 

the student to form some idea of the extent to which these 

differences are found in extant texts ^ 

Genesis xlviii. 17 f. 

Cyprian, testimonia i. 212. Lyons Pentateuch. 

^7ubi vidit autem loseph quo- '^yidens autem Joseph quod 

niam superposuit pater suus misisset pater ipsius dexteram 
manum dexteram super caput suam super caput Ephrem, grave 
Effraim, grave illi visum est, et ei visum est, et adprehendit lo- 
adprehendit loseph manum pa- seph manum patris sui ut aufer- 
tris sui auferre earn a capite ret earn a capite Ephrem super 
Effraim ad caput Μ anasse. '^ dixit caput Manassis. '^dixit autem 
autem loseph ad patrem suum loseph patri suo Non sicut, 
Non sic, pater; hie est primi- pater; hie enim primitivus est; 
tivus meus ; superpone dexteram impone dextram tuam super 
tuam super caput suum. caput huius. 

^ To facilitate comparison obvious errors of the MSS. and orthographical 
peculiarities have been removed. 

^ On the MSS. of the Testimonia cf. O.L. Texts, ii. p. 123 ff. 

90 Ancieiit Versions based tipon the Septuagmt. 


""'et dixit Moyses 
ad Aron (2uid fecit 
tibi populus hie quia 
induxisti super cos 
peccatum magnum ? 
^^et dixit Aron ad 
Moysen Noli irasci, 
domine ; tu enim scis 
^3dixerunt enim mihi 
Fac nobis deos qui 
praeeant nos ; nam 
Moyses hie homo qui 
eduxit nos de Aegyp- 
to, nescimus quid 
factum sit ei. -^et 
dixi eis Quicunque 
habet aurum demat 
sibi. et dederunt mihi, 
et misi illud in ignem, 
et exiit vitulus. 

Exod. xxxii. 21 — 24. 


'''et dixit Moyses 
ad Aron Quid fecit 
populus hie quia in- 
duxisti super eos pec- 

catum magnum i 


dixit Aron ad Moysen 
Noli irasci, domine: 
tu enim scis impetum 
populi huius. -^^lixe- 
runt enim mihi Fae 
nobis deos qui praece- 
dant nos; nam Moy- 
ses hie homo qui e- 
duxit nos ex terra Ae- 
gypti, nescimus quid 
factum sit ei. ^■^et 
dixi illis Quicunque 
habet aurum, demat ; 
et dempserunt* et 
dederunt mihi, et misi 
illud in ignem, et exiit 

* cod. demiserunt 



^' et dixit Moyses 
ad Aron Quid fecit 
tibi populus hie quo- 
niam immisisti eis 
delictum maximum? 
--et dixit Aron ad 
Moysen Ne irascaris, 
domine ; tu enim scis 
populi huius impe- 
tum. ^^dixerunt enim 
mihi Fac nobis deos 
qui praecedant nos; 
Moyses enim hie 
homo qui nos eiecit 
de terra Aegypti, ne- 
scimus quid accident 
ei. ^^et dixi eis Si qui 

habet aurum t 

tollat ad me ; et dede- 
runt mihi, et proieci 
in ignem, et exivit 

t hiat cod. 

Leviticus iv. 27 — 29. 

Lyons MS. 

^7 si autem animadeliquerit in- 
prudenter de populo terrae in 
faciendo vel unum ex omnibus 
praeeeptis Dei quod non faciet, 
et neglexerit, ^^et cognitum ei 
fuerit delictum in quo deliquit* 
in eo, et adferett primitivum de 
ovibus feminum immaculatum 
quod deliquit ; ^^et imponet ma- 
num supra caput eius et Occident 
primitivum delicti in loco in quo 
occidunt holoeausta. 

* cod. delinquii f cod. adfert 

WURZBURG Fragments. 

^7 si autem animaunadeliquerit 
invita de populo in terra eo quod 
fecit unum ab omnibus praeeep- 
tis Domini, quod fieri non debet, 
et neglexerit, ^^et cognitum fuerit 
peccatum eius quod peccavit in 
ipso, et adferet hedillam de ca- 
pris feminam sine vitio propter 
delictum quod deliquit; ^^et su- 
perponet manum super caput de- 
licti sui et victimabunt hedillam 
quae est delicti in loco ubi vic- 
timabunt holoeausta. 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 91 

Micah V. 2. 
Cyprian, testhnonia ii. 12. Weingarten Fragments. 

et tu, Bethleem, domus illius et tu, Be[thleem,] domus [ha- 

Ephratha, num exigua es ut bita]tioni[si Efrajta, nu[mquid 

constituaris in milibus luda? ex mini[ma es] ut sis [in milibus 

te mihi procedet ut sit princeps luda? [ex te mi]hi pro[diet qui_ 

apud Israel, et processiones eius sit prin[ceps in] Istra[hel, et 

a principio, a diebus saeculi. eg]ressus ip[sius ab] initi[o, ex 

diebus] saec[uli]. 

Isaiah xxix. 11, 18. 

Cyprian, testimonia i. 4. WuRZBURG Palimpsest. 

"et erunt vobis hi omnes ser- "et erunt verba haec omnia 

mones sicut sermones libri qui sicut verba libri huius signati, 

signatus est, quern si dederis quern si dederint homini scienti 

homini scienti litteras ad legen- Htteras dicentes ex lege haec, et 

dum dicet Non possum legere, dicet Ν on possum legere, signa- 

signatus est enim...'^sed in ilia turn est enim...'^et audient in 

die audient surdi sermones libri, die ilia surdi verba libri, et qui 

et qui in tenebris et qui in in tenebris et qui in nebula; 

nebula sunt; oculi caecorum vi- oculi caecorum videbunt. 

It is clearly unsafe to generalise from a few specimens, but 
the student will not fail to observe that the variations in these 
extracts may, perhaps without exception, be attributed either 
to the ordinary accidents of transcription or to the recensions 
of the original text. In the case of the New Testament 
Dr Hort^ held that there was "some justification for the 
alternative view that Italy 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 classi- 
fication of the Old Latin authorities for the O. T. is less 
advanced, and owing to the fragmentary character of most of 

^ 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 Ancient Versions based upon the Septnagint. 

the MSS. it is more difficult ; but we may assume that it will 
proceed on the same general lines, and that the pre-Hierony- 
mian types of text in the Old Testament as in the New will be 
found to be mainly two, i.e. the African, and the European, 
with a possible sub-division of the latter class'. In pursuing 
this 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 
by Sabatier {Biblioruui sacrorum Latinae versiones antiquae... 
opera et studio D. Petri Sabatier O. S. B., Reims, 1743, '49, 
Paris, 1751 ; vols. i. 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 

These researches are important to the student of the 
Septuagint in so far as they throw light on the condition of 
the Greek text in the second and third centuries after 
Christ. The Latin translation of the Old Testament which is 
largely quoted by Cyprian was probably made in the second 
century, and certainly represents the text of MSS. earlier than 

1 Cf. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate^ p• 6; Kennedy, in Hastings' D. B. 
p. 58 ff. 

■^ Introduction, p. 83. 

^ P^or this purpose the Vienna Corpus Scriptortun Ecclesiasticorum 
Latinorum is the best collection available ; but it is still far from complete. 

■* A revised Sabatier is promised by the Munich Academy {Arckiv, viii. 
2, p. 3"ff•)• 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint, 93 

the time of Origen. What Mr Burkitt has pointed out' in 
reference to the prophetic books is doubtless true in general ; 
^' no... passage [to which the asterisk is prefixed in Hexaplaric 
MSS.] is found in any form of the African Latin." Thus, as 
he remarks, ''the Old Latin brings us the best independent 
proof we have that the Hexaplar signs introduced by Origen 
can be relied on for the reconstruction of the lxx." Again, 
M. Berger^ has called attention to the prominence of Lucianic 
readings in certain Old Latin texts; and the fact that a 
Lucianic element is widely distributed in Old Latin MSS. and 
quotations has also been recognised by Vercellone ' and 
Ceriani^. This element is found even in the African text^, and 
its occurrence there suggests that the Antiochian recension, 
though it 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 

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 

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. 

2 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 LXX 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. 

94 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 

Containing Gen. xvi. 9 — xvii. i8, xix. 5 — 29, xxvi. 33 — xxxiii. 
15, xxxvii. 7 — xxxviii. 22, xlii. 36 — 1. 26; Exod. i. i — vii. 19, xxi. 
9 — 36, XXV. 25 — xxvi. 13, xxvii. 6 — xl. 32 ; Leviticus^ i. i — xviii. 

30, XXV. 16 — xxvii. 34; Numbers^ ; Deuteronomy^. 

Fragmenta Wirceburgensia palimpsesta, ? vi. (E. Ranke, Par 
palimpsestorum Wircebu7'gensiuin'^^ Vienna, 1871). 

Containing Gen. xxxvi. 2 — 7, 14 — 24, xl. 12 — 20, xli. 4 — 5; 
Exod. xxii. 7 — 28, XXV. 30 — xxvi. 12, xxxii. 15 — 33, xxxiii. 13 — 27, 
XXXV. 13 — xxxvi, I, xxxix. 2 — xl. 30; Lev. iv. 23 — vi. i, vii. 2, 
II, 16—17, 22— 27, viii. 1—3, 6—13, xi. 7—9, 12—15, 22—25, 27— 
47, xvii. 14 — xviii. 21, xix. 31— xx. 3, xx. 12, 20 — xxi. 2, xxii. 19 — 
29; Deut. xxviii. 42 — 53, xxxi. 11 — 26. 

Fragmenta Monacensia, v. — vi. (L. Ziegler, Bruchstiicke eiiier 
vorhiero7iy7nianischen JJbersetzung des PeJitateuchs^ Munich, 

Containing Exod. ix. 15 — x. 24, xii. 28 — xiv. 4, xvi. 10 — xx. 5, 
xxxi. 15 — xxxiii. 7, xxxvi. 13 — xl. 32; Lev. iii. 17 — iv. 25, xi. 12 — 
xiii. 6, xiv. 17 — xv. 10, xviii. 18 — xx. 3; Num. iii. 34 — iv. 8, iv. 31 
— V. 8, vii. 2>1 — 73» xi• 20 — xii. 14, xxix. 6 — xxx. 3, xxxi. 14 — xxxv. 
6, xxxvi. 4 — 13; Deut. viii. 19 — x. 12, xxii. 7 — xxiii. 4, xxviii. i — 

31, xxx. 16 — xxxii. 29. 

Lectiones ap. Cod. Ottobonian., viii. (C. Vercellone, variae 
lectiones^ Rome, i860, i. p. 183 ff.). 

Containing Gen. xxxvii. 27 — 35, xxxviii. 6 — 14, xli. i — 4, 14 — 
20, xlvi. 15 — 20, xlviii. 13, 20 — 22, xlix. 11—32, 1. i — 25 ; Exod. x. 
13 — 14, xi. 7 — 10, xvi. 16 — 36, xvii. i — 10, xxiii. 12 — 30, xxiv. i — 
18, XXV. I — yjy xxvi. I — 27, xxvii. i — 5. 

Fragmenta Philonea (F. C. Conybeare, in Expositor iv. iv. 

Consisting of Gen. xxv. 20 — xxviii. 8 in a Latin version of 
Philo, quaest. 

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

Containing Gen. xii. 17 — xiii. 14, xv. 2 — 12. 

1 Leviticus and Numbers formed until recently a separate codex, see 
Robert, p. vi. f. 

2 Deut. xi. 4 — xxxiv. 12 belongs to the fragment announced by Delisle 
but not yet published. 

Belonging to the Library of the University of Wiirzburg. 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 95 

ii. Historical Books. 
Joshua, Judges. 

Cod. Lugdunensis (including the new portion announced by 
Dehsle, Decouverte &c.). 


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

I — 4 Regn. 

Fragments of Corbie and St Germain MSS. (Sabatier); 
fragments from a Verona MS. and a Vatican MS. in Bianchini 
{Vindiciae, p. cccxli. ff.), from a Vienna MS. in Haupt's vet. 
ajitehieron. vers, fragjnenta Vmdobone?isia, 1877, from an Ein- 
siedeln 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 con- 
taining 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, viii. 2. 

I Esdras. 

An O. L. text is to be found in the Paris MS. Bibl. Nat. lat. 
Ill, the Madrid MS. E. R. 8, and another in a Lucca MS. ap. 
Lagarde, Septuagintastiidieii^ 1892. 

Judith, Tobit. 

Cod. Complutensis. 

Cod. Goth. Legionensis. 

Cod. Vatic, regin. (Bianchini, Vijidiciae, p. cccl. f. ; Tobit 

O. L. texts are also to be found in the Paris MSS. Bibl. Nat. 
lat. 6, 93, 161 (Tobit), 11 505, 11 549 (Judith), 11 5 53, in the Munich 
MS. 6239, the Milan MS. Amb. Ε 26 infr. (Tobit), and the Oxford 
MS. Bodl. auct. E. infr. 2 (Judith). See Notices et Extraits., 
p. 142 ff. Of these texts some were prmted by Sabatier, and 
Munich 6239 is in Belsheim's Libr. Tobiae, &c. (1893). 


Cod. Pechianus (Sabatier). 

Cod. Vallicellanus (Bianchini, 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). 

An 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.). 

I, 2 Maccabees. 

O. L. texts are to be found in the Paris MS. Bibl. Nat. lat. 
1 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. 

Cod. Veronensis (in Bianchini). 
Cod. Sangermanensis (in Sabatier). 

A Reichenau palimpsest described by Mone, /. jc. gr. Messen^ 
p. 40. 

Fragments of the ωδαι edited by F. F. Fleck (Leipzig, 1837), 
and L. F. Hamann (Jena, 1874). 


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 in a St Gallen MS., see Notices et Extraits., p. 
137 ff. 

Wisdom, Sirach. 

See Lagarde, Mittheilungen i. (Gottingen, 1884). 

iv. Prophets. 

Fragmenta Wirceburgensia, vi. (.?) (E. Ranke, Par palimp. 
Wirceb. p. 49 sqq.). 

Containing Hos. i. i — ii. 13, iv. 13 — vii. i ; Jon. iii. 10— iv. 11; 
Isa. xxix. I — XXX. 6, xlv. 20— xlvi. 11 ; Jer. xii. 12 — xiii. 12, xiv. 15 
— xvii. 10, xviii. 16 — xxiii. 39, xxxv. 15 — 19, xxxvi. 2 — xxxvii. 11, 
xxxviii. 23 — xl. 5, xli. i — 17; Lam. ii. 16 — iii. 40; Ezek. xxiv. 
4 — 21, xxvi. 10 — xxvii. 4, xxxiv. 16— xxxv. 5, xxxvii. 19 — 28, 
xxxviii. 8—20, xl. 3 — xlii. 18, xlv. i — xlvi. 9, xlviii. 28—35; Dan. 
i. 2 — ii. 9, iii. 15 — (26), viii. 5 — ix. 10, x. 3 — xi. 4, 20 — 42, and Bel. 

Fragmenta Fuldensia, v. (E. Ranke, Fragtn. versioiiis ante- 
Hierojiyiniafiae^ Marburg, 1856). 

Containing Hos. vii. 6 — ix. i, Amos ix. 3—9, Mic. ii. 3 — iii. 3. 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 97 

• Fragmenta Weingartensia, v. (E. Ranke, Fragrn. v. ante-H.^ 
Vienna, 1868 ; P. Corssen, Zwei neue Fragmeiite d. Weitigar- 
teiier ProphetenhajidscJuift^ Berlin, 1899). 

Containing Hos. iv. 13 f., v. 5, 7, vii. 16, viii. i — 6, 13 f., ix. 
I — 17, xii. 3, 7, 9, 12, xiii. i, 3 — xiv. 2; Amos v. 24 — vi. 8, viii. 
10 — ix. I, 5 — X. 9; Mic. i. 5 — iii. 3, iv. 3 — vii. 20; Joel i. i — 14, 
ii. 3 — 5, iv. 2 — 4, 15 — 17; Jon. i. 14 — iv. 8; Ezek. xvi. 52 — xvii. 
6, 19 — xviii. 9, xxiv. 25 — xxv. 14, xxvi. 10 — xxvii. 7, 17 — 19, 
xxviii. I — 17, xxxiii. 7 — 11, xlii. 5, 6, 14, xliii. 22 — xliv. 5, 19 — xlv. 
2, xlvi. 9 — 23, xlvii. 2 — I5,xlviii. 22 — 30; Dan. ii. 18 — 33, ix. 25 — 
X. II, xi. 18 — 23. 

Fragmenta Stutgardiana (E. Ranke, Aiitiquissiina V. T. 
versionis Latinae fragmenta^ Marburg, 1888). 

Containing Amos vii. i — viii. 10; Ezek. xviii. 9 — 17, xx. 18 — 
21, xxvii. 7 — 17, xxxiii. 26 — 30, xxxiv, 6 — 12; Dan. xi. 35 — 39. 

Fragmenta monast. S. Pauli Carinthiaci (A. Vogel, Beitrdge 
2iir Hef^stelhmg der A. L. Bibeliibersetzimg^ Vienna, 1868). 

Containing Ezek. xlii. 5, 6, 14, xliv. 19 — xlv. 2, xlvi. 9 — 23, 
xlvii. 2 — 15. 

Fragmenta palimpsesta Vaticana (F. Gustafsson, Fragmenta 
V. T. in Latiniini co7iversi a paliinpsesto Vaticaiw eruta^ Helsing- 
fors, 1 881). 

Containing Hosea iv. 6, 7; Joel ii. 5 — 7; Amos v. 16 — 18, 
vii. 2 — 7, ix. 5 — 8; Jon. iii. 7 — iv. 2; Hab. i. 16 — ii. 3; Zeph. iii. 
13 — 20; Zech. vii. 11 — 14, viii. 16 — 21. 

Fragmenta palimpsesta Sangallensia (F. C. Burkitt, O. L. 
and Itala^ Camb. 1896). 

Containing Jer. xvii. 10 — 17, xxix. 13 — 19. 

Codex \^allicellanus B. vii. (Bianchini, Vindiciae, p. ccxiii.). 

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 Specu- 
lu7n, 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 regu- 
larum 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 ff. 

S. S. 7 

98 Ancient Versions based npon the Septiiagint. 

(2) Latin versions of the lxx. revised or taken over by 

The great Pannonian scholar, Eusebius Hieronymus (a.d. 
329 — 420), began his "useful labours'" upon the Old Testa- 
ment at Rome about the year 383, probably (as in the case of 
his revision of the Gospels) at the suggestion of the Romaa 
Bishop Damasus (t 384). His first attempt was limited to a 
revision of the Latin Psalter and conducted on lines which 
afterwards seemed to him inadequate. A few years later — but 
before 390 — i, when he began to translate from the Hebrew — 
a fresh revision of the Psalter from the lxx. was undertaken 
at the desire of 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 
of remodelling the Latin Psalter after the example of the 

Praef. in libr. Psahnorum: "psalterium Romae dudum posi- 
tum emendaram et iuxta LXX. interpretes, licet cursim, magna 
illud ex parte correxeram^ quod quia rursum videtis, ο Paula 
et Eustochium, scriptorum vitio depravatum, plusque antiquum 
errorem quam novam emendationem valere, cogitis ut...renas- 

centes spinas eradicem notet sibi unusquisque vel iacentem 

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." 

These two revised Latin Psalters were afterwards known as- 
Psalteriuin Roviaimm and Psalterium Gallica7iuin respectively. 
Both recensions established themselves in the use of the Latin 
Church^, the former in the cursus psallendi^ the latter in the 

^ Aug. ep. 82 {ad Hierony)7tu7ti) : " hi qui me invidere putant utilibus 
laboribus tuis." 

2 Cf. adv. Rufin. ii. 30 " psalterium... certe emendatissimum iuxta lxx. 
interpretes nostro labore dudum Roma suscepii;"; where, as Westcott says 
(Smith's D. B. iii. 1698 «.), he seems to include both revisions. 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 99 

bibliotheca or Church Bible. At length Pius V. (f 1572) 
ordered the Gallican Psalter to be sung in the daily offices, an 
exception being made in favour of St Peter's at Rome, St 
Mark's at Venice, and the churches of the Archdiocese of 
Milan, which retained the 'Roman' Psalter \ In MSS. of 
the Vulgate a triple Psalter not infrequently appears, shewing 
Jerome's two Septuagintal revisions side by side with the Psal- 
teriui?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 
sings and reads a version of the Psalms which is based on the 
Septuagint. The liturgical Psalter of the Anglican Church 
"followeth...the Translation of the Great English Bible, set 
forth and used in the time of King Henry the Eighth, and 
Edward the Sixth"; i.e. it is on the whole a version of the 
' Gallican ' Psalter which had passed through Tindale and 
Coverdale into Cranmer's Bible (1540). 

The following specimen (Ps. lxvii.=lxviii. 12 — 14, 18 — 22) 
will enable the reader to form an idea of the relation between 
Jerome's two revisions of the Old Latm and his 'Hebrew' 

Roman. Gallican. Hebrew. 

"Dominusdabitver- "Dominusdabitver- '^Domine,dabis ser- 

bum evangelizantibus bum evangelizantibus monem adnuntiatri- 

virtute multa ; 'Srex virtute multa; '^j-ex cibus fortitudinis plu- 

virtutumdilecti,etspe- virtutum 5iC• dilecti : et rimae, '^reges exerci- 

ciei domus dividere speciei domus divi- tuum foederabuntur, 

spolia. ^-^si dormiatis dere spolia. ^-^ si dor- foederabuntur et pul- 

in medios cleros, pen- miatis inter medios critudo domus dividet 

nae columbae dear- cleros pennae colum- spolia. '"^si dormieritis 

gentatae,etposteriora bae deargentatae et inter medios termi- 

dorsi eius in specie posterioraijc-dorsieius nos, pennae columbae 

auri. \diapsabna\ in paliore auri. dia- deargentatae et pos- 

^*^currusDeidecemmi- psabna '^currus teriora eius in virore 

lium multiplex, milia Dei decem milibus auri ^^currus Dei 

laetantium. Dominus multiplex, milia lae- innumerabiles, milia 

^ Martene, de ant. rit. i. p. 18 f. 

I (Χ) Ancieiit Versioits based iipoji the Septiiagiiit. 


in illis in Sina in 
sancto. ''ascendens in 
altum captivam duxit 
captivitatem, dedit 
dona hominibus. et- 
enim non credunt in- 
habitare. ^^Dominus 
Deus benedictus ; be- 
nedictus Dominus de 
die in diem, prospe- 
rum iter faciei nobis 
Deus salutaris noster. 
diapsalma. ^' Deus 
noster deus salvos fa- 
ciendi, et Domini exi- 
tus mortis, "verum- 
tamen Deus conquas- 
sabit capita inimico- 
rum suorum, verticem 
capilli perambulan- 
tium in delictis suis. 


tantium : Dominus in 
eis % in : 3ina in 
sancto. '^ascendisti 
in altum : cepisti cap- 
tivitatem, accepisti 
dona in hominibus. 
etenim non credentes 
inhabitare Dominum 
Deum. -° benedictus 
Dominus die quoti- 
die ; prosperum iter 
faciei nobis Deus sa- 
lutarium nostrorum. 
diapsalma. ^' Deus 
noster, Deus salvos -^ 
faciendi : et Domini 
% Domini : exitus 
mortis, ^^verumtamen 
Deus confringet capi- 
ta inimicorum suo- 
rum, verticem capilli 
-i-perambulantium in 
delictis suis. 


abundantium; Domi- 
nus in eis in Sina, in 
sancto. '^ascendisti 
in excelsum, captivam 
duxisti captivitatem, 
accepisti dona in ho- 
minibus; insuper et 
non credentes habi- 
tare Dominum Deum. 
^^ benedictus Domi- 
nus per singulos dies ; 
portabit nos Deus 
salutis nostrae. se7n- 
per. ^'Deus noster 
deus salutis, et Domini 
Dei mortis egressus. 
"^^ verumtamen Deus 
confringet capita ini- 
micorum suorum, ver- 
ticem crinis ambulan- 
tis in delictis suis. 

The book of Job offered a still more promising field for the 
labours of the Hexaplarising reviser, for the Greek text as 
known to Origen fell greatly short of the current Hebrew, and 
it was this defective text which formed the basis of the Latin 
versions used by Cyprian and Lucifer and in the Speculu7n\ 
Jerome, who had access to 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 cor- 
rected 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^; 

1 Burkitt, 0. L. and Itala, pp. 8, 32 f. 

2 Praef. in libr. Job: "qui adhuc apud Latinos iacebat in stercore et 
verniibus scatebat errorum." 

ibid, "integrum immaculatumque gaudete." 

Ancieitt Versions based upon the Septuagmt. loi 

the difference between the Old Latin version and the new 
seemed to him to be nothing short of that which separates 
falsehood from truth'. The asterisks shewed that from 700 to 
800 lines had been restored to this long mutilated book^ 

A few brief specimens from Lagarde's text^ will suffice to 
shew the character of the Avork. 

X. 4 aut sicut homo perspicit, perspicis ? ijc• aut sicut videt 
homo, videbis? "< aut humana est vita tua? aut anni tui sunt 
tanquam % dies "^ hominis ? 

xix. 17 et rogabam uxorem meam V invocabam -^ blandiens 
filios ijc• uteri mei Κ ; at illi in perpetuum despexerunt me ; cum 
surrexero, locuntur ad me. 

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

Jerome also revised from the Hexaplaric Septuagint, for 
the benefit of Paula and Eustochium, the 'books of Solomon' 
(Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles), treating the Greek text 
after the manner of Origen \ but his work has perished, the 
preface alone surviving. A like fate has overtaken a transla- 
tion of Chronicles, undertaken at the desire of Domnio and 
Rogatianus. This version of Chronicles appears from the preface 
to have been influenced by Jerome's Hebrew studies, which were 
now sufficiently matured to enable him to form an independent 
judgement in reference to the merits of his Greek text, though 
he still clung 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. auc- 
toritati reddidi, vel antepositis lineis (-f•) superflua quaeque 

^ Ad Pammach.: "veterem editionem nostrae translation! compara, et 
liquido providebitis 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 "). 

'^ Praef. in Job ed. Heb. See below, pt II., c. ii. 

^ In Mittheihingen, ii. 

I02 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 

designans, vel stellis (^•) titulo(?) praenotatis ea quae minus 
habebantur ubi praepostero ordine atque per- 
verse sententiarum fuerat lumen ereptum suis locis restituens 
feci intellegi quod latebat." Praef. in libr. Paralipome7ion: 
"cum a me nuper litteris flagitassetis ut vobis librum Paralipo- 
menon Latino sermone transferrem, de Tiberiade legis quondam 
doctorem qui apud Hebraeos admirationi habebatur assumpsi... 
et sic confirmatus ausus sum facere quod iubebatis. libere enim 
vobis loquor, ita et in Graecis et Latinis codicibus hie nominum 
liber vitiosus est ut non tam Hebraea quam barbara quaedam... 
arbitrandum sit. 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." 

Whether Jerome dealt with the rest of the canonical books 
of the 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 his letters occasionally speak of his revision of 
the Old Latin in terms which seem to imply that it was com- 
plete, and in one of them there is a passage which suggests that 
the disappearance of the other books was due to the dishonesty 
of some person whose name is not given. 

Adv. Rufin. ii. 24: "egone contra LXX. interpretes aliquid 
sum locutus quos ante annos plurimos diligentissime emendatos 
meae linguae studiosis dedi ? " Ep. 71 {ad Luciniiwi): "LXX. 
editionem et te habere non dubito." Ep. 106 i^ad Siinn. et Fret.): 
"editionem LXX. interpretum quae et in ίξαπλοίς codicibus repe- 
ritur et a nobis in Latinum sermonem tideliter versa est." Cf. 
Ep. Augustini ad Hieron. (116), (c. 405): "mittas obsecro inter- 
pretationem 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 text of the Latin Bible, except in the 
Psalter. Even his translations from the Hebrew did not easily 
supersede the Old Latin. The familiar version died hard and, 

Ancierit Versions based upon the Septuagint. 103 

as the list of MSS. will have shewn, parts of it were copied 
as late as the seventh century. Even at Rome the old 
version long held its ground by the side of the new; in the 
last years of the sixth century, Gregory the Great, while basing 
his great commentary on Job upon the Vulgate, claimed a 
right to cite the Old Latin when it served his purpose, " quia 
sedes apostolica utrique nititur\" 

The coexistence of the two versions naturally produced 
mixture in the MSS. ^ which was not altogether removed by the 
revisions of the sixth and ninth centuries. Moreover, the Old 
Latin version continued to hold its 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 : " porro in eo 
libro qui a plerisque Sapientia Saloinotiis inscribitur et in 
Ecclesiastico...calamo temperavi, tantummodo canonicas scrip- 
turas vobis 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 
have been incorporated in the Vulgate, but the Vulgate 
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, i, 2 Maccabees are supplied 
from ante-Hieronymian sources. Thus to this day a consider- 
able part of the Latin Bible is in greater or less degree an 
echo of the Septuagint. 

Literature. Besides the editions already mentioned the 
student may consult with advantage Eichhorn, Einleitimg, i. 
321 ; N. 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 

^ Praef. ad Moralia in Job. 

- Cf. e.g. Berger, op. cit. p. xi. : " les textes des anciennes versions et 
de la nouvelle sont constamment meles et enchevetres dans les manuscrits.'' 

^ On the relation of Jerome's Latin Judith to the Septuagint see 
C. J. Ball in Speaker's Commentary, Apocrypha, p. 257 ff. 

104 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 

Hierony?nus {Mnrnch., iSyg) ; Lagarde, Prooe einer Jieue?t Ausgabe 
der lat. Ubersetzu7igen des A. T. (1870); A. Ceriani, Le recensioni 
dei LXX e la versione latina delta Itala^ 1886; L. Salembier, 
Une page iiiedite de Fhistoire de la Vulgate, Amiens, 1890 ; 
Bleek-Wellhausen (1893), p. 553 ff. ; Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 
191 fif. ; Gregory, p. 949 ff. ; F. C. Burkitt, The Old Lati7t and 
the Itala, in Texts a?td Studies (Cambridge, 1896) ; E. Nestle, 
Urtext, pp. 84 ff. [specially valuable for the bibliography of the 
Latin versions] ; H. A. A. Kennedy, The Old LatiJi Ve7'sions, 
in Hastings' D. B. iii. pp. 47—62. 

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 Church in that city. The first converts were doubtless, as 
at Rome, Greek-speaking Jews, descendants of the old Jewish 
settlers-, and their Greek proselytes ; and the first extension of 
the movement was probably amongst the Greek population 
of the towns on the sea-coast of the Mediterranean. As it 
spread to the interior, to the villages of the Delta, to Memphis, 
Oxyrhynchus, Panopolis, and eventually to Thebes, it en- 
countered native Egyptians who spoke dialects of the Egyptian 
tongue ^ How soon they were evangelised there is no direct 
evidence to shew, but the process may have begun shortly 
after the Gospel reached Alexandria. The native Church 
retained its own tongue, and in the fourth and fifth centuries 
Greek was still unknown to many of the monks and eccle- 
siastics of Egypt. Christianity however is probably responsible 
for either introducing or spreading the use of a new system of 

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 
a yet earlier beginning is possible. In Acts xviii. 24 cod. D reads Άλβξ- 
av5p€vs...^s ην κατηχημένο$ eu rrj ττατρίδί τον \6yov του κυρίου, on which 
Blass {/Icta app. p. 201) remarks: "itaque iam tum (id quod sine testi- 
monio suspicandum erat) in Aegyptum quoque nova religio permanaverat." 

2 Acts ii. 9 f. ot κa.τo^κoυvτί'i...h:iyυ^Γτov. lb. vi. 9 TLvh έκ τη$ συνα-γω- 
yrji της \eyoμέvηs . . I Αλβξανδρέων . 

3 Cf what is said of St Anthony in the Fita Antonii (Migne, P. G. 
xxvi. 944 sq.). 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint 105 

writing with characters which are chiefly of Greek origin \ 
This writing, known as Coptic — a corruption of Αιγύπτιος — is 
found with some variations in all MS. fragments of the 
Egyptian versions of the Old and New Testaments. 

The analogy of the 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 
into the Egyptian tongue. " We should probably not be 
exaggerating if we placed one or both of the principal Egyp- 
tian versions, the Bohairic and the Sahidic, or at least parts of 
them, before the close of the second century." The Bishop is 
wridng with only the New Testament in view, but his argu- 
ment 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 
evidence... on the whole, points to the third century as the 
period when the first Coptic translation was made." " But 
this view," he adds, "can only be regarded as tentative. In 
the light of future discoveries it may have to be modified^" 

The plurality of the Egyptian versions is well ascertained. 
Perhaps the geographical form of Egypt gave special oppor- 
tunities for the growth of popular dialects ; certain it is that 
increased knowledge of the language has added to the dialectic 
complications with which the Coptic scholar has to struggle'. 

1 Of the 31 letters of the Coptic alphabet 7 only (ig, q, ^5, g^ -x, <3', \) 
are not from the Greek. On the pre-Christian systems see Clem, strom. 
V. 4 oi Trap' AiyvTTTLOLS τταώ^νόμενοι ιτρωτον μβν ΤΓάντων...έκμανθάνουσί την 
έτηστοΧοΎραφίκην καΚουμένην (the Demotic), bevripav δέ την Ίερατικην... 
ύστάτην δε και TeXevraiav την ίερο'/λυφίκην. 

^ 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 

io6 Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 

It was in these popular dialects that the translations of the 
Bible were made. " Christianity... was in Egypt a great popular 
movement... the Scriptures were translated, not into the literary 
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 
the Bohairic\ Sahidic, and Middle Egyptian dialects. The 
Bohairic dialect was spoken in Lower, the Sahidic in Upper, 
Egypt, and the Middle Egyptian in the intermediate province 
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 
the Gospels and Epistles, if not indeed before them. Portions 
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 Penta- 
teuch, 14 of the Psalms, 5 of Proverbs, 3 of Job, 4 of the 
Minor Prophets, 5 of Isaiah, 3 of Jeremiah, 4 of Daniel, and 

variation, perhaps because the specimens which have reached us were all 
the Avork of the single class — the scribes: see Hyvernat, Etude sur les 
versions Copies in Revue Biblique, v. 3, p. 429 ; A. C. Headlam in 
Scrivener-Miller, p. 105. 

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

- Cf. Steindorfif, Die Apokalypse des Elias, p. 2. 

Ancient Versions based npon the Septnagint. 107 

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

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

BOHAIRIC. D. Wilkins, Qidnque libj'i Moysis, 1731 ; La- 
garde, Der Pe7itateuch koptisch^ 1 867 ; Bruchstiicke 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). 

Sahidic. Lagarde, Aegyptiaca, 1883; Ciasca, Sac7'. bibl. 
f7'ag77i. 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, Mit- 
theihi7tge7i, 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- 
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; Υ^χζΆ.., 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 ff. (Leipzig, 1899). 

It may reasonably be expected that the Egyptian versions 
of the Old Testament, when they have been more fully 
recovered and submitted to examination by experts, will prove 

io8 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 

to be of much importance for the criticism of the text of 
the Lxx. Ceriani^ has shewn that the Greek text of Cod. 
Marchahanus agrees generally with that which underlies 
the Bohairic version of the Prophets, vai\\%\. both are in har- 
mony with the text which is quoted by Cyril of Alexandria. A 
German scholar^, starting with the Bohairic Prophets, finds that 
their text is similar to that of the Codex Alexandrinus, the 
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 
the Complutensian Polyglott. Of the Sahidic fragments, those 
which belong to the book of Job yield a pre-Origenic text^ 
whilst the Sahidic Isaiah is 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 
may have been at work^ and much remains to be done before 
these versions can be securely used in the work of recon- 
structing the text of the Greek Old Testament ^. 

Literature. Quatremere, Recherches ; Zoega, Catalogus ; 
L. Stern, Koptische Grainmatik^ 1880; Kopten, Koptische 
Sprache u. Litteratur^ 1886; Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 91 ff. 
(J. B. Lightfoot and A. C. Headlam); Gregory, prolegg.^ 
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 
biblique^ v. 3, 4, vi. i ; E. Nestle, Urtext, p. I44ff. 

1 See O. T. in Greek, iii. p. ix. 

2 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 
Ijob, p. 4; Burkitt, 0. L. and Itala, p. 8; Kenyon, Our Bible and the 
ancient MSS., p. 751. 

^ Hyvernat, p. 71. 

^ See the remarks of F. Robinson in Hastings' Diet, of the Bible, 
i. 673 a. 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 109 

3. The Ethiopic Version. 

Ethiopia is said to have been evangelised in the fourth 
century from Tyre. The Tyrian 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 
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 is on the whole supported by the character 
of the version. The Ethiopic Bible presents phenomena 
which are not easily reconciled with the hypothesis of a Greek 
origin. These appear, however, to be Umited to a certain 
group of MSS. 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 ; 
(2) those of a later recension — the most numerous class — cor- 
rected by other MSS. of the lxx. ; (3) those in which the 
original version has been revised from the Hebrew ^ Lagarde 
suggested that the existing Ethiopic version was translated 
from the Arabic, as late as the fourteenth century, and main- 
tained that in any case the printed texts of the Ethiopic Old 
Testament depend upon MSS. which are too late and too bad 
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-. 
The Ethiopic version of the Old Testament contains all the 
books of the Alexandrian canon except i — 4 Maccabees, 
together with certain apocrypha which are not found in MSS. 
of the Lxx. (Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, 4 Esdras, &:c.). A 
considerable part of it has appeared in print. Dillmann edited 
the Octateuch and the four books of Kingdoms (1853-71), 
and the deuterocanonical books (1894); the book of Joel 
appeared in Merx, Die Prophetie des Joels, the book of Jonah 
in W. Wright's Jonah in four Se?nitic versions (London, 1857). 
The Psalms were printed by Ludolf (1701), Rodiger (181 5), 
Dorn (1825), and Jeremiah, Lamentations and Malachi by 
Bachmann (1893); Bachmann also edited the Dodecapro- 
pheton, 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) 5 
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. 

4. The Arabic Version. 

The Arabic Old Testament printed in the Paris and 
London Polyglotts is a composite work, the Hexateuch being 
a translation from the Hebrew, and the books of Judges, 
Ruth, I Regn. i. — 2 Regn. xii. 17, Nehemiah i. — ix. 27, and Job 
from the Peshitta ; the Septuagint has suppHed the basis for 

^ Ankiindigting einenmim Ausgabe der gr. Ubersetzung d. A. 71, p. 28; 
cf. Materialen, i. p. iii. 

- Charles, I. c: "it is unquestionable that our version was made in the 
main from the Greek." 

Ancient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. iii 

the other poetical books and for the Prophets'. Some of the 

MSS. exhibit in certain books a translation which has come 

from the lxx. through the Coptic ; the book of Job in this 

version has been published by Lagarde {Psalterium Job Pro- 

verbia arabice, Gottingen, 1876)-. 

The Arabic version directly derived from the lxx. is said 

to exhibit in the Prophets a text akin to that of Cod. A 

(Ryssel, in ZAIV. 1885, p. 102 fif., 158). It shews traces 

of Hexaplaric influence (H. Hyvernat, in Vigouroux, D. B. i. 

p. 846). 

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

MSS. Lists of MSS. 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 
λΐ. D. Gibson's Studio Sifiailica, iii. (London, 1894), Catalogue of 
Arabic MSS. at Sinai (codd. i — 67). Cf. Hyvernat, op. cit. 

Literature. Schnurrer, Bibliotheca Arabica., 1780 ; H. E. G. 
Paulus, 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; 
Fritzsche-Nestle in Urtext, ^. 150 ff.; F. C. Burkitt, art. ^rrt<^zV 
Versio?is^ in Hastings' D.B. i. p. ΐβόίΤ. ; Η. Hyvernat, op. cit. 

5. The Svriac Versions. 

According to Moses bar-Cephas (t 913), there are two 
Syriac versions of the Old Testament — the Peshitta, translated 

^ Loisy, Hist, crit., I. ii. p. 239. Mri Burkitt in Hastings' D. B. 
(i. p. 137) writes "J(udges), S^amuel), K(ings), and Ch(iOnicles), are all 
from the Peshitta." 

- Lagarde gives for the Psalter four texts, viz. those published at Rome 
(1614), Paris (1645), Ruzhayya (1612), Aleppo (1706); for Job, besides the 
versions mentioned in the text, that of the Paris Polyglott. 

112 A?icie7tt Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 

from the Hebrew in the time of King Abgar, and the version 
made from the Septuagint by Paul, Bishop of Telia. This 
statement is neither complete nor altogether to be trusted, 
but it may serve as a convenient point of departure for a 
summary of the subject. 

(i) The origin of the Peshitta is still as obscure as when 
Theodore of Mopsuestia wrote : ηρμηνευται Se ταΰτα eU μ^ν την 
των 2υρων nap* οτον 8ηποτ€, ουδέ γαρ Ιγι/ωσται μ^χρί- της τημζρον 
οστίς 7Γοτ€ οντάς Ιστίν\ That the translation on the whole was 
made from the Hebrew is the verdict of modern scholars as it 
was that of Moses bar-Cephas. Yet certain books display the 
influence of the lxx. While "the Pentateuch follows the 
Hebrew 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 
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 
with that of the canonical books among which they are 
inserted ^" 

(2) The Syriac version ascribed to Paul, Bishop of Tella- 
dhe-Mauzelath (Constantine) in Mesopotamia, was a literal 
translation of the lxx. of the Hexapla, in which the Origenic 
signs were scrupulously retained. A note in one of the rolls 
of this version assigns it to the year 616 — 7 ; the work is said 
to have been produced at Alexandria under the auspices of 
Athanasius, Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch, who with five 
of his suffragans had gone thither to visit the Alexandrian 
Patriarch. Paul of Telia and Thomas of Harkel appear to 
have been of the party, and their visit in Alexandria led to 

^ Migne, P. C, Ixvi. 241 ; cf. ih. 252 f. , 263, 466 fF., 492 ff. 

2 Nestle in Urtext, p. 230; cf. Bleek-Wellhausen, pp. 558 — 560. 

2 Gwynn, D. C B., iv. p. 434. 

A ncicnt Versions based tipon the Septuagint. 1 1 3 

the translation of the entire Greek Bible into Syriac, the New- 
Testament having been undertaken by Thomas, while Paul 
worked upon the 01d\ 

The version of Paul of Telia, usually called the Syro- 
Hexaplar, was first made known to 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, 
Judith, and part of Tobit, in this translation. The codex 
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 
of Solomon, the two Wisdoms, the twelve Prophets, Jeremiah 
(with Baruch, Lamentations, and the Epistle), Daniel (with 
Susanna and Bel), Ezekiel, Isaiah. Portions of the historical 
books of the Syro-Hexaplar- have been discovered among the 
Nitrian MSS. of the British Museum, and a catena, also at the 
Museum, contains fragments of Chronicles and the books of 
Esdras, while the Paris Library contributes 4 Kingdoms. 
Norberg edited Jeremiah and Ezekiel in 1787; Daniel was 
published by Bugati in 1788 and the Psalms in 1820; 
Middeldorpf completed the prophetical and poetical books in 
his edition of 1835, and in 1861 Ceriani added Baruch, 
Lamentations, and the Ep. of Jeremiah. Of the historical 
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 also given to the world the Milan 
fragments in Man. vol. vii. 

The Hexapla, Tetrapla, and occasionally the Heptapla, are 

' Gwynn, Paulus Tellensis and Thomas Harklensis, in D. C. B., iv. 
pp. 266 ff., 1014 ff. 

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

S. S. 8 

114 Ancient Versions based upon tJu Septiiagint. 

mentioned as the sources of the text in the subscriptions to 
the books of the Syro-Hexaplar. These subscriptions were 
doubtless translated with the rest of the Greek archetypes, but 
they shew the character of the copies employed by the trans- 
lators. The version is servile to such an extent as sometimes 
to violate the Syriac idiom \ It is obvious that this extreme 
fidelity to the Greek, while it 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 
Alexandria at the beginning of the 7th century, derived 
ultimately from the Hexapla and Tetrapla through the re- 
cension of Eusebius. Thus it supplements our scanty stock 
of Greek Hexaplaric MSS., and indeed forms our chief 
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. One of the Greek texts of Daniel — that 
which Origen regarded as the true Septuagintal text — has 
survived only in a single and relatively late MS. The 
Syro-Hexaplar here supplies another and earlier authority, 
which enables us to check the testimony of the Chigi Greek. 

(3) Other Syriac versions made from the Greek. 

{a) Fragments of a Syriac version in the Palestinian 
dialect have been printed by Land, Anecdota Syriaca, iv. 
(Leyden, 1875), J. R. Harris, Biblical Fragments 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)^ This version has been made 
from the lxx.; in the Books of Kings the text appears to 

^ Field, Prolegg. in Hex., p. Ixix. , where many instances are produced. 

2 The fragments in Studia Sinaitica are accompanied by critical notes, 
the work of Dr Nestle, in which they are carefully compared with the 
Greek text (pp. xl. — Ixxiv.). 

A ncient Versions based upon the Septiiagint. 1 1 5 

be Lucianic (Anecd. Oxon. ix. p. 32); in the Greater Prophets, 
it is in part at least Origenic {Studia Sinaiiica, pp. xvi., Ixiii.); 
Job seems to have contained the interpolations from Theodotion 
which are found in the extant 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 — 5, 18 — xix. 30, xxii. i — 19; Ex. viii. 22^^ — 
xi. 10, xxviii. i — 12*; Num. iv. 46 f , 49 — v. 2 f., 4, 6, 8 ; 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. I f., xxix. 2, 4, XXX. 2, 6, xxxiv. i, 11, xxxvii. 2, 18, xl. 2, 5, 7, 
xliii. 12 — 27, xliv. — xlvi., xlviii. 15 ff., xlix. i — 9, liv. 2, 22, Iv. 7 ff., 
Ivi. I — 7, Ixiv. 2, 6, Ixviii. 2, 3, 22, Ixxvi. 2, 21, Ixxvii. 52 — 65, 
Ixxxi., Ixxxii. i — 10, Ixxxiv. 2, 8, Ixxxv. i, 15 f., Ixxxvii. 2, 5 — 7, 
18, Ixxxix. I — xc. 12, xcvii. i, 8 f., ci. 2 f. ; Prov. i. i — 19, ix. 
I — II; Job xvi. i — xvii. 16, xxi. i — 34, xxii. 3 — 12; Sap. ix. 
8 — II, 14 — X. 2; Amos ix. 5 — 14% viii. 9—12; Mic. v. 2 — 5; 
Joel i. 14 — ii. 27, iii. 9 — 21 ; Jonah; Zech. ix. 9 — 15, xi. 11^ — 14; 
Isa. iii. 9^ — 15, vii. 10 — 16, viii. 8 — xi. 16, xii. i — 6, xiv. 28 — 32, 
XV. I — 5, XXV. I — 3% XXXV. I — 10, xl. I — 17, xhi. 5 — 10, 17 — xhii. 
21, xliv. 2 — 7, 1. 4 — 9, Iii. 13 — liii. 12, Ix. i — 22, Ixi. i — 11, Ixiii. 
I — 7; Jer. xi. 18 — 20^. 

{b) 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 

{c) Of Jacobite versions from the lxx. there were several. 
(i) Polycarp the chorepiscopus, who in the fifth century laboured 
upon a translation of the New 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., I. ix. p. 44, and cf. Nestle's 
notes to Studia Sinaitica, vi. 

^ See Studia Sin., vi. p. xiv. f. 

^ Bickell, Conspectus rei Syr. lit., p. 9; cf. Ebedjesu in Assemani, iii. 71. 

•* Field, Hexapla, ii. p. 448. 


1 6 Ancient Versions based upon the Septuagint. 

to which two fragments printed by Ceriani^ from the British 
Museum MS. Add. 17106 are beUeved to belong. The text 
of these fragments agrees on the whole with that of the Lucianic 
MSS. of the Prophets. (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"^. 

{d) From Melito downwards the Greek fathers refer 
occasionally to the Greek renderings of an interpreter who is 
called 6 2υρος. The student \vill find in Field's prolegomena a 
full and learned discussion of the question who this Syrian 
interpreter was. Field inclines to the opinion that he was a 
bilingual Syrian, of Greek origin, who translated into Greek 
from the Peshitta^ 

Editions. Peshitta. Lee, V. T. 5yrz^^^ (London, 1823); 
O. and N. T., 1826. A complete Syriac Bible has recently been 
pubhshed by the Dominicans of Mosul ((1)1887 — 91 j (-)i888 — 92). 

Syro-Hexaplar. a. Masius, Josuae-historia illustrata 
(1574); M. Norberg, Codex Syriaco-Hexaplaris (1787); C. 
Bugati, 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. Syro- 
hexapl. (1861); P. de Lagarde, V. T. ab Origene recejisiti frag- 
vie7ita 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 

1 Mon. sacr. etprof. v.; cf. Gwynn in D. C. B. iv. p. 433. 

2 Gwynn, D. C. B. iii. 

' I Regn. i. i — 3 Regn. ii. 11, and Isaiah are in the London MSS. Ix., 
Ixi. (Wright, Catalogue, p. 37 fiF.), and the Pentateuch and Daniel are 
preserved at Paris. 

^ See Ladvocat, Journal des savants, for 1765; Eichhom, Bibliothek, 
ii. p. 270; De Sacy, Notices et extraits, iv. p. 648 fiF. ; Ceriani, Mon. sacr. 
etprof. v. i. I. 

5 On the other hand see Scrivener- Miller, ii. p. 7, note; and Bleek- 
Wellhausen (1893), p. 560. 

Ancient Versions based npon the Septiiagint. 117 

et pj'ofaiia, ii., 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, Littera- 
iiira Syriaca (1888), and Urtext (1897), p. 227 ff. ; Scrivener- 
Miller, ii. p. off. ; Gregory, p. 807 ff . ; J. P. P. Martin, Introduc- 
tion (p. theor.), p. 97 ff! ; Loisy, Histoire critique I. ii. p. 234 f. 

6. The Gothic Version. 
About the year 350 a translation of the Bible into the 
Gothic tongue was made by Ulfilas (Wulfila)-, the descendant 
of a Cappadocian captive who had been brought up among the 
Goths 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 
their records of wars and conquests (Philostorg. loc. cit.\ μ,^τί- 
φρασίν ets την αυτών φωνην τας γραφας άττάσας ττλην γ€ δ•^ των 
Βασιλειών ατ€ των μίν ττοΧ^μ^ων Ιστορίαν Ιγρνσών, τον^ξ. έθνους 
οντος φιλοπόλεμου). Unfortunately only a few scanty frag- 
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 — 
16, xvi. 14 — xvii. 3, xvii. 13 — 45. With the exception of the 
scrap from Genesis, they are derived from palimpsest fragments 
belonging to the Ambrosian Library which were discovered by 
Mai in 181 7 and subsequently published at Milan by Mai and 
Castiglione ; and they are printed in the great collection of 
Gabelentz and Loebe {Ulfilas: V. et N. Testamentu.firag- 
7nenta, Lipsiae, 1843) ^^^d in Migne P.L. xviii.; a more recent 
edition is that of Massmann {^Ulfilas: die heiligen Schrifie7i alien 
u. neuen Bundes in gothischer ^/^-r^iT/^^... Stuttgart, 1895 — 7). 

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

1 1 8 A ncieiit Versions based tipoji the Septuagmt, 

Lagarde {Librorum V. T. canonicormji pars i., p. xiv., 1883) 
shews by an examination of the Esdras fragments that Ulfilas 
probably used MSS. of the Lucianic recension, and the same 
view is held by A. Kisch, Der Septuaginia- Codex des Ulfilas 
{Monatschrift f. Gesch. u. W. des Judefithwns^ 1873), ^.nd 
F. Kauifmann, Beitrdge zur Quellenkritik d. gothischen Bibd- 
iibersefzufig {Z. f. d. Phil. 1896). Ulfilas was in Constantinople 
for some time about 340, and his MSS. of the lxx. were 
doubtless obtained in that city, which according to Jerome 
was one of the headquarters of the Lucianic lxx. ("Con- 
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 its gnomic character gave it a special importance in 
their eyes. The work is said to have been begun at Edessa, 
but MSS. were afterwards obtained from Constantinople; and 
Moses of Khoren, a nephew and pupil of Mesrop, was 
despatched to Alexandria to study Greek in order to secure "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 as the place of 
origin, and from the circumstance that Syriac was the Church- 
language of Armenia before the introduction of the Armenian 
alphabet ^ On the other hand the existing Armenian version 

1 So F. C. Conybeare (Hastings, i. p. 152). In Scrivener-Miller, ii. 
p. 151, he suggests that the earlier books had been rendered previously. 
^ On this see Conybeare, Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 153. 
' See Dr Salmon in D. C. B., iii. p. 908. 

A ncient Versions based upon tJie Septuagint. 1 1 9 

is clearly Septuagintal, It fits the Greek of the Lxx. "as a 
glove the hand that wears it"; keeping so close to the Greek 
that it "has almost the same value for us as the Greek text 
itself from which (the translator) worked would possess\" But, 
as Lagarde has pointed out^, the printed text is untrustworthy, 
and the collation made for Holmes and Parsons cannot be 
regarded as satisfactory. A fresh collation will be made for 
the larger edition of the Cambridge Septuagint^ 

The order of the books of the O.T. in Armenian MSS., as 
given by Conybeare'' (Octateuch, i — 4 Regn., i — 2 Paralipp., 
I and 2 Esdr., Esther, Judith, Tobit, i — 3 Mace, Psalms, 
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, 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. 

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 Cony- 
beare it is a MS. of the last century. 

Editions. Venice (Psalter), 1565; Amsterdam, 1666; Con- 
stantinople, 1705 ; Venice, 1805 (the first edition which is of any 
critical value, by J. Zohrab); Venice, 1859 — 60 (by the Mechitar- 
ist fathers of San Lazzaro). 

Literature R. Holmes, Praef. ad Petit. \ F. C. Conybeare 
in Scrivener-Miller, ii. 148 ff. and in Hastings' D. B.^ I.e.; 

^ Conybeare, op, cit., p. 151 f. He attributes the composite character 
of the Armenian text (of which he gives instances) to Hexaplaric influences. 

^ Genesis Gr., p. 18. 

"^ Mr McLean, who has collated the greater part of the Octateuch, 
informs me that " the Armenian shews a typical hexaplar text in Genesis 
and Exodus, agreeing closely Λvith the Syriaco-hexaplar version, and in 
varying degrees with the MSS. that compose the hexaplar group." " The 
hexaplar element (he adds) is much less in evidence in Leviticus, Numbers, 
and Deuteronomy, but again appears strongly in Joshua, Judges, and 

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 

8. The Georgian Version. 

The origin of this version is obscure. According to Moses 
of Khoren, the Georgian as well as the Armenian version was 
the work of Mesrop. Iberia seems to have received the 
Gospel early in the fourth century, if not before; but it may 
have possessed no translation of the Scriptures until the move- 
ment initiated in Armenia by Mesrop had communicated itself 
to the neighbouring region. That the Georgian Old Testament 
was based upon the Greek is said to be manifest from the 
transliteration of Greek words which it contains. 

MSS. A Psalter of cent. vii. — viii. is preserved at the monas- 
tery of St Catherine's, Mt Sinai, and at Athos there is a MS., 
dated 978, which originally contained the whole Bible, but has 
lost Lev. xii. — Joshua. Both the Sinai library and the Patriarchal 
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, .'* ιΓ 

9• The Slavonic Version. 

The Greek Bible was translated into Slavonic by the 
brothers Cyril and Methodius, from whom in the ninth century 
the Slavs received the faith. Of the Old Testament the 
Psalter alone 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 1 

longer exists, the codices having perished in the Tartar invasion 
of the thirteenth century; and the fragments of the Old 
Testament of Cyril and Methodius which are embedded in the 
present Slavonic Bible are "so mixed up with later versions as 
to be indistinguishable \" The existing version has not been 
made uniformly from the Greek. Esther was translated from 
the Hebrew, while Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, and certain 
other books, were rendered from the Latin Vulgate in the 
fifteenth century. On the other hand the Octateuch, the 
books of Kingdoms, and the poetical books are from the 
Greek, and some of them, especially the Octateuch, contain 
old materials probably due, at least in part, to the work of Cyril 
and Methodius. 

A Psalter in the Glagolitic script, preserved at Sinai, has 
been edited by Geitler (Agram, 1883); and there is a critical 
edition of the Slavonic Psalter by Amphilochius (Moscow, 


So far as the Slavonic Old Testament is based on the lxx., 
its text is doubtless Lucianic; cf. Lagarde, Fraef. in Libr. V. T. 
can. i. p. xv. *'ni omnia fallunt Slavus nihil aliud vertit nisi 
Luciani recensionem," and Leskien in Uriext, p. 215, "dass im 
allgemeinen der Kirchenslavischen Ubersetzung der griech. 
Text der Lucianischen (Antiochenisch-Konstantinopolita- 
nischen) Rezension zu Grunde liegt ist sicher." 

Literature. The Russian authorities are given by Mr 
Bebb in Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 158. See also Gregory, Prolegg. 
p. iii2ff. ; Professor Leskien of Leipzig in Urtext, p. 211 ff., and 
the article in Ch. Quarterly Review cited above. 

^ The Russian Bible, in Ch. Quart. Review, xli. 81 (Oct. 1895), p. 219. 


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 last 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 

texts. In this chapter an effort has been made to present 

the student with a complete list of all the MSS. which have 

been or are being used by editors of the lxx., and of the 

important fragments so far as they are known to us. It is, 

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 

^ Lagarde's CEHKRSUYZ were unknown to the Oxford editors. 
Greek capitals have been used in the Cambridge manual LXX. for a few 
uncials not mentioned by Lagarde. 

Manuscripts of the Septtcagint. 123 

this 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 /Λ m p ζ 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 ex- 
amined and catalogued ; meanwhile it is sufficient to call atten- 
tion to the variety of practice which exists. 

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 par- 
ticular book (as Genesis, or the Psalms, with or without the 
liturgical ωδαι), or a particular group of books such as the Pen- 
tateuch (tJ 7Γ€ντ(ζτ£υχος^) or the Octateuch (τ; οκτάτευχο? = Gen . 
— Ruth), the Historical Books (i Regn. — 2 Esdr., Esth., Judith, 
Tobit), the three or five books ascribed to Solomon, the Minor 
Prophets {ro δωδεκαττρόφτ^τον), the Major Prophets (ot rcWapes), 
or the Prophets complete (τό ίκκαι^ζκαττρόφητον). Larger com- 
binations are also found, e.g. Genesis — Tobit, the Poetical 
Books as a whole, or the Poetical Books with the Prophets. 

In reference to the date of their execution, the uncial MSS. 
of the LXX. range from the third century to the tenth, and the 
cursives from the ninth to the sixteenth. Their present distri- 
bution may be seen from the descriptions ; an analysis of 
the list of Holmes and Parsons gives the following general 
results: Italy, 129; Great Britain and Ireland, 54; France, :^6; 
Austria, 26; Russia, 23; 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 t?ieits. et pond. 4. Penta- 
teuchus occurs in Tertullian adv. Marc. i. 10. 


Manuscripts of the Septiiagiiit. 

idea of the proportion in which the MSS. of the lxx. were dis- 
tributed among European countries, Greece excepted, at the 
beginning of the nineteenth century. But the balance will 
be considerably disturbed if we add the acquisitions of 
Tischendorf and other discoverers, and the treasures of the 
libraries at Athens, Athos, Patmos, Smyrna, Jerusalem, and 
Mount Sinai, which are now within the reach of the critical 


I. Uncial MSS. 

The following table of the Uncial MSS. may be found 
convenient. A detailed account of each will follow. 



Name of Codex. 


Present locality. 

H.-P. Lagarde. 






















ix — X 







IV + V 




Leyden, Paris, St 




St Petersburg 

aii = i3 












V — vi 










viii — ix 



















Leipzig, St Petersburg 













viii — ix 

















Fragmenta Tisch( 




viii — i.N 



iv — V 




viii — ix St Petersburg 

Manuscripts of the Septnagint. 125 

(A) Complete Bibles. 

A (III). Codex Alexandrinus. British Museum, Royal, 
I. D. V. — viii. 

A AIS. of the O. and N. Testaments, with lacunae. The 
O. T. is defective in the following places: Gen. xiv. 14 — 17, xv. 
I — 5, 16 — 19, xvi. 6 — 9 (leaf torn across and the lower portion 
lost); I Regn. xii. 20 — xiv. 9 (leaf missing); Ps. xlix. 19 — Ixxix. 
10 (nine leaves missing). Slighter defects, due to the tearing of 
leaves, occur in Gen. i. 20 — 25, 29 — ii. 3; Lev. viii. 6, 7, 16; 
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. i. Genesis — 2 Chronicles ; vol. ii. Hosea — 4 Maccabees ; vol. 
iii. Psalms — Sirach ^ The first volume begins with a table of 
the Books, in a hand somewhat later than the body of the MS. 
The Psalter, which contains the ψαλμός ιδιόγραφος (cli.) and the 
liturgical canticles, is preceded by the Epistle of Athanasius to 
Marcellinus, the υποθέσεις of Eusebius, a table, and the canons 
of the Morning and Evening Psalms. The books of vol. iii. are 
written στιχηρώς. 

The covers of the volumes bear the arms of Charles I. The 
codex had been sent to James I. by Cyril Lucar, patriarch suc- 
cessively of Alexandria and Constantinople, but did not reach 
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 
Cyril Lucar has written on a leaf prefixed to vol. i. : " Liber iste 
...prout ego traditione habebam, est scriptus manu Theclae 
nobilis faeminae Aegyptiae ante MCCC annos circiter, paulo post 
concilium Nicaenum." But, apart from palaeographical con- 
siderations^, this date is discredited by tfie occurrence in the 
MS. of excerpts from the works of Athanasius and Eusebius, and 
the liturgical matter connected Avith the Psalter. It has been 
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 1657 (facsimile of Ps. i.), Gale, 1678 (Psalter); and 
the MS. was used by Grabe as the basis of his great edition 

1 For the order of the books see Part II. c. i. 

2 As to these see Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient A7SS,, p. 129. 

126 Mmmscripts of the Septiiagint. 

of the LXX. (1707 — 1720^). Baber in 1812 published the Psalter 
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 valu- 
able 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 diffi- 
cult 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 apo- 
strophe 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 θο, i<c, χο, fnTp, mhp, yc, anoc, 
oyNOC, ΑλΑ, ΐΗλ, ιλΗΜ, ττΝΛ, and 15, μ, c, ν,, τ, {καΊ^ μον, σον, 
-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. 

Β (II). Codex Vaticanus (Vatican Library, Or. 1209). 

A MS. of the Old and New Testaments, defective at the 
beginning and in some other places. The O. T. has lost its first 
31 leaves, the original hand beginning at Gen. xlvi. 28 (with the 
words πάλιν (Ις γην '¥'αμ€σση). Through the tearing of fol. 178 
2 Regn. ii. 5 — 7, 10 — 13, has also disappeared, and the loss of 

^ See c. vi. 

- Prolegg. i. p. 358. 

2 E. Maunde Thompson, Cod. Alex. i. p. 8 ff. Ibid. 

Maimscripts of the Septiiagint, 127 

10 leaves after fol. 348 involves a lacuna which extends from Ps. 
cv. (cvi.) 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 Β with the Aldine text was made by 
Bartolocci in 1669, and is still preserved at Paris in the Biblio- 
theque 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 aniiqui- 
tate codicis Vaticani (Freiburg, ίδιο) 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. Nei- 
ther 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 pub- 
lishing 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 fac- 
simile 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.^ 

! This has been proved by Nestle {Academy, May 30, 1891) against 
Batiffol {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-. 
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 
beautiful hand^ which "may be attributed to the fourth century," 
and probably to the middle of the century ^, and bears a resem- 
blance to the hand which is found in papyri of the best Roman 
period^. The leaves are arranged in quinions (gatherings of ten 
pages); each page exhibits three columns of 42 lines with 16 — 18 
letters in each line. There are no breathings or accents in the 
first hand ; a point occurs but rarely ; initial letters do not pro- 
ject into the margin. The text is written in two contemporary 
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 correc- 
tions of B'^ rather than the original text. 

C. Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus Parisiensis. 
Bibliotheque Nationale, Gr. 9 (formerly Reg. 1905, Colbert. 


A folio consisting at present of 209 leaves, of which 64 con- 
tain portions of the O. T. The fragments are as follows : Prov. 
i. 2 νοησαί — ii. 8, XV. 29 κρίίσσων — xvii. I, xviii. ii ή b€ δόξα — xix. 
23, xxii. 17 την 8e σην — xxiii. 25, xxiv. 22 e ώστβ άτρωτα — 56 η yi], 
xxvi. 23 χ€ΐλη Xeto — xxviii. 2, xxix. 48 — end of book; Eccl. i. 2 
ματαιότης — 14, ii. 18 νπυ τον ryXtoy — end of book ; Cant. i. 3 — iii. 9 
Σαλωμών ; Job ii. 12 ρηξαντ^ς — iv. 12 iv \6yoLs σον, V. 27 σν δβ 
γι/ώ^ι — vii. 7, Χ. 9 — xii. 2 άνθρωποι, xiii. 18 οι'δα βγω — xviii. 9 
παγίδας, xix. 2y a ό οφθαλμός — xxii. 14 ν€φ€\η, xxiv. 7 yvpvovs 
πολΧονς — XXX. I ev μ€ρ€ΐ, xxxi. 6 — xxxv. 1 5 6pyr]v αυτόν, xxxvii. 5 
— xxxviii. 17 θανάτου, xl. 20 π^ριθησας — end of book; Sap. viii. 5 
epyaζόμevoς — xii. ID τόπον μετανοίας, xiv. 1 9 — Xvii. 1 8 (νμίΚης, 
xviii. 24 eVI γά /j — end of book ; Sir. prol. I — vii. 14 πρεσβυτέρων, 
viii. 15 aiiTos yap — xi. IJ ίύσεβέσιν, xii. 16 κα\ iav — xvi. I άχρη- 
στων, xvii. 12 — XX. 5 σοφός, xxi. 12 — xxii. 19, xxvii. 19 — xxviii. 25 
σταθμόν, xxx. 8 — xxxxiv. 22 ου μη σοι, xxx. 25 — xxxi. 6, xxxii. 22 καΐ 
6 κνριος — xxxiii. 1 3 ^Ιακώβ, xxxvii. 1 1 — xxxviii. 15, xxxix. 7 — xliv. 27 
άφικώμίθα, xlv. 24 Ίνα αυτω — xlvii. 23 'Ροβοάμ, xlviii. II — xlix. 12 
^Ιησονς νΙός. The distribution of the leaves is Proverbs 6, Eccle- 
siastes 8, Cant, i, Job 19, Wisdom 7, Sirach 23. 

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. 

2 Sir E. M. Thompson, op. cit. p. 159; WH., Intr. p. 75. 

2 F. G. Kenyon, Paleography of Greek papyri, p. 120. See A. Rahlf, 
Altera. Heimath dcr Vat. Bibelhandschrift, in N. G. IV., 1899, i. p. 72 ff. 

Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 129 

The copy of the Greek Bible of which these fragments have 
survived unfortunately fell during the middle ages into the hands 
of a scribe in want of writing materials. Originally, as it seems, 
a complete Bible, written probably in the fifth century and, as 
Tischendorf believed, in Egypt, in the twelfth century it was 
taken to pieces, sponged, and used for other writings 1. What 
became of the missing leaves we do not know; those of the 
Paris volume are covered with the Greek text of certain 
works of Ephrem the Syrian'-. The book was probably brought 
to Florence early in the i6th century by Andreas Lascaris, the 
agent of Lorenzo de' Aledici, and passing into the possession 
of Catharine de' Medici, accompanied her to France, where 
it found its way into the Royal Library. Here the value of the 
underlying text was recognised by Montfaucon, who called atten- 
tion to it in his PalaeograpJiia Graeca, and gave a specimen 
from the fragments of the N. T. (p. 213 f.). The O. T. frag- 
ments were partly examined by Wetstein and Thilo^, but were 
not given to the world until in 1845 Tischendorf, who had pub- 
lished 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, Δ, B, K, 
S, X, Φ) 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. Neverthe- 
less 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. 

The remains of this great uncial Bible contain the following 
portions of the O. T. : Gen. xxiii. 19 αντη — xxiv. 4 nopevaj], xxiv. 

^ On palimpsest MSS. see Sir E. M. Thompson, Gree^ and Latin 
Palceography, p. 75 ff. 

^ For a list of these see Omont, Inventaire sonifnaire des manuscrits 
grecs, p. 2. 

^ Tischendorf, Cod. Ephraemi rescriptus, prolegg. p. 9. 

^ See a photographic facsimile in Facsimiles des phis anciens manuscrits 
grecs de la Bibl. Nat. (H. Omont, Paris, 1892). 

^ See Tischendorf, op. cit.., prolegg. p. 5. 

S. S. 

1 30 Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 

5 eis Tr]v γην — 8, 9 ρήματος — 14 καμηΧονζ, 17 και eineu — 19 ^(os αν, 
25 αντώ — 27 την, 30 ανθρωπον — 33 λαλτ^σαί, ^6 αυτω{ΐ°) — 4^ ^'^ 
της, 41 ορκκτμοΐι — ^6 αφ' ; Num. ν. 20 αί/της — 3^ ποιήσει, vi. 5 
ayios — 6 τ€Τ€λ€υτηκνία, II κ^φαΧην — 12 αί (2°), 17 κάνω — 18 μαρτυ- 
ρίου, 22, 23, 27 ΚύριοΓ, νϋ. 4 ^Ιαυσην — 5 Aevetraiy, 12 Ναασσώι/ — 
13 "', 15 ^^^ (2°) — 20 θυμιάματος, Ι Par. ix. 27 το πρωί — xix. 1 7, 
2 Esdr. ix. 9 Kupios• — end of book; Esther; Tobit ; Judith; Joel, 
Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zecha- 
riah, Malachi; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lam. i. i — ii. 20; i and 4 Mac- 

The forty-three leaves containing i Par. xi. 22 — xix. 17, 
2 Esdras ix. 9 — end, Esther, Tobit i. i — ii. 2, Jer. x. 25 — end, 
and Lam. i. i — ii. 20 were found by Tischendorf in a waste- 
paper basket at the Convent of St Catharine's, Mount Sinai, in 
1844, 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. i. (1855) he was able to add 
Isa. Ixvi. 12 — Jer. i. 7 from a copy made during the same visit to 
Sinai. A second visit in 1853 enabled him to print in the next 
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 
This final success led to the publication in 1862 of the Bibliorum 
Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitaiius, containing a facsimile of the 
St Petersburg portion of the Sinaitic MS. Lastly in 1867 Tisch- 
endorf completed his task by printing in his Appendix Codicutn 
certain fragments of Genesis and Numbers which had been dis- 
covered by the Archimandrite Porfirius in the bindings of other 
Sinai MSS.2 

This great Bible was written on leaves which originally 
measured 15 χ I3| inches, and were gathered, with two excep- 
tions, into quires of four. Each column contains 48 lines, with 
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 some- 
what square, written without break, except when an apostrophe 
or a single point mtervenes ; a breathing prima manic has been 

1 So called in honour of Frederick Augustus, King of Saxony. 

2 Cf. 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. 

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 A the fragments of Chro- 
nicles, 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 Β ; 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 ϊ^% ^*^•% ^ί'^•^ ^'-^•^ ϊ^•^. 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 occu- 
pied itself with retracing faded writing in the Prophets. 

After I Chron. xix. ιη 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 τοντον \τον\ σημ€ίον των τριών 
σταυρών iaTtv το τέ\ος τών ίπτα φνΧΧων τών πβρίσσών και μη 
όντων του "Έα8ρα. 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 {Βι'δΙ^ 
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- 
tains 4 Maccabees under the heading Μακκαβαίων δ' although it 
certainly did not give the second and third books (Thackeray, 

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 

Ν (XI). Codex Basiliano-\^aticanus. Vatican Library, 
Gr. 2106, formerly Basil. 145^. 

1 Another explanation (suggested by Dr Gwynn) is given by Dr 
Lupton in Wace's Apocrypha, i., p. 2. 

- A facsimile of 2 Esdr. xviii. 15— xix. 15 may be seen in Stade, Gc'sc/i. 
d. Volkes Israel, ii. p. 192. 

2 Cf. Wetstein, N. T. i. p. 133; Lagarde, Septuagintastudien, p. 48. 

132 Manuscripts of the Septuaghit. 

V (23). Codex Venetus. St Mark's Library, Venice, 
cod. Gr. I \ 

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. 

The Vatican portion now contains Lev. xiii. 59 — Num. xxi. 
34, Num. xxii. 19 — Deut. xxviii. 40, Deut. xxx. 16 — Jud. xiv. 16, 
Jud. xviii. 2 — I Regn. xvii. 12, i Regn. xvii. 31 — 3 Regn. viii. 8, 
3 Regn, xi. 17 — end of 2 Paralip., 2 Esdr. v. 10 — xvii. 3, Esther. 
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., 
Bar., Lam., Ezek., Daniel, Tobit, Judith, i — 4 Mace. 

The Venice folio measures 16^ χ ii§ inches, the Vatican at 
present a little less, but the breadth and length of the columns is 
identical in the two codices ; in both there are two columns of 
60 lines. The Venice MS. contains 164 leaves, the \^atican 132. 
The first leaf of the Venice book begins the 27th quire of the 
original MS., and on computation it appears that, if to the Vatican 
leaves were added those which would be required to fill the 
lacunae of the earlier books and of Job, the entire number 
would make up 26 quires of the same size*. As regards the 
history of the separated portions, it appears that the Vatican 
MS. was originally brought to Rome from Calabria by a Basihan 
monk^; the Venice book was once the property of Cardinal Bes- 
sarion, by whom it was presented to St Mark's•*. 

The handwriting of Ν and V is in the sloping uncials of cent, 
viii. — ix. Some use was made of V in the Roman edition of 
1587, where it seems to have supplied the text of Maccabees; 
both codices were collated for Holmes and Parsons. 

(B) Octateuch and Histo7'ical Books. 

D (I). Codex Cottonianus. British Museum, Cotton 

MSB., Otho B. vi. 5—6. 

A collection of fragments, the largest of which measures no 
more than 7x5^ inches, containing portions of the Book of 
Genesis with vestiges. of pictures executed in a semi-classical 

1 Cf. Deutsche Lit.-Zeit. 1897, p. 1475 f. 
- Klostermann, p. 9. 
^ Holmes, Praef. ad Pentatetich. 

■* It was the eighth of Bessarion's MSS. ; see Schott in Eichhorn's 
Repert., viii. 181. 

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 by Gale, Crusius, and Grabe; and 
Grabe's collation, which is 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 por- 
tions of the text of fragments which have since disappeared. 

Lastly, among the Peiresc papers in the Bibliotheque Na- 
tionale, transcripts have been found of Gen. i. 13, 14, xviii. 24 — 
26, xliii. 16, which were made from the MS. in 1606. They are 
printed in MSmoires de la Societe Natiofiale des Antiquaires de 
France, liii. pp. 163 — 172^. As this discovery was overlooked 

•^ Still an episcopal see in the time of Le Quien ; see Lightfoot, Philip- 
pians, p. 64, note. 

^ They stated that it had once been the property of Origan. 

' Walton's statement that Cod. D at one time contained the Pentateuch 
is however groundless ; in the Cotton catalogue of 162 1 it is described as 
"Genesis only." 

^ I owe the reference to Dr Nestle {Urtext, p. 71). 

134 Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 

when the second edition of The Old Testa7nent in Greek, vol. i., 
passed through the press in 1895, it may be convenient to the 
student to have the new fragments placed before him in extenso. 

Gen, i. 13, ΙΔ,...^^ ίσττίρα καΐ eyevero πρωί, ημίρα τρίτη. ^^ και 
einev ό Oeos Τ€νηθητωσαν φωστήρας iv τω στ€ρ€ώματι τον ουρανού 
els φανσιν της "γηζ, <α\ άρχβτωσαν της ημ4ρας και της νυκτός τον 8ια- 

II. xviii. 24 — 26. ^^ €αν ώσιν πεντήκοντα δίκαιοι iv τη ττόλβι, 
άποΧίσας αυτονς; ονκ άνησας πάντα τον τόπον εκείνον ένεκα των 
πεντήκοντα δικαίων, εάν ώσιν εν αύτη ; ^^ μηδαμώς συ ποιήσεις ως το 
ρήμα τοΰτο, του άποκτεΐναι δίκαιον μετά άσεβους, κα\ εσται ό δίκαιος 
ως ό άσεβης• μηδαμώς. ό κρίνων πάσαν την γην, ου ποιήσεις κρίσιν ; 
^ είπεν δε ό κύριος Έάν ενρω εν Σο[δόμοις]. . . 

ΐ6. xhii. 16.. .θύματα καϊ ετοίμασαν μετ εμού ya\_p'\ φά-γονται οι 
άνθρωποι ούτοι άρτου[ς'\ την μεσημβρίαν... 

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, some- 
times 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 cor- 
rectors 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. Bodleian Library, Oxford. Auct. 
T. infr. ii. i. 

The Bodleian volume contains the following fragments of 
Genesis: i. I — xiv. 6, xviii. 24 δικαίων — xx. 14 και άπεδωκεν, xxiv. 
ζ4 εκπέμψατε — xlii. 1 8 ειπεν δε αύΐτοίς]. Another leaf, now at the 
Cambridge University Library, contains xlii. 18 [oL-JroTy τη ήμερα 
■ — xliv. 13 τον ενα και, but the verso, to which xlii. 31 — xliv. 13 
belongs, is written in Q) contemporary minuscules. It is now 
known that this text is carried on by more than one cursive 
MS. The St Petersburg cod. Ixii. begins where the Cambridge 
fragment leaves off (at Gen. xliv. 13 Βενιαμίν εγω μεν yap), and 
proceeds, with some lacunae, as far as 3 Regn. xvi. 28 {τά λοιπά 
των συμπλοκών). 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 Cam- 
bridge fragment, and St Petersburg cod. Ixii. 

Manitscripts of the Septiiagint. 135 

The recent history of this MS. is both curious and instruc- 
tive. The portions now at Oxford and London were brought 
from the East by Tischendorf in 1853; the Cambridge leaf and 
the St Petersburg portion followed in 1859. Tischendorf pub- 
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 com- 
municated 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 Gottin- 
gen ^ 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 
late form on 29 leaves of stout vellum ; each page carries two 
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 some- 
times 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 contempo- 
rary corrector, and also of another whose writing is more recent. 

F (VII). Codex Ambrosianus. Ambrosian Library, 
Milan. A. 147 infr. 

The remains of this important Codex 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 IVissen- 
schaften zu Gdttingen, 1898; cf. Th, L.-Z., Feb. 4, 1899, p. 74. See also 
E. Klostermann, G. G. Α., 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 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint, 

fragments of the Octateuch : Gen. xxxi. 15 [aXXorp/Jat — 37 ηραν- 
νησας, xlii. 1 4 on κατάσκοποι — 21 ίίσηκονσαμβν αύτον, 28 erapa- 
χθησαν — xlvi. 6 την κτησιν, xlvii. 16 et €k\4\olwcv — xlviii. 3 6 Bcos 
μοι ωφθη, xlviii. 21 των πατέρων — li. I4 οί άδβλφοί. Exod. i. ΙΟ 
yrjs — viii. 19 τω [Φαραώ], xii. 3 1 ol νΙοί — xxx. 29 άπτ. αυτών, xxxi. 
18 €V τω op€L — xxxii. 6 θυσ[ίαν], xxxii. 13 [πολνπλη]θυνώ — xxxvi. 3 
προσ[€δ€χοντο], xxxvii. I Ο αί βάσεις — end of book. Lev. i. i — ix. 
18 κύκλω, X. 14 [άφαφ€μα]τος — end of book. Num. (without 
lacuna). ' Deut. i. i — xxviii. 63 Ύ]νφράν\βη\ xxix. 14 κα\ την άράν 
— end of book. Jos. i. I — ii. 9 εφ' [η]μας, ii. 15 αυτής iv τω τ\ζ]ίχα 
— iv. 5 βμπροσθ^ν, iv. ΙΟ [au^vcTeXeaev — v. I 1ορ8άνην, ν, J ^Ιησοΰς 
— ^vi. 23 ά8€λφούζ αυτής, vii. I Ζαμβρί — ix. 27 τής σήμ€ρον ήμΐέρας], 
χ. 27 ν^ ^^ αυτή — χϋ. 12 βασ. Έγλώΐ'^. 

An inscription on a blank page states that the fragments ΛΥβΓβ 
"ex Macedonia Corcyram advecta, ibique III. Card. Fed. Borro- 
maei Bibliothecae Ambrosianae Fundatoris iussu empta eidem- 
que Bibliothecae transmissa sunt." They attracted the notice of 
Montfaucon {Diar. Ital, p. 11, Pal. sacr. pp. 27, 186), and were 
collated for Holmes, but in an unsatisfactory manner. Ceriani's 
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 cha- 
racters are those of cent. iv. — v. ; initial letters are used, which 
project to half their breadth into the margin. Punctuation is fre- 
quent, and there is much variety in the use of the points ; accents 
and breathings are freely 3.άά&ά prima inanu, a feature in which 
this 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 
first scribe throughout. The MS. has passed through the hands 
of two early correctors, and the margins are crowded with 
various readings, notes, and scholia. 

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, ΛΙοη. sacr. et prof., praef. p. ix. 

'^ See Sir E. Maunde Thompson, Greek and Latiti Pal., p. 62. 

3 Cf. Thompson, op. cit. p. 72, "they were not systematically applied 
to Greek texts before the 7th century." 

Manuscripts of the Scptiiagint. 137 

G (IV, V). Codex Colberto-Sarravianus. (i) Leyden, 
University Library, Voss. Gr. Q. 8. (2) Paris, Bibliotheque 
Nationale, cod. Gr. 17, formerly Colbert. 3084. (3) St Peters- 
burg, Imperial Library, v. 5. 

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 : Gen. xxxi. 53 αντων — xxxvi. i8-)!C-^vyarpos• Άνά. 
^*Exod. xxxvi. 8 — 29, *xxxvii. 3 υφαντού — 6, *xxxviii. I — 1 8, 
*xxxix. I [κατ]€ΐρ•γάσθη — II,*l6 σκβνη — IQ, xl. 2 e/cet την κιβωτόν 
to end of book, *Lev. i. i — iv. 26 €ξ{€)ίλάσ€ται ττβρί, iv. 27 λαού 
της γήζ — xiii. 1 7 και ίδοΰ, *xiii. 49 ψ<^'''ίφ — xiv. 6 λημψ^ταί αύτυ 
και, *xiv. 33 — 49 άφαγνί[σαι], *χν. 24 κοιμηθτ] — χνϋ. ΙΟ προσ- 
[ί^λύτων], *xviii. 28 \ϊ\θν€σιν — xix. 36 στάθμια δίκαια και, xxiv. 9 «ιΐ- 
τοΙς νΐοίς — χχνϋ. ΐ6 άνθρωπος τω. Num. i. I — vii. 85 των σκίνων, 
xi. 18 τις ψωμί€ΐ — xviii. 2 φνλην, xviii. 30 ^Ρ^'-^ — χχ• 22 
irapcyivovTo οί, *χχν. 2 αυτών και — xxvi. 3> *xxix. 12 €ορτάσ€Τ€ — 
33 σΰ-γκρισιν, 34 '^«'ί χ{^)ψ^ρ{ρ)^^ — ^nd of book. Deut. iv. 
1 1 •)«{ [/capjSi'as• : του ουρανού — 20 e/cel κ\η\^ρονομησαί\, vii. 1 3 τον 
σίτον — χνϋ. 14 κατακ\ηρονομη\^στ}ς'], xviii. 8 — xix. 4 τον 7Γλ77[σ/οΐ'], 
xxviii. 12 [βθνί\σιν — xxxi. 11. Jos. ix. 33 \βκ\4ξη']ταί — xix. 23 
αυτή η κληρονομιά, fjud. ix. 48 αύτος κα\ πάς — χ. 6 Άσσαρώ^ίϊί 
κα\ συν τοΙς, χν. 3 [Σα/χ]\//•ώζ/ — xviii. ΐ6 οί €κ των υίών, xix. 25 αύττ} 
οΚην — xxi. 12 τ^τρακοσίοις. 

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 (Leip- 
zig, i860); a splendid photographic reproduction of all the 
known leaves of the codex appeared at Leyden in 1897^. 

^ Fragments marked * are at Paris ; that marked f is at St Petersburg. 

^ Montfaucon, Pal. sac?•, p. 186 f . ; Tischendorf, Mon. sacr. iiied. n. c. 
\\\. prolegg. p. xviii. 

^ V. T. gr. cod. Sarraviani-Colhertini quae super sunt 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 fre- 
quently by an early corrector. Of the seven correctors noticed 
by Tischendorf three only need be mentioned here, — (A) a con- 
temporary 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 aste- 
risk (ijc• ) and various forms of the obelus (— ? —•, -^-, ^-, and in the 
margin, — ), the metobelus frequently occurs (:, •/> /') */')• The 
importance of Cod. Sarravianus as a guide in the recovery of 
the Hexaplaric text has been recognised from the time of Mont- 
faucon (comp. Field, Hexapia^ i., p. 5) ; and it is a matter for no 
little congratulation that we now possess a complete and admir- 
able 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 
its 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 — 23, vi. 6 — vii. 7, vii. 41 — 78, viii. 2 — 
16, xi. 3 — xiii. II, xiii. 28 — xiv. 34, xv. 3 — 20, 22 — 28, 32 — xvi. 31, 
xvi. 44 — xviii. 4, xviii. 15 — 26, xxi. 15 — 22, xxii. 30 — 41, xxiii. 12 — 
27, xxvi. 54 — xxvii. 15, xxviii. 7 — xxix. 36, xxx. 9 — xxxi. 48, xxxii. 
7 — xxxiv. 17, xxxvi. I — end of book. They are printed in Motiu- 
menta sacr. ined.^ nov. coll. i. (Leipzig, 1855). 

In Tischendorf's judgement the upper writing is not later 
than the ninth century ; the lower writing he ascribes to the 
sixth ; for though the characters are generally such as are found 
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 
are 207 — and at the end of the book the number of stichi is 

Mamiscripts of the Septiiagint. 139 

specified (,y(/)Xe' = 3535) ; the scribe appends his name — 'ΙωΛΝ- 
Νογ ΜΟΝΛχογ οερρίογ. 

Κ. Fragmenta Lipsiensia. Leipzig, University Library 
(cod. Tisch. ii.). 

Twenty-two leaves discovered by Tischendorf in 1844, of 
which seventeen contain under Arabic writing of the ninth cen- 
tury fragments of Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, and Judges 
(Num. V. 17 — 18, 24 — 25; vii. 18 — 19, 30 — 31, 35 — 36, 37 — 40, 42 
— 43, 46 — 47; XV. II — 17, 19 — 24; xxvii. i — xxviii. 5, xxviii. 10— 
xxix. 2, xxxv. 19 — 22, 28 — 31. Deut. ii. 8 — 10, 15 — 19, ix. i — 10, 
xviii. 21 — xix. i, xix. 6 — 9; xxi. 8 — 12, 17 — 19. Jos. x. 39 — xi. 
16, xii. 2 — 15, xxii. 7 — 9, 10 — 23; Jud. xi. 24 — 34, xviii. 2 — 20^). 

The Greek writing is not later than cent. vii. The fragments 
are printed in the first volume of Monunienta sacra inedita^ n. c. 

L (VI), Codex Purpureus Vindobonensis. Vienna, 
Imperial Library. 

This MS. consists of 24 leaves of Genesis, with which are 
bound up two leaves of St Luke belonging to Codex Ν of the 

The Genesis leaves contain Gen. iii. 4 — 24, vii. 19 — viii. 20, 
ix. 8 — 15, 20 — 27; xiv. 17 — 20, XV. I — 5, xix. 12 — 26, 29 — 35; 
xxii. 15 — 19, xxiv. I — II, 15 — 20; xxiv. 22 — 31, xxv. 27—34, xxvi. 
6 — II, XXX. 30 — 37; xxxi. 25 — 34; xxxii. i — 18, 22 — 32; xxxv. i 
— 4, 8, 16 — 20, 28 — 29, xxxvii. I — 19, xxxix. 9 — 18, xl. 14 — xli. 2, 
xli. 21 — 32, xlii. 21 — 38, xliii. 2 — 21, xlviii. 16 — xlix. 3, xlix. 28 — 

33, 1• 1—4. 

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., 1776), and a transcript of the text in R. 
Holmes's Letter to 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. 
Franz Wickhoff^ Wien, 1895). 

^ On the fragments of Judges see Isloox^, Judges, p. xlv. 
^ On the latter see H. S. Cronin, Codex Ficrpurens Petropolitamis, 
p. xxiii. 

140 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 

Μ (X). Codex Coislinianus. Paris, Bibliotheque Natio- 
nale, Coisl. Gr. i. 

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 cen- 
tury. It was first described by Montfaucon, who devotes the 
first 31^ pages of his Bibliotheca Coisliniana to a careful descrip- 
tion 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 sep- 
timo saeculo exaratus "), but the later date is now usually ac- 
cepted. 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. Two of a series of 

fragments of various MSB. discovered by Tischendorf and 

printed in the first and second volumes of Monumenta sacra 

inedita, nov. coll. i. ii. (1855, 1857). 

Z^ Three paHmpsest leaves containing fragments of 2 — 3 
Regn. (2 Regn. xxii. 38—42, 46—49; xxiii. 2—5, 8—10; 3 Regn. 

^ Other notes occur in a hand of the ninth century and in a late cursive 

- Gregory, i. p. 375 ; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 134. 

Maimscripts of the Septiiagint. 

xiii. 4—6, 8— II, 13—17, 20—23, xvi. 31—33, xvii. 1—5, 9—12, 
14 — 17). The upper writing is Armenian, the lower an Egyptian- 
Greek hand of the 7th century, resemking that of cod. Ο (v. 
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. 

Π. Fragmenta Tischendorfiana. 

Four leaves taken from the binding of Cod. Porhrianus Chio- 
vensis (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. 28 — 30, 31 — 32). The writing appears to belong 
to cent. ix. 

(C) Poetical Books. 

I (13). Codex Bodleianus. Oxford, Bodleian Library, 
Auct. D. 4. I. 

A Psalter, including the Old Testament Canticles and a 
catena. Described by Bruns in Eichhorn's Repertoriu7n., xiii. 
p. 177; cf. Lagarde's Ge?iesis graece, p. 11, and Nov. Ρ salt. Gr. 
edit. Specijnen, p. 3. Parsons, who reckons it among the cur- 
sives, 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. 

R. Codex Veronensis. Verona, Chapter Library. 

A MS. of the Psalter in Greek and Latin, both texts written 
in Roman characters. A few lacuTiae (Ps. i. i — ii. 7, Ixv. 20 — 
Ixviii. 3, Ixviii. 26 — 33, cxv. 43 — cvi. 2) have been supplied by a 
later hand, which has also added the ψαλμός Ιδιόγραφος (Ps. cli.). 
The Psalms are followed pri?/! a manu by eight canticles (Exod. 
XV. I — 21, Deut. xxxii. i — 44, i Regn. ii. i — 10, Isa. v. i — 9, Jon. 
ii. 3 — 10, Hab. iii. i — 10, Magnificat., Dan. iii. 23 ff.). 

Printed by Bianchini in his Vindiciae cano7iicarH7n scriptura- 
ru77t^ i. (Rome, 1740), and used by Lagarde in the apparatus of 
his Specinie7i and Psalterii Gr. quinqiiage7ia pri77ia., and in the 
Cambridge manual Septuagint (1891). A new collation was 
made in 1892 by H. A. Redpath, which has been employed in 

1 See Gregory, i. p. 447, Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 172 f. 

142 Manuscripts of the Scpttiagmt, 

the second edition of The O. T. in Greek (1896); but it is much 
to be wished that the Verona Chapter may find it possible to 
have this important Psalter photographed. 

The codex consists of 405 leaves, measuring \ο^γ.η\ inches; 
each page contains 26 lines. The Greek text appears at each 
opening on the left-hand page, and the Latin on the right, 

Τ (262). Codex Turicensis. Zurich, Municipal Library. 

A 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. 3 — xciii. 7, xcvi. 12 — xcvii. 8. The 
first five 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. R 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 στάσου. 

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 

The text of Τ agrees generally with that of cod. A, and still 
more closely with the hand in cod. t< known as i?•'^ 

U. Fragmenta Londinensia. London, British Museum, 
pap. xxxvii. 

Thirty leaves of papyrus which contain Ps. x. (xi.) 2 [e]i? 
φαρίτραν — xviii. (xix.) 6, xx. (xxi.) 14 ev ταΐς δυναστ^ίαις σον — 
xxxiv. (xxxv.) 6 κατα8ιώκ[ω]ν. 

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 ff. 

ManiLscripts of the Septuagint. 143 

legg. ad V. T. Gr., p. ix., "quo nullus codicum sacrorum antiquior 
videtur"), 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^. 

X (258). Codex Vaticanus Iobi. Rome, Vatican 
Library, Gr. 749. 

A MS. of Job Avith occasional lacunae; the remaining por- 
tions are i. i — xvii. 13, xvii. 17 — xxx. 9, xxx. 23 — xxxi. 5, xxxi. 24 
— xxxiv. 35. There are miniatures, and a catena in an uncial 
hand surrounding the text. At the beginning of the book Hexa- 
plaric 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 

W (43). Codex Parisiensis. Paris, Bibliotheque Na- 
tionale, Gr. 20. 

A portion of an uncial Psalter containing in 40 leaves Ps. 
xci. 14 — cxxxvi. I, with laamae extending from Ps. ex. 7 to cxii. 
10, and from Ps. cxvii. 16 — cxxvi. 4. So Omont {Invejitaire 
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. 

^ 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 Palaeo- 
graphy of papyri, p. 1 16 f. 

- Kenyon, loc. cit. 

^ See £. Klostermann, Analecta zur Septuaginta, ^^c, p. 68, 

^ Hexapla, ii. p. 2. 

144 Mamiscripts of the Septtiagint. 

Z'^. See above under (B), p. 140. 

Fragments of the fourth or fifth cent. (Tisch.), containing Pss. 
cxli. (cxlii.) 7 — 8, cxlii. (cxliii.) i — 3, cxUv. (cxlv.) 7 — 13. 

(D) Prophets. 

Ο (VIII). Fragmenta Dublinensia. Dublin, Trinity 
College Ivibrary, K. 3. 4. 

Eight palimpsest leaves — in the original MS. folded as four — 
which are now bound up with Codex Ζ of the Gospels ^ and yield 
Isa. XXX. 2 — xxxi. 7, xxxvi. 19 — xxxviii. 2. 

The original leaves of the Codex measured about 12x9 inches, 
and each contained 36 lines of 14 — 17 letters. The writing, which 
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). Codex Marchalianus. Rome, Vatican Library, 
Gr. 2125. 

A magnificent codex of the Prophets, complete, and in the 
order of cod. Β (Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, 
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 
characteristically Egyptian form. From Egypt it was carried 
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 
its name. From the library of R. Alarchal it passed into the 
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, 
collated for Parsons, and printed in part by Tischendorf m the 

1 See Gregory, i. p. 399 f.; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 153. 
^ Recensioni dei LXX.y p. 6. 

Mamtscripts of the Septuagint. 145 

ninth volume of his Nova Collectio (1870). Field followed 
Montfaucon in making large use of the Hexaplaric matter Avith 
Avhich the margins of the MS. abound, but was compelled to 
depend on earlier collations and a partial transcript. The 
liberality of the Vatican has now placed within the reach of all 
O.T. students a magnificent heliotype of the entire MS., accom- 
panied (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. 

Y. Codex Taurinensis. Turin, Royal Library, cod. 9. 

This codex consists of 135 leaves in quarto, and contains the 
Βω8€καπρόφητον. The MS. is difficult to read, and there are many 
lacunae. The text, written according to Stroth- in the ninth 
century, is surrounded by scholia, and prefaced by Theodoret's 
ντΓοθξσας to the various books. 

The Turin MS. does not appear to have been used hitherto 
for any edition of the LXX., nor has any transcript or collation 
been published. 

Z^'^ See above, under (B), p. 140. 

Z^ Palimpsest fragments of Isaiah (iii. 8—14, v. 2 — 14, xxix. 
1 1 — 23, xliv. 26 — xlv. 5). As in Z% the upper writing is Armenian ; 
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. 

1 Printed in 0. T. in Greek, mr, p. 8 f. 
^ In Eichhom's Repertoriuni, viii. p. 202 f. 

S. S. 


146 Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 

Γ. Codex Cryptoferratensis. Basilian Monastery of 
Grotta Ferrata, cod. E. β. 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 accom- 
panied 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. About 130 leaves in the present 
liturgical 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. (Rome 1867). 

The original codex seems to have contained 432 leaves 
gathered in quires of eight ; and the leaves appear to have 
measured about lof χ 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 

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 photo- 
graphic edition, or at least a fresh examination and more com- 
plete collation of this interesting palimpsest. 

Δ. Fragmentum Bodleianum. Oxford, Bodleian Library, 
MS. Gr. bibl. d. 2 (P). 

A fragment of Bel in the version of Theodotion (21 ywaiKUtv — 
41 Αανιηλ). A vellum leaf brought from Egypt and purchased for 
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. 

The following uncial fragments have not been used for 
any edition of the lxx., and remain for the present without 
a symbolical letter or number. 

(i) A scrap of papyrus (B. Vi.^pap. ccxii.) yielding the text 
of Gen. xiv. 17. See Catalogue of Additions to the MSS., 
1888 — 93, p. 410. Cent. iii. (?). 

(2) The vellum fragment containing Lev. xxii. 3 — xxiii. 22, 
originally published by Brugsch {Neue Bruchstiidie des Cod. 
SUi.^ Leipzig, 1875), ^^^o believed it to be a portion of Codex 
Sinaiticus ; a more accurate transcription is given by J. R. 
Harris, Biblical Fraginents^ no. 1$ (cf. Mrs Lewis's Studia Sin. 
i. p. 97 f ). Cent. iv. 


Manuscripts of the Septtiagint. 147 

(3) Another Sinaitic fragment, containing Num. xxxii. 29, 
30 (J. R. Harris, op. cit.., no. i). Cent. vii. 

(4) Another Sinaitic fragment, containing a few words of 
Jud. XX. 24 — 28 (J. R. Harris, op. cit., no. 2). Cent. iv. 

(5) Another Sinaitic fragment, containing Ruth ii. 19 — iii. i, 
iii. 4 — 7 (J. R. Harris, op. cit.., no. 3). Cent. iv. 

(6) Part of a Psalter on papyrus (B. M., pap. ccxxx.), con- 
taining Ps. xii. 7 — XV. 4; see Athenaeicm^ Sept. 8, 1894, and 
Kenyon, Palaeography of Greek Papyri., pp. 109, 131. Cent. iii. 

(7) Part of a Psalter on a Berlin papyrus, containing Ps. xl. 
26 — xli. 4; see Blass in Z. f. cigypt. Sprache., 1881 (Kenyon, op. 
^zV., p. 131). 

(8) Nine fragments of a MS. Avritten in columns of about 
25 lines, one on each page. The fragments give the text of 
Ps. ci. 3, 4, cii. 5—8, cv. 34—43, cvi. 17—34, cviii. 15—21, 
cxiii. 18 — 26, cxiv. 3 — cxv. 2. J. R. Harris, op. cit.., no. 4. 
Cent. iv. 

(9) A vellum MS. in the Royal Library at Berlin (MS. Gr. 
oct. 2), containing Ps. cxi. — cl., followed by the first four 
canticles and parts of Ps. cv. and cant. v. See E. Kloster- 
mann, Z.f. A. T. IV., 1897, p. 339 ff. 

(10) Fragments discovered by H. A. Redpath at St Mark's, 
Venice, in the binding of cod. gr. 23, containing the text of 
Prov. xxiii. 21 — xxiv. 35. Published in the Academy, Oct. 22, 
1892. A fuller transcript is given by E. Klostermann, Analecta, 
pp. 34 ff. 

(11) Portion of a leaf of a papyrus book, written in large 
uncials of cent. vii. — viii., exhibiting Cant. i. 6 — 9. This scrap 
came from the Fayum and is now in the Bodleian, where it is 
numbered MS. Gr. bibl. g. i (P); see Grenfell, Greek papyri 
(Oxford, 1896), pp. I2f. 

(12) Palimpsest fragments of Wisdom and Sirach (cent. vi. — 
vii.), 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. 

(13) Two palimpsest leaves of Sirach belonging to cod. 2 in 
the Patriarchal Library at Jerusalem : cf. Papadopulos, Ί^ροσ. 
Βΐ/3λ., i. p. 14: τα αναπΧηρωτκά φνΧλα 2"/ και 56 elai τταΚίμ-^ηστα 
ων η αρχική γραφή άνήκ€ΐ els τον e' αΐώνα.,.το παλαιον de αυτών 
κ€ίμ€νόν €στι 8ί(ττη\ον, κα\ iv φνΧ. ζ6 διακρίνεται ή επιγραφή 

coφί(^ ΐΗΟογ γίογ αιρ^χ. The leaves contain Sir. prol. i — i. 14, 
i. 29 — iii. II. Printed by J. R. Harris, op. cit., no. 5. 

(14) Part of a Papyrus book which seems to have contained 
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 

10 — 2 


Manttscripts of the Septuagint. 

claimed for this papyrus an extravagantly early date, but the 
hand appears to belong to the seventh century ; see Kenyon, 
ΡαΙαβοίζπιρΗγ of papyri, p. ii8. When last seen, it was in the 
shop of Th. Graf, a dealer at Vienna [ib., p. 24). 

(15) Two 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 — 12, xiii. 3 — 5. 
"About the fifth century " (Grenfell, Greek papyri, p. 11 f). 

(16) A Rainer papyrus, assigned to the third century and 
containing Isa. xxxviii. 3 — 5, 13 — 16; see Nestle, TJfiexi, p. 74. 

(17) A portion of a leaf of a papyrus book, bearing the 
Greek text of Ezech. v. 12— vi. 3 (Bodl/iMS. Gr. bibl. d. 4 (P)) ; 
see Grenfell, Greek papyri, pp. 9 ff. The text shews Hexaplaric 
signs ; the writing is said to belong to the third century (Kenyon, 
Palaeography of papyri, p. 107). 

(18) A fragment of a lead roll on w^hich is engraved Ps. 
Ixxix (Ixxx). I — 16, found at Rhodes in 1898. See Sitzimgsberichte 
d. kmigl. Preicss. Akad. d. Wissenschaften stt Berlin^ 1898 

II. Cursive MSS. 

We proceed to give a list of cursive MSS. of the Greek Old 
Testament, or of books belonging to it, limiting ourselves to 
the codices used by Holmes and Parsons, with the addition 
in the Octateuch of others which have been recently examined 
or collated by the editors of the larger Cambridge Septuagint'. 

14. Gen., Ex., ep. 

Arist., cat. (xi) 

15. Octateuch (ix — 


16. Octateuch (xi) 

17. Genesis, cat. (x) 

(A) The Octateuch. 

Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr. Klostermann, Anal. 

203 p. 1 1 n. 

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. Hexaplaric in early 

Florence, Laur. v. 38 
Moscow, Syn. 5,Vlad. 
18. Octateuch (x — Florence, Laur. Med. 


Pal. 242 (formerly 
at Fiesole) 


Batiffol, Vat., p. 91 

1 The arable numerals are the symbols employed by H. and P. For 
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 the Septuagint. 149 

19. Octateuch ^ Rome, Chigi R. vi. 38 Bianchini, Vind., p. 

(?x) 279 ff. 

Lucianic, Lagarde's h 

20. Genesis (ix) [Cod. Dorothei i.] 

25. Gen., Ex., ep. Munich, Stadtbibl. Field, ii. Auct. p. 3 
Arist.^ cat. (xi) Gr. 9 

28. Num., Deut., Rome, Vat. Gr. 2122 

Jos., imperf. (formerly Basil. 161) 

29. Octateuch (inc. Venice, St Mark's, Cf. Lagarde Genesis^ 

Gen. xliii. 15) Gr. 2 γ. 6, Septuagi?itast. 

... (x) i. ρ II 

30. Octateuch (inc. Rome, Casan. 1444 

Gen. xxiv. 13) 

31. Genesis, ΛϊΛ(χΐν) Vienna, Theol. Gr. 4 

32. Pentateuch (xii) [Cod. Eugenii i.] Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 

2,7. Lectionary (a.d. Moscow, Syn. 31, 

III 6) Vlad. 8 

38. Octateuch... (xv) Escurial, Y. 11. 5 Hexaplaric, cf. Field, 

i. p. 398 

44. Octateuch.. .(xv) Zittau, A. i. i Lagarde's^-: s^eGene- 

sis gr., p. 7 ff. and 
Libr. V. T. can. i. 
p. vi. ; Scrivener- 
Miller, i. p. 261 ; 
Redpath, Exp. T., 
May 1897 

45. Num. {lect.), (xi) Escurial 

46. Octateuch.. .(xiv) Paris,Nat. Coisl. Gr.4 O.T. exc. Psalter 

47. Fragment of lee- Oxford, Bodl. Baron. 

tionary 201 

50. Lectionary (xiii) Oxford, Bodl. Seld. 30 

52. Octateuch...,^;). Florence, Laur. Acq. 

Af^ist., cat. (x) 44 

53. Octateuch (a.d. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 

1439) 17' 

54. Octateuch, <?/.yi- Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Field, i. p. 223. La- 

rist. (xiii — xiv) 5 garde's k 

55. Octateuch... (xi) Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr. Part of a complete 

I Bible, cf. Kloster- 

mann, p. 12 

56. Octateuch.. .(a.d. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Lagarde's k 

1093) 3 

57. Octateuch, ep. Rome, Vat. Gr. 747 Field, i. pp. 5, 78 

Arist., cat. (xi) 
^ Dots in this position shew that the MS. extends beyond the Octateucli. 

150 Maimscripts of the Septiiagint. 

58. Pentateuch Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr, Field, i. p. 78 

(xiii) 10 

59. Octateuch (xv) Glasgow, Univ. BE. 

7^ 10 (formerly at 
C.C.C., Oxford) 
61. Lectionary (xi) Oxford, Bodl. Laud. Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 
36 329 

63. Jos., Jud., Ruth Rome, Vat. 1252 Klostermann, p. 12 

{iuiperf.) (x) 

64. Octateuch ... (x Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Field, i. p. 5 

— xi) 2 O.andN.T. 

68. Octateuch... (xv) Venice, St Mark's, O. and N.T. Scrive- 

Gr. 5 ner-Miller, i. p. 219 

70. Jos., Jud., Ruth Munich, Gr. 372 (for- 

... (xi) merly at Augsburg; 

71. Octateuch.. .(xiii) Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. i 

72. Octateuch.. .(xiii) Oxford, Bodl. Canon. Hexaplaric. Tischen- 

Gr. 35 (formerly at dorf in L. C.-BL^ 
\'enice; see H. P.) 1867 (27) 

73. Octateuch, ep. Rome, Vat. Gr. 746 Field, i. p. 78 

Arist. (part), 
cat. (xiii) 

74. Octateuch. ..(xiv) Florence, Laur. Acq. Hesychian (?) 

700 (49) 

75. Octateuch (a.d. Oxford, Univ. Coll. Hi. Lagarde's i». Horne- 

1126) mann, p. 41 ; Owen, 

Enquiry^ p. 90 

76. Octateuch. ..(xiii) Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4 
ηη. Octateuch, cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 748 


78. Gen., Ex., cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 383 Field, i. p. 78 


79. Gen., ep. Arist.., Rome, Vat. Gr. 1668 

cat. (xiii) 

82. Octateuch.. .(xii) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. Lagarde's/ 


83. Pentateuch, cat. Lisbon, Archivio da 

(xvi) Torre da Tombo 

540 &c. (formerly 
at Evora) 

84. Heptateuch (zw- Rome, Vat. Gr. 190 1 Hesychian (?) 

perf.) (x) 

85. Heptateuch {ivi- Rome, \^at. Gr. 2058 Field, i. pp. 78, 397 

pc7'f.) (xi) (formerly Basil. 97) ("praestantissimi 

93. Ruth... (xiii) London, B. M. Reg. Lucianic (Lagarde's 

i. D. 2 VI) 

Mamiscripts of the Septiiagint. 



105. Exod. xiv. 6 — 26 

&c. (xiii — xiv) 

106. Octateuch...(xv) 

107. Octateuch...(A.D. 


108. Octateuch...(xiv) 

118. Octateuch {im- 
perf.) (xiii) 

120. Octateuch... (xi) 

121. Octateuch (x) 

122. Octateuch... (xv) 

125. Octateuch... (xv) 

126. Heptateuch 

cat. in Gen., Ex. 

(A.D. 1475) 

127. Octateuch... (x) 

128. Octateuch (xii) 

129. Octateuch (xiii) 

130. Octateuch (?xi) 

131. Octateuch 

(x— xi) 

132. Lectionary (pa- 

limpsest, xi — 

133. Excerpts from 


134. Octateuch... (xi) 

London, B. M. Bur- 

Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. 

Gr. 187 

Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. 

Gr. 188 
Rome, Vat. Gr. 330 

Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 

Venice, St Mark's, 

Gr. 4 
Venice, St Mark's, 

Gr. 3 
Venice, St Mark's, 

Gr. 6 

Moscow, Syn. 30, 

Vlad. 3 
Moscow, Syn. 19, 

Vlad. 38 

Moscow, Syn. 31 a, 

Vlad. I 
Rome, Vat. Gr. 1657, 

formerly Grotta fer- 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1252 
Vienna, Th. Gr. 57 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 23 

Oxford, Bodl. Selden. 

Leyden, Univ. 
Florence, Laur. v. i 

Hesychian (?). O. T., 
N. T. (582 Greg., 
451 Scr.). Lagarde, 
Ank. p. 27 

Lagarde, ib. 

Field, i. p. 5. Luci- 
anic text (Lagarde's 

Lucianic (Lagarde's 

O. and N. T. (Ev. 
206) in Latin order. 
Copy of 68 

Field, i. p. 5. La- 
garde, Ank. p. 3 
Field, i. pp. 168, 224 

See note to 63 

Field, i. p. 6. La- 
garde, Ank. p. 26. 
See note to 131 

Field, i. p. 5: "in 
enumeratione Hol- 
mesiana [cod. 130] 
perverse designatur 
131, et vice versa." 
O. and N. T. 

Hesychian (.?) 

152 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 

135. Gen., Ex. i. i — Basle, A. N. iii. 13 Field, i. p. 6. La- 

xii. 4, cat. (xi) garde's r {Genesis., 

p. 6). Hexaplaric 

136. Excerpts from Oxford, Bodl. Barocc. 

Pentateuch 196 

(A.D. 1043) 
209. Jos., Jud., Ruth, [Cod. Dorothei iv] 

cat. (xii) 
236. Jos., Jud., Ruth Rome, Vat. Gr. 331 Klostermann, p. 78 

... (xii) 

241. Jos., Jud., Ruth London, B. M. Harl. P. Young's copy of 
... (xvii) 7522 Cod. A 

246. Octateuch Rome, Vat. Gr. 1238 Cf. Batiffol, (Cun im- 

(xiii) poi'tant MS. des 

Septante^ in B7cl- 
letiit Critique., 1 5 
March, 1889 

Josh. — Ruth (x London, B.M. Add. Continuation of Ε (p. 

— xi) 20002 134) 

Octateuch, cat. London, B.M. Add. 

(xii — xiii) 35123 

Lev. — Ruth, cat. Lambeth, 12 14 

(A.D. 1 104) 

Lev. — Ruth, cat. Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

(A.D. 1264) 5 

Jos. — Ruth Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

comjn. (xii) 7 

Octateuch Paris, Arsenal 8415 Hexaplaric readings 


Heptateuch {im- Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. Lucianic {!) 

per/.) (xiii) 184 

Lev. — Ruth, cat. Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

(xiii) 6 

Octateuch...(xiv) Paris, Nat. Suppl. Hesychian (?) 

Gr. 609 

Octateuch, ep. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 

Arist., cat. (xii) 128 

Ex. — Ruth, cat. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Hexaplaric readings 

(xv) 132 

Octateuch, ep. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Hexaplaric readings 

Anst.,caL{xu\) 129 

Gen. — Ex. {im- Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 

per/. \ep.A rist. , 1 30 

cat. (xv) 

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 1 5 3 

'Ex.{ijnperf.),cat. Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. Hexaplaric readings 

(xvi) 131 (interlinear) 

Gen. i. — iii. (.?), Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 

conwi. (palim.) 161 


Gen., Ex., ep. Escurial Σ. i. 16 Hexaplaric readings 

Arist.^ cat. 

(A.D. 1586) 

Octateuch...(z;/z- Escurial i2. i. 13 

pcrf) (xi) 

Octateuch, cat. Leyden, 13 (belongs 

(xiii) to Voss collection) 

Exod. — Deut. Leipzig, Univ. Libr. Hexaplaric readings. 

{imperf.){'n)... Gr. 361 Published by Fis- 
cher in 1767 = Lips. 
(H. P.) 

Gen., Ex., ep. Munich, Gr. 82 


Jos.— Ruth... (x) Munich, Gr. 454 (for- 
merly at Augsburg) 

Octateuch, ep. Zurich, Bibl. de la Hexaplaric matter 

Arist..,cat.{xui) ville, c. 11 ^ 

Gen. iv. — v., Ex. Basle, O. ii. 17 

xii. — xxviii., 

comm. (xi) 

Octateuch, cat. Rome, Barb. Gr. iv. 

(?xii) 56 

Gen., cat. (xvi) Rome, Barb. Gr. vi. 8 

Num. — Ruth ... Rome, Vat. Gr. 332 

(xiv — xv) 

Hexateuch... (x) Grotta FerrataY. γ. i 

Gen. — Jos. {ivi- St Petersburg, Imp. Continuation of Ε (p. 

perf.)...{x — xi) Libr. Ixii 134) 

Gen., comm. Moscow, Syn. Vlad. 

Chrys. 35 

Joshua — Ruth... Athos, Iver. 15 

cat. (xii) 

Octateuch (x) Athos, Pantocr. 24 Hexaplaric readings 

Octateuch... (x Athos, Vatop. 5 it 


Octateuch Athos, Vatop. 513 

(A.D. 1 021) 

Lev. — Ruth, cat. Athos, Vatop. 515 

(xi — xii) 

Ex. — Ruth Athos, Vatop. 516 Hexaplaric readings, 

(xiv) much faded 

154 Mamiscripts of the Septicagint. 

Pentateuch (zV;z- Athos, Protat. 53 Hexaplaric readings 

per/.\ (A.D. 

Octateuch (a.d. Athos, Laur. γ. 112 Hexaplaric readings 

1013) (a few) 

Genesis, i:rt:/.(?xi) Constantinople, 224 

(formerly 372) 
Octateuch... az/. Athens, Bibl. Nat. 43 

Octateuch.. .(xiii) Athens, Bibl. Nat. 44 Lucianic (?) 
Octateuch, cat. Smyrna, σχολή evayy. 

Niceph. (xii) i 

Pentateuch, cat. Patmos, 216 

Num. — Ruth, Patmos, 217 

cat. (xi) 
Heptateuch (z;;z- Patmos, 410 

perf.) (xiii) 
Pentateuch, /t'j•/. Patmos, 411 

xii. pair, (xv) 
Octateuch... (x Sinai, i 

Pentateuch, cat. Sinai, 2 

Octateuch... (ix Jerusalem, H. Sepul- 

med.) chre 2 

Genesis, cat. (xii Jerusalem, H. Sepul- 

— xiii) chre 3 

(B) Historical Books. 

i9i...iRegn.,2Esdr., Rome, Chigi R. vi. 38 
Judith, Esth., 
I — 3Macc.,&c. 

29... I — 4 Regn., I — Venice, St Marks, 

3 Mace, (im- Gr. 2 

perf.), &c. (x) 
38... I Regn., 2 Regn. Escurial, Y. 11. 5 

i. I — XX. 18 (xv) 
44...iRegn.,2 Esdr., Zittau, A. τ. i 

I — 4 Mace, 

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. 1 5 5 

46...1 Regn.-2Esdr., Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

Esth., Judith, 4 

I — 4 Mace, 

52...iRegn.-2Esdr., Florence, Laur. Acq. 

Esth., Judith, 44 

I — 4 Mace, 

Tob., schoL (x) 
55...iRegn.-2Esdr., Rome, Vat. Regin. 

Judith, Esth., Gr. i 

Tob., I — 4 

Mace, (xi) 
56... I — 4 Regn., I — Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 3 

2 Chron., 1—2 

Mace, (xii) 
58... I — 4 Regn., I — Rome, Vat. Regin. 

2 Chron., i — 2 Gr. 10 

Esdr., Jud., 

Tob., Esth., 

&c. (xiii) 
60. 1-2 Chron. (.?xii) Cambridge, Univ. Walton, PoIys;l. vi. 
Libr. Ff. 1. 24 i2iff.; J. R. Harris, 

Origin of Leicester 
Cod., p. 21 
64...iRegn.-2Esdr., Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 

Esth., Tob., 2 

I — 2 Mace, (x) 
68...iRegn.-2Esdr., Venice, St Mark's, 

Esth., Judith, Gr. 5 

Tob., 1—3 

Mace... (xv) 
70.. > I -4 Regn., parts Munich, Gr. 372 (for- 

of Chron., Tob. merlyat Augsburg) 

71. ..2 Esdr., I — 3 Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. I 

Mace, Esth., 

Judith, Tob. 

74.. .1—2 Esdr., I — 4 Florence, St Mark's 

Mace, Esth., 

Judith, Tob. 

76... Esth., Judith, Paris, Nat. Reg. Gr. 4 

Tob. (xiii) 
82... I — 4 Regn. (xii Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

—xiii) 3 

92. 1—4 Regn. (x) Paris, Nat. Gr. 8 Field, i. p. 486 

1 56 Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 

93...i-2Esdr.,Esth., London, B. M. Reg. 

1-3 Mace. (xiii) i. D. 2 

98. I — 4Regn., I — 2 Escurial, Σ. 2. 19 

Chron., cat. 

1 06... I Regn.-2Esdr., Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. 

Judith, Esth., Gr. 187 

I — 2 Mace. 

107. I Regn.-2 Esdr., Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. 

1—3 Mace, Gr. 188 

Esth., ludith, 


io8...iRegn.-2Esdr., Rome, Vat. Gr. 330 Cf. Field, i. p. 702 

Judith, Tob., 

Esth. (xiv) 

119. I — 4Regn.,i — 2 Paris, Nat. Gr. 7 

Chron., i — 2 

Esdr. (x) 

120. ..iRegn.-2 Esdr., \^enice, St Mark's, 

I — 4 Mace, Gr. 4 

Esth. (xi) 

121...1 Regn.-2 Esdr. Venice, St Mark's, 

(x) Gr. 3 

122. ..Historical Bks., Venice, St Mark's, 

... (xv) Gr. 6 

123. I — 4 Regn. (xi) [Cod. Dorothei v.] 

1 2 5... Historical Bks., Moscow, Syn. 30, 

... (xv) Vlad. 3 

i26...Judith,Tob.(xv) Moscow, Syn. 19, 

Vlad. 38 

127... I — 4 Regn., I — Moscow, Syn. 31a, 

2 Chron. xxxvi. Vlad. I 

131. ..Historical Bks. Vienna, Th. Gr. 23 

(exc. 4 Mace.) 

134...1 Regn.-2Esdr., Florence, Laur. v. i 

I Jiiacc. (x) 
158. I — 4 Regn., I — 2 Basle, B. 6. 22 Wetstein, Λ'. T. i. p. 

Chron. 132 

236... I Regn.-2Esdr., Rome, Vat. Gr. 331 

Esth., Judith, 

Tob., 1—4 

Mace, (xii) 
241... I — 4Regn.,i — 2 London, B. AL Harl. 

Chron. 7522 

242. I — 4 Regn. Vienna, Th. Gr. 5 

243. I — 4 Regn. Paris, Nat. Coisl. 8 Field, i. p. 486 

Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 157 

243*. I— 4Regn.(i-rt/.), Venice, St Mark's, Field, i. p. 486 
I Chron. — 2 cod. 16 
Esdr., Esth., 
Tob.Jud.,1 — 4 

244. 1—4 Regn. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. ^^^ 

245. I Regn. (ix— x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 334 Lucianic (Field) 
246... I Regn. (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1238 

247. I Regn. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. Urb. i 

248...1— 2Esdr.,Tob., Rome, Vat. Gr. 346 Nestle, Marg. p. 58 

Judith, Esth., 

&c. (xiv) 
31 1. ..Historical Bks. Moscow, Syn. 341 



Esth., Tob. 
...Judith, I — 3 Escurial, Ω. i. 13 

Mace. (3 M. 

imperf.) (xi) 
...iRegn.-2Chron. Munich, Gr. 454(?for- 

(x) merly at Augsburg) 

...I Regn. -3 Regn. St Petersburg, Imp. 

xvi. 28 (x or xi) Libr. Ixii. 
...Tob., Judith, GrottaFerrata,A. γ. I 

Esth., Ruth (x) (catal., 29) 
...Tobit(xivorxv) Rome, Vat. Gr. 332 
...I Esdr., Tobit Leipzig, Univ. Libr. Hexaplaric readings 

(fragments) (x Gr. 361 

or xi) 
...Esth., Judith, Athos, Vatop. 511 


(x or xi) 
...Esth., Tob., Athos, Vatop. 513 

Judith (A.D. 

102 1 ) 
...1-2 Chron. (xiv) Athos, Vatop. 516 
...I — 4 Regn., ί:<ϊ/. Athens, Bibl. Nat. 43 

...iRegn.-2Esdr., Athens, Bibl. Nat. 44 

Esth., Judith, 

Tob. (xiii) 
...I — 4 Regn., I — Paris, Arsenal 8415 

2 Chron. (xiv) 
...I Regn.-2Esdr., Paris, Nat. Suppl. Gr. 

1—4 Mace, 609 

Esth., Judith, 

Tob. (xiv) 

158 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 

...I — 4 Regn. (xii) Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

... I Regn. -2 Esdr., Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr. i 
Judith, Esth., 

(C) Poetical Books. 

13. =1 (see under 

Uncial MSS.) 
21. Psalms, schol. [Cod. Eugenii iv.] 

(xiii — xiv) 
27. Psalms i — Ixx Gotha, formerly Loth- An uncial MS., La- 
ringen garde's M(p«) {Spe- 

cimen^ P• 27) 
39. Psalms (/;;i/^r/;) [Cod. Dorothei ii.] An uncial MS., La- 

(ix) garde's E(p«) {Spe- 

cimen, p. 2) 
43. =W (see under Lagarde's F^p^) {Spe- 

Uncial MSS.) cimen, p. 2) 

46...Prov., Eccl., Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

Cant., Job, 4 

Sap., Sir., ύμ- 
νος των ττατ. 

ημών (xiv) 

5 5 -.Job, Psalms Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr. 
(?xi) I 

65. Psalms, ca7it., Leipzig 

Lat. (xii) 

66. Psalms, cant. Eton Coll. 


67. Psalms, ca7it. Oxford, C.C.C. 19 Harris, Leicester Co- 

(xvi) dex, p. 20 

68. ..Poetical Books Venice, St Mark's, 

(XV) Gr. 5 

69. Psalms, ca7it. Oxford, Magd. Coll. 9 


80. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Christ Ch. A 

(xiii — xiv) 

81. Psalms (xi) Oxford, Christ Ch. 2 
99. Psalms, schol., Oxford, Trin. Coll. jZ 

cant, (xii — xiii) 
100. Psalms, ca?it. Oxford, Christ Ch. 3 

(xi— xii) 
loi. Psalms, cant. Oxford, Christ Ch. 20 


Manuscripts of tJie SepUtagmt. 





















Psalms, cant. 

Prov. i. — xix. 


Psalms i.-x. (xvi) 
Cant, Sap., Sir. 
...Psalms (xv) 
Proverbs... (xiii) 
Job, schol. (ix) 
Psalms (ix) 
Psalms, i:^/.(A.D. 

Psalms, comni. 

(A.D. 967) 
..Psalms, comvi. 
Psalms, comm. 
..Poetical Books 
Psalms, cant. 
..Proverbs {co7mn. 
Chrys.)^ EccL, 
Cant., Sap. (xv) 
..Poetical Books, 

&c. (?xii) 
Job, cat. (xi — xii) 

Job (x) 
Proverbs — Job 

Psalms (A.D. 

Psalms, comm. 
Psalms, prooem. 

= 131 

Psalms, cant, (x) 
Psalms (x) 
Prov. — Job, cat. 

... (xiii) 
Job, Prov., EccL, 

Cant., Sap., 


Psalms (?xiv) 
Psalms {impeff.) 
Psalms (xi) 

Oxford, Christ Ch. i 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 25 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 27 
Ferrara, Bibl. Comm. 
Gr. 188 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 26 
Vienna, Th. Gr. 9 
Milan, Ambr. P. 65 
Milan, Ambr. F. 12 

Milan, Ambr. B. 106 

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. 10. 2)3 
Turin, B. 2. 42 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 10 
Vienna, Th. Gr. 19 

Velletri, Borg. 
[Cod. Fr. Xavier] 
Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 7 

Ferrara, Carmelit. 3 
Venice, Bibl. Zen. 
(Cod. Nani) 

Klostermann, pp. 6, 

Klostermann, p. 18 

Field, ii. p. 2, and 

Auct. p. 5 
Field, ii. p. 2 
Field, ii. p. 2 

Klostermann, p. 51 

= 3o8*H.P. SeeGeb- 
hardt. Die Psabnen 
Salomo's., p. 15 

A Graeco- Latin MS. 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 


Psalms (xiii) 

(Cod. M( 

sermanni I) 


Psalms (xii — 


(Cod. M( 

sermanni II) 


Psalms, ijiterlin. 

Basle, A 

'7- Ζ 


Job, Prov.,Eccl., 
Cant., Sap. 

Basle, B, 



EccL, Prov. 
(part), Cant., 
schol. (xi) 


, I 


Job fxiv) 




Job, Prov.,Eccl., 
Cant, (xiv) 


) 3 


Psalms, ijita'lin. 

Paris, Nat. Reg. Or. 

Latin (xi) 



Psalms (xii) 

Paris, Nat. Colbert. 

Gr. 26 


Psalms (xiv) 


B. M. Harl. 


Psalms (xiv) 



B. M. Harl. 


Psalms, cant. 


B. M. Harl. 

(A.D. 1283) 



Psalms, cant. 


B. M. Harl. 




Psalms {wiperf.) 


B. M. Harl. 

(xi — xii) 



Psalms (xii — 


B. M. Harl. 




Psalms, cajit. 


B. M. Harl. 




Psalms, cant. 


B. M. Harl. 




Psalms, cajit. 


B. M. Harl. 

(A.D. 1488) 



Psalms, cajit. 


B. M. Harl. 


Psalms {Latin, 


B. M. Harl. 

Arabic) (a.d. 


1 1 53) 


Psalms (xi) 




Psalms, ca?ti. 


B. M. Harl. 

An uncial MS. La- 
garde's D(P8) {Speci- 
men, p. 2, cf. Ank. 
p. 27) 

Wetstein, Λ"^. Τ. i. 32 

Klostermann, p. 39 

Field, ii. p. 2 ; cf. 6, 
309, and Auct. 22. 
Cf. Klostermann, 
pp. 16, 39 

Mamtscripts of the Septuagint. 





















Psalms {imperf.) Paris, Nat. Gr. 27 

cani. (xiii) 
Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 40 

(A.D. 1059) 
Psalms, catit. Paris, Nat. Gr. 41 

Psalms, emit. Paris, Nat. Gr. 42 

Psalms, cat.{yl\\) Cod.DucisSaxo-Goth. 
Psalms, i"«;z/.(xi) Rome, Chigi 4 
Psalms, cant. Rome, Chigi 5 

Psalms, couim. Vienna, Th. Gr. 17 

(ix— x) 
Psalms, co7}ini. Vienna, Th. Gr. 18 

Psalms, coimn. Vienna, Th. Gr. 13 

VszXms {i7nperf.) St Germain 10 
V S3\rs\s {i7nperf.) St Germain 186 

Psalms, cant. St Germain 13 
Vs3\t[\s {imperf.) St Germain 187 

An uncial MS. La- 
garde's H(P«) {Speci- 
men^ p. 3). Often 
agrees with 156 

An uncial MS. La- 
garde's YS"^"^) {Speci- 
men, p. 3) 

Psalms, cant. St Germain 188 

Psalms (/?;z/6'^) Paris, Nat. Gr. 13 

cant, (xiii) 

Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 21 


Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 22 


Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 23 


Psalms (inc. ii. Paris, Nat. Gr. 25 

3), cant, (xii) 

Psalms, cant. Paris, Nat. Gr. 29 


Psalms (xi) Modena, Est. 37 

Psalms, cajit. Oxford, Bodl. Barocc. Cf. Nestle, Septna- 
15 gintastud. iii. p. 14 

Psalms, cant. Oxford, Bodl. Barocc. 


Psalms, ca?it., Oxford, Bodl. Cromw. 

comm. no 

S. S. 



Manuscripts of tJie Septuagint. 


Psalms, ca?it., 

Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 

prayers (a.D. 




Psalms {tmpe7'f.) 

Oxford, Bodl. Laud. 

schol.^ prayers 



Psalms, cafit. 

Cambridge, Trin. 


Psalms, caiit. 

Cambridge, Gonville 

Facsimile in Harris, 


& Caius Coll. 348 

Leicester codex 


Psalms (z;;z/i'^). 

Tiibingen, (cod. 




Psalms (xiv) 

[Cod. Demetrii v.] 


Psalms, cant. 


Rome, Vat. Gr. 1541 


Psalms {ijnperf.) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1542 


Psalms {t7?ipe7'f.) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1848 


Psalms, cartt. 


Rome, Vat. Gr. 1870 


Psalms, cajtt. 
(a.D. loii) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1873 

Klostermann, p. 13 


Psalms, caftt. (x) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1927 


Psalms, cant. 
(a.D. 1029) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 341 


Psalms, li. — liii. 

(xiii — xiv) 



Psalms, cant. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 20 

220 = 

= 186 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 13 


Psalms, ix. — cl., 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 16 


Psalms, cant. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 21 


Psalms, cant. 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 22 


Psalms, cajit. 


Bologna, 720 


Psalms, ca7it.^ 
prayers (x) 

Rome, Barber, i 


Psalms {ifnperf.) 
cant.^ prayers 

Job, &c. (xiii) 

Rome, Barber. 2 


Rome, Vat. Gr. 1764 


,..Prov., Eccl., 

London, B. M. Harl. 




..Prov., Eccl., 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 346 

Hexaplaric readings. 

Cant., Job, 

Field, ii. p. 2 

Sap., Sir., &c. 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 163 

249. Job, Sap., Sir., Rome, Vat. Pius i Field, /. c. 


250. Job (xiv) Munich, Elect. 148 Field, I.e. 

251. Job, (frt/.. Psalms Florence, Laur. v. 27 


252. Job, Prov.,Eccl., Florence, Laur. viii. Field, I.e.; cf. p. 309 

Cant, (ix — x) 27 and Auct. p. 2 

253. Job, Prov. (xi — Rome, Vat. Gr. 336 Klostermann, p. 17 

xiv) ff. Gebhardt, Die 

Psabncn Salomo's 
p. 25 ff. 

254. Job, Prov. (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 337 

255. Job (ix) Rome, Vat. Gr. 338 Field,ii.p,2. Kloster- 

mann, p. 69 ff. 

256. Job, schol. (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 697 Field, I.e. 

257. Job, coDwi. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 743 

258. Job,(:i7/.,/zV/.(ix) Rome, Vat. Gr. 749 Field, I.e. Kloster- 

mann, p. 68 

259. Job, sehol. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 230 Field, /. e. Kloster- 

mann, p. I I 

260. Job, eat.., Prov. Copenhagen, Roj-al 


261. Job, Prov., Eccl., Florence, Laur. vii. 30 

Sap. (xiv) 

263. Psalms Copenhagen, Royal 


264. Psalms, cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 398 Cf. Field, ii. p. 84 f., 

and Auct. p. 11 

265. Psalms, cant.., Rome, Vat. Gr. 381 

piet. (xiv) 

266. Psalms (imperf.) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2101 


267. Psalms, cant. Rome, Vat. Gr. 294 


268. Psalms, cofmn., Rome, Vat. Gr. 2057 Cf. Field, ii. p. 84 


269. Psalms, comin. Rome, Vat. Gr. Pal. 

A then. (a.d. 44 


270. Psalms, cant. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1864 


271. Psalms, comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1747 


272. Psalms (imperf.) Rome, Vat. Gr. 247 

cat. (xiii) 

273. Psalms, ίΤΛ/. (xiv) Rome, Vat., Reg. Gr. Cf. Field, ii. p. 84 


II — 2 


Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 












Psalms {ijnpe?'/.) 

C07)ijn. (xiii) 
= 221 

Psalms, ca7it. 
Psalms (xii — 

Psalms, cant. 

(xiii — xiv) 
Psalms (xi) 
Psalms (xi) 
Psalms (xv) 
Psalms (xii) 
Psalms, ca7it. 

Psalms, cant. 

Psalms, comvi. 

Psalms {ufiperf.) 

comm. (xii) 
Psalms, coniin. 

That, (xii) 
Psalms, conwi. 


Psalms, cant. 
Psalms (xi — xii) 
Psalms, cat. (xi) 
Psalms, metr. 

paraphr. (xv) 
Psalms, Ixxi. 14, 

-Ixxxi. 7,cxxvii. 

3 — cxxix. 6, 

cxxxv. 1 1 — 

cxxxvi. I, 

cxxxvii. 4-cxli. 

21 (?xiii) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 343 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 1874 

Vienna, Th. Gr. 24 
Florence, Laur. v. 23 

Florence, Laur. v. 35 

Florence, Laur. v. 5 
Florence, Laur. v. 18 
Florence, Laur. v. 25 
Florence, Laur. vi. 36 
Florence, Laur. v. 17 

Florence, Laur. v. 34 

Florence, Laur. v. 30 

Florence, Laur. v. 14 

Florence, Laur. xi. 5 

Florence, Laur. ix. 2 

Florence, Laur. 
Florence, Laur. v. 39 
Florence, Laur. vi. 3 
Florence, Laur. v. 37 

Cambridge, Emma- 
nuel College 

Lagarde calls it Ρ in 
Genesis gj-aece, but 
N(P^) in the Speci- 
men. Apparently a 
copy in a Western 
hand of an early 
cursive Psalter; see 
M. R. James in 
Proceedings of the 
Ca nibridg e An ti- 
qiia7-ian Society^ 
1892— 3, p. i68iif.i ' 

1 Other Psalters used by Lagarde {Specimen, p. 3f.) are St Gall 17 (ix). 
= G^P">; Munich 251= Up"; a Bamberg Graeco-Latin MS. and a Cologne 
MS. closely related to it, which he calls W and Ζ respectively. 

Majiuscripts of the Septnagint. 


295. Prov., coinui. Rome, Vat. Ottob. 

Pi'ocop. (xiv) Gr. 56 

296. Prov. — Sir. (xiii) Rome, Vat. Palat. Gr. 

297. Prov.,6i?/;/;;z.(xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1802 

298. Eccl.,<f(5';/z;;/.(xii) [Cod. Eugenii 3] 

299. Eccl., Comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1694 Klostermann, p. 29 f. 

Gre^. Nyss.^aL 

300. Cant., cojnni. [Cod. Eugenii 3] 

302. Prov....(ix)= 109 

(D) Prophetical Books. 

22. Prophets (xi — London, B. M. Res 

xii; i. B. 2 

24. Isaiah, cat. (xii) [Cod. Demetrii i.] 

26. Prophets (?xi) Rome, Vat. Gr. 556 

■})'}). Dan.. Jer.. cat. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1 154 


34. Dan. (xii) 

35. Dan. (xii) 

36. Prophets (xiii) 

40. Dodecaprophe- 

ton (xii) 

41. Isa., Jer. (ix — x) 

42. Ezek., Dan. (xi 

— xii) 

46. ..Isa., Jer., Bar., 
Lam., Ep. 

Ezek., Dan., 
Minor Pro- 
phets... (xiv) 

48. Prophets (xii) 

Rome, Vat. Gr. 803 
Rome, Vat. Gr. 866 
Rome, Vat. Gr. 347 

[Cod. Dorothei iii.] 

[Cod. Demetrii ii.] 
[Cod. Demetrii iii.] 

Paris, Nat. Coisl. Gr. 

Rome, \^at. Gr. 1794 

Field, ii. p. 428f. Cor- 
nilPs I 

Hesychian fCornill, 
Ceriani) : cp. Klos- 
termann, p. 10 f. 

Originally belonged 
to same codex as 
Vat. gr. 1 153 : see 
Klostermann, p. 1 1. 
Cp. notes on 97, 238 

Klostermann, p. 11 n. 

Lucianic (Field). 

Cornill's ο 

Lucianic (Field) 

49. Prophets (xi) Florence, Laur. xi. 4 

Lucianic (Field), Cor- 
nill's 77. Kloster- 
mann, pp. 1 1, 14 

Hesychius, Cornill's κ 

1 66 Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 

51. Prophets (xi) Florence, Laur. x. 8 Lucianic (Field). 

Cornill's θ 
58... Prophets (xiii) Rome, \'at. Reg. Gr. On the text of Daniel 
10 inthisMS.seeKlos- 

termann, p. 12 
62. Prophets (xiii) Oxford, New Coll. Lucianic (Field). 

Field, ii. p. 907 ; 
Burkitt, Tyconius^ 
p. cviii ; Kloster- 
mann, p. 51 
68...Ezek.,Dodecapr. Venice, St Mark's, Gr. Hesychian. Cornill's 

(xv) 5 ^ 

70... Prophets (x — xi) Munich, Gr. 372 (for- 
merly at Augsburg) 

86. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Rome, Barber, v. 45 Field, ii. p. 939. Wal- 

Dodecapr.(.?ix) ton, vi. 131 f.; Klos- 

termann, p. 50 

87. Prophets (.^ ix) Rome, Chigi 2 Hesychian. Cornill's 

/3. For the relation 
of 87 to 91 and 96 
see Faulhaber Die 
Prophete7i - catenen 
(Freiburg, 1899) 

88. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Rome, Chigi 3 87 in Field (ii. p. 766). 

Dan. (LXX.) O.T. in Greek (iii. 

(?xi) p. xiii.). Cf. Klos- 

termann, p. 31 

89. Daniel (xi) = 239 

90. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Florence, Laur. v. 9 Lucianic (Field) ; in 

Dan., cat. (xi) Ezekiel, Hesychian 

ace. to Cornill : 
Cornill's λ 

91. Prophets, cat. Rome, Vat. Ottob. Gr. Hesychian (Cornill). 

(xi) 452 Cornill's μ. See 

note on 87 
93... Isa. (xiv) London, B. M. Reg. Lucianic (Field) 

i. D. 2 

95. Dodecaproph., Vienna, Th. Gr. 163 Lucianic (Cornill) 

co7nin. Theod. 

96. Isa., Jer., Ezek., Copenhagen See note on Ζη 


97. Dodecapr., Isa., Rome, Vat. Gr. 1153 See note on "^i 

cat. (x) 
1 05,.. Fragments of London, B. M. Bur- 
Prophets, &c. ney 
(xiii — xiv) 

Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 167 

io7...Isa., Jer.j Ezek., Ferrara, Gr. 187 

Dan., Minor 

Prophets to • 

Micah (xv) 
109. . . I saiahjiTrt/. = 302 
114. Dodecaproph., Erora, Carthus. 2 

CO mm. Theod. 

122. ..Prophets (xv) Venice, St Mark's, 

Gr. 6 
1 3 1... Prophets (.''xii) Vienna, Th. Gr. 23 
147. ..Dan, (imperf.), Oxford, Bodl. Laud. Lucianic (cf. Field, ii. 

Dodecaproph. 30 p. 907) 

148. Daniel (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2025 

153. Prophets (exc. Rome, Vat. Gr. 273 Lucianic (Cornill) 

Zech.), comm. 

1 85... Dodecaproph. Vienna, Th. Gr. 18 Lucianic (Cornill) 

198. Prophets (im- Paris, Nat. Gr. 14 =Ev. 33. Burkitt, 

perf.) (ix) Tyconius^ p. cviii 

228... Prophets (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1764 Hesychian (Cornill, 

but cf. Kloster- 
mann, p. I3f. Cor- 
nill's Φ) 

229. ]^x.^Ozxi.^co7nm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 673 


230. Daniel (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1641 

231. Jer. with Baruch Rome, Vat, Gr. 1670 From Grotta Ferrata. 

&c. (xi) Lucianic,Corniirs t. 

Cp. Klostermann, 
p. 14 

232. Daniel (xii) Rome, Vat. Gr, 2000 A Basilian MS., cp. 

Klostermann, p. 15 

233. Prophets (xiii) Rome, Vat. Gr. 2067 Lucianic (Field) 

234. Susanna Moscow, Syn. 341 

235. Susanna Rome, Vat. Gr. 2048 

238. Ezekiel, i:<2/. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 1 153 Hesychian (Cornill). 

Cornill's 5". See 
notes on 33, 97 

239. Prophets (A.D. 

1046) = 89 

240. Dodecapr., cat. Florence, Laur. vi, 22 

(A.D. 1286) 
301. Isaiah (ix) Vienna, Th. Gr. 158 


= 109 

1 68 Manuscripts of the Septuagint. 

303. Isaiah, covim. Vienna, Th. Gr. 100 

30^. Isaiah i. — xxv. Florence, Laur. iv. 2 

comtn. Basil. 


305. Isaiah (imperf.), Copenhagen, Reg. 


306. Isa., Ezek. (xi) Paris, Nat. Gr. 16 

307. Isaiah, comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 430 

Basil, (xi) 

308. Isaiah, comm. Rome, Vat. Gr. 1509 Lucianic (Field) 

Basil. a?id 

Thdt. (xiii) 

309. Isaiah, cat. (x) Rome, Vat. Gr. 755 Cf. Klostermann, p. 


310. Dodecapr.,Jir//i?/. Moscow, Syn. 209 

3 II... Prophets (xi) = 

...Prophets (ix, Jerusalem, H. Sepul- 
med.) chre 2 

III. Lectionaries. 

From the second century the Greek-speaking Churches, 
following the example of the Hellenistic Synagogue, read the 
Greek Old Testament in their public assemblies. 

Justin, .^^i?/. i. 67 τα συγγράμματα των προφητών αν αγιρώσκ^ται. 
Cofist. αρ. ϋ. 57 /^fO"oy δε ο αναγνώστης βφ' ΰψηΧον tlvos €στώί 
άναγινωσκ€τω τα Μωσβ'ω? κα\ Ίησον τον Νανη, τα των Κριτών καϊ 
των Βασιλειών κ.τ.λ. Ibid. viii. 5 Μ^'"" "^Ψ άνάγνωσιν τον νόμου κα\ 
των προφητών. ChryS. in Rom. xxiv. 3 ό μάτην €ντανθα ίΙσ€λθών, 
eiVe TLS προφήτης, τις απόστολος σήμερον δί€λ€χθη. 

At a later time the ανάγνωσης or α,ναγνωσματα were copied 
consecutively for ecclesiastical use. 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 con- 
tents would doubtless be of interest, not only from a liturgical 

^ Specimens are given by H. Omont, Facsimiles des plus anciens Jl/SS. 
Grecs (Paris, 1892), nos. xx. — xxii. 

Manuscripts of the Septiiagint. 169 

point of view, but for the light which it would throw on the 
ecclesiastical distribution of various types of text. Little has 
been done as yet in this direction, and our information, such as 
it is, relates chiefly to the N.T. 

See Matthaei, A^. T. Gr., ad fin. vol. i. ; Neale, Hoty Eastern 
Ckurch, General Intr., p. 369 ff.; 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, 
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- 
tions they are limited to those which are bound up with N.T. 
lections and have been catalogued under the head of N.T. 
lectionaries by Dr C. F. Gregory and Scrivener-Miller. 

London, Sion College, Arc. i. i (vi or vii) Gr. p. 720 (234, Scr. 227) 
B. M. Add. 1 1841 (? xi) Gr. p. 783 (79, Scr. 75) 

„ B. M. Add. 18212 (xi) Gr. p. 715 (191, Scr. 263) 

„ B. M. Add. 22744 (xiii) Gr. p. 731 (324, Scr. 272) 

„ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 42 (xiv) Gr. p. 730 (315, Scr. 253) 

„ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 44 (xv) Gr. p. 749 (476, Scr. 290) 

„ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 46 (xiii) Gr. p. 734 (84) 

„ Burdett-Coutts, iii. 53 (xv) Gr. p. 719 (226, Scr. 249) 

Oxford, Christ Church, Wake 14 (xii) Gr. p. 717 (207, Scr. 214) 
„ Christ Church, Wake 1 5 (a.d. 1068) Gr. p. 717(208, Scr. 215) 
Cambridge, Univ. Libr. Add. 1879 (? ^') (Gen. xi. 4 — 9, Prov. xiii. 

19 — xiv. 6, Sir. xxxvii. 
13— XXX viii. 6) : a frag- 
ment purchased from 
the executors of Tisch- 
„ Christ's College, F. i. 8 (xi) Gr. p. 714 (185, Scr. 222) 

= Z% WH. 59 
Ashburnham, 205 (xii) Gr. p. 720(237, Scr. 237-8) 

Paris, Nat. Gr. 308 (xiii) Gr. p. 779 (24) 

„ Nat. Gr. 243 (a.d. ι 133) Omont.MSS. Grecs dates^ 

no. xlvi. 

^ A few lectionaries have already been mentioned among the H.P. MSS. 
(37. 61, 132). 

170 Mamiscripts of the Septiiagiftt. 

Paris, Nat. suppl. Gr. 32 (xiii) 

Gr. p. 704 (84) 

Rome, Vat. Reg. Gr. 59 (xii) 

Gr. p. 757 (573, Scr. 


„ Vat. Gr. 168 (xiii or xiv) 

Gr. p. 786(188, Scr. 


„ Vat. Gr. 2012 (xv) 

Gr. p. 756(556, Scr. 


„ Barb. 18 (xiv) 

Gr. p. 780 (40) 

Grotta Ferrata, A' δ' 2 (χ) 

Gr. p. 748 (473, Scr. 


A' δ' 4 (xiii) 

Gr. p. 748 (475» Scr. 


Δ' β' 22 (xviii) 

Gr. p. 751 (506, Scr. 


Venice, St Mark's, i. 42 (xii) 

Gr. p. 724 (268, Scr. 


Treves, Bibl. Cath. 143 F (x or xi) 

Gr. p. 713(179) 

Athens, Nat. 86 (xiii) 

Gr. p. 745 (443) 

Salonica, 'ΈΧΚηνικον "γυμνασίου ώ' (xv 



Gr. p. 771 (837) 

Cairo, Patr. Alex. 927 (xv) 

Gr. p. 776 (759, Scr. 


Sinai, 748 (xv or xvi) 

Gr. p. 775 (900) 

„ 943 (a.D. 1697) 

Gr. p. 775 (908) 

St Saba, in tower, 16 (xii) 

Gr. p. 770 (829, Scr. 


Jerusalem, H. Sepulchre (xiii) 

Harris, p. 13 

Literature (on the general subject of this chapter). Stroth, 
in Eichhorn's Repertoriiwi (vi,, viii., xi.) ; the prolegomena to 
Grabe, Holmes and Parsons, Tischendorf, and The Old Testa- 
ment in Greek ; the prefaces to Lagarde's Ge7iesis graece^ Libr. 
V. T. Canon.^ p. i., Psalterii sped?nen ; Kenyon, Our Bible and 
the Aftcient MSS. ; Madan, Supnmary, p. 615 ff. (Holmes MSS., 
A.D. 1789— 1805); Nestle, l/rtext, p. 7 iff. 

The lists of MSS. given in this chapter must be regarded as 
tentative and incomplete. The student may supplement them 
to some extent by referring to recently published catalogues of 
MS. libraries, especially the following : V. Gardthausen, Catalogus 
codd. Graecorum Sitiaiticorum (Oxford, 1886); Papadopulos 
Kerameus, Ίίροσολυμιηκη Βιβλιοθήκη i. — iv. (St Petersburg, 1891 
— 1899); Sp. P. Lambros, Cata.logiie of the Greek MSS. on 
Mount Athos (Cambridge, vol. i., 1895; vol. ii. in type, but not 
yet published). He may also consult with advantage J. B. 
V'\\.x2i., Analecta sacra., iii. (1883), p. 551 ff. ; P. Batiffol, in Btdletin 
critiqtce., 1888, p. ii2ff. ; H. A. Redpath, in Academy, Oct. 22, 
1893; E. Klostermann's Analecta zur Septuaginta (1895). 

The first part of the Aviherst Papyri, edited by Messrs Grenfell and Hunt, which 
has just appeared (October, 1900), makes the following additions to the store of unused 
uncial fragments enumerated in pp. 146 — 8: _ 

(19) A papyrus leaf containing, with other F)iblical matter, Gen. i. 1—5 (LXX. and 
Aquila). The writing appears to be of the time of Constantine. 

(20) A leaf of a papyrus book, containing Ps. V. 6 — 12. Cent. v. or vi. 

(21) Fragment of a vellum leaf belonging to a Psalter, containing parts of Pss. Ivin., 
lix., in a hand " dating apparently from about the fifth century." 

(22) Fragments of Pss. cviii., cxviii., cx.xxv., cxxxviii.— cxl., from the leaves of a 
papyrus book written perhaps in cent. vii. 

(23) Fragmentof aleaf of apapyrusbook, conuining Jobi. 2if.,ii. 3. About cent. vu. 


Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 

The printed texts of the Septuagint fall naturally into two 
classes, viz. (i) those which contain or were intended to exhibit 
the whole of the Greek Old Testament; (2) those which are 
limited to a single book or to a group of books. 

I. Complete Editions. 

I. The first printed text of the whole Septuagint is that 
which forms the third column in the Old Testament of the 
great Complutensian Polyglott. This great Bible was printed 
at Alcalk {Coniplutuni) in Spain under the auspices of Francisco 
Ximenes de Cisneros, Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo. Ximenes, 
who, 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 
sheets pass through the press. He died Nov. 8, 15 17, and the 
fourth volume, which completes the Old Testament and was 
the last to be printed, bears the date July 10, 15 17. But the 
publication of the Polyglott was delayed for 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) 
is as follows: "Biblia sacra Polyglotta complectentia V.T. 

172 Printed Texts of the Septiiagiiit. 

Hebraico Graeco et Latino idiomate, N.T. Graecum et Lati- 
num, et vocabularium Hebraicum et Chaldaicum V.T. cum 
grammatica Hebraica necnon Dictionario Graeco. Studio 
opera et impensis Cardinalis Fr. Ximenes de Cisneros. In- 
dustria Arnoldi Gulielmi de Brocario artis impressorie magistri. 
Compluti, i5i4[— 15,— 17]." 

The O.T. volumes of the Complutensian Bible contain in 
three columns (i) the Hebrew text with the Targum of Onkelos, 
(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 Complu- 
tensian Lxx. Nevertheless we have the assurance of Ximenes 
that the greatest care was taken in the selection of the MSS. 
on which his texts were based". Of his own MSS. few remain, 
and among those which are preserved at Madrid there are 
only two which contain portions of the Greek Old Testament 
(Judges — Mace, and a Psalter). But he speaks of Greek 
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 con- 
struction 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. Testa- 
menti codices perquam humane ad nos misisti." 

■* See Vercellone, in V. ei N.T. ed. Mai, i. p. v. n. ; Var. lectt. ii. p. 
436; Dissertaziotii Accademicke, 1864, p. 407 ff.; Tregelles, An account of the 
printed text of the Greek N.T. (London, 1854), p. 2 ff. ; Delitzsch, Studien 
ztir Entstehungsgeschichte der Polyglotten Bibcl des Cardinals Ximenes 

Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 173 

reason to suppose that a Venice MS. (S. Marc. 5 ^ H.P. 68) 
was also employed ; a copy of this MS. still exists at Madrid. 

The editors of the Complutensian Polygott \vere the 
Spaniard Antonio de Nebrija, Professor of Rhetoric at Alcala, 
and his pupil Ferdinando Nunez de Guzman (Pincianus) ; Diego 
I.opez de Zuniga (Stunica) ; Juan de Vergara, Professor of 
Philosophy at Alcala ; 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 Λvhole 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 Complu- 
tensian Polyglott but before its publication, Andreas Asolanus\ 
father-in-law of the elder Aldus, issued from the Aldine press 
a complete edition of the Greek Bible bearing the title : Υίάντα. 
τά κατ 1^ογΎ\ν καλον /xeva βιβλίο., θζίας ^ηλα^η γραφής τταλαιας re 
καί veas. Sacrae scripturae veteris novaeque omnia. Colophon: 
Venetiis in aedib[us] Aldi et Andreae soceri. mdxviii., mense 

Like Ximenes, Andreas made it his business to examine the 
best 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, Septuagin- 
tastudien, 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. 

been found in his text of three at least of those MSS. (cod. ii = 
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 
the editions of (i) Joh. Lonicerus, Strassburg, 1526 — 8 ; (2).? with 
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. 

3. In 1587 a third great edition of the Greek Old Testa- 
ment was published at Rome under the auspices of Sixtus V. 
{editio Sixiina^ Romano). It bears the title: η πάλαια διαθήκη | 


The volume consists of 783 pages of text, followed by two 
of addenda and corrigenda, and preceded by three (un- 
numbered) leaves which contain (i) a dedicatory letter addressed 
to Sixtus V. by Cardinal Antonio Carafa, (2) a preface to the 
reader^ and (3) the papal authorisation of the book. These 
documents are so important for the history of the printed text 
that they must be given in full. 

(i) SixTO QuiNTO PoNTiF. MAX. Antonius Carafa 
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- 

Urtext, p. βί,. On the source of the Psalms in this edition see Nestle, 
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 1587. 

2 "Elle n'est point signee, mais on sait qu'elle fut redigee par Fulvio 
Orsini. Elle est d'ailleurs tres inferieure a la lettre de Carafa." (P. Batiffol, 
La Vaiicane de Paul III. a Paul F., p. 89). 

Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 175 

tuaginta Interpretum Biblia, quibus Ecclesia turn Graeca turn 
Latina iam inde ab Apostolorum temporibus usa est, ad fidem 
probatissimorum codicum emendarentur. Quod enim Sanctitas V. 
pro accurata sua in perlegendis divinis scripturis diligentia anim- 
advertisset, 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 e multiplici eaque confusaveterum 
interpretatione fluxisse; 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 
sapientiam magnopere admirer ; cum videam S. V. de Graecis 
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 deman- 
datum esset a Gregorio XIII., cuius cogitationes eo maxima 
spectabant ut Christiana Religio quam latissime propagaretur, 
operam dedi ut in celebrioribus Italiae bibliothecis optima quae- 
que 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 doc- 
trinam et multiplicem linguarum peritiam in locis obscurioribus 
mihi consulendum proposueram) persaepe examinatis et cum 
vestro Vaticanae bibliothecae (cui me benignitas vestra nuper 
praefecit) exemplari diligenter collatis ; intelleximus cum ex ipsa 
collatione tum e sacrorum veterum scriptorum consensione, 
Vaticanum codicem non solum vetustate verum etiam bonitate 
caeteris anteire ; quodque caput est, ad ipsam quam quaere- 
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 κατά 
Toiis €β8ομηκοντα, curavi do consilio et sententia eorum quos supra 
nominavi, huius libri editionem ad Vaticanum exemplar emen- 
dandam ; 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 

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 Printed Texts of the Septiiagint. 

fuerit absolutum; scilicet ut hoc praeclarum opus, vestro Sanctis- 
simo nomini dicatum, quasi monumentum quoddam perpetuum 
esset futurum apud omnes bonos et vestrae erga Rempublicam 
Christianam voluntatis et meae erga Sanctitatem vestram obser- 

(2) Praefatio ad Lectorem 

Qui sunt in sacrosanctis scripturis accuratius versati, fatentur 
omnes Graecam Septuaginta Interpretum editionem longe aliis 
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 ex- 
planatam 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, 
aliquibus locis non est probata. Hunc vero qui subsequuti sunt, 
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 
perverterit potius quam converterit sacros libros. Fuerunt 
praeter has apud Graecos aliae duae editiones incertae aucto- 
ritatis : altera Antonio Caracalla Imp. apud Hierichuntem, altera 
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 retinu- 
erunt. 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 modo possit, vel ipsis etiam Graecis scriptoribus testan- 
tibus et Niceta confirmante his plane verbis in commentario 
Psalmorum : τ]\ίύ^ hk και την τοιαΰτην '4κ^οσιν σ^βαζόμβνοι, τη 
των (β^ομηκοντα προσκ^ίμ^θα μάλιστα, δτι δι^ρημίνως την της 

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint. 177 

biakiKTov μ€ταβολ.ην ποίησάμ€νοι μίαν iv ίκάστοις evvoLav κα\ Xe^Lv 

Adeo Septuaginta Interpretum editio magni nominis apud 
omnes fuit ; nimirum quae instinctu quodam divinitatis elabo- 
rata bono generis humani prodierit in lucem. Sed haec etiam 
ipsa, quod in hexaplis ita primum ab Origene collocata 
fuerit ut eius e regione aliae editiones quo inter se comparari 
commodius possent ad legendum propositae essent, deinde 
vero varietates tantum ex iis ad illam sub obelis et asteriscis 
notari essent coeptae, factum est ut vetustate notis obliteratis 
insincera nimis et valde sui dissimilis ad nos pervenerit : quippe 
quae insertis ubique aliorum interpretationibus, aliquibus autem 
locis duplici atque etiam tnplici eiusdem sententiae interpre- 
tatione 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 
se sed a veteribus etiam scriptoribus dissensiones. Quod malum 
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 singu- 
larem 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 exe- 
quendam cum ille demandasset Antonio Carafae Cardinali, viro 
veteris sanctitatis et omnium honestarum artium cultori, nulla 
is interposita mora delectum habuit doctissimorum hominum 
qui domi suae statis diebus exemplaria manuscripta, quae 
permulta undique conquisierat, conferrent et ex iis optimas 
quasque lectiones elicerent ; quibus deinde cum codice V^ati- 
canae 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- 

Sed emendationis consilio iam explicato, ipsa quoque ratio 
quae in emendando adhibita est nunc erit aperienda, in primis- 
que 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. 

omnibus autem 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 emenda- 
tionem 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 ad- 
vectus nunc est Carafae Cardinalis : qui liber cum Vatican© 
codice ita in omnibus consentit ut credi possit ex eodem arche- 
typo 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 ortho- 
graphiam 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 ap- 
parebat 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- 

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 arche- 
typis exemplaribus reperiuntur descripta sunt, quo uniuscu- 
iusque arbitratu adiuvantibus libris restitui possint. Nee vero 
illud omittendum, quod item pertinet ad notationes ; non omnia 

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint. 179 

in lis repraesentata esse quae aut ad confirmandas lectiones 
Vaticanas e scriptoribus vulgatis, aut ad explenda quae in Sep- 
tuaginta non habentur, ex aliorum editionibus afferri potuissent, 
quod in communibus libris cum legantur, inde sibi unusquisque 
nullo negotio ea parare possit. Quae vero in libris manuscriptis 
reperta, vel ad indicandas antiquarum turn lectionum turn inter- 
pretationum varietates (sub scholii illas nomine, quod ipsarum 
incerta esset auctoritas, nonnunquam relatas) vel ad stabiliendam 
scripturam Vaticanam et eius obscuriores locos illustrandos per- 
tinere 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 
Propbetas et hos ipsos aliter dispositos ; deinde reliquos quat- 
tuor, quemadraodum vulgo editi sunt. Atque hunc ordinem 
verum esse intelligimus ex eo quod ilium agnoscunt et pro- 
bant 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- 

Maccabaeorum libri absunt ab hoc exemplari, atque item 
liber Genesis fere totus ; nam 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 
emendata sunt. 

Quod si aliqua videbuntur in hac editione, ut ait B. Hie- 
ronymus, vel lacerata vel inversa, quod ea sub obelis et aste- 
riscis 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 
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, dubi- 
tabit nemo qui banc cum ilia accurate comparaverit. 

Quae si doctis viris et pie sentientibus, ut aecjuum est, proba- 
buntur, reliquum erit ut Sixto V. Pont. Max. huius boni auctori 
gratias agant, et ab omnipotenti Deo publicis votis poscant, 

12 — 2 

1 80 ρ 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 
est quin Rep. Christiana optimis legibus et sanctissimis institutis 
per eum 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 improbi- 
tate corrupti, pro sua eximia benignitate ab omni labe vindicati, 
quam emendatissimi pervulgentur. 

(3) SixTUS Papa V. 

Ad perpetuam rei memoriam. Cupientes, quantum in nobis 
est, commissi nobis gregis saluti quacunque ratione ac via pro- 
spicere, 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 potui- 
mus, 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 recorda- 
tionis Gregorius Papa XIII. praedecessor noster, nobis sugge- 
rentibus, Graecum Vetus Testamentum iuxta Septuaginta Inter- 
pretum editionem, qua ipsi etiam Apostoli nonnunquam usi 
fuerunt, ad emendatissimorum codicum fidem expoliendum 
mandaverit; eius rei cura dilecto filio nostro Antonio Sanctae 
Romanae Ecclesiae Presb^'tero Cardinal! Carafae, et ad id per 
eum delectis eruditis aliquot viris demandata, et iam expolitio 
huiusmodi, permultis exemplaribus ex diversis Italiae bibliothecis 
et praecipue ex nostra Vaticana diligenter coUatis matureque 
examinatis, absoluta sit : \^olumus et sancimus ad Dei gloriam 
et Ecclesiae utilitatem, ut Vetus Graecum Testamentum iuxta 
Septuaginta ita recognitum et expolitum ab omnibus recipiatur 
ac retineatur, quo potissimum ad Latinae vulgatae editionis et 
veterum Sanctorum Patrum intelligentiam utantur. Prohibentes 
ne quis de hac nova Graeca editione audeat in posterum vel 
addendo vel demendo quicquam immutare. Si quis autem 
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. 
Tho. T/io/n. Giialterutius. 

The reader will not fail to note the intelligent appreciation 
of the Lxx., and the wide outlook over the history of the Greek 

Printed Texts of the Septuagint. i8i 

versions which are implied by these documents ^ They shew 
that the Vatican had already learnt the true value of the 
Alexandrian Old Testament and, as a consequence, had re- 
solved 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 ancient Church, and was now felt to be essential to a right 
understanding of the Fathers and of the Latin Vulgate. The 
inception of the work was due to Pope Sixtus himself, who 
had suggested it to his predecessor Gregory XIII. in 1578; 
but the execution was entrusted to Cardinal Antonio Carafa 
and a little band of Roman scholars including Cardinal Sirleto, 
Antonio Agelli, and Petrus Morinus. Search was made in the 
libraries of Italy as well as in the \^atican for MSS. of the lxx., 
but the result of these enquiries satisfied the editors of the 
superiority of the great Vatican Codex (B = cod. \^at. gr. 1209) 
over all other 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 identi- 
fied with S. Marc. cod. gr. 1 (H. P. 23, Lag. V); a MS. belong- 
ing to Carafa, possibly cod. \^at. gr. 1252 (H. P. 63 -i- 129, cf. 
Klostermann, p. 12 f., and Batiffol, Bulletin critique^ 15 Mars 
1889), and certain Laurentian MSS. of which collations are 
still preserved in the Vatican Library (Vat. gr. 124 1, 1242, 
1244; see Batiffol, La Vaticane, p. 90 f.). From these 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 
even to the correction of errors, as will appear from a 
comparison of the Sixtine text with the photographic represen- 
tation of the Vatican MS. The edition of 1587 is not an 
exact reproduction of a single codex, even where the selected 
MS. was available ; but it is based as a whole on a great uncial 

^ Cf. Tregelles, An accotint of the printed text, ore, p. 185. 
- According to Nestle {Scptitagintastiidien, i. p. 9, ii. p. 12) Genesis i. 
I — xlvi. 28 are supplied from cod. Chis. R. vi. 38 (H. P. 19, Lag. h). 

τ 82 Printed Texts of the Septiiagint. 

MS., and it is the first edition of the lxx. which possesses this 
character. Moreover, criticism has confirmed the judgement 
of the Roman editors in regard to the selection of their basal 
MS. It is 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. 

Besides the text the Roman edition contained considerable 
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. Jo. Morinus, Paris, 1628, 1641. 2. R. Daniel, London, 
4to and 8vo, 1653 ; Cambridge, 1653. 3. B. Walton, London, 
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, 
Amsterdam, 1683. 6. Leipzig, 1697 (with prolegomena by 
J. Frick). 7. L. Bos, Frankfort, 1709. 8. D. Mill, Amsterdam, 
1725. 9. C. Reineccius, Leipzig, 1730. 10. Halle, 1759 — 62 
^with a preface by J. G. Kirchner). 11. Holmes and Parsons, 
Oxford, 1798 — 1827. 12. Oxford, 181 7 (with introduction by 
J. [G.]^ Carpzow). 13. F. Valpy, London, 1819. 14, London, 
1 82 1, 26, 31, 51, 69, 78 (the LXX. column of Bagster's Polyglott). 
15. Venice, 1822. 16. Glasgow and London, 1827, 31. 17. L. 
Van Ess, Leipzig, 1824, 35, 55, 68, 79, 87 (prolegomena and epile- 
gomena 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. 

4. The example of Rome was followed in the iSth century 
by England, which had meanwhile acquired an uncial Bible 

^ The praefatio was reprinted with Archd. Churton's notes by Prof, W. 
Selwyn (Cambridge, 1855). 

- See Nestle, ScptuagintasUidicn , iii., p. 32, note/. 

Printed Texts of tJie SeptimgiJit. 183 

only 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, 
John Ernest Grabe, an adopted son of the University of Oxford. 
This edition appeared ultimately in four folio volumes (1707 — 
20), but only the first 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. 
respectively. Vol. i. (1707) contains the Octateuch, Vol. ii. 
(17 19) the Historical Books, Vol. iii. (1720) the Prophets, 
Vol. iv. (1709) the Poetical Books. The title to the first volume 
runs : '' Septuaginta | interpretum | tomus I | continens Octa- 
teuchum | quem | ex antiquissimo codice Alexandrino | accu- 
rate descriptum | et ope aliorum exemplarium, ac priscorum 
scriptorum | praesertim vero Hexaplaris editionis Origenianae | 
emendatum atque suppletum | additis saepe asteriscoram et 
obelorum signis | summa cura edidit | Joannes Ernestus Grabe 
S.T.P. I Oxonii, e theatro Sheldoniano | ...mdccvii." 

This title sufficiently indicates the general principles upon 
which this great undertaking was based. Like the Sixtine 
edition, Grabe's is in the main a presentation of the text 
exhibited in a single uncial codex ; like the Sixtine, but to a 
greater extent, its 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 
as Origen dealt with the κοινή, marking with an obelus 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. A (Walton's 
Prolego?nena, ed. Wrangham, ii. p. 124). His transcript of the MS. is still 
preserved at the British Museum (Harl. 7522 = Hohiies 241; see above, 
p. 152). 

184 Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 

risk before such as he believed to have been derived from 
Theodotion or some other non-Septuagintal source. If he 
constantly adds to his MS. or relegates its readings to the 
margin, such additions and substituted words are distinguished 
from the text of cod. A by being printed in a smaller type. 
So far as it professes to reproduce the text of the MS., his 
edition is substantially accurate. The prolegomena by which 
each volume is introduced are full and serviceable ; and the 
work as a whole, whatever may be thought of the method 
adopted by the editors, is creditable to the Biblical scholarship 
of the age. 

Grabe's text was reproduced by Breitinger (Zurich, 1730 — 2), 
and Reineccius (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 
( Veties Testameniuui Graece hixta LXX. hiterpretes. Receit- 
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 


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 
of a codex, or to provide a full apparatus criticus, the purpose 
of the editors in each case being practical rather than critical. 
This want was met in some degree in certain of the secondary 
editions; thus the Basle reprint of the Aldine text (1545) 
gave a short list of variants and conjectural emendations; in 
the London Polyglott the readings of Codex Alexandrinus 

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint. 185 

were printed underneath the Sixtine text, and those of Codex 
Sarravianus were exhibited in the Septuagint of Lambert Bos. 
But the first comprehensive effort in this direction was made by 
Robert Holmes (1748 — 1805), Professor of Poetry at Oxford, 
and Canon of Christ Church, and, from 1804, Dean of Win- 
chester. The preparations for his great work were begun in 
1788. An appeal was made to the liberality of pubhc bodies 
and private patrons of learning, and the task of collating MSS. 
was committed to a large number of scholars at 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 
(Holmes MSS. a.d. 1789 — 1805, nos. 16455 — 16617)^ which 
were deposited there during those seventeen years. In 1795 a 
specimen of the forthcoming work was published together with 
a transcript of the Vienna Genesis in a letter to the Bishop of 
Durham (Shute Barrington). Genesis appeared separately in 
1798, followed in the same year by the first volume bearing the 
title : Vetus Testainentiun Graeciun cum variis lectionibus, Edidit 
Roherius Holmes^ S.T.P.,i?.,5'.6'., Aedis Christi Cano?iicus. To7?ius 
primus. Oxofiii : e typographeo ClarendoJiiano. mdccxcviii. 
This volume, which contains the Pentateuch, with a preface 
and appendix, was the only one which Holmes lived to complete. 
He died Nov. 12, 1805, and two years later the editorship was 
entrusted to James Parsons^ under whose care the remaining 
volumes Avere issued (Vol. ii., Joshua — 2 Chronicles, 1810; 
Vol. iii., 2 Esdras — Canticles, 1823; Vol. iv., Prophets, 1827 ; 
Vol. v., the non-canonical books, i Esdras — 3 Maccabees, 1827). 
At the end of Vol. v. there is a list of the Greek MSS. collated 

1 Cf. Ch. Q. R., April 1899, p. 102. 

- Cf. Madan's Sumjuary catalogue of MSS. in the Bodleian: Eighteenth 
century collections, pp. 614 — 641. 

'^ On Holmes' less distinguished coadjutor see Ch. Q. R. p. 104. 
Parsons died in 1847 at the age of 85. 

1 86 Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 

for the work. Three hundred and eleven are enumerated (i. — 

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 

Parsons exhibits the evidence of the Old Latin versions so far 

as it had been collected by Sabatier, and of the Coptic (Mem- 

phitic 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 

printed text of the catena of Nicephorus (Leipzig, 1772 — 3), 

and J. F. Fischer's edition of cod. Lips. 361 (Leipzig, 1767 — 8)'. 

The great work of Holmes and Parsons has been severely 

criticised by later scholars, especially by Hatch ^ and Lagarde^. 

A vigorous defence of the Oxford editors will be found in a 

recent article in the Church Qiiarte?'ly Review (already quoted). 

It appears to be certain that every effort was made by Holmes 

to secure the services of the best scholars who were available 

for the 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 (^Copen- 
hagen). "The Armenian Version was chiefly collated by Her- 
mannus Breden-Kemp (1793) and F. C. Alter (1795— 1804), the 
latter also taking the Georgian . . the Slavonic . . Coptic . . and 
Bohemian Versions. The Arabic X'^ersions were undertaken 
by Paulus and Prof Ford, and the Syriac quotations in the Hor- 
reuin mystcrioriDH of Gregorius Bar-Hebraeus . . by Dr Holmes" 
(F. C. Madan, Summary catalogue, p. 640). 

But in so vast an accumulation of the labours of many 
workers it was impossible to maintain an uniform standard of 
merit; nor are the methods adopted by Holmes and his con- 

1 See above, p. 153. - Essays in Biblical Greeks p. 132. 

^ Libr. V. T. Canon, p. i. p. xv. 

Printed Texts of the Septtiagint. 187 

tinuator altogether such as would commend themselves at the 
present day. The work, is an almost unequalled monument 
of industry and learning, and will perhaps never be superseded 
as a storehouse of materials ; but it left abundant room for 
investigations conducted on other Hnes and among materials 
which were not accessible to Holmes and his associates. 

6. The next step was taken by A. F. C. von Tischendorf 
(1815 — 1874), who in the midst of his researches in Eastern 
libraries and his 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 ; 
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 esset, addita vero 
plena lectionis varietate ex tribus codicibus antiquissimis quos 
fere solos utpote editos confidenter adhibere licebat." The 
three MSS. employed by Tischendorf in his first edition (1850) 
were A (from Baber's facsimile), C (from his own facsimile), 
and FA, the portion of Cod. Sinaiticus which was published 
in 1846 ; in the third and fourth editions he was able to make 
further use of Cod. Sinaiticus, and to take into account Mai's 
edition of Cod. B. 

Since Tischendorf's death three more editions of his Septuagint 
have appeared — 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^ con- 
sisting 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 ί<; 
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 

^ Prolegg. § viii. 

1 88 Printed Texts of the Septuagint. 

was a collation of cod. A from the London photograph which 
appeared in 18S2 — 3. With these helps the reader of Tischen- 
dorf's Septuagint is able to correct and supplement the appara- 
tus, and to compare the text with that of cod. Β so far as it 
could be ascertained before the publication of the photograph. 

7. Another of the great Biblical scholars of the nineteenth 
century, Paul de Lagarde, commenced an edition of the Greek 
Old Testament, which was intended to be a definite step 
towards the reconstruction of the text. Lagarde's general 
plan was announced in Sym/fiicta ii. (1880), p. 137 ff., and in a 
modified and simpler form by a pamphlet published two years 
later {Aiikuiidigung einer ?ieuen Aiisgabe der griechische?i iiberset- 
zung des A.T.^ Gottingen, 1882). A beginning was made by 
the appearance of the first half of the text of the Lucianic 
recension {Librortcni V.T. ca?ionicorum pars prior Graece Pauli 
de Lagarde studio et su?npiibus edita, Gottingen, 1883). La- 
garde's untimely death in 1891 left this work incomplete, and 
though his papers are preserved at Gottingen, it is understood 
that 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 texts are given, with an apparatus, but Λvith this 
exception the text stands alone, and the reader knows only 
that it is an attempted reconstruction of Lucian, based upon 
six MSS. which are denoted af h in pz (H. P. 108, 82, 19, 93, 
118, 44). This is not the place to discuss Lagarde's critical 
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. 

8. In the spring of 1883 the Syndics of the Cambridge 

Printed Texts of the Septtmgint. 189 

University Press issued a notice that they had undertaken 
''^an edition of the Septuagint and Apocrypha with an ample 
apparatus criticus intended to provide material for a critical 
determination of the text," in which it was "proposed to give 
the variations of all the Greek uncial MSS., of select Greek 
cursive MSS., of the more important versions, and of the 
quotations made by Philo and the earlier and more important 
ecclesiastical writers." As a preliminary step they announced 
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 
Press in the year 1875, but was ultimately prevented by many 
preoccupations and failing health from carrying his project into 
execution. After undergoing various modifications 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 in particular the editor was largely indebted for 
counsel in matters of detail. The first edition of the portable 
text was completed in 1894 {The Old Testame^it in Greek 
according to the Septuagint^ vol. i., Genesis — 4 Regn., 1887; 
vol. ii., I Esdr. — Tobit, 1890 ; vol. iii., Hosea — 4 Mace, 
1894); a second and revised edition^ has now been carried 
through the press (vol. i., 1895 ; vol. ii., 1896 ; vol. iii., 1899). 
The larger Cambridge Septuagint has been entrusted to the 
joint editorship of the Rev. A. E. Brooke, Fellow of King's 
College, and Mr N. McLean, Fellow of Christ's College ; and 
the Octateuch, which will form the first volume, may be 
expected in the course of a few years. It will reproduce the 
text of the manual Septuagint, but the apparatus will embrace, 
according to the original purpose of the Syndics, the evi- 

^ 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 Printed Texts of the Septtiagint. 

dence of all the uncial MSS., and of a considerable number 
of cursives "selected after careful investigation Λvith 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 made of the quotations in 
Josephus as well as those in Philo and the more important 
Christian fathers. Such an apparatus will fall far short of that 
presented by Holmes and Parsons, in regard to the quantity 
of evidence amassed; but efforts are being made to secure a 
relatively high degree of accuracy, and the materials will be 
selected and arranged in such a manner as to enable the 
reader to study the grouping of the MSS. and other authorities. 
Thus the Avork will proceed upon the principle formulated by 
Lagarde : "editionem Veteris Testamenti Graeci...collatis in- 
tegris codicum familiis esse curandam, nam familiis non acce- 
dere auctoritatem e codicibus, sed codicibus e familiis'." 

A word may be added with regard to the text w^hich will be 
common to the manual and the larger edition of the Cam- 
bridge Septuagint. It is that of the great Vatican MS., with 
its lacunae supplied from the uncial MS. which occupies the 
next place in point of age or importance. For a text formed 
in this way no more can be claimed than that it represents on 
the whole the oldest form of the Septuagint to be found in any 
one of our extant MSS. But it supphes at least an excellent 
standard of comparison, and until a critical text has been 
produced-, it 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, I 
(Genesis only published). 

^ V. T. Libr. can. praef. p. xvi. 

2 Cf. E. Nestle, Zur Rckonstriiktion der Septiiaginta, in F/iiiologus, 
N. F. xii. {1899), p. 121 ff. 

Printed Texts of the Septtiagint. 191 


P. A. de Lagarde, Leipzig, 1868: Genesis graece e fide editio- 
nis Sixtinae addita scriphirae discrepantia e libris maim scj'iptis 
a se collatis et edd. Compliitensi et Aldina adciiratisshne enotata. 
The MSS. employed are ADEFGS, 29, 31, 44, 122, 130, 135. 
The text is preceded by useful lists of the available uncial MSS. 
and VSS. of the LXX. 


C. L. F. Hamann, Jena, 1874: Canticzim Moysi ex Psalterio 
quadruplici . . .maim scripto quod Bambergae asservatitr. 


A. Masius, Antwerp, 1574 : losicae impei'atoris historiae. 
Readings are given from the Codex Syro-hexaplaris Ambrosi- 


J. Ussher, 1655 (in his Syntagma., Works, vol. vii.). Two 
texts in parallel columns (i) "ex codice Romano," (2) "ex codice 

O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1867 : liber ludiciim secundum Ixx. 
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 recen- 
sion of the book exhibited by K, 54, 59, 75, 82, and Theodoret.] 


Drusius, 1586, 1632. 

L. Bos, Jena, 1788 : Rtcth ex versione Ixx. interpretiim secun- 
dum exemplar Vaticanum. 

O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1867 '- 'Ρονθ κατά tovs ο'. 


Separate editions of the Greek Psalter were published at 
Milan, 1481 (Bonacursius) ; Venice, i486; Venice, before 1498 
(Aldus Manutius); Basle, 15 16 (in Hieronymi Opera., t. viii., 
ed. Pellicanus); Genoa, iz,i6{0ctaplum Psalteriiim fustiniani); 
Cologne, 15 18 {Psalterium in iv. Unguis cura lohannis Potkeii). 
Other known editions bear the dates 1524, 1530 {^Ps. sextuplex\ 

192 Printed Texts of the Septtiagint. 

1533, 1541, 1543, 1549, 1557, 1559, 1571, 1584, 1602, 1618, 1627, 
1632, 1643, 1678 (the Psalter of cod. A), 1737, 1757, 1825, 1852, 
1857, 1879 {Ps. tetraglotton, ed. Nestle), 1880, 1887 (Lagarde, 
Novae psalterii gr. editioiiis specimeji), 1889 (Swete, The Psalms 
in Greek ace. to the LXX., with the Canticles \ 2nd ed. 1896), 
1892 (Lagarde, quinquagena prima). 


Patrick Young, 1657 (in the Catena of Nicetas). 
Franeker, 1663. 


J. Ussher, 1655 (in his Syntagma^ Works, vol. vii.). Two 
texts, one Hexaplaric from an Arundel MS. (H. P. 93). A second 
edition, Leipzig, 1695. 

O. F. Fritzsche, Zurich, 1848: ^Εσθηρ. Duplicem libri textum 
ad opt. Codd. emendavit et cum selecta lectionis varietate edidit. 
The Greek additions appear also in his Libri apocryphi V. T. 
(see below). 


J. Philippeaux, Paris, 1636 ; Hos. i. — iv., after Cod. Q. 
D. Parens, Heidelberg, 1605 : Hoseas commentariis illus- 


Vater, Halle, 18 10. 


S. Miinster, 1524, 1543. 


S. Miinster, 1540 (in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin). 
J. Curter, Paris, 1580 (in Procopii commentarii in lesaiam — 
the text of Cod. Q). 


S. λIϋnster, 1540. 

G. L. Spohn, Leipzig, 1794 : feremias vates e vers. Judaeorum 
Alex, ac reliquorum interpretum Gr.\ 2nd ed., 1824. 


Kyper, Basle, 1552 : Libri tres de re gram m. Hebr. ling. (Hebr., 
Gr., Lat.). 

Printed Texts of the Septiiagint. 193 

Ίβ^€κΐ77λ κατά rovs ο', Rome, 1840. 

Daniel (Theod.). 
Ph. Melanchthon, 1546. 
Wells, 1 7 16. 

Daniel (lxx.). 

S. de Magistris (?), Rome, 1772 : Da7iiel secundum lxx. ex 
tetraplis Origenis 7iu?ic primuni editus e singulai'i Chlsiaiio 
codice. Reprinted at Gottingen, 1773, 1774 (Michaelis) ; at 
Utrecht, 1775 (Segaar) ; at Milan, 1788 (Bugati) ; and at Leipzig, 
1845 (Hahn). The lxx. text is also given in the editions of 
Holmes and Parsons, Tischendorf, and Swete. 

Non-Canonical Books (in general). 

J. 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 

O. F. Fritzsche, Leipzig, 1871 : Libri apoc?ypki V. T. gr.... 
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- 

W. J. Deane, Oxford, 1881 : The Book of Wisdom^ the Greek 
text., the Latiji Vulgate, and the A. V.j with an introductioti, 
critical apparatics, and commentary. 

Wisdom of Sirach. 

D. Hoeschel, Augsburg, 1604: Sapientia Sirachi s. Ε cele- 
stas ticus, collatis lectioiiibiis var cum notts. 

Linde, Dantzig, 1795: Sente?itiae lesu Sii'acidae ad fidem 
codd. et versionu7n. 

Bretschneider, Regensburg, 1806: Liber lesu Siracidae. 

Cowley-Neubauer, Original Heb7'e'w of a portio7i of Eccle- 
siasticus, &c. (Oxford, 1897); Schechter-Taylor, lVisdo7n of Be 71 
Sira (Cambridge, 1899J. 

S. S. 


194 Printed Texts of the Septuagint, 


Reusch, Bonn, 1870 : Libellus Tobit e cod. Siiiaitico. 

Kneucker, Leipzig, 1879. 

Psalms of Solomon. 

J. L. de la Cerda, in an appendix to his Adversai'ia Sacra, 
Lyons, 1626. 

J. A. Fabricius, in Codex pseudepigraphus V. T., Hamburg 
and Leipzig, 171 5. 

A. Hilgenfeld, in Zeitschrift fiir wissensch. Th. xi., and in 
Messias ludaeorimi, Leipzig, 1869. 

E. E. Geiger, Augsburg, 1871 : Der Psalter Saloind's heraiis- 
^e get 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- 

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 of). 

The fragments [in Ep. Jud. 14, 15 ; the Chronography of 
G. Syncellus (ed. W. 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 archtolo- 
giqtie fran^aise an Caire., ix., Paris, 1892] have been collected 
by Dillmann, iiber den 7ieufufide?ien gr. Text des He7ioch-buches 
(1893); Lods, Livre d'He7ioch (1893); Charles, Book of E7ioch., 
(1893), and are printed with an apparatus in the O. T. i/i Greek, 
vol. lii., 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1899). 

Literature (upon the general subject of this chapter). 

Le Long-Masch, ii. p. 262 ff., Fabricius-Harles, p. 6ηι ff., 
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. 






Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of 
THE Books. 

The Greek Old Testament, as known to us through the 
few codices which contain it as a whole, and from the lists 
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 common to both, 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 
vestige in the Hebrew canon, besides large additions to the 
contents of more than one of the Hebrew books. These 
differences are of much 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 Titles, Grouping, Ntimber, and Order of Books. 

I. The following tables shew (A) the Hebrew, Greek, and 
Latin titles of the canonical books of the Old Testament ; 
(B) the order and grouping of the books in (i) lists of Jewish 
origin, (2) the great uncial MSS. of the Greek Bible, (3) patris- 
tic and synodical lists of the {a) Eastern, {b) Western Church. 

A. Titles of the Books. 


Transliteration i 


Vulgate Latin 





rm^ n^«} 

OveXe σμώθ 








"Αμμε$ φεκωδείμ^ 



Dnn^nn n^N* 

"E\e αδδζβαράμ 




Ιωσουβ βεν "^ούν 







Οι)α/χ/Λέλχ Ααβίδ'^ 

ία, β' 

Βασιλβιων { 

(I, ^ 

Regum < 

U. 4 

•in^vci^, τ\\ψ\ 




•ΊΠ^ρτ, π^^ΡΙ"! 




















1 As given by Origen ap. Eus. H. E. vi. 25. 

2 I.e. Dn-li??) ^^T\ 'fifth of the precepts'; cf. the Mishnic title ΊΏΟ 
DH-lpS (Ryle, Canon of the 0. T., p. 294). Jerome transliterates the ini- 
tial word, vayedabbe)' \ cf. Epiph. (Lagarde, 6>W7/«V^z ii. 178), ούαϊδαβήρ, 
η έστιν 'Αριθμών. 

^ I.e. ΊΠ "^^ΏΠ") (first two words of ι Kmgs i.), Jl/a/ac/ii'm, Jerome ; 
δμαλαχείμ, EjMphanius. 

Titles, Groiipmg, Nicmber, and Oj^der of Books. 199 




Vulgate Latin 







D-im, D-in: 



















Σ0άρ ^eXXei> 

Ψαλ,αοί, Ψαλτή- 











□η^^π Ύ2ί^ 

Σϊρ άσσφίμ 

Ασμα, ξ,σματα 

Canticum canti- 






Threni, Lamen- 





.. . „ 











Esdras i , 2 


Ααβρη ίαμβίν 

α', β' 

I, 2 

^ With variants Μεσλώ^, ΜισΧώθ (leg. for. 'ΜσΧώθ). Masaloth, Jerome; 
δμ^θαΚώθ, Epiphanius. 

" Origen includes Ruth with Judges under Σαφατ€ίμ. 

^ Epiph. /.c. : ?στί δε και άλλη μικρά βίβλοί η KaXelrac Κινώθ [Mishn. 
Πυ''ΡΊ, ijris ερμηνεύεται Qpijuos 'Ιερεμίου. 

200 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

Β (i). Order of the Books in Jewish Lists' 



German & 




French MSS. 



I Torah 





II Neblim 



















I, 2 Samuel 





I, 2 Kings 
















xii Prophets 

xii Prophets 

xii Prophets 

xii Prophets 













III Kethiibim 





















Song of Songs 

J Proverbs 

Song of Songs 






Song of Songs Song of Songs Lamentations 

Song of Songs Lamentations 

























I, 2 Chronicles 

1 This list has been adapted from Ryle, Canon of the O.T. (table 
following p. 280). 

Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 20 1 

Β (2). Order of the Books in Uncial MS. Bibles. 

Codex Vaticanus (B) 

Codex Sinaiticus (Ν) 







' λριθμοί 










BaaiXeLibv a' — δ' 


ΙίαραΚατΓο μένων α' , β' 

Ha pa\e LIT μένων a , [β''\ 

"Εσδρα^ α', β' 

"Εσδραζ [α], β' 








Μακκαβαίων α', δ' 



Σοφία Σαλωμωνοζ 


Σοφία Σβιράχ 

θρήνοι Ί€ρ€μίου 

























'Ayy aios 







Ψαλμοί Αάδ ρνα' [subscr.) 


Τίαροιμίαι [ + Σολομωντο$ stibscr.'] 




''Ασμα ασμάτων 

Έττιστολη Ιερεμίου 

Σοφία Σαλομωντος 


Σοφία Ίησοΰ νιου Σβιράχ 



202 Titles^ Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

Codex Alexandrinus (A) 

Codex Basiliano-Venetus (N+V) 

ret-eais κόσμου 


"E^oSos At7U7rT0i; 



(Ν) AeviTLKOv 





'1ησοΰ$ vibs Χαυη 




Ύούθ [όμοΰ βφλία η'] 


Βασιλείων α — δ' 

Βασιλειών α — δ' 

ΐΙαραλειτΓομένων α', β' [όμοΰ βφλία Γ'] 

Ιϊαραλειπομένων α', β' 

Προφηταί ιΓ' 

"Εσδραί [α], β' 

'Ώσηβ α 


Άμώ$ β' 


Μιχαία? y' 

Ίωήλ δ' 


Άβδεωύ e 

(V) Ίώβ (subscr.) 

Ίωναα ζ"' 


Ί^αούμ ξ'' 


Άμβακούμ τ] 

"Ασμα ασμάτων 

'Σοφονίο.'ΐ θ' 

Σοφία Σολομωντο% 

'Kyyaio'i l 

Σοφία Ίησοΰ υίοΰ Σιράχ 

Ζαχαρία5 ια 


Μαλαχία? ιβ' 


'Hcratas ττροφητψ ly 


le/oe/itas ■προφ'ητη$ ιδ 




Qprjvos [ + Ίερε/χίου, siibsci'.] 


Έττιστολή Ύβρεμίου 


'1ε^€κιηλ ττροφητψ le 


Αανί-ηλ [ + ΐΓροφήτη$ ι5"', caia/.] 




Ύωβίτ {Τωβ€ίτ, sicbscr.) 




"E^pas α' ό lepeus {"Ea^pas a' iepevs, 




Έί/)α5 β' iepeus {"Ea^pas β' iepeus 


catal. ) 


Μακκαβαίων a' — δ' 


Ψαλτηρων [Παλμοί pv' καΐ ίδώypa- 


φοί α' siibscr., seq. φ'δαι ιδ'. Ψ'αλ- 


ττηρων μβτ' φδών catal.) 



Μακκαβαίων α — δ' 

Υ\.αροιμ!ιαι 'Ζο\ομωνΎθ% 


"Ασματα {".^σμα subscr.) ^σμάτων 

Σοφία Σo\oμώvτos (Σ. Σολομώνο$ 

subscr. ', + η Uavaperos, catal.) 

Σοφία Ίησοΰ υίοΰ Σιράχ {Σαράχ, 


Ψαλμοί Σολομωντο$, catal. 

Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 203 

Β (s) W• Order of the Books in Patristic and 
Synodical Lists of the Eastern Church. 

I. Melito {ap. Eus. H.E. iv. 26). 
Μωυσ6'ω5 ιτέντβ 


Ίησοΰ$ Ναυ•?7 

Βασί\€ίων τέσσαρα 
ΤΙαραλείΤΓομέρων δύο 
Ψαλμώι^ Δα^βίδ 

Σαλομωρο$ ΤΙαροιμίαι, η καΐ Σοφία^ 
''Ασμα ασμάτων 



Ύων δώδζκα iu μονοβίβΧφ 




2. Origen («/. Eus. H.E. vi. 25). 
'ϊησου5 υίόί ^αυή 

Έασιλειών α' — δ' 
Τίαραλεητομέρων α' , β' 
'Έσδρα$ α', β' 
Βίβλοί Ψαλμών 
Σολομώντο$ Τίαροιμίαι 
'Ασ^αα ασμάτων 
'Ιερεμίας συν θρήνοις και rg Έττι- 

στολ^ έν ένί 

"Εξω δε τούτων έστι 
Ύά Μακκαβαϊκά 

3• Athanasius {ep.fest. 39> 
Migne, P.G. xxvi. 1437). 


' Ιησούς ό του Ναυή 

Βασίλειων τέσσαρα βιβλία 
ΤίαραλεπΓομένων α' , β' 
"Εσδρας, α' , β' 
Βίβλος Ψαλμώί/ 

4- Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. iv. 35). 
At '^Α.ωσέως ττρώται πέντε βίβλοι 





Έξης δέ 

Ίησοΰ υιοΰ 'Ναυή 

Των Κριτών βιβλίον μετά της 'Ρουθ 
Ύων δέ λοιττών ιστορικών βιβλίων 

Βασιλειών α' — δ' 

ΙΙαραλειττομένων α', β' 

Του "Εσδρα α', β' 

Έσθήρ {δωδέκατη} 

' Cf. Eus. H. Ε. iv. 22 ό Tras των αρχαίων χορός ΐίανάρετον Σοφίαν τας 
Σολομώνος παροιμίας έκάλουν. 

204 Titles, Grotiping^ Number, and Order of Books. 

Κσμα ^.σμό,των 

Ot δώδεκα 
'lepe/itas λ-αΐ συν αύτφ Βαρούχ, 

θρήνοι, 'Έτηστολή 

"Εστί καΐ erepa βιβλία τούτων ^ξωθ€ν, 
ου κανονιζ'άμβνα μέν τετνττωμένα δέ 
τταρά των πατέρων άνα^ινώσκζσθαι 
Tois άρτι ττροσβρχομένοΐί... 

"Σοφία ΣοΧομώντοί 

Σοφία Σιράχ 




Τα δέ στιχηρά TUyxavei ττέντβ 


Βίβλοί Ψαλμών 



'^Α.σμα ρ,σμάτων {έτττακαιδέκατον 
ΈτΓΐ δ€ τούτοις τα προφητικά πέντε 

Ύών δώδεκα προφητών μία βίβλος 

'Ήσαίον μία 

Ιερεμίου [μία] μετά Βαρούχ και 
θρήνων και ^Επιστολής 


Αανιηλ {εικοστή δευτέρα βίβλος) 
Τα δε λοιπά πάντα ^ξω κείσθω εν δεν- 


5^ Epiphanius (/laer. ι. 












Ίησύΰ τον Ναι/ή 


Των Κριτών 


Της Ύούθ 

ΎοΟ Ίώβ 

Το Ψαλτηριον 

ΙΙαροιμίαι Σολομώντος 


Το "^Ασ/χα των ς,σμάτων 
-ι^'. Βασιλειών α — δ' 
ιθ'. ϋαραλειπομένων α, β' 

Το Αωδεκαπρόφητον 
. Ησαΐας 6 προφήτης 
. Ιερεμίας 6 προφήτης, μετά τών 
θρήνων και 'Επιστολών αύτοΰ 
τε και Βαρούχ 
. Ιεζεκιήλ 6 προφήτης 
. Αανιηλ ό προφήτης 
, κζ''."Εσδρα α', β' 
. Έσθήρ 

S^. Epiphanius (de t/iens. et po)id. 4). 

nevTe νομικαί {ή πεντάτευχος ή και 

{Τένεσις — Αευτερονόμιον) 

ΙΙέντε στιχήρεις 

{Ίώβ, Ψαλτήριον, ΙΙαροιμίαι Σα- 
λομώντος, 'Εκκλησιαστής, "Ασ/Λα 

"Αλλη πεντάτευχος, τά καλούμενα Τρα- 
φέια, παρά τισι δέ Ά-γιόΎραφα λε• 
Ύομενα {Ίησου του 'Saυή, βίβλος 
Κριτών μετά της "Ρουθ, ϋαραλει- 
πομένων α', β', Βασιλειών α', β', 
Βασιλειών y', δ') 

Ή προφητική πεντάτευχος {το δωδεκα- 
πρόφητον, Ήσαία5, Ιερεμίας, Ίεξ'ε- 
κιήλ, Αανιήλ) 

"Αλλαι δύο {τοΰ'Έσδρα δύο, μία λoyι- 
ζομένη, της Έσθήρ) 

Ή του Σολομώντος ή ϋανάρετος 

Ή του Ιησού του υιού Σειράχ 

Ή Σοφία του Σιράχ 

Ή [Σοφία] του Σολομώντος 

Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 205 

S'^. Epiphanius i^de jnefis. et pofid. 23). 
Veveais κόσμου 

"Ε^'οδο? των υίων 'Ισραήλ έξ Αί-γύπτου 
Το Αβντβρονόμων 
Ή του Ίησοΰ του Ναυη 
Ή του 'ϊώβ 
Ή των Κρίτων 
Ή TTjs '?ούθ 
Το Ψαλτηρων 
Ύών ΐΙαραλβίΤΓομένων α, β' 
Βασίλειων α — δ' 
Ή Τίαροίμιών 
Ό Εκκλησιαστής 
Το ''Ασμα των ασμάτων 
Το Αωδβκαττρόφητον 
Ίου προφήτου Ήσαώι; 
ΤοΟ Ίβρξμίου 
Του 'Ie^'€Ki7]\ 
Του Aavi7]\ 
Του "Έσδρα α', β' 
Τψ Έσθτίρ 

6. Gregory of Nazianzus {fianii. ι, xii. 5 fif.)- 

Bt'/SXot ίστορικαί ίβ' 

{Τέν€σίς,"Έξοδο$, Αβνιτικόν, 'Αριθ- 
μοί, AeOT^pos νόμο$, '1ησοΰ$, Kpt- 
ταί, 'ΈΌύθ, Ilpa^eis βασιΧήων, 
ίΙαραλ€ηΓ6μ€ναι, "Εσδραϊ) 

"Βίβλοι στιχηραι e' 

(Ίώβ, Ααυίδ, Tpels Σολομωντίαι, 
'Έκκλησιαστ7]$, ''Ασ/Λα, ]Iapot- 

Βίβλοι ιτροφητικαι e' 

(Οί δώδβκα — Ώση€,'Αμώ$, Μίχαία$, 
Ίωήλ, '1ωνοί$, Άβδία$, ^αόύμ, 
Άββακονμ, Σοφονίας, AyyaTos. 
Ζαχαρίας, Μαλαχία? — ^Ήσαία5. 
'lepe/xtas, Έ^€κιηλ, Αανιήλος) 

η. ΑχΆ-^\Άο<^\λΧ%{αά Seleiic. ap. Greg. Naz. 
cann. 11. vii., Migne, P.G. xxxvii. 1593). 

Ή -πεντάτευχος 

(Κτίσυ, "E^'oSos, Αευιτικόν, ^Αριθ- 
μοί, Αευτερονόμιον) 
Οί Κριταί 
Ή '?ούθ 
Βασιλειών α' — δ' 
Ίίαραλειπομένων α', β' 
"Εσδρας α', β' 
Στιχηραι βίβλοι e 

(Ίώβ, Ψαλμοί, τρεις Σολομώντος — 
Παροιρ,ίαι, Έκ-κΑτ/σίαστή^,'^Ασ^ιο 
ΙΙροφηται οί δώδεκα 

[Ώσηε, Άμώς, Μιχαίας, Ίωήλ, 
Άβδίας, Ίωνάς, Ι^αούμ, Άμβα- 
κούμ, Σοφονίας,Ά'γ'γα'ΐος, Ζαχα- 
ρίας, Μαλαχίας) 
ΤΙροφήται οΐ τέσσαρες 

(Ήσαίαϊ, Ιερεμίας, Ίεξ'εκιήλ, Δα- 
Toi^Tois προσεΎρκίνονσι την Έσθήρ 

8. Pseudo-Chrysostom (ijyw. script, sacr. 

praef.). Migne, P.G. Ivi. 513 sqq. 
To ιστορικόν, ώς 

Ή Τένεσις 

Ή "Εξοδο? 

Το Αευιτικόν 

Ot 'Αριθμοί \ ί' ' ' 

Τό Αευτερονόμιον^ ^ ^^ οκτατενχος) 

'ίησοΰς 6 του Ί^αυή 

Οί Κριταί 


At ΒασιλεΓαι α' — δ' 

Τό συμβουλευτικόν, ώς 

Αί ΙΙαροιμίαι 

Ή του Σιράχ Σοφία 

"Ο 'Εκκλησιαστής 

Τα "Ασματα τών ασμάτων 
Τό προφητικόν, ώς 

Οί δεκαέξ προφηταί 

Ύούθ (?) 


2o6 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

9. 2ΰίΌψις kv ίπιτόμω ap. 



Anonymi dial. Timothei et Aqiiilae. 

Septuagintast., i'i. p. 60 f.' 



Τα ΜωσαΙλ'ά 
α'. Vheai<i 



"Ε^οδοϊ <ττ Af 
ToAevcTiKOv Η Μωσα^.η 

β'. "Εξοδοι 


Oi 'Αριθμοί Te.rarevxos 

y'. AevLTLKOv 


To Αευτβρονόμιον 

δ'. 'Αριθμοί 


Ό τοΰ '^ανή 

e'. Α^υτβρονόμιον 


Οί Κριταί, μ€τά τψ 'Ρουθ 

Τα erepa 


Ύά Παραλειττόμενα α', β' 

5"'. '1ησοΰ$ 6 τοΰ Χαυη 


Των βασιλείων α', β' 

^'. Κρίταί 


Των /ϊασιλειώΐ' y', δ' 

η'. Ύούθ 



TeXos TTJs όκτατεύχου 


Το Ψαλτηριον τοΰ Δαυίδ 

Το τβτραβασίλεων 


At ΙΙαροιμίαι Σολομωντο^ 

θ'. BaaiXeiQu α' 


Ό ^Εκκλ-ησιαστψ., συν τοΐ$ " Α- 

ι'. Βασίλειώΐ' /3' 


ta'. Βασίλβιώί' γ' 

le . 

Τό δωδεκαπρόφητον Ήσαίαί, 

t/S'. Βασιλβιών δ' 

Ιερεμίας, Ίε'ζβκιήλ, Αανιηλ, 

ly'. ΐίαραλβίττόμενα α 


ίδ'. ΐίαραλειττόμενα β' 

κα' . 

, Ίονδίθ 

Le. "Εσδρα α 


. Έσθήρ 

Lg-'. "Εσδρα β' 


ι'ς'. Έσθήρ 


L7]. Ύωβίτ 

Ή Σοφία Σο\ομώντο5 

ώ'. Ίονδήθ 

Ή Σοφία Ίησοΰ υίοΰ Σιράχ 

κ'. Ίώβ 

Τοΰ Σολομωντοί 

κα'. Σοφία 

κβ' . ΥΙαροιμίαί 

Ky'. Έκκλησίαστ'η$ 

κδ'. "^Ασμα ασμάτων 

01 φ' ττροφηται 

κ€. 'ίίσηέ 

κζ". Άμώϊ 

κξ'. Μιχαίαϊ 

κη. Ίωτηλ 

κθ'. Άβδίού 

λ'. Ίωναί 

λα', ^αούμ 

λ/3'. Άββακούμ 

\y'. Σοφονίαί 

λδ'. ^Ayya'ios 

λε'. Ζαχαρία? 

λδ"'. Μαλαχία? 

Οί δ' μeyaKoL ττροφηταί 

λ^'. "Ησα•/α5 

λη. 'lepe^ttas 

λ^'. 'le^'eKLTjX 

μ. Αανιήλ 

T^Xos των ^ξ και δέκα 

, ττροφ-ητων 

μα'. Σοφία Ίησοΰ τοΰ Σι 


1 Lagarde, /.c: 

" ich wiederhole 

sie, von mir redigiert." 

Titles^ Groupings NiLnibe7% and Order of Books. 207 

II. Junilius de inst. reg. div. legis i. 3 fF. 
(ed. Kihn). 

Historia (xvii) 






lesu Nave 



Regnn. i — iv 

[Adiungunt plures Paralipome- 
non ii, lob i, Tobiae i, Es- 
drae ii, ludith i, Hester i, 
Macchabaeorum ii] 
Prophetia (xvii) 

Psalmorum cl 
















Proverbia (ii) 

Salomonis Proverbiorum 

lesu filii Sirach 

[Adiungunt quidam libr. vSapi- 
entiae et Cantica Cantico- 
Dogmatica (i) 


13. 'L•^Qτi\Λ.\x%{de SectisVi.'). 
Τά ιστορικά, βιβλία {ιβ') 

{Teveais, "E^oSos, 'Αριθμοί, Aeviri- 
κόν, Αευτβρορόμιορ' Ίησοΰ3 του 
'Savri, Κριταί, VouO, Aoyoi των 
βασιλ€ΐων α — δ', Πα/3αλεί7ΓΟ/χ.€- 
ναι, "Εσδρα$) 

12. Pseudo-Athanasii syu. scr. sacr. 
(Migne, /'.G. xxviii. 283 ff.). 





Ίησoΰs 6 του Ναυτ/ 



"Βασιλβιώρ α', β' 

ΒασιΧβιων y', δ' 

ΪΙαραΧβπΓομένων α', β' 

"Εσδρα$ α', β' 

ΨαΧτηριον Ααβιτικόν 

ΐίαροιμίαι Σολομώντοί 

Έκκ\ησιαστ-η$ του αύτου 

"Άσμα ασμάτων 


ΙΙροφηται δώδβκα eh iv άριθμούμβνοι 

'Ώ,σηβ, Άμώ$, '^lιχaίas, Ίωηλ, Άβ- 
διού, Ίωναί, Ί^αούμ, Άμβακούμ, 
'Σοφωνίαί, 'Ayyalos, Ζαχαρία?, 
Έξ9ι$ δε 'έτβροί τέσσαρες 




'Ektos δέ τούτων etVt ττάΧιν 'έτβρα 

/3ι/3λία κ. τ. Χ. (as in Athanasius, 

but adding 

'^ίακκαβαικα βιβλία δ' 
Ψαλμοί καΐ ωδη Σολομωντοζ 

14- John of Damascus (defide 07-thod. 
iv. 17). 

ΙΙρώτη ΤΓ€ντάτ€υχοί, η και νομοθεσία 
[Τένεσι^, "E^oSos, Αευιτικόν, 'Αριθ- 
μοί, Αβυτερονόμιον) 

Αευτέρα ττεντάτευχοί, τά καλούμενα 
Γραφεία, τταρά τισι δε Ά^ώ^ραφα 
(Ίτ/σοΟ? ό του Nay??» Kptrai μετά, 

2o8 Titles, Grouping, Number, ajid Order of Books. 

Τά Ίτροφητικά (e') 

{Ήσαία$, 'lepe/itas, Ίξ^εκιήλ, Δα- 
νιήλ, το Αωδβκαττρόφητον) 
Τά τταραινζτίκά (δ') 

(Ίώ/3, Τίαροιμίαι Σο\ομωντο$, Έκ- 
κλησίαστή$, το 'Ασ^ια τω?/ ^σ/^ά- 
των, το Ψαλτήριον) 

τή$ "Ρουθ, Βασιλειών α, β', Βασι- 
λειών y', δ', των ΐίαραλβιττομένων 

α', β'} 
Τρίτη ΤΓ€ντάτ€νχο$, at στιχηραι βίβλοι 
{του Ίώ/3, το Ψαλτήριον, Hapoi- 
μίαι Σολομώντοί, "Εκκλησιαστ-η$, 
του αύτοΰ, τά" Ασματα τών' Ασμά- 
των του αύτοΰ) 
Τετάρτη ττεντάτευχοζ ή προφητική 
(τό Αωδεκαττρόφητον, Ησαΐας, Ίε• 
ρεμία^, Ιεζεκιήλ, Δανιήλ) 
"Αλλαι δύο 

(τοΟΈσδρα α', β', ή 'Έσθήρ) 

Ή ΊΙανάρετοζ τ. έ. ή Σοφία του Σολο- 

Ή Σοφία τοΰ'Ιησοΰ 

15• Nicephorus, Stichometria. 
Α. "Οσαι εισι Ύραφαι έκκΧησιαζόμεναι 
καΐ κεκανονισμέναι 

α'. Τένεσι$ στίχ. ^δτ' 

β'. "Εξοδο$ στίχ. βω' 
Αενιτικόν στίχ. βψ' 
'Αριθμοί στίχ. ρ/φλ' 
Αευτερονόμιον στίχ. ,yp' 
'1ησοΰ$ στίχ. βρ' 
\\ριται και "Ρουθ στίχ. βυν' 
Βασιλειών α, β' στίχ. βσμ 
Βασιλειών y' , δ' στίχ. βσy' 
ΤΙαραλεητόμενα α, β' στίχ. ^εφ' 
"Εσδρα5 α', β' στίχ. ^εφ' 
Βίβλο$ Ψαλμών στίχ. ,ερ' 
ΙΙαροιμίαι Σολομώντο$ στίχ. 

ιδ'. Έκκλησιαστήί στίχ. ψν' 

ιε'. "^Ασ/χα ασμάτων στίχ. σπ' 
Ίώ/3 στίχ. ,αω' 
'Ή.σαία$ -προφήτης στίχ. ;^ω' 
Ίερεμίαί προφήτης στίχ. ^δ' 
Βαρούχ στίχ. ψ' 
Ίεζ^εκιήλ στίχ. ^δ' 
Δα^/ιηλ στίχ. β' 
Οί δώδεκα ττροφήται στίχ. ;y' 
'Ομού της παλαιά5 διαθήκης 
βίβλοι κβ'. 




ια . 








ι6. Ebedjesu {catal. libr. Eccl. , Assemani, 
ΒιόΙ. Or. iii. 5 f.). 



Liber sacerdotum 



Josue filii Nun 




Liber Dabariamin 


Psalmi David Regis 

Proverbia Salomonis 


Sirat Sirin 


Sapientia Magna 









Ν ahum 




Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 209 

B. "Οσαι avTiXeyovraL καΐ ουκ εκκλη- 




a. Μακκαβαϊκά y' στίχ. ,ζτ' 


β'. 'Σοφία Σολομωντοί στίχ. 



y'. Σοφία νιου του Σιραχ στίχ. 




δ'. Ψαλμοί και φδαι Σολομώντοί 


στίχ. βρ' 


e'. Έσθηρ στίχ. τν' 


ζ"'. Ίουδιθ στίχ. μψ' 


ζ'. Σωσάννα στίχ. φ' 

Daniel Minor 

η' . Ύωβίτ, 6 και Τω|8ία5 στίχ 


Epistola Baruch 

Liber traditionis Seniorurrr 

Josephi proverbia 

Historia filiorum Samonae [i.e. 

Maccab. iv] 
Liber Maccabaeorum (i — iii) 

17- Laodicene Canons (Ix.). 

18. Apostolic Canons (Ixxxiv.). 

a. Τέν€σι$ κόσμου 

Μ.ωυσέω$ ττέντβ 

β'. 'Έξοδο$ έξ Aίyύπτoυ 

{Τένβσι$, "Εξοδοϊ, AeviTiKov, 'Α- 

y . Αβυιτικόν 

ριθμοί, Αευτβρονόμιον) 

δ'. ^Αριθμοί 

Ίησοΰ5 λ^αυή 

€. Α€υτ€ρον6μιοΐ' 


Γ'. ΊησοΰΒ Ναυ?? 

Βασιλβιών τέσσαρα 

f'. Κριταί, "Ρουθ 
-η. 'Έ,σθηρ 

ΤΙαραλειττομένων δύο 

"Εσδρα δύο 

θ'. Βασιλ€ΐών α , β' 


ι'. Βασιλβιών y' , δ' 

Μακκαβαίων τρία 

ια. liapaXeiiTO μένων α', β' 


ιβ'. Έσδραϊ α , β' 


17'. BtjSXos Ψαλμών ρν' 

Σολομώντοί τρία 

ιδ'. ΙΙαροιμίαι Σολομώντοί 

{ΙΙαροιμίαι, 'Εκκλησιαστής, 

le'. 'Έκκλησιαστη$ 

'^Ασμα ς,σμάτων) 

ίζ"' .''Ασμα ασμάτων 

Τίροφητών δβκάδυο 'έν 

ιξ'. Ίώβ 

'Υίσαίου 'έν 

νη . Αώδ€κα προφηται 

Ίβρεμίου 'έν 

ιθ'. 'Ησαία5 

Ίβζ€ΚΙ^λ 'έν 

κ . Ίβρβμίαζ καΐ Βαρούχ, θρήνο 


Δαζ/ιήλ 'έν 


"Έιξωθίν δέ ττροσιστορείσθω μανθά- 

κα'. 'Ιβξ'βκιηλ 

veiv υμών τους νέου$ την Σοφίαν 

κβ'. ΑανιηΧ 

του ΤΓολυμαθοΰς Σιράχ 

ιρ. in Codd. Barocc. 206 

; Β. Μ. Add. 17469; Coisl. 120. 

Ilepi των |' βιβλίων, και 'όσα τούτων 

e. Αευτερονόμιον 


ζ"'. Ίησους 

α'. Τένβσΐί 

ξ'. ΚριταΙ καΐ 'Ρουθ 

β'. "Έξοδο$ 

η'-ια' . Βασιλειών α' — 8' 

y'. AeuLTLKov 

ιβ'. ΙΙαραλειττόμενα α', β' 

δ'. 'Αριθμοί 

ly'. Ίώβ 

S. S. 


210 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

ιδ'. Ψαλτηρίον 
te'. ΙΙαροίμίαι 

tf '. ^Ασμα ασμάτων 
ιη'. "Εσδραϊ 
ιθ'. Ώση€ 
κ'. 'λμώ$ 
κα. Μιχαία? 
κβ'. Ίωήλ 
κ-γ'. '1ωνα$ 
κδ'. Άβδωύ 
κβ'. "Ναούμ 
κζ"'. Άμβακούμ 
κξ". Σοφονίαζ 
κη'. 'Ayy alos 

κθ\ Ζαχαρία? 
λ'. Μαλαχία5 
λα'. 'Hcrataj 
λ/3'. Ίβρεμίαί 
\y'' 'ϊβζ'βκιήΧ 
\δ'. Δανιήλ^ 

Και δσα ^ξω των ξ' 

α'. Σοφία 'Σολομώντο$ 

β'. Σοφία Σιράχ 

y' —ζ'. Μακκαβαίων [α' — δ'] 

r. [Εσθηρ 

η'. Ίονδηθ 

θ'. Ύωβίτ 

Β (s) W• Order of the Books in Patristic and 
Synodical Lists of the Western Church. 

I. Hilary, /r£>/. in libr. Psalm. 
i— V. Moysi[s] libri quinque 
vi. lesu Naue 
vii. ludicum et Ruth 
viii. Regnorum i, ii 
ix. Regnorum iii, iv 
X. Paralipomenon i, ii 
xi. Sermones dierum Esdrae 
xii. Liber Psalmorum 
xiii — XV. Salomonis Proverbia, Ec- 
clesiastes, Canticum Canticorum 
xvi. Duodecim Prophetae 
xvii — xxii. Esaias, Jeremias cum 
Lamentatione et Epistola, Daniel, 
Ezekiel, Job, Hester 

[xxiii — xxiv. Tobias, Judith] - 

2. Ruffinus {CoDim. z« symb. 36). 

Moysi[s] quinque libri 

(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Nu- 
meri, Deuteronomium) 
lesus Naue 

ludicum, simul cum Ruth 
Regnorum iv 

Paralipomenon ( = Dierum liber) 
Esdrae ii 

(Esaias, leremiaSjEzechiel, Daniel, 
xii Prophetarum liber i) 

Psalmi David 
Salomon[is] iii 

(Proverbia, Ecclesiastes, Cantica 

Sapientia Salomonis 

Sapientia Sirach ( = Ecclesiasticus) 



Maccabaeorum libri 

1 The B.M. MS. counts Ruth as a separate book and after Daniel 
places the numeral \e'. 

2 " Quibusdam autem visum est additis Tobia et Judith xxiv libros 
secundum numerum Graecarum literarum connumerare. " 


Titles, Grouping, Ν limber, and Order of Books. 2 1 1 

3. AM'gxi%u.ViQ.{de doctr. Chr. ii. 13). 

[Historiae :] 

Quinque Moyseos [libri] 

(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, 
Numeri, Deuteronomium) 
lesu Naue 

Regnorum libri iv 
Paralipomenon libri ii 

Machabaeorum libri ii 
Esdrae libri ii 
Pi'ophetae : 

David liber Psalmorum 
Salamonis libri iii 

(Proverbiorum, Canticum Can- 
ticorum, Ecclesiastes) 
Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus ^ 
Prophetarum xii \ 

(Osee, loel, Amos, Ab- 
dias, lonas, Michaeas, 
Nahum, Habacuc, So- 
phonias, Aggaeus, Za- 
charias, Malachias) 
Prophetae iv maiorum volu- 

(Isaias, leremias, Daniel, 
Ezechiel) / 


4. Innocent I. (ep. ad Exsnperiiati). 

Moysi[s] libri quinque 

(Genesis, Exodi, Levitici, Nu- 
meri, Deuteronomii) 
lesu Naue 

Regnorum libri iv 

Prophetarum libri xvi 
Salomonis libri ν 
Historiarum : 





JNIachabaeorum libri ii 

Esdrae libri ii 

Paralipomenon libri ii 

5. Pseudo-Gelasius dccret. de libr. 
Moysis V libri : 





lesu Naue 
Regum i — iv 

6. Cassiodorius {de ifist. Div. litt. 14). 

lesu Nave 
Regum i — iv 
Paralipomenon i, ii 

^ Of the canonicity of these two books Augustine speaks with some 
reserve: "de quadam similitudine Salomonis esse dicuntur...qui tamen 
quoniam in auctoritatem recipi meruerunt inter propheticos numerandi 


2 1 2 Titles, Groupi7ig, Number, aiid Order of Books. 

Item libri prophetarum numero xvi : 

(Isaias, Ieremias,Ezechiel, Daniel, 
Osee, Amos, Michas, lohel, 
Abdias, lonas, Naum, Abacu, 
Sofonias, Agaeus, Zacharias, 

Paralipomena i, ii 

Psalmorum cl 

Salamonis libri iii 

(Proverbiorum, Ecclesiastes, 
Canticum Canticorum) 

Liber Sapientiae tilii Siracis 

Alius subsequens liber Sapientiae 
Item historiarum : 





Macchabaeorum libri ii 

Salomonis libri ν 

(Proverbia, Sapientia, Ecclesias- 
ticus, Ecclesiastes, Canticum 


(Isaias, Hieremias, Ezechiel, Da- 
niel, Osee, Amos, Michaeas, 
Joel, Abdias, Jonas, Naum, 
Abbacuc, Sofonias, Aggaeus, 
Zacharias, Malachias, qui et 





Esdrae [libri] ii 

Machabaeorum libri ii 

7. Isidorus {de ord. libr. s. scr.). 

1. Quinque libri Moyseos 

2. lesu Nave, ludicum, Ruth 

3. Regum i — iv, Paralipomenon i, 

ii, Tobiae, Esther, ludith, 
Esdrae, Machabaeorum libri 

Prophetae : Psahnorum liber i, 
Salomonis libri iii (Proverbi- 
orum, Ecclesiastes, Cantica 
Canticorum), Sapientia, Eccle- 
siasticus, libri xvi Propheta- 

Mommsen's List, cited by Zahn, Gesch. d. N. T. Kanons, ii. p. 143 f. ; Sanday, 

Sttidia Biblica, iii. p. 222 f. 

Libri canonici 

Genesis versus IIIDCC 
Exodus ver III 
Numeri ver III 
Leviticus ver IICCC 
Deuteronomium ver IIDCC 
Hiesu Nave vHr MDCCL 
ludicum ver MDCCL 

Fiunt libri vii ver XVIIIC 
Rut ver CCL _ 

Regnorum liber i ver IICCC 

Preuschen, Analecta, p. 138'. 

Regnorum liber ii ver IICC 
Regnorum liber iii ver IIDL 
Regnorum liber iv ver IICCL 
Fiunt versus VIIIID 

Paralipomenon liber i ver TlXL 

liber ii ver IIC 
Machabeorum liber i ver IICCC 
liber ii ver MDCCC 
lob ver MDCC 
Tobias ver DCCCC 
Hester ver DCC 

^ The text of Preuschen has been followed ; it is based on a St Gall 
MS. which appears to be less corrupt than the Cheltenham MS. used by 
Mommsen and others. 


Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 2 1 3 

ludit ver MC 
Psalmi Davitici cli ver V 
Salomonis ver YID 
Prophetaemaiores verXVCCCLXX 
numero IIII 
Esaias ver IIIDLXXX 

leremias ver IIIICCCCL 
Daniel ver MCCCL 
Ezechiel ver mCCCXL 
Prophetae xii ver IIIDCCC 
Erunt omnes versus numero 

9. List in Cod. Claroinontamis . 
Versus scribturamm sanctarum 
ita Genesis versus IIIID 
Exodus versus HIDCC 
Leviticum versus IIDCCC 
Numeri versus IIIDCL 
Deuteronomium ver. IIICCC 
lesu Nauve ver. II 
ludicum ver. II 
Rud ver. CCL 
Regnorum ver. 

primus liber ver. I ID 
secundus lib. ver. II 
tertius lib. ver. HDC 
quartus lib. ver. IICCCC 
Psalmi Davitici vei•. V 
Proverbia ver. IDC 
Aeclesiastes DC 
Cantica canticorum CCC 
Sapientia vers. Ϊ 
Sapientia IHU ver. flD 
XII Profetae ver. iTlCX 
Ossee ver. DXXX 
Amos ver. CCCCX 
Micheas ver. 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 
Malachiel ver. CC 
Eseias ver. IIIDC 
leremias ver. IIIILXX 

10. Liber sacramentoruin (Bobbio, cent, 
vi, vii). 

Liber Genesis 

Libri mulierum 



Maccabeonim libri duo 


Regum quattuor 
Prophetarum libri xvi 
Daviticum ν 
Solomonis iii 
Esdra i 

Fiunt libri Veteris numero 

214 Titles, Grouping, Ntimber, and Order of Books. 

Ezechiel ver. Π I DC 

Daniel ver. IDC 

Maccabeorum sic. 
lib. primus ver. IICCC 
lib. secundus ver. IICCC 
lib. quartus ver. I 

ludit ver. ICCC 

Hesdra rD_ 

Ester ver. I 

lob ver. IDC 

Tobias ver. I 

II. Council of Carthage, a.d. 397 (can. 

. 47 = 39)- 


lesu Xaue 

Regnorum libri iv 
Paralipomenon libri ii 

Psalterium Davidicum 
Salomonis libri ν 
xii libri Prophetarum 

Hesdrae libri ii 
Machabaeorum libri ii 

2. We may now proceed to consider the chief points 
which these tables illustrate. 

(i) The Titles of the Books. It will be seen that the 
Hebrew titles fall into three classes. They consist of either 
(i) the first word or words of the book (Genesis — Deuteronomy, 
Proverbs, Lamentations) ; or (2) the name of the hero or 
supposed author (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah and 
the other Prophets, Job, Ruth, Esther, Daniel, Ezra) ; or (3) a 
description of the contents (Psalms, Song of Songs, Chronicles). 
Titles of the second and third class are generally reproduced 
in the Greek ; there are some variations, as when Samuel 
and Kings become 'Kingdoms,' and 'Diaries' (D^p^n-n^l) 
is changed into Omissions' (IJapaXciTro'/xci^a^), but the system 
of nomenclature is the same. But titles of the first class 
disappear in the Greek, and in their place we find descriptive 
names, suggested in almost every case by words in the ver- 
1 Or less correctly uapaXetTro/uei/ac, ' omitted books,' as in some lists. 

Titles^ Groupings Number, and Order of Books. 215 

sion itself. Thus Genesis appears to come from Gen. ii. 4 
αυττ7 -η βίβλος γβνεσεως ovpavov και γης, Exodus from Ex. xix. I 
ττ7ς k^o^ov τΟ>ν υιών Ίσραϊ)λ Ικ γης ΑΙγντττον, Nitmbers from 
Num. i. 2 κατά αρίθμον ii ονόματος, Deuterono7ny from Deut. 
xvii. 18 ypdif/ei αντω το δευτίρονό/αιον τοντο eis βιβλίον^^ Kccle- 
siastes from Eccl. i. I ρήματα ΙκκΧ-ησιαστον. 

The Greek titles are probably of Alexandrian origin and 
pre-Christian use. Not only were they familiar to Origen (Eus. 
If. E. vi. 25), but they are used in Melito's list, although it 
came from Palestine. Some of them at least appear to have 
been known to the writers of the New Testament ; cf Acts 
ii. 30 €v βίβλω ψαλμών, xiii. 33 iv τω ψαλμω τω SetrripiD, Rom. 
ix. 25 iv τω Ώση€ Aeyei^ Philo^ USes Γενεσις, Έ^οδο?, Λευιτικόν 
or Λ€υίτικ?7 βίβλος, Δευτβρονο/αιον, Βασιλ€Ϊαι, ΐίαροιμίαι, but his 
practice is not quite constant; e.g. once or twice he calls 
Exodus η Έ^αγωγτ/^ ; Deuteronomy is sometimes η Έτηνομίς, 
and Judges η τών Κριμάτων^ βίβλος. Similar titles occur in 
the Mishna^, whether suggested by the Alexandrian Greek, or 
independently coined by the Palestinian Jews ; thus Genesis is 
HTV; ISp, Numbers Cjnspp 'D, Proverbs Πφ^Π 'D, Lamentations 

Through the Old Latin version the Greek titles passed into 
the Latin Bible ^ and from the Latin Bible into the later ver- 
sions of Western Christendom. In three instances, however, 
the influence of Jerome restored the Hebrew titles; i, 2 King- 

^ On this rendering see Driver, Deuteronomy, p. i. The Massora calls 

the book rr\^7\r\ Π3^ρ. 

2 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. In the 
former of these passages Philo ascribes this title to Moses. Yet ki^o.'yw'ii] 
does not like ^|o5os occur in the Alexandrian version of the book. 

5 Cf. the change from 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, 
O. L. and Itala, p. 4. 

2i6 Titles y Grouping, Ν umber ^ and Order of Books. 

doms have become i, 2 Samuel, and 3, 4 Kingdoms, i, 2 
Kings, whilst 'Chronicles,' representing the Hebrew Ω^ρ*Π"η.:5η^ 
has taken the place of Paralipomenon. 

Cf. Hieron. Prol. Gal. : " tertius sequitur Samuel^ quem nos 
Regnorinn primum et secundum dicimus; quartus Malachiin^ id 
est Reguin^ qui tertio et o^-axlo Regnorum volumine continetur... 
Septimus Dabre aianihn, id est 'Verba dierum,' quod significan- 
tius Chronicon totius divinae historiae possumus appellare." 

The Greek titles vary slightly in different codices and lists. 
Besides the variations of cod. A which appear in Table Β (2), 
the following are mentioned in the apparatus of Holmes and 
Parsons. Joshua : Ίτ^σοΰ? ό Ναι;?7, 6 τοΰ Savr], Judges : Kptrai 
rov Ισραήλ, ai των κριτών πράξας. Chronicles '. ΐίαραλαπομίνων 
των βα(ΤίΧ€ΐών ^lovda. Psalms: Δαυίδ προφήτου καΙ βασιλ€ως 
μ€λος. When Nehemiah is separated from Ezra its title is : 
τα 7Γ€ρΙ Nee /Αΐου or λόγοι Ν. νίοΰ Άχαλία. Α few further forms 
may be gleaned from the patristic lists. As an alternative for 

Τ1αραλ€ίπομ€νων the Apostolic Canons give τοΰ βιβλίου των ημ€- 
ρών, while Ezra is known to Hilary as sermones dierum Esdrae. 
The Psalter is sometimes βίβλος Ψαλμών, liber Psalmoruin, or 
Ψαλτηριον Ααβιτικόν, Psahni David regis, Psalte?'iu?n Daviti- 
CU7n, For ^Ασμα ασμάτων we have occasionally άσματα ασμάτων 
— a form rejected by Origen {ap. Eus. Ρί.Ξ. vi. 25 ov yap, ώ$• 
νπολαμβάνουσί Tives, "Ασματα ασμάτων), but used by Pseudo- 
Chrysostom 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 
δώ8€κα or Sficadvo, τών δώδεκα προφητών μία βίβλος, το δωδίκα- 
πρόφητον, prophetae xii ; the greater, o\ τίσσαρ^ς, prophetae iv, 
prophetae iv ?naioru7n volu??ii?iu??i, or simply maiores ; when 
the two collections are merged into one they become 01 δ^καί^ 
or 01 €κκαίδ€κα, το ίκκαώΐκαπρόφητον, prophetae xvi. 

(2) The Grouping of the Books. The methods of 
grouping adopted in the Hebrew and Alexandrian Greek 
Bibles differ not less widely than the nomenclature of the 
books. The Hebrew canon is uniformly tripartite, and " the 
books belonging to one division are never (by the Jews) trans- 
ferred to another ^" Its three 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. 

Titles, Grouping, Ntimber, and Order of Books. 2 1 7 

(n-jin), the Prophets (Q'i<?^), and the Writings (D^n-in?). 
The Massora recognised, however, certain subdivisions within 
the second and third groups ; the Prophets were classed 
as Former (Ω"'3'"ΐίί^ΝΊ), 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' (η'•ι?:ρ), i.e. Ruth, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamen- 
tations, Esther, made a subsection among the Kethub- 
im. The tripartite division of the canon was known at 
Alexandria in the second century B.C., for the writer of the 
prologue to Sirach refers to it more than once (if. rov νόμου 
Koi των προφητών καΐ των άλλων των κατ αντονς ηκολονθηκότων : 
6 f. του νομού και των ιτροφτητών και των άλλων ττατρίων βίβλίοίν : 
14 f• ό νόμοζ και at τΓροφ-ητίίαι και τα λοιττα των βιβλίων). It is 
also recognised in the New Testament, where the Law and the 
Prophets are mentioned as authoritative collections, and in one 
passage the ' Writings ' are represented by the Psalter (Lc. 
xxiv. 44 ττάντα τα -γζγραμμίνα iv τω νόμω Μωυσ€ω? καί, τοις 
ττροφηταις και ψαλμοΐζ). But the New Testament has no 
comprehensive name for the third group, and even Josephus 
{e. Ap. i. 8) speaks of four poetical books (probably Psalms, 
Job, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes) as forming with the Law and 
the Prophets the entire series of sacred books : the rest of 
the Hagiographa seem to have been counted by him among 
the Prophets-. At Alexandria the later books were probably 
attached to the canon by a looser bond. The writer of the 
De vita conteinplativa appears to recognise four groups^ (§ 3 
νόμους, και λόγια βίσττισΒίντα δια ττροφητών, και ύμνους, και τα 
άλλα οίς Ιττιστημη καΐ εύσε/^εια συναύ^ονται και τ€λ€ΐοί;ι/ται). 

Only the first of the three Palestinian groups remains undis- 

^ So already in Sir. xlix. 10 των φ' ττροφητών. 
- See Ryle, Canon of the O.T., p. 165 f. 

"* Unless we omit the comma after υμνον% and regard v. καΧ τα άλλα as 
= the Hagiographa; cf. Joseph, c. Ap. as quoted below, p. 220. 

2i8 Titles, Grouping, Ν timber, and Order of Books. 

turbed' in the Alexandrian Greek Bible, as it is preserved to us 
in MSS. and described in Christian lists. When the Law was 
translated into Greek, it was already a complete collection, 
hedged round with special sanctions, and in all forms of the 
Greek Bible it retains its precedence and has resisted any ex- 
tensive intrusion of foreign matter. It is otherwise with the 
Prophets and the Hagiographa. Neither of these groups 
escaped decomposition when it passed into the Greek Bible. 
The Former Prophets are usually separated from the Latter, 
the poetical books coming between. The Hagiographa are 
entirely broken up, the non-poetical books being divided 
between the histories and the prophets. This distribution is 
clearly due to the characteristically Alexandrian desire to 
arrange the books according to their literary character or 
contents, or their supposed authorship. Histories were made 
to consort with histories, prophetic and poetical writings with 
others of their respective kinds. On this principle Daniel 
is in all Greek codices and catalogues one of the Greater 
Prophets, while Ruth attaches itself to Judges, and Canticles 
to Ecclesiastes, 

In many of the Greek patristic Hsts the Alexandrian 
principle of grouping receives express recognition. Thus 
Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Leontius, 
divide the books of the Old Testament into (i) historical 
— 12, including the Mosaic Pentateuch; (2) poetical — 5; 
(3) prophetical — 5. Epiphanius, followed by John of Da- 
mascus, endeavours to combine this grouping with a system of 
pentateuchs^ — (i) legal, (2) poetical, (3) historical^ (4) pro- 

^ Yet even the Toiah was not always kept apart in the Greek Bible, as 
the names Octateuch and Heptateuch witness. 

2 Dr Sanday (in Studia Biblica, iii. p. 240) regards this as Palestinian, 
identifying it with Cyril's method. But Cyril begins \vith a dodecad 
(δωδεκάττ; ή Έσ^ηρ" καλ τα μ^ Ιστορικά ταΰτα). 

^ The term -γραψβΐα (ΰ^3•1Π2) or ά-γώ-γραφα is transferred to this group. 


Titles y Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 219 

phetical — an end which he attains by relegating Ezra and 
Esther to an appendix. Pseudo-Chrysostorn's arrangement is 
similar, though slightly different in some of its details ; 
according to his view the Bible began with an Octateuch, and 
the στιχηρά are broken up, the Psalter being placed with the 
Prophets, and the Salomonic books described as 'hortatory^' 
(το σνμβονλίντικόν). Even in the eccentric arrangement of 
Junilius^ the Greek method of grouping is clearly domi- 

The relative order of the groups in the Greek Bible, being 
of literary and not historical origin, is to some extent liable 
to variation. The 'five books of Moses' always claim 
precedence, and the ' rest of the histories ' follow, but the 
position of the poetical and prophetical books is less certain. 
Codex Β places the poetical books first, whilst in Codd. s and 
A the prophets precede. But the order of cod. Β is supported 
by the great majority of authorities both Eastern and Western 
(Melito, Origen, Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius (i, 3), Gregory, 
Amphilochius, the Laodicene and 'Apostolic' canons, Ni- 
cephorus, Pseudo-Chrysostom, the Cheltenham list, the 
African canons of 397, and Augustine). Two reasons may 
have combined to favour this arrangement. ' David ' and 
' Solomon ' were higher up the stream of time than Hosea 
and Isaiah. Moreover, it may have seemed fitting that the 
Prophets should immediately precede the Evangelists. 

(3) The Number of the Books. In our printed Hebrew 
Bibles the 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 

^ So Leontius (τά τταραινζτικά), but he classed the Psalter among 

2 See Kihn, Theodor v. Mopsuestia u. Juniliiis, p. 356 f. 

220 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

Chronicles \ were originally single books^ and the Minor Pro- 
phets were also counted as a single book. Thus the number 
is reduced to 24 (Law, 5; Former Prophets, 4; Latter Pro- 
phets, 4; Hagiographa, 11), and this answers to the prevalent 
Jewish tradition. On the other hand Josephus expressly limits 
the books to 22 (Law, 5; Prophets, 13; Hymns and moral 
pieces, 4). He has probably included the historical Hagio- 
grapha among the Prophets, and treated Ruth and Lamenta- 
tions as appendices to Judges and Jeremiah respectively. 

Both traditions were inherited by the Church, but the latter 
was predominant, especially in the East. In some lists indeed 
the twenty-two books became twenty-seven, the 'double books' 
being broken up into their parts (Epiph. ι)"*; in some a similar 
treatment of the Dodecapropheton raised the number to 34 
(the 'Sixty Books'), and there are other eccentricities of nume- 
ration which need not be mentioned here. 

Josephus, C. Ap. i. 8 : oh μνριά^ζς βφλίων ela\ παρ' ημϊν άσνμ- 
φώνων και μαχ^ομβνων, δυο δε μόνα προς τοΊς (ίκοσι βίβΧία,.,και 
τοντων πίντί μβν eVrt Μ.ωυσ4ως...οί μ€τα Μωνσην προφηται.,.σννέ- 
ΎραλΙ/αν iv τρισΧ κα\ δίκα βιβλίοις' αί de ΧοιπαΙ reaaapes ύμνους els 
τον θΐον κα\ τοί? άνθρωποις νποθηκας του βίου π^ρύχουσιν. He 
is followed by Origen ap. Eus. I.e. ουκ άγνοητ4ον δ' elvai ras 
€ν8ιαθηκους βίβΧους ως 'Ε/3ραίοι τταραδιδόασιι/, όσος 6 αριθμός 
των παρ' αύτοίς στοιχείων €στίν• and Cyril. Hier. catech. iv. 33 
ανα^ίνωσκ^ τας Ocias "γραφής, τάς βικοσι δυο βίβλους της παΧαιάς 
8ιαθηκης. Similarly Athanasius, ep. /est. 39 (Migne, P.G. xxvi. 
col. 1437). 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 /Ή and (fflr, and in jtl it follows Nehe- 
miah and forms the last book of the Canon (cf. Mt. xxiii. 35, and see 
Barnes, Chronicles, in the Caynbridge Bible, pp. x. — xiii.). 

2 The division probably began in the LXX. 

2 Jerome, Λ'ί?/. Gal.: "quinque a plerisque libri duplices aestimantur." 
As the twenty-two books answered to the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew 
alphabet, so these ' double books ' were thought to correspond to the 
'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, ωιά 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, ανταΊ άσιν αϊ άκοσι 
ίτττα βίβλοι αΙ €κ θ(ον doOelaaL τοϊς ^lov8aioLs, ('ίκοσι δυο δξ ως τα 
παρ^ αντοϊς στοιχεία των ^Εβραϊκών γραμμάτων άριθμονμζναι δια το 
διπΧοΰσθαί δέκα βίβΧουί els πέντζ Xeyo^eVas•• dial. ΤΐΙΠ. et Aq, 
(ed. Conybeare, p. 66), αύται al βίβΧοι αί θ^όπν^νστοι κα\ evdiaSe- 
τοι, kS*' μβν ούσαι, κβ be άριθμονμ^ναι δια το... (ζ αυτών διπΧονσθαι. 
On the other hand the numeration in 4 Esdr. xiv. 44 rests, if 
7ionge7iti qiiatuor be the true reading, on a tradition which 
makes the Hebrew books 24. This tradition is supported by 
the testimony of the Talmud and the Rabbinical literature \ and 
the Canon is known in Jewish Avritings by the name DHSD T'D, 
"the Twenty-Four Books." It finds a place in certain Western 
Christian writers, e.g. \^ictorinus of Petau comm. m 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 sup- 
putantur...quamquam nonnulli Ruth et Cinoth inter Hagio- 
grapha scriptitent et libros hos in suo putent numero supputan- 
dos et per hoc esse priscae legis libros viginti quatuor"). 

Let us now turn to the ecclesiastical lists and see how far 
the Hebrew Canon was maintained. 

Our earliest Christian list was obtained from Palestine '^ 
and probably represents the contents of the Palestinian Greek 
Bible. It is an attempt to answer the question, What is the 
true number and order of the books of the Old Testament? 
Both the titles and the grouping are ohviously Greek, but the 
books are exclusively those of the Hebrew canon. Esther 
does not appear, but the number of the books is twenty-two, if 
we are intended to count 1 — 4 Regn. as two, 

^ Cf. Ryle, Canon, pp. 157 f,, 222, 292 ; Sanday, op. cit. p. 236 ff. 

- Zahn offers a suggestion, to which Sanday inclines, that the writer 
refers to the Excerpta ex Theodoto which are partly preserved in the works 
of Clement of Alexandria. 

2 Melito ap. Eus. H.E. iv. 26 έττβιδη μαθεΐν την των τταΚαιων βιβλίων 
έβονλ'ηθη$ άκρίβξίαν, πόσα τον αριθμόν και όττοΓα την τάξιν €Ϊ€ν...άν€λθών e/s 
την άνατολην και έ'ωί του τόττου 'ένθα έκηρύχθη και έπράχθη...ίτΓ€μφά σοι. 

222 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

The next list comes from Origen. It belongs to his com- 
mentary on the first Psalm, which was written at Alexandria \ 
i.e. before a.d. 231. The books included in it are expressly 
said to be the twenty-two of the Hebrew canon {άσ\ δε at άκοσι 
δυο βίβλοι καθ' Έ/^ραιους αιδε). Yet among them are the first 
book of Esdras" and the Epistle of Jeremiah, which the Jews 
never recognised. With the addition of Baruch, Origen's list 
is repeated by Athanasius, Cyril, Epiphanius (i), and in the 
Laodicean canon ; Amphilochius mentions two books of 
Esdras, and it is at least possible that the Esdras of Gregory 
of Nazianzus is intended to include both books, and that the 
Epistle, or Baruch and the Epistle, are to be understood as 
forming part of Jeremiah in the lists both of Gregory and 
Amphilochius. Thus it appears that an expansion of the 
Hebrew canon, which involved no addition to the number of 
the books, was predominant in the East during the fourth 

The Eastern lists contain other books, but they are 
definitely placed outside the Canon. This practice seems to 
have begun with Origen, who after enumerating the twenty - 
two books adds, €^ω δε τοντων iarl τα Μακκαβαϊκά. Athanasius 
takes up the expression, but names other books — the two 
Wisdoms, Esther^, Judith, and Tobitl Palestine was perhaps 
naturally conservative in this matter ; Cyril will not allow his 
catechumens to go beyond the Canon, and Epiphanius men- 
tions only, and that with some hesitation, the two books of 
Wisdom [elal δε και αλλαι τταρ' αΰτοις βίβλοι iv αμφιλύκτω^... 

1 Eus. //.£. vi. 24• 

- 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 
("Εσδραϊ πρώτη, devripa iv evi). 

3 Cf. Melito's omission of Esther, and the note appended to the list of 

* The N.T. members of the same class are the Teaching and the 

5 Haer. i. i. x. 


Titles, Grouping, Nicmber, and Order of Books. 223 

αύται χρήσιμοι /xeV εισι και ωφέλιμοι, αλλ' etg αριθμόν ρητών 
ονκ αναφέρονται)^. And this was the prevalent attitude of the 
East even at a later time. There are exceptions ; Pseudo- 
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 upon the two Wisdoms, 'Ei/aperot μίν και καλαί, 
αλλ' ουκ αριθμούνται''. 

On the other hand the West, further from the home of the 
Hebrew canon, and knowing the Old Testament chiefly 
through the Latin version of the lxx., did not scruple to 
mingle non-canonical books with the canonical. Hilary and 
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 who wished to 
raise the number of the canonical books to twenty-four by 
including Tobit and Judith in the canon. From the end of 
the fourth century the inclusion of the non-canonical books in 
Western lists is a matter of course. Even Augustine has no 
scruples on the subject ; he makes the books of the Old 
Testament forty-four {de doctr. Chr. ii. 13 "his xliv libris 
Testamenti A^eteris terminatur auctoritas^"), and among them 
Tobit, Judith, and two books of Maccabees take rank with 
the histories; and the two Wisdoms, although he confesses that 
they were not the work of Solomon, are classed with the 

^ De mens, et pond. 4. 

- Like Origen, he explains that they form together but a single book 
{του "Εσδρα at δι/ο et's μίαν σννατττόμβναι βίβΧον). 

^ The non-canonical books (τά έ'^ω) are however carefully distinguished 
from real apocrypha when the latter are 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 maiori- 
bus appellati sunt." 

5 Cf. Retract, ii. 4. 

224 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

Prophets. His judgement was that of his Church (Cone. 
Carth. iii. can. xlvii. " sunt canonicae scripturae Salomonis libri 
quinque... Tobias, Judith... Machabaeorum libri duo"). The 
African Church had probably never known any other canon, 
and its belief prevailed wherever the Latin Bible was read. 

There can be little doubt that, notwithstanding the strict 
adherence of the Eastern lists 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, 
not the earlier tradition of the Church, but the corrected esti- 
mate of Christian scholars who had learned it from Jewish 
teachers. 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' places the story of Judith side by side with that of 
Esther ; the Wisdom of Sirach is cited by Barnabas- and 
the DidacJie^, and Tobit by Polycarp* ; Clement of Alex- 
andria^ and Origen appeal to Tobit and both the Wisdoms, 
to which Origen adds Judith''. Our earliest MSS. of the 
Greek Bible confirm the impression derived from the quota- 
tions of the earliest Christian writers. Their canon corre- 
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 
Lxx. Codd. Β Ν» A contain the two Wisdoms, Tobit, and 
Judith ; I — 2 Maccabees are added in X, and i — 4 Macca- 
bees in A; cod. C still exhibits the two Wisdoms, and when 
complete may have contained other books of the same class. 

^ r Cor. 55. 2 c. 19. 9. ^ c. 4. 

* Philipp. 10. ^ Strom, i. lo, v. 14. 

β Cf. Westcott in D.C.B. iv. p. 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 
or the will to distinguish them from the books of the Hebrew 
canon. In the light of the facts already produced, it is clear 
that the presence of the non-canonical books in Greek Bibles 
cannot be attributed to the skilled writers of the fourth and 
fifth centuries. They have but perpetuated an older tradition 
— a tradition probably inherited from the Alexandrian Jews. 

An explanation of the early mixture of non-canonical 
books with canonical may be found in the form under which 
the Greek Bible passed into the keeping of the Church. 
In the first century the material used for literary purposes 
was still almost exclusively papyrus, and the form was 
that of the roll'. But rolls of papyrus seldom contained 
more than a single work, and writings of any length, espe- 
cially if divided into books, were often transcribed into two or 
more separate rolls ^. The rolls were kept in boxes (κιβωτοί, 
κίσται, capsae, cistaeY, which served not only to preserve them, 
but to collect them in sets. 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 it in 
the 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. It is not a serious objection to this hypothesis 

1 See Kenyon, Palaeography of Greek papyri , pp. 24, 113 ff. 

2 lb. p. 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. 

S. S. 


220 Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 

that Philo does not quote the Apocrypha, and has no certain 
allusion to it\ A great scholar would not be deceived by the 
mixture of heterogeneous rolls, which might nevertheless 
seriously mislead ordinary readers, and start a false tradition 
in an unlettered community such as the Christian society of 
the first century. 

(4) The Internal Order of the Groups. Even in 
Jewish lists 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) Jere- 
miah, Isaiah, Ezekiel". The order of the Hagiographa varies 
more extensively. In the printed Bibles they are arranged in 
three subdivisions: (i) Psalms, Proverbs, Job; (2) Canticles, 
Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther (the five Megilloth) ; 
(3) Daniel, Ezra, Chronicles. The Talmudic order is as 
follows : Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, 
Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Chronicles. The MSS. vary, 
many agreeing with the printed Bibles ; others, especially those 
of Spanish provenajice, following the order : Chronicles, Psalms, 
Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, 
Esther, Daniel, Ezra^ 

In the lists of the Greek Bible and the sequence of its 
MSS. the Law and the ' Former Prophets ' generally retain 
their Hebrew order, with the noteworthy exception that Ruth 
is always attached to Judges. But there are also minor excep- 
tions which are of some interest. Even in the Pentateuch 
Melito, Leontius. and the Cheltenham list reverse the common 
order of Leviticus and Numbers'*. The sequence is broken in 
some lists after Ruth (Laod., Epiph. i), or even after Joshua 

' Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture, p. xxxiii. 

^ See Ryle, Canon, p. 225 ff. 

3 Ryle, ib., pp. 229 ff., 281 f. 

■* On this see Sanday, Sttidia Biblica, iii. p. 241. 

Titles, Grouping, Niimber, and Order of Books. 227 

(Epiph. 3^) or Deuteronomy (Epiph. 2). Occasionally 
Chronicles, which is an intruder from the Hagiographa, pre- 
cedes I — 4 Regn. (Epiph. 2, Dial. Tim. et Aq.), or drops 
out altogether (Ps.-Chrys., Junilius, Cod. Clarom.). All 
these disturbances of the normal order may be ascribed to 
local or individual influences, and find no support in the 
uncial MSS. of the Greek Bible. But it is otherwise when we 
come to the ' Latter Prophets ' and the Hagiographa. With 
regard to the Prophets, three questions of order arise, 
(i) There is the relative order of the Twelve and the Four. 
In the majority of patristic Hsts the Twelve precede (Ath., 
Cyr., Epiph., Greg., Amph., &c.), and this is also the order 
of Codd. A, B, N-V. But Cod. X begins with the Four, and 
it is supported by other authorities, chiefly Western (Ruff., 
Chelt., Ps.-Gelasius, Cassiodorius, Nicephorus) : whilst in a 
few the subdivisions are mixed (Melito, Junilius, Ebedjesu^). 
(2) The internal order of the Βω^βκαττρόφητον in most of the 
MSS. and catalogues^ where it is stated differs from the 
Hebrew order in regard to the relative positions of the pro- 
phets 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 

^ Ruth is attached to r Regn. in the Cheltenham list, and Augustine 
inclines to this arrangement (see Sanday, I.e., p. ■242). The result was to 
create a Heptateuch; for the word cf. J. E. B. Mayor, The Latin Hepta- 
teuch, 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. 
xxiii. (1895). 

2 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. 


228 Titles, Grouping, Ν timber, and Order of Books. 

Greek order of the Greater Prophets follows the oldest Hebrew 
tradition (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel), but it appends Lamenta- 
tions to Jeremiah, and enlarges the group by placing Daniel 
either before (Melito, Origen, Hilary, Chelt., Augustine), or, 
more usually, after Ezekiel. 

The relative order of the Hagiographa in the lxx. is more 
perplexing. For Ruth, Lamentations, and Daniel we have 
already accounted ; there remain Chronicles, Job, Psalms, 
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Esther, and Ezra. Chroni- 
cles, in accordance with the theory enshrined in its Greek 
name, usually follows Kings. Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, 
Canticles, for the most part hold together in that order, as a 
group of poetical books ; but there are many exceptions. 
' David ' sometimes goes with the Prophets (Ps.-Chrys., Juni- 
lius, Augustine, Isidorus), and the group is then regarded as 
'Salomonic,' or 'hortatory.' Lists which admit the two books 
of Wisdom usually join them to this subdivision (Ebedjesu, 
Carth., Augustine, Innocent, Cod. Clarom., Ps.-Gelasius, 
Cassiodorius, Isidorus). The internal order of the Salomonic 
books varies (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles ; Ecclesiastes, 
Canticles, Proverbs ; Proverbs, Canticles, Ecclesiastes) ; the 
Wisdoms usually 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, 
Innocent, Cod. Clarom., Ps.-Gelasius, Cassiodorius), or after 
the Prophets (Origen). The position of Esdras is not less 
uncertain ; its normal place is after Chronicles, but it is 
also found before or after the Prophets (Mehto, Epiph., 
John of Damascus, Cod. Barocc), or in connexion with a 
group of the apocryphal histories (cod. A, Carth., Augustine, 
&c.). Esther is still more erratic; sometimes it follows 
the poetical books, sometimes the Prophets, sometimes the 

Titles, Grouping, Number, and Order of Books. 229 

histories ; not a few lists place it among the antilegomena, 
or omit it altogether. When admitted to a place in the 
Canon, it is usually to be found at or near the end (Origen, 
Epiphanius, Amphilochius, John of Damascus, Hilary, Carth., 
Cod. Clarom., Ps.-Gelasius, Cassiodorius), and in company with 
apocryphal books, especially Judith^ and Tobit (codd. B^ίA, 
Chelt., Carth., Augustine, and the later Latin lists^). It seems 
as if the doubt which the Jewish authorities felt with regard 
to this book was inherited by many Christians. On the other 
hand Cyril, who represents the tradition of the Church of 
Jerusalem, makes it the twelfth of the canonical books, and in. 
the Laodicene list it stands eighth. 

Except in cases where an old or well-defined tradition fixed 
the internal order of groups of books, there was clearly room 
for every possible variation so long as the books were written 
on separate rolls. The cista might serve to keep a group 
together, but it offered no means of fixing the relative order 
of its contents. In the codex, on the other hand, when it 
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 mark 
the mass of later MSS. A single instance may suffice. It 
has been stated that Esther is 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 of papyri, 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. 

with Judith and Tobit. But these books occur in varying 
order in the oldest MSS.; in Β we have Esther, Judith, Tobit, 
but in κ A, Esther, Tobit, Judith ; a favourite Western order 
is Tobit, Esther, Judith (Chelt, Augustine, Innocent, Gelasius, 
Cassiodorius, Isidorus); another, sanctioned at Carthage in 
397, is apparently more common in MSS. of the Vulgate, viz., 
Tobit, Judith, Esther \ Such variations, resting on no obvious 
principle, 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 

Literature. On the general subject of this chapter the 
student may 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). 

^ For the order of the books in Latin MS. Bibles see S. Berger, His- 
toire de la Vulgate, pp. 301-6, 331-9• 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

The books which are common to the Hebrew Bible and 
the Alexandrian Aversion ^ differ in regard to their contents as 
well as in their titles and order. Differences of contents may 
conveniently be considered under two heads, as they affect the 
sequence or the subject-matter. 

(A) Differences of Sequence. 

I. The following table shews the principal instances in 
which the Greek and the Hebrew books are at variance in 
reference to the order of the contents. The chapters and 
verses in the left-hand column are those of the Cambridge 
Septuagint; the right-hand column follows the numeration of 
the printed Hebrew Bibles. 

Greek. Hebrew. 

Gen. xxxi. 46^ — 52 Gen. xxxi. 48^, 47, 51, 52% 48^ 

49, 50% 52^ 

„ XXXV. 16 — 21 „ XXXV. 16+21, 17 — 20, 22^ 

Exod. XX. 13 — 15 Exod. xx. 14, 15, 13 

„ XXXV. 8 — II, 12, 15 — 16, „ XXXV. 9—12, 17, 13—14, 
17, 18, ig'^ 16, 19, 15 

^ Following the order of The Old Testament in Greek, these are Genesis, 
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, i — 4 
Kingdoms (vol. i.), i— 2 Paralipomena, 2 Esdras, Psalms, Proverbs, Eccle- 
siastes, Canticles, Job, Esther (vol. ii.), the Twelve Minor Prophets, the 
Four Greater Prophets (vol. iii.) — 37 in all. 


Books of the Hebrew Canon. 




xxxvi. 8^ — 40 


. xxxix. I — 31 


xxxvii. I — 2 


xxxvi. 8—9 


„ 8-6 


„ 35-38 




xxxviii. 9 — 23 


xxxviii. I — 17 


xxxvii. I — 24 


„ 18-20 


xxxvi. 20 — 34 

21 — 24 


xxxviii. I — 7 


„ 25 


xxxvii. 29 


„ 26 


xxxviii. 8 


,, 27 


xl. 30 — 32 


xxxix. I — 10 


xxxviii. 24 — 31 


„ II 


xxxix. 32 


„ 13—23 


„ 33—43 


xl. 6^—8, 10—25, 26, 27 


xl. 8—10, 12—27, 29, -:,z, 




i• 24—37 


1. 26—37, 24—25 


vi. 22 — 26 


vi. 22, 23, 27, 24, 25, 26 


xxvi. 15—47 


XXVI. 19—27,15—18, 44— 
47, 28—43 


ix• Z—ZZ 


viii. 30—33, ix• 3—27 


xix. 47—48 


XIX. 48, 47 

3 Reg 

^n. iv. 17, 18, 19 

I Kings iv. 18, 19, 17 


„ 20—21,22- 



„ 7—8, 2—4, 9—14 


V. I — 16, 17 


V. 15—30, 32^ 


vi. 2 — 3 


v. 31—32- 


vi. 4—5, 6—7, 



vi. 37—38, 2—3, 14, 4 
—10, 15—36 


vii. 1—6, 7, 8- 
II, 12—13 

-9, 10— 


vii. 13—18, 21, 19—20, 
23—24, 26, 25 


vii. 14—37, 38- 



vii. 27 — 51, I — 12 


X. 23— 24% 24b 



ix. 15, 17—19, 20—22 


„ 26—29 


X. 23—26 



V. I- 


„ 31—33 


X. 27—29 


xi. 3—8 


xi-.4, 3, 7, 5, 8, 6 


XX. xxi 


xxi. XX 

Psalms ix. 22 — 39 

Psalms x. i— 18 


X. — cxii 


xi. — cxiii 


cxiii. I — 8 


cxiv. I — 8 


cxiii. 9—12 


cxv. I — 4 




cxvi. I — 9 




cxvi. 10—19 


cxvi. — cxlvi 


cxvii. — cxlvii. 1 1 


cxlvii. I — 9 


cxlvii. 12 — 20 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 




Prov. XV. 27^ — xvi 

• 4, 

6, 9 

Prov. xvi. 6, xv. 28, xvi. 7, xv 29 


, xvi. 8—9, XV. 30—33^ 


, xvi. 5, 4'-^ 

„ XX. 10^ — 12. 

, I 


6, 17 


, XX. 20—22, 10—13, 23— 



„ xxiv. 24—37 

, 3^ 


, 50— 


XXX. I — 14, xxiv. 23 — 34, 

68, 69-77, 



XXX. 1 5 — 23j ^^^^• I— 9j 10 



Jer. XXV. 14 — 19 


, xlix. 34^—39 

„ xxvi. I 


„ 36^ 

„ „ 2—28 


xlvi. 2—28 

„ xxvii 



5, xxviii 



„ xxix. 1—7 


xlvii. I — 7 

„ „ 8-23 


xlix. 7 — 22 

„ XXX. 1—5, 6— 


12 — 



„ I— 5, 28— 33, 23— 27 

„ xxxi 



„ xxxii. I — 24 


XXV. 15 — 38 

„ xxxiii 



„ xxxiv. I — 18 


xxvii. 2 — 22 

„ xxxv 



„ xxxvi 



„ xxxvii 



„ xxxviii. I — 34, 





xxxi. 1—34, 37, 35, 3^, 38- 



„ xxxix 



„ xl 



„ xh 



" ^^?? 



„ xliii 



„ xliv 



„ xlv 



„ xlvi 



„ xlvii 



„ xlviii 



„ xlix 



„ 1 



„ h. 1—30, 31 — 



xliv. I — 30, xlv. I — 5 

Ezech. vii. 3 — 9 

Ezek. vii. 6 — 9, 3 — 5 

2. Each of these contexts must be separately examined 
with the view of discovering the extent and the cause of the 
divergence. This can be done but briefly here; for further 

234 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

particulars the student is referred to the commentaries which 

deal with the several books. 

In the following pages e = the Greek text, and β'^' ^' ^^''• = the 
Greek 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. 

Gen. xxxi. 46 fif. The passage is in some confusion ; 
"w. 45, 47, 51 — 54 appear to embody E's account... z'Z'. 46, 
48 — 50 the account given by J\" i^ is loosely put together, 
and V. 50^, which (& omits, is hardly consistent with vv. 48, 
52. In ^ the materials seem to have been re-arranged with 
the view of giving greater consistency to the narrative. 

Gen. XXXV. 16 ff. The transposition in (& appears to be 
due to a desire to locate Eder (Γάδερ) between Bethel and 
Bethlehem ; see art. Eder in Hastings' D. B. (i. p. 644). 

ExoD. XX. 13 — 15. ^^ and iW represent here two distinct 
traditions with regard to the order of the Decalogue. For the 
order followed by & see Lc. xviii. 20, Rom. xiii. 9, Jas. ii. 11, 
Philo de x. orac. 10, de spec. legg. iii. 2 ; that of ^^^^ is 
supported by Mt., Mc, and Josephus. In Deut. v. 17 — 19 
cod. Β wavers between the two, but cod. A consistently agrees 
with iW. 

ExoD. XXXV. — xl. is "the sequel to c. xxv. — xxxi., relating 
the execution of the instructions there communicated to 
Moses," the correspondence being so close that " in the main, 
the narrative is repeated verbati77i — with the single substitution 
of past tenses for future^" But whilst in c. xxv. ff. the lxx. 
generally follows the Massoretic order, in the corresponding 
sections at the end of the book "extraordinary variations occur 
in 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 Penta- 

1 Driver, Intr. p. 15. 

2 Driver, Intr. pp. 37, 38. 

'^ Robertson Smith, 0. T. in the J. Ch. p. 124 f. 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 


The passage deals with the building and furniture of the 
Tabernacle, and the attire of the Priesthood. The following 
rough table will enable the student to see how the details 
are arranged in the lxx. and Heb. severally. 

Oriiaments of the Ministers. 
Ephod (xxxvi. 9 — 12). 
Onyx stones (xxxvi. 13 — 14). 
Breastplate (xxxvi. 15 — 29). 
Robe of Ephod (xxxvi. 30 — 34). 
Linen vestments (xxxvi. 35 — 37). 
Crown plate (xxxvi. 38 — 40). 

Structure of the Tabernacle 
and Court. 
Hangings (xxxvii. i — 2). 
Veils (xxxvii. 3 — 6). 
Court (xxxvii. 7 — 18). 

Furniture of the Tabernacle^ &^c. 
Ark (xxxviii. i — 8). 
Table (xxxviii. 9 — 12). 
Candlestick (xxxviii. 13 — 17). 
Altar of Burnt-offering (xxxviii. 

22 — 24). 
Oil and Incense (xxxviii. 25 — 

Laver (xxxviii. 27). 

Structure of the Tabernacle. 
Hangings (xxxvi. 8 — 19). 
Boards (xxxvi. 20 — 34). 
Veils (xxxvi. 35 — 38). 

Furniture of the Tabernacle 
and its Court. 
Ark (xxxvii. i — 9). 
Table (xxxvii. 10 — 16). 
Candlestick (xxxvii. 17 — 24). 
Altar of incense (xxxvii. 25 — 29). 
Altar of Burnt-oifering (xxxviii. 

Laver (xxxviii. 8). 
Court (xxxviii. 9 — 20). 

Ornaments of the Mifiisters. 
Ephod (xxxix. 2 — 5). 
Onyx stones (xxxix. 6 — 7). 
Breastplate (xxxix. 8 — 21). 
Robe of the Ephod (xxxix. 22 — 

Linen vestments (xxxix. 27 — 29). 
Crown plate (xxxix. 30 — 31). 

It is clear from this comparison that both (& and 0i follow 
a system, i.e. that the difference of sequence is due to a 
deliberate rearrangement of the groups. Either the Alexandrian 
translator has purposely changed their relative order, giving 
precedence to the ornaments of the priesthood which are 
subordinated in the M. T. of cc. xxxv. — xl., as well as in both 
texts of cc. XXV. — XXX.; or he had before him in c. xxxv. ff. 
another Hebrew text in which the present Greek order was 
observed. Many O. T. scholars (e.g. Kuenen, Wellhausen, 
Dillmann) regard cc. xxxv. — xl. as belonging to a " secondary 

236 Books of the Hebrew CaiioJi. 

and posterior stratum of P\" Thus it 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 
afterwards from a longer Hebrew recension of the 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 
from the fact that the Hebrew technical terms which are 
common to xxv. — xxx. and xxxv. — xl. are in certain cases 
differently rendered in the two contexts". 

Numbers i. 24 ff., xxvi. 15 ff. Each of these passages 
contains a census of the tribes, and in each the order of the 
tribes is slightly different in <& and i^. In both lists i^l places 
Gad third, 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 
sequence presented by (& is to bring Gad into close proximity 
to Asher, a position which this tribe occupies in i. 5 — 15 {(& 
and 0i). For this there may have been genealogical reasons ; 
see Gen. xxx. 10 ff., xlix. 19. 

C. vi. 22 ff. Here 0i obviously has the simpler and more 
natural order, and Xiyovn^ αΰτοΓ? at the end oi v. 23 seems to 
shew that the Greek order, though supported by BAN*, is the 
result of an early accidental displacement in the Greek text. 

Joshua ix. 3 ff. In the present Hebrew text the ceremony 
at Ebal and Gerizim follows immediately upon the taking of 
Ai, but in (& it is separated from the latter incident by the 
hostile gathering of the western kings (ix. i, 2) and placed 
immediately before the story of the Gibeonites. ^ " involves 
a geographical difiiculty, for Ebal lies considerably to the north 

1 See Driver, Intr. pp. 35, 39 ; Addis, Documents of the Hexateiuh, ii. 
p. 276 f. 

^ Robertson Smith, 0. T. in the J. Ch. p. 125. 

Books of the Hebrew Cation. 


of Ai, and until the intervening territory was conquered... it is 
difficult to understand how Joshua could have advanced 
thither \" The situation however is scarcely improved if we 
adopt the order of (&, unless the gathering of the kings is 
taken to imply a further victory on the Israelite side which 
opened the way to central Palestine. Dillmann suggests that 
ix. 2 was once followed by the details of a battle. If so, it is 
possible that ^ still preserves the original order, though in 
common with ^ it has lost this record. 

C. xix. 47 — 48. On these verses, which exchange places 
in the Greek, see under (B) ". 

3 Regn. iv. 17 if. 

The change of order in vv. 17 — 19 needs no discussion; 
the transposition may be due to an accident of transcription in 
the archetype of Cod. B, or, like the variations in Num. i., 
xxvi., to some consideration connected with the placing of the 
tribes. The real problem of the passage begins at iv. 20. Its 
nature may best be understood from a table of the contents. 
These consist of the details of Solomon's personal greatness and 
public works ; the facts are arranged by ©^ and ^ respectively 
as follows : 

Provision for the royal table (iv. 

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 

Hiram (v. i — 12). 
His corvee of workmen (v. 13 — 

Foundations of the Temple laid 

(vi. 1—5). 
Dimensions of the Temple (vi. 


1 Driver, /;//;-. p. lOO. 

Solomon's marriage (iii. i). 
Provision for the royal table (v. 

2f., 7f.)• 
The King's power (v. 4). 
His wisdom (v. 9 — 14). 
His negociations with King 

Hiram (v. 15 — 25). 
His corvee of workmen (w 27 — 

Foundations of the Temple laid 

(vi. I). 
Dimensions of the Temple (vi, 6). 
Details of the building (vi. 2, 

7, 36)• 

2 Cf. ί7ΐβ-α, p. 244. 

238 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

Details of the building (vi. 8 — Building of the royal palaces 

34)• (vii. I — 12). 

Work of Hiram the artist (vii. Work of Hiram the artist (vii. 

1—37). 12—51)• 

Building of the royal palaces Solomon's wife's dowry (ix. 16 f.). 

(vii. 38—50). 

As in the disturbed section at the end of Exodus, it is easy 
to see that each order follows a system : (i) Whilst ^ places 
the marriage of Solomon to Pharaoh's daughter, and the use 
made by the king of his wife's marriage portion, in their 
historical settings, & brings the two incidents together, as the 
finishing strokes to the picture of Solomon's power. Again, 
whilst ^ deals with the whole of Solomon's public \vorks 
before it describes the skill of Hiram, (&^ completes the history 
of the building of the Temple with the account of Hiram's 
labours before it describes the 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 

C. x. 23 — 33. The text of ©^'^"<=• here admits two pas- 
sages which it had passed over in the earlier contexts, where 
they stand in ^θί (c. ix. 15, 17 — 22, v. i). Of ix. 10 — 28 
Prof. Driver remarks that it "consists of a series of notices 
imperfectly connected together," and that its "literary form, for some reason, less complete than that of any other 
portion of the Books of Kings^" Under these circumstances 
it is not surprising that some of these notices occupied another 

^ Cf. Driver, Intr. p. 182, and note; C F. Burney, in Hastings' D. B. 
p. 862 ff. 

2 Intr. p. 181. 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 239 

place in the text which was before the Alexandrian trans- 
lator. C. V. 1% which in the Greek order is x. 30, belongs in 
i^ to another similar collection of loosely-connected para- 
graphs. The arrangement folloAved by Gr^ is perhaps not 
materially better, but it probably represents an earlier stage 
in the formation of the book. 

C. xi. 3 — 8. Here ©^• ^"'=• presents a text which differs 
from (S^ and itt both in order and in form. A comparison of 
(^'^ with ©^ and i^ will be found to be instructive ; the latter 
is diffuse and repeats itself unnecessarily (3 ΙκΚιναν γνναΐκζς 
αντον την καρδιαν αντον...^- at γυναΓκ6ς αντον Ι^ΙκΚιναν την καρδιαν 
αντου...^ €7Γορ€νθη %αλωμων όττίσω της Άστάρτης . . . "j τότ€ ώκοδό- 
μησ€ν 2. νψηλον . . .τη "Αστάρτη) ; the former presents the facts-^ 
briefly and in a logical sequence. Here as elsewhere in this 
book Cod. A represents the Hexaplaric Greek, and not the 
original lxx." 

Cc. XX., xxi. The relative order of these chapters is reversed 
in iH, which justifies the change by prefacing the story of 
Naboth with the words ^^^\\ Qn?'=in ΊΠΝ \n^^i. ''The dislocation 
may have been due to the desire to bring the prophecy of 
Ahab's death nearer to the account of its occurrence I" Ob- 
viously wrong as the present Hebrew order is, Cod. A has 
adopted it, interpolating the inapposite iyeveTo /xera τα ρημ,ατα 
ταύτα, which Origen had borrowed from Aquila ; and even 
Lucian (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. 

Psalms ix. — cxlvii. 

Throughout the greater part of the Psalter © and iW 

1 Β however omits the important statement o{ v. 3% which comes "'from 
the older nan-ative" (Driver). 

- See Field ad loc, and cf. Silberstein, iiber den Ur sprung der im cod. 
Alex. u. Vat. des dritten Konigsbuches...iiberlieferten Textgestalt (Giessen, 

=i C. F. Burney, I.e. 

240 Books of tJie Hebrew Canon. 

follow different systems of numeration. This is due to certain 
consecutive Psalms in the Hebrew Psalter being counted as 
one in the Greek (ix. + x. Heb. ^ ix. lxx. ; cxiv. λ- cxv. 
Heb. =cxiii. lxx.), and certain of the Hebrew Psalms being 
vice versa divided in the Greek into two (cxvi. Heb. = cxiv. + 
cxv. LXX.; cxlvii. Heb. = cxlvi. + cxlvii. lxx.). 

In the Heb. Psalms ix. and x. there are traces of an 
acrostic system which have been taken to indicate that the 
two Psalms were originally one\ Many Hebrew MSS. join 
Psalms cxiv., cxv.^, as m the lxx. For the division of Psalms 
cxvi. and cxlvii. it is less easy to account, but it may have been 
due to a desire to make up the number of the Psalms to 150^. 

Proverbs xxiv. — xxxi. 

In the first great section of this book (cc. i. — ix.) there is 
no important difference of order, nor does the second section 
(x. — xxii. i^) or the third (xxii. 17 — xxiv. 22) offer more than 
an occasional variation in the grouping of proverbs, combined 
with omissions and additions on either side. But at c. xxiv. 23 
we enter upon a series of collections which seem at one time 
to have formed distinct books or cycles of proverbial teaching, 
and here ^ and ^H differ widely, as a comparison of the 
contents will shew. 

© iH 

Words of Agar (xxiv. 24 — 37). Sayings of the Wise (xxiv. 23 — 

Sayings of the Wise (xxiv. 38 — 34). 

49). Proverbs of Solomon (xxv. i — 

Rest of the Words of Agur xxix. 21). 

(xxiv. 50 — 68). Words of Agur (xxx. i — 33). 

1 See Cheyne, Book of Psalms^ p. 228; Bleek-Wellhausen, p. 471. 
Prof. Kirkpatrick {Psalms, 1. p. 41) speaks with less confidence. 

2 See Kennicott, ii. p. 410. It should be added that in the 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 ί/ιέ Hebrew Cano7t. 241 

Words of Lemuel (xxiv. 69 — 'j']). Words of Lemuel (xxxi. i — 9). 

Proverbs of Solomon (xxv. i — Praise of the Virtuous Woman 

xxix. 27). (xxxi. 10 — 31). 
Praise of the Virtuous Woman 

(xxix. 28 — 49). 

Evidently the order of this portion of the book had not 
been linally settled when the Alexandrian translator did his 
\vork\ Moreover he has failed to understand the headings of 
the two sections attributed to Agur and Lemuel^, and has 
broken up Agur's collection, the unity of which he seems not 
to have recognised, placing the Sayings of the Wise between 
the fragments ; unless, indeed, he found them divided in his 
Hebrew archetype. 

Jeremiah xxv. — li. A glance at the table which stands 
near the beginning of this chapter will shew that the section 
c. XXV. 15 — xlv. 5 (iil) answers in a general way to c. xxxii. 
I — li. 35 (^), whilst c. xlvi. i — li. 64 (iH) is represented, 
though not without considerable interruptions of the present 
Hebrew order, 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 final section of the book, coming immediately before 
the historical appendix (c. Hi.). If these prophecies were 
circulated in a separate form, the words of c. xxv. 13 might 
naturally have led an Alexandrian collector to place them 
where they stand in the lxx., 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 1 ; Toy, Proverbs^ p. xxxiii. 

^ See Lagarde, Anmerkungen zur griech. tlbersetzung d. Proverbien, 
pp. 90, 91. 

■* Cf. Origen ad Afric. 4 πολλά 5e τοιαΰτσ. κοΧ ev τφ Ίερβμίφ κατβνοήσα- 
μ€Ρ, έν φ καΐ ττολΧηρ μ€τάθ€σίν καΐ έναλΧα-γην τψ \έξ€ω$ των ττροφητευομέ- 
-νων εϋρομζν. 

S. S. ι6 

242 Books of the Hebreiu Canon. 

after xlv. 5. 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. The order of the 
nations denounced is in G• Elam, Egypt, Babylon, Philistia, 
Edom, Ammon, Kedar, Damascus, Moab ; but in i^T, Egypt, 
Philistia, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus, Kedar, Elam, 
Babylon. The prophecies had apparently been grouped in 
the Alexandrian collection after one manner, and after another 
in the collection which was current in Palestine. 

EzEKiEL vii. 3 — 9. Here the divergence of the lxx. from 
the Hebrew text 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 transferan- 
tur." The transposition, to whichever side it is to be ascribed, 
may be explained by the genius of the passage which is in " a 
lyric strain such as is unwonted in Ezekiel•." A full examina- 
tion of the context may be seen in Cornill", who justly 
describes it as " eine stark verderbte Stelle," and finds a 
solution in the hypothesis of a doublet (cf vv. 3 — 4, 7 — 8). 

(B) Differences of Subject- Matter. 

I. A further comparison of the lxx. with the Massoretic 
Hebrew reveals the presence in each text of a considerable 
number of passages which are not to be found in the other. 
This fact was known to Origen, and frankly recognised by him 
{ep. ad African. § 3 και kv άλλοις h\ ττολλοΖ? aytotg βφ\ίοι% 
€υρομ€ν ττη μα' ττλειονα τταρ' ημίν Κίίμ^να η τταρ Έ/3ραιοις, τγ•:^ ^e 
λίίττοντα) ; and the Hexapla, as we have seen^, was the result 
of a mistaken endeavour to assimilate the lxx. to the current. 

1 Driver, Intr. p. 263. 2 Ezechiel, p. 212. 

^ Pt. I. c. iii. 

Books of the Hebrew Canofi. 243 

Hebrew text. Its remains are still invaluable as bearing 
witness to the condition of both texts in the second and third 
centuries after Christ. The student who would grasp the 
nature and extent of the problem must examine them in 
Field's great edition ; in this place we will content ourselves 
with some notice of additions and omissions which extend to 
entire verses or paragraphs. 

Pentateuch. As a whole, the Law has escaped material 
changes in either direction. But there are a few impor4;ant 
exceptions. In Gen. iv. 8 the lxx. suppHes the Avords of 
Cain (Βύλθωμζν eU TO TTeSiov), which are wanting in the 
Hebrew 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 
eight, thus : 

[εύψράνθητβ, ουρανοί, αμα αύτω, 

και προσκννησάτωσαν αντώ νίοΐ θ^ουΛ 
(ύφράνθητβ, ξθνη, μ€τά του Χαου αύτοΰ, 

\^κα\ βνισχυσάτωσαν αίιτω πάντες ayyeXoL ^βοΰ.] 
eVt το αίμα των υίών αυτοΰ €κδί<άται, 

\^κα\ €κδικησ€ί] κα\ ανταπόδωσα δίκην τοΙς βχθροϊς, 
[και rots• μισουσιν άνταποδωσα,Ί 

κα\ €κκαθαρΐ€ΐ [Κυριο?] την yrjv τοΰ Χαου. 

There is nothing in 01 which corresponds with the 
bracketed words of the version. Yet they are present in all 
uncial MSS. of the lxx., and were probably in the earlier 
copies of Deuteronomy which passed into the possession of 
the Christian Church. Possibly the Song was circulated in a 
separate form in more than one translation. The present 
Greek text seems to be the result of conflation, lines i and 3, 
2 and 4, 6 and 7, being doublets ; line 2 = 4 appears to be an 
adaptation of Ps. xcvi. (xcvii.) 7. 

16 — 2 

244 Books of the Hebrew Cano7t. 

Joshua. Besides innumerable smaller variations in this 
book which shew that it was not regarded by the translators 
as sharing the peculiar sanctity of the Torah^, there are in the 
last four chapters several important contexts in which (& and 
^ differ by defect or excess-. 

C xix. 47 — 48 (i-K). The order of these verses is reversed 
in ^, so as to bring the words αντ-η η κληρονομιά κτλ. into 
juxtaposition with the list of the Danite towns {vv. 41 — 46); 
and to each of the verses which have thus exchanged places 
the Lxx. attaches a rider, based apparently upon Judges ii. 
34 f., and describing the relations between the new settlers 
and the Amorites. 

C. XX. 4 — 6. Omitted in ©. " It is probable that the 
ch. in its original form (P) has been enlarged by additions 
from the law of homicide in Dt. (c. 19) at a comparatively late 
date, so that they were still wanting in the MSS. used by the 
LXX. translators I" 

C. xxi. ;^6 — 37, 42 a — d. The printed Hebrew Bibles 
omit vv. 36 — 37, which contain the names of the Levitical 
cities in the territory of Reuben, and they seem to have 
been obeHsed in the Greek by Origen. They are found, how- 
ever, in the majority of Hebrew MSS.'', and are necessary to 
the completeness of the narrative. Vv. 42 a — c are little more 
than a doublet of c. xix. 50, 51 b; 42 d appears to be based 
tipon c. V. 3. 

C. xxiv. 30 a — 33 b. V. 30 a continues the story of the 
4iint knives (v. 7, xxi. 42 d). (&, which omits v. 31, a 
doublet of Judges ii. 7, adds to the book a postscript, 
■ZJ. 33 a — b, based on v. 33, i Sam. iv. 3 if., Judges ii. 6, 11 ff., 
iii. 14'. 

^ See G. A. Smith in Hastings' D. β. ii. p. 784. 
2 Op. cit., p. 781 ff. ^ Driver, Intr. p. 105. 

^ See Kennicott, i. p. 474, De Rossi, i. p. 96 ff.; and cf. Field, Hexapla, 
i, p. 387, Addis, Documents of the Hexaieuch, ii. p. 472 ff. 

^ See Knobel in Kiirzgef. exeg. Handbuch zum A.T., p. 488. 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 245 

I Samuel (i Regn.). 

C. ii. 9, 10. The closing stanza of this hymn, like that of 
the Song of Moses, is presented by ffi in a modified and 
expanded form. Vv^ 8 c, 9 a are omitted in CBr, which substi- 
tutes διδους ξ.νγΎ]ν . . .'^ικαίον ("apparently an attempt to ac- 
commodate the Song more closely to Hannah's position'"), 
and inserts in the heart oi v. 10 a passage from Jerem. ix. 23, 
24, taken from the Greek version, but with variations which 
form an instructive study : — 

I Regn. ii. Jer. ix. 

6 φρόνιμοί iv rfi φρονήσει. ..6 6 σοφοζ iv xfj σοφία. ..6 Ισχ^νρος 

8ννατ6ς iv rrj 8υνάμ(ΐ...τ6ν Κν- iv τη Ισχνι,.,οτι iyoo eiftt Κνριος 6 

piov, και TTOielv κρίμα και 8ικαιο- ποιων eXeo? και κρίμα κα\ 8ίκαιο- 

σύνην iv μέσω της "γης. σύνην iπ\ της "/ης. 

It has been noticed that i Regn. ii. iia (καΐ κατελιττεν 
αντον ζκεΐ ένωπων Κυρίου) probably corresponds to I Sam. i. 
28 b (njn^^ D*^ -inn^M). if so, the 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 (&. 

Cc. xvii — xviii. This is the most important of the contexts 
in which G^ differs from (5^ 01 in the way of defect. The 
omitted verses contain the story of David's visit to the camp 
of Israel (xvii. 12 — 31); David's interview with Saul and 
Jonathan (xvii. 55 — xviii. 5); Saul's attempts upon David's 
life (xviii. 10 — 11, 17 — 19); besides occasional details of less 
importance (xvii. 41, 50; xviii. 30). 

These omissions have been variously explained. Accord- 
ing to Wellhausen and Kuenen^, the Greek translator, or the 
scribe of the archetype followed by Cod. B, has deliberately 

^ Driver, Samuel, p. 20. 

2 See Wellhausen, der Text d. B. Sa»iuelis, p. 42; Driver, op. cit., pp. 
17, 18, 21; H. P. Smith, Samuel, p. 13. 
•^ Or'iver, Inlr., p. 170; Savmel, p. ii6f. 

246 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

removed the missing verses, from a desire to harmonise. Cer- 
tainly the result of their absence is to reduce, if not altogether 
to remove, the conflict between c. xvi, i4fr., which represents 
David as an experienced warrior with whose reputation Saul 
is already acquainted, and cc. xvii., xviii., where on a later 
occasion he appears as a shepherd lad of whom the king has 
as yet heard nothing. But, as Robertson Smith has pointed 
out, it is difficult to believe that simple omissions made without 
changing a word of what was left could produce a complete 
and consecutive narrative such as we find in (5r. He con- 
cludes that the verses omitted by (& are "interpolations in the 
Hebrew text, extracts from a lost biography of David... not 
found in the text 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 any- 
thing at variance with the narrative interpolated." " We seem 
therefore (he adds) shut 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 ; the passages are marked with an 
asterisk in the Hexaplaric MSS. 64, 92 ^ 

C. xxiii. II — 12. Here ©^ omits by homoeoteleuton the 
Heb. from ^T. [v. 11) to -ll-^P: {v. 12). But it also omits 'ί?ΐ;? 
n^l np^rp {v. 11), and Wellhausen conjectures with probability 
that €t άτΓοκλΐίσ-θησζταί was wanting in the original form of the 


I Kings (3 Regn.). 

In this book ^^ contains a large quantity of additional 
matter, of varying character and worth. 

^ O.T. in J. Ch., pp. 121, 431 ff.; cf. Kirkpatrick, r Samuel, p. 241 ff. 

2 I Samuel, p. 117. 

3 Cf. Field ad loc. * See H. P. Smith, Samuel, p. 212. 

Books of tJie Hebrew Canon. 247 

C ii. 35 a — n, 46 a — 1, are summaries of Solomon's 

personal history, which have been attached, probably by the 

accidents of transcription, to the verses which they severally 

follow. 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 ii. 35 a — b = iv. 25 — 26, c = iv. 31, d = v. 15, e = vii. loff., 
f — g = ix. 24 — 25 (iH), h = v. 16, i — k = x. 23 ff., 1 — o = ii. 8 — 9. 
Similarly, ii. 46 a = iv. 20 (iB), b = v. 2 (iH), c = iii. i (iH), d = ix. 
18 (i-B), e = iv. 22—23, i = iv. 24, g = v. 5 (iB), h = 2ff., i— k = x. 

C. viii. 53a is an addition of quite another character and 
of the highest interest. The true lxx. {(&^) omits viii. 12, 13, 
which in cod. A are thus supplied from Aquila' : τότξ. cTttcv 
2αλω/χων Κύριος eiTTcv του σκηνώσαί iv -γνόφω. οΙκο^όμησα οίκον 
κατοίκητηρίον σοι, εδρασ/χ,α τη<ζ κα^€δρας σου αιώι/ος. But after 
V. ζ2> ^ gives the substance of these words in a poetical form 
which is expressly attributed to an older source : 

Tore ζΚαΚησ^ν Σ. νπερ τον ο'ίκον ως avvereXeaev του οίκοδομησαι 
αυτόν "ΉΧιον iyvaipiaev (Luc, βσττ/σ^ι/) iv ουρανω Κύριος' \ (Ιπ^ν 
του κατοικύν €κ. "γνόφου (Α, ev -γνόφω)• | οίκοδόμησον οίκον μου, 
οίκον €κπρ€πη (Α, €ύπρ€πη) σαντω, \ του κατοικύν β'πι καινότητος. \ 
ουκ ίδου αυτή γέγραπται ev βιβλίω της ω8ης; 

Though this occurs in cod. A and Lucian, it was want- 
ing in the Hebrew text which was before the translators 
of the second century a.d., for in the Hexapla it appeared 
only in the lxx. column^. But (as its very errors shew) it is 
a translation of a Hebrew original, and the βφλίον της ωδ^ς 
from which it came is doubtless none other than the Book 
of Jashar (T^'^nnsp, read as I'if^n 'D)^ Here G has preserved 

1 Cf. Field ad loc. 

- See Field ad he, who quotes from cod. 243, ταΟτα ev τω έξαττλφ παρά. 
μ6νοι$ φέρ€ται rots ο'. 

^ Cf. Driver, /nir., p. 182. 

248 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

for us a precious relic, which in ^ has been first misplaced 
and then partly lost'. 

C. xii. 24 a — z. The longest interpolation in the book, 
partly similar to the Greek additions in c. ii., but presenting 
greater difficulties. After rehearsing the facts connected with 
the death of Solomon, and summarising the reign of Rehoboam, 
the interpolator tells the story of the rise of Jeroboam and 
the revolt of Israel, going over the ground already covered 
in cc. xi — xii., and anticipating c. xiv. (i^). 

The parallels are xii. 24 a = xi. 43, xiv. 21 — 22; b = xi. 26 — 
28; c = xi. 40; d — f=xi. 43^; xii. 2 — 5 (iB) ; g — n* = xiv. i — 20 
(iB); n^ — z = xii. 3 — 24. 

But the passage is no mere cento of verses to be found 
elsewhere either in €Br or ^ ; it is a second and distinct 
recension of the story, resting equally with the first upon a 
Hebrew original. So different 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 
worthy of notice that cod. Β omits the reference to Jeroboam's 
residence in Egypt in xii. 2, and the visit of Jeroboam's wife to 
Ahijah as it is told in c. xiv. i — 20, though it gives the two 
irreconcilable accounts of the meeting of Jeroboam with the 
prophet (xi. 29 ff., xii. 240). The whole of the narrative, 
so far as it exists only in the Greek, is omitted by A and 

^ See the passage discussed in Robertson Smith, O. T. in J. C/i., 

P• 4.3.^• 

'■^ Robertson Smith, op. cii.^ p. 118. 

Books of tJie Hebrezv Canon. 249 

the Syro-hexaplar, but it seems to have been retained by 

C. xvi. 28 a — h consists of another recension of the sum- 
mary of Jehoshaphat's reign which occurs in c. xxii. 41 — 44, 
47 — 50, where the last four verses are omitted altogether in 
(&^. Lucian, who agrees with G^ in the interpolation at xvi. 
28, omits xxii. 40 b — 52. 

2 Kings (4 Regn.). 

C. i. 18 a — d. An addition similar in character to that 
which follows 3 Regn. xvi. 28. The summary of Joram's 
reign has attached itself to the beginning as well as to the 
end of the story of Elijah's ascension, whilst in ^^ it finds a 
place only at the end (iii, i — 3). In this instance, however, 
^A, Luc. agrees with ffi^ in repeating the summary, though 
with some variations. The student will find a comparison 

1 Chronicles i. 10 — 16, 17 b — 23 are wanting in S^, which 
thus shortens the genealogy by omitting (i) the posterity of 
Ham, except the Cushites, (2) the longer of two lists of the 
posterity of Shem. Both passages are supplied (from Gen. 
X. 13 — 18, 22 — 29) by cod. A, in a version which came from 
Hexaplaric sources (see Field, i. p. 704). 

2 Chronicles xxxv. 19 a — d, xxxvi. 2 a — c, 5 a — d, are 
versions of 2 Kings xxiii. 24 — 27, 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. 

2 EsDRAS xxi, xxii. (Neh. xi, xii.). The hsts of princes and 
Levites are much shortened in (K^, which omits altogether xxi. 
16, 20, 21, 28, 29, 32—35 ; xxii. 4—6, 9, 15—21, 38, 40, 41. 

^ Lagarde, V.T. Gr. i. ad loc. For a careful treatment of the diffe- 
rences between @ and fH in 3 Regn. see Herzfeld, Gesch. d. Volkes 
Israel, ii. 

250 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 


In G many of the Psalms receive titles, or additions to 
their titles, which are wanting in JH. The following is a list 
of those which occur in the uncial MSS. 

X. (xi.) + -v/raX/xos•. So xiii. (xiv.), xxiv. (xxv.), xliii. (xliv,), Ixxx. 

xxiii. (xxiv.) + r7;s• μια^ σαββάτον. 

xxvi. (χχνϋ.) + 7Γρό τον χρίσθηναι. 

xxviii. (χχΐχ.) + 6|οδιΌυ σκηνής. 

xxix. (χχχ.) pr. els τ6 riXos. 

XXX. (xxxi.) + €κστάσ€ως. 

xxxii. (xxxiii.). Τω Aaveld. 

xxxvii. (xxxviii.)-|-7rfpt σαββάτον. 

xli. {χΙη.) + ψαλμ6ς τω Aavei8 (cod. Α.). 

xlii. (xliii.). Ψαλμός τω Aaveid. 

xlvii. (xlviii.) + Sevrepa σαββάτον. 

Ixv. {lxvi.)-\- αναστάσεως. 

Ixvi. (1χνϋ.)+τώ AaveiS (om. ωδής). 

Ixix. (lxx.) + 6t? TO Σώσαί μ€ Κι'ριον. 

Ixx. (Ixxi.). Τώ Δουβί'δ, νιων Ίωνα8αβ και των πρώτων αΐχμα- 

Ιχχν. (lxxvi.) + 7rpos τον \\σσνριον. 

Ixxix. (1χχχ.) + ύ7Γ6ρ τον Άσσνρίον. 

XC. (xci.). Αίνος ωδής τώ Αανείδ. 

xcii. (xciii.). Έΐς την ημέραν τον προσαββάτον, οτι κατώκισται η 
γη' αίνος ώδης τω Aaveid. 

xciii. (xciv.). Ψαλμός τω Aaveid, τετράδι σαββάτον. 

xciv. (xcv.). Αίνος ωδής τω Aaveid. 

XCV. (xcvi.). "Ort ό οίκος οικοδομείται μετά την αίχμαλωσίαν 
ώδη τώ Αανείδ. 

xcvi. (xcvii.). Τώ Αανείδ, οτε η γη αντον καθίσταται. 

xcvii. (xcviii.) + r<u Αανείδ. 

xcviii. (xcix.). Ψαλμός τω Αανείδ. 

ciii. (civ.). Τώ Αανείδ. 

civ. (cv.). Άλληλονιά: so cv., cvi. (cvi., cvii.), cxiii. (cxiv., 
cxv.), cxiv. (cxvi.) I — 9, cxvi. (cxvii.), cxvii. (cxviii.), cxxxv. 
(cxxxvi.), [but in each of these cases the Greek title is the 

equivalent of a final HI^-Ip^lI in the M.T. of the preceding Psalm]. 

ex. (cxi.). Άλλ77λουιά: so cxi., cxii. (cxii., cxiii.), cxxxiv. 
(cxxxv.), [but in each of these cases the Greek title is the 
equivalent of an opening Π^•177Π in the M.T. of the Psalm]. 

cxv. (cxvi. 10 — 19). ' Αλλ7]λονιά. So cxviii. (cxix.). 

cxxxvi. (cxxxvii.). Τώ Αανείδ. 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 251 

Cxxxvii. (αχχχνϋΐ.) + Ζα;^αριου A (-pias T). 

cxxxviii. (cxxxix.) + Za;^apiOv (cod. A.) + eV rfj διασπορά (A^ T). 

cxlii. (cxliii.) + ore αυτόν 6 vlos καταδιώκβί (κατζδίωξβν A). 

cxliii. (cxliv.) + 7rpos• τον ToXiad. 

Cxlv. (cxlvi.). 'Αλληλούια• Άγγαίον κα\ Ζαχαρίου (Heb. H'pnjjl 

cxlvi. (cxlvii. I — 11). Αλληλούια- Άγγαίου καΐ Ζαχαρίου {where 
Άλλ. answers to the first word of the Psalm in JH as in ex. 

cxlvii. (cxlvii. 10 — 20). As cxlvi., except that Άλλ. is not in 


cxlviii. As cxlvi. but Άλλ. is here represented in iH both 
at the end of the preceding Psalm and at the beginning of Ps. 

cxhx. Αλληλούια. In fH at the end of cxlviii. and the 
beginning of cxlix. 

cl. Άλλ7;λοι;ιά. As in cxlix. 

On 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 last- 
named 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?/ μια σα^βάτου, δ^υτίρα 
σ., TeTpadi σ.^, eh την ημίραν του προσαββάτου (cf. Mc. XV. 42))? 
and in those which attribute others to the time of the Return 
{Ζαχαρίου, ' Κ-γ-γαίου) or to the Dispersion (eV r^ διασπορά). On 
the other hand some of the Greek titles appear to be fanciful 
{προ του χρισθηναι, προς τον Γολίάδ), whilst Others are obscure 
(βκστάσβωί, άναστάσβως). 

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. 

Ps. xiii. (xiv.) 3 a — c. This, the only long interpolatiQn in 
the Greek Psalter, is found upon examination to be made up 
of Pss. V. lob, cxxxix. (cxl.) 4b, ix. (x.) 17a, Isa. lix. 7, 8, Ps. 
XXXV. (xxxvi.) I a, all taken or abridged from the lxx. version 
with slight variations. That it never formed a part of the 

1 Cf. πέμτΓΤΎΐ σαββάτου prefixed to Ps. Ixxxi. in the cursive MS. 156 
{Urtext, p. 75)• 

252 Books of tJie Hebrew Canon. 

Hebrew Psalm may be safely affirmed, yet it is quoted con- 
tinuously in Rom. iii. 13 — 18, where it follows without break 
upon an abridgement of Ps. xiii. (xiv.) i — 3. 

The Greek addition had a place in the κοινή before 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 ff.). 

Ps. cli. (ψαλμός ιδιόγραφος). The MSS. of the LXX. con- 
tain after Ps. cl. a Psalm which bears the title Ούτος 6 ψαλμός 
ιδιόγραφος εις Δαυ€ΐδ και ίζωθ^ν τον αριθμόν, ore Ιμονομάγτ^σ^ν τω 
Γολιάδ, Ο. L., hie psalmus sibi proprie scripUis est David, extra 
numerum, ciwi pugiiavit cum Golia\tJi\. The letter of Athana- 
sius to Marcellinus, which is incorporated in cod. A, speaks 
freely of this Psalm as the work of David, and as Ps. cli. (§ 14 
01 μ\ν κανχτίσίωζ της iv Κυριω ά7Γαγγ€λλοντ€ς λογονς €ΐσι κβ' και 
κγ', λη.,.ρνα' : § 25 τω εκλβ^α/χβνω κνρίω διδούς δο^αν ψάλλ€ και 
συ τον ρνα ίδιον όντα τον Δαυει'δ) ; and it is quoted as a Psalm 
of David by the author of the pseudonymous letter of Mary to 
Ignatius (cent. iv. ; Lightfoot, Igftatius, iii. 144, φησίν yap ττου 
αυτό? ότι Μικρός ημψ, κτλ.). Moreover the scribe of Cod. fc< 
regarded it as a part of the Psalter, for his subscription runs 
ψΛλΜοι Δ<\λ ρΝΛ. In cod. A, however, it is carefully excluded 
from the Psalter proper (subscr. ψΛλΜοι rn κλι ιλιΟΓΡ^φοΰ λ); 
and the judgement of the Laodicene canon (βίβλος ψαλμών 
εκατόν τΓζντηκοντα) is Upheld by the title which in all the MSS. 

^ Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 209 ff. 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 


pronounces this 'autograph' (ιδιόγραφο?) work of David to be 

€$ωθ€ν or €/cT09 τον άριθμοχ)^ i.e. των pv ψαλμών. 

This Psahn is clearly based on i Kings xvi. 7, 11, 26, 43, 

51; 2 Kings vi. 5 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 26; Ps. Ixxviii. 70, Ixxxix. 

20. Its resemblance to the lxx. of those passages is not so 

close as to suggest a Greek original, but on the other hand 

there is no evidence that it ever existed in Hebrew. Whether 

it had a Hebrew or a Greek original, it was probably added to 

the Greek Psalter after the translation of the fifth book was 


For the literature .of Ps. cli. see Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 749, 
and Fabricius, Cod. pseudepigr. v. 7-, p. 905 £f. 

The Ecclesiastical Canticles. 

In certain uncial MSS. and a large proportion of the cur- 
sives the Psalms are followed by a collection of liturgical ωδαι 
{cantica). The following table shews the sources and order of 
those which are given by codd. A, R, T. 


I. Exod. XXV. I — 19. 

Exod. XV. I- 


2. Dent, xxxii. i — 43. 

Deut. xxxiii. 


3. I Regn. ii. i — 10. 

I Regn. ii. i• 

— 10. 

4. Isa. xxvi. 9 — 20. 

Isa. v. I — 9. 

5. Ion. ii. 3—10. 

Ion. ii. 3 — 10. 

6. Hab. iii. i — 19. 

Hab. iii. i — 


[6] I Regn. ii. [i] — 10. 

7. Isa.xxxviii. 10— 20. 


7. Magnificat. 

8. Prayer of Manas- 

Dan. iii. 52- 


8. Isa.xxxviii. 10— 20. 


9. P7'ayer of Manas- 

9. Dan. iii. 26—45. 


10. „ „ 52—88. 

10. Dan. iii. 26 — 45. 

II. Magnificat. 

II• ,, ,, 52—56. 

12. Ntuic dimittis. 

12. „ „ 57—90. 

13. Benedictus. 

13. Benedictus. 

14. Morning Hymn. 

14. Nnnc.di7nittis. 

15. Morning Hym7i. 

^ The προσευχή Ήίαννασσή (so Cod. A; Cod. T. ττρ. Μανασση ν'ωΰ 
'Efe/cioi;) is usually regarded as an attempt by a Hellenistic Jew to re- 
construct the prayer mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxiii. 18; see, however Ball 

254 Books of the Hebrezu Caii07i. 

The nine Odes now sung at Lauds in the Orthodox Church 
are (following the order of cod. A) nos. i, 2, 3, 6, 4, 5, 9, 10, 
11 + 13; ^e Roman Church uses at Lauds on successive days 
of the week 10, Isa. xii., Isa. xxxviii. 10 — 20, 3, i, 6, 2, whilst 
13, II, 12 are recited daily at Lauds, Vespers, and Compline 
respectively. The Alozarabic Breviary, as printed, provides no 
fewer than 76 scriptural canticles. Little has been done as yet 
to examine either the Greek or the Latin Psalters with the view 
of determining the local distribution of these canticles ; but the 
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 
severally belong. Thus we find the following variants : Exod. 
XV. 14 ώρ^/ίσθησαν, cant, εφοβηθησαν : Deut. xxxii. 7 yevecuv ye- 
veais, cant, yeveas ysveutv : 1 8 yevvqaavra, cant, ποιήσαντα : I Regn. 
ii. 10^ φρονησίί, cant, σοφία: lO^' άκρα yijs, cant. -\- δίκαιος ων. But 
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. 

The division of the Psalter into books' seems to have 
been already made when it was translated into Greek, for 
though the Greek codices have nothing to answer to the head- 
ings ΐ1t^*δ<Ί Ί20, etc., which appear in the printed Hebrew Bible, 
the Doxologies at the end of the first four books appear in the 

in Speaker's Comm. (Apocr. ii. 362 ff.). The Greek text appears in 
Const. Apost. ii. 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 can- 
ticles. See Fabricius-Harles, iii. 732, Westcott in Smith's D. B. ii. 226, 
Schiirer•^, iii. 337 f. : and for the text with an apparatus, Fritzsche, V. T. 
Or. lihr. Apocr., pp. xiv. sq., 92 sq. A detailed account of the editions, 
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 A pre-Christian arrangement, as Hippolytus already knew {hypoth. ift 
Psahnos, το φαλτήριον els ττέντ^ bieVKov βιβλία oi Εβραίοι). Cf. Robertson 
Smith, 0. T. in Jewish Ch., p. 194 n. In the lists of the Canon "the 
mention of five Books of Psalms is peculiar to Codex Amiatinus " (Sanday, 
in Studia Biblica iii. p. 242 ff.). 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 255 

Greek as well as in the M. T. (Ps. xl. (xli.) 14, Ixxi. (Ixxii.) 
18 — 20, Ixxxviii. (Ixxxix.) 5, cv. (cvi.) 48). 

Proverbs. The variations of ^ and i-H in this book are 
treated by Lagarde in his early 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 
genuine portions of the original collections, though wanting in 
the present Hebrew text, e.g. vii. i a, viii. 21a. ix. 12 a — c, 
18 a — c, xii. II a, 13 a, xvii. 6 a, xviii. 22 a, xxii. 8 a (cited in 
2 Cor. ix. 7), xxiv. 22 a — e, xxvii. 20 a, 21a. 

Job. The lxx. text of Job current in Origen's time is 
known to have been very much shorter than the Greek text 
preserved in extant MSS. and the M.T. 

Ad African. 4 ιτ\ύστά. re οσα 8ιά μέσον 6\ov τον Ίώ3 τταρ' 
Έβραίοίζ μ€ν κύται παρ' ημίν δε ηνχί, και πολλάκις μ€ν €πη τύσσαρα 
η τρία• €σθ^ ore Se κα\ ^^κατέσσαρα καΐ beKaevvia και deKae^ {/or. 
leg. evvea κα\ e^ 1). Cf. 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 

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. 

Greek Job^ and in MSS. of Jerome's version, while the shorter 
form is represented by the earUest form of the O.L. and in the 
Sahidic version. Most of the extant Greek MSS., including 
the best uncials, offer a text in which the lacunae are supplied 
(chiefly from Theodotion), but which still falls short of the 
fulness of the Hexaplaric lxx. and of iK -. 

Dr Hatch ^ in his Essay On Origen's revision of the lxx. 
text of 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 in the earlier 
treatise of Bickell de indole ac ratione versionis Alexand?'inae 
in interpretando libro lobi (Marburg, 1862). Recent critics 
incline to an opposite view. The evident desire of the trans- 
lator to follow classical models suggests that he was an Alex- 
andrian Hellenist^ who intended his version for general reading, 
rather than for use in the synagogue^ Under such circum- 
stances he may have been tempted to reduce the length of 
his original, especially in passages where it did not lend itself 
readily to his 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 (χρόι/ου 
...τΓολλοΰ ττροβββηκότος . . .λζ-γων Ίδου άναμ,ενω κτλ.). 

The two notes at the end of the Greek Job (xlii. 17a, b — e) 
scarcely profess to belong to the book. The first (yeypanrai 8e 
avTov παΚίν άναστησ^σθαί μ^θ ων 6 κύρως άνίστησίν) may be 
either a Pharisaic or a Christian gloss, intended to balance the 
€Τ(λ€ντησ€ν Ίώβ of the previous hemistich, and arising out of 

1 Cf. Hatch, Essays^ p. 216; Field, Hexapla, ii. p. i f . ; E. Kloster- 
mann, Analecta, p. 63 f. 

2 Burkitt, 0. L. and Hal a, p. 8. ^ Essays, p. 214 ff. 
^ On the translator's date cf. Schlirer•^, iii. pp. 311, 356 f. 

^ Cf. Hatch, op. cit., p. 219: "It was made after Judaism had come 
into contact with Greek philosophy. It may be presumed to have been 
intended not only for Greek -speaking Jews, but also for aliens." The ver- 
sion shews some knowledge of Homer and Aeschylus (cf. Smith, D. Br, 
vol. I. pt. ii. p. 1723)• 

Books of the Hebrew Canofi. 257 

xix. 26 eVi yr]^ αναστησαι (v. I. άναστησ€ί) το ^ίρμα μον, tO which 

passage yiypanTai seems to refer. The second note, which 
professes to come from an Aramaic source {ούτος ίρμην€νζται ΐκ 
τψ "Συριακής βίβλου'^), confuses Job (3Vi<) with the Edomite king 

Jobab (^I'V) (Gen. xxxvi. 33f. = 1 Chron. i. 44 f.), and bases on 
this identification a pedigree of the patriarch, 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 
Aristeas 2. Beyond the geographical description of Uz (eVi rots 
όρίοις της ^Ιδου μαίας <αΙ Αραβίας), and the Statements that Job's 
wife was an Arab woman and that her son's name was Ennon 
or Enon {v. L), the note contains nothing new: ij c — <^ rests 
upon Gen. xxxvi. 32 — 35 (LXX.), and 17 e on Job ii. 11 (lxx.). 

Esther. In the Greek Esther we reach the maximum of 
interpolation. 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 fill several consecutive chapters (x. 4 — xi. 
5=:F, xi. 2 — xii. 6 = A, xiii. i — 7 = b, xiii. 8 — xiv. 19 = 0, xv. 
4 — 19 = D, xvi. I — 24 =e). This arrangement is due to 
Jerome, who relegated the Greek interpolations to the end of 
the canonical book ; but it has had the effect of making them 
unintelligible. In their Greek sequence they form part of a 
consecutive history; a, which precedes c. i., introduces the 
story by describing the events which led to the first advance- 
ment of Mordecai at the court of Artaxerxes ; β and e, which 

^ "'E/c TTjs Σ. β. weist doch auf einen Midrasch oder ein Targum hin" 
(Dillmann, Hiob, p. 361). 

^ Schiirer•^, iii. p. 311. 

^ Cf. Origen, ad Afric. 3 e/c τύ\% 'Έσθηρ ούτε ή του Μαρδοχαίου €ύχη οϋτε 
7] TTJs Έσ^ήρ.,.ΤΓαρ' 'E/3patOis φέρονται' άλλ' ούδε α'ι έττιστοΧαί' άλλ' ουδέ ij 
τφ ' Αμμάν έττι καθαιρέσει του των 'Ιουδαίων 'έθνου$ yey ραμμένη, ουδέ η του 

■* In the Cambridge LXX. they are distinguished by the Roman capitals 
A — F, a notation suggested by Dr Hort. 

s. s. 17 

25 δ Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

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 

between c. iv. and c. v., contain the prayers of Mordecai and 

Esther, and a description of Esther's approach to the King; 

F is an epilogue, which completes the story by relating the 

institution of the feast of Purim. Such Haggadic accretions 

will not create surprise if it be remembered that Esther was 

among the latest of the Kethubim, and that its canonicity was 

matter of dispute in Jewish circles even in the last years of the 

first century a.d.^ 

A note attached to the last of the Greek additions professes 

to relate the circumstances under which the book was brought 

to Egypt : " in the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and 

Cleopatra, Dositheus, who said that he was a priest and Levite, 

and his 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 

Cleopatra (Epiphanes, Philometor, Physcon, and Lathyrus), so 

that the date intended by the fourth year of Ptolemy and 

Cleopatra is by no means certain, though it is perhaps most 

naturally interpreted as = B.C. 179-8, the fourth year of 

Philometor^ But the historical value of the note is more 

than doubtfuP. 

The Greek text of Esther exists in two recensions (i) that of 
i^ABN 55, 93^, 108 Λ, 249 al., (2) that of 19, 93 iZ, loS^; both are 
exhibited by Ussher {Syniag7na), Fritzsche (Έσ^^ρ, 1848; libri 
apocryphi, 1871), and Lagarde {libr. ca>io?i. V. T. i., 1883). The 

■^ See Ryle, Canon, p. 139 f., 203 ff. ; and cf. supra, p. 228 f. 

^ Φρονραί {Φρουραια i<*, Φρονριμ ^<'^•''), cf. c. ix. 26, and Jos. ant. vi. 13 
ol ΊουδαΓοι tols ΤΓρο€ΐρημένα$ ημέρας έορτάζουσίν wpoaayopeuaavTes auras 
φρουρέας (v. 1. φρονραίας, Lat. conservaiorcs). The 'Letter of Purim' 
seems to be the book of Esther as a whole; cf. c. ix. 20. 

2 Handbiich zii d. Apocrypha, i. p. 73. 

^ 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 Ζ A Τ IV,, 
1890 (p. 241 ff.). 

Jeremiah. Besides the extensive transpositions already 
noticed, the lxx. text of Jeremiah differs widely from M.T. in 
the way of excess and defect. The subject has received careful 
treatment from Dr A. W. Streane {Double Text of Jeremiah, 
Cambridge, 1896), whose verdict is on the whole in favour of 
the LXX. text, especially with regard to its 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 memory was of marked interest 
to the post-exilic Jews... operated much more shghtly among 
Egyptian Jews than with their brethren elsewhere^"; and con- 
cludes that " the ' omissions ' to be observed in the lxx. of 
Jeremiah, speaking generally, exist only in consequence of its 
nearer approximation to the original form of the Hebrew text." 

The Greek additions, in Jeremiah, rarely exceed a few words 
in a verse (see the list in Streane, p. 19). Omissions are more 
numerous, and sometimes extend over several consecutive verses 
of ίϊΐ; the following are the most noteworthy: viii. lo'^ — 12, x. 6, 
8, 10, xvii. I — 5% xxix. (xxxvi., LXX.) 16 — 20, xxxiii. (xl., LXX.) 
14^26, xxxix. ( = xlvi., LXX.) 4 — 13, lii. 28 — 30. Of these pas- 
sages viii. 10^ — 12 seems to be based on vi. 12 — 15, and xxix. 
16 — 20 on xxiv. 8 — 10; X. 6, 8, 10, xxxix. 4 — 13 and lii. 28 — 30 
are probably interpolations in the M.T. On the other hand it is 
possible that the omission of xvii. 1—5^ was due to homceote- 
leuton, the eye of the translator or the scribe of his archetype 
having passed from T\'\T\'^ (xvi. 21) to ΠΊΓΓ' (xvii. 5^). It is more 
difficult to account for the absence from φ 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. 

Lamentations. The Greek translator has prefixed a head- 
ing which connects the book with Jeremiah (και cycVcro . . . εκα- 
βισ^ν 'lepc/xtas κλαίων κτλ.), 

1 P. 24 f. Cf. A. B. Davidson in Hastings' D.B. ii. 573 ff. 

17 — 2 

26ο Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

Daniel. Like Esther the Book of Daniel in both its Greek 

forms' contains large contexts which have no equivalent in ^. 

There are three such passages in the Greek Daniel: (i) the 

story of Susanna (2ουσάι/να, 2ωσάννα), which in the version of 

Theodotion as given by the great uncials precedes Dan. i. i ; 

(2) the story of Bel and the Dragon (Βτ)λ και ^paKiuv) which 

follows Dan. xii. 13; (3) after Dan. iii. 23 a digression of 67 

verses (iii. 24 — 90, lxx., Th.), consisting of {a) the prayer of 

Azarias (24 — 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 — 90). In the Greek MSS. no 

break or separate title divides these Greek additions from the 

rest of the text, except that when Daniel is divided into 

"visions," the first vision is made to begin at i. i, Susanna 

being thus excluded from the number ; Bel, on the other hand, 

is treated as the last of the visions (ορασις φ' AQ). Internal 

evidence appears to shew that both these stories originally 

had a separate circulation ; Susanna does not form a suitable 

prologue to Dan. i.-, for v. 6 introduces Daniel as a person 

hitherto unknown to the reader ; and the position of Bel as an 

epilogue to the prophetic portion of the book is still less 

appropriate. From the Fathers, however, it is clear that in the 

earliest Christian copies of the lxx. both Susanna and Bel 

formed a part of Daniel, to which they are ascribed by Irenaeus 

and Tertullian, and implicitly by Hippolytus. The remarkable 

letter of Julius Africanus to Origen which throws doubt on the 

genuineness of Susanna, calling attention to indications of its 

Greek origin, forms a solitary exception to the general view; 

even Origen labours to maintain their canonicity. 

Iran. iv. 26. 3 "et audient eas quae sunt a Daniele propheta 
voces" (^Sus. 56, 52 f.), iv. 5. 2 "quern et Daniel propheta... annun- 
tiavit" (Be/ 41, 25). Tert. c/e idololatria, 18 {Bel ^i.). Hippol. in 

^ Vide supra, p. 46 fif. 

- Susanna is perhaps made to precede Daniel because it describes 
events which belong to his early life; cf. v. 44 flf. and v. 62 in a, b (lxx.). 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 261 

SyIS. (Lagarde, p. 145) αντη μβν ουν η Ιστορία γί'γ&ηται νστ€ρον, 
προ€γράφη 5e της βίβλου πρώτης. Africanus, t'p. ad Ol'ig. θαυμάζω 
δε πώς eXaOe σ€ το μέρος του βιβλίου τοντο κίβ8η\ον ον κτλ. Ol'ig. 
ad African, παρ' άμφοτ€ροις (lxx. and Theodotion) €Κ€ΐτο το π(ρ\ 
την Έωσάνναν (ώ? συ φης) πλάσμα, κα\ αΐ τ^Χ^υταΙαι iv τω Δανιήλ. 
π€ρίκοπαί. It will be noticed that the extracts from Hippolytus 
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 
on the paronomasia (σχΐνο';, σχίζίΐν) in Siis. 54 f., Ball 
iySpeaker's Conwi., Apocrypha, ii. p. 330 f.) has given reasons 
for believing that both Susanna and Bel once existed in an 
Aramaic or a new-Hebrew original^ The lxx. version repre- 
sents Bel as a fragment of Habakkuk (cod. 87, Syro-Hex., tit. 
εκ ττροφητζίας Άμβακονμ vlov ^Ιησον €Κ της φνλης Aevi), an 
attribution evidently due to v. 33 ff., but inconsistent with the 
place of the story in the Gk. MSS. 

The addition to Dan. iii. 23 is clearly Midrashic and 
probably had a Semitic original". The two hymns contained 
in it found a place, as we have seen, among the Greek ecclesi- 
astical Canticles, where they appear as the ττροσ^νχη Άζαρίον 
and the νμνος των ττατερων ημών (cod. A) or v. τών τριών τταί'δων 

(cod. Τ). 

Besides these additions, which are common to both texts of 
Daniel, the text of the lxx. contains a large number of shorter 
interpolations, especially in c. iii. — vi. where " the original 
thread of the narrative is often lost in a chaos of accretions, 
alterations, and displacements^." The student can easily test 
this statement by comparing the two versions as they stand 
face to face in the Cambridge lxx., especially in c. iii. i — 3, 
46, iv. 14 (17), 19 (22), 29—34 (32—37). V. 13—23, vi. 2—5 

^ But see Kamphauseii in Encycl. Biblica, i. 1013, and comp. Roth- 
stein, Apokr., 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. 

262 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

(3 — 6), 12 — 14 (13 — 15), 22 (23). But the whole of this 
section of the book in the lxx. may be regarded as a para- 
phrase rather than a translation of a Hebrew text. In Susanna 
Theodotion has here and there a much shorter text than the 
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 the canonical books (considered sepa- 
rately or in groups). 

Pentateuch. Amersfoordt, Dissert, philol. de varus lectio- 
nibus Holmes. Pentateuchi (18 15). Hug, de Peiitateuchi 
vers. Alexaiidrina co}n?nentatio (1S18). Topler, de Penta- 
teuchi i?iterpretatio?iis Alexandrinae indole ( 1 830). Thiersch, 
de Pentateiichi versione A lexandi'ina, libri ii i ( 1 84 1 ). Frankel, 
iiber de?i Einfluss der paldst. Exegese auf die alex. Henne- 
iieiitik (1851). Η ο 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). 

Exodus. Selwyn, Notae C7'iticae in Versionem LXXviralem, 
Exod. i — xxiv (1856). 

Numbers. Selwyn, Notae^ &c., Liber Numerorum (1857). 
Howard, Numbers and Deuteronomy ace. to the LXX. 
tra?islated zjtto English (1887). 

Deuteronomy. Selwyn, Notae, &c., Liber Deuteronomii 
(1858). Howard, i?/, aV. (1887). Oy'wqy, critical and Ε xe- 
getical Commentary on Deut. (1895). 

Joshua. Hollenberg, Der Charakter der alex. Ubersetzung 
des Buches Josua (1876). 

Judges. Fritzsche, Liber ludicum sec. LXX. ititerpretes 
(1867). Schulte, de restitutione atque indole genuitiae ver- 
siojiis graece ludicum (1889). Lagarde, Septuagifttast. i. 
(1891), (Jud. i — v., texts of A and Bj. Moore, critical and 
Exegetical Co mm. 07i Judges (1895). 

Ruth. Fritzsche, 'Ρού^ κατά τούί ο' (1867). 

Books of the Hebrew Canon. 263 

I, 2 Kingdoms. Wellhausen, Der Text der Biicher Samiielis 
iintersttcht (1871). Woods, the light thj'owii by the LXX. 
on the Books of Samuel (in Stiidia Biblica^ i. 21, 1885). 
Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Saimiel 
(1890). Steinthal, zur Geschichte Sanls ίι. Davids (1891). 
Kerber, Syrohex. Fragmente zii den beiden Samiielis- 
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 ( 1 899). 

3, 4 Kingdoms. Silberstein, i/ber den Ursprung der im 
Codex Alex. u. Vat. des drittefi Konigsbuches der Alex, 
tjbersetzimg iiberlicferten Textgestalt iya ZATW., 1893). 

I, 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah. Howorth, The true 
LXX. version of Chr.-Ezra-Neh. (in Academy, 1893). 
Nestle, Marginalien (1893), p. 29 fF. 

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 
(1892). Mercati, iin palimpsesto Amb7Osiano dei Salmi 
Esapili (1896). Jacob, Beitrdge zu einer Eiideitung in die 
Psahnen (I. Exc. v.), (1896). 

Proverbs. Lagarde, Anme?'kungen zur griech. Ubersetz. 
der Proverbien (1863). Pinkuss, die syr. Ubersetzung des 
Pi'overbien, ihrem Verhdltniss zu dein Mass. Text., 
den LXX. u. dem Targ. untersucht {ZATIV., 1894). 

Ecclesiastes. \\ngh.t, The book of Koheleth {i?>Zt,). Gratz, 
Koheleth (1884). Klostermann (E.), de libri Coheleth ver- 
sione Alexandjnna {\'^^2). Dollmann, iiber die Gr. Uber- 
setzung des Koheleth (1892). Kohl, observ. ad inteipr. Gr. 
et Lat. vet. libri Job (1834). 

Job. Bickell, De indole ac ratione versionis Alexa7idrijiae 
Jobi (1862) ; 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). 

Esther. Jacob, Esther bei de7n LXX. {ZA TW., 1890). On 
the Greek additions see Ryssel in Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 193 fF. 

264 Books of the Hebrew Canon. 

DODECAPROPHETON. VoUers, Das Doci. der Alexandriner 
(1880), continued in ZATW.., 1883-4. Stekhoven, de alex. 
Vertaling va7i het Dod. (1887). 

HOSEA. Treitel, 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, Zur Kritik dei' alt. Ve?-s. d. Proph. 
NaJmm (1867). 

Habakkuk. Sinker, Psabn of Habakkuk (1890). 

Zechariah. Lowe, Comvi. 07i Zech. (1882). 

Isaiah. Scholz, Die Masor. Text n. alex. Ubersetzung des 
B. fesaias (1880). Weiss, Peschitta zu Deiiterojesaia u. 
ihr Verhdltniss zu M.T., LXX. u. Targ. (1893). 

Jeremiah. Movers, De utriusqiie rece7ts. JereTniae i7idole et 
origine {\Zyj). Wichelhaus, de Jere7niae vers. Alexandr. 
i7idole (1847). Schulz, de Ie7-e77iiae textus Hebr. et Gr. dis- 
crepantia (1861). Scholz, der Masor. Text u. die LXX. 
Ubersetz. des B. Jere77iias (1875). Kiihl, das Verhdltniss 
der Massora zur Septuagi7ita i7i Jere77iia (1882). Work- 
man, the text of Jeremiah (1889). Coste, die Weissagung- 
e7i der Prophete7t Iere7nias (1895). Streane, the double text 
of 'Jere77iiah (1896). The question of the two recensions 
is dealt with at length in Bleek-Wellhausen, Ei7ileitung^ 

Lamentations. Goldwitzer, Ube7'setzzmq 77iit Vergleichung 
d LXX. (1828). 

EZEKIEL. Merx, Der Werth der LXX. fur die Textkritik 
der A Τ a77i Ezechiel aifgezeigt {fb. pr. Th., 1883). Cornill, 
das Buch des Proph. Ezechiel {\ZZ(:>)\ cf. Lagarde in G'ott. 
gelerhte A7izeige7i (i June, 1886). 

Daniel. Bludau, De alex. interprete lib7'i Da7iiel indole 
(1891); die alex. Ubersetztmgdes B. Da7iiel{iZ()'j). Bevan, 
the Book of Datiiel {\Z<^2). Lohr, lextk7'it. Vora7'beite7i zu 
ei7ier Erkla7-img des Bitches Da/iiel {ZATIV.., 1895). On 
the Greek additions see Rothstein in Kautzsch, Apokr.^ 
p. 172 ff. 

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 

The MSS. and many of the lists of the Greek Old Tes- 
tament include certain books which find no place in the 
Hebrew Canon. The number of these books varies, as we 
have seen ; but the fullest collections contain the following : 
I Esdras, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Judith, 
Tobit, Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah, i. — iv. Maccabees. 
We may add the Psalms of Solomon, a book which was 
sometimes included in MSS. of the Salomonic books, or, in 
complete Bibles, at the end of the Canon ; 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 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 "Εσδρας β','Έσ-^ρας a 
being appropriated by another recension of the history of the 
Captivity and Return \ The 'Greek Esdras' consists of an 

1 Cod. A entitles both books [o] tepei/s — perhaps in order to distinguish 
the canonical Esdras from the 'Prophet ' = 4 Esdras — "liber Esrae prophe- 
tae" (cf. Clem. M. s/rom. iii. 16 "Εσδρα$ ό ττροφήτψ X^yei). 

266 Books not inchided in tJie Hebrew Canon. 

independent and somewhat free version of portions of 2 
Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, broken by a long context 
which has no parallel in the Hebrew Bible. 

Thus I Esdr. i. = 2 Chron. xxxv. i — xxxvi. 21 ; ii. i — 14 -Ezra 
i. ; ii. 15 — 25 = Ezra iv. 7 — 24; iii. i — v. 6 is original; v. 7 — 70 
= Ezra ii. i — iv. 5; vi., vii. = Ezra v., vi. ; viii. i — ix. 36 = Ezra vii. 
I — X. 44; ix. y] — 55 = Neh. vii. 73^ — viii. 13^ The Greek book 
ends abruptly, in a manner which suggests that something has 
been lost ; cf. ix. 55 και €πίσννηχθησαν with 2 Esdr. xviii. 13 
σννηχθησ-αν ot άρχοντας κτλ. The Student may compare the 
ending of the Second Gospel (Mc. xvi. 8). 

The context i Esdr. iii. i — v. 6 is perhaps the most in- 
teresting of the contributions made by the Greek Bible to 
the legendary history of the Captivity and Return. We owe to 
it the immortal proverb Magna est Veritas et praevalet (iv. 41 ^), 
and the story which forms the setting of the proverb is* worthy 
of the occasion. But in its present form it is certainly un- 
historical; Zerubbabel (iv. 13) belonged to the age of Cyrus, 
and it was Cyrus and not Darius (iv. 47 f ) who decreed the 
rebuilding of Jerusalem. It has been suggested that "this 
story is perhaps the nucleus of the whole (book), round which 
the rest is grouped^" In the grouping chronological order 
has been to some extent set aside ; the displacement of Ezra 
iv. 7 — 24 (=1 Esdr. ii. 15 — 25) has thrown the sequence of 
events into confusion, and the scene is shifted from the court 
of Artaxerxes to that of Darius, and from Darius back again 
to Cyrus, with whose reign the history had started. Yet 
Josephus^, attracted perhaps by the superiority of the Greek 
style, uses i Esdras in preference to the Greek version of 
the canonical Ezra-Nehemiah, even embodying in his narra- 
tive the legend of ZerubbabeP. He evades the difficulty 

^ The future {praevalebit) is without authority. In v. 38 Cod. A gives 
Ισχύσει, but in v. 41 ύττερισχύει is unchallenged. The Latin texts have the 
present in both verses. 

2 H. St J. Thackeray, in Hastings' D. B. i. p. 76. 

3 ant. X. 4. 4 — xi. * ant. xi. 3. 2 sqq. 

Books not inchided in the Hebrew Canon. 267 

arising out of the premature reference to Artaxerxes by sub- 
stituting Cambyses\ In the early Church the Greek Esdras 
was accepted without suspicion ; cf. e.g. Clem. Alex, strom. 
i. 21; Origen, in Joann. t. vi. i, in Jos. horn. ix. 10; 
Cyprian, ep. 74. 9. Jerome, however {praef. in Ezr.), dis- 
carded the book, and modern editions of the Vulgate 
relegate it to an appendix where it appears as 3 Esdras, the 
titles I Esdras and 2 Esdras being given to the two parts 
of the canonical book Ezra-Nehemiah". 

The relation of the two Greek recensions of Ezra to 
one another is a problem analogous to that which is presented 
by the two ' versions ' of Daniel, and scarcely less perplexing. 
It has been stated with great care in Hastings' Dictionary 
of the Bible (i. p. 759 if.), by Mr H. St J. Thackeray. He 
distinguishes three views, (i) that i Esdras is a compilation 
from the lxx. version of 2 Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, 
(2) that it is based on an earlier Greek version of those books, 
and (3) that it is an independent translation of an earlier 
Hebrew text ; and while refusing to regard any solution as 
final, he inclines to the second. The third has recently 
found a champion in Sir H. Howorth^, who adds to it the 
suggestion that i Esdras is the true Septuagintal (i.e. the 
Alexandrian) version, whilst 2 Esdras is later, and probably 
that of Theodotion. Mr Thackeray is disposed to regard this 
contention as "so far correct that [i Esdras] represents the 
first attempt to present the story of the Return in a Gr[eek] 
dress," 2 Esdras being "a more accurate rendering of the 
Heb[rew] " which was " subsequently... required and... supplied 
by what is now called the lxx. version." 

2. Wisdom of Solomon. The Greek title is %οφία 

2αλω/ΛώΐΌ5 (2αλο/χώντο9, ^ολο/χώντο9, 2αλω/χ,ώι/). But the book 

^ ant. xi. 2. I sqq. 

2 The English Article (vi) follows this numeration. 

2 In the Academy for 1893. 

268 Books not ifichided in the Hebrew Canon. 

was often cited as r\ 2οφια, -η τται/άρετος 'ϊ^οφία, a name which 
it shared with Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus ; see Lightfoot on 
Clem. I Cor. 55. In the Muratorian fragment it is described 
as " Sapientia ab amicis Salomonis in honorem ipsius scripta." 
The Latin versions and fathers called the book Sapientia 
or Sophia Salomonis (Cyprian, O. Z.), but also simply liber 
Sapie7itiae (Lactantius, Vulg.), 

No other book in the Greek Bible is so manifestly Alex- 
andrian in tone and style. Some early Christian writers 
attributed it to Philo (Hieron. /riz^/i in libros Salomonis: '*non- 
nulli scriptorum veterum hunc esse ludaei Philonis affirmant"), 
and it 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, it is free from the allegorizing spirit of that writer, and 
its conception of the Logos is less developed than his^ On 
the other hand it clearly belongs to a period when the Jewish 
scholars of Alexandria were abreast of the philosophic doctrines 
and the literary standards of their Greek contemporaries. The 
author is acquainted with the Stoic doctrine of the four 
cardinal virtues (c. viii. 7 et ^ίκαίοσννην άγαττα τΐ9, OL Ίτόνοι 
TavrY]<i ίΐσΐν άρ^ταί' σωφροσννην yap καΐ φρόνησιν εκδιδασκει, 
8ίκαίοσννην καΐ dvSpeiav), and Avith the Platonic sense of 
υλ"»; (c. xi. 17 κτίσασα τον νόμ,ον i$ άμορφου νλης' cf. Philo, 
de victim. 13, de inund. opif. 12). His ideas on the subject 
of preexistence (c. viii. 20), of the relation of the body to 
the spirit (c. ix. 15), of Wisdom as the soul of the world 
(vii. 24), are doubtless due to the same source. His language 
is no less distinctly shaped upon Greek models ; " no existing 
work represents perhaps more completely the style of compo- 

1 Ab amicis suggests ύττό φί\ων, and ΰττό φίλων has been thought to be a 
corruption of ύττό Φίλωνο$. 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 the Hebrew Canon. 269 

sition which would be produced by the sophistic school of 
rhetoric^," as it existed under the conditions of Greek life at 
Alexandria. This remark may be illustrated by the peculiar 
vocabulary of the book. Unusual words abound, e.g. ακ-^Χί- 
'^uiTO'i, άμβρόσως, Ι^αλλος, ζωηκόζ, Ιοβόλοζ, κακόμοχθο^, κυνητίκός, 
κρυσταλλοβί,δτ/?, όμοιοτταθης, τταντεττισκοττο?, 7Γθλνμ€ρη<;^ ττρωτο- 
ττλαστος' ά-γζρωχ^ία, άπαΰγασ/χα, άττόρροια, ίΐ^ίγθίΐα, evepyeia, 
evSpaveia, ρ€μβασμόζ, συλλογισμός' μ^τακφναν, /χ,εταλλευειν, ττρον- 
φ^στάναι^. In some of these we can trace the influence of 
philosophical thought, in others the laboured eff"ort of the 
writer to use words in harmony with the literary instincts of 
the age and place to which he belonged. 

The object of the book is to protect Hellenistic Jews from 
the insidious influences of surrounding ungodliness and idolatry, 
but while its tone is apologetic and even polemical, the point 
of view is one which would commend itself to non-Jewish 
readers. The philosophical tendencies and the literary style 
of Wisdom favour the view that it is earlier than Philo, but 
not earUer than the middle of the second century B.C. As to 
the author, the words in which Origen dismissed the question 
of the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews may be 
applied to this pre-Christian writing — τις 8e 6 γραι//ας...το μ^ν 
αληθίς θίος olSev. 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 Jesus, son of Sirach. In cod. Β the 
title of this book is simply 2οφια Setpa^^, but codd. AC give 
the fuller and more accurate form %οφία Ίησον vlov Seipa^ 
(cf. C. L. 27 TTathuav . . Λ\άρα^α iv τω βίβλίω τούτω Ίησονς vlbs 

1 Westcott in Smith's B. D. ii. 1780. Cf. Jerome, /. c. "ipse stylus 
Graecam eloquentiam redolet." 

2 See Deane, p. 27, Westcott, p. 178, Ryle, Smith's B. D"-. i. p. 185. 

3 Σβφάχ^ΝΊ'Ό. " In the Hebrew Josippon (Pseudo-Josephus) the form 
"IT'K^ is a transliteration from the Latin" (Cowley and Neubauer, Original 
Hebrew of a portion of Ecclesiasticus, p. ix. n.). 

270 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 

Sctpa'x'). Jerome had seen a Hebrew Sirach which shared 

with the canonical book the title of Proverbs {praef. in libros 

Salo7n. : "Hebraicum reperi... Parabolas {u''h\!^O) praenotatum"). 

The later name, Ecdesiasticus^ which appears in Cyprian (e.g. 

testi??i. ii. i "apud Ecclesiastico "), marks the 

book as the most important or the most popular of the libri 

ecclesiastici — the books which the Church used for the purpose of 

instruction, although they were included in the Jewish canon. 

Cf. Rufin. ill syinb. 38: "alii libri sunt qui non canonici sed 
ecclesiastici a maioribus appellati sunt, id est, Sapientia quae 
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 qua- 
litas cognominata est." 

The Wisdom of the Son of Sirach was the work of a 
Palestinian (c. l. 27 Ίτ/σου? ο Ί€ροσολνμ.€ίτης), and written in 
Hebrew or Aramaic ; the Greek version was made by the 
grandson of the writer during a visit to Alexandria {prolog.^ 
II. 5, 18 ff.). This visit is said to have begun Iv τω ογδόω 
και τριακοστά) eVet Ιττί τον Ένεργετον βασιλέως — WOrds which, 
simple as they seem, are involved in a double ambiguity, 
since there were two Ptolemies who bore the 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 prede- 
cessor Philometor, we arrive at B.C. 132 as the terminus a quo 
of the Greek version, and the original may have been com- 
posed some fifty years earlier. 

Fragments of the original are preserved in Rabbinic 

1 On 'E\eafa/3 (which follows Σβί/οάχ in the Greek) see Ryssel in 
Kautzsch, Apokr., p. 253. The newly-discovered Hebrew reads jlVDCi' 
ΝΊ>0 p 1Ti?'?N ρ yiC^*^ p, on which see Schechter, Wisdom of Ben 
Sira, p. 65. 

Books not inchided iii the Hebrew Caiion. 271 

literature. These are in the dialect of the Talmud ; but 
recent discoveries have brought to light a large part of the 
book in classical Hebrew. A comparison of the Greek version 
with the Hebrew text, so far as it has been printed, reveals 
considerable differences, especially when the Greek text em- 
ployed is that of cod. B, which was unfortunately chosen for 
the purpose by the Oxford editors of the Hebrew fragments. 
It must be remembered that these fragments come from a 
MS. of the nth or 12th century, which may present a cor- 
rupt form of the Hebrew text; and on the other hand, that 
there are considerable variations in the Greek text of Sirach, 
cod. Β 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 ^. At present few experts accept this theory, 
but the question must perhaps be regarded as sub iudice. 

In all but one^ of the known MSS. of the Greek Sirach, 
there is a remarkable disturbance of the sequence. They pass 
from c. xxx. 34 to c. xxxiii. 13 b, returning to the omitted 
passage after xxxvi. 16 a. The error seems to have arisen 
from a transposition in the common archetype of the pairs of 
leaves on which these two nearly equal sections were severally 
written•* — a fact which is specially instructive in view of the 
large divergences in the Greek MSS. to which reference has 

^ Cf. Hatch, Essays, p. 281. A group of MSS. headed by V = '23 
contains a considerable number of verses or stichi omitted by the rest 
of our Greek authorities; see Smith, Ό. B'^. i. i. p. 842. 

2 Origin of the original Hebrezo of Ecclesiasticus, 1 899. See on this a 
letter by Prof. Driver in the Guardian, June 28, 1899, and Dr Taylor's 
remarks in Ben Sira, p. Ixx ft". 

^ The exception is H-P., 248, a Vatican MS. of the 14th century. On 
this MS. see Fritzsche, p. xxiii; Zenner in Z. K. Th., 1895. 

^ See Fritzsche in exeg. Handbuch, v. p. 169 f. 

272 Books not mchided in the Hebrew Canon. 

been made. The true order is preserved in the Old Latin^, 
Syriac, and Armenian versions. 

4. Judith ('louSet^, -8t^, -S>7<9, = Γΐη•ΐπ^., cf. Gen. xxvi. 34, 
where the same spellings are found in the cursives, though the 
uncials exhibit 'lo^SetV, Ιουδιν), an historical romance, of which 
the scene is laid in the days of Nebuchadnezzar (c. i. 2). The 
date of its composition is uncertain. A ter7ninus ad quevi is 
provided by the fact that Clement of Rome knew the story 
(l Cor. 55 Ίουδι^ ύ] μ-ακαρία.,.τταρζΒωκζν Κύριος ^Ολοφζρνην iv 
χ^φΐ θηλίία%)-; and the name of Judith's enemy has suggested a 
ter??ii?ius a quo, for Olophernes^ appears to be a softened form 
of Orophernes, the name of a Cappadocian king, c. B.C. 158, 
who may have been regarded as an enemy of the Jews'*. The 
religious attitude of the author of Judith is that of the devout 
Pharisee (cf. e.g. viii. 6, x. 2 if., xi. 13, xii. 7), and the work 
may have been a fruit of the patriotic feeling called forth by 
the Maccabean wars. 

Origen's Jewish teachers knew nothing of a Semitic original 
(cf. ad African. 13 : 'E^patot τω Ύωβία ov )(^ρωνταί οΰδε τ-β 
lovSrje, ovhe yap €χονσίν αντα και iv άττοκρυφοις Έβραιστί, ω? 
απ αυτών μ.αθόντί'ζ έγνωκαμζν). Jerome, οη the Other hand, 
not only says expressly {praef. in Judith) : " apud Hebraeos 
liber ludith inter apocrypha {ν.ί. hagiographa) legitur," but 
he produced a version or paraphrase from an Aramaic source 
("ea quae intellegentia Integra ex verbis Chaldaeis invenire 
potui, Latinis expressi")^ 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 Ό\οφέρνη%, as is presupposed by the Latin. 

* Cf. art. Holof ernes in Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 402. There were, 
however, earlier kings of the same name [op. cit. p. 823; cf. Schiirer^, iii. 
p. 169 f., n. 19). 

5 See however Ball in Speaker's Conim. Apocr. i. pp. 243, 259 ff . ; 
and F. C Porter in Hastings' B. D. ii. p. 822^. 

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 273 

The Greek Judith is said by Fritzsche' to exist in three 
recensions : (i) that of the Uncials and the majority of the 
cursives, (2) that of codd. 19, 108, and (3) that which is 
represented by cod. 58, and is in general agreement with 
the Old Latin and Syriac versions, which are based upon a 
Greek text. 

5. ToBiT (Ύωβζίτ (-βίτ, -βητ), Ύωβζίθ, Todias, liber Tobiae, 
iitriusqiie Tobiae), a tale of family life, the scene of which is 
laid at 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 
of Origen's time, however, refused to recognise its authority 
(Grig, de or at. 14 τ•^ δέ τον Ύωβήτ βίβ^ίο άνηλίγονσίν οΐ e/c 
ττΐριτομης, ως μη ζν^ίαθηκω), Οι even to include it among their 
apocrypha (see above, under Judith) ; but it was accepted by 
the Church {ep. ad African. I. c. χρώνται τω Ύωβία at εκκλη- 
σίαή, and there is abundant evidence of its popularity among 
Christians (cf. Ps. Clem. 2 Cor. 16. 4, Polyc. ad Smyrn. 10. 2, 
Clem. Alex, strom. ii. 23, vi. 12, Grig, de orat. 11, in Ro?n. 
viii. II, c. Cels. v. 19, Cypr. tesfi?n. iii. i, 6, 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 
' Chaldee,' i.e. Aramaic, copy, but with such haste that the 
whole was completed in a single day {praef. in Tob. "exi- 
gitis ut librum Chaldaeo sermone conscriptum ad latinum 
stylum tradam..,feci satis desiderio quia vicina 
est Chaldaeorum lingua sermoni Hebraico, utriusque linguae 
peritissimum loquacem reperiens unius diei laborem arripui, 
et quidquid ille mihi Hebraicis verbis expressit, hoc ego 

^ Fritzsche, libri apocr. p. xviii sq. ; Schiirer^, iii. p. 172. The text in 
codd. 19, 108, is said to be Lucianic (Max Lohr in Kautzsch, Apokr., 
p. 147). 

S. S. 18 

274 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 

accito notario sermonibus Latinis exposui^"). Thus, as in 
the case of Judith, we have two Latin versions, the Old 
Latin, based upon the Greek, and Jerome's rough and ready 
version of the Aramaic. 

The Greek text itself exists in two principal recensions, 
represented by the two great uncials Β and i<. In c. vi. 9 — 
xiii. 18 Fritzsche adds a third text supplied by the cursives 
44, 106, 107. The relation of the two principal texts to each 
other has recently been discussed by Nestle (Septuagintastu- 
dien, iii.) and by J. Rendel Harris (in the Avierican Journal 
of Theology^ iii. p. 541 if.). Both, though on different grounds, 
give preference to the text of X. Harris, however, points out 
that while Κ is probably nearer to the original Hebrew, Β 
may exhibit the more trustworthy text of the Alexandrian 
version of the book. 

6. Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah (Βαροΰχ, Έττι- 
στολτ; 'Icpe/xtov, \^prophetid\ Baruch) were regarded by the Church 
as adjuncts of Jeremiah, much in the same way as Susanna and 
Bel were attached to Daniel. Baruch and the Epistle occur 
in lists which rigorously exclude the non-canonical books ; 
they are cited as 'Jeremiah' (Iren. v. 35. i, Tert. scorp. 8, 
Clem. Alex. paed. i. 10, Cypr. testim. ii. 6); with Lamentations 
they form a kind of trilogy supplementary to the prophecy 
(Athan. ep. 39 'lepc/^tas και σνν αΰτω Βαρου;^, Qprji'OL, Έττιστολτ;, 
Cyril. Hier. catech. iv. -^^i 'lepe/Atov /Λ€τά Βαρούχ και, Θρτ/νωι/ και 
Έ7Γΐστολτ79^). In some Greek MSS. the Epistle follows Baruch 
without break, and in the Latin and English Bibles it forms 
the sixth and last chapter of that book. 

^ A 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 list 
of the Hebrew canon (Eus. H. E. vi. 25 Ίερβμία^ σνν θρήνοις καΐ τχι 
ΈτΓίστολ^ έν evi). 

Books not included in tJie Hebrew Canon. 275 

The Epistle (άντίγραφον επιστολής ης αττεστίίλβι/ 'lepe^ta? 
ττρός τονς αχθησομ^νονζ \ί). Ι. α.'κα.γβίντα.%\ αίχμαλωτονζ €ΐ9 Έαβν- 
λώνα) seems to have been suggested by Jer. xxxvi. (xxix.) i 
(cf. 2 Kings XXV. 20 ff.). It is generally recognised that this 
little work was written in Greek by a Hellenist who was 
perhaps anterior to the writer of 2 Maccabees (cf. 2 Mace, 
ii. iff.)^ 

The problem presented by Baruch is less simple. This 
book is evidently a complex work consisting of two main 
sections (i. i. — iii. 8, iii. 9 — v. 9)^, each of which may be 
subdivided (i. i — 14, historical preface; i. 15 — iii. 8, confession 
and prayer; iii. 9 — iv. 4, exhortation; iv. 5 — v. 9, encourage- 
ment). Of these subsections the first two shew traces of a 
Hebrew original; cf. e.g. i. 10 /χάννα = ΠΠρρ^ ϋ. 3 ανθρωπον 
=^^^i<, iii. 4 τΦν τ^θνηκότων^'^ΌΌ (for ^Γ>Ρ)^; the third has been 
held"* to rest on an Aramaic document, whilst the fourth is 
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 Chris- 
tian writers from Athenagoras {suppl. 9) until the time of 

^ On the first point see J. T. Marshall in Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 579, 
and on the other hand Schiirer^, iii. p. 344. Cf. Nestle, Marginalien, 

P• 4^ ^• . , ., . 

- In the first section the Divine Name is Kiiptos or K. ό ^eos, while in 

the second it is either [d] ^eos or ό aiovios, 6 ayioi. See Dr Gifford in 

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. 


2/6 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 

Jerome, and its practical inclusion in the canon, if the Greek 
version in its 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. 

C07ist. Ap. V. 20 και γαρ κα\ νυν δεκάττ; τον μηνός Ταρπιαίον 
σνναθροιζόμίνοί tovs θρήνους Ϊ€ρ€μίου αναγινόίσκουσιν ...και τον 
Βαρούχ. Hieron. p7'ae/. co7mii. in lerem. "vulgo editioni Septua- 
ginta copulatur, nee habetur apud Hebraeos" ; praef. ve?'s. lerem. 
"apud Hebraeos nee legitur nee habetur." Epiph. de mens, et 
pond. 5 ου κύνται αϊ ΙττιστοΚαι [Βαρού;^ και Ίερβ/χίου] τταρ 'Έβραίοις. 

η. Books of Maccabees (Μακκαβαίων α, β", γ', δ', Macha- 
baeorum lihri; τα Μακκαβαϊκά, Hippol. in Σ>αη. iv. 3 ; Orig. ap. 
Eus. H. E. vi. 25). The four books differ widely in origin, 
character, and literary value; the bond which unites them is 
merely their common connexion with the events of the age 
which produced the heroes of the Hasmonaean or Maccabean'' 

I Maccabees. This book seems to have been used by 
Josephus {ant. xii. 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 το των 

1 Dr Nestle points out that Baruch and Jeremiah seem to have been 
translated by the same hand, unless the translator of Baruch deliberately 
copied the translator of Jeremiah. Certain unusual words are common to 
the two books in similar contexts, e.g. a^aros, άποστολτ^, δεσ/^ώττ;?, irei- 

2 ν• 20• But the reference to Baruch is wanting in the Syriac Didas- 
calia (Smith, D. B.^ i. p. 359). 

•^ For the name Ma/c/ca^aios see Schiirer, E. T. i. p. 212 f. n.; it 
belonged primarily to Judas, cf. r Mace. i. 4 ά.νίστΎ\'\ούΙο.%ο καλούμ€νο$ Μ.; 
Joseph, αηί. xii. 6 'loo8as ό καλ. Μ. 

Books not inchided in tJie Hebrew Canon. 277 

Μακκαβάίκών, Origen ap. Eus. I.e. m Μακκαβαϊκα αττερ iinye- 
Ύραπται %αρβηθ σα^βαναιελ {vJ. %. σαβανί eX). Whatever may 
be the meaning of this title', it is clearly 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 
or 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 is preserved in a St Germain's and a 
Madrid MS. ; a Lyons MS. gives a text in which the two are 
mixed ^. 

The history of i Mace, covers about 40 years (b.c. 175 
— 132). There are indications that the writer was removed 
by at least a generation from the end of his period (cf c. xiii. 
30, xvi. 23 f). He was doubtless a Palestinian Jew, but his 
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. 

2 Maccabees. The existence of a book bearing this title 
is implied by Hippolytus, who quotes i Mace, with the 
formula ev rfi ττρωτΎ) βίβλω των Μακκαβάίκών άναγεγραττται, and 
by Origen, if we may trust the Latin interpretation {in ep. ad 
Rom.., t. viii. i "in primo libro Machabaeorum scriptum est"); 
the title itself occurs in Eus. praef. ev. viii. 9 (tJ δευτέρα τών 
Μακκαβαίων). But the evidence goes further back. Philo 
shews some knowledge of the book in Qiiod 077i7iis probus liber., 
§13, and the author of the Ep. to the Hebrews has a clear 
reminiscence of its Greek (Heb. xi. 31 άλλοι δέ ^τνμπανίσθησαν 
κτλ., cf. 2 Mace. vi. 19, 30). 

1 For various attempts to interpret it see Ryle, Canon, p. 185. 

2 Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, pp. 62, 68. 

2/8 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 

The writer is described by Clement of Alexandria {strain, v. 
14) as δ σννταζάμενος την των Μακκαβαϊκων έτητομην. This 
is precisely what he claims to do (c. ii. 23 νπο Ίάσωνος τον 
Κ.νρηναίον Βεβηλωμένα δια TreWe βιβλίων, ττεφασόμεθα Bl €vbs 
συντάγματος Ιττίτεμάν). The work of the Cyrenian has 
perished, whilst the Alexandrian epitome survives. For Alex- 
andrian the epitomist probably was; "the characteristics of the 
style and language are essentially Alexandrian... the form of 
the allusion to Jason shews clearly that the compiler was not 
his fellow countryman \" ''The style is extremely uneven; at 
times it is elaborately ornate (iii. 15 — 39, v. 20, vi. 12 — 16, 
23 — 28, vii. &c.) ; and again, it is so rude and broken as to 
seem more like notes for an epitome than a finished composi- 
tion " (xiii. 19 — 26) ; indeed it is difficult to believe that such 
a passage as the one last cited can have been intended to go 
forth in its present form. That the work never had a Semitic 
original was apparent to Jerome {prol. gal. "secundus Graecus 
est, quod ex ipsa quoque φράσ^ι probari potest"). The 
vocabulary is extraordinarily rich in words of the later literary 
Greek, and the book betrays scarcely any disposition to 

The second book of Maccabees presents a striking contrast 
to the first. Covering a part of the same period (b.c. 175 
— 160), it deals with the events in a manner wholly different. 
In I 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. A third book of Μακκαβαικά finds a place 

1 Westcott in Smith's D. B.^ ii. p. 175. 

2 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." 

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 279 

in 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. δ< passes from the 
first book to the fourth, whether the omission of the second 
and third is due to the deliberate judgement of the scribe or 
to his want of an archetype. 

A more exact description of 3 Maccabees would be that 
which it seems to have borne in some circles — the Ptolemaica^. 
The story belongs to the reigns of Ptolemy Philopator (b.c. 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 Egypt with the intention 
of avenging himself on the Alexandrian Jews ; but by the 
interposition of Providence his 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 [c. vii. 11] cannot be an inven- 
tion... that Philopator in some way injured the condition of the 
Jews, and that they were concerned in the insurrection of the 
nation, seems very probable^." Moreover Josephus has a 
somewhat similar tale drawn from another source, and con- 

^ Fritzsche has used codd. 19, 44, 55, 6i, 64, 71, 74, 93. 

2 In the Pseudo-Athanasian synopsis where the MSS. give Μακκαβαίκα 
δ', ΐΐτολεμαίκά. Credner proposed to read M. /cat (>>-) Πτολ. An ex- 
planation of the existing reading attempted by Fabricius, cod. pseud, epigj'. 
V. T. i. p. 1 164, is hardly to be considered satisfactory. Zahn {Gesch. d. 
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. 

28ο Books 910 1 included in tJie Hebrew Canon. 

nected with another reign' {c. Ap. ii. 5). The present book 
is doubtless Alexandrian, and of relatively late origin, as its 
inflated style, "loaded with rhetorical ornament^," sufficiently 
testifies. Some critics (Ewald, Hausrath, Reuss^) would place 
it in the reign of Caligula, but the knowledge of earHer 
Alexandrian life which it displays points to an earlier date, 
perhaps the first century B.C. 

4 Maccabees. According to Eusebius and Jerome this 
book was the work of Josephus^. 

Eus. H. E.f iii. 10 τηπόνηται 8e icai αλΧο ουκ ayevves σττου- 
8ασμα τω άν^ρΐ (sc. Ιωστ^ττω) nepl αντοκράτορος Χογισμον, ο TLves 
Μακκαβαϊκον cTrey payj/av τώ tovs ay ων as των iv τοί? ούτω καΧον- 
μίνοις ΜακκαβαϊκοΊς συyypάμμaσίv νπ€ρ της els το 6eiov euae/3etas 
άν^ρισαμύνων Εβραίων περ^χβιν. Hieron. de virr. ill. 13 "alius 
quoque libro eius qui inscribitur Trepi αντοκράτορος Xoyισμov 
valde elegans habetur, in quo at Maccabeorum digesta martyria" 
(cf c. Pelag. ii. 5). 

The book is a philosophical treatise upon the question, 
€t αΰτοδεστΓΟΤο? Ιστιν τώι/ ττα^ών ό €νσ€βή<; λογισ/χο?. But the 
greater part of it^ is occupied by a rhetorical panegyric upon 
the Jewish martyrs, Eleazar, and the seven brothers and their 
mother, who perished in the Maccabean troubles. This 
portion appears to be based on 3 Mace. vi. 18, vii. 42, 
which it amplifies with an extraordinary wealth of language 
and a terribly realistic picture of the martyrs' sufferings. 
The rhetoric of the writer, however, is subordinated to his 
passion for religious philosophy. In philosophy he is a pupil 
of the Stoics; like the author of the Wisdom of Solomon 
he holds fast by the doctrine of the four cardinal Virtues 
(i. 18 της 8e σοφίας ei8eai καθιστασιν φρόνησις και Βίκαωσννη 

1 That of Euergetes II. (Physcon) ; cf. Mahaffy, p. 381. 

2 Westcott in Smith's £>. B. ii. p. 179. 
"^ Schurer•^ iii. p. 365. 

•* The same belief is expressed by the fact that the book is found 
in some MSB. of Josephus. See Fabricius-Harles, v. 26 f. 
5 Viz. c. III. 19, to the end. 

Books not incliLded in the Hebrew Canon. 281 

/cat dvSpLa καΐ σωφροσύνη), and he Sternly demands that the 
ττάθη shall be kept under restraint by the power of Reason. 
In religion he is a legahst with Pharisaic tendencies; he 
beheves in future punishment (ix. 9, xiii. 15), in the eternal 
life which awaits the righteous (xv. 3, xvii. 5, xviii. 23), and 
in the atonement for sin which is made by voluntary sacrifice 
(vi. 29, xxii. 22). 

The style of 4 Mace, abounds in false ornament and 
laboured periods. But on the whole it is "truly Greek V' 
and approaches nearer than that of any other book in the 
Greek Bible to the models of Hellenic philosophy and rhetoric. 
It does not, however, resemble the style of Josephus, and 
is more probably a product of Alexandrian Judaism during 
the century before the fall of Jerusalem. 

8. To the books of the Hebrew canon (τα ΙνΖίάθηκα, τα 
άκοσί^νο) and the 'external' books (τά ε^ω), 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 
catalogue of the 'Sixty Books,' after reciting the canonical 
books of the O. and N. Testaments, and τά ττερι [leg. ττερα) τούτων 
ίξω (the two Wisdoms, i — 4 Maccabees, Esther, Judith, Tobit), 
continues : Kat οσα άττόκρνψα• Άδά/Λ ,Ένώ;^, Αάμ^χ, ΐΐατριάρχαι^ 
ΐΐροσζνχι^ *1ωσηφ, Έλδάδ, Αιαθηκη Μ,ωνσεως, Άνάληψίς Μωυσεω?, 
Ψαλμ,οΙ '^ολομωντος, Ήλιου άττοκάλνφίς, Ήσαίου ορασίς, '^οφονίον 
άποκάλυφίζ, Ζαχαρίον αττοκάλυψίς, "Εσδρα αττοκάλυι/^ί,ς. The 
Pseudo-Athanasian Synopsis and the Stichometry of Nice- 
phorus count among the αττόκρνφα τη<; τταλαια?, together with 
certain of the above, 'Αβραάμ. .. Β αρονχ, Άββακονμ, Έζζκίηλ, 
καΐ Δανί.ϊ;λ, ι/ζευδετηγραφα". Ebed Jesu mentions also a book 
called Traditions of the Elders^ the History of Asenath, and 

1 Westcott in Smith's D. B?- ii. p. 181. 

2 On 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). 

282 Books not mcluded in the Hebrew Canon. 

even the Fables of Aesop disguised under the title Proverbs 
of Josephiis. Besides these writings the following are cen- 
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 perhi- 
betur, Testamentum Lob, Poenitentia Lambre et Mambre, Solo- 
monis i?iterdicfio. 

Though the great majority of these writings at one time 
existed in Greek, they were not admitted into collections of 
canonical books. A partial exception was made in favour 
of the Psalms of Solomon. This book is mentioned among 
the (xvTtXeyo/xem of the O.T. in the Stichometry of Nice- 
phorus and in 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 in the list immediately precedes them. It has 
been conjectured^ that they once had a place in Cod. Sinai- 
ticus, which like Cod. A has lost some leaves at the end of 
the N.T. Their absence from the other great uncials and 
from the earlier cursives may be due to the influence of the 
Laodicean canon (lix.), on ov Set ΐΖιωτίκον<; ψαλμούς^ XiyeaOaL 
Iv TTj εκκλησία ουδέ ακανόνιστα )8ι/?λια, άλλα μόνα τά κανονικά 
της τταλαιάς καΐ κάινης Βιαθηκης. Happily the Psalms Survived 
in private collections, and find a place in a few relatively 

^ The catalogue ends ΟΜογ ΒιΒλίλ . . | and below, γΛλΜΟί coAo- 

ΜωΝτοΰ I IH. 

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 Her- 
mas correspond with fair accuracy to the space which would be required for 
the Psalms of Solomon, 

3 Cf. Babr. ap. Beveregii Synod, p. 480 ευρίσκονται rtves ψαΚμοΙ πέρα 
τού$ pv' φα\μον3 του ΑαβΙδ \ΐ^6μενοι του Σο\ομωντο$...τούτονί οΰν ονομά- 
aaPTes οΐ ττατέρεζ ίδίωτίκού$. 

Books not iiiclnded in the Hebrew Canon. 283 

late cursives of the poetical 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 their teaching and 
spirit 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 exists between the Greek Psalms and the Greek Book of 
Baruch. Professor Ryle and Dr James, who regard Baruch 
iv. 2>^ — V. 9 (Greek) as based on the Greek of Ps. Sol. xi., 
are disposed to assign the version of the Psalms to the last 
decade of the first century B.C. ^ They observe that the Mes- 
sianic passages contain "no trace of Christian influence at 
work." 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 other apocryphon of the Greek Old Testament claims 
attention here. The Book of Enoch has since 1838 been 
in the hands of scholars in the 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 {cf. 14 f.), a brief tachygraphic extract in cod. 
Vat. gr. 1809, published in facsimile by Mai {patr. nov. 
biblioth. ii.), and deciphered by Gildemeister {ZDMG., 1855, 
p. 622 ff.), and the excerpts in the Chrojiographia of Georgius 
Syncellus^ But in 1886 a small vellum book was found in 

1 In the latter case they go with the two Wisdoms in the order Sap., 
Ps. Sol., Sir. or (in one instance) Sap., Sir., Ps. Sol. 

2 Ryle and James, Psalms of the Phaj-isees, p. xl ff., xliv fF. Schiirer^, 
iii. p. 152 f. 

^ 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 By- 
zantinae, t. i, where they are edited by W. Dindorf. 

284 Books not included in the Hebreiv Canon. 

a Christian grave in Akhmim (Panopolis), in Upper Egypt, 
which contained ititcr alia the first thirty-two chapters of 
Enoch in Greek — nearly the whole of the first section of the 
book. This large fragment was published by M. Bouriant 
in the ninth volume of Memoires piiblies par les membres de 
la mission archeologique Fran^aise au Caire (Paris, i^'' 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 version of Enoch seems to have been circulated 
in the ancient Church; cf. Barn. 4. 16; Clem. Alex. eel. prop h. 
2 ; Orig. de princ. i. 3. 3, iv. 35, ho7n. in Nu?n. 28. 2. The 
book was not accepted by authority (Orig. c. Cels. v. 54 
ev rats ίκκλησίαις ov ττάνν φερβται ώς ^eta τα eTrtyeypa/xjutei/a 
του *Evcu;>^ βιβλία: in loann. t. vi. 25 et τω φίλον τταρα^ίχεσθαι 
ώ? αγιον το βιβλίον. Hieron. de virr. ill. 4 "apocryphus 
est"), but opinion was divided, and Tertullian was prepared to 
admit the claims of a writing which had been quoted in a 
Catholic Epistle {de cult. faem. i. 3 " scio scripturam Enoch 
...non recipi a quibusdam quia nee in armarium ludaicum 
admittitur...a nobis quidem nihil omnino reiciendum est quod 
pertineat ad nos...eo accedit quod E. apud ludam apostolum 
testimonium possidet)." In the end, however, it appears to 
have been discredited both in East and West, and, if we 
may judge by the almost total disappearance of the Greek 
version, it was rarely copied by Catholics even for private 

^ See Schiirer•"^, iii. p. i96ff. 

Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 285 

study. A mere chance has thrown into our hands an excerpt 
made in the eighth or ninth century, and it is significant that 
in the Akhmim book Enoch is found in company with frag- 
ments of a pseudonymous Gospel and Apocalypse \ 

Literature of the non-canonical Books. 

I ESDRAS. De Wette-Schrader, Lehrbuch, §§ 363 — 4; Konig, 
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. — x., i — 30; 
Lagarde, tibr. V. T. canon.., p. i. (Lucianic) ; O. T. in Greek., ii. 
(text of B, with variants of A); W. J. Moulton, iiber die Uber- 
lieferung des textkrit. Wei'th der drittoi Esra-Bicchs, Ζ A TW., 
1899, 2 (p. 209 ff.). Commentaries: Fritzsche, exeg. Hattdbiich 2. 
d. Apokr.., i. ; Lupton, in Speaker's Co7n?n., Apocrypha., i. ; Guthe, 
in Kautzsch, Apohypheti, p. i ff. 

Wisdom of Solomon. Fabricius-Harles, iii. 727. De Wette- 
Schrader, Lehrbiich., §§ 378 — 382; Konig, Einteitimg, p. 146; 
Dahne, Darstelltmg., ii. p. 152 ff. ; Westcott, in Smith's D. B. iii. 
p. 1778 ff. ; Drummond, Philo Judaeiis., \. p. 177 ff. Text and 
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. 
Sot. (1828); Grimm, 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). 

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 
Testa7}ie7tt of Abraham {ed. M. R. James), parts of the Oraaila Sibylli7ta 
{ed. A. Rzach), the Testaments of the XII Patriarchs {ed. Sinker), the 
Latin Ascension of Isaiah {ed. O. von Gebhardt, Λvith the new Greek frag- 
ments), 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, η λειττη 
TeVeats {ed. R. H. Charles). 

286 Books not included in the Hebrew Canon. 

Wisdom of the Son of Sirach. Fabricius-Harles, iii. 718; 
De Wette-Schrader, § 383 if. ; Konig, p. 145. Westcott and 
Margoliouth, Ecdesiasticus, in Smith's D. Br i. 841; Schiirer^, 
iii.. p. 157 ff. (where a full list of recent monographs will be 
found). Text with apparatus : 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). Bretschnei- 
der, liber lesii Siracidae Or., Ratisbon, 1806. Cf. Hatch, Essays^ 
p. 296 ff. Nestle, Marginalie?i (1893), p. 48 ff. Klostermann, 
Aiialecta, p. 26 f. Commentaries : Bretschneider {ut supra) ; 
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- 
ment der Weisheit des fesus Sirach., 1897; Halevy, Etude sur la 
pa7'tie du texte hebreu de VEcclesiastique (Paris, 1897); Schlatter, 
das neu gefundene hebr. Stiick des Sirach (Guterslob, 1897); 
l^Qvi, Ε Ecclesiastique^ Paris, 1898; C. Taylor, in fQR., 1898; 
D. S. Margoliouth, the origin of the ^Original Hebrew' of Eccle- 
siasticus., 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, 
§ 373 ff• ; Konig, p. 145 f. ; Nestle, Marginalien, p. 43 ff. ; West- 
cott-FuUer in Smith's D. BP- I. ii. p. 1850 ff. ; F. C. Porter in 
Hastings' D. B. ii. p. 822 ff. ; Schiirer^, iii. p. 167. 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; 
Schiirer^, iii. p. 174. Text and apparatus : Holmes and Parsons, 
v.: Fritzsche, pp. xvi ff., 108 ff.; Old Testament in Greek, ii. 
(texts of Β and ί<, with variants of A) ; Reuscli, libellus Tobit e 
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 iji the Hebrew Canon. 287 

(Munster, 1877); Scholz, Commeiitar s. Biiche Tobias (1889); 
Rosenmann, Stiidien z. Buche Tobit (Berlin, 1894); J. M. Fuller 
in Speako^s Co/nm., Apoc?'., i. ; Lohr, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen^ 
p. 135 ff. Cf. E. Nestle, Septiiagintastiidien^ iii. (Stuttgart, 1899); 
J. R. Harris in American J οιΐ7ΊΐαΙ of Theology^ July, 1899. 

Baruch and Epistle. Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 734 f. ; De Wette- 
Schrader, § 389 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. Bib- 
lica, i. 492 ff. Text and apparatus : Holmes and Parsons, v. ; 
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, p. 213 ff. 

I — 4 Maccabees. Fabricius-Harles, iii. p. 745 ff. ; De Wette- 
Schrader, § 365 ff. ; Konig, p. 482 ff. ; Westcott in Smith's D. B.^ 
ii. p. 170 ff.; Schiirer^, iii. pp. 139 ff., 359 ff., 393 ff. ; Rosenthal, 
das erste Makkabderbuch (Leipzig, 1867); Willrich, Judeji ti. 
Griechen vor der makkab. Erhebufig (1895) 5 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. Hand- 
buch, Apokr., iii., iv. ; Bissell, in Lange-Schaff's Comm.\ G. 
Rawlinson in Speaker's Comm., Apocr., ii. (books i. — ii.) ; Fair- 
weather and Black, i Maccabees (Cambridge, 1897); Kautzsch 
and Kamphausen, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, p. 24 ff. 

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA. The Student will find fuller information on 
this subject in Fabricius, Codex pseicdepigraphus V. T. (Ham- 
burg, 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 of apocalyptical J ewisli 
literature (N. Y., 1891); Smith's and Hastings' Bible Diction- 
aries; 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- 

^ A collation of the Syriac 4 Mace, with the Greek has been contributed 
by Dr Barnes to 0. T. in Greek^, vol. iii. (p. 900 ff.). 

288 Books not included in the Hebrew Cajion. 

calyptic Literature and Apocrypha (i. 213-58). For the litera- 
ture of the several writings he may refer to Strack, Eiiileitung^ 
p. 230 ff. In Kautzsch's Apokr. u. Psetidepigraphen the follow- 
ing O. T. pseiidepigrapha are included : Martyrdom of Isaiah 
(Beer), Sibylline Oracles^ iii. — v., Άηά prooe7n. (Blass), Asccnsioii 
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), Testa- 
7fie?its of XII Patriarchs (Schnapp). On the eschatology of this 
literature see Charles, Eschatology^ Hebrew^ Jewish and Chi'is- 
iian (London, il 

Psalms of Solomon. Fabricius, Cod.pseudepigr. V.T., i. p. 914 ff. ; 
Fritzsche, tibr. apocr. V. T. gr., pp. xxv ff., 569 ff. ; Ryle and 
James, Psalms of the Pharisees (Cambridge, 1891); O. v. Geb- 
hardt, die PsalmcTi Salo7nds {\^€ν^τ\%^ 1895); Old Testa77ie7it iji 
Greek'^ (Cambridge, 1899^). Ryle and James' edition is specially 
valuable for its full Introduction, and Gebhardt's for its inves- 
tigation into the pedigree and relative value of the MSS. On 
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. Laurence, Libri E7wch ve7-sio aethiopica (Ox- 
ford, 1838); Dillmann, Z/<^<?r He7wch acthiopice (Leipzig, 185 1); 
Bouriant, F7'ag77ients du texte grec dii livre d^E7ioch...m Me- 
7noires, &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 
art. in 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 intro- 
duction and German version by Dr G. Beer will be found in 
Kautzsch, Pseiidepigraphen., p. 217 ff. 

1 The text in the Cambridge manual LXX., which is that of cod. Vat. 
gr. 336, and is accompanied by an apparatus and a brief description of the 
MSS., can be had, together with the text of Enoch, in a separate form. 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 

I. No thorough treatment of the Greek idiom of the 
Lxx. is known to exist. Two ancient treatises upon the 
dialect of Alexandria, by Irenaeus (Minutius Pacatus) and 
Demetrius Ixion\ have unhappily disappeared. In modern 
times the ground has been broken by Sturz and Thiersch", 
and within the last few years Deissmann^ has used the recently 
discovered papyri of Egypt to illustrate the connotation or 
the form of a 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 
Old Testament is still a real want, and the time has almost 
come for attempting to supply it. Biblical scholars have now at 

^ See Fabricius-Harles, vi. p. 193 f. Both writers lived in the time of 

- 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. 

^ Bibelstudien (1895), and A^eue Bibelstudieii (1897). 

4 Sources of N.T. Greek (1895). 

5 Etude sur le Grec du N.T. (1896). 

S. s. 19 

290 The Greek of the Septiiagint. 

their disposal a store of trustworthy materials in the Oxford 
Concordance, and the larger Cambridge Septuagint will supply 
an accurate and sufficient textual guide. On the basis of 
these two works it ought to be possible for the workers of 
the twentieth century to prepare a satisfactory grammar and 
lexicon \ Meanwhile in this chapter nothing more can be 
attempted than to set before the beginner some of the lin- 
guistic problems presented by the Greek of the Septuagint, 
and to point out the chief features which distinguish it from 
other forms of the language. 

2. The student who enters upon this subject with some 
knowledge of the Greek New Testament must begin by 
reminding himself of the different conditions under which 
the two parts of the Greek Bible were produced. The Greek 
Old Testament was not like the New Testament the work of 
a single generation, nor are its books as homogeneous in their 
general character. The Septuagint is a collection of transla- 
tions interspersed with original Greek works, the translations 
belonging partly to the third century B.C., partly to the second 
and first, and the original works chiefly to the end of this 
period. Even in the case of the Pentateuch we are not at 
liberty to assume that the translators worked at the same time 
or under the same circumstances. These considerations com- 
plicate 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 
to speak shortly after their settlement in Egypt. Later trans- 
lations will 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 lexicon was planned in 1895 by a Cambridge Committee, but the 
work is suspended for the present. There is some reason to hope that 
a Grammar may before long be undertaken by a competent scholar. 

The Greek of the Septiiagint. 291 

books. Lastly, in the original writings, many of which are 
relatively late, and in which the writers were free from the 
limitations that beset the translator, the Greek will be nearly 
identical with that which was Avritten by the Jewish-Alexan- 
drian historians and philosophers of the time. 

3. We begin by investigating the literary conditions 
under which both the translators and the Avriters lived at 

In the middle of the second century e.c. Polybius' found 
Alexandria inhabited by three races, the native Egyptians, 
who occupied the site of the old seaport Rhacotis, the mer- 
cenary class {το μίσθοφορίκόν), who may be roughly identified 
with the Jews, and the Greeks of the Brucheion, a mixed 
multitude claiming Hellenic descent and wedded to Hellenic 
traditions (et /xtyctScg, "Ελληνβς ομον αν€καθ€ν ήσαν, καί e/xe- 
μνηντο τον kolvov των Ελλήνων Ιθονζ). This fusion of various 
elements in the Greek population of the city must have ex- 
isted from the first. The original colony was largely made up 
of the veterans of Alexander's Macedonian army, volunteers 
from every part of Greece, and mercenaries from the Greek 
colonies of Asia Minor, and from Syria. Even in the 
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 
doubt a similar medley of Hellenic types. Each class 
brought with it a dialect or idiom of its own. The Mace- 
donian dialect, e.g., is said to have been marked by certain 
phonetic changes^ and the use of barbarous terms such as 

^ ap. Strab. 797. 

2 MahaflFy in Flinders Petrie Papyri, i. p. 42. Cf. Empire of the Ρίο- 
le?nies, p. 178 f. 

3 As the change of φ into β {Βερενίκη for Φβρενίκη, &c.), cf. Sturz, de 
dial. Mac, p. 51, n. 

19 — 2 

292 The Greek of the Septiiagiiit. 

dSrj = ουρανός, βζθν^ = άηρ, Sai'os = θάνατος, and of Greek words 

in unusual senses, as -αμ^μβολη, 'camp,' ρνμ.η, street'. Some 

of these passed into the speech of Alexandria, and with them 

Avere echoes of the older dialects — Doric, Ionic, Aeolic — 

and other less known local varieties of Greek. A mongrel 

patois, η Άλ€^ανδρ€ων διαλ€κτο5, as it was called in the title of 

the treatise of Demetrius Ixion, arose out of this confusion 

of tongues. 

No monument of the Alexandrian ' dialect ' remains, unless 

we may seek it in the earlier books of the Alexandrian Greek 

Bible. We have indeed another source from which light 

is thrown on the popular Greek of Egypt under the earlier 

Ptolemies. A series of epistolary and testamentary papyri 

has recently been recovered from the Fayum, and given to 

the world under the auspices of the Royal Irish Academy^; 

a similar collection has been issued at Berlin^ The Greek of 

these documents is singularly free from dialectic forms, owing 

perhaps to local circumstances, as Professor Mahaify suggests ; 

but the vocabulary has, in common with the lxx., many 

striking words and forms, some of which are rare elsewhere. 

The following list has been formed from the indices to the 
Flinders Petrie collection : avabev^pas, άναψάΧακρος, άναφάλαντος, 
αρχίσω ματοφνΧαξ, άρχιτζκτονά,ν, αχνρον, βασίλισσα, -γένημα, δίωρνξ, 
βπιγονη, €ργο8ιώκτης, (νίΧατυς, (φώίΐν, €φωρκ€'ϊν, θίρίστρον, ολιγο- 
"^νχύν, οχνρωμα, oyj/wviov, παιδίον, napaSel^ai, τταρξττίδημος, Trepi- 
δίξιον, neptodeveiv, πράκτωρ, πρεσβύτεροι, στενοχωρείν, χώμα. The 
Berlin papyri yield many other such words, e.g. άναμέτρησις, 
γΧύμμα, δικαίωμα, ΙεροψάΧτης, ιματισμός, καταΧοχισμός, κτηνοτρόφος, 
μισοπονηρία, ολοσχερής, σνμπληρωσις, υπομνηματισμός. 

^ Α list of these words, collected from Hesychius and other lexicogra- 
phers, may be seen in Sturz, p. 34 if. 

^ From Q. Curtius [Be rebus gestis Alexandri M., vi. 9. 36) it appears 
that the Macedonian and the native Greeks understood one another with 

3 In the Cunjiingham Metnoirs for 1891, '93, edited by Prof. Mahaffy. 

•* Agyptische U?'kundeii aus den k'onigl. Museen zu Berlin. Gricchische 
Urk. i. ii. (1895). Further contemporary illustrations of Alexandrian 
Greek may Idc found in Wilcken's Griechische Ostraka (1899). 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 293 

The following letter of the time of Philadelphus will serve 
to 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 (δίκάταρχοί) of a gang engaged in a stone quarry to 
the engineer of the works (αρχιτέκτων) : 

ΚΧέωνι χαίρ€ΐν. οί δ^κάταρχοι των €Χ€υθερ\_ων^ Χατόμων adiKOv- 
μεθα- τα yap 6μοΧο-γηθξ.ντα νπο \\ποΧΧωνίου του διοκητοΰ ονθβν 
yiveTai ημϊν, €χ€ΐ 8e την γραφην Αίότιμος. σπούδασαν οΰν Ινα καθα 
βζξϊΧηφαμξν ήδη, υπο Αίοννσίον και Αιοτίμον χρηματισθί^ ημϊν, <αΙ 
μη τα €ργα €νΧ€ίφθη, καθα καΐ ίμπροσθ^ν iyiveTo. eav yap α'ίσθωνται 
οί ipyaζόμevoL ονθβν ημάς €ΐΧηφϋτας τον σώηρον ενέχυρα θησονσιν^. 

4- Simultaneously with the growth of the colloquial mixed 
dialect, a deliberate attempt was made at Alexandria to revive 
the glories of classical Greek. The first Ptolemy, who had 
been the companion of Alexander's early days, retained 
throughout his life a passion for literature and learning. 
Prompted, perhaps, by Demetrius of Phalerum, Soter founded 
at Alexandria the famous Museum, wdth its cloisters and 
lecture rooms and dining hall where scholars lived a common 
life under a warden appointed by the King-. To Soter is 
also attributed the establishment of the great library which is 
said to have contained 400,000 codices^ Under his successor 
the Museum and Library became a centre of literary activity, 
and the age to which the inception of the Greek Bible is 
usually ascribed produced Aratus, Callimachus, Herondas, Ly- 
cophron, and Theocritus. There is however no reason to 
suppose that the Jewish translators were officially connected 
wath the Museum, or that the classical revival under Soter 
and Ptolemy affected them directly. Such traces of a lite- 
rary style as we find in the Greek Pentateuch are probably 

1 Flinders Petrie Papyri, ii. xiii. (p. 33). The reader will notice several 
LXX. words (5eiv:aTapxos = LXX. 5e/ca5., δίοικητ-ήί, χρηματί^εσθαι, ένέχυρον). 
Sometimes these papyri afford illustrations of the LXX. which are not 
merely verbal; cf. II. xiv. 2 es τά αχνρα -rrpos την ττλίνθορ. 

'^ Strabo, 794; cf Mahafify, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 91 ff. 

3 Joseph., ant. xii. 2. Seneca, de traiiquiL animae 9. Cf. Susemihl, 
Gesch. d. griech. Litteratiir in d. Alexandrinerzeit , i. 336• 

294 '^^^^ Greek of the Septiiagint. 

due not to the influence of the scholars of the Royal Library, 
but to the traditions of Greek writing which had floated 
down from the classical period and were already shaping 
themselves under altered conditions into a type of Greek 
which became the common property of the new Hellenism. 

5. The later Greek, the κοινή or Έλλτ^νικτ) Βιάλ^κτοζ — 
the dialect in general use among Greek-speaking peoples 
from the fourth century onwards^ — was based on Attic Greek, 
but embraced elements drawn from all Hellenic dialects. 
It was the literary language of the cosmopolitan Hellas 
created by the genius of Alexander. The change had begun 
indeed before Alexander. Even Xenophon allows himself 
to make free use of words of provincial origin, and to em- 
ploy Attic words with a new connotation ; and the writings 
of Aristotle mark the opening of a new era in the history 
of the Greek language". But the golden age of the kolvtj 
begins in the second century with Polybius (c. B.C. 145), and 
extends a century or two beyond the Christian era, producing 
such writers as Diodorus Siculus (b.c. 40), Strabo (a.d. 10), 
Plutarch (a.d. 90), and Pausanias (a.d. 160). The language 
used by the writers of the Greek Diaspora may be regarded 
as belonging to a subsection of an early stage of the kolvtj, 
although, since the time of Scaliger, it has been distinguished 
from the latter by the term ' Hellenistic^' A 'Hellenist^*' is 
properly a foreigner who aftects Greek manners and speaks 
the Greek tongue. Thus the Jewish Greek spoken in Pales- 
tine was ' Hellenistic' in the strictest sense. The word is 
often used to describe the Greek of such thoroughly Hellen- 

^ See Professor Jebb in Vincent and Dickson's Handbook to j?iociern 
Greek., p. 290. 

- Mullach, Gramvi. d. Vulgarsprache, p. 48• H. A. A. Kennedy, 
Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 11 ff. 

"* See Winer-Moulton, p. 29. 

^ Acts vi. i, xi. 20. 

The Gi'eek of the Septuagint. 295 

ised writers as Philo and Josephus, and the post-apostolic 
teachers of the ancient Church ; but it is applied with special 
appropriateness to the Alexandrian Bible and the writings of 
the New Testament, which approach most nearly to the 
colloquial Greek of Alexandria and Palestine. 

6. Such were the local types of Greek upon which the 
Jewish translators of the O.T. would naturally mould their 
work. While the colloquial Greek of Alexandria was their 
chief resource, they were also influenced, in a less degree, 
by the rise of the later literary style which was afterwards 
known as the κοινή. 

We are now prepared to begin our examination of the 
vocabulary and grammar of the Alexandrian Bible, and we 
may commence by testing the vocabulary in the translated 
books. Let us select for this purpose the first three chapters 
of Exodus, I Kingdoms, 2 Chronicles, Proverbs, and Jeremiah, 
books which are, perhaps, fairly representative of the trans- 
lation as a whole. 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 
following results. In Exod. i. — iii. there are 19 such words; 
in I Regn. i. — iii., 39 ; in 2 Chron. i. — iii., 27 ; in Prov. i. — iii., 
16; in Jer. i. — iii., 34; making a total of 135 later words in 
15 chapters, or nine to a chapter. Of these words 52 — 
considerably more than a third — appear to be peculiar to the 
Lxx., or to have been used there for the first time in extant 

The following are the Septuagintal words observed in the 
above-named passages. Verbs: άνδρωνν, devrepovv, diodeveiv, 

ξνζνΚο'/ζίσθαι, e^oXeOpevetv, i^ov6evovv, evodovv, κατακληρονομύν, κατα- 
σκοτΓβύβιν, κατ€μβ\€7Γ€ίν, κατο8ννάν, oXeupeveLv, ορθοτομ^Ιν, ορθρίζαν, 
πν€νματοφορ€'ίσθαί,πτωχίζ€ΐν,σκοπ€ν€ΐν, συνεδρίαζαν, τρι^τίζαν, τρο- 
φ€ν€ΐν, φιΚεχθραν. Nowis : αγάτττ^, ασννθζσ'ια, άσφαλτόπισσα, 
βδίΧν-γμα, γένημα, δόμα, (ρ'/οδίόχτης, ΘΧιμμός, καταπάτασμα, κρίμα, 
Χατόμοζ, μίθνσμα, όΧοκαντωμα, όΧοκαύτωσις, ορόφωμα, παντοκράτωρ^ 

296 TJie Greek of the Septiiagint. 

προσηλντος, πρόσκομμα, βοίσκος, σνντριμμα. Foreign ivords (a) 
with Greek terminations : αβρά, θϊβις, σίκλος- {b) transliterated : 
αΐλάμ, 8αβ€ίρ, ξφούδ βάρ, re'/SeX, ^'λωε σαβαώθ, οΐφί, aepaepeO, 

Α 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. i. — x. he 
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 Testa- 
ment; nearly half belonged to the κοίνη, and more than a 
fourth had been used by the writers of tragedy and comedy. 

A complete list of the late words in the lxx. is still a 
desideratian. Lists 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 
part — of the vocabulary of the lxx. As Dr T. K. Abbott 
has pointed out^, the 51st Psalm alone yields four important 
words (aya^wetv, άκοντίζ^ιν, άνόμ-ημ.α, άνταναιρ^ίν) which find 
no place in the N.T. This fact is suggestive, for the Psalm 
is doctrinally important, and the words are such as would 
have lent themselves readily to N.T. use. 

The following lxx. words are condemned by Phrynichus as 
non-Attic: αΙχμα\ωτίζ€σθαι, άποτάσσβσθαί, βασίλισσα, βουνός, 
βρ€χ€ίν (in the sense of v€lv), γρηγορ^Ίν, βΧ^νσεσθαι, β^άδβλφοί, 
κατόρθωμα, 쀕γίστάν, μέθυσος, οικοδομή, παιδίσκη, πάπυρος, παρεμ- 
βολή, πίποίθησις, πΧηζαι, ράπισμα, ρύμη, σκορπίζεσθαι, σΰσσημον. 
Some of these words are said to be provincialisms; e.g. βουνός 
is Sicilian, σκορπίζ^σθαι is Ionic, παρεμβολή and ρύμη are Mace- 

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 

^ Kennedy, oJ>. cit., p. 62. Cf. the lists in the appendix to Grimm- 
Thayer's Lexicon of N. T. Greek (p. 691 fif.). 

- Essays, p. 69. ^ See above, p. 292. 

The Greek of the Septiiagint. 


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 
-^ογ^νζ^ιν occurs in a papyrus of 241 — 239 B.C. ; €ργο8ίωκτης, 
255 'B-C: παρεπίδημος, 225 B.C. ; forms SUCh as ήλθα, επηλθοσαν, 
yeyovav, οΓδβ?, can be quoted from the papyri passim ; avaarpi- 
φεσθαι and ανάστροφη in an ethical sense, \eLTovpyelv in reference 
to the service of a deity, πΐριτύμνεσθαί of circumcision, πρεσβΰ- 
Tepos of an official, are shewn to 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 
into contact with Hebrew associations. As examples the follow- 
ing may suffice : ayyeXos, ypaμμaτ€vs, διάβοΧος, βιδωλοι/, βθνη, 
ξΚκΧησία, παντοκράτωρ, πεντηκοστή, προσηΧντος, χριστός. 

The forms of many words have undergone a change since 
the age of classical Greek. A few specimens may be given from 
the pages of Phrynichus : 

Attic Greek. 

Greek of the lxx. 

Attic Greek. 

Greek of the lxx. 




μόκλος (MSS.) 

«XP^ H-^Xpi 

αχρις, μέχρις 

νεοσσός, -σία 

νοσσός, -σία 







νου μην ία 






















7- But the vocabulary of the lxx. is not its most character- 
istic feature. With no other vocabulary than that of the 
Alexandrian translators, it might be possible to produce a 
fairly good piece of Greek prose in the style of the later prose 
writers. It is in its manner, in the construction of the sen- 
tences and the disposition of the Avords, that the Greek of the 
LXX. is unique, and not only or chiefly in its lexical eccen- 
tricities. This may perhaps be brought home to the student 
most effectually by a comparison of the Greek Bible with two 
great Hellenistic writers of the first century a.d. (a) In the 
works of Philo we have a cultured Hellenist's commentary on 

298 The Greek of the Septuagint. 

the earlier books of the lxx., and as he quotes his text ver- 
batim, the student can discern at a glance the gulf which 
divides its simple manner, half Semitic, half colloquial, from 
the easy command of idiomatic Greek manifested by the 
Alexandrian exegete. We will give two brief specimens. 

Philo de opif. rmindi 7 : φτ^σΐ δ' ώ? iv άρχη ^ποίησ^ν 6 θβος 
τον ονρανον και την yrjv την αρχήν παραΧαμβάνων, ονχ ως 
οίοντα'ι τιν^ς την κατά χρόνον, χρόνος γαρ ουκ ήν προ κόσμου, αλλ' ή 
συν αυτώ η μ€τ αυτόν. eVei yap διάστημα της του κόσμου κινήσεως 
ξστιν 6 χρόνος, πρότερα be τοΰ κινουμένου κ'ινησις ουκ αν yevoiTO, 
αλλ' άναγκαΊον αυτήν ή ύστερον ή άμα συν'ιστασθαι, άναγκαιον αρα 
καιτον χρόνον η ισηΧικα κόσμου yeyovevai η νίώτ€ρον €Κ€ίνου• πρ^σ- 
βύτ€ρον δ' άποφαίν(σθαι τοΧμαν άφιλόσοφον. De migr. Ab7'ahami 
39 '• ^^ν μίντοι σκοπούμενος μή ρα8ίως καταΧαμβάνης ο ζητΰς, ΐπ'ιμενζ 
μή κάμνων . . ου χάριν 6 φιλομαθής τοΰ τόπου Συχ€μ ενβίληπται, 
μεταΧηφθεν 8e τοϋνομα Έυχίμ ωμίασις καΧ^Ιται, πόνου σύμβοΧον, 
€π€ΐδή τοϊς μύρεσι τούτοις άχθοφορείν 'ίθος, ως κα\ αυτός ίτύρωθι 
μάμνηται Χέγων €πί τίνος άθΧητοΰ τούτον τον τρόπον Ύ π έθη κ€ τον 
ώ μον €ΐς το πον^'ιν, κα\ iyiv€TO άνήρ γεωργός. ωστ€ μηδέποτε, 
ώ διάνοια, μαΧακισθεϊσα όκΧάσης, άΧΧά καν τι δοκτ) δυσθεώρητον eivai, 
το iv σαυττ) βΧίπον διανοίξασα διάκυ-ψ•ον ε'ίσω. 

{δ) Josephus is not a commentator, but a historian who 
uses the lxx. as an authority, and states the facts in his own 
words. We will contrast a few passages of the Greek Bible 
with the corresponding contexts in the Antiquities. 

Exod. ii. 2 — 4. Joseph. a?it. ii. 9. 4. 

εσκίπασαν αυτό μήνας τρεις τρεΙς μεν μήνας παρ" αύτοΐς 

...εΧαβεν αύτώ η μι^τηρ αυτού τρέφουσι Χαν θανόντες... μηχανών - 

θϊβιν, κα\ κατέχρισεν αυτήν ται πΧεγμα βίβΧινον . . έπειτα χρί- 

άσφαΧτοπ ισστ] και ενεβαΧεν το σαντες άσφάΧτω . . εντιθεασι τό 

παιδίον εις αυτήν,,, και κατεσκό- παιδίον...'Μαριάμη δε τού παιδός 

πευεν ή άδεΧφή αυτού μακρόθεν άδεΧφή . .άντιπαρεζ-ηει φερόμενον 

μαθείν τΊ το άποβησόμενον αύτω. οποί χωρήσει όψομενη τό πΧεγμα. 

Ι Regn. i. ι — 4• Joseph, ant. v. 10. 2. 

άνθρωπος ήν εζ Άρμαθάιμ . . άνήρ των εν μέσω ποΧιτων της 

εξ ορούς 'Έφράιμ. . κα\ τούτω δύο ^Εφράμου κΧηρουχίας 'Ραμαθάν 

γυναίκες' όνομα ttj μιά^Αννα κα\ πόΧιν κάτοικων εγάμει δύο γυναίκας 

τή μια Φεννάνα. κα\ ήν τη Φεν- "Ανναν τε κα\ Φεννάναν. εκ δε 

ν άνα παιδία, καΐτή "Αννα ουκ ήν ταύτης καί παίδες αύτω γίνονται, 

παιδίον . . πΧήν οτι τήν "Ανναν τήν δε ετεραν ατεκνον ούσαν 


άπα Έλκανά ύπερ ταύτην. αγαπών διετεΧει. 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 299 

2 Chron. iii. i — 2. Joseph. a7it. viii. 3. i. 

και ήρζατο Έαλωμων τον της de οίκοδομίας του ναον 

οίκο^ομύν τον οίκον Κυρίου . . Σολομών ή'ρξατο τέταρτον eTOS ή8η 

κα\ ήρξατο οΙκοδομη iv τω μην\ της βασι\(ίας €χων μηνΐ δβι,'Τβρω. 
τώ bfvTepcd iv τω €Τ€ΐ τω τβτάρ- 
τω τήί βασιλείας αυτοΰ. 

Isa. xxxix. 6 — y. Joseph, aut. χ. 2. 2. 

Ιδον ημ4ραί άρχονται και ισθι ου μ€τ ολίγον χρόνον eh 

λημ•\\τονταί ττάντα τα iv τω ο'ίκω Βαβυλώνα σου τούτον μβτατίθησό- 

σου κα\...€ΐί Βαβυλώνα rj^et... μ^νον τον πλουτον κα\ τους €κ- 

και από τών τίκνων σου ων ■γόνους (υνουχισθησομένους κιιι 

γίννησ^ις λημ•ψ•ονταί, καΐ ποιη- άττολάσαντας το άνδρας elvaL, τώ 

σονσιν σττάδοντας iv τω ο'ίκω Βαβυλωνίω δουλζύσοντας βασίλίΤ. 
τον βασιλέως τών Βαβυλωνίων. 

Josephus, it will be seen, has rewritten each passage, and 
in doing so, has not only modified the vocabulary, but revo- 
lutionised the style. On turning from the left hand to the 
right hand column we pass from a literal translation of Semitic 
texts to an imitation of classical Greek. But the contrast is 
not entirely due to the circumstance that the passages taken 
from the Septuagint are translations, while the Aiitiqiiities 
is an original work. Translations, however faithful, may be 
in the manner of the language into which they render their 
original. 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 
thought into their adopted tongue. The translators write 
Greek largely as they doubtless spoke it ; they possess a 
plentiful vocabulary and are at no loss for a word, but they 
are almost indifferent to idiom, and seem to have no sense 
of rhythm. Hebrew constructions and Semitic arrangements 
of the words are at times employed, even when not directly 
suggested by the original. These remarks apply especially 
to the earlier books, but they are true to a great extent in 
regard to the translations of the second century \ the manner 
of the older translations naturally became a standard to which 

300 The Greek of the Septtiagint. 

later translators thought it right to conform themselves. Thus 
the grandson of. Jesus son of Sirach writes his prologue in 
the literary style of the Alexandrian Jews of the time of Euer- 
getes, but in the body of the work he drops into the Biblical 
manner, and his translation differs little in general character 
from that of the Greek version of Proverbs. 

8. From the general view of the subject we proceed to a 
detailed account of some of the more characteristic features 
of the language of the lxx. They fall under three heads — 
orthography, accidence, syntax. Under the second head a 
full list of examples from the Pentateuch will be given, with 
the view of familiarising the beginner with the vocabulary 
of the earlier books. 

I. Orthography. 

In the best MSS. of the lxx. as of the N.T. a large 
number of peculiar spelHngs occur, of Avhich only a part can 
be assigned to itacism and other forms of clerical error. 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 trans- 
lators, and it is manifest that we have before us specimens of 
a system which was prevalent at Alexandria^ and other centres 
of Greek life- during the third and second centuries before 

To a considerable extent the orthography of the MSS. is 
the 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, Winer- 

^ Cf. Sturz, de dial. Alaced., p. 1 1 1 ff . 

^ See (e.g.) 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). 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 301 

Moulton, Winer-Schmiedel, Blass). But even in MSS. which 
hke XBAC originally contained the whole of the Greek Scrip- 
tures, the Greek Old Testament possesses an orthography 
which is in part peculiar to itself, and certain features which 
are 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 work out 
the details from the apparatus criticus, and more especially 
from the appendix, where he will find all the spelHngs of the 
uncial MSS. employed which were not thought worthy of a 
place in the footnotes to the text. For those to whom ortho- 
graphy is of little interest the specimens given below will pro- 
bably suffice. 

Co7isonants. Assimilation neglected in compounds : ivyaa- 
τρΊμνθος, σννκατακ\ηρονομ€Ϊν, συνσ€ΐσμ6ς, ivKaivia, €νχ^€ΐρίδιον. 
Assimilation where there is no composition : eft Μ^σω, ey 
yaarpL Use of ν €φ€Χκνστικόν before consonants (omission is 
rare, except in a few cases such as πάσι before the art.) ; use of 
the final $■ in αχρις, pexpis, οΰτως, αντικρνς. Retention of the μ in 
fut. and aor. pass, of \αμβάν€ίν (λημψομαί, (λημψθην), and in words 
formed from it, e.g. πρόα-Χημψις, ττροσωττολημπτύν. OvueiS; μηθ^ίς 
for ovdeis, μηδΐίς. Γ dropped in the middle of a word between 
vowels, as κράνη, oXlos, φΐύβιν (especially in cod. N). 'P not 
doubled in compounds, e.g. (πιραντίζαν, κολοβόρΐξ, κατάρακτος), 
and reduplicated in the augment {pe ραντισμένος); σσ for ττ in 
€λάσσων, ησσων, and ρσ for ρρ in αρσην, θαρσβΊν. In some verbal 
forms consonants are doubled, e.g. βένναν^ ureweiv, xvweiv. 
Rough and smooth consonants are occasionally exchanged, e.g. 
κνθρα (i Regn. ii. 14, B) for χύτρα. 

Vowels. E6 for ι in syllables where t is long, e.g. Semitic 
words such as Aeuei, Aeueir?;?, Aave'ib, 2€ΐων, and Greek words as 
τραπεζίίτης, yeLveauat, yeivodaKCiv. Also (perhaps by itacism) in 
innumerable instances of t^: e.g. Keivelv, καθΰσαι, κλ^ίνη, Kpeivelv. 
I for et, e.g. τίχος, XiTovpyelv, άλίψξίν, αλιμμα, κατ^Χίφθην, παράδιγμα, 
8ανίζ€ίν, οφίΧέτης, atyios, and esp. in nouns in -eia, eta, e.g. άπωΧία, 
eVSt'a, παώία, Σαμάρια, στρατιά, and those in elov, as daviov, eldcuXcov. 
A for e, as ipavvav ; e for a, as €καθ€ρίσθην, μικρός, τ^σσ^ράκοντα. 

^ Especially in cod. Β {Ο. Τ. in Greek, i. p, xiii.). 

302 TJie Greek of the Septiiagint. 

Omission of a syllable consisting of t, as in πάν, ταμύον. Pre- 
fixing of a vowel, as in Ιγβίς. 

Breathi7igs. Rough breathing for smooth : e.g. ονχ ολίγος, 
β'φ' βλτΓΐ'δι, βφιδί, ονχ ζΐσακονσομαι (Jer. νϋ, ΐ6), καθ^ οφθαλμούς 
(Ezech. XX. 14). Similarly we find άλσος, άλώπηξ, ένιαυτός Dt. 
xiv. 20 (Nestle, Septiiagintasiudie7i i. p. 19, ii. pp. 12, 13, 20 f.). 
Smooth breathing for rough: ονκ eveKev (2 Regn. vii. 12), οίκ 
ν-πάρχ€ΐ (Job xxxviii. 26, A). 

Abnormal spellings such as these occur on every page of 
an uncial MS. of the lxx. and sometimes cause great per- 
plexity to an editor of the text. So far as they correctly 
represent the written or spoken Greek of the period, their 
retention is, generally speaking, desirable. In some cases the 
MSS. are unanimous, or each MS. is fairly persistent in its 
practice ; in others, the spelling fluctuates considerably. The 
Cambridge manual lxx. usually adopts a spelling which is 
persistently given by the MS. whose text it prints, and on 
the same principle follows the fluctuations of its MS. where 
they are of any special interest. But the whole question of 
orthography is far from having reached a settlement. 

II. Accidence. We will deal with (i.) the formation 
of words, (ii.) the declension of nouns, (iii.) the conjugation 
of verbs. 

(i.) Formation of words. 

(a) Words formed by termination : 

Verbs. In -ovv from nouns in -ov : άμανρονν, άττο^Εκατοϋν, άπο- 
λντρονν, άποτνφλονν, άσφαλτονν, διαβωνν, €κτυττονν, ξλαττονονν, ini- 
διπλονν, ίπιπΐμπτονν, epvOpodavovv, evodovv, θανατονν, καταχρνσονν, 
κνρουν, παλαίουν, παραζηλονν, πζρικνκλουν, συγκυρονν. In -ίζΐΐν, 
-άζζΐν, -ιάζζΐν, -ύζαν : άγίάζ€ΐν, αίρ^τίζαν, άκοντίζ^ιν, άναβιβάζ^ιν, 
αναθεμάτιζαν, άπογαλακτίζαν, αύγάζειν, άφαγνίζαν, αφάνιζαν, αφόρι- 
ζαν, βάδιζαν, γΐλοίάζαν, Ύρύζ€ίν, 8ανίζαν, δίαγογγνζαν, δίασκίδάζειν, 
διασκόρπιζαν, διαχωρίζζΐν, εκθερίζαν, (κκλησιάζαν, (κμνελίζαν, 
€κσπ€ρματίζαν, (κτοκίζαν, ενταφίαζαν, εννπναίζειν, ενωτίζεσθαι, 
β^ακονίζειν, εξέταζαν, εξοπλίζειν, εξόρκιζαν, επικλνζειν, επιραντίζειν, 
επισκιάζειν, επ ιστοιβάζειν , επιφημίζειν, θνσιάζειν, καταβιάζειν, κατα- 
σκίάζείν, κατασοφίζειν, κληδονίζειν, κομίζειν, κονφίζειν, λεπίζειν, 
λενκαθίζειν, μακαρίζειν, μελίζειν, οίωνίζείν, όνυχίζειν, οπτάζειν, 
όρθρίζειν, παραδειγματίζαν, παραδοξάζειν, παραλογίζείν, περιασπί- 

The Greek of the Septtiagint. 303 

ζ^ιν, π^ρίονυχίζαν, π^ριραντίζαν, π\€ονάζ(ΐν, ττοΧνχρονίζξΐν, προα^γ- 
Ύίζ€ίν, 7Γροσοχθίζ€ίν, σαββατίζαν, σκβπάζζίν, σπζρματίζΐΐν, στήριζαν ^ 
στοχάζ€ίν, σνμποδίζίΐν, σνναθροίζ€ίν, συνοίκίζ€ίν, σφακ.€\ίζ€ΐν, σ\οΧά- 
ζ€ίν, Τ€ΐχίζ€ίν, φανΧίζίίν, φλογίζ^ιΐ', χ\ωρίζ€ίν, χρονίζβίν, •φ•ωμΙζ€ΐν. 

In -€V€Lv : ά•γχιστ€ν€ίν, diodeveiv, βξο\(θρ€ν€ίν, iepareveiu, κατα- 
dvvaaT€V€Lv, κατακνρίίνίΐν, καταφντ€ν€ίν, κατοχ^ν^ιν, μ€ταΧλ€ν€ΐν, 
προφητ€ν€ίν, πρωτοτοκ€ν€ίν, arparoTredeveiv, τροφίύ^ιν, vdpeveLU. 

iSfouns. In -/χα, from verbs : ά-γίασμα, αγνισμα, αδίκημα, 
αίνιγμα, αΧλαγμα, άνάστ€μα, άνόμημα, άνταπό8ομα, απότομα, άσ€ βήμα, 
αϋγασμα, άφαίρ€μα, β8€Χυγμα, διήγημα, δικαίωμα, διόρνγμα, διχοτό- 
μημα, δόμα, €γκατά\ιμμα, εδβσ/ια, ίκκόΧαμμα, €κτνπωμα, eVi'^e/xa, 
ζπκαΧνμμα, (ττιτηδίνμα, e\|/'e/xo, ημίσ^νμα, θηρ^νμα, θυμίαμα, θυσί- 
ασμα, ΐ€ράτ€νμα, κάρπωμα, κατά<ανμα, καταπίτασμα, καύχημα, κΧίμμα, 
Χέπισμα, όΧοκαντωμα, όραμα, οφζίΧημα, όχύρωμα, παράδειγμα, παρά- 
θεμα, παράρνμα, περίθεμα, περί-^ωμα, προσόχθισμα, πρόσταγμα, 
πρωτογενημα, στερέωμα, σννάντημα, σννκάΧνμμα, σύστεμα, τάγμα, 
τίμημα, τόξενμα, φαΧάκρωμα, φύΧαγμα, φύραμα, χόρτασμα, χώνενμα. 

In μός, from verbs : αφανισμός, γογγνσμός, ενδεΧεχισμός, ενπο- 
ρισμός, εξιΧασμός, επισιτισμός, ιματισμός, καθαρισμός, μηρνκισμός, 
οιωνισμός, ορισμός, όρκισμός, παροξυσμός, πειρασμός, σταθμός, στε- 
ναγμός, φραγμός, χωρισμός. 

In -σις, from verbs : άναίρεσις, άνάμνησις, άποκώάρωσις, αφεσις, 
βεβαίωσις, γόγγυσις, γνμνωσις, δηΧωσις, διάβασις, διασάφησις, εκδί- 
κησις, εκστασις, 6κ;^υσι?, επερώτησις, κατακάρπωσις, κατάΧειψις, 
κατάσχεσις, κατοίκησις, όΧοκάρπωσις, οΧοκαυτωσις, όμοίωσις, πΧη- 
ρωσις, πόρευσις, πρασις, σύγκρασις, συνάντησις, συντίμησις,σύστασις, 
ταπείνωσις, υπερόρασις, υπεροψις, υπόστασις, φαΰσις, χαράκωσις, 

In -17, from verbs : άΧοιφη, άναζυγη, αποσκευή, άποστοΧη, απο- 
στροφή, άφη, διασκευή, δοχη, εκτριβη, εντοΧη, επαγωγή, επισκοπή, 
καταφυγή, όΧκη, παραβοΧη, προνομη, προφυΧακη, συναγωγή, τροπή. 

In της, from verbs (m.) : αΐνιγματιστής, ενταφιαστής, εξηγητής, 
επιθυμητής, ερμηνευτής, ποΧεμιστής, ραφιδευτής, σκεπαστής, σχο- 

Adjectives. \τν-ινος: δειΧινός, δερμάτινος, καρΰινος, όστράκινος, 
πράσινος, στυράκινος, φΧόγινος. 

In -ιος : ενιαύσιος, όμομήτριος, ποΧυχρόνιος, υποχείριος. 

In -ικός: αρσενικός, ειρηνικός, Χαμπηνικός, Χειτουργικός, Χιθουρ- 
γικός, μυρεψικός, πατρικός, ποικιΧτικός, ποΧεμικός, προφασιστικός. 

In -τος : άκατασκεύαστος, άΧυσιδωτός, αόρατος, άπερικάθαρτος, 
επικατάρατος, εύΧογητός, Χαξευτός, μισθωτός, ονομαστός, πΧεοναστός, 

{b) Words formed by composition : 

Verbs compounded with two prepositions : άνθυφαιρεΐν, άντ- 
αποδοΰναι, άποκαθιστάν, ενκαταΧείπειν, ενπεριπατείν, εξαναστέΧΧειν, 

304 The Greek of tlu Septuagint. 

βτησννιστάν, κατ€μβ\€π€ΐν, τταρ^μβάλΧαν, σνναναΧαμβάνξΐν, σνν- 
αναστρέφξσθαί, σνναττοΧΚχχιν, συν^κπολΐμονν, συν^πακολονθ^ΐν, 
σνν(7τισκ(7ΓΤ€ίν, συν κατακληρονομ^Ιν , σννπαραΚαμβάναν, σννπρο- 

Nouns. Compounded with nouns : άσφαλτόπισσα, ^ασνπονς, 
€τ€ρόζνγοζ, καμη\ηπάρ8α\ίζ, κολοβόρις, μακροημ€ροί., μακροχρόνιος, 
μικρόθνμος, όΧόαΧηρος, όλοπόρφνρος, noXveXeos, ποΧνχρόνιος, σκΧη- 
ροτράχηΧος, χοιρογρνΧΧιον. 

Compounded with a prefix or preposition : άνηπρόσωπος, 
^ΑντίΧίβανος, άρχώίσμοφνΧαξ, άρχώξσμώτης, άρχκρ^ύζ, άρχιμάγαρος, 
άρχιοινοχόος, άρχισιτοποιόζ, €7Γίπ€μ7ΤΤος, ευπρόσωπος, κατάΧοίπος, 
κατάζηρος, παράΧως, παρεπίδημος, περώάζιον, περίλυπος, περίοικος, 
περίχωρος, ϋπανδρος, υπερμηκης. 

Compounded with a verb stem, and forming a fresh noun or 
a verb : άνεμοφθόρος, γΧωσσότμητος, εργοδιώκτης, θανατηφόρος, 
θηριάΧωτος, θηρόβρωτος, Ιππόδρομος, Ισχνόφωνος, κτηνοτρόφος, 
νυμφαγωγός, σιτοποιός, σφυροκόπος, τεΧεσφόρος, χαροποιός, δι- 
χοτομεϊν, ζωογονεΐν, κΧοπ οφο ρείν , κρεανομείν, ΧιθοβυΧεΙν, Χιμα-γ- 
χονείν, νευροκοπειν, όρνιθοσκοπειν, συμβοΧοκοπειν , τεκνοποιειν, 

(ϋ.) Declension of nouns : 

Declension ι. Nouns in -pa, -υΊα, form gen. in ης, as μαχαίρης 
Gen. xxvii. 40, Exod. xv. 9 ("vielfach bei A, bes. in Jerem./' W.- 

Schm.), κυνομυίης Exod. viu. 17, επιβεβηκυίης I Regn. XXV. 20. 

Declension 2. Certain nouns in -οίς end also in -ος, e.g. 
χείμαρρος, άδεΧφιδός. The Attic form in -εως disappears ; e.g. Χαός 
and ναός are written for Χεώς and νεώς — the latter however occurs 
in 2 Mace. (A). Nouns in -άρχος pass occasionally into the first 
declension, e.g. τοπάρχης Gen. xli. 34, κωμάρχης Esth. ii. 3, -γενε- 
σιάρχης Sap. xiii. 3. 

Declension 3. Uncontracted forms are frequent, as βαθεα 
Job xii. 22, υστέα, πήχεων, χειΧεων, and in the plural nom. and 
ace. of neuters in -ας, as κέρατα, πέρατα. Τήρας makes gen. -γηρους 
dat. yrjpd. Metaplasmus occurs in some Avords, e.g. δύο, δυσί, πάν 
with masc. noun, πύΧη, πΰΧεσιν (3 Regn. xxii. 11, A), σάββατα, 
σάββασιν, τέσσαρες, τεσσάροις, χ(ίρ, χεΊραν. 

Proper noims. Many are mere transliterations and indeclin- 
able, e.g. Άδά/χ, 'Αβραάμ, Ιωσήφ, ΣαμουήΧ, Ααυείδ, Άχαάβ, ΉΧειού, 
ΈΧεισαΊε, ΑανιήΧ. On the Other hand some well-known names 
receive Greek terminations and are declined, as Μωυσής or Μωσής, 
Ίησοΰς, Έζεκίας, Ησαΐας, Ιερεμίας ; while some are found in both 
forms, e.g. we have both ΉΧειού and ΉΧ{ε)ίας, Μανασσή and 
Μανασσής, Έ,οΧομων indecl. and ΣοΧομών gen. -μώνος or -μώντος. 
But in the translated books the indeclinable forms prevail, and 
there is no appearance of the forms "λβραμος, ΊσράηΧος, Ίώσηπος, 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 305 

which are famihar to the reader of Josephus. In the case of 
local names transhteration is usual, e.g. Ιερουσαλήμ, Βηθλ^μ, 
Βαιθηλ, Σ€ΐών. A few however have Greek terminations, as 
Σαμάρ€ία or Σαμαρία, 'lopbavos, and some names of foreign localities 
are Hellenised, as Βαβυλών, Συρία, η ερυθρά θάλασσα, Ίδουμαία, 
Α'ίγυπτοζ, and the two Egyptian towns Ηρώων ττόλις (Gen. xlvi. 
28), Ήλιου πόλυς (Exod. i. ii). The declension of the Hellenised 
names presents some irregularities ; thus we find Μωυσής, -σή, 
-(Γ6Ϊ, -σήν Ίησοΰί, -σου, -σοί, -σοΰν Μανασσης, -ση. 

(ίϋ.) Conjugation of verbs. 

Augmoits. Doubled, as in κίκατηρανται Num. xxii. 6, xxiv. 

9, απ € κατέστησαν Gen. xxiii. 1 6, παρεσυνεβληθη Ps. xlix. 1 3, 21 (A). 
Prefixed to prepositions, e.g. επρονόμευσαν Num. xxi. i, Deut. ii. 
35, βπροφητευσαν Num. xi. 25 f., ηνωτίσαντο 2 Esdr. xix. 30 (B). 
Lengthened, as ήμελλον Sap. xviii. 4, ηβουλόμην Isa. i. 29, xiii. 9, 
η8υνηθην, η^υνάσθην, 2 Chr. XX. ■^j, Jer. V. 4. Omitted, as in άνάθη 
Jud. viii. 3, αφέθη Isa. xxxiii. 24, αύτάρκησεν Deut. xxxii. 10, εξο- 
λόθρευεν I Chr. xxi. 1 5, t^ev Gen. i. 4, κατορθώθη 2 Chr. XXXV. 10. 

Tenses and Persons, (i) Verbs in -ω. New presents, as α/^ιφίά^ω, 
γρηγορώ, βέννω, κτάννω. Futures and aorists with reduplication: 
κ€κράξομαί (Job vi. 5), εκεκραξα (Num. xi. 2), έττεποίθησα (Jud. ix. 
26 A). Contracted futures in -ώ from -άσω : έργα Gen. iv. 2, άρπα 
Lev. xix. 13, ζ<δικαται Deut. xxxii. 43, εγκαυχα Ps. lii. 3, σνμβίβα 
Isa. xl. 13, άπο^οκίμώ Jer. xxxviii, (xxxi.) 2>7• Irregular futures': 
εδομαι, φάγομαί, χεώ (Exod. iv. 9). Second aor. forms with termi- 
nation in -a: εί^αμεν I Regn. x. 14, έφυγαν 2 Regn. X. 14, εφάγα- 
μεν 2 Regn. xix. 42, ελθάτω Esth. v, 4. Person endings : 2nd p. 
s. pres. pass, or middle in -σαι: πίεσαι, φάγεσαι (Ezech. xiii. 18, 
Ruth ii. 9, 14), άπεξενοΰσαί 3 Regn. xiv. 6. 3rd p. pi. imperf. and 
aor. act. in -οσαν: εγεννώσαν Gen. vi. 4, ήλθοσαν Exod. xv. 27, 
κατελίποσαν Exod. xvi. 24, κατενοονσαν Exod. xxxiii. 8, ηνομοΰσαν 
Ezech. xxii. 11; cf. the opt. αΐνεσαισαν Gen. xlix. 3, ελθοισαν 
Deut. xxii. 16. 3rd p. pi. aor. mid. in -εντο : επελάθεντο Jud. iii. 
7 (A), Hos. xiii. 6 (B), Jer. xviii. 15 (B*A), &c. 3rd p. pi. perf. 
act. in -av. εώρακαν Deut. xi. 7; πεποιθαν, Judith vii. 10. 2nd p. 
s. perf. act. in -ες ; άπεστάλκες Exod. v. 22 ; έδωκες, 2 Esdr. xix. 

10, Ezech. xvi. 21. (2) Verbs in -μι. From εΙμί we have ή μην, 
ησθα. From κά^τ^/χαι, κά^ου Ps. cix. (cx.) I. From ϊστημι, εστηκεναι, 
εστηκώς. From δίδωμι, εδίδετο Exod. V. 1 3 (A), Jer. xii. 34; 
δοΐ, Ps. xli. 3 (B), 2 Regn. iii. 39 (A). 

III. Syntax. 

Many of the irregularities which fall under this head are 
s. s. . 20 

3o6 The Greek of the Septuagint. 

due to the influence of the Hebrew text or of Semitic habits 
of thought. These will 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 

Cases and Numbers. Nom. for voc, e.g. ο Oeos for Bee, Ps. 
xxi. 2, esp. in the phrase Kvpte 6 θβός; θυγάτηρ — θνγατ^ρ, Ruth ii. 
2, 22, iii. I, &c. Disuse of the Dual. 

Comparison. Use of a preposition with the positive for the 
comparative, e.g. μέγας παρά πάνταί, Exod. xviii. 1 1 ; αγαθός 
νπβρ δβ'κα, I Regn. i. 8. 

Numerals. 'Έπτά = €πτάκίς, Gen. iv. 24. Omission of καί 
when numbers are coupled, e.g. δέκα dvo, δέκα e|, δβκα irivre, (Sec. 

Verbs. Rarity of the optative mood, and disappearance of 
that mood in dependent clauses. Periphrasis with dpi, e.g. 

7Γ€ποιθως €σομαι, 2 Regn. xxii. 3; 'ίσθί π€ποίθώς, Prov. iii. 5. 
Indicative with ίίν : imperf. and aor., όταν €ΐσηρχ€το, Gen. xxxviii. 
9; όταν enrjpev, Exod. xvii. II ; όταν κατέβη, Num. xi. 9; ηνίκα αν 
eiaenopeveTo, Jud. vi. 3 ; eav €σπ€ΐραν, Jud. vi. 2. Coordination 
of indicative with conjunctive : Exod. viii. 8 ^ξαποστίΚω αυτούς, 
και θνσωσι, Lev. vi. 2 ψνχη eav άμάρττ} κα\. . .παρίδτ] . . .κα\ ψ^ύσηται, 
ή ηδίκησ^ν.,.η €vpev...KaL ψ€νσηταί...κα\ υμόστ] κτλ. Use of infini- 
tive, with or without the article, to express object, purpose, sub- 
ject, or result^; e.g. {a) €ζητ€ί aveXelv, Exod. ii. 15 : ήρξατο τον 
οΙκοδομ^Ίν, 2 Chr. iii. I ; (b) παραγίνεται βοηθηναι, 2 Regn. viii. 5 ; 
άπέσταλβν του ΙδβΙν, Gen. viii. 7 ; {c) συνέβη κρεμασθηναι, Gen. xli. 
13; TO προσκοΧλασθαι αγαθόν Ps. Ixxii. 28; {d) 6 θεός βγω του 
θανατωσαι κα\ ζωοποιησαι, 4 Regn. ν. J. 

Connexion of the sentence. Use of gen. abs. in reference to 
the subject of the verb: e.g. πορενομένου σου.,.ορα, Exod. iv. 21. 
Anacoluthon : Ιδών δε Φαραώ... έβαρύνθη η καρδία Φαραώ, Exod. 
ix. 7• Use of the finite verb where the classical language prefers 
to employ a participle. 

9. Besides the non-classical forms and constructions which 
may fairly be placed to the credit of Alexandrian Greek, the 
translated books of the Greek Bible naturally exhibit a large 

1 I follow mainly the classification of C. W. Votau in his excellent 
thesis on the subject (Chicago, 1896). Votau has shewn that in the trans- 
lated 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. 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 307 

number of irregularities which are of Semitic origin. The 
following are examples. 

{a) Lexical. 

1. Transliterations, and Greek words formed from the 
Hebrew or Aramaic. 

2. Words coined or adopted to express Semitic ideas, as 
άκροβνστία, άναθζματίζ€ΐν^ ολοκαύτωμα, προίτωποΧημπτβϊν, a<avda- 
Xt'^eij/, σπλα-γχνίζ^ιν. 

3• Phrases answering to the Hebrew idiom : e.g. αρτον φα-γύν 

=11 Dnb ^~^ eXeos noLelv μίτά τίνος — DP *10Π Π^'^^ ενώπων τον 

κυρίου =ζ Γ\\Γ\\~'^^ϊρ ^ ζητεΐν ψυχην = Ei'SJ ^93, θυσία σωτηρίου = ΠΠΤ 

D''Plp^, λαμβάνειν πρόσωπον = U''2p ^ψ\, πάσα σαρξ = 'ψ2~73 ^ 

-υίος τεσσεράκοντα καχ ivos ενιαυτων = ^^ J^Π^s\ D''yil'lX"|5. 

4. Words with a new connotation : ayios, αμαρτωλός, αρετή, 
άφόρίσμα, άφρων, διάβολος, διαθήκη, δικαιοσύνη, εκκλησία, ελεημο- 
σύνη, εξιλασμός, καρδία, Κύριος or ό κύριος, λειτουργεϊν, ματαιότης, 
όσιότης, πειράζειν, προφήτης, πτωχός, σαρξ, φυγαδευτηριον. 

{Ρ) Granunatical ^ . 

Nouns. Repeated to express distribution, e.g. άνθρωπος 
Άνθρωπος :=.^'^ t^^X, Num. ix. lo; έθνη εθνη = ^)^ '•ίϋ, 4 Regn. 
xvii. 29. Similarly δύο δύο. Gen. vi. 19; κατά μικρόν μικρόν (AF), 
Exod. xxiii. 30. Emphatic adverbs also are occasionally doubled 
after the Hebrew manner, as σφόδρα σφόδρα, Exod. i. 12, Ezech. 
ix. 9; cf, σφόδρα σφοδρως, Gen. vii. 19 (A). 

Pro7ioujis. Otiose use, e.g. Gen. xxx. i τελευτησω εγώ (ΠΠρ 
"•DiJN); Exod. ii. 14 σύ θέλεις ("ΐρ'ίί ΠΓ1Ν) ; Exod. xxxvi. 4 αυτός, 
αυτοί. 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 αύτοΙ καΙ οί βασιλείς αυτών καΐ οί 
άρχοντες αυτών κα\ οί ίερείς αυτών και οί προφηται αυτών. The 
fem. αϋτη is occasionally used for τοΰτο 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. 
13, εφ' ης.,.επ' αύτης (Πν^. . .Ίΰ^Ν) ; Deut. i. 22 δι' ης. ..εν αυτγι 

^ On this head see esp. Frankel, Vorstudien, p. 132 ff. ; Thiersch, de 
Pentat. vers. Alex., p. iii if. 

20 2 

3o8 The Greek of the Septiiagint. 

(•^^...Ί^ίί); Prov. iii. 15 ων.,.αντων. A similar redundancy 
occurs with relative adverbs: Deut. ix. 28, οθζν..Λκά6ίν ("lt^'^ί... 
D^'P); 2 Chr. i. 3, ον.,Ακά. 

Verbs. The following Hebraisms may be specially noted. 
Various phrases used to represent the Heb. inf. abs. when pre- 
fixed to a finite verb, e.g. Exod. iii. 7, ίδώ^ "ώον (Τί^ΝΊ Πϊ<Ί) ; 
Deut. xxxi. 18, άποστροφίϊ άποστρ€^ω (Ι^ΓΙΡΧ ΊΓΙΟΠ) ; also the 
Heb. idiom ? ^ψ\: e.g. Exod. xiv. 13, ov προσθησ^σθζ en iSeir, 
I Regn. iii. 6 προσέθετα και cKokeaev (cf V. 8 ττροσίθ. καλίσαι, 
Job xxix. I Ίτροσθάς einev (IPN*! ...^P*^)• Constructions with 
prepositions contrary to the Greek idiom: β^ΐλύσσ^σθαι, άπό 
(■•JSP), Exod. i. 12; φβιδεσ^αι eVt, Deut. vii. 16; ^π^ρωτάν iv 

Κνρίω {^)ΐ1''2 aS^Oj I Regn. x. 22; evdoKelv iv or eVi (3 ^Sfl). 
Hebrew forms of adjuration as i Regn. iii. 14 el (DN) ζξίλασθη- 
aerai, ib. 1 7 τάδε ττοιησβι σοι ό Oeos, iav... A question Standing 
for the expression of a wish : Num. xi. 29 κα\ τις 8ωη πάντα τον 
λαον Κυρίου... ; Ps. Hi. (liii.) 6 tls δώσει €κ Σίΐων το σωτήρων του 
"Ισραήλ; Έγώ et/xi followed by an ind. (Jud. vi. 18 εγώ άμι 
καθίσομαι, 2 Regn. ii. 2 εγώ εί /it πορβύσομαι) — a construction 
limited in Β to Judges, Ruth, 2 — 4 Regn. Periphrases such as 
€σομαί dtdovaL (Tob. v. 1 5, Β A). Pleonastic use of λέγω 1/ ="liDK?, 
often soloecistically : e.g. Gen. xv. I ζγβνηθη βήμα Κυρ ίου... λέγων, 
χΐν. 1 6 δί€βοηθη η φωνή... λέγοντας. 

Particles. Pleonastic use of και and δε', (ι) in an apodosis, 
e.g. Num. XV. 14, €αν...7τροσΎ4νηταί, ..., κα\ ποιήσει κάρπωμα; PrOV. 
1. 28, εσται 6ταν...€•γω δε'... ; (2) after a participle: Num. xxi. II, 
και €ξάραντ€ζ...καϊ παρίνίβαλον. Use of και in a coordinated 
clause, where a dependent clause might have been expected ; 
e.g. Num. XXXV. 2, σνντά^^ις τοΙς υΐοίς "Ισραήλ, κα\ δώσουσιν κτλ. 

Prepositio)is. See under Verbs. Peculiar uses of the Heb. 
prepositions are often reflected in the Greek ; e.g. i Regn. i. 24, 
άνββη iv μόσχω (0"'ΊΕΐ3) ; Lev. xxi. lO, ό μέγας άπο των αδελφών 
αυτοΰ (νΠΝρ 7ί"Ι|Π). Α number of new prepositions or preposi- 
tional phrases are used to express the Hebrew ''PP?, e.g. evavTi, 
απέναντι, κατέναντι, ενώπιον, κατβνώπιον, από, (πι, προ, προσώπου. 
Similarly οπίσω represents ^"ΙΠΧ ; iv μέσω, άνα μέσον, δια μέσου 
= 'ΐ\'\Γ\Ί1, άπο (εκ) μέσου = "^^Ί^Ό ; dia χειρός, (Ις χείρας, ε'κ χ€φός 
= ''!Ρ, Τ?; όδόν = "^1/}^. The use of σΰν to express the prefix 
ΓΙδί, which is characteristic of Aquila, occurs in codex A six 
times in 3 Regn., once in Esther (where it probably came 
from the Hexapla), and frequently in Ecclesiastes, where even 

The Greek of the Septiiagint. 309 

cod. Β shews this pecuharity, e.g. Eccl. ii. 17 ΙμΊσησα συν την 

ζωην (D''»nn-nN:)i. 

10. Both the vocabulary and the syntax of the lxx. 
exhibit remarkable affinities with the modern language. Mr 
Geldart {Modern Greek Language, p. loi f.) urges the study 
of modern Greek upon Biblical students on the ground that 
" the 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 
philosophers." He adds: "The phraseology of the lxx. is 
modern to an extent which is quite marvellous... let me men- 
tion a few well-known words common to the lxx. and modern 
Greek : εττισκεπτο/χ,αι, άττοκρίνομαι, ζΐτιστρέφω, ττροσκννω, €νωπων, 
ττροσκομμα, ττ^ιράζω, ακολουθώ, κοίμω/χαι, ολθ9, κατοικώ, καθί- 
ζομαι, καθίζω, τα Ιμάτια, ΰτταγω... 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 
Greek usage as a key to the meaning of the lxx. But the 
general similarity of the Alexandrian vocabulary and, to a 
less extent, of the Alexandrian syntax to those of the spoken 
language indicates a common affinity to the old 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 
a more chastened style than Alexandrian translators of the 
time of Philadelphus and Euergetes, who had been born in 
the heart of a great Greek city teeming with a cosmopolitan 

^ See above, p. 39, n. 2. 

2 Cf. Prof. Jebb 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." 


TJie Greek of the Septuagtnt. 

II. Some of the non-canonical books of the Greek Old 
Testament, which were either {a) loosely translated or para- 
phrased from a Hebrew original, or {b) originally written 
in Greek, need separate treatment in regard to their lexical 
and grammatical character. Such are {a) i Esdras, Daniel 
(lxx.), ip) Wisdom, 2 — 4 Maccabees. 

The lexicography of the ' Apocrypha ' has been sepa- 
rately treated by C. A. Wahl {Clavis libr. V. T. apocryphorum 
philologica^ Leipzig, 1853), and with the help of the Oxford 
Concordance it may be studied independently. But, for the 
sake of the student who has not the necessary leisure to 
examine the subject in detail, it is desirable to notice here 
the more conspicuous words in each of the books referred to 

I Esdras. 

βύφνης (Sap., 2 Mace.) 


ακολούθως = <ατά, dat. (2 Esdr., 

2 Mace.) 
άναΎνά)στης = γραμματ€νζ, 2 Esdr. 
άναπΧηρωσις (Dan.) 
aviepovv (3 Maee.) 
αντίγραφαν (Esth., Ep.-Jer., I, 2 

άπονοζίσθαί (2 Mace.) 
άποστατίς (2 Esdr.) 
δημαγωγίΐν, -για 

δίάΒημα (Esth., Sap., 2, 4 Macc) 
8ογματίζ€ίν (Esth., Dan., 2, 3 

δυσσ€/36ΐα, -βήμα (2 MaCC.) 
(ΙδωλξΙον (Dan., ι Maee.) 

enianevbeiv (Esth.^, Prov.^) 
ξρωμίνη, η (eod. Β) 
(υθαρσής (ι, 2 Maee.) 
evnpencus (Sap.) 



καταλοχισμός (ΐ, 2 Chr.) 

Ko\aKev€Lv (Job^, Sap.^) 



μανιακή (Dan.) 





ορκωμοσία (Εζ.) 

7Γ€ΐθαρχ€ΐν (Jen, Dan.) 

προκαθηγβΐσθαι (eod. Β) 


π ροσκβφάΧαων (Εζ.) 


σωματοφνΧαξ (Judith, 2 Maec.) 


φορολογία (ι Maee.) 

χρηματιστή ρων 
χρυσοχάΧινος (2 Maee.) 

The Greek of the Septuagint. 



αποθανμάζζΐν (Sir.) 
αττοτνμττανΊζ^ιν (3 Macc.) 

άρχιττατριώτης (Jos.•^) 




8ιάπνρος {$ Macc.) 

8ωικητη9 (2 Esdr., Tob.) 


βποργίζβσθαι (2 Macc.) 

εστιατόρια (4 Regn.) 



βερμασία (Jer.^) 

κηΚώονσθαι (Jer.) 


κοπανίζίΐν (3 Regn.) 

μανιακής (ΐ Esdr.^) 

μζγαλξίότης (ΐ Esdr., Jer.^) 

ττρόσο-φ-ίς (2 MaCC.) 


σοφιστής (Exod.^) 






νπζρμε-γζθης (ΐ Chr.) 

ν7Γ€ρνψ-ονν (Ps.^) 


φιλόσοφος (4 Macc.) 


This book contains an unusually large vocabulary, con- 
sisting in great part of compound words. The following list, 
taken from c. i. — vi., will suffice to shew its lexical character*. 

ά-γερωχία (2, 3 MaCC.) 


αθανασία (4 Macc.) 


άκηΧίδωτος (Ps.^) 


άλαζονεύεσθαι (Ps.^) 









απότομος, αποτόμως 


ατίμητος (3 MaCC.) 



βασκανία (4 Macc.) 



δύσχρηστος (Isa.^) 


επιτήδειος (ΐ Chr., Ι — 3 Macc.) 

επιφημίζειν (Deut.^) 


εύκΧεης (Jer.^) 


ενμορφία (3 Macc.) 



Ιδιότης (3 Macc.) 


* Cf. supra, p. 268 f., for some interesting examples from other parts 
of the book. 


The Greek of the Septnagint. 




μακρόβιος (Isa.^) 


όμοιοπαθης (4 Macc.) 


παράδοξος (Judith, Sir., 


noXvyovos (4 Macc.) 


π ρωτόπΧαστος 



σνΧλογισμός (Εχ.^) 

Τ€κμηρων (3 Macc.) 


χρησιμξύίίν (Sir.) 

In 2 — 4 Maccabees the reader 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 
first centuries B.C. The writers, especially the writer of 4 
Maccabees, may be said to revel in the use of compound words, 
many of which may have been of their own coinage. Speci- 
mens follow. 

2 Maccabees. 





























π ροσνπομιμνησκβιν 







βαρνηχης ^ 

The Greek of the Sept nag int. 


























4 Maccabees. 
























παθοκρατζίσθαι, -τία 









In the styte of the originally Greek books there is little 
to remind us of the Semitic origin of the writers. The 
Wisdom of Solomon follows generally the parallelisms of 
Hebrew poetry, and its language is moulded to some extent 
by the lxx. of the Psalms and of Prov^erbs. In 2 — 4 
Maccabees the influence of the canonical books appears in the 
retention of transliterated names such as 'Αβραάμ, Ίσραηλ, 
Δ,ανίηλ. But Ί€ρονσαλημ has become 'Ιεροσόλυμα, and Eleazar 
is usually Έλεάζαρο^. Of Hebrew constructions or modes of 
thought there is only an occasional instance, whilst it is obvious 

314 TJie Greek of the Septuagmt. 

that the writers lose no opportunity of exhibiting their skill 
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 Sep- 
tuaginta (1841); F. W. A. Mullach, Gra7nm. d. Vulgarsprache 
in historischer Entwicklung (1856); G. v. Z'dizsch'^niz, Ρ 7'ofan- 
g7-dcitdt u. hellenist. Sprachgeist (1859); E. Reuss, art. Helle- 
nistisches Idio77i (in Herzog-Plitt, vi., 1880); W. Schmid, Der 
Atticis7)ins...vo7i Dio7iysms v. Halikar7iass bis auf d. zw. Philo- 
j/r^/z^i- (Stuttgard, 1889 — 97); K. Meisterhans, Graiii77i. d. Atti- 
sche7i 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, Coti- 
C07'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, 

Much information on points of grammar and orthography 
may also be gleaned from the N.T. grammars — A. Buttmann, 
Gra77i7)iatik d. NTliche7i Sprachgebrauchs (Berlin, 1859) ; Winer- 
Moulton, Treatise 07i the Greek of the N.T.^ (1877); Winer- 
Schmiedel, 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. 
Jannaris, Historical Greek Gra7n7nar (1897) ; and from the 
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. 


The Septuagint as a Version. 

The purpose of this chapter is to prepare the beginner for 
grappling with the problems presented by the Septuagint when 
It is regarded as a translation of the Hebrew Bible. Almost at 
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 by which the translators were beset, and the prin- 
ciples which guided them in the performance of their task. 

I. The reader of the Septuagint must begin by placing 
before his mind the conditions under which it was produced, 
and the relation of the original work to our present texts, 
Hebrew and Greek. 

I. {a) Strictly speaking the Alexandrian Bible is not a 
single version, but a series of versions 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 
groups of books. The Pentateuch is on the whole a close 
and serviceable translation ; the Psalms" and more especially 

1 The external evidence has been briefly stated in Part i. c. i. (p. 23 fif.). 

2 Cf. R. Sinker, So?ne remarks on the LXX. Version of the Psalms^ 

3i6 The Septiiagint as a Version. 

the Book of Isaiah shew obvious signs of incompetence. The 
translator of Job was perhaps more familiar with Greek pagan 
literature' than with Semitic poetry; the translator of Daniel 
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. 
When we come to details, the evidence in favour of a plurality 
of translators is no less decisive. A comparison of certain 
passages which occur in separate contexts distinctly reveals 
the presence of different hands. The reader can readily form 
a judgement upon this point if he will place side by side in the 
Hebrew and the Greek 2 Regn. xxii. 2 if. and Ps. xvii. (xviii.) 
3 if., 4 Regn. xviii. 17 — xx. 19 and Isa. xxxvi. i — xxxix. 8, or 
Mic. iv. and Isa. ii. 

A single specimen may be given from Ps. xvii. compared 
with 2 Regn. xxiii. 

Ps. xvii. 3 — 6. 2 Regn. xxii. 2 — 6. 

^Κνριος στζρίωμά μου και ^Kvpie πέτρα μου κα\ οχν- 

καταφνγη μου κάΙ ρνστης μου• ρωμά μου και ^ζαιροΰμ^ν ός μ€ 

6 θζόί μου βοηθός κα\ βΧπιώ €μοί' ^ό θ^ός μου φύΧαζ earai μου, 

67γ' αυτόν π€ποιθ ως €σομαι eV αυτω .... 

'^ αίνων ζπικάΚίσομαι Κύριον, κα\ ^alverov €πι<α\4σομαί Κύριον, 

€Κ των €χθρών μου σωθησομαι. και e/c των βχθρών μου σωθησομαι. 

^π€ρύσχον μ€ ω8ΐν€ς θανάτου, ^otl Trepiia^ov μ€ συντ ριμμοΧ 

κώ. χείμαρροι ανομίας (ζ^τάραξ- θανάτου, γ^είμαρροι ανομίας ξθάμ- 

άν 쀕 ^ώδίν^ς αδου π€ρΐ€κυκΧω- βησάν 쀕 ^ώδϊν€ς θανάτου 

σαν μ€, προβφθασάν μ€ παγίδα? €κύκΧωσάν /xe, προέφθασάν μ€ 

θανάτου, ^και ev τω ΘΧίβ^σθαί σκΧη ρότητ€ς θανάτου. "^ iv τω 

μ€ €π€καΧ€σάμην τον κύριον, κα\ ΘΧίβ^σθαί μ€ ζπικαΧίσομαι Κυ- 

ττρος τον θ€Ον μου ΐκέκραζα- ρων, καϊ προς τον θ^όν μου βοη- 

ήκουσ€ν 6κ ναοϋ άγιου αύτοΰ σομαι, κα\ (π ακούσ^ται ΐκ ναού 

φωνής μου, κα\ η κραυγή μου αύτοΰ φωνής μου, κα\ η κραυγή 

[^ενώπιον αυτού εισ^λβυσβται] el ς μου ev τοΙς ώσΐν αυτού, 
τα S>Ta αυτού. 

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, ΠΊ-Ί^ίρ in the first verse, and the use of the aorist and the 
future in vv. 6, 7. 

If further proof is needed it may be found in the diverse 
renderings of the same Hebrew words in different parts of the 
Canon. This argument must be used with caution, for (as 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. Thus Q''J^*f ^?) is uniformly represented in the 
Hexateuch by Φυλίστ^ίμ, but in Judges and the later books by 
αλλόφυλοι; ΠΟΏ is φάσ€κ or φάσβχ in Chronicles ('^) and Jere- 
miah^^), but ττάσχα in all other books; Cl-I^^ is δτ^λωσις or 8y}\ol 
in the Pentateuch, but in Ezra-Nehemiah φωτίζοντας, φωτίσων ; 
Ώ'Ί^η is άληθαα in Exodus, but in Ezra τέλειοι/ ; in Isaiah ^^^^^V 
is σα/?αώ^ more than 50 times, whilst τταντοκράτωρ, which in 
other books is the almost uniform rendering of the word when 
it is used as a title of Deity, does not once occur ; ί'Πζ is 
συναγωγή in Gen., Exod., Lev., Num., and again in the Pro- 
phets, but Ικκλησία in Deuteronomy (with one exception) and 
onwards to the end of the historical books. The singular 
phrase Ιγω eiju,t=''?Ji? is limited to Judges, Ruth, and i — 4 Regn. ; 
σνν= Πδ< of the object occurs in the true lxx. only in Ecclesi- 
astes; αμήν is peculiar to Chronicles and Ezra, other books 
which contain the Heb. word (Num., Deut., i Regn., Psalms, 
Jer.) preferring γένοιτο. Similar results may be obtained from 
a comparison of the forms assumed by the same proper names 
in different books. Elijah (-in'tJ^) is Ήλειον in the Books of 
Kings, but Ήλιας in Malachi and Sirach. The lists in 
Chronicles use the Hebrew form of Gentile names {®€κωεί, 
Άναθωθαί, &c.), where other books adopt the Greek (Θεκωειττ^ς, 

3i8 The Septuagint as a Version. 

Άναθωθ€ίτης, &C.). In Ezra ti'll.lV'n^^ becomes Άσσονηρο<;, but 
Άρτα^ζρ^ζ is substituted by the translator of Esther, and 
"Bcpi^ by the lxx. translator of Daniel (ix. i)\ It is difficult 
to resist the force of this cumulative evidence in support of a 
plurality of translators, especially when it is confirmed by what 
we know qf the external history of the Septuagi-nt 

(ύ) Further it is clear that the purpose of the version in 
the later books is not altogether that which the translators of 
the Pentateuch had in view. 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 
and the scribe. Our estimate of the translator's work must 
clearly take account of his attitude towards the book upon 
which he is engaged. 

(c) It is important also to bear in mind the peculiar diffi- 
culties which beset the translators in their attempts to render 
the 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 

^ Theod. has Άσσονήρου in Daniel. 
2 Cf. prol. to Sirach : των άλλων πατρίων βιβλίων. 

^ Α. F. Kirkpatrick in Expositor, v. iii. p. 268. Cf. W. R. Smith, 
0. T. in J elvish Ch., pp. 75 f. 

The Septiiagint as a Version. 319 

idiom refused to lend itself to the forms even of Hellenistic 
Greek without losing to some extent its identity, as the trans- 
lator 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 interpre- 
tation of obscure words and contexts which guided the Pales- 
tinian Jew^. The want of a sound tradition is especially 
manifest in poetical passages and books, and it makes itself 
felt in the numerous transliterations, and in faulty readings 
and renderings of the text^. 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 Hebrew text which lay before the Alexandrian 

{a) The text of the Hebrew Bible has undergone no 
material change since the beginning of the second century a.d. 
A vast store of various readings has been collected from the 
MSS. by the diligence of Kennicott and De Rossi, but few 
among them appear to be more than the omissions or corrup- 
tions which spring from the accidents of transcription. All 
existing MSS. belong to one type of text, and it is, in the main, 
the type which was known to Jerome, to Origen, and to 
Aquila, and which is reflected in the Targums and the Talmud. 

^ Prol. ου yap ισοδυναμεί κτλ. 

2 Even in Palestine "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 έξελβύσεταί. Ps. cxl. 4 ττροφασίξβσθαί. Hos. i. 6 
ηλεημένη, vi. 5 άττεθέρίσα, ii άρχου. Isa. iv. 2 έττιλάμψει, liii. 10 καθαρίσαι.. 
Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 13 χαρήσορται. Arabic: Isa. vii. 6 συνλαλήσαρτεί. 

320 TJie Septttaghit as a Version. 

But it is not that which was possessed by the Alexandrians of 
the third and second centuries, B.C. At some time between the 
age of the lxx. and that of Aquila a thorough revision of the 
Hebrew Bible must have taken place, probably under official 
direction ; and the evidence seems to point to the Rabbinical 
school which had its centre at Jamnia in the years that 
followed the fall of Jerusalem as the source from which this 
revision proceeded \ The subject, as a whole, will be treated 
in a later chapter; meanwhile it is sufficient to warn the beginner 
that in the lxx. he has before him the version of an early 
text which often differed materially from the text of the printed 
Hebrew Bible and of all existing Hebrew MSS. 

{b) The palaeographical character of the MSS. employed by 
the translators requires consideration. It will be remembered 
that the newly discovered fragments of Aquila present the 
Tetragrammaton in archaic letters-. These letters 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 exist- 
ing Hebrew MSS. and in the printed Bibles must have been prac- 
tically complete in our Lord's time, since He refers to x\\^^ yodh 
as the smallest letter, and to the «cpeat which are peculiar to 
the square alphabet (Mt. v. i8). That the change had begun • 

1 See W. R. Smith, 0. T. in J. Church, pp. 56 f.; Driver, Sarmiel, 
p. xxxix. ; Kirkpatrick, Divine Library of the 0. T., p. 64. Among the 
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., 


2 See pp. 39 f. 

'^ y3"ipnn3, or,astheTahnudcalLsit, Πη-Ίίί'ίί '3; see Driver, Sannicl, 

pp. ix. ff. 

The Septitagint as a Version. 321 

in the MSS. employed by the Alexandrian translators^ may be 
gathered from the fact that they repeatedly confuse letters 
which are similar in the square character but not in the archaic. 
Professor Driver holds that the alphabet of their MSS. was a 
transitional one, in which 1 and ^ ^ and Ώ, Π Π and D, as well 
as 2 and 2, Τ and 1, were more or less difficult to distinguish ^ 

A few examples may be given from Driver's list. (1)1 Regn. 
ii. 29 οφθαλμω (pV, for py) ; xii. 3 άποκρίθητ€ κατ ξμον ("Ί ""jy, for 
■•2 1^''^); Ps. xxi. (xxii.) 17 ωρνξαν (11i<3, for ''"1N3); Isa. xxix. 13 
μάτην δε σέβονται μ€ (^ΠΧ DHST ΙΠΠΊ, for ^ΊΝ* ΟΠΝΎ ^Ά^). 
(2) Ι Regn. vi. 20 διβλ^βίι/ O^V*?, for "ΙΌ1?7); Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 25 
τον viov avTTJs (Π3Π for KJO)^; i Regn. iv. lo ταγμάτων (vi"T, for 
^'Pn), xxi. 7 Αωηκ 6 Σύρος (^ΏΊΝΠ JNl, for 'Oli^n 'Ί). 

Another cause of confusion was the scriptio defectiva in the 
case of "1 and '' where they represent long vowels, e.g. i Regn. 
xii. 8 KCLL κατωκισ^ν αυτούς (D2''t^'"''l, for Dll'^ii''•')) ; Ps. v. tit. vnep της 
κληρονομούσης (Π^Π^Π 7ϋ, for Πΐ'^ΤυΠ 7Χ) ; Job xix. l8 els τον 
αΙωνα {Ov, for U'h')]}) ; Jer. vi. 23 ως ττύρ (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. 
13 τρία €τη, ίΗ 'seven years,' where Τ has been read for J. Here 
€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 
to have been separated by any system of punctuation or 
spacing. On the Moabite stone^ and in the Siloam inscrip- 
tion^ a point has been used for this purpose, but the Phoeni- 

1 Except perhaps those which lay before the translators of the Penta- 
teuch ; see Driver, /.c. 

' A specimen of such a script, but of much later date, may be seen in 
Driver, o/>. cit., p. Ixv. 

^ Cf. Streane ad loc. and on Jer. xx. 17. 

■* See Driver, op. cit., p. Ixxxvi., or Hastings' D.B. iii. art. Moab. 

^ Driver, op. cit., p. xv. 

S. S. 21 

322 The Septuagint as a Version. 

cian inscriptions are without punctuation, and so were probably 
the early Biblical rolls. The division adopted by the lxx. is 
frequently at variance with that of the Massoretic text, and 
is sometimes preferable to the latter, sometimes inferior; but 
the differences witness to the absence of divisions in the 
Hebrew MSS. and the non-employment of the final letters 

1 Q η r. 

Thus Gen. xlix. 19, 20 αντων κατά ττοδα?. Άσ//ρ... = 1Ι^•Χ ί U2\)V 
(ίΗ, X'NiD :2py); Deut. xxvi. 5 Σνρίαν ci7re^aXfv = "I2S^ DlX 
(IB, ΠηΝ >ΌΊΝ); I Regn. i. i eV Νασ6ί'/3 = Τν:η (IB, ^ri P) ; 
Ps. xliii. (xHv.) 5 6 ueos μου ό eVr6XXo^6i/oy = niVD ^Π'ΡΧ (ΙΪΙ, D\n'?S 
niV); Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 15 δίά τί ζφνγβν άττο σον 6'A7ri9,- = D3 yilD 
Ψ (ίΒ, ηΠΟ: ynn); Zech. xi. 7 ft?rr)i/ Xaraai/iV7?i. = ^::yiD'? (fE l^S 

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 
tradition which is enshrined in the Massoretic points differs, 
often very widely, from that which was inherited or originated 
by the Alexandrian translators \ 

A few examples may suffice : Gen. xv. 1 1 καΙ συν^κάθίσ^ν 
ούτοι? ^ Drii< 2C'M (ίΗ, Cn'N 2L*'n); Num. xvi. 5 €'ΐτ€σκ€πται = '\\?2. 
(ίϊΐ, ■1|"^3); I Regn.xii. 2 καθησομαι = '^7\:^ψ\ (ίΗ, ^"^ρΐ^Ί); Nah. iii. 8 

μ€ρ'ώα \^μμών = \'\Ό^ ΠίΟ (ίΗ, flOi? ^ϊ^) ; Isa. ix. 8 θάνατον {^^^ 
ίΉ, ■ί?'^) άπ4στ€ΐλ€ν Κύριος eVl Ιακώβ, Ιπ proper names the 
differences of the vocalisation are still more frequent and appa- 
rent, e.g. Μαδαί/χ (|ΠΡ) ; Βαλαάμ (^vh^), Τόμορρα (ΠΊ^), XoboX- 
λογόμορ (Ίρν*?"!"!?), Φασγά (Π|ΡΏ), Ί,αμ^\τών ()iί^'PP'). 

{ή One other preliminary consideration remains. The 
student must not leave out of sight the present state of the 
Greek text. A homogeneous text is not to be found even in the 

1 Jerome in the last years of the 4th century knows nothing of a system of 
vowel points ; see Nowack, Die Bedcutiing dcs Hicronymus fiir die A Tliche 
Tcxtkritik (Gottingen, 1875). 

The SeptiLagint as a Version. 323 

oldest of our uncial MSS., 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 to the transmission 
of ancient books. The state of the Greek text has been 
touched upon already, and will form the subject of a chapter 
in the third part of this book. Here it is sufficient to notice 
the presence of mixture and corruption as a factor in the 
problem which the student of the lxx. must keep in view. 

II. We are now prepared to deal with those features of 
the version which are not incidental but characteristic of the 
translators' principles and methods. 

T. The reader of the Alexandrian Greek Bible is con- 
tinually reminded 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 first chapter of Genesis will supply instances of extreme 
literalness, e.g. v. 4 ava. μίσον τον φωτός καΐ ανά μ€σον τον 
σκότονς' ν. 5 eycVero έσττερα και iyevcTO ττρωί, ήμίρα μία' V. 20 
kpTT^To. ψνχων ζωσων. 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 
άφίκζσθαι €ως ττρος τίνα, τταρασιωτταν αττο τιι/θ9, ττροστίθίναι (τον) 
TTOLelv, λαλείν ev χ^ιρί rtvo?, e^^e? και τρίτην, αττο γενεών εις 
γενεάς (εως γενεάς και γενεάς, εις γενεάν καΐ γενεάν), may be found 
in the Prophets and Hagiographa as well as in the Pentateuch. 
Occasionally the translators set the sense at defiance in their 

^ Cf. Driver, oJ>. cit., p. Iviii. 

21 2 

324 The Septtiagint as a Version. 

desire to be true to what they conceive to be the meaning of 
the Hebrew, as when in i Regn. i. 26 they render ^3 (8co/Aat) 
by kv Ιμοί. In some books, especially perhaps in the Psalms 
and in Isaiah, entire sentences are unintelligible from this cause. 
Even when the Alexandrians have rightly understood their 
original they have generally been content to render it into 

I Greek with little regard for rhythm or style, or the requirements 

■ of the Greek tongue. 

{b) To the same spirit of loyalty may be ascribed in part 
the disposition to transliterate words which present unusual 
difficulty. The number of transliterations other than those of 
proper names is considerable \ and they are to be found in 
nearly all the translated books. In some cases they are due 
to misunderstanding, as in Jud. i. 19 'Ρτ^χα/? δΐ€στ€ΐλατο αΰτοΓς 
where 'ρΤΊη(π) seems to have been read as "ρπαπ, and 23Ί con- 
sequently treated as a proper name ; in others, the Hebrew 
form is purposely maintained (e.g. άλληλονιά, άμ,ην). But in 
the majority of instances transliteration may be taken for a 
frank confession of ignorance or doubt ; it is clearly such, for 
example, in Jud. viii. 7 h ταΓς άβαρκην€ίν, 4 Regn. ii. 14 άφφω 
(χι Π P|X), Jer. XXX viii. (xxxi.) 40 ττάντες ασαρημωθ Ιωξ νάχαΚ 
Κώρών. As in the first and third of these specimens, the 
article is often included ; and when a proper name is trans- 
literated, the name is sometimes for this reason not easily 
recognised; thus Ramathaim (i Regn. i. i) becomes Άρμαθάψ 
(D^nO"in)^ Similarly the Π local is taken over in the trans- 
literation, as in Gen. xxxv. 6 eU Αονζα = ΠΤ•')'?, Sometimes two 
words are rolled into one, as in Ούλαμμανς = ί-Ί'' ^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; 
Histories, 26; Psalms &c., 3; Prophets, 6. The principles by which the 
LXX. appear to have been guided in these transliterations of Hebrew con- 
sonants and vowel-sounds are expounded by Frankel, Forstudien, p. 107 ff. 

2 Unless the α is here prothetic, which is however less probable. 

The Septuaghit as a Version. 325 

xxviii. i9)\ A doublet is occasionally created by adding a 
translation to the transliterated Hebrew, e.g. in i Regn. vi. 
II, 15 TO θξμα ^ργάβ, νϋ. 4 τα αλστ; "Ασταρωθ, xxiii. 14 ei/ 
Μασ€ρψ iv τοΐς στ^νοΐς. In the case of a significant proper 
name, where it is necessary for the reader to be made aware 
of its meaning, the lxx. sometimes translate without trans- 
literating, e.g. Gen. iii. 20 €κάλ€σ€ν ΆΒαμ το όνομα της γυναικός 
Ζωη ("^JD) ; xi. 9 εκλήθη το όνομα αυτοί) 2νγχυσ6ς (''?^) ', xiv. 
13 αττηγγαλζν ^Αβραμ τω ττ^ράτΎ] ^''"jijiyn). 

2. The Alexandrian translators, however, while loyal to 
their original, sometimes even to a fault, manifest nothing like 
the slavish adherence to the letter with which Aquila has been 
charged. They often 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 to be 
ascribed to a fuller text, occur frequently in all parts of the 
LXX. ; e.g. the insertion of λέγων 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. 
xxxiv. 10 ιδού η yrj ττλατεΐα ivavTiov υμών, xl. 17 άττο ττάντων των 
Ύ^νημάτων ων 6 βασυλζυς Φαραώ laOUi, Deut. vii. 16 φά-γΎΐ 
τταΐ'τα τα σκΰλα των Ιθνών (Heb. ' thou shalt eat all the nations '). 
The translators frequently manifest a desire to supply what 
the original had omitted or to clear up what was ambiguous : 
they name the subject or object when the Hebrew leaves it 

^ Cf. Hieron. Qtiaest. hebr. p. 44 (ed. Lagarde), De situ et noju. pp. 106, 
158. Pearson {Praef. paraen. p. 6) endeavours to defend the LXX. even 

320 The Septuagint as a Version, 

to be understood (Gen. xxix. 9 αυτή γαρ ίβοσκ^ν τά ττρόβατα 
τον πατρός αντης, Heb. 'fed them'; xxxiv. 14 και ίΤτταν αντοΐς 
'^ν/χζων καΐ Ac υ ι οι αδελφοί Δε ίνας υιοί δέ Λείας, Heb. 
'and they said unto them '), or they add a clause which seems 
to follow as a necessary consequence (2 Regn. xii. 21 ανίατης 
και έφαγες αρτον και ττε'ττωκας: χνΐ. ίο και αφετε αυτόν και 
ούτως καταρα'σ^ω = '^.r'i^^. ('Ρ Π3) ''D), or they make good an apo- 

siopesis (Exod. xxxii. 32 ει μίν αφεις αυτοΓς την άμαρτίαν αυ'τών 
αφες). Less frequently they insert a whole sentence which is 
of the nature of a gloss, as in Gen. i. 9 καΐ σννηχθη το ύδωρ το 
υτΓΟκάτω του ουρανού εις τάς συναγωγας αυτών και ωφθη η ζηροί, 
which is merely an expansion of καΐ εγε'νετο ούτως in the terms 
of the preceding command συΐ'α;^6'77τω κτλ.; or i Regn. i. 5 otl 
ουκ ην αυτΎ) τταιδιΌν, a reminiscence of ?'. 2 τη "Αννα ονκ ην 
τταιδιον. On the other hand the lxx. not uncommonly present 
a shorter text, as compared with M.T., e.g. Gen. xxxi. 21 και 
8ύβη τον τΓοταμόν (Heb. 'he rose up and passed over'), ib. 31 
εΓττα γαρ Μη ττοτε κτλ. (Heb. 'Because I was afraid, for I 
said...'); i Regn. i. 9 /χετά τό φαγειν αυτούς εν ^^^λώ (Heb. 
' after they had eaten in Shiloh and after they had drunk '). 

(ί?) The translators frequently interpret words which call 
for explanation. Hebraisms are converted into Greek phraseo- 
logy, e.g. "^ρ.Γι? becomes άλλογεντ^ς (Exod. xii. 43), and '"^^^'i? 
ενιαύσιος (Num. vii. 15); CJ^nDy* 7"!^ ''J^^1 is rendered by εγώ δέ 
αλογός εΐ;αι (Exod. vi. 1 2). A difficult word or phrase is ex- 
changed for one more intelligible to a Greek reader; thus 
ή έρημος is used for 2^3Π (Gen. xii. 9) ; ' Urim and Thummim ' 
become η Βηλωσις και η άλ?;6'εια (Exod. xxviii. 26); in the Psalms 
οίντίλημπτοιρ is written for Ιί^ (Ps. iii. 4), βοηθός for l-l^* (xvii. = xviii. 
3), and γλώσσα for "ti^l (Ps. xv. = xvi. 9); similarly in Jer. ii. 23 
TO τΓολυάνδριον 'the cemetery' stands for Χ."•^?, i.e. the valley of 
Hinnom. An effort is made to represent Hebrew money by its 
nearest Greek equivalent ; thus for ^Ί"^^ we have διδραχρ,ον (Gen. 

The Septiiagint as a Versio7i. 327 

xxiii. 15, Deut. xxii. 29, 2 Esdr. xv. 15) as well as σίκλοζ, and 
for ΠΊ3 οβολός. Occasionally a whole clause is interpreted 
rather than translated ; e.g. Gen. i. 2 7; δε yij ην αόρατος καΐ άκατα- 
σκζ-ναστος, Exod. iii. 14 ^γω et/xt 6 ων, Ps. xl. (xxxix.) 7 σώμα δε 
κατηρτίσω μ,οι. Α 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 in the Pentateuch, e.g. Gen. xviii. 25 
μηΒαμώς συ 7τοίησ€ίς (Heb. 'that be far from thee ') ; Exod. iv. 16 
σύ δέ αντω eay τα ττρος τον Oeov (D^H'Pi^T'^ ; xxiv. ΙΟ elSov τον 
τόπον ου ζΐστηκζί 6 θζος τον ^Ισραήλ (Heb. 'they saw the God of 
Israel,' Aq. etSov τον Oeov 'ΊσραηΧ); ib. 11 των ΙτΓίλζκτων τοΐ) Ίσ- 
ραηλ ου διεφώντ/σεκ βυδέ εΙς; Num. χϋ. 8 την Βόξαν (n^pjjl) Κυρίου 
elSev; Exod. xv. 3 Κίφως συντριβών ττολζμονς (ΠρΠρΌ ^''^)•^ Deut. 
xiv. 230 τόπος oV αν Ικλ^έηταί Κΰριο? ό θεός σου Ιττίκληθηναι (15^^) 
το όνομα αυτού e/cet; Jos. iv. 24 η Βυναμίς του κυρίου (Π1Π^"Ί2). 
Such renderings manifest the same spirit of reverence which 
led the lxx. to write ο κνρως or the anarthrous Κύριο?, or 
not infrequently ό θεός, for the Tetragrammaton, just as their 
Palestinian brethren read for it ""Ρ'ή or 0^Π?^\ In other 
places the lxx. appear to be guided by the Jewish Halacha, 
e.g. Gen. ii. 2 συνετίΧεσεν 6 θεός iv τύ} ημίρα τύ) €κτύ} (^^'^^Ψ^, 
Aq. T-rj ίβ^όμτ]) ; Lev. xxiv. 7 Ιπιθησετε Ιτη. το θέμα Χίβανον 
καθαρόν κα\ αλα^; xix. 7 εάν δέ βρωσει βρο^θ-η tyJ ήμερα τύ} τρίτΎ], 
αθυτόν εστίν (Heb. ' an abomination ')^. Οί Haggada also there 
are clear traces, as in Exod. xii. 40 εν yrj Αιγυτττω και εν yfj 
Χανααν, I Regn. i. 14 εϊττεν aiTYJ το τταιδάριον 'HAct "*; v. 6 

1 See W. R, Smith, 0. T. in J. Church, p. 77. Aquila, as we gather 
from Origen and now know from his published fragments (p. 39 f.), wrote 
the word in archaic Hebrew characters, Avhich however were read as 

- "Because salt as well as frankincense was used in the actual ritual of 
their period" (W. R. Smith, op. cit., p. 77). 

^ On xxiii. 11 see p. 17. 

4 "An evident attempt to shield the priest from the charge of harshness" 
(H. P. Smith, Sanmel, p. 10). 

328 The Septiiagint as a Version. 

και /xeVov rr\% yjjipa.% avrrj'i άνίφνησαν /xves, και iyevero σνγχνσίς 
θανάτου μ^-γαλτη iv Trj ττόλει. 

(ή The Lxx. render the same Hebrew word by more than 
one Greek equivalent, sometimes even 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.) 
νψ"} is translated by ά/χαρτωλός in vv. 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 
32, 40, but by άσεβψ in vv. 28, 35, 38. In many others it may 
be ascribed to the circumstance that certain common Hebrew 
words take a special colouring from the contexts in which they 
occur, and must be rendered accordingly. Thus i^^, 'giveV 
which belongs to this class has received in the lxx. more than 
30 different renderings ; sometimes it is translated by a para- 
phrase, e.g. Jos. xiv. 12 αΐτονμαί σ€ C'? '1^^), Deut. xxi. 8 Γνα μη 
γζνηταί (CT *??<) ; when it is rendered directly, the following 
Greek verbs (besides 8<.8oVat and its compounds) are used to 
represent it : aycii/, άττοστελλειν, CLTTOTLveLV, άφύναι, BeLKvvvaL, 
ΒωρεΙσθαί, iav, Ικτιθί-ναι, eKrtveiv, ζκγίξ,ίν, iXcav, έμβάλλζΐν, Ιγκα- 
ταλζίτταν, Ιτταίρ^υν, Ιττίβάλλζΐν, εττιτι^εναι, i-m^i^Lv, «φιστάναι, 
ιστάναι, καταβάλλζίν, καθιστάναί, κατατάσσίίν, κρ€μάζ€ίν, τταρα- 
TiOivaLy TrepiTt^cVat, Troietv, 7Γρθ€κφ€ρ€η', ττροσιεναι, ττροστιθεΐ'αί, 
στηρίζίΐν, συνάγειν, φερξίν. This is a somewhat extreme in- 
stance, but a glance at Hatch and Redpath Avill shew that 
there are many which do not fall far behind it, and that in the 
majority of cases the ordinary words of the Hebrew Bible 
have more than one equivalent in the Greek of the lxx. 
The Alexandrian translators have evidently made an honest 
endeavour to distinguish between the several connotations of 
the Hebrew words. Thus, to take a few examples : "P. is 
variously rendered by άκρον, άρχη, κλίτος, μ^ρος, ττερας, τάξις, 

1 The example is suggested by Dr Hatch {Essay's, p. 18), who gives many 
of the passages at length. The ini/t'x Hebraeus at the end of Trom will 
enable the student to add other instances (besides διδόναι and its compounds). 

The Septtiagint as a Version. 329 

XpoVos ; among the equivalents of "i?"^ are άττοκρισι?, εττερώτ?;- 
σΐ9, κρίμα, ττρα-γμ,α, τρόπος, φωνή; for ^/. we have not Only 
κάρδια, ψνχη, φρην, vovs, διάνοια, στόμα, φρόνησίζ, but σ-τηθος 
and even σα'ρ^ ; for ^P2, άριθμ^ΐν, επισκίΤΓτεσ^αι, Ιτάζΐ,ίν, IkSl- 
κ€Ϊν ; for ΐ^ϊ^Τν, δικαιοσΰι/•/;, έλζημοσννη, ευφροσύνη. Conversely, 
the same Greek word often serves for several Hebrew words. 
Thus Βιαθηκη, which is generally the lxx. rendering of πηψ^ 
stands also for Π-πν (Exod. xxvii. 21, xxxi. 7), ^1^^"^ (Dan. 
ix. 13, LXX.) and even "^^1 (Deut. ix. 5) ; Ιξαιράν, λντρονν, 
ρνεσθαί are all used to represent ''^^; €ΐδωλον appears in different 
contexts for ^^, r\)b% b'h^, ΠΌ2, hn, 'ρηπ, ί^Π, 2p, ^pp, dSv, 
γρψ^ D^SlJ;). Even in the same context or verse this some- 
times occurs. Thus in Gen. i. — iii. yrj translates Y"}^, '"^^l^., 
HTJ'j Ί2Γ• in Exod. xii. 23 "»?V and HDS are both represented 
by Ίταρίρχζ.σθαι ; in Num. xv. 4 f. ^υσια is used both for ^^}^ 
and n?T. In such cases it is 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 
Pentateuch shews no poverty of words, and considerable skill 
in the handling of synonyms. 

{d) In reference to metaphors the Alexandrians allow 
themselves some discretion. Thus in Gen. vi. 2 'the sons of 
God' become ol ayyeXot τον 6eov; in Num. xxiv. 17 'a sceptre 
{^^^) shall rise' is rendered by α'νασττ^'σεται ανθρωττος; in Deut. 
X. 16 'the foreskin of your heart' is turned euphemistically into 
την σκληροκαρΒίαν νμών; in Isa. ix. 14 /xeyav και μικρόν represents 
Heb. ' both branch and rush.' Occasionally the translators 
indulge in paronoffiasia, without authority from the Heb., e.g. 
Gen. XXV. 27 οικών οικία,ν —^'^ITJ'^ ^*^*1'' ; xxvi. 18 καΊ έττωνόμα- 
σ€ν αντοΐς ονόματα ΠΐΟΕ?^ ]ΤΌ Ν")ί^»1 ; Job xxvii. 12 κ€νά kcvols; 
XXX. 13 €^€τρίβησαν τρίβοι μον. 

(e) 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 ; omissions occur which may be 
explained by homoioteleuton ; still more frequently the trans- 
lation has suffered through an insufficient knowledge of Hebrew 
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 must be used with caution and reserve, as the 
experience of the Ancient Church shews. With this subject 
we shall deal in a future chapter; it is sufficient to note the 
fact here. 

III. The beginner, for whose use this chapter is chiefly 
intended, will now be prepared to open his Septuagint and his 
Hebrew Bible, and to compare the two in some famiHar 
contexts. The following notes may assist him in a first effort 
to grapple with the problems which present themselves. 

Gen. XV. 1—6. 

I. Τά ρήματα... ρήμα, Heb. 'ΐ2'Π...ϋη3'1.. Αβγών = lbi<i? ; cf. 

V. 4, where, as elsewhere, Aq. renders, τω Xiyav. Ύπίρασπίζω σον, 
Heb. '<2W a shield to thee'; cf Deiit. xxxiii. 29, Prov. ii. 7, al. 
Ό μισθός σον ttoXvs. Vulg., A.V., R.V. connect Heb. with the 
foregoing, supplying "I. 2. Δβσττόττ;? = "'J^^<, as in v. 8, and not 
infrequently in Jer. and Dan. (lxx.). Απολύομαι ut€kvos — an 
interpretation rather than a literal rendering of ^y\^. "^^ΐπι. Υίό? 
Μάσ€κ της oi/coyei/oi? /ιου = ''Π"•3 Γ\2 pL^Ό p: cf. Hieron. quacst. 

^ Philo has άπξλβύσομαι (see below). 

The Septuagint as a Version. 331 

in Gen. "ubi nos habemus Et filius Masec ve^-fiaailae meae., in 
Hebraeo scriptum est Tl''^ pOO pi, quod Aquila transtulit 6 vl6s 
τον ποτίζοντοζ οΐκίαν ;ioi;...Theodotio vero κα\ νίος του eVi της 
οΙκίας μου." Ααμασκος ^Ελύζ^ρ, a literal rendering of the Heb., 
leaving the difficulty unsolved. 3. Έπ€ώή=^][}, and so in xviii. 
31, xix. 19; did LXX. read DX? OlKoyevrjs h.ere = r\''2r[']2. κλη- 
ρονομήσει μ€ — a Hebraism, = κΧηρονόμος μου €σταί. 4• ^^^ evSvs 
..,eyeVf7-o= Π3Π1. Φωνή = ^2"^^, as in xi. i, but apparently not 
elsewhere. "Os...ovto9, Ν•1Π..."1^Χ. Έκ σοΰ, euphemism for Heb. 
^^y^p, unless the LXX. read "^IpD. 5. Προς αυτόν, Λ Heb. 6. Και 
€7Γίστ€υσΐν = \Όί^'^) (cf. Haupt ad loc). \\βράμ, λ Heb. Τω θεω 
= nin^2. Έλο-γΙσθη...€ΐς δκ., 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 = ''n*l...''n^'l, Τενηθέντος προς op-> 
θρον = '\Ρ2Γ\ η*'!!?. Έτγ' ορονς ^etva, Heb. On the mountain.' 
Φωνή, cod. F with iH pr. καί. 1 7. Ύττό TO ορός 2.'(om. Σ. AF), 
Heb. 'at the nether part (ΓΤ'ΓΙΠη^) of the mountain.' 18. Δια τ6 
καταβ€ΐ3ηκ€ναί, an idiomatic rendering of 11^ TJ'i:^"'':^p. Ύον θβόν 
= mn\ cf. 21. Ό καπνός, Heb. 'the smoke of it.' 'Εξώστη, Heb. 
as V. 16 where LXX. renders επτοήθη. Ό λαό? = ΟΙ/Π; Μ. Τ., 
1ΠΠ. Ι9• ΐΐροβαίνονσαι Ισχυρότεραί = ΡΙ^\ "Π/Ίϊ^• 20. Έκύλβσεί' 
...Μωϋσ^ΐ', Heb. Πιί'Ώ*? ; the *? after ίίΐρ is dropt in accordance 
with Greek idiom ^ 21. Αεγων, λ Heb. Έγγισωσιι/, a soften- 
ing of the Heb. ' break forth ' (Din) ; in the next verse cyyiCeiv 
= 'C*^2 7ii. 22. και, Heb. 'and also' (DJT), usually καί ye, Aq. και 
Kaiy^^ (Burkitt, Aquila, p. 13). Κυρι'ω τω βεω, a double ren- 
dering of n'jn''. 7ίί. ^Απαλλάξη απ' αυτών : another instance of 
euphemism : Heb. 'break forth upon them' (Aq. διακόψτ] ev αύτοϊς). 
23. τίροσαναβήναί: the double compound occurs six times in Jos. 
xi. — xix. Άφόρισαι: the verb is here as in -z/. 12 the equivalent 
of S2II ki. ' enclose,' but with the added thought of consecration 
which is latent in άφορίζβιν, άφόρίσμα, αφορισμός (cf. 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. 

26, Ezech. XX. 40). 24. Άπολίστ], euphemistic, as άπαλλάξη in 
V. 22 ; Aq. again, διακόψτ]. 

Num. xxiii. 7 — 10. 

7. Παραβολην: here for the first time =7^^^. Lyons Pent., 
pafabida. Μβσοποταμίαί, i.e. Ο^Π^ ϋΊΧ (Gen. xxiv. lo), or Π? 
D"3i:?. (Gen. xxv. 20) : here an interpretation of the simple D'lN. 
Άττ', λεγωι^, /^ Heb. Έπικατάρασαί μοι, and καταράσωμαι in ?/. 8, 
represent DVT, whilst αρασαι answers to "1*1N, and άράσωμαι {v. 8) 
to 3p3, an unusual instance of carelessness or poverty of 
language on the part of the translator; ορύων {v. 9) is equally 
unfortunate as a rendering of CIV, while on the other hand 
οψομαί, προσνοησω fairly represent the Heb. ΙΙροσνοάν renders 
'^1ί^' again in Job xx. 9, xxiv. 15. 10. Έξακριβάζίσθαι (Num.^, Job^, 
Dan. LXX.i), a late form for ^ξακριβοΰν in LXX. and Jos. To 
σπ€ρμα, Heb. 'the dust': did LXX. read ^"IT, or have they glossed 

"iSy? Και τις €ξαρίθμησ€ταί, reading IDD•• '•ΌΊ. Αημονς Ίσραηλ, 

Heb. 'the fourth part of Israel' (Aq. τον τβτάρτου Ί.). Ή ψνχη 
μου, as Heb., whilst the next word is sacrificed to an alliteration 
(ψυχή, ψυχαΊζ). To σπέρμα μου is a gloss on ''Π''"}ΠΧ (cf. Brown, 
Hed. and E7ig. Lex., p. 31); ω$• το σπέρμα τούτων, Heb. 'as he.' 

This passage illustrates both the greater freedom which the 
Greek translators allowed themselves in poetical contexts, and 
their comparative incompetence to deal with them. 

Deut. vi. 1—9. 

I. Αύται αί ivToXal, Heb. 'this is the commandment.' Ό 
θΐος ημών, Heb. ' your God.' Ούτως, ^ Heb. Έΐσπορ(ύ€σθ€, 
Heb. 'go over'; the Greek has lost the local reference, as in 
iv. 14, 4 Regn. iv. 8. 2. "Iva φοβησθ€...νμών, Heb. 2nd pers. 
sing. "Σήμερον, f^ iH. Oi υΙο\ κτλ., Heb. 'thy son and thy 
son's son.' "Iva μακροημ^ρ^ύσητε, Heb. 'and that thy days may 
be prolonged'; μακροημ^ρ^ύαν {μακροημξρος γίνίσθαι) represents 
this or a similar phrase in iv. 40, v. 30, xi. 9, 21, xxxii. 47; μακρο- 
χρόνιος, μακροχρονίζίίν also occur in iv. 40, V. 16, xvii. 20, 
xxxii. 27. The group is not found elsewhere in the LXX. except 
in Exod.\ Jud.\ and in Sirach. 3. Δοίι^αι ^ M.T. ; perhaps 

added to complete the sense of the Greek ; yet see v. 10 ("Πί" ΓΙΓΙ7). 
4. Και TadTa...Alyv7rTov λ Heb; perhaps repeated from iv. 45 
to form an introduction to "Ακουβ κτλ. 5. Αιανοίας... ψυχής... 8υνά- 
μ€ως. The readings vary ; for 8ίανοίας AF Luc. read καρ8ίας, and 
the text of Β is here super 7'asu7'a7n ; for ^υνάμ^ως some texts 
give Ισχΰος. The N.T. citations (Mt. xxii. 37 = Mc. xii. 29 ff., 

The Septiiagint as a Version. 333 

Lc. X. 27) present much diversity, giving both renderings of 
η^η*? and both of "qiXP ; cf. Dittmar, V. T. in Novo, p. 50 f. 

6. Koi iv TTj yj/vxjj σου, /^ Heb. ; for 'in thy heart' Heb. has 
'upon,' "as it were imprinted there (Jer. xxxi. 33)^" 7. Προ- 
βιβάσας, Heb. 'shalt impress them upon' ; Aq. δβυτβρώσβι^, as if 
the root were n:*J'. Έι^ αυτοΊς = Ώ2. Καθήμενος κτ\., Heb. 'in thy 
sitting &c.' ; eV ο'ίκω, iv όδω are inexact, Heb. 'in thy house,' 'in 
the Avay.' 8. Ασάλευτοι/ (F, άσάλΐντα) = ΓίΖίψύ/, 'for frontlets,' 
circlets or tires for the head: Lyons Pent, (reading σαλβυτά), 
inobilia. ^ ΚσαΚ^υτον occurs in the same phrase in Exod. xiii. 16, 
Deut. xi, 18. Aq. seems to have rendered the Heb. here and in 
Exod. by νακτά, i.e. ' compressed,' ' tight,' which Field {Hexapla, 
i. 103) explains as the "thecas in quas schedulae membraneae 
...inferciebantur." The LXX. rendering may be an Alexandrian 
name for the φνλακτηρων, but the whole subject is obscure. 
9. Φλιάί =ηίΤ]ιΡ, as in Exod. xii. 7ff. 

Jos. x. 12 — 14. 

12. ^Ήί ημ€ρα τταρ^δωκ^ν.. .νποχβίριον — idiomatic rendering of 
''59Λ..ΠΓΙ DVIl. The words that follow {ηνίκα,.Λαραηλ) seem to 
be a gloss derived from v. 10. Και sLTrev Ίησοΰς, Heb. 'and he 
said in the eyes of Israel.' Έτητω, Heb. 'be still.' Ταβαών, ίΗ 

'Gibeon.' Αίλών, ίΗ 'Aijalon' (Ρ'^ϊ^*) ; cf. 2 Chron. xi. 10 A,. 
Αίαλών. 13. Έν στάσβί = ΐρΓ, which is thus distinguished from 
the verb represented by €στη. Ό Oeos, Heb. ''ΐϋ, Aq. to eOvos. 
Unless a primary error is to be suspected here, the LXX, has 
glossed 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, ^ ουχί τοΰτο 
γ€γραμμ€νον eVt βιβλίου του ζύθους V. Ου προ€πορ€ύ€Το κτλ., a loose 
rendering of Heb. D'*pri Di••? ND? }*ζί Νλ 14. Ήμ€ρα τοιαύτη ούδε 

το πρότξρον ούδ€ το Ζσχατον, a good example of a conscientious 
compromise between idiomatic and literal modes of rendering 

(cf. Heb.). ^Χνθρώπον, t^''S ?1p2. 2υν€πολ€μησ€ν τω Ί., Heb. 
'fought for Israel.' 

JUD. v. 28—302. 

28. <&^ here omits the difficult word 22^Γ\) (β^, κα\ κατ^μάν- 

^ Driver, ad loc. 

2 In this passage the text of Β in O.T. in Greek, i. 489, should be compared 
with that of A (ed. Brooke and McLean). 

334 The Sephiagint as a Version. 

Baviv). Έκτος του τοξίκον, 'forth from the loophole'; cf. Symm. 
in Ezek. xl. i6 Ovpides τοξικαί: (5-^ δια της 8ικτνωτης, 'through the 
lattice' (cf 4 Regn. i. 2, Ezek. xli. 16). 'ΈττίβΚίπονσα...Ί.ισαρά in 
A appears to be a supplementary gloss. 'Β.σχννθη (Β) confuses 
είΤ'3 pdiel with ^'\'2 kal; the general sense of the former is given 
by ησχάτισξ^ν A. For (σχατίζαν cf. I Mace. v. 53 ; has it been 
suggested here by its similarity to the word used in Β ? nodes : 
A more literally 'ίχνη, but πους represents ΠΓ2 elsewhere, e.g. 
Ps. Ivi. (Ivii.) 6, Prov. xxix. 5. 29. At σοφαΐ αρχουσαι: A, again 
aiming at a literal rendering, σοφοί άρχουσών. On the other 
hand B's άπ€στρ€ψ€ν λόγους αυτής €αυτί] is close and yet idiom- 
atic, while A's άπ^κρίνατο iv ρήμασιν αυτής goes too far afield ; 
the latter appears to be a Hexaplaric correction (Field, αίϊ loc). 
30. Ουχ ζυρήσουσιν αυτόν 8uipepi(ovTa σκΰΧα ; SO (B^-^ ; Heb. 'are 
they not finding, [are they not] dividing booty?' LXX. seem 

to have read Ρ?Γ\Ό for ΐρ?Π\ Οίκτ^ίρμων οίκτίφήσα Β, φιλιάζων 
φίλοις Α ; both, while labouring to keep up the alliteration of the 
Heb., miss its point through ignorance of a rare use of ΟΠΊΐ ; for 

φϊλιάζ^ίν cf. xiv. 20 B, 2 Chron. xix. 2. Τίοικιλτών (A, ποικίλων) 
misses the dual ' embroidery on both sides' (R. V.), or ' a couple of 
pieces,' " precisely as DTli^m above '"' (Moore). Βάθη in A seems 
to be an error for βαφή, which is found in several cursives ; see 
Field, acf loc, and Lagarde's Lucian. Τω τραχήλω αυτού σκΟλα = 

apparently 'ρ'ρΚ-• inNlv'?; Μ. Τ. 'for the necks of the spoil.' Θ^ 
substitutes the usual ανατολή for the spirited and literal rendering 
of Β (cf. Ps. xviii. = xix. 7), and appears to have read Vm332 ; 
cf. Ps. xix. (xx.) 7. 

This passage is a severe test of the translator's knowledge 
and skill, and shews him perhaps at his worst. 

I Regn. xvii. 37 — 43. 

37. ίϊΐ begins ΠΠ "1PN*1, A, Luc. κα\ elnev Δ. Έ /c χ€ΐρ6ς του 

λίοντος,,.τής αρκου, an exact rendering ; cf. Gen. ix. 5 e'/c χειρός 
πάντων των θηρίων. LuC, Th., €κ στόματος του λ. καΐ €κ χάρος τής 
αρκου. Ύοΰ άπ€ρίτμήτου, repeated from V. 36 (λ ίϊΐ)• 3^• Ρ<^ν- 
δύαν (Jud. iii. 16, 2 Regn. χ. 4): +αυτοΰ, Α, with iH. Πβρίκβφα- 
λαίαν χ. π€ρΙ την κ€φαλήν αυτού '. LuC. (Α), with ΙΪΙ, π. χ. €π4θηκ(ν 
€πί κτλ., adding, κα\ ^νίδυσ^ν αυτω θώρακα. 39• "^ζωσ^ν τον 
Ααυ€ί8, SC. Σαούλ (cf V. 38) ; Luc, A, follow Heb. in making 
David the object of the verb {(ζώσατο Δαυβι'δ). Έκοπίασ^ν π€ρι- 
πατήσας (Α, π(ριπατήσαί) άπαξ κα\ δις, 'more than once he wearied 

^ "Of the versions only [Vulg.] comes near the true sense" (Moore). 
Jerome renders pulcherriviafetniuarmn. 

The Septuagint as a Version. 335 

himself with walking (strove to walk) in them,' reading i^^f.l, as 
in Gen. xix. 11 -"li^/fl, LXX. παρ^λυθησ-αν (Wellhausen, Driver, 

H. P. Smith). "Απαξ και 8ls occurs also in Deut. ix. 13 (where, 
as here, there is nothing in the Heb. to correspond), and in Neh. 
xiii. 20, where it represents D.''riti^-"1 DyS. Άφαιροΰσιν αντα αττ' 
αίιτον, reading the verb probably as D"}P!'!l, and omitting ΊΠ. 

40. λίθους reXeiovs in Β is obviously wrong, and A scarcely mends 
matters by omitting the adjective. Correct, with Lucian, λίθους 
Χζίους. Έι/ τώ καδίω ποιμ^νικω : κα8ίον = καδίσκος, here only in 
LXX., and perhaps unknown elsewhere : ποιμενικός (D"*yin) again 

in Zach. xi. 15. Έΐς συλλογην, apparently for l^IpP"•'? (HH 

0•ΐρ*?»5•1, Aq. κα\ iv άνα\€κτηρίω). 41 is wanting in β^, and 

probably belongs to the same recension of the story which has 
supplied the great gaps vv. 12 — 31, 55 — xviii. 5. 42. Heb. 'looked 
and saw' ; so A, Luc. Πυρράκης• cf. xvi. 12, Gen. xxv. 25. 
43. Ώσβι, added by the translators to soften the opprobrious κνων. 
Έν ράβδω καΐ λίθοις, {Β, 'in (with) Staves'; και λίθοις is prob- 
ably intended to make the question correspond to the statement 
oi V. 40. The next words in the LXX. κα\ elnev Ααυείδ Ουχί, αλλ' 
η χ€ίρω[ν'] κυνός are evidently of the same character — "a singu- 
larly vapid reply" (Driver). 

4 Regn. ii. II — 18. 

II. Αντων πορ€υομ€νων επορεύοντο κα\ εΧάλουν — an interesting 
attempt to combine Greek idiom with some reminiscence of the 
Heb. phrase; Lucian abandons the Heb., and corrects, αυτών 
πορ€υομ€νων καΙΧαλούντων. "ίππος πυρός, Heb. ' horses of fire'; 
cf. Ιππους, Heb. 'horsemen,' v. 12. Άνά μ€σον (p?), cf. Gen. 
i. 7 δί€χούρισ€ν...άνά μίσον. \\ν(λημφθη, Heb. 'went up'; the 
Greek verb is apparently repeated from vv. 9, 10, where it = rip1>. 
From this 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. Ώ?, λ Heb. ; cf. i Regn. xvii. 43 (above). 
12. Harep πάτβρ, Heb. 'my father' dz's. Αί^ρρηξ^ν... ρήγματα, after 
the Heb. : Lucian omits the noun, probably because of the harsh- 
ness of the assonance. 13. Kat υψωσ€ν = ϋΎ) ; Luc, κα\ άνειλατο. 
Μηλωτην, ' sheepskin,' an interpretation of ΠΊ^,Χ {Vulg. pal/ium) 

wherever it is used of Elijah's characteristic raiment (3 Regn. 
xix. 13, 19, 4 Regn. ii. 8ff.) ; cf. Heb. xi. 37 πβριηλθον iv μηλωταΐς. 
^Έ,πάνωθζν, sc. αυτοΰ (Heb., Luc). Έλβίσαΐβ, /^ Heb. ; και eVe- 
στρξψζν 'EXeiaaU is Hexaplaric, and wanting in B*, but 

336 The Septiiagiitt as a Version. 

supplied by B^^A Luc. 14. Ό <9fuy, iH \n>if Τψ\. Άφφώ, a 
transliteration answering to Sin ηχ (iB.); in x. 10 the same 
form = ϊ<12Ν, which was perhaps the reading before the LXX. in 
this place. Aq. Kairrep αυτός, but Symm. και νυν, whence Jerome 
etiam ?iu?ic. 15. κα\ ol ev ^ΐ€ρ€ίχώ: λ <at A Luc. with fB.. 16. *C\1 
is not represented by ©-^^ ; Luc. adds elai. Ylol 8ννάμ€ως, Ρ^Π"\321. 
'Έν τω Ιορδάνη, 'EXeiaaU, ^^ Heb., Luc. 1 8. In A Luc. Aq. Th. IB 
the verse begins 'And they returned to him'; cf. v. 13. 

Ps. cix. (ex.) I — 4. 

I. [Ό] Kvpios τω κνρίω μου, '';ilX? ^]Γ{\. Έκ δβ^ιώι/, ^yip'h; in 
V. 5 the same Gr. is used for ''^''P'! ^V- Ύποπόδιον τών ποδών σου : 
ΰποκάτω is the reading of the best authorities in Mt. xxii. 44, 
Mc. xii. 36, but υποπ. keeps its place in Lc.^"• ^*^*-, Hebrews. 2. και 
κατακυρΐ€υ6= mm apparently. 3. Mera σου, "^IpV (ίϊΐ, ^PV). Ή άρχη 
seems to point to a reading Π2Π: or Π^Π: (cf. Job xxx. 15, Isa. 
xxxii. 8); των ά-γίων (σου) = D^t^np ("Ι^ΕίΠρ); Symm. eV δρβσιι/ 
(■ΊΊΠ2 for ''1"ΙΠ2) ayioLS. Έκ γαστρος προ εωσφόρου βγέννησά σ€, 
though not quoted in the Ν. Τ., had an important place in post- 
apostolic Christian teaching from Justin onwards (cf. Justin, 
Tryph. cc. 63, 76, 83 ; Tert. adv. Marc. v. 9 ; Cypr. test. 17, ep. 
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. 
Ariaii. iv. 27 sq. ; de deer. 3, &c. ; Hilar, de trin. vi. 16, xii. 8. 
The O.L. seems to have rendered uniformly ex utero ante luci- 
ferum geiiui te, with the variant generavi in Tert. I.e. ; Jerome's 
' Hebrew ' Psalter reads with ΙΐΙ quasi de vulva orietur tibi ros 
adolescentiae. The LXX. appear to have read their Heb. text 
as '^^ril'?'! "in'^f^P ΟΠΊϋ, perhaps dropping 71027 as unintelligible. 
4. Kara τψ τάξιν, ^ΠΊΠΉ. hv, Aq. Symm. κατά λόγον. Cf. Heb. V. 
6 ff., vii. II, 15 (κατά την ομοιότητα). The translator probably 
had before him the LXX. of Gen. xiv. 18; he transliterates the 
unique name plV'DT'O in the same way. 

Prov. viii. 22—25, 30—31. 

22. "Εκτισαν μ€. So ©KB^etc. Q.L. {condzdit, ereavit); codd. 
23 = V, 252, with Aq. Symm. Th. Vulg. (possedit), give €κτη- 
ο-ατο— both possible meanings of r\2p. The former rendering 
supplied the Arians with one of their stock arguments (cf. Athan. or. 
e. Arian. ii. 44 sqq.). Els epya αυτόν, a loose and partial translation, 
probably a confession of inability to understand the Heb. ; Th. 

The Septuagiiit as a Version. 337 

προ της epyaaias άπο rore. 23. ^Έ,θζμζΚίωσίν /xe, reading apparently 
^^ID"» where fH has ^Γ1?Ε>3 ; cf. Ps. Ixxvii. (Ixxviii.) 69. Προ τον 
την γην ποιησαί, a poor rendering of Heb., probably adopted to 
bring this clause into Hne with v. 24 with which the LXX. seem 
to have connected it. 24. LXX. overlook ''Π771Π and ΠαΠί, unless 
they intend to convey the general sense by ττοιήσαι and προίΚθύν. 
25- Ιΐάντων, Λ ίΗ• Γ6ί/ί/ά /Me, iB Ί was brought forth.' 30. αρ- 
μόζουσα = pt^^, the word being referred by the translator to 
\Ό^ ; similarly Symm. Th., €στηριγμ€νη. ^y προσίχαιρ^ν implies 
the reading νΏ^^Ώ\:^ ; DV DV is connected by LXX. with the next 
clause. 31. "Ore., συντβλεσαί : Heb. 'rejoicing in the world of 
his earth.' LXX. seem to have read Πν^Π^ pnii'D, as Lagarde 
suggests ; had ^1T\ stood in their text, οίκονμένη would have 
been ready at hand as a rendering (cf. 2 Regn. xxii. 16, Ps. ix. 9, 
&c.). Έύφραίν^το, reading 1''Vii'yL*\ Yio\ ανθρώπων = D'^^^ \i3 ; 
cf. vlovs Άδά/χ, Deut. xxxii. 8 ; DIN '2 is translated by this phrase 
in Ps. X. (xi.) 4, and repeatedly in the poetical books. 

Job xix. 23 — 27. 

23. Tif yap av δωη ; See above p. 308 ; the phrase is repeated 
in the Hebrew, but the translator contents himself with using it 
once. iSS is ignored ; its usual equivalent in the LXX. is vvv or 
ovv, unless it is transliterated (p. 324). Els τον αΙώνα seems to 
represent ΊΓ?, which in fH belongs to the next verse ; Th. 
translates it eiy μαρτύρων, reading the word as "I^r. 24. B* omits 

iv πίτραις ζνγλυφηναι which appears to be necessary to the sense ; 
in supplying it B^^'^iiA prefix ή, a manifest gloss. 25. 'AeVaos• 
caTLv 6 €K.\v€cv μ€ μξλλων, a paraphrase of Heb. ' my Goe/ lives ' ; 
aevaos in the LXX. elsewhere = D7y, and ^NJI is άγχιστξνς (Ruth 
iii. 9, etc.), or λυτρωτής (Ps. xviii. 14, Ixxvii. 35). 25 — 26. ΈπΙ 
yrjs άναστησ-αι or ανάστησα appears to correspond with 12Γ ΡΓ 
(D^p"•) D-1pJ, and τ6 deppa μου το άναντΧοΰν ταΰτα with Γl^ίT -ISpJ "'liy. 
β^ points to ΠΝΤ "PS^DP ^"t^V η\^φ (Siegfried in Haupt ad /oc). 
But the translator perhaps interprets his text in the light of the 
doctrine of the Resurrection, which was accepted from Mac- 
cabean times (cf. Job xlii. 17*^, and see Dan. xii. 2, 2 Mace, 
vii. 14, xii. 43) ; as cited by Clem. R. i Cor. 26 {αναστήσεις 
την σάρκα μου ταύτην την άναντΧησασαν ταΰτα πάντα), the words 

are brought into still nearer agreement with the faith of the 

S. S. 22 

33^ The Septuagint as a Version. 

Churoh; see Apostles' Creeds p. 89 f. Παρά yap Κυρίου. ,.σνν^τί- 
Χέσθη corresponds in position with words which £H divides and 
points as Π17Ν ΠΤΠΧ nb^D-l, but seems to be partly borrowed 
from the next verse. @^ suggests rh^ 'h -ib^: •?ϊ'?ΝΡ•1 (Sieg- 
fried). 27. Πάι/τα δε μοί συντ€τέλ(σται' IH, ""D Υ? •1^|'. 

MiCAH V. I (iv. 14)— 4 (3). 

I. Έμ,φραχθησ^ταί θυγάτηρ €μφραγμώ, i.e. ^^ί Π3 "Ίυπη. 

Τάί φυλάς τοΰ Ίσραηλ : LXX. read 'ΡΧ")'^^. ^ρηί?* for '' DSb^. 2. Br;^- 

Xe6/A oLKos Έφράθα : did LXX. read «^ΠΊΏ^ίί n^3 0Π^η"'2 ? Όλιγο- 

στό? α roC tii /αι ' art little to be,' as Heb. The passage is quoted 
in Mt. ii. 6 in a Greek paraphrase^ which substitutes ουδαμώς 

ΙΚαχίστη for 'little to be,' and τοις ηγ^μόσιν CSpSj?) for 'thousands' 
C???^)• 3• "^(os καιρού τικτουσψ re^erai, apparently for βω? καιρού 
ου τΊκτουσα τίζίται or e. κ. τικτούσης ore re^erai. 4• Και δ'ψ'εται, 
το τΓοιμνιον αυτοΰ were obelised in Hex. and find no place in ί$1 ; 
the former has perhaps originated in a misreading of nm as 
Πϊ^ΊΙ, so that κα\ oy\r. κα\ ποιμανύ is in fact a doublet. Kvptoy, 
subject; Heb. 'in the strength of J.,' the subject being the same 
as in 7/. I. Ύττάρξουσιν, •Π^^'ΐ ; the LXX. read )2l^\ connecting 
the verb with the previous words ; for 21^'* = υπάρχίΐν cf Ps. 
liv. (Iv.) 20 6 υπάρχ^ων προ των αιώνων. 

JEREM. xxxviii. 31 — S7 (xxxi. 30 — 36). 

Vv. 31 — 34 are cited in Heb. viii. 8 — 12, q.v. 31. Αιαθησομαι, 
in Hebrews συντελέσω, cf. Jer. xli. (xxxiv.) 8 συντβλίσαι (HID) 
διαθηκην, and ib. 15. Τω ο'ίκω dzs, in Hebrews eVl τ6ν οικον. 
32. Ακθ^μην, in Hebrews ' εττοι'τ/σα : the writer appears to dislike 
the repeated alliteration in διατίθ€σθαι διαθηκην. Έν ημάρα iiri- 
\αβομ€νου μου, for the more usual τοΰ €πιΚαβ4σθαι μ€ or οτ€ (fj) 
(πίλαβόμην. 'Ότι ουκ ζνέμΐΐναν eV... Heb. ' which. ..they broke'; 
ημίλησα αυτών, reading "TlPyJ for ''n^yQ. ^2- h διαθήκη μου, Heb. 
'the covenant.' Αώούς δώσω, a Hebraism not represented in IH ; in 
Hebrews διδού? appears without δώσω, and so AQ in Jer. Els την 
διάνοιαν αυτών, Heb. 'in their inward parts.' 34. llV \^ has no 
equivalent in the Greek; τον πολίτην αύτοΰ, Heb. 'his neighbours' 
(cf Prov. xi. 9, 12, xxiv. 43 = 28), reminds us that we are dealing 

^ The paraphrastic character of the reference appears more distinctly in 
the second stanza έκ σου... Ισραήλ, which blends Mic. v. γ**, 3*. It will 
be observed that cod. A reads ή-γούμίνοί with Mt. 

TJie Septiiagmt as a Version. 339 

with an Alexandrian version. 'Αττό.,.εωΓ, Πρί....'?; άδικίαις... 
άμαρηών,ίί^, 'iniquity,' 'sin.' 35—37. In l¥l 36, 27 precede 35. 
35. Φη<τΙν Kupiof, Heb. 'thus saith J.' (at the beg. of the verse). 
Ύψωθη, reading -Ίϋ-ΊΤ for •Π?5^. ; ταπ€ΐνωθτ], Heb. 'be searched.' 
Ουκ άτΓοδοκίμω [ αττοδ. is a contracted future (cf. p. 305) ; 
ουκ is inserted, because the drift of the verse has been mis- 
understood (cf. Streane, p. I56f.). To yivos Ίσραηλ, Heb. 'all 
the seed of I.'; yei/oy = yiT. again in v. -yj- 36• ^ίληνψ, fH, 'the 
ordinances of the moon ' (but cf. D'^ipnn in v. 35, Heb.). Κραυγην, 
reading perhaps tJ^JIl or T3"l for 1?ί"1. 27- Κυριο$• ΤΙαντοκράτωρ 
= niN*3V '"lin% as almost invariably in the Prophets^ from Hosea 
xii. 5 (6) onwards, with the exception of Isaiah, who transhterates 
niXQV (KvpLos σαβαωθ, Isa. i. 9, al). 

Dan. xii. i — 4. 

I. Χώραι/ (lxx.), probably a corruption for ωραν (cf. Bevan, 
p. 48); TrapeXevaeTai (LXX.), reading "12^^ for "^OV (άναστήσίται, 
Th.). Ό ayyekos (LXX.), a gloss ; Th. literally, 6 άρχων. Έπι 
του? VLOVS (lxx., Th.), ../Ar^ ^y. ^Εκ€ίνη ή ημίρα, LXX., eVrat 

καιρός Th. ; Th. is again more literal than LXX. θλί-ψ -Ls ola ου 
yiyovcv (cf. Mt. xxiv. 21, Mc xiii. 19). Th. repeats the subject 
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. Ύψωθησ -eTaLLXX.; Bevansuggestsacorruptionfor 6κσω^77σ6τα4 
or some other compound of σωθησίται ; but ύλ//•. may be a gloss 
upon the tamer word which stood in the original. Th, rightly, 
σωθήσ^ται. *0$• αν €υρ€θη, Χ ViDIl Π -^overlooked by Th., unless we 

accept the reading of AO, 6 elpeOels [0] yeypaμμ€vos. 2. Έι/ τω 
τΓλάτ€ΐ rrjs y^y, LXX. ; ev yrjs χώμαη Th.J Heb. 'in the ground of 
dust '(but see Bevan, p. 201 f.). Διασποραν καΐ αίσχύνην, LXX.; 
διαστΓ. is perhaps a gloss on αίσχ. ; for the word see Deut. xxviii. 
25. 3. Oi φωστήρας τοΰ ουρανού, LXX., a reminiscence of Gen. i. 14 
(lxx.); cf. Sap. xiii. 2. Oi καησχυοντζς τους λόyoυς LXX., reading 
Dn2T ^ρ-ΤΠΌ for D'2in"^P^'=lVP ; Th. translates 0^3ΊΠ D^p'^n-Vrip. 

Τά άστρα τοΰ ουρανού (lxx.), the Ordinary Biblical phrase, used 
in iii. 36, 63 ; Heb., Th. have ' the stars.' 4. ΆτΓο/χαι/ώσιι/ (lxx.), 
δώαχθώσιν (Th.). Both senses have been found in the Heb. ; 
cf. Bevan, ad loc. Υί\τί]σθτι η yrj αδικίας, LXX., reading T^]ί'^ or 

ny-i for nyn. 

1 Zech. xiii. 2, Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) lo are the only exceptions, and in both 
cases the MSS. are divided. 

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 recom- 
mended to begin the careful study of some one book or group 
of books. For several reasons the Books of Samuel (i — 2 
Regn.) offer a promising field for work of this kind. They 
are on the whole the part of the Old Testament in which the 
value of the Septuagint is most manifest and most generally 
recognised \ and invaluable help in the study of both the 
Hebrew text and the versions is at hand in the commentaries 
of Wellhausen, Driver, and H. P. Smiths But whatever book 
may be selected, the method and the aims of the reader will 
be the same. He will read the Greek in the first place as a 
version, and he will use all the means at his disposal for ascer- 
taining the original text which lay behind it. But he will read 
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 trans- 
lating the Hebrew Scriptures, eventually became the vehicle 
of a fuller revelation in the writings of the Apostolic age. 

Literature on the general subject of this chapter : Pear- 
so7ii praefatio paraeiietica (Cambridge, 1665; aim iifltulis E. 
CJmrto?!^ 1865); Hody, Όξ Bibl. textibus originalibus (Oxford, 
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, 

1 W. R. Smith, 0. T. in J. C/iurch, p. 83. 

2 If the student prefers to begin with Genesis, he will learn much 
as to the LXX. version from Spurrell's Notes (ed. 2, 1898). For more ad- 
vanced study Proverbs will form a suitable subject, and here he may seek 
help from Lagarde's Anvierkungcn, and Professor Toy's recent commen- 
tary in the 'International Critical' series. 

TJie Septnagmt as a Version. 34] 

Kano7i n. Text des O. T. (Leipzig, 1891); Nestle, Marginalicn 
(Tubingen, 1893); Streane, Double Text of Jcreiniali (Cam- 
bridge, 1896); the various Introductions to the Old Testament; 
Commentaries on particular books, esp. those of Dillmann and 
Spurrell (Genesis), Driver (Deuteronomy), Moore (Judges), Well- 
hausen. Driver, and H. P. Smith (Samuel), Toy (Proverbs), 
Ryssel (Micah), Cornill (Ezekiel). A complete commentary on 
the LXX., or on any of the groups of books which compose it, is 
still a desideratinn. 

On the Semitic style of the LXX. the reader may consult the 
Εισηγωγ?] of Adrianus (Migne, P. G. xcviii.). 


Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, 

The Greek Old Testament, as it appears in the editions 
of the last three centuries, is divided into chapters and verses 
which correspond generally Avith those of the printed Hebrew 

The traditional text-divisions of the Hebrew and the Greek 
Bible are not absolutely identical. Besides the more serious 
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 con- 
sequence there are two systems of verse-numeration throughout 
the succeeding chapter^ 

A system of verse-division^ is mentioned in the Mishnah 
{Meg. 4. 4, Kidd. 30. i). The Massorets noted the number 
of verses (D''i>1D?) at the end of each book and portion of the 
canon ; thus 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 pre- 
Talmudic division of the canon into sections known as ni^^ns. 
The parashahs are of two kinds, open and closed, i.e. para- 

^ 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 
ti. Text, γ. 222; Bleek-Wellhausen, p. 574 f•; Ryle, Cation of the O. T, 
p. 235. Blau, Massoretic Studies, iii., in J.Q.K., Oct. 1896. 

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters^ Lections^ etc. 343 

graphs, which begin a new line, and sub-paragraphs \ which 
are preceded only by a space. They are still registered in 
the printed Bibles by the Q (for nmnp, Open') and D (for 
npinp, ' closed ') which occur at intervals throughout the 
Torah^ {b) A second system of parashahs breaks up the text 
into longer sections for the use of the synagogue. The Law 
was divided into 54 Sabbath lessons according to the Baby- 
lonian tradition, but into 154 according to the tradition of 
Palestine. With few exceptions^ the beginning of a lesson 
coincides with that of an open or closed parashah ; the coin- 
cidence is marked in the Ί orah by a thrice repeated s or D. 
The Prophets were similarly divided for synagogue reading, 
but the prophetic lections were known as haphtaroth (Γΐηο^Π) 
and were not, like the liturgical parashahs, distinguished by 
signs inserted in the text, {c) Lastly, the printed Hebrew 
Bibles are divided into chapters nearly identical with those of 
the English versions. This system of capitulation is relatively 
modern, and was applied first to the Latin Vulgate in the 
thirteenth century, probably by Stephen Langton, Archbishop 
of Canterbury (t 1228)^ It 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 
verses ox pesukim. 

Of printed editions the Bomberg Hebrew Bible of 15 21 
was the first to 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 
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 text- 
division occur in MSS. of the Greek Old Testament, except in 
relatively later copies", or in older MSS. where the numerals 
have been supplied by a recent hand. But the student who 
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 

I. We begin with the shorter divisions, known as στίχοι, 
κώλα, or κ6μ.ματα. 

(a) 'Στίχος, Lat. versus, is properly a series of objects 
placed in a row. The word is used in the lxx. of the stones 
in the High Priest's breastplate (στίχοι λίθων, Exod. xxviii. 
17 ff.), the pomegranates wrought upon the capitals of the 
pillars in the Temple (στίχοί βοών, 3 Regn. vii. 6), and the rows 
of cedar-wood shafts (τριών στίχων στνλων κί^ρίνων, ib. 9)• 
When apphed to the art of writing, the word signifies a con- 
tinuous line of letters or syllables. The extent of an author's 
literary work was measured by the stichi he had written ; 
cf. e.g. Diogenes Laertius iv. 24, Κράντωρ κατίλιπ^ν υπομνήματα 
€ΐς μυριάδας στίχων τρεις: Dionysius Halicarn. vi. 1 1 26 tt^vtc η 
ζξ /αυριάδας στίχων τον ανδρός (sc. Αημοσθίνονς) καταλελοιπότος. 
The 'line' might be measured in various ways, as by the limits 
imposed upon the scribe by the breadth of his papyrus, or 
in the case of poetry by the number of feet in the metre ; or 
again it might be fixed in each instance by the requirements of 

^ It prints the verse-numbers in the margin, and begins every verse with 
a capital letter. 

2 E.g. H.-P. 38 (xv.), 122 (xv.), where the modern chapters are marked. 

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 345 

the sense ; or it might depend upon a purely conventional 
standard. Evidence has been produced' to shew that the last 
of these methods was adopted in the copying of Greek prose 
writings, and that the length of the prose stichus was deter- 
mined by that of the 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 
the stichus was on the average 37 — 38 in the one case, and 
28 — 29 in the other. Such a system served more than one 
useful purpose. Besides facilitating reference, it regulated the 
pay of the scribe, and consequently the price of the book. The 
number of the lines in a book once determined, it might be 
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 sticho- 
metry\ Thus the careful entry of the στίχοι in the margins of 
ancient books, or the computation at the end of the number of 
στίχοι contained in them, was not due to mere custom or 
sentiment, but served an important practical end. 

{b) Besides this conventional measurement there existed 
another system which regulated the length of the line by the 
sense. Sense-divisions were commonly known as κώλα or 
κόμματα. The co/on, according to Suidas, is a line which 
forms a complete clause (o άττηρτισμ^νην hvoiav €χων στίχος) ; 
the comma is a shorter co/on'\ 

This arrangement was originally used in transcribing poetry, 
but before Jerome's time it had been applied to the great prose 

^ By Ch. Graux, /^evue de philolog'ie, II. (1878), p. 97 ff. 

- J. R. Harris, Stichometry, pp. 8, 15. 

2 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. 

34^ Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 

authors ; cf. Hieron.^r^^/i ad Isa}\ "nemo cum prophetas versibus 
viderit esse descriptos, metro eos aestimet apud Hebraeos ligari, 
et aliquid simile habere de Psalmis vel operibus Salomonis ; sed 
quod in Demosthene et TuHio solet fieri, ut per cola scribantur 
et commata, qui utique prosa et non versibus conscripserunt, nos 
quoque, utilitati 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. Cas- 
siod. de inst. div. Hit., praef. Hesychius of Jerusalem (fc. 433) 
treated the Greek text of the Dodecapropheton in the same 
way^: ean μβν άρχάΐον τούτο toIs θ€θφόμοις το σπονδασμα στιχη- 
δόν, ως τα. πολλά, πμος την των μ^λζτωμίνων σαφηνααν τάς πμοφη- 
τ€ΐας ζκτίθ^σθαι. ούτω Toiyapovv oyj/et μβν τον ΑαβΙδ κιθαρίζοντα, 
τον ΐίαροιμιαστην de τάς παραΐΒολάς και τον 'Έκκλησιαστην τάς πμο- 
φητίίας ^κθέμ^νον ούτω σνγ-γμαφΐΐσαν την β'ττι τω Ίώ/3 βίβλον, ούτω 
μ€ρισθ€ντα toIs στίχοις τα. των 'Ασ/ζάτωι/ άσματα... ου μάτην iv ταΊς 
δώδεκα βίβλοίζ των προφητών κα\ αντος ηκολονθησα. 

Specimens of colometry may be seen in Codd. Ν Β, 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 to two columns instead of dividing his page into three or 

Among the lists of the books of the O.T. canon printed 
in an earlier chapter of this book (Part 11. c. i.) there are three 
which are accompanied by a stichometry. We will now collect 
their measurements and exhibit them in a tabular form. 

Stichometry of Stichometry of 

Stichometry of 


Nicephorus. Cod. Clarom. 

Mommsen's list. 


4300 4500 



2800 3700 



2700 2800 



3530 3650 


Deuteronomy 3100 3300 



2100 2000 



\ -'° 1 =^ 




^ Migne, P. L. xxviii. 771. 

- Migne, P. L. xxviii. 938. 

•^ Migne, P. G. xxiii. 1339 sq. 

^ Total of first 7 books, ' 18000.' 

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 347 


1 Kingdoms 

2 Kingdoms 

3 Kingdoms 

4 Kingdoms 

1 Paralip. 

2 Paralip. 

1 Esdras 

2 Esdras 



Ν ahum 

1 Maccabees 

2 Maccabees 

3 Maccabees 

4 Maccabees 

Stichometry of 

\ 2240 \ 



Stichometry of 


chometry of 

Cod. Clarom. 

Mommsen's list. 



2000 ^ 
2600 • 



































^ In Mommsen's list the following totals are also given : Ruth and 
I — 4 Kingdoms, 9500; Salomonic books, 6500; Major Prophets, 15370; 
the whole canon, 69500. 

- Susanna is calculated separately (500). 

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. of the Greek Bible contain more or less 
complete stichometries of the several books of the canon. 
Either the total number of stichi is registered at the end of the 
book, or a record is kept throughout the book by placing a 
figure or figures in the margin at the end of each centenary of 
lines. Some of our oldest MSS. reproduce in this form the 
stichometry of their archetypes ; in other cases, a stichometry 
which has been copied into the margin by a second or later 
hand. Thus in Cod. B, the margins of i — 4 Regn. and Isaiah 
present a nearly complete record ^ of stichi written prima 
majiu, and doubtless transcribed from the MSS. to which the 
scribe owed his copy of those books. A marginal register of 
stichi is also found in part of Cod. F, beginning with Deutero- 
nomy, and in Cod. Q, where it is due to the hand which has 
added the Hexaplaric matter. The entries in Β and Q agree 
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 
of 200 stichi in Nicephorus and Cod. 87 is due, Ceriani 
suggests, to the greater length of the Hexaplaric and Lucianic 
texts ^ There is a similar disparity between the stichometry of 
Nicephorus and the reckoning of Cod. F in Deuteronomy, 

1 It is printed by Harris, Stichometry^ p. 59 ff. 

2 ωκ, or as AUatius read the MS., f^H (3808); see Cozza, Sacr. bibl. 
vet. fragm. iii. p. xv. 

^ De cod. March., p. 23 f. 

Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 349 

where in F the stichi zxt 3000', but in Nicephorus 3100. On 
the other hand the later uncial Κ makes the stichi of Numbers 
to be 3535, which comes very near to the reckoning of 

Stichometrical variation is doubtless chiefly or largely due 
to divergent types of text. But other causes of disparity were 
at work. It was easy for scribes to misread the letters which 
represented the number of the lines, especially when they were 
mechanically copied from an archetype. The older signs may 
have been sometimes misunderstood^, or those which were 
intelligible may have been confused by careless copying. A 
glance at the comparative table on p. 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. 30, 52, 85 ; Barb. iii. 36 ; Vat. gr. 746 ; 

Pal. gr. 203 ; Athos, Pantocr. 24, Laur. γ. 

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; 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. 

•* See p. 44 fif. 

^ 4400 in H.-P. 54. 

6 3530 in H.-P. 54. 











350 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 



1 Kingdoms 

2 Kingdoms 

3 Kingdoms 

4 Kingdoms 

1 Paralip. 

2 Paralip. 

1 Esdras 

2 Esdras 











Barb. iii. 36; 2156, Paris, Reg. gr. 2 ; Athos, 

Pantocr. 24 
Barb. iii. 36; Paris, Reg. gr. 2 
Barb. iii. 36 (500, Ven. Marc. gr. xvi) 
Barb. iii. 36 ; 2042, Ven. Alarc. gr. xvi 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi 
Barb. iii. ^6 j 
Barb. iii. 36 ( 5000, Ven. Marc. gr. XVI 

Barb. iii. 361 

Barb. iii. 36i >^^°°' ^^"• ^^^''- -'' ^^^ 

Barb. iii. 36 ^ 

H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36 

H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 753, H.-P. 

H.-P. 161, 248; Barb. iii. 36; 353, H.-P. 

(^including asterisked lines, 1600 without 

them) H.-P. i6i(?), 248; Barb. iii. 36 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. gr. i. 13 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. gr. i. 13 
Barb. iii. 36 ; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi, \^en. gr. 

i• 13 
Barb. iii. 36; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi 
Barb. iii. 36 ; Ven. Marc. gr. xvi, Ven. gr. 

i• 13 
H.-P. 86 
H.-P. 86 
H.-P. 86 
H.-P. 86 
H.-P. 86 

H.-P. 86; 776, H.-P. 231 
H.-P. 86; 204, H.-P. 231 s 
H.-P. 231 ; 3820, Barb. iii. 36 
H.-P. 231 ; 3800, Barb. iii. 36 
H.-P. 231 ; 350, Barb. iii. 36 
H.-P. 86; μ{?) H.-P. 231 ; 860, Barb. iii. 36 
Barb. iii. 36 

H.-P. 231 ; 4000, Barb. iii. 36 
H.-P. 231 ; 1720, Barb. iii. 36 
H.-P. 231 

^ 2450 in H. P. 54. 

2 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). 

































Ep. of Jeremiah 

ι 200 







Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 351 

2. No complete system of capitulation is found in any 
of our existing uncial MSS. of the Greek Old Testament. 
Yet even the Vatican MS., which is written continuously except 
in the poetical books, bears traces of a system of chapter- 
divisions which is older than itself \ It begins with Proverbs, 
and from that book onwards chapter-numbers appear in the 
margin of the canonical writings, whilst in some instances 
there is a double capitulation, as the following table will shew. 







































Ep. of Jeremiah 













The figures in the left-hand column are prima manu ; those 
on the right are in a hand of perhaps the eleventh century 
(? that of ' Clement the Monk,' the industrious instaurator who 
has left his name on pp. 238 and 264 of the MS.''). In 
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song the capitulation of the later 
hand differs widely, as will be observed, from the system which 
the original scribe reproduced from his archetype. But in 
the Prophets the corrector seems simply to have followed the 
numbers inscribed in the margin by B*; the latter can be de- 
tected here and there under the large coarse characters of the 
later hand, and towards the end of Jeremiah and throughout 

1 Tischendorf {Mon. sacr. ined. ti. c, i. prolegg., p. xxvii.) points out 
that Tertullian recognises a system of chapters in Numbers. 

- In this book the chapter-numbers correspond to the divisions indicated 
in the original by the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and in the recension by 
transliteration of the Hebrew alphabetic names. 

^ This number includes the Greek additions. 

■* See the pref. to Fabiani and Cozza's facsimile, p. xvii. sqq. 

352 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 

Daniel the two sets of numbers are distinctly visible. In 
Jeremiah the iristaurator here and there breaks away from the 
guidance of the first hand, and the totals are slightly different. 
But the difference is probably accidental, and it is certainly 
slight ; whereas in the Salomonic books another system is 
followed, in which the chapters are three or four times as 
long as those of the older capitulation. 

Cod. A is broken into paragraphs throughout the prose 
books, the beginning of each paragraph being indicated not 
only by paragraph-marks, but by the use of a capital letter 
which projects into the margin. Besides the paragraphing 
certain books — Deuteronomy, Joshua, 3 — 4 Kingdoms, Isaiah 
— retain traces of a capitulation imperfectly copied from 
the archetype. In Deuteronomy chapter-marks occur at 
cc. i. I, 9, 19, 40; ii. I, 7, 14; in Joshua they begin at 
ix. I {ιβ) and proceed regularly (x. i, 16, 29, 31, 34, T^d, 
38; xi. I, &c.) down to xix. 17 (λ'>7) ; in 3 Regn. the first 
numeral occurs at c. viii. 22 [κβ), and the last at xxi. 17 
(v^) ; 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 
irregular; β appears at c. ii. i, and Β at xxi. i. 

Cod. X seems to have no chapter-marks prima manu, but 
in Isaiah they have been added by K"'' throughout the book\ 

Jeremiah, the Epistle of Jeremiah, and Ezekiel are capitu- 
lated in cod. Q, and in the two last-named books the capitula- 
tion of Q agrees with that of B. In Jeremiah, where the 
agreement is less complete, the chapters in Q do not proceed 
beyond c. xxiv., a circumstance which suggests a Hexaplaric 

Cod. Μ Hke cod. Β exhibits two systems of capitulation^, 

^ Tischendorf, notes to facsimile, p. v. 

'^ Ceriani, de cod. March., p. 24 ff. 

3 See Montfaucon, Biblioth. Coisliniana, p. 4 sqq. 

Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters^ Lections, etc. 353 

one of which is accompanied by brief headings corresponding 
in general character to the rtVAot of the Gospels. The two 
capitulations, which are represented with more or less of com- 
pleteness in the Hexateuch and in 1-3 Kingdoms^, differ 
considerably, as the following table will shew : 



tulation accompanied 


by titles. 






τ ΙΟ 










Cod. Sin. I. (x.) is divided into κεφάλαια which number as 
follows: Genesis, 150; Exodus, 88; Leviticus, 63; Deutero- 
nomy, 69 ; Joshua, 30 ; i Regn., 66 ; 2 Regn., 63"*. 

A Hst of sections quoted by Dr Klostermann^ from the 
cursive MS. cod. Barberini iii. T^d (cent, xi.) exhibits another 
widely different scheme ** : 



3 Kingdoms 






4 Kingdoms 


































I Kingdoms 






2 Kingdoms 






^ Another Coislin MS. (Coisl. gr. 8) gives the following capitulation 
for some of the later histories: i Chron. 83, 2 Chron. 86, Tobit 21, Judith 
34, I Esdr. 109, 2 Esdr. 80, Esther 55. 

^ Beginning at c. iv. 41. 

^ In Judges there is no capitulation, but the periods of bondage are 
distinguished as λογλείΛ Λ, Β, &c., and the exploits of the successive 
judges by κ ρ IT Η C Λ, Β and so forth. 

^ Cf. the numbers in B. M. Add. MS. 35123: Gen., 148; Exod., 84; 
Lev., 62; Num., 61; Deut., 69; Josh., 30; Jud., 33. 

•^ Analecta, p. 83 if. 

^ Interesting traces of another old capitulation are to be found in the 
έκλο^η του νόμου printed in Cotelerii £cc/. Gr. Moti. i. p. i. The chapters 
here are shorter and therefore more numerous than in any of the lists given 

S. S. 


354 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 

It is clear that no induction can be drawn from the facts 
which are at present within our reach ; nor can the various 
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 
be nearly as numerous as the capitulated copies of the lxx., 
will 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. In Numbers, e.g., the 
following table shews little correspondence between those in 
codd. K, M, even when the chapters coincide. 

Cod. K. 

Cod. Μ. 


vii. lo. 

Τά hu>f)a των αρχόντων. 

Πβρι των δώρων ων προσηνεγκαν 
οι [t]/3' αρχοντίς. 

viii. 5. 

Ilepi του άγνισμοΰ των 

Αφορισμός των Αΐυατών els το 


Χ^ίτουργεΊν Κυρίω. 

xi. 16. 

Uepl των πρεσβυτέρων 

Tlepl πρεσβυτέρων των προψη- 

Χηψομένων'^ το ττνεν- 



above, e.g. Exod. xxii. ι — 27 forms part of the 68th chapter and Deut. 
XXV. II ff. of the 93rd in their several books, while Leviticus apparently 
contains 150 chapters and Numbers 140. 

1 Paragraphs or sections marked by capitals protruding into the margin 
or written in red ink, or (less frequently) distinguished by numbers, occur 
perhaps in the majority of cursives ; the following list of cursives thus 
divided is taken from descriptions of MSS. collated for the use of the Editors 
of the larger LXX. : H.-P. x. xi., 16, 17, 18, 29, 38, 46, 53, 54, ^6, 57, 59, 
64 (double system of capitulation), 68, 70, 73, 74, 76, 78, 79 (in Gen. χττβ'), 
83, 84, 93, io8, 118, 120, 121, 123, 126, 127, 128 (contemporary numbers), 
130, 131, 134; B. M. Add. 35123, Lambeth 1214; Paris Ars. 8415 ; Esc. Ω. 
i." 13, Σ. i. 16; Munich gr. 454 ; Grotta Ferrata A. 7. i ; Leipzig gr. 361 ; 
Athos, Pantocr. 24 (double system of capitulation, τίτλοή, \'atop. 513, 
516; Laur.„2 (both chapters and στίχοι numbered); Athens, nat. gr. 44; 
Sinai I, Jerusalem, H. Sep. 2. 

- Tischendorf {Afon. sacr. ined. n. c. i. p. 78) prints ΛψΟΜεΝωΝ. 

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections^ etc. 355 

Cod. K. 

Cod. M. 

xii. I. Ααρών και Μαρία κατά Tlepl της Χίπρας Μαριάμ ην ζσχζν 

Μωνσην. νβρίσασα την -γυναίκα Μωση. 

xiii. Ι. Ilepi των κατασκβψαμβ- Πβρι των άποστα\έντων κατασκο- 

νων την γην. πησαι την -γην. 

χίν. 23- Πβρι Χά[λ6/3] νίον ['le- 

xiv. 34• Ότι όσας ημέρας κατ- 

€σκ4\Ι/•αντο την yrjv, 

τοσαντα €τη εποίησαν 

€v TTj €ρημω. 
xvi. I. Ilept Kope και Ααθάν κα\ Ilepi της €παναστάσ€ως της κατά 

Άβιρων κα\ Αννάν. Μωσην παρά τον Kope συνα- 

χνϋ. Ι. Hep ι της ράβ8ον ^ Ααρών 

της βλάστησα σης. 
xxi. 21. Ilfpi Σηων βασιλέως Ά- Eiepi των άποσταλέντων προς 

μορραίων. Σηών, και πώς ένίκησ^ν αντον 

6 Ίσραηλ. 
xxxiii. Ι. "Έπαρσις κα\ σταθμοί των ΤΙώς διώδβυσαν οι υΙο\ ^Ισραήλ. 

υιών Ίσραηλ. 
xxxiii. 3• Πβρι τον νυχθημ^ρον. 
XXXV. 9• Πβρι τών πολξων των Tlcpi φονέως. 


The following τίτλοι for Exod. ii.— viii. are taken from a 
Vienna MS. (Th. gr. 3) : 

a. Trepi της γ^ννησίως Μωυσέως. 

β. πρώτη οπτασία προς Μωυσην ev ttj βάτω. 

γ. Trepi της συναντήσεως /ier' (?) Ααρών. 

δ. (ίσο^ος (?) Μωυσέως και ^ Ααρών προς Φαραώ. 

6. 7Γ6ρί τών μαστιγωθέντων γραμματέων. 

ζ". Trepi της ράβδου της στραφίίσης ei'y οφιν. 

ζ. πρώτη πληγή ' μεταστροφή τοΰ νδατος eis αίμα. 

η. δεντέρα πληγή, τών βατράχων. 

θ. τρίτη πληγή, τών σκνιπών. Κτλ. 

Examples occur of longer headings, which aim at giving a 
comprehensive summary or a brief interpretation, (a) The 
preface to Hesychius's colometrical arrangement of the Minor 
Prophets is followed by a complete set of τίτλοι for the Twelve 
Prophets and Isaiah ^ The numbers are as follows : Hosea 

^ Migiie, P. G. xciii., 1345 sqq. The titles for Isaiah with a collection 


356 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters^ Lections, etc. 

20, Joel 10, Amos 17, Obadiah 3, Jonah 4, Micah 13, Nahum 
5, Habakkuk 4, Zephaniah 7, Haggai 5, Zechariah 32, Malachi 
10, Isaiah ZZ. The titles are with scarcely an exception 
polemical or dogmatic in character, e.g. Hosea : a. Εικών τη% 
τών Ιουδαιωι/ συναγωγτ^ς, e^ r)<i 6 Χριστός το κατά. σάρκα τίκτεται, 
καΧ Χαον το μ,\ν iv απιστία e/xcti/ev, το δ€ νστ^ρον εττιστρί'φει και 
σω^€ται. (^) The Syro-hexaplaric Daniel is divided into ten 
chapters, each headed by a full summary of its contents \ 

3. One class of sections calls for separate treatment. 
In Part i. c. v. (p. 168 f ) some account has been given of 
MSS. which consist of lessons taken from the Old Testament. 
Few of these lectionaries are older than the eleventh century, 
and only one goes back to the sixth or seventh. But the 
choice of passages for public reading in the services of the 
Church must have begun at a much earlier period. The 
public reading of the O. T. Scriptures was an institution 
inherited by the Church from the Synagogue (Lc. iv. 16 if., 
Acts xiii. 15, XV. 21; cf i Tim. iv. 13), and there is evidence 
that 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 
week-days as well as on Sunday. "At Alexandria (writes 
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. Faul- 
haber from cud. Vat. Gr. 347 {Hesychii Hieros. interpretatio Isaiae, Frei- 
burg i. Breisgau, 1899). 

^ Bugati, Daniel, p. i. See also the περωχαΐ (or ύττοθέσεις) ets rovs 
χΙ/αλμούί 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 Άλίξανδρείφ rrj τ€τράδί καί rrj Χε^ομέντι παρασκενη Ύραφαί 

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 357 

we find allusions which shew that they were usually based on 
the lesson for the day, and we get light upon the length of the 
selected passages. 

In Horn, in Num. xv. Origen apologises to his hearers for not 
keeping strictly to the lesson for the day : "licet non ordo lectio- 
num 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 disputatio- 
nis adduci, non ita ordini lectionum satisfacere aequum credidi 
ut desideriis auditorum." This homily probably belongs to Ori- 
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 at a single sitting : τα άναγνωσ-θ^ντα nXeiova ian• καΐ 
eVfi χ^ρη Ιπιτ^μνόμ^νον elneiv, δυσι nepLKOirais άν^γνώσθη τά Trepi 
Ναβάλ.,.βίτα μ€τα τοίιτο η Ιστορία η nep\ του κβκρνφθαί τον Δαυίδ... 
etra τά βζης η Ιστορία ην τρίτη, οτ€ κατ€φνγ(ν προς ^Αχάρ...€ξης τού- 
τοις ην η ιστορία η διαβόητος vwep της (γγαστριμύθον... τεσσάρων 
ονσων περικοπών... ότι ποτ€ βονΧίται 6 επίσκοπος προτ€ΐνάτω. On 
this occasion the O.T. lesson seems to have extended from 
I Regn. XXV. i to xxviii. 25, including four π^ρικοπαί or shorter 
sections, which, judging from the description, corresponded in 
length very nearly to our own chapters'^. 

The lections to which Origen refers were doubtless those 
which were read in the pre-anaphoral portion of the Liturgy in 
the hearing of the catechumens as well as the faithful. In the 
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 άναΎΐνώσκονται, καΐ οί διδάσκαΧοι ταύτας έρμηνεύονσι. . .καΐ τοντό έστιν έν 
Ά\€ξανδρ€ία Wos άρχαΐον καΐ yap Ώρΐ'γένη$ τά πολλά iu ταύται$ rats 'ήμέραί$ 
φαίνβται 67Γΐ τή$ έκκΧησίαί δίδάξas. 

1 Σ>. C. Β. ίν. ρ. Ι04. 

2 Cf. the τίτΧοι in the Coislin MS. (Μ), where μη, μθ', ν' are nearly 
identical with cc xxxi., xxxii., xxxiii. respectively (Montfaucon, iS'zW. CoisL, 
p. 28). 

358 Text-divisions : Stichi, CJuxpters^ Lections, etc. 

Psalter and perhaps the Book of Esther, were employed for 
this purpose. 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 known to 
St Chrysostom at the end of the fourth century, and it held its 
place in the East generally till the seventh ^ In the West the 
'prophecy' was read by the North African Church of St Augus- 
tine'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 
apxrj, τέλος, written opposite to the beginning and end of the 
TTcptKOTTi;^. Such traces of adaptation to liturgical use are found 
even in cod. 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. 

The Psalter obviously needed no capitulation, nor was it 
ever read by the αναγνωσττ;? in the lessons for the day. But 
special Psalms were recited or sung in the Church, as they had 

1 Brightman, Eastern Liturgies, pp. 470, 476, 527, 580. See Chrys. 
in Rom. xxiv. 3 (cited above, p. r68). 

- D. C. Α., Prophecy, Liturgical (ii. 173'' ff.). 

3 De inst. coenoh. ii. 6. 

■* On this word see Suicer, Thesaurus, ii. 673 sqq. It is used by Justin, 
Dial. 78 and Clem. ΑΙ., Strom, iii. 38. In Origen (quoted above) the ■κΐ.ρι- 
κοττή is merely a section; at a later time it was used for the άνά-γνωσμα. 

^ Fabiani and Cozza, pro Icgg., p. xix. 

Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 359 

been in the Synagogue \ and in some early monastic com- 
munities arrangements were made for a regular recitation of 
the Psalter both in public and private ^ The scribe of cod. A 
has copied into his MS. a list of Psalms for daily use, in which 
three are appointed to be said at each of the two public 
services, and one is selected for private use at each hour of 
the day and night. It is as follows : 

KANONec ΗΜερίΝώΝ vf<^λMώN, Κ. ΝγκτερίΝοί τώΝ ψ<\λΜώΝ, 


















































δ' ^ 





ρ La 



















The existing order of the Orthodox Eastern Church divides 
the Psalter into 20 sections known as καθίσματα, each of which 
is broken by the recitation of a Gloria into three στάσεις. The 
larger sections are i. — viii., ix. — xvi., xvii. — xxiii., xxiv. — xxxi., 
xxxii. — xxxvi., xxxvii. — xlv., xlvi. — liv., Iv. — Ixiii., Ixiv. — Ixix., 
Ixx. — Ixxvi., Ixxvii. — Ixxxiv., Ixxxv. — xc, xci. — c, ci. — civ., 
cv. — cviii., cix. — cxvii., cxviii., cxix. — cxxxi., cxxxii. — cxlii., 
cxliii. — cl. In the later liturgical Greek Psalter the cathismata 
are divided by an ornamental band or some other mark of 

separation, and the staseis by a marginal λο (δό^α, i.e. the 
Doxology, which was repeated at the end of each)^ 

^ See p. 251. 

2 Cf. Cassian, Inst. iii. 289. * 

^ Cf. Const, viii. 37, μ^τατο ρηθηναι τον όρθρινόρ. 

^ Cf. Const, viii. 34, τον έιηλυχνίκόν ψαλμόν. 

5 Cf. Ο. Τ. in Gr., ii. p. xi. 

360 Text-divisiotis : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 

(i) A few other text-divisions, peculiar to certain contexts 
or books, may be specified here. In Isaiah it was not unusual 
to mark in the margin the place where each of the books of 
Origen's commentary ended {τόμος a — λΓ', cf Eus. H.E. vi. 36). 
Both in Isaiah and in Daniel certain prophetic όράσβυ were dis- 
tinguished. Thus cod. 0*"= places opACic λ opposite to Isa. vii. i, 
and opACic h' at c. xvii. i. In Daniel cod. A marks 12 opauas^ 
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 
of division is used in codd. Qr. In Lamentations each stanza is 
preceded by a representation of the Hebrew letter with which it 

begins, e.g. αλβφ (ολφ, άλφά'^), βηθ, yt'/xeX {-γίμλ), 8άλ€θ (SeXe^, 
δβλτ, δβλθ), and so 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 
η νύμφη προς τον ννμφίον, ταϊς νβανίσιν η ννμφη, αί veavides τω 
ννμφίω^ . 

Srnall departures from the continuous or slightly paragraphed 
\vriting of the oldest MSS. are found in a few contexts which 
lend themselves to division. Thus even in cod. Β the blessings 
of the tribes in Gen. xlix. 3 — 27 are separated and numbered 
Λ— TB. a similar treatment but without marginal enumeration is 
accorded to Deut. xiv. 12 — 18 and i Paral. i. 51 — 54, Eccl. iii. 
I — 8. The ten words of the Decalogue are numbered in the 
margins of codd. BA, but not prima juanii ; and the systems of 
numeration differ to some extent. Thus according to B% α = pro- 
logue, i3' — i + ii, 7' = iii, 5' = iv, €' = v, r' = vii, ^' = viii, η =\\^ 
^' = ix, t' = x, while A^ makes y' = iv, δ' = ν, e' = vi; the other 
numbers in A are effaced, or were never appended. 

(2) It would be interesting, if sufficient materials were avail- 
able, to pursue the subject of text-division with reference to the 
daughter-versions of the LXX. On the stichometry and capitu- 
lation 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 

^ The variations in the MSS. are interesting and instructive. 

2 Greek numerals are sometimes added in the margin ; see above, p. 351. 

•^ In cod. V = 23 these become sometimes lengthy τίτλοι, e.g. at v. 7 
k^rfKdev μη ΐΰρουσα τόν νυμφίον η νύμφη καί ώ$ iv ννκτΐ evpedeiaa άττό των 
φυλάκων τηί ττόλεω? τραυματίζεται, και α'ίρουσιν αύτηί τό θέριστρον οι τ€ΐχο- 

τ 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 

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 con- 
sult the list of authorities collected by Brightman, A7tcient 
Liturgies., p. Ixix. For the Ethiopic version, cf. Dillmann's Ethio- 
pic Pentateuch., I. ii., pp. 163 f., 173. The stichometry of the 
Syro-Hexaplaric is discussed by Lagarde, Mittheilunge?!., iv. 
(1891), p. 205 f. A list of Church lessons, taken from the Pales- 
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 text in MSS. of the Greek Bible. The 
student will have observed that many of the codices enume- 
rated in Part i. c. v. (pp. 148 — 168) contain commentaries, 
either original {comm.), or compiled {cat.). Of the Greek 
commentators something will be said when we come to con- 
sider the use of the lxx. by the Greek fathers ; in this place 
we will limit ourselves to the relatively late compilations which 
are based on the exegetical works of earlier writers I 

Such expositions were formerly described as UXoyai or 
τταραγραφαί, or as €7Γΐτο/χαι ίρμηναων, 0Γ €$ηγησ€ΐ.ς ίρανισθζίσαί 
άτΓΟ 8ta<^opojv ττατερων, ΟΓ σνν6ψ€ί<ζ σχολικαΐ €κ διάφορων νττο- 
μνημάτων σνλλζχθ^ίσαι, ΟΓ by some similar periphrasis. The 
use of the technical term catena (σειρά) is of comparatively 
modern date. Catena aurea is a secondary title of the great 

1 Cf. Sanday, op. cii., p. -272. 

- Ch. Q. R. i. 99, p. 34 : "the process of drawing up Catenae goes on 
from the fifth to the fourteenth or fifteenth century." 

362 Text-divisio7ts : Stichi, Chapters^ Lections, etc. 

compendium of comments on the Four Gospels brought 
together by Thomas Aquinas, and a Greek MS. Psalter of the 
1 6th century (Vat. Gr. 2240) adopts the phrase, translating it 
by χρνση άλυσις. %€Lpa is used in this sense by the editor of 
the Greek catena of Nicephorus, which bears the title Seipa 
€vos καΐ 7Γ€ντηκοντα υπομνημαηστων els την ^Οκτάτενχ^ον και τα 
των Βασιλείων. The metaphor so happily expresses the 
principle on which such commentaries are constructed, that 
books of this description are now universally known as catenae 
or aeLpai They are ' chains ' in which each link is supplied 
by some ancient author, scraps of exegesis threaded together 
by the ingenuity or industry of a collector who usually elects 
to be anonymous. 

The catenists drew their materials from all sources within 
their reach. They laid under contribution Jewish writers such 
as Philo and Josephus, heretics like Basileides, Valentinus, and 
Marcion, suspects like Origen, Eusebius of Caesarea, Apol- 
linarius, and Theodore of Mopsuestia, as well as the accepted 
teachers 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 
disappeared. Hence their value in the eyes of patristic 
scholars and editors. But they are not without importance for 
the purposes of the biblical student. The text embedded in the 
commentary may be late', but the commentary itself often pre- 
serves the witness of early writers to an old and valuable type. 

The catena is usually written in the broad margins which 
surround the text, or it embodies the text, which in that case is 
usually distinguished from it by being written in uncials or 
in coloured ink, or enclosed within marks of quotation. The 
names of the authors who have been pressed into the service 
of the catenist are commonly inserted in the margin at the 

^ See, however, the facts collected in C/i. Q. K. i. 99, p. 46 f. 

Text-divisions : Stichi, Chaptei's, Lections, etc. 363 

place where their contributions begin : thus χργΰ[οατΟΜογ], 
cop[ireNOYc], €γο[εΒίογ], θεολ[ώρογ] ΛΝτ[ιοχέοο], ΓΡΗΓ[ορίογ], 
κγρ[ίλλογ]. If a second passage from the same author occurs 
in the same context it is introduced as τογ Λγτογ ; an anony- 
mous writer is 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 his guard against a too unsuspecting acquiescence 
in the witness of his MS. Nor can he place implicit con- 
fidence in the verbal accuracy of the excerpts. The catenists 
evidently regarded themselves as free, 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,, Ant- 
werp, 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. i. 99, pp. 36—42• 

The nineteenth century has added little to our collection 

of printed Greek catenae on the Old Testament, and the 

earlier editions do not always adequately represent the witness 

of the best MSS. Meanwhile a great store of MS. catenae 

awaits the examination of Biblical scholars. Some of these 

are at Athos, Athens, Smyrna and Jerusalem, but there is an 

abundant supply in libraries more accessible to Western 

students, at St Petersburg, Rome, Paris, and London. Perhaps 

no corner of the field of BibHcal and patristic research offers so 

much virgin soil, with so good a prospect of securing useful if 

not brilliant results. 

364 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 

The following Lxx. MSS. amongst others contain catenae on 
one or more of the books which form their text : H.-P. 14, 17, 24, 
25. 31. 33, 52, 57, ΊΖ. 77, 78, 79, §3, 87, 90, 91, 97, 9^,99, 109, 112. 
128, 135, 147, 181, 209, 238, 240, 243, 264, 272, 292, 302, 309; 
London B.M. Add. 35123, Lambeth 1214; Paris, Coisl. gr. 5, 7, 
Reg. gr. 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 161 ; Zurich c. 1 1 ; Basle gr. iv. 
56, vi. 8; Esc. Σ. i. 16; Leyden, 13; Munich gr. 82 ; Athos Vatop. 
15, Iver. 15 ; 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, 
p. y] ff. Some of the Vatican catenae are handled by Pitra, 
analecta sacra 11, Klostermann, analecia, passim; a full and 
valuable account of Roman MS. catenae on the Prophets is 
given by Faulhaber {die Propheteii-Cateneii). For lists of 
the catenae in the great libraries of Europe and the East, the 
student must consult the published catalogues, e.g. Montfaucon, 
Omont (Paris), Stephenson (Vatican), Lambeccius (Vienna), 
Lambros (Athos), Papadopulos ("Jerusalem). The more im- 
portant MSS. are enumerated by Harnack-Preuschen, and 
Heinrici, and in the older work of Fabricius-Harles. 

5. Besides catenae and detached scholia the margins of 
LXX. MSS. frequently contain notes of various kinds, written 
oftentimes in perplexing abbreviations. Lists of abbreviations 
are given by the principal palaeographical authorities, such as 
Montfaucon's Falaeographia Graeca, Gardthausen's Griechische 
Paldographie, and Sir E. Maunde Thompson's Hafidbook of 
Greek and Latin Palaeography ; but the subject can only be 
mastered by working upon the MSS. themselves or their 
facsimiles. It may be useful, however, to print here a few of 
the abbreviated notes and symbols which occur in the appa- 
ratus of the Cambridge manual lxx., or are of frequent 
occurrence in the principal codices. 

Λ = Άκυλα?. c', cy' —^νμ.μ.αγο^. θ, θε' = Θίοδοτιων. 

ογ κ' π εΒρ' = οΰ κίΐται τταρ Έ^ραιοις. θί ω Β' ογ κ π eBp' 
= οί ωβζλίσμενοί (στίχοί) ον κ€Ϊνταί τταρ* Έ^ραιοις. 0Μ^ ΤΟΙΟ ο' 
= ό/αοι'ως τοις Ιβ^ομηκοντα. οι f = οΐ rpct?, i.e. Aquila, Sym- 

Text-divisions : Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 365 
machus, Theodotion. π = TraVres. λ — Λουκιαι/ος (Field, 


Hexapla, i. Ixxxv.). 01 \ — oi XolttoL mo = μόνος. (Κ — ώραΐον, 

ο " 

ip or (S ^Ώρυγένης. For πιπί see above, p. 39 f. 

(B = σημ€ίωσαι, σημ€ίωτ€ον, σημ^Ιον. fP = "γράφον ΟΓ -γράφεται. 
ό.ρ'^=άρχη. Τ6'=τ€λος. CTI — στι^^ος. κε'= κεφαλαιον. ΚΛ —κά- 
θισμα. ό.Ν^ = ανάγνωσμα. cp = διώρ^ωται (i.e. 'corrected thus 
far'), a mark inserted by the Βίορθωτης usually at the end of a 
book. For further particulars see Field, op. cit., p. xciv. sqq. 


Stichometry, colometry, &c. 

¥λΧΧο, Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, 2X\.. Verse; Herzog- 
Plitt, art. Stichometrie; Gregory, i. p. 112 f.; Scrivener- Miller, 
i., p. 52 ff. ; Gardthausen, Paldographie, p. 127 fif. ; E. M. Thomp- 
son, 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). 


Schiirer, 11. ii. 79 ff. ; Buhl, Kanon u. Text d. A. T., p. 222; 
Ryle, Canon of the O.T., p. 235; Morinus, Exerc. Bibl. xvii. 3; 
O2i\.\n\is, De ordine pe7'icoparu7n {o'^ iv,); Zacagni, Collectanea, 
praef., pp. Ixvii., Ixxxi. ; Montfaucon, Biblioth. CoisL, p. iff.; 
the Benedictine Prolegomena in div. S. Hieron. biblioth. iv. 
(reprinted in Migne, P. L. xxviii. loi sqq.) : Suicer, Thes. eccl. 
s.vv. κ€φάλαίον, 7Γ€ρικο7Γή ; Herzog-FUtt, a.vt. Perikopen ; Gregory, 
i. p. 120 ff.; Scrivener-Miller, i. p. 56 ff.; Thomasii opp. i. ; 
Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, p. 323 ff. 


Suicer, Thes. eccl. s.vv. ανάγνωσμα, άνάγνωσις, γραφή', 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''ό?η. Liturgie (Berlin, 1847). 


T. Ittig, De bibliothecis et catenis patrum (Leipzig, 1707); 
J. C. Wolf, De catenis Gr. patrum (Wittenberg, 1742); Fabricius- 

^66 Text-divisions: Stichi, Chapters, Lections, etc. 

Harles, viii. p. 637 ff. ; J. G. Dowling, Notitia scriptoru7n ss. 
patriun (Oxford, 1839); Walch-Danz, Biblioth. patristica (Jena, 
1834), p. 247ff.; Harnack-Preuschen, Gesch. d. altchr. Litteratur^ 
i. p. 835 ff. ; G. Heinrici, in Hauck, Real-Encyklop. iii., art. 
Catenen ; P. Batiffol, in Vigouroux' D. B. ii., p. 482 ff., art. 
Chai?ies Bibliqiies; Lietzmann, Cateiieii (Freiburg i. B., 1897); 
M. Faulhaber, Die Prophet en- Catenen 7iach rdmische?i Hand- 
schriften, in Biblische Siiidien, iv. 2, 3 (Freiburg i. Breisgau, 
1899). The two last-named works are indispensable to students 
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. 





Literary use of the lxx. by non-Christian 

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 
Christian era. The Greek historiographer, Alexander Corne- 
lius — better known as Polyhistor (o πολνίστωρ), from his 
encyclopaedic learning — wrote a treatise On the Jews which 
contained extracts from Jewish and Samaritan Hellenistic 
writings'. Of these a few were copied from Polyhistor's book 
by Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius of Caesarea, in whose 
pages they may still be read. They consist of fragments of 
the historians Demetrius, Eupolemus, Artapanus, and Aristeas, 
the poets Philo, Theodotus, and Ezekiel, the philosopher 
Aristobulus, and Cleodemus or Malchas. There is reason to 
believe that Demetrius flourished c. B.C. 200; for the other 
writers the date of Polyhistor (c. B.C. 50) supplies a terminus 
ad que?n, if we may assume" that he wrote the work attributed 
to him by Clement and Eusebius. 

^ Cf. Joseph., ant. i. 15, Clem. Al. strom. i. 130, Eus. /r. ev. ix. 17. 
^ See Schurer^ iii. p. 347 f. 

S. S. 24 

370 Use of the LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists. 

The following references will enable the student to find the 
fragments: (i) Demetrius: Clem. Al. strom. i. 141. Eus./r. ev. 
ix. I9(?), 21, 29. (2) Eupolemus: Clem. Al. strom. i. 141. Eus. 
pr. ev. ix. 17, 26 ( = Clem. Al. strom. i. 153), 30—34, 39. (3) Arta- 
panus: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 18, 23, 27. (4) Aristeas: Eus. pr. ev. ix. 
25. (5) Philo the poet : Eus. pr. ev. ix. 20, 24, -^η (cf. Clem. Al. 
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. 
(8) Aristobulus : Eus. /r. ev. viii. 10; ix. 6 ( = Clem. Al. sti'om. i. 
22); xiii. 12. (9) Cleodemus or Malchas : Eus. /r. ^•ς/. ix. 20. 

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. They wished to 
represent their national history in a form more acceptable 
to their pagan neighbours ; but while avoiding the uncouth 
phraseology of the Greek Bible they frequently betray its 
influence. A few extracts will make this plain. 

Demetrius: i^a) rov Oeov τω Αβραάμ προστάξαι ΊοΛΛΚ TON 
γίΟΝ όλΟΚΛρΤτώΰΛΙ αυτω• τον Se άναγαγόντα τον πάΐδα eVi το 
ορός πνραν νησαι κα\ επίθεΐΝΛΐ τον Ισαάκ* ΰφΛζείΝ Se μίΧλοντα 
κωΚνθηναί νπο ΛΓΓελογ κρίΟΝ αντω προς την ΚΛρπωΰΙΝ τταρα- 
στήσαντοζ^. {b) €Κ(Ιθζν δε ελθεΐΝ eic ΧλφρΛθΛ, ev6(v παρα- 
γ6ΐ/€σ^αι eic ' ΕφρΛθΛ, ΗΝ είΝΛΙ ΒΗθλε€Μ. . .και τελβυτ^σαι 'Ραχτ^λ 
τεκογΰΛΝ τον BevLcipiv'-. {c) φησί yap τον Αβραάμ nal^as npoc 
ΛΝΛΤΟλΛΰ eVt κατοίκίαν πίμ-^αι- 8ιά τούτο de καΐ 'A^pcON ΚΛΙ 
ΜλρίΛΛΛ €ΐπίΙν €Ν ΆΰΗρώθ Μωσην ΑΐθίΟπίλλ γημαι ΓΥΝΛΐΚΛ.^. 
{^) μη έχοντα δε γλωρ εκεί ykvKV άλλα ΤΤΙΚρΟΝ, του deov 
(Ιπόντος, ΙγλΟΝ η €ΜΒΛλεΪΝ e\C την ττη-γην, καΐ γενε'σ^αι γλυκύ 
ΤΟ γλωρ. ε'κεΐ^ει/ δε e\C ' ΕλείΜ ελ^είν, κα\ ehpflv eKfl λώλεΚΛ 

/χει/ nHfAC γλΛτωΝ, έΒλοΛΛΗΚοΝΤΛ δε ΰτελέχΗ φοίΝίκωΝ^. (For 
other coincidences, see above, p. 18.) 

Eupolemus: εγλοΓΗτόΰ ό θεόΰ oc τον ογρΛΝΟΝ κλΙ την 

ΓΗ Ν εκτίσει/, os (ΐλ^το ανθρωπον χρηστον εκ χρηστού ανδρός... κα\ 
αρχιτέκτονα COI ΛΤτέΰΤΛλΚΛ ανθρωπον Ύνρων εκ μητρός Ιουδαίας 
εκ της φυΧης Αάν^. 

' Cf. Gen. xxii. ι ff. 

- Cf. Gen. XXXV. 16. 

^ Cf. Gen. XXV. 6; Num. xi. 34 — xii. i. 

* Cf. Exod. XV. 2 3fr. 

^ Cf. 2 Chron. ii. 12 ff. 

Use of the LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists. 371 

Aristeas : τον Ήσαύ γημαντα Βασσάραν eN ' ΕλοΟΜ yewrjaat 

Ίώβ• κΛτοικεΐΝ 8e τούτον eN ΤΗ Αγοίτιλι χώρα επί toTc opioic 

THC ΊλογΜΛίλΟ ΚΛΙ ΆράΒίλΟ• -/(νέσθαί δξ αντον λίκΛΙΟΝ καΐ 
πολνκτηνον, κτησασθαι yap αυτόν προΒΛΤΛ μ^ν επΤΛΚΙΟχίλΐΛ, 

κΛΜΗλογο δε τριοχιλίΛΟ, ζεγρΗ ΒοώΝ πεΝΤΛκόαΐΛ, ΟΝογο 

θΗλείλΟ ΝΟΜΛλΛΟ πεΝΤΛΚΟΟίλΟ^. 

Ezekiel (in his tragedy η Έξayωyη) : 

Μαριάμ δ' άΒξΧφη μου <ατώπτ€ν€ν ττελαί• 
<απ€ίτα θvyάτηp βασιλέως λΒρΛΙΟ όμον 
<ατηΧΘ( ΧοντροΙς, χρώτα φαώρΰναί νέον. 
ΊλογΟΛ δ' €υθνς κα\ λαβονσ ΛΝείλετο, 
βγνω δ' ΈβραΙον οντά• κα\ Xeyec τάδβ 
Μαριάμ άδ^Χφη προαδραμονσα βασιΧίδΐ' 
Θέλε Ι C τροφό Ν σοι παιδί τωδ' €νρω ταχν 
εκ τώΝ 'ΕβρλίωΝ; η δ' cneanevaev κόρην 
μοΧοΰσα δ' etVe μητρί, <άι τταρην ταχν 
αύτη Τ€ μητηρ κίιΧαβέν μ €S ayKaXas. 
€iuev δβ θνγάτηρ βασιΧ4ως Ύοντον, yvvai, 
τρόφεγε, ΚΛρώ λλιοΘον άποΚώοω aidev. 

* * * * * 

ουκ εγλορΟΟ πέφνκα, γλώσσα δ' icrr'i μου 
δύσφραστος, ϊαχΝΟφοοΝΟΟ, ωστ€ μη λόγον? 
€μονς yeviaBai βασιΧέως βναντίον'-^. 

Aristobulus : (α) εΝ χειρί κρΛΤΜΛ έ^ΗΓ^ρεΝ ό θεόο ce el 
Αΐργπτογ^. (^) ίλογ χειρ Κγρίογ έοτΛΐ * εΝ toTc κτΗΝεοί 

coy και €v πάσι toTc εΝ TOTc πελίοΐΟ θΛΝΛΤΟα ΜεΓΛΟ. 

2. Besides these fragments, some complete books have 
survived the wreck of the pre-Christian literature of the Jewish 
colony at Alexandria. They are included in the Alexandrian 
Greek Bible, but may be employed as separate witnesses of 
the literary use of the canonical translations. And the evidence 
supplied by them is abundant. Thus the writer of Wisdom 
knows and uses not only Exodus (Sap. xvi, 22 = Exod. ix. 24, 

^ Cf. Job xlii. 17 b, c, i. iff. Pseudo- Aristeas ad Philocratem makes 
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 if. ; iv. 10, where ουκ exfkoyo'i is read by cod. F. 

^ Exod. xiii. 9. 

* Exod. ix. 3. "Εσται A, έττέσται Β. Και ev ττασι, which is wanting in 
our MSS. , may be due to a slip of memory, or it is a short way of 
expressing what follows in the text {h re to?s ϊτΓττοί? κτλ.). 

24 2 

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. i. 17, Sap. xi. 4 = Deut. viii. 15), but Isaiah 
(Sap. ii. i2 = Isa. iii. 10, Sap. xv. io = Isa. xliv. 20). The 
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 
the Lxx.^ In 2 Maccabees vii. 6 we have a verbatim quota- 
tion from Deut. xxxii. -^^d, and in 4 Maccabees xviii. 14 if. a 
catena of references to the Greek Bible, including direct cita- 
tions of Isa. xliii. 2, Ps. xxxiii. 19, Prov. iii. 18, Ezek. xxxvii. 
4, Deut. xxxii. 39, xxx. 20 — all from the lxx. The picture 
which the last-named passage draws of a Jewish father read- 
ing and teaching his children out of the Greek Bible (cf. 
2 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". 

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. Thus in Sibyll. iii. 310 €$ζχ€ας is a 
reminiscence of Ps. Ixxviii. 3, lxx.; ib. 606 χ€φοποίητα..Λν 
σχίσμαΐς ττ^τρων κατακρνψαντζζ is borrowed from Isa. ii. 19 ff., 
LXX.; ib. 708 if. is probably modelled on the Greek of Isa. xi. 

4. There remains one Alexandrian Jewish writer, the 
greatest of the succession, whose extant works happily are 
numerous and throw abundant light on the literary use of 
the Septuagint at Alexandria. 

Philo's literary life probably coincided as nearly as possible 
with the first forty or five and forty years of the first century 

1 See Edersheim in Wace's Apocr. ii. p. 26. 

2 Cf. A. Deissmann in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphett, p. 150: "als 
Abfassungszeit wird man den Zeitraum von Pompejus bis Vespasian 
annehmen dlirfen." 


Use of the LXX. by non- Christian Hellenists. 373 

A.D.; in 40 A.D. he could speak of himself as already an old 
man\ but his literary activity was not yet at an end, as ap- 
pears from his account of the embassy to Rome in that year. 
Thus the evidence of his writings belongs to a period just 
antecedent to the rise of the earliest Christian literature, and 
his numerous quotations enable us to form a fair idea of the 
condition of the text of the lxx. in Alexandrian copies shortly 
before it passed into the hands of the Church. 

The following list of Philo's works may be useful for refer- 
ence. Cohn and Wendland's order is followed so far as their 
edition has been published. 

A. Exegetical works. De opificio mmidi (Gen. i.). Legum 
allegoriae (ii. i — iii. 19). De Cherubin etc. (iii. 24 — iv. i). De 
sacrificiis Abelis et Caini (iv. 2 f.). Qiiod deterius poiiori 
insidiari soleat (iv. 3 — 15). De posteritate Caini (iv. 16 — 26). 
De gigantibus (vi. i — 4). Quod Dens sit iinmutabilis (vi. 4 — 12). 
De agrictiltitra (ix. 20). De piantatione Noe (ix. 20). De 
ebrietate (ix. 21 — 23). De sobrietate (ix. 24). De confiisione 
lingiiariim (xi. i — 9). De migratione Abrahami (xii. i — 6). 
Quis rerum divinarum /teres (xv.), De congressu guaeretidae 
eruditionis gratia (xvi. i — 6). De fiiga et inventione (xvi. 6 — 
14). De 7nutatione nominum (xvii. i — 22). De somniis i., ii. 
(xxviii. 12 ff., xxxi 11 — 13, xxxvii., xl., xli.). De Abrahamo. De 
Joseplio. De vita Moysis. De decalogo. De circiuncisione. 
De monarchia. De praemiis sacerdotum. De victimis. De 
victimas offerentibits. De 7nercede meretricis. De specialibus 
legibus (3rd — loth commandments of the Decalogue). De 
iudice. De iiistitia. De creatioiie priiicipiun. De tribiis vir- 
tutibus. De poenitentia. De praemiis et poenis. De execra- 
tiojiibus. Qnaestio7ies et soIntio7ies (i) i7i Ge7iesi77i^ (2) in 
Exodn77i'^-. B. Philosophical works. De 7iobilitate. Quod 
077i7iis probus liber sit. De vita C07ite77iplativa. De i7icorrupti- 
bilitate 77iii7idi. De provide7itia. De ratio7ie a7ii77ialin77i. De 
77iu7ido. C. Political- works. /;/ Flaccimi. De legatio7ie ad 

In his exegetical writings Philo quotes the lxx. directly, 
announcing each citation by a formula such as φτ^σι, ctTrev, 

^ Leg. ad Cai. i. 28. 

^ On these see J. R. Harris, Fragrnents of Phih, p. 11 ff., and F. C. 
Conybeare, Expositor, iv. iv. p. 456 ff. 

374 Use of the LXX. by non-CJiristiaii Hellenists. 

Xcyci, XeyeraL, γβγραττται, or some more elaborate phrased In 
this way he reproduces a considerable portion of the Greek 
text of the Pentateuch, as well as a few passages from Joshua, 
Judges, I, 3 Kingdoms, i Chronicles, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, 
Jeremiah, and some of the minor Prophets. His Greek is, on 
the whole, clearly that of the Alexandrian version, which he 
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 
best of them. 

5. The task of comparing Philo's quotations with the 
LXX. has been undertaken in Germany by C. F. Hornemann 
and C. Siegfried, and 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 will need revision when the critical edition of 
Philo's works, now in course of being published, has reached 
completion. The following specimens will shew the extent 
to which Philo departs from the lxx. 

Gen. ii. 7 els ψνχην ζωής (LXX. els ψ. ζώσαν)^. iv. 21 ovtos earl 
πατήρ 6 Karabei^as "^αΚτηριον και κιθάραν (LXX., ήν 6 κ.), vi. 14 
voσσLas voaaias noL-qaeis την κιβωτόν {voaaias seniel LXX.). ix. 25 
■KcCis olKiTr\s hovkos hovkwv eVrai (LXX. tt. οικ€τη5 earai, and SO Philo, 
ii. 225. 20). XV. 18 €ωs του ποταμού, τον μίγάλον ποταμού Έυφράτον 
(lxx. om. ποταμού 2^)*. xviii. 12 οϋπω μοι yiyove το €νδαιμον€ΐν 
eωs τον νυν (LXX. omit το evd. and so Philo once, iii. 184. 28). 
Exod. iv. 10 ovK (ΙμΙ evXoyos (so Philo, apparently^: LXX. oi< 
LKavos (Ιμί). XV. ly €^ρασμα (Is καθίδραν σον κατίΐργάσω (LXX. 
els €Τοιμον κατοικητηριόν σον 6 κατ.). XX. 23 μ^τ^ €μον (LXX., νμϊν 
avTols). xxiii. 2 /xerct πολλών (LXX., μ€Τα πλαόνων). Lev. xix. 
23 ξνλον (:ipώσeωs (LXX., ξ. βρώσιμον, and SO Philo ii. 1 52. 8). 
Deut. viii. 18 άλλα μν^ία μνησθηστ) (LXX. και μνησθ.). xxi. 16 κλη- 
pohoTTj (lxx., κατακληρονομη Β, κατακληρο8οττ) AF, and these 

readings are found as variants in Phil. i. 209. 4). 

1 Cf. Ryle, Ρ/ιζίο, p. xlv.f. - Cf. vit. Mays. 6, 7. 

3 On this see Nestle, Ztir iieueti Philo- Atisgabe in ΡΙηΙοΙοίζΐι$, 1900, 
p. 259. Dr Nestle informs me that cod. 75 often agrees with Philo. 
■* See Nestle, i?/. cit., p. ■270. ^ See above, p. 371. 

Use of the LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists. 375 

The student who is at the pains to examine the readings 
given above, Λνϋΐ find that while 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 
seem to have a conflation of two renderings (Gen. iv. 21, ix. 
25), one of which is preserved in all extant MSS. of the lxx., 
while the other agrees more nearly with the Hebrew. When 
the MSS. of the lxx. are at variance, Philo inclines on the 
whole to Cod. B\ but the preponderance is not strongly 
marked. Thus in Exodus — Deuteronomy, he agrees with Β 
against one or more of the other uncials sixty times, while in 
fifty-two places he takes sides against B. It has been observed 
that in several instances where Philo opposes the combined 
witness of the uncials, he goes with Lucian; e.g. Lev. xviii. 5 
ο ΤΓΟίησας; Deut. xii. 8 οσα, xxxii. 4. + iv αντω. 

Besides substantial variants, Philo's quotations shew many 
departures from the lxx. which may be ascribed to inaccuracy, 
defects of memory, or the writer's method of citing. Thus 
(a) he omits certain words with the view of abbreviating; 
(ί^) he substitutes for a portion of his text a gloss or other 
explanatory matter of his own; (c) he exchanges Hebraisms 
and words or phrases which offend him for others in accord- 
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 και δραμοΰσα eVi το φρέαρ vdpevaaro 
Tois καμηΧοις (LXX., και ζδραμ^ν eVl το ψρίαρ άντΧησαι νδωρ καΐ 
υ8ρ. ττάσαις τάΐς καμηΧοις). {b) Num. V. 2 ξξαττοσταΧάτωσαν e/c 
τψ άγιου ^νχης (LXX. €Κ της παρίμβοΧής) πάντα Χίπρόν. (c) Gen. 
xxviii. 13 η y^ (v. 1. την yrjv) €φ' ής σν καθ(νδ€ίς { + €π' αύτης LXX.) 

^ In Genesis i. — xlvi. 27, where Β is wanting, Philo shews on the 
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 LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists. 

σοι δώσω αντην. {d) Gen. xvii. l+xxxv. II iyo) (Ιμι Oeos aos- eyco 
ό θ(ός σον αί'ζάνου και πΧηθννον (Phil. iii. ΐ6ΐ. 4 ^•)• 

The 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^; and 
his respect for the Alexandrian \^ersion was at least as great 
as that with which the x^uthorised Version is regarded in 
England, and Luther's Aversion in Germany. Nevertheless he 
did not scruple to quote his text freely, changing words at 
pleasure, and sometimes mingling interpretation with citation. 
This method of dealing with a source, however high its 
authority, was probably not peculiar to Philo, but a literary 
habit which he shared with other Jewish writers of his age^ 
We shall have occasion to observe it again when we consider 
the use of the lxx. by the writers of the New Testament. 

6. The Alexandrian Version was also used by the Pales- 
tinian Jew, Flavius Josephus, who represents Jewish Hellen- 
istic literature in the generation which followed Philo. He was 
born at Jerusalem within the lifetime of the great Alexandrian 
(a.d. 37 — 8). He was descended from a priestly family^; 
his early education familiarised him with the learning of the 
Rabbis, and the opinions of the great schools of Jewish 
thought; in his nineteenth year he was enrolled a member 
of the sect of the Pharisees^ His earliest work, on the 
Jewish War, was written in Aramaic ^ and when he desired to 
translate it into Greek, he was constrained to seek assistance 
(c. Ap. i. 9 χρησάμ€νόζ τισι ττρός την Έλλτ/ΐΊ'δα φωνην συι/εργοις 
όντως ζΤΓΟιησάμην τ<Ζν ττράέ^ων την τταράδοσιν). But the Antiqui- 
ties of the Jews (at Ίωστ/ττου Χστορίαι της ^ΙυνΒαϊκης άρχαιολο-γίας), 

^ See Ryle, p. xvi. fif. 

2 Cf. B. C. B. iv. p. 387^ 

3 Vit. I. ^ Ih. 2. 

^ B. J. prooeni. i ττ? πατρίω [sc. yXuaarj] συντάξας. 

Use of the LXX. by non-Christian Hellenists. 377 

which appear to have been completed in a.d. 93 — 4, form an 
original Greek work which, so far as we know, was composed 
without material help. In it Josephus professes to interpret 
the Hebrew records for the benefit of Hellenic readers: Ant. \. 
proem. I ravjiqv δέ τΎ]ν ένζστώσαν ίγκ€)(ζίρισμαί πραγματ^ίαν, 
νομίζων αττασι φανίΐσθαί τοις "Έιλλησίν άζίαν σττον^ης ' μζλλζί yap 
Trepte^ctv αττασαν την ■παρ' ημΐν ap^aLoXoylav κα\ διάτα^ί,ν του 
■π oXltcv ματ ο<ζ Ικ των 'Εβραϊκών μ^θ η ρ μην ίν μίνην '•^ραμμά- 
των. His chief source, therefore, was the Hebrew Bible, with 
which he was doubtless acquainted from boyhood \ Never- 
theless, there is ample evidence in the Antiquities that the 
writer knew and, for the purpose of his work, used the 
Alexandrian Greek version. He does not, indeed, like Philo, 
quote formally either from the Hebrew or from the Greek, 
but he shews a knowledge of both. 

His indebtedness to the lxx. appears in a variety of ways. 
{a) He interprets proper names as they are interpreted by the 
LXX. e.g. Ant. I. I. 2 Ένα... σημαίνει... -πάντων μητέρα (Gen. iii. 
20); I. 2. I Κάις...κτισιι/ (v. 1. κτησιν) σημαίνει (Gen. iv. i); 
iii. I. 6 καΧονσι δί 'Έιβραΐοί το βρωμά τοντο μάννα' το yap μάν 
ζπ^ρώτησίς.. .'τι τοντ' εστίν' άνακρίνονσα (Exod. xvi. 15); V. 10. 
3 ^αμονηΧον . . .θεαίτητον αν τΐζ clttol (ι Regn. i. 2θ). (ύ) His 
narrative frequently follows a Heb. text different from the M.T., 
but represented by the lxx.; e.g. Ant. vi. 4. i ήσαν €β8ομη- 
κοντα τον αριθμόν (ι Regn. ix. 2 2, 0L Ώψ7ψ3) -^ vi. II. 4 
νποθίίσα τοις έπιβοΧίαίοις ητταρ ("^^3) αιγός (ι Regn. xix. 1 3, 
^^ "'"'^Di vi. 12. 4 Aoiqyos δ' ό '%νρος 6 τάζ ημιόνονζ αντον 
βόσκων (ι Regn. χχϋ. g, 01 '?-1i<i^-n?rbi; 3•>*^ Κ-ΊΠ^ ^φ^Π λΧΙ) ; 
νϋ. 2. I μόνον €νρόντ€ς...τόν Ίεσβωθον και μητζ τονς φύλακα? 
παρόντας μητ€ την θνρωρόν iypηyopvΐav (cf 2 Regn. iv. 6 LXX. και 
ΐδου η θυρωρός εννσταέ^ν καΐ εκά^ευδεν) ; νϋ. 5• 3 ^(^^^ρον 6 των 

^ He possessed a copy of the saci-ed books which Titus granted him from 
the spoils of the Temple: FiV. 75 την αϊτησιν έττοίούμην Tirou... βιβλίων 
iepuiv [και] 'έ\αβον χαρισαμένου Τίτου. 

37^ Use of the LXX, by non-Christian Hellenists. 

Αί-γντΓτίων βασιλεύς 2οΰσακο9...€λα/3€ (2 Regn. viii.7, LXX. ;/\^^). 
(c) Whilst retailing in his own words the story of the Hebrew 
records, he falls from time to time into the peculiar phrase- 
ology of the Alexandrian version. A few examples will make 
this evident. A/it. i. i (Gen. i. i ff.), cv apxfj Ικτισει/ 6 Oeos 
τον ovpavov και την yrjv. . .yeveaOaL φως εκελευσεν ό^εος... 
οΐ€^ωρισ€ το re φως και το σκότος. ..και ανττ} μ€ν αν αη 
ττρωτη ημίρα, 'Μωνσης δ' αντην μίαν €ΐ7Γ€...τό των τετραπόδων 
γίνος άρρίν καΙ θηλν ττοιησας. ί. ΐθ. 3 (Gen. χν. g f.) δά/χα- 
Xlv τρί€Τ ίζονσαν και αίγα τρί€Τ ίζονσαν και κριον ομοίως 
τρίίτη και τρυγόνα και ττεριστεραν κελευσαντος διειλε, των 
ορνίων ουδέν διελω'ν. i. 18. 7 (Gen. xxvii. 30) τ^ο-ρην Ήσαΰς 
άτΓΟ τη^ θήρας. [. 2θ. 2 (Gen. χχχϋ. 23 f.) χαμάρρονν τινά 
Ίάβακχον λεγο^αενον Βίαβζβηκότων Ιάκωβος υττολελει/χ/χε'νος 
...διετταλαιεν. ϋ. 4• Ι (Gen. xxxix. ι) ^Ιωσηφον δε ττωλουρ,ενον 
ΰτΓο τώι/ Ιμττόρων ωνησάρΛνος Πετεφρτ^ς avr;p Αιγΰτττιος εττι 
των Φαραω^ου /χαγειρων. ϋ. 6. Ι (Gen. xli. 45) 7Γpoσηy6p€vσ€v 
αντον 'Φovθovφάvηχov...ay€τaL yap και Πετεφρου θυγατέρα των 
εν Τ7^ Ήλιουπολει ίερεο^ν.. .Άσε'ννί/^ιν ονό/Αατι. ϋ. 7• 5 (Gen. 
xlvi. 28) άτταντησόμ^νος ε^εισι και κα^' Ηρώων ττολιν αΰτώ 
συνε/?αλεν\ (^/) There is evidence to shew that Josephus used 
I Esdras, which is known only in a Greek form, and the Book 
of Esther with the Greek additions, i Esdras. Ant. xi. i. i 
(i Esdr. ii. 3 f.) Κύρος ο /βασιλεύς λέγει Έττει ρ,ε ο ^εός 6 
/χεγιστος της οίκονμίνης άττεδειίε ^ασιλε'α, τον ναον αυτοΰ 
οΙκοΒομησω εν Ίεροσολυ/χοις εν τη 'Ιουδαία χωρά. xi. 2. 2 
(ΐ Esdr. ϋ. 21, cf. 2 Esdr. iv. 17) /?ασιλευς Κα/χ/?υστ79 
'Ρα^υμω τω γράφοντι τα ττροσττιτττοντα και, Βεελ^ε'/χω και 
2ε/αελιω γραρ,/χατεΐ και τοις λοιττοΓς τοις συντασσο/χε'νοις 
και οικουσιν εν 2α/ααρεια και Φοινίκη τάδε λε'γει. xi. 3• 
2 — 8 = 1 Esdr. iii. — iv. Esthei'. Ant. xi. 6. 6 = Esth. B; xi. 
6. 8 fif. = C, D; xi. 6. 12 f. = E. The first Book of Maccabees 

1 For some of these instances I am indebted to a collation made by 
Mr C. G. Wright for the Editors of the larger LXX. 

Use of the LXX. by non-CJiristian Hellenists. 379 

was also known to Josephus in its Greek form\ which under- 
lies his account of the Maccabean wars, just as the Greek 
translation of the canonical books is used in the earlier books 
of the Antiquities. 

A recent examination, by A. Mez, of Basle', into the 
Biblical text presupposed by Josephus' history in Ant. v. — vii. 
has led to the following results, which are important for the 
criticism of the lxx. (i) The Josephus text of the lxx. has 
no affinity with the characteristic text of cod. B. (2) In Joshua 
it generally approximates to the text of 0i. (3) In Judges 
it is frequently, but not constantly, Lucianic; in i, 2 Kingdoms 
it agrees with Lucian so closely as to fall into the same omis- 
sions and misconceptions; only in four instances, other than 
proper names, does it 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. These investigations, so 
far as they go, point to a probability that in these books the 
Greek Bible of Palestine during the second half of the first 
century presented a text not very remote from that of the re- 
cension which emanated from Antioch early in the fourth. 
While Philo the Alexandrian supports on the whole the text 
of our oldest uncial cod. B, Josephus the Palestinian seems 
to have followed that of an ' Urlucian.' 

Literature. Hellenistic writers before Philo: Text: C. 
MuUer, Fragfnenta historica Graeca iii. J. Freudenthal, Hellen- 
istische 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 exercita- 
tionuin criticarum in versionem LXX. interpretum ex Philone 
(Gottingen, 1773); C. Siegfried, Philo und der iiberlieferte Text 

1 Bloch, Die Quellen d. Fl. Josephus, p. 8 ff. 
^ Die Bibel des Josephtis, p. 79 ff. 

38ο Use of the LXX. by noii- Christian Hellenists. 

der LXX. (in Z. f. wiss. Theologie, 1873, pp. 217 ff., 411 ff., 
522 ff.); A. Edersheim in D. C. B. iv. p. 357 ff. ; E. Hatch, 
Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford, 1889), p. 140 ff.; F. C. Cony- 
beare, in Expositor., 1891 p. 456 ff., and yewish Q. R., 1893, 
p. 246 ff., 1896, p. 88 ff. ; H. E. Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture 
(London, 1895); P• Wendland, in Philologus 1898, p. 283 ff. 

Sibyllines. Text: A. Rzach, (9nz<:i//<2 6V<5j////«^, Vienna, 189 1. 
Cf. F. Blass in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen., p. 177 ff. 

Josephus. Text: B. Niese, Fl. yosephi opera {^QxWn^ 1887 — 
1895). Cf. E. Schiirer^, E. T. i. i. p. jy^.; A. Edersheim in 
D. C. B. iii. p. 441 ff.; C. Siegfried in Stade's Z.f. d. ATliche 
Wissenschaft, 1883, p. 32 ff. ; H. Bloch, Die Quellen des Fl. 
yosephiis in seiner Archdologia (Leipzig, 1879); A. Mez, Die 
Bibel des yosephus untersucht fiir Buck v. — vii. der Archdologia 
(Basle, 1895). 



Quotations from the lxx. in the New 

I. 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 Pales- 
tinian Jews; a seventh, though 'a Hebrew of Hebrew paren- 
tage,' 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 diversity of practice as to the literary use of the 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 
device, though otherwise admirable \ does not enable the 
student to distinguish direct citations from mere allusions 
and reminiscences ; and as the distinction is important for 
our present purpose, we will begin by placing before him a 
table of passages in the Old Testament which are formally 
quoted by New Testament writers. 

^ See below, p. 403• 

382 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

By passages formally cited we understand (i) those which 
are cited with an introductory formula, such as τοντο ydyovev tva 
πΧηρωθτ] το ρηθέν (Mt.), όντως or καθώς yeypaTTTat, or yeypanTac 
simply (Mt., Mc, Lc, Paul), yeypappivov €στίν (Jo.), ^Ιωνσης 
(Δαυβιδ) Xeyei or clnev, Xeyet or etVfr ή ypa(^r] (Jo., Paul), or το aytov 
πν€νμα (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. Τ 

Tad/e of O. T. passages quoted hi the N. T. 

Gen. i. 27 (v. 2) 
ii. 2 


V. 24 
xii. I 

3^ (xxii. 18) 
XV. 5 

xvii. 5 
xviii. 10, 14 
xxi. 10 
xxii. i6f. 
XXV. 23 
xlvii. 31 
Exod. ii. 14 
iii. 5 ff. 

ix. 16 

xii. 46 (Num. ix. 12, Ps. 

. xxxiii. 20) 

xiii. 12 

xvi. 4, 15 (Ps. Ixxvii, 24) 

xix. 13 
XX. 12 — i7(Deut.v. i6ff.) 

xxi. 16 (17) 


xix. 4, Mc. X. 6 


iv. 4 

I Cor. 

XV. 45 


xix. 5 f., Mc. X. 7 f., I Cor. 

vi. 16, Eph. V. 31 


xi. 5 


vii. 3 

iii. 25, Gal. iii. 8 


iv. 18 


ii. 23, Rom. iv. 3, Gal. 

iii. 6 


vii. 6 f. 


iv. 17 

ix. 9 


iv. 30 


ix. 7, Heb. xi. 18 


vi. I3f. 


ix. 12 


xi. 21 


vii. 27 f. 


xxii. 32, Mc. xii. 26, Lc. 

XX. 37, Acts vii. 32 ff. 


ix. 17 


xix. 36 


ii.. 23 


vi. 31 ff. 

2 Cor. 

viii. 15 


xii. 20 


V. 21, 27, XV. 4—6, xix. 

18 f, Mc. vii. 10, X. 

19, Lc. xviii. 20, James 

ii. II, Rom. vii. 7, xiii. 

9, Eph. vi. 2 f. 

XV. 4, Mc. vii. 10 

Quotations from the LXX. in tJie Neiu Testament. 383 


xxi. 24 (Lev. xxiv. 20, 
Deut. xix. 21) 


V. 38 

xxii. 28 


xxiii. 5 

xxiv. 8 


ix. igf. 

xxv. 40 

viii. 5 

xxxii. I 


vii. 40 


I Cor. 

X. 7 

xxxiii. 19 


ix. 15 


xi. 44 f. (xix. 2, XX. 7, 26) 

I Pet. 

i. 16 

xii. 6, 8 


ii. 22 ff. 

xviii. 5 (2 Esdr. xix. 29) 


X. 5, GaL iii. 12 

xix. 18 


v. 43, xix. 19, xxii. 39, 
Mc. xii. 31, Lc. x. 27, 
James ii. 8, Rom. xiii. 
9, Gal. V. 14 

xxvi. 1 1 f.(Ezek. xxxvii.27) 

2 Cor. 

vi. 16 


xvi. 5 

2 Tim. 

ii. 19 


iv. 35 


xii. 32 

vi. 4f. 


xxii. 37 f., Mc. xii. 29— 
2>% Lc. x. 27 

. 13,16 

iv. 7, 10, Lc. iv. 8, 12 

viii. 3 

iv. 4, Lc. iv. 4 

ix. 19 


xii. 21 (.?) 

xviii. 15, 18 f. 


iii. 22 f., vii. 37 

xix. 15 


xviii. 16, Jo. viii. 17, 2 Cor. 
xiii. I 

xxi. 23 


iii. 13 

xxiv. I 


v. 31, xix. 7, Mc. X. 4 

XXV. 4 

I Cor. 

ix. 9, I Tim. V. 18 

xxvii. 26 


iii. 10 

xxix. 4 


xi. 8 



xii. 15 

XXX. 12 — 14 


x. 6—8 

xxxi. 6, 8 (Jos. i. 5) 


xiii. 5 

xxxii. 21 


x. 19 


xii. 19, Heb. x. 30 

36 (Ps. cxxxiv. 14) 


x. 30 

43 (Ps. xcvi. 7) 

i. 6 


.vii. 8, 14 

2 Cor. 

vi. 18, Heb. i. 5 


.xix. 10, 14, 18 


xi. 3 f. 


ii. I f. 


iv. 25 f. 


xiii. 33, Heb. i. 5, v. 5 

viii. 2 


xxi. 16 

... 7—9 

I Cor. 

XV. 27, Heb. ii. 6—8 

xiii. 3 (v. 10, ix. 28, XXXV. 


iii. 10 — 18 

2, lii. I — 3, cxxxix. 4, 

Isa. lix. 7 f.) 

384 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament, 


XV. 8— II 


ii. 25 — 28 

xvii. 50 


XV. 9 

xviii. 5 

X. 18 

xxi. 2 


XXV ii. 46, Mc. XV. 34 


xxvii. 43 



xix. 24 



ii. 12 

xxiii. 1 

I Cor. 

X. 26, 28 

xxxi. I f. 


iv. 6—8 

xxxiii. 13 — 17 

I Pet. 

iii. 10—12 

xxxiv. 19 (Ixviii. 5) 


XV. 25 

xxxix. 7—9 


X. 5—7 

xl. 10 


xiii. 18 

xliii. 22 


viii. 36 

xliv. 7f. 





iii. 4 

liv. 23 

I Pet. 

v. 7 

Ixvii. 19 


iv. 8 

Ixviii. 10 


ii. 17, Rom. XV. 3 

23 f. 


xi. 9f. 



i. 20 

Ixxvii. 2 


xiii. 35 

Ixxxi. 6 


X• 34 

Ixxxviii. 21 


xiii. 22 

XC. I I f. 


iv. 6, Lc. iv. 10 f. 

xciii. II 

I Cor. 

iii. 20 

xciv. 8 — II 


iii. 7 — II 

ci. 26—28 

i. 10—12 

ciii. 4 

i• 7 

cviii. 8 


i. 20 

cix. I 


xxii. 44, Mc. xii. 36, Lc. 
XX. 42 f., Acts ii. 34 f., 
Heb. i. 13 



V. 6 (vii. 17, 21) 

cxi. 9 

2 Cor. 

ix. 9 

cxv. I 

iv. 13 

cxvi. I 



cxvii. 6 


xiii. 6 

22 f. 


xxi. 42, Mc. xii. 10 f., 
Lc. XX. 17, I Pet. ii. 7 


iii. 1 1 f. 


xii. 5 f. 


J as. 

iv. 6, I Pet. V. 5 

xi. 31 

I Pet. 

iv. 18 

XXV. 2 1 f. 


xii. 20 

xxvi. II 

2 Pet. 

ii. 22 


v. 13 

I Cor. 

iii. 19 


i. 10 


ix. 26 

Quotations from the LXX. in tJie New Testament. 385 


ii. 23 


ix. 25 

vi. 6 


ix. 13, xii. 7 

xi. I 

ii. 15 

xiii. 14 

I Cor. 

XV. 55f. 


V. 25, 27 


vii. 42 f. 

ix. 1 1 f. 

XV. 15—17 


V. 2 


ii. 5 f. (Jo. vii. 42) 


ii. 28 — 32 


ii. 17—21 


i• 5 

xiii. 41 



i. 17, Gal. iii. 11, Heb. x. 
37 f. 


iii. 2 



ix. 9 


XXI. 5, Jo. xii. 15 

xi. 13 

xxvii. 9f. 

xii. 10 


xix. y] 

xiii. 7 


xxvi. 31, Mc. xiv. 27 


i. 2f. 


ix. 13 

iii. I 


xi. 10, Mc. i. 2, Lc. vii. 



i. 9 


ix. 29 

vi. 9 f. 


xiii. 14 f., Mc. iv. 12, Lc. 
viii. 10, Jo. xii. 40 f., 
Acts xxviii. 26 f. 

vii. 14 

i. 23 

viii. 14 


ix. ^% I Pet. ii. 8 



ii. 13 

ix. I f. 


iv. 1 5 f. 

X. 22 f. 


ix. 27 f. 

xi. 10 

XV. 12 

xxii. 13 

I Cor. 

XV. 32 

XXV. 8 


xxviii. 1 1 f. 

xiv. 21 



ix. 33, x. II, I Pet. ii. 6 

xxix. 10 

xi. 8 



XV. 8f., Mc. vii. 6f. 


I Cor. 

i. 19 

xl• 2>—S 


iii. 3, Mc. i. 3, Lc. iii. 
4—6, Jo. i. 23 


I Pet. 

i. 24f. 

13 f. 


xi. 34 f., I Cor. ii. 16 

xiii. I — 4 


xii. 18—21 

xlv. 23 


xiv. II 

xlix. 6 


xiii. 47 


2 Cor. 

vi. 2 

Iii. 5 


ii. 24 

7(Nah. i. 15) 

X. 15 


2 Cor. 

vi. 17 



2 ς 

386 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

Isa. lii. 15 
liii. I 




liv. I 

Iv. 3 

Ivi. 7 Mt. xxi. M, Mc. xi. 17, Lc. 


XV. 21 


xii. 38, Rom. x. 16 


viii. 17 

I Pet. 

ii. 24 f. 


viii. 32 f. 


XV. 28, Lc. xxii. 37 


iv. 27 


vi. 45 


xiii. 34 


xxi. 13, Mc. xi. 17, 

xix. 46 


xi. 26 f. 


iv. 18 f. 

I Cor. 

ii. 9(?) 


X. 20 f. 


vii. 49 f. 


ix. 48 


xxi. 13, Mc. xi. 17, 

xix. 46 

I Cor. 

i. 31, 2 Cor. X. 17 


ii. 18 


viii. 8 — 12 


xxiv. 15, Mc. xiii. 14 

lix. 20 f. 
Ixi. I f. 
Ixiv. 4 
Ixv. I f. 
Ixvi. I f. 
Jer. vii. 11 Mt. xxi. 13, Mc. xi. 17, Lc. 

ix. 23 f. (i Regn. ii. 10) 
xxxviii. 15 

31—34 . 
Dan. xii. 11 (ix. 27, xi. 31) 

Thus upon a rough estimate the passages directly quoted 
from the Old Testament by writers of the New Testament are 
160. Of these 51 belong to the Pentateuch, 46 to the Poetical 
Books, and 61 to the Prophets. Among single books the Psalter 
supphes 40 and Isaiah 38; i.e. nearly half of the passages 
expressly cited in the N.T. come from one or other of these two 

2. The table already given shews the extent to which the 
Old Testament is directly cited in the New. In that which 
follows the comparison is inverted, and the student will be 
able to see at a glance how the quotations are distributed 
among the several groups of writings of which the New 
Testament is made up. 

(i) Quotations in the Synoptic Gospels. 

Mt. Mc. Lc. O. f . 

i. 23 Isa. vii. 14 

ii. 23 Exod. xiii. 12 

Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 387 





0. T." 



Mic. V. 2 
Hos. xi. I 
Jer. xxxviii. 15 





iii. 4 — 6 

Isa. xl. 3 — 5 



iv. 4 

Deut. viii. 3 


10 f. 

Ps. XC. I I f. 



Deut. vi. 16 




15 f. 

Isa. ix. I f. 







Exod. XX. 13 

Deut. xxiv. I 
Num. XXX. 3 (cf. Deut. xxiii. 

Exod. xxi. 24 
Lev. xix. 18 



Isa. liii. 4 


13 (xii. 7) 

Hos. vi. 6 





vii. 27 

Mai. iii. i 



Hos. vi. 6 
Isa. xiii. i 


14 f. 

iv. 18 f. 

vi. 9f. 
Ps. Ixxvii. 2 
Isa. Ixi. I ff. + lviii. 6 





Exod. XX. 12, xxi. 16 



Isa. xxix. 13 



Ixvi. 24 



X. 6 


Gen. i. 27 + ii. 24 




xviii. 20 f. 

Exod. XX. 12 — 17 



Zech. ix. 9+ Isa. Ixii. 11 




xix. 46 

Isa. Ivi. 7+ Jer. vii. 11 


Ps. viii. 2 



, 10 

XX. 17 

cxvii. 22 f. 





Deut. XXV. 5 (cf. Gen. xxxviii. 





Exod. iii. 6 


29 f. 

X. 27^ 

Deut. vi. 4f. 




Lev. xix. 18 



XX. 42 f. 

Ps. cix. I 
Deut. vi. 4 


• 15 



xxii. 37 

Dan. xii. 11 
Isa. liii. 12 





Zech. xiii. 7 


i. 9f. 

xi. 13 




Ps. xxi. I 

25 — 2 


liv. 13 


Ixxxi. 6 


ix. 9 


liii. I 

vi. 10 


xxxiv. 19 (Ixviii. 5) 

xxi. 19 


xii. 46 (Num. ix. 12, Ps, 

xxxiii. 21) 


xii. 10 

388 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

(2) Quotations in the Fourth Gospel. 

Jo. i. 23 Isa. xl. 3 

ii. 17 Ps. Ixviii. 10 

vi. 31 Exod. xvi. 4, 15 (Ps. Ixxvii. 24f.) 

X. 34 
xii. 15 


XV. 25 
xix. 24 



(3) Quotatiojis in the Acts. 

Acts i. 20 Ps. Ixviii. 26 + cviii. 8 

ii. 17 — 21 Joel ii. 28 — 32 

25—28 Ps. XV. 8— II 

34 f. cix. I 

iii. 22 f. (vii. 27) Deut. xviii. 15, 18 f. 

25 Gen. xii. 34-xxii. 18 

iv. 2 5f. Ps. ii. I f. 

vii. 3 Gen. xii. i 

6f. XV. i3f. 

27 f., 35 Exod. ii. 14 

33 f. iii. 6—8 

40 xxxii. 23 

42 f. Amos v. 25 — 27 

49 f. Isa. Ixvi. I f. 

viii. 32 f. liii. 7 f•. 

xiii. 22 Ps. Ixxxviii. 21 etc. 

33 ii• 7 

34 Isa. Iv. 3 

35 Ps. XV. 10 
41 Hab. i. 5 
47 Isa. xlix. 6 

XV. 16— 18 Jer. xii. 15+Amos ix. II f. -h 

Isa. xlv. 21 

xxviii. 26 f. Isa. vi. 9 f . 

Quotations from tlie LXX. in the New Testament. 389 

(4) Quotations in the Catholic Epistles. 

James ii. 8 


iv. 6 

1 Peter i. 24 f, 

ii. 6 

ill. 10 — 12 
iv. 18 
V. 7 

2 Peter ii. 22 
Jude 9 

Lev. xix. 18 

Exod. XX. 1 3 f. 

Gen. XV. 6 

Prov. iii. 34 

Isa. xl. 6 — 9 

xxviii. 16 

Ps. xxxiii. 12 — 17 

Prov. xi. 31 

Ps. liv. 23 

Prov. xxvi. 1 1 

Zech. iii. 2 

(5) Quotations in the Epistles of St Paul. 

Rom. i. 17 

ii. 24 

iii. 4 

10 — Ii 

iv. 3, 22 

vii. 7 

viii. 36 

ix. 7 


X. 6 — 9 



20 f. 


11. 4 


lii. 5 



xiii. I — Ϋ 

cxlii. 2 


XV. 6 


xxxi. I f. 


xvii. 5 

XV. 5 


XX. 14, 17 


xliii. 23 


xxi. 12 

xviii. 10 

XXV. 23 


i. 2f. 


xxxiii. 19 

ix. 16 


i. 10 


X. 22 f. 


viii. 14 + xxviii. 16 


XXX. II — 14 


lii. 7 (Nah. i. 15) 

liii. I 


xviii. 5 


xxxii. 21 


Ixv. I f. 

^ See above, p. 251 

390 Quotations from the LXX. m the New Testament. 

Rom. xi. I f. 


26 f. 

34 f. 
xii. 2of. 
xiii. 9 
xiv. 1 1 
XV. 3 



1 Cor. i. 19 

iii. 19 

vi. 16 
ix. 9 
X. 7 
xiv. 21 
XV. 32 


54 f. 

2 Cor. iv. 13 

vi. 2 

16 ff. 
viii. 15 
ix. 9 
X. 17 
Gal. ii. 16 
iii. 6 





iv. 27 

V. 14 
Eph. iv. 8 


xciii. 14 


Lxix. 10, 14, 18 


xxix. 10+ Deut. xxi.x. 4 


Ixviii. 23f. + xxxiv. 8 


lix. 20+xxvii. 9 

xl. 13 


XXV. 2 1 f. 


XX. 13 ff., Lev. xix. 18 


xiv. 23 


Ixviii. 10 

xvii. 50 (2 Regn. xxi 



xxxii. 43 


cxvi. I 


xi. 10 

Iii. 15 

xxix. 14 


ix. 24 


Ixiv. 4 + lxv. 17 (.?) 


^• .13 


xcin. II 


ii. 24 


XXV. 4 


xxxii. 6 


xxiii. I 


xxviii. II f. 

xxii. 13 


ii• 7 . . 


XXV. 8 + Hos. xiii. 14 


cxv. I 


xlix. 8 


xxxvii. 27 + Isa. Hi. 11 


xvi. 18 


cxi. 9 


ix. 24 


cxlii. 2 


XV. 6 

xii. 3 


xxvii. 26 


ii• 4 


xviii. 5 


xxi. 23 


liv. I 


xxi. 10 


xix. 18 


Ixviii. 19 


viii. 16 


iv. 5 


11. 24 


XX. 12 


XXV. 4 


XVI. 5 

Quotations from the LXX. in the Nezv Testantent. 391 

Eph. iv. 26 
V. 31 
vi. 2 

1 Tim. V. 18 

2 Tim. ii. 19 

(6) Quotations in the Epistle to the Hebrews. 

Heb. i. 5 


10 — 12 


ii. 6—8 


iii. 7 — 12 
iv. 4 

V. 6 (vii. 17, 21) 
vi. I3f. 
viii. 5 

8 — 13, X. i6f. 
ix. 20 
X. 5 — 10 


37 f. 
xi. 5 

xii. 5 f. 



xiii. 5 

Some interesting results follow from an inspection of these 
lists, (i) The Synoptic Gospels have 46 distinct quotations 
(Mt. 40, Mc. 19, Lc. 17), of which 18 are peculiar to Mt., 
3 to Mc, 3 to Lc. There are 10 which are common to the 
three, 3 common to Mt. and Mc, 4 to Mt. and Lc, but none 


ii. 7 (2 Regn. vii. 14) 

xcvi. 7 (Deut. xxxii. 43) 

ciii. 4 

xliv. 7 f. 

ci. 26—28 

cix. I 

viii. 5—7 

xxi. 23 


viii. I7f. 


xciv. 8 — II 




cix. 4 


xxii. i6f. 


XXV. 40 


xxxviii. 31—34 


xxiv. 8 


xxxix. 7 — 9 


xxxii. 35 f. 




V. 24 

xxi. 12 

xlvii. 31 


iii. 1 1 f. 


xxix. 18 


xix. I2f. 


ii. 6 


xxxi. 6, 8 


cxvii. 6 

392 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

which are shared by ^Ic. and Lc. to the exclusion of Mt. 
(2) 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. at all, and the other Catholic Epistles 
contain few direct citations. (5) Of 78 quotations in St Paul, 
71 are in the four first Epistles (Romans 42, i — 2 Corinthians 
19, Galatians 10); there are none in the Epistles of the Roman 
captivity, with the exception of Ephesians, which has five. 
(6) The Epistle to the Hebrews quotes 28 passages, of which 
21 are not cited in any other N. T. writing^ (7) The Apoca- 
lypse does not quote, but its 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 
which the N. T. quotations bear to the 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. We may now address ourselves to this 
further question; and it 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 
in general 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 185^; and by another that "not more than fifty" of the 
citations "materially differ from the lxx.""' On either estimate 
the LXX. is the principal source from which the writers of the 
N. T. derived their O. T. quotations. 

More may be learnt by patiently examining the details of 
the evidence. This cannot be done here in full, but we may 

^ Westcott, Hebrews, p. 473. 

2 Turpie, O.T. in the N., p. 267. 

3 Grinfield, Apology for the LXX. ^ p. 37. 

Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 393 

point out the method to be pursued in such an investigation, 
and its chief results. 

Each group of the N. T. writings must be interrogated 
separately. {a) Beginning with the Synoptic Gospels, we 
observe that the quotations partly occur in narratives or 
dialogue which are common to the Synoptists or to two of 
them, and are partly due to the individual writer. Between 
these two classes of quotations there is a marked contrast. 
Citations belonging to the common narrative, or to sayings 
reported by all the Synoptists, or to two of them, with 
few exceptions adhere closely to the lxx., the differences 
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. 
alone completing the verse. Mt. xxi. 42 = Mc. xii. 10= Lc. xx. 
17 = LXX., Lc. omitting πάρα Κυρίου κτλ. Mt. xxii. 37 = Mc. xii. 
29f. = Lc. X. 27*^ = LXX., with variants^. Mt. xxii. 39= Mc. xii. 
3i = Lc. X. 27^ = LXX. Mt. xxii. 44= Mc. xii. 36 = Lc. xx. 42 f.,:^ 
LXX. with the variant υποκάτω in Mt., Mc. (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., 
Mc. omitting προσκολληθησ^ται κτλ. Mt. xxiv. i5 = Mc. xiii. 14 = 
LXX. and Th. Mt. xxvi. 31 = Mc. xiv. 27 (omitting τψ ποίμνης) = 
LXX., cod. A, with one important variant not found in any MS. 
of the LXX. ; cod. Β has quite a different text^. (3) Citations 
common to Mt., Lc. Mt. iv. 4=Lc. iv. 4 = LXX., Lc. omitting 
the second half of the quotation. Mt. iv. 6=Lc. iv. lof. = lxx., 
except that the clause του 8ιαφυλάξαι is omitted by Mt. and in 
part by Lc. Mt. iv. 7 = Lc. iv. 12 = LXX. Mt. iv. 10 = Lc. iv. 8 = 
LXX., cod. A. 

Thus it appears that of 14 quotations which belong to this 
class only two (Mt. xv. 8 f., xxvi. 31) depart widely from the 
LXX. But when we turn from the quotations which belong to 
the common narrative to those which are peculiar to one of 
the Synoptists, the results are very different. 

1 On these see Hatch, Essays, p. 104, and the writer's St Mark, p. 255. 
- Hatch, op. cit., p. 177 f. 
3 St Mark, p. 318 f. 

394 Quotations from the LXX. in the Nczv Testament. 

In Mt. there are i6 quotations which are not to be found in 
Mc. or Lc. (Mt. i. 23, ii. 6, 15, τ8, iv. 15 f., v. y^,, 38, 43, viii. 17, 
ix. I3 = xii. 7, xii. iSfif., xiii, 14 f., 35, xxi. 4 f., 16, xxvai. gf.)• Of 
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. A ; Lc. iv. 18 f. difters from the LXX. 
in important particulars. 

It may be asked whether the quotations in the Synoptists 

which do not agree with our present text of the LXX., or with 

its relatively oldest type, imply the use of another Greek 

version. Before an answer to this question can be attempted, 

it is necessary to distinguish carefully between the causes 

which have produced variation. It may be due to {a) loose 

citation, or to {b) the substitution of a gloss for the precise 

words which the writer professes to quote, or to {c) a desire to 

adapt a prophetic context to the circumstances under which it 

was thought to have been fulfilled, or to {d) the fusing together 

of passages 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, 

and imply an independent use of the original, whether by the 

Evangelist, or by the author of some collection of excerpts 

which he employed. 

The following may be taken as specimens of these types of 
variation, {a) Mt. ii. 18, xxi. 4 f . ; {b) Mt. ii. 6, xxvii. gf. ; {c) Mt. 
ii. 15 ; {d) Lc. iv. 18 f. ; (f) Mt. xii. 18 ff., Mc. xii. 29 f.; (/) Mt. xiii. 
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 τον 
νΐόν μου for τά τίκνα αντης may be due either to the Evangelist's 
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 LXX. in the New Testament. 395 

(i) A few of the Synoptic quotations are manifestly 
composite. E.g. Mt. xxi. 4 f., which is mainly from Zech. 
ix. 9, opens with a clause from Isa. Ixii. 1 1 (eiVare rrj θν-γατρί 
2touF Ίδου κτλ.). Lc. iv. 18 f., which is professedly an extract 
from a synagogue lesson Isa. Ixi. i if., inserts in the heart of 
that context a clause from Isa. Iviii. 6 (ά7Γοστ€Γλαι τίθραν- 
σμά'ονς iv άφίσζή. Still more remarkable is the fusion in Mc. 
i. 2 f , where, under the heading καθώς yiypaiTTai iv τω Ήσαια 
τω ττροφητγ), we find Mai. iii. i + Isa. xl. 3^ Here the parallel 
passages in Mt., Lc, quote Isaiah only, using Malachi in 
another context (Mt. xi. 10, Lc. vii. 27). 

(2) There is a considerable weight of evidence in favour 
of the belief that the Evangelists employed a recension of 
the LXX. which came nearer to the text of cod. A than to 
that of our oldest uncial B. This point has been recently 
handled in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift f. 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 its agreement with cod. A is especially close ^ 
It may of course be argued that the text of these authorities 
has been influenced by the N. T.'*; but the fact that a similar 
tendency is noticeable in Josephus, and to a less extent in 
Philo, goes far to discount this objection. Still more remark- 
able is the occasional tendency in N. T. quotations to support 
Theodotion against the lxx.^ Some instances have been 
given already; we may add here Mt. xii. 18 = Isa. xlii. i: 

Mt. LXX. Th. 

ιδού ό τταις μου ον Ίακώ/3 6 ttcus μου Idov ό παΙς μον, 

■ηρίτίσα, ο αγατΓΤ/τόί μον άντίλ7]μψομαι αντον ' άντιληψομαι αντον ' 

6ν (ύ^όκησβν η ψυχή ^ΙσραηΧ ό βκλβκτό? 6 (κΧ^κτός μον ον 

μου. μον, ΤΓροσβδε'Ι^ατο €υ8όκησ€ν ή ψνχη 

αντον η ψνχη μον. μον. 

1 Sf Mark, p. 2. - In iios. xxxv., xxxvi., xxxviii., xl. 

^ xxxvi., p. 97 f. ^ Cf. Zahn, Einkitun^, ii. p. 314 ff. 

5 Cf. p. 48. 

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 
independent of the lxx., or have been but slightly influenced 
by it. These require to be studied separately, and, as they are 
but few, they are printed below and confronted with the lxx. 

Mt. ii. 6 

και συ, ΒηθΧ4€μ, yrj ^lov8a, 
ουδαμώς ζΧαχίστη ei iv rois 
ηγίμόσίν 'lov8a ' e/c σου yap 
4^ίΚ(νσ€ταί ηγο-ύμ€νος, όστις 
ποιμανίΐ τον Χαόν μου Ίσραηλ. 

ονΒαμωςΙ μη Ό \ εκ σου] e^ 
ου (B*)iiC(D) Ι om γαρ i<* 

Mic. V. 2, 4 
και συ, Βηθλ(€μ, οίκος 
^Έ,φράθα, όΧιγοστος ei του eivai 
iv γ^ιΚίάσιν Ιούδα • e^ ού μοι 
ζ^ίΚΐΰσΐται του (ίναι ety άρχοντα 
του ^Ισραήλ. ..και ποιμανύ... 

6^ ου'\ €κ σου B^'^AQ | e|e- 
\(υσ€ται] + ηγούμενος Α 

On the relation of the LXX. in this passage to the M. T. see 
above p. 338. Χιλιάσιν, ηγεμόσιν answer to different vocalisations 

of ''ST'^5, but ουδαμώς (λαχίστη ei and ηγούμενος όστις π. τον λ. 
μου are paraphrastic. The Evangelist has put into the mouth 
of the Scribes an interpretation rather than a version of the 

Mt. iv. 15 f. 
γη ΖαβουΧων και γη Νβφ- 
θαλείμ^ odov θαλάσσης^ πέραν 
τοΰ ^Ιορδανού, ΤαΧειλαία των 
εθνών, 6 Χάος ό καθήμενος εν 
σκοτία φως είδεν μέγα• και τοϊς 
καθημένοις εν χώρα κα\ σκιά 
θανάτου φώς άνετειΧεν αύτοϊς. 

OL καθήμενοι Ό 
om και Ό* 

και σκιά 

Isa. ix. I f. 
χώρα ΖαβουΧών, η γη Νίφ- 
θαΧε'ιμ, και οι ΧοιποΧ οι την 
τταραΧΊαν κάΊ πέραν τοΰ ^Ιορ- 
δανού, ΤαΧειΧαία των εθνών, ό 
Χάος 6 πορευόμενος εν σκότει, 
ϊδετε φώς μέγα' οι κατοικοϋντες 
εν χύ>ρα σκιά θανάτου, φώς 
Χάμψει εφ* υμάς. 

Ί>*εφθαΧειμ] + οδον θαΧασσης 
t<^-^AQ(Aq. Th.) παραΧιαν]-\- 
κατοικουντες fc<*^\\Q | πορευ- 
ομενος^ καθήμενος Α | σκιά] pr 
και X^-^AQr 

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., Γ. των (θνών, χώρα [καί] σκιά. On the other hand 
όδόι/ θαλάσσης, ei'Sei/, αντοίς agree with Μ. Τ. The writer quotes 
from memory, or from a collection of loosely cited testUnonia. 

Mt. viii. 17 Isa. liii. 4 

avros Tas άσθίν^ίας ηιχών ovtos tcis αμαρτίας ημών 

eXa'fiev κα\ τας νόσους ζ'βάσ- φέρξΐ κα\ rrepl ημών 68ννάταί. 


Mt.'s version is based upon Heb., from which the LXX. departs. 
Cf. Symm. : τάς αμαρτίας ημών αυτός άν4Χαβ€ν καΐ τους πόνους 

Mt. xiii. 35 Ps. Ixxvii. 2 

ανοίξω iv παραβοΧαΙς τυ ανοίξω iv τταραβοΧαΙς το 

στόμα μου' €ρ€ύξομαί κ€κρυμ- στόμα μου• φθέ-γξομαί προ- 

μένα από καταβολής. βλήματα αττ' άρχης. 

καταβολης^ + κόσμου N*CD 

V. 35* iri Mt. follows the LXX. 7'erdat2m, while 35^^ is an inde- 
pendent 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 ίρ^ύξομαι is nearer to ΠΓ^3Ν than φθξγξομαι, από 
καταβολής introduces a conception which has no place in ΟΊ[ί^"''^ρ^ 
■ and in this sense the Greek phrase is practically limited to the 
N. T. (see Hort on i Pet. i. 20). 

Mt. xxvii. gf.i Zach. xi. 13 

καΐ Τλαβον...την τιμήν του κα\ etVei/ 'Κνριος προς με 

Τΐτιμημένου όν €Τΐμησαντο από Κά^βί αυτούς (Ις τό χωνευτηριον 

υίών ^Ισραήλ, κα\ έδωκαν αυτά κα\ σκεψομαι el δόκιμόν εστίν, 

εις τόν aypov τοΰ κεραμεως, ον τρόπον εδοκιμάσθη υπέρ 

καθά συνεταξεν μοι Κύριος. αυτών. κα\ ελαβον...κα\ ενε- 

βαλον αυτούς εις τόν οίκον Κυ- 
ρίου εις τό χωνευτηρίον. 

εδωκεν Α*""'"^ ίδωκα i< εδοκιμασθην B*f°^'t<AQ 

Mt. has re-arranged this passage, and given its sense, with- 
out regard to the order or construction of the original. In doing 
this he has abandoned the LXX. altogether, and approximates 

to the Heb. ; cf. Aq. η τιμή ην ετιμηθην ύπερ αυτών. 

^ Mt. ascribes this prophecy to Jeremiah : τότε εττληρώθη τό ρηθέν δια 
Ιερεμίου τοΰ προφήτου. The slip is probably due to a confusion between 
Zach. 1. c. and Jer. xviii. 2. 

39S Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

In these five passages the compiler of the first Gospel has 
more or less distinctly thrown off the yoke of the Alexandrian 
version and substituted for it 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 this liberty 
only in quotations which proceed from himself, if we except 
the references to the O. T. in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 
V. 21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43) which are hardly of the nature of 
strict citations; the formula ippWy τοΐς αρχαίοι? distinguishes 
them from that class, and suggests that they purport only to 
give the general sense. 

(^) The Fourth Gospel quotes the lxx. verbatim^ or with 
slight variants, in cc. ii. 17, x. 34, xii. 38, xix. 24, τ^6 \ and 
more freely in vi. 31, 45, xv. 25. In other places the author 
takes a more or less independent course: e.g. in i. 23, 
quoting Isa. xl. 3 he writes eu^vrare τ•^ν όδόν Κυρίου for crot- 
μάσατ€ τ. δ. Κ., βνθζίας TTOtetre τας τρίβονζ τον θ^ον ημών (cf., 
Mt. iii. 3' ^Ic. i. 3, Lc. iii. 4); in xii. 40, Isa. vi. 9, 10 is 
paraphrased τζτνφλωκζν αυτών τονς οφθαλμούς καΐ εττώρωσεν 
αυτών την καρδιαν, which agrees neither with the lxx. nor Avith 
M.T. ; in xix. 37 οψονται eh ov €$€κ€ντησαν is a non-Septuagintal 
rendering of Zach. xii. 10, which was perhaps current in 
Palestine, since ct? oV Ιξ^κΙντησαν appears also in Theodotion 
(cf. Aq., Symm., and Apoc. i. 7). 

{c) The quotations from the O. T. in the Acts are taken 
from the lxx. exclusively. With the exception of the τηρίοχη 
in c. viii. 32 \ they occur only in the speeches. A few points 
deserve special notice. In vii. 43 (= Amos v. 26) the lxx. is 
followed against M.T. {Ύαμφά{ν} or 'Ραιφάν, £H |•1*3). Simi- 
larly in xiii. 34 (= Isa. Iv. 3) τα όσια Δαυ€ΐδ is read with the 
LXX. for "Ή "ΊΡΟ. C. xiii. 22 is a conflation of Ps. Ixxxviii. 
1 An exact citation, with one or two variants of the A type. 

Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 399 

2i+lxxi. 20+1 Regn. xiii. 14 + Isa. xliv. 2%. C. xv. 16 if., 
which is introduced by the formula τοντω σνμφωνονσιν ol λόγοι 
των προφητών, καθώς γεγραττται, presents a remarkable instance 
of free citation accompanied by conflation, which calls for 
separate study. 

Acts XV, i6ff. Jer. xii. 15+Amos ix. 11 f 

μ€τα ταΰτα αναστρέψω κα\ μ^τά το €κβα.\(Ίν μ€ αντονς 

άνοικο3ομησωτην (τ<ηνην Aaveld ζ7τιστρέ•\\τω ... αναστήσω την 

την π€πτωκνΐαν, και τα κατζ- σκηνην Aaveld την π€7Γτωκν1.αν.. 

στραμμένα αντης ανοικοδομήσω και τα κατασκαμμένα αντης άνα- 

κα\ ανορθώσω αντην, οττως αν στήσω καΐ ανοικοδομήσω αντην 

ζκζητησωσιν οι κατάλοιττοι των καθώς αί ημέραι τον αΙώνος, 

ανθρώπων τον κνριον και πάντα όπως έκζητησωσιν οί κατά- 

τά 'έθνη έφ' ους έπικέκΧηται το Χοιποι των ανθρώπων, κα\ 

ονομά μου eV αντονς, Xe'yet πάντα τα '4θνη βφ' ους eVi- 

Kuptoj ό ποιών ταΰτα * * κέκΧηται το ονομά μου έπ' 

* ^. αντονς, Xe'-yei Κύριος ό ποιών 

καταστραμμένα] κατασκαμ- κατασκαμμένα] καταστραμ- 

μένα ACD μάνα Α^Ο* 

οπως]-{-αν Α | ανθρωπων']-^- 
τον κνριον Α 

The combination in this quotation of looseness with close 
adherence to the LXX. even where it is furthest from the Heb. 
(e.g. in όπως ακζητησωσιν κτλ.) is significant, especially when it is 
remembered that the speaker is St James of Jerusalem. 

(d) The Catholic Epistles use the lxx. when they quote 
the O.T. expressly, and with some exceptions keep fairly close 
to the Alexandrian Greek. Thus Jas. ii. 8, ii^ 23, iv. 6, 
I Pet. i. 24 ^ iv. 18, V. 5. are substantially exact, i Pet. ii. 6 
differs from the lxx. of Isa. xxviii. 16. i Pet. iii. 10 ff., an 
unacknowledged extract from Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff., is adapted to 
the context by a slight change in the construction, but other- 
wise generally follows the lxx. : θ^λων ζωην άγατταν καΐ ISeiv 
ημάρας άγαθάς for θίΧων ζ., αγαπών ιδ. η μ. αγαπάς is probably 

1 On this reading see W. H.-, Azotes on select readings, p. 96. 

2 Cf. Mc. X. 19, Lc. xviii. 20. 

2 On the few variants in this passage see Hort, St Peter, p. 93. 

400 Quotatio7ts from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

a slip, shewing that the writer was quoting from memory. In 
2 Pet. ii. 2 2 (= Prov. xxvi. Il) κΰων ^πίστρίψας cVt το ίδιον 
€^€ραμα is nearer to the Heb. than κ. όταν έτΓζλθγ) inl τον 
iavTov eyaeroi/, and appears to be an independent rendering. 

(e) 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 (Rom. i. 17, ii. 24, iii. 4, iv. 7 f., 18, vii. 7, 
viii. 36, ix. 7, 12, 13, 15, 26, X. off., 16, i8j 19, 20 f., xi. 26 f., 
34 f., xii. 20 f., xiii. 9, xv. 3,9, 10, 11, 12, 21; i Cor. iii. 20, vi. 
16, X. 7, 26, XV. 32; 2 Cor. iv. 13, vi. 2, viii. 15, ix. 9; Gal. 
iii. 6, II, 12, iv. 27, v. 14; Eph. iv. 26; 2 Tim. ii. 19). A 
smaller proportion shew important variants (Rom. iii. 20= Gal. 
ii. 16 ττασα σάρέ for ττας ζων LXX.; ix. 9 κατά tou καφον τοντον 
έλζνσομαί, και Ισται rfj "Χάρρα νΙός for ηξω.,.κατα τον καιρόν 
τοντον... καΐ €$€l νΐον ^άρρα LXX. ; ix. 17 €15 αυτό τοντο €$ηγ€ίρά 
σ€ for ev€K€v τοντον ^ίΐτηρηθης, and δυνα/χιν for Ισχνν LXX.'; 
ix. 27 ό άρίθμοζ των νΙών Ί., iirl Trj<; yfj's; xiv. 1 1 ^ώ €γώ for 
κατ' Ιμ,αντον ομννω, Ι^ομοΧο-γη σ€ται τω θίω for ομίίται τον Oeov 
LXX.; I Cor. i. 19 a.θ€τyjσω for κρύψω LXX.; Gal. iii. 8 ττάντα 
τα €θνη for ττασαι at φνλαΐ τη<ζ yrj<i LXX.; iii. 13 €ττίκατάρατο<; 
(cf. V. 20) for κίκαταραμίνος LXX.; Eph. iv. 8 Ιδωκεν δο/χ,ατα 
τοις ανθρο)ΤΓθί<; for €λα/3€ς δ. ev ανθρωττω' LXX.; iv. 25 μ^τα τον 
ττλησίον for ττρός τον ττλ. LXX. ; V. 31 ^^'^'- τοντον for ev€K€v τ., 
om. αντον 1°, 2°; cf. Mt. xix. 5 f., Mc. X. 7 f, ; vi. 3 καΙ eay 
μακροχρόνιος for κ. Ινα μακροχρ. yivrj). 

In other passages St Paul departs 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. Examples of loose quotations 
or of paraphrases will be found in Rom. ix. 27, xi. 3, 4, i Cor. 
XV. 45, Gal. iv. 30; conflation occurs in Rom. iii. 10 ff.^, ix. 
33, xi. 8, 9, 26 f.; I Cor. xv. 54f., 2 Cor. vi. 16 fif. 

^ B^ reads δύναμιν. ^ aPois B'^XR*. 

3 On this passage, see above, p. 251 f. 

Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testa^nent. 401 

The following instances will 
carried in cases of conflation. 

Rom. ix. 33 Ihov τίθημι iv 
Σιώτ \ίθον π ρο(Γ κόμματος και 
ττάτραν σκανδάλου• καΐ ό ττισ- 
τζνων eV αυτω ου καταισχυν- 

shew how far reconstruction is 

Isa. viii. 14 ούχ ως Χίθον 
προσκόμματί συναντησ^σθ^ 

oxjbe ως rrerpas πτώματι^. 
xxviii. 16 Ιδού βγω €μβάΧλω els 
τα θίμίΧια "Σ^ιων Χίθον ττοΧυ- 
ΤίΧη, (κΧίκτον ακρογωνίάΐον, 
€ντιμον,..κα\ ό τηστβυων ου μη 

Isa. xxix. 10 π€7ΓΟτικ€ν υμάς 
κύριος πν^ύματι κατανύζ^ως. 
Deut. xxix. 4 'ίαΊ f>^< €δωκ€ν 
Κύρως 6 θ^ος ύμίν καρδίαν 
€ΐδ€ναί καΐ όφθαΧμούς [τοΰ'\ 
βΧέτταν και ώτα άκούίΐν ζ'ως 
της ημέρας ταύτης. 

Isa. Ixiv. 3 ουκ ηκούσαμ^ν 
ουδΐ. οί οφθαΧμοΙ ημών (ίδον 
θίόν πΧην σου, καΐ τα. epya 
σου ά ποιησ€ΐς το2ς ύπομά- 
νουσιν TXeov. Ιχν. 1 7 ουδ' ου 
μη ζπέΧθτ] αυτών eVt καρδίαν. 

Isa. XXV. 8 κατέπΐξν 6 
θάνατος Ισχύσας. Hos. xiii. 
14 τ^οΰ η δίκη σου, θάνατ€ ; πού 
το κίντρον σου, αδη ; 

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. xi. 8 €δωκ€ν αύτοΐς 6 
θΐος πνεύμα κατανύζ^ως, οφθαλ- 
μούς του μη βλβττβιν καΐ ώτα 
τού μη άκού€ΐν, €ως της σήμερον 

Ι Cor. ϋ. 9 ο οφθαλμός ούκ 
€ίδ€ν και ούς ούκ ήκουσ^ν κα\ 
€7γΙ καρδίαν ανθρώπου ούκ 
άνέβη, οσα ητοίμασ^ν ό θ^ος τοΙς 
άγαπώσιν αύτόν^. 

α^αττωσιν] υπομ^νουσιν 

Clem. R. i. 34? 8. 

I Cor. XV. 54 f. κατ€πόθη 6 
θάνατος eh νϊκος\ πού σου, 
θάνατ€, το νίκος ; πού σου, 
θάvaτe, το κέντρον ; 

Rom. xi. 2 if. 
ούκ ο'ίδατ€ iv Ηλβ/α τι λ4γ€ΐ 
η y ραφή... Κύ pie, τους προφη- 
τας σου άπeκτeιvav, τα θυσια- 
στήρια σου κατάσκαψαν, κάγώ 
ύπεΧ€ΐφθην μόνος, καΐ ζητούσιν 
την ψυχην μου. άλλα τι Xeyei 
αιτώ ό χρηματισμός; Kare- 
λιπον έμαυτω ίπτακισχΐλίους 
άνδρας, o'ιτιveς ούκ CKapyj/av 
•γόνυ τη Βάαλ. 
^ Aq. και ets arepebv σκανδάλου. 

3 Regn. xix. 14 ff• 
κα\ eίπev 'Ηλειού.,.τά θυ- 
σιαστήρια σου κaθeΐλav κα\ 
τους προφητας σου άπ4κτ€ΐναν 
...και υπολέλιμμαι e-yo) μονώ- 
τατος καΐ ζητούσι την ψυχην 
μου... και etVei/ Κύριος προς 
αυτόν... κaτaλeίψ■eις iv Ισραήλ 
€πτά χιλιάδας ανδρών, πάντα 
γόνατα α ούκ ώκλασαν γόνυ τώ 

2 Cf. Ι Pet. ϋ. 8 (Hort). 

On this passage see Resch, Agi-apha, p. r54ff. ■* 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 Isa. xxviii. ii f. 

eV τω νόμ(ύ ykypaTrrai οτι dia. φανΧισμυν χαΧίωι/, 8ια 

Έν €Tepoy\a)aaoLS καΐ iv χ€ί- γΧώσσης erepas• οτι Χαλησον- 

Xeatv €Τ€ρων ΧαΧησω τω Χαω σιν τω Χαω τοντω,.,και ουκ 

τούτω, και ούδ οΰτως €Ϊσ- ηθίΧησαν aKoveiv. 
ακονσονταί μον, Xc'-yfi Κύριο?. 

Jerome, quoting these words from St Paul, rightly adds, 
" Quod mihi videtur iuxta Hebraicum de praesenti sumptum 
capitulo." Aquila's rendering is remarkably similar, otl iv iTepo- 
γλώσσοίί κα\ ev xeiXeaLv eTepois ΧαΧησω τω Χαω τούτω. Theodo- 
tion unfortunately is wanting. 

(/) The Ep. to the Hebrews is in great part a catena 
of quotations from the lxx. "The text of the quotations 
agrees in the main with some form of the present text of the 
Lxx.^" A considerable number of the passages are cited 
exactly, or with only slight variation (i. 5, 8 f., 13; ii. 6 ff., 
13; iv. 4, V. 6, vi. 13 f., viii. 5, xi. 5, 18, 21; xii. 5 f., xiii. 6). 
The writer usually follows the lxx. even when they differ 
materially from the Heb. (viii. 8ff.^ x. 5 ff., σώ/χα Sk κατηρτίσω 
μοί, 37 eav νττοστύΧηται, xi. 2 1 ράβδου, χϋ. 5 μαστιγοΐ^). But 
he sometimes deserts both version and original, substituting a 
free paraphrase, or apparently citing from memory (i. 6, ix. 20 
€ΐ/€Τ€ΐλατο, X. 3o^, xii. 19 f., 26). Some of his readings are 
interesting : in i. 7 we have ττνρος φλόγα for ττνρ φλ^-γον*^; in 
i. 12 ως Ιμάτίον seems to be a doublet of ώσ€ΐ ττίριβυλαων. 
Notice also ii. 12 άτταγγελώ for Βίηγησομαι (perhaps after Ps. 
xxi. 31 f.) ; iii. 9 iv δοκι/χασια for εΒοκίμασαν (ελοκίΜΛΟΐΛ for 
ελοκίΜΛΟΛ), and iii. 10 Τ€σσ€ράκοντα ίτη• διο ττροσωγθίσα for 

^ As έν τφ νόμιρ seems to indicate. 

2 Westcott, Hebreivs, p. 476. 

3 Cf. p. 338• 

^ Yet "he nowhere shews any immediate knowledge of the Hebrew 
text" (Westcott, op. cit., p. 479). 

^ Cf. Rom. xii. 19. Apparently a stock quotation, current in this form. 
^ A* has irvpbs φ\4•γα (sic) in Ps. ciii. 4. 

QiLoiations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 403 

τεσσ. try] ττροσωχθ. ', X. 6 €νΒ6κησας for τ^τϊ^σας Β, ε^τ^ττ^σας 
t^ART; xii. 15 ^νοχλ-τ) for ev χολ-β, a corruption supported 
even in the lxx. by B*AF^. 

In the Epistles, as in the Gospels, the text of the lxx. 
which is employed inclines to cod. A rather than to cod. B. 
But its agreement with the A text is not without exception; 
and there are other elements in the problem which must not 
be overlooked. As in the Gospels, again, we notice from time 
to time a preference for Lucianic readings, or for the readings 
of Theodotion. It has been reasonably conjectured that the 
writers of the N.T. used a recension which was current in 
Palestine, possibly also in iVsia Minor, and which afterwards 
supplied materials to Theodotion, and left traces in the 
Antiochian Bible, and in the text represented by cod. A. 
We shall revert to this subject in a later chapter; for the 
present it is enough to notice the direction to which the 
evidence of the N.T. seems to point. 

4. We have dealt so far with direct quotations. But in 
estimating the influence of the lxx. upon the N.T. it must 
not be forgotten that it contains almost innumerable references 
of a less formal character. These are in 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. xiv. 62 = Lc. xxii. 69; Mc. iv. 29, vi. 23, ix. 48, xvi. 
19; Lc. xii. 53, xxi. 22, 24, xxiii. 30, 46); (d) in the canticles 
of Lc. i. — ii. ; (c) in St Stephen's speech, and, though more 
sparsely, in the other speeches of the Acts; (d) in the Epistle 

26 — 2 

404 Quotations from the LXX. in the New Testament. 

of St James ^ and the First Epistle of St Peter; {e) in the 
Epistles of St Paul; where, though not so numerous as the 
citations, the allusions to the lxx. are more widely distributed, 
occurring in i, 2 Thessalonians, Philippians and Colossians, 
as well as in the great dogmatic Epistles; (/) in the Epistle 
to the Hebrews (ii. 16, iii. 5 f, vi. 7 f, 19 f, vii. i if., x. 29 f., 
xi. 12 f., 17 f, 28, xii. 12 — 21, xiii. 11, 20); and especially {g) 
in the Apocalypse, where references to the Greek Old Testa- 
ment abound in every chapter. 

5. This summary by no means represents the extent of 
the influence exerted upon the N.T. by the Alexandrian 
Version. The careful student of the Gospels and of St Paul 
is met at every turn by words and phrases which cannot be 
fully understood without reference to their earlier use in the 
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. F. Junius, Sacrorn77t Pat-allelorum libi'i iii. 
(Heidelberg, 1588); J. Drusius, Parallela Sacra (Franeker, 

^ vSee Mayor, Stja7nes, pp. Ixviii.ff., cxxxix. 

- The facts are collected by Dr Ryle in Smith's D.B.- art. Apocrypha 
(i. pp. 183, 185). 

^ See below, c iv. 

Qnotatio7ts from the LXX. hi the New Testament, 405 

1594); H. Hody, De Bibl. textibus, p. 243 ff. (Oxford, 1705); 
W. Surenhusius, Π^ί^ΟΠ Ί20 sive βίβλος καταλλαγης (Amsterdam, 
17 1 3); Η. Owen, Modes 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 Testa- 
menti 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. 
(Oxford, 1889); W. Staerk, in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift fiir 
Wissenschaftliche Theologie, xxxv, — xl. : A. Clemens, Der Ge- 
brauch 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. 


Quotations from the lxx. in early 
Christian Writings. 

"The quotations from the lxx. in the Greek Fathers are 
an almost unworked field'." So wrote Dr Hatch in 1889, and 
the remark is still true. Indeed, this field can hardly be 
worked with satisfactory results until the editor has gone 
before, or a 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 
in the editions of Lightfoot and Gebhardt-Harnack; the minor 
Greek Apologists have been well edited in Texte imd Unter- 
suchungen^ 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 
with some reserve. In this chapter we shall limit ourselves to 
the more representative Christian writers before Origen. 

I. The earliest of non-canonical Christian writings, the 
letter addressed c. a.d. 96 by the Church of Rome to the 
Church of Corinth, abounds in quotations from the O.T. ; and 
more than half of these are given substantially in the words of 
the LXX. with or without variants. 

^ Biblical Essays, p. 133. 

2 Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahr- 
Ininderte (Hinrichs, Leipzig). The volumes already published contain 
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. 
I ff.), xii. I ff. (x. 3), xiii. 14 ff. (x. 4 f.), xv. 5 (x. 6), xviii. 27 (xvii. 
2) ; Exod. ii. 14 (iv. 9) ; Deut. xxxii. 8 f. (xxix. 2) ; Ps. ii. 7 f. 
(xxxvi. 4), xi. 5 f . (xv. 5), xvii. 26 f. (xlvi. 2), xviii. 2 ff. (xxvii. 7), 
xxi. 7ff, (xvi. 15 f.), xxiii. i (Uv. 3), xxx. 19 (xv. 5), xxxi. i f. (I. 6), 
10 (xxii. 8), xxxiii. 12 — 20 (xxii. i ff.), xxxvi. 35 f. (xiv. 5), xlix. 16 ff. 
(xxxv. 7 ff.), 1. 3 ff. (xviii. 2 ff.), Ixi. 5 (xv. 3), Ixxvii. 36 (xv. 4), 
Ixxxviii. 21 (xviii. i), ciii. 4 (xxxvi. 3), cix. i (xxxvi. 5), cxvii. 18 
(Ivi. 3), 19 f, (xlviii. 2), cxxxviii. 7 f. (xxviii. 3), cxl. 5 (Ivi. 5) ; Prov. 
i. 23 ff. (Ivii. 3ff.), ii. 21 f. (xiv. 4), iii. 12 (Ivi. 3f.), 34 (xxx. 2), xx. 
21 (xxi, 2); Job iv. 16 ff. (xxxix. 3 ff.), v. i7ff. (Ivi. 6 ff.), xi. 2 f . 
(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). 

The variants are often of much interest, as shewing 
affinities to certain types of lxx. text. The following are 
specially worthy of notice : Ps. xxi. 7 ^ξονθζνημα, t^AR; xxxi. 
I f. ov, i<*BA (ag. ^i''•* ω); xxxiii. 14 χ^ίλη τον, i^'^-^AR: 16 om. 
OTL, i^^-^AR; xxxvi. 36 έζζζητησα (Η. P. 99, 183); xlix. 21 
ανομζ, i^*' ; 22 άρττ. ως λίων, R; 1. 17 το στόμα... τα χ^ίλη; 
Ixxxviii. 21 eXeci, Β*; Prov. ii. 21 χρηστοί έσονται οίκητορες γης, 
άκακοι 8k νττοΧίίφθησονται Ιττ αντης, cf. ί^'^'^'^Α — a doublet want- 
ing in Β, whose reading "appears to shew the hand of an 
Alexandrian reviser" (Toy, cf. Lagarde); iii. 12 τταιδενει, ί^Α; 
XX. 21 (27) Χνχνος, a reading found in A as a doublet (φώς... 
η λύχνος); Job iv. 21 Ιτίλίντησαν (for Ι^ηράνθησαν), A; v. 17 ff. 
is without the additions of the A text, and nearly as in B; 
Isa. i. 17 χήρο., B"^, ag. Β^'^ίίΑ, Set-re και Ζιελε-γχθ. (^ιίχλ^χθ. 
Qciem^^ i^AQ; liii. 5 αμαρτίας... ανομίας tr., t^ AQ ; 6 νπίρ των 
αμαρτιών ημών; 8 ηκ€ΐ for ηχθη, Q"'^, 62, 90 al., Syrohex.™^; 

9 ζνρίθη δόλος, i^'^^'AQ (see Lightfoot's note) ; της νληγης, 
Β (A, άτΓΟ τ. ττλ.); 1χ. ij άρχοντας] εττισκόττους j £7Γΐσκ07Γονς] δια- 
κόνους; Ezech. xxxiii. 11 αμαρτωλού, Α (Β, άσεβους); Dan. vii. 

10 ελειτονργονν, Th. (lXX. €^ep(X7rei;ov)\ 

^ On Clement's quotations from the Psalms and Isaiah, see Hatch, 
£ssays,pp. 175 — 9. 

408 Qiiotatio7is in early Christian Writings. 

{a) A few readings imply correction from the Hebrew, or 
rather perhaps a Greek text with affinities to the translations 
of the second century; e.g. Ps. cxxxviii. 8 ka.v καταστρώσω^ 
Ά. 2. eai' στρώσω (lxx. eav καταβώ); Isa. Ixvi. 2 ττραον, Ά. (lxX. 
ταπζΐνόν). Others seem to be due to the imperfect memory 
of the writer, who has not verified his quotations by referring 
to his papyrus, e.g. Ps. Ixxxviii. 21 iv eXeet αΐωνίω: Mai. iii. i 
άγιος' for 6 αγγβλος. 

(3) A large proportion of Clement's quotations are com- 
posite"; sixteen passages may be thus described. Some of 
these consist of citations accurately given from the lxx. and 
strung together, with or without a formula cita7idi (e.g. Ivi. 
3 — i4 = Ps. cxvii. i8 + Prov. iii. 12 + Ps. cxl. 5 (c^77atV)+Job 
V. 17 — 26 (και -πόΧιν Aeyct)). In Other cases one of the cita- 
tions is correctly given, and another quoted loosely (e.g. xiv. 
4 = Prov. ii. 21 f. (A) -h Ps. xxxvi. 38, confused with 21^). But 
more commonly in Clement's conflate quotations, texts are 
fused together without regard to verbal accuracy; cf. e.g. xxvi. 
20 λέγει γαρ ττου Και ε^αι/ασττ^σεις yue και ε^ο/χολογτ^σο/χαι σοι• 
και, €κοίμ'ηθη και νττνωσα- ζζηγέρθψ', οτι συ μ€τ e /χοΰ ei, where 
fragments of Pss. xxvii. 7, iii. 5, xxii. 4 are blended into an 
arabesque. Except in this class of quotations Clement is not 
often guilty of citing loosely; see however xx. 7 (Job xxxviii. 
11), xxviii. 3 (Ps. cxxxviii. 7), xxxii. 3 (Gen. xv. 5), xlii. 5 
(Isa. Ix. 17). 

(ή Special interest attaches to Clement's quotations of 
passages which are also quoted in the N.T. The following 
are the most instructive instances: (i) Gen. xii. 1=1 Acts vii. 
3 = Clem. X. 3 : Clem, reads απ^λθί for e^cA^e (lxx. and Acts), 
but rejects και hevpo with KD against Acts and cod. E. 

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 error. 

2 On 'composite' quotations from the LXX. see Hatch, op. cit. 
p. 203 ff. 

Quotations ΐ7ΐ early Christian Writings. 409 

(2) Exod. ii. 14 = Acts vii. 27 = Clem. iv. 11: Clem, reads 
κρίτην for άρχοντα — "perhaps from confusion with Lc. xii. 14" 
(Lightfoot). (3) Jer. ix. 23 f. (i Regn. ii. 10) =1 Cor. i. 31, 
(2 Cor. X. 17) = Clem. xiii. i; here the relation of Clement to 
the Biblical texts is best shewn by juxtaposition: 

Jer. /.c. 

μη κανχάσθω 6 σο- 
φοί iv rf] σοφία αύτον, 
και μη κανχάσθω 6 
Ισχυρός ev TJj Ισχύι 
αυτοί; και μη καυχάσθω 
6 πΧονσιος iv τώ ττΧου- 
τω αυτοί)• αλλ' η iv 
τούτω κανχάσθω ό καυ- 
χώμίνος, συνίβιν καΐ 
γινώσκίΐν οτι iyoa βίμι 
κύριος ό ποιων eXeos 
και κρίμα και 8ικαι- 
οσΰνην eVi της yrjs. 

Ι Regn. I.e.* 
μη κανχάσθω ό φρό- 
νιμος iv τη φρονήσει 
αυτοί, καΐ μη κανχά- 
σθω ό 8ννατ6ς iv τη 
δννάμίΐ αντοί, και μη 
καυχάσθω ό πΧονσιος 
€v τώ πΧουτω αυτοί' 
αλλ η iv τοντω καν- 
χάσθω ό κανχώμ^νος, 
σννίζΐν και γινώσκ^ιν 
τον κνριον, και ποκίν 
κρίμα καΐ δικαιοσίινην 
iv μίσω της -γης. 

* Cf. ρ. 245. 

Clem. I.e. 
μη κανχάσθω 6 σο- 
φός iv ττ) σοφία αυτοί, 
μη8€ ό Ισχνρος iv τη 
ίσχνι αντοί, μηδί ό 
πΧουσιος iv τω πΧον- 
τω αντοί• αλλ' η fo 
κανχώμίνος iv Κνρίω 
κavχάσθωf, τοί iκζη- 
Τ€Ϊν αυτόν κα\ ποκιν 
κρίμα και δικαιοσννην. 

+ Ι Cor. i. 3^5 2 Cor. 
χ. 1 7 : see Lightfoot's 
note ad loc. 

(4) Ps. xxi. 9 = Matt, xxvii. 43 = Clem. xvi. 15; Clem, 
agrees with lxx., Mt. substitutes ττίττοώ^ν for ηλτησ€ν, τον 
θίόν for Κύριοι/, and d for on. (5) Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff. = i Pet. 
iii. loff. = Clem. xxii. i if.; Clem, agrees with lxx. against 
St Peter, who changes the construction (0 θίλων...ιτανσάτΐύ 
κτλ.). (6) Ps. cix. I = Mt. xxii. 44 (Mc, Lc), Acts ii. 34 f , 
Heb. i. 13 = Clem, xxxvi. 5: Clem, reads υποττόΒων with Lc, 
Acts, Hebr., against νττοκάτω Mt., Mc. (BD). (7) Prov. iii. 
12 = Heb. xii. 6= Clem. Ivi. 4: see above, p. 402. (8) Prov. 
iii. 34 = Jas. iv. 6, i Pet. v. 5= Clem. xxx. 2: ©eo? (0 Θ. Jas., 
Pet.) against Κύριο? lxx.; M.T. ίί-ΊΠ, but with reference to 
nini in V. ^^. (9) Isa. xxix. 13^ = Mt. xv. 8, Mc. vii. 6 = Clem. 
XV. I : again the passages must be printed in full: 

^ See Hatch, op. cit., p. 177 f. 

4IO Quotations in early CJiristian Writings. 

Isa. I.e. I Mt., Mc. Clem. I.e. 

(γγίζίΐ μοι ή Xaos ή \a6s ούτος [ούτος Ούτος ό Χάος τοΊς 

ούτος e'v τω στόματι ό \αος Mc.) τοΙς χ€ί- χίίλίσίν μ€ τιμά, ή be 

αυτόν, καϊ iv τοΙς χ(ί- Xecriv μ€ τιμά, η Se καρδία αυτών πόρρω 

Χίσιν αυτών τιμώσίν καρδία αυτών πόρρω ι απ^στιν άττ' ipox). 

μ€, η δε καρδία αυτών απέχει απ' (μου. \ ^^^^ χά\(σιν] τώ στο- 

πόρρω άπ€χ€ΐ άπ (μου. άττε'χβί] Mc. άφέστη• ' μάτι C^•^'". 

om iv τω στόμ. αύτου κεν D άττ^στιν L 2?^ άττεστιν] άττέχβι C'^^^"^ 
καϊ έν t<AQ. 

Through constant citation, the context has taken more than 
one type ; Clement's is close to that of the EvangeHsts, 
but has not been borrowed from them in their present form, 
as απ^στιν shews. (lo) Isa. liii. i — i2=Clem. xvi. 3 — 14; 
cf. Jo. xii. 38 (Rom. x. 16), Mt. viii. 17, Acts viii. 32 f., i Pet. 
ii. 22, Mc. XV. 28. 

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 ; {b) that as between the texts of the lxx. 
represented by Β and A, while often supporting A, it is less 
constantly opposed to Β than is the New Testament; and 
(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 conclu- 
sions harmonise on the whole with what we know of the 
circumstances under which Clement wrote. The early Roman 
Church was largely composed of Greek-speaking Jews, the 
freedmen of Roman families; and Clement himself, as Light- 
foot has suggested \ 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 
that the text of Clement's copies of Old Testament books, 

1 Clement of Rome, p. 61. Τ>χ '^Q?,\\^ {Z. f. die NTUche Wissenschafiy 
i. 2) points out the Semitic style which reveals itself in Clement, e.g. v. 6 
€ΤΓτάκι$, xii. 5 Ύΐνώσκονσα ^ινώσκω. 

Quotatio7is in early Christian Writings. 41 1 

while derived from Palestinian archetypes, should contain 
readings brought to the capital by Jewish- Greek visitors from 
other lands. 

2. Whatever the history of the so-called Second Epistle of 
Clement to the Corinthians, whether it is of Roman or of 
Corinthian origin, like the genuine Epistle it makes extensive 
use of the Greek Old Testament. The following quotations 
occur: Gen. i. 27 (xiv. 2); Mai. iv. i (xvi. 3); Isa. xxix. 
13 (iii. 5), xxxiv. 4 (xvi. 3), lii. 5 (xiii. 2), liv. i (ii. i), 
Iviii. 9 (xv. 3), Ixvi. 18 (xvii. 4 f,), 24 (vii. 6, xvii. 24); Jer. 
vii. II (xiv. i), Ezech. xiv. 14, 18, 20 (vi. 8). The last of 
these passages is cited very freely or rather summarised, 
although introduced by the words Xcyet r\ γραφτί} iv τω *Εζζκιηλ. 
The writer follows Clement in the form of several of his 
quotations (iii. 5 = Clem, i Cor. xv. 2, xiv. 2 = Clem, i Cor. 
xxxiii. 5; in xiii. 2 he quotes Isa. lii. 5 as it is quoted by 
Polycarp (see beloAv)). 

3. Another second century document, indisputably Roman, 
the Shepherd of Hermas, contains no quotation from the lxx. 
But Ps. ciii. 15 LXX. has supplied the writer with a phrase in 
Maud. xii. 3. 4, and Vis. iv. 2. 4 supplies evidence that he 
knew and read a version of Daniel which was akin to Theodo- 
tion's. The passage runs : 6 κυρίου άττίσΎζίλ^ν τον άγγελοι/ 
αντον τον εττί, των θηρίων οι/τα, ού το ονομά Ιστιν Φ^εγρι'^, και 
Ινζ,φρα^ίν το στόμα αντον Ίνα μ.ή σε λνμάντ). Compare Dan. vi. 
2 2 (23) Th., 6 θΐός μον άττεστειλεν τον αγγελον αντον καΐ ενε- 
φραέίν τα στόματα των λεόντων (lxX. σεσωκε /χε ό ^εός άττό των 
λεόντοιν), καί ονκ ΙΚνμ-ηναντό /χε^. 

4- The Old Testament is quoted in the Epistle of 
Barnabas even more profusely than in the Epistle of Clement, 

^ The acute conjecture of Dr J• Rendel Harris, who saw that the name, 
which appears in the MSS. as Qeypi or the hke, must be an attempt to 
reproduce the verb "DID (Dan. /. c). 

2 See above, p. 47, n. 4. 

412 Quotations in early Christian Writifigs. 

but with less precision. The writer is fairly exact in well- 
known contexts belonging to the Psalter or the Book of 
Isaiah S but elsewhere he appears to trust to memory, and not 
to concern himself greatly about the words of his author. 
Even when preceded by a forinida citatidi his citations often 
wander far from the lxx., although they are clearly based upon 
it; e.g. Exod. xxxiii. i — 3 is quoted in Barn. vi. 8 after this 
manner : ri Xcyct 6 άλλος ττροφητης Μωυστ^ς αύτοΓ? ; Ίδον τάδε 
XiyCL Κύριος ό θζός Εισελ^ατε et? την γην την άγαθην, ην ωμοσ^ν 
Κΰ/3109 τω Άβρααμ και Ισαάκ: και ^Ιακωβ, και κατακληρονομησατ€ 
αντην, -γην ρίόνσαν γάλα και /χέλι. Similar liberties are taken 
even when the writer mentions the book which he is quoting : 
X. 2 Μωυσΐ79... λέγει αυτοΓς Iv τω Δευτερονο/χιω Καί, ^ιαθησομαι 
προς τον λαοί/ τοντον τα δικαιώ/χατά μον — a sentence which, 
though it has all the notes of a strict quotation, proves to 
be a mere summary of Deut. iv. i — 23. 

The following analysis of the quotations in Barnabas may be 
found useful, (a) Exact or nearly exact : Gen. i. 28 (Barn. vi. 
12), Exod. XX. 14 (xix. 4), Deut. x. 16 (ix. 5), Ps. i. i, 3—6 (x. i, 
xi. 6f), xvii. 45 (ix. i), xxi. 17, 19 (vi. 6), cix. i (xii. 10), cxvii. 12, 
22 (vi. 4, 6), Prov. i. 17 (v. 4), Isa. i. 2, 10 ff. (ii. 5, ix. 3, xv. 8), 
iii. 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. 
(xiv. 8), liii. 5, 7 (v. 2), Ixi. i f. (xiv. 9), Ixvi. i f. (xvi. 2). {d) Partly 
exact, partly free: Gen. xxv. 21 ff. (xiii. 2), xlviii. 9 — 11, 14 ff. 
(xiii. 4 f.), Isa. xxviii. 16 (vi, 2), Iviii. 4 ff. (iii. i f.), Jer. ii. 12 f. (xi. 
2). (c) Free: Gen. i. 26 (vi, 12), 28 (vi. 18), Lev. xxiii. 29 (vii. 3), 
Deut. ix. 12 (iv. 8), x. 16 (ix. 5), Ps. xxi. 21, cxviii. 120, xxi. 17 
(v. 13), Zech. xiii. 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 + 
Zech. vii. 10, viii. 17 (ii. 7 f,). {e) Free summary: Lev. xi., Deut. 
xiv. (x. i), Deut. iv. 10 ff. (x. 2), Ezech. xlvii. (xi. 10). (_/") Very 
loose citation: Gen. ii. 2 (xv. 3), xvii. 5 (xiii. 6), Exod. xvii. 14 
(xii. 9), xxiv. i8-|-xxxi. 18 (xiv. 2), xxxiii. i ff. (vi. 8), Lev. xvi. 7 ft'. 

^ See Hatch, Essays, p. 180 ft. 

Quotations in early Christian Writings. 413 

(vii. 6), Deut xxvii. 15 (xii, 6), Ps. xxxiii. 13 (ix. 2), Sir. iv. 31 
(xix. 9), Isa. xlix. 17 (xvi. 3), Dan, vii. 7 f., 24 (iv. 4), ix. 24 
(xvi. 6). 

As the Epistle of Barnabas is not improbably a relic of 
the earliest Alexandrian Christianity, it is important to 
interrogate its witness to the text of the lxx. This can 
best be done, as we have seen, by examining its quotations 
from the Psalms and Isaiah. 

Ps. i. I eVi καθβδραν, BS (ag. e. καθέδρα AR), 5 01 ασβββίί, 
αμαρτωλοί, Β (ag. ασ6/3βίί, οί άμ. Α). xV'ii. 45 νττηκονσαν, Ν* | μον, 
Ν=•^ RU (ag. μοι 1° ΒΝ*Α). xxi. 17 π^ρύσχ^ν, Η. -Ρ. 8ι, 2θ6. cix. ι 
Κύριος, R | νττοπό^ίον (ag. υποκάτω, Mc. χϋ. 36, BD). Isa. iii. 9 
ΟΤΙ, ΑΓ; ν. 21 €αυτών, AQ ; xxviii. 16 ίμβαλώ, ΝΑΟ; χΐϋ. 7 '«α'ι 
i^ayayuv \ δβδβμίΐ'ουί] π^π^^ημένονς (as Justin, Dial. 26, 65, 122). 
xlix. 6 τίθ^ικα, NAQ* (ag. όβδωκα BQ™^), 7 \ντρωσάμ€νος (for ρυσά- 
/Ltfz/os) ; liii. 5 ανομίας, αμαρτίας, ΝΑΟ, y τον κ^ίραντος αντον, Ν*^•^ 
AQ ; Iviii. 5 λ^ yf t Kuptos-, Ο, 6 Ibov αντη η νηστεία ην ; Ixi. Ι τα- 
rreLvoh, Ν*; Ixvi. Ι η 8e -γη, NAQ | 7/ (for καΐ 2°), ΝΑ. 

The leaning in Isaiah towards the text of Q, especially 
when found in company with A or ^^A, is noteworthy, and it 
is worth mentioning that in Zech. xiii. 7, where the text 
of Barnabas does not seem to have been influenced by the 
Gospels, it agrees with A in adding τη<; ιτοψνης. Occasionally 
the text used by Barnabas seems to have been revised from 
the Heb. ; e.g. in Jer. ii. 12 Ιξέστη, Ιφριξίν become ίκστηθι, 
φριξάτω in accordance with M.T. ; in Gen. ii. 2 Barnabas has 
with M.T. iu rrj ήμίρα ttj ίβΒόμΎ] where the LXX. read e. r. η. 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, in 
the rarity of their appeals to the Old Testament, {a) The 
genuine Epistles of Ignatius quote it only twice with 2. formula 
cita?idi (Prov. iii. 34 = Eph. v. 3, xviii. i7 = Magn. xii. i) ; 

^ For further details see Hatch, op. cit. p. 180 ff. 

414 Quotations in early CJiristian Writings. 

two or three allusions (Ps. xxxii. 9 = Eph. xv. i, Isa. v. 26 = 
Smyrn. i. 2, lii. 5 = Trail, viii. 2) complete the instances of a 
direct use of the lxx. by this writer. V/hen he quotes or 
alludes, he is fairly close to the lxx., unless we may except 

the last instance, where δι' ύ/χα? δια παντός τό ονομά μον 
βλασφημείται iv τοΙς eOveatv appears to be changed into οΰαι 
Sl ov cVi ματαωτητί τό ονομά μον Ιττί τίνων βλασφημείται — a 
form which occurs also in Pseudo-Clement (2 Cor. xiii. 2) and 
Polycarp (Phil. x. 3) \ ■ (ί?) The Bishop of Smyrna is no less 
sparing in his references to the O. T. than the Bishop of 
Antioch. He quotes only Isa. lii. 5^ (x. 3), Tob. iv. io = xii. 9 
(x. 2), Ps. iv. 5 (xii. i) — the last-named passage perhaps indi- 
rectly, from Eph. iv. 26 — and Prov. iii. 4 (vi. i). In Phil. vi. i 
there is an allusion to Ezech. xxxiv. 4, from which it may be 
gathered that Polycarp read there ίτηστρίφατζ, with cod. A. 

6. Irenaeus may be taken next, for though he belonged 
to the next generation and his literary activity was connected 
with the West, his copies of the Old Testament writings were 
doubtless of Asiatic provenajice. His method of quotation 
however differs widely from that of the earlier writers. He 
is a theologian and a controversialist, and he quotes the 
Scriptures to refute an antagonist or to support the traditional 
faith. Accordingly his citations are, with few exceptions, 
either exact extracts, or but slightly abridged and adapted, 
and he is almost wholly free from the habit of loose para- 
phrase. How copiously he cites, especially in Adv. haereses 
iii. iv., will appear from the following list-. 

Gen. i. 3 (iv. 32. i), 5 (v. 23. 2), 26 (iii. 23. 2, iv. 20. i, v. i. 3); 
ii. I f. (v. 28. 3), 5 (iii. 21. 10), 7 (ii. 34. 4, iv. 20. i, v. 7. i, v. 15. 
2), 8 (iv. 5. i), 16 f. (v. 23. I), 23 (iii. 22. 4); iii. i ff. (v. 23. i), 8 
(v. 17. i), 9 (v. 15. 4), 13 (iii. 23. 5), 14 (iii. 23. 3), 15 (iv. 40. 3, 
v. 21. I), 19 (v. 16. i); iv. 7 (iv. 18. 3), 9 (iii. 23. 4), 10 (v. 14. i); 

^ On this quotation, however, see Nestle in Exp. Ti?nes, ix., p. 14 f. 
2 The chapters and sections are those of Stieren. 

Qiwtatio7is in emdy Ch^'istiaii Writings. 415 

ix. 5f. (v. 14. i); xiii. 14 f., 27 (v. 32. 2); xiv. 22 (iv. 5. 5); xv. 18 
(v. 32. 2); xvii. 9ίτΓ. (iv. 16. i); xix. 34 (iii. 6. i), 31 ff. (iv. 31. i); 
xxvii. 27 ff. (v. 33. 3); xlix. 10 ff. (iv. 10. 2), i8 (iii. 10. 3). Exod. 
i. 13 f. (iv. 30. 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). 
Num. xvi. 15 (iv. 26. 4); xviii. 20 (iv. 8. 3); xxiv. 17 (iii. 9. 2). 
Deut. iv. 14 (iv. 16. 5), 19 (iii. 6. 5); v. 2 f. (iv. 16. 2), 8 (iii. 6. 5), 

22 (iv. 15. I, 4); vi. 4ff. (iv. 2. 2, V. 22. i); viii. 3 (iv. 16. 3); x. 
12 (iv. 16. 4), 16 (iv. 16. i); xvi. 5 f . (iv. 10. i), 16 (iv. 18. i); 
xviii. I (iv. 8. 3); xxviii. 66 (iv. 10. 2, v. 18. 3); xxx. 19 f. (iv. 16. 
4); xxxii. I (iv. 2. i), 4 (iii. 18. 7), 6 (iv. 10. 2; 31. 2), 8f. (iii. 12. 
9); xxxiii. 9 (iv. 8. 3). • i Regn. xii. 2f. (iv. 26. 4); xv. 22 (iv. 17. 
i). 2 Regn. xi. 27, xii. i ff. (iv. 27. i). 3 Regn. viii. 27 (iv. 27. i); 
xi. iff. (iv. 27. i); xviii. 21, 24, 36 (iii. 6. 3); xix. iif. (iv. 20. 10). 
Ps. ii. 8 (iv. 21. 3); iii. 6 (iv. 31. i); vii. 11 (iii. 10. 4); viii. 3 (i. 
14. 8); xiii. 3 (i. 19. i); xviii. 2 (i. 14. 8), 7 (iv. 2>2>' I3); xx• 5 (ϋ• 
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• 3X 23 (v. 7. 2); xlix. I (iii. 6. i), 3 f. (v. 18. 3), 9ff. (iv. 17. 1); 
1. 14 (iii. 17. 2), 18 ff. (iv. 17. i); Ivii. 4 f. (iii. 10. i, iv. 41. 3); 
Ixviii. 27 (iii. 22. 2); Ixxv. 2 (iii. 9. 2), 3 (iv. 33. 11); Ixxvii. 5 ff. 
(iii. 16. 3); Ixxix. i (iii. 11. 8); Ixxxi. i, 6 f. (iii. 6. i, iii. 19. i); 
Ixxxiv. 12 (iii. 5. i); Ixxxv. 13 (v. 31. i); xc. 13 (iii. 23. 7); xciv. 
4ff. (iii. 10. 4); xcv. I (iv. 9. i), 5 (iii. 6. 3); xcvii. 2 (iii. 10. 3); 
xcviii. I (iv. 33. 13); ci. 26 ff. (iv. 3. i) ; ciii. 30 (v. 33. i); cix. i 
(ii. 28. 7, iii. 6. i); ex. 10 (iii. 23. 5); cxiii. 11 (iii. 8. 3); cxxxi. 
lof. (iii. 9. 2); cxlv. 6 (i. 10. i); cxlviii. 5 f. (ii. 34. 2, iv. 41. i). 
Prov. 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. 
24. i). Sap. vi. 19 (iv. 38. 3). Hos. iv. i (1. 19. i); xii. 10 (iii. 
12, 13, iv. 20. 6). Amos i. 2 (iii. 20. 4); viii. 9f. (iv. 33. 12). Mic. 
vii. 19 (iii. 20. 4). Joel iii. 16 (iv. 33. 11). Jon. i. 9, ii. 3, iii. 8 f. 
(iii. 20. I). Hab. iii. 2 (iii. 16. 7), 3ff. (iii. 20. 4, iv. 33. 11). Zech. 
vii. gff. (iv. 17. 3, iv. 36. 2); viii. i6f. (iv. 17. 3), 17 (iv. 36. 2); xii. 
10 (iv. 33. 11). Mai. i. 10 f. (iv. 17. 5), ii. 10 (iv. 20. 2); iv. i (iv. 
4. 3). Isa. i. 2 (iv. 2. I, iv. 41. 2), 3 (i. 19. i), 8 f. (iv. 4. 2, iv. ^ili- 
13), II (iv. 17. i), 16 (iv. 17. I, iv. 36. 2, iv. 41. 3), 22 (iv. 12. i), 

23 (iv. 2. 6); ii. 3 f . (iv. 34. 4), 17 (iv. ^y 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. 
33. II, V. 15. I, V. 34. i); xxvii. 6 (iv. 4. i); xxviii. 16 (iii. 21. 7); 

41 6 Quotations in early Christian Writings. 

xxix. 13 (iv. 12. 4); XXX. I (iv. 18. 3), 25 f. (v. 34. 2); xxxi. 9 (v. 

34. 4) ; xxxii. I (v. 34. 4) : xxxiii. 20 (iii. 20. 4) ; xxxv. 3 f. (iii. 20. 
3, iv. ^2>• II); xl• 15» 17 (v. 29. i); xli. 4 (iv. 5. i); xlii. 5 (iv. 2. i, 
V. 12. 2), lofif. (iv. 9. i); xliii. 5 fif. (iv. 14. i), 10 (iii. 6. 2, iv. 5. i), 
18 (iv. 33. 14), 23 (iv. 17. 3), xlv. 7 (iv. 40. i); xlvi. 9 (i. 5. 4), 
xlviii. 22 (i. 16. 3); xlix. 16 (v. 35. 2); li. 6 (iv. 3. i), liii. 4 (iv. 33. 
II), 8 (ii. 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) ; Ix. 17 ; Ixi. i ff. (iii. 9. 3) ; Ixiii. 9 
(iii. 20. 4); Ixv. I (iii. 6. i), I7ff. (iv. 26. 4, v. 35. 2, 34. 4), 21 (v. 

35. I), 22 (v. 15. I), 25 (v. 33. 4), Ixvi. I (iv. 2. 5), 2 (iv. 17. 3), 3 
(iv. 18. 3), 22 (v. 36. i). Jer. i. 5 (v. 15. 3); ii. 29 (iv. 37. 7); iv. 
22 (iv. 2. I); V. 8 (iv. 41. 3, v. 7. 2); vi. 17 ff. (iv. 36. 2), 20 (iv. 17. 
2); vii. 2f. (iv. 17. 2), 3 (iv. 36. 2), 21 (iv. 17. 3), 25 (iv. 36. 5), 
29 f. (iv. 36. 2); viii. 16 (v. 30. 2); ix. 2 (iv. 25. 3), 24 f. (iv. 17. 3); 
x. II (iii. 6. 3); xi. 15 (iv. 17. 3); xiv. 9 (iv. 33. 12), xvii. 9 (iii. 18. 
3, iv. 33. 11); xxii. 17 (iv. 18. 3, iii. 21. 9); xxiii. 7 f. (v. 34. i), 20 
(iv. 26. i), 23 (iv. 19. 2), 29 (v. 17. 4); xxxi. 10 fif. (v. 34. 3), 26 (iv. 
31. i); xxxv. 15 (iv. 36. 5); xxxvi. 30 f. (iii. 21. 9); xxxviii. 11 (iii. 
8. 21). Lam. iv. 20 (iii. 20. 3). Bar. iv. 36 — v. fin. (v. 35. i). 
Ezech. ii. i (iv. 20. 10); xx. 12 (iv. 16. i), 23 f. (iv. 15. i), xxviii. 
25 f. (v. 34. i); xxxvi. 26 (iv. 23. 4); xxxvii. i fif. (v. 15. i), 12 (v. 
34. i). Dan. ii. 23 f., 41 ff. (v. 26. i); iii. 24 fif. (v. 5. 2) ; vii. 8 (v. 
25• 33X 10 (ii• 7• 4), 14 (iv. 20. 11), 2ofif. (v. 25. 3), 27 (v. 34. 2); 
viii. II f., 23 ff. (v. 25. 4) ; ix. 7 (v. 25. 4); xii. 3 f., 7 (iv. 26. i), 9 f. 
(i. 19. 2), xii. 13 (v. 34. 2). Sus. 52 f., 56 (iv. 26. 3). Bel 3f., 24 
(iv. 5. 2). 

The Latin version, in which the greater part of these 
quotations are clothed, appears to be exact where it can be 
tested (cf. e.g. Isa. xlvi. 9 (i. 5. 4), xlviii. 22 (i. 16. 3), Dan. 
xii. 9 (i. 19. 2)). Assuming that it is so throughout, it is 
obvious that in Irenaeus we have an important witness to the 
Lxx. text of the second century. The following variants taken 
from Books iii., iv., will shew the general tendencies of his 

Gen. xlix. 10 cui repositiun est (M""^ ω αττοκ^ιται^)\ 1 8 in 
salute?)! tuam siistiiiui te, Domine (cf. F'""'''' ""^ ap. Field). Exod. 
XXV. i\o fades oimiia (F ποιησας ττάντα, Luc.) secimduin typum 
eorupi quae vidisti. Num. xxiv. 17 siirget dux in Israel (cf Heb. 
ϋΠΚ^, Σ. σκητΓτρον ; LXX. άνθρωπος e^ Ί.). Deut. V. 22 (19) SCrip- 
sit ea in duabus tabulis lapideis {-\-λιθίνας B'^^A Luc); xxxii. 6 

1 Cf. Justin, Dial. 120. 

Quotations in early Christian Writings. 417 

et fecit te et creavit te ( + και €κτισ€ν σβ AF, +καΙ enXaaev ae 
Luc.)• I Regn. xv. 22 aicditiis bonus super sacrificium {άγαθη 
Luc). Ps. xxxix. 7 mires autein perfecisti mihi (possibly a cor- 
rection from the Gallican Psalter, but a few cursives read after 
the Heb. ί>τια or 3>τα)\ xliv. \η facti sunt tibi filii {^^ KKY eyevr]- 
θησαν, ag. B*i< iyevv.) ; xlix. lo bestiae terrae {aypov N'^-^A, δρνμον 
BN*), 15 171 die tribidationis tuae (^λίλ/^βώ? σον N'^-^AR) ; ci. 27 
inutabis eos (aWc'i^ets N* eXi'lety B(i<'--^)AR(T)) ; cix. i siippeda- 
ncwn pedum tuorum (ύττοττόδιοτ, not ύποκάτω); cxiii. 11 om. eV 
τοις ουρανοίς (with N'^-^AT). Mic. vii. 19 ipse (αυτός AQ)...proi- 
ciet {άπορρί-^€ΐ A(0), άπορίφησονται Β), om. πάσας. Hab. iii. 3 
pedes eitis {p\ πόδβ? AQ, κατά ττόδα? Β). Isa. i. 17 iustificate 
viduavi {χηραν Β^-^ΧΑΓ ag. χήρα B*0*) ; xi. 4 argiiet gloriosos 
terrae {τονς €ν8όξονς ϋΟ'^'^'', ag. τ. ταπεινούς BAQ*) ; xxv^ 9 οιώ. 
κα\ σώσΐΐ ήμας...υπξμζίναμ€ν αντω (with i<AO*, a hexaplaric addi- 
tion, cf. Field, ad toe.); xxix. 13 popitliis hie labiis me honorat 
(om. with XAO eV τω στίψατι αντον καΐ iv); xliii. 23 7ion servisti 
mihi in sacrificiis^=ov\hV\ €δού\€νσάς μοι iv ταΐς θνσίαις [σου] Ν•^* 
(ΑΓ), fecisti in (cf. A* enoiHC<\eeN) ; Ixv. i qzii 7ne 7io?i quae7'ic7it 
{ζητονσιν NAQ, ag. ζπ^ρωτωσιν Β). Jer. xliii. 31 i7ife7'a77i super 
eos (αυτούς XAO*, ag. aiWov BQ^°''''), locutus SU771 super eos (eV 
αυτούς AQ, προς αυτ. BX). Bar. v. 2 laetitiae (LXX. δικαιοσύνης). 

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 additions. Two exceptions are 
worth noting: Dan. vii. 10 is quoted by Irenaeus as it is by 
Clement of Rome, in a form which agrees with neither lxx. 
nor Th. ; Dan. xii. 9 is cited in the form Άπότρζχΐ, Δανιτ/λ- 
ovTOL yap oi λόγοι kμ^Γξ.φpayμξ.voi etcrtv, €ω9 ol avvteVre? σννιωσι 
καΐ ol λζνκοί λ^νκανθώσί, where αττότρΐχζ is a LXX. reading, whilst 
iμ^τ■€φpayμζvoL is from Th. and the rest of the sentence 
seems to be suggested by his version (cf. €ω<;...€κλ€νκανθωσίν, 
Th.). This quotation however is professedly taken from a 
Valentinian source, which may account for its freedom. 

7. Like Irenaeus, Justin quotes profusely, and his aim as 

an apologist and a controversialist compels him to cite his 

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 δ Quotations in early Christian Writijigs. 

than those of Irenaeus, since his subject leads him, especially 
in the Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, to quote long extracts 
without break or interpolated matter; more than once an 
entire Psalm, or a passage exceeding in length one of our 
modern chapters, is copied into his pages, presumably as it 
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— 

25 {D. 56), 27 f. {D. 56) ; xxvi. 4 {D. 120); xxviii. 10 — 19 {D. 58, 
120); xxxi. 10 — 13 {D. 58); xxxii. 22 — 30 (Z^• 58, 126); xxxv. 6 — 
10 {D. 58); xlix. 8 — 12 {A. 32, 54; D. 52, 120). Exod. ii. 23 {D. 
59); iii, 2—4 {D. 60), 3ff. {A. 63); vi. 2 — 4 {D. 126); xvii. 16 \D. 
49); XX. 22 {D. 75); xxiii. 20 f. {D. 75); xxxii. 6 (A 20). Lev. 
xxvi. 40 f. {D. 16). Num. xi. 23 (Z>. 126); xxi. 8 f. {A. 60); xxiv. 
17 {A. 32, B. 106). Deut. x. 16 f. (Z>. 16); xxi. 23 {D. 96); xxvii. 

26 {D. 95); xxxi. 2f. {D. 126), 16—18 [D. 74); xxxii. 7 — 9 (Z>. 
131), 15 {D. 20), 16—23 {D. 119), 20 (Z). 27, 123), 22 {A. 60), 43 
(Z>. 130); xxxiii. 13 — 17 (Z?. 91). Jos. v. 2 (Z?. 24); v. 13 — vi. 2 
(Z). 62). 2 Regn. vii. 14—16 (Z>. 118). 3 Regn. xix. 10, 18 {D. 
39). Ps. i. {A. 40); ii. {A. 40); ii. 7 f• {D. 122); iii. 5 f . (^. 38, 
Z). 97); viii. 3 {D. 114); xiv. 2ff. {D. 27); xvii. 44 f. {D. 28); 
xviii. 3ff. (^. 40, D. 64); xxi. 1—24 {D. 18), 8 f. (^. 38), 17 ff. 
(^. 35, 38, Z>. 97); xxiii. {D. 36); xxiii. 7 (^i. 51, Z>. 85); xxxi. 2 
(Z). 141); xliv. {D. 38); xliv. 7ff. (Z?. 56, 63); xlvi. 6—9 {D. Z7); 
xlix. {D. 22); Ixvii. 19 {D. 39); Ixxi. i — 19 (ΖΛ 34, 64, 121); Ixxi. 
17—19 (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. 
iff. {A. 45, Z?. 56), 3ff. (I). 63), 4 φ. ii8); cxxvii. 3 (Z>. no); 
cxlviii. I f. (D. 85). Prov. viii. 21 — 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 — 12 {A. 52), 12 (B. 121); xiii. 7 {B. 53). Mai. i. 10—12 (B. 
28, 41). Isa. i. 3 {A. 63), 7 (^• 47), 9 (^• 53, ^• Mo), u f. M- 
37), i6ff {A. 44, 61), 23ff (Z?. 27, 82); ii. 3f• (^• 39), 5 ff- (^• 
24, 135); iii.9(^• 136), 9— n (^• i?), 9— 15 i^- i33), i6(Z?. 27); 
V. 18—25 {B. 17, 133), 20 (^. 49); vi. 10 {B. 12); vii. 10—16 

Quotations in early CJiristian Writings. 419 

(Z>. 42, 66), 14 {A. ^l) ; viii. 4 {D. 77) ; ix. 6 {A. 35) ; xi. 1—3 {D. 
87); xiv. I {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 — 19 {D. 70); XXXV. i — 7 {D. 69), 4 ff. (yi. 48); xxxix. 3 
{D. 50); xl. I— 17 (/^. 50); xlii. 1—4 {D. 123, 135), 5—13 {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), 13— liii. 8 {A. 50), 
lii. 15— liii. i {D. 118); liii. iff. (Z?. 42); liii. 8—12 {A. 51), 9 
(Z:>. 97); liv. I {A. 53); Iv. 3f. (Z>. 12), 3—13 {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), 
17—25 (Z». 8i); Ixvi. I {A, yj , D. 22), 5—11 (Z>. 85), 23 f. (/?. 
44), 24 (^. 52, Z>. 140). Jer. ii. 12 {D. 114), 13 (Z>. 19); iv. 3 
{D. 28); vii. 21 ff. {D. i-z); ix. 25 ff. (Z). 28), 26 (^. 53); xxxviii. 

15 (Z>. 78), 27 {D. 123), 31 f. (Z?. II). Thren. iv. 20 (^. 55). 
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). 

From the circumstances of Justin's life we are prepared to 
find in his writings an eclectic text of the lxx. Of Palestinian 
birth but of 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. 10 — 19. 11 (θηκβ, D^'^K 13 (στηρικτο eV* 

αντην 6 he einev | ό Seas I°] pr Kvfuos \ om ό Oeos 2° 1 4 γηί, 

DE I eVt I°] els I om eVi 2°, 3°, 4° (eV) I λίβα] νότον 1 5 eV όδώ 

πάσγι η αν ΐ8 νπέθηκίν, Ζ)^'' 19 om eKeivov \ ΟυΚαμμαονς^ 

DE* Ι το όνομα. χχχϋ. 22 — 3*^• 24 ayyeXos μeτ αυτόν, D 
26 μe evXoyT](rr]s, D^'^^R 28 om eTi, Ε | eaTai το ονομά σου, 

D I τον θ€ον, Ε Ι δυνατός] + eV//, Ζ>^'Έ 29 om σν, D 

30 eataBri] €'χάρη (but €σώθη, infr. D. 1 26). Deut. χχχϋ. 1 6 — 23- 

1 6 €ξ€πίκραναν, AF 17 Om και ον Beco, Beols | ^detaav] ο'ίδασιν \ 
πρόσφατοι] pr καί, Α 20 om rjpepoiv, AF 21 παρώξνναν] 
παρωργισαν, Α 22 KavurjaeTat] pr και | om κάτω. Deut. 
xxxiii. 13 — 17' 13 f'^'] "^ό (cf. αττ' AF) | ουρανών, δρόσων Ι 
αβύσσου 14 <αθ' ώραν] καθαρών 15 από] pr καί, AF | 

27 2 

420 Quotations in early Christian Writings. 

ά(νάων'\ pr κα\ ποταμών 1 6 καθ^ ωραν'\ καρπών \ ttj βάτω | eVj 

eV, AF 17 της -γης, AF J OS. v. I 3 — vi. 2. 1 3 Om καΐ 2° \ 

tSev] ορά I eVarn'oi/] κατίναντι \ om καΐ τ} ρομφαία... αντην \ ό Ίησονς 
14 ό d(] και 15 το υπόδημα εκ] τα υποδήματα \ βφ' ώ | ΟΓΠ vCi' 

(so A, but adding σν) | ayios] yrj ά-γία. vi. I e^ αυτής ίξ€πορ. | om 
ούδβ (ίσίπορίύ^το 2 om eyco Ps. xxi. I — 24. 4 roC ΊσραηΧ 

N^-^U 7 aI/^/Jώ7rωr, NRU j (ξυυθ^νημα, NAR 8 /cal (XU) 

(λάλησαν χύΧ^σιν II αττό γαστρό?, N'^•^ 12 /3θ7^^ώι/] + /χοι, 

j^tc.aR* J 4 ^ ά/ίπ^^ωι/] om 6, RU 15 (ξ^χυθη, N^-^R 

16 ώσβΐ] ώί, NARU 17 πό3ας] + μου, X=-^ARU Ps. xlix. 

I om και 2°, N'^-^RT 3 evavTiov] ενώπιον, RT 4 διακρΐΐ'αι] 

pr roO, i<<=-aART oo'^edy, NRT 7 oia/xaprvpoi/iat, N'^-^T 

10 δρυμού] ay ρου, N'^-^A 1 6 (κδιηγτ}, t<*^-^AT 1 9 δολιότητας, 

5<c.aj^a 21 +rar αμαρτίας σου. Β^Ν<=•^Τ 22 οι) /^τ;, K<:-^RT 

23 του θίοΰ] μου, Ν^•^Τ. Prov. viii. 21^ — 36. 24 τάς 

πηyuς προίλθύν (but in D. 1 29 ττρ. τ. τττ^γά?) 25 τώι/ 

βουνών (but Ζ>. 129 omits art.) 26 ό θ(ός 28 καί ώί (ΐ°)" 

ήνίκα, ΝΑ 29 KCti ώ?] ηνίκα 35 ητοίμασται 3^ άσίβοΰσιν 

+ 61?, Ν'^-^Α. Amos ν. ΐ8 — νί. 7• 1 8 τοΰ κυρίου ig (άν φυy^] 
όταν iK(^{)yi], Α | άρκτος | ό οφίί 20 ανττ;] αυτοϊς 22 τα όλο- 

καντώματα, Α | τα? θυσίας | 7Γροσδ€^ο/Λαι] + αύτά, AQ*"^ j σωτηρίου, 
Α 23 αττόσττ/σοί' | ^χοι^] πλήθος | ψαλμών opyavov 25 om 

ρ,' eVr; | +Aeyet Kvptos•, ΑΟ 20 'Ραφάν \ om αυτών, AQ*. vi. Ι 
α7Γ6τρνγτ;σαζ/] pr οί ώνομασμίνοι eVi Toiy άpχηyoΊς (a doublet for 
the Greek which follows, ascribed to Symmachus by SH) | om 
και 2^ I αυτοί] €αυτοΙς, Q^ | τοΰ Ίσρ.] om τοΰ 2 4-eiy Χαλάνην, 

22, 36, 42 ; Heb. I δΐίλθατβ] πορίύθητ( \ Έμαθ 'Ραββά] Άμαθ την 
μ^γάλην {την μey., Symm. "20, 36, 5^ ^ϊ•") Ι αλλοφύλων] pr τών \ 
πλζίονι, Α ί om. Ιστίν \ υμετέρων ορίων] όρ. υμών 3 '^^' 

κην] πονηράν 4 καθ^ύδοντ^ς] κοιμώμ€νοι | ξρίφους] αρνας 

5 ίστώτα, AQ 6 τΰν διυλίσμίνον (a doublet)] eV φιάλαις (Heb.) 

7 δυναστών] + τώι^ άποικιζομίνων | κοΊ μ€ταστραφησ€ται ο'ίκημα 
κaκoυρyώv (a doublet of /cat (ξαρθ. κτλ.). Zach. ϋ. ΙΟ — iii. 2. 

ΙΟ Τ€ρπου] χαίρι (cf. Eus. d.e., p. 252) | οτί, Ν I I καταφίύ- 

^οΐ'ται] π ροστζθησονται \ κατασκηνώσω | iπLyvώσ^]] yvώσovτaι \ 
Παι/τοκράτωρ] τών δυνάμεων | άπίσταλκ€ 12 τ/} μ€ρίδϊ] κα\ 

την μζρίδα, Χ'^-^Α, and, without και, Ν*θΓ | αΙρίΤίύ] βκλίξ^ταί " 86 
in textu ex alio videlicet interprete" (Field). iii. i om Κύριος, 

Κυρίου I τυν Ίησοΰν] Om τόν, Αί^Γ | ό δίά/3ολθί] om ό 2 om 

^πιτίμησαι ( Ι °).. .διάβολε | om ώί (Heb.). Mai. i. ΙΟ — 12. 

JO θίλημά 'μου \ τάς θυσίας υμών II από, ΑΓ | Om και 1°, 

AQ Ι πpoσάy€τaι] προσφ€ρ€ται | διότι μeya] οτι τιμάται {οτι /xeya 
D. 41) Ι ΟΏΙ ΐΐαντυκράτωρ. Isa. i. 1 6 — 20. 1 7 χηραν, 

Β^^ΝΑΓ 1 8 δ€ΰτ€]+καί, NAQr | διαλ€χθώμ(ν^ | χιόνα, 

i'peov] epeov, χιόνα ig {Α. 6ΐ omits και eav θ€λΐ]Τ€,,.φάγ€σθ€.) 

^ See above, p. 407• 

Quotations in early Christian Writings. 421 

Isa. lii. 13 — liii. 12. lii. 13 ιδοΰ] ίδβ ψιρ Α. \\ ττολλοι eVt σε 
A.D. 15 θαυμασθησονται D. \ om eV αύτω Λ. 1 6 om 

6ψ•ονται Α. liii. 2 eVaj/ri'or] ενώπιον Α. \ iv. αυτοί ώ? τταιδ. 

A.D. 3 τού$• υίούί τώι/ αι/^ρώττων] του? αι^^ρώττουί ^ί. (cf. ττάιτα? 

αν^ρώτΓου?, ΑΟ*) 5 α^το? | ανομίας, αμαρτίας Α., ΝΑΟ | Om 

ημών 3° -^• 6 ΟΓΠ KUpiOf ^. 7 κ^ίροντος A.D., Β + αυτόι/ 

^., Χ^•^ΑΟ 8 Toi λαοί' μου] αυτών Α. \ ηχθη] ή<€ΐ A.D., Q™^ 

9 θανάτο\>\ + αυτοί) Α., B^-^NAQ ΙΟ του πόνου] ΟΓΠ του Α. 

II αυτών'] ημών A.D. 12 παρξ^όθη] pr αύτόί ^. Isa. Ιχϋ. ΙΟ 

— Ixiii. 6. II ταΐς θυγατράσιν | σοΙ ό σωτήρ, i<AQ | om αύτοΰ 1°, 
AQ* 12 ού καταΧ6\€ΐμμ€νη, (Χ). Ιχΐϋ. Ι €ρύθημα, Β j ί/ζαη'ωι/] 

+ αύτοΰ Ι /3ί'α] pr άναβαίνων (cf. Svmm. βαίνων^ Heb.) 3 +^771/01' 
απάτησα μονώτατος, Svmm., Heb. (a doublet of ττλ. κατατΓβτΓ.) | 
om μου, NAQ I +eif yrjr, B^'-^SAQ, 5 ούδίίς, i<AQ | di/rfXu/Sero, 
X I om αυτούς \ om /χου 1° 

To shew Justin's relation to the two recensions of Daniel, 
it is necessary to place some verses side by side with the 
corresponding contexts of the lxx. and Theodotion\ 

Justin, Diat. 31. 

(θίώρουν €ως ότου 
θρόνοι €Τ€θησαν, καΐ 6 
παΧαιος ήμερων €κα- 

θητοεχούΝ περιΒολΗΝ 

ώσβΐ χιόνα \€υκην, και 
ΤΟ ΤρίχωΛΛΛ της κβφα- 
Χης αυτοί) ωσ^ι epiov 
καθαρόν, 6 θρόνος αύτοΰ 
tbcei φΧόξ πυρός, οι 
τροχ^οΐ αυτού πύρ φλ€- 
γον. ποταμός πυρός 
€Ϊλκ€ν εΚΉΟρε^όμ^νος 
€κ τϊροοώπου Λγτογ ' 
χ^ίΧιαι χ^ι\ΐ('ώ€ς eX€i- 
τούρ-γουν αύτω και μυ- 
ριαι μυριά^^ς παρ€ΐσ- 
τηκ€ΐσαν αύτώ' βίβΧοι 
άν€ωχθησ-αν κα\ κριτη- 

ρίΟν €<άθΐσ€ν. €0(03- 

ρουν ΤΟΤ€ ΤΗΝ φω Ν Η Ν 

Dan. νϋ. 9 — 14> LXX. 

ζθ^ωρουν ζ'ως οτ€ 
θρόνοι €Τ€θησαν, και 
παΧαιός ημ€ρών βκ άθητο 
εχωΝ περιΒολΗΝ ώσ^ι 

χΐ(')να, καΐ τΟ τρίχωΜΛ 
της κ€φαΧης αυτού ωσ(\ 
epiov Χίυκον καθαρόν • 
ό θρόνος ώΰεΐ φΧοξ 
πυρός, τροχοί αυτού 
πύρ <aiopevov. ποτα- 
μός πυρός €Χκων, κα\ 

έΐεπορεγετο κλτλ 
πρόοωποΝ λγτογ 
ποταμός πυρός • χίΧιαι 
χιΧιάδ^ς βθ^ράπ^υον 
αυτόν και μυριαι μυ- 
ριάδβς παρ€ΐ(ττηκ€ΐσαν 
αύτώ' κα\ κριτηριον 

Ibid., Th. 

βθ^ώρουν €ως ότου 
θρόνοι ζτέθησαν, και 
παΧαιός ημερών βκά- 
θητο, και το ένδυμα 
αυτού wcrei χιών Χ^υκόν^ 
και τ; θρίξ της κ€φαΧης 
αυτού ωσβι epiov καθα- 
ρόν ό θρόνος αυτού 
φΧόξ πυρός, οι τροχοί 
αυτού πύρ φλδγον. πο- 
ταμός πυρός cIXkcv €μ- 
προσθ^ν αυτού • χίΧιαι 
χιλιάδας €λ€ΐτούργουν 
αύτω, καΐ μυριαι μυ- 
ριάδ€ς παριστηκ€ΐσαν 
αύτώ' κριτηριον βκάθι- 
σ€ν, κα\ βίβΧοι ην^ωχ- 
θησαν. ζθ^ώρουν τότΐ 
(καΟισ€ και ρίβΧοι [ από φωνής των Χόγων 
ην^ωχθησαν. ζθ^ώρουν των μβγάΧων ων το 

^ Words common to Justin and LXX. but not in Th. are printed in 
small uncials; those common to Justin and Th. but not to LXX., in 
thick cursives. Most of the remaining words are to be found in the 
three texts. 


Quotations in early Christian Writings. 

Justin, Dial. 31. 
των μζγάΧων λύγων ων 
το Kepas λαλβϊ, κα\ 
ΛπετγΜπΛΝίοθΗ τ6 

θηρίον, καϊ απώΧ^το το 
σώμα αυτού κα\ (Βόθη 
(Is κανσιν πυρός' καϊ 
τα λοίΊτά θηρία [ΐ€τ€- 
<Γτάθη της άρχήβ αυτών, 
κα\ XpONOC ζωής τοΙς 
θηρίοιςίδόθη βως καιρού 
καϊ χρΟΝΟγ• (θίώρουν 
iv όράματί της νυκτός, 
κα\ Ιδού [ΐΐτατών j/e0e- 
Χών τού ουρανού ως 
υ'ώς ανθρώπου €ρχό- 
μ€νθ5, και ηΧθ^ν έ'ωδ 
του παλαιού τών ημε- 
ρών, κα\ ΠΛρΗΝ ενώ- 
πιον αυτού• κα\ οί 

π^ρεατΗκότεο ιτροσ-- 

ηγαγον αυτόν. κα\ 

έλόθΗ Λγτο3 έΙογοίΛ 


κόΛ ΠΛΟΛ Κόΐό. Λλ- 
τρεγογοΛ- κλι η έΐ- 
ογοίΛ Λγτογ έ5ογοί<\ 
ΔΪώΝίοα HTIC ογ μη 

ΛρθΗ, ΚόΛ Η ΒΛΟΐλείΛ 

Λγτογ ογ μη φθΔρπ. 

J Dan. vii. 9 — 14? LXX. 

I ΤΟΤ€ ΤΗΝ φωΝΗΝ τών 
ι λόγων τών μ€γάλων ων 
το κέρας iXoKa• θεω- 
ρών ημην, κα\ ΛΤΤετγΜ- 
πΛΝΙΟθΗ το θηρίον, 
καϊ άπώΧ^το το σώμα 
αυτού κα\ ξδόθη (Ις 
καύσιν πυρός, καϊ τους 
κυκ\ω αυτού απ4στησ€ 
της (ξουσίας αιτών, καϊ 
XpONOC ζωής €δόθη αύ- 
τοίς €ως χρΟΝΟγ καϊ 
καιρού. βθίώρουν ev 
όράματι της νυκτός, καϊ 
Ιδού €πϊ τών νξφξΧών 
τού ουρανού ως υιός 
ανθρώπου ήρχ€Το, καϊ 
ως παΧαιός ημερών 
παρην καϊ οί ΠΛρεΟ- 
ΤΗκότεο παρησαν αύ- 
τω. καϊ βδόθη αύτώ 
εξουσία καϊ τιμή βα- 
σιΧικη, καϊ πάντα τα 
βθνη της γης κατά γίνη 
καϊ πάσα δόζα αίτω 
Χατρίύουσα• καϊη €ξου- 
σ'ια αυτού ζ^ουσ'ια αιώ- 
\ νιος ήτις ου μη άρθτ}, 
j καϊ 7] βασιΧίία αυτού 

ήτις ου μη φθαρτή. 

j Ibid., Th. 

j κέρας έκ^Ινο eXuXei, εως 
άντ)ρέθη το θηρίον καϊ 
άπώΧίτο, καϊ το σώμα 
αυτού εδόθη (Ις καύσιν 
Ι πυρός, καϊ τών λοιττών 
' θηρίων η άρχη μ€Τ€σ-τά- 
θη, και μακρότης ζωής 
εδόθη αυτοίς €ως καιρού 
καϊ καιρού. έθ^ώρουν 
€v όράματι της νυκτός, 
καϊ ιδού μ.€τα τών ι/βφε- 
Χών τού ουρανού ώς 
υιός ανθρώπου €ρχόμ6- 
VOS, καϊ 'έωζ τον παλαιού 
τών ήμ(ρών 'έφθασίν • 
καϊ προσήχθη αύτω. 
καϊ αύτω εδόθη ή αρχή 
καϊ ή τιμή καϊ η βασι- 
Xfia, καϊ πάντ€ς οί Χαοί, 
φυΧαί, καϊ γΧώσσαι 
δουΧξύουσιν αύτω • ή 
εξουσία αυτού έζουσία 
αιώνιος ήτις ου παρβΧ^υ- 
σ€ται, καϊ ή βασιΧίία 
αυτού ου διαφθαρήσβ- 

The Student will notice that Justin's O.T. text is a mixed one. 
(a) In Genesis it contains many readings of D or DE where 
those later uncials depart from A; (l?) in Deuteronomy it oc- 
casionally supports A or AF against B, and {ή in the Psalms 
the group ART, with the concurrence sometimes of «*, some- 
times of i^^•^; (d) in the Prophets it not seldom agrees with Q 
(AQ, «AQ). In the Minor Prophets it is startling to find in 
Justin more than one rendering which is attributed to Sym- 
machus ; and as it is in the highest degree improbable that 

Quotations in early CJu'istian Writings. 423 

his text has been altered from the text of Symmachus, or at 
a later time from a Hexaplaric copy of the lxx., we are led 
to the conclusion that these readings belong to an older 
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 of Theodotion's readings. Έλειτουργουν 
meets us here, as in Clement of Rome, and the phrases τα 
λοιπά θηρία μ€τ€στάθη της α.ρχΎ)<;, μετά. των νεφελών ερ;(ο/χενος, 
εω? τον τταλαίον, ττροσηγαγον αυτόν, are undoubtedly due tO 
Theodotion, or rather to the version on which he worked. On 
the other hand έχων ττεριβολην, το τρίχωμα, ττνρ φλζγον, αττίτνμ- 
ττανίσθη, χρόνος ζωής, οΐ τταρΐστη κότες, and the whole of V. 1 4 
as clearly belong to the Chigi text. That this mixture is not 
due to an eclectic taste or a fickle memory is clear from the 
fact that the same text meets us in the Latin version of the 
passage as given by Tertullian\ 

In a few instances Justin shews a disposition to criticise 
the LXX. reading. E.g. in Ps. Ixxxi. (Ixxxii.) 7, he probably 
proposed to read ως ανθρωττος (D"7i<?) for ώς άνθρωποι^. 
Similarly in Deut. xxxii. 8 he realises that the LXX. has sub- 
stituted αγγέλων Oeov for ?i<"i":^p:?l He maintains that in 
Gen. xlix. 10 the reading of the lxx. is έ'ω? αν ελθ-τ] ω απόκειται, 
though according to the Jewish interpreters of his time the 
words should rather be rendered εως αν I. τά αττοκει/χενα αΰτω. 
His text of the lxx. contained some remarkable interpola- 
tions ; thus he quotes Ps. xcv. (xcvi.) 10^ in the form 6 κύριος 

1 Burkitt, Old Latin and Itala, p. 2 3ff. 

- Dial. 114. In the editions ανθρωττοι occurs twice, but the context 
appears to shew that the singular should stand in the quotation. 
'^ Dial. i3f. 

424 Quotations in early Christian Writings. 

ΙβασιΧίνσίν άττό τον £ΰλου', and ascribes to Jeremiah the words 
ΐμνησθη Sc κνρως 6 θΐος άττό 'Ισραήλ των ν€κρων αντον τον 
κ€κοιμημ-€νων €ΐς yrjv ^^ώ/αατος, και κατ^βη ττρος αντονς εΰαγγελι- 
σασθαχ αντοΐς το σωτηριον αντον^. He cites also SOme words 
which appear to have found a place in his copy after 2 Esdr. 
vi. 21: καΐ eiTrev "Εσδρας τω λαώ Ύοντο το ττάσχα 6 σωτηρ ημών 
και η καταφνγη ημών και eav 8ίανοηθητ€ και άναβ•?! νμών 
Ιτη την KapStav otl Μελλο/χεν αντον ταττευνονν iv σημίίω, και 
μ€τα ταίίτα ζλττίσωμζν (? ΙΧτήσητί) Ιττ αυτόν, ον μη Ιρημωθχι ο 
τότΓος ούτος εις ατταντα χρόνον, λέγει ό ^εός των δυνά/χεων iav δε 
μη ττιστίνσητί αντω /Λτ^δέ εΐσακοΰσΐ7τε τον κηρνγματοζ αντον, 
εσεσ^ε ίττίχαρμα τοΐς Wveat^. These passages appear to be of 
Christian origin, yet Justin is so sure of their genuineness that 
he accuses the Jews of having removed them from their copies. 

8. Hippolytus of Portus, as we learn from the in- 
scription on the chair of his statue and from other ancient 
sources, was the author of a large number of Biblical 
commentaries^ These included works on the Hexaemeron 
and its sequel (τα /^ετα την Ιξαημ^ρον) ; on Exodus, and 
portions of Numbers and Samuel; on the Psalms, Proverbs, 
Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs; on Zechariah, Isaiah, Jere- 
miah, parts of Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel. Of these 
exegetical works there remains only the commentary on Daniel ^ 

^ Ap. i. 41, Dial. 73. Cf. Tert. c. Marc. iii. 19, adv. Jtid. 10. No 
existing Greek MS. of the Psalter is known to contain the words except 
cod. 156 (see p. 160), which gives them in the suspicious form άττό τω ^ΰ\(^. 
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 
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. τ,χ. i) or 
to Isaiah (iii. 20. 4). Cf. Lightfoot, Clement, ii. p. 40, and the writer's 
Apostles' Creed'^, p. ^8 f. 

3 Dial. ib. 

4 On his works see Lightfoot, Clement of Rome, ii. pp. 388 if., 419 fif. 

5 Edited by G. W. Bonwetsch and H. Achelis in the new Berlin Corpus 
{Hippolytus'' Werke, i., Leipzig, 1897). 

Qiwtations in early Christian WiHtings. 425 

with fragments of most of the rest. The great treatise Adversus 
omnes haereses yields but Httle in the way of Scriptural quo- 
tations \ but the minor theological works collected by Lagarde" 
supply a considerable number of fairly long extracts from the 
Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Prophets. The text of the 
Lxx. which is exhibited in these passages is often of much 
interest, as a i^w specimens will shew. 

Gen. i. 7 βπάΐ'ω] νπ€ράνω 28 <ατακνρί€νσατ(^ κατακ\ηρονομησατ€. 
xlix. 8 ff. (Lag. 5 (l), 102 (2)) 8 αΙν€σάτωσαν (l) αΐνύσονσιν (2) 
9 eK βλαστού μου vie (2) ΙΟ ω αττόκβιται (ΐ), τα άποκ^ίμ^να αύτω 

(2) Ι αύτύζ^+βσται (ΐ) 12 χαροττοί (cf. Field, ad loc.) j ως άπο 

ο'ίνον : cf. άπο ο'ίνου, \D¥. Exod. XX. 13 ff ου μοιχ€νσ€ΐς, αν φον^ύ- 
σεΐί, ου KXe-yj/ecs. Deut. xxxii. 34 f 34 '^o.p^ βμου 35 δται/] 

pr eV καιρώ, AF. xxxiii. 22 €κπηδησ€ταί, Β. Ruth ii. 9 

v8p€vovTai, A 14 ev τω οξα, Β^•^Α. Ps. Ixviii. I ff. 4 ζγ-γίζαν] 
(Χπίζξΐν (B^-^XR) μ€ (R) 5 ηρτ^αζον 6 βγνως^ οίδας \ άπ€- 

κρυβησαν, Ν*^•^ 8 eKokvyj/av ivTponrj ΙΟ κατίφαγί. Prov. 

vi. 27 άπο8ησ€ΐ] a-rrodeapeveL. xxiii. 29 f 29 άηδίαι, XA | ττίλώ- 
νοί, B^ 30 ^^ ο'ίνω I Ιχνβνόντων^ κατασκοπουντων. Job ii. 9 

TrXavTjTts, X'^-^A. Am. V. 12 κατατΓατονντ€ς, AO*. Mic. ii. 7 f 

7 πορεύονται 8 KoreVarrt] κατά πρόσωπον \ δοράν] δόζαν (sic). 

iii. 5 ή•/€ΐραν^ ηγίασαν, Q'^^. v. 5 '4σται αυτή η παρ' βμοΰ ΐίρηνη 

όταν ό \\σσνριος (cf. ΑΟ) επίΧθτ]. Mai. iv. 4 αποσΓβλλω] ττβμ- 

λ/^ω Ι 7rpiV]-|-7; | ?7/Li€pai/] pr την, Γ 5 τ^ητύρων eVi τέκνα \ ίΧθων 

πατάξω, Χ^•^. Isa. χ. 12 ff. 1 3 om. iv bis, NAQr 14 tjJ 

χ^ίΐρι\-\-μου, AO 1 6 Kupioy σαβαώθ'\ άδωναΧ Κύριος I J πυρί 

καιομβνω] φλογί (cf. Svmm.). xiv. 4 ff. II els αδονί (h -γην \ 

κατακάΧνμμα] κατάΧειμμα 12 7rpc)$•] ety, 6<* 1 4 νεφεΧών, ΝΑΟΓ 
1 6 θανμάσουσιν, XAQF 1 9 τβ^ι/τ^κότωι/] ττβτττωκότωΐ' 20 

καθαρό?] κομψός \ ;^ρόΐΌΐ^] χρόνιος 21 σφαγ?}ι/αι] €ΐς σφαγην. 

χΐν. II -ϊ-και των θυγατβρων μου (cf. ΧΑΟ) 13 om βασιΧέα, 

Χ'^-^ΑΟ 14 ^ν σο\ π ροσκυνησονσιν . Ixvi. 24 τεΧευτησει, ΒΧΟ 

(ag. Α, τεΧευτά). Ezech. xxviii. 5 εμπορία] εμπειρία. Dan. 

ii. I ff I βασϊΧεία] + '^αβονχοδονοσόρ, A 5 ^ά.ν'\ + ούν, AO | 

σύ•γκρισιν'\-\-αύτοΰ, Q 

The text of Hippolytus, it will be seen, like most of the 
patristic texts, leans slightly to AF in the Pentateuch, ^* or 
i^^•^ in the poetical books, and AQ in the Prophets. 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 IVrittJigs. 

same time it is full of surprises, and often stands quite alone 
among existing witnesses. 

9. Our last witness is Clement of Alexandria. Clement 
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. Hence it 
must not be too hastily assumed that the text of his O.T. 
quotations is purely Alexandrian. On the other hand it is 
reasonable to suppose that during the period of his literary 
activity he was familiar with the Alexandrian text and used it 
when he quoted from his MS. On the whole therefore we 
may expect his quotations to be fairly representative of the 
Biblical text current at Alexandria during the generation 
preceding the compilation of the Hexapla. 

Clement quotes both the Jewish and the Christian scrip- 
tures profusely, but his extracts seldom extend beyond two or 
three verses, and are often broken by comments or copied 
with considerable freedom. His purpose was didactic and 
not polemical ; even in the λόγος ττροτρίττηκό^; he aims to 
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 emanating from 
Alexandria, these are of no little value to the student of the 
Greek Bible'. A 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 

Quotations in early Christian Writings. 427 

Biblical quotations will be found in the edition of Potter ; here 
it must suffice to give some specimens of the text which 
they exhibit in the Pentateuch, the poetical books, and the 

(rt) Gen. i. 26 {sirom, v. 29) κατ UKOva και όμοίωσιν ημ^τέραν 
(elsewhere CI. reads 6μ. ημών, or omits the pronoun). xxxvii. 
24 {stro?n. V. 54) 6 Se λάκκο$• κ^νός, DE. Exod. xx. 13 ff. {pro- 

trept. 108, strojn. ii. 33) ου φον€νσ€ΐ9 ου μοιχζΰσ€ΐς...ου κΚί-^^ις ου 
ψ€ν8ομαρτυρησας, AF. Lev. xviii. I ff. {strom. ii. 46). 3 eV 

αυτΊ] (eV αυτί) Β*, eV αυτής B^^AF) ου ποιησβτί {τΐοιηθησ€ταί Β*) 
4 πορ€ν€σθ€ Α ^ ό ττοίησας αυτά. Deut. xxxii. 23 ff• {paed. i. 

68) 23 συντ{Κί.σα (συντ€\€σω AF, συνποΧ^μησω, Β) 24 

ΐΤταποστίΚώ, Α | της -γης, Α (F) 4^ ^• ανταποδώσω, AF 4- + 

και η μάχ^αιρά μου φάγβται Kpia άπο αίματος τραυματιών, AF 
{δ) Ps. xxxiii. 12 ff. {strotn. iv. iii). 13 ημίρας Idelu, NAR 

14 χ€ίλη σου, N'^-^AR. xcv. 5 {protrept. 62) δαιμονίων €ΐσ\ν βΐ'δωλα 
(ci. Iren.). cii. 14 {paed. i. 62) μνησθητι, BN* Th. cxl. 5 

(ypaed. i. 79) ξΧί'γχζτω /xe δίκαιος κα\ τταιδευσάτω. cl. 4 οργάι/ω, 

BNRT. Prov, i. 25 {paed. i. 85) υπηκου^τ^, ΝΑ j ov ττροσβι'χβτβ, 

NAC {ηπ€ΐθησατ€, Β). iii. 5 ff. [strom. ii. 4). 6 eV ττάσαΐί•, A 1 

ray όδον? σου]-{-ό §e ttoUs σου ού μη προσκόπτί] (cf. Χ'^-^ : SH pr -τ-) 
12 TratSfufi, ΝΑ (ίΚβγχίΐ, Β). xxiii. Ι^ μη άπόσχου {άπόσχ-η 

LXX.) νηπιον παώ^ύων (Α; τταιδ^ύβίν, Β). Sir. i. 18 {paed. i. 

68) + φόβος yap Κυρίου άπωθ€2ται αμαρτήματα (so far 248), αφηβος 
δ' ου 8ννησ€ται δικαιωθηναι, O.L. ix. 9 {paed. ii. 54) Ζ^*? (Τυμβο- 

Χοκοπησης'Ι μη συμματακΧιθης in ά-γκώνα, O.L. xxxiv. 25 {paed. 

ii. 31) αττώλβσβι/] ηχρ^ίωσ^. xxxvi. 6 {paed. i. 42) ώ? φίλο? /^,ώκοί] 
ό φιλήδονος κα\ μοΙχος (cf. ώί φιΧόμοιχος, 55? 254)• xxxviii. Ι 

{paed. ii. 68) om. τιμαΐς, ιο6, 296, O.L. xxxix. 13 {paed. ii. 76) 
αγροΰ {υγροΰ NAC)] υδάτων. 1 8 {paed. ii. 44) δ? βλαττώσβι] 

€λάττωσις €ΐς, Heb. (^) Am. iv. 13 {protrept. 79) ιδού βγω, 

B^-^AQ (om Β*). Nah. iii. 4 {paed. i. 81) βπίχαρις, B^-^Q. 

Mai. i. 10 ff. {stj'oin. v. 137). 11 om. και I°, AO | βυμίαμα\ 

θυσία \ ττροσάγβται] προσφέρεται (cf. Justin). Isa. ix. 6 {paed. 

i. 24) Uios και εδόθη, ΝΑΟΓ | om εγενηθη, Γ | εκΧηθη {καλείται, 
BSOr, καλέσει. A) | +^αυραστο? σύμβουλος (Ν'^-^Α) θεός δυνάστης 
πατήρ αΙωνιος άρχων εΙρηνης (Ν'^-^Α). J μεγάλη η άρχη αυτοϋ^ +τω 
πληθΰνειν την παιδείαν, Th. | opior] πέρας, Th., Symm. xi. I ff. 
{paed. i. 61). xi. 4 ελεγζει τους αμαρτωλούς της γης (cf. Iren.). 

xxix. 13 {paed. i. 76) ό λαός ούτος το\ς χείλεσιν αυτών τιμώσί με, η 
δε καρδία αυτών πόρρω εστίν απ εμοΰ' μάτην δε σέβονται με διδάσ- 

of the LXX. is not likely to be equally instructive, but it ought to reward 
a patient investigator. 

428 Quotations in early Christian Writings. 

Kovres 8ι8ασκα\ίας €ντάλματα ανθρώπων (cf. Alt. XV., Mc. vii.). 
Ixvi. 13 (ypaed. i. 21) νμας τταμακαΚίσω^ Ν. Jer. ix. 23 f. {paed. 

i. 37): V. 24 abbreviated as in i Cor. i. 31. xiii. 24 ff. {strom. 

iv. 165 f.). 24 8ίέσπ€φα, BXO (Βκφθαρα A) | ύττό, NAQ (από, 

Β) I φίρόμ^να] 7Γ €τωμ€να 2 5 aTret^etr ύμά? e'/xoi 27 μοιχεία 

anarthr., Ο | χρ€μ(τισμός anarthr., Β. xxiii. 23 f. {protrcpt. j8). 
24 ft ποίησ€ί τι άνθρωπος (el κρνβησ€ταί ris, Β, ei κρ. άνθρωπος, 
ΑΟ). Bar. iii. 13 (paed. i. 92) om ;^ρόι/οι/, Β. Thren. i. i 
{paed. i. 80) άρχοντα χωρών €γ€νηθη eh φόρους. Dan. ix. 24 ff. 

{strom. i. 125) as in Th. (B*), with the addition και ημισν της 
€β8ομάδος κατάπαυσα θυμίαμα θυσίας κα\ πτ^ρυ-γίου αφανισμού €ως 
συντίΧ^ίας κα\ σπουδής τάζιν αφανισμού (cf. Β^^ΑΟ). 

ΙΟ. This examination has been but partial, even within 
the narrow field to which it was limited. It has dealt only 
with direct quotations, and in the 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 
named. Even if he adds the writings of Aristides, Tatian, 
Athenagoras, Theophilus, and the anonymous Teaching and 
Epistle to Diognetus, there will still remain the fragments 
collected in the Relliquiae Sacrae and by the researches of 
Pitra, and the Pseudo-Clementine, apocryphal, and Gnostic 
literature of the second century. Still more important help 
may be obtained from Latin Christian writers who quote the 
O.T. in the Old Latin version, e.g. Cyprian, Lucifer, Λ^igilius 
of Thapsus, the Donatist Tyconius, and the author of the 
Speculum''. This part of the evidence was collected for 
Holmes and Parsons, and will be presented in a more perma- 
nent form, if not at so much length, in the apparatus of the 
larger Septuagint. 

Much useful and interesting work might be done by follow- 
ing the lines of Dr Hatch's attempt to collect and compare 
the early evidence in reference to particular texts and con- 

^ See above, p. 97, and the art. Old Latin Versions in Hastings' D. B. 
iii. (already mentioned, p. 88). 

Quotations in early Cki'istian Writings. 429 

stantly recurring extracts from the lxx.^ Perhaps however it 
would be expedient to limit such an investigation to post- 
apostolic Christian writers, and to 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- 
tations," 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 
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 
a second century writing. This point, however, must be re- 
served for fuller consideration in a later chapter ^ 

1 1. With Origen the science of Christian Biblical criticism 
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 skill in allegorical 
interpretation ; and his knowledge both of the original and of 
the Greek versions prepared him to deal with the difficulties 
of his text. Unhappily there is no class of his writings which 
has suffered so severely. 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 follow- 
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 Essays, i. p. 129 ff. ("On Early Quotations from the Septuagint.") 

2 See Part iii. c. vi. 

2 They are collected in Migne, F. G. xi. — xvii. 

430 Quotations in early CJiristian Writings 

tr. by Rufinus. Leviticus. Fragments and notes from catenae. 
Homilies (i6) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Numbers. Notes from 
catenae. Homilies (28) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Deuteronojuy. 
Notes from catenae, <S:c. Joshua. Fragments and notes from 
catenae, &c. Homilies (26) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Judges. 
Notes from catenae. Homilies (9) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. 
Ruth. A note on Ruth i. 4. i — 4 Kingdoms. Homily virkp 
της €Ύ•)/αστριμνθον. Fragments. Homily in Latin on i Regn. 
i. ff. Psalms. Fragments of the Commentaries and Homilies; 
notes from catenae. Homilies (9) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus [on 
Pss. xxxvi. — xxxviii.]. Proverbs. Fragments and notes, Greek 
and Latin. Ecclesiasics. Notes from catenae. Canticles. Frag- 
ments and notes. Homilies (2) in Latin, tr. by Jerome. Com- 
mentary (prol., tt. i. — iv.) in Latin, tr. by Rufinus. Job. Notes 
from catenae. Fragment of a Homily, in Latin. The xii. 
Prophets. Fragment on Hosea xii. (in Philocal. 8). Isaiah. 
Fragments (2) of the Commentaries, in Latin. Homilies (9) 
in Latin, tr. by Jerome. Jeremiah. Homilies (19) in Greek, 
and notes from catenae. Homilies (2) in Latin, tr. by Jerome. 
Lameniatio7is. Notes from catenae. Ezekiel. Fragments, and 
notes from catenae. Homilies (14) in Latin, tr. by Jerome. 

12. It is impossible within the limits of an Intioduction 
to enumerate all the ecclesiastical writers who during the 
golden age of patristic literature quoted or commented upon 
the Greek Old Testament. But the student who is not a 
specialist in this field may be glad to have before him the 
names and dates of the principal Greek Fathers, with some 
notice of such of their extant works as are concerned with 
O.T. exegesis. The Roman numerals in brackets direct him 
to the volumes of Migne's Patrologia Graeca., in which the 
authors are to be found ; in the case of a few writings which 
are not included in the Patrologia and some others, references 
are given to other editions. 

Acacius of Caesarea, 1366. Fragments in catenae. 

Ammonius of Alexandria, c. 460. Fragments on Genesis and 

Daniel. (Ixxxv.) 
Anastasius of Antioch, t598. (Ixxxix.) 
Anastasius of Sinai, cent. vi. — vii. (Ixxxix.) 
Apollinarius of Laodicea (the younger), +c. 393. (xxxiii., cf. 

Draseke's edition in Texte u. Unters. vii.) 

Quotations in early Christian Writings. 431 

Apostolical Constitutions, cent. iii. — iv. (ed. Lagarde). 

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 (ττβρι τ^? 

eV πν^νματι και άληθ^ία προσκυνησ€ως, and "γΧαφυρά), comm. on 

Isaiah, comm. on the xii. Prophets ; fragments on Kingdoms, 

Psalms, Proverbs, Canticles, and the minor Prophets. (Ixviii. 

— 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. 

Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, cent. v. (iii. — iv.) 
Dorotheus the Archimandrite, cent. vi. — vii. (Ixxxviii.) 
Ephraem 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 π€ρ\ 

των τοπικών ονομάτων των iv ttj θίία γραφτ] and π€ρ\ της τον 

βιβλίου των προφητών ονομασίας. 

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.) 
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. 

1 1 ; 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.) 

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. ) 

Philo of Carpasia, c. 380. Commentary on Canticles, (xl.) 

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, 

I Regn. — 4 Chr., Prov., Cant., Isaiah. (Ixxxvii.) 
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. 

Theodore of Mopsuestia, t428. Fragments of commentaries on 

Genesis (Syriac and Latin), the rest of the Pentateuch and 

the historical books : comm. on the Psalms in Syriac and 

large fragments in Greek : a commentary on the xii. Prophets. 

Theodoret of Cyrrhus, tc. 458. Et? τα nrropa τψ θ^ίας -γραφής, 
questions on the Pentateuch and historical books. Commen- 
taries on the Psalms, Canticles, the xii. Prophets, Isaiah, Jere- 
miah (including Baruch and Lam.), Ezekiel, Daniel. (Ixxx. — 

Titus of Bostra, tc. 370. (xviii.) 

Victor of Antioch, cent. v. — 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 
i. B., Ϊ894). Fessler-Jungmann, Institiitiones Patrologiaf (1890). 
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, 
vol. ii. (Halle, 1834). R. Gregory, Prolegomena {de scriptoribus 
ecclesiasticis, p. ιΐ3ΐίΤ.). Scrivener-Miller, ii. p. 167 ff. Hatch, 
Biblical Essays, p. 1 3 1 ff. 

The Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 

I. No question can arise as to the greatness of the place 
occupied by the Alexandrian Version in the religious life of 
the first six centuries of its history. The Septuagint was the 
Bible of the Hellenistic Jew, not only in Egypt and Palestine, 
but throughout Western Asia and Europe. It created a 
language of religion which lent itself readily to the service of 
Christianity and became one of the most important allies of 
the Gospel. 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 
as a basis for fresh translations into the vernacular ^ 

The Septuagint has long ceased to fulfil these or any 
similar functions. In the West, after the fourth century, its 
influence receded before the spread of the Latin Vulgate ; in 
the East, where it is still recited by the Orthodox Church in 
the ecclesiastical offices, it lost much of its influence over 
the thought and life of the people. On the other hand, this 
most ancient of Biblical versions possesses a new and increas- 
ing importance in the field of Biblical study. It is 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 TJie Greek Versions as aids to Biblical Study. 

A. As the oldest version of the Hebrew Bible, the Sep- 
tuagint claims especial attention from Old Testament scholars. 
It represents a text and, to some extent, an interpretation 
earlier than any which can be obtained from other sources. 

I. (a) The printed Hebrew Bibles give on the whole 
the Massoretic text, i.e. 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, traditio) is already mentioned in the 
saying of R. Akiba, Pirqe Aboth, iii. 20 min'? Υ^Ό miDO, 
'tradition is a fence to the Law'i; but the word is used there in refe- 
rence 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 pronuncia- 
tion of the text which had been fixed by their predecessors. The 
Massora"^ embodies the readings which tradition substituted for 
the written text (πρ^ ^''Γ>?), the corrections known as the \^s>7\ 
DHDID^, and observations on the text tending to stereotype its 
interpretation in minute points. To the Massorets we also owe 
the perfecting of the system of vowel-points and accents. The 
labours of the Massorets culminated in the Wes